Mansouri Occult-Mysticism 2021

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201
brill.com/jss
Walāya between Lettrism and Astrology

The Occult Mysticism of Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī (d. c. 787/1385)
Mohammad Amin Mansouri

University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
Amin.mansouri@mail.utoronto.ca
Abstract
This article examines Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī’s occult narratives of sainthood (al-walāya)
with a focus on his Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ fī sharḥ al-fuṣūṣ, a voluminous commentary on Ibn
al-ʿArabī’s (d. 638/1240) Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam. I argue that Āmulī uses lettrism, astrology, and
alchemy to construct occult narratives that advocate for the supremacy of sainthood
over prophecy (al-nubuwwa). I first examine the relation between Āmulī’s lettrism
and Shiʿism by concentrating on Shiʿi narratives about the mysterious occult books,
Jafr and Jāmiʿa, that are transformed into the macrocosmic and microcosmic books
in Āmulī’s work. The focus then shifts to Āmulī’s analysis of the complex relation
between alif, bāʾ, and the dot written under bāʾ as the first three components of the
basmala formula. As will be seen, Āmulī uses astrology in a similar fashion to illustrate
the supremacy of sainthood by associating the heavenly planets with prophecy and
the zodiacal signs with sainthood. He also draws on alchemy, or what he identifies as
“spiritual alchemy (al-kīmiyāʾ al-maʿnawī),” to argue for the supremacy of sainthood.
Keywords
occult sciences – lettrism – astrology – alchemy – sainthood – prophecy
1 Introduction
Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī is one of the most profound Shiʿi philosophers whose
voluminous works cover various subjects such as philosophy, occult sci-
ences, theology, and the Qurʾanic commentary. One of the important aspects
of Āmulī’s work is his interest in occult properties of letters and astrological
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2021 | doi:10.1163/22105956-bja10011

162 Mansouri
entities. As will be explained in this paper, he uses occult sciences to par-

ticularly explain the supremacy of sainthood (al-walāya) over prophecy (al-
nubuwwa), and his works display a complex negotiation between occult
sciences, Shiʿism, and Akbarian thought. Occult sciences (ʿulūm al-gharība or
ʿulūm al-khafiyya) are different branches of knowledge that Muslims inherited
from various places such as Babylonia, ancient Persian, Egypt, and Alexandria.1
A Shiʿi native of Āmul and Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī’s contemporary, Shams al-Dīn
Āmulī (d. 753/1351), in his Nafāʾis al-funūn (The Precious Arts), a three-volume
encyclopedic compendium of various branches of knowledge, provides a com-
prehensive compilation of the various branches of occult sciences. He dedi-
cates a whole section to Sufism (ʿilm-i taṣawwuf ),2 and an elaborate subsection
to lettrism (ʿilm-i ḥurūf ).3
Shams al-Dīn Āmulī classifies lettrism as a subset of Sufism, but he also
regards many other occult sciences, such as alchemy (kīmiyāʾ), producing
visions (sīmiyāʾ), dream interpretation (taʿbīr-i khāb), physiognomy ( firāsat),
astrology (nujūm), and geomancy (ʿilm-i raml), as legitimate natural (ṭabīʿī) and
mathematical sciences (riyāḍī).4 He particularly regards lettrism as a univer-
1 See Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Science: An Illustrated Study (n.p.: World of Islam Festival:
Publishing Company Ltd, 1976), 206.
2 Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Maḥmūd Āmulī, Nafāʾis al-funūn fī ʿarāʾis al-ʿuyūn, ed. Sayyid
Ibrāhīm Miyānjī, 3 vols. (Tehran: Intishārāt-i Islāmiyya, 1381 sh./2002), 2:91–110.
3 Āmulī, Nafāʾis al-funūn, 2:91–110. Also, see Matthew Melvin-Koushki, “Powers of One: The
Mathematicalization of the Occult Sciences in the High Persianate Tradition,” Intellectual
History of the Islamicate World 5 (2017): 179.
4 Āmulī, Nafāʾis al-funūn, 3:158–281, 537–56. It is important to note that the distinction between
occult sciences and mysticism is difficult to maintain as both deal with the hidden aspects
of things, but I find Noah Gardiner’s point helpful that he takes occult sciences to “refer to
theories and practices of discerning and harnessing the hidden- i.e., ‘occult’-properties of
various phenomena (stars and planets, gems, herbs, magnets, the letters of the alphabet,
etc.).” See Gardiner, “Stars and Saints: The Esotericist Astrology of the Sufi Occultist Aḥmad
al-Būnī,” Journal of Magic, Ritual, and Witchcraft 12.1 (2017): 46. One also should note that
such sciences were not always classified as the branches of occult sciences. For example,
one of the most profound, and yet unstudied, elaborations of lettrism (ʿilm al-ḥurūf ) is
found in Muʾayyad al-Dīn al-Jandī’s (d. 700/1300) lengthy introduction to his commentary
on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, but he does not classify it as an occult science. See Jandī,
Sharḥ fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, ed. Sayyid Jalāl al-Dīn Āshtiyānī (Mashhad: Intishārāt-i Dānishgāh-i
Mashhad, 1361 sh./1982), 77. Thus, following Matthew Melvin-Koushki who considers three
branches of occult sciences, namely, astrology, geomancy, and lettrism as the most common
branches of occult sciences which helped political elites claim sainthood (al-walāya) from
the eighth/fourteenth century onwards in much of the Islamic world, in this paper I view
not just alchemy, but also lettrism (ʿilm al-ḥurūf ) and astrology (ʿilm al-nujūm), as occult sci-
ences. See Melvin-Koushki, “Astrology, Lettrism, Geomancy: The Occult-Scientific Methods
of Post-Mongol Islamicate Imperialism,” The Medieval History Journal 19.1 (2016): 142–50.

Walāya between Lettrism and Astrology 163
sal knowledge, saying, letters represent whatever exists in the world, whether
they are from the higher realm (ʿulwiyyāt) or the lower realm (sufluyyāt).5 He
associates the Intellect (ʿaql), as God’s first creation, with the letter alif, which
contains the secrets of all letters. That is why the Intellect “is potentially the
compendium of all letters and it received the secrets of all sciences through
the realities of the letters before every other being.”6
Shiʿism and occult sciences have closely interacted with one another
throughout history. Jābir b. Ḥayyān (d. c. 199/815), known in Latin as Geber, is
rightly accredited as the father of alchemy. He was a Shiʿi and it is said that he
was the disciple of the sixth Shiʿi Imam, Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq (d. 148/765).7 In Kitāb
Usṭuquss al-uss al-thānī (The Second Book of Foundations), one of the oldest
treatises of the Jābirian Corpus, the link between Shiʿism and not just alchemy
but all branches of knowledge is attested as the following: “God knows the
secret [of everything], their benefit and detriment, and, they said, in the
same fashion all knowledge is brought to us by prophets (al-anbiyāʾ), Imams
(al-aʾimma), gates (al-abwāb), proofs (al-ḥujaj), and scholars (al-ʿulamāʾ).”8
Another common branch of occult sciences, Jafr, which is letter divination
and it is associated with lettrism as a whole, finds its root in early Shiʿi sources
where various traditions have it that Shiʿi Imams possessed a book called
Jafr, and it contained the knowledge of the past and the future.9 The eighth/
5 Shams al-Dīn Āmulī, Nafāʾis al-funūn, 2:94.

7 Paul Kraus believed some of the Jābirīan works are not authentic and they were produced
by certain Ismailis in the fourth/tenth century, but his point still indicates the influence of
Shiʿism on Islamic occultism. See Kraus, “Jābirian Alchemy,” International Journal of Shīʿī
Studies 4.3 (2006): 195; Nasr, Science and Civilization in Islam (Chicago: ABC International
Group, Inc., 2001), 258–59. Also, Pierre Lory argues that the doctrine of Imamate is a fun-
damental part of Jābirian alchemy although some parts of it may not fully correspond with
Shiʿism. See Lory, “Aspects de l’ésotérisme chiite dans le Corpus Ǧābirien: Les trois Livres
de l’Elément de fondation,” Al-Qanṭara 37.2 (2016): 279–98. For some further studies on the
thought of Jābir also see Henry Corbin, Alchimie comme art hiératique (Paris: L’Herne, 1986);
Syed Nomanul Haq, Names, Natures, and Things. The Alchemist Jābir ib Hayyān and his Kitāb
al-Ahjār (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994); Yves Marquet, La philosophie des
alchimistes et l’alchimie des philosophes : Jâbir ibn Ḥayyân et les « Frères de la Pureté » (Paris:
Maisonneuve et Larose, 1988).
8 Jābir ibn Ḥayyān, Majmūʿa muṣannafāt fī al-kīmiyāʾ wa-l-iksīr al-aʿẓam, ed. Marcellin
Berthelot, M.O. Houdas, and Eric Holmyard (Reprint, Jubayl: Dār Maktaba Bībliyūn, 2008),
88. Also, see Lory, “Aspects de l’ésotérisme chiite,” 288. All translations are the author’s own,
unless otherwise noted.
9 Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, “The Silent Qurʾan and the Speaking Qurʾan: History and
Scriptures through the Study of Some Ancient Texts,” Studia Islamica 108 (2013): 160–61;
Amir-Moezzi and Christian Jambet, Qu’est-ce que le shîʾisme ? (Paris: Fayard, 2004), 124–25.
For the Shiʿi origin of Jafr see Gernot Windfuhr, “Jafr,” in Encyclopedia Iranica, Online edition,

164 Mansouri
fourteenth century, when Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī flourished, also witnessed a

dynamic interaction between Shiʿism and occult sciences. For example, Ḥāfiẓ
Rajab Bursī (d. c. 813/1411), the prominent Shiʿi mystic, incorporates lettrism in
his Mashāriq al-anwār (The Dawning Places of the Light), saying that:
The secret of God is deposited in the treasure of lettrism (ʿilm al-ḥurūf )

since it is the hidden knowledge (ʿilm al-makhzūn) in the hidden
book (kitāb al-makhzūn) that can be touched only by the pure souls
(al-muṭahharūn) and can be reached only by those who are brought
close to God (al-muqarrabūn).10 It is the fountain of the secrets of God’s
majesty (al-jalāl) and the compendium of the names of God’s perfec-
tion (al-kamāl), with which the Qurʾanic surahs begin and the secrets of
the predestination and fate (al-qaḍāʾ wa-l-qadar) are deposited in them.
That is because when God willed to extract being (al-wujūd) from the
non-existent world (ʿālam al-ʿadam) towards the existent world (ʿālam
al-kawn) … He placed in them [the beings] the secrets of the letters.11
Against this background, Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī represents a fundamental ful-

crum in the occult-mystical genre of thinking in the eighth/fourteenth cen-
tury within the Shiʿi milieu. He has enjoyed considerable esteem amongst
various groups of Shiʿas and his works paved the way for the further fusion of
occult sciences in Shiʿism.12 Not long after Āmulī, various Shiʿi scholars such
as Jalāl al-Dīn Dawānī (d. 908/1502), Ghiyāth al-Dīn Manṣūr Dashtakī Shīrāzī
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/jafr (hereafter EIr). The current paper also offers

an account of the link between Jafr, lettrism, and Shiʿism.
10 The term al-muṭahharūn refers to the following verse that is often taken by Shiʿas to refer
to Imams: “Only the pure souls touch it [the Qurʾan] (Q. 56:79).” I use Abdel Haleem’s
translation of the Qurʾan for this paper, but the translations are modified as needed (The
Qurʾan: A New Translation, trans. Haleem [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005]).
11 al-Ḥāfiẓ Rajab al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār al-yaqīn fī asrār amīr al-muʾminīn (Beirut:
Muʾassasat al-Aʿlamī lil-Maṭbūʿāt, n.d), 18–19. Also, see Todd Lawson, “The Dawning Places
of the Lights of Certainty in the Divine Secrets Connected with the Commander of the
Faithful by Rajab Bursī (d. 1411),” in The Heritage of Sufism, ed. Leonard Lewisohn, vol. 2
(Oxford: Oneworld, 1992), 261–76.
12 The influence of Āmulī’s philosophy on the later Shiʿi philosophers, in particular during
the Safavid era, deserves further study. My recent paper briefly explains the similarity
between Āmulī’s philosophy of the unity of being (waḥdat al-wujūd) and Mullā Ṣadrā’s
(d. 1045/1640) notion of the illuminative relation (al-iḍāfa al-ishrāqiyya). See Mansouri,
“The Sea and the Wave: A Preliminary Inquiry into Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī’s Criticism of Ibn
al-ʿArabī’s Ontology,” Journal of Muhiddin Ibn ʿArabi Society 68 (2020): 89–90.

(d. 948/1542), and Shaykh Bahāʾī (d. 1030/1621), many of whom enjoyed the
patronage of the Safavid rulers, would become the representatives of Shiʿi
occultism in the late medieval and early modern Persianate world.13
Ḥaydar Āmulī’s occultism also pioneered Ibn Turka Iṣfahānī (d. 835/1432),
one of the most prominent representatives of occult sciences during the
Timurid and early modern intellectual era in the Islamicate world, who simi-
larly used lettrism and astrology to explain sainthood (al-walāya). Matthew
Melvin-Koushki has studied Ibn Turka’s occultism, a pivotal figure who, along
with Sharaf al-Dīn Yazdī (d. 858/1454), used occult sciences to legitimize the
Timurid political authority.14 Unlike Ḥaydar Āmulī, who abandoned the court
life and lived an apolitical life, Ibn Turka was an influential political figure, the
chief judge in Isfahan and Yazd,15 and he had strong relations with the intel-
lectual and political circles of the Timurids.16
Ibn Turka regarded lettrism as the supreme knowledge and the best sci-
ence to claim the universal truth, which can replace metaphysics, philoso-
phy, and even Sufism.17 That is because, according to him, the letter embodies
everything, be them existent or not, which makes it “the only truly universal
science.”18 While Ibn Turka was a Sunni himself, he regarded lettrists as the
heirs of Shiʿi Imams (aṣḥāb al-khātam wa-warathahuhu).19 It is strikingly sim-
ilar to Ḥaydar Āmulī, himself a devoted Shiʿa but also an Akbarian philoso-
pher par excellence, who regarded Sunni Sufis as the possessors of the secret
13 See for example, Melvin-Koushki, “Pseudo-Shaykh Bahāʾī on the Supreme Name, a

Safavid-Qajar Lettrist Classic,” in Light upon Light: Essays in Islamic Thought and History in
Honor of Gerhard Bowering, ed. Jamal J. Elias and Bilal Orfali (Leiden: Brill, 2019), 256–90.
14 Melvin-Koushki, “Powers of One,” 179.
15 Melvin-Koushki, “Powers of One,” 135–36.
16 Melvin-Koushki, “Powers of One,” 160.
17 Melvin-Koushki, “The Occult Challenge to Philosophy and Messianism in Early Timurid
Iran: Ibn Turka’s Lettrism as a New Metaphysics,” in Unity in Diversity: Mysticism,
Messianism and the Construction of Religious Authority in Islam, ed. Orkhan Mir-Kasimov
(Leiden: Brill, 2014), 255.
18 Melvin-Koushki, “The Occult Challenge,” 263. For a thorough study of the relation
between sainthood (al-walāya) and other occult sciences, such as lettrism and astrology,
in Ibn Turka’s work see Melvin-Koushki, “The Quest for a Universal Science: The Occult
Philosophy of Ṣāʾin al-Dīn Turka Iṣfahānī (1369–1432) and Intellectual Millenarianism in
Early Timurid Iran” (PhD diss., Yale University, 2012).
19 Melvin-Koushki, “The Occult Challenge,” 262–63. It must also be noted that the lettrism
of Ibn Turka was “simultaneously the science of the Imams and the ancients” such as
Pythagoras and Plato, and it “represents the culmination of neoplatonic-neopythagorean
philosophy … Lettrism thus represents for Ibn Turka the definitive confluence of the
Islamic and pre-Islamic legacies.” See Melvin-Koushki, “Powers of One,” 153.

