As is affirmed and corroborated both by many predictive allusions, ¹ and numerous exacting scholars, and his works, the Risale-i Nur, in which are solved hundreds of religious, scholarly, and sufistic questions, in respect of his scholarly personality and his way of service Bediuzzaman Said Nursi was a regenerator of religion and a solver of mysteries and difficulties. He was correct in all matters and disclosed the ‘straight path,’ which is direct and free of danger. He was also a guide who solved for the people of this age at the end of time, and in particular for Muslims, their religious, worldly, social, and political problems.

The above description is not exaggeration in reference to Bediuzzaman and his Risale-i Nur; it is accurate and correct. For the facts have been proven with sound evidence. It is enough to study the Risale-i Nur once in order to prove my assertion, on condition it is understood and the reader has some knowledge of the Islamic sciences.

While the fact is this, it has been seen and is to be seen that Muslims do not truly understand and know Bediuzzaman’s person and way, and the Risale-i Nur, his culture and knowledge, or they have not grasped their nature and reality. So much so that even many well-known and distinguished scholars of religion consider the Risale-i Nur to be a repetition of the traditional questions of kalâm and the fundamentals of belief. They therefore suppose the Risale-i Nur and the original, most valuable truths it contains to be knowledge that has long since been available. Whereas it is completely the opposite of this. Just as such a view and approach is not based on investigation, so it is deceptive and does not go beyond being a supposition taking one away from the truth.

Yes, those who study the Risale-i Nur closely know that its most original side and salient characteristic distinguishing it from the style and methods of former works of logic and ‘ilm al-kalâm, is its proving the reality, elevated quality and naturalness of the questions and truths of Islamic belief within the matters themselves, evincing no need whatsoever for anything outside of them. I claim that this is a distinctive feature particular to the Risale-i Nur which has no predecessor. In addition, the Risale-i Nur weighs up on the scales of reason, understanding, and perception, the questions of Islam and belief, and particularly all the matters related to the fundamentals of belief, and has the capacity to satisfy and convince the human faculties.

Thus, since the true nature of the Risale-i Nur was not understood and known to the desired degree, despite being distinguished by the above characteristics as an inspired work, foremost its author, Ustad Bediuzzaman Hazretleri, published it at the outset with various striking names, in order to attract attention to them. Names like Asâ-yi Mûsa (The Staff of Moses), Zülfikâr, Tilsimlar Mecmuasi (The ‘Mysteries’ —lit. ‘Talisman’— Collection), Siracü’n-Nûr (The Light-Giving Lamp).

Secondly: He wrote that there are numerous predictions about the Risale-i Nur, that is, allusions informing that Bediuzzaman and these works would appear at this time, and he had them published in the collection Sikke-i Tasdik-i Gaybî (The Ratifying Stamp of the Unseen Collection).

Thirdly: For the same purpose he recorded some of the instances of grace and Divine assistance that were manifested in the work of publishing the Risale-i Nur, whether in hand-written copies or in other forms, and had them published.

Despite all these activities, one cannot say that the Risale-i Nur and its elevated truths have received the attention they deserve. Many things have prevented scholars, and particularly religious scholars, being drawn to it, not allowing them to appreciate its worth.

Thus, I want in this Symposium to rend the veil of familiarity that hinders chiefly the religious scholars, to which they have long since become accustomed, that is, to dispel their false assumption that “it is something we know about. It addresses not us but the young people of this time, and is useful for them.” In the hope of banishing some of those things which prevent them directing their attention towards it, I want to present my paper “Bediuzzaman and the Mysteries of Religion.” Success is only from God Almighty.

The dictionary meaning of the word ‘tilsim’ does not refer to anything specific. It has generally been thus in the dictionaries and lexicons. However, it is a word that has been used occasionally in a technical sense with an allegorical or allusive meaning by literary figures and sufis, such as in the title Esrar-i Mutsalsim (The Talismanic Mysteries). As a word referring to something vague, like ‘elixir’, it may also be an expression with a meaning like ‘transmuting earth into gold.’

Bediuzzaman occasionally used the word ‘tilsim’ (here translated as ‘mystery’) in his works in the technical or allegorical sense, referring to “obscure meanings which are difficult to disclose and solve.” For example, in the Seventh Word “which solves the obscure riddle (talisman) of creation;” in the Eighth Word, “... solve this world’s talisman;” in the Eleventh Word, “If you want to understand a little about the talisman of the wisdom of the world and the riddle of man’s creation...;” and in the Thirtieth Word, “As the key to the Divine Names, which are hidden treasures, the ‘I’ is also the key to the locked talisman of creation; it is a problem-solving riddle, a wondrous talisman.” The word recurs in many places of the Risale-i Nur in this sense.

The word ‘tilsim’ was also given to the fact that the Risale-i Nur discloses a number of obscure truths of religion, the Qur’an, and Hadiths, which are difficult to solve, and this is our chief subject. That is, the fact that numerous obscure matters contained in the Qur’an and Hadith, the sacred sources of the Islamic religion, and in the science of kalâm and sufism, and other works of Islam, which are sorts of interpretations of those sacred sources, —matters rational understanding of which is difficult, were completely solved in the Risale-i Nur. This is a matter of the very greatest importance.

We see that Bediuzzaman first noted these down in his defence speeches in Eskisehir Court, in 1935:

“There is nothing in the universe more important than the mystery of belief (iman), which is the supreme question of the universe and the greatest riddle (tilsim) in the creation of the world, that belief could made a tool of it. God forbid! Members of the Court! If this tortuous imprisonment concerned only my worldly life and my person, you can be sure that I would continue to be silent as I have these past ten years. But since it concerns the eternal life of many people and the Risale-i Nur, which expounds and solves of the mighty riddle (tilsim) of the universe, if I had a hundred heads and every day one was cut off, I still would not give up this mighty mystery...” ²

In various places in the Risale-i Nur, he writes that the Risale-i Nur has solved many mysteries of religion and that the works should be applauded from this point of view. It is appropriate to mention a few of these passages. In order, they are in Sözler (The Words), Mektûbat (Letters), Lem’alar (The Flashes Collection), Sualar (The Rays Collection), and following these, in Barla Lahikasi, Kastamonu Lahikasi, and the first and second volumes of Emirdag Lahikasi. A few of the most important of these, without following the order, are given below. ³

Thus, in many places in the Risale-i Nur, its author, Bediuzzaman, stated completely sincerely and comfortably that the Risale-i Nur has solved and disclosed hundreds of obscure matters rational understanding of which is difficult. And these are not merely unsupported claims; he is able to prove categorically what he says, because for evidence he ascribes primarily to the Qur’an itself the disclosures the Risale-i Nur has made and its solving of the mysteries of religion. Then he says, being a shining mirror of the Qur’an, this aspect of the Risale-i Nur is a ray of the Qur’an at this time, manifested in its mirror. Similarly, in order to prove how the Risale-i Nur has proved these aspects of the world and religion that are mysteries, he wrote the following at the beginning of the work he published under the title of Tilsimlar Mecmuasi (The Mysteries Collection), referring to universal subjects and treatises:

“Through the effulgence of the Qur’an of Miraculous Exposition, which solves the vast and obscure riddle of the universe, the Risale-i Nur has solved and disclosed and proved and elucidated hundreds of those riddles and mysteries of the Qur’an, and the most significant part of them is included in this ‘Mysteries Collection.’”

It was for this reason that we chose ‘Bediuzzaman and the Mysteries of Religion’ as the title of this paper. Only, I have not chosen to collect together the long treatises as Bediuzzaman did in The Mysteries Collection in order to prove his assertions in this matter, I have preferred another method. I want to bring together the most important and clearest of each of the hundreds of matters found in various places in the Risale-i Nur and the evidences that prove and corroborate each other, and listing them according to their degree, perform the service of further elucidating, commenting on, and completing them. Furthermore, how were all the questions that are solved in the Risale-i Nur explained, set out, and expressed in the Arabic originals and books of former Islamic writers, written previously to the Risale-i Nur? This will also be mentioned briefly, so that the matters the Risale-i Nur solved will become completely clear, and being known, it will make understood the extent of Bediuzzaman’s knowledge, and his way and the service he performed, as well as his ‘station’ and the ways in which he was a Regenerator of Religion.

The opinions of professors of religion who have carried out particular research on this subject, support the view that the way of the Risale-i Nur is a “new method in the science of kalâm.” Two of these eminent scholars are Prof. Dr. Muhsin ‘Abdulhamid (Professor of Qur’anic exegesis and kalâm in Baghdad University), and Prof. Ahmad ‘Abdurrahim al-Sayih (Professor of ‘Aqida and philosophy in the Faculty of Usul al-Din in al-Azhar University).

These two learned scholars have written articles setting out their ideas on the subject. Prof. Muhsin ‘Abdulhamid’s was published in Arabic in the magazine Nur-The Light, which is published in Istanbul, in the January, February, March (1995) number. Prof. al-Sayih has published two articles, one of which was published independently in Arabic. His second is in the book of the 1992 International Symposium on Bediuzzaman. We may also learn of the gist of the matter from the author himself.

Before explaining it, however, we should answer a question: Is the method by which, through the effulgence of the Qur’an, the Risale-i Nur solves “the obscure riddles” of the mysteries of religion and the universe a method followed by the science of kalâm?

The Answer: At once and most definitely we say: No! For the traditional science of kalâm had a classic form and method, and being based on material, rational principles, mostly used the weapons the sceptical philosophers hostile to religion themselves had developed, or accepting to be unshakeable their laws and rules, tried to prove the matters of Islamic belief with these ‘outside’ evidences. Bediuzzaman therefore considered a kalâm method of this sort to be defective. However, he accepted that in former times, the science of kalâm had defended the tenets of Islamic belief and had performed important functions, particularly in the matter of proving God’s necessary existence. ⁴

We may learn from Bediuzzaman himself the nature of the difference between the methods of kalâm and the principles of the other Islamic philosophers, which addressed only the reason, and the extremely effective and productive principles which Bediuzzaman discovered and took without intermediary from the pure source of the Qur’an. ⁵

In the last passage, the approach is different, but if studied carefully, it is seen that by saying about the Risale-i Nur “it comprises teachings of the luminous, true science of kalâm,” it is stating unmistakably the clear difference between the style and method of the Risale-i Nur and that of kalâm. That is, to put it briefly, the Risale-i Nur is a science of kalâm spring from the Qur’an, it is different, it is luminous, etc.

Expressions of this sort are to be found in many places in the Risale-i Nur. For example, in The Supreme Sign, and in the question and answer on page 442 of Mektûbat (Letters p. 516), and in the final part of Hücumat-i Sitte (The Six Attacks, Letters p. 499). It is stated here definitely and unreservedly that even if the Risale-i Nur’s method and manner of exposition, which is based entirely on evidence and proof, bears superficial resemblances to the science of kalâm, it certainly does not possess its classic characteristics. This matter will be more clearly understood below, where we include some examples from the Risale-i Nur.

It is my guess that the differences between Bediuzzaman’s entirely authentic Qur’anic way and the methods of other Islamic thinkers and scholars of kalâm have now been understood. Nevertheless, a clearer understanding may be gained from the sections below which contain explanations about questions related to religion and the universe.

The ‘mysteries of religion’ which the Risale-i Nur has solved are truly numerous; they run to hundreds. In brief, these mysteries are as follows: the purpose of the creation of the universe, known as the riddle of creation, and particularly the reason for the creation of mankind; the wisdom and purpose in the constant observable destruction and reconstruction of beings, their being brought into existence and annihilated, which is necessitated by the continuous creation in the universe; the certain proof of the existence and unity of the universe’s Creator, and the power of His sovereignty, which is without assistant or deputy; the creation of all things being as easy for Divine power as one thing; the rational, readily comprehensible proof of bodily resurrection, which forms part of belief in the resurrection of the dead, the last judgement, and the hereafter, and the solving of this mystery; the scholarly proof of the existence of the angels and spirit beings, and the fact that they are creatures charged with duties; the rational and scholarly proof of the Prophet’s (PBUH) Ascension, which he made both physically and in the spirit; the solving of the obscure and ‘mysterious’ aspects of many questions related to belief and its tenets; and proofs supported by the most penetrating evidence of both the Qur’an’s miraculousness, and that its injunctions and truths are in conformity with knowledge, reason, and the natural disposition of things.

Of the many questions of religion and subtle points of belief like the above, summaries which are listed in order of importance in this paper, (I was able to prepare only thirty-three), doubtless the most important and extensive of them will be the sections on belief and its tenets. This subject is also contained in other matters. For instance, by proving in scholarly fashion a Hadith about the lifespan of the world, Muslims’ belief will be strengthened and burnished.

The beliefs of the Islamic religion vary in importance. This is shown in the ‘Amantu’ or Islamic creed, which makes it clear that one has to believe without doubting in God’s existence and unity, in His ‘essential’ and ‘negating’ attributes, and all His Most Beautiful Names, as well as His Godhead, dominicality and being the sole being fit to be worshipped, and one has to try to recognize the activity of the manifestations of all His Names. Since the Risale-i Nur attaches the greatest importance to the evidence the Qur’an offers for all these beliefs, and to the rational and reasonable proof of them, a number of examples of each are given in this paper.

Abdülkadir Badilli

Before setting out and describing the mysteries of religion which are solved in most original fashion in the Risale-i Nur, I want to try to explain a number of points:

1) On a superficial perusal, one face —like the two faces of a mirror— of the religious, scholarly, and sufistic questions solved in the Risale-i Nur, might be considered similar to the matters expounded in former works. But if the other face is studied attentively, it will be seen certainly that the Risale-i Nur’s author at no time took matters that had already been solved and repeated them. For Bediuzzaman always observed the scholarly principle, “It is not permissible to scribble things about a question that has already been solved and write treatises about it.”

2) No one can deny that the learned Islamic scholars of former times wrote brilliant treatises and works about the questions of Islam, especially concerning Arabic and rhetoric. But doubtlessly every age has its own system of thought, method, and weapon of struggle; so too each has a style particular to it and system in accordance with which it strives. For example, if the weapons that the mighty Ghazzali used are inadequate in the face of the doubts and scepticism of the enemies of religion this age, the deficiency is not Ghazzali’s —God forbid!— it lies in the times. For like all thinkers, he was the son of his time.

Bediuzzaman alluded to this point in Kastamonu Lahikasi, ⁶ and in the piece called Konusan Yalniz Hakikattir or Yalniz Hakikat Konusuyor, ⁷ which he wrote in 1951. A summary is this:

“Every age the All-Wise Qur’an gives a weapon to its students which is appropriate to the age. Moreover, those who suppose that everything can be solved through brilliant eloquence and style are wrong. Feelings like sincerity, self-sacrifice, and so on, have to play apart...”

3) The spiritual light and weapon or method of striving that Bediuzzaman received directly from the Qur’an differs from those of former erudite scholars on several points. The most striking of these is that without describing the form of the doubts and hesitations about questions, that is, without describing them in detail, Hazret-i Ustad proved rationally and in scholarly fashion the truth and indubitableness of those matters pertaining to the Qur’an and religion, thus eradicating and destroying the doubts.

One of the most important of similar points is that the mysteries that are demonstrated below are solved by Bediuzzaman according to a completely original and new method. This will be seen, so here we suffice with this much.

