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

1093/jis/etq001

PRESENCE OF GOD ACCORDING TO EAQQ

¯

AL-YAQIN, A SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY ¯

TREATISE BY SHAYKH SHAMS AL-DIN 8

¯

AL-SUMATRA I (D. 1630)

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

MOHAMAD NASRIN MOHAMAD NASIR
University Brunei Darussalam

¯
A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF SHAMS AL-DIN

We have very little material with which to reconstruct the life of Shams al-
1
D;n. From local Achehnese reports—namely, De Hikajat Atjeh, Adat
2 3
Atjeh and Bust:n al-sal:3;n —we can safely say that he was a highly
respected scholar at the court of Sultan Iskandar M<d: (d. 1634). His
presence is noted at various functions organized by the Sultan where he was
asked to read the supplication of thanks, to meet dignitaries from foreign
countries, and where he also met with local Achehnese Aujj:j who brought
4
some news from abroad. He died in 1630, which coincided with the attack
5
on Mallacca by the Achenese forces. Since we do not know his date of birth
we cannot work out how long he lived. However, we do know that he was of
Pasai origin and a follower of the Shafi6i school of law. With regard to
theology, he followed the Ahl al-Sunna school, specifically Ash6ar; kal:m.
This is shown in his theological

1 Teuku Iskandar (ed.), De Hikajat Atjeh (Leiden: Verhandelingen van het

Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde (VKI) 26, 1958), 167–8.
2 G. W. J. Drewes and P. Voorhoeve, Adat Atjeh (Leiden: Verhandelingen van het
Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde (VKI) 24, 1958), 87.
3 Teuku Iskandar (ed.), Bust:n al-sal:3;n (Kuala Lumpur: DBP, 1966).
4 See Mohamad Nasrin Mohamad Nasir, ‘Persian Quotations in the Eaqq al-yaq;n
f; 6aq;dat al-muAaqqiq;n f; dhikr asr:r al-B<f; al-muAaqqiq;n of Shaykh Shams
al-D;n al-Sumatra8; (d. 1630 ce)’, al-Shajarah 11/2 (2006), 271–95.
5 Al-Raniri, Bust:n al-sal:3;n, b:b 2 faBl 13, 27.

The Author (2010). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Oxford Centre for Islamic
Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
214 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir
6
work the Mir6:t al-mu8min;n. We also know almost nothing of his training,
7
who his teachers were, where he studied, and who taught him Persian and
Arabic to a level that enabled him to claim, as he does in the introduction of
Eaqq al-yaq;n, to have mastered these languages. Such questions can only
be answered by conjecture at best. His teacher must have been Hamza
8 9
Fansuri. That the two were acquainted is indicated in the historical records.
10
He also wrote a commentary on a poem by Hamza, and he frequently relies
on the latter’s poetry when explaining

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

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

complex metaphysical concepts. This has led many scholars to believe that
Hamza Fansuri was his teacher and mentor, perhaps his only one. However,
the point at which the student’s thinking departs from that of his teacher has
not been elucidated, giving the impression that Shams al-D;n was a mere
follower of Hamza. I aim to demonstrate here that Shams al-D;n is a more
accomplished presenter of metaphysical teachings than Hamza. If Hamza
was the master of utilizing poetry for that purpose, then Shams al-D;n has to
be considered the master of prose. His prose work is more complex and

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

includes a greater range of thinkers associated with the Ibn 6Arab; school
than Hamza’s work. Shams al-D;n is the master explicator and narrator, who
fused together the different views of the verifiers (muAaqqiq;n) in one
coherent narrative. The result is metaphysical writings that surpass all others
in the history of Malay metaphysics.

Precisely where Shams al-D;n acquired his knowledge of Persian remains

a mystery. Studies point to various possibilities, one of which is that he
11
travelled to India and picked up Persian while studying there. Another
possibility, preferred by some scholars, is that he learnt Persian through his
12
mentor Hamza Fansuri who had picked it up in Shahr Nawi in Thailand.
13
Drewes and Brakel question whether Hamza knew Persian; they think that
he could simply have quoted Persian verses from other Sufi manuals such as
K:lab:dh;’s (d. 990s) Kit:b al-Ta6arruf and Hujw;r;’s (d. 1077) Kashf al-
MaAj<b, and consider his knowledge of Persian to have been second hand.
However, in his argument Drewes points out that Hamza quotes from the
K;miy:-i sa6:dat which he wrongly thought was the Persian abridgement of
al-Ghaz:l;’s (d. 1111) IAy:8 6ul<m al-d;n. But, the very fact that Hamza
quotes from the K;miy: is indicative of his competence in Persian; to suggest
that his knowledge of Persian was second hand is thus wide of the mark.

Shams al-D;n wrote numerous treatises found recently through the efforts
of local libraries and museums such as the Pusat Manuksrip Melayu of the
National Library of Malaysia, Perpustakaan Nasional Indonesia and the
Tanoh Abe Museum of Acheh. The late Ustaz Wan

11 Teuku Iskandar (ed.), De Hikajat Atjeh, Introduction.

12Al-Attas, Reid and Johns suggested that it was likely that Hamza had picked up
Persian while studying here. In a more recent study, Christoph Marcinkowski presents
evidence of a Persian community in Shahr Nawi which was under the Ayyutia; see his
‘Features of the Persian Presence in Southeast Asia’ in Imtiyaz Yusuf (ed.),
Measuring the Effects of Iranian Mysticism in Southeast Asia
(Bangkok: Iranian Culture Centre, 2004), 24–44.
13 G. W. J. Drewes and L. F. Brakel, The Poems of Hamzah Fansuri
(Dordrecht: Foris KITLV, Bibliotheca Indonesia 26, 1986), 14.
216 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir
Shaghir Abdullah published a number of Shams al-D;n’s treatises in several
of his works. He had managed to locate about 30 works attached to Shams al-
14
D;n’s name. I managed to find 15, available at the Pusat Manuskrip
Melayu, National Library of Malaysia. Out of these I found three
manuscripts, of divergent quality, that have the same title: Eaqq al-yaq;n f;
6aq;dat al-muAaqqiq;n. I have studied these manuscripts and produced an
15
annotated, critical edition of the text, with a translation into English.

