No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
The title of this paper suggests a definite answer to a definite question. I do not think that such an answer can be given except in very general terms. The mystics of Islam, like all other mystics, recognize that the object of their search cannot be apprehended by knowledge, much less described by words. The goal is ineffable: all that can be done is to describe the journey from beginning to end. This is no easy task, and would assuredly be a long one if we accept the view of a celebrated Persian theosophist that the ways to God are in number as the souls of men. It is possible, however, to reduce to a system the main features, both theoretical and practical, of any mystical type, and with the help of a highly developed symbolism to indicate in some degree what is the nature of those experiences which lie beyond thought and knowledge. My present purpose is to discuss the meanings attached by Ṣúfís to certain metaphorical terms which are used in reference to the state of union with God.
page 57 note 1 Luma', 96bGoogle Scholar: 
page 57 note 2 Luma', 153bGoogle Scholar: 
page 57 note 3 Luma', 153bGoogle Scholar: 
page 58 note 1 Luma', 97aGoogle Scholar: 
page 58 note 2 Cf. my translation of the Kashf al-Maḥjúb, p. 244.Google Scholar
page 59 note 1 Luma', 189aGoogle Scholar: 
page 60 note 1 Luma', 189aGoogle Scholar: 
page 60 note 2 Risálat (Cairo, 1318 A.H.), 43, 13–45, 1.Google Scholar
page 60 note 3 pp. 242–6 of my translation.
page 61 note 1 Qushayrí, , 44, 12Google Scholar, distinguishes three stages of faná similar to those described above. The first is “passing away from the ‘self’ and its qualities through continuance in the qualities of God”; the second is “passing away from the qualities of God through contemplation of God”; and the third is “passing away from the contemplation of passing away through annihilation (istihlák) in the being of God”. The last words are remarkable as showing that a comparatively orthodox Ṣúfi could use the language of pure pantheism, but they show, too, the danger of understanding mystical expressions in their literal and obvious sense. Qushayrí refers to the unconscious absorption of thought and will in contemplation of the Divine being.
page 61 note 2 Luma', 192b.Google Scholar
page 62 note 1 Kashf al-Maḥjúb, 304.Google Scholar
page 62 note 2 Ibid., 257.
page 62 note 3 See “One phase of the doctrine of the unity of God”, by Macdonald, D. B. in the Hartford Seminary Record, vol. xx, No. 1, p. 36 (01, 1910).Google Scholar
page 63 note 1 Kashf al-Maḥjúb, 245.Google Scholar
page 63 note 2 See the introduction to his edition of the Gulshan-i Ráz, by Maḥmúd Shabistarí, and compare my Selections from the Díván-i Sliams-i Tabríz, pp. 31–6 of the introduction.Google Scholar
page 65 note 1 See his article “al-Ḥalláj” in Revue de l'histoire des religions for 06, 1911.Google Scholar
page 65 note 2 Tadhkirat al-Awliydá, i, 160, 13.Google Scholar
page 66 note 1 Meaning, apparently, that here is no question of an individual soul passing from one body to another.
page 66 note 2 Ḥalláj is often called Manṣúr, which is properly the name of his father.
page 66 note 3 Díván-i Shams-i Tabríz (ed. of Tabríz, 1280 A.H.)Google Scholar, 199, and more fully in the complete Lucknow edition (1302 a.h.), 225. The poem is entitled 
. I give the text of the lines translated above.
page 67 note 1 The Lucknow edition reads 
, “he flew to Paradise.”
page 67 note 2 The Tabríz edition reads 
page 68 note 1 Whittaker, T., The Neoplatonists, 190.Google Scholar