Mysticism and Philosophy in Al-Andalus
Mysticism and Philosophy in Al-Andalus
Mysticism and Philosophy in Al-Andalus
Islamic History
and Civilization
Studies and Texts
Editorial Board
Hinrich Biesterfeldt
Sebastian Günther
Wadad Kadi
VOLUME 103
By
Michael Ebstein
Leiden • boston
2014
Cover illustration: Al-Aqmar Mosque, Cairo. Photograph by David Silverman, DPSimages
Ebstein, Michael.
Mysticism and philosophy in al-Andalus : Ibn Masarra, Ibn al-ʿArabi and the Ismaʿili tradition /
by Michael Ebstein.
pages cm — (Islamic history and civilization ; v. 103)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-90-04-25536-4 (hardback : alk. paper) — ISBN 978-90-04-25537-1 (e-book)
1. Mysticism—Islam—Spain—Andalusia—History. 2. Islamic philosophy—Spain—Andalusia—
History. 3. Ismailites—Spain—Andalusia—History. 4. Ibn Masarrah, Muhammad ibn ʿAbd Allah,
882 or 883–931. 5. Ibn al-ʿArabi, 1165–1240. I. Title.
BP188.8.S72A534 2014
297.409468—dc23
2013039812
This publication has been typeset in the multilingual “Brill” typeface. With over 5,100 characters
covering Latin, IPA, Greek, and Cyrillic, this typeface is especially suitable for use in the
humanities. For more information, please see www.brill.com/brill-typeface.
ISSN 0929-2403
ISBN 978-90-04-25536-4 (hardback)
ISBN 978-90-04-25537-1 (e-book)
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV
provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................... xi
Note on Transliteration, Translation and Dates .................................... xiii
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
Al-Andalus ............................................................................................. 1
Ismāʿīlīs, Fāṭimīs and Andalusīs ...................................................... 4
From Ibn Masarra to Ibn al-ʿArabī ................................................. 8
Religion, Politics, Science: Developments and Setbacks
in Modern Scholarship .................................................................. 13
Terminology and Typology ............................................................... 21
Some Notes on the Sources .............................................................. 28
2 Letters .......................................................................................................... 77
Common Conceptions Regarding the Letters ............................ 80
The Letters as the Building Blocks of the Universe ............. 80
The Letters and the Four Natures ............................................. 96
The Notion of Parallel Worlds and the Letters ..................... 102
viii contents
6 Conclusion .................................................................................................. 231
Bibliography ...................................................................................................... 239
Index .................................................................................................................... 261
Acknowledgements
Al-Andalus
1 On Andalusī history and culture see Torres Balbás et al., Al-Andalus; Kennedy, Muslim
Spain; Marín, Fierro and Samsó, Formation; Jayyusi, Legacy.
2 See Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 10, 15, 49 n. 4. On the influence of Ibn al-ʿArabī on
later generations see also Blochet, Études 49–111; Schaeder, Islamische Lehre 221, 237–9;
Asín Palacios, Mystical philosophy 128–9; Corbin, Science; Sviri, Spiritual trends 78; and the
references given below in n. 74. On the lives and works of Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī
see below pp. 8–10.
2 introduction
3 On this unique feature of Andalusī mysticism in the Islamic and Jewish worlds, see
Sviri, Spiritual trends; cf. Akasoy, Andalusi exceptionalism. On Jewish mystical-philosoph-
ical thought in al-Andalus see also the discussion below on pp. 15, 21.
4 On the meaning of the term ‘Esotericism’ employed here see the discussion below
on p. 27.
5 According to the Shiʿi view, only the members of the Prophet’s family (ahl al-bayt)—
i.e., ʿAlī and his descendants—have the Divine right to rule the Islamic community, in
both political and religious matters. See also the discussion below at the beginning of
chapter 3.
6 On the history of the Ismāʿīlīs (including the Fāṭimīs), see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs. On their
literary output and contribution to the intellectual tradition of Islam, see, for example,
introduction 3
Daftary, Ismaili literature; Daftary, Mediaeval Ismaʿili history; Nasr, Ismāʿīlī contributions;
Halm, Fatimids.
7 On this perception, see, for example, Sviri, Self; Sviri, Taste, index, s.v. “nafs”.
8 For a useful definition of ‘theosophy’ in this context, see Scholem, Major trends 206.
9 On cosmogony, cosmology and Neoplatonic philosophy, see chapter 1 of this study; on
the science of letters, see chapter 2. On the epistle on letters attributed to Sahl al-Tustarī,
the well-known Sufi master who lived in the 9th century, see Ebstein and Sviri, So-called
Risālat al-ḥurūf and the discussion below on pp. 90–1 (chapter 2). Note that the writings
of al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī, a Sunni mystic who likewise lived in the 9th century (yet did not
belong to the Sufi tradition), exhibit some of the unique traits found in the works of Ibn
Masarra, Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ismāʿīlī authors; on him see below pp. 130–2 (chapter 3).
4 introduction
the Fāṭimīs never gained any significant political control in the Iberian
Peninsula, there is evidence that points to a Fāṭimī impact on al-Andalus
in this context. The most well-known example occurred in 316/929, when
ʿAbd al-Raḥmān III, ruler of Umayyad Spain (300/912–350/961), declared
himself a khalīfa (Caliph), i.e., “God’s vicegerent on earth” (khalīfat allāh)
and “the Prophet’s successor” as the ruler of the Islamic community
(khalīfat rasūl allāh). This declaration was meant, inter alia, to challenge
the Fāṭimī claim to power.13
It is conceivable that in the course of their political-religious struggle
against the Fāṭimīs, the Andalusīs became exposed to Ismāʿīlī conceptions
and perhaps even to Ismāʿilī writings. For instance, under the Caliph-
imām al-Muʿizz, an exchange of letters took place between the Fāṭimī
and Umayyad courts in which issues pertaining to political-religious
legitimacy were fiercely debated.14 Moreover, it is evident from the Arabic
sources that during the 10th century, the Fāṭimīs attempted to instigate
or support revolts in al-Andalus against the Umayyad regime.15 Natu-
rally, this Fāṭimī subversion entailed missionary activity (daʿwa) whereby
Ismāʿīlī-Fāṭimī ideas were disseminated in al-Andalus and in other ter-
ritories under Umayyad control.16 The Fāṭimī attempts to influence the
13 On this declaration and on the Fāṭimī-Umayyad struggle, see Fierro, ʿAbd al-Rahman
III 28, 53–60, 73–8, 114–5, 125–31; Halm, Empire 280–4. On the concept of khalīfa see the
discussion below on pp. 175–9 and the references given there.
14 See al-Qāḍī al-Nuʿmān, al-Majālis 164–96; see also Dachraoui, Al-Muʿizz; Krinis, Idea
28 n. 118 (in Hebrew). On the exchange of letters between the Fāṭimī Caliph-imām al-ʿAzīz
(ruled between the years 365/975–386/996) and the Umayyad Caliph al-Ḥakam II (the
successor of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān III, ruled 350/961–366/976), see Imamuddin, Commercial
relations 13.
15 Thus, ʿUmar b. Ḥafṣūn, who revolted against the Umayyads in al-Andalus during the
years 267/880–303/916, announced his allegiance to ʿAbdallāh / ʿUbaydallāh al-Mahdī, the
first Fāṭimī Caliph-imām (ruled 297/909–322/934). Al-Mahdī sent two Ismāʿīlī missionaries
(duʿāt, singular: dāʿī) to Ibn Ḥafṣūn, one of the two being Abū ʿAbdallāh Jaʿfar b. Aḥmad b.
al-Haytham from Qayrawān, author of Kitāb al-munāẓarāt (“The Book of Discussions”). See
Ibn al-Haytham, al-Munāẓarāt 2 (the Arabic text), 32–3, 53, 63–4 and n. 2 (the introduc-
tion and translation into English); Tibi, ʿUmar b. Ḥafṣūn; Halm, Empire 280; Fierro, ʿAbd
al-Rahman III 33, 45; Fierro, La Heterodoxia 121–3; Fierro, Plants 125–6 and the references
given there. On Ibn al-Haytham see also Daftary, Ismaili literature 117. On the execution
in Cordova of Abū l-Khayr at the beginning of al-Ḥakam II’s reign, perhaps due to his
pro-Shiʿi and pro-Fāṭimī sympathies, see Dachraoui, Tentative; Dachraoui, Al-Muʿizz 487a;
cf. Fierro, La Heterodoxia 153–4.
16 See, for example, Ibn al-Haytham, al-Munāẓarāt 2; Dachraoui, Tentative; see also
Halm, Fatimids 57. On the presence of Ismāʿīlī duʿāt in al-Andalus during the 10th century
and perhaps even earlier, towards the end of the 9th century, see Fierro, ʿAbd al-Rahman
III 36, 75; see also Fierro, La Heterodoxia 93–4, 118–20; Fierro, Opposition 177–8; Asín Pala-
cios, Mystical philosophy 21. For an attempt to chart the history of the Shiʿi presence in
al-Andalus, see al-Makkī, al-Tashayyuʿ; and, concerning North-Africa, see also Madelung,
6 introduction
Some notes. On the role of the daʿwa in propagating Ismāʿīlī doctrines in North Africa in
the course of the 10th century, see S. Hamdani, Dialectic. On the Ismāʿīlī daʿwa in general,
see the references given below on p. 129 n. 21.
17 See al-Makkī, Maẓhar; see also al-Makkī, al-Tashayyuʿ 126–45.
18 See Fierro, Almohads.
19 See Imamuddin, Commercial relations 13–4; see also Wasserstein, An unrecognized
hoard.
20 On this subject see chapter 1 of this study.
21 See the references given below on p. 76 nn. 149–50.
22 See also al-Makkī, al-Tashayyuʿ 103–11. On Andalusī scholars who visited and settled in
Fāṭimī Egypt during the 12th century—albeit Mālikī ones, and mainly in Alexandria—see
introduction 7
For example, Ibn Masarra, on his way east to Mecca,23 stayed in Qayrawān,
where, until 308/921, the court of al-Mahdī, the first Fāṭimī Caliph-imām,
was situated.24 Qayrawān was also the town where Isaac Israeli resided.
Israeli, an important Jewish Neoplatonic philosopher, served as al-Mahdī’s
personal physician; and, as we shall see in what follows,25 both the Neo-
platonism of Israeli and that of Ibn Masarra share a close affinity with
Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic thought. Thus, Qayrawān constituted for Ismāʿīlī
duʿāt, Sunni Andalusī scholars and Jewish thinkers a convenient locale
where they could exchange ideas and traditions in the fields of religion,
philosophy and even the occult sciences such as the science of letters.26
The arrival in al-Andalus of Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ (“The Epistles of
the Sincere Brethren”) at a relatively early stage in the development of
Andalusī mystical-philosophical thought, and the Rasāʾil’s influence on
both Muslim and Jewish authors, testify to the impact of the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī
Leiser, Muslims 137–49, 157–8. On the enormous size of the Fāṭimī library in Cairo, which
must have attracted the attention of Andalusī scholars, see Halm, Fatimids 91–3; De
Smet, Les Bibliothèques 491–2. According to a report quoted by Halm (Fatimids 92), this
library also held works that dealt with astronomy and occult matters such as alchemy and
ruḥāniyyāt, a term denoting “the spiritual powers [of the planets]”, not “spiritual knowl-
edge” (on this term, see the discussion below on p. 135 n. 42). For a report indicating
the presence in Egypt of a work by Jābir b. Ḥayyān (on whom see below on pp. 30–2),
see Ṣāʿid al-Andalusī, Ṭabaqāt al-umam 153. On Cairo as the center of Ismāʿīlī daʿwa, see
Stern, Cairo. On the presence of Ismāʿīlī duʿāt in the ḥajj caravans, see Halm, Fatimids
15. As regards Baṣra, it was the city where Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ resided (on whom see below
pp. 28–30); it is significant that Ibn Masarra’s father visited there (see Stroumsa and Sviri,
Beginnings 201).
23 For Ibn Masarra’s biography, see below pp. 8–9.
24 See Stroumsa, Ibn Masarra 98, 101 n. 28, 110 n. 79; Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings
201–2. The exact dates of Ibn Masarra’s voyage to the east remain unclear. According to the
different reports in the Arabic sources, he may have travelled to the east anytime between
300/912 (or a little before that) and 317/929; see Lévi-Provençal, A Propos de l’ascète phi-
losophe Ibn Masarra 81. On the Fāṭimī presence in Qayrawān see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index,
s.v. “Qayrawān”. On Qayrawān as a center where discussions or debates (munāẓarāt) took
place between Ismāʿīlī duʿāt and Mālikī scholars in the early days of the Fāṭimī Empire,
see Hamdani, Dialectic. The Sunni-Mālikī school was predominant not only in Qayrawān
(see ibid. 17) but in al-Andalus as well: it was officially adopted by the Umayyad Caliphs in
Cordova and played a central role in their struggle against the Shiʿis-Ismāʿīlīs. See Fierro,
ʿAbd al-Rahman III 127–31; Dachraoui, Tentative.
25 See below pp. 73–4.
26 For a report attesting to the existence of letter speculations among the Ismāʿīlīs in
Qayrawān in the early days of the Fāṭimī Empire, see Ibn al-Haytham, al-Munāẓarāt 46
(the Arabic text). On the Jewish side, one may mention the name of Israeli’s disciple,
Dūnash b. Tamīm, who composed a commentary on the important Jewish mystical work
entitled Sefer yetsīrah (“The Book of Creation”), famous for its speculations on letters; see
Stroumsa, Ibn Masarra 101 n. 28, 108 n. 70, 110 nn. 78–9; Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings 214.
On the centrality of letter speculations in the Ismāʿīlī tradition and in the writings of both
Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī, see chapter 2 of this study.
8 introduction
27 On these Epistles and their connection to the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī world, see the discussion
below on pp. 28–30.
28 See below pp. 31–2.
introduction 9
29 On Ibn Masarra’s life, see Asín Palacios, Mystical philosophy 30–42; Arnaldez, Ibn
Masarra; Lévi-Provençal, A Propos de l’ascète philosophe Ibn Masarra; Addas, Andalusī
mysticism 913–5; Stroumsa, Ibn Masarra 98; Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings 201–2; Fierro,
La Heterodoxia 113–5; Ramón Guerrero and Garrido Clemente, Ibn Masarra, and the
references given there; and see the wide-range of primary sources collected by Brown,
Muḥammad b. Masarra 39–92. On the two works by Ibn Masarra that have survived, see
below p. 14.
30 See Asín Palacios, Mystical philosophy 98–101; Fierro, La Heterodoxia 132–40, 155–6,
166–8; Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Andalus 98, 105 n. 104; Fierro, Opposition 178–84; Stroumsa
and Sviri, Beginnings 202; and the references in the previous note.
31 For a more detailed discussion of the term bāṭinī and the various opinions concern-
ing Ibn Masarra’s religious and intellectual affiliation, see below pp. 25–6.
32 Contrary to Dozy’s opinion; see the reference in Addas, Andalusī mysticism 912.
33 On the anti-Shiʿi policy of the Umayyad regime in al-Andalus, see, for example,
al-Makkī, al-Tashayyuʿ 116–26.
10 introduction
burnt while others hidden, or else the identity of their true authors was
concealed.34
Muḥyī l-Dīn Abū ʿAbdallāh Muḥammad b. ʿAlī Ibn al-ʿArabī was like-
wise criticized, inter alia, of being influenced by the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī tradi-
tion. Born in Murcia in 560/1165, Ibn al-ʿArabī spent roughly the first half
of his life in al-Andalus. Like Ibn Masarra, he too traveled to the east: he
had visited several cities in North Africa before beginning his long journey
to Cairo, Jerusalem, Mecca and to various other cities in Iraq, Anatolia
and Syria. Unlike Ibn Masarra, however, Ibn al-ʿArabī never returned to
his beloved homeland of al-Andalus, dying in Damascus in 638/1240. Both
a prolific and a controversial writer, Ibn al-ʿArabī drew many followers
as well as critics already during his own lifetime; his thought has been
debated by Muslims from medieval times down to the present.35
As stated above, one reason for the negative attitude of various Sunni
scholars towards Ibn al-ʿArabī were the correspondences that they per-
ceived between his thought and Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī doctrines. Ibn Khaldūn,
the well-known North African historian of the 14th century, declares, for
example, that Ibn al-ʿArabī should be counted among
those Sufis of later generations who spoke of unveiling and of that which
is beyond the senses. They have delved deeply into these matters, many of
them believing in Divine incarnation (ḥulūl) and in unity (waḥda) as we
have already indicated.
According to Ibn Khaldūn,
their predecessors have mingled with the Ismāʿīlīs, the Shiʿis of later genera-
tions. These Ismāʿīlīs too have professed their belief in Divine incarnation
and in the divinity of the imāms, a belief not known to their precursors.
Each one of these two groups became imbued with the beliefs of the other
group, their sayings became intermixed and their doctrines assimilated.
Ibn Khaldūn further states that the belief in a hierarchy of saints or
“friends of God” (awliyāʾ)—a belief central to Islamic mysticism in both its
34 On this see Ebstein and Sviri, So-called Risālat al-ḥurūf 224–30 and n. 34; see also
Ṣāʿid al-Andalusī, Ṭabaqāt al-umam 162–5; Asín Palacios, Mystical philosophy 100–1; Ham-
dani, Brethren of purity 75–6.
35 On the life and works of Ibn al-ʿArabī, see Addas, Quest; Hirtenstein, Unlimited merci-
fier; Corbin, Creative imagination 38–77; Ateş, Ibn al-ʿArabī; on his works see also http://
www.ibnarabisociety.org/works.html and http://www.ibnarabisociety.org/archive.html.
For general introductions to his thought, see Chittick, Sufi path; Chittick, Self-disclosure;
Corbin, Creative imagination; Affifi, Mystical philosophy. On the controversies surrounding
his thought in past times and in the present, see Knysh, Ibn ʿArabi; Homerin, Ibn Arabi.
introduction 11
Palacios (1871–1944), the famous Spanish Orientalist, held that both Ibn
Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī were influenced by the ‘Pseudo-Empedoclean’
tradition, that is, by Neoplatonic teachings attributed in various Arabic
sources to Empedocles, the Greek philosopher who lived in the 5th cen-
tury B.C. According to Asín Palacios’s theory, Ibn Masarra was the first
one to introduce the ‘Pseudo-Empedoclean’ tradition into Spain. This tra-
dition was then passed on, via Ibn Masarra’s disciples and followers in
the 10th and 11th centuries, to ‘the School of Almería’ as Asín Palacios
called it—i.e., the school comprised of the Andalusī mystics Abū l-ʿAbbās
Aḥmad b. Muḥammad Ibn al-ʿArīf (died in 536/1141), Abū l-Ḥakam ʿAbd
al-Salām b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn Barrajān (died in 536/1141 as well), Abū
Bakr Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Mayūrqī (died 537/1142) and Abū l-Qāsim
Aḥmad b. Ḥusayn Ibn Qasī (died 546/1151). The ‘Pseudo-Empedoclean’
teachings, according to Asín Palacios, finally reached Ibn al-ʿArabī.41
Over the years, Asín Palacios’s theory—published in his 1914 Aben-
masarra y su escuela, long before the works of Ibn Masarra were discov-
ered—was severely criticized by different scholars. The latter doubted
whether ‘the School of Almería’, linking Ibn Masarra to Ibn al-ʿArabī via
such Andalusī mystics as Ibn al-ʿArīf, Ibn Barrajān and Ibn Qasī, had ever
really existed. They further claimed that Ibn Masarra’s writings contain
no traces of any such ‘Pseudo-Empedoclean’ doctrines.42 Indeed, it is
by now clear that Asín Palacios was wrong in emphasizing the ‘Pseudo-
Empedoclean’ element which does not appear at all in those works of
Ibn Masarra that have survived. Nevertheless, and despite his various
outdated—at times ‘Orientalist’ and racist—notions regarding Islam and
Andalusī Arabic-Islamic history, Asín Palacios was correct in his basic
understanding that Ibn Masarra had been influenced by Neoplatonic
mystical-philosophy.43 Ibn al-ʿArabī too was influenced by Neoplatonism.
Furthermore, Ibn al-ʿArabī was familiar with various teachings attributed
to Ibn Masarra, including ones dealing with cosmological issues and the
science of letters,44 although it is not clear whether he had access to
Ibn Masarra’s works, at least in the form in which they have come down
41 See Asín Palacios, Mystical philosophy. Concerning al-Mayūrqī, cf. Fierro, Opposition
184 n. 40.
42 See Affifi, Mystical philosophy 174–83; Stern, Ibn Masarra; Addas, Andalusī mysticism;
De Smet, Empedocles Arabus; Brown, Muḥammad b. Masarra; and cf. Tornero, A report
145–9.
43 See also Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings 207–11.
44 For the mention of Ibn Masarra in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings, see the references to
Affifi and Addas above in n. 42; see also Asín Palacios, Mystical philosophy 43 n. 1, 123
introduction 13
to us.45 Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī can thus be viewed, respectively,
as the starting point and the culmination of a distinct type of mystical-
philosophical thought that evolved in al-Andalus during the 9th–12th/13th
centuries. This thought was deeply influenced by Neoplatonism and has
much in common with the Ismāʿīlī tradition, especially in its Neoplatonic
form. To what degree, if at all, other Andalusī mystics such as Ibn Barrajān
and Ibn Qasī belong to this type of mysticism demands further research,
which, unfortunately, falls beyond the scope of this study. Such research
would indeed enable us to re-chart the history of Islamic mysticism in
al-Andalus.46
n. 12. Concerning letter speculations, see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 7 (read
ة �ل �ن ة �ل �ن
� ا ب� �م��سر� ا ج� ب����ليinstead of � ;)ا ب� �م��سر� ا ج�ي����ليand see also Garrido, Science 57–61.
45 See also Rosenthal, Ibn ʿArabī 19 n. 83. Note that in his writings, Ibn al-ʿArabī also
refers to Ibn al-ʿArīf, Ibn Barrajān and Ibn Qasī; see the references to Asín Palacios, Affifi
and Addas in the previous notes.
46 This endeavor would require scholars to rethink prevalent conceptions regarding
various typological issues. The common understanding of terms such as taṣawwuf, zuhd
(“asceticism”) and ‘Islamic mysticism’ as well as the relation between them will need to be
reconsidered (see also the discussion below on pp. 21–7). For current surveys of the history
of Islamic mysticism in al-Andalus, see Addas, Andalusī mysticism; Marín, Abū Saʿīd ibn
al-Aʿrābī; Marín, Early development; Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Andalus; Fierro, Polemic; Fierro,
Opposition; González Costa and López Anguita, Historia.
47 Much if not most of the progress in recent decades in the field of Ismāʿīlī studies is
due to the activity of The Institute of Ismaili Studies. This Institute, which is situated in
14 introduction
seen great progress in the past few decades: the literature dedicated to
the works and thought of Ibn al-ʿArabī—the greatest Muslim mystic of
al-Andalus—is by now vast.48 In addition, the discovery in the 1970s of a
manuscript containing two of Ibn Masarra’s works which had been pre-
sumed lost (Risālat al-iʿtibār, “The Epistle on Contemplation”, and Kitāb
khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf wa-ḥaqāʾiqihā wa-uṣūlihā, “The Book on the Properties
of Letters, their True Essences and Roots”) and their publication have
allowed scholars to analyze Ibn Masarra’s thought and to chart the begin-
nings of Andalusī mysticism in a more careful and less speculative way
than before.49
Despite these impressive developments, not one serious study has been
devoted to the links and affinities between Ismāʿīlī thought and Sunni
mysticism in al-Andalus. Though important references to this issue can
be found in the works of authors like Henry Corbin, Abul Ela Affifi, Kāmil
Muṣṭafā al-Shaybī and others, these references are mostly sporadic and
often superficial.50 This is quite odd, especially in view of the fact that
London, was founded in 1977 by the fourth Āghā Khān (the current imām of the Nizārī
Ismāʿīlīs); for its website, see http://www.iis.ac.uk/home.asp?l=en. On the history of
Ismāʿīlī studies, see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 1–33; Daftary, Ismaili literature 84–103. For a bibli-
ography of the relevant primary and secondary sources, see ibid. 104–439. For catalogues
of Ismāʿīlī manuscripts see Poonawala, Biobibliography; Gacek, Catalogue; Cortese, Arabic
Ismaili manuscripts; Cortese, Ismaili and other Arabic manuscripts.
48 Special mention should be made of The Muhyiddin Ibn ʿArabi Society (see http://
www.ibnarabisociety.org/), whose activity contributes much to the study of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
thought. For the history of modern research on Ibn al-ʿArabī, see the short surveys in
Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 3–5; Chodkiewicz, Ibn ʿArabī 81–3; and see also the refer-
ences above in n. 35.
49 The manuscript was discovered and published by the Egyptian scholar Muḥammad
Kamāl Ibrāhīm Jaʿfar; see Jaʿfar, Min qaḍāyā l-fikr al-islāmī 310–44, 345–60; see also
Tornero, A report 133–4. The numerous errors and misreadings in Jaʿfar’s edition have been
corrected by Garrido Clemente, Edición crítica de la Risālat al-iʿtibār; Garrido Clemente,
Edición crítica del K. Jawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf.
50 The Egyptian scholar Affifi, who studied under the well-known Reynold A. Nichol-
son, calls attention in his 1939 The Mystical Philosophy of Muhyid Din-Ibnul Arabi to the
similarities between Ibn al-ʿArabī’s teachings and Ismāʿīlī doctrines, taking special notice
of the influence of Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ on Ibn al-ʿArabī; see Affifi, Mystical philosophy,
index, s.v. “Ikhwānuṣ-Ṣafā” and “Ismāʿīlīs”. Corbin, for his part, perceived the intellectual
worlds of Ibn al-ʿArabī and the Ismāʿīlīs as being closely related from a phenomenologi-
cal point of view. According to Corbin, links also existed between Ibn Masarra’s thought
and the Ismāʿīlī tradition; see, for example, Corbin, Creative imagination 9, 16, 24–6, 45,
48–9, 79, 112 and index, s.v. “ismailianism”; Corbin, History 3, 28, 76, 183, 224, 226 (these
two works are based on studies published in the 1950s and 1960s); see also the references
below in n. 53. The Iraqi author Al-Shaybī (Affifi’s student), in his book written in the
1960s and entitled al-Ṣila bayna l-taṣawwuf wa-l-tashayyuʿ (“The Connection between
Sufism and Shiʿism”), discussed the influence (as he saw it) of the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī tradition
on Sufism in general and on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought in particular; see al-Shaybī, al-Ṣila i,
introduction 15
already Ibn Khaldūn, centuries ago, had called attention to the correspon-
dences between Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought and Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī doctrines. More-
over, the Ismāʿīlī impact on Andalusī mystical-philosophical thought has
been demonstrated, at least to a certain degree, in the field of Jewish stud-
ies. Various scholarly works on Jewish thought and Kabbalah have shown
that Ismāʿīlī ideas and terminology influenced several medieval Jewish
authors in Spain during the 11th–13th centuries, both those who were
under direct influence of the Arabic culture (in the Muslim South) and
those who lived in the Christian North. Ismāʿīlī traces can also be detected
in Jewish mystical-philosophical works written in medieval Yemen, where
the political-religious presence of a dominant Ismāʿīlī community contin-
ued for centuries.51 One would expect scholars in the field of Islamic stud-
ies to have addressed this issue as well, namely, the relation between the
Ismāʿīlī tradition and Sunni mysticism in al-Andalus, a region which for
many years, as I have emphasized above, was so deeply preoccupied with
the Fāṭimī-Ismāʿīlī challenge.
especially pp. 220, 223, 225–9, 379–82, 405–8, 416–7, 448–50, 463, 478–506. Louis Massi-
gnon, basing himself on Asín Palacios’s theory, likewise claimed an Ismāʿīlī influence on
the Andalusī mystical school to which Ibn al-ʿArabī belonged; see Massignon, Sālimīya
(where it is stated that Ibn Barrajān, Ibn Qasī and Ibn al-ʿArabī all belong to the same
“semi-Ismāʿīlī school of Andalusian mystics of the sixth century”. This sentence was omit-
ted from the second edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam, see Massignon [and Radtke],
Sālimiyya). Note that Corbin too relied on Asín Palacios’s theory; see Corbin, Creative
imagination 25–6, 48–9; Corbin, History 221–6. However, it is important to emphasize that
Asín Palacios himself did not relate directly to any Ismāʿīlī influence on Andalusī mysti-
cism; see below n. 79. Several other scholars have also noted briefly the Ismāʿīlī, or else
the Ikhwānian impact on Ibn al-ʿArabī; see al-Makkī, al-Tashayyuʿ 108–9, 132–3 (on Ibn
Masarra); Hodgson, Order of assassins 181; Nyberg, Kleinere Schriften 145; Nasr, An introduc-
tion 36 n. 53; Addas, Quest 58–9. Finally, the article in Portuguese by De Macedo, Influência,
published in a relatively unknown journal—though containing a few interesting observa-
tions—relies exclusively on secondary literature, including Asín Palacios’s outdated study.
51 See, for example, Pines, Shīʿite terms; Pines, La Longue récension 20; Pines, Nathanaël
ben al-Fayyûmî; Pines, On the term Ruḥaniyot (in Hebrew); Krinis, Idea (in Hebrew);
Krinis, Judeo-Arabic manuscripts (in Hebrew); Wilensky, ‘First created being’; Ivry, Ismāʿīlī
theology (and see also Ebstein, Secrecy 341–2); Idel, Sefirot 270–7 (in Hebrew); Idel,
Ashkenazi esotericism 112 n. 135; Blumenthal, An example; Blumenthal, On the theories;
Blumenthal, An illustration 297–9, 303–7; Kiener, Jewish Ismāʿīlism; Langermann, Cultural
contacts 282–3; Hames, A seal 153–4, 157, 171–2; Vajda, Un Opuscle; Goldreich, Theology (in
Hebrew). Goldreich (see pp. 148–9) stresses that the number of translations from Arabic
into Hebrew among Spanish Jews was far greater than the number of Hebrew translations
from the Latin, a fact that bears testimony to the Arabic influence on Jewish thought even
in the Northern-Christian parts of Spain. On Jews and the Fāṭimī-Ismāʿīlī daʿwa, see Stern,
Fāṭimid propaganda; Cohen and Somekh, In the court. On the influence of Rasāʾil ikhwān
al-ṣafāʾ on Jewish authors in al-Andalus, see below n. 83.
16 introduction
It seems that many scholars nowadays who deal with Sunni mysticism
in al-Andalus, and specifically with Ibn al-ʿArabī, are uninterested in or
perhaps are unwilling to contemplate the question which I have posed at
the beginning of this introduction: what were the historical factors behind
the emergence in al-Andalus of the unique type of mysticism which is
reflected in the writings of Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī? In order to fully
understand why this setback has occurred in the study of Sunni Andalusī
mysticism, one must appreciate the methodological difficulties and prob-
lems with which this field of research abounds. These can be divided into
five main categories.
52 See, for instance, Corbin, Creative imagination 25–6; Corbin, History 332; Corbin,
En Islam iranien iii, 156 n. 5.
introduction 17
attitude. According to Corbin, the battle between those who are loyal to
the esoteric truth and those who adhere solely to the exoteric aspect of
reality and faith has always existed, in all three Abrahamic traditions. It
is evident in the struggle that took place between the official Church in
the first few centuries of the Christian era and the gnostic sects; between
the Sunnis, who exclusively follow the ẓāhir (the exterior, manifest aspect
of religion), and the Shiʿis, who acknowledge the bāṭin (its inner, hidden
dimension); between “Sufi theosophists” such as Ibn al-ʿArabī and their
rivals, the legal scholars and the dogmatic theologians; between mod-
ern, scientific secularism and the sublime, esoteric-mystical tendencies of
man; and between modern scholars who adhere to a historicist and lin-
ear-horizontal view of reality and those few who, in contradistinction, are
aware of the meta-historical and vertical aspect of human life. In most cases,
the orthodox establishment suppresses those who are loyal to the esoteric
truth, since the latter endanger the exoteric and dogmatic worldview of
the former. Corbin thus perceives the various esoteric traditions in Islam
and in other religions as partaking in the same ahistorical reality; mystics
from different places and generations—be they Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī authors or
Sunni theosophists such as Ibn al-ʿArabī, Christian gnostics or Protestant
mystics—all are members of the same esoteric family, of the same meta-
historical community responsible for safeguarding the esoteric truth.
In the context of Islamic history, Corbin viewed the Shiʿi tradition as the
source of Islamic esotericism, as its most perfect and truthful expression
and as the vehicle by which it was preserved throughout the generations.
In Corbin’s own words, the Shiʿa is “the sanctuary of Islamic esotericism”
(le sanctuaire de l’ésotérisme de l’Islam). From this perspective, Corbin
had no doubt that the Sufis in general and Ibn al-ʿArabī in particular were
deeply influenced by the Shiʿi tradition. The influence of Ibn al-ʿArabī on
later Shiʿi theosophists was merely ‘a return to the source’ of Shiʿi esoteri-
cism, which initially had influenced Ibn al-ʿArabī.53
53 For these various conceptions see, for example, Corbin, Creative imagination 3–101;
Corbin, L’Initiation ismaélienne; Corbin, En Islam iranien i, 61, 219–84 (see especially
p. 250 n. 234), ii, 359, iii, 153–7, 197–9, iv, 14; Corbin, History xv–xvi, 1–14, 28–30; and the
various articles in Amir-Moezzi, Jambet, and Lory, Henry Corbin. For the expression
“le sanctuaire de l’ésotérisme de l’Islam” see Corbin, En Islam iranien i, xiv. See also Rus-
poli, Ibn ʿArabî, where a similar pro-Shiʿi attitude as that of Corbin is expressed. For a
balanced appraisal of Corbin’s work, see Adams, Hermeneutics; Landolt, Henry Corbin; De
Smet, Henry Corbin; and see also Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 211 n. 527. For a more negative
view, see Meyer, Tendenzen; Wasserstrom, Religion; Algar, Study; and, in relation to Ibn
al-ʿArabī, see Chodkiewicz, Ibn ʿArabī; Brown, A counter-history. Note that Corbin’s critics
18 introduction
2. Traditionalism
A number of eminent scholars in the field of Islamic mysticism, includ-
ing ones who specialize in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought, are connected in one
way or the other, directly or indirectly, to the modern spiritual movement
known as ‘traditionalism’. This movement was founded and developed by
various 20th century European thinkers—many of whom converted to
Islam—such as René Guénon (1886–1951), Frithjof Schuon (1907–1998),
Michel Vâlsan (1907–1974) and others. Nasr (see above) likewise belongs
to the traditionalist movement, and has contributed greatly to the prop-
agation of its ideas in Iran and in other areas of both the Islamic and
Western worlds.
The basic principles of traditionalism are reminiscent of Corbin’s
thought, although the latter did not belong to this movement: 1) The mod-
ern Western world—secular, materialistic and obsessed with science—
has gone astray and is in the midst of a deep crisis, suffering from moral
corruption and spiritual deterioration; 2) There is one spiritual-philo-
sophical truth, universal and esoteric, that is shared by all religions and
which derives from their common, primordial source (‘Perennialism’); 3)
Modern Western culture has lost this truth, whereas the eastern tradi-
tions, such as Sufism, have preserved it; hence, the salvation of the West
depends upon its adoption of these traditions. Indeed, Sufism plays a cen-
tral role in the history of traditionalism: Guénon himself became a devout
also emphasize his pro-Iranian or ‘Iranocentric’ stance; see the discussion and references
in ibid. 49–51.
54 See Nasr, Shiʿism. On the relationship between Nasr and Corbin, see Corbin, His-
tory xvii–xviii; Algar, Study 90; Wasserstrom, Religion 150–1; Sedgwick, Against the modern
world 156–7.
introduction 19
55 See Sedgwick, Against the modern world. For scholars in the field of Islamic mysti-
cism who are connected to the traditionalist movement, particularly those who study Ibn
al-ʿArabī’s thought, see ibid. 134–5, 157, 250. For examples of traditionalist ideas in scholarly
writings, see Chittick, Imaginal worlds 34, 43; Chittick, Science; and on these matters see
also Brown, Andalusī mysticism 95–6.
56 The pertinent words of Brown (A counter-history 62) are worth quoting here: “The
uniqueness of any great thinker, the singular qualities of their contributions, are utterly
opaque to us if the light of history is put out”.
57 See, for example, Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 64–5 and the references to this study
given below in n. 59; see also Taji-Farouki, Beshara, especially pp. 177–83. On the danger of
blurring the lines between religious faith and scientific inquiry, see also Radtke, Between
projection and suppression.
58 On the Shiʿi-Sunni struggle in recent years, see Bar, Sunnis; Hasson, Les Šīʿites;
Hasson, Contemporary polemics; Elad-Altman, Sunni-Shi’a conversion controversy; Litvak,
More harmful; Yegnes, Sunna (in Hebrew); Rabi, ‘Shīʿī crescent’ (in Hebrew).
20 introduction
59 Examples of a pro-Shiʿi bias: see the references to the works of Corbin and al-Shaybī
above in nn. 50, 53. An example of the opposing attitude: see Chodkiewicz, Seal of the
saints 5, 21–2, 41 n. 46, 49 n. 4, 98 n. 4, 137, 145 n. 47.
60 See, for example, the discussion below concerning the hierarchy of the awliyāʾ
on p. 132. For studies that deal with the early contacts between the Shiʿi tradition and
Sunni mysticism in their formative periods (the 8th–9th centuries), see, in addition to the
works by al-Shaybī (al-Ṣila i) and Nasr (Shiʿism), Sviri, Early mystical schools, especially
pp. 457–62; Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 130; and the references given below on p. 121 n. 151.
61 For examples of scholars who emphasize the political, social and economic aspects
of Shiʿi history, see Wellhausen, Religio-political factions 93–167; Modarressi, Crisis; Modar-
ressi, Early debates; and more. For examples of scholars who emphasize the esoteric-
mystical aspect of the Shiʿa, see the references to the works by Amir-Moezzi and Corbin
in the bibliography to this study; and see especially Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 3; see also
Jafri, Origins, especially pp. 1–26.
introduction 21
62 Unfortunately, many scholars in the field of Jewish studies are likewise unaware of
the Ismāʿīlī impact on Jewish mystical-philosophical thought. In general, though many
in this field acknowledge the Arabic-Islamic influence on medieval Jewish theology and
philosophy, they fail to consider the possible influence of Arabic-Islamic thought on the
development of medieval Jewish mysticism. See also Anidjar, Jewish mysticism; Anidjar,
“Our place in al-Andalus”; and cf. Idel, Orienting. Nevertheless, special mention should be
made of Fenton’s studies which are indeed dedicated to the connections between Islamic
and Jewish mysticism in medieval times; see the references to his works in the bibliogra-
phy to this study. Note however that Fenton’s work focuses mainly on Islamic and Jewish
Sufism; on the difference between Sufism and other mystical trends in the world of medi-
eval Islam see below pp. 23–6.
63 On the need for an integrative and interdisciplinary approach to the study of Andalusī
philosophy and mysticism, see Brown, Andalusī mysticism; Stroumsa, Al-Andalus; Sviri,
Jewish-Muslim mystical encounters; and see also Liebes, Shlomo Pines 21–2 (in Hebrew).
For studies that demonstrate the great potential of such an approach, see Wasserstrom,
Sefer yeṣira (cf. Liebes, Ars poetica 232–7, in Hebrew); McGaha, Sefer ha-bahir (cf. Sviri,
Jewish-Muslim mystical encounters); Hames, A seal; Ariel, Eastern dawn; Berman, Judaeo-
Arabic thought. On possible links between Islamic and Christian mysticism in al-Andalus,
see Asín Palacios, Mystical philosophy 131–45.
22 introduction
Let me begin with the term ‘mysticism’, which has been a target of
much criticism in the last quarter of the 20th century. Various critics of
this term have shown that as an analytical category in religious studies,
‘mysticism’ is a modern invention and a product of Western-Christian
culture. According to these critics, ‘mysticism’ is too general a term, too
universal and rigid, ignoring as it does differences between cultures and
religions as well as historical, political, economic, social and gender-
related contexts.64 Consequently, several scholars point to the problems
that arise when attempting to apply the term ‘mysticism’ to non-Christian
and non-Western phenomena such as Jewish Kabbalah or Islamic Sufism.65
A comprehensive discussion of this issue is obviously beyond the scope of
this study; however, I wish to make it clear to the reader why and in what
sense do I use the term ‘mysticism’ in this book.
Despite the obvious Western-Christian roots of this term, and notwith-
standing many erroneous paradigms found in modern studies dedicated
to Islamic mysticism, until now, and in my opinion, no serious alternative
has been proposed for the term ‘mysticism’. Renouncing this term does
not seem to advance scholarship (at least in the field of Islamic studies)
but rather often leads to theoretical, unproductive and at times political
deliberations. ‘Mysticism’ is a useful, albeit fluid and relative category of
research; it is best perceived as a kind of a coordinate that allows scholars
to situate certain religious movements in the general ‘map’ of any given
religion.66 These movements, defined by the scholar as ‘mystical’, are
unique in the nature of the religious experience advocated by them, in
the intensity of this experience and in the practical-spiritual path leading
to it. Often, this religious experience is described as an unusual or direct
encounter with Divinity—as union with It, as an awareness of Its presence
and so forth. However, there is no one definition of the mystical experi-
ence, and its character or nature may differ from one religious movement
to the other. Be that as it may, this experience is perceived by the mystics
themselves as the most important element in their religion, as the heart
of the tradition to which they belong; hence, this experience becomes the
main object of their hermeneutical activity and textual-literary creativity.67
64 For this criticism and for the history of the term ‘mysticism’, see, for example, Katz,
Mysticism; Bouyer, Mysticism; McGinn, Presence of God 263–343 (appendix); Schmidt,
Making.
65 See, for instance, Safi, Bargaining, especially pp. 260–4, 280–1; Chittick, Faith 168–73;
Huss, Formation, especially pp. 142–7; Huss, Mystification (in Hebrew).
66 See also Sviri, Sufism.
67 See also McGinn, Presence of God xiii–xx.
introduction 23
68 See Sviri, Sufism; Sviri, Reconsidering (in Hebrew). Cf. Chittick, Faith 165, 175–6: the
author, who does not approve of the use of the term ‘mysticism’, defines a priori all mysti-
cal phenomena in Islam, including philosophical mysticism and Shiʿi mysticism, as ‘Sufi’.
69 Note that according to various scholars, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ (on whom see below
pp. 28–30) were influenced by the Sufi mystical movement. Some scholars also claim that
Jābir b. Ḥayyān (see below pp. 30–2) belonged to this movement. See, for example, Nasr,
An introduction 25 n. 1, 31 n. 32, 33, 36; Netton, Muslim Neoplatonists 49–50, 52; Lory, Alchi-
mie 53, 125 n. 240; see also Corbin, En Islam iranien i, 92; Chittick, Faith 175. These scholars
rely mainly on sporadic occurrences of the terms taṣawwuf and ṣūfī/ṣūfiyya in the Epistles
of the Ikhwān, and on the fact that Jābir is referred to in Arabic biographical and biblio-
graphical sources as al-ṣūfī (see Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, xl–xli, xliii, lx n. 3). However, the
terms taṣawwuf and ṣūfī/ṣūfiyya in these contexts should be translated as “asceticism” and
“ascetic/s” (respectively) rather than “mysticism” and “mystic/s”. See, for example, Ikhwān
al-ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 8: “[. . .] asceticism, austerity and abstinence according to the Christian
way [. . .] (wa-l-taṣawwuf wa-l-tazahhud wa-l-tarahhub ʿalā l-minhaj al-masīḥī)”; see also
Ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 21, 267, ii, 376, iii, 15; cf. the translations in Baffioni, “Friends
of God” 18 n. 5, 7; De Callataÿ, Classification 63; Nasr, An introduction 31; and see also
El-Bizri, Epistles 6–7; Poonawala, Why do we need 47. Though the Ikhwān seem to have
been familiar with the mystical movement known as Sufism (see their Rasāʾil i, 240: ahl
al-wajd min al-mutaṣawwifa), they did not belong to it. As this study will demonstrate,
their mystical conceptions are clearly Neoplatonic, not Sufi. Regarding Jābir, to the best of
my knowledge, Ṣāʿid al-Andalusī (5th/11th century) was the first author to link him to the
Sufi mystical movement; see his Ṭabaqāt al-umam 152–3. However, Ṣāʿid’s statement in
this passage is both historically and typologically erroneous; on this see Ebstein and Sviri,
So-called Risālat al-ḥurūf 228–30.
70 See the references to their works in the bibliography to this study.
24 introduction
this study, I will present the following five mystical types that, in my view,
played a central role in the development of medieval Islamic mysticism:
Ibn Masarra) combined this type of mysticism with his Sufi heritage,73
thus creating an original synthesis which, in turn, influenced later mys-
tics in both the Sunni and Shiʿi worlds.74
Naturally, this short list does not cover the full range of mystical authors
and movements in the medieval world of Islam. In addition, the mysti-
cal types which I have enumerated above contain within them numerous
‘sub-types’ or divisions.75 Finally, the dividing lines between these differ-
ent types are by no means dichotomous: as the case of Ibn al-ʿArabī shows,
in various periods in Islamic history and in different regions of the Islamic
world, contacts and overlappings were formed between these movements,
often creating new mystical types and variations. The typology presented
here demands further elaboration, yet it suffices to show the complexity
and wealth of medieval Islamic mysticism.
The mistaken assumption that ‘Islamic mysticism’ equals ‘Sufism’ and
vice versa, in addition to the disregard for the role of philosophy in gen-
eral and Neoplatonism in particular in the development of Andalusī mys-
ticism, are the main factors behind the great confusion surrounding the
figure of Ibn Masarra. Both medieval Arabic authors and modern scholars
have portrayed Ibn Masarra in diverging ways: he has been described as a
bāṭinī (i.e., one who adheres to the inner, hidden dimension of the Quran
and sharīʿa rather than or in addition to their exterior, manifest aspect),
as a Muʿtazilī, as a philosopher influenced by the ‘Pseudo-Empedoclean’
tradition and more.76 Various scholars still view Ibn Masarra as a ‘Sufi’,
though his works, displaying clear traits of Neoplatonic mystical philoso-
phy, have long been published.77 The terms ṣūfī or taṣawwuf do not appear
73 The influence of the Sufi tradition on Ibn al-ʿArabī as well as his indebtedness to vari-
ous Sufi teachers has been referred to in many studies; see, for example, Addas, Andalusī
mysticism 909–11, 927–9; see also Rosenthal, Ibn ʿArabī 1–3; and the works of Chittick and
Chodkiewicz cited in the bibliography.
74 On this influence and on the relationship in later generations between Sunni mys-
ticism, Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought and the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī tradition, see al-Shaybī, al-Ṣila ii;
Corbin, En Islam iranien iii–iv; Corbin, History 283–366, and note especially pp. 332–5;
Nasr, Shiʿism 114–9; Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 410–442; Daftary, Ismaili-Sufi relations; and the refer-
ences given below on p. 122 n. 153.
75 See, for instance, Lobel, A Sufi-Jewish dialogue 21–34.
76 See the discussions and references in Affifi, Mystical philosophy 179; Addas, Andalusī
mysticism 912, 915–6; Stroumsa, Ibn Masarra 99–100; Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings 202–3.
On ‘Pseudo-Empedocles’ see above, pp. 11–13.
77 See, for instance, Stern, Ibn Masarra 325, 327 (Stern, however, did not have the writ-
ings of Ibn Masarra at his disposal); Gril, Science 140, 146; Addas, Andalusī mysticism 911,
917–8; Garrido, Science 56; Fierro, Opposition 178.
26 introduction
in Ibn Masarra’s works and there is nothing distinctly Sufi in them; rather,
the mystical conceptions in Ibn Masarra’s thought and the terminology he
employs point to a type of Neoplatonic mystical philosophy that is found
in Ismāʿīlī literature as well, especially (but not only) in Rasāʾil ikhwān
al-ṣafāʾ.78 This correspondence between Ibn Masarra’s teachings and the
Ismāʿīlī tradition seems to be the reason why Ibn Masarra was branded
a bāṭinī.79
78 This will be demonstrated throughout this study; see also Stroumsa and Sviri, Begin-
nings 207–11, 214–5; Tornero, A report 134–5, 148–9. On the 9th century Sufi master Sahl
al-Tustarī, who is mentioned in Ibn Masarra’s writings, see below pp. 90–1.
79 See above pp. 8–10; and see also Stroumsa, Ibn Masarra 101; Stroumsa and Sviri,
Beginnings 209 n. 35, 210; Fierro, ʿAbd al-Rahman III 126–9, 131. On bāṭinī/bāṭiniyya as
a derogatory term designating “Ismāʿīlī/Ismāʿīliyya”, see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v.
“Bāṭinīs”; Hodgson, Bāṭiniyya; Pines, Shīʿite terms 240; Saleh, Use of Bāṭinī; Stern, Ismāʿīlīs
289–90. Several scholars hold that the term bāṭinī means “Sufi” or “philosopher” as well;
see, for example, Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Andalus 106; Fierro, Plants 135; and cf. De Smet,
Au delà de l’apparent 200, 202. It seems that the source of this confusion is Asín Pala-
cios’s theory: he employed the term bāṭinī in the sense of “Sufi”, “Shiʿi”, “Ismāʿīlī”, “Fāṭimī”,
“philosopher” or a Neoplatonic/Pseudo-Empedoclean thinker—in short, to designate any
“independent” or “free thinker”, contrary to the dogmatic Muslim orthodoxy, which was
(in Asín Palacios’s view), by nature, anti-mystical and anti-philosophical. See, for example,
Asín Palacios, Mystical philosophy 5–6, 20, 22, 23 n. 20, 35, 46, 74, 91, 98, 113–4. However,
although the pair bāṭin-ẓāhir plays an important role in the Sufi tradition (see below
n. 81), to the best of my knowledge, no Sufi has ever been called a bāṭinī, at least not in
the periods relevant to the discussion here. The title of the anti-Ismāʿīlī treatise by the
great Sufi author al-Ghazālī (died in 505/1111)—Faḍāʾiḥ al-bāṭiniyya (“The Disgraces of
the bāṭinīs”)—bears testimony to this fact (on this treatise, see Daftary, Ismaili literature
177; Mitha, Al-Ghazālī). Note also the titles of the following anti-Ismāʿīlī works written by
Zaydī authors: Min kashf asrār al-bāṭiniyya (“Revealing the Secrets of the bāṭinīs”), by Abū
l-Qāsim Ismāʿīl b. Aḥmad al-Bustī (died in 420/1029; see Daftary, Ismaili literature 175);
and Qawāʿid ʿaqāʾid āl Muḥammad fī l-radd ʿalā l-bāṭiniyya (“The Principles of Faith of
Muḥammad’s Family in Refuting the bāṭinīs”), by Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Daylamī (died
after 707/1308; see Daftary, Ismaili literature 176). Furthermore, the Andalusī scholar Abū
ʿUmar al-Ṭalamankī (died in 428/1036 or in 429/1037) is said to have written a refutation
of Ibn Masarra’s thought, entitled (according to Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Andalus 103; Fierro,
Polemic 247 n. 103; Fierro, Opposition 179–80) al-Radd ʿalā l-bāṭiniyya (“Refutation of the
bāṭinīs”). Finally, one should note that whereas the term ʿilm al-bāṭin designates in Sufi
parlance “the knowledge of [man’s] inner realm”—i.e., knowledge of his psychological-
spiritual dimension—in the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī tradition, this term signifies “the knowledge of
the hidden realm”, i.e., knowledge of esoteric and occult matters; see Ṣāʿid al-Andalusī,
Ṭabaqāt al-umam 152–3 (and cf. Ebstein and Sviri, So-called Risālat al-ḥurūf 227 n. 38,
228–30); Goldreich, An unknown treatise 176–7 (in Hebrew); Radtke, Between projection
and suppression 72. The esoteric-occult meaning of the term ʿilm al-bāṭin is exactly the one
found in Ibn Masarra’s works; the expressions he employs ahl al-ʿilm bi-l-kalām al-bāṭinī
and ahl al-ʿilm bi-l-bāṭin (“those who possess knowledge of the hidden realm”, a positive
epithet, contrary to bāṭinīs) appear in a clearly Neoplatonic context and bear resemblance
to similar passages from Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ’s Epistles. On this see below pp. 86, 103.
introduction 27
Finally, a few words on the term ‘esotericism’ are in place. In the con-
text employed in this book, this term has three main aspects:
The current study deals mainly with medieval texts written in Arabic, the
language in which Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī wrote and in which the
bulk of classical Ismāʿīlī literature (i.e., the literature produced from
the beginning of the 10th century to the end of the Fāṭimī period) was
composed. The Ismāʿīlī corpus as well as the oeuvre of Ibn al-ʿArabī are
vast; moreover, numerous Ismāʿīlī works and various treatises written by
al-Shaykh al-akbar are still in manuscript form. Naturally, this study can
only focus on but a few of these writings. However, since these four writ-
ings do reflect basic conceptions and terminology that are characteristic
of Ismāʿīlī doctrines and of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought in general, they will
suffice to demonstrate the links and affinities between these diverse intel-
lectual worlds.
I have previously mentioned the name Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, “The Sincere
Brethren” (or, in their full name, Ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ wa-khullān al-wafāʾ,
“The Sincere Brethren and the Loyal Friends”), and their Epistles, Rasāʾil
ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ. As we shall see throughout this study, these Epistles are
essential for understanding important aspects of both Ibn Masarra’s and
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought.82 In fact, the Brethren’s Epistles exercised much
influence on Andalusī mystical-philosophical thought in general, in the
Muslim as well as in the Jewish milieus.83
There is no consensus in modern scholarship regarding the exact date
of the Epistles’ composition, the precise identity of their authors and their
religious affiliation. Paul Casanova, for example, who was one of the first
scholars to notice the Ismāʿīlī ‘coloring’ of the Epistles, held that they
were written between 418/1027 and 427/1035. However, most scholars
82 I will refer in the concluding chapter of this study to the chronological problems
related to the connection between the Ikhwān and Ibn Masarra.
83 For the Ikhwānian influence on Abū Muḥammad ʿAbdallāh b. Muḥammad Ibn
al-Sīd al-Baṭalyawsī (444/1052–521/1127), see Eliyahu, Ibn al-Sīd al-Baṭalyawsī 66, 67–9 (in
Hebrew). Ibn al-ʿArabī mentions al-Baṭalyawsī in his writings (see Addas, Quest 108; Eli-
yahu, Ibn al-Sīd al-Baṭalyawsī 163–5), but, as will become evident throughout this study, he
seems to have read the Epistles of the Ikhwān himself (cf. Rosenthal, Ibn ʿArabī 19 n. 83).
For a possible Ikhwānian influence on Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Malik Ibn Ṭufayl
(died in 581/1185), see Kruk, Neoplatonists 77. For the Ikhwānian influence on various Jew-
ish Andalusī authors of the 11th century and later, see Zonta, Influence; Ali-de-Unzaga,
Use 49–54; Krinis, Idea 30–1; Krinis, Judeo-Arabic manuscripts (in Hebrew); Sviri, Jewish-
Muslim mystical encounters; Schlanger, La Philosophie 94–7; Lobel, A Sufi-Jewish dialogue
2–3; Fenton, Arabic and Hebrew versions 257.
introduction 29
assume that the Epistles were composed during the second half of the
10th century, and some point to an even earlier date, sometime in the first
half of the 10th century. For instance, Abbas Hamdani is of the opinion
that the Epistles were produced sometime between 260/873 and 297/909
by Ismāʿīlī ‘propagandists’ who sought to prepare the ground ideologically
for the rise of the Fāṭimī Empire. Maribel Fierro offers the year 325/936
as a terminus ante quem; while Yves Marquet, who presumes that various
sections of the Rasāʾil were written from a pro-Fāṭimī standpoint, views
the writing and editing of the Epistles as a long process which contin-
ued from the beginning of the 10th century until approximately the third
quarter of that century. In contrast, Samuel Stern and Wilferd Madelung
believe that the Epistles were composed around the middle of the 10th
century and that their authors belonged to an Ismāʿīlī faction that did not
support the Fāṭimīs, such as the Qarāmiṭa.84 There are other opinions in
scholarship as well, including those which deny the Ismāʿīlī identity of
the Ikhwān.85 However, it seems that nowadays, most scholars agree that
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ were indeed affiliated, in one way or the other, with the
Ismāʿīlī milieu, and that they composed their Epistles in the city of Baṣra
in southern Iraq sometime during the 10th century.86
An important issue that has much to bear on the dating of the
Ikhwān’s Epistles is the question of their arrival in al-Andalus. The preva-
lent view among scholars is that Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ were introduced
into al-Andalus during the first half of the 11th century by the Andalusī
astronomer and mathematician Abū l-Qāsim Maslama b. Aḥmad
al-Majrīṭī (died around 398/1007) or by his disciple, Abū l-Ḥakam ʿUmar
b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Kirmānī (died circa 468/1075). However, Fierro
84 On them see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v. “Qarmaṭīs”; Stern, Ismāʿīlīs and Qarmaṭians;
Stern, Studies, index, s.v. “Qarmaṭians”; Madelung, Fatimids.
85 See, for example, Netton, Muslim Neoplatonists 95–104, 107; Netton, Brotherhood; and
my discussion of Netton’s view in chapter 4 of this study, p. 180.
86 For the studies of the scholars mentioned above see the references throughout Daft-
ary, Ismaili literature; for introductions to the thought of the Ikhwān and surveys of the
various opinions in modern scholarship concerning their identity and the dating of their
Epistles, see the discussions and references in Daftary, Forward; Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 234–7;
El-Bizri, Epistles 1–10; Hamdani, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, especially pp. 189–90; Stern, Authorship;
Stern, New information; Nasr, An introduction 25–37, 275; Marquet, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ; Netton,
Muslim Neoplatonists 1–4, 96–7; Kraemer, Humanism 175–8; Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Andalus
106–9; Carusi, Le Traité alchimique 500–2 and n. 46; and see also Halm, Kosmologie 37, 138.
On the famous report by Abū Ḥayyān al-Tawḥīdī concerning the identity of the Ikhwān,
see below p. 238 n. 25. For a bibliography of Ikhwān-related studies, see also the references
in Daftary, Ismaili literature 166; and the list at the end of El-Bizri, Epistles.
30 introduction
87 See Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Andalus 106–8; see also Hamdani, Brethren of purity
78; Hamdani, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ; Ebstein and Sviri, So-called Risālat al-ḥurūf 224–30. On
al-Qurṭubī see below pp. 31–2. For scholars who claim that the Epistles arrived in al-Anda-
lus during the first half of the 11th century, see, in addition to the references by Fierro and
Hamdani, the discussions and references in Stern, New information 173 n. 42; Poonawala,
Why do we need 34–5; Hamdani, Abū Ḥayyān al-Tawḥīdī 351 n. 32; Carusi, Le Traité alchi-
mique 495 n. 15.
88 On the Jābirian corpus in general and its dating, see Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, xvii–
lxv; Kraus, Dschābir ibn Ḥajjān; Kraus, Djābir b. Ḥayyān; and see also Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs
84–5 and the references given there. On the Neoplatonic philosophy in this corpus, see
Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 135–85. For other, more conservative and traditional views con-
cerning the dating of this corpus and the figure of Jābir see Lory, Alchimie 12–22 and espe-
cially the references there in n. 15.
89 See Lory, Alchimie 47–125, 199 n. 2; and cf. Marquet, La Philosophie 96–129, 132–4. On
the term ghulāt see above n. 38. On the links between the Ismāʿīlī world and the ghulāt,
cf. Halm, Kosmologie 142, 149, 165–8.
introduction 31
authors were deeply influenced by the Hermetic tradition and dealt with
occult matters such as astrology, magic and alchemy, adapting these also
to Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī notions; and both interpreted these notions in a humanis-
tic, universalist and ecumenical way.90 The combination of these various
traits is unique to the Epistles of the Ikhwān and to the Jābirian corpus,
and is found neither in the Shiʿi-Twelver tradition nor in the Sunni mysti-
cal tradition as they evolved in the 9th and 10th centuries. It is plausible,
therefore, that these two corpora—despite the many, essential differences
between them—are the product of the same Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī milieu which
was active at the end of the 9th and beginning of the 10th centuries.
Moreover, the Jābirian corpus likewise exercised considerable influ-
ence on the mystical-philosophical thought in al-Andalus. Its influence
is evident, for example, in the writings of Ibn al-ʿArabī and perhaps to a
certain extent in the thought of Ibn Masarra.91 The Jābirian impact is also
reflected in the occult treatises Ghāyat al-ḥakīm (“The Goal of the Sage”,
known in the Latin West as Picatrix) and Rutbat al-ḥakīm (“The Degree
of the Sage”), composed, according to Fierro, by Abū l-Qāsim Maslama
b. Qāsim al-Qurṭubī, an Andalusī scholar who specialized, inter alia, in
magic.92 The author of the Ghāya and the Rutba, which deal with magic,
astrology and alchemy, derived from both the Ikhwān’s Epistles and the
90 On the many similarities between the Epistles of the Ikhwān and the Jābirian corpus,
see especially Marquet, La Philosophie; see also Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, lxiv; Nasr, An
introduction 37–8. For astrological, magical and alchemical motifs in the Ikhwān’s Epistles,
see mainly their last Epistle (Rasāʾil iv, 283–463); and see also Marquet, La Philosophie
15–66. On the humanistic, universalist and ecumenical attitude of the Ikhwān, see below
pp. 179–88.
91 See the discussion below on pp. 90–101.
92 See Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Andalus; Fierro, Plants 127–31; and see also Hamdani,
Brethren of purity, especially pp. 75–6. On Ghāyat al-ḥakīm and Rutbat al-ḥakīm, see Rit-
ter and Plessner, Picatrix xx–lxxv; Pingree, Some of the sources; Carusi, Le Traité alchi-
mique. The identity of the author of the Ghāya and Rutba is a vexed question in modern
research, and has been discussed by many scholars; it is closely related to the issue of the
date at which the Ikhwān’s Epistles arrived in al-Andalus (see above pp. 29–30). Most
scholars reject the traditional attribution of the Ghāya and Rutba to Abū l-Qāsim Maslama
b. Aḥmad al-Majrīṭī (on whom see above p. 29), yet nonetheless date their composition
to the first half of the 11th century. However, it seems to me that the literary-philological
evidence adduced by Fierro in her article (quoted at the beginning of this note) as well
as her historical arguments prove beyond reasonable doubt that Abū l-Qāsim Maslama
b. Qāsim al-Qurṭubī—who, contrary to al-Majrīṭī, is known to have dealt with the occult
sciences—is the true author of the Ghāya and Rutba, and, in addition, is probably the
one who introduced the Epistles of the Ikhwān into al-Andalus. See also Carusi, Le Traité
alchimique.
32 introduction
Jābirian corpus.93 Hence, the last two corpora can be viewed as a literary
bridge connecting medieval al-Andalus with the Hellenistic heritage—
more specifically, with Neoplatonic mystical philosophy, Hermetic litera-
ture and the Pythagorean/Neopythagorean tradition.94
93 See Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, xli n. 7; Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 63 n. 6, 104 n. 12, 106
n. 8, 173 n. 1, 193 n. 11; Ritter and Plessner, Picatrix xx–lxxv; Plessner, Hermes 57–8; Pingree,
Some of the sources 2–3; Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Andalus 94, 96, 106; Hamdani, Brethren of
purity 73, 75; Poonawala, Why do we need 35. For the Ghāya’s influence on al-Baṭalyawsī,
see Eliyahu, Ibn al-Sīd al-Baṭalyawsī 75–6; and for its influence on Jewish authors, see the
references in Ebstein and Sviri, So-called Risālat al-ḥurūf 225 n. 29.
94 On the Pythagorean/Neopythagorean tradition, Hermetic literature and the Jābirian
corpus, see Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 270–303, and index, s.v. “hermétisme”, “néopythago-
risme”, “pythagoricien” and “pythagorisme”. On Hermetic literature and the Ismāʿīlī tradi-
tion, including the Ikhwān’s Epistles, see Marquet, Sabéens; Corbin, Sabian temple; Van
Bladel, Arabic Hermes 168–71, 179–81, 183, 222, 227, 237; Green, City of the moon God 139–41,
171, 181–90, 207–14; Peters, Hermes 196–8; Netton, Muslim Neoplatonists 50–2; Nasr, An
introduction 33–40; El-Bizri, Epistles 10; Joosse, An example 289–93; Widengren, Gnostic
technical language, especially pp. 182, 193–4, 200–3. On the Ikhwān and the Pythagorean/
Neopythagorean tradition, see below p. 194 n. 26. On Hermetic literature and Islam in
general, see also Affifi, Influence; Plessner, Hermes; Pingree, Ṣābians.
Chapter One
One of the most important issues dealt with in both Ismāʿīlī literature and
the works of Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī is the word of God and the
Divine will. Recurring in their writings on this issue are a number of Ara-
bic terms which are all interrelated: kalima (“word”), kun (the Divine fiat:
“be!”), amr (“command” or “affair”) and irāda (“will”). In order to under-
stand the various meanings of these terms, I will first review their Bibli-
cal and Hellenistic roots and then analyze the Quranic context in which
they appear. I will then examine the role these terms played in the Arabic
Neoplatonic tradition and conclude by elaborating on their Ismāʿīlī and
Andalusī usage.
The discussions of kalima, kun, amr and irāda in Ismāʿīlī literature and
in the writings of Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī focus mainly on the cos-
mogonic and cosmological aspects of these terms, on the one hand, and
on their religious significance for man and society, on the other. Similar
discussions of the Divine parole may be found in the pre-Islamic religious
and philosophical heritage. In the Old Testament, the term davar—close
in meaning to the Arabic kalima—signifies God’s creative power; His rev-
elation to the prophets; the Divine law; and God’s commands and decrees
as they are reflected in nature and in human history. In the Hellenistic
period, the biblical davar was linked with the Greek term logos, which sig-
nifies, inter alia, “word”, “speech”, “reason” and “thought”. Thus, in the Sep-
tuagint, davar was translated as logos, while in the Aramaic translations
of the Bible it was rendered memra.1 In Greek philosophy, the term logos
was granted a cosmic dimension: according to Heraclitus (6th–5th centu-
ries B.C.), logos is a universal and rational principle governing the world
and unifying its many contradictory phenomena; it is also the human
1 See O’Shaughnessy, Koranic concept 7–11 (= revised edition, 1–4); Procksch, Word of
God. On memra see also the discussion and references in Boyarin, Gospel of the Memra,
especially pp. 252–61.
34 chapter one
thought and its expression in words. Similarly, the Stoics viewed logos as
an all-pervading, universal and rational principle. According to the Stoic
conception, the logoi (plural of logos) exist in nature as physical, forming
principles. Man’s logos, i.e., human rationality and its expression in words,
is part of the universal logos, and from an ethical point of view, man is
required to live according to the logos.2 A most important writer in this
respect is Philo of Alexandria (1st century B.C.–1st century A.D.), whose
writings reflect the Hellenistic merging of Biblical-Judaic concepts with
Greek notions and philosophy. In Philo’s thought, the logos functions as
an intermediary entity between the transcendental God and the created
world. The ontological status of this entity is complex: on the one hand,
it functions as God’s eternal mind, whose object of thought is the world
of ideas on which the physical universe is modeled; on the other hand,
in the act of creation, the logos stands apart from God, as a hypostasis
containing these ideas. Unlike man, the logos is not created; unlike God,
it is not uncreated. In addition to its capacity as a creative Divine force,
the logos is identified by Philo with the Divine wisdom and the Mosaic
religious law. Similarly to the Stoic conception, Philo too views the logos
as an immanent principle active within nature: the powers of the logos
reside in nature in a nonphysical mode, preserving the forms of things
and guaranteeing the continuation of their species. Like the philosophy
of Heraclitus and the Stoics, Philo too stresses the unifying power of the
logos.3 All these different conceptions have contributed to the formation
of the Christian logos. This term, which plays a central role in Christi-
anity, appears already in the New Testament, where it signifies, among
other things, a primordial Divine entity responsible for the creation of the
world. This entity was manifested in human history as a human being, i.e.,
Jesus.4 Much thought and discussion within the Christian tradition has
been devoted to this concept of logos.5
2 See Scolnicov, A short history 77–85 (in Hebrew); Long, Heraclitus and Stoicism 44–53;
and the references below in n. 5.