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

A note on the MSS used
There exist three manuscripts of Eaqq al-yaq;n f; 6aq;dat al-muAaqqiq;n.
Two are available at the Pusat Manuskrip Melayu (Malay Manuscript
Centre) of the Malaysian National Library. The third is with the late Ustaz
16 17
Wan Shaghir, who romanized the text and had it published. The two
copies at the Pusat Manuskrip Melayu are labeled as MS 2581(F) and MS
18
1556(N) in their catalogue. The former is the most complete of the three,
containing the Prologue, Introduction (muqad-dima) and Ending (kh:tima)
chapters. Details about the history of each

14
My efforts to discover the titles of the Shams al-D;n manuscripts in Indonesia
indicated by the late Ustaz failed. One of the reasons for this failure is the
arrangement of materials at the Perpustakaan Nasional (Perpusnas) Indonesia Jakarta,
namely by manuscript title to which the author name is not attached. Since it is
characteristic of Malay manuscripts that different authors use the same title, it can
make tracing a particular work very difficult. I hope future scholars will be able to
produce a new catalogue, including author name, for the huge collection of
manuscripts currently available at Perpusnas. The Tanoh Abe Museum’s catalogue of
manuscripts has recently been published thanks to the efforts of Dr. Oman
Fathurrahman. This can be seen on his blog: naskahkuno
.blogspot.com. Having checked with Perpusnas and Dr. Oman, I am able to confirm
that neither has the particular treatise being presented in this paper in their manuscript
collection.
15 Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’.
16He passed away in April 2007. According to his students, his vast collection of
Malay manuscripts was donated to Akademi Tamaddun Melayu (ATMA), Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM). It is hoped that scholars there will produce a catalogue
of the collection for the benefit of future researchers.
17 Hj Wan Mohd. Shaghir Abdullah, al-Ma6rifa: Pelbagai Aspek Tasawuf Di
Nusantara (Kuala Lumpur: Khazanah Fathaniyah, 2004), i. 67–150. This book is a
diverse collection of romanized Jawi writings of many famous Malay Sufis.
18 Anonymous, Katalog Manuskrip Melayu di Pusat Manuskrip Melayu
(Kuala Lumpur: Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia, 2001), vol. iii.
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 217
19
of the manuscripts are available in my critical edition; the variants noted
therein are not presented in this paper.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE TREATISE, EAQQ AL-YAQ>N

The treatise is intended to serve as a guide for the people of Acheh, to enable

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

them to follow in the footsteps of the verifiers (muAaqqiq<n). This is
needed, according to Shams al-D;n, because the people do not understand the
language of the verifiers (Arabic and Persian). Shams al-D;n, being an able
scholar, utilizes these sources and presents his findings in the form of a
guide, hence the title ‘The Certified Truth in regard to the Faith of the
Verifiers’. It is ‘certified’ in the sense that the seeking subject unites with the
sought object of knowledge at the end of the journey, thus being able to
certify it as true. The subject here is the Muslim individual and the object is
God. The faith of the verifiers indicates what is believed by them in their
visions of God and how they orient (tawajjuh) the eye of their hearts in
achieving that vision. The aim is to enable those who follow these
instructions to become verifiers themselves. Such is the practical nature of
the treatise that Shams al-D;n constantly mixes theoretical discussions with
practical hints and advice for the student (3:lib). The treatise has eight
chapters plus an introduction (muqa@dima) and a concluding chapter
(kh:tima). Detailed discussions of each chapter can be found in ‘A Critical
Edition’ and subsequent translation. Here, as a way of indicating the content
of the work, I list the chapter headings:

Muqaddima: On the aim of writing the treatise On

the terminologies used by the verifiers
On Non-entification (l: ta6y;n)
On He-ness (al-huwiyya)
On I-ness (al-aniya)
On the divine presences and their worlds (discussed in this article)
On the relations (al-nisba)
On the Divine Perfections (al-kam:l:t al-Il:hiyya)
On the Divine Nearness (al-qurb al-Il:hiyya)
Ending: Concerning recollection (dhikr), vigilant concentration (mur:qaba),
orientation towards (tawajjuh) and witnessing (mush:hada) of God.

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

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

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

detail, leading to a discussion of our own wuj<d and how it is connected to
wuj<d mu3laq.
The second chapter concerns the various entifications of God to the three
main levels: aAad;yya, w:Aidiya and waAda. The third chapter concerns
‘He-ness’, i.e. God in His own Self. Shams al-D;n explains that it is an
unclear state and that we cannot know God at this level. Proceeding from
there, the only way of knowing God is through His many divine names and
attributes. The fourth chapter deals with the concept of aniyya, the sheer
existence of God by His essence. The fifth chapter deals with the various
levels of God’s presences. It is in this chapter that Shams al-D;n shows his
preference for MuAammad ibn Shaykh Fa@l All:h al-Burh:np<r;’s (d. 1620)
seven levels of God’s presences. The sixth chapter explains the subtleties of
God’s divine names and attributes and their relation or affinity with the
creature, and discusses a few divine names and the division of the attributes
into two sorts, namely Bif:t al-jam:l and Bif:t al-jal:l. In the seventh chapter,
on the perfections of God, Shams al-D;n presents a complex discussion on
God’s perfections at the level of His essence and at the level of His names.
The eighth chapter deals with the topic of coming close to God,

treating in considerable detail the different ways of doing so—the concepts

fan:8, fan:8 f;-l- fan:8, baq:8, baq:8 bi-l-l:h and baq:8 bi-l-baq:8
are treated in considerable detail. The concluding chapter (kh:tima) contains
a discussion of practical aspects of Sufism. After a short introduction on the
virtues of dhikr, vigilant concentration (mur:qaba), attentiveness towards
God (tawajjuh) and witnessing (mush:hada), Shams al-D;n goes on to
explain each in separate sections within the chapter, making it the longest. In
the final few lines, he cautions the reader that what he has written in this
treatise are the secrets of God and that they should only be divulged to the
select few, lest the layperson misunderstand God’s way.

