IBN cARASI AND HIS INTERPRETERS

PART I: RECENT FRENCH TRANSLATIONS

JAMES WINSTON MOUIS
IN~ OF IsMAILI STUD~ PUIS

Part I of this review article introduces a numba' of recent U'aDllaboDl and related studies of
worb by the peat Islamic mystical thinker Ibn cArabY (d. 638/1240) that tOFther illustrate the
many represeDtative faeeu of his thoqllt, writiq. aDd inteJratiOD of earlier bI8mic traditiolll. Part
II, to appear in two follown., iuues, OUtliDCISODle of the maiD lines of interpmation and influmce
that awbd the reception of his t ouPt by IIIb1equent 1J1aaUc writcn iD • wide raqe of
discipli and historical seuinJl, .po bMed on • survey of recent publications (primarily
truslatiODl) iD several .........

INftODUCTION interested specialists to this large body of new publica-

ScHOLAU wamNG (or teachin&> about the elaborate
dilciplines of later Islamic thoupt-philOIOphy, kaIam,
SufISm, etc.-inevitably encounter a dilemma that
must be shared by -Oricntalists" studYina other similar
traditions: in the absence of an adequate body of
appropriate translations, they can either aaume an
intimate acquaintance with the texts and traditions in
question, in which case their audieace' effectively
tions aDd to fomp scholan (lome of them yaun, aDd
DOt yet widely known) working in this flCld. ' But
secoDcllr, given tbe potentially wider interest of the
subject, we shall also try to provide the non-specialist
with lome basic bactpound for approachina these
translations.
I We have also made ewry effort to mention the receat

limited to a handful of colleagues with the requisite
philolosical trainiq; or they can undertake the difTlCUlt
task of explanation and abstraction for a hypothetical
-general" audieace, an effort whose intrinsic limitations
are evident in even the best of the secoDclary literature
on these subjects. This dilemma is all the more frustrat-
ins when ODe recoaniza that the interests aDd capacities
required for appreciating the deeper intellectual and
spiritual dimensions of those traditions, if only suffi-
cient translations were available, are fortunately much
more common than the vocation and training required
to decipher them in their originallanpaae and cultural
setting. In this context, the recent appearance of more
than a dozen translations of works by the famous
Islamic mystic: Ibn cArabI(d. 638/1240) aDd later SufIS
of his school is a remarkable phenomenon; these
books-and others promised by the same scbolan-
may open the way not only to a wider appreciation and
undentandina of the MGreatest M ter" (aJ-Sbaykh al-
EnaJisb-laDpaae trauJaUons (aDd some importaDt Arabic
publicatio ) in tbe field, either in tbe tellt or footnota,
have avoided any detailed commenuso _ DOt to preclude the
full-scale reviews each of those orb c1etetVa. Althoup it
falls outside the limited scope of this article, we mUll also at
IeaIt mention the recent appearance of Prof. Sucid aI-l;lakrm's
tJ-MuCjtun aJ-$UjT: 1Il-lJiJcnfII flIJudi1d td-KMi1rM (Beirut:
Daodala publi hers. 1981). which is tnaly a milestone in the
study of Ibn cArabI~the pateIt achievementiDce
Osman Yallia'. bio-bibliopaphy (n. 3 be10 )-and will be an
iDdilpensable tool for every serious student and translator of
the Sbayth from now 00. This monumental ork (1311 pp.)
provides (in addition to the K.oranic and lexical bacqrOUDd)
defmitioos and ciWions, drawn from the FwfiI.tJI and n
other orb by Ibn cArabI, iUustratiq some 706 of his key
technical terms. (The Ktual number of terms diJcuaed.liven
the additional crOll-references. synonyms, and related roou,
is in the thousand..)
1 It is a sipif"lCUlt aDd iDIeratin& fact (especially for non-

Akbar, as he is traditionally known) and his teachings,
but also for substantially improved acc.a to the
various Islamic traditions that are integrated in his
ork.
The purpose of this review article is therefore twofold.
Ymt, is customary, we . h to draw the attention of
Islamicist raders of this J01U"DaI) tlW available Weatcm-
Jaaauaae studies of IbD cArabJ baed on a comparison with
copate traditiOlll of Hindu. eopiatOllic. ChriItiaa, Budcl . to
ud even Tao· mystical tbouPt are perhaps more nWDerO
aDd more aa:esaible thaD works praeatiDa him primarily in
the contellt of his own IsJamic tladitioDl ud soun:a.

S39
 JOumJll O/IM AmnictIn Oriental
Due to the great number and diversity of the works
to be covered, this article hu been divided into parts.
Part I is devoted to the translations of Ibn cArabrs
own writinp, preceded by a brief introduction to the
complexities facing all students and interpreters of the
Shaykh. Part II, to appear in two future issueI, will
focus on the historical trends and influcnc:cs illustrated
by the recent translations of works by Ibn cArabI·s
later followen, colDDlcntaton, and critics (as weD as
certain "apocrypha" widely attributed to him). How-
ever, as we shall see, most of those historical tendencies
in interpretation are already reflected in the approaches
of contemporary schoWs.
PAaTI
Students of Ibn cArabT, whether specialists or bcgin-
nen, face four dauntins obstacles to an intqrated and
comprehensive appreciation of his wort: (I) the sheer
volume and variety of his writinp, possibly unparalleled
in Islamic civilization;) (2) the extreme divcnity of
symbols, allusions, rhetorical forms, and subjects which
are brought tOJCthcr, often in radically new contexts,
in his works; (3) his distinctive personal "inspjml" and
(most often) nOD-linear writing style, with its complex
parallels to the Koran itself; and (4) his presumption,
in most of his worts (including all the most famous
ones), of a specialized audience with a high degree of
spiritual development and immersion in the practice
(and vocabulary) of the Sufi path. These difficulties,
which readen will find amply illustrated in the transla-
tions mentioned below, have often given rise to impres-
sions (whether amoDglbn <:ArabI'l historical critics or
in modem secondary literature) reminiscent of Rumi's
fable of the blind men and the elephant! To transcend
J The standard biblioaraPhicai RfeRDCe wor~ Osman
y.ma's two-volume Histon et Chu3ificllliorr de 1'00000re
d7b" CArllbr(Damucus: IDititut Fr~ de 1>aJuI, 1964),
mentioDS some 846 titlcs; even if a number of these aR
apocryphal, excerpts from IlltlCr worb, or dupticale titles,
Ibn cArabl'. own penonallists of his writinp (the FIJrrU aDd
ljaza discussed by Yama), oomposed for disciples late in his
life, e.:h contain Dearly 2SO worts. The sheer n....ber of these
writiDp should not ObscuR the comprehensive aDd authorita-
tive IWUre of Ibn cArabI' 111-FutU/.tM aI-MakId)ltl (wrbc
Mec:can Inspirations") which wu oomposed and added to
throupout the last 30 yean of his life, and which coven
the full ranae of subjects and disciplines treated in his many
otberworb.
• One bouJd also not minimize the extent to which t~
clifrlCUlties reflect certain rhetoric:al features of Ibn CAnbY's
Soc~ty 106.3 (1916)
these initial obstacles and discover the unifying vision
and intention in Ibn cArabI's works requires extraordi-
nary efforts and abilities on the part of both the reader
and the translator, for the translator- ifbc is seriously
trying to communicate with the non-specialist-must
also act 81 commentator and guide through this laby-
rinth of symbols.
One traditional response to tbele problems was to
focus on a single "representative" text and interpretive
penpective, most often the philosophical, conceptual
analysis of Ibn cArabY's FUIilI al- QIkam (MBezels of
Wisdomj. This approach, initiated by Ibn CAnbY's
son-in-law and close disciple SUr ai-DIn al-QOnawi
aDd carried out in a line of douns of extensive
commentaries down to the present day, j is now readily
accessible in Enatish throup the superb study by
Toshihito lzutsu and a complete translation of the
FUlfil by R. W. J. Austin.' These two worts, because
worb that may have been oonscioUily intended either to
dissuade unqualif'Jed readen or-mOR, positively-to induce
a state of l}tIyra (~") leadins to the traDJceDdeD<:e
of establiJbcd mental eatqorics and judlJDClltl. as with the
"oem-lite wla1)iit (-ecsaabc paradoxes") favored by certain
famous SufIS. In any ellie, the bizarre epithets one sometimes
finds applied to Ibn cArabr, whether in Islamic or modern
Western 10W"CCI--e.1-, -incoherent,to pantbeist,.. ""heretic,"
16
""monist," madman;" dC.-aR undenaandablc lea as rea-
16
soned judpaents about tlae wbole of his wort than as
reactions to tbe difficult cba11enae of unifyina and intepatinl
sucb diverse and challeoainl materials.. One of the peat
advantqa of thex new tnulllatioDl is that readers can at last
beain to form their own judp:lenh on the basis of • more
representative sample of . writinp.
.s This process and referenca to QOnawl, K hlDI, and
other important figures will be disaaued in Pan II. See in
particular, in O. y~ op. cit., the list of 120 commentaries
on the Faqiq (I, pp. 241-S6) and the list of some 64 critics aDd
defenden of the Fupq (I, 114-35); neither liItina is to be
taken u exhaustive of the available soun::a in tbis reprd.
, Tr. R. W. J. Austin, TM IWuIJ of Wudom (New York:
Paulist Ina, 1980); another oomplete EaaJish translation,
1M &als of Wirdo"" Ir. A. cAbd ai-Rahman at-TaIjumana
(Norwich, UK: Diwan Ina, 1980), is somewhat DIOR read-
able, but unfortunately inKauate in many places. Both
tran.lations should be lupplemented, WheR poaaible, by the
partial translation of T. Burckhardt (EnaJ.isb tr. from the
French by A. Culme-Scymour), 1Jte Wwo", ofthe Prophet,
(Aldlworth, UK: BesbaraPublicatioDS, 1975), hichcontains
more of the commentary and reference to the underlyina
Arabic that is often needed to follow the details of Ibn
cArabl's 81'JU1DeDts. However, the Burckhardt translation
 MoulS: Ibn 'Arabi tmd his InterptYtns. Part I
of their comprehensiveness, maturity and faithful reflec..
tion of a Ionl tndition of commentary, provide an
ideal starting point for the study of Ibn cArabL How-
ever, relyinllolely on the FU#iI-or more specifacally,
on the scholastic tradition of commentary focusing
primarily on the systematic metaphysical underpimainp
of Ibn cArabY's thought-ultimately gives a one-sided
aDd hiahly misleading image of the Shaykh's writinp,
his historical influence, and his own character and
pcnonality.
Two other aspects of Ibn cArabI's wort are at leut
u essential to an adequate, intepated undentandina
of his writinp (includina the Frq;q): they are his
concern with the practice aDd methods of Sufmn, his
lifeloDl activity as teacher and spiritual guide, from
Andalusia to Anatolia; and his consistent focus on the
Koran and teaching of the Prophet Muhammad as the
source and context of all his work. These two inter-
related upecQ, which underly Ibn CArabI's conception
ofbia own unique role I I the ~ of the Muhammwlan
Sainthood" (/chQtm aJ-waJijytl tll-mul;Jommtltiiya) and
help account for his subsequent veneration as the
"Greatest Master" among a wide range of Islamic
schools and spiritual paths, may well have been taken
for granted in the trMitionallslamic teaching context
(including the commentators of the FUlfil); but their
centrality-which is most marked in the F~t-is
not at all reflected in the available English sources.7
iacluda only 9 fuU chapters (out of 27) and does Dot have the
~ importaDt IDtroduetioa to the Fupq.
The recent publication of a DeW, revised editioa of Toshihiko
Izutsu's Sujbm tmd Taoism: A ComptUtIliw Study of Key
Pld/moplticaJ Cort«pu, (University of California Pta&, 1984)
[title sliahtly different than the original two-volume edition
(Totyo: Keio IDStitute, 1967)], should help mate more acces-
sible this cIusic study of Ibn cArabt's "philosophic" thouaht.
(For those uafamiliat with this work, it should be stressed
that Part I of the boot is an entirely independent study of the
FIlfWI, relyilll especially on the famous COIlllllellWy of CAbd
aI-RazzIq UshInI [see Pt. 11], separate from the relativdy
shorter Taoist and comparative sections; the section on Ibn
CAnbY is not only cleat aDd reliable, but also com.iDI helpful
translations of perhaps J5-2O% of the Fupq.)
7 This is in no way intended • a criticism of the modem
authon in question, who most often are the mOlt colllCious of
tbe limitations of their particular studia, in view of their
direct contact with Ibn cArabl's writinp. Unfol'tUllatdy, most
raden-includin. many .-nOOn of secondary literature and
translaton from Wcstcm Iaa&u-.es bid into Arabic-lactina
writ.
adequate finthaacl acquaintance with IbD cArabt', actual
haft naturally tended to tate the limited pcnpecti~
S41
The point is not a minor ODe. Many of the standard
criticisms and misundentandinp of Ibn 'Arabi', work
(e.g., "'incoherence," Mrepetition," Mlack of focus" or
Morder,'" Mcontradictioo," Mextravapace," etc.) arise
from misconceptions of his intention as Mapplying'" a
pre-cooceived doctrine or interpretation to traditional
materials, disciplines, etc.' For the unifying intentions
and actual rhetorica) fuDctiODl of his writinp only
become evident when they are viewed in their original
penpedive of practice and realization; the same is true
if one is to appreciate the depths of his treatment of the
Koran, 1)lIdrth, and blamic rites and pndicel. Since
the actual integration of these interpretive upects of
Mtheory" and pfllCtice only becomes .pparent throup
extensive reading and familiarity with Ibn cArabI's
writinp (especially the Fllti1l}4t) and their cultural
context, one of the most important contributions of
the new translatioDl discussed below is the way they
bring out more forcefully these euential and too often
DeJIected aspeets of his work..
The translations are mentioned here roughly in
order of their accessibility and importance (in terms of
representativeness and scope of issues treated) for non-
specialists approachina Ibn cArabI's writings, other
than the Frq;q aJ- IfiJuun, for the rant
time. In addition,
readen familiar with tbe standards and procedures of
American or German scholarly publishing should be
cautioned that most of these books are marked by a
relative lack of indexes, bibliography, adequate
intcrats, and methods of presentation found in such studies
to be lCpl'CleDtative of the Shayth's ort .. a bole. The
resultiD. distortions haft beeD especially remarkable where
modern Muslim writcn have derived their imqe of Ibn
l;Arabi from lICCountJ aDd JClectiODl inteDdecl to "introduce"
him to a non-Islamicist audieDce (sec n. 21).
a Unfortunately, there is Aill no inb'oduetory study Me-
quately prcscntiDl the CIIeDtia) '-rhetorical" aspect of Ibn
cArabI's writiaat, Le.. the way be UDites many methods, styles,
and traditional subjects in view of certain I'CCUJ'fCIlt spiritual
intcntiOftS-a leek that is DOt too .urprisin& liven the cultural
bKklfound, profound tllOWlcdae of Arabic, aDd insi&bt that
tuk would require. Howner, tbc best illustration of tbc
Deeded *CIlSitivity to that crucial dimension of Ibn cArabJ'.
writi.... usually phrased in terms of COIlUDCllU on -SufISm" in
aeneral, is to be found ia tJac various coIledioDl of essays by
F. Scbuon OD Islamic subjects; sec, &IDona others. u SowflSrM.
Voile et Quinlnsenu (Paris: Dcrvy-Livrcs, 1980) and Ap-
prochn du Plthtomhv ReliVna (Paris: i.e Courricr du
Livre, 1914). However, those reflections BeDerally presuppose
a peat familiarity with both the writinp of IbD cArabI and tbe
broMer Sufi traditio of which they are a pan.
 JOIImtIl 01 1M Americtm OrimUJI Sod«y 106.3 (1986)
proofreadin~ and scholarly peer review, features
which-whether due to consideratioDJ of economy or
tradition-are not limited to this particular area of
French publishina- Hopefully, agrowina awareness of
the obstacles this poses for readers unfamiliar with the
oriainaJ Arabic will encouraae areater attention to
these mallers in the future.' For those interested in
consultina the Arabic orilinals. each translation has
been identified by its number in O. Yahia's "dpertoire
"
aelX~ the standard bibliOJl'8Ptiical reference for Ibn
cArabJ. 10
, Due to tbe rdati~ abUDdaDce of translated material (M
Ie_ compared with most areas of Islamic studies), writen on
Ibn cArabi hopeluDy will soon be&in to sift increasina
thouabt to the onaoioa, cumulative aature of their on aDd
to their respoasibilitics to a widei' interested public. ODe sian
of this interest (ill addition to the sheer volume of receat
writins) is the recent orpnization of a MMuhyiddin Ibn cArabr
Society" in Oxfo~ EJIIIaDd. and their publicatiOD (siDee
1982) of a biannual Jounwl, which may serve • ODe means of
communication and coordination in this field. In any case.
readen attemptiDa to compare two or more translations will
quickly recognize tbe Deed for fuD indexes of Koran and
J,tuJrt1t (inc1udin. important allusions as well • direct cita-
tiODS) and of technical tmnino1o&Y (keyed to the underIyina
Arabic expressio... liven the inevitable variations in choice
of equivaleDu by many translators). likewise, ai~ the
practic:al impossibility of reaclina all relevant worb on IbD
cArabi, it' important that translations (and especially DOtes
and commentary) reflect the input of other qualified scholan
in the fld.d-somethina that wa clearly not the case with
aneral of the otb reviewed bete.
10 See n. 3 &bow. Readen unfamiliar with Prof. Yahia's
work should be amed that many of Ibn CArabi's writinp
were known under multiple titles. even in his own lifetime,
and tbM the titles frequently are only vapely or symbolically
related to tile primary subjects of the worb in question. This
belps explain why translaton-addilll to the confusion-have
frequently chosen to use their own, more representative titles.
As a J"CIult, Dr. Yabia's dClCriptiOD of the contents of worb
he WU DOt able to examiJle din:c:tJY. where baled on indica-
tiona in the titles, are not always completely accuraae. In
additioD, the work is by DO means complete in ill citation of
earlier tranaJatio . a correcteeI aDd updMeci list, by M.
N01Cutt. is liven in tbe above mentioned JOUTIIGl of 1M
MuI)yiddin Ibn cA,tlbr SocWty. In (1984). and should be
supplemented in fonhc:omina issues.
For traDllatiolll from the Futlll)at (O.Y., o. 1lS), liwn
the v.t extent of that wort, we haft cited the chapter number
(same in all editio ) and the volume aDd pqa KCOrdina to
the 1329 Cairo edition, frequently reprinted in Beirut (011'
I. The new translation of M. AsfN PALACIOS' classic
study, L 7sklm chriltianlll: buM $lIT ¥ Sou.f'/RM d1bn
CArabl tk Mur~ [Tr. B. DURANT. Pp. 379. Paris: GUY
TamANIEL/ EDmONS DE LA MAUNIE. 1982.], despite
the age of the oJiaina1 (1931) and the evident limitations
of the approach IUuestcd by its title, still remains the
best available introduction to Ibn cArabY's own life and
spiritual practice, and to those crucial practical and
experiential aspects of his work which were shared
with earlier SufISm (and ultimately with mystics of
many religious traditions). As such, it provides an
indispensable complement to the metaphysical, ~ret­
ical" aspect emphasized in the FUIiiI 111- 8iklmt and the
studies of Izutsu and most other available sources in
English. The fruit of decades of study and reflection on
Ibn cArabI'. work H (and the often unavowed inspira-
tion of many subsequent studies), Alin's work contains
almost as many pages of tran lation and 81 wide a
range of topics a all the other books reviewed below
taken together. The volume is divided into what can be
regarded as three distinct books: (a) a detailed bio,-
raphy of Ibn cArabi, based on his own autobio-
JI1lphical remarks throupout the FuttiJ;I41 (pp. 23-90);
(b) an anthology of representati~ excerpts, focusin,
on the Sbaykh's spiritual method and experience, from
a number of key works (pp. 209-378); and (c) a
comparative study of Ibn cArabY's spiritual method
and "psycholol)'," to a areat extent typical of SufISm
more generally, which must be approached with
caution (pp. 91-208).
The biopaphical section, while by no means exba
ina the references available in the FutQhal (and other
works),12 does Ii e an indispensable self-portrait of the
~ldir) and dlewbere, aDd followed in Prof. aJ-l;Iakrm's
lexicon of Ibn cArabI's technical vocabulary (n. 1 abo~).
(Osman Yabia'l new. 1Cieatif'Je: edition of tile FUJiiJJ4t. with
extensive and invaluable indexes. has not yd reached the end
of Volume I of the oIcIer editions, and a tberd'ore not used
for any of the tranIlatioDl reviewed hac.)
II We may mention in partic:u1ar tbe (abridp) English
translation of his hl4m tIIUI t~ DiviM Comedy. tr. H.
Sutherland. (London: Frank Cas and Co. Ltd.• 1968-reprint
of t 1926 ("tnt edition), which retains ita usefulness u the
best available study of Ibn cArabT's esc oJoay aDd its
soun:a in Islamic t.nMlition, nm ifit is no ouadated u far
the question of infIueftCCS OD Dante' coocemed.
12 It should be nOled that AJfn's refereoces are to the older.
BQ1Iq lithoarapbed cclition of t Fu~, also in four
volumes, but with entiRly different paaination from t
edition most often cited in more modern worb OD Ibn cArabi
 MoulS: Ibn cArdi tmd lab IlIlnpmen. PtlTt 1
Shayth and his dramatic penonality-a portrait that
not only offen a vivid sense of Ibn cArabl as a
"practicing" Sufi, but also may IUgest some of the
underlyiDJ reasons for the oDJoiq hostility and uspi-
cion his works encountered (both during and after his
lifetime) amoDJ certain aroupl of mo~ sober-minded
theologians, lawyen, aad philosophen. Jl This portrait
of Ibn cArabI and his Sufi milieu is perfectly comple-
mented by the deICriptioDS of his own masters and
companions in the biosraphical sections of his RQl;a
aI-Quds and aI-Durrat al-F4Jchira. readily available in
Austin·. translation- 14 In addition, Asm·. quotations
(pp. 79-85) of some of Ibn cArabrs own descriptions
of his distinctive, t6inapired" method of composition in
virtually all of his works. and of the way the FUlfil and
FlltQ1.r4t were meant to be read. should be required
readinl for anyone who sets out to study those
writinp.IS
(cairo. 1329: cf. n. 10 abo~). IsJamieists shoUld be able to
decipher the transliteration of references. proper names, etc.,
which-since the translator dearly .u unfamiliar with the
underlyina Arabic-bas sometimes taken some peculiar tums
in the passaae from Spanish to French (e.,., al-Mariq aI-
Mobadam for ai-Malik aI-MuC~).
The inflUCDCe of Asfn Palacios' biographical selections in
this ort (and the pervasiveness of tbe phenomena alluded to
in n. 7 above) is ill rated by the frequcoc:y with which its
panial Arabic translation by t:.A. BadawI (Ib" t:..AI'Gbr: U.
yatuJru wtI MIIIiJrJuIbuJru. Cairo. 1965) is no cited in contem-
porary Arabic cliscuuions of Ibn cArabr instead of references
to the correspondina pauaJCI from the FUliU;t41 itJelf.
1) See Part II for further refcrcnca to this problem. These
historical phenomena are otherwise almost impossible to
comprehend if one approaches the problem from a "doctrinal,"
purdy conceptual study of his writinp.
•• Sufu of .A1UItIJwitl, tr. R. W. J. Austin. (London: Georae
AUcn. Unwin, 1971). The boot Ius also been translated into
French, by G. Leconte, us Soufu d"A1tdIJJ0ruie. (Paris:
Sindbad/ Editions Orientales, 1979). but without the indexes
and helpful biblioaraPhy provided in the oriainal Eoaliah
version. Althoup Asfn docs not usually quote from the
RiiJ.r tIl-Qutb, be docs Jive frequent refCreocel to tbe cor-
rcspondiq biographical entries, which can be c-.iIy matd1ed
with Austin's translation.
IS Given the diversity and diJtiDCti'Ye1lCll of Ibn CAnbY's
style of writins. even in comparison with other forms of Sufi
literature, a comprehensive study of his methods of writina
and rhetorical techniques, in the laraer context ofhiJ spiritual
method-bued on the many indications scattcred throup
the FUI~ill-issurely one of the peat needs in this fJeld. (Sec
also n. 8 above.)
543
Probably the most valuable aspect of the work are
Asfnt translations from six different treatiJa by Ibn
cArabl (plus another work now attributed to a later
Turkish author) focusina on the Shaykh·s spiritual
advice and his own discussions-often illuminated by
accounts of his penonal experience-of ..... and
conditions of the Sufi path. These seleaioDJ although
t
systematically leavina out the more diffacult meta-
physical and cosmological passages, are repreaentative
of a central and still virtually unstudied dimension of
Ibn cArabI's work that is elaborated. for example, in
huDdrecb of pqes of the FlltQJ.r4t. Three of tile selec-
tions are co~ primarily with what may be broadly
called the tId4b aspect of SuflSlll, "rules" or advice
conceminl spiritual practice and method. The treatise
on "The Essence of What is Indispensable for the
Novice" (O.U.• N- 352) has since become available in a
complete EnaJish translation; 16 in clear aDd ItI'aipt-
forward terms. it lives an excellent idea of what Ibn
cArabi would have PR:IilPposed as the very minimal
conditions for most readers of his worb. The "rmn
Rule Conceminl the Conditions Necessary for the
People of God's Path" (K. a/-Amr aI-MuJ;rJcam . .• ,
O.U. 28) is a considerably more advanced work.
including fascinatina advice to spiritual JUides on the
types of languaae and teachil18 they should offer to
different audiences and types of students-remarks
which could be usefully applied to the interpretation of
Ibn cArabi's own writinp. The brief paaages from the
K. aI-Tat/built al-1IahlJ'd (O.Y. 716). while not really
representative of that major work as a whole,11 include
brief but pointed re~ for both novices and more
advanced seeken. that should be exmmely intereltiq
to students of the practical and socio-historical side of
Sufism. Such students will fmd that frequently Ibn
cArabi's !lugestions-e-g., on questions of JDmiIC or
the inadvisability of frequent traveti., etc.- are often
•• "Instructions to a Postulant,"tr. Arthur Jeffery. pp. 640-
SS in bis A R~ 011 lsliun, (London, 1962).
•, See the edition. and cspecially the 10Dl German introduc-
tion (pp. 1-162). of H. S. Nybera's Kkltwn Sdlri/tm da Ibn
aJ-cArtlbl. (Lcidcn: E. J. Brill, 1919), hicb pves a detailed
analysis of some of tbe mclaphysical concepts of tho and
related early orb. It would appear that the relative aa:es-
libility of Nybcra's study of Ibn cArabJ"1 ""tbeoIophica1lystcm"
(pp. 29-160)-0 account hich siva DO inklin& e.8-, of the
dimensions repracntecl by Asfn's IClcctions from the Tlldbrrilt-
helps cxplain the predominance of this aspect in ublequcnt
Western secondary literature and popular conceptions of thc
Sbayth (see n. 7 abovc).
 JourNIl of tM American Oriental Society /06.3 (19116)
contrary either to popularly accepted imaaa of SufISm
or to common Sufi p ~ in other rqions and
periods of the Islamic world.
The other three selections are primarily concerned
with the phenomenology and (in the broadest possible
sense) "psychology" of the spiritual path, subjects
whic:h in Ibn cAmbrs writings-unlike some of the
earlier, "clauical" Sufi literature in this area-are
usually closely integrated with his mystical theology,
metaphysics, etc. The briefest treatise, the R. al-Anwar
(O.Y. 33), while explicitly concerned with the phe-
DOmena experienced duriDa klullwtl, or spiritual retreat,
is also a concise survey of some key stages of the
spiritual path, and has often been commented on in
that context. II Ibn cArabI's much longer Mtlwiiqi C al-
NujQm (0.Y. 443), summarized and partially translated
here, coven an extraordinary ranae of spiritual phe-
nomena and insiJhts in a relatively accasible form,·'
and was even more widely read and studied by later
SufIS. The culminatina selection (pp. 337-78) is made
up of long passap from chapter 78 of the FutUl)4t, on
divine and human love; his subtle analysis of that
theme-althOUgh its overall role is by no means as
predominant in Ibn cArabI's work as with the famous
Sufi poets, for example-is perhaps unsurpassed in
Islamic mystical literature. 20
I' This work hal also recently been translated into English,
under the descriptive title JOUT1WY to 1M Ltxd 0/ POwn', IT.
R. T. Harris, (New York: Inner Traditions International,
1981), aloDI Yiitb iJDponant seleetio from tbe tommeotary
by cAbd al-KarrmmT(to be discussed in Part II). O. Yahia(I,
p. 162) mentions ICVeO alternative titles aDd, toldher witb
Broctelmann, almost SO maDusaipts. The full traD5lation of
tbe staDelard title wouJd be --rhe Lipts Conceminl the
Mysteries (or secrets) Beatowe<l on ODe Who it in Retreat
(kJuJlwIl)." Sec also the translation and extensive commentary
on tbis work-drawml especially on JfiT's commentary and
367)-in Michel Chodkiewicz' u &ellU .$
corresponding paaaga from tbe FWQ/:r4t (chapters 167 and
sainu: hophltk
~t Ubtltll dtmJ III docltlnt d7bn CAtabr. (Pari. Gallimard,
1986), pp. 181-221. [This major new study of Ibn C Arabi's
conception of prophecy aud sainthood, bued on a tboroUib
study of the FWUl}a1 and many other writinp, appeared too
recently to be included in the body·oftbis artide.]
., The subject ()( this work. which has little to do witb
trolOJY of any sort, is better indicated by the alternative title
(0. Yahia, II, p. 37S) X. Sirr III-A$'''' WII rmIIIUIIti ciJm 111-
lib,., ... ; according to Yahia, it was abo commented on by
cAbd a1-RazzIq al-Kisbini (also discussed in Part II).
20 Lone quotations from the same chapter (78) are also
available in the EnPsh tranIlation (by R. Mannheim) of
H. Corbin's CTNIM ImtJPrIIlion in 1M S,qum o/Ibn cA'lIbT,
The central, analytical section of Asin's book is
undoubtedly the most dated and problematic, Jiven his
avowed intention of"explaining" Ibn cArabrs spiritual
method by reference to Christian mystical precunon.
However, it is not too difficult for an attentive reader
to transform that historicist penpedive into a more
appropriate comparative one, thereby bringing out the
universality of the underlyina phenomena. ADd for
more specialized readers with access to the Arabic texts
frequently cited, As{n's detailed references (mainly to
works other tban the FutilJ;Jat) represent tbe fruits of
yean of JaCuch that would be diff'lCUlt to duplicate.
More daqerous than the explicit historicist peaspective,
however, is tbe repeated UIC of alien and inappropriate
interpretive eategories-e.g., 1Jantheist," -..nonist,"
...heoI0IY," "heterodox/ orthodox," etc. -which, aI-
houp undentaDdable in terms of Alin's intended
audience, cannot but mislead thole lackina a finthand
acquaintance with Ibn cArabl's works. Surely nothing
has done more to pRVeDt serious study and understand-
ing of Ibn CArabi than the virtuaUy universal repetition
of such formulae in modern secondary literature by
authors who (unlike Asin) have had no inkling of their
appropriateness and limitations. 21 Finally, readers must
be cautioned that the author here-as in his Is/tun and
the Divine Co~dy-has offered only the evidence
that j]]ustrates his thetis; as a rauh, not surprisingly,
Bollinsen Series XCI, (Princ:eton: Princeton University Pras,
1969), cspccia11y in the nota to the chapter on the -dialedic of
love." Alin'. lC~ons-toup1y IG-IS% of the orilinal
cbapacr (= FUI~, II, pp. 320-62), althoup not indXated
• such in tbis traDalation-lcave out the complex meta-
pbysical-tbeolo,ical dilcuaioDS that fonn the pater body of
the chapter; tbe selec:tion makes for easier readinJ, but is not
wbolly representative as a result.
The fOUf openine pap (pp. 333-36) are taken from
unidentified lCCtions of the FwUJ,at, dew. witb the impor-
tant diffcr~ between the -Sufi," aDd the MMiIIbtlUry,,"
(or mlll4mr)'d, the foremost of whom beina the Prophet
Muhammad), in Ibn cArabl's distinctive usaae of that term:
this subject and related spiritual .....nks" and functions are
discussed in detail in chapter 73 (beainnina of Vol. II) of the
FIdiiI.t4t.
21 The most gIarin. instana:, almost inacapable in secoocIary
lileralUR refcrrin. to Ibn cArabr, is tbe formula ~ 111-
wujUd" (roulbly translatable as tbe "'transceodent Unity of
Beinej-a phrase have not 10Qtcd anywhere in Ibn
cArabI'. own writ.inp (but see the remub on BalylnJ and tbe
school of Ibn SabcTn in Pan II). Sucb formulae may have a
certain usefulness as a sort of .. hortband" when used by
specialists wellllCQuainted .tb their intended references (and
intrinsic limitatiODl), but their use for a wider audience
 Mouu: Ibn cATllbi tmd hb InurpTetns. Part I
one comes away with little sense of the overwhelming
role of Koran and ~th in all of Ibn cArabY's
writings, in his own self-image (as tbe ~aI of Muham-
madan Sainthood"), or in his later influence throuJbout
the Islamic world. Fortunately, however, the transla-
tions discussed below offer a much more balanced
impression of that aspect of his work.
U. Despite its brevity, this translation of Ibn CArabi's
K. al-Ftma' fi al-MwhiiJu1d4 (O.Y. 125), 1.1 Livre
tk rExtinction dmu fa Contnnpkltion [Tr. MICHEL
V.(LSAN. pp.
57 (translation pp. 25-50). Paris: LBS
EDITIONS DE L 'OEuvRE. 1984.] offen a remarkable
introduction to some of the central and recurrent
concerns of all his writing. n Above all, Ibn cArabi
explicitly stresses throughout this treatise-what is
often only implicity elsewhere-the decisive importance
of the appropriate spiritual realization (ta/:Jqlq) for a
true awareness of each of the classical sufi topia he
discusses: the consciousness of divine Unicity (aJ.uuI1ya)
and the illusions of unif1C81ion" (IttiJ:JadJ; the necessity
M
of carefully crafting one's speech and action when
discussing the realities of spiritual "unveiling" (kahj)
in the midst of those who are unaware of them;23 the
functions of himma (Minner intention; and especially
its highest spiritual degrees, culminating in the pure
devotion (ilchliq) of the mu1}tIqqiqiin; the differences
between the revealed Reliaion (din) of the Prophet
(and earlier prophets) and the divene teachings insti-
tuted by non-prophetic saaes (the ~:J);24 and the
inevitably ends up conveyina iOmcthin. quite different from
what • • ori.inally intended-a diff"lCulty that is especially
compounded in tbe case of Muslim (or more secular) readers
entirely unaware of tbe complex theoloaicaJ iuua and per-
sonal commitments that underly the use of these and other
tbeolOJica1 categories lDd judatnents in this section of Asm's
wort (or, to take an even more influential cue, in the writin..
of Masaianon). The most effective antidote seems to be
extended contact with the Shaykh's actual writinp tbemJclves.
22 The concision and clarity of this work, which recommend
it for teaebin. and oral exposition, may also explain its plac:e
at the very beJinnins of the widely reprinted Byclerabacl
(1948) edition of the R/ua>iJ Ibn aJ-CA,abr, pp. 2-9. A new
EngliJb translation, with more complete commentary, would
be a welcome 1C1'Yice for students approacmn, this field.
23 The dimension of-csotericism" in Ibn cArabY's writinp-
UDderIyin, sucb crucial problems • the interpretation of his
cosmolOlialsymbolism. his understanding of Islamic tradi-
tion, the relation of his different writiup and their intended
audiences, etc.-is still virtuaDy untouched in tbe available
scholarly discussions of his work (see notes 8 aDd IS above).
24 The contrast between the relative e1l'ectiveoas and limita-
tions of Caql (unaided reason," in this context) and Juulrf
M equivalents), wbich is very useful in this cue since tbe
S45
contrast between the Sufi and both literalist and
rationalist undentandinp of the realities of Faith
(rman), epitomized in the famous /.uIdith on "l/p6n"
(*WoRmp God as thouah you law him ... j.
The density of Ibn CArabI's allusions in this text and
the concision of his treatment of subjects developed
at great length elsewhere (especially in the FutW)4t)
offer a difficult challenge to any commenwor, so that
the late translator·s annotation in this instance is
something of • model in its genre. Not only have most
of the Koranic and lpu/flh references been clearly
identifIed and commented on,2S but the Shaykh '8 tech-
nical terminology (usually with the Arabic tetms given
in parentheses) has been carefully explained wherever
necessary, often with references demonstrating a pro-
found acquaintance with the FUIiiJ}at. Above all, the
commentary is clearly thought out and consistently
directed toward the reader's undentanding of the text
itself; that sort of dilciplined pedagogical unity and
intelligence is a rare phenomenon not only in transla-
tions of Ibn 'Arabi, but in writing on Islamic mysticism
in general. 26
('"illumination" or spiritual"discovery" based on tbe deepenin.
of scriptural indications and prescriptions) is one of the
tealrretlt themes of tbe FrlliiI)4J, especially, bcarilll on vir-
tually all the topics Ibn 'ArabI disawes-most notably, his
understandina of spiritual practice or method, and the central
role of tbe interiorilation of tbe ,luuc, the revealed Path of tbe
Prophet. The implications of these discussions, bile impos-
sible to summarize bere, are certainly different from bat one
might pther simply from the analysis of the Fupq and its
philosophic commentaries taken by thenuelves.
n One of thl major diff'lCUlties witb most available transla-
tions of Ibn (ArabI (mcludina those of the Fupq, n. 6
above), is the inadequate discussion of allusions (as wen as
direct quotations) to the Koran aDd 1)4drlh, witboul which
large parts of the tex~ are frequently incomprehensible or at
least quite puzzling. Even simple paae or verse references
(witbout full, appropriate retranslations aDd often elaborate
contextual explanations) are often of little usc to those
without a serious tnowledF of clauical Arabic, ready aaas
to tbe /.uuIfth collections, and a tborough acquaintance with
Ibn cArabi's often tecbnical use (build ina on earlier Sufi
authon) of those traditional SO\lKCl. This IOrt of apparatus-
eucntial for molt modem readers, includin. many Mualims-
corresponds to a bacqround and preparation Ibn cArabI
took for ....nted amons most of his intended audience;
obviously the impression or rhetorical dfec:t is racially
different in the t 0 caes. (See also nota 4, 8, and 15 above.)
26 In this reprinted version, the editor bas also added an
index of Arabic technical terms (thoqb not of their French
 Jour1lll1 of tM Amme.n Orlentlll Sockt, 106.3 (1986)
According to the editor's note, this is only the rtnt in
a series of republications of the late Mr. VIIsan\ many
translations from Ibn cArabI (including some eleven
shorter chapten of the FutQ/;rill, as weD as many of the
treatises included in the Hyderabad edition of the
RJu8~/) which oJiainally appeared in the journal
&u.s traditionnella,11 and which together constitute
perhaps the largest body of translations of Ibn cArabI
<apart from the FUfiif) available in any Western lan-
auaae. While not devoid of mistakes and occasional
disputable interpretations, these translations and their
1CC0mpanyina annotation and commentary are of a
quality considerably above the average in this fJeld,
and their republication would be a most valuable
contribution to all students of Ibn cArabY, and of
SufISm aDd Islamic spirituality more genera1ly.
DI. 1.11 Niche da LunaJirel [Tr. MUHAMMAD VXLSAN
(son of preceding translator). Pp. 156. Paris: LEs EDI-
nONS DE L'OEuvu. 1983.1 a truslation of Ibn cArabrJ
personal coUcction of lOllpJdrth qudrrentitled Mbhlc4t
ai-Anwar (0. Y. 480 and 11),11 is marked by a sim-
translator hu si~ the underlying Arabic expression in
parentheses in most places where a translation alone might be
inadequate. Although this procedure does make for a cluttered
and perhaps leu immediately Mreadable" translation, it is
probably essential for any more serious study of Ibn cArabi,
especially by DOn-Arabilts, liven tbe lack of a dir~tly
equivalent tectmical vocabulary in non-Islamic 1aJl&uaIes.
(The situation is no different than with translations of philo-
sophic or mystical texIS from Sanskrit, Tibetan, Chinese, etc.)
The need for common reference to the Arabic is compounded
when, u is now the case, students are fKed with venioDS of
Ibn cArabY's worb by a dozen or more translaton.
27 A full bibliography of those translations is Jiven in a
recent collection entitled L'lslimr el hi Fonetlon de ReM
Guhwn, (Paris: Les Editions de l!()euvre, 1984), pp. 194-96;
the bibliolFaphy also lists the same author's many translations
of chapters from al-KllhlnI's commentary OD the Koran,
often (faJsely) attributed to Ibn cArabt (sec Part 11). The same
coUection also includes the author's translations of part of tbe
Foreword to the FwQ/.tat (pp. 180-91) and of chapter 20, on
the "mowled. of Jesus" (pp. 13-82); unfortunately, the
apparatus in these lattCl' two cases is more oriented to the
author's GumoDian preoccupations, amply illustrated in the
remaininl articles of this collection.
11 The full title-in this version; O. Yam. (11, 390) mentions
eight other titles from other manuscripts-is "n.e Niche of
Liihts Cooceminl the Reports (aJchb6r) Related From God."
(This book, incidentally, is quite distinct from a famous and
frequently translated Sufi work by aI-GbazIlI whose title
beains with tbe &aIDe words.)
plicity~ directness, and accessibility that makes it not
only an indispensable reference for students of Ibn
cArabl, but also an excellent introduction to this
fundamental and frequently misundentood aspect of
Islamic devotional and spiritual life. Its usefulness for
students-liven the decepti~ "simplicity" of the Arabic
of many 1;Iadllh-is further enhanced by the addition
of a facin& fuDy vowelcd Arabic text. The translator's
brief but dense introduction (pp. 7-14) focuses on Ibn
cArabl as a mubaddllh, mentioniDJ his teaehen in that
domai~ his favorite sources, and a number of other
penonal collections of his (most now lost) refemcl to
in his writings. However~ this information, while
important, does not even beain to convey the funda- .
mental importance of I;uldTth as sources for all of the
Shaykb'. work. Those who study attentively e\'CIl thelc
few examples, though, win soon recopize to wbat a
great extent worb such as the Frqiq and FuI~ ~
in fact woven out of exteDli~ reflection and com-
mentary on these and other I;uldrlh. which function
much like musicalleitmotifs.19 For the most part the
ethical and spiritual intentioDl of these 1)Gdfth (which
frequently recall portions of the Gospels) are readily
apparent, and eschatological themet are panicularly
predominant. 30
As Ibn 'ArabI expl8ins in his introduction (p. 16),
this collection consists of three parts (of 40, 40, and 24
2' See the extensive indexes of /JtMl1th refereoca in each
volume of O. Yahia's new, Ongoinl edition of IIl-FuJiIJ,4II1I-
Mllklclytl, and the selcetiw dilcusaion of 44 of the most
important of these (nol inducled in the Ml.shk4t m-A.rrwar) at
the end of S. al-l:Iatrm;s IIl-Mu7am 1Il-$UfT (n. 2 above),
pp. 12S7-69. The importaoe:e of this element in Ibn cArabY's
writinp underlies and eumplda his daim to be the aseal of
MuhammlNlan Sainthood" (ie., among other thinlS, tbe
exemplary interpreter of the inner meanins of the onl and
ceadtiop of tbe Prophet), and belps to explain-far more
than his diff"lCUlt metaphyaical doctrines-the extent of his
widespread veneration in the Islamic world u the "patest
Shaykh... Unfortunately, most available studies of Islam (and
of /.uIdr'h in particular) fail to convey tbe central importance
of selected J.wJa1r (maoy or which are often literally inseparable
from the Koran in popular consciousness) in the reliaioUl
experience of people from all Islamic rCJioDl, sects, and
periods. This spiritual dimension, quite distinct from the
Mprofeaional" use of 1)tId1I1t in qat and thcolosial contextl
that has been the object 01 much modem historical raearcb,
is the main foe of Ibn cArabI's interest in and pedaaoaiW
use of /.uIdIIlt.
)0 Especially intcratinc in that rcprd is the I}IMJTth tll-
mtlWik[i1 (tbe "stations" of the Resurrection), here Jiven in
several parts in the last t 0 sections, which mates up much of
 MODIS: Ibn CArabl IIItd his Intnpreter8. Part I
luJdrth, respectively, the fant group with their full imIld
IOml back to the Prophet (who relates them from God
or via Gabriel), while the second arlHlCWI aR related
directly from God. (The translator has added an
interestinl appendix, pp. 14S-SI, from an 18th-century
Maprebi Sufi writer, concerniDa the distinctions which
were necessarily drawn between these widely recognized
"divine ..yinp~ and the words of the Koran iuelf.) It
may be pointed out, given the widespread prejudices to
the contrary (at least in modem secondary literature),
that the peat majority of the J.uu/1th collected here,
includinl all of tbose in the first part, are taken from
the standard canonical recensions, and were not Min_
vented" by Sufi tradition. This point is further empha-
sized and elaborately demonstrated in W. A. Graham's
Div;' Word and Prophetic Word in Eiuly blilm,3' a
work (apparently unknown to Mr. Vilsan) which took
Ibn cArabr's collection as one of its points ofdeparture,
and which contains English translations of thole hDdrth
from the MishJcJIt that are also included in the canonical
collections.
IV. Stcphane Ruspoli's translation of chapter 167 of
the FllIiil)Qt, L "tIkhimit du bonheur JHUfait [Tr. S.
RUSPOLI. Pp. lSI. Paris: Boo INTEINATIONAL (collec-
tion"L'De verte"). 1981.] is certainly the most ambitious
and pioncerinl effort among tbe studies reviewed here,
since it is the fust complete Western translation32 of a
chapten 64-6S of the Futiil)at, on the stases of the Resurrec-
tion and the states of the bIeaed in Paradise.
Uafortunately, the lack of any iDdex-althoulh it would
admittedly have been a areat deal of ork-somewhat limits
*
the usefuloeu OCth.ii translatioli ai referenee (with reaard to
other writinp of Ibn cArabI) (or those who are not able to
memorize its conteDts.
31 The H.,..e: MOutoDA Co., 1977. Prof. Graham's work is
by no means exhaustive of the I}tu/flh qudsT iDcluded in tbe
canonical collections; a recent COllecb\4e survey of the -Six
Boob," al-A~tJr 1I1-Q&ubfya, (Cairo: Wizlrat aI-
Awqlf ... , 140(/1980), cites in fun some 400 eumples,
iDdudina fun references to the originailOurca. Many of tbae
I]adTtJr qudii, not included in the Mw.Jc1J al-AnwIT, are
litewiac repeatedly cited aDd interpreted in IbD cArabl'
worb (e.&-, the "'Iiiq Ill-jIuuwI," pp. 470«. iD the above-
mentioned urvey, which is at the heart of his escbatoloaica1
diKuaions in the FUliiblt).
n The problems posed by complete translations of extensive
sections from the FutUl)iIt (u oppoRd to translatina only
short, self-contained chapters or 1C1eded pusqa, • in Asfn
Palacios' book above) are basically twofold: (I) wbat to do
with phrases one doesn\ really uDdentand, but wbole "'key"·
pcobably liven IOmewhere else in that massiYe wort (which
547
long chapter of the FutUJ,iit (14 pages of Arabic text,
or roughly .S% of the book)-oDe of its most complex
and allusive passages, and one whose eludication and
undentaDdina inevitably requires references to many
other sections of tbat immense work. The narrative
framework of the chapter is the quest for spiritual
perfection undertaken by two friend , a "follower of
Muhammad 19 (with aU that implies for Ibn cArabT) and
an ambitious "'hcoretician" (part mutaJudlim, part
philosopher) wbo relies on his own tbeoloaical cosmo-
logical reasonings. n The contrast of their very different
paths and experiences, in the context of the traditional
stales of the Prophet'S spiritual ascension (miCrjjj),
enables Ibn cArabI to allude to many of his most
essential spiritual insiabts and reaIizations wbile con-
tinually reminding tbe reader of their practical and
penona! presuppositions.
However, just as in Ibn cArabI's other works using
the MiCrllj framework (especially tbe long chapter 367
of the FutiiJ)(lt, recountinl the Sbaykb's own penonal
miCrjjj, and tbe K.. m_brjj"),M the variety of subjects
and symbols brought into play in this chapter is so
great that an adequate commentary-which the trans-
lator bas promised for a future volume-would have to
be many times longer than the actual translation. In
the interim, this venion does provide illuminatinl and
essential notes at many points,J' and readers acquainted
mi&bt take a decade to rU4 aad annOble ill its efttirety); aDd
(2) what to do where, _ is often the case, adequate explana-
tion of a .inale aUusioD may require whole p8.ICI of com-
mentary drawn from other cbapten or orb by Ibn cArabl1
It is DO doubt the presence or lDUIy substantial collllDClltarin,
ubltantidy eliminatifti taw. two IJ'C*l obstacles, that helps
explain the focus of academic interest on tbe Frq;q al-Qilumt.
J) This symbolic exprasion of a recurrent theme in the
FutiiJ.tllt, tbe contrat betWCCD the two paths of /uuhf and clU/l
and their relative efficacity (see al 0 n. 24 above) raises a
DUmber of diffICUlt problems for modem readers and inter-
preters, and perhaps calls into question tbe adequacy of some
of the traditional approaches to the FUIfJI. At tbe Yery least,
this attitude wa not without its repercussions in the later
attacks on Ibn cArabt's orb and his Sufi defenden by
certain theologians and pbilosophen (see Part II).
14 Chapter 367 = FutU/:t4t III, 340-S4; K. ai-JR." ...
(O.Y., o. 313) = RtuallllHr a/-cArIlbT(Hycierabad, 1948),
Pt. I, 13th treatise (pp. 1-92). An ex1cnsiYe summary of the
/;uIdrtlr and ~oranic soun:es and ymbolism used in these
chapters, a well _ a broad outline ( ithout interpretation) of
each of them, can be found in ARn Palacios' [8"'" tmd tM
Divine COlMdy (full ref. at D. II above).
lS The usefulness of Dr. Ruspoli'. notes and the advance
they represent can be measured apinst an earlier, partial
S48 JDUmIII 01 the Amniam OrimtDl Society 106.3 (1986)
with the FUIiJI, for example, will recognize discussions
of many of the same questions of metaphysics and
mystical theology. Moreover, the discussions of 001-
mololY and principles of created beiDa in the con-
cluding sections also form an exceUent complement to
the equally condensed pn:sentations of those matters in
the works translated by D. Gril and M. Gloton dis-
cussed below. However, even allowing for the serious
challenges posed by this chapter, the quality of the
translation and commentary alike show evidence of a
certain haste and carelessness that will limit its useful-
ness for the general reader, and may even give a
misimpression of confusion or disorder that does not
truly reflect the Arabic original.
V. The two studies dealt with in this section are likely
to prove less accessible for those approaching Ibn
cArabI for the first time. Both of them, in highly
condensed and symbolic language, touch on limited
aspects of a complex symbolic framework of cosmol-
ogy, cosmogony, and metaphysical concepts (the InslIn
Kiimil, "Muhammadan Reality", etc.) which-in its
twofold interrelations with the traditional sources of
the Koran and I,atulith, on the one hand, and their
spiritual realization and verifICation on the other-
underlies virtually all of Ibn cArabY's writing. Unfortu-
nately, there is really no single work to which
non-specialists can refer for 16keys" (or even adequate
clues) for fully decipherinl these and many similar
symbolic treatises of Ibn cArabT. l6 But even if these
texts cannot really be "understood" in isolation,]7 they
translation of this same chapter by G. Anawatj, ML 'AJchimie
du Bonheur, d1bo cArabi." pp. 353-86 in the RnIW ell
rbutUut Domilllc.u. d'£tude$ OrimltJln du CiliTe, Mlhmge$
6 (Cairo, 1959-61).
l6 In Western 1anIuaaes, the best introduction is certainly
the tudy of the FU#4 a1- QiJuI", by T. Izutsu (see n. 6 above),
to be supplemented by the German introdue:tion to H. S.
Nybera's Klmwn Sehri/tm tk$/b" cArabf(n. 11 above). The
broadest and most useful refereDte, fOt tbose able to read Ibn
cArabl in Arabic, is now no doubt the -.gufi lexicon" of
S. aI-"aklm (n. I above), under tbe appropriate beadinp;
see, e.•., the entry for tl/-iluiln tll-Umi/ (entry no. 66,
pp. 158ff.) aJJd its forty synonyms in Ibn cArabY's technical
terminology for ,hal key term alone.
)7 Nor can it be assumed that such brief symbolic writinp
weR always meant to be Mgnderstood" in a systematic SCDJe;
dependifll on the case, one can hypothesize a number of
aesthetic, pedaaogical, Or eYen socio-political explanations of
certain of these puzzlina treatises. It is worth notiaa. in this
coDDedion, tbat Ibn cArabT often praises tbe condition of
do offer representative cases of important stylistic and
rhetorical aspectl of Ibn cArabJ'. work which we have
not already encountered.
M. Oloton'. translation of the Shajorat til· KJzwn
(0.Y. 660), L 'Arbre du Morule [Tr. MAV.lCE GLOTON.
Pp. 230. Paris: Us DEUx OcEANS. 1982.~ previously
translated into Enalish by Arthur Jeffery, I is perbap
most noteworthy for its extensive commentary and
additional references (the actual translation covering
only pp. 48-108). That e planatory material includes
not only long passages from the Koran an4 I;uItllth
(e.g., those underlyiDl the notion of the "Muhammadan
Reality"), JurjlnI's dcfmitions of Sufi technical terms,
and sections of the FUIUI not otherwise available in
French, but aliO certain pteYio Iy UDtranllated parts
of the Fut~t-the most important being chapter 63,
on the borztlkh (both the intermediate, O&imaginal" level
of reality, and the esc:batologicaJ state loosely resem-
bling purgatoryj.39 Ibn cArabY's work itself is divided
U
into three D'&ain ptl1U:«J (pp. 49-62) a brief cosmological
outline of the "Tree of Being" using primarily Koranic
symbolism; (pp. 63-92) a discussion of the levels and
aspects of this cosmic whole (incJuding its microcosmic
correspondences) in terms of tbe "Muhammadan Real-
ity"; (pp. 93-1(6) a symbolic recounting, in this CO$Dlic
context, of the archetypal spiritual uc:ension of the
Prophet, somewhat shorter than the venion in the
work translated by Dr. Ruspoli above. While the
extensive references illuminate tbe many individual
""yrtl, of one'. ego beiDI"at a loss"-and thus more receptive
to tbe spiritual Truth-ill comparison with tbe (relatively)
superficial and schematic son of undentaDdin, normany
soulbt by the unenJilbteDed ctlql.
31 Mlbn AI.cArabt"s Sbajarat aI-Kawa," Studis IdtllJlktl, X
n
(1959), pp. 43- and XI (1960), pp. 113~ recently reprinted
in boot form in Lahore, Pakistan (1980). The annotation in
Jeffery's venion is not as useful nor as complete as that in this
new FRncb translation, but the translation itself IeC1I1S mOR
readable, perhaps partly because it bas Dot been so syste-
matically ubclivided.
)t We must note the commendable provision of a detailed
Index'alouary (COftrilll both Arabic terms and their French
equivalents here) and a helpful introductory bibliography. In
aeneral, while the wealth of references offered by Mr. Gloton
may be Rduftdam and poaibly even annoyin. to scholars
already havin, such bacqroUDd. it shoulcl surely be of IervLce
to students approacbinl this wort for the rust time.
40 Our description heR docs not correspond exactly to the
translator's own far moR elaborate system of seetiODS and
subclivisions-a useful device which may have been carried
too far in this case.
 No als: Ibn cArtlbi tIIUi IJU Interpreter'. Port I
terms and symbols of the discussion, neither they nor
the translator's introduction really provide the com-
mentary that would be necessary to make sense of this
work as a whole.
Prof. D. Gril's translation of the R. al-iltihild 111-
ktlW1l1(O.Y. 319), L'Arbn e' 1D QlMure OIsellux [Tr.
DENIS GIlIL. Pp. 73. Paris: La DEux OCEANS. 1984.] is
as concise and exact as the preceding work is prolix;
the poetry and symbolic prose of this text demand such
acquaintance with Ibn cArabI and careful attention to
the Arabic that a translation in the full sense is
virtually impossible:" However, this tudy does serve
to point out both the central importatx:e of Arabic
poetry and poetic expression in all of the Shaykb',
writings'Z and the terrible difficulties facing translators
who would try to do justice to its mcanina (not to
mention the form). This is all the more important in
that the most strikina and controversial formulations
of the Shaykh's thought-here, for example, his con-
sistent use of the fmt penon sinJUlar when dilcu ina
the different aspects of the "Perfect Man"-are fre-
quently expressed in his poetry, althoulh one is seldom
quite sure how much weight should be given the
rhetorical dimension of dramatic or poetic license.
Perhaps more important, this work helps draw our
attention to the many aspects of Ibn cArabi's character
and expression which are profoundly and essentially
MArab" in a way that was often nq1ected already in his
transmission to the Eastern Islamic world.·)
., This study fint appeared (in subltantially the same form
• reprinted here), aloJII with a fulllCientiflC edition of the
Arabic text, in the AnnIIln Is/mrroloKiques XVII (1981),
(Cairo,IDltitat FranpiJ d'~"losieOrienlale), pp. 53ft'.
42 In EnJlisb, the bat available illustration is the recently
reprinted traDIIaIiOft of Ibn cArabt'l 1M TtII'jum4II.I-AMwilq
by R. A. Nicholson, (London: Royal Asiatic Socidy, 1911;
repro Loadon: Theosophical PublUhioa House, Ltd.• 1978).
Nicholson'l book a1Jo includes an edition of the Arabic text
(0.Y., No. 767) aocl a partial translation of Ibn cArabi's later
mystical commentary on these poems, K. ll1-lJJuIIcM'i, WQ
tU-Aclaq If Slttlrl} ... , (O.Y. No. 116). Unfortunately, Ibn
cArabI rarely provided such collllDentaries for the yilt number
of venea, for the most part much more opeDly metapbysical
and pedqosical in nature, which are scattered throu....out the
FIIIS1]4, ancI which provide a IOrt of ultimate cbaDeaF for
the tr&nJlator, giYeD their depth of allusion and the multiple
radinp and interpretatio.. they oftea contain.
4) See Part II for the relative emphasis in tbe nOD-Arabic
Islamic world on the FIqiq 1Il-lIihm and the cooc:cptual,
philosophic undentandina of the Shaykb's writinp. In addi-
tion to the role of Arabic poetry and other rhetorical and
The subject of the treatise ('·addressed to myself,"
Ibn cArabl lays), the cosmic unity of divine Manifesta-
tion in the 11111n aI- Kiimi/, is aptly described by the
lonl Arabic ti~ loosely translatable as MEpistle on the
unification of manifest heinl at the level of immediate
vision of the presence of the Tree of Man and the four
spiritual birds," where the tree (as in Sluljtullt 111-
KlIWn) symbolizes the ....nivenal Man" and the four
birds symbolize the four inseparable principal aspects
of manifest existence-the Intellect, Univenal Soul,
universal Body, and "Dust" (luIbii') or Prime Matter-
which are discussed in dozens of the Shaykh'l writinp
on cosmology and cosmoaony. One point worth noting
is Ibn cArabl' vigorous defense (pp. 69-70) of the
equal and essential role of the principle of "universal
Body" in the manifestation of the world, a key aspect
of his theology I philosophy of flljalliy.," that brings
out its dramatic contrast with the more "dualistic"
schemas (of matter and pirit, etc.) adopted by other
schools of SufllDl and otber relipoUi and philosophic
traditioDS. Prof. Gri!'s concise introduction (pp. 7-31)
identifaes these main "characten" and some of the
standard sources for their interpretation (see n. 36
above), but-no doubt wiJely-does not attempt a
detailed commentary, which would require many vol-
umes of this size.
VI. The two recent boob by Mr. Charles-Andre Gills,
which can only be partially considered as translations
of Ibn cArabt,·5 are curious contemporary ilIustratiollI
of the perennial pheooJDena of "scholasticization,"
aesthetic tendencies in Ibn cArabl'. writiDp (sec n. 8 above),
one may abo note his clistiDCtive t6etymoloJical" form of
Koranic interpRtation (amply illustrated in the F",u,)-
thintinJ, or at least praentina his tbouaht, tbroup the
usociation and analysis of Yerbal roots aDd derived fOnDI-
aDd his aoaIolOUI empbuil on the importance of Imall
details of the "iteral," outwanl aspect of the marrcQ and
tradition to a dqree which is perhaps more bro••y typical of
Arab forms of SufISm.
44 T. Izuuu, op. cit. (0. 6 above), Jives an especially clear
account of this dimension of Ibn cArabi'l metaphysics. See
also the important discussion or tbe basic clifJereaca betweea
Ibn cArabT'. outlook and the system of Ibn Sabcln and his
followers, in M. Cbocltiewicz' introduction and <:ommentary
of BalylnT'l P.plt,~ su, /"Unidtl Ab$Olw (often attributed to
Ibn cArabJ), (Paris: lei Deux Oc:WII, 1982); the sipiflC&DCe
of tbis point will be brouabt out in Part II.
45 In contrail witb the previous worts, it is the tnDIIMorI com-
mentator'. name-aDd not Ibn cArabt'l-wbich fJlUfa prom-
inently on the COftC of these boob.
 JoUT1lill of the Amerlc"" Orimttd ~ty /06.3 (1986)
g10.S5eS, and supercommentaries that were often mani-
fested in the reception of Ibn cArabI's work, especially
in the non-Arabic Islamic world. ott As is inevitable in
such cases, the commentary tradition-rather than
serving to re-create or make accessible the spiritual
and intellectual insights that motivated Ibn CArabI's
writing-easily takes on a life of its own, becoming a
"doctrine" or intellectual object of study in its own
right, accessible only to members of the particular
school or sect in question. In this instance, excellent
and thoughtful translations of important works of Ibn
cArabl, and serious reflection concerninl them, have
been clothed in an elaborate supercommentary on the
author's "two masters" (R. Guenon and M. Vilsan)
which unfortunately will tend to obscure Ibn cArabi,
rather than to illuminate him, for those who are either
unfamiliar with those writers or who happen to find
the author', distinctive melange of (among others)
numerololY, astrology, Hermeticism, Masonic ritual,
and Vedantic terminolo&y less congenial. 4'
If we bave not simply passed over these two books in
silence, it is because the underIyina works of Ibn cArabi
are of substantial value in their own right, are capably
and seriously translated and, at least in the second
case, would well repay the effort of study in abstraction
from their exotic lurroundinp. La DoctriM lnitiDtique
a
du Pllerinage 10 Maison d'AlltIh [fr. C.-A. GILlS.
pp. 331. Paris: LB EDlnONS DE L'OEVvu. 1982.].
bued loosely on cha.cter 72 of the Futiil)4t ("On the
Hajj and Its Secretsj -althoulh it is virtually im~
sible here to separate the author's penonal commen-
taries from any translations of Ibn cArabi, even
.. See Part II for details; if the phenomenon is univenal with
tbe heritage of all &real ofiainal thinken, it is still especially
easy to comprebcDd in the cue of Ibn cArabI, pen the
diftrlity and volume of his writinp aad ahe aJroseaher
exceptional variety of sources and traditions tbat are iDtepatcd
in them.
47 In all fairness, it must be noted that tbe author', com-
mentaries in both volumes also include some contn"butioDl
from two classic Islamic interpreters of tbe Sbayth', school
who will be encountered in Part II, CAW al-1lazzIq al-
~lshInI and cAbd al-Q1dir al-Jau)irI, whose remarks 8ft
usually more obviously Rlevant to the texts of lbe cArabL
However, tbe references to their worb ber'e are almost
impouible to separate from their occultist surroundin .
.. To give some idea oCtbe abridaement involved (and at the
~ time of tile detail of Ibn cArabl'. intelat in thil.ubject
and the depth of his interpretation), the lithop'apbcd Arabic
witb Arabic text in hand-should at least draw atten-
ion to the central position in the Shaykb'. thought and
practice of the prescriptions of Islamic law; his develop-
ments in that area are more profouDd and IUbtle, as
well as more voluminous, than the better-known com-
parable passap in al-GhazllT's ThY';) C UlUm td-Drn. 4'
Le Cortm et ItI Fonetion d'Herml8 [Tr. C.-A. GILlS.
pp. 226. Paris: 1.Bs EDITIONS DE L UwvaE. 1984.],
despite its title (which bas notbinl directly to do with
Ibn cArabt or the text in question), is in fact centered
on a translation of chapter 198, section 9 (II, pp.
405-21) of the Futlil)lt, consistina of Ibn cArabr'a
interpretation of the thirty-six Koranic statements of
tQw1;lId (the Unity of God), COrrespondinl to the
81ulhiJda but each set forth in slightly different terlDl. JO
The fascinating way in which Ibn cArabT brinp out
unsuspected riches of insight and meaning in each of
those Koranic verses, in conjunction simultueously
with the spiritual states and corresponding metaphysi-
cal realities they manifest and express, is a remarkable
illustration of his extraordinary capacities of interpre-
tation, as well as an excellent practical introduction to
tbe central role of the divine Names and Attributes in
his thouabt.
One cannot read this work tbrough, challenging as
that may be, without laininl at least lome sense of the
penuasiveness of Ibn cArabI's repeated claims that aU
his writinp and inspirations are nothina more than the
text of almost 100 paaa (1, pp. 66S-763) oWd be equivaleot
to some 1000 printed pap of a complete, annotated Enph
tnmslalion.
49 Tbe Dlost mODumenW and accessible illustration of uu.
dimeosion of Ibn cArabt', teacbinl is the seCtion, in the
Fu'Q/.IlIl on the "Seems of the Sharica" and the basic rituals
of Islam (ill/iii, 1}IIjj, etc.), vol. I, 322-763. equivalent to
thousand. ofpap in EnJlisla translation; there an also OWly
shorter treatises by the Sbaykh alonl similar liDes, lOme of
them diJcuuecl in Asia PalKios' wort mentioned above.
An excelleDt introduction to this stiD larFly neaJeeted area
of his thought is the article by M. Cbodkiewicz. "Ibn cArabI,
la lettre d I. Loi," pp. 27-40 in the Act~s flu Co//oqw
uMystique. CuJtur~ e' SociI,I': (Paris: Univ. de Paris-
Sorbonne,I9M).
~ Fonunately the translator', personal commentaries on
this wort are dearly separated from a complete translation of
Ibn cArabT'. own remarks, following each of the 36lCCtioDl.
Mr. Gw' comments, while still rcflectina (u in his title) tbe
same OCJCuItiat toDCenlJ, are conaiderably mOR CIORIy related
to Ibn cArabl's writing tbaa in the volume on tbe Hajj.
 MoaRIS: Ibn CArabi tmtJ his Interpreters. Part I
fruits of reflection on, or internalization of, the Koran
and 1;Iadith (and not the application to them of an
external schema of interpretation). Nor can one study
any work of his for loog without developing a trans-
formed awareness of and sensitivity to the words and
deeper dimensions of the K.orao. It is just this sort of
realization, that can only be reached through actual
meditation on Ibn cArabi's writings-not from any
account of that work, no matter how capable-that
helps justify (and no doubt partly motivated) the years
of devoted effort that are represented by all these new
publications.s I
51 Certain translations of other boob frequently attributed
to Ibn cArabT which one might expect to find here in Part I are
instead dealt with in Part II. In particular, these include the
R. tIl-A/.uuIfya of al-Balylnl (see n. 44 above); '"La Pro/~uion
de Fol," tr. R. Deladriere; and works concerning the Tafl" of
cAbd al-Razziq al-UsbiDi.
 IBN cARABI AND HIS INTERPRETERS
PART II: INFLUENCES AND INTERPRETATIONS
JAMES WINSTON MODIS
INSTITUTE OF IsMAJU STUDIES, PAaIS