The basis of this matter, belief in God, is the greatest, most brilliant, and most firmly established truth in the universe. All the revealed scriptures and prophets and all religions have proved and proclaimed it. Moreover, the logical proofs and evidences of the great scholars raised in the Muslim Umma, the scholars of kalâm and the philosophers, and particularly the Risale-i Nur of Bediuzzaman this age, have demonstrated this matter with such scholarly and logical proofs that it is not possible to doubt it. In any event, the rational belief of intelligent beings in the universe in the truths of Godhead, dominicality and the One fit to be worshipped, and their all acting in accordance with that belief in their different ways, forms another proof of it. It is because of this that, even if defined wrongly, the sense of worshipping some object has always dominated man’s nature. All the different religions, beliefs, and forms of worship demonstrate this truth clearly. Basically, there is no need to dwell on this matter, since it has been solved. That is, it is superfluous to discuss it in this paper, for it is proved as clearly as daylight in the Risale-i Nur, and is there for all to see. However, certain aspects of the attributes like Divine unity, oneness, knowledge, will, and power, about which one is obliged to have knowledge in order to believe, as well as aspects of certain matters related to them, all need to be solved. I shall therefore attempt to set forth in list form the original explanations of them in the Risale-i Nur, as well as their clear proofs, the comparisons illustrating them, their clarity in respect of reason and knowledge, and how matters like these have been solved in the Risale-i Nur. Below are included a small part of only one or two of the many proofs of the Divine necessary existence; part of the Eighth Note of the Seventeeth Flash; part of the section from the beginning of the Twenty-Second Word, which demonstrates how all particles prove the necessary existence, oneness, and unity of God; and part of the Eleventh Hope of the Twenty-Sixth Flash: ⁸

“Compare, then, animals like the bee, who receives inspiration, the spider, and the nightingale, who weaves his nest like a stocking, with the mosquito, and you can even compare plants to these animals in just the same way. Yes, the Absolutely Generous One (May His glory be exalted) has given each living being a memorandum written with the pen of pleasure and ink of need, and with it has deposited in the being the programme of the creative commands and index of its duties. See how the All-Wise One of Glory has written on a receipt the amount concerning the bee’s duties, from the principles of the Clear Book, and placed it in the coffer in the bee’s head. And the key to the coffer is the pleasure particular to the diligent bee. With it, it opens the coffer, reads the programme, understands the command, and acts.”

“...If all material causes were to gather together and if they possessed will, they could not gather together the being of a single fly and its systems and organs with their particular balance. And even if they could gather them together, they could not make them remain in the specified measure of the being. And even if they could make them remain thus, they could not make those minute particles, which are constantly being renewed and coming into existence and working, work regularly and in order. In which case, self-evidently, causes cannot claim ownership of things. That is to say, their True Owner is someone else.”

“In Short: If the miniature suns and various colours in droplets of water and fragments of glass are not attributed to the sun’s reflection and the manifestation of its reflection, it is necessary to accept the existence of innumerable suns in place of the one sun; it necessitates accepting an utterly impossible superstition. In exactly the same way, if everything is not attributed to the Absolutely Powerful One, it necessitates falling to the degree of accepting a hundredfold impossibility like accepting infinite gods instead of the Single God; indeed, gods to the number of particles in existence. To Sum Up: From each particle three windows open up onto the Light of Unity and Necessary Existence of the Pre-Eternal Sun: ...”

Rational and scholarly evidences for Divine unity are found in the former books of kalâm and the tenets of faith. However, the evidences and proofs in the Risale-i Nur are both more numerous, and more direct, and different. There is another very important point besides this: the question is not solved by proving the Divine unity (vahdet) alone; the truth of the affirmation of Divine unity (tevhid), His single Essence administering, directing, and planning all things without partner, helper, or deputy have also to be proved, in addition to His oneness (ehadiyet) and unity (vahdaniyet, vahidiyet). The matter therefore contains several significant and subtle truths.

The First: The Divine Essence being One and Single.

The Second: The universe in its entirety, with its inner and outer faces, being His property and everything being able to act only through His will and command.

The Third: Despite the singleness and oneness of the Divine Essence, His having disposal over all things without assistant or partner. We shall prove truths like these and analyze them.

1. Proof that the Divine Essence is One and Single

Firstly I shall give one or two brief examples of the extensive manner in which these are proved in the books of kalâm and the tenets of faith, then shall offer some examples of how they are proved in the Risale-i Nur. For example, in an esteemed work of the famous Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi, is the following summary of the proofs of the scholars of kalâm:

“The world and all that is in it are bound by time. There is nothing that can be outside time. It therefore cannot be supposed that the world should be outside time. What is meant by time is the period of continuance of all bodies, whether in motion or at rest. Since everything is restricted by time, which consists of a particular period, time is a counted number. Also, everything has a beginning, and is dependent on it, in which case everything was created. Being created necessitates one who creates. Thus, the world in its entirety is created, and this necessitates there being a Creator Who does not decline or die.

“Furthermore, God Almighty is One and undying. Yes, for the world suffers decline and death and is created, and this necessitates that it has a single, undying Creator. For if there were more than one creator, they would be subject to what is called number, and everything that is numbered has to have an end (as was mentioned above). All finite things are necessarily created. And everything of which there are two has to something other than itself. According to this, one of the two would necessarily be composed of the essence and would possess attributes distinguishing it from the other. And if it is compound, it has to be a creature that has been planned. It is therefore impossible for these creatures to be God. They are therefore necessarily dependent on the necessary existence of a being who is One.” ⁹

In other books on the tenets of belief and the large works of kalâm, some aspects of this matter are expounded more extensively. But as is seen from the above example, they address not everyone, but informed scholars, and are mostly in the form of defences and consist of proofs taken from ‘outside’ the discipline to answer doubts raised in those times. Now to come to the Risale-i Nur:

Yes, truly the Risale-i Nur has put forward wondrous proofs of Divine unity and oneness that afford complete certainty in this pillar of belief, and leave no room for any doubt or even hesitation. This is not with ‘external’ proofs; ninety-nine per cent of its proofs of this Islamic matter pertaining to belief are taken from the Qur’an. It does this in a language and style that everyone may understand easily and with hundreds of the clearest of proofs. Thus, all those parts of the Risale-i Nur which deal with belief prove both the Divine necessary existence, and God’s unity and oneness. However, some of its treatises focus particularly on the affirmation of Divine unity, and Divine oneness and singleness. Below are passages dealing with this matter in particular:

The Words: The First Ray of the Sixteen Word; the whole of the Twenty-Second Word, and especially the Fourth Flash of the Second Station; the First and Second Stopping-Places of the Thirty-Second Word; and the Thirtieth Window of the Thirty-Third Word, and the Second Point of the Thirty-First Window.

Letters: The end part of the section ‘He has no partner’ in the Second Station of the Twentieth Letter, and the part of the section ‘And He is powerful over all things’ about “the assistance of unity, the facility of unity, and the manifestation of oneness;” and the part of the same section on the facility resulting from unity; and the Fourth Matter of the Fourth Topic of the Twenty-Sixth Letter.

The Flashes Collection: The beginning and end of the Ninth Flash; the Matters of the Thirteenth Note of the Seventeenth Flash; the Eleventh Hope of the Twenty-Sixth Flash; and the whole of the Thirtieth Flash, particularly the section of the Divine Name of Single.

The Rays: The whole of the Second Ray, and particularly its Second and Third Stations; the proofs of God’s necessary existence and unity in the Third Ray, the Treatise on Supplication; the whole of the Seventh Ray, The Supreme Sign, particularly the Second Station; and the First Station of the Fifteenth Ray.

al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri: The part entitled Lem’alar at the beginning of the work, which comprises evidences for God’s necessary existence and unity; page 140 of Katre Risalesi; page 403, the i‘lem and Habab Risalesi; and many places mentioning Divine oneness and unity.

As examples, we give the following

First: Part of the Fourth Matter of the Twenty-Sixth Letter.

“Each object, especially if it is animate, is a miniature specimen of the universe, a seed of the world, and a fruit of the globe of the earth. Since this is so, the one who created the miniature specimen, seed and fruit must also be the one who created the whole universe. For the creator of the fruit cannot be other than the creator of the tree that bears it.”

Second: Part of ‘The Third Point Necessitating Divine Unity’ from the Second Station of the Second Ray.

“Since, together with the extraordinary art in the creation of things, especially in living beings, a seed is a small sample of the fruit, a fruit is a miniature specimen of the tree, a tree is a summary index of the species, and the species is a concise map of the universe which has the meaning of a seed, and each of these is a comprehensive point and a droplet gathered together and distilled from the universe according to the principles of knowledge and balances of wisdom; the one who created any one of them must be the one who created the whole universe. Yes, the one who creates the seed of a melon is self-evidently he who created the melon; it is impossible and precluded that it should be anyone other than he.” ¹⁰

Third: Part of the Twenty-Ninth Window from the Thirty-Third Word.

“... Like a seal, everything ascribes all things to its own Creator. It proves each is the letter of its own Scribe. Thus, everything forms a window onto Divine Unity that is such that each thing gives all things to a Single One of Unity. That is to say, there is an impress so wonderful, an art so miraculous in each thing, and especially in each living being, that the one who makes it and inscribes it so meaningfully can make all things, and the one who makes all things is certainly Him. That is to say, one who cannot make all things cannot create a single thing.” ¹¹

If we say that the evidences and proofs of this question in the old works of kalâm and the tenets of belief are not striking (that is, they are not comprehensible and satisfying for the people of this age), we would not be wrong. This subject has been dealt with in the works of the great scholars of kalâm such as the following: Sharh al-Mawaqif of Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani, Sharh al-Maqasid of Sa’d al-Din al-Taftazani, Kitab al-Tawhid of Imam al-Maturidi, Tahafut al-Falasifa of Imam Ghazzali, as well as the works of the thinkers and strivers of our times such as al-Hadarat al-Islamiyya, the series, Allah, al-Rasul, and al-Islam of Said Hawwa, and the works of Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti and Sayyid Qutb.

It is clear that the manner in which matters which are obscure but whose existence is established by the Qur’an, that is, the mysteries of religion, are solved in the Risale-i Nur, is not to be found in above valuable works of Islamic scholars, old or new. It is inappropriate therefore for us to quote the relevant passages from them at the beginning of each matter. For on examining those works it is seen that for the most part they comprise replies to the doubts and objections put forward by philosophers, Mu‘tazilites, and even Christians and Jews and members of other heretical sects, and that they also describe the doubts in detail. And in proving God Almighty’s unity and oneness, they offer no clear evidences addressing both the reason and heart which demonstrate that everything from the sun to minute particles are God’s dominions and totally owned property. This means that the obscure aspects of such matters continue to be obscure. Those who wish to see examples may refer to Kitab al-Tawhid of Imam al-Maturidi pp. 118-135; Sharh al-Mawaqif of Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani pp.32-72; Sharh al-Maqasid of Sa’d al-Din al-Taftazani vol. ii, pp. 98-105; and al-Iktisad fi’l-I’tiqad of Imam al-Ghazzali p. 49.

To pass on to the method this matter is proved and explained in the Risale-i Nur: all the parts of the Risale-i Nur mentioned in the preceding Mystery, which prove the Divine unity and oneness, also prove the present question brilliantly. It also forms the main subject of other parts, in particular the Treatise On Nature, which is the Twenty-Third Flash, and its Third Impossibility; the Fourteenth Note of the Seventeenth Flash; the whole of the Thirtieth Flash, and particularly the parts of the sections on the Divine Names of Self-Subsistent and Single; the Twentieth Letter and especially the Fourth Phrase, ‘His is the dominion;’ and numerous other treatises which prove as brilliantly as daylight the Divine unity and oneness, our matter here. We offer as examples:

First: Part of the section ‘His is the dominion’ from the Second Station of the Twentieth Letter.

“Is it therefore at all possible that anything apart from the Glorious Lord of All Dominion, Who makes everything, from the vast world of minute particles to a fly, as a field and cultivated property, and makes insignificant man a spectator, an inspector, a tiller, a merchant, a herald, a worshipper, and a slave in that vast property and takes him as an honoured guest and beloved addressee of Himself—could anything apart from Him have free disposal over the property and be lord over the totally owned slave?” ¹²

Second: Part of the Fourth Point of the Thirtieth Flash, on the Divine Name of Single.

“The manifestation of Divine Singleness has placed a seal of unity on the face of the universe whereby it has made it an indivisible whole. One who does not have power of disposal over the whole universe cannot be the true owner of any part of it. The seal is this: like the finest machinery in a factory, the beings and realms of beings in the universe assist one another, and work to complete each other’s functions. ...” ¹³

As well as parts of the First Point of the Fourth Indication of the same treatise:

“Yes, both unity and singleness come about through everything being connected with the One of Unity, and through reliance on Him. And this reliance and connection may become a boundless power and strength for the thing. Through the strength of the reliance and connection, that small thing may perform works far exceeding its individual strength, and produce results. ”

Although the matters of this ‘mystery’ are of the very greatest importance in increasing the degrees of certainty of belief, I will not be in error if I say I have been able to find no reasoned arguments or proofs of them in the books of kalâm. For they have not dealt with it. However, it is especially essential at the present time that this matter is proved rationally and in scholarly fashion. It is imperative if one is to attain absolute certainty of belief. We have therefore to ask from the Risale-i Nur directly about this great mystery and obscure riddle. It is true that many verses of the Wise Qur’an proclaim this truth, but it has also to be proved rationally and reasonably. This is what the Risale-i Nur does. That is, its esteemed author, Bediuzzaman. A few examples are as follows.

The First: The First Ray of the Sixteenth Word:

“O my ignorant soul! You say, ‘The oneness of the Divine Essence together with the universality of the Divine acts, the unity of Almighty God’s person together with His unassisted comprehensive dominicality, His singleness together with His unshared all-embracing disposal, His being beyond space and yet present everywhere, His infinite exaltedness together with being close to all things, and His being One and yet Himself holding all matters in His hand, are among the truths of the Qur’an. Yet the Qur’an is All-Wise, and that which is Wise does not impose on the reason things which are unreasonable. And the reason sees an apparent contradiction between these things. I would like an explanation of them which will impel the reason to submit .... Since comparison is a most brilliant mirror to the Qur’an’s miraculousness, we too shall look at this mystery by means of a comparison. ...”

After proving with the three sorts of comparison and representation the question of the simultaneous disposal of reflections and images in mirrors, he says:

“And so, what thing may hide itself from address of oneness which is within the manifestation of the attributes and acts of the Most Pure and Holy One through His universal will, absolute power, and all-encompassing knowledge? The Most Holy One, Who is far beyond and exalted above matter; free and exempt from any restriction or limitation and the darkness of density; of the sacred lights of Whose Names all these lights and luminous beings are but dense shadows; and of Whose beauty all existence and all life and the World of Spirits and the World of Similitudes are semi-transparent mirrors; Whose attributes are all-encompassing and Whose qualities, universal? What matter could be difficult for Him? What thing can be concealed from Him? What individual can be distant from Him? What person can draw close to Him without acquiring universality?” ¹⁴

The Second: Part of the Second Aim from the Second Stopping-Place of the Thirty-Second Word. ¹⁵ [Not included here]

In its continuation, in the Second Comparison, he moves on from a tree to the tree of creation, and explaining the mystery of Divine oneness, solves the matter in question. Similarly, the final part of the Second Aim, even as far as the Fifth Indication of the Third Aim solve this truth in a most original way. Other parts of the Risale-i Nur which explain it are as follows: the Second Question in the Conclusion of the Twenty-Third Flash; the First and Second Rays of the Sixth Point of the Thirtieth Flash; and many other parts. I curtail this here since in this paper I am compelled to show only the tips of treatises like the above as examples.

Since the above is established by numerous of the Qur’an’s verses, I wanted to see how the verses were explained and proved in the old books of kalâm and Qur’anic commentaries. I looked too at the works of eminent scholars of the present day. In the following, Almighty God’s attribute of ‘power,’ one of His seven essential attributes, is defined and proved: Sharh al-Maqasid of Sa^d al-Din al-Taftazani vol. ii, pp. 347-374; Sharh al-Mawaqif of Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani vol. iii, pp. 41-66; and al-Iktisad fi’l-I’tiqad of Imam al-Ghazzali p. 53-64. But in these the subject is expounded according to the accepted method of scholars of kalâm, which is to refute a whole string of doubts and objections after having first relating them. Moreover, since the way they followed was long and steep, it was difficult to reach the conclusion. Also, the profound truth which is part of our matter, that of everything from minute particles to the sun, and from flies to the heavens, being created directly by His power, is not to be found in the above works.

The Risale-i Nur’s method, however, is to prove in certain manner the essence of the matter and the beliefs of the Sunnis, relying directly on the Qur’an, without looking ‘outside’ or mentioning the doubts and objections.

