_The Gaekwad Studies
                                    in
                       Religion and Philosophy_: X

                         SOME RELIGIOUS AND MORAL
                         TEACHINGS OF AL-GHAZZALI

         Printed by Mr. K. G. Patel at the Lakshmi Vilas P. Press
          Co. Ltd. and published by A. G. Widgery, the College,
                            Baroda, 5-1-1921.




Other Works by Professor Nawab Ali


MAA’RIJ-UDDIN.

The Ladder of Religion. A Comparative Study of Religions.

TARIKHI-SOHAF.

History of the Holy Scriptures.

TAZKIRAL-UL-MUSTAFA.

Life of Prophet Mohammed.

May be had from The Seminar, The College, BARODA




                         SOME RELIGIOUS AND MORAL
                         TEACHINGS OF AL-GHAZZALI

                      Being brief extracts from his
                           _Ihya-u-Ulum-id-din_

                     Freely rendered into English by
                           SYED NAWAB ALI M. A.
                Professor of Persian, the College, Baroda.

                         With an introduction by
                          ALBAN G. WIDGERY M. A.
             Professor of the Comparative Study of Religions,
                           The College, Baroda.

                                  BARODA




PREFACE


The perusal of the constructive treatises of the foremost leaders of the
different religions should help to promote at least more mutual respect,
if not, indeed, actual co-operation, among their devotees than the study
of the critical discussions of lesser minds. For this reason the present
small volume of extracts from the chief constructive work of Al Ghazzali
has been included in the Gaekwad Studies in Religion and Philosophy. The
purpose of that series is to be constructive rather than critical, and
further, it is meant to contain volumes appealing to the general public
as well as to the scholar. For a wider and more correct understanding and
appreciation of the spirit of Islam, it is to be regretted that there
are so few English translations of Muslim works in Arabic and Persian.
It is to be hoped that in future more attention will be turned in this
direction. In the meantime the present volume may serve at least to
arouse some interest.

This work was undertaken at the request of Professor Widgery, to whom I
am indebted for several suggestions and for going through the whole of
the manuscript and the proofs.

                                                                 NAWAB ALI

_Baroda, 1920._




CONTENTS


    Preface                                              _Page_ 5

    Introduction                                                9

    List of Al Ghazzali’s works                                30

       I. The Nature of Man                                    41

      II. Human Freedom and Responsibility                     53

     III. Pride and Vanity                                     78

      IV. Friendship and Sincerity                             95

       V. The Nature of Love, and Man’s highest Happiness     116

      VI. The Unity of God                                    138

     VII. The Love of God and its Signs                       145

    VIII. Riza or Joyous Submission to His Will               164




INTRODUCTION


The Comparative Study of Religions, interesting as a form of intellectual
research, has for many a further value in the influence it may exert upon
the widening and the deepening of the religious life. The practical value
may become more and more acknowledged, if, as signs suggest, the reality
of the religious experience is more keenly felt and mankind recognise
the place of religious goods in the highest type of life. Though it is
certainly premature to say that there is much serious acknowledgement and
recognition of these values amongst the peoples of the world, there are
reasons to think that tendencies of thought and feeling in this direction
are increasing in power. One of the best means of aiding the Comparative
Study of Religions and promoting these tendencies is by the publication
of important books connected with the religions, representing the views
of leading thinkers and saints.

If we turn to Islam, we find that some Western writers describe it as in
a condition of progressive decay, while others would have us believe that
its onward march is a menace. It is well to be able to avoid the obvious
purpose which lies behind both contentions. Nevertheless, to the present
writer it appears true to say that there is much stagnation in Islam (In
which religion is there not?), and that its spirit is often lost and
its real teachings neglected owing to the general use of Arabic in the
recitation of the Quran by persons entirely ignorant of that language,
and also to the prevalent mechanical conception of the character of the
Quran as a form of divine revelation. We believe that the Comparative
Study of Religions will help to turn the attention of Muslims away
from these to the emphasising of the essential spirit of Islam. This
should be central and normative in the rising movements of reform and
rejuvenescence. In this connection, as bringing out this spirit, it is
especially appropriate, both for the students of the religions and for
those directly interested in the spiritual revival in Islam, to publish
in an easily accessible form some of the religious and moral teachings of
Ghazzali. A Western scholar has written of him that he is “the greatest,
certainly the most sympathetic figure in the history of Islam ... the
only teacher of the after generations ever put by Muslims on a level
with the four great Imams.”[1] And he goes on to remark further; “In the
renaissance of Islam which is now rising to view, his time will come and
the new life will proceed from a renewed study of his works.”[2] But
Dieterici says of him: “As a despairing sceptic he springs suicidally
into the all-God (_i.e._ all-pervading deity of the Pantheists) to kill
all scientific reflection.”[3] To justify such a judgment would indeed
be impossible if the whole course of Ghazzali’s works is taken into
consideration. The greatest eulogy is perhaps that of Tholuck: “All that
is good, worthy, and sublime, which his great soul had compassed, he
bestowed upon Muhammedanism, and he adorned the doctrines of the Quran
with so much piety and learning that in the form given them by him they
seem, in my opinion, worthy of the assent of Christians. Whatsoever was
most excellent in the philosophy of Aristotle or in the Sufi mysticism,
he discreetly adapted to the Muhammedan theology. From every school he
sought the means of shedding light and honour upon religion, while his
sincere piety and lofty conscientiousness imparted to all his writings a
sacred majesty.”[4]

One feature of Ghazzali’s attitude has considerable significance in
looking to an increased study of his works as a factor towards the
revivification of Islam: his tolerance. Although regarding Al Hallaj’s
expressions, (for example, I am the truth, _i.e._ God) as incautious,
he helped to defend him and to save him from execution on a charge of
blasphemy. He wrote a treatise on tolerance: _The Criterion of the
Difference between Islam and Heresy_. In this teaching of tolerance he
felt himself to be pointing back to the policy of the earliest Muslim
times and to the greatest authorities of early Islam. He “strove to
attract the souls of his fellow Muslims to spiritual faith which unifies,
to worship at the altars which are in the hearts of men”.[5]

The influence of Ghazzali has been represented by Mr. Macdonald as
chiefly that he led men back from scholastic labours upon theological
dogmas to living contact with, study and exegesis of the Quran and
Traditions; gave Sufiism an assured position within the Church of Islam;
and brought philosophy and philosophical theology within the range of the
ordinary mind.[6]

Al Ghazzali has given some account of his own religious development in a
work entitled: _Munqidh min-ad-dalal_. This account is significant, but
as the Baron Carra de Vaux remarks, his eventual explicit adoption of a
Sufi mysticism was not merely a consequence of the failure of his other
attempts to find a solution to life’s profoundest problems but a result
of his early influences. For, soon after his birth at Tus in Khorassan in
450 A.H. (1059 A.D.), his father died and he was brought up by a Sufi.
Nevertheless his mystical leanings did not assert themselves vigorously
till he was well on to maturity. Up to that time he devoted himself to
the usual studies of canon law, the orthodox theology, the doctrines of
the Mutazillites, and a variety of other subjects including the works of
the Sufis. For a time he was a student of the Asharite Imam Al Haramayn
at Nysabur. He himself represents his attitude as at this time that of
one working and wishing for reputation and wealth. In 484 A.H. he was
honoured by appointment to the “University” or “Academy” of Baghdad,
where he soon acquired great renown as lawyer and theologian.

On the threshold of maturity he was afflicted by doubts as to the
validity and worth of the theological and philosophical bases of his
religious belief. The strain of his reflection and the intensity of
his anxiety to reach a secure faith seem to have caused a breakdown of
health. With unexpected suddenness he left Baghdad. That was in 488 A.H.
(1095 A.D.) He had examined in all details the traditional orthodox
scholastic system of the _Kalam_, the positions of the Mutazilites and
the philosophers, and in the light of his new doubts and experiences
turned again also to a closer study of the writings of the leading
mystics, such as Abu Talib, Al Muhasibi, and Al Junayd. His early
training had predisposed him to the acceptance of mysticism, and this
acceptance was led up to by the conclusions of his reflection, in which
it has been maintained he carried doubt as far back as did Descartes.

Thus he himself writes: “A thirst to comprehend the essential natures of
all things was, indeed, my idiosyncrasy and distinctive characteristic
from the beginning of my career and prime of my life: a natural gift and
temperament bestowed on me by God, and implanted by Him in my nature
by no choice or device of my own, till at length the bond of blind
conformity was loosed from me, and the beliefs which I had inherited,
were broken away when I was little more than a boy.”[7]

Carra de Vaux[8] thus graphically describes the process in Al Ghazzali’s
mind, as he himself suggests it to us: “Religious beliefs, he reflected,
are transmitted by the authority of parents; but authority is not proof.
To arrive at certitude it was necessary for him to reconstruct all
his knowledge from the very foundation. With a vivid feeling of this
necessity, he aspired to certitude, defining it in a purely psychological
fashion as a state in which the mind is so bound up with and so satisfied
with a piece of knowledge that nothing might henceforth deprive him of
it. This curious definition, which is applied to religious faith as well
as to scientific knowledge, does not escape from being purely subjective.
As one might foresee, the great desire for certitude only led him at
first into a series of doubts. As he sought this state of perfect
assurance, step by step he saw it recede before him. He looked for
certitude in the perceptions of the senses, with the result that he could
no longer trust his senses. Sight, the most powerful of the faculties
of sense, for example, led him to the perception of an immovable shadow
on the sun and an hour afterwards this shadow was gone. Sight showed
him a star which is very small, and geometry made him recognise it to
be greater than the earth. Then he turned to the first principles of
reason; but the perception of the senses took its revenge in saying to
him: ‘Previously you believed in me and you abandoned me when this judge
reason presented itself. If this judge had remained hidden you would have
continued to believe in me. Who can tell you that beyond the reason there
is no other judge, which if it made itself evident, would convict reason
of falsehood?’. That is a movement of thought which is dramatic enough,
though perhaps a little artificial.—The thinker continued his search for
the certain. He halted and concerned himself with the famous comparison
of life with a dream and death with an awakening. Perhaps after that
awakening he would see things in a different manner from that in which he
then saw them. Mysticism thus suggested itself to him: This actual dream
of death could be anticipated by the condition of ecstasy, by less than
ecstasy, by a light which God pours into the heart. In this light, he saw
not only the truth of the dogmas of the faith or the beauty of the moral
life, but he was assured of the truth of the first principles of reason,
the basis of all knowledge and all reasoning. He doubted no longer; he
was cured of his pains; he had found certitude and peace.”

On leaving Baghdad, he retired to meditate in the mosques of Damascus,
and is further reported to have made pilgrimages to Jerusalem, Hebron
(the burial place of Abraham), Medina and Mecca. In abandonment to his
immediate religious experience of the love of God he found more peace. In
the course of time he associated again more definitely with his family.
Eventually in 499 A. H. (1106 A.D.) he was ordered by the Sultan to teach
in the Academy at Nysabur. After a life in which he had written a large
number of independent treatises and indeed brought about a great change
in the tendencies of Islam, he died at his native town of Tus in 505
(1111 A.D.).

If in his initial process of doubt Ghazzali resembled Descartes, in his
view of causality he reminds us of Hume; in his general attitude he
approaches Kant and Schleiermacher. On the one hand he insists on the
limitation of the efficiency of the theoretical reason, on the other he
finds in will, in the moral and the religious experience a more immediate
avenue to real knowledge. For the study of religion in our day it is
important to note that Ghazzali (here unlike Kant) sees in religious
experience a way to certitude. But in this he is led to acknowledge that
the advance of the human mind towards its goal of real knowledge and
peace is dependent upon an active influence of God upon man. It may be
maintained that he puts here in religious terminology the central idea
of the Aristotelian conception of Scholastic times, the relation of the
“Active Intelligence” to the minds of men. His view enabled him to give a
due position to the Prophet and the Quran. For the knowledge of God is to
be conceived as coming not in immediate mystical intuition to all alike,
but while in some degree to all, to some in a special degree. These are
the prophets. The position which Maimonides presents in his _Guide to the
Perplexed_[9] with relation to religious knowledge and the functions of
the prophets is parallel with that of Ghazzali.

From the accompanying list and classification of the works of Ghazzali,
it will be seen that he was a writer on all sides of the theory
and practice of his religion. He was an authority on canon law and
jurisprudence, and a commentator of the Quran. He examined the positions
of the Scholastic theologians, and found that they depended entirely on
the acceptance of their initial dogmatic assumptions. The disputes of the
Scholastics amongst themselves appeared to have little or no relation
with religious life, rather if anything they were a hindrance to true
religion. And in face of the philosophers the Scholastic theologians
were almost helpless. But the books which exerted the greatest influence
both within and beyond Muslim circles, and the books that still retain
their interest today are the Maqasid ul Falasafa (The Aim or Goal
of the Philosophers) the Tahafat ul Falasafa (the Refutation of the
Philosophers) and the Ihya-u-Ulum-id-Din (The Renovation of the Sciences
of Religion.) In the first of these he gives an account of the different
philosophical positions which were more or less prevalent. In the second
he critically examines those positions. In the third he gives a general
survey with a constructive purpose chiefly moral and religious. It
is due to this last work more than all others that Ghazzali has been
called “The Regenerator of Religion”, “The Proof of Islam”. The _Ihya_
“expounds theology and ethics from the moderate Sufi school”. Though it
was committed to the flames, chiefly in Spain, probably by those holding
opinions which Ghazzali had bitterly attacked, it soon established its
position in the Muslim world, in which it has been widely studied up
to today. From it the passages translated in this book are taken. The
following table of contents will show the range of the subjects with
which it deals.

THE RENOVATION OF THE SCIENCES OF RELIGION.

PART I.

    1. On Knowledge. Articles of Faith.
    2. On Purification.
    3. Prayer and Its Meaning.
    4. Zakat and Its Meaning.
    5. Fasting and Its Meaning.
    6. Pilgrimage and Its Meaning.
    7. The Reading of the Quran.
    8. Varieties of Orisons.
    9. The Order of Praying, and Vigils.

PART II.

    1. On Eating.
    2. On Marriage.
    3. On Business.
    4. The Lawful and the Unlawful.
    5. Social Relations and Etiquette.
    6. On Retirement.
    7. On Travel.
    8. On Music.
    9. On Enforcing Good and Checking Evil.
    10. Good Living: Description of the Prophet’s Mode of Living.

PART III.

    1. Psychological Description of the Nature of Man.
    2. On Virtues and the Purification of the Heart.
    3. On Appetite and Passion.
    4. On the Tongue: Its Goods and Evils.
    5. On Anger: Enmity and Envy.
    6. The Evils of the World.
    7. Parsimony and the Evils of the Love of Wealth.
    8. On the Evils of Reputation and Hypocrisy.
    9. Pride and Vanity.
    10. Self-deception.

PART IV.

    1. Repentance.
    2. Patience and Thanksgiving.
    3. Hope and Fear.
    4. The Poor and the Hermit,
    5. Unity of God, and Dependence on Him.
    6. On Love, Ecstasy, and Joyous Submission to His will.
    7. On Intention, Sincerity and Truth.
    8. Meditation.
    9. Contemplation and taking a Warning.
    10. On Death and the After-Life.

Against the philosophers he argued for the belief in the reality of the
divine attributes and against the view of the eternity of the world. He
contended against the theory that there would be no physical punishments
and rewards hereafter, maintaining, as he did, the doctrine of the
resurrection of the body. He virtually denied that there is real causal
connection in events as experienced by us: but only sequence: in this he
adumbrates the theory of Hume. For Ghazzali, God is the only efficient
cause. From the scepticism to which his consideration of philosophy led
him he turned to the acceptance of revelation, this as found in the
mystic experience and in the words of saints and prophets, especially the
Prophet Muhammed.

The knowledge of moral principles Ghazzali conceived as coming not
through rational reflection but by immediate intuition of the divine
character revealing itself. Moral truths come especially through moral
and religious teachers, as the most fit persons for the transmission of
these revelations. He possessed great skill in psychological analysis
of moral conditions, and passages in illustration of this have been
included here, treating of pride and vanity, friendship and sincerity. As
almost all great practical moral and religious teachers, Ghazzali makes
considerable use of apt stories, and of striking sayings from the saints
and prophets. He continually harks back to the time of the Prophet and
his “Companions”.

Ghazzali’s abandonment of his academic position at Baghdad, his
retirement to mosques and journeyings on pilgrimage, are sufficient
evidence that he recognised that the truth of mysticism could not be
tested by theoretical reflection but only by an attempt at practice.
Only the experience itself could prove its own reality. He appears
to have held that for the attainment of the condition of ecstasy the
means of asceticism and meditation should be used. But it does not
seem quite correct to suggest as does Carra de Vaux that Ghazzali did
not recognise the fact of divine “grace”, though he did not use a
corresponding term. The beatific vision of the mystic certainly depended
in part, for Ghazzali, on God’s mercy in removing the veil. How far he
himself was successful in attaining the bliss of the mystic vision it is
impossible to tell: in this direction he gained no such reputation as
did several other Sufis. He taught that repentance, a moral conversion,
is a necessary preliminary to the mystic life, and he fought against a
common tendency of mystics towards antinomianism. Similarly he tried to
avoid the danger of interpreting the union of the soul with God as its
identification with God in a pantheistic view of the universe. Goldzieher
says he differed from the Sufis generally in the rejection of their
pantheistic aims and low estimate of religious ordinances.[10]




A LIST OF WORKS BY AL GHAZZALI[11]


                              A: CANON LAW.