Part II of this article, to be coDduded in lA.OS 107.1, surveys tome repreICIltatM fuaa of
interpretation and inftueac:e of Ibn cArabJ', wort aDlODI JUt.equeat blamic mystics and thinken
(aDd their critia) • they are teYeaIcd in receat traDIIatioaa. Their coaapariJon with Ibo cAnbr,
own wrilinp briDp out (I) the intellectual and institutional coDditioDi uDderlyiDa the creative
upedJ oftbe Sbayth" work and ac:couotiq for its pbcDomenallpl'ald; (2) importallt UpcctI of
his writiq and teaehiDI often oePctcd by his later interpreten; and (3) the remarkable diversity,
selectivity, aod autonomous development of I1Ib1cqueal Sufi traditiODJ • they traDlfol'lDeCl aad
Idapted his worb in liabt of their own concerns. This half deals with a famous treatiIe (by BaJyIDT)
repraeotiDl the -monistic" Sufism of Ibn SabcTn (and iU many critics); aa iDteratiDl apocrypbal
work (lICtually by • Wet QIdirt writer); the in8uential Persian worb of NIIafI; aod the cIec:iIive
role of the metaphysically oriented teaehinp of Ibo cArabt', ctilciple QOnawT and his JUCCaIOI'I.

INDODUCTION degree to which Ibn cArabI'. own works are JI'Ounded

PAaAPHaASING WHITBHBAD'S FAMOUS .BMA.~
about Plato-and with somethina of the same cIep'ee
of exaggeration-one could say that the history of
Islamic thoupt subsequent to Ibn cArabt (at least
down to the 18th century aud the radically new
encounter with the modem West) JDiaht largiely be
construed as a series of footnotes to his work. To the
desrce that such • statement is justifiable, this wide-
ranpn, influence must be explained not simply by
reference to the intrinsic characteristics of Ibn cArabrs
own life and works discussed in Part I of this article
(.uch features as the .heer volume of his writin& the
diversity of intellectual disciplines he draws 00, his
consistent focus on the Koran and /:uIdfth as his
fundamental sou.rces aDd primaty mode of P~ta­
tion, or the remarkable scope of his penonal teacbinJ
and contacts, from Andalusia to Anatolia), but also by
their coincidem:e with a broader historical movement
of institutionalization of Sufism (with a CODCOmitant
penetration of --Sufi" forms and allusions in virtually
every domain of the arts and intellectual life) that
seems to have touched the most scattered rePoDl of the
Islamic world at almost the same time, and with a
broad ranF of inescapable intellectual aad practical
problems posed by that iDstitutionaJization. 1 Because
of the vast extent of that larger mOYemalt and the
I Historical obIerven ba\'e often noted the ran.-table-
some would say "'providential--coincldenc::e of many of the
733
in broader traditions (of common texts, vocabulary,
methods, etc.) he sbared with other prominent Sufi
fiaura of this period, it is often very difBcult to pup
the depth and directness of his influence once one Joel
beyond the most prominent tradition constituted by
his commentaton and the line of his disciples aDd their
direct students.
Despite these complicatin, facton, however, it is
clear that an adequate account of Ibn cAnbY's inter-
preters, in addition to (I) the direc:t line of his com-
mentaton and students, would have to take into
coDlideration at least the following broader dimen-
DoDJ of his inftuence; (2) the profound penetration of
his technical vocabulary and concepts (more or less
peatcst Sufi saints (AbO Madyan, Ibn al- cAl1f, cit.), poets
(IUimt. CAtttr, Ibn al-Firi4), aDd foODden of IIIOIl of the
classical orden within the period of • century or 10 1Uf-
rotmdina the data of Ibn cArabT', life. (See, e.&-, A Schimmel,
MystbJ DilMruiOIU of bltult, p. 279, who also noteJ the
coiDcidCIM:C of similar mystical movements at the AIDC period
in DOn-1sWDic pam of Europe and AIiL) One of the most
Jtrikina eumples of this is the circle of Sufi acquaiDtaDca of
IbD <Arabi.. clilciple $adr al-Dln al-Qana~ddalt. later in
dIU article. HiitorkaJ raearcb inao the IWure and Iipj-
ficancc of the wider procca of iDlUtutioaalizatiOll, in par-
tic:u1ar, is still in its infancy and laraely cIdenniDed by limited
pcnpcdiva (an:hitcd~po~ social, JCOpapbicaJ, etc.)
that mate ~ O D Jconcemina the broader phenomena
very clifticuIt.
734 JOUTNII of the A~riaJn
adequately undentood) in subsequent Islamic poetry
(first in Persian, then in Janaua8es such I I Turkish or
Urdu influenced by Persian poetic forms), as well as in
tile explanation or interpretation of earlier Sufi poets
such II RDmi or Ibn al-F'Iri4;z (3) a siJiillar spreadinS
of hiJ metaphysical concepti and problems-apia
with widely varyin, dqrees of comprehension aud
qreement or disaareement-into subsequent scbooll
of philosophy (especially those descending from
Avic:enna), kalam theology, and even TweMt Shiite
thoupt;' and (4) the more practical and devotional use
2 (The COBUDClltariel on Ibn aJ-FIri4'. famous NtIpft Ill-
SIIJilk by .uch key fipra in Ibn cArabr. "aoo'" • S.cId
aJ-FarghInJ aDd cAbcl al-1lazzIq al-hsbinI are dilcuued
below, DB. 63 aDd 73.) The widest popular suney of the
iDftueDCCI of IbD cAnbI\ termiDololY ad popaluizcd (aDd
often quite fallacioUl) vasiODl of his thoupt in the poetry of
many blamic lanpqes is in A. Schimmel, op. cit. (index
under "lbD cArabt,.... WtJJ.u/4t IIl-wujQd," de.), whida is cape-
ciaBy helpful for the Turkish aDd wlndo-Pakiltaailt rqioDl,
complemeDtinl the larFly Iranian focus of IIUICh of the
raearcb sammariz:ed in this uticle. Professor Schimmel
frequently ,treaea (e.,., p. 280) that the poetic integration of
Ibn CArabl'. tenllinolOl)' often reftcctcd little or DO UDder-
studinl of his teaebiDp, aad the pqa de¥oted to the
Sbaykb bimIdf(pp. 263-7., on "theosophical Saismj Ktu-
ally are belt uodentood • • rdlection of some of those
dauical stereotypelJ aDd miluDderstaDdiDp (""putbeism, It
"monism,""IDOIis, etc.). AI we haft attempted 10 point out
It
both ill Part I and ill IeYCI'81 ICdiODI below, thole JDis..
representations are not limply a ~o." or popular
"limpJificatioD of 11m cArab!'. ideal, but rather the symptolDl
It
of cmaiD ollloina, historically inftuential tendenciel in Sufism
(conapondina to ccrtaiu perennial poIIibilitiel in the philo-
sophic UDdentanclinl and formulation of mystical experience)
considerably pre-datinl the Shayth. In fact, the more ~
reticaJ ..pect of his writiDa (aDd the ell'ortl of his IaIa'
clisciples) can belt be uDdentood .. an attempt 10 overcome
the interrelated pradiuI, philosophic, aad tbeoloP:a1 impli-
eatiou of pRCilely thOle popular and m:urrent misundel'-
,taIIclinpl
J A number of particular "pedS of this teDdeDcy are
discuacd in the fourth section (Qilnawt, kIIbIaJ, Amult, etc.)
and .:companyiDJ noca below. The ollly broad iDtroduetion
to tbis mOvmleDt, at 1eut iD Weaem 1aD.paaa, is to be
found in Part II of H. Corbin', HUloir~ • J. pItIJo$opIJ~
u14",lq.. ("La philolOphie islamique depuil la mort
d'A~ jusqu'l nOi jouI'l, M pp. 1061-1188 in the volume
BUlow" Ie PItiJoMJfJIW-Jll iD the E1rqcJopb& • iii
Pliltl«; see especially pp. 1097-1134 on -La ~ysiquedu
Soufiame" and pp. 1149-S2 on "11ntqraUon d'lbn •Arabi 1la
Oriental ~ty 106.4 (1986)
of the full ruae of his writinp (not so exclusively the
metaphysical or doctrinal ones), I I part of the laraer
corpus of Sufi literature, by ordinary Sufis of all raub,
especially in thOle repons where Ibn cArabr. own
4
Arabic works were more popularly acceuibJe. FmaUy,
• • sort of secondary reflection of aD these divene
strauds of inftueDCe, there is the ongoing (and .till
virtually unexplored) chain of critiques and attaeb on
Meuphysique SbICitej, and in its continuation, in IOmewlW
&Rater detail, iD the volUllle eatitIed u.
plriwopIW iT"".",.
ultmtiqw tIUX XYII' ~t XYIII' $lkln (Paris, Buchct/OullteI,
1981), a collection of the French introductions 10 the first
three volumes of the Persian aDd Arabic texu edited by
J. AlbtiyloI in the ~ M$ philOMJphn irllllleM dqub
Ie XYIP nick jusqu'lJ no.J jour$ (Tehran, 1971, I97S, and
1978). In addition 10 the inIIerent limits of these studia-in
the case of the encydopedia article [now reprinted, with
updated bibliogaphy, ill .1iIIIIe volume with Part I, HUloir~
• iii plliJo$oplrk UltImique (Paris, GaUimard, 1986»), the
extreme cODCision of both the text (IarJdy limited 10 the
citation of key fiJurca aDd their major worb) and biblioa-
raphy; in the cue of the AIJIltoloP, the nccasariJy penonal
ldection of themes ~ in the Frach 11IIIlDW'ies-
readen should also keep in mind that these diJcullioM are
primarily limited 10 the dIemes and individuals that were
subsequeat1y taken • important in 1aIa' I,..... (and pri-
marily Twelftl' Shiiu) tboqbt. SimiI..- cIevdopmenti in the
OttollWl realms aDd Maslim India aDd Central Asia, for a
variety of reaIODI, haft not yet received the same kiDd of
sustained scholarly attention • the traditioDl that IUJ'Vived in
1raD.
4 This is the realm in which the questiOD of IbD cArabt°.
more profound spiritual inIuences-most dOIely corrapond-
milO his own aim, aad iDtentioDl, • exprased in his claim
to be the "aeal of Muhammadan sainthood" (1WI141)w), ancIlO
ccrtaiuly mOlt pertiaeal, IiDce his uJtimale .m..
his perception by later Sufis • the "peatest muter"-is
the promulptioD of a penooaI doctrine or teadlin&. but an
clearly DOt
individual transformation and realizatioD whole inner dep'ee
and outward manifeswioas necessarily dilI'er with each indi-
vidual It is also where the IiIIlitatiOlll of IUIaorical ancIliterary
evideac:e arc most evicIeat. AI a small but typical illustration.
one can irnaaiae the cliMculties involved in tracin8 Ibn
CArablO, widespread "inIuences," even in DOn-MUIlim (aDd
nOD-scholarly) circles, iD the modem West. As ODe C8D tee in
a case lite cAbcI aI-QIdir a1-Jad'id (at the eDd of this artide),
that sort of tranImiuion is often conaec:ted with Ibn cArabr.
role in a nUlDber of Sufi orden (apin, lee Schimmel, op. cit.,
for intaatinl casa in India and even Malaysia).
Invaluable evidence concernina lb. C ArabI"J own oral
teachina and practical activity • a spiritual master is provided
 Mo au: Ibn 'Arilbi fIIId His Jntnprel6s
Ibn cArabi-or more precisely, on social movements,
phenomena, and formulaic ~b tt vquely .&ted
with his name-that has likewise continued tbrouabout
the IJIamic world down to our own day, illustrated by
such symbolicaJJy important (and otherwise disparate)
fiames as Ibn TaymIya, Ibn KhaJdOn, or Attmad
SirhindT. J
In light of the scope ofeach of these perspectives and
the multitude of still largely UDexplored problems and
in the importaDt text by one of his closest aDd oldest disciples,
truslalcd aDd c:ditccl by Denis GriI, tALe Kitab lI1-inbIh CtI1iI
IIIIfq AlJiIh de CAbdaDah Badr a1-Babalr: UD""oiIuIe de
l'emeipemeDt spiritud de M~ HtIn Ibn cArmI," pp. 97-
164 in A1tItGks bMmolop,ws, tome XV (1979). (Acompletc
review of Prof. Gril"ltudy, which came to our attention too
late to be inducIed in this artide, should appear in a future
issue of the MuI,yidtlin Ibn ~rdbr Sockty.) Another typical
illustration of the Sbayth· wider, aDd purdy ~heo­
Rtical," influence &mODI Sufis in (at least) the Arab world can
be found in the studies of the Moroccan Sui Ibn cAjJba
(I 747-1809} by J.-L. Michon: u Soufi MtlTOCtIin A!.rnuJd Ib"
CA]llH1 n SO" MiCra.;: KIou4ire « 14 mystiqw IrIII.fII1IruJM
(Paris, Vrin, J973). aacI L 'AUlobloftaplW (FwtIMI) du SoufI
MtITOCtIin AIpntJd Ibn CAlfbtz (2nd edition: Milan, ~,
1982). In IIdclition to briqin, out the inftuenc:e of IbD CAmbI's
pr8)U1 (tnWU) aDd poem in this context, .udlltUdies are
extnmely importaDt-if not indeed indispensable-in sMDI
a more concrete sense of the IOrt of practical aDd historical
settiDp in which the transmission of thae MjnftueDca" and
tellchiDJi took place. We ha~ tried to sugat IOIIICthiD& of
the declaive importaDc:c aDd diversity of tboee COIltexts-
which speci' ofteD take for gaoted. but are seldom
self-evident to readen limited to tnlDIlatiODS aDd the purdy
IiteraIy dimeIlsiol'1-ita the d· that foUo .
, For some of the literary sources of this IoIlJ line of
critiques and defenses-in almost all cues. symptomatic of
the IKk of any serious intc:re:lt in Ibn cAr.brl own writinp or
teachinJ, limited to a few "classic" p aaes from the FUIiiI
tIl-QIbm-see the refereDCel by Osman Yam. in his Huton
el cltasificGliorI ..• , vol. I, pp. 114-3S. which are co . er-
ably expaDded in the Arabic introduction to his edition (with
B. Corbin). dilcuucd below n. 88, of the introduction
to \laydar XmuJrl COIlllDeDWy on the FuP4 tIl-fliIuurt
(K. NtqI tI1-NIIIiiI'·u Texte des TeXla," Tehran/Paris.
1975), pp. 36-6S ~f the Ala· introduction. This can be
lupplemented. for certaiD rqio • by related rd'eRDCCI and
dilcuslionl in E. L Ormsby. T1wodiey in /61iuftic 17rotchl
(PriDcetou, '984), especially lor the soUJ'Ca of one aspect of
this controversy in the Mqhreb and £&ypt (pp. 92-I3J;
otberwile WlRIiab in depiction of GbuIIT, Ibn cArabI. aad
later Sufism aDd IaIamic pbilosop y in JCIICUI); for the
735
areas of research they IUgest,' the translations d' -
cussed in this article can only terve to biablilbt our
reJati\!e igno~-historically peaking, at Ieut-of
this vat period of Islamic intellectual life and the
Yemen. see aDUliODI by Ahmed Atq in his article on Ibn
al-cArabT ift me E12. vol.lD. pp. 710-11.
A. with the mOlt recent modem continuation of this
controveny-i.e., the public debate over the attemptecl
luppreuion of O. Yahia' new critical edition of the FIIlDh41
in EJYPt in the late ItJOs-most of this dispute are
fuciDatina and reveaIiD&' of uDderIyina political and
social tcDJio and co icb' hich, with rare exccpti0Dl9
the referenca to Ibn cArabI (whether pro or COIl) sene almost
exclUli~ly an ideolop (and Dot intcIIectual or philosop . )
fuoction. UDfonuutdy, mOlt secoDCIary IICCOUDtI, eYeD by
modem Western scboIan, baYe been content to repeal the
outward ~logical·remains of tbese disputes rather thaD. to
iDvestipte their actual contemporary implications in each
case. (Two otable exceptio ,carefi By distinpiabiDl the
inteUcdual and socio-poIiticaI elements of IUCb controvenia
in their contemporary 1CUinp. are the study of SimnlDI by
H. Landok dilcuued below(n. 80], and Y. Friedman" S1rIIIkh
AJ.uruu/ Sirhindl . .. , Moatreti, 197J; tbe (Me of Sitbiftdt'
discuued more pnenlly in the . toricalsurwys of both Dr.
Schimmel, op. ciL, pp. 367ff., and M. Mo~ 1.n myniqlln
IftIUIIlmillU_ Paris, 1965, pp. J08-JO.) Hopefully the many
contemporary mswx:a ~ persecution of SuJiJ or .imiIar
Jl'oups (e.I.• most receatIy in Sudau aDd 1raD) wiD eacour
funber healthy dilcrimiDatioD, in . oriealltUdiel. between
the imeDectual and spirituJ serious of such conuo"Cnia
(DlOIt often neaJiJible, at belt) and t . icleolo,ical functions
and IipificaDce in C8Ch partjcuIar cue; see, in this reprd. the
iJ]uminatinl remarks concemina tbru earlier ic -sufi
trials" (of dd, J;laUIj, aDd CAyn al-Qa4Il) in C. Ernst,
Words 01 EcsUUy in SUjUm (Albany, 1985). pp. 97-132.
• The limitations (for the most part implicit) of the trans-
lation aDd studies diJcusled below arc in fad repraentati~
of two broader problems with mOlt available ort on other
traditions of Islamic thoupt in aeneral durina this later
period: (I) Scbolanbip (Islamic at Ieut. ucb Western)
cootin to focus mainly OIl Anbic (and PeniaD and TurtiJh)
sourt.a fro the -central" IIIamic reai aDd tb frequently
retlects catqories and judJIDCDtI (e..., of Ndccadeoce,"
MmarainaIitY,••dependeocy." etc.) mayor y not be
applicable to developments in re .onl lib Malay' •
Indo ia, nOD-Arab Africa, etc. (2) The limitations and
distonio of the c theoloJicai cum pbilolop:aJ treat-
ment of Islaaic disciplines become quite apparent where, in
contralt with eadicr periods, ~ . at historical
evidence to pm:eive mol'C cJearly both the intellectual aDd the
or
socio-cultural complexities later devdopmellts; iDtcpatina
736 JOIlmIIl O/tM Amnktm 0rImI4l Sot*ty 106.4 (1986)
ricbes it contains. 7 The works dealt with in this Part are
introduc:ed rouahlY in chronoloJica1 order (acc:ordina
to the dates of their original author), but each seaiOD
focUlel on • dift'ereDt apeel of the Sbaykb" broader
heritqe that is exemplified by tbe trauslatioo in ques-
tion. This procedure should provide a framework
within which non-specialiJts caD also better appreciate
the historical context and importance of tbeIe (and
other forthcoming) contributions in this area. Of coune
this also meaDS that tbe same weipt cannot be JiveD.
in the limited space of this article, to other penpectives
aDd aspects of these worb tbat-depeadiDa on each
reader's interests-are certaiDIy equally deserviDg of
further attention in each cue. Fortunately, quite apart
from their bistorical interest which is our main focus
here, DWly of these boob are themselves classici in
one field or another of Sufi literature, chosen by their
traDslators for their evident intellectual or spiritual
value. Even in translation, tbose intrinsic qualities
should be readily aca:ssible to readen approaching
them in that spirit.
I. Michel Chodkiewicz's translation of Aw\1ad aI-Drn
BalylnI'. K. aJ.W"'tU-MUl1tIqa[~~ . .I'Unidtl
AbMJlw. pp. 8S. Paris: La DEUx OCEANS. 1982] is far
more than a new (aDd greatly improved) version of a
daaic:, frequently translated Sufi text often mistakenly
attributed to Ibn cArabY.· Thanks to the author's
thole two approacbes, however, requires a breadth of trainin.
aDd iDsiPt thM arc likely to remain quite rare iD tbae 6e1ds.
1 -Relative" iporance because that iponDCe (mel cone-
spondiD. MJtoowm,j which CODCml our autbon bere clearly
traue::eDd any particular historical lituatioa aad neD the
b1Iditions which sene (potent"y, at least) to traDlmit aDd
awaken that awareaea. OIl the purdy IIiatot'a1 plane, what is
remarkable is how much our curreDt ianoranc:e rdcdJ not a
lack of lextuailOUfCCl, but rather a son of wiDhaI ~
or colleetive "aDiDaia"-extremely recent, IIiItorically
speakiDa-ftowiq from the traDlfol"lDation of educational
methods aad social ItnICtUJa, aDd from JDCniaDCllU of
'"reform" and "return to the IOwca"frequady iDYoIviDa the
radical rejection of an immeme cultural beritalt 01 which
tbae traditio.. are one intep'a1 part. The writiDp of cAbd
al-Qidir (d. 1300/1883) cIiIcuaed below-and their contralt
with his perceptioo by modem nationalism-are ODe particu-
larly IlrikiDa iUUItratioD of the l'CCCDt aDd radical aature of
this trusfonution.
• The ume boot was oriJinally traDl1aled at the tuna of the
century by T. H. Weir (7J¥ nwuIR 011 Unity, in tile JRAS,
October, 1901/ repriDted .. Wlr060 KtwtWlla HllltHlf,
London. Beshara Publicationl, 1976), who attributed it
extremely condensed DOtes and mtroduction-dearly
the fruit of yean of research aDd reled.ion not only on
Ibn cArabI but also on the many other currents (and
critiques) of later Islamic mysticism-thilltUdy actu-
ally constitutes an extraordinarily rich introduction to
the new aDd diltinctiw dimensions of Ibn <Arabt'.
tboUJbt. the underJyiDB motivations (both historical
and philosophic) for those coatributioDl in the context
of the development of Sufism, and the eaential reaons
(or their remarkable biItoricallUCCell when compared
with olber efforts in the same directioD. Mr. Cbod-
kiewicz brio. out tbae crucial points tbrouah his
succinct allusions to four int.errelated historical and
doctrinal developments: (1) the identification of the
real author of the work, • PeniaD Sufi master of Shiraz
(d. 686/1288~' aDd other sourcea conceminl his teach-
directly to Iba CArab'L AD ltaliaa vtniOD • • pablilhcd in
1907 by MAbdul-HIdr [lvu-Gustav Apdi; see M. Cbod-
kiewicz'J references, p. 17, D. 4 of the introduetiOD], followed
by a FreDCh version (in U G~, 191 I) JIIOIl rcc:eady
reprinted .. U Irtliti 1M lilnhi. Mdit d1bn (ArabI'" (pariJ.
SiDdbad/EditiODS de 1~ 1977). alODI with another
translation aDd article by Abdul-Hidl. Abdul-Hldi'. onpw
iDttocluetion (pp. 19-21 of the 1m edition) clearly ..... the
quation ofattribution aad die likely audtonbip of"8abIbiDr'
or -BalaylnI,.. while the IIIOSt receat editor (G. Lecollle, p. 10)
foBoWl M. VIIIan in cIdiDitdy .ributin. it to Mal-BalabInI."
Osman Yabia (MJUpettoiIe ~t*I,.. Numbers 12, 181,
458) also recopiza both the apocryphal nature of the
attribution aDd the multiplicity of tides, which apparently
explains the eventual attribution to Ibn cArabT; ODe of thole
titles. the R. flIJ1-AJ.-Ir~ is ftI'Y dose to an authentic work
of Ibn CArabI---on a ftI'Y different subjea-entitled K. til-
Ali/. or K. td-Al}tIdrytl. (ThaI aauiDe wort of the Sbaytb bu
recently been traDJlaIed by Abnham Abadi: 77re Book ofAIJI
(Or) 7J¥ Book of UrUIy, . . . . with brief commentarieJ from
the FIIIiiI.J-~IUm, in the Joumtd of 1M M~yiddbt Ibn
CArGbi Sodny, n [1984], pp. 1S-«).)
M. CbocItiewicz.. traIiIIMion is baled on a DeW.1Cientik
editioa (see p. -to), "willi on a Dumber of manUlCripla
mainly attribatecl to al-BalyIDt (Osman Ya1Ua lilts oo1y thOle
MSS apocrypbally attrilNtcd to Ibn cArabl). which • to be
published with a col1edioa of relaud Arabic rem 00 the
question of ~t td-wujiid. He nota that the same text
exiItI UDder at least leWD titIa (p. 19, n. I), aDd that his
choice in IhiI cue (R.Ill- W.., td-MU/1Iql) Mrm. on purely
doctrinal COnsideratiODl- (ic.. dose a8bIiticI with the lCbool
of Ibn SabCJn). wbida are card'ully exp1aiDed in the rat of the
colDlDeDlaly.
, (He also dean up the loDpteDdin. CODfuaiOD~.", iD
Brockdmann-of this individual with KYen1 later writen

