Published-Presence of God

Journal of Islamic Studies 21:2 (2010) pp. 213–234 doi:10.
1093/jis/etq001
PRESENCE OF GOD ACCORDING TO EAQQ

AL-YAQĪN, A SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY
TREATISE BY SHAYKH SHAMS AL-DĪN
AL-SUMATRA8Ī (D. 1630)
Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

MOHAMAD NASRIN MOHAMAD NASIR
University Brunei Darussalam
A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF SHAMS AL-DĪN
We have very little material with which to reconstruct the life of Shams
al-D;n. From local Achehnese reports—namely, De Hikajat Atjeh,1 Adat
Atjeh2 and Bust:n al-sal:3;n3—we can safely say that he was a highly
respected scholar at the court of Sultan Iskandar M<d: (d. 1634). His
presence is noted at various functions organized by the Sultan where he
was asked to read the supplication of thanks, to meet dignitaries from
foreign countries, and where he also met with local Achehnese Aujj:j
who brought some news from abroad.4 He died in 1630, which
coincided with the attack on Mallacca by the Achenese forces.5 Since we
do not know his date of birth we cannot work out how long he lived.
However, we do know that he was of Pasai origin and a follower of the
Shafi6i school of law. With regard to theology, he followed the Ahl al-
Sunna school, specifically Ash6ar; kal:m. This is shown in his theological
1
Teuku Iskandar (ed.), De Hikajat Atjeh (Leiden: Verhandelingen van het
Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde (VKI) 26, 1958), 167–8.
2
G. W. J. Drewes and P. Voorhoeve, Adat Atjeh (Leiden: Verhandelingen van
het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde (VKI) 24, 1958), 87.
3
Teuku Iskandar (ed.), Bust:n al-sal:3;n (Kuala Lumpur: DBP, 1966).
4
See Mohamad Nasrin Mohamad Nasir, ‘Persian Quotations in the Eaqq al-
yaq;n f; 6aq;dat al-muAaqqiq;n f; dhikr asr:r al-B<f; al-muAaqqiq;n of Shaykh
Shams al-D;n al-Sumatra8; (d. 1630 ce)’, al-Shajarah 11/2 (2006), 271–95.
5
Al-Raniri, Bust:n al-sal:3;n, b:b 2 faBl 13, 27.
ß The Author (2010). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Oxford Centre for Islamic
Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
214 mo h am a d na s r i n m o ha m ad n a s i r
work the Mir6:t al-mu8min;n.6 We also know almost nothing of his
training, who his teachers were, where he studied,7 and who taught him
Persian and Arabic to a level that enabled him to claim, as he does in the
introduction of Eaqq al-yaq;n, to have mastered these languages. Such
questions can only be answered by conjecture at best. His teacher must
have been Hamza Fansuri.8 That the two were acquainted is indicated in
the historical records.9 He also wrote a commentary on a poem by
Hamza,10 and he frequently relies on the latter’s poetry when explaining

6
There is currently no edition of this work, considered by many to be Shams
al-D;n’s principal theological work. See C. A. O. van Nieuwenhuijze, Samsu’l-
Din Van Pasai, Bijdrage Tot De Kennis Der Sumatraansche Mystiek (Leiden:
Brill, 1945).
7
Teuku Iskandar is of the opinion that Shams al-D;n travelled to Mughal
India where he met with many Sufi masters, amongst them Shaykh MuAammad
ibn Fa@l All:h al-Burh:np<r; who had a great influence on him through his
‘Seven degrees of Being’, which later came to be known in Malay Sufi texts as
‘Martabat Tujuh’. Iskandar’s opinion is based on his other view that Shams al-
D;n was the writer of the Hikayat Atjeh, which, according to Iskandar, is
modeled on Firdaws;’s Sh:hn:meh. The Sh:hn:meh was popular in Mughal
India and Shams al-D;n could have come across it while there. Iskandar does not
provide any other evidence for this claim—as there are no surviving accounts of
the early life of Shams al-D;n. Nevertheless, I am inclined to agree with Iskandar
for several reasons, one of which is that Shams al-D;n’s work displays numerous
influences that could not have come from Hamza, among them that of the
Shattari 3ar;qa. I argue this more fully in M. N. M. Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition and
Study of Eaqq al-yaq;n f; 6aq;dat al-muAaqqiq;n of Shams al-D;n al-Sumatra8;’,
unpublished PhD. diss., International Institute of Islamic Thought and
Civilization (ISTAC), Malaysia (2008).
8
G. W. J. Drewes and L. F. Brakel (The Poems of Hamzah Fansuri
[Dordrecht: Foris KITLV, Bibliotheca Indonesia 26, 1986]) believed that Hamza
died in 1590. S. M. N. al-Attas (The Mysticism of Hamzah Fansuri [Kuala
Lumpur: University of Malaya Press, 1970]) is of the opinion that Hamza lived
during the reign of Sultan Ala al-Din Riayyat Syah Sayyid al-Mukammil, which
ended in 1604. Recently scholars have suggested that Hamza died much earlier
than that; for a discussion of these views, see Vladimir Braginsky, ‘Towards the
Biography of Hamzah Fansuri: When Did Hamzah live? Data from His Poems
and Early European Accounts’, Archipel 57 (1999): 135–75. For a summary of
the discussion and of Braginsky’s own views, see his The Heritage of Traditional
Malay Literature: A Historical Survey of Genres, Writings and Literary Views
(Leiden: KITLV Press, 2004), 744, n. 13.
9
See Van Newvenhuijze, Samsu8l-Din Van Pasai, 18–24.
10
The title of the work is ‘Sharh Ruba6i Hamzah Fansuri’. See Wan Shaghir,
Tafsir Puisi Hamzah Fansuri (Kuala Lumpur: Pustaka Fathaniyyah, 1997), 43–
67, which contains, as well as this commentary on the poetry of Hamza, three
romanized versions of short treatises written by Shams al-D;n.
SHAYKH SHAMS AL-D>N AL-SUMATRA8> (d. 1630) 215
complex metaphysical concepts. This has led many scholars to believe
that Hamza Fansuri was his teacher and mentor, perhaps his only one.
However, the point at which the student’s thinking departs from that of
his teacher has not been elucidated, giving the impression that Shams al-
D;n was a mere follower of Hamza. I aim to demonstrate here that
Shams al-D;n is a more accomplished presenter of metaphysical
teachings than Hamza. If Hamza was the master of utilizing poetry for