The treatise is written in prose with quotations from various Sufi figures,
20
the verifiers (muAaqqiq<n). Apart from these, there are
For my account of the nature of these quotations, see Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, ch. 4.
20
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 219
quotations also from the Qur8:n and Prophetic traditions (aA:d;th
nabawiyya). Shams al-D;n wrote the treatise on the pattern of the many
other Sufi treatises available in Arabic and Persian.
As can be seen above, the discussions clearly relate to Muslim
metaphysics from the school of theoretical Sufism of the Ibn 6Arab; variety.
Though it is heavy going at times, Shams al-D;n does present the practical
side of the discussion so as not to tax his readers unnecessarily with technical
jargon. I would argue that the treatise demonstrates complexities in Malay

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

metaphysical writings of the seventeenth century not replicated later. No
other treatise in the later Malay metaphysical writings comes close to the
high level and complexity of the discussions found here, which probably led
to misunderstandings of the work’s contents. Al-Ran;r; (d. 1658), the scholar
who originally came from India and established himself in the court of the
subsequent Sultan, Iskandar II (d. 1641), had this to say about the work:

Syahdan adalah beberapa lagi banyak I8tiqad kufur dan dhalalah itu tersebut didalam
kitab karangan Shams al-D;n Sumatrani seperti: Kit:b Khirqah dan
Mir6:t al-muAaqqiq;n dan Eaqq al-yaq;n.21
The translation:
Thus some of many deviant and incorrect beliefs are contained in the books of Shams
al-D;n Sumatra8; such as Kit:b al-Khirqa (The Book of the Sufi Cloak), Mir6:t al-
muhaqqiq;n (The Mirror of the Verifiers) and Eaqq al-yaq;n (The Truth of the
Certainty).22
What is discussed here is Chapter 5 of the treatise, with annotations and a
complete translation into English.

ON THE PRESENCE OF GOD AT THE DIFFERENT

LEVELS AND THE VARIOUS ENTIFICATIONS

According to Shams al-D;n the worlds (6:lam;n) are the locus of God’s
manifestation or theophany (tajall;), which occurs through His divine names
and attributes. The presence of God is thus the presence of His divine names
and attributes, not His essence, as nothing can contain His essence. God’s
essence is known (to an extent) through the becoming

21 Hj. Wan Mohd. Shaghir Abdullah, Khazanah Karya Pusaka Asia Tenggara
(Kuala Lumpur: Khazanah Fathaniyah, 1991), ii. 54.
22See also: Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, 152.
220 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir

manifest of His divine names and attributes. These places of manifesta-tion

are known as ‘world’ (6:lam). ‘2lam in Arabic means ‘signs’ or ‘symbols’,
thus these signs or symbols point to God’s essence. However, according to
the specific terminology of Ibn 6Arab; and his followers, 6:lam means what
is other than God (m: siw: All:h). The existence of this world (6:lam) or
worlds (6:lam;n) indicates the existence of the essence of God. These
6:lam;n indicate the presence of God and are thus known as the presence of
the Divine (Aa@rat al-il:hiyya).

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

What about entification? Entification means to become any imaginable
entity. Chittick explains: ‘So God is an entity, as are the world and man.
Each is a particular entification and delimitation (taqy;d) which has been
assumed by Being as such, which is Nonentified (ghayr muta6ayyin) and
Nondelimited (mu3laq).’ Thus the presences are the entifications of Being,
23
or they are modes within which that Being manifests Itself.
Shams al-D;n rightly outlines the various views regarding the Aadrat al-
il:hiyya. According to him some regard it as three levels, some five and some
seven. Most of Ibn 6Arab;’s students and followers would regard the number
of levels as five. This includes figures such as 4adr al-D;n al-Qunaw; (d.
1274), Fakhr al-D;n al-6Ir:q; (d.1289), 6Abd al-Razz:q
24
K:sh:n; (d. 1335-6) and Mu8ayyad al-D;n Jand; (d. 1300). From where
then did Shams al-D;n get this idea of three levels? Looking at al-Qunaw;’s
teachings we find the three levels are the initial or most fundamental
ontological level of presences. According to al-Qunaw;, ‘although the levels
are numerous, they are reducible to the Unseen, the Visible and the Reality
25
which comprehends the two’.
Shams al-D;n was obviously unaware of al-Qunaw;’s view, given that it is
not mentioned either in the TuAfa of Burh:np<r; nor in the many works of
Hamza Fansuri. The five levels of divine presences are also known as the
levels of existence (mar:tib al-wuj<d) or the five worlds (al-‘aw:lim al-
khamsa). Beyond this level is the level called the mist (al-‘am:8) or the
abysmal darkness. As God cannot be known at this point, none of the
interpreters of the Ibn 6Arab; school actually talk about it. When God is
known it is already a level proceeding from that high level. The differences
in the verifiers’ view on whether they accept five divine presences or six or
seven is due to their accepting or expanding these original five levels.
Comparing al-Qunaw;’s view to Shams

23 William C. Chittick, ‘The Five Divine Presences,’ The Muslim World 72

(1982), 111.
24 Ibid, 120–2.
25 I 6j:z al-bay:n f; tafs;r umm al-Qur8:n (Hyderabad-Deccan: D:8irat al
Ma6:rif al-6Uthm:n;yya), 2nd edn., 1368/1949), 113, cited in Chittick, ‘The Five
Divine Presences’, 110.
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 221
al-D;n’s we find the other two levels are an expansion of al-Qunaw;’s
original five levels. Al-Qunaw;’s five divine presences are:
1. Presence of Knowledge or the Inner
2. Central Presence, the Perfect Man (encompasses both the Inner and the Outer)

3. World of Sense Perception or the Presence of the Outer

4. World of Image-Exemplars (between the Central Presence and the Visible World)

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

5. World of Spirits (between the Central Presence and Divine Unseen)

The Perfect Man embraces all four levels as he is the Central Presence,
which is between the four different levels.
According to Shams al-D;n there are seven levels of divine presences.
They are:
1. Level or presence of Non-entification, known as aAadiyya. God is not known
at this level as He is beyond any description. This level is known as His innermost
essence (kunh26 dh:t).
2. The level of Inclusive-Oneness (waAda).This is the world of God’s divine
predispositions. According to the TuAfa, this is the level pertaining to the
MuAammadan Reality. However Shams al-D;n does not signify it as such; instead
he explains that this is the level of God’s knowledge before it is differentiated or
particularized or specified. This is the Absolute Unseen level.
3. The level of Inclusive-Unity (w:Aidiyya). This is the level of God’s knowledge,
the level of His immutable entities (a6y:n th:bita).27 Unseen level.