iDa; (2) tile relations of BalylDt with the inftuential
"monistic" Sufi teachi... cbancteristic of Ibn SabCJn
(d. 669/1270) and his followen, and the fundamental
dift'ereDCeI leParatiDa them from the views of Ibn
cArabl; (3) the partial awamaa of thae difl'aeaces
&lid of their deeper philosophic sipificaDce revealed in
the famous critiques of later Sufism by Ibn TaymTya
aud Ibn naJdOD; aDd (4) alIusioDl to the .ipificuK:e
of this misattribution, as spread by the eartier traDJ-
JatiODl, for the prevalent imqe of Ibn cArabl in the
West, both popularly and in much scholarly writinJ. In
each cue, the historical refereuca, which at fiat JIaoce
mipt appear to be merely achoJarly details, actually
IeI'Ve to brina out certain fUDdlmentai (aad ItiD far too
often neaJeetcd) aspeets of Ibn CArabr. wort and
thouaht·
To begin with, this DeW traDIIation, far more thaD its
predccaIon, lUCCeIIfuJly caupt the extraordinary,
almost lyrical rhetorical power of BalylDr brief work
(pp. 45-79, iodudiDa the extensive .nota), that ria-
orouslimplicity &Del "force incantatoire" (p. 38) which
DO doubt help expIaiD its favor with the earlier traJII.-
laton and succeedilll p:oerations of students. Intro-
duced as a IOrt of CODDeDtary on the famous 1,JtIdflh
"He who moWi his lelf, knows his Lord, ,,10 it is far leu
• theoIOJicaI or philosophic uaI)'1i1 than an extended
sJuzt/.l-an "c:cstatic uttennee" exprasin, directly and
without qualification an immediate pmoDl1 rea1iza..
lion of the ultimate Unity of God and the IOUI, and the
"illusory" nature of all elle when seen from that
enlightened penpective. One cannot help but be
with the same lut name, and explaiDa at least lOme of the
variatiODi in IpelliD&. which may ba~ been already current by
the time of Ibn TayDU-yL) TIlt most important DeW bio-
graphical information, which is in perfect KCOnluce with tbe
content of this book (sec the uec:dote at n. II below), is
drawn from JImI's Ntl/tllfiJtlll-lbu, pp. 258-62 in the edition
account BalyIDI w.
of M. Taw~Tpilr (Tehran, 1336/ Its7); IICCOrdiDa to this
a .baykh of the SubrawanllYa order.
II The traDllatGr' h. an excelJalt cliacussion (pp. 27-31)
explaininl the sipileeDCe of the form of this IpIitlr adopted
by BalylDT (i.e., with flJlllld, iJDplyina that ODe tllntlily
knowsl kDew ODe', Lord), aDd UDderlinina the ftI'Y cliI'erent
interpretation sometimes liven to this ~Ir by IbD cArabI,
in view of the particular, hiabJy '"individualiud- JBeaDin. of
~ DotioD of -lord" (rtIbb) in his 1h0llJbt.
More pDeJ'alJy, Balyllif" use of btu/Dh, bucd 08 a limited
selection of tbema already dictated by a 10111 pn:cedina Sufi
traditioll, iI in.tri.kiaa cont....t with Ibn cArabI.. procedure.
The diJf'erenc:e does not c:oacem questions of-atbeaticity--
where, .. M. Cbodtiewicz nota. both authon adhere to
737
reminded at every point-and it is here that the
identification of the author aan influential Sufi abaykh
of Shiraz, desceaded from a line loinl back to aI-
Qushayd (d. 4(5/1074), takes on its run importaDce-
of the echo of 10 many famous Persian vena, re8ected
in a wide variety of imqa, on the SlIDe ecatatic theme
of t6Jumuz 061" (-All is Her"). For the individual
buildiDa blocb of thilllmost lyrical work-BalylnJ'.
particular choice of ~oranic vena, ~ (esptA:iIDy
the recurreDt I}tuIIth ilHMwlfll), IDd SIuqMJat (from
al-6a1J1j and aJ.JIaItIm1)-were the same familiar
materials throop wbicb pueratioDl of earlier and
later Sufi writers in that part of the IlJamic world
continued to exprc:ll their .piritual inliJhts in PeniIII
poetry or Arabic prole. CJearly, then, what sets this
work apart is Dot the on,inaJity (or euctitucle) of its
tbought, but the artistry, simplicity aDd abcm all the
passion with which it repeats that overpowaina vision.
Indeed to a peat exteDt it was precisely the p'owina
pervaiveaeu and familiarity of these mystical symbo
aDd forms of expreaioa, even outside their oriJinal
Sufi IettiD& and the CODCOIDitant riIb of lerio.
misuDdentlDdinp-at once pnlCtical, pbiJosopbic, and
theoloJica1-tbat they pole when taken litenUy or
simplistically, without reprd to their appropriate COD-
text, 11 that belp 8CCOUDt for Iba CArabI'. DlOlt diltiJlc..
tive penonal contribution and the aspect of his work
criteria other than tJaoee of the strict ~-but
rather the far pater ,..", of materiU aDd (at least rdati~)
..,.~ aDd oriIiuJity of Ibn CArabi's interpretatiODl.
which often (lite his trubDeDt of the ~oraa) reflect a JCDuioe
inspiration aad penoaal cl"ort of meditation, iDICad of the
repetition of KCepted tbemes. (See also the cliIcuuion of his
collection of ~" qutbT, the MUItk4t Ill-Anwar. in Part I.)
This is abo ODe of the more obvious cIiItiDctioDi betM.en Ibn
cArabl aacllater writers of his MlCbooi.- who Iddom depart
from his iatcrprctatio (apcciaJly in the FIlIiiI). That ia,
their familiarity with thoR interpretations, bether of ~oran
or tuu/fllt, and their readiDeu to provide a c:oberent meta-
physical explanation, eYeDluaUy tend to obIcure tbe (some-
times DO doubt intentionally) sbockin. fra 8Dd oriai-
nality of Ibn cArabrl OWD formuLatio (ThiI is another
advantqe to rudinl the ~ . where DO IUCb "inlulatiIll-
body of iuterpretation exiIts.)
II TbeJe riIkJ of a sort or placed IittFaIiaJD- ·tIl reprd
to BalybJ" JaD&uaIe (_ its equivaJeDu lJarouPOut Sufi
li1crature) are poipaady IIated ia JImI'. story (p. 22 iD the
introduction to this traDsIation) of a dilaplc of the Shirazi
.baytb who Jet himse" be bitteD by a poisonous snate
bc:cauIe, .. he reproK • mater, "You youndfsaid that
there is only Godf" M. CIaocIkiewicz ata (pp. 2M.) other
138 JOIInIiIl of 1M AnwrIcmt 0rletIUIl Sodety 106.4 (1986)
that bad me sreatett vilible Unl*t on subsequent
Islamic thoupt; that is, his persistent fOQll on a
comprehensive aDd elaborately baJaDced tyltematic
framework (both theoIOIical and pbi1olopbic) for thole
foDowiq the spiritual Patb-a framework wbidI in
the Sbaykb's own writiDp, at least, is always at OIlCe
metaphysical mil biPIY practical. Ba1yIDI's wort,
with its repeated literal insistence on the world and self
alike asnotlting but 16illusion," was the perfect exemplifi-
cation of those recurrent moral daJlFn aDd &enuine
illusions-antinomianism, quietism, and megjanism-
aod tbote OIteDSibly .. befetiea}" tbeolopeaJ formula-
tions which had to be overcome and raolwd, on both
the tbeolosica1 aDd the deeper philosophic or spiritual
levels, if Sufilm was to aDlwa' the more serious
UDderlyiDa ObjectioDl of such critics u Ibo Taymiya or
Ibn KbaldiiD. 12
The "originality"-if not the compre~and
re~ effeetivenea-of Ibn cArabt's respoIIIe in this
reprd is often exagerated in IeCOIIdary eccounts of
his work. Almost aU of Abu l:Iimid al-GbazIII"s
(d. 1111) later writin& for example, is directed towards
couottrina the same theotetical and ptaedcal danaen
and illusions tIW &Ie 10 vividly iIhutrataI throqhout
BalylDI's tratiJe; iDdeed the I"tulrth aDd shtlllIJ,iiI
which GbazI1l repeatedly discu•• el, SlId the miluoder-
..aodinl' be ICeb to avoid, are preciIeIy thole chosen
JtataDenll by BalyIDI transmitted by JImI (e..., -Be God!"
[kladl barIUd]) which, wbiJe compRbeIlIible in the broader
doctrinal context of this work, would 1ikewiIe readily lead
themIelveI to rather obvious milUDdcntaDdiDp. (Whether or
DOt such Itoria aR apocryphal is of relatiftly little iDlpor-
taDCe compared to their eumplaly "cance in this COft-
text.)
11 The truslator cIiscusIa at lOme Jenatb the frequent
c:ondcmnatiOIll of BalyIDT (aod of the "monist" interpre-
taboDi of Sufism more ameraJly) by Ibn Taymtya. It is
important to recopize that the UDderlyinl CODCmll of these
aDd other rdatecl Islamic aitiqua are not limited to the
particular (aad to .. often seeDliJllly arbitrary) tbeolOJical
tenDI in which they were offa formulated. We have men-
tioDed antinomian;'m, quietism, etc., becaUIe thae .... real,
bistoricaIly visible comcquaxa (aIMI eva'-praeul iDDa'tempta-
tions) whenever the iDIdIect fails to IJ'MP the intended
meaniq of copatc spiritual teach""', in any civilizatjonal
Idtinl- Lolli before 11m cArabr or Ibn Saber. aDd the
purportedly "monist.. and "'theoretical" Suhm that is the
0IteDIibIe tarFt or lUCIa critica • Ibn T~a and Ibn
~OD, one can bel caentiaDy the same cribcilml and
CODCCI'DI CODItaDtly repeated_ for example, in the worb of
al-GbazlIT (sec below and D. 13).
aDd emphasized (one mi&bt almost say "flaunted") by
this later shaykh of Shiraz.l] Moreover, GbazIlrs
favorite dialectical u.moJa" and vocabuiary in that
effort were drawn from tile same Ashcarite kaIam aDd
Avicennan philosophy that are key dements of Ibn
cArabrs Own systematic tbouJbt, wbile siJniIat efforts,
IJ Many of the relevant ...... by aI-GhazIJT. from this
penpective, are co1ledcd in the seria of traDIIatioDI by
Father R. McCarthy to be fOUDd in his Fr«domllllt1 FulfJl-
mml •. . (Boston, Twayne Publishers, 1910), which also COD-
taint a useful lMotaIed blbliopapby. Readers should be
warned that at least ~ of the vall secondary IitcnIture on
GbazIIT, indudiq many traDIlatioaa, betrays DO awaraaa of
the ullifyiq spiritual (both pbilOlOphic and Sufi) penpectiYe
aDd multifaceted rhetorical methods and iDlcDtiODI that tie
tOJdber his outwardly disparate writiDp. There is Itill DO
-&Ie study Ihowml bow OhazIIJ '=IatiYdy traDlformed the
meaniD. of elements from other iDtdIec:tuaJ tnditioDl-
Aahearite bam. Avicm..... /tI1MJftl, aod Shiite writiDp-in
liPt of tbis central iDlclldon. NOI' is there a sinaIe readily
available lOurce ahowiDa where his reworkiDp of thoee
trlditioDt ate pided by an iD1emal, -dac:riplM"1IlirroriD&
of metaphysical realities and their rdIectioD in spiritual
experieDce, ucI where-. is f . more colDlDOD1y the CIIIe-
their particular form. is didated by an apoloactic, dcfeDliw
relpoDK to (or intdlectual darificatioIl of) the sort of theo-
logical/ philosophical eritiqua evoked here.
In any eYeDt, GbuIII is certaiDly the molt important
mown ~nor" of the explicitly metapbysical upect of
Iba CArabrs writiDp-the often cited -.chooI of Ibn "I.........
beiD& 10 far u we know, a curious fiction inadwrtently
created by AslD PablciOi. (See the explanation of the temIa1
misuftde,..ancti..,. 0 • that myth was built, 1ft S. M.
Stem-. "Ibn Masarra, Follower of Pleudo-Empcdodel. an
lDusion," pp. 32S-37 in Ad4U do W ~MO. ntut:lol
tIIYIba ~ uhlmico$ (Lcidaa, 1971) [now reprinted in S. M.
Stem's J/~ A.,tlbk _ Rn"ew TItotcht, cd. F. W.
ZiJnmennan. London, 1983, artide V); Stem-. remarks are
coDirmed by the recent dilcowry of authentic works by Ibn
"luana, which have no "'pteado-Empedodean" dementi_
but are typical of the early Suhm of Sabl aI-TUItaIf.)
Probably the bat introduction to this side of Glwllrs
tboqht (Jiven the UDfOltUDale iDaclequcy of IDOIt of the
explanatory material for lIWly of the traDI1atioDI from his
l1}yI' cUIDm tJl-DrII) is his MUltIc4t IJI.A1IMJr, which should
be approac:becl in the exceUent recent FreDdl traM18hon by
Roaer DeladriUe, 1.1 TtJhemtIck tin LwrtJlra (Paris, Edi-
tions du Seuil, 1911). (The frequently reprinted EnJIiIb
venioD by W. H. T. Oaintner complddy e:tumaa the order
and diviliODI or Ghazllrs text, entirely misrepraaatiq it ..
merely a sample of Sufi -exqesiaw mel livm, DO idea of the
 Mot.lS: Ibtt 7frtlbi IIIId Nil Intnpnten
usin, a diff'erent metaphysical vocabulary, were m8de
by such leaer-kDOWD earlier fipres. CAyn al-QucJa
14
HamadlDT and SubrawardJ. Perhaps the IDOIt inftu-
ential such systematic elaboration of the metaphysicaJ
strict technical taminoloaY and conceptual straeture UDder-
JyiD& Gbat.IlT'. expotitjol'1.)
1"bc eompariJcm of Gbazilt aDd Ibn cArabJ alto brinp out
the third, aDd most problematic, cliaJcdicaI ~t" in
their thoqht, aamcly, their debts to Shiite (or rdMed Nco-
plMODic) authors, beyond the more apparent role of the
Ikbwln al-~afi;)-their commoa interat in DOt drawina
atlcDtion to mch readiap beiDa readily wadena-net-hie If
Ibn Khaldtln" 1ICCUIati0DI (in his ~ ) that evcry-
tJUDI ctistiDCIive of the taler, more ~beoretical- IChooII of
SufiJID wu "borrowed" from the Shiite "exll'clDists- arc u
much mudl1inaina • they are a concrete literary judpleDl,
they do at Ieaat rat on a n_her of strikiD& lomttIl raem-
bIaJx:cI. e.g., in c:osmoiOlY, utnI cyda, spiritual hienrchia,
eschatololY, aDd the use of -neptive tbeo1o&Y." But quite
apart from the more obYious adaptatioDl of .uch themes in a
writer lite Ibn (Arabi. there is CODIiderabIe doubt wbetber the
Neoplatonic ootolOlY aDd neptive tbeo1o&Y Olle finds in
those earlier Shiite lOurca aetua1ly repreteDti tbe ame kiM
of mystical. -spiritually descriptiYeoo (and only lClCODdarily
"theoretical"") fUDCtion that it taka on in lba cArabJ (al
already in GbazilI.. JlUIrIcM).
14 The relative I.ck of inftueDce of both of their dl'orlS in
blamic circJa probably hal lea to do with the martyrdoms of
both tbiakers • relaliwly yOUIII men, and more to do with
their relative outspokennea and unwilliDpca to anpbuizc
too aclusively the in... COncordUICC between their apiritual
inti...ts aDd the more popular aDd IepIistic undentancli.... of
the ..Jamie ~Jation-featurea which, .. we have empha-
Ii7Jed in Pan I, are developed witb scnipUlous tate and
atIc1ltion throqhout Ibn cArabT'. writinp, ad IDOII exten-
sively in the FutiiJ;Iat. (See IMlditionai dilcuaioDi of this
eaential dimension ofbis work in several placa below.)
For SubrawarcIJ (traditionally referred to .. -Ji.,ttiJ,* to
distinpisb him from bis inlueutia1 Sui bODlOnymJ in
Baabdad, includm, the follllClen of the Subrawudtya order.
initiator of tbe.futannw movement, etc.), ICC the many ItUdia
by Henry Corbin, aud apecia1Iy hiI traDllabon of fifteen
shorter mystical aDd philosophic worb, L ~rn..w" ,.1ft-
pourpri (PariJ: Fayard, 1976). This should soon be .upple-
mented by the publiadion (Paris, Verdier, 1917) of Corbin..
tranaI8tion of the complete metaphysical pan of Sularawanlt..
"...,.."" opw. the {llJcnMllIl-blv." alona with 1aqe partI of
the COIDlDenWia by SbabrazGrl, Qutb at-Om al-ShIrIzI, aDd
MuUI $adlI SbIrIzT; tOJdbcr, these texll alrady constitute
sometbiDa like a history of thilltill ....ly UDknowD tradition
of Islamic pIlilosopby Ofti' a period of KYerai ccaturies. (In
739
dimensions of Sufism, after the writinp of Ibn cArabI,
wu developed in the works of bit fellow AndaJuaian
Sufi and near contemporary, Ibn Sabcrn, whOle dis-
tinctively -monistic9t foJ'IDI of expreaion may also
have bad an indirect inftuence on BaIyInI'. writin,. IS
Mr. Cbodkiewic%'. comparative notes (bated on exten-
live refereDCCI to televant pauapa of the FIlIQI.tiU)-
tbroup their detailed contrast of Balylm-. (and
Eqlilb, ruden are ItiIllarply limited to the excellent brid'
introduction to his life IDd work in S. H. N....•• 11uw
Muslim Sil6n [CambridF, M_., J963].)
For CAyn aI-Qu4Il aI-HamadlnI. noa-speclalilu iDterated
in his mysticall philosophical thinkiq-wlaida seems to have
been ma.t appreciated IIIDOIlI later Indian Sufis (ICe the
translations and comllM!llt-ria on his TtIIIIIrIdiII c:ited by
A. Schimmel, ope cit., 1Dda under M(Ayn a1-Qu4It~-ItilI
have only a few rdatiYeIy short studia by T. IzutJu, dapite
the availability of acdIeat critical editions of his major worb
by A. CUsayrlD (aDd A. Munzavl). Izuuu'. IIlIdia include
-Creation and the Timelal Order of TbiDp: A Study in the
Mystical Philolopby of CAyn al-Qu41t," pp. I~ in 1Jw
Philo6oplticfll F011lm IV, BO. J (FaD 19n); -rhe Concept of
Perpetual Creation in IsJalDie My.ticism aDd in Zen
Buddhism," in MIItmpI ofIms j &nry CorlHn (febran,
1969); aDd -Mysticism aad the Linpiltic Problem of Equivo-
cation in the Thoupt of CAyn a1-Qu4It HamadlDJ," pp. 153-
51 in SIIMlM bMmktl XXI (1970). The first two artideI, wbidl
brina out his considerable aIlnities with the later thouabt of
Ibn cArabI, are DOW more tadily acceaible in • Frencb
translation (alolll with two of Prof. Izuuu'l other. IDOI'e
Fnera11tudie1 of Islamic IIIJIlicaI tJaouaht) by M.-C. Graudry.
lhtidIlIM ruumt« " Critllion IWpItwIk m MynIqw
16/iuniqu1' (Paris, La Deux Ocbns. 1980). A. J. Arberry'.
translation of the swwa tJl-GhtItfb, aD "apoJoay" written
shortly before his martyrdo.... is a fascinatiq autobiOIf8Pb-
ical document and introduction to CAyn aJ-QueJit'. lyrical
Sufism, but does not p much idea of hiI more pbilOlOpbic
aud teehrUcal writina: A ~ JltII1yr: 11w Apo/ogitl of CAin
III-QIMJiIIIII-HtIIrttIIiJIanf(LoodOl1, 1969).
IS M. Cbodkiewicz-folDwina Ma.ipoo-iDdicata (pp. 23-
25) that tbiI inftueocc c:oUl have p-.ed tJarvuab Ibn SabCtn"
clilciple. the influential Arahic mystical poet (and df'ectivc
founder of tbc SOCiDlya ItUlqtl in E&YPt) aJ-Sbusht""
(d. 661/1269), with whom Ba1yIDt may have studied dunllla
piJarimqe to Mecca. Whalcver the hiItorical relatioDl-aad
maDY exprasiona reminiscent of Ibn SabcIn'. ecstatic
-moailmOO of Beina can be found, appareatJy independently,
in both earlier aDd later Penian mystical poetry-the distioe-
lion between that outlook aDd Ibn cArabJ·. far more IUbtle
metaphysics and theo1olY. wbiell tbe ttaDIIatot UftCIerlifteI at
many points in this text~ are certainly in.tructive. (He
 JoumtIl of the Amnlam 0rienUJJ Society 106.4 (1986)
Ibn Sab cYn91) rhetorically simplified. often intention-
ally paradoxical metaphysical formulations with Ibn
cArabI 9s far more sophisticated "non-dualisticft meta-
pbysics of tll}tl1li,at-de.Jy brilll out tbe very dill'erent
(if not ultimately opposed)l6 pncticaJ and theoretical
implications of the two penpectives. Yet at the same
time, precisely this contrast between tbeIc two wide-
spread -systems ft of later Sufi metaphysics-a distinc-
tion already noted by sucb critics as Ibn TaymTya aDd
Ibn ~baldOn-belps mniDd us of the symbolic (and
inherently relative) nature of tbe particular expres-
promises, at p. 39, a more detailed study of tlac CIODtr.... ill
a fut1lR book on Ibn cArabI', thouJht.)
Dapite the compIetiOD of KCalIiblc editioDl of 11m Sab'lD's
major worb, there is ItiII a remarkable lack of aD)' cxteDli~
published Western Itudia of his tho.....t. (The available
1Oun:a, Iar&dY ill Arabic or unpublished tbe8eI, me cited at
pp. 34-3S here.) Readers should be cautioDCd daM the more
opcoly mystical, Sufi side or hii thou,ln emphMiz.ecl here
(which may itself, u the tnUJlJator hypothaiza, haw bceD
iDtIuenced by Ibn CAnbY'. writiDp) seems to ha~ beeD
intearated with other claDcnu (..ychoJoU, cpisaaDoJoay,
etc.) draWJl from vanOUl1Claoo1a of bIamic pbiIoIophy (i.e.,
ItIlMIftl); ICC, for eumple. the text of his III-M_>tl III-
$iqIlIrytI. ·C~ pltJloMJphlqw tIWC I ~
FritMrlc II ,. Holtnultlll/~... ed. S. Yaltbya (and with
Fracb iotroductioD by H. CorbiD), Paris/Beirut, 1M}, which
pves lOme idea of his cxteDaivc philosophical traUUDl.
strooalY recallioa SubrawanII. For a brief but rewaIiDa
overview, which abo brinp out the still uuexp10rCd diff'tI'-
cncca bct1n:eD IbD SabCJD and Shusb~ ICC the IdectaI texts
from both authol"l ill L. M.....oD·• • cwiJ,. ~xtn iItItliu
~r7MIIl 1'Irlstoft ,. " my"" m JHq8 47.... (Paris,
)929), pp. }23-40, and JDOIt Dotably the ItraDF imU of the
,.,., MbCUr1ytl (pp. 139~), mixina Plato and AristotJc,
famous Sufts (iaclUdiDa Ibn CAtabJ aad Ibft al-F-w), aDd
such Islamic: pbiJolopben • Ibn SIDi, Ibn Tufayf, aDd IbD
RusbcI!
16 M. ChocIkiewicz aeDCI'aIIy ..... to imply-DO doubt
ripdy. aDd foUowina a perspective that is alreadyevidcot iD
both Gbazilt aDd Ibn cArabJ-tbat BalylDJ's work aDd
oudook (aDd by CX1CDIioD, that of IbD SabcJn and other Sufis,
cspcciaDy poctI, cmployiDa similar cxpreuio.) can belt be
undcntoocl • a IOI't of rhetorical reduction (<< in IOIDC caa
an unrdccti~ ".piritual reaIiam" which may be juItificd OD
its own plane, provided that the racier or 1isteDcr is able to
IUPply the DClCCII&rY metaphysical (and practical) qualifi-
catioDL SomethiDa of tbe same sort teems to ha~ bccD true
of BaIyIaI himself, if we may judF by his prudCDt rcadioD ( .
reponed by JImt, D. ) J above) to tbe disciple bitten by the
poiIO-. make be u.s taken for --(joel."
sions of any theoretical schema in tbis domain, a
point wbose decisive practical importance wu DOt
always openly KtnowledFd by Ibn cArabi's later
11
commentaton.
The translator's discussion of Ibn TaymIya9s famous
attacks on (amona other thinp) the more systematic
metaphysical pretensions of later Sufism also serves to
brin, out those distinctive features of Ibn cArabY's
writiol which no doubt 10 far in explaininl tbe
ovcrwbelminlsuccea of his "systematization" of Sufi
doctrine in the later Islamic world wben compared
with the comparable dorts of sucb fiJUres .. BalyIDt,
Ibn Sabcyn. or Suhra atdl Thole characteristics, illus-
trated in detail in Mr. Cbodkiewicz9s invaluable notes9
are essentially (a) his extraordinarily careful attention,
in unfoldinl the inner meaning of scripture, to the
sipificance of the "Jetterft aDd sma1Iat details of
expression of the ~oran.1)odith, aDd Islamic law (the
6IuIrJCa); (b) his relative concentration on expreainl
his metapbysical inliabts in the vocabulary of kaJam
theolOl)', rather than the uspect terminology of the
philosophen; (c) his insistence on the central role of
the Prophet, at every level of bein& and of the superior
efficacy (compared to other valid methods and paths)
of the practical implementation of all of his teachinp;
and (d) his systematically balanced consideration of
the needs and Iimitatioas of the full rmae of human
types. capacities and social situations (not merely the
I'
spiritual elite) in his expression of his teachings. Yet,
however importal'lt tbae features may hPe been,
historicaDy speatin& for the acceptance and wide-
ranJina inftuence of Ibn cArabrs teachina throupout
17 Although it it certaiDly -.mcd by the much wider Jl'oup
of Sufis-illustrated by die worb of NaaafJ ad the later
Qldid shaykh discuucd in the followin. two leCtiona-who
teftded to usimiJate individual -pieces" of Ibn CArabI'l tenDi-
DOIoaY or te8C1Unp (e.... CODCerIIiD& the "Perfect Man,"
~ tIl-wujiid, or ~ aDd prophecy) without the same
COJK:Cl'll for the syIICDUIaic cobcrcDce aDd inteDedual UDder-
ItaDcIiDc of his thouaht that is 10 cvidc:Ilt ill QGu and .
1U«eII01"I. (ID this repnI. M. Choclkiewicz DOteS [po 36] the
intcrelliDl story of a mcetiDa in EuPt between Ibn SabCJn
and Ibn cArabt·. two ctiIcipIcI QODawl aDd TilimIIDI, briDaina
out the latter'. relatiw aIinitia with Ibn SabcIn-which arc
confirmed by their aaociaboD • tar. . . for later critiques of
the "'monist" Wll/fMlrytl.)
II MOlt of these cllanclerilticl arc ClleDtialJy .hared,
altbouah ill varyiD. dcarea. by aJ-GbazIIt (i.e., AbO J:l1mid)
ill his Sufi writinp, aod DO doubt also IIdp account for his
similarly widespread veneratiOD (a -Imam,'" etc.) amoD,
Sufis and noo-Stafil alike.
 MoaalS: Ibn CArtlbi II1Id Hu lnurpntnl
the Islamic world, it must also be admitted that they do
not always facilitate its acceaibility to a non-Muslim
audience.
In this lipt, the widespread interest in BalylDt's
work in the West-despite its ironic misattn"bution to
Ibn cArabJ-is not really 10 surprisinl. In many ways,
its distinctive featura are almott the oppolite of those
outlined above: there is <a) DO explicit reference (except
for a few hints at the very end) to the indispensable role
of spiritual practice and experience, and to the decisive
differences of human capacity in that reprd; (b) no
strea (to put it mildly) OIl the practical or metaphysical
importance of the Prophet and the Law, or indeed of
any form of human responsibility, and (c) a cone-
spondinl emphasis (whose quietistic or antinomian
implications are unavoidable) on the "illusory" nature
of the world and the self; and (d) not only no appeal to
the inte1lect and the intd1isible order of the wodd at all
levels of manifestation, but in fact a sort of "anti-
intellectual" depreciation of My effort of either IICtivity
or undentandinl.19 Moreover, the superficial resem-
blaJx:es of Balylm-s formulations to certain popular
conceptions of Hindu thoupt (especially the role of
"Maya] are especially Itriking. 1ft Althoup Mr.
Chodkiewicz does not say 10 explicitly, ~ can be
19 It is important, both biltorica1ly and pbikMopbically, to
note that altbouah 1bcIc poiDts certainly do 1101 apply to Ibn
cArabt or to many other Sufi writerl and teadIen aDd their
foDowas-aad lddolD 01" Dntr Jed to the 4raIDatic aati-
DOmiaD CXc:aICI (IbM.-) aDd bcraia cited by the polemicists
in nery . .-they do point to real aDd socially important
pr.aieal tl'Cllds in later Sufism, especially in ita IIIOrc ~u­
lar" and vulprizcd fOJDII, that were an evident tar8et both of
earlier critics IUdl • Ibn TaymJya aDd Ibn CWdan aDd of
modern "reformen" mainly ccmcerned with the this-worldly
effects of such ideal and conapoDdinl popular CUIloms. One
iDUitration of these tendenc:ia is the filet that the peater part
of the dozens of apocrypbal treatiles attributed to Ibo cArabi,
• listed by Osman Yahia. cooc:em mqical and oc:cuIt pt'1IC-
tic:a (astrology, ete.}-precile1y tbe tort of aupcrstilion that Ii
ODe of the prime tarptJ of Ibn KhaldOD', Jenathy auaeb and
"debunkinl" of such practices in the MuqtIIIdimtI.
a This should DOt at all be taken to deny that ODe can
ultimately find wry similar conc:eptioDi in Ibn cArabl" own
thouPt; but lite mOlt &Iamic aoteric wrikrs (iDdudiDa
Shiite thinkers aDd philolophen, as well .. Sufis), he is
usually reluctant to refer too directly to realities and plio-
noJDeU which-if they were misundentoocl-could ad to
Jqliaence of one', ctbic:aI and social rapoDlibility (11lk1ff).
This reticence is DOt always 10 evident in tile ICtUal oral
teachina and methods of spiritual masten, and the relatWe
741
little doubt that the emphuis on the "universality" of
the Shayth's thouaht aDd teachiq which h.. been •
keynote of modern Western diJcuss.ioDl owes a areat
deal to the facility (in both senses of the term) of
Balylni's little treatise. What he does demonstrate,
conviDcinJly and in detail, is that readers who take
BaJylDJ to be Ibn cArabJ will find it very difficult indeed
to enter into the far more complex and cha1leoaiDI-if
no less "universal"-world of the Shaykh's own
writinp and teaehinp.
D. If we were to foDow a Itric:tly chronoJoaical order,
Roger Delad~re's trauslation of the TlldhJcirat Ill-
1cJuIwIlR WG caqTI:/Qt ahl fli·ilclttillll [1.4 P,o/~uion tk
/oi. pp. 317. Paris: SINDBADIEDmoNs OaIENTALES.
1978.]-. bizarre mixture of Hanbalite caqrdtl (a doc-
trinal statement followiDa a standard kalam-Iike frame-
wort) and turgid "Sufiltic" sermonWnl in the ftorid
rhetoric ofa 10th or II th century (AR) Q..irI autho~l­
would come near the end of this article, illustratina the
wide range of Ibn CArabrs formal or literary ~inftu­
ences" in later Sufism 8Dd the important fact that that
MfrankDell" of Nasafrs writinp (ICe below) may partly
conapcmd to a more ralIJiaed oriliDal audicDce.
21 Note the followin& iBUItratins both the author's prolix
style and his QIdUf aJIiliatiOD: "••. incomparable maten of
the esoteric Truth. iDUItriouIlinb in a chain extcDdiDa from
my lord, muter of the masters of knowiq, the quinteuence
of the Saints in God', proximity ("".",.IIbIin) and ol1hole
who mow with certainty (miiqiniill), the master of the Way
aDd the source of the aoteric Truth (",.cdin III-II.,.), the
master CAW al-Qldir al-.ntI-may God IaDCtify his sublime
lOul and iUumiute his tomb"(Pp. 103-4);"... our Jord, our
pide and our model ill the path to God, the Shayth MU\lyi
al-om CAW ~ aJ..ntI ..." (p. 142); aDd •..• *XOrdiDg
to our lord the Shayth CAW al-Qldir ..•" (p. 16S)--eKh of
thae precedin, loft' citalio.. from his X. III-GJrunytlli-1Jlihr
TIITfq IIl-lJtJqq•
The author of this work is evidently one "cAbel al-$amad
al-Qldiri," cited as IUdl in two of the oldest of daht
manuscripts-the earlieIt of them daama ollly from the
11th! 17th centwy-used ill the critical edition that formed
part of the traDllator"s dillertation (1974). (Information taken
from the review by Prof. D. Grit ill AIJIIIIln lWm%8iqws,
XX (1984), pp. 337-39, since theIe biahlY relevant facti arc
not mentioned ill the brief notice coDCCllliq the edition liwn
III the beaillDinl of this volume.) The wort is DOt lilted in
either of Ibn cArabr. 10l1lliltl of hiI own writinp" and it is
cspcciaIJy JipificaDt that the book itJdf coDtainJ DO indi-
e:atiOft that the origiDalllUtbor (as oppOeed to the modern
traDllator!) had the ,liJbtat pretcnle of auributina it to Ibn
742 10runoJ of 1M Anwrlca 0rlmt1l1 SodIly 106.4 (1986)
sort of influence wu often relatively superficial, reflcet-
ina in many cues no serious undentandina or study of
his works. 22 However, we shaD mention it here because,
like BalylnJ's work (only perhaps more so), it otren an
ideal opportunity to briol out further characteristic
and fUDdamentai features of Ibn 'Arabr.spiritual
teacbiOI and method-precisely because itlltyle, con-
tent, and intentioDl (aide from the few pusaps
borrowed literally from his writinp) are so totally
ditrereot from thOle of the Shaykh al-Akbar.
Unfortunately, rather than using this work (which is
otherwise of only limited historical interest) for that
purpose, Profcssor DeladriUe hu utonishiDJly chosen
to KCept-or more honestly, to promote2 ) -its attri-
bution to Ibn 'Arabt His motives for this pious deed
CArabt, cspeciaDy IiDce both the style ad coDteJds (apart
from the borrcnrinp mentioaed below) are 10 totally incom-
patible with any mtbe Shaykh'l kDown worb.
Ibn cArabl (u noted by D. Gril in the abovc-mentioaed
review) OCQIionaDy does JDeIltion cAbd al-QIdir, iDdudina a
spiritual eDCOWIter with him in the 1Huukh, but not wilh the
IOrt of wonbipful quotation of Jenathy pasuaa (and the
almost idolatrOUI eacomiu. .) foUDd in the ICClioDi cited
&bow. utew_, the dole 8IIOCiation of Hanbalilm and
QIdirf Salim here is DOt lurpriliDa (aJthoaah it is by DO
meanl the rule amon.later Qldirts either), Jiven that cAbd
»-QIdir himself • • a ferveat Haabalite preacher (ICC article
M<Abd aJ-~ldir aJ-DJDlnl" in EI2, I, pp. 68-70), and many
other Hanba1itcs, perhaps ~n more than with lOme of the
other IepI ",tIdJrJrtIb$, were also promioent Sufis, iDcludina
mOlt notably cAbduDlb ADfId of Hent. (The DOCOriouI
critiques of Sufism by Ibn TaymTya and other Haabalite
/uqIIIt4:>, IOIIIdiJDa themIcha UIOCiatcd with more -mod-
erate" orden, were commooly directed at what they COD-
sidered t leKie8Cl" or -umovatiODL i
U And sometimes, u in this cue (see below), lletUally
tumina up in contexts almost diametrically oPlN*d to the
spirit and intentiool of his taebina. (See abo the eeaeraJ
obtervations or Professor Schimmel witb reprd to the wide-
spread later poetic . . . . of Ibn cArabt's teebDial termi-
DOJoay, cited in n. 2 abow.)
n Giwn the obvious Hanb8litel QidiJf alIqiaDce aDd much
later Arabic style of this wort (ae n. 21 aboyc), which could
K&n:ely escape even a bqinniDl student, one must choose
betweea two bypothela coocernin, the truIIator: either
utter incompetence-which is extremely difticult to imaaine,
ciwn his able I'CIIderiDa of the Arabic: ad evideat learaioa
(includinl eonaiderable study of Ibn cArabt'. own worb) that
are maaifested both here aDd milia earlier artideI and . . .
excellent translatioDl of teveraI Sufi -clallics" (iDdudiDl
GhadIT'. MbhUt al-AnMfr[rd. at n. 13 UoYC1 Kalabldbt'.
are clearly stated at the end of his Introduction (p. 78):
-rhus it seemed to UI that the beat means of unquo-
tionably refutiq every accusation 8pinst Mul;tyt aJ-DIn
(by "Ibn TaymIya _ representative of the ShmfCaj
was to publish hiI Profession of Faith, which is in
perfect apeement with the doctrioe of the AlII 111-
SUIIIUI Wtl_l_jtmIaca."ZA Unfortunately, while there is
indeed no doubt about the -pure doctrinal orthodoxy"
(p. 76) of thil particular book from that particular
point of view-since ita author'. stated purpGle, from
fint to last, is to outline the simple creed of the AIU
al-SUIUIIl wtI aJ-lama c• (the epithet the Hanbalita
applied to themselves and those Muslims they apprcm:d
of) and to .how how the other 72 troublemakina
"scctI" of Islam (not to mention the rest of humanity!)
are III eternally d'mned to Hellfire-ODe woDden
K. td- Til >4UTI4f[ Trtlill iMlOU.f'imw: fa Mtlltrn ~, In tttIpU,
Paris, SindNd, 1981.1 and the coJlected fraplCDtl and
sayinp of Junayd (JUIIqd: ~mmt $pIrlIwl, Paris,
Sindbad, 1983.}-or alOrt ofwdl-intcationed "pious fraud,"
reminilcem of FlrlbT'I similar DIe 01 PIotiDUi (of tbe 'J'¥.
0/00) u "Aristotle.. for the purposes of bit famous exoteric
MHarmonization" of Plato aad Aristotle.
Not only does the traDlJator careruny refrain from men-
tiomn, all the mOlt obvious lips of the true ntbonbip just
mentioned (n. 21), which could scarcely fail to Itrite ~ the
mOlt aaive racier of the Freocll venion (amcb 1ca the
Arabic), but in discuaiDa (pp. 32-39) the clIq1dJI borrowd
from the bqinoina of the FUlW)lI, lie forthriahtlY aDd totally
misrepresems it • the Shayth'. "major" profcssioo of faith
(the followilll . . . . . . .11I dilmilled • '"two other minor
professionl of faitbi in • way that is more or lea the exact
cotllrlUY of wbat ODe bds lUted repeMedJy aad explicitly in
pJeCisely those I&DIC . . . . . . of the FutiJJ}at. (See below.
DO. 21, 29-31.)
24 Despite the tende1Itious natUR of the l8tter part of the
InlrodUdioa (pp. 321'.), the two opcniDa tee:tioM (pp. 11-31)
do contain some valuable biosraphical information, and a
brief diKuuioa of hilluPJM*d +IIW'f" tendencies in jlqh.
However, while we haYe already ttreucd the relatiw neaIi-
aeoce of tbae elemeatl of the Sbaykhtl tho. . . and beck-
around in Western literature until n:cently (a teadmcy itself
rdectina later IlIamjc treatmelltl 01 JbD cAtabri -Iystem- iD
relative separation from its pr8dical, operative dimenaioDl),
readen .ould cert.mJy be better IIdviled to c:oasult Ibn
CArabt'. own, quite radically difl"emat treatment of thole
trllditiooal materiaJI-. iIIustnIIed in IeYCraI 01 the n:c:eat
translation. mentioned in Pan I-rather thaD this Hanbalite
document, wllich is. far removed from Ibn cArabrt uader-
ltaDdina aad spiritual depth of treatment of thOle ID8terials •
could pouibly be ilNlaincd.
 MoaalS: Ibn CATtJbi tmd Hu Intnpnterl
whether even the most obtuse of those "IItuluzwfyQ"
would ever have Jiven credeace to its attn"bution to Ibn
cArabl
The framework of the book u a ~hole (sections
1-13 and IS9-6S, in the translator's division), u we
have just indicated, is the famous l}adrth of the "73
sects," interpreted here-in the polemic (in fact often
fanatic) heresiolDPhicaI JanauaIe UICd throughout the
work-to exclude from the sinJIe "saved sect" all
Muslims but the author's own handpicked group, who
are defined by the Hanbalite ctujfdII outlined in the
intervening sections: chapten on TtIW/ftd, the "Reality
of the Prophet," Faith, and the fint four Sunni ImamJ
and their rank (sections 88-1 S8, the main body of the
work). In all but the first two chapters, there is nothing
remotely resembling the treatment of those subjects in
any of the known works of Ibn cArabI, and indeed their
Hanbalite dOJlDatism and polemic intention leave little
room for more than brief allusions to the author's
QldirJ Sufism. The visible "inftuences" of Ibn cArabI,
apart from one or two verses,IS an lOme very brief
quotations in the section on the "Reality of the
Prophet,"" plus the openins clU/fdtl (sections 14-27),
which is quoted in part-with some brief but sipifi-
cant additions atld exclusions-from Ibn cArabI's
MuqlUldinul to the FutU/:Uit. What is significant about
theae two brief "borrowings,tIn though-and represen-
tative of much later use of Ibn cArabI's work-is that
15 In addition to those identmed by the traDslator, D. Grit
(in the review cited in n. 21) mentioDi the poem borrowed at
the end and in seelion 26. TIle fact that nODe of these
borrowiDp are explicitly rderrcd to Ibn cArabT is certainly
undentaDdable in the author's Hanbalite lettina. where the
Sbaykh's name wu by no means uDiverully revered, to say
the least.
26 Apin, most of tbese passaaes, as the traus1ator indicates,
seem to be paraphrased from the SIuIjtITllt Ill- KiJwn or other
worb concerniq die "MuhamlJUldan Reality"; Prof. GriJ bas
I"CICOplizcd section 51. e.J.. as a quotation from Iba cArabt'a
It 1l1-lttiJ)JJd tll-KJJwnr, the text be edited and traDIIated (see
our review in Part I). It is typical, however, that they are used
here in an apologetic, defensive, and historicist seme which
refteds a complete misUDdentandinJ (or misrqJraentation)
of Ibn cArabt's own distiDctively ontoloP:al (and therd'0I'e
nec:caariJy universal) ute of these concepts. (See also DB. 21-
28 below.)
77 This cllqrdlz correspoDds very rouPIy to die FM, I,
pp. 36.6-38.3. but with lOme very sipificant internal chan&es
and onaiaions-not to mention tile suppression of Ibn
cArabt'. eueatial qualifications of this paIIaF (see DB. 29-
31)-whicb are cspccially revea1in1 of the Hanbalite author's
743
they are ultimately literary or stylistic, phrases and
terminol0IY borrowed without any (implicit or explicit)
reference to or deeper uDdentandinl of their oriJinal
systematic context and implications.
This point is especially clearly-and ironically-
illustrated in the cue of the OpeniDl caqrdil borrolftd
from the FUIUJ;Iat. For Ibn cArabJ, far from beina the
Yet')' different undentandiD& aDd inteatiODI. ODe especially
stritinl example is the passage On the divine '"Speech"
(ktl14m), which in this venion (seetioD 24, p. 98 of the
translation) becomes a series of separate historical acts:
..... By it He spoke to MOICI and He c:a11cd illbora; by it He
spoke to David and calIrd it Psalms, to Jeaus and called it
Gospel. ..." (indudina lines completely abient from the
FtitOlJat here in any form!).
In the COrrespondilll paIAF in the Flltiil)8t (I, p. 38, lines
210-21) one fiDds aometbiq as difl'ernt from thillitcraliI~
historicist Hanhalite perspective as day from ni&bt: ..... with
this (Speech] He spoke to Moses, and He cal1ed it Revelation
(t4nZf/), Psalms, Torah, lad Gospels, without letters or
sounds or voice or Ian What Ibn CArabl is refer-
rinJ to here is a1re8dy quite de8rly-althoup his meaninJ it
amplified in hundmls oflatcr pqa of the FutQ.-prccilely
the eternal spirituallleUty which is at once the Source of all
historical "revelations" and the common object of the path
and teachinp of the tlWllya;) (in 11111 historical or reIiaioUl
settina). As always in Ibn cArabI-and that is pn:cilely the
point of his credo of the c-wmm-this formulation encom-
puses and illuminates the popular comprdleDaiOD of the
Hubalitea (and indeed of virtually all the other "'schools," in
this aDd other reliaioftS!), but it is in no way reducible to that
limited vision, and in fact directs the readcr' precisely beyond
whatever mental i.mqeI and conceptions be may happen to
have of that Reality.
a This is especially obvioas in this author'. references to the
"Muhammadan Reality,"wbicb here is little more than empty
bautilll Oft a sectarian historical level, without the slilbtest
inkling of the meaning and impJicatioDi of that term in Ibn
CArabT' OWll writina. (As such, it is a typical illustration of
the IOrt of literary ooinftuence" of Ibn cArabr. tcrmiDololY
and concepts without any serious undentanding of what they
represeBt, and indeed often in ways quite contrary to his
intentions; see already DB. 2, 26, and the IeCtion on Nuafr
below.) In In cAnbY, for example, tbis Reality (with its many
equivalent names: see S. a1-~akim. III-JlIl7-n 1II-$iJfT(dis-
cussed in Part I, n. I], pp. :W7-S2 and 151-68, plus the 10111
list of cross-references in each case) is consiltcntly treated in a
way that briap out its univenaI. oqoiDl manifestations,
both in Islam and other re1ipons (and prophets) and at all the
relevant !eve of the "Complete M.... (iIulIIr /c6mil). It is
perh... worth addinl t1Iat in Ibn cArabt tbeIe implicatioDl
744 JOfInfJIl O/IM Amnkllll 0rimt4l SocIety 106.4 (1986)
-credo of the elite" in the title of this work (ctlqrdm
tlhJlI1-iklt~)t it is deteribed as the "credo of the
commonen •.. amona the peoples of taqlrd, w1f and is
immediately followed by two JoIJI, extremely complex
symbolic aud mystical discuaioDl which tOJdbcr make
up what Ibn ~abt explicitly calls his own-how
radically and irreducibly difrerentr-CaqrdGt ahl aJ.
IkJuIl6l min IIh1 Allah.· But that second ItaF is only
aDd lIWIifelUtio. ~ by DO meaDS a matter of IOIIIC abItract
theof'CtiQl -system,. but of coacrete aDd particular reaIita-
bO.. in the life of each iDdiYidual. (The bat avai1abIe
iJluIIraIion is in the traDIlaaiODl aDd comJDeDtaria on the
FUlDllIl-{liIcturt diIcuaed in Part I.)
It The pRCiIe terJDa of Ibn cArabrs dacriptioDl of this
clIII'Idt4 both precedina aDd immediately followiDa .it, are
extremely impotWlt aDd daene to be cited in full, althouJb
~ cannot commeJlt on the meanina of ada of tile tenDs he
UICS. FlltUJ.tat 1, p. 37.5: -AppeDdix, contaiDiDa what IhouId
be believed (lctItfiItI) 8IDODI the common pubtic (III- CWniim,
hoi polloi); it is the credo of the people of outwarcIlUbmiaion
(uJam). xcepted (",.,.,.".) without any mquity (,..,.,)
into (ratioDai or ICriptural) iDdieatioDi (dII1rl) or (spiritual
aad experiential) proof (burhlll). FutiiI.tM I. p. 38: "'So this
[Precedina 1tatemeDI, iDdudin. a Ion, coadudina leCtion not
used by the Babalite author] is the credo of the mallei
(c4rWl1mlft)aJDema tJae people of IUbmiuioD (IIIIm), the
people of lilqlrd, aDd the people of IfIIIIlT [i Tho cArabf"
. . . . priDwiJy the m&IIiIktIJlimii, but also _ _ types of
pbiJoIopbcnJ, IUIIIJIIU'ized aDd ....,ed... The Ii mcaniDa
of tJaae terms will be recopized by thOle who have ~
queDIccIlbn cArabi's worb. In any ncnt, tba'e caa be littJe
doUbt tbM such tetmI • c4lWlmm aad Ulqlrd refer here (as
tikewme in many other tnditio. of IaJamic tIIOupt) to
prcciIdy the IOrt of Jiaoroua nOD-tbinkin, (by DO meam
aduiwIy Banbalite!) 10 perfectly iIluatrated, if not iDdccd
clcfeDded, by this particular book.
JO F~t I, p. 41, lines 1-8. Tbii dettription of tbe
intencnin& aedioos (pp. 41-47) IUIIlJDaI'izina "the belief of
the people of the tJile amGllI the people of God [ODe of Ibn
cArabf's favorite CXpralioDi for the true SuD] who are
between intellectual inquiry (1IGJ4U) aDd expcrienu.l unveil-
iDa" (p. 41.3) bas been quoted because it islUdl an ironic
COIIUIIeIHarY on the prcccDIio. of tbis later Banbaliae text. In
Ibn CArabra IonF dacriptioll (po 31, tina 22-21) of tlae
two ~ . _ abady morecliltiDctiwly Sufi -crcaIa"-
eatirely dift'erent, iDcideDlaUY. iD their subjects and (0l11li of
expraaion-be describes tJae true "lIhllll-ikhl~"• ~
dite of tbe people of God aIDOq tbe people or the Path of
God, thole who truly realize the divine Truth (tll-~
in its Sufi usqe), tJae people of direct unveiliDa (bDItf) aDd
true Beina (or -eataly," wujlid)." To daaibe this staae as
-minor" (u the tnDIIator doa). in relation to the pncecliDa
the beJinnina: ~ow u for the cfIqfdtl concerain& God
of the quinteaenee of the elite (kJrMllqtJt tII-IcMHtJ),
that is a matter even above this one, wllkh we IuIw
6pr«ld thr0U6ltout tJrJs book. •.. 91SI In other .0Rb,
the around and true meaninl of Ibn cArabJ'1 openinJ
c4UJfda-aad the immeaaurable diataDce teparatina it
from the perspective of this one~imenlional Hanbalite
~ofeaioD of faitb - Q J l only be fuUy appreciated by
9l
one who baa aaimilated all the tenin,1 and inaipts
of tlae FutfJl)al and (most impottaJltly) the profound
spiritual realization UDderlyi.ns them.
No doubt the tranalator of this ork is quite jUltified
in insistinl throughout biI Introduction that Ibn CArabJ
\Va iDdeed "mUl~ 91161UD1li," "orthodox" (and many
other thin besidea),J2 but readen of this wort ril
learn Dotbina-aDd indeed are likely to be .moUlly
mW&:d-about the deeper, perennial dimensio of
such terms in the life and teachina of the Shaykh and
the ways be IUgatl they can be realized (the dimen-
sion of tah.qlq).....A.hJ IIl-mtrIUI," like "catholic," hu
several levels of meanh,. AI we have indie-ted in
Part I of this article, both bam and fUlh are extremely
important-and still ....1y unstudied-aspects of Ibn
cArabl's thouJht, especially in the FutiiJ}at. But his
distinctive personal treatment aud multidimensional
undentaDdinl of both lubjects, consistently trlDlCelld-
in. the sectarian and dopIatic approach of the tradi-
tional rruMIJJahib, is a IOrt of polar opposite to the
fanatic doam,rillD of this later Hanbalite tract.
credo (n. 29), repraeatl a penpeam wbidl-aJtboalb DO
doubt faithfully BubaIitc-ia c:ertaiDIy quite clitl'aent from
Ibn cArabJ·..
)1 FIlIiiJ,4I 1, p. 47, JiDa 71f.; the . . . . . coatiDua - ..•
beca IDOIt mteJlectl, bd1w wiW by IMir tlaotclw. are
hie to perc:eM this bccauae of their 1Kt of (spiritual)
purification (ttljrfd)" (tIllplwil outS, ill both cases). TIle fact
that tbe FutDI}at in ill entirety conWDs dear but -dilpened"
.nUliODS to the bipest spiritual truth, which each rader must
-Put tOld-" accordina to the ..... of . inIiabt· IWed
even more clearly at p. 38, lines 2S-28: WfhOlC (cleater
ltatementl of the Truth] are aepankd mid scattered•• we
llaw IIICntioDed. So may he on whom God .... batowed their
UDdentaDdiq rec:opize (the truth 00 their matter and
diItiDpisb them from the other thiDp. For that is the True
Kno Wac (tll-cllm aHwulq) aad the AutbeDtic SayiDJ (til-
qtlWllll-pilq). Tbere is DO JOAI beyo II, aad "the blind and
the truly IeCina are not alike· [el. ~oraa 6:SO, etc.] in III
rqard...."
)1 See II. 2A and the clilaasiODI of traDl1aaed acaWDe worb
of Ibn cArabt partly iIIU1tntiD1 these points, • be UDdcrstood
them. in Put I.
 Mo au: Ibn CArobi tmd Hu Intnpreters
m. The widely read Fenian works of the Kubriwt
haykh cAzrz aI-Nuafl (d. late 7th/13th century) i1lus-