that purpose, then Shams al-D;n has to be considered the master of
prose. His prose work is more complex and includes a greater range of
thinkers associated with the Ibn 6Arab; school than Hamza’s work.
Shams al-D;n is the master explicator and narrator, who fused together
the different views of the verifiers (muAaqqiq;n) in one coherent
narrative. The result is metaphysical writings that surpass all others in
the history of Malay metaphysics.
Precisely where Shams al-D;n acquired his knowledge of Persian
remains a mystery. Studies point to various possibilities, one of which is
that he travelled to India and picked up Persian while studying there.11
Another possibility, preferred by some scholars, is that he learnt Persian
through his mentor Hamza Fansuri who had picked it up in Shahr Nawi
in Thailand.12 Drewes and Brakel question whether Hamza knew
Persian;13 they think that he could simply have quoted Persian verses
from other Sufi manuals such as K:lab:dh;’s (d. 990s) Kit:b al-Ta6arruf
and Hujw;r;’s (d. 1077) Kashf al-MaAj<b, and consider his knowledge of
Persian to have been second hand. However, in his argument Drewes
points out that Hamza quotes from the K;miy:-i sa6:dat which he
wrongly thought was the Persian abridgement of al-Ghaz:l;’s (d. 1111)
IAy:8 6ul<m al-d;n. But, the very fact that Hamza quotes from the K;miy:
is indicative of his competence in Persian; to suggest that his knowledge
of Persian was second hand is thus wide of the mark.
Shams al-D;n wrote numerous treatises found recently through the
efforts of local libraries and museums such as the Pusat Manuksrip
Melayu of the National Library of Malaysia, Perpustakaan Nasional
Indonesia and the Tanoh Abe Museum of Acheh. The late Ustaz Wan
11
Teuku Iskandar (ed.), De Hikajat Atjeh, Introduction.
12
Al-Attas, Reid and Johns suggested that it was likely that Hamza had picked
up Persian while studying here. In a more recent study, Christoph Marcinkowski
presents evidence of a Persian community in Shahr Nawi which was under the
Ayyutia; see his ‘Features of the Persian Presence in Southeast Asia’ in Imtiyaz
Yusuf (ed.), Measuring the Effects of Iranian Mysticism in Southeast Asia
(Bangkok: Iranian Culture Centre, 2004), 24–44.
13
G. W. J. Drewes and L. F. Brakel, The Poems of Hamzah Fansuri
(Dordrecht: Foris KITLV, Bibliotheca Indonesia 26, 1986), 14.
Shaghir Abdullah published a number of Shams al-D;n’s treatises in
several of his works. He had managed to locate about 30 works attached
to Shams al-D;n’s name. I managed to find 15,14 available at the Pusat
Manuskrip Melayu, National Library of Malaysia. Out of these I found
three manuscripts, of divergent quality, that have the same title: Eaqq al-
yaq;n f; 6aq;dat al-muAaqqiq;n. I have studied these manuscripts and
produced an annotated, critical edition of the text, with a translation
into English.15

A note on the MSS used
There exist three manuscripts of Eaqq al-yaq;n f; 6aq;dat al-muAaqqiq;n.
Two are available at the Pusat Manuskrip Melayu (Malay Manuscript
Centre) of the Malaysian National Library. The third is with the late
Ustaz Wan Shaghir,16 who romanized the text and had it published.17
The two copies at the Pusat Manuskrip Melayu are labeled as MS
2581(F) and MS 1556(N) in their catalogue.18 The former is the most
complete of the three, containing the Prologue, Introduction (muqad-
dima) and Ending (kh:tima) chapters. Details about the history of each
14
My efforts to discover the titles of the Shams al-D;n manuscripts in
Indonesia indicated by the late Ustaz failed. One of the reasons for this failure is
the arrangement of materials at the Perpustakaan Nasional (Perpusnas)
Indonesia Jakarta, namely by manuscript title to which the author name is not
attached. Since it is characteristic of Malay manuscripts that different authors use
the same title, it can make tracing a particular work very difficult. I hope future
scholars will be able to produce a new catalogue, including author name, for the
huge collection of manuscripts currently available at Perpusnas. The Tanoh Abe
Museum’s catalogue of manuscripts has recently been published thanks to the
efforts of Dr. Oman Fathurrahman. This can be seen on his blog: naskahkuno
.blogspot.com. Having checked with Perpusnas and Dr. Oman, I am able to
confirm that neither has the particular treatise being presented in this paper in
their manuscript collection.
15
Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’.
16
He passed away in April 2007. According to his students, his vast collection
of Malay manuscripts was donated to Akademi Tamaddun Melayu (ATMA),
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM). It is hoped that scholars there will
produce a catalogue of the collection for the benefit of future researchers.
17
Hj Wan Mohd. Shaghir Abdullah, al-Ma6rifa: Pelbagai Aspek Tasawuf Di
Nusantara (Kuala Lumpur: Khazanah Fathaniyah, 2004), i. 67–150. This book is
a diverse collection of romanized Jawi writings of many famous Malay Sufis.
18
Anonymous, Katalog Manuskrip Melayu di Pusat Manuskrip Melayu
(Kuala Lumpur: Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia, 2001), vol. iii.
of the manuscripts are available in my critical edition;19 the variants
noted therein are not presented in this paper.
THE STRUCTURE OF THE TREATISE, EAQQ

AL-YAQ>N

The treatise is intended to serve as a guide for the people of Acheh, to
enable them to follow in the footsteps of the verifiers (muAaqqiq<n). This
is needed, according to Shams al-D;n, because the people do not
understand the language of the verifiers (Arabic and Persian). Shams al-
D;n, being an able scholar, utilizes these sources and presents his findings
in the form of a guide, hence the title ‘The Certified Truth in regard to the
Faith of the Verifiers’. It is ‘certified’ in the sense that the seeking subject
unites with the sought object of knowledge at the end of the journey, thus
being able to certify it as true. The subject here is the Muslim individual
and the object is God. The faith of the verifiers indicates what is believed
by them in their visions of God and how they orient (tawajjuh) the eye of
their hearts in achieving that vision. The aim is to enable those who
follow these instructions to become verifiers themselves. Such is the
practical nature of the treatise that Shams al-D;n constantly mixes
theoretical discussions with practical hints and advice for the student
(3:lib). The treatise has eight chapters plus an introduction (muqa@dima)
and a concluding chapter (kh:tima). Detailed discussions of each chapter
can be found in ‘A Critical Edition’ and subsequent translation. Here, as
a way of indicating the content of the work, I list the chapter headings:
Muqaddima: On the aim of writing the treatise
On the terminologies used by the verifiers
On Non-entification (l: ta6y;n)
On He-ness (al-huwiyya)
On I-ness (al-aniya)
On the divine presences and their worlds (discussed in this article)
On the relations (al-nisba)
On the Divine Perfections (al-kam:l:t al-Il:hiyya)
On the Divine Nearness (al-qurb al-Il:hiyya)
Ending: Concerning recollection (dhikr), vigilant concentration (mur:qaba),
orientation towards (tawajjuh) and witnessing (mush:hada) of God.
Shams al-D;n concentrated upon the metaphysics prevalent in the

school of Ibn 6Arab;. Instead of delving into metaphysics straightaway,
19
Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, ch. 3, 126–30.
Shams al-D;n begins by showing how important it is to be on the path
towards achieving enlightenment and how knowledge of God is
considered to be compulsory for people, just as it is compulsory to
fulfil the other obligations of religion such as the five daily prayers.
He then goes on to give detailed explanations of some of the common
terms used by the verifiers in their explication of Islamic metaphysics.
The contrast between the words wuj<d and ‘adam, ‘:shiq and ma6sh<q,
‘ilm and ma6l<m is explained. The various denominators or modes of