3 See Wolfson, Philo i, 200–94, 325–47; see also the discussions and references in Win-
ston, Logos; Boyarin, Gospel of the Memra 249–52.
4 See John, 1:1–18; for scholarly discussions of this passage see the references in Boyarin,
Gospel of the Memra, especially pp. 262–84.
5 See O’Shaughnessy, Koranic concept 11–5 (= 4–6 in the revised edition); Pépin, Logos.
On the logos in Greek philosophy, Hellenistic thought and Christianity, see also the discus-
sion and references in Theological dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. “λέγω” / paragraphs
A, B, D, iv 69–91, 100–36 (various authors); Kerferd, Logos; Stead, Logos; and see also Amir-
Moezzi, Le Coran silencieux 215–6.
the word of god and the divine will 35
20 See Corrigan, Essence and existence 110–3; Wagner, Plotinus on the nature 136–7,
156–60; cf. Armstrong, Architecture 98–108; Graeser, Plotinus and the Stoics 35, 41–3.
21 See, for example, Badawī (ed.), Theology of Aristotle (the shorter version), 46, 74, 86,
88, 92, 113, 124, 127, 153–4; cf. Zimmermann, Origins 200–2; Adamson, Arabic Plotinus 35.
22 The longer version is available only in manuscript form, in Judeo-Arabic; see Theology
of Aristotle (the longer version), fols. 4b–6b, 8a–8b, 11a–12a, 15b; see also Pines, La Longue
récension 8–11; Stern, Ibn Ḥasdāy’s Neoplatonist 82–91; Fenton, Arabic and Hebrew ver-
sions 250–4, 263 n. 77; De Smet, Le Verbe-impératif 406–7.
the word of god and the divine will 39
in the realm that lies between God and the universal intellect. To be sure,
the notion of intermediaries standing between the One and the universal
intellect is not entirely alien to the Neoplatonic tradition of Late Antiq-
uity; thus, Iamblichus (3rd–4th centuries A.D.) and Proclus (5th century
A.D.) added, for various reasons, other entities or hypostases between the
One and the intellect.23 However, the longer version is unique in combin-
ing the Quranic concepts pertaining to God’s word and Divine will with
the Neoplatonic scheme and in placing these terms between God and the
universal intellect. It seems that this doctrine was motivated by two main
theological considerations: first, placing the Divine word and will between
God and the intellect was meant to solve the contradiction between the
concept of Divine creation ex nihilo shared by Judaism, Christianity and
Islam, on the one hand, and the original Neoplatonic notion of emana-
tion, on the other. According to the latter, the emanation of the universal
intellect from the One is, for all intents and purposes, an involuntary or
unintentional act, while the ex nihilo conception views creation as a direct
consequence of God’s will. Secondly, the creative intermediary between
God and the intellect bridges the gap between the transcendental God
and the created world, and at the same time maintains the proper dis-
tance between the two. Hence, according to the longer version, although
the ultimate cause of the intellect is God, the kalima functions as its
immediate cause. This doctrine obviously created additional problems
concerning the ontological status of the kalima: on the one hand, it is
described as being separate from God; on the other hand, once created,
the universal intellect is completely united with the kalima. This para-
dox brings to mind the complex ontological status of the logos in Philo’s
thought (see the discussion above).
The incongruity between the Jewish, Christian and Islamic concept of
creation and the Neoplatonic notion of emanation, as well as the attempt
to resolve it, are also evident in the shorter version of the Theology.24 In
addition, Plotinus himself was ambivalent on the issue of Divine will:
he describes the One as standing beyond any will, and at the same time
views the One as being all will—though this is an ‘inward’ will, identi-
cal to the One’s own being, unlike the Divine will in Judaism, Christian-
ity and Islam, which is directed towards creation and human beings.25
23 See Dillon, Solomon Ibn Gabirol’s doctrine 43–8, 52; De Smet, Empedocles Arabus
106–9; see also Altmann and Stern, Isaac Israeli 162–4.
24 See Adamson, Arabic Plotinus 137–55.
25 See Plotinus, Enneads v, 113–7 (= Ennead v, 3, 12), vii, 221–97 (= Ennead vi, 8).
40 chapter one
Nonetheless, neither Plotinus nor the shorter version adopted the solu-
tion to the problem of Divine will formulated in the longer version of the
Theology of Aristotle.
Shlomo Pines was the first scholar to point out the strong similarity between
the longer version of the Theology of Aristotle and the Neoplatonic Ismāʿīlī
tradition with respect to the doctrine of God’s word and Divine will. Pines
showed that, like the longer version, the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic writers too
placed the kalima between God and the universal intellect. According to
Pines, these writers identified the kalima with God’s amr, the Divine will
and at times with God’s knowledge and the ibdāʿ, i.e., the Divine creation
ex nihilo. Pines also showed that the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic writers stress the
unity between the kalima and the universal intellect and characterize the
kalima as the cause of the intellect and as “the cause of causes”. Based on
these facts, Pines hypothesized that the shorter version of the Theology
had originally been modified in accordance with the Ismāʿīlī concept of
the kalima or possibly with a pre-Ismāʿīlī kalima doctrine, thus giving rise
to the longer version. In other words: the longer version must have been
created either in an Ismāʿīlī or proto-Ismāʿīlī milieu.26
Pines’s theory positing the Ismāʿīlī origin of the longer version of the
Theology, published in 1954, has been called into question. F. W. Zimmer-
mann tried to prove that the longer version was composed before the
consolidation of Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism (i.e., no later than the beginning
of the 10th century A.D.), and that therefore the longer version was the
source for Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism, not vice versa.27 Whether this is true
or not is of no consequence to the present discussion; what is important
to emphasize is that modern scholarship has acknowledged the strong
link that connects the longer version of the Theology to the Neoplatonic
Ismāʿīlī tradition.28 Two other points need to be stressed here. The first is
that the Ismāʿīlī doctrine of the kalima was perceived from a fairly early
stage as a distinctive feature of Ismāʿīlī thought.29 Though the important
30 See al-Kirmānī, al-Muḍīʾa 43–60; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 56, 126, 221–9; al-Kirmānī,
Rāḥat al-ʿaql 59–94; Walker, Ḥamīd al-Dīn al-Kirmānī 85; cf. al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 45,
61–2. On al-Kirmānī and his philosophy, see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 233–4; Walker, Ḥamīd al-Dīn
al-Kirmānī; De Smet, La Quiétude.
31 See below pp. 41–3.
32 See below pp. 44–51. On the influence of al-Sijistānī (on whom see below) on Nāṣir-i
Khusraw’s writings, see De Smet, Was Nāṣir-e Ḫusraw a great poet.
33 See Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 3–6, 17; see also Halm, Kosmologie 75–80;
Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 133–6; Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, xlix. For other versions of this myth and
for the Neoplatonic adaptations of it which were produced during the 4th/10th century,
see Halm, Kosmologie 53–66, 133–5. On the Gnostic roots of this myth, see ibid. 89–90,
98–9, 115–27 and the reference to Daftary in this note.
34 Fa-lammā arāda irāda wa-shāʾa mashīʾa. The difference between irāda and mashīʾa
merits a close examination which, unfortunately, falls beyond the scope of this chapter.
For the purpose of the current discussion, I will refer to both concepts as equally relating
42 chapter one
to the realm of the Divine will. See, however, Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings 237–8. On the
Gnostic roots of this Ismāʿīlī use of the pair irāda and mashīʾa in a cosmogonic-cosmologi-
cal context, see Halm, Kosmologie 78–9.
35 Perhaps the meaning is: “that which is above Qadar”, Qadar being the cosmic entity
below Kūnī; cf. Halm, Kosmologie 75 n. 5. Concerning the phrase “then Allāh”, this may be
a reference to Kūnī, who, in this myth, is also designated by the Divine name Allāh; see
below p. 87; and concerning the letters wāw and yāʾ, see below p. 80 n. 15.
36 Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 7–8 (“Fa-lammā arāda irāda wa-shāʾa mashīʾa
fa-khalaqa nūran wa-khalaqa min dhālika l-nūr khalqan fa-makatha dhālika l-nūr burha
min dahrihi lā yadrī khāliq huwa am makhlūq thumma nafakha fīhi rūḥan wa-awqaʿa minhu
ṣawtan bi-an kun fa-kāna bi-idhni llāh lahu wa-kawwana llāh jamīʿ al-ashyāʾ mubdaʿa min
al-kāf wa-l-nūn wa-takawwun wa-mukawwin wa-kāʾin thumma llāh thumma bi-l-wāw wa-l-
yāʾ fa-ṣāra sman li-man fawqahu fa-sammāhu kūnī thumma jarā ilayhi l-amr min bāriʾihi
bāriʾ al-barāyā an ukhluq min nūrika khalqan yakūnu laka wazīran wa-muʿīnan wa-li-
amrinā muʾaddiyan fa-khalaqa min nūrihi khalqan wa-alqā ʿalayhi sman fa-sammāhu
qadar fa-bi-kūnī kawwana llāh jamīʿ al-ashyāʾ wa-bi-qadar qadarahā llāh”); cf. Stern’s trans-
lation, ibid. 18. On the term qadar (which also signifies, inter alia, God’s decree), see Halm,
Kosmologie 57, 65; al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 149.
37 Cf. Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 20; Halm, Kosmologie 76. On muʾtamir
as “obeying”, see Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 100; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 199;
al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 355; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 243.
the word of god and the divine will 43
Divine command plays a central role in both the creation of the world
(cosmogony) and its governance (cosmology). The spiritual aspect of this
governance is evident in the twelve “boundaries” (ḥudūd)38 or “spiritual
beings” (rūḥāniyya) which Qadar creates from its own light, in accordance
with God’s command. These twelve celestial beings function as mediat-
ing entities (wasāʾiṭ) between the Divine world and the prophets, ensur-
ing the spiritual wellbeing of humanity.39 Finally, the importance of the
Divine will is also reflected in the creation of six additional “boundaries”,
three above Kūnī and three below it. The first three boundaries, i.e., those
which are situated above Kūnī, are termed tawahhum (“imagination”),
irāda and mashīʾa.40
God’s will and speech and the Arabic terms pertaining to them like-
wise figure prominently in the mythic cosmogony of al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām
(“The Learned One and the Young Man”), a work probably written by the
Ismāʿīlī dāʿī Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, who was active in North Africa
and died circa 346/957. In this work it is said that the first being which
God created was light. From this light, three words emanated (tafarraʿa,
literally: “branched off ”):
The first word was irāda; from irāda, al-amr emanated; and from al-amr
emanated the saying ‘be!’ to whatever He desired, and so it was. Thus, the
beginning of creation was the will of a command by means of a saying
(irādat amr bi-qawl).
From these cosmogonic, Divine ‘building blocks’—the light, the three pri-
ف� ن
mordial words and the seven letters of kun ( �� ن
� ) كand fa-yakūnu (� �و ي�� ك,
“and it is”; see, for example, Q 16:40)—the remaining existents were all
created.41 As in the myth of Kūnī-Qadar, here too, God’s light, will, com-
mand and kun are key elements in the process of Divine creation.
42 Al-Nasafī’s main work, al-Maḥṣūl, was written around 300/912 but has not survived.
Parts of it do, however, appear in other works, such as Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī’s al-Iṣlāḥ and
al-Kirmānī’s al-Riyāḍ. The latter book discusses the theological disputes between al-Nasafī,
al-Rāzī and al-Sijistānī; see Walker, Early philosophical Shiism 55–7; Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 223–
34; Daftary, Ismaili literature 13, 29, 125.
43 Al-Nasafī: see al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 221–30; Halm, Kosmologie 128–31, 224. Al-Rāzī:
al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 24–7, 32, 35–6, 38–9, 48–9, 130; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 58, 101–2, 119, 139;
al-Rāzī, al-Zīna i, 129–32. Al-Sijistānī: al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 3, 16–9, 24–6, 38–9, 70–1,
77–8, 90–4; al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 147–8; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 100–7, 182, 187;
al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 58, 65–6, 125–6, 131–2, 221–2; see also Makārim, ‘Al-amr al-ilāhī’ 7–13;
De Smet, Le Verbe-impératif; Walker, Early philosophical Shiism 41, 53, 57–8, 81–6; Steiger-
wald, Le Logos; Steigerwald, Divine word; Corbin, L’Initiation ismaélienne.
44 See al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 24 (“Li-anna l-mubdaʿ al-awwal huwa wa-l-ibdāʿ wāḥid [. . .] huwa
wa-l-ibdāʿ ays wāḥid”), 39 (“[. . .] Kadhālika l-ibdāʿ huwa wahmī lā taẓharu dhātuhu illā fī
l-mubdaʿ al-awwal”).
the word of god and the divine will 45
lar vein and like the longer version of the Theology, al-Sijistānī describes
the ibdāʿ as laysa (“not”) in the sense that it is neither being nor nothing-
ness (nafy al-aysiyya wa-l-laysiyya). The amr did not antecede the world
and the world did not antecede the amr.45 Finally, like the longer version,
al-Sijistānī too identifies the kalima with the Divine will and knowledge
(irāda, ʿilm) and links it to God’s power (qudra).46
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ
The doctrine of God’s word and Divine will in its unique formulation in
the longer version of the Theology and in the eastern Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic
writings is also found in the Epistles of Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ (“The Sincere
Brethren”),47 especially in the esoteric work “The Comprehensive Epistle”
(al-Risāla al-jāmiʿa) which is attributed to them. This fact, however, has
been disregarded by most scholars who have examined the doctrine dis-
cussed here, possibly due to the insufficient attention accorded to “The
Comprehensive Epistle” in modern scholarship.48 This Epistle is viewed
by most scholars as a simple summary of the other 52 Epistles composed
by the Ikhwān. However, according to the Ikhwān themselves, the Jāmiʿa
is actually the most important part—indeed, the esoteric pinnacle—of
their work: it includes all that is said in the other epistles, and at the same
time clarifies and reveals all that is hidden and implied in them.49 The fact
that the Epistles of the Ikhwān contain a doctrine of the Divine word and
will similar to the one found in the eastern Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic writings
is important for two main reasons. First, this is further evidence of the
Ismāʿīlī affiliation of the Ikhwān. Second, since we know for a fact that
45 See al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 39 (“Fa-ammā l-ibdāʿ nafsuhu fa-huwa l-laysa bi-maʿnā nafy
al-aysiyya wa-l-laysiyya”); al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 106 (“Fa-idhan wujūd al-amr lā yataqadd-
amu l-ʿālam wa-la yataʾakhkharu”).
46 See, for example, al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 18, 77–8; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 187.
47 Regarding the Ikhwān see the references above in the Introduction, pp. 28–30.
48 Except for Pines (see Pines, Shīʿite terms 171–2, 174–8, 229), and, to a certain extent,
Baffioni (see Baffioni, Ibdāʿ). On the Ikhwān as the authors of “The Comprehensive
Epistle”, see Hamdani, Arrangement 86, 89–91; Netton, Muslim Neoplatonists 2–3; Krinis,
Judeo-Arabic manuscripts nn. 2, 16 (in Hebrew). Not all scholars are convinced that the
Ikhwān were the authors of “The Comprehensive Epistle”; see, for example, De Smet, Les
Climats du monde 75 and the references given there in n. 26 to previous studies of his; and
De Smet, Henry Corbin 115 (referring to Ivanow). This issue requires further philological
examination; be that as it may, the Ismāʿīlī affiliation of the Jāmiʿa’s authors (whoever they
might be) seems to be certain.
49 Thus, according to the Ikhwān themselves; see, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
al-Jāmiʿa i, 47–8, 109, 122–3, 239, 608; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 42–3, iv, 250; cf. Krinis,
Judeo-Arabic manuscripts, nn. 13–4.
46 chapter one
50 On the date of the Epistles’ arrival in Spain, see above in the Introduction, pp. 29–30.
Note that in several manuscripts and in the works of some scholars, “The Comprehensive
Epistle” is erroneously attributed to the Andalusī mathematician and astronomer Maslama
b. Aḥmad al-Majrīṭī (on whom see above p. 29); see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 3–13 (the
editor’s introduction); Krinis, Judeo-Arabic manuscripts n. 16; Fierro, Bāṭinism in al-Anda-
lus 101–2. In my opinion, this erroneous attribution indicates that this epistle was brought
into al-Andalus clandestinely and that the true identity of its authors (the Ikhwān) was
hidden; see also Ebstein and Sviri, So-called Risālat al-ḥurūf 226 n. 34.
51 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 622–3 (“Wa-huwa l-amr al-ladhī fawqa l-ʿaql wa-l-nafs
wa-dūna l-bārī subḥānahu [. . .]”), 633 (“Fa-bi-l-burhān anna l-ʿilm bi-tawḥīdihi wa-maʿrifat
mā abdaʿahu min mawjūdātihi wa-gharāʾib maṣnūʿātihi huwa amruhu l-awwal al-ladhī huwa
fawqa l-amr al-thānī wa-l-nafs wa-huwa l-kalima l-latī minhu badat wa-ilayhi taʿūdu”). On
the identification between the kalima and the Divine power, see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil
iv, 206; on the identification of God’s speech (kalām) with the ibdāʿ and the kun, see ibid.
iii, 517. On the Divine command (amr or amr allāh) situated above the intellect, cf. ibid.
iv, 199–203.
52 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 528–37, 545–53, 559 (cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 140), 563–4,
ii, 139, 248; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 212.
53 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 616, 619, 621 (cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 157: al-ḥaqq
al-makhlūq bihi), 629. On the kalima and al-ḥaqq, cf. ibid. 471–3. The expression al-ḥaqq
al-makhlūq bihi is based on various Quranic verses, such as Q 10:5 and more; see the root
ḥ.q.q. in ʿAbd al-Bāqī, al-Muʿjam al-mufahras.
the word of god and the divine will 47
the Ikhwān perceive the kalima as united (muttaḥida) with the univer-
sal intellect; the latter receives the kalima, or, it is the mawḍiʿ (“place”,
“object”) of the kalima.54
However, despite these similarities, the Ikhwān’s discussions con-
cerning the kalima lack the philosophical-theological casuistry which is
characteristic of the longer version and the eastern Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic
writings. Thus, in contrast to the longer version and to al-Sijistānī’s con-
ception, the Ikhwān do not define the kalima as laysa (“not”). Though the
kalima is perceived by the Ikhwān as united with the intellect, there is
no doubt that, for them, the kalima is a living and active entity situated
between God and the intellect, an entity which bestows vitality and unity
on the whole universe. The Ikhwān emphasize—even resorting, at times,
to anthropomorphism—the aspect of speech inherent in the Divine
kalima. Explaining the essence of Divine creation ex nihilo and the differ-
ence between this and the spontaneous process of composition (tarkīb,
taʾlīf ) which occurs continuously within nature, the Ikhwān state:
This is similar to the speech of the speaker and the writing of the writer.
One of these two resembles creation [ex nihilo, ibdāʿ], and this is speech;
while the other resembles composition, and this is writing. If the speaker
becomes quiet, the speech ceases to be; yet if the writer stops [writing], the
existing writing does not cease. Hence, the existence of the world in relation
to Allāh is like the existence of speech in relation to the speaker: if He stops
His speaking, the speech ceases to be.55
This extraordinary approach is combined with Plotinus’s concept of the
logoi, translated in the Theology of Aristotle as kalimāt (“words”):
[God’s] words are found among His created beings through His saying,
‘be!’. The word is thus the wellspring of the root of creation and the source
of its origination. By His speech, His benevolence appeared [. . .] Like one
who speaks: by his speech he brings to light his commandments and pro-
hibitions which he has willed, as well as his will and choice which have
been executed through this speech, according to his ability (qudratihi) and
54 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 528, 532, 563–4, 618–20, 667, ii, 31; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
Rasāʾil iv, 206. Concerning the term mawḍiʿ, cf. the term maḥall amrihi (“the place of His
command”) in al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 147.
55 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 337–8, 351 (“wa-laysa l-ibdāʿ wa-l-ikhtirāʿ tarkīban
wa-taʾlīfan bal iḥdāth wa-khtirāʿ min al-ʿadam ilā l-wujūd wa-l-mithāl fī dhālika kalām al-
mutakallim wa-kitābat al-kātib fa-innā aḥadahumā yushbihu l-ibdāʿ wa-huwa l-kalām wa-l-
ākhar yushbihu l-tarkīb wa-huwa l-kitāba fa-min ajli hādhā ṣāra idhā sakata l-mutakallim
baṭala wijdān al-kalām fa-idhā amsaka l-kātib lā yabṭulu l-mawjūd min al-kitāba fa-wujūd
al-ʿālam min allāh ka-wujūd al-kalām min al-mutakallim idhā amsaka ʿan al-kalām baṭala
wijdān al-kalām”); see also Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 288–9.
48 chapter one
power (wa-quwwatihi). For we have already said that the effect contains the
traces of the cause. It is thus proven that all existent beings came into being
through Allāh’s complete and universal words.
Like the longer version and the eastern Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonists, the Ikhwān
view the kalima as the cause of the world, deriving from God’s will and
power. Yet the Ikhwān stress the aspect of speech related to this cause:
for them, God’s incessant creative speech and the Divine words which
emanate from it and which are dispersed throughout the universe are the
direct reason for the continuous existence of the world. Were this speech
to cease,
the heavens and the earth would vanish and creation would disappear;
things would be reduced to nought all at once—were [God], glory be to
Him, to stop the flow of His mercy and the blessings of His word.56
The process of creation as well as the physical and spiritual functioning
of the universe are all dependent upon the kalima and on its power being
channeled through the various hierarchal levels of the universe. Accord-
ing to the Ikhwān, the kalima and the amr are permanently attached
(muttaṣil) to the universal intellect and, on a lower level, also to the sun
and the moon, which manage and maintain the celestial spheres and the
sub-lunar world.57 Like the logos in Greek and Hellenistic thought, the
kalima and the amr give unity to the universe: the whole world is “one
body whose spirit is the word of Allāh”.58 The Ikhwān explain that
the word of Allāh, may He be exalted, is continuously attached to [the
world], reinforcing it with abundance (ifāḍa) and benevolence in order that
it be complete and continue existing. [The kalima] begins its flow (fayḍihā)
through its unification with the first created being, the active intellect
[= the universal intellect]; then, through the mediation of the intellect, [the
kalima reaches] the universal soul, the passive intellect; then, through the
mediation of the universal soul, [it reaches] prime matter; then, through the
mediation of prime matter, the absolute body; finally, [the kalima] is scat-
tered throughout the world.
The role of the kalima is not reduced to sustaining the universe solely in
its physical aspects: “[The kalima] appropriates from among the human
virtuous figures the prophets, messengers and righteous men”.59 The
kalima, then, is manifested within the sub-lunar world in the figures of
the prophets and righteous men, thus ensuring the proper spiritual course
of human history. Likewise, the Ikhwān define Divine knowledge—identi-
cal, as stated above, to the kalima and the amr—as “the man of knowl-
edge and the figure of religion” (al-insān al-ʿilmī wa-l-shakhṣ al-dīnī). This
man or figure is realized in the sub-lunar world in “seven virtuous fig-
ures” (sabʿa ashkhāṣ fāḍila), who appear among men in the seven cycles
of human sacred history. Each one of these seven figures is joined by
twelve supporters from among “his most venerable companions, relatives
and family members (min ajillat aṣḥābihi wa-aqāribihi wa-ahl baytihi)”. To
these supporters are subjected numerous other men whose mission it is
to assist the “virtuous figure” in propagating his message and attracting
followers to his cause (= daʿwa, literally: “summoning”). It is clear that
the Ikhwān are referring here to the seven “speaker prophets” (nuṭaqāʾ)
known to us from the Ismāʿīlī tradition, to their supporters (the twelve
nuqabāʾ, “chiefs”), to the imāms who are members of the Prophet’s family
and to the hierarchal daʿwa organization subordinate to them.60 In other
words: God’s word and the Divine knowledge and will are the ontological
59 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 635–6 (“[. . .] Wa-anna kalimat allāh taʿālā muttaṣila
bihi tumidduhu bi-l-ifāḍa wa-l-jūd li-yatimma wa-yabqā fī l-wujūd wa-anna awwal fayḍihā
ttiḥāduhā bi-l-mubdaʿ al-awwal wa-huwa l-ʿaql al-faʿʿāl thumma bi-wasāṭatihi ilā l-nafs
al-kulliya wa-hiya l-ʿaql al-munfaʿil thumma bi-wasāṭat al-nafs al-kulliya ilā l-hayūlā l-ūlā
thumma bi-wasāṭat al-hayūlā l-ūlā ilā l-jism al-muṭlaq thumma tanbaththu fī l-ʿālam bi-
asrihi wa-annahā mukhtaṣṣa min al-ashkhāṣ al-insāniyya l-fāḍila bi-l-anbiyāʾ wa-l-mursalīn
wa-l-ʿibād al-ṣāliḥīn”). On “prime matter” and “the absolute body” see Altmann and Stern,
Isaac Israeli 182–3; Nasr, An introduction 52, 58–9. For the term imdād (“increasing”, “suc-
coring”, “reinforcing”) and its derivatives (namely mādda, “continuous increase”, “[spiri-
tual] substance”), in their cosmic sense and in the context of amr and kalima, see also
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 658, 707–8, ii, 5, 139–40, 148; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 201,
203–4; and see also below pp. 153–4.
60 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 608–34 (the quotations are from pp. 616, 629–30); cf.
Pines, Shīʿite terms 174–8. On the seven nuṭaqāʾ, see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v. “nāṭiq,
nuṭaqāʾ ”; on the nuqabāʾ , see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v. “naqīb, nuqabāʾ ”; Hamdani,
Evolution 90 n. 24.
50 chapter one
61 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 621–2; cf. ibid. 610. On the concept of walāya see
chapter 3 of this work.
62 See Q 18:109; 31:27.
63 See Q 3:7; 13:39; 43:4; 68:1; 85:22; and Wensinck, Lawḥ; Geoffroy, Umm al-kitāb; Huart,
Ḳalam. On the pen and tablet in Muslim theology, see also Wensinck, Muslim creed, index,
s.v. “Table”, “Pen”.
64 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 25, 536–7, 705 (cf. Tāmir’s edition
v, 179), ii, 8 (cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 187), 33–4; cf. al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 148–9;
al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 110–5. For a similar identification in Ismāʿīlī mythical writings of the
cosmic entities Kūnī-Qadar with kursī-ʿarsh (sic, in this order) and qalam-lawḥ, see Halm,
Kosmologie 219. On the Divine throne and footstool in the Quran and Muslim theology,
see the roots ʿ.r.sh. and k.r.s.i. in ʿAbd al-Bāqī, al-Muʿjam al-mufahras; and see Huart, Kursī;
Wensinck, Muslim creed 67 and index, s.v. “Throne”; Gimaret, Dieu à l’image de l’homme
76–89.
65 On mashīʾa (translated here as “volition”) and irāda see above n. 34.
the word of god and the divine will 51
This Divine writing is made possible by, or is a result of the divine utter-
ance “be!” (kun).66 Thus, both the Divine speech and Divine writing are
perceived by the Ikhwān as the source of creation and life.
The various terms pertaining to God’s word and Divine will (kalima, kun,
amr and irāda) also play a central role in the writings of the Andalusī
Sunni mystics Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī. As will be demonstrated,
these terms were integrated by these authors into a Neoplatonic scheme,
in a very similar way to what we have seen in the longer version of the
Theology of Aristotle and in the Ismāʿīlī writings examined above.67
Ibn Masarra
As argued in the Introduction, Ibn Masarra, the first Muslim mystic in al-
Andalus who is known to us from his own writings, should be viewed as
a Neoplatonic mystic-philosopher. The Neoplatonic philosophy stands at
the heart of his two works that have come down to us: the “Epistle on
Contemplation” (Risālat al-iʿtibār) and the “Book on the Properties of
Letters, their True Essences and Roots” (Kitāb khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf
wa-ḥaqāʾiqihā wa-uṣūlihā). Like the longer version of the Theology of Aris-
totle and the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic tradition, Ibn Masarra too integrates the
terms relating to God’s word and Divine will into a Neoplatonic scheme.
According to Ibn Masarra,
the remembrance (al-dhikr) is the universal intellect, which Allāh, may He
be exalted, has designated exclusively for the greater soul [al-nafs al-kubrā =
the universal soul], which is situated in the carrying footstool.
68 See Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 164–5 (“[. . .]Wa-l-dhihn [read: wa-l-dhikr] huwa
l-ʿaql al-kullī l-ladhī khaṣṣa llāh taʿālā bihi l-nafs al-kubrā l-latī fī l-kursī l-ḥāmil”; “Thumma
fawqa l-dhikr fī l-martaba mawḍiʿ al-kun wa-huwa khurūj al-amr min al-dhikr al-aʿlā wa-
huwa l-ghayb ilā l-nafs al-kubrā wa-imdāduhu iyyāhā [. . .]”).
69 For the term dhikr in the Quran, see the root dh.k.r. in ʿAbd al-Bāqī, al-Muʿjam al-
mufahras. Though dhikr is an important Sufi concept, the cosmological-cosmogonic con-
text in which Ibn Masarra employs this term points to a different source of inspiration,
other than the Sufi tradition—namely, Neoplatonism. On Ibn Masarra, Sufism and Neo-
platonism, see the Introduction to this work, pp. 25–6.
70 On mawḍiʿ, see above n. 54; on imdād, see above n. 59; on the footstool and the
universal soul, see above n. 64.
71 See Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 136, 140–1, 145, 150, 153–4, 166.
72 Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 175 (“[. . .] Fa-l-ʿālam kulluhu kitāb ḥurūfuhu kalāmuhu [. . .]”).
the word of god and the divine will 53
upon His throne all of His decrees and sentences as well as that to which
His will applies”.73 In addition, according to Ibn Masarra, all the decrees
are written upon the tablet by means of the pen, as an expression of the
Divine will and volition.74 Unlike the Ikhwān, however, Ibn Masarra iden-
tifies both the pen and the tablet with the universal intellect.75
Ibn al-ʿArabī
Know that the existent beings are the words of Allāh which do not cease.
[Allāh], exalted be He, said concerning the existence of Jesus, peace be upon
him, that he is ‘[the messenger of God] and His word which He has cast
unto Mary [Q 4:171]’; this is Jesus, peace be upon him. So this is why we say
that the existent beings are the words of Allāh [. . .] The words known in the
common language are formed by arranging the letters [that result] from the
breath which comes out of the one who breathes. This breath is broken up
in the various articulation points (al-makhārij), and the letters’ entities thus
appear according to specific ratios, producing words.76
This succinct passage, taken from the beginning of chapter 198 of al-Futūḥāt
al-makkiyya (“The Meccan Revelations”)—Ibn al-ʿArabī’s largest and most
important work—contains some of the most central ideas in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
thought, at least as regards the issue of God’s creative speech. According
to Ibn al-ʿArabī, all existent beings are the words of God: in the same way
that human speech is formed from letters and words which result from
the process of breathing, so too the Divine speech is formed from letters
and words which derive from God’s breath, “the breath of the All-Merciful”
(nafas al-raḥmān, al-nafas al-raḥmānī) or “the Divine breath” (al-nafas
al-ilāhī). God’s letters are therefore the building blocks of reality; from
them the Divine words are created—i.e., the existent beings. In various
passages, Ibn al-ʿArabī links the concept of nafas al-raḥmān with the term
kun (“be!”) and defines the latter as God’s word (kalima) and command
73 Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 182, 184–5 (“[. . .] Fa-qālū hādhā falak al-ʿaql ʿālam al-ʿaql
fa-wajadū makān al-ʿarsh wa-mawḍiʿ al-maqādīr al-ʿulā wa-l-mashīʾa l-kubrā [. . .]”), 188
(“[. . .]Wa-kataba fī ʿarshihi jamīʿ maqādīrihi wa-qaḍāyāhu wa-mā tajrī ʿalayhi irādatuhu
[. . .]”).
74 Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 145–6.
75 Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 154.
76 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 385 (the beginning of chapter 198: “Iʿlam anna
l-mawjūdāt hiya kalimāt allāh al-latī lā tanfadu qāla taʿālā fī wujūd ʿīsā ʿalayhi l-salām
annahu wa-kalimatuhu alqāhā ilā maryam wa-huwa ʿīsā ʿalayhi l-salām fa-li-hādhā qulnā
inna l-mawjūdāt kalimāt allāh [. . .] wa-l-kalimāt al-maʿlūma fī l-ʿurf innamā tatashak-
kalu ʿan naẓm al-ḥurūf min al-nafas al-khārij min al-mutanaffis al-mutaqaṭṭiʿ fī l-makhārij
fa-yaẓharu fī dhālika l-taqāṭuʿ aʿyān al-ḥurūf ʿalā nisab makhṣūṣa fa-takūnu l-kalimāt”).
54 chapter one
(amr, amr ilāhī). According to Ibn al-ʿArabī, all beings exist eternally in
God’s mind as “immutable entities” (aʿyān thābita), as infinite possibilities
of existence (mumkināt). Nafas al-raḥmān and kun bring these immuta-
ble entities into existence, giving them life. Through nafas al-raḥmān and
kun, the Divine letters, which are the entities of the existent beings, are
formed into Divine words, i.e., into the beings themselves as they exist in
the created world. The creative Divine speech occurs perpetually; creation
is renewed with every breath of God. This is why the existent beings, in
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s own words, “are the words of Allāh which do not cease”.77
These ideas have a lot in common with the Ismāʿīlī conceptions dis-
cussed above, especially with those found in the Epistles of Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ.
It almost seems as if Ibn al-ʿArabī adopted the semi-anthropomorphic
attitude of the Ikhwān, focusing as he does on the aspect of speech inher-
ent in the notion of God’s creative word. Like the Ikhwān, Ibn al-ʿArabī
does not show any real interest in the philosophical-theological casuistry
of this issue, and perceives Divine speech as a dynamic living entity which
bestows vitality and existence to the universe. Furthermore, both the
Ikhwān and Ibn al-ʿArabī emphasize the incessant state of Divine creation:
the unceasing act of Divine speech is the only guarantee for the continua-
tion of life and existence in the universe. In order to establish this idea of
creation as being perpetually renewed, the Ikhwān do not content them-
selves with the Quranic notion of God’s unceasing words,78 but also quote
the verse which states that “every day He is upon a task” (kulla yawm huwa
fī shaʾn).79 This verse recurs in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings, expressing one of
the most central ideas in his thought: the perpetual renewal of Divine
creation brought about by God’s speech or nafas al-raḥmān.80 Both the
Ikhwān and Ibn al-ʿArabī stress the Divine attribute of mercy as a central
element that sets the unceasing creative process in motion.81 However, it
77 For these concepts, see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 224 (chapter 20, =
ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition iii, 89–90), ii, 394–5 (chapter 198, faṣl 2), 395–7 (ibid. faṣl 5), iii,
507–8 (chapter 384), iv, 211–3 (chapter 558, “ḥaḍrat al-khalq wa-l-amr”); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ
al-ḥikam 142, 211.
78 See the references above in n. 56.
79 See Q 55:29; and Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 338, 351; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii,
288–9; see also Rasāʾil iii, 370, iv, 209; al-Jāmiʿa ii, 320.
80 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 277 (chapter 167), 386 (the beginning
of chapter 198), 389, 393–4 (chapter 198, faṣl 1), iii 507 (chapter 384), iv 169–70 (chapter
524), 229 (chapter 558, “ḥaḍrat al-rafʿa”); and Chittick, Sufi path 18–9, 96–112; Chittick, Self-
disclosure 66–72.
81 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 472–3; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 385
(the beginning of chapter 198); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 220–1; and s.v. “mercy” in
the word of god and the divine will 55
the indexes of Chittick, Sufi path and Chittick, Self-disclosure. On mercy in the Sufi tradi-
tion and its roots in the pre-Islamic heritage, see Sviri, Between fear and hope, especially
pp. 333–7.
82 For this tradition, see, for example, Ibn Ḥanbal, al-Musnad xii, 481 (ḥadīth 16132); see
also Gimaret, Dieu à l’image de l’homme 61–5.
83 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 386 (the beginning of chapter 198: “Thumma lammā awjada
l-ʿālam wa-fataḥa ṣūratahu fī l-ʿamāʾ wa-huwa l-nafas al-ladhī huwa l-haqq al-makhlūq bihi
marātib al-ʿālam wa-aʿyānuhu [. . .]”).
84 Ibid. (“[. . .] Wa-jaʿala fī l-nafas al-ilāhī ʿillat al-ījād min jānib al-raḥma bi-l-khalq li-
yukhrijahum min sharr al-ʿadam ilā khayr al-wujūd [. . .]”).
85 See above pp. 40, 44. Note that in various passages in his writings, Ibn al-ʿArabī
explicitly states that God is not to be considered the cause of creation; see, for instance,
al-Futūḥāt i, 136 (chapter 2, towards the end of faṣl 2, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 76), 168
(chapter 6, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 223), 227 (chapter 21, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition
iii, 107–8); Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿUqlat al-mustawfiz 69; cf. Chittick, Self-disclosure 16–20; Rosen-
thal, Ibn ʿArabī 32 n. 177.
56 chapter one
86 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 390 (chapter 198): “[. . .] the perfect man is truly the
truth by means of which—that is, because of which—the world was created [. . .]” (“[. . .]
Fa-l-insān al-kāmil huwa ʿalā l-ḥaqīqa l-ḥaqq al-makhlūq bihi ay al-makhlūq bi-sababihi
l-ʿālam [. . .]”). Regarding the perfect man’s ontological root being situated above the uni-
versal intellect, see ibid. iii, 430 (chapter 371, faṣl 9). Note that Ibn al-ʿArabī also identifies
God’s speech and command with the Divine knowledge; see, for example, ibid. ii, 397
(chapter 198, faṣl 5). Finally, note that Ibn al-ʿArabī himself claims to have borrowed the
concept of al-ḥaqq al-makhlūq bihi from the teachings of Ibn Barrajān, the Sunni mys-
tic from Seville (d. 536/1141); see Chittick, Sufi path 133, 398 n. 15–6. However, as is clear
from the current discussion, the notions concerning al-ḥaqq al-makhlūq bihi in the context
referred to here—God’s word and Divine will—are ultimately derived from the Neopla-
tonic scheme of the Ikhwān.
87 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 389 (chapter 198), iii, 429 (chapter 371, faṣl 9). Regard-
ing the ʿamāʾ being situated above the universal intellect and identified with al-ḥaqq
al-makhlūq bihi, see ibid. ii, 279 (towards the end of chapter 167). On nafas al-raḥmān, the
ʿamāʾ and al-ḥaqq al-makhlūq bihi see also Chittick, Sufi path 125–30, 132–4.
88 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 465 (chapter 198, faṣl 50).
89 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 149 (the beginning of chapter 5: “[. . .] Fa-l-ʿālam ḥurūf
makhṭūṭa marqūma fī raqq al-wujūd al-manshūr wa-lā tazālu l-kitāba fīhi dāʾima abadan
lā tantahī [. . .] wa-hādhā kitāb aʿnī l-ʿālam al-ladhī natakallamu ʿalayhi [. . .]”, = ʿUthmān
the word of god and the divine will 57
The central role of God’s word and Divine will is not restricted to the
cosmogonic process or to the mere physical maintenance and manage-
ment of the universe; it is also reflected in the religious and spiritual guid-
ance of mankind, as was shown in our discussion of the Ikhwānian “man
of knowledge and figure of religion” and of the concept of “the truth by
means of which the world was created” in the thought of both the Ikhwān
and Ibn al-ʿArabī. I will now discuss this issue in greater detail.
Ismāʿīlī Literature
The concept of the Divine command (amr, amr allāh, amr ilāhī) occupies
a prominent place in Ismāʿīlī literature. Its importance for the Ismāʿīlī
worldview stems from its relevance to the status of “God’s friends”
(awliyāʾ)—the prophets and the imāms. The Divine command, being an
expression of the Divine will, is the direct source for the supreme status
of the prophets and imāms and for their central role in human history.
From the Divine command emanate the spiritual powers of the prophets
and the imāms, as well as the special religious knowledge that they possess.
Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 133). On creation as a book, see also ibid. 160 (chapter 5, “waṣl fī asrār
umm al-qurʾān”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 184–7), ii, 463–4 (chapter 198, faṣl 46), iii, 441
(the beginning of chapter 373), iv, 170 (chapter 524); Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 38, 42.
For the expression “the open-spread parchment” (al-raqq al-manshūr) see Q 52:2–3; for its
use in a context similar to the one discussed here, see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 210.
90 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 37 (“khuṭbat al-kitāb”: “Thumma ghamasa qalam al-irāda
fī midād al-ʿilm wa-khaṭṭa bi-yamīn al-qudra fī l-lawḥ al-maḥfūẓ al-maṣūn kull mā kāna
wa-mā huwa kāʾin wa-sayakūnu wa-mā lā yakūnu [. . .]”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 48).
Cf. ibid. 201 (chapter 13, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 350–1), ii, 279 (towards the end of
chapter 167), iii 387 (chapter 369, waṣl 19); Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 176–181, 222.
91 See above n. 66.
58 chapter one
The prophets and imāms are responsible for fulfilling God’s will on earth
and executing His command among men, by introducing the Divine reli-
gious law (the sharīʿa), developing its esoteric interpretation (taʾwīl) and
divulging the sacred knowledge to the true believers who are initiated
into the real faith. Hence, the Divine command which is directly linked
to the status of the prophets and the imāms is the true essence of religion,
the true meaning of the Divine amr and nahy (commandment and prohi-
bition) and of al-amr bi-l-maʿrūf wa-l-nahy ʿan al-munkar (“commanding
right and prohibiting wrong”).92 Accordingly, obeying the prophets and
imāms is equivalent to obeying God’s command, while disobeying them is
considered to be an outright rebellion against the Divine will. Since God’s
will and command never change and since the bond connecting them
with the prophets and their heirs always remains intact, the amr imparts
to human history coherence, unity and continuity: God’s command passes
from one prophet to the next, from one imām to the one who follows
him, linking together all prophets and imāms throughout the ages. Man-
kind is therefore always being led—manifestly or secretly—by a divinely
sanctioned leadership. Thus, in the early Ismāʿīlī work Kitāb al-kashf (“The
Book of Unveiling”), it is stated that
[. . .] Allāh’s command remains continuous (muttaṣil) from the first ones
among His prophets, messengers and the leaders of His religion [wa-aʾimmat
dīnihi, i.e., the imāms] to the last one among them. Whoever obeys the last
one among them, it is as if he obeyed the first one among them, for Allāh’s
command remains continuous from the first one, through the one who fol-
lows and down to the last one. And whoever obeys the first one—his obedi-
ence will direct him and bring him to the last one. What is meant is Allāh’s
command which He establishes through each and every one of them in his
own age; then it reaches the one who follows him.93
94 See, for instance, al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba 50, 52, 57–8; Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-
Yaman, al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām, index, s.v. “amr”; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 74, 139, 220; al-Sijistānī,
al-Yanābīʿ 18; al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 152–3; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 169–70, 177, 186–
7, 201–2, 208, 210–1; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 124, 326, 370, 414; al-Kirmānī, al-Muḍīʾa 59.
95 See, for example, Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām 2–3; al-Sijistānī,
al-Iftikhār 185–7.
96 See, for example, al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 179; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 344 (cf.
Tāmir’s edition v, 285); al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 134, 152, 161, 345; and Amir-Moezzi, Divine
guide, index, s.v. “amr”.
97 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 528–37, 545–53, 559 (cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 140),
563–4.
98 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 248–9 (“Wa-kāna l-ʿaql awwal al-qābilīna li-amr allāh
ʿazza wa-jalla wa-nahyihi l-mustaqīm [. . .]”). See also ibid. 310: “Know [. . .] that the law is
a Divine command [. . .] It is the command by means of which the heavens and the earth
and all that is between them were set up [. . .]” (“Iʿlam [. . .] anna l-nāmūs amr ilāhī [. . .] wa-
huwa l-amr al-ladhī qāmat bihi l-samawāt wa-l-arḍ wa-mā baynahumā [. . .]”). On religion
as “command and prohibition”, see ibid. 142.
60 chapter one
al-nāṭiq), i.e., any one of the seven law-giving prophets in the seven cycles
of human history. The nāṭiq is the source of spiritual movement (ḥaraka)
which motivates men to gain knowledge of their Lord:
This movement is given to him as support [al-muʾayyad bihā, from taʾyīd,
“support”] from the command of Allāh, powerful and mighty is He, through
the angels and Spirit who descend upon him with the commandment
and prohibition, [aiding him in] composing the laws and religious codes
(al-nawāmīs wa-l-sharāʾiʿ).99
The source for the religious activity and special virtues of each raʾīs (“chief ”,
i.e., the nāṭiq in any given cycle) is the “heavenly support and Divine com-
mand (taʾyīd samāwī wa-amr ilāhī)”.100 According to the Ikhwān, towards
the end of each historical cycle and at the beginning of the next one,
God’s command descends or emanates through the universal intellect and
soul, and eventually reaches the relevant raʾīs or nāṭiq. The latter executes
the new Divine command by establishing a new sharīʿa for mankind. The
Divine command is therefore not only a cause for historical continuity
and unity, but also reflects the dynamic aspect of the Divine realm.101
Finally, it should be noted that the term amr or amr allāh appears
also in Shiʿi-Imāmī literature of the 9th–10th centuries. As in the Ismāʿīlī
writings, the Imāmī traditions emphasize the aspect of historical conti-
nuity and unity pertaining to amr.102 One should bear in mind that the
Imāmī and Ismāʿīlī traditions derived from the same early Shiʿi heritage
of the 8th–9th centuries. However, contrary to the Imāmī traditions, the
Ismāʿīlī authors emphasize the cosmogonic and cosmological aspects of
amr. Moreover, the Neoplatonic scheme into which this and various other
related concepts are incorporated is distinctively Ismāʿīlī.
99 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 249 (“[. . .] Thumma yanbaʿithu minhu bi-hādhihi
l-ḥaraka l-muʾayyad bihā min tilqāʾ amr allāh ʿazza wa-jalla bi-nuzūl al-malāʾika wa-l-rūḥ
ilayhi bi-l-amr wa-l-nahy wa-waḍʿ al-nawāmīs wa-l-sharāʾiʿ [. . .]”); see also ibid. i, 531–4. On
the term nāṭiq, see above n. 60. On the spirit mentioned here, see above pp. 35–6.
100 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 660; see also ibid. 664–5: “[. . .] The knowledge attached
to it [the human soul] is a Divine command, through the mediation of the intellect [. . .]”
(“[. . .] Wa-anna l-ʿilm al-muttaṣil bihā amr ilāhī bi-wāsiṭat al-ʿaql [. . .]”).
101 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 705–7 (cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 179–80), ii, 138–54, 359–
66; cf. Pines, Shīʿite terms 174–8; Krinis, Idea 175. Note that among the Ismāʿīlī authors
there was disagreement on whether or not Adam (the first of the seven prophets) inaugu-
rated a sharīʿa, and whether or not the seventh and last prophet (the messianic figure of
the mahdī or qāʾim) will abrogate the Islamic sharīʿa. On this dispute see Halm, Kosmologie
101–9, 121–2; De Smet, Adam. On the qāʾim see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v. “Qāʾim”.
102 See Pines, Shīʿite terms 170, 174; Krinis, Idea 174–5.
the word of god and the divine will 61
103 Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 165 (“[. . .] Wa-minhu aʿṭā jamīʿ man fī l-samawāt wa-l-
arḍīna min al-malāʾika wa-l-jinn wa-l-ins juzʾan fa-ʿaqalū bihi wa-ʿalimū khāliqahum [. . .] li-
annahu nazala l-dhikr ʿalā arbaʿa anbiyāʾ wa-hum ibrāhīm wa-mūsā wa-ʿīsā wa-muḥammad
ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi wa-ʿalā jamīʿ al-nabiyyīna”).
104 Ibid. 156–7 (“[. . .] Li-anna nuzūl amrihi tabāraka wa-taʿālā kāna ʿalā arbaʿa anbiyāʾ
wa-hum maʿdin al-nubuwwa fa-nazala amruhu awwalan ʿalā ibrāhīm [. . .] thumma
nazala baʿda dhālika ilā l-ṭūr ʿalā mūsā [. . .]”; “[. . .] Wa-huwa nuzūl al-amr wa-ifḍāʾuhu ilā
muḥammad ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi wa-sallama wa-ʿalā jamīʿ al-nabiyyīna [. . .]”); see also ibid. 142;
and Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 177: “The messengers conveyed information based on Allāh’s
command [. . .]” (“[. . .] Fa-nabaʾat al-rusul ʿan amr allāh taʿālā [. . .]”).
62 chapter one
105 The phrases amr allāh and amr ilāhī are very common in Ismāʿīlī sources; see above,
pp. 46, 57–60. For these phrases in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings, see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Futūḥāt iii, 122–3 (chapter 333), iv, 428 (chapter 559); see also the references above in
n. 77 and below nn. 108–9, 111.
106 See Chittick, Sufi path 169, 172, 250–1; Chittick, Self-disclosure 112–3; and the refer-
ences below in n. 108. Concerning akhbār, cf. the Ismāʿīlī use of this term (see the refer-
ences below in nn. 122, 130).
107 Note that the throne and footstool in this context are not the universal intellect and
soul, but the ninth and eighth celestial spheres (respectively), situated above the other
seven spheres. Certainly, Ibn al-ʿArabī also identifies the throne and footstool with the uni-
versal intellect and soul; see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 123, 133–4, 152, 176–8,
211; Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿUqlat al-mustawfiz 52; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Mabādiʾ 111–3; and the references
in the following note. Similarly, according to Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, the throne and footstool des-
ignate not only the universal intellect and soul, but also (respectively) the ninth sphere (al-
falak al-muḥīṭ, “the encompassing sphere”) and the eighth one ( falak al-kawākib al-thābita,
“the sphere of fixed stars”). See, for example, Rasāʾil ii, 26, iv, 224; see also above n. 64.
108 For this cosmic process, see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 159 (chapter 5,
“laṭīfa”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 182–3), 201 (chapter 13, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition
ii, 352), ii, 254 (chapter 158), 278 (chapter 167), 426 (chapter 198, faṣl 15), 428 (ibid. faṣl 17,
where al-nafas al-raḥmānī, from whence the kalima descends to the throne, is called al-
amr al-ilāhī), 429 (ibid. faṣl 18), 431 (ibid. faṣl 19), 662–3 (chapter 295), iii, 418–9 (chapter
371, faṣl 2), 447–9 (the beginning of chapter 374); Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 42; Chittick,
Sufi path 358–61.
the word of god and the divine will 63
lations examined above. In the process of this cosmic descent from the
upper spiritual worlds to the lower corporeal worlds, the Divine com-
mand assumes the form of religion, in both its legal aspect (pertaining to
the messengers and prophets) and its esoteric-mystic aspect (pertaining
also to the friends of God—the imāms in the Ismāʿīlī tradition and the
mystics in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought). In addition, Ibn al-ʿArabī distinguishes
between amr takwīnī and amr taklīfī. Al-Amr al-takwīnī (“the existentiat-
ing command”), or amr al-mashīʾa (“the command of volition”) as it is
sometimes termed, is the command that creates everything according to
the Divine will and volition. In contradistinction, al-amr al-taklīfī (“the
imposing command”) is the command that imposes religious obligations
and duties on mankind, in the framework of the sharīʿa. The amr taklīfī
is also called al-amr bi-l-wāsiṭa (“the command through mediation”), i.e.,
the command that does not reach our world directly but via mediating
links—the various cosmic entities and the prophets in the sub-lunar
world.109 The term wāsiṭa in this cosmic context of amr appears also in
Ismāʿīlī writings.110
Finally, in his famous work Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam (“The Ring-Gems of the Wis-
doms”), Ibn al-ʿArabī declares that
in the same way that it is said concerning the doctor that he serves nature,
it is also said of the messengers and heirs [wa-l-waratha, i.e., the friends of
God] that they serve the Divine command generally.111
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ state in a similar vein:
All beliefs and religions were established as medicines and potions which
eliminate the doubts that overwhelm the souls, just as the medicine elimi-
nates the fatal infirmities and illnesses that seize the body. The originators
of the religious legal codes and those who establish the laws by the com-
mand of Allāh, powerful and mighty is He, are the doctors of the souls.112
109 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 165–6; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i,
236–7 (chapter 22, “manzil al-amr”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition iii, 142–3), iii, 122–3 (chapter
333); see also Chittick, Sufi path 291–4; Chittick, Self-disclosure 250–3.
110 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 534 (cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 134), 635–6,
ii, 149; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 185–6. Concerning the phrase al-amr al-takwīnī, cf. the phrase
al-amr al-kunī (“the command ‘be!’ ”), in al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 24.
111 Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ 97 (“Wa-ʿlam annahu kamā yuqālu fī l-ṭabīb innahu khādim
al-ṭabīʿa kadhālika yuqālu fī l-rusul wa-l-waratha innahum khādimū l-amr al-ilāhī fī
l-ʿumūm”); see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 112: “[. . .] This is the pole [al-quṭb, the senior
one among the friends of God], around whom the Divine command turns” (“[. . .] Fa-huwa
l-quṭb wa-ʿalayhi madār al-amr al-ilāhī [. . .]”); and see Chittick, Sufi path 272, 304–9.
112 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 337 (“[. . .] Al-madhāhib wa-l-diyānāt kullahā wuḍiʿat kal-
adwiya wa-l-ashriba l-muzīla li-mā yaʿtarī l-nufūs min al-shubuhāt kamā bi-l-dawāʾ yazūlu
64 chapter one
The Ikhwān likewise designate as “doctors of the souls” those “who are
learned in the rulings of the law” (ʿulamāʾ aḥkām al-nāmūs), the phi-
losophers, and the supporters (awliyāʾ) and vicegerents (khulafāʾ) of the
prophets.113 Both the Ikhwān and Ibn al-ʿArabī perceive those who possess
religious knowledge—legal and esoteric alike—as acting in accordance
with the Divine command. The existence of prophets and heirs is there-
fore essential for mankind at all times. Indeed, the prophets and their heirs
through the ages are portrayed by Ibn al-ʿArabī as forming various links
of a single chain which begins with Adam and ends with the three mes-
sianic figures associated with the term khātam/khatm al-awliyāʾ, “the seal
of God’s friends”. In various passages, Ibn al-ʿArabī refers to this historical
chain or to its religious-spiritual activity as amr—“affair” or perhaps also
“command”.114 Thus, like the Ismāʿīlīs, Ibn al-ʿArabī views sacred human
history as a continuous, unified whole: this history is sustained by the
leadership of the prophets and their heirs (the imāms in the Ismāʿīlī tra-
dition and the mystics in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought), and it ends with the
appearance of a last, messianic figure—the seventh nāṭiq of the Ismāʿīlīs
and the khātam/khatm al-awliyāʾ of Ibn al-ʿArabī.
Taʾyīd
The term taʾyīd (“support”), which has already surfaced in our discussion,
plays an important role in the Ismāʿīlī worldview and is quite common
in Ismāʿīlī literature, yet it has not been given due attention in modern
mā yaʿriḍu lil-ajsām min al-āfāt wa-l-ʿilal al-muhlikāt wa-anna aṣḥāb al-sharāʾiʿ wa-wāḍiʿī
l-nawāmīs bi-amr allāh ʿazza wa-jalla hum aṭibbāʾ al-nufūs”).
113 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 348–9, ii, 141, iii, 11–12, iv, 14–7, 329–30, 376. Regarding
the notion of the prophet as a spiritual doctor in Ismāʿīlī literature, see also al-Kirmānī,
Rāḥat al-ʿaql 383–90; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 304; Walker, Early philosophical Shiism 122;
Walker, Ḥamīd al-Dīn al-Kirmānī 73–4.
114 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt iii, 388 (chapter 369, waṣl 19): “[. . .]
until the amr concerning this reaches the seal of God’s friends, the seal of those who
rule on legal issues from among Muḥammad’s community [khātam al-mujtahidīn
al-muḥammadiyyīn—presumably, Ibn al-ʿArabī himself], and then it reaches the universal
seal [al-khatm al-ʿāmm—Jesus], who is Allāh’s spirit and word [. . .]”, “[. . .] Ilā an yanta-
hiya l-amr fī dhālika ilā khātam al-awilyāʾ khātam al-mujtahidīna l-muḥammadiyyīna ilā an
yantahiya ilā l-khatm al-ʿāmm al-ladhī huwa rūḥ allāh wa-kalimatuhu”), 442 (chapter 373:
“[. . .] and Muḥammad, the father of the heirs from Adam to the seal of the amr among the
heirs [. . .]”, “[. . .] Wa-muḥammad ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi wa-sallama abū l-waratha min ādam ilā
khātam al-amr min al-waratha [. . .]”); cf. Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 214; Ibn al-ʿArabī,
ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 42, 71. On the seal of God’s friends, see Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints
116–46; Addas, Quest 76–81.
the word of god and the divine will 65
an argument against the beings He created and so that they may guide His
servants to Him by His command.118
The existence of prophets and imāms is vital for mankind’s salvation.
Their religious-spiritual activity, which derives from, and at the same time
executes, God’s command, is enabled by the Divine taʾyīd. The religious
knowledge of the prophets and imāms—both legal and esoteric—results
from the taʾyīd. Thus, according to Kitāb al-kashf, the ḥujja—one of the
most high-ranking dignitaries of the Ismāʿīlī hierarchy—is the curator of
the esoteric knowledge, and from him the Ismāʿīlī believers obtain their
knowledge. The imām, to whom the ḥujja is subordinate, “reinforces him
with the foundations of his knowledge, by the support of Allāh, power-
ful and mighty is He”.119 Hence, the prophets and their heirs are the true
possessors of Divine knowledge: “Through them Allāh comes to be known
[by men]”, for
his command and support are found among them and with them [. . .] He
has made them His servants who know His hidden realm, who have become
enlightened by the light of His guidance and are continuously attached to
the light of His being.120
The link between taʾyīd and imdād is reflected in yet another Fāṭimī work,
al-Risāla l-mudhhiba, attributed to the famous al-Nuʿmān b. Muḥammad
(d. 363/974), the chief Fāṭimī qāḍī ( judge) and dāʿī (missionary). This work
emphasizes the cosmic aspect of the terms discussed here: the Divine
support flows unceasingly through the various spiritual entities in the
118 Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 102 (“[. . .] Maʿādin amr allāh wa-waḥyihi wa-hum
al-rasūl wa-l-aʾimma tatanazzalu fīhim barakat allāh wa-taʾyīduhu ḥattā yaṣṭafiyahum fī
kull ʿaṣr wa-zamān li-yaḥtajja bihim ʿalā khalqihi wa-yahdū ʿibādahu ilayhi bi-amrihi”). The
idea behind the expression “so He can use them as an argument against the beings He
created” (li-yaḥtajja bihim ʿalā khalqihi) is that the imāms do not only constitute a proof
(ḥujja) of God’s existence, but also an argument (ḥujja) against mankind on judgment day,
for men then will not be able to claim that they had been unaware of the true path. On the
term ḥujja, see the indexes of Halm, Kosmologie and Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs; see also Hodgson,
Ḥudjdja; and Hamdani, Evolution.
119 Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 60–1 (“Wa-ḥujjat al-imām ṣāḥīb al-taʾwīl fī ʿaṣrihi
wa-summiya l-ḥujja bi-l-miskīn li-anna l-nufūs taskunu ilā ʿilmihi [. . .]”; “[. . .] Wa-huwa
miskīn ilā l-imām limā yumidduhu bihi min qawāʿid ʿilmihi bi-taʾyīd allāh ʿazza wa-jalla”);
see also ibid. 84–5, 113. For the term ḥujja, see the references in the previous note.
120 Ibid. 151 (“Wa-l-ʿālimūna hum al-anbiyāʾ wa-l-mursalūna fī kull ʿaṣr wa-zamān
al-ladhīna kushifa lahum ʿilm al-ḥaqīqa”; “ʿUrifa llāh bihim wa-ʿurifa llāh min qibalihim [. . .]
ʿalā wajhi anna llāh ʿazza wa-jalla amruhu wa-taʾyīduhu mawjūd fīhim wa-maʿahum [. . .]
wa-jaʿalahum ʿibādahu l-ladhīna ʿalimū ghaybahu wa-staḍāʾū bi-nur hidāyatihi wa-ttaṣalū
bi-nūr anniyyatihi [. . .]”); see also ibid. 169. On the philosophical term anniyya (“being”),
see Adamson, Arabic Plotinus, index, s.v. “anniyya”.
the word of god and the divine will 67
upper worlds until it reaches the Ismāʿīlī hierarchy in the corporeal world.
The result of this cosmic process is the Divine knowledge, which is pos-
sessed solely by the prophets, their heirs and those who follow them. This
is the knowledge of “the boundaries (al-ḥudūd)”, i.e., the supreme cosmic
entities and their earthly equivalents among the dignitaries of the Ismāʿīlī
hierarchy,
the means and salvation for anyone who seeks the [knowledge] of [God’s]
unity and receives the traces of the support from the higher boundaries
which reinforce the lower boundaries.121
The term taʾyīd plays an important role in the thought of the Ismāʿīlī Neo-
platonist Abū Yaʿqūb al-Sijistānī, who devoted to it a whole chapter in
his book al-Yanābīʿ (“The Wellsprings”)—the last chapter, entitled “On
the way in which the support is attached to those who receive support in
the physical world” ( fī kayfiyyat ittiṣāl al-taʾyīd bi-l-muʾayyadīn fī l-ʿālam
al-jasadānī). According to al-Sijistānī, the support becomes attached to
“those who receive support” (al-muʾayyadūn) in the same way that the
powers of the celestial bodies are attached to the physical things in our
world, except that it is “nobler and finer” (ashraf wa-alṭaf ). In contradistinc-
tion to the ordinary learned man (ʿālim), he who receives the taʾyīd does
not need the physical senses and their corporeal objects (al-maḥsūsāt) in
order to obtain the abstract objects of the intellect (al-maʿqūlāt) and keep
them stored in his memory, since his mental consciousness is the prod-
uct of taʾyīd. When the taʾyīd becomes attached to the muʾayyad, “truths
from the sciences of the hidden realm (ḥaqāʾiq min ʿulūm al-ghayb)” and
“many secrets of the concealed matters (asrār kathīra min al-khafiyyāt)”
are revealed to him. Hence the absolute superiority of the knowledge
resulting from taʾyīd, knowledge which is also referred to by al-Sijistānī
as akhbār (“reports”). The taʾyīd is the source of the nāmūs—the Divine
122 See al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 94–6. Concerning akhbār, compare its use in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
writings; see the references above in n. 106.
123 See al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 3, 9–12, 35–6, 48, 75, 85, 92–4; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 124,
152–3, 158; al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 148, 153; see also Walker, Early philosophical
Shiism 117, 130.
124 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 434, 540, ii, 114–5 (cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 218).
125 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 32, ii, 36; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 186, 198.
126 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 493 (“[. . .] Kamā tūḥī l-malāʾika ilā l-anbiyāʾ bi-l-
taʾyīd wa-tahbuṭu ilayhim bi-l-awāmir wa-l-nawāhī wa-tanzilu bi-amr rabbihā ʿalā man
yashāʾu min ʿibādihi [. . .]”), 616, 619; and above p. 49. For the link between the Divine
command (al-amr al-ilāhī) and taʾyīd, see also al-Jāmiʿa i, 660; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv,
375. For the link between God’s word or speech (kalima, kalām) and taʾyīd, see al-Jāmiʿa i,
698; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 141.
127 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 539, ii, 381.
128 See, for instance, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 342, ii, 63, 332; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil
ii, 476.
the word of god and the divine will 69
their Epistles, the Ikhwān address the reader with the blessing “may Allāh
support us both with a spirit from Him” (ayyadaka llāh wa-iyyānā bi-rūḥ
minhu). This blessing is based on the assumption that anyone who follows
the Ikhwān’s path—be he a prophet, an imām or an ordinary believer—is
likely to gain Divine support.129
Like al-Sijistānī, the Ikhwān emphasize the difference between con-
ventional human knowledge and the knowledge resulting from taʾyīd.
According to the Ikhwān, there are two kinds of knowledge: knowledge
produced by mental reflection or consideration (naẓarī) and knowledge
that stems from “reports” (khabarī). The former pertains to the physi-
cal objects which are apparent to the eye and is obtained by means of
the senses, basic human intuitions and the intellect, whereas the latter
pertains to unseen matters and is gained via tradition and the reading
of books. This latter kind of knowledge, the one based on reports, the
Ikhwān further divide into two categories: the first is related to physical
matters that either occur in faraway places or which have occurred in
the past (= history), while the second is related to nonphysical matters
such as foretelling the future, astrology, philosophy, cosmogony, cosmol-
ogy and eschatology. This second category is the knowledge possessed
by the prophets—it is included in the holy scriptures and results from
“a higher support” (taʾyīdāt ʿulwiyya).130 The knowledge granted to the
reader of their Epistles—especially that which pertains to eschatological
issues—the Ikhwān portray as esoteric in nature, as secret Divine knowl-
edge that must be concealed from the common people. This knowledge
can be attained only by
those who have inner vision, who are trained in the intellectual sciences
[= the sciences emanating from the universal intellect] and are given Divine
support. [They have received this] from what the angels have taught them
[or: cast unto them], from the holy spirit by which they were supported and
from that which is contained in the revealed books.131
129 This blessing appears throughout the Ikhwānian corpus, especially at the beginning
of their Epistles. For other Ismāʿīlī writings in which a similar blessing is found, see, for
example, al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba 65–6, 80, 83; Stern, Earliest cosmological doc-
trines 15.
130 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 38–42. Concerning the term akhbār, see above
nn. 106, 122. On philosophical knowledge as the fruit of taʾyīd, see al-Jāmiʿa i, 430. On the
magical and astrological knowledge of the prophets and their heirs as originating in taʾyīd
and the Divine command, see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 374–6, 378.
131 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 109–10 (“Wa-kāna hādhā l-faṣl min al-ʿilm ghāmiḍan
daqīqan ẓāhiruhu ʿilm jalīl wa-bāṭinuhu sirr nabīl mastūr wa-khafī lā yaṣilu ilayhi illā ahl
al-baṣāʾir al-murtāḍūna bi-l-ʿulūm al-ʿaqliyya l-muʾayyadūna bi-l-taʾyīdāt al-rabbāniyya
70 chapter one
mimmā laqqanahu ilayhim al-malāʾika wa-mā uyyidū bihi min rūḥ al-qudus wa-mā jāʾa fī
l-kutub al-munazzala”; cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 33, where he has alqathu instead of laqqa-
nahu); see also ibid. 332. On the esoteric aspect of knowledge in the thought of the Ikhwān,
in comparison with Ibn al-ʿArabī, see Ebstein, Secrecy 319–29, 338–9.
132 Regarding this author, see above n. 30.
133 See al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 83–4, 89, 93, 122–3, 163, 169, 198, 206–8, 217, 266, 268,
298, 329, 342–3, 354–6, 361–3, 365–7, 370–2, 380–1, 391, 400–38.
134 For the term taʾyīd in Kanz al-walad, see al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 3, 42, 47, 57–8, 69,
74, 79–80, 83–4, 88–9, 104–5, 157–8, 166–7, 172–3, 176, 231–2, 241, 245, 247, 290. On al-Ḥāmidī
and his thought, see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 264–5, 269–76; Daftary, Ismaili literature 113. For
taʾyīd in the Nizārī tradition, see Steigerwald, Divine word 341–2, 346–7.
