Tefsīr al-Tusterī

﷐

 

Tafsīr al-Tustarī

 

by

Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Tustarī

Great Commentaries on the Holy Qurʾān

translated by

Annabel Keeler and Ali Keeler

Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought

 

FONS VITAE

First published in 2011 by Fons Vitae

49 Mockingbird Valley Drive Louisville, KY 40207

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without prior permission of the publishers. All rights reserved.

This book was typeset by Neville Blakemore, Jr. and Muhammad Hozien

Printed in Canada

 

Contents

Acknowledgements    ix

Preface          xi

Introduction to the Translation         xv

i.        Sahl al-Tustarī’s Spiritual Formation and his Teachers  xv

ii.       Tustarī as Spiritual Master, and his Disciples       xix

iii.      Tustarī’s Works          xxiii

iv.       The Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿaẓīm            xxv

v.        Tustarī’s Approach to Qurʾān Interpretation           xxvi

vi.       Mystical Teachings     xxx

vii.     Conclusion      lix

Introduction to the Commentary       1

1         Al-Fātiḥa        10

2         Al-Baqara       12

3         Āl ʿImrān        41

4         Al-Nisāʾ          53

5         Al-Māʾida       60

6         Al-Anʿām        64

7         Al-Aʿrāf          71

8         Al-Anfāl          81

9         Al-Tawba        83

10       Yūnus  88

11       Hūd     91

12       Yūsuf   95

13       Al-Raʿd           100

14       Ibrāhīm           102

15       Al-Ḥijr 104

16       Al-Naḥl           107

17       Al-Isrāʾ           112

18       Al-Kahf           115

19       Maryam          119

20       Ṭā Hā  124

21       Al-Anbiyāʾ      128

22       Al-Ḥajj            131

23       Al-Muʾminūn  135

24       Al-Nūr 137

25       Al-Furqān       139

26       Al-Shuʿarāʾ     142

27       Al-Naml          144

28       Al-Qaṣaṣ         147

29       Al-ʿAnkabūt    149

30       Al-Rūm            151

31       Luqmān           153

32       Al-Sajda          155

33       Al-Aḥzāb         157

34       Sabaʾ   160

35       Al-Malāʾika (or Fāṭir)            161

36       Yā Sīn  163

37       Al-Ṣāffāt         165

38       Ṣād      167

39       Al-Zumar        170

40       Al-Muʾmin (or Ghāfir)           175

41       Al-Sajda (or Fuṣṣilat) 177

42       Al-Shūrā (or Ḥā Mīm ʿAyn Sīn Qāf)  180

43       Al-Zukhruf      183

44       Al-Dukhān      186

45       Al-Jāthiya       188

46       Al-Aḥqāf         191

47       Muḥammad     193

48       Al-Fatḥ           196

49       Al-Ḥujurāt      200

50       Qāf      204

51       Al-Dhāriyāt    207

52       Al-Ṭūr 210

53       Al-Najm          212

54       Al-Qamar        215

55       Al-Raḥmān      216

56       Al-Wāqiʿa       218

57       Al-Ḥadīd         220

58       Al-Mujādila    224

 

 Contents

59 Al-Ḥashr 226

60 Al-Mumtaḥana 229

61       Al-Ṣaff 231

62 Al-Jumuʿa 233

63 Al-Munāfiqūn 234

64 Al-Taghābun 236

65 Al-Ṭalāq 237

66 Al-Taḥrīm 238

67 Al-Mulk 240

68  Al-Qalam (or Nūn) 242

69 Al-Ḥāqqa 244

70 Al-Maʿārij 247

71  Nūḥ 250

72 Al-Jinn 251

73 Al-Muzzammil 253

74 Al-Muddaththir 255

75 Al-Qiyāma 257

76 Al-Insān 259

77 Al-Mursalāt 261

78 Al-Nabaʾ 263

79 Al-Nāziʿāt 265

80  ʿAbasa 267

81 Al-Takwīr 268

82 Al-Infiṭār 270

83 Al-Muṭaffifīn 272

84 Al-Inshiqāq 274

85 Al-Burūj 276

86 Al-Ṭāriq 277

87 Al-Aʿlā 279

88 Al-Ghāshiya 280

89 Al-Fajr 282

90 Al-Balad 285

91 Al-Shams 288

92 Al-Layl 289

93 Al-Ḍuhā 291

94 Al-Inshirāḥ 293

95 Al-Tīn 295

96 Al-ʿAlaq 296

 

97       Al-Qadr           297

98       Al-Bayyina      298

99       Al-Zalzala       299

100     Al-ʿĀdiyāt       301

101     Al-Qāriʿa        302

102     Al-Takāthur    303

103     Al-ʿAṣr 304

104     Al-Humaza      306

105     Al-Fīl  308

106     Quraysh          309

107     Al-Māʿūn        310

108     Al-Kawthar     312

109     Al-Kāfirūn      313

110     Al-Naṣr           314

111     Al-Masad        316

112     Al-Ikhlāṣ         317

113     Al-Falaq         318

114     Al-Nās 320

Appendix of Names Cited      323

Bibliography 333

Index I: Qurʾānic Citations  343

Index II: People and Places  353

Index III: Subjects and Technical Terms      359

Plates follow page lx.

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to HRH Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad who first invited us to embark on the translation of a Sufi tafsīr for the Great Commentaries on the Qurʾān Project, and to the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute, Amman, Jordan, for their generous patronage of our translation of the Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm of Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Tustarī. We would also particularly like to thank the Series Editor, Yousef Meri, for his tireless support in overseeing the translation through all its different stages, for his careful perusal of the English translation against the Arabic original, and for his help and many suggestions regarding the referencing in the annota- tion of the translation.

We would also like to offer our thanks and appreciation to Samir Mahmoud, here in Cambridge, who has gone through the whole translation, both at an early stage, and in its final draft. Being a native speaker of Arabic and having fluency in English as well as a proficient knowledge of Sufism, his comments and suggestions on many details of the text, and his answers to our many queries, have been invaluable. Also here in Cambridge, we would like to thank Aziza Spiker, who has acted as proof reader and copy editor for the translation, and who has also made pertinent comments about the translation of some of the Qurʾānic verses. Our thanks are also due Sahra Ucar, who at short notice stepped in to help with compiling the Appendix, and to Lejla Demiri, who assisted with the sourcing of many ḥadīths, and who acted as our guide at the Suleymaniye Library, whence we were able to obtain two of the manuscripts we used for the translation. In addition, we would like to thank Professor Paul Ballanfat of the Galatasaray University in Istanbul, with whom we have consulted on certain passages in the Tafsīr, and Professor Nasrollah Pourjavady of Tehran University and Harith Bin Ramli (the latter currently working on Makkī’s Qūt al-qulūb at Oxford University), both of whom read through our Introduction to the Translation and made several helpful sugges- tions, though we should add that any and all mistakes are, of course, our own. We would also like to mention our gratitude to Robert Spiker and Ana Maria Giraldo for lending their expertise in design and graphics, and to Valerie Turner and Muhammad Hozien for the extraordinary, unstinting dedication they have shown in the final copy-editing, proofreading and typesetting of the manuscript.

Lastly, we would like to thank our families, and especially our spouses, Paul the husband of Annabel, and Mariam the wife of Ali, for their tremendous patience and encouragement during the completion of this work.

We would like to dedicate this translation to the master sitarist, Ustad Mahmud Mirza, whose pure and beautiful music first gave us a glimpse of Paradise, and has continued to inspire us ever since.

From the earliest centuries of Islam, Muslim mystics, or ‘Sufis’ as they are now mostly called, reflected upon the verses of the Qurʾān, expounding their insights and inspired comments to others who might benefit from them. These comments were not intended to contradict or stand in place of the literal readings of the Scripture; rather they were a way of going beyond them in order to draw out inner meanings that sprang from, and were informed by, states, stations and spiritual realities (ḥaqāʾiq) experienced by the mystics. This process of eliciting inner meanings from the Qurʾān, termed by some Sufis ‘istinbāṭ’, meaning literally ‘drawing up water from a well’, might take the form of brief, elliptical and allusive comments, or lengthier and more detailed explanations. These early comments were eagerly memorised and passed on by the mystics’ associates and followers, since they were seen not only as a profound way of understanding the Qurʾān, but also as a source of guidance and illumination for anyone aspiring to travel the spiritual path.

As with other religious sciences, the early esoteric interpretations of the Qurʾān were, to begin with, mainly transmitted through the oral tradition, and for the most part they appear to have remained as scattered comments preserved in disparate sources until the time when the fifth/ eleventh-century Sufi, Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī (d. 412/1021) compiled his anthology of Sufi Qurʾān commentary, the Ḥaqāʾiq al-tafsīr (‘Realities’ or ‘Truths of Interpretation’). Sulamī arranged all the exegetical material he could gather, comments that had been attributed to many different mystics, in a verse-by-verse commentary on the Qurʾān.

The Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿaẓīm (‘Commentary on the Great Qurʾān’) of Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Tustarī (d. 283/896) is remarkable in having been compiled much earlier than this, by Tustarī’s immediate disciples and within one generation of his death, and in having been preserved as a commentary on the Qurʾān through an authenticated chain of transmission, until it was first written down by a scribe in the mid-sixth/twelfth century. Thus it may claim to be the earliest extant Sufi Qurʾān commentary ascribed to a single author. What is more, Tustarī’s disciples integrated within this exegetical corpus a large number of apposite sayings of their master as well as accounts of events in his life. This makes it possible to situate the interpretations within the compass of Tustarī’s thought, and to gain a greater understanding of the profound connection between his mystical doctrines and his exegesis of the Qurʾān.

Tustarī was among the most important and influential mystics of the early, formative period of Islamic mysticism, and many later famous Sufis and thinkers drew upon his ideas and cited his sayings, including Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111), Shihāb al-Dīn Yaḥyā al-Suhrawardī (d. 587/1191) and Muḥyī al-Dīn Ibn ʿArabī (d. 638/1240). The fourth/tenth-century Sufi author Abū Ṭālib al-Makkī (d. 386/996), who had fully imbibed Tustarī’s teachings through contact with the circle of his followers in Basra, contributed to the promulgation of his thought and sayings through his treatise on Sufism, the Qūt al-qulūb (‘Nourishment of Hearts’), which was freely used by Ghazālī in the composition of his celebrated Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn (‘Revival of the Religious Sciences’). Among Tustarī’s significant contributions to the doctrines of Sufism are his emphasis on the remembrance of God (dhikr), on complete trust in God (tawakkul) and his discourse on the ‘Muḥammadan Light’.

This volume represents the first translation into English of Tustarī’s Tafsīr, and indeed of any complete Sufi commentary on the Qurʾān. The printed text we have used is the most recent edition published in Lebanon by Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, and edited by Muḥammad Bāsil ʿUyyūn al-Sūd.

This appears to be a replication of the Cairo edition published in 1911, and is not a critical edition of the text. However, we were fortunate in obtaining CDs of three manuscripts of the Tafsīr, and have consulted these manuscripts throughout the process of our translation. This has enabled us to fill in a number of lacunae, and correct numerous mistakes in the current published edition. All the additions that we have made on the basis of these manuscripts have been clearly marked between half brackets, thus: ⸢…⸣, and referenced in the footnotes along with the folio numbers of each manuscript, and likewise, any corrections we have made have been recorded in the notes. The corrections made to the text are not exhaustive, but have assisted, we hope, in clarifying many unnecessarily obscure passages. The manuscripts we have used are as follows:

MS Fātiḥ 638, dated 872/1468 MS Fātiḥ 3488, dated 965/1558

MS Ẓāhiriyya 515, dated twelfth/eighteenth or thirteenth/nineteenth century.

In the footnotes, we have referred to these as MSS Z515, F638 and F3488, and have cited them in this order, rather than in their chronological order, since it was the Ẓāhiriyya manuscript that was first available to us. The MSS Z515 and F3488 form part of the same manuscript tradition, whilst MS F638 represents the second manuscript tradition — Professor Gerhard Böwering, in his study of the manuscripts of Tustarī’s Tafsīr, has identified two groups of manuscripts overall, and we have thus had access to representatives of both. A comparison of the manuscripts of the Tafsīr in general, and of the two manuscript traditions in particular, reveals only minor differences between them.1

As is the case with most Sufi commentaries on the Qurʾān, Tustarī’s Tafsīr does not comprise interpretations of every single verse. Nonetheless there are comments on a selection of verses, or parts of verses, from all the sūras of the Qurʾān, amounting to around 1000 verses in total. These comments, as they appear in both the published edition and the manuscripts, mostly follow the order of the Qurʾān itself, the main exception being sections of verse ordering in Sūras 2 and 3 (al-Baqara and Āl ʿImrān). In cases where there is a divergence from the verse order, we have not corrected it, unless such a change was warranted by the manuscripts. All citations of the Qurʾānic text are in italic. In accordance with the wishes of our patrons, we have used the Aal al-Bayt’s official transla- tion of the Qurʾān, with a few minor amendments which were often, though not always, required to comply with Tustarī’s particular understanding of the meaning of a word in the verse. Indeed, any examination of a variety of Qurʾān translations will demonstrate the polysemy of its language.

The editor of the Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya edition of Tustarī’s Tafsīr, while not making any substantial changes to the earlier Cairo edition of the text, has sourced many of the ḥadīths and traditions that are cited in the commentary. We felt it useful to include these as they are, even though we did not have access to the same editions of all the ḥadīth collections he was using, and were therefore not able to check all his references. Those that we were able to check, we found to be correct. We have additionally sourced quite a number of ḥadīths for which the editor had not provided references, though we were unfortunately not successful in sourcing all those that are cited in the commentary. Where two editions of the same ḥadīth collection have been referred to, they are differentiated by the place and/or date of publication.

For a Sufi text that is so allusive in nature, and in which terms are used in subtly different ways in the various contexts, we decided that rather than providing a glossary of technical terms, it might be more useful to compile a detailed index, in which various meanings and applications of a particular term will be given along with the references to the relevant page and note numbers. The Introduction to the Translation presents detailed explanations and discussions of the salient doctrines presented in the Tafsīr, as well as some of the more unusual concepts and complex aspects of Tustarī’s teachings.

It is worth explaining here the use of a few of the terms that occur frequently in this volume. As indicated above, the term ‘Sufi’, as a noun or adjective, is now generally used to denote either ‘a

 

1   The manuscripts of Tustarī’s Tafsīr are fully discussed in Gerhard Böwering, The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: The Qurʾānic Hermeneutics of the Sūfī Sahl at-Tustarī (d. 283/896) (Berlin and New York, 1980), pp. 100–5.

Preface

proponent of mysticism in Islam’, or ‘related to, and associated with, Islamic mysticism’, respectively. In the Introduction to the Translation, and in some of the notes to our translation, the word ‘Sufi’ has been used with this meaning. However, it is worth bearing in mind that this is a retrospective use of the term Sufi, which in the early period was mainly associated with mystics of Baghdad, and only gradually, from the sixth/twelfth century on, gained wider currency in the Muslim world. Tustarī never once uses the Arabic equivalent for ‘Sufi’ in his Tafsīr (that is, taṣawwuf or ṣūfī); instead, he speaks of the ‘mystic’ (ʿārif, pl. ʿurafāʾ) or the ‘friend of God’ (walī, pl. awliyāʾ). The second term that should be mentioned here is the word maʿrifa, a term applied by Sufis to mean a divinely- bestowed mystical or experiential knowledge of God that is beyond the level of knowledge attained merely through instruction or discursive reasoning. For this we have used the conventional English translation ‘gnosis’. The word nafs (pl. anfus or nufūs) can be used to mean ‘self ’, ‘person’ or ‘soul’, according to context. In the Qurʾānic verses translated in this volume, the word ‘soul’ has mostly been employed for nafs. In the translation of the passages of commentary we have translated nafs as ‘soul’ in those contexts where Tustarῑ seems to imply more generally the spiritual, immaterial and immortal part of the human being. However, we have used the word ‘self ’ for nafs in the more numerous instances where Tustarῑ designates different levels and aspects of the nafs within the human being, as, for example, the ‘spiritual self ’ (nafs al-rūḥ) ‘natural self ’ (nafs al-ṭabʿ), ‘evil-inciting self ’ (nafs ammāra bi’l-sūʾ) and so on. The all-important word tawḥīd meaning literally ‘making or understanding as one’, we have translated as either ‘attesting to’ or ‘professing God’s oneness’, when Tustarī appears to imply an active commitment to belief in the oneness of God, or ‘realising God’s oneness’, when he seems to imply by tawḥīd a more profound mystical experience of God’s oneness.

We have retained the masculine gender in translating verbs and pronouns, assuming them to be intended inclusively. Likewise in the Introduction to the Translation, the use of the masculine gender or the terms ‘man’ or ‘mankind’ is intended to be inclusive of both genders.

The translation has employed the transliteration system used by the International Journal of Middle East Studies (IJMES). The tāʾ marbuṭa has been rendered –a in the presentation of Arabic equivalents, when the word is not in the construct state (e.g. ḥaqīqa), but –at in the construct form (e.g. ḥaqīqat al-īmān). Only the names of less well-known places have been transliterated. Standard abbreviations have been used for titles of encyclopaedias: e.g. EI2 for the Encyclopaedia of Islam (Second edition); EIr for the Encyclopaedia Iranica; and EQ for the Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān. The abbreviation of journal titles is as in the Index Islamicus. The honorific ‘may God bless him and grant him peace’ (ṣalla’ Llāhu ʿalayhi wa’l-salam), which traditionally follows the mention of the Prophet, has been represented as () in the translation; while the honorific ‘peace be upon him, or them’ (ʿalayhi/ʿalayhim al-salām) following the mention of other prophets is represented as (, ). The traditional honorific for ‘may God be pleased with him, her or them’ (raḍiya’Llāhu ʿanhu/hā/ hum/humā) following the mention of others is presented as (, , ). When cross-referencing in the footnotes, we have referred to the Introduction to the Translation as IT and the Introduction to the Commentary as IC; cross references to other notes appear by page and note number. Within Qurʾānic quotes, square brackets indicate a word or phrase (additional to the Qurʾānic text) that has been added to clarify the meaning; parentheses indicate that a part of the Qurʾānic text has been added that is not in the Tafsīr to provide necessary context for the reader.

In conclusion, we would like to add that the Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿaẓīm does not represent the entirety of Qurʾānic interpretations attributed to Tustarī; a large number of other comments in his name are included in Sulamī’s Ḥaqāʾiq al-tafsīr, as well as in Sulamī’s supplement to this work, the Ziyādāt ḥaqāʾiq al-tafsīr. We had considered the idea of including the translation of these comments as an appendix to the present publication, but decided that this, in itself no small undertaking, would be better attempted once Professor Böwering’s critical edition of the Ḥaqāʾiq al-tafsīr has been published.

Introduction to the Translation

i.              Sahl al-Tustarī’s Spiritual Formation and his Teachers1

ahl b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Tustarī was probably born in 203/818 in Tustar (pronounced in Persian as Shūshtar) in Khūzistān, south-western Iran, and it is here that he spent the early years of his life.2 When still a young boy, he was introduced to Sufism by his maternal uncle Muḥammad b.

Sawwār, and at the age of seven begged his uncle to allow him to wear the patched frock (muraqqaʿ)

— an indication that he had been initiated into the mystical path.3 Sahl would rise in the early hours and watch his uncle performing his nightly vigil.4 It was his uncle who initiated Sahl into the Sufi practice of remembrance of God (dhikr Allāh), when one night he told him to recite inwardly with- out moving his tongue the words, ‘God is with me, God is watching over me, God is my Witness (Allāhu maʿī, Allāhu nāẓirī, Allāhu shāhidī)’. To begin with, Sahl’s uncle told him to recite these words three times. Then, when Sahl reported to him that he had done this, he instructed him to recite the words seven times every night, and when Sahl had accomplished this, he finally increased the number to eleven times each night, urging the young Sahl to continue this practice every day until he went to his grave, and explaining to him that he would derive great benefit from them in this world and the next. Tustarī relates that he soon experienced from this practice a sweetness (ḥalāwa) in his heart, and he states that after continuing the practice for two years, this sweetness was felt in his innermost being or ‘secret’ (sirr). His uncle later said to him, ‘Sahl! If God is with someone, and beholds him and watches over him, can he then disobey Him? You should never do so.’5 This teaching concerning the remembrance of God that his uncle had instilled in him had a profound influence on Tustarī, and was to become a cornerstone of his mystical doctrine, as we shall see. Muḥammad b. Sawwār also imparted to his nephew some instruction in Qurʾānic exegesis, and ḥadīth.6 Little is known about Muḥammad b. Sawwār’s spiritual background other than that he may have had some connection to Maʿrūf al-Karkhī (d. 200/815), whom, according to Tustarī, he once described as ‘one of the significant masters and spiritual forbears’.7

 

1                      For the first four sections of this introduction, I am indebted to the excellent study on Sahl al-Tustarī by Gerhard Böwer- ing, The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: The Qurʾānic Hermeneutics of the Sūfī Sahl at-Tustarī (d. 283/896) (Berlin and New York, 1980), as well as the PhD thesis of M. K. I. Gaafar, ‘The Sufi Doctrine of Sahl al-Tustarī, with a Critical Edition of his Risālat al-ḥurūf ’ (Cambridge University, 1966). For the remaining sections of the Introduction, my main source has been the Tafsīr itself.

2                      An alternative date of 200/815 is given in the sources, but both Böwering and Gaafar appear to favour the later date of 203/818 as more likely.

3                      ʿAbd Allāh al-Anṣārī, Ṭabaqāt al-ṣūfiyya (Kabul, 1961), p. 116.

4                     Abū al-Qāsim al-Qushayrī, al-Risālat al-Qushayriyya fī ʿilm al-taṣawwuf (Cairo, 1966) p. 83; trans. Alexander D. Knysh as Qushayri’s Epistle on Sufism (Reading, 2007), p. 33.

5                      Ibid, pp. 83–4.

6                      In the Tafsīr Tustarī quotes quite a number of ḥadīth transmitted to him by his uncle Muḥammad b. Sawwār.

7                      Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī, Ṭabaqāt al-ṣūfiyya (Leiden, 1960), p. 74.

Even as a child, Tustarī showed a strong inclination to lead an ascetic, solitary and contempla- tive life.8 He attended lessons with a Qurʾān teacher only on the condition that he should be allowed to return home after one hour lest his spiritual concentration (himma) be dissipated.9 It was said that he lived on barley bread alone until the age of twelve.10 At the age of thirteen, he experienced a spiritual crisis in the form of a profound question that persistently troubled him. He requested that he should be allowed to travel to Basra to discover whether any of the learned men of that city would be able to answer his question. Finding no one who was able to help him there, he travelled on to the island of ʿAbbādān (in present-day south-western Iran), where a famous ribāṭ or spiritual refuge and retreat is said to have been established by followers of Ḥasan al-Baṣrī. It was here that Tustarī met Abū Ḥabīb Ḥamza b. ʿAbd Allāh al-ʿAbbādānī, who was at last able to provide him with an answer to his question.11 He remained with Abū Ḥabīb for some time, in order to benefit from his knowledge and become trained in the ways of Sufi adab, that is, the disposition and modes of conduct proper to the mystical path.12 It was also in ʿAbbādān, Tustarī relates, that one night he saw the words: God, there is no god save He, the Living, the Eternal Sustainer [2:255], written in green light on one line across the sky from East to West.13

After this period of training under a spiritual master, Tustarī returned to his native town of Tustar, where for some twenty years he mainly lived a solitary life, subjecting himself to exceptionally rigorous ascetic disciplines with periods of sustained and severe fasting — indeed, he is cited many times in Sufi literature as exemplifying the benefits of hunger and fasting. The following account is taken from the Risāla of Qushayrī:

Then I returned to Tustar. By that time, my diet had been reduced to the point that [my people] would buy barley for me for a dirham, grind it, and bake it into bread for me. Every night about dawn, I would break my fast with merely an ounce [of that bread], without salt or condiment. The dirham lasted a year for me. After that, I resolved to break my fast once every three days, then once every seven days, then once every twenty-five days. I continued this practice for twenty years.14

Although based in Tustar during this period, after a few years Tustarī did make another journey away from his home town, performing the pilgrimage to Mecca in the year 219/834. According to some reports, it was at Mecca that he first encountered Dhū’l-Nūn al-Miṣrī (d. 245/860).15 It is not known whether or not Tustarī formally became a disciple of Dhū’l-Nūn, staying with him and remaining in service to him for a period of time, but there is little doubt that a strong spiritual association was established between the two mystics.16 One report does state that Tustarī travelled to Egypt to visit Dhū’l-Nūn, where the latter taught him about the nature of true trust in God (tawakkul), which is in fact one of the key doctrines that Tustarī expounds in his Qurʾān commentary.17 Moreover, a

 

8          Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 84. Farīd al-Dīn ʿAṭṭār, Tadhkīrat al-awliyāʾ (Tehran, 1992), p. 306.

9          Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 84; ʿAṭṭār, Tadhkīrat al-awliyāʾ, p. 305.

10        Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 84; ʿAṭṭār, Tadhkīrat al-awliyāʾ, p. 306.

11        According to Ibn ʿArabī, Tustarī’s question related to the heart and whether or not it prostrated before God. The answer he was given was, ‘Yes, it does, forever.’ Muḥyī al-Dīn Ibn ʿArabī, al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya (Beirut, 2007), vol. 1, p. 101; vol. 2, p. 164; vol. 3, pp. 26 and 119–20.

12        Qushayrī, Risāla, pp. 84–5.

13        This is mentioned in Tustarī’s commentary on 2:255.

14        Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 85; trans. Böwering, Mystical Vision, p. 55.

15        Sulamī, Ṭabaqāt, p. 199; Abū Nuʿaym al-Iṣfahānī, Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ (Cairo, 1932–8), vol. 10, p. 190; Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 83.

16        Both Anṣārī, Ṭabaqāt, p. 113, and following him Nūr al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Jāmī, Nafaḥāt al-uns min ḥaḍarāt al-quds (Tehran, 1991), p. 66, refer to Tustarī as a disciple or pupil (shāgird) of Dhū’l-Nūn. While, as Böwering reports, Samʿānī and Ibn al-Athīr both describe Tustarī as having ‘associated with’ (ṣaḥiba) Dhū’l-Nūn. See Böwering, Mystical Vision,

p. 50, who cites ʿAbd al-Karīm b. Muḥammad al-Samʿānī, Kitāb al-Ansāb, facsimile edition (Leiden, 1912), f. 106b and ʿIzz al-Dīn ʿAlī b. Muḥammad Ibn al-Athīr, al-Lubāb fī tahdhīb al-ansāb (Cairo, 1929–67), vol. 1, p. 176.

17        The report is to be found in a work compiled by Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī on Dhū’l-Nūn’s life and teaching, published by Arthur J. Arberry as ‘A Biography of Dhul-Nūn Al-Miṣrī,’ in M. Rām and M. D. Aḥmad, ʿArshī Presentation Volume

report in the Kitāb al-Lumaʿ of Abū Naṣr al-Sarrāj (d. 378/998) indicates that Tustarī certainly held for Dhū’l-Nūn a deference akin to that which a disciple would traditionally hold for his master, for when asked why in earlier years he had refrained from teaching, he answered: ‘I did not like to engage in discourse concerning mystical knowledge as long as he [Dhū’l-Nūn] was alive, out of reverence and respect for him.’18

Later, both the philosopher/mystic Shihāb al-Dīn Yaḥyā Suhrawardī Maqtūl (d. 587/1191), and Ibn ʿArabī (d. 638/1240) were to assume in different ways a definite transmission of knowledge from Dhū’l-Nūn to Tustarī. Suhrawardī linked the two mystics not only to each other, but to the Hermetic tradition. He explained that of the two currents of ancient wisdom which together formed the basis of his ‘Philosophy of Illumination’ (Ḥikmat al-ishrāq), the current which he called the ‘Pythagorean leaven’, that is, the branch of Greek/Pythagorean wisdom that had been transmitted through Hermes, had come down to Dhū’l-Nūn and from him had passed to Tustarī and his ‘party’, whence it had been transmitted to the East.19 According to Ibn ʿArabī, both Tustarī and Junayd had derived mystical teachings from Dhū’l-Nūn, as well as from other mystics.20 A comprehensive study of the sayings and teachings of Dhū’l-Nūn al-Miṣrī, and a careful collation between these and the corpus of sayings collected from Tustarī is required before the extent and nature of influence of Dhū’l-Nūn on Tustarī’s thought can be ascertained.

Suhrawardī was not alone in linking both Dhū’l-Nūn and Tustarī to the Hermetic tradition,21 and there is at least some circumstantial evidence to support this. Dhū’l-Nūn was born and brought up in Ikhmīm, Upper Egypt, a major centre of Hermeticism in the Graeco-Egyptian world.22 Ibn Nadīm names him as being among the philosophers who spoke about the art of alchemy, and two works on alchemy, now no longer extant, were said to have been written by him under the guidance of the famous alchemist, Jābir b. Ḥayyān (d. ca 200/815).23 Yet the numerous sayings in the name of Dhū’l-Nūn that have been preserved in the works of Sufism are entirely concerned with the mystical path.24 Dhū’l-Nūn was known as ‘the leader (imām) among the Sufis’,25 and is said to have been the first mystic to have made a distinction between allusion (ishāra) and outward expression (ʿibāra), as well as devising the concept of mystical states and stations.26 As for Tustarī, one anecdote cer- tainly indicates that he had knowledge of alchemy,27 and he included both alchemy and astronomy

 

(New Delhi, 1965), pp. 11–27.

18                   Abū Naṣr ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAlī (al-Ṭūsī) al-Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ fī’l-taṣawwuf (London and Leiden, 1914), p. 181.

19                   The ‘Khusrawan leaven’, on the other hand, was transmitted into Islamic mysticism through Abū Yazīd Bisṭāmī (d. 261/874), Ḥusayn b. Manṣūr al-Ḥallāj (d. 309/922) and Abū al-Ḥasan Kharaqānī (d. 425/1029). See Shihāb al-Dīn Yaḥyā al-Suhrawardī, Kitāb al-Maṣārī wa’l-muṭāraḥāt, in Henri Corbin, Opera Metaphysica et Mystica (Istanbul, 1945), vol. 1

p. 502f. For other references see Böwering, Mystical Vision, p. 52.

20                   Ibn ʿArabī, Futūḥāt, vol. 1, p. 188.

21                   For example, the philosopher and historian Abū al-Ḥasan al-Qifṭī (d. 646/1248), in his Taʾrīkh al-ḥukamāʾ, states that Dhū’l-Nūn was well-versed in alchemy and the secret hermetic sciences, and mentions both Sahl al-Tustarī and al- Ḥārith al-Muḥāsibī as being exponents not only of the esoteric knowledge associated with Sufis, but also of the legacy of the second/eighth-century alchemist and philosopher Jābir b. Ḥayyān (d. ca 200/815). See al-Qifṭī, Taʾrīkh al-ḥukamāʾ (Leipzig, 1903), pp. 160 and 185. For other examples see Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 53–4.

22               See Garth Fowden, The Egyptian Hermes: A Historical Approach to the Pagan Mind (Cambridge, 1996), and especially

pp. 120–6 on Zosimus of Ikhmīm; and Peter Kingsley, Ancient Philosophy, Mysticism and Magic (Oxford, 1995), p. 389.

23                   Ibn al-Nadīm, Fihrist (Leipzig, 1871–2), pp. 358 and 355; cf. Louis Massignon, Essai sur les origines du lexique technique de la mystique musulmane (Paris, 1922), p. 207.

24                   See, for example, sayings of Dhū’l-Nūn cited in Annemarie Schimmel’s Mystical Dimensions of Islam (Chapel Hill, NC, 1975), pp. 42ff.; and Margaret Smith, Studies in Early Mysticism in the Near and Middle East (London and New York, 1931), pp. 191ff. and 230ff.

25                   Jāmī, Nafaḥāt al-uns, p. 28, citing Khwāja ʿAbd Allāh Anṣārī.

26                   Ibid, pp. 27–8. It is also worth mentioning that Dhū’l-Nūn is said to have studied with Imam Malik. Moreover, under the rule of the Caliph al-Maʾmūn he was persecuted for his belief in the uncreated Qurʾān. Again, see Nafaḥāt al-uns,

p. 27.

27                   Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, pp. 319 and 326ff.; Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 677. On the death of a person named Isḥāq b. Aḥmad (evidently an alchemist who had repented and then become Tustarī’s disciple), Tustarī entered his cell and found some alchemical materials there, a lump of gold, a lump of silver and two bottles containing red and yellow liquids. Tustarī

or astrology in his categorisation of four branches of knowledge, comprising: al-ṭibb (medicine), al-nijāma (astronomy/astrology), al-diyāna (religion) and al-kīmiyāʾ (chemistry/alchemy).28 Among the works attributed to Tustarī is an astrological chart, known as a Zāʾirja which, if it ever existed, has not survived.29 An extant treatise on the significance of the letters of the alphabet is attributed to him, known as Risālat al-ḥurūf, and Tustarī is reported to have commiserated with another mystic, Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥusayn b. Makkī al-Ṣubayḥī, who was being persecuted for his knowledge of ‘the divine names and attributes and of the science of the letters’ (ʿilm al-asmāʾ wa’l-ṣifāt wa ʿilm al-ḥurūf).30 However, the anecdote which shows Tustarī’s knowledge of alchemy also implies that he did not see fit to practice it himself.31 His treatise on letters is not concerned with the sciences of jafr or abjad,32 but is concerned with the cosmological symbolism of the letters.33 Again, it can be said that the examination of Tustarī’s tafsīr and other works attributed to him, as well as the corpus of his sayings that have been preserved in the works of later Sufis, shows the essentially mystical nature of his thought.34

It is worth bearing in mind that during the second and third centuries of the Hijra, there was considerable interest in the different traditions of science and wisdom that had been preserved and were now being translated from Greek, Syriac and other languages into Arabic, especially in the Fertile Crescent.35 Dhū’l-Nūn had grown up in a centre of Graeco-Alexandrian learning, and Tustarī not far from Jundishapur, which had been a great centre for the translation of medical and other scientific texts. Thus it is no surprise that these two mystics should have been acquainted with, and possibly have drawn upon, the rich and diverse sources of knowledge that were accessible to them. It appears that at this time there may have been a particular intellectual fluidity, with boundaries of knowledge being less sharply drawn between Sufism other streams of thought. What is remarkable is not the fact that these early mystics should have been in contact with, or have drawn upon, such sources of knowledge, but rather the way in which aspects of this knowledge, and terms in which

 

threw the gold and silver into the River Tigris, and poured the bottles of liquid onto the ground, at the same time ex- plaining to the disciple who was with him, Muḥammad b. Sālim, how the elixir of those liquids could transmute copper and lead into gold and silver.

28        Kalām Sahl, MS Köprülü, 727, f. 64a.

29        See Böwering, Mystical Vision, p. 54, citing Ibn Khaldūn’s Kitāb al-ʿIbar (Beirut, 1961), vol. 1, p. 206f, and a much later work of Ismāʿīl Pāšā al-Bāghdādī (d. 1338/1920), Hadiyat al-ʿārifīn (Istanbul, 1951–5), vol. 1, p. 412.

30        This is recorded in Sarrāj’s Kitāb al-Lumaʿ. See Arthur J. Arberry’s publication of lacunae from the Lumaʿ, entitled Pages from the Kitāb al-Lumaʿ (London, 1947), p. 9.

31        As can be seen from the story related in n. 28 above. This is not to say that mystics in general, and Muslim mystics in particular, were necessarily opposed to alchemy, which was rich in symbolism and could even be practised as a spiritual discipline. On the spiritual dimensions of alchemy, see Fowden, Egyptian Hermes. On Sufism and alchemy, see Pierre Lory, Alchimie et mystique en terre d’Islam (Lagrasse, 1989). Tustarī’s objection may have been to its practice purely in material terms. Interestingly, we find him using the language of alchemy in the Tafsīr.

32        On the science of divination according to the numerical values of the letters in the Qurʾān, see T. Fahd, ‘Djafr,’ EI2, vol. ii, p. 375 (although Fahd does not make a clear distinction between jafr and the cosmological and metaphysical specula- tions on the letters made by mystics); Azartash Azarnoosh, ‘Abjad’, trans. R. Gholami, Encyclopaedia Islamica, vol. 1, p. 339.

33         See Gaafar’s doctoral dissertation, which includes an edition, translation and commentary on Tustarī’s Risālat al-ḥurūf. The treatise was subsequently published along with other works ascribed to Tustarī in idem (Muḥammad Kamāl Ibrāhīm Jaʿfar), Min al-turāth al-Tustarī al-ṣūfī: dirāsa wa taḥqīq (Cairo, 1974–), vol. 1. See also Pilar Garrido Clemente’s article, ‘El Tradado de las Letras (Risālat al-ḥurūf) del Sufí Sahl al-Tustarī’, Anuario de Estudios Filológicos 29 (2006), pp. 87–100, which comprises a discussion and Spanish translation of the treatise; and idem, ‘Estudio, Traducción y edición de las obras de Ibn Masarra de Córdoba: la Ciencia de las Letras en el Sufismo’, PhD thesis (University of Salamanca, 2007).

34        That is to say, discussions of a theological and ethical nature are mainly centred on Tustarī’s vision of the spiritual purpose of man’s existence, as has been discussed by both Böwering and Gaafar in their comprehensive studies of the teachings of Tustarī.

35        On this subject see Richard Walzer, Greek into Arabic (Oxford, 1962); Franz Rosenthal, The Classical Heritage in Islam, translated from the German by Emile and Jenny Marmorstein (London, 1992); Dimitri Gutas, Greek Wisdom Literature in Arabic Translation (New Haven, CT, 1975); idem, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture (2nd–4th/8th–10th centuries) (London, 1998); and idem, Greek Philosophers in the Arabic Tradition (Aldershot, 2000).

they were expressed were assimilated, and integrated by them, so as to become part of the language they used to expound their doctrines.36

ii.                Tustarī as Spiritual Master, and his Disciples

According to Tustarī’s own statement quoted above, he began teaching after the death of Dhū’l-Nūn, in the year 245/860. At this time he must have begun teaching publicly, that is, to a larger group of followers, though it is possible that he had already been imparting instruction to those of his disciples who were closest to him, such as Muḥammad b. Sālim (d. 297/909), who claimed to have been with him for his whole life.37 Sometime between the years 262/876 and 263/877, Tustarī was forced to leave Tustar and flee to Basra along with his disciples.38 Traditional sources are agreed that a local scholar, or at least someone claiming or purported to be a devout man of learning, roused the people against him. Both Sarrāj and Farīd al-Dīn ʿAṭṭār (d. before 617/1220) state that it was Tustarī’s particular emphasis on the need for repentance (tawba) that was the focus of the scholar’s disapproval,39 while according to a report quoted from Sulamī, the antagonist made the accusation that Tustarī was claiming to be visited by angels, spirits and devils with whom he had conversed.40 Tustarī was, according to the different accounts, accused either of committing evil acts or of heresy, and driven out of the city.41

Once he had settled in Basra, Tustarī’s life was not entirely free of controversy, for on one occa- sion, he was challenged by two Shāfiʿī jurists, Abū Zakariyya al-Sājī and Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Zubayrī, who took objection to his statement: ‘I am the proof of God (ḥujjat Allāh) for you in particular and for the people in general’, and went to question him as to whether he considered himself to be a prophet or a righteous saint. Tustarī’s response to their objections eventually led them to acknowl- edge his spiritual superiority.42 Tustarī made his home in Basra until his death in 283/896. He was apparently happily married and had at least one child.43

Tustarī had numerous disciples, some of whom remained with him for many years, while others stayed only a short time. Among his long-standing disciples, the most important were: Muḥammad

b. Sālim and the latter’s son Aḥmad b. Sālim (d. 356/967), both of whom transmitted and expounded numerous sayings and teachings of Tustarī; Abū Bakr al-Sijzī who received permission to transmit

 

36                   One obvious example in the case of Tustarī’s Tafsīr is his reference to red sulphur (kibrīt aḥmar) (Tafsīr, 19:61). Many other examples could be found, such as his definition of different dispositions or natures (ṭabāʾiʿ) within the human being (Tafsīr, 12:53). On the diverse sources of terms assimilated into the mystical language of Manṣūr b. al-Ḥallāj, see Massignon, The Passion of al-Ḥallāj, trans. Herbert Mason (Princeton, 1982), vol. 3, pp. 6ff.

37                   According to Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, p. 177, or ‘many years,’ according to Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 654; while he was his disciple for between thirty and sixty years according Anṣārī, Ṭabaqāt al-ṣūfiyya, p 258.

38                   For a discussion of the likely dates of Tustarī’s move to Basra see Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 58ff.

39                   Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, p. 407. This is also mentioned among the lacunae from Sarrāj’s Lumaʿ in Arberry, Pages, p. 9, and in ʿAṭṭār, Tadhkirat al-awliyāʾ, p. 306. The objection was to the fact that Tustarī expressed the view that repentance (tawba) was a religious obligation (farīḍa), and that just as the sinner must repent of his sin, so also the obedient person (muṭīʿ) must repent of his acts of obedience.

40                   Ibn al-Jawzī, Talbīs Iblīs (Cairo, 1950), p. 162. Perhaps this was a misrepresentation of Tustarī’s account of his encounter with a jinn, which is discussed below.

41                   Gaafar (dissertation, pp. 21–7) suggests other factors which may have aroused the opposition of the ʿulamāʾ in Tustar, such as the wide publicity concerning Tustarī’s ‘miracles’ or charismata, some of his ‘wild and ambiguous utterances (shaṭaḥāt) and his continuous criticism of various classes of religious scholars, Qurʾān reciters and ascetics. Böwering, however, conjectures that there may have been political reasons for his departure, for which see Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 59–63.

42                   Böwering, Mystical Vision, p. 64, citing ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Shaʿrānī, Ṭabaqāt al-kubrā (Cairo, 1315/1897), vol. 1, p. 67; and Ibn al-Jawzī, Talbīs Iblīs, p. 204. Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Zubayrī is also mentioned by Sarrāj as having persecuted al-Ṣubayḥī (see above p. xviii and n. 30), the mystic with whom Tustarī commiserated, and to whom he pointed out that people were not able to tolerate the knowledge they were speaking about. See Arberry, Pages, p. 9.

43                   Gaafar (dissertation, p. 136) notes, without citing any sources, that from Tustarī’s description of the way that she brought up their son, it appears that his wife was also something of an ascetic.

