The Spiritual Heritage of Illumination by Professor Henry Corbin, translated by Dr. Ensha'allah Rahmati

The “great thought” of Shaykh al-Ishrāq is precisely the founding of a complete and perfect spiritual culture that encompasses the entirety of philosophical knowledge while simultaneously aiming at the complete spiritual realization of the person himself. The path of Ishrāq, the path of “Illuminationist” wisdom revived from [the heart of the wisdom of] ancient Iran, deviates neither to the right nor to the left. The wayfarer who sets foot on this path has neither the mission of becoming a theorist of a philosophy heedless of the true end of philosophy, nor an adventurer in the valley of mysticism, unaware of the dangers that beset those whom philosophy has not yet brought to self-awareness and rendered immune to all manner of mirages.

For this reason, this path can be called the “Royal Road.” This term is borrowed from the mystical wisdom of Philo of Alexandria,¹ whose works can be compared in various respects with those of the “Illuminationist” sages, even though his works were unknown to them. These comparisons will merely extend those that others have already made between the thought of the divine “Powers” in Philo’s thought and the Aməša Spəntas or Bounteous Immortals in the Avesta.

The name Royal Road is taken from the Book of Numbers (in the Torah): “We will go by the king’s high way, we will not turn to the right hand nor to the left, until we have passed thy borders” (20:17 and 21:22). This Royal Road is the Royal Road of gnosis. It brings the wayfarer to knowledge through direct vision, for this Royal Road is the path of the “people of insight.”

By traversing this path, the people of insight advance to the highest degree, which Suhrawardī terms “ta’alluh” (deification). This is the very path that led the “Stranger” [in the Tale of the Occidental Exile] to the summit of Mount Sinai, to the place from which he found his way to the “Eighth Clime.” Moreover, this Royal Road is the same one that the Muslim gnostics have referred to as the “Straight Path” (ṣirāṭ mustaqīm): the path that deviates neither to the left nor to the right, the path of the mountain ridge where the plants growing on both slopes reach their zenith and converge.

Suhrawardī’s great thought has had a profound influence on the spiritual culture of the Iranian world. Certainly, there have been both theoretical philosophers in this land and Sufis who looked upon philosophy with contempt; yet neither of these represents this culture in its complete and perfect state. Mullā Ṣadrā Shīrāzī has already borne witness to this meaning: “It is fitting that the traveler on the path of Truth combine both ways; therefore, his inner purification must not be devoid of reflection, nor his reflection devoid of inner purification. Rather, his way must be, like the way of the Illuminationist sages (the Platonists of Persia), an isthmus uniting both ways.”

Khusrawānīyūn

Thus, the spiritual order intended by Suhrawardī has continued century after century, and the name “Royal Road” (or the Khusrawānī path) is a very fitting title for this way. For this title is derived from the name of Kay Khusraw;² that sage and mystic king who, by journeying on this path, brought the heroic epic of the Iranian world to its conclusion and perfection in a mystical epic. This title is derived from the name of Kay Khusraw because all the sages of ancient Iran who followed in his footsteps on this Khusrawānī path are also named after him, that is, “Khusrawānīyūn,” and this is a term that in Suhrawardī’s thought is synonymous with the term “Ishrāqīyūn.”

It now becomes clear what great importance Suhrawardī attaches to this name and to the role of Kay Khusraw. The importance of the exemplar of Kay Khusraw, as well as the importance of the description Khusrawānīyūn in Suhrawardī’s view, confirms the more explicit statements he makes regarding his intentions to revive the mystical wisdom of the sages of ancient Iran. If these sages were “Illuminationist,” it is because they were Khusrawānī. This is the meaning and import of what can be termed Suhrawardī’s “Iranocentrism.” The entirely spiritual and deified nature of this Iranocentrism is manifest with the utmost clarity.