26 kunh is an Achenese word meaning ‘innermost’, though sometimes translated

also as ‘ineffable’: see al-Attas, The Mysiticism of Hamzah Fansuri, 72, 161, 434.
27Ibn 6Arab; was the first person to use this term, taken from various sources,
philosophical (Plato, Aristotle, Ibn S;n:) and theological (the Mu6tazila). By the term
‘entity’, Ibn 6Arab; means reality and essence or quiddity; and ‘immutable’ is a
quality of the existence in the mind of something—like the existence in the mind of
the quiddity of the human being or of the concept of one-third—in contrast to the
existence of that which exists outside of the mind in time and space—like the
existence of some particular individual or of a concrete one-third in the outside world.
Thus, whenever Ibn 6Arab; uses the term ‘immutable entities’, he indicates the
existence of the intelligible world with the immutable entities in it, which are the
realities of things or their intelligible entities (see Mu6j:m al-S<f;, 831–2).
‘Immutable entities’ is sometimes translated as ‘permanent archetypes’. At this level
the entities are still within God’s knowledge and have not taken on existence so that
they emerge in the outside world. (See further William C. Chittick, The Sufi Path of
Knowledge: Ibn al-6Arab;’s Metaphysics of Imagination [Albany: State
University of New York, 1989], 83–8.)
222 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir
4. The level of the world of Spirits. Relative Unseen level.
5. The level of the world of Image-Exemplars. Relative Unseen level.
6. The level of Bodies. Visible level.
7. The seventh level is the level of comprehensive Unity. It is the level of the Most
Perfect Man.28 This level encompasses all the other levels within it.
As we have seen above, in al-Qunaw;’s as well as Shams al-D;n’s (but not
Burh:np<r;’s) system and the other systems that follow, these divine

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

presences can be divided into roughly two broad categories, namely the
Unseen and the Visible. ‘Unseen’ indicates those things that do not become
apparent in this world. According to al-Qunaw; again, the Unseen contains
within it two levels and the Visible contains within it three levels.

To Shams al-D;n there are seven levels of God’s presence. At each level
God has a corresponding sign or world. The presence of God, al-Aa@rat al-
il:hiyya, is one and the same—the levels are the way His presence manifests.
God manifests or discloses Himself through these various levels and worlds
in order for human beings to know Him. There is a Aad;th often repeated in
Sufi circles: ‘I was a hidden treasure and I loved to be known, thus I created’.
He is known through the various manifestations that occur through these
seven levels, according to Shams al-D;n. The first corresponds to the level of
God’s knowledge and non-entification (l: ta6y;n) or exclusive-unity
(aAadiyya). It is called exclusive-unity because at this level it excludes any
multiplicity. God’s knowledge is known at this level only by God. God’s
knowledge or the immutable entities (a6y:n th:bita) are similar to the Divine
Names of God (al-asm:8 al-Ausn:) as all of creation is a name of God. This
comes about through the process of the effusion of the Most Holy (fay@ al-
aqdas) or the Unseen disclosure (tajall; ghayb;).

The first level or level of aAadiyya is also known as the level where no
entification takes place (l: ta6y;n). Thus He cannot be known at this level.
The only thing we know is that there is this level before He is known. There
are no worlds connected to this level as God is beyond all descriptions,
relations and attributes. He is not even connected to absolute or non-
delimited (mu3laq) connection (qayd). Is this level similar to the level of the
mist (al-‘am:8)? Al-J;l; (d. 1410) does not even consider this level as
aAadiyya. To him if a level is known as aAadiyya it is already known and
thus not al-‘am:8 which remains a mystery. Shams al-D;n is clearly
following al-Burh:np<r; here with his elaboration of aAadiyya, in contrast to
al-J;l; and other interpreters from the Ibn 6Arab; school.

Eaqq al-yaq;n, ch. 5.

28
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 223
Shams al-D;n’s adaptation of al-Burh:np<r;’s system is not a mere
imitation. Rather, he joins to it his understanding of metaphysics from
various other verifiers, which he includes in his interpretation of al-
Burh:np<r;. In his explanation of the divine presences, Shams al-D;n brings
in the discussion of the Unseen and the Visible, which is not found in the
TuAfa, but which is very close to the method of explication of al-J:m; (d.
1492) in his Naqd al-FuB<B. Another point worth mentioning is that where
the TuAfa is quite straightforward to comprehend, Eaqq al-yaq;n is more

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

difficult. Al-Burh:np<r; made it easier to understand the connection between
entification and the various divine levels, unlike Shams al-D;n who separated
29
the discussion into different parts.

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

ON THE REALITY OF THE PERFECT MAN

(AL-INS2N AL-K2MIL)

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

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

before they come to exist in the visible; it is also referred to as the reality of
the Perfect Man. The view that this level is also known as the level of the
Perfect Man is held by al-6Ir:q;, J:m; and al-Qunaw;. The second presence
refers to the visible world of spirits. Between this presence and the next
presence of the corporeal bodies there is the world of image exemplars
(6:lam al-mith:l). All five levels are included in the Perfect Man, the logos,
who gathers every aspect of these entifications into a unity in himself. He is
the mirror image of the non-entified Being. He is created and uncreated at the
same time. The reality of the Perfect Man represents the metaphysical and
cosmological principle that embraces all of creation and is man’s ontological
32
prototype.
Unlike J:m;, Shams al-D;n does not discuss the idea of the Perfect Man
in relation to Ibn 6Arab;’s idea of man as the microcosm (6:lam Bagh;r) of
33
the macrocosm (6:lam kab;r). The relation of the Perfect Man to God is
like the relation between the lover (6:shiq) and the beloved (ma6sh<q).
In many places, Shams al-D;n leans very closely towards pantheism,
especially when he quotes from a Aad;th: ‘I have not manifested in anything
34
as My manifestation in man’. Even though the Perfect Man may be the
most perfect place of God’s disclosure, Shams al-D;n is very clear in stating
that the Perfect Man is still the slave of God. As he says:
There is no difference between the divine presence and the level of the Perfect Man
except that Divine presence is God’s presence and the level of the Perfect Man is the
level of the slave.35
In another place the concept of the Perfect Man is used in contrast to the
concept of animal-man (ins:n–hayaw:n). (See below, footnote 66,

32 The foregoing is summarized primarily from William C. Chittick and Peter

Lamborn Wilson, Fakhruddin 6Iraqi: Divine Flashes (New York: Paulist Press,
1982), 6–17.
336Abd al-RaAm:n ibn AAmad al-J:m;, Naqd al-nuB<B f; sharA Naqsh al-fuB<B
(ed. William C. Chittick; Tehran: Imperial Iranian Academy of Philosophy, 1977), 91.

