Qurʾānic Knowledge and Akbarian Wisdom: Ibn ‘Arabī’s Daring Hermeneutics in Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam

Year 2021, , 479 - 493, 15.06.2021

İsmail Lala

https://doi.org/10.18505/cuid.851857

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ‘Arabī is arguably the most influential Ṣūfī theorist in Islam. In his most enduringly popular work, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, he conspicuously and persistently demonstrates that whatever our perception of a prophet in the Qurʾān, the wisdom associated with him and derived from him is very different. This is not to suggest that Ibn ‘Arabī denies the literal text of the Qurʾān. Quite the contrary. He simply asserts that there are different levels of perception of and reception to the Qurʾān: The outer reality (ẓāhir) of the Qurʾān is for mass consumption and is the knowledge one derives from, according to Ibn ‘Arabī, a superficial understanding of the Qurʾān. There is, nevertheless, a deeper understanding of the inner reality (bāṭin) of the Qurʾān that is the preserve of the gnostics (‘ārifūn). Through this reading of the Qurʾān, one that goes beyond the outer reality but is inextricably bound to it, Ibn Arabī perpetuates the tradition of mystical interpretation of the Qur’ān whilst doing so in his own way and executes his primary objective in every chapter of the Fuṣūṣ: Highlighting the antithesis between the ẓāhir and bāṭin of the Qurʾān, whilst maintaining the legitimacy of both, and even going as far as to assert that the bāṭin may only be accessed through the ẓāhir. This paper scrutinises four chapters of the Fuṣūṣ in which we find the most explicit cases of this mutually-dependent knowledge (‘ilm)/wisdom (ḥikma) antithesis, and have been selected for specific reasons: The chapter of Ādam was chosen as it is the first chapter of the Fuṣūṣ and in it Ibn ‘Arabī’s objective and approach for the work in its entirety comes into sharp focus. The chapters of Lūṭ and Hārūn were singled out as they constitute the most perspicuous examples of the Andalusian’s binary hermeneutic principle. Finally, the chapter of Nūḥ was selected because it displays that even when Ibn ‘Arabī seems to contradict the ẓāhir of the text, he is actually elucidating a more advanced interpretive model that builds on the primary exoteric one. In the chapter of Ādam, Ibn ‘Arabī suggests that the Qur’ānic representation most consistently associated with Ādam is of his humanity as he is the father of mankind. Yet his wisdom is of divinity. This is because it is only in the human that the divine finds His starkest and fullest expression. The Qur’ānic symbol of Nūḥ, on the other hand, is the flood in which the vast majority of his people drowned. His wisdom, according to the Mystic, is making things swim—the wisdom of subbūḥiyya/ sabbūḥiyya. For Ibn ‘Arabī, drowning, rather than a cause of death, becomes a source of life. Lūṭ’s most abiding image in the Qur’ān is of his powerlessness because of his seeming inability to curb the transgression of his people. His wisdom, nevertheless, says Ibn ‘Arabī, is power. Finally, Hārūn is portrayed in the Qur’ān as being obedient to Mūsā. He was granted prophethood to aid his brother, to assist him in bearing his burden. Even when Mūsā goes to Sinai and leaves him in charge, he is only fulfilling his role as Mūsā’s helper and is subordinate to him. Yet his wisdom is the antithesis of subordination, it is of leadership.

Keywords

Ṣūfism, Ibn ‘Arabī, Fuṣūṣ, Qur’ān, Prophets, Tafsīr.

Supporting Institution

Gulf University for Science and Technology

Thanks

Sema Yılmaz for her help during the submission process.

Kur’anî Bilgi ve Ekberî Hikmet: Fusûsü’l-Hikem’de İbn Arabî’nin Cesur Hermenötiği