  _Title._                    _Subject._                _Place and date
                                                         of publication._

  _K. Wajiz_ (_Compendium_).  Canon Law.                 Cairo   1317 A. H.

  _Risalat-ul-Qudsiyya._      (Transcendence of God)
                              included in Ihya as the
                              3rd section of the 2nd
                              Chapter of its Book 1.

  _Anqud ul Mkhtasir._        Summary of Jowim’s
                              Mukhtasar.

  _Ghait ul Ghor fi Masail    Divorce.
  il dor._

  _Gaur ul Durar._

  _Qanun ul Rasul._           The Canon Law of the
                              Prophet.

                            B: JURISPRUDENCE.

  _Al Mustafa._               Jurisprudence.             Boulac  1322 A. H.

  _Al Manhul wal Muntahal._   Doctrines falsely
                              attributed to others
                              and falsely claimed
                              by some. Jurisprudence.

  _Wajiz fil Furu._           Jurisprudence.             Egypt   1305 A. H.

  _Khulasat ul Fikh_          Jurisprudence.
  (Quintessence of
  Jurisprudence).

  _Al-durr ul Manzum fi       An Exposition of
  sirr il Muktum Wasit._      Shafite Jurisprudence.

                                C: LOGIC.

  _Mizan ul Amal._            Logic.                     Cairo   1328 A. H.

  _Mihakkul Nazar fil         Logic.                     Cairo
  Mantaq._ (Whetstone of
  reflection).

  _Maayar ul Ilm._            Logic.

  _Al Maarif ul Aqliyyah      Discourses on Logic.
  wal Allahiyyah Al
  Mutaqid._

  _Mayar ul Ilm Fannil        On Logic.                  Cairo   1329 A. H.
  Mantaq._ (the weighing
  scale of the science).

                             D: PHILOSOPHY.

  _Ihya u-Ulum-id-Din._       (The most important        Cairo   1322,
                              book for his philosophy).          1324 A. H.
                                                         Egypt   1282   ”
                                                         Lucknow 1281   ”
                                                         Meerut  1280   ”

  _Maqasid ul Falasafa._                                 Cairo   1326   ”
  (The aims of the
  philosophers).

  _Maznun bihi ala Ghairi     Exposition of Ghazzali’s     ”     1328   ”
  Ahlihi._                    own views.

  _Kitab-ul-Arbain._          Abridgement of Ihya.         ”     1328   ”

  _Risalat ul Luduniyya._     Knowledge (Ilham and Wahi)   ”     1328   ”

  _Al-Kashfu-wat-Tabyin fi    On the delusion of men in    ”     1324   ”
  Ghurur il khalqi Ajmain._   general. (On the margin of
                              As-Shurain’s Tanbihal
                              Mughtarrin.)

  _Faysalut-Tafriqa baynal    Refutation of Atheists.    Cairo   1325 A. H.
  Islami-wa-z Zandiqah._

  _Al Fikratu al Ibrah._      Meditation and Contemplation.

  _Tahafat ul Falasafa._      Destruction of the           ”     1321   ”
                              Philosophers.

  _Iljam ul Awam._            Abbreviation of the Ihya.

  _Al-Imla-u-’ an             Statements on disputed     In the margin of
  ishkalat-il-Ihya._          passages of Ihya.          1334 edition of
                                                         Ihya.

  _Mustazhiry._               A guide for novices.

  _Al Hikmat-u-fi-            Wisdom of God.             Cairo   1326 A. H.
  Makhluq-i-Ilahi._

  _Hakikat ul Ruh._           On Soul.

                               E: ETHICS.

  _Badayat ul Hidayah._       Ethics.                    Cairo   1317,
                                                                 1326 A. H.

  _Kimiya i Saadat._          Ethics.                      ”

  _Tibr ul Masbuk._           An ethical mirror for        ”     1317   ”
                              princes. A letter.

  _Ayyuh al Walad._           A letter of faith and        ”     1328   ”
                              conduct.

                 F: THEOLOGY: EXEGETICAL AND DOGMATICAL.

  _Al durr ul Fakhira._       On eschatology.              ”     1322   ”

  _Yaqut ul Tawil fi Tafsir   A commentary on the Quran
  il Tanzil._                 in 40 vols. Not found.

  _K. Iqtisad fil-I’tiqad._   Exposition of Faith.        Cairo

  _Fadhaih ul Abahiya._       The exposure of the
                              Doctrines of the
                              Free-thinkers

  _Al Quistas ul Mustaqim._   (No Imam is necessary        ”
                              except the Prophet
                              himself).

  _Al Qual ul Jamil fil       Criticism of those who
  Raddi Ala man Ghayyar       have changed the text
  al Injil._                  of the Bible.

  _Haqiqat ul Qualain._       An Exposition of truth
                              of two sayings.

  _Tadlis Iblis._             The intrigue of the devil.

  _Jawahir ul Quran._         A collection of the best     ”     1329 A. H.
                              verses of the Quran.

  _Risalat ul Wahdah          A brief letter on preaching
  wal-I’tiqad._               and Belief.

  _Risalat-ul-’Aqaid._        Doctrines of Islam and     Cairo   1325 A. H.
                              the duties of rulers.

  _Al Maqasid ul Khilaf       Different theories of
  fi fan il Kalam._           Kalam.

                               G: SUFIISM.

  _Al-Adab-fid-din._          (Fitting behaviour in        ”     1328   ”
                              religion).

  _Al-Qawaid ul-Ashara._      (A very brief summary        ”     1328   ”
                              of general advice of
                              religious matters).

  _Maqasid ul Hasana Sharh    An exposition of Divine      ”     1322   ”
  Asma i-illahi’l Husna._     names.

  _Minhaj ul Abidin._         The path of the devout.    Cairo   1313 A. H.
                              (Said to be the last of
                              his work).

  _Nasihat-ul Talmiz._        An Epistle.                  ”     1295   ”

  _Kitab Asrar al Anwar._

  _Madkhal ul Suluk ila       A Guide for kings.
  Manazil il Muluk._

  _Al Munqid min ad Dalal._   Autobiographical statement    ”    1303,
  (Deliverer from error).     of his spiritual progress.         1320 A. H.

  _Tajrid fil-Kalimat il      Exposition of Kalima.         ”    1325   ”
  Tauhid._

  _Murshid ul Talibin._       A Guide for novices.

  _Mishkat ul anwar fi        Esoteric exposition of the    ”    1325   ”
  Lataif il Akhbar._          verse “God is the light of
  (Niche for the lights).     heaven and earth.”

  _Kitab ul-Madnun-i-Saghir._ Esoteric exposition of     Cairo   1328 A. H.
                              the verse “Then shaped
                              him and breathed of His
                              Spirit into him.”

  _Makashifat-ul-Qulub._      (Abridgement of a work     Boulaq & Cairo
                              of doubtful authorship             1360 A. H.
                              ascribed to Al Ghazzali).  Cairo   1306 A. H.




MORAL AND RELIGIOUS TEACHINGS OF AL GHAZZALI




THE NATURE OF MAN[12]


Though man shares with the other animals external and internal senses, he
is at the same time also endowed with two qualities peculiar to himself,
knowledge and will. By knowledge is meant the power of generalisation,
the conception of abstract ideas, and the possession of intellectual
truths. By will is meant that strong desire to acquire an object which
after due consideration of its consequences has been pronounced by reason
to be good. It is quite different from animal desire, nay, it is often
the very opposite of it.

In the beginning children also lack these two qualities. They have
passion, anger, and all the external and internal senses, but will
finds its expression only later. Knowledge differs according to the
capacity for it, according to the latent powers in a man. Hence there
is a variety of stages amongst Prophets,[13] the Ulamas, the Sufis and
the Philosophers. Further progress is possible even beyond these stages,
for divine knowledge knows no bounds. The highest stage is reached by
one to whom all truths and realities are revealed intuitively, who by
virtue of his exalted position enjoys direct communion and close relation
with the Most Holy. The real nature of this position is known only to
him who enjoys it. We verify it by faith. A child has no knowledge of
the attainments of an adult; an adult is not aware of the acquisitions
of a learned man. Similarly, a learned man is not cogniscant of the
holy communion of the saints and the prophets, and of the favours
bestowed on them. Although the divine blessings descend freely, those
are fit recipients of them, whose hearts are pure and wholly devoted to
Him. “Verily,” says the Hadis, “the desire of the virtuous is to hold
communion with me, and I long to look at them”. “He who approaches me a
span, I approach him an arm”.[14] The divine favours are not withheld,
but hearts bedimmed by impurity fail to receive them. “Had it not been
that the devils hover round the hearts of men, they would have seen the
glories of the Kingdom of the Heaven”.[15]

The superiority of man consists thus in his being cogniscant of divine
attributes and actions. Therein lies his perfection; thus he may be
worthy of admission to God’s presence.

The body serves as a vehicle for the soul, and the soul is the abode
for knowledge which is its fundamental character as well as its
ultimate object. The horse and the ass are both beasts of burden, but a
superiority of the former is found in its being gracefully adapted for
use in battle. If the horse fails in this it is degraded to the rank of
mere burden bearing animals. Similarly with man. In certain qualities
man resembles a horse and an ass, but his distinguishing trait is his
participation in the nature of the angels, for he holds a middle position
between the beast and the angel. Considering the mode of his nourishment
and growth he is found to belong to the vegetable world. Considering his
power of movement and impulses he is a denizen of the animal kingdom. The
distinguishing quality of knowledge lifts him up to the celestial world.
If he fails to develop this quality and to translate it into action he
is no better than a grunting pig, a snarling dog, a prowling wolf, or a
crafty fox.

If he wishes for true happiness, let him look upon reason as a monarch
sitting on the throne of his heart, imagination as its ambassador,
memory as treasurer, speech as interpreter, the limbs as clerks, and the
senses as spies in the realms of colour, sound, smell, etc. If all these
properly discharge the duties allotted to them, if every faculty does
that for which it was created—and such service is the real meaning of
thanksgiving to God—the ultimate object of his sojourn in this transitory
world is realised.

Man’s nature is made up of four elements, which produce in him four
attributes, namely, the beastly; the brutal, the satanic, and the divine.
In man there is something of the pig, the dog, the devil, and the saint.
The pig is the appetite which is repulsive not for its form but for
its lust and its gluttony. The dog is passion which barks and bites,
causing injury to others. The devil is the attribute which instigates
these former two, embellishing them and bedimming the sight of reason
which is the divine attribute. Divine reason, if properly attended to,
would repel the evil by exposing its character. It would properly control
appetite and the passions. But when a man fails to obey the dictates of
reason, these three other attributes prevail over him and cause his ruin.
Such types of men are many. What a pity it is that these who would find
fault with those who worship stones do not see that on their part they
worship the pig and the dog in themselves: Let them be ashamed of their
deplorable condition and leave no stone unturned for the suppression
of these evil attributes. The pig of appetite begets shamelessness,
lust, slander, and such like; the dog of passion begets pride, vanity,
ridicule, wrath and tyranny. These two, controlled by the satanic power
produce deceit, treachery, perfidy, meanness etc. but if divinity in man
is uppermost the qualities of knowledge, wisdom, faith, and truth, etc.
will be acquired.

Know then that mind is like a mirror which reflects images. But just as
the mirror, the image, and the mode of reflection are three different
things so mind, objects, and the way of knowing are also distinct. There
are five reasons which may prevent the object from being reflected in the
mirror. 1. There may be something wrong with the mirror. 2. Something
other than the mirror may prevent the reflection. 3. The object may
not be in front of it. 4. Something may come between the object and
the mirror. 5. The position of the object may not be known, so that
the mirror may be properly placed. Similarly, for five reasons, the
mind fails to receive knowledge. 1. The mind may be imperfect, like the
child’s. 2. Sin and guilt may bedim the mind and throw a veil over it. 3.
The mind may be diverted from the real object. For example, a man may
be obedient and good, but instead of rising higher to the acquisition
of truth and contemplation of God is contented with bodily devotions
and acquirement of means of living. Such a mind, though pure, will not
reflect the divine image for his objects of thought are other than this.
If this is the condition of such mind, think what will be the state of
those minds which are absorbed in the gratification of their inordinate
passions. 4. An external screen, may as it were, come before the objects.
Sometimes a man who has subjugated his passions still through blind
imitation or prejudice fails to know the truth. Such types are found
amongst the votaries of the Kalam. Even many virtuous men also fall a
prey to it and blindly stick to their dogmas. 5. There may be ignorance
of the means for the acquisition of truth. Thus for illustration, a man
wants to see his back in a mirror: if he places the mirror before his
eyes he fails to see his back; if he keeps it facing his back it will
still be out of sight. Let him then take another mirror and place one
before his eyes and the other facing his back in such a position that the
image of the latter is reflected in the former. Thus he will be able to
see his back. Similarly the knowledge of the proper means is a key to the
knowledge of the unknown from the known.

The divine dispensation is liberal in the distribution of its bounties,
but for reasons mentioned above, minds fail to profit by them. For human
minds partake of the nature of the divine and the capacity to apprehend
truth is innate. The Quran says: “Surely we offered the trust to the
heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they declined to bear it
up and were afraid of it and man took it up. Surely he is not just (to
himself) and is ignorant”.[16] In this passage the innate capacity of man
is hinted at and refers to the secret power of knowing God, latent in
human minds by virtue of which they have preference over other objects
and the universe. The Prophet says: “Every child is born in the right
state (Fitrat) but his parents make him a Jew, a Christian, or a Magian.”
And again: “Had it not been that evil spirits hover round the hearts of
the sons of Adam they would have seen the kingdom of heaven”. Ibn Umar
reports that the Prophet was once asked as to where God is found either
on earth or in heaven. “He is in the hearts of his faithful servants”,
replied the Prophet.

It will not be out of place to throw some light here on the following
terms which are often vaguely applied while dealing with the question of
human nature.

1. Qalb (heart) has two meanings. (_a_) a conical shaped piece of
flesh on the left side of the chest, circulating blood, the source of
animal spirits. It is found in all animals. The heart thus belongs to
the external world and can be seen with the material eyes. (_b_) A
mysterious divine substance which is related to the material heart like
the relation between the dweller and the house or the artisan and his
implements. It alone is sentient and responsible.

2. Ruh (spirit) means (_a_) a vapoury substance which, issues from the
material heart, and quickens every part of the body. It is like a lamp
which is placed in a house and sheds its light on all sides. (_b_) The
soul which is expressed in the Quran as ‘divine commandment’[17] and is
used in the same sense as the second meaning of Qalb, mentioned above.

3. Nafs (self) which means (_a_) the substratum for appetite and passion.
The Sufis call it the embodiment of vices. (_b_) The ego which receives
different names in accordance with the qualities acquired from changes
in its conditions. When in subjugating passions it acquires mastery
over them and feels undisturbed, it is called _the peaceful self_
(Nafsi mutmainna). The Quran says: “Nafs that art at rest. Return to
thy Lord well pleased with Him, well pleasing.” When it upbraids man
for his actions it is called _conscience_ (Nafsi lauwama). When it
freely indulges in the gratification of his passions, it is called _the
inordinate self_ (Nafsi ammara).




HUMAN FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY[18]


Actions are either voluntary or involuntary. The difference between them
is not of kind but of degree. Analyse the process of an involuntary
action and you will find that if, for example, a man intends to thrust
a needle in your eye or draws a sword to strike on your head, your eye
in the former case will at once close and in the latter your hand will
suddenly be raised up to shield your head. This prompt action on the
part of your eye and hand is due to your consciousness of the evil to
be evaded, and this gives rise to volition which moves the eye and the
hand without the least delay. There are, however, cases the desirability
or rejection of which needs meditation, but the moment mind decides,
the decision is carried out as promptly as in the above example. This
meditation translated into choice or rejection constitutes will. Now will
makes its choice between two alternatives and takes its cue either from
imagination or reason. For example, a man may be unable to cut his own
throat, not because his hand is weak or a knife is not available, but
because will is lacking which would give the stimulus to suicide. For
man loves his own life. But suppose he gets tired of his life, owing to
having harrowing pains and unbearable mental sufferings. He has now to
choose between two alternatives which are both undesirable. A struggle
commences and he hangs between life and death. If he thinks that death
which will put an end to his sufferings quickly is preferable to life
with its lingering intolerable pains, he will choose death although he
loves his life. This choice gives rise to will, the command to which,
communicated through proper channels, would then be faithfully executed
by his hand in the manner of suicide. Thus, though the process from the
commencement of mental struggle for the choice between too alternatives
down to the stimulus to physical action is uniformly determinate there is
at any rate a sort of freedom traceable in the will.

