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.

FIRST POINT

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, to fear distance from the beloved as though fearing Hell, and to abominate transience; to love union with the love of one’s own spirit and life, and to yearn for closeness to the beloved with the longing for Paradise. And so, through adhering to a manifestation of Divine immediacy in all things, those who took the way of the Unity of Existence disregarded separation and distance; supposing union and meeting to be permanent, they said: “There is no existent but He;” through the intoxication of love and as demanded by the ecstasy of permanence, meeting, and union, they imagined that in the Unity of Existence was a most pleasurable way of illumination whereby they could be saved from the dreadfulness of separation.

That is to say, the source of the first reason was the hand of the intellect being unable to reach up to some of the truths of belief, which were extremely broad and elevated; its being unable to comprehend them, and not having developed completely in regard to belief. While the source of the second reason was the extraordinary unfolding of the heart from the point of view of love, and its wondrous expansion and breadth.

However, the supreme level of Divine Unity the Purified Ones—who were the people of sobriety and great saints of the legacy of prophethood —saw through the explicit expositions of the Qur’an is both extremely elevated, and shows both the maximum level of dominicality and creativity, and that all the Divine Names are real. It preserves its bases and does not spoil the balance of the decrees of dominicality. For they say that together with the Oneness of His Essence and His being free of space, with His knowledge, Almighty God encompasses and determines directly all things together with all their attributes, and through His will He chooses and specifies them, and through His power He creates them. He creates and directs the whole universe as though it were a single being.

He creates the huge spring with the same ease as creating a flower. Nothing can be an obstacle to anything else. There is no fragmentation in His regarding things; He is present everywhere at the same instant through the disposal of His knowledge and power. There is no division or distribution in His disposal. This mystery has been expounded and proved completely in the Sixteenth Word and in the Second Stopping-Place of the Thirty-Second Word. Since, according to the rule, “Comparisons are incontestible,” attention is not paid to defects in comparison and allegory, I shall set forth a very faulty comparison so that the difference between the two ways may be understood to a degree.

For example, let us imagine a huge, matchless, and wondrously adorned peacock which can fly from east to west in an instant, and opens and closes its wings, which stretch from north to south, are adorned with hundreds of thousands of fine patterns, and in every single feather of which are included brilliant arts. Now, there are two men observing it; they want to fly with the wings of the intellect and heart up to the elevated qualities of this bird; to its wondrous decorations. One looks at the peacock’s state and form and the marvellous inscriptions of power on all its feathers; he loves it with extreme passion and ardour; he in part abandons his attentive reflective thought, and adheres to love. But then he sees that every day those lovable decorations change and are transformed. Those objects of his love, which he worships, disappear and are lost.

While he should have said that through true Divine Unity, which he could not encompass with his mind, and absolute dominicality and the Oneness of the Divine Essence, they were the artistic decorations of an Inscriber possessing universal creativity, he said instead—in order to console himself—that the spirit of the peacock was so sublime that its Maker was within it, or that the peacock had become Him, and that since its spirit had become one with its being, and its being had combined with its outward appearance, its spirit’s perfection and being’s exaltedness displayed those manifestations, showing a different inscription and beauty every moment; it was not a true creation through its will, but rather a manifestation, an emanation.

As for the other man, he said that those harmonious and well-ordered decorations so full of art definitely required will, choice, intention, and purpose. It was not possible for there to be a manifestation without will, an emanation without choice.

Yes, the peacock had a beautiful and elevated nature, but it could not be the doer; it was passive. It could not become one with the active agent. Its spirit was fine and exalted, but it could not be the creator and disposer, only receptive and a means. For observedly in each of its feathers was an art performed with infinite wisdom and an inscription and decoration made through an infinite power. And these could not occur without will and choice. These arts showing perfect wisdom within perfect power, and perfect dominicality and mercy within perfect wisdom were not the work of some sort of manifestation. The scribe who had written that gilded notebook could not be inside it and be united with it. The notebook rather only had contact with the nib of the scribe’s pen. In which case, the wondrous decorations of the similitude of the peacock known as the universe were a gilded missive of the peacock’s Creator.