Tustarī’s Tafsīr in the year 275/888; and ʿUmar b. Wāṣil al-ʿAnbarī, who narrated anecdotes about Tustarī and elucidated some of his Qurʾān interpretations. Others who are named by the sources as direct disciples of Tustarī include Ḥusayn b. Manṣūr al-Ḥallāj, who became his disciple at the age of sixteen and stayed with him only two years, perhaps moving to Basra with Tustarī, but then going on to join Junayd’s circle in Bagdhad; Ḥasan b. Khalaf al-Barbahārī (d. 329/941), a well-known Ḥanbalī theologian and jurist of Baghdad; Abū Muḥammad b. Ḥusayn al-Jurayrī (d. 312/924), who went on to become one of of Junayd’s foremost disciples, supervising his circle after his death; and Abū al-Ḥasan b. Muḥammad al-Muzayyin al-Tirmidhī (d. 328/939), who was also a disciple of Junayd.44

Tustarī’s disciples not only transmitted his teachings and aphorisms, they also related their own observations about their master’s spiritual states, as well as sayings in which Tustarī himself described his mystical experiences. Many of these are included in the text of the Tafsīr. Among them are reports of some miraculous events which Tustarī either described to them, or they themselves witnessed. Abū Bakr al-Sijzī assumes Tustarī’s account of meeting a man who eats a pomegranate from Paradise, and his vivid description of how it tasted, to be an indication that Tustarī himself had tasted the fruit.45 ʿUmar b. Wāṣil relates how one night Tustarī held his finger in the flame of a lamp for nearly two hours without feeling any pain.46 Yet another anecdote tells of two men who came to visit Tustarī after the afternoon prayer, and then mysteriously vanished. When Muḥammad

b. Sālim enquired where they had gone, he replied that one of them prayed the sunset prayer in the East, and the other in the West.47 Tustarī himself describes his encounter and conversation with a jinn who was of such a great age that he had met both Jesus and Muḥammad.48 He was also famed for his intimacy with wild beasts and birds. In the Tafsīr it is related that he kept a room in his house which he called the ‘room for predatory beasts’. The beasts would approach him, and he would admit them into that room, offer them hospitality, feed them some meat, and then let them go free.49 He warned one of his young disciples that if he was afraid of predatory beasts he should not keep company with him.50 Many other anecdotes recount different miraculous occurrences involving Tustarī.51

However, Tustarī did not pay any particular regard to these ‘miracles’ or rather, charismata.52 For example, when people remarked at having seen him walking upon water, he recounted to them an incident in which the muezzin of the mosque had rescued him from drowning once when he fell into a pool.53 When asked how a person might reach the rank of such charismatic gifts, he replied, ‘Whoever abstains from the world for forty days in true faith and sincerity, will have charismatic gifts (karāmāt) manifested to him from God, Mighty and Majestic is He. So, if [such gifts] are not manifested to a person, it is due to the lack of true faith and sincerity in his renunciation.’54 Several anecdotes about Tustarī illustrate his humility. For example, one day someone remarked to him, ‘O

 

44        Other disciples and associates of Tustarī are discussed in detail by Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 78–99.

45        Tafsīr, 2:25.

46        Tafsir, 21:69.

47        Tafsir, 114:4

48        Tafsīr, 72:1.

49        Tafsīr, 10:62; see also Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, p. 316, where Sahl’s house was called ‘the house of predatory beasts’ (bayt al-sabuʿ).

50        Tafsīr, 45:13. A similar anecdote (Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 447, ʿAṭṭār, Tadhkira, p. 309) relates that a young visitor found a viper in the house and became afraid, whereupon Tustarī warned him that no one reaches the reality of faith (ḥaqīqat al-īmān) as long as he fears anything on the face of the earth.

51        Other anecdotes about charismatic episodes connected with Tustarī are cited in Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 68–71.

52        The term ‘charismatic gifts’ or charismata (translating karāmāt, sing. karāma) is used here to distinguish it from other kinds of miracles defined in Arabic by the word (muʿjizāt, sing. muʿjiza). The former are associated with ‘saints’ or friends of God, while the latter are the preserve of prophets. On this subject see Josef W. Meri, The Cult of Saints among Muslims and Jews in Medieval Syria (Oxford, 2002), pp. 73–6 and Kitāb Kasr al-shahwatayn, trans. Timothy J. Winter, Al-Ghazālī on Disciplining the Soul and on Breaking the Two Desires (Cambridge, 1995), p. 97, n. A.

53        Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 703; ʿAṭṭār, Tadhkira, pp. 308–9.

54        Tafsir, 45:13; ʿAṭṭār, Tadhkīra, p. 314.

Abū Muḥammad! Look what [God] has done with you and how He has elevated you!’ But he was totally unaffected by these words and said, ‘It is He who is sought, He who is sought!55 Regarding his mystical knowledge, he is quoted as having said:

Indeed, God willing, I have been granted wisdom and [knowledge of] the unseen which I was taught from His unseen secret (min ghayb sirrihi), and thus He sufficed me from the need for all other knowledge…and He completed what He had begun with me out of His grace and beneficence.56

This statement is an indication of Tustarī’s constant awareness of his dependence on God, and of his perpetual consciousness of God’s presence, precisely the teaching that had been instilled in him by his uncle. Thus it is related that he said, ‘My state during the ritual prayer and before entering ritual prayer is the very same’.57

Mention has been made of Tustarī’s apparently extreme imposition of hunger and fasting on himself. But the sources indicate that this practice was for him not a matter of self-mortification; it was rather that, as Böwering has observed, he was wholly sustained by God.58 Thus it is reported that when questioned on the subject of provision, Tustarī stated that the believer’s daily bread (qūt) is God, his sustenance (qiwām) is the remembrance of God, and his nourishment (ghidhāʾ) is religious knowledge (ʿilm).59 He certainly extolled the spiritual benefits of certain ascetic practices, as when he said, ‘God created the world and placed knowledge and wisdom in hunger, and ignorance in satiety’.60 He also recommended that his disciples lead a life of simplicity, as when he advised them:

Let your food be barley, your sweetmeat dates, your condiment salt and your fat yoghurt. You should let your clothes be of wool, your houses be mosques, your source of light the sun, your lamp the moon, your perfume water, your splendour be in cleanliness, and your adornment wariness (ḥadhr) [of God]...61

However, it is clear that he neither expected nor demanded that his disciples should attain the same level of abstinence as him. One of his disciples reports:

Sahl used to intensify his ecstasy (wajd) for seventy days, during which he would not eat anything, while he would order his companions to eat meat once a week so that they would not become too weak for worship. However for him, when he ate he would become weak, and when he became hungry he would gain in strength. He would sweat during the severe cold of winter while wearing only one shirt.62

Tustarī explained the principle as follows:

One should always adopt hardship for oneself, but when giving counsel to others, one should choose what is bearable and easy. To do this is to follow in the footsteps of the Prophet, who, when confronted with a particular matter concerning the community, used to choose what was light and gentle, but when the matter concerned himself, would apply that which is hard- est and most severe.63

Moreover, Tustarī had some knowledge of medicine, yet it is reported that for thirty years he suf- fered from an illness which he used to treat in others, whilst not applying the treatment to himself.64

 

55 Tafsīr, 19:61.

56                  Tafsīr, 2:3.

57                  Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, p. 293 .

58                  Böwering, Mystical Vision, p. 56.

59                  Ibid, citing Abū Ṭālib al-Makkī, Qūt al-qulūb fī muʿāmalat al-maḥbūb, 2 vols. (Beirut, 1997), vol. 2, p. 282.

60                  Tafsīr, 7:31.

61                  Tafsīr, 7:172.

62                  Tafsīr, 15:3.

63                  Kalām Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh, MS Köprölü 727, 51a; ed. Gaafar (Jaʿfar), Min al-turāth al-Tustarī, vol. 2, p. 156. This was also the principle which Tustarī followed with regard to the practice of total trust in God (tawakkul) and earning (kasb), for which see, for example, his commentary on 25:58 in the Tafsīr.

64                  Muʿāraḍa, MS Köprölü 727, f. 236b, 206; Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, pp. 203–4. See also Qushayrī, Risāla, pp. 682, 704.

Towards the end of his life he became weakened both by this illness and by the effects of age, to the point that he could not get up from where he was sitting. Even so, Sarrāj reports that when it came time for prayer, he would stand upright like a pole in the prayer niche.65 Concerning his qualities, Abū Bakr al-Sijzī relates:

It was his way and his conduct to be full of gratitude and remember [God] a great deal. He was also constant in observing silence and reflection. He would dispute little and was of a generous spirit. He led people through his good character, mercy and compassion for them, and by giv- ing good counsel to them…Truly God filled his heart with light, and made his tongue speak with wisdom…If it wasn’t for the fact that nobody can be valued alongside the Companions because of their companionship and witnessing [of the Prophet ], then one would say that he was as one of them. He lived a praiseworthy life and died as a stranger in Basra, may God have mercy upon him.66

After his death, Tustarī’s close circle of disciples divided broadly into two groups. Abū Muḥammad al-Jurayrī and Abū al-Ḥasan al-Muzayyin went to Baghdad and entered the circle of Junayd’s disciples. Ḥasan al-Barbahārī and ʿUmar b. Wāṣil also went to Baghdad, and are known to have preached in the Ḥanbalī quarter of the city. The sources indicate that all these disciples eventually moved to, or spent a period in Mecca, where they would have disseminated Tustarī’s teachings among the com- munity of renunciants (zuhhād) and ‘metics’ (mujāwirūn) who chose to live close to the Sanctuary.67 Muḥammad b. Sālim and his son Aḥmad b. Sālim, on the other hand, remained in Basra, where they assembled a group of associates (aṣḥāb) around them, who came to be known as the Sālimiyya. Some teachings of this so-called ‘group of Sufi theologians’,68 were later denounced by the Shīrāzī Sufi Ibn Khafīf (d. 371/981),69 the Ḥanbalī theologian, Abū Yaʿlā b. al-Farrāʾ (d. 458/1065),70 and following the latter, the Ḥanbalī Sufi ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Jīlānī (d. 561/1167).71 Some of these points may well amount to misreadings of sayings attributed Tustarī and his followers, such as the words:

God has a secret; if He were to make it manifest, the divine providence would be rendered null. The prophets have a secret; if they were to make it manifest, prophethood would be rendered null. The learned have a secret; if they were to make it manifest, knowledge would be rendered null.72

 

65       Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, p. 155; ʿAṭṭār, Tadhkira, p. 309.

66       Tafsīr, 10:62.

67       See Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 88ff. for sources.

68       According to the geographer al-Maqdisī (d. 380/990), the Sālimiyya were ‘a group of popular preachers and ascetic Sufi theologians’ at Basra. See ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Maqdisī (al-Muqaddasī), Aḥsan al-taqāsīm fī maʿrifat al-aqālīm (Leiden, 1877), pp. 126 and 130. They were also designated as ‘a band of kalām scholars’ by ʿAbd al-Qāhir al- Baghdādī in his al-Farq bayn al-firaq (Beirut, 1973), p. 247 (cited by Tobias Mayer, ‘Theology and Sufism’, in Timothy J. Winter, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Classical Islamic Theology [Cambridge, 2008], p. 262).

69       These were apparently compiled in a treatise that is no longer extant, al-Radd ʿalā Ibn Sālim, for which see Böwering, Mystical Vision, p. 93, citing Fuad Sezgin, Geschichte des Arabischen Schrifttums (Leiden, 1967), vol. 1, p. 663; Massignon, Essai, p. 319 and Abū al-Ḥasan ʿAlī al-Daylamī, Sīrat-i Ibn-i Khafīf, translated into Persian by Rukn al-Dīn Yaḥyā b. al- Junayd al-Shīrāzī, ed. Annemarie Schimmel (Tehran, 1984); see editor’s introduction, p. 32.

70       In his al-Muʿtamad fī uṣūl al-dīn (Beirut, 1974), pp. 217–21. Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 94–5, has translated the eighteen objectionable points listed by Ibn al-Farrāʾ.

71       ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Jīlānī, al-Ghunya li-ṭālibī ṭarīq al-ḥaqq (Cairo, 1322/1904), vol. 1, pp 106ff. According to Böwering,

Mystical Vision, p. 93, Jīlānī copied the list of Ibn al-Farrāʾ, omitting five of the points.

72        This, the fifth proposition in Ibn al-Farrāʾ’s list, may be traced to a saying cited in Makkī’s Qūt al-qulūb, vol. 2, p. 149; and ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Shaʿrānī, Ṭabaqāt al-kubrā (Cairo, 2005), vol. 1, p. 111. The saying as it appears in Makkī’s Qūt al-qulūb is attributed anonymously to ‘one of them’, and might be translated as follows: ‘The divine lordliness (rubūbiyya) has a secret which, if revealed, would render prophesy (nubuwwa) null; prophesy has a secret which, were it to be uncovered, would render knowledge (ʿilm) null; and the knowers of God (ʿulamāʾ bi’Llāh) have a secret which, were God to reveal it, would render the laws (aḥkām) null. The sustenance of faith and continual existence of the Law [is ensured] through the withholding of the secret. Through it [God’s] management [of things] (tadbīr) is implemented and on its basis the command[s] and prohibition[s] are ordered.’ I am grateful to Harith Bin Ramli both for locating this citation and for the translation of this extract, which is largely his. The statement is slightly reminiscent of part of Tustarī’s comment on 12:108: ‘For sure, the inner truth [or secret, sirr] has not been revealed to people, for if it were disclosed to them then they would have perceived it. Nor have they witnessed [it], for if they had witnessed it, the whole matter would be over,

Or:

The [divine] volition (irāda) is a branch of the divine will (mashīʾa), and the divine will is the root of the divine volition. The divine will is eternal and the volition is originated.73

Other points may amount to distortions of sayings of Tustarī or his followers, or an exoteric, literal- ist reading of some esoteric sayings. The latter is likely, for example, in the case of the eighteenth proposition: ‘God is present in every place, and there is no difference between the divine Throne and other places.’74

It was through the Sālimiyya that Tustarī’s teachings reached Abū Ṭālib al-Makkī (d. 386/996). Makkī grew up in Mecca, where he is said to have studied with the Sufi Abū Saʿīd al-Aʿrabī (d. 341/952), who was of Basran origin and had been for a time in the circle of Junayd in Baghdad. Later Makkī went to Baghdad, where he studied for a while under Abū Naṣr al-Sarrāj, and then to Basra, where he spent time with the Sālimiyya, although it is not known whether or not he ever met Aḥmad b. Sālim in person. Eventually he returned to Baghdad, where he ended his days. Makkī’s best known work, the Qūt al-qulūb (‘Nourishment of Hearts’), was to become one of the most important sources for the transmission and propagation of Tustarī’s sayings.75 Böwering notes that Tustarī is quoted some two hundred times in the work, while there are also sayings of Aḥmad b. Sālim. He refers to the former as ‘the master of our master’ (shaykh shaykhinā), which would indicate that he regarded Aḥmad b. Sālim as his master.76 The Qūt al-qulūb was later copiously used as a source by Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī in the composition of his Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn,77 which has been described as ‘an enlargement and popularisation of the Qūt al-qulūb’,78 and as ‘a brilliant reworking of this often dense and at times abstruse compendium on piety’.79 It has recently been argued that another work attributed to Makkī, bearing the title ʿIlm al-qulūb (‘Knowledge or Science of Hearts’) is in fact a composition of unknown authorship dating from the fifth/eleventh century.80

iii.        Tustarī’s Works

Pre-modern bibliographical sources list some fourteen titles of different works ascribed to Tustarī.81 However, only two of those listed works find equivalents of real significance among Tustarī’s extant works, namely his commentary on the Qurʾān and a work on the stories of the prophets (Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ), though even then there is no precise correspondence between titles.82 On the other hand,

 

and that is a grave matter.’

73                    The thirteenth proposition in Ibn al-Farrāʾ’s list, which may be compared to sayings of Tustarī cited in Kalām Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh, ed. Gaafar, in idem (Jaʿfar), Min al-turāth al-Tustarī, Part 2, pp. 202 and 303; MS Köprülü 727, f. 72b and 142a. Gaafar has summarised this teaching as it appears in f. 72b, as follows: ‘God’s Will (or “Uncreated Will’’, mashīʾa), is associated with His Knowledge, while God’s Volition (or “Creative Will”, irāda) is associated with His Omnipotence. The mashīʾa is the gate of Knowledge (bāb al-ʿilm); the irāda is the gate of Omnipotence (bāb al-qudra).’

74                  Compare the statement in Makkī’s Qūt al-qulūb (vol. 2, p. 141), ‘…His proximity to the earth and to everything is as His proximity to the Throne…’

75                  Makkī, Qūt al-qulūb. Translated into German with introduction and commentary by Richard Grämlich as Die Nahrung der Herzen (Stuttgart, 1992–5).

76                  Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 25–7.

77                  Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad al-Ghazālī, Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn (Damascus, 1417/1997).

78                  Ali Hasan Abdel-Kader, The Life, Personality and Works of al-Junayd (London, 1947), p. xiv.

79                    Ahmet T. Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period (Edinburgh, 2007), p. 88. The influence of Makkī’s work on Ghazālī’s Iḥyāʾ is also discussed by Hava Lazarus-Yafeh, Studies in al-Ghazzālī (Jerusalem, 1975), pp. 34–5, and by Kojiro Nakamura, ‘Makkī and Ghazālī on Mystical Practices’, Orient 20 (1984), pp. 83–91.

80                  See Nasrollah Pourjavady, ‘Bāzmānda-yi kitāb-i al-Ishārah wa’l-ʿibārah-i Abū Saʿd Khargūshī dar kitāb-i ʿIlm al-qulūb’, Maʿārif 15, no. 3 (1999) 34–41; now republished in idem, Pazhūhishhā-yi ʿirfānī: just-u-jū dar manābiʿ-i kuhan (Tehran, 2006), pp. 64–72.

81                  For a full list of these see Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 8–12.

82                  The only pre-modern bibliographical source to allude to the Tafsīr is the Ṭabaqāt al-mufassirīn of Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad al-Dāwūdī (d. 945/1538), who does not mention any title, but names Tustarī as the author of a Qurʾān

we find among extant works ascribed to Tustarī, titles of several works not listed among the early bibliographical sources. Important among these are three collections of Tustarī’s sayings that are preserved in a manuscript in the Köprülü Library in Istanbul, MS, no. 727 (dated seventh century ah). They are entitled: Kitāb al-Sharḥ wa’l-bayān li-mā ashkala min kalām Sahl (‘Explanation and Elucidation of Difficult Points in Sahl’s Doctrine’); Kitāb al-Muʿāraḍa wa’l-radd ʿālā ahl al-firāq wa ahl al-daʿāwā fī’l-aḥwāl (‘Remonstrance and Refutation of the People of Factions and of the People of Pretensions Concerning Mystical States’); Kalimāt al-imām al-rabbānī Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Tustarī (‘Sayings of our Lordly Guide, Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Tustarī’).83 Another extant work attributed to Tustarī but not listed in the bibliographical works is the Risālat al-ḥurūf (‘Treatise on the Letters’), which appears to have been preserved in one manuscript only, held in the Chester Beatty collec- tion, CH. Beatty 3163/3. The treatise is a short work, most of which comprises a metaphysical and cosmological exposition of the relation between God, His names, His attributes and His creation, and the significance of the letters.84

Among those extant works ascribed to Tustarī that are also mentioned in bibliographical sources is the Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿaẓīm, which is preserved in six extant manuscripts and will be discussed in a separate section below. A work of not entirely unquestionable authenticity is the Laṭāʾif al-qiṣaṣ (‘Subtleties of the Stories [of the Prophets]’), which comprises 17 chapters, 11 of which relate subtle reflections on a particular prophet, beginning with Adam and ending with Muḥammad, while the remaining three chapters consist of Sufi anecdotes and sections on ritual prayer and the Basmala.85 Another title listed among Tustarī’s works, the authenticity of which is less likely, is the Risālat al-manhiyāt (‘Treatise on Illicit Acts’),86 while the Risāla fī’l-ḥikam wa’l-taṣawwuf (‘Treatise on Wisdom and Sufism’),87 represents a collection of Tustarī’s sayings gleaned from Qushayrī’s Risāla fī’l-taṣawwuf.

Aside from these works in Tustarī’s name, many of his sayings have been preserved in the works of Sufism, among the most important being the Kitāb al-Lumaʿ of Abū Naṣr al-Sarrāj and the Qūt al-qulūb of Abū Ṭālib al-Makkī (mentioned above). Both of these writers had direct contact with the second generation of Tustarī’s followers. Other early sources for Tustarī’s sayings include the so-called manuals of Sufism, such as those of Kalābādhī,88 Hujwīrī89 and Qushayrī; biographical or hagiographical works such as the Ṭabaqāt al-ṣūfiyya of Sulamī (d. 412/1021), and the Ḥilyat

 

commentary. The extant work on stories of the prophets bears the title Laṭāʾif qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ and is preserved in MS Ṭalʿat, mag. 283, whereas Ḥājjī Khalīfa in his Kashf al-ẓunūn (Leipzig, 1835), vol. 4, pp. 303 and 518, and Ismāʿīl Pāshā in his Hadiyat al-ʿārifīn, vol. 1, p. 412, list a work entitled simply Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ.

83       The first and third of these collections of sayings are also preserved in the Asad Library, MSS, 1623 and 3527 respectively. The content of these works is discussed by Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 12–6, and by Gaafar, dissertation, pp. 41ff. As was noted above, Gaafar has also edited and published these works in Gaafar (Jaʿfar), Min al-turāth al-Tustarī.

84       Regarding the authenticity of this work, Böwering (Mystical Vision, pp. 17–8) expresses the view that ‘the internal criteria do not go further than to prove a similarity of ideas’. Gaafar, however, argues for its authenticity in his dissertation, pp. 77–9, as does Pilar Garrido Clemente in her article, ‘El Tradado de las Letras’. A critical edition of this work is included in her PhD thesis cited above, n. 34. On the question of authenticity, we might also refer again to the report in Sarrāj’s Kitāb al-Lumaʿ mentioned above (Arberry, Pages, p. 9), where Tustarī’s comments indicate that he was in sympathy with Ṣubayḥī who was known for his ‘knowledge of God’s names, attributes and the science of the letters’, precisely the subject matter of the Risālat al-ḥurūf.

85       Böwering’s view is that external evidence would confirm Tustarī’s authorship of the work, since Ḥājjī Khalīfa not only lists a Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyā as among Tustarī’s compositions, but also quotes the first sentence of the work, which exactly matches that of the manuscript. However, Böwering suggests that the internal evidence is not so strong, since, while some subject matter resembles that of the Tafsīr, there are no particular sayings or passages corresponding to any mate- rial in other works ascribed to Tustarī, or to his sayings in other Sufi sources. See Mystical Vision, pp. 16–17.

86       The treatise is held in Tehran, Tehran Faculty of Law, 251j.

87       This treatise is held in Istanbul, Ayasofia 4128/4.

88       Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. Isḥāq al-Kalābādhī, Kitāb al-Taʿarruf li-madhhab ahl al-taṣawwuf (Cairo, 1934); English trans., Arthur J. Arberry as Doctrine of the Sufis (Cambridge, 1935).

89       ʿAlī ʿUthmān Jullābī al-Hujwīrī, Kashf al-maḥjūb (Tehran, 2004); references in the text are to the Tehran, 2004 edition; English trans., Reynold A. Nicholson as Kashf al-maḥjūb: The Oldest Persian Treatise on Sufism (London, 1911).

al-awliyāʾ of Iṣfahānī (d. 430/1038);90 and other treatises, such as the Kitāb ʿAṭf al-alif al-maʾlūf of Daylamī (fl. 400/1000).91

iv.         The Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm

Evidence suggests that Tustarī’s Tafsīr, like many other Sufi works of this period, was not a writ- ten composition of Tustarī’s hand, but was delivered orally by him to a circle of disciples, who preserved and transmitted it. At a later date the Tafsīr was then compiled and written down, with some additions.92 Although the earliest extant manuscripts of the Tafsīr date to the ninth/fifteenth and tenth/sixteenth centuries,93 the authorities cited by an anonymous scribe in the introduction of the original archetype of these manuscripts make it possible to date this archetype considerably earlier, to the mid-sixth/twelfth century.94 However, since numerous comments cited in the name of Tustarī by Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī in his Ḥaqāʾiq al-tafsīr95 are identical word for word with comments in the Tafsīr, it is possible that the latter already existed in written form at least by the late fourth/tenth or early fifth/eleventh century. Since Sulamī includes some comments ascribed to Tustarī that are absent from the Tafsīr, it may be assumed either that the former had derived these comments from a separate written or oral source, or that he was drawing comments from a larger version of the text.96

In his detailed analysis of the history, structure and compilation of Tustarī’s Tafsīr, Böwering has identified three structural layers in its composition, marking stages in its compilation: the first comprises Tustarī’s actual comments on the verses; the second includes a number of Tustarī’s aphorisms on mystical topics (usually those raised in the comments) as well as illustrative mate- rial taken from the stories of the prophets, probably added by Tustarī’s disciples; the third level represents further insertions into the text by later hands, and includes exegetical proof texts taken from the Qurʾān and aḥādīth, the lengthy explanation of a poem, and anecdotes about Tustarī. Two of Tustarī’s disciples who appear to have been the main compilers of the Tafsīr, and who are most often named in the Tafsīr, are Abū Bakr al-Sijzī and ʿUmar b. Wāṣil, while Muḥammad b. Sālim is also mentioned (as Ibn Sālim), though only three or four times.97

The Tafsīr includes comments on selected verses of all the sūras of the Qurʾān, amounting to comments on some 1000 verses in all. As Böwering has suggested, it is likely that Tustarī’s exegesis of the Qurʾān was delivered during sessions in which the Qurʾān was recited.98 After the recita- tion of portions of the Qurʾān, he would have commented on certain verses, or parts of the verses, according to meanings that he was moved to expound. In its present written form, the comments follow on from the verses, and, with a few exceptions (most notably in Sūrat al-Baqara and Sūrat

 

90                  Iṣfahānī, Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ.

91                  Abū al-Ḥasan ʿAlī al-Daylamī, ʿAṭf al-alif al-maʾlūf ʿalā’l-lām al-maʿṭūf (Cairo, 1962); French trans. by Jean-Claude Vadet as Le traité d’amour mystique d’al-Daylami (Geneva, 1980); English trans. by Joseph N. Bell as A Treatise on Mystical Love (Edinburgh, 2005). For a detailed account of the respective importance of these works and many later Sufi works as sources for the Tustarī tradition, see Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 18–42.

92                  For a detailed study of the history, authenticity, structure and compilation of Tustarī’s Tafsīr, see Böwering, Mystical Vision, Chapter III.

93                  MS Gotha 529 is dated 825/1422, MS Fātiḥ 638, 872/1422, while MS Ṣanʿāʾ 62 is dated 936/1530 and MS Fātiḥ 3488, 965/1558. A full discussion of the MSS is given in Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 100–5.

94                  The two authorities mentioned are Abū Bakr al-Baladī (d. 504/1110) and his grandson Abū Naṣr al-Baladī (d. after 551/1156). See Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 107–8.

95                  Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī, Ḥaqāʾiq al-tafsīr, MS British Museum Or. 9433; ed. Sayyid ʿImrān (Beirut, 2001).

96                  For a list showing the presence of comments on different verses of the Qurʾān ascribed to Tustarī in the Ḥaqāʾiq al-tafsīr of Sulamī, the ʿArāʾis al-bayān fī ḥaqāʾiq al-Qurʾān of Rūzbihān b. Abī Naṣr Baqlī (Lucknow, 1315/1898), al-Muwāfaqāt fī uṣūl al-aḥkām of Ibrāhīm b. Mūsā al-Shāṭibī (d. 790/1388), (Cairo, 1922), and al-Shifāʾ bi-taʿrīf ḥuqūq al-muṣṭafā of ʿIyāḍ

b. Mūsā al-Qāḍī (d. 544/1149), (Damascus, 1972), as against Tustarī’s Tafsīr, see Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 113–26.

97                  See Mystical Vision, pp. 128–35.

98                  Ibid, pp. 135ff.

Āl ʿImrān), are arranged according to their conventional numbering. The nature of the exegetical content is varied, and includes exoteric interpretations which either provide additional information and context for the verses, or explain and expand upon their literal meaning,99 as well as comments that might be considered ethical in nature.100 However, there is sufficient content of an esoteric nature for Tustarī’s commentary to have been counted as part of the Sufi tradition of Qurʾānic exegesis.101 It was, moreover, liberally used as a source for later Sufi commentaries, such as those of Sulamī, Maybudī (fl. sixth/twelfth century)102 and Rūzbihān Baqlī (d. 606/1209). In addition to its exegetical content, the Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿaẓīm includes other material of a largely esoteric nature, such as discussions of mystical topics which arise in the interpretations, anecdotes about earlier mystics and about Tustarī himself, and numerous aphorisms of Tustarī concerning different aspects of the mystical path.

v.         Tustarī’s Approach to Qurʾān Interpretation

Tustarī’s Tafsīr includes a number of traditions and statements which give us some idea of the principles underlying his interpretation of the Qurʾān. Several of these speak of different levels of meaning in the scripture, and among them are three quoted from Tustarī himself, all of which are presented in the Introduction to the Commentary.

The first is cited in the context of a discussion of the process of revelation:

God sent down the Qurʾān in five instalments of five verses at a time: five clear verses (muḥkam), five ambiguous verses (mutashābih),103 five concerning what is permissible (ḥalāl), five con- cerning what is prohibited (ḥarām), and five parabolic verses (amthāl). The believer who has gnosis (maʿrifa) of God, Exalted is He, adheres to what is clear in it, believes what is ambiguous, holds as permissible that which it has made permissible, holds as prohibited that which it has prohibited and comprehends its similitudes, as He has said: …but only those understand them [the similitudes] who know [29:43] — that is, those who have knowledge (ʿilm) of God, Exalted is He, and especially those who have gnosis (maʿrifa) of Him.104

In the passage above, Tustarī has indicated an esoteric understanding or gnosis (maʿrifa) of the similitudes (amthāl) or parabolic verses of the Qurʾān. In a second statement he mentions knowledge of both the inner and outer levels of meaning in the Qurʾān, as when he states in the Introduction to the Commentary:

…God has said, Mighty and Majestic is He, We have made it an Arabic Qurʾān [43:3] — that is, we have expounded it in a clear Arabic tongue in the letters of the alphabet which God has clearly set forth for you, and by which you attain to knowledge of [its] inner (bāṭin) and outward (ẓāhir) [meanings].105

 

99       Comments of this type are too numerous to list, but we may cite here 5:83, 14:25, 42:7, 52:4 and 63:1 as examples.

100    As, for example, in the commentary on 3:159, 7:56, 7:68 and 15:85, though it should be borne in mind that it is often difficult to make a watertight distinction between the ethical and the mystical.

101    On Sufi hermeneutics see: Massignon, Essai sur les origines, trans., Benjamin Clark, Essay on the Origin of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism (Paris, 1997); Paul Nwyia, Exégèse coranique et langue mystique (Beirut, 1970); Böwering, Mystical Vision, esp. pp. 135–42; ‘Sufi Hermeneutics and Medieval Islam’, Revue des études islamiques 55–7 (1987–8); pp. 255–70; ‘The Light Verse: Qurʾānic Text and Sufi Interpretation’, Oriens 36 (2001), pp. 113–44; and ‘The Scriptural Senses in Medieval Ṣūfī Qurʾān exegesis’, in Jane D. McAuliffe et al., eds., With Reverence for the Word (Oxford and New York, 2003), pp. 350–1; Pierre Lory, Les Commentaires ésotériques du Coran d’après ʿAbd al-Razzâq al-Qâshânî (Paris, 1980); Kristin Z. Sands, Ṣūfī Commentaries on the Qurʾān in Classical Islam (London and New York, 2006); Annabel Keeler, Sufi Hermeneutics: The Qurʾān Commentary of Rashīd al-Dīn Maybudī (Oxford, 2006), especially ch. 3; and ‘Sufi tafsīr as a Mirror: Qushayrī the murshid in his Laṭāʾif al-ishārāt’, JQS 7 (2006), pp. 1–21.

102    Abū al-Faḍl Rashīd al-Dīn Maybudī, Kashf al-asrār wa ʿuddat al-abrār (Tehran, 1952–60).

103    The ‘clear’ (muḥkam) and ‘ambiguous’ (mutashābih) verses are mentioned in the Introduction to the Commentary and in 3:7. They will be discussed below, p. 4, n. 20.

104    IC, p. 6.

105    IC, p. 5.

Tustarī says more about the inner and outer levels of meaning in a passage earlier in his Introduction:

Every verse of the Qurʾān has four senses: an outward (ẓāhir) and an inward sense (bāṭin), a limit (ḥadd) and a point of transcendency (maṭlaʿ). The outward sense is the recitation and the inward sense is the understanding (fahm) of the verse; the limit defines what is lawful and unlawful, and the point of transcendency is the heart’s place of elevation (ishrāf) [from which it beholds] the intended meaning, as an understanding from God, Mighty and Majestic is He (fiqhan min Allāh ʿazza wa jalla). The outward knowledge [of the Qurʾān] is a knowledge [accessible to the] generality (ʿāmm); whereas the understanding of its inner meanings and its intended meaning is [for] a select few (khāṣṣ)…106

In this latter statement, Tustarī has indicated both that the inner meanings are intended for a select few, and that the understanding of these meanings comes ‘from God’. A similar principle is expressed when he states:

Truly God has not taken as a friend (walī) one of Muḥammad’s nation (umma) without teaching them the Qurʾān, either in its outward or inner aspects. They said, ‘We know about its outward aspect, but what is its inner aspect?’ He replied, ‘That is its understanding (fahm); and it is its understanding that is intended.’107

More than once in the Tafsīr, Tustarī warns against interpreting the Qurʾān according to one’s own whims or desires (ahwā). Commenting on the words, As for those in whose hearts is deviation, they follow the ambiguous part, desiring sedition and desiring its interpretation [3:7], he glosses sedi- tion as ‘unbelief ’, and interprets the words desiring its interpretation as a reference to ‘interpretation according to the desire of their lower selves’. Later in the commentary on this same verse [3:7], but this time on the words those rooted in knowledge, he cites a saying of ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib:

[Those rooted in knowledge] are the ones whom knowledge has protected from plunging [into the interpretation of the Qurʾān] according to some whim (hawā) or with set argument[s] (maḍrūba), without [awareness of] the unseen [mysteries] (dūn al-ghuyūb). [This is] due to God’s guidance of them, and His disclosing to them His unseen secrets (asrārihi al-mughayyaba) from within the treasure chests of knowledge.

Along with the sense that the esoteric meanings and ‘unseen mysteries’ of the Qurʾān are something precious that may be directly disclosed by God (to a certain chosen few, or His friends), Tustarī also conveys his awareness of the arcane, sometimes inexpressible nature of the inner meanings of the Qurʾān, and the humbling sense that the Qurʾān can never be fathomed. One example occurs in his commentary on the words, Say, ‘If the ocean were ink for [writing] the words of my Lord, it would run dry…’ [18:109]:

His Book is part of His knowledge, and if a servant were given a thousand ways of understand- ing each letter of the Qurʾān, he would not reach the end of God’s knowledge within it. This is because it is His pre-eternal speech, and His speech is one of His attributes, and there is no end to any of His attributes, just as He has no end. All that can be comprehended of His speech is as much as He opens to the hearts of His friends.

In another statement, he indicates that even were the mysteries of the Book to be fathomed, they are beyond expression or even allusion. The context is Tustarī’s commentary on Abraham’s request for an increase in certainty, related in 2:40:

The one who is close (qarīb) [to God] has access to understanding (fahm), conjecture (wahm) and interpretation (tafsīr). But the one who is closest (aqrab) is beyond understanding, conjecture

 

106                 IC, p. 2. An almost identical statement is cited by Sulamī as a tradition of ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib in the introduction to his Ḥaqāʾiq al-tafsīr. On this tradition and more generally on theories of four levels of meaning in the Qurʾān, see Böwering, ‘The Scriptural Senses’, pp. 346–75. On the levels of meaning in Qurʾānic exegesis, see also A. Keeler, Sufi Hermeneutics,

pp. 69–81.

107                IC, p. 7.

and interpretation, and what is beyond that cannot be contained by expression (ʿibāra) or allusion (ishāra).108

The statements cited above go some way to explaining the varied nature of the content of the Tafsīr, and the often allusive, elliptical and even obscure style of the esoteric interpretations. However, some of this abstruseness may also be due to the fact that the comments were initially delivered orally as extemporary, inspired responses to the recited verses, such that the Tafsīr was eventually compiled from the notes of disciples who were themselves probably already familiar with the teachings that Tustarī was conveying through his exegesis. Indeed many of the aphorisms contained in the Tafsīr, which Böwering suggests were added later, may precisely have been added for the benefit of later aspirants in the circle of Tustarī’s disciples, who did not have this familiarity with his doctrines.

The esoteric meanings which Tustarī elicits from the Qurʾānic verses and expounds through his commentary were clearly intended to convey spiritual guidance and illumination. For the most part, they provide direct guidance designed to assist the seeker with progress on the spiritual path, and include: discussions of qualities and virtues to which the seekers should aspire; vices which they should avoid; knowledge about the inner make-up of the human being; and descriptions of mystical experience. Other interpretations of an esoteric nature comprise Tustarī’s metaphysical and cosmological discussions, such as those of the Muḥammadan Light, the covenant which God made in pre-eternity with all of humanity, known as ‘the Covenant of Alast’, and the miraculous Night Journey (Isrāʾ) and Ascension (Miʿrāj) of the Prophet.109

These interpretations appear to derive, or spring from, the verses in different ways.110 Often they arise as metaphorical or allegorical interpretations, as in Tustarī’s commentary on the words, That you may warn [the people of] the mother of cities, and those around it… [42:7], which he interprets in the following manner:

In its outward meaning, it [the mother of cities] refers to Mecca. In its inner meaning it refers to the heart, while those around it refer to the bodily members (jawāriḥ). Therefore warn them, that they might safeguard their hearts and bodily members from delighting in acts of disobedi- ence and following [their] lusts.

Another example of a metaphorical or allegorical interpretation occurs in his commentary on the words, and the sun and moon are brought together [75:9]:

Its inner meaning is the following: the moon represents the light of the sight of the physical eye, which pertains to the natural self (nafs al-ṭabʿ), and the sun represents the light of the sight of the eye of the heart, which pertains to the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ) and the intellect (ʿaql).

Or again, his commentary on the words, and the raised canopy [52:5], which he glosses as: The pleasing and pure act, through which no reward is sought except God, Exalted is He.

In the first of these three comments, it is to be noted that Tustarī has juxtaposed his exoteric and esoteric interpretations. This he does in numerous contexts, as in the following example, which comprises firstly an explanation at the literal level and then an esoteric interpretation of the words, By those sent forth in succession [77:1]:

By this is meant the angels who are sent with the good of His command…In its inner meaning it refers to spirits of the believers which are sent inspiration (ilhām) that is in accordance with the Book and the Sunna.

 

108    This saying occurs as part of the long commentary on a poem which is cited in the commentary on 2:40. It is possible, therefore, that these are the words of Abū Bakr al-Sijzī, or whoever was commenting on the poem. It may nonetheless be said to reflect Tustarī’s teachings.

109    The content of these interpretations will be discussed in the section on Tustarī’s mystical teachings below.

110    For a full discussion of Tustarī’s ‘method’ of Qurʾān interpretation, see Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 135ff. For a dis- cussion of the method of esoteric interpretation in Qushayrī’s Laṭāʾif al-ishārāt (Cairo, 1968–71) and Maybudī’s Kashf al-asrār, see Keeler, Sufi Hermeneutics, pp. 81–90.

Another mode of esoteric interpretation takes the form of a discussion of the spiritual or ethical significance of a word mentioned in a verse, as for example when he comments on the words, So be forgiving with gracious forgiveness [15:85]:

[One should be] without resentment (ḥiqd) or censure (tawbīkh) after forgiving someone; this is to overlook [someone’s misdeeds] graciously (iʿrāḍ jamīl).

Sometimes these comments constitute Tustarī’s reply to a question put to him about a succinct interpretation he has given, as when he glosses Jacob’s exhorting himself to comely patience [12:18] with the words ‘patience and contentment’, and when asked about the sign of this, replies, ‘It is not to regret what has happened’. When further asked how a person can attain comeliness of patience, he explains:

By knowing that God, Exalted is He, is with you, and by the comfort of [the concomitant sense of] well-being. Patience may be compared to a bowl which has patience at the top and honey underneath.

Another form of esoteric interpretation springs from what Böwering has termed ‘Qurʾānic keynotes’.111 This is where a particular word or expression sets off a train of mystical thought or associations in the commentator.112 The resulting interpretation may or may not bear any obvious relation to the context in which the ‘keynote’ word appears. We find it exemplified, for example, in Tustarī’s commentary on the words, When God wishes to guide someone, He expands their breast to Islam [6:125], where the verb wishes (arāda, from the root r-w-d) leads Tustarī into a discussion of the terms murīd and murād, both drawn from the same root. This subject may already have been in his mind since he refers to an earlier verse in the same sūra which mentions those who seek God’s countenance, and therefore already indicates the ‘aspirant’ or ‘one who seeks [God]’ (murīd), while the ‘one who is [divinely] sought’ is picked up from the words, God wishes (or seeks):

Truly God has distinguished between the one who seeks (murīd) and the one who is [divinely] sought (murād), even though they are both from Him (min ʿindihi). But He simply wanted to distinguish the elite (khāṣṣ) from the generality (ʿumūm), and so He singled out the one who is sought (murād) in this sūra and others. He also mentioned the one who seeks (murīd), representing the generality, in this sūra in His words, Exalted is He: Do not drive away those who call upon their Lord, morning and evening, seeking His countenance [6:52].

Another example of an interpretation arising from a ‘keynote’ or association of ideas occurs in Tustarī’s commentary on the words, If trouble should befall a man, he cries out to Us [in supplication], whether lying on his side… [10:12], which in their Qurʾānic context refer to people who are heedless of God, and call on Him only when they are affiicted. However, here Tustarī is moved to speak of the true meaning of supplication, related to the verb translated as he cries out (daʿā):

Supplication (duʿāʾ) is freeing oneself (tabarrī) of everything save Him, Exalted is He.

Given the complex nature of the doctrines expounded by Tustarī, the fact that they are some- times allusively expressed, and the fact that they are scattered throughout the pages of his Tafsīr, the following sections will be devoted to a discussion of some of the key mystical teachings that are presented in the work. Striking in Tustarī’s expositions is the extent to which he uses the imagery and metaphors of light, especially when discussing divinely-inspired knowledge and guidance.