Man holds the balance between determinism and freedom. The uniform
succession of events is on the lines of determination but his choice
which is an essential element of will is his own. Our Ulamas have
therefore coined a separate phrase: _Kasb_ (acquisition), distinguishing
it from _Jabr_ (necessity) and _Ikhtiyar_ (freedom) They say that
fire burns of necessity (Jabr) but man may acquire fire through the
appropriate methods, while in Almighty God is the ultimate cause of fire
(_Ikhtiyar_). But it must be noted that when we use the word Ikhtiyar for
God, we must exclude the notion of choice, which is an essential element
of will in man. Let it be here recognised once for all as a general
principle that all the words of man’s vocabulary when used for God’s
attributes are similarly metaphorical.[19]

The question may be asked: If God is the ultimate cause why should there
be a causal connection in the orderly succession of events? The answer
to this lies in the correct understanding of the nature of causation.
Nothing causes anything. Antecedents have consequents.[20] God alone is
the efficient cause, but the ignorant have misunderstood and misapplied
the word _power_. As to the orderly succession of events, let it be
understood that the two events are conjoined like the relation between
the condition and the conditioned. Now certain conditions are very
apparent and can be known easily by people of little understanding, but
there are conditions which are understood only by those who see through
the light of intuition: hence the common error of miscalculating the
uniformity of events. There is a divine purpose linking the antecedents
to the consequents and manifesting itself in the existing orderly
succession of events, without the least break or irregularity. “Verily”,
says the Quran. “We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is
between them in sport. We did not create them both but with truth, but
most of them do not know”.[21]

Surely, there is a set purpose pervading the universe. The uniform
succession of events is not at random. There is no such thing as chance.
Here again it may be asked: If God is the efficient cause, how will
you account for actions attributed to man in the scriptures? Are we to
believe that there are two causes for one effect? My answer to this will
be that the word cause is vaguely understood. It can be used in two
different senses. Just as we say that the death of A was caused by (1)
B. the executioner, and (2) C the king’s order. Both these statements
are correct. Similarly God is the cause of actions as He has creative
power and efficiency. At the same time man is the cause of actions as he
is the source of the manifestation of uniform succession of events. In
the former case we have a real causal connection, while in the latter
a relation of the antecedent to the consequent after the manner of the
connection between the condition and the conditioned. There are passages
in the Quran where the word cause is used in different senses.

“The angel of death who is given charge of you shall cause you to die:
then to your Lord you shall be brought back”.[22] “Allah takes the souls
at the time of their death”.[23]

“Have you considered what you sow?”[24] “We pour down the water, pouring
it down in abundance. Then we cleave the earth; cleaving it asunder. Then
we cause to grow therein the grain”.[25]

“Fight them: Allah will chastise them by your hands and bring them to
disgrace”.[26] “So you did not slay them, but it was Allah who slew
them, and thou didst not smite when thou didst smite, but it was Allah
who smote, that he might confer upon the believers a good gift from
himself”.[27]

These passages show that the word, cause, signifies creative power, and
must be applied to God alone. But as man’s power is the image of God’s
power the word was applied to him figuratively. Yet, just as the death of
a culprit is caused by the actual killing by the hand of the executioner
and not the king’s order, so the word cause actually applied to man is
contrary to fact. God alone is the real efficient cause, and the word
must be applied to him in its root sense of power.

It may be asked then, why man should be rewarded for his good actions and
punished for his misdeeds. Let us consider first the nature of reward
and punishment. Experience tells us that things have natural properties
and that physical laws operate in a uniform manner. Take, for example,
the science of medicine. Certain drugs are found to possess certain
qualities. If a man swallows poison of his own accord he has no right
to ask why poison kills him. Its natural property has simply operated in
his system and caused his death. Similarly actions make an impression on
mind. Good and bad actions are invariably followed by pleasure and pain
respectively. A good action is its own reward of pleasure and a bad one
of pain. The former works like an elixir; the latter like poison. The
properties of actions have been discovered, like discoveries in medicine,
but by the physicians of the heart, the saints and the prophets. If you
will not listen to them you must suffer the consequence. Now hear a
parable:

A certain king sent a horse, a robe of honour, and travelling expenses to
one of his suzerains in a distant land. Although the king had no need of
his services, the royal gift was a favour shown to his suzerain, so that
he might come to the king’s court and be happy in his presence. If the
suzerain understands the king’s intention from the nature of the gift and
utilizes it properly with a grateful heart, he will wait on the king and
live happily, but if he misuses the gift or takes no heed of it, he will
prove an ungrateful wretch.

It is thus that the boundless mercy of the omnipotent and omniscient
God bestowed on us the gift of life, providing us with bodily organs,
mental and moral faculties, so that we uplift ourselves by utilizing
them properly, and be worthy of being admitted into his holy presence.
If we misuse them or pay no regard to them, surely we shall be (Kafirs)
(literally “ungrateful”) for his blessings bestowed on us for our good,
and thus be doomed.

“Verily,” says the Quran, “we created man in the best make. Then we
render him the lowest of the low. Except those who believe and do good,
so they shall have a reward never to be cut off”.[28].[29].


_The Allegory of the Pen_

A certain devotee who was on the way to illumination saw a piece of paper
with lines written on it. “Why”, said the devotee, “hast thou blackened
thy bright face?” “It is not fair to take me to task”, replied the
paper, “I have done nothing. Ask the ink why she has sallied forth from
the inkstand where she was quite at ease, and forcibly blackened my
face”. “You are right” said the devotee. Then he turned to the ink and
enquired of her. “Why do you ask me”, she said, “I was sitting still in
the inkstand and had no mind to come out but this truculent pen rushed at
me, drew me out and scattered me over the page. There you see me lying
helpless, go to the pen and ask him”. The devotee turned to the pen and
interrogated him about his high-handedness. “Why do you trouble me”,
answered the pen, “Look, what am I? an insignificant reed. I was growing
by the banks of silvery streams amidst shady green trees, when lo: a
hand stretched at me. It held a knife, which uprooted me, flayed me and
separated my joints, hewed me, cleaved my head then, chopped it off. I
was sent headlong towards the ink, and have to serve abjectly. Do not add
insult to my injuries, go to the hand and ask him”. The devotee looked
at the hand and said: “Is it true? Are you so cruel?” “Do not be angry,
Sir” replied the hand “I am a bundle of flesh, bones, and blood. Have you
ever seen a piece of flesh exerting power? Can a body move of itself?
I am a vehicle used by one called vitality. He rides on me and forces
me round and round. You see, a dead man has hands but cannot use them
because vitality has left them. Why should I, a mere vehicle, be blamed?
Go to vitality and ask him why he makes use of me.” “You are right”, said
the devotee, and then questioned vitality. “Do not find fault with me”,
answered vitality, “Many a time a censurer himself is reproved, while
the censured is found faultless. How do you know that I have forced the
hand? I was already there before he moved, and had no idea of the motion.
I was unconscious and the on-lookers were also unaware of me. Suddenly
an agent came and stirred me. I had neither strength enough to disobey
nor willingness to obey him. That for which you would take me to task I
had to do according to his wish, I do not know who this agent is. He is
called will and I know him by name only. Had the matter been left to me I
think I should have done nothing.” “All right”, continued the devotee, “I
shall put the question to will, and ask him why he has forcibly employed
vitality which of its own accord would have done nothing”. “Do not be in
too great a hurry”, exclaimed will, “perchance I may give you sufficient
reason. His majesty, the mind, sent an ambassador, named knowledge,
who delivered his message to me through reason, saying: ‘Rise up, stir
vitality’. I was forced to do so, because I have to obey knowledge and
reason, but I know not why. As long as I receive no order I am happy, but
the moment an order is delivered I dare not disobey. Whether my monarch
be a just ruler or a tyrant, I must obey him. On my oath, as long as
the king hesitates or ponders over the matter I stand quiet, ready to
serve, but the moment his order is passed my sense of obedience which is
innate forces me to stir up vitality. So, you should not blame me. Go
to knowledge and get information there”. “You are right,” consented the
devotee, and proceeding, asked mind and its ambassador, knowledge and
reason, for an explanation. Reason excused himself by saying he was a
lamp only, but knew not who had lighted it. Mind pleaded his innocence
by calling himself a mere _tabula rasa_. Knowledge maintained that it was
simply an inscription on the _tabula rasa_, inscribed after the lamp of
reason had been lighted. Thus he could not be considered the author of
the inscription which may have been the work of some invisible pen. The
devotee was puzzled by the reply, but collecting himself, he spoke thus
to knowledge: “I am wandering in the path of my enquiry. To whomsoever
I go and ask the reason I am referred to another. Nevertheless, there
is pleasure in my quest, for I find that everyone gives me a plausible
reason. But pardon me, Sir if I say that your reply, knowledge, fails to
satisfy me. You say that you are a mere inscription recorded by a pen. I
have seen pen, ink, and tablet. They are of reed, a black mixture, and of
wood and iron, respectively. And I have seen lamps lighted with fire. But
here I do not see any of these things, and yet you talk of the tablet,
the lamp, the pen and the inscription. Surely you are not trifling with
me?” “Certainly not”, returned knowledge, “I spoke in right earnest. But
I see your difficulty. Your means are scanty, your horse is jaded, and
your journey is long and dangerous. Give up this enterprise, as I fear
you cannot succeed. If, however you are prepared to run the risk, then
listen. Your journey extends through three regions. The first is the
terrestrial world. Its objects pen, ink, paper, hand etc. are just what
you have seen them to be. The second is the celestial world, which will
begin when you have left me behind. There you will come across dense
forests, deep wide rivers and high impassable mountains and I know not
how you would be able to proceed. Between these two worlds there is a
third intermediary region called the phenomenal world. You have crossed
three stages of it, vitality, will, and knowledge. To use a simile: a man
who is walking is treading the terrestrial world: if he is sailing in a
boat he enters the phenomenal world: if he leaves the boat and swims and
walks on the waters, he is admitted in the celestial world. If you do
not know how to swim, go back. For, the watery region of the celestial
world begins now when you can see that pen inscribing on the tablet of
the heart. If you are not of whom it was said: ‘O ye of little faith,
wherefore didst thou doubt?’[30] prepare thyself. For, by faith you shall
not simply walk on the sea but fly in the air”. The wondering devotee
stood speechless for awhile, then turning to knowledge, began: “I am in
a difficulty. The dangers of the path which you have described unnerve
my heart, and I know not whether I have sufficient strength to face
them and to succeed in the end”. “There is a test for your strength”,
replied knowledge, “Open your eyes and fix your gaze on me. If you see
the pen which writes on the heart, you will in my opinion, be able to
proceed further on. For he who crosses the phenomenal world, knocks at
the door of the celestial world, then sights the pen which writes on
hearts”. The devotee did as he was advised, but failed to see that pen,
because his notion of pen was no other but of a pen of reed or wood.
Then knowledge drew his attention, saying: “There’s the rub. Do you not
know that the furniture of a palace indicates the status of its lord?
Nothing in the universe resembles God,[31] therefore his attributes are
also transcendental. He is neither body nor is in space. His hand is not
a bundle of flesh, bone, and blood. His pen is not of reed or wood. His
writing is not from ink prepared from vitriol and gall. But there are
many who ignorantly cling to an anthropomorphic view of Him, there are
few who cherish a transcendentally pure conception of Him, and believe
that He is not only above all material limitation but even above the
limitation of metaphor. You seem to be oscillating between these two
views, because on the one hand you think that God is immaterial, that His
words have neither sound nor shape; on the other hand you cannot rise to
the transcendental conception of His hand, pen and tablet. Do you think
that the meaning of the tradition “Verily God created Adam in His own
image”[32] is limited to the visible face of man? Certainly not: it is
the inward nature of man seen by the inward sight which can be called
the image of God. But listen: You are now at the sacred mount, where
the invisible voice from the burning bush speaks: “I am that I am;”[33]
“Verily I am thy Lord God, put off thy shoes”.[34] The devotee, who
listening with rapture, suddenly saw as it were a flash of lightning,
there appeared working the pen which writes on hearts-formless. “A
thousand blessings on thee, O knowledge, who hast saved me from falling
into the abysm of anthropomorphism (Tashbih). I thank thee from the
bottom of my heart. I tarried long, but now, adieu”.

The devotee then resumed his journey. Halting in the presence of the
invisible pen, politely he asked the same question. “You know my reply”
answered the mysterious pen, “You cannot have forgotten the reply given
to you by the pen in the terrestrial world”. “Yes, I remember,” replied
the devotee, “but how can it be the same reply, because there is no
similitude between you and that pen”. “Then it seems you have forgotten
the tradition: Verily God created Adam in his own image”. “No, Sir”,
interrupted the devotee, “I know it by heart”. “And you have forgotten
also that passage in the Quran: “And the heavens rolled up in his right
hand.”[35] “Certainly not”, exclaimed the devotee, “I can repeat the
whole of the Quran by rote”. “Yes, I know, and as you are now treading
the sacred precincts of the celestial world I think I can now safely
tell you that you have simply learnt the meaning of these passages from
a negative point of view. But they have a positive value, and should be
utilised as constructive at this stage.[36] Proceed further and you will
understand what I mean”. The devotee looked and found himself reflecting
upon the divine attribute omnipotence. At once he realised the force
of the mysterious pen’s argument, but goaded by his inquisitive nature
he was about to put the question to the holy being, when a voice like
the deafening sound of thunder was heard from above, proclaiming: “He
is not questioned for his actions but they shall be asked”. Filled with
surprize; the devotee bent his head in silent submission.

The hand of the divine mercy stretched towards the helpless devotee; into
his ear were whispered in zephyr tones: “Verily those who strive in our
way we will certainly show them the path which leads to us”[37]. Opening
his eyes, the devotee raised his head and poured forth his heart in
silent prayer. “Holy art thou, O God Almighty: blessed is thy name O Lord
of the universe. Henceforth I shall fear no mortal: I put my entire trust
in thee: thy forgiveness is my solace: thy mercy is my refuge.”

(Light may be thrown on the matter by consideration of the unity of
God.[38])




PRIDE AND VANITY[39]


When a man feels a superiority over others and with this a sort of
inward elation, this is called pride. It differs from vanity in as much
as vanity means consciousness of one’s elation while pride requires
a subject, an object and a feeling of elation. Suppose a man is born
solitary in the world, he may be vain but not proud, because in pride
man considers himself superior to others for certain qualities of his
self. He allots one position to his self and one to another, and then
thinks that his position is higher and is therefore elated. This “puffed
up” feeling which imparts a sense of “touch me not” is called pride. The
Prophet says: “O God save me from the puffing up of pride”. Ibn Abbas
says that the sentence in the Quran “And they have pride in their hearts
and will fail to reach it” means that the thought of inward greatness
will be denied to them. This thought is the source of inward and outward
actions, which are so to speak the fruits of it.

A proud man will not tolerate any other to be on equal terms with
himself. In private and in public he expects that all should assume a
respectful attitude towards him and acknowledging his superiority treat
him as a higher being. They should greet him first, make way for him
wherever he walks; when he speaks everyone should listen to him and
never try to oppose him. He is a genius and people are like asses. They
should be grateful to him seeing that he is so condescending. Such proud
men are found especially among ulamas. Sages are ruined by their pride.
The Prophet says: “He who has an atom of pride in his heart will fail
to enter paradise.” This saying requires explanation, and should be
carefully listened to. Virtues are the doors of Paradise, but pride and
self esteem lock them all. So long as man feels elated he will not like
for others what he likes for himself. His self esteem will deprive him
of humility, which is the essence of righteousness. He will neither be
able to discard enmity and envy, resentment and wrath, slander and scorn,
nor will he be able to cultivate truth and sincerity, and calmly listen
to any advice. In short, there is no evil which a proud man will not
inevitably do in order to preserve his elation and self-esteem. Vices
are like a chain of rings linked together which entangle his heart.
Therefore, an atom of pride is Satan’s spark, which secretly consumes the
nature of the sons of Adam.

Know then that pride is of three kinds: 1. Against God; 2. Against
prophets and saints; 3. Against fellowmen.

1. Against God. It is due to mere foolishness when a biped creature
considers himself as if Lord of the universe. Namrud and Pharoah were
such types, who disdained to be called God’s creatures on earth: “Verily,
Verily,” says the Quran, “the Messiah does by no means disdain that he
should be a servant of Allah, nor do the angels who are near to Him,
and whoever disdains His service and is proud He will gather them all
together to Himself.”[40]

2. Against prophets and saints. It is due to unwarranted self esteem when
one considers obedience to any mortal being as lowering his own position.
Such a person either fails to reflect on the nature of prophetship
and thereby feels proud of himself and does not obey the prophet, or
refuses to consider the claims of prophetship as being derogatory to
his elated self and therefore pays no regard to the prophet. The Quran
quotes the words of such persons:—“And they say: what is the matter with
this Apostle that he eats food and goes about in the markets, why has
not an angel been sent down to him so that he should have been a warner
with him. Or (why is not) a treasure sent down to him or he is made to
have a garden from which he should eat”. And those who do not fear our
meeting, say: “Why have not angels been sent down to us, or (why) do we
not see our Lord? Now certainly they are too proud of themselves and have
revolted in great revolt.”[41]

Our Prophet Mohammed was an orphan and had scanty means of livelihood, so
the Koraishite chief Walid bin Moghera and Abu Masood Sakfi used to speak
contemptuously of him.[42] And when people believed in him and accepted
Islam, the proud Koraishites used to say: Mohammed is surrounded by poor
men, let him send them off and then we of the aristocracy of Mecca will
listen to him. But God spoke to Mohammed “And withhold thyself with those
who call on their Lord morning and evening, desiring His good will, and
let not their eyes pass from them, desiring the beauties of this world’s
life, and do not follow him, whose heart we have made unmindful to our
resemblance, and he follows his low desires, and his case is one in which
due bounds are exceeded.”[43]

3. Against fellowmen. A proud man considers himself a superior being
and would like to see everybody humbled before him. He is therefore
quarrelling with God, trying to share with Him His attribute omnipotence.
God is spoken of in the Hadith, as saying: “Omnipotence is my mantle, he
who quarrels with me for it, him will I crush”. Surely men are all His
servants and no servant has a right to treat his fellow servants as their
master. But a proud man in the intoxication of his elation takes himself
as God on earth. He is too haughty to listen to truth from the lips of
any of his fellowmen. Ibn Masud says: “It is enough for sin if a person,
who is advised to fear God answers his advisor: Look to thine own self.”