166 Mansouri
of sainthood (sirr al-walāya),20 and pupils and disciples of the Shiʿi Imams,21
who receive the hidden teachings (al-bāṭin) of sharīʿa from the Prophet and
the Imams.22
In addition to the studies of Matthew Melvin-Koushki, Noah Gardiner
investigates the contribution of Aḥmad al-Būnī (d. c. 622/1225), who enjoyed
wide influence in North Africa, arguing that he was not simply “a magician in a
Sufi garb,”23 but his works display “deep commitment to ‘esotericism,’ by which
is meant an epistemic, exegetical, and rhetorical style cultivated among groups
that regarded scripture and, to varying extents, nature as possessed of both
apparent and hidden layers of meaning.”24 Mention also should be made of
Pierre Lory’s survey of lettrism of several figures such as Ibn al-ʿArabī, Aḥmad
al-Būnī, and Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ (d. c. fourth/tenth).25 Several volumes on the
Islamicate occult sciences have also appeared in recent years, which have made
Islamic occult studies a burgeoning academic field.26 Also, Shahzad Bashir
provides a general overview of the ideas of Faḍl Allāh Astarābādī (d. 796/1394),
the founder of the anarchic and millenarian Ḥurūfī movement, and Orkhan
Mir-Kasimov dedicates his elaborate book to explore Faḍl Allāh Astarābādī’s
Jāwidān-nāma (The Great Book of Eternity).27
20 Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī, “Naqd al-nuqūd fī maʿrifat al-wujūd,” in Jāmiʿ al-asrār wa-manbaʿ
al-anwār bi-inḍimām risāla naqd al-nuqūd fī maʿrifat al-wujūd, ed. ʿUthmān Ismāʿīl Yaḥyā
and Henry Corbin (Tehran: Anjuman-i Īrānshināsī-yi Farānsi wa Shirkat-i Intishārāt-i
ʿIlmī wa Farhangī, 1347 sh./1969), 620.
21 Āmulī, Jāmiʿ al-asrār, 229.
23 Gardiner, “Stars and Saints,” 41. Also, see Gardiner’s dissertation “Esotericism in a
Manuscript Culture: Ahmad al-Buni and his Readers through the Mamluk Period” (PhD
diss., University of Michigan, 2014).
24 Gardiner, “Stars and Saints,” 45. See also Jean-Charles Coulon, “Magie et politique : événe-
ments historiques et pensée politique dans le Šams al-maʿārif attribué à al-Būnī (mort en
622/1225),” Arabica 64.3/4 (2017): 442–86; Coulon, “Building al-Būnī’s Legend,” Journal of
Sufi Studies 5.1 (2016): 1–26.
25 Lory, La science des lettres en Islam (Paris: Dervy, 2004). See also Lory, “La magie des lettres
dans le ʿšams al-maʿarif d’al-Būnī,” Bulletin d’études orientales 39/40 (1987–88): 97–111.
26 For example, see Eva Orthmann and Nader El-Bizri, ed., The Occult Sciences in Pre-
Modern Islamic Cultures (Beirut: Ergon Verlag, 2018); Gardiner and Melvin-Koushki, ed.,
“Islamicate Occultism New Perspectives,” Arabica 64 (2017); Liana Saif, Francesca Leoni,
Melvin-Koushki, and Farouk Yayha, ed., Islamicate Occult Sciences in Theory and Practice
(Leiden: Brill, 2021). The following volumes in French have also appeared in recent years:
Coulon, La magie en terre d’islam au Moyen Âge (Paris: Comité des travaux historiques et
scientifiques, 2017); Lory, La dignité de l’homme face aux anges, aux animaux et aux djinns
(Paris: Albin Michel, 2018).
27 Orkhan Mir-Kasimov, Words of Power: Ḥurūfī Teachings between Shiʿism and
Sufism in Medieval Islam: The Original Doctrine of Faḍl Allāh Astarābādī (London:

While these studies provide groundbreaking knowledge on Islamic occult

sciences, there is still little mention of Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī who singlehand-
edly transformed Twelver Shiʿism, Sufism, Akbarian mysticism, and occult-
ism into a powerfully original philosophy.28 Henry Corbin discusses Ḥaydar
I.B. Tauris Publishers in Association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2015); Shahzad
Bashir, Fazlallah Astarabadi and the Hurufis (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005). I mentioned some
of the works that are closer to the topic of the current paper. However, many other studies
merit mentioning, from the works of Manfred Ullmann, Paul Kraus, Toufic Fahd, Charles
Burnett, David Pingree, Emilie Savage-Smith, to many other recent studies carried out by,
among others, Liana Saif, Travis Zadeh, Ahmet Tunç Sen, and Farouk Yahya. For a helpful
and up-to-date survey of the studies of various aspects of Islamic occult sciences see, Saif
and Leoni, “Introduction,” in Islamicate Occult Sciences in Theory and Practice, 1–40.
28 Henry Corbin and Peter Antes provide the first comprehensive studies of Āmulī in west-
ern scholarship, which were followed by Hermann Landolt’s and Robert Wisnovsky’s
works. See Henry Corbin, En Islam iranien : Aspects spirituels et philosophiques, 4 vols.
(Paris: Gallimard, 1971–2), 4:149–213; Corbin, Temple and Contemplation, trans. Philip
Sherrard (London: The Institute of Ismaili Studies, 1986), 55–132; Hermann Landolt,
“Ḥaydar-i Āmulī et les deux miʾrājs,” Studia Islamica 91 (2000): 91–106; Robert Wisnovsky,
“One Aspect of the Akbarian Turn in Shīʿī Theology,” in Sufism and Theology, ed. Ayman
Shihadeh (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007), 49–62. There are some sig-
nificant studies on Āmulī in Persian and Arabic too. See Khanjar ʿAlī Ḥamiyya, al-ʿIrfān
al-Shīʿī: Dirāsa fī al-ḥayāt al-rūḥiyya wa-l-fikriyya li-Ḥaydar al-Āmulī (Beirut: Dār al-Hādī,
1425/2004); Ismāʿīl Manṣūrī Lārījānī, Musāfirī gharīb: Sharḥ-i aḥwāl wa āthār-i ʿAllāma
Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī wa barrasī-yi mawḍūʿ-i walāyat dar āthārash (Tehran: Nashr-i Bayn
al-Milal, 1381 sh./2002); Muḥammad Karīmī Zanjānī Aṣl, ed., ʿIrfān-i shīʿī bi riwāyat-i
Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī (Tehran: Intishārāt-i Iṭṭilāʿāt, 1385 sh./2006); Muḥammad Jawād
Gawharī, Taṣawwuf al-Shīʿa: Naẓra ilā ḥayāt al-Sayyid Ḥaydar al-Āmulī wa-ʿaqāʾidihi
(Tehran: Muʾassasat al-Ṭabāʿa wa-l-Nashr, 1411/1991). There are also some recent studies on
Āmulī. See Mathieu Terrier, “The Defence of Sufism among Twelver Shiʿi Scholars of Early
Modern and Modern Times: Topics and Arguments,” in Shiʿi Islam and Sufism: Classical
Views and Modern Perspectives, ed. Denis Hermann and Mathieu Terrier (London: I.B.
Tauris, 2020), 27–63; Mohammed Rustom, “Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī’s Seal of Absolute walāya:
A Shīʿī Response to Ibn ʿArabī,” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 31.4 (2020): 407–23;
Mohammad Amin Mansouri, “The Sea and the Wave,” 75–116. Nicholas Boylston explores
Āmulī’s commentary on the Qurʾan, which has been so far unstudied and provides a
general overview of Āmulī’s Tafsīr. See Boylston, “Quranic Exegesis at the Confluence of
Twelver Shiism and Sufism: Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī’s al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam,” Journal of Qurʾanic
Studies 21.1 (2021): 1–35. There are also two encyclopedia reviews of Āmulī’s life and work
by Etan Kohlberg and Josef Van Ess. See Kohlberg, “Ā molī, Sayyed Bahā al-Dīn,” in EIr;
van Ess, “Ḥaydar-i Āmulī” in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, Brill, https://refer
enceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/haydar-i-amuli-SIM_8612
(hereafter EI2) There are also numerous Persian articles on Āmulī but here I mention
only some of them: ʿAbd al-Raḥīm ʿAnnāqa, “Khatm-i walāyat az dīdgāh-i Ibn ʿArabī wa
Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī,” Pazhūhishnāma-yi Zabān wa Adabiyyāt-i Fārsī 1.4 (1388 sh /2009):
87–110; ʿĀdila Kūhī and Shādī Nafīsī, “Jāygāh wa kārburd-i ḥadīth dar tafsīr-i Sayyid Ḥaydar
Āmulī,” Dū Faṣlnāma-yi ʿIlmī-Pazhūhishī-yi Ḥadīth-Pazhūhī 7.13 (1394 sh./2015): 185–222;

168 Mansouri
Āmulī’s views on numbers and to some extent letters and his analysis revolves
around Āmulī’s crafting of the science of balance (ʿilm al-mīzān), but the rela-
tion between occult sciences and sainthood (al-walāya) and its supremacy
over prophecy (al-nubuwwa) is not a subject of his study.29 The present paper
contributes to understanding the occultism of the eighth/fourteenth century
by focusing on the writings of Ḥaydar Āmulī, in particular his commentary on
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam (The Bezels of Wisdom), exploring the complex
relation between occult sciences, namely, lettrism, astrology, and alchemy, and
sainthood (al-walāya) in Āmulī’s thought. This paper does not offer a compre-
hensive view on occult sciences in Āmulī’s work, a topic too broad to cover
here, rather it aims to demonstrate how he uses these sciences to provide
occult platforms for the supremacy of sainthood (al-walāya) over prophecy
(al-nubuwwa) with a particular focus on his commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam.30
2 A Note on Āmulī’s Life and His Commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s

Fuṣūṣ
Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī, or as he introduces himself in Naqd al-nuqūd (The

Critique of the Critiques), Ḥaydar b. ʿAlī b. Ḥaydar al-ʿAlawī al-Ḥusaynī al-Āmulī,31
is arguably one of the most profound representatives of Shiʿi thought. A Sayyid,
or a descendant from the noble family of the Prophet, he traced his ancestry
back to the fourth Shiʿi Imam, ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn Zayn al-ʿĀbidīn (d. 98/713).32 He
was born in Āmul, northern Iran, in 719/1319 or 720/1320 into a Twelver Shiʿi
Mahīn ʿArab, “Walāyat dar dīdgāh-i Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī,” Dānishkada-yi Adabiyyāt wa
ʿUlūm-i Insānī 44.156 (1379 sh./2000): 209–28; ʿAlī Naqī Khudāyārī, “Rūykard-i ḥadīthī-yi
Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī dar Jāmiʿ al-asrār,” ʿUlūm-i Ḥadīth 28 (1382 sh./2003): 65–96; Ḥusayn
Muttaqī, “Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī wa tashkīk dar intiṣāb-i yak athar bih nām-i ū,” Payām-i
Bahāristān 1.3 (1388 sh./2009): 101–8; Parwīn Kāẓimzāda, Raḥīm Dihqān Sīmkānī, and
Maryam Dāwarniyā, “Wujūd-i munbasiṭ dar andīsha-yi Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī wa Ṣadr
al-Mutiʾallihīn,” Majalla-yi Adyān wa ʿIrfān 46.1 (1392 sh./2013): 63–84.
29 Corbin, Temple and Contemplation, 55–132.
30 Āmulī’s terminology for lettrism is ʿilm al-ḥurūf. For example, see Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ
fī sharḥ al-fuṣūṣ li-Muḥyī al-Dīn Ibn ʿArabī, ed. Muḥsin Bīdārfar, 3 vols. (Qom: Intishārāt-i
Bīdār, 1394 sh /2015), 2:878. He also uses ʿilm al-nujūm for astrology. See Āmulī,
al-Muqaddamāt min kitāb naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ fī sharḥ fuṣūṣ, 2nd ed., ed. Henry Corbin and
ʿUthmān Ismāʿīl Yaḥāʾ (Tehran: Tūs, 1367 sh./1988), 2:320.
31 Āmulī. “Naqd al-nuqūd,” 620.
32 Ḥaydar ibn ʿAlī Āmuli, Tafsīr al-muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam wa-l-baḥr al-khaḍm fī taʾwīl kitāb Allāh
al-ʿazīz al-muḥkam, ed. Muḥsin al-Musawī al-Tabrīzī, 7 vols. (Qom: Muʾassasa-yi Farhangī
wa Nashr-i Nūr ʿālā Nūr, 1385 sh./2006), 1:527.

family, and found recognition at the court of Shāh Kaykhusraw’s (d. 712/1328)
son, Fakhr al-Dawla Ḥasan also known as Ḥasan II, the ruler of the Bāwandid
dynasty from 734/1334 until 749/1349.33
According to his own testimony, Āmulī left court life in 749/1349 as a result
of a spiritual awakening, but his departure might have been influenced by
the souring of relations between the Bāwandid dynasty and the Jalālī fam-
ily, a prominent powerful family in Sārī, a neighboring city of Āmul, which
ultimately resulted in the murder of Ḥasan II and the establishment of the
Afrāsiyāb dynasty in 749/1349.34 Āmulī undertook a journey to perform Hajj
and visit the shrines of the Prophet and Shiʿi Imams via Ray, Qazwīn, and
Iṣfahān where he received an initiatory robe (khirqa) from a certain Nūr al-Dīn
al-Ṭihrānī after spending some time under his spiritual tutelage.35 He finally
moved to Najaf (al-mashhad al-muqaddas al-gharawī) and confirms that he
wrote this commentary, which he calls Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ fī sharḥ al-fuṣūṣ (The Text
of the Texts in Explaining the Bezels) between 781/1379 and 782/1380, which is
the last date that we are certain he was active.36
Āmulī’s commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam is the first known
Shiʿi encounter with Akbarian theosophy. The introduction of this volumi-
nous commentary was edited and published by ʿUthmān Ismāʿīl Yaḥyā and
Henry Corbin in 1352 sh./1973, but the commentary itself remained unedited
and unpublished until Muḥsin Bīdārfar published it in three volumes in 1394
33 Āmūli, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 1:529.

34 For further information about this period see Sayyid Ẓahīr al-Dīn Marʿashī, Ţārīkh-i
Ṭabarastān wa Rūyān wa Māzandarān, ed. Muḥammad Ḥusayn Tasbīḥī (Tehran:
Intishārāt-i Muʾassasa-yi Sharq, 1345 sh./1966).
35 Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 1:530–1.
36 Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 536. Al-gharawī refers to Qariyy, which is one of the names
of Najaf. It is also reported that qariyyān (plural of qariyy) referred to two buildings in
Najaf, which were near the shrine of Imām ʿAlī. A certain Shaykh Kāẓim refers to Najaf
in his poem as follows, “If you see the land of Qariyyān, then show humility/ and take
off your shoes setting your foot on it.” See Luwīs Maʿlūf, Tarjumat al-munjid, ed. Ibrāhīm
Muḥaddith, 2 vols. (n.p., n.d.), 2:1238. With regards to the date of Āmulī’s death, Henry
Corbin maintains that the last time we know Āmulī was alive was 787/1385, which is based
on the completion date of the manuscript of al-ʿUlūm al-ʿulyā (The Highest Knowledge)
that was supposedly written by Āmulī himself. See the French introduction of Corbin
here: Āmulī, Jāmiʿ al-asrār, 20. This is also confirmed by ʿAllāma Aghā Buzurg Tihrānī
(d. 1348 sh./1970), who states that he saw this manuscript that was written by Āmulī him-
self and was dated at 787/1385. See al-Ṭihrānī, al-Dharīʿa ilā taṣānīf al-Shīʿa, 25 vols. (Beirut:
Dār al-Aḍwāʾ, n.d.; repr., 2nd), 15:326–27. Following Muḥammad Khwājawī who maintains
it is possible that this manuscript was not written by Āmulī, Khanjar ʿAlī Ḥamiyya refrains
from confirming 787/1385 as the last date that we know Āmulī was alive. See Ḥamiyya,
al-ʿIrfān al-Shīʿī, 44, 112, 13.

