of Nokoonam, (Session 254)
This work constitutes a meticulous rewriting and profound analysis of the esteemed lecture series Manzil al-Sirn (Session 254, October 2008), focusing primarily on the second stage of tawakkul (trust in God) and a critical appraisal of the commentators perspectives regarding the abolition of personal striving (isqt al-alab), abandonment of causes (tark al-asbb), and the disparagement of human dignity (taqr sharaf al-nafs). The present treatise endeavours to explicate true tawakkul as a balanced synthesis between the utilisation of means and reliance upon the Almighty. Central to this discourse is a rigorous critique of deterministic mysticism, which propels the seeker towards passivity, destitution, and mendicancy.
According to the lecture, the initial degree of tawakkul encompasses five essential conditions: seeking, cause, engagement, benefiting creation, and refraining from claim. This level situates tawakkul within the framework of social praxis and responsible utilisation of means. At this stage, the seeker actively participates in social and economic domains, such as commerce and agriculture, pursuing lawful sustenance whilst concurrently anchoring their heart in the Almighty, Who is the Ultimate Cause of causes (mubsib al-asbb). This approach harmonises with practical and responsible mysticism and guides the seeker towards a balanced life imbued with dignity.
In explicating the second degree, the commentator offers a divergent stance comprising the abolition of seeking (isqt al-alab), forsaking causes (gha ayn an al-sabab), suppressing human dignity (qam tasharrof al-nafs), and devoting oneself exclusively to obligatory worship (tafrah li al-wjibt). This perspective urges the seeker to desist from effort, abandon means of livelihood, and even belittle human dignity. Rather than leading to perfection, such an approach culminates in passivity, impoverishment, and misery, standing in stark contradiction to the authentic mysticism of the Imams, who regarded tawakkul as inseparable from endeavour and honour.
The commentators outright rejection of seeking exhorts the seeker to relinquish both the pursuit of sustenance and efforts for livelihood. This stance directs the seeker towards misfortune and negates the necessity of striving, as though tawakkul is contingent upon passivity and abandonment of action. Conversely, the conduct of the Imams interweaves tawakkul with diligent pursuit of lawful provision. The Holy Quran explicitly commands mankind to strive and seek sustenance as an intrinsic aspect of spiritual practice:
فَامْشُوا فِي مَنَاكِبِهَا وَكُلُوا مِن رِّزْقِهِ ۖ وَإِلَيْهِ النُّشُورُ (Al-Mulk: 15). This verse unequivocally underscores the utilisation of means and effort for provision whilst anchoring the heart in the Almighty.
The commentators exhortation to forsake all causes (such as commerce, agriculture, and earning) conflates tawakkul with causelessness and passivity. He asserts that the seeker must eschew all reliance on means for tawakkul to be perfected. This stance not only results in poverty and misfortune but also contradicts the logic of genuine mysticism, which integrates the use of causes with trust in the Ultimate Cause. The Imams, exemplified by the Prophet Solomon (peace be upon him), employed means and resources whilst manifesting true tawakkul without compromising human dignity or honour.
By emphasising the suppression of human dignity, the commentator encourages the seeker to belittle their honour and embrace misery and mendicancy, as though tawakkul necessitates abasement and poverty. This perspective is antithetical to the dignity lauded in the Quran:
وَلَقَدْ كَرَّمْنَا بَنِي آدَمَ (Al-Isr: 70). True tawakkul neither requires nor condones self-deprecation; rather, it upholds human dignity and directs the seeker towards honourable and responsible endeavour.
The commentator links devotion to obligatory worship with the abandonment of means, even essential implements such as a water vessel. This conflation reduces worship to passivity and misery, stripping it of its authentic meaning. In genuine mysticism, worship is inseparable from active life and the prudent use of causes. The Imams embodied worship within social and economic contexts, not isolation and poverty.
The commentators view reduces mysticism to folly, mendicancy, and misfortune. This deterministic mysticism, by compelling passivity and poverty, not only undermines human dignity but also weakens Islamic societies, facilitating external domination over Muslim resources. The parable of Shurbdwhere deterministic guides accumulate communal wealth (such as saffron) while living in luxuryexemplifies the inherent contradiction and exploitation in this perspective. These guides exploit the navet of the populace, usurping their wealth and leading society towards ruin.
