Mystical Theology 3: Fear and Love

Text of Hamid Entezam's lecture titled Mystical Theology 3 (Fear and Love)—2007 Hamid Entezam, in this series of sessions, explains and elucidates God from the perspective of mystics. It should be noted that this series of sessions on mystical theology continued for 18 sessions.

Session Three: Fear and Love

In the past several sessions, we have spoken about some of the categories raised in mystical theology. Among them, the place of reason, the capacity of the heart (qalb) in acquiring knowledge, and the importance of inner purity and cleanliness of the heart in the matter of witnessing, illumination, and acquiring certain knowledge (not conjectural or speculative) of God. In the previous session, we spoke about the veils that separate man and God, and that the mother of all veils is arrogance and pride, and that people who are arrogant and proud are not only afflicted with a moral vice, but are also deprived of intimacy with God. However, in the next few sessions, I will speak about

In any case, in this session I will speak about the concept of love in Islamic mysticism. My talk today concerns what kinds of relationships are fundamentally possible between human beings and God. Throughout history, various answers have been given to this question. But as an introduction, I will speak a little about the image and conception of God in the Qur'an so that the nature and importance of the issue can be better understood. In all monotheistic religions, God is an incorporeal being, superior and transcendent beyond the world. In these religions, God is far beyond and more exalted than creatures. He is infinitely great and infinitely elevated above the created world. The Qur'anic expressions are very eloquent and expressive. The Holy Qur'an uses the word "Aḥad" as an attribute for God. When we say God is "Aḥad," in a sense it is as if God does not want to be known very much and keeps Himself distant. In greatness, knowledge, creativity, and power, as the Holy Qur'an explicitly states, He has no like or equal. The Qur'an also introduces God with the attribute "al-Ṣamad." "Ṣamad" means the Absolute. God is the Absolute. Now the question is, such a being who is Ṣamad, Aḥad, and infinitely elevated beyond earth and time; such a being fundamentally does not fit within human understanding and comprehension. That is, God always remains beyond human perception, and no system of vocabulary or discourse can describe that Ṣamad or Absolute. Therefore, God is like a gazelle that flees from being perceived and described. Hence, with this description, no conceptual or theological system can offer a complete and comprehensive theory about God. Saying this is very simple, but digesting it is difficult. If we take this statement seriously, it means that no book, no theory in the created world encompasses God. This statement is incompatible with the outward appearance of Muslims' religious beliefs, yet at the same time, it is the truth. God does not fit within human understanding and perception. The Holy Qur'an says, "Laysa kamithlihi shay'" (There is nothing like unto Him). That is, God is not like anything in the created world; He is always superior and more transcendent. In the Holy Qur'an, emphasis is placed on the majesty, omnipotence, and everlasting power of God. Phrases like "Kun fa-yakūn" (Be, and it is) in fact say that God's will is identical with the realization of that matter. That is, God never needs to make preliminary arrangements to carry out His plans and projects. These phrases actually indicate that God is higher than creatures. In our daily prayers, we also remind ourselves of these very matters. When we bow down in rukūʿ, we say, "Subḥāna rabbiya al-aʿlā wa biḥamdih" (Glory be to my Lord, the Most High, and praise be to Him). In prostration, we remind ourselves, "Subḥāna rabbiya al-ʿaẓīm wa biḥamdih" (Glory be to my Lord, the Most Great, and praise be to Him). All of these depict that face of God which is very elevated above the earth and us, and at the same time, before such a God, a human being must inevitably and necessarily feel smallness, a feeling of helplessness and smallness before God. God is placed in such a lofty position that He is infinitely distant from His small servant. Given this introduction, two major questions arise. The first question is, what kind of servitude is worthy of such Lordship? That is, given God's attributes, what servitude is worthy of Him? What state and disposition should the human being, who is God's servant, have before such a God? The second question is, does a God so elevated, great, and inaccessible only instill helplessness, incapacity, and fear in His servants? Or can such a God also be loved? Is such a God fundamentally lovable and worthy of affection? Is the possibility of establishing a close, intimate, emotional, and loving relationship between a human being and this God elevated above creatures even conceivable? In other words, what relationship can exist between that infinitely great and this infinitely small?