 

111                See Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 136–7.

112                On this subject see also Nasrollah Pourjavady, ‘Laṭāʾif-i Qurʾānī dar majālis-i Sayf al-Dīn Bākharzī’, Maʿārif 18 (2001),

pp. 3–24.

vi.       Mystical Teachings

A.   The Qurʾān and the Prophet

Throughout the Tafsīr, Tustarī emphasises the centrality and importance of the Qurʾān and the Sunna or exemplary practice of the Prophet. In his view, the Qurʾān and the Prophet together provide a complete source of guidance for humanity, as well as acting as mediators between God, the Ineffable and Transcendent One, and His creation. For example, in the Introduction to the Commentary, he draws on a Qurʾānic metaphor used in 3:103, when he states that the Qurʾān is ‘a rope (ḥabl) between God and His servants’, and when asked to explain this definition he says:

This means that they have no way to Him save through the Qurʾān, and through understanding [all] that has been addressed to them therein concerning that which is required of them, as well as putting that knowledge into practice for God’s sake with complete sincerity, and following the exemplary way (sunna) of Muḥammad , who was sent to them.113

Tustarī cites numerous traditions concerning the nature of the Qurʾān, including a ḥadīth of the Prophet which states, ‘The Qurʾān is God’s wisdom (ḥikma) among His servants. Whoever learns the Qurʾān and acts according to it, it is as if prophethood were incorporated within him, except that he does not receive revelation…’ He also repeatedly emphasises the importance of the Sunna, as when he says, ‘Mindfulness of God (taqwā) signifies the Sunna, and no obligatory act (farḍ) is complete without the Sunna’;114 or again when he states, ‘All action is futile except that which is done with sincerity (ikhlāṣ), and sincerity is not achieved except through adherence to the Sunna.’115 The Sunna, he explains, has no limit, and this is explained as meaning:

No one has fear like the fear of the Prophet , and [the same goes for] his love (ḥubb), his longing (shawq), his abstinence (zuhd), his contentment (riḍā), his trust (tawakkul), and his [noble] characteristics (akhlāq). Indeed, God, Exalted is He, has said [of him]: ‘Assuredly you possess a magnificent nature [68:4].’116

Regarding the Qurʾān’s role of mediation, Tustarī cites a ḥadīth according to which the Prophet describes the Qurʾān as ‘an excellent intercessor whose intercession is accepted (shāfiʿ mushaffaʿ), and a truthful advocate (māḥil muṣaddaq)’,117 while of the Prophet’s mediating role he states, ‘[God] has made the Emissary the most elevated and the greatest mediator (wāsiṭa) between you and Him’.118

In the Introduction to the Commentary, Tustarī shows how the Qurʾān and the Prophet are inextricably linked. For example, he states, ‘God, Exalted is He, sent down the Qurʾān to His Prophet, and made his heart a mine of His oneness and of the Qurʾān’.119 Both the Qurʾān and the Prophet are also linked in being identified with light. Regarding the Qurʾān, for example, Tustarī states ‘God has made the Qurʾān a light and has said: …but We have made it a light by which We guide whomsoever We wish of Our servants’ [42:52]; and he understands the words …and [those who] follow the light which has been revealed with him [7:157], to be a reference to the Qurʾān, ‘of which the heart of the Prophet is the mine.’120 Tustarī also describes the Prophet’s breast (ṣadr) as a light, and Abū Bakr al-Sijzī explains this as meaning: ‘it is a repository of light from the divine Substance (jawhar), which is the original locus of light within the breast.’121 The star of piercing brightness [86:3] is interpreted

 

113 IC, p. 5.

114     Tafsīr, 5:2.

115     Tafsīr, 4:77.

116     Tafsīr, 18:30. The explanation is given by Mattā b. Aḥmad who, according to Böwering was also known as Aḥmad b.

Mattā, and although not listed as one of Tustarī’s disciples, appears to have been close to him.

117     IC, p. 3.

118     Tafsīr, 14:34.

119     IC, p. 3.

120     IC, pp. 4ff.

121     IC, p. 2.

by Tustarī as an allusion to the heart of the Prophet, ‘resplendent with the realisation of God’s one- ness, the upholding of His transcendence, constancy in the practices of remembrance, and in the contemplative witnessing of the Omnipotent’; while in his commentary on the verse, By the dawn [89:1], Tustarī explains that its inner meaning refers to Muḥammad , ‘from whom the lights of faith, the lights of acts of obedience and the lights of the two worlds of existence gushed forth’.

Tustarī’s teachings concerning the Qurʾān and the Prophet have theological and metaphysical, as well as cosmological, dimensions (as can be seen in the last quote above). At the beginning of the Introduction to the Commentary, he appears to associate the Qurʾān with God’s pre-eternal knowledge, for when asked about whether God’s knowledge about His servants was apparent to Him before or after He created them, he cites in answer the verse, It is a Glorious Qurʾān [85:21], and adds, ‘that is, it is a Book [that was] fixed in a Preserved Tablet [85:22] before they were created.’122 We have already seen above that he identifies the Qurʾān with God’s knowledge and His speech, explaining that His speech is therefore (like His knowledge) one of His attributes. Not surprisingly, therefore, he also unequivocally asserts the uncreated nature of the Qurʾān, as when he comments on the words, And there would never come from the Compassionate One any reminder that is new but that they used to disregard it [26:5], and says:

That is, whenever there came to them, through revelation, knowledge of the Qurʾān which was new to them and of which they had no prior knowledge, they would turn away from it. This is not to say that the Reminder (dhikr) [i.e. the Qurʾān] itself is created (muḥdath), however, for it is from among the attributes of the essence of God, and is therefore neither existentiated (mukawwan) nor created (makhlūq).123

In another context, Tustarī suggests that the Qurʾān ‘contains’ the Names and Attributes of God. In his commentary on the ‘disconnected letters’ at the commencement of Sūrat al-Baqara, Alif lām mīm [2:1], he observes, ‘Each book that God, Exalted is He, sent down contains a secret and the secret of the Qurʾān is contained within the [disconnected] letters which open the sūras, because they are Names and Attributes [of God].’ Before this, Tustarī’s interpretation of the Basmala in the concluding section of the Introduction to the Commentary indicates more about the significance and mystery held in the letters of the Qurʾān:

The ‘bā’ stands for ‘bahāʾ Allāh’ (the magnificence of God), Mighty and Majestic is He, the ‘sīn’ stands for ‘sanāʾ Allāh’ (the resplendence of God), and the ‘mīm’ stands for ‘majd Allāh’ (the glory of God), Mighty and Majestic is He. Allāh is the Greatest Name, which contains all His names. Between its ‘Alif ’ and ‘Lām’ there is a cryptic letter, something of the unseen from an unseen to an unseen, a secret from a secret to a secret, a reality from a reality to a reality.124

B.           The Muḥammadan Light

Tustarī was among the early Muslim mystics to have contemplated the idea of the Muḥammadan Light (nūr Muḥammadiyya).125 The idea is twofold: firstly that Muḥammad had a special ‘time’ in pre-existence, alone with God; the second is that all of creation was created from the Muḥammadan Light.126 These doctrines are first discussed in the context of 7:172, a verse which recounts the

 

122 IC, p. 1.

123                   The doctrine of the majority of Sunni Muslims now is that the Qurʾān is uncreated and eternal. Among those who opposed this view were, to begin with, the Jahmites and then the Muʿtazilites. On this subject see Richard C. Martin ‘Createdness of the Qurʾān’, EQ, vol. 1, p. 467; Montgomery Watt, ‘Early Discussions about the Qurʾān,’ Muslim World 40 (1950), pp. 21–40 and 96–105; Wilferd Madelung, ‘The Origins of the Controversy Concerning the Creation of the Qurʾān’, in idem, Religious Schools and Sects in Medieval Islam (London, 1985), pp. 504–25; and Walter M. Patton, Aḥmad

b. Ḥanbal and the Miḥna (Leiden, 1897).

124                 IC, pp. 8–9.

125                 He may well have been the earliest Sunni mystic to have formulated such a doctrine, although in Shīʿī and Imāmī circles the idea seems to have existed earlier. See, for example, Uri Rubin, ‘Pre-existence and Light: Aspects of the Concept of Nūr Muḥammad’, Israel Oriental Studies 5 (1975), pp. 62–119; and Arzina Lalani, Early Shīʿī Thought: The Teachings of Muḥammad al-Bāqir (London, 2004), pp. 80–2.

126                 A similar doctrine in Sufism was that Muḥammad, the first in creation, was created for God, while the rest of creation

pre-eternal covenant which God made with humanity (the Covenant of Alast): And, [remember] when your Lord took from the Children of Adam, from their loins their seed, and made them testify about themselves, [saying], ‘Am I not your Lord?’ They said, ‘Yea, indeed, we testify’…127 In the fol- lowing extract, Tustarī expounds his doctrine of the Muḥammadan Light:

The seed (dhurriyya) comprise three [parts], a first, second and third: the first is Muḥammad , for when God, Exalted is He, wanted to create Muḥammad , He made appear (aẓhara) a light from His light, and when it reached the veil of divine majesty (ʿaẓama) it prostrated before God, and from that prostration God created an immense crystal-like column of light, that was inwardly and outwardly translucent, and within it was the essence of Muḥammad .128 Then it stood in service before the Lord of the Worlds for a million years with the essential charac- teristics of faith, which are the visual beholding of faith (muʿāyanat al-īmān), the unveiling of certainty (mukāshafat al-yaqīn) and the witnessing of the Lord (mushāhadat al-rabb). Thus He honoured him with this witnessing a million years before beginning the creation.129

Also in the context of 7:172, Tustarī discusses the creation of Adam and the descendants of Adam from the Muḥammadan light, and it can be seen that there are varying degrees of illumination in their creation:

The second among the progeny is Adam . God created him from the light of Muḥammad . And He created Muḥammad , that is, his body, from the clay of Adam .

The third is the progeny of Adam. God, Mighty and Majestic is He, created the seekers [of God] (murīdūn) from the light of Adam, and He created the [divinely-]sought (murādūn) from the light of Muḥammad . Thus, the generality among people live under the mercy of the people of proximity (ahl al-qurb) and the people of proximity live under the mercy of the one brought near (al-muqarrab) [i.e. the Prophet] — With their light shining forth before them and on their right [57:12].

The Prophet’s time alone with God is also alluded to in Tustarī’s commentary on 53:13: And verily he saw Him another time. He states:

That is, in the beginning when God, Transcendent and Exalted is He, created him as a light within a column of light (nūran fī ʿamūd al-nūr), a million years before creation, with the essential characteristics of faith (ṭabāʾiʿ al-īmān), in a witnessing of the unseen through the unseen (mushāhadat al-ghayb bi’l-ghayb).

The derivation of other creatures (or the light of other creatures) from the Muḥammadan Light is also referred to in a number of other passages, as in the following:

He [God] made the gushing forth of the wellsprings of the heart of Muḥammad , with the lights of knowledge of different kinds, a [sign of] mercy for his nation, because God, Exalted is He, honoured him with this honour. For the light of the prophets  is from his [Muḥammad’s]

 

was created for Muḥammad. Later this idea became popularised and known simply as the doctrine of law lāka, being an abbreviation of ‘If it were not for you We would not have created the spheres (law lāka la-mā khalaqtu’l-aflāk)’, on which see Annemarie Schimmel, And Muḥammad is His Messenger (Chapel Hill, NC, 1985), pp. 131–2.

127      In the so-called ‘Covenant of Alast’, the word alast is a reference to God’s question, alastu, ‘Am I not…?’

128      Interestingly, Tustarī speaks here of the ‘essence’ (ʿayn) of Muḥammad; later Sufis, especially after Ibn ʿArabī (d. 638/1240) would refer not only to the Muḥammadan Light (nūr Muḥammadiyya) but also to ‘the Muḥammadan Reality’ (ḥaqīqa Muḥammadiyya). See Michel Chodkiewicz, Seal of Saints: Prophethood and Sainthood in the Doctrine of Ibn ʿArabī (Cambridge, 1993), ch. 4.

129      A parallel passage is cited in both the ʿAṭf al-alif of Daylamī, p. 33, and the ʿIlm al-qulūb attributed to Makkī, ʿIlm al- qulūb (Beirut, 2004), p. 93, which according to Böwering’s translation reads: ‘When God willed to create Muḥammad, He made appear a light from His light and disseminated it. It spread in the entire kingdom [of pre-existence]. When it reached the majesty it bowed in prostration. God created from its prostration a mighty column of dense light like a crystal glass that is as thick as the seven heavens and outwardly and inwardly translucent.’ On the Muḥammadan Light according to Tustarī, see Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 149–53; on the Muḥammadan Light in Sufi literature, see Schimmel, Muḥammad, ch. 7.

light, the light of the heavenly dominions (malakūt) is from his light and the light of this world and the Hereafter is from his light.130

And the above-cited passage:

By the dawn [89:1] refers to Muḥammad , from whom the lights of faith, the lights of acts of obedience and the lights of the two worlds of existence gushed forth (tafajjarat).

C.          Theology

The theological doctrines that Tustarī expounds in his Tafsīr are for the most part those that were adhered to by the majority of early Sunni traditionalist Muslims.131 Among these doctrines, that of the uncreated Qurʾān has been discussed above. Another key theological doctrine that is presented early in the Introduction to the Commentary is that of God’s pre-eternal knowledge of all human acts, and His decreeing everything in accordance with His knowledge:

God’s knowledge of His servants and what they would do was complete before He created them. [This does not imply] His forcing them into disobedience, coercing them into obedience, or leaving them out of His divine plan. Rather, it draws attention to that which those who deny His decree are promised, for He says: … whoever will, let him believe, and whoever will, let him disbelieve [18:29], in the way of a threat, since they [actually] have no power (ḥawl) or strength (quwwa) except in accordance with that which is contained in His pre-eternal knowledge con- cerning them, which will come to be, from Him, [but] through them and for them.132

Later in the course of his commentary, Tustarī adds that God’s pre-eternal knowledge inevitably has to be manifested, ‘since God’s knowledge is a final decree that cannot change to other than that which the All-Knowing knows, Mighty and Majestic is He.’133

Tustarī’s doctrine concerning the carrying through of the divine decree by human beings is interestingly nuanced. He teaches that God created both good and evil, and He commanded the good and forbade evil. However, as he indicates in the above passage, the compliance or otherwise to the divine command by human beings does not involve any coercion (jabr) on the part of God; rather, the matter of obedience depends upon His granting of protection (ʿiṣma), success (tawfīq) and help (maʿūna), while disobedience is the result of His withdrawing His protection from, or His abandonment (khidhlān) of, a person:

Indeed, God, Exalted is He, has created good and evil and established the command and pro- hibition. He has made us worship Him through the good and linked that with success (tawfīq), while He has forbidden us from evil and linked the perpetration of it to the relinquishing of [His] protection (ʿiṣma), and abandonment (khidhlān) [by Him]. All of these are of His crea- tion. Whoever is successful in [doing] good has a duty to show gratitude (shukr), and whoever has been left to do evil must repent and cry out for God’s help, Mighty and Majestic is He.134

In another passage, the same principle is expressed slightly differently, and here he mentions the attribution of acts to human beings:

 

130 Tafsīr, 11:40.

131                 On the development of Muslim theology see Josef van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert Hidschra: eine Geschichte des religiösen Denkens im frühen Islam (Berlin, 1991–5); idem, The Flowering of Muslim Theology, trans. Jane Marie Todd (Boston, 2006); Montgomery Watt, The Formative Period of Islamic Thought (Edinburgh, 1973); Morris

S. Seale, Muslim Theology (London, 1964); Robert Caspar, A Historical Introduction to Islamic Theology: Muhammad and the Classical Period, trans. P. Johnstone (Rome, 1998); Tilman Nagel, The History of Islamic Theology: From Muhammad to the Present, trans. Thomas Thornton (Princeton, 2000); Michael Marmura (ed.), Islamic Theology and Philosophy (Albany, 1984); Richard C. Martin, et al., Defenders of Reason in Islam: Mu‘tazilism from Medieval School to Modern Symbol (Oxford, 1987); and Timothy J. Winter (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Classical Islamic Theology (Cambridge, 2008).

132                 IC, pp. 1–2.

133                 Tafsīr, 2:41.

134                 Tafsīr, 30:40.

Affiiction and well-being are from God, Mighty and Majestic is He. The command and pro- hibition are from Him; protection and the granting of success are from Him; and reward and punishment are from Him. However, actions are attributed (manṣūba) to the children of Adam, so whoever performs a good action must express gratitude to merit thereby an increase [in goodness]; and whoever performs a wicked act must seek forgiveness, so that he thereby merits forgiveness.135

In both these passages Tustarī is urging that human beings should recognise the omnipotence of God, who has predetermined all that they do, and whose help or abandonment is instrumental in their accomplishment of all predetermined acts of good or evil. Yet in addition, especially in the second passage, he is indicating that even God’s predestination of wicked acts leaves a door open to salvation through repentance and forgiveness, and that through gratitude for good works, man may gain access to an increase in good works.136

The closely related doctrines of the divine decree, infallibly carried out in accordance with God’s pre-eternal knowledge, of God’s omnipotence, and of humanity’s total helplessness and depend- ence on God, prevail throughout the Tafsīr. It could more specifically be called a ‘mystical theology’ since Tustarī shows how, as well as having profound implications for man’s ultimate salvation, it can impact upon his inner spiritual states. He teaches that people should be aware not only that God controls all things, but also that He suffices for them in every way. Indeed, their downfall occurs precisely when they start to believe in their own power (ḥawl) and strength (quwwa), and try to rely on their own planning and management (tadbīr) of their affairs. He finds many opportunities to illustrate this principle. For example, in the continuation of the passage cited above from his commentary on 2:214, he states:

Affiiction from God is of two kinds: an affiiction of mercy and an affiiction of punishment. An affiiction of mercy leads the affiicted person to show his utter need (iftiqār) for God, Mighty and Majestic is He, and leads him to the abandonment of devising (tadbīr). However, an affiiction of punishment leads the affiicted person [to rely] on his own choice (ikhtiyār) and devising.

Another example of this teaching is to be found in his commentary on the words those who believe in the unseen (ghayb) [2:3], where Tustarī directly links believing in the unseen with disclaiming all power and strength:

God is the unseen and His religion is the unseen, and God, Mighty and Majestic is He, has ordered them to believe in the unseen, to acquit themselves of [every claim] to power and strength concerning that which they have been commanded to do and prohibited from doing, in faith, speech and action, and to say, ‘We have no power (ḥawl) to keep ourselves from diso- bedience save through Your protection (ʿiṣma), and we have no strength (quwwa) to obey You save through Your aid (maʿūna).’

Those who are ‘damned from pre-eternity’, however, are those who claimed their own power and strength, as exemplified by Pharaoh, who ‘claimed to have power, strength and ability, and said, “Whenever I wish to believe I will believe”, but when he actually came to believe [once he had seen the approach of his doom], it was not accepted from him, as God, Exalted is He, said, Now — when hitherto you have disobeyed and been of those who do corruption? [10:91]’137

One of the most interesting and unusual applications of this doctrine is in Tustarī’s interpre- tation of the story of Adam’s fall or ‘slip’ from grace in Paradise [2:30]. He describes how when Adam entered the Garden and saw all that was in it, he said, ‘If only we could stay here forever; yet,

 

135      Tafsīr, 2:214. We might compare Tustarī’s use of the concept of the ‘attribution’ of acts by human beings to the doctrine of ‘acquisition’ (kasb) which later came to be particularly associated with Ashʿarī theology. On the doctrine of kasb see

W. Montgomery Watt, ‘The Origin of the Islamic doctrine of Acquisition’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1943), pp. 234–47; idem, Free Will and Predestination in Early Islam (London, 1948); Daniel Gimaret, Théories de l’acte humaine en théologie musulmane (Paris and Leuven, 1980).

136      Perhaps this statement may in part be intended to discourage a sense of fatalism. But it is also interesting how Tustarī emphasises the need for a spiritual response to predestination.

137      Tafsīr, 2:3.

indeed, we have an appointed time that extends to a known limit.’ This, he explains, was Adam’s heart’s acquiescing in the ‘whispering’ or evil prompting (waswasa) of his lower self (nafs),138 and it was thus that Satan could have access to him and offer to lead him to the ‘tree of eternity that he longed for’, which would be ‘the means to attain immortality and everlastingness’. Further on in his interpretation of this primordial event, Tustarī observes that Satan had access to Adam because of the latter’s preoccupation with his own devising and planning (tadbīr), and he adds:

[Adam’s] thought [for everlasting life] did not involve any considered reflection which might have made it a form of worship, but rather it was a kind of thinking that springs from a natural disposition (jibilla) in his lower self (nafs).

Thus Adam’s reliance on his devising (tadbīr) represented, as Tustarī shows in his long commentary on this verse, a moment of forgetfulness and an absence of the remembrance of God, and we shall see later that remembrance of God is a touchstone of all Tustarī’s teachings concerning the spiritual path.

The prophet Jonah is also shown by Tustarī to have succumbed, like Adam, to reliance on his own devising, this being his only sin, before he was chosen by God and made of the righteous.139 Tustarī’s general admonition on the basis of this doctrine is summarised in his commentary on the words He directs the command from the heaven to the earth…[32:5]:

He reveals to His servants from His knowledge that which is a means of guidance and salva- tion for them. The person who is content with the destined provision resulting from God’s management [of things] (tadbīr) for him, will have the evil of his own devising disposed of and removed from him. Thus [God] will have returned him to a state of contentment (riḍā) with the divine decree, and rectitude (istiqāma) in face of the unfolding of what is destined for him. [Such people] are among those who are brought into proximity [with Him] (muqarrabūn). Truly, God, Exalted is He, created people without any veil, and then made their devising [for themselves] (tadbīr) into their veil.

This last passage in particular illustrates the mystical dimension of Tustarī’s theology, and its poten- tially transformative impact upon the inner life of the human being.

D.          The Spiritual Destiny of Human Beings: Cosmology and Eschatology

The doctrine of the divine foreknowledge and decree is also to be found in Tustarī’s interpretation of the pre-eternal covenant made between God and all of humanity (Covenant of Alast), as recounted in the Qurʾānic verse 7:172, which we shall again cite here:

And, [remember] when your Lord took from the Children of Adam, from their loins their seed, and made them testify about themselves, [saying], ‘Am I not your Lord?’ They said, ‘Yea, indeed, we testify’…

In his long interpretation of this verse, Tustarī not only expounds his doctrine of the Muḥammadan Light, as discussed above, but he also pays close attention to the Covenant itself, which in fact he understands as two covenants, taken separately, first from the prophets and then from all the progeny:

God, Exalted is He, took the prophets  from the loins of Adam, and then He extracted from the back of each prophet his progeny in the shape of specks possessing intellects (ʿuqūl). Then he took from the prophets their pledge, as is stated in His words, We took from the prophets their pledge: as (We did) from you and from Noah… [33:7]. The Covenant that they were bound to was that they would convey from God, Exalted is He, His commandments and prohibitions. Then He called them all to affirm His lordship, with His words, Exalted is He: ‘Am I not your Lord?’, and He manifested His omnipotence [to them], so they said: ‘Yea, indeed, we testify.’ [7:172] … Then He returned them to the loins of Adam , and subsequently He sent the prophets to remind them of His Pact and Covenant.

 

138                 The word waswasa, derived from the onomatopoeic root w-s-w-s, means literally ‘a whisper or whispering’, but usually in religious texts in the sense of an evil prompting, incitement or temptation. Two derivatives from this verb are used in the final sūra of the Qurʾān, 114:4 and 5.

139                 Tafsīr, 68:49.

As can be seen, Tustarī has here stated that the progeny were in the shape of specks ‘possessing intellects (ʿuqūl)’. Later in the Tafsīr, in his commentary on the words, O you who believe, fear God, and let every soul consider what it has sent ahead for tomorrow…[59:18], he warns that on the Day of Resurrection everyone will be questioned about three things: ‘that which he owes to himself, that which he owes to the knowledge between him and his Lord, and that which he owes to the intellect’. The believers, then, must be concerned in this life to fulfil the pre-eternal Covenant made with God, and to be among those who ‘verify’ the affirmation made in the response, ‘Yes we testify’, with the awareness that they will certainly be answerable for it in the Hereafter. This verifying is none other than the realisation of the oneness of God (tawḥīd). Thus he interprets [those] who stand firm in their testimony [70:33], as:

[Those] who stand firm, upholding that to which they have testified, namely that there is no god except God, and who do not shirk with regard to it in any of their deeds, words or states.

Tustarī does not fail to remind those whom he is addressing of the accounting that they will inevi- tably face at the Resurrection,140 and he also warns them not to be complacent, for they do not know in what state they will die. Thus when he comments on the words, And no soul knows in what land it will die [31:34], he says: ‘[It does not know] what its state (ḥukm) will be when it dies: [eternal] bliss (saʿāda) or wretchedness (shaqāwa)’. The use here of the word ḥukm, which can have the meaning of ‘ordinance’ or ‘decree’, is a reminder that the nature of our end is dependent on the divine decree, and for this reason, he follows his interpretation of the verse with two prayers of the Prophet Muḥammad, asking that God should make him die in His religion, as well as prayers of the prophets Abraham and Joseph asking that they should die in a state of submission to God.

Believers must, therefore, be aware that until their last breath they should be constantly renew- ing their pre-eternal Covenant by professing and realising the divine oneness, and, since they have no idea what is in God’s pre-eternal knowledge, they should pray for His mercy and assistance in this. Tustarī must certainly have known that such awareness would be intensified by his many quite literal comments on the eschatological verses of the Qurʾān recounting the torments of Hell and delights of Paradise, to which he sometimes adds vivid details.141 Again, he makes it clear that it is those who denied the divine oneness who will be consigned to Hell, whereas the reward for belief in God’s oneness will be Paradise.142

However, Tustarī does not see Paradise as being confined to the delights that are portrayed in the Qurʾān. He understands there to be two Paradises: one, the Garden with all its delights, pro- vides the rewards for the bodily members; the other, the reward for the realisation of God’s oneness, contains ‘the delight of the vision (naẓar) of God and the manifestation of the divine unveiling (tajallī al-mukāshafa), this itself being permanent subsistence with the Permanently Subsistent One (baqāʾ maʿa’l-Bāqī).’143 Moreover, those who have devoted themselves completely to God will have no desire for the delights of the Garden, but wish only to be with God. Commenting on the words, And enter My paradise [89:30], he says:

It has been related in a report that the angels say to those solely devoted to Him (munfaridūn) on the Day of Resurrection, ‘Proceed to your resting places in Paradise’, to which they say, ‘What is Paradise to us when we have devoted ourselves solely to [Him] because of a special understanding which has been [granted] to us from Him? We do not want anything save Him

— that is the only good life (ḥayāt ṭayyiba).’

Whilst in his Tafsīr Tustarī shows the greatest and ultimate reward for the realisation of God’s oneness to be the encounter with God, subsisting with Him and the beatific vision of Him, which

 

140      Examples of such comments occur in Tafsīr, 9:122; 16:55; 17:14; 19:83; 23:1 and 2; and 69:18.

141      As, for example, in Tafsīr, 57:13; 67:1 and 2, 69:32; 76:21; 81:7; Sūra 83; 84:9; Sūra 88 and 89:14.

142      e.g. Tafsīr, 83:18.

143      Tafsīr, 43:69 and 70. Tustarī also states in his commentary on 90:18 that those who perceived none other than God [in this world] will be rewarded with ‘life with Life itself (ḥayāt bi-ḥayāt), eternity with Eternity itself (azaliyya bi-azaliyya), and a mystery with Mystery itself (sirr bi-sirr)’, while in his commentary on 92:21 he describes the reward as: ‘a mystery with Mystery itself (sirr bi-sirr), life with Life itself (ḥayāt bi-ḥayāt), and eternity with Eternity itself (azaliyya bi-azaliyya).’

are to be anticipated and hoped for in the Hereafter, he does also indicate that mystics who have attained the highest states may taste in this life experiences of encounter with God, described as the unveiling (mukāshafa) and witnessing (mushāhada) of God. Thus in his commentary on the words, As for the righteous, they will be in bliss (naʿīm) [82:13], he states:

The bliss of the elect among His servants who are the righteous (abrār) is the encounter with Him (liqāʾuhu) and the witnessing (mushāhada) of Him, just as their bliss in this world was in the witnessing of Him and proximity (qurb) with Him.

We find in the Tafsīr only a few glimpses into the nature of this experience. One of the best examples may be seen in the commentary on a mystical poem, probably composed by Tustarī, which is quoted in the context of the long commentary on 2:260. In this poem, the experience of ‘face-to-face encounter with God’ (kifāḥ) is compared to the spider’s web which appeared over the entrance to a cave in which the Prophet and Abū Bakr were hiding when they were escaping from Mecca.144 Commenting on this analogy, either Tustarī or one of his disciples explains:

His saying: ‘Like the spider’s web covering the entrance of a cave’, [is an allusion to] the cave of mystics (ʿārifūn) [which is] the[ir] innermost secret (sirr), and the[ir] beholding (iṭṭilāʿ) of the Lord of the Worlds, when they reach the station of face-to-face encounter (maqām al-kifāḥ), that is, the immediate vision of direct witnessing (ʿiyān al-ʿiyān) beyond what has been [ver- bally] elucidated (bayān). Then there is nothing between the servant and God except the veil of servanthood, due to his contemplation (naẓar) of the attributes of lordship (rubūbiyya), ipseity (huwiyya), divinity (ilāhiyya), and [God’s being] eternally Self-Sufficing and Besought of all (ṣamadiyya ilā’l-sarmadiyya), without any obstacle or veil.145

Tustarī draws from the words, And brought him near in communion [19:52], which allude to the special proximity accorded to the prophet Moses, a more general observation about the grace of unveiling (mukāshafa):

That is, being secretly called for the unveiling (mukāshafa), [an unveiling] which is not con- cealed from hearts, in [intimate] conversation (muḥādatha) and loving affection (wudd), just as He said, Exalted is He, Truly those who believe and perform righteous deeds — for them the Compassionate One shall appoint love (wudd) [19:96], meaning that [through] this unveiling, the mysteries are received without any mediation. This is a station given by God to those who are true and faithful to Him both in secret and openly.

Parts of Tustarī’s interpretation of the miraculous Ascension or Miʿrāj of the Prophet [53:1–18] also suggest that aspects of the Prophet’s conduct are being presented to provide a model for the conduct of mystics in their experiences, as when Tustarī comments on 53:17, The eye did not swerve, nor did it go beyond [the bounds]:

He did not incline to the evidences of his self (shawāhid nafsihi), nor to witnessing them (mushāhadatihā), but was totally absorbed in the witnessing (mushāhada) of his Lord, Exalted is He, witnessing (shāhid) the attributes [of God] that were being manifested [to him], which required firmness from him in that place (maḥall).

And when he comments on the words of the next verse, Verily he saw some of the greatest signs of his Lord [53:18]:

That is, those of His attributes which became manifest through His signs. Though he saw them, he did not let slip [his gaze] from his witnessed Object (mashhūd), and did not withdraw from the vicinity of his worshipped Object (maʿbūd) but rather [what he saw] only increased him in love (maḥabba), longing (shawq) and strength (quwwa).

Aside from these glimpses into experiences of union or proximity with God or the mystical unveiling and contemplative witnessing of Him, most of the spiritual teachings in Tustarī’s Tafsīr are concerned with outlining essential prerequisites of the Path, models to be emulated, qualities

 

144                 The spider’s web and a dove’s nest next to the cave’s entrance persuaded those among the Quraysh who were pursuing them that there was no point in entering, and so the Prophet and Abū Bakr were saved.

145                 Tafsīr, 2:260.

to be aspired to and proprieties (ādāb) of spiritual conduct to be upheld, especially in relation to others. The spiritual aim of the mystical way is, as he indicates, to attain complete sincerity (ikhlāṣ) in the worship of God and in the attestation of His oneness, and the key to it is, as we shall see, the remembrance of God. Before outlining in more detail Tustarī’s teachings about the principles and practice of the spiritual path, we shall look at his perception of the interior world of the human being and his teachings regarding the nature of, and relationship between, faith, knowledge and certainty.

E.    Spiritual Psychology

1.                         The inner make-up of the human being

Sufis did not simply understand the human being to be made up of ‘body, soul and spirit’; they developed a subtle and complex science of the inner human make-up, which one might call a ‘spir- itual psychology’ or ‘science of the soul’. The Qurʾān itself speaks of the human heart (qalb) upon which God inscribes faith [58:22], and which was able to take on the ‘Trust’ (amāna) [33:72];146 the spirit (rūḥ) [e.g. 32:9; 15:29; 38:72]; the ‘pith’ or ‘inner substance’ (lubb, used in the plural, albāb) [e.g. 2:179, 197; 3:7, 190]; the ‘breast’ (ṣadr) [e.g. 7:2; 11:12; 15:97; 94:1]; and many times of the ‘soul’, ‘self ’ or ‘ego’ (nafs).147 Moreover, the Qurʾān speaks of different forms of the latter, namely, the ‘evil-inciting self ’ (al-nafs al-ammāra bi’l-sūʾ) (alluded to in 12:53), the ‘self-reproaching’ or ‘blaming self ’ (al-nafs al-lawwāma) [75:2] and the ‘self at peace’ (al-nafs al-muṭmaʾinna) [89:27]. These Qurʾānic designa- tions no doubt inspired and informed the development of the Sufis’ own ways of understanding the spiritual psychology of human beings.148

Tustarī was among the early Muslim mystics who expounded an understanding of the complex- ity of the inner human make-up.149 In general terms, he seems to perceive two sides or propensities within the human being, one which tends toward earth and the physical and sensory pleasures, and the other which tends toward heaven and the spiritual realm. He expresses this overall scheme in different ways in the Tafsīr (see diagram, below). Most often, he contrasts two sides of the ‘self ’ (nafs). There is on the one hand the ‘self of man’s basic nature’ (nafs al-ṭabʿ, but also occasionally, nafs al-jibilla), which we have rendered as the ‘natural self ’; and on the other, the ‘self of the spirit’ (nafs al-rūḥ), which we have rendered as the ‘spiritual self ’.150 The former is associated with dark- ness, and the latter with light, as when Tustarī interprets the night when it enshrouds [92:1] as ‘the natural self ’ (nafs al-ṭabʿ) and the day as it unveils [92:2] as ‘the spiritual self ’.

In a few instances, Tustarī appears to employ the word rūḥ (spirit) on its own synonymously with nafs al-rūḥ. The term ṭabʿ on its own, however, is almost always used by him to designate man’s basic nature, or his physical appetites and instincts, though in one context he speaks of four inborn natures or dispositions (ṭabāʾiʿ), which are all part of his basic nature (ṭabʿ). They are: the animal nature (tabʿ al-bahāʾim), the satanic nature (tabʿ al-shayāṭīn), the sorcerous nature (ṭabʿ al-saḥara) and the devilish nature (ṭabʿ al-abālisa). All of these are potentially negative forces within the

 

146      The ‘Trust’ (amāna) is discussed below, p. 219, n. 6.

147      On the different usages of the term nafs (pl. anfus or nufūs) in the Qurʾān, see Th. E. Homerin, ‘Soul’, EQ, vol. 5, p. 80.

148      On the connection between the development of Sufi concepts and terminology in relation to the Qurʾān, see Paul Nwyia,

Exégèse coranique (Beirut, 1970) and Massignon, Essai.

149      Other early mystics to have developed such schemes are al-Ḥārith al-Muḥāsibī (d. 243/837), Abū al-Ḥusayn al-Nūrī (d. 295/907) and al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī (d. between 295/905 and 300/910). On Muḥāsibī, see Josef van Ess, Die Gedank- enwelt des Ḥārit al-Muḥāsibī (Bonn, 1961); Gavin N. Picken, ‘The Concept of Tazkiyat al-Nafs in Islam in the Light of the Works of al-Ḥārith al-Muḥāsibī’, PhD thesis (University of Leeds, 2005). Nūrī is said to be the author of a work entitled Maqāmāt al-qulūb, ed. with introduction by Paul Nwyia in Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Joseph 44 (1968), pp. 117–54, while a comparable work on the inner make-up of human beings is ascribed to al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī, entitled Bayān al-farq bayn al-ṣadr wa’l-qalb wa’l-fuʾād wa’l-lubb (Cairo, 1958); English trans. by Nicholas Heer, with Kenneth

L. Honerkamp, Three Early Sufi Texts (Louisville, KY, 2003).

150      The use of this construct is unusual in Sufi texts, if not unique to Tustarī, and it may initially be tempting to understand the word nafs here in its idiomatic usage for emphasis in Arabic, as in nafs al-shay, meaning ‘the thing itself ’. However, we have discounted this interpretation partly because it occurs rather too frequently to be merely for emphasis, and partly for other reasons which will become apparent in the course of this discussion.

human being and should be combatted in different ways.151 Thus Tustarī appears to distinguish man’s ‘natural self ’ (nafs al-ṭabʿ) from his ‘basic nature’ (ṭabʿ).

 

 

Further Designations of the Self (nafs)

evil-inciting self

al-nafs al-ammāra bi’l-sūʾ

self at peace

al-nafs al-muṭmaʾinna

self-reproaching / blaming self lustful self

al-nafs al-lawwāma

al-nafs al-shahwāniyya

self of gnosis

nafs al-maʿrifa

 

In fact, the term nafs on its own is frequently used by Tustarī to designate the darker, earth- bound side of the human being that is opposed to the spiritual self (or spirit). In these instances, we have translated the word nafs as ‘lower self ’. An example is the following passage:

The lower self (nafs) desires the world because it comes from that, but the spirit (rūḥ) desires the Hereafter because it comes from that. Gain ascendancy over the lower self and open for it the door to the Hereafter by glorifying [God] (tasbīḥ) and seeking forgiveness for your nation.152

Here, Tustarī is indicating that the lower self can potentially be ‘saved’ through the glorification of God. Elsewhere, he shows that the natural self (nafs al-ṭabʿ) can be allied or brought into coalition with the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ) through the remembrance of God (dhikr). Thus he interprets the forenoon [93:1] as ‘the spiritual self ’, and the night when it is still [93:2] as ‘the natural self when it finds repose with the spiritual self in constant remembrance of God, Exalted is He.’ In another context he emphasises the salutary role of both the remembrance of God (dhikr) and gratitude (shukr), as in his commentary on the words, when souls shall be coupled [81:7], where he states:

The natural self and spiritual self will be joined together and will be mingled in [their partaking of] the bliss of Paradise inasmuch as they were allied in this world in keeping remembrance constantly and upholding a state of gratitude.

In an interesting passage, Tustarī contrasts the inner process which takes place at death with that which occurs during sleep. He explains that both the luminous spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ al-nūrī) and the dense natural self (nafs al-ṭabʿ al-kathīf) have a subtle substance (laṭīf). When a person dies, God removes from him the subtle substance of the luminous spiritual self, separating it from the subtle substance of the dense natural self, ‘and by this [luminous spiritual self] he compre- hends things, and is given the vision (rūʾyā) [of God] in the heavenly kingdom (malakūt).’ When a person sleeps, however, God removes from him only the subtle substance of the dense natural self, so that when he awakens, he is able to recover a ‘subtle breath’ from the luminous substance of the spiritual self, because it is ‘by virtue of the light of the subtle substance of the spiritual self that the natural self has life’. Thus, the natural self derives life from the spiritual self, while the life

 

151 Tafsīr, 12:53.

152 Tafsīr, 110:2.

of the spiritual self, as Tustarī explains, is ‘by virtue of the remembrance [of God] (dhikr), indeed its sustenance is remembrance, while the sustenance of the natural self is food and drink.’ He then adds the observation:

Whoever cannot reconcile these two opposites, I mean by that, the natural self and the spiritual self, so that the subsistence (ʿaysh) of the two together is by remembrance, and the endeavour [to accomplish] remembrance, is not a mystic (ʿārif) in reality.153

So far we have seen the ‘natural self ’ (nafs al-ṭabʿ or nafs al-jibilla), the ‘[lower] self ’ (nafs) and basic nature (ṭabʿ) opposed to the ‘spiritual self ’ (or the ‘spirit’), but in his overall twofold scheme Tustarī sometimes contrasts the lower self (nafs) with the heart (qalb), as, for example, when he explains:

If your lower self overpowers your heart, it will drive you to the pursuit of desire (hawā). But if your heart overpowers your lower self and your bodily members, it will tether them with propriety (adab), compel them into worship (ʿibāda), and then adorn them with sincerity in servanthood.154

He also interprets the two seas [55:19] as: ‘the sea of the heart, full of gems, and the sea of the lower self. Between these two is a barrier that they do not overstep [55:20].’ Likewise, in his interpretation of the words, He knows what enters the earth [57:4], he states: ‘The earth is the natural self, and thus He knows among the things which enters it that which is wholesome or corrupt for the heart.’

In many places in the Tafsīr, Tustarī presents a more complex twofold scheme of the inner constitution of human beings, comprising on one side the natural self (nafs al-ṭabʿ), or lower self (nafs), and on the other, the heart (qalb), the intellect (ʿaql) and the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ) — (again, see the diagram on p. xxxix) An example of such a scheme occurs in his commentary on the words, By those that deliver the reminder [77:5], which in its exoteric sense is understood to refer to the delivering of the revelation by the angels to prophets:

This is the revelation (waḥy) through inspiration (ilhām) which the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ), the intellect (ʿaql) and the heart (qalb) cast upon the natural self (nafs al-ṭabʿ), and this is the hidden form of reminder (dhikr khafīy).

Sometimes Tustarī refines these definitions further, specifying ‘the understanding of the intel- lect’ (fahm al-ʿaql) and ‘discernment of the heart’ (fiṭnat al-qalb) as well as the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ),155 or with minor variations, as when he speaks of ‘the intuition of the spiritual self ’ (dhihn nafs al-rūḥ). One example is when he explains that the vision of God in the Hereafter will be the share of ‘the intuition of the spiritual self, the understanding of the intellect and the discernment of the heart’, since they were present without the natural self when God addressed human beings in molecular form in pre-eternity. He adds that the natural self will nonetheless receive some share of the beatific vision in Paradise, ‘like a fragrant breeze, due to its being fused with those lights’.156 These three faculties (heart, intellect and spirit or spiritual self) work together in different ways to overcome or transform the lower or natural self, as Tustarī shows, for example, when he explains the repetition of the words, truly with hardship comes ease [94:5]:

God, Exalted is He, has magnified the state of hope in this verse out of His generosity and His hidden grace, and thus He mentions ease twice. Indeed, the Prophet  said, ‘Hardship will not overwhelm the two ‘eases’. By this he meant: the discernment of the heart (fiṭnat al-qalb) and the intellect (ʿaql) are the two ‘eases’ which overcome the natural self, and return it to the state of sincerity (ikhlāṣ).