trate some important pectJ of the initial reception of
Ibn cArabl's work (on a more practical and lea purely
theoretical level) among Persian and Central Asian
Sufia, a movement that is already evident in the
relations of Nasan's own master Sacd aI-Oln aI-
J::IamtPT (d. 6SO/I2S3) with both Ibn CArabI aDd $adr
al-DIn aI-Qilnawi. JJ Not only does NasafI's wort (like
J) For lJamil~'1 conta:ts with QGnawr aDd a cIeKription of
the contents of his IettcI' to Ibn cArabI, ICe M. Mol~"
IntrOduction to his edition of the Ki,.b tIl-buIIn td-Dmil
(and several other collec:tio.. of short treatises) of N...n,
Tehran/Paril, 1962, pp. 7-8. (Since lJama~ knew QOnawlill
Damascus before Ibn cArabI'1 death, it ICeIDI hi""y litely
that he did have some personal contact with the Shaykh.)
l:IamO~" iDftueoc:e is visible throuabout Nuafrl worb,
where he is coastantly cited as -our mutet," etC.; see the
further dilcuaion of their rdatioDi ill MO~'1 bttroduction.
ope cit., pp. 7-21.
A number of early Ihaykhl of the Kubrlwrya order have
been closely studied in worb by teYera1 ICbolan which
totetber &iYe UI probably tbe most detailed picture, both in
quantity ad quality of dilcuuion. of ay c:ompanble period
aDd rqion of Sui KtiYity. (TbeIe studies also mate it dear
and theoretical upeets of IbD cArabI', work w.
that l;Iamii1's aDd Nuaff', rdativc inlerat in the ODtoloPcal
DOt shared
by other important CODtcmporaria in that laDle -onter"; see,
e.I-, the references to SimDInI belo .)
For Nasafr himself, see also two Itudia by F. Meier, -Ou
Problem der Natur im esoteriac:ben MonismUl del bIama,"
UtlllM-Jtlhrbudt 14 (1946), pp. 149-227, and"Die Sc:briftell
t&lCuItM .$
cia cAm aI-NuafT," pp. 125-82 in tbe W".mu ZIludtri/t/fJT
M~ S2 (l9S3), • welIu M. Mo~',
article on -La Kubrawiyya entre IWlIIisme et I ~.. Rnw
.$ ltuM$ i&ltmtiqw$, 1961. The clauic study ofNajm al-DIn
KubrI himlelf is F. Meier's German mUOdue:tion to his
edition, Die "llIWa".J~ al-ttunal IN IlIWilil) tIl-IlIlal" tin
NtJImuddrn al-Kub,i, WicsbMen, 19S7. For Ntlr al-Drn
lsfarIyiDJ (aDd his dilCiple SimDlnt, disc:uued further. D. 80
below), see espec:ially tbe JoDI Introduction to H. LaDdolt'.
edition of his COI7UpOItI1Im« $pIriIwlJe (with SimnlDl),
(TehranI Paris, 1972), aDd his IntroductioD. truslation of
Isfarlyinl's Kamif Gl-ARl" aDd. edition of that wort ad
related Persian letten of spiritual JUidance in Dmiftll-hTilT
(Tehran, USBf 1980). This latter WOTk, bich in fa coDlti-
tutes a history of many apcct. or the early KubrlwtJa order
more ~y, ... now beeu republiabcd, in a RYiIed ad
more acceaible version. • u JUW1IJteur tID Mptbu: "Ifill
• $tJII/imw (Pari&. Verdier, 1986). For more detailed biblioa-
rapby (iDdudina many other studies by Meier aDd Molt), lee
both LaDdolt, Ope cit., aDd R. GramJich, DW $dtilIueltm
745
that of BalylnJ above) represent a vital, long-atab-
liabed current of Sufi tboupt aDd expreaioD in its own
ri&bt (in which, foUowina Tumidht, the more theo-
retical writinp-often in Penian-of A\UDad GIwIIJ
and CAyn aI-Qu41t Hamadini bad played a formative
role), but at the same time it briop out quite sharply,
even more than Baly~ the vast ranF of problems
and complex issues (both practical aDd theoretical)
that had already come to the forefront in the develop-
ment of Sufism prior to Ibn cArabI, aDd which in large
part helped structure both his own creative response
aDd the lublequcnt UICI and transformatio of his
writinp in the euterD IJlamic orld. Moreover the
comparison of Ibn CAnbY and NasafI (and the ten-
dencies their difJerilll formulations represent)· not
only historically illuminatin~ It is also a salutary
philosophic remiDcler of the full rUF of ethical,
political, theoloaical. and practical problems that one
ioevitably eacounten (in tilly cultural context) in
attempting to reaJizc the deeper spiritual intentions of
those writers (or the prophets who are their own guides
and inspiration).J4
The wide diffusion and popular inftuence of Hasan's
writiD&S-a ~ which may be explainable, at least
in part, precisely by their characteristic directDCa aDd
relative lack of subtlety aDd overt systematic CODCCI'DI
(whether' theoretical or practical)-c:an be judged by
the profusion of IIWIUlCripts aad early translations
(especiaUy Turkish) ofbia worb. Their relative acca-
sibility is no doubt alto reftected in tbe teDW'kable
series of Western vemODl of his brief MtU/,.J-i Aq,a
which for several centuries constituted one of the few
translated sources on Sufism in Europe, beginning with
A. Mueller's Turkish edition and Latin traDIlation
DnwUdtOTdm hniDu, W'1CIbaden. I96S (Part I) ad 1967
(Part II), wbic:b aIao offen a broader perspective 011 this
movement. For Najm a1-Drn RizI, ICC n. 62 below.
U Seen iD t • lipt. detailed historical raeardl (whether
lOCio-c:u1t1n'al or-doctriJlal.. aDd philolop:aI mfoc:ua) caD be
of considerable philosophic value, even when the raearcben
themIdves are rdalively UDCODCerDcd with the apiritual dimea-
siona of their abject. One of the IimitatioDl of translatio of
Sufi tem aimed mainly at ""'introducin." -Sufism, W which still
iDdudes molt of the boob readily available to Itudentl, is
th. they teDd to present an idealized, abItnld ima&e Ieaviq
out the fwI ranae of problema aDd iJIua (with their historical
particularities) with which iDdividual Suit have DeCCIUrily
aI ays been invohed. The Itudics j maatioDcd (n. 33) are
espec:iaIly helpful in th. reprd. m briDaiDI out Mpecta of
Sui practice (aDd life in a partic:ut.r ~ aoc:iety) wbidl
were ofteD lakea for panted in mysticallil6",un-aDd for
that reaoD are often -mviliblew to modem readen.
746 Joumal of tM Amerialn Orienllll Sockty 106.4 (1986)
(Brandenbura, 1665), then F. Tholuct's influential
handbook on "the pantheistic: theosophy of the Per·
siaDa" (Be~ 1821), aDd Eo H. Palmer', Eq1ish
Mparaphrase" [Oriental Mystlcum: a Treatise on
SlIjiutic ad UnittITum Tlteosophy of tM Pe"liDu.
Pp. xiv + 84. LoDdon: FaANIC CASS. 1969. (Reprint of
1867 edition.»)." Yet while it is not difficult to leCOI"
nize, with considerable regret, the wider intellectua1
CODICQUCDCel of takin.a work like the Maql/ld.. j Aq,a
(and moreover, in a tnmeated, groaIy iudcquate
summary) as somehow intellectually or spiritually rep--
reseotative of ~ufismIt in pnerai, Palmer'. paraphrase
does retain a certain usefu1nea for specialiatl who can
approach it with an awareness of the underlyina text
and its biuorital background, since NaaafT sometimes
states his own opinioDi more explicitly there than
elsewhere. )6
Fortunately, thoup; babelte de Gutincs' recent
tranIlation of two of Nasafl's loqer writinp, the
U For cIetailI 08 the manUitripti and traDIIatiou, lee
Mo~'s editioB of 1l1-1tuiIn lII-K4miJ (n. 33 aboft), pp. I and
28-S6, • well. F. Meier's article on Naafl's writiDp (ref. at
B.33).
Palmer's opeaioa ..mion (p. ix) that ""'this work was
0ri&inaUY written iD Turkish aDd translated iDlo PeniaD by
~h hazim Shah" Jives lOme idea of its quality. The eucti·
lude and method of his "paraphnst"-which completely
allen Hasan's chapter divisioDl, and iD which it is oflCD
impossible to decide where Palmer is inteJjectiaa his own
extraneous remarks-can be judaed by comparilll his
·Part III" (pp. 43~, OB WfIlayIl and llllbuwwll), with Mole's
complete translation (rouPJy twice • 100&) of the COfTCI.
POncliD& chapter 5 of Nasafrs work (at pp. 1'-18 of his
I~uetion to the above-mentioDed edilion). The reprint
publisher's assertion (on the jacket) that USome works stand
the telt of time better than othen" and that this ODe -is still an
iDdispeDJable 100J for Islamic tcboJan" is an ironic iDUlt~
lion (amon, the multitude lhat could be cited by uy teacher
in this 01' other area of IsJamic thoqht) of the 1astiD, cIamap
that can be done by inadequately prepared aDd UlDOtatcd
translations of important worb, not leat by discouraainl
any subsequcut attempt at a more adequate treatment.
J6 MOlt notably on the question of wdI,. and nubuwwa
(= Palmer, pp. 43-44), KCOrdina to discuuio by M. Mo~
and F. Meier, rcferrinl to the reIatioaa between the MIIqIMl
and Naafl'llonaer KJuhFtJl-lJlfII/ll% ICC. e..., Molt, pp. IS-
27 of tbe Introduction to IIl-hu4It III-bmil. Another .van-
. . of the MIlt/II'd. nCD compared, for eumple, to the texts
iDcluded in 16 llvn ,. /'No"",., P"r/llil, is its relative
concision aDd systematic fOnD; hich brinp out more clearly
the overall structure of Naaafr's coDCCrDI-althouah one
ould hesitate to call this a "system." if compared to tbe
Mtm4zil-i sa'i,,.,. and /ndn-i K4miJ [I.e Livre de
['Homme Parfait. pp. 381. Paris: FAYAaD. 1984.], giva
a far more comprebauive and rcveaIinI view of this
fucinatinl fipre. Both Mbooks" included in this trans-
lation are actually collections of Naufl'. letters in
response to questions from his dilciplea or other Sufis;
these particular titJa, the overall oRier and Dumber of
treatises, and even the prefaca purportina to explain
that order all .em to ha'YC been added (or at least
revised) after their oriIinaI composition, either by
Nasafl or by later Meditors. "37 While raisinl • Dumber
intdJectual coherence evident iD Ibn CArabi aDd his commen-
laton cIUcuued below. UDfortu.nately, even with some aware-
DCII of the likely PeniaD lad Arabic equivalents, ODe can
neftr be very .ure how dOle Palmer's ~hrue"is to the
original lerDII. (For the full measure of the euctitude and
complexity of that oripw 1enniDoIoaY, whether iD Peniu
or Arabic. see tbe many illustrations in the notes to
H. Landolt's translatioa of IsfariyinI's nmi/III·AsTiJT [n. 33
above) aDd tbe detailed AeDcb and Persian indexes to that
ltUdy. Many of tbote -nota"-reminisceDt of KrauI's Jab"
ilHr Qllyy6t-are actually lCparate IDOnopaphs on the devd-
oplDCDt of these conc:epll aDd techBa terms.)
J7 See Mo~'1 iDlroductioa 10 his edition for an explanation
of the complex and problematic manUlCript history of these
works, all of which later circulated UDder many nama, with
the same treati8e OftCD appear101 in rouply tbe same form iD
IC\Ieral different col1edioa. In addition to a vat nllDlber of
ordinary variant readinp (pp. 488-551), Mole also includes
(pp. 444-82) 1001 a1temate sections (often equivalent to
several paaa iD truslaboo) found iD certain manuscripts of
these treatises. The Freach translation contains DO reference
to these serio problems which have a potelltially important
bearin, on how one iDterpretl the work . . . whole-e.I-, bow
mucb is NuafJ~s OWD writin& what may have beeD cban&ed
or interpolated by later compilen, etc. The title adopted here,
a Mole notes (intro., p. 38), is almost certainly due to • later
compiler. aDd quite possibly to a confi ioa with mY's much
more systematic work (ICC below) of the same name.
In pneral, readen should be cautioned that the translator
here-a iD her Preccdinl venion of cAttJr's MrqrlNn"."",
[u liv,~ ,. l'ip,ftIW, Paris, Fayard, 1981, with preface by
A. SCbiJnmel)-lw .opted • reIaantdy popular or free
method of translation (ofteD parapbruiD& or droppin, several
lines, and with essentially no explanatory iDtroeIuetion,
detailed notes, or index) directed toward the "aenenl public"
iD the broadest ICDIC. The rault is often Iesa repetitive and
more immediately "'readable" &Del ~ Pleasinl (to
our modCl1l taIte), but at the same time tends to obJCure those
meaninp aDd • that would require a more extCDlive
llCquaintaDce with t author and his historical conteXL
(Those interested iD Nasafl himself or the ~ubriwtya, for
 MORRIS: Ibn 'Artlbi IIIId His Interpreter.
of serious interpretive problema, the particular arcum-
ItaDc:a of their composition do 10 a lonl way toward
explaining some of the most strikinl characteristics of
both of tbae worD, features which make this trans-
lation especia1ly fuciDatinl, if also sometimes frus-
tratina, readilJl.
Those unusual characteristics, which in many
respects are certainly typical of the behavior of a livin,
•hayth with his disciples (but not 10 commonly of Sufi
prose worD destiDed for an indeterminate public),
include; (a) Nasafi's relative disorder aDd lack of
concern for formal systematic coherence, whether in
his practical advice or in his treatment of theological
aDd metaphysical issucs, an impreuicm that may be
partly explicable by the different inner aptitudes and
conditions of his particular correspondents; (b) his
open, informal style, showing DO fear of (apparently)
contradietin. himself or admittiJll his own uncertainty
and hesitation on crucial iuuea, sometimes vergiq on
a systematic skepticism-features which are remark-
ably revealin, (for medieval Islamic literature) of
Nuafl's own cbarllCler and personality; and (c) his
apparent (but as we shall ICC, quite problematic)
"openness" and expticitDell in diacuuina the most
controversial esoteric questions. All these distinctive
features-which are sometimes so Itrikinl here, when
compared with mOlt classical Sufi prOle, that one
could almost imaaine oneself in CaJilornia"-may
also reflect the widespread socia-political disorder and
consequent greater freedom of ekpreuion in Ilkhanid
Iran and Central Asia after the MODgol invasion.)9 But
example, will therefore still have to refer diredIy to the
Penian texts.)
). By this we are referriJJ& to Nasali's remarkably open.
relatively non-dogmatic, aDd frequently prqmatic or even
"experimental" attitude-as in his I'q)eatcd indications of
uncertainty as to whether withdrawal from the world or
(ascetic) participation in it is a better spiritual JDethoct-and
his continued actnowlcdJllle1lt of the spiritual ..d...."focuain.
OIl wbat actually works in a &i~ case. As just noted, these
cbataeteristics may actually be typical of some Sui ....ten in
their real life, but they are rather strikiD. wbell compared to
most of the UlnwlUn of Islamic mysticism. in which (a with
the Haabali/ Qldirf text ctiIcuIIcd above) tbcoloP:al COD-
siderations of ODe IOIt or another are usuaJ)y much more
visible. (ThiS impRllioa may also have to do with the free and
uncommented nature of the translation, as indiallcd in the
Prececlin& note.)
» This extremely unusual set of politiall cin:u.mataces-ia
wbich Islam (and Sunnism in particular) actually cused to be
tbe state reliIiOD Del (to IOIDe extent, at least) the state-
enfon:ed Law for dOle to. century-i. cited in. variety of
747
more important, they are also indicatil'e of certain
broader (both earlier aDd onl0iJaa) Sufi traditiODI aDd
tendencies in that region (already visible, for example.
in BalylDI" work, but dramatically illuatrated in many
Persian Sufi poets) that helped determine the partial-
tar forma of "reception" of Ibn cArabI'. writiDp (jUit
u earlier, in the case of al-TirmidbI or certain Shiite
1OW'Ca, they bad helped shape the problems that Ibn
cArabT wa intent on raolvina).
TIle lipificant coatrutI between NuafJ ad Ibn
cArabT are equally appaRnt wbetber we consider their
trutment of the practical questions of spiritual disci-
pline and method or more .....coretical" and doctrinal
illues. Here we shall coDCCDtrate on a few typical
theologicall philosophical quations. since they 10
clearly illustrate the types of widespread, potentially
controversial problems for which Ibn CArabY's works,
connections in the studies by Ludolt, Mo~ and Meier
mentioned above (n. 33); the political role of Sufis like
Isfariyini, in particular, is diJcuaed in detail in H. Landolt'.
introductiOD to hiJ Kashif IIl-hrar, pp. JS- 19 and related
notes. The brolMler importance of tbete socio-politica1 con-
Shiite philosopher and scientist N...
ditioDl-includina the control of wtlllf endowments by the
aI-Di'n AI-TiiSi, as
Mooaol w.mr-in encouraaina the spread of Avicennan
philosophy _d "speculative mysticiJm" (amoul other ..het-
erodox" IDOvemenu) in the eastern Islamic world, is evoked
by W. MadelUDI in bis "Ibn Abi Gumhar al-A~~'s Syn-
thesis of 1uIlam, Philosophy and Sufism." now readily avail-
able in his Re/i6Ious SclrbtJu tmd &eu In MedkWlI/$Itun,
Loncloll, 1985, selection XIII (pp. 147-56). (See also the
illustratiw cue of Ibn AbI JumbOc'1 open reference to
transftliaration of souls, n. 46 below.)
It should be stressed that the consequences of this tem. .
rary period of relatiw ""intellectual freedom" were quite
cliJf'erent from (if not indeed the exact opposite of) those
foUowin. the later Safavid imposition of clerical Twelver
Sbiism several centuria later. The widespread veueratiOD of
CAlI and coucerD with wtlMytI that is 10 evident with Naafi
and other Sufis of the time-and which is more closely
analyzed in an extensiw literature wbicb can be found in the
worts cited at n. 33-1CC1D to have had little or nothiDl to do
with the quite distinct Twelver Shiite lepl and J,tJdrlh scbooll
dunDl . period. (The cue of the llmaili m~t after
the MOD.ol inVasiODSICCIDI to have been quite clil'erent; the
interpenetrations with lra.iu Sufism were so profound that
Sufis like Nuafl (see Mo~'s introduction. pp. 20-27) and
Sbabiltarf (see H. Corbin's edition and trallllation of an
Ismaili commentary on his GubNm-i Nz (Trno,N ismMl-
WIIM, Paris/Tehran, 1961, pp. 1-17. of the French traDI-
II.tioD. sectiOllIII]) were apparently -adopted" by later Pmian
Ismailis.
748 JoUl7llll 01 the Americllll OrienltlJ Sockty 106.4 (1986)
through their adaptation by QnnawI and later inter-
preters (diacuaed below), were IUbiequently to pro-
vide more adequate and widely accepted solutions.
These closely interrelated problems-since all of them
are only facets of what Nasafi (following many other
Sufil and Shiite thinkers) undentandl by the different
dimensions of man's 66Resurrection" (qiytima)-are
(I) the relation of nubuwwa (or risGlo, i.e., legiJlative
prophecy) and waliiya, as bound up with (2) the theory
of cosmic and historical cycles; (3) the succeuive lives
and forma of existence involved in the gradual per-
fection of tbe soul; aDd (4) his understanding of the
position of the "people of Unity" (tzhl-i val}dol), in
relation to the rat of mankind. If Nuafl (like his
master l:IamO>J) was already aware of some of Ibn
cArabI's theories in these and related areas, his very
limited adaptation of them only serves to underline the
more fundamental distance seParating the two per-
spectives. 40 In each of tbetc cues (and in manyothcn),
N asaf'j's underlying approach is basica1ly the same,
characterized by <a> an ostensible "openness" (which,
40 In the MflqlMl-i Ap (Palmer's paraphrase), note the
dilCUSlion of tbe Frqiq fll-J)iIuIm (p. SS) and of a dispute
between QOnawi and l;IamQ?J concerning tbe divino Names
and Attributes (pp. 27-28). More perally, u in parts of
fll-lruTIn tll-Kiimil, one can see Ibn cArabi'1 poaitiona bem,
taken into account in reJ8ld to luch questions U IIIWI}Id or
the -unity of HeiDI." wtlIDYlI, tile flCya tltabhtl (where Ibn
cAnbI i cited by name, p. 296), or the "Perfect Man" (a far
lesl important topic in this coDec:tion than the subsequent title
might sugest). While tbe ~ interest in tbae metaphysical
aDd cosmolO&icaJ topics does distinguish Nasafl and lJamO>r
from a far more practice-orientcd K.ubdwI shaykh like
IsfarayinI (see references in D. 33 above), for example, it is
also clear that Nuafl is dealing with Ibn cArabi'1 contribu-
tions (which here, • 10 often, seem to be essentially limited to
the FU#II) on somethinslike a case-by-ease basis-as though
in convenarlon with another respected sbayth about matten
with which each is familiar-with little ICDIC of either his
overall Iystematic coberencc or the lupreme I"Clpect for his
teachings that certainly characterizes all the fipres in the
-school" of QlDawt discussed below. (A particularly obvious
example of this relative "1Ddepenclence"-aJtbough it would
probably be more URful to take Nasafl as often repraenting
precisely the sort of typical, relatively disorganiml cliscuuion
of these questions prior to their transformation by Ibn
cArabl-is his discussion of the -Perfect Man," pp. 16-22 in
translation, where the "Perfect Man"· dealt with primarily as
a panicular human individual, an ideal human type, with little
emphasis on the transcendent, cosmic dimensions that are so
prominent in Ibn ~Arabt.)
from Ibn cArabi's standpoint, would instead probably
be characterized as an illusory Iiteraliam and Rduetiw
VUlgarization) concerning the 66esoteriC" (balin) dimen-
sion of the spiritual path; aDd (b) a concomitant elitist
disregard-indeed sometimes an almost dualistic or
gnostic disdain-for every aspect of "his world"
(iucluding the pjhir of religion and prophecy) and the
mass of men who are deluded into takin& it as their sole
reality.
That these characteristics are not limply a matter of
rhetorical empbuis aDd partial expression (as they
may well be in certain poets) can be seen most clearly
here in N uafl's undentanding of the wali (or vali, in
Persian), who for him-in a conception totally differ-
ent from wbat one finds in Ibn cArabi-is the ..$QI:Ub
ai-am"'," a messianic fipre whom NuafI (like his
teacher l:IamlPT) apparently took to be a particular
historical individual bo as shortly coming, in his
own lifetime, to transform totally the human condition
10 that the "MflcQ (and ..~,. in general) would no
longer be necessary aud only the esoteric Truth (the
balin) would rule."· His own historicist, DOn-symbolic
.1 For the historicity of Nuafrs conceprion (following
l:IamO"'I), see his dream of the Prophet in n. 42 below.
Nasafr'1 views on this question must be carefully distin-
pished from (I) Ibn cArabrI views collCCl'lling the relations
of wtll4ytl, nubuWWfl, met rislllI, which have little to do with
the particular point Nuafl is discu ins in terms of the
"waiT" [See now the compI'Cbensive study of tbeIe subjecu in
Michel Cboclkiewicz, I.e S«tIu tin Minll: f"opIthie ~t Mlinlet~
dtDu III doctriM d'lbn CAr.; (Paris, ~ 1986)}; (2) Ibn
cAram'1 conception of the nuUull, which is more closely
related to this point; aDd (3) Twelver Shiite aDd Ismaili Shiite
conceptions oftbe MabdI. WaII, and ~b al-ZamIn, which
are apin c10scst to Nuafr'l terminolOlY, although that
similarity is unlikely to rdect any dogmatic theolo&ical
"allegiance" on either his or lJam1i>r'1 part (see Mole'
d.iscussion in his introduction to the edition of this text,
pp. 20-27). What sets Nuafl apart from all of the above-or
at least from their more spiritual conceptions, if not the
popular messianic misUDdentandinp-is preciJely his histor-
ical "literaIism" and appamd belief that the MabeU ·11
totally trusform the human condition by doiIW tlWfly with
the 8ht1"ctI aDdllhir, rather than ( . in many ""elIth cited by
Ibn cArabI) coming to hold men to the sluufciI-« more
precisely, rutins acxordins to the blIIln of the (true, eternal)
sMrfcfl. While Dot denying the validity of the many tradition.
concerning tbe transformations to take place at the"cud of
time.. (about which, moreover. they diJl'er in other important
respects), both Ibn cArabr and most Shiite thinkers alike
tended instead to ItrCIS the prumJ meaniDS or potential of
 MoUlS: Ibn 'ArtJbi and Hi8 Interpnlen
conception of that fUDCtion (or rather, of that indi-
vidual)-aDd the wider antiDominan danaen of such
popular mcuianic belief-aK aptly illustrated in his
observations about the many pretenden to this role
who were springing up throughout Iran in his time;
their failures did not teem to shake his own profound
usurance that .uch an individual was about to come
(aDd would even approve the teaching and promul-
gation of Nasafrs own book.!)."z His expectation of
this forthcomiDa transformation of the humaD condi-
tion wa apparently bound up with his beliefs con-
cemina a.mea oC cosmic eyeJea-of 1000, 7000, and
49,000 years-that make up, at least on one plane of
interpretation, what NuaflundentaDdl by the~,"
Mgreat," and Mgreatest" ResurrectioDl.") While one can
find superficially similar notions of COIoric cycles in
both Ibn CArabi and many straDda of Shiite thoUBbt
(and indeed in many other reJi,iODl as well), whose
outward aspect is apparently bucd on the implications
oC a common astronomicai/utroloJicai system, what
tbole traDlformatiODl as an inner apirituaI reality-but not.
somehow oodoina away with" tbe 14/JiT of this world and its
-relative reality." The iDseparability of the two _pccts ba
obvious pr8Ctica1 implicatioDl for their attitude toward man's
external reliJioUl (and legal aDd socio-political) duties • well.
U See the traDlJatiOD of N-...fr. dram of his eDCOUDter
with the Prophet aDd his muter "amtl>y, taken from tbe
pref-=e to his KaJif tIl-fltlql'iq (Molt, intro. to Ill-Ins'" ... ,
pp. 8-9). in which tbe Prophet alSib'tS him tbat after tbe year
700, most of the students in the ",..."". will be llUdyina his
writinp. Perhaps even more sipi6caat, in lipt of what we
have already noted about the SlnUnIMopenneu" of NuafI's
statements, is l:Iamii>'i's remark. in the same dream. that Mbe
(i.e., Nuafl) striws to proclaim opaaIy and unveil everythinl
which I bad tried to hide aDd conce." (p. 9).
43 In this view (pp. 334-36 of the translation), tbe lesser,
10000year Mresurrection" iDvolva the establishmcot of a1llW
_nell throupout the earth (the concordance of this mille~
oilllD with his immediate expectation of the villiafter only 700
yean is not explaiDed; perhaps be would rule until the coming
of a DCW Jaw-Jiviq prophet). while the two pater cycles
invoM partial and total oosmic cataclysms, each wipinl out
all animal and veJelable life, which then bqiDI oYer in a new
cyde. This chapter of the Mtut4zil tI1-Si~iTin (pp. 329-40 of
tbe traDJlatiOD) implies views of transmiaratiODS of (tbe?) lOul
which are apparently presented here .. Nasafl's Owll. (The
Persian text is actuaDy more clear than tbe French in implying-
although not with absolute certainty-that Nasafl is talking
about conditions he really believes to be the case. These views
are certaioly coincident with tbe escbatoloJica1 opinions he
CXpl'CSlel in other chapterS of these two collections.)
749
is &Jain most strikin. with Nasafr-apecialJ:y com-
paRd with Ibn cArabI or the Shiite writen expoUDdiq
such theories, for whom they can (and perhaps mUlt)
be understood first of aD on a purely IJIDbolic, iute-
riorized level-is the literalism and historicity oC
NuafT'sllCCOWlt, with its apparent UDderlyiJII.-ump-
tion that the spiritual Truth (the ba,ln) could somehow
be ~auaht," if it were not for the obstacles pOled by
man's current condition and the (apparently Mgntnle")
teaebinp of the tbeolO!iaDI, philosophers, etc.
The same assumption oC "literal eaotericiIm,,. with
similarly problematic etbicaJ and RJiaioUi implica-
tions, is apparent in NasafI's account (tr., pp. 329-40)
of the development of the (MiDdividual"1) IOU1 •
involvillJ a p-adual purgation aDd perfection, o~
thousands of years, through conditions as mineral,
plant, anima'" and human-animal (with its manifold
poaibilitic:l) until finally rachin. the truly bUlDall
state, where man'slpiritual development, more strictly
speakin~ can actually beJin..... From this penpcctive-
which seems to convey at least the mOlt explicit and
tangible aspect of Nuafl's own escbatoloP:a1 belief-
Paradise and Hell (*Dd mOre especially, for mOlt of
mankind. the latter; ICe p. 239) are quite immediately
with us here and now, and it is only throop DWly
lifetimes of long and painful experience (the purptive
torments brought on by our p ionate psychic attach-
ments to one or another dimension oC ~ worldj
that some individuals can move on to the hiaher,
paradisial stages of .piritual awareness and the true
44 Here one mipt expect Nasafi to oontmue by speaking of
the lOul's further puri6c:alion uad advaJICeIIlent, at leut in
symbolic terms, OOUlrouP" the heavenly spheres or the IJi&ber
spiritual states they repraeot, as in SO many other fo of
IJlamic tboupt. But another rather oriainal apeel of N...rrs
work is his treatment of the spheres and the plandl (in his
discusaion of the "cosmic tree" as Jeen from the biIhat slalC
of the tIh1-i vtllulilt, pp. 345-4) u the Mlower world."IDltcad,
be quite vigorously insists (in the same chapter, at leut) that
the hipest state of perfect vision is that attaiDed in the here
and DOW. (Denial of the spiritual, supernal state of the
beaYCDIy Iphera and their 1DtcUecu, as implied in the accepted
Ptolemaic cosmololY of that time, is usually to be found only
amona more literal-minded theologians.) This attitude may
also flow frol'Q a very literal conception of Mtelncarnation" Oft
NuafI's part; one woDden, in the same connection, whether
his words about the pouible Mre-descent" of sinncn into
animal bodies are to be taken literaDy or-u for 10 many
other Penian Sufis-as rd'erence to the v t majority of
Mhuman animals" (btuhtu, not iIu4n) exhibiting a corr~
spondinl variety of Manimal" natures.
750 JOUI7UI1 01 the Ammcan Orientlll Society 106.4 (1986)
"end" of their "cycle" of perfection.·' ~ while one
would not want to deny that, with appropriate qualifi-
eatiODl, this is at least one possible aspect of Ibn
cArabt·. (and maDy other IaJamic thinken') under-
standing of the eschatological language of the Koran,
what is extraordiaary here (for an Islamic mystic. at
least) is Nasafi's unqualified and quite open statement
of this point of view-opening the way to all those
potential ethical perversions of this vat transmigra-
tionilt penpective (in terms of either quietism or
antinomianism, ibiil)ll) which. in the Islamic world,
seem to have restrained its non-symbolic formulation
by any but certain "extraDe" (and in their own way
equally literalist!) Shiite ghul4t groups.... Moreover,
quite apart from these potentially dangerous popular
misunderstandings, even the Sufi reader could easily
reduce the bcarin& of NasafI's formulations-which
give only minimal reference to the complex eschato-
logical symbolism of the Koran and I}tuIrth, portrayed
in such detail in Ibn cArabI's own writinp-to the
single plane of his own limited immediate experience,
with the obvious danaen either of a short-circuiting of
his spiritual tealiution or of a sort of vain ·spiritual
45 The final chapter of Q/·huilJQ/·K4mi/(pp. 231-51 of this
translation), devoted to the exposition of ~he Paradise and
Gebenna that are in us" fits integrally with the aa:ount of
IllUkh and mtulch (loosely translatable as -transmiaratiOD,"
thoup whether of -mdividual" souls Ot ODe cosmic soul is
also unclear from this description) in the description of the
fifth stalc of the soul's d~lopment in the Man4ziI 1I1-S4:Jirfn
(the chapter disallsed at n. 43 above). Nasafi acids that the
"story" of ... be paradise and bell that will be- is "already
known" and tbat he will speak: in another treatise of the one
'"that is outlide us "-not necessarily the same as the story that
is -already knowo"?-but he does DOt do th}s here or in the
other work we have seen, 10 far as we can tell.
46 It is essential here-as indeed in most traditions of Islamic
thou&b~ whether mystical. philosophic, or Shiite-to distin-
guish ~fully between what is ~xp'~$Md and hat may well
be believed or known; it is the expression, and DOt the belief,
that caused cenain JfOUPS to be c1aued u -extremist... (See
Ibn 'ArabI's own indications in tbil regard, nn. 29-31.) Ibn
Abi Jumhiir's open statemen~ at a slightly later period, th
-most of the philosophen and the Illuminationists" believed
in the transmilration of souls (cited by W. Madelung, op. cit.
in n. 39 above; Madeluns does not live the Arabic term or
add what additional explanations may have been provided in
the orisinal text), is a revealina indication of whal can be
gathered from the symbols and allusions of sue figures as
SuhrawanlI., the Riu4;)iI of the Ikbwln a1-~'. aod many
other Sufis and philosophen before and after that time.
elitism" (familiar danaen Nasafr himxlf denOUDCCl in
other contexta).
We have already dealt with the way Ibn cArabT (and
his (ollowers), throqh their emphasis on the key
notion of tajalliY4t, carefully avoided the confusions
and practical danaen Bowing from the simplified con-
ceptions of "Unity" (w~) exemplified in the works
of Balyinl or Ibn SabCJn, and OWly of the wne
remarks would be applicable to NasafT'. own discus-
sions of the "people of Unity" (ahl-I vDJ)d4t, perhaps
equivalent to the muwo1}/}idfin, in tbe usual Sufi usage
of that term), whom he uaually considers the JUabest,
most realized group'" (He also speaks of their unitive
insight as though it were 1M "resurrection" and Para-
dise, whereas that realization is always quite explicitly
only one dimension of thOle symbols in Ibn cArabL)
An interestinl practical corollary of this metaphysieal
conception throughout both works translated here is
NasafI's comparison of the Dhl-i vaJ:ulat with the (for
him) clearly inferior conceptions of the mutllkallimfin
and the philosophers (~mi;:'). For him (see p. 26S)
these are the tint two stages o( man's truly responsible
spiritual advancement-the vast mass of mankind, as
already indicated, being still animals in human form-
and once their illusions and limitations are desaibed.
they merit no further mention. With Ibn cArabI, and
even more 10 in his later interpreters discussed in the
following sections,'" the focus is always on the formu-
lations of each group of the "theoreticians" (as with the
even more fundamental role of the "lord 9t praent in
each man's faith), as in themselves a prefiguration of
the Truth, a valid and indispensable mirroring, in that
penon's experience, of the absolute Reality (lJaqq)-a
47 Naaa1l's temunology or categorization seems to vary in
this regard (this being one of the points where reference to bi
other worb and other KubriwI writinp miaht have been
especially bdpful): at the end of the Mtmdzil fIl-SQ'irln
(pp. 349-S2), be calls the "postics" (ciri/in) an even hiper
group within the tlhl-i vtIhdtz,. In any case, it is interatina that
here (e.I., p. ~) the term -Sufi already refen to a relatively
M
lower, more popular category or staF. remindinS us of the
similar relative denipation of 'ibid and zahid (common
terms applied to the earlier Sufis), in favor of the term 'ilrif
(-postic" or '"true knowcrj already in the works of Ibn Sini,
GhazIlT, etc.
.. See the similar comparisons of the Sufi, klllllm, and
flllstlfll positions on basic theoloaical questions, itb the same
systematic approach (but quite ditrerent from Nasafl·s) in
such figures as IJ. Amun, Ibn Turb IsfahlnI. Ibn Abi
JumhQr, Jimi, and MuIIl ~adrl discussed in the text and
note below.
 MoulS: Ibn CArob; IIIId His Interpreters
truly univenal penpective which emphasizes the
brotherhood ftowm, from each individual'. intrinsic (if
rarely fully realized) relatioDlhip with God (rather than
the exclusiveness of • ".Dostic" elite), and which
sugests a far more comprehensive awa.reoess of the
manifold functions of the prophets (and their t6heinj,
in this world as ~n u the hereafter.
IV. cAbcI aI-Razzlq aI-KllhInI(d. ca. 1~5/13~S) wu
one of the foremost and certainly one of the most
influential repraentati~ of what may Dlore riptfully
be called a "school" of Ibn cArabi, a line of inter-
pretation and further development of the Shaykb's
thought whose essential features are already dearly
evident in its founder, Ibn cArabY's stepson and close
disciple ~r aI-Din aI-QOnawr (or "al-QunyaWi,tt after
the city of Konia where be died in 673/1274). Given the
decisive and still laraely unrecopized importance of
this school for the later development of Islamic thought
in aeneral, aloOl with the remarkable Iact of trans-
lations and aeueral studies of its key figures,'" the few
recent French publications on KlihlnI will be supple-
mented in this section by brief references to works in
several lauguases on or by other major fipres in this
movement (QOnawI, JIlT, AmulT, and JImi) and by an
introduction to a few of its distinctive characteristics
shared by all these anthon. To beain with, this tradi-
tion of biablY sophisticated philosophic and theologi-
.. The mOlt substantial studies OD the early, formative
figures in tbis school are tbOie cited in the rest of tbis section
below, which can be supplemented by the general historical
outlines in the two surveys by H. Corbin mentioned in n. 3
above. In addition to the writinp discussed in thole studies,
see the much lonaer list of sources aDd authors (especially the
dozens of commentators of the Frqiq al-J:lilumt and Ibn
cArabl's brief summary, Natph al-FIIIfiI) given by Osman
Yahia in his Hutoir~ n cltusif~lIlion ... ( ~ Gen&-a!,
items ISO and 528) aDd in tbe Arabit introduction to his
edition (with H. Corbin) of l:Iayclar Amun's NtlR IIl-Nrq;q
(full references at n. S above). Also extremely important in
this rcpnI, bceausc Jiving UI SOIDC insight into the many
possible "non-literary" chains of transmission, are the long
lists of diRd auditors (from the early IIlaDUICripts) given in
Dr. Yahia's new, 0Dlomg critical edition of tbe F~', as
well as bis summaries of sneral sibiltls of direct trausmitters
oflbn CArabI'. works (HUlo;" .•• , Addenda At II, pp. S39-
SI) and the transmiuion of Ibn 'ArabI's IcJIiTqtI IIkIHurYtl
(A4deDda. B, II, p. 543). (For further refereDCCS to this last
siJsilll, which wa transmitted within several of the weU-
known Sui orden, see the discus1ions by Michel Cbodkiewicz,
ref. at n. 113 below.)
7S1
cal speculation must be distinpishcd from several
other important but more dift'ulC lines of influence of
Ibn cArabI's work in the later Islamic world which are,
if anytbina, even lea studied: (a) the influence of the
Shaykb and his Arab Sufi disciples (e..., Ibn SawdakTn,
cAflf ai-DIn al-TilimsIDT, etc.) in the Maghreb aDd
other Arabic-speatin, regions;jC) (b) the multiple
dimensions of Ibn cArabT's inftueace on ""ractising"
Sufis within many difl'erent orden, as illustrated in part
by the work of NuafI and the later Qldirf text
discussed above; and (c) the even more complex ques-
tion of Mborrowinptt of vocabulary and concepts
(especially connected with the notion of W~I al-
wujiid) by later poets, theoloaians, etc., exbibitin.
varyina degrees of acquaintance with Ibn cArabi's own
works or even with the tommentators on the Fu/ilI.'.
With reprd to its formal and historical character-
istics, the school of Islamic thougbtS2 that developed
50 For a few _peets of this subject, see the diKuuion of
(Abel al-Qldir al-Jazl'iJf at the end of this article and the
refereDCCS to the 18th-eentury Moroccata Sufi Ibn cAjIba
(works by Jean-Louis Michon at n. 4 above), as well as the
imponant treatise by Ibn cArabi's close disciple Badr al-
I;lab bI, also mentioned in n. 4. It is e:atainly tbe c:asc tbat
the "Ibn cAlabro criticized by Ibn Khaldiin in the Muqtli/Jimtl,
where the focus is entirely on the occult, magic, aDd tbe
supemananl (*bleb may have played a much IJUler role in
some kinds of Mpopular" Sufism; see the kinds of apocryphal
worb commonly attributed to Ibn cArabI, n. 19 above), is
unbelievably distaDt from die fiaure presented in the tradition
of Qiinawi aDd his succason discussed bere.
SI This relatively superficial approach is certainly c:harac:ter-
istic of much of tbe polemical literature, whether pro or COD,
revolving around the Frqiqll"I;IikJIm (references above, n. S),
as well as with mucb of tile poetic and literary use of Ibn
cArabI's technical terminology (n. 2 above). ~ with the uses
of Platonic (or Neo-Platonic) themes in Western literature, it
is probably fairly rare for poets and men of Jetten to bawe
studied the works of Ibn cArabr and his inta'pmcn in great
detail; yet the ability to perceive and convey his central
insights (_ with Plato) is not dependent on (nor even always
combined with) a more Mscbolastic," systematic study of those
works thcmIelves.
n The term Mscbool- here must be used cautiously and
subject to two extremely imponant qualificalions. Fant, the
real philosophic and theoIoJic:aI unity and diversity of thetc
writers have not begun to be explored in modem researeh; the
same is true, incidentally, for the later schools of Islamic
philosophy a weU. (MOlt Western authors, U can be seen
from many of the translatiODI available in this fidel, have
soupt instead to briog out the peral M 1slamic" or M Akbarl"
7S2 JoUl7lll1 o/IM Amnialn 0rlmuJI Sot*ty 106.4 (1986)
out of QOnawi's interpretation of Ibn cArabT .aa
marked by at least four diItincti~ features. F1I'Ity ita
focus on the actual writinp of Ibn cArabI, insofar •
they were studied at all, S) wu primarily on the Frqtq
al-IJiktml, and even there wu mainly dedicated to
bringina out the metaphysical and theoloaica1 aspects
of that work (the ·U nity of Beine." the ontololY of the
divine MPresences,,. aDd their rdlection in the -Perfect
Man j. Secondly, the popularity and tremendous
influence of this more strie:tly conceptual, metaphysical
approach seem to have been patelt 00 the eastern
Islamic world (includilll the Ottoman realma, Central
Asia, Muslim India, and other lands where Persian w
for many centuries the /inpIIfrMal of higher culture),
where Arabic was for the mOlt part the lana. . . only
of a learned scholarly elite; hence its leading figures,
belinaina with QonawI, ~re often CWam4' u well u
Sufis, and were UICd to writina in both Arabic and
PeniaD (and IOmetitnet Tutkidl), depeDdin8 on their
intended audience." Thirdly, this school developed,
aspect of these worb-which is uDdentandably more impor-
tant to a Fneral auclieDce-rather than to focus on those
questioDl that pcraacd the bUDdrcda (if not tho. . . .) of
boob produced in tbiI school) Secondly, noac of tllele
writen are mere "colllJDella.1on" of Ibn cAnbY, .. c:an readily
be Ken even in tbe worts (KllbInl, JIlt, AmuIr, JImJ, etc.)
dilcuacd below. M with -AriItotclianiIm" or -Plaonism" in
Western th~ lbo cArabT's writinp were only tile startiDa
point for the molt dil'CrIC developments, in wbicJa rdermce to
IUbiequeftt interpretm quietly became at least .. impolUnt
.. the study of the Sbaykh himself.
n Sec more JmeOIIy nn. SI-S2 above. In particular, the
special role of the FfII/iI til- QikimI as the primary III1CN1w
tool (altho'" the muten themlelva no doubt read more
widely) in the eaateI1l Islamic rid is amply i.UuItraacd by the
vast number of commentariea produced down to the 19th
century (n. 49).
The fate of Ibn cArabI in this leIard, at 1eMt within thiI
more 1CIa01u1y tndition, is doIdy anaIoaOUI to that of Ibn
SIni in later lJIamic pbilolophy aDd 1uJIam: alrady by the
time ofGbazIII(aDd indeed of Aviceftaa.. immediatediscip1el
luch _ Dahmany"', whole K. tll-TIIIRJ/(cd. M. Mu~,
Tehran, 1349] quietly became a favorite teachin.text), Ibn
SId'l ideu-ofteD in IIIJI'tJCOIDiza aocI DO Jon.,- philo-
sophic form-were IaIJdy beina traJwnitted tbroup IUb-
leql1ent manuals and sum..nes, wbether in Josie or
metaphysics, often reducina his thouabt to rote -/ud4m- (in
both IeIIICI of that term).
~ For the importaDce 01 Persian poetry, in particular, in the
further spre8d of Ibo cArabrI ~--with the tranlmuta-
from the very beJinnio& in extremely clote interaction
with the separate intellectual traditiOdJ of A vieaun
fllbilfll (especiaUy aa transmitted by N. TIIII) and of
later kalam (Fubr aJ.DIn aI-RIzI, al-IjJ, etc.) which
were both already deeply Cltablished in those reaioDl;"
this intellcc:tual context in particular involved a serious
limitation-or at least a sipificant transformation-of
its audience, intentions, and choice of lubjcdl when
compared with the actual writinp of Ibn cArabr.
Finally, while all three of these traditions of Islamic
thought maintained their separate identities-and espe-
cially their fundamentally different conceptions of spir-
itual or philosophic: lWIhod, which often were at least
U sipificant u their nominal "conclusions"-they
shared a formally similar taIam IaD&uaF aDd prob-
Iematic,1O that lCpresentatives of each Mschool" were
usually at least superficially acquainted with the liter-
ature and terminolOJY or the opposina IfOUps.56
tion that neccaariIy invol¥cd-see the discuaioo of JImJ and
clrIqI later in this article.
~, See especially the ~n of QOnawrl correspoDdence
with the AvK:ennan philolopher (and Shiite tbeoJoaian) NIIflr
al-DIn __ rosr diIcuIlCd • n. 65 below (article by W. Chittick).
An espec:idy uaefuI indicMion of the . orical Iit1Iation of
thae inte1Jcetual tnMlitioal in AnatoJia immediately prior to
the spmMI of Ibn cArabra tboupt by Qanawt and his
foUowers (if we can trust the date 629/1231 in the colophon) is
the text Gl-Bul611t1ft tll-1JihruJ published in (.-simile by the
Turkish sc:ho'. (ud author of an important work on
QOna.r), Dr. Nibat K-etJik (Istanbul. '969). While the ort
is mOlt certainly not by Ibn cAnlbt. .. the editor then
nWntaiDcd-a point worth ItJaIina, Jiven the ay luch
attributio tend to spread if not noccd by boobdlen aDd
libraries-it is a remarkable indication of the situation of
-Speculative mysticism- in ita more intellectual, metaphysical
form at this period; it tbaeforc rc1lecb many of Ibn c-ArabJ".
(aDd QOnawr. or Ibn SabcTn'a) immediate precunon in this
area of Islamic tbouaJd. The unbown author draWl a~
cia1lyon the works of SuhrawardI........" (0. 14 above) aDd
GbazIIT (n. 13), within. broader metaphysical framework
taken (_ with both Subrawardt aDd GbazIIt) from a certain
Avicennan tradition. His poIitive aDd enah • . \lie of
Sumwanll is especiaDy iDteratin& since mOlt of Suhra-
wantI'slater commcntalOn (ICC n. .4) mown to us-up until
MuIIl $adrt-tendcd to be lairly Ilon-myltical Avicennan
thinters ueatiDa Subrawardl not .. a Sufi writer, but _
another 1Cb~ collUDeDtator of Ibn sma.
56 This cootinuin. teparatioIl of tbae distiDct intd1ectual
traditio becomes quite qparmt, after QGnawt (d. n. 6S). in
the many orb by later wriacrI in the IDOI'C mysbcallChool of