The consciousness of superiority which begets pride is due to certain
attributes or accomplishments which can be summed up as:

    a. Spiritual, divided into (1) knowledge; (2) devotion.

    b. Worldly, of five kinds: (3) pedigree; (4) beauty; (5)
    strength; (6) wealth; (7) kith and kin.

There are thus seven causes in all, and these need some description.

Knowledge is power. Consciousness of power easily elates a man, who
considers himself superior to others and treats them in a supercilious
manner. If he accepts the greetings or the invitation of his fellowmen
or receives them in audience he thinks they should be thankful to him
for his condescension. People should obey and serve him, for by virtue
of his knowledge he thinks he has a right over them. Such a proud “Alim”
is sorry for the sins of others but unmindful of his own condition.
While he freely distributes Heaven and Hell among his fellowmen, he
claims salvation and Heaven for himself. The question is whether he is
really justified in holding the title of Alim. For an Alim is one who,
knowing himself knows God, who fears the Lord most, who holds himself
more responsible for his actions for he knows good and evil and feels
the awful presence of a mighty and just Being who looks to righteousness
alone.

Let us consider why men of knowledge become proud. There are two main
causes which should be noted. First there is a false conception about
the nature of real knowledge. Devoted to certain sciences and arts such
as mathematics, physics, literature, and dialectics, they think that
proficiency in them makes a man perfect. But real knowledge means the
lifting of the veil from before the eyes of the heart so as to see the
mysterious relation between man and his maker and to be filled with a
sense of awe and reverence in the presence of an omniscient holy Being
who pervades the universe. This attitude of mind, this enlightenment is
real knowledge. It produces humility and repels pride.

Secondly, there is an indifference to moral training during student
life. Wicked habits thus produce bitter fruits of pride. Wahb has well
illustrated this point, when he says: “Knowledge is like rain falling
from above, so pure and sweet but the plants when they absorb it,
embitter or sweeten it, according to their tastes. Man in acquiring
knowledge acquires power, which gives strength to the hidden qualities
of his heart. If he was prone towards pride and paid no attention to
the subjugation of it, he would prove more proud when he acquires
knowledge.” “There will be men,” says the Prophet “who will have the
Quran on their lips but it will not go down their throats. They will
claim knowledge of it, calling themselves learned Qari. They will be
from among you my companions, but woe to them, for they will see the
consequence of it in Hell”.[44]

Warned by their Prophet, his companions lived a life of humility and
their example taught its lesson to their successors. A person came to
Khalif Omar after morning prayers and said: “I should like to give public
sermons”. “My friend”, said the Khalif, “I am afraid you would soon be
puffed up with pride”. Huzaifa, the companion of the Prophet, was a
leader of prayer. One day he said to his congregation: “Brethren, have
another leader, or go and pray alone, for I begin to feel puffed up with
your leadership”.

Thus, the companions of the Prophet lived meekly, the humble servants
of God on earth, keenly watching the changing phases of their Hearts and
promptly seeking the remedy. But we who call ourselves their followers
not only do not try to purify our hearts but do not even think it worth
while to consider the means for their purification. How can we expect
salvation? But we ought not to lose heart. The apostle of mercy for the
worlds (Rahmet ul lilalamin) has said: “Soon a time will come when if any
person will do even one tenth of what you are doing now, he will have his
salvation”.[45]

Devotion and religious service elicit admiration and praise for the
devotee, who finding himself respected by the people is elated. This
elation quietly develops into pride and then the devotee considers
himself a superior being and favoured of God. He despises his fellow men
and calls them sinners, who will be doomed for ever. But he does know
that he himself will be doomed for despising his fellowmen and thinking
too much of himself. The Prophet says: “When you hear any person, saying:
‘Woe to the people they are doomed,’ know that he himself will be doomed
first”.

It is recorded that a certain sinner among the Jews passed by a well
known Pharisee. Struck with the appearance of the Pharisee’s piety and
devotion, the poor sinner sat down by him, believing in the saving grace
of his holy touch. But the proud Pharisee disdainfully spoke out: “Touch
me not thou filthy sinner, and leave my presence”. Whereupon God sent
His word to the prophet of that age: “Go and tell that sinner; thou art
forgiven. As for that Pharisee, his devotion is cast aside and he is
doomed”.

3. People are usually proud of their lineage, and look down on men of low
birth. They refuse to treat them on equal terms, and boastfully speak of
their ancestors in the presence of men, who are treated by them in a
haughty manner. This evil lurks even in the hearts of good and virtuous
men, although their manners and actions throw a veil over it. But in an
unguarded moment of excitement and fury, this demon of pedigree is let
loose from the innermost corner of the heart.

The Prophet’s companion Abuzar says: “I was quarrelling with someone in
the presence of the Prophet when suddenly in a fit of rage I abused the
man; Thou son of a negress!” On this the Prophet coaxingly said to me:
“Abuzar, both the scales are equal. The white has no preference over the
black.” Hearing this I fell and said to the person: “Brother come and
trample on my face and then forgive me.”

It is reported in the Hadith that two men were quarrelling before
the Prophet. One said to the other; “I am the son of such and such
illustrious man, tell me who thy father is?” The Prophet, addressing
the boastful man said; “There were two men in the time of Moses who
boastfully spoke of their pedigree. One said to the other: “Look how
my nine ancestors all in one line were men of renown.” And God said to
Moses: “Tell this man: All thy nine ancestors are in Hell and thou art
the tenth.”

4. Women generally feel proud of their beauty. This leads to finding
fault with others, and this gradually assumes the form of contempt and
disdain. Ayesha, the wife of the Prophet, says: “One day a woman came to
the Prophet and I said to him: ‘Look at this dwarf.’ The Prophet turned
towards me and said: ‘Ayesha, repent of what thou hast said, for it is
slander.’”

5, 6, 7. People feel a sort of elation at the sight of their possessions.
A merchant is elated with his stores, a landowner with his fields and
groves, and a nobleman with his retinue and riches. In short, every
person feels proud of his worldly possessions and looks down on those
who are lacking in them. He believes in riches and worships mammon.[46]
He has no idea of what is meant by: “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for
their’s is the kingdom of Heaven”.[47]

We may quote a parable from the Quran. “And set forth to them a parable
of two men. For one of them we made two gardens of grape vines, and
we surrounded them both with palms, and in the midst of them we made
corn-fields. Both these gardens yielded their fruits and failed nothing.
We caused a river to gush forth in their midst. The man possessed much
wealth and he said to his companion while he disputed with him: I have
greater wealth than you and am mightier in followers. While he entered
his garden he was unjust to himself. He said: I do not think that this
will ever perish. I do not think the hour will come, yet even if I return
to my Lord I shall most certainly find a place better than this. His
companion said to him, while disputing with him: Do you disbelieve in Him
who created you from dust, then from a small germ life, then he made you
a perfect man? But as for me, Allah is my Lord and I do not associate any
one with my Lord. When you entered your garden, why did you not say: It
is as Allah has pleased. There is no power save Allah. If you consider me
to be inferior to you in wealth and children, perhaps my Lord will give
me something better than your garden, and send on it a reckoning from
heaven, so that it shall become even ground with no living plant. Or the
waters may sink into the ground so that you are unable to find them. His
wealth was indeed destroyed, and he began to wring his hands for what he
had spent on it. While it lay there (for it had fallen down from the
roofs) he said: Ah me! would that I had not associated anyone with my
Lord. He had none to help him besides Allah nor could he defend himself.
In Allah, alone is protection, the True One. In the bestowal of reward
and in requital he is best.

Set forth to them also the parable of the life in this world. It is
like the water which we send down from the clouds on account of which
the herbs become luxuriant. Then these become dry, break into pieces
and the winds scatter them. Allah holds power over all things. Wealth
and children are an adornment of the life of this world. The good
works, the ever-abiding, are with your Lord better in reward than in
expectation”.[48]

How fleeting are our worldly gains, and how foolish are we in feeling
proud of them! Let us then, live as meek and humble servants of God on
earth.




FRIENDSHIP AND SINCERITY[49]


Friendship is one of God’s favours, says the Quran. And hold fast by the
covenant of Allah all together and be not disunited, and remember the
favour of Allah on you when you were enemies, then He united your marts
so by His favour you became brethren[50]. The Prophet says: Those amongst
you are my close companions who have good dispositions, are affectionate
and tenderly love each other. And again: “God when He shows His kindness
towards any person gives him a Good friend.”[51] “Verily God will say
on the day of resurrection where are those who loved each other for my
sake; today they shall rest under my shelter when there is no other
shelter.”[52]

“Seven kinds of men will, on the Day of Judgment, rest under His shelter
when there will be no other shelter:—(1) A just Imam, (2) An adult who
is devoted to God, (3) A man who after coming out from the mosque finds
his heart attached to it till he enters again, (4) Two friends who lived
and died in their friendship for God’s sake, (5) He who for fear of the
Lord wept in secret, (6) He whom a beautiful woman of good birth allures
but he replies: I have fear of my Lord, (7) He who gives alms in a manner
that his left hand does not know what is given by his right hand.”[53]

Friendship, then, is God’s favour and should be cultivated for His sake.
But if we shun the company of our fellowmen let it also be for God’s
sake. “The strongest rope of Faith”, says the Prophet, “is love and hate
both for God’s sake.”

Christ says, “Love God by avoiding the wicked; seek His nearness by
shunning their company and please Him by courting their displeasure.”
“With whom should we keep company, O Word of God”, asked the people. And
Christ replied, “Sit with those whose appearance reminds you of God,
whose words add to the stock of your knowledge and whose actions serve as
an incentive for acquiring the kingdom of Heaven.”

God spoke to Moses saying, “Son of Amran be up and find out a friend for
thee and he who would not be with thee for my good will is thy enemy.”

Choose a friend who has five qualities viz: wisdom, good disposition,
abstinence from sin, heresy and greed.

A fool’s company gives no good, it ends in gloom. Good disposition is
necessary in as much as a man may be wise but be subservient to his
inordinate passion and hence unfit for company. And a sinner and a
heretic are to be avoided for the simple reason that they who have no
fear of the Lord and are regardless of committing forbidden actions are
not to be relied on. Besides contagion will secretly spread and he too
will think of sin lightly and gradually lose power of resisting it. And
a greedy worldling is to be avoided because his company will deaden the
heart in the quest of the kingdom of Heaven.

Alkama on his death bed gave a fine description of a friend. “My son”,
said he, “If you wish to keep company try to find out such a friend who,
when you live with him defends you, adds to your prestige, bears the
load of your hardships, helps you in your doings, counts your virtues,
dissuades you from vices, readily responds to your requests, inquires
himself for your needs when you keep quiet, shows his deep sympathy
in your sufferings, bears witness to your sayings, gives good advice
when you intend to do some work and prefers you to his own self when
difference arises between you and him.” This piece of advice gives the
qualities of a friend in a nutshell. When Caliph Mamun the Abbaside heard
of it, he said, “Where should we find such a friend”. And Yahya replied,
“Alkama’s description means that we should live in retirement.”

Imam Jafar ‘Assadiq’ (the veracious) gives a negative description of a
friend. “Do not keep company with five sorts of men viz: a false man who
deceives you like a mirage; a fool who cannot benefit you, (even if he
tries to do so he would do harm through his foolishness;) a miser who
when you need his help the most, severs himself from you; a coward who
will leave you when you are in danger; a wicked sinner who will sell you
for a piece of bread.”

Sahl of Taster says, “Avoid the company of 3 kinds of men, (1) tyrants
who forget God, (2) Ulamas who practise dissimulation, (3) Sufis who are
ignorant.”

It must be remembered here that the above passages serve as an ideal but
for purposes we should look to the present practical conditions and try
to get as much good as may be had from them. For man’s life seems dreary
when he has no friends. And men are like trees. Some are fruit-bearing
and shady, some are shady only and some are mere thorns and thistles.
Similarly some friends are a blessing both here and hereafter; some are
for worldly gain for the world is a shadow, and some are of no good in
this world and the next as if they are scorpions in human form.

“And they were not enjoined anything except that they should serve
Allah, being sincere to Him in obedience, upright, and keep up prayer
and pay the poor rate (zakat) and that is the right religion”.[54]
“Then serve God, being sincere in religion unto Him, Aye, God’s is the
sincere religion”. Musab says that his father Saad was considering
himself superior to other poor and destitute companions of the Prophet.
“God”, said the Prophet, “has helped my people with my poor and humble
followers’ prayer and sincerity.”[55] “Sincere action,” says the
Prophet “even if it be little will suffice for thee.”[56] The following
saying of the Prophet is reported by Abu Huraira: “Three persons shall
be questioned first on the day of resurrection. One will be the learned
man who would be asked as to what he had done with his learning”. “Day
and night,” the learned man will reply “I tried my best to propagate
it, O Lord”. “Thou speakest falsely”, God will answer and the angels
will also join with him. “Thy sole aim was to be called a learned man by
the people, and the title was thine”. The second will be the rich man
who would be asked about his riches. “Day and night”, the rich man will
reply, “I gave it in charity.” “Thou speaker of untruth”, God and his
angels will say. “Thou wishest to be labelled a generous man, and it was
done”. The third will be the martyr who too will be asked about his deed.
“O Lord”, the martyr will reply, “Thou didst command us to wage Holy
war (Jehad), I obeyed thee and fell fighting”. “Thou liest,” God and His
angels will answer. “Thy aim was to be trumpeted as a hero and it was
done”. “Then,” says Abu Huraira, “the Prophet after finishing the sermon
pressed me and said: These three would be the first to be thrown into the
flames of hell”.

In the narratives of the Israelites, a story is told of a certain devotee
who had served God for many years. Once he was informed of the apostacy
of a tribe, which, forsaking the true worship of Yahweh had taken to tree
worship. The hermit filled with the spirit of the “jealous” God took an
axe and set out to level the tree to the earth. But the devil in the
shape of an old man met him on the way and inquired of his intention.
The hermit told him of his determination, whereupon Satan addressed him
thus: “Why on earth are you leaving aside your prayers and vigils and
devoting yourself to other work!” “But this too is a sacred cause”
replied hermit. “No, nor will I allow you to do so” exclaimed the devil.
Whereupon the hermit in the white heat of his pious rage caught hold of
the devil and forcibly held him down. “Spare me Sir”, begged the devil,
“I have something to say to you.” The hermit let him go. Then spoke
Satan; “I think God has not commanded you to do this thing. You do not
worship the tree, you are not responsible for the sins of others. If
God wills it he will send some prophet, and they are so many, who would
carry out his order. So I think it is not your duty, why then trouble
yourself?” “But I belong to the chosen people of Yahweh, and I am in
duty bound to do so”, replied the hermit. Whereupon they again began to
wrestle and eventually Satan was thrown down. “O! I see” cried Satan.
“An idea has just come into my mind; let me go please, and I will tell
you.” Thus obtaining his release, the Evil One addressed him as follows:
“Is it not the case that you are poor and have to live on the alms of
those who are devoted to you? But in your heart of hearts you would like
to shower your bounties on your brethren and neighbours so generous and
compassionate is your nature. What a pity that such a noble soul lives
on alms”. “You have read my mind aright,” quietly responded the hermit.
“May I hope,” said the Evil One entreatingly, “that you will be pleased
to accept two golden dinars which you will find at your bed side every
morning from tomorrow. You will then be relieved of depending on others
and be in a position to do charity to your poor relations and brethren.
As for that wretched tree, what if that be cut down. Surely your poor
needy brethren would get nothing and you would lose the opportunity of
helping them while the tree would grow again”. The hermit pondered over
these words and said to himself “This old man speaks quite reasonably,
but let me think over the pros and cons of the case. Am I a prophet? No,
I am not; therefore I am not bound to cut it down. Am I commanded to do
so? No. Then if I do not do it I shall not be guilty of the iniquity.
Should I accept his proposal? No doubt from the religious point of view
it is more useful. No doubt. I think I should accept it: yes, I must.”
Thus the two pledged their words and the hermit returned. Next morning
he found the two dinars at his bed side and was highly pleased. Another
morning the glittering gold was there, but on the third morning the
hermit searched for them in vain. His fury knew no bounds. He rushed for
his axe, and hurried with it towards the place of idolatry. Satan again
met him in the way as before. “Thou wretch, thou arch-devil”, cried out
the hermit “wilt thou prevent me from my sacred duty?” “You cannot do it,
you dare not do it”, retorted the Evil one. “Hast thou forgotten the
test of my powers”, sharply replied the infuriated hermit and rushed at
him. But to his great discomfort and humiliation the hermit instantly
fell flat on the ground like a dry leaf from a tree. The devil planted
his foot on his chest, holding him by the throat, dictating the following
terms: “Either swear not to touch that tree or be prepared to die”. The
hermit finding himself quite helpless said, “I swear, but tell me why I
am so discomfitured”. “Listen”, answered Satan. “At first thy wrath was
for God’s sake, and zealous vindication of his commandments. Hence I was
defeated, but now thou art furious for thyself, and worldly gain”. The
story illustrates the saying “I will certainly cause them all to deviate
from the way except thy servants from among those who are sincere”. A
devotee cannot be immune from Satan’s temptation except by sincerity and
therefore saint Maaruf of Karkh used to upbraid himself, saying: “If thou
wishest salvation, be sincere”.