135 See Krinis, Idea 58, 102–3 and the references given there.
the word of god and the divine will 71
Traces of the Ismāʿīlī use of the term taʾyīd can be detected in the
works of Ibn al-ʿArabī. As in Ismāʿīlī literature, so too in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
writings, taʾyīd is perceived as directly related to God’s command and as
the source of Divine knowledge granted to the prophets and their heirs,
the friends of God. For example, Ibn al-ʿArabī distinguishes between two
types of Divine spirit: the spirit of life which is breathed into every created
being, called “the spirit of the letter yāʾ which is affixed [to God’s name]”
(rūḥ yāʾ al-iḍāfa, al-rūḥ al-iḍāfī or al-rūḥ al-yāʾī), i.e., the spirit which is
affixed to God himself in several Quranic verses (such as Q 15:29); and
the spirit which emanates from the Divine command, “the spirit of the
command” (rūḥ al-amr, al-rūḥ al-amrī).136 The spirit deriving from the
Divine command is bestowed to the prophets and the friends of God as
part of the Divine support, the taʾyīd. This spirit descends upon them by
means of the angels and grants them Divine knowledge, “Divine power”
(quwwa ilāhiyya) and the ability to perform miracles.137 The link drawn
by the Ismāʿīlī authors between taʾyīd and imdād can also be found in
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings.138 Throughout his writings, Ibn al-ʿArabī addresses
the reader with the Ikhwānian-style blessing: “may Allāh support you”
(ayyadaka llāh), “may Allāh support us both” (ayyadanā llāh wa-iyyāka),
“may Allāh support you with a spirit from Him” (ayyadaka llāh bi-rūḥ
minhu), “may Allāh support us both with a spirit from Him” (ayyadanā
llāh wa-iyyāka bi-rūḥ minhu), “may Allāh support you with the holy
136 On the Quranic association of rūḥ with amr, see above n. 14.
137 On the two kinds of spirit mentioned here and taʾyīd, see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Futūḥāt iii, 124 (chapter 333); and Chittick, Self-disclosure 271–3, 276–9, 320, 342, 369. On
taʾyīd and mystical knowledge, mystical experiences, Divine power and miracles, see, for
example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 36 (“khuṭbat al-kitāb”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 44,
46), 158 (chapter 5, “miftāḥ”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 176), 159 (ibid. “īḍāḥ”, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 178–9, 181), 160 (ibid. “wāqiʿa”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 188), 530
(chapter 69, towards the end of “faṣl bal waṣl fī l-tashahhud fī l-ṣalāt”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s
edition vi, 325–6), ii, 23 (chapter 73, on the aḥbāb, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition xi, 370), 26
(ibid. “waṣl”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition xi, 387–8), 366 (chapter 186), 397 (chapter 198, faṣl
7), 476 (chapter 206; cf. i, 888, chapter 72, ḥadīth 27, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition xi, 162), 594
(chapter 278), 664 (chapter 295), iii, 492 (chapter 381); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 47–8;
Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Mabādiʾ 137 (“[. . .] Let him know this by means of support from Allāh’s
command [. . .]”, “fa-l-yaʿlam hādhā bi-taʾyīd min amr allāh”). On taʾyīd and Divine power in
Ismāʿīlī literature, see, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 127; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa
ii, 36; see also al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 83, 371, 424; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 104–5, 269.
138 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 151–2 (the beginning of chapter 5,
“waṣl”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 144–6); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-alif 3; Ibn al-ʿArabī,
Kitāb al-yāʾ 12.
72 chapter one
spirit” (ayyadaka llāh bi-rūḥ al-qudus), etc.139 Ibn Masarra too uses a very
similar blessing.140
The presence of terms pertaining to God’s word and Divine will (kalima,
kun, amr, irāda and taʾyīd) in the writings of Ibn Masarra and Ibn
al-ʿArabī, who employ them in the framework of Neoplatonic philosophy
and within the context of cosmogonic and cosmological speculations,
points to a deep affinity between their thought and the Ismāʿīlī tradition.
A distinctive feature of the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic scheme is that God’s
word and Divine will are placed between God and the universal intellect;
this very same feature resurfaces in the writings of Ibn Masarra and Ibn
al-ʿArabī. In so far as this feature is also found in the longer version of
the Theology of Aristotle, it is possible that Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī
were influenced by this work as well, directly or via some other source.
However, given unassailable evidence linking the longer version to the
Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic tradition, it is plausible to assume that a link also
exists between the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic tradition and the Neoplatonism of
Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī. Furthermore, various elements in the writ-
ings of these two authors relating to the issue of God’s word and Divine
will—such as the motif of al-ḥaqq al-makhlūq bihi and the ontological
root of the friends of God; the concept of Divine writing and the iden-
tification of the Quranic pen and tablet, throne and footstool with the
universal intellect and soul; the religious and historical aspects of amr;
and taʾyīd—these and other elements testify to the Ismāʿīlī impact on the
Andalusī mystical-philosophical thought of the 10th to 12th centuries, i.e.,
139 As in the epistles of the Ikhwān, these blessings appear in many of the chapters of
the Futūḥāt, mostly at their beginning. See also Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 68, 158; Ibn
al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 71; and more.
140 See Ibn Masarra, Khawwāṣ al-ḥurūf 134, 141–2. Another blessing recurring both in the
epistles of the Ikhwān and in the writings of Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ibn Masarra is related to the
term tawfīq (“success” or “succor” granted by God): “may Allāh grant you success/succor”
(waffaqaka llāh), etc.; see, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 157, 182, 275, 389, ii, 6, 378,
iii, 268 and more; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 349, 354; Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 175 (and see
Stroumsa, Ibn Masarra 101); Ibn al-ʿArabī, throughout his Futūḥāt, mostly at the beginning
of various chapters; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 115; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Inshāʾ al-dawāʾir 5, 29,
32 (where the blessing is combined with sadād, “rightness” or “truth”; for this combination
see the references to the Ikhwān in this note). Note that according to al-Sijistānī, tawfīq
originates in the universal soul; see al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 2, 12, 83; see also Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr
al-Yaman, al-Kashf 113; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 403, 409.
the word of god and the divine will 73
141 See Altmann and Stern, Isaac Israeli xxiii, 95–7, 127–9; Stern, Ibn Ḥasdāy’s Neo-
platonist; Zimmermann, Origins 129, 190–6; see also Adamson, Arabic Plotinus 24–25; De
Smet, Empedocles Arabus 104–5 and n. 235.
142 See Ha-Israeli, Sefer ha-yesodot 3 (in Hebrew); see also Altmann and Stern, Isaac
Israeli xvii–xxiii. Note that Ibn Masarra too spent time in Qayrawān during this period;
see above in the Introduction, pp. 6–7.
74 chapter one
longer version and the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonists all emphasize the centrality
of the Divine will and power in the cosmogonic process. Israeli holds that
the Divine will and power create the first matter and form, and while
they do not constitute a real hypostasis, they are conceived of as Divine
forces which are active in the first stages of creation. It seems, then, that
despite the various differences between Israeli’s thought, on the one hand,
and the longer version and Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism, on the other, an affinity
exists between all three traditions.143
Additional evidence of the Ismāʿīlī role in the formation of Andalusī
thought in the context dealt with here is found in the writings of the Jewish
Andalusī author Judah Ha-Levi (d. 1141). Shlomo Pines and later Ehud Krinis
both demonstrated a deep affinity between the Ismāʿīlī notion of amr and
Ha-Levi’s al-amr al-ilāhī, one of the most important concepts in his Book of
Kuzari.144 Similar traces of Ismāʿīlī notions can perhaps also be seen in the
important role which the concept of amr allāh plays in Almohad political-
religious thought.145 Finally, one may also draw a connecting line between
the Neoplatonic thought of the 11th century Andalusī author Solomon Ibn
Gabirol, on the one hand, and the distinctive type of Neoplatonism found
in the longer version of the Theology, the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic tradition and
Isaac Israeli’s writings, on the other. Like Israeli, Ibn Gabirol places the first
matter and form between God and the universal intellect. Unlike Israeli,
Ibn Gabirol holds that the first matter and form, from which the intellect
was created, are universal, that is, they are manifested in every echelon of
creation. Moreover, according to Ibn Gabirol, the Divine will plays a cen-
tral role in creation—not only in its highest levels (= the realm between
God and the first matter and form), but also in the lower worlds.146 I will
143 On the elements in Israeli’s thought referred to here, see Altmann and Stern, Isaac
Israeli 83–90, 98–103, 111, 119, 154–7, 159–64; see also Fenton, Arabic and Hebrew versions
255–6; and cf. De Smet, Le Verbe-impératif 408–10.
144 See Pines, Shīʿite terms; Krinis, Idea 164–207. For taʾyīd in the Kuzari, see ibid. 57–8.
On ittiṣāl and amr in Ha-Levi’s thought—a combination found in Ismāʿīlī sources as well—
see Lobel, Ittiṣāl. It is noteworthy that despite his objection to the Neoplatonic theory of
emanation (see Krinis, Idea 164 n. 668), Ha-Levi seems to have been influenced by various
Neoplatonic notions; see ibid. 166–7, 171–2, 192–3; and cf. Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 148–9.
145 See Peña, El término, especially pp. 199–200, 209, 218–20. On the Almohads, see
above n. 18 in the Introduction.
146 On Ibn Gabirol’s thought, see Schlanger, La Philosophie. Note that like Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ, Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī, Ibn Gabirol too views creation as an act of Divine
speech and writing, associating the latter with the Divine will; see ibid. 47–9, 273, 280–1,
286–8; see also Liebes, Rabbi Solomon Ibn Gabirol’s use 84 (in Hebrew). It seems that Ibn
Gabirol’s concept of Divine will influenced the 13th century Kabbalist Itsḥaq b. Laṭīf, in
the word of god and the divine will 75
add that Ibn Gabirol was acquainted with the Epistles of Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ
and was influenced by them.147
It seems to me that these various traditions—the longer version of the
Theology of Aristotle, Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism, Isaac Israeli’s thought, and the
writings of Ibn Masarra, Ibn Gabirol, Judah Ha-Levi and Ibn al-ʿArabī—
should all be viewed as variations of one and the same unique type of
Neoplatonism. These variations have essential differences and at the same
time significant similarities that pertain mostly to the metaphysical realm
between God and the universal intellect or to the issue of God’s word
and Divine will. If we examine their common features in light of the geo-
graphical (North Africa and al-Andalus) and the chronological context
(the 10th to 12th centuries), we can contend with a fair degree of assur-
ance that the various traditions dealt with here all belong to a common
intellectual world. Each one of these traditions adopted certain elements
from its Neoplatonic heritage, developing, adapting and incorporating
them in an original manner into its own distinctive worldview.148 It is
evident, however, that the Ismāʿīlīs played a crucial role in forming the
distinctive type of Neoplatonism to which these various traditions belong.
Not only were the Ismāʿīlīs instrumental in passing Neoplatonic materials
from the eastern parts of the Islamic world to the west, but by rework-
ing these materials and adapting them to their own Shiʿi outlook, they
also contributed greatly to the formation of a new and unique Neopla-
tonic tradition, distinct from other Neoplatonic traditions in the Islamic
whose writings the traces of Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism can be detected; see Wilensky, ‘First
created being’, especially pp. 66–7.
147 See Haneberg, Ueber das Verhältniss; Schlanger, La Philosophie 94–7; Krinis, Idea
30–1 and n. 126. For the various opinions in modern scholarship concerning the sources of
Ibn Gabirol’s thought, see the discussions and references in Pines, La Longue récension 8,
20; De Smet, Empedocles Arabus 15–20, 95 n. 196; Schlanger, La Philosophie 52–109; Dillon,
Solomon Ibn Gabirol’s doctrine 52–6; Liebes, Rabbi Solomon Ibn Gabirol’s use 118 n. 68
(in Hebrew).
148 To this common intellectual world one may also add the Arabic Neoplatonic tra-
dition attributed to Empedocles and other Pre-Socratic philosophers. This tradition is
reflected in various Arabic sources, many of which are Andalusī. Regarding this tradition,
see De Smet, Empedocles Arabus, especially pp. 91–121; Altmann and Stern, Isaac Israeli
162–3. On the links between this tradition and Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism, see De Smet, Les
Bibliothèques 490; De Smet, La Doctrine avicennienne 81 and n. 26; Affifi, Mystical philoso-
phy 181–3; Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings 207–11; Stroumsa, Review of Empedocles Arabus
96–7. On the problem of the relation between this tradition and Ibn Masarra’s thought,
see above pp. 11–3. On the problem of the relation between this tradition and Ibn Gabirol’s
thought, see the references given in the previous note.
76 chapter one
world of that period.149 One should bear in mind that, during the 10th
century, Neoplatonic philosophy was widespread among the Ismāʿīlīs of
North Africa and Egypt and that, during that time, it was even officially
adopted by the Fāṭimī Empire.150 Naturally, each one of the traditions
mentioned above was influenced by various sources other than Neopla-
tonic philosophy: Jewish sources (Ibn Gabirol and Judah Ha-Levi), Sufi
sources (Ibn al-ʿArabī), etc.
Ultimately, the links and affinities between the various traditions dis-
cussed here and the significant role played in this respect by the Ismāʿīlīs
are important not only for understanding the development of Islamic
mystical-philosophical thought in al-Andalus, but perhaps also for fath-
oming the Jewish intellectual world in medieval Spain, including the
emergence of Kabbalah.151
149 Cf. Zimmermann, Origins 129: “Presumably, L [the longer version of the Theology,
M.E.] was brought to Egypt, together with the Neoplatonism of the Ismaʿilis of Persia,
under the Fatimids. That would confirm the Ismaʿili connexion of L. The question whether
L was the source or the product of Ismaʿili Neoplatonism remains”; see also Fenton, Arabic
and Hebrew versions 255.
150 See De Smet, Les Bibliothèques; De Smet, Risāla al-mudhhiba; Halm, Kosmologie
135–8; Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 223–34; see also Zimmermann, Origins 231 n. 123, p. 237 n. 334.
It seems that Neoplatonic writings circulated among the Ismāʿīlīs in North Africa much
before the official adoption of Neoplatonism by the Fāṭimī Caliph-imām al-Muʿizz; see the
reference to De Smet in this note.
151 On the influence of Isaac Israeli on the Kabbalists in the Gerona circle of the 13th
Century, see Altmann and Stern, Isaac Israeli 130–2. Regarding the possibility of Ismāʿīlī
influences on certain Kabbalistic writings, see Wilensky, ‘First created being’; Goldreich,
Theology (in Hebrew); Idel, Sefirot 270–7 (in Hebrew); cf. Pines, Shīʿite terms 243–7.
Chapter Two
Letters
1 See Weiss, A conceptual examination (in Hebrew); Liebes, Ars poetica (in Hebrew). The
dating of the last two works mentioned above is a matter of dispute between modern-
day scholars, their estimated time of composition ranging from the first century A.D. (Sefer
yetsīrah), or from the 5th–6th centuries (Ōtiyōt de-rabbī ʿakīvā), to the 8th–9th; see the dis
cussion and references in Weiss, A conceptual examination 191 nn. 93–7, 248 n. 54. According
to several scholars, Sefer yetsīrah was influenced by Islamic-Arabic culture, especially by the
Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī tradition; see Wasserstrom, Sefer yeṣira; Wasserstrom, Further thoughts. This
thesis was strongly rejected by Liebes and others; see Liebes, Ars poetica 232–7.
2 See mainly Weiss, A conceptual examination; see also Weiss, The perception (in
Hebrew); Dornseiff, Alphabet; Idel, Kabbalah, index, s.v. “letters”; La Porta and Shulman,
Poetics; Bitton-Ashkelony and Kofsky, Monastic school 107–26; Bitton-Ashkelony, Counsel
ing. On the Neopythagorean tradition see also below nn. 24, 90; on Gnosticism see also
below n. 136.
3 On letter speculations in Islam, see Lory, La Science; Lory, Symbolism; Gril, Sci
ence; Böwering, Sulamī’s treatise; Fahd, La Divination 214–45; Fahd, Ḥurūf; MacDonald,
Sīmiyāʾ; Massignon, La Philosophie; Massignon, Essay 68–72; Massignon, Passion iii, 92–9;
Canteins, Hidden sciences; Ryding, Alchemical phonology; Schimmel, Primordial dot;
Schimmel, Mystical dimensions 411–25; Schimmel, Secrecy 89–91; Sviri, Words of power
and the references given there in n. 4; Sviri, Kun; Zoran, Magic 40–54 (in Hebrew); Dorn-
seiff, Alphabet 142–5.
78 chapter two
4 On the fawātiḥ and their various interpretations in Islamic tradition and in modern
scholarship, see Welch, Mysterious letters; Massey, Mysterious letters; and see also the
references given in Böwering, Sulamī’s treatise 342 n. 14.
5 For an example of such Sufi speculations, see Böwering, Sulamī’s treatise, especially
pp. 356–69. For a more detailed discussion of the differences between the Sufi type of let
ter speculations and the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī type, see Ebstein and Sviri, So-called Risālat al-ḥurūf,
especially pp. 230–2. Concerning the epistle on letters attributed to Sahl al-Tustarī, the 9th
century Sufi master, see ibid. and the discussion below on pp. 90–1.
6 On this corpus, see above pp. 30–2 of the Introduction; on letters in the Jābirian
corpus, see below pp. 96–101.
letters 79
this subject a long and detailed chapter (chapter two) in his magnum
opus, al-Futūḥāt al-makkiyya (“The Meccan Revelations”). In fact, different
issues in the second chapter of the Futūḥāt are based on an earlier work
by Ibn al-ʿArabī, entitled Kitāb al-mabādiʾ wa-l-ghāyāt fī maʿānī l-ḥurūf
wa-l-āyāt (“The Book of Beginnings and Ends Concerning the Meanings
of the Letters and the Miraculous Signs”). Ibn al-ʿArabī deals with the Ara-
bic letters in other chapters of the Futūḥāt and in additional works of his
as well.7
Letter speculations in the Ismāʿīlī tradition and in the thought of Ibn
Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī should be viewed as closely linked to the notion
of the Divine creative speech as analyzed above in chapter 1. Given that
the whole universe is perceived as a product of God’s speech, much sig-
nificance is ascribed to the letters comprising human language, which
in many ways parallels the ‘Divine language’.8 Such a radical conception
which views human language as corresponding to the Divine speech
and which perceives letters as the building blocks of creation is quite
exceptional in the landscape of mainstream medieval Islam. Indeed, it
seems that letter speculations were regarded by Islamic orthodoxy as an
undesirable and dangerous occupation, one that is often accompanied by
magical-alchemical practices.9 Hence, at least as regards letter specula-
tions, the Ismāʿīlī authors, Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī can be viewed as
standing in a common position vis-à-vis their orthodox opponents, Shiʿi
and Sunni alike.10
7 See, for instance, chapter 198 of al-Futūḥāt al-makkiyya; see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb
al-mīm wa-l-wāw wa-l-nūn (“The book on the [Letters] Mīm, Wāw and Nūn”); and Ibn
al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-yāʾ (“The book on the [Letter] Yāʾ”). For the mention of Kitāb al-mabādiʾ
wa-l-ghāyāt in the second chapter of the Futūḥāt, see, for example, al-Futūḥāt al-makkiyya
i, 95 (chapter 2, the beginning of faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 236); see also Ibn
al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 2. On the importance of letters in the thought of Ibn al-ʿArabī, see
also Gril, Science 123 n. 30; Lory, La Science 123. For a general discussion of Ibn Masarra’s
teachings on letters, see Garrido, Science.
8 See also Lory, La Science 13.
9 See, for example, Böwering, Mystical vision 80; see also the discussion below on
pp. 96–101; and see also Weiss, A conceptual examination 60, 282. The fear of Islamic ortho-
doxy may explain why Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ (Rasāʾil iii, 382) define the fawātiḥ as a secret which
must be kept hidden from the eyes of the common Muslims (“Wa-hiya l-sirr al-maktūm
al-ladhī lā yaṣluḥu an yaʿlamahu kull aḥad illā l-khawāṣṣ min ʿibād allāh al-mukhliṣīna
[. . .] wa-dalalnā ʿalā annahā sirr al-qurʾān wa-lā yajūzu l-ifṣāḥ ʿanhā idh lam yaʾdhan lanā
l-ḥukamāʾ wa-l-anbiyāʾ ṣalawāt allāh ʿalayhim”).
10 Concerning Shiʿi orthodoxy, one may mention the Ithnā ʿAsharī (“Twelver”) Shiʿa
as it evolved from the 10th century (and especially from the second half of that century)
onwards. On the emergence of an orthodox trend among Ithnā ʿAsharī scholars during this
period, see below n. 153.
80 chapter two
22 See Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 48–50; for similar motifs in another Ismāʿīlī
text see Halm, Kosmologie 44–5. Speculations on the diacritical marks (the Niqqud) are also
found in Sefer yetsīrah; for a comparison between the latter and Kitāb al-kashf, see Halm,
Kosmologie 48–9. On the importance of diacritical marks in Jewish Kabbalah, see Zoran,
Magic 47 n. 124 (in Hebrew). In addition, the number seven figures as well in cosmogonic-
cosmological letter speculations in Sefer yetsīrah, in the Samaritan Memar marqah (whose
date of composition ranges, according to the various scholarly opinions, from the first to
the 9th century) and in the Christian work The Mysteries of the Greek Letters (most likely
dating from the 6th century); see Weiss, A conceptual examination 191–203 (in Hebrew).
23 On these authors see above p. 44.
24 See al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 39 (“[. . .] Al-ʿilla l-ūlā [. . .] wa-hiya ʿinda l-ḥukamāʾ kalimat al-bārī
jalla wa-taʿālā ṣūratuhā kun wa-humā ḥarfāni kāf mutaḥarrika wa-nūn sākina fa-l-kāf wa-l-
nūn lil-kalima bi-manzilat al-jasad wa-l-ḥaraka wa-l-sukūn lahā bi-manzilat al-rūḥ [. . .]”;
“[. . .] Wa-l-ʿilla l-ūlā l-latī hiya l-kalima hiya hayūlā l-ʿawālim kullihā”). A similar analogy is
expressed by Ibn al-ʿArabī, who holds that letters are like matter (mawādd) in relation to
words, whereas the vowels are like the Divine spirit infused into man; see Ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Futūḥāt i, 130 (chapter 2, the beginning of faṣl 2, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 51–2).
Interestingly, according to Judah Ha-Levi’s The Kuzari and various Kabbalistic writings,
the body corresponds to the letters and the spirit (or the soul) corresponds to the vowels
and the diacritical marks (the Niqqud). Alternatively, the letters correspond to matter and
the vowels correspond to the form; see Judah Ha-Levi, al-Kitāb al-khazarī 150 (fourth part,
paragraph c, = Hirschfeld’s translation, p. 178); Scholem, Studies 99–100 (in Hebrew); Aloni,
Ha-ōtiyōt (in Hebrew); Liebes, Prakīm 174–6 (in Hebrew); Meroz, Ōr bahīr 151 n. 50 (in
Hebrew; I thank Mr. Oded Porat for his help in finding these sources). Notwithstanding the
possibility of an Ismāʿīlī influence in this context on Ibn al-ʿArabī, Ha-Levi and the Kab
balah, the analogy between the consonants and the body and between the vowels and the
soul is already found in the Hellenistic-Pythagorean tradition; see Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān
ii, 210; Dornseiff, Alphabet 33.
letters 83
25 The fifth imām according to the Ismāʿīlī tradition and the sixth according to the
Twelver Shiʿis.
26 See al-Rāzī, al-Zīna i, 66 (“Kāna awwal mā tawahhama llāh ʿazza wa-jalla
shayʾan mutawahhaman wa-arāda murādan wa-shāʾa mashīʾan fa-kāna tawahhumuhu
wa-mashīʾatuhu wa-irādatuhu lil-ḥurūf al-latī jaʿalahā ʿazza wa-jalla aṣlan li-kull shayʾ
wa-dalīlan ʿalā kull mudrak wa-fāṣilan li-kull mushkil”), 67 (“Wa-mā jamaʿathu l-ḥurūf aw
faraqathu fa-huwa mafʿūl bi-l-ḥurūf min khalq samāʾ aw arḍ aw barr aw baḥr aw shams aw
qamar aw jinn aw ins aw malak aw falak aw hawāʾ aw ghayr dhālika fī tadbīr tilka l-ḥurūf
ḥaythu jamaʿat aw faraqat”). This tradition is translated into French by Vajda, Les Lettres,
and into German by Halm, Kosmologie 50–1. On tawahhum, irāda and mashīʾa as hypos
tatic beings situated above Kūnī in the myth of Kūnī-Qadar, see above p. 43. Note that in
Twelver sources, this tradition is attributed to the eighth imām ʿAlī l-Riḍā (d. 203/818); see
Ibn Bābawayhi, ʿUyūn akhbār al-riḍā ii, 154–5; Ibn Bābawayhi, al-Tawḥīd 435–7; al-Majlisī,
Biḥār al-anwār x, 314–5, lvii, 50–1; Ibn Shuʿba l-Ḥarrānī, Tuḥaf al-ʿuqūl 424–5. In most of
these sources, the term tawahhum is substituted by the less anthropomorphic and more
philosophical term ibdāʿ (“creation [ex nihilo]”). This may indicate that al-Rāzī’s version is
earlier than the Twelver one.
27 According to the tradition quoted by al-Rāzī, the twenty-eight letters of the Arabic
alphabet include the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew and Syriac languages, and are also
joined by an additional five letters representing all other human languages. Thus, the cos
mogonic letters—thirty three in number—are the basis for all the languages of the world;
see al-Rāzī, al-Zīna i, 66; cf. Ibn Bābawayhi, ʿUyūn akhbār al-riḍā ii, 154; Ibn Bābawayhi,
al-Tawḥīd 436; al-Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār lvii, 54; and see also Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 245
n. 2; Amir-Moezzi, Persian; Rubin, Language; Weiss, Medieval Muslim discussions.
84 chapter two
28 See al-Rāzī, al-Zīna i, 67. In other traditions which are attributed either to Jaʿfar
al-Ṣādiq or to Muḥammad al-Bāqir (the fourth imām according to the Ismāʿīlīs, the fifth
according to the Twelvers, d. circa 114/732), letters are described as the first thing to have
been created by God; see Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 90 (“Awwal mā khalaqa llāh
ḥurūf al-muʿjam”); al-Maḥmūdī (ed.), al-Uṣūl al-sitta ʿashar 284 (“Innī la-aʿlamu awwal
shayʾ khuliqa qāla wa-mā huwa qāla l-ḥurūf ”).
29 See, for example, Al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 101–2, where the author stresses the fact that
God did not articulate the letters kāf and nūn (kun) during creation, since unlike humans,
He has no voice.
30 Al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 8–15.
31 On the nāṭiq see above p. 49 n. 60; on the asās see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v. “asās”.
letters 85
their ability to receive its Divine flow.32 Hence, despite the fact that he
does not view the letters as concrete building blocks of reality, al-Sijistānī
does perceive them as signs indicating and paralleling the very structure
of the universe, in accordance with Neoplatonic cosmology.
A more mythic conception of letters is reflected in al-Sijistānī’s discus-
sion of “the seven supreme letters” (al-ḥurūf al-ʿulwiyya l-sabʿa, i.e., the
letters kūnī-qadar), a theme that will be dealt with in more detail later
on in this chapter.33 According to al-Sijistānī, since the numerical value
of the letters comprising kun is 70 (kāf + nūn = 20 + 50), which corre-
sponds to the number seven, one may conclude that “through His com-
mand, which is called will, Allāh desired to manifest the seven supreme
letters, by means of which he gave rise to the spiritual forms”. These seven
letters correspond to the seven planets, the seven nuṭaqāʾ (“the speaker
prophets”), the seven organs of the human body, etc.—all of which are
a product of God’s will.34 Although at times al-Sijistānī treats the theme
of “the seven supreme letters” in a less mythic and more philosophical
manner,35 it is evident that in his view, these seven letters do exist on a
cosmological level, albeit in a spiritual form.36
32 See al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 14 (“Wa-inna abʿad al-ḥurūf makhrajan min al-badan hiya
l-ʿayn wa-l-ḥāʾ wa-l-khāʾ wa-l-hāʾ kadhālika abʿad al-ḥudūd ghawran wa-aqrabuhā qubūlan
min al-kalima l-uṣūl al-arbaʿa fa-l-ʿayn minhā naẓīr al-sābiq [. . .] wa-l-ḥāʾ minhā naẓīr al-tālī
[. . .] wa-l-khāʾ minhā naẓīr al-nāṭiq [. . .] wa-l-hāʾ minhā naẓīr al-asās [. . .]”). See also ibid.
90–2, where the letters comprising the word kalima are said to parallel or to be similar to
(naẓīr) the four “spiritual wellsprings”. In addition, see ibid. 18, where the letters kāf, lām,
mīm and nūn (= the letters of kun and the two letters located between them according to
the alphabetical order) likewise correspond to (ʿalā) these four wellsprings. On the letters
of the shahāda (the Islamic declaration of faith) and the four “spiritual wellsprings”, see
ibid. 70–3. For additional examples of the use of the expressions bi-izāʾ, yuwāzī/tuwāzī,
dalāla ʿalā and ʿalā in order to designate the correspondences between the letters and vari
ous cosmological beings, see ibid. 72, 92–4; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 124–5. For the expression
kināya ʿan (“alluding to”) in this context, see ibid. 106–7.
33 See pp. 113–4.
34 Al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 18 (“Fa-kaʾannahu yunbiʾuka anna amr allāh al-ladhī yuqālu
lahu irāda innamā arāda llāh an yuẓhira bihi l-ḥurūf al-ʿulwiyya l-sabʿa l-latī bihā anshaʾa
l-ṣuwar al-rūḥāniyya”). On the seven organs of the human body, see also ibid. 58, 80 and
below p. 193.
35 See, for example, al-Iftikhār 124–5, where the pair kūnī-qadar is said to indicate the
universal soul and universal intellect respectively, as well as other spiritual and physical
beings which populate the universe. Cf. al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 205–6.
36 Al-Kirmānī too addressed the motif of “the seven supreme letters” in his philosophi
cal oeuvre. However, by interpreting “the seven supreme letters” as merely designating
the lower seven intellects, al-Kirmānī divested this motif of its mythic dimension. See
al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 104, 121, 132, 139, 147; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 79, 105; Walker, Ḥamīd
al-Dīn al-Kirmānī 96; Halm, Kosmologie 66; and see also above n. 13.
86 chapter two
37 See Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 143-4 (“Qāla ahl al-ʿilm bi-l-kalām al-bāṭinī inna
a l m huwa ism allāh al-aʿẓam wa-inna l-alif ishāra ilā dhāt allāh taʿālā li-nfirād al-alif ʿan
al-ittiṣāl wa-huwa l-ism al-qadīm al-azalī l-ladhī lā yufassaru bi-akthar min huwa wa-lammā
kānat al-lām taṣḥabu l-alif wa-tattaṣilu bihā min bayni sāʾir al-ḥurūf kānat dālla ʿalā l-ḥijāb
al-awwal wa-l-ghayb al-maknūn wa-huwa l-ism al-ladhī tasammā llāh bihi wa-lammā lam
yakun baʿd al-ulūhiyya fī naẓar al-khalq aʿẓam min al-malīka [read: al-mamlaka] wa-l-
taraʾʾus wa-l-qudra ʿalā l-ashyāʾ wa-kānat al-mīm al-ism al-thābit wa-li-dhālika qāla ʿazza
min qāʾil ʿālim al-ghayb wa-l-shahāda li-anna jamīʿ al-ashyāʾ shayʾāni ẓāhir wa-bāṭin wa-
lahu ʿilm muḥīṭ bi-l-bāṭin wa-l-ẓāhir fa-l-muḥīṭ bi-l-bāṭin huwa l-ladhī nfarada bihi wa-huwa
lawḥuhu l-maḥfūẓ wa-smuhu l-maknūn wa-huwa l-lām wa-l-muḥīṭ bi-l-ẓāhir al-ladhī huwa
jism al-kull fa-hiya l-nafs al-kubrā wa-hiya l-mulk wa-hiya l-latī kanā ʿanhā taʿālā dhikruhu
ا �ل���م� م��ل � ة ا �ل���م��ل� � ة
bi-l-mīm fa-kamāl maʿrifatihi fī maʿrifat hādhihi l-thalātha l-asmāʾ al-latī dallat al-ḥurūf
ʿalayhā [. . .]”). Concerning the reading “ ���
” �� كinstead of “ ���
” ي ك, cf. Garrido-Clemente,
Edición crítica del K. Jawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 70.
letters 87
is indicated by the alif, the universal intellect by the lām, and the univer-
sal soul by the mīm.38 The terminology he employs in this context (ishāra
ilā, dālla ʿalā, kanā ʿan) is familiar to us from al-Sijistānī’s writings.39
Two themes in particular in this passage from Ibn Masarra’s Khawāṣṣ
al-ḥurūf bear a resemblance to Ismāʿīlī speculations. First, Ibn Masarra
identifies the universal intellect with the name Allāh and “the first veil”.40
Similarly, in the myth of Kūnī-Qadar, the Divine names are perceived as
a veil which, on the one hand, separates God’s essence from the created
beings and, on the other, functions as the only possible means of gain-
ing knowledge of God. In fact, God, to whom nothing can be attributed,
is called “the creator of all created beings” (bāriʾ al-barāyā), whereas the
name Allāh designates Kūnī, and al-Raḥmān (“the All-Merciful”) desig-
nates Qadar.41 In Ismāʿīlī philosophy, Kūnī was replaced by the universal
intellect (or by the first intellect, according to al-Kirmānī and his Ṭayyibī
followers). The latter was thus identified with the name Allāh and was
perceived as the first veil in the series of cosmic veils that separate God
from man.42 Second, Ibn Masarra associates the universal intellect and
soul with the pair bāṭin-ẓāhir; similar speculations are found in Ismāʿīlī
writings.43
38 On the lām as indicating the universal intellect, see also Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ
al-ḥurūf 151, where Ibn Masarra states that the lām alludes to God’s tablet, which is the
throne and the “model” (mithāl) according to which the existents were created. The throne
and the model are identified with the universal intellect (see Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿitibār 184-5;
Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 149, 152).
39 See above n. 32; see also Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 136–7, 146, 151, 154–5, 157,
159–60, 164; and see also Garrido, Science 53–4.
40 See also his interpretation of the cluster a-l-m-ṣ in Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 146–51.
41 See Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 7, 10–2. Note in particular the blessing
tabāraka wa-taʿālā which is conferred on Kūnī, ibid. 9. See also Ibn Masarra’s interpreta
tion of the basmala (the formula bi-smi llāh al-raḥmān al-raḥīm, “in the name of Allāh, the
All-Merciful and the Compassionate”), in his Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 132–3 (“Wa-min al-ulūhiyya
maʿa l-raḥmān maʿa l-raḥīm taʿlamu anna l-ʿaql al-kullī mustaghriq fī l-nafs al-kulliyya wa-
anna l-nafs al-kulliyya mustaghriqa fī juththat al-ʿālam [. . .]”). According to this interpreta
tion, Allāh designates the universal intellect and al-Raḥmān designates the universal soul,
just as in the myth of Kūnī-Qadar, the two supreme beings following bāriʾ al-barāyā are
called Allāh and al-Raḥmān.
42 See, for example, al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿAql 64, 87–8; al-Kirmānī, al-Muḍīʾa 56–7;
al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 44, 68, 79, 98, 157; see also (Pseudo?) Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Jāmiʿat
al-jāmiʿa 338; and Halm, Kosmologie 88–9. Note that al-Sijistānī too links the name Allāh
with the universal intellect: as explained above (see p. 84), according to al-Sijistānī, the let-
ters of Allāh indicate the universal intellect and soul as well as their terrestrial equivalents,
the nāṭiq and the asās. See also al-Daylamī, Qawāʿid ʿaqāʾid āl Muḥammad 53–4.
43 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 7–8, 11. Note, however, that the Ikhwān
define the intellect as ẓāhir and the soul as bāṭin, since the powers of the soul, which are
active in this world, are hidden and unseen. One may add that in Twelver sources (see
88 chapter two
Amir-Moezzi, La Préexistence 112–3) as well as in the Ismāʿīlī Kitāb al-kashf (42–3, 48),
the ʿarsh (God’s throne) is linked to the bāṭin while the kursī (His footstool) is linked
to the ẓāhir. In Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic philosophy and in Ibn Masarra’s thought, the ʿarsh
is identified with the universal intellect and the kursī with the universal soul (see above
p. 50 n. 64, p. 52).
44 See, for example, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 146–51 (on the letters a-l-m-ṣ), 162–6 (“al-qawl fī
tartīb hādhihi l-suwar”).
45 See Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 153 (“Al-qawl ʿalā khyʿṣ ammā hādhihi fa-qīla
inna maʿnā l-kāf hiya kāf al-kun wa-hiya l-kalima l-latī hiya ʿillat al-kawn kullihi [. . .]”;
“Wa-l-hāʾ baʿd al-kun li-annahā hiya l-habāʾ wa-hiya l-ḥurūf al-latī naṭaqa llāh bihā min
qabli l-khalq wa-minhā taʾallafat al-umūr al-bāṭina wa-hiya qiwā mufrada nafsāniyya
wa-li[dhālika] ṣārat al-quwwa l-nāṭiqa fī l-martaba fawqa l-ḥurūf fa-idhā aradta l-taʿbīr ʿan
al-maʿānī allafta min al-ḥurūf kalāman wa-kasathu [read: wa-kasawtahu] rūḥan fa-ẓahara
lil-samʿ [. . .]”), 154 (“[. . .] Li-anna l-bāriʾ taʿālā arāda l-ashyāʾ awwalan fa-aḥkamahā
letters 89
and in Ismāʿīlī mythical writings, see the references in Ebstein and Sviri, So-called Risālat
al-ḥurūf 250.
48 See above n. 18.
49 See Ebstein and Sviri, So-called Risālat al-ḥurūf, especially pp. 221–4.
50 On this corpus see above pp. 30–2. Kitāb al-taṣrīf deals with issues such as cosmol
ogy, the four natures, “the science of balance” and “the balance of the letters” (on these
terms see below pp. 96–7). The title of this work is translated by Kraus as “le livre de la
Transmutation; ou de la Morphologie”; see Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, 98. On the term taṣrīf
see Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, index, s.v. “taṣrīf ”.
51 See Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 10 n. 3, 142, 152, 153 n. 2, 154 n. 6, 170 n. 3.
52 See above pp. 88–9.
53 See Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 157 n. 4, 166, 173 nn. 1–2.
letters 91
Masarra’s notion of the habāʾ and that of the Jābirian authors is strik-
ing: both endow the habāʾ with a cosmological dimension, and link it—
directly (Ibn Masarra) or indirectly (the Jābirian authors)—to the letters
of the alphabet. Notwithstanding the essential differences in this context
between Ibn Masarra and the Jābirian authors—the latter do not identify
the habāʾ itself with the letters, nor do they perceive the letters as play-
ing a cosmogonic-cosmological role—it seems that Ibn Masarra’s specu-
lations on the habāʾ and those found in the Jābriain corpus are closely
related.
Further evidence for the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī provenance of the term habāʾ in
its cosmogonic-cosmological context is found in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s al-Futūḥāt
al-makkiyya. As in the Jābirian corpus, Ibn al-ʿArabī too views the habāʾ
as situated below the universal soul, or more precisely: below nature
(ṭabīʿa) which is located beneath the universal soul. In various passages,
Ibn al-ʿArabī states that the term habāʾ originates in a tradition which
goes back to ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib, and in one passage he claims that this term
was mentioned by ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib, Sahl b. ʿAbdallāh (al-Tustarī) and other
men who were granted mystical unveilings.54 It should be noted, how-
ever, that Ibn al-ʿArabī links the habāʾ situated below the universal soul
with al-ḥaqīqa l-kulliyya / ḥaqīqat al-ḥaqāʾiq (“the universal true essence” /
“the true essence of all true essences”), which, according to Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
metaphysical system, functions as an intermediary between God and
creation. Alternatively, he links the habāʾ with nafas al-raḥmān (“the
breath of the All-Merciful”), which is identical to the ʿamāʾ (“cloud”) and
is located above the universal intellect. According to Ibn al-ʿArabī, nafas
al-raḥmān / the ʿamāʾ receives the various forms of the created universe
and manifests itself through them, in the same way that the habāʾ, which
is a substance ( jawhar) or matter (hayūlā), receives the diverse forms of
nature and manifests itself through them. At times, Ibn al-ʿArabī explicitly
employs the term habāʾ in order to designate the ʿamāʾ.55 It is possible
54 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 169 (chapter 6, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 226; and
cf. ibid. 201, chapter 13, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 349–50), 172 (chapter 7, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 236), ii, 424-6 (chapter 198, faṣl 14).
55 See, in addition to the references given in the previous note, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt
i, 122 (chapter 2, “maʿrifat alif al-lām al”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 331–3), 167 (the begin
ning of chapter 6, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 220), 192 (chapter 11, = ii, 316), ii, 389 (chap
ter 198), 662–3 (chapter 295); Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 168; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam
144, 219; see also al-Futūḥāt iv, 229 (chapter 558, “ḥaḍrat al-rafʿa”); and cf. Asín Palacios,
Mystical philosophy 125–7. In these passages, Ibn al-ʿArabī also employs the terms jawhar,
al-jawhar al-habāʾī, al-jawhar al-hayūlānī or al-hayūlā l-kull in order to signify the habāʾ.
92 chapter two
that this identification of the habāʾ with the ʿamāʾ is influenced by Ibn
Masarra’s Kitāb khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf.56 Be that as it may, the basic meaning of
the term habāʾ in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings seems to derive from the Jābirian
corpus. The ascription of this term to ʿAlī (among others) strengthens the
hypothesis concerning its Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī origin.
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s conceptions regarding the letters of the Arabic alphabet
likewise bear resemblance to Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī notions. Like the Ismāʿīlī Neo-
platonists examined above and Ibn Masarra, Ibn al-ʿArabī combines in his
treatment of the letters mythic themes with Neoplatonic schemes. This is
clearly reflected in chapters 2 and 198 of his al-Futūḥāt al-makkiyya. Chap-
ter 2 will be analyzed below, since it deals, inter alia, with the relationship
between letters and the four natures; chapter 198, dedicated to the con-
cept of nafas al-raḥmān, will be discussed here. As we have seen in the
previous chapter,57 Ibn al-ʿArabī perceives Divine creation as correspond-
ing to human speech which consists of breathing, the pronunciation of
letters according to the various points of articulation (makhārij) and the
assembling of the letters into words (= the existents). Letters are therefore
the basic elements or building blocks of reality. The mythic dimension
of this conception is evident not only in the attribution of breathing and
speaking to God but also in the literary manner in which Ibn al-ʿArabī
chooses to describe the act of Divine creation:
We say: the breath itself is the cloud, for the expression ‘the breath of he
who breathes’ does not mean that this breath is like wind, but rather that it
is like vapor. This is the true essence of any given breath. From [the breath]
came the cloud, just like a cloud is formed from the vapor which originates
in the humidity of the [four] elements: the [vapor] ascends and rises, and,
at first, the cloud emerges from it. Then, subsequently, it becomes thicker,
the air carries it and the wind drives it. Hence, it is not the air itself but the
vapor itself. This is why it is said, concerning the cloud in which our Lord
was situated before creation, that it was a cloud above which and below
which no air was found.58 He [the Prophet Muḥammad, to whom this tradi-
The use of the terms jawhar and hayūlā for habāʾ is familiar from the Jābirian corpus; see
the references to Kraus above in n. 51.
56 See above n. 47: it is possible that Ibn Masarra himself identified the habāʾ with the
ʿamāʾ, in which case Ibn al-ʿArabī may have been influenced by him in this regard. Alter
natively, if the identification between the two terms originated with some later copyist
of Kitāb khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf, it is possible that this copyist was influenced by Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
writings.
57 See especially pp. 53–7.
58 Or, “[. . .] above which and below which [only] air was found”. On this mythic tradi-
tion, see above p. 55 n. 82.
letters 93
tion regarding the cloud is attributed] stated that the [cloud] has an upper
aspect, which means that the Truth was in it, and a lower aspect, which
means that the world was in it. Thus, there was nothing there except the
breath of the Truth and within it the air. Then, both stormy and moder-
ate winds blew—these are the strong letters [i.e., alif, bāʾ, tāʾ, jīm, dāl, ṭāʾ,
qāf, kāf ] and the lax letters [thāʾ, ḥāʾ, khāʾ, dhāl, zāy, sīn, shīn, ṣād, ḍād, ẓāʾ,
ghayn, fāʾ, hāʾ]. From this breath, sounds of thunder appeared like the vocal
letters [alif, hamza, bāʾ, jīm, dāl, dhāl, rāʾ, zāy, ḍād, ṭāʾ, ẓāʾ, ʿayn, ghayn, qāf,
lām, mīm, nūn, wāw, yāʾ], and a light breeze—these are the non-vocal letters
[tāʾ, thāʾ, ḥāʾ, khāʾ, sīn, shīn, ṣād, fāʾ, kāf, hāʾ]. Then the layers (al-ṭibāq) of the
celestial spheres appeared, like the emphatic letters [al-ḥurūf al-muṭbaqa:
ṣād, ḍād, ṭāʾ, ẓāʾ] in the breath of a human being who intends to speak. In
the Divine sciences, this is ‘if We will [something], [all] We say to it is ‘be!’’
[see, for example, Q 16:40]. So, the emphatic letters in the Divine breath are
the existence of the heavens in seven layers [. . .]59
The mythic elements in this passage are quite striking: the Divine breath
is accompanied by storms, winds and thunders; the natural phenomena
and the beings that are created during this process are all a product of
the Divine letters, articulated by God Himself. To be sure, the thunders
are “like the vocal letters”, and the celestial spheres are “like the emphatic
letters”—in other words, the Divine creation corresponds to human
speech, but is not identical to it. Similarly, the mythic tradition concerning
the primordial Divine cloud is here also given an allegorical interpretation:
God and the world were in some way united before creation. However,
the phrasing of the passage discussed here indicates that Ibn al-ʿArabī did
not interpret the idea of Divine creative speech in a strictly allegorical
sense, and that he deliberately chose not to eliminate the mythic dimen-
sion inherent in the notion of letters as the building blocks of reality.
59 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 386 (the beginning of chapter 198: “[. . .] Fa-qulnā ʿayn al-
nafas huwa l-ʿamāʾ fa-inna nafas al-mutanaffis al-maqṣūd bi-l-ʿibāra ʿanhu mā yatanazzalu
manzilat al-rīḥ wa-innamā yatanazzalu manzilat al-bukhār fa-l-nafas hādhā ḥaqīqatuhu
ḥaythu kāna fa-kāna ʿanhu l-ʿamāʾ kamā yaḥduthu l-ʿamāʾ ʿan bukhār ruṭūbāt al-arkān
fa-yaṣʿadu wa-yaʿlū fa-yaẓharu minhu l-ʿamāʾ awwalan thumma baʿda dhālika yakthufu
wa-l-hawāʾ yaḥmiluhu wa-l-rīḥ tasūquhu fa-mā huwa ʿayn al-hawāʾ wa-innamā huwa ʿayn
al-bukhār wa-li-dhālika jāʾa fī ṣifat al-ʿamāʾ al-ladhī kāna fīhi rabbunā qabla khalq al-khalq
annahu ʿamāʾ mā fawqahu hawāʾ wa-mā taḥtahu hawāʾ fa-dhakara anna lahu l-fawq wa-
huwa kawn al-ḥaqq fīhi wa-l-taḥt wa-huwa kawn al-ʿālam fīhi fa-lam yakun thamma ghayr
nafas al-ḥaqq fa-fīhi yakūnu l-hawāʾ wa-jarat al-riyāḥ mā bayna zaʿzaʿ wa-rukhāʾ wa-hiya
l-ḥurūf al-shadīda wa-l-rikhwa wa-ẓahara ʿan hādhā l-nafas aṣwāt al-ruʿūd ka-l-ḥurūf
al-majhūra wa-hubūb al-nasīm wa-hiya l-ḥurūf al-mahmūsa wa-ẓaharat al-ṭibāq fī l-aflāk
ka-l-ḥurūf al-muṭbaqa min tanaffus al-insān bi-l-qawl idhā qaṣadahu wa-huwa fī l-ilāhiyyāt
idhā aradnāhu an naqūla lahu kun fa-l-ḥurūf al-muṭbaqa fī l-nafas al-ilāhī wujūd sabʿ
samawāt ṭibāqan wa-kull mawjūd fī l-ʿālam ʿalā jihat al-inṭibāq”).
94 chapter two
60 See p. 84.
61 This term appears already in the Quran; see Q 10:5; 36:39. On the letters and the lunar
mansions, see also below pp. 103–8.
62 See Chittick, Sufi path 8–11, 16, 33–58, 94–6; Elmore, Four texts.
63 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 389 (chapter 198). Note that the order of the letters in
this chapter, according to their modes of articulation, is almost identical to the order of the
letters as found in Futūḥāt i, 109–19 (= ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 295–323). Ibn Masarra
too sees a basic correspondence between the order of the letters, according to their points
of articulation (makhārij), and the hierarchal structure of the universe, in accordance
with Neoplatonic cosmology; see Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 139–41 (on the letters hāʾ,
hamza, alif, wāw and yāʾ); and cf. Ibn al-ʿArabī’s discussion of the letters alif, wāw and yāʾ
in al-Futūḥāt ii, 385–6 (the beginning of chapter 198).
letters 95
64 65 66
Table 1.
The
Its Creative The Corresponding
The Created Being Corresponding
Divine Name Lunar Mansion
Letter
1. The Universal al-Badīʿ (The Originator of hamza al-Sharaṭān
Intellect Creation)64
2. The Universal al-Bāʿith (He Who Causes hāʾ al-Buṭayn
Soul Emanation/Resurrection)65
3. Nature (ṭabīʿa) al-Bāṭin (The Hidden) ʿayn al-Thurayyā
4. Habāʾ al-Ākhir (The Last) ḥāʾ al-Dabarān
5. The Universal al-Ẓāhir (The Manifest) ghayn al-Hakʿa / Maysān
Body (al-jism al-kull)
6. The Form (al-shakl) al-Ḥakīm (The Wise) khāʾ al-Taḥiyya /
al-Hanʿa
7. The Throne al-Muḥīṭ (The All- qāf al-Dhirāʿ
Encompassing)
8. The Footstool al-Shakūr (The Grateful)66 kāf al-Nathra
9. The Zodiac al-Ghanī jīm al-Ṭarf
(al-falak al-aṭlas) (The Self-Sufficient)
10. The Sphere of the al-Muqaddir (He Who shīn al-Jabha
Fixed Stars ( falak al- Decrees/Allots)
kawākib al-thābita)
11. The First Heaven al-Rabb (The Lord) yāʾ al-Kharātān
12. The Second Heaven al-ʿAlīm (The All-Knower) ḍād al-Ṣarfa
13. The Third Heaven al-Qāhir (He Who lām al-ʿAwwā
Subdues)
14. The Fourth Heaven al-Nūr (The Light) nūn al-Simāk al-aʿzal
64 The Divine names al-badīʿ and al-bāʿith are based, in this cosmological context, on
Neoplatonic terminology. The term ibdāʿ (from the same root as badīʿ), signifying Divine
creation ex nihilo, appeared as early as the 9th century in the circle of al-Kindī, and is
very common in Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic writings. Ibdāʿ typically refers to the creation of the
universal intellect by God, whereas inbiʿāth designates the emanation of the universal soul
from the universal intellect. Inbiʿāth also carries an eschatological connotation: to be resur-
rected. See Altmann and Stern, Isaac Israeli 68–74; Walker, Early philosophical Shiism 41,
53, 57, 76, 82–6; Blumenthal, On the theories. Ibn al-ʿArabī makes the same distinction as
the Ismāʿīlī authors between ibdāʿ (pertaining to the universal intellect) and inbiʿāth (the
universal soul); see, for example, al-Futūḥāt i, 140 (chapter 3, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii,
97), ii, 279 (chapter 167), 414–22 (chapter 198, faṣl 11–2), 662 (chapter 295), iii, 387 (chapter
369, waṣl 19).
65 See the previous note.
66 I.e., He who rewards or forgives much.
96 chapter two
cont.
The
Its Creative The Corresponding
The Created Being Corresponding
Divine Name Lunar Mansion
Letter
15. The Fifth Heaven al-Muṣawwir rāʾ al-Ghafr
(The Giver of Forms)
16. The Sixth Heaven al-Muḥṣī ṭāʾ al-Zubānā
(The Enumerator)67
17. The Seventh Heaven al-Matīn (The Strong) dāl al-Iklīl
18. The Sphere al-Qābiḍ (The Taker of tāʾ al-Qalb
(kurra) of Fire Souls / The Withholder)
19. The Sphere of Air al-Ḥayy (The Living) zāy al-Shawla
20. The Sphere of Water al-Muḥyī sīn al-Naʿāʾim
(The Giver of Life)
21. The Sphere of Earth al-Mumīt ṣād al-Balda
(He Who Causes Death)
22. Minerals al-ʿAzīz (The Mighty) ẓāʾ Saʿd al-dhābiḥ
23. Plants al-Razzāq (The Provider) thāʾ Saʿd bulaʿ
24. Animals al-Mudhill dhāl Saʿd al-suʿūd
(He Who Abases)
25. Angels al-Qawī (The Powerful) fāʾ Saʿd al-akhbiya
26. Genies al-Laṭīf bāʾ Fargh al-dalw
(The Benevolent) al-muqaddam
27. Human Beings al-Jāmiʿ mīm Fargh al-dalw
(The Gatherer)68 al-muʾakhkhar
28. The Level Rafīʿ al-darajāt wāw al-Rishāʾ
(al-martaba) = (The Exalted One in
the Goal (al-ghāya) Respect of Degrees)
belong to this corpus, the treatment of the letters forms an integral part
of “the science of the balance” (ʿilm al-mīzān), and is consequently called
“the balance of the letters” (mīzān al-ḥurūf ). “The science of the balance”
is based on the assumption that all existent things in the sub-lunar world
can be measured and quantified by discovering the exact ratio between
the four natures or qualities of which they are composed (heat, cold,
humidity and dryness). This science constitutes the basis of alchemy,
since, according to the Jābirian theory, changing the ratio between the
four natures enables one to manipulate matter. “The balance of the let-
ters” assumes a correspondence between the letters and the four natures:
words are composed of letters in the same way that existent things are
composed of natures. Moreover, the letters indicate the quantitative and
qualitative structure of the objects signified by the words which the letters
comprise. Hence, in order to discover the inner structure of any existent
thing—i.e., the ratio between its four natures—one must analyze the let-
ters that comprise the name signifying that very thing. “The science of
the balance” and “the balance of the letters” derive from various Greek
and Hellenistic conceptions, mainly those originating in the Platonic and
Pythagorean traditions.70
The Jābirian linkage of the letters to the four natures resurfaces in the
writings of Ibn al-ʿArabī. In the second chapter of his Futūḥāt—the main
chapter in this work dealing with the subject of letters—Ibn al-ʿArabī
presents different classifications of the Arabic letters. The first classi-
fication is based on the tripartite connection between the letters, the
four natures and the celestial spheres (aflāk). Thus, the simple letters of
the alphabet71 are divided into four “levels” (marātib), according to the
number of spheres from which each letter emanates. Each letter is fur-
ther characterized by two of the four natures, which also emanate from
the motions of the spheres. In addition, every one of the four categories
of existents—Divinity, human beings, genies and angels—is linked to one
of the four levels.72 The terms which Ibn al-ʿArabī employs in order to
70 See Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 187–270; Lory, Alchimie 130–50. Note that in Greek, the
word stoicheion signifies, inter alia, both “letter” and “element”; see Weiss, A conceptual
examination 39, 216–8; Bitton-Ashkelony, Counseling 188–90.
ن ن )ع�� ن = ( ) � نare yāʾ, nūn, alif, hamza and wāw.
71 Basāʾiṭ al-ḥurūf, i.e. the letters that compose the name of any given letter. For exam
ple, the basāʾiṭ of the letter ʿayn (� �و, ي�ا ء,�ي ي� ع
72 For instance, “the ninth level” is linked to the genies and includes the letters ʿayn
(whose nature is cold and dryness), ghayn (cold and dryness), sīn (heat and dryness) and
shīn (heat and dryness). Every one of these letters is produced from the motion of nine
celestial spheres. In addition, the spheres from which the letters ʿayn and ghayn are pro
duced also function as the source of cold and dryness, whereas the spheres from which
sīn and shīn are produced function as the source of heat and dryness. The genies likewise
98 chapter two
signify the four natures (al-ʿanāṣir al-uwal) or the simple letters (basāʾiṭ)
likewise denote the natures in the Jābirian corpus.73 In addition, in Ibn
al-ʿArabī’s works, the term imtizāj signifies the merging of the natures into
four pairs from which the four elements are formed (heat + dryness =
fire, heat + humidity = air, cold + humidity = water, cold + dryness =
earth). Similarly, in the Jābirian corpus, imtizāj denotes the merging of the
natures with one another as well as their merging with the habāʾ which
precedes them in the cosmic hierarchy.74 Moreover, in various other dis-
cussions of the letters found in his works, Ibn al-ʿArabī explicitly mentions
Jābir b. Ḥayyān or “the disciple of Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq”.75 Notwithstanding his
disagreements with Jābir on different issues (see below), it is clear that
Ibn al-ʿArabī was influenced by Jābirian concepts related to the connec-
tion between the four natures and the letters.76
There are, however, essential differences in this context between Ibn
al-ʿArabī and the Jābirian corpus. To begin with, according to the first
classification of the letters presented in the second chapter of the Futūḥāt,
the Arabic letters, like the natures, emanate from the celestial spheres,
and hence are perceived as concrete building blocks of reality. In contra-
distinction, according to the Jābirian theory, the letters do not exist on
come from the spheres of this ninth level. See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 94–5 (chapter 2,
faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 232–8). For a general analysis of chapter 2 of the Futūḥāt
and for translations of selected sections from it, see Gril, Science; see also Lory, La Science
115–36; Lory, Symbolism.
73 See Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 147 n. 7, 165 n. 6, 173 n. 2, 179 n. 3. For the expression
al-ʿanāṣir al-uwal in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings, see al-Futūhāt i, 95 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition i, 234–5). Ibn al-ʿArabī also refers to the letters as mufradāt (“uncom
pounded units”) and to the words composed of them as the product of tarkīb (“composi
tion”); see ibid. i, 130 (chapter 2, faṣl 2, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 53–4), ii, 386 (chapter
198), iii, 507 (chapter 384). In the Jābirian corpus (and presumably in al-Nasafī’s thought
as well, see Halm, Kosmologie 224), the term mufradāt signifies the natures and the term
murakkabāt signifies the elements composed of them; see above n. 53.
74 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūhāt i, 98 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i,
246–7), ii, 386 (chapter 198); Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 167–8. On the importance of the
term mizāj in the Jābirian corpus, see ibid. 311 and n. 5; and see also Walker, Early philo
sophical Shiism 58–9.
75 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūhāt i, 250 (chapter 26, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition iii, 204);
Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 4–6; Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿUqlat al-mustawfiz 67 (see also Kraus, Jābir
ibn Ḥayyān ii, 244 n. 11); Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tajalliyyāt 41 (see also Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii,
266 n. 1; Pseudo al-Majrīṭī, Ghāyat al-ḥakīm 7); and Gril, Science 124, 128–30.
76 See also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūhāt i, 98–9 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edi-
tion i, 248, 250); and see also Gril, Science 203 nn. 200–1; Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 326–7;
Sezgin, Geschichte iii, 71, 86.
letters 99
mukhāṭabūna wa-mukallafūna wa-fīhim rusul min jinsihim [. . .]”; “Wa-hum ʿalā aqsām
ka-aqsām al-ʿālam al-maʿrūf fī l-ʿurf ”; “Fa-hāʾulāʾi ʿawālim wa-li-kull ʿālam rasūl min jinsi
him wa-lahum sharīʿa taʿabbadū bihā [. . .]”). Cf. ibid. 123 (= ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i,
335); and Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 1. This perception of the letters brings to mind the
Islamic notion of genies: the world of the genies parallels the world of man, comprising
of believers, heretics, etc.
84 See the references above in n. 79.
85 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūhāt i, 94 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 232),
99–100 (= ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 253, 255–6), 102 (= i, 264–5), 108 (= i, 293–4), 115–6
(= i, 312–3).
86 See Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, xxv–xxvii; Lory, Alchimie 59–62. Note, however,
that Ibn al-ʿArabī is careful not to criticize Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq himself; see, for example, Kitāb
al-mīm 5–6.
87 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūhāt i, 95–7 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s
edition i, 237–43), 99 (= ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 253–4), 102–8 (= i, 266–94), 120–3 (= i,
325–34). See also the polar opposites of rajāʾ-khawf (“hope”-“fear”), basṭ-qabḍ (“expansion”-
“contraction”) and jamāl-ijlāl (“beauty”-“exaltedness”) in the poem on the letter kāf in ibid.
111–2 (= i, 303). In addition, note the division of the letters into two opposite groups: those
pertaining to Divine mercy and those pertaining to Divine power and subjugation (qahr),
in ibid. 124-5 (= i, 341–3). See also Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 8–16. On the opposing attri
butes of God and the polar mystical states, see Sviri, Between fear and hope.
letters 101
88 On the mystical experiences and Divine knowledge that can be attained by means
of the letters, see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūhāt i, 129 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition i, 357–8); Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Mabādiʾ, especially pp. 141–61.
89 For evidence of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s knowledge in this domain, see, for example, Ibn
al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 7–8; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūhāt i, 223–6 (chapter 20, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition iii, 88-99), 234 (chapter 22, “manzil lām al-alif”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition
iii, 133–7), 249–51 (chapter 26, = iii, 201–8), ii, 390 (chapter 198, on the power of the letter
wāw); and cf. Gril, Science 123–4. Note also the expression sulṭānuhu fī or ẓuhūr sulṭānihi
fī (“the rule/power of the [letter] is manifested in-”) recurring on pp. 109-19 in the second
chapter of the Futūḥāt (= ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 295–323). This expression implies
that the letters influence the various dimensions of reality; see also Kitāb al-yāʾ 3–4. The
magical-practical aspect of the letters is especially evident in the work attributed to Ibn
al-ʿArabī entitled al-ʿIqd al-manẓūm fī mā taḥwīhi l-ḥurūf min al-khawāṣṣ wa-l-ʿulūm (“The
Necklace Concerning the Properties and Knowledge Inherent in the Letters”). This work
is a manual for the magical-astrological use of the Arabic letters, based on the connection
between the letters, the natures, the lunar mansions, the zodiac and the stars. It is not
clear, however, whether or not Ibn al-ʿArabī is the real author of this work; this question
demands further research.
102 chapter two
90 See Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 199–223, especially pp. 207–14.
91 Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 9. On the seven Cherubs and the twelve spiri
tual beings see above pp. 41–3.
92 See above n. 18.
93 See Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām 15, 17. On the nuqabāʾ and the
ḥujaj see above chapter 1 nn. 60, 118. On the term jazīra see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v.
“jazīra”; Stern, Cairo as the centre 248–9.
letters 103
94 See above pp. 84–5; and see the table in al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 15.
95 See above, pp. 94–6.
96 See p. 89.
97 See Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 135–6 (“Wa-qālū ayḍan inna hādhihi l-aḥruf
al-madhkūra ʿalā ʿadad manāzil al-qamar wa-in iʿtabarta manāzil al-qamar tajidhā
kadhālika arbaʿa ʿashar minhā ẓāhira wa-arbaʿa ʿashar minhā bāṭina wa-kadhālika tajidu
ayyām al-shahr fī muwāfaqat al-qamar lahā fī ziyādatihi wa-nuqṣānihi wa-idhā qarrabta
baʿḍ hādhihi l-dalāʾil ilā baʿḍ wa-amʿanta l-naẓar min jihat al-iʿtibār istadlalta min dhālika
ʿalā muddat al-dunyā wa-kadhālika in naẓarta ilā l-qamar waqt istihlālihi wa-ntiqālihi
ilā l-manāzil wa-qaṭʿihi lil-burūj intahayta min dhālika ilā kayfiyyat mabdaʾ al-ashyāʾ
wa-khurūjihā min al-imkān wa-ziyādatihā wa-numuwwihā wa-kamālihā wa-baʿda dhālika
naqṣihā wa-nḥiṭāṭihā wa-qabḍ al-rūḥ ʿanhā wa-rujūʿihi min al-asfal ilā l-aʿlā wa-stiqrārihi
ʿinda aṣlihi wa-mawḍiʿ mabdaʾihi thumma iʿādatihā tāra ukhrā wa-qabḍ al-rūḥ wa-qiyām
al-ashyāʾ bihi kamā badaʾahā awwal marra”). See also ibid. 143.
104 chapter two
Like the moon at the end of the month, the demise of the world at the end
of time constitutes a return to the beginning:
When the [universal] soul, turning towards the [universal] intellect, will
stop reinforcing (imdād) this body [of the world] with the benefits that it
derived (istafādathu) from the light of the intellect—then the whole affair
will come to an end, the knowledge of everything will return to it/Him [the
universal intellect, or God] and the world will be destroyed and will cease
to exist.98
To this intricate network of parallel worlds—the letters, the lunar man-
sions and the universe as a whole—Ibn Masarra adds the microcosm, i.e.,
man. The human rational/speaking soul (al-nafs al-nāṭiqa) corresponds
to the moon, whereas the human intellect corresponds to the sun. Just as
the moon draws (yastamiddu) its light from the sun, so too the rational/
speaking soul draws its light from the intellect. The knowledge produced
from this light is expressed by means of the twenty-eight letters of the
Arabic alphabet, which, as mentioned above, correspond to the lunar
mansions. “This proves”, Ibn Masarra concludes, “that the small world [the
microcosm] is part of the big world [the macrocosm]”.99 The letters, then,
parallel the lunar mansions; the lunar mansions indicate cosmogonic and
eschatological processes; and, finally, man’s intellect and soul parallel the
sun and the moon, and, by implication, the universal intellect and soul.
The terms imdād, istimdād and istifāda (or their derivatives) are quite
typical of Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic writings; their origins are found in the early
Arabic Neoplatonic tradition which evolved in the 9th century.100 The
comparison between the universal intellect and soul, on the one hand,
and the sun and moon, on the other, appears already in Plotinus’s Enne-
ads and resurfaces in Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic literature. Similarly, in the myth
98 Ibid. 142 (“[. . .] Wa-dhālika idhā tarakat al-nafs al-imdād li-hādhā l-jism bi-mā
stafādathu min nūr al-ʿaql wa-aqbalat ʿalā l-ʿaql inqabaḍa l-amr kulluhu wa-rajaʿa ʿilm kull
shayʾ ilayhi wa-fasuda l-ʿālam wa-tamma amr al-dunyā”). The perception of the end of time
as a return to the source or to the beginning appears already in the Quran; see, for exam
ple, Q 10:4, 34; 21:104; 30:11; 36:79. This perception is quite prominent in Ismāʿīlī thought,
and merits a separate discussion.
99 Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 142–3 (“Wa-kadhālika jaʿala taʿālā smuhu al-nafs
al-nāṭiqa ka-l-qamar wa-jaʿala l-ʿaql ka-l-shams fa-hādhihi l-nafs al-nāṭiqa l-latī fī l-insān
tastamiddu min nūr al-ʿaql kamā yastamiddu l-qamar min ḍiyāʾ al-shams wa-yaẓharu
dhālika l-ʿilm al-ladhī stafādathu bi-thamāniya wa-ʿishrīna ḥarfan ʿalā ʿadad manāzil al-
qamar wa-kadhālika yuʿabbiru l-insān ʿammā fī ḍamīrihi bi-thamāniya wa-ʿishrīna ḥarfan
wa-fī hādhā dalīl ʿalā anna l-ʿālam al-ṣaghīr juzʾ min al-ʿālam al-kabīr [. . .]”).
100 See above p. 49 n. 59; see also below pp. 153–4 and the references in the following
note.
letters 105
101 For Plotinus see Enneads v, 208–11 (= Ennead v, 6, 4); cf. Badawī (ed.), al-Shaykh
al-yūnānī 186 (on this Neoplatonic source see Rosenthal, Aš-Šhayḫ al-Yûnânî and Adam
son, Arabic Plotinus 7); and see also Altmann and Stern, Isaac Israeli 160 n. 1. For Ismāʿīlī lit
erature, see, for example, Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 14; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil
ii, 462; al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 149–50; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 63. Certain motifs in
the myth of Kūnī-Qadar bear a resemblance to Ibn Masarra’s speculations analyzed above.