Now, first I shall quote one or two passages as examples of the works of the great scholars of kalâm, then shall mention a number of proofs from the Risale-i Nur. The following are pieces taken from Sharh al-Mawaqif of Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani:

At the beginning of his discussion of this subject is lengthy analysis of the philosophers’ calling Almighty God ‘self-necessitating,’ that is, the idea springing from disbelief that acts proceed from Almighty God outside His will. Following this it says:

“Almighty God’s power is essentially infinite. For His attributes are pre-eternal, and He is One, and He is infinite in respect of His Essence. (That is, in the meaning of negating finiteness.) His power also encompasses all contingent beings, and the relation of His Essence with contingent beings is the same. For if the relation of His power with some of them is proved, its relations with all them is proved. This is the view of the people of truth. It is well-known that the first of the groups that oppose this principle, that is, the relation of Divine power with all creatures being the same, is the group of philosophers called the al-hukama’ al-ilahiyun, who say: ‘God is truly One. In which case, from one only one thing can proceed.’”

The second group consisted of the astronomers called the Sabiyyun. “They ascribed the motions and revolutions in the world to the situations of the stars. However, both rational proofs and those of the Qur’an and Sunna unanimously attest that nothing in existence other than God has an effect.” It supplies replies to false ideas besides these, and then answers the false beliefs of the Magians concerning the gods of good and evil.

We ask the Risale-i Nur about the same questions, and see that many parts of it prove them as clearly as sunlight, also dealing with the Qur’an’s reality, which is the essence of the question here. In particular, the Second Ray of the Sixteeth Word, and the section “And He is powerful over all things,” which is the Tenth Phrase of the Second Station of the Twentieth Letter; and the Fourth Truth, “Sovereignty,” of the Second Station of the Seventh Ray, called The Supreme Sign; and the section discussing the attribute of “Power” in the Second Station of the Fifteenth Ray, called The Shining Proof. Referring detailed proof and explanation to the Risale-i Nur, here we include three of the above passages by way of example.

The First Piece: Part of the Tenth Phrase of the Second Station of the Twentieth Letter.

“In relation to Divine power the greatest thing is as easy as the smallest. The creation of a species with all of its individuals is as easy and trouble-free as the creation of one individual. It is as easy to create Paradise as the spring and it is as easy to create the spring as a flower. ... A decisive and self-evident proof that everything is equal in relation to Divine power is this: we see with our own eyes in the creation of animals and plants the highest degree of mastery and exquisiteness of art within an infinite multiplicity and liberality; and the greatest distinction and differentiation within the utmost confusion and intermingling; and the highest worth as regards art and the most supreme beauty as regards creation within the greatest abundance and profusion.” ²³

Later in the same section, it proves how through “the facility of unity,” the creation of a single thing is as easy for that power as all things; and alludes to many other vast mysteries through the mystery of “the manifestation of oneness;” and through the really wonderful proofs of the three mysteries of “the necessity and total detachment and disengagedness of the Maker,” “the complete otherness of His Essence and His unrestrictedness,” and “His not being bound by space and His indivisibility,” demonstrates that for the power of the All-Powerful One the creation of a minute particle and the sun are the same.

Second Piece: Part of the Fourth Truth, “Sovereignty,” of the Second Station of the Seventh Ray, The Supreme Sign.

“...The prevailing creative commands, imperious orders, and kingly laws enunciated in those numerous armies, that extend from the hosts of the atom, the battalions of the vegetable kingdom, the brigades of the animal kingdom, to the armies of the stars, and embrace both the lowliest soldier and the loftiest commander — they all indicate self-evidently the existence of an absolute sovereignty and a universal authority. There is then a truth of absolute sovereignty, and there can be no truth of assigning partners to God. For ... if numerous hands all engage assertively in the same task, the result will be confusion. If there are two kings in one country, or even two headmen in one district, order will disappear, and administration be replaced by anarchy. But on the contrary we see everywhere such order, from the wing of the fly to the lamps of the heavens, from the cells of the body to the signs of the planets, that there is no possibility for the intervention of any partner in God’s affairs.” ²⁴

Third Piece: Part of the Second Station of the Fifteenth Ray, The Shining Proof. ²⁵ [Not included here]

In the continuation of this, this vast and incomprehensible truth is investigated and proved in “Nine Steps” on eleven pages. It may be referred to.

This question is discussed in detail in the books of kalâm and the tenets of belief, there being little difference of view. What they say is this: there are thirteen or fourteen Divine attributes it is obligatory to believe in, and each of these are proved to an extent in the books of kalâm. The subject is set out concisely in works like Kitab al-Tawhid of Imam Maturidi, al-Iktisad fi’l-I’tiqad of Imam al-Ghazzali, Sharh Jawhar al-Tawhid of Imam Bajuri, Kastali&s gloss on ‘Aqa’id al-Nasafi, and al-Husn al-Hamidiyya of Husayn al-Jisri. Having mentioned these, I shall attempt to explain what the ‘mystery’ aspect of this subject is in the Risale-i Nur and how it came to have its present form.

We may first take two sentences from the definition of the ‘positive’ attributes in Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani’s work Ta’rifat: “The essential (dhatiya) attributes; they are attributes that can only qualify God, and the opposite of which is completely impossible. For example, power, glory, grandeur, and so on...” ²⁶

I now want to illustrate with one or two examples how it is defined in the books of ‘aqa’id mentioned above. For instance, in ‘Aqa’id al-Nasafi: Almighty God has pre-eternal attributes subsistent through His Essence. These attributes are neither identical to Him nor are they other than Him. They are: knowledge, power, life, strength, hearing, sight, will, choice, action, creativity, providing, and speech.

In Sharh Jawhar al-Tawhid, in total fourteen attributes which are ‘positive’ and ‘negating’ are listed. Seven of these are ‘essential,’ and the rest are ‘positive’ and ‘negating.’ ²⁷

In Imam A‘zam’s Fiqh al-Akbar, these attributes are said to be fourteen, seven of which are essential (dhatiyya) and seven pertain to action (fi’ili). ²⁸

In Husayn al-Jisri’s al-Husn al-Hamidiyya, these attributes are said to total thirteen.

Thus, these attributes are stated to number twelve, thirteen, or fourteen. Together with ‘existence’ (vujud) and ‘giving of existence’ (takwin), they are fourteen.

From page 53 to 101 of his work al-Iktisad fi’l-I’tiqad, Imam Ghazzali proves these attributes rationally and in scholarly fashion. It may be referred to. I do not consider it appropriate here to take passages from the above-mentioned works and Ghazzali’s work, and make comparisons with the proofs of the Risale-i Nur. For Bediuzzaman called Ghazzali his “master,” and in his time Ghazzali achieved an unsurpassed renewal of the religion of Islam from the point of view of scholarship, proofs, and kalâm; but his scholarly achievements and proofs looked to that age. Discussion of the matter may therefore be referred to a number of passages that Bediuzzaman wrote about the above-mentioned attributes, and particularly about the seven essential (dhatiyya) attributes.

This question is proved and expounded in the Risale-i Nur in a few places only when it arises. For example, in some places the attributes of knowledge, power, and will are proved, while in others, the manifestations of attributes like life, hearing, sight, and self-subsistence. For example, in the First Stoppping-Place of the Thirty-Second Word; certain sections of the Second Ray; the whole of The Supreme Sign, and especially its Second Chapter; the Second Station of The Shining Proof, the Fifteenth Ray; the Second Station of the Twentieth Letter; the treatises of the Thirtieth Flash, and especially those about the Divine Names of Ever-Living, and Self-Subsistent. And so on.

As examples, I want to quote two parts of pieces which expound and prove the seven essential attributes in particular:

The First: Part of the Nineteenth Degree of the First Station of The Supreme Sign:

“From this continuous, wise and imperious activity, the deeds of an All-Powerful and All-Knowing Doer can be discerned, as if from behind a veil. And from behind the veil of these nurturing and administering deeds of dominicality, the Divine Names, manifest in all things, can be immediately perceived. Then behind the veil of the Beautiful Names, manifest with Glory and Beauty, can be deduced the existence and reality of the seven sacred attributes, according to the testimony of all creation, in a life-giving, powerful, knowledgeable, all-hearing, all-seeing, volitional and speech-endowed form, there appears to the eye of faith in the heart —self-evidently, necessarily, and with full certainty— the existence of a Necessary Existent that is described by these attributes, a Single One of Unity known by these Names, a Peerless and Eternal Doer, in a form more evidential and brilliant than the sun.” ²⁹

In the continuation of the discussion, which we cannot include here, by describing the manifestations of the seven attributes in the universe, it demonstrates that they cannot be separated from the Necessarily Existent One and that they are signs of the functions of the Divine Essence. Those who wish may refer to it.

The Second: Part of the Ninth Phrase of the Second Station of the Twentieth Letter:

“The Maker Who controls and creates with actions which are to be seen in the universe has an all-encompassing knowledge, and such knowledge is His particular, inherent and necessary quality. Its separation from Him is impossible. In the same way that it is not possible for the sun to exist but for its light not to exist, it is also not possible, though thousands of times more so, for the knowledge of the Being Who creates these well-ordered beings to be separated from Him. Like this all-comprehending knowledge is necessary to that Being, so is it also necessary to all things from the point of view of their being connected to Him. That is to say, it is not possible for anything to be hidden from Him. Just as it is not possible for objects on the face of the earth to face the sun with no barrier and not see it, so is it a thousand times less possible, it is impossible, for things to be hidden in the face of the light of the All-Knowing One of Glory’s knowledge. This is because they are in his presence. That is, everything is within the range of His sight, is facing Him, is within the compass of His witnessing; He penetrates into all things.” ³⁰

This contains brilliant proofs of the first of the attributes, knowledge and will. Anyone who wishes may refer to it.

There are further explanations in other places, and especially the Second Station of The Shining Proof, and its sections following the discussion of al-tahiyyat. Referring readers to that, I cut short this here.

A mystery (tilsim) not found in other works, which is solved in the Risale-i Nur, is each of the six pillars of belief necessitating the existence of the others in accordance with the rule called talazum, and none of them being able to exist without the others, or without being deficient, and Muslims having to believe in all of them without exception, and if they do not believe in any one of them, their ceasing to be Muslims and believers; and the proof of these.

Of the works of the Islamic thinkers, old and new, this matter has been mentioned only briefly in al-Hadarat al-Islamiyya by Abu A‘la al-Mawdudi, and elucidated to a small extent. Included here are a few sentences related to our subject:

“The relation between belief in God and belief in the prophets. Yes, if there is anything true to be said on this subject, it is this: since no one else was party to the knowledge God’s Messenger (PBUH) was party to; and the light, wisdom, and insight which Almighty God gave him were not given to anyone else; beliefs concerning Almighty God other than those which God’s Messenger proclaimed and presented to men and invited them to accept should not be authentic and correct. If a person appears and announces a belief about God’s Essence and attributes based on his own thought and ideas, or on what philosophers and others said to be clever have put forward, such a belief can never be true or correct... The meaning of this is as follows: the matters pertaining to belief and the truth and authenticity of the pillars of belief are dependent on belief in the prophets. Belief in the Unseen necessitates too that when by means of the prophets we cease to concern ourselves with what has come from other channels and ways, we will have founded our ideas on true, sound knowledge.”

Having supported what he asserts with three verses from the revealed Qur’an, Mawdudi continues:

“In all their clarity, these verses and hundreds like them proclaim that the tie between belief in God and belief in the prophets is such that it can never be severed or broken... ” ³¹

We may now examine the Risale-i Nur’s method of proof and explanation. Firstly, this matter is discussed in several places in the Risale-i Nur and is proved in several ways. Among these are the Second Topic of the Fifth Matter of the Third Point, on the Divine Name of Sapient, of the Thirtieth Flash; the Conclusion of the Second Ray; the pillars of belief in the angels and Divine Determining in the Ninth Ray; several points of the Fifth Point, on the Divine Name of Ever-Living, of the Thirtieth Flash; the question and answer in the Ninth Topic of the Eleventh Ray, The Fruits of Belief; the end of the section, Reshalar, pp.66-86 in Mathnawi al-‘Arabi, and the beginning of Lâsiyyemalar; and part of the treatise Habab, p. 176, from the same work.

And so, a few sections from the above parts of the Risale-i Nur:

First: The Fourth Sign of the Fifth Point, on the Divine Name of Ever-Living, of the Thirtieth Flash.

In this treatise, entering through the door of life and spirit, the manifestation of the Name of Ever-Living, the author demonstrates with rational and scholarly proofs the pillars of belief in the hereafter, the angels, the prophets, Divine Determining, and the rest. I am compelled here to refer those interested to the original and to cut short this here.

In the Second Topic of the Fifth Matter of the Third Point, on the Divine Name of Sapient, of the Thirtieth Flash, he proves that the manifestation of the Divine Names of All-Wise and Sapient necessitates absolutely certainly the messengership of Muhammad (PBUH).

Second: Part of the Ninth Topic of the Eleventh Ray:

“Belief in God proves with its own proofs both the other pillars and belief in the hereafter, as is shown clearly in the Seventh Topic of the Fruits of Belief. Yes, is it at all possible and can the reason accept that a pre-eternal everlasting sovereignty of dominicality, a post-eternal Divine rule, which administers the boundless universe as though it was a palace, a city, or a country; and makes it revolve in balanced and ordered fashion; and changes it with wisdom; and equips and directs together particles, planets, flies, and stars as though each was a regular army, and continuously drills them within the spheres of command and will in a lofty manoeuvre; and employing them in duties makes them act, and to wander and travel, and to parade worshipfully; —is it at all possible that that eternal, everlasting, enduring rule would not have an eternal seat, a permanent means, and an everlasting place of manifestation; that is, the hereafter? God forbid! That means the sovereignty of Almighty God’s dominicality and —as is described in the Seventh Topic— most of His Names and the proofs of His necessary existence, require the hereafter and testify to it. So see and understand what powerful support this pole of belief has, and believe in it as though seeing it!” ³²

Following this, each of the pillars of belief in the prophets, the revealed scriptures, the angels, and Divine Determining are demonstrated with scholarly and rational proofs. Those who wish may look at these and receive their effulgence.

Third: These examples, that is, several places from Mathnawi al-‘Arabi, the Third Point of the Eighteenth Word, and the beginning of the Nineteenth Word, prove this matter with such clarity that I do not want to increase the length of this paper by quoting them here.

A number of important figures like Muhyiddin al-‘Arabi supplied some reasonable explanations in their works of this mighty riddle, but it is mostly sufis and those who seek reality through illumation that have been able to benefit from his profound expositions. I do not consider it necessary to quote here any examples from Muhyiddin al-‘Arabi, just to mention as a summary of his ideas on this subject, that when expounding the verse All praise is due to the Sustainer of All the Worlds, he interpreted the Hadith: “I was a hidden treasure, so I created the universe that they might know Me,” as meaning “I created creatures to be mirrors to Me to behold My beauty in them.” ³³ Those who want to learn more of this, may refer to Muhydiddin’s works al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya and Fusus al-Hikam.

We may consider now the point of view of, and rational explanations introduced by, the Risale-i Nur. Some examples are these: the Tenth Lesson of Nur’un Ilk Kapisi; part of the treatise Semme in al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi; the first parts of the Eleventh Word; and the first question in the Conclusion of the Twenty-Third Flash. As examples:

Firstly: The first part of the Eleventh Word.