 

153 Tafsīr, 39:42.

154      Tafsīr, 48:4.

155      Tafsīr, 18:21 and 19:61. The juxtaposition of these three in this form is a further indication that Tustarī is not using the word nafs in its emphatic meaning in the construct nafs al-rūḥ.

156      Tafsīr, 42:20. We may note here that Tustarī had stated in the passage on death and sleep cited above that ‘the substance of the luminous spiritual self ’ is separated from ‘the substance of the dense natural self at death’, since it is through the former that man is able to comprehend things and enjoy the beatific vision in the Hereafter.

Interestingly, Tustarī does not, like later Sufis, suggest a particular hierarchy among these different faculties within the human being.157 Neither does he include along with the heart, the intellect and the spiritual self, that important inner faculty so often mentioned in Sufism, the ‘[innermost] secret’ (sirr), also translated as ‘mysterium’, ‘mystery’ or ‘inmost being’.158 However, he does mention the sirr separately, in a number of contexts. It seems that he understands the innermost secret (sirr) to be at the very deepest level of the human being. Most often, it is associated with the contemplative witnessing of God (mushāhada) and with certainty (yaqīn), and as such it will be seen in several extracts cited in Section 4 below. At other times he speaks of the innermost secret when he wishes to describe the deepest and most sincere attainment of a spiritual virtue, such as humility,159 veracity,160 neediness for God,161 surrender to Him,162 and fear of Him.163 In one instance, he contrasts the ‘innermost secret’ (sirr) within the human being with the ‘outer self ’ (ẓāhir). The life of the former is in God’s remembrance, while the life of the latter is in praising and thanking God.164

2.     The nafs

We have seen reference to man’s natural self (nafs al-ṭabʿ or nafs al-jibilla), [lower] self (nafs) and also basic nature (ṭabʿ), being opposed to the heart, intellect and spiritual self or spirit. Describ- ing the nafs, Tustarī states that when God created it, He made ignorance its nature and desire the closest thing to it,165 and in another context he shows it to be in partnership with Satan.166 When it is clearly in this role we have translated nafs as ‘lower self ’, as noted above. But Tustarī, like other Sufis, also appears to understand the nafs to have a number of different levels according those mentioned above that are spoken of in the Qurʾān, namely the ‘evil-inciting self ’ (nafs ammāra bi’l- sūʾ), the ‘self-reproaching or blaming self ’ (nafs lawwāma) and the ‘self at peace’ (nafs muṭmaʾinna), though he refers to these only in one or two instances. About the evil-inciting self, he states that it ‘is lust (shahwa), which itself is the role played by man’s basic nature (ṭabʿ)’.167 He identifies the self- reproaching or blaming self with the evil-inciting self.168 Elsewhere, he speaks of the ‘lustful self ’ (nafs shahwāniyya)169 and the ‘self of gnosis’ (nafs al-maʿrifa),170 which seem to be manifestations of the natural or lower self and the spiritual self, respectively. Moreover, in one context he identifies the self at peace (nafs muṭmaʾinna) with the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ).171 In many Sufi texts, the different aspects of the nafs, such as those of the nafs ammāra, nafs lawwāma, and nafs muṭmaʾinna are understood as stages in its spiritual development. Without spiritual discipline, man remains enslaved to the dictates of the evil-inciting self, but through rigorous spiritual discipline and with the assistance of divine grace, the nafs may gradually be transformed into the self at peace (nafs muṭmaʾinna).172 Tustarī, however, does not appear to see them as one nafs that is transformed, but

 

157                 On these hierarchies, and levels within the inner world of the human being see Keeler, Sufi Hermeneutics, pp. 154ff.

158                 The term sirr is used by different Sufi authors in various ways, but is generally used to define a subtle centre of percep- tion or locus of mystical experience deep within the human being. On this subject see Shigeru Kamada, ‘A Study of the Term sirr (secret) in Sufi Laṭāʾif Theories’, Oriens 19 (1983), pp. 7–28.

159                 e.g. Tafsīr, 5:6.

160                 e.g. Tafsīr, 33:8.

161                 e.g. Tafsīr, 35:15.

162                 e.g. Tafsīr, 37:84.

163                 e.g. Tafsīr, 23:1–2.

164                 Tafsīr, 26:227. In this case, innermost secret (sirr) would appear to represent nafs al-rūḥ, and outer self (ẓāhir), the nafs al-ṭabʿ, here in coalition with the nafs al-rūḥ through the remembrance of God.

165                 Tafsīr, 12:53.

166                 Tafsīr, 22:52.

167                 Tafsīr, 12:53.

168                 Tafsīr, 75:1, 2.

169                 Tafsīr, 33:4.

170                 Tafsīr, 12:53.

171                 Tafsīr, 89:27.

172                 Or, according to the terminology of some schools of Sufism, beyond the nafs muṭmaʾinna to reach higher stages of the

nafs.

as the twofold nafs (the natural and spiritual self), which can, through the remembrance of God, be brought into coalition, though they will not partake of the same experience in Paradise.173

3.                        The heart (qalb)

In his Tafsīr, Tustarī pays particular attention to the heart. Like other Sufis he sees the heart as the ‘seat’ or locus of faith within the human being, and this has its basis in the Qurʾān, for example in the words of 58:22: …He has inscribed faith upon their hearts and reinforced them with a spirit from Him… Commenting on these words, Tustarī states that this inscription on the heart is the work of God, not the work of the servant, and he describes it as a ‘gift of faith (mawhibat al-īmān)’. He also speaks of the heart as being a locus of the realisation of God’s oneness (tawḥīd) and of gnosis (maʿrifa), love (maḥabba) and intimacy (uns) with God. Interpreting the Much-frequented House (Bayt Maʿmūr) [52:4] in a metaphorical way, he states:

In its inner meaning, it refers to the heart: the hearts of mystics are frequented (maʿmūra) by His gnosis (maʿrifa), His love (maḥabba), and intimacy (uns) with Him. It is to this [the mystic’s heart] that the angels make pilgrimage, for it is the House of the Realisation of God’s Oneness (bayt al-tawḥīd).

Tustarī states that God created the heart ‘for Himself ’,174 and in one instance interprets the House of God (i.e. the Kaʿba) esoterically to represent the heart. Thus when he comments on the words, Purify My House for those who circumambulate it… [22:26], he states: ‘Just as God has commanded the purification of His House [at Mecca] from idols, so also He has commanded the purification of that house of His in which He deposited the mystery of faith (sirr al-īmān) and the light of gnosis (nūr al-maʿrifa), namely, the heart of the believer.’ Tustarī again employs the symbolism of the house for the heart when he comments on houses [lying] deserted [27:52], and explains:

Their houses are an allusion to hearts; for there are hearts which are inhabited (ʿāmir) through remembrance (dhikr), and there are those which are ruined (kharib) through heedlessness (ghafla). Whomsoever God, Mighty and Majestic is He, inspires with [His] remembrance, He has freed from oppression (ẓulm).175

Yet again showing the heart to be God’s property, he states:

Truly the heart is [like] a house: if it is unoccupied it goes to ruin, while if it is occupied by other than its owner, or by other than one whom the owner has settled there, it will also go to ruin. Therefore, if you wish your hearts to be in good repair, do not let your prayer in them be other than to God, Exalted is He.176

The heart, therefore, needs to be protected from heedlessness and from being occupied with other than God, and Tustarī shows that, although it is the seat of faith, it can be diverted from the true direction. As was seen above, Adam’s banishment from Paradise was because his heart acquiesced in the desire and devising of his lower self. In one context he states that although the heart is the most beneficial part of the human being, it is also the most dangerous, due to its tendency to turn back and forth and fluctuate (taqallub) and its depth, and he compares it to a sea across which one must journey.177 The heart has a light of insight, through which it can overcome desire and lust. But Tustarī warns:

When the heart’s sight is blind to what is within it, lust will overcome him and heedlessness will [affiict] him at regular intervals. Consequently his body will stray into sin without being guided to God under any circumstances.178

 

173      For example, the natural self will not be granted the vision of God.

174      Tafsīr, 19:85.

175      That is, the oppression of, or wrongdoing towards, their own selves.

176      Tafsīr, 22:26.

177      Tafsīr, 30:41.

178      Tafsīr, 22:46.

Interestingly, in his commentary on 22:46, he also speaks of an inner heart, which is ‘the position from which the servant stands before his Master without being agitated or busied by anything, but in a state of tranquillity and stillness in Him’. It may be that what Tustarī is referring to here is that which he elsewhere describes as the function of the innermost secret (sirr).

The heart’s locus is the breast (ṣadr), which acts as a medium of transmission between the heart and the body. The breast is itself described as the locus of Islam, so it can be said that just as ῑmān (faith) is situated within islām, so the heart is situated within the breast. (For references on breast or ṣadr see Index iii).

4.     Knowledge, faith and certainty

In the main, Tustarī speaks of three kinds of knowledge in the Tafsīr: ‘knowledge’ (ʿilm), ‘gnosis’ or ‘mystical knowledge’ (maʿrifa), and ‘understanding’ (fahm), although in a few contexts he also mentions ‘wisdom’ (ḥikma).

Gnosis (maʿrifa) differs from knowledge and understanding in that its locus is, as Tustarī con- sistently states, the heart (qalb). The ‘light of gnosis’ was, as we saw, a ‘deposit from God’ within the heart, along with faith. Conversely, he describes the nature of vengeance which God took on those who angered Him [43:55] as being: ‘[His] removal of the light of gnosis (nūr al-maʿrifa) from their hearts, the lamp of the realisation of [His] oneness (sirāj al-tawḥīd) from their innermost secrets (asrār), and entrusting them to their own selves.’ Thus gnosis cannot be acquired through one’s own efforts, but is granted by God. Like other Sufi authors, Tustarī understands maʿrifa to be the experiential, mystical apprehension of God or of the divine mysteries. He also extends gnosis to include the inner meanings of the Qurʾān,179 and to the signs or portents of God in creation and within the human being. Thus in his commentary on the words and in yourselves too [are signs], do you not see? [51:21], he cites a tradition according to which God has created within the soul of the son of Adam one thousand and eighty portents, three hundred and sixty of which are appar- ent and three hundred and sixty of which are hidden, and revealed only to a prophet or veracious person, and he adds:

Truly God, Exalted is He, has veiled the hearts of those who are heedless (ghāfilūn) from His remembrance due to their pursuance of lusts, which [prevent them] from perceiving these por- tents. However, He has unveiled them to the hearts of those who have gnosis of Him (ʿārifūn), thereby causing them to attain it [sincerity].

Tustarī shows gnosis (maʿrifa) to be beyond knowledge (ʿilm), as is indicated when he glosses the words, but only those understand them [the similitudes] who know [29:43] with the words, ‘that is, those who have knowledge (ʿilm) of God, Exalted is He, and especially those who have gnosis (maʿrifa) of Him.’ Moreover, he states that it is by granting gnosis that God elevates the rank of whomever He wills.180 This principle is endorsed when he comments on the words, And on the Heights are men [7:46], and indicates that another dimension of gnosis is the knowledge of the inner states of men:

The People of the Heights are the people of gnosis (maʿrifa). God, Exalted is He, said: …who know each by their mark [7:47]. Their standing is due to the honour (sharaf) they enjoy in the two abodes and with the inhabitants of both…[God] honoured them by allowing them to see into the secrets of His servants and their states in this world.

Tustarī also teaches that the attainment of maʿrifa is associated with the experience of suffering and need. For example, he states, ‘Truly affiiction is a doorway between the people of gnosis (ahl al-maʿrifa) and God, Mighty and Majestic is He’,181 and exhorts his disciples:

Say in your supplication (duʿāʾ): ‘O my Lord, if you cook me, I’ll bear it and if you roast me, I’ll be happy. It is essential that You be known, so favour me with gnosis (maʿrifa) of You’.182

 

179 IC, p. 6.

180 Tafsīr, 40:15.

181 Tafsīr, 29:1, 2.

182 Tafsīr, 21:83. See also the commentary on 47:38, where Tustarī states that gnosis of the secret [divine] mystery is to be found entirely through a sense of neediness (faqr) [for God].

Understanding (fahm) is, like gnosis (maʿrifa), shown in the Tafsīr to be an aspect of esoteric knowledge, though unlike gnosis its locus is the intellect (ʿaql), as can be seen in the many cases when Tustarī speaks of the three allied tendencies of the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ), the under- standing of the intellect (fahm al-ʿaql) and the discernment of the heart (fiṭnat al-qalb).183 In this sense, understanding is among the pre-eternal gifts from God which assist the human being in overwhelming the natural or lower self:

He [God] said, ‘Truly, We gave ascendancy (sallaṭnā) over your dense natural self to the subtle [substances] (laṭāʾif) of your spiritual self, intellect, heart, and understanding (fahm), all of which pre-existed as a momentous gift (mawhiba jalīla) before the creation appeared by a thousand years, and thus did they subdue the natural self.184

Often, however, the term ‘understanding’ (fahm) is employed in a particular sense that is associated with the Qurʾān,185 and indeed, in the Introduction to the Commentary there is a separate section devoted to those who ‘seek the understanding of the Qurʾān (fahm al-Qurʾān)’. In this section, understanding is shown to be, on the one hand, a full and wholehearted grasping of the meanings of the Qurʾān, and particularly of its commands and prohibitions, as when Tustarī states: ‘they have no way to Him save through the Qurʾān, and through understanding [all] that has been addressed to them therein concerning that which is required of them…’;186 On the other hand, understanding is often more specifically associated with the comprehension of the inner meanings of the Qurʾān. In the same section of his introduction, he speaks of God’s teaching the Qurʾān to His friends, both in its outer and inner aspects, and as was mentioned above, when asked by his disciples what he means by its ‘inner aspects’, he replies, ‘That is its understanding (fahm); and it is its understanding that is intended.’187 It will also be recalled that in Tustarī’s definition of four levels of meaning in the Qurʾān, he equated understanding (fahm) with the inward sense (bāṭin).188 Like gnosis, understand- ing is granted as a grace from God. Thus, commenting on the similitudes that We strike for the sake of mankind [29:43], he states:

The similitudes which God strikes for man are available for everyone [to see], since the evidences of [His] omnipotence (qudra) are [in themselves] proof of the [existence of] the Omnipotent. However, it is only His elect (khāṣṣa) who fully understand them. Thus, knowledge is rare and understanding granted by God (fiqh ʿan Allāh) even rarer.

However, the prerequisite for such a bestowal from God is fulfilment of what is commanded by Him, as Tustarī states:

There are those who have been granted understanding by virtue of their maintaining the practice of what is commanded and the avoidance of what is forbidden, both inwardly and outwardly, and by their affirmation of it [the Qurʾān] with the light of the insight of certainty (nūr baṣīrat al-yaqīn)…189

Interestingly, Tustarī also points out that human understanding (fahm) has limits — as does the intellect (ʿaql), which will be discussed below, whereas he does not mention limits with regard to gnosis (maʿrifa). In the Introduction to the Commentary he states about the Qurʾān, ‘It is that which is beautifully ordered in its outward form and profound in its inner meaning. It is, moreover, that before which all understanding (fahm) is powerless.’190 As we saw above, he also describes a state that is beyond understanding:

 

183 See section 1 and diagram above.

184 Tafsīr, 94:5. Note that the understanding of the intellect was also present with the spiritual self and the discernment of the heart at the Covenant of Alast, without the presence of the natural self. See above, p. xl.

185 As, for example, in the commentary on 2:269, 3:7, 7:146, 29:43.

186 IC, p. 5. See also the commentary on 19:61.

187 IC, p. 7.

188 IC, p. 2.

189 IC, p. 3, as also is indicated in the commentary on the Basmala, IC, pp. 8–9. Conversely, acting arrogantly can result in a person’s being deprived of the knowledge of the Qurʾān, as is shown in Tustarī’s commentary on 7:146.

190 IC, p. 1.

The one who is close (qarīb) [to God] has access to understanding (fahm), conjecture (wahm) and interpretation (tafsīr). But the one who is closest (aqrab) is beyond understanding, con- jecture and interpretation, and what is beyond that cannot be contained by expression (ʿibāra) or allusion (ishāra).191

The term ‘knowledge’ (ʿilm) is employed in a number of ways in Tustarī’s Tafsīr. In some instances, he uses it in a general way when it is opposed to ignorance, as when he comments on the words, And He appointed darknesses and light [6:1], and states that its inner meaning is that ‘light is knowledge (ʿilm) and darkness is ignorance (jahl)’;192 or when he comments on 35:32, Yet among them is the one who has wronged himself (ẓālim), the one who is moderate (muqtaṣid) and the one who is foremost in good deeds (ṣābiq), where he interprets the foremost as the one who is learned (ʿālim); the midmost as the one who is learning (mutaʿallim), and the one who has wronged himself as the one who is ignorant (jāhil). In another context he uses the metaphor of life and death, when he contrasts people’s knowledge with their ignorance of themselves (by which he means, perhaps, ignorance of their true human responsibility of realising the oneness of God):

God, Exalted is He, created all creatures. Then He brought them to life by the name of life. Then He caused them to die by their ignorance of themselves. Those who live through knowledge are the living; otherwise they are dead through their ignorance.193

Usually, however, Tustarī applies the word ʿilm to an ‘outer’ knowledge of the oneness of God, of His commands and prohibitions and of the Sunna of the Prophet, as is evidenced by his admonitions concerning the need to put such knowledge into practice. Indeed, he repeatedly asserts that without being implemented, knowledge is not merely without benefit, it is detrimental, as when he states:

This whole world consists of ignorance except for where knowledge is to be found. All knowl- edge is a testimony against [the one who possesses it], except for that which is acted upon.194

And again:

Every possessor of knowledge (ʿālim) who has been given knowledge of evil but does not avoid it is not a [true] possessor of knowledge. Similarly, whoever has been given knowledge of the acts of obedience but does not practise them is not a [true] possessor of knowledge.195

In a number of contexts, he also warns of the uselessness or danger of knowledge that is attained for purely worldly reasons. Here he is contrasting two attitudes among those who have an under- standing of the Qurʾān:

There are but two [kinds of] men who understand the Word [of God]: the first wants to under- stand so he can speak about it from a position [of authority], and his lot is nothing but that; the other hears it and is occupied with acting upon it to the exclusion of all else. This person is rarer than red sulphur (al-kibrīt al-aḥmar) and more precious than all that is dear.196

In another context, it is related that a certain Abū Ḥamza al-Ṣūfī visited Tustarī and discussed with him the subject of intoxication. He informed Tustarī that he had heard it said that intoxication was of four kinds: ‘The intoxication of drink, the intoxication of youth, the intoxication of wealth and the intoxication of authority.’ To this Tustarī replies:

There are two kinds of intoxication about which he did not inform you…: the intoxication of the scholar who loves this world, and the intoxication of the worshipper who loves to be noticed.197

The locus of knowledge is, according to Tustarī, the intellect (ʿaql):

 

191 Tafsīr, 2:260.

192 The verse is cited in his commentary on 3:106, in which he actually links knowledge to belief, and ignorance to disbelief.

193 Tafsīr, 16:21.

194 Tafsīr, 4:77.

195 Tafsīr, 11:88.

196 Tafsīr, 19:61.

197 Tafsīr, 16:67. See also his commentary on 23:17, where among seven veils which veil the believer from God, knowledge is named because of the vainglory it breeds among peers.

Know that God, Exalted is He, when He wished to make His knowledge apparent, deposited His knowledge in the intellect (ʿaql). Then He ruled that no one could have access to any of it [His knowledge] except through the intellect. Thus whoever has been deprived of his intellect has also been deprived of knowledge.198

Tustarī’s saying that no one can have access to God’s knowledge ‘except through the intellect’ is an indication that he understands the intellect to be more than simply a repository of knowledge. In fact, the intellect has its own particular function, as can be seen in the many instances when the intellect or ‘understanding of the intellect (fahm al-ʿaql)’ is associated with the spiritual self and the heart.

It was seen that the heart should not be allowed to acquiesce in the desires of the lower self,199 but this does not indicate a dual nature for the heart. The intellect, however, does have a dual nature, according to Tustarī. Included in the context of 33:4, God has not placed two hearts inside any man, is the following observation:

[That is, he does not have] one heart with which he approaches God, and another heart with which he manages the affairs of this world. [On the other hand], the intellect (ʿaql) does have two natures (ṭabʿān): a nature which is orientated towards this world, and a nature which is orientated towards the Hereafter (ākhira). The nature which is orientated towards the Hereafter is in coalition (muʾtalif) with the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ), whereas the worldly-orientated nature is in coalition with the lustful self (nafs shahwāniyya).

The side of the intellect that is oriented towards the Hereafter, therefore, has a key role to play in relation to the heart. In another part of his commentary on 3:28, Tustarī explains:

If [the servant] is involved in an act [motivated by] his lower self, and something comes to his heart which guides him to remembrance and obedience, that is the role played by the intellect (mawḍiʿ al-ʿaql).

This may be partly where the believer’s answerability will lie, when at the Resurrection he is ques- tioned in relation to what he owes his intellect.200

Yet, despite the important role of ʿaql, the servant must also recognise its limitations. In his discussion of the locks on the heart mentioned in 47:24, Tustarī explains that when God created the hearts He secured them with locks. The keys to those locks were the realities of faith, and the only ones who were vouchsafed the opening of their hearts through those realities were [God’s] friends (awliyāʾ), messengers (rusul) , and the veracious (ṣiddīqūn). The rest of people leave this world without the locks on their hearts being opened. He then adds:

The renunciants (zuhhād),201 devout worshippers (ʿubbād), and scholars (ʿulamāʾ) will leave this world with locked hearts because they sought the keys to them with the intellect (ʿaql), and thus strayed from the path. If only they had sought them by having recourse to divinely-bestowed success (tawfīq) and grace (faḍl), they would have attained them [the keys].

In his commentary on the words, And He creates what you do not know [about] [16:8], he states:

The inner meaning of these words [is that] God, Mighty and Majestic is He, has taught you to restrain yourself when your intellect (ʿaql) fails to grasp the effects of His creation and the multifarious dimensions of [His] knowledge, so that it [your intellect] does not meet it with denial, for He has created what you do not know about, neither you nor anyone else among His creatures except those whom God has taught, Mighty and Majestic is He.

 

198 Tafsīr, 16:12.

199 As was discussed above in relation to Adam’s banishment from Paradise, above p. xxxv.

200 See above, p. xxxvi.

201 The term zuhd is often translated as asceticism, though it is more precisely a renunciation and disdain for the world. Michael Cooperson, in his book Classical Arabic Biography: The Heirs of the Prophets in the Age of al-Maʾmūn (Cambridge, 2000), has coined the word ‘renunciant’ as a translation of the word zāhid (pl. zuhhād).

As can be seen from the two passages above, Tustarī teaches that there is a knowledge of unseen things or realities which God imparts not to all, but to a select few of His creatures.202 In another context, when he is commenting on those who are rooted in knowledge (al-rāsikhūna fī’l-ʿilm), mentioned in 3:7, he discusses three categories of knowledge and four different ways in which God imparts knowledge (and here the term knowledge [ʿilm] is clearly not being restricted to an outer level). He observes that those rooted in knowledge are shown to be exceptional because of their saying, according to the verse: ‘All is from our Lord’, and he then explains that they (the rāsikhūna fī’l-ʿilm) reveal three kinds of knowledge, since those who know may be designated in three ways: rabbāniyyūn, nurāniyyūn and dhātiyyūn. The precise nature of the connection Tustarī intends between each of these kinds of knowers and the divine lordliness, light and essence is not made clear by these allusive terms.203 However, given that he has specified about these three kinds of knowers of God that they say, ‘All is from our Lord’, we might render them somewhat freely as: ‘those whose knowledge derives from, or is through, the divine lordliness, light and essence’, respec- tively.204 Another approach would be to interpret these three designations of knowledge as being manifestations of the divine lordliness, light and essence.205 Tustarī discusses these three categories of knowers of God (rabbāniyyūn, nurāniyyūn and dhātiyyūn) once more in his commentary on 3:79, with a particular focus on the rabbānī. Here again the context suggests a kind of knowledge that is received directly from God, a knowledge through God’s knowledge, which Tustarī here subtly compares to prophetic knowledge. Thus he cites the Qurʾānic words, She asked, ‘Who told you this?’ He said, ‘I was told by the All-Knowing, the Aware’ [66:3], and adds, ‘Anyone who informs you of something which conforms to the Book and the Sunna, is ‘an informant’ (munbiʾ)’. Hence Tustarī is also suggesting that an aspect of the rabbānī knowledge is its transmission to others, and this is confirmed by a saying of ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib that he cites in this context, where the ‘knower whose knowledge derives from the divine lordliness’ (ʿālim rabbānī) is contrasted with ‘the one acquiring knowledge’ (mutaʿallim). Returning to his commentary on 3:7, we find that after Tustarī has discussed three of the highest modes of knowing, or of receiving knowledge from God, he then presents a different scheme comprising four modes of divinely-bestowed knowledge. These are: revelation (waḥy), theophany (tajallī), ‘knowledge directly bestowed by God’ (ʿindī) and ‘knowledge from the divine presence’ (ladunnī).

 

202 This was also mentioned above in relation to the understanding of the inner meanings of the Qurʾān. See above, p. xxvii.

203 Böwering’s translation of the three designations in his Mystical Vision (pp. 227–9) reads: ‘those who perceive God as Lord, those who perceive God as Light and those who perceive God as Essence’.

204 The idea of ‘knowing’ or ‘perceiving’ the essence of God is problematic, since not only theologians but most Sufis con- sider the divine essence to be unknowable. In other instances in the Tafsīr, when mentioning some connection with the divine essence, Tustarī appears to be cautious, as in his discussions of certainty (Tafsīr, 2:40 and 41), which will be discussed below. A passage quoted from Tustarī in the chapter on Tawḥīd in Qushayrī’s Risāla may be helpful here: ‘The essence of God may be characterised (mawṣūfa) through knowledge (ʿilm), not grasped through comprehension (ghayr mudraka bi’l-iḥāṭa), nor seen by human eyes (marʾīya bi’l-abṣār) in this world, though it is found (mawjūda) through the realities of faith (ḥaqāʾiq al-īmān), without any limit (ḥadd), comprehending (iḥāṭa) or indwelling (ḥulūl). In the Hereafter eyes will see it manifested in His dominion and omnipotence. He has veiled the creatures from gnosis (maʿrifa) of the profundity (kunh) of His essence, but He gives them an indication to it (dallahum ʿalayhi) by His signs…’ Qushayrī, Risāla, p. 565.

205 In Chapter 58 of the Kitāb al-Taʿarruf, ‘On Manifestation (or theophany, tajallī) and Veiling (istitār)’, Kalābādhī opens his discourse with the following saying attributed to Tustarī: ‘Manifestation has three ‘degrees’ (aḥwāl): a manifestation of [the] essence (dhāt), which is unveiling (mukāshafa); a manifestation of the attributes of the essence (ṣifāt al-dhāt), which is illumination (mawḍiʿ al-nūr ); and a manifestation of the decree [or power] of the essence (ḥukm al-dhāt), which is the Hereafter and what it entails.’ See also the Qūt al-qulūb, vol. 2, pp. 142–3, where Makkī states that God has ‘elevated His essence above hearts (qulūb) and [modes of] thought (afkār); it can neither be imagined through the intellect (ʿaql) nor depicted through thought (fikr) lest fanciful supposition (wahm) should take hold of it.’ He continues by saying that God’s essence cannot be contemplated by any thought, understood by any intellect or perceived by any comprehension, unless or until it be by a manifestation (tajallī) through His beneficence (iḥsān), as in the first place He had manifested [it] through His loving compassion (ḥanān). This manifestation, Makkī states, may be to His friends today (i.e. in this life) through the lights of certainty (anwār al-yaqīn) in [their] hearts, whereas it will be a visual beholding of the eyes (muʿāyanat al-abṣār) tomorrow (in the Hereafter).

Tustarī speaks of divinely-bestowed knowledge in other contexts, often using the image of light, where knowledge is particularly associated with guidance from God. For example, in the Introduction to the Commentary he is quoted as saying, ‘According to the measure of light which has been allotted to a person by God, Exalted is He, he will find guidance for his heart and insight (baṣīra).’206 In his commentary on the words, Those are upon guidance from their Lord [2:5], he states:

By the light of His guidance hearts witness Him in confident abandonment to Him due to a light from His light, by which He singled them out in His pre-eternal knowledge. Thus they do not speak except with guidance, and their inner perception is solely directed towards that guidance. So those who are guided by [this light] are never left by it. Thus they are [constant] witnesses to it because they are never absent from it.

Tustarī also speaks of his own experience of this direct guidance from God, as when he states, as noted above, ‘Indeed, God willing, I have been granted wisdom and [knowledge of] the unseen which I was taught from the unseen of His secret (min ghayb sirrihi), and thus He sufficed me from the need for all other knowledge…’207

In these passages, Tustarī is indicating a profound and arcane connection between the depths of human consciousness and God, and he consistently employs allusive terms to describe such mystical experiences, as, for example in the following statement:

In reality, the servant only beholds (yanẓuru) God by means of a subtle ‘substance’ (laṭīfa), through its connection to his heart. This subtle substance pertains to the attributes of the Essence of his Lord. It is neither brought into being (mukawwana), nor created (makhlūqa), neither conjunct [with God] (mawṣūla), nor cut off [from Him] (maqṭūʿa). It is a secret (sirr) from a secret to a secret, an unseen [mystery] (ghayb) from an unseen to an unseen.208

We find an analogous mode of expression in Tustarī’s discussions of certainty (yaqīn). Thus in the continuation of the above passage, he states:

Certainty (yaqīn) is through God, and the servant finds certainty due to a cause (sabab) that comes directly from Him to the servant, according to the measure of the gifts that God has apportioned him, and the wholeness of his innermost heart (suwaydāʾ qalbihi).

Tustarī discusses certainty in a number of passages in the Tafsīr, showing it to be beyond knowledge, and to be an advanced form of faith. Certainty also has degrees. Thus in the context of his commentary on Abraham’s request that God show him how He gives life to the dead [2:260], Tustarī is asked if Abraham was in doubt concerning his faith, and was therefore making this request of God in order to restore his faith, he answers:

His question was not out of doubt; he was merely asking for an increase in certainty (ziyāda yaqīn) to the faith he already had. Thus he asked for an unveiling of the cover of visual behold- ing with his physical eyes, so that by the light of certainty, his own certainty regarding God’s omnipotence might be increased, and [his certainty] regarding His creative [power] might be consolidated... [Therefore] the request for profound peace of mind (ṭumaʾnīna) signified a request for an increase in his certainty.

A detailed explanation of the degrees of certainty and its relation to faith is outlined when Tustarī comments on the word rahba, meaning ‘awe’ in 2:40. He observes that endurance and struggle are part of faith when it is ‘for the sake of ’ God (īmān li’Llāh). But when the heart ceases to have fear of any other than God, and is therefore in a state of true awe (rahba) towards Him, then the light of certainty is unveiled. Then the servant, who had been abiding in faith ‘for the sake of ’ God, attains the level of faith ‘through’ God (īmān bi’Llāh). At this level, his affirmation of the oneness of God has reached a point of stability, and his heart is in a state of tranquil and confident repose with God. Then he is taken to a deeper realisation of certainty when, as Tustarī explains, ‘the light of certainty (nūr al-yaqīn) unveils the knowledge of the eye of certainty (ʿilm ʿayn al-yaqīn) and

 

206 IC, p. 4.

207   Tafsīr, 2:3.

208   Tafsīr, 2:41.

this is the attainment of God.’209 But this certainty that leads to the eye of certainty is not something that is brought into being (mukawwan) or created (makhlūq); it is rather ‘a light from the light of the essence of God’. Here, lest he be misunderstood, Tustarī adds that what he means by this is not any ‘indwelling (ḥulūl), conjoining (jamʿ) or conjunction (ittiṣāl) with God; rather it is due to the true realisation of God’s oneness (tawḥīd) and obedience to God and His Prophet’. He further explains that according to the strength of the servant’s perception (baṣar) of God (i.e. his certainty), he will attain both awe (rahba) and full awareness of God (taqwā). We also find that he associates the ‘eye of certainty’ with a wholeness, an ‘all-ness’ or entirety of perception — on three occasions when he speaks of ʿayn al-yaqīn he follows it with the words wa kulliyyatihi.210 Tustarī sums up the importance of certainty at the end of this passage when he states:

Know that human beings will vary in rank on the Day of Resurrection according to the measure of the light of certainty that they possess. The weightier the certainty a person has, the heavier will his scales weigh [in his favour], even though there might [otherwise] be less in his scales.

F.            The Spiritual Path

1.      Precepts and proprieties

In the preceding sections we have discussed some passages in which Tustarī shows glimpses of the experiences of certainty and mystical unveiling that might be encountered by those who are advanced on the spiritual path. But in the Tafsīr we also find numerous passages in which he presents instruction for aspirants, to guide them from the most elementary stages through to the highest attainments of the Way.

All important is, of course, the opposing and controlling of the lower self (nafs) and its desires, which was alluded to in some passages on spiritual psychology discussed above. The following is an example of a specific exhortation to control the self (or lower or natural self), which constitutes a metaphorical interpretation of the words, It is He who has made the earth tractable for you…[67:15]:

God, Exalted is He, created the souls in a humble state. Whoever subdues (adhalla) his self by opposing it, actually saves it from temptations, tribulations and trials. However, whoever debases (adhalla) his self and follows it, will be brought to humiliation and destroyed by it.

In other passages, Tustarī interprets holy war (jihād) as the struggle or battle with the lower self. Thus, he states:

All forms of obedience to God involve struggle with the lower self (jihād al-nafs). There is no struggle easier than the struggle with swords, and no struggle harder than opposing the lower self.211

When someone asked him, ‘I have wealth and strength and I want to perform jihād. What do you command me to do?’ he answered:

Wealth is knowledge (ʿilm), strength is intention (nīya) and jihād is the struggle with the lower self (mujāhadat al-nafs).212

 

209          Here also Tustarī is clearly not using the term ʿilm in an outer sense. The juxtaposition of the ‘knowledge of certainty’ (ʿilm al-yaqīn) and the ‘eye of certainy’ (ʿayn al-yaqīn) have their origin in the Qurʾān 102:5 and 7, and in the latter verse the expression ʿayn al-yaqīn is actually used, and suggests a degree of certainty that is as direct and immediate as seeing with the eyes (see the passage cited above, p. xxxvii, regarding the meaning of the expression of ʿiyān al-ʿiyān derived from the same verbal root ʿ-y-n). In later Islamic mysticism a further degree of certainty was added, that of the ‘truth of certainty’ (ḥaqq al-yaqīn), an expression that is also to be found in the Qurʾān, 56:95 and 69:51. On the development of terminology denoting different levels of experienced or realised truth and certainty, see Nasrollah Pourjavady, ‘Parvāna u ātash: sayr-i taḥawwul-i yik tamthīl-i ʿirfānī dar adabiyyāt-i Fārsī’, Nashr-i Dānish, Year 16, no. 2 (1999), pp. 3–15.

210          Tafsīr, 2:40, 41; 102:7.

211          Tafsīr, 8:72.

212          Tafsīr, 16:110.

In another metaphorical interpretation, this time of the words, O Prophet, struggle against the disbelievers and the hypocrites [9:73], he states:

Struggle against your lower self with the sword of opposition! Place upon its [back] the bur- dens of remorse (nadam), and guide it through the desert plains of fear (khawf), so that you may turn it back to the path of repentance (tawba) and contrition (ināba). Repentance is not acceptable save from one who feels perplexed at his concerns, and grief-stricken at heart due to what has befallen him.

In the latter passage Tustarī has associated opposing the lower self with repentance. Like other Sufis, he sees repentance (tawba) as an initial step on the way,213 and so he says, ‘The first thing that a novice is instructed to do is to change his reprehensible actions into praiseworthy ones, which is repentance.’214 However, in his commentary on this same verse [9:112] he insists that repentance should be perpetual:

Of the rights [due to God] in this world there is none whose fulfilment is more incumbent upon humanity than repentance. Indeed it is obligatory [for them] at every moment and instant, and there is no punishment severer on them than the lack of knowledge of repentance.215

In a similar vein, he emphasises the need for vigilance and self scrutiny. For example, he states:

The real believer is the one who is not heedless of his lower self and his heart, but scrutinises his states (aḥwāl), and keeps a close watch over his moments (awqāt). He observes his increase [in a good state, distinguishing it] from his decline, and shows gratitude on seeing an increase, but when there is a decline devotes himself [to remedying it] and makes supplication.216

And elsewhere:

The capital (raʾs al-māl) of wisdom consists of three things: the first is disciplining the lower self (riyāḍat al-nafs) concerning things which are reprehensible; the second is emptying one’s heart of any love for carnal lusts (shahawāt); and the third is standing guard over one’s heart by warding off [unwarranted] thoughts which occur to it (khaṭarāt). Moreover, whoever is mindful of God when [unwarranted] thoughts [come upon] his heart, will have [God] protect him in his bodily acts.217

Tustarī supplies numerous practical rules and guidelines for the spiritual life. Like many Sufis, he recommends fasting, seclusion and the night vigil, though he also advocates silence:

All goodness comes together in four things: … an empty stomach, seclusion from people, the night vigil, and observing silence.218

He describes hunger as ‘one of God’s secrets’,219 and states, ‘God, Exalted is He, created the world and placed knowledge and wisdom within hunger, and placed ignorance and transgression within satiety.’220 Apart from these particularly rigorous disciplines, Tustarī generally advocates a simple life for aspirants. He warns against four traits that will prevent the aspirant from attaining anything: ‘If he likes to eat tasty food, dress in fine clothes, see his commands executed and his possessions increase.’221 When asked to define the proprieties of the Way he states:

 

213  In several Sufi manuals tawba is presented as the first stage on the Path, as for example in the Risāla of Qushayrī, where it is the first among the stations (maqāmāt), and the Manāzil al-sāʾirīn of ʿAbd Allāh al-Anṣārī (Cairo, 1962), where it is second only after awakening (yaqẓa).

214   Tafsīr, 9:112.

215   See above, p. xix, where Sarrāj, among others, suggested that it was Tustarī’s insistence on the obligatory nature of repentance, to which the person who had him expelled from Tustar took objection.

216   Tafsīr, 48:25.

217   Tafsīr, 2:269.

218   Tafsīr, 10:62.

219   Tafsīr, 7:31.

220   ibid.

221   Tafsīr, 15:3.

[It is that you should] let your food be barley, your sweetmeat dates, your condiment salt, your fat yoghurt. You should let your clothes be of wool, your houses be mosques, your source of light the sun, your lamp the moon, your perfume water, your splendour be in cleanliness and your adornment wariness (ḥadhr) [of God]. Moreover, you should let your work consist in being content (irtiḍāʾ) — or he said: contentment (riḍā) —, your journey’s provision (zād) be piety, your eating be at night, your sleep in the day, your speech be remembrance (dhikr), your resolve (ṣamma) and your aspiration (himma) be for contemplation (tafakkur), your reflective thought (naẓar) be to take example (ʿibra), and your refuge (maljaʾ) and the one who helps you (nāṣir) be your Lord. Persevere in this until you die.222

In the above passage Tustarī has combined instructions for the practical side of life as well as giving guidelines for spiritual conduct. The Tafsīr also contains a great number of short passages present- ing different prescriptions and formulae for the spiritual life. Just a few examples will be cited here:

The backbone (qiwām) of religion and this world is in three things: knowledge (ʿilm), propriety (adab) and initiative (mubādara). However, the ruin of religion and this world comes from three things: ignorance (jahl), folly (khurq) and laziness (kasal).223

There are four things which are among the buttresses (daʿāʾim) of religion: to uphold the truth even against your own self and others; to renounce falsehood in yourself or others; to love people who are obedient to God and to detest those who disobey Him.224

Here he lists six vices and six virtues:

The servant will not get the taste of faith until he quits six vices [lit. character traits, khiṣāl]: he should quit what is forbidden (ḥarām), illegal possessions (suḥut), what is dubious (shubha), ignorance (jahl), intoxicant[s] (muskir), and ostentation (riyāʾ); [on the other hand] he should adhere to [six virtues]: knowledge (ʿilm), putting his actions right (taṣḥīḥ al-ʿamal), integrity of heart (naṣḥ bi’l-qalb), veracity of the tongue (ṣidq bi’l-lisān), correct conduct (ṣalāḥ) in associat- ing with people, and sincerity (ikhlāṣ) in the way he deals with his Lord.225

And here he outlines the fundamentals of worship:

The basis of worship is the profession of God’s oneness (tawḥīd) along with living according to what is lawful, while avoiding the harm [of others] (kaff al-adhā). Furthermore, a person can- not accomplish living by what is lawful without abandoning the harm of others, and likewise he does not abandon causing harm save through living by what is lawful. If you know how to abide by what is lawful, how to abandon causing harm, and the [correct] intention (nīya) behind actions, as well as you know the Fātiḥa, then your faith will become pure, as will your hearts and bodily members. Indeed, these are the fundamentals.226

And here he defines three modes of excellence:

The most ascetic (azhad) of people are those who have the purest source of food; the most devout (abʿad) of people are those who are most earnest in their effort to uphold His commandments and prohibitions; and the most beloved (aḥabb) of them to God are those who are the sincerest (anṣaḥuhum) towards His creatures.227

Noticeable among these precepts and guidelines is Tustarī’s concern with correct conduct towards others, and avoidance of harm to them. In other passages he specifically focuses on this. For exam- ple, he states:

 

222 Tafsīr, 7:172.

223 Tafsīr, 4:171.

224          ibid.

225          Tafsīr, 48:25.

226          Tafsīr, 3:64. The Fātiḥa is the first sūra of the Qurʾān, which is recited in each rakʿa of the canonical prayer.

227          Tafsīr, 6:52.

The earth will not consume the body of anyone who keeps the following three qualities: refrain- ing from harming people, bearing the harm that comes from them and doing good to them.228

And here he states the same idea, this time using the earth as a simile.

Know that the servant does not attain true faith (ḥaqīqat al-īmān) until he becomes as the earth for the servants of God — it endures the suffering that they [impose] upon it and they [derive] benefits from it.229

Tustarī also warns more than once against judging or criticising others. For example, he observes:

No one looks upon the slips of [other] people except an ignorant wrongdoer, and no one [may] make known that which he has looked upon [of the faults of others] except God.230

In his commentary on the words and shun much suspicion [49:12], he further warns against hold- ing a ‘bad opinion’ (sūʾ al-ẓann) of others, and when asked to explain in this context a ḥadīth of the Prophet, ‘Be on your guard with people, [by holding a] bad opinion (sūʾ al-ẓann)’, he replies:

The meaning of this is [that protection from people] is [through holding a] bad opinion of yourself, not of other people. In other words, accuse your own self for not treating them fairly in your dealings with them.