For example, the sun and the moon are perceived as the ẓāhir indicating the bāṭin, i.e. the
hypostases Kūnī and Qadar. From the ẓāhir, one may gain knowledge or evidence (istidlāl)
concerning the bāṭin. Moreover, according to the Ismāʿīlī myth, Kūnī reinforces Qadar
with “[spiritual] substance” (mādda—from the same root as imdād). This is quite similar
to the description of the relationship between the sun/intellect and the moon/soul in the
writings of Ibn Masarra and the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonists. For the use of the terms imdād,
istimdād and istifāda with reference to the sun and the moon, see also Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
al-Jāmiʿa i, 533–4; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 188-9; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 181.
102 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 49-50, 88, iii, 333–4, 354–5. Note that
in the latter passage, the Ikhwān quote from Q 21:104, which belongs to the same group
of verses referred to by Ibn Masarra (see above in nn. 97–8). Similar to Ibn Masarra,
the Ikhwān also employ in this passage the derivatives of the terms iqbāl ʿalā (“turning
towards”), ifāda and istifāda, in order to describe the relationship between the universal
intellect and soul.
106 chapter two
103 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 232–3 (“Wa-l-qiwā l-khams tushbihu l-kawākib al-khamsa
wa-hātāni l-quwwatāni aʿnī l-nāṭiqa wa-l-ʿāqila mushābihatāni lil-shams wa-l-qamar
wa-dhālika anna l-qamar min al-shams yaʾkhudhu nūrahu bi-jarayānihi fī manāzilihi
l-thamānī wa-l-ʿishrīna kadhālika l-nāṭiqa min al-quwwa l-ʿāqila taʾkhudhu maʿānī
l-mawjūdāt wa-ḥaqāʾiq al-marʾiyyāt fa-tukhbiru ʿanhā bi-thamāniya wa-ʿishrīna ḥarfan
min ḥurūf al-muʿjam”). Note that in ibid. ii, 464–5, and Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 585–
8, the term al-quwwa l-ʿāqila is replaced by al-ʿaql, and the verb fa-tukhbiru is replaced
by the verb fa-tuʿabbiru—in a wording very similar to that found in Ibn Masarra’s work
(see above n. 99). According to Wolfson, the term “the speaking faculty”, as referring to one
of man’s mental faculties (“the inner senses”, al-ḥawāss al-bāṭina), is typically Ikhwānian;
see Wolfson, Internal senses 77–82; see also Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 414–5, iii, 195, 244–6,
iv, 57; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 506–10, ii, 29. In addition to Wolfson’s philological
explanations of this term, I would also propose to view it as related to nuṭq (“speaking”,
“rationality”), an important concept in the Ismāʿīlī tradition. In Ismāʿīlī thought, the nāṭiq
is assigned the role of formulating the sharīʿa. Hence, nuṭq signifies both the rational-
intellectual activity of the prophet (in accordance with the Aristotelian definition of
man as a rational animal) and the prophet’s ability to express Divine truths in human
language, in the form of the sharīʿa. Nuṭq is likewise connected to the idea of God’s
creative speech—a central notion in Ismāʿīlī thought (see above chapter 1). Accordingly,
the prophetic speech is perceived as paralleling the Divine speech; see, for example,
al-Jāmiʿa i, 507–8 (“[. . .] Wa-huwa l-nuṭq al-ilāhī ʿalā l-ḥaqīqa [. . .]”). Finally, note that Ibn
Masarra too employs the term al-quwwa l-nāṭiqa, see Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 153–4.
104 For a more detailed examination of the term iʿtibār, see below pp. 212–29.
letters 107
letter is not contracted; or, alternatively, one group consists of the letters
that have diacritical points and one group consists of the letters that lack dia-
critical points.105 The lunar mansions are likewise divided into two groups
of fourteen mansions each: fourteen “in the northern signs of the zodiac”
and fourteen “in the southern ones”. Hence, all existent things whose
number is twenty-eight are divided into two groups of fourteen each.
This is the reason why out of the sum total of twenty-eight letters, He [Allah]
has presented [at the beginning of twenty-nine Quranic sūras] fourteen let-
ters and not the other fourteen, given that to the former a different rule
applies than to the latter. These fourteen [= the fawātiḥ] are a concealed
secret, the knowledge of which is not fit for every one—only for the unique
ones from among Allah’s servants, the sincere ones.
The correspondence between man’s anatomy, the letters of the Arabic
alphabet and the lunar mansions is not accidental: the Ikhwān claim that
by establishing twenty-eight letters, the “wise philosopher” who invented
the Arabic script had in fact emulated the wisdom of the Creator.106 Thus,
the twenty-eight letters of the Arabic alphabet, and the fourteen fawātiḥ in
particular, are the key to understanding God’s creation. Both the Ikhwān
and Ibn Masarra are of the opinion that an in-depth contemplation of
these letters and of the corresponding microcosmic-macrocosmic systems
inevitably leads one to a full understanding of the universe.
However, there is an essential difference between the Ikhwānian
perception of the fawātiḥ and that of Ibn Masarra. In contradistinction to
105 Note that the Ikhwān enumerate fifteen letters with diacritical points and thirteen
without.
106 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 380–2 (“Wa-hākadhā yanbaghī li-man yurīdu an
yaʿrifa sirr hādhihi l-ḥurūf al-latī hiya fī awāʾil al-suwar lima kāna minhā arabaʿa ʿashar min
jumlat thamāniya wa-ʿishrīna ḥarfan an yaʿtabira l-mawjūdāt al-latī ʿadaduhā thamāniya
wa-ʿishrūna fa-innahu yajiduhā tanqasimu qismayni ḥaythu mā wajada fa-min dhālika
thamāniya wa-ʿishrūna ʿadad mafāṣil al-yadayni lil-insān fa-innahā fī l-yad al-yumnā arbaʿa
ʿashar wa-arbaʿa ʿashar fī l-yad al-yusrā wa-inna ʿadadahā muṭābiq li-ʿadad thamānin
wa-ʿishrīna kharaza hiya fī ʿamūd ẓahr al-insān minhā arbaʿ ʿashra fī asfal al-ṣulb wa-arbaʿ
ʿashra fī aʿlāhu”; “Wa-hākadhā ḥukm al-ḥakīm al-wāḍiʿ lil-khaṭṭ al-ʿarabī fa-innahu qtafā
fī waḍʿihi l-khaṭṭ al-ʿarabī ḥikmat al-bārī fa-innahu kāna ḥakīman faylasūfan [. . .] wa-
min al-latī ʿadaduhā thamāniya wa-ʿishrūna hiya manāzil al-qamar fī l-falak fa-inna
ʿadadahā thamāniya wa-ʿishrūna minhā fī l-burūj al-shimāliyya arbaʿa ʿashar wa-fī l-burūj
al-janūbiyya arbaʿa ʿashar [. . .] fa-li-hādhihi l-ʿilla awrada min jumlat al-thamāniya wa-l-
ʿishrīna ḥarfan ḥurūf al-jummal arbaʿa ʿashar ḥarfan wa-lam yūrid al-arbaʿa ʿashar al-ukhrā
li-anna li-hādhihi ḥukman laysa li-dhālika wa-hiya l-sirr al-maktūm al-ladhī lā yaṣluḥu an
yaʿlamahu kull aḥad illā l-khawāṣṣ min ʿibād allāh al-mukhliṣīna”); see also ibid. i, 217, iii,
143–4; and al-Daylamī, Qawāʿid ʿaqāʾid āl Muḥammad 68; Canteins, Hidden sciences 453–4,
456–8.
108 chapter two
the latter, the Ikhwān do not view the letters (including the fawātiḥ) as
building blocks of reality. Rather, the letters are the product of a human
invention, albeit a Divinely-inspired invention which corresponds to the
harmonious structure of the universe. Ibn Masarra’s perception of the let-
ters as building blocks of creation is shared by Ibn al-ʿArabī, who likewise
links the fawātiḥ to the lunar mansions. According to Ibn al-ʿArabī,
He [God] has set the number of [lunar] mansions at twenty-eight owing to
the letters of the merciful breath. We only say this because people believe
that the number of the twenty-eight letters was determined in accordance
with the [lunar] mansions. However, in our opinion, the opposite is true: it
is in accordance with these letters that the number of mansions was deter-
mined.107
It seems that Ibn al-ʿArabī is criticizing the Ikhwānian view on this mat-
ter: the Arabic language and its letters are not a product of a human
invention, designed according to the structure of the universe; on the
contrary: the structure of the universe was designed in accordance with
the twenty-eight cosmogonic-cosmological letters! From this perspective,
both Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī are closer to Ismāʿilī mythical thought
than to the more scientific outlook expressed in the Epistles of the Ikhwān
and in the Jābirian corpus.
107 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 432 (chapter 198, the beginning of faṣl 20: “Wa-jaʿalahā
thamāniya wa-ʿishrīna manzila min ajli ḥurūf al-nafas al-raḥmānī wa-innamā qulnā dhālika
li-anna l-nās yatakhayyalūna anna l-ḥurūf al-thamāniya wa-l-ʿishrīna min al-manāzil ḥukm
hādhā l-ʿadad lahā wa-ʿindanā bi-l-ʿaks bal ʿan hādhihi l-ḥurūf kāna ḥukm ʿadad al-manāzil”).
On the fawātiḥ and the lunar mansions see also ibid. i, 102 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition i, 266–7); and see also ibid. 378 (chapter 62, = iv, 395–6).
letters 109
God and the upper, Divine worlds, ultimately linking the awliyāʾ to the
creative word of God, the kalima.
is, the Fāṭimī Caliphs, who come after the atimmāʾ.113 In his work entitled
al-Iftikhār, al-Sijistānī writes that the four letters kūnī correspond to the
universal soul, which is responsible for establishing the religious leader-
ship in each historical cycle (dawr): the nāṭiq, his asās, the imām and the
latter’s ḥujja. These four figures are thus indicated by the four letters of
kūnī.114 Similar speculations appear in other Ismāʿīlī works as well.115
Ibn al-ʿArabī too links the letters of the Arabic alphabet to the hierarchy
of the friends of God. However, Ibn al-ʿArabī views the letters not only as
signs indicating the friends of God but also as live entities which populate
a world of their own. In fact, the world of letters has its own awliyāʾ hierar-
chy: “Among [the letters] there is a pole [quṭb, the highest-ranking friend
of God], just as there is one among us—the alif [. . .]”. Below the level of
the alif-pole are the weak letters wāw and yāʾ, which are considered to
be the two imāms; then come the four “pegs” (awtād)—the alif, wāw, yāʾ
and nūn, which signify the case endings (ʿalāmāt al-iʿrāb); and, finally,
ن
the seven “substitutes” (abdāl, singular: badal)—the alif which signifies
the dual in the nominative (� )_ا, the wāw which signifies the plural in the
ن
nominative (�)_و, the yāʾ signifying the plural and the dual in the accusa-
)_ � ن, the nūn signifying the plural form of the verb ( )_ ن
tive and genitive (�ي �و
and the tāʾ, the kāf and the hāʾ of the pronouns. Ibn al-ʿArabī defines the
pronouns as “substitutes” since they replace other letters which indicate
explicit names.116 Ibn al-ʿArabī’s discussion is somewhat more sophisti-
cated and complex than the Ismāʿīlī speculations on the letters and the
hierarchy of the awliyāʾ. Elaborating on the phonetic and grammatical
aspects of the letters, Ibn al-ʿArabī draws a fuller and more interesting
comparison between the world of letters and the hierarchy of the friends
of God. This comparison gives life and vitality to the world of letters, and,
113 See al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 18–9. On the Fāṭimī concept of khulafāʾ and its espousal by
al-Sijistānī, see Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 164–6, 208, 226–8; Walker, Early philosophical Shiism 21.
114 See al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 124–5.
115 See, for example, Ibn Ḥawshab (Manṣūr al-Yaman), al-Rushd wa-l-hidāya 189–90,
197–202, 207–8, 211; Halm, Kosmologie 44–8; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 27–8; see also
al-Daylamī, Qawāʿid ʿaqāʾid āl Muḥammad 52–5, 67–71.
116 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 123 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 335–
6: “[. . .] Fa-minhum al-quṭb kamā minnā wa-huwa l-alif [. . .]”; “Wa-l-imāmāni l-wāw wa-l-yāʾ
al-muʿtallatāni l-ladhāni humā ḥarfā l-madd wa-l-līn lā l-ṣaḥīḥatāni wa-l-awtād arbaʿa l-alif
wa-l-wāw wa-l-yāʾ wa-l-nūn al-ladhīna hum ʿalāmāt al-iʿrāb wa-l-abdāl sabʿa l-alif wa-l-wāw
wa-l-yāʾ wa-l-nūn wa-tāʾ al-ḍamīr wa-kāfuhu wa-hāʾuhu fa-l-alif alif rajulāni wa-l-wāw wāw
al-ʿumarūna wa-l-yāʾ yāʾ al-ʿumarīna/al-ʿumarayni wa-l-nūn nūn yafʿalūna”). On the quṭb,
the two imāms, the four awtād and the seven abdāl, see below p. 130 n. 25.
letters 111
at the same time, enriches our understanding of the status and functions
of the awliyāʾ.117
The Neoplatonic aspect of the linkage between the letters and the
friends of God is of special interest for the current discussion. In Ismāʿīlī
literature and in the writings of Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī, the univer-
sal intellect (or the first intellect) is at times perceived as corresponding
to the letter alif.118 In the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic tradition, the nāṭiq—the
highest-ranking friend of God—is the terrestrial equivalent of the uni-
versal intellect; the latter functions as the nāṭiq’s spiritual source. Hence,
there is a tripartite correspondence between the first letter of the alphabet
(alif ), the first created being (the universal intellect), and its representa-
tive on earth—the most eminent human being, “the speaker prophet”.119
This tripartite correspondence is also found in the Epistles of Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ. However, the Ikhwān often replace the figure of the nāṭiq with the
figure of the ideal human being, i.e. any man (not necessarily a prophet
or imām) who fully realizes his rational/speaking soul (al-nafs al-nāṭiqa).
117 On the letters as indicating the hierarchy of the friends of God, see also Ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Mabādiʾ 108–11; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 237–8 (chapter 22, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition
iii, 147–8).
118 To be more exact, in Ismāʿīlī sources, the intellect corresponds to the alif, whereas in
the writings of Ibn masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī, who do not consider the alif and hamza as
one letter, the intellect corresponds to the hamza. See al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 9; al-Ḥāmidī,
Kanz al-walad 27; al-Daylamī, Qawāʿid ʿaqāʾid āl Muḥammad 55; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i,
105 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 277), ii, 415 (chapter 198, faṣl 11). On the
alif and hamza, see ibid. ii, 385 (the beginning of chapter 198: “[. . .] Kāna l-nafas bi-l-ḥarf
al-hāwī khāṣṣatan wa-mā huwa ʿindanā min al-ḥurūf [. . .]”); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 4
(“[. . .] Wa-ʿindanā l-alif laysat min al-ḥurūf wa-ʿinda jābir bni ḥayyān anna l-alif niṣf ḥarf wa-
l-hamza l-niṣf al-ākhar fa-l-alif wa-l-hamza ḥarf wa-qad bayyannā hādhā kathīran fī ghayr
hādhā l-mawḍiʿ”). As regards Ibn Masarra, see Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 140 (“[. . .] Wa-dhālika anna
l-hāʾ ishāra ilā l-dhāt wa-hiya khārija min al-ṣadr wa-talīhā l-hamza wa-hiya ishāra ilā l-aza-
liyya [read: al-irāda] [. . .] fa-idhā naṭaqta bi-l-hamza [wa-]akhadhta bihā makhraj al-ʿadl
wa-huwa l-wasaṭ ḥadatha min dhālika l-alif al-ladhī huwa mithāl al-takwīn ay khaṭṭ al-ʿālam
bi-jumlatihi wa-kānat lil-alif fī nafsihā thalāth marātib nafs nāṭiqa wa-nafs ḥayawāniyya
wa-nafs nabātiyya fa-qīla inna l-hamza hiya l-ʿaql wa-hiya l-irāda wa-inna l-alif hiya l-nafs
al-nāṭiqa wa-l-wāw hiya l-nafs al-ḥayawāniyya wa-l-yāʾ hiya l-nabātiyya [. . .]”). According to
the first opinion mentioned by Ibn Masarra, the hamza alludes to the Divine will, whereas
the alif is the mithāl (i.e., the universal intellect, see above n. 38). According to the second
opinion, the hamza is the universal intellect and will, whereas the alif is the rational/
speaking soul. In other passages, Ibn Masarra identifies the alif with the mithāl and the
Divine will (see Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 136–7, 166). One may conclude that according to Ibn
Masarra: 1. The hamza and alif are not the same letter; 2. At times the alif is identified
with the universal intellect and at other times the hamza; 3. The alif is also linked to the
rational/speaking soul.
119 On the relationship between the universal intellect and the nāṭiq, see below pp. 151–
6. See also Ibn Ḥawshab (Manṣūr al-Yaman), al-Rushd wa-l-hidāya 190, 198 (where the alif
is said to indicate the nāṭiq); and see also al-Daylamī, Qawāʿid ʿaqāʾid āl Muḥammad 68.
112 chapter two
Man’s supreme status in creation and the connection between him and
his higher, spiritual source is symbolized by the letter alif:
The first letter is the straight line which is the alif ()ا, and the second [letter]
is the bāʾ (�) ب. Facing it in the upper world is the preceding one which is the
[universal] intellect, and the following one which is the [universal] soul [. . .]
According to the Ikhwān,
the human form is like the straight line, whereas the animal form is like
the curved line, for the plants and animals are situated below the level of
man.120
In a similar vein, according to Ibn al-ʿArabī, the pole—the ideal human
being—corresponds to the letter alif, and the universal intellect corre-
sponds to the hamza.121 Ibn Masarra too links the intellect with the letter
alif and the figure of man. According to him, the rational/speaking soul,
which corresponds to the alif, derives from the intellect, which likewise
corresponds to the alif, or, alternatively, to the hamza.122 Both the Ikhwān
and Ibn Masarra see a resemblance between the graphic shape of the alif
and the physical form of man: like the alif and in contradistinction to
the plants and animals, man stands erect, hence his supreme status in
creation.123
120 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 144 (“Fa-awwal al-ḥurūf huwa l-khaṭṭ al-mustaqīm
al-ladhī huwa l-alif wa-l-thānī l-bāʾ wa-bi-izāʾihi fī l-ʿālam al-ʿulwī l-sābiq wa-huwa l-ʿaql
wa-l-tāmm [read: wa-l-tālī] huwa l-nafs [. . .]”), 145 (“[. . .] Wa-ṣūrat al-insān shibh al-khaṭṭ
al-mustaqīm wa-ṣūrat al-ḥayawānāt shibh al-khaṭṭ al-muqawwas wa-l-nabāt wa-l-ḥayawān
murattabāni taḥt al-insān [. . .]”). On the correspondence between the rational/speaking
soul and the universal intellect, see below pp. 154–6.
121 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 123 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i,
335), ii, 415 (chapter 198, faṣl 11). On the letter alif as indicating both man, in his capac
ity as “God’s vicegerent on earth” (khalīfa), and the universal intellect, see Ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Mabādiʾ 49–52.
122 See the references above in n. 118. On the rational/speaking soul as deriving from the
intellect, see Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 142–3.
123 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 144–5; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 241, 358, 385, 496–7,
ii, 13; Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 140; see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 176 (chapter 7, =
ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 252), ii, 385 (chapter 198, on the difference between alif, wāw
and yāʾ). Note also the term al-qāma l-alifiyya (“[he who possesses] the alif-like posture”)
in al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 55, 102, 105, 117, 148, 153, 155, 159, 185, 190, 262, 275, 298–300, 310.
Speculations on the graphic shape of the alif and its correspondence with man’s upright
posture are also found in early Sufi sources (see Böwering, Sulamī’s treatise 355, 357,
364; see also Lory, La Science 45–6). However, these speculations lack the philosophical-
Neoplatonic aspect which is so central to the Ismāʿīlī and Andalusī writings discussed
here.
letters 113
127 See Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, Sarāʾir wa-asrār al-nuṭaqāʾ 21; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār
123–37, 143–4, 223; al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 11, 14, 18, 71; al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 146,
148, 151, 153; al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 91–2, 199, 201–2, 204–7, 210–1, 253, 256, 318; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ
204 (perhaps read ḥaẓẓ instead of khaṭṭ); see also Halm, Kosmologie 53–66, 215–6; Walker,
Cosmic hierarchies 26–7.
128 See al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 234, 248–9, 253, 258–64, where the author quotes from
al-Sijistānī’s lost work, Kitāb al-bishāra/al-bishārāt, “The Book of Good Tiding/s”; on this
work see Walker, Early philosophical Shiism 20. On the cyclical-eschatological perception
of history described here, see also Ebstein, Secrecy 322–6.
letters 115
129 The link between the prophets and the Divine word is also connected to Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
perception of created beings in general as the words of God. See above pp. 53–7; see also
Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 142 (“Fa-l-mawjūdāt kulluhā kalimāt allāh al-latī lā tanfadu fa-innahā ʿan
kun wa-kun kalimat allāh”).
130 See also Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 58: “The ring-gem of every wisdom is the word to which it
is ascribed” (“Fa-faṣṣ kull ḥikma l-kalima l-latī tunsabu ilayhā”). On the historical continu
ity between the different prophets and their heirs, see, for example, ibid. 175: “[. . .] Allāh
called him [John] yaḥyā [literally: “he lives/will live”], that is, the memory of Zachary will
remain alive through him [. . .] Adam’s memory remained alive through Seth, the memory
of Noah remained alive through Shem and thus the [remaining] prophets [. . .]” (“[. . .]
Fa-inna llāh sammāhu yaḥyā ay yaḥyā bihi dhikr zakariyyā [. . .] fa-inna ādam ḥayiya dhi
kruhu bi-shīth wa-nūḥan ḥayiya dhikruhu bi-sām wa-kadhālika l-anbiyāʾ [. . .]”). See also
above p. 64 n. 114. Note that in the Ismāʿīlī tradition, Seth and Shem are considered the
legatees (awṣiyāʾ) or the ḥujaj of Adam and Noah respectively; see Halm, Kosmologie 18–37;
Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 132.
131 On the correspondence between the twenty-eight letters of the alphabet and the
twenty-eight Divine words that comprise creation, see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 389
(chapter 198).
132 On the seal of the friends of God see above p. 64 n. 114.
133 But not the Ikhwānian one; see below pp. 179–88.
116 chapter two
general, not just the prophets and their heirs, the friends of God. The lat-
ter are historical expressions or manifestations of the figure of the perfect
man, who embodies the Divine word and its twenty-eight letters. In one
passage, Ibn al-ʿArabī explains that the letter wāw is the last letter in the
Arabic alphabet in terms of its articulation point, and therefore includes
the magical powers of all preceding letters. Similarly, the perfect man
has the power of every existent in the world. He has all the levels and con-
sequently is the only one who was given the form [i.e., he was the only
one who was created according to God’s form]. He unites the Divine true
essences, which are the [Divine] names, with the true essences of the world,
for he is the last existent: the merciful breath reached his existence only
after it had gathered with it the power of the levels of the whole world [. . .]
Man, according to Ibn al-ʿArabī,
is the most perfect existent, just like the wāw is the most perfect letter [. . .]
everything other than man is created except for man, who is both a created
being and a God [khalq wa-ḥaqq]. The perfect man is truly the truth by
means of which—that is, because of which—the world was created [. . .]134
As explained above,135 according to Ibn al-ʿArabī, “the breath of the All-
Merciful” is identical to “the truth by means of which the world was cre-
ated”, and consequently, the creative word of God is the ontological root
of the perfect man. The latter, in his capacity as an intermediary between
God and creation, truly embodies the Divine word and its letters.
Common Techniques
134 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 390 (chapter 198, “[. . .] Fa-fī l-insān quwwat kull
mawjūd fī l-ʿālam fa-lahu jamīʿ al-marātib wa-li-hādhā khtuṣṣa waḥdahu bi-l-ṣūra fa-jamaʿa
bayna l-ḥaqāʾiq al-ilāhiyya wa-hiya l-asmāʾ wa-bayna ḥaqāʾiq al-ʿālam fa-innahu ākhir
mawjūd fa-mā ntahā li-wujūdihi l-nafas al-raḥmānī ḥattā jāʾa maʿahu bi-quwwat marātib
al-ʿālam kullihi [. . .]”; “[. . .] Fa-kāna l-insān akmal al-mawjūdāt wa-l-wāw akmal al-ḥurūf
wa-kadhā hiya fī l-ʿamal ʿinda man yaʿrifu l-ʿamal bi-l-ḥurūf fa-kull mā siwā l-insān khalq illā
l-insān fa-innahu khalq wa-ḥaqq fa-l-insān al-kāmil huwa ʿalā l-ḥaqīqa l-ḥaqq al-makhlūq
bihi ay al-makhlūq bi-sababihi l-ʿālam [. . .] fa-l-ghāya huwa l-amr al-makhlūq bi-sababihi
mā taqaddama min asbāb ẓuhūrihi wa-huwa l-insān al-kāmil”). On the perfect man see
below chapter 4.
135 See above p. 55.
letters 117
numerous. A full survey of them would fall beyond the scope of this study.
I will therefore present only two techniques which are common to Ismāʿīlī
literature and to the writings of Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī.
The first hermeneutical technique concerns the names of the letters,
and is found in Gnostic writings and in other Non-Islamic sources as well.136
According to Kitāb al-kashf,137 after creating the first series of seven cos-
mogonic letters, God articulated their names, and, as a result, sixteen let-
ters came into being. In addition, following the Divine pronunciation of
the names of the letters sīn and shīn (s/sh, i, n, y, a, ʾ, n, u, n), which
designate the kursī (footstool) and the ʿarsh (throne) respectively, the nūn
was produced, and from the latter (n, u, n), the wāw appeared. Hence, the
Divine articulation of the letters’ names is perceived as an essential ele-
ment in the process of creation. From a hermeneutical point of view, this
technique enables Kitāb al-kashf to maintain the centrality of the number
seven, and, at the same time, to include all the twenty-eight letters of the
Arabic alphabet in its cosmogonic narrative.138 Al-Sijistānī too employs
a similar hermeneutical technique. In his work al-Iftikhār, al-Sijistānī
explains that from “the seven supreme letters” (= kūnī-qadar), five addi-
tional letters (alif, fāʾ, lām, mīm and yāʾ) were produced (or “born”, yataw-
waladu), in the following manner: kāf, wāw, nūn, yāʾ, qāf, dāl, rāʾ → alif, fāʾ,
lām → mīm → yāʾ. These five letters correspond to the five usus (singular
asās), i.e. the legatees of the prophets Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and
Muḥammad. In the same manner, from each one of “the seven supreme
letters”, six additional letters are produced (with the exception of the
nūn, from which seven letters are produced); these constitute the “share”
(qisma) of the six imāms who follow each and every nāṭiq.139
The names of the letters likewise figure in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings. For
example, the first classification of the Arabic letters at the beginning of
the second chapter of the Futūḥāt deals with the simple letters (basāʾiṭ
136 The names of the letters play a significant role in the cosmogonic speculations of
Marcus the Valentinian; see Halm, Kosmologie 49–50; Weiss, A conceptual examination
47. Similarly, speculations on the names of the letters also appear in the Jewish Ōtiyōt
de-rabbī ʿakīvā and in the Christian The Mysteries of the Greek Letters; see ibid. 55–6, 88,
270; see also Dornseiff, Alphabet 26–8.
137 See above pp. 81–2.
138 Note that the letter hāʾ is not included in the various groups of letters referred to by
Kitāb al-kashf, since, according to Kitāb al-kashf, this letter designates Allāh.
139 See al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 128–30, and the editor’s commentary on pp. 337–8. See
also al-Daylamī, Qawāʿid ʿaqāʾid āl Muḥammad 69–70.
118 chapter two
al-ḥurūf ), i.e. the letters that comprise the names of the alphabetical let-
ters. In this classification, the simple letters correspond to the four natures,
whereas in another classification presented in the second chapter of the
Futūḥāt, the alphabetical letters correspond to the four elements. Thus,
the letters of the alphabet are comprised of simple letters just as the ele-
ments are comprised of the natures.140
The second hermeneutical technique, common to Ibn Massara, Ibn
al-ʿArabī and the Ismāʿīlī authors, concerns the graphical shape of the
letters. To be sure, references to the graphical shape of the letters are also
found in Sufi literature141 as well as in non-Islamic sources.142 However,
one theme in particular is unique to Ismāʿīlī literature and to the writings
of Ibn Massara and Ibn al-ʿArabī: the shape of the letters kāf and nūn—
the letters comprising kun (�� ن �) ك, the Divine fiat “be!”. The graphical differ-
ن
ence between the kāf and the nūn—the former turns upward ()ك, whereas
the latter turns downward (�)—forms the basis for the speculations
on this matter. Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ explain that the kun is composed of two
letters, since
the kāf is attached to the upper side, which is the first face [al-wajh al-
awwal = the sun], whereas the nūn descends to the lower side, which is the
second face [al-wajh al-thānī = the moon]. The [word kun] has two sides:
one which draws and one which reinforces. In the same way, the second
face draws from the first [face] which has perfect lights and shines brightly,
until it [the second face] becomes full [. . .] then it begins to reinforce [with
light, or spiritual substance] those who are situated below it in the world of
generation and corruption.143
According to the Ikhwān, the location of the moon between the sun and
the sub-lunar world corresponds to that of the universal soul which is
situated between the universal intellect and the lower, corporeal worlds.
Both the universal soul and moon receive the Divine flow which emanates
from above, and then channel this flow downwards to the worlds situated
140 See above nn. 71, 81; and see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Mabādiʾ 76–97, 149.
141 See the reference to Böwering above in n. 123.
142 For speculations on the graphical shapes of the letters in Greek sources, Rabbinical
literature of the Talmudic era and in the Christian The Mysteries of the Greek Letters, see
Weiss, A conceptual examination 232–80; see also Dornseiff, Alphabet 20–5, 30.
143 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 533 (“Fa-li-dhālika ṣārat kalimat kun mabniyya ʿalā
ḥarfayni fa-l-kāf muttaṣila bi-l-ʿuluww wa-huwa l-wajh al-awwal wa-l-nūn munḥaṭṭa ilā
asfal wa-huwa l-wajh al-thānī wa-hiya dhāt ṭarafayni ṭaraf yastamiddu wa-ṭaraf yumiddu
kadhālika l-wajh al-thānī yastamiddu min al-awwal al-tāmma anwāruhu al-muḍīʾ ishrāquhu
ḥattā yamtaliʾa [. . .] thumma yabdaʾu yumiddu man dūnahu fī ʿālam al-kawn wa-l-fasād
[. . .]”; cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 133–4).
letters 119
144 Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 161–2 (“Wa-lammā qāma kāna l-nūr [read: al-nūn]
asfal wa-huwa nihāyat al-ḥaraka wa-l-kawn wa-ṣāra l-kāf aʿlā wa-huwa mawḍiʿ mundafaʿ
al-ḥaraka wa-l-amr”). For a discussion of the letters kāf and nūn in a cosmogonic context,
see also al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 91; for other speculations on the graphical shapes of letters,
see ibid. 9–10, 92.
145 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 96 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i,
237–41), 122 (“maʿrifat alif al-lām”, = i, 331); see also ibid. 103 (= i, 270–1), 154 (chapter 5,
“waṣl: qawluhu l-raḥmān [. . .]”, = ii, 159–60); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 12; and see also
Gril, Science 148–9. Cf. the analysis of the nūn in Ibn Ḥawshab (Manṣūr al-Yaman), al-
Rushd wa-l-hidāya 190.
146 Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-yāʾ 8. For other references to the graphical shapes of the
letters, see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 98–9 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition i, 249–50), 111 (the poems on the letters khāʾ and qāf, = i, 301–2), 120
(“maʿrifat lām alif ”, = i, 325–7); Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Mabādiʾ 129–40; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm
5–6, 10; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-yāʾ 11.
147 For instance, the hermeneutical technique which views the letters as acronyms or
abbreviations of words appears in early Islamic interpretations of the fawātiḥ and in Sufi
120 chapter two
works as well. See al-Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-bayān i, 130–2 (on Q 2:1); Böwering, Sulamī’s treatise
356–65; Nwyia, Le Tafsīr mystique 188–9, 230; Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 141–2, 145–6,
151, 153–4, 158–9, 161; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 115 (on the letter ṣād, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s
edition i, 313); Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 379; al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 14–5, 91–2.
148 See Gril, Science 136, 139–42. On the letter speculations of al-Ḥallāj, which probably
influenced Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought, see Böwering, Sulamī’s treatise 350–5.
149 See also Corbin, History 76; and cf. Gril, Science 146.
letters 121
more so than by the Twelver scholars who lived and were active in the
10th century onwards.153
153 From the 10th century (and especially from the second half of that century) onwards,
under the rule of the Buwayhīs, a rational, theological and legal tendency developed among
Twelver scholars, which was marked by an anti-mythic and anti-esoteric attitude. This atti-
tude seems to have led to the suppression of letter speculations in the Twelver world, at
least in comparison with the Ismāʿīlī world. Letter speculations resurface in the writings
of Twelver scholars who lived in later periods such as Ḥaydar Āmulī (the 14th century).
The latter was greatly influenced by Ibn al-ʿArabī’s teachings, which were, in turn, close
(as this study attempts to show) to the Ismāʿīlī tradition. The mutual influences in later
generations between Sufi mysticism (especially as it was developed by Ibn al-ʿArabī) and
Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī mysticism, in the context of letter speculations, is likewise reflected in the
movement of the Ḥurūfiyya (“Those who deal with letters”). On these matters see Corbin,
Science; Corbin, En Islam iranien iii, 149–213; Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 5–28, 130, 137–8;
Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 420–2 and the references given there; Bausani, Ḥurūfiyya; Gril, Science
191 n. 63, 198 n. 148; Lory, La Science 50–1, 54–7; and the articles by Mir-Kasimov cited in
the bibliography to this study.
Chapter three
1 On walāya/wilāya in general, see Radtke, Walī; Radtke, Saint; Izzi Dien and Walker,
Wilāya; Landolt, Walāyah; Corbin, En Islam iranien iv, index, s.v. “walâyat”; Amir-Moezzi,
Notes; Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 159 n. 151; Al-Geyoushi, Al-Tirmidhī’s theory 17–8; Chod
kiewicz, Seal of the saints 17–46; Elmore, Islamic sainthood 109–62; Gramlich, Wunder
58–60; Karamustafa, Walāya 64–70; Cornell, Realm, especially pp. xvii–xliv (in the Intro
duction); Fenton, Hierarchy and the references given there in notes 5–9. On the veneration
of saints in Islam, see also Goldziher, Muslim studies ii, 253–341; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the
saints 7–15. On the question of the correct pronunciation of this term—walāya or wilāya—
see the studies by Chodkiewicz, Landolt and Cornell referred to in this note.
2 On the holy man or saint of Late Antiquity, see the references to the studies of Peter
Brown given in the bibliography; see also Elm, Introduction; and the discussions and refer
ences in Bitton-Ashkelony, Encountering the sacred 14–7 n. 58–62, 66–70; Harvey, Asceti
cism 4–21 (the Introduction).
3 See Q 33:40.
124 chapter three
4 See Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide, index, s.v. “mîrâth” and “wârith, waratha”; Corbin, En
Islam iranien i, 251–71; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 74–88.
5 See, concerning Sufism, the pertinent words of Chodkiewicz (Seal of the saints 13):
“Sufism and sainthood are inseparable. In the absence of saints there is no Sufism: it is
born of their sainthood, nourished by it, and led to reproduce it”.
6 Note that in the Shiʿi parlance, the Shiʿi believers, i.e., the followers of the imāms, are
also called awliyāʾ. In this sense, walāya should be translated as “loyalty” and “devotion
[to the imāms]”; see the references to Amir-Moezzi’s studies above in n. 1; and see also
Kohlberg, Evolution.
7 For the relevant traditions attributed to Muḥammad al-Bāqir and Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq,
see the references to Amir-Moezzi’s studies throughout this chapter. On al-Junayd in the
context dealt with here, see Karamustafa, Walāya; and on al-Tustarī and al-Tirmidhī, see
below pp. 129–32, 144–5.
the friends of god 125
8 For example, the idea expressed in several ḥadīths, and, later on, in various mystical
teachings (see the discussion below), according to which the continuing existence of the
world depends upon a fixed number of righteous men who live in every generation, is
already found in Rabbinical literature of the Talmudic era. See The Babylonian Talmud,
Yomā 38:b and Ḥagīgah 12:b; Ginzberg, Legends i, 250–3, v, 239 n. 164; Schwarzbaum,
Lamed vav tsadīqīm (in Hebrew); Scholem, Lamed vav tsadīqīm (in Hebrew); Scholem,
Elements 219–20, 227 (in Hebrew); Liebes, Ha-mashīaḥ shel ha-zohar, especially pp. 118–28
(in Hebrew); Sviri, Emergence. For a general comparison in this matter between Jewish
and Islamic mysticism, see Fenton, Hierarchy.
9 On the hierarchy of the awliyāʾ as an early theme in Islam, see also Massignon, Essay
92; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 89-92; Chabbi, Abdāl; cf. Radtke and O’Kane, Concept of
sainthood 7; Radtke, Concept of Wilāya 483, 494–5.
126 chapter three
Allāh, powerful and mighty is He, has among mankind three hundred
[men] whose hearts are like the heart of Adam, peace be upon him; forty
whose hearts are like the heart of Moses, peace be upon him; seven whose
hearts are like the heart of Abraham, peace be upon him; five whose hearts
are like the heart of Gabriel, peace be upon him; three whose hearts are like
the heart of Michael, peace be upon him; and one whose heart is like the
heart of Isrāfīl, peace be upon him.
According to this tradition, the number of those who belong to each
category remains fixed at all times: when Isrāfīl’s equivalent (the “one”)
dies, he is substituted by one of the three who are positioned below him
(abdala llāh ʿazza wa-jalla makānahu min al-thalātha); when one of the
three dies, he is replaced by one of the five, and so on. The tradition fur-
ther defines the role of those who belong to this hierarchal system:
Through them [i.e., as a result of their prayers and supplications], Allāh
grants life and brings about death, He makes the rain come down, He causes
the plants to grow and averts disasters.10
In other, similar traditions, the classification of the friends of God is less
sophisticated, and only a small number of hierarchal degrees are enumer-
ated. For instance, in another ḥadīth quoted in the introduction to Ḥilyat
al-awliyāʾ, it is said that
the best among my nation (khiyār ummatī), in every generation, are five
hundred, while the substitutes (abdāl) are forty. Neither number is [ever]
reduced: whenever someone [from among the forty] dies, Allāh, powerful
and mighty is He, replaces him with one of the five hundred (abdala llāh
ʿazza wa-jalla min al-khamsimiʾa makānahu [. . .])11
In other sources, the number of categories or ranks, the number of those
who belong to them, and the terminology used to designate them all vary
from one tradition to the other. Thus, in various traditions, one may find
10 See al-Iṣfahānī, Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ i, 9 (“Inna li-llāh ʿazza wa-jalla fī l-khalq thalāthamiʾa
qulūbuhum ʿalā qalb ādam ʿalayhi l-salām wa-li-llāh taʿālā fī l-khalq arbaʿūna qulūbuhum
ʿalā qalb mūsā ʿalayhi l-salām wa-li-llāh taʿālā fī l-khalq sabʿa qulūbuhum ʿalā qalb ibrāhīm
ʿalayhi l-salām wa-li-llāh taʿālā fī l-khalq khamsa qulūbuhum ʿalā qalb jibrīl ʿalayhi l-salām
wa-li-llāh taʿālā fī l-khalq thalātha qulūbuhum ʿalā qalb mikāʾīl ʿalayhi l-salām wa-li-llāh
taʿālā fī l-khalq wāḥid qalbuhu ʿalā qalb isrāfīl ʿalayhi l-salām fa-idhā māta l-wāḥid abdala
llāh ʿazza wa-jalla makānahu min al-thalātha wa-idhā māta min al-thalātha abdala llāh
taʿālā makānahu min al-khamsa [. . .] fīhim [read: fa-bihim] yuḥyī wa-yumītu wa-yumṭiru
wa-yunbitu wa-yadfaʿu l-balāʾ [. . .]”). See also al-Suyūṭī, al-Khabar al-dāll 58–60.
11 Al-Iṣfahānī, Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ i, 8 (“Khiyār ummatī fī kull qarn khamsumiʾa wa-l-abdāl
arbaʿūna fa-lā l-khamsumiʾa yanquṣūna wa-lā l-arbaʿūna kullamā māta rajul abdala llāh
ʿazza wa-jalla min al-khamsimiʾa makānahu wa-adkhala min al-arbaʿīna makānahum
[. . .]”).
the friends of god 127
12 For the relevant traditions, see Ibn Abī l-Dunyā, al-Awliyāʾ 9–49; al-Tirmidhī, Nawādir
al-uṣūl i, 383–6 (aṣl 51), 567–70 (aṣl 103), 618–23 (aṣl 123), ii, 41–52 (aṣl 162); al-Iṣfahānī,
Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ i, 4–17; Ibn ʿAsākir, Taʾrīkh madīnat dimashq i, 289–304; al-Yāfiʿī, Rawḍ
al-rayāḥīn 11–36 (“al-faṣl al-awwal min al-muqaddima”); al-Suyūṭī, al-Khabar al-dāll 41–78;
see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, Ḥilyat al-abdāl, the editor’s Introduction 6–7.
13 See, for example, Ibn Durayd, Jamharat al-lugha 300; and see also the references
given in the previous note. On the abdāl or budalāʾ, see also Goldziher, Abdāl; Chabbi,
Abdāl; Flügel, Schaʿrânî 38–40; Blochet, Études 49–111; Moosa, Extremist Shiites 110–9;
Cook, Studies 154–5, 161–2 (see especially n. 121), 164, 205; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints
103–4; Sviri, Emergence; Sviri, Self 196.
14 See also Flügel, Schaʿrânî 40.
15 See Ibn Abī l-Dunyā, al-Awliyāʾ 27 (“Lammā dhahabat al-nubuwwa wa-kānū awtād
al-arḍ akhlafa llāh makānahum arbaʿīna rajulan min ummat muḥammad ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi
128 chapter three
wa-sallama yuqālu lahum al-abdāl lā yamūtu l-rajul minhum ḥattā yunshiʾa llāh ʿazza
wa-jalla makānahu ākhar yakhlufuhu wa-hum awtād al-arḍ qulūb thalāthīna minhum
ʿalā mithli yaqīn ibrāhīm [. . .]”; Sufyān b. ʿUyayna on the authority of Abū l-Zinād); cf.
al-Tirmidhī, Nawādir al-uṣūl i, 383 (on the authority of Abū l-Dardāʾ). In the version
quoted by al-Tirmidhī, the phrase akhlafa llāh makānahum is replaced by abdala llāh
taʿālā makānahum, and it is also stated that the abdāl are “the deputies/successors of the
prophets” (khulafāʾ min al-anbiyāʾ). See also al-Suyūṭī, al-Khabar al-dāll 17 (the editors’
Introduction), 63–4, 67–8, 70; al-Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār xxvii, 48. On Sufyān b. ʿUyayna
(107/725–196/811), see Spectorsky, Sufyān b. ʿUyayna; on Abū l-Zinād (died circa 130/748,
at the age of approximately 66), see Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb v, 182–3;
and on Abū l-Dardāʾ (died around 32/652), who, according to the prevalent opinion, was
a ṣaḥābī, see Jeffery, Abū al-Dardāʾ.
16 See, for example, Ibn Ḥawshab, al-Rushd wa-l-hidāya 200; Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-
Yaman, al-Kashf 133; al-Haft wa-l-aẓilla 116–7; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 208; al-Majlisī,
Biḥār al-anwār xxvii, 48, xxxiv 212–3. According to several early traditions, the abdāl reside
in Umayyad Syria, and appear during the eschatological events as a pro-Shiʿi group in sup
port of the mahdī (“the rightly guided one”, i.e., the messianic figure). See the reference
to Cook’s study above in n. 13; see also Moosa, Extremist Shiites 112–3; al-Suyūṭī, al-Khabar
al-dāll 45–51, 64; al-Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār liii, 83–4.
17 See Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 235 n. 715; Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, liii; Halm, Kosmol
ogie 153–6, 158, 160. On the hierarchy of the awliyāʾ in Nuṣayrī texts and in Umm al-kitāb,
see Kraus, Les Dignitaires 85 n. 1–2, 5–6, 86 n. 1, 5–6; Bar-Asher and Kofsky, Nuṣayrī-ʿAlawī
religion, index, s.v. “bāb” and “yatīm”. On the term ghulāt, see above p. 11 n. 38.
the friends of god 129
18 See Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān i, liii–liv; Kraus, Les dignitaires; Lory, Alchimie 70–89. On
the Jābirian corpus see above pp. 30–2.
19 On the seven nuṭaqāʾ and their followers, see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 629–30,
669–73, ii, 138–54, 212. On the term nāṭiq, see above p. 49 n. 60.
20 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 376–7, ii, 375. Regarding the Pythagorean influence on
the Ikhwān, see below p. 194 n. 26.
21 See Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v. “daʿwa” and “hierarchy”; Madelung, Imamat; Halm,
Kosmologie 18–37; Halm, Fatimids 56–70; Hamdani, Evolution; Madelung, Ismāʿīliyya 203b.
On the importance of the daʿwa organization for the Ismāʿīlī worldview, see also Walker,
Early philosophical Shiism 29, 129.
22 Dhū l-Nūn: see al-Iṣfahānī, Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ i, 12–5. Sahl al-Tustarī: Böwering, Mys
tical vision 231–41. Al-Kattānī: al-Suyūṭī, al-Khabar al-dāll 69. Al-Tirmidhī: Al-Geyoushi,
130 chapter three
26 See the references to Chodkiewicz in the previous note; see also Takeshita, Ibn
ʿArabī’s theory 128–31.
27 See the discussions below in this chapter; see also above pp. 108–16.
28 On these matters, see al-Hujwīrī, Kashf al-maḥjūb, Nicholson’s translation 210;
Al-Geyoushi, Al-Tirmidhī’s theory 18, 59–61; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints, index, s.v.
“Tirmidhī, (al-Ḥakīm)”; Radtke, A forerunner; Radtke, Concept of Wilāya 487, 496; Radtke,
Walī; Radtke and O’Kane, Concept of sainthood 5–9.
132 chapter three
29 See Ibn Khaldūn, al-Muqaddima iii, 1108–9 (translated into English by Rosenthal, Ibn
Khaldûn iii, 92–4); Corbin, En Islam iranien i, 92, 118–27; Corbin, Creative imagination 16,
45; Corbin, History 29; al-Shaybī, al-Ṣila i, 225–6, 229, 379–80, 407, 485–95; Chodkiewicz,
Seal of the saints 98 n. 4, 137, 145 n. 47; and see also the discussions and references in de
Jong, Al-Ḳuṭb; Chabbi, Abdāl; Schaeder, Islamische Lehre 240–1; Affifi, Mystical philosophy
89; Massignon, Essay 92; Elmore, Islamic sainthood 179–82. On Chodkiewicz and Corbin,
see also above p. 20 n. 59.
30 On this later influence, see Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 10, 15, 49 n. 4; Corbin,
Science; Blochet, Études 49–111; and above p. 1 n. 2.
the friends of god 133
within himself all the different worlds, spiritual and corporeal alike. These
notions are also shared by Ibn al-ʿArabī.
Ismāʿīlī writings contain many speculations on the correspondences
between the hierarchy of the friends of God, the celestial bodies and
the geographical structure of the sub-lunar world. The link between the
friends of God and the geographical structure of the world is already
drawn in early ḥadīths, in which different groups of awliyāʾ are said to
reside in specific regions of the Islamic world.31 Like other motifs in
early Islamic traditions which treat of the awliyāʾ, this motif too has its
origins in pre-Islamic sources.32 However, in Islam, detailed analogies
between the awliyāʾ hierarchy, the celestial bodies and the geographical
regions of the world are typically found in Ismāʿīlī writings. For instance,
in the 10th century Ismāʿīlī work al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām,33 it is stated that
the imām corresponds to the sun; the ḥujja (“proof”) of the imām or his
bāb (“gate”) corresponds to the moon; and the duʿāt (the members of
the daʿwa organization) correspond to the stars. In addition, the seven
nuṭaqāʾ correspond to the seven heavens; the seven imāms correspond to
the seven layers of the earth; the twelve supporters or nuqabāʾ (“chiefs”)
of each nāṭiq (“the speaker prophet”) correspond to the twelve signs of
the zodiac; and the twelve ḥujaj (plural of ḥujja) of every imām are in
charge of the daʿwa in the twelve geographical regions of the world (the
jazāʾir, plural of jazīra, literally: “island”).34 In a similar vein, al-Kirmānī
(d. after 411/1020) explains that the seven nuṭaqāʾ parallel the seven celes-
tial spheres of the seven planets, whereas the six imāms in each histori-
cal cycle parallel the six small spheres which belong to each one of the
seven big spheres. To the aforementioned correspondences found in
al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām, al-Kirmānī adds the correspondences between the
seven awṣiyāʾ/usus (“legatees”/“foundations”) and the seven geographical
districts of the world (aqālīm, plural of iqlīm).35 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ likewise
31 See, for example, Ibn Abī l-Dunyā, al-Awliyāʾ 30; Ibn Durayd, Jamharat al-lugha 300;
al-Tirmidhī, Nawādir al-uṣūl i, 383, 385 (aṣl 51); Ibn ʿAsākir, Taʾrīkh madīnat dimashq i,
289–304; al-Yāfiʿī, Rawḍ al-rayāḥīn 18–9; al-Suyūṭī, al-Khabar al-dāll 45–54, 60–2, 67–9, 71;
see also Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 222–3 (concerning Nuṣayrī literature).
32 See, for example, The Jerusalem Talmud, ʿAvōdah zarah 9:a (chapter 2:1); Schwarz
baum, Lamed vav tsadīqīm 84–6, 93 (in Hebrew); Scholem, Lamed vav tsadīqīm 200 (in
Hebrew); Fenton, Hierarchy 15.
33 On this work see above p. 43.
34 See Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām 16–7. On the term ḥujja, see
above p. 66 n. 118; on the term jazīra, see above p. 102 n. 93.
35 See al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 187, 242–3, 423 (on al-Kirmānī see above pp. 40–1). On
the seven aqālīm in medieval Arabic geography, see Miquel, Iḳlīm; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Ḥilyat
134 chapter three
emphasize the correspondence between the seven planets and the twelve
signs of the zodiac, the seven days of the week and the twelve months
of the year, the seven aqālīm and the twelve jazāʾir, the seven spiritual
faculties of man (= the five senses, the speaking faculty and the faculty
of the intellect) and the twelve orifices in the human body, and, finally,
the seven nuṭaqāʾ (termed sabʿa ashkhāṣ fāḍila, “seven virtuous figures”)
and the twelve supporters of each nāṭiq.36 Ismāʿīlī literature abounds with
such speculations. One should note the great importance attributed by
the Ismāʿīlī authors to the numbers seven and twelve.37
Very similar speculations are found in the works of Ibn al-ʿArabī.
According to the latter, the quṭb (“pole”) corresponds to the sun; the four
awtād (“pegs”) correspond to the four corners of the kaʿba;38 the seven
abdāl correspond to the seven aqālīm or to the seven planets; the twelve
nuqabāʾ correspond to the twelve signs of the zodiac; and the eight
nujabāʾ (“noble ones”) correspond to the eight planets and the eight celes-
tial spheres which are situated below the ninth, encompassing sphere. Ibn
al-ʿArabī further explains that the seven abdāl are appointed by God to
safeguard the seven aqālīm, and that they benefit from the spiritual pow-
ers (rūḥāniyyāt) emanating from the seven planets and seven heavens. The
seven abdāl also derive their spiritual powers from the seven pre-Islamic
prophets Adam, Jesus, Joseph, Idrīs, Aaron, Moses and Abraham, who
are stationed in the seven heavens. In each day of the week, a different
celestial sphere, planet and prophet exercise their particular spiritual
influence on one of the seven abdāl.39 Obviously, the connection between
the seven prophets and the seven heavens is based on the famous tradition
concerning Muḥammad’s ascension to the heavens (the miʿrāj). According
to various ḥadīths, contained in the canonical compilations and in other
sources as well, Muḥammad encountered a different prophet in each one
of the seven heavens which he visited. However, the link between the
friends of God, the seven aqālīm, the heavens, the planets and the days of
the week is typically Ismāʿīlī.40 Moreover, Ibn al-ʿArabī defines the fourth
celestial sphere, i.e., the sphere of the sun, as the “millstone” (raḥā) and
“pole” (quṭb) of all the other celestial spheres, and as “the heart of the
world and the heart of the heavens”. “The station of Idrīs’s spiritual power”
(maqām rūḥāniyyat idrīs) is located within this fourth sphere. In addition
to being a prophet, Idrīs himself is a pole, that is, the one who stands
at the summit of the awliyāʾ hierarchy.41 Now, the concept of rūḥāniyyāt
(plural of rūḥāniyya) and the connection between this concept and the
seven planets; the significance of the sun; the correspondence between
the sun, the human heart and the highest-ranking friend of God; and the
link between rūḥāniyyāt and Idrīs, who is identified with Hermes—these
themes are also found in the Epistles of Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ.42
duction 8–13; Blochet, Études 51–2, 58 n. 2; Corbin, Creative imagination 45 n. 15; Chodkie
wicz, Seal of the saints 93, 97, 100 n. 22, 106.
40 For the correspondence between the nuṭaqāʾ, the seven days of the week and
the seven planets, see, for example, al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 143–5; al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-
Mudhhiba 44; see also Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 315–20; and Marquet, Imamat 75–9.
41 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 75 (“Wa-aʿlā l-amkina l-makān al-ladhī tadūru
ʿalayhi raḥā ʿālam al-aflāk wa-huwa falak al-shams wa-fīhi maqām rūḥāniyyat idrīs ʿalayhi
l-salām [. . .] fa-min ḥaythu huwa quṭb al-aflāk huwa rafīʿ al-makān”); idem, al-Futūḥāt ii,
437 (chapter 198, faṣl 24: “[. . .] Al-samāʾ al-rābiʿa wa-hiya qalb al-ʿālam wa-qalb al-samawāt
[. . .] wa-askana fīhā quṭb al-arwāḥ al-insāniyya wa-huwa idrīs ʿalayhi l-salām”); and see
also Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 94. On the quṭb see above n. 25. Note that in various
Arabic sources influenced by the Hermetic tradition, including Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī works such
as the Epistles of Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Idrīs-Enoch is identified with Hermes; see the references
above in p. 32 n. 94 and in the following note.
42 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 145, 477, iv, 214–5, 443, 445; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i,
519–20, ii, 111–20, 254–9 (where the qāʾim is said to parallel the sun and the heart); see also
Marquet, Imamat 66, 94 n. 61, 109, 111; Marquet, La philosophie des Iḫwân aṣ-Ṣafâ: l’Imâm
et la société 137. On the significance of the sun in the Epistles of the Ikhwān, and on the
Platonic, Neoplatonic and Hermetic roots of this motif, see De Smet, Le Soleil. On the sun
as the center, the heart and the pole, see also al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 156. On the connec-
tion between the heart and the friends of God, see ibid. 160–1, 295–6, 343–4, 415; al-Ḥāmidī,
Kanz al-walad 254, 257; cf. Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 62; and Krinis, Idea 119–20 (in
Hebrew). For a discussion of the term rūḥāniyyāt and its origins in Hellenistic theurgy and
magic—including pagan Neoplatonism—see Pines, On the term Ruḥaniyot (in Hebrew).
136 chapter three
43 See Halm, Kosmologie, index, s.v. “ḥadd, ḥudūd” and “-ḥudūd al-ğusmānīya,
ar-rūḥānīya”; Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs, index, s.v. “ḥudūd”; De Smet, Mīzān 251 n. 10; Corbin, Divine
epiphany; Hamdani, Evolution 87. See also Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 8–9; and
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 24 (“[. . .] Wa-kull yantahī ilā ḥadd lahu maḥdūd [. . .]”).
44 See, for example, Ibn Ḥawshab, al-Rushd wa-l-hidāya 189, 198; Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-
Yaman, al-Kashf 117, 125, 131–4, 143–4, 149, 155–6; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 624–5;
al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat al-mustajībīn 152–3; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 94, 127, 130, 148, 170; al-
Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 205–15, 223–6; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 163–204; Lewis, An Ismaili
interpretation 700, 701. The Ismāʿīlī authors and Ibn al-ʿArabī also employ the term rutba
(plural: rutab), which seems to be identical in meaning to the term martaba.
the friends of god 137
it. Each of the remaining cosmic beings, spiritual and corporeal alike,
is equally positioned in its proper hierarchal level—below the preced-
ing being or encircled by it. This universal hierarchy corresponds to the
numbers from one to ten: God corresponds to the number one; the uni-
versal intellect corresponds to the number two; the universal soul cor-
responds to the number three; prime matter (al-hayūlā) corresponds to
the number four; and so on. The sub-lunar world too is structured in a
hierarchal fashion: the martaba of the minerals is situated below the mar-
taba of the plants; the martaba of the plants is situated below the martaba
of the animals; the martaba of the animals is situated below the mar-
taba of man; and the latter is situated below the martaba of the angels.
Each one of these marātib is further subdivided into additional levels. For
example, according to one classification of the Ikhwān, the human level
is divided into the following categories: the simple men; the craftsmen
and artisans; the rulers; the kings; and, finally, at the uppermost level,
the prophets, their heirs and their followers. The differences between
these diverse human classes correspond to the differences between inani-
mate beings, plants, animals, human beings and angels. The levels of the
various souls in the sub-lunar world—from the vegetative soul, to the
simple human soul, to the prophet’s soul—correspond to the hierarchy
of the numbers mentioned above.45
Similar speculations appear in the writings of Ibn Masarra and Ibn
al-ʿArabī. Both share the Ismāʿīlī-Ikhwānian worldview which perceives
human society and the universe at large as hierarchal systems.46 More-
over, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ and Ibn al-ʿArabī maintain that the hierarchal struc-
ture of creation originates in the Divine world itself—more precisely, in
its manifest and creative aspect, i.e., in the Divine word and command
45 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 311–3, 318–31, ii, 150–1, 166–72, iii, 127, 129, 178–82, 224–9,
246, 348–9, 353, 359, 368–9, 371, 377, iv, 76, 169–77, 199–201, 212–31, 237–8, 276–82, 374–81;
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 16–8. On the hierarchal worldview of the Ikhwān, see also
Marquet, Imamat, esp. pp. 103–39; Marquet, La philosophie des Ihwan al-Safa: de Dieu à
l’homme 393–8; Netton, Muslim Neoplatonists 33, 35–7; Nasr, An introduction 44–74. On
the hierarchal worldview in other Ismāʿīlī sources, see Corbin, Divine epiphany; Walker,
Early philosophical Shiism, index, s.v. “hierarchy”; Walker, Cosmic hierarchies; Hamdani,
Evolution.
46 For Ibn Masarra, see, for example, Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 146–50; Ibn
Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 183, 185 (where the term ḥudūd is used in a cosmological context similar
to that which is found in Ismāʿīlī literature). For Ibn al-ʿArabī, see the discussion below
and Chittick, Self-disclosure 289. The writings of yet another Andalusī author—the Jewish
Judah Ha-Levi (d. 1141; see above p. 74)—likewise exhibit a hierarchal worldview which is
quite similar to that of the Ismāʿīlī tradition; see Pines, Shīʿite terms 178–92, 203, 217; Krinis,
Idea 66–7, 101–21; and see also Berman, Judaeo-Arabic thought 41–2.
138 chapter three
The Divine origin of the human and cosmic hierarchies may explain why
both Ibn al-ʿArabī and the Ismāʿīlī authors attach such great importance
to the observance of the hierarchal order: any deviation from this order
is conceived of as a transgression against the Divine will itself. Accord-
ingly, Ismāʿīlī tradition views Iblīs’s disobedience of the Divine command
to bow down before Adam (see Q 2:34) as a rejection of the Divinely-
ordained hierarchy in the world. In a similar vein, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ inter-
pret Adam’s sin as a premature and illicit attempt to obtain for himself a
higher rank in the religious hierarchy.52 In fact, acknowledging the hier-
archal structure of the universe and of human society forms the crux of
the Ismāʿīlī faith itself. In the Ismāʿīlī worldview, every created being—in
the spiritual and corporeal worlds alike—is, on the one hand, superior
to those beings that are situated below it ( fāḍil), and, on the other hand,
inferior to those located above it (mafḍūl). As a result, the primary reli-
gious obligation of man is to acquire knowledge of the various hierarchal
levels found above and beneath him and to accept his own proper rank
in this hierarchy.53 Moreover, acknowledging the human and universal
hierarchies is the basis for the belief in the unity of God (tawḥid), and, in
effect, is equal to it; the propagation of this notion among men is the main
al-dawāʾir 32–8; Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 33–6; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 153.
The hierarchal perception described here is especially evident in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s myth
of the Divine creative names; see Elmore, Four texts; see also Chittick, Sufi path 47–58.
On the term martaba in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings, see also ibid. index, s.v. “martaba”; and
Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 89.
52 See Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 10, 11–4; Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, Sarāʾir
wa-asrār al-nuṭaqāʾ 21; Ebstein, Secrecy 322–6. Note that in Twelver sources, Adam’s sin
is often interpreted as a denial of walāya and of the imāms’ high status; see De Smet,
Adam 189; Amir-Moezzi, Notes 734; Amir-Moezzi, La Préexistence 118 n. 34; Amir-Moezzi,
Divine guide 163 n. 184; Kohlberg, Some Shīʿī views 55–7; Bar-Asher, Scripture 134–5, 185.
The Ismāʿīlī-Ṭayyibī author Ibrāhīm al-Ḥāmidī (on whom see above p. 70) describes the
emergence of the world of the ten intellects along similar lines: the third intellect, having
refused to acknowledge the superior rank of the preceding intellect, falls down to the bot
tom of the Divine world and is henceforth situated below the other nine intellects. The
restoration of the Divine world to its initial state becomes the responsibility of the Ismāʿīlī
believers themselves: through their faith and religious deeds, and especially through their
acknowledgement of the various ḥudūd, the fallen intellect (= the tenth intellect) is able to
eventually return to its original rank in the Divine hierarchy. See al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad
66–133, 157 ff., 295–297; Daftary, Ismāʿīlīs 269–276. On the Gnostic roots of this myth, see
Halm, Kosmologie 75–90, 117-8.
53 On the principal of tafḍīl/tafāḍul, see, for example, Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-ʿĀlim
wa-l-ghulām 8–9, 16, 79–81; Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 142–4; al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān,
Daʿāʾim al-islām 9–11; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 140–1; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 299, 434.
140 chapter three
54 See, for instance, Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 11; al-Sijistānī, Tuḥfat
al-mustajībīn 154; al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba 60; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 15, 18, 25,
103–4, 121, 134–5, 143, 186; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 49, 83, 159–60; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad
23–4, 26, 29, 75, 163, 279; Marquet, Imamat 60, 92–4.
55 See, for instance, Q 2:47, 253; 4:34, 95; 16:71; 17:55.
56 See Bar-Asher, Scripture 196–9; Krinis, Idea 102–3, 115–6 (in Hebrew).
57 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt iii, 443 (chapter 373: “[. . .] Fa-l-ʿālam kulluhu fāḍil mafḍūl”);
see also ibid. ii, 23 (chapter 73, on the aḥbāb, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition xi, 369; and see
also ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition, chapter 54, iv, 263–6), 254 (chapter 158); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ
al-ḥikam 132; Chittick, Sufi path 12–4, 47–52, 336, 363.
58 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 146 (chapter 4: “Fa-kamā tatafāḍalu l-manāzil
al-rūḥāniyya kadhālika tatafāḍalu l-manāzil al-jismāniyya wa-illā fa-hal al-durr [read:
al-madar] mithlu l-ḥajar illā ʿinda ṣāḥīb al-ḥāl wa-ammā l-mukammal/l-mukmal ṣāḥib
al-maqām fa-innahu yumayyizu baynahumā kamā mayyaza baynahumā l-ḥaqq [. . .] fa-l-
ḥakīm al-wāṣil man aʿṭā kull dhī ḥaqq ḥaqqahu [. . .]”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 120,
where “( ا �ل���م�د رa clod of clay”) appears instead of “( ا �ل�د رpearls”)). See also Ibn al-ʿArabī,
Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 219 (“Fa-tamayyazat al-aʿyān bi-l-marātib fa-aʿṭā kull dhī ḥaqq ḥaqqahu kull
ʿārif ”; on aʿyān and marātib see above nn. 48–9). On ḥakīm (“wise one”), ḥukamāʾ (“wise
ones”) and ḥikma (“wisdom”) in the writings of Ibn al-ʿArabī, see Rosenthal, Ibn ʿArabī 13–6
and the discussion below.
the friends of god 141
62 See al-Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ i, 457–8 (Kitāb al-ṣawm / bāb man aqsama ʿalā akhīhi li-yufṭira
fī l-taṭawwuʿ, ḥadīth 1968), iv, 102 (Kitāb al-adab / bāb ṣunʿ al-ṭaʿām wa-l-takalluf lil-ḍayf,
ḥadīth 6139); Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, al-Musnad ii, 203–4 (Musnad al-zubayr b. al-ʿAwwām,
ḥadīth 1434), xiii, 456–7 (Ḥadīth ʿamr b. khārija, ḥadīths 17594, 17596–17597); al-Ṭabarī,
Jāmiʿ al-bayān vi, 241 (on Q 9:75–77); al-Ghazālī, Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn i, 51 (a tradition attrib-
uted to Jesus).
63 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 141 (“[. . .] Wa-yaḍaʿa kull shayʾ minhā fī mawḍiʿihi
wa-yuwaffiyahu qisṭahu min ḥifẓ al-niẓām wa-bulūgh al-tamām”), 199–200 (“Fa-ammā
l-ḥukamāʾ al-fīthāghūriyyūna fa-aʿṭaw kull dhī ḥaqq ḥaqqahu idh qālū inna l-mawjūdāt
bi-ḥasab ṭabīʿat al-ʿadad [. . .] wa-hādhā madhhab ikhwāninā ayyadahum allāh wa-bi-ḥasab
raʾyihim fī waḍʿ al-ashyāʾ mawāḍiʿahā wa-tartībihim ḥaqq marātibihā ʿalā l-majrā l-ṭabīʿī
wa-l-niẓām al-ilāhī”). See also ibid. iv, 204, 237, 462; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 115–7, 136,
138, 140–1, 143–4, 471–2, 529, ii, 333. Note that according to the Ikhwān, “placing everything
in its proper place” also means to keep Divine truths secret, since by disclosing Divine
secrets to the uninitiated, one “places them in their improper places” (see Ebstein, Secrecy
322–6). This esoteric aspect is based on a tradition which is attributed to Jesus; see the
reference to al-Ghazālī above in n. 62.
the friends of god 143
The Divine Origin of the Friends of God and their Supreme Source
In the Shiʿi tradition and in Sunni mysticism, the ability of the awliyāʾ to
function as mediators between God and man is due to their unique rela-
tionship with the Divine world. This relationship is not restricted to the
framework of human history, but is rather conceived of as having existed
even before creation. Consequently, the friends of God are distinct from
the ordinary human beings in their very essence, deriving as they do from
the Divine world itself.