“Brother! If you want to understand a little about the talisman of the wisdom of the world and the riddle of man’s creation and the mystery of the reality of the prescribed prayers, then consider this short comparison together with my own soul. One time there was a king. As wealth he had numerous treasuries in which were diamonds and emeralds and jewels of every kind. Besides these he had other, hidden and most strange treasuries. By way of attainment he had great skill in strange arts, and encompassing knowledge of innumerable wondrous sciences, and was most erudite in endless branches of abstruse learning. Now, like every possessor of beauty and perfection wants to see and display his own beauty and perfection, that glorious king also wanted to open up an exhibition and set out displays within it in order to make manifest and display in the view of the people the majesty of his rule, his glittering wealth, the wonders of his art, and the marvels of his knowledge. And also so that he could behold his beauty and perfection in two respects...” ³⁴

Bediuzzaman explains the meaning of the comparison, which is a mirror to the reality of the universe and all its extraordinary creatures, as follows:

“The palace is this world. Its roof is the heavens illuminated with smiling stars, and its floor, the face of the earth adorned from east to west with multifarious flowers. As for the King, he is the Most Holy One, the Pre-Eternal and Post-Eternal Monarch, Whom all things in the seven heavens and earth glorify and extol, each with its particular tongue. He is a king so omnipotent that He created the heavens and earth in six days, then abided on the Throne; One of Power and Majesty, Who, alternating night and day like two threads, one white and one black, writes His signs of the page of the universe; One to Whose command the sun, moon, and stars are subjugated. The apartments of the palace are the eighteen thousand worlds, each of which has been set in order and decorated in a fashion suitable to it. The strange arts you saw in the palace are the miracles of Divine Power you see in this world, and the foods you saw there are signs to the wonderful fruits of Divine Mercy in this world, especially in summer, and above all in the gardens of Barla. The stove and kitchen there is the earth here, which has fire in its heart, and the face of the earth. While the jewels of the hidden treasuries you saw in the comparison are the similitudes of the manifestations of the Sacred Divine Names. The embroideries there, and the signs of the embroideries, are the well-ordered and finely worked beings and the harmonious impresses of the pen of Power which adorn this world and point to the Names of the All-Powerful One of Glory. As for the Master, he is our Master Muhammad (upon whom be blessings and peace). His assistants are the prophets (upon whom be peace), and his students, the saints and purified scholars. The ruler’s servants in the palace indicate the angels (upon whom be peace) in this world. And the guests invited to the banquet and to spectate in the comparison are the jinn and mankind in this guest-house of the world, and the animals, who are the servants of mankind. As for the two groups, one of them here is the people of belief, who are the students of the All-Wise Qur’an, the interpreter of the verses and signs of the book of the universe. The other group are the people of unbelief and rebellion, who follow Satan and the evil-commanding soul; deaf and dumb, like animals, or even lower, they form the group of the misguided, who recognize the life of this world only.” ³⁵

He then explains in six pages the purpose, wisdom, and aims of men and jinn coming to this realm of examination, and their duties. I refer readers to the original rather than extending the discussion here.

Secondly: The question and answer at the end of the Conclusion of the Twenty-Third Flash.

“We hear many lazy people and those who neglect the five daily prayers ask: ‘What need has God Almighty of our worship that in the Qur’an He severely and insistently reproves those who give up worship and threatens them with such a fearsome punishment as Hell? How is it in keeping with the style of the Qur’an, which is moderate, mild and fair, to demonstrate the ultimate severity towards an insignificant, minor fault?’

“T h e A n s w e r : God Almighty has no need of your worship, nor indeed of anything else. Rather, it is you who needs to worship, for in truth you are sick. As we have proved in many parts of the Risale-i Nur, worship is a sort of remedy for your spiritual wounds. If someone who is ill responds to a compassionate doctor who insists on his taking medicines that are beneficial for his condition by saying: ‘What need do you have of it that you are insisting in this way?’, you can understand how absurd it would be...” ³⁶

The Seventh and Eighth Words may also be referred in connection with this.

Eleventh Mystery: It is apparently ugly that with the revelation of scriptures and sending of prophets, and the evil ones being set to pester people, the majority of people fail the examination in this arena of trial and testing and due to their embracing unbelief, sin, and rebellion, are sent to Hell. Where is the Divine mercy in such examination and accountability, when for the majority the results are detrimental?

I reckon there is not much to be found in the books of kalâm and doctrine written by the Islamic scholars which solves this awesome question. I myself could find nothing in my limited searches. Perhaps in their times, no need was felt to ask such a question. Nevertheless, if anyone knows of such discussions, they may make a comparison.

The Risale-i Nur, however, has supplied thorough answers to this question, and has truly succeeded in solving this awesome riddle. The following are some of the pieces where they are to be found: parts of the Twelfth Word; the question and answer in the Second Sign of the Third Station of the Second Ray; the discussion on page 207 of the Arabic edition of Isha\ra\t al-I^ja\z; the Second Sign of the Thirteenth Flash; and so on. Of these, one or two are now given as examples:

Firstly: From the Twelfth Letter.

“Why are devils created? Almighty God created Satan and evils; what is the wisdom in it? Isn’t the creation of evil, evil, and the creation of bad, bad?

“T h e A n s w e r : God forbid, the creation of evil is not evil, the ‘acquisition’ of or desire for evil is evil. For creation and bringing into existence look to all the consequences, whereas such desire looks to a particular result, since it is a particular relation. For example, there are thousands of consequences of rain falling, and all of them are good. If through mischoice, some people receive harm from the rain, they cannot say that the creation of rain is not mercy, they cannot state that the creation of rain is evil. For it is due to their mistaken wishes and inclinations that it is evil for them. Also, there are numerous benefits in the creation of fire, and all of them are good. But if some people receive harm from fire through their misuse of it and their wrong choice, they cannot say that the creation of fire is evil; because it was not only created to burn them. Rather, they thrust their hands into the fire while cooking the food by mistake, and made that servant inimical to themselves. In Short: The lesser evil is acceptable for the greater good. If an evil which will lead to a greater good is abandoned so that a lesser evil should not be, a greater evil will then have been perpetrated.” ³⁷

The remaining two questions and answer in this letter have great importance. The first, “The majority of humanity become unbelievers due to the existence of Satan and embrace unbelief and suffer harm, despite the sending of prophets...? Its answer is sufficient. The other question, “Almighty God sends calamities and inflicts tribulations; is this not tyrannical towards the innocent in particular, and animals even?” The answer truly springs from belief and the Qur’an, with a brilliance and luminosity, satisfying both the reason and the heart. It may be referred to.

Second Piece: Part of the question and answers in the Second Sign of the Third Station of the Second Ray:

“You are saying in this Station that beauty, good, and justice encompass the universe, so what do say to all the ugliness, disasters, illness, tribulations, and death that we see before us?

“The Answer: A single instance of ugliness which results in or shows up numerous instances of beauty is indirectly an instance of beauty. While the non-existence of an ugliness, or its being invisible, which then conceals numerous instances of beauty and does not permit them to be seen, is not a single, but a manifold, ugliness. For example, if an ugliness which is a unit of measurement is non-existent, the beauty would be of only one sort, and its numerous degrees would remain concealed. For it is through the intervention of ugliness that the degrees of beauty unfold. Just as the degrees of heat become apparent through the existence of cold, and the degrees of light are known through darkness, so universal instances of good, universal benefits, universal bounties, and universal instances of beauty become apparent through there being minor instances of evil, harm, calamities and ugliness. This means that the creation of ugliness is not ugly, it is beautiful, because the majority of its results are beautiful... As for transience and death, ... they are not contrary to general mercy, all-embracing beauty, and comprehensive good; in fact, they are necessitated by them. The creation of Satan, even, since he is the cause of striving and competition, the springs of man’s spiritual progress is also good, as is the creation of his species; their creation is beautiful in that respect. Also, for unbelievers to suffer torments in Hell even is good, since through their unbelief they have transgressed the rights of all beings and insulted their honour.” ³⁸

Following the above question is another, which is of great importance: “We may say that the creation of unbelievers and satans is good since it is the cause of competition and progress... but why does the Absolutely Compassionate One, the Absolutely Self-Sufficient One, inflict evil, calamities, and ugliness on wretched individuals?” The answer too is extremely important and makes one’s belief sparkle almost visibly. It may be referred to.

It will be seen that in addition to the pieces mentioned above, in the Fourth Topic of the Twenty-Sixth Word from the point of view of reason and the Islamic viewpoint it is solved completely.

I have researched this awesome question, and have been able to find its answer and solution neither in the old books of kalâm, nor in the sufi works, nor in the works of the learned thinkers and mujahids of this age. However, it is discussed in several places in the Risale-i Nur, and satisfactory and sufficient answers are given. Some of them are as follows: the Eleventh and Twelfth Signs of the Thirteenth Flash; part of the Twenty-Eighth Flash; the Arabic edition of Isharat al-I’jaz pages 86-7; the end of the Eighth Topic of the Eleventh Ray; and so on. There are other places I have not found and written here. Now a number of mysteries connected with the answer of this important question:

First Piece: Part of the Eighth Topic of the Fruits of Belief (Eleventh Ray):

“There is no contradiction between the existence and ghastly torments of Hell, and infinite mercy, true justice, and wisdom with its balance and absence of waste. Indeed, mercy, justice, and wisdom require its existence. For to punish a tyrant who tramples the rights of a thousand innocents and to kill a savage animal who tears to pieces a hundred timid animals, is for the oppressed a thousandfold mercy within justice. While to pardon the tyrant and leave the savage beast free is for hundreds of wretches a hundredfold pitilessness in place of that single act of misplaced mercy. Similarly, among those who will enter Hell is the absolute disbeliever. For through his disbelief and denial he both aggresses against the rights of the Divine Names, and through denying the testimony of beings to those Names, he transgresses their rights, ... His disbelief is therefore a crime and wrong of such vast proportions it may not be forgiven..” ³⁹

Second Piece: Various parts of the second part of the Twenty-Eighth Flash:

“How can incarceration in Hell for an infinite duration in return for unbelief for a short duration be justice?

“T h e A n s w e r : Reckoning a year to be three hundred and sixty-five days, the law of justice requires for a one-minute murder seven million eight hundred and eighty-four thousand minutes imprisonment. So, since one minute’s unbelief is like a thousand murders, according to the law of human justice, someone who lives a life of twenty years in unbelief and dies in that state deserves imprisonment for fifty-seven billion, two hundred and one thousand two hundred million years. ... The reason for the connection between these two numbers, so far from one another, is this: since murder and unbelief are destruction and aggression, they have an effect on others. A murder which takes one minute negates on average at least fifteen years of the victim’s life, so the murderer is imprisoned in their place. While since one minute of unbelief denies a thousand and one Divine Names and denigrates their inscriptions, violates the rights of the universe and denies its perfections, and gives the lie to innumerable evidences of Divine Unity and rejects their testimony, the unbeliever is cast down to the lowest of the low for more than a thousand years, and ‘dwells’ in imprisonment.” ⁴⁰

There are numerous further explanations of this in the Risale-i Nur. Particularly in the Tenth Word, proving how one minute’s disbelief is denial of a thousand and one Divine Names and insulting towards them. Another side of the question is demonstrated in the Second Indication of the Thirteenth Flash; and there are further complementary explanations on page 207 of the Arabic edition of Isharat al-I’jaz. All these may be referred to.

This question contains a number of points. As far as I have been able to see, this matter is not expounded in the books of kalâm and doctrine. I referred to verse 25 of Sura al-Anfal in Fakr al-Din al-Razi’s al-Tafsir al-Kabir, and again there was nothing by way of answer. I looked too at the books of sufism, namely Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qahir al-Dabbagh’s al-Ibriz, the famous Risalat al-Qushayriyya, ‘Abd al-Qadir Gilani’s book of guidance al-Fath al-Rabbani, and ‘Ata’ullah Iskandari’s al-Hikam al-‘At’a’iyya, and could find no detailed reply to the question above. Only in al-Fath al-Rabbani and al-Hikam al-‘At’a’iyya, there were explanations of instances of wisdom in the visitation of calamities and tribulations on believers. For example, in al-Hikam al-‘At’a’iyya it says:

“Almighty God, the All-Wise Opener, bestows calamities, illnesses, and tribulations in order to make Himself known. They are means of acquiring knowledge of Him through His attributes. Like through His grace and wrath, etc. The disaster-struck should not be unhappy, for through illness they make large gains with few actions. For the illnesses and calamities visited on you are sent by God to make Himself known. While your worship and good works are things you wish to present to Him. Can there be any comparison between what He has visited on you, and what you want to offer to Him?” ⁴¹

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir’s admonitions and guidance in his work mentioned above are similar to this.

We may now look at how the Risale-i Nur solves the ‘obscure’ aspects of this question and how it clarifies them: the Second Point of the Eighteenth Word; the Fourth Topic of the Twenty-Sixth Word; the Third Question of the Twelfth Letter; the First Sign of the First Station of the Twenty-Fourth Letter; the Second Point of the Second Flash; the Second Indication of the Thirteenth Flash; the Thirteenth Hope of the Twenty-Sixth Flash; the question and answer in the Second Sign of the Third Station of the Second Ray; al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi page163, Katre Risalesi; the Introduction to the Seventeenth Word; the First Station of the Fifteeth Ray, called The Shining Proof.

Some of the places given above were cited in the previous Mystery, and may be referred to there. I want to give two or three examples dealing with this matter in particular:

First Example: Part of the Second Point of the Eighteenth Word.

“...Because man is both enamoured of the apparent and is self-centered, he considers only the externals and pronounces them ugly. Since he is self-centred, he reasons according to the result which looks to himself and judges it to be ugly. Whereas, if, of their aims one looks to man, thousands look to their Maker’s Names. For example, man reckons to be harmful and meaningless thorned plants and trees, which are among the great miracles of the Creator’s power. Whereas they are the well-equipped heroes of the grasses and trees. And for example, hawks hharrying sparrows is apparently incompatible with mercy. But through this harrying, the sparrow’s abilities unfold. And for example, he considers the snow to be very cold and uninviting, but under that cold and unpleasing veil there are aims so warm and results so sweet that they defy description.” ⁴²

Second Example: The Fifth Question of the Addendum to the Fourteenth Word.

“Why does the One Who is All-Just and All-Compassionate, All-Powerful and All-Wise, not give particular punishments for particular wrongs, but inflicts a mighty element? How is this in keeping with the beauty of His mercy and His all-encompassing power?

“T h e A n s w e r : The All-Powerful One of Glory assigns numerous duties to each element and causes them to produce numerous results through each duty. If one result of one of an element’s duties is ugly, evil, or calamitous, the other good results make this result good also. If the element, which is angry at man, is prevented from that duty so that the single ugly result will not occur, then instances of good to the number of the good results will be abandoned, and so since not doing a necessary good is evil, instances of evil will be done to the number of the instances of good. A single evil not occurring would be extremely ugly, contrary to wisdom, contrary to reality, and a fault. And power, wisdom and reality are free of fault. Since certain faults are rebellion comprehensive enough to cause the earth and elements to become angry, and are insulting aggression infringing the rights of numerous creatures, for sure, in order to demonstrate the extraordinary ugliness of that crime, the command being given to a mighty element to ‘reprimand them’ among its other general duties, is perfect wisdom and justice, and for the oppressed, perfect mercy.” ⁴³

This addendum contains other curious questions and their answers. Those who wish may refer to the third and fourth in particular.

Third Example: Part of Abdülkadir Badilli’s Turkish translation of al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri. ⁴⁴ [Not included here]

This awesome riddle and profound mystery was not discussed much in the old Islamic works of kalâm, doctrine, and philosophy; that is, in the way it is elucidated and proved in the Risale-i Nur. However, in the books of kalâm it was discussed concisely as follows:

“All beings and bodies may be put into two categories; those included in a place or class, and those that are not. If the former are not united with others, they are called an ‘atom,’ whereas if they are, they are called ‘bodies.’” And so on. Lengthy explanations then ensue. Nevertheless, some kalâm scholars put forward proofs and arguments refuting the question of the indivisible atom. In short, the matter is lengthy and as explained in those old books extremely difficult to draw conclusions from them at this time. The names of some of those I have been able to look at are Ghazzali’s al-Iktisad fi’l-I’tiqad pages 19-21, Ibn Hazm’s al-Fasl fi’l-Milal, vol. v, page 92. And some others.

Now we may consider this subject in the Risale-i Nur: the Eighteenth Letter; Twenty-Fourth Letter; and Thirtieth Word; and many other places. Of these, we give one or two as examples:

First Example: The Introduction of the Second Aim of the Thirtieth Word.

“The transformation of particles are the vibrations and wanderings that occur while the signs of creation are being written in the book of the universe by the pen of power of the Pre-Eternal Inscriber. They are not games of chance and jumbled meaningless motion like the Materialists and Naturalists fancy. Because, like all beings, each particle says ‘In the Name of God’ at the start of its motion, and it raises loads infinitely exceeding its strength. For example, a seed the size of a grain of wheat shoulders a load the size of a huge pine tree. And on completion of its duty, it says ‘All praise be to God.’ For by exhibiting an art that is beautiful and full of purpose and a decoration that is fine and full of benefits which astound all minds, it displays a work of art like an ode in praise of the Glorious Maker. Look carefully at pomegranates and ears of corn, for example.” ⁴⁵

The Second Aim of the Thirtieth Word, about the transformations of minute particles is eleven pages in length. On each page, the purpose and aims of the motion and transformations of particles are proved according to scholarly and rational principles. Those who wish may refer to it.