The first conceivable and possible relationship between man and God is one based on fear. In our religious teachings, the awe-inspiring face of God has generally been spoken of, and those who have recently stepped into the realm of religiosity find the attributes of God’s majesty and omnipotence greatly emphasized. They see God depicted in such a way that, before Him, truly nothing arises from man but helplessness, smallness, dread, and fear. We have all more or less grown up with this religious paradigm. Of course, the truth of the matter is that in the Holy Quran and the words of our religious teachers, fear and awe before God are mentioned. In verses 40 and 41 of Surah An-Nazi'at, we read: (( وَ أَمّٰا مَنْ خٰافَ مَقٰامَ رَبِّهِ وَ نَهَى اَلنَّفْسَ عَنِ اَلْهَوىٰ ﴿۴۰﴾ فَإِنَّ اَلْجَنَّةَ هِيَ اَلْمَأْوىٰ ﴿۴۱﴾)) “Those who fear the station of their Lord and restrain the soul from passion, Paradise will be their abode.” It is as if God ties Paradise to fear of Himself, meaning only those who fear God will enter Paradise. Of course, two important points in these verses must be noted. First, God is not a frightening being; the above verse says those who fear the “station” of God, not God Himself. However, we generally interpret the word khawf (fear) in Persian as “tars” (terror). We have no choice but to do so, and we truly know of no other word to take as a synonym for khawf. But in Arabic, there is another word that is also translated as “tars” in Persian, and that is the word jubn. Khawf and jubn are two contrasting words, yet both are translated as “tars” in Persian. Jubn means cowardice and is a psychological state mixed with ignorance. Khawf is also a psychological state, but one mixed with knowledge and awareness. This is where the difference between khawf and jubn becomes clear, yet in Persian, we translate both as fear. When we encounter a great and immense matter and become deeply aware of its grandeur, we become fearful of the greatness and grandeur of that thing. Here, the basis and foundation of fear is gaining awareness of that thing. The point is that when you encounter a great and immense matter or phenomenon, you feel small and helpless, and this smallness and helplessness makes you more aware and cognizant of your true limit and status. As a general rule, any grandeur outside induces a sense of abjectness within us. The fear that results from the grandeur and majesty of an external being arises from deep awareness and liberation from ignorance. But not every fear is jubn. Fear, when it stems from knowledge, awareness, and consciousness, is certainly commendable; it is jubn that is blameworthy and undesirable because it is based on unawareness and ignorance. Fear of God arises from the deep awareness of the gnostic human in his encounter with a being of ultimate grandeur and sublimity, transcendent from the world. In religions, the remembrance of two things is obligatory: first, the remembrance of God, and second, the remembrance of death. Now the question is, what relationship exists between the remembrance of Allah and the remembrance of death? The answer is clear: man cannot overcome God or death. You will never be safe from the clutches of death. The fact that man cannot overcome God and death is a reminder of man’s inherent helplessness and inability. The gnostic human who has truly understood his own station and position in this world can do nothing but surrender before God. In any case, a human who truly perceives his own station and status in this vast and infinite existence sees no recourse for himself other than surrender to God. How beautifully Rumi says:

What recourse is there but surrender and contentment,

You are in the clutches of a bloodthirsty male lion.