This notion is found in various early ḥadīths where it is expressed in a
rather mythical language. These ḥadīths form the basis for both the Shiʿi
and Sunni-mystical discussions concerning the Divine roots of the awliyāʾ,
though the mythical treatment of this theme is particularly evident in Shiʿi
sources. In the Ismāʿīlī tradition, the relationship between the awliyāʾ and
the upper, Divine realm was interpreted in a unique way, in accordance
with Neoplatonic philosophy. A very similar interpretation, likewise
inspired by Neoplatonism, is found in the writings of Ibn al-ʿArabī.
is also the spiritual source of the prophets and friends of God. Accord-
ingly, the relationship between God and Muḥammad prior to creation
is described by al-Tustarī in Sufi terminology: mukāshafa (“mystical
unveiling”), mushāhada (“mystical vision”), maḥabba (“love”) and so
forth. Another concept in the teachings attributed to al-Tustarī which is
closely linked to that of nūr muḥammad is qalb muḥammad (“the heart
of Muḥammad”). “The heart of Muḥammad”, containing all the Divine
truths which were revealed to Muḥammad before creation, is the arche-
type and source of prophecy and friendship with God.69 The Divine roots
of the prophets and the friends of God, and the events that took place
before creation, occupy an important place in the teachings attributed
to al-Tustarī. Their mythic formulation seems to set al-Tustarī apart from
other 9th century Sufi masters.70 Although al-Tustarī was apparently
inspired by the early ḥadīths treating of nūr muḥammad, his preoccupa-
tion with this theme can be understood as a Sunni-mystical response to
the Shiʿi speculations on the Divine roots of the imāms.
References to the primordial being of Muḥammad are also found in
the teachings of both al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī and the well-known al-Ḥallāj
(executed in 309/922).71 However, there is no doubt that in the history
of Sunni mysticism, the motif of nūr muḥammad was developed in the
most elaborate and profound way by Ibn al-ʿArabī. In the writings of
the latter, the mythic theme of nūr muḥammad is reflected in the concept
of al-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya, “the true essence of Muḥammad”. Accord-
ing to Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya was, in effect, the first being
to emerge out of the Divine light; from al-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya and by
means of it, all other beings were created. Al-Ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya like-
wise functions as the spiritual source of all the prophets and the friends of
God throughout history, and is thus the root of “the perfect man” (al-insān
al-kāmil).72 These notions are clearly derived from the aforementioned
69 See Böwering, Mystical vision 145–65, 231–2, 238–9; Rubin, Pre-Existence 113–4.
70 See the statements of ʿUmar b. Wāṣil, al-Tustarī’s disciple, quoted in Böwering, Mystical
vision 148–9. In addition, compare the speculations on nūr muḥammad which are attrib
uted to al-Tustarī to al-Ghazālī’s conservative interpretation of the ḥadīth “I [Muḥammad]
was already a prophet when Adam was still between water and clay [i.e., when the cre
ation of Adam had not yet been completed]” (“Kuntu nabiyyan wa-ādam bayna l-māʾ wa-l-
ṭīn”), in Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 61 n. 3; see also Rubin, Nūr Muḥammadī.
71 See Radtke, Concept of Wilāya 491; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 66; Schimmel, And
Muhammad is His messenger 125–6; Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 145–6.
72 See Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 60–73. Regarding the influence of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
concept of al-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya on subsequent generations of Muslim mystics, see
Schimmel, And Muhammad is His messenger 127, 129, 132–4, 137–8.
146 chapter three
ḥadīths dealing with nūr muḥammad,73 and perhaps also from the teach-
ings attributed to al-Tustarī. However, other elements in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
treatment of the awliyāʾ’s Divine roots—namely, the connection he draws
between the awliyāʾ and God’s names, and the Neoplatonic context of his
speculations—point to additional sources of inspiration, that is, the Shiʿi-
Ismāʿīlī tradition.74
73 See, for example, the mythic motif of the cosmogonic pearl in Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt
i, 37 (“Khuṭbat al-kitāb”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 48–9).
74 On the affinity between the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī tradition and Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought as
regards al-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya, see al-Shaybī, al-Ṣila i, 405–6, 478–85; Nasr, Shiʿism
111 and n. 17.
75 See the references below in n. 78.
76 See, for example, Ibn Bābawayhi, al-Tawḥīd 152 (“Bi-ʿibādatinā ʿubida llāh wa-lawlā
naḥnu mā ʿubida llāh”); see also Amir-Moezzi, Remarques 97 and n. 35.
the friends of god 147
al-Ḥusayn; and ‘He is the creator ( fāṭir) of the heavens and the earth’ [see,
for example, Q 6:14]—from here he derived the name of Fāṭima. Having
created them, He placed them on the right side of the throne.
According to this tradition, the members of the Prophet’s family (ahl al-
bayt) originate in the Divine world itself: they are created from the very
light of God’s face; they are directly linked to God’s names, thus form-
ing a veil between the Divine essence and creation; and they are situ-
ated on the right side of God’s throne. The tradition quoted here goes on
to explain that the names which God had revealed to Adam, and which
granted him superiority over the angels (see Q 2:30–34), are none other
than God’s names, in other words, the names of the imāms. This is the
reason why Iblīs, who refused to bow down before Adam, is perceived as
the prototype for the Shiʿa’s enemies throughout history: these enemies
deny the Divine origin of the imāms and their supreme status.77 Another
tradition in Kitāb al-kashf states that every messenger and imām, in every
generation, is
the name of Allāh, by means of which Allāh is invoked in that particular
generation. Allāh, powerful and mighty is He, said: ‘Allāh has the most
beautiful names, so invoke Him by means of them [Q 7:180]’, that is to say,
Allāh has the imāms, who guide [men] towards the right path, and the
messengers whom He has chosen. Therefore, seek His proximity by obey-
ing them [. . .] For they are His gates and the means by which His created
beings [reach] Him.
The nuṭaqāʾ and the imāms are thus a veil which, on the one hand, stands
between the Divine essence and creation, and, on the other, functions as a
gate and a means of access to God. The friends of God are the mediators
par excellence between God and man—not only in terms of their reli-
gious mission in the framework of human history, but also in terms of
their ontological nature, a human-Divine nature which bridges the gap
between the Creator and the created.78
77 Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 35 (“Wa-ʿan abī ʿbdillāh ʿalayhi l-salām annahu
qāla inna llāh khalaqa ḥujuban min nūr wajhihi wa-sammā kull wāḥid minhum isman min
asmāʾihi fa-huwa l-ḥamd musammā bihi nabiyyuhu ʿalayhi l-salām wa-huwa l-ʿalī wa-amīr
al-muʾminīna ʿalī wa-lahu l-asmāʾ al-ḥusnā shtaqqa minhā sma al-ḥasan wa-l-ḥusayn
wa-huwa fāṭir al-samawāt wa-l-arḍ ishtaqqa minhā sma fāṭima fa-lammā khalaqahum
aqāmahum ʿan yamīn al-ʿarsh”), 36–37.
78 Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 108 (“[. . .] Wa-taqaddasat asmāʾuhu [. . .] bayān
qawlihi fī l-asmāʾ annahum al-hudāt ilayhi wa-l-dalāla ʿalayhi min al-nuṭaqāʾ wa-l-aʾimma
ʿalayhim al-salām”), 109 (“Fa-kull qāʾim fī ʿaṣrihi huwa smu llāh al-ladhī yudʿā bihi fī dhālika
l-ʿaṣr kamā qāla llāh ʿazza wa-jalla wa-li-llāh al-asmāʾ al-ḥusnā fa-dʿūhu bihā yaʿnī li-llāh
148 chapter three
was the aim of Allāh [in creating] the world. He is the true vicegerent, he
is the locus in which the Divine names are manifested and he comprises
within himself the true essences of the whole world [. . .]
Within this noble compendium [of the macrocosm], that is, within the
perfect man, [God] has brought into existence all the Divine names as well
as the true essences of that which is found outside of him in the big world
[. . .]81
These notions of Ibn al-ʿArabī are quite unique and radical in compari-
son with other mystical-Sufi teachings that were developed prior to Ibn
al-ʿArabī’s time. Although in Sufi thought the mystic is indeed required
to emulate the attributes of God (al-takhalluq bi-akhlāq allāh), neverthe-
less, this is mostly an ethical-spiritual obligation, not an ontological state-
ment concerning the essential nature of God’s friends; the latter are not
perceived as an indispensable means for the Divine self-manifestation in
creation.82
In contradistinction to the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī perception, Ibn al-ʿArabī views
the perfect man in general—regardless of his physical genealogy—as
an ontological embodiment of God’s names. Ibn al-ʿArabī also sees in
the created universe as a whole a locus of manifestation for the Divine
names.83 Ibn al-ʿArabī’s outlook is thus both universal (all of creation) and
humanistic (the perfect man in general).84 The Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī worldview,
on the other hand, is less universal and more sectarian: the imāms alone
correspond to God’s names, and, consequently, only their followers, the
Shiʿi believers, enjoy a special relationship with the Divine world.
However, a universal-humanistic approach, similar to that of Ibn
al-ʿArabī, can be detected in the Epistles of Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ. To be sure, the
Ikhwān seem to have espoused the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī idea of a correspondence
between the Divine names and the friends of God. This idea is interpreted
81 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 176 (chapter 7, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 252:
“[. . .] ʿAlimnā qaṭʿan anna l-insān huwa l-ʿayn al-maqṣūda li-llāh min al-ʿālam wa-annahu
l-khalīfa ḥaqqan wa-annahu maḥall ẓuhūr al-asmāʾ al-ilāhiyya wa-huwa l-jāmiʿ li-ḥaqāʾiq
al-ʿālam kullihi [. . .]”); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 199 (“Fa-awjada fī hādhā l-mukhtaṣar
al-sharīf al-ladhī huwa l-insān al-kāmil jamīʿ al-asmāʾ al-ilāhiyya wa-ḥaqāʾiq mā kharaja
ʿanhu fī l-ʿālam al-kabīr al-munfaṣil [. . .]”). See also Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 41 (“[. . .]
Fa-anta ṣifātī fīhim wa-asmāʾī [. . .]”); Chittick, Sufi path 27–30, 366–72, 375–6; Chittick,
Imaginal worlds 20–3, 28–9, 36–7, 146–9. On the perfect man as a veil, see al-Futūḥāt ii, 348
(chapter 178); Chittick, Sufi path 329.
82 Compare, for instance, Ibn al-ʿArabī’s view in this context with that of al-Ghazālī in
Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 31–9, 170–1.
83 See Chittick, Sufi path 8–11, 16, 33–58, 94–6; Chittick, Imaginal worlds 32–3; Elmore,
Four texts.
84 On the terms ‘universal’ and ‘humanistic’ see below chapter 4, especially pp. 179–88.
150 chapter three
rather than on the figures of the prophets and their heirs. In a discussion
of theirs concerning the Divine attributes (ṣifāt), the Ikhwān emphasize
the close links between all created beings and the attributes of God: “these
attributes”, the Ikhwān explain,
are found among His existents. They are inscribed on His earth and in His
heavens; they are His miraculous signs that are written ‘in the horizons and
in the souls’ [see Q 41:53].87
Since the universal intellect was created by God Himself, through His
command and word (amr Allāh, kalima), it follows that the intellect and
all the existents emanating from it have their share in the Divine attri-
butes: they all have life (ḥayāt), power or ability (qudra), knowledge (ʿilm)
and so forth. Naturally, the correspondence between the attributes of the
created beings and those of God is relative and limited. Accordingly, the
Ikhwān stress that God has attributes that are unique to Him, such as His
eternal existence without beginning (qadīm azalī) or His act of creation
ex nihilo (mubdiʿ). In addition, the attributes of the created beings are
partial ( juzʾiyya) and include opposing qualities—for instance, life and
death, knowledge and ignorance, power and inability. God, in contradis-
tinction, is beyond these opposites. Finally, the created beings differ from
one another in respect of their attributes—the Prophet’s knowledge,
to give one example, is obviously not the same as that of the common
man—whereas God’s attributes are unqualified and absolute. Neverthe-
less, the Ikhwān clearly maintain that all created beings share, to some
extent, the Divine attributes.88
87 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 210 (“[. . .] Wa-lahu l-asmāʾ al-ḥusnā [. . .] fa-hādhihi
l-ṣifāt al-muḥayyira li-dhawī l-albāb wa-l-ʿuqūl fī maʿrifat al-bārī minhā subḥānahu bi-
annahu lā yashrakuhu fīhā aḥad siwāhu wa-fiʿlihi l-ladhī faʿalahu bi-dhātihi wa-awjadahu
bi-kalimātihi mawjūda fī mawjūdātihi masṭūra fī arḍihi wa-samawātihi wa-hiya āyātuhu
l-maktūba fī l-āfāq wa-l-anfus [. . .]”). On the concept of “the miraculous signs”, see below
pp. 212–29.
88 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 206–10.
152 chapter three
89 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 140 (chapter 3, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition
ii, 97: “Wa-kadhālika l-mafʿūl al-ibdāʿī l-ladhī huwa l-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya ʿindanā wa-l-
ʿaql al-awwal ʿinda ghayrinā wa-huwa l-qalam al-aʿlā l-ladhī abdaʿahu llāh taʿālā min ghayr
shayʾ [. . .]”), 169 (chapter 6, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 227: “[. . .] Ḥaqīqat muḥammad
ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi wa-sallama l-musammāt bi-l-ʿaql [. . .]”), iii, 430 (chapter 371, faṣl 9: “[. . .]
Al-qalam al-ilāhī [. . .] wa-huwa l-ʿaql al-awwal [. . .] wa-huwa l-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya
wa-l-ḥaqq al-makhlūq bihi wa-l-ʿadl ʿinda ahl al-laṭāʾif wa-l-ishārāt wa-huwa l-rūḥ al-qudusī
l-kull ʿinda ahl al-kushūf wa-l-talwīḥāt”); see also Affifi, Mystical philosophy 71, 74, 90, 186;
Lory, La Science 117, 133. On the universal intellect (or al-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya) as al-rūḥ
al-qudusī l-kull or al-rūh al-kullī (“the universal holy spirit” or “the universal spirit”), see
also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 389 (chapter 198: “Kadhālika naqūlu fī l-ʿaql al-awwal ʿaqlan
li-maʿnan yukhālifu l-maʿnā l-ladhī li-ajlihi nusammīhi qalaman yukhālifu l-maʿnā l-ladhī li-
ajlihi nusammīhi rūḥan yukhālifu l-maʿnā l-ladhī li-ajlihi nusammīhi qalban”); Ibn al-ʿArabī,
ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 40; Affifi, Mystical philosophy 75 and n. 3; Chittick, Self-disclosure 271–3. For
the identification of the universal intellect with rūḥ or rūḥ al-qudus in Ismāʿīlī literature,
see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 238; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 9, 139; Walker, Early philo-
sophical Shiism 117; Makārim, ‘Al-amr al-ilāhī’, 9. Note that the term al-ʿaql al-awwal (“the
first intellect”), which Ibn al-ʿArabī often employs in order to signify the universal intellect,
likewise appears in the writings of the Ikhwān with reference to the universal intellect; see
al-Jāmiʿa i, 273, ii, 5, 139.
90 See the discussions and references in Goldziher, Neuplatonische und gnostische
Elemente 318–24; Rubin, Pre-Existence 115–6 and n. 23; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 63
n. 13, 68 n. 28; Wensinck, Muslim creed, index, s.v. “Pen”.
91 See above p. 50 n. 64.
the friends of god 153
96 On the relationship between the universal intellect and nāṭiq, and for various exam
ples of the use of the root m.d.d. and its derivatives in Ismāʿīlī literature, see al-Sijistānī,
al-Yanābīʿ 8–15, 57, 72, 75, 91, 94; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 77, 79, 152, 207, 209, 214; al-Kirmānī,
al-Riyāḍ 60, 70–1, 82–3, 89–90, 95, 162; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 64–8, 79, 94, 100, 102, 112,
123–4, 186, 188–9, 362, 378; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 5, 55, 57–8, 69, 157–8, 176, 181, 228, 230,
269, 279, 290; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 146–7, 312, iii, 185–6, 189–90, 296–7, iv, 136, 200–1,
209, 223–5, 330, 396; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 528–37, 540–2, 625, 635–6, 658, ii, 5, 140,
148; Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 4, 55, 61, 165; al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba 28, 34,
49–50, 52–6, 60, 84; Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 10, 14–6; Halm, Kosmologie 215;
al-Daylamī, Qawāʿid ʿaqāʾid āl Muḥammad 68; Lewis, An Ismaili interpretation 699, 702;
see also Walker, Early philosophical Shiism 117 and n. 31; Marquet, La philosophie des Iḫwân
aṣ-Ṣafâ: l’Imâm et la société 134–7; Pines, Shīʿite terms 176 n. 84; Pines, La Longue récen-
sion 12 n. 5; De Smet, Le Verbe-impératif 404 n. 51, 405 n. 53; De Smet, Les Épîtres 59–60.
97 For the correspondence between “the human form” and the universal intellect, see
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 144–5. For the correspondence between “the rational/speaking
soul” and the universal intellect, and for the expressions nafs juzʾiyya and ʿaql juzʾī, see
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 12–3. Elsewhere, man’s individual intellect is said to corre
spond to the universal intellect, whereas his soul is said to correspond to the universal
soul; see ibid. 33–4. On the nāṭiq and his relationship with the universal intellect, see ibid.
248–9.
the friends of god 155
98 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 139 (the beginning of chapter 3, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 91), 204–5 (chapter 14), ii, 661–2 (chapter 295: “[. . .] Al-quṭb al-ladhī
huwa l-imām [. . .] yakūnu māddatuhu min al-ʿaql al-awwal”); Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Mabādiʾ 52
(“[. . .] Ka-ḥaqīqat muḥammad ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi wa-sallama l-qāʾima bi-l-amr min warāʾ
al-ghayb al-ladhī minhā māddat al-khulafāʾ wa-l-aʾimma wa-l-aqṭāb wa-l-qāʾimīna bi-amr
allāh taʿālā”). On the universal intellect as the source of imdād, see also al-Futūḥāt ii, 415
(chapter 198, faṣl 11); cf. Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 122. See also al-Futūḥāt ii, 279 (towards
the end of chapter 167), where it is said that the universal intellect is the source of “the
knowledge pertaining to the friendship with God” (ʿilm al-walāya). On the similarities
between Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought and the Ismāʿīlī tradition in the context dealt with here,
see also Affifi, Mystical philosophy 74–5, 88–90, 188; de Jong, Al-Ḳuṭb 544; Corbin, En Islam
iranien i, 253.
99 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 176 (chapter 7, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 251-2: “[. . .]
Fa-huwa naẓīr al-ʿaql al-awwal wa-bihi rtabaṭa [. . .] wa-ntahā l-khalq ilā l-jins al-insānī
fa-kamulat al-dāʾira wa-ttaṣala l-insān bi-l-ʿaql kamā yattaṣilu ākhir al-dāʾira bi-awwalihā
fa-kānat dāʾira [. . .]”; “Wa-aqāma subḥānahu hādhihi l-ṣūra l-insāniyya bi-l-ḥaraka
l-mustaqīma ṣūrat al-ʿamad al-ladhī lil-khayma fa-jaʿalahu li-qubbat hādhihi l-samawāt fa-
huwa subḥānahu yumsikuhā an tazūla bi-sababihi fa-ʿabbarnā ʿanhu bi-l-ʿamad [. . .]”); see
also ibid. 170 (chapter 6, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 231: “Fa-l-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya
[. . .] naẓīruhā min al-insān al-laṭīfa wa-l-rūḥ al-qudusī”); and Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt
211. For a very similar Ikhwānian use of the term naẓīr (“corresponds” in the translation
above), see al-Jāmiʿa ii, 33–4. Note that in several Neoplatonic Ismāʿīlī sources, the various
worlds are likewise described as circles; see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 198–249; Kraus, Jābir
ibn Ḥayyān ii, 135–85; al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 59 (“[. . .] Wa-katabnā fī hādhihi l-dāʾira ʿinda
nuqṭat al-markaz al-ʿaql fī muqābalat al-insān [. . .]”).
156 chapter three
According to Ibn al-ʿArabī, the Divine flow, which he signifies by the use
of the terms imdād-istimdād, also exists among other ranks of the awliyāʾ
hierarchy, and influences the spiritual and physical wellbeing of human
beings in general.100 The link between imdād and taʾyīd likewise appears
in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings.101
Finally, it is significant that similar conceptions are also reflected in the
works of Ibn Masarra. The latter maintains that the rational/speaking soul
draws (tastamiddu, from istimdād) its spiritual-intellectual power from
the light of the intellect, i.e., from the individual human intellect and, by
implication, from the universal intellect.102
100 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 112; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 105 (chap
ter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 277–81), 151–2 (chapter 5, the “waṣl” at the begin
ning of the chapter, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 144–5), 204–5 (chapter 14), 208 (chapter
15, = ii, 377), ii, 15 (chapter 73, “rijāl al-hayba wa-l-jalāl”, = xi, 316), 16 (“rijāl al-imdād al-
ilāhī wa-l-kawnī”, = xi, 322), 24, 415 (chapter 198, faṣl 11), 465 (chapter 198, faṣl 50); Ibn
al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 47, 65–6, 163; Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 42–3, 48, 51, 57–9;
Ibn al-ʿArabī, Kitāb al-mīm 14–5.
101 See above p. 71 n. 138.
102 See Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 142-3 (“[. . .] Fa-hādhihi l-nafs al-nāṭiqa l-latī fī
l-insān tastamiddu min nūr al-ʿaql [. . .]”).
Chapter four
The notion of human perfection and the concept of “the perfect man”
(al-insān al-kāmil) play a central role in both the Ismāʿīlī tradition and
in the thought of Ibn al-ʿArabī. This theme, which is closely linked to the
broader subject of walāya and awliyāʾ, has its roots in the pre-Islamic
heritage, including the Zoroastrian, Manichean and Gnostic traditions.1
In Islam, the term al-insān al-kāmil is most frequently associated with
the teachings of Ibn al-ʿArabī. However, this and similar terms appear
already in the Epistles of Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ.2 Thus, contrary to a prevalent
opinion among modern scholars,3 it seems that Ibn al-ʿArabī was not the
first mystic to coin the term al-insān al-kāmil, nor was he the first one
to develop the various ideas pertaining to it. Rather, it appears that the
Ismāʿīlī authors, and above all Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, should be credited with
systematically developing the concept of the perfect man in its mystical-
philosophical context.4
Discussions dedicated to the subject of human perfection are quite
common in Ismāʿīlī literature. In al-Kirmānī’s philosophical oeuvre, for
instance, human perfection (tamām, kamāl) occupies a central place.
According to al-Kirmānī, perfection—more precisely, “the second perfec-
tion” (al-kamāl al-thānī), to be distinguished from “the first perfection”
5 See al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 15-7, 33–4, 61–2, 74, 76–84, 99–100, 112–3, 134, 157–8, 188,
300–60; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 58–9, 79–80, 89–90, 128; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 55, 176,
228, 275–6, 279–80; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 5–6, 30; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 101–3,
518, 559–62, ii, 63–4; see also Walker, Ḥamīd al-Dīn al-Kirmānī 116. On al-Ḥāmidī see above
p. 70.
6 See De Smet, Perfectio prima; Alon, Al-Fārābī’s philosophical lexicon i, 17, 36, 82, 275,
419–21; Pines, Limitations; see also Adamson, Arabic Plotinus 49–54, 95–7, 119–24; Wis
novsky, Avicenna 96–105; Badawī (ed.), Theology of Aristotle (the shorter version) 54–5,
99–100, 110–1, 134–5, 139–40, 147; al-Khayr al-maḥḍ 6–8, 20, 23, 25; al-Kindī, Fī l-nafs
274–5.
the perfect man 159
15 See Badawī (ed.), Theology of Aristotle (the shorter version) 69 (“Wa-aqūlu inna
l-insān al-ḥissī innamā huwa ṣanam al-insān al-ʿaqlī wa-l-insān al-ʿaqlī rūḥānī wa-jamīʿ
aʿḍāʾihi rūḥāniyya [. . .]”), 139 (“[. . .] Wa-l-insān fī l-ʿālam al-aʿlā tāmm kāmil [. . .]”), 144
(“[. . .] Fa-kadhālika hādhā l-insān al-ḥissī huwa ṣanam li-dhālika l-insān al-awwal al-ḥaqq
[. . .]”), 145–6 (“[. . .] Wa-l-insān al-ʿaqlī yufīḍu bi-nūrihi ʿalā l-insān al-thānī wa-huwa l-insān
al-ladhī fī l-ʿālam al-aʿlā l-nafsānī wa-l-insān al-thānī yushriqu nūruhu ʿalā l-insān al-thālith
wa-huwa l-ladhī fī l-ʿālam al-jismānī l-asfal fa-in kāna hādhā hākadhā ʿalā mā waṣafnā
qulnā inna fī l-insān al-jismānī l-insān al-nafsānī wa-l-insān al-ʿaqlī wa-lastu aʿnī annahu
huwa humā lākinnī aʿnī bihi annahu muttaṣil bihimā li-annahu ṣanam lahumā wa-dhālika
annahu yafʿalu baʿḍ afāʿīl al-insān al-ʿaqlī wa-baʿḍ afāʿīl al-insān al-nafsī [. . .]”); cf. Plotinus,
Enneads vi, 314–7 (= Ennead vi, 4, 14), vii, 93–107 (= vi, 7, 3–6); and Schaeder, Islamische
Lehre 221–6. Note that Philo of Alexandria too discusses the corporeal-terrestrial man vis-
à-vis his spiritual-celestial counterpart or form; see Winston, Logos 25.
16 On this scheme see above pp. 36–51.
17 See above pp. 49–50.
18 See above pp. 53–7.
19 See especially Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 608–34; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 386, 390
(chapter 198), iii, 430 (chapter 371, faṣl 9).
162 chapter four
In the Ismāʿīlī tradition and in the thought of Ibn al-ʿArabī, human per-
fection is not merely an intellectual, spiritual and moral perfection, as
in various medieval Arabic philosophical works, nor is it simply an ethi-
cal, psychological and mystical perfection, as in certain Sufi teachings.
Rather, human perfection is an ontological state, total and comprehensive
in its nature, deriving as it does from the Divine origins of the perfect man
as well as from his central position in the universe. The perfect man—that
is, the nāṭiq, his legatee and the imāms in the Ismāʿīlī tradition, or the
ideal man in general, regardless of his physical genealogy, in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
thought—is conceived of as an entity which comprises or unites within
itself all the different worlds: the Divine world in its manifest-creative
aspect, the upper-spiritual worlds and the lower-corporeal ones. The
Divine aspect of the perfect man is apparent in the Divine names which
he manifests21 and in the image of God in which he was created;22 the
created aspect of the perfect man is evident in his role as a microcosm.
Consequently, the perfect man functions as a link which bridges the gap
between Divinity and creation, and is thus the mediator par excellence
between God and man.23
20 Further evidence of the Neoplatonic background of the concept of the perfect man
may be found in the work Kitāb al-amad ʿalā l-abad (“On the Afterlife”, according to Row
son’s translation), composed by the Neoplatonic philosopher Abū l-Ḥasan Muḥammad
b. Yūsuf al-ʿĀmirī (died in 381/992); see Rowson, A Muslim philosopher 108 (“Bal bi-hādhā
yūjadu ʿishq al-insān al-kāmil lil-ḥusn al-bāṭin ashadd min ʿishq al-insān al-nāqiṣ lil-ḥusn
al-ẓāhir [. . .]”).
21 See above pp. 146–51.
22 See below pp. 165–8.
23 See pp. 172–5.
the perfect man 163
there is the power of every existent in the world. He has all the levels ( jamīʿ
al-marātib) and consequently is the only one who was given the form
[i.e., the only one who was created according to God’s form]. He unites
( fa-jamaʿa) the Divine true essences, which are the [Divine] names, with
the true essences of the world, for he is the last existent [. . .]
Man is “the most perfect existent [. . .] everything other than man is cre-
ated except for man, who is both a created being and a God”.24 The use of
the derivatives of the root j.m.ʿ. in this context appears in other passages
as well in the works of Ibn al-ʿArabī. The entity of the perfect man
was the aim of Allāh [in creating] the world. He is the true vicegerent
(khalīfa), he is the locus in which the Divine names are manifested and he
comprises within himself ( jāmiʿ) the true essences of the whole world [. . .]
Within this noble compendium [of the macrocosm, al-mukhtaṣar al-
sharīf ], that is, within the perfect man, [God] has brought into existence all
( jamīʿ) the Divine names as well as the true essences of that which is found
outside of him in the big world [. . .]25
In his renowned work Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, Ibn al-ʿArabī explains that
all the names in the Divine forms were manifested within this human entity.
The latter thus obtained the encompassing and comprehensive degree (rut-
bat al-iḥāṭa wa-l-jamʿ) by this existence. [Through man], Allāh’s argument
(ḥujja) against the angels was established.26
According to Ibn al-ʿArabī, the great virtue of Adam—the prototype of
the perfect man in general—was his jamʿiyya, i.e., his God-given ability to
comprise or unite within himself ( jāmiʿ, majmūʿ) all the Divine names and
24 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 390 (chapter 198: (“Fa-fī l-insān quwwat kull mawjūd fī
l-ʿālam fa-lahu jamīʿ al-marātib wa-li-hādhā khtuṣṣa waḥdahu bi-l-ṣūra fa-jamaʿa bayna
l-ḥaqāʾiq al-ilāhiyya wa-hiya l-asmāʾ wa-bayna ḥaqāʾiq al-ʿālam fa-innahu ākhir mawjūd
[. . .]”; “Fa-kāna l-insān akmal al-mawjūdāt [. . .] fa-kull mā siwā l-insān khalq illā l-insān
fa-innahu khalq wa-ḥaqq [. . .]”).
25 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 176 (chapter 7, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 252 : “[. . .]
ʿAlimnā qaṭʿan anna l-insān huwa l-ʿayn al-maqṣūda li-llāh min al-ʿālam wa-annahu
l-khalīfa ḥaqqan wa-annahu maḥall ẓuhūr al-asmāʾ al-ilāhiyya wa-huwa l-jāmiʿ li-ḥaqāʾiq
al-ʿālam kullihi”); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 199 (“Fa-awjada fī hādhā l-mukhtaṣar
al-sharīf al-ladhī huwa l-insān al-kāmil jamīʿ al-asmāʾ al-ilāhiyya wa-ḥaqāʾiq mā kharaja
ʿanhu fī l-ʿālam al-kabīr al-munfaṣil [. . .]”); see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, Inshāʾ al-dawāʾir 21–2;
Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 5, 39, 45; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 70–1; Takeshita, Ibn
ʿArabī’s theory 53–73. Note also the importance which Ibn al-ʿArabī attaches to the ḥadīth
which states that Muḥammad was given “the comprehensive words” ( jawāmiʿ al-kalim);
see, for example, Chittick, Sufi path 104 and n. 17, 239.
26 Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 50 (“[. . .] Fa-ẓahara jamīʿ mā fī l-ṣuwar al-ilāhiyya min
al-asmāʾ fī hādhihi l-nashʾa l-insāniyya fa-ḥāzat rutbat al-iḥāṭa wa-l-jamʿ bi-hādhā l-wujūd
wa-bihi qāmat al-ḥujja li-llāh taʿālā ʿalā l-malāʾika”). For a similar use of the root j.m.ʿ, see
also ibid. 48. On the term ḥujja see above p. 66 n. 118.
164 chapter four
27 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 50, 54–6; see also Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory
50–3. For the term majmūʿ in relation to the perfect man, see, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Futūḥāt iii, 289 (chapter 361).
28 See above p. 147.
29 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 473, 475, iii, 188 (“Wa-qad ijtamaʿa fī tarkīb al-insān jamīʿ
maʿānī l-mawjūdāt min al-basāʾiṭ wa-l-murakkabāt al-latī taqaddama dhikruhā li-anna
l-insān murakkab min jasad ghalīẓ jismānī wa-min nafs basīִṭa rūḥāniyya [. . .]”), iv, 12 (“[. . .]
Li-anna ṣūrat al-insān [. . .] wa-hiya l-majmūʿ fīhā ṣuwar al-ʿālamīna jamīʿan [. . .]”); Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 240, 475–6, 482, 575 (“[. . .] Wa-anna fīhi maʿānī l-mawjūdāt kullihā fa-
huwa l-kull al-muḥīṭ bi-l-jamīʿ [. . .]”; cf. Tāmir’s edition v, 144, where he reads ��ل �كا �ل ك
� instead
�)ا �ل ك, 579. For the use of the root j.m.ʿ. in similar contexts, see also al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 211–6;
of ��ل
al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba 53; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 298.
the perfect man 165
the nāṭiq as comprising within himself ( jāmiʿ) “the prophetic virtues and
the lights of the kingdom”, that is, the Divine lights flowing from the world
of the ten intellects. In a similar vein, the nāṭiq is said to comprise within
himself all the forms that emanate from this supreme world.30 Finally,
al-Kirmānī states that the human soul, having attained its final perfec-
tion, “comprises within itself all the levels (marātib), all the multiplicity
(kathra), all the forms; it becomes one form for all the [different] forms”.31
Thus, by employing the derivatives of the Arabic root j.m.ʿ., both the
Ismāʿilī authors and Ibn al-ʿArabī portray the perfect man as a compre-
hensive entity, in an ontological as well as in an epistemological sense:
the perfect man contains within himself all the different worlds, spiritual
and physical alike; accordingly, his intellectual-mystical apprehension is
all-encompassing.
ʿAlā Ṣūratihi
The idea according to which man, or the world at large, were created in
the image of God is an ancient theme in the history of human thought. It
appears in different formulations and in various sources: in the Bible (see
Genesis 1: 26–27), in the Dialogues of Plato, in the Enneads of Plotinus and
in many Jewish, Christian and Gnostic writings.32 In Islamic literature,
this theme is echoed in the well-known tradition which is contained in
the canonical Ḥadīth compilations: “Allāh created Adam according to His
form (khalaqa llāh ādam ʿalā ṣūratihi)”. In another version, which does
not appear in the canonical compilations, it is stated that man was cre-
ated “according to the form of the All-Merciful (ʿalā ṣūrat al-raḥmān)”.33
30 See al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 61–2 (“Wa-lammā kāna mawjūdan min anfus al-
bashar man kharaja ilā l-fiʿl mithl al-anbiyāʾ wa-l-awṣiyāʾ wa-l-aʾimma ʿalayhim al-salām
wa-tābiʿihim bi-naylihim al-kamālayni wa-stīfāʾihim al-saʿādatayni wa-maṣīrihim majmaʿan
lil-faḍāʾil ṣifran min al-radhāʾil tāmman [. . .]”), 124 (“Fa-ḥakamnā min maqām al-nāṭiq
fī hādhā l-ʿālam wa-kawnihi ʿaqlan tāmman sāʾisan li-man dūnahu jāmiʿan lil-faḍāʾil al-
nabawiyya wa-l-anwār al-malakūtiyya [. . .]”), 187 (“Wa-kawn al-nāṭiq jāmiʿan li-jamīʿ ṣuwar
al-mawjūdāt al-ʿaqliyya l-sābiqa fī l-wujūd ʿalayhi [. . .]”); see also ibid. 127–9, 145, 152, 159,
162, 167, 431.
31 Ibid. 336 (“[. . .] Fa-takūnu jāmiʿa lil-marātib kullihā wa-lil-kathra kullihā wa-lil-ṣuwar
kullihā fa-takūnu ṣūra lil-ṣuwar kullihā”); see also ibid. 64, 134–7, 298, 338, 380, 425.
32 See Plato, Timaeus 50–7, 252–3 (= 29–31, 92); Plotinus, Enneads v, 58–61 (= Ennead
v, 2, 1). For Jewish, Christian and Gnostic sources, see the discussions and references in
Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 9–15; Amir-Moezzi, Remarques 89 n. 1; Lorberbaum, Image
of God (in Hebrew); Kister, Some early Jewish and Christian exegetical problems; Winston,
Logos 25.
33 See, for example, al-Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ iv, 122 (Kitāb al-istiʾdhān / bāb badʾ al-salām,
ḥadīth 6227: “Khalaqa llāh ādam ʿalā ṣūratihi ṭūluhu sittūna dhirāʿan [. . .]”); Aḥmad b.
166 chapter four
Both in Sunni and Shiʿi sources, this ḥadīth was given different interpre-
tations, in an attempt to eliminate its blunt anthropomorphism: Adam,
according to these interpretations, was not at all created in the image of
God, neither in a physical nor in a spiritual sense.34
Contrary to this mainstream, conservative approach, Ibn al-ʿArabī, who
is quite fond of the ʿalā ṣūratihi tradition, chose to emphasize the close
relationship between man and God as reflected in this ḥadīth. According
to Ibn al-ʿArabī, the true meaning of this tradition is that Adam—the pro-
totype of the perfect man—embodied all the Divine names:
What is [the meaning of] the [Prophet’s] saying, ‘[Allāh] created Adam
according to His form’? The answer: know that any form which one pictures
[in his mind, yataṣawwaruhu] is the same as one’s own self; it is nothing
else, for it is not extrinsic to him. The form of the world must be pictured by
God according to what its entity manifests. The [perfect] man, who is Adam,
is comprised of the whole world. He is the small man, the compendium of
the big world [. . .] Allāh has arranged within him all that is found outside
of him, save for Allāh. Furthermore, to each and every part of him was con-
nected the true essence of the Divine name which caused it to appear and
from which it became manifested; all the Divine names were connected to
him, with no exception. Thus, Adam emerged according to the form of the
name Allāh, for this name contains all the Divine names [. . .]
Despite man’s small physique,
he comprises within himself all the true essences of the big world. This is the
reason why the wise men call the world ‘a big man’ [. . .] Knowledge is pic-
turing the form of the object which is known; knowledge is also one of the
essential attributes of the knower; His knowledge is His form, and according
to it Adam was created. Hence, Allāh created Adam according to His form.35
Ḥanbal, al-Musnad viii, 219–20 (Musnad Abū Hurayra / Ṣaḥīfat Hamām b. Munabbih,
ḥadīth 8156); al-Haythamī, Majmaʿ al-zawāʾid viii, 106 (“Qāla rasūl allāh ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi
wa-sallama lā taqbaḥū l-wajh fa-inna bna ādam khuliqa ʿalā ṣūrat al-raḥmān tabāraka
wa-taʿālā”); see also the references in Chittick, Sufi path 399 n. 4.
34 See Gimaret, Dieu à l’image de l’homme 123–36; Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 15–7
n. 21, 29 n. 58; Amir-Moezzi, Remarques 100 n. 45; see also Ibn Qutayba, Taʾwīl mukhtalif
al-ḥadīth 217–21.
35 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 121 (chapter 73, question 143, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edi
tion xiii, 125–7: “Mā qawluhu khalaqa ādam ʿalā ṣūratihi l-jawāb iʿlam annahu kull mā
yataṣawwaruhu l-mutaṣawwir fa-huwa ʿaynuhu lā ghayruhu fa-innahu laysa bi-khārij ʿanhu
wa-lā budda lil-ʿālam an yakūna mutaṣawwaran lil-ḥaqq ʿalā mā yuẓhiru ʿaynuhu wa-l-
insān al-ladhī huwa ādam ʿibāra ʿan majmūʿ al-ʿālam fa-innahu l-insān al-ṣaghīr wa-huwa
l-mukhtaṣar min al-ʿālam al-kabīr [. . .] fa-rattaba llāh fīhi jamīʿ mā kharaja ʿanhu mimmā
siwā llāh fa-rtabaṭat bi-kull juzʾ minhu ḥaqīqat al-ism al-ilāhī l-latī abrazathu wa-ẓahara
ʿanhā fa-rtabaṭat bihi l-asmāʾ al-ilāhiyya kulluhā lam yashudhdha ʿanhu minhā shayʾ
fa-kharaja ādam ʿalā ṣūrat al-ism allāh idh kāna hādhā l-ism yataḍammanu jamīʿ al-asmāʾ
the perfect man 167
al-ilāhiyya [. . .]”; “[. . .] Kadhālika l-insān wa-in ṣaghura jirmuhu ʿan jirm al-ʿālam fa-innahu
yajmaʿu jamīʿ ḥaqāʾiq al-ʿālam al-kabīr wa-li-hādhā yusammī l-ʿuqalāʾ al-ʿālam insānan
kabīran [. . .] wa-l-ʿilm taṣawwur al-maʿlūm wa-l-ʿilm min ṣifāt al-ʿālim al-dhātiyya fa-ʿilmuhu
ṣūratuhu wa-ʿalayhā khuliqa ādam fa-ādam khalaqahu llāh ʿalā ṣūratihi”); see also ibid. 385
(chapter 198); Chittick, Sufi path 16–7, 274–8; Chittick, Imaginal worlds 31–8; Takeshita, Ibn
ʿArabī’s theory 50–73; Affifi, Mystical philosophy 78.
36 On the motif of the Divine names, see above pp. 146–51; on the notion of parallel
worlds, see below chapter 5.
37 See Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 15–49, 171; cf. Gimaret, Dieu à l’image de l’homme
131–2.
168 chapter four
44 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 460 (“[. . .] Wa-yuqālu innahu mukhtaṣar min al-lawḥ
al-maḥfūẓ”), 462 (“[. . .] Li-anna l-bārī taʿālā khalaqa l-insān fī aḥsan taqwīm wa-ṣawwarahu
akmal ṣūra wa-jaʿala ṣūratahu mirʾāa li-nafsihi li-yatarāʾā fīhā ṣūrat al-ʿālam al-kabīr
wa-dhālika anna l-bārī jalla jalāluhu lammā arāda an yuṭliʿa l-nafs al-insāniyya ʿalā
khazāʾin ʿulūmihi wa-yushhidahā l-ʿālam bi-asrihi ʿalima anna l-ʿālam wāsiʿ kabīr wa-laysa fī
ṭāqat al-insān an yadūra fī l-ʿālam ḥattā yushāhidahu kullahu li-qiṣar ʿamrihi wa-ṭūl ʿumrān
al-ʿālam fa-raʾā min al-ḥikma an yakhluqa lahā ʿālaman ṣaghīran mukhtaṣaran min al-ʿalam
al-kabīr wa-ṣawwara fī l-ʿālam al-ṣaghīr jamīʿ mā fī l-ʿālam al-kabīr wa-maththalahu bayna
yadayhā [. . .]”); see also Schaeder, Islamische Lehre 226–7.
45 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 460, 475, iv, 12, 42, 167–8, 213, 427–8;
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 240, 480, 496–7. On the universal intellect as a book, see above
n. 41. On the motif of the book in general, see below pp. 212–29.
170 chapter four
46 See, for example, Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 121 (chapter 73, question 143, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition xiii, 126).
47 On the world as a product of Divine speech and writing, see above pp. 45–57; see
also Lory, La Science 38–9, 117–20, 127–8, 134. On the perfect man as a Divine book and a
Divine word (kalima), see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 496–7; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 360;
Marquet, Imamat 128–9; Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿUqlat al-mustawfiz 94 (“[. . .] Fa-jaʿala nuskha min
al-ʿālam kullihi fa-mā min ḥaqīqa fī l-ʿālam illā wa-hiya fī l-insān fa-huwa l-kalima l-jāmiʿa
wa-huwa l-mukhtaṣar al-sharīf [. . .]”); Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 188 (chapter 10, = ʿUthmān
Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 300: “[. . .] Lākinna l-insān huwa l-kalima l-jāmiʿa wa-nuskhat al-ʿālam
[. . .]”), 276 (chapter 34, in the poem), 280; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 50; Chodkiewicz,
Seal of the saints 70–1 and n. 39, 119–20.
48 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿUqlat al-mustawfiz 45 (“Bāb al-kamāl al-insānī ammā baʿd fa-inna
llāh taʿālā ʿalima nafsahu fa-ʿalima l-ʿālam fa-li-dhālika kharaja ʿalā l-ṣūra wa-khalaqa
llāh al-insān mukhtaṣaran sharīfan jamaʿa fīhi maʿānī l-ʿālam al-kabīr wa-jaʿalahu nuskha
jāmiʿa limā fī l-ʿālam al-kabīr wa-limā fī l-ḥaḍra l-ilāhiyya min al-asmāʾ wa-qāla fīhi rasūl
allāh ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi wa-sallama inna llāh khalaqa ādam ʿalā ṣūratihi fa-li-dhālika qulnā
kharaja l-ʿālam ʿalā l-ṣūra”); see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 121 (chapter 73, question
143, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition xiii, 125–7), 385 (the beginning of chapter 198); Ibn al-ʿArabī,
Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 199; Ibn al-ʿArabī, Inshāʾ al-dawāʾir 21–2. On the perfect man as a micro-
cosm, see also Chittick, Imaginal worlds 31-8; Affifi, Mystical philosophy 82.
49 See above p. 152.
the perfect man 171
50 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 38 (“Wa-kāna muḥammad ṣallā llāh ʿalayhi wa-
sallama nuskha min al-ḥaqq bi-l-iʿlām wa-kāna ādam nuskha minhu ʿalā l-tamām wa-kunnā
naḥnu nuskha minhumā ʿalayhimā l-salām wa-kāna l-ʿālam asfaluhu wa-aʿlāhu nuskha
minnā wa-ntahat al-aqlām ghayr anna fī nuskhatinā min kitābay ādam wa-muḥammad sirr
sharīf wa-maʿnā laṭīf [. . .]”); see also ibid. 42 (“[. . .] Fa-l-insān al-kitāb al-jāmiʿ [. . .]”).
51 See, for instance, Ibn Abī l-Dunyā, al-Awliyāʾ 15 (“Bihim qāma l-kitāb wa-bihi qāmū
wa-bihim naṭaqa l-kitāb wa-bihi naṭaqū wa-bihim ʿulima l-kitāb wa-bihi ʿulimū [. . .]”).
52 See Amir-Moezzi, Notes 729 and the references given there in n. 50; Amir-Moezzi,
Divine guide 79; Amir-Moezzi, Remarques 106, 108 n. 93; Amir-Moezzi, Le Coran silencieux
101–7, 115; Ayoub, Speaking Qurʾān, especially pp. 178–83; Lory, La Science 63–5. See also the
discussion of the terms umm al-kitāb and ʿilliyyīn in Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 29, 38–9,
167 n. 198; Amir-Moezzi, La Préexistence 110 n. 5, 114, 122–5.
53 See Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 20–1 (“[. . .] Wa-l-kitāb al-mubīn amīr
al-muʾminīna ʿalī bnu abī ṭālib ṣalawāt allāh ʿalayhi [. . .]”), 50–1, 131 (“Wa-min al-bayān fī
qawl allāh ʿazza wa-jalla minhu āyāt muḥkamāt hunna umm al-kitāb anna l-kitāb mimmā
yusammā bihi l-nāṭiq wa-l-āyāt mimmā yusammā bihi l-aʾimma [. . .]”), 163 (“[. . .] Al-imām
wa-huwa l-kitāb [. . .]”), 168, 171.
54 See Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 29–30, 42–4, 47–8.
172 chapter four
ideas analyzed here are far more central to the Ismāʿīlī worldview and to
the thought of Ibn al-ʿArabī than to al-Ghazālī’s teachings. Moreover, it is
quite plausible that al-Ghazālī himself was influenced by Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ
in this context, notwithstanding his criticism of the Ismāʿīlī tradition.55
Cosmic Mediation
The concept of the awliyāʾ as mediators between God and men is an early
theme in Islam, and it is reflected in various ḥadīths treating of God’s
friends.56 In Ismāʿīlī literature and above all in the Epistles of Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ, the ideal man is perceived as a bridge, as a mediating entity stand-
ing between the spiritual and the corporeal worlds. In addition to being a
microcosm which unites within itself the different dimensions of reality,
the mediating role of the perfect man derives from his unique position in
the cosmic hierarchy. Although these notions are also familiar from other
philosophical and religious traditions,57 their distinctive formulation in
the Epistles of the Ikhwān and in the writings of Ibn al-ʿArabī is particu-
larly relevant to the current discussion.
According to the Ikhwān, when viewed in relation to other levels in
the universal hierarchy, the level of man is the last to be found among
the corporeal existents, and the first one to be found among the spiritual
beings:
[. . .] In truth, the human form, in its very nature, is the choice part of
this world; it is its fruit and its best portion. Yet it is also the turbid part
of that world—i.e., the upper world—and its refuse. The fact that [man]
is the last of the corporeal essences indicates that he is the first one among
the spiritual essences, that is, if he receives the flow from the [upper world]
and adheres to it [. . .] He is like a line bordering each of the two worlds (ka-l-
ḥadd al-mutākhim li-kilā l-ʿālamayni), like a root uniting both perfections. If
he accepts the instructions of those who possess Divine knowledge, follows
those who guide, obeys His creator and knows Him as he should—then he
obtains both kinds of happiness and acquires the two ranks: that of human
perfection and virtuous nature [or, according to another version: virtuous
55 See Mitha, Al-Ghazālī. For possible Ismāʿīlī influences on al-Ghazālī, see below p. 191
n. 14.
56 On these ḥadīths, see above pp. 123–32.
57 See Conger, Theories 22, 24, 30–2, 41, 79, 128; Allers, Microcosmus 321–2, 355, 361–2,
379–80, 384, 390–1; Armstrong, Architecture 101.
the perfect man 173
philosophy] in this world, and that of the angelic form and the proximity to
God on the rungs of paradise [. . .] in the world to come.58
The definition of man as a borderline (ḥadd mutākhim), or, alternatively,
as a mediating entity (wāsiṭa), appears in other passages as well in the
Rasāʾil. Moreover, in their Epistles, the Ikhwān identify the perfect man
with the ṣirāṭ, i.e., the right path (al-ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm, see Q 1:6 and more),
and also the bridge which, according to Islamic eschatology, extends over
hell. In the Ikhwān’s worldview, the perfect man functions as a bridge
that leads from hell, that is: the physical-corporeal world, to paradise, that
is: the upper, spiritual worlds.59 It seems that here too, the Ikhwān were
inspired by early Shiʿi traditions in which the imām is identified with the
ṣirāṭ.60
The notion that man is the last among the corporeal beings and the
first among the spiritual ones is closely linked to the concept of martaba
(hierarchal “level”), which, as explained above,61 plays a central role in the
thought of the Ikhwān. The Ikhwān explain that
since the last level (martaba) among humans is attached to the first level
among angels, and the last level among animals is attached to the first
level among humans, it follows that man is comprised of both worlds, and
stands between the two.62
58 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 566–7 (“Faṣl fī anna l-insān mukhtaṣar min al-ʿālamayni
l-rūḥānī wa-l-jismānī iʿlam ayyuhā l-akh [. . .] anna l-ṣūra l-insāniyya muhayyaʾa majbūla
min sūs huwa fī l-ḥaqīqa khulāṣat hādhā l-ʿālam wa-thamaratuhu wa-zubdatuhu wa-kadar
dhālika l-ʿālam aʿnī l-aʿlā wa-nuqāyatuhu [or read: wa-nufāyatuhu] wa-anna kawnahu ākhir
al-maʿānī l-jismāniyya dalīl ʿalā annahu awwal al-maʿānī l-rūḥāniyya idhā qabila l-fayḍ
minhu wa-taʿallaqa bihi [. . .] fa-huwa ka-l-ḥadd al-mutākhim li-kilā l-ʿālamayni wa-ka-l-
aṣl al-jāmiʿ lil-kamālayni fa-in qabila waṣāyā l-ʿārifīna wa-ttabaʿa al-murshidīna wa-aṭāʿa
bāriyahu wa-ʿarafahu ḥaqq maʿrifatihi nāla l-saʿādatayni wa-ḥaṣalat lahu l-manzilatāni
ا �ل��ف��� ف ة
manzilat al-insāniyya l-kāmila wa-l-ṭabīʿa l-fāḍila fī l-dunyā wa-ṣūrat al-malāʾika wa-jiwār
al-raḥmān fī darajāt al-jinān [. . .] fī l-ākhira”); for the alternate reading �����ل��س وinstead of
ا � ط�����ع��ة
و ل�� بي, see Tāmir’s edition v, 142).
59 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 241, 480, 497, 570, 614–5; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
Rasāʾil iv, 12, 138, 211, 237. For the notion according to which the sub-lunar world is hell,
whereas the world of the celestial spheres is paradise, see, for example, ibid. iii, 63, 296.
On the term ṣirāṭ, see Monnot, Ṣirāṭ.
60 See Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 45; Amir-Moezzi, Remarques 95. For Ismāʿīlī sources,
see, for instance, Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 109, 119 (“[. . .] Wa-l-ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm
fī l-bāṭin yusammā bihi l-imām ʿalayhi l-salām [. . .]”); and see also al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad
148, 152, 212, 282, 299.
61 See above pp. 136–8.
62 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 342 (“Wa-lammā kāna ākhir martabat al-insān muttaṣilan
bi-awwal martabat al-malāʾika wa-ākhir martabat al-ḥayawān muttaṣilan bi-awwal martabat
al-insān wajaba an yakūna l-insān majmūʿan min al-ʿālamayni mutawassiṭan baynahumā”).
174 chapter four
For the concept of martaba in this context, see also ibid. 276–81, 341, 486; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
Rasāʾil ii, 150–1, 166–72, 378, iii, 127–31, 224–9, 359, 368–70, iv, 237–8, 276–82.
63 See below pp. 221–9.
64 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 390 (chapter 198).
65 Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 39 (“[. . .] Fa-innahu ākhir mawjūd ḥissan wa-awwal
mawjūd nafsan [. . .]”).
the perfect man 175
his true essence; he is absolutely perfect, in being both created and eternal
without beginning.66
The affinity between Ibn al-ʿArabī and the Ikhwān is evident not only in
their perception of man as a borderline which both separates and unites
the spiritual and corporeal worlds (ḥadd mutākhim, khaṭṭ fāṣil), but also
in the eschatological role which they assign to the perfect man. Just as
the Ikhwān identify the perfect man with the ṣirāṭ, so too Ibn al-ʿArabī
identifies him with the barzakh, a Quranic term designating an isthmus,
a partition or a barrier (see Q 25:53; 55:20). In Islamic tradition, this term
received an eschatological meaning (see also Q 23:100): according to dif-
ferent commentators, barzakh signifies that which separates life in this
world from the afterlife, for instance, the interval between death and res-
urrection, or the physical tomb in which the dead person lies.67 Thus, the
Ikhwān and Ibn al-ʿArabī perceive the perfect man not only as an entity
which mediates between the spiritual and corporeal realms or between
the Divine and created dimensions, but also as a being which bridges the
gap between this world and the world to come.
Khalīfa
In Ismāʿīlī literature and in the works of Ibn al-ʿArabī, the perfect man is
defined as a khalīfa, that is, as the terrestrial vicegerent or deputy of God.
The numerous religious, political and historical implications of the term
khalīfa fall beyond the scope of this chapter.68 I shall limit myself here to
66 Ibn al-ʿArabī, Inshāʾ al-dawāʾir 22 (“Wa-l-insān dhū nisbatayni kāmilatayni nisba yad
khulu bihā ilā l-ḥaḍra l-ilāhiyya wa-nisba yadkhulu bihā ilā l-ḥaḍra l-kiyāniyya fa-yuqālu fīhi
ʿabd min ḥaythu annahu mukallaf wa-lam yakun thumma kāna ka-l-ʿālam wa-yuqālu fīhi
rabb min ḥaythu annahu khalīfa wa-min ḥaythu l-ṣūra wa-min ḥaythu aḥsan taqwīm fa-ka-
annahu barzakh bayna l-ʿālam wa-l-ḥaqq wa-jāmiʿ li-khalq wa-ḥaqq wa-huwa l-khaṭṭ al-fāṣil
bayna l-ḥaḍra l-ilāhiyya wa-l-kawniyya ka-l-khaṭṭ al-fāṣil bayna l-ẓill wa-l-shams wa-hādhihi
ḥaqīqatuhu fa-lahu l-kamāl al-muṭlaq fī l-ḥudūth wa-l-qidam [. . .]”). Regarding the use of
the term nisba (“relation” in the translation above), in the context of the perfect man and
his role as a mediating link between the spiritual and physical worlds, cf. al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat
al-ʿaql 112 (“[. . .] Kawn al-nāṭiq fī dār al-jism dhī nisbatayni nisba ilā ʿālam al-quds bi-kawn
sharafihi l-ladhī huwa l-kamāl al-thānī minhu wa-hiya l-ashraf wa-nisba ilā ʿālam al-ṭabīʿa
bi-kawn dhātihi fī wujūdihi l-ladhī huwa l-kamāl al-awwal minhu [. . .]”), 233 (“[. . .] Kawn
al-nāṭiq jāmiʿan li-nisbatayni [. . .]”), 234.
67 See Zaki, Barzakh; Carra de Vaux, Barzakh. On barzakh in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought,
see Bashier, Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Barzakh; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints, index, s.v. “Barzakh”;
Chittick, Sufi path, index, s.v. “barzakh”.
68 On some of these implications, see Crone and Hinds, God’s caliph.
176 chapter four
form, he is worthy of being Allāh’s vicegerent [on earth] and His deputy
in the world”.71
In addition to the religious-spiritual and magical aspects of khilāfa,72
the perfect man also enjoys political power. From the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī point
of view, the claim that the prophet’s heir, the imām, is the only true khalīfa
(along with the prophet himself), is both a religious assertion—he is God’s
vicegerent and deputy, embodying as he does the figure of the ideal man—
and a political statement: the imām is the only one who is worthy of
leading the Islamic community. Hence, the title khalīfa signifies “God’s
vicegerent on earth” (khalīfat allāh ʿalā l-arḍ) and, at the same time, “the
successor of God’s Messenger” (khalīfat rasūl allāh), that is, his heir as
leader of the Islamic community.73
This political aspect resurfaces in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings:
Know that the required perfection, for which man was created, is none
other than khilāfa [. . .] This is a more specific station than that of being a
messenger, for not every messenger is a khalīfa. The rank of a messenger
amounts specifically to the deliverance [of the Divine message] [. . .] The
[messenger] does not have the authority to pass his own judgment against
those who disobey him, but can only issue judgments from Allāh, or based
on what Allāh has specifically shown him. If Allāh allows him to pass his
own judgment among those to whom he was sent, then this is an appoint-
ment as a khalīfa, [this is] khilāfa and the messenger is the khalīfa. Not
everyone who is sent [by God] is given authority to judge. If he is given the
sword and he executes the deed, it is then that he has perfection, manifest-
ing himself through the power of the Divine names: he bestows and he with-
holds, he elevates and abases, he gives life and brings about death, he causes
both harm and benefit. He manifests himself through the opposite names,
together with prophecy—there is no other way. However, if he passes his
own judgment without prophecy, then he is a king, not a khalīfa. The latter
is only he whom God has appointed to this office over His servants, not he
71 Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿUqlat al-mustawfiz 45 (“Wa-li-kawn al-insān al-kāmil ʿalā l-ṣūra l-kāmila
ṣaḥḥat lahu l-khilāfa wa-l-niyāba ʿan allāh taʿālā fī l-ʿālam”); see also ibid. 94; Ibn al-ʿArabī,
Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 48–56; Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 17, 28, 50; Affifi, Mystical philosophy
78, 188.
72 On the magical knowledge and powers resulting from khilāfa, see, for example,
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 374–80.
73 See Crone and Hinds, God’s caliph; and cf. the discussion of the terms khalīfa ʿan
allāh / khalīfat allāh and khalīfa ʿan rasūl allāh / khalīfat rasūl allāh in Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ
al-ḥikam 162–3. On the prophet and imām as khalīfas, see, for example, Kohlberg, From
Imāmiyya to Ithnā-ʿAshariyya 526 and n. 34; Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 45, 56; Amir-
Moezzi, Remarques 95; Hamdani, Evolution 91; Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-ʿĀlim wa-l-
ghulām 16, 28, 32, 58, 92; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 74, 121, 129, 148–9, 156–7, 171, 175; al-Kirmānī,
al-Riyāḍ 189; and more.
178 chapter four
whom the people introduce, swear allegiance to and promote for their own
sake and over themselves. This is the rank of perfection. Men are allowed
to try and attain the station of perfection, but not prophecy. Hence, khilāfa
can be acquired, not prophecy.74
According to Ibn al-ʿArabī, the highest degree of human perfection is
embodied in the figure of the prophet who is both a messenger and a
khalīfa, in other words, the prophet who delivers a new Divine law
(sharīʿa) to mankind and, at the same time, is given political power, by
means of which he enforces the Divine law. This political aspect is what
transforms an ‘ordinary’ messenger into a truly perfect man, a khalīfa.
The political authority of the khalīfa is divinely sanctioned, and, what
is more, it derives from the power of God’s own names. The latter are
divided into two groups: those pertaining to the merciful attributes of
God (bestowing, elevating, giving life, causing benefit), and those related
to His wrathful attributes (withholding, abasing, bringing about death,
causing harm).75 Hence, a political leader who is not a prophet—even
if he enjoys the support of his subjects—is merely a king: his actions do
not manifest the Divine names, and, as a result, they are not sanctioned
by God. On the other hand, even those who are not prophets—that is,
the awliyāʾ, the friends of God—may become khalīfas, or perfect men
who function as God’s terrestrial vicegerents. Thus, Ibn al-ʿArabī’s figure
of the prophet-messenger-khalīfa corresponds to the Ismāʿīlī nāṭiq, who
enjoys prophetic powers as well as religious-legal and political authority;
while Ibn al-ʿArabī’s walī corresponds to the Ismāʿīlī imām, who, though
74 Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 269 (chapter 167, “waṣl fī faṣl”: “Iʿlam anna l-kamāl
al-maṭlūb al-ladhī khuliqa lahu l-insān innamā hiya l-khilāfa [. . .] wa-huwa maqām akhaṣṣ
min al-risāla fī l-rusul li-annahu mā kull rasūl khalīfa fa-inna darajat al-risāla innamā
hiya l-tablīgh khāṣṣatan [. . .] wa-laysa lahu l-taḥakkum fī l-mukhālif innamā lahu tashrīʿ
al-ḥukm ʿan allāh aw bi-mā arāhu llāh khāṣṣatan fa-idhā aʿṭāhu llāh al-taḥakkum fīman
ursila ilayhim fa-dhālika huwa l-istikhlāf wa-l-khilāfa wa-l-rasūl al-khalīfa fa-mā kull man
ursila ḥukkima fa-idhā uʿṭiya l-sayf wa-amḍā l-fiʿl ḥīnaʾidhin yakūnu lahu l-kamāl fa-yaẓharu
bi-sulṭān al-asmāʾ al-ilāhiyya fa-yuʿṭī wa-yamnaʿu wa-yuʿizzu wa-yudhillu wa-yuḥyī
wa-yumītu wa-yaḍurru wa-yanfaʿu wa-yaẓharu bi-asmāʾ al-taqābul maʿa l-nubuwwa lā
budda min dhālika fa-in ẓahara bi-l-taḥakkum min ghayr nubuwwa fa-huwa malik wa-laysa
bi-khalīfa fa-lā yakūnu khalīfa illā man istakhlafahu l-ḥaqq ʿalā ʿibādihi lā man aqāmahu
l-nās wa-bāyaʿūhu wa-qaddamūhu li-anfusihim wa-ʿalā anfusihim fa-hādhihi hiya darajat
al-kamāl wa-lil-nufūs taʿammul mashrūʿ fī taḥṣīl maqām al-kamāl wa-laysa lahum taʿammul
fī taḥṣīl al-nubuwwa fa-l-khilāfa qad takūnu muktasaba wa-l-nubuwwa ghayr muktasaba
[. . .]”).
75 On the opposing Divine names, see Sviri, Between fear and hope.
the perfect man 179
Who, then, is the perfect man? In theory, the answer to this question is
rather simple: according to the Ismāʿīlī tradition, only the prophet and
the imāms are perfect men, whereas in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought, it is the
perfect man in general—the ideal friend of God, regardless of his lin-
eal descent. However, within the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī tradition itself, different
approaches to this issue can be found. Above all, it is Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ who
seem to have introduced a universal-humanistic interpretation of the
Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī beliefs, including those pertaining to the figure of the ideal
man.77 In addition to ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib and his biological offspring, or, at
times, in their stead, the Ikhwān point to man in general—irrespective
of his genealogy—as a potential perfect man and khalīfa of God. Accord-
ingly, the ideal community envisioned by the Ikhwān is not necessarily
the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī community, but rather an ecumenical and mystical—
some would even say utopian—brotherhood of ‘perfect men’.78 It appears
that this universal-humanistic attitude of the Ikhwān facilitated the recep-
tion in al-Andalus of the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī ideas related to the figure of the
ideal human being.79
Nevertheless, it is important to emphasize that the universal-humanistic
approach of the Ikhwān does not imply that they rejected the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī
worldview, or that they sought to supersede it with their new teachings.
and light, by means of God’s friend, the imām. One may conclude that in
the early Shiʿi tradition, certain teachings centered on the believer himself
and on his own spiritual-mystical experiences. As it seems, the Ikhwān
were inspired by these teachings: in their Epistles, it is man himself who
stands at the center of stage, alongside the prophet and the imām, or, at
times, in their stead.
A few examples from the Ikhwān’s Rasāʾil will suffice in order to dem-
onstrate these points. In the introduction to their twenty-second Epistle,
the Ikhwān state that
we have already made it clear in our Epistle on ethics that the human form
is Allāh’s vicegerent on earth (khalīfat allāh fī arḍihi). We have also clarified
how every man should behave in order to become worthy of being one of
Allāh’s friends (awliyāʾ allāh) and in order to deserve His honor.
According to the Ikhwān, if a person is “virtuous and good, he is a noble
angel and the best among men; but if he is bad, he is an accursed devil
(shayṭān) and the worst among men”.85 The Shiʿi appellations, which are
typically assigned to the prophets and imāms (khalīfat allāh, awliyāʾ allāh)
or to their enemies (Satan and his followers), are here given to man in
general, whoever he might be: if he chooses the right path, he most cer-
tainly will become a friend of God and an angel, that is, a potential angel
before death and an actual angel after death. The definition of man in gen-
eral, “the human soul” (al-nafs al-insāniyya), or “the human form” as God’s
vicegerent appears in many other passages of the Ikhwān.86 Similarly,
the Ikhwān refer to the believer’s intellect (ʿaql) as “Allāh’s hidden-inner
vicegerent” (khalīfat allāh al-bāṭin), in other words, the vicegerent that
is hidden within the believer himself, contrary to the manifest-external
vicegerent, who is the historical prophet or imām. This brings to mind the
aforementioned, early Shiʿi theme of al-ruʾya bi-l-qalb, according to which
the believer contains within himself an ‘inner imām’. Furthermore, the
Ikhwān describe the intellect as “Allāh’s argument” (ḥujjat allāh) against
man; according to them, “the human form is the biggest argument Allāh
has against His created beings”. Ḥujja is an important Shiʿi term, typically
85 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 179 (“Wa-qad bayyannā fī risālat al-akhlāq anna
ṣūrat al-insāniyya hiya khalīfat allāh fī arḍihi wa-bayyannā fīhā ayḍan kayfa yanbaghī an
takūna sīrat kull insān ḥattā yastaʾhila an yakūna min awliyāʾ allāh wa-yastaḥiqqa l-karāma
minhu [. . .]”; “[. . .Wa-anna l-insān idhā kāna fāḍilan khayran fa-huwa malak karīm khayr
al-bariyya wa-in kāna sharīran fa-huwa shayṭān rajīm sharr al-bariyya”).
86 See ibid. i, 297–8, iii, 427, 475; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 497.
182 chapter four
used to designate the prophets, the imāms and (in the Ismāʿīlī tradition)
one of the highest ranks in the daʿwa organization.87
The Ikhwān encourage the reader of their Epistles to adhere to “those
who possess knowledge” (ahl al-ʿilm) and to “the people of remem-
brance, who hail from the family of prophecy, and who are responsible
for the salvation of created beings” (ahl al-dhikr min ahl bayt al-nubuwwa
al-manṣūbīn li-najāt al-khalq). As is well known, the concept of ahl al-
bayt (the Prophet’s family) is of great importance in Islam in general and
in the Shiʿi tradition in particular. According to the Shiʿi interpretation
of this term, ahl al-bayt designates the members of Muḥammad’s family:
Fāṭima (his daughter), ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (Muḥammad’s cousin and Fāṭima’s
husband), and their descendants, the imāms.88 The Ikhwān, however,
add that “in a certain sense, ‘the people of remembrance’ is the intellect,
which reminds the soul of its spiritual world and its abode of lights which
became hidden from it”. The intellect—that is, the individual intellect of
man as well as the universal intellect—urges the soul to disengage itself
from the corporeal-physical world to which it is naturally inclined and
to reunite with its spiritual source.89 Thus, the term ahl al-bayt, which
plays such a central role in the Shiʿi tradition, is interpreted here in both
a universal sense (the universal intellect and soul) and an individual-
humanistic sense (the individual intellect and soul of every human being).