wuj<d are described in some considerable detail, leading to a discussion
of our own wuj<d and how it is connected to wuj<d mu3laq.
The second chapter concerns the various entifications of God to the
three main levels: aAad;yya, w:Aidiya and waAda. The third chapter
concerns ‘He-ness’, i.e. God in His own Self. Shams al-D;n explains that
it is an unclear state and that we cannot know God at this level.
Proceeding from there, the only way of knowing God is through His
many divine names and attributes. The fourth chapter deals with the
concept of aniyya, the sheer existence of God by His essence. The fifth
chapter deals with the various levels of God’s presences. It is in this
chapter that Shams al-D;n shows his preference for MuAammad ibn
Shaykh Fa@l All:h al-Burh:np<r;’s (d. 1620) seven levels of God’s
presences. The sixth chapter explains the subtleties of God’s divine
names and attributes and their relation or affinity with the creature, and
discusses a few divine names and the division of the attributes into two
sorts, namely Bif:t al-jam:l and Bif:t al-jal:l. In the seventh chapter, on
the perfections of God, Shams al-D;n presents a complex discussion on
God’s perfections at the level of His essence and at the level of His
names. The eighth chapter deals with the topic of coming close to God,
treating in considerable detail the different ways of doing so—the
concepts fan:8, fan:8 f;-l- fan:8, baq:8, baq:8 bi-l-l:h and baq:8 bi-l-baq:8
are treated in considerable detail. The concluding chapter (kh:tima)
contains a discussion of practical aspects of Sufism. After a short
introduction on the virtues of dhikr, vigilant concentration (mur:qaba),
attentiveness towards God (tawajjuh) and witnessing (mush:hada),
Shams al-D;n goes on to explain each in separate sections within the
chapter, making it the longest. In the final few lines, he cautions the
reader that what he has written in this treatise are the secrets of God and
that they should only be divulged to the select few, lest the layperson
misunderstand God’s way.
The treatise is written in prose with quotations from various Sufi
figures, the verifiers (muAaqqiq<n).20 Apart from these, there are
20
For my account of the nature of these quotations, see Nasir, ‘A Critical
Edition’, ch. 4.
quotations also from the Qur8:n and Prophetic traditions (aA:d;th
nabawiyya). Shams al-D;n wrote the treatise on the pattern of the many
other Sufi treatises available in Arabic and Persian.
As can be seen above, the discussions clearly relate to Muslim
metaphysics from the school of theoretical Sufism of the Ibn 6Arab;
variety. Though it is heavy going at times, Shams al-D;n does present the
practical side of the discussion so as not to tax his readers unnecessarily
with technical jargon. I would argue that the treatise demonstrates

complexities in Malay metaphysical writings of the seventeenth century
not replicated later. No other treatise in the later Malay metaphysical
writings comes close to the high level and complexity of the discussions
found here, which probably led to misunderstandings of the work’s
contents. Al-Ran;r; (d. 1658), the scholar who originally came from
India and established himself in the court of the subsequent Sultan,
Iskandar II (d. 1641), had this to say about the work:
Syahdan adalah beberapa lagi banyak I8tiqad kufur dan dhalalah itu tersebut
didalam kitab karangan Shams al-D;n Sumatrani seperti: Kit:b Khirqah dan
Mir6:t al-muAaqqiq;n dan Eaqq al-yaq;n.21
The translation:
Thus some of many deviant and incorrect beliefs are contained in the books of
Shams al-D;n Sumatra8; such as Kit:b al-Khirqa (The Book of the Sufi Cloak),
Mir6:t al-muhaqqiq;n (The Mirror of the Verifiers) and Eaqq al-yaq;n (The Truth
of the Certainty).22
What is discussed here is Chapter 5 of the treatise, with annotations
and a complete translation into English.
ON THE PRESENCE OF GOD AT THE

DIFFERENT LEVELS AND THE VARIOUS
ENTIFICATIONS
According to Shams al-D;n the worlds (6:lam;n) are the locus of God’s
manifestation or theophany (tajall;), which occurs through His divine
names and attributes. The presence of God is thus the presence of His
divine names and attributes, not His essence, as nothing can contain His
essence. God’s essence is known (to an extent) through the becoming
21
Hj. Wan Mohd. Shaghir Abdullah, Khazanah Karya Pusaka Asia Tenggara
(Kuala Lumpur: Khazanah Fathaniyah, 1991), ii. 54.
22
See also: Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, 152.
manifest of His divine names and attributes. These places of manifesta-
tion are known as ‘world’ (6:lam). ‘2lam in Arabic means ‘signs’ or
‘symbols’, thus these signs or symbols point to God’s essence. However,
according to the specific terminology of Ibn 6Arab; and his followers,
6:lam means what is other than God (m: siw: All:h). The existence of
this world (6:lam) or worlds (6:lam;n) indicates the existence of the
essence of God. These 6:lam;n indicate the presence of God and are thus
known as the presence of the Divine (Aa@rat al-il:hiyya).

What about entification? Entification means to become any imaginable
entity. Chittick explains: ‘So God is an entity, as are the world and man.
Each is a particular entification and delimitation (taqy;d) which has been
assumed by Being as such, which is Nonentified (ghayr muta6ayyin) and
Nondelimited (mu3laq).’ Thus the presences are the entifications of
Being, or they are modes within which that Being manifests Itself.23
Shams al-D;n rightly outlines the various views regarding the Aadrat
al-il:hiyya. According to him some regard it as three levels, some five and
some seven. Most of Ibn 6Arab;’s students and followers would regard the
number of levels as five. This includes figures such as 4adr al-D;n al-
Qunaw; (d. 1274), Fakhr al-D;n al-6Ir:q; (d.1289), 6Abd al-Razz:q
K:sh:n; (d. 1335-6) and Mu8ayyad al-D;n Jand; (d. 1300).24 From where
then did Shams al-D;n get this idea of three levels? Looking at al-
Qunaw;’s teachings we find the three levels are the initial or most
fundamental ontological level of presences. According to al-Qunaw;,
‘although the levels are numerous, they are reducible to the Unseen, the
Visible and the Reality which comprehends the two’.25
Shams al-D;n was obviously unaware of al-Qunaw;’s view, given
that it is not mentioned either in the TuAfa of Burh:np<r; nor in the
many works of Hamza Fansuri. The five levels of divine presences are
also known as the levels of existence (mar:tib al-wuj<d) or the five
worlds (al-‘aw:lim al-khamsa). Beyond this level is the level called the
mist (al-‘am:8) or the abysmal darkness. As God cannot be known at this
point, none of the interpreters of the Ibn 6Arab; school actually talk about
it. When God is known it is already a level proceeding from that high
level. The differences in the verifiers’ view on whether they accept five
divine presences or six or seven is due to their accepting or expanding
these original five levels. Comparing al-Qunaw;’s view to Shams
23
William C. Chittick, ‘The Five Divine Presences,’ The Muslim World 72
(1982), 111.
24
Ibid, 120–2.
25
I 6j:z al-bay:n f; tafs;r umm al-Qur8:n (Hyderabad-Deccan: D:8irat al
Ma6:rif al-6Uthm:n;yya), 2nd edn., 1368/1949), 113, cited in Chittick, ‘The Five
Divine Presences’, 110.
al-D;n’s we find the other two levels are an expansion of al-Qunaw;’s
original five levels. Al-Qunaw;’s five divine presences are:
1. Presence of Knowledge or the Inner
2. Central Presence, the Perfect Man (encompasses both the Inner and the
Outer)
3. World of Sense Perception or the Presence of the Outer
4. World of Image-Exemplars (between the Central Presence and the Visible