What resulted from tbete developments. already in
the writinp of QOnawt. wu a body of complex
theoretical literature focusing on the intellectual
undentaDdiD. and elaboration of certain perennial
philosophic and theolosical problems within its own
independent conceptual framework aDd teclmical
terminolOJY, drawn 1aqely from the writiDp of Ibn
cArabL)1 Whatever one7s opinion of this tranaforma-
tion-and, among the many motivations for QUnawl's
cfl'ortJ, there is little doubt that it helped to mate Ibn
CArabT more interestinlaDd acceptable to the educated
elite of the time, from both talam aad philosophic
bacqroUDdJ-tbc outcome was clearly something very
different from Ibn cArabr. own writinp (aDd espe-
cially the FutUI}at), as one can readily verify even in
Ibn 'ArabI comparina Ilia po.itioftt .-itb t'ott of the
AYicennan pbilosopben aud nrutlllulOimlilr: see tile works by
1:1. Am~ Ibn Turo bfahlnI, Ibn AbT JUJIIhOr. JImt, and
MuIJi Sadri di8cuacd below.
Apart from Itudies of those wri~ we still have almost no
literatUR brinpna out the vitality, iDdependeDCC, aDd oriai-
nality of tIleR otber later traliitioDi of Islamic thoup~
usually because outlicle IChoIan have been unaware of the
Mc:ocIe-worda" aud distinctive commitmentsllDcl MlUmptioas
UDderlyilll tile colDIDon-_ ofteD biIbIy milleadin.-blam
framework. (ODe would have much the same impreuion in
approadlina the dassicl of medieval Latin pbilo&opby with
no prior backlfOuDd.) Some idea of thole features-within a
quite limited time aDd aeoanpbica1 area-can be ptheRd
from the texts iDcluded in Corbin aDd Ashtiyani'l MlhologW
dn philMophn ITtmieIu .•. (d. .. 3 above ucl our review in
SophiII hrmnu In. no. I [Tehran, 1977]. pp. 128ft'.).
51 This delcription is already true even of the earliest
Mcommentaries" on tbe FIIIfiI (d. n. S2 for tbe pouibly
miI1cadinl nature of this term) by Qinawr, where indepen-
dent theoretical developments already often take precedence
Ola the illumination of Ibn cArabr. aetuaI .nama. (See
illustrative tl'8Dl1abODI by W. Cliittict mentioud below.)
While the COlDlllCDtary of OawOd al-Qanan is probably the
mo8t helpful in actually UDdentaDdina tile FfIIiiI itlelf. his
Mlntroduction" (muqaddinuJ) is virtually an iDdcpeDdent
philosophic study. 8Dd W8I itself the object of doUDS of
subsequent commentaries. The latest of tbeIe supcn:ommen-
taricI (iUdf a rneaJina iUultratioa of this pare, wbida aIm_
0~1ms Qaypd91 relatively brief Introductioa) is S. JaW
ai-DIn AsbtiyanI'l SNub-; MlU/tlddinul-Jl; {ltIJI,.ri •• .•
Muhbad. 13M! 1966 (6S1 pp. with Freacb aDd Enalilh
introduetioDi by H. Corbin aad S. B. Nasr). (Sipificanlly
enoup. in view of the coDtinuina clerical mspicio.. of Ibn
cArabt [see n. S above), AshtiylBI'I own exteDdcd Persian
753
translation." Within this new intellectual pellpective,
ODe may aIIo note the relative DeJieet (at least in the
literature itle1f) of two key features of mOlt of Ibn
cArabI'. own writinp: his detailed c:oDCeI'D with method
and practice, the "phenomenololY" of the spiritual
Path (a dimenaion be shared with other Sufi muten
and mOlt early Sufi authon); and his attempts to
communicate his spiritual realizatioDl and iDlipti
directly to his readen, throuab a wide variety of
rhetorical devices (often cloeely tied to the Arabic
IanP.> which arc neYer entirely separate from-nor
reducible to-thcir implicit intellectual and metaphys-
ical framework." The relative suppreaion of these
features. wbile aIIowinl peater conceptual clarity aDd
systematic coherence, did have its costI. For both of
these reuona. Don-apecia1iatI will almost inevitably
find Ibn cArabr. own writinJl both more powerful and
more directly aanaiblc than those of his interpreters
in this "school," since the worb of QUnawr and his
IUCCCIIOn are often virtually inoomprebenaible with-
out a 1enIthY preliminay explanation of their own
intellectual framework and tenninoJoay, as well as the
related kalam and IIlbqfIl If temI frequently involved
in the diJcuaions.6O
COllllDeDtary on the FUIiiI, promised in this volume, bas Dot
yet been publiahed.)
,. A handy illustration of this poia~ while awaitiDa tbe
10nJCr tranllations promised by William Chittick and
S. Ruspoli (nD. 61-68), is the translatiOD of Qllnawr. brief
MIT~" tJI-'Ari./rn dilcuued below, at n. 69.
5' This Dot at all to imply that the foremost representatives
of thilscbool were not theauelvel Sufis, nor that they did not
also, in lOme cues (d. JDI beloW) write OlMr worb illus-
tratina either of these poilU. In faa, most of them were often
deeply involved in various IlIIriqa-this concern with the
Mpractice" of Sufism beiIIa of course the element that espe-
cially cIiItiquished tbeaI, for example. from the AviceDnan
pbilOIOpben whom they were clebatina- But it is nonethelcu
true that these two upectI of theory aDd .piritual realization
are not nearly 10 intimMely aDd explicitly (indeed often
iucparably) linked • they are in the Sbaytb'l OWII writinp.
(See our remarks on the importaDce of the Mrhetorical"
dimension of Ibn cArabr'1 writina. in tile broadest ICDIC of
that term, in Pan I of this artide, at .. S.)
.. For these reasons (lee D. S6 above). the relative of'i&inality
and creativity of Wamic thouabt in tbU period-wbicb are
UDCleniable. e.... in a writer lite JUt (see below)-are IliIl
larae)Y UDexplorcd, aDd must remain relatively "invisible"
until their termiDolOU and eateaol'iel are more adequately
explored. (The impr'ClliODI of Mstapation," McteeacIence,"
754 JOIII'NI1 of 1M Ammcll1l 0rlmIId Sockty 106.4 (1986)
QUnawi's more I'tematic and theoretical writinp,
however, reftcd only ODe dimension of his role in the
transmission and systematization of Ibn cArahr. ideas
and teadlinp. EquaJly important was the extraordi-
nary range of his personal relationships hich-
whether as DWter, disciple, or colleape-spanned
almost every Islamic intellectual tendency and school,
both Sufi and non-Sufi, of his age. (That phenomenon
is no doubt partly explicable by Konia' unusual
situation at that time as a sanctuary for refuFCS fleeinl
the Mongol invasions of Central Asia and Iran.)
Among his wide-ranging contacts were the renowned
Persian mystical poets RnmI (d. 672/1273), Aw\lad
aI-DIn KirmAnI (d. 635/1238; a shaykh of the
Suhrawardlya order and, alonl with Ibn cArabl,
QOnawI's own master), and-most directly inftuenced
by Qiinawrs teacbins-Fakhr ai-Din Clraqi (d. 688/
1289);'1 the J(ubrlwIya sbaykbs Sacd ai-Din }jamiPi
(d. 650/1252-53; the master ofNasafl discussed above)
and Najm ai-Din RIzT (d. 654/1256),'2 author of sOme
of the most widely read Persian prose manuals of Sufi
teachinp; Sacid aI-Drn FarghinI (d. ca. 700/1300), the
influential commentator (in both Persian and Arabic)
"fossilization," and the like that one often WI in secondary
1M:lC000U aR seldom based on serious, Icqthy study of the
tnlditiODl in question-beiDa rouPJy equiv" to the likely
rcaetion if ODe were to baDd worb of Kaat am aCFl. in the
oriIinal aDd with 80 COllllDeDtary or explaaatioa, to IOmeoDe
from an entirely diftCrcat civilization. At the very ~ that
person ouId tillCl it very difliwlt to sort out bat is oJiaiDal
aDd importallt from bat is not, without IIIIda deeper
KqlIaintuce with the tradition iD quation.)
" For a vivid and detailed description of cIriqrl relations
with QGnawi-and of QQ_wt'l Jaraer cin:le, iIIcIudinI his
own relationship u a disciple or KirmiDJ--see the bio-
araplaical section. pp. 33-66. in the translation aDd study of
<;lrIqT'1 lAmDclJt by William Cbitt~k aDd Peter L. Wilsoa,
Divilw FltuMs (New Yort. Pauli.. Press, 1982); tbiI wort is
discuuecl further in the sectiOD on the poet Jlmibclow. These
biopapbical passaaes, iJacludm, a Jetter of C)rlqI to QOoawt,
aR iDvaluable simply for their portrayal of an -.pea of
QOuWt that coulc1 otberwile ICan:ely be ilft.lliocd simply on
the bail of his more theoretical writiDp.
62 For Najm aI-DiD Kubri, J;lamu>J, aDd otJ.er major fipres
iD the early Kubrlwtya, sec the ref'~ at Do 33 aDd
throuabout the section on NuaCI above. Prof. H. Ludolt bas
detected some inftueDce of Ibn cAtabl s thou,bt (as witJl
9
Nasafl, on a particular subject, not as a total system) iD the
Mir,u 1Il-'Ibid, a wielely read Pcniaa prose orlt oa Sufism
by Najm ai-DID RIzI: see the article on SimDlDI and Klsblnt
of Ibn al-Flricrl celebrated Arabic Sufi poem, the
T,>rytl;63 and finally the lcadm, Aviamnan philOIOpher
<and Shiite theologian) of that time, NqTr aI-Drn TOSI,
and his disciple Qufb al-Drn ShIrlzi (d. 710/1311),
who also spent several years studyina with Qnnawl. 64
The record of QDnawI's extended correspondence with
TOsi, carefully summarized in an important article by
in Dn hllmr (fun ~femlCel at n. 10 in the coadudi part of
this article). p. 30, ft. 4. 1lUI'. ort hal recently become
available in a complete Eaalish tt latioD (with limited
Introduction aDd annotatioD) by H. AIpr', 1M Path of God's
IIonds1MIr (New Yort. Caravan Press. 1980).
6] His commentary bas also beea edited: MtUMrlq tIl-
DtriIf: Slttul}-I Tl~ytI-/ Jbn.i F6I#. ed. JaW al-Dfa AsbtiyIDJ
(M8Ibhad.I979),183 pp.; CAbd al-1lazzIq al-KllbIDI(whoIe
Koranic commentary is discuued later in this section) bas abo
been attributed a famous COlDlDe1ltary on this N~ tIl-SrJiiJc
(but see n. 73 belo ). See also the En..... trmslatioo aud
runniq collUDelltary of the same work by A. J. Arberry, TM
PMm of lire WtIY (London. 1952; Chester Beatty MOD~
araphs No. 5).
.. The worb of both mea have been studied (in the West)
most receatly in terms of their utroDomica1 activity at the
famous observatory TDsJ established at Mar.peh; see the
utides on this aspect ia the Dictio".", of Sdmtiflc Bio-
PtIPhy. Unfortuutely, "fIII·s decisive and muJti-facded m-
fhIeDcc OD subsequent Islamic thouPt-where be .. of the
utmost importance in rcviviDa the tndy philosophic study of
Ibn SId (tbroqb his ~tary 011 the Im4ril aDd .
several worb severely -taekina the in ueatial "".,tI1c.u;m
Fakhr al-DIn RIzI) aDd iDaapratiDa an important liDe of
Twelvcr Shiite theolOl1 (tJaroup his TIIjr'Id tll-cA~>Id, the
objcd of dOUDS of later COIIUDCIItaries)-bas Dot yet attracted
study in proportion to its UaportaDce. (See also D. 39 above,
for W. MadeIUD,'1 article llreuiDa T 1'1 major political role
as well.) W. Strothmaan's monop-aph IN ZwiJl/n Schi,,:
Z~i r~ligiollSg~sch;clulidte CluutIC~rb;1der tIllS Mr MOil-
go/mzeit, recently repriatal (Hildcsbcimj New York, 197~), is
a helpful biolUPbical outlinc-briaaiDI out the (apia still
JarFIy udied) importuce ofT '1 maay yean ofactivity
an lamaili theoloaian-but does ot really 10 into a deeper
study of his role iD Islamic inlel1«1IItIl . ory, and especially
the way his Aviceanan pbiJoIOpbic commitment expressed
i. his tbeoloaical and political activities.
The appareat lack of . .y .moIlS ""Sufi" OrieDtatiOll in Qutb
al-Din' commentary on Sum arefT (lee Do 14 for its forth-
comiDa pubJicatiOll in Freucb tranIlatioa) bas oDeD been
commented on, but apin there is not yet any comprebeDsive
Itudy of his maDy activities (closely paralleliDa thole of T •
except for the Shiite theolosical side).
 MoltaIS: Ibn Ckabi tmd His Interpreterl
William Chittick." is a remarkably revealing illustra-
tion of the way this systematic ·school" of Ibn cArabi
developed in many respects out of the attempt to
rephrase the Sbaykh·s insights and conclusions-taken
to be representative of the methods and principles of
Sufism more FDeraUy-in terms CODVincin& and intel-
ligible to the prevaiJiDg philosophic and theological
schools of the time."
Our knowledge and understanding of QOnawrs work
and his creative historical role in the transmission of
Ibn cArabl should be greatly increased by two major
6S "Mysticism Venus Philosophy in Earlier Illamic History:
the at-T81i, aJ-QDDawI ConespoDdtnc:e," Religiolu Studies 17
(1981), pp. 87-104, where the author also mentioas (p. 98,
n. I) that he ha prepared a critical edition of this text. Those
acquainted with tbe dilliculty of the ofiaioal Arabic~n­
sistilll of a letter from QOnawr attemptina to phrase key
insiJhts aDd assumptioas of Ibn CArabI in terms comprc-
beDsible to -Pa1pateric" tbouJht; 'fOIT's rather coadesceDcIin.
rcspoue, ecboiDI Ibn STd'l attitude toward Sufism in the
IslWll; and QilDa1YT's reply aDd answers to 'fOsT'1 objectiODS-
will appreciate the mastery of Prof. Chittick's IUIIUIW'Y of the
uDderlyina issues.
In panicular, this correspondence and the Avicennan intel-
lectual context it assumes (see also n. SS abo~) sugests some
of the reasons for the subsequcnt centrality of problems of
wal}dtlt Il1-WIIjQd (aDd the correspoocliaa formulation of Ibn
cArabi's thoupt in primarily ontolo&ical, rather than thea-
1000ca1, tell'Dl, draYrioa 1aJ1dy 00 Ibn Sld'i voc:alMalary) in
the writinp of this school, sinee that conceatration is by DO
meaDS reflective of the importance of this problem or this
vocabulary in Ibn 'Arabi's own writinp. (Typically-and
following other Sufi writen of his time in peral-be makes
more frequent use of the talaml Koranic lanpaae of the
diviDe Attributes aDd Names, with tbe distinctively Sufi focus
on their existential correlates.) This coDtrut can readily be
seen in compariDa the FIqiq itaelf with tbose colDIDCDtaries.
(See further remarks on DshIni's vocabulary below.)
.. This should not be taken to imply that the form of this
tradition can imply be understoOd as a SOrt of apol0aetic (or
polemic) reaction to competilll intellectual traditions of the
time; but it does mean that eYeD -mtanal" developments aDd
explication of problems already posed within Ibn cArabr,
writinp tended to be formulated in tile ...... aDd conc:epts
takeD over fro~ eldstioaf4llM/4I and 1uJI4m traditioDS. This
prOCCSl is especially evident with commentatOR lite KasbInJ
who came to Ibn cArabI not from a purely Sufi bacqround,
but with extensive trami. in the philosophy (or tbeoiOlY) of
Ibn SId aDd his fonowers. (The same path, of course, w
also followed by SuhrawardI [nD. 14 and SS above}. whose
7SS
works whose publication has been promised by Dr.
S. Ruspoli (a French translation and commentary of
the MIft4J) G1uJyb ai-Jam C wtl-I- WujQd)'l and Pro-
fessor William Chittick (a comprehensive study indud-
ing a number of translations)." While awaiting those
lonaer studies, one can pin a first imprasioD of tbe
major themes and distinctive style of QOnaWi and his
school-and of the original developments separatina
his approach from Ibn cArabrs-from an EnaJish
version of his short treatiJc (only 14 pqes in transla-
tion), Mir~at aJ-cArifln [Reflection of the Awaluned.
-Attributed to al-QiinaWl'."Tr. SAYYJD HASAN AsxAtl.
pp. S9 + 48 pp. of Arabic: text. London: ZAHRA TRUST.
1981.]." The central themes alluded to here (so con-
cisely as to be incomprehensible without lengthy com-
mentary)-such problems as Koranic cosmology and
distinctively mystical thouJht and iasipts were likewise
expressed in terms still so heavily AvicennaD that subsequent
commentators often took little DOte of the truly decisive
diJrerences between the two perspectives.)
It is also importaDt to recopize that withiJlthis intellectual
and historical context "IbD cArabi" (i.e.• the writi. . of this
tradition of QGnawf aod his foDowen) ofteD came to be seen
as a son of normative tbeoloJicaI ""representative"-as in the
many controvenies discusled in n. S above-for a multitude
of enstilll Sufi orden and practices. inc:ludiDI many beliefs
aDd tendencies that could scarcely be jUltiied or defCDdcd on
the basis of his own Sufi writinp. (Sec also references to
attaeb by Ibn TaymIya aJMl IbD KhaJdiln throuahout the
~ sections.)
61 This is a revised aDd abridp version of his doctoral
thesis (Univ. de Paris IV, 1978), which also included a critical
editioD of this major wort ot QUnawi.
6. This work, ""teDtativdy titled ~ Stars ofFailh, "is
mentioned in several of Prof. Chittick's recent studies of
aspects of QUnawi's thouaht, and will apparently include
traDIlatioDS of several important treatisa. In the meanwhile,
in addition to his articles cited above (n. 6S) and below (n. 71)•
sec also ~r ai-DIn QlDawt on the Ooeness ot Beina...
l1UtnuJIIOIIIII Philosophial/ Qututerly XXI (1981), pp. 171-
84, and "1be Last Will aDd Testament of IbD cArabi's
Foremost Disciple and Some Notes OD its Author," SopIritl
hrmnis 4 (1978), pp. 43-58.
., The phrase ..attributed to al-QilDawI" men to tbe iDter-
estin. and historically sipificant f~ diJcuacd at IeD&th iD
Prof. Askari'. introduction, "... that from tbe twelfth cen-
tury onwards both in Persian and Urdu (Twelver Shiite]
circles, Miral ,-Arifin [ ic] seriously considered a work
of Imam Husayn" (p. 3). While the book itself is undoubtedly
either by Qiinawl or some later fipre in his school, this
756 JoumtII 01 1M Americtm 0rimIIlJ Sockly 106.4 (1916)
the degrees of existence, their reinteJl'ation in the
realization of the ·Perfect Man" (al...i1uan aI-Until),
and the ontological correspondences and distinctions
at each level of that Mcircle of being"-a~ all iDus-
trated and analyzed in profuse detail in the longer
works of QOnawt and his followen, especiaJJy the
influential line of commentatoR of the FUlfil al-1J1IuIm
that continued throup Mu'ayyid al-Din JandT (d. ca.
700/1300), cAbd al-RazzIq KlshinI(d. 736/1335), and
Oawtid Qaytarl (d. 751/1351).70 TOFther, these (our
attribution is itJelf a fascinatin. pbenomeDOn OR at least two
counts: (I) a it illustrates the remarkable pcnetratiOD of Ibn
cArabi'. idea and vocabulary in all area of the eutem
Is1amic world (see n. 2 above); and (2) u it raises Itill virtually
unexplored questions of the bKqround-or at least the
uDdcaiabJe paraUdism-betwccn many of IbD cArabi's tllemes
aDd methods aDd those of earlier Shiite works, questioDl
which are often applicable to the intellectual and philosophic
exprasions of Sufism more pnerally (see n. 13 above).
The translator's DOtes and explaDatioDS of this text are also
a salutary illustratioD of the difliculties facina anycme who
wisla to explaill the tethaical pbi!OIophie ....... aDd
problematic of Qilnawr and his sua::ason to contemporuy
readers (see nB. S6 and 60 above)-a prob1elD which in itself
points to the SVMtaDtial cliJl'ereaca between their writiDp
and those of the Shaykh bimsell.
70 See B. 57 above for the most recent c:ontiDuation of this
traditioD (based on Qanarrs ·collllDelllUy") by a modem
Iranian student of these authors, and see n...9 for the
multitude of intermediate links in this chain of writers on tbe
FIqiq. Also worth ootin. is the fact that each of these four
figures-whose works demonstrate an originality and
indepeudenc:e that mates them considerably mo~ than
me~ tAcommentators" in any limited sense-seem to
have determined the major themes aDd conceptions
that pided the more theoretical teaching and under-
studio, of Ibn cArabI (and, at Ie.t in much o( the
Eastern Islamic wo~ of Sufism m~ generally),
through dozens ofsubsequent commentaries and more
independent works, down to the present day. An
excellent introduction to some o( their central common
themes, and at the same time to their individual
particularities, is now available in two pioneering
comparative studies by Professor Chittick, incorpora-
tin, extensive translations from each of these authon:
MThe Five Divine Presences: From al-Qiinawf to al-
Qa~" and MThe Chapter Headinp of tile F~u.."71
&pres personally studied the text with his predecessor,
bqinnina with Ibn cAnbI; referaaa:s in O. y~ His-
loir~ • .. , Addenda A (I~ pp. 539-"'1).
11 The first of these ~ which, • the author notes. is
likewise about one esseatial aspect of Ibn cArabt'. BOliOD of
the /1UM KDmiI. appeam1 ill 1'Ite MII$/Jm World LXXII
(1982). pp. 107-28. ThiJ study is baled on the worb of
QDnawf and his students men Fnerally, aad thus brinp out
the importaDCC of the tbouabt of his other disciple al-FarabInJ,
whose commentary on the NllpPf td-SuIUk • already a.c.
tioDCCl (n. 63 above).
The second study, iJa the JOIImIII of 1M MuJ,yUJdin Ibn
cArabt ~Iy II (19M), pp. "I-M. which includes remarks
from each of these thiaken. is especially useful in suuestina
their historical relations of dcpendeDcy aDd oJiaiDality.
 IBN cARABI AND HIS INTERPRETERS
PART II (CONCLUSION): INFLUENCES AND INTERPRETATIONS
JAMES WINSTON MORRIS
INmTUTE OF IsMAIU STUDII!Sy PAaD