Yacub, the Sufi, says: “He who conceals his virtues like vices, is
sincere.” In a dream a man saw a Sufi who was dead and inquired about the
actions of his previous life. “All those actions” said the Sufi, “which
were for God’s sake I was rewarded for, even the least of them. For
example, I had thrown aside a pomegranate’s peel from the thoroughfare.
I found my dead cat but lost my ass worth one hundred dinars, and a
silken thread on my cap was found on the side of iniquities. Once, I gave
something in charity, and was pleased to see people looking at me,—this
action has neither reward nor punishment for me”. “How is it that you
got your cat and lost your ass?” said the man to the Sufi. “Because”,
responded the latter, “When I heard of the death of my ass I said: ‘Damn
it’. I ought to have thought of God’s will”. Saint Sufyan Saori, when he
heard of this dream, said, “The Sufi was fortunate as no punishment was
meted out to him for that charity which pleased him when people watched
him”.

There is a report that a man, putting on a woman’s dress used to frequent
purdah parties in marriage and funeral processions. Once a lady’s pearl
was lost in a party. Everybody was being closely searched, and the man
was very much afraid of the disclosure of his identity, as it would mean
the loss of his life. He sincerely repented in his heart, never to do the
same thing again, and asked God’s forgiveness and help. Then he found
that it was now the turn of himself and his companion to be searched. His
prayer was heard, the pearl being found in his companion’s clothes and he
was saved.[57]

A Sufi narrates the following story: “I joined a naval squadron which was
going on holy war (Jehad). One of us was selling his provision bag, and I
bought it, thinking it would prove useful in the war, and that when the
war was over I might dispose of it with profit. That same night I dreamt
that two angels came down from heaven. One of them said to the other:
Make a complete list of the crusaders. The other began to write down: So
and so goes on a trip; so and so for trading, so and so for reputation;
so and so for God’s sake. Then he looked at me saying: Put this man down
as trader. But I spoke: For God’s sake do not misrepresent me. I am not
going for business. I have no capital, I have simply started for the
holy war. “But Sir”, said the angel “Did you not buy that provision bag
yesterday, and were you not thinking of making some profit?” I wept and
entreated them not to put me down as a trader. The angel looked at the
other, who said: “Well, write thus: This man set out for the holy war,
but on the way bought a provision bag for profiting: now God will judge
the man”.

Saint Sari Saqati says: “Two rakats of prayer offered with sincerity in
seclusion are better than copying seventy or seven hundred traditions
with the complete list of authorities. Some say that one moment’s
sincerity is salvation, but it is very rare. Knowledge is the seed,
practice is the crop, and sincerity is the water nourishing it. Some say
that God’s displeasure is revealed in a person who is given three things;
and is denied the same number. He gets access into the society of the
virtuous, but derives no benefit therefrom. He performs good actions but
lacks sincerity. He learns philosophy but fails to understand truth.”
Says Susi: “God looks to sincerity only, and not to the action of his
creatures”. Says Junaid: “There are some servants of God who are wise,
who act as wise men, who are sincere when they act, then sincerity leads
them to virtue.” Mohammed, son of Said Marwazi, says: “The whole course
of our actions tends towards two principles, viz. (1) His treatment
meted out to thee; (2) thy action for him. Then willingly submit to what
is meted out to thee and be sincere in all thy dealings. If thou art
successful in these two things thou shalt be happy in both the worlds”.

Says Sahl: “Sincerity means that all our actions or intentions—all the
states of our minds whether we are doing anything or at rest, be solely
for God.” But this is very difficult to acquire as it does not in the
least attract the ego itself. Rowim says: “Sincerity means disregard of
recompense for action in both the worlds”. In this he wishes to point
out that the gratifications of our sensuous desires whether in this
world or the next are all insignificant and low. He who worships God in
order to attain joy in paradise is not sincere. Let him act for God’s
“Riza”. This stage is reached by Siddiks (Sincerely devoted to God), and
is sincerity _par excellence_. He who does good actions for fear of hell
or hope of heaven is sincere in as much as he gives up at present his
sensual worldly enjoyment, but wishes for the future, the gratification
of his appetite and passion in paradise. The longing of true devotees
is their Beloved’s Riza. It may be objected here that men’s motive is
pleasure, that freedom from such pleasures is a purely divine attribute.
But this objection is based on misunderstanding. It is true that man
desires pleasure but pleasure has different meanings. The popular view
is gratification of sensuous desires in Paradise but it has no idea of
the nature of higher pleasures of communion and beatitude or the vision
of God, and hence fails to consider them as pleasures. But these are
the pleasures and he who enjoys them will not even look to the popular
pleasures of Paradise for his highest pleasure. His summum bonum is the
love of God.

Tufail says: “To do good for men’s sake is hypocrisy; not to do is
infidelity; sincere is he who is free from both and works for God only”.
These definitions suggest the ideal of sincerity aimed at by noble souls.
Let us now look to the practical side of it for the sake of the average
man.

Actions make an impression on the heart, and strengthen that quality of
it which served as a stimulus for them. For example, hypocrisy deadens
the heart and godly motive leads to salvation. Both of them will gather
strength in proportion to the actions which proceed from their respective
sources. But as they are intrinsically opposed to each other an action
which gets an equal stimulus at one and the same time will be stationary
in its effect on the heart. Now take a mixed action which draws the doer
nearer to virtue, say, by one span, but removes him away by two spans,
the inward result of his progress will be that he would remain where he
was, although he would be rewarded or punished according to his motive.
A man starts for “Haj” but takes with him some articles for trade, he
will get his reward of pilgrimage but if his motive was trade only, he
could not be considered a “Haji”. A crusader who fights for his religion
would have his recompense although he acquires booty, for so long as his
sole motive is to uphold the cause of religion the latent desire of booty
would not come in the way of his recompense. Granted that he is inferior
to those noble souls who are wholly absorbed in Him “who see through Him,
who hear through Him, who act through Him,” (Hadis) He still belongs
to the good and the virtuous. For if we apply the highest standard to
all, religion will be considered a hopeless task, and will ultimately be
reduced to pessimism.

At the same time we must sound a note of warning for those who are
satisfied with the low standard. They are very often deceived. They
consider their motive is purely for God’s sake while in reality they
aim at some hidden sensuous pleasure. Let a doer, after he has
exerted himself and pondered over his motive, be not over-confident
of his sincerity. With the fear of its rejection let him hope for its
acceptance—this is the creed of the righteous who fears the Lord and
hopes from him.




THE NATURE OF LOVE[58]


Experiences are either agreeable and therefore desired or disagreeable
and avoided. Inclination towards a desired object when deeply rooted and
strong constitutes love. Knowledge and perception of the beloved is the
first requisite for love which is consequently divided according to the
division of the five senses each of which is inclined towards its desired
object. Thus the eye apprehends beautiful forms, the ear harmonious
sounds, etc. This kind of experience we share with the animals. There is,
however, one more sense, peculiar to man, which delights the soul. The
prophet has said: “I desire three things from your world, sweet smell,
tender sex, and prayer, which is the delight of my eye”. Now prayer is
neither smelt nor touched—in fact its delight is beyond the scope of the
five senses and yet it has been described as the “delight of my eye”,
which means the inner eye—the soul with her sixth sense. Concepts of this
special sense are more beautiful and charming than sensuous objects—nay,
they are more perfect and strongly attract the soul. Is it not, then,
possible, that One who is not perceived by the five senses may yet be
found and felt attractive by that sense and loved by the soul?

Let us now enumerate the circumstances which excite love. 1. Every living
being first of all loves his own self, that is to say, the desire for
continuity of his existence as opposed to annihilation is innate. This
desire is augmented by the desire of the perfection of his self by means
of sound body, wealth, children, relations and friends. For all of these
serve as a means to the end of the continuity of his self and therefore
he cherishes love for them. Even “unselfish” love of his dear son, if
probed, smacks of love for the continuity of his self, because his son
who is part of his self serves as a living representative of his self’s
continuity.

2. The second cause is the love for one’s benefactor towards whom the
heart is naturally attracted. Even if he be a stranger, a benefactor will
always be loved. But it must be remembered that the benefactor is loved
not for himself, but for his beneficence, the extent of which will be a
dominating factor in determining the degree of love.

3. The third cause is love of beauty. It is generally supposed that
beauty consists in red and white complexions, well proportioned limbs,
and so forth, but we can also say “beautiful writing”, “beautiful
horse”, etc. Hence beauty of an object consists in its possession of
all possible befitting perfections. It will vary in proportion to the
perfections attained. That writing in which all the rules of caligraphy
are properly observed will be called beautiful and so on. At the same
time there can be no one standard for judging the beauty of different
objects. The standard for a horse cannot be the same for, say, writing
or man. It must also be remembered that beauty is not connected with
sensible objects only but is also related to concepts. A person is
not always loved for his external beauty, but often the beauty of his
knowledge or virtues attracts the heart. It is not necessary that the
object of such kind of love be perceived by the senses. We love our
saints, imams, and prophets but we have never seen them. Our love
for them is so strong that we would willingly lay down our lives for
upholding their good name. If we wish to create love for them in young
minds we can produce it by giving graphic accounts of their virtues.
Stories of the heroes of any nation will excite love for them.

    “Love looks not with the eyes but with the mind; and therefore
    is winged Cupid painted blind”.

4. The fourth cause is a sort of secret affinity between two souls,
meeting and attracting each other. It is what is called “love at first
sight”. This is what the prophet meant when he said “The souls had
their rendezvous: Those who liked each other, then love here; those
who remained strangers then do not join here”. If a believer goes to a
meeting where there are a hundred manafiks (hypocrites) and one momin
(faithful) he will take his seat by the side of the momin. It seems that
likes are attracted by their likes. Malik bin Dinar says: Just as birds
of the same feather fly together two persons having a quality common to
both will join.[59]

Let us now apply these causes and find out who may be the true object
of love. First, man who is directly conscious of his own self in whom
the love for continuity of the self is innate, if he deeply thinks on
the nature of his existence will find that he does not exist of his own
self, nor are the means of the continuity of his self in his power.
There is a being, self-existent, and living who created and sustains
him. The Quran says: “There surely came over man a period of time when
he was not a thing that could be spoken of. Surely we have created man
from a small life germ uniting. We mean to try him, so we have made him
hearing, seeing. Surely we have shown him the way, he may be thankful
or unthankful.”[60] This contemplation will bear the fruit or love for
God. For how could it be otherwise when man loves his own self which is
dependent on Him, unless he be given up to the gratification of his
passions and thereby forgetting his true self and his sustainer.

Secondly, if he thinks over the aim and scope of beneficence, he will
find that no creature can show any purely disinterested favour to another
because his motive will be either 1. praise or self-gratification
for his generosity, or 2. hope of reward in the next world or divine
pleasure.[61] Paradoxical though it sounds, deep insight into human
nature leads us, inevitably to the conclusion that man cannot be called
“benefactor”, in as much as his action is prompted by the idea of gain
and barter. A true benefactor is one who in bestowing his favours has
not the least idea of any sort of gain. Purely disinterested beneficence
is the quality of the All-merciful Providence and hence He is the true
object of love.

Thirdly, the appreciation of inward beauty, that is to say the
contemplation of any attractive quality or qualities of the beloved
causes a stronger and more durable love than the passionate love of the
flesh. However such a beloved will still be found lacking in beauty from
the standpoint of perfection because the three genders are creatures and
therefore cannot be called perfect. God alone is perfect beauty—holy,
independent, omnipotent, all-majesty, all-beneficent, all-merciful. With
all this knowledge of His attributes we still do not know Him as He is.
The prophet says: “My praise of Thee cannot be comprehensive, Thou art
such as wouldst praise Thyself”.[62] Are not these attributes sufficient
to evoke love for him? But beatitude is denied to the inwardly blind.
They do not understand the attitude of the lovers of God towards Him.
Jesus once passed by some ascetics who were reduced in body. “Why are
you thus”? he said to them. And they replied “Fear of hell and hope of
heaven have reduced us to this condition”. “What a pity”, rejoined Jesus,
“your fear and hope is limited to creatures”. Then he went onward and saw
some more devotees, and put the same question. “We are devoted to God and
revere him for his love”, they replied with downcast eyes. “Ye are the
saints” exclaimed Jesus, “you will have my company”.[63]

Fourthly, the affinity between two souls meeting and loving each other is
a mystery, but more mysterious is the affinity between God and his loving
devotee. It cannot and must not be described before the uninitiated.
Suffice it to say that the souls possessing the higher qualities of
beneficence, sympathy, mercy, etc. have that affinity hinted at in the
following saying of the prophet: “Imitate divine attributes”. For man has
been created in the image of God, nay he is, in a way, akin to Him, says
the Quran. “And when the Lord said to the angels: Surely I am going to
create a mortal from dust, so when I have made him complete, and breathed
into him of My Ruh (soul), fall down making obeisance to him”.[64] It is
this affinity which is pointed out in the following tradition: God said
to Moses “I was sick and thou didst not visit Me”. Moses replied “O God,
thou art Lord of heaven and earth: how couldst thou be sick?” God said “A
certain servant of mine was sick: hadst thou visited him, thou wouldst
have visited me”. Therefore our prophet Mahommed has said: “Says God:
My servant seeks to be near me that I may make him my friend, and when
I have made him my friend, I become his ear, his eye, his tongue.”[65]
It must, however, be remembered that mystical affinity vaguely conceived
leads to extremes. Some have fallen into abject anthropomorphism; others
have gone so far as to believe in the airy nothings of pantheism. These
are all vagaries of the imagination, whether they take the form of “Ibn
Allah”, (Son of God) or “Anal Haq” (I am God).[66] They are to a great
extent responsible for the evils of superstition and scepticism.

These four causes when properly understood, demonstrate that the true
object of our love is God and therefore it has been enjoined: “Thou shalt
love the lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with
all thy mind”.[67]


Man’s highest happiness

The constitution of man possesses a number of powers and propensities,
each of which has its own distinctive kind of enjoyment suited to it
by nature. The appetite of hunger seeks food which preserves our body
and the attainment of which is the delight of it, and so with every
passion and propensity when their particular objects are attained.
Similarly the moral faculty—call it inward sight, light of faith or
reason—any name will do provided the object signified by it is rightly
understood—delights in the attainment of its desideratum. I shall call it
here the faculty of reason (not that wrangling reason of the Scholastics
and the dialecticians)—that distinctive quality which makes him lord
of creation. This faculty delights in the possession of all possible
knowledge. Even an expert in chess boastfully delights in the knowledge
of the game however insignificant it may be. And the higher the subject
matter of our knowledge the greater our delight in it. For instance
we would take more pleasure in knowing the secrets of a king than the
secrets of a vizier. Now delights are either (a) external, derived from
the five senses, or (b) internal, such as love of superiority and power,
love of the knowledge, etc. enjoyed by the mind. And the more the mind is
noble the more there will be a desire for the second kind of delights.
The simple will delight in dainty dishes, but a great mind leaving them
aside will endanger his life and his honour and reputation from the
jaws of death. Even sensuous delights present an amusing example of
preference. An expert in chess while absorbed in playing will not come to
his meals though hungry and repeatedly summoned, because the pleasure
of check-mating his adversary is greater to him than the object of his
appetite. Thus we see that inward delights and they are chiefly love of
knowledge and superiority are preferred by noble minds. If then a man
believes in a perfect being, will not the pleasure of His contemplation
be preferred by him and will it not absorb his whole self? Surely the
delights of the righteous are indescribable, for they are even in this
life, in a paradise which no eye has seen and no ear has heard.

Abu Sulaiman Darani,[68] the renowned Sufi, says: “There are servants of
God whom neither fear of hell nor the hope of heaven can deviate from the
divine love, how can the world with its temptations come in their way?”.
Abu Mahfuz Karkhi was once asked by his disciples: “Tell us what led you
to devotion” but he kept quiet. “Is it the apprehension of death.” said
one of them. “It matters little” replied the saint “Is it due to hell
or to paradise”, inquired another. “What of them” said the saint “both
belong to a supreme Being, if you love him you will not be troubled by
them”. Saint Rabia[69] was once asked about her faith: “God forbid”,
answered Rabia: “If I serve him like a bad labourer thinking of his wages
only”. And then she sang: “Love draws me nigh, I know not why”. Thus we
see that the hearts of those who ate and drank and breathed like us felt
delights of divine love which was their highest happiness.

If we think over man’s gradual development we find that every stage of
his life is followed by a new sort of delight. Children love playing and
have no idea of the pleasures of courtship and marriage experienced by
young men, who in their turn would not care to exchange their enjoyments
for wealth and greatness which are the delights of the middle aged men
who consider all previous delights as insignificant and low. These last
mentioned delights are also looked upon as unsubstantial and transitory
by pure and noble souls fully developed.

The Quran says: “Know that this world’s life is only sport and play and
boasting among yourselves, and vying in the multiplication of wealth
and children”. “Say, shall I tell you what is better than these? For
the righteous are gardens with their Lord, beneath which rivers flow,
to abide in them and pure mates and Allah’s pleasure and Allah sees the
servants”. “Those who say: Our Lord, surely we believe, so forgive us our
faults, and keep us from the chastisement of fire; the patient and the
truthful and the obedient and those who spend (benevolently) and those
who ask forgiveness in morning times”.[70]

Let us now point out some drawbacks which hinder the path of the divine
love.