170 Mansouri
sh./2015. The edition of Bīdārfar, exceeding two-thousand pages, only covers

Āmulī’s introduction and his commentary on the first five chapters of Fūṣūs
and, as Bīdārfar states, he was unable to find the remaining twenty-two chap-
ters of this gigantic commentary.37 Āmulī holds Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ in high
esteem, saying, Ibn al-ʿArabī was correct in his assertion that the Prophet
delivered Fuṣūṣ to him, so it is accurately attributed to the Prophet.38 Āmulī
wrote a separate section on the virtues of Ibn al-ʿArabī, his superiority over
previous mystical masters, and why he believes that the Andalusian master
truly received the Fuṣūṣ from the Prophet himself.39 Also, while Āmulī calls the
Qurʾan “a book revealed to the Prophet (al-nāzil ʿalayhi),” he calls Fuṣūṣ a book
“issued from the Prophet (al-ṣādir minhu),” which indicates the unique status
of this book for Āmulī’s thought.40 On another occasion, associating these
two books with the Prophet, he also states that Fuṣūṣ was bestowed upon Ibn
al-ʿArabī (al-wāṣil ilayhi) while al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya (Meccan Revelations)
was “issued from him (al-ṣādir minhu).” Similarly, Āmulī regards his own com-
mentary on the Qurʾan as “a book conferred upon him (al-fāʾiḍ ʿalaynā) and
his commentary on Fuṣūṣ as a book issued from him (al-ṣādir minnā).”41 Such
correspondences indicate that Āmulī regards both Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ and his
own commentary on it as uniquely distinct mystical works that stand out in
the history of Islamic mysticism.
37 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 1:77. Bīdārfar used Carullah Efendi Library’s manuscript, Istanbul,
manuscript no. 1033 as it seems to be the only manuscript that contains the entire extant
portion of Āmulī’s commentary. As also noted by ʿUthmān Yaḥyā, this manuscript was
supposed be two volumes but only the first volume, covering Āmulī’s introduction and
the first five chapters, is extant See ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s introduction in the following source
Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 21.
38 Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 13. This refers to the dream Ibn al-ʿArabī reports in his sermon
(khuṭba) of Fuṣūṣ according to which he saw the Prophet in 627/1224 in Damascus “while
he had a book in his hand. He told me: ‘this is Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, take it to people as it ben-
efits them.’ I told him, ‘I submit and bow to God, His Prophet, and the guardians of our
affairs as we are asked.’” See Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, ed. Abū
al-ʿAlā ʿAfīfī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿArabiyya, n.d.), 47. Thereby, Ibn al-ʿArabī does not
regard himself as an author of this book, but as a translator (al-mutarjim), who delivered
what was delivered to him. See Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, 48. Āmulī believes in the
correctness of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s dream, which is why this book has a unique status for him,
just as his voluminous commentary on the Qurʾan was a commentary on the words of
God, his commentary on the Fuṣūṣ is a commentary on the words of the Prophet. He even
states that just as it was required for God to send down the Qurʾan through the Prophet, it
was also required for him to order the Prophet to share with people a book that actually
belongs to himself, which is the Fuṣūṣ. See Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 77.
39 Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 64–84.
40 Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 43.

3 Jafr, Jāmiʿa, and Āmulī’s Lettrism
Shiʿism, in particular traditions pertaining to the mysterious books called Jafr

and Jāmiʿa, forms the backbone of Āmulī’s interest in lettrism, which embod-
ies, according to him, subtle hints (al-ishārāt al-laṭīfa) and noble allusions
(al-kināyāt al-sharīfa).42 He draws on a tradition which he attributes to the
sixth Shiʿi Imam, Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq, according to which Shiʿi Imams possessed
Ghābir, Mazbūr, the scratching of the heart (al-nakt fī l-qulūb), rapping on the
ears (al-naqr fī l-asmāʿ), red Jafr (al-jafr al-aḥmar), white Jafr (al-jafr al-abyaḍ),
the Ṣaḥīfa of Fatima, and Jāmiʿa that contain everything people need until the
resurrection (al-qiyāma).43 The Imam was asked for further clarification on
these sources of knowledge and he stated,
Ghābir is the knowledge of whatever will happen, Mazbūr is the knowl-

edge of whatever happened before, the scratching of the heart (al-nakt
fī l-qulūb) is the inspiration (al-ilhām), the rapping on the ears (al-naqr
fī l-asmāʿ) is the speech of the angels that we hear but we cannot see
them, the red Jafr contains the prophetic weapon (silāḥ rasūl Allāh) that
will not appear until the arrival of our Resurrector (qāʾimunā) from the
prophetic household (ahl al-bayt), the white Jafr contains the Torah of
Moses, the Bible of Jesus, Zabūr of David, and the primary books of God.
The Muṣḥaf of Fatima contains all events and also names of all who will
rule until the resurrection, and Jāmiʿa is a book that is seventy cubits long
(al-dhirāʿ) measured by the Prophet himself, dictated by him, and written
by ʿAlī with his hand. This book contains everything that people will need
until the resurrection, even the compensation of a scratch on the body
and [the punishment of] lashing are in it …44
42 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:878.

43 I use Etan Kohlberg’s translation for the following terms: rapping on the ears (al-naqr fī
l-asmāʿ) and the scratching of the heart (al-nakt fī l-qulūb). See Kohlberg, In Praise of the
Few: Studies in Shiʿi Thought and History (Leiden: Brill, 2020), 243. Also, as Noah Gardiner
states, the white Jafr includes tablets that are “inscribed with the knowledge passed
down from the Israelite originals of such sources as the scrolls of Abraham, the Torah of
Moses, the Gospel of Jesus, and the Psalms of David…. Red jafr is a weapon or is filled with
weapons and will be wielded only by the hidden twelfth Imām at the time of his return.”
See Gardiner, “Jafr,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Three (Leiden: Brill, 2021), 48–9 (here-
after EI3).
44 Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 1:498. For the roots of these written books in early Shiʿism
see Arzina R. Lalani, Early Shiʿi Thought: The Teachings of Imam Muhammad al-Baqir
(London: Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2000), 41. This ḥadīth is also cited in early Shiʿi
sources. For example, see al-Imām Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ibn

172 Mansouri
Many similar traditions are recorded in the early Shiʿi sources that attri-
bute various books to Shiʿi Imams. As Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi notes, the
details surrounding these books “are numerous, confusing, disordered; appar-
ently a number of titles are ascribed to a single Book, or, inversely, one title is
given to a number of different Books.”45 But it is generally believed that Shiʿi
Imams have access to all holy books in their original and undistorted forms.46
Amongst these books, two are significant for Āmulī, which are Jafr and Jāmiʿa.
Jāmiʿa was dictated by the Prophet and written by ʿAlī and is known as the book
of ʿAlī (kitāb ʿAlī), but it is different from Jafr as Jāmiʿa has a legal nature and
“The Imams’ possession of it renders their knowledge of the law far superior to
that of any other scholars.”47
The book of Jafr, according to some traditions, refers to the tablets of Moses
that contained all knowledge of the world. Moses hid them into a mountain in
Yemen and they remained buried until the time of the Prophet Muḥammad
when certain riders found the book and brought it to the Prophet. He read the
tablets, written in the Hebrew script, and gave them to ʿAlī, who wrote them
all onto a sheepskin, which is called Jafr, but the written Hebrew words were
miraculously turned into Arabic overnight.48 Jafr is particularly significant as
it became associated with the science of Jafr (ʿilm al-jafr), which explores the
occult properties of letters and is identical with lettrism although it is not clear
how they became associated.49 The identification of Jafr and lettrism is pres-
ent in Aḥmad al-Būnī’s work, as one of the main representatives of Islamic
occult sciences. Al-Būnī attributes Jafr to Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq, and maintains
that this book has 748 pages, 31952 lines, 21456 squares, and 2145634 letters. It
contains the secrets of the past events and the names of every king that will
rule until “rising of the hour (qiyām al-sāʿa),” i.e., until the resurrection, but
they should be properly interpreted using the techniques of lettrism such as
the fraction of numeration (taksīr).50
Nuʿmān (al-Shaykh al-Mufīd), al-Irshād fī maʿrifa ḥujaj Allāh ʿalā al-ʿibād, 2 vols. (Beirut:
Muʾassasat Āl al-Bayt li-Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth, 1416/1995), 2:186.
45 Amir-Moezzi, The Divine Guide in Early Shiʿism: The Sources of Esotericism in Islam, trans.
David Streight (Albany: SUNY Press, 1994), 73.
46 See Amir-Moezzi, The Spirituality of Shiʿi Islam: Beliefs and Practices (London: I.B. Tauris
in association with The Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2011), 201–2.
47 Etan Kohlberg, “Authoritative Scriptures in Early Imāmī Shiʿism,” in Les retours aux
Écritures : Fondamentalismes présents et passés, ed. Evelyne Patlagean and Alain Le
Boulluec (Louvain: Peeters, 1993), 302.
48 Kohlberg, “Authoritative Scriptures in Early Imāmī Shiʿism,” 300.
49 Gardiner, “Jafr,” 50.
50 Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī al-Būnī, Shams al-maʿārif al-kubrā wa-laṭāʾif al-ʿawārif, 4 vols. (Beirut: al-
Maktaba al-Falakiyya, n.d.), 3:343–44. The fraction of numeration (taksīr) refers to the

The association of Jafr with lettrism is also present in a story narrated by

the author of Shams al-maʿārif al-kubrā (The Sun of the Greatest Knowledge)
about Aḥmad al-Būnī’s own experience while a similar story is also attrib-
uted to Kamāl al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. Ṭalḥa (d. 652/1254), an occult-
ist who was born in Iraq and gained fame in Damascus as a sermon deliverer
(al-khaṭīb).51 The story narrates al-Būnī’s travel to the Levante and Aleppo
where he met a certain person from the substitutes (abdāl).52 This unnamed
mystical shaykh explains to al-Būnī that once he was able to see a tablet and
what is written on it, which were lines (khuṭūṭ), circles (dāʾira), letters (ḥurūf ),
and names (asmāʾ), during his solitude (khalwa). Then, he fell into a sleep and
saw Imam ʿAlī, who asked him, “Where is the tablet?” He said, “Here is the tab-
let, take it from me.” Imam replied, “Know that this tablet contains the secret
act of breaking words down to their constituting letters. For example, the world salām
( ‫ )��س�لا‬is broken down to sīn, lām, alif, and mim as these four letters form this word. These
‫م‬
letters also can be further broken down by the technique of fraction. As an example, the
‫ن‬
‫ )��س�� ن‬is broken down to sīn, yā, and nūn as these are the letters that form sīn
letter sīn (�‫ی‬
(� ‫ ) � ی‬or even it can be more broken down by applying the fraction to its components.
For example, sīn could be broken down to sīn, yāʾ, and nūn, but its yāʾ and nūn are also
broken down to yāʾ, alif, nūn, wāw, and nūn, so the letter sīn can be written as the fol-
‫ن ن‬ ‫ن‬
lowing: � ‫�� ی � �ی ا � و‬. This process can be continued ad infinitum. See Jalāl al-Dīn
Humāyī’s introduction to the following source Abū ʿAlī ibn Sīnā, Kunūz al-muʿazzimīn, ed.
Jalāl al-Dīn Humāʾī (Tehran: Anjuman-i Āthār-i Millī, n.d.), 60–63. The fraction can also
be used to find the numerical value of words and these values will be used for making
talismans, predicting the future, etc. See Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad Mahdī Narāqī, Khazāʾin,
ed. Ḥasan Ḥasanzāda Āmulī (Qom: Qiyām, 1380 sh./2001), 245–46. The technique of
taksīr is the equivalent of kabbalistic temurah, which applies to substituting letters with
one another. See Joseph Dan, “Medieval Jewish Influences on Renaissance Concepts of
Harmonia Mundi,” Aries 1.2 (2001): 142.
51 I maintain the narrative of Shams al-maʿārif al-kubrā, but Ḥājī Khalīfa (d. 1067/1657) attri-
butes a similar story to Ibn Ṭalḥa. See Muṣṭafā ibn ʿAbd Allāh (Ḥājī Khalīfa), Kashf al-ẓunūn
ʿan asāmī al-kutub wa-l-funūn, ed. al-Sayyid Shihāb al-Dīn al-Najafī al-Marʿashī, 2 vols.
(Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, n.d.), 2:991; Gardiner, “Forbidden Knowledge? Notes
on the Production, Transmission, and Reception of the Major Works of Aḥmad al-Būnī,”
Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 12 (2012): 102. It is worth mentioning that while some
scholars believe that sections of Shams al-maʿārif al-kubrā were interpolated to the book
by later figures, according to Noah Gardiner, this book in its totality was not written by
al-Būnī. As Gardiner argues, none of the manuscripts of Shams al-maʿārif al-kubrā were
written before eleventh/seventeenth century and there are significant cases where the
author takes the chains (isnād) of his alleged teachers from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Bisṭāmī’s
(d. 858/1454) chains, which makes the authorship of al-Būnī impossible. For more details
see Gardiner, “Forbidden Knowledge?” 124–29. Also, see Coulon, “Magie et politique,”
445–47.
52 For a useful account on al-abdāl specially in early ḥadīth corpus see Rana Mikati, “On
the Identity of the Syrian Abdāl,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 80.1
(2017): 21–43.

174 Mansouri
of the truth and the knowledge of the divine secrets. I gathered [them into] the
Jafr and called it the tablet of the predestination (al-qaḍāʾ) and fate (al-qadar)
in which one can find the secret of alif, the root of the greatest name (al-ism
al-aʿẓam), and the circles of the poles and the caliphs.” Imam placed his finger
on one of its letters and said it is the root of the greatest name, then he left.
As the author of Shams al-maʿārif continues, the unnamed person gave the
tablet to al-Būnī who decided to explain all occult secrets (al-asrār al-khafiyya)
and the luminous letters (al-anwār al-ḥarfiyya) of this tablet by order of the
Prophet and Imam ʿAlī in his book.53 Ibn Ṭalḥa himself relates Jafr, lettrism,
and Shiʿism together in his al-Durr al-munaẓẓam fī l-sirr al-aʿẓam (The Pearl
Composed on the Greatest Secret) as follows:54
I have mentioned in this book, which speaks truthfully, the Jafr of Imam
ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib. This book contains 1700 sources for the keys of knowl-
edge and the lamps of stars, and it is known amongst scholars as the
comprehensive prognosticon (al-jafr al-jāmiʿ) and splendid light (al-nūr
al-lāmiʿ), and Sufis refer to it as the tablet of the predestination and
fate (lawḥ al-qaḍāʾ wa-l-qadar). It is said that [this book] is the buried
knowledge (al-ʿilm al-maknūn) and protected secret (al-sirr al-maṣūn).
The noble lettrists (al-sādat al-ḥarfiyya) call it the occult language (al-
lugha al-khafiyya), which is the key to the secrets of the invisible (asrār
al-ghuyūb). It is also called the key of the tablet (al-lawḥ) and the pen
(al-qalam), and the key of wisdom (al-ḥikma). The people of predictions
(ahl al-malāḥim) maintain that this [book] is the key to the secrets of the
invisible (asrār al-ghuyūb) and the secret of the wordly accidents. It is
said that [this book] is the illuminator of the ambiguous matters, explan-
ator of the events of all ages, the key to divinely deposited knowledge
(al-ʿilm al-ladunnī), the secret of the predestination and fate, and the key
of knowledge. These two are lofty books and Imam ʿAlī mentioned one
of them in his sermon in Kufa while he was on the minbar as it will be
explained, God willing.
The Prophet of God, peace be upon him, eventually confided the secret
of this book to ʿAlī, and it is the buried knowledge (al-ʿilm al-maknūn),
which is referred to in his following speech, “I am the city of knowledge
and ʿAlī is its gate.” He ordered ʿAlī to compose this book. Thus, Imam
53 Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī al-Būnī, Shams al-maʿārif al-kubrā, 2nd ed. (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Nūr
lil-Maṭbūʿāt, 1427/2007), 347–48.
54 Ḥaydar Āmulī was well familiar with Ibn Ṭalḥa’s works and cites his works at length. For
example, see Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 340–44.