CoDCIudiDa our .urvey of major historical teDdeDcic:I in tbc interpretation aDd receptio of Ibn
CArtbi's writinp in various traditions of later Islamic tbouabt, as illustrated by recent traDllatiODI
aDd related studies, this fiJIaJ leCtion deals with repraentati~ fiawa in the DlOI'e pbiIotopbie
"school" founded by QOnawT (KIIbIDI, 1;1. AmulI, aDd mT); in mystical poeuy (JImI, clrlql, aDd
othen) aDd philosophy (Mulli Slldrl aad his IUCCCIIOn); aad witb the more receot Sufi writiap of
cAbd aJ-QIdir aJ-Jazl>id, who recapitulates and intcpates many of tbclc traditiODl while retUl'llins
to the spiritual.ourca and inteDtiODI uderlyina Ibn cArabI's own wort and tew:bin.

IV [Coat.] CAB» AL-RAZZAQ AL-KlsHlNI (d. ca.
736/(335) has almost certainly been the most widely
read (and cited) of these early interpreten of Ibn
cArabI, to such an extent that much of the subseqUCDt
discussion of Mlbn cArabrs· thought and doctrine"
whether in the Eastern Islamic world or in the modem
West" can best be undentood as in fact a reference to
Kisbini's writinas cospcria11y where writas ~ expound-
ina what they take to be Ibn cArabi"s ·system" or
philosophic Mdoctrine" (e.... of wlll;ultlllll-wujiid).72 In
this regard, the modem attribution to Ibn CArabT of
Kishlni's TII:>wiliil III-Qur:Jiin is unfortunately u
symptomatic as it is historically unfounded. 7J Profes-
12 This is even true to a certain extent of T. lzuuu's
fundamental study of Ibn CArabI's tboupt, Sl{"um tmd
TlIOism . .. (see Part I, D. 6 aboft), which, as tbc author
himself streaes in the 1Dtrocluetion, is heavily Jdiant on
KII~I'I commentary, usually citinl it at the same time as
the text of tbe Frqi4 tI1-J:likimr. (This is another illustration of
the chanlcteriltic pedaaoP:aJ usefulocl. and iDtelltion of
KlIbInI's works, diJtulsed bdo. ill telatiOIl to his Koranic
coJDJDeDtaries.)
1) Altboup Prof. Lory, followinl Brockelmaan, remarb
that all the manuscripts of this work are attributed to KIIbInt
(or ODe of the other variant fo.... of his name, such ..
"al-K.IshJ," etc.), Osman Yabia (Bistain ... , DO. 732 aDd
724) does mentioD a few later manuscripts of this work
attributed to Ibn cArabT (aloOl witb KllblDJ'. treatiK OD
~> and ~, OY DO. 723). However, it is ccnaiDJy true,
.. P. Lory iDdicate:s, that the most recent modem publishen
of tbis wort (in India, cairo, and Beirut) IIlUIt bPe been
primariJy motivated by commercial coDlicleraliom in conlinu-
sor Pierre Lory's recent study of that frequcntly
reprinted work [UI ColfllnOllllirn elotlrique8 du
Cortm d'apre$ cAbd ar-RDzzaq aJ-Q4Ihibrr. pp. 111.
ins to affix "lbD CArabi's"name to the text. Some of tile more
imponant distiDctiODl between ~1IhIar. and Ibn cArabI'.
respectiw approaches to the Koran are diKaac:d belo in this
section or. for Ibn cArabi, in IeVeI'81 earlier JNUU of this article
• well.
Both Prof. Lory (p. 23) and O. Yabia (II, p. '"3, baed on
Klsblnt's own autoaraph \el'lion of his work, attributed by
later librariaDI to Ibil cArabf) ftOle that cttWn IIWlUlCripu of
KlsbiDr. COlDIDeDtary go only • far .. Sura 32; tbc same faa
is DOled in H. Landoh's importaDt study of KIIhIDr. corre-
.pondence with CAli.> aJ-Dawla aJ-Simnlni (discuaed at D. 80
below), without any bypothesis .. to who miabt haw com-
pleted it-possibly an immediate disciple, since readers do not
seem to ha~ noticed any peat differeaca between the earlier
and later sectioDi. ProfeAOr Landolt also points out (p. 36)
that the commentary on ItJIl aJ-F'lricrl NtlP'f tI1-SuliiIc usually
attributed to our author (in several printed editio. and in
Arberry'l traDllatioD of Ibn al-FIri4, see D. 63 &bow) is
actUally by clzz aJ-DIn M~Od aJ-UshInJ (d. 73S/1334-
3S), best known for his widely read Pa'sian traDIlatiOD of
CUmar SuhrawardY'. famous Sufi manual cAwllrl/tU-MtlclIrif,
the M~ III-HiMyG. (The Mt,biIh, ndhcrthan Suhraw.-clr.
ori&inal Arabic, was the bMis for Wdberforce Clarke'. still
frequently rq»rinted partial EnaIish paraphrue ..TIte cAwlrlf-
u;)/-Mtl c4TIf," CaJcutta. 1891.) In the comext of this artide,
the fld that this COllUDClltary OD Ibn aJ-F1ri4 hal for so Ion,
paacd • the wort of CAW aJ-Razziq KiIJWlI is still another
int.erestina sip of the remarkable peoetration of subsequent
Iranian Sufi thouabl by the conceptions aDd t.erminolOlY of
this "school" of Ibn CArabL

101
102 JoUl7Ull of tM Anvrialn OrimltJI SociDy 107.1 (1987)
Paris: La DEUX <>dANS. 1981.] is not only an exceDent
introduction to the main outlines of KlshlDT'1
metaphysics or "spiritual cosmology," but also a useful
illustration of those characteristic feamres of his
writings and interpretations that help explain their
great influence OD later Muslim thinken, especially
philosophcn and theologians. (Ruden without access
to the Arabic can supplement Professor Lory's analysis
of this commentary by referring to the carefully anno-
tated partial tranalatioDl of M. VIIsan, or the summa-
ries of certain sections in M. Ayoub's The Qur'jjn and
Its Interpreters.)'·
Kllhtnrs work is in fact Dot so much a "ta'>w,f" in
the more specifically Sufi usqe of a profound and
inevitably quite personal awareness of the immediate
14 Prof. Lory liva a briefrdereoc:e to M. Vilsan'. tramla-
tioas, whicb are apin of coDlisteally biP quality and with
extremely useful notes aDd explanations, in the Bibliogrwphy
(p. (67) at the end of his book; for fuU biosraPhical details
and a CODlplete liItiq of the pauqa traDS1atccl, ICC the
biblioJrapby of all of Mr. VIIsaD'I writinp.. iDductiDI many
traDllatio.. from tbe: F~', discuaed in Pmt I, n. 27 &bene
(the collected articles entitled L 7Mi1m ~, ,. Fonclio" • RmI
Guhum, ed. C. Gayat).
Prof. Mahmoud Ayoub'. work-VoL I (Albany, NY. SUNY
Press, (984) coven sUral 1Il-1JGqtJr1l aad the ~ but the
Itudy is to be exteDded to the en~ Koran-c:u be used only
for a Focral notion of KilblDt'I interpretations, since it lives
only a paraphnuc or summary of certain aectio... Altboup
Prof. Ayoub briely mentions that Mit is more commonly
believed" that tbis work is "by ODe of Ibn C Arabi's disciples
• • • C Abel aI-Razzaq aI-Qubani" (p. 6), be coadudes that
-Wboever tbe author may be, the work clearly repraentl the
tbou&bt aDd style of Ibn C Arabi. to aDd then procaldI to cite "Ibn
cArabi"-with DO further mention of Kisbini-throuabout
the I'CIt of his study, indudina the index, bibliopapby, and
key to the sources. This practice-which bopefWl.y will be
corrected in the second aDd subsequent volumes-is especially
unfortunate not only because KisbinT is nol at aU representa-
tive of Ibn cArabT'I"style" or ..method" of exqesis, and only
to a very limited extent (for reaIOns outlined below in this
seelioD) of Ibn cArabrs ""tboujbt." More importam, far ftom
~presentinl Sufi tbought at its biabeIt level of esoteric
exeaais" (p. 6), it is-a bshlnI bimlelf explicitly briop out
in his Introduction (a. 75 beJow)-aa elementary wor~ for
bqinners on the spiritual Path, with very limited pedaaoaical
aims, aDd tbcrefore is completely different in style aDd conteftt
from wbat one usually fiDel. (to take only examples in the
framework of this article) in either tbe worb of IbD CARbY or
the more iDtiIIlate paIIIICI in cAbd al-Qldir's JltIWiqif
(traaslatiODl d.iscuaed below).
spiritual implications of particular Koranic verses," ..
it is the application to the Koran of • coherent
l' P. Lory pva a remarkably coadeDleclsummary of these
typic:al featurea of Sufi "1Iermeneutics" at the bepnnilll of this
study (pp. 9-18), with appropriate emphasis on the funda-
mental role of individul .piritual realizatiOD (p. 15) in aU the
forma of Sufi exqeais-a dimension which makes it extremely
diffialJt to "1UJIlID&rizc" or systematize, even within tbe works
of a sinale autbor. However, be: does nOl draw the reader"s
attention to the peat dearee to which ptecilely KllbIDJ'I
commentary tends to depart from tllia norm. (For a relatively
accasible sampliDi of some more typic:aJ CaICI of Sufi ,. ""r/-
precilely in their radieaJ diwnity of outlook aod illlCrpmation
-see tbe discussions of Rtlzbebln Baqn, NajmuddJD Kubri,
SimnInr(n. 80 below], aDd others in H. Corbin'. TM Man of
U,h' in Irll1rllUJ Sufism, tT. N. Peanoa, Boulder a LoDdoa,
1978.)
It is perhaps also indicative that Ibn cArabI himself rarely
uses the term III>wJI (which in his work can have a pejora-
ti~ ICDIC of an "CIOleric" iJlterpretahon arbitrarily auaehed
to a Koranic expression, with DO eaential iDDCf coDDCCtion to
the actual meanin, of the text), and that be: commonly UICI
the word 'II/.rrr-which, a P. Lory nota, wa ordinarily used
for -exoteric," historical aDd pmm,'icaI commentaries-
precisely for his owa spiritual undentandinl- This is only ODe
sip of Ibn cAnbY's broader metapbysical outlook. For him, in
JCneraI, what we would ordinarily call the "spiritual" meanin,
u precilCly the "literal" meanin. (u typitied in his character-
istic Jinluistic, "etymotop:al" approKb to key Koranic terma~
indeed" the -Reality" of the ~oran itJdf-in a sease which
include$, but is in no way reducible to, the sort of biatoricist
and lepIistic· viewpoiDb (themleha "interpretations j that
are unthinkingly accepted • the "obvious" meaniaa of the
text mo t of the time. This "Platonic" UDdentandinI of the
Koran (and of rneIation iD ament) is in DO way reducible to
the sort of 1Ihir/W,in or 11Ift"/,."., 1 sc:bema implicit in
Kllblnrs approacb (and in tbe philosophic, Sua, aDd Shiite
penpectives he ultimaJe1y draws on). and cannot really be
"'-up."-preciJely because that would imply that tbe:"mean-
ing" were somehow reducible to a system or let of CODCCptl
somehow separable from tbe triad Koran-reader-Reality
which &lODe is the matrix within which, for Ibn cArabY, that
meanin& is ncceaariIy both manifested aDd perceived.
It is certainly true that KlihInI'. orb in JlCaeral (cf. on.
74, 76, 78) are extremdy helpfuJ pcdqoaica.l tools, for thOle
previously unacquainted with Ibn cArabl's outlook and termi-
no!o&Y, in briD&inI out tome of his key cooceptI aDd technical
vocabulary. But the relation of these demaatI to the Sbaykh's
own orb can probably best be expreac:d u t.bat of a
IfaDUIW' in relation to aU tbe riclmess of a livilll1aqua&e,
botb spoken ud written.
 Moaals; Ibn cArtJbi tmd his Interpreters, Pm II
metaphysical system, elaborated in all of his works,76
based on elements from both Ibn cArabl's writinas and
the prevalent Avicennan school of philosophy in which
X.lshlnI himself was originally trained. The fint half of
Professor Lory's outline of Klshlnrs system (chapters
4-7) is a remarkably clear and readable summary of its
metaphysical structure (the divine "Presences" and the
ontological levels of the divine Essence, Attributes, and
Acts) and its manifestations or expressions in cosmol-
ogy, theology, and spiritual psychology. The second
half of his account (chapters 8-11) deals with Kishinrs
application of this conceptual schema to more practical
and experiential aspects of the spiritual life, with
regard to a representative selection of Koranic verses
and themes (eschatology, morality, the religious Law
and its application, prophecy and sainthood, etc.)
traditionally taken to refer to these issues in Sufi
writing more generally. The author's exposition through-
out is aimed primarily at readers without much previous
background in Islamic spirituality, and thus may well
serve (for that group) as an extremely useful general
introduction not only to KishiJirs metaphysics, but
also to certain essential features common to many
forms of Sufism and their spiritual approach to the
Koran. For example, Professor Lory's explanation in a
number of later chapters of the fundamental shift in
perspective from a "moralistic" and historicist frame-
work (in which Koranic categories and judgments an:
viewed as applying to specific external groups and
individuals) to a profoundly and rigorously internalized
spiritual (or "ontological") understanding of those
passages, is especially helpful in that regard. 17
76 For a further, more detailed introduction to this system,
as it was developed in KIshinI's famous commentary on the
FU#iI a/-lJiJcam, sec T. lzutsu·s Sufwn tlIfd TQosim . .. (cr.
n. 72 and Part I. n. 6), as wen as substantial segments
translated or summarized in the two articlcs of William
Chittick on the commentators of the FUID1 cited at n. 71 of
this review article. (The same conceptual system is also
presupposed in Kishlnrs untrans1ated, but widely read works
mentioned at n. 78 below.)
71 In this regard, it should be noted that Prof. Lory's book is
evidently intended not only as an introduction to Klshlnrs
own thought, but also as a general introduction to certain
common features of Sufi exegesis, as well as their relation to
other forms of Islamic Koran interpretation (e.&-. in the
author·s Foreword and the opening and concluding chapters).
There is certainly a great need for such an introduction for
students unable to read exemplary texts in the original Arabic
or Persian, since the most alIequate modem Western-language
studies of this subject (e.g.. P. Nwyia's Exige~ Coranique et
103
However, the relative clarity and simplicity of
Professor Lory's book also reflect similar features in all
of KlshiJifs own works-features which have to do
with both the form and the substance of that work, aDd
which in some key respects are radically different from
what one finds in Ibn cArabrs Writings (or in many of
his more purely Sufi commentators). Kishinrs Koranic
commentaries, like his other boots, are all clearly
distinguished by a thoroughgoing pedagogical concern
and didactic procedure71 that is manifested in such
interrelated characteristics as their rigorous systematiza-
tion, the clarification and simplification of vocabulary
(especially if compared with Ibn cArabI), and the
conceptualization (often in an openly reductionist man-
ner) of what were originally multivalent symbols.
These tendencies are not merely stylistic particularities;
they also reflect a shift in the content and underlying
intentions of Kishinl's writing (when compared with
Ibn CArabi) that brought him very close to the prevail-
ing systems of Avicennan philosophy (especially in
their interpretations of the phenomena and claims of
Sufism) and related schools of kalam-to such a
Ltmgllge Mystique [Beirut, 1970J and G. ~wcring's 1'1u!
Mystical Yi.sion ofExistence in Cl4uictU hlmn: The Qur:>anic
Herme1lftllia of the Sufi SDhl 111- TustiiTT [Berlin I New York,
1980D probably presuppose more backgrOUnd than can be
expected from most beginning students. while the still fre-
quently cited works of Goldziher and Massigoon are both
outdated and extremely misleading on fundamental points.
However, one may question whether most readers of this
work will be able to readily distinguish where (as in chapters
4-7, on the underlying "spiritual cosmology") KlsblDI"s views
are relatively unique or representative only of this particular
school. and where (as in most of the latter chapters) his
approach and presuppositions are more broadly typical of
Sufism in general.
71 This particular intention is brought out very clearly in the
Introduction to Kishaors TQ:>wflOt, which is translated in full
here (pp. 149-S3), where be clearly explains that his intention
is only to open up the possibility of a spiritual understanding
of the Koran for those beginning Sufis who may still find that
difficult (as he himself once did), and where he states that he
will avoid his more pcnooal (and possibly controveni81)
understandings of many points. However, the same pedagog-
ical approach and broader audience likewise seem to be
assumed in his other extant writings, including his commentary
on the FU#lI (d. n. 76), on AnprI's Manazil tIl-S4:>iTin. and
his frequently cited Sufi lexicon (l11i/QJ.r4t QI-$iijiya), which
was explicitly intended as a learning aid for readcn of the
three above-mentioned commentaries.
104 JounttIl of 1M Ammctm 0rlMttI1 ~ty 107.1 (1987)
depee that their verbal formuJatioDi are sometimes
virtually indistiDpisbable.'"
The background of that teDdeney is at least partly
explained by some rare autobiOJl8PbicaI remarb in
KlihInrs famous letter to cAlI' aI-Dawla a1-Simnlnt
defeodina his coaception of wtJ1)dm Gl-wujQd-a ....
sage translated in its entirety here (pp. JS4-M) from
JImi's Naf~t fI1.CJnI'O-in which he explains that.
79 The permeation of Dlhlarl thouabt by Avicaman con-
cepts and prauppositioDs (larJdy explicable by the bio....,.
icaI dements mentioDCd at n. 80 below) is espcciaDy mdent iD
his psychololY aDd theory of intellection (e•.., pp. ~2 in
P. Lory's book), where his remarb could DO doubt be read by
the Aviceoaan pbilosopben ofms day .. simply a restatemeat
of their own vicws. (This WM especially litdy since post-
Avicemwa philosophic thouaht bad d~loped an explanation
of Sui pncIice aDd experience, buiIdiaI on hints ia Ibn S-mi"s
K. tlI-J~6t, which paatc:d them a ccrtaiD validity, albeit at a
lower, pre-pbi1osophic level.)
While KlahlDrs adaptatioas of AviceJman thouPt can
probably best be UDdentood, on their own termI (aadjudBiDI
by his own autobioaraPbica1 explanations, n. 80 below), as an
attempt to explain the iDliabts of Ibn cArabI to Itudems with
a phiiOlOphic badtJl'Ound, with the aim of drawiDa them iDto
the practical dons aca:ssary to realize the IDOI'C profound
intentioas of Ibn CArabt (aod Sufism more acoenUY), they
also made it easy for sublequeat students to trat the Shaykh's
tboupt as a purely intdIcctual and, u it were, -.atcmalive"
philosophical system, with little or DO refemac:e to its experien-
tial aDd pnctical presuppositions and ultimate am..
.. Here readen are referred to H. Landoh's much more
detailed daaaic study of this conapondence (iDdudins
SimnlDrs reply to KllhIDJ): "Ocr Briefwccbael Zwischen
KIIIDI und SiJDDIDI Ober WlIJ.u/dt Ill- WuIfld," Dn 1$1imt,
Band 50, J (1973), pp. 29-81, which briop out the &fOunds
for SimnlnI'. attack-which was an important souroe for
later critiques oC Ibn cArabi, such M tbat by Atamad SirbindT
(n. S, Part II), even if it was not euetly typical of Sufi
attitudes at the time (~1IbIftI ftOtes [po 163] the approval of
Ibn cArabT's theais by SimnIDt's own master, IsfarlyinI)-ia
fean for blamic "orthodoxy" (especially in reprd to the
pnctice of and IIdhereace to the bJamic: Law) in a situation iD
which SimnIDt's conception of blam appeared quile con-
cretely threateDed by other reJiaioDS or sects under the relative
toleraoce enforced by the Mongol rulers of the time. For
SimninT's own dramatic life aod politico-refilious role, see
the bibliosrapbic references in the same uticle (p. 37, n. 36),
Prof. Landolt's introduction (pp. S-S2) to his edition of the
COf'r~$plrltwlk ofSimaIDI and lsfarlyiJlI(fehralll
Paris, Bibliotheque iranienne no. 21, 1912), the article ",cAlI)
al-Oawla al-SimnlnJ'" (by F. Meier) in E/2 (I, pp. 346-47),
a yOUIII man be reached the hiJbest depee of attain-
ment in the study ofloJic and (AviceDnan) philosophy,
befon: continuiDllpirituai cliSlatisfaction drove him to
seek the company and JUidance of Sufi masters. It is
not 10 surprisina. then, that Klsblnrl worb often
appear, at the very least, • a biIb1Y theoretiallsort of
~lo8Y" of SufiaJn directed-whether as apologetic
or protreptic-more towards convincinB readers with a
similar fa1MJfa or kaIam training (rather than the
spiritual direction of already practicing Sufis); or that
often his writing turns toward a purely conceptual,
"rational" philosophic exposition in which only the
broader problems and technical vocabulary recall the
inftuence of Ibn CArabi or other Sufi authon. This
latter development, throop which selected themes and
approaches from Ibn tArabi'. works gnldually became
integrated into the intellectual discourse of a variety of
later philosophic and theological schools, is especially
weD illustrated in the rec:ent reprint of S. Guyard's
translation (and Arabic edition) of K.llblnI's R. fi
tl1-QGf/;f> Wtl tJl-QadIu [Traite SlIT 111 PridutiNltion et
Ie libre arbitre, prkldJ • q&l/Utl1Ue htlditlu. Introduc-
tion (and supplementary material) by G. 1...EcoNTE.
pp. 114 + 25 pp. of Arabic text. Paris: SINDBAD/EDI-
TlONS OmENTALES. 1978.],11 which (despite the limited
and the additional aoun::a on the KubrlWlya order and
historical context at this time in DD. 33 aod 39 of Put II.
Within the penpcctive of this article, Klahlnrs letter is
especially lipificaDt in explaiDina (a) the early reception of
Ibn <ArabI's tboualat (once apia. in the fonn of the Frqiq) iD
Iranian Sufi cin:Ica primarily M a form of-mystical theology"-
especially on the question of w~ 411-wujUd-6llinI a
widely-felt Deed for a more adequate intellectual defeuse (or
description) of the metaphysical claims of the exiJtiDI Sufi
orden, aod (b) the pervasiveness of Avimman conceptions
(whether understood as tbeo1o&Y or philosophy) in tbe intel-
lectual trainina oftbe time (see nn. 79, SS-S6, and 64-66). On
the last point, especially, I'rof. Landolt·s article (pp. 33-36)
adds a Dumber of indispeDaable explanations (bioanPbica1
details, etc.) to the list of names of masten supplied by
Kishlnt, iDc1udini the fact that the philosopber-scientist
Qu~b al-DJn al-8bJrlZI (d. DD. J4 and 64 above) JhJdied with
KllhInI"l own Ipiritual master U a yOUDI man.
I. The systematic scope of this treatise can be measured by
consultiDl o. B. MacDoaald's article "CAbeI aI-~
aI-~iIbInt, .. reprinted in the E/2 (1, pp. 88-90>, which is
Jaraely an cxteDlive summary of iu CODteDts. baled on S.
Guyard·1 translation and edition. The editor of this reprinted
edition bu added a helpful introduction placina ~lsbInrs
ideas iD the larger context of Iba cArabJ~ tboupt, with a
number of merences to the FutiiJ,il1 and the FflIIlI, M well