Man from his infancy is accustomed to enjoy sensual delights which
are firmly implanted in him. Blind imitation of the creed with vague
conception of the deity and his attributes fails to eradicate sensual
delights and evoke the raptures of divine love. It is the dynamic force
of direct contemplation of his attributes manifested in the universe that
can prove an incentive for his love. To use a figure: a nation loves
its national poet, but the feeling of one who studies the poet will be
of exceeding strong love. The world is a masterpiece; he who studies it
loves its invisible Author in a manner which cannot be described but is
felt by the favoured few. Another drawback which sounds like a paradox,
should be deeply studied. It is as follows: when we find a person writing
or doing any other work, the fact that he is living will be most apparent
to us: that is to say, his life, knowledge, power and will will be more
apparent to us than his other internal qualities, e.g. colour, size,
etc. which being perceived by the eye may be doubted. Similarly stones,
plants, animals, the earth, the sky, the stars, the elements, in fact
everything in the universe reveals to us the knowledge, power and the
will of its originator. Nay, the first and the foremost proof is our
consciousness, because the knowledge that I exist is immediate,[71]
and more apparent than our perceptions. Thus we see that man’s actions
are but one proof of his life, knowledge, power and will, but with
reference to God the whole phenomenal existence with its law of causation
and order and adaptability bears testimony of him and his attributes.
Therefore, He is so dazzlingly apparent that the understanding of the
people fails to see Him just as the bat pereeaes at night fails to see
in daylight, because its imperfect sight cannot bear the light of the
sun, so our understanding is blurred by the effulgent light of his
manifestations. The fact is that objects are known by their opposites but
the conception of one who exists everywhere and who has no opposite would
be most difficult. Besides, objects which differ in their respective
significances can also be distinguished but if they have common
significances the same difficulty will be felt. For instance if the sun
would have shone always without setting, we could have formed no idea of
light, knowing simply that objects have certain colours. But the setting
of the sun revealed to us the nature of light by comparing it with
darkness. If then light, which is more perceptible and apparent would
have never been understood had there been no darkness notwithstanding its
undeniable visibility, there is no wonder if God who is most apparent
and all pervading true light (Nur)[72] remains hidden, because if he
would have disappeared (which means the annihilation of the universe),
there would have been an idea of him by comparison as in the case of the
light and darkness. Thus we see that the very mode of his existence and
manifestation is a drawback for human understanding. But he whose inward
sight is keen and has strong intuition in his balanced state of mind
neither sees nor knows any other active power save God omnipotent. Such a
person neither sees the sky as the sky nor the earth as the earth—in fact
sees nothing in the universe except in the light of its being work of an
all pervading True One. To use a figure: if a man looks at a poem or a
writing, not as a collection of black lines scribbled on white sheets of
paper but as a work of a poet or an author, he ought not to be considered
as looking to anything other than the author. The universe is a unique
masterpiece, a perfect song, he who reads it looks at the divine author
and loves him. The true Mowahhid is one who sees nothing but God. He
is not even aware of his self except as servant of God. Such a person
will be called absorbed in Him; he is effaced, the self is annihilated.
These are facts known to him who sees intuitively, but weak minds do not
know them. Even Ulamas fail to express them adequately or consider the
publicity of them as unsafe and unnecessary for the masses.




THE UNITY OF GOD[73]


There are four stages in the belief in the unity of God. The first is
to utter the words: “There is no God but God” without experiencing any
impression in the heart. This is the creed of the hypocrites. The a
second is to utter the above words and to believe that their meaning
is also true. This is the dogma of ordinary Muslims. The third is
to perceive by the inward light of the heart the truth of the above
Kalima. Through the multiplicity of causes the mind arrives at the
conception of the unity of the final cause. This is the stage of the
initiates. The fourth is to gaze at the vision of an all-comprehensive,
all-absorbing One, losing sight even of the duality of one’s own self.
This is the highest stage of the true devotee. It is described by the
Sufis as Fanafittauhid (i.e. the effacement of one’s individuality in
contemplating the unity of God).[74] To use a simile these four stages
may be compared with a walnut which is composed of an external hard rind,
an internal skin, the kernel, and oil. The hard rind, which is bitter in
taste, has no value except that it serves as a covering for some time.
When the kernel is extracted the shell is thrown away. Similarly the
hypocrite who, uttering the Kalima, is associated with the Muslims and
safely enjoys their privileges, but at death is cut off from the faithful
and falls headlong into perdition. The internal skin is more useful than
the external in as much as it preserves the kernel and may be used, but
is in no way equal to the kernel itself. Similarly the dogmatic belief
of the ordinary Muslim is better than the lip service of the hypocrite,
but lacks that broad clear insight which is described as “He whose heart
Allah has opened to Islam walks in his light”.

The kernel is undoubtedly the desired object, but it contains some
substance which is removed when oil is being pressed out. Similarly the
conception of an efficient final cause is the aim and object of the
devotees, but is inferior to the vision of the all-pervading Holy One,
because the conception of causality involves duality.

But the objection may be urged: How can we ignore the diversities and
multiplicities of the universe? Man has hands and feet, bones and blood,
heart and soul,—all distinct—yet he is one individual. When we are
thinking of a dear old friend and suddenly he stands before us, we do not
think of any multiplicity of his bodily organs, but are delighted to see
him. The simile, though not quite appropriate is suggestive, especially
for beginners. When they reach that stage they will themselves see its
truth. Words fail to express the beatitude of that highest stage. It can
be enjoyed, but not described.[75]

Let us consider the nature of the third stage. Man finds that God alone
is the prime cause of everything. The world, its objects, life, death,
happiness, misery, all have their source in his omnipotence. None is
associated with Him in this. When man comes to recognise this, he has no
fear of anything, but puts his trust in God alone. But Satan tempts him
by misrepresenting the agencies of the inorganic and organic worlds as
potent factors independent in the shaping of his destiny.

Think first of the inorganic world. Man thinks that crops depend on
rain descending from clouds, and that clouds gather together owing to
normal climatic conditions. Similarly his sailing on the sea depends
on favourable winds. Without doubt, these are immediate causes, but
they are not independent. Man who in the hour of need calls for God’s
mysterious help, forgets Him and turns to external causes as soon as he
finds himself safe and sound. “So, when they ride in ships, they call
upon Allah, being sincerely obedient to Him, but when he brings them safe
to land, they associate others with Him. Thus they become ungrateful
for what we have given them, so they might enjoy: but they shall soon
know”.[76] If a culprit, whose death sentence is revoked by the king,
looks to the pen as his deliverer, will it not be sheer ignorance and
ingratitude? Surely, the sun, the moon, the stars, the clouds, in fact,
the whole universe is like a pen in the hand of an omnipotent dictator.
When this kind of belief takes hold of the mind, Satan is disappointed
in covertly tempting man, and uses subtle means, insinuating thus:
“Do you not see that the king has full power either to kill or favour
you, and though the pen, in the above simile, is not your deliverer,
the writer certainly is”? As this sort of reflection led to the vexed
question of free will, we have dealt with it already at some length.

At the outset, let us point out that just as an ant, owing to its limited
sight will see the point of the pen blackening a blank sheet of paper
and not the fingers and hand of the writer, so the person whose mental
sight is not keen will attribute the actions to the immediate doer
only. But there are minds, which, with the searchlight of intuition,
expose the lurking danger of wrongly attributing power to any except the
all-powerful omniscient being. To them every atom in the universe speaks
out the truth of this revelation. They find tongues in trees, books in
the running brooks, sermons in stones. The worldling will say: Though we
have ears, we do not hear them. But asses also having ears do not hear.
Verily there are such ears which hear words that have no sound, that are
neither Arabic nor any other language, known to man. These words are
drops in the boundless unfathomable ocean of divine knowledge: “If the
sea were ink for the words of my Lord, the sea would surely be consumed
before the words of my Lord are exhausted.”[77]




THE LOVE OF GOD AND ITS SIGNS[78]


Love of God is the highest stage of our soul’s progress and her summum
bonum. Repentance, patience, piety, and other virtues are all preliminary
steps. Although rare these qualities are found in true devotees and the
commonality, though devoid of them, at any rate believe in them. Love
of God is not only very rare: the possibility of it is doubted, even by
some Ulamas who call it simply service. For, in their opinion love exists
amongst species of the same kind, but God being ultra-mundane and not
of our kind, His love is an impossibility and hence the much talked of
ecstatic states of the “true lovers of God” are mere delusions. As this
is far from truth and impedes the progress of the soul, by spreading
false notions, we shall briefly discuss the subject. First we shall quote
passages from the Quran and the Hadith testifying to the existence of
the love of God.

“O you who believe, whosoever from among you turns back from his
religion, then Allah will bring a people: He shall love them, and
they shall love him, lowly before the believers, mightily against the
unbelievers, they shall strive hard in Allah’s way and shall not fear the
censure of any censurer: this is Allah’s grace, He gives it to whom He
pleases and Allah is ample-giving, knowing.”[79]

“And there are some among men who take for themselves objects of worship
besides Allah, whom they love. Allah and those who believe are stronger
in love of Allah.”[80] These passages not only refer to the existence of
the love of God but point to the difference in degree. The Prophet has
taught us that the love of God is one of the conditions of faith. “None
among you shall be a believer until he loves Allah and his apostle more
than anything else.”[81]

True, as the Quran says “If your fathers and your sons and your brethren
and your mates and your kinsfolk and property which you have acquired and
trade, the dullness of which you fear, and dwellings which you like, are
dearer to you than Allah and His apostle and striving in His way, then
wait till Allah brings about His command, and Allah does not guide the
transgressing people.”[82]

A man came to the Prophet and said: “I love thee, O Apostle of God”.
“Be ready for poverty.” replied the Prophet. “And I love Allah”, said
the man. “Prepare to face tribulations”[83] replied the Prophet. The
following tradition is narrated by the Khalif Omar: The Prophet one day
saw Masah, son of Umair coming to him with a lambskin round his loins.
“Look” said the Prophet to his companions, “how God has illumined his
heart. I have seen him living in ease and well provided by his parents
but now the love of Allah and His apostle has wrought a change in
him.”[84]

The Prophet used to pray thus: “My God, give me thy love and the love of
him who loves thee and the love of that action which will bring me nearer
to thee and make thy love sweeter than cold water to the thirsty”.[85]

“Verily Allah loves those who repent and those who purify
themselves.”[86] Say “If you love Allah, then follow me. Allah will love
you and forgive you your faults, and Allah is forgiving, merciful”.[87]
We have said before that love means yearning towards a desired object
and that beneficence and beauty, whether perceived or conceived, equally
attract our hearts. But in using the word love for God, no such meaning
is possible as it implies imperfection. God’s love towards men is the
love of His own work. Someone read the following verse of the Quran: “He
loves them and they love him” in front of Shaikh Abu Said of Mohanna,
who interpreted it saying: “He loves Himself because he alone exists.
Surely an author who likes himself; his love is limited to his self.”
God’s love means the lifting the veil from the heart of His servant, so
that he might gaze at Him. It also means drawing him close to Himself.
Let us give an illustration. A king permits some of his slaves to
approach his presence, not because he requires them but because the
slaves possess or are acquiring certain qualities which are worthy of
being displayed before the royal presence. This privilege, this lifting
of the veil, brings us nearer to the conception of God’s love. But it
must be remembered that approaching the divine presence should entirely
exclude the idea of space, for then it would imply change in Him, which
is absurd. Divine proximity means the attainment of godly virtues by
abstaining from the promptings of the flesh and hence it implies approach
from the point of view of quality and not of space. For example, two
persons meet together either when both of them proceed towards each other
or one is stationary and the other starts and approaches him. Again a
pupil strives to come up to the level of his teacher’s knowledge who is
resting in his elevated position. His uphill journey towards knowledge
keeps him restless, and he climbs higher and higher till he catches a
glimpse of the halo which surrounds his master’s countenance. The nature
of divine proximity resembles this inward journey of the pupil; that
is, the more a man acquires insight into the nature of things, and by
subjugating his passions leads the life of righteousness, the nearer
will he be coming to his lord. But it must be remembered that a pupil
may equal his teacher, even be greater than he, but as regards divine
proximity, no such equality is possible. God’s love means that which
purifies the heart of his servant in a manner that he may be worthy of
being admitted before his holy presence.

It may be asked: “How can we know that God loves a certain person?” My
answer is that there are signs which bear testimony to it. The Prophet
says: When God loves his servant, He sends tribulations, and when He
loves him most he severs his connection from everything. Some one said
to Jesus: “Why do you not buy a mule for yourself”? Jesus answered: “My
God will not tolerate that I should concern myself with a mule”. Another
saying of Mohammed is reported thus: When God loves any of His servants
He sends tribulations, if he patiently bears them, he is favoured, and if
he cheerfully faces them, he is singled out as chosen of God. Surely it
is this joyous attitude of his mind whether evil befalls him or good,
that is the chief sign of love. Such minds are providentially taken care
of in their thoughts and deeds and in all their dealings with men. The
veil is lifted and they live in wrapped communion.

As for the signs of a man’s love for God, let it be borne in mind
that every body claims His love, but few really love Him. Beware of
self-deception; verify your statement by introspection. Love is like a
tree rooted in the ground sending its shoots above the starry heaven; its
fruits are found in the heart, the tongue and the limbs of the lover—in
fact his whole self is a witness to love just as smoke is a sure sign of
fire burning.

Let us, then, trace the signs which are found in the true lover.

Death is a pleasure to him, for it removes the barrier of body and lets
the fluttering soul free to soar and sing in the blissful abode of his
beloved. Sufyan Thauri and Hafi used to say: “He who doubts dislikes
death, because a friend will never dislike meeting a friend”.[88]

A certain Sufi asked a hermit whether he wished for death, but he gave
no answer. Then the Sufi said to him: “Had you been a true hermit you
would have liked death. The Quran says: If the future abode with Allah
is especially for you to the exclusion of the people, then invoke death
if you are truthful. They will never wish it on account of what their
hands have sent on before, and Allah knows the unjust”.[89] The hermit
replied: “But the Prophet says: ‘Do not wish for death’”. “Then you are
suffering”, said the Sufi, “because acquiescence in divine decree is
better than trying to escape it”.

It may be asked here: Can he who does not like death be God’s lover? Let
us consider first the nature of his dislike. It is due to his attachment
to the worldly objects, wife, children, and so forth, but it is possible
that with this attachment, which no doubt comes in the way of his love
of God there may be some inclination towards His love, because there
are degrees of His love. Or it may be that his dislike is due to his
feeling of unpreparedness in the path of love. He would like to love
more so that he might be able to purify himself just as a lover hearing
of his beloved’s arrival would like to be given some time for making
preparations for a fitting reception. For these reasons if a devotee
dislikes death, he can still be His lover, though of inferior type.

He should prefer, both inwardly and outwardly, God’s pleasure to his
desires. For he who follows the dictates of his desires is no true
lover, for the true lover’s will is his beloved’s. But human nature is
so constituted that such selfless beings are very rare. Patients would
like to be cured but they often eat things which are injurious to their
health. Similarly, a person would like to love God but very often
follows his own impulses. Naaman was a sinner, who being repeatedly
excused by the Prophet was at last flogged. While he was being flogged a
certain person cursed him for his iniquity. “Do not curse him”, said he
“he has a regard for God and his apostle”.

Experience tells us that he who loves loves the things connected with his
beloved. Therefore another sure sign of God’s love is the love of his
creatures who are created by and are dependent on him; for he who loves
an author or poet, will he not love his work or poem? But this stage is
reached when the lover’s heart is immersed in love and the more he is
absorbed in Him, the more will he love His creatures, so much so that
even the objects which hurt him will not be disliked by him—in fact the
problem of evil is transcended in his love for him.

It may be objected here that it follows that he loves the evil-doers and
sinners. But a deep insight into the nature of such love shows that he
loves them as creatures of God, but at the same time hates their actions
which are contrary to the command of his beloved. If this point is lost
sight of, people are apt to be misguided in their love or hatred of His
creatures. If they show their love towards any sinner, let it be in pure
compassion, and not any sense of taking the sin lightly. Similarly their
hatred should proceed from the consciousness of His stern law and justice
and not from ruthless bigotry.

In one of the Hadisi-Qudsi[90] God has said: “My saints are those who cry
like a child for my love, who remember me like a fearless lion at the
sight of iniquities”.

A reverent attitude of mind is another sign of his love. Some hold that
fear is opposed to love, but the truth is that just as the conception
of beauty generates love, the knowledge of his sublime majesty produces
the feeling of awe in us. Lovers meet with fears which are unknown to
others.[91] There is the fear of being disregarded. There is fear of the
veil being drawn down. There is the fear of their being turned away. When
the Sura Hud was revealed, in which the awful doom of the wicked nations
is narrated,: “Away with Samood, away with Midian,” the Prophet heaved a
sigh and said: “This Sura has turned me into an old man.” He who loves
His nearness will feel acutely the fear of being way from Him. There is
another fear of remaining at a particular stage and not rising higher,
for the ascending degrees of His nearness are infinite. A true lover is
always trying to draw nearer and nearer to Him. “A thin veil covers my
heart,” says the Prophet, “then I ask for His forgiveness seventy times
in day and night.”[92] This means that the Prophet was always ascending
the scales of his nearness, asking for His forgiveness at every stage
which was found lower than the next one.

There is another fear of over confidence which slackens the efforts and
mars progress. Hope with fear should be the guide of love. Some Sufis
say that he who worships God without fear is liable to err and fall;
he who worships him with fear turns gloomy and is cast off, but he who
lovingly worships him with hope and fear is admitted by him and favoured.
Therefore lovers should fear him and those who fear him should love him.
Even excess of his love contains an inkling of fear: it is like salt in
food. For human nature cannot bear the white heat of His love, if it is
not chastened and tempered by the fear of the Lord.