ʿAlī composed the book in scattered letters (ḥurūf al-mutafarraqa) in the

manner of the book of Adam (sifr Ādam) in the Jafr, which means a parch-
ment (raqq) made of the camel skin ( jild al-baʿīr).55 It became known
amongst the people as the the comprehensive prognosticon and splen-
did light (al-jafr al-jāmiʿ wa-l-nūr al-lāmiʿ), and it is also called Jafr and
Jāmiʿa as one can find in this book what happened to the ancient people
(al-awwalūn) and what will happen to the last people (al-ākhirūn).56
Similarly, Shams al-Dīn Āmulī regards lettrism (ʿilm-i ḥurūf ) as being identi-
cal with the science of Jafr (ʿilm-i jafr), and maintains that the secrets of this
science was written on the tablet made of the deerskin and was buried in the
Hira cave until Gabriel informed the Prophet about its whereabouts and the
Prophet handed the book to ʿAlī at the night of his ascent to the heaven and
told him, “God did not open any gate of knowledge unless He ordered me to
open it for you as well.”57 Ibn Khaldūn (d. 808/1406), the prominent Muslim
historian with extreme hostility towards occult sciences,58 cites some predic-
tions (malāḥim) that were common during his lifetime and some of them show
the identification of Jafr and lettrism. For example, while traveling in the east
of the Muslim world, he came across a prediction (malḥama) from a certain
Sufi that foresaw the emergence of the Turkic dynasty (dawlat al-Turk): “O my
companion! If you want the secret of Jafr to be made known for you/ and Jafr
is the knowledge of the best legatee (waṣī), the father of al-Ḥasan [refering to
Imam ʿAlī]// Know and learn the letters and their numerical values/ and the
description of them, like a quick and perceptive learner.”59
55 Various books on lettrism are attributed to Adam such as the book of the occult (sifr
al-khafāyā), which is the first book composed on lettrism, or the book of Adam (sifr
Ādam), which refers to a book that was revealed to Adam and it was written in twenty-
one leaves of the heavenly olive containing its names, attributes, and numbers, and they
produce the knowledge of names (al-asmāʾ), attributes (al-ṣifāt), decree (al-ḥukm), and
clear signs (al-āyāt al-bayyināt). See Ḥājī Khalīfa, Kashf al-ẓunūn, 2:991.
56 Kamāl al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Ṭalḥa al-Shāfiʿī, al-Durr al-muntaẓam fī al-sirr al-aʿẓam, ed.
Mājid ibn Aḥmad al-ʿAṭiyya (Beirut: Dār al-Hādī, 1425/2004), 32–33.
58 Ibn Khaldūn is not generally a reliable source on occult sciences. See Melvin-Koushki,
“In Defense of Geomancy: Šaraf al-Dīn Yazdī Rebuts Ibn Ḫaldūn’s Critique of the Occult
Sciences,” Arabica 64 (2017): 346–403; Mushegh Asatrian, “Ibn Khaldūn on Magic and the
Occult,” Iran and the Caucasus, 7.1–2 (2003): 73–123. That said, his statement, which is in
line with other sources, indicates that Jafr was already well known as lettrism in his time.
59 ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn Khaldūn, Tārīkh Ibn Khaldūn, 2nd ed., ed. Khalīl Shaḥāda and Suhayl
Zakkār, 8 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr, 1408/1988), 1:411–20.

176 Mansouri
Thus, Āmulī’s interest in lettrism finds its root in the Shiʿi traditions of Jafr
and Jāmiʿa, but he transforms these books into microcosmic-macrocosmic
books. He cites ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Kāshānī (d. 730–6/1329–35), the prominent
Muslim mystic, according to whom Jafr is the tablet of predestination (al-lawḥ
al-qaḍāʾ), which is the Universal Intellect (al-ʿaql al-kull), and Jāmiʿa is the tab-
let of fate (al-lawḥ al-qadar), which is the Universal Soul (al-nafs al-kull). Thus,
these two books contain everything that happened, happens, and will happen,
and they are the promised book (al-kitāb al-mawʿūd) that will be brought to
humanity by al-Mahdī.60 Āmulī critiques al-Kāshānī, saying that the problem
with his view is that the First Intellect (al-ʿaql al-awwal) or the tablet of pre-
destination (al-lawḥ al-qaḍāʾ), and the Universal Soul (al-nafs al-kulliya), or the
tablet of fate (al-lawḥ al-qadar), are parts of the book, not the whole book, so
they cannot be regarded as Jafr and Jāmiʿa.61 He proposes a different narra-
tive according to which the world is a macrocosmic book (kitāb kabīr) and the
human being is a microcosmic book (kitāb ṣaghīr),62 which is why he regards
Jafr as the macrocosmic book of the universe (al-kitāb al-kabīr al-āfāqī) and
Jāmiʿa as the microcosmic book of human souls (al-kitāb al-ṣaghīr al-anfusī).63
He explains that since these two books contain all matters of the world, they
cannot be reduced to the First Intellect (al-ʿaql al-awwal) and the Universal
Soul (al-nafs al-kulliya) as these two are just two elements of the world. Rather,
Āmulī regards Jafr and Jāmiʿa as expressions for the universe and the human
being, transforming the macrocosm or the universe at large (al-āfāq) and
the microcosm or the human souls (al-anfus), not just the First Intellect and
Universal Soul, into occult books.64
Āmulī’s narrative of Jafr and Jāmiʿa should be viewed in light of his assess-
ment of the world as a book, consisting of lordly letters and words (al-ḥurūf
wa-l-kalimāt al-rabbāniyya) and divine verses (al-āyāt al-ilāhiyya).65 He cites
several Qurʾanic verses to prove his view. For example, referring to the world,
60 Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 5:49–52. For al-Kāshānī’s narrative see Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ʿAlī
ibn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Ṭāʾī al-Ḥātamī (Ibn al-ʿArabī), Tafsīr Ibn
ʿArabī, ed. Samīr Muṣṭafā Rabāb, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 1422/2001),
1:11. Although this commentary is published under the name of Ibn al-ʿArabī, probably for
marketing reasons, there is no doubt it is written by al-Kāshānī. See Majīd Hādīzāda’s note
here: ʿAbd al-Razzāq ibn Jalāl al-Dīn Kāshānī, Majmūʿa rasāʾil wa muṣannafāt, ed. Majīd
Hādīzāda (Tehran: Markaz-i Nashr-i Mīrāth-i Maktūb, 1379 sh./2000; repr., 2nd), 170–74.
62 Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 2:16.

the Qurʾan maintains, “This is our book that speaks the truth about you,”66
which Āmulī regards as a reference to the universal book of the horizons
(al-kitāb al-āfāqī al-kullī). He also regards the Qurʾanic verse “Read your book,
today you are sufficient for yourself to calculate your account”67 as a reference
to the particular book of the human souls (al-kitāb al-anfusī al-juzʾī).68 This
forms a fundamental principle of the correspondence (al-taṭbīq) in Āmulī’s
thought according to which the Qurʾan, the microcosmic book or the book of
the human souls (al-kitāb al-anfusī), and the macrocosmic book or the book of
the universe (al-kitāb al-āfāqī) completely correspond with one another and
each of these three books consists of letters, words, and verses.69 For example,
he states, the simple and single things (basāʾiṭ al-ʿālam wa-mufradātuhu) of
the world are the letters on the horizons (al-ḥurūf al-āfāqiyya) and they cor-
respond with the letters of the Qurʾan, which are twenty-eight. Similarly, the
simple and single things of the universe are twenty-eight letters as follows:
The prime matter (al-hayūlā al-ūlā), nine heavens (al-aflāk al-tisʿa), and four
elements (al-ʿanāṣir al-arbaʿa). These entities add up to fourteen but each
one has a hidden aspect in addition to its apparent aspect. Thus, if one com-
bines the hidden and apparent aspects of the universal letters, they add up to
twenty-eight.70 Āmulī offers other accounts on the universal letters. As an
example, he maintains that letters in the universe refer to the fixed reali-
ties (aʿyān al-thābita) as they exist in the divine knowledge,71 and cites Ibn
al-ʿArabī’s view of the world as the collection of letters which are constantly
being written on “a parchment unrolled (raqq al-manshūr).”72
66 Q. 45:29.
67 Q. 17:14.
69 Nicholas Boylston examines the principle of correspondence (al-taṭbīq) in his paper on
Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī’s commentary on the Qurʾan. See Boylston, “Quranic Exegesis,”
16–17. This principle, interestingly, indicates that Āmulī’s commentary on the Qurʾan
should also be read in relation to his commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ as this principle
plays a significant role in both works.
70 He also states that the letters of the Qurʾan consist of forteen dotted and fourteen undot-
ted letters that correspond with the strucutre of the universal letters. For more details see
Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 2:433.
72 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:866. Raqq manshūr (Q. 52:3) is a Qurʾanic term “fī raqq manshūr
(a parchment unrolled),” but its meaning is subject to disagreement. For example, see
Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Ṣāwī, Ḥāshiyat al-Ṣāwī ʿalā tafsīr al-jalālayn, ed. Muḥammad
ʿAbd al-Salām Shāhīn, 4 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1427/2006), 4:93; Ḥusayn
ibn ʿAlī al-Rāghib al-Iṣfahānī, Mufradāt alfāẓ al-Qurʾān, ed. Ṣafwān ʿAdnān Dāwūdī
(Beirut: Dār al-Shāmiyya, 1412/1992), 361; Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad Azharī, Tahdhīb al-
lugha, ed. ʿUmar Salāmī and ʿAbd al-Karīm Ḥāmid, 15 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth

178 Mansouri
Words are also not, from Āmulī’s perspective, conventional arrangements of

the letters. He states that some people regard the three kingdoms of generated
beings (al-mawālīd al-thalātha), which are the mineral (al-maʿdan), vegeta-
tion (al-nabāt), and animal (al-ḥayawān), as the universal words (al-kalimāt
al-āfāqiyya). Some others regard being in a general way as the universal word,
but “it is more accurate to regard [the universal words as] anything that ema-
nates from the divine ink, also called the Invincibility (al-jabarūt), and is writ-
ten on the leaves of contingent and relational existence (al-wujūd al-iḍāfī
al-imkānī) by the divine pen, also known as the First Intellect.”73 He particu-
larly uses the words to refer to the spiritual realities of the world such as saints
(awliyāʾ), prophets (anbiyāʾ), divine spirits (al-arwāḥ al-qudsiyya), and imma-
terial souls (al-nufūs al-mujarrada).74 As he states, similar to the words that
intermediate between the speaker and the listener, saints and prophets are the
intermediaries (al-wasāʾiṭ) between the Real (al-ḥaqq) and the creation (al-
khalq), hence they are words:
So you learned it in the first chapter, and you have learned it over and over,
that the world in its entirety is a divine book (kitāb ilāhī) and holy volume
(muṣḥaf rabbānī), consisting of verses (al-āyāt), words (al-kalimāt), and
letters (al-ḥurūf ) the greatest amongst which are prophets (al-anbiyā),
apostles (al-rusul), saints (al-awliyāʾ), poles (al-aqṭāb), Imams (al-aʾimma),
and pillars (al-awtād), next are the common humans, then are the angels
(al-malāʾika), jinn (al-jinn), animals (al-ḥayawān), plants (al-nabāt), and
minerals (al-maʿdan). If you regard them as verses (al-āyāt) or letters
(al-ḥurūf ), it is permissible as they embody everything.75
al-ʿArabiyya, 1421/2001), 8:230; Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad Abū al-Suʿūd, Tafsīr Abī
al-Suʿūd (Irshād al-ʿaql al-salīm ilā mazāyā al-Qurʾān al-karīm), 9 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-Iḥyāʾ
al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 1983), 8:146.
73 Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 2:441. Just like the universe or the macrocosm, the microcosm
or the human being is also a word. Āmulī maintains the human beings are the com-
plete words (al-kalimāt al-tāmma) and the rest of the creatures are non-complete words
(al-kalimāt ghayr al-tāmma). See Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 2:451. Thus, the microcosm,
the macrocosm, and the Qurʾan all consist of words.
74 Āmulī discusses words and letters in numerous places and often adds layers to his dis-
cussions the exploring of which goes beyond the scope of the present study. For details
about his views on words and letters see, amongst others, the second volume of Āmulī’s
tafsīr that is dedicated to this theme: Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 2:15–564; also see Āmulī,
al-Muqaddamāt, 297–347.
75 Āmulī often uses different terms to refer to the various groups of saints and prophets, and
they need some explanation. The most common amongst them are saints (al-awliyāʾ),
prophets (al-anbiyā), and apostles (al-rusul). He regards prophecy (al-nubuwwa), like
apostleship (al-risāla), exoteric since it “represents a specific relation between the prophet,

If they are regarded as letters, it is like what they state, “I am

alif-lām-mīm of this book,” “I am Ṭāhā,” I am the ḥāʾ of al-ḥawāmīm, “I am
the ṭāʾ of al-ṭawāsīm.”76
his community, and God. He [the prophet] is the intermediary (al-wāsiṭa) between God
and the servant … but his [the prophet’s] sainthood represents a relationship between the
prophet and God with no intermediary.” See Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 3:1266. Thus, he regards
sainthood (al-walāya) higher than the other two since it is the hidden aspect (al-bāṭin) of
prophecy (al-nubuwwa), which is the hidden aspect of apostleship (al-risāla). See Āmulī,
Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 3:1271. That said, he clarifies, it does not mean that saints are higher than
prophets and apostles since prophets and apostles such as Abraham and Muḥammad are
the most perfect humans. As he explains, the sainthood of prophets “is higher than their
prophecy … likewise, their prophecy is higher than their apostleship … since they would
not become a prophet unless they first become a saint, and they would not become an
apostle unless they first become a prophet. So every prophet is a saint but not vice vera.”
See Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 169. For a detailed analysis of these three and their various
meanings also see Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 169–81. Āmulī also maintains that the grand
prophets (ulū al-ʿazm) are seven, who are Adam, Noah, Abraham, David, Moses, Jesus,
and Muḥammad. They are sometimes called the poles (al-aqṭāb) and each one of them
has twelve legatees (al-awṣiyāʾ) and saints (al-awliyāʾ), who are called caliphs (al-khulafāʾ)
or Imams (al-aʾimma). See Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 155. While he uses Imams (al-aʾimma)
and saints (al-awliyāʾ) for the twelve legatees (al-awṣiyāʾ) of every grand prophet and the
poles (al-aqṭāb) for the seven grand prophets, he also uses them for the saintly hierar-
chy as well. As he states, there is a pole (al-quṭb) in every age, who is followed by two
Imams, four pillars (al-awtād), seven substitutes (al-budalāʾ), forty nobles (al-nujabāʾ),
and three hundred chiefs (al-nuqabāʾ). He mentions other groups which do not have spe-
cific numbers and cites Ibn al-ʿArabī’s and Saʿd al-Dīn Ḥammūya’s (d. 650/1252) accounts
at length to provide more details on this saintly hierarchy. See Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt,
273–80. One also should note that, while the term Imams (al-aʾimma) is used exclusively
in relation to Shiʿi Imams, who are also saints, Āmulī uses saints (al-awliyāʾ) in a broader
sense to also include Sufis and mystics such as Ibn al-ʿArabī. For example, see Āmulī,
al-Muqaddamāt, 105.
76 These expressions are attributed to Imam ʿAlī and Āmulī cites them as part of the ser-
mon he titles the sermon of glory (al-khuṭba al-iftikhāriyya). See Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt,
203. This sermon is presently known as the sermon of declaration (al-khuṭba al-bayān),
which is recorded entirely under this name in sources written as late as the nineteenth
century. See ʿAlī al-Yazdī al-Ḥāʾirī, Ilzām al-nāṣib fī ithbāt al-ḥujja al-ghāʾib, 2nd ed., 2 vols.
(Beirut: Dār al-Tawḥīd, 1390/1971), 2:178–241; Sulaymān ibn Ibrāhīm al-Ḥusaynī al-Balkhī
al-Qundūzī al-Ḥanafī, Yanābīʿ al-mawadda: Sijjil ʿaẓīm lil-aḥādīth al-nabawwiyya fī
manāqib al-imām ʿAlī wa-ahl al-bayt ʿalayhum al-salām, ed. ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn al-Aʿlamī, 3 vols.
(Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Aʿlamī lil-Maṭbūʿāt, 1418/1997), 3:461–64. But previous sources reg-
ister it under a different title. For example, similar to Āmulī, Ḥāfỉẓ Rajab Bursī records
this sermon under the title “the sermon of glory (khuṭbat al-iftikhār).” See Rajab al-Bursī,
Mashāriq al-anwār, 164–66. For the root of this sermon in the early Shiʿi sources see Riḍā
Asadpūr, “Khuṭbat al-bayān wa shaṭḥiyyāt-i ʿārifīn,” Pazhūhish-nāma-yi Adyān 2.3 (1378
sh./1999): 1–40. Some of the terms of this passage need explanation. Ṭāhā refers to the
Qurʾanic surah Ṭāhā, and al-ḥawāmīm refers to the seven Qurʾanic surahs that begin
with the letters ḥāʾ and mīm (Q. 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46). See Islam Dayeh, “Al-Ḥawāmīm:

180 Mansouri
If they are regarded as verses (al-āyāt), it is like what they state, “We
are the greatest verses of God and the high words of God,” and the word of
God that “We made the son of Maryam and his mother as verses.”77
If they are regarded as words (al-kalimāt), it is similar to what has been
stated with regards to Jesus and others, such as “Christ is Jesus, the son
of Maryam, the prophet of God and His word that has been delivered to
Maryam.”78 That is why the Intellect (al-ʿaql) is sometimes called the pen
(al-qalam) as He states, “Nūn, and the pen and what they write,”79 and the
soul (al-nafs) is called the tablet (al-lawḥ), and things that stem from it
are called the spiritual words (al-kalimāt al-maʿnawiyya). Sometimes the
nature (al-ṭabīʿa) is called the pen, the object (al-jism) is called the tab-
let, and things that stem from it are called the formal words (al-kalimāt
al-ṣūriyya) …80
Thus, the purpose of all this is that the prophets and saints are the
divine, general, and absolute words (al-kalimāt al-tāmma al-kulliya
al-ilāhiyya) and the holy wisdom and true knowledge is revealed on their
pure hearts and souls with or without an intermediary.81
Āmulī’s lettrism finds its roots in the Shiʿi tradition of Jafr and Jāmiʿa, but he
transforms them into microcosmic-macrocosmic books, or the book of the
universe (al-kitāb al-āfāqī) and the book of human souls (al-kitāb al-anfusī)
that stand for the human being and universe at large, and these books consist
of numerous letters and words, which refer to various realities of the world.
Thus, he transforms lettrism into the microcosm-macrocosm model by regard-
ing Jafr as the macrocosm and Jāmiʿa as the microcosm.
Intertextuality and Coherence in Meccan Surahs,” in The Qurʾān in Context: Historical and
Literary Investigations into the Qurʾānic Milieu, ed. Angelika Neuwirth, Nicolai Sinai, and
Michael Marx (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 461–98. Three Qurʾanic surahs that begin by the let-
ters ṭāʾ, and sīn or ṭāʾ, sīn, and mīm are called al-ṭawāsīm (Q. 26, 27, 28). See Muḥammad
Yusuf Ḥarīrī, Farhang-i ịṣṭilāḥāt-i Qurʾānī (Qom: Muʾassasa-yi Intishārāt-i Hijrat, 1384
sh./2005), 184. Alif-lām-mīm is also one of the most recurring disjointed letters (al-ḥurūf
al-muqaṭṭaʿa) in the Qurʾan. See Martin Nguyen, “Exegesis of the ḥurūf al-muqaṭṭaʿa:
Polyvalency in Sunnī Traditions of Qurʾanic Interpretation,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies
14.2 (2012): 1–28.
77 Q. 23:50. Similar traditions are attributed to Shiʿi Imams in Āmulī’s work. For example, he
attributes the following tradition to Imam ʿAlī, “we are the words of God that will no end,
our virtues will not be understood, and they will not be counted.” See al-Sayyid al-Muḥsin
al-Mūsawī al-Tabrīzī’s footnote here Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 2:453.
78 Q. 4:171.
79 Q. 68:1.
80 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:950–51.

4 The Dot Is Sainthood, Bāʾ Is Prophecy
Āmulī dedicates six chapters of his commentary to the six components of bism
Allāh al-raḥmān al-raḥīm (in the Name of God, the Merciful, the Beneficent),
often abridged as basmala: The letter bāʾ; the dot (al-nuqṭa) written under
the letter bāʾ; the letters sīn and mīm; Allāh; al-raḥmān and al-raḥīm; and
the last component is the correspondence between the letters of basmala, the
universe (al-āfāq) as the macrocosm, and the human souls (al-anfus) as the
microcosm.82 The reason that basmala acquires a central status in Āmulī’s let-
trism is that it is inclusive ( jāmiʿ) of the entire world, and the nineteen letters
of basmala correspond with the nineteen levels of beings both in the micro-
cosm and the macrocosm.83 To analyze a wide range of the occult meanings
of basmala, he breaks it down into several triple forms, an act that resembles
the fraction of numeration (taksīr) in lettrism. Triple forms are significant in
Āmulī’s work, which is illustrated in various triple forms he mentions such as
82 See the list here Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:865.

83 Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 5:22–25. Basmala possesses a significant status for Āmulī and
he often states that it consists of nineteen letters that correspond with the nineteen lev-
els of being, which is why basmala possesses inclusivity (al-jāmiʿiyya) in a sense that it
includes and embodies the entire world. Āmulī offers several narratives on these corre-
spondences. For example, he maintains that the formal world (ʿālam al-ṣūrī) consists of
the following nineteen levels that correspond with the letters of basmala: The intellect
(al-ʿaql), the soul (al-nafs), the seven heavens (al-aflāk), the four elements (al-ʿanāṣir),
three kingdoms of generated beings (al-mawālīd al-thalātha), and the human being
(al-insān), and this corresponds with the spiritual world (al-ʿālam al-maʿnawī), which
consists of the seven poles and twelve saints or seven prophets and twelve Imams. For
more details see Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 298. Similarly, nineteen levels in the human
being are as follows: The particular intellect (al-ʿaql al-juzʾī), particular soul (al-nafs
al-juzʾī), five hidden and apparent senses (al-ḥawāss al-ẓāhira wa-l-bāṭina), four souls
(al-nufūs al-arbaʿa), and three spirits (al-arwāḥ al-thalātha). See Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt,
307. Another narrative about the correspondence between basmala and the human being
is found here: Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 5:392. Also, see Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 331, 18,
and Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:858, 892, 914, 923, 924. Āmulī offers several other narratives
on this correspondence between basmala and the world from various points of view. For
example, in the following he offers the views of Sufis, the lords of the intelligent world
(arbāb al-maʿqūl), and the people of God (ahl Allāh) that are different from his own to an
extent since, amongst other reasons, they do not maintain that bāʾ corresponds with the
first intellect (al-ʿaql al-awwal). See Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 5:184–209. Generally, one
should endeavor to reach the dot in basmala, which as will be explained stands for mysti-
cal annihilation, and it corresponds with his macrocosmic and microcosmic endeavors
to also get rid of the nineteen levels that separate humans from God both in him and the
universe. According to Āmulī, the following tradition refers to these nineteen veils that
should be removed: “whoever is loved by God, is saved from the nineteen angels of pun-
ishment (al-zabāniyya al-tisʿa ʿashar).” See Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 5:391–92.

182 Mansouri
prophecy (al-nubuwwa), apostleship (al-risāla), and sainthood (al-walāya); law

(al-sharīʿa), path (al-ṭarīqa), and truth (al-ḥaqīqa); revelation (al-waḥy), inspi-
ration (al-ilhām), and unveiling (al-kashf ); Islam (al-islām), faith (al-īmān),
and certitude (al-yaqīn), etc.84 Through these examples, Āmulī aspires to illus-
trate how the world is structured around triple forms since “being is estab-
lished upon triplicity (al-tathlīth).”85 That is because every manifested object
in the world is manifested in the form of triplicity (ṣūrat al-tathlīth), which is
why he calls it an ontological triplicity (al-tathlīth al-wujūdī).86
According to Āmulī, basmala consists of multiple triple forms, that are bāʾ,
the dot (al-nuqṭa) written under bāʾ, and alif hidden in bāʾ as three consonants
of the first letter of the Qurʾanic phrase; bāʾ, sīn, and mīm as three letters of
the first Qurʾanic word (bsm); and Allāh, al-raḥmān, and al-raḥīm as three
remaining words of this phrase.87 He dedicates much of his analysis to the
triplicity of bāʾ/dot/alif , and narrates several traditions on the virtues of the
first component of this triplicity, bāʾ. According to a tradition attributed to
the Prophet, Āmulī narrates, “all beings appeared from bāʾ of bism Allāh
al-raḥmān al-raḥīm,” or a tradition attributed to Imam ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib puts it,
“If I wanted, I could load seventy camels with the secrets of bāʾ of bism Allāh
al-raḥmān al-raḥīm.”88 Also, Ibn al-ʿArabī maintains, “with bāʾ being appeared
and with the dot the worshiper became distinct from the worshipped,” and
Abū Madyan al-Maghribī (d. 594/1198) similarly mentions, “I have not seen
anything unless bāʾ was written on it.”89

85 Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 62–63; Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī, Asrār al-sharīʿa wa-aṭwār al-ṭarīqa
wa-anwār al-ḥaqīqa, ed. Riḍā Muḥammad Ḥudarj (Beirut: Dār al-Muḥajja al-Bayḍāʾ,
1433/2012), 64. While one is reserved for the divine, Āmulī’s avoidance to use the number
two and his keen interest in the number three can be explained by the point Annemarie
Schimmel makes about the negative connotations of the number two in religious tra-
ditions that stands for “disunion” and “the falling apart of the absolute divine unity.”
See Annemarie Schimmel, The Mystery of Numbers (New York: Oxford University Press,
1993), 46.
86 Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 59. He generally regards the external beings (al-mawjūdāt
al-khārijiyya) as three, which are the Real (al-ḥaqq), the world (al-ʿālam), and the human
(al-insān) and each of them appears in various triple forms. Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt,
58–63.
87 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:865. Āmulī also uses other variants for the basmala triplicity such
as bāʾ, movement, dot; bāʾ, sīn, mīm; and Allāh, al-raḥmān, al-raḥīm, but he does not much
explain them. For example, see, Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:894.
89 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:865. Abū Madāyin was an influential Andalusian master of
Islamic mysticism whom Ibn al-ʿArabī held in high esteem and often cites in his works.
For studies on Abū Madyan see Abū Madyan Shuʿayb ibn al-Ḥusayn al-Anṣārī, The Way of

According to Āmulī, bāʾ is the first being (al-mawjūd al-awwal), “which

is called the intellect (al-ʿaql), spirit (al-rūḥ), pen (al-qalam), substance (al-
jawhar), light (al-nūr), great element (al-ʿunṣur), cause (al-ʿilla), barzakh
(al-barzakh),90 presence of oneness (ḥaḍrat al-wāḥidiyya), presence of names
(ḥaḍrat al-asmāʾ), first self-determination (al-taʿayyun al-awwal), first manifes-
tation (al-maẓhar al-awwal), the caliph (al-khalīfa), and first Imam (al-imām
al-awwal).”91 But more illuminating on the nature of bāʾ is the following pro-
phetic ḥadīth that he cites:
God has sent one-hundred-and-four books. The knowledge of one hun-

dred of them is deposited in four of amongst them, which are the Torah
(al-Turāh), Bible (al-Injīl), Psalms (al-Zabūr), and Furqān (al-Furqān).92
Abū Madyan: Doctrinal and Poetic Works of Abū Madyan Shuʿayb ibn al-Ḥusayn al-Anṣārī
(c. 509/1115–16–594/1198), trans. Vincent J. Cornell (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1996);
Gerald T. Elmore, “Ibn al-ʿArabī’s ‘Cinquain’ (Taḫmīs) on a Poem by Abū Madyan,” Arabica
46.1 (1999): 63–96; Jean Joseph Léandre Bargès, Vie du célèbre marabout Cidi Abou-Médien,
autrement dit Bou-Médin (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1884).
90 Barzakh means a barrier between two things, or the barrier between the hell and the
heaven, the grave, or the wall, but “in Sufi and mystical traditions, barzakh stands for
the visible world between the realm of non-material, simple meanings and that of
material objects.” See Malihe Karbassian, “The Meaning and Etymology of Barzakh in
Illuminationist Philosophy,” in Illuminationist Texts and Textual Studies, ed. Ali Gheissari,
John Walbridge, and Ahmed Alwishah (Leiden: Brill, 2017), 87.
92 The Furqān (the Separator) is the name of one of the surahs of the Qurʾan and the
commentators often regard it as another name for the Qurʾan. For example, Abū Jaʿfar
Muḥammad b. Jarīr Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) in Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān maintains that,
“The Furqān according to us is the distinction (al-farq) between two things and the sepa-
ration between them, which … is the separation between the truth and the falsehood.
It is illustrated by the fact that the Qurʾan is called the Separator (al-Furqān).” See Abū
Jaʿfar Muḥammad ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān, 15 vols. (Beirut: Dār
al-Maʿrifa, 1323/1905), 1:34. But, in the tradition narrated by Āmulī, the Furqān is men-
tioned along with other prophetic books and then it is stated that the Qurʾan contains
these four books. One here is reminded of the point Ibn al-ʿArabī makes by regarding
a distinction between the Qurʾan and the Furqān since al-Shaykh al-Akbar regards the
Furqān as expressive of Noah’s prophetic mission and his book, which only embodied
the transcendence (al-tanzīh) of God. But the Qurʾan, as the comprehensive book of
God, embodies both transcendence (al-tanzīh) and assimilation (al-tashbīh), which is
why, according to Ibn al-ʿArabī, “the Qurʾan includes the Furqān, but the Furqān does not
include the Qurʾan, and that is why the Qurʾan is exclusively allocated to Muḥammad,
peace be upon him, and this community, which is the best community that ever existed.”
See Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, 70. Thus, in the tradition narrated by Āmulī, the Qurʾan,
Torah, Bible, and Psalms refer to the prophetic books of Muḥammad, Moses, Jesus,
and David, and the Furqān seems to refer to the book of Noah For a survey on tashbīh
and tanzīh see Claude Gilliot, “Attributes of God,” in EI3, Online edition, http://dx.doi

184 Mansouri
Then, He deposited the knowledge of these four books into the Qurʾan,
then He deposited the knowledge of the Qurʾan into its expanded section
(al-mufaṣṣal),93 then He deposited the knowledge of the expanded sec-
tion into the disjointed letters (al-ḥurūf al-muqaṭṭaʿa) at the beginning
of [some] surahs, then He placed the knowledge of all of them into the
[surah] al-Fātiḥa, then He deposited the knowledge of al-Fātiḥa into its
“In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Beneficent,” then He deposited the
knowledge of “In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Beneficent,” into its
bāʾ, then He deposited its [bāʾ’s] knowledge into its dot. Thus, whoever
reads al-Fātiḥa, it is as if he reads the Torah, Bible, Psalms, and al-Furqān,
and whoever knows its commentary, he is like someone who knows the
commentaries of all revealed books of God. Similarly, whoever reads “In
the Name of God, the Merciful, the Beneficent,” and knows its commen-
tary and interpretation (taʾwīluhā), and the interpretation of its bāʾ and
dot, he then becomes the knower of everything.94
Āmulī further explains the first triplicity of the Qurʾanic phrase, saying, alif
represents the presence of the absolute unicity of the essence (al-ḥaḍra
al-aḥadiyya al-dhātiyya al-muṭlaqa), bāʾ represents the presence of the contin-
gent and barzakh of the oneness of the divine names (al-ḥaḍra al-wāḥidiyya
al-imkāniyya al-barzakhiyya al-asmāʾiyya), and the dot represents the presence
of the divine actions (al-ḥaḍra al-fiʿliyya).95 The action of the dot is to turn alif
into bāʾ since if one removes the dot, bāʾ would be indistinguishable from alif,
.org/10.1163/1573-3912_ei3_COM_0163. Also, in his commentary on the Qurʾan, Āmulī

offers an interpretation of the Furqān as an ability to separate between the truth and
falsehood, which provides us with another reading of this term. According to Āmulī, once
one can properly practice piety (al-taqwā) and understand the Qurʾan properly, then he
can understand the universal book (al-kitāb al-āfāqī) and is able to separate the truth
(al-ḥaqq) from falsehood (al-bāṭil) since he is granted a vision that is comprehensive
(al-jāmiʿ) of both the unity (al-waḥda) and the multiplicity (al-kathra) of the world. See
Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 1:290–91.
93 Al-mufaṣṣalāt are certain short surahs at the end of the Qurʾan, which are also called “the
garden of the Qurʾan (riyāḍ al-Qurʾān).” As the Prophet famously stated, “I was given seven
long surahs in lieu of Torah, one hundred surahs in lieu of Zabur, al-mathānī [referring to
the seven verses of surat al-Fātiḥa] in lieu of the Bible, but I was given privilege over them
by al-mufaṣṣal.” See ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Abū Bakr Suyūṭī, al-Itqān fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān,
ed. Fuwāz Aḥmad Zumurlī, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿArabiyya, 1421/2000), 1:206;
Muḥammad Bāqir ibn Taqī Majlisī, Mirʾāt al-ʿuqūl fī sharḥ akhbār āl al-rasūl, 2nd ed., ed.
Hāshim Rasūlī et al., 26 vols. (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 1363 sh./1984), 7:95.
95 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:873. For a different reading of these three stages, namely, aḥadiyya,
al-wāḥidiyya, and al-rubūbiyya see Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 3:1630.