34 Introduction to Eaqq al-yaq;n.

35 Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, ch. 5, 83.
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 225
for discussion of this concept.) According to Ibn 6Arab; the animal-man is
36
the representative of the Perfect Man in this world of bodies.
The concept of the Perfect Man is normally associated with four main
figures: Shaykh al-Akbar MuAy; al-D;n Ibn 6Ar:b;, Shaykh SuAraward; al-
Ishr:q; (d. 1191) known as al-Hak;m al-Muta8allih, 6Abd al-Eaqq ibn
37
Ibr:h;m Ibn Sab8;n (d. 669/1270) and of course 6Abd al-Kar;m al-J;l;.
According to al-Attas and more recently Riddell, Hamza Fansuri was greatly
38

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

influenced by al-J;l;’s conception of the Most Perfect Man. Thus Hamza
follows the Ibn 6Arab; school mainly through al-J;l;. I am not quite sure how
this came about but it gives us the impression that the school of Ibn 6Arab; is
divided according to the different figures and their teachings of the Shaykh
al-Akbar. This is contrary to the view of Chittick, who after thirty years of
studying Ibn 6Arab; and the main figures associated with his teachings, has
39
said that the differences between these figures are minor. Therefore we can
safely conclude that there are different approaches used by these scholars in
explicating the teachings; some prefer prose and some poetry, and some
touch upon one particular aspect of the teachings more than others but there
40
are no substantial differences that can be seen amongst them. Coming back
to the issue of al-J;l;’s influence, we need to look deeper to find a well-
balanced answer. Looking at the discussion of the Perfect Man in al-J;l;’s
main work, we find that there are similarities to the teachings of Shams al-
D;n. Shams al-D;n regards the Perfect Man as having all the comprehensive
names within him. As he says:

The seventh level is the level of comprehensive unity, it is the level of the Perfect
Man for he is the one who unites all the worlds within him in actuality and in
potentiality. The world of man and animals are in actuality and not potentiality. 41

36 See Su6:d al-Hak;m, Mu6jam al-4<f; (Beirut: Dandarah, 1981), 156. For a
translation of the relevant parts of the text, see Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, 85 ff.,
125.
37 Y<suf Zaydan, al-Fikr al-B<f; ‘inda 6Abd al-Kar;m al-J;l; (Beirut: D:r al-
Nahda al-6Arabiyya, 1988), 66.
38Al-Attas, The Mysticism of Hamzah al-Fansuri; Peter Riddell, Islam and the
Malay-Indonesian World: Transmission and Responses (Singapore: Horizon
Books, 2001), 115.
39 William C. Chittick, ‘The Perfect Man as the Prototype of the Self in the Sufism
of Jami’, Studia Islamica 49 (1979), 140. I would like to thank Prof. Chittick for
making this article available to me.
40Al-J;l; made the concept of Perfect Man his main concern in his teaching of the
Shaykh al-Akbar’s ideas.
41 Nasir, ‘A Critical Edition’, ch. 5, 81.
226 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir

Though the Perfect Man is the complete logos of God and contains all of
the creations in their potential form, the Perfect Man lacks two particular
qualities, which makes him different from God. The two missing qualities are
necessary existence and the quality of total independence (ghin: mu3laq).
This point is mentioned in Shams al-D;n’s other works, for example
‘Regarding the Loftiness of Man’ (Pada Menyatakan Kemuliaan Insan).

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

ANNOTATED TRANSLATION:
CHAPTER 5: ON THE PRESENCEOF GOD42
AND ITS (CORRESPONDING) WORLDS

O seeker, May God beautify you in the two abodes. It is proper for you to
know and become familiar with all of God’s presences (Aa @r:t) and their
corresponding worlds (6:lam).
Surely all the verifiers had named it as presence because God’s essence
and existence pervades all the worlds, which in turn are His Self-disclosure
(tajall;) and places of His Self-manifestation (Cuh<r) from eternity without
beginning (azal) to eternity without end (abad). As God says in the Qur8:n
[41. 53]: ‘Is it not enough [O MuAammad] that your Lord does witness all
43
things?’ Shaykh MaAm<d Sh:bist:r; [. . .] said: ‘He that knows ‘‘the
44
Truth’’ and to whom Unity is revealed/Sees at the first glance the light of
45
very Being’. Thus all the places of His Self-disclosure are termed by [the
verifiers] as 6:lam because the 6:lam according to the people of God is
(actually) indicating that which is different from His essence, attributes and
divine names.
For surely God is known and made familiar through the apparentness of
His essence by all of His attributes and Divine Names in their places of

42
The divine presence is the various worlds, which are the loci of the manifestation
of God’s divine Names, see ‘al-Aa@rat al-il:hiyya’ in Mu6jam al-4<f;, 327. The
Divine Presence of God or Aa@ra is a term made more systematic by al-Qunaw;.
Ibn 6Arab; does not use the term as systematically as al-Qunaw;, whose followers
developed the idea further. See William C. Chittick, ‘The Five Divine Presences,
from al-Qunawi to al-Qaysari’, The Muslim World, 72 (1982), 107–28.

43 On the influence of Sh:bist:r; in Shams al-D;n’s writings see Nasir, ‘Persian

Quotations’, 287–91.
44 In other words, one of the verifiers.
45E. H. Weinfeld (transl.), Sa6d al-D;n MaAm<d Shabist:r;, Gulsh:n-i r:z. The
Mystic Rose Garden (Lahore: Islamic Book Foundation, 1880), 6, line 84 (Persian);
8 (English).
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 227

being apparent. Hence [these places] are known as worlds because of His
names which are distinct from each other by their specific places of being
apparent. As God says in the Qur8:n [15. 85]: ‘And We had not created the
seven heavens and the seven earths except bi-l-Aaqq’. The Holy Prophet is
46
reported to have said: ‘Whoever has seen me surely they have seen God’.
Shaykh Hamza Fansuri [. . .] said:
As you look at cotton and cloth

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

Both are the same but with different names
My oneness requires the Outward and the Inward
That is the knowledge, the result of action.47

Now to some verifiers, the presence of God has seven presences, to some
48 49
others there are five, and to [still] others there are three presences.

46 According to Schimmel this saying is quoted in Far;d al-D;n al-A33:r’s D;w:n-i

qaB:8id wa ghazaliyy:t (ed. Sa6;d Naf;s;; Tehran: n.p., 1339 sh (1960),
50. See Annemarie Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam (Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press, 1975), 223. Unfortunately IIUM Gombak library
does not have this source. However, this Aad;th is found in J:mi6 al-Bagh;r, where
the text has an additional sentence: ‘for surely Satan cannot become like me’. See
6Abd al-RaAm:n ibn Ab; Bakr al-Suy<3;, al-J:mi6 al-Bagh;r f; aA:d;th al-bash;r
al-naC;r (Cairo: Ma3ba6 MuB3af: al-B:b; al-Ealab;, 1982), no. 20645, vii. 32.

