The book Maqamat al-Sa'irin (The Stages of the Seeker), an enduring work by Khwaja Abdullah Ansari, serves as a radiant beacon guiding spiritual travelers towards the summit of divine proximity. This work, by elucidating the stages of spiritual ascension in the form of distinct stations or manazil, illustrates each as a step on the ladder to the celestial ascension. The present lecture, drawn from Session 431 of s teachings, explores the third station of union, specifically idhmihal fi shuhud al-hadra (the dissolution in the witness of the Presence). This stage, akin to the evaporation of dew in the presence of the boundless divine sun, manifests the pinnacle of divine witnessing and unity with the Truth.
In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful (Translation by Fouladwand). The lecture commences with this noble verse from the Qur'an, providing an introduction to the third stage of union: "The third level of union is dissolution in the witness of the Presence, which cannot be expressed in words, its limits cannot be indicated, nor can its essence be apprehended." This stage, like a droplet dissolving in the boundless ocean of the divine, absorbs the seeker in the vision of the Presence of the Truth to the extent that their essence surpasses the reach of language, limits, and the intellectual understanding of the rational mind. Idhmihal (dissolution) is not the annihilation of existence but the removal of the self-identities that separate the seeker from union with the Truth. This stage, akin to the highest peak of spiritual ascension, transports the seeker to a place where nothing is seen except the Divine, and no existence remains but the Divine.
The lecture outlines three fundamental features of the dissolution stage as follows:
These features, like stars in the sky of knowledge, illuminate the nature of the stage of union, emphasizing the incapacity of intellect and language to encompass this station.
The lecture critically examines Khwaja Abdullah Ansaris view that it is impossible to express, point to, or grasp the essence of union. Contrary to this perspective, the perfect mystic, like a master alchemist, is capable of transmitting the sense of union to others, articulating it in words, and indicating its limits. This ability, like light emanating from the sun of the mystic's being, illuminates the darkness of others egos and reveals the Truth. The lecture emphasizes that the average mystic can only transmit this sense of union if the recipient is suitably prepared; however, the perfect mystic, without need for preparation, directly imparts this sense.
To elucidate the possibility of transmitting the sense of union, the lecture draws upon a noble allegory: The perfect mystic, like a wealthy merchant, is able to enrich the poor beggar with the wealth of spiritual insight. This transmission is like pouring clear water into a thirsty vessel, creating a sense of union within the recipient. The average mystic can only transmit this sense if the recipient is appropriately prepared, like soil ready to receive a seed. However, the perfect mystic, like a sun that requires no preparation, shines its light upon all, instilling the sense of union in their hearts.
The lecture critiques Abdul Razzaq Kashanis commentary for conflating the concepts of union, truth, and majesty. The commentator merges union, which is an intermediate stage in the spiritual journey, with truth, which represents the highest degree of divine essence, and majesty, which is a divine attribute. This confusion, much like attaching an incompatible bead to a mismatched screw in mechanics, leads to disorder and confusion in spiritual interpretation. Union, like a breeze, draws the heart towards the Truth, while truth, like an endless ocean, engulfs all distinctions. Majesty, like the awe of a towering mountain, is but one of the divine attributes and differs in essence from the Truth.
The commentator interprets *idhmihal* as the annihilation of the self, equating it with the destruction of all forms. The lecture deems this interpretation incorrect: Dissolution does not mean annihilation, but the removal of distinctions. Annihilation suggests complete obliteration, whereas dissolution, like the blending of a color with light, signifies the removal of egoic distinctions without the destruction of existence. This critique acts like a lamp, dispelling the darkness of misunderstanding and illuminating the true nature of dissolution.
Khwaja speaks of the witnessing of the Presence in a general sense, but the commentator limits it to the oneness of God: In witnessing the Presence, it includes all stations, not only the Oneness. Union is like a flowing river, encompassing all divine attributesaction, description, essence, determinacy, and indeterminacy. Limiting it to the Oneness is like confining the ocean to a small jar, missing its vastness. The lecture emphasizes that union is not restricted to divine Oneness, but embraces witnessing across all divine stations.
The lecture distinguishes between Khwaja Abdullah Ansaris mysticism, which is "condensed," and that of Abdul Razzaq Kashani, which is "clung." Khwaja is a mystic whose knowledge flows like a clear spring from the fountainhead of direct experience, whereas Kashani is a scholar who has acquired mysticism through intellectual and acquired knowledge, trapped within the limitations of conceptualization. This difference is like the gap between the sun and its shadow: Khwaja radiates pure experiential knowledge, while the commentator only reflects a dim echo of it.
The lecture critiques the commentators attribution of a saying to Amir al-Muminin (A.S.), deeming it fabricated and false. Due to the lack of a reliable source and its inconsistency with the wisdom of the Infallible, the attribution lacks credibility. The words of the Infallible are like a pure gem, free from any error, and such a fabricated attribution, like a dark veil, tarnishes the commentators academic integrity.
The lecture, using a mechanical metaphor, underscores the necessity of conceptual coherence in mysticism: Mysticism, like mechanics, requires connection. Just as in mechanics, where each gear fits into its specific place, in mysticism, concepts must be applied in their appropriate contexts. The confusion between union, truth, and majesty is like attaching an incompatible bead to a mismatched screw, leading to disorder and inefficiency. This allegory, like a mirror, reflects the importance of structure and accuracy in explaining spiritual concepts.
The lecture critiques generalized mysticism and Sufism due to their lack of thematic coherence and systemic order. This form of mysticism, like a scattered breeze, leads to disorder and vague generalities, hindering the attainment of higher spiritual realms. In contrast, the mysticism of Khwaja Abdullah Ansari is portrayed as a solid structure, explaining mystical knowledge with precision and order.