World)
5. World of Spirits (between the Central Presence and Divine Unseen)
The Perfect Man embraces all four levels as he is the Central Presence,
which is between the four different levels.
According to Shams al-D;n there are seven levels of divine presences.
They are:
1. Level or presence of Non-entification, known as aAadiyya. God is not known
at this level as He is beyond any description. This level is known as His
innermost essence (kunh26 dh:t).
2. The level of Inclusive-Oneness (waAda).This is the world of God’s divine
predispositions. According to the TuAfa, this is the level pertaining to the
MuAammadan Reality. However Shams al-D;n does not signify it as such;
instead he explains that this is the level of God’s knowledge before it is
differentiated or particularized or specified. This is the Absolute Unseen level.
3. The level of Inclusive-Unity (w:Aidiyya). This is the level of God’s knowledge,
the level of His immutable entities (a6y:n th:bita).27 Unseen level.
26
kunh is an Achenese word meaning ‘innermost’, though sometimes
translated also as ‘ineffable’: see al-Attas, The Mysiticism of Hamzah Fansuri,
72, 161, 434.
27
Ibn 6Arab; was the first person to use this term, taken from various sources,
philosophical (Plato, Aristotle, Ibn S;n:) and theological (the Mu6tazila). By the
term ‘entity’, Ibn 6Arab; means reality and essence or quiddity; and ‘immutable’ is
a quality of the existence in the mind of something—like the existence in the
mind of the quiddity of the human being or of the concept of one-third—in
contrast to the existence of that which exists outside of the mind in time and
space—like the existence of some particular individual or of a concrete one-third
in the outside world. Thus, whenever Ibn 6Arab; uses the term ‘immutable
entities’, he indicates the existence of the intelligible world with the immutable
entities in it, which are the realities of things or their intelligible entities (see
Mu6j:m al-S<f;, 831–2). ‘Immutable entities’ is sometimes translated as
‘permanent archetypes’. At this level the entities are still within God’s knowledge
and have not taken on existence so that they emerge in the outside world. (See
further William C. Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-6Arab;’s
Metaphysics of Imagination [Albany: State University of New York, 1989],
83–8.)
4. The level of the world of Spirits. Relative Unseen level.
5. The level of the world of Image-Exemplars. Relative Unseen level.
6. The level of Bodies. Visible level.
7. The seventh level is the level of comprehensive Unity. It is the level of the
Most Perfect Man.28 This level encompasses all the other levels within it.
As we have seen above, in al-Qunaw;’s as well as Shams al-D;n’s (but
not Burh:np<r;’s) system and the other systems that follow, these divine

presences can be divided into roughly two broad categories, namely the
Unseen and the Visible. ‘Unseen’ indicates those things that do not
become apparent in this world. According to al-Qunaw; again, the
Unseen contains within it two levels and the Visible contains within it
three levels.
To Shams al-D;n there are seven levels of God’s presence. At each level
God has a corresponding sign or world. The presence of God, al-Aa@rat
al-il:hiyya, is one and the same—the levels are the way His presence
manifests. God manifests or discloses Himself through these various
levels and worlds in order for human beings to know Him. There is a
Aad;th often repeated in Sufi circles: ‘I was a hidden treasure and I loved
to be known, thus I created’. He is known through the various
manifestations that occur through these seven levels, according to
Shams al-D;n. The first corresponds to the level of God’s knowledge and
non-entification (l: ta6y;n) or exclusive-unity (aAadiyya). It is called
exclusive-unity because at this level it excludes any multiplicity. God’s
knowledge is known at this level only by God. God’s knowledge or the
immutable entities (a6y:n th:bita) are similar to the Divine Names of
God (al-asm:8 al-Ausn:) as all of creation is a name of God. This comes
about through the process of the effusion of the Most Holy (fay@ al-
aqdas) or the Unseen disclosure (tajall; ghayb;).
The first level or level of aAadiyya is also known as the level where no
entification takes place (l: ta6y;n). Thus He cannot be known at this
level. The only thing we know is that there is this level before He is
known. There are no worlds connected to this level as God is beyond all
descriptions, relations and attributes. He is not even connected to
absolute or non-delimited (mu3laq) connection (qayd). Is this level
similar to the level of the mist (al-‘am:8)? Al-J;l; (d. 1410) does not even
consider this level as aAadiyya. To him if a level is known as aAadiyya it
is already known and thus not al-‘am:8 which remains a mystery. Shams
al-D;n is clearly following al-Burh:np<r; here with his elaboration of
aAadiyya, in contrast to al-J;l; and other interpreters from the Ibn 6Arab;
school.
28
Eaqq al-yaq;n, ch. 5.
Shams al-D;n’s adaptation of al-Burh:np<r;’s system is not a mere
imitation. Rather, he joins to it his understanding of metaphysics from
various other verifiers, which he includes in his interpretation of al-
Burh:np<r;. In his explanation of the divine presences, Shams al-D;n
brings in the discussion of the Unseen and the Visible, which is not found
in the TuAfa, but which is very close to the method of explication of al-
J:m; (d. 1492) in his Naqd al-FuB<B. Another point worth mentioning
is that where the TuAfa is quite straightforward to comprehend,

Eaqq al-yaq;n is more difficult. Al-Burh:np<r; made it easier to
understand the connection between entification and the various divine
levels, unlike Shams al-D;n who separated the discussion into different
parts.29
How much of Shams al-D;n’s discussion is his own and how much
comes from al-Burh:np<r;? From the foregoing, it seems very clear that
the only similarity between the two is the number of levels they
distinguished. However, as we saw with al-Qunaw; above, the seven
levels are merely an expansion or separation of the original five; there is
nothing new that is mentioned beyond the original five. As we compare
the systems of Shams al-D;n and al-Qunaw;, we find that the level of
God’s essence which is unknowable is mentioned as a distinct level
although al-Qunaw; does not mention it as such. According to Chittick,
Sa6;d al-D;n al-Fargh:n; (d. ca. 700/1300), the disciple of al-Qunaw;,
was the first to have included this level in the system of five, making it
six.30 Al-Qunaw; also does not make a distinction between the level of
Inclusive-Oneness (waAda) and Inclusive-Unity (w:Aidiyya), using these
terms interchangeably or sometimes juxtaposing them.31 So if we were to
divide the first presence into two and add another level beyond it to
signify God’s non-entification level, then we would get the seven levels of
divine presences as accepted by both Shams al-D;n and Burh:np<r;.
ON THE REALITY OF THE PERFECT MAN