title) actually recapitulates the broad outlines of his
diJtiDctive metaphysical system. In this respect, Kishi-
nI is probably the best-known (if by no means the mOlt
profOUDd) .epreseDtatile of this major inteUectuaI ten-
dency in the treatment of Ibn cArabt's heritage in later
Islamic tbouah~ ~D8 his philosophic aDd theological
defeoden and critics alike.a}
Whether one happens to view this transformation
positively or negatively, the distance separatiDa Kishi-
Drs approach ftom that of Ibn I';Arabt-iJlltyle, COD-
tent, audience, aDd ultimate iDtentions-1taDds out
dramaticaUy wbeD one compares their writinp OD
almost any issue. To tate one of the most striking
examples, the related problems of escbatoiOlY, resurrec-
tion, and the afterlife, Profeaor Lory dearly points
out (pp. 107-21) how for KlsbInT-who in his interpre-
tation follows the understaDding both ofearlier philos-
ophen and many Sufi writers (d. Nasafl above) as
well-k • • • the Resurrection is that "instaat' in which
the encounter of the atemporal (of the metaphysically
"timeless') and historical duration shatters the latter
while revealing to it its own true nature" (p. J20). But
while that formula (and the insight and experience it
conveys) surely corresponds to at leut one important
facet of Ibn I';ArabT's eschatology, taken by itself it
could also lead, as frequently seems to be the cue with
Klshlnt, to a son of allegorical m1uetiOD of the
complex symbolism of the Koran and I}tulrth to a
single (or at most twofold) plane of refen:ace, and even
potentially to an implicit denial of any meaningful
"survival" of the individual soul, with its wide range of
a translation (apin by Mr. Leconte) of a c:oJJection of 4M)
/;IIId1th from the RW14I by the jurist al-QayrawinJ, uitended to
show the doJID&tic Nortbodoxy· of the Sufi position (here
identified with XlshlnJ). While these texts are fascin-tinS in
themselves and help to brina out the traditional Islamic
bactsroUDd of Klshlnl's (and Ibn cArabI'S) positions Oil this
iuue, it is perhaps worth noline that the positions on tbis
question-whether from the standpoint of ~Ih aud Koran,
fUlh, ulam, aDd Sufism, aJDODI others-are not quite •
simple u the editor miPt imply, siDce this panicular problem
Utlbr and qiu/Qr) bas aenerated * monumental literature in
each of those domains, extenclins from the first Wamic
centuries down to our own day.
12 To take only his -defenders" or later interpmen in the
scbool of Ibn cAnbI mentiooed below. he is frequeotly cited
by ~aydaT Amun. JIJDI, Ibn Abl lumbar. Ibn Turb, MuIlI
~rI (who. followina JImt, diJcusses the correspondence
with SimnInJ at Ieqth in hiI K. tJl-A$fIT __Arbe e.), and a
Dumber of the IaIer Iranian thinken included in the Anllrol-
ogw . .. ofS. J. Asbtiyint aDd H. Corbin (n. 3. Pan 11).
lOS
possibly serious practical consequences (both penon-
ally and politically). By contnst. in Iba cArabt (e.&-,
FutfJJ.r4t, c:bapters 60-64 aDd 371, for the most extended
KCOuots of acbatololY), what must strib aDy reader
is the consistent and thorough ""literality"-an attitude
equally removed from Klsblnrs ""symbolic" approach
and from what we ordinarily think of. -literalism"-
with which the Shaykb treats the profuse descriptions
given by the :Koran and /;uu:lrIJa, his extraordinary
respect for each concrete detail in the -..iminl" and
""location" of the stagea of man's poll-mortem existence
(his ongoina development and spiritual experience in
the 1HIrziIklt or -Ieuer Resurrection," then the events of
the Greater Resurrection, then the many facets of
Gehenna, the Garden, aDd the beatific Vision).ll When
IJ (See a1rady the clileuuioft of Ibft cAtabT·. broader attitude
toward the ~oran and 1}tJd1llt in Part I aud at nota 10 aDd 7S,
Pan II.)
In metaphysical terms, ODe could say that the difference
turns especially on their ditrerina conceptions of what Ibn
CAnbY calls 1chtqIl, in boda its cosmic dimension, on many
planes of beins (indudina the "material" world); and its
macroc:osmic, human maDifatations (where ""im"linatioll" is
both a weak and mialeadinl equivalent, since it UDderIies most
of the phenomena-DOl merely the NrdiaiOUS" or imqinal
of experieace in JeIICIlI1). For a more CODCI'de example, one
can compare Ibn CArabrs tttatmeDt of the esdwoJoaical
materials of Islamic tndition with that of GbazIJI in his
Duntll tll-FIkltirtlfl KMJ; cUIilm tll-AkJrinl (1M Pr«iota
P«Ul: tI TrlllVllUkJftfrom 1M Anlbk. tr. Jane Smith, Missoula,
MODt..I919[DOt to beconfaled withJIDiI+s DurTIlt aJ-Fakhir.
hose translation and edition are discuued belowD, whose
restricted rhetorical intenIions and UDderpinniDp-more or
las aimed at Nfn,btenina" the Ctlwimm into carryin, out
their reJilious duties-an clearfy outlined in Ghazllrs more
philosophic writinp (d. n. 13, Pan m. It is precildy the
relative separation of -ethical.. and -intellectual" (or spiritual)
planes of meaDiq and inteftlion-and the c:onscquent division
of types of writiJlS and tadainS- hieh ObazIIJ took ovn
from tile Avicennan philosophy of his day that is called into
question by Ibn cArabl's metaphysics aud his distinctive
understandiJII of propbeq and revelation in all their dimen-
sions. (The same fundamental role of lMy4l for Ibn cArabi
likewise seems to underlie bis cryptic rapoDIC. in his famous
fint encoWder with the noted philosopher Ibn RUlhd [Aver-
roes). to . qUCltion wbethcr the wer-to a mysteriously
IInnameet probJem!-achieYc:d by illumination and inspiration
wu the same u that provided by rational inquiry: ·Yes 'and
no. Between the yes and the no. spirits take their ftiabt from
their matter and heads are separated from their bocIieI." See
pp. 41-42 in the EqIisb tnmslation of H. Corbin's CrwIIM
106 JOUTIIIIl 01 1M Americlm OrimMl Soclet, 107.1 (1981)
this characteristic procedure is combined with Ibn
cArabr, repeated vivid delcriptioDl of his own (or other
Sufia') personal visionary experiences aDd encounters
with many dcceuecl individuals (cartier masten, pro-
phets, etc.) in the other world (btuza/ch), it is relatively
easy to lee that his own constant-and highly problem-
atic, not to say diJconcertina-insistence on the pri-
mary role of k4.tJif(immcdiale experiential-UOvcilin.i
and the concomitant limitations of abstract, formal
~reasoning" (ctlql) have been substantially altered, if
not indeed reversed, in Klshlnl's far more sober
philosophic perspective."
At the same time, it must be stressed that Klsblnr.
relatively conceptual treatment of Ibn cArabI'sl)'mbols
(or rather, ofbis pcnonal experience and re-expression
of the data of the Koran and J.uu/fth, in 10 many
domains) represents only one typical strand among Ibn
cArabt', later interpreten. One cannot help but be
reminded again of the similar diversity of approedles in
Western civilization to Plato's dialogues, according to
subeequent readers' cmplwea on his myths, psycbolOJ)',
ontolOl)'; cosmology, logic, and 10 forth. The fecundity
of Ibn cArabi's writing and his richness of expression
(and possibilities of interpretation) are certainly com-
parable, even if their later creative development is still
far less known to us. Continuing beyond KlshInI,
students can pin some notion of those alternative lines
l~ ill 1M $iifum of Ibn f;Artlbr, PriDcetoo, 1969; a
more complete traaslatioo of the same paIU&Ie, from the
FutilI}at. I, 1S3-SC, can be fouod in Asln PaJaciO$' L 'b1iJm
~ [trauslabon dilcussc:d in Part I]. pp. 30-31.)
M Some of the gounds of the difl'erina outlooks of Ibn
f;Arabt aod Kllblni have been disc:uacd in scaenJ termI in
notes 1S and 83 aboft. Still another typiaaI example of
KIIhtnra auimilatioo of Ibn f;ArabI's ideas to Avicennan
notions is in his treatment or COIJDOlol)' (= Prof. Lory's
study, pp. ~S9), where the various co-equal aDd concomitant
dements of Ibn cArabT's CQlmoJoay-discusscd briely in Put
I in tbe context of a translatioo of D. GriI-are transformed
into dqrces of ·proareuive particularization" (p. 54), with
-Prime ~. the lowest level
It should be added that Dlhlni"s approach was not
necauriIy typical of otla colDllleDtaton and interpreters of
lbo cArabt Somethina of the clistinctiftDeu of his approach
(in an tbe ways 01ltliDed above) coma out more clearly. for
example. wben it· contnlted with mrs much more faithful
commentary on Ibn cArabt"s RUaItlt IIl-AnWiIT discuuecI
below. mI'. relative faitbfuIneu to tbe Shaykh's Janauaae
aDd inteatioDl can be plainly seen, e.... in his dilcuslion (pp.
121'.) of Ibn cArabt's aIhIsions to the stqes and realities of the
nen world.
of interpretation by referring to relatively acceuiblc
worb by Haydar AmuJT (d. 787/1385) and CAW
a1-KarIm a1-mT (d. 8OS/14(3), both litewilc comlllen-
tatOlS of the Fr.qlq, but also independent and important
thinken in their own riaht.as
The three works by }Jaydar AmulI edited by
H. Corbin and O. Yahya (and at least partially acces-
sible to non-Arabisa in Professor Corbin's French
introduction and related stUdies) have a considerable
historical aDd an intrinsic interest, even if AmulI's
immediate influence in Islamic thought seems to have
been relatively limitc:cLN To begin with, they are an
excellent illustration of those general features which, as
we have already noted, characterize most of the later,
more "scholastic" and theoretical treatments of Ibn
cArabT's thought: the relative concentration (amonl
the Shaykh', own works) on the Frqfq aJ-IJiIuIm, the
determinant role of the commentaries of Qayf&d and
Kishlni, and the centrality of the complex of problems
-at once philosophic, theological, and mystical-
summed up in the controvenial formula of the "Unity
of Being" (wcrhda' tI1-wujQd).'''
More important, however, these books have certain
qualities which might recommeocl them more partic-
ularly to modem t'Cadcn, if only tbey were better
known. To begin with, both the masaive K.. Jami C
al-ARM wa Manba::J aJ.Anwifr and the much shorter
R. Ntlqd al-NuqUd fi MaCri/at al-WujQd printed
IS Their line is contiaued by audI fipra as 11m1 (d.
898/1492), MuIIl SadrI. ad a number of other leu renowned
thinkers who are briefty mentioned below (e.I.• at n. 91).
.. The relative rarity of manuscripts of AmuJr'l works
(compared with authon lite K1sblnt, Qlnawi, or JilI) JCeIDS
to re~ not so much the intrinsic qualities of his thOU8hl u
the restricted nature of his oriPW audience-primarily
TwelYer Shiite tbeololians-and his pioncerin. status in
d~endinl the writiDp of Ibn cArabr in that context. (He •
&monl the authOR cited by the later Shiite writer Ibn AM
JumhOr [lee the article of W. MlMleJunl at n. 39. Put II). who
likewise attempted to assimilate Ibn cArabt·. penpectiva in
the Shiite theoloPca1 context.) For a tentative listina of
Amutt" worts and extant manUKripts, lee espc:cially the
introductions to his Jilmi C IIl-Asr. (fuD refereDCa in text
below).
•, The indexes to the Jimi c til-b. and NtIqd IIl-Nuqiid are
especially revealiDa of the Ieadina role of UIhInI and Qanad
in detmnioin, Amun's conception of Ibn cArabl's -Philo-
sophy." The same -school" seems to have been equally
inftuential in his later COllUlJeDtary 00 the Frqiq (NiIII
tU-NIqUI . •. ). to juclae by the refereocea in his Introduction
(the only pan so far edited; ICle n. 90 below).

with it ["fA phi/o$OP~ $hrc;u." Ed. H. CouIN
et O. YAHYA. pp. 832 (Arabic introcluctioD~ texts,
and extensive indexes) + 76 pp. French introduction.
Tehran I Paris: BIBLIOTBEQUEWNIENNI!, n· 16. 1969.1'
are mainly devoted to explaining lOme of Ibn C;ArabT~s
key cooc:epts (aDd their pncticaI, cxpericntial Piesupposi-
tions) to readen who are not UIUlIled to be familiar
with his worb, an especially di1IicuJt daalIenae that
must obviously be faced by any contemporary writer
on these subjects. ~ a result, Amun's dilc:ussioDS~
while no doubt lacking the philosophic subtlety and
complex technical vocabulary of the clauical worts
directed toward "specialists" (QaytaJ'l, KIIhInT, Jr~
etc.), are likely to be considerably clearer and more
~ble to readers approaching these issues, at least
in their Islamic form, for the fint time. This pedagog-
ical interest is amplified, at least in the Jllmi c lll-A6rar-
a work of Amuli's youth, written soon after his
"convenion" to Sufism in the form of Ibn cArabI's
teachinp-by a reveaIin& penonal openness and direct-
ness, an unconcealed autobiographical dimension
which is relatiYeJy rare in Islamic literature in general,
and certainly in most works of this school. This
pcnonal aspect is especially visible in AmulI's impas-
sioned attempts-which provide the justification and
framt\1Vork for the book-to coaYinoe bis mostly hostile
and suspicious Twclver Shiite colleagues and friends
(in the holy cities of Iraq where he was writing) of the
ultimate unity of Ibn 'ArabI's Sufi path and the
insipta and teaehinp traditionally attributed to the
early Shiite Imams."
II The importaDCe of Osman Yahia'llonl Arabic introduc-
tion to this volume for the entire history of the commentaria
aDd reception (critical. well u favorable) of the F"'IiI
td-{liJulm bas almwIy been mcntiooed at n. S, Part II.
Relldcn unable to coDlU1t the Arabic texts in this volume
will fiDeI an exc:el1etlt brief introduction to Amulrs meta-
phyUcal thouJbt, bued IarFly on both the worb edited
there, ill T oshihiko Izutlu'l article on Wfbe Baic StnlCtUre of
Metaphysical Thoqbt in Islam,,. DOW most readily accasiblc
in FreDCh translation ill the collection of his Clays entitled
Urdll « 1"ExU1aI« ~t Crltuion hrpItwlk m Myst;qw
I&ltmtiqw (paris, Lcs Deux 0c:Qm, (980), pp. 9-47 (lee also
Do 14, Part 11).
., Thil latter point daena IOIDC further amplification,
since Professor Corbin·. introduction fOCllla on the -meta·
historical" or pbilosophic 1IDity (a perceived by Amun and a
few otbeI' relatiftly rare Shiite scholan) between Sufism aDd
Shiiam, but does not stress the real Irbloriall difticultia
AmuII (and his lucc:euon; see Do 91 below) eDCOUIlten:d in
tryiua to conviDce their fellow Shiites of the valictity of this
107
The leCoDd volume edited by Corbin and Ymy&, the
JODI introduction to Autun'. commentary on the
.$
Frq;q II1-Qilulm [NtIR IIl-Nrqiil/f SlwuI;IIu-FUIiiII "u
T~xl~ T~xt~$." Ed. H. eoaBIN et O. YABYA.
pp. 547 (text) + 77 pp. FreDCh introduction and 80 pp.
Arabic introduction. Paris/Tehran: Bau01'llllOOl laAN-
JENNE, n· 22-21. 1975.fO written in his old ap, is still
marked by his Twelver Shiite convictions on the
conc:eption. In fact, AmuIr. UlUJDeIlt is a1moIt entirely
intended to explain Ibn cArabI'. outlook to Shiite reli&iOUI
scholars (whose trainiDa was traditionally in Shiite I)«/1Ih,
fiqh, and 1uIJbJ tbeoIo&Y) and to convince them of the
superiority of Sufism and iu related lpiritual pnctices. in the
form expressed by IbIl cArabt, u the proper aDd uniquely
effective way to .... p tile tnae intentions aDd meaninas of the
talChinp of the early Im8IDI-which AmuII uDdentands •
another spiritual -Path,. {IdrJqllr), Iharin& many of the key
penonalitics (e.I., CAli and Jacfar ~ also found in
many Sufi chai of initiation. The ork is ItOt devoted (aacl
here the FrmdI title may be lIIIiDteDboaally irODic) to defend-
ina ShiiJm to non-Shiite Sufis. for example; Amu1I comis-
tendy writes from the penpectWe of the directly experienced
Truth (~.) uDdertyiaa thae IIDd many other reliaious
traditions. and does DOt attempt to circumlcribe the uniwnal
import of Ibn cArabt'1 mer. In that liaht, it is cuy to
uDdmtand the relative hOstility (or perhaps mon: often
simple indifference) wbidI WM the usual derical reIpODSe to
similar attempts by AmuJI and his IUCCeIIOn.
Historically spcakiJJ& the cfl'orts 01 AmuJJ mel RICh TwcMr
Shiite scholars u MuDa $adrl (or in our own clay, S. J.
AshtiylDI: ICe n. S7, Put II) to brilll out this uniftJ'Ul
spiritual dimension of Shiite tradition (almost always under
the direct or indirect inftueDc:e of Ibn cArabT) have usually-
with the poaible exception of certain teacben ill Qajar
Iran-remaiDcd at best somewhat maqiDal in theeycs ofthc
vat JUjority of the Twdftr c:w.ma', and often IUbjec:t to
banasmeIlt Or even open persecution u a suspect heresy. (The
typical case of Mulli $adrl aDd his attempts to ~. the
profound inftueDce of Iba cArabI, in his more popular writinp,
is detailed ill our traDllation ad introduction to his 17te
WuJo", 01 1M Tlrrone •.. , Princeton, 1911.) Without an
awarenas of this historical bIlctarouDd. more recent cIevdop-
menta in Twclftf SlWsm milbt appear somewhat aaomaloUl,
rather than .. heina the cootinuation of Ouaoinl aDd deepIy-
rooted tendeocies.
,.. This edition docs not include Prof. Yabya'i cxtenIiw
iDdeuI mentioocd ill the French introduction (_ the projected
part 2 of this volume in the -Bibli~ue iranielmej;
apparently they have not yet been publilbecl. An especially
intereltiq feature of this text are Amun'. many circular
diapams UICd to illustrate upedI of tbc doctrine of ~t
108 JoUTIIIII of tM Ammc4II 0rimt1l1 ~ty 101.1 (1987)
question of wa/8ytJ (which may have accounted for its
relative aep:et by sublequent non-Shiite authon), but
is instead an advanced, philosophically elaborate trea-
tise, aimed at other hiahlY trained students of Ibn
cArabr, discussing all the key themes of the FUIilI from
the threefold standpoiat of IUlqI (1}tIdrth aad Wamic
tradition), clI'Il (the dialectic -reason" of later kaIam
aDd Avicennan philosophy), aod kiuhf (the direct
experiential realization of the Sufis). Amulrs explicit
comparatiw analysis of tbae three dimensions (at
once of intellectual fonn and spiritual method), which
are inextricably interwoven in Ibn cArabra own writ-
ings, is a typical feature of virtually aD subsequent
commentaria and discussions or his taebinp-at
least when some attempt was made to explain or
defend them to pbilolopben and theol()JiaDs outside
strictly Sufi circles.'1
cAbd al-Karim aI-.mt(d. 832/1428) was undoubtedly
both the most original thinker and the mOlt remarkable
tIl-WIIjDd aod ttljMtiylt, wbicb are CODliderably more elaborate
than thole aiYCD by Iba CArabl iD the FUllll,lt.
A phyaicaJ indication of the extent (and relative pbilolophic
iDdeJ'C!*oce) oftbis tnditioll ofI6C0111IDODtar,.' OIl the FIIIiII
by this time can be aIe&DCd from the editors' remark that an
edition of the first half of AmulT'. 8CtUal commentary (the
only part now available in maaUlCript) would have takea four
or he volumes the tizc of this -IntroebIctioo- (547 pp. of
Arabic text alone).
" See tile very .imiIar aaalysil of tNJ"dIIt tIl-wujIMJ ad
related themea, in contrut with the Avicennan philosophic
aacI bam .taaclpoiDta, by another, 'li&btly I.ter Twelver
Shiite writer, $a>jn al-Dfa Turb Isfahlnt (d. ca. 83~ A.B.) in
bit T..mJd .,.g.w~[ed. S. J. AIhtiyIDt 274 pp. + 6 pp.
EnaU.h iDarodudion by S. H. NMI'. Tehran, 1976.]. This was
aD important tuchiaa text in IaIeI" Iraoiu pbilolopbic cin:IeI,
• iDcticated by the &Jolla by 19th and early 20th ceDtury
tneIitionailraniu philolopben iDCluclecl in this edition; their
role is aplaiDed in the editor's JeDathy PeniaD iDtroduction
(III pp.). T'bia IbD Tura. . .,pareatly the IOn or JfUdson
of $adr al-Drn Ibo Turta, another Twle¥er .cbo!ar "coo-
verted- to the Sufism or I_ cArabT, no. RUAI frill- WIIjfid
tll-MU/1iIq is cited by AmulJ bimself in the J6ml c td-AsrIT,
pp.496-97.
Another .ucceaor in this hierarchical resolutioa of the
penpectiva of taIam, plailolophy, and Ibe cArabI (repre-
sentinl Sufism more acneraUY) is the Shiite thinker lbo AM
JumbOr (d. &me 9th1 15th cmtUIY), whole views iD bit majot
work, the K. tIl-MujlIare outliDed in W. Madeluaa's "Ibn AbI
GumbOr al-A~=n SyothaiI of ~ PbiIoIopby aDd
Sufism- (ICe Do 39, Pan II), wbidl alto meatioDl • fonhcomina
article OR IbD Abt Jamb in the ~ to the Btl. (This
article, tint praented in 1976, does DOt mention the poaible
aud independent mystical writer amona the figures we
have discuaed in the "school" of Ibn cArabl (or of
QOnaWl). lodeed the sort of derivative relationship
implied by that expression is quite milleedilll unIea
we undentand their relation as comparable, (or exam-
f1
ple, to ProcJus' position vil-l-vis Plotinus. For, haviDa
completely assimilated the teacbiap and writings of
the Shayth (aDd his earlier collUDentaton), nil pro-
ceeds to develop the same broad themes (metaphysica,
cosmololY, spiritual psycboloJ)', etc.), but with an
oriJinality aud independence which is consistendy
grounded-like Ibn CArabrs-ia his own piritual
insight and experieacc. These distinctive qualities,
which are especially strikina wben let apiDat the
relatively geater theolOJica1 and philosophic emphasis
of most earlier (aDd 1a1er) writen ill this school, no
doubt helped account for the wide diffusion and accep-
tance of his writinp amon. Sufis from Muslim India
(where .nJTtraveled) to the Ottoman lauds.') However,
that same riclmea and depth of implicit references
lina of COnaec:bon with the eartier worb or ~. Amuh aDd
11m Turk&.)
Comparative wor~ aIoq Iimilar IiDa by the poet-
philosopher JImJ aod by MulJI Sadri are dilculled in the
IeCtion on JImI below.
n The ana1o&Y in this CalC is particularly stroDl because one
of the importaDt features of mrs indc:pm:teat pbiJolopbic
contribution, • with Procl.. and suhlcquent Neoplatonilts,
baa to do with his subtle anaJyIiI ud muJtiplicatioa of
distiDctioDi conClCl'DiDa the -intermediate- coaditioaa aDd
ItatcI of beiDa; see, for example, E. Buaerth, -0. 8ucb der
40 Stufen von CAbei a1-~adm a1-lmt," ~ M AU-
~ . , W"1UeIUdttIftm. phiJoio,um-hUtorUdw KJa.
230, no. 3 (J 9S6). cAbei al-QIdir a1-JazI~iJf'. defeme of Ibn
cArabI qaiDIt lOme of mrs "'iDDovatioDs- or clUpeementl
oa certain points is cliIcaIIed by M. Cbodkiewicz in the
IDtrocluetion to his traDdatioDl from the M"""""(tbe tmu
spiriluelr dilcuucd at the CIId of this article), pp. 31 and 189.
t ) For mr. trawll . . life. ICe the artide by HeJbDut
Ritter, MCAbd al-Kadm al-DjIIt'" iJa Ell, I, p. 11; the importaace
of tile Yemen in .nn'l life mniDds us of the IIiD virtually
unkDown Itory or the IICCqUDCc &lid development of Ibn
cAraIIJ'. inaueDce there (a subject evoked only bridy at the
eDd of A. Atq'. article in the EJ2). Some idea of the spread of
his ideas &lid writiDp, espccWly in sabtcqUCDt Turkish
Sufism, can be pthered from the locatioaa of manuscripts
listed in Brockelman. GALS II, pp. 283-84, peI-for.nn's
comlllClJtariel OR acvera.I ofIba cArabJ's worb-in O. Yabia'.
HUtoir, ...•
The IDOIt accaIible popuJar iDtroduction to Jm is probably
ItiII that iDdIIded iD R. A. NicboltoD'. SIIMlIa ill IMtuIIk
M,me;., (Cambrid~ 1921; repro 1967), cbapter II.

<aaain comparable to the later Neoplatonists), which
pose such a dilemma for students in most domains of
later Islamic cult~ are a formidable obstacle for
modem students and traDllators-a fact which may
explain the limited availability of his writinJS in any
Western lanauaae.
TItus Burckhardt's partial translation of the opening,
metaphysical chapters of mrs K. Gl-I1Ul1n al-Kbnil
[De I"HomlM ~l. pp. 101. Paris: DEavy-LlvRES.
1975 (1st ed. 19S3)./ English tr. (from the French) by
A. CUUIIE-SEYMOUR. UniwrMd Man. pp. 93. Sher-
borne, UK: BESHARA PuBLlcAnONS. 1983.], with its
extensive introduction and careful treatment of philo-
sophic vocabulary (including an excellent glossary),
has been a classic introduction to this dimension of
Ibn cArabY's tboupt for many yean. However, the
translator's intentionally limited selection of topics
and particular pedagogical intention-both carefully
acknowledged in the opening sections" necessarily
lead the uninitiated reader in a direction almost the
opposite (at least historically speaking) of that actually
followed by the author; it ia very difficult, unless the
reader is already quite familiar with Ibn CArabi and his
earlier commentators, to see how Jili is actually using
their concepts and terminology in an independent,
creative fashion to develop and express new insights and
oriainal ideas." A relatively complete and appropriately
,. This wrsion, a the translator strases, coven omy rouably
y. of the total wort, and is not entirely complete: even for tbe
chapters that arc included. The translator Jives a careful
outline of tbe chapter beadinp of the rest of the book,
but-as often with both Ibn cArabt and many of his later
interpreters-an outline does not really sugest the likelihood
of such discussions .. those mentioned in n. 95 below.
Readers of .mT's work, not to mention translators, are
certainly not aided by the state of the available printed texts,
where it is clear that the editorI printer hu himself often not
been able to follow tbe diJcuaion.
~ In Jill's case, the almost universal problem, for modern
students and translators of later Islamic thoupt, ofwidespread
iporancc of the distinct traditions of later killam and Aviccn-
nan philosophy (already cited at nn. 55-56 aDd S9--a», Part II)
is further compounded by his creative devdopmmt of Ibn
cArabY's own tceImical terminolOl)', which also umes a
considerable acquaintance with the Shaykh"s writinp in gen-
era), especially in his more complex metaphysical cliIcussions.
This is not always the case with Jl'1l, a iDdica'cd by two
fasclnatin, brief excerpts from the K. ai-I'" al-Dmil (from
later chapters than those included in the Burckhardt transla-
tion). which are readily accasible in the EnaJish tranIlation of
H. Corbin's SpiriIutIl Body tIIUl Qkstitll FAr~ (tr. N. Pearson,
PriDceton. 1977), pp. 148-63. (The fint selection concerns the
109
annotated translation of such a work, difficult that
mipt be, could help transform many widespread
misconceptions concerning this whole current of later
Islamic tbouJbt.
In the meanwhile, readers can find an exceUent,
eminently tadabIe illustration of these distinctive qual-
ities of JitI'a work in the recent partial translation of
his commentary on Ibn cArabT's R. al-Anwlr [JOUI7Je}'
to the Lord of Power. Tr. R. T. HAUlS. pp. 116. New
York: INNEIl TaADmONS IN1'EaNAnONAL. 1981.]."
What is remarkable about that commentary, in com-
parison with the works by authon discussed earlier in
this section, is its consistent, unmistakable reference to
direct experience of the realities in question, not just as
a premise of the discussion, but as its very rai30n d'ltre.
.nu, like Ibn cArabI and unlike 10 many of his other
commentatoR, is careful here to raise questions of
"theoryW or intellectual explanation as they naturally
arise within the context and ultimate aim of spiritual
realization-not as they are generated by extraneous
apologetic concerns, or by an internal intellectual
dialectic taken as an end in itself. The result, aided by
his frequent references from appropriate passages of
the FutDJ,at aDd other orks of Ibn cArabi, is a truly
Sufi commentary (not 10 much a philosophic or theo-
logical one), grounded in terms acc:essible to any reader
favorite Sufi theme of the -men of III-A c,rlcf. Koran 7:468'.),
the second a mystical encounter with the initiatic figure of
Khip".) Without already knowing that Ji1I wa their author,
it would be difficult to imaaine that these pusages are dra n
from the same book as the earlier ~hapten traDllated by
T. Burckhardt.
" The excerpts from JDi's commentary here coven 33
pages, venus only 24 Pa&a for the aaua1 translation of Ibn
cArabr. text. (Aim Palacios' earlier tranIlation of the I8.IDC
text was diJcuased in Part I above.) This English vcrRon also
includes a helpfuill-p. Jloaary (includin, aplan tiODI of
biographical references to cartier Sufi authors), bile the
on 81 a whole-iftCludina the introductory material by two
contemporary Je~ Sufi lhaykbs-reftects the great esteem
nn lonl enjoyed in Ottoman (by no means exclusively
1"urkishj Sufi cirdes. a phenomenon also indicated by the
many manuscripts of his oft. found in libraries in that
rqion (n. 93 above).
Althoup the tra.DIlatio in this wort are nOt by a
scholarly specialist, any IhortcomiDp in that regard (e.z.,
technical terms not always clearly explained ucb. mcreDCeS
and allusions not always identified) are more than COUDter-
bal-need by the translator", obvio care for tbe ~larity and
readability of the fiDal vcnion-a fundamental co ideration
that is unfortunately not always so apparent in the available
tr latio in this area.
110 JOU17IIIl olllw Americtm Orinrtlll Society 101.1 (1987)
wiIlin, to foDow the spiritual proareuion underlyin,
Ibn cArabY's exposition in this work. (The same distiDc-
tive qualities arc likewise evident in the translations
from CAbd al-Qldir a1-JazI'itt discussed below.)
v. Althouah cAbd al-Rabmin al-JImI(d. 898/1492)
could quite justifiably be considered a major fiaure in
the ~bool" of Ibn cArabYand QOnawi discuued in the
prea:din, section, simply on the basis of his Sufi
commentaries and more philosophical writinp, be is
certainly far better known today as one of the greatest
clauical Persian poets. Professor Yann R.idaard'l trans-
lation (aDd new edition, with facing Persian text) of his
famous LIlwI'iJ} [UI JllillisfelM1lu '*
Lum;e,~.
pp. 179. Paris: Lm DEUx OCEANS. 1982.1 whose 36
-IUuminations" are a masterful combination of power-
ful, immediately accessible Sufi poetry and complex
metaphysical analysis (almost entirely bued on Ibn
cArabI and his earlier commentators), thus illustrates
the inner connection between these two equally euen-
tial aspects of JImi's life and work. At the same time,
amonl aU the translations disaaued here, this work
(a1onl with cAbd al-QIdir's K. al-MilWiiqif, diseussed
below) is especially suitable as an introduction to this
current of later Islamic thoupt for students without
any previous background, precisely beuuse JImJ-
whose intentions are ably conveyed in Professor
Richard's careful tl'BDJlation -has constructed the
work as a sort ofdialogue in which the poelty (althoup
Ga*ionally didactic) most often directs the reader to
the immediate and indispensable experiential insilhts
(the -illuminations" or I&ftashes" of the title) whose
metaphysical and theological implications are then
clarified and elaborated in the aceompanyina prOle,
often by contrutin, the approach of the Sufi -knowen"
(as exemplified here by Ibn cArabYand QtlnawT) with
the limited methods of the muIIJIcoUiman and/alMila. t7
In virtually every section he thereby brinp the reader
'7 This sort of "dialOCUC" of ecstatic poetry aDd philosophic
prose often strikinlly illustrates tbe IOrt of problems and
possible misconceptions (at once prKtical, theoJo&ica1, and
spiritual) that frequently pve rise to the need for theoreticalj
doctrinal clarification in earlier Sufism., u explaiDcd in our
discuaion of BaJyIDt (and his critics) above. A ic example
is the poetic: refrain O(M".",. a.r,"(MaJl is He!") in IDumination
22, immediaacly followed by the tbeolopcal and practical
explanations of wbM such an expression reaDy IIICaDI (sections
23-24).
Sec note 100 for lOme of the relermces to Ibn CARbY and
QOnawI. JImI"s ~ comparison oCthe mdhod and
conclusions of tbe SWl AvkeDl'lan philosophers, and talam
theoloJiaDI is expressed in its most systematic form in his K.
explicitly face-to-face t in extremely concise fashion,
with the three essential elements of all the writiup of
this school: the experiential around (and its broader
Sufi presuppositions); its doctrinal or theoretical e1abo-
ration; aDd its broader dialectical context (i.e., the
competina or ostensibly opposed doctrines, methods,
and interpretations, each usually expressed in the
shared tecJmical vocabulary of post-Avicenaan kaIam).
(The apparent difliculty or obscurity of most of the
more abstract and purely 14theoretical" writinp of this
school-including JlmI's own longer prose works
whose translations are diIaused below-is almost
entirely due to the modem reader's undentandable
lack of acquaintance with the fint aDd especially the
third of those elements, which were naturally presup-
posed in the oriJinal audienc::e.)"
The same carefully conceived spiritual pedagOIY
clearly underlies the structure of the work u a whole:
JImT bepns with fundamental conditions of each
individual's search (the state of -dispersion" aDd its
causes, 16illuminatioos" 1-4), points out the profound
inDer relation of the seeker aDd God (lilW~t 5-6)
which is the ultimate context of all that folio , alludes
to ome of the key features of the spiritual method
(7-10) leadinl to a growing awamJCII of this Reality,"
and above all to ODe' awakenina to the true IWUR of
Love (11-12), the sip and companion of oue's subse-
quent propess on this path. This fint third of the work
has a universality that seems to justify JImI's initial
claim (in his Introduction) to be nothing but a 14transJa-
tor" (Itujumiin) of the Truly Real; and there are
constant aBusions to this incr pensabIe personal dimen-
siOD throughout the subsequent metaphysical discus-
sions, until he retums to that plane of immediate insight
even more forcefully in his conclusion: wr0 express the
Realities in words is but a dream ... Silence is better
td-DumIt td-FilkJllril (translation aDd edition by N. Reer
diIcuucd below).
ta This problem stands out most clearly wben one com-
pares the ~~iJ.t with the Enalish translation of the
Duntl' tll-FilJcJJiTtI (see below), hicb is often virtually
incomprebensible-at least to nonspeciaIistJ-for lack of
lIdequate explanation of thole presuppositions. (lb.iI is not to
minimize the diJIicuJty of the cbaDenp faced by traDllaton in
this domain., since there really. no simple way to condense
several yean of Itudy-w . b would litewiIe be required for
most Western tbcoloPcal or pbilolopbic tnlditioDl-inlO
lOme more easily KCCIIible form; d. our remarb on other
upects ohbis problem at Dn. 56,60 in Part II, and 9S above.)
" The traIISIator'. brief outlillC (pp. 12-1S) of IOIDC of the
key features of Naqshbanclt spiritual method is especially
illuminati. and helpful at . point.
 MODIS: Ibn cArtlbi and Irb 1ntnprelerl, PllI't II
than this convenation of oun!711 The intervening sec-
tiODI (13-36), however, are mainly devoted to an
elaborate metaphysical analysis, in terms at once onto-
10aica1 and theolo~ of the inner structure and
dynamics of absolute Bein! (wujQdl htutT) and the
divine Reality (IIl-JJllqq) in relation to the mani-
fest, phenomenal world, a discussion almost entirely
based on the Frq;q al-Qilcllm and its subsequent
commentatoR.100
Rather than attempting a detailed commentary of
these complex, still highly condensed discussioos (which
would no doubt overwhelm this brief and intention-
ally introductory wort), Professor Richard bas often
referred the reader to two of Jimrs own 10lller
100 In addition to the explicit references to the FUIiiI
tll-/JiJuJIrt (section 26 [from the FIIH of Shucayb], discuaiq
the bean of the true ~nower and the stage of c.,.,. tll-Jam c is
especially importan~ along with other explicit citations in 30
and 36) and to QOnawt (section 33, citin, his K. M-NU#lI),
students of Ibn CAnbY will recognize that much of this part of
the book is basically a Persian translation or paraphruc of
P. . . . . from the Frqiq or from commentaries in the line of
QUnawi; the subject has been 10 deeply assimitated that it is
dilicult to say whether limT was knowingly traDslatinc
certain pauap or simply rephrasing their common insights.
(Sec below for limi's own explicit studies of the Frq;q.)
Also DOICWonhy in this regard arc JImI'. quotations of
lines from rUlmrs MIImtIVT (section 6) and froID Malpnad
Shabistiri's (d. 720/1320-21) GubJum-i Raz, indicatift of the
extent to which Ibn cArabY's (or QUDaWl'S) idea had come to
be IICCePted • the standard Sufi interpmation for the mystical
vcncs of many carlier Sufi poets not directly inftuenced by the
Shaykh or his writiop. In fact, Shabisdri's Gubhtm-i JUz,
composed in 1311, is-like the works of uatI discussed
above-an intertstin& example of the early, popular Sufi
assimilation of many of Ibn CAnbY's ideas (e.g.., cobCefDing
the in.san lcilmil) in a form not yet heavily inftueaced by the
more systematic philosophic and thcoloP:aJ lanauaF of the
school 01 QiinawI. Unfortunately, althoqb there are a number
of popular, frequently reprinted EnJlish versions ('The Ro~
GarMn of MYJlnWJ, tr. E. H. Wbinfield, London, 1880
[reprinted); nw &enl Gtlrden, tf. J. Pasha, New York, 1974;
1M &cnl GtUdln, tr. Juraj Puta, N.Y. and London, 1969),
the lack of unotation makes it cliJIicuJt to grasp the more
systematic upcct of the work which made it such a common
teachinl text in Persian Sufi cirdcs for maay ceaturics. The
most widely read COlDIDCDtary, in this coDDCCtion, wu no
doubt M ~ UhIjI·s MqfJtrJ, tIl-ICj4zfl ShtJrlJ Gubhtm
tll-Rb (ed. 'K. SamJ<t. Tebran, 1331 [h.s.]/19S8). written
sometime in the later 8th/14th century. (One may hope that
projected translations of at least partS of that o~ in both
Frmcb and English, will soon be completed.)
III
commentaries on Ibn cArabI and his metaphysicalI
theoloJical thoupt (tll-Durral tJl-FiJJcJlira and NtUld
al-NIIIflI) which are fortunately readily available in
rec:ent critical editions and (at least partial) EnJlish
translations (sec discussion below); a detailed, compre-
hensive understanding of the more philosophic parts of
the text is probably impossible without extensive refer-
euce to those sources. However, his translation (and
edition) is especially marked by an awareness of and
careful attention to JImI's systematic thought and
technical vocabulary (including a useful glossary of tey
terms) that is one of its several distiDct improvements
over the outdated English venion by Whinfield and
Kazvini. 101 The translator's brief iDtroduetion (pp. 1-
28)-again clearly designed for a paeral audience with
little or DO specialized background-is a marvel of
concision. since it covers not only Jlmlts life and
eventful historical context (including his scientific train-
ing, his extensive travels and contacts with the Ottoman
and Aq Quyunlu sultans, his Naqshbandt Sufi afIilia-
tions, and his equally famous contarlporaries in Herat's
"Golden Age" under l:Iusayn Bayqara, Behzld and
Mir CAli Shir Navi~) and the manuscripts, edition and
commentaries of the UJwa~iJ), but also a fascinating
summary of NaqshbandI principles of spiritual method
and a long list of JimY's principal writings (with
available traDSlatioDS and editions).101
101 This book, I..trH>U,: A Tr«ltworJ Sufu"., has JUeDtIy
been reprinted (London, 1918) with the very useful addition
of an introduction by Prof. S. H. N... (pp. xix-xxvii)
covering in a briefer form many of the same points as Y.
Richard's French introduction. and corm:ting WhinficJd's
extremely misleading introductory COlDIDCDtI. (Whinfidd'.
remarks-with their aIlusio to alIlOrti of"'causa1'" expo.
lions of Sufism in terms of Indian, Buddbist, and Neoplatonic
sources-Ire symptomatic of his iporauce of the Islamic
traditiollJ themselves, but do indicate the ftry real progrcu
that has been made in these Itudia over the put tentury,
when they are compared, for example, with the works of W.
Chittick and N. Beer on JImY diJcUllCd below.) That the
English translation itself is still quite UlCful is no doubt
explicable by the fact (explaiDcd by Whinficld at the end of his
oriainal Preface) that virtually aD of ~ inducting the entire
philosophic later part, was tranJ1ated not from the Pcnian.
but from a French traDllation by the renowned Pcnian
scholar Mrrd Mlltuumud ~ .
101 For more ~mplete aDd detailed references. ICC the
Pcnian introduction by W. Chittick to his editon of JImT'.
Ntlqd IIl-NIIfI1l. .. (discussed below). aDd the long bio-
bibliographical study by A. A. Hetmat. JIIftl .• .• Tehran,
1320 b.s., pp. 161-213. (The translator IICkno IccIFI thcIc
sources for his .bOOpd liIt.)
112 JOIIm/II of 1M A.merielm 0rimttJJ Society 101.1 (1981)
Within tbe historical context of this article (and
Jiven JImI'. modem reputation primarily as • poet
rather tban a mystical philosopher and theologian),
that list is especially reveaIina in several respects. Not
only are 32 of the 44 titles cited as Sufi subjects
(includina the renowned biosrapbica1 compilation
Ntl/al)41 al- Uns, a classic source for the most diverse
aspects of Sufism), but the majority of those worb
actually involve either commentaries on Ibn cArabl
(includinB two on the FJqiq til- /JiJcam) or elaborations
(mostly in Penian prose, but also in poetry and
even-notably with al-Dumzt aJ-Fakhira-in Arabic
prose) of classical themes and problems within his
"school"; often these analyses are applied, as in the
LJlwa~iJ;J itself, to the interpretation of mystical poetry,
including Sufi verses by Ibn al-Flri4 (both the MrmTya
aDd tbe Napn al-SulQJc), Rumi (the M1U1UIVl1, Jimi
himself (his /luNcTy4/), and Fathr al-Drn clrIqI
(Ashi CCat Ill- Lama Cit). 1be mention of the last of those
boob is especially sipifiamt, since clrlqrs /..amaCat,
with its masterful mixture of ecstatic Persian love
poetry and short prose interludes, not only provided the
obvious formal model for the 1Awa~i/:I, but was actually
composed under tbe immediate inspiration of ~r
aI-Drn aI-QanawT's 1edures on Ibn CArabI's thought. In
this reprd we can only briefly mentioD-so • not to
preclude the full-length review it richly deserves-the
recent study aDd English truslation of cIrlqi'. work by
William Chittick and Peter Lamborn Wilton [Divine
Flashes. Pp. 178 + xvi (Preface by S. H. Nur). New
York: PAULIST PREss. 1982.], and especially Prof.
Chittick's analytic:al introduction ('"The Mystical Philo-
sophy of the Divine Flashes j and extensive commen-
tary (and index of technical terms) brinainl out the
systematic metaphysical underpinnings of C lrIqI's
poetry. Those sections, which often cite or paraphrase
Jlmi's commentary on the lmnoCat (AshiCCat al-
LaI1Ul Ciit), in themselves constitute a substantial intro-
duction to QanawT and his interpretation of Ibn cArabi's
teaching, and clearly demonstrate its profound influence
on limi's own thin Dill. 103
The juxtaposition of these two widely read aDd
aenuinely popular worts of cIrlqi and lami is also a
MIl This wort is a model of the sort of backarouod that must
be Jiven in order to enable nOD-specialist readers to under-
stand the meaninl aod intentions 0( writers in IhcIe traditioDi.
In addition to the pbiJ~bic commentaries, the boot aIIo
iDdudes a fuclnatiDa-aod less demandina-bioaraPbical
and historical introduc:tio~ discussina c1rIqi'sl stay (aDd
subsequent influence) in Muslim Iodia .. weB u his role in the
l8IFr circle of ~r al-Drn QOnawT (see also DOteS 61-64,
Pan U).
reminder of the much broader-if still little studied-
problem of the Kjnftuences" of Ibn cArabT (and espe-
cially the vocabulary and systematic interpretations of
the Fup:q) in the later poetry and literature of tbe
Eastern Islamic world, in Turkish and Urdu (and even
Malay or Indonesian) as well 81 in Persian. Two
outward, easily discernable (and no doubt interrelated)
sips of that inftuence are the almost univenal use of
the systematic conceptions of this "school" (especially
such symbolically rich themes u wal}dln al-wujUd,
tajalliyiit, the "presences" of divine Being, etc.) in
com.mentaries on earlier, widdy read Sufi poets lICk as
ROmI and Ibn al_FIri4,IM and the pervasiveness of Ibn
cArabT's technical vocabulary (again wac1y as trans-
mitted by QOnawT and his JU«essors) throuJhout the
poetry compolCd in thOle lanauqes down throuah the
19th century. Readen familiar with this school can
readily note the existence of its tenniDolOJY and prob-
lems; but determining to what dearee those formal
metaphysical allusions (and Sufi lanpap in aeneral)
&dually represent conscious acquaintance with and
serious undentandinl of Ibn cArabI and his follower1,
rather than merely traditional (or even ironic) use of
those materials, requires close acquaintance with each
individual writer and his personal background (Sufi
afIiliations, studies, etc.) aDd an informed sensitivity to
their role in his writing. I"
104 See 0 notes 2, 63, 73, and 104 (for Sbabistlrr aod
LlbIjr). Amon. other, more iDlIuentiai poets whose wort was
monety muted by the ideas of Ibn cArabt, one ould a1Jo
have to mention "Ibn cArabT's faithful interpreter (Shams
aJ-Drn M. al-Tab1fz11 al-MqluibT(d. ca. 1406)"(A. Schimmel,
op.cit., p. 167], whose mysticalJhazals haft yet to find their
translator, and the fouodcr of the Nic uIJIbt order, Shih
Ni C matuJ1lh WaIT KirmIDl. A po))llIar, readily acceasible
introduction to his life aod subsequeat spiritual inJIuenc:e can
be fouod-aJOIII with translatio from his poecie orb aDd
those of his disciples aDd IUCCCIIOn (pp. 191-24S)-in Kingl
of Lo-w: T1u! History & PMtry 0/ 1M Ni Cmtltull4hI Sufi
Or., of I,,,,,, tf. P. L. Wilson and N. Pourjavacly, Tehran,
1978; see Index under "Ibn cAnbY,""'QODJ wI," aod aJ)dat
al-wujOd... (This study also lives some iadicatiOD of the vast
Persian biblioarapby on this subject, indudi. the extensive
editions of Shih NiCmatulllb's poetry aad prose treatises by
the modem NiCmatulllbJ shaykh, Javld NOrbabh.) In
French, see the brief introduction to J. Aubin's Jltltl,itIux
porn- 111 bqraplrk « Shah NicrruIlUlW Will; KnmDni
(Tehran, 1956), and the relevant DOticcs in H. Corbin's
Histoire • 111 phiJOMJPhk islIImiqw, Part II (full rd'eRDCa
n. 3, Part II), pp. 1l~-26 aDd 1130-33.
105 TIle interpreti~ problem is essentially DO di1rereot than
with, for example, the question of Platonic or Neoplatonic
 MODIS: Ibn cArabi and
Fortunately, in the case of JImi at least, that neces-
sary back&r0und is readily accessible, even in English
translation, through two recent in-depth studies (includ-
ing major critical editions) of some of his key meta-
physical prose writings-works which are perfectly
complementary, and which clearly represent the fruits
of years of research in this area. 1O' William Chittick's
carefully annotated critical edition of llmi's early
commentary on the FIJIilI al-Qikam (or rather, on Ibn
cArabi's own condensed metaphysical summary of it,
the Naqsh al-Fzqi4 [Naqd al-N~lfi SharI) Naqsh
al·FuPJI. Tehran, 1977.]-frequently cited in Professor
Richard's own introduction-actually constitutes a
sort of broad historical introduction (but proceeding
backwards in time) to the whole school of QOnawI,
since JImT often uses long excerpts from many of the
commentators discussed above (though not Amuli and
.nIl). A partial English translation (some I S%, summa-
rizing the main outlines, according to the author) is
now readily accessible in the first volume (1982) of the
JOUI7UIl of ,he Muhyiddin Ibn cArabi Society.l07
themes in Western vernacular literatures. One has a similar
range of possibilities, from conscious literary 14allusions"
(which can often be purely fonnal in nature) to more mean-
ingful and convincing poetic use by writen who may have had
little or no formal study of their "original" philosophic
sources. The sensitivity needed to judge these questions is
especially great with these later Islamic literatures because the
"'sobk-i Hindi" style (common to Persian, Turkish, Urdu, etc.
in the centuries following Jmtf) assumed such a tremendous
range of cultural references (including extensive knowledge of
metaphysics and theology) on the part of writers and readers
alike. (See the related observations at notes 56, 60, and 98 of
Part 11.)
106 Our comments bere are intentionally limited to a brief
description, given the framework of this article, so as not to
preclude the fully detailed reviews each of these works
deserves-especially sim:e both studies involve more extensive
and ambitious efforts than most of the translations which
have been our primary focus here.
107 "Ibn cArabrs Own Summary of the FU$IiT. 'The Imprint
ofthe Bezels of Wisdom:" pp. 30-93; the article is reprinted
here from two earlier issues of the journal Sophia Perennis,
vol. I (197S), pp. 88-128 and II (1976), pp. 67-106. This work
includes the complete translation of Ibn cArabi's work (Naqsh
a1-FuPil) itself. "Summary" is probably not the precise term
to describe its relation to the FUIiJI IIl-lJikam. given the
extreme concision of the Nllqsh (itself incomprehensible
without a commentary) and its greater focus on the ""meta-
physical" side of the Fulfll. to a certain extent prefillJring
QOnawi's own primary orientation.
his Interpretn'$, Part II 113
Jiml's 01- Du"at a/. Fakhira-an Arabic prose trea-
tise comparing the views of the Sufis (i.e., the school of
Ibn CArabI), the mutaka/limiin, and the Avicennan
philosophen on the central metaphysical/ theological
questions of Islamic thought (as expressed in their
common vocabuJary of the divine Essence and Auri-
butes), and implicitly demonstrating the superiority
and comprehensiveness of the Sufi undentanding of
each of those issues-is an even more fascinating
historical document, since it was apparently written at
the demand of the Ottoman sultan Muhammad II.
That detail illustrates both Jimi's contemporary
renown as a metaphysician (as well as poet), and the
truly "ecumenical" nature of Islamic higher culture
immediately prior to the historic divisions introduced
by the Safavid revolution. At the same time, this work
(and the intellectual situation it exemplifies) clearly
pointed the way toward the creative resolution of those
different points of view by ~adr ai-Din al-SbIrnzi
("Mulll ~adra,., d. 1050/1641), whose comprehensive
synthesis and readily accessible presentation of the
fundamental insights of Ibn CArabi and his commen-
tators (in language largely drawn from both Subrawardi
and Avicennan philosophy) was to dominate subse-
quent treatment of these problems in the Iranian
world, at least. 101
101 See the introductory section of our study. The Wisdom
of the Throne: An Introduction to lhe Philosophy of MuUa
StJdra (Princeton, 1981). For ~adra's own treatment of the
same questions summarized by JImI in the Durrm al.rakhira,
Part I of the Sadri'S work translated above (pp. 94-129)
should be supplemented by his more lengthy discussion of
those issues in his Kitiih aJ-Mash4 cir, tr. H. Corbin: I.e Livre
des Penetrllt;01l3 mililphysiqun (TehranI Paris 1964). (Prof.
Corbin's work includes an edition not only of the Arabic
original, but also of a 19th-century Persian translation by the
same Qajar prince who translated Jlmrs aJ-Durrat aI-raJchirll",
see n. 109 below.) For a more recent, increasingly scholastic
stase of this philosophic development-in which the imme-
diate inftuence of Ibn cArabi's thought is far less apparent-see
the translation by T. lzutsu and M. Mohagbegh of the
metaphysical part of the Ghurar a1·Filri~id (or ~hartt-i
Man~ilma·yi l:Iikmatj by Muna HIdI Sabzavlrt (d. 12841
1878), The Metaphysics of Sllbzavarl (Delmar, N.Y.• 1977);
the work also includes a translation (by P. Sprachman,
pp. 11-24) ofSabzavln-ts autobiography. a historically revea1-
ing document in its own right. The philosophic and tbeoloaical
developments of the intervening period in the Iranian (and
Twelver Shiite) milieu are partially covered in the works of
H. Corbin (with S. J. Ashtiyini) discussed in n. 3. Part II. As
already noted, the fate of JImJ's more philosophic writings
(and the broader intellectual tradition they represent) in most
114 JoumtIl olIM Amnicmt Orimllll SociII}' 101.1 (1981)
Professor Nicholas Heer's translation of the Durrllt
111-Fllelrirll [1M Pncious PetIT!. pp. 237 + ix. Albany:
SUNY Puss. 1979.], toaetJler with JlmI's own glosses
and the subsequent commentary by his foremost disci-
ple al-Lirr (d. 912/15(4), is (along with the Arabic
edition itself) a monument of industry and erudition,
whose careful philological attention to detail (illu-
strated, among other tbiDp, by the massive index!
glossary of Arabic technical terms, the identification
and discussion of JImI's sources for each of the three
"schools" discussed, location of subsequent commen-
taries, etc.) will make it especially useful to specialists
in this area. Ho~ver, little or DO attempt has been
made in the translation volume to explain the actual
philosophic and spiritual meaning and more universal
sipificauce of JImI's discussions, so that this text is
likely to appear opaque and merely "scholastic" (in the
pejorative sense) to l'CIden without extensive back-
ground in tbe traditions in question. In fact, the deeper
sipific:aDce (and onaoinl historical inftuence) of Jlmi's
wort is brought out far more clearly in the volume
contaiDina both the Arabic editions of these texts (also
by Professor Heer) aDd an edition of its Penian
translation-by the same Qajar prince who translated
MuI1I ~adrl's widely studied ~xtbook" on the same
ontological/tbeoloJical issues, the K. II1_MtUM ciT. 109
of tbe rest of tbe Islamic world ItilI remains to be explored;
further developments were c:eruiDly not limited to Salavid
Iran.
For JlmY's predecaIon amona commentaton of Ibn <Arabi
correlatilJl the elements or contribuUoDi of 1IIIf/, ctll/1. aDd
bsIif-wbicb could be very looeely conDeded with the meth-
ods or prauppoaitiODI of blam, AvicenDaD pbilOIOphy, aDd
Sufism-see tbc discussions of Amun. Ibn Turta, Ibn AbJ
JumbOr al-Atad>J. aDd N..-fT above. JImI', work is diltiJ).
guilbcd primarily by its more ')'Itematic and lebolastic
praentation of the "rational" (ctll/1I) formuJatiolll of each of
these intdlqctual traditions.
lot See D. 108 for H. Corbin's edition aDd translation of the
M4Ih4<ir. The volume of editions of tIl-DurrtU IIJ-Filkhiril aDd
the relaIed commentaries aDd Persian traDslatiOD (Wo. XIX in
the "Wisdom of Persia" Series, Tehran, J9S0) is also note-
worthy for the 10lIl introduction by the Pasiaa editor,
A. Musavi 8ebbehaDi; it is a philosophically ICrious aocl
creative attempt to rethink the issues which have traditionally
been taken to clistiDpish the schools in qucstioa aDd thereby
to ao beyond the standard repetition of stereotyped ICbolastic
deKriptions. That iodcpeodent viewpoint is relalively unique
amon, the traditional (Le., non Wcstem-edueated) Iranian
philosophers clealin, with these schools of later Islamic
thouabt.
-lbat 19th-centwy translation of JImI'. work is only
one sip of the viaorous, onaoin. ~lopJDCDt in
Salavid and Qajar Iran (and the Shiite centers of cIraq)
of this school whose Ianpaae and problematic is 10
deeply rooted in the study of Ibn cArabr-a historical
development we are fortunate enoqh to be able to
follow in some detail only through the coincidence of
that ~'I relative insulation from direct colonization,
plus the devoted eft'orts of a handful of more recent
scholars. However, when one loots at the actual
location of manuscripts of works by JImI or any of the
other writers (iDcludina Ibn cArabJ himself) dilcuued
above-or at the even greater multitude of poets and
literary figures who transmuted their contributions
into many laJllWlFS-it is clear that their influence, at
least up to the 19th century, was probably at least as
great and divene in the higher culture and among the
Sufi orders both of the Ottoman empire and the
Muslim regions of India and Central Asia;l1O our
relative iporanee of those later developments in those
rqions reftects factors other than any lack of sources.
H the Sufi writinp of cAbd aI-QIdir al-Jazl'itI
(d. 130(/1883) discussed in the following section appear
to US today 81 a sudd~ mysterious -renaiIAnce" or the
creative study of Ibn cArabY in the Arabic world, II t that
is simply a reminder of how much research remains to
be done in this <and other) areas of later Islamic
tbou8ht.
11. A case in point is Prof. RicbanI'1 mention of a com-
mentary on the l..tnN>tI) by one of JImi'I penonal dilciplel
which was nc:eotly di~ in a library in Pekina (details
onp.29).
Equally far a6eJd is the IDdoDeliaa Q..irf Sufi and
Malay poet l;Iamza aI-FaDfiIrJ (late 10th/16th century), who
MbeIoJllcd to the school of mysticism chal'8derized by nama
like Ibn al-cArabJ and c~- (article "l:Iamza FaDfOrr by
P. Voorboeve in E/2_ III, p. ISS). (We baYC DOt been able to
COD ult the study by Syed Muhammad Naquib aI-AUas., TIle
My,tidmr of /JIImZIIIIl-FlI1IIf1rl, Kuala Lumpur, 1970, cited
in A. Schimmel, op. cit., p. 354.)
Another, historically C\I'CIl more ioIIuential, example would
be the later Kubrlwt Sufi cAlI aI-HUDIldIDI (d. 786/I38S),
author of stiJl another COllUlleDtary on the FUIiiI tIl-/jiJulm,
who played an important role in the cstablisbmeot of Sufiam
(and Islam more generally) in Kashmir; see H. Corbin,
Histo;,~ ... , Part II (D. 3, Part II), pp. II J6-17, and
additional biblioJl'aphic references in the article "CAli
HaDUldlDI'"by S. M. StaB, £/2,1, p. 392.
III Sec n. 4, Part )( fOl' recent studia of the 18th-«otury
Moroccan Sufi Ibn cAjIba, for whom Ibn cArahr seems to
have played a role that more fully reftccu the broad raDF of