Abstract

Muhyiddin ibn Arabî, İslam'daki tartışmasız en etkili sufi teorisyendir. Kalıcı şekilde en popüler çalışması olan Fusûsül-hikem'de, Kur'an'da bir peygamber hakkında algımız ne olursa olsun, onunla ilişkilendirilen ve ondan türetilen hikmetin çok farklı olduğunu açıkça ve ısrarla göstermektedir. Bu, İbn Arabî'nin Kur'an'ın literal metnini inkar ettiği anlamına gelmez. Tam tersine, O sadece Kur'an'ı farklı algılama ve alımlama düzeylerinin olduğunu iddia eder: Kur'an'ın dış gerçekliği (zâhir) kitlesel tüketim içindir ve İbn Arabî'ye göre kişinin Kur'an'ın yüzeysel bir anlayışından elde ettiği bilgidir. Bununla birlikte, Kuran'ın, ariflerin (arifûn) korumasında olan daha derin bir anlayışı vardır. İbn Arabî, dış gerçeğin ötesine geçen, ancak ona (dış gerçekliğe) ayrılmaz bir şekilde bağlı olan Kur’an’ı bu şekilde okumasıyla, Kur'an'ın tasavvufi tefsir geleneğini kendi tarzında sürdürür ve birincil amacını Fusûs’un her bölümünde uygular: Her ikisinin de meşruiyetini korurken, Kur'an'ın zâhir ve bâṭını arasındaki antitezi vurgulamak ve hatta bâṭına ancak ẓâhir yoluyla erişilebileceğini iddia edecek kadar ileri gitmek. Bu makale, bu karşılıklı bağımlı bilgi ('ilm)/hikmet (hikma) antitezinin en açık örneklerini bulduğumuz ve belirli nedenlerle seçilmiş Fusûs'un dört bölümünü detaylı şekilde incelemektedir: Adem bölümü, Fusûs'un ilk bölümü olduğu için seçilmiştir ve bu bölümde İbn Arabî'nin eserin tamamına yönelik amacı ve yaklaşımı net şekilde belirginleşir. Lût ve Hârûn bölümleri, Endülüs'ün ikili hermenötik ilkesinin en bariz örneklerini oluşturdukları için seçilmiştir. Son olarak, İbn Arabî metnin tahiriyle çelişiyor gibi görünse bile, aslında birincil zahiri modele dayanan daha gelişmiş bir yorum modelini açıkladığı için Nûh bölümü seçilmiştir. Âdem bölümünde İbn Arabi, Adem ile ilişkilendirilen en tutarlı Kur'anî betimlemenin insanlığın babası olduğu için onun insanlığının olduğunu öne sürer. Oysa onun hikmeti ilahi vasfıdır. Bunun nedeni, İlahi en katıksız ve tam ifadesini ancak insanda bulabilmesidir. Diğer taraftan, Nuh'un Kuranî sembolü ise kavminin büyük çoğunluğunun boğulduğu tufandır. Sufî’ye göre (İbn Arabî) onun hikmeti, şeyleri yüzdürmesidir- subbūḥiyya/sebūḥiyya hikmeti. İbn Arabî için boğulma bir ölüm nedeni olmaktan çok bir yaşam kaynağı olmuştur. Lut'un Kur'an'daki en kalıcı imgesi, kavminin günahını dizginlemedeki yetersizliğinden dolayı güçsüzlüğüdür. İbn Arabî, ama yine de onun hikmetinin güç olduğunu söylüyor. Son olarak, Hârûn, Kuran'da Mûsâ'ya itaat eden biri olarak tasvir edilir. Kardeşine yardım etmesi, yükünü taşımasına yardım etmesi için kendisine peygamberlik verildi. Mûsâ, Sina'ya gidip onu sorumlu bıraktığında bile, o sadece Mûsâ'nın yardımcısı rolünü yerine getirir ve ona tabidir. Oysa onun hikmeti itaatin, liderliğin antitezidir.