which is why the dot acts as a separator between the Real and the created, or
between alif and bāʾ. Although the difference between alif and bāʾ morphologi-
cally comes down to the underlying dot, Āmulī here speaks of an ontological
transformation. Muʾayyad al-Dīn al-Jandī illustrates the ontological relation
between alif and other letters in his commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ by
regarding alif as the prime matter (al-hayūlā) of other letters whose property
is hidden (khafī al-ḥukm). That is why alif does not appear in the divine name
Allāh, and, instead, it begins with hamza, which represents alif.96 Thus, while
alif represents the transcendence of God, or what al-Jandī calls “the undeter-
mined that has no determination (al-ghayr al-mutaʿayyana fī l-lā-taʿayyun),” it
also participates in all letters and is present in all of them, which represents
God’s presence in the world or what al-Jandī calls “the form of the reality that
is determined by determination (ṣūrat al-ʿayn al-mutiʿayyana bi-l-taʿayyun).”97
Āmulī provides a more elaborate account on the relation between alif and
other letters which he illustrates via the notion of the descent (tanazzul).98 As
he states, alif exists in all letters either in the literal sense of the term, which
is illustrated by the presence of alif in the transcribed forms of letters such as
bāʾ, tāʾ, thāʾ, etc., or in the figurative sense of the term, as is evident in letters
such as mīm, nūn, and jīm. He states that while letters such mīm and nūn do not
seem to contain alif in their transcribed forms, yāʾ (‫ )�ی‬in mīm ( �‫ )� یم‬and wāw (‫)و‬
‫ن ن‬ ‫م‬
in nūn (�‫ )�و‬are indeed alif disguised in these letters.99 This relation between
alif and other letters illustrates the relation between God and the world since,
he puts it, “the manifestation of the Real (ẓuhūr al-ḥaqq) in the forms of the
beings is like the manifestation of alif in all forms of the letters. That is because
when alif descends from its presence where it is high, elevated, absolute, and
abstract, to a presence where it is lowered, curtailed, and delimited, it takes the
form of bāʾ, then it becomes tāʾ, thāʾ, and the rest of letters.”100 This transition
from alif to bāʾ and other letters, or from the transcendent God that is beyond
the world into the immanent God that dwells in us, takes place via the dot,
or the stage of sainthood (al-walāya) as the threshold between the divine and
the created.101
96 Jandī, Sharḥ fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, 46.

97 Jandī, Sharḥ fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, 41.
98 For this notion also see Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 5:250–22.
99 Āmulī, “Naqd al-nuqūd,” 701–2.
100 Āmulī, “Naqd al-nuqūd,” 701.
101 The dot transforms alif into bāʾ, but it also corresponds with the fact that alif is hidden
in ��‫ ن‬but is dropped (saqaṭa) in the written form, which is noted by Āmulī himself, who
‫م‬
states that in some instances the Qurʾan records �� as �� ‫ �ا‬although alif is not vocal-
‫�� ن م ن م‬
ized. For example, one reads in the Qurʾan: “Read in the name ( ‫ )ن�ا‬of your Lord who
‫م‬

186 Mansouri
Āmulī further explains the action of the dot, saying that, “the Gnostics
(al-ʿārifūn) often state ‘with bāʾ being becomes manifested and with the dot
the worshiper (al-ʿābid) becomes distinct from the worshiped (al-maʿbūd).’”102
He elaborates the action of the dot as the separator between the Real and the
First Intellect:
… the self-determination (taʿayyun) of the Real – the absolute (al-muṭlaq)

that is the worshiped – occurs in the form (ṣūra) of the delimited creation
(al-khalq al-muqayyad) – that is the worshiper – only because of the cre-
ated and determining dot whose being is relational (al-iḍāfiyya). This dot,
also called contingency (al-imkān) and temporal origination (al-ḥudūth),
is placed under the existential bāʾ as the first contingent being (al-awwalī
al-imkānī).103
That is why the relationship between the First Intellect and the Real is similar
to that of bāʾ and alif since the First Intellect is the Real that is created and
bāʾ is the alif that is dotted.104 The dot is expressive of the ultimate mystical
union humans can reach, one which confuses the borders between the creation
َ ْ ��ّ‫ )��َ��س‬of your Lord” (Q. 87:1). In both of

created” (Q. 96:1) or “Glorify the name ( �� ‫ا‬
‫َن َح م‬
these instances, alif is not vocalized but it is still retained in the written form. As Āmulī
explains, unlike ��‫ ن‬in basmala, alif in such instances is dropped for grammatical reasons,
‫م‬
but from an intuitive point of view (min ḥayth al-dhawq), the transcribed alif is not vocal-
ized in these instances as it is added (muḍāf ) to the divine name Lord (rabb) while in
basmala it is added to the divine name Allāh, the greatest name of God. It indicates that,
“whoever reaches the One who is in place of alif, has to drop his esteem as alif is dropped
when it reaches the divine Name Allāh.” See Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 5:69.
104 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:883. Āmulī states that “when alif is descended from its absolute
and abstract presence, it is called bāʾ, jīm, and dāll until the last letter in a general man-
ner. Similarly, when the Real or Being is descended from its absolute and abstract pres-
ence, it is called the Intellect, spirit, and soul until the last creature in a general manner.”
See Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:872. It is also interesting to note that Āmulī relates lettrism
to waḥdat al-wujūd, as is evident from his analysis of alif, since this letter is both sepa-
rated from and present in other letters while there is only one unitary letter, which is alif.
Āmulī himself states, “When the Real (al-ḥaqq) Almighty is manifested in the form of any
manifestation (al-maẓhar) or is determined by a form from the manifestations of beings
and creatures, it is named by their names, it [the Real] logically becomes that being, be
it a human or an angel, and it is not a shortcoming for its essence or imperfection for its
absoluteness (al-iṭlāq). This is similar to [the relation between] letters and alif as there
is no true being other than alif, and all [other] letters have only relational and nominal
being (wujūd iḍāfī iʿtibārī) with no reality in the external world … That is because the true

and God in an Akbarian manner since it transfigures the transcendental alif

into the created bāʾ, hence problematizes the fixed dichotomy between the
divine and creation and forms a fluid space where they constantly take the
shape of one another. According to Āmulī, whenever the servant desires union
with the Real and becomes identical with Him (yaṣīr huwa huwa), he “should
waive the distinguishing dot, which causes the distinction between the servant
and the lord.”105 This idea is reminiscent of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s doctrine of the cre-
ated Real (al-ḥaqq al-khalq) according to which
When you look at His ḥadīth that, “I am his feet with which he walks, his
hand with which he drinks, and his tongue with which he speaks,” until
all organs are mentioned and the organs become His locus, it is not differ-
ent from saying that everything is the Real (al-ḥaqq) and everything is the
created (al-khalq). He is the created from one aspect and the Real from
another aspect since both of them are one thing (al-ʿayn wāḥida). The
image (ṣūra) of what appears is identical with the image of what receives
this appearance, so He is both the appeared (al-mutajallī) and the one
receiving the appearance (al-mutajallī lahu).106
Similarly, Āmulī maintains that when alif descends from the presence of abso-
luteness (ḥaḍra iṭlāqihi), other letters are formed and this process illustrates
how God is concealed in creatures such as the Intellect (al-ʿaql), the spirit
(al-rūḥ), etc.107 It is because God and alif have two aspects: Insofar as its/
His absoluteness (iṭlāquhu) is concerned, He/it is the hidden treasure (kanz
makhfī) so He/it remains independent (al-ghanī) from other letters/creatures.
But insofar as His/its descent (al-tanazzul) and manifestation (al-ẓuhūr) is
concerned, He/it exists in every letter/creature.108 That is why mystics often
state that, “there is a secret (sirr) for lordship (al-rubūbiyya) that voids the lord-
ship once this secret is manifested.”109 Once alif is manifested/dotted, it is no
longer alif, but it takes the shape of other letters such as bāʾ, a similar process
happens between God and His creation as once God takes the shape of His
creation, his secret, hidden existence disappears. Mawlānā Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī
being belongs to alif, not others, both in terms of the form (al-ṣūra) and the meaning
(al-maʿnā).” See Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 5:90–91.
106 Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, 121.

188 Mansouri
(d. 652/1273), the prominent Persian poet, marvellously captures this idea with
his mesmerizing words that,
All this is secret (ramz) and this is the reason that/ the other world (ān
jahān) is coming into this world (īn jahān) constantly.
Like cream in the very heart of the milk/ no-place (lā makān) is coming
into place (makān) constantly.
Like the intellect wrapped by skin and blood/ no-sign (bī-nishān) is com-
ing into a sign (nishān) constantly.
From behind the intellect, the beautiful love,/ while has wine at her hand
and trails her skirt, is coming constantly.
From the above love, that cannot be explained/ save saying that (ān) is
coming constantly.110
The coming, or what Ibn al-ʿArabī calls the flowing (sarayān),111 of no-place
into place or no-sign into a sign, or the “that” which constantly becomes “this,”
is a poetic illustration of the Real which dwells in His creation or, in Āmulī’s
words, alif which is constantly manifested into letters through the dot. The dis-
tinguishing dot is the only difference between alif and bāʾ, or between Adam,
as the image of God, and God Himself, and if any creature crosses this thresh-
old, “then the possible crosses the limit of possibility and is released from con-
ditionality (al-taqyīd) and becomes attributed with necessity (al-wujūb) and
absoluteness (al-iṭlāq)…. And all this goes back to waiving the distinguishing
dot from bāʾ’s being, also known as the annihilation ( fanāʾ) in God and sub-
sistence (baqāʾ) in Him.”112 Thus, the dot is expressive of the highest mystical
union as the stage of annihilation since once this threshold is crossed, bāʾ and
other letters for that matter, or creation, become indistinguishable from alif
or the Real. Āmulī illustrates this point by narrating several mystical axioms,
such as “unity is to abolish the relations (al-tawḥīd isqāṭ al-iḍāfāt),” “when the
destitution (al-faqr) is over, this is Allah,” “there is only God in my cloak (laytha
110 Jalāl al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad Mawlawī, Kulliyyāt-i Shams (Dīwān-i kabīr), ed.
Badīʿ al-Zamān Furūzānfar, 10 vols. (Tehran: Amīr Kabīr, 1378 sh./1999; repr., 4th), 6:171.
I am indebted to Prof. Maria Subtelny’s year long seminar on Persian poetry where we
extensively discussed various meanings of this passage of Rūmī.
111 See Todd Lawson, “Friendship, Illumination and the Water of Life,” Journal of the
Muhyiddin Ibn ʿArabi Society 59 (2016): 17–56.

fī jubbatī sawā Allāh),”113 or “I am the Real (anā al-ḥaqq)” and “I am Allah (anā
Allāh).”114
This context helps understand why Āmulī makes a correspondence between
the dot and sainthood as they both express the highest stage one can reach. He
explicitly relates the dot to sainthood and critiques Ibn al-ʿArabī for attributing
the dot tradition, which has it as “I am the dot under bāʾ,” to Abū Bakr al-Shiblī
(d. 334/946).115 According to Āmulī,
Bāʾ represents absolute prophecy (al-nubuwwa al-muṭlaqa), but the dot

is allocated to absolute sainthood (al-walāya al-muṭlaqa), and al-Shiblī
is not the absolute saint, but a manifestation of its manifestations. But
this speech, according to the consensus of the scholars, was uttered by
the commander of the believers (amīr al-muʾminīn) ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib on a
minbar in Kufa, so the dot refers to absolute sainthood, bāʾ refers to abso-
lute prophecy, and both of them altogether refer to apostleship, so such a
speech could only be stated by ʿAlī.116
Āmulī takes issue with the attribution of the dot tradition to al-Shiblī as he was
the disciple of al-Junayd (d. 297/910), who was the disciple of al-Sarī al-Saqaṭī
(d. 253/867), who was the disciple of Maʿrūf al-Karkhī (d. c. 200/815), who was
the disciple of Imam Muḥammad b. ʿAlī al-Jawād (d. 220/835), which indicates

115 This ḥadīth seems to have been in circulation as early as sixth/twelfth as recorded in Ibn
Shahr Āshūb’s (d. 588/1192) Manāqib. See Ibn Jaʿfar Rashīd al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn
Shahr Ạshūb al-Sarwī al-Māzandarānī, Manāqib Āl Abī Ṭālib, 4 vols. (Qom: Muʿassasa-yi
Intishārāt-i ʿAllāma, n.d), 2:49. The circulation of this ḥadīth in Islamic mysticism is
indebted greatly to Ibn al-ʿArabī although he attributed it to Abū Bakr Shiblī in several
places. For example, see Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn al-ʿArabī, Mashāhid al-asrār al-qudsiyya
wa-maṭāliʿ al-anwār al-ilāhiyya, ed. Saʿīd ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya,
1426/2005), 121–22.
116 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:890–91. While Āmulī’s narrative confirms the superiority of the
saintly dot over prophetic bāʾ, it does not properly account for the equivalence between
alif and apostleship, making apostleship superior to sainthood. It is clear that Āmulī con-
sistently ranks sainthood higher than prophecy and apostleship, but it remains contradic-
tory that apostleship is on a par with alif, which is representative of the divine presence
and the Real, hence highest realm of existence. One possible answer to this contradiction
is that Āmulī was mainly concerned with the relation between sainthood and prophecy
since he dedicates much of his analysis to these two, which is why he does not account
for the problematic equivalence between alif and apostleship as it would simply imply
the superiority of apostleship over other two while apostleship represents the sharīʿa or
the most exoteric aspect of Islam, so it is lower than the stage of the truth and the stage
of the path.

