The Kashf al-mahjúb: The oldest Persian treatise on SúfiismHujviri, ‘Ali ibn ‘Usman
Islamic
The Kashf al-mahjúb: The oldest Persian treatise on Súfiism
Hujviri, ‘Ali ibn ‘Usman
Sufism -- Early works to 1800
You must know that miracles may be vouchsafed to a saint so long as he
does not infringe the obligations of the religious law. Both parties of
the orthodox Moslems agree on this point, nor is it intellectually
impossible, because such miracles are a species of that which is
predestined by God, and their manifestation does not contradict any
principle of the religious law, nor, on the other hand, is it repugnant
to the mind to conceive them as a genus. A miracle is a token of a
saint’s veracity, and it cannot be manifested to an impostor except as a
sign that his pretensions are false. It is an extraordinary act (_fi`lí
náqiḍ-i `ádat_), performed while he is still subject to the obligations
of religion; and whoever is able, through knowledge given him by God, to
distinguish by the method of deduction what is true from what is false,
he too is a saint. Some Sunnís maintain that miracles are established,
but not to the degree of an evidentiary miracle (_mu`jizat_[120]): they
do not admit, for example, that prayers may be answered and fulfilled,
and so forth, contrary to custom. I ask in reply: “What do you consider
wrong in the performance by a true saint, while he is subject to
religious obligations, of an act which violates custom?” If they say
that it is not a species of that which is predestined by God, this
statement is erroneous; and if they say that it is a species of that
which is predestined, but that its performance by a true saint involves
the annulment of prophecy and the denial of special privileges to the
prophets, this assertion also is inadmissible, since the saint is
specially distinguished by miracles (_karámát_) and the prophet by
evidentiary miracles (_mu`jizát_); and inasmuch as the saint is a saint
and the prophet is a prophet, there is no likeness between them to
justify such precaution. The pre-eminence of the prophets depends on
their exalted rank and on their being preserved from the defilement of
sin, not on miracles or evidentiary miracles or acts which violate
custom. All the prophets are equal so far as they all have the power of
working such miracles (_i`jáz_), but some are superior to others in
degree. Since, then, notwithstanding this equality in regard to their
actions, some prophets are superior to others, why should not miracles
(_karámát_) which violate custom be vouchsafed also to the saints,
although the prophets are superior to them? And since, in the case of
the prophets, an act which violates custom does not cause one of them to
be more exalted or more specially privileged than another, so, in the
case of the saints, a similar act does not cause a saint to be more
specially privileged than a prophet, i.e. the saints do not become like
in kind (_hamsán_) to the prophets. This proof will clear away, for
reasonable men, any difficulties that this matter may have presented to
them. “But suppose,” it may be said, “that a saint whose miracles
violate custom should claim to be a prophet.” I reply that this is
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account