47See poem no. III in W. M. Abdul Hadi Tasawwuf Yang Tertindas. (Jakarta:
Paramadina, 2002), 355.
48 According to al-Qunaw; they are: the Divine, spiritual, imaginal, sensory and
all-comprehensive. A brief statement by al-Qunaw; may be quoted here: ‘God’s
entification as Oneness is the mode (i6tib:r) which follows Nonentification and
Nondelimitation. After this Oneness follows the mode of His knowing Himself
through Himself in Himself... This mode opens the door to other modes [i.e. prepares
the way for further entifications]... So to the relation of Knowledge belongs the
relation of Inclusive-Oneness, which follows Exclusive-Unity, which in turn follows
the Unknown, Nonentified Nondelimitation’. See Chittick, ‘The Five Divine
Presences’, 116 for a further summary of al-Qunaw;’s view. Chittick has dedicated
several writings to al-Qunaw;: ‘The Last Will and Testament of Ibn Arabi’s Foremost
Disciple and Some Notes on its Author’, Sophia Perennis 4/1 (1998): 43–58; ‘The
Circle of Spiritual Ascent according to al-Qunaw;’ in P. Morewedge (ed.),
Neoplatonism and Islamic Thought (Albany: State
2
University of New York Press, 1992), 179–209; ‘4adr al-D;n al-K<naw;’, EI
.
art.; ‘Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi on the Oneness of Being’, International Philosophical
Quarterly, 21 (1981): 171–84.
49They can be reduced to the Unseen, the Visible and Man. These are the three
basic entifications of God. See Chittick, ‘The Five Divine Presences’, 112.
228 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir
As for those who say there are seven presences: one of them is Shaykh
50
MuAammad ibn Shaykh Fa@l All:h [. . .]:
51
The first divine presence: The presence of Non-Entification, Non-
delimited and Exclusive-Unity. Hence for this level of Non-Entification and
Exclusive Unity there is no worlds (6:lam), that is to say, at this level there is
no apparentness of [a] world because God’s existence here is elevated
beyond any relations, descriptions (nu6<t) and high above any attribute and
from any limitation (qayd), even from Non-delimited connection (qayd

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

i3l:q). This is the level where no entification occurs (mafhum salab
ta6ayyun). Hence it is known as His innermost essence (kunh dh:t) to the
verifiers. It is higher than all the other levels; consequently all other levels
52
are beneath it.

50This reference to al-Burh:np<r; is based upon his al-TuAfa al-mursala il: r<A
al-Nab; which he wrote in 1590. See A. H. Johns’ monograph, The Gift Addressed
to the Spirit of the Prophet (Canberra: Australian National University,
1965; Oriental Monograph Series 1), 128–49, for the Arabic text and English
translation; see also the text of the TuAfa romanized and translated into Malay by
Wan Shaghir in his al-Ma6rifa, ii. 9–26. On al-Burh:np<r;, see MuAammad Am;n ibn
Fa@l All:h MuAibb;, Khul:Bat al-:th:r (Cairo: D:r al-Kit:b al-Isl:m;, 1980), 110–11;
6All:ma 6Abd al-Eayy b. Fakhr al-Din al-Easan;, Nuzhat al-khaw:3ir wa baAjat al-
mas:mih wa-l-naw:Cir (Karachi: N<r MuAammad, 1976),
iv. 363. While al-Burh:np<r; was an adherent of the Chishti 3ar;qa, Shams al-D;n
does not indicate in the works studied here adherence to any 3ar;qa. For al-
Burh:np<r;’s Chishti connection, see Sayyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, A History of Sufism
in India (Delhi: Munshiran Manoharlal Publishers, 1983), ii. 283–6 and 343–5. See
also William Chittick, ‘Notes on Ibn al-Arabi’s Influence in the Subcontinent’, The
Muslim World 82/3–4 (July–Oct. 1992): 230–1. For the influence of the seven levels
of being on Buton in the south-east of the island of Sulawesi, see Abdul Rahim
Yunus, ‘NaC:riyah ‘‘Martabat tujuh’’ f; niC:m al-Maml:kah al-Butuniyyah’, Studia
Islamica 2/1 (1995): 95–110. The ideas in TuAfa spread through the various
translations of it into Javanese.
51 Al-Qunaw; does not indicate this to be a proper level as it cannot be
conceptualized. It is the ‘am:8, the blindness which we do not have knowledge of.
For al-Qunaw;’s view, see the articles mentioned in n. 48 above. For Ibn 6Arab;’s
view, see Mu6jam al-4<f;, 820–6 for references to the FutuA:t and elsewhere. Izutsu
writes: ‘...Ibn 6Arabi calls the Absolute in this aspect ‘‘ama’’ or the ‘‘abysmal
darkness’’ and, quoting al-K:sh:n;: ‘The Divine Essence in the state of Unity before it
manifests itself in the plane of the Names remains in an abysmal darkness’. Toshihiko
Izutsu, A Comparative Study of the Key Philosophical Concepts in Sufism and
Taoism, Ibn Arabi and Lao-Tzu, Chuang-Tzu (Tokyo: Keio Institute of Cultural
and Linguistic Studies, 1966), ch. 2 ‘The Abysmal Darkness’, 17.

52 Compare this description of the first level with the Arabic text of the TuAfa in
A. H. Johns, The Gift, 130, x4. The similarities are remarkable. It seems very
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 229

The second divine presence: The level of Absolute Inclusive-Oneness,

[which is] unseen. The world is the divine state (sha8n) of His essence in
His knowledge. Hence all things at this level are those objects of knowledge
(ma6l<m) which are obscure (mubham) and relatively undifferentiated
53
(mujmal), [and] which are not created.
The third divine presence: The level of Inclusive-Unity, [which is] unseen.
The world is the world of the immutable entities which are within the world
of God. Hence all things at this level are the objects of knowledge which are

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

54
both specific (mu6ayyan) and relatively differ-entiated (mufaBBal).

