The Alchemy of Happiness — trans. Claud Field (1910)

Open to allal-Ghazālī100 segments · 34 pp

The text is shown on its own: no facing layer is held for this issue.

page 9

The translator’s English as printed (Claud Field). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.

And, as we arrive at some knowledge of God's essence and attributes from the contemplation of the soul's essence and attributes, so we come to understand God's method of working and government and delegation of power to angelic forces, etc., by observing how each of us governs his own little kingdom. To take a simple instance: suppose a man wishes to write the name of God. First of all the wish is conceived in his heart, it is then conveyed to the brain by the vital spirits, the form of the word "God" takes shape in the thought-chambers of the brain, thence it travels by the nerve-channels, and sets in motion the fingers, which in their turn set in motion the pen, and thus the name "God" is traced on paper exactly as it had been conceived in the writer's brain. Similarly, when God wills a thing it appears in the spiritual plane, which in the Koran is called "The Throne"; from the throne it passes, by a spiritual current, to a lower plane called "The Chair"; then the shape of it appears on the "Tablet of Destiny"; whence, by the mediation of the forces called "angels," it assumes actuality, and appears on the earth in the form of plants, trees, and animals, representing the will and thought of God, as the written letters represent the wish conceived in the heart and the shape present in the brain of the writer.

No one can understand a king but a king; therefore God has made each of us a king in miniature, so to speak, over a kingdom which is an infinitely reduced copy of His own. In the kingdom of man God's "throne" is represented by the soul, the Archangel by the heart, "the chair" by the brain, "the tablet" by the treasure-chamber of thought. The soul, itself unlocated and indivisible, governs the body as God governs the universe. In short, each of us is entrusted with a little kingdom, and charged not to be careless in the administration of it.

As regards the recognition of God's providence, there are many degrees of knowledge. The mere physicist is like an ant who, crawling on a sheet of paper and observing black letters spreading over it, should refer the cause to the pen alone. The astronomer is like an ant of somewhat wider vision who should catch sight of the fingers moving the pen, i.e., he knows that the elements are under the power of the stars, but he does not know that the stars are under the power of the angels. Thus, owing to the different degrees of perception in people, disputes must arise in tracing effects to causes. Those whose eyes never see beyond the world of phenomena are like those who mistake servants of the lowest rank for the king. The laws of phenomena must be constant, or there could be no such thing as science; but it is a great error to mistake the slaves for the master.

As long as this difference in the perceptive faculty of observers exists, disputes must necessarily go on. It is as if some blind men, hearing that an elephant had come to their town, should go and examine it. The only knowledge of it which they can obtain comes through the sense of touch: so one. handles the animal's leg, another his tusk, another his ear, and, according to their several perceptions, pronounce it to be a column, a thick pole, or a, quilt each taking a part for the whole. So the physicist and astronomer confound the laws they perceive with the Lawgiver. A similar mistake is attributed to Abraham in the Koran, where it is related that he turned successively to stars, moon, and sun as the objects of his worship, till, grown aware of Him who made all these, he exclaimed, "I love not them that set."

Commentary
page 9 ·
Cross-estate§003

Field's preface says Rumi borrowed the elephant from Ghazzali, and the shelf lets the claim be tested. Here the observers are "some blind men, hearing that an elephant had come to their town," and the target is the physicist and astronomer who "confound the laws they perceive with the Lawgiver." In Whinfield's Masnavi the people can see and the room is dark. The change moves the fault. Ghazzali's blindness is a defect in the observer, matching his ants on the page who see only the pen; Rumi's darkness is a condition everyone shares, which is why his verses compare the eye of sense to a palm that cannot hold the whole. The animal is the same; the diagnosis is not.

contrasts with Masnavi i Ma'navi — trans. E. H. Whinfield (abridged) (1898)