Due to its eminent status, the Ikhwān define the intellect as their “leader”
(raʾīs)—a title which the Ikhwān usually assign to each one of the seven
nāṭiqs.90
87 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 174 (“[. . .] Wa-l-ʿaql khalīfat allāh al-bāṭin [. . .]”), 303 (“[. . .]
ʿAqluka l-ladhī huwa ḥujjat allāh ʿalayka [. . .]”), iv, 12 (“[. . .] Li-anna ṣūrat al-insān akbar
ḥujja li-llāh ʿalā khalqihi [. . .]”); see also al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 211–2. On the ʿaql (the spiritual-
mystical intellect) in early Shiʿi traditions, and for the distinction made therein between
ḥujja ẓāhira (the prophets and imāms) and ḥujja bāṭina (the believer’s ʿaql), see Amir-
Moezzi, Divine guide 6–13 and index, s.v. “ʿaql”; Taylor, Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq 204–5. For a possible
Shiʿi influence on Sahl al-Tustarī in this context, see Böwering, Mystical vision 155, and
above p. 130 n. 24. On the term ḥujja, see above p. 66 n. 118.
88 On the term ahl al-bayt, see Sharon, Ahl al-bayt; Sharon, Umayyads.
89 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 156 (“Fa-ʿalayka ayyuhā l-akh bi-ahl al-ʿilm wa-muwāẓabat
al-ladhīna hum ahl al-dhikr min ahl bayt al-nubuwwa l-manṣūbīna li-najāt al-khalq [. . .]
thumma ʿlam bi-anna ahl al-dhikr fī baʿḍ al-wujūh huwa l-ʿaql al-ladhī yudhakkiru l-nafs mā
ghāba ʿanhā min amr ʿālamihā l-rūḥānī ma-maḥallihā l-nūrānī [. . .]”).
90 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 127 (“Wa-naḥnu qad raḍīnā bi-l-raʾīs ʿalā jamāʿat ikhwāninā
wa-l-ḥakam baynanā l-ʿaql al-ladhī jaʿalahu llāh taʿālā raʾīsan ʿalā l-fuḍalāʾ min khalqihi
l-ladhīna hum taḥt al-amr wa-l-nahy [. . .]”). In a similar vein, Ibn al-ʿArabī declares that
the intellect is the true imām; see Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 6 (“[. . .] Wa-ajʿalu ʿaqlī
imāman ʿalayya wa-aṭlubu minhu l-ādāb al-sharʿiyya fī bāṭinī wa-ẓāhirī wa-ubāyiʿuhu ʿalā
the perfect man 183
iṣlāḥ awwalī wa-ākhirī [. . .]”); see also ibid. 60–3. On the term raʾīs as designating the nāṭiq,
see, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 632.
91 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 306 (“[. . .] Wa-lākinna l-insān al-muṭlaq al-kullī huwa l-maṭbūʿ
ʿalā qubūl jamīʿ al-akhlāq wa-iẓhār jamīʿ al-ṣanāʾiʿ wa-l-aʿmāl lā l-insān al-juzʾī wa-ʿlam bi-
anna kull al-nās ashkhāṣ li-hādhā l-insān al-muṭlaq wa-huwa l-ladhī asharnā ilayhi annahu
khalīfat allāh fī arḍihi [. . .] wa-hiya l-nafs al-kulliyya l-insāniyya l-mawjūda fī kull ashkhāṣ
al-nās [. . .] hādhā l-insān al-muṭlaq al-ladhī qulnā huwa khalīfat allāh fī arḍihi wa-huwa
maṭbūʿ ʿalā qubūl jamīʿ al-akhlāq al-bashariyya wa-jamīʿ al-ʿulūm al-insāniyya wa-l-ṣanāʾiʿ
al-ḥikamiyya huwa mawjūd fī kull waqt wa-zamān wa-maʿa kull shakhṣ min ashkhāṣ al-
bashar taẓharu minhu afʿāluhu wa-ʿulūmuhu wa-akhlāquhu wa-ṣanāʾiʿuhu [. . .]”); cf. Mar
quet, La philosophie des Ihwan al-Safa: de Dieu à l’homme 289-90; Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s
theory 82–3; Nasr, An introduction 68.
184 chapter four
the prophets and imāms, and it is man in general who is the focus of the
Ikhwān’s attention.92
To be sure, in many other passages, the Ikhwān espouse the more
familiar and ‘orthodox’ Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī belief, according to which man’s
intellectual, spiritual and mystical perfection can only be attained through
the mediation and guidance of the prophets and imāms.93 However, it is
difficult to ignore the humanistic-universal attitude of the Ikhwān. In one
passage, the Ikhwān openly declare:
Know [. . .] that there are people who seek to gain Allāh’s proximity by
means of His prophets and messengers, by means of their imāms and lega-
tees, by means of God’s friends and righteous servants or by means of the
angels who are close to Allāh [. . .]
However,
he who possesses the proper knowledge of Allāh does not seek His nearness
by means of anyone else save for Allāh Himself. This is the level of those
who possess Divine knowledge, the friends of God.
According to the Ikhwān, the attempt to draw closer to God by means of
the prophets and imāms results from a misapprehension and a lack of true
knowledge.94 On the one hand, the Ikhwān acknowledge the important
role of the prophets and their heirs in the spiritual-religious guidance of
mankind; on the other hand, the Ikhwān explicitly state that the highest
92 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 343–5 (“[. . .] Wa-idhā rtafaʿa ilā l-rutba l-malakiyya
staḥaqqa sma l-insāniyya wa-ṣūrat al-malakiyya wa-an yakūna khalīfat allāh fī arḍihi
wa-mudabbir ʿālamihi wa-yaṣīra fī maqām al-rubūbiyya wa-yastaḥiqqa l-ʿibāda wa-l-ṭāʿa
mimman dūnahu min al-nufūs al-nāqiṣa l-radhla l-mutakhallifa ʿan darajat al-kamāl ḥattā
yuraqqiyahā ilā ajall al-aʿmāl wa-anfas al-aḥwāl [. . .]”; “Wa-l-ladhīna hādhihi manzilatuhum
hum ṣafwat allāh min ʿibādihi wa-khāliṣatuhu min bariyyatihi l-ladhīna adhhaba ʿanhum rijs
al-khaṭīʾa wa-ṭahharahum min dhunūb al-maʿṣiya ahl bayt al-ʿiṣma [. . .]”). See also ibid.
100–7, 346–7; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 371.
93 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 63–4; see also ibid. i, 668; Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 267, 323, ii, 478, and more.
94 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 483 (“Thumma ʿlam yā akhī anna min al-nās man
yataqarrabu ilā llāh bi-anbiyāʾihi wa-rusulihi wa-bi-aʾimmatihim wa-awṣiyāʾihim aw
bi-awliyāʾ allāh wa-ʿibādihi l-ṣāliḥīna aw bi-malāʾikat allāh al-muqarrabīna [. . .]”; “Fa-ammā
man yaʿrifu llāh ḥaqq maʿrifatihi fa-huwa lā yatawassalu ilayhi bi-aḥad ghayrihi wa-hādhihi
martabat ahl al-maʿārif al-ladhīna hum awliyāʾ allāh wa-ammā man qaṣara fahmuhu
wa-maʿrifatuhu wa-ḥaqīqatuhu fa-laysa lahu ṭarīq ilā llāh taʿālā illā bi-anbiyāʾihi wa-man
qaṣara fahmuhu wa-maʿrifatuhu bihim fa-laysa lahu ṭarīq ilā llāh taʿālā illā bi-l-aʾimma min
khulafāʾihim wa-awṣiyāʾihim wa-ʿibādihi l-ṣāliḥīna fa-in qaṣara fahmuhu wa-maʿrifatuhu
bihim fa-laysa lahu ṭarīq illā ttibāʿ āthārihim [. . .]”); see also ibid. i, 362–83, iv, 57–8, 173–
5. Concerning the term awliyāʾ allāh in the Epistles of the Ikhwān, cf. Baffioni, “Friends
of God”.
the perfect man 185
level to which every man can and should aspire—that of human perfec-
tion and friendship with God—is beyond the mediation of the prophets
and imāms. This revolutionary and radical approach, which is at odds
with both the Shiʿi and Sunni worldview, indicates that the perfect man
in general—rather than the prophet and the imām—is the main focus of
the Ikhwān.
Theoretically, then, there is a contradiction in the Rasāʾil between the
Shiʿi-Ismāʿīli sectarian view and the Ikhwān’s own universal-humanistic
attitude. One possible way of solving this apparent contradiction would
be to refer to the historical dimension of the issues dealt with here. In one
passage in their Epistles, the Ikhwān write that during the cycle of con-
cealment (dawr al-satr), the prophets, the imāms and their close followers
(perhaps the daʿwa members), who are all defined as God’s vicegerents
on earth, do not reveal themselves and, therefore, are not always avail-
able to the believers. The Ikhwān advise their reader that if his attempts
to contact the khalīfa of his generation prove to be unsuccessful, “you
should appoint your intellect as your own khalīfa, and receive from him
his commandments and prohibitions”.95 Presumably, then, the universal-
humanistic approach in the Ikhwān’s Rasāʾil is only relevant to the cycle
of concealment, during which time the imāms are in hiding. However,
it seems wrong to view the numerous, profound universal-humanistic
statements of the Ikhwān as merely reflecting a temporary and relative
ideology, designed for a very specific period of time in human history.
Another possible solution to the aforementioned contradiction lies in
the concept of taqiyya, i.e., the Shiʿi obligation to conceal (when neces-
sary) one’s true beliefs or to dissimulate oneself by outwardly adopting
the Sunni faith. In fact, there are modern scholars who claim that the
Ikhwān practiced or employed taqiyya in the writing of their Epistles.96
Accordingly, one may posit that the various passages in these Epistles that
express a universal-humanistic approach are simply a façade and disguise,
95 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 379 (“Wa-l-ladhīna hum al-khulafāʾ [. . .] mithl
al-anbiyāʾ wa-l-aʾimma wa-l-tābiʿīna lahum bi-l-iḥsān [. . .] hum khulafāʾ allāh taʿālā
l-tābiʿūna li-amrihi wa-bihim ṣalāḥ al-ʿālam wa-rubbamā kānū ẓāhirīna bi-l-ʿiyān mawjūdīna
fī l-makān fī dawr al-kashf wa-bi-l-ḍidd min dhālika fī dar al-satr [. . .] fa-ammā awliyāʾuhum
fa-yaʿrifūna mawāḍiʿahum wa-man arāda minhum qaṣdahum tamakkana minhu [. . .]”),
380 (“[. . .] Wa-milta naḥwa l-khalīfa l-ladhī ʿindahu l-ḥaqq wa-l-yaqīn wa-stakhlaftahu ʿalā
nafsika l-zakiyya ra-rūḥika l-muḍīʾa wa-in qadarta ʿalayhi wa-waṣalta ilayhi fa-qad najawta
[. . .] wa-in ʿadumta dhālika fa-jʿal al-khalīfa ʿalā nafsika ʿaqlaka wa-qbal minhu awāmirahu
wa-nawāhiyahu [. . .]”).
96 See, for example, El-Bizri, Epistles 6; Baffioni, “Friends of God” 19 n. 9. On taqiyya see
Ebstein, 2010 and especially the references there in n. 4.
186 chapter four
aimed at alluring Sunni readers and eventually winning them over to the
Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī cause. In other words, Ikhwānian statements pertaining to
the perfect man in general should be interpreted as actually referring
to the prophet or the imām.97 Notwithstanding the possible use of taqiyya
in the Ikhwāns’ writings,98 here too, it seems wrong to view the complex
and profound corpus of the Ikhwān as a ‘deceitful’, albeit sophisticated
instrument of propaganda, aimed at disseminating Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī beliefs.
Viewing the Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ, including al-Risāla l-jāmiʿa, as a
single whole99 leads me to the conclusion that the Ikhwān were indeed
affiliated with the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī milieu, and that, in this sense, they can
be defined as Shiʿis-Ismāʿīlīs. However, they were also very different from
the majority of the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī authors who were active in that period.
The great accomplishment of the Ikhwān lies in their ability to combine
their own Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī beliefs with a truly universal-humanistic outlook.
It was this outlook, inter alia, that inspired the Sunni and Jewish intel-
lectual world in al-Andalus, the world from which Ibn al-ʿArabī emerged.100
Having emphasized the universal-humanistic attitude of the Ikhwān,
it is important to note that this attitude does not imply full equality
between all human beings; on the contrary. Both the Ikhwān and Ibn
al-ʿArabī regard the majority of human beings, who, unsurprisingly, fail to
reach the level of human perfection, as animals rather than real men. This
radical and extreme view is reflected in several passages in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s
writings. For instance, in chapter 198 of the Futūḥāt, Ibn al-ʿArabī refers to
the figure of the perfect man, who unites within himself the Divine names
with the true essences of the created world, thus obtaining the title of
khalīfa. Ibn al-ʿArabī adds that
if someone does not obtain the level of perfection, then he is an animal,
whose external form is similar to that of a human being. Our discussion,
then, pertains [only] to the perfect man.
97 See Marquet, Imamat 66 and throughout the article; Marquet, La philosophie des
Iḫwân aṣ-Ṣafâ: l’Imâm et la société 135. Support for this explanation may be found in
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 204 (“[. . .] Wa-khalīfat allāh fīhā wa-amīnuhu ʿalayhā huwa l-nafs
al-juzʾiyya l-latī hiya nafs ṣāḥib sharʿ kull dawr [. . .]”).
98 See also Ebstein, Secrecy, especially pp. 319–29.
99 Cf. above p. 45 n. 48. Even if al-Risāla l-jāmiʿa was not composed by the Ikhwān,
one can still find both approaches—the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī approach and the universal-
humanistic one—in the Rasāʾil themselves.
100 On the influence of the Ikhwān’s Epistles on Jewish authors in al-Andalus, see above
p. 28 n. 83.
the perfect man 187
101 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt ii, 458 (chapter 198, faṣl 37: “Fa-idhā lam yaḥuz insān
rutbat al-kamāl fa-huwa ḥayawān tushbihu ṣūratuhu l-ẓāhira ṣūrat al-insān wa-kalāmunā fī
l-insān al-kāmil”), iii, 289 (chapter 361: “Wa-hādhā huwa l-insān al-kāmil al-maṭlūb wa-mā
ʿadā hādhā fa-huwa l-insān al-ḥayawānī wa-rutbat al-insān al-ḥayawānī min al-insān
al-kāmil rutbat khalq al-nasnās/nisnās min al-insān al-ḥayawānī”). See also ibid. ii, 390
(chapter 198: “Wa-innamā qulnā l-kāmil li-anna sma l-insān qad yuṭlaqu ʿalā l-mushbih bihi
fī l-ṣūra kamā taqūlu fī zayd innahu insān wa-fī ʿamr innahu insān wa-in kāna zayd qad
ẓaharat fīhi l-ḥaqāʾiq al-ilāhiyya wa-mā ẓaharat fī ʿamr fa-ʿamr ʿalā l-ḥaqīqa ḥayawān fī
shakl insān [. . .]”); Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam 75, 199; Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿUqlat al-mustawfiz
46; see also Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 109–13; Chittick, Sufi path 275–7; Chittick, Ima
ginal worlds 23, 36–8.
102 See above pp. 136–43.
103 See Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 39, 162 n. 178, 197 n. 403; Amir-Moezzi, Only the man
of God. On the creatures termed al-nasnās/al-nisnās in Islamic tradition in general, see
Ibn Manẓūr, Lisān al-ʿArab vi, 231–2 (s.v. n.s.s.); Amir-Moezzi, Only the man of God 26
n. 27; Jesús Viguera, El Nasnās.
104 See, for instance, al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 145 (“Wa-lastu urīdu bi-qawlī l-insān
illā man huwa bi-l-ḥaqīqa insān mithl aṣḥāb al-adwār wa-khāṣṣatan ṣāḥib al-dawr al-sābiʿ
al-jāmiʿ lil-nuṭaqāʾ wa-l-usus wa-l-atimmāʾ wa-tābiʿīhim ʿalā amrihim al-ladhīna ḥāzū l-faḍāʾil
wa-ḥawawhā fa-ṣārū ʿuqūlan qāʾima bi-l-fiʿl lā man hum ashbāh al-insān bi-ṣuwarihim
al-jismāniyya wa-hum wuḥūsh wa-dhiʾāb wa-qirada wa-khanāzīr wa-ʿaqārib wa-kilāb
bi-ṣuwarihim al-nafsāniyya l-ladhīna lā ḥaẓẓ lahum fī dār al-thawāb”), 338; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz
al-walad 55; see also De Smet, Mīzān 253–4.
105 See above p. 106 n. 103.
188 chapter four
106 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 100–3 (102: “[. . .] Li-yaṣīra bi-wujūd dhālika mawjūdan
bi-mā huwa insān baʿda an kāna mawjūdan bi-mā huwa ḥayawān [. . .] wa-matā saqaṭa
l-insān ʿan fiʿlihi l-khāṣṣ bihi idhā lam yakun ʿalā afḍal aḥwālihi wa-ʿāmilan bi-anfaʿ aʿmālihi
lam yakun insānan mawjūdan bi-l-fiʿl innamā huwa insān bi-l-quwwa”), 343–4; Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 251.
107 See above p. 161.
108 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 608 (“[. . .] Wa-hiya maʿrifat al-insān al-kullī wa-l-
shakhṣ al-ʿilmī l-ladhī bi-maʿrifatihi yastaḥiqqu l-insān ism al-insāniyya”); see also ibid. 621.
chapter five
Parallel Worlds
Microcosm-Macrocosm
in Ismāʿīlī literature. Naturally, this motif is not unique to the Ismāʿīlī tra-
dition, but is rather common to many other religious and philosophical
systems, western as well as eastern, ancient and modern alike.6 The micro-
cosm-macrocosm analogy is also found in medieval Arabic philosophy. It
appears in the Neoplatonic Theology of Aristotle and in the writings of
various philosophers such as al-Kindī, al-Fārābī and Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna).7
These philosophers and the Ismāʿīlī authors ultimately derived their
notions regarding the microcosm-macrocosm analogy from the pre-
Islamic heritage.8 In what way, then, is the Ismāʿīlī tradition unique in its
treatment of this ancient, universal theme?
To begin with, as I mentioned above, in the Ismāʿīlī tradition, the corre-
spondence between man and the universe is seen as just one relationship
among many in the complex network of cosmic correspondences. This
network likewise consists of the hierarchy of the awliyāʾ, the numbers, the
letters of the alphabet, the Divine holy book and so forth. Furthermore, in
Ismāʿīlī writings, the microcosm-macrocosm analogy is emphasized and
developed much more so than in the works of Muslim philosophers such
as al-Kindī, al-Fārābī and Ibn Sīnā. In fact, this analogy, and the notion of
parallel worlds in general, are of crucial importance for the Ismāʿīlī faith
itself. According to the Ismāʿīlī worldview, the three-way relationship
between God, the friend of God and the common believer began prior to
creation, and it unfolds not only in the terrestrial-horizontal framework of
human history, but also along the hierarchal-vertical axis which connects
the world of man to the upper, spiritual realm.9 Man is thus inevitably
linked to the universe at large and to the various worlds that lie beyond
the corporeal, sub-lunar world. In addition, the numerous comparisons
drawn in Ismāʿīlī literature between the awliyāʾ hierarchy and the macro-
6 For the history of the microcosm-macrocosm analogy in western culture, see Conger,
Theories; Allers, Microcosmus; El-Bizri, Microcosm/macrocosm analogy 5–12. Regarding
Philo of Alexandria in this context, see also Winston, Logos 17–8. For the Hermetic tradition,
see also Drijvers, Bardaiṣan 199–200; and, concerning Zoroastrianism, see Schaeder, Isla-
mische Lehre 205. For a phenomenological comparison between Western philosophy and
Islamic thought as regards the microcosm-macrocosm analogy, see Tymieniecka, Islamic
philosophy. As for Eastern traditions, one may mention, for example, the importance of
this analogy in the Upaniṣads; see Olivelle, Upaniṣads lii–lvi (in the Introduction).
7 See Badawī (ed.), Theology of Aristotle (the shorter version) 77–8. For al-Kindī, see
Fakhry, A history 84; Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 75–7. Al-Fārābī: Fakhry, A history 121;
Conger, Theories 51. Ibn Sīnā: Banchetti-Robino, Microcosm/macrocosm analogy 25–30;
Nasr, An introduction 251–62.
8 See the references in the last two notes.
9 See above pp. 143–56.
parallel worlds 191
cosm grant the figure of God’s friend a truly cosmic dimension, and, con-
sequently, are essential for both establishing and legitimizing his supreme
status in human society. Finally, the microcosm-macrocosm analogy is
based on the assumption that the universe is a well-organized, harmoni-
ous and hierarchal system, in which every part finds its right place and
proper rank.10 This hierarchal perception of the universe is an essential
component of Ismāʿīlī thought.11
It comes as no surprise, then, that the notion of parallel worlds in gen-
eral, and the correspondence between man and the universe in particular,
occupy a central place in most (if not in all) medieval Ismāʿīlī works. It is
noteworthy that the microcosm-macrocosm analogy is especially charac-
teristic of many Neoplatonic teachings in the history of Western thought,
notably those that were influenced by the Pythagorean/Neopythagorean,
Hermetic and Gnostic traditions, and in which astrology, alchemy and
magic figure prominently. Typical examples of such teachings may be
found in the Italian renaissance and in the Ismāʿīlī tradition itself.12 Yet it
seems that the Ismāʿīlī speculations on the microcosm-macrocosm anal-
ogy are of an extent and range that are unprecedented not only in the
world of Islam—at least prior to the emergence and crystallization of the
Ismāʿīlī tradition—but perhaps even in the entire pre-Islamic religious and
philosophical heritage.13 In fact, it is possible that the Ismāʿīlī tradition,
and particularly Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ, influenced in this context various
scholars in the world of medieval Islam, including Jewish authors.14
on Jewish authors, especially in al-Andalus, see Conger, Theories 29, 36–7, 41–3, 48 n. 4,
51–2; Allers, Microcosmus 346–7, 387 n. 199; Altmann and Stern, Isaac Israeli 30 n. 2; Kie-
ner, Jewish Ismāʿīlism 258–62; Ivry, Ismāʿīlī theology 297 n. 93. As regards Ibn Sīnā, in
the short work attributed to him, entitled al-Risāla l-nayrūziyya, the author establishes
a network of correspondences between the hierarchal levels of the universe, the num-
bers and nineteen letters of the Arabic alphabet (the fourteen letters of the fawātiḥ + five
additional letters; on the importance of the number nineteen in the Ismāʿīlī tradition,
see below n. 48). As Massignon has demonstrated, this work clearly points to an Ismāʿīlī
influence on its author; see Ibn Sīnā, al-Nayrūziyya; Massignon, La philosophie; Nasr,
An introduction 209–12. As is well known, both the father and brother of Ibn Sīnā adhered
to the Ismāʿīlī faith, and it is through them that the young Ibn Sīnā became acquainted
with Ismāʿīlī teachings. Moreover, he was familiar with Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ, and most
likely was influenced by them. See Nasr, An introduction 177–8, 182; Fakhry, A history
133–4, 136; Wisnovsky, Avicenna 94–6, 98–9; Halm, Fatimids 51; De Callataÿ, Classifica-
tion 82; Walker, Ismāʿīlīs 88–9; Pines, Shīʿite terms 215 n. 283; Michot, Misled 175–9; see
also De Smet, La doctrine avicennienne. In contradistinction, according to Lory (Lory, La
Science 77–88; see also Grill, Science 135), it is the Sufi tradition rather than the Ismāʿīlī
one which influenced the author of al-Risāla l-nayrūziyya. However, the analogies drawn
in this work between the letters, the numbers and the cosmic hierarchy are characteris-
tic of Ismāʿīlī works, not of classical Sufi writings (at least not those composed prior to
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s time). In addition, the cosmological scheme of al-Risāla l-nayrūziyya fea-
tures the universal intellect and soul, as in Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism. Finally, the terms ibdāʿ
(“creation [ex nihilo]”), amr (“command”), and takwīn (“bringing into being”, from kun,
“be!”), which appear in al-Risāla l-nayrūziyya in a Neoplatonic framework, are very typical
of Ismāʿīlī writings (see above chapter 1).
15 On these sources and authors see above pp. 41–5.
16 On the jazāʾir, see above p. 102 n. 93.
17 See above pp. 41–3.
18 See above pp. 132–5.
parallel worlds 193
organs, corresponds to these various worlds. Finally, the numbers and the
letters of the Arabic alphabet—the latter perceived as the building blocks
of reality, or as signs indicating cosmogonic processes and cosmological
systems—parallel the structure of the universe and the hierarchy of the
friends of God.19
Such correspondences are likewise one of the main features of Rasāʾil
ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ. Although both the twenty-sixth Epistle of the Ikhwān
( fī qawl al-ḥukamāʾ inna l-insān ʿālam ṣaghīr, “Concerning the Saying
of the Wise Men that Man is a Small World”) and the thirty-fourth one
( fī maʿnā qawl al-ḥukamāʾ inna l-ʿālam insān kabīr, “On the Meaning of
the Wise Men’s Saying that the World is a Big Man”) are dedicated to the
microcosmic-macrocosmic analogy, in reality this motif appears through-
out the Ikhwān’s writings.20 According to the Ikhwān, the human body
corresponds to the universal body. Man’s soul and its powers, which spread
throughout the human body, parallel the universal soul and its powers,
which spread throughout the corporeal world. The seven internal organs
of man (the heart, spleen, liver, gall bladder, stomach, brain and lungs)
correspond to the seven planets and their spiritual powers (rūḥāniyyāt)
which influence the sub-lunar world.21 The seven physical faculties of
man (the attracting, grasping, digesting, pushing, feeding, growing and
forming faculties = al-jādhiba, al-māsika, al-hāḍima, al-dāfiʿa, al-ghādhiya,
al-nāmiya and al-muṣawwira), as well as his seven spiritual faculties (the
five senses, the speaking faculty and the faculty of the intellect), all corre-
spond to the seven planets. In the worldview of the Ikhwān, these are not
merely fanciful speculations, but rather form the theoretical basis for such
practices as astrology and magic. The Ikhwān further maintain that the
human body corresponds to the sub-lunar world itself: the four main parts
19 For the Ismāʿīlī myth of Kūnī-Qadar and Fāṭimī literature, see Stern, Earliest cos-
mological doctrines 9, 14; Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām 15, 17; al-Qāḍī
l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba 53–4, 79; see also De Smet, Adam 187–8 (on Qarmaṭī teachings).
Eastern Neoplatonists: al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 8–15, 17–9, 56–9, 92; al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār
106–7, 143–5, 178–9; Halm, Kosmologie 69; al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 211–20. On letters, see also above
pp. 102–8.
20 For Epistles 26 and 34, see Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 456–79, iii, 212–30. For the
terms ʿālam ṣaghīr, ʿālam kabīr and insān kabīr, see, for example, ibid. ii, 24–5, 378, 462,
iii, 114, 333, iv, 213; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 238–40, 563–5, ii, 28; and see the references
to al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān’s al-Mudhhiba and al-Rāzī’s al-Iṣlāḥ in the previous note. For general
discussions of the microcosmic-macrocosmic analogy in the Epistles of the Ikhwān, see
Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 77–92; Nasr, An introduction 66–74, 96–104; Conger, Theories
46–51; El-Bizri, Microcosm/macrocosm analogy 10–12; Fakhry, A history 178–9.
21 On the term rūḥāniyyāt, see above p. 135 n. 42.
194 chapter five
of man’s body—the head, the chest, the stomach, and the area extending
from the intestines to the legs—parallel the four elements which comprise
the physical world. Man’s body as a whole resembles the earth; his bones
resemble the mountains; his bone marrow is similar to the minerals; his
intestines and the arteries are similar to rivers and brooks; his hair resem-
bles the plants; his breath the wind; his speech the thunder; and so on.
The Epistles of the Ikhwān abound with such speculations; their descrip-
tions in this context are rather exhaustive, yet colorful and poetic.22
The distinctive Ismāʿīlī aspect of these Ikhwānian speculations is
reflected in two main points. First, the perception of the universe as
“a big man” is closely linked to the Ismāʿīlī concept of the Divine word
and command.23 The Ikhwān explain that “the big man” is governed by
and is under the complete control of the Divine command (amr, amr
Allāh), which is situated above the universal intellect. This command is
an expression of God’s will, volition and power (irāda, mashīʾa, qudra); it
encompasses (muḥīṭ) all of creation, thus unifying it and turning it into
a living organism, which corresponds to man, “the small world”. In the
Ikhwān’s own words, the whole universe is “one body whose spirit is the
word of Allāh (kalimat allāh)”.24 Second, the Ikhwān view the hierarchy
of the friends of God as corresponding to both the microcosm and the
macrocosm. For instance, according to the Ikhwān, the seven planets and
the twelve signs of the zodiac parallel the seven faculties in the human
body and its twelve orifices, and are also analogous to the seven nuṭaqāʾ
(termed by the Ikhwān sabʿa ashkhāṣ fāḍila, “seven virtuous figures”) and
the twelve supporters of each nāṭiq.25
The numerical-mathematical dimension of these various correspon-
dences plays an important role in the writings of the Ikhwān, a fact
which bears testimony to the impact of the Pythagorean/Neopythagorean
tradition on their thought.26 According to the Ikhwān, all existents are
22 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 463–8, 472–3, 476–9; see also ibid. 143–8,
iii, 124–5, iv 212–25, 231–8, 345, 414–6; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 582–92.
23 On this concept, see above chapter 1.
24 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 635–6, ii, 24–38.
25 See ibid. i, 624–34.
26 On the importance of the microcosmic-macrocosmic analogy in the Pythagorean
and Neopythagorean traditions, see Allers, Microcosmus 332, 341–3, 370–83; Takeshita, Ibn
ʿArabī’s theory 74–5. On the influence of these traditions on the Ikhwān’s thought, see
Netton, Muslim Neoplatonists 9–16; Nasr, An introduction 33–40, 45 n. 5, 47–51, 77–8, 84;
Fakhry, A history 170–5. Concerning the importance of numbers and mathematics in the
Ikhwān’s Epistles, see also Lory, La Science 70–4; Marquet, La philosophie des Ihwan al-Safa:
de Dieu à l’homme 32–5.
parallel worlds 195
27 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 53–4, ii, 461–2, iii, 181–2, 202, 224, 377, iv, 276; see also
ibid. iii, 141–2, 148.
28 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 140–1, ii, 197, iii, 362. On the term khawāṣṣ and its
significance in the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī corpus attributed to Jābir b. Ḥayyān, see Kraus, Jābir ibn
Ḥayyān ii, 61–95.
29 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 141–5, 376–83, iv, 232–3; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i,
585–8. For analyses of these passages, see above pp. 105–8, 111–2.
30 On al-Kirmānī, see above pp. 40–1.
196 chapter five
One typical example from Rāḥat al-ʿaql will suffice in order to demonstrate
these points. In a chapter dedicated to a discussion of nature (al-ṭabīʿa),
al-Kirmānī explains that nature is situated midway between the first
intellect, which is termed, in this context, “the first extremity” (al-nihāya
l-awwala), and man, called “the second extremity” (al-nihāya l-thāniya). The
chapter is divided into two parts: the first one contains the philosophical-
cosmological claims concerning nature, and the second supplies proofs for
these claims, all based on the notion of parallel worlds. The second part of
the chapter begins as follows: “Our preceding statements are verified by
the type of correspondence and agreement (al-muwāzana wa-l-muṭābaqa)
that is expressed by the balance of religion (mīzān al-diyāna)”. According
to al-Kirmānī, the fact that the nāṭiq (“the speaker prophet”) in the world
of religion is a “first extremity” from which the daʿwa organization derives
proves that the first intellect in the upper, spiritual world is likewise a “first
extremity” from which nature derives. Nature, which operates through the
celestial spheres and the four elements, corresponds to the daʿwa hierar-
chy, which operates by means of the Quran and the sharīʿa. In a similar
vein, the qāʾim (the messianic figure of the seventh nāṭiq),31 from a reli-
gious point of view, is a “second extremity”, since he occupies the final
hierarchal level (martaba) and comprises within himself the “lights” and
spiritual knowledge of all the preceding nuṭaqāʾ. This proves that from a
cosmological point of view, man is “the second extremity” in relation to
nature and occupies the last hierarchal level in creation. In addition to
these correspondences between the macrocosm and “the world of reli-
gion” (ʿālam al-dīn), al-Kirmānī proves his philosophical claims by draw-
ing analogies between the awliyāʾ hierarchy and the human organism,
“the small world” or “the child of the big world” (walad al-ʿālam al-kabīr).
Al-Kirmānī concludes the chapter analyzed here by stating:
This, briefly, is the correspondence between the small world and the big
world, on the one hand, and the world of religion, on the other. If indeed
there exists a correspondence and an agreement (al-tawāzun wa-l-taṭābuq)
between the worlds, and the world of religion is similar to the small world,
and the big world is like the world of religion—then it follows that the small
world is like the big world. Nothing of the latter escapes the former [see
Q 18:49].
All the worlds are held fast to one another. They are linked together like
a chain, in accordance with the harmonious order dictated by the Divine
wisdom.32
These notions and the various terms used to express them (mīzān
al-diyāna, muwāzana/tawāzun, muṭābaqa/taṭābuq, niẓām) all recur, in
different variations, in al-Kirmānī’s works.33 Furthermore, al-Kirmānī ded-
icated an entire epistle, albeit a short one, to the idea of parallel worlds
(Risālat al-naẓm fī muqābalat al-ʿawālim). In this epistle, al-Kirmānī draws
various analogies between the letters of the Arabic word fard (“The One
and Only”), the numbers from one to twelve and the different worlds
which comprise the universe. These worlds include “the world of creation”
(ʿālam al-ibdāʿ, i.e., the world of the ten intellects); “the world of assem-
bling” (ʿālam al-tarkīb, i.e., the world of the celestial spheres); “the small
40 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 210 (“Wa-lawmā qaṣadnā fī kitābinā hādhā ṭarīq
al-ishāra wa-l-tanbīh la-ḍarabnā lahu dawāʾir ʿalā ṣuwar al-aflāk wa-tartībihā wa-najʿalu
li-kull falak fī l-ʿālam mā yuqābiluhā min al-insān [. . .]”); al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 59 (“Wa-
qad ṣawwarnā dāʾira mushtamila ʿalā ṣūrat hādhihi l-taqāsīm [. . .] wa-waḍaʿnā kull qism
minhā bi-izāʾ mā yalīhi min qismat al-arbaʿ bi-l-arbaʿ wa-l-sabʿa bi-l-sabʿa wa-l-ithnay ʿashar
bi-l-ithnay ʿashar wa-katabnā fī hādhihi l-dāʾira ʿinda nuqṭat al-markaz al-ʿaql fī muqābalat
al-insān [. . .]”); al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 121–31; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 163–71. The circu-
lar vision of the cosmos and of human history is typically an Ismāʿīlī theme, which merits
a separate discussion; see above p. 155 n. 99.
41 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 171 (= ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 231–2: “Wa-min
dhālika l-malāʾika wa-naẓīruhā min al-insān al-arwāḥ al-latī fīhi wa-l-qiwā”; “Fa-minhum
al-rūḥāniyyūna naẓīruhum al-qiwā l-latī fī l-insān”).
42 See above p. 193. The term naẓīr (“corresponding to”) in the passages quoted here
from Ibn al-ʿArabī’s al-Futūḥāt (see above nn. 39, 41) appears in a very similar context
in Ismāʿīlī literature; see, for example, Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 9; Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 33–4; al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 14, 90–2. The term muqābala and its deriv-
atives, which are quite common in Ismāʿīlī discussions of the microcosm-macrocosm anal-
ogy (see above n. 33), are also employed by Ibn al-ʿArabī; see, for instance, Ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Tadbīrāt 108, 111, 174, 177, 210.
43 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 213, 251–7; al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 58; see also Kraus,
Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii, 173 n. 1; and Pseudo al-Majrīṭī, Ghāyat al-ḥakīm 102.
44 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 473–5; and above, pp. 162–5, 169–72. For
the possible influence of the Ikhwān on Ibn al-ʿArabī in these matters, see Affifi, Mystical
philosophy 188.
200 chapter five
chapter.45 Naturally, this idea is unique neither to the Ismāʿīlī authors nor
to Ibn al-ʿArabī but is shared by other medieval Muslim scholars.46 Ibn
al-ʿArabī, therefore, must have derived this and other concepts pertaining
to the microcosm-macrocosm analogy from diverse sources. Nevertheless,
the close affinity between Ibn al-ʿArabī and the Ismāʿīlī authors becomes
apparent when one considers the specific contexts in which they employ
the microcosm-macrocosm analogy—namely, the notion of walāya and
the awliyāʾ hierarchy; the concept of the perfect man; the letters of the
alphabet and their cosmogonic-cosmological significance;47 and, finally,
numerical-mathematical speculations.48 The fact that all these various
themes are woven together by the notion of parallel worlds, and are often
discussed in the framework of Neoplatonic cosmology, points to the simi-
larity between Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought and the Ismāʿīlī tradition.
45 See Conger, Theories 19, 32, 34, 42–3, 56–7, 65, 83; Allers, Microcosmus 321–3, 340,
344–51, 379–80, 384, 399.
46 For instance, both al-Kindī and Ibn Sīnā maintain that man has the faculties or prop-
erties of all existents; see Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 76; Banchetti-Robino, Microcosm/
macrocosm analogy 27–8; Nasr, An introduction 257–60.
47 See above pp. 102–8.
48 For the connection between numbers and the letters of the alphabet, the hierarchal
structure of the universe and the hierarchy of the awliyāʾ, see, for instance, Ibn al-ʿArabī,
al-Mabādiʾ 43, 99–140; Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt i, 97–8 (chapter 2, faṣl 1, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s
edition i, 243, 246), 125–6 (= ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition i, 344–9). A good example of the
close affinity between Ibn al-ʿArabī and the Ismāʿīlī authors may be found in their specula-
tions on the number nineteen. In chapter 22 of the Futūḥāt (i, 228, 237–8, = iii, 147–8), Ibn
al-ʿArabī draws an analogy between nineteen mystical stations or levels of mystical knowl-
edge (manāzil/marātib) and the following worlds: the twelve signs of the zodiac + the
seven planets; the fourteen fawātiḥ + the five levels in which they are arranged (according
al-raḥmān al-raḥīm, حي����م� ;) ب�(ا)��س��ما �ل�ل�ه ا �لرح�م� ن� ا �لرand the twelve nuqabāʾ + the seven abdāl
to Ibn al-ʿArabī’s own theory); the nineteen letters of the basmala (the formula bi-smi llāh
(on whom see above, p. 130 n. 25). Very similar speculations are found in Ismāʿīlī sources.
(the formula lā ilāh illā llāh) + its seven orthographic parts ()لاإ� �ل�ه إ� لا ا �ل�ل�ه, correspond to the
For instance, the nineteen letters of the basmala, or the twelve letters of the shahāda
twelve signs of the zodiac + the seven planets, as well as to the twelve ḥujaj + the seven
nuṭaqāʾ/imāms. See Pines, Nathanaël ben al-Fayyûmî 17–9; Kiener, Jewish Ismāʿīlism 260–1;
al-Shaybī, al-Ṣila i, 216–7; al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 56–9; Filippani-Ronconi, Soteriological
cosmology 115; and see also Corbin, Science 81–103; al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba 36; and
above, p. 134 n. 37.
parallel worlds 201
osophical and political works from medieval times to the modern era.49
In fact, this theme is already found in the Dialogues of Plato and in the
writings of Aristotle.50 In medieval Islamic thought, the Platonic analogy
between man and the city-state was employed by different philosophers
and mystics such as al-Fārābī, Ibn Sīnā, al-Ghazālī, Ibn al-ʿArabī and the
Ismāʿīlī authors.51 The latter placed much emphasis on this analogy, as it
served them to illustrate and legitimize the supreme status of the proph-
ets and their heirs in human society. Consequently, Ismāʿīlī discussions
of the correspondences between the human organism and society focus
on various concepts that pertain to religious-political power and author-
ity, such as khilāfa and imāma.52 Similarly, Ibn al-ʿArabī too attaches
much importance to the analogy between man and the city-state, and in
his treatment of this theme the concepts of khilāfa and imāma likewise
occupy a central place.
Ismāʿīlī writings contain many speculations on the human body, which is
perceived as corresponding to human society in general and to the Ismāʿīlī
community in particular. For example, al-Rāzī, al-Sijistānī and al-Kirmānī
draw various parallels between the different organs of the human body and
the hierarchy of the awliyāʾ—the nuṭaqāʾ, their legatees, the imāms and the
daʿwa organization.53 Similar speculations are also found in the Epistles of
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ. According to the latter, the human organism corresponds
not only to the world of the celestial spheres, but also to human society
and to the religious system. Thus, man’s physical organs correspond to the
prophets, their heirs, their close supporters and the common believers,
while the various activities and functions of the human body parallel the
modes in which both human society and religion operate. The religious
leaders, like the seven planets and the main organs of the human body, are
termed ruʾasāʾ (“leaders”), and are responsible for managing (tadbīr) the
49 See Conger, Theories 35–6, 68–9, 78, 87, 99–101, 110–8; Allers, Microcosmus 323–5,
367–9.
50 See, for example, Plato, Republic i, 370–85, 404–23 (Book iv, 434–6, 441–5), ii, 371
(Book ix, 580); Plato, Laws, ii, 552–5 (Book xii, 964–5). Regarding Aristotle, see Conger,
Theories 7–8, 10.
51 Al-Fārābī: see al-Fārābī, al-Madīna l-fāḍila 97–104 (chapters 26–27). Ibn Sīnā: Nasr,
An introduction 270. Al-Ghazālī: Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 92–9, 103–5. Concerning
the Ismāʿīlīs and Ibn al-ʿArabī, see the discussion below. On the close affinities between
al-Fārābī and Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ and their historical implications, see Baffioni, Al-madīnah
al-fāḍilah; and cf. Marquet, Imamat 50 n. 2, 54 n. 11; Hamdani, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ.
52 On khilāfa, see above pp. 175–9.
53 See al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 211–6; al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 18, 79–80; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql
160–2, 295–9, 343–5; see also De Smet, Adam 187–8 (on the Qarāmiṭa).
202 chapter five
system that is under their control. The Ikhwān describe man (the micro-
cosm), the universe (the macrocosm) and the ideal society as living organ-
isms which enjoy internal unity and harmony.54
The Ismāʿīlī authors accord special honor to the seventh nāṭiq, the
messianic qāʾim, and emphasize his superiority over all his predecessors,
the preceding prophets and imāms. In their view, the qāʾim is destined
to complete the process of human redemption and to bring it to its final
end. The linear progression of sacred human history, with its messianic-
eschatological climax, corresponds in Ismāʿīlī literature to the development
of the fetus in his mother’s womb. In the same way that the six stages of
pregnancy, alluded to in the Quran (see Q 23:12–14), are indispensable for
the perfect formation of the fetus’s physical form, so are the six historical
cycles, led by the nuṭaqāʾ and their heirs, necessary for the formation of a
perfect spiritual-religious “form” (ṣūra). The advent of the messianic figure
in the seventh cycle, and the various eschatological events associated with
it—i.e., the completion of the aforementioned spiritual-religious “form”,
resurrection and the appearance of the world to come—correspond to the
birth of man.55 In al-Ḥāmidī’s mythical-mystical worldview,56 the spiritual-
religious forms of the prophets, the imāms and their followers are all grad-
ually assembled together throughout the many cycles of human history
into one single form, which constitutes a spiritual figure. The organs of this
figure are composed of the spiritual-religious forms of the Ismāʿīlī commu-
nity. According to al-Ḥāmidī, this figure eventually ascends to the Divine
world, more precisely, to the level of the tenth intellect, which, during cre-
ation, had fallen from its initial rank as the third intellect. This process
enables the tenth intellect itself to rise to its original rank, thus restoring
the Divine world to its pristine, pure state.57
Overall, the analogies drawn in Ismāʿīlī literature between the human
organism and the Ismāʿīlī community are intended to portray the ideal
society. This society is led by the prophets and the imāms, and it is
this leadership alone that guarantees prosperity and spiritual salvation.
The structure of the human body and its physical development reflect the
54 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 601–2, 624–42, 702–3, ii, 111–23; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
Rasāʾil iv, 134.
55 See al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 216; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa ii, 358–66; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql
391–5; Walker, Early philosophical Shiism 141; and the references to al-Ḥāmidī below in
n. 57.
56 See above p. 139 n. 52.
57 See al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 172, 174, 188, 217, 228–9, 239–48, 253–8, 264, 268–9,
and more.
parallel worlds 203
progression of sacred human history and indicate the role of the prophets
and the imāms in this Divine-human ‘drama’. One may conclude that the
Ismāʿīlī treatment of the correspondences between the human organism
and society is rather unique in its Shiʿi, mythical, mystical and eschato-
logical aspects, in addition to a certain magical-alchemical aspect, which,
however, cannot be dealt with here.58
As mentioned above, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ likewise discuss at length the cor-
respondences between the human organism and human society. However,
in many passages throughout their Rasāʾil, the Ikhwān focus their atten-
tion on man in general rather than on the prophet and the imāms.59 In
these passages, the human organism is perceived not only as a microcosm
which reflects or indicates society and the supreme status of the prophets
and the imāms, but is also seen as an autonomous and independent world
which forms the real locus of human spirituality. Contrary to other Shiʿi-
Ismāʿīlī authors and to philosophers such as Plato and al-Fārābī, who typi-
cally emphasize the political-social aspect of the analogy between man
and the city-state, the Ikhwān stress the individual-personal aspect of
this analogy, that which pertains to man’s inner, spiritual-mystical realm.
The correspondences between the human organism and society serve the
Ikhwān as a means of illustrating the function and significance of this
inner realm.
According to the Ikhwān, man’s body is a city (madīna) or a kingdom
(mamlaka), headed by a king (malik) or a leader (raʾīs)—that is, the
human soul, or rather, the rational/speaking soul (al-nafs al-nāṭiqa). The
faculties (qiwā) of the soul are the soldiers of the city and its sentries, while
the five “external senses” (al-ḥawāss al-ẓāhira) are spies (ʿuyūn, aṣḥāb
al-akhbār), who are responsible for gathering information and bringing
it to the king. As regards “the inner senses” (al-ḥawāss al-bāṭina) or “the
spiritual faculties” of man, the imagining, thinking and preserving facul-
ties (al-mutakhayyila, al-mufakkira, al-ḥāfiẓa) are the close companions
58 As an example of this magical-alchemical aspect, one may mention the term tadbīr
(“management”). This term signifies the universal soul’s management of the physical world,
by means of the celestial spheres (see, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 36, iv, 285);
the individual soul’s management of the human body (ibid. ii, 387); man’s domination of
nature, in his capacity as “God’s vicegerent on earth” (khalīfa; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i,
26); the nāṭiq’s political-religious control over his fellow men (al-Sijistānī, al-Iftikhār 118;
al-Sijistānī, al-Yanābīʿ 91); and, finally, the alchemical operation (Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān ii,
index, s.v. “tadbīr”). Similarly, the concept of khilāfa entails both political-religious author-
ity and magical powers; see above p. 177 n. 72.
59 See also above pp. 179–88.
204 chapter five
60 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 384, 468–72 (cf. ibid. iii, 242); Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa
i, 593–603. On “the inner senses” or “the spiritual faculties”, see above p. 106 n. 103. Note
that in his al-Madīna l-fāḍila (71, chapter 20), al-Fārābī likewise describes the five senses
as aṣḥāb al-akhbār who are in charge of gathering information from the different parts of
the kingdom and bringing it to the king. The latter, according to al-Fārābī, is “the leading
faculty” (al-raʾīsa), which resides in the heart (qalb). On the affinity between the Ikhwān
and al-Fārābī in this context, see above n. 51. On the heart, see below n. 77.
61 On tadbīr see above n. 58.
62 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 382, 384, 387, 389; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 242–
4. For the definition of the human soul and intellect as khalīfas, see above p. 176 n. 70
and pp. 181–2 nn. 85, 87. For the definition of both the nāṭiq and intellect as raʾīs, see
p. 182 n. 90.
63 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 380–2, 385–95; and see also ibid. iii, 427.
64 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 467, iii, 215–21. On the Neoplatonic notion of the cos-
mos as a living organism controlled by the universal soul, see also Plotinus, Enneads iv,
parallel worlds 205
232–9 (= Ennead iv, 4, 32), v, 14–9 (= v, 1, 2). On the analogy between the cosmos and the
polis in Greek philosophy, see Allers, Microcosmus 338.
65 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 104, 111, 137, 154, 185. For the microcosm-macrocosm
analogy in general, and for the terms al-ʿālam al-akbar/al-kabīr and al-ʿālam al-ṣaghīr, see
ibid. 103, 106–12.
66 It is possible that Ibn Sīnā and al-Ghazālī—perhaps even al-Fārābī—were influ-
enced by the Ismāʿīlī tradition in the context dealt with here; see above nn. 14, 51. Note that
al-Ghazālī is mentioned in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s al-Tadbīrāt (122, 134), albeit in a discussion of the
amr-kalima motif which bears resemblance to Ismāʿīlī speculations (on this see below).
206 chapter five
al-Tadbīrāt al-ilāhiyya. Thus, Ibn al-ʿArabī also refers to the human spirit
as “the universal spirit” (al-rūḥ al-kullī), “the holy spirit” (al-rūḥ al-qudusī)
or “the universal holy spirit” (al-rūḥ al-kullī l-qudusī).67 It seems that in Ibn
al-ʿArabī’s view, the spirit found within man, which governs his body and
soul, corresponds to the universal spirit, which controls the whole uni-
verse.68 In Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic writings, the same relationship is envis-
aged between man’s soul and intellect, on the one hand, and the universal
soul and intellect, on the other.69 Elsewhere in his writings, Ibn al-ʿArabī
explicitly identifies the spirit or the universal spirit with the universal
intellect. Similarly, the Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonists refer to the universal intel-
lect, inter alia, as “spirit” or as “the holy spirit”.70 Moreover, Ibn al-ʿArabī
holds that the spirit or the universal spirit was the first being to have been
created; he identifies it with the Divine throne (ʿarsh), and names it “the
first [spiritual] substance” (al-mādda l-ūlā), “the first source of [spiritual]
substance / of reinforcement” (al-mumidd al-awwal) and “the first teacher”
(al-muʿallim al-awwal); and he explains that the spirit was created directly
from God’s word and command (kalima, amr), with no other intermediary
(wāsiṭa) separating between the spirit and its Lord.71 Equally, according
to Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism, the universal intellect is identical to the Divine
throne and is the first created being;72 it is the source of “[spiritual] sub-
stance” or of “reinforcement” (imdād) for the lower cosmic beings,73 and
is also responsible for their taʿlīm (“teaching”), that is, for granting them
spiritual powers and knowledge;74 and, finally, the intellect was created
67 For the terms mentioned here, see Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 120–2, 131, 143–4, 185–6,
188–9, 211, 213. See also ibid. 181: man—that is, his spirit—is entrusted with “the office of
the imām” (manṣib al-imāma). For other passages in which the concepts related to reli-
gious-political power are given an inner, mystical interpretation, see, for example, ibid.
111–2; Ibn al-ʿArabī, ʿAnqāʾ mughrib 6, 60–3. Note also the use of the terms khalīfa and
mustakhlif (“He who appoints someone to the office of khalīfa”) in al-Tadbīrāt 132; and cf.
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 380.
68 See also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 127 (“Wa-nisbat hādhihi l-arwāḥ ʿindahum ilā l-rūḥ
al-kullī ka-nisbat wulāt al-amṣār ilā l-imām [. . .]”).
69 See above p. 154 n. 97.
70 See above p. 152 n. 89; and see also al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 64–5; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
al-Jāmiʿa ii, 139.
71 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 121–5.
72 See above pp. 44–51; concerning the Divine throne, see above p. 50 n. 64.
73 See above p. 49 n. 59, pp. 151–6.
74 For the cosmological context of the terms muʿallim-taʿlīm, see, for instance, Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 354–5, 480, iv, 212–3; cf. Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt iii, 387 (chapter 369,
waṣl 19).
parallel worlds 207
tual forms in the world of the universal intellect. The final victory of the
rational/speaking soul over the appetitive and angry souls and its complete
control over them establishes the ideal hierarchy within man’s spiritual-
psychological realm. This hierarchy, in turn, corresponds to the hierarchy
that prevails in the macrocosm between man and the animals, as well as
to the hierarchy that exists in human society between the friends of God
and all other men.81
In al-Tadbīrāt al-ilāhiyya too, the human organism is perceived as a
battleground in which a similar struggle takes place between the human
spirit and intellect, on the one hand, and the evil inclination of man and
its vizier, lust (shahwa), on the other. These fierce enemies fight for con-
trol over the human soul (nafs), or rather, the rational/speaking soul,
which Ibn al-ʿArabī describes as the “noble” female spouse (ḥurra, karīma)
of the khalīfa-imām, the spirit.82 The Neoplatonic framework is clearly evi-
dent here: according to Ibn al-ʿArabī, the soul corresponds to the Divine
footstool (kursī) and is also identified by him with the universal soul.83
This correspondence is typical of Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic literature, where
the relationship between the universal intellect and soul is likewise por-
trayed as an erotic one, like the relationship between man and wife.84 As
in the Epistles of the Ikhwān, so too in al-Tadbīrāt, the battle over the
human soul is linked to the primordial struggle between Adam and Iblīs.85
The concept of psychomachia—that is, the raging battle within man’s
soul between his base, physical inclinations and the noble, spiritual
ones—and the various motifs pertaining to it (such as the role of Satan;
the evil inclination and lust; or the spiritual interpretation of jihād) are
unique neither to the Ikhwān nor to Ibn al-ʿArabī. They are found in
various Islamic mystical sources, be they Sunni sources—for instance, in
the writings of al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī and al-Ghazālī, or in the teachings
attributed to Sahl al-Tustarī—or Shiʿi ones, for instance, in the work Umm
al-kitāb (“The Mother of the Book”). In fact, the concept of psychomachia
81 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 237–55, especially pp. 242–4. On this Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī
hierarchal worldview, see above pp. 136–43; and cf. the hierarchal perception reflected in
Ibn al-ʿArabī’s al-Tadbīrāt 108–9, 185–6.
82 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 133–8, 141–3, 189–200; see also Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt
i, 162–3 (chapter 5, “waṣl fī qawlihi rabb al-ʿālamīna l-raḥmān al-raḥīm”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s
edition ii, 193–7).
83 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 176, and the references in the previous note.
84 See above p. 50 n. 64. Regarding the erotic relationship between the universal intel-
lect and soul, see, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 200, 203–4; and see also Plotinus,
Enneads iii, 194–203 (= Ennead iii, 5, 8–9).
85 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 137.
210 chapter five
86 See Sviri, Self 196 and the references given there in nn. 8–10; Van Ess, Gedankenwelt
64–159; Elmore, Islamic sainthood 238 n. 11; Böwering, Mystical vision 158–9, 241–61; Radtke,
Iranian and Gnostic elements; Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 96–9, 103–5; see also Plato,
Republic i, 404–9 (= Book iv, 441–2). On the war between the armies of the ʿaql and those
of the jahl (ignorance, wrong conduct or even savagery) in early Shiʿi traditions, see Amir-
Moezzi, La Préexistence 120–2; Amir-Moezzi, Divine guide 7–8 and index, s.v. “ʿaql”.
parallel worlds 211
87 See Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt 120–1 (“Kāna sabab taʾlīfinā li-hādhā l-kitāb annahu
lammā zurtu l-shaykh al-ṣāliḥ abā muḥammad al-mawrūrī bi-madīnat mawrūr wajadtu
ʿindahu kitāb sirr al-asrār [. . .] fa-qāla lī abū muḥammad hādhā l-muʾallif qad naẓara fī
tadbīr hādhihi l-mamlaka l-dunyawiyya fa-kuntu urīdu minka an tuqābilahu bi-siyāsat
al-mamlaka l-insāniyya l-latī fīhā saʿādatunā fa-ajabtuhu wa-awdaʿtu fī hādhā l-kitāb
min maʿānī tadbīr al-mulk akthar min al-ladhī awdaʿahu l-ḥakīm wa-bayyantu fīhi ashyāʾ
aghfalahā l-ḥakīm fī tadbīr al-mulk al-kabīr [. . .] wa-yakūnu jirm kitāb al-ḥakīm fī l-rubʿ aw
al-thulth min jirm hādhā l-kitāb”); see also Takeshita, Ibn ʿArabī’s theory 100; Manzalaoui,
Pseudo-Aristotelian Kitāb sirr al-asrār 242. On al-Mawrūrī see Addas, Quest, index, s.v.
“ʿAbd Allāh (b. al-Ustādh) al-Mawrūrī”. Sirr al-asrār was indeed known to Muslims, Jews
and Christians alike in medieval al-Andalus, and was translated into Latin and Hebrew;
see Manzalaoui, Pseudo-Aristotelian Kitāb sirr al-asrār 158, 170, 189.
88 See Badawī (ed.), Sirr al-asrār 132–3.
89 See ibid. 129–33, 139–40; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 468–72, 474–5, iii, 206–7, 187–96.
90 See Manzalaoui, Pseudo-Aristotelian Kitāb sirr al-asrār 175–84, 193, 197, 199.
91 See Manzalaoui, Pseudo-Aristotelian Kitāb sirr al-asrār 242; cf. ibid. 170, and Grignas-
chi, L’Origine.
212 chapter five
referring only to Sufi literature or, for that matter, to Sirr al-asrār alone.
Rather, this work should also be analyzed by unearthing the subtle links
that connect it to the Ismāʿīlī tradition, particularly to the Epistles of
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ.
Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī Motifs
Elsewhere in this study, I have analyzed the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī perception of
the imāms as God’s names and have also referred to the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī
identification of the imām with the Quran or a Divine holy book (kitāb).93
According to another related notion which is likewise reflected in early
Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī traditions, the imāms are āyāt (singular: āya), i.e., miraculous
signs indicating the existence and greatness of God and, at the same time,
the verses of the Quran. In these traditions, the imām is also described
as al-mathal al-aʿlā (“the most sublime simile”; see Q 30:27; 16:60).94
l-ṣādiq naḥnu wajh allāh wa-naḥnu l-āyāt wa-naḥnu l-bayyināt wa-naḥnu ḥudūd allāh”);
Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-Kashf 44–5, 80, 115, 131–3 (see especially ibid. 131: “[. . .] Minhu
āyāt muḥkamāt hunna umm al-kitāb anna l-kitāb mimmā yusammā bihi l-nāṭiq wa-l-āyāt
mimmā yusammā bihi l-aʾimma”); al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba 29–30 (“Wa-ʿanhu ṣalawāt
allāh ʿalayhi annahu qāla naḥnu āyāt allāh al-kubrā wa-asmāʾihi [read: wa-asmāʾuhu]
l-ḥusnā wa-amthāluhu l-ʿulyā wa-kalimātuhu l-ṣidq wa-l-ʿadl fa-man tawassala bi-ghayrinā
lam yuʿṭā [read: yuʿṭa] wa-man daʿā li-ghayrinā lam yujab [. . .] fa-man aṭāʿanā fa-qad aṭāʿa
llāh wa-man ʿaṣānā fa-qad ʿaṣā llāh”); Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 118.
95 See above pp. 41–51.
96 See above pp. 169–72.
97 See above pp. 51–7.
98 On the universal intellect as a Divine book in the Epistles of the Ikhwān, see above
p. 168 n. 41; and in the writings of Ibn al-ʿArabī, see, for example, al-Futūḥāt i, 160 (chap-
ter 5, “waṣl fī asrār umm al-qurʾān”, = ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition ii, 184: “[. . .] Li-anna l-kitāb
ʿibāra min bāb al-ishāra ʿan al-mubdaʿ al-awwal [. . .]”); see also above pp. 170–2; and in the
works of Ibn Masarra, see Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 145–6, 151–2, 154.
214 chapter five
99 See the many references to the Quran in Jeffery, Āya; Abrahamov, Signs; and ʿAbd
al-Bāqī, al-Muʿjam al-mufahras, s.v. b.ṣ.r., n.ẓ.r., f.k.r., ʿ.q.l. and ʿ.b.r.
100 See Abrahamov, Signs 8–9.
101 Apparently, the aforementioned Kitāb al-dalāʾil wa-l-iʿtibār was the source from
which both al-Ghazālī and Baḥyā derived their notions regarding iʿtibār. On this matter
and on Ibn Rushd and Maimonides, see Baneth, Common teleological source (in Hebrew);
Harvey, Averroes (in Hebrew); Lobel, A Sufi-Jewish dialogue 117–45.
parallel worlds 215
106 See, for example, the titles of the chapters in this Epistle (Rasāʾil ii, 457, 463, 473):
iʿtibār aḥwāl al-insān bi-aḥwāl al-mawjūdāt (“learning about the condition of man from
the condition of [other] existents”), iʿtibār aḥwāl al-insān bi-aḥwāl al-falak (“learning about
the condition of man from the condition of the celestial sphere[s]”), iʿtibār aḥwāl al-insān
bi-l-mawjūdāt al-latī dūna falak al-qamar (“learning about the condition of man from
the existents in the sub-lunar world”). Note also the recurring use of the verb iʿtabara in
this context in ibid. 456–7 (+ naẓar, mushāhada, tafakkur), 458–60; see also ibid. iv, 235
(+ taʾammul). Compare to a similar use of the term iʿtibār in Ibn al-ʿArabī, al-Tadbīrāt
107–9 (+ fikr and the verse from Q 41:53), 120, 126–7, 139–41, 152; see also ibid. 104 (+ naẓar),
105, 111 (+ naẓar). On eschatological salvation (najāt) and the notion of parallel worlds, see
ibid. 111. For the verse from Q 41:53 in the writings of Ibn al-ʿArabī, in a context similar
to the one examined here, see also Chittick, Self-disclosure 6–12; Chittick, Sufi path xv,
157 and n. 21. For a general discussion of iʿtibār in the thought of Ibn al-ʿArabī, see Gril,
L’Interprétation 147, 157–61.
107 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 475–6 (“Fa-nẓur yā akhī ilā hādhā l-haykal al-mabnī bi-l-
ḥikma wa-taʾammal hādhā l-kitāb al-mamlūʾ min al-ʿulūm wa-tafakkar fī hādhā l-ṣirāṭ
al-mustaqīm al-mamdūd bayna l-janna wa-l-nār fa-laʿallaka an tuwaffaqa lil-khayrāt
ʿalayhi wa-l-mamarr ʿalā l-ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm wa-taʾammal hādhā l-mīzān al-mawḍūʿ bi-l-
qisṭ fa-laʿallaka taʿrifu wazn ḥasanātika wa-sayyiʾātika wa-ḥsub ḥisābaka bihi qabla fawt raʾs
mālika fa-inna l-janna min warāʾ hādhā kullihi”).
108 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 608–9, ii, 111; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql
180–1, 226, 240, 263; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 273.
parallel worlds 217
109 See, in addition to the references in nn. 110–12 below, al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-Mudhhiba
29, 41, 63; al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 246–7; al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 176–7, 185, 194.
110 For istidlāl, see, for example, Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 14; Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 114–5 (+ tafakkur), iii, 377 (+ iʿtibār); Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa (Tāmir’s
edition) v, 154; al-Ḥāmidī, Kanz al-walad 273. On istidlāl as the process whereby one learns
about the structure of the universe from religion, see al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 179, 318. On
istidlāl as the unveiling of the inner aspect of religion through its external aspect (= taʾwīl),
see al-Kirmānī, al-Riyāḍ 176.
111 On this early Ismāʿīlī work and its author, see above p. 43.
112 See Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, al-ʿĀlim wa-l-ghulām 15–8, 24–5 and the references in
the index, p. 112. On the friends of God as signs proving the existence of God and as guides,
see also al-Kirmānī, Rāḥat al-ʿaql 51, 217–8; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 672–3, ii, 346–9.
218 chapter five
indicating the seven Cherubs and the twelve “spiritual boundaries”, while
the sun and the moon indicate Kūnī and Qadar respectively.113 Finally,
Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī maintains that the structure of the human body points
to the seven letters of kūnī-qadar and to the awliyāʾ hierarchy—the seven
nuṭaqāʾ, their legatees, the imāms and the ranks of the daʿwa organization.
Al-Rāzī explains that man is
the small world, for within him all the evidence (shawāhid) is assembled
together. Allāh, powerful and mighty is He, created man and all his [differ-
ent] parts as an indicative sign (dalīl) for his own sake, so that he will be an
argument against himself (ḥujja ʿalā nafsihi).114
In al-Rāzī’s view, studying the microcosm and discerning its correspon-
dences with the macrocosm lead one to the recognition of God’s friends.
Man is therefore “an argument against himself ”—in other words, on judg-
ment day, he will not be able to claim that he was unaware of the right
path, unaware of the existence and true nature of the awliyāʾ.115
Contrary to this mainstream Ismāʿīlī approach, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ espouse
a more complex view, one which focuses not only on the prophets and
their heirs, but also on man in general and on the universe at large. As
regards the universe, the macrocosm, the Ikhwān perceive all of creation
as a Divine book and as a reality replete with signs, marks and proofs
(āyāt, ʿalāmāt, dalālāt). This notion is reflected in many passages through-
out their Epistles; the Ikhwān urge the believer to read the cosmic book,
to consider and observe (naẓar), to look into (taʾammul, tadabbur) and to
reflect on (tafakkur) “the signs/verses which are written in the horizons
and in the souls” (al-āyāt al-maktūba fī l-āfāq wa-l-anfus). The decipher-
ing of these signs will lead one to the knowledge of the Creator, His unity,
power and might.116 As to the microcosm, the Ikhwān maintain that man
himself abounds with signs, evidence and proofs (āyāt, shawāhid, dalālāt),
similes and indications (mithālāt/amthāl, ishārāt) which all point to the
113 See Stern, Earliest cosmological doctrines 9, 14–5; see also al-Qāḍī l-Nuʿmān, al-
Mudhhiba 54. On the hypostases and angelic beings mentioned here, see above pp. 41–3.
114 Al-Rāzī, al-Iṣlāḥ 211–2 (“Wa-kadhālika l-sharāʾiʿ kulluhā ʿalā mithāl ṣūrat al-insān
al-ladhī huwa l-ʿālam al-ṣaghīr li-annahu majmaʿ al-shawāhid kullihā wa-inna llāh ʿazza
wa-jalla khalaqahu wa-khalaqa jamīʿ ajzāʾihi dalīlan lahu li-yakūna ḥujja ʿalā nafsihi”); see
also ibid. 213.
115 On the term ḥujja, see above p. 66 n. 118.
116 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 104–7, 151, 182, 199–201, 289–90, 360,
448–50, ii, 21, 25–6, 35, 356.
parallel worlds 219
117 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 457, 463, 472, iv, 235; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
al-Jāmiʿa i, 239, 241, 333.
118 See, for instance, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 475–6, iv, 167–8, 237; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ,
al-Jāmiʿa i, 170–2, 579–81, 592, ii, 332–3.