This is the first time I am using the term Iranocentrism. I imagine that if Suhrawardī’s works had been known [in the West], his Iranocentrism could have emerged within a certain grand system of “philosophy of history” that took shape in the West. In fact, there exists a system of the philosophy of history [in the West] in which this term has been employed and elevated to the rank of a metaphysical principle; however, the philosophical system in which such a term is used is the achievement of a school that is itself little known in Western Europe outside specialist circles. I am referring to the circle known as the “Slavophiles”³ in old Russia, in the first half of the nineteenth century. If the principle of Iranocentrism bore fruit in the domain of philosophy in that land, it may not be a mere geographical accident.⁴

Most regrettably, it is unlikely that the Iranian philosophers of that era could have obtained any information about it, and since then conditions have not been favorable enough for their attention to be drawn to this school which, precisely in its Iranocentrism, could be of direct interest to us. I have previously noted elsewhere the points of commonality and difference between the Iranocentrism of figures like Alexis Khomiakov⁵ and the Iranocentrism of figures like Suhrawardī. I must acknowledge that a full-fledged book needs to be written on this matter, for this subject is among the fields for comparative discussion that have not yet been explored. Here I will only briefly mention some supplementary points regarding the initial suggestions I have made elsewhere.

Two Types of Civilization

According to that grand philosophy of history founded by Khomiakov, which owes no debt to the Hegelian dialectic, two principles stand in opposition to one another. Two types of civilization have been born from the very entry of humankind into history: one is the “principle of freedom,” manifested through creativity, and the other is the “principle of necessity,” manifested through reproduction. These two principles are embodied by the names Khomiakov gave them: Iranocentrism is the creative spiritual principle, the religion of moral freedom; Kushitism (Kush is the name for Ethiopia in the Bible) is the religion of natural necessity and also the religion of logical necessity. Kushitism is solely bound to the necessary sequence of logical reasoning. In this sense, the Hegelian system is its most complete manifestation. Iranocentrism, the Iranian thought, “rests upon tradition and is never based on pure logical deduction; for the concept of creative freedom is not confined by rules and cannot be deduced from rules. This concept is discernible only through a superior intuition, and this intuition far transcends the narrow circle of reasoning in which, in the crucible of the ages, all the stages of negation and denial have tried their luck.” Can it not be said that, for Suhrawardī, Kushitism is manifested in the philosophy of the Peripatetics, the precinct of logic, the necessity of the laws of discursive understanding? That which, in Khomiakov’s view, Hegel epitomizes, in Suhrawardī’s view, the Peripatetic school—with the exception of Aristotle himself—stands as its indicator.

Can it not be said that, for Suhrawardī, Kushitism is manifested in the philosophy of the Peripatetics, the precinct of logic, the necessity of the laws of discursive understanding? That which, in Khomiakov’s view, Hegel epitomizes, in Suhrawardī’s view, the Peripatetic school—with the exception of Aristotle himself—stands as its indicator, and the intuitive wisdom of the Khusrawānī sages of Iran, with the aid of the free flight of creative intuition, this “superior intuition” that finds its way to the sanctuary of the spiritual worlds beyond the reach of the Hegelian dialectic, shatters this very [precinct and] dominion of logical as well as natural necessity. Therefore, positing the world of images (mundus imaginalis) is a kind of “paradox” that can escape the grip of the limitations of empiricism and the axioms of discursive logic and overcome their contradiction. As Khomiakov says, “[In this station] all the stages of negation and denial have tried their luck.”

Suhrawardī, who is also extraordinarily opposed to the Peripatetic school, stipulates at the same time that his student must first pass through all the stages of Peripatetic philosophy, the stages of the science of logic (he himself does this throughout the first part of the book *Ḥikmat al-Ishrāq*, but there, of course, the discussion is inspired by the Stoic school, in which hermeneutics (taʾwīl) prevails over dialectics (jadal, argumentation, and reasoning), so that logic is left simplified and reduced, and the book concludes with intuitive metaphysics). One cannot overcome the Cushite [or Abyssinian] principle by ignoring it and by rejecting and negating it. Perhaps Khomyakov’s astute intuition, when compared with the perspective of Suhrawardī, the ‘reviver’ of the wisdom of ancient Persia, finds an unintended elaboration.