When a human being encounters that Infinite, the mountain of their existence trembles, just as Moses (peace be upon him) experienced at the appointed time. What the religions have intended is that each and every religious person should repeat experiences like those of Moses in their own lives, not merely recall the experiences of the prophets while themselves being deprived of and without share in those experiences. In Surah Al-A'raf, verse 143, it is stated:(( وَ لَمّٰا جٰاءَ مُوسىٰ لِمِيقٰاتِنٰا وَ كَلَّمَهُ رَبُّهُ قٰالَ رَبِّ أَرِنِي أَنْظُرْ إِلَيْكَ قٰالَ لَنْ تَرٰانِي وَ لٰكِنِ اُنْظُرْ إِلَى اَلْجَبَلِ فَإِنِ اِسْتَقَرَّ مَكٰانَهُ فَسَوْفَ تَرٰانِي فَلَمّٰا تَجَلّٰى رَبُّهُ لِلْجَبَلِ جَعَلَهُ دَكًّا وَ خَرَّ مُوسىٰ صَعِقاً فَلَمّٰا أَفٰاقَ قٰالَ سُبْحٰانَكَ تُبْتُ إِلَيْكَ وَ أَنَا أَوَّلُ اَلْمُؤْمِنِينَ ﴿۱۴۳﴾)) “Moses came to the appointed time and his Lord spoke with him. Moses said, ‘My Lord, reveal Yourself to me so that I may behold You.’ The Lord said, ‘You shall never see Me; but look at the mountain: if it remains firm in its place, then you shall see Me.’ And when his Lord manifested Himself to the mountain, He crushed it to dust, and Moses fell down stunned.” When God manifests upon the world, truly nothing remains of the existence of that which was the locus of God's manifestation. Now suppose this God manifests upon your heart—would anything remain? This is the very thing that Rumi also spoke of. God manifests upon the human being with such firmness and awe. The fear of this encounter and manifestation envelops the human being's existence; this fear arises from knowledge of God and from knowledge of the self, meaning that here there is both theology and self-knowledge. Therefore, the more a human being knows themselves in relation to God, the greater their fear and awe will become. Verse 28 of Surah Fatir also contains a subtle point, saying that indeed, among God's servants, those who possess knowledge and are learned are the ones who have awe of God. This awe is preceded by knowledge and awareness and arises from self-awareness and self-knowledge. For figures such as Abu Hamid Muhammad al-Ghazali, God manifested to them in a fearsome form, and this fearsome description of God was very prominent in their theology. But, and a thousand buts. This fearsome image of God and this relation to God is not complete. Fear of God is praiseworthy, but fear is not the entirety of the possible relation between the human being and God. In Surah Ya-Sin, verse 11, it is stated:(( إِنَّمٰا تُنْذِرُ مَنِ اِتَّبَعَ اَلذِّكْرَ وَ خَشِيَ اَلرَّحْمٰنَ بِالْغَيْبِ فَبَشِّرْهُ بِمَغْفِرَةٍ وَ أَجْرٍ كَرِيمٍ ﴿۱۱﴾ )) addressing the Prophet, it says, “You can only warn one who follows the Reminder and fears the All-Merciful in the unseen; so give such a one glad tidings of forgiveness and a generous reward.” The phrase “خَشِيَ اَلرَّحْمٰنَ بِالْغَيْبِ” is one of the most subtle and profound expressions in the Holy Quran. It speaks of a being named God whom one must both fear and, at the same time, see as a lovable and merciful being. The verse says that the message of the prophets takes effect in those who fear that Merciful God. God's servants are fearful, but they are not cowardly or abject. The Holy Quran states that one should not be afraid of the fearsome God. Of course, at first glance, this may seem paradoxical. In Surah An-Naml, the story of Moses (peace be upon him) and his approach to a tree that had caught fire is recounted. The story goes that Moses was in the valley of Tuwa when he suddenly saw a tree on fire, and out of curiosity, he approached it. Suddenly, a call came from the tree: (( يٰا مُوسىٰ إِنَّهُ أَنَا اَللّٰهُ اَلْعَزِيزُ اَلْحَكِيمُ ﴿۹﴾)) “I am God, the All-Knowing, the All-Powerful.” Moses initially thinks he is imagining things. But the tree speaks again; this time, to draw Moses' attention, the call comes: “Moses, what is that in your right hand?” Moses replies, “A staff.” It says, “Throw down the staff.” When Moses threw it down, the staff suddenly turned into a serpent. Moses (peace be upon him) was terrified by the sight and turned to flee. Just as he resolved to flee the scene, the tree addressed him again: ((... يٰا مُوسىٰ لاٰ تَخَفْ إِنِّي لاٰ يَخٰافُ لَدَيَّ اَلْمُرْسَلُونَ ﴿۱۰﴾ )) “O Moses, do not be afraid; indeed, the messengers do not fear in My presence.”

