BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY

AND TEMPORAL POWER:

IBN KHALDUN’S VIEWS ON SUFISM

Saiyad Nizamuddin Ahmad

Abstract
In the 9th/15th century the jurist and historian ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn
Khaldun (d. 808/1406) became involved in a dispute that broke out in
Andalusia about whether one needed a shaykh to tread the sufi path
or whether books sufficed. The dispute was a very heated one and
generated much discussion about the nature of sufism and spiritual
realization. The response of Ibn Khaldun, as well as the other key
figures who issued rulings (fatwas) on this question, are analyzed
and Ibn Khaldun’s view is further examined in the light of a much
neglected fatwa of his in addition to relevant passages from the
0XTDGGLDPDDQG6KLID¶ƯDO-sa’il. It is argued that that Ibn Khaldun
favored a sober pursuit of the spiritual path based on rigorous
adherence to the Qur’an and Sunna while rejecting the monistic
doctrines of Ibn al-‘Arabi and others whom he condemned in the
strongest possible terms. Moreover, this condemnation was the result
of what Ibn Khaldun perceived to be the dangers inherent in Ibn a-
l-‘Arabi’s doctrine of the Perfect Man since it allowed for the
possibility of individual saintly apotheosis that he further saw as an
even more dangerous coinciding of spiritual authority and temporal
power.

Introduction
Ibn Khaldun became involved in an intellectual dispute which arose
in Andalusia on the nature of the sufi spiritual quest to which he
devoted an entire treatise entitled Shifa’ al-sa’il ila tahdhib
al-masa’il which despite its appearance in a critical edition in 1958

55
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

continues to be somewhat neglected.1 He additionally made known

his views on the potential dangers of certain kinds of sufism, sufis
and sufi books in an also somewhat neglected fatwa of condemnation
which comes down to us in three slightly different versions.2 In what
follows, we will examine Ibn Khaldun’s view of what constitutes
legitimate Sufism as set out in Shifa’ al-sa’il together with his fatwa
against certain sufi writings. We will conclude with a reflection on
the possible reasons for Ibn Khaldun’s position which we see as an
instance of the tension between spiritual authority and temporal
power.
The dispute in which Ibn Khaldun became involved was on the
question of whether a sufi required a spiritual guide (shaykh), or
whether books on sufism—assuming adherence on the part of the
seeker to Islamic ritual—sufficed. That the latter debate retained its
resiliency for centuries afterwards is indicated by a specific reference
to it in one of the works of the 13th/19th century sufi Abu’l-‘Abbas
Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Ajiba al-Hasani (1160–1224/1747–1809),

1
‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Khaldun (d. 808/1406), Shifa’ al-sa’il ila tahdhib al-masa’il,
ed. Muhammad Ibn Tawit al-7DQML $QNDUD $QNDUD hQLYHUVLWHVL øOkKL\kW )DNOWHVL
<D\ÕQODUÕ;;,,$GRFWRUDOVWXG\ZDVGHYRWHGWRWKLVZRUNE\<RXPQD$GDO
“Sufism in Ibn Khaldun: An annotated translation of the Shifa’ al-sa’il li tahdhib
al-masa’il,” Ph.D. diss. Indiana University, 1990.
2
The first version appears as an appendix to Muhammad Ibn Tawit al-Tanji edition
of Ibn Khaldun’s, Shifa’ al-sa’il li tahdhib al-masa’il, 110–11. Ibn Tawit al-Tanji
bases his text on two MSS , Tanbih al-ghabi ‘ala takfir Ibn ‘Arabi by Burhan al-Din
al-%LTDµL G  ùHKLW $OL 06  IROV -69 and ‘Abd al-Ghani
al-Nabulusi (d. 1143/1730) al-Radd al-matin øVWDQEXO hQLYHUVLWHVL 06 $< 
fol. 105. The former work has since been published as Masra‘ al-tasawwuf aw
tanbih al-ghabi ila takfir Ibn ‘Arabi, ed. ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Wakil (Cairo:
1409/1989). The fatwa was most probably given sometime between 774 and 776 H
(i.e. between 1372 to 1374), that is to say at approximately the same time as the
composition of the Shifa’ al-sa’il. The second version is quoted by Alexander D.
Knysh, Ibn ‘Arabi in the Later Islamic Tradition. The Making of a Polemical Image
in Medieval Islam (Albany, SUNY Press, 1999), 191–92, 357 n. 160; citing Taqi
al-Din Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Fasi in al-‘Iqd al-thamin fi ta’rikh al-balad al-amin,
8 vols. Ed. Muhammad Hamid al-Faqi, Fu’ad Sayyid, and Mahmud Muhammad
Tanahi (Cairo: Matba’at al-Sunna al-Muhammadiya, 1958–69), 2:180–1. The third
version is quoted by the 11th/18th century Zaydi scholar Salih Ibn Mahdi al-Muqbili
in his al-‘Alam al-shamikh fi ithar al-haqq ‘ala al-aba’ wa’l-masha’ikh (Cairo:
1328), 428.