The fourth divine presence: The level of the Relative Unseen (ghayb
mu@:f) which accompanies the Absolute Unseen (ghayb mu3laq). This
world is the world of spirits. Hence all things at this level are those objects of
knowledge which are ‘outside’ the knowledge of God [meaning, not
connected and not specific], which are created, granted to the external, which
55
do not have form, colour, nor reach the outer senses.

The fifth divine presence: the level of the Relative Unseen which is
accompanied by the level of Absolute Witnessing (Aa@rat al-shah:da al-
mu3laqa). The world is the Imaginal world (6:lam al-mith:l). Hence all
things at this level are those objects of knowledge which are specific,
relative, created and obtained in the external, which have bodily form but do
56
not reach the outer senses.

likely that Shams al-D;n translated this particular passage and included it in his work
here.
53Compared to the first divine presence which seems to be a direct translation
from the TuAfa, here it seems that Shams al-D;n used his own formulation to
describe the second divine presence. Apart from calling this level the level of first
entification, al-Burh:np<r; also calls it the level of the MuAammadan reality (al-
Aaq;qa al-MuAammadiyya). For the TuAfa’s original Arabic text see A. H. Johns,
TuAfa, 130. This is the level where the immutable entities are found as objects of
knowledge.
54The external entities (al-a6y:n al-kh:rija) are found here at this level. ‘In the
cosmos the divine names are relatively differentiated (mufaBBal), while in man they
are relatively undifferentiated (mujmal), see William C. Chittick, Sufi Path of
Knowledge, 17.
55 ‘The fourth level is the world of Spirits, it is the expression of the pure
engendered existents (al-ashy:8 al-kawniyya al-mujarrada). The simpleness (al-
bas;3a) which is apparent upon its essence and upon its exemplars (amth:lu-h:)’, A.
H. Johns, The Gift, 131 x5.
56 ‘The fifth level is the level of the Imaginal world. It is the expression regarding
the subtle composite engendered existents, which do not accept particularities nor
division and rending nor mending’. Ibid, 131.
230 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir

The sixth divine presence: The level of the Relative Unseen which is
connected to the level of Absolute Witnessing. This world is the world of
bodies. Hence every object of knowledge at this level is perceptible
57
(maAs<s) to the internal senses and [also] specific and attached to the
outer senses; [it is] created and obtained by the external which has bodily
58
forms.
The seventh divine presence: The level of Comprehensive Unity (j:m; 6a)
for all the other presences from the Relative Unseen whose world is the

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

world of spirits, the world of the unseen (6:lam al-ghayb), the imaginal
59
world, the world of bodies. For the Relative Unseen also is the world of
60
bodies. Hence at this level of Comprehensive Unity is the Most Perfect
61
Man (al-ins:n al-k:mil ), for he is the one who unites all the worlds within
him in actuality (fi6l) and potentiality (quwwa). The world of animal-man
[see note 66 below] here is only in actuality but not potentiality.
Hence all things at this level are objects of knowledge [as objects having
some being], which are [also existing] outside of God’s knowl-edge, which
are obscure, specific, relatively undifferentiated and relatively particularized,
which are created, not created, without a form, have forms with colour,
without colour, [which are] sensible and non-sensible objects.

As for the Absolute Unseen whose world is the [divine] states which are
intellectual (‘ilm;) signs of God’s knowledge of His essence and His
attributes, and all existents in which there are no differences between them.
They are relatively undifferentiated from the objects of divine knowledge.
This level is known as Inclusive-Oneness and the MuAammadan Reality. Its
reality is the coming together of the outward essence of God with all of His
perfect attributes. This is the presence of the Necessary existence at the level
of His Self-disclosure with the attribute of unity. Thus He sees Himself as
Inclusive Oneness and

57 In Wan Saghir: maAb<s. I think this is a copyist’s error.

58 ‘The sixth level is the level of the world of bodies and it is the expression
regarding the gross composite engendered existents which accept particularities and
division’. Johns, The Gift, 131.
59 ‘The seventh level is the level of gathering-together for the entire known levels,
the luminous, al-waAda, al-w:hidiyya and the other divine Self-disclosure, which is
the human being’. Ibid, 131.
60 In the original, this sentence is repeated: another copyist’s error.
61 Al-Jurj:n; defines the level of the Perfect Man as ‘an expression regarding the
entire divine and creational levels from the universal and particular intellects
and souls and the levels of nature and others (which is) a descent (tanazzul) of the
existent. It is also called the blinding level (al-martaba al-‘am:8iyya)’, Sayy;d Shar;f
al-Jurj:n;, al-Ta6r;f:t (Beirut: World of Books, 1996), 262.
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 231

Exclusive-Oneness. At this level, the Self-disclosure of His attributes of

knowledge is united with the objects of knowledge so that He sees Himself
as uniting knowledge and what is known i.e. the object of knowledge.

As for the presence of the Absolute Unseen: its sign is the sign of the
immutable entities, which are the signs of His knowledge of His essence, all
of His attributes, and upon all existents which (come to exist through) the
path of details, which makes them distinct from each other. Its many

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

particularized details (tafB;l) are through the objects of (divine) knowl-edge.
This presence/level is thus termed by the verifiers Inclusive-Unity and it is
the reality of man (Aaqiqat ins:n) meaning Adam [. . .] and of all of us. Thus
the reality of man meaning Adam [. . .] is the place of gathering of His
perfect attributes, His essence and all of His beautiful names.

As for the Relative Unseen presence: its world is the world of spirits,
which are the details from all existents meaning all created things, which are
bodiless, non-composite. It becomes manifest upon their essences and their
types.
As for the Relative Unseen presence: its world is the Imaginal world
which are signs from all existents, i.e. from all created things, which are
subtle (la3;f) and composite, which do not receive [subdivision into]
quarters, damage (fus<q), and do not meet.
As for the Relative Unseen presence: its world is the world of bodies
which is the sign from all existents i.e. from all created things, which are
composite, gross (kath;f), which receive division or can be divided to quarter
or half etc.
As for the comprehensive presence of all the presences: its world is the
world of gathered-together meaning, the signs from gathering of the divine
62
presences and all the engendered (kiy:n;) level, which is similar to the
divine. Thus there is no difference between the divine presence and the level
of the Perfect Man, except that the divine presence is the presence of God
while the level of the Perfect Man is the level of the slave.