Now, look at the peacock and read the missive. Say to its Scribe: “What wonders God has willed! Blessed be God! Glory be to God!” One who supposes the missive to be the scribe, or the scribe to be inside the letter, or fancies the missive to be imagination, has surely hidden his reason in the veils of love, and been unable to see the true form of reality.

Among the varieties of passionate love, the one most giving rise to the way of the Unity of Existence, is love of this world. When it turns into true love, love of this world, which is metaphorical, is transformed into the Unity of Existence. A person loves a personal beloved with metaphorical love. Then, unable to situate his beloved’s transience and ephemerality in his heart, he consoles himself saying that he is a mirror to the True Object of Love and Worship, and attaches himself to a reality, so acquiring permanence for him through true love.

In the same way, when the strange love of one who takes the huge world and the universe in its totality as his beloved is transformed into true love through the constant blows of death and separation, he seeks refuge in the way of the Unity of Existence, in order to save that great beloved of his from death and separation. If he has extremely strong and elevated belief, it becomes a pleasurable, luminous, acceptable level, like with those resembling Muhyiddin al-Arabi. However, there is the possibility of falling into abysses, entering materiality, and becoming submerged in causes. As for the Unity of Witnessing, it is harmless; it is an exalted way of the people of sobriety.

O God, show us what is indeed the truth, and make us follow it!

Glory be unto You! We have no knowledge save that which You have taught us; indeed, You are All-Knowing, All-Wise.

FOOTNOTES

1. Abdülmecid (Abdulmajid) was Bediuzzaman’s younger brother. A teacher of the religious sciences, then a Mufti, he translated parts of the Risale-i Nur into Arabic, and Isharatu’l-I’jaz and Mesnevi-i Nuriye from Arabic into Turkish. He died in 1967. (Tr.)

2. Hulûsi Yahyagil was one of the first students of the Risale-i Nur. From Elazig in eastern Turkey, he was at that time serving as a captain in the army. He first visited Bediuzzaman in 1929, and in Bediuzzaman’s words, “his zeal and seriousness were the most important reason for the last of the Words (Sözler) and The Letters (Mektûbat) being written. (Tr.)

3. Sabri Arseven. Known as ‘Santral Sabri’, he was one of Bediuzzaman’s most important students in Barla and was also imam of the neighbouring village of Bedre. He died 1954.(Tr.)

4. Hakki Tigli. He was from Egridir and was imprisoned together with Bediuzzaman in Eskishehir in 1935. He also acted as Bediuzzaman’s lawyer. (Tr.)

5. Muhyiddin b. Arabi. Known as Ibn al-Arabi and al-Shaykh al-Akbar, he was born in Andalusia in 560H and died in Damascus in 638H. Among his best known works are Fususu’l-Hikam and al-Futuhatu’l-Makkiya.

6. Sadruddin al-Qunawi. One of Ibn al-Arabi’s foremost students, he wrote a number of works on Sufism, among which is an-Nusus fi Tahqiqi’t-Tawri’l-Makhsus.

7. That is, everything is from Him; He creates it, not everything is Him so that it may be said “There is no existent save Him.”

8. The extraordinary achievements of an extraordinary human individual who is the leader of a quarter of mankind, transformed humankind into angels of a sort, and left this world to make the heavens his dwelling—these extraordinary achievements of his demand an extraordinary form of the law of reproduction. For his being included under that law in a dubious, unknown, unnatural, and even base way would in no way have been appropriate for him, nor was there any necessity for him to be included under it. Moreover, the explicit statements of the Qur’an do not sustain interpretation. How can the law of the angels’ sexuality, which is outside reproduction and in no way can be broken for the sake of repairing the law of human reproduction—which has been broken in a hundred ways—how can this law—together with powerful laws like the law of the explicit verses of the Qur’an—be violated?

9. Qur’an, 3:59.

10. I wonder, does the fact that, despite all the wondrous progress and civilization of Europe and its advances in science and knowledge beneficial for humanity, its people eat pork not play some part in their becoming piggishly stuck in the darkness of materialism and naturalism, which are entirely the reverse of that progress, knowledge, and attainment? I ask you. Evidence that man’s temperament is affected by the food he eats is the saying: “One who eats meat every day for forty days will suffer anxiety and sorrow in his heart,” which has become proverbial.