56
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

who not only mentions Ibn Khaldun but indicates the involvement of
a large number of other scholars in the debate.3 After stating that the
admonitions of the masters of the spiritual path (shuyukh) regarding
the necessity of recourse to a spiritual preceptor and warnings against
not doing so are legion, and quoting the warning of Abu Yazid 4 that
“He who lacks a shaykh has taken Satan as his imam,” Ibn ‘Ajiba
informs us that,

Considerable dispute and debate arose toward the end of

the eighth century [hijri] among the brethren in
Andalusia so much so that they even struck each other
with their shoes over whether it was sufficient to merely
observe the rituals of the faith and study books about the
path of the Sufis… or whether a spiritual guide (shaykh)
was necessary. So they wrote to scholars far and wide
and each answered according to his capacity, such as
‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Abbad, 5 may Allah be pleased with him;
and such as Abu ‘Abdullah Ibn Khaldun, may Allah

3
Abu’l-‘Abbas Ibn ‘Ajiba (d. 1224/1809), al-Futuhat al-ilahiyya fi sharh
al-Mabahith al-‘aliyya printed on the bottom of his Iqaz al-himam fi sharh al-hikam,
2 vols. in 1, (Beriut: Dar al-Fikr, no date), 147–148. This is a re-print of an edition
which was printed, according to the notice on 2:461, in 1331 H, perhaps in Cairo.
Moreover, on the same page we learn that Iqaz al-himam begun in Muharram 1211
H and completed on a Wednesday, 8 Jumada I of the same year, whereas al-Futuhat
al-ilahiyya was completed on a Thursday in the middle of Ramadan 1211 H. The
Hikam, or sufi aphorisms, upon which Iqaz al-himam is a commentary, is by the
famous Shadhili master Ibn ‘Ata’illah al-Sikandari, whilst al-Futuhat al-ilahiyya is a
poem on the spiritual path Abu’l ‘Abbas Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Yusuf known as
Ibn al-Banna “al-Saraqusti” indicating his origin Saragossa, Spain. He should not be
confused with the mathematician, astrologer/astronomer and occultist Ibn al-Banna
who died in 721 H at Marrakech; see E12 3:731 (H. Suter and M. Bencheneb). On
Ibn ‘Ajiba see J. L. Michon, The Autobiography of the Moroccan Sufi Ibn ‘Ajiba,
Trans. David Streight (Louisville, KY: 1999).
4
Presumably Abu Yazid al-Bistami (d. 261/874 or 264/877-8). See E12 1:162
(Helmut Ritter).
5
According to the entry on Ibn ‘Abbad by Paul Nwiya in E12 3:670, he is Abu
‘Abdullah Muhammad b. Ishaq Ibrahim al-Nafzi al-Himyari al-Rundi (d. 792/1390).
See also Nwiya’s full study of him, Ibn ‘Abbad de Ronda (Beirut: 1961). He was
from Ronda 36º N 44´´ 5º W 10´´, in present day Spain. See “Runda” in E12 8:615
(Manuela Marin).

57
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

have mercy on him, who devoted a separate work to this

question.