Second Example: The Third Matter of the Eighteenth Letter.

“What is the reason for and wisdom in the astonishing unceasing activity in the universe? Why do these fleeting beings not stop, but continuously change and are renewed?

“... If a person performs a natural function or social duty and works enthusiastically to do so, one who observes him carefully will certainly understand that there are two things that make him perform the duty: The First are the benefits, fruits, and advantages which result from the duty, which are called ‘the ultimate cause.’ The Second: there is a love, a desire, a pleasure, which cause the duty to be performed enthusiastically, and these are called the ‘necessitating cause and reason.’

“For example, eating food; the pleasure and longing arising from appetite drive a person to eat, and afterwards, the result of eating is nourishing the body and perpetuating life. In the same way, And God’s is the highest similitude, based on two sorts of Divine Names, the awesome and astonishing endless activity in the universe is for two vast instances of wisdom, each of which is also infinite...” ⁴⁶

In fact, it is the Twenty-Fourth Letter where this difficult and obscure question is solved. With its two Stations and ten Signs and Indications, each of which demonstrates a different meaning, different evidences, and different scholarly truths, the Twenty-Fourth Letter makes the matter completely clear. Even if only a small example, I include here one or two sentences:

“... As necessitated by mercy, wisdom, and lovingness, the Wise, Compassionate, and Loving Creator causes the factory of the universe to work. He makes all transient existences the seeds to numerous perpetual existences; He makes them the means for the fulfilment of the dominical aims; He makes them manifest the Divine functions; He makes them the ink for the pen of Divine Determining and shuttles for the weaving of Divine power; and for many elevated aims and favours which we do not yet know, through the activity of His power, He causes the activity of the universe; He causes particles to spin, beings to travel, animals to flow, and the planets to rotate; He makes the universe speak, causing it to silently recite His verses, His signs, and to inscribe them.” ⁴⁷

This matter is discussed in the books of doctrine, and has been debated to an extent in the light of the Qur’an and Hadiths. The consensus of the Sunnis is that “Those who commit grievous sins —so long as they do not consider it to be lawful— should not be deemed to be unbelievers; they can only be called sinners.” They put forward numerous evidences from the Qur’an and Sunna to support this. Nevertheless, since they did not explain the underlying wisdom in this and the true reason, this ruling of Islamic beliefs has in one respect always remained obscure. For further study of it, readers may refer to ‘Ali al-Qari’s commentary on Imam A‘zam’s Fiqh al-Akbar pp. 102-3, and Imam Bajuri’s Sharh Jawhar al-Tawhid, page 433.

We now turn to the Risale-i Nur to learn the wisdom and ‘obscure’ (tilsim) aspects of the matter, as well as its scholarly and rational side. There are discussions of it in the Fifth and Seventh Indications of the Thirteenth Flash; the Second Flash; The Damascus Sermon page 99; Habbe Risalesi in Mathnawi al-‘Arabi, page 229, and in other places. Now of these, we give one or two as examples:

The First: Part of the Fifth Indication of the Thirteenth Flash.

“Thanks be to God, through its light I understood both that the All-Wise Qur’an’s powerful encouragement and assurances are completely in place, and that the people of belief being deceived by Satanic machinations is not due to lack of belief or weakness of belief. I understood too that one who commits grievous sins does not become an unbeliever, and that the Mu’tazilites and some Kharijite sects are in error by stating that ‘Someone who commits a grievous sin either becomes an unbeliever or is in a state between belief and unbelief,’ and that that unfortunate friend of mine sacrificing a hundred lessons in reality to win the attentions of such a scoundrel was not despicable abasement and degeneration; I thanked Almighty God and was saved from the abyss.” ⁴⁸

The Second: Part of the Seventh Indication of the Thirteenth Flash.

“‘How can someone who commits grievous sins remain a believer?’... Just as man’s evil-commanding soul prefers an ounce of immediate, present pleasure to a ton of postponed, hidden pleasure, so too he shrinks at the fear of an immediate slap more than at a year’s torment in the future. Furthermore, if the emotions are dominant in a person, they do not heed the reasoning of the mind. Desires and delusions govern and he prefers the slightest and least significant present pleasure to huge reward in the future. He flinches from some minor present distress more than from some terrible postponed torment. ... In which case, committing grievous sins does not arise from lack of belief, but from the defeat of the heart and mind due to the predomination of emotion, desire, and illusion.” ⁴⁹

The Third: The other side of this question, that all sins may lead to unbelief, which is explained in the First Point of the Second Flash.

“Sin, penetrating to the heart, will blacken and darken it until it extinguishes the light of belief. Within each sin is a path leading to unbelief. Unless that sin is swiftly obliterated by seeking God’s pardon, it will grow from a worm into a snake that gnaws on the heart.” ⁵⁰

Together with there being a number of differences between the schools of law, in the books of the Shari‘a various matters have been called “unbelief.” For instance, the uttering of certain expressions and commiting certain actions. However, although one of the severest warnings God’s Messenger (PBUH) gave concerning the error and danger of ascribing unbelief to others, I carried out a small investigation into to whom and when it could be applied. It is well-known that the Mu‘tazilites, the Shi‘a, and some Kharijites went to excess in this matter and accused Muslims of unbelief and associating partners with God on virtually any pretext. So I looked at what the Sunni scholars had to say about the apparent meanings of Hadiths, which by way of encouraging [what is good] and restraining [from what is bad], state in exaggerated manner that certain acts and sayings are unbelief. They made these rulings without taking into consideration the extremist and mistaken views of the above-mentioned groups, who opposed the majority of Muslims.

This matter is studied at length in an excellent work called al-Hukm wa Qadiyya Takfir al-Muslim by Salim al-Bahnasawi. After a general discussion, he offers a section called “Unbelief in actions and metaphorical unbelief.” To disbelieve in the tenets of belief is denial of some or all of the pillars of belief or their subsidiary matters, and puts a person outside the religion of Islam (God forbid). However, unbelief in actions is not to conform to the major precepts of Islam, like not performing the obligatory prayers and not governing in accordance with the Divine commands, and does not put a person outside the religion. ⁵¹

Accordingly, what is meant by unbelief in actions is grievous sins. Anyway, the unanimous view of the Sunnis is that “Those who commit grievous sins are not unbelievers, but sinners. But if they believe that the sin is licit, then it is a different matter.” This has been dealt with thoroughly and solved. Here, the important, but obscure, matter is whether or not unbelief in actions and grievous sins are the same thing. Especially in the Hanafi School, they are considered to be different. The Shafi‘i’s have called “grievous sins” certain words and actions known as unbelief, but have still have noted the existence of certain acts they call “unbelief.” And so, what is the true place of “metaphorical unbelief” or the question of actions, which is different to unbelief in respect of belief itself, and when does it occur? Also, in regard to the other side of this question, how should the ecstatic utterances of some important sufi figures be regarded, and the fatwa’s of some excessively bigotted scholars of the schools of law, which accused them of unbelief. In these questions I referred to the Risale-i Nur, Bediuzzaman’s pharmacy, and I may say that, with God’s permission, it solves the matter completely. Before imbibing the healing potions of the Risale-i Nur, I want to quote two passages from one of Ibn Hajar al-Haythami al-Makki’s rulings (fatwa) on the latter question, since he was an eminent mujtahid. In summary:

“Ibn al-‘Arabi’s extraordinary wonder-working and mental states; his asceticism, worship, fear of God, learning, and complete knowledge of the sciences of religion and truths of the Shari‘a, even to the extent of qualifying to practise ijtihad, ... and the fact that he continued all these till his death, shows that some of the explicit expressions in his works which do not conform to Islamic beliefs must hold another meaning. For according to the rule, ‘what is fundamental to things is constancy or continuation,’ that sublime person’s asceticism, worship, and perfect fear of God, which continued till his death, were fundamental, so he may not be judged according to certain things he said which need to be interpreted and not comprehensible by everyone... ” ⁵²

Now we pass on to the Risale-i Nur and to Bediuzzaman’s early works, and we see that the matter as a whole is founded on three questions:

Firstly: Even if a person deserves to be accused of unbelief, the Shari‘a does not command that he should be called “an unbeliever” (kafir).

Secondly: The error of those, being influenced by extremist Sunni scholars, pass judgement in accordance with the apparent meanings of some verses and Hadiths.

Thirdly: The analysis of what certain sufis said while in a state of ecstasy, or as a result of illuminations.

Taking these three matters in order, I shall give examples from the Risale-i Nur, showoing how it discusses them:

First Matter: Part of Bediuzzaman’s reply to Salih Yesiloglu, who had ‘Alawi leanings. ⁵³ [Not included here]

A passage illustrating another side of the question. ⁵⁴ [Not included here]

A passage from Sünûhat solves yet another side of it. ⁵⁵ [Not included here]

Second Matter: Part of a question and answer from Münâzarat. ⁵⁶ [Not included here]

Third Matter: Part of the Fourth Topic of the Twenty-Sixth Letter.

“Others of the saints have appeared outside some of the principles of the Sunnis, and on a path opposed to their rules. Thus, those who have considered this group of saints have divided into two groups: One group have denied their sainthood because they are opposed to the principles of the Sunnis. They have even gone as far as declaring some of them to be unbelievers. The other group are those that follow them. Since they accept their sainthood, they say that ‘The truth is not restricted to the way of the Sunnis.’ They have formed a group of the innovators and have even gone as far as misguidance. They do not know that every person who is rightly guided cannot be a guide. Their shaykhs are to be excused from their mistakes, because they were ecstatics, but their followers cannot be excused. As for the middle group, they do not deny the sainthood of the saints, but do not accept their ways and paths. They say: ‘Their words which are opposed to the principles [of religion] were either metaphorical utterances the meaning of which is not known, or they [the saints] were in error, being overcome by their mental state.’” ⁵⁷

Another scholarly and investigative analysis is found in Lemâat. ⁵⁸ [Not included here]

Yes, this question has to be solved too. For the verse, How many are the creatures that carry not their own sustenance? It is God Who feeds [both] them and you (29:6) states explicitly that sustenance is guaranteed by the Munificent Provider, which necessitates that no one should die of hunger. This important and difficult mystery should have been solved in connection with the tenets of belief, yet there is no discussion of it in the books of kalâm and doctrine. That means no one felt the need to ask such a question. We refer the matter directly to the Risale-i Nur, and there it is discussed and solved in several places. For example, in the Twelfth Flash; the Fourth Point of the Nineteenth Flash; in one of the pieces in the second part of the Twenty-Eighth Flash; and in some places of al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi. As an example,

First Piece: Part of the First Point of the Twelfth Flash.

“The Sustainer’s guarantee is a reality; none die of hunger. For that All-Wise One of Glory stores up some of the sustenance He sends to the bodies of living creatures as fat, as reserves. In fact, He stores up a part of the sustenance He sends to each cell, in the cell, like a reserve stock to be spent when no sustenance comes from outside. They die before this store is finished. That is to say, such death is not from lack of sustenance; they rather die from a habit acquired through wrong choice and due to illness arising from desire for the wrong things and the giving up of habit.” ⁵⁹

Deeming this First Point of the Twelfth Flash to be sufficient, I have not given any other examples here.

I looked at a number of old Islamic works on asceticism, sufism, and conduct, and particularly, Imam Ghazzali’s Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din, vol. i, pp. 304-9, where the conduct, conditions, and times of prayers are discussed. It goes without saying that in this work the matter is set out in the best way. However, I saw that it offers no explanation that might reply to our question. Thus, the point continues to be obscure. Again I referred the matter directly to the Risale-i Nur, which mentions it in several places. For example, the Fifth Point of the First Chapter of the Twenty-Third Word; the Eighth Lesson of Nur’un Ilk Kapisi; Semme Risalesi in Mathnawi al-‘Arabi, page 373; the Third Point in particular of the First Addendum to the Twenty-Fourth Letter; and the Third Matter of the Thirteenth Note of the Seventeenth Flash. Now, three pieces from these:

First Piece: Part of the Fifth Point of the Twenty-Third Word.

“‘We frequently offer supplications, but they are not accepted, and the verse is general; it states that every supplication is answered.’

“T h e A n s w e r: To answer is one thing, to accept is something quite different. Every supplication is answered, but its being accepted and exactly what was sought being given is dependent on Almighty God’s wisdom. ... Thus, since Almighty God is all-present and all-seeing, He responds to the supplications of His servants. Through His presence and response, He transforms the desolation of loneliness and solitude into familiarity. But He does this, not in accordance with man’s capricious and importunate demands, but in accordance with the requirements of dominical wisdom; He gives either what is sought or what is better than it, or He gives nothing at all.” ⁶⁰

Second Piece: Part of the Third Point of the First Addendum to the Twenty-Fourth Letter:

“There are two ways in which voluntary supplication by word is acceptable. It is either accepted exactly as desired or what is better is granted. For example, someone asks for a son, and Almighty God gives a daughter like Mary. It may not be said: ‘His supplication was not accepted,’ but that ‘It was accepted in a better form.’”

And a couple of sentences from the Fourth and Fifth Points:

“The best, finest, sweetest, most immediate fruit and result of supplication is this, that the person who offers it knows there is someone who listens to his voice, sends a remedy for his ailment, takes pity on him, and whose hand of power reaches everything. ... Supplication is the spirit of worship and the result of sincere belief. For one who makes supplication shows through it that there is someone who rules the whole universe; One Who knows the most insignificant things about me, can bring about my most distant aims.” ⁶¹

Third Piece: Part of the Third Matter of the Twelfth Note of the Seventeenth Flash.

“And so, those who do not understand this mystery, recite for example the Awrad-i Qudsiya-i Shah Naqshband, which yields a hundred benefits and merits, or Jawshan al-Kabir, which yields a thousand, making some of those benefits their prime intention. Then they do not receive the benefits, and shall not receive them, and do not have the right to receive them. For the benefits may not be the reason for the invocation and may not themselves be intended and sought. For they are obtained when unsought for, as a consequence of the sincere invocation, as a favour. If they are intended, it damages the sincerity to an extent. Indeed, it ceases being worship and looses all value.” ⁶²

It is essential to solve and understand the obscurities underlying this question. For, since the ordinary people do not have a clear understanding of it, they may be hesitant about supporting the truth and their belief. I searched for the answer in a number of kalâm books, but could find nothing which solves it. It says in the Qur’an that victory and succour are forthcoming only through God’s will. Verses of this sort are expounded in Hadiths, but the essence of the matter here, that is “why?”, the Risale-i Nur has solved convincingly, as it has questions about similar matters. But without prolonging the discussion, I give the relevant places:

Habab Risalesi from Mathnawi al-‘Arabi, page 190; Barla Lahikasi page 272; the Fifth and Ninth Indications of the Thirteenth Flash; the beginning of the Eleventh Topic of the Eleventh Ray; the question and answer in the second part of the Seventh Flash; and the piece entitled “Why is British diplomacy victorious?” in Asâr-i Bedi‘iye. Now a few examples:

First Piece: Part of the beginning of the Eleventh Topic of the Eleventh Ray, the Fruits of Belief.

“‘The people of guidance are assisted and strengthened by innumerable sweet fruits and benefits like these, the fine results of good deeds, and the Most Merciful of the Merciful’s compassionate succour and assistance, so why are they frequently defeated by the people of misguidance, and sometimes twenty or a hundred of them are routed?’ While pondering over this, I recalled the mobilizations and angels in the Qur’an in the face of Satan’s feeble machinations, and Almighty God’s sending assistance to the people of belief. Since the Risale-i Nur has explained the purpose and wisdom of this with decisive proofs, we shall here make only very brief allusion to it.

“Yes, sometimes in the face of a single vandal trying to set fire to a palace which a hundred men have made, the palace can remain standing only through a hundred men protecting it and by having recourse to the government and the king. For its existence is possible only through the existence of all its conditions and causes, but its non-existence and destruction may occur through the non-existence of a single condition. Just as the palace may be burnt to the ground by a single match of a layabout, so with some small actions, satans from among jinn and men cause vast destruction and terrible non-physical conflagrations. Yes, the basis and leaven of all bad, evils and sins is non-existence, it is destruction. The non-existence and destruction are concealed beneath the apparent existence. Thus, relying on this point, satans from among jinn and men and evil beings withstand an infinite force with an extremely weak force, driving the people of truth and reality to always seek refuge at the Divine Court, and to flee to it. The Qur’an therefore mobilizes great forces for their protection. It gives for their use ninety-nine Divine Names, and commands them sternly to withstand those enemies.” ⁶³

Second Piece: The Fourth of the ‘Miscellaneous Matters’ which were originally assigned to be the Addendum to the Twenty-Sixth Word and then were included in Barla Lahikasi. ⁶⁴ [Not included here]

Third Piece: Part of the Ninth Indication of the Thirteenth Flash.