Certainly, what matters for Khomyakov is neither the historical nor the geographical, nor even the ethnic; rather, what matters to him is the religious principle, or better put, the conflict between two principles that constitutes the drama of humanity’s spiritual history. At the same time, in his philosophy there is a concern to elevate the hidden character at the foundation of a people’s life, in this case the Russian character, to the rank of a universal value. Although he, and likewise the Slavophiles, regard the mission of the Russian people as the exemplar of a fully Orthodox people, there is perhaps a hidden preoccupation with a worldly ideal, something that could be interpreted as an inherent ‘vulgarization’, in their perspective. Such a concern is entirely remote from Suhrawardī’s Iranocentrism.

Suhrawardī shows that the Iranian people, by virtue of being Iranian, are not worthy of the description ‘Oriental Illuminationists’ in the sense he intends by this term. The knowledge of the ancient sages is not considered Oriental-Illuminationist knowledge merely because they lived in the geographical East. On the contrary, it is thanks to ‘Oriental-Illuminationist’ knowledge that these Iranians became fully-fledged ‘Oriental Illuminationists’. The light of this Orient is the light of Glory (*khvarenah*), which is sometimes bestowed upon a being and may at times depart from him. The lineage of the ‘Oriental Illuminationist’ that Suhrawardī claims for himself and his followers is not rooted in a racial principle, but emanates from a sacred lineage. This lineage does not fit within the circle of causal relations among nations and states. The documents and records of this lineage belong to a history that shatters what we ordinarily call history.

For this reason, another counterpart must be chosen for comparison with Suhrawardī. The alternative that occurs to me is the researches of Konstantin Leontiev,⁶ who believes not in Russia and the Russian people, but in the sacred and theandric ideal of the Byzantine world. His concern is by no means to provide a mystical foundation for an earthly theocratic government. To the very extent that the Byzantine theologians adopted the heritage of the sacred wisdom of the Neoplatonists, Suhrawardī’s views are comparable to those of Leontiev, which are of a spiritual and ascetic nature.

In the view of both, what matters is not a people in and of itself, but the sacred Idea that dwells within that people and dominates it. The status of the sacred Byzantine Idea for Leontiev is exactly the same as the status of the Idea of the wisdom of ancient Persia for Suhrawardī. Moreover, the principle of freedom, of which Iranocentrism is the manifestation in Khomyakov’s dramatization based on sacred history, can also be found alive and present in Suhrawardī; for no one is at once more revolutionary and more traditionalist than Suhrawardī; for although he claims to have had no predecessor, the reality is that it is through him and simultaneously with him that the ‘Illuminationist’ tradition, which is the bond linking the spirituality of ancient Persia with the spirituality of Islamic Iran, steps onto the stage of existence.

It is therefore not without irony that I recently encountered objections raised against one of my colleagues for having considered Suhrawardī a Sufi; whereas, according to the critic, Suhrawardī was a Hellenistic philosopher and had no connection whatsoever with any path within “official Sufism.” However, the label “Hellenistic philosophers” is generally applied to those whom Suhrawardī, for being pure philosophers, considers outside the “highway” [or “straight path”]. It is therefore impossible that he himself could be counted among these “Hellenistic philosophers”! As for the claim that belonging to Sufism depends on a person having received a certificate or document to that effect, or having taken the cloak (khirqa) from the hand of a master, I must say that such a notion is a peculiar Western convention and is entirely remote from the sphere of the “Illuminationists” intended by Suhrawardī. But regarding the “systematic” tradition to which Suhrawardī considers himself connected, it must be said that Suhrawardī does not merely content himself with proving his connection to that tradition, but rather he gives life to it. The spiritual lineage bears witness to this claim; for this lineage is proven not according to documents and records, but on the basis of that mode of being, that mode of conduct and thought, which is set before humanity as an exemplar.