Keeping love secret and giving no publicity to it is another sign of His
love. For love is the beloved’s secret: it should not be revealed nor
openly professed. However, if he is over-powered by the force of his
love, and unwittingly and without the least dissimulation his secret
is out, he is not to be blamed. Some Sufis say: He who is very often
pointing towards Him is far from Him, because he feigns and makes a show
of his love of Him. Zunnun[93] of Egypt once went to pay a visit to one
of his brother Sufis, who was in distress, and who used to talk of his
love openly. “He who feels the severity of pain inflicted by Him,” said
Zunnun, “is no lover.” “He who finds no pleasure in such pain,” returned
the Sufi, “is no lover.” “True,” replied Zunnun, “but I say to you that
he who trumpets his love of Him is no lover.” The Sufi felt the force of
Zunnun’s words and fell down prostrate before God and repented and did
not talk again of his love.

It may be objected: Divine love is the highest stage, it would be better
to manifest it, where is the harm? No doubt love is good and if of itself
it is evident, there is no harm, but those who give themselves trouble to
make it known are blameable. Let our hearts speak, let our deeds proclaim
it, but not our tongue. Nay, he should always aim at making it evident
before his beloved. The gospel says: “Take heed that ye do not give your
alms before men to be seen: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father
which is in heaven. Therefore, when thou doest thine alms do not sound
a trumpet before thee as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the
streets, that they may have the glory of men. Verily I say unto you they
have their reward. But when thou doest alms let not thy left hand know
what thy right hand doeth. That thine alms may be in secret, and thy
Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. Moreover
when ye fast, be not as the hypocrites, of sad countenance: for they
disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I
say unto you they have their reward. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint
thine head and wash thy face, that thou appear not unto men to fast, but
unto thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret
shall reward thee openly.”[94]

The essence of religion is love; some signs of which have been enumerated
above. The love of God may be of two kinds. Some love him for his
bounties, others for his perfect beauty irrespective of bounties. The
former love increases according to the bounties received, but the latter
love is the direct result of the contemplation of his perfect attributes
and is constant even in tribulations. “These are His favoured few,” says
Junaid of Baghdad.[95] But there are many who pose as his lovers and
with much talk of his love lack the signs of true love. They are deluded
by the devil, slaves of their passions, seeking a hollow reputation,
shameless hypocrites who try to deceive the omniscient Lord their
creator. They are all enemies of God, whether they are revered as divines
or Sufis. Sahl of Taster who used to address everyone as “Friend”, was
once asked by a person the reason of his doing so, as all men could not
be his friends. Sahl whispered in his ear saying: “He will either be a
believer or a hypocrite; if he is a believer, he is God’s friend; if a
hypocrite, the devil’s friend.”

Abu Turab Nakshabi has composed some verses describing the signs of love.
Their translation is as follows:

Do not profess your love. Hearken to me: These are the signs of his
love. The bitterness of tribulations is sweet to him, he is happy for
he believes that everything proceeds from him; for praise or censure
he cares not, the will of his beloved is his will. While his heart is
burning with love his countenance is radiant with joy. He guards the
secret of love with all his might, and no thought save of his beloved
enters into his mind. Yahya bin Maaz Razi[96] adds some lines: “Another
sign is that he is up and ready like a diver at the bank of a river; He
sighs and sheds tears in the gloom of night, and day and night he appears
as if fighting for the sacred cause of his love. He entrusts his whole
self to his love and gladly acquiescing abides in his love.”[97]




“RIZA” OR JOYOUS SUBMISSION TO HIS WILL[98]


Riza is the quintessence of love and is one of the highest stages of the
favoured few. But some doubt its existence, saying, How can man be joyous
for what is against his own will. He may submit to God’s will, but it
does not follow that he also shares the feeling of joy. We shall discuss
the nature of Riza and prove its existence.

Let us first turn to the Quran and the Hadis. “Allah has promised to
the believing man and the believing women gardens, beneath which rivers
flow, to abide in them, and goodly dwellings in gardens of perpetual
abode and best of all is Allah’s goodly pleasure—that is the grand
achievement”.[99] In this passage God’s pleasure (Rizwan) is described
as best of all blessings. In another passage this blessing is also
bestowed on those who joyfully submit to his will, “Allah is well pleased
with them and they are well pleased with him; that is for him who fears
his Lord.”[100] “Who fear the beneficent God in secret and come with a
penitent heart, enter it in peace that is the day of abiding. They have
therein what they wish _and with us is more yet_.” Some commentators
while commenting on the words in italics say that three gifts will be
given in paradise: (i) a rare gift of which “no soul knows (in this
world) what is hidden for them of that which will refresh the eyes”.[101]
(ii) The salutation as mentioned in the Quran: “Peace (Salam) a word
from the merciful Lord”.[102] (iii) His goodly grace and pleasure as
mentioned in “wa Rizwanumminallahi akbar” (and best of all is Allah’s
goodly pleasure).

The Prophet once asked some of his companions to point out the signs of
the faith which they professed. “O apostle of God,” said the companions,
“we are patient in tribulations, grateful in felicity and pleased with
what is ordained”. “Ye are Muslims” said the Prophet. Again the Prophet
said: “Ye who are poor be pleased with what God has put you in and then
you shall have your reward”.

Let us discuss the nature of Riza. Those who deny the existence of Riza,
saying that man can be patient in sufferings but joyous submission to
His will is not possible, really deny the existence of love and its
all-absorbing nature. A lover always loves his beloved’s actions. Now
this love of actions is of two kinds: (1) Redemption from the experience
of pain caused in mental or physical suffering.

Experience shows that many warriors while enraged do not feel the pain
of their wounds, and know it only when they see blood gushing from them.
Even when a man is engaged in some action which absorbs his attention,
the pain of a thorn pricking him will not be felt. If then in such
cases—and there are many such—pain is not felt, will it not be possible
that a devotee who is absorbed in him does not feel pain, which in his
belief is inflicted by his beloved?

Or (2) although pain is felt, he would desire it just as a patient who
feels the pain caused by the surgeon’s lancet is glad to be operated
upon and is pleased with the surgeon’s action. Similarly he who firmly
believes that tribulations are like God-sent curatives will be pleased
with them and be thankful to God. Anyone who ponders over the nature of
the above mentioned kinds and then in the light of them reads the lives
and the sayings of the lovers of God, will, I believe, be convinced of
the existence of Riza.

Saint Basher, son of Harith, narrates the story: In the Sharkia Lane of
Baghdad, I saw a man who received a thousand stripes, but did not cry
in his agony. He was then sent to prison and I followed him. “Why have
you been punished so mercilessly?” I asked. “Because they have found out
the secret of my love”. “But why were you so strangely quiet while you
were punished so severely”, I asked in astonishment. “Because”, answered
the poor fellow with a sigh, “She was looking at me from her balcony”.
“Oh that you might see the true Beloved”, I murmured. Hearing this, his
colour at once changed, and with a loud cry he fell dead.

The same saint tells another story: “While I was a student of Sufiism I
went to Jazirai Abbadan,[103] where I saw a blind epileptic leper, lying
on the ground while worms were eating his flesh. I sat by his side and
placed his head on my lap and spoke gently to him. When he came to his
senses, he spoke: ‘Who is this stranger who comes between me and my
Lord. Even if each and every limb is severed from my body, I will love
Him.’ That scene of Riza, says the saint, I shall never forget; it is a
life-long lesson for me.”

It is said that Christ once saw a blind forlorn leper who was praying:
“Blessed art thou, O Lord, who hast saved me from such maladies which
have overtaken many of us”. “Art thou not in misery” asked Christ, “Tell
me which is that malady which has not overtaken thee”. “Thank God”, cried
the leper, “I am not like him who does not know God”. “You are right”,
said Christ, “Give me your hand”. And the breath of Christ instantly
healed the leper, and he became one of his followers.

The Prophet’s companion Said bin Wakas,[104] lost his eyesight in old
age, and resigning his post returned to Mecca. People flocked to him for
blessing as he was known to be one whose prayers were always heard. Says
Abdullah bin Said: “I was then a mere boy; I too went to pay my respects
to the venerable Said. He spake kindly to me and blessed me. Then I said:
‘Uncle, how is it that you who are praying for everybody would not pray
for the restoration of your eyesight?’ ‘My son’, answered Said with a
smile, ‘to be pleased with His sweet will is better than eyesight’”.

Some people went to see Shibli[105] at Maristan, where he was imprisoned.
“Who are you?” asked the saint. “Friends”, they all replied with one
voice. Hearing this Shibli fetched some stones and began to throw them at
them, and they all fled calling him a madman. “What’s this”, exclaimed
Shibli, “You call yourselves my friends but if you are sincere, bear
patiently what ye receive from me,” and then he sang: “His love has
turned my brain. Have you ever seen a lover who is not intoxicated with
love!”

These narratives point out that Riza or joyous submission to God’s will
is possible and is one of the highest stages to which the souls of true
devotees could aspire. People believe in eccentricities of Cupid’s
votaries but give no ear to the ecstasies of the true lovers of God.
Perhaps they have no eyes to look at the manifestation of His beauty; no
ears to listen to the music of His love, no heart to gaze at and enjoy
His sweet presence. Perhaps they are proud of their learning and think
too much of their good deeds but they have no idea of humble and broken
hearts.

A certain nobleman of Bustam, comely in appearance and lordly in bearing,
used to attend the sermons of saint Bayazid of Bustam.[106] One day he
said to the saint: “For thirty years I have been keeping fasts waking
for the whole night and offering my prayers, but still I do not find in
me the animating force of what you teach, although I believe in it and
cherish love for you.” “Thirty years”: ejaculated the saint: “Why for
three hundred years if you do as you have done till now you will not have
a bit of it.” “How is that?” asked the astonished nobleman. “Because”
answered the saint “the veil of your egotism has fallen heavily on your
mind’s eye”. The chief then asked the saint to tell him of some remedy,
but he declined saying that the chief would not like to take it. “But do
tell me”, entreated the nobleman, “And I will try my best to follow your
kind advice”. “Listen then”, calmly answered the saint, “This very moment
go to the barber, get your head and beard shaven, take off this apparel,
and gird your loins with a piece of blanket; gather children round you
and tell them that whosoever gives you a slap with the hand will get a
walnut; pass through the throngs in all the bazars, followed by those
children and then show yourself to your intimate friends”.

“Subhan Allah” exclaimed the chief, “Do you say that to me”. “Hold thy
tongue”, retorted the saint, “thy Subhan Allah is blasphemy.” “How is
that”, asked the chief. “Because,” replied the saint, “you uttered Subhan
Allah not for any reverence for the Holy Being but out of respect for
your own vain self”. “Well”, said the chief, “tell me some other remedy,
please”. “Try this remedy first”, continued the saint. “I cannot do so,”
rejoined the chief. “There you are”, spoke the saint finally, “Did I not
tell you that you would not like the remedy.”

Our egoistic tendencies impede the progress of our souls towards higher
virtues, and hence some of us go the length of denying the possibility of
their existence. Let the lives of the true lovers of God be our guide.




FOOTNOTES


[1] D. B. Macdonald: _Muslim Theology_ London 1903. p. 215. This book
gives the best account of Al Ghazzali’s work yet available in English.

[2] ibid. p. 240.

[3] Quoted in E. G. Browne: _Literary History of Persia_ 1903. Vol. I. p.
294.

[4] ibid. p. 293.

[5] I. Goldzieher: _Vorlesungen uber den Islam_ Leipzig 1910. p. 185. See
translation in the Indian Philosophical Review by the present writer:
Vol. 1. pp. 260-6.

[6] Op. cit. pp. 238-40.

[7] From Al Munqidh min ad’-Dalal.

[8] _Gazali._ Paris 1902. pp. 44-45.

[9] See the English translation of the Guide by Friedländer; _The Guide
to the Perplexed_, London, especially pp. 225 ff. Al Ghazzali’s works
were so widely studied that it is hardly possible to suppose that
Maimonides was not influenced by them. The influence may have been
direct, as Maimonides was not only a student in Spain but also physician
in the court of Saladin in Alexandria. Indirectly the influence may have
come through the Jewish poet Yehuda Halevi.

[10] op. cit. p. 179.

[11] This list is taken from _A Chronological List of Muslim Works on
Religion and Philosophy_ which has been for a short time in preparation
at the Seminar for the Comparative Study of Religions, Baroda, by
Professor J. ur Rehman of Hyderabad, and Professor F. S. Gilani of Surat,
Fellows of the Seminar. The list has been compared with that of Shibli in
his Urdu life of Ghazali (Cawnpore 1902) whose classification is followed
with slight modification.

[12] _Ihya_ III. 1.

[13] This word is used both for _Rasul_ and _Nabi_, but the Muslim notion
of _Rasul_ differs from that of _Nabi_. Malachi was a prophet (_Nabi_),
but Moses was more than a prophet (_Rasul_). Thus in _St. Matthew_ XI. 9
we have: “But wherefore went ye out? to see a prophet? Yea, I say unto
you, and much more than a prophet”.

[14] Abuhuraira’s report given in Bokhari and Muslim.

[15] Reported by Abuhuraira in Ahmad’s _Masnav_. Egypt 1300 A. H.

[16] _Quran_ XXXIII. 72.

[17] _Quran_ XVII. 85.

[18] _Ihya_ IV. 5.

[19] It is interesting to note here the following passage from a modern
European author: “If we form a conception of a Perfect or Infinite Mind
it is in this sense that we must speak of such a mind as free. To speak
of choice between alternatives is to suggest that another than the
best might be chosen and this would be inconsistent with the idea of
perfection.

A finite mind, limited in knowledge and power and distracted by desires
other than the will to goodness, may yet have a partial measure of
self-determination which is complete only in the infinite. It is
incompletely determined by forces external to itself. And if it stand—as
it does stand—between the realm of nature and the realm of goodness,
conscious of the good and yet beset by many temptations to fall to a
lower level, then the relative independence or partial spontaneity of
such a mind may be exhibited in the power to direct its own path toward
the goal of goodness or to allow it to lapse into evil. Its freedom
will be neither complete independence of external determination nor
complete agreement with the ideal of goodness; but it will exclude total
subordination to the forces beyond itself, and it will give opportunity
for choosing and serving the good. In spite of its restrictions human
activity will be recognized as possessing a core of spontaneity”. W. R.
Sorley: _Moral Values and the Idea of God_. Cambridge 1918 pp. 446-7.

[20] Ghazzali here anticipated Hume. “Seven hundred years before Hume,
Ghazzali cut the bond of causality with the edge of his dialectic”.
_Journal of the American Oriental Society_ vol. XX. 103.

[21] _Quran_ XLIV. 38, 39.

[22] _Quran_ XXXII. 11.

[23] _Quran_ XXXIX. 42.

[24] _Quran_ LVI. 63.

[25] _Quran_ LXXX. 25-7.

[26] _Quran_ IX. 14.

[27] _Quran_ VIII. 17. This passage refers to the battle of Badr, the
first battle of the Prophet. The Muslims slew the enemy but it is
affirmed that really they did not slay, but it was Allah who slew them;
the meaning apparently being that Allah’s hand was working in the battle,
which is also clear from the fact that three hundred Muslims mostly raw
and equipped with neither horses nor sufficient arms, prevailed against
a thousand of the most renowned warriors who had come to crush the
growing power of Islam. “And Thou didst not smite when thou didst smite”.
Ghazzali points out that negation and affirmation for one and the same
action throw new light on the nature of causation. Negation affirms God
as the efficient and real cause; affirmation establishes man’s free-will
faithfully executing divine order.

    Whose branches are ever shaken by the wind,
    And whose fruit is showered on the sleeper’s heads.
    Fatalism means sleeping amidst highwaymen.
    Can a cock who crows too soon expect peace?
    If ye cavil at and accept not God’s hints,
    Though ye count yourselves men, see, ye are women.
    The quantum of reason ye possessed is lost,
    And the head whose reason has fled is a till.
    Inasmuch as the unthankful are despicable,
    They are at last cast into the fiery pit.
    If ye really have trust in God, exert yourselves,
    And strive in constant reliance on the Almighty.

                (Translation by E. Whinfield. _Masnavi._
                  2nd ed. 1898. Bk. I, pp. 19-20.)

[28] _Quran_ XCV. 4-6. Whether man is by nature good or bad is a question
which has vexed great thinkers from ancient times. Various answers have
been suggested, which are summed up in three distinct theories:

1. Evil is innate. Education simply muzzles the brute in man.
Civilisation is mere veneering process. This cynical view of human nature
is the religion of despair.

2. Man is neither good nor bad. Mind is a _tabula rasa_. Good or bad
actions leave their impression. Thorns and roses are alike gathered by it.

3. Good and evil are mixed up in man. He has an angelic as well as a
satanic nature. The development of this double nature depends on the
force of external circumstances and surrounding influences. Good and evil
are like two seeds: whichever is sown and taken care of will grow into a
tree.

The Quranic expression: “we created man in the best make” emphasises
the purity of his nature. He is born with good and for good, but has to
preserve and to develop his goodness to his full capacity in the struggle
of life. He has but one seed which is good if it grows and bears fruit it
is called goodness; if it be crushed or nipped in the bud it is called
evil. Evil, therefore has no separate entity in him, it is simply a
negative which will lose his soul and reduce him to the lower depths.