190 Mansouri
that al-Shiblī was the disciple of Shiʿi Imams, hence had an inferior spiritual
status.117 Āmulī speculates that al-Shiblī was simply narrating this tradition
on the authority of Imam ʿAlī and certain bigots (al-mutaʿaṣṣibūn) removed
the chain of narratives (al-isnād) and fabricated this tradition.118 Āmulī under-
stands this tradition in conjunction with another tradition attributed to Imam
ʿAlī according to which, “I was a saint (walī) when Adam was between water
and clay,” which indicates that just as bāʾ is the first determination (al-taʿayyun
al-awwal) of alif, ʿAlī was also the first human reality (al-ḥaqīqa al-insāniyya),
but it is not in contradiction with the following prophetic tradition, “I was
Prophet when Adam was between water and clay.” That is because both the
Prophet and ʿAlī were created from the same primordial divine light, “I and
ʿAlī are from a unitary light (nūr wāḥid).”119 In other words, this light has two
aspects: the hidden (al-bāṭin), which refers to the dot or sainthood (al-walāya),
and the apparent (al-ẓāhir), which refers to bāʾ or prophecy (al-nubuwwa).120
Āmulī uses the dot to articulate sainthood (al-walāya) as a threshold between
the divine and the created, and maintains that both sainthood (al-walāya) and
the dot represent the highest stage one can reach. Thus, Āmulī’s lettrism estab-
lishes the superiority of the saintly dot over the prophetic bāʾ, providing an
occult construct for sainthood (al-walāya) and its supremacy over prophecy
(al-nubuwwa). He explains:
The Prophet is like bāʾ and ʿAlī is like the dot written under bāʾ since it
does not become determined except by the dot just as the Prophet does
not become perfect except by sainthood (al-walāya) even though the
saint (al-walī) is inferior to the Prophet in terms of his stage. The com-
mander of believers (amīr al-muʾmīnīn) referred to this in his speech,
“knowledge was just one dot but the ignorant folks (al-juhhāl) multiplied
it.” This means that the true knowledge (al-ʿilm al-ḥaqīqī) is the dot and
obtaining this knowledge requires gaining awareness about this dot,
117 While Āmulī maintains that Maʿrūf al-Karkhī was the disciple of Imam Muḥammad
al-Jawād, the ninth Shiʿi Imam, a mistake seems to have happened as Maʿrūf al-Karkhī
was converted to Islam by Imam ʿAlī b. Mūsā al-Riḍā (d. 202/818), the eighth Shiʿi Imam,
and Maʿrūf remained as his doorman (al-ḥājib) until he passed away (d. 202/818). See Abū
ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥusayn al-Sulamī, Ṭabaqāt al-ṣūfiyya, ed. Muṣṭafā
ʿAbd al-Qādir ʿAṭā (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1424/2002), 82.
119 For the light tradition and its root in Sufi and Shiʿi circles see Uri Rubbin, “More Light
on Muḥammad’s Pre-existence: Qurʾānic and Post-Qurʾānic Perspectives,” in Books and
Written Culture of the Islamic World: Studies Presented to Claude Gilliot on the Occasion of
his 75th Birthday, ed. Andrew Rippin and Roberto Tottoli (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 288–311.

the quality of its manifestation, and its stages. But “the arrogant people
multiplied it” by their arrogance and denial of the possessor of this dot.
“Those for whom God did not provide any light, do not possess any light,”121
and “This is God’s grace, He grants it to whomever He wills, and God is
the possessor of the greatest grace.”122
The dot is expressive of the knowledge that only the possessor of sainthood
knows, and Āmulī interprets it as referring to the highest mystical stage, which
is that of annihilation. In his words, if one removes the added bāʾ (al-muḍāf
al-bāʾī) and the distinguishing dot (al-nuqṭa al-tamyīziyya), he becomes anni-
hilated in God.123 He cites the beautiful poem of Manṣūr al-Ḥallāj (d. 922/309)
to indicate that this mystical annihilation is indeed the eternal and everlasting
life within God: “Murder me my faithful friends/ as life arises from my mur-
der// My death is in my life/ and my life is in my death.”124 Thus, Āmulī uses
lettrism to indicate how the dot written under the bāʾ of bism Allāh al-raḥmān
al-raḥīm represents the highest mystical stage, which is the stage of saint-
hood (al-walāya) as the threshold one should pass to be annihilated in God
and reach the ultimate union with Him, and thus associates the supremacy of
sainthood over prophecy with occult narratives.125
5 Astrology and Sainthood
In addition to lettrism that serves to explain the supremacy of sainthood

(al-walāya) over prophecy (al-nubuwwa), as this section explains, Āmulī also
uses astrology to deliver this supremacy. Āmulī’s astrological discussion about
sainthood revolves around two numbers, seven and twelve, totaling nineteen,
which also represents the totality of the world.126 While these two numbers
represent a wide variety of objects, he particularly relates them to the twelve
121 Q. 24:40.
122 Q. 62:4. Āmulī, Jāmiʿ al-asrār, 563–64.
124 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:888. Also, see Louis Massignon, The Passion of al-Ḥallāj: Mystics
and Martyr of Islam, trans. Herbert Mason, 4 vols. (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1982), 3:352.
125 It was also mentioned that Āmulī believes the Qurʾan, the microcosm or the human
souls (al-anfus), and the macrocosm or the universe (al-āfāq) correspond with one
another. Thus, since the entire secrets of the Qurʾan is deposited into the dot of basmala,
it becomes evident that sainthood (al-walāya), or the annihilating dot, encapsulates all
truths of the Qurʾan, microcosm, and macrocosm.
126 Corbin, Temple and Contemplation, 97.

192 Mansouri
signs of the zodiac and the seven planets, which help him articulate the
supremacy of sainthood (al-walāya) over prophecy (al-nubuwwa). The number
seven represents several groups of objects. For example, Āmulī speaks of seven
principal attributes (al-ṣifāt al-sabʿa) of God, which are life (al-ḥayāt), knowl-
edge (al-ʿilm), power (al-qudra), will (al-irāda), speech (al-kalām), hearing
(al-samʿ), and vision (al-baṣar). They give rise to seven divine names; namely,
the alive (al-ḥayy), knower (al-ʿālim), powerful (al-qādir), seeker (al-murīd),
speaker (al-mutakallim), hearer (al-sāmiʿ), and seer (al-baṣīr).127
According to Āmulī, these divine names and attributes have seven major
spiritual manifestations (al-maẓāhir al-maʿnawiyya sabʿa), who are Adam,
Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus, and Muḥammad, and seven major formal
manifestations (al-maẓāhir al-ṣūriyya sabʿa), which are the sun, Jupiter, Mars,
Saturn, Venus, Mercury, and the moon. These seven planets represent the seven
prophets, who are also called the grand prophets (ūlū al-ʿazm) since, accord-
ing to Āmulī, “the grand prophets are seven, not five nor six as some groups
of Muslims assumed.”128 He further states that “the seven climes (al-aqālīm
al-sabʿa) correspond with the seven planets (al-kawākib al-sabʿa), seven earths,
seven tribes, seven ranks of the hell, and seven days [of the week], and other
groups of seven.”129 He also writes about seven poles (al-aqṭāb, sing. al-quṭb)
and seven ecstatic angels (al-malāʾikat al-muhayyam al-sabʿa).130 The saints,
whom Āmulī identifies as the men of the invisible (rijāl al-ghayb), are classified

128 Āmulī, Jāmiʿ al-asrār, 237. The idea that the grand prophets are seven strikes as odd since
they are often five in Twelver Shiʿi theology, and it has a rather interesting similarity with
the Ismaili doctrine of the cycles of prophets that are also seven. For example, the promi-
nent Ismaili thinker, Nāṣir-i Khusraw (d. 481/1088), argues that God finished the creation
of the world, as stated in the Qurʾan, in six days, but he interprets these days as standing
for the cycles of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muḥammad. These cycles will
be completed by the seventh cycle, which is the seventh day or the Sabbath, when the
riser (al-qāʾim) will arise and felicity is fully achieved. See Shafique N. Virani, “The Days of
Creation in the Thought of Nasir Khusraw,” in Nasir Khusraw: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow,
ed. Sarfaroz Niyozov and Ramazon Nazariev (Khujand: Noshir Publications, 2004), 80.
Sayyid Ḥaydar’s narrative of the grand prophets replaces the Qāʾim with David but the
rest remains entirely the same. This is remarkable considering the fact that Āmulī’s rela-
tion with Ismailism is complex since he, as a Twelver Shiʿa, is critical of their doctrine. See
here as an example: Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 1:78. That said, he also does not hesitate to
draw on Ikhwān al-Safāʾ as an important semi-Ismaili group. See for example here: Āmulī,
al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 1:542–43.

in seven ranks,131 and there are also seven species (al-anwāʿ, sing. al-nawʿ)
under the genus of wisdom (al-ḥikma).132
Twelve also embodies considerable astrological dimensions in Āmulī’s
thought, and, even though he believes that one cannot fully fathom the proper-
ties of numbers,133 he still finds twelve embodied in several material and spiri-
tual entities. That is because, he maintains, “twelve is a strange number (ʿadad
gharīb) similar to which nothing exists so it should not come as a surprise that
numerous things represent this number, e.g., zodiac signs, months, hours of the
day, hours of the night, the twelve tribes of Israel, and their chiefs, twelve splits
[of the Red Sea] caused by the staff of Moses for the twelve tribes of Israel,
and likes of these.”134 Like the astrological correspondence between the seven
major planets and the seven major prophets, Āmulī crafts an astrological cor-
respondence between twelve signs of the zodiac (al-burūj al-ithnā ʿashar) and
twelve Shiʿi Imams.135 In discussing signs of the zodiac, Āmulī heavily relies on
Ibn al-ʿArabī since the connection between zodiac signs and sainthood, astrol-
ogy and Islamic mysticism, was a central theme in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s mysticism.136
These signs of the zodiac, as Titus Burckhardt states in his study of astrology in
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought, are located in the sky without stars (al-falak al-aṭlas),
and “these are not identical with the zodiacal constellations contained in the
sky of the fixed stars ( falak al-kawākib or falak al-manāzil), but represent ‘vir-
tual determinations’ (maqādir) of the celestial space and are not differentiated
except by their relationship to planetary ‘stations’ or ‘mansions’ (manāzil) pro-
jected on the sky of the fixed stars.”137

135 Āmulī, Jāmiʿ al-asrār, 237–38. Every one of these seven prophets also have twelve legatees
(al-awṣiyāʾ) and Āmulī lists their names. See Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 156–57.
136 Ibn al-ʿArabī was not the first Muslim mystic to form a relation between astrology and
mysticism, and one can find elaborate discussions on this topic in the works of other
thinkers such as Aḥmad al-Būnī or much before in the work of Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ. For exam-
ple, see Nasr, An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines: Conceptions of Nature and
Methods Used for its Study by the Ikhwan al-Safaʾ, al-Biruni, and Ibn Sina (Bath: Thames
and Hudson Ltd, 1978), 75–84; Gardiner, “Stars and Saints,” 39–65.
137 Titus Burckhardt, Mystical Astrology according to Ibn ʿArabi, trans. Bulent Rauf (Louisville:
Fons Vitae, 2001), 15. Burckhardt’s research is one of the few studies on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
mystical astrology but oddly, and despite its title, his study entirely leaves out the mysti-
cal aspects of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s astrological accounts. For example, Burckhardt offers a dense
account of zodiacal signs in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thoughts, but he does not mention anything
about the link the Andalusian shaykh estabilishes between zodiacal signs and sainthood,
which greatly influenced Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī. For Ibn al-ʿArabī’s views on astrology

194 Mansouri
Āmulī cites Ibn al-ʿArabī’s al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya (The Meccan Revelations)

according to which God appointed twelve governors (ithnā ʿashar wālī), who
are located in the farthest heaven from us (al-falak al-aqṣā minnā) in the zodia-
cal signs. God divided the farthest heaven into twelve sections (ithnā ʿashar
qism), and every one of them becomes the residence of one of these governors.
He sent the governors to the zodiacal signs while they were sitting on the impe-
rial throne (al-takht), and also removed the veil (al-ḥijāb) which prevented
them from seeing the preserved tablet (al-lawḥ al-maḥfūẓ), so they could see
their own names and ranks as written on the tablet. They also can see what
God has determined to occur through them in the created world (al-ʿālam al-
khalq) until the day of the resurrection (yawm al-qiyāma), and anything they
see becomes written on their souls.
Ibn al-ʿArabī further states that every governor has two chamberlains
(al-ḥājibayn), who transfer their mandates to the delegates (al-nuwwāb, sing.
al-nāʾib), located in the seven heavens. There is also an ambassador (al-safīr)
between every two chamberlains by order of God, and He placed these cham-
berlains in the second heaven that consists of twenty-eight stations (al-manāzil,
sing. al-manzil),138 which is a reference to the stations of the moon (manāzil
al-qamar) or the 28 lunar mansions located near the moon as the spots of
28 nights of monthly revolution.139 The delegates and chiefs (al-nuqabāʾ), who
aid the chamberlains, reside in the seven firmaments (al-samāwāt al-sabʿ), and
look after the interests and wellbeing of the material world (al-ʿālam al-ʿunṣurī)
under the guidance and instructions of the twelve governors.140 Āmulī also
see Ibn al-ʿArabī, Rasāʾil Ibn Arabī (al-Quṭb wa-l-nuqabāʾ wa-ʿaqlat al-mustawfiz) (n.p:
al-Intishār al-ʿArabī, n.d), 68–130.
139 Paul Kunitzsch, “al-Manāzil,” in EI2.
140 Āmulī, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 2:83. For Ibn al-ʿArabī’s narrative see Abū Bakr Muḥyī al-Dīn
Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn Muḥammd ibn Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥātamī ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya, ed. Aḥmad Shams al-Dīn, 11 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya,
1420/1999), 1:444–46. According to Ibn al-ʿArabī, God placed in the material world
(al-ʿālam al-ʿunṣurī) people from the kinds of these governors, such as apostles (al-rusul),
caliphs (al-khulafāʾ), sultans (al-salāṭīn), kings (al-mulūk), and the governors of the affairs
of the world (wulāt umūr al-ʿālam), and as he states this explains the sultanate of the high-
est world (salṭanat al-ʿālam al-ʿulwī) with that of the material or lowest world (al-ʿālam
al-suflā). See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya, 1:447. That is why Ibn al-ʿArabī in
chapter 371 of al-Futūḥāt maintains that God placed a heavenly angel in every zodiacal
sign, and these twelve angels are like the four elements of the heaven, meaning they are
like the water, earth, air, and fire with which the heaven is formed, and on this basis, he
criticizes Twelver Shiʿas who assume these twelve angels to be identical with the twelve
Imams. According to Ibn al-ʿArabī, if these angels are twelve, it is because they are from
the four elements of the heaven and each of these four exists in three stages (al-manāzil),
which are the material world (al-dunyā), barzakh, and the hereafter (al-ākhira), which is

cites chapter 462 of al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya, which is on the Muḥammadan

poles (al-aqṭāb al-Muḥammadiyyūn) where Ibn al-ʿArabī provides details
about the twelve poles:
There are two groups of the Muḥammadan poles. One group was born
before the Prophet was chosen and one group was born after he was
appointed as the Prophet. Those who were born before his prophecy
totalled 313, but the poles of his community, who came after him, are
twelve, excluded are two seals [i.e., conditional and absolute] as they are
from the singulars (al-mufradūn) … The poles of the Muḥammadan com-
munity are of various groups, but what I mean by the poles and that there
is one of them in every age, refers to the twelve poles … The poles of the
Muḥammadan community are twelve and this community orbits them,
which is similar to how the material and corporeal world orbits the twelve
zodiac signs. God entrusted them over everything which appears in both
worlds of generation and corruption (al-kawn wa-l-fasād), whether it
is recurrent or not. But there are many singulars (al-mufradūn) such as
both seals who are from the singulars, but not from the poles. None of the
poles accord to the heart of the Prophet, but the singulars (al-mufradūn)
accord to the heart of the Prophet, and the seal, I mean the specific seal of
the saints (khatm al-awliyāʾ al-khāṣṣ), is amongst the singulars. Thus, the
twelve poles conform to the hearts of [other] prophets.141
These twelve poles, in Āmulī’s analysis, are identical with the twelve gover-
nors located in the zodiac signs. He leaves out the category of the singulars
(al-afrād), in particular the conditional and absolute seals of the saints,142 who
have higher spiritual status than these twelve governors in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s doc-
trine and their hearts correspond with the heart of the Prophet, a unique status
not granted to the twelve poles.143 Nevertheless, according to Āmulī, the twelve
Shiʿi Imams from the family of the Prophet correspond with the true celestial
why these angels are twelve. See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya, 6:200. Thus, from
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s perspective, these twelve angels or governors are not Shiʿi Imams, or any
human figures for that matter, rather they are prototypes for various humans such as
caliphs and religious leaders.
141 Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 163–65. Also, see Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya, 7:111–12.
142 For the comprehensive survey of sainthood in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought see Gerald T. Elmore,
Islamic Sainthood in the Fullness of Time: Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Book of the Fabulous Gryphon
(Leiden: Brill, 1999); Michel Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints: Prophethood and Sainthood in
the Doctrine of Ibn ʿArabī, trans. Liadain Sherrard (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993).
143 The singulars (al-afrād) in Ibn al-ʿArabī are higher than the poles, and they are not subject
to the authority of the poles. Interestingly, Ibn al-ʿArabī regards ʿAlī b. Abū Ṭālib as belong-
ing to this category. See Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints, 107–15.