In Iran, a type of Sufism outside the organizations of Sufism has existed and continues to exist, which is not known by the name of Sufism and even shuns being called by this name, preferring the terms ‘irfān (gnosis) and ‘urafā (gnostics). [In addition to the Sufi orders of the Sunnis,] Shiite Sufi orders also exist “in an organized form”; but there are also orders that have never left, and will never leave, any trace of themselves in any historical archive whatsoever; yet this in no way prevents their “members” from being Sufis in the true sense of the word. Suhrawardī received that spiritual heritage which he left for his followers from an infinitely more exalted station, in the sphere of which [belonging to] an “official” path carries no weight. The path of the Illuminationists likewise lacks an archive. Suhrawardī made it the duty of his followers to discover his spiritual heritage by wayfaring upon the “straight path,” and this is the sole condition he set for them. Setting foot upon this path does not depend on outward formalities, but rather on an inner vocation that Suhrawardī, at the end of the book Ḥikmat al-Ishrāq, in the form of a “testament” addressed to the continuers of his way, explicitly mentions.

The final pages of the book serve as a prelude to this testament. These pages are a confirmation that Ḥikmat al-Ishrāq was not composed as a theoretical treatise, but is in reality a treatise in the field of angelology. The book has practical aims and must be used as an instrument for meditation and spiritual realization. Corresponding to the theological and philosophical “propositions and rules” are psycho-spiritual forces that can assist in this spiritual realization and receive the gift of such a realization. Between the angelic epiphanies (or angelic apparitions) and the degree of the gnostic’s spiritual perfection, there exists a kind of correlation that is the source of the uniqueness of his experience. The chapter preceding the “Author’s Testament” is a prelude for the confirmation and realization of the preceding articles, within the sphere of [the gnostic’s] experience.

At the beginning of the chapter, two prayers are presented,⁷ and the author warns that to understand the secret of these invocations, one must learn them in the presence of the person he refers to as the “Guardian of the Book.” Their resonance corresponds to the same Manichaean hue evident in Suhrawardī’s other supplications: “O God of all gods, exalt the remembrance of the Light, aid the people of Light. Guide the Light toward the Light.”

The opening of the first of the two invocations or two “heartfelt inspirations” that appear at the end of the book Ḥikmat al-Ishrāq is as follows: “The wayfarers who knock with sincerity and patience upon the doors of the chambers of Light, the angels draw them toward the Orient of Lights, shower upon them the felicitations of the celestial kingdom, and pour over their heads the water that gushes forth from the fountain of goodness, so that they may be purified.” When this ecstatic outpouring subsides, the discussion is resumed with a description of the experiences of the people of spiritual meaning (paragraph 272).

The commentators (Qutb al-Din Shirazi and Shahrazuri) opportunely remind us that not only were all the theoretical questions discussed in this book personally verified by the author [in his own experience], but all the truly illuminative states mentioned here refer to experiences he himself underwent and discovered within himself; these are the fifteen lights and illuminations that shine upon the heart of the gnostic after he has passed beyond the stage of beginners, entered the ranks of the intermediate, and advanced to the first degree of the perfect. The secondary phenomena accompanying these lights, their seemingly paradoxical nature, the embodiment of the inner being that has advanced to the stage of dissolution, and so forth—all these matters are described concisely and in very precise terms. These states must be compared with the similar states (visions of lights) mentioned by Najm al-Din Kubra (d. 617 AH), 'Ala' al-Dawla Simnani (d. 737 AH), and Sayyid Muhammad Nurbakhsh.

"Whenever the divine lights shine abundantly upon a person, they clothe him in the robe of might and awe, and souls come under his command" (section 277). The term "khvarenah" (glory) is not mentioned here, but these are the very expressions Suhrawardi uses elsewhere regarding the investiture of the royal khvarenah, a robe bestowed in the mystical journey upon the wayfarer who, under the onslaught of the Victorious Lights, has become ecstatic and once again ascended the royal throne. This existential transformation through the illumination of khvarenah (the Light of Majesty) corresponds to an event the gnostic has personally experienced. Finally, we have the sublime phrases of the spiritual testament which, before concluding in silence, remind us that "Hikmat al-Ishraq" is not a book to be studied like other books; for its aim is not merely to convey information, but to provoke the true event of the soul—the very event Suhrawardi described in his mystical allegories, an event which is the crossing of Mount Qaf, the arrival at Mount Sinai, in a word, the journey upon the "highway" or "straight path":