[29] It is interesting to note a parallel passage from the _Masnavi_ of
Jal al uddin Rumi, who was born in 1207 A.D. ninety-seven years after the
death of Al Ghazzali:

    When a master places a spade in the hand of a slave,
    The slave knows his meaning without being told
    Like this spade, our hands are our Master’s hints to us;
    Yea, if ye consider, they are his directions to us
    When ye have taken to heart His hints,
    Ye will shape your life in reliance on their direction;
    Wherefore these hints disclose His intent,
    Take the burden from you, and appoint your work,
    He that hears it make it hearable by you.
    He too is able to make it within your ability.
    Accept his command and you will be able to execute it
    Seek union with Him, and you will find yourselves united.
    Exertion is giving thanks for God’s blessings;
    Think ye that your fatalism gives such thanks;
    Giving thanks for blessings increases blessings
    But fatalism snatches those blessings from your hands
    Your fatalism is to sleep on the road; sleep not
    Till ye behold the gates of the King’s palace.
    Ah! sleep not, unreflecting fatalists,
    Till ye have reached that fruit-laden Tree of Life.

                                E. Whinfield, trs, _Masnavi_.

[30] _St. Matthew_ XIV. 55-31. “And in the fourth watch of the night
he came unto them, walking on the sea. And when the disciples saw him
walking on the sea, they were troubled saying, It is an apparition and
they cried out for fear. But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying:
Be of good cheer, it is I, be not afraid. And Peter answered him and
said: Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee upon the water. And
Peter went down from the boat and walked upon the waters to come to
Jesus. But when he saw the wind he was afraid, and beginning to sink he
cried, saying,: Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth his
hand, and took hold of him and said unto him: O thou of little faith,
wherefore didst thou doubt?”

[31] Comp. _Quran_ XLII. 11: Nothing is like a likeness of Him. He is the
hearing, the seeing.

[32] Comp. _Genesis_ I. 27.

[33] _Exodus_ III. 14.

[34] _Quran_ XX. 12. It is generally supposed that Moses was ordered to
take off his “leather shoes” out of respect for the sacred place. But
Razi in his Commentary calls it an idiom and says that the Arabs used the
word Na’al (shoe) for wife and family. The command to put off the shoes
is therefore a metaphorical expression for making the heart vacant from
care of family. See _Tafsir-i-Razi_ vol. VI. 19. Stamboul edition.

[35] _Quran_ XXXIX. 97. The full text runs: And they have not honoured
Allah with the honour due to him: and the whole earth shall be in his
grip on the day of resurrection and the heavens rolled up in his right
hand; glory be to him and may he be exalted above what they associate
with him.

[36] Ghazzali has dealt with the question fully in his work entitled
‘Iljamal awam’. He says that every object has four stages of existence.
To use a figure: “Fire” is (1) written on paper: (2) pronounced as Fire
(3) burns; and (4) is perceived by the mind to be inflammable. The first
two are purely conventional but have an educational value. Similarly the
anthropomorphism of the passages of the Scriptures should be studied in
the light of the above stages.

[37] _Quran_ XXIX. 69.

[38] See Section vi of this book.

[39] _Ihya_ III. 9.

[40] _Quran_ IV. 172.

[41] _Quran_ XXV. 7, 8; 21.

[42] _Quran_ XLIII. 31. “And they say: why was not this Quran revealed to
a man of importance in the two towns.” (Mecca and Taif).

[43] _Quran_ XVIII. 28.

[44] Ibn Abbas.

[45] Trimizi: Abu Huraira’s report.

[46] Comp. _Matt_ VI. 24 “No man can serve two masters for either he will
hate the one and love the other; or else he will hold to the one and
despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon”.

[47] _Matt_ V. 3.

[48] _Quran_ XVIII. 32-46.

[49] _Ihya_ 115; IV. 7.

[50] _Quran_ III. 102.

[51] Tibrani and Abu Daud.

[52] Muslim.

[53] Bokhari and Muslim.

[54] _Quran_ XVIII. 5.

[55] Nasai and Bokhari.

[56] Adu Mansur.

[57] Rumi has beautifully described this story of Nasuh in _Masnavi_ Bk.
V.

[58] _Ihya_ IV. 6.

[59] Bukhari and Muslim.

[60] _Quran_ LXXVI. 1-3.

[61] Ghazzali’s remark should not be confounded with either egoistic or
universalistic hedonism. See his remark on the affinity of souls (pages
95 ff).

[62] Muslim.

[63] From uncanonical sayings of Christ.

[64] _Quran_ XXXVIII. 71, 72.

[65] See Bukhari _Haddis Qudsi_.

[66] Al Ghazzali condemns all such expressions which are called by
Cardinal Newman “eccentricities of the saints.” He is aware of their
liability to abuse and points out their error in a manner which six
hundred years later took the form of Bishop Butler’s dictum that reason
cannot abdicate its right of judging obvious improprieties in religious
doctrines and persons. “Ibn Allah”, (Son of God) refers to the orthodox
Christian view of Jesus. “Anal Haq” (I am the truth, i.e. God) refers
to the expression of Husain bin Mansur al Hallaj, who in 309 A.D. was
crucified in Bagdad for his blasphemy. The poet Hafiz says of him:
“Jurmash an bud ki asrar huwaida bikard.” (His crime was that he revealed
the secrets.)

[67] _St Matthew_ XXII 35-57. “And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a
question, tempting him,: Master, which is the great commandment in the
law? And he said unto him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.” In the above passage
the law referred to is _Deuteronomy_ VI. 5, where instead of mind, the
word might is used.

[68] Daran, a village near Damascus, where he died in 215 A.H.

[69] A famous Muslim woman saint of Basrah, considered to be an authority
on Sufiism. She died in 801 A. D.

[70] _Quran_ LVII. 20 and III. 14-16.

[71] Compare Descartes’: _Cogito ergo sum_.

[72] Compare _Quran_ XXIV. 35. “Allah is the light of the heavens and the
earth: a likeness of his light is a pillar on which is a lamp, the lamp
is in a glass (and) the glass is as it were a brightly shining star lit
from a blessed olive tree, neither eastern nor western, the oil whereof
almost gives light though fire touches it not (heads daffor.) Allah
guides to his light whom he pleases, and Allah sets forth parables for
men and Allah is cogniscant of all things.” Al Ghazzali has written a
separate treatise called _Mishkat ul Anwar_ dealing exhaustively with the
above passage. An excellent summary of his views is given by Razi in his
Commentary, vol. VI. 393-408. (Stamboul edition). In the above parable
Islam is represented as a likeness of the divine light, a light placed
high on a pillar so as to illumine the whole world, a light guarded by
being placed in a glass so that no puff of wind can put it out, a light
so resplendent that the glass itself in which it is placed is as a
brilliant star. Just as a fig tree stands for a symbol of Judaism (see
_St. Matthew_ XXI. 19) the olive stands for Islam, which must give light
to both the East and the West, and does not specifically belong to either
one of them.

The doctrine of _Fana_ is misunderstood by many Western scholars.
Tennyson puts it:

    “That each, who seems a separate whole,
    Should move his rounds and fusing all
    The skirts of self again, should fall
    Remerging in the general soul,
    Is faith as vague as all unsweet.”

                      (_In Memoriam_ XLVII.)

Ghazzali’s vivid description is neither vague nor unsweet. To him _Fana_
is “a prayer of rapture”. “In that state man is effaced from self, so
that he is conscious neither of his body nor of outward things, nor of
inward feelings. He is rapt from all these, journeying first to his Lord
and then in his Lord, and if the thought that he is effaced from self
occurs to him, that is a defect. The highest state is to be effaced from
effacement”. E. Whinfield: _Masnavi_, Introduction p. xxxvii.

[73] _Ihya_ IV. 5.

[74] Usually _Fana_ is translated as “annihilation,” but Al Ghazzali here
means what is implied in the statement: “To live, move, and have our
being in Him”.

[75]

    “And thou shalt one day, if found worthy, so defined
    See thy God face to face, as thou dost now.”

                 Byron _Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage_. CLV.

[76] _Quran_ XXIX. 65-66.

[77] _Quran_ XVIII. 109. Compare Jalal-ud-Din Rumi:—

    Air, earth, water, and fire are God’s servants.
    To us they seem lifeless, but to God living.
    In God’s presence fire ever waits to do its service,
    Like a submissive lover with no will of its own.
    When you strike steel on flint fire leaps forth;
    But ’tis by God’s command it thus steps forth.
    Strike not together the flint and steel of wrong,
    For the pair will generate more, like man and woman.
    The flint and steel are themselves causes, yet
    Look higher for the First Cause, O righteous man!
    For that Cause precedes this second cause.
    How can a cause exist of itself without precedent cause?
    That Cause makes this cause operative,
    And again helpless and inoperative.
    That Cause, which is a guiding light to the prophets,
    That, I say, is higher than these second causes,
    Man’s minds recognise these second causes,
    But only prophets perceive the action of the First Cause.

                E. Whinfield: _Masnavi_, 2nd ed. 1898. p. 16.

[78] _Ihya_ IV. 6.

[79] _Quran_ V. 54.

[80] _Quran_ II. 165.

[81] Bukhari and Muslim.

[82] _Quran_ IX. 24.

[83] Tirmizi.

[84] Abu Naim.

[85] Tirmizi.

[86] _Quran_ II. 222. Repentance is the first step towards God. Comp.
_St. Matthew_ III. 2.

[87] _Quran_ III. 30. Keeping God’s commandments revealed through his
holy prophets constitutes love of Him. Comp. _St. John._ XV. 10 “If
ye keep my commandments ye shall abide in my love; even as I keep my
Father’s commandments and abide in his love”.

[88] A Sufi of great renown: died at Baghdad in 840 A.D.

[89] _Quran_ II. 94-95.

[90] Hadisi Qudsi is that kind of tradition in which God is himself
reported to speak.

[91] Comp:

    Let knowledge grow from more to more,
    But more of reverence in us dwell;
    That mind and soul, according well,
    May make one music as before,
    But vaster. We are fools and slight;
    We mock thee when we do not fear;
    But help Thy foolish ones to bear,
    Help Thy vain worlds to bear, thy light.

                                   Tennyson.

[92] See Bukhari.

[93] Called the “father of Sufiism”. He founded a sect of Sufis in Egypt.
He died in 860 A.D.

[94] St. Matthew VI. 1-4; 16-18.

[95] A celebrated Sufi called Syed Uttaifa (chief of the sect). He died
at Baghdad in 911 A.D.

[96] A theologian and Sufi of Ray in Persia. He died in 871 A.D.

[97] Comp:

    Good shepherd, tell this youth what ’tis to love.
    It is to be all made of sighs and tears;
    It is to be all made of faith and service;
    It is to be all made of fantasy,
    All made of passion and all made of wishes;
    All adoration, duty, and observance,
    All humbleness, all patience and impatience,
    All purity, all trial, all observance.

                Shakespeare: As you like it. _Act_ V.

[98] _Ihya_ IV. 6.

[99] _Quran_ IX. 72.

[100] _Quran_ XCVIII. 8.

[101] _Quran_ XXXII. 17.

[102] _Quran_ XXXVI. 58.

[103] In Tigris.

[104] He conquered Persia in the time of the Khalifa Omar.

[105] The Arabs address elders in this way.

[106] One of the most renowned of the early Sufis. His grandfather was a
Magian who accepted Islam. He was born in 777 A. D. and died at a great
age in 878 A. D.




_Some Preliminary Announcements_

_of_

THE GAEKWAD STUDIES

IN

RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY

_Edited by_

ALBAN G. WIDGERY M.A.,

_Professor of Philosophy and the Comparative Study of Religions, Baroda._


This Series is established with the sanction and financial support of the
Government of His Highness the Maharajah Gaekwad of Baroda. The aim is
to provide an opportunity for the publication of works on religious and
philosophical subjects. Some of the volumes will be more popular and some
more technical in nature. Only books written in the tolerant spirit of
genuine scholarship will be included.

                              _The Manager_,
                           THE COLLEGE, BARODA.


THE GAEKWAD STUDIES IN RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY

_First issues:_

Personality and Atonement. By the Editor.

Human Needs and The Justification of Religious Beliefs. By the Editor.

The Heart of the Bhagavatgita. By Lingesha Mahabhagavat.

Zoroastrian Ethics. By M. A. Buch.

Kant and Sankaracharya. Prof. C. G. Bhate, Poona.

Selections from Al-Ghassali. By Professor Syed Nawab Ali.

The Doctrine of Karma. A Volume of Essays by various writers.

Immortality and Other Essays. By the Editor.

The Comparative Study of Religions. By the Editor.

A Buddhist Bibliography. By various scholars.

A Chronology and Bibliography of Muslim Literature on Religion and
Philosophy. By Professor M. Jamil ur Rehman and F. S. Gilani, M. A.

Some Modern Religious Movements. By various writers.

Jesus. By the Editor.

Goods and Bads: Outlines of a Philosophy of Life. By the Editor.


HUMAN NEEDS AND THE JUSTIFICATION OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS

_The Burney Prize Essay Cambridge 1909_

and

PERSONALITY AND ATONEMENT

_Essays in the Philosophy of Religion._

by

ALBAN C. WIDGERY

Cloth: Six Rupees


THE HEART OF THE BHAGAVAD-GITA

BY

His Holiness Sri Vidya Sankara Bharati Swami, Jagadguru Sankaracharya of
Karvir Pitha.

In this book one of the most enlightened leaders of Modern Hindu
religious life discusses the important and ever interesting question:
“What is the value of the Gita as a guide to practical life?” It should
be read by all educated Hindus and by all non-Hindus who wish to know the
religious attitude of a prominent Hindu scholar and devotee.

                               The Manager,
                           THE COLLEGE, BARODA.


IMMORTALITY AND OTHER ESSAYS

BY ALBAN G. WIDGERY

Paper covers: Two rupees

Cloth: Three rupees.

                               The Manager,
                           THE COLLEGE, BARODA.


THE CONFUTATION OF ATHEISM

Translated by

VALI MOHAMMED CHHAGANBHAI MOMIN.

This short treatise which comes down from the sixth Imam, Hazrat Imam
Jafar-us-Sadak, should prove of great interest to all Muslims. It will
attract others also by the beauty of its style and the remarkable
likeness it bears to the arguments of Bishop Butler in his _Analogy of
Religion_.

_Fourteen annas, post free._

                               The Manager,
                           THE COLLEGE, BARODA.


ZOROASTRIAN ETHICS

BY

MAGANLAL A. BUCH M. A.,

_Fellow of the Seminar for the Comparative Study of Religions, Baroda._

CONTENTS

    Introduction.
    Bibliography.

    Part I
    I. The Available Zoroastrian Literature.
    II. The Historical and Social Conditions.
    III. Psychological Conceptions.

    Part II
    IV. The General Moral Attitude.
    V. The Value of Life: Industry and Indolence.
    VI. Truthfulness and Deceit: Purity and Impurity.
    VII. The Ethics of Sex Relations.
    VIII. Benevolence: other Vices and Virtues.
    IX. The Ethical in Legal References in Zoroastrian Literature.
    X. Theological and Metaphysical Conceptions.
    Index.

_Paper covers: Two Rupees._

_Cloth covers: Three Rupees._

                               The Manager,
                           THE COLLEGE, BARODA.


_In the Press_

THE COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RELIGIONS

A Systematic Survey

By

ALBAN G. WIDGERY M A.,

_Professor of Philosophy and the Comparative Study of Religions, Baroda._

CONTENTS.

    INTRODUCTION: Scientific Theology and the Comparative Study of Religions.
    I. The Sources and Nature of Religious Truth.
    II. Supernatural Beings, Good and Bad.
    III. The Soul: its Nature, Origin, and Destiny.
    IV. Sin and Suffering: Salvation and Redemption.
    V. Religious Practices.
    VI. The Emotional Attitudes and Religious Ideals.
    Appendices; Maps; Illustrations; Bibliography; and Index.

This volume is meant to be a systematic introduction to the subject.
Much of the technical detail being in the form of notes the book is thus
adapted to the general reader as well as to the needs of students.

Cloth, superior paper Rs. 12.; 15s. 0d.

Cloth, ordinary paper Rs. 10.; 12s. 6d.

                               The Manager,
                           THE COLLEGE, BARODA.


_In preparation_

An important volume of Essays on

THE DOCTRINE OF KARMA

By

Representatives of the different great religions.

The purpose of the volume is to present for comparison the views of
certain writers of distinction from the different religions upon the
theory that the suffering and happiness of the individual is due solely
to his own action, past or present.

_Some Contributors_

    Shams-ul-Ulama J. J. Modi, C. I. E., Ph. D.
    The Very Rev. Hastings Rashdall, D. Lit; D.C.L.
    S. Khuda Buksch, M. A., B. C. L., (Oxon.)
    Champat Rai Jain, Author of _The Key of Knowledge_
    Israel Abrahams, D. Lit.
    Alban G. Widgery M. A. (Cantab.)

                               The Manager,
                           THE COLLEGE, BARODA.


_In preparation by Various Scholars_

A BUDDHIST BIBLIOGRAPHY

CONTENTS

_Preface._

_Introduction._

BOOK I.

I. Buddhist Literature in Pali with translations, Commentaries, and
References to specific works in European Languages.

II. Buddhist Literature in Sanskrit with translations, Commentaries, and
References to specific works in European Languages.

III. References to Buddhism in non-Buddhist Sanskrit Literature.

IV. Buddhism in General with special References to Buddhist Doctrine and
Practice in European Languages.

BOOK II.

I. Buddhism in India (works in European Languages only).

II. Buddhism in Ceylon.

III. Buddhism in Burma.

IV. Buddhism in Malay and Java.

V. Buddhism in Siam and Cambodia.

VI. Buddhism in Himalayan Tracts.

VII. Buddhism in Tibet.

VIII. Buddhism in Central Asia and Mongolia.

IX. Buddhism in China. X. Buddhism in Korea.

XI. Buddhism in Japan.

Appendices, Maps, Indices.

                               The Manager,
                           THE COLLEGE, BARODA.