VI. cAbd al-QIdir al-JazI:>iJf(I222/1807-1300/1883)
is today no doubt most widely knOWD, at least in the
nations immediately concerned. as the leader of Alger-
ian resistance to the p1Idual invasion and colonializa-
tion of that country between 1832 and 1847. However,
the two recent Frencb translations of parts of his KU4b
IlI-MtlW4qtf, a vast work including his lectun:s. medita-
tions. and a sort of "spiritual diary" from the decades
of his exile in DamMQIS (18S1-1883), present a VerJ
different _pcct of his charader and historical penona:
an extraordinary Sufi writer and teacher who-if these
selections can be taken u representative-was not only
responsible for reviving the teaebinp of the Shaykh,
but was also himself in many ways a sort of Ibn cArabi
rebom. 112 Compared to the relatively "scholastic" tradi-
tions disaJsscd above, cAbd al-Qidir's wort (like Ibn
cArabrs) consistently conveys a stOkin., UDJDiitakable
sense of true originality, of the fresh and compelling
expression of immediate spiritual experience, JrOunded
in the most profound penonal reftection on the Koran
and tuuJrth as ~ll as extensive study of the works of
Ibn cArabi and their conunentators. That impression
of immediacy and authenticity is no doubt a reftection
both of cAbd al-QIdir·s distinctive personal virtues and
at the same time of his indebtedness to a broader (not
merely literary) tradition of study and applic:ation of
the Shaykh'l writinp in a pradical, effective spiritual
context.
All of tbcsc features are carefully explained in
Michel Chodkiewia' remarkable introduction to his
scJcction of shorter chapters from the K. tIl-MilW4qif
[Ecrit.r .rpmtwu. By OUR ABD EL-lC.ADD. pp. 226.
Paris: EDITIONS DU SWJL. 1982.], a text bida is itself
a mine of valuable historical references. To beain with,
in n:calling the successive external staFI of cAbcI
biJ writinp aDd aetivitiea-althoup it is diflicuJt to know
how far one can geoeraIiz.e from tbis single case.
m Amolll the sipificant biopaphiul flCtl DOted in the
translator's Introduction (teriu spiritue&, f\lll refereoca
below), proceediDl from the outward lips inward, are his
having lived ICftrai decUs in the boule where Ibn cArabI
died.in Damascus, his beiDa buried DCXt to the Shaykh there
(until the more recent removal of his remains to AIFria), his
n:ceptioo of the k/rIrqtl tIIcbtDfye (ICe also n. 113 below) from
lUI father, Stdt MMu\1yf aJ-~ .. aDd his repeated compdlina
visiOIlS and encoUDters with the Mspiritual reality" (~J)w)
of the Sbaykh ai-Akbar; ICC the cIiKussioa of tbcse iDcidaatl,
with full referenc:a to the specific pusaaes in the MIIW4qtf, in
M. Chodtiewicz's boot, pp. 28 IDd 187-88.
The resemblance of cAbd aJ-QIdir' writina to that of Ibn
cArabY, both in style aDd content, is discussed in detail below.
liS
al-Qldir' own lpiritual initiation-his youthful recep-
tion of the lhirqtJ alcbilrrYIl from his own father,
himself a Qidiri master;lU his encounter with the
DOted Sbaykh ~hI1id al-Naqshbandi durins his first
pilgrimage and visit to Damascus (at aae 20); and his
matUre study with the ShldhiII sbaykh Mw,ammad
al-Fisi at Mecca (in 1269/1863)-Mr. Cbodkiewicz
clearly brinp out an indispensable dimension of Ibn
CArabI's influence and spiritual function wbidl is at
once more fundamental and yet inherently Jess visible
than its occasional I&J1istorical" or literary manifesta-
tions. 1J4 However, in cAbd al-Qldir's own exceptional
case-again not unlike Ibn CArabT's-tbe usual forms
and methods of the Sufi path (the spiritual combat of
the murTd. the "one who desires" union) appear to have
only supplemented and confirmed a special vocation
113 It is important to Gte, as the traaslator streueI, that tbe
/cJIirqtl lIklNriyrl (which CAbd aI-QIdir's gandfatber had
earlier received in £&ypt) did not distiDpil)a a separate Sufi
·order," but was transmiutd by certain shayths of IC\'CI'aJ
'GTTq4Is, includiDa (at least mOlt n:cauly) the NaqsbbaDdlya
and SbldhilTya. Especially intcratinl in this reprd ii die
JODI historical note (pp. 183-84) on Ibn cArabJ'1 own sibilas
or chains of spiritual initiation (of which the DOte lilts five,
three ,oina bact to the Prophet aDd two to ~); it abo
mentions the initiatic sibIla (rom Ibn cArabJ do. . to cAbd
al-QIdir. all of them '""Iinnm, with QtinawI. (ApiB. ICC
QtlDawr', central role in the IiDes of direct ttaDlmission of the
FUlfil outJinc:d by O.Y., Hinoin . ..• n. Appendix S.)
I U Especially valuable ia this reprd is die exteDlive informa-
tion (pp. 3S-38 aDd accDlllpUlyina DOtes), drawn larJdy from
still unpublished sources Mel ~ studies by £ayptian &Del
Syrian scholars. on tbe inIutDcet of CAM al-QIdir's teaCbin,
and personal example on contemporary Sufi Shaykhs (pri-
marily of the ShldhilI aDd NacpbbaDdI orden) aDd their
SUCCCSIOn down to the praent. On &BOther left), but no Iaa
important. the translator . . notes (p. 35) that it was 'Abel
al-Qldir who financed the 1m publication (in Cairo) of the
complete tIl-F~ tIl-M~.
On tbe historicaI plane which is our main focus beret this
introductiOD abo oft'en a valu ble lummary (with leDJthy
refereaca in tile notes) of three satient iJIucs in the lolli
cootroveny surrouDdm, Ibn cArabl &Del the FIqiq al-lJihm
(see n. S. Part II, aDd a nwnber of otber puaaaes above). The
questioDs dilcuued Ilere (pp. 32-3S) arc the "faith of Pha-
raoh,.. the .eternity" of punishment in HeD. aDd the ·univer-
sality· of the Sbaykh'l spiritual outlook; each or them is
treated, with reference to both Ibn CAnbY and cAbd aJ-Qldir,
with a clarity and coDCilioa that mates tbii teetion Uldul
even for t Ole who are not already acquainted with thae
disputed sections of the FUJi4.
116 JounttI1 01111I A1Mrlctm 0rimIIIl SocWty /01.1 (1981)
for the more direct and relatively effortless path of
"ecstatic j))umination"(jGdhbcr) that typifies those rare
individuals "chosen" by God (the "muTldj.lIS Yet ..
the translator indicates (pp. 25-26)t it is perhaps even
more cbancteristic that having bad this transforming
experience of enlighteomeot (\1rith the CODC()mitant
insipt aDd passion that illuminates all tbac mIlWilqif),
cAbd al-Qldir should subsequently return to follow the
guiducc of a more traditional master (the SbldhiIT
sbaykb M. al-Flst, at Mecca) and carefully retrace all
the accustomed staaa and states of the more ....ormal"
patht in order to t:dcct his own insight .. spiritual
guide and teachert 16 the activity that largely occupied
the final decades of his life.
I U cAbel aI-QIdir speaks of his own unuaual palh ud draws
tbc 4istiaction bet1fteD these two way.-while uDdcrlinina
the daDFn aod actvaotaaa of each-in lOme quiIe revea1iDa
autobiop'aphical remarks in MtIWtIlf 18, the ICCODd ldection
(pp. 46-49) translated here. The distinction of muritJ aod
IIIIII'fd alluded to ~ as M. Chodkiewicz points out (referriDa
to Ibn cArabI's brief Lniw,4/), is taken over from the Shayth;
there is a more adequate aDd extremely cleat discuIsioD of this
same distinction at the end of Ibn al-cArabrI MtlWilqlc
tIl-NIIjIim. summarized by Asin P~ 1'/"" CluUliIIIrUI
(Frmch traDslation dilcuued in Pan I), p. 319. (Ibn cArabl'.
41/W:t11 tIl-$al"YCI-the CuD ranae of titles is aivca in O.Y.,
DO. 31 S-a shon work aIao inclUded, in inverse order, in tbe
=
FUliiJJat (11,.128-34 ch8pt. 73, question IS3), b. been
translated by R. T. Harris in tbe JOumtll a/1M Mullyitldin
Ibn cA,.; Soeilly, III (1984), pp. X1-S4, in a popular version
with a miJlimum of notes or explanations; it should be used
with ektreme caution in mldina other worb of the Shaykh,
since the -definitions- Jiven here often touch OIl 0DIy a limited
upcct or a sinak meaniDI aDlODI the multitude of ICIIIa that
a Jiven term may haw in his own writinp.]
Although cAbel aJ-Qldir's own reference to a spcc:iaI divine
"attraction" or jtldhiNI in the pauaJe just meationed woukl
aIJow one, in purdy liquistic terms., to call him -1JIIljdJriIb,-
we must stress that there is nothing either in his writinp or in
what is described here of his life that would sugcst the $On of
patbolOlical chanIcIeristicI (IOJDdima rather cupbemiaticaUy
called "divine madaasj that are often UIOCiaIcd with the
term -rrt4}dIri1b to in many lslamic countries. Such a usqe
could be hiPly misleading ICC, for example, cAbel al-Qldir's
typically ""sober" remarb coocerni1Ia al-lJaIJIj". reIatM "mad-
ness- or intoxication" pp. 4S. 88" etc. (FortUDatdy-aod quite
exceptioaally &IDona the French traDllations dealt with in this
article-this book is provided with aD excellent lndexf)
..6 Apin (sec: n. 112) the year ad a half cAbel aI-QIdir spent
in Mec:c:a aDd Mecliu marked by 0 extnordiDary set of
symbolic "coincidencea"meotioned by the trauslator (pp. 2S-
26, aM, the biopaphy by the Emir'. son wbida is one of tile
Certainly it is this unifying practical aim of spiritual
pedaaolY (rather than either Sufi "apoloaeUcs" or
theoretical elaboratio.. pursued for their own sate),
an intention constaDtly illumined and guided by imme-
diate personal experience and insight into the issues in
question, that typifies cAbd al-Qldjr'. writinp (or at
least the texts transletM here) aDd distinguisbes them
10 strikingly from many of the interpreters diJcussed
above. 117 The central mctaphysical/thcologic:al prob-
lems and intuitioDSt and even the technical vocabulary,
are all essentially the same u in Ibn cArabT and such
commentators as Qt1DdJ and KlsbInI-and Mr. Cbod-
kiewicz stresses and elaborately documents cAbd
al-Qldir's profouDd debts to those authon ll' -but
they arc treated here in • practical spiritual perspective
main lOurces for the introduction). In Medina, be ti\'ed aDd
kept hil spiritual retreat _ the site of the boule of AbO BUr,
adjoinina the mosque of the Prophet; he IIChiewd his culmi-
nating. -hisbcst depee of illumination" while medilatina in
the caw of Kin, site of the Prophet'. fint revelation.
For the sipificance of this careful ..retracina" of the
spiritual Path common to IDOIt individuals, in rdatioD to the
lilk of this wo~ see n. 119 below.
J 11 It is important to recopize that cAbel aJ-Qldir'. MtIWiiqif
are for the IDOII part directed toward a very diJrerem audieace
tbaD many of the worb in the IChool of Qlaawt, klsbIDI,
etc.: they are not tryinc to convince, defend, or persuade a
1arJer "'ublic"; DOt tryiua to ~xpJain" a text in systematic
aDd continuous famon; aod not direded toward other
cw.n..~ in aeoeraI, but raaher toward sillCere ud ..,ractiJin.-
seekers. The similar clarity aDd clirectnas one finds in certain
of the worb of Jm (see above) may refted the same sort of
cooditioDS. In oy cue, the relatnely intimate spiritual nature
of these texU, more jmmediately JI'OUDded in experience,
means that there is rdatiwJy leu need for explanation aDd
preliminary backgroUDd f« modern readers.
til For the more explicit rdereaca to Ibn CArabi aDd his
works, ICC the introduction, pp. 21-11 and index under the
appropriate beadinJl, pIuI tbe elaborate nota-b8Ied on the
FUIfJI, FIItilI)4t, 41iJ1lbM, and otber worb-detailiD& his
direct borrowinp aDd debts to the Shaykh. HoWCYCl', a the
translator IU~ cAbel aJ..QIdir hu 10 perfectly recreated
the problematic and auidiDa insights of Ibn cArabI that the
mere enumeration of explicit quotations or allusions is in
ibelf quite milrepreKlltaane. An aoecdote be recounts (p. 31)
sugests 1OmethiD& both of cAbel aI-Q..ir's cleYotiOD to tbe
Sbaykh and his deep conc:em for the exactitude of his
teacbiDa: he once sent two of his dose dilciples to x'onya to
verify certain readinp in his own text of the Fudi/:tIIt by
comparina them willa Ibn cArabf's own autoaraPb maoUlCl'ipt
preserwd in a library there (the IUDe manuscript which is the
basil for Osman Yahia's new ICieDtific edition).
 MoUJS: Ibn cArtlbi lIIId hU lnlerpnl6l, PtlI'lll
whose immediacy and wriversality (and resultinl coher-
ence) are far more directly accessible to non-specialist
readen. In sum, cAbd al-Qldir is not so much "com-
mentinl on'" Ibn cArabY (or his IUCCCIIOn) as actually
recreatinl the Shaykb-S deepest intentions. The differ-
ence of penpective' palpable, and makes this work
itself an excellent introduction to the study of Ibn
cArabrs own writinp, pven its relative simplicity aDd
clarity of exposition.
The 39 borter Mhalts'" (often only two or three paaes
lona) translated in this selection 1I' usually beJin with a
short Koranic citation (or occasionaDy a sayinl of the
Prophet) illustratinl and illuminating a particuJar spiri-
tual insiabt or problem and pidina a more extended
reflection-sometimes didactic, sometimes quite per-
sonal and even ecstatic-on its metaphysical, moral, or
theolopcal implications. The result, at ita best, is
neither a sermon nor formal (even mystical) exeaes' ,
but sometbinl much more intimate and direct, namely,
the communication of what Ibn cArabi often ca1II the
MUhartl,'" the "allusion" or inocr mcaninl that applies
pccificalJy to ooc's own immediate spiritual condition.
This aspect of the Mawlqifis especially apparent in the
more intimate, autobiopaphical P..... (e..., sections
] and 36-37 here)-a IOrt of writin. relatively rare in
Arabic mystical JJurtllUU, but revealing the very esscoc:e
of the spiritual work and relation between master and
disciple-in which cAbd aI-Q1dir recOUD his own
repeated experiences of what he calls (apin foOowinl
Ibn cArabY) "ilqi'," that is, the direct inner awareness
of the -projc:dion" into one's conscious of a p
of the Koran together with the pecific meaninl
uniquely appropriate to one's spritual state at that
119 CloseD from &IDODI almoR 400. mOlt of evidently
much Ion.... siDce the Arabic edition taka up three 1arF
voluma; there is a concordaDce (po 221) of tile FreDCh
translatioD aud DUlDberiD& of sectiolD here . the ~ to his fulldioft
IJ'ODCIiaI numberin. and , . . of the Arabic: text.
The lipific:aDcc of the title is carefully cKplaiued at
pp. 27-28. More importaDt than any aUUIioa to the ort
of the same name by the fam
M. Cbodtiewicz nota.' its
early Sufi
by Ibil C
itrId..
for o.
mIIWqif, in the context of the iritual path, is the .. or
Matoppinl" place between t 0 spiritual ItatiOllS (mazil or
"..,am) where tbe tra~ (dllk) rccciws the pidaoc:e or
instructiOID that eubIe him to realize funy and in deIail the
piritual UDdentaDclina appropriate to the Ii station.
There is a profound inner connection bctweeD the
--Spiritual itinerary" tnIced out in detail in writiIl and
CAW al-Qldir'l decision (see D. 116 above) to rctunI and
retrace in full the ditl'ertIlt required of IDOIt spiritual
pilarima.
117
moment. l20 The majority of these selections, ho ever,
are comparatively more didactic and impenonal; often
reftecting cAbd al-Qldir~1 own teaebin& activity (includ-
illl daily lectures in his later yean at Daawau),
they all revolve aroUDd the central trausfonnin. insiaht
into the transcendent Unity of Beine (MwtJl)dtJl
aJ-wujildj and the apparent paradoxes and potential
misuDdcntandinp that iDevitably result wbeo the aware-
ness of that reality is approached as an external
~heory'" rather than the expression of an inner realiza-
tion. Ul Formally speaking. both the problems aDd the
reapoDICS offered here had for the most part 10 been
classic in the "school" of Ibn cArabL But what 10
po mully distinpisbes cAbd al-Qldir'l writina, even
on the most apparently abstract metaphysical to . ,
from that of bInI, for example-and hat at the
same time 10 strikingly unites him .tb Ibn cAra -_.
his constant contact with and reference to the imme-
diate vision, the Source UDderlyina those formulations.
and (scarcely distiDJUisbable from the precedina point)
his fresh, authentic realization of the reality aDd inten-
tions of the oran and the Propbet (via I,tMllth) as
they are lI'asped preciJely at that level of immediate
pen:eption. IU
I.
See apec:ially CAW aI-QIdir's RYa1iDa dacription of
• pbenolDCDOll in the opeDiDa MtIWqIf(= ICCtion 36, p. IS7
in the traIIIIation). where be states that "everythinl in these
MtltNqifia of this nature." OtIIer explicitly autobioJrapbiC81
all ions to this pbeno on QII be fo here in ICdio
2~and9.
One is raDinded of J I Jdatcd the tqinain
of tbe LtJwi~iJ.t (ace abcnte) be is oaly a r"
( ~ in the ICDIC of ODe who ~ and conveys the
true. intended me·ni.... Mlhout coJoriDa it 'th uythina of
• own adclitioll)-a t that evideady refen JDaiDly to
. poetry in that wort. (See abo Ibn cArabItl 0 reference
l4rj&lntan-in this ¥Cry speci6c ICDIC-in .
introduction to the FUlDllII-ljiJulm; the FutiJJ)IIt contains
many more detailed eKplaDatioDl of the importance of this
awareneu and prOCCll of ......iation,.. in repnI to the 10
both of the prophets ad the -.ainu" [4IWli".a;)].)
111 Althoop the r attempted t6 divide thae
selectio conc:crnin, IbD CArabl'1 teaebina topically-
aa:ordina to luch themes - the ....nity of BeiDa... ""theo-
phaDia," UOocI aDd ,ods," -intermediate C&UICa." and ~
Prophet..-the contro' focus of CAW al-Qldir's intcrat
and· .&ht' 10 sreat ODe scaredy notica iIlteDded
traIIIi . from ODe bject to other.
In In this volume, the "ecstatic.. dcmcDt is openly
aprcued in the d . poem (section aiO. p. In. the only
.election taken from his - ) and in the openiq JltJWqif.
It' a1moIt thoup the traasIator inteacIed the rat of the
118 JOUI7IIII 01 lite AmnictJn 0rVn1lll ~/y 107.1 (1987)
This ecstatic ground of cAbd al-Qldir's (and Ibn
cArabrs) spiritual insight-reminiscent, in its most
direct lyrical expressions, of a sort of s1ul1lh or of the
rhapsodic 6htw1b of ROml-is even more directly
apparent in some of the 19 poems from his introduction
to the K. td-Milwlqi/. translated by Cbarles-Andd
Gills [Polmes MetllJ1hysiquu. By eMIR ABD AL-QADIa
L'ALGDIEN. pp. 80. Paris: l.Es EDmONS DE L-OEUVRE.
1983.], which form an excellent complement to tbe
more expository prose of the preceding work ( ithout
which, one should add, they would often be diflicult to
UDdentand).lu A few of these poems are complex, but
relatively conceptual summaries of metaphysical issues
and paradoxes usinC a traditional Sufi imaaery
(MajnOn-Layll, etc.); IS such, they are often remini-
scent of the elaborate metaphysical venea that usually
open the chapten of the FUliiJJ4t and the Fr,qtq.'24
But the best and most powerful of them, transceodina
and transforming those traditional materials, directly
express that decisive unitive (and truly univasal) insight
. which is at the core of all of CAbd al-Qidir's (and Ibn
cArabI's) writing t through daring reference to the
theophany of the divine "I" or in an intimate dialogue
of the soul with God that cannot but rec:all similar
poems of St. John of the Cross. In translation, at least,
these verses are surely as fresh and evocative as the
most celebrated poems from Ibn cArabr. lyrical TiII'-
ork, aeaaaDY more elaborately MdoctriJlaJ" aDd theoretical,
to be taken _ a sort of COIIUDeDtary on thoK two framina
selectio -ad fOf.them to ItaDd for the ilwlispcnuble
of what comes between. (AI DOted below, the poems from the
Introduction to the Mawaqif are often in this ~ openly
ecstatic key.)
IlJ The traDJl.ator's YCI'Y brief introduction, wbicb tells us
virtually nothin, about either the MIIWiIqif or their author,
appears to Mlumc coDiiderabJe previous acquaia,ena: with
botb-a bac:taround wbich is fortulWely supplied by the
prec:c:cIiJII wort. Likewise the broader doctrinal or theoretical
context of the poems- bich may wd1 have beeD supplied in
the interveDinl pl'OlC ICICtioIII of cAbeI aI-QIdir'l 1DtrocIuctiOD,
about which we are told DOthiDJ!- apin apparemly taba
for panted, sioce the nota are limited mainly to identif"yinl
the molt evident Koranic quotations aDd aUUliODS.
114 It is iDtereItiDI to DOte dult the poems of tIUa 1011 are
distinpishcd by cAbeI al-Qidir91 adcln:asinI his reader in the
second peno~ like a WIeber .nth' udentI (as in the more
prosaic parts of the MtIWlIqifmcntioaed above). But the more
intimate-aDd convincina-vena are thOle in tbe int penon
or in immediate diaIope with God. often with complex
allusio to the correspondina ~oranic: modes of addreuinl
the Prophet.
jum4n al-Asltwiiq. And if their underlying unity of
insipt aDd perception is such that they could hardly be
distinguished, in that respect, from the works of the
Shaytb ai-Akbar, cAbd al-Qldir is clearly far from
being a MdiJciple" in the sense of an epigon. One's
impression, here u throUJbout tbe M.w6qif, is n~ 10
much of dependency or derivation, but rather (to
borrow his own Ianguqe) of t 0 equals drinkiDl from
a common Source.
Finally, the recent translation of a letter of cAbd
al-Qldir to the Socilti il.fiiltique (written in 1855 from
Buna in Turkey, where the Emir fint lived after being
released from imprisonmeDt in France) [Lellre iIIU
Fr~IIb: Notn btivn dutinks II MIX qui comprm-
IImt, pOW' ilttiTer liJttentioll nil' tin problhnD euen-
lieU. Tr. RENE R. KHAWAM. pp. 279. Paris: PHDus.
.19n.l,'l.' brings out a very different upect of his
m The oriaiul title of the letter is that traDS1atcd as the
subtitle of this traftS1&tioIl. We shoUld also note me recent
rqHIblicatioD (EditioDi BouI1ama, Tunis, n.d.) of the on,uw
French traaslatioD (in 18S8) by Gustave Du~ u livre
d' cAbMl Ktuln ... , wbicb is revealina of the prejudicca of
his day (as Mr. Khawuo points out at areat Jenath), but which
is also provided with exteDsive nota aDd an iDdex (pp. 181-
370) which lbow some Ierious effort (baed on the YCI'Y
limited kDowJcdae avWble at that time) to acquaiat tbe
ruder with the traditio. of IIIamic pbilolophy UDCIerlyiDa
cAbd aI-Q"ir',leUer. R. I.ha am's traDIlatioa illOmewhat
doter to the Arabic, mel aiws a useful cbronoJoay (pp. 3S-S9.
prinaarily political. some inttreltin& bioIraphical
details) and aleJection of 8ClCOUDtI (pp. U 1-16: <II Abel d-Kader
en Fraocej by French coatemporaria, which aptly co.~
the perception of the dipity and ,piritual force of the Emir',
personality even by overtly hOlliIe witneues.
However, neither translation Jiva much inklina of the
actual content of tbe tnelibou of lJIamic thoupt (aDd
especially the IsJamic polibcal philosophy of A viceDna, TiIA,
and Ibn KbaIcIOn) UDCIerlyiDa and informinl cAbeI aI-QIdir',
""brief ranarb." (One rcwaIinI aDd Jrimly hUlDOrOUl example
is hen cAbd al-Qldirt • • on to the MahdI's unifyina
mankind ~ the onl--a detail specified in numerous
I:-/ftlt. frequently cOllllDCDted on (but ill a very difl'erent
cliRclion!) by Ibn cArabt-is tRated • a pracieDt "'prophecy"
(p. 164) of the liberation of AJacria.) The modem traDIIator's
fn:queat impassioned -ida, while Iymptomatic of the co -
quenca of the contemporary iporaoce (me.t Itritioa pre-
cisely in the lslamic: world) of the complexity aDd univerulity
of the divene intellectual traditions underlyina cAbd aI-QIdir's
letter, are in te'\UliD1 contrast with cAbeI aI-QIdir'l own
serene and (for those aware of the traditions in quation)
doIeIy reasoaed diIcoune.
 MoUJS: Ibn cArtlbi tDUl /aU 1nI6preters, PtlTI 11
thought-his acquaintance with the traditions of
IaIamic philosophy, and more particularly of political
philosophy, transmitted (in his case) through such
fipres u AviCCllJUl, TOIi, and Ibn Kha1dtin. This
work, in its more philosophical sections, is a brief (and
relatively unoricinal) paraphrase of the buic concep-
tions of those authors concerning man'5 nature and
perfection u I&knowcr,*26 aDd of the eaentia1SUidinl
J» cAbcI al-QIdir'l own Sufi collUllitmenll and UDdentaDd-
illl aR mOlt evident here in his aUusiODS to the rdevaDt IOrts
or metaphysical IObowIecI&e- (CUm) coDSiderecl • maD'S
hipeIt e~ and in his statement at the eDd of his cIiIcuaion
of prophecy (p. 164): IOIf IOIDeODC came to IDe wisbiDa to
know the way of the truth, and provided that be knew my
laquqe perfectly well, I would lead him to the way or the
tnlth without difliculty-DOt by prasurin. him to .ccept my
ideas, but limply by matiDa the truth appear before Jail eyes,
119
role of the prophets and the communities they establish
in enablina man to realize that perfectioa. What .
remarkable here is cAbd aJ-Qldir's matter-of-fact reli-
ance on that (reputedly extinct) intellcctuU tradition,
apparently in no way felt to be incompatible with his
Sufism or -alien" to Islam, and the extraordinary
clarity and serenity with which it helped him to compre-
hend and come to terms with the dramatic: historical
changes that marked his own life and times. As such, it
is an appropriate temibder of other, no Jess univenal
and humanly significant dimensions of later Islamic
thought which have ~ become, if anythin& even
more unknown (and misunderstood) than the manifold
contributions of Ibn cArabI and his interpreten.
in such a way that he could not avoid acknowlcdaiDI it"
(tranIlated here from the FreDCh). If otbiftI e , NCb ordJ
au. . * spirit with wbidI be approaebed the M~