In a sense, God plays with Moses. First He says, 'Throw down your staff,' and from this staff a serpent appears, causing Moses to be afraid. This is a game God plays with human beings: those who are unaware, God frightens them, and as soon as they become aware, He removes their fear. As Rumi says:

Do not fear, for He has given you fear

He sends bread, since He sent you a platter

It says when fear comes, the call of "Do not fear" will follow in its wake. God frightens the one who is ignorant and does not fear the majesty and grandeur of Lordship, and to the one who has attained gnosis and fallen into fear of God's majesty and omnipotence, He says, "Do not fear." On one hand, God manifests to the human being with awe and firmness, making them so utterly abject that nothing remains of them; yet on the other hand, He takes this same terrified human being by the hand of love, seats them beside Himself, grants them security and peace, and dispels their fear. Is faith anything other than this?! Faith comes from the root "amn," meaning to enter a sanctuary. In that sanctuary, you attain security, you find peace.

In one of his ghazals, Hafez speaks of a beloved who, on one hand, sends a message of terror and appears wrathful, and on the other hand, harbors a hidden grace for him:

Though he said, "I will kill you miserably," I saw

That secretly he had a glance for me, the heart-burnt one

Hafez's amorous experience was like this. He says, I found myself like a gazelle in the claws of a lion. I saw that this beloved, at any moment he willed, could spill my blood, but despite his wrathfulness, he signaled to me to take heart, be secure and at ease, and not be terrified of his power and grandeur.

Rumi's mystical experience was also like this; he too, in confronting the grandeur, majesty, and omnipotence of God, saw himself as a wisp of straw in the grip of a storm:

I am a straw before you, O fierce wind

How can I know where I will fall?

A straw before the wind, and then stillness?

A resurrection, and then resolve for work?

He says, imagine you are a wisp of straw and a storm has arisen; what remains of this straw's existence?

I am a cat in a bag, in the hand of Love

One moment up, one moment down, by Love

He keeps spinning me around his head

I have no rest below, nor above

Lovers have fallen into a fierce torrent

They have set their hearts upon the decree of Love

Picture a cat that has fallen into a bag, and that bag is being swung around someone's head. The cat falls up and down and has no way of escape, no rest or stillness. Rumi says the lovers of the Truth are like this. Like a stone caught in the grip of a flood, they are constantly being raised and lowered. But at the same time, the lovers have given their hearts to the decree, will, and command of Love and are certain that Love wills nothing but good for them. This is the meaning of tawakkul in Islamic theology: that you truly find yourself to be a stone in a very mighty river. You realize you are a stone that constantly strikes the banks of the river, but you are certain that you will emerge safely from this river. This is tawakkul. Elsewhere, Rumi says:

O companions, the Beloved has blocked the paths

We are a lame gazelle and He is a hunting lion

What recourse is there but submission and contentment

In the clutches of a fierce, bloodthirsty lion?

He has no sleep or food, like the sun;

He renders spirits without food and sleep,

Saying, ‘Come, be Me, or of My nature,

So that you may behold My face in manifestation.’

He interprets God as a sun that has no sleep or food, and whenever this sun manifests upon the existence of the servants, they too will lose their sleep and appetite. This is precisely a terrifying experience, and Muslim mystics have reported it.