196 Mansouri
governors (al-wulāt al-ḥaqīqiyya al-ʿulwiyya).144 He also states, “the Twelver

Shiʿas believe that these angels are the Imams of the world, which is under
their watch, and since they are already twelve, they do not change their loci.
That is why Shiʿas believe in the infallibility (al-ʿiṣmat) of the Imams, but they
are unaware that the Imams receive the divine assistance (al-imdād) from this
place.”145 Āmulī thus associates Ibn al-ʿArabī’s poles with the Twelver Shiʿi doc-
trine of Imamate, but he also relates the superiority of sainthood (al-walāya)
over prophecy (al-nubuwwa) to the relation between zodiacal signs and plan-
ets as follows:
Know that the lords of inquiry (arbāb al-taḥqīq), who are the people of
unity (ahl al-tawḥīd), have solid ideas and subtle thoughts about this topic,
I mean the topic of the numbers of Imams and the likes of it. They believe
whenever we parallel the world of form (al-ʿālam al-ṣūra) with the world
of the meaning (al-ʿālam al-maʿnī), and likewise the macrocosm (al-ʿālam
al-āfāq) with the microcosm (al-ʿālam al-anfus), we cannot find anything
in the world of form that does not exist in the world of the meaning. That
is why we find in the world of form the heavens (al-aflāk), seven planets
(al-kawākib al-sabʿa), twelve zodiacal signs (al-burūj al-ithnā ʿashar), four
elements (al-ʿanāṣir al-arbaʿa), and three kingdoms of generated beings
(al-mawālīd al-thalātha) with which the world is established, and we con-
clude that [similar things] must exist in the world of the meaning so that
the correspondence is accurate, and indeed there are accurate reports
[on this matter]. Thus, the nine heavens correspond with the following in
the world of meaning: The absolute prophet (al-nabī al-muṭlaq), absolute
saint (al-walī al-muṭlaq), and seven great prophets, who are Adam, Noah,
Abraham, David, Moses, Jesus, and Muḥammad. They establish the world
of meaning since they, and those who follow their footsteps, are the true
poles of the world (al-aqṭāb al-ʿālam bi-l-aṣāla). The seven planets are like
the seven poles, or the seven prophets, upon whom the spiritual world
(al-ʿālam al-maʿnawī) is established, and the twelve zodiac signs are like
the twelve Imams, who form a circle around which the seven poles are
located. That is because the cycles of the prophets and the poles occur
only across the zodiacal signs of the saints and Imams (abrāj al-awliyāʾ
wa-l-aʾimma), which resembles the superiority (al-taqdīm) of sainthood
(al-walāya) over prophecy (al-nubuwwa) and the nobleness of sainthood
over prophecy as it has been frequently stated and we will state them


in the future, God willing. That said, it does not mean the saint (al-walī)
is nobler than the prophet (al-nabī) as the follower (al-tābiʿ) cannot be
nobler than the followed (al-matbūʿ) so long as he is just the follower, and
this topic has been explained at length.146
As Āmulī clearly states, similar to the planets, which are located on the zodiac
belt, prophets are also located on the belt of sainthood (al-walāya), and he
concludes that this amounts to the superiority of sainthood (al-walāya) over
prophecy (al-nubuwwa). Āmulī’s analogy needs to be understood within the
context of the status of zodiacal signs and planets in Islamic astrology, which
was adopted by Ibn al-ʿArabī and his commentators. Āmulī approvingly cites
the prominent commentator of Ibn al-ʿArabī, Muʾayyad al-Dīn al-Jandī, for sev-
eral pages since “it is comprehensive of everything one needs to know about
this topic [of the Throne (al-ʿarsh) and the heavens (al-aflāk)].”147 Al-Jandī’s
narrative provides an astrological context for the relationship between saint-
hood (al-walāya) and prophecy (al-nubuwwa) in Āmulī’s analysis. According
to this narrative, the highest heaven is the throne (al-ʿarsh), covered by the
light of the merciful (nūr al-raḥmān), and the second heaven is the footstool
(al-kursī). Then, the divine name self-sufficient (al-ghanī) manifested itself in
the heaven of heavens (al-falak al-aflāk), which is also the heaven without stars
(al-falak al-aṭlas), and then the divine name the pre-determiner (al-muqaddir)
manifested itself into the heaven of zodiacal signs (al-falak al-burūj).148 The
pre-determiner determined the divine lights, which embodied the secrets of
the divine names, so “the zodiacal signs were determined by such realities, and
the stages of the lights became illuminated by such subtleties.”149
Al-Jandī further explains the formation of the twelve zodiacal signs by stat-
ing that the word of the merciful (al-kalima al-raḥmāniyya) was one in the
throne, and it was split into two words, the message (al-khabar) and the ruling
(al-ḥukm), in the footstool. While the message is one, the ruling was divided
into five rulings, which are the compulsory (al-wujūb), forbidden (al-haẓar),
neutral (al-ibāḥa), recommended (al-nadb), and reprehensible (al-karāha).
These six rulings of the footstool times two steps of the footstool, which is
a reference to the duality of the footstool as opposed to the oneness of the
throne, equals twelve, which is a number of the zodiacal signs.150 Then, the


198 Mansouri
four qualities (dryness, wetness, hotness, and coldness), four basic elements
(fire, water, earth and air), fixed stars (al-kawākib al-thābita), and finally the
seven planets in the seven heavens appeared, which indicates the planets’
inferior astrological position to the zodiacal signs located under the heaven
without the stars.151 That is why the relationship between the zodiacal signs
and the seven planets symbolizes the superiority of sainthood (al-walāya) over
prophecy (al-nubuwwa) in Āmulī’s analysis as zodiacal signs are placed in a
higher astrological position than the planets, and are thus closer to the throne,
hence the divine realm of God. Just as the zodiacal signs are higher than the
planets, sainthood is also higher than prophecy.
In addition to the astrological positions, the movement of the planets vis-
à-vis the immobility of the zodiac belt can further explain the hierarchical
relationship between sainthood (al-walāya) and prophecy (al-nubuwwa) in
Āmulī’s analysis. The planetary positions in the zodiacal signs is one of the
fundamental principles of astrology. One can observe the zodiacal belt by
simply following the stars which appear after the sun throughout the year as
the ecliptic, a band divided into twelve equal sectors each one of which is 30
degrees, which are the twelve constellations identified by the Babylonians and
the Greeks. The positions of the planets constantly change at different speeds
and thus they form different conjunctions.152 For example, it takes eighty-eight
days for Mercury to go around the ecliptic, but Jupiter finishes the circle in
twelve years, and Saturn spends two years and a half in only one zodiacal sign.153
That is why these seven planets were perceived in ancient astrology as wander-
ers since they constantly move across the belt of the zodiacal signs, creating
different forms and conjunctions.154 Planets are wandering and the zodiac belt

152 Stephen P. Blake, Astronomy and Astrology in the Islamic World (Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press Ltd, 2016), 29.
153 Tamsyn Barton, Ancient Astrology (London: Routledge, 1994), 86–88.
154 For more studies on Islamic astrology see Ahmet Tunç Şen, “Reading the Stars at the
Ottoman Court: Bāyezīd II (r. 886/1481–918/1512) and his Celestial Interests,” Arabica
64.3–4 (2017): 557–608; Pingree and Kennedy, Astronomy and Astrology in the Medieval
Islamic World (Brookfield: Ashgate, 1998); Charles Burnett, Jan Pieter Hogendijk, Kim
Plofker, and Michio Yano, ed., Studies in the History of the Exact Sciences in Honour of
David Pingree (Leiden: Brill, 2004); George Saliba, Islamic Science and the Making of the
European Renaissance (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007); Saliba, “The Role of the Astrologer
in Medieval Islamic Society,” Bulletin d’études orientales, 44 (1992); 45–76; Saif, “Islamic
Astrology,” in Astrology through History: Interpreting the Stars from Ancient Mesopotamia
to the Present, ed. William E. Burns (Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2018), 176–85; Paul
Kunitzsch, The Arabs and the Stars: Texts and Traditions on the Fixed Stars, and their
Influence in Medieval Europe (Northampton: Variorum Reprints, 1989).

is fixed, and it provides an astrological context for Āmulī’s alchemical inter-

pretation of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s metaphors of gold (al-dhahab) for sainthood and
silver (al-fiḍḍa) for prophecy, which also represents the superiority of saint-
hood (al-walāya) over prophecy (al-nubuwwa) in Akbarian theosophy.155 As
Āmulī explains:
The exposition of this simile (al-tashbīh) of prophecy (al-nubuwwa)

and sainthood (al-walāya) to gold and silver requires length, but it sim-
ply means that gold in the presence of the contingent being (al-wujūd
al-imkānī) is similar to the image of sainthood (al-walāya) since it is not
capable of change (al-taghyīr) and alteration (al-tabdīl) of its essence
(al-dhāt) and reality (al-ḥaqīqa) in any form, and amongst the miner-
als gold has this feature. But silver in the presence of the possible being
is similar to the image of prophecy (al-nubuwwa) since it is capable
of change and alteration in relation to times (al-azmān) and periods
(al-awqāt), as silver is also capable of change and alteration, and that is
why it is likened to silver and sainthood is likened to gold.156
This spiritual alchemy (al-kīmiyāʾ al-maʿnawī), as Āmulī phrases it,157 likens

sainthood (al-walāya) to gold, which is consistent with its zodiacal stability
since gold does not fade or tarnish with time like the sainthood which is lasting
and immobile, and prophecy to silver, which is consistent with its planetologi-
cal wandering position since silver tarnishes with time like prophecy which
was in motion until the prophecy of Muḥammad but became sealed after
him. Thus, zodiacal sainthood remains as lasting and superior as gold while
planetological prophecy is as tarnishing and inferior as silver. In other words,
prophecy is silver, meaning it is not eternal as the last Prophet has ended the
cycle of prophecy, but sainthood is gold since it is an eternal attribute of God to
which humans can be attributed too, so it cannot be circumscribed to certain
historical cycles. That is why prophecy is missionary and once its goal is met, it
is sealed, but sainthood is existential, so it remains in the world so long as the
world exists.
155 For these metaphors see Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, 62–64.

200 Mansouri
6 Conclusion
As the prominent Persian mystic ʿAzīz al-Dīn Nasafī (fl. seventh/thirteenth)

recounts, the topic of the superiority of sainthood (walāyat) over prophecy
(nubuwwat) was a common debate not only in his hometown, Nasaf, but also
across Transoxiana in the seventh/twelfth century and everyone was talking
about it.158 Although Nasafī does not mention Ibn al-ʿArabī, it is evident that
these intellectual conversations that would become part and parcel of Islamic
intellectual history were inspired by Ibn al-ʿArabī’s doctrine of sainthood.
Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī possesses a unique position in this process of transform-
ing sainthood into the highest mode of spirituality in Islam as he uniquely
weaves together Shiʿism, Akbarian mysticism, and occult sciences to articulate
the supremacy of sainthood over prophecy. Focusing on Āmulī’s commentary
on Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam and placing it within the larger context of his work, this
study presented a survey of the relation between occult sciences and mysti-
cism in Āmulī’s thought and demonstrated that Āmulī associates lettrism,
astrology, and also alchemy with the supremacy of sainthood over prophecy.
The first part of the paper explained the relevance of the Shiʿi traditions
pertaining to Jafr and Jāmiʿa for Āmulī’s lettrism and that he transforms these
books into the microcosmic and macrocosmic books and turns the universe
and the human being into occult books. Focusing on the first triplicity of bism
Allāh al-raḥmān al-raḥīm, which is alif, bāʾ, and the dot written under bāʾ,
the second part of the paper explained Āmulī uses lettrism to articulate the
supremacy of sainthood over prophecy. The last part of this paper examined
the relation between astrology and mysticism in Āmulī’s thought and how he
relates sainthood to the signs of the zodiac and prophecy to planets, which,
according to Āmulī, provides astrological expressions for the superiority of the
sainthood over prophecy. Āmulī’s argument is also alchemical in equal mea-
sures as he draws on the Akbarian metaphors of gold for sainthood (al-walāya)
and silver for prophecy (al-nubuwwa) to illustrate the supremacy of sainthood
over prophecy. Ḥaydar Āmulī deserves recognition as he represents a fulcrum
of the sanctification of the occult sciences in the Shiʿi world and also paved
the way for the later Neo-Platonic and Pythagorean Sunni-Shiʿi occult sciences
to flourish under the Timurids and Safavids.159 This process reached its culmi-
nation by the further integration of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought into Shiʿism that
158 ʿAzīz al-Dīn ibn Muḥammad Nasafī, Kashf al-ḥaqāʾiq, ed. ʿAlī Aṣghar Mīrbāqirīfard
(Tehran: Intishārāt-i Sukhan, 1391 sh./2013), 316.
159 Melvin-Koushki, “Powers of One,” 133–35.

would come to be known as the school of Iṣfahān (maktab-i Iṣfahān).160 Thus,

studying Āmulī’s voluminous works, which have remained terra incognita par
excellence, is an intellectual exigency, one which serves as a building block
for understanding later negotiations between Shiʿism, Sunnism, and occult sci-
ences in the early modern Persianate and Islamicate world.
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank Prof. Shafique Virani for reading several drafts of this
paper and providing excellent feedback that helped me sharpen my argument.
I also would like to thank Faraz Alidnia for reading the first draft of this paper
and providing feedback for me. I also thank Prof. Mohammed Rustom for his
generous support during the publication process and many thanks to Prof.
Alexandre Papas and the anonymous reviewers of the JSS for their suggestions
and comments.
160 See Andrew Newman, “Towards a Reconsideration of the ‘Isfahān School of Philosophy’:
Shaykh Bahāʾi and the Role of the Safawid ʿulamā,” Studia Iranica 15 (1986): 165–99;
Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy, trans. Liadain Sherrard and Philip Sherrard
(London: Routledge, 2006), 332–47; Lewisohn, “Sufism and the School of Isfahan,” in The
Heritage of Sufism: Late Classical Persianate Sufism, ed. Leonard Lewisohn and David
Morgan (Oxford: Oneworld, 1999), 63–134; Nasr, “The School of Iṣpahān,” in A History of
Muslim Philosophy, ed. Mian Mohammad Sharif (Weisbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1966),
904–32; Nasr, “Spiritual Movements, Philosophy and Theology in the Safavid Period,” in
The Cambridge History of Iran, ed. Peter Jackson and Lawrence Lockhart (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1986), 656–97; Nasr, “The School of Isfahan Revisited,”
in Islamic Philosophy from its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the Land of Prophecy
(Albany: SUNY Press, 2006), 209–22.

Mansouri Occult-Mysticism 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mansouri Occult-Mysticism 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

Walāya between Lettrism and Astrology

Mohammad Amin Mansouri

occult sciences – lettrism – astrology – alchemy – sainthood – prophecy

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2021 | doi:10.1163/22105956-bja10011

entities. As will be explained in this paper, he uses occult sciences to par-

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

5 Shams al-Dīn Āmulī, Nafāʾis al-funūn, 2:94.

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

fourteenth century, when Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī flourished, also witnessed a

The secret of God is deposited in the treasure of lettrism (ʿilm al-ḥurūf )

Against this background, Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī represents a fundamental ful-

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/jafr (hereafter EIr). The current paper also offers

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

13 See for example, Melvin-Koushki, “Pseudo-Shaykh Bahāʾī on the Supreme Name, a

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

While these studies provide groundbreaking knowledge on Islamic occult

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

2 A Note on Āmulī’s Life and His Commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s

Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī, or as he introduces himself in Naqd al-nuqūd (The

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

33 Āmūli, al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam, 1:529.

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

sh./2015. The edition of Bīdārfar, exceeding two-thousand pages, only covers

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

3 Jafr, Jāmiʿa, and Āmulī’s Lettrism

Shiʿism, in particular traditions pertaining to the mysterious books called Jafr

Ghābir is the knowledge of whatever will happen, Mazbūr is the knowl-

42 Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:878.

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

The association of Jafr with lettrism is also present in a story narrated by

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

ʿAlī composed the book in scattered letters (ḥurūf al-mutafarraqa) in the

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

Words are also not, from Āmulī’s perspective, conventional arrangements of

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

If they are regarded as letters, it is like what they state, “I am

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

4 The Dot Is Sainthood, Bāʾ Is Prophecy

82 See the list here Āmulī, Naṣṣ al-nuṣūṣ, 2:865.

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

prophecy (al-nubuwwa), apostleship (al-risāla), and sainthood (al-walāya); law

84 Āmulī, al-Muqaddamāt, 58–60.

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

According to Āmulī, bāʾ is the first being (al-mawjūd al-awwal), “which

God has sent one-hundred-and-four books. The knowledge of one hun-

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

.org/10.1163/1573-3912_ei3_COM_0163. Also, in his commentary on the Qurʾan, Āmulī

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

96 Jandī, Sharḥ fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, 46.

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

… the self-determination (taʿayyun) of the Real – the absolute (al-muṭlaq)

َ ْ ����ّ‫ )��َ��س‬of your Lord” (Q. 87:1). In both of

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

and God in an Akbarian manner since it transfigures the transcendental alif

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2020) 161–201

َ ْ ��ّ‫ )��َ��س‬of your Lord” (Q. 87:1). In both of