Keywords

Tasavvuf, İbn Arabî, Fusûs, Kur’an, Peygamberler, Tefsir

References

• Addas, Claude. Quest for the Red Sulphur- the Life of Ibn ‘Arabī, trans. Peter Kingsley. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993.
• ‘Afifī, Abu’l-‘Alā’. The Mystical Philosophy of Muḥyīd’Dīn Ibnul-‘Arabī. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1939.
• Almond, Ian. “The Honesty of the Perplexed: Derrida and Ibn ‘Arabi on ‘Bewilderment”’. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 70/3 (2002), 515-37. Access December 12 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1466522.
• Austin, Ralph. Ibn al-‘Arabī: The Bezels of Wisdom. New Jersey: Paulist Press, 1980.
• Brown, Jonathan. The Canonization of al-Bukhārī and Muslim: The Formation and Function of the Sunnī Ḥadīth Canon. Leiden: Brill, 2007.
• Bukhārī, Muḥammad b. Ismāʿīl. al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ. ed. Muḥammad Zuhayr b. Nasr. 8 Volumes. s.l.: Dār Tawq al- Najāt, 2. Edition, 1422/2001.
• Calder, Norman. “Tafsīr from Ṭabarī to Ibn Kathīr: Problems in the Description of the Genre, Illustrated with Reference to the Story of Abraham”. Approaches to the Qurʾan, ed. Gerald Hawting and Abdul Shareef. 101-40. London: Routledge, 1993.
• Chittick, William C. “Mysticism versus Philosophy in Earlier Islamic History: The al-Ṭūsī, al-Qūnawī Correspondence”. Religious Studies 17/1 (1981), 87-104.
• Chittick, William C. “Death and the World of Imagination: Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Eschatology”. The Muslim World 78 (1988), 51-82.
• Chittick, William C. Faith and Practice of Islam: Three Thirteenth Century Ṣūfī Texts. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1992.
• Chodkiewicz, Michel. An Ocean without Shore: Ibn ʿArabī, The Book, and the Law, trans. David Streight. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993.
• Chodkiewicz, Michel. The Seal of the Saints: Prophethood and Sainthood in the Doctrine of Ibn ʿArabi. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993.
• Corbin, Henry. Creative Imagination in the Ṣūfism of Ibn ʿArabī, trans. Ralph Manheim. London: Routledge: 1969.
• Corbin, Henry. Alone with the Alone: Creative Imagination in the Sūfism of Ibn ʿArabī. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1997.
• Dhahabī, Muḥammad Ḥusayn. Al-Tafsīr waʾl-mufassirūn. 3 Volumes. Cairo: Maktabat al-Wahbiyya, n.d.
• De Cillis, Maria. Free Will and Predestination in Islamic Thought: Theoretical Compromises in the Works of Avicenna, al-Ghāzālī and Ibn ‘Arabī. London and New York: Routledge, 2014.
• Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid. Faḍāʾiḥ al-bāṭiniyya. Kuwait: Dār al-Kutub al-Thaqāfiyya, n.d.
• Ghurāb, Maḥmūd Maḥmūd. Al-Fiqh ʿind al-Shaykh al-Akbar Muḥyi al-Dīn ibn ʿArabī. Damascus: Maṭbaʿat Zayd ibn Thābit, 1981.
• Ghurāb, Maḥmūd Maḥmūd. Sharḥ Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam min kalām al-Shaykh al-Akbar Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn al-ʿArabī. Damascus: Maṭbaʿat Zayd ibn Thābit, 1985.
• Gril, Denis. “Ibn ʿArabī et les categories”. Logik und Theologie. Das Organon im arabischen und im latinischen Mittelalter, ed. Dominik Perler and Ulrich Rudolph, 147-65. Leiden, Brill, 2005.
• Ḥakīm, Suʿād. Al-Muʿjam al-ṣūfī/ Al-Ḥikma fī ḥudūd al-kalimāt. Beirut: Dandara, 1981.
• Hirtenstein, Stephen. The Unlimited Mercifier: The Spiritual Life and Thought of Ibn ‘Arabī. Oxford: Anqa Publishing, 1999.
• Ibn ʿArabī, Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad. Divine Governance of the Human Kingdom (At-Tadbirat al- ilahiyyah fi islah al-mamlakat al-insaniyyah); What the Seeker Needs (Kitab kunh ma la budda minhu lil- murid); The One Alone (Kitab al-ahadiyyah), trans. Tosun Bayrak al-Jerrahi al-Halveti. Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae: 1997.
• Ibn ‘Arabī, Muḥammad ibn ‘Alī ibn Muḥammad. Al-Futūḥāt al-makkiyya. Beirut: Dār Ṣādir, n.d.
• Ibn ‘Arabī, Muḥammad ibn ‘Alī ibn Muḥammad. Dīwān Ibn ‘Arabī. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1996.
• Ibn ‘Arabī, Muḥammad ibn ‘Alī ibn Muḥammad. Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, ed. Abu’l-‘Alā’ ‘Afīfī. Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-‘Arabī, 2002.
• Ibn Baṭṭāl, Abu’l-Ḥasan. Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Riyad: Maktabat al-Rushd, 2003.
• Ibn Kathīr, ‘Imād al-Dīn Abu’l Fidā’ Ismā‘īl ibn ‘Umar. Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-‘aẓīm. Damascus: Maktabat Dār al-Fīḥā’, 1998.
• Ibn Mājah, Muḥammad b. Yazīd. Sunan Ibn Mājah. ed. Muḥammad Fuʾād ʿAbd al-Bāqī. Egypt: Dār Iḥyā’ al-Kutub al-‘Arabiyya, n.d.
• Ibn Sulaymān, Muqātil. Tafsīr Muqātil ibn Sulaymān. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā’ al-Turāth, 2002.