(AL-INS2N AL-K2MIL)
The idea of the Perfect Man and how it is perfectly demonstrated in the
figure of the Prophet is indicated throughout the work. Though Shams
al-D;n does not dedicate a separate section to detailed discussion of
this matter, it does seem that it is a central concept. The Perfect Man is
29
See Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, ch. 5, 91–2.
30
Chittick, ‘The Five Divine Presences’, 116.
31
Ibid.
God’s most perfect mirror (cf. the Aad;th cited earlier, ‘I was a hidden
treasure. . .’).
Shams al-D;n instead discusses the concept together with his
discussion of the divine presence in Chapter 5. The seventh presence is
the level where the Perfect Man is found. He unites within him all of the
worlds. He is al-Aa@rat al-j:m; 6a: the uniter of all within his being. Shams
al-D;n repeatedly emphasizes that the Perfect Man encompasses all five

divine presences. The first entification encompasses all the immutable
entities before they come to exist in the visible; it is also referred to as the
reality of the Perfect Man. The view that this level is also known as
the level of the Perfect Man is held by al-6Ir:q;, J:m; and al-Qunaw;. The
second presence refers to the visible world of spirits. Between this
presence and the next presence of the corporeal bodies there is the world
of image exemplars (6:lam al-mith:l). All five levels are included in the
Perfect Man, the logos, who gathers every aspect of these entifications
into a unity in himself. He is the mirror image of the non-entified Being.
He is created and uncreated at the same time. The reality of the Perfect
Man represents the metaphysical and cosmological principle that
embraces all of creation and is man’s ontological prototype.32
Unlike J:m;, Shams al-D;n does not discuss the idea of the Perfect Man
in relation to Ibn 6Arab;’s idea of man as the microcosm (6:lam Bagh;r) of
the macrocosm (6:lam kab;r).33 The relation of the Perfect Man to God is
like the relation between the lover (6:shiq) and the beloved (ma6sh<q).
In many places, Shams al-D;n leans very closely towards pantheism,
especially when he quotes from a Aad;th: ‘I have not manifested in
anything as My manifestation in man’.34 Even though the Perfect Man
may be the most perfect place of God’s disclosure, Shams al-D;n is very
clear in stating that the Perfect Man is still the slave of God. As he says:
There is no difference between the divine presence and the level of the Perfect
Man except that Divine presence is God’s presence and the level of the Perfect
Man is the level of the slave.35
In another place the concept of the Perfect Man is used in contrast to

the concept of animal-man (ins:n–hayaw:n). (See below, footnote 66,
32
The foregoing is summarized primarily from William C. Chittick and Peter
Lamborn Wilson, Fakhruddin 6Iraqi: Divine Flashes (New York: Paulist Press,
1982), 6–17.
33
6Abd al-RaAm:n ibn AAmad al-J:m;, Naqd al-nuB<B f; sharA Naqsh al-fuB<B
(ed. William C. Chittick; Tehran: Imperial Iranian Academy of Philosophy,
1977), 91.
34
Introduction to Eaqq al-yaq;n.
35
Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, ch. 5, 83.
for discussion of this concept.) According to Ibn 6Arab; the animal-man is
the representative of the Perfect Man in this world of bodies.36
The concept of the Perfect Man is normally associated with four main
figures: Shaykh al-Akbar MuAy; al-D;n Ibn 6Ar:b;, Shaykh SuAraward;
al-Ishr:q; (d. 1191) known as al-Hak;m al-Muta8allih, 6Abd al-Eaqq ibn
Ibr:h;m Ibn Sab8;n (d. 669/1270) and of course 6Abd al-Kar;m al-J;l;.37
According to al-Attas and more recently Riddell, Hamza Fansuri was
greatly influenced by al-J;l;’s conception of the Most Perfect Man.38 Thus

Hamza follows the Ibn 6Arab; school mainly through al-J;l;. I am not
quite sure how this came about but it gives us the impression that the
school of Ibn 6Arab; is divided according to the different figures and their
teachings of the Shaykh al-Akbar. This is contrary to the view of
Chittick, who after thirty years of studying Ibn 6Arab; and the main
figures associated with his teachings, has said that the differences
between these figures are minor.39 Therefore we can safely conclude that
there are different approaches used by these scholars in explicating the
teachings; some prefer prose and some poetry, and some touch upon one
particular aspect of the teachings more than others but there are no
substantial differences that can be seen amongst them.40 Coming back to
the issue of al-J;l;’s influence, we need to look deeper to find a well-
balanced answer. Looking at the discussion of the Perfect Man in al-J;l;’s
main work, we find that there are similarities to the teachings of Shams
al-D;n. Shams al-D;n regards the Perfect Man as having all the
comprehensive names within him. As he says:
The seventh level is the level of comprehensive unity, it is the level of the Perfect
Man for he is the one who unites all the worlds within him in actuality and in
potentiality. The world of man and animals are in actuality and not
potentiality.41
36
See Su6:d al-Hak;m, Mu6jam al-4<f; (Beirut: Dandarah, 1981), 156. For a
translation of the relevant parts of the text, see Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, 85 ff.,
125.
37
Y<suf Zaydan, al-Fikr al-B<f; ‘inda 6Abd al-Kar;m al-J;l; (Beirut: D:r al-
Nahda al-6Arabiyya, 1988), 66.
38
Al-Attas, The Mysticism of Hamzah al-Fansuri; Peter Riddell, Islam and the
Malay-Indonesian World: Transmission and Responses (Singapore: Horizon
Books, 2001), 115.
39
William C. Chittick, ‘The Perfect Man as the Prototype of the Self in the
Sufism of Jami’, Studia Islamica 49 (1979), 140. I would like to thank Prof.
Chittick for making this article available to me.
40
Al-J;l; made the concept of Perfect Man his main concern in his teaching of
the Shaykh al-Akbar’s ideas.
41
Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, ch. 5, 81.
Though the Perfect Man is the complete logos of God and contains all
of the creations in their potential form, the Perfect Man lacks two
particular qualities, which makes him different from God. The two
missing qualities are necessary existence and the quality of total
independence (ghin: mu3laq). This point is mentioned in Shams
al-D;n’s other works, for example ‘Regarding the Loftiness of Man’
(Pada Menyatakan Kemuliaan Insan).

ANNOTATED TRANSLATION:
CHAPTER 5: ON THE PRESENCEOF GOD 4 2
AND ITS (CORRESPONDING) WORLDS
O seeker, May God beautify you in the two abodes. It is proper for you
to know and become familiar with all of God’s presences (Aa@r:t) and
their corresponding worlds (6:lam).
Surely all the verifiers had named it as presence because God’s essence
and existence pervades all the worlds, which in turn are His Self-
disclosure (tajall;) and places of His Self-manifestation (Cuh<r) from
eternity without beginning (azal) to eternity without end (abad). As God
says in the Qur8:n [41. 53]: ‘Is it not enough [O MuAammad] that your
Lord does witness all things?’ Shaykh MaAm<d Sh:bist:r;43[. . .] said:
‘He that knows ‘‘the Truth’’44 and to whom Unity is revealed/Sees at the
first glance the light of very Being’.45 Thus all the places of His Self-
disclosure are termed by [the verifiers] as 6:lam because the 6:lam
according to the people of God is (actually) indicating that which is
different from His essence, attributes and divine names.
For surely God is known and made familiar through the apparentness
of His essence by all of His attributes and Divine Names in their places of
42
The divine presence is the various worlds, which are the loci of the
manifestation of God’s divine Names, see ‘al-Aa@rat al-il:hiyya’ in Mu6jam al-
4<f;, 327. The Divine Presence of God or Aa@ra is a term made more systematic
by al-Qunaw;. Ibn 6Arab; does not use the term as systematically as al-Qunaw;,
whose followers developed the idea further. See William C. Chittick, ‘The Five
Divine Presences, from al-Qunawi to al-Qaysari’, The Muslim World, 72 (1982),
107–28.
43
On the influence of Sh:bist:r; in Shams al-D;n’s writings see Nasir, ‘Persian
Quotations’, 287–91.
44
In other words, one of the verifiers.
45
E. H. Weinfeld (transl.), Sa6d al-D;n MaAm<d Shabist:r;, Gulsh:n-i r:z. The
Mystic Rose Garden (Lahore: Islamic Book Foundation, 1880), 6, line 84
(Persian); 8 (English).
being apparent. Hence [these places] are known as worlds because of His
names which are distinct from each other by their specific places of being
apparent. As God says in the Qur8:n [15. 85]: ‘And We had not created
the seven heavens and the seven earths except bi-l-Aaqq’. The Holy
Prophet is reported to have said: ‘Whoever has seen me surely they have
seen God’.46 Shaykh Hamza Fansuri [. . .] said:
As you look at cotton and cloth