The commentator encourages the seeker to delegate their assets, such as cattle farms, to others, ostensibly to renounce worldly concerns. This stance invites exploitation and abuse and stands opposed to true tawakkul, which harmonises asset management with trust in God. Such delegation, rather than reinforcing tawakkul, fosters colonisation and misfortune.
The commentator cites narratives of mystics such as usayn ibn Manr and Ibrhm Kha to substantiate the abandonment of means. However, these accounts conflict with the conduct of the Imams, who integrated tawakkul with preservation of causes and dignity. Such narratives compromise the credibility of genuine mysticism and steer seekers towards passivity and misfortune.
The commentator regards carrying a club (a means of defence) as a sign of deficient tawakkul and urges the seeker to abandon it and face dangers, such as a dog attack, unprotected. This view is not only illogical and hazardous but also contradicts true tawakkul, which integrates the use of means with trust in God. The Imams sanctioned the employment of means as part of sincere tawakkul and eschewed any call to passivity or peril.
True reliance, functioning as a bridge between the temporal world and the hereafter, summons the spiritual traveller (slik) to a responsible utilisation of the means (as exemplified by commerce and agriculture) coupled with an unwavering trust in Almighty God as the ultimate Provider (Rziq). The exemplary conduct of the infallibles, such as Prophet Solomon (peace be upon him), manifests the verity that reliance is harmonious with wealth acquisition, dignity, and social engagement. This mystical paradigm, rather than promoting poverty or passivity, directs the slik towards diligent endeavour while preserving self-respect and honour.
True mysticism stands as the bride of sciences, surpassing even philosophy, physics, and chemistry in modernity. This science guides the slik towards an equilibrium between the worldly and the eternal, liberating them from determinism and passivity. Contrary to the commentators perspective, true mysticism is logical, practical, and centred on dignity; it conscientiously recognises the realities of time and economic conditions, thereby leading the spiritual aspirant towards responsible action.
Contemporary societies, endowed with sagacity and awareness, have turned away from deterministic exhortations, such as the relinquishment of property under the pretext of reliance. This wisdom epitomises the intellectual advancement of the community and paves the way for the revival of authentic mysticism. A society that distances itself from simplicity and navet facilitates the emergence of a rational and responsible mystical framework.
Certain jurists, through issuing contradictory legal opinions (fatw), such as permitting the consumption of the Imams share, have exacerbated complexity and facilitated exploitation. These contradictions align with deterministic mysticism and erode public trust. When jurisprudence and mysticism are transparent and logical, they have the capacity to steer society towards dignity and justice.
The true mystic must possess an acute awareness of the times and comprehend socio-economic realities, such as the price of rice or everyday necessities. Absent this cognisance, the mystic forfeits any rightful claim to the property of others. Temporal awareness directs the mystic towards responsible action and genuine reliance, rather than passivity or exploitation.
This treatise, through a comprehensive rewriting of the discourse in Manzil al-Sirn (Lecture 254), critiques the deterministic viewpoint of the commentator regarding reliance and elucidates true reliance as a balance between employing means and trusting Almighty God. The commentators advocacy of abandoning demands, forsaking means, disparaging self-worth, and dedicating oneself solely to obligatory acts promulgates a deterministic and illogical mysticism that culminates in poverty, mendicity, and misery. This perspective stands in stark opposition to the conduct of the infallibles, who perceived reliance as integrally connected to effort, dignity, and social activity. Deterministic mysticism, through narratives such as those involving Husayn ibn Mansur al-Hallaj and Ibrahim al-Khawas, has undermined the legitimacy of true mysticism and weakened Islamic societies. True reliance, by utilising means while safeguarding dignity, guides the slik towards meaningful worship and a balanced life. The wisdom of contemporary peoples serves as a bulwark against deterministic calls and establishes the foundation for the renaissance of authentic mysticism.
Supervised by SSadegh Khademii