• Izutsu, Toshihiko. Sufism and Taoism. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1983.
• Jāmī, Nūr al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān. Sharḥ Jāmī ‘alā fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2009.
• Jīlī, ʿAbd al-Karīm. Al-Insān al-kāmil fī maʿrifat al-awākhir waʾl-awāʾil, ed. Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ṣalāḥ ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿUwayḍa. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1997.
• Kiliç, Mahmud Erol. “Mysticism”. History of Islamic Philosophy, ed. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Oliver Leaman, 47-59. London and New York: Routledge, 2007.
• Knysh, Alexander. Ibn ʿArabī in the Later Islamic Tradition. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 1999.
• Knysh, Alexander. “Sufi Commentary: Formative and Later Periods”. The Oxford Handbook of Qur’anic Studies, ed. Mustafa Shah and Muhammad Abdel Haleem. 746-765. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.
• Lala, Ismail. “Reflections on ‘Abd al-Razzāq al-Qāshānī’s commentary on Fuṣūṣ al-Ḥikam”. The Maghreb Review 37/1 (2012), 33-57.
• Lala, Ismail. Knowing God: Ibn Arabī and ‘Abd al-Razzāq al-Qāshānī’s Metaphysics of the Divine. Leiden: Brill, 2019.
• Lala, Ismail. “Outpourers and Receptacles: The Emergence of the Cosmos in the Ṣūfī Thought of Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ‘Arabī and ‘Abd al-Razzāq al-Qāshānī”. The Maghreb Review 44/2 (2019), 223-272.
• Landau, Rom. The Philosophy of Ibn ʿArabī. Abingdon: Routledge, 2008.
• Lane, Edward. An Arabic-English Lexicon. 8 Volumes. New Delhi/ Chennai: Asian Educational Services, 2003.
• Lipton, Gregory A. Rethinking Ibn Arabi. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018.
• Mayer, Toby. “Theology and Sufism”. The Cambridge Companion to Classical Islamic Theology, ed. Tim Winter, 258-87. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
• Mitha, Farouk. Al-Ghazālī and the Ismailis: a Debate on Reason and Authority in Medieval Islam. London: I.B. Tauris in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2001.
• Morris, James. “Ibn ʿArabī and his Interpreters”, part II-B. Journal of the American Oriental Society 107 (1987), 101- 19. Access 16 December 2014. www.ibnarabisociety.org.uk/articlespdf/hi_interpreters3.pdf
• Morrissey, Fitzroy. “The Origins of the Fuṣūṣ: Early Explanations of Ibn ‘Arabī’s ‘Vision’ of the Prophet”. The Maghreb Review 45/ 4 (2020), 763-94.
• Muslim b. al-Ḥajjāj. al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ. ed. Muḥammad Fuʾād ʿAbd al-Bāqī. Cairo: s.n., 1374-75/1955-56.
• Nasafī, Najm al-Dīn. Tafsīr al-Nasafī. Beirut: Dār al-Kalim al-Ṭayyib, 1998.
• Nettler, Ronald. Sufi Metaphysics and Qur’ānic Prophets. Cambridge: The Islamic Texts Society, 2003.
• Qāshānī, ʿAbd al-Razzāq. Sharḥ ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Qāshānī ʿalā Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, ed. Bālī Khalīfa al-Ṣūfiyāwī. Cairo: Al-Maṭbaʿa al-Ẓāhira, 1892.
• Qūnawī, Ṣadr al-Dīn. Al-Fukūk fī asrār mustanadāt ḥikam al-fuṣūṣ. Beirut: Kitāb Nāshirūn, 2013.
• Qurṭubī, Abū ‘Abd Allāh Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad. Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2004.
• Qushayrī, ‘Abd al-Karīm. Laṭā’if al-ishārāt. Egypt: Al-Hay’a al-Miṣriyya li’l-Kitāb, 2010.
• Sands, Kristin Zahra. Ṣūfī Commentaries of the Qurʾan in Classical Islam. Abingdon: Routledge, 2006.
• Schimmel, Annemarie. Mystical Dimensions of Islam. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1978.
• Scholem, Gershom. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism. New York: Schocken Books, 1995.
• Sells, Michael A. Mystical Languages of Unsaying. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994.
• Shehadi, Fadlou A. Ghazali’s Unique Unknowable God. Leiden: Brill, 1964.
• Sulamī, Abū ‘Abd al-Raḥmān. Haqā’iq al-tafsīr. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2001.
• Suyūṭī, Jalāl al-Dīn. Tanbīh al-ghabī bi-tabri’at Ibn ‘Arabī. Beirut: s.n., 1980.
• Suyūṭī, Jalāl al-Dīn. Ta’yīd al-ḥaqīqa al-‘aliyya. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2006.
• Tahrali, Mustafa. “L'Expression en alternance dans les Fusûs al-Hikam”. Tasavvuf 28 (2011), 1-11.
• Tustarī, Sahl. Tafsīr al-Tustarī. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2002.
• Wolfson, Harry Austryn. “Philosophical Implications of the Problem of Divine Attributes in the Kalam”. Journal of the American Oriental Society 79 (1959), 73-80.
• Wright, William. A Grammar of the Arabic Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
• Yahya, Osman. Histoire et classification de l’oeuvre d’Ibn ʿArabī: étude critique. 2 Volumes. Paris: s.n., 1964.