“Why is it that the people of guidance, who are God’s party, are so often defeated by the people of misguidance, who are Satan’s party, despite the Glory of the World (Upon whom be blessings and peace) being at their head and their receiving so much Divine mercy and assistance and so many favours? ...

“The All-Glorious Creator of the universe has two sort of Names, those pertaining to His Glory and those pertaining to His Beauty. Since these Names require to demonstrate their decrees through different manifestations, the Glorious Creator blended together opposites in the universe. Bringing them face to face, he gave them aggressive and defensive positions, in the form of a sort of wise and beneficial contest. Through making the opposites transgress one another’s bounds, He brought conflict and change into being, and made the universe subject to the law of change and transformation and the principles of progress and advancement. In human kind, the comprehensive fruit of the tree of creation, he made that law of contest in even stranger form, and opening the door to striving, which would be the means of all human progress, He gave Satan’s party certain faculties with which to be able to challenge God’s party.

“It is because of this subtle mystery that the prophets were often defeated before the people of misguidance. And the people of misguidance, who are extremely weak and impotent, temporarily triumph over the people of truth, who in reality are extremely strong, and struggle against them. ...” ⁶⁵

In the continuation of the same, reasons are given for the defeats of the Companions at Uhud and Hunayn.

Fourth Piece: Part of Tuluât in Asâr-i Bedi‘iye. ⁶⁶ [Not included here]

The above are sufficient to explain the people of misguidance’s side of the question. In respect of the people of truth and guidance, the Twentieth Flash, the Treatise on Sincerity, and the First Topic of the Twenty-Second Letter may be referred to, for they have solved it completely.

These two sorts of Hadiths apparently contradict each other, so it surely necessitates showing how the two are conformable, and solving this problem.

Firstly, I consulted the works of a number of learned mujtahids who were authorities on Hadith, known as the purified ones of the Umma, but I did not discover the solution to the problem or any explanation as to how these two sorts of Hadiths are conformable with each other. Nevertheless, they expound Hadiths of this sort excellently with a view to admonishing and enjoining asceticism and self-sufficiency. I am not going to give any examples of these to illuminate the question, or for comparison, because I would not be wrong to say that they offer no explanation of how the two sorts conform. For in former times, it was the application of Hadiths with a view to abandoning the world and asceticism that was emphasized.

We therefore seek the answer directly from the Risale-i Nur, and we see that it deals with the question in a completely original way which solves it at a fundamental level, in most convincing and explanatory fashion. Some of the relevant places are: the Ninth Principle of the Third Branch of the Twenty-Fourth Word; the Second Question of the First Addendum of the Twenty-Seventh Word; the Second and Third Stopping-Places of the Thirty-Second Word; the Second Point of the Fifth Sign of the First Station of the Twenty-Fourth Letter; the Second Question in the Third Station of the Second Ray; and Semme Risalesi in al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi, page 349. Now one or two examples:

First Example: Part of the second question of the Addendum to the Twenty-Seventh Word.

“They say that the saints and possessors of perfection abandoned the world. It even says in a Hadith: ‘Love of this world is the source of all error.’ Whereas the Companions were very involved in the world. It was not abandoning the world, some of the Companions were ahead of the civilized of that time even? ... It has been proved most decisively... that to love the face of the world which looks to the hereafter and that which looks to the Divine Names is not the cause of loss, but the means to perfection and attainment, and however far one goes in those two faces, the further one goes in worship and knowledge of God. The world of the Companions was in those two faces. They saw this world as the arable field of the hereafter, and sowed and reaped it. They saw beings as the mirrors of the Divine Names, and gazed on them yearningly. As for the transience of the world, it is its transitory face, which looks to man’s base desires.” ⁷²

Second Example: The Fifth Word of the Third Aim of the Second Stopping Place of the Thirty-Second Word.

“The world has three faces.

“Its First Face looks to God Almighty’s Names; it displays their impress. It is a mirror to them, reflecting their meanings. This face of the world consists of innumerable letters or missives describing the Eternally Besought One. This face is utterly beautiful, and is worthy of love, not loathing.

“Its Second Face looks to the hereafter. It is the seed-bed of the hereafter and arable field for Paradise. It is the flower-bed of mercy. This face is also beautiful like the first one and is deserving of love not contempt.

“Its Third Face looks to man’s base appetites. It is a veil of neglect and a plaything for satisfying the desires of the worldly. This face is ugly because it is transient and mortal; it is full of pain and it deceives. The contempt described in the Hadith and the loathing of the people of truth, then, is for this face. The importance and approbation which the All-Wise Qur’an demonstrates towards the universe and all beings is towards the first two faces.” ⁷³

Referring readers to that treatise for further explanations, we cut this short here.

Third Example: Part of the Ninth Principle of the Third Branch of the Twenty-Fourth Word.

“For instance, there is this Hadith which has worried the heads of the unfair more than any. Its meaning is: ‘If the world had as much value as a fly’s wing for Almighty God, the unbelievers would not have had so much as a mouthful of water from it.’ The reality of it is this: the phrase for Almighty God refers to the eternal realm. Yes, since a light from the eternal realm to the extent of a fly’s wing is everlasting, it is greater than a temporary light that fills the face of the earth. That means it is not to say that the huge world is equal to a fly’s wing, but that everyone’s private world which is situated within their short lives is not equal to an everlasting Divine effulgence and bounty to the extent of a fly’s wing from the eternal realm. Furthermore, the world has two faces, indeed, three faces. One is the mirrors to Almighty God’s Names, another looks to the hereafter and is its arable field, and the third looks to transience and non-existence...” ⁷⁴

Firstly, this Hadith is found in the following sources: al-Hakim, Mustadrak, iv, 568, 569, 594; Ibn Hazm, al-Fasl fi’l-Milal, ii, 103; Ibn Kathir, al-Bida’I’ wa’l-Niha’yi, ii, 172; Ibn al-Mubarak, al-Zuhd, ii, 118; Imam Bayhaqi, Shu’ab, ii, 244. For the many others, see Badilli, Risale-i Nur’un Kudsi Kaynaklari, 460.

That is to say, the Hadith is definitely sound. In order to learn what the Islamic scholars had said about it, I turned to those most qualified to speak of it: ibn Hazm al-Andalusi’s al-Muhalla bi’l-Athar and al-Fasl fi’l-Milal; Imam Ghazzali&s Ihya; Husayn al-Jisri’s al-Husn al-Hamidiyya, but I could no manner of explanation other than admonition. Only, in Ibn Hazm’s al-Fasl fi’l-Milal it says that the heavens encompass the heavens like a dome, that the world is beneath them, and that these concepts of over and under are relative. ⁷⁵ Otherwise, I could find nothing explaining how Hell is under the ground and where and what this means. Probably at that time no need was felt to ask. However, the Risale-i Nur’s method is one of proving and expounding.

In the Risale-i Nur this subject is discussed at various times in various places. For example, in the Second Question of the Tenth Letter; the Third Question of the First Letter; in the middle of the Third Letter; the Arabic edition of Isharat al-I’jaz pages 185 and 192; Asâr-i Bedi‘iye, page 210; and so on. We quote here from two of these:

First: The Third Question of the Third Letter. [Given only in part here]

“I n S h o r t : Paradise and Hell are the two fruits of a branch of the tree of creation which stretches out towards eternity. The fruits’ place is at the branch’s tip. And they are the two results of the chain of the universe; and the places of the results are the two sides of the chain. The base and heavy are on its lower side, the luminous and elevated on its upper side. They are also the two stores of this flood of events and the immaterial produce of the earth. And the place of a store is according to the variety of the produce, the bad beneath, the good above. They are also the two pools of the flood of beings which flows in waves towards eternity. As for the pool’s place, it is where the flood stops and gathers. That is, the obscene and filthy below, the good and the pure above. They are also the two places of manifestation, the one of beneficence and mercy, the other of wrath and tremendousness...” ⁷⁶

Bediuzzaman’s statements that Hell is under the earth, and about its unimaginable vastness are also to be found in the treatises of the Thirtieth Flash and in the Eighth Topic of the Eleventh Ray. Those who wish may refer to them.

Second: Part of the Fifth Matter of Muhâkemat, in Asâr-i Bedi‘iye. ⁷⁷ [Not included here]

Twenty-Second Mystery: It says in some sound Hadiths that Paradise is the source of rivers like the Nile and Euphrates. Other Hadiths say that they continuously pour out of Paradise drop by drop. Such Hadiths are indisputably sound yet some scholars of religion and even of Hadiths have objected to them. In al-Azhar University in 1954 even, some teachers who denied the authenticity of these Hadiths openly taught that it was doubtful. However, it is unanimously agreed by Sunni scholars that the authenticity of Hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim the soundness of which is agreed, should in no way be doubted. However, those who make their own minds the measure of their judgement attack Hadiths like this, saying that they are irrational.

I am not going to mention their names here; certainly those who followed the debate know them.

Some of the sources of the Hadith are as follows: Sahih al-Bukhari, ii, 134; Sahih al-Muslim, iv, 2183 no: 2839; Musnad al-Ahmad, ii, 289; Mishkat al-Masabih, no: 5628; narrated from Malik ibn Sa’sa’a and Abu Hurayra.

For Bediuzzaman’s interpretation of the profound meaning of this unanimously agreed sound Hadith, see: The First Station of the Twentieth Word, p. 250; The Supreme Sign (the Seventh Ray), p. 112; and Badilli, Mufassal Tarihçe-i Hayat, iii, 1660.

In 1953 and 1954, some of the al-Azhar teachers, because they could not comprehend the apparent meanings of indubitably sound Hadiths on this subject and ones like it, and their allegorical interpretations, chose the easy way out and either did not accept them or turned a blind eye to them, and said they were doubtful. For this reason, a number of students from Turkey who were studying there at that time, chiefly Emirdagli Ali Kiliçarslan, asked Ustad Bediuzzaman by letter to solve the question. Bediuzzaman wrote a lengthy reply which was signed by the students attending him at that time, and the letter was published that ‘Id (Qurban Bayrami) as a congratulations, and disseminated among the Risale-i Nur students as a ‘Lahika’ letter.

First: Parts of the above-mentioned letter. ⁷⁸ [Not included here]

Second: Part of the Fourth Degree of The Supreme Sign, the Seventh Ray.

“The traveller then looks at the rivers and sees that the benefits inherent in them, the functions they perform, and their continual replenishment, are inspired by such wisdom and mercy as indisputably to prove that all rivers, springs, streams and great waterways flow forth from the treasury of Mercy of the Compassionate One, the Lord of Glory and Generosity. They are preserved and dispensed, indeed, in so extraordinary a fashion that it is said ‘Four rivers flow forth from Paradise.’ That is, they transcend by far apparent causes, and flow forth instead from the treasury of a non-material Paradise, from the superabundance of an unseen and inexhaustible source. For example, the blessed Nile, that turns the sandy land of Egypt into a Paradise, flows from the Mountains of the Moon in the south without ever being exhausted, as if it were a small sea. If the water that flowed down the river in six months were gathered together in the form of a mountain and then frozen, it would be larger than those mountains. But the place in the mountains where the water is lodged and stored is less than a sixth of their mass. As for the water that replenishes the river, the rain that enters the reservoir of the river is very sparse in that torrid region and is quickly swallowed up by the thirsty soil; hence it is incapable of maintaining the equilibrium of the river. A tradition has thus grown up that the blessed Nile springs, in miraculous fashion, from an unseen Paradise. This tradition has profound meaning and expresses a beautiful truth.” ⁷⁹

Despite being certain and indubitably sound, some scholars who rely on their own intellects have attacked this Hadith, causing others to doubt it. Its sources, which after the Qur’an, are considered to be indisputably authentic, are: Sahih al-Bukhari, ii, 113; Sahih al-Muslim, iv, 1843; Sahih of Ibn Hibban, viii, 38; and Baghawi’s Sharh al-Sunna, v, 265. For further sources see, Risale-i Nur’un Kudsi Kaynaklari, 689.

Firstly: Part of Bediuzzaman’s reply about this Hadith: the Second Part of the Twenty-Eighth Letter.

“This was written to put a stop to and solve an important argument about the Hadith which describes how Moses (Upon whom be peace) struck Azra’il (Upon whom be peace) in the eye, and the rest of the story... Thus, according to this way, Azra’il (Upon whom be peace) has a face and an eye which looks to every individual. Moses (Upon whom be peace) striking Azra’il (Upon whom be peace) was not directed at his essential self and his true form, and it was not an insult, or non-acceptance; he struck, and strikes, in the eye the one who drew attention to his death and wanted to prevent his work, because he wanted his duties of prophethood to continue permanently.” ⁸⁰

Although this Hadith or narration is definitely sound and is included in numerous Qur’anic commentaries and collections of Hadith, some religious scholars, relying on their own ideas, have preferred to say it is dubious, saying that it is “unauthenticated and a superstition or Isra’iliyat,” therefore denying a profound truth. The matter has therefore remained obscure and something of a mystery. Because even if scholars of that sort have objected to it innumerable times, it is still in the reliable commentaries and books of Hadith.

First I shall give some of the sources of this narration or Hadith, then some of the places Bediuzzaman has expounded it. A few of the reliable sources are: al-Bazzar, Kashf al-Astar al-Zawa’id, ii, 450; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, iii, 588; Suyuti, al-Fath al-Kabir, ii, 201, 209; Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, vi, 249. For further sources, see, Risale-i Nur’un Kudsi Kaynaklari, 397.

Some of the places in the Risale-i Nur where it is expounded and explained are Asâr-i Bedi‘iye, 201; the Second Station of The Shining Proof (Fifteenth Ray); Eleventh Topic of the Eleventh Ray; and First Station of the Fourteenth Word.

First Piece: From Muhâkemat. ⁸¹ [Not included here]

Bediuzzaman’s approach in this work, which he wrote in his youth, is highly learned and analytical. He takes into account the views both of the traditionists, and the geographers and astronomers. Basically, what Bediuzzaman does not accept here and what he is combatting, is the lengthy story-like form some people had added onto the Hadith, resembling the well-know Isra’iliyyat, which was extraordinary and completely unreasonable, as well as being opposed to the order of the universe and laws of creation. In the subsequent two pieces given below, Bediuzzaman deals more with the Hadith’s meaning and proving its correctness.

Second Piece: Part of the Eleventh Topic from the Eleventh Ray.

“Through this fruit, for example, the creation of the earth and its natural duties, which the soulless laws of philosophy show to be dark and desolate, are placed in luminous familiar fashion on the shoulders of, that is, under the supervision of, two angels called Thawr (the Bull) and Hut (the Fish). And a truth, a substance of the hereafter called sakhra, is sent as an everlasting foundation stone of the transitory earth, that is, as a sign that in the future part of it will be transformed into eternal Paradise, and it is made a point of support for the angels Thawr and Hut. This was narrated by the old prophets of the Children of Israel, and also by Ibn ‘Abbas. Unfortunately, in the course of time, this sacred meaning and allegory was taken literally by the ordinary people and acquired a form outside the bounds of reason. Since the angels travel through earth and rock at the centre of the earth the same as they do through the air, they, and the earth, surely have no need of physical rocks and a fish and ox to support them.” ⁸²

Third Piece: The First Station of the Fourteenth Word, which treats the subject in depth, analyzing the Hadith’s meanings, which are correct, and making it completely clear. I include two paragraphs by way of example. [Not included here. ]

One of the two remaining aspects of the Hadith: one of the most important components of mankind’s commerce is agriculture, which for thousands of years has rested on the ox. The other is the fish, which Bediuzzaman says is a major source of livelihood and trade, and that the Hadith alludes to this aspect as well.