119 See Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 175 (“Thumma jaʿala ʿazza wa-jalla kull mā khalaqa min
samāʾihi wa-arḍihi āyāt dāllāt ʿalayhi muʿriba bi-rubūbiyyatihi wa-ṣifātihi l-ḥusnā fa-l-
220 chapter five
ʿālam kulluhu kitāb ḥurūfuhu kalāmuhu yaqraʾuhu l-mustabṣirūna [. . .]”), 176 (“[. . .] Kull
mā khalaqa min shayʾ mawḍūʿ lil-fikra wa-maṭlab lil-dalāla”; “Wa-nabbaha ʿazza wa-
jalla wa-ḥaḍḍa wa-karrara wa-raghghaba fī kitābihi ʿalā l-tafakkur wa-l-tadhakkur wa-l-
tabaṣṣur”; “Wa-baʿatha l-anbiyāʾ ṣalāt allāh ʿalayhim wa-barakātuhu yunabbiʾūna l-nās
wa-yubayyinūna lahum al-umūr al-bāṭina wa-yastashhidūna ʿalayhā bi-l-āyāt al-ẓāhira
[. . .]”); see also ibid. 189. For a general discussion of the concept of iʿtibār in Ibn Masarra’s
thought, see Gril, L’Interprétation 149–52.
120 See below pp. 221–9. On the eschatological dimension in Ibn Masarra’s thought, see
also Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings 212, 228, 231, 243–4.
121 In addition to iʿtibār, Ibn Masarra also employs the terms naẓar and istidlāl in order
to designate the process described here; see Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 175–6, 179–81, 184–7,
189; Ibn Masarra, Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 130, 133, 135–6, 140–1. Other relevant terms are fikra and
tafakkur; see al-Iʿtibār 175–6; Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 130. As is clear from the discussion in this
chapter, all these various terms are quite common in Ismāʿīlī literature, in contexts which
are similar to those found in Ibn Masarra’s works.
parallel worlds 221
already informed [us] of it and has roused [our] attention to it, whether in
a detailed or a general way.122
The correspondence between religion and the structure of the universe
may explain why Ibn Masarra and the Ikhwān assume such a close link
between the knowledge of the Quran and the study of creation. Both the
Quran and the universe are Divine texts; hence, the interpretation of one
inevitably leads to the deciphering of the other. This idea may also explain
why Ibn Masarra and the Ikhwān chose to interpret the Quranic fawātiḥ
in line with Neoplatonic cosmology and the notion of parallel worlds, and
why they both perceive this interpretation as an act of human contempla-
tion, iʿtibār.123
Mystical Ascension
Mystical ascension is a common theme in the mystical writings of all
three Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity and Islam. There are
many questions pertaining to this theme: for instance, who is granted the
privilege of performing such an ascension, and which part of man par-
ticipates in it (the soul, the intellect or the physical body as well)? What
is the final destination or limit of the mystical ascension? When does the
ascension take place (during sleep, or in the state of wakefulness; before
death, or thereafter)? And what is the ultimate goal of the ascension
(a vision of the upper worlds, the obtainment of Divine secrets, union with
God, etc.)?124 I will limit myself here to a discussion of the link between
122 Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 189–90 (“Fa-jāʾa khabar al-nubuwwa mubtadiʾan min jihat
al-ʿarsh nāzilan ilā l-arḍ fa-wāfaqa l-iʿtibār al-ṣāʿid min jihat al-arḍ ilā l-ʿarsh sawāʾan
sawāʾan lā farq lam yaʾti nabaʾ ʿan allāh bayyinan illā wa-fī l-ʿālam āya dālla ʿalā dhālika
l-nabaʾ wa-laysa fī l-ʿālam āya dālla ʿalā nabaʾ illā wa-l-nubuwwa qad nabbaʾat bihi wa-
nabbahat ʿalayhi immā tafṣīlan wa-immā mujmalan”); see also ibid. 175, 178. Note that in a
discussion of his concerning the structure of the universe (in line with Neoplatonic cos-
mology), and the way in which this structure is reflected in the basmala, Ibn Masarra
emphasizes the compatibility of prophetic knowledge with the knowledge of Divine unity
that was attained by “the philosophers and the ancient ones from among the erring nations
(al-umam al-ḍālla), those who lived in the periods of intervals [between the prophets,
ahl al-fatarāt]”; see Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf 133. This positive, albeit condescending attitude of
Ibn Masarra towards the philosophers brings to mind the positive attitude of the Ismāʿīli
Neoplatonists towards philosophers, particularly that of the Ikhwān; see, for example, El-
Bizri, Epistles 10–13; Netton, Muslim Neoplatonists 6–52. On the other hand, Ibn Masarra
is also quite critical of the philosophers; see al-Iʿtibār 187–8; see also Stroumsa and Sviri,
Beginnings 212, 230–1, 241; and cf. Tornero, A report, especially pp. 134–5.
123 See above pp. 103–8.
124 On the theme of mystical ascension, mainly in Judaism and Islam, see Idel,
Ascensions; Idel, Kabbalah 88–96, and the references given there in n. 88–94; Altmann,
222 chapter five
Ladder; Amir-Moezzi, Le Voyage; Colby, Subtleties, especially pp. 1–27; Colby, Narrating
Muḥammad’s night journey; Chodkiewicz, Seal of the saints 147–82; Morris, Spiritual ascen-
sion; Bar-Asher and Kofsky, Nuṣayrī-ʿAlawī religion 75–88; Gruber and Colby, Prophet’s
ascension; Vuckovic, Heavenly journeys; Van Bladel, Arabic Hermes 164–84; Halperin, Hek-
halot and Miʿraj.
125 See, for example, Plotinus, Enneads i, 258–63 (= Ennead i, 6, 9), iv, 140–3, 396–401
(= iv, 4, 2; iv, 8, 1), v, 14–21, 72–135, 268–77, 286–91 (= v, 1, 2–3; v, 3; v, 8, 10–11; v, 9, 1–2), vii,
181–201, 301–45 (= vi, 7, 31–36; vi, 9); see also the references above in p. 24 n. 71.
126 On this work, see above pp. 36–40.
127 See, for instance, Badawī (ed.), Theology of Aristotle (the shorter version) 110 (“Fa-idhā
raʾā hādhihi l-ashyāʾ al-ḥissiyya l-latī fī hādhā l-ʿālam al-suflī l-ḥissī fa-l-yarqa bi-ʿaqlihi ilā
l-ʿālam al-aʿlā l-ḥaqq [. . .] wa-yulqi baṣarahu ʿalayhi fa-innahu sa-yarā l-ashyāʾ kullahā l-latī
raʾāhā fī hādhā l-ʿālam ghayr annahu yarāhā ʿaqliyya dāʾima muttaṣila bi-faḍāʾil wa-ḥayāt
naqiyya [. . .] wa-yarā hunāka l-ʿaql al-sharīf qayyiman ʿalayhā wa-mudabbiran lahā bi-ḥikma
lā tūṣafu [. . .] wa-yarā hunāka l-ashyāʾ mumtaliʾa nūran wa-ʿaqlan wa-ḥikma [. . .]”), 111.
128 See Q 6:75–9. For the Jewish midrashic motifs, see the references in Stroumsa and
Sviri, Beginnings 211 n. 43.
parallel worlds 223
of the 10th century,129 incorporated these themes into the distinctive cos-
mological scheme of Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism:
When [Abraham] discovered the rank of al-Jadd 130 and saw ( fa-raʾā) its
light, its beauty and its majesty, he considered [it] extraordinary, deemed
[it] great and assumed that it was the Creator. Yet when he looked closely
at it (taʾammalahu), he found that it ultimately reached that which was
above it [or: that it reached its end by that which was above it, mutanāhiyan
ilā mā fawqahu].
Then, according to al-Nasafī, when Abraham
saw the [universal] soul, which had appeared before him in its very own
being (qad tarāyā lahu bi-huwiyyatihi), and he saw its light, its beauty and
its greatness, he became submissive, acknowledged that this was the Creator
and said: ‘this is my Lord [see Q 6:77]’. However, when he finally reached
(tanāhā) the boundary of the preceding one [ḥadd al-sābiq, i.e., the level of
the universal intellect], he discovered that the [universal soul] is [likewise]
finite (mutanāhiyan) [. . .] [And when Abraham] discovered the boundary of
the preceding one, he deemed it great, acknowledged [his own] servitude
and said, ‘this is my Lord, this is bigger [Q 6:78]’. He said concerning it what
he had said concerning al-Jadd and the [universal] soul.
Having realized that all created beings, in their very nature, are finite,
Abraham eventually came to recognize the one supreme God.131 In this
passage, the contemplation of the structure of creation is perceived not
only as a mental-intellectual activity, but also as a mystical ascension
through the various levels of the cosmos—the angelic hypostases al-Jadd,
al-Fatḥ and al-Khayāl, situated (according to Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonic cosmol-
ogy) beneath the universal soul; the universal soul; the universal intellect;
and, finally, God. In the course of this ascension, man reaches (tanāhā
in al-Nasafī’s text) the uppermost spiritual worlds—perhaps even God
132 This may be inferred from al-Rāzī’s criticism of al-Nasafī. According to the former,
the vision of God is not at all possible, while the vision of the universal soul and intel-
lect in this world amounts only to intellectual knowledge; see al-Iṣlāḥ 184–9, especially
p. 185: (“Fa-inna hādhihi manzila lā yanālūnahā fī hādhā l-ʿālam innamā yaʿrifūna nūrahu
wa-bahāʾahu maʿrifa wa-ʿilman lā ruʾya bi-huwiyyatihi wa-lā yajūzu an yaʿtaqida annahum
yanālūna ruʾyat al-aṣlayni bi-huwiyyatihimā fī hādhā l-ʿālam [. . .]”).
133 Compare the passage analyzed here to the description of the mystical ascension in
Plotinus, Enneads v, 286–91 (= Ennead v, 9, 1–2).
134 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 158 (“[. . .] Anna madhhab ikhwāninā [. . .] huwa l-naẓar
fī jamīʿ al-mawjūdāt wa-l-baḥth ʿan mabādiʾihā wa-ʿan ʿillat wijdānihā wa-ʿan marātib
niẓāmihā wa-l-kashf ʿan kayfiyyat irtibāṭ maʿlūlātihā bi-ʿilalihā”), 159 (“[. . .] Fa-inna l-naẓar
fī hādhā l-ʿālam yakūnu sababan li-taraqqī himam nufūsinā ilā ʿālam al-aflāk maskin
al-ʿilliyyīna wa-yakthuru jawalānu afkārinā [or: wa-yukaththiru jawalāna afkārinā] fī maḥall
al-rūḥāniyyīna wa-kathrat afkārinā fī ʿālam al-aflāk takūnu sababan li-ntibāh nufūsinā min
nawm al-ghafla wa-raqdat al-jahāla wa-yadʿūhā dhālika ilā l-inbiʿāth min ʿālam al-kawn
parallel worlds 225
In other passages as well, the Ikhwān link the figure of Abraham and
the motif of “the kingdom of the heavens and the earth” to the herme-
neutical-mystical process whereby the believer studies reality, deciphers
its signs and reads the microcosmic and macrocosmic books.135 Through-
out their Epistles, the Ikhwān emphasize the eschatological outcome of
this process: the contemplation of reality is indispensable for man’s spiri-
tual salvation, and it guarantees his final passage, following his physical
death, to the world of the celestial spheres, where he becomes an actual,
living angel.136
In Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ, studying “the kingdom of the heavens and
the earth”, reflecting on the Divine signs within creation and reading the
cosmic book are perceived as a religious-mystical ritual which involves
the observance of the heavenly bodies, ablution and prayer.137 More-
over, according to the Ikhwān, by contemplating reality and reading
the microcosmic and macrocosmic books, man experiences not only a
mystical-intellectual ascension, but also a profound change in his very own
personality. In one passage, the Ikhwān urge the believer to read the four
types of books which form the basis of their religious-spiritual path: the
philosophers’ books; the holy books delivered by the prophets; “the books
of nature” (al-kutub al-ṭabīʿiyya), that is, the world of the celestial spheres
and the sub-lunar world with all its inhabitants; and, finally, “the Divine
books” (al-kutub al-ilāhiyya)—the human souls, their modes of operation,
the hierarchy in which they are organized and their eschatological fate.
The Ikhwān assure the believer that if he were to join their company,
assimilate their moral traits (al-takhalluq bi-akhlāqihim) and awaken his
soul from its “sleep of neglectfulness and slumber of ignorance”, then
wa-l-fasād ilā ʿālam al-baqāʾ wa-l-dawām wa-yuraghghibuhā fī l-riḥla min ʿālam al-ajsād
wa-jiwār al-shayāṭīn ilā ʿālam al-arwāḥ wa-jiwār al-malāʾika l-muqarrabīna”; “[. . .] Lil-
mutafakkirīna fī malakūt al-samawāt wa-l-arḍīna l-ladhīna yaqūlūna rabbanā mā khalaqta
hādhā bāṭilan [. . .] wa-qāla llāh taʿālā wa-fī l-arḍ āyāt lil-mūqinīna wa-qāla wa-kadhālika
nurī ibrāhīm malakūt al-samawāt wa-l-arḍ wa-li-yakūna min al-mūqinīna”). Concerning the
expression “to roam” ( jawalān) in this context, cf. Ibn Masarra, al-Iʿtibār 182; and see also
Stroumsa and Sviri, Beginnings 234–5.
135 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 170–1, 212–3, 360–3; see also Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil
iv, 251–2.
136 See, for example, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil i, 167–8 (where the terms iʿtibār, naẓar,
tafakkur and āyāt are mentioned), iv, 68 (tafkīr and iʿtibār), 237 (where taʾammul, naẓar,
tafakkur and āyāt are mentioned with the motifs of the book and mystical ascension).
137 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 264. For the Ḥarrānian-Ṣābiʾian background of this
ritual, see Marquet, Sabéens 96–103; see also Corbin, Sabian temple.
226 chapter five
your chest will become expanded, your sagacity will become pure and the
eye of inner vision (ʿayn al-baṣīra) will open from within your heart. You will
see ( fa-tarā) what they [the Ikhwān] have visualized with the eyes of their
hearts (mā qad abṣarūhu bi-ʿuyūn qulūbihim); you will watch (wa-tushāhidu)
what they have viewed with their own eyes (ʿāyanūhu) through the purity of
the substances of their souls; you will observe (wa-tanẓuru) what they have
observed through the light of their intellects (bi-nūr ʿuqūlihim); and you will
understand the meanings of these four [types of] books as they have under-
stood. Then you will be given support with the spirit of life; you will live as
the learned ones live and as the martyrs live; and you will be given the abil-
ity to climb up to the kingdom of heaven (wa-tuwaffaqu lil-ṣuʿūd ilā malakūt
al-samāʾ), where you will observe the supreme assembly, ‘the [angels] who
circle round the throne, praising their Lord [Q 39:75]’ [. . .]138
The experience which is described so beautifully in this passage is both
of an intellectual nature (bi-nūr ʿuqūlihim) and of a visionary-mystical one
(wa-tushāhidu, ʿāyanūhu, wa-tanẓuru, ʿayn al-baṣīra, bi-ʿuyūn qulūbihim).
The link between the intellect and the heart as well as the notion of inner
vision are already found in early Shiʿi traditions to which I have referred
above.139 Yet in this passage of the Ikhwān, the figure of the imām, which
serves as the focal point of the Shiʿi spiritual-mystical experience, is here
replaced by man in general, “the Divine book”. The climax of the contem-
plative experience is described by the Ikhwān in clear mystical terms:
Oh brother, observe this Divine, universal providence and the wise gover-
nance of the Lord, reflect on it, contemplate it—and perhaps your soul will
waken from the sleep of neglectfulness and the slumber of ignorance. The
eye of inner vision will then open up for your soul, and through the light of
the intellect you [or: your soul] will observe this wise Maker (al-ṣāniʿ ), who
manages these affairs, in the same way that you have observed with the
physical eye the objects of [His] making (al-maṣnūʿāt) [. . .]140
138 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iv, 168 (“[. . .] Wa-yanshariḥu ṣadruka wa-yaṣfū dhih-
nuka fa-tuftaḥu ʿayn al-baṣīra min qalbika fa-tarā mā qad abṣarūhu bi-ʿuyūn qulūbihim
wa-tushāhidu mā qad ʿāyanūhu bi-ṣafāʾ jawāhir nufūsihim wa-tanẓuru ilā mā naẓarū ilayhi
bi-nūr ʿuqūlihim wa-tafhamu maʿānī hādhihi l-kutub al-arbaʿa kamā fahimūhā wa-tuʾayyadu
bi-rūḥ al-ḥayāt wa-taʿīshu ʿaysh al-ʿulamāʾ wa-taḥyā ḥayāt al-shuhadāʾ wa-tuwaffaqu lil-ṣuʿūd
ilā malakūt al-samāʾ wa-tanẓuru ilā l-malaʾ al-aʿlā l-ḥāffīna min ḥawli l-ʿarsh yusabbiḥūna
bi-ḥamd rabbihim [. . .]”). On the four books mentioned here, see also ibid. 42.
139 See p. 180.
140 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ii, 73 (“Fa-nẓur yā akhī ilā hādhihi l-ʿināya l-ilāhiyya l-kulliyya
wa-l-siyāsa l-rabbāniyya l-ḥakīma wa-tafakkar fīhā wa-ʿtabirhā laʿalla nafsaka tantabihu
min nawm al-ghafla wa-raqdat al-jahāla wa-tanfatiḥu lahā ʿayn al-baṣīra fa-tanẓuru bi-nūr
al-ʿaql ilā hādhā l-ṣāniʿ al-ḥakīm al-mudabbir li-hādhihi l-umūr kamā naẓarta bi-ʿayn al-
jasad ilā hādhihi l-maṣnūʿāt [. . .]”).
parallel worlds 227
Thus, the contemplation of reality and the deciphering of the Divine signs
reveal the figure of the Maker to “the eye of inner vision”. This figure is
veiled (muḥtajib) or hidden from the majority of human beings; discover-
ing it becomes possible when one follows “the traces of the handiwork
(athar al-ṣanʿa) in the manufactured objects themselves (al-maṣnūʿāt)”, in
other words, when one deciphers the signs that testify to the existence of
the Maker or “the Manufacturer”. The believers who manage to do so and
are granted the vision of God are described by the Ikhwān as “those who
possess Divine knowledge” (al-ʿārifūn), “those who are endowed with per-
ceptive vision” (al-mustabṣirūn) and “the friends of Allāh” (awliyāʾ allāh).
They are likewise given appellations that are typically reserved for the
prophets and the imāms—“the chosen ones” (al-muṣṭafawna) and “Allāh’s
elect” (aṣfiyāʾ allāh).141 Their mystical knowledge and vision of God are
permanent and everlasting:
They see Him and watch Him in all their states and in everything that they
do, night and day; He does not conceal Himself from them, not even for a
single moment.
Having fathomed the Divine signs in creation,
Allāh expands their hearts, illuminates their inner vision (abṣārahum) and
removes the covering from them, so that they finally see Him and watch
Him with their inner vision, in the same way that they have known Him
with their hearts.142
The Divine knowledge which these awliyāʾ obtain pertains primarily to
cosmological and cosmogonic matters—all expressed in Neoplatonic
terms.143
141 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 336 (“Faṣl fī bayān mushāhadat al-ʿulamāʾ al-ḥukamāʾ
al-ʿārifīna l-mustabṣirīna l-ladhīna hum awliyāʾ allāh al-muṣṭafawna l-ladhīna yarawna ṣāniʿ
al-ʿālam bi-ʿayn al-baṣīra”; “Fa-ʿlam anna ṣāniʿ al-ʿālam lammā kāna muḥtajiban ʿan abṣār
al-nāẓirīna l-ladhīna hum bihi jāhilūna kāna athar al-ṣanʿa fī maṣnūʿātihi ẓāhiran jaliyyan
bayyinan lā yakhfā ʿalā kull ʿāqil munṣif li-ʿaqlihi [. . .] fa-mushāhadatuhum athar al-ṣanʿa
fī l-maṣnūʿ [. . .] dalāla ʿalā annahā kullahā bi-qaṣd qāṣid wa-ṣanʿ ṣāniʿ wa-fiʿl ḥakīm qādir
[. . .]”). See also ibid. ii, 152.
142 Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 336 (“Wa-ammā awliyāʾ allāh wa-aṣfiyāʾuhu wa-l-ʿulamāʾ
al-ʿārifūna l-mustabṣirūna fa-innahum yarawnahu wa-yushāhidūnahu fī jamīʿ aḥwālihim
wa-mutaṣarrafātihim laylahum wa-nahārahum lā yaghību ʿanhum ṭarfat ʿayn [. . .]”),
337 (“Wa-lammā taḥaqqaqa awliyāʾ allāh taʿālā fahm hādhihi l-āyāt wa-ʿarafūhā ḥaqq
maʿrifatihā sharaḥa llāh qulūbahum wa-nawwara abṣārahum wa-kashafa l-ghiṭāʾ ʿanhum
ḥattā raʾawhu wa-shāhadūhu bi-abṣārihim kamā ʿarafūhu bi-qulūbihim [. . .]”). See also
ibid. iii, 310–2; Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, al-Jāmiʿa i, 452–5. Regarding the term al-mustabṣirūn, cf.
ibid. 200 (ahl al-baṣāʾir), 360 (ūlī l-abṣār), ii, 356 (dhawī l-baṣāʾir).
143 See Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil iii, 342–3, and note the use of the term iʿtibār on p. 342.
228 chapter five
Conclusion
1 The works of the 9th century Sunni mystic al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī share several of
the traits mentioned here—namely, a theosophical discourse, letter speculations and a
developed theory of walāya. However, al-Tirmidhī can be defined neither as a classical Sufi
232 chapter six
the writings of later authors such as Ḥaydar Āmulī.2 On the other hand,
these traits are all found in Ismāʿīlī literature.
The links and affinities between the Ismāʿīlī tradition and the thought of
Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī are thus undeniable. However, their precise
historical meaning is a matter of interpretation, and, most likely, of future
dispute. Various scholars may indeed choose different ways of explaining
the similarities between Ismāʿīlī literature and the writings of Ibn Masarra
and Ibn al-ʿArabī. More specifically, two main historical explanations are
plausible in this context:
– Ismāʿīlī thought, on the one hand, and the teachings of Ibn Masarra and
Ibn al-ʿArabī, on the other, are best perceived as two parallel lines in
the history of Islamic mysticism. Both derive from common sources—
the pre-Islamic heritage (including the Gnostic and Hermetic traditions,
as well as Hellenistic and Late-Antique Neoplatonism), the Quran and
Ḥadīth, Arabic theology and philosophy and so on. Although one may
speak of mutual influences between the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī tradition and Sunni
mysticism in different points of time and in certain historical junctures,
as a rule, the Ismāʿīlī authors and the Andalusī-Sunni mystics referred
to here represent distinct branches in the world of Islamic mysticism,
stemming from the same, common roots.
– The Ismāʿīlī tradition played a significant role in the formation of the
intellectual world from which both Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī
emerged. Despite the fact that these two authors were doubtlessly influ-
enced by other, diverse sources—such as the Quran and Ḥadīth, Arabic
theology and philosophy, and, in the case of Ibn al-ʿArabī, by Sufism
as well—the Ismāʿīlī tradition helped shape the unique intellectual cli-
mate in North Africa and al-Andalus from which Ibn Masarra and Ibn
al-ʿArabī derived.
As stated above, both approaches are plausible, and modern scholarship
in the field of Islamic mysticism will only benefit from scholarly attempts
to substantiate either of the two. As is clear by now to the reader, I favor
the second approach—the one which points to the significant role of the
Ismāʿīlī tradition in the development of mystical-philosophical thought
in medieval al-Andalus. In my opinion, this approach is corroborated
by various historical facts which are often ignored by scholars who
study the works of Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī. To begin with, the
3 Although the Ismāʿīlī tradition originated in Iraq and Syria, and despite the fact that
its exponents were present throughout the Islamic world, many if not most of the signifi-
cant developments in Ismāʿīlī thought during the 10th–12th centuries were connected, in
one way or the other, to the Fāṭimī Empire and its religious-political fortunes.
4 See above p. 28 n. 83.
5 See above pp. 73–4.
6 See above p. 74.
7 See above pp. 4, 32 nn. 11, 94.
234 chapter six
*
It is important to emphasize once again that the conclusions reached here
regarding the affinities between the Ismāʿīlī tradition and Ibn Masarra
and Ibn al-ʿArabī by no means imply that the latter two were Ismāʿīlīs or
Shiʿis in any way.8 Nowhere in their writings can one find an expression
of the most essential and fundamental tenet of the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī belief—
the recognition of ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib and his descendants, the imāms, as the
sole legitimate leaders of the Islamic community. If one may speak of an
Ismāʿīlī impact on the intellectual world from which Ibn Masarra and Ibn
al-ʿArabī emerged, it is only in the nature of their mystical-philosophical
discourse. Furthermore, in my eyes, Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī should
be viewed as having successfully faced the Shiʿi and the Fāṭimī-Ismāʿīlī
challenge to the Sunni tradition. Rather than simply adopting or plagia-
rizing concepts that ultimately originated in the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī world, Ibn
Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī adapted these concepts to their Sunni heritage,
incorporating them into their own original teachings. Whether or not Ibn
Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī were aware of the Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī provenance of
various ideas and terms which they employed in their writings is a ques-
tion that cannot be given a simple answer. Each case must be judged on
its own.
8 See also above p. 8. For Ibn al-ʿArabī’s criticism of the Shiʿa, see, for example, Ibn
al-ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt, ʿUthmān Yaḥyā’s edition iv, 280 (chapter 55); and al-Ghorab,
Muhyiddin Ibn al-ʿArabi 202–6, 213–6; Chodkiewicz, Ibn ʿArabī 87.
conclusion 235
Although this study has focused on the common traits that link Ibn
Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī to the Ismāʿīlī authors, the profound differ-
ences between their distinct worldviews and their originality should not
be overlooked.9 Essential differences are likewise found between Ibn
Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī themselves, and perhaps it is not superfluous
to reiterate here that the Ismāʿīlī world was also comprised of diverse and
often rival factions. These factions, as I have mentioned earlier on in this
study, differed on important doctrinal issues.10
Finally, one should bear in mind that the Ismāʿīlī tradition is but one
source among many that helped shape the intellectual world of Ibn
Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī. The latter in particular may be viewed as hav-
ing integrated into his thought many different traditions which origi-
nated in a variety of sources. These sources—be they Sufi or Shiʿi-Ismāʿīlī,
theological or philosophical—should all be given their due attention by
scholars.
9 See, for example, concerning dhikr in Ibn Masarra’s thought (above p. 52), or the
concepts of nafas al-raḥmān and ʿamāʾ in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s writings (above pp. 53–7). Ibn
Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī incorporated these original concepts into Neoplatonic schemes
that are otherwise found in Ismāʿīlī sources as well. Note also, for example, the essential
difference between Ibn al-ʿArabī’s monistic vision of existence and the Ikhwān’s view, in
the context of their discussions concerning “the words of God” (above p. 55).
10 See above p. 180.
11 See above p. 28.
12 On Ibn Masarra and the Ikhwān’s Epistles see the discussion below.
236 chapter six
as is clear from this work and other studies as well.17 Second, it is evident
that various Ismāʿīlī teachings, other than those of the Ikhwān, likewise
played their role in the formation of the mystical-philosophical thought in
medieval North Africa and al-Andalus. Such is the conclusion one reaches
when analyzing the subject of letter speculations: with one exception,18
the Epistles of the Ikhwān do not contain any letter speculations of the
mythical-anthropomorphic and Neoplatonic kind that are so central to
the thought of Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī. Such speculations, how
ever, are indeed found in other Ismāʿīlī works, such as the 10th century
North-African Kitāb al-ʿālim wa-l-ghulām, Kitāb al-kashf and the writings
of al-Rāzī and al-Sijistānī.
One last issue which deserves our attention here is the chronological
problems related to the links between Ibn Masarra and the Ikhwān. In
line with several previous studies,19 this work has demonstrated the close
affinity between Ibn Masarra’s teachings and the thought of the Ikhwān.
However, Ibn Masarra died in the year 931, whereas, according to most
modern scholars, the Epistles were composed sometime during the sec-
ond half of the 10th century.20 Stroumsa and Sviri have suggested that
Ibn Masarra may have derived his teachings from an intellectual-mystical
milieu that was similar or even identical to the one that gave rise to the
Ikhwān.21 Another possible solution to this chronological problem would
be to establish an earlier date—as some scholars have proposed22—for
the compilation of the Brethren’s Epistles or at least parts of them, i.e.
the first three decades of the 10th century. This is the solution I favor.
Several factors—the similarities between Ibn Masarra and the Ikhwān;
the convincing arguments of Maribel Fierro regarding the early dating
of Ghāyat al-ḥakīm and Rutbāt al-ḥakīm and the latters’ relation to the
Ikhwān’s Epistles;23 and the links between the Rasāʾil and the Jābirian cor-
pus, which was composed during the second half of the 9th century and
the first half of the 10th century—24 these factors indicate, in my opin-
ion, that the Rasāʾil were compiled at an earlier date than is commonly
assumed.25 I will add that the Ismāʿīlīs in North Africa seem to have
taken an interest in Neoplatonic philosophy long before its official adop-
tion by the Fāṭimī Caliph-imām al-Muʿizz in the third quarter of the 10th
century.26 It is possible that Ibn Masarra became acquainted with Neo-
platonic texts—perhaps even with the Epistles of the Ikhwān, or several
of these Epistles—during his stay in Qayrawān, in the course of his visit
to Mecca or maybe even after his return to al-Andalus. At any rate, the
difficulties pertaining to the dating of Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ are far from
being resolved at this point in time. It is clear, though, that any future
discussion of this matter will have to take into account the links between
Ibn Masarra and the Ikhwān.
*
The fact that in various aspects both Ismāʿīlī authors and Andalusī writers
such as Ibn Masarra and Ibn al-ʿArabī represent a type of mysticism that is
different from the classical, eastern Sufi type testifies to the richness and
diversity of medieval Islamic mysticism. Crude typologies and simplistic
definitions of Islamic mysticism, hitherto prevalent in modern scholar-
ship, should be abandoned in favor of a more sophisticated approach.
Islamic mysticism does not amount to Sufism alone. Furthermore, as
previously noted by scholars such as Henry Corbin and Amir-Moezzi,27
the Shiʿi and Ismāʿīlī traditions should be regarded as playing a central
role in the development of Islamic esotericism and mysticism, not only
in the later middle ages, but also—and perhaps more significantly so—
in the formative periods of Islamic culture.
25 An earlier dating of the Rasāʾil is, of course, not without its own problems. Most sig-
nificantly, it does not fit in with the later date (the second half of the 10th century) which
various scholars have established on the basis of the well-known report by Abū Ḥayyān
al-Tawḥīdī (who lived approximately between the years 310–320/922–932 and 414/1023),
in his Kitāb al-imtāʿ wa-l-muʾānasa. In this report, al-Tawḥīdī mentions the names of sev-
eral men, who, according to him, were responsible for composing the Rasāʾil; see Stern,
Authorship; Stern, New information. However, the common understanding of this report
has been called into question by certain scholars; see Marquet, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ 1071–3;
Hamdani, Abū Ḥayyān al-Tawḥīdī; Hamdani, The Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ 189–90, 197–8, 201, 203
n. 10; cf. Kraemer, Humanism 165–78, especially p. 168 n. 165. This issue should be read-
dressed in the future, especially in light of Fierro’s study on the Ghāya and the Rutba and
the findings in this work concerning Ibn Masarra and the Ikhwān.
26 See above p. 76 nn. 149–50.
27 See the references to their works in the bibliography.
Bibliography
——, ʿUqlat al-mustawfiz, in Kleinere Schriften des Ibn al-ʿArabī, ed. H. S. Nyberg, Leiden
1919, 39–99.
Ibn ʿAsākir, Abū l-Qāsim ʿAlī b. al-Ḥasan, Taʾrīkh madīnat dimashq, ed. ʿUmar b. Gharāma
al-ʿUmrawī, 80 vols., Beirut 1995–8.
Ibn Bābawayhi, al-Shaykh al-Ṣadūq, Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad b. ʿAlī, al-Tawḥīd, ed. Hāshim
al-Ḥusaynī l-Ṭihrānī, Qom, n.d.
——, ʿUyūn akhbār al-riḍā, ed. Ḥusayn al-Aʿlamī, Beirut 1984.
Ibn Durayd, Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan, K. Jamharat al-lugha, ed. Ramzī Munīr
Baʿalbakī, Beirut 1987–8.
Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, Abū l-Faḍl Aḥmad b. ʿAlī, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, ed. Muṣṭafā ʿAbd
al-Qādir ʿAṭā, 12 vols., Beirut 1994.
Ibn Ḥanbal, Aḥmad b. Muḥammad, al-Musnad, ed. Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir, 20 vols.,
Cairo 1995.
Ibn Ḥawshab Manṣūr al-Yaman, Abū l-Qāsim al-Ḥasan b. Faraḥ/Faraj, K. al-Rushd wa-l-
hidāya, ed. Muḥammad Kāmil Ḥusayn, in Ivanow, V. (ed.), Collectanea i (The Ismaili
Society Series, A n. 2), Leiden 1948, 185–213.
Ibn al-Haytham, The advent of the Fatimids: a contemporary Shiʿi witness. An edition and
English translation of Ibn al-Haytham’s Kitab al-munazarat, eds. and trans. W. Madelung
and P. E. Walker, London 2000.
Ibn Khaldūn, Walī l-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Muḥammad, Muqaddimat Ibn Khaldūn, ed. ʿAlī
ʿAbd al-Wāḥid Wāfī, 3 vols., Cairo 1979–81.
Ibn Manẓūr, Abū l-Faḍl Muḥammad b. Mukarram, Lisān al-ʿarab, 15 vols., Beirut 1956.
Ibn Masarra l-Jabalī, Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad b. ʿAbd Allāh, K. Khawāṣṣ al-ḥurūf wa-
ḥaqāʾiqihā wa-uṣūlihā, Chester Beatty library, manuscript 3168, 129–66 (edited by Jaʿfar,
Min qaḍāyā l-fikr al-islāmī, 311–44 and Garrido Clemente, Edición crítica del K. jawāṣṣ
al-ḥurūf ).
——, Risālat al-iʿtibār, Chester Beatty library, manuscript 3168, 175–90 (edited by Jaʿfar,
Min qaḍāyā l-fikr al-islāmī, 348–60 and Garrido Clemente, Edición crítica de la Risālat
al-iʿtibār).
Ibn Qutayba, Abū Muḥammad ʿAbd Allāh b. Muslim, Taʾwīl mukhtalif al-ḥadīth, ed.
Muḥammad Zuhrī l-Najjār, Beirut 1972.
Ibn Shahrāshūb, Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad b. ʿAlī, Manāqib āl abī ṭālib, ed. Yūsuf al-Buqāʿī,
1421 H.
Ibn Shuʿba l-Ḥarrānī, Abū Muḥammad al-Ḥasan b. ʿAlī, Tuḥaf al-ʿuqūl, ed. ʿAlī Akbar al-
Ghifārī, Qom 1404 H.
Ibn Sīnā, Abū ʿAlī l-Ḥusayn b. ʿAbd Allāh, al-Risāla l-nayrūziyya fī maʿānī l-ḥurūf al-hijāʾiyya,
in Tisʿ rasāʾil fī l-ḥikma wa-l-ṭabīʿiyyāt, Qusṭanṭīniyya 1298 H., 92–7.
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ wa-khullān al-wafāʾ, 4 vols., Beirut 1957; edited also
by ʿĀrif Tāmir in Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ wa-khullān al-wafāʾ, Beirut 1995, i–iv.
——, al-Risāla l-jāmiʿa, 2 vols., ed. Jamīl Ṣalībā, Damascus 1949–1951; edited also by ʿĀrif
Tāmir in Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ wa-khullān al-wafāʾ, Beirut 1995 v, 7–304.
(Pseudo) Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, Jāmiʿat al-jāmiʿa, in Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ wa-khullān al-wafāʾ,
ed. ʿĀrif Tāmir, Beirut 1995, v, 305–66.
al-Iṣfahānī, Abū Nuʿaym Aḥmad b. ʿAbd Allāh, Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ wa-ṭabaqāt al-aṣfiyāʾ,
8 vols., Cairo 1932.
Ha-Israeli, Isaac Bar Shlomo: Sefer ha-yesōdōt, trans. Abraham Bar Shmuel Ha-Levi Ḥasdāy,
Drohobycz 1899.
Ivanow, W. (ed.), Umm al-Kitāb, in Der Islam, 23 (1936), 1–132; translated into Italian by
P. Filippani-Ronconi, Ummu’l-Kitāb, Naples 1966.
Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman, K. al-Kashf, ed. R. Strothmann, London 1952.
——, The master and the disciple: an early Islamic spiritual dialogue. Arabic edition and
English translation of Jaʿfar b. Manṣūr al-Yaman’s Kitāb al-ʿĀlim wa’l-ghulām by James W.
Morris, London 2001.
——, Sarāʾir wa-asrār al-nuṭaqāʾ, ed. Muṣṭafā Ghālib, Beirut 1984.
bibliography 241
ʿAbd al-Bāqī, M. F., al-Muʿjam al-mufahras li-alfāẓ al-qurʾān al-karīm, Beirut 1992.
Jaʿfar, M. K. I., Min qaḍāyā l-fikr al-islāmī: dirāsa wa-nuṣūṣ, [Cairo] 1978.
Makārim, S. N., ‘al-Amr al-ilāhī’ wa-mafhūmuhu fī l-ʿaqīda l-ismāʿīliyya, in al-Abḥāth, 20/1
(1967), 3–16.
al-Makkī, M. ʿU., Maẓhar min maẓāhir al-ʿalāqāt bayna miṣr al-fāṭimiyya wa-l-andalus
khilāl al-qarn al-ḥādī ʿashar al-mīlādī ṭibqan li-wathāʾiq jadīda makhṭūṭa, in Abḥāth al-
nadwa l-dawliyya li-taʾrīkh al-qāhira: mars-abrīl 1969, Cairo 1971, iii, 1239–62.
——, al-Tashayyuʿ fī l-andalus, in Revista del Instituto Egipcio de Estudios Islamicos en
Madrid, ii (1954), 93–149.
al-Shaybī, K. M., al-Ṣila bayna l-taṣawwuf wa-l-tashayyuʿ, 2 vols., Beirut 19823; translated
into English as Sufism and Shiism, Surbiton 1991.
Aloni, N.: Ha-ōtiyōt ke-gūfōt, in Meḥqarey lashōn ve-safrūt (6): leqūṭōt, Jerusalem 1992,
149–50.
Baneth, D. H., The common teleological source of Bahye Ibn Paqoda and Ghazzali, in
Epstein, J. N. et al. (eds.), Magnes anniversary book, Jerusalem 1938, 23–30.
Eliyahu, A., “Ibn al-Sīd al-Baṭalyawsī and his place in medieval Muslim and Jewish thought,
including an edition and a translation of Kitāb al-dawāʾir al-wahmiyya known as Kitāb
al-ḥadāʾiq”, Ph.D. dissertation, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2010.
Freudenthal, G., The philosophical mysticism of Maimonides, in Elqayam, A. and Schwartz, D.
(eds.), Maimonides and mysticism, Ramat Gan 2009, 77–97.
Goldreich, A., An unknown treatise on suffering by Abū l-Qāsim al-Kirmānī, in Idel, M.,
Harvey, W. Z. and Schweid, E. (eds.), Shlomo Pines: jubilee volume on the occasion of
his eightieth birthday (Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 7), i, Jerusalem 1988, 169–204.
——, The theology of the Iyyun circle and a possible source of the term “Aḥdut Shava”, in
Dan, J. (ed.), The beginnings of Jewish mysticism in medieval Europe (Jerusalem Studies
in Jewish Thought, vi 3–4), Jerusalem 1987, 141–56.
Harvey, W. Z., Averroes and Maimonides on the obligation of philosophic contemplation
(iʿtibār), in Tarbiz, 58 (1989), 75–83.
Huss, B., The mystification of the Kabbalah and the myth of Jewish mysticism, in Peʿamim,
110 (2007), 9–30.
Idel, M., The Sefirot above the Sefirot, in Tarbiz, 51/2 (1982), 239–80.
Kasher, H., Mysticism within the confines of reason alone, in Elqayam, A. and Schwartz, D.
(eds.), Maimonides and mysticism, Ramat Gan 2009, 37–43.
Krinis, E., Judaeo-Arabic manuscripts from an Ismāʿīlī circle in the Firkovich collections, in
Erder, Y. et al. (eds.), The proceedings of the 14th conference of the society for Judeo-Arabic
studies, Tel Aviv 2013; translated into English as: al-Risāla al-jāmiʻa and its Judeo-Arabic
manuscript, in Amir-Moezzi, M. A. (ed.), Islam: identité et altérité—hommage à Père Guy
Monnot, Turnhout 2013, 311–29.
——, “The idea of the chosen people in Judah Halevi’s al-Kitāb al-khazari and its origins
in Shīʿī Imām doctrine”, Ph.D. dissertation, Ben-Gurion University, 2008; forthcoming
in English as God’s chosen people: Judah Halevi’s Kuzari and the Shīʿī Imām doctrine,
Turnhout 2013.
Liebes, Y., Ars poetica in “Sefer yetsira”, Tel-Aviv 2000.
——, Ha-mashīaḥ shel ha-zōhar: le-dmūtō ha-meshīḥīt shel rabbī shimʿōn bar yōḥāy, in
The messianic idea in Jewish thought (publications of the Israel Academy of Sciences
and Humanities: a study conference in honour of the eightieth birthday of Gershom
Scholem held 4–5 December 1977), Jerusalem 1982, 87–236.
——, Prakīm be-mīlōn sefer ha-zōhar, Ph.D. dissertation, Hebrew University, 1977.
bibliography 243
——, Rabbi Solomon Ibn Gabirol’s use of the Sefer yeṣira and a commentary on the poem
“I Love Thee”, in Dan, J. (ed.), The beginnings of Jewish mysticism in medieval Europe
(Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, vi 3–4), Jerusalem 1987, 73–123.
——, Shlomo Pines and the study of Kabala, in Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 9
(1990), 16–22.
Lorberbaum, Y., Image of God: Halakha and Aggadah, Tel-Aviv 2004.
Meroz, R., Ōr bahīr hū ba-mizraḥ: ʿal zmanō u-mekōmō shel miktsatō shel sefer ha-bahīr,
in Daʿat, 49 (2002), 137–80.
Pines, S., On the term Ruḥaniyot and its sources and on the doctrine of Yehuda Ha-Levi,
in Tarbiz, 57 (1988), 511–40.
Rabi, U., ‘The Shīʿī crescent’: an Iranian vision and Arab fears, in Rabi, U. (ed.), Iran time,
Tel-Aviv 2008, 77–98.
Scholem, G., Elements of the Kabbalah and its symbolism, Jerusalem 1980.
——, Lamed vav tsadīqīm nistarīm be-masōret israel, in Scholem, G., Explications and
implications: writings on Jewish heritage and renaissance, ed. A. Shapira, ii, Tel-Aviv 1989,
199–204.
——, Studies in Kabbalah, i, Tel-Aviv 1998.
Schwarzbaum, H., Lamed vav tsadīqīm ba-fōlklōr ha-yehūdī, in Schwarzbaum, H., Roots
and landscapes: studies in folklore, ed. E. Yassif, Beer-Sheva 1993, 84–95.
Scolnicov, S., A short history of Greek philosophy: the pre-Socratic philosophers, Tel Aviv
1981.
Sviri, S., Reconsidering the study of Islamic mysticism and its instruction: methodological
questions, in Layish, A. (ed.), Conversion, Sufism, revival and reform in Islam: essays in
memory of Nehemia Levtzion, Jerusalem 2012, 109–33.
Weiss, T., A conceptual examination of the attitude towards alphabetic letters as indepen-
dent units in Jewish and culturally affiliated sources of Late Antiquity: Midrash, mysti-
cism and magic, Ph.D. dissertation, Hebrew University, 2008; forthcoming as Letters by
which heaven and earth were created : the origins and the meanings of the perceptions of
alphabetic letters as independent units in Jewish sources of Late Antiquity, Jerusalem.
——, Different traditions of creation of the world from letters, in Kabbalah: Journal for the
Study of Jewish Mystical texts, 17 (2008), 169–200.
——, The perception of the letters in the Samaritan memar marqah and in its equivalents
in Rabbinic sources and in the Book of creation, in Jewish Studies: The Journal of the
World Union of Jewish Studies, 43 (2007), 89–129.
Yegnes, T. (ed.), Sunna and Shiʿa: the changing balance of power, Tel-Aviv 2008.
Zoran, Y., Magic, theurgy and the knowledge of letters in Islam and their parallels in Jewish
literature, in Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Folklore, 18 (1996), 19–62.
——, The mystical philosophy of Muhyid Din-Ibnul Arabi, Cambridge 1939, repr. Lahore
1964.
Akasoy, A., Andalusi exceptionalism: the example of philosphical Sufism and the signifi-
cance of 1212, in Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies, 4/1 (2012), 113–7.
——, What is philosophical Sufism? in Adamson, P. (ed.), In the age of Averroes: Arabic
philosophy in the sixth/twelfth century, London 2011, 229–49.
Algar, H., The study of Islam: the work of Henry Corbin, in Religious Studies Review, 6/2
(1980), 85–91.
Alí-de-Unzaga, O. (ed.), Fortresses of the intellect: Ismaili and other Islamic studies in honour
of Farhad Daftary, London 2011.
——, “The use of the Qurʾān in the epistles of the Pure Brethren (Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ)”,
Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge University 2004.
Allers, R., Microcosmus: from Anaximandros to Paracelsus, in Traditio, 2 (1944), 319–407.
Alon, I., al-Fārābī’s philosophical lexicon, Warminster 2002.
Altmann, A., The ladder of ascension, in Studies in mysticism and religion presented to Ger-
shom G. Scholem on his seventieth birthday, Jerusalem 1967, 88–119, repr. in Altmann, A.,
Studies in religious philosophy and mysticism, London 1969, 41–72.
Altmann, A. and Stern, S. M., Isaac Israeli: a Neoplatonic philosopher of the early tenth cen-
tury, London 1958.
Amir-Moezzi, M. A., Du Droit à la théologie: les niveaux de réalité dans le Shiʿisme duo-
décimaine, in Cahiers du groupe d’études spirituelles comparées (L’Esprit et la nature:
colloque tenu à Paris les 11 et 12 mai 1996), 5 (1997), 37–63.
——, La Préexistence de l’Imam, in Amir-Moezzi, M. A.: La Religion discrète, Paris 2006,
109–33.
——, La Religion discrète: croyances et pratiques spirituelles dans l’Islam Shiʿite, Paris 2006;
trans. as The spirituality of Shiʿi Islam: beliefs and practices, London 2011.
——, Le Coran silencieux et le Coran parlant: sources scripturaires de l’Islam entre histoire
et ferveur, Paris 2011.
——, (ed.), Le Voyage initiatique en terre d’Islam: ascensions célestes et itinéraires spirituels,
Louvain 1996.
——, Notes à propos de la walāya Imamite (aspects de l’imamologie duodécimaine, x), in
JAOS, 122/4 (2002), 722–41, repr. in Amir-Moezzi, M. A., La Religion discrète, Paris 2006,
177–208.
——, Only the man of God is human: theology and mystical anthropology according to
early Imāmī exegesis (aspects of twelver Imamology iv), in Kohlberg, E. (ed.), Shīʿism,
Aldershot 2003, 17–39 (originally published in French in Arabica, 45/2 [1998], 193–214
and repr. in La religion discrète, 209–228).
——, Persian, the other sacred language of Islam: some brief notes, in Alí-de-Unzaga, O.
(ed.), Fortresses of the intellect: Ismaili and other Islamic studies in honour of Farhad Daft-
ary, London 2011, 59–75.
——, Remarques sur la divinité de l’Imam, in SIr, 25 (1996), 193–216, repr. in Amir-Moezzi,
M. A., La Religion discrete, Paris 2006, 89–108.
——, The divine guide in early Shiʿism: the sources of esotericism in Islam, trans. D. Streight,
Albany 1994.
Amir-Moezzi, M. A., Jambet, C. and Lory, P. (eds.), Henry Corbin: philosophies et sagesses
des religions du livre. Actes du colloque “Henry Corbin” Sorbonne, les 6–8 Novembre 2003,
Turnhout 2005.
Anidjar, G., Jewish mysticism alterable and unalterable: on orienting Kabbalah studies and
the Zohar of Christian Spain, in Jewish Social Studies 3 (1996), 89–157.
——, “Our place in al-Andalus”: Kabbalah, philosophy, literature in Arab Jewish Letters,
Stanford 2002.
Aouad, M., La Théologie d’Aristote et autres textes du Plotinus Arabus, in Goulet, R. (ed.),
Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques. i. Abam(m)on à Axiothéa, Paris 1989, 541–90.
bibliography 245
Ariel, D. S., The eastern dawn of wisdom : the problem of the relation between Islamic and
Jewish mysticism, in Blumenthal, D. R. (ed.), Approaches to Judaism in medieval times,
ii, Chico 1984, 149–67.
Armstrong, A. H., The architecture of the intelligible universe in the philosophy of Plotinus,
Cambridge 1940.
Arnaldez, R., Ibn Masarra, in EI2, iii, 868–72.
——, Al-Insān al-kāmil, in EI2, iii, 1239–41.
Asín Palacios, M., The mystical philosophy of Ibn Masarra and his followers, trans. E. H.
Douglas and H. W. Yoder, Leiden 1978.
Ateş, A., Ibn al-ʿArabī, in EI2, iii, 707–11.
Ayoub, M., The speaking Qurʾān and the silent Qurʾān: a study of the principles and devel-
opment of Imāmī Tafsīr, in Rippin, A. (ed.), Approaches to the history of the interpreta-
tion of the Qurʾān, Oxford 1988, 177–98.
Baffioni, C., Ibdāʿ, divine imperative and prophecy in the Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ, in Alí-de-
Unzaga, O. (ed.), Fortresses of the intellect: Ismaili and other Islamic studies in honour of
Farhad Daftary, London 2011, 213–26.
——, Al-Madīnah al-fāḍilah in al-Fārābī and in the Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ: a comparison, in Leder, S.
et al. (eds.), Studies in Arabic and Islam (Proceedings of the 19th congress, union Euro-
péenne des arabisants et islamisants, Halle 1998), Leuven 2002, 3–12.
——, The “Friends of God” in the Rasāʾil iḫwān aṣ-ṣafāʾ, in Fodor, A. (ed.), The Arabist:
Budapest Studies in Arabic (Proceedings of the 20th congress of the union Européenne
des arabisants et islamisants held at Budapest in 2000), 26–27 (2003), 17–24.
Baljon, J. M. S., The Amr of God in the Koran, in Acta Orientalia, 23 (1959), 7–18.
Banchetti-Robino, M. P., The microcosm/macrocosm analogy in Ibn Sînâ and Husserl, in
Tymieniecka, A. T. (ed.), Islamic philosophy and occidental phenomenology on the peren-
nial issue of microcosm and macrocosm, Dordrecht 2006, 25–39.
Bar, S., Sunnis and Shiites—between rapprochement and conflict, in Current Trends in
Islamist Ideology, 2 (2005), 87–96.
Bar-Asher, M. M., Scripture and exegesis in early Imāmī Shiism, Leiden 1999.
Bar-Asher, M. and Kofsky, A., The Nuṣayrī-ʿAlawī religion: an enquiry into its theology and
liturgy, Leiden 2002.
Bashier, S. H., Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Barzakh: the concept of the limit and the relationship between
God and the world, Albany 2004.
Bausani, A., Ḥurūfiyya, in EI2, iii, 600–1.
Berman, L. V., Judaeo-Arabic thought in Spain and North Africa: problems and prospects,
in Golb, N. (ed.), Judaeo-Arabic studies: proceedings of the founding conference of the
society for Judaeo-Arabic studies, Amsterdam 1997, 33–43.
Bitton-Ashkelony, B., Counseling through enigmas: monastic leadership and linguistic
techniques in sixth-century Gaza, in La Porta, S. and Shulman, D. (eds.), The poetics of
grammar and the metaphysics of sound and sign, Leiden 2007, 177–99.
——, Encountering the sacred: the debate on Christian pilgrimage in Late Antiquity, Berkeley
2005.
Bitton-Ashkelony, B. and Kosfky, A., The monastic school of Gaza, Leiden 2006.
Black, D. L., Psychology: soul and intellect, in Adamson, P. and Taylor, R. C. (eds.), The
Cambridge companion to Arabic philosophy, Cambridge 2005, 308–26.
Blochet, M. E., Études sur l’ésotérisme musulman, in JA 19 (1902), 489–531, 20 (1902),
49–111.
Blumenthal, D. R., An example of Ismaili influence in post-Maimonidean Yemen, in Morag,
Sh., Ben-Ami, I. and Stillman, N. A. (eds.), Studies in Judaism and Islam, presented to
Shelomo Dov Goitein, Jerusalem 1981, 155–74.
——, An illustration of the concept of philosophic mysticism from fifteenth century
Yemen, in Nahon, G. and Touati, C. (eds.), Hommage à Georges Vajda: études de histoire
et de pensée juives, Louvain 1980, 291–308.
——, On the theories of Ibdāʿ and Taʾthīr, in WI, 20/3–4 (1980), 162–77.
246 bibliography
——, Philosophic mysticism: the ultimate goal of medieval Judaism, in Hary, B. and Ben-
Shammai, H. (eds.), Esoteric and exoteric aspects in Judeo-Arabic culture, Leiden 2006,
1–18.
Bouyer, L., Mysticism / an essay on the history of the word, in Woods, R. (ed.), Understand-
ing mysticism, Garden City, New York 1980, 42–55.
Böwering, G., Ensān-e kāmel, in EIr, viii, 457–61.
——, Sulamī’s treatise on the science of the letters (ʿilm al-ḥurūf ), in Orfali, B. (ed.), In the
shadow of Arabic: the centrality of language to Arabic culture. Studies presented to Ramzi
Baalbaki on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, Leiden 2011, 339–97.
——, The major sources of Sulamī’s minor Qurʾān commentary, in Oriens, 35 (1996),
35–56.
——, The mystical vision of existence in classical Islam: the Qurʾānic hermeneutics of the Ṣūfī
Sahl al-Tustarī (d. 283/896), Berlin and New York 1980.
Boyarin, D., The gospel of the Memra: Jewish binitarianism and the prologue to John, in
Harvard Theological Review, 94/3 (2001), 243–84.
Brown, J. V., A counter-history of Islam: Ibn al-ʿArabī within the spiritual topography of
Henry Corbin, in Journal of the Muhyiddin Ibn ʿArabi Society, 32 (2002), 45–65.
——, Andalusī mysticism: a recontextualization, in Journal of Islamic Philosophy, 2 (2006),
69–101.
——, Muḥammad b. Masarra al-Jabalī and his place in medieval Islamicate intellectual his-
tory: towards a reappraisal, B. A. thesis, Reed College 2006.
Brown, P., Society and the holy in Late Antiquity, London 1982.
——, The cult of the saints: its rise and function in Latin Christianity, Chicago 1981.
——, The making of Late Antiquity, Cambridge 1978.
——, The rise and function of the holy man in Late Antiquity, in The Journal of Roman
Society, 61 (1971), 80–101; repr. and rev. in Brown, P., Society and the holy in Late Antiquity,
London 1982, 103–52.
——, The saint as exemplar in Late Antiquity, in Representations, 2 (1983), 1–25.
Bussanich, J., Plotinus’s metaphysics of the One, in Gerson, L. P. (ed.), The Cambridge com-
panion to Plotinus, Cambridge 1996, 38–65.
Butterworth, C. E., Ethical and political philosophy, in Adamson, P. and Taylor, R. C. (eds.),
The Cambridge companion to Arabic philosophy, Cambridge 2005, 266–86.
Canteins, J., The hidden sciences in Islam, in Nasr, S. H. (ed.), Islamic spirituality: manifes-
tations, New York 1997, 447–68.
Carra de Vaux, B., Barzakh, in EI2, i, 1071.
Carusi, P., Le Traité alchimique rutbat al-ḥakīm. Quelques notes sur son introduction, in
Baffioni, C. (ed.), Religion versus science in Islam: a medieval and modern debate (Oriente
Moderno 19/3), Rome 2001, 491–502.
Chabbi, J., Abdāl, in EIr, i, 173–4.
Chittick, W. C., Faith and practice of Islam: three thirteenth century Sufi texts, Albany 1992.
——, Imaginal worlds: Ibn al-ʿArabī and the problem of religious diversity, Albany 1994.
——, Science of the cosmos, science of the soul: the pertinence of Islamic cosmology in the
modern world, Oxford 2007.
——, The self-disclosure of God: principles of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s cosmology, Albany 1998.
——, The Sufi path of knowledge: Ibn al-ʿArabi’s metaphysics of imagination, Albany 1989.
Chodkiewicz, M., Ibn ʿArabī dans l’oeuvre de Henry Corbin, in Amir-Moezzi, M. A., Jambet, C.
and Lory, P. (eds.), Henry Corbin: philosophies et sagesses des religions du livre. Actes du
colloque “Henry Corbin” Sorbonne, les 6–8 Novembre 2003, Turnhout 2005, 81–91.
——, Seal of the saints: prophethood and sainthood in the doctrine of Ibn ʿArabī, trans.
L. Sherrard, Cambridge 1993.
Cohen, M. R. and Somekh, S., In the court of Yaʿqūb Ibn Killis: a fragment from the Cairo
Genizah, in The Jewish Quarterly Review, 80/3–4 (1990), 283–314.
Colby, F. S., Narrating Muḥammad’s night journey: tracing the development of the Ibn ʿAbbās
ascension discourse, Albany 2008.
bibliography 247
——, The subtleties of the ascension: early mystical sayings on Muḥammad's heavenly
journey compiled by Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Sulamī, Louisville 2006.
Conger, G. P., Theories of macrocosms and microcosms in the history of philosophy, New
York 1922, repr. 1950.
Cook, D., Studies in Muslim apocalyptic, Princeton 2002.
Cook, M., Commanding right and forbidding wrong in Islamic thought, Cambridge 2000.
Corbin, H., Creative imagination in the Ṣūfism of Ibn ʿArabī, trans. R. Manheim, Princeton
1969.
——, Cyclical time and Ismaili Gnosis, London 1983.
——, Divine epiphany and spiritual birth in Ismailian Gnosis: 3. Hierarchies and cycles:
the fundamental angelology of Ismailism, in Corbin, H., Cyclical time and Ismaili Gnosis,
trans. R. Manheim, London 1983, 84–103.
——, En Islam iranien: aspects spirituels et philosophiques, 4 vols., Paris 1971–2.
——, From the Gnosis of antiquity to Ismaili Gnosis, in Corbin, H., Cyclical time and
Ismaili Gnosis, trans. J. W. Morris, London 151–93.
——, History of Islamic philosophy, trans. L. Sherrard, London 1993.
——, L’Initiation ismaélienne ou l’ésotérisme et le Verbe, in Eranos Yahrbuch, 39 (1970),
41–142.
——, Sabian temple and Ismailism, in Corbin, H., Temple and contemplation, trans. P. Sherrard,
London 132–82.
——, Temple and contemplation, trans. P. Sherrard, London 1986.
——, The science of the balance and the correspondences between worlds in Islamic Gno-
sis, in Corbin, H., Temple and contemplation, trans. P. Sherrard, London 55–131.
Cornell, V. J., Realm of the saint: power and authority in Moroccan Sufism, Austin 1998.
Corrigan, K., Essence and existence in the Enneads, in Gerson, L. P., The Cambridge com-
panion to Plotinus, Cambridge 1996, 105–29.
Cortese, D., Arabic Ismaili manuscripts: the Zāhid ʿAlī collection in the library of the Institute
of Ismaili Studies, London 2003.
——, Ismaili and other Arabic manuscripts: a descriptive catalogue of manuscripts in the
library of the Institute of Ismaili Studies, London 2000.
Crone, P. and Hinds, M., God’s caliph: religious authority in the first centuries of Islam, Cam-
bridge 1986.
Dachraoui, F., Al-Muʿizz li-dīn allāh, in EI2, vii, 485–9.
——, Tentative d’infiltration šīʿite en Espagne musulmane sous la règne d’al-Ḥakam II,
Al-Andalus, 23 (1958), 97–106.
Daftary, F., Forward, in El-Bizri, N. (ed.), Epistles of the Brethren of Purity. The Ikhwān
al-Ṣafāʾ and their Rasāʾil: an introduction, Oxford 2008, xv–xix.
——, Ismaili literature: a bibliography of sources and studies, London 2004.
——, Ismaili-Sufi relations in post-Alamut Persia, in Daftary, F. (ed.), Ismailis in medieval
Muslim societies, London 2005, 183–203.
——, (ed.), Mediaeval Ismaʿili history and thought, Cambridge 1996.
——, The Ismāʿīlīs: their history and doctrines, Cambridge 20072.
——, Umm al-kitāb, in EI2, x, 854–5.
Daiber, H., Abū Ḥātim ar-Rāzī (10th century A.D.) on the unity and diversity of religions,
in Gort, J. et al. (eds.), Dialogue and syncretism: an interdisciplinary approach, Michigan
and Amsterdam 1989, 87–104.
De Callataÿ, G., The classification of knowledge in the Rasāʾil, in El-Bizri, N. (ed.), Epistles
of the Brethren of Purity. The Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ and their Rasāʾil: an introduction, Oxford
2008, 58–82.
De Jong, F., Al-Ḳuṭb, in EI2, v, 544.
De Macedo, C. C., Influência Ismaili nos Batinis de Al-Andalus, in Revista de Estudos da
Religião, 8 (2008), 142–66. http://www.pucsp.br/rever/rv1_2008/i_macedo.htm
De Smet, D., Adam, premier prophète et législateur? La Doctrine chiite des ūlu al-ʿazm et
la controverse sur la pérennité de la šarīʿa, in Amir-Moezzi, M. A., Bar-Asher, M. M. and
248 bibliography
Hopkins, S. (eds.), Le Shīʿisme Imāmite quarante ans après: hommage à Etan Kohlberg
(Bibliothèque de l’école des hautes etudes / sciences religieuses, 137), Turnhout-Belgium
2009, 187–202.
——, Au Delà de l’apparent: les notions de ẓāhir et bāṭin dans l’ésotérisme musulman, in
Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica, 25 (1994), 197–220.
——, Empedocles Arabus: une lecture néoplatonicienne tardive, Brussel 1998.
——, Henry Corbin et les études Ismaéliennes, in Amir-Moezzi, M. A., Jambet, C. and
Lory, P. (eds.), Henry Corbin: philosophies et sagesses des religions du livre. Actes du col-
loque “Henry Corbin” Sorbonne, les 6–8 Novembre 2003, Turnhout 2005, 105–18.
——, Jaʿfar al-Ṣādeq, iv (Esoteric Sciences), in EIr, xiv 362–3.
——, La Doctrine avicennienne des deux faces de l’âme et ses racines ismaéliennes, in SI,
93 (2001), 77–89.
——, La Quiétude de l’intellect: Néoplatonisme et gnose Ismaélienne dans l’oeuvre de Ḥamîd
ad-Dîn al-Kirmânî (Xe/XIes), Louvain 1995.
——, Le Soleil, roi du ciel, dans la théologie astrale des Frères de la Pureté (Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ),
in Acta Orientalia Belgica, 12 (1999), 151–60.
——, Le Verbe-impératif dans le système cosmologique de l’ismaélisme, in Revue des Sci-
ences Philosophiques et Théologiques, 73 (1989), 397–412.
——, Les Bibliothèques Ismaéliennes et la question du néoplatonisme Ismaélien, in
D’Ancona, C. (ed.), The libraries of the Neoplatonists, Leiden 2007, 481–92.
——, Les Climats du monde et l’inégalité des races humaines. Une approche Ismaélienne,
in Acta Orientalia Belgica, 16 (2002), 69–80.
——, Les Épîtres sacrées des Druzes. Rasāʾil al-Ḥikma, Volumes 1 et 2: introduction, édition
critique et traduction annotée des traités attribués à Ḥamza b. ʿAlī et Ismāʿīl at-Tamīmī,
Leuven 2007.
——, Mīzān ad-diyāna ou l’équilibre entre science et religion dans la pensée Ismaélienne,
in Acta Orientalia Belgica, 8 (1993, = Naster, P., Ries, J. and Van Tongerloo, A. [eds.],
Humanisme: science et religion, 1994), 247–54.
——, Perfectio prima—perfectio secunda ou les vicissitudes d’une notion: de S. Thomas aux
Ismaéliens ṭayyibites du Yémen, in Recherches de Theólogie et de Philosophie médiévales,
66 (1999), 254–88.
——, The Risāla al-mudhhiba attributed to al-Qāḍī al-Nuʿmān: important evidence for the
adoption of Neoplatonism by Fatimid Ismailism at the time of al-Muʿizz?, in Alí-de-
Unzaga, O. (ed.), Fortresses of the intellect: Ismaili and other Islamic studies in honour of
Farhad Daftary, London 2011, 309–41.
——, Was Nāṣir-e Ḫusraw a great poet and only a minor philosopher? Some critical reflec-
tions on his doctrine of the soul, in Craig, B. D. (ed.), Ismaili and Fatimid studies in honor
of Paul E. Walker, Chicago 2010, 101–30.
Dillon, J. M., Solomon Ibn Gabirol’s doctrine of intelligible matter, in Goodman, L. E. (ed.),
Neoplatonism and Jewish thought, Albany 1992, 43–59.
Dornseiff, F., Das Alphabet in Mystik und Magie, Leipzig 1925.
Drijvers, H., Bardaiṣan of Edessa and the Hermetica: the Aramaic philosopher and the
philosophy of his time, in Ex Oriente Lux ( Jaarbericht van het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch
Genootschap), 21 (1969–70), 190–210.
Ebstein, M., Secrecy in Ismāʿīlī tradition and in the mystical thought of Ibn al-ʿArabī, in
JA, 298/2 (2010), 303–43.
Ebstein, M. and Sviri, S., The so-called Risālat al-ḥurūf (epistle on letters) ascribed to Sahl
al-Tustarī and letter mysticism in al-Andalus, in JA, 299/1 (2011), 209–66.
Elad-Altman, I., The Sunni-Shiʿa conversion controversy, in Current trends in Islamist ideol-
ogy, 5 (2007), 1–10.
El-Bizri, N. (ed.), Epistles of the Brethren of Purity. The Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ and their Rasāʾil: an
introduction, Oxford 2008.
——, The microcosm/macrocosm analogy: a tentative encounter between Graeco-Arabic
philosophy and phenomenology, in Tymieniecka, A. T. (ed.), Islamic philosophy and
bibliography 249
Hamdani, A., Abū Ḥayyān al-Tawḥīdī and the Brethren of Purity, in IJMES, 9/3 (1978),
345–53.
——, Brethren of Purity, a secret society for the establishment of the Fāṭimid Caliphate:
new evidence for the early dating of their encyclopaedia, in L’Égypte fatimide: son art et
son histoire. Actes du colloque organisé à Paris les 28, 29 et 30 mai 1998 / sous la direction
de Marianne Barrucand, Paris 1999, 73–82.
——, Evolution of the organizational structure of the Fāṭimī Daʿwah: the Yemeni and Per-
sian contribution, in AS, 3 (1976), 85–114.
——, The arrangement of the Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ and the problem of interpolations, in
El-Bizri, N. (ed.), Epistles of the Brethren of Purity. The Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ and their Rasāʾil:
an introduction, Oxford 2008, 83–100.
——, The Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ: between al-Kindī and al-Fārābī, in Alí-de-Unzaga, O. (ed.),
Fortresses of the intellect: Ismaili and other Islamic studies in honour of Farhad Daftary,
London 2011, 189–212.
Hamdani, S., The dialectic of power: Sunni-Shiʿi debates in tenth-century North Africa, in
SI, 90 (2000), 5–21.
Hames, H. J., A seal within a seal: the imprint of Ṣūfism in Abraham Abulafia’s teachings,
in Medieval Encounters, 12 (2006), 153–72.
Haneberg, B., Ueber das Verhältniss von Ibn Gabirol zu der Encyclopädie der Ichwān
uç çafā, in Sitzungsberichte der königlich bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu
München, 2 (1866), 73–102, repr. in Sezgin, F. (ed.), Rasāʾil ikhwān aṣ-ṣafāʾ wa-khillān
al-wafāʾ (2nd half 4th/10th cent.): texts and studies, Frankfurt am Main 1999, 333–62.