Both are the same but with different names
My oneness requires the Outward and the Inward
That is the knowledge, the result of action.47
Now to some verifiers, the presence of God has seven presences, to
some others there are five,48 and to [still] others there are three
presences.49
46
According to Schimmel this saying is quoted in Far;d al-D;n al-A33:r’s
D;w:n-i qaB:8id wa ghazaliyy:t (ed. Sa6;d Naf;s;; Tehran: n.p., 1339 sh (1960),
50. See Annemarie Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam (Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press, 1975), 223. Unfortunately IIUM Gombak
library does not have this source. However, this Aad;th is found in J:mi6 al-Bagh;r,
where the text has an additional sentence: ‘for surely Satan cannot become like
me’. See 6Abd al-RaAm:n ibn Ab; Bakr al-Suy<3;, al-J:mi6 al-Bagh;r f; aA:d;th al-
bash;r al-naC;r (Cairo: Ma3ba6 MuB3af: al-B:b; al-Ealab;, 1982), no. 20645,
vii. 32.
47
See poem no. III in W. M. Abdul Hadi Tasawwuf Yang Tertindas. (Jakarta:
Paramadina, 2002), 355.
48
According to al-Qunaw; they are: the Divine, spiritual, imaginal, sensory
and all-comprehensive. A brief statement by al-Qunaw; may be quoted here:
‘God’s entification as Oneness is the mode (i6tib:r) which follows Nonentification
and Nondelimitation. After this Oneness follows the mode of His knowing
Himself through Himself in Himself... This mode opens the door to other modes
[i.e. prepares the way for further entifications]... So to the relation of Knowledge
belongs the relation of Inclusive-Oneness, which follows Exclusive-Unity, which
in turn follows the Unknown, Nonentified Nondelimitation’. See Chittick, ‘The
Five Divine Presences’, 116 for a further summary of al-Qunaw;’s view. Chittick
has dedicated several writings to al-Qunaw;: ‘The Last Will and Testament of Ibn
Arabi’s Foremost Disciple and Some Notes on its Author’, Sophia Perennis 4/1
(1998): 43–58; ‘The Circle of Spiritual Ascent according to al-Qunaw;’ in
P. Morewedge (ed.), Neoplatonism and Islamic Thought (Albany: State
University of New York Press, 1992), 179–209; ‘4adr al-D;n al-K.<naw;’, EI2
art.; ‘Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi on the Oneness of Being’, International
Philosophical Quarterly, 21 (1981): 171–84.
49
They can be reduced to the Unseen, the Visible and Man. These are the three
basic entifications of God. See Chittick, ‘The Five Divine Presences’, 112.
As for those who say there are seven presences: one of them is Shaykh
MuAammad ibn Shaykh Fa@l All:h [. . .]:50
The first divine presence: The presence of Non-Entification,51 Non-
delimited and Exclusive-Unity. Hence for this level of Non-Entification
and Exclusive Unity there is no worlds (6:lam), that is to say, at this level
there is no apparentness of [a] world because God’s existence here is
elevated beyond any relations, descriptions (nu6<t) and high above any

attribute and from any limitation (qayd), even from Non-delimited
connection (qayd i3l:q). This is the level where no entification occurs
(mafhum salab ta6ayyun). Hence it is known as His innermost essence
(kunh dh:t) to the verifiers. It is higher than all the other levels;
consequently all other levels are beneath it.52
50
This reference to al-Burh:np<r; is based upon his al-TuAfa al-mursala il: r<A
al-Nab; which he wrote in 1590. See A. H. Johns’ monograph, The Gift
Addressed to the Spirit of the Prophet (Canberra: Australian National University,
1965; Oriental Monograph Series 1), 128–49, for the Arabic text and English
translation; see also the text of the TuAfa romanized and translated into Malay
by Wan Shaghir in his al-Ma6rifa, ii. 9–26. On al-Burh:np<r;, see MuAammad
Am;n ibn Fa@l All:h MuAibb;, Khul:Bat al-:th:r (Cairo: D:r al-Kit:b al-Isl:m;,
1980), 110–11; 6All:ma 6Abd al-Eayy b. Fakhr al-Din al-Easan;, Nuzhat al-
khaw:3ir wa baAjat al-mas:mih wa-l-naw:Cir (Karachi: N<r MuAammad, 1976),
iv. 363. While al-Burh:np<r; was an adherent of the Chishti 3ar;qa, Shams al-D;n
does not indicate in the works studied here adherence to any 3ar;qa. For al-
Burh:np<r;’s Chishti connection, see Sayyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, A History of
Sufism in India (Delhi: Munshiran Manoharlal Publishers, 1983), ii. 283–6 and
343–5. See also William Chittick, ‘Notes on Ibn al-Arabi’s Influence in the
Subcontinent’, The Muslim World 82/3–4 (July–Oct. 1992): 230–1. For the
influence of the seven levels of being on Buton in the south-east of the island of
Sulawesi, see Abdul Rahim Yunus, ‘NaC:riyah ‘‘Martabat tujuh’’ f; niC:m al-
Maml:kah al-Butuniyyah’, Studia Islamica 2/1 (1995): 95–110. The ideas in
TuAfa spread through the various translations of it into Javanese.
51
Al-Qunaw; does not indicate this to be a proper level as it cannot be
conceptualized. It is the ‘am:8, the blindness which we do not have knowledge of.
For al-Qunaw;’s view, see the articles mentioned in n. 48 above. For Ibn 6Arab;’s
view, see Mu6jam al-4<f;, 820–6 for references to the FutuA:t and elsewhere.
Izutsu writes: ‘...Ibn 6Arabi calls the Absolute in this aspect ‘‘ama’’ or the
‘‘abysmal darkness’’ and, quoting al-K:sh:n;: ‘The Divine Essence in the state of
Unity before it manifests itself in the plane of the Names remains in an abysmal
darkness’. Toshihiko Izutsu, A Comparative Study of the Key Philosophical
Concepts in Sufism and Taoism, Ibn Arabi and Lao-Tzu, Chuang-Tzu (Tokyo:
Keio Institute of Cultural and Linguistic Studies, 1966), ch. 2 ‘The Abysmal
Darkness’, 17.
52
Compare this description of the first level with the Arabic text of the TuAfa
in A. H. Johns, The Gift, 130, x4. The similarities are remarkable. It seems very
The second divine presence: The level of Absolute Inclusive-Oneness,
[which is] unseen. The world is the divine state (sha8n) of His essence in
His knowledge. Hence all things at this level are those objects of
knowledge (ma6l<m) which are obscure (mubham) and relatively
undifferentiated (mujmal), [and] which are not created.53
The third divine presence: The level of Inclusive-Unity, [which is]
unseen. The world is the world of the immutable entities which are