In a humorous allegory, the lecture compares the confusion of concepts by the commentator to sermonizers who link everything to a single theme, such as the Karun River. This confusion, akin to mixing door and gate, arises from the lack of thematic coherence and leads to disorder in the explanation of esoteric teachings.
The lecture posits that the sense of mystical union is the primary tool for transmitting spiritual stages. The average mystic, by cultivating a sense of union in a receptive audience, can transfer this state, like a gardener planting seeds in fertile soil. However, the perfected mystic, like a sun that requires no ground, directly imparts this sense of union to others, like light dispelling darkness immediately.
The lecture identifies the mystics spiritual power and the receptive conditions in the audience as the key factors for the transmission of spiritual stages. Elements such as good intention, divine sustenance, and spiritual affinity (Musahnat) play a role in facilitating this transfer. Musahnat, like a key, unlocks the hearts and facilitates the transfer of knowledge. This principle is rooted in the hadith "The souls are armies arrayed in ranks," which points to spiritual harmony among beings.
The lecture describes divine decrees as divine causes that play a role in either guiding or misguiding individuals. Divine decrees, like an invisible thread, shape the existential path of a human being. For example, Aisha, despite her love for the Prophet (PBUH), was deprived of guidance due to her animosity towards the Ahl al-Bayt (AS), whereas Khadijah (AS), due to her existential harmony, found guidance. This difference is like two branches of the same tree, one growing towards light and the other towards darkness.
The lecture, citing the prayer "O Allah, do with me as You deem fit, not as I deserve," emphasizes the necessity of reliance on God and seeking divine mercy. This prayer, like a key, opens the doors to Gods mercy and protects the seeker from the errors of the ego.
The lecture points out that even the Prophet (PBUH), despite his divine authority, could not guide Aisha due to her animosity towards the Ahl al-Bayt (AS). This inability arose not from the weakness of the Prophet, but from the absence of suitable conditions in Aisha, like soil that cannot nurture the seed of guidance. This example reflects the role of divine decrees and existential conditions in guidance or misguidance.
The lecture critiques essentialism for imposing limitations and multiplicity. Essence, like a cage, confines the fluid existence of the human being, preventing infinite transformation. This view, rooted in Aristotelian philosophy, has hindered the flourishing of Islamic societies. The lecture emphasizes that by negating essence, existence becomes like a fluid substance, transforming without limitation into rain, snow, or hail.
The lecture, using an elegant allegory, compares existence to a fluid that can transform into rain, snow, or hail. This fluidity, like the principle of "Everything is in everything," represents the potential for infinite existential transformation. By negating essence, a human being can move from one form of existence to another, like a flower transforming from earth to petal, and from petal to fragrance.
The lecture critiques the traditional view that an unworthy person cannot be educated, emphasizing that, with the negation of essence, all humans are educable. The example of animal training in the West, such as with dogs and cats, illustrates the possibility of existential transformation. This view, like a fresh breeze, dispels traditional limiting notions and emphasizes the infinite capacity of humans for growth.
The lecture, using the allegory of the "Wall of Death," illustrates the possibility of overcoming obstacles in the spiritual journey. Just as a motorcyclist climbs the Wall of Death with speed and precision, the mystic, through purification of the soul and proper conduct, can ascend to higher mystical stages. This allegory acts like a lamp, lighting the way on the spiritual path.
Inspired by the journey of Moses (Kalimullah), the lecture emphasizes that by negating essence, a human being can attain divine stages and "become God." This possibility is like a peak that the mystic reaches through purification and spiritual striving, where the divine attributes are manifested in their being.
The lecture attributes the backwardness of Islamic societies to the philosophy of essentialism. This philosophy, by imposing limitations and multiplicity, has stifled human flourishing. The lecture cites the hadith "The people follow the religion of their rulers," highlighting the role of scholars and philosophers in this limitation. This critique acts like a sword, tearing down the veils of ignorance and showing the path to liberation.
The lecture uses Imam as an example of a person who, by negating the limitations of essence, transformed the world. This example, like a mirror, reflects the grandeur of human existence and demonstrates that through spiritual striving and purification, anyone can attain the highest peaks of greatness.
The lecture compares the fear of greatness to a beggar who fears a whole loaf of bread. This fear, like a shadow, prevents the light of human existence from shining. A society accustomed to the limitations of essence shrinks away from accepting higher spiritual stages, much like a beggar rejecting a full loaf out of suspicion of its being poisoned.
In a humorous allegory, the lecture compares the King of England to a puppet, bound by the philosophy of essentialism. This allegory acts like a mirror, reflecting the futility of the limitations of essence, and invites humanity to break free from these chains.
The lecture describes humanity as the essence of God, bearing His names and attributes. Essence, like a cage, confines this grandeur. By negating essence, humanity can reflect the divine beauty and majesty, like a mirror that reflects the face of the Divine.
The 431st lecture of Nokounam (may his soul rest in peace) meticulously elucidates the third stage of mystical union in the stages of the spiritual traveler, highlighting the importance of thematic coherence in mysticism. The obliteration of existence in the vision of the Divine Presence, like dew dissolving in the sun, leads the seeker to unity with the Divine. The critique of essentialism serves as a key that unlocks the limitations of existence and affirms the potential for infinite transformation. Notable insights include the distinction between essential and non-essential mysticism, the role of divine decrees in guidance and misguidance, and the prayer for divine mercy as an essential tool for the mystic. Supervised by: Sadegh Khademi