اما یک نسبت دیگری هم بین انسان و خداوند وجود دارد. و آن نسبتی مبتنی بر عشق و محبت است.خوف تنها نسبت میان انسان و خداوند نیست .از همان دوران اولیه اسلامی عارفان مسلمان به نیکی دریافته بودند که رحمانیّت و رحیمیت خداوند یک مدلول روشن دارد و آن اینکه بین انسان و خداوند نسبت و رابطه دیگری هم به نام محبت وجود دارد. و اگر محبتی در کار نبود رحمت و رحمانیت هم موضوعیتی پیدا نمی کرد.بدون هیچ تردیدی قرآن کریم بر وجود عنصر حب بین انسان و خداوند تاکید می کند.در سوره مائده آیه ۵۴ آمده "یحبهم و یحبونه" “خداوند آن ها را دوست دارد و آنها هم خداوند را دوست دارند”. اینجا سخن اهل ایمان است. می فرماید مومنین کسانی هستند که بین آنها و خداوند "حب" وجود دارد."حب" مفهومی عربی است؛تعبیری که عارفان مسلمان پارسی گوی ما از حب داشته اند واژه "عشق" است.این عارفان اهمیت عشق را در سلوک معنوی متذکر شدند و سهم عشق را در تقرب به خداوند ادا کردند.عرفای مسلمان سعی کردند هم عشق را تببین کنند و هم اهمیت عشق را در دین ورزی و سلوک معنوی تذکر دهند.آن دسته از فقیهان که با عرفان چندان میانه خوبی نداشتند حب خداوند را می پذیرند چرا که تصریح قرآن کریم است اما آن ها محبت را تنها به صورت اطاعت و عبادت خداوند قبول دارند.از نظر آن ها محب خداوند از دستورات خداوند اطاعات و تبعیت می کند.و این تبعیت عین محبت است نسبت به خداوند. اما عارفانی چون مولانا ،شمس تبریزی، بایزید بسطامی، حلاج،عطار و سهروردی هرچند تبعیت از احکام شریعت را لازم می‌دانستند، اما دامنه حب و عشق را بسی فراخ تر از طاعات و عبادات می دانستند.برای این ها خداوند پر مهابت و پر صلابت ، دوست داشتنی هم هست.خداوند با جلال و جبروت،جمیل و زیبا هم هست.همانگونه که پیامبر فرمود: ((ان الله جمیل و یحب الجمال)) “خداوند زیباست و زیبایی را دوست دارد”. کسانی همچون غزالی چشمشان تنها جلال و جبروت خداوند را میدید، اما عارفانی همچون مولانا چشمان ما را به جمال خداوند گشودند. همین زیبایی و مهربانی خداوند است که او را دوست داشتنی می کند.کشف بزرگ این عارفان عنصر عشق بود. این عارفان به نیکی دریافته بودند که اگر سالک بر مرکبی از عشق و محبت سوار نباشد و اگر دلش آکنده از محبتی نباشد هیچ وقت در طاعت خداوند توفیقی پیدا نمی کند.یعنی اطاعت از خداوند هنگامی کامل است که حب خداوند در دل بنده نشسته باشد.طاعت بدون حب کاربرد چندانی نخواهد داشت.انسان باید حظی از عشق و محبت پیدا کند تا بتواند دشواری های راه حق را تحمل کند.مولوی ها و شمس ها به درستی دریافته بودند که اگر انسان از محبت و عشق بی نصیب باشد رفته رفته به واسطه دشواری‌های راه مجاهدت با نفس کم حوصله و عبوس و ترش رو می شود و تعادل شخصیتی خود را از دست می دهد. برخی‌ دینداران کم حوصله،عبوس و ترش رو هستند چون از محبت حظی نبرده اند و طاقت تحمل دشواری های راه را هم ندارند.و این عدم تعادل شخصیتی حتی ممکن است به جایی برسد که همین آدمی که در انجام جزئیات احکام عبادی بر خود بسیار سخت می گیرد، به انسانی بسیار قسی القلبی هم تبدیل شود که هزار هزار انسان را بکشد و ککش هم نگزد.اگر این فرد با همان وسواس و دقت نظرش در شکیات نماز، به مجرمیت انسانها توجه می کرد امکان نداشت که خون از دماغ کسی‌ بریزد.کم نبودند در طول تاریخ انسان های شب زنده داری که قسی القلب ترین آدم ها بودند و این نماز خواندن ها هیچ تعارضی با قسی القلب بودن ندارد و کاملا با هم قابل جمع هم هستند.آن چیزی که قساوت قلب را زایل می کند محبت و عشق است. آن کسی که دلش آکنده از عشق و محبت است، امکان ندارد که قسی القلب و خونریز شود.در بینش خشک فقهی حظی از صمیمت و دوستی خداوند نیست.در این رویکرد فقیهانه نسبتی که میان انسان و خداوند وجو دارد نسبت مولا با برده است.مولا حکم صادر می کند و بنده اطاعت مطلق و بی چون و چرا می کند.در این رویکرد خداوند به گونه ای تصور می سود که مانند برده داران دنبال بهانه می‌‌گردد تا عقوبت و شکنجه بکند.خداوندی که غالب دین داران تصور می کنند چنین موجودی است که همواره دنبال بهانه می گردد تا انسان را به جهنم بفرستد.مادامی که چنین تصویری در میان دین داران وجود داشته باشد اخلاقی متناسب با خدای برده دار پیدا می کنند نه یک خدای زیبا و دوست داشتنی.حقیقتا در چنین آیینی چیزی جز عبوسی و تندخویی و تندگویی در نزد دین داران نمی شود سراغ گرفت.در چشم یک زاهد عبوس،خداوند مانند یک زندانبان است.زندانبانی که مراقب است کار خطایی از ما صورت نگیرد.حضور خداوند را همچون یک زندانبان تلقی کردن،اخلاقی را پدید می آورد که که عین قید و بند و زنجیر است. اهتمام حافظ بر آن بود که خوشرویی را جانشین عبوسی و ترشرو