within the world of God. Hence all things at this level are the objects of
knowledge which are both specific (mu6ayyan) and relatively differ-
entiated (mufaBBal).54
The fourth divine presence: The level of the Relative Unseen (ghayb
mu@:f) which accompanies the Absolute Unseen (ghayb mu3laq). This
world is the world of spirits. Hence all things at this level are those
objects of knowledge which are ‘outside’ the knowledge of God
[meaning, not connected and not specific], which are created, granted
to the external, which do not have form, colour, nor reach the outer
senses.55
The fifth divine presence: the level of the Relative Unseen which is
accompanied by the level of Absolute Witnessing (Aa@rat al-shah:da al-
mu3laqa). The world is the Imaginal world (6:lam al-mith:l). Hence all
things at this level are those objects of knowledge which are specific,
relative, created and obtained in the external, which have bodily form
but do not reach the outer senses.56
likely that Shams al-D;n translated this particular passage and included it in his
work here.
53
Compared to the first divine presence which seems to be a direct translation
from the TuAfa, here it seems that Shams al-D;n used his own formulation to
describe the second divine presence. Apart from calling this level the level of first
entification, al-Burh:np<r; also calls it the level of the MuAammadan reality (al-
Aaq;qa al-MuAammadiyya). For the TuAfa’s original Arabic text see A. H. Johns,
TuAfa, 130. This is the level where the immutable entities are found as objects of
knowledge.
54
The external entities (al-a6y:n al-kh:rija) are found here at this level. ‘In the
cosmos the divine names are relatively differentiated (mufaBBal), while in man
they are relatively undifferentiated (mujmal), see William C. Chittick, Sufi Path
of Knowledge, 17.
55
‘The fourth level is the world of Spirits, it is the expression of the pure
engendered existents (al-ashy:8 al-kawniyya al-mujarrada). The simpleness (al-
bas;3a) which is apparent upon its essence and upon its exemplars (amth:lu-h:)’,
A. H. Johns, The Gift, 131 x5.
56
‘The fifth level is the level of the Imaginal world. It is the expression
regarding the subtle composite engendered existents, which do not accept
particularities nor division and rending nor mending’. Ibid, 131.
The sixth divine presence: The level of the Relative Unseen which is
connected to the level of Absolute Witnessing. This world is the world of
bodies. Hence every object of knowledge at this level is perceptible
(maAs<s)57 to the internal senses and [also] specific and attached to the
outer senses; [it is] created and obtained by the external which has bodily
forms.58
The seventh divine presence: The level of Comprehensive Unity
(j:m; 6a) for all the other presences from the Relative Unseen whose

world is the world of spirits, the world of the unseen (6:lam al-ghayb), the
imaginal world, the world of bodies.59 For the Relative Unseen also is
the world of bodies.60 Hence at this level of Comprehensive Unity is the
Most Perfect Man (al-ins:n al-k:mil61), for he is the one who unites all
the worlds within him in actuality (fi6l) and potentiality (quwwa). The
world of animal-man [see note 66 below] here is only in actuality but not
potentiality.
Hence all things at this level are objects of knowledge [as objects
having some being], which are [also existing] outside of God’s knowl-
edge, which are obscure, specific, relatively undifferentiated and
relatively particularized, which are created, not created, without a
form, have forms with colour, without colour, [which are] sensible and
non-sensible objects.
As for the Absolute Unseen whose world is the [divine] states which
are intellectual (‘ilm;) signs of God’s knowledge of His essence and His
attributes, and all existents in which there are no differences between
them. They are relatively undifferentiated from the objects of divine
knowledge. This level is known as Inclusive-Oneness and the
MuAammadan Reality. Its reality is the coming together of the outward
essence of God with all of His perfect attributes. This is the presence of
the Necessary existence at the level of His Self-disclosure with the
attribute of unity. Thus He sees Himself as Inclusive Oneness and
57
In Wan Saghir: maAb<s. I think this is a copyist’s error.
58
‘The sixth level is the level of the world of bodies and it is the expression
regarding the gross composite engendered existents which accept particularities
and division’. Johns, The Gift, 131.
59
‘The seventh level is the level of gathering-together for the entire known
levels, the luminous, al-waAda, al-w:hidiyya and the other divine Self-disclosure,
which is the human being’. Ibid, 131.
60
In the original, this sentence is repeated: another copyist’s error.
61
Al-Jurj:n; defines the level of the Perfect Man as ‘an expression regarding
the entire divine and creational levels from the universal and particular intellects
and souls and the levels of nature and others (which is) a descent (tanazzul) of the
existent. It is also called the blinding level (al-martaba al-‘am:8iyya)’, Sayy;d
Shar;f al-Jurj:n;, al-Ta6r;f:t (Beirut: World of Books, 1996), 262.
Exclusive-Oneness. At this level, the Self-disclosure of His attributes of
knowledge is united with the objects of knowledge so that He sees
Himself as uniting knowledge and what is known i.e. the object of
knowledge.
As for the presence of the Absolute Unseen: its sign is the sign of the
immutable entities, which are the signs of His knowledge of His essence,
all of His attributes, and upon all existents which (come to exist through)

the path of details, which makes them distinct from each other. Its many
particularized details (tafB;l) are through the objects of (divine) knowl-
edge. This presence/level is thus termed by the verifiers Inclusive-Unity
and it is the reality of man (Aaqiqat ins:n) meaning Adam [. . .] and of all
of us. Thus the reality of man meaning Adam [. . .] is the place of
gathering of His perfect attributes, His essence and all of His beautiful
names.
As for the Relative Unseen presence: its world is the world of spirits,
which are the details from all existents meaning all created things, which
are bodiless, non-composite. It becomes manifest upon their essences and
their types.
As for the Relative Unseen presence: its world is the Imaginal world
which are signs from all existents, i.e. from all created things, which are
subtle (la3;f) and composite, which do not receive [subdivision into]
quarters, damage (fus<q), and do not meet.
As for the Relative Unseen presence: its world is the world of bodies
which is the sign from all existents i.e. from all created things, which are
composite, gross (kath;f), which receive division or can be divided to
quarter or half etc.
As for the comprehensive presence of all the presences: its world is the
world of gathered-together meaning, the signs from gathering of the
divine presences and all the engendered (kiy:n;)62 level, which is similar
to the divine. Thus there is no difference between the divine presence and
the level of the Perfect Man, except that the divine presence is the
presence of God while the level of the Perfect Man is the level of the
slave.
As for all of the stated levels, from the level of Inclusive-Oneness to the
level of man or animal-man (ins:n hayw:n), all of them are surely the
62
According to Chittick (Sufi Path of Knowledge, 41), ‘The engendered things
are the existents or the acts, the creatures which have been brought into existence
by the Divine Command ‘‘Be’’ (kun) and which will pass out of existence when
their stay in this world is over. Many names are attributed to them. Every noun
that denotes something existing in the cosmos in every language in the world is a
name of an engendered thing’.
Self-disclosure of the Real’s Being, Self-manifestation of His existence,
and [they] are His garments (lib:s).
Then there is the level of the Perfect Man, the level of self-disclosure of
animal-man, the level of self-manifestation and the level of his
adornments. The first of the seven levels is the level of Non-
Entification, Self-disclosure and Self-manifestation. The six other levels
are levels of Entification, Self-disclosure and Self-manifestation. Two of
the six levels are called inner Self-disclosure63 and inner Self-manifesta-