He continues with an explanation of the psychology of ‘bad opinion’, in which he mentions not only holding a bad opinion of other human beings, but also of God:

Bad opinion comes from ignorance and pertains to the natural self (nafs al-ṭabʿ). The most ignorant person is the one who estranges his heart [from God] without being aware of it. Indeed, God, Exalted is He, has said: And that suspicion of yours which you held about your Lord has ruined you, so you have become among the losers [41:23]. Certainly, the servant is deprived of blessed provision and prayer at night because of bad opinion.

The rewards for holding a ‘good or beautiful opinion’ (ḥusn al-ẓann) of God, however, are immense, as Tustarī shows. He discusses ḥusn al-ẓann in two quite different ways. The first occurs in the context of a discussion of God’s forgiveness in the commentary on 4:48:

If no one has any grievance against him, and his sins are only between him and God, Exalted is He, indeed He forgives those sins, for He is the Magnanimous, the Generous. It has been related from the Prophet  that he said, ‘A servant may be brought forward on the Day of Resurrection and directed to the Fire, but then he will say, ‘This is not in accordance with what I supposed [my outcome would be].’231 Then God, Mighty and Majestic is He, will ask, ‘What was your opinion of Me?’ to which he will reply, ‘That You would forgive me’, upon which God, Mighty and Majestic is He, will say, ‘Truly I have forgiven you’, and He will direct him to Paradise.

Here, ḥusn al-ẓann is being shown as the means to salvation in the Hereafter, but in another context in the Tafsīr, ḥusn al-ẓann is shown to be the means to the most immediate experience of proximity with God. This particular, mystical understanding of ḥusn al-ẓann is presented in the poem which was already cited above, the first line of which indicates that ‘good opinion’ can be a means to ‘direct or face-to-face encounter’ (kifāḥ) with God, and that it traverses every veil. The first two couplets of this allusive and evocative poem may be rendered as follows:

The abundant sufficiency (kifāyāt) of direct encounter [with God] (kifāḥ), [attained] through my good opinion of Him,

Is like the spider’s web covering the cave’s entrance.

Good opinion has traversed every veil,

Good opinion has traversed beyond the light of fire232

 

228  Tafsīr, 76:5.

229  Tafsīr, 9:71.

230  Tafsīr, 83:1. See also the commentary on 49:12.

231  lit. ‘This is not in accordance with my opinion (mā kadhā ẓannī).’

232  The poem follows the commentary on 2:260.

The meaning of ḥusn al-ẓann here is not clear, though it might be described as the soul’s being predisposed for complete reliance upon, and confidence in, God. This may also be seen in another context where Tustarī links ḥusn al-ẓann with certainty (yaqīn).233 When asked how one might know the soundness of a person’s certainty he replies, ‘By the strength of his confidence (thiqa) in God, Exalted is He, and his good opinion (ḥusn al-ẓann) of Him’.234 Ḥusn al-ẓann is thus the soul’s reaching a state of complete readiness, openness and receptivity, a state in which God may suffice for it in bringing it to Him. So Tustarī cites a tradition of the Prophet:

‘Yesterday I saw an amazing thing; a servant between whom and God there was a veil, but then when his good opinion of God appeared, He drew him in from behind the veil’.235

2.     Emulation and aspiration

Tustarī often speaks of the importance of emulation (iqtidāʾ) without always mentioning who is to be emulated and whose example is to be followed. Clearly, the first example to be followed is the Prophet through his Sunna, as Tustarī emphasises on many occasions, including the following:

The believer has one face, without a reverse side; he makes repeated [advances] and never retreats. You will see him striving for the cause of God’s religion and His obedience, upholding God’s oneness and the following of His Prophet , constantly making humble entreaty of God and seeking refuge in Him in the hope of connecting to Him through following [exemplary guidance] (iqdidāʾ).236

However, in the following passage he does not state who is to be followed:

The livelihood (ʿaysh) of angels is in obedience (ṭāʿa); the livelihood of the prophets is in knowledge and waiting for relief; and the livelihood of the veracious (ṣiddīqūn) is in emula- tion (iqtidāʾ).237

While Tustarī shows the Prophet to be the supreme model for the believers, he also describes others whom he wishes to be seen as examples to be emulated. In some cases, he indicates their position in the spiritual hierarchy among successors to the Prophet, as when he observes that the veracious (ṣiddīqūn) are ‘heirs to the secrets of their [the prophets’] sciences’.238 They have attained the stage in which they speak only in four ways: ‘in God, through God, for God and with God’. He understands the foremost mentioned in 56:10, as follows:

They are those for whom God’s election (ikhtiyār) and special friendship (wilāya) preceded them before they were even brought into existence. The ones who are brought near [to God] [56:11] are in stations of proximity (manāzil al-qurb), and [enjoy] the ease of intimacy (rawḥ al-uns). They are the ones who were the foremost (sabaqū) in this life. The prophets were the foremost in having faith in God. The veracious (ṣiddīqūn) and martyrs (shuhadāʾ) among the Companions and others were the foremost in having faith in the prophets.

In another passage it is those who are sincere and mindful of God (al-mukhliṣūn al-muttaqūn) who are portrayed as the best among the community:

The best among people are the Muslims, the best among Muslims are the [true] believers, the best among believers are the scholars who act upon their knowledge, the best among those who act [upon their knowledge] are the fearful (khāʾifūn), and the best among the fearful are those who are sincere and mindful of God (al-mukhliṣūn al-muttaqūn), whose sincerity and mindfulness of God remains with them up until their death.239

 

233          And it is worth noting that the poem itself occurs as part of Tustarī’s lengthy commentary on 2:260, which discusses Abraham’s desire for an increase in certainty. See above, IT, p. xlviii.

234          Tafsīr, 2:40.

235          Tafsīr, 2:260.

236          Tafsīr, 22:11.

237          Tafsīr, 2:197.

238          Tafsīr, 58:22.

239          Tafsīr, 48:26.

A part of emulation is the desire to be close to those who have attained proximity with God, to whom Tustarī often refers as the ‘friends’ (awliyāʾ) of God. Thus, in his commentary on part of the prayer of Solomon, and include me, by Your mercy, among Your righteous servants [27:19], he explains:

This means, ‘Grant me proximity to Your friends (awliyāʾ) so that I may be among their com- pany, even though I have not reached their station (maqām)’.

We have seen also that in his commentary on 7:172, Tustarī explains that the seekers (murīdūn) were created from the light of Adam , while the [divinely] sought (murādūn) were created from the light of Muḥammad . Following this statement he observes:

Thus, the generality among people live under the mercy of the people of proximity (ahl al-qurb) and the people of proximity live under the mercy of the one brought near (al-muqarrab) — With their light shining forth before them and on their right [57:12].240

Apart from passages which exhort seekers to emulate, or keep close to, those who have attained spiritual perfection, friendship and proximity with God, there are also passages which describe qualities and virtues to which they should aspire, such as veracity (ṣidq),241 patience or forbearance (ṣabr),242 and humility. On the virtue of the latter he states that ‘pure servanthood is self-abasement (dhull) and humble submission (khushūʿ)’,243 while in his commentary on the story of Korah (Qārūn) he states:

The fortunate person (saʿīd) is he who averts his eye from [looking upon] his states and acts; to him is opened the way of receiving grace (faḍl) and being gracious to [others] (ifḍāl), whilst keeping sight of God’s favour in [the accomplishment of] all acts.244

Closely related to humility is poverty (faqr), by which is not meant the outer poverty of not owning things (discussed above), but an inner sense of poverty or utter neediness (iftiqār) vis-à-vis God’s infinite wealth, plenitude and lack of need (istighnāʾ). Thus when he comments on the words O mankind! It is you who stand in need of God [35:15], Tustarī states:

That is, ‘You [depend] upon Him in your very selves, for truly when God created all creatures, He imposed upon His servants neediness (faqr) for Him, while He is the Rich and Independ- ent (al-Ghanī). Furthermore, whoever claims to be wealthy has been veiled from God, Mighty and Majestic is He. On the other hand, whoever shows his need for God, will find that He joins his need to His wealth.

In his commentary on the words: You will not attain mindfulness of God until you expend of that which you love [3:92], Tustarī finds an opportunity to discuss the quality or state of love, which he illustrates with a story about Jesus, who successively meets three groups of people. The first, with emaciated bodies and pale faces, when questioned by Jesus, explain that their state has been brought about through the fear (khawf) of God. He tells them that they will be granted safety from that which they fear. The second group of people he encounters are even more emaciated than the first. They inform him that their state is due to their yearning (shawq) for God, and he tells them that God has made it incumbent upon Himself to grant them that which they long for. Finally he comes across a group who are even more emaciated, but whose faces are radiant like full moons. When questioned by Jesus, they reveal that their condition is due to love (ḥubb). Jesus tells them three times that they are the people of proximity (muqarrabūn). Tustarī then adds, ‘Thus, whoever loves God, Exalted is He, is one of the people of proximity, for if anyone loves something, they hasten towards it.’

 

240  The ‘one brought near’ being Muḥammad.

241  e.g. Tafsīr, 33:8 and 19:52.

242  Tafsīr, 103:3, for example.

243  Tafsīr, 35:15.

244  Tafsīr, 28:78.

3.      Trust, mindfulness of God and sincerity

Three spiritual qualities or virtues which Tustarī particularly stresses in the Tafsīr are: trust, that is, complete trust in God (tawakkul); ‘mindfulness’ or ‘full awareness of God’ (taqwā); and sincerity (ikhlāṣ), which means making all one’s actions purely for God, and freeing oneself from all other than Him. These three qualities are themselves often linked both to each other and to other quali- ties, as we shall see.

Tustarī defines trust (tawakkul) as the first of four pillars of faith,245 and as the last of seven ‘lines’ of faith that God inscribes upon the hearts of His friends.246 One of his longest discussions of tawakkul occurs in his commentary on the words, So turn away from them, and put your trust in God [4:81]. Here, he defines trust as ‘a means of livelihood (ʿaysh) for those who possess it’, and further states that the divine omnipotence (qudra) will not become apparent save to the one who has complete trust. In the section on mystical theology above, mention was made of Tustarī’s teaching that the downfall of human beings lies in reliance on their own devising and management (tadbīr), and that they must therefore look only to God for the management of their affairs. This latter involves their realising that all power (ḥawl) and strength (quwwa) belongs to God. In this same discussion of trust in the context of 4:81, he explains that it involves three things: ‘submission of the body in servanthood, attachment of the heart to the divine lordliness (rubūbiyya), and disclaiming all power and strength.’ He also shows trust to be closely related to the state of sukūn, that is, the servant’s tranquil reliance on God and complete acquiescence in what God has destined for him. He states that trust has a thousand ranks, the lowest of which is the ability to walk upon air.247 When asked how that level might be reached, he states:

The first thing is gnosis (maʿrifa), then affirmation (iqrār), then the profession of God’s oneness (tawḥīd), then submission (islām), then the perfection of faith (iḥsān), then the committing of one’s affairs [to God] (tafwīḍ), then trust (tawakkul), and finally the state of tranquil reliance (sukūn) on God, Mighty and Majestic is He, in every situation.248

Elsewhere Tustarī shows tawakkul to be connected to other qualities and capacities. For example, when asked about the reality (ḥaqīqa) of trust, he replies: ‘It is to be at ease (istirsāl) with whatever God wants’.249 Hence it is close to the quality of contentment (riḍā). This connection is clearly illustrated by the following statement:

God is content with your performing for Him just a day’s worship at a time, so be content with Him for the provision you receive a day at a time.250

A similar admonition is to be found when Tustarī discusses different ways in which the servants of God might worship, ending with the one who worships with equity or justice (inṣāf), that is, one who does full justice to worship. Asked to explain inṣāf in worship, he answers:

It is that none of your bodily members moves unless it be for God. Furthermore, when you ask Him for the next day’s provision your equity has left you, for the heart cannot bear two concerns (hammayn).251

In other words, Tustarī is here associating tawakkul, that is, not asking for the next day’s provision, with equity, which is acting only for God and being concerned with none other than Him, and this, as we shall see, is also how he understands sincerity. Tustarī also links tawakkul with taqwā (mindfulness of God), when he states, ‘Trust in God is not admissible from anyone except those

 

245          Tafsīr, 3:200. The other three pillars are complete submission (istislām) to God’s commands; contentment (riḍā) with what God has preordained, and gratitude (shukr) for His blessings. These, Tustarī adds, are accompanied by mindfulness of God (taqwā).

246          Tafsīr, 58:22.

247          This is another indication that Tustarī did not attach any particular importance to charismatic gifts. See above, p. xx.

248          Again, this occurs in the commentary on 4:81.

249          Tafsīr, 12:67.

250          Tafsīr, 51:22.

251          Tafsīr, 36:11.

who are mindful of God, and mindfulness of God is not acceptable except with trust in God.’252 In another context, Tustarī compares mindfulness of God (taqwā) and certainty (yaqīn) to the two pans of a pair of scales, while trust (tawakkul) is the pointer which indicates increase and decrease in the other two.253

Many passages in the Tafsīr emphasise the importance of taqwā, and the need to ‘fear’ or be fully aware and mindful of God. For example, in his lengthy commentary on the words, So fear Me, O people of pith [2:197] he states:

Whoever hopes for God’s favour (karāma), Mighty and Majestic is He, should be mindful of Him, for truly it is through mindfulness of God that [the servant] may attain His favour and admittance into Paradise, abide in His vicinity, and triumph with a tremendous victory.

Taqwā is, in Tustarī’s words, ‘the best travelling companion leading to the remembrance (dhikr) of God’.254 Elsewhere, he links taqwā to sincerity (ikhlāṣ), as when he states in a passage cited above: ‘the best among the fearful are those who are sincere and mindful of God (al-mukhliṣūn al-muttaqūn) whose sincerity and mindfulness of God remains with them up until their death.’255

The different resonances of the Arabic word used for sincerity, ikhlāṣ, which in its root (kh-l-ṣ) can have the meaning of both ‘being pure and unmixed’ and ‘becoming free of ’, are illustrated in Tustarī’s discussions of the term in his Tafsīr. The importance of this quality, state or station is emphasised in many contexts.256 For example, among the list of aphorisms which appear at the end of the Tafsīr is the recommendation, ‘You must have sincerity (ikhlāṣ) to keep you safe from [satanic] whispering’.257 Elsewhere, he recommends, ‘Seek sincerity with an [inner] intention, for only the sincere can recognise ostentation (riyāʾ).258 In another context he warns that discernment (fiṭna) is not attained through effort, but by acting with sincerity for God.259

We have seen that sincerity (ikhlāṣ) is linked to mindfulness or full awareness of God (taqwā), but sincerity is also linked to both faith and certainty. For example, in his commentary on the words, And they were only commanded to worship God, devoting religion purely to Him [98:5], Tustarī states:

All knowledge is concerned with acts, until the person attains sincerity (ikhlāṣ). Then when he reaches sincerity, he will attain profound peace (ṭumaʾnīna). For the one whose knowledge [has become] certainty (yaqīn) and whose works are [done in] sincerity will find that God removes from him three things: anxiety (jazaʿ), ignorance (jahl) and action (ʿamal), and will grant him patience (ṣabr) in exchange for anxiety, knowledge in exchange for ignorance, and the abandonment of choice in exchange for action — but this will only be the case for those who are fully aware of God (muttaqūn).

Or again in the following passage, where sincerity is shown to be a manifestation, fruit or branch of certainty:

Certainty (yaqīn) is the heart of faith, patience (ṣabr) is the backbone of faith, and sincerity (ikhlāṣ) is the perfection of faith, for through sincerity the servant reaches true affirmation

 

252  Tafsīr, 65:2. See also 4:81.

253  Tafsīr, 67:2.

254  Tafsīr, 2:197

255  Tafsīr, 48:26.

256  Tustarī does not define these qualities or virtues as being either a ‘state’ (ḥāl) or ‘station’ (maqām), perhaps because the difference between these two as technical terms had not yet been generally or formally established in Sufism. On the emergence of a systemisation of states and stations in Islamic mysticism see Nasrollah Pourjavady, ‘Nahj al-khāṣṣ (atharī az Abū Manṣūr-i Iṣfahānī)’, Taḥqīqāt-i Islāmī, Year 3 (1988–9), no. 2, pp. 94–149, and especially pp. 104ff. Two early mystics who are accredited with developing a scheme of stages in the spiritual path are Shaqīq Balkhī (d. 195/810), whose short treatise, the Adab al-ʿibādāt, concerned the waystations (manāzil) of the path, see P. Nwyia, Exégèse coranique,

pp. 213–6; and Abū Saʿīd al-Kharrāz (d. 286/899 or earlier) who spoke of progress through different stations (maqāmāt), for which see Iṣfahānī, Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ, vol. 10, p. 248.

257  See p. 321.

258  Tafsīr, 7:29.

259  Tafsīr, 19:61.

(taṣdīq). Furthermore, through true affirmation he attains realisation (taḥqīq), and through realisation he reaches God (al-Ḥaqq). Sincerity is the fruit of certainty, for certainty is witness- ing (mushāhada) in the innermost secret (sirr)…260

In his commentary on the words, Then they pray to God, becoming sincere [in their] faith in Him

[10:22], Tustarī states:

Sincerity (ikhlāṣ) is witnessing (mushāhada). The light of the heart is in two things: in its root, it is faith (īmān) and in its branch (farʿ), it is sincerity. Sincerity is a matter of great importance (khaṭar) and the one who possesses it is wary lest his sincerity should not prevail till death…

He presents a number of different definitions of sincerity, or the way that sincerity may be attained, some of which appear straightforward, as when he says, ‘whoever subdues his lower self through propriety serves God, Mighty and Majestic is He, with true sincerity (ikhlāṣ).’261 Other definitions may be less simple than they appear, as when he interprets the words, Say ‘Indeed I have been commanded to worship God devoting [my] religion purely to Him’ [39:11] thus:

Sincerity (ikhlāṣ) is responding (ijāba), and whoever has no response has no sincerity.

Presumably the response is to God’s command that worship should be devoted solely to him. Tustarī then explains what this implies:

The astute (akyās) reflected upon sincerity and did not find anything except the following: that everything the servant does, whether done in secret or openly, is for God alone, Mighty and Majestic is He, and is mingled neither with desire nor with the self.

Similarly, commenting on the words And they were only commanded to worship God, devoting religion purely to Him [98:5], he states:

Sincerity has three facets: worshipping purely for God (ikhlāṣ al-ʿibāda li’Llāh), acting purely for Him (ikhlāṣ al-ʿamal lahu), and [keeping one’s] heart purely for Him (ikhlāṣ al-qalb lahu).

4.     Remembrance of God (dhikr)

As can be seen, these virtues involve the seeker being wholly centred upon, aware of, and devoted to God, all of which are in fact aspects of the remembrance of God (dhikr). Tustarī not only shows the remembrance of God to be an essential key to the mystical path, he also describes it as the very ‘sustenance of the spiritual self and the intellect, just as it is the sustenance of the angels.’262 When discussing the nature of the ‘provision’ from God mentioned in 34:39, he states:

Provision (rizq) is of two kinds: the provision that is remembrance for the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ), the intellect (ʿaql) and the heart (qalb), which is like the sustenance of the angels — their very life (ʿaysh) is in remembrance, and were this to be withheld from them they would perish. The other kind of provision is that which is eaten, drunk and so on for the benefit of one’s physical nature.

Elsewhere, commenting on [those who] remember God frequently [26:227], he explains:

God, Exalted is He, created the innermost secret (sirr) and made its life consist in His remem- brance. He created the outward self (ẓāhir) and made its life consist in praising (ḥamd) and thanking (shukr) Him. He appointed for both of them duties (ḥuqūq), which are works of obedience (ṭāʿa).

This emphasis on the importance of remembrance of God may well have its roots in the instruction given to the young Sahl by his uncle Muḥammad b. Sawwār that he should recite to himself eleven times a day, ‘God is with me, God is watching over me, God is my Witness’. We find this teaching

 

260          In a short section on faith at the end of his commentary on Sūra 3.

261          Tafsīr, 7:176.

262          Tafsīr, 78:11.

echoed more than once in the Tafsīr, as when, in the context of the words and the men who remember God often and the women who remember God often [33:35], he states:

The one who observes true remembrance is he who is aware that God witnesses him. He per- ceives Him with his heart as being close to him, and therefore feels shame before Him. Then he gives Him priority over himself and over everything else in every situation.

Another instance is when Tustarī is asked to explain remembrance, and answers:

It is the realisation (taḥqīq) of the knowledge that God, Exalted is He, witnesses you, and it is that you see Him close to you with your heart. Thus, you feel shame before Him and give Him priority over yourself in all your affairs.263

In these two cases, remembrance has an ethical dimension, or function, and this is also indicated when, in the context of this same verse, Tustarī is asked to explain the meaning of the Prophet’s words, ‘The world is accursed and what it contains is accursed, save the remembrance of God (dhikr Allāh), Exalted is He’, and replies:

His saying ‘the remembrance of God’ here means the abstinence from what is not lawful, that is, when something unlawful comes his way he remembers God, Exalted is He, and he knows that God is watching him, so he avoids that unlawful thing.264

However, remembrance also clearly has a contemplative dimension, as is shown when Tustarī explains the inner meaning of the command, Glorify the name of your Lord Most High [87:1]:

It [means] to proclaim His transcendence above having rivals (aḍdād) and equals (andād). This is its outward meaning. In its inner meaning it is to witness Him through remembrance (dhikr) during the ritual prayer, without witnessing anything else.265

Of course, this is not intended to imply that remembrance should be limited to the occasion of ritual prayer. Tustarī advises that the remembrance of God should be with His servants at every moment, a point which he is at pains to emphasise when he gives his disciples the following admonishment:

In truth I say to you without any falsehood, in certainty without a doubt, that any person who spends a breath in other than God’s remembrance does so while being heedless of God, Mighty and Majestic is He.266

The same principle is here expressed in another way;

There is not a servant who desired God with a genuine resolve, without everything vanishing from his [consciousness] besides Him.267

In the following passage Tustarī indicates the profundity of remembrance, employing different forms of the verbal root dh-k-r:

The life of the spirit (ḥayāt al-rūḥ) is in the remembrance [of God] (dhikr), the life of remem- brance is in the one who remembers (dhākir), and the life of the one who remembers is in the One who is remembered (madhkūr).268

Finally, Tustarī discusses the highest level of remembrance, which is purified of all other than God. Here he is taking up the word ‘remember’ as a keynote from a verse speaking of Abraham’s remembrance of the Abode [38:46]:

 

263 Tafsīr, 7:205.

264  ibid. Again, this is reminiscent of the admonition given to Tustarī by his uncle. See above, p. xv.

265  One is reminded of the definition of spiritual virtue (iḥsān) in the famous ḥadīth of Gabriel, which is explained as ‘To worship God as if you see Him, for if you do not, He surely sees You.’ The ḥadīth is listed in Abū Zakariyya Yaḥyā al- Nawawī, An-Nawawī’s Forty Ḥadīth, selected and translated by Ezzeddin Ibrahim and Denys Johnson-Davies (Lebanon, 1980), pp. 28–31, and also in the ‘Kitāb al-Īmān’ in the Ṣaḥīḥ collections of both Bukhārī and Muslim. Qushayrī discusses some spiritual implications of this ḥadīth in the twenty-fourth chapter of his Risāla, ‘Bāb al-murāqaba’ (Cairo, 1966),

pp. 405–7; trans. Knysh, pp. 202–3.

266  Tafsīr, 7:205.

267  Tafsīr, 73:9.

268  Tafsīr, 58:22.

He [God] purified Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac from the remembrance of this world through a remembrance of Him, purely for [His sake] (khāliṣatan), not for the attainment of recompense. Neither did they witness themselves in it [their remembrance]; rather, they remembered Him through Him and for Him. Furthermore, the one who remembers God through God is not like the one who remembers God through the remembrance of God.

The state which Tustarī is here describing, in which the mystic, represented by Abraham and his sons, is totally freed of himself to the point that it can be said that he remembers God through God, was defined by other mystics as the state of annihilation from self (fanāʾ) and subsistence in God (baqāʾ), and is now generally understood in Sufism as attainment of the ultimate state on the spiritual path.269

vii.                    Conclusion

It is hoped that the foregoing discussion will have given the reader some idea of the depth and scope of doctrines presented in Tustarī’s Tafsīr. As can be seen, they range from theological discussions of the divine attributes, through cosmological reflections on the Prophet’s time alone with God in pre-eternity and the derivation of the two worlds from the well-spring of the Muḥammadan Light, to eschatalogical portrayals of what is in store for those who are blessed and those who are doomed in the Hereafter; and from glimpses of the highest experiences of realised mystics, through descrip- tions of spiritual virtues, to practical guidelines for the way of life of intitiates, and instructions for their conduct on the path. Although the profoundest moments of illumination and intimacy with God are for the most part allusively expressed in the Tafsīr, we find that Tustarī articulates and expounds in a clear and precise manner his understanding of spiritual psychology and the workings of the inner world of the human being, with its two ‘sides’, the one tending toward the earth and the realm of darkness, namely man’s lower self (nafs) along with his basic human nature (ṭabʿ ), and the other tending toward heaven and the realm of light, namely man’s spirit (rūḥ), heart (qalb) and intellect (ʿaql). Likewise he shows how these two sides can and should be brought into coalition through the remembrance of God.

During this period, knowledge of the states (aḥwāl) and stations (maqāmāt) of the spiritual path had not generally been subjected to any formal systematisation in Sufism,270 yet Tustarī presents numerous discussions of topics such as repentance (tawba), spiritual poverty or neediness for God (faqr), patience (ṣabr), contentment (riḍā), complete trust in God (tawakkul), mindfulness of God (taqwā) and sincerity (ikhlāṣ), and in one or two instances incorporates some of these into a scheme of progress through spiritual stages.271 Many of his sayings on these topics, which he regarded as necessary virtues or attributes for spiritual wayfarers, were to be cited in the manuals and treatises of later Sufi authors.

In the Tafsīr, Tustarī’s teachings are inevitably dispersed through his interpretations of different Qurʾānic verses. However, when these fragments and gems of wisdom are brought together and col- lated, we find, as Böwering has noted, a ‘mystical synthesis of ideas that is marked by its coherence and specific terminology’, and we can get a clear impression of Tustarī’s ‘mystical world view’.272 A thread that runs consistently through his teachings is the theme of light, which represents for him divine guidance at all its levels: the Qurʾān is light; the Prophet, in his primordial existence was light, and continues to be light, radiating the light of faith and guidance to believers and to the world, and it is a light from the light of the essence of God that brings the mystic to the highest level of certainty and the ‘attainment’ of God.

 

269          In his Tafsīr, Tustarī does not use these two terms fanāʾ and baqāʾ as they are frequently applied by Sufis to the concom- mitent states of ‘annihilation from self ’ and ‘subsisting in God’. However, he does use the term baqāʾ as a permanent subsisting with God in Paradise, as for example in his commentary on 43:69 and 70. See above, p. xxxvi, and n. 143. Abū Saʿīd al-Kharrāz is accredited with being the first mystic to have discussed fanāʾ and baqāʾ as mystical states.

270          See above, n. 256.

271          e.g. Tafsīr, 4:81.

272          Böwering, Mystical Vision, p. 265.

Tustarī’s mystical world view, or perhaps we might call it his ‘spiritual universe’, is firmly framed within his theological, cosmological and eschatological beliefs, and this is, as he sees it, precisely the challenge which faces all human beings, and which he encourages aspiring mystics to take up. God is the Transcendent, the Unknowable, yet as he says, ‘Truly behind the names and attributes are attributes which no comprehension can penetrate, for God is a blazing fire and is inaccessible. Yet we have no option but to plunge in [and try to reach Him].’273 Our destiny is pre-determined for us by God, and it is actually and only through our knowledge that He is in control of all things, our acceptance of what He has destined for us with contentment (riḍā), and our complete trust (tawakkul) and tranquil acquiescence (sukūn) in Him, that we can be freed from the veil of our own management of things (tadbīr).274 In the Tafsīr, Tustarī reminds us that at the Covenant of Alast all human beings bore witness to God’s lordship, and that all human beings will definitely be answer- able in the Hereafter for the extent to which they have kept that Covenant (i.e. the profession of God’s oneness). The intense awareness of those two moments of encounter with God, one which took place in pre-eternity and the other that is to come, place the mystic in the immediacy of the present moment in which He stands before his Lord.

Annabel Keeler November 2010

 

273  Tafsīr, 7:180. See the discussion of this saying in T. Mayer, ‘Theology and Sufism’, in T. Winter, Cambridge Companion to Classical Islamic Theology, p. 263.

274  Tafsīr, 32:5; also 7:33 and 16:97.

The Commentary

Introduction to the Commentary

In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.

May God bless our master Muḥammad, his Family and Companions, and grant them peace.

In an authorised oral transmission in the house of Yūsuf, I was informed by the Shaykh and preacher Abū Naṣr Aḥmad b. ʿAbd al-Jabbār b. Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Abī al-Naṣr al-Baladī, that his grandfather the Imam Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Baladī, had informed him: the jurist Abū Naṣr Aḥmad b. ʿAlī b. Ibrāhim al-Ṭāʾifī al-Ṣaffār related to us that Abū al-Qāsim ʿAlī b. Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Waḍḍāhī was told by Abū al-ʿAbbās ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. al-Ḥasan b. ʿUmar al-Balkhī on the Sassanian Road in Balkh, that Abū Yūsuf Aḥmad b. Muḥammad

b. Qays al-Sijzī ⸢related that Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. al-Ashʿath b. Tamīm b. Muhājir al-Zaman al-Sijzī⸣1 said: ‘I heard Muḥammad Sahl b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Tustarī, may God the Exalted have mercy on him, in the year two hundred and seventy five, say:

It was narrated to us by Muḥammad b. Sawwār on the authority of Abū ʿĀṣim al-Nabīl, on the authority of Bishr, on the authority of ʿIkrima, [that] Ibn ʿAbbās, may God be pleased with them both, said, ‘I asked the Messenger of God  how to attain salvation in the Hereafter, to which he replied: “You should keep to the Book of God, for in it there is information about those who came before you and news of those who will come after you. It is the arbiter between you in matters of your religion, by which God, Mighty and Majestic is He, has made you worship Him. Through it [the Qurʾān] you [may] attain gnosis (maʿrifa); and whoever seeks guidance another way, God will lead astray. It is the command of God, the Wise, it is the straight path, and it is the beneficial cure. No sooner did the jinn hear it than they exclaimed: …We have indeed heard a marvellous Qurʾān. It guides to rectitude.  Therefore we believe in it and we will never associate anyone with our Lord. [72:1, 2]”’2

[He, Sahl, continued]:

It is that which is beautifully ordered in its outward form and profound in its inner meaning. It is, moreover, that before which all understanding is powerless, according to the words of God, Exalted is He:

And when We sent a company of jinn your way to listen to the Qurʾān and when they were in its presence, they said, ‘Listen carefully!’ When [the reading] was finished, they returned to their people to warn [them].  They said, ‘O our people! Indeed we have heard a book revealed after Moses, confirming what came before it: it guides to the truth and to a straight path.’ [46:29–30]

Then a man asked him [Sahl] about God’s knowledge of His servants, whether it was something that became apparent to Him after He created them, or before their creation. He replied:

…It is a Glorious Qurʾān [85:21], that is, it is a book [that was] fixed in a Preserved Tablet [85:22] before they were created;3 God’s knowledge of His servants and what they would do was complete before He created them. [This does not imply] His forcing them into disobedience, coercing

 

1                     Added on the basis of Z515, f. 1b and F3488, f. 181b.

2                     Abū ʿĪsā Muḥammad al-Tirmidhī, al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ wa huwa Sunan al-Tirmidhī (Cairo, 1937–65), ‘Mā jāʾa fī faḍl al- Qurʾān’; Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Bayhaqī, al-Jāmiʿ li-shuʿab al-īmān (Beirut, 1996), vol. 2, p. 836.

3                     Here, Tustarī appears to be identifying the Qurʾān with God’s pre-eternal knowledge.

them into obedience, or leaving them out of His divine plan. Rather, it draws attention to that which those who deny His decree are promised, for He says: …whoever will, let him believe, and whoever will, let him disbelieve… [18:29], in the way of a threat, since they [actually] have no power (ḥawl) or strength (quwwa) except in accordance with that which is contained in His pre-eternal knowledge concerning them, which will come to be, from Him, [but] through them and for them.4 God, Exalted is He, says: …And if God wills misfortune for a people there is none that can repel it [13:11]. The good from God is a command for which He provides support (wilāya),5 and the evil from God is a prohibition against which He provides protection (ʿiṣma).6

Sahl, may God be pleased with him, said:

Every verse of the Qurʾān has four senses: an outward (ẓāhir) and an inward sense (bāṭin), a limit (ḥadd) and a point of transcendency (maṭlaʿ). The outward sense is the recitation and the inward sense is the understanding (fahm) of the verse; the limit defines what is lawful and unlawful, and the point of transcendency is the heart’s place of elevation (ishrāf) [from which it beholds] the intended meaning, as an understanding from God, Mighty and Majestic is He (fiqhan min Allāh ʿazza wa jalla). The outward knowledge [of the Qurʾān] is a knowledge [accessible to the] generality (ʿāmm); whereas the understanding of its inner meanings and its intended meaning is [for] a select few (khāṣṣ)…Thus God has said: …What is wrong with this people that they fail to understand any words? [4:78] That is, they do not understand what they are being told.

Sahl , [further] said:

The servant cannot do without his Master, nor can he do without His Book, nor without His Prophet , for his heart is a mine of God’s oneness, and his breast (ṣadr) is a light from [His] ‘substance’ (jawhar). It [the breast] derives its strength from the mine of his heart, [transmit- ting it] to his frame.7 He who has nothing by way of guidance that he has heard8 or [has it] but ignores it, will likewise not have Paradise as his [final] abode, and if God is not with him as his succour, then who is? If the Qurʾān is not his guide, and the Prophet  is not his intercessor, then who is there to intercede for him? And if he is not in Paradise, then he must be in the Hellfire.

His [Sahl’s] saying9 that [the Prophet’s] ‘breast is a light’ means that it is a repository of light ‘from His [God’s] substance’, which is the original locus of light within the breast, whence light spreads throughout the rest of the breast. The attribution of ‘substance’ (jawhar) to God does not imply [a reference to] His essence (dhāt), but rather it is an indication of possession (mulk). ‘It derives its

 

4          For Tustarī’s teachings on divine preordination and decree, see Introduction to the Translation, pp. xxxiiiff. Henceforth abbreviated to ‘IT’.

5           That is, patronage, guardianship or even friendship, all of which are meanings of the word wilāya, derived from the verbal root w-l-y, meaning to be near, from which is also derived the word walī, which will be discussed below. For a discussion of the different significations of the word wilāya and its variant walāya, see M. Izzi Dien and P. Walker, ‘Wilāya’, EI2, vol. xi, p. 208–9; Hermann Landolt, ‘Walāyah’, The Encyclopedia of Religion (New York, 1987), vol. 14, pp. 9656–62; Chodkiewicz, Seal of Saints, chs. 1 and 2; Bernd Radtke and John O’Kane, The Concept of Sainthood in Early Islamic Mysticism (Richmond, 1996); and Bernd Radtke, ‘The Concept of Wilāya in Early Sufism’ in Leonard Lewisohn (ed.), The Heritage of Sufism (Oxford, 1999), vol. 1, pp. 483–96.

6           As can be seen here, Tustarī teaches that both good and evil come from God. As Böwering has explained, ‘God lays down what is good through His command (amr), and He sets down what is evil through His interdiction (nahy).’ Furthermore, ‘God’s command is accompanied by an act of divine help (maʿūna), [or, as above, wilāya] whereas His interdiction is accompanied by an act of divine protection (ʿiṣma).’ See Böwering, Mystical Vision, pp. 176–80. See also IT, pp. xxxiiiff.

7          Lit. to his ‘temple’ (haykal). The question arises as to whether Tustarī intends here the heart of Muḥammad, or the human heart in a general sense. Böwering has taken it to mean the heart of Muḥammad, probably because of other similar passages. See his discussion of the heart of Muḥammad in Mystical Vision, pp. 162–3. However, Gaafar, in ‘The Sufi Doctrine’, p. 110, n. 7, has taken it to mean the heart of the human being in general. We have followed Böwering’s interpretation, according to which Tustarī is here referring to the Prophet’s heart.

8          MS F638, f. 1b has samiʿa bihi instead of yatbaʿu bihi which is in Z515, f. 2b, F3488, f. 182b and the published edition. The commentary which follows in the next paragraph would seem to favour the F638 version, which is what we have translated.

9          These words are a comment on the words of Tustarī, probably given by Abū Bakr al-Sijzī.

strength’ means, the strength of light from his mine, ‘it’ being the breast and a truthful advocate (māḥil muṣaddaq).10 ‘To his frame’ means [to] his limbs. What he meant by this is the light of acts of obedience [manifested] through the limbs. ‘He who has nothing’ means he [who does not have] any guidance, ‘that he has heard’, that is, understood.

[Sahl continued]:11

The Prophet  said, ‘The Qurʾān is an excellent intercessor whose intercession is accepted (shāfiʿ mushaffaʿ) and a truthful advocate (māḥil muṣaddaq). Whomsoever the Qurʾān intercedes for will be saved, and whoever acts evilly by it (man maḥala bihi) will be doomed.12

Sahl said:

God, Exalted is He, sent down the Qurʾān to His Prophet and made his heart a mine of His oneness and of the Qurʾān, for He said: It was brought down by the Trustworthy Spirit upon your heart… [26:193]. He further charged him with its promulgation and explanation, so that through him the believers would be apprised of what had been sent down to them. Whoever believes in it, knows its explanation and acts upon its injunctions, will have perfected his faith in God, Exalted is He. But whoever believes in it and reads it, but does not act upon his knowledge of what it contains, will not receive his reward in full.

People who recite the Qurʾān are of three ranks. There are those who have been granted under- standing by virtue of their maintaining the practice of what is commanded and the avoidance of what is forbidden, both inwardly and outwardly, and by their affirmation of it [the Qurʾān] with the light of the insight of certainty (nūr baṣīrat al-yaqīn), which is [in effect] the heart’s reliance on God, Exalted is He, in every state and in any situation. They attach no importance to melodies [in the recitation] or the delight that may be aroused by the charm of contrived vocal embellishments. Their only concern is with trying to understand, and asking God for an increase in such understanding with regard to His commands and prohibitions, and what is intended by the ordinances concerning that which He has made obligatory, and [that which is prescribed by] the Sunna of His Prophet . Hence, these people act upon the knowledge they have of it, ever seeking God’s aid, and are steadfast in carrying it out,13 as He commanded them when He said: …Pray for help from God and be patient… [7:128], that is, ‘Seek God’s aid in fulfill- ing His command, in the obligatory way that is the way of God; and be steadfast in carrying it out both inwardly and outwardly, so that He may impart to you understanding, discernment and that which He wants from you, as a grace from Him.’ [So, those whom I have described] do not pay attention to beautiful voices. It is to them that God has granted the understanding of the Qurʾān. They are the elect of God and His friends (awliyāʾ).14 They have nothing to do with this world and the world has no claim on them, nor do they have any desire for what is in Paradise. He took the world away from them, but they did not mind, and when He gave it to

 

10                   It is interesting to note that in the following paragraph Tustarī uses this same epithet for the Qurʾān, and later it will be seen that in one instance, he interprets the Preserved Tablet (lawḥ maḥfūẓ) as the breast in which the Qurʾān is preserved. See Tustarī’s commentary on 85:22.

11                   It is not quite clear here whether the speaker is Tustarī or Abū Bakr al-Sijzī.

12                   That is, whoever finds respite in the Qurʾān, that is, a false sense of reassurance and ease, and therefore continues in error and disbelief will ultimately be doomed to perish in the Fire. We shall see later a similar doctrine in relation to the term istidrāj.

13                   That is, translating adāyihi (for adāʾihi) according to MSS: Z515, f. 3b and F3488, f. 183a. F638, f. 3a has ādābihi the first time and iddāyihi (for iddāʾihi) the second. The confusion arises with some copyists who rendered hamza as ‘yā’. Another example will be seen below.

14                   Awliyāʾ is the plural of the word walī, which, like the word wilāya discussed above in n. 5, derives from the Arabic verbal root w-l-y. The walī can be a person in authority, a guardian, protector, or friend (especially of God). Concerning its latter meaning, Pierre Lory has stated (‘Walī,’ EI2, vol. xi, p. 109): ‘in some way the walī also acquires his Friend’s, i.e. God’s, good qualities and therefore he possesses particular authority, … capacities and abilities.’ In its meaning of ‘friend of God’, the word walī is often translated as saint, which is understandable given that there is no idiomatic equivalent for the word walī in English, but ‘saint’ does not really convey the Arabic sense, and can also be misleading since there is no canonisation in Islam.

them they refused it, just as their Prophet had refused it when it was presented to him.15 They cast themselves before God in contentment and reliance on Him. They said: ‘We cannot do without You. You are You, and we have no desire for other than You. They are the ones who have isolated themselves for God (mutafarridūn) mentioned by the Prophet  when he said ‘Walk the way of those who are solely dependent (mutafarridūn) on the mercy of God, Exalted is He.’ They inquired: ‘Who are the mutafarridūn, O Messenger of God?’ He replied: ‘They are those who have become ecstatic (ahtarū) in the remembrance of God, Exalted is He.16 They will come on the Day of Resurrection light [of load] for [their] remembrance will have lifted from them their burdens [of sin].’17

Sahl then said [concerning this ḥadīth]:

They are the shaykhs [or spiritual masters] who are ecstatic in the remembrance of God (dhikr), for which they are [constantly] assembled, as the Prophet  said: ‘God, Exalted is He, says, “I keep company with the one who remembers Me. Whenever my servant seeks Me out, he will find Me.”’18 And He, Exalted is He, has said: …Whithersoever you turn, there is the Face of God… [2:115]

A section on those who seek the understanding of the Qurʾān

God, Mighty and Majestic is He, has said:

‘Truly it is a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds,  brought down by the Trustworthy Spirit,

 Upon your heart, that you may be [one] of the warners.’ [26:192–4] Sahl said:

According to the measure of light which has been allotted to a person by God, Exalted is He, he will find guidance for his heart and insight (baṣīra). Lights from His light will be manifested in his characteristics. God, Exalted is He, has said: …For any to whom God has not granted light, there is no light. [24:40] Thus the Qurʾān is God’s rope (ḥabl) [linking] Him with His servants. Whoever holds fast to it is saved, for God has made the Qurʾān a light, and has said:

…but We have made it a light by which we guide whomsoever We wish of Our servants… [42:52].19 The meaning of …We have made… here is: ‘We have expounded within it that which is clear (muḥkam) and ambiguous (mutashābih),20 that which is lawful (ḥalāl) and unlawful (ḥarām),

 

15        This is a reference to one account of the Prophet’s Night Journey and Ascension (Isrāʾ wa Miʿrāj), when, according to certain traditions, the whole world was presented to him in all its splendour and adornment, but he said that he had no need for it. See, for example, Abū al-Qāsim al-Qushayrī, Kitāb al-Miʿrāj (Cairo, 1964), pp. 44ff., who relates one such tradition on the authority of Ḍaḥḥāk. A lengthy traditional account of the Miʿrāj may be found in ʿAbd Allāh b. Masʿūd Ibn Isḥāq, Kitāb al-Mubtadaʾ wa’l-mabʿath wa’l-maghāzī, known as Sīrat Ibn Isḥāq (Rabat, 1976); English trans., Alfred Guillaume as The Life of Muḥammad (London, 1955), pp. 181–7. On the Miʿrāj, see also Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī, Bayān laṭāʾif al-miʿrāj, English trans. with Arabic text by Frederick S. Colby as Subtleties of the Ascension (Louisville, KY, 2006).