Harvey, S. A., Asceticism and society in crisis: John of Ephesus and the lives of the eastern
saints, Berkeley 1990.
Hary, B. and Ben-Shammai, H. (eds.), Esoteric and exoteric aspects in Judeo-Arabic culture,
Leiden 2006.
Hasson, I., Contemporary polemics between Neo-Wahhabis and Post-Khomeinist Shiites,
in Research Monographs on the Muslim World, 2/3 (2009), Hudson Institute / Center on
Islam, Democracy, and the Future of the Muslim World, 1–26.
——, Les Šīʿites vus par les Néo-Wahhābites, in Arabica, 53/3 (2006), 299–330.
Hirtenstein, S., The unlimited mercifier: the spiritual life and thought of Ibn ʿArabi, Oxford
1999.
Hodgson, M., Bāṭiniyya, in EI2, i, 1098–100.
——, Ḥudjdja / in Shīʿī terminology, in EI2, iii, 544–5.
——, Ismaʿili piety: esotericism and hierarchy, in Nasr, S. H., Dabashi, H. and Nasr, S. V. R.
(eds.), Shiʿism: doctrines, thought, and spirituality, Albany 1988, 88–94.
——, The order of assassins: the struggle of the early Nizari Ismailis against the Islamic
world, The Hague 1955.
Homerin, T. E., Ibn Arabi in the People’s Assembly: religion, press, and politics in Sadat’s
Egypt, in Middle East Journal, 40 (1986), 462–77.
Huart, C. [and Grohmann, A.], Ḳalam, in EI2, iv, 471b.
Huart, C. [and Sadan, J.], Kursī, in EI2, v, 509.
Huss, B., The formation of Jewish mysticism and its impact on the reception of Rabbi Abra-
ham Abulafia in contemporary Kabbalah, in Bock, H., Feuchter, J. and Knecht, M. (eds.),
Religion and its other: secular and sacral concepts and practices in interaction, Frankfurt
2008, 142–62.
Idel, M., Ascensions on high in Jewish mysticism: pillars, lines, ladders, Budapest 2005.
——, Ashkenazi esotericism and Kabbalah in Barcelona, in Hispania Judaica Bulletin, 5
(2007), 69–113.
——, Kabbalah: new perspectives, New Haven and London 1988.
——, Orienting, orientalizing or disorienting the study of Kabbalah: an almost absolutely
unique case of occidentalism, in Kabbalah, 2 (1997), 13–47.
Imamuddin, S. M., Commercial relations of Spain with Ifriqiyah and Egypt in the tenth
century A.C., in IC, 38/1 (1964), 9–14.
252 bibliography
Ivanow, W., Notes sur l’Ummu’l-kitāb des Ismaëliens de l’Asie Centrale, in REI, 6 (1932),
419–81.
Ivry, A. L., Ismāʿīlī Theology and Maimonides’ Philosophy, in Frank, D. (ed.), The Jews of
medieval Islam: community, society and identity, Leiden 1995, 271–99.
Izzi Dien, M. Y. and Walker, P. E., Wilāya, in EI2, xi, 207–9.
Jafri, S. H. M., Origins and early development of Shiʿa Islam, London 1979.
Jayyusi, S. K. (ed.), The legacy of Muslim Spain, 2 vols., Leiden 1992.
Jeffery, A., Abū al-Dardāʾ, in EI2, i, 113–4.
——, Āya, in EI2, i, 773–4.
Jesús Viguera, M., El Nasnās: un motivo de ʿAǧāʾib, in Barral, J. M. (ed.), Orientalia His-
panica: sive studia F. M. Pareja octogenario dicata, Leiden 1974, 647–74.
Joosse, N. P., An example of medieval Arabic Pseudo-Hermetism: the tale of Salāmān and
Absāl, in JSS, 38/2 (1993), 279–93.
Karamustafa, A. T., Walāya according to al-Junayd (d. 298/910), in Lawson, T. (ed.), Reason
and inspiration in Islam: theology, philosophy and mysticism in Muslim thought: essays in
honour of Hermann Landolt, London 2005, 64–70.
Katz, S. T. (ed.), Mysticism and philosophical analysis, New York 1978.
Kennedy, H., Muslim Spain and Portugal: a political history of al-Andalus, London 1996.
Kerferd, G. B., Logos, in Edwards, P. (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, v, New York
1967, 83–4.
Kiener, R. C., Jewish Ismāʿīlism in twelfth century Yemen: R. Nethanel Ben Al-Fayyūmī, in
The Jewish Quarterly Review, 74/3 (1984), 249–66.
Kister, M., Some early Jewish and Christian exegetical problems and the dynamics of
monotheism, in Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman
Period, 37/4 (2006), 548–93, repr. and rev. as ‘Tohu wa-Bohu’, primordial elements and
‘creatio ex nihilo’, in Jewish Studies Quarterly, 14/3 (2007), 229–56.
Knysh, A. D., Ibn ʿArabi in the later Islamic tradition: the making of a polemical image in
medieval Islam, Albany 1999.
Kohlberg, E., Authoritative scriptures in early Imāmī Shīʿism, in Patlagean, É. and Le Boul-
luec, A. (eds.), Les Retours aux écritures: fondamentalismes présents et passés, Louvain
1993, 295–312.
——, From Imāmiyya to Ithnā-ʿAshariyya, in BSOAS, 39/3 (1976), 521–34.
——, Some Shīʿī views of the antediluvian world, in SI, 52 (1980), 41–66, repr. in Kohlberg, E.,
Belief and law in Imāmī Shīʿism, Aldershot 1991, article xvi.
——, The evolution of the Shīʿa, in Jerusalem Quarterly, 27 (1983), 109–26.
——, The term ‘Muḥaddath’ in Twelver Shīʿism, in Studia orientalia: memoriae D. H. Baneth
dedicata, Jerusalem 1979, 39–47, repr. in Kohlberg, E., Belief and law in Imāmī Shīʿism,
Aldershot 1991, article v.
Kraemer, J. L., Humanism in the renaissance of Islam: the cultural revival during the Buyid
age, Leiden 1986.
Kraus, P., Dschābir ibn Ḥajjān und die Ismaʿīlijja, in Dritter Jahresbericht des Forschungs-
Institut für Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften in Berlin: der Zusammenbruch der
Dschābir-Legende, Berlin 1930, 23–42.
——, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān: contribution à l’histoire des idées scientifiques dans l’Islam. i. Le cor-
pus des écrits jābiriens, Cairo 1943.
——, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān: contribution à l’histoire des idées scientifiques dans l’Islam. ii. Jābir
et la science grecque, Cairo 1942.
——, Les Dignitaires de la hiérarchie religieuse selon Ğābir ibn Ḥayyān, in BIFAO, 41
(1942), 83–97.
Kraus, P. [and M. Plessner], Djābir b. Ḥayyān, in EI2, ii, 357–9.
Kraye, J., Ryan, W. F. and Schmitt, C. B. (eds.), Pseudo-Aristotle in the Middle Ages: the theol-
ogy and other texts, London 1986.
bibliography 253
Kruk, R., Neoplatonists and after: from Ibn Ṭufayl to Ibn an-Nafîs, in Vanderjagt, A. and
Pätzold, D. (eds.), The Neoplatonic tradition. Jewish, Christian and Islamic themes, Köln
1991, 75–85.
Landolt, H., Henry Corbin, 1903–1978: between philosophy and orientalism, in JAOS, 119/3
(1999), 484–90.
——, Walāyah, in Eliade, M. (ed)., The Encyclopedia of Religion, xv, New York 1986–7,
316–23.
Langermann, Y. T., Cultural contacts of the Jews of Yemen, in Harrak, A. (ed.), Contacts
between cultures. i. West Asia and North Africa, Lewiston 1992, 281–5.
La Porta, S. and Shulman, D. (eds.), The poetics of grammar and the metaphysics of sound
and sign, Leiden 2007.
Leiser, G., Muslims from al-Andalus in the madrasas of late Fāṭimid and Aiyūbid Egypt, in
Al-Qantara, 20 (1999), 137–59.
Lévi-Provençal, E., A Propos de l’ascète philosophe Ibn Masarra de Cordoue, in Gren, E.
et al. (eds.), Donum natalicium H. S. Nyberg oblatum, Uppsala, 1954, 75–83.
Lewis, B., An Ismaili interpretation of the fall of Adam, in BSOS, 9/3 (1938), 691–704.
Litvak, M., ‘More harmful than the Jews’: anti-Shiʿi polemics in modern radical Sunni
discourse, in Amir-Moezzi, M. A., Bar-Asher, M. M. and Hopkins, S. (eds.), Le Shīʿisme
Imāmite quarante ans après: hommage à Etan Kohlberg, Turnhout (Bibliothèque de
l’école des hautes etudes / sciences religieuses, 137), 2009, 293–314.
Lobel, D., A Sufi-Jewish dialogue: philosophy and mysticism in Baḥya Ibn Paqūda’s duties of
the heart, Philadelphia 2007.
——, Ittiṣāl and amr ilāhī: divine immanence and the world to come in the Kuzari, in
Hary, B. and Ben-Shammai, H. (eds.), Esoteric and exoteric aspects in Judeo-Arabic cul-
ture, Leiden 2006, 107–30.
Long, A. A., Heraclitus and Stoicism, in Long, A. A., Stoic studies, Cambridge 1996, 35–57.
Lory, P., Alchimie et mystique en terre d’Islam, Paris 1989.
——, La Science des lettres en Islam, Paris 2004.
——, The symbolism of letters and language in the work of Ibn ʿArabī, in Journal of the
Muhyiddin Ibn ʿArabi Society, 23 (1998), 32–42.
MacDonald, D. B. [and T. Fahd], Sīmiyāʾ, in EI2, ix, 611–3.
Madelung, W., Das Imamat in der frühen ismailitischen Lehre, in Der Islam, 37 (1961),
43–135.
——, Fatimiden und Baḥrainqarmaṭen, in Der Islam, 34 (1959), 34–88, trans. as The Fatim-
ids and the Qarmaṭīs of Baḥrayn, in Daftary, F. (ed)., Mediaeval Ismaʿili history and
thought, Cambridge 1996, 21–73.
——, Ismāʿīliyya, in EI2, iv, 198–206.
——, Some notes on non-Ismāʿīlī Shiism in the Maghrib, in SI, 44 (1976) 87–97; repr. in
Madelung, W., Religious schools and sects in medieval Islam, London 1985, article xiv.
Manzalaoui, M., The Pseudo-Aristotelian Kitāb sirr al-asrār: facts and problems, in Oriens,
23/24 (1974), 147–257.
Marín, M., Abū Saʿīd ibn al-Aʿrābī et le développement du soufisme en al-Andalus, in
REMMM, 63–4 (1992), 28–38.
——, The early development of zuhd in al-Andalus, in De Jong, F. (ed.), Shīʿa Islam, sects
and Sufism: historical dimensions, religious practice and methodological considerations,
Utrecht 1992, 83–96.
Marín, M., Fierro M. and Samsó, J. (eds.), The formation of al-Andalus, 2 vols., Aldershot
1998.
Marquet, Y., Ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ, in EI2, iii, 1071–6.
——, Imamat, résurrection et hiérarchie selon les Ikhwan as-safa, in REI, 30 (1962), 49–142,
repr. Paris 1963.
——, La Philosophie des alchimistes et l’alchimie des philosophes: Jâbir ibn Ḥayyân et les
“Frères de la pureté”, Paris 1988.
——, La Philosophie des Ihwan al-Safa: de Dieu à l’homme, Lille 1973.
254 bibliography
Nwyia, P., Exégèse Coranique et langage mystique: nouvel essai sur le lexique technique des
mystiques musulmans, Beirut 1970.
——, Le Tafsīr mystique attribué a Ğaʿfar Ṣādiq: edition critique, in Mélanges de l’Université
Saint-Joseph, 43/4 (1968), 181–230.
Nyberg, H. S., Kleinere Schriften des Ibn al-ʿArabī, Leiden 1919.
Olivelle, P. (trans.), Upaniṣads, Oxford 1996.
O’Shaughnessy, T. J., The development of the meaning of spirit in the Koran, Roma 1953.
——, The Koranic concept of the word of God, Roma 1948, rev. as Word of God in the Qurʾān,
Rome 1984.
Peña, S., El término de origen coránico Amr Allāh (“disposición de dios”) y el linguocen-
trismo trascendente islámico, en torno al siglo XII, in Anaquel de Estudios ārabes, 22
(2011), 197–224.
Pépin, J., Logos, in Eliade, M. (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Religion, ix, New York 1986–7,
9–15.
Peters, F. E., Hermes and Harran: the roots of Arabic-Islamic occultism, in Mazzaoui, M. M.
and Moreen, V. B. (eds.), Intellectual studies on Islam: essays written in honor of Martin B.
Dickson, Salt Lake City 1990, 185–215.
Pines, S., La Longue récension de la théologie d’Aristote dans ses rapports avec la doc-
torine ismaélienne, in REI, 22 (1954), 7–20, repr. in Pines, S., Studies in the history of
Arabic philosophy (The Collected Works of Shlomo Pines, iii), Jerusalem 1996, 390–403.
——, Nathanaël ben al-Fayyûmî et la théologie ismaëlienne, in Revue de l’Histoire Juive en
Égypte, Cairo 1947, 5–22.
——, Shīʿite terms and conceptions in Judah Halevi’s Kuzari, in JSAI, 2 (1980), 165–251.
——, The limitations of the human knowledge according to al-Farabi, Ibn Bajja and Mai-
monides, in Twersky, I. (ed.), Studies in medieval Jewish history and literature, Cambridge
1979, 82–109.
Pingree, D., Some of the sources of the Ghāyat al-ḥakīm, in Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes, 43 (1980), 1–13.
——, The Ṣābians of Ḥarrān and the classical tradition, in International Journal of the Clas-
sical Tradition, 9/1 (2002), 8–35.
Plessner, M., Hermes Trismegistus and Arab science, in SI, 2 (1954), 45–59.
Poonawala, I. K., Biobibliography of Ismaʿili literature, Malibu 1977.
——, Why do we need an Arabic critical edition with an annotated English translation
of the Rasāʾil ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ, in El-Bizri, N. (ed.), Epistles of the Brethern of Purity. The
Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ and their Rasāʾil: an introduction, Oxford 2008, 33–57.
Procksch, O., The word of God in the Old Testament, in Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament, s.v. “λέγω”, iv, 91–100.
Radtke, B., A forerunner of Ibn al-ʿArabî: Hakîm Tirmidhî on sainthood, in Journal of the
Muhyiddin Ibn ʿArabi Society, 8 (1989), 42–9.
——, Between projection and suppression: some considerations concerning the study of
Sufism, in De Jong, F. (ed.), Shīʿa Islam, sects and Sufism: historical dimensions, religious
practice and methodological considerations, Utrecht 1992, 70–82.
——, Iranian and Gnostic elements in early Taṣawwuf: observations concerning the Umm
al-kitāb, in Gnoli, G. and Panaino, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the first European conference
of Iranian studies (Serie Orientale Roma, 67/2), ii, Rome 1990, 519–30.
——, Saint, in EQ, iv, 520–1.
——, The concept of wilāya in early Sufism, in Lewisohn, L. (ed.), Classical Persian Sufism:
from its origins to Rumi, London and New York 1993, 483–96.
——, et al., Walī, in EI2, xi, 109–24.
Radtke, B. and O’Kane J., The concept of sainthood in early Islamic mysticism: two works by
al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī, Richmond 1996.
Ramón Guerrero, R. and Garrido Clemente, P., Ibn Masarra, in Lirola Delgado, J. and
Puerta Vílchez, J. M. (eds.), Biblioteca de al-Andalus: de Ibn al-Labbāna a Ibn al-Ruyūlī,
iv, Almeria 2006, 144–54.
256 bibliography
Ritter, H., ʿAbd al-Karīm, Ḳuṭb al-Dīn b. Ibrāhīm al-Djīlī, in EI2, i, 70–1.
Ritter, H. and Plessner, M. (trans.), Picatrix: Das Ziel des Weisen von Pseudo-Magriti, London
1962.
Rosenthal, F., Aš-Šhayḫ al-Yûnânî and the Arabic Plotinus source, in Orientalia, 21 (1952),
461–92, 22 (1953), 370–400 and 24 (1955), 42–66, repr. in Rosenthal, F., Greek philosophy
in the Arab world, Aldershot 1990, article iii.
——, Ibn ʿArabī between ‘philosophy’ and ‘mysticism’, in Oriens, 31 (1988), 1–35.
——, Ibn Khaldûn: the muqaddimah. An introduction to history, London 1958.
Rowson, E. K., A Muslim philosopher on the soul and its fate: al-ʿĀmirī’s Kitāb al-amad ʿalā
l-abad, Connecticut 1988.
Rubin, M., The language of creation or the primordial language: a case of cultural polemics
in antiquity, in Journal of Jewish Studies, 49 (1998), 306–33.
Rubin, U., Nūr muḥammadī, in EI2, viii, 125.
——, Pre-Existence and light: aspects of the concept of Nūr Muḥammad, IOS, 5 (1975),
62–119.
Ruspoli, S., Ibn ʿArabî et la prophétologie shîʿite, in Jambet, C. (ed.), Henry Corbin (L’Herne,
39), Paris 1981, 224–39.
Ryding, K. C., Alchemical phonology: science, sound, and mysticism in the Arab Middle
Ages, in History of Linguistics, 78 (1993; = Papers from the sixth international conference
on the history of the language sciences, ed. K. R. Jankowsky), 83–92.
Safi, O., Bargaining with baraka: Persian Sufism, mysticism, and pre-modern politics, in
MW, 90 (2000), 259–87.
Saleh, S., The use of bāṭinī, fidāʾī and ḥashīshī, in SI, 82 (1995), 35–43.
Schaeder, H. H., Die islamische Lehre vom vollkommenen Menschen, ihre Herkunft und
ihre dichterische Gestaltung, in ZDMG, 79 (1925), 192–268.
Schimmel, A., And Muhammad is His messenger: the veneration of the prophet in Islamic
piety, Chapel Hill 1985.
——, Mystical dimensions of Islam, Chapel Hill 1975.
——, Secrecy in Sufism, in Bolle, K. W. (ed.), Secrecy in religions, Leiden 1987, 81–102.
——, The primordial dot: some thoughts about Sufi letter mysticism, in JSAI, 9 (1987),
350–6.
Schlanger, J., La Philosophie de Salomon Ibn Gabirol: étude d’un néoplatonisme, Leiden
1968.
Schmidt, L. E., The making of modern ‘mysticism’, in Journal of the American Academy of
Religion, 71/2 (2003), 273–302.
Scholem, G., Major trends in Jewish mysticism, New York 1995.
Sedgwick, M., Against the modern world: traditionalism and the secret intellectual history of
the twentieth century, Oxford 2004.
Sezgin, F., Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, 9 vols., Leiden 1967–84.
Sharon, M., Ahl al-bayt-people of the house, in JSAI, 8 (1986), 169–84.
——, The Umayyads as ahl al-bayt, in JSAI, 14 (1991), 115–52.
Smith, M., Al-Risālat al-laduniyya by Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad al-Ghazālī (450/1059–
505/1111), in JRAS, 2 (1938), 177–200, 353–74.
Spectorsky, S. A., Sufyān b. ʿUyayna, in EI2, ix, 772.
Stead, C., Logos, in the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, v, 817–9.
Steigerwald, D., Le Logos: clef de l’ascension spirituelle dans l’ismaélisme, in Studies in
Religion (= Sciences Religieuses), 28/2 (1999), 175–96.
——, The divine word (kalima) in Shahrastānī’s majlis, in Studies in Religion (= Sciences
Religieuses), 25/3 (1996), 335–52.
Stern, S. M., Cairo as the center of the Ismāʿīlī movement, in Le millenaire du Caire:
mélanges, 1972, repr. in Stern, S. M., Studies in early Ismāʿīlism, Jerusalem and Leiden
1983, 234–56.
——, Fāṭimid propaganda among Jews according to the testimony of Yefet b. ʿAlī the Kara-
ite, in Stern, S. M., Studies in early Ismāʿīlism, Jerusalem and Leiden 1983, 84–95.
bibliography 257
——, Heterodox Ismāʿīlism at the time of al-Muʿizz, in BSOAS, 17 (1955), 10–33, repr. in
Stern, S. M., Studies in early Ismāʿīlism, Jerusalem and Leiden 1983, 257–88.
——, Ibn Ḥasdāy’s Neoplatonist: a Neoplatonic treatise and its influence on Isaac Israeli
and the longer version of the theology of Aristotle, in Oriens, 13 (1960–1), 58–120.
——, Ibn Masarra, follower of Pseudo-Empedocles—an illusion, in Actas do IV congresso
de estudos Ārabes e Islâmicos, Coimbra-Lisboa 1 a 8 de Septembro de 1968, Leiden 1971,
325–37, repr. in Stern, S. M., Medieval Arabic and Hebrew thought, ed. F. W. Zimmer-
mann, London 1983, article v.
——, Ismāʿīlīs and Qarmaṭians, in L’Élaboration de l’Islam, Paris 1961, 99–108, repr. in Stern,
S. M., Studies in early Ismāʿīlism, Jerusalem and Leiden 1983, 289–98.
——, New information about the authors of the ‘epistles of the Sincere Brethren’, in
Islamic Studies, 3 (1964), 405–28, repr. in Stern, S. M., Studies in early Ismāʿīlism, Jerusa-
lem and Leiden 1983, 155–76.
——, Studies in early Ismāʿīlism, Jerusalem and Leiden 1983.
——, The authorship of the epistles of the Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ, in IC, 20/4 (1946), 367–72 and
21/4 (1947), 403–4.
——, The earliest cosmological doctrines of Ismāʿīlism, in Stern, S. M., Studies in early
Ismāʿīlism, Jerusalem and Leiden 1983, 3–29.
——, The early Ismāʿīlī missionaries in North-West Persia and in Khurāsān and Transox-
ania, in BSOAS, 23/1 (1960), 56–90, repr. in Stern, S. M., Studies in early Ismāʿīlism, Jeru-
salem and Leiden 1983, 189–233.
Stroumsa, S., Al-Andalus und Sefarad: Von Bibliotheken und Gelehrten im muslimischen
Spanien, in Clemens, L. et al. (eds.), 12. Arye Maimon-Vortrag an der Universität Trier 5.
Oktober 2009 (Arye Maimon-Institut für Geschichte der Juden: Studien und Texte, 2),
Trier 2010, 9–37; trans. as Thinkers of ‘this peninsula’: an integrative approach to the
study of philosophy in al-Andalus, in Freidenreich, D. and Goldstein, M. (eds.), Border
crossings: interreligious interaction and the exchange of ideas in the Islamic Middle Ages,
Philadelphia (forthcoming).
——, Ibn Masarra and the beginnings of mystical thought in al-Andalus, in Schäfer, P. (ed.),
Mystical approaches to God: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, München 2006, 97–112.
——, Review of Empedocles Arabus: une lecture néoplatonicienne tardive by Daniel De
Smet, in JAOS, 122/1 (Jan.–Mar. 2002), 94–7.
Stroumsa, S. and Sviri, S., The beginnings of mystical philosophy in al-Andalus: Ibn Masarra
and his epistle on contemplation, in JSAI, 36 (2009), 201–53.
Sviri, S., Between fear and hope: on the coincidence of opposites in Islamic mysticism, in
JSAI, 9 (1987), 316–49.
——, Ḥakīm Tirmidhī and the Malāmatī movement in early Sufism, in Lewisohn, L. (ed.),
Classical Persian Sufism: from its origins to Rūmī, London 1993, 583–613.
——, Jewish-Muslim mystical encounters in the Middle Ages, with particular attention to
al-Andalus (Muslim Spain), in The Cambridge history of Judaism. v–vi. Mysticism among
Jews in the Islamic middle ages until 1500 (forthcoming).
——, Kun—the existence-bestowing word in Islamic mysticism: a survey of texts on the
creative power of language, in La Porta, S. and Shulman, D. (eds.), The poetics of gram-
mar and the metaphysics of sound and sign, Leiden 2007, 35–67.
——, Spiritual trends in pre-Kabbalistic Judeo-Spanish literature: the cases of Bahya ibn
Paquda and Judah Halevi, in Donaire, 6 (1996), 78–84.
——, Sufism: reconsidering terms, definitions and processes in the formative period of
Islamic mysticism, in Gobillot, G. and Thibon, J. J. (eds.), Les Maîtres soufis et leurs
disciples. IIIe–Ve siècles de l’hégire (IXe–XIe s.). Enseignement, formation et transmission,
Beirut 2012, 17–34.
——, The early mystical schools of Baghdad and Nīshāphūr: in search of Ibn Munāzil, in
JSAI, 30 (2005), 450–82.
258 bibliography
——, The emergence of the holy man and the spiritual hierarchy in Islamic mysticism:
Biblical (and other) echoes in a Muslim woman’s dream, in Meddeb, A. and Stora, B.
(eds.), Histoire des relations entre juifs et musulmans du Coran á nos jour (forthcoming).
——, The self and its transformation in Ṣūfīsm, in Shulman, D. and Stroumsa, G. G. (eds.),
Self and self-transformation in the history of religions, Oxford 2002, 195–215.
——, The taste of hidden things: images on the Sufi path, Inverness 1997.
——, Words of power and the power of words: mystical linguistics in the works of al-Ḥakīm
al-Tirmidhī, in JSAI, 27 (2002), 204–44.
Taji-Farouki, S., Beshara and Ibn ʿArabi: a movement of Sufi spirituality in the modern world,
Oxford 2007.
Takeshita, M., Ibn ʿArabī’s theory of the perfect man and its place in the history of Islamic
thought, Tokyo 1987.
Taylor, J. B., Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq: spiritual forebear of the Ṣūfīs, in IC, 40/2 (1966), 97–113.
——, Man’s knowledge of God in the thought of Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq, in IC, 40/2 (1966), 195–206.
Tibi, A., ʿUmar b. Ḥafṣūn, in EI2, x, 823–5.
Tornero, E., Noticia sobre la publicación de obras inéditas de Ibn Masarra, in Al-Qanṭara,
xiv (1993), 47–64, trans. as A report on the publication of previously unedited works by
Ibn Masarra, in Fierro, M. and Samsó, J. (eds.), The formation of al-Andalus. ii. Language,
religion, culture and the sciences, Aldershot 1998, 133–49.
Torres Balbás, L. et al., Al-Andalus, or Djazīrat al-Andalus, in EI2, i, 486–8.
Treiger, A., Andrei Iakovkevič Borisov (1903–1942) and his studies of medieval Arabic phi-
losophy, in Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, 17 (2007), 159–95.
Tymieniecka, A. T. (ed.), Islamic philosophy and occidental phenomenology on the perennial
issue of microcosm and macrocosm, Dordrecht 2006.
Vajda, G., Les Lettres et les sons de la langue Arabe d’après Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī, in Arabica,
8 (1961), 113–30.
——, Un Opuscle ismaélienne en transmission judaeo-arabe, in JA, 246 (1958), 459–66.
Van Bladel, K. T., The Arabic Hermes: from pagan sage to prophet of science, New York 2009.
Van Ess, J., Die Gedankenwelt des Ḥāriṯ al-Muḥāsibī: anhand von Übersetzungen aus seinen
Schriften dargestellt und erläutert, Bonn 1961.
Vuckovic, B. O., Heavenly journeys, earthly concerns: the legacy of the miʿraj in the formation
of Islam, New York 2004.
Wagner, M. F., Plotinus on the nature of Physical Reality, in Gerson, L. P. (ed.), The Cam-
bridge companion to Plotinus, Cambridge 1996, 130–70.
Walker, P. E., Cosmic hierarchies in early Ismāʿīlī thought: the view of Abū Yaʿqūb
al-Sijistānī, in MW, 66 (1976), 14–28.
——, Early philosophical Shiism: the Ismaili Neoplatonism of Abū Yaʿqūb al-Sijistānī, Cam-
bridge 1993.
——, Ḥamīd al-Dīn al-Kirmānī: Ismaili thought in the age of al-Ḥākim, London 1999.
——, The Ismāʿīlīs, in Adamson, P. and Taylor, R. C. (eds.), The Cambridge companion to
Arabic Philosophy, Cambridge 2005, 72–91.
Wasserstein, D. J., An unrecognized hoard of Fāṭimid silver from al-Andalus and a phan-
tom caliph, in Al-Qantara, 15 (1994), 245–52.
Wasserstrom, S. M., Further thoughts on the origins of sefer yeṣirah, in Aleph, 2 (2002),
201–21.
——, Religion after religion: Gershom Scholem, Mircea Eliade, and Henry Corbin at Eranos,
Princeton 1999.
——, Sefer yeṣira and early Islam: a reappraisal, in Journal of Jewish Thought and Philoso-
phy, 3 (1993), 1–30.
——, The moving finger writes: Mughīra B. Saʿīd’s Islamic Gnosis and the myths of its
rejection, in History of Religions, 25 (1985), 1–29.
Weiss, B. G., Medieval Muslim discussions of the origin of language, in ZDMG, 124/1 (1974),
33–41.
bibliography 259
Weiss, T., On the matter of language: the creation of the world from letters and Jacques
Lacan’s perception of letters as real, in Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy, 17/1
(2009), 101–15.
Welch, A. T., Al-Ḳurʾān/The mysterious letters, in EI2, v, 412–5.
Wellhausen, J., The religio-political factions in early Islam, trans. R. C. Ostle and S. M. Walzer,
Amsterdam 1975.
Wensinck, A. J., The Muslim creed: its genesis and historical development, New York 1932.
Wensinck, A. J. [and C. E. Bosworth], Lawḥ, in EI2, v, 698.
Widengren, G., The Gnostic technical language in the Rasāʾil Iḫwān al-ṣafāʾ, in Actas do
IV congresso de estudos Ārabes e Islâmicos, Coimbra-Lisboa 1 a 8 de Septembro de 1968,
Leiden 1971, 181–203.
Wilensky, S. O. H., The ‘first created being’ in early Kabbalah: philosophical and Ismaʿilian
sources, in Binah: Studies in Jewish History, Thought and Culture, 3 (1994), 65–77.
Winston, D., Logos and mystical theology in Philo of Alexandria, Cincinnati 1985.
Wisnovsky, R., Avicenna and the Avicennian tradition, in Adamson, P. and Taylor, R. C.
(eds.), The Cambridge companion to Arabic philosophy, Cambridge 2005, 92–136.
Wolfson, H. A., Philo: foundations of religious philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam,
2 vols., Cambridge 1947.
——, The internal senses in Latin, Arabic, and Hebrew philosophic texts, in Harvard Theo-
logical Review, 28/2 (1935), 69–133.
Zaki, M. M., Barzakh, in EQ, i, 204–7.
Zimmermann, F. W., The origins of the so-called theology of Aristotle, in Kraye, J., Ryan,
W. F. and Schmitt, C. B. (eds.), Pseudo-Aristotle in the Middle Ages: the theology and other
texts, London 1986, 110–240.
Zonta, M., Influence of Arabic and Islamic philosophy on Judaic thought, in Zalta, E. N.
(ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2009 edition), http://plato.stanford
.edu/archives/win2009/entries/arabic-islamic-judaic/.
EI1, Encyclopaedia of Islam (1st edition), ed. M. T. Houtsma et al., 9 vols., Leiden 1913–36.
EI2, Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd edition), ed. H. A. R. Gibb et al., 12 vols., Leiden 1960–2006.
Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. E. Yarshater, 14 vols., London 1985–2004.
Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. E. Craig, 10 vols., London 1998.
The Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān, ed. J. D. McAuliffe, 6 vols., Leiden 2001–6.
The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. P. Edwards, 8 vols., New York 1967.
The Encyclopedia of Religion, ed. M. Eliade, 16 vols., New York 1986–7.
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. G. Kittel, trans. G. W. Bromiley, 10 vols.,
Grand Rapids 1965–78.
Index
amr allāh (“Allāh’s command”) 35, nūr al-ʿaql (“the light of the intellect”)
46n51, 57, 59n98, 60, 61n104, 62, 156, 226, 228
71n137, 74, 136, 194 the ten intellects 70, 85n36, 139n52,
amr and nahy (“command” and 164–5, 198, 202
“prohibition”) 58, 59–60, 62, 68, 185 Arabic, see alphabet, language and letters
al-amr bi-l-maʿrūf wa-l-nahy ʿan ʿĀrifūn (“those who possess Divine
al-munkar (“commanding right knowledge”) 129, 172, 227; see also
and forbidding wrong”) 58 maʿrifa
al-amr al-ilāhī (“the Divine command”) Aristotelian, Aristotle 16, 106n103, 187,
54, 57, 59n98, 60, 62, 63n111, 68n126, 74 198, 201, 207n77, 210–1
al-amr al-kunī (“the command ‘be!’”) ʿArsh (“throne”) 50, 52–3, 62, 72, 81,
63n110 87n38, 88n43, 95, 117, 144, 147, 206, 220,
al-amr al-taklīfī (“the imposing 226; cf. kursī
command”) / al-amr bi-l-wāsiṭa Asās (plural: usus, “foundation”) 84, 94,
(“the command through mediation”) 109–10, 128, 143, 153; see also awṣiyāʾ
and amr al-mashīʾa (“the command Ascension 214–5, 220, 221–29; see also
of volition”) / al-amr al-takwīnī irtiqāʾ, miʿrāj, ṣuʿūd, taraqqī and
(“the existentiating command”) 63 taṣaʿʿud
Analogy, analogies, see parallel worlds Asceticism, see zuhd
Al-ʿAnāṣir al-uwal (“the first elements”, Aṣfiyāʾ allāh (“Allāh’s elect”) 227
i.e. the four natures) 98 Ashbāḥ (“silhouettes”) 144
Anatolia 10 Ashkhāṣ (“figures”) 49, 128, 134, 150, 183
Al-Andalus, Andalusī, Andalusīs 1–13, 15, Asín Palacios, Miguel 11–3, 15n50,
16, 21, 29–30, 31–2, 45–6, 72–6, 179, 186, 26n79
192n14, 211n87, 214, 231–8 Aṣl (“root”) 46, 89, 90, 103, 172
Angels 42–3, 50, 60, 68, 69, 71, 96, 97, Asmāʾ (singular: ism, “names”)
137, 150, 163–4, 173, 181, 183, 184, 198–9, Allāh (the name of God) 84, 166
224–6; see also al-Fatḥ, Gabriel, al-Jadd, Allāh (the name of the first created
Karūbiyya, al-Khayāl, Rūḥāniyya and being below the Creator) 42, 86–7
spirit the awliyāʾ or imāms as the Divine
Anniyya (“being”) 66n120 names 142–3, 146–51, 162, 168, 212–3
Anthropomorphic, anthropomorphism the Divine names 50, 94–6, 116, 138,
47, 54, 84, 166, 231, 237 163–4, 166–7, 176, 177–8, 186
ʿAql (“intellect”) 104–6, 112, 152, 180, 181, the names of the letters 81, 117–8;
182, 185, 204, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210n86, see also basāʾiṭ al-ḥurūf
226, 228 versus maʿnā 216
al-ʿaql al-awwal (“the first intellect”, Astrology, astronomy 7n22, 31, 69,
i.e. the universal intellect or the 101n89, 134n37, 191, 193, 236
first among the ten intellects) 87, Atimmāʾ (singular: mutimm, “those who
152n89, 196 complete”, i.e. the seven imāms) 109
al-ʿaql al-faʿʿāl (“the active intellect”, Atqiyāʾ (“God fearing ones”) 127
i.e. the universal intellect) 48 Attributes, see ṣifa; see also asmāʾ
aql juzʾī (“partial intellect”) 154; Avempace, see Ibn Bājja
see also juzʾ Averroes, see Ibn Rushd
al-ʿaql al-kullī (“the universal intellect”) Avicenna, see Ibn Sīnā
37–40, 44–5, 46–53, 56–7, 59, 61, 62, Awliyāʾ (singular: walī, “friends of God”)
68, 69, 72–5, 84, 85n35, 86–7, 89, 10–11, 24, 27, 50, 57, 62–4, 71, 72, 101,
94–5, 104–6, 109, 111–2, 114, 118, 136–8, 108–116, 120, 123–56, 157, 158, 171, 172,
150–6, 160–2, 168, 169, 170, 182, 188, 178, 179, 181, 184, 189, 190, 192–4, 195–6,
192, 195, 198n38, 206, 209, 213, 215, 219, 197n33, 198, 200, 201, 209, 213, 214, 217–8,
222–3, 224n132 220, 227, 229, 231
al-ʿaql al-munfaʿil (“the passive as “those who are loyal to”, “supporters”
intellect”, i.e. the universal soul) 49 64, 124n6
as “understanding” 214 see also walāya
index 263
Awṣiyāʾ (“legatees” of the prophets) 113, Book 50, 52, 168, 169–72, 176, 189, 212–29,
129, 132–3, 136, 154, 158, 162, 164, 171, 187, 235; see also writing
189, 201, 218; see also asās Book of Kuzari 74, 82n24
Awtād (“pegs”) 84, 110, 127, 130n23, Borisov, Andrei 37
130n25, 134 Brain 207
Āya (plural: āyāt, “miraculous sign”; Breath, see nafas
“verse”) 102, 142–3, 151, 212–29 Bridge, see ṣirāṭ
āyāt allāh al-kubrā (“the greatest signs Budalāʾ, see abdāl
of Allāh”) 228 Al-Bustī, Abū l-Qāsim 40n29
Aʿyān (“entities”) 53, 138n49, 140n58 Buwayhīs 122n153, 179n78
aʿyān thābita (“immutable entities”)
54, 138, 167 Cairo 6n22, 7n22, 10
ʿAyn al-baṣīra (“the eye of inner vision”) Caliph, see khalīfa
226–7 the rightly guided Caliphs 144
ʿAyn al-qalb (“the eye of the heart”) 226 Casanova, Paul 28
Ays (“being”) 44 Celestial spheres 48, 62n107, 67, 83, 90,
Aẓilla (“shadows”) 144 93, 95–6, 97–9, 133–5, 173n59, 192, 196,
Al-ʿAzīz 5n14 197, 198, 201, 203n58, 215, 216n106, 224–5;
see also falak and planets
Bāb (plural: abwāb, “gate”) 128, 133, 147 Chodkiewicz, Michel 132
Baḥyā b. Paqūda 214 Christian, Christianity 16–7, 21n63, 22,
Balance, see ʿilm al-mīzān 34, 36, 37, 39, 77, 80, 165, 210, 211n87, 214,
Bāriʾ al-barāyā (“the Creator of all created 221; see also Jesus
beings”) 42, 87 Circle, circles, circular 51n66, 90, 104,
Barzakh (“isthmus”) 174–5 136–7, 155, 198
Basāʾiṭ (“simple ones”, i.e. the spiritual City-State, see man-city-state analogy
existents) 164 Command, see amr
Basāʾiṭ al-ḥurūf (“the simple letters”) Compendium, see mukhtaṣar
97–8, 117–8; see also asmāʾ, the names Contemplation, see iʿtibār
of the letters Corbin, Henry 14, 16–8, 19, 23, 132, 238
Baṣar (plural: abṣār) and baṣīra (plural: Cordova 5n15, 7n24, 9
baṣāʾir, “inner vision”) 69, 227, 229 Correspondences, see parallel worlds
baṣar al-qalb (“the inner vision of the Cosmic, cosmological, cosmology,
heart”) 228 cosmos 3, 12, 36, 43, 55, 56, 59, 60,
Basmala (the formula bi-smi llāh 62–3, 65, 67, 69, 70, 72, 78, 80–96, 131,
al-raḥmān al-raḥīm, “in the name 132, 134n37, 136–43, 159, 172–5, 231,
of Allāh, the All-Merciful and the 235; see also hierarchy and parallel
Compassionate”) 87n41, 200n48, worlds
221n122 Cosmogonic, cosmogony 3, 36, 43, 59, 60,
Baṣra 6, 7n22, 29 69, 72, 74, 78, 80–96, 103, 131, 143–51, 159,
Al-Baṭalyawsī, Abū Muḥammad ʿAbdallāh 193, 200, 227, 231
b. Muḥammad Ibn al-Sīd 28n83, Creation ex nihilo, see ibdāʿ
32n93, 236 Cycle, see dawr
Bāṭin (“inner, hidden”) 9, 17, 26n79, 27,
86–7, 88, 89, 102, 103, 105n101, 162n20, Daftar, see book
164, 180, 181, 189, 216–217, 219; cf. ẓāhir Dāʿī, see daʿwa
Bāṭinī, bāṭinīs 9, 25–6 Dalāla/dalīl (plural: dalāʾil, “sign”, “proof”)
Bible, see Old and New Testaments 83, 84, 85n32, 86–7, 103, 109–12, 216–8,
Birth 202 219, 228; cf. madlūl
Body Damascus 10
the human body 85, 106, 134, 169–70, Darkness, see ẓulma
176, 192–4, 200–12, 215 Davar (“word”) 33, 35
the universal/absolute body, see jism Daʿwa (“summoning [to the truth]”,
al-kull and al-jism al-muṭlaq “propaganda”, “missionary activity”)
264 index
Gnostic, Gnosticism 4, 17, 41n33–4, 77, Hayūlā (“matter”) 82, 90, 91, 208
80, 117, 121n152, 134n37, 144n66, 157, 165, first matter 73–4
191, 210, 232–3 al-hayūlā l-kull (“universal matter”)
Grammar 110 92n55
Graphic shape of the letters 112, 118–20 al-hayūlā l-ūlā (“prime matter”) 49,
Guénon, René 18–9 137, 195
see also mādda; cf. ṣūra
Habāʾ (literally: “dust”) 88–92, 95, 98 Heart, see qalb
Ḥadīth (a tradition attributed to the Hebrew 83n27, 109b112, 211n87
Prophet or the imāms) 20, 55, 92–3, Heichalōt (“Palaces”) literature 77, 80
121, 123–4, 125–32, 133, 142, 143–6, 148, Hell 173, 176, 216; see also eschatology
152, 163n25, 165–6, 170, 171, 180, 232 and paradise
Ḥajj (“pilgrimage”) 6, 7n22 Hellenism, Hellenistic thought 32, 33–6,
Al-Ḥakam II 5n14–15 48, 77, 97, 102, 134n37, 135n42, 158,
Ḥakīm (plural: ḥukamāʾ, “wise one”) 179n78, 232
140–2, 193; see also ḥikma Heraclitus 33–4
Ḥāl, see aḥwāl Hermes, Hermetic, Hermeticism 4, 31, 32,
Al-Ḥallāj 120n148, 145 135, 191, 225n137, 232–3, 236
Ḥamaʾ (“mud”) 81n18, 102 Al-Hidāya ilā farāʾiḍ al-qulūb (“The Duties
Hamdani, Abbas 29 of the Hearts”) 214
Al-Ḥāmidī, Ibrāhīm b. al-Ḥusayn 70, Hierarchal, Hierarchy 10–11, 55–6, 59, 94,
139n52, 158, 198 109–10, 125–43, 172–5, 189, 192n14, 192–4,
Hamza, see alif 195–6, 200, 201, 209, 218, 219, 225, 228,
Ḥaqīqa (plural: ḥaqāʾiq, “truth”, “reality”, 235; see also martaba
“essence”) 116, 149, 163, 166, 186 Ḥifẓ (“memory”, “preservation”) 207n78
Al-ḥaqīqa l-kulliyya / ḥaqīqat al-ḥaqāʾiq Ḥijāb (“veil”) 86–7, 147, 148, 149n81, 227,
(“the universal true essence” / “the 229
true essence of all true essences”) Ḥikma (“wisdom”) 115, 140n58; see also
91 ḥakīm
al-ḥaqīqa l-muḥammadiyya (“the true Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ (“The Ornament of the
essence of Muḥammad”) 145–6, 152, Friends of God”) 125–6
170, 198 Himma (plural: himam, “concentrated
Ḥaqq intention”) 224, 228
“Truth” (God) 93, 116, 163–4 Holy man, see awliyāʾ
“right” 140–2 Horizons and the souls, see al-āfāq
Al-Ḥaqq al-makhlūq bihi, al-ḥaqq wa-l-anfus
al-makhlūqa bihi l-dunyā (“the truth Ḥudūd (singular: ḥadd, “boundaries”) 43,
by means of which this world was 67, 81, 136, 137n46, 139n52, 223
created”) 46, 55–6, 72, 116, 161 Ḥujja (plural: ḥujaj, “proof”, “argument”)
Ḥaraka (“movement”, “motion”) 60, 119 66, 102, 109, 110, 113, 133, 163, 192, 200n48,
Ḥarrān 225n137; see also Hermes, 218
Hermetic, Hermeticism ḥujjat allāh 130n24, 181–2
Al-Ḥasan b. ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib 146 ḥujja bāṭina (“inner proof”) and ḥujja
Hawā (“evil inclination”) 207n78, 208–9 ẓāhira (“external proof”) 182n87
Hawāʾ (“air”) 81n18, 89, 92, 102 Al-Hujwīrī, Abū l-Ḥasan ʿAlī b.
Ḥawārī (plural: ḥawāriyyūn, “apostles”) ʿUthmān 130
130n25 Ḥulūl (“Divine incarnation”) 10–11
Al-Ḥawāss (“senses”) 105, 204n60, 208 Humanism, Humanistic 31, 149–51, 154–5,
al-ḥawāss al-bāṭina (“the inner 171, 179–88, 203–5, 212, 213, 218–9, 226–7,
senses”) 106n103, 203 236
al-ḥawāss al-ẓāhira (“the external (The four) humors 199
senses”) 134, 193, 203 Ḥurūf al-jummal, see numerical value of
Ḥaydar Āmulī 122n153, 232 the letters
266 index
Al-Ḥurūf al-ʿulwiyya l-sabʿa (“the seven his relation to Ibn al-ʿArabī 11–3, 91–2
supreme letters”) 85, 113–4, 117; see his role in Andalusī mysticism 1, 13,
also Kūnī-qadar 24–5
Ḥurūfiyya 122n153 his teachings 51–3, 61, 72, 86–91, 103–8,
Al-Ḥusayn b. ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib 147 111–2, 119, 137, 156, 219–21, 228–9
Huwa (“He”) 86 persecution of his followers 9–10
Huwiyya (“being”) 223, 224n132 Ibn Qasī, Abū l-Qāsim Aḥmad b.
Ḥusayn 12–3, 15n50
Iamblichus 39 Ibn Rushd 158, 214
ʿIbād (“God’s servants”) 127 Ibn Sīnā 158, 190, 192n14, 200n46, 201,
ʿIbāda (“worship”) 146, 183, 215 205
Ibdāʿ (“creation [ex nihilo]”) 39, 40, 44, Ibn Ṭufayl, Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. ʿAbd
46, 47, 83n26, 95n64, 151, 192n14 al-Malik 28n83
Iberian Peninsula, see al-Andalus ʿIbra (“warning / example taken”), see
Iblīs 139, 147, 164, 208–9 iʿtibār
Ibn al-ʿArabī, Muḥyī l-Dīn Abū ʿAbdallāh Ibṣār (“looking at”, “visualizing”) 214,
Muḥammad b. ʿAlī 226, 229
controversies surrounding his figure Idrīs 134–5
10–11 Ifāda (“bestowing”) 105n102; cf. istifāda
differences between his teachings and Ifāḍa (“causing abundance”, “causing to
Sufism 1, 3, 78, 91–2, 112n123, 118, flow”) 48; see also fayḍ
119–20, 120–2, 130–2, 134–5, 149, Iḥāṭa (“encompassing”) 163, 164, 194
159–60, 162, 167, 171–2, 205–12, 231–5, Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ (“The Sincere Brethren”)
238 23n69, 26
his influence on later generations 1, 25, identity and the dating of their epistles
132, 145n72 28–32, 45–6, 180
his life and works 10 their humanistic-universal
his relation to Ibn Masarra, Ibn al-ʿArīf, approach 31, 179–88, 203–5, 212, 213,
Ibn Barrajān, Ibn Qasī and Sufi 218–9, 226–7, 236
masters and teachings 11–3, 15n50, their impact on Andalusī thought,
24–5, 56n86, 91–2, 100, 145–6, 167 including the writings of Ibn Masarra
his role in Andalusī mysticism 1, 13, and Ibn al-ʿArabī 7–8, 28, 179, 186,
14, 24–5 191, 205–12, 233, 235–8
his teachings 53–7, 61–4, 71–2, 91–101, their relation to the Jābirian corpus
108, 110–2, 114–6, 117–8, 119, 130–2, 30–2
134–5, 137–8, 140–1, 148–9, 155–6, their teachings 45–51, 59–60, 68–70,
161–4, 166–7, 170–1, 174–5, 176–9, 105–8, 111–2, 118–9, 129, 133–4, 136–9,
186–7, 198–200, 205–12 142, 149–51, 154, 161–2, 164, 168–9,
Ibn al-ʿArīf, Abū l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad b. 172–4, 176, 179–88, 193–4, 201–2,
Muḥammad 12 203–4, 207–9, 215–6, 218–9, 224–7
Ibn Bājja 158 ʿIlla (“cause”) 38, 52, 55, 224
Ibn Barrajān, Abū l-Ḥakam ʿAbd al-Salām al-ʿilla l-ūlā (“the first cause”) 44, 82
b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān 12–3, 56n86 ʿillat al-ʿilal (“the cause of causes”)
Ibn Gabirol, Solomon 21, 74–5, 76, 38, 40
236n16 ʿIliyyīn 171n52, 224
Ibn al-Haytham, Abū ʿAbdallāh Jaʿfar b. ʿIlm (“knowledge”) 38, 40, 45, 46, 49–50,
Aḥmad 5n15 55, 56n86, 57–8, 60n100, 62, 64, 65–71,
Ibn Khaldūn 10–11, 15, 132 86, 87, 88, 89, 100, 101, 104, 107, 113, 124,
Ibn Masarra, Muḥammad b. ʿAbdallāh 138, 151, 153–4, 158, 161, 164, 166–7, 170,
al-Jabalī 182, 188, 206, 224
differences between his teachings and ʿilm al-mīzān (“the science of the
Sufism 1, 3, 25–6, 52n69, 112n123, 118, balance”) and mīzān al-ḥurūf (“the
119–20, 120–2, 231–5, 238 balance of the letters”) 90n50, 97,
his life and works 7, 8–10, 14 101, 197n33
index 267
Mādda (plural: mawādd, “continuous 173–4, 183, 184, 195, 196, 200n48, 224; see
increase”, “[spiritual] substance”) also hierarchy and rutba
49n59, 82n24, 105n101, 113n126, 153–6; Mary 36, 53
see also hayūlā, imdād and istimdād Mashīʾa (“volition”) 41n34, 43, 50, 52, 63,
al-mādda l-ūlā (“the first [spiritual] 83, 194; see also irāda
substance”) 206 Maṣnūʿāt (“[the Maker’s] manufactured
Madelung, Wilferd 29 objects”, i.e. the created beings)
Maʿdin (plural: maʿādin, “repository”, 226–7, 229n151; see also ṣanʿa and
“mine”) 61, 65 al-ṣāniʿ
Madlūl (that which is indicated or Massignon, Louis 15n50, 192n14
proven by the dalāla/dalīl or “sign/ Mathal (plural: amthāl, “parable”,
proof”) 216–7 “simile”) 102, 216–8
Magic 31, 77, 79, 101, 116, 135n42, 176–7, al-mathal al-aʿlā (“the most sublime
191, 193, 203, 236 simile”) 212
Maḥabba (“love”) 145, 146 cf. mamthūl
Maḥall (“place”) 47n54 Mathematics, see numbers
Mahdī (“rightly guided”, the messianic Matter, see hayūlā and mādda
figure) 60n101, 64, 128n16; see also Mawḍiʿ (plural: mawāḍiʿ, “place”,
qāʾim “object”) 47, 52, 141–3, 168
Al-Mahdī, ʿAbdallāh / ʿUbaydallāh 5n15, Mawrūr (Moron), 210
7, 73 Al-Mawrūrī, Abū Muḥammad
Al-Maḥṣūl 44n42 ʿAbdallāh 210
Maimonides 157n4, 214 Al-Mayūrqī, Abū Bakr Muḥammad b.
Majmaʿ (“confluence”) 164 al-Ḥusayn 12
Majmūʿ (“sum total”) 163, 164 Mecca 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 238
Al-Majrīṭī, Abū l-Qāsim Maslama b. Medicine 63
Aḥmad 29, 31n92, 46n50 Medina 2, 6
Makān (“place”) 89n47 Memar marqah 82n22
Makhraj (plural: makhārij, “articulation Memra (“word”) 33, 35
point”) 53, 84, 92, 94, 116 Mercy 54, 55, 100n87; see also al-nafas
Malakūt (“kingdom”) 165, 229 Messengers 49, 58, 59–60, 61n104, 63,
Malakūt al-samawāt wa-l-arḍ (“the 65, 99n83, 109, 147, 177–8, 184; see also
kingdom of the heavens and the prophecy and nāṭiq
earth”) 222, 224–6, 228 Michael, 126, 153; see also angels
Malāmiyya (“those who adhere to the path Microcosm 162, 167, 168, 169–72, 176,
of blame”) 141 189–212, 213, 215, 216, 218, 225; see also
Mālikī school of law, Mālikīs 6n22, 7n24, al-ʿālam al-ṣaghīr and parallel worlds;
9 cf. macrocosm
Mamthūl, the meaning or object of the Midrash, see Judaism
mathal (“simile”) 102, 216–7 Miracles 68, 71
Man-city-state analogy 200–12 Miʿrāj (Muḥammad’s ascension to the
Maʿnā (“meaning”) 216; cf. asmāʾ heavens) 135; see also ascension
Manāzil (“lunar mansions”) 94–6, 101n89, Mithāl (“model”, “pattern”) 87n38, 168,
103–8 216, 218; see also mathal
Manichean religion 144n66, 157 Mizāj (“mixture”) 98n74
Manzalaoui, Mahmoud 211 Mīzān (“scales”) 176, 216; see also
Maqādīr (“decrees”) 52–3 eschatology
Marcus the Valentinian 117n136 Mīzān (“balance”) and mīzān al-ḥurūf
Maʿrifa (“knowledge”) 146, 147, 180, 184, (“the balance of the letters”), see ʿilm
213, 218, 224n132, 227; see also ʿārifūn al-mīzān
and ʿilm Mīzān al-diyāna (“the balance of
Marquet, Yves 29 religion”) 196
Martaba (plural: marātib, “level”) 46, 52, Moon 48, 118, 133, 192, 218; see also
56, 88, 96, 97, 116, 136–8, 141n60, 163, 165, manāzil
index 271
Al-nafs (“soul”) (cont.) 160–2, 200, 205–7, 213, 219, 220, 228–9,
al-nafs al-nāṭiqa (“the rational/speaking 231–8
soul”) 104–6, 111–2, 154, 156, 158, 183, Jewish Neoplatonism 7, 72–6
187, 203–4, 207n78, 208–9; see also mystical dimensions 24; see also
nāṭiq and nuṭq philosophy, mystical
al-nafs al-qudsiyya (“the holy soul”) 68 Neopythagorean tradition, see
al-nafs al-shahwāniyya (“the appetitive Pythagorean and Neopythagorean
soul”) 183, 208 tradition
Najāt (“salvation”) 140, 159, 182, 202, Netton, Ian 180
215–7, 220, 225, 236; see also Nicholson, Reynold A. 14n50
eschatology Al-Nihāya l-awwala (“the first extremity”)
Najīb, see nujabāʾ and al-nihāya l-thāniya (“the second
Name, names, see asmāʾ extremity”) 196
Nāmūs (“Divine law”) 59n98, 60, 63–4, Nineteen 192n14, 200n48; see also
67, 150; see also sharīʿa numbers
Naqīb, see nuqabāʾ Niqqud, see diacritical points/marks
Al-Nasafī, Muḥammad b. Aḥmad 44–5, Nisba (“ratio”; “relation”) 53, 174, 175n66,
114, 222–4, 228 198
Nāṣir-i Khusraw 41 Al-Nisnās, see al-nasnās/al-nisnās
Al-nasnās/al-nisnās (semi-human, Niẓām (“harmonious order”) 142, 197,
monstrous creatures) 187 224
Nasr, Seyyed Hossein 18 Nizārī, Nizārīs 14n47, 70n134
Nāṭiq (plural: nuṭaqāʾ , “speaker Noah 113, 115n130, 117
prophet”) 49, 51n66, 59–60, 84–5, 94, North Africa 2, 5n16, 6, 8, 10, 11, 21, 43,
102, 106n103, 109–10, 111–2, 113–4, 117, 58n93, 73, 75–6, 113, 192, 232–3, 236–8
128, 129, 132–4, 136, 143, 147, 150, 152–4, Nujabāʾ (singular: najīb, “noble
161, 162, 164–5, 168, 171, 178, 182, 187, 188, ones”) 128, 130n25, 134
192, 194, 196, 200n48, 201–2, 203n58, 204, Al-Nuʿmān b. Muḥammad, al-Qāḍī 66,
217–8; see also nuṭq and prophecy; 67n121
cf. ṣāmit Numbers 137, 142, 189, 190, 193, 194–5,
Nature, see ṭabīʿa 197, 200; see also nineteen, seven and
(The four) natures 90–1, 96–101, 118, 120 twelve
Naẓar (“consideration”, “observation”) Numerical value of the letters 85, 109,
214, 216, 218–9, 220n121, 224, 225n136, 121n151
226 Nuqabāʾ (singular: naqīb, “chiefs”) 49,
Naẓīr (“corresponding to”, “paralleling”, 102, 109, 128, 130n25, 133–4, 192, 194,
“similar to”) 84, 85n32, 199n42 200n48
Neoplatonism 16 Nūr muḥammad (“the light of
and Pseudo-Empedocles 12, 75n148 Muḥammad”) 143–6; see also light
Arabic 36–40, 104, 160–1; see also Nuṣayrī, Nuṣayrīs 128n17, 133n31
Theology of Aristotle Nuskha (“copy”) 170–1, 176; see also
contribution of Ismāʿīlī Neoplatonism to microcosm and mukhtaṣar
Andalusī thought 3–4, 6–7, 13, 32, Nuṭaqāʾ, see nāṭiq
45–6, 72–6, 120, 200, 205–12, 231–8 Nuṭq (“speaking”, “rationality”) 106n103,
in Andalusī mysticism 3–4, 6–7, 12–3, 187; see also al-nafs al-nāṭiqa and
27, 32, 233 nāṭiq
in the Ismāʿīlī tradition 3–4, 6–7, 13,
24, 27, 32, 40–51, 60, 70, 76, 82–5, Occult, occultism 3–4, 7n22, 24, 26n79,
102–3, 104–8, 111–2, 113–4, 120, 136, 140, 27, 30, 31, 121, 233–4, 236
143, 149–54, 161, 200, 213, 223–7, 231–8 Old and New Testaments 33–4, 165, 176
in the teachings of Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ibn (The) One 37–40, 136, 174, 222
Masarra 3, 7, 12–3, 24–6, 27, 51–7, Ōtiyōt de-rabbī ʿakīva (“The Letters of
72–3, 76, 86–96, 103–8, 111–2, 120, Rabbi Akiva”) 77, 117n136
index 273
Paradise 173, 176, 216; see also Qalb (“heart”) 135, 204n60, 207, 226–8
eschatology, hell and jannat al-maʾwā qalb muḥammad (“the heart of
Parallel worlds 102–8, 120, 131, 132–5, 167, Muḥammad”) 145; cf. nūr
189–229, 231, 235; see also macrocosm muḥammad
and microcosm al-qalb al-nabātī (“the vegetative
Pearl 144, 146n73 heart”) 207n78
Pen, see qalam al-ruʾya bi-l-qalb (“the vision with/in the
Perennialism 18 heart”) 180–1
Perfection, see al-insān al-kāmil, kamāl Qarāmiṭa 29, 41, 180
and tamām Qayrawān 5n15, 7, 9, 73, 233, 238
Philo of Alexandria 34, 38, 161n15, 190n6 Al-Qiyāma l-kubrā (“the bigger
Philosophy, philosophers, philosophical resurrection”) and al-qiyāma l-ṣughrā
64, 69, 107, 158, 162, 173, 179n78, 208, 214, (“the smaller resurrection”) 105
221n122, 222, 232, 236 (The four) qualities, see (the four)
Mystical, intellectual mysticism 6, 8, natures
12, 15, 21, 24, 26, 28, 31, 32, 51, 72–6, 160, Qudra (“power”) 38, 45, 46, 47, 57, 74,
220, 222, 225, 228–9, 231–4, 236 151, 168, 194, 214, 218
see also Neoplatonism Quran, Quranic 18, 20, 25, 27, 35–6,
Picatrix, see Ghāyat al-ḥakīm 38–9, 50, 54, 65, 71, 78, 90, 94n61,
Pines, Shlomo 40, 74 104n98, 105n102, 123, 140, 146, 153,
Planets 85, 105, 133–5, 192–4, 198–9, 171, 175, 196, 198, 202, 207n78, 212–29,
200n48, 201, 204, 217; see also celestial 232
spheres al-qurʾān al-nāṭiq (“the speaking
Plato, Platonism 16, 97, 135n42, 165, 201, Quran”) 171; cf. al-imām al-ṣāmit
203, 210 see also book
Plotinus 36, 37–8, 39–40, 47, 104, 165, 222 Qurb (“closeness”, “proximity”) 184, 229
Pole, see quṭb Al-Qurṭubī, Abū l-Qāsim Maslama b.
Polis 205n64; see also man-city-state Qāsim 30, 31
analogy Quṭb (“Pole”, “axis”) 63n111, 81, 110, 112,
Power, see qudra and quwwa 130n25, 134, 135, 152, 155
Pregnancy 202 Quwwa
Proclus 39 as “faculty” 203
Prophecy, prophet, prophetic, prophets as “power”, “strength” 48, 68, 71, 88,
27, 33, 35, 36, 43, 49, 57–8, 61, 62–4, 116, 153–4, 163, 164, 177, 193, 206
65–71, 89, 113–6, 123, 127, 128, 129, 137, al-quwwa l-ʿāqila (“the faculty of the
140, 143–6, 151, 152, 158, 164–5, 177–9, intellect”) 105–6, 134, 193, 199
181–8, 189, 202–4, 208, 213, 214, 217, 219, al-quwwa l-dāfiʿa (“the pushing faculty”)
220–1, 225, 228; see also nāṭiq 193
Prophet’s family, see ahl al-bayt al-quwwa l-dhākira (“the remembering
Pseudo-Empedocles 12, 25, 26n79, 75n148 faculty”) 199
Psychomachia 207–10 al-quwwa l-ghādhiya (“the feeding
Pythagorean and Neopythagorean faculty”) 193
tradition 32, 77, 82n24, 97, 102, 129, al-quwwa l-hāḍima (“the digesting
142, 191, 194n26, 233, 236 faculty”) 193
al-quwwa l-ḥāfiẓa (“the preserving
Al-Qāʾim 58n93 faculty”) 203
Qāʾim (“he who rises”, the messianic al-quwwa l-ḥissiyya (“the sensing
figure) 60n101, 64, 113, 114, 134n38, 196, faculty”) 199
202; see also mahdī al-quwwa l-ʿilmiyya (“the knowing
Qalam (“pen”) 50–1, 52–3, 56–7, 72, 89, faculty”) 199
150, 152, 169, 213 al-quwwa l-jādhiba (“the attracting
qalam al-irāda (“the pen of will”) faculty”) 193
51n66, 57 al-quwwa l-khayāliyya (“the imagining
cf. lawḥ faculty”) 199
274 index
difference between Sufism and the Unity 10, 44, 62, 141, 167; see also ittiḥād
teachings of Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ibn and tawḥīd; cf. multiplicity
Masarra 1, 3, 52n69, 78, 90–2, Universal 31, 149–51, 171, 179–88, 203–5,
112n123, 118, 119–20, 120–2, 130–2, 149, 212, 213, 218–9, 226–7, 236; see also
159, 162, 167, 171–2, 192n14, 205–12, humanism, humanistic
231–5, 238 Universe, see cosmic
relation to Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ and Jābir b. Upaniṣads 190n6
Ḥayyān 23n69 ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān 144
see also mysticism
Taṭābuq (“agreement”) 196–7 Vâlsan, Michel 18–9
Tawahhum (“imagination”) 43, 83 Vapor, see dukhān
Tawāzun (“correspondence”) 196–7 Veil, see ḥijāb
Tawfīq (“success”; “succor”) 72n140, Vision, see baṣar, muʿāyana, mushāhada
216n107, 226 and al-ruʾya bi-l-qalb
Tawḥīd (belief in the unity of God) 139, Volition, see mashīʾa
189, 218, 229; see also unity Vowels 82; see also letters
Al-Tawḥīdī, Abū Ḥayyān 238n25
Taʾwīl (“esoteric interpretation”) 9, 27, Waḥda, see unity
58, 65, 68, 215, 217n110 Waḥy (“revelation”) 65, 68
Taʾyīd (“support”) 36, 60, 64–72, 153, Walāya/wilāya (“friendship with God” or
156, 226, 235 “loyalty [to the imāms]”) 123–4, 131–2,
Ṭayyibī, Ṭayyibīs 70, 87, 139n52, 158, 140, 146, 157, 158, 161, 171, 185, 200, 220,
198 229, 231; see also awliyāʾ
Theology of Aristotle 36–41, 44–5, 46, Walī, see awliyāʾ
47, 48, 51, 52, 72–6, 160–2, 190, 222, 231, Waratha (singular: wārith, “heirs”) 63–4,
233 66, 70, 71, 114, 115, 123–4, 137, 151, 152, 161,
Theosophical, theosophy 3, 17, 24, 27, 131, 177, 184, 201, 202, 213, 219
231, 233–4 Waṣī, see awṣiyāʾ
Throne, see ʿarsh Wāsiṭa (plural: wasāʾiṭ, “intermediary”)
Ṭīn (“clay”) 89 38, 43, 44, 60n100, 63, 173, 206
Al-Tirmidhī, al-Ḥakīm 3n9, 124, 129, Water, see (māʾ)
130n24, 131–2, 145, 209, 231n1 Wilāya, see walāya
Traditionalism 18–9 Will, see irāda and mashīʾa
Transoxiana 44 Wind, see rīḥ
Al-Ṭūr (Mount Sinai) 61 Word of God, see kalima
Al-Tustarī, Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh 3n9, 89, Writing 47, 50–1, 52–3, 56–7, 72, 74n146,
90–1, 124, 129, 130n23, 144–5, 146, 182n87, 169–72, 212–29; see also book
209 W.z.y 84, 85n32, 197n33
Twelve 102, 109, 133–4, 197, 200n48,
217–8; see also numbers and seven Yatīm (plural: aytām, “orphan”) 128
Twelvers, see al-Ithnā ʿashariyya Yemen 15, 70
Twenty-eight, see alphabet, fawātiḥ and
manāzil Zachary 115n130
Zāhidūn (“ascetics”) 129
ʿUlamāʾ (singular: ʿālim, “learned ones”) Ẓāhir (“external, manifest”) 9, 17, 26n79,
123–4; see also ʿilm 27, 86–7, 89, 102, 103, 105n101, 162n20,
ʿUmar b. Ḥafṣūn 5n15 164, 181, 189, 216–8, 219; cf. bāṭin
ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb 144 Zaydīs 26n79, 40n29, 41
ʿUmar b. Wāṣil 145n70 Zimmermann, F. W. 40, 73
Umayyad regime (in al-Andalus) 4–8, 9 Zodiac 84, 95, 101n89, 102, 107, 109, 133–4,
Umm al-kitāb (“mother of the book”) 192, 194, 200n48, 217
the Quranic term 50, 171n52 Zohar 2
the Shiʿi work 121n152, 209 Zoroastrian religion 144n66, 157, 190n6
ʿUmud/ʿamad (“the poles [of the tent]”, Zuhd (“asceticism”) 13n46, 23, 222, 236
“columns”) 130n25, 155 Ẓulma (“darkness”) 81n18, 89, 102