As for its other aspect, even if it is not correct, the ancient philosophers in particular supposed the sun to pass through the twelve constellations in its annual rotation. However, according to modern science, the earth shows the constellations in its annual rotation. Thus, the first time the question was asked, the earth was in the constellation of the Fish, and according to one narration, when it was asked a month later, it was in the constellation of the Bull; it was this that the Hadith was alluding to. Those interested may refer to the original. ⁸³

This exceedingly wondrous matter is something believed by all people of faith and has become a fact established through the acceptance of all the Umma of Muhammad (PBUH). It is alluded to by Hadiths and narrations; also all those who have written ‘mevlids’ have expressed it in poetry. Many of the great Islamic scholars, such as Imam Ghazzali, Imam-i Rabbani, Imam Bajuri, and Ibn al-Hajar al-Makki, have discussed the side of this question that looks to the conscience and heart, without providing any rational explanations of it. The great tradionists made some criticisms and corrections as required by the principles of the science of Hadiths. Now I shall note the sources of some of the Hadiths which allude to the basis of the matter, then again see how the Risale-i Nur proves it rationally and according to scholarly principles.

The sources of the Hadiths are: ‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa, ii, 164; ‘Ali al-Qari, Sharh al-Shifa’, i, 6; Nazm al-Mutanathir fi’l-Hadith al-Mutawatir, 11; al-Sirat al-Halabiyya, i, 240; ‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa, i, 265. For further sources, see, Risale-i Nur’un Kudsi Kaynaklari, 814. Suyuti, al-Hawi li’l-Fatawa, ii, 545; Qastalani, al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyya, i, 25-83; al-San’ani, al-Mussannaf, xi, 276. For further sources, see, Risale-i Nur’un Kudsi Kaynaklari, 434.

This matter is discussed in several places in the Risale-i Nur in the light of the above Hadiths and narrations, and a different aspect of it is proved. For example, the First and Second Difficulties in the Third Principle of the Thirty-First Word; the First Addendum of the Twenty-Fourth Letter, and particularly its conclusion; al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi, pp. 59, 177, 224; Mesnevi-i Nûriye (trans: Abdülmecid), 117; Seventh Topic of the Eleventh Ray; the Fourth Sign of the Fifth Point of the Thirtieth Flash, on the Divine Name of Ever-Living; the third part of the Fifteenth Ray, The Shining Proof; Arabic ed. Ishara\t al-I’jaz, 124. And so on.

And so, some of these passages:

The First: Part of the First Difficulty in the Third Principle of the Thirty-First Word.

“Thus, when the universe is considered from the point of view of wisdom, it is seen to bear the meaning of a mighty tree. For just as a tree has branches, leaves, blossom and fruit, so too in this lower world, which is one part of the tree of creation, there are elements, which are like its branches; plants and trees, which are like its leaves; animals, which are like its flowers; and man, which is like the fruit.

“Furthermore, the Divine Name of All-Wise requires that a law of the All-Glorious Maker that is in force in trees generally will also be in force in the mighty tree of creation. Since this is so, wisdom requires that the tree of creation also, be formed from a seed, and such a seed that contains the essentials and principles of other worlds besides the corporeal world. For the fundamental and original seed of the universe, which comprises thousands of different worlds, cannot be a scrap of desiccated matter.

“Since before the tree of the universe there was no tree of the same kind, it is also a requirement of the Name of All-Wise that meaning and light, which are like a source and seed to it, should be clothed with the garment of a fruit on the tree of the universe. For a seed cannot remain permanently unclothed. And since at the beginning of creation it was not clothed in the garment of a fruit, it would surely be clothed in it at the end. And since that fruit is mankind. And since, as was proved above, the most famous fruit and sublime result from among mankind, who attracted the attention of all and confined to himself the gaze of a fifth of mankind, and with his moral and spiritual qualities caused the world to consider him with either feelings of love or of wonder, is the Person of Muhammad (Upon whom be blessings and peace), most certainly, light, which was the seed from which the universe was formed, would become clothed in corporeality in his person and would appear in the form of an ultimate fruit.

“O listener! Do not consider it improbable that this strange and mighty universe is created from the particular essence of a human being! Why should the All-Powerful One of Glory Who creates a huge pine tree, which is like a sort of world, from a seed the size of a grain of wheat not create the universe from ‘the Light of Muhammad’ (Upon whom be blessings and peace)? Why should He not be able to do so?” ⁸⁴

In order to understand this piece fully, one needs to read the whole of this treatise carefully, and really the whole of the Risale-i Nur.

The Second: Towards the end of the Fourth Sign of the Fifth Treatise of the Thirtieth Flash.

“Yes, just as life is the distilled essence of the universe; and consciousness and sense perception are distilled from life and are the essence of life; and intelligence too is distilled from consciousness and sense perception and is the essence of consciousness; and spirit is the pure, unsullied substance of life, its stable and autonomous essence; so too, the physical and spiritual life of Muhammad (PBUH) is the distilled quintessence of the life and spirit of the universe; and the Messengership of Muhammad (PBUH) is the very purest essence distilled from the senses, consciousness, and intelligence of the universe. Indeed, the physical and spiritual life of Muhammad (PBUH), is, through the testimony of its works, the very life of the life of the universe. And the Messengership of Muhammad (PBUH) is the consciousness and light of the universe’s consciousness. While the Qur’anic revelation, according to the testimony of its living truths, is the spirit of the universe’s life and the intelligence of its consciousness.

“Yes, yes, yes! If the light of the Messengership of Muhammad (PBUH) was to depart from the universe, the universe would die. If the Qur’an was to depart, the universe would go mad, the earth would lose its head and its reason; it would even strike its now unconscious head on a planet and Doomsday would occur.” ⁸⁵

The Third: Part of Habbe Risalesi from Mesnevi-i Nuriye (Badilli trans.).  ⁸⁶ [Not included here]

The Fourth: From Arabic ed. Isharat al-I’jaz.  ⁸⁷ [Not included here]

I firstly wanted to seek the answer to this truly important, and as much as it is important, strange and insoluble question, in the books on Islamic beliefs. I looked first at Imam al-A‘zam Abu Hanifa’s Fiqh al-Akbar, and in the original text it says: “... and the appearance of the Dajjal (Antichrist), and of Gog and Magog, the sun rising in the west, and the descent of Jesus from the skies, and the other signs of the end of time are to be found in sound Hadiths, and they are true and will occur.” ⁸⁸ It is understood from this that one has to believe in narrations about this as they are. The original text of ‘Aqa’id al-Nasafi says exactly the same thing. ⁸⁹

That is, rulings about Qur’anic verses and Hadiths are made according to their apparent meanings. Nevertheless, the scholars of the principles of religion laid down the rule: “If anything in the Qur’an and Hadiths (naql) is contrary to reason, it is interpreted.” As in the discussion about the ‘negating’ Divine attributes in his work Nahj al-An‘am, the famous Molla Khalil-i Si‘ird, about whom Bediuzzaman said “his word is proof,” it is said: “If some meanings of verses and Hadiths appear to be reasonably impossible, interpret them; do not leave them to the people of misguidance.”

Again on this subject, the famous scholar Husayn al-Jisri said in his work al-Husn al-Hamidiyya:

“The incontrovertible points of the Shari‘a are the Qur’anic verses and unanimously related Hadiths about worship and social relations, and some other famous Hadiths. We are obliged to rely on these incontrovertible points in the injunctions of the Shari‘a, so it is obligatory to rely on them in questions of belief. Then, it is obligatory that we rely on the apparent meanings of all verses and Hadiths, and those that are clearly comprehensible. It is certainly not permissible to prefer some other meaning to the apparent meaning because of interpretation. However, if we are faced with definite reasonable evidence and it abrogates the apparent meaning, then it is understood that the apparent meaning was not what was intended. We may then interpret that decisive verse or Hadith for some other meaning...” ⁹⁰

This means that those with sound knowledge, when necessary, may, as indicated by a verse of the Qur’an, interpret the apparent meaning for another meaning. Among the Islamic scholars, there have been those who have done this, even if they have been few in number. For example, those who have studied Ibn al-Kathir’s Bida’yi’ wa Niha’yi and Barzanji’s al-Isha’ know that they have interpreted the apparent meanings of the occasional Hadith. Nevertheless, the matter is not solved completely.

Now we take the matter to Bediuzzaman and study what he wrote about this subject in his works. It, that is, the solving of this mystery, is discussed and analyzed in particular in several places. For example, the Third Branch of the Twenty-Fourth Word; the third section of the First Letter; the Fourth Question of the Fifteenth Letter; the Fourth Principle of the Fourth Sign of the Nineteenth Letter; the second question and answer in the Fourth Indication of the Seventh Part of the Twenty-Ninth Letter, and in the Sixth Indication; al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi (latest ed.) page 445; the Fifth Ray and especially its introduction; Kastamonu Lahikasi pages 26, 80; and some letters in Emirdag Lahikasi. And some pieces as examples:

The First Example: Part of the Eighth Principle of the Third Branch of the Twenty-Fourth Word.

“Now, the difference in the narrations about individuals like the Mahdi, and their meaning, is this: those who expounded Hadiths applied the text of the Hadiths to their own interpretations and commentaries. For example, since the centre of power at that time was Damascus or Medina, they imagined the events connected with the Mahdi and Sufyan in places like Basra, Kufa, and Syria, which were in the region of those centres, and expounded them accordingly. Moreover, they imagined the mighty works pertaining to the collective identity or community which those individuals represent to be in their persons and expounded them in that way, so that they ascribed a form to them whereby when those extraordinary individuals appear, everyone will recognize them. However, as we said, this world is an arena of trial, the door is opened to the reason, but the will is not taken from the hand. So, when those individuals, and even the terrible Dajjal, appear, many people and himself even will not know to start with that he is the Dajjal. Rather, those individuals of the end of time will be known through the insight of the light of belief.” ⁹¹

It is necessary to read all twelve of these principles in order to gain a complete understanding of this matter, and we refer readers to them for now.

Second Example: Part of the introduction of the Fifth Ray. ⁹² [Not included here]

We include too a couple of narrations and their explanation, which have been interpreted on the basis of firmly founded knowledge. ⁹³ [Not included here]

Those who wish may read the twenty-three matters interpreted in the Fifth Ray, together with its introduction. Not wanting to prolong the discussion with further examples, I refer those interested to the above-mentioned references so that they may see that the question has truly been solved.

This Hadith is sound and unanimously reported. But in its literal meaning, when not interpreted, it does not conform with Islamic beliefs. It is because of this that some sufis have expounded it in inappropriate manner. That is to say, the Hadith has an ‘obscure’ aspect. In the face of the sufis’ inappropriate interpretations, some externalist scholars who rely on their own ideas, have gone so far as denying the Hadith. Without exacerbating the situation, I give its sources:

Sahih al-Bukhari, iv, 160; viii, 62; ix, 88; Sahih al-Muslim, iv, 1283; viii, 82, 366, Nos: 28, 115. For further sources, see, Risale-i Nur’un Kudsi Kaynaklari, 2nd. ed., 360.

The scholars of the principles of religion and of kalâm have dealt with this sound Hadith and have interpreted it in various ways. Of these, Imam Ibn Furak’s Mashkil al-Hadith (tahqiq: Musa Muhammad ‘Ali) from page 45, offers lengthy discussions. It gives various interpretations based on a grammatical analysis, but still, when compared with the Risale-i Nur, it is seen that it has not solved the allegorical aspects of the Hadith. Despite the lengthy analyses of the author and its editor, it is not solved and the obscure aspects remain. Only in one place in all these does it say, “What is meant by God’s form is His attributes.” Now to move on to the manner in which the Risale-i Nur expounds the Hadith:

First Piece: Part of the Second Station of the Fourteenth Flash.

“Indeed, the Most Pure and Holy Deity, Who administers with order the whole universe as though it was a palace or house, and spins the stars as though they were particles and causes them to travel through space with wisdom and ease, and employs minute particles as though they were orderly officials, has no partner, match, opposite, or equal. So also according to the meaning of the verse: There is nothing whatever like unto Him, and He hears and sees [all things], He has no form, like, or peer, there is nothing resembling or similar to Him. However, according to the meaning and manner of comparison of the following verse, And His is the highest similitude in the heavens and the earth, and He is Exalted in Might, Full of Wisdom, His actions, attributes, and Names may be considered. That is to say, allegory and comparison may be used in connection with His actions. One aim of the above-mentioned Hadith is as follows: ‘Man is in a form showing the Divine Name of All-Merciful in its entirety.’

“For sure, as we explained before, just as the Divine Name of All-Merciful is manifest through the rays of a thousand and one Names on the face of the universe, and is apparent through the innumerable manifestations of God’s absolute dominicality on the face of the earth, so also is the complete manifestation of the Name All-Merciful apparent in a small measure in man’s comprehensive form, like on the face of the earth and the face of the universe.

“A further indication is this: the evidences to the Necessarily Existent One of places of manifestation like animate creatures and man, who are proofs of and mirrors to the All-Merciful and Compassionate One, are so certain, clear, and obvious that just as it may be said of a shining mirror which reflects the image of the sun: “That mirror is the sun,” indicating to the clarity of its brilliance and evidence, so also it has been said and may be said: ‘Man is in the form of the All-Merciful One,’ indicating to the clearness of his evidence and completeness of his connection.”  ⁹⁴

Second Piece: Part of a letter from Emirdag Lahikasi. ⁹⁵ [Not included here]

Third Piece: Passages from the Thirty-Third Word. ⁹⁶ [Not included here]

This matter is truly an obscure mystery that needs to be solved. For when statements, arrived at through illumination, of persons whom most Muslims know of and trust, and predictions about the future, turn out not to conform to the physical world or reality, it gives rise to doubts concerning them, particularly among the ordinary people. Since such persons are important religious figures, doubts about them indirectly cause doubt about religion. Thanks be to God, the Risale-i Nur has solved this important riddle and obscure matter as well.

The comparison illustrating this in the Second Branch of the Twenty-Fourth Word; the First Matter of the Eighteenth Letter; Emirdag Lahikasi, ii, 111; the First Question of the Sixteenth Flash; the Third Matter of Muhakemat; and the part ‘A matter related to belief,’ in the piece Sirr-i Inna a’teyna’.

First Piece: Part of the First Matter of the Eighteenth Letter.

“They are the people of truth and reality. They are also saints and those who witness the realities. They saw correctly what they saw, but since they were not correct in declarations they made while in the state of illumination and witnessing, which is without comprehension, and in their interpretations of their visions, which were like dreams, they were partially incorrect. People of illumination and witnessing of that sort cannot interpret their own visions while in such a state, just as a person cannot interpret his own dream while dreaming it. Those who can interpret them are the exact scholars of the legacy of prophethood, called ‘the purified ones.’ For sure, when they rise to the rank of the ‘purified ones,’ the people of witnessing of that group understand their errors through the guidance of the Qur’an and the Sunna, and they correct them; and they did correct them.” ⁹⁷

Second Piece: Part of the Third Matter of Muhâkemat. ⁹⁸ [Not included here]

Third Piece: Part of the First Matter of the Sixteenth Flash.

“Why do people of sainthood and illumination such as that make predictions that are contrary to reality? They asked me, and a summary of the reply I gave them, with which I was inspired, is this:

“It is said in a Hadith: ‘Sometimes a calamity is visited on a person, but it is confronted with alms-giving, and is repelled.’ The underlying meaning of this Hadith shows that while appointed events are going to come to pass through certain conditions, they do not occur. That is to say, the appointed events of which the people of illumination are aware are not absolute, but restricted by certain conditions; on the conditions not being present, the event does not occur. However the event, like the appointed hour of death, which is suspended, is written and determined in the Tablet of Appearance and Dissolution, which is a sort of notebook of the Pre-Eternal Tablet. It is only extremely rarely that illuminations penetrate as far as the Pre-Eternal Tablet; mostly they cannot rise that far.” ⁹⁹

Fourth Piece: Bediuzzaman’s comparison of his own intuitive disclosures. ¹⁰⁰ [Not included here]

It is known by everyone that in this matter the sufis have put greatest emphasis on actions related to killing the soul. Although there are slight differences between those who practise public recitations and those who practise silent recitation, they are in agreement on abandoning all other than God and annihilating the soul. However, it is known that the Companions of the Prophet (PBUH) and subsequent generations approached the matter differently. Imam-i Rabbani has described this very well in one or two of his letters. That is, in the age of the Companions, the perfections of Prophethood prevailed, but subsequently they diminished slightly, till at the end of the third century they disappeared completely, and after this the ways of sainthood (velayet) started to appear. ¹⁰¹

So to see which is in conformity with wisdom and suitable for perfect worship, we turn to the Risale-i Nur of Bediuzzaman, and receive our reply from the Ninth Letter; the Four Steps, which is the Addendum to the Twenty-Sixth Word; and a passage from Semme Risalesi in Mathnawi al-‘Arabi.