16        Or it might be translated as crazed, for they appear incoherent and even insane, due to the ecstasy they experience in their remembrance of God. MS Z515, f. 3b and F3488, f. 183b both have ihtazzū and the corresponding muhtazzīna in the following sentence, meaning they quiver, tremble or are moved (by the remembrance). MS F638, f. 3a has ihtadū meaning they are guided and muhtazzūna in the following sentence.

17        Muḥammad b. ʿAlī (al-Ḥakīm) al-Tirmidhī, Nawādir al-uṣūl fī maʿrifat aḥādīth al-rasūl (Beirut, 1993), vol. 3, p. 64.

18        Bayhaqī, Shuʿab al-īmān, vol. 1, p. 451.

19        Tustarī has understood ‘it’ in this sentence to stand for the Qurʾān, though commentators point out that it could also be referring to the Spirit mentioned earlier in the verse: and thus have We revealed to you a Spirit from Our command. You did not know what the Book was, nor faith…

20        The muḥkam and mutashābih verses in the Qurʾān are mentioned in 3:7, which reads as follows: ‘It is He who revealed to you the Book, wherein are verses [that are] clear (muḥkam) forming the Mother of the Book (umm al-kitāb), and others ambiguous (mutashābihāt). As for those in whose hearts is deviation, they follow the ambiguous part desiring sedi- tion, and desiring its interpretation…’ The end of 3:7 reads: wa mā yaʿlamu taʾwīlahu illā’Llāhu wa’l-rāsikhūna fi’l-ʿilmi yaqūlūna āmannā bihi kullun min ʿindi rabbinā wa mā yudhakkaru illā ūlū ’l-albāb. There was a difference of opinion as to whether, grammatically, there should be a break between the word Llāhu and wa (underlined text). According to one opinion, held, for example, by Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) and Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), it should

and that which is commanded (amr) and forbidden (nahy)’, as God has said, Mighty and Majestic is He: We have made it an Arabic Qurʾān [43:3] — that is, ‘We have expounded it in a clear Arabic tongue in the letters of the alphabet which God has clearly set forth for you, and by which you may attain knowledge of [its] inner and outer [meanings]’.

God, Exalted is He, has said: and [those who] follow the light which has been revealed with him

[7:157], referring to the Qurʾān, of which the heart of the Prophet is the mine.

He [Sahl] was asked the meaning of his saying that the Qurʾān is the ‘rope’ (ḥabl) between God and His servants. He replied:

This means that they have no way to Him save through the Qurʾān, and through understand- ing [all] that has been addressed to them in it concerning what is required of them, as well as putting that knowledge into practice for God’s sake with complete sincerity (mukhliṣūna fīhi), and following the exemplary way (sunna) of Muḥammad , who was sent to them. Thus He has said: Whoever obeys the Messenger, verily obeys God [4:80] — that is, whoever obeys the Messenger  in [keeping] his Sunna, has indeed obeyed God in those things that He made obligatory for him.

Ibn ʿAbbās  has said, ‘The Qurʾān was sent down all at once to the heaven of this world, and then God, Exalted is He, sent it down to the Prophet  in instalments of five verses at a time, or more or less than this’.21 He has said, Glorified and Exalted is He: Nay, I swear by the setting- places of the stars!  — And that is indeed a tremendous oath, if you but knew —  This is indeed a noble Qurʾān [56:75–7].

And Ibn ʿAbbās  said, ‘The Qurʾān did not come down in one month or two, nor in a year or two; the time between the first revelation and the last was twenty years, or as [many] as God willed.’ This is because Isrāfīl is stationed in the Throne with a lowered gaze,22 and around him are the noble recording angels, and an emerald tablet. When God wills something, it is to be found on this Tablet, then that one [Isrāfīl] will knock his forehead on the Tablet so that he sees its contents, upon which he sends out the messengers [angels]. This is what is meant by His words: [Sealed] in a Preserved Tablet [85:22]. The Qurʾān was sent down all at once to the noble recording angels, then they in turn sent it down to Gabriel  in instalments over the course of twenty years, and likewise did Gabriel bring it in instalments to the Prophet . The idolaters said, ‘If only the Qurʾān was sent down to him all at once’, to which God, Exalted is He, responded: Thus [is it revealed], that We may strengthen your inner heart with it [25:32] — that is, so that it may be an answer to that about which they question you. For if We had sent it down all at once you would not have [to hand] the answers to their questions.

 

read: and none knows its interpretation save only God. And those who are rooted in knowledge say, ‘We believe in it; all is from our Lord’, while according to the other, that held, for example, by Maḥmūd b. ʿUmar al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144) and Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad al-Ṭūsī (d. ca 460/1067), it should read: and none knows its interpretation save only God and those who are rooted in knowledge, who say...’ Tustarī appears to hold the former view as will be seen below. On the muḥkam and mutashābih verses in Qur’anic hermeneutics see Jane D. McAuliffe, ‘Qurʾānic Hermeneutics: The Views of Ṭabarī and Ibn Kathīr’, in Andrew Rippin, Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qurʾān (Oxford and New York, 1988), pp. 46–62; Leah Kinberg, ‘Muḥkamāt and Mutashābihāt (Q. verse 3/7): Implication of a Qurʾānic Pair of Terms in Medieval Exegesis’, Arabica 35 (1988), pp. 143–72; Michel Lagarde, ‘De l’ambiguité dans le Coran’, Quaderni di Studi Arabi 3 (1985), pp. 45–62; Sahiron Syamsuddin, ‘Muḥkam and Mutashābih: An Analytical Study of al-Ṭabarī’s and al-Zamakhsharī’s Interpretations of Q. 3:7’, Journal of Qur’anic Studies 1/1 (1999), pp. 63–79; and Stefan Wild, ‘The Self-Referentiality of the Qurʾān: Sura 3:7 as an Exegetical Challenge’, in Jane D. McAuliffe et al., eds., With Reverence for the Word (Oxford and New York, 2003), pp. 422–36.

21                   Bayhaqī, Shuʿab al-īmān, vol. 2, p. 331.

22                   According to the Islamic tradition, Isrāfīl is one of the archangels, whose duty it is to read out the divine decrees from the Preserved Tablet (lawḥ maḥfūẓ) and transmit them to the other angels, and to blow the Trumpet signalling the coming of the Day of Judgement. Isrāfīl is said to be of an immense size, such that while his feet are beneath the seventh earth, his head reaches up to the pillars of God’s Throne. He has four wings: one in the east, one in the west, one to cover his body, and one as a protection from the divine majesty. See A. J. Wensinck, ‘Isrāfīl,’ EI2, vol. iv, p. 211.

Sahl said:

God sent down the Qurʾān in five instalments of five verses at a time: five clear verses, five ambiguous verses, five concerning that which is permissible, five concerning that which is prohibited, and five parabolic verses. The believer who has gnosis (maʿrifa) of God, Exalted is He, adheres to what is clear in it,23 believes what is ambiguous,24 holds as permissible that which it has made permissible, holds as prohibited that which it has prohibited, and comprehends its similitudes (amthāl), as He has said: but only those understand them [the similitudes] who know [29:43] — that is, those who have knowledge (ʿilm) of God, Exalted is He, and especially those who have gnosis (maʿrifa) of Him.25

Sahl said:

In the Qurʾān there are no two verses that are so harsh against those who dispute the Qurʾān as the following: [in the first,] God, Exalted is He, says: None dispute the signs of God except those who disbelieve [40:4], by which is meant the one who disputes God’s verses, arguing in accordance with the whim[s] of his lower self (hawā nafsihi), and following his own mental disposition (jibillat ʿaqlihi). God, Exalted is He, has [likewise] said, nor [should there be for them] disputing in the Hajj [2:197], meaning, there shall be no quarrelling during Hajj. The second [of the two verses] is His saying: But those who disagree about the Book are in a schism, far removed [from the truth] [2:176].

The Prophet  said: ‘O fellow companions, do not dispute [with others] about what is in the Qurʾān. For while a believer who is guided may dispute with recourse to the Qurʾān and hit the mark, if a lying hypocrite disputes with recourse to the Qurʾān he will present his proofs based on analogy and selfish whims and will be far from correct.’26 The Prophet  said: ‘The worst of God’s servants pursue the worst matters to test God’s servants by provoking them.’27 And God will be their opponent on the Day of Resurrection, as every questioner will be asked on the Day of Resurrection, ‘What was intended by your question?’

Sahl said:

How amazing it is that someone can read the Qurʾān, but then not act according to it, nor avoid what God forbids [in it]! Does such a person not feel shame before God for his contentiousness and rebellion against Him and against that which He has commanded and prohibited, even after having the knowledge of it? Is there anything of greater enormity than this contention? Has he not heard His promise and threat? Does he not listen to what God has promised him through admonishing examples, so that he might have compassion on himself and repent? Has he not heard His words, Surely the mercy of God is near to the virtuous [7:56], that he might strive to do good? Has he not heard His words, ‘And My mercy has precedence over My punishment’,28 so that he might long for His mercy?

Then Sahl said:

O God! You honoured them with this beautiful gift [the Qurʾān] and You privileged them with this favour. O God, pardon us and them!

 

23        The clear (muḥkam) verses are generally held to be unambiguous verses which inform believers of what is prescribed and proscribed by God.

24       The mutashābih verses mentioned in Q. 3:7 are often rendered in English as ‘metaphorical’ or ‘allegorical’, though they include other verses, the meanings of which are not readily understandable for other reasons.

25        Tustarῑ has here contrasted gnosis (maʿrifa) and knowledge (ʿilm), and indicated that the former goes beyond the latter. There are instances, however, when the word maʿrifa may simply mean knowledge. On the use of the term maʿrifa, see

R. Arnaldez, ‘Maʿrifa’, EI2, vol. vi, pp. 568ff.

26        In other words, however correct the believer’s argument might be, it is better not to enter into a dispute at all.

27        Aḥmad b. Shuʿayb al-Nasāʾī, al-Sunan al-kubrā (Beirut, 1991), vol. 2, p. 317.

28        This ḥadīth qudsī resembles a better-known ḥadīth, ‘My mercy has precedence over My wrath (raḥmatī sabaqat ghaḍabī)’, which is listed as ḥadīth no. 1 in Abū Zakariyya Yaḥyā al-Nawawī, Forty Ḥadīth Qudsī, selected and translated by Ez- zeddin Ibrahim and Denys Johnson-Davies (Lebanon, 1980).

Then he said:

Truly God has not taken as a friend (walī)29 one of Muḥammad’s nation (umma) without teach- ing them the Qurʾān either in its outward or inner aspects.

They responded, ‘We know about its outward aspect but what is its inner aspect?’ He replied, ‘That is its understanding (fahm); and it is its understanding that is intended.’

Abū Bakr al-Sijzī said:

Junayd heard me relate the following story and said that Sahl spoke the truth. Once there was a man of a black complexion and foreign tongue with us in Baghdad. We would ask him about the Qurʾān verse by verse and he would answer us with the best response, without having learnt the Qurʾān by heart, and that was a clear proof of his friendship [with God] (wilāya). Sahl said, ‘It was narrated on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd  that he [Ibn Masʿūd] said: “The one who knows the Qurʾān by heart [lit. bearer of the Qurʾān, ḥāmil] should be known for his vigil at night while people are asleep, for his fasting during the day while people are eating, for his sorrow while people are rejoicing, for his weeping when people are laughing, and for his silence when people are talking.” Thus he who knows the Qurʾān by heart should be tearful, sorrowful, wise and learned, not hard-hearted and deceptive, that is to say, not dishonest.’

Sahl said:

Muḥammad b. Sawwār informed me that when he performed the Hajj one year, he saw Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī, who had begun the first [part] of his recitation of the whole Qurʾān in his prayer (ṣalāt). [At the same time] he noticed another man from Basra facing the Kaʿba who had started reciting Sūrat al-Muṭaffifīn [83] and kept on repeating the verse, ‘Do they not know that they will be resurrected?’ [83:4].

Sahl continued:

Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī had reached two-thirds of the way through the Qurʾān when that man was still repeating this same verse. At the approach of dawn Ayyūb had reached the Sūrat al-Fīl [105], while the other man had reached God’s words, A day when (all) mankind will rise before the Lord of the Worlds? [83:6].30 Then that same man fell unconscious, and on approaching him we found him dead.

Indeed people have differed in the way they seek the understanding of the Qurʾān. One group tries to understand the Qurʾān through repetitive study, so that they can derive an understanding of the outward meaning of its ordinances. Among these, some attain a little [understanding] and some attain abundant [understanding]. The latter are knowledgeable and [either] act for the sake of God, Exalted is He, [in the hope of attaining] the abodes of Paradise; or act for God, Exalted is He, in [pure] compliance (ījāban); or they are knowledgeable but do not act [on that knowledge].31 Another group seek to understand the Qurʾān for the sake of memorising its recitation and teaching it to others. Among them, some are sound in their actions, while others are insolent before their Lord. Then there is the one who has studied it a great deal, but whose aim is to learn its melodies and be noticed. He gains [naught but] the ruin of this world and is the worst off out of the three groups in the eyes of God, Exalted is He.

Sahl said:

I was informed by Muḥammad b. Sawwār who received it from ʿAmru b. Mirdās on the authority of Abū Hurayra , who related that the Prophet  said: ‘Recite the Qurʾān with the melodies of the Arabs without extraneous affectation, and do not recite it using the tunes of churches, or of heretics or innovators. For verily I and the pious of my nation are free from affectation.

 

29                   See above p. 2, n.5 and p. 3, n. 14 regarding the word walī. The word used of God in this context is istawlā, which usually means to take possession of, make oneself the master of, to overpower or to imprison; so there is a sense here of God’s taking possession of His friends from among the nation of Muḥammad.

30                   In other words, in all that time he had focussed his attention on three verses of the Qurʾān.

31                   The printed edition has ʿāmil lahu, i.e. they do not act upon that knowledge ‘for His sake’. However, the word lahu is absent from all three MSS.

But people will come after me who will make their voices quaver in [their recitation] in the manner of female singers delivering their songs. Their hearts are beguiled and they beguile the hearts of their listeners. For sure, it is they who are the heedless.’32

Sahl said:

I truly fear that by the year 300 [a.h.] onwards,33 the Qurʾān will become effaced through people’s preoccupation with tunes, poems and songs.

Then he was asked, ‘How will that happen, O Abū Muḥammad?’ He replied:

It will come about because people only initiate these tunes, poems and songs in order to earn from it, and so Iblīs takes possession of their hearts, just as he took possession of the hearts of the poets of the Jāhiliyya,34 depriving them of the understanding of the Qurʾān and of act- ing according to it for the sake of God. It was related by Muḥammad b. Sawwār from Ibn Abī Dhiʾb from Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān on the authority of Thawbān that he heard the Prophet  say: ‘Listening to songs makes you forget the Qurʾān and distracts you from the remembrance [of God].’

Abū Bakr [al-Sijzī] reported that Abū Saʿīd al-Kharrāz used to live in Mecca, and had the greatest love for listening to odes and love songs, and his servant Abū al-Udhnayn informed me that he saw him after his death in a dream and asked him, ‘How did God deal with you, O Abū Saʿīd?’, to which he responded: ‘He forgave me after an upbraiding — I would have preferred to have been sent to the Hellfire rather than be upbraided by God!’ When he [Abū al-Udhnayn] asked Abū Saʿīd why this was so, he replied, ‘God (al-Ḥaqq) had me stand before Him behind the veil of fear and He said to me. “You assigned to Laylā and Suʿdā [feelings] that were My preserve, and if it was not for your taking up a standpoint for My sake from which you sought Me, I would have sent you to Hell.” Then, when the veil of fear was changed to the veil of [His] good pleasure (riḍā), I said, “O God! I didn’t find anyone who could bear what You have burdened me with except You, so I alluded to You.”35 He said, “You have spoken the truth”, and He sent me to Paradise.’ But God knows best.

A section on His words, In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

[1:1]36

Abū Bakr [al-Sijzī] reported that Sahl was asked about the meaning of [God’s words], In the name of God the Compassionate (al-Raḥmān), the Merciful (al-Raḥīm). He replied:

The ‘bā’ stands for ‘bahāʾ Allāh’ (the magnificence of God, Mighty and Majestic is He), the ‘sīn’ stands for ‘sanāʾ Allāh’ (the resplendence of God), and the ‘mīm’ stands for ‘majd Allāh’ (the Glory of God), Mighty and Majestic is He.37 Allāh is the Greatest Name, which contains all His names. Between its ‘Alif ’ and ‘Lām’ there is a cryptic letter, something of an unseen from an unseen to an unseen, a secret from a secret to a secret, a reality from a reality to a reality, of which no one can attain an understanding except those who are pure of all blemishes, and

 

32        Tirmidhī, Nawādir al-uṣūl, vol. 2, p. 255; Bayhaqī, Shuʿab al-īmān, vol. 2, p. 540.

33        912 c.e.

34        i.e. the period before Islam.

35        Presumably, his love was so great that no human could have borne it, so through his love-songs the poet/singer was alluding to God. The same can be said of much of the love poetry of later mystics who composed poetry.

36        We have followed the editor of the Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya edition in numbering the words, In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful (bismi’Llāhi’l-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm), known as the Basmala, as the first verse of the first sūra. The inclusion of the Basmala as a verse of Sūrat al-Fātiḥa is obligatory according to the Shāfiʿī school, while more gener- ally it is thought not to be incorrect to begin any sūra with the Basmala except Sūrat al-Tawba. Since the verses in the MSS are not numbered, it is not possible for us to know whether or not Tustarī considered it to be one of the verses of Sūrat al-Fātiḥa. In any case, it was customary for exegetes to devote a separate section to their commentary on the Basmala.

37        These being the three consonants forming the construct bi ismi meaning ‘in the name of ’.

who take what is permissible according to what is stipulated by their faith.38 Al-Raḥmān is a name which contains a quality from the aforementioned cryptic letter between the Alif and Lām. Al-Raḥīm is the One who inclines to His servants in kindness by providing for them, this being a ramification (farʿ) [of the significance of this name], while in origin it is His initiation (ibtidāʾ) [of all things], as a mercy (raḥmatan), related to His pre-eternal knowledge.39

Abū Bakr added:

In other words, through the zephyr of His grace, God originated whatever He willed in the king- dom of creation, out of mercy because He is the Merciful. ʿAlī b. Abū Ṭālib  said: ‘Al-Raḥmān and al-Raḥīm are two names of compassion, one of which [signifies] greater compassion than the other;40 by them God, Exalted is He, has expelled despair (qunūṭ) from the believers among His servants.’

 

38                   This is probably the closest that Tustarī comes in his Tafsīr to the content of the cosmological treatise on letters that has been attributed to him, the Risālat al-ḥurūf. See IT, p. xxiv; the dissertation of Gaafar, ch. 4, and Garrido Clemente, ‘El Tratado de las Letras’.

39                   Alternatively, we might read it as: ‘this being a ramification (farʿ), while in origin (aṣl) the initiation [of creation] is a mercy (raḥma) connected to His pre-eternal knowledge’. Either way, this passage indicates that Tustarī understands the creation as a manifestation of God’s quality of being the Merciful, as is confirmed by the explanation that follows it.

40                   lit. ‘are two compassionate names (ismān raqīqān), of which one is more compassionate (araqq) than the other’. In his commentary on the Basmala, Ṭabarī explains that of the two forms derived from the verbal root r-ḥ-m, al-raḥmān denotes a stronger quality than al-raḥīm. According to a tradition narrated in Ṭabarī’s commentary on the authority of al-ʿArzamī, ‘[the divine name] al-Raḥmān [denotes mercy] to all creatures, while the name al-Raḥīm [denotes mercy] to the believers.’ According to another tradition narrated on the authority of Abū Saʿīd al-Khuḍrī, ‘Jesus, the son of Mary, said: “Al-Raḥmān is the Merciful in the next world as well as in this world; al-Raḥīm is the Merciful in the next world.”’ See Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-bayān ʿan taʾwīl āy al-Qurʾān, published under the title Jāmiʿ al-bayān ʿan tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. Maḥmūd Muḥammad Shākir and Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir, vols. 1–16, incomplete (Cairo, 1955–69). vol. 1, pp. 148–9; trans. John Cooper, The Commentary on the Qurʾān by Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad b. Jarīr al-Ṭabarī (Oxford, 1987), pp. 55–6.

[1:2] Praise be to God1

Sahl said:

The meaning of ‘Praise be to God’ (al-ḥamdu li’Llāh) is ‘thanks be to God’ (al-shukru li’Llāh), [for] gratitude towards God is obedience (ṭāʿa) to Him. Obedience to Him is guardianship (wilāya)2 from Him, Exalted is He, and thus God, Exalted is He, has said: ‘Your patron (walī) is God only, and His Messenger, and the believers...’ [5:55] God’s patronage can only be fully attained by becoming free of all other than Him.

The meaning of Lord of the Worlds is: the Lord of all created beings and the One who rears and fosters them (murabbī); He is the One who presides over their affairs and who rectifies and orders things for them, even before they and their acts are brought into existence. He deals with them according to His pre-eternal knowledge of them, as He wills and for whatever purpose He wills, wishes, rules, and decrees, regarding that which is commanded and that which is forbidden, and they have no lord except Him.

[1:4] The Master of the Day of Judgement:

That is, the Day of Reckoning.

[1:5] You [alone] we worship…,

That is, we submit to, and humble ourselves before, You alone. We recognise Your lordship and we affirm Your oneness, and You do we serve. From this word (naʿbudu) is derived the word ʿabd meaning ‘servant’.3 …And You [alone] we ask for help, that is, in what You have charged us with, which is [rightfully] Yours, [and over which] You exercise Your will (mashīʾa) and volition (irāda).4 Moreover, knowledge and sincerity are due only to You. We are incapable of [accomplishing that with which You have charged us] except through aid (maʿūna) and steadfastness (tasdīd) that come from You, for there is no power or strength except that which comes from You.

([1:6] Guide us to the straight path.)5

He [Sahl] was asked, ‘Has not God already guided us to the straight path?’ He replied:

That is so, but this refers to seeking more from Him, as He has said: and with Us there is yet more [50:35]. [Thus] what is meant by His words Guide us is: ‘Support us with Your aid (maʿūna) and empowerment (tamkīn)’.

 

1          See above, IC, p. 8, n. 36 concerning the numbering of the verses of Sūrat al-Fātiḥa.

2          That is, obedience is a way of manifesting our gratitude, and our gratitude is increased through obedience, while obedi- ence itself is a manifestation of God’s patronage and protection. See also above, IC, p. 2, and IT, p. xxxix. The relationship between gratitude and divinely bestowed increase is discussed again later, in Tustarī’s commentary on 14:7.

3          Or ‘slave’.

4           Gaafar (PhD thesis, p. 224) explains that in Tustarī’s theology, God’s Will (or ‘Uncreated Will’, mashīʾa), is associated with His Knowledge, while God’s Volition (or ‘Creative Will’, irāda) is associated with His Omnipotence: ‘The mashīʾa is the gate of Knowledge (bāb al-ʿilm); the irāda is the gate of Omnipotence (bāb al-qudra).’ See also Kalām Sahl ibn ʿAbd Allāh, ed. Gaafar, in Jaʿfar, Min al-turāth al-Tustarī, Part 2, p. 202; MS Köprülü 727, f. 72b.

5          This verse (1:6) itself is not written out either in the printed edition or in the MSS, though the question and Tustarī’s response which follow the comment on 1:5 clearly refer to 1:6.

On another occasion he said that Guide us (ihdinā) means:

Guide us (arshidnā) to the religion of Islam, which is the way to You, through assistance from You, which is insight (baṣīra), for we cannot be guided except through You, just as he [Moses] said: ‘Perhaps my Lord will show me the right way’ [28:22], that is, ‘Guide me to pursue the path that leads to Him’.

I heard Sahl relate on the authority of Muḥammad b. Sawwār from Sufyān, who heard it from Salīm, who was told by Abū al-Jaʿd from Thawbān, who narrated that the Messenger of God  said:

God says: ‘I have divided the prayer between Me and My servant into two halves. Half of it is for Me and the other half is for My servant, and My servant gets what he asks for.’ Thus, when the servant says, Praise be to God, Lord of the Worlds, God, Exalted is He, says, ‘My servant has praised and thanked Me.’ When he says, the Merciful, the Compassionate, [God says], ‘My servant has extolled Me’. And when he says, Master of the Day of Judgement, [God says], ‘My servant has glorified Me. These verses are for Me and for My servant is what he asks for [in the verses that come] after, as when he says, You [alone] we worship, and You [alone] do we ask for help.  Guide us to the straight path, until the end of the sūra.’ God, Mighty and Majestic is He, says: ‘These verses are for My servant and My servant shall receive what he asks for.’6

Sahl said:

The meaning of ‘My servant has glorified Me’ here is: ‘He has attributed abundant beneficence (iḥsān) and munificence (inʿām) to Me’.

Sahl related on the authority of Mujāhid:

Āmīn is one of the names of God, Exalted is He.7 Ibn ʿAbbās  said, ‘The Christians have never envied you anything as much as your saying Āmīn.’8 Muḥammad b. Sawwār related from Ibn ʿUyayna from ʿAmr b. Dīnār on the authority of Jābir b. ʿAbd Allāh , who related that the Messenger of God  said, ‘Keep to the straight path, [though] you will not be able to encompass [all good actions]. Know that the best of your actions is prayer, and [indeed] only a believer observes ablution carefully. Whenever the imam says, Nor [the path] of those who go astray [1:7], you should say, ‘Āmīn’, for God is pleased with the one who says it, and He accepts his prayer and responds to his supplication.’

Al-Zuhrī related from Ibn al-Musayyab on the authority of Abū Hurayra  that the Prophet said, ‘When the imam says, Nor [the path] of those who go astray, say ‘Āmīn’, for truly the angels say ‘Āmīn’, and the one whose pronouncement of ‘Āmīn’ is simultaneous with that of the angels will be forgiven for all his previous sins.’



 

6                     Ibn Māja, Sunan (Beirut, 1995), ‘Al-Adab: Bāb thawāb al-Qurʾān’; Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī, Sunan (Beirut, 1988), ‘Kitāb al-Ṣalāt’; Tirmidhī, Sunan, ‘Kitāb Tafsīr al-Qurʾān’.

7                     Āmīn is traditionally said following the last verse of Sūrat al-Fātiḥa when it is recited during the canonical prayer, or as part of other prayers or invocations. When one person makes a supplication on behalf of and in the presence of others, it is likewise customary for the congregation to repeat Āmīn (Amen).

8                     Regarding this saying of Ibn ʿAbbās, the editor of the Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya edition cites here another version of the tradition, listed in ʿAbd al-Raʿūf al-Munāwī and ʿAbd al-Salām al-Suyūṭī, Fayḍ al-qadīr: sharḥ al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaghīr min aḥādīth al-bashīr al-nadhīr (Cairo, 1938), vol. 5, p. 441, in which it is said to have been the Jews rather than the Christians who are envious of the Muslims’ saying ‘Āmīn’.

[2:1] Alif Lām Mīm

Sahl said:

Alif Lām Mīm is a name of God, Mighty and Majestic is He, and within it are meanings and attributes that people of understanding (fahm) know, not to mention the many meanings that it holds for the people of outward [knowledge].1 If these letters are read separately, Alif stands for God’s assembling [things in their creation] (taʾlīf), Mighty and Majestic is He, for He brought together all things as He willed. The Lām stands for His pre-eternal grace (luṭfuhu al-qadīm) and the Mīm stands for His great glory (majduhu al-ʿaẓīm).

Sahl said:

Each book that God, Exalted is He, sent down contains a secret, and the secret of the Qurʾān is contained within the letters which open the sūras, because they are names and attributes, such as when He says Alif Lām Mīm [2:1; 3:1; 29:1 and 31:1], Ṣād [38:1], Alif Lām Rā [10:1; 11:1;

13:1; 14:1 and 15:1], Kāf Ḥā Yā ʿAyn Ṣād [19:1], Tā Sīn Mīm [26:1 and 28:1], Ḥā Mīm [41:1], ʿAyn Sīn Qāf.2 When these letters are brought together they make up the Greatest Name of God3 — that is, if a letter is taken from each [group] of the opening letters of the sūras, one after the other in the order that the sūras were revealed, that is, Alif Lām Rā, Ḥā Mīm, and Nūn,4 they form the divine name al-Raḥmān.’ Ibn ʿAbbās and Ḍaḥḥāk, on the other hand, said that Alif Lām Mīm means ‘I am God and I know’; while ʿAlī  said that these are names [in the form of] ‘disconnected’ [letters], but if a letter is taken from each of the opening groups of letters, on the condition that it is not the same as the letter adjacent to it, and then they are assembled, they form one of the names of the Merciful. If this name is known and used in supplication, it will be the mightiest name by which the prayer of the supplicant who uses it will be answered.

Sahl said:

In the words Alif Lām Mīm,  That Book [2:1–2], Alif stands for God (Allāh), Lām stands for the servant (ʿabd), and Mīm stands for Muḥammad . So, [through these letters] the servant may gain access to his Master from the position of affirming His oneness (tawḥīd) and by fol- lowing the example of His Prophet.5

 

1          Note that above, IC, p. 2, Tustarī had connected understanding (fahm) to the inner meanings of the Qurʾān.

2          The ‘disconnected letters’ (al-ḥurūf al-muqaṭṭaʿa), also referred to in English as the ‘mysterious letters’, with which some of the sūras begin, have been the subject of many traditional interpretations as well as modern theories. Traditional interpretations include the view that they represent names of Qurʾānic sūras, or names of God, as in the first tradition presented by Tustarī above, or that they have mystical significance, or a cryptic meaning, as in the second interpretation he presents above. They are also sometimes subject to interpretations based on the numerical values of the letters. See K. Massey, ‘Mysterious Letters’, EQ, vol. v, 412–4. For a discussion of one non-Muslim attempt to explain the significance of the detached letters, see Neal Robinson, Discovering the Qurʾān: A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text (Washington, D.C., 2003), pp. 260ff.

3          In this instance, the Greatest Name is said to be al-Raḥmān, but below it is said to be Allāh.

4          Sūra 68 (The Pen) commences with this letter.

5          See above, IC, p. 9, n. 38 and IT, p. xxiv, concerning Tustarī’s Risālat al-ḥurūf. In that treatise Tustarī ascribes special cosmological significance to the letters alif, waw and yā, with alif being assigned to the rational power (quwwa nāṭiqa), waw being assigned to the ‘animal force’ (quwwa ḥaywāniyya), and yā being assigned to ‘natural activity’ (quwwa

Sahl further said:

I received [a tradition] on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās according to which he said: ‘God, Exalted is He, has sworn that this Book which was revealed to Muḥammad  is the book from God’s presence, Exalted is He. So He said: Alif Lām Mīm, That Book... [In these words], Alif stands for God (Allāh), Lām stands for Gabriel  and Mīm stands for Muḥammad , thus God, Exalted is He, has taken an oath by Himself, by the angel Gabriel  and by Muḥammad .’

He also said:

God, Exalted is He, extracted from His Greatest Name [Allāh]6 the letters Alif, Lām and Hāʾ and said: Indeed I am God, the Lord of the Worlds [28:30],7 and for [His creatures’] sake He derived a name from among His names and made it the name of His Prophet , and He derived from the end of the name of His Prophet  the name of His prophet Adam .8 Thus He says: That is because God is the Patron [or Friend] of those who believe, and those who disbelieve have no patron [47:11] — except the Devil, that is, Satan.

[2:2] …In it there is no doubt (rayb)…

This means that there is no uncertainty (shakk) in it. A guidance for those who are mindful of God (muttaqūn) — that is, an explanation (bayān) for those who are mindful of God.9 The mindful of God are those who have freed themselves from the claim of possessing any power or strength except in God, Exalted is He, and who have resorted to taking refuge [in Him] and depending solely on His power and strength in every situation. So God has assisted them and provided for them whence they had no reckoning,10 and made for them a source of relief and release from the trials to which He has subjected them.

Sahl [further] said:

God’s power (ḥawl) and strength (quwwa) are [manifest in] His act, His act is according to His knowledge, and His knowledge is among the attributes belonging to His essence.11 The power and strength of the servant are but a temporary claim which lasts only until the last hour. The last hour is in the possession of God alone, Exalted is He.

[2:3] The [ones who are] mindful of God are those who believe in the unseen…

God is the unseen and His religion is the unseen, and God, Mighty and Majestic is He, has ordered them to believe in the unseen, to free themselves from [any claim] to power and

 

ṭabīʿiyya) (trans. Gaafar, PhD thesis, pp. 97–8).

6                     See above, Tustarī’s commentary on the Basmala and 2:1, and the accompanying notes.

7                     These are among the words spoken to Moses from the burning bush.

8                     i.e. when the last two letters, mīm and dāl, are taken in reverse order. Here is an allusion to the doctrine that in pre- eternity, the existence of the Prophet Muḥammad preceded all creatures and all the other prophets derived their light from him, although he was the last to appear in the sublunary world. This is discussed by Tustarī in his commentary on 11:40. On this doctrine see IT, pp. xxxiff. A later discussion is presented by Maybudī, Kashf al-asrār, vol. 10, p. 202.

9                     The words taqwā and muttaqī are derived from the verb w-q-y, which means to ‘be mindful, aware or wary of ’ some- thing, though these two derivatives are often translated as ‘fear of God’ and ‘God-fearing’, respectively. However, there are various words for different forms of fear [of God], such as khawf, khashy and waraʿ (these are discussed later in the commentary by Tustarī), and therefore we are translating the word taqwā in cases such as this as ‘mindfulness of God’, and muttaqī as the one who is mindful of God. The expressions ‘fear of God’ or ‘God-fearing’ will only be used in our translation of these words in those contexts where a particular emphasis is placed on the sense of wariness and awe towards God. On taqwā in Tustarī’s teachings see above IT, p. lvi.

10                   That is, from a source which they had not taken into account.

11                   We have seen above, p. 10, that God’s Knowledge is the ‘gate’, hence ‘prior’ to His Uncreated Will (mashīʾa), which precedes His Creative Will and Omnipotence, not in their existence but in their effects. But, as Gaafar explains, Tustarī also sug- gests that the Uncreated Will of God is an immediate stage that succeeds His Knowledge. In his Kitāb al-Muʿāraḍa, MS Köprülü 727, f. 212a, Tustarī outlines the stages of creation as being firstly Knowledge (that is, the divine Omniscience); secondly, the Book, comprising all the decrees of God, which are susceptible of effacement or affirmation (maḥw wa ithbāt, through mashīʾa); thirdly there is qaḍā, the affirmed Decree of God (ḥukm thābit); and fourthly, there is qadar, the actual manifestation of that which has been decreed. See Gaafar, PhD thesis, pp. 223–5.

strength concerning that which they have been commanded to do and prohibited from doing, in faith, speech and action and to say, ‘We have no power (ḥawl) to keep ourselves from diso- bedience save through Your protection (ʿiṣma), and we have no strength (quwwa) to obey You save through Your aid (maʿūna).’ This is [a result of] of His compassion (ishfāq) towards them, and of His assisting them so that they do not claim power, strength and ability as did those who were damned from pre-eternity. When [these latter] saw the punishment with their own eyes, they disowned [their claim], but their disavowal did not avail them after they had actually seen the punishment. God has informed us about those who fit this description in His words But their faith was of no benefit to them when they (actually) saw Our punishment [40:85], and: Their only plea when Our might came upon them, was to say, ‘We were evildoers indeed’ [7:5]. Similarly, Pharaoh claimed to have power, strength and ability, and said, ‘Whenever I wish to believe, I will believe’, but when he actually came to believe it was not accepted from him, as God, Exalted is He, said, Now — when hitherto you have disobeyed and been of those who do corruption? [10:91]

[2:3] …And spend out of what We have provided them:

Sahl said:

Truly God, Exalted is He, has described in this way those whom He has moulded with a certain nature, who are connected to Him by a certain link, and who never lapse in their heedfulness (murāqaba) of Him. They are those who never made a choice and desired nothing other than Him. Their only choice is that He should choose for them, even as He has chosen them for Himself.12 They desire nothing that has any relation to another which will remove them from their dependence solely on Him, for they have freed themselves from other than Him.

Abū Bakr relates that it was said to Sahl: ‘Truly God has granted you wisdom (ḥikma)’, to which he replied:

Indeed, God willing, I have been granted wisdom (ḥikma) and [a knowledge of] the unseen (ghayb) which I was taught from the unseen of His secret (min ghayb sirrihi),13 and thus He sufficed me from the need for all other knowledge — and that the ultimate end is toward your Lord [53:42], and He completed what He had begun with me out of His grace and beneficence.

His words, Mighty and Majestic is He:

[2:5] Those are upon guidance from their Lord…

That is, a clear explanation (bayān) from their Lord: by the light of His guidance hearts witness Him in confident abandonment to Him due to a light from His light, by which He singled them out in His prior knowledge.14 They do not speak except with guidance (hudā), and their inner perception is solely directed towards that guidance. So those who are guided by [this light] are never left by it; they are [constant] witnesses to it because they are never absent from it. If people were to ask them about it they would inform them, and if they were to will [something], it would quickly be brought about.15 Thus …they are the ones who will prosper [2:5], and they are directed to guidance and success through His guidance. [It is they who will] remain (bāqūna) in Paradise with the permanent subsistence (baqāʾ) of God, Mighty and Majestic is He.16

 

12        That is according to all three MSS (Z515, f. 10b, F638, f. 6a and F3488, f. 188b), which have: kamā ikhtārahum lahu, as opposed to kamā ikhtārahu lahum.

13       That is, perhaps, from the profound, secret link between man in his deepest being and God. This is explained by Tustarī in his commentary on 2:41. See also IT, p. xlviii.

14        There may be an allusion here both to 24:40 and to a ḥadīth, which reads ‘Verily God created the creatures in darkness, and then He cast upon them some of His light. Whosoever was touched by that light found guidance and whomsoever it missed went astray.’ Ibn Ḥanbal, al-Musnad (Cairo, 1895), vol. 2, pp. 176 and 197; Tirmidhī, Sunan, ‘Kitāb al-Īmān’, and Nawādir al-uṣūl, vol. 2, p. 413.

15        lit. ‘things would hasten to [fulfil] their wish’.

16       We shall see later that Tustarī describes the grace which God grants to those who have found guidance and success, beyond the blessings and delights of Paradise, as being: ‘life with Life itself ’, and ‘permanent subsistence with Permanent Subsistence itself ’.

Then Sahl said:

It was transmitted to me that God, Exalted is He, revealed to David  the words: ‘Make sure that I do not pass you by, for in that case you would forgo everything. Verily I created Muḥammad  for My sake, and I created Adam  for his sake.17 I created My believing serv- ants for My worship, and I created all other things for [the service of] the son of Adam.18 So if he preoccupies himself with that which I have created for his service, I will veil him from that [for] which I created [him] for My sake.’19

[2:22] …So set not up compeers (andād) to God…

That is, adversaries (aḍdād),20 and the greatest adversary is the self that incites to evil (al-nafs al-ammāra bi’l-sūʾ), which is only bent on its own pleasures (ḥuẓūẓ) and cravings (munā), without having any regard for guidance from God.21

Sahl was asked about God’s words:

[2:25] …They shall be given it [the fruits] in perfect semblance; …and there for them shall be spouses, purified…,

He replied:

In Paradise there are no carpets, vessels, clothes, perfume, birds or plants, nor any fruits [as we know them]. Thus the semblance that the things of this world bear to those [mentioned in the verse] is no more than a coincidence in their names. So the pomegranate of this world does not in the least resemble the pomegranate in Paradise, except in name. The same is the case with resemblance of the date, the jujube and other such fruits [to those of Paradise]. What is intended in His saying in [perfect] semblance is only a likeness in colour, for there is a differ- ence in taste. When in Paradise the angels bring an apple to the friends of God (awliyāʾ) during the day, and then they bring them another during the night, and they ask, ‘Is this one [like the other]?’ They are told, ‘Taste it’, and on tasting it they experience a different taste to that of the first one. It should not be discounted from God’s ability, Exalted is He, that He could make an apple taste like a pomegranate, almond or quince.’

Sahl continued:

Indeed I know one of the friends of God (awliyāʾ) who saw on the seashore a man who had before him the biggest pomegranate that there ever was. The friend of God (walī) asked him what he had before him, to which he replied, ‘It is a pomegranate that I saw in Paradise. I desired it so God granted it to me, but when He placed it before me I regretted my haste for having it while still in this world.’ That man [the walī] asked, ‘May I eat some of it?’ and the man responded, ‘If you have the capacity to eat it, then do so’;22 upon which he grabbed the fruit from him and ate most of it. When the man saw him eating the fruit he it was astounded and said, ‘Receive glad tidings of Paradise, for I did not know your [spiritual] rank before you ate it; no one eats of the food of Paradise in this life except the people of Paradise.’

Then Abū Bakr asked Sahl if the one who had eaten the pomegranate had informed him of its taste, to which he replied:

He did, and its taste brings together the tastes of all fruits, and in addition it has a smoothness and coolness which is unlike any of the tastes [experienced] in this world.