As for all of the stated levels, from the level of Inclusive-Oneness to the
level of man or animal-man (ins:n hayw:n), all of them are surely the

62According to Chittick (Sufi Path of Knowledge, 41), ‘The engendered things

are the existents or the acts, the creatures which have been brought into existence by
the Divine Command ‘‘Be’’ (kun) and which will pass out of existence when their
stay in this world is over. Many names are attributed to them. Every noun that denotes
something existing in the cosmos in every language in the world is a name of an
engendered thing’.
232 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir

Self-disclosure of the Real’s Being, Self-manifestation of His existence, and

[they] are His garments (lib:s).
Then there is the level of the Perfect Man, the level of self-disclosure of
animal-man, the level of self-manifestation and the level of his adornments.
The first of the seven levels is the level of Non-Entification, Self-disclosure
and Self-manifestation. The six other levels are levels of Entification, Self-
disclosure and Self-manifestation. Two of the six levels are called inner Self-
63
disclosure and inner Self-manifesta-tion, that is to say, they are called the

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

presence of God’s predispositions or divine states and they are called that
presence whose world is the immutable entities. The other four levels are
64
called outward Self-disclosure and outward Self-manifestation, which are
the presence which has as its worlds the world of spirits, the Imaginal world
and the world of bodies, and the world of the Perfect Man or the world of
animal-man.

Firstly, the level which is known as Non-Entification, Exclusive-Unity, the

most unseen of the unseen (ghayb al-ghuy<b), does not have worlds, as also
the level of Absolute Unseen (ghayb mu3laq) does not. Second, the level of
Inclusive-Oneness whose world is the (divine) predispositions or states.
Third, the level of Inclusive-Unity whose world is the world of the
immutable entities. Surely it is called Exclusive-Unity by the verifiers
because He is the One who fixed His essence through His glory.
And surely it is named by them as Inclusive-Unity because that Inclusive-
Unity is none but all the attributes and all the divine names. The attributes
and the divine names are nothing but the state of the Essence at this level of
Inclusive-Unity. Shaykh Jam:l al-D;n ibn IsA:q [. . .] said: ‘A part of men is a
65
copy of the world and another part is the copy of God surely’. As the
statement regarding the oneness of God is clear, it is proper to know and to
become familiar with the differences that all the worlds of the Divine
Presence of God have, with respect to His Oneness. The differences between
the worlds of the Divine Presence with God are not hidden from the knowers
or from the ignorant.
The Oneness of God is seen at all levels of the worlds of God’s presence.
For surely the level of Inclusive-Oneness (waAda), which is the
MuAammadan reality, whose world in its predisposition is the

63 Also known as tajall; ghayb; or the most holy effusion, where the first
entification takes place. This is God’s Self-knowledge. See al-Qunaw; on Being:
William C. Chittick, ‘4adr al-D;n Qunaw; on the Oneness of Being’,
International Philosophical Quarterly 21 (1981), 179.
64Regarded as tajall; al-shah:d; by Shams al-D;n or as al-fay@ al-muqaddas by
al-Qunaw; (ibid, 180).
65 I have not been able to trace this quotation.
 SHAYKHSHAMSAL-D>NAL-SUMATRA8>(d.1630) 233
metaphorical symbol of the level of Exclusive-Unity (aAadiyya), which is
the reality of God. For God does not have any world and form in actual fact.
Thus the level of Inclusive-Unity (w:Aidiyya) whose reality is the reality of
man also has a world, which is the world of the immutable fixed entities.

Hence the world of spirits is the form of the reality of man. The world of
bodies is the form of the Imaginal world; the Perfect Man or animal-man
66

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

(ins:n hayw:n ) is the form of the world of bodies. Now whatever the
verifiers have mentioned here as part of God’s oneness does not mean that it
does not come to manifest. Therefore the manifestation of anything by
stating [at the same time] that it is divine at the level of its existence and
reality, even if there are differences at the level of entification, would still not
necessitate its manyness [in essence] from [the viewpoint] of the Most
Perfect Verifier who received guidance from the Real.

It is necessary for the knower to become familiar with all the divine
presences of God and the corresponding worlds so that, through this
knowledge, he may be able to achieve the title of the most perfect knower
(‘:rif k:mil mukammil). Surely anyone who knows as much would not
commit a mistake or an error in his gnosis of God. As God says in the Qur8:n
[41. 53]: ‘We will show them our signs in the horizons and in themselves.’
Al-Ghaz:l; [. . .] said: ‘It has become clear upon you

66‘Animal-man is one of the genus of humanness. He demonstrates the reality of

the world only. Thus he is the form of the world. This is in contrast to the Perfect Man
who is added to the total realities of the world [and] the total realities of the Absolute
Real. Surely the Perfect Man is upon two forms [the form of the world and the form
of the Absolute Real]—and he [animal-man] is of the totality of animals, his level is
[similar to] the level of the monkey from the [view of the] Perfect Man. Ibn 6Arab;
says: ‘‘Animal-man is the successor of the Perfect Man. He is the outer form of which
all the realities of the world are united or brought together. The Perfect Man is he who
is added to this assembly of realities of the world [and] the realities of the Absolute
Real.’’ Surely the Perfect Man is contrary to the animal-man in his properties: for the
animal-man nourishes himself through the nourishment of the animals [i.e. food and
drink] and these are also for his perfection and growth. [However,] for the Perfect
Man [he] nourishes [himself] through divine nourishment; not what is used by the
animal-man; and they are: that which pertains to the sciences of thought [which will
not nourish the animal-man] and unveiling (kashf), taste (dhawq) and correct
thinking.’ See Su6:d al-Eak;m, Mu6jam al-B<f;, 156. This is a term associated with
Ibn 6Ar:b; and indicates that Shams al-D;n had access to his Fut<A:t al-Makkiyya. I
could not find the term either in the extant work of Hamza Fansuri or in al-
Burh:np<r;’s TuAfa.
234 mohamad nasrin mohamad nasir
67
by the Divine presences and the worlds being apparent to you’. Mawl:n:
6Abd al-Kar;m al-J;l; [. . .] said: ‘Our perfection [lies] in comprehending all
the levels of existence by perception. [For,] when you do not differentiate the
levels, where then does the differentiation exist? Thus, when you name [each
of the levels] with a specific name [for each], it is permissible [that you do
68
so]’.
And God guides with certified proofs. And God knows best.

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

67
I have not been able to locate in al-Ghaz:l;’s works the words here attributed to
him.
68 What is meant here is that, for the verifiers, there is nothing in existence
except God and thus that is the Being that they see at all levels of existence. Indeed,
they do not perceive many of the levels as they are witnessing only the Absolute One
permeating the whole of existence.