Ibn ‘Ajiba goes on to tell us that the views of Ibn Khaldun and Ibn
‘Abbad were summarized by Abu’l-‘Abbas Ahmad Ibn ‘Isa
al-Barnusi al-Fasi, known as Ahmad al-Zarruq (d. 899/1493), in his
‘Uddat al-murid. 6 Not only do we find mention of these matters in
the latter, but also in Zarruq’s Qawa‘id al-tasawwuf. 7 However,
these works provide only a terse summary of the dispute and none of
these sources provide quotations – whether in full or in part – of the
responsa that emerged as a result of the correspondence initiated by
the Andalusian sufi brethren. For this we are indebted to Abu Ya’qub
Ibn Muhammad al-Wanshirisi (d. 914/1408) and his voluminous
compendium of Islamic legal rulings, Kitab al-Mi‘yar, which
preserves the responsa of Abu‘1-‘Abbas al-Qabbab (d. 779/1377)
and the sufi-scholar Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn ‘Abbad al-Rundi (d.
792/1390) 8 whose fatwa also appears as an epistle (no.16) in his
letters of spiritual instruction, al-Rasa’il al-Sughra. 9 These sources
tell us that the controversy became so protracted and unresolved that
the scholars of Granada finally decided to appeal to erudite scholars
in the Maghrib, and it was only then that Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi (d.
790/1388), himself an eminent Maliki jurist of Granada, addressed a
letter (istifta’) to several learned men in Fez which was the capital of
the Marinid dynasty at the time and a center of intellectual activity.
Among these were the aforementioned Maliki jurist al-Qabbab, who
had also been one of al-Shatibi’s teachers, and the renowned sufi, Ibn
6
We have not been able to secure a copy of this work.
7
Ahmad al-Zarruq, Qawa‘id al-tasawwuf (Cairo: 1976), 40. An excellent study of
Zarruq and complete English translation is Zeinab S. Istarabadi, “The Principles of
Sufism (Qawa’id al-Tasawwuf): An annotated translation with introduction,” Ph.D.
diss. Indiana University, 1988.
8
al-Wansharisi, al-Mi‘yar al-mughrib wa al-jami‘ al-mu‘rib, 12 vols. Ed.
Muhammad Haji (Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islami, n. d.). al-Qabbab’s ruling is in
11:117–123 and Ibn ‘Abbad’s ruling is in 12:293–307.
9
Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn ‘Abbad al-Rundi (d. 792/1390), al-Rasa’il al-Sughra,
Ed. Paul Nwiya, a. k. a. Bulus Nawiyya (Beirut: al-Maktabat al-Kathulikiya, 1957),
epsitle no.16, pp. 106–115 and appendix C, pp. 125–138. The latter has been
translated into English by John Renard as Ibn ‘Abbad of Ronda: Letters on the the
Sufi Path. Classics of Western Spiritualty (New York: Paulist Press, 1988).

58
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

‘Abbad. The most detailed response was Ibn Khaldun’s who

produced a detailed study of the issue in his Shifa’ al-sa’il ila tahdhib
al-masa’il.

Sufism and the Question of the Spiritual Master

The various responses given to al-Shatibi all seem to favour the
necessity of a spiritual master to some degree or another, including
Ibn Khaldun’s. We shall begin with al-Qabbab followed by Ibn
‘Abbad and then turn to Ibn Khaldun in a separate section.
As noted above, al-Qabbab was one of al-Shatibi’s teachers
and a renowned Maliki jurist. He taught at Gibraltar and Fez.10 It is
important to bear in mind that he was not only a jurist but had also
practiced Sufism. In his view, no art whether it be grammar (nahw),
law (shari‘a), or medicine (tibb), can be mastered on the basis of
mere formal book based-study alone; this was all the more true in the
case of Sufism, for not only is it a discipline in which just that,
namely discipline and practice are paramount, but a science whose
deep truths were often conveyed in the form of symbols, allusions
and technical language that only those who were experts in such
matters could impart in person. Thus, he took a firm position in
favour of the necessity of spiritual guidance imparted by a living
master over the sole reliance on books by such masters. He clarified
his position by noting that knowledge is in the “hearts of men” (sudur
al-rijal) and it is there that the ultimate keys to such knowledge were
to be found. Even if such knowledge was put in writing, the keys
would still be retained in the hearts of the experts. He also viewed the
science or discipline of tasawwuf as having two dimensions: an
esoteric one, dealing with knowledge of mystical states (ahwal) and
stations (maqamat), and an ethical one, dealing with the spiritual
remedies for the baser tendencies of the soul. Having knowledge of
this second ethic is incumbent on all Muslims and is much easier to
acquire through books if a master cannot be found, in contrast with
the first dimension which can only be learned from a master. Books
that deal with the esoteric dimension can also be very dangerous as

10
al-Qabbab’s views are summarized from al-Wansharisi, al-Mi‘yar, 11:117–123.

59
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

they may lead the practitioner astray.