 

17                   That is, so that the Muḥammadan Reality could become manifest. Again, see above, IT, pp. xxxiff.

18                   That is, humanity in general.

19                   Or, ‘from that which I created for My sake,’ i.e. the Prophet.

20                   The Qurʾānic word used is andād, which can mean ‘peer’, ‘partner’ or alternatively ‘antagonist’, ‘rival’. Tustarī had clearly understood it to mean the latter here.

21                   On the term nafs ammāra, or more fully, al-nafs al-ammāra bi’l-sūʾ and more generally on Tustarī’s teachings concerning the nafs, see above, IT, pp. xxxviiiff, and especially pp. xliff.

22                   If it is read in the passive (i.e. qudirta instead of qadarta), it could mean ‘if you are foreordained to eat it’, which is how Böwering translates it.

Then Abū Bakr commented, ‘I have no doubt, nor does anyone who heard this story from Sahl, that he himself was in fact both the possessor of that pomegranate and the one who ate it.’

Sahl was asked about His words:

[2:30] …I am appointing on earth a vicegerent…

He answered:

God, Exalted is He, before he created Adam  said to the angels I am appointing on earth a vicegerent, and He created Adam from the clay of might consisting of the light of Muḥammad , and He informed him that his self which incites evil (al-nafs al-ammāra bi’l-sūʾ) would be his worst enemy,23 and that He had created it so that he conduct it [on the path] to Him, accord- ing to his knowledge of it, regarding notions (khawāṭir)24 and impulses (himam) [which arise in it], and that he [Adam] conduct it in such a way as to remain utterly dependent on Him, seeking refuge in Him.25 If He shows it an act of obedience, it should respond by saying, ‘O help me!’, and if it is moved to an act of disobedience, it should cry out, ‘O protect me!’ If it is moved to a blessing, it should say, ‘Grant me a share of it!’ If He says to it, ‘Be patient in the face of tribulation’, it should respond saying, ‘O, grant me patience!’ His [man’s] heart should not entertain the slightest whispering (waswasa) of the self without abandoning it and return- ing to its Lord. God, Exalted is He, made the natural propensity (ṭabʿ) of the self such that it is passive when faced with commandments and active when faced with prohibitions. However, He commanded it to respond with passivity when inclined to activity, and to be active when inclined to passivity, with the words, ‘There is neither power nor strength except in God’, that is, there is no power to resist disobeying Him except through His protection, and no strength to obey Him except with His aid.

Then He ordered him [Adam] to enter the Garden and eat from it at ease wherever he wished, after which He decreed to him that he may not eat from the Tree. When he entered the Garden and saw what he saw there, he said, ‘If only we could stay here forever; yet, indeed, we have an appointed time that extends to a known limit.’ Then Satan approached him, on account of his heart’s accommodating itself (musākana)26 to the whispering of his lower self, and said, ‘Shall I lead you to the tree of eternity that you long for in this abode, which is the means to attain immortality and everlastingness?’, and he added, Your Lord only prohibited you both from this tree, lest you become angels or immortals [7:20]. His argument was just a form of deception. Thereby God, Mighty and Majestic is He, inflicted on [Adam] the Adversary’s whispering, in accordance with His pre-eternal knowledge concerning him, and in fulfilment of what He had preordained and justly decreed for him.27

 

23        Here and in his commentary on 2:22 above, Tustarī is alluding to a ḥadīth of the Prophet in which he is reported to have said: ‘Your greatest enemy is your lower self (nafs) which is between your two sides.’ This ḥadīth is listed in Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Bayhaqī’s Kitāb al-Zuhd al-kabīr (Kuwait, 1983), p. 190. Ghazālī cites the ḥadīth in the Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn, Book 21: Kitāb Sharḥ ʿajāʾib al-qalb.

24        The word khāṭir (pl. khawāṭir) has the sense of a thought which is stirred up in the mind, or occurs unexpectedly to a person. Kalābādhī explains that there are four kinds of khaṭar: one that comes from God; one that comes from an angel; one that comes from the nafs; and one that comes from the Enemy (i.e. Satan). See his Kitāb al-Taʿarruf, pp. 90–1; English trans. Arberry, p. 80.

25        That is reading yuṣirrahā on the basis of MSS Z515, f. 12a, F638, f. 7a and F3488, f. 190a, instead of yaʾmurahā as in the printed edition. It is also possible to read God as the subject throughout the sentence, in which case it would translate as: ‘…and He created it so that He might conduct it to Himself, according to His knowledge of it, regarding notions and impulses which arise in it, and that He might conduct it in the state of utter dependence on Him…’.

26        It will be seen that Tustarī uses the term musākana in a very particular way for the lower self ’s or heart’s accommodating itself to, or acquiescing in, a desire that arises, or a suggestion that concerns, other than God, or the disobeying of His command.

27        Concerning Tustarī’s doctrines of the dangers of the nafs, see Böwering, Mystical Vision, p. 258.

The first instance of forgetfulness (nisyān) that took place in Paradise was the forgetfulness of Adam, and it was a deliberate forgetfulness, not accidental, that is, it signified his abandonment of the Covenant.28

Sahl said:

I was informed in an account of one of the Followers (tābiʿūn)29 that he [the Prophet] said that forgetfulness in the Book of God, Mighty and Majestic is He, is of two kinds. [One is] abandon- ment, as for example in Sūrat al-Baqara, Or we cause to be forgotten [2:106], when it means: ‘We abandon it and we do not abrogate it’; and also in His words: Forget not kindness between you [2:237], meaning: ‘Do not abandon kindness between yourselves’; and likewise in Sūrat Ṭā Hā, but he [Moses] forgot [20:88], meaning: ‘He has abandoned the Covenant’. Another example occurs in Sūrat al-Sajda, in the words, Taste [now], for your having forgotten the encounter of this day of yours, and We [too] shall forget you [32:14], meaning: ‘We shall abandon you to your punishment as We lifted Our protection from you when you persisted in committing sin.’

He continued:

The other meaning of forgetfulness is when someone cannot remember because the informa- tion leaves his memory, exemplified by his [Moses’] words [narrated] in Sūrat al-Kahf, I did indeed forget the fish [18:63], meaning: ‘I couldn’t keep it in my memory’ — this is due to the fact that God, Exalted is He, has made Satan a partner with the natural self (nafs al-jibilla) regarding the desires that it has which have nothing to do with God, Exalted is He.30 Another example is in Moses’ words to Khiḍr, Do not take me to task on account of that which I forgot [18:73], meaning: ‘That which escaped my memory’. Also He said in Sūra Sabbiḥ [Sūrat al-Aʿlā], We will have you recite [the Qurʾān], so you do not forget. [87:6] — that is: ‘We shall have you memorise [the Qurʾān], so that you do not forget it’.

So this [Adam’s forgetfulness and Satan’s access to him] was because of his preoccupation with his own devising (tadbīr).31 His thought [for everlasting life] did not involve any considered reflection which might have made it a form of worship, but rather it was a kind of thinking that springs from a disposition (ṭabʿ) in his self (nafs al-jibilla). God, Exalted is He, decreed when He created the heavens and the earth, that if He sees in a person’s heart something in which he is acquiescing other than Himself, that person will be overpowered by Satan, who will whisper in his breast (ṣadr) to his lower self, by [generating] a desire, such that it [the nafs] will invite him to pursue it. Or he may turn back to his Lord seeking refuge in Him and clinging to His protection (iʿtiṣām). However, in his native land,32 God concealed His remembrance from [Adam] until after he had committed that which was forbidden, so that His prior knowledge concerning that which He had forbidden him could be fulfilled; and Adam’s act [of disobedi- ence] then became a habit33 among his progeny up until the Day of Resurrection. In reality, God did not mean by this the matter of eating [from the tree], but rather the acquiescence (musākana) of the desire (himma) in something other than Him. Phrased another way, [God

 

28                   The covenant that is being referred to here is the pact that God took from Adam in Paradise that he would not eat of the tree (the Qurʾān does not, like the Bible, specify that it is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil), and Tustarī’s words appear to be an allusion to 20:115: And We made a covenant with Adam before, but he forgot, and We did not find any constancy in him.

29                   The tābiʿūn are the generation immediately after the Companions of the Prophet.

30                   The construct here: nafs al-jibilla is similar to that of nafs al-ṭabʿ and Tustarī may here be using jibilla as more or less equivalent to ṭabʿ. On Tustarī’s teachings concerning different levels of the nafs, see IT, pp. xliff.

31                   i.e. his thinking about how much better it would be if he were to live forever in Paradise. In Sufi writings, human plan- ning and contrivance (tadbīr) are often contrasted with divine determination and decree (taqdīr). The latter, of course, is always shown to overcome the former. In the course of his commentary, Tustarī frequently warns against having recourse to our own planning and attempts to manage our lives (tadbīr), which are both incompatible with true trust in God. On tadbīr and taqdīr see IT, pp. xxxivff.

32                   i.e. Paradise.

33                   That is a habitual practice or norm (sunna). The published edition has ṣāra fiʿluhu ʿilm sunnatan, whereas MS 515, f. 13a omits the word ʿilm, which in any case should have been in the accusative.

is saying]: ‘He [man] should not concern himself with anything other than Me’. Adam  was not protected from the desire (himma) and the act (fiʿl) in Paradise, so what befell him, befell him for that reason. Similarly, he who claims what is not his, while his heart appeases him by entertaining the desire of his lower self, will be affiicted with God’s abandonment (tark), Mighty and Majestic is He, notwithstanding the fact that God naturally disposed his lower self to it, unless He has mercy upon him by protecting him from his own devising (tadbīr), and helps him against his enemy, that is, his self that incites to evil.34 The people of Paradise, when they are in Paradise, will be protected from the planning (tadbīr) that they were accustomed to in the abode of this world. Yet Adam, when he was placed in Paradise, was not protected from his heart’s acquiescence in the planning of his lower self for immortality. Do you not see that calamity (balāʾ) befell him because of the reliance (sukūn) of his heart upon what his lower self whispered to him? And so desire (hawā) and lust (shahwa) overwhelmed knowledge (ʿilm), the intellect (ʿaql), lucidity (bayān) and the light of the heart (nūr al-qalb), on account of that which God, Exalted is He, had preordained. Thus the end of the situation was as the Prophet  foretold when he said: ‘Truly passion and desire overwhelm knowledge and intellect’.35

[2:37] Thereafter Adam received certain words from his Lord, and He relented towards him...

Sahl was asked, ‘What were the words that Adam learnt from his Lord?’ He replied:

Muḥammad b. Sawwār informed me, [in a narration] from his father, from al-Thawrī, from ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. Rafīʿ, on the authority of ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿUmar , that he [the latter] said: ‘When Adam  recalled his error he said: “O Lord, do you see the act of disobedience by which I disobeyed You as something that You preordained for me before You created me, or some- thing that I initiated?” He replied: “Indeed, it is something that I preordained for you, that you would do as a consequence of My lifting My protection from you, fifty thousand years before creating you.” Then Adam  asked, “As you preordained it for me, then forgive me, for indeed We have wronged our own souls [7:23], through carrying out the lower self ’s desire and relying on its devising, and we have repented from ever going back to that. If You do not forgive us — that is, in this life, and have mercy upon us, during what remains of our lives we shall surely be among the lost [7:23] — that is, among the damned and tormented in the Here- after.”’ So these were the words which God, Exalted is He, was speaking about when He said: Thereafter Adam received certain words from his Lord, and his Lord relented towards him, truly He is the Relenting, the Merciful.

It was related from the Prophet  that he said: ‘Adam asked Moses, (peace be upon them both), “How many years before my creation do you find that my sin was destined for me?” He replied, “Forty thousand years.”’ The Prophet  then said, ‘Thus did Adam confute Moses (peace be upon them both).’36

Sahl was asked about God’s words:

[2:30] …Whilst we glorify You with praise and sanctify You…

It means ‘We purify ourselves for Your sake by saying what You inspired us to say through the favour that You bestowed upon us. Blessed are You, O our Lord!’

[2:40] …And be in awe of Me.

 

34        MSS Z515, f. 13a and F3488, f. 191a both have nafs while F638, f. 7b has al-nafs al-ammāra bi’l-sūʾ. None of the MSS has

Iblīs wa, which is in the printed edition.

35        The editor of the Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya edition notes that this is not a prophetic ḥadīth, but a saying of Ḥārith b. Asad, which is cited in Iṣfahānī, Ḥilyat al-awliyāʾ, vol. 10, p. 88.

36        This is part of a tradition which relates how the prophet Moses rebukes Adam for being the one who had humankind exiled from Paradise. Adam’s response is to remind Moses that all this was predestined by God before his creation. For an account of this tradition, see Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad Samʿānī, Rawḥ al-arwāḥ fī sharḥ asmāʾ al-Malik al-Fattāḥ (Tehran, 1989), p. 156.

Sahl was asked, ‘What is this awe (rahba) that He commanded them to feel towards Him?’ He replied:

He meant by this, the [true] locating of the light of certainty (mawḍiʿ nūr al-yaqīn)37 in rela- tion to the heart’s insight (baṣar al-qalb), and gnosis (maʿrifa) in relation to the entirety of the heart (kulliyat al-qalb). For endurance (mukābada) and struggle (mujāhada) are a part of faith ⸢for the sake of God (īmān li’Llāh)⸣. Then, when the heart ceases to have fear of all other than Him, the light of certainty is unveiled, and the servant who abides in faith for the sake of God, attains ⸢to faith in [or through] God (īmān bi’Llāh)⸣,38 with an unshakeable realisa- tion of His oneness (tawḥīdan ʿalā tamkīn), by which I mean, his heart is in a state of tranquil and confident repose with his Master (sukūn qalbihi ilā mawlāhu).39 Consequently, the light of certainty unveils the knowledge of the eye of certainty (ʿilm ʿayn al-yaqīn),40 and this is the attainment (wuṣūl) of God, Exalted is He. For this certainty, by virtue of the light of certainty (bi-nūr al-yaqīn) that leads to the eye of certainty, is not ⸢something that is brought into being (mukawwan)⸣,41 nor is it something created (makhlūq); rather it is a light from the light of the essence of God (dhāt al-Ḥaqq), not in the sense of an indwelling (ḥulūl), nor of conjoining (jamʿ), or conjunction (ittiṣāl). Rather, the meaning of the servant’s attainment (ittiṣāl)42 of his Master refers to the [true] locating (mawḍiʿ) of his realisation of the divine oneness, and his obedience to God and His Messenger.

So, according to the strength of his perception (baṣar) of God, he will attain full awareness (taqwā) and awe (rahba) of Him. The root of full awareness of God is in relinquishing the lower self (mubāyanat al-nafs),43 so let [the servant] relinquish [the lower self] for this, and not accommodate any of the pleasures [demanded by] its desire (hawā), nor any of those pleasures to which it [the lower self] is summoning him, and for which it has no excuse.44 Know that human beings will vary in rank on the Day of Resurrection according to the measure of the light of certainty that they possess. The weightier the certainty a person has the heavier will his scales weigh, even though there might [otherwise] be less in his scales.

He [Sahl] was asked, ‘How can you tell the soundness of someone’s certainty?’ To which he replied:

By the strength of his confidence (thiqa) in God, Exalted is He, and his good opinion (ḥusn al-ẓann) of Him.45 Trust in God is witnessing (mushāhada) through certainty (yaqīn), the eye of certainty (ʿayn al-yaqīn), and the wholeness [of its vision] (kulliyyatihi). Its perfection and goal is the attainment of God, Mighty and Majestic is He.

 

37                   The words ‘light of certainty’ have been substituted here for light of the self (nūr al-nafs) on the basis of Böwering’s translation of this passage. We have found this only in MS F3488, f. 191b. The other two MSS (Z515, f. 14a, F638, f. 8a), as well as the printed edition, have nūr al-nafs.

38                   These two additions were made with reference to MSS Z515, f. 14a and F638, f. 8a.

39                   Tustarī appears to be teaching that endurance and struggle remain at the level of faith ‘for God’, that is, while the aspirant is in a state of separation from God, believing from the point of view of duality. However, once he reaches the level of tamkīn in tawḥīd, that is, firmly and unshakeably in the realisation of the divine oneness, he will have attained the level of faith in or through God. At this level also there can be no fear or awareness (taqwā) of other than God, because he is not conscious of anything other than God. On faith and certainty, see also IT, above p. xlviii.

40                   The word ʿayn in this context was added from the MSS Z515, f. 14a and F3488, f. 192a. MS F638, f. 8a, however, has ʿilm al-yaqīn, like the published edition. On the expression ʿayn al-yaqīn, see above IT, p. xlix, n. 209.

41                   ‘Brought into being or existentiated (mukawwan)’ was added on the basis of the MSS: MS Z515, f. 14a, F638, f. 8a and F3488, f. 192a.

42                   Sic in all the MSS as well as the published edition. Perhaps it should have been wuṣūl here, as earlier in the passage. Alternatively, the previous ittiṣāl, should perhaps have been ittiḥād.

43                   Or it could mean ‘separating the self [from the unreal]’.

44                   Tustarī has returned in his discourse to the level of awareness of the separation of the slave and his Master, perhaps to remind his listeners on the one hand that, aside from those moments when the mystic experiences union with God, when he attains the realisation of tawḥīd through God, and the envisioning or ‘eye’ of certainty (ʿayn al-yaqīn), the awareness of man’s slavehood and God’s lordship must remain. On the other hand, it is a reminder that the way to taqwā and rahba requires the purification of the self from its desires and from other than God.

45                   The subject of good opinion [of God] ḥusn al-ẓann is discussed further by Tustarī later in his commentary on this sūra, and is also discussed above, IT, pp. lii–liii.

[2:41] …And fear Me46

When asked about this verse, Sahl replied:

What He means by this is [their being aware] of His prior knowledge concerning them, that is, ‘You should never feel secure from the [divine] ruse (makr),47 nor of His act of giving respite (istidrāj),48 such that your hearts become complacent in the observance of your security in this world while you persist in falling short [in good works]; nor should you rely upon My leniency towards you in the matter of [not] hastening your punishment, in that same [false] sense of security, and in your delusion (ightirār) and heedlessness (ghafla), lest you perish.’49

The Prophet  said: ‘Had Jesus the son of Mary  had greater certainty (yaqīn) he would have walked in the air as he walked on water.’50 And truly our Prophet  traversed the air on the Night Journey (Isrāʾ) due to the strength of the light of his certainty, [a certainty] which God, Exalted is He, granted to him from His light, as an increase in light to the light that he already possessed from God, Exalted is He. The Prophet  also said: ‘If gnosis (maʿrifa) had remained firmly rooted in the heart of David  and he had not slipped into negligence, he would not have fallen into disobedience.’ By my life, truly gnosis (maʿrifa) was enclosed within its own abodes (udrijat fī awṭānihā),51 in order that what was contained within God’s prior knowledge concerning him would befall him. This is because it [God’s prior knowledge] inevitably had to be manifested in his qualities, since God’s knowledge is a final decree that cannot change to other than what the All-Knowing knows, Mighty and Majestic is He. Indeed God, Mighty and Majestic is He, concealed [from David]  in David’s realm, the light of certainty (nūr al-yaqīn) by which he could have perceived [with] the eye of certainty (ʿayn al-yaqīn) and the wholeness [of its vision],52 in order that His decree could thereby be fulfilled, Exalted is He. Do you not see that in reality the servant only beholds God by means of a subtle ‘substance’ (laṭīfa) from God, through its connection to his heart (bi-wuṣūlihā ilā-qalbihi). This subtle substance pertains to the attributes of the essence of his Lord. It is neither brought into being (mukawwana), nor created (makhlūqa), neither conjunct [with God] (mawṣūla), nor cut off [from Him] (maqṭūʿa). It is a secret (sirr) from a secret to a secret, an unseen [mystery] (ghayb) from an unseen to an unseen.53 Certainty is through God, and the servant finds certainty due to a cause that comes directly from Him to the servant, according to the measure of the gifts that God has apportioned him, and the wholeness (jumla) of his innermost heart (suwaydāʾ qalbihi).

Faith has two abodes (waṭanān),54 and it is that which settles and does not leave. The light of certainty, [however] comes in momentary [flashes] and when it settles and takes root, it becomes faith. Thereafter certainty comes in flashes and increases in this manner indefinitely.

[2:42] And do not obscure the truth with falsehood, and do not conceal truth wittingly.

 

46        Or we might translate this as ‘Be fully aware’ or ‘mindful of Me’. The Qurʾānic words are iyyāya fa’ttaqūn.

47        The word makr is used in Sufism to refer to an illusion created by God to test the spiritual wayfarer.

48        The word istidrāj here means God’s drawing a person to destruction little by little, so that they are lulled into a sense of security and thinking that all is well.

49        Tustarī is here using iltifāt, the rhetorical feature of the Qurʾān, which involves shifts between the first person singular (or plural) and the third person singular.

50        Bayhaqī, Kitāb al-Zuhd al-kabīr, p. 357.

51       That is to say, God decreed that it (gnosis) should not be available to the prophet David at that moment, just as we see further down in this same passage that God concealed from him the light of certainty.

52        lit. and its ‘entirety’ (kulliyya). See above, IT, p. xlix, and the commentary on 102:7 below.

53        This passage is closely related to, and helps to clarify, the passage cited above on the previous verse (2:40), which discussed attainment of the eye of certainty (ʿayn al-yaqīn). Both passages use different words derived from the root w-ṣ-l (here wuṣūl, in the previous passage ittiṣāl), indicating an indefinable connection and closeness to God, that nonetheless does not imply any conjunction, or indwelling on the part of God.

54        Sic in the published edition and all three MSS. Tustarī does not say what these two abodes are, though elsewhere he states that the locus of faith (īmān) is the heart (qalb), on which see above IT, p. xlii.

Sahl was asked about this verse, to which he replied:

This means, ‘Do not cover up a matter of the Hereafter because of a worldly concern.’ What [God] means is that it is not allowed for the people of truth to conceal the truth from the people of truth (ahl al-ḥaqq) in particular, or from those who long to be guided thereby to God. As for the people of truth, they will increase in insight (baṣīra) [through hearing it], and as for those who are not of the elite of the people of truth, the words of God are a source of guidance for them and of direction to God, Exalted is He.

[2:45] Seek help in patience and prayer…

When asked about these words Sahl said:

Patience here [means] fasting, while prayer [means] the bond (waṣla) of gnosis (maʿrifa). He whose prayer — this being his bond [with God] — is sound, will be exempt from accusation (tuhma) before God; for interrogation (suʾāl) is a form of accusation, but with this bond there remains no interrogation. Do you not take note of His words [in the second part of this verse],

It is hard indeed, except for the humble? 55

[2:48] …and no intercession shall be accepted from it [the soul], nor shall compensation be taken, neither shall they be helped.

When asked about these words Sahl said:

It means that even if it [the soul] were to bring the sum of all good actions great and small, in abundance or just a few, none of this will be accepted from it on its arrival on the Day of Resurrection, nor anything from him [the servant]. Compensation (ʿadl) here means equiva- lence [or like, mathal]. Do you not note His words: Or its compensation in fasts [5:95] — that is, its equivalence and reward?

[2:55] …and the thunderbolt took you even as you looked on56

When asked about this verse Sahl said:

The thunderbolt (al-ṣāʿiqa) signifies death, and it also signifies every destructive punishment that God sends down upon whomever He wills of His servants, which they behold with their own eyes, whereby He shows to others among them a lesson and an admonishment.

[2:71] …and without blemish…57

When asked about this verse Sahl said:

This means that there should be no mark on it which blemishes it, nor a patch of colour which differs from the colour of the rest of its body. In this there is wisdom from its Maker and a lesson for the one who takes heed by it, and grows in certainty because of his faith and his profession of God’s oneness.

[2:72] And when you killed a living soul and disputed thereon…

That is, you fell into discord concerning it. Why then did you slay them, if you speak the truth?

[3:183]58

 

55                   That is to say that it (prayer) is burdensome to those who lack humility, according to the commentary of Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī and Jalāl al-Dīn al-Maḥallī, in Tafsīr al-Jalālayn, ed. ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Arnāʾūṭ and Aḥmad Khālid Shukrī (Damascus and Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr, 1998), trans. Feras Hamza (Louisville, KY: Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought and Fons Vitae, 2008).

56                   This verse refers to Moses’ people after they had been reprimanded for worshipping the calf in his absence (2:51–4). They then told him they would not believe him until they saw God openly, which is when they witnessed the thunderbolt.

57                   This is among the qualities of the cow that was to be sacrificed by the Children of Israel, as commanded by God through Moses.

58                   The relevance of the commentary on the verse introduced here is Tustarī’s explanation that a matter may be addressed to a people concerning members of their community, even though what is being referred to may have occurred in the past. Likewise, a matter may be addressed to the community when it concerns the Prophet and vice versa.

Sahl said regarding these words:

This is a reproach from God, Mighty and Majestic is He, to them [the Jews] with regard to those of their forefathers who were murderers of prophets. As you know, those who are addressed in this verse had not killed a prophet at the time of the Prophet , nor was there at that time any other Prophet but him. However, God addressed them with reference to those who came before them among their kin, as He addressed the Prophet  with what was in reality directed to his nation [as a whole] with His words: O Prophet! When you [men] divorce women, divorce them by their prescribed period [65:1] The same [principle applies] to His words: About what are they questioning one another?  About the awesome tidings [78:1, 2], [by which is meant], ‘For what reason do you question the Prophet , when he is more knowledgeable concerning that’.59

[2:175] …Ah! What boldness [they show] for the Fire!

When asked about these words, Sahl replied:

That is [boldness] in issuing legal ruling[s] (fatwā) without sufficient knowledge of the Sunna or the divine law (sharʿ), and [boldness] in servitude to the practice of the people of the Fire.

[2:102] …But they could not thus harm anyone except by God’s permission…

That is, save that it be in God’s prior knowledge, which precedes the occurrence of the act of the one doing it.

Concerning His words, Exalted is He:

[3:102] …Fear God as He should be feared…

[Sahl said]:

That is, by the worship He has prescribed for you, and not by that which God merits in His essence (fī dhātihi).60

[2:59] …So we sent upon the transgressors a plague…

He said:

the plague being punishment.

[2:112] Nay, but whoever submits his purpose to God, being virtuous...

Concerning these words of God, Exalted is He, Sahl said:

That is, his religion, is as it is said in Sūrat al-Nisāʾ: Who is fairer in religion than one who sub- mits his purpose to God? [4:125], meaning: ‘Than a person who dedicates (akhlaṣa) his religion purely to God’, that is, Islam and its laws.61 This meaning is reiterated in Sūra Luqmān: Whoever surrenders his purpose to God, and is virtuous [31:22], which means [whoever] devotes himself in religion purely to God.

He was asked about His words, Exalted is He:

[2:78] …Who know not the Book, but only [see therein their own] desires…

He said:

This means that they rest their hopes in God based upon falsehood, inclining towards the desire (hawā) of their lower selves without following guidance from God. This is referring to the Jews.62

 

59        According to the commentaries, these verses are being addressed to the Quraysh.

60        Or ‘as He is in Himself ’, because that would be beyond the capacity of a human being, just as the Prophet is reported to have said at the end of a prayer: ‘I cannot adequately encompass Your praise. You are as You have praised Yourself.’ This prayer is reported in a ḥadīth which is listed in many collections, including Muslim, Ṣaḥīḥ, ‘Kitāb al-Ṣalāt’, and in Tirmidhī, Nawādir al-uṣūl, vol. 2, p. 384.

61        The fourth form of the verb khalaṣa here also has the meaning of sincerity, as in the title of Sūra 112 (Al-Ikhlāṣ).

62        Most of the traditions cited by Ṭabarī on this verse state that these were illiterate people among the Jews, perhaps because much of this part of Sūrat al-Baqara relates to the Jews. However, a couple of traditions simply state that they were illiterate people.

He was asked about His words:

[2:87 and 253] …and confirmed him with the Holy Spirit…63

He replied:

The Holy (al-Quddūs) refers to God, that is, the One who is sanctified above having children, partners or a spouse.

[2:128] …and of our progeny, a community submissive to You…

‘A community’ (umma) refers to a group of people, and ‘submissive’ (muslima) means they submit to Your commandments and prohibitions, thereby attaining Your good pleasure and acceptance.

He was asked about His words:

[2:134 and 141] That is a community that has passed away. Theirs is what they have earned…

He replied:

That is to say, this was a community that passed away in accordance with God’s prior knowl- edge concerning them.

[2:143] …a community of the middle [way] (wasaṭan)…

That is, they are just. In this way, a believer gives credence to God’s servants in accordance with His words, He believes in God, and has faith in the believers [9:61], which means that he affirms [the truth of] God and ascribes truth to the believers.

His words, Exalted is He:

[2:143] …For God is gentle with people, merciful.

That is, He shows great [lit. intense, shadīd] mercy (raḥma) and kindness (raʾfa) towards them. This refers to the gentleness (rifq) and clemency (ḥilm) that He shows them due to His knowl- edge of their weakness and of the fact that they have no strength before Him, except through Him and from Him.

[2:148] Every person has a direction to which he turns…

He means by this that God, Exalted is He, turns people of each religion in the direction that He wills.

[2:155] …Yet give good tidings to those who are patient.

He [Sahl] said:

They are those for whom patience (ṣabr) has become a way of life (ʿaysh), a [source of] rest (rāḥa) and a homeland (waṭan). They find delight in practising patience for the sake of God, Exalted is He, in every situation.

[2:157] They are those on whom [descend] blessings from their Lord, and mercy; it is they who are truly guided.

Sahl said:

What is implied by blessings (ṣalawāt) upon them is the bestowal of mercy (taraḥḥum) upon them, that is, a bestowal of mercy from their Lord. The Prophet  said, ‘May God bless the family of Abū Awfāʾ, when they brought him charitable donations, by which he meant ‘[May God] have mercy on them.’64

He also said:

Muḥammad b. Sawwār told us on the authority of Abū ʿAmr b. ʿAlāʾ that he said: ‘Ṣalāt’ has three meanings, one of which is the prescribed prayer with its bowings and prostrations, which is referred to when God says: So pray to Your Lord and sacrifice [108:2], that is, grasp your left arm with your right hand in prayer, in self-abasement and in awe before God, Exalted is He. This

 

63                   The Arabic construction here is rūḥ al-quddūs meaning literally ‘spirit of the holy’.

64                   Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ, ‘Kitāb al-Zakāt’.

is also reported from ʿAlī . The second meaning is to show mercy (taraḥḥum) [as discussed above], and the third meaning is supplication (duʿāʾ), as [for example] in the prayer over the dead. Indeed, the Prophet  said: ‘If any of you are invited for a meal, you should [accept the invitation]. But if [the one invited] is fasting he should pray’,65 that is, he should make a sup- plication for them to be endowed with blessing. Furthermore, the Prophet  said in a ḥadīth, ‘…and may the angels pray over you’, meaning pray for mercy to be bestowed upon you. In this [same] ḥadīth the Prophet  went on to say, ‘And if someone eats at his house, the angels pray over him [the host] until eventide’, meaning the angels supplicate for him.66

Sahl continued:

Ṣalāt carries two meanings: one is the seeking of forgiveness (istighfār), and the other is forgiveness itself (maghfira). As for the meaning of ‘seeking forgiveness’, it is referred to in His words, And pray for them [9:103], that is, ask forgiveness for them; [and in His words], to [secure] the prayers of the Messenger [9:99], meaning asking for the Messenger’s supplication for forgiveness. As for its meaning of ‘forgiveness’, it is referred to in His words, Exalted is He, He it is who blesses you [33:43], meaning: ‘He forgives you’, and [again in His words]: as do His angels… [33:43], by which is meant: ‘They seek forgiveness for you’. In the same vein are His words: Indeed God and His angels bless the Prophet [33:56], which mean: ‘Truly God forgives the Prophet, and the angels seek forgiveness for him.’ Then He says, O you who believe, invoke blessings on him, and invoke peace on him in a worthy manner [33:56], meaning: ‘Seek forgive- ness for him’. Also in Sūrat al-Baqara are His words: Blessings from their Lord [2:157], meaning: ‘Forgiveness from their Lord.’

[2:161] …Upon them shall be the curse of God…

This means that their lot is banishment (ṭard) from the mercy of God, and alienation. In this manner, every accursed one is banished.

[2:166] …and the cords are cut away before them67

This refers to the ties by which they were connected to each other in this world. For the sake of [these ties] mutual affections were cemented, without obedience to God and His Messenger, and without seeking God’s good pleasure.

[2:186] …So let them respond to Me…

He [Sahl] said,

[Let them respond] through supplication (duʿāʾ), …and believe in Me…, — that is, ‘Affirm Me as True (saddaqanī), for I am there whenever someone calls on Me with sincerity (mukhliṣan), without despondency (āyis) or despair (qanaṭ).’

[2:197] And take provision, but the best of provisions is mindfulness of God...68

He [Sahl] said:

It [mindfulness of God, taqwā] is the [best travelling] companion (rafīq) leading to the remem- brance (dhikr) of God, Exalted is He, in fear (khawfan); just as there is no [travelling] provision (zād) for the lover (muḥibb) save the Beloved (maḥbūb), and no provision for the possessor of mystical knowledge (ʿārif) save the Known (maʿrūf).69

 

65        Muslim, Ṣaḥīḥ, ‘Kitāb al-Nikāḥ’; Tirmidhī, Sunan, ‘Kitāb al-Ṣawm’.

66       Ibn Ḥanbal, al-Musnad (Egypt, n.d.), vol. 3, p. 137. Both these traditions of the Prophet are indications of the importance in Muslim culture of both giving and receiving hospitality. All references in the text are to this edition, unless another is mentioned.

67        In its outward meaning this verse refers to those who were leaders and misled their followers in denying God. At the Resurrection, they will disown all their followers, denying that they misled them.

68        This is part of the verse which describes some injunctions concerning the performance of the Hajj. Provision here firstly refers to bringing provisions (zād) to suffice for the journey.

69        Interestingly, Tustarī seems here to be alluding to three approaches to, or dispositions in, the mystical way, namely those of fear (makhāfa), love (maḥabba) and [mystical] knowledge (maʿrifa).

[Continuing on from this] Sahl explained that the words, If he is able to make his way there [3:97] are an allusion to the provision (zād) and the riding beast (rāḥila). He then asked, ‘Do you know what the provision and riding beast are?’ They replied: ‘No’. So he said, ‘The provision is remembrance (dhikr) and the riding beast is patience (ṣabr).’ Then he went on to relate how a man had accompanied him on the road to Mecca, and for two days had not found anything [to eat], so he said, ‘O teacher! I need sustenance!’ to which he [Sahl] replied, ‘Sustenance is God.’ The other man then said, ‘One cannot do without sustenance for the body to function.’ To which he replied, ‘All bodies exist [only] through God, Mighty and Majestic is He.’ Then he recited the following lines [in the basīṭ metre]:

O Beloved, replenish [my longing]!

May the water of longing pour down upon you from the rain cloud, Whose pouring increases my sorrows and anguish.

An anguish remains in my heart, consuming me,

Truly as love increases, with it will increase my rapture.70

After that, he said, ‘It is the world71 that severs those who are devoted to God from God, Mighty and Majestic is He.’ Finally, he said, ‘The livelihood (ʿaysh) of angels is in obedience (ṭāʿa); the livelihood of the prophets is in knowledge (ʿilm) and waiting for relief (intiẓār al-faraj);72 and the livelihood of the veracious (ṣiddīqūn) is in emulation (iqtidāʾ).73 As for the rest, their livelihood is in food and drink.’

[2:197] …So fear me,74 O people of inner substance (ulū’l-albāb)!

[Sahl said] that this means:

‘O people of understanding (fahm)!’75 That is, those who are possessed of sound intellects (ʿuqūl salīma). Truly God, Exalted is He, has commanded them to be aware of Him according to the capacity of their intellects, by virtue of that which He has specially allotted them, such as: the light of guidance by His essence;76 [their] receptivity to [that light] from Him; His having singled them out by depositing something (maʿnā) within them; and His knowledge of them prior to their creation. So [in this verse], He reminded them of that bounty He had granted to them, and summoned them by this antecedent bounty to recognise a second bounty after their pre-eternal gift, which is the reality of gnosis (maʿrifa), and to accept [that] knowledge by dedicating their actions to Him.

It was asked [of him], ‘What is the meaning and reality of mindfulness of God (taqwā)?’ He answered:

Its reality belongs to God, Mighty and Majestic is He, by virtue of the fact that you will be pressed on to death while in possession of few good deeds, and likewise [that you will be pressed on to the] punishment for your sins.77 Thus [the one who is mindful of God] knows this and fears Him, and does not rely on anything save Him.

 

70                   Some reference has been made to Gaafar’s dissertation in the translation of these verses.

71                   i.e. in this case, concern for physical sustenance.

72                     i.e. from the suffering which they inevitably bear, according to the ḥadīth, ‘Those who suffer the most are the prophets and those most like them’ (al-anbiyāʾ wa’l-amthāl wa’l-amthāl). See Tirmidhī, Sunan ‘Kitāb al-Zuhd’; Ibn Māja, Sunan, ‘Abwāb al-fitan’; Ibn Ḥanbal, al-Musnad (Cairo, 1895), vol. 1, pp. 172 (the latter version of this ḥadith includes the virtuous (ṣāliḥūn) after the prophets), pp. 174, 180; vol. 4, p. 369. This teaching will be discussed by Tustarī again later.

73                   Probably what is meant is emulation of the example of the Prophet. Tustarī often uses the term iqtidāʾ without specifying who is to be emulated. See IT above, pp. liiiff.

74                   The word used is ittaqūnī, from the same root as taqwā, and therefore could also mean: ‘Be fully aware, wary or mindful of Me!’ See above, p. 13, n. 9, regarding the translation of words derived from the root w-q-y.

75                   All the MSS (Z515, f. 18a, F638, f. 10a and F3488, f. 195a) have the plural here (fuhūm), corresponding to the plural in the following ʿuqūl, though the plural would not be idiomatic in English.

76                   Note that earlier Tustarī states that the eye of certainty is a light from the light of the essence of God. See his commentary on 2:40 above.

77                   Note that the MSS Z515, f. 18a only has the following: wa kadhā khaṭāyā bi-asbāb al-ʿuqūba.

Someone said to him, ‘Truly, the reasons for people’s mindfulness of God vary.’ He affirmed this and added, ‘Just as their deeds vary.’ Abū Bakr [al-Sijzī] then said, ‘I mentioned that it is confirmed in the Qurʾān that the awareness that every man [has of God] is according to his capacity.’ He [Sahl] replied, ‘Yes, indeed. God, Exalted is He, has said, So be aware of God as much as you can; listen and obey... [64:16].’ Thus does He direct them to what is within their capability.’ So I [Abū Bakr] then said to him, ‘Truly God, Exalted is He, has said, Fear God as He should be feared [3:102]’, to which Sahl replied:

As for our companions, they say that this is addressed to a people distinguished by their eminence, because what was demanded of them was not [even] demanded of the prophets (). And as both Abraham and Jacob said to their children: ‘My sons, God has chosen for you the [true] religion; see that you do not die save in submission’ [2:132]. So truly God requires His creatures to worship Him according to their [individual] capacities. For those who were told, ‘Fear God as He should be feared’, awareness of God (taqwā) was demanded of them in the measure of their knowledge (maʿrifa) of Him. What is meant here is ‘Fear God as He should be feared’, as much as you can. This does not, however, constitute permission to abandon awareness of God. [Note that] in the context of Sūra Āl ʿImrān, the words: See that you do not die save in submission [3:102] mean: submitting to God’s command in every condition and consigning [your affairs] to Him, while others are directed back to striving (ijtihād). So understand the difference between the two in this address, for although the wording is the same, the implication differs, the one [applicable] to the elect, and the other to the generality of people.78

Abū Bakr [al-Sijzī] then related that Sahl said:

If those who are mindful of God (muttaqūn) had supplicated against the transgressors, (musrifūn), they [the latter] would have perished, both those who came first and those who come last. How- ever God made the mindful of God as a mercy for the oppressors (ẓālimūn), that by means of them He might save them, and indeed the most noble (akram) of creatures before God, Mighty and Majestic, are those who are [fully] mindful and aware of Him. As He has said, Truly the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one among you who is most mindful of Him.’ [49:13] So whoever hopes for God’s favour (karāma), Mighty and Majestic is He, should be mindful of Him, for truly it is through mindfulness of God that a person may attain God’s favour and admittance into Paradise, abide in His vicinity, and triumph with a tremendous victory. Indeed the Prophet  said, ‘Whoever corrects his inner self [lit. secret, sarīra] will find that God puts right his public life and whoever fears God in his innermost secret, will find that God draws him nearer and brings him close [to Him].’79

[2:201] …Our Lord, give us good in this world…

These words refer to knowledge and sincere devotion, ...and good in the Hereafter…, refers to His good pleasure (riḍā), as He said: God is well-pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him… [5:119].

[2:224] Do not make God’s [name] an excuse in your oaths not to be righteous…

Sahl was asked concerning this verse, ‘What is this righteousness (birr)?’ He replied: ‘This means that you do not maintain your family ties [just] because of an oath.’ Then [in this connection] someone mentioned to him the verse: It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards East or West [2:177], and he [Sahl] said:

 

78        This is because the first instance of the command that they should die in submission [to God] [2:132] comes in the context of Abraham and Jacob addressing their sons and telling them that God has chosen for them the true religion, whereas the second instance of the command to die in submission to God [3:102] follows the rigorous command to fear God as He should be feared, which is said to be possible only for an elect among the believers, and which, Tustarī has suggested, was not even demanded of the prophets (i.e. the sons of Abraham and Jacob).

79        Ibn Abī Shayba, al-Muṣannaf (Riyadh, 1988), vol. 7, pp. 162 and 217.

This means: it is not righteousness that you do nothing other than this; [True] righteousness is [that of] the one who believes in God [2:177], to the end of that verse.80 Do you not notice how He says, Do you bid others to righteousness, while you forget [to practise it] yourselves? [2:44], which is a reference to Jews who were commanding their foster brothers to obey God, Exalted is He, and to follow the Prophet , while they themselves did not do that.