One of the ascetics will do:

The ill-tempered wool-clad ascetic has heard nothing of love

Tell him a secret of its intoxication, so he may abandon sobriety

Ascetics used to wear woolen garments to be harsh upon their bodies, so that their spirits might find an opportunity for release and flight. Hafez says that wearing wool brings ill-temper in its wake. And this is no idle or exaggerated statement. Most religious people who are devoid of love and affection are sullen and grim-faced, and cannot tolerate cheerfulness, smiles, or joy at all. Such a relationship between the human being and God will inevitably bring about this kind of disposition. This group of religious people do not live; their hope is to experience life after death, in another world. It is for this very reason that in our religious culture, sorrowfulness and weeping have always been prominent signs and markers of piety, while, conversely, vitality, freshness, and cheerfulness have been seen as signs of recklessness and distance from God. One of the afflictions threatening our religiosity is precisely this ill-temper, sullenness, and dead-heartedness. If love and affection have no standing in our epistemological system, if love has no place in our religious practice and faith, such will be our fate. One of the important reasons for the youth's aversion to religion is precisely that they have seen nothing from religion but lamentation, sorrow, and tears. One of the outstanding services of Muslim mystics was the promotion of the element of love in the religious life of Muslims, in order to thereby impart a freshness, vitality, and liveliness to Muslim religiosity, so that Islam might emerge from being a set of dry, lifeless rules and customs and transform into a tremendous spiritual force for the existential growth and development of the faithful. Muslim mystics extensively elaborated upon concepts such as love and made them a significant part of their own religious practice. They founded Islamic amorous mysticism—a particular kind of religiosity based on spirituality, joyousness, delight, and cheerfulness. Amorous mysticism must not be confused with recklessness, licentiousness, or hedonism. Our mystics emphasized the importance of devotional rulings and the regulations of the Sharia, and were far more committed to them than we are.

They did not view the legal rulings of the Sharia as "obligations"; rather, they found them beautiful. Prayer is beautiful, and alms are beautiful. Charitable deeds, giving, aiding the deprived, and caring for the orphan are beautiful. Love and affection do not replace acts of worship but are added to them. When affection and love are added, they then carry the person more swiftly toward God. As Rumi says:

The ascetic races on foot, driven by fear

Lovers fly, swifter than lightning and wind

He says the fearful ascetic walks toward God on foot, but the loving mystic flies toward God.

pdf Mystical Theology 3

Transcription and editing of the lecture:Omid Ghaem Panah