First Piece: Part of the Ninth Letter.

“...The intense curiosity, fervent love, terrible greed, and stubborn desires, and other intense emotions in man’s nature were given in order to gain the matters of the hereafter. To direct those emotions in intense fashion towards transitory worldly matters means giving the price of eternal diamonds for pieces of glass that are to be smashed. A point has occurred to me in connection with this, and I shall tell it. It is like this: passionate love is an ardent sort of love. When it is directed towards transitory objects, it either causes its owner perpetual torment and pain, or, since the metaphorical beloved is not worth the price of such fervent love, it causes the lover to search for an eternal beloved. Then metaphorical love is transformed into true love. Thus, there are in man thousands of emotions, each of which has two degrees, one metaphorical, the other, true...” ¹⁰²

The answers to another aspect of the ‘obscure’ side of this matter are to be found in the pieces of the Risale-i Nur given in the Twentieth Mystery above, and may be referred to.

Second Piece: Semme Risalesi, 3rd part, Mesnevi-i Nuriye (trans. Badilli) p. 475. [Not included here]

Third Piece: Part of the Addendum to the Twenty-Sixth Word.

“The ways leading to Almighty God are truly numerous. While all true ways are taken from the Qur’an, some are shorter, safer, and more general than others. Of these ways taken from the Qur’an is that of impotence, poverty, compassion, and reflection, from which, with my defective understanding, I have benefited.

“Indeed, like ecstatic love, impotence is a path which, by way of worship, leads to winning God’s love; but it is safer. Poverty too leads to the Divine Name of All-Merciful. Like ecstatic love, compassion also leads to the Name of All-Compassionate, but it is a sharper and broader path. Also like ecstatic love, reflection leads to the Name of All-Wise, but it is a richer, broader, and more brilliant path. This path consists not of ten steps like the ‘ten subtle faculties’ of some of the tariqats employing silent recollection, nor of seven stages like the ‘seven souls’ of those practicing public recitation, but of Four Steps. It is reality [haqiqat], rather than a tariqat. It is Shari‘a.” ¹⁰³

This strange and very important statement about intention and point of view was made of course by Bediuzzaman. There are numerous statements about intention in Hadiths, with strong encouragement to the effect that sincerity and a good intention is the spirit of everything. There is no need to note them here. So we suffice with a Hadith which was reported unanimously, the meaning of which is: “Actions are judged according to the intention. Everyone will be rewarded for their actions only in accordance with their intentions.” ¹⁰⁴

According to the meaning Bediuzzaman arrived at, ordinary actions may be transformed into worship through intention; so too, according to the viewpoint, physical sciences can become knowledge of God. This statement is to be found only in the Risale-i Nur. If someone is able to find something similar, he should point it out.

I looked at various passages in the Risale-i Nur to see how the question is dealt with. It is mentioned in several places. For instance, the Second and Third Fruits of the Fifth Branch of the Twenty-Fourth Word; Katre Risalesi in Mathnawi al-‘Arabi, pages 105, 109, 327, 330, and 481; the Eleventh Flash; Lema’at in Asâr-i Bedi‘iye page 558. As well as in other places in various ways. Now some examples:

First: Part of the Second Fruit of the Fifth Branch of the Twenty-Fourth Word. (About intention.)

“If you say: ‘How can I respond to these countless, universal bounties with my limited and partial thanks?’

“The Answer: With a universal intention and boundless belief... For example, a man enters a king’s presence with a gift worth five kurush, and he sees that other gifts worth millions have arrived from acceptable people, and have been lined up there. It occurs to him: ‘My present is nothing. What shall I do?’ And he says suddenly: ‘My Lord! I offer you all these valuable gifts in my name. For you are worthy of them. If I had the power, I would have given you gifts equal to them.’ Thus, the king, who has need of nothing and accepts his subjects’ gifts as a sign of their loyalty and respect, accepts that wretched man’s universal intention and wish, and the worthiness of his fine and exalted belief as though they were the greatest gift.”

Second: Part of the Ninth Point of the Eleventh Flash.

“Actually following to the letter every aspect of the Practices of the Prophet (PBUH) is only bestowed on the highest of the elite. If it is not possible to follow them in practice, everyone can seek to do so by intention, purpose, and by supporting them and being biased towards them.” ¹⁰⁵

Third: Part of Katre Risalesi in Mathnawi al-^Arabi.

“In the forty years of my life and thirty years of study, I have learnt only four words and four phrases. They shall be explained in detail, but here only alluded to briefly. The aim of the words is ‘the meaning of a thing which signifies another’ (mâna-yi harfî), ‘the meaning of a thing which signifies itself only’ (mâna-yi ismî), ‘intention,’ and ‘point of view.’ It is like this:

“Everything other than Almighty God (that is, the universe) should be considered as signifying one other than itself, its Maker; it should be looked at on His account. To regard it as signifying itself and to look on it on account of causes is an error. Yes, everything has two aspects. One looks to the Creator, the other to creation. The aspect which looks to creation should be like a lace veil or transparent piece of glass over the aspect looking to the Creator; like a veil over that aspect which displays it. Therefore, when bounties are considered, the Bestower of Bounties should come to mind; when art is beheld, the Maker should be thought of; and when causes are held in view, the true Causer of Effects should come to mind and be pondered over.

“Similarly, ‘point of view’ and ‘intention’ change the nature of things. They transform sins into meritorious acts, and meritorious acts into sins. Yes, intention turns a habitual action into worship, and turns worship performed for show into a sin. If material things [physical sciences] are considered on account of causes, it is ignorance, while if they are considered on account of God, it is knowledge of God.” ¹⁰⁶

Fourth: Part of Katre Risalesi, Introduction. ¹⁰⁷ [Not included here]

Fifth: Part of Semme Risalesi Part 2, in Mathnawi al-‘Arabi. ¹⁰⁸

Sixth: Part of Lema’at. ¹⁰⁹ [Not included here]

Also, if one studies carefully the Sixth Topic of the Eleventh Ray keeping the above in mind, it will be seen how intention and viewpoint transform commonplace physical sciences into knowledge of God. The curious may refer to that too.

It is compulsory according to the unanimous view of the Sunnis to believe and assent to prophets’ miracles and wonder-working of the saints. See for example, Imam Bajuri’s Sharh Jawhar al-Tawhid pp. 340-2.

Yes, besides his many unanimously reported miracles, our Master God’s Messenger (PBUH) —as an instance of wonder-working, and as is recorded in certain Hadiths and narrations, broke off a bunch of grapes in Paradise and ate them. For the sources see, Risale-i Nur’un Kudsi Kaynaklari, page 775, No: 771. And Zacharia (Upon whom be peace) seeing various fruits which were out of season in Mary’s (Upon whom be peace) room, as is stated by Sura Al-i Imran v. 38, was not as prophet but as saint. Similarly, wonder-working of this sort of some of the great saints of the Islamic Umma is well-known and unanimously reported. Just as we definitely accept the occurrence of these, so the only scholar who has proved their possibility this age has been Bediuzzaman. Although there are accounts in the old books of sufism and Islamic beliefs describing the occurrence of such marvels, they contain no rational proofs. The Risale-i Nur, however, discusses and proves the possibility of their occurrence, one example of which is among the pieces of the Twenty-Eighth Flash.

“Also, it is said that some of the people of prophethood and some wonder-workers as though pluck from close to the fruits of Paradise, which according to incontestable verses of the Qur’an, is above the heavens, and sometimes gaze on Paradise from near at hand. This matter, which concerns infinite distance within infinite proximity, is not conformable with the understanding of the present age...” ¹¹⁰

The Fifteenth and Thirty-First Words come to mind at this point, not directly in relation to this subject, but proving with numerous scholarly evidences the existenec of a way to ascend to the heavens, and the possibility of the Prophet’s Ascension. Referring the curious to those treatises, we cut this short here.

The master of the way of the Unity of Existence was Muhyiddin al-‘Arabi, al-Shaykh al-Akbar, as is well-known. Although the principles of this way and those of the Sunni beliefs do not completely conform to each other, it cannot be said that Sunni scholars have set out both sides —that is, the principles on which the Unity of Existence is based and the fundamental principles of the Sunnis— with complete clarity. Thus, because both sides of the matter, but particularly the sources of the way of the Unity of Existence have not been set out precisely, the matter has remained obscure to a degree and at odds. In bigotted manner some externalist scholars have attacked it unfairly, and have gone so far as to accuse its founder, Muhyiddin, of unbelief and misguidance. Other religious scholars who were fairer but did not go into the matter in sufficient depth, said that he wwas an ecstatic who got carried away. In his discussion about Muhyiddin in his Maktubat, Imam-i Rabbani, Shaykh Ahmad al-Sirhindi, criticized the Unity of Existence severely. However, many great saints from among the sufis have accepted it as a way of truth, and have even followed it. Thus, down to the present it has remained something of a mystery and somewhat vague. I do not consider it necessary to describe here the various disputes concerning it. It will be of little value to describe the fierce disputes between Imam Sibqi‘, who answered Ibn Taymiyya’s relentless attacks, and Ibn al-Hajar al-Makki. And the Unity of Existence and some of the Sunnis replying to it, and others of the Sunnis not doing anything although they knew it to be wrong —I have not repeated this since it is well-known.

Bediuzzaman too did not ignore the question, he studied it, and just as he solved numerous questions related to religion, so he solved this easily and explained it. There is discussion of it in several of his works, both early and later. For example, in the middle of Isharat in Asâr-i Bedi‘iye; in the section Telvih and Isaret in the First Aim of Muhâkemat; the Second Point of the Eighteenth Letter; at the beginning and end of the Ninth Flash; in several pieces of the Twenty-Eighth Flash; and in Barla Lahikasi.

We see that Bediuzzaman discussed the question from several angles when analyzing it. Firstly, what the bases of the Unity of Existence are and how it arose, and secondly, its errors compared with the principles of the Sunnis, and thirdly, how disseminating this way at the present time will cause much harm. By way of example, we include the following:

First Piece: Part of the Ninth Flash.

“Q u e s t i o n : Muhyiddin al-‘Arabi considered the Unity of Existence to be of the highest level. Likewise, some of the great saints who took the path of love followed him. However, you say that this matter is not of the highest level, and is not real; that it is rather the way, to a degree, of those who become intoxicated and immersed in the Divine, and of the people of love and ecstasy. So what, briefly, is the high level of the affirmation of Divine Unity pointed out by the clear verses of the Qur’an, through the mystery of the legacy of prophethood? Can you explain it?

“T h e A n s w e r : It is a hundred times beyond the ability of an utterly powerless unfortunate like myself to judge these elevated stations with his limited thought. I shall just explain one or two extremely brief points proceeding from the effulgence of the All-Wise Qur’an. Perhaps they will be useful in understanding the matter...

“There are numerous reasons for the way of the Unity of Existence, and for becoming enmeshed in it; one or two of them shall be described:

“The First Reason: Because they could not squeeze into their brains the maximum degree of the creativity of dominicality, and could not entirely establish in their hearts that everything, through the mystery of Divine Oneness, is held directly in the grasp of dominicality and that all things have existence through Divine power, choice, and will, those who took that way were obliged to say that everything is either Him, or does not have existence, or is imaginary, or is His manifestation or emanation.

“The Second Reason: The mark of passionate love is to want never to be separated from the beloved and to flee desperately from such separation; to tremble at the thought of parting...” ¹¹¹

Second Piece: Part of the Second Important Matter in the Eighteenth Letter.

“Q u e s t i o n : The Unity of Existence is considered by many people to be the most elevated station. But the way of the Unity of Existence in this form was not seen explicitly in the Companions and foremost the four Rightly-Guided Caliphs, who were at the level of ‘the greatest sainthood,’ or in the Imams of the Prophet’s Family and foremost the five ‘People of the Cloak,’ or the great interpreters of the law and the generation following the Companions and foremost the founders of the four schools of law. So did those who emerged subsequently to them advance further than them? Did they find a better highway on which to proceed?

“T h e A n s w e r : God forbid! Nobody at all has the ability to advance further than those purified ones who were the stars and heirs closest to the Sun of Prophethood; the highway is indeed theirs.

“As for the Unity of Existence, it is a way and a state, but it is a deficient degree. However, because it is illuminating and pleasurable, most of those who have reached that degree on their spiritual journeyings have not wanted to leave it; they have remained there and supposed it to be the ultimate degree.

“Thus, if one who takes this way is a spirit who is divested of materiality and intermediaries and has rent the veil of causes, and is immersed in a state of witnessing, then an experiential —not pertaining to knowledge— unity of existence which arises not from the Unity of Existence but from the Unity of Witnessing, may obtain for him a certain attainment, a spiritual station. He may even reach the degree of denying the universe for the sake of God. But if he is submerged in causes and preoccupied with materiality, the term Unity of Existence may go so far as meaning denying God on account of the universe.” ¹¹²

We said that Bediuzzaman dealt with the question from three angles; the two above pieces illustrate the first two. For the third, about the harm caused by the Unity of Existence at the present time, see the following:

“Teaching this question of the Unity of Existence to people at the present time causes serious harm. Just as when metaphors and similes pass from the hands of the learned to those of the common people and knowledge passes from scholars to the ignorant, they are thought to be literally true, so when elevated truths like the Unity of Existence pass to the heedless and to the common people submerged in causes, they are thought to be Nature, and cause three significant instances of harm...” ¹¹³

Now a piece which demonstrates, together with the above three explanations, that the way of the Unity of Existence is a way of illumination that has emerged directly from Islam and the Qur’an, and that it has absolutely no connection with the false ways of the ancient philosophers, which were superstition and had entered Islam from outside:  ¹¹⁴ [Not included here]

A dispute about Muhyiddin al-‘Arabi’s way flared up in Egypt between Mustafa Sabri, the last Ottoman Shaykh al-Islam, and Musa Bekuf, who had made a name for himself in Egypt. Bediuzzaman was in Eskisehir Prison at the time, 1935. He was asked about their dispute, and he gave a reply:

“I do not have the time to weigh up the ideas of Mustafa Sabri and those of Musa Bekuf. I shall only say this much, that the one went to one extreme, and the other to the other extreme. Mustafa Sabri was right relatively to Musa Bekuf, but it is not right to denigrate someone like Muhyiddin who was a miracle of the Islamic sciences.

“Yes, himself, Muhyiddin was rightly-guided and acceptable, but in all his works cannot be the guide and instructor. Since he very often proceeded in the realities without balance, he opposed the rules of the Sunnis and some of the things he said apparently express misguidance. However, he himself is free of misguidance...” ¹¹⁵

Bediuzzaman also provided a most original and important answer to Muhyiddin’s views on the nature of spirit in the context of the Unity of Existence. Although he recognizes Muhyiddin’s personal rank, wondrous knowledge, and his guidance, he analyzes and points out those of his writings that oppose the principles of the Sunnis. As follows:

“It is because of this that although he was such an elevated and wondrous spiritual pole, a unique one of ages, it is as though his particular way was very short and restricted to Sadruddin al-Qunawi, and that his works are only rarely benefited from by those on the straight path. Some of the authoritative scholars do not show any inclination to study those valuable works, and some of them even prevent it.

“Lengthy study and a very elevated and broad view is needed to show the fundamental differences together with their sources between the Hadhrat Muhyiddin’s way and that of the exacting scholars. Yes, the differences are so fine and profound and the sources, so elevated and extensive that Hadhrat Muhyiddin has not been censured and has continued to be accepted. For if in regard to thought, scholarship, and illumination the difference and sources had become apparent, it would have been an extremely serious fall for him, and grievous error.” ¹¹⁶

Anyone interested in completing this subject may refer to the Second Matter of the Twenty-Sixth Letter, which explains why Muhyiddin al-‘Arabi wrote to Fakhr al-Din al-Razi saying: “Knowing that God exists is not the same as knowing Him.”