tion, that is to say, they are called the presence of God’s predispositions
or divine states and they are called that presence whose world is the
immutable entities. The other four levels are called outward Self-
disclosure64 and outward Self-manifestation, which are the presence
which has as its worlds the world of spirits, the Imaginal world and the
world of bodies, and the world of the Perfect Man or the world of
animal-man.
Firstly, the level which is known as Non-Entification, Exclusive-Unity,
the most unseen of the unseen (ghayb al-ghuy<b), does not have worlds,
as also the level of Absolute Unseen (ghayb mu3laq) does not. Second, the
level of Inclusive-Oneness whose world is the (divine) predispositions or
states. Third, the level of Inclusive-Unity whose world is the world of the
immutable entities. Surely it is called Exclusive-Unity by the verifiers
because He is the One who fixed His essence through His glory.
And surely it is named by them as Inclusive-Unity because that
Inclusive-Unity is none but all the attributes and all the divine names.
The attributes and the divine names are nothing but the state of the
Essence at this level of Inclusive-Unity. Shaykh Jam:l al-D;n ibn IsA:q
[. . .] said: ‘A part of men is a copy of the world and another part is the
copy of God surely’.65 As the statement regarding the oneness of God is
clear, it is proper to know and to become familiar with the differences
that all the worlds of the Divine Presence of God have, with respect to
His Oneness. The differences between the worlds of the Divine Presence
with God are not hidden from the knowers or from the ignorant.
The Oneness of God is seen at all levels of the worlds of God’s
presence. For surely the level of Inclusive-Oneness (waAda), which is the
MuAammadan reality, whose world in its predisposition is the
63
Also known as tajall; ghayb; or the most holy effusion, where the first
entification takes place. This is God’s Self-knowledge. See al-Qunaw; on Being:
William C. Chittick, ‘4adr al-D;n Qunaw; on the Oneness of Being’,
International Philosophical Quarterly 21 (1981), 179.
64
Regarded as tajall; al-shah:d; by Shams al-D;n or as al-fay@ al-muqaddas by
al-Qunaw; (ibid, 180).
65
I have not been able to trace this quotation.
metaphorical symbol of the level of Exclusive-Unity (aAadiyya), which is
the reality of God. For God does not have any world and form in actual
fact. Thus the level of Inclusive-Unity (w:Aidiyya) whose reality is the
reality of man also has a world, which is the world of the immutable
fixed entities.
Hence the world of spirits is the form of the reality of man. The world
of bodies is the form of the Imaginal world; the Perfect Man or animal-
man (ins:n hayw:n66) is the form of the world of bodies. Now whatever

the verifiers have mentioned here as part of God’s oneness does not mean
that it does not come to manifest. Therefore the manifestation of
anything by stating [at the same time] that it is divine at the level of its
existence and reality, even if there are differences at the level of
entification, would still not necessitate its manyness [in essence] from
[the viewpoint] of the Most Perfect Verifier who received guidance from
the Real.
It is necessary for the knower to become familiar with all the divine
presences of God and the corresponding worlds so that, through this
knowledge, he may be able to achieve the title of the most perfect
knower (‘:rif k:mil mukammil). Surely anyone who knows as much
would not commit a mistake or an error in his gnosis of God. As God
says in the Qur8:n [41. 53]: ‘We will show them our signs in the horizons
and in themselves.’ Al-Ghaz:l; [. . .] said: ‘It has become clear upon you
66
‘Animal-man is one of the genus of humanness. He demonstrates the reality
of the world only. Thus he is the form of the world. This is in contrast to the
Perfect Man who is added to the total realities of the world [and] the total
realities of the Absolute Real. Surely the Perfect Man is upon two forms [the
form of the world and the form of the Absolute Real]—and he [animal-man] is of
the totality of animals, his level is [similar to] the level of the monkey from the
[view of the] Perfect Man. Ibn 6Arab; says: ‘‘Animal-man is the successor of the
Perfect Man. He is the outer form of which all the realities of the world are
united or brought together. The Perfect Man is he who is added to this assembly
of realities of the world [and] the realities of the Absolute Real.’’ Surely the
Perfect Man is contrary to the animal-man in his properties: for the animal-man
nourishes himself through the nourishment of the animals [i.e. food and drink]
and these are also for his perfection and growth. [However,] for the Perfect Man
[he] nourishes [himself] through divine nourishment; not what is used by the
animal-man; and they are: that which pertains to the sciences of thought [which
will not nourish the animal-man] and unveiling (kashf), taste (dhawq) and
correct thinking.’ See Su6:d al-Eak;m, Mu6jam al-B<f;, 156. This is a term
associated with Ibn 6Ar:b; and indicates that Shams al-D;n had access to his
Fut<A:t al-Makkiyya. I could not find the term either in the extant work of
Hamza Fansuri or in al-Burh:np<r;’s TuAfa.
by the Divine presences and the worlds being apparent to you’.67
Mawl:n: 6Abd al-Kar;m al-J;l; [. . .] said: ‘Our perfection [lies] in
comprehending all the levels of existence by perception. [For,] when you
do not differentiate the levels, where then does the differentiation exist?
Thus, when you name [each of the levels] with a specific name [for each],
it is permissible [that you do so]’.68
And God guides with certified proofs. And God knows best.
67
I have not been able to locate in al-Ghaz:l;’s works the words here
attributed to him.
68
What is meant here is that, for the verifiers, there is nothing in existence
except God and thus that is the Being that they see at all levels of existence.
Indeed, they do not perceive many of the levels as they are witnessing only the
Absolute One permeating the whole of existence.

Published-Presence of God

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Published-Presence of God

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Islamic Studies 21:2 (2010) pp. 213–234 doi:10.

PRESENCE OF GOD ACCORDING TO EAQQ

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF SHAMS AL-DĪN

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

THE STRUCTURE OF THE TREATISE, EAQQ

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Shams al-D;n concentrated upon the metaphysics prevalent in the

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

ON THE PRESENCE OF GOD AT THE

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

ON THE REALITY OF THE PERFECT MAN

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

In another place the concept of the Perfect Man is used in contrast to

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

Downloaded from http://jis.oxfordjournals.org at Universiti Brunei Darulssalam on July 12, 2010

You might also like