"My brothers, I counsel you to act upon what God has commanded and to abstain from what God has forbidden. I counsel you to direct all your aspiration toward God, the Light of Lights, to abandon every word and deed that is of no benefit to your state, and to detach your hearts from every demonic anxiety. I counsel you to guard this book, to exercise caution regarding it, and to protect it from the unworthy; and God is my judge concerning you. At the end of the month of Jumada al-Thani in the year 582, on a day when the seven stars were gathered in the sign of Libra, at the end of the day, I completed the composition of this book. Do not give this book except to those who are worthy of it, and he is worthy who has thoroughly learned the method of the Peripatetics, is a lover of the Light of God, and before beginning it, undertakes forty days of spiritual discipline, abstains from eating meat, reduces his food, severs himself from all things, and devotes himself to contemplating the Light of God, the Great and Exalted, and to acting upon the instructions of the book. When the time for studying the book arrives [after fulfilling these conditions], he may delve deeply into its study" (sections 278–280).

The chief concern of the Shaykh al-Ishraq, upon concluding his book, was that this book should only fall into the hands of the seeker of the "straight path"; that is, into the hands of one who has perfectly completed the full course of Peripatetic philosophy and at the same time possesses a soul overflowing with love, so that he may pass beyond this stage and become free from the bonds of external and theoretical evidence. According to the commentators of Hikmat al-Ishraq, only those seekers eager to enter the path that ends in the Orient of Lights are worthy of this book.

The commentators explain in detail the program of a kind of forty-day retreat, to which the Shaykh has only alluded in a few words, and this retreat must serve as preparation for the study of the book Ḥikmat al-Ishrāq: “After cleansing the body of external impurities, one must reside in a small, dark house, far from the clamor of people and their occupations, fast, and break the fast after the sunset prayer with a small quantity of high-quality food (pure bread and foods obtained from good grains, suitable vegetables, and appropriate spices, along with almond or walnut oil, or syrup and the like). One must continually anoint the head and body with pure oils and use pleasant fragrances in one’s solitude. Night and day should be occupied with invocation of the heart and tongue…” The wayfarer who has chosen seclusion must engage in this for a long period, such that he imagines himself as if he has separated from sensible directions, time, and place, and has recovered the pure abstraction of his own essence…

The convergence between Shiʿi and Illuminationist terminology is not a matter of chance. Certainly, even non-Shiʿi Sufism believes in the initiatic chain of “Poles” (aqṭāb); for example, according to Simnānī, the lineage of the spiritual ancestors preceding the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) continues in him, then in the Imams up to the Twelfth Imam, and after him in the Pole of Poles (Quṭb al-aqṭāb). This lineage, although a transformed form of the Shiʿi idea of the cycle of “Walāyah,” differs fundamentally from it; for it does not consider the Twelfth Imam to be perpetually alive and present in this world, nor does it regard him as the permanent “Pole of Poles”; it also differs from the lineage intended by Suhrawardī. Moreover, we know that everyone agrees on this statement: the relation of Illuminationist Wisdom (Ḥikmat al-Ishrāq) to philosophy is like the relation of Sufism to theology (Kalām). There is a relation of resemblance between Illuminationist Wisdom and Sufism, not a relation of identity.

*Iranian Islam (abridged)

.

---

.

Endnotes:

1- Philon d’Alexandrie, a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher, was born around 20 BCE in Alexandria and died around 50 CE.

2- The eponymous hero of it is Kay Khosrow.

3- Slavophiles, a movement or movements in nineteenth-century Russia that defended the superiority of Slavic culture over the culture and works of Western Europe.

4- Given the proximity of Russia and Iran, connections may have been established between Iranian and Russian thinkers at certain periods.

5- Alexis Khomiakov

6- Constantin Leontiev

7- Ḥikmat al-Ishrāq, paragraph 262, p. 246.

.

---

.

The Spiritual Heritage of Illumination by Professor Henry Corbin, translated by Dr. Ensha’allah Rahmati

Source: Ettela'at Newspaper

.

---

.