[2:235] …But do not make arrangements with them secretly…

That is, arrangements of marriage, …and know that God knows what is within yourselves, so be wary of Him…, by which is meant that He knew what was hidden within yourselves before He created you, namely, every single act81 done in the way of goodness, that He was to com- mand and the performance of which He would aid, and [likewise] every act [you would do], which He had forbidden, and from which He would not protect [you].82 He abandoned whom He willed to his desire, so that the act which He had forbidden would become manifest from that person, and He did not grant His protection, out of His justice and decree. The meaning of His words, what is within yourselves refers to that which you have not yet done, and within yourselves refers to that which you will do. So be wary of Him, that is to say, humbly implore Him concerning it,83 that He should be the one who takes care of your affairs by extending His aid and guaranteeing your success in the [realisation] of obedience, and by granting His protection from forbidden [acts] through [His] help and support. Do you not take heed of the words of ʿUmar and Ibn Masʿūd? :

‘O God! If in the Mother of the Book that is with You,84 we are among those who are wretched and deprived, then erase that from [our destiny] and appoint us to be among those of felicity who are encompassed by Your mercy. Truly You erase what You will and establish [what You will] and the Mother of the Book is with You.’

His words:

[2:204] …Yet he is the most stubborn in altercation.85

That is, [he is] extremely contentious [on the basis of] what is false. Indeed, ʿĀʾisha  narrated that the Prophet  said, ‘The most abhorrent of men before God, Exalted is He, are those who are stubborn and antagonistic.’86

His words:

[2:214] …And were so shaken [in spirit]…87

 

80                   2:177 is a long verse which outlines the tenets of Muslim belief as well as other requisite virtues. It reads as follows: It is not righteousness that you turn your faces to the East and to the West. True righteousness is [that of] the one who believes in God and the Last Day and the angels and the Book and the prophets, and who gives of his substance, however cherished, to kinsmen and orphans and the needy and the traveller and beggars, and sets slaves free, and who observes the prayer and pays the alms; and those who fulfil their covenant when they have engaged in a covenant, those who endure with fortitude misfortune, hardship and peril; these are the ones who are truthful, and these are the ones who are mindful of God.

81                   lit. every act (fiʿl) of motion (ḥaraka) and stillness (sukūn).

82                   On this doctrine see above, IC, p. 2, and IT, pp. xxxiii–xxxiv.

83                   i.e. the ‘latent’ acts of goodness and disobedience that are within us.

84                   i.e. what is preordained, before it is even written on the ‘Preserved’ or ‘Well-Guarded Tablet,’ on which see above IC, p. 5,

n. 22. The ‘Mother of the Book’ (umm al-kitāb) appears in around forty ḥadīths and is interpreted in a number of ways. Most often it denotes the heavenly prototype of the Qurʾān, but it is also, as here, identified with the Preserved Tablet upon which the destiny of all creatures has been inscribed. In this meaning, it is found in the Qurʾān: God effaces what He will and confirms [what He will]. With Him is the Mother of the Book [13:39]. The term ‘Mother of the Book’ is also one of the many names given to Sūrat al-Fātiḥa, on account of the fact that it is said to contain the whole Qurʾān. See

E. Geoffroy and F. Daftary, ‘Umm al-kitāb’, EI2, vol. x, p. 854.

85                   According to Tafsīr al-Jalālayn this refers to al-Akhnas b. Sharīq, while Ṭabarī cites this as one view along with others which consider that the verse concerns the hypocrites more generally.

86                   Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ, ‘Kitāb al-Tafsīr’.

87                   These words occur in the middle of a verse which describes a people (according to the commentaries, the early Muslim community in Mecca), who were suffering all sorts of trials and hardships.

That is, their willing was through Him, they were fearful because of Him, and were wary of God’s ruse (makr), Mighty and Majestic is He; …that the Messenger and those who believed with him said, ‘When will God’s help come?’ Ah, but surely God’s help is nigh.

Sahl was asked concerning these words, ‘Did they ask this because they found that help slow in arriving?’ He replied:

No, but when they lost hope in their own devising (tadbīr) they said, ‘When will God’s help come?’ Hence, when God, Exalted is He, saw that they had given up on their own power (ḥawl), strength (quwwa) and devising (tadbīr), and saw their display of neediness for Him, and [their admission that] they had no means without Him, He responded to them with His words, Ah, but surely God’s help is nigh.

Sahl further said:

Affiiction (balāʾ) and well-being (ʿāfiya) are from God, Mighty and Majestic is He. The com- mand and prohibition are from Him; protection and the granting of success are from Him; and reward and punishment are from Him. However, actions are attributed (manṣūba) to the children of Adam, so whoever performs a good action must express gratitude to merit thereby an increase [in goodness]; and whoever performs a wicked act must seek forgiveness, so that he thereby merits forgiveness. Affiiction from God is of two kinds: an affiiction of mercy and an affiiction of punishment. An affiiction of mercy leads the affiicted person to show his utter need (iftiqār) for God, Mighty and Majestic is He, and leads him to the abandonment of devis- ing (tadbīr). However, an affiiction of punishment leads the affiicted person [to rely] on his own choice (ikhtiyār) and devising.

Sahl was then asked, ‘Which is more difficult, patience (ṣabr) in [a state of] well-being or patience during adversity?’ He replied:

Asking for safety (salāma) in times of security is more difficult than asking for safety in [a state of] fear.

[On the same subject] Sahl said regarding His words, And if anyone believes in God, [God] guides his heart [aright] [64:11], ‘[Whoever] believes in God and that his affiiction comes from God, will find his heart guided by God to the expectation of relief (intiẓār al-faraj) from Him’.

His words:

[5:2] …Help one another to righteousness and mindfulness of God…

That is, to the performance of the obligatory acts, for righteousness (birr) is faith (īmān), and the performance of obligatory acts is a branch (farʿ) of faith. Mindfulness of God (taqwā) signifies the Sunna, and an obligatory act is not complete without the Sunna. He prohibited helping one another to sin (ithm) — which [is tantamount to] disbelief (kufr) and hypocrisy (nifāq) — and enmity, which [signifies] innovation (bidʿa) and controversy (khiṣām). Both the aforementioned are [derisive] play (laʿbān), and they have been forbidden from derisive play.88 They have also been commanded to do [acts of] righteousness, which include both the obligatory acts and those which are Sunna, and to be steadfast in sincerely devoting themselves to God in all of this.

[Concerning] His words:

[2:246] Have you not seen the chiefs of the Children of Israel…

Sahl was asked who the chiefs were. He replied:

He [God] means by this the leaders. Take note of the saying of the Messenger of God  when he heard a man after the Battle of Badr say, ‘On the Day of Badr we only killed bald, old men’, to which the Messenger of God  replied, ‘They are the chiefs of Quraysh’, meaning the nota- bles and leaders.89

 

88        Several verses castigate the hypocrites and disbelievers for their derisive play (laʿb) and diversion (lahw); for example: 5:57 and 58; 6:32,70 and 91.

89        Tirmidhī, Nawādir al-uṣūl, vol. 1, p. 333.

Sahl was asked about His words:

[2:255] God, There is no god except Him, the Living, the Eternal Sustainer…

He replied:

This is the mightiest (aʿẓam) verse in God’s Book, Exalted is He. Within it is God’s Greatest Name, and it is written across the sky in green light in one line from East to West. This is how I saw it written on the Night of Great Merit (Laylat al-Qadr)90 in ʿAbbādān: There is no god except Him, the Living, the Eternal Sustainer.

The Living, the Eternal Sustainer is the One who oversees everything pertaining to His creatures: their life spans, their actions, and their provision. He is the One who requites goodness (iḥsān) with goodness, and misdeeds with forgiveness (ghufrān), but He requites hypocrisy, disbelief and innovation with punishment. Whoever pronounces the saying: ‘There is no god except God’ has made a pact with God, so it is unlawful for him, after making a pact with God, to disobey Him in any of His commandments or prohibitions, in secret or public, or to support His enemy, or to show enmity towards a friend of His.

…No slumber can seize Him, nor sleep… Slumber (sina) here means sleepiness.

He [Sahl] also said:

Slumber is when the heart (qalb) is mingled with sleep.

[2:257] God is the protector of the believers…

Concerning these words Sahl said:

That is, [He protects them with] the protection of [His] good pleasure (riḍā). He is their pro- tector due to the former guidance He granted them, and His knowledge concerning them, of their affirmation of His oneness. This is due to His knowledge that they have freed themselves from every cause except their Creator.91 Hence they were taken out of the darkness into the light, and from disbelief, error, disobedience and innovation to faith, which is the light that God, Mighty and Majestic is He, established in their hearts. This is the light of the insight of certainty (nūr baṣīrat al-yaqīn) by which they seek inner perception of the divine oneness (tawḥīd), and obedience to Him in that which He has commanded and forbidden. For anyone to whom God gives no light, there is no light! [24:40]

His words, Mighty and Majestic is He:

[2:257] And the disbelievers — their protectors are false deities…

That is, Satan.

Sahl said:

The head of all devils is the evil-inciting self (nafs ammāra bi’l-sūʾ), for Satan cannot overpower man except through the desire (hawā) of his lower self. So if he [Satan] senses something that it desires, he casts temptation at it.

[2:260] And when Abraham said, ‘My Lord! Show me how You give life to the dead’…

[Sahl] was asked whether or not Abraham was in doubt concerning his faith, and was therefore asking his Lord to show him a sign or miracle in order to restore his faith. He replied:

His question was not out of doubt; he was merely asking for an increase in certainty (ziyādat al-yaqīn) to the faith he already had. Thus he asked for an unveiling of the cover of visual beholding with his physical eyes, so that by the light of certainty, his own certainty regarding God’s omnipotence might be increased, and [his certainty] regarding His creative [power] might

 

90                   Laylat al-Qadr, variously translated as the ‘Night of Glory, ‘Night of Power’ ‘Night of Ordainment’, and here, ‘Night of Great Merit’, is mentioned in 97:1 as being the night during the holy month of Ramadan in which the Qurʾān was revealed in its entirety. Each year, Laylat al-Qadr is said to fall on an odd night during the last part of Ramadan, often the 27th night.

91                   Both editions and MSS Z515, f. 20b and F3488, f. 197b have khālif here rather than khāliq, though it is difficult to under- stand what could be meant by khālif in this context. There are no visible diacritics in F638, f. 11b.

be consolidated. Do you not notice how when He asked [him], ‘Why, do you not believe?’ he replied ‘Yes.’ If he had been in doubt he would not have said ‘Yes’. Furthermore, if God was aware of any doubt in him and had he given Him the answer ‘Yes’, [attempting to] conceal his doubt, God would definitely have disclosed that, Exalted is He, as such things cannot be concealed from Him. Therefore, this confirms that the request for [his heart’s] reassurance (ṭumaʾnīna) signified a request for an increase in his certainty.92

Then it was asked, ‘Surely the people of the “Table Spread”93 sought profound peace of mind, through the sending down of the feast, and their [request] was out of doubt. So how does this correspond?’ He replied:

Abraham  made it known that he was a believer, and he only asked for profound peace of mind in addition to faith in order to receive greater [certainty]. The people of the Table Spread, on the other hand, made it known that they would believe only after they had found calm reassurance in their hearts. As He said: and that our hearts may be reassured, and that we may know that you have spoken to us truthfully [5:113]. Thus they made it known that their knowledge of his [Jesus’] truthfulness, after they had been reassured by witnessing the feast, was to be the starting point of their faith.

Abū Bakr [al-Sijzī] said: I heard him say on another occasion:

…But so that my heart may be reassured… [2:260] — that is, ‘I do not feel secure against one of Your enemies challenging me if I should say, My Lord is He who gives life and death [2:258], and then [one of them] should ask, “Did you see Him give life and death?” In this way my heart would be at ease in being able to answer “Yes” to him, once I had witnessed that.’ This is why the Prophet  said: ‘Hearing about something is not the same as seeing it.’

Sahl also said:

[Abraham’s request] might also have another meaning: he might have asked God to show him the reviving of the dead so that he could feel sure that he had [truly] been chosen as the friend (al-Khalīl).94

Sahl then said:

Another aspect [of meaning] is the following: ‘What I have requested of You, I have no right to, save [for] that which You will realise for me’ — and this is the position of the elect of His creation — ‘So my request for You to show me the reviving of the dead was in order to put my own heart at rest.’ This was because he was called the ‘intimate friend’ (al-Khalīl) even in the ‘Time of Ignorance’ (Jāhiliyya).95 And as we said, his words ‘that my heart may be reassured’ mean ‘[that it may be reassured] of my friendship [with You]. This, because I know that You give life and death’.

Sahl was asked: ‘If the servant reaches the face-to-face encounter of direct vision (kifāḥ al-ʿiyān), what signs of this will be manifest?’ He replied:

He [the servant] triumphs by repelling Satan, and this is because the lower self is extremely weak;96 there is no way for him, when it comes to [dealing with] the lower self and Satan, and

 

92        The words ṭumaʾnīna and iṭmiʾnān have the meaning of a calmness and tranquillity that is associated with a deep sense of confidence, reassurance, trust and, as can be seen in this context, a level of certainty.

93        This is an allusion to Sūrat al-Māʾida [5:112–5], which relates how Jesus’ disciples asked if God would send a feast (lit. a table spread) down from heaven from which they could eat, so that this might act as a sign for them to know that what he was telling them was the truth. Jesus accordingly prayed to God to send down the feast. God agreed to do so, but warned that anyone who disbelieved after that would be punished.

94        Abraham is known by the honorary title ‘Friend of God’ (Khalīl Allāh) on the basis the words of 4:125, …and God took Abraham for a friend.

95        i.e. before the coming of Muḥammad and the revelation of the Qurʾān in which God’s taking Abraham as a friend is mentioned.

96        This is according to the MSS Z515, f. 21b, F638, f. 12a and F3488, f. 198a, which have bi-ghāyat al-hawān, as opposed to

fī muʿāyanat al-hawān as in the published edition.

cutting them both off,97 save the protection of the All-Merciful.

He [Sahl] then recited a poem [in wāfir metre]:

The abundant sufficiency98 of direct encounter [with God] [attained] through my good opinion of Him99

Is like the spider’s web covering the cave’s entrance100 Good opinion has traversed every veil,

Good opinion has traversed beyond the fire’s light,101 The signs of the one brought near are clear,

Near or far it is the same to the night voyager,102 For the one who has beheld God directly,

There is no sleep to settle him until day.

Three times did God ask of them:

‘Is there anyone to ask for the kindness of the Maker?’ When did the lapping [of a dog] defile an ocean of love?

So ignore the barking of that wretched creature at my porch O ego along with Satan! Be off!

And likewise the falsity of incitement and trouble.

In his saying,103 ‘The abundant sufficiency of direct encounter (kifāḥ) [with God] [attained] through my good opinion of Him’, it is as if he is alluding to His words: Is it not sufficient that your Lord is witness to all things? [41:53], to which the Messenger of God  replied, ‘Yes it is, O Lord.’ So it was, when the following verse was sent down: Is not God the fairest of all judges? [95:8], to which the Messenger of God  also replied, ‘Yes, O Lord.’ And from the way they understand the Qurʾān [this means]: Is it not sufficient that your Lord, O Muḥammad, has supported you in this world against your enemies through killing and defeating [them], and in the next life, by granting you the Praiseworthy Station (maqām maḥmūd) and the right to intercession, and in Paradise by granting you the encounter and the visitation (ziyāra)?104

His saying, ‘Like the spider’s web covering the entrance of a cave’, [is an allusion to] the cave of mystics (ʿārifūn) [which is] the[ir] innermost secret (sirr), and the[ir] beholding (iṭṭilāʿ) of the Lord of the Worlds, when they reach the station of face-to-face encounter (maqām al-kifāḥ), that is, the immediate vision of direct witnessing (ʿiyān al-ʿiyān) beyond what has been [verbally]

 

97                   In order to make sense of this passage, it was necessary to ignore the words ʿan al-shayṭān, which follow bi-ʿazlihimā, and which are found in all the MSS and the published edition.

98                   Kifāyāt, sing. kifāya derived from the verbal root k-f-y means to be sufficient, but by extension can mean to suffice for protection, to guard or protect. Thus Tustarī compares it in the next line to the spider’s web that protected the Prophet when he was hiding in the cave.

99                   The expression ḥusn al-ẓann is usually rendered in English as ‘good opinion’, which is perhaps adequate when it involves relations between human beings. However, ḥusn al-ẓann towards God involves an unequivocal, wholehearted trust in His goodness. For a discussion of Tustarī’s application of this term, see IT, pp. liiff.

100                This is an allusion to the time when the Prophet was fleeing Mecca, accompanied by Abū Bakr, pursued by a party of the Quraysh who were intent on killing him. The two of them hid in a cave, and when their pursuers came by the cave and were about to enter it, they found a spider’s web over the cave’s entrance (also a dove’s nest, right next to the cave entrance), so they assumed that no one could be inside the cave and passed by without discovering its occupants. See Martin Lings, Muḥammad (Cambridge, 2005), p. 119.

101                This is an allusion to the stations of the prophets Abraham and Moses, as will be seen in the commentary on the poem which follows.

102                Here is another allusion to the Miʿrāj, the miraculous Night Journey and Ascension of the Prophet, as will also become clear from the commentary on the poem. For references on the Miʿrāj, see above IC, p. 4, n. 15.

103                If the poem was composed by Tustarī, then the lengthy commentary that follows it may be by his disciple and the main source of the Tafsīr, Abū Bakr al-Sijzī. However, if the poem was by some other anonymous author, then the commentary might be by Tustarī.

104                i.e. the visitation of God, His Throne. The ‘Laudable or Praiseworthy Station’ is, according to tradition, among the special blessings promised to Muḥammad in the Hereafter. It is said to be at the right hand of the Throne in Paradise. In the Qurʾān it is mentioned in 17:79.

elucidated (bayān).105 Then there is nothing between the servant and God except the veil of servanthood, due to his contemplation (naẓar) of the attributes of lordliness (rubūbiyya), ipseity (huwiyya), divinity (ilāhiyya), and [God’s being] Self-Sufficing and Besought of all, to eternity (ṣamadiyya ilā’l-sarmadiyya), without any obstacle or veil. One similitude among many might be that of a spider’s web when it encompasses his heart (qalb), his innermost secret (sirr) ⸢and⸣ his heart’s core (fuʾād),106 through the grace of lordship (luṭf al-rubūbiyya) and complete com- passion (kamāl al-shafaqa), such that there is no veil between him and God, Exalted is He.107 Just as through the spider’s web, which covered the entrance to the cave of the Messenger of God , God turned away all the enemies among the leaders of the Quraysh who were being directed by Iblīs against him, so in the case of the people of gnosis, when they reach the sta- tion of direct witnessing (ʿiyān) beyond elucidation (bayān), the provocations of Satan and the sultan of the lower self are cut off and repelled, and their scheming becomes ineffectual, as is expounded in His words, Surely the plotting of Satan is ever feeble [4:76], meaning, that it had become ineffectual against them, just as He also said, Truly over My servants you [Satan] shall have no warrant… [15:42]. This is because, if the servant traverses all veils through his good opinion [of God], such that there remains no veil between him and God, thereafter the lower self, Satan and the world can have no access to his heart and mind by means of provocation. Thus did the Prophet  say, ‘Yesterday I saw an amazing thing; a servant between whom and God there was a veil, but then when his good opinion of God appeared, He drew him in from behind the veil’.

Regarding his saying [in the poem], ‘Good opinion has traversed beyond the light of fire’,108 it is as if this is alluding to the honour of following the Messenger , due to his being given preference [by God] over the Friend of God [Abraham] and the Interlocutor of God [Moses],109 for in the station of perceiving fire and light prophets and saints are [accorded] different ranks (maqāmāt). The Friend [of God] saw the fire and it became for him a source of coolness and safety [21:69].110 The Interlocutor [of God] saw the fire as light as is expounded in His words, Wait, I see a fire in the distance’ [20:10; 28:29]. However, this [fire] was in origin light, as [is indicated] by His words, Blessed is he who is in the fire [27:8], which refer to Moses surrounded by [lit. in the midst of] light. But then [Moses] became preoccupied with the light, so God reprimanded him saying, ‘Do not preoccupy yourself with the light, for truly I am the Illuminator of light’, as expounded in His words, Indeed, I am your Lord. So take off your sandals [20:12]. However, when it came

 

105     The word bayān is derived from the root b-y-n, meaning to become separate (as in the preposition bayn, ‘between’) or, by extension, to become clear by being distinct. Lane lists numerous meanings for bayān, including: ‘the means by which one makes a thing [distinct] apparent, manifest, evident clear or perspicuous’, which may be either a circumstantial or verbal indication, and hence it can mean ‘speech’, or ‘eloquent speech’. In this context, we may understand Tustarī to be using it to indicate that the mystic is taken beyond what he has come to know indirectly, for example through verbal communication, to experience it in a direct and unmediated way.

106     The wāw has been added on the basis of Z515, f. 22a, F638, f. 11b and F3488, f. 198b.

107     That is, the innermost secret of the mystic is at this moment enclosed and protected in its being completely with God.

108     This is an allusion to Moses’ experience of hearing God speak from the burning bush, related in 20:10–66, 27:7–9 and 28:31–5.

109       While in Islamic tradition, Abraham has the honorific title of ‘Friend of God’ (Khalīl Allāh), Moses has the title of ‘Interlocutor of God’ (Kalīm Allāh), which is derived from the Qurʾānic words, ‘kallama ’Llāhu Mūsā taklīman’ [4:164], which is usually translated as: ‘God spoke to Moses directly’.

110       A reference to the story of Abraham, when his people (according to tradition, Nimrod and his followers) commanded that he should be thrown into a fire as a punishment for his destroying their idols, related in Sūrat al-Anbiyāʾ (21:51–70). God commanded the fire Be coolness and safety for Abraham (21:69). Some traditions concerning this verse relate that Abraham sat a while in the midst of the fire, where there appeared a garden. See for example Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al- Thaʿlabī, Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ al-musammā bi’l-ʿArāʾis al-majālis (Cairo, n.d.), p. 85; English trans. by William M. Brinner as ʿArāʾis al-majālis fī qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ or: Lives of the Prophets as recounted by Abū Isḥāq Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Ibrāhīm al-Thaʿlabī (Leiden and Boston, 2002), p. 133, who relates one such tradition from Suddī. The same tradition is cited in Maybudī’s Kashf al-asrār, vol. 6, pp. 267–8. The motif of the garden in the midst of a fire became a favourite motif in Persian mystic poetry.

to the Beloved [of God] [Muḥammad ],111 God showed him the fire and the light, and took him beyond the veil of fire and light. Then He brought him near without fire or light until he saw in the closest proximity the Illuminator of lights, as is expounded in His words, The heart did not deny what he saw [53:11].112 Thus did He elevate [His] Beloved [Muḥammad] above the station of [His] Friend [Abraham] and [His] Interlocutor [Moses], and the stations of all of the prophets who were brought nigh, until he was addressed by God without the means of any revelation (waḥy) or interpreter (tarjumān), as is expounded in His words, Whereat, He revealed to His servant what He revealed [53:10], meaning, ‘The Beloved communicated with the beloved in secret, and taught him and honoured him by granting him the Opening of the Book (al-Fātiḥa) and the closing verses of Sūrat al-Baqara.113

When he says [in the poem], ‘The signs of the one brought near are clear’, he means that all the prophets and angels have proximity [with God], but Muḥammad  is the closest in proximity (aqrab), following the form of af ʿal114 — one says qarīb meaning close and aqrab meaning closer or closest. Now the one who is close (qarīb) [to God] has access to115 understanding (fahm), conjecture (wahm) and interpretation (tafsīr). But the one who is closest (aqrab) is beyond understanding, conjecture and interpretation, and what is beyond that cannot be contained by expression (ʿibāra) or allusion (ishāra). Thus it was that Moses, when he heard the call of unicity (waḥdāniyya) from God, on the night of the fire, said, ‘O God! Are You near that I may whisper to You, or far away that I should call out to You?’116 Then He [God] called out to Kalīm from a place that was both near and far, telling him that He was near. This, however, was not how the Messenger was described when [God] brought him near, such that He greeted him saying, ‘Peace be upon you!’ Furthermore, God, Exalted is He, praised his nation when He said, And the foremost, the foremost:  they are the ones brought near [to God]’ [56:10, 11]. He did not say ‘they were near’ (qarībūn) [but they were ‘brought near’ (muqarrabūn)]. Thus the words [of the poem,] ‘The signs of the one brought near are clear’ refers to this nation.117 The one who is near experiences bounty and honour from God, but the one who is far away experiences torment and punishment from Him. The one who is far away experiences from God veiling and severance [from Him], but the one who is brought near experiences from God the encounter [with Him] and [His] visitation (ziyāra).

As to his saying [in the poem], ‘For the one who has beheld God directly [there is no sleep to settle him until the day]’, [he is referring to] a sign of the people of longing (mushtāqūn), for they can enjoy neither sleep nor rest, by day or at night. Among those who were characterised by this trait are Ṣuhayb and Bilāl. Bilāl was one of the people of longing, and so was Ṣuhayb, for

 

111                Just as the prophets Abraham and Moses have their honorific titles (Khalīl Allāh and Kalīm Allāh) so the Prophet Muḥammad came to be known as Ḥabīb Allāh, the ‘Beloved of God’.

112                 This is another allusion to the Miʿrāj, or Night Journey and Ascension of the Prophet Muḥammad. See above, IC, p. 4,

n. 15.

113                The importance of Sūrat al-Fātiḥa is evident because it is recited in every rakʿa of the canonical prayer (ṣalāt), and indeed the prayer is not acceptable without its recitation. But there are also hadīths attesting to its importance, such as those that are listed in the Ṣaḥīḥ of Bukhārī, ‘Kitāb al-Tafsīr’, in which the honorifics ‘Mother of the Book’ and ‘Seven Oft-repeated Verses’ are given for Sūrat al-Fātiḥa. Other ḥadīths mention the importance of reciting both al-Fātiḥa and the two last verses of Sūrat al-Baqara, such as one narrated on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās, and listed in the Ṣaḥīḥ of Muslim, ‘Kitāb al-Ṣalāt’, which relates that an angel greeted the Prophet and gave him the message, ‘Rejoice in two lights given to you which have not been given to any prophet before you: Fātiḥat al-Kitāb and the concluding verses of Sūrat al-Baqara. You will never recite any letter from them for which you will not be given a reward.’ Another tradition narrated on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd states that if anyone recites the last two verses of Sūrat al-Baqara at night that will suffice him. The latter is also listed in the Ṣaḥīḥ of Muslim, ‘Kitāb al-Ṣalāt’, as well as in the Ṣaḥīḥ of Bukhārī, ‘Kitāb al-Tafsīr’.

114                 That is, the form of the adjective that makes it comparative, or in this case superlative.

115                 lit. ‘enters into’ (yadkhulu).

116                The ‘call of Unicity’ is a reference to the words spoken to Moses from the burning bush: Verily I am God, there is no God but Me (20:14, 27:9 and 29:30).

117                 i.e. the nation of Muḥammad.

neither of them could sleep or find rest. Indeed it was narrated that a woman who had bought Ṣuhayb [as a slave] saw him in this condition and said, ‘I will not be satisfied until you sleep at night, for you are becoming so weak that you are not in a condition to perform the tasks you do for me.’ Thereupon Ṣuhayb wept and said, ‘Whenever Ṣuhayb thinks of the Fire, sleep flees from him, and when he thinks of Paradise, he is seized with longing, and when he remembers God his longing (shawq) is perpetuated’.

[When] he says [in the poem], ‘Three times did God ask them “Is there (hal)…?”, [the word] hal is an interrogative particle. Verily God, Mighty and Majestic is He, lifts the veil every night and says, ‘Is there (hal) anyone asking, so that I may grant him his request? Is there (hal) anyone seeking forgiveness, so that I may forgive him? Is there (hal) anyone supplicating, so that I may respond to his supplication?’118 However, if it is the Night of Great Merit (Laylat al-Qadr), God lifts the first condition and says, ‘I have forgiven you even though you didn’t seek forgiveness. I have granted [it] to you even though you didn’t ask [it] of Me, and I have responded to you before you even supplicated to Me.’119 This is the height of generosity (karam).

His saying [in the poem], ‘When did the lapping [of a dog] ever defile an ocean of love?’ is an allusion to the lapping of a dog in a vessel which [according to the divine law (sharīʿa)] then requires cleaning seven, or three, times [with water], depending on which of the different word- ings of the sayings transmitted from the Prophet  are followed. However what if a thousand thousand [i.e. a million] dogs lapped [up water] from an ocean? There is no dispute within the community that in such a case the sea would not be defiled. So [it is] with the whisperings of Satan and his lapping in the hearts of the mystics and the lovers, for how can this cause defilement in the ocean of love (baḥr al-widād), when each time he laps there, a wave comes and washes over it.

Regarding his saying, ‘So ignore the barking of a wretched creature at my porch’, he means: ‘Leave Iblīs in his wretchedness, yelling at the door of this world with all his different kinds of incitement (wasāwis), for he does not harm me.’ As [God] says, when a visitation from Satan touches them they remember… [7:201] His oneness in accordance with His words, And when you mention your Lord alone in the Qurʾān, they turn their backs in aversion [17:46]. His saying: ‘Be off!’ means, ‘Get far away from me!’ ‘Be off!’ is said to dogs and signifies total expulsion and banishment. In this way did He punish them [the inhabitants of Hell] in the final punishment that He gave them. Thus He said, Begone into it! And do not speak to me!’ [23:108].120

His words, Exalted is He:

[2:238] Maintain the prayers…

That is, ‘Persist in upholding them’. However His words, And establish prayer and pay the alms. [24:56], have two aspects, one of which is establishing prayer without the affirmation [of faith], just as when He said in Sūra Barāʾa,121 if they repent, [9:5] meaning, from idolatry (shirk), and establish regular prayers’ [9:5], that is, committing themselves to prayer and almsgiving, then let them be. In this regard, He also said: Yet if they repent, establish prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then they are your brothers in religion [9:11] [and comrades].122 There is something similar

 

118       Reference is being made here to a ḥadīth listed in the Ṣaḥīḥ of Bukhārī in the ‘Kitāb al-Ṣalāt’, and in the Ṣaḥīḥ of Muslim, ‘Kitāb al-Ṣalāt’. The ḥadīth, in a version narrated on the authority of Abū Hurayra, reads as follows: ‘When half of the night or two thirds of it are over, God, Blessed and Exalted is He, descends to the lowest heaven and asks: “Is there any beggar to whom something might be given? Is there any supplicant that he might be answered? Is there anyone seeking forgiveness that he might be forgiven?” [And God continues asking this] till it is daybreak.’ In other versions of this ḥadīth God’s question begins with ‘Who is there (man)…?’

119     Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ, ‘Kitāb al-Mutahajjid’, ‘Kitāb al-Daʿwāt’, and ‘Kitāb al-Tawḥīd’; Ibn Ḥanbal, al-Musnad, vol. 2, p. 433, vol.

4, pp. 81, 217, 218.

120     According to the commentaries, ‘it’ here refers to the Hellfire.

121     Sūra Barāʾa is otherwise known as Sūrat al-Tawba (or Repentance).

122     Wa mawālīkum is absent from the MSS.

to this in Sūrat al-Sajda.123 The second aspect of establishing [the prayers] (iqāma) is referred to when He says in Sūrat al-Mujādala, Then establish the prayer and pay the obligatory alms [58:13], as in Sūrat al-Muzzammil [73:20],124 and again with His words in Sūrat al-Māʾida,125 [believers who] establish the prayer [5:55], meaning that they fulfil it [that duty] completely.

[2:238] …especially the middle prayer…126

[Sahl] was asked about these words, and the reason why [the middle prayer] is singled out. He replied:

It is singled out due to a particular characteristic it possesses, even though it is not apart from the obligatory prayers as a whole, in the same way that Gabriel and others were singled out for mention among the host of the angels, due to a certain particularity.

He continued:

There is another reason, namely, that the times of the rest of the prayers are known by both the knowledgeable and the ignorant, because their signs are obvious.127 However, the time for the ʿAṣr prayer is less clear. Thus by mentioning [this prayer] in particular, He urged people to take care to observe it at its correct time.

His words [that follow in the same verse]:

…And stand before God in submission

That is, ‘Stand before God in prayer in a state of obedience, for many a worshipper is disobedi- ent, such as the hypocrite and his like. The Prophet  was asked, ‘Which prayer is the best?’ He replied, ‘The longest in devotion (qunūt), that is, the prayer [for which] one stands the longest (ṭūl al-qiyām).128 And Zayd b. Arqam  said that being devout (qunūt) is silence, for we used to speak during the prayer until God, Exalted is He, sent down the words, And stand before God in submission [2:238], after which we desisted from speaking [during prayer]. Muḥammad b. Sawwār said, ‘The qunūt is the witr,129 which was called a (qunūt) because of the supplication (duʿāʾ) which is offered in it whilst standing, aside from the recitation of Qurʾān.’ This is a kind of magnifying (taʿẓīm) [of God] through supplication.

[2:268] Satan promises you poverty and enjoins you to indecency…

He was asked about these words and replied, ‘[He, Satan, does this] so that they should take some- thing which is not lawfully theirs, and deposit it in other than its proper place.’130

[2:269] …And he who is given wisdom has been given much good.

He was asked about these words and he said:

Abū Saʿīd al-Khuḍrī  narrated from the Prophet  that he said: ‘The Qurʾān is God’s wisdom (ḥikma) among His servants. Whoever learns the Qurʾān and acts according to it, it is as if prophethood were incorporated within him, except that he does not receive revelation. He is called to account in the same way as the prophets except in the matter of conveying the message.’131

And Muḥammad b. Sawwār reported to me from ʿAqīl, from Ibn al-Musayyab, on the author- ity of Abū Hurayra  that he stated that the Prophet  said, ‘The Qurʾān is wisdom, and

 

123                 There is no obvious verse with this meaning in Sūrat al-Sajda.

124                 The same words are also to be found in Sūrat al-Ḥajj [22:78].

125                 Corrected by the editor of the Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya from al-Baqara.

126                 A term that is used for the ʿAṣr prayer, the time for which is between the middle of the afternoon and sunset.

127                 For example, it is easy to see the time of the sun’s rising and setting, and the moment when it is at its zenith.

128                 Muslim, Ṣaḥīḥ, ‘Kitab Ṣalāt al-musāfirīn wa-qaṣrihā’; Ibn Māja, ‘Kitāb al-Ṣalāt’.

129                The witr is the prayer cycle (rakʿa) which makes the sum of supererogatory prayers an odd number. It is the late-night prayer prescribed by the Prophet for after the ʿĪshāʾ prayers, and is usually prayed silently.

130                That is, Satan is trying to dissuade them from the almsgiving as prescribed in the previous verse [2:267]. The placing or depositing of something (probably wealth) in other than its proper place may mean avoiding giving it to those who have a right to it.

131                 Ibn Abī Ḥātim, ʿIlal al-ḥadīth (Beirut, 1985), vol. 2, p. 65.

whoever learns the Qurʾān in his youth, it mingles with his flesh and blood.132 And surely the Fire cannot touch a heart which contains the Qurʾān, nor a body which avoids that which it prohibits (maḥārim), and keeps to what it permits (ḥalāl), believes in that which is clear [in it] (muḥkam), refrains from judgement in that which is ambiguous [in it] (mutashābih), and does not make innovations regarding it.’133 Mujāhid and Ṭāwūs said, ‘Wisdom is the Qurʾān, as He says in Sūrat al-Naḥl, Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom [16:125], meaning the Qurʾān. Ḥasan said, ‘Wisdom is the understanding of the Qurʾān, and wisdom is prophethood, as He says in Sūrat Ṣād, and gave him wisdom’ [38:20], meaning prophethood (nubuwwa). And God said [concerning] David , And God gave him kingship and wisdom [2:251] meaning prophethood, along with the Book.134

Qatāda said, ‘Wisdom is understanding the religion of God, Mighty and Majestic is He, and following the Messenger of God ’; Suddī said: ‘Wisdom is prophethood’; Zayd b. Aslam said, ‘Wisdom is the intellect (ʿaql)’; while Rabīʿ b. Anas said, ‘Wisdom is the fear of God, Exalted is He’. Ibn ʿUmar said, ‘Wisdom is [to be found in] three things: a clear verse (āya muḥkama),135 the Sunna put into practice and a tongue which is articulate with the Qurʾān.’

Abū Bakr stated that Sahl [himself] said, ‘Wisdom is the integration of the sciences, and its origin is the Sunna. God, Exalted is He, has said: And recite what is rehearsed to you in your houses of the revelations of God and His wisdom [33:34]. The revelations are that which is obligatory [according to the religious law] and the wisdom (ḥikma) is that which is Sunna.’ Sahl meant by this that the Arabs say that you restrain a man when you prevent him from falling into harm or leaving the truth.136 [He was asked the meaning] of His words, wisdom that is far-reaching (bāligha) [54:5]. He replied:

It means perfect and complete (tāmma), as in His saying, We gave him [power of] judgement (ḥikma) and knowledge [21:74],137 for it [wisdom] at that time was ⸢perfect and complete⸣138 such that it reached those who were worthy of it without reaching others.139 In every situation they speak according to it. They resort to its rulings and reveal its meanings.

It has also been said, ‘Keep close to the wise, for certainly God revives dead hearts with wisdom just as He revives the barren land with a downpour of rain.’

Then he said:

The capital (raʾs al-māl) of wisdom consists of three things: the first is disciplining the lower self (riyāḍat al-nafs)140 concerning things which are reprehensible (makrūhāt);141 the second is emptying one’s heart of any love for carnal lusts (shahawāt); and the third is standing guard (qiyām) over one’s heart by warding off [unwarranted] thoughts (khaṭarāt) which occur to it.142 Moreover, whoever is heedful (rāqib) of God when [unwarranted] thoughts [come upon] his heart, will have [God] protect him in his bodily acts.

 

132     Thus far, the ḥadīth is recorded in Bayhaqī, Shuʿab al-īmān, vol. 2, pp. 330 and 553; and in Tirmidhī, Nawādir al-uṣūl, vol. 2, p. 96.

133     See above IC, p. 6, nn. 23 and 24 regarding the categories of verses in the Qurʾān.

134     That is, reading maʿa’l-kitāb as in all the MSS, Z515, f. 25b, F638, f. 13b and F3488, f. 201b, instead of min al-kitāb.

135     Given the interpretation that was made in the previous paragraph this probably means ‘a clear (i.e. unambiguous) verse’, as in the designation of the muḥkam and mutashābih verses given in 3:7, though it is also possible that it means a ‘clear sign’.

136     It appears here that Sahl has attached to the meaning of wisdom the responsibility of commanding right and forbidding wrong.

137     Said of Lot.

138     Tāmma is added on the basis of all three MSS: Z515, f. 25b, F638, f. 13b and F3488, f. 201b.

139     Here again, what Sahl seems to imply by wisdom is the Revelation and the Sunna.

140     The MSS (Z515, f. 25b, F638, f. 13b and F3488, f. 201b) have the more likely riyāḍa instead of riyāḍ in the printed edition.

141     According to Islamic Law, the makrūhāt are things which, though not unlawful, are disapproved of, and should be avoided if possible.

142     As noted above, p. 16, n. 24; khaṭar is something that occurs to the mind or comes to the heart, which may be undesirable or even evil.

ʿUmar b. Wāṣil said: ‘His words, Exalted is He, He grants wisdom to whomsoever He pleases… [2:269] mean that He bestows the correct understanding of His Book upon whomsoever He wills, just as He, Exalted is He, said while addressing the wives of the Prophet , when they had been given bounties in abundance, And recite what is rehearsed to you in your houses, of the revelations (āyāt) of God and His wisdom’ [33:34]. [In this verse] the revelations are the Qurʾān, and wisdom is that which the Messenger  had extracted from it (mustanbaṭ),143 just as ʿAlī  said, ‘The signs are [manifest in] a man to whom God has granted understanding of His Book.’144

He was asked about His words:

[2:273] [Charity is] for the poor, who are constrained in the way of God…

Sahl was asked about these words and the difference between the poor (fuqarāʾ) and the abject (masākīn).145 He replied:

God, Exalted is He, described the poor (faqīr) in terms of destitution (ʿadam) due to their state of asking Him out of utter neediness (iftiqār) and resorting (lijāʾ) to Him. He also described them as having the qualities of contentment (riḍā) and satisfaction [with their lot] (qunūʿ), for He said, Exalted is He, …They do not beg from men importunately [2:273].

These are the People of the Bench (Ahl al-Ṣuffa) of the Messenger of God  who were about forty men.146 They did not have any dwellings in Medina nor [did they belong to] any tribes. These were the circumstances of a group of people whom God, Exalted is He, praised for the high degree of their dependence on Him. They had no ability (istiṭāʿa), nor any strength (quwwa) except in Him and from Him. He was their power (ḥawl) and strength (quwwa). He uprooted from them the power for their hearts to depend (sukūn) on anything other than Him, which is the incitement (waswasa) of the lower self towards that which is other than God, Exalted is He. Because of this [quality] they are elevated in their [spiritual] state. But [this is unlike] the one whom God turns back to the acquiescence of his lower self (musākana nafsihi), [about whom] He said, It belonged to deprived people (masākin) who worked at sea [18:79].147 He returned them to the situation in which they had acquiesced. However, as regards the poor and needy person (faqīr), whose want has made him surrender himself to God, Exalted is He, his action involves

 

143                 The word mustanbaṭ, or istinbāṭ meaning literally ‘drawing water from a well’ came to be used by some Sufis to designate their elicitation of inner meanings from the Qurʾānic verses. See, for example, the chapters on mustanbaṭāt in Sarrāj, Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, pp. 105ff, and in Abū Saʿd Khargūshī’s Tahdhīb al-asrār, MS Ahlwardt 2819, fols. 2818ff; 98ff.

144                 It should be borne in mind that the word aya (pl. āyāt) can mean a ‘sign’ or ‘revelation’ as well as ‘verse’.

145                 Masākīn is the plural of miskīn, which according to Lane can mean ‘lowly, humble or submissive’, although it can also take the meaning of ‘low, abject, ignominious’. The word occurs in a ḥadīth of the Prophet: ‘O God, make me live lowly, die lowly and gather me [on the Day of Resurrection] in the congregation of the lowly (masākīn).’ The ḥadīth is listed in Ibn Māja, Sunan, ‘Abwāb al-zuhd’, and Khaṭīb al-Tibrīzī, Mishkāt al-maṣābīḥ, trans. by J. Robson (Lahore, 1975), vol. 2, Book 25, ‘Words that Soften the Heart’. However, Tustarī appears in this passage to be using the word in a pejorative sense, as will be seen from the latter part of the commentary on this verse.

146                The Ahl al-Ṣuffa, usually translated in English as the ‘People of the Bench’, were a group of Companions of the Prophet who, according to tradition, chose to live their lives in a portico or vestibule of the mosque in Medina, only leaving when they were commanded by the Prophet to go