Ibn ‘Abbad’s letter to al-Shatibi is longer than the response
of al-Qabbab and can be viewed almost as an independent essay on
the need for a spiritual guide on the Sufi path. 11 He refused to
become directly involved in the Granada dispute and confines
himself to discussing the role of the spiritual master. Ibn ‘Abbad
states that one could hardly deny the necessity of a spiritual guide in
Sufism and proceeds to outline the various types of guides: the
shaykh al-ta‘lim and the shaykh al-tarbiya. The first is the “Master or
guide who educates.” Not all seekers on the path need a shaykh
al-ta‘lim. It is only those who have a dull mind and a rebellious lower
self that must have recourse to this type of master who acts in fashion
akin to a physician that heals a chronically ill person. Such persons
cannot treat themselves and must seek out a competent physician.
Those who have a more expansive mind and sufficient control over
their lower selves only need a shaykh al-tarbiya who assigns them
specific spiritual practices exactly suited to each individual, although
they may still be in need of ta‘lim, i.e. the sort of instruction imparted
by the first kind of shaykh. Thus, the two types are not mutually
exclusive although the functions and qualities of the shaykh
al-tarbiya encompass those of the shaykh al-ta‘lim, but not the
reverse. As for books there is no harm in consulting them provided
they are by people of true knowledge (i.e. that they are consistent
with the shari‘a), yet one can only truly know this through the
teaching of a living guide. Thus, the reading of books, though they
have value, does not mean that one can dispense with a spiritual
master. Nevertheless, Ibn ‘Abbad very realistically noted the
difficulty of finding a genuine shaykh al-ta‘lim in his day. Given this
difficult state of affairs, Ibn ‘Abbad concluded that rather than rely
on books or masters, the seekers should rely on Allah. There is no
point in searching for the shaykh since he is a divine gift, a

11
Ibn ‘Abbad’s views are summarized from al-Wansharisi, al-Mi‘yar, 12:293–307;
Ibn ‘Abbad, al-Rasa’il al-Sughra, 106–115 and 125–138. The references to Ibn
‘Abbad in Ibn ‘Ajiba are highly condensed and are culled from Ahmad Zarruq’s
Uddat al-murid, a work which I have not been able to locate. However, Zarruq also
refers to the debate and the views of Ibn ‘Abbad, also in highly condensed form, in
his Qawa’id al-tasawwuf (Cairo: no publisher given, 1976), 40.

60
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

manifestation of divine grace and will be encountered at the

appropriate time if it is one’s destiny. Even so, in the meantime, one
cannot relinquish practice for the ultimate goal is neither books nor
masters but knowledge of Allah (‘irfan), and thus such a person must
continue to practice while remaining true and sincere, continually
relying on Allah to send him guidance in the person of a master.

Ibn Khaldun’s position on the need for a spiritual master in

Shifa’ al-Sa’il
In Shifa’ al-sa’il, Ibn Khaldun reaches very similar conclusions, but
discusses the question in relation to his understanding of sufism’s
history. Sufism for Ibn Khaldun is a science (‘ilm), but like any other
phenomenon pertaining to human existence, tasawwuf is also liable
to change (tabddul) in its external, relative and contingent aspects
and in this sense is a historical phenomenon. Ibn Khaldun observed
that sufism had a history, for it emerged at a particular time, grew
and, in his opinion had declined somewhat in his time. Like any other
aspect of culture (zahira ‘umraniyya) sufism was born out of a need.
Approximately the first three or four generations of Muslims led
virtuous and pious lives in perfect accord with the shari‘a and
focused primarily on their inner spiritual deportment and deeds rather
than on external ones only 12. After this period of relative spiritual
balance and equilibrium, differences and disagreements emerged
among members of the Islamic community thus opening the door to
deviations from the earlier period of virtuous adherence to the
straight path. It thus became necessary for the jurists to standardize
ritual observances (‘ibadat) and to codify the laws pertaining to
human relations (mu‘amalat). This opened the way for many to
forget the importance of the inner spirit and deeds. This diminishing
focus upon actions stemming from the heart, along with the
unfortunate infiltration of heretical beliefs and doctrines and their
adoption by many Muslims, according to Ibn Khaldun, contributed to
the emergence of tasawwuf around the year 200 H. Thus, in his
opinion sufism emerged in the form of a distinct discipline as a kind
of reaction to the growing entanglement and involvement of most of

12
Shifa’a al-sa’il, 143.

61
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

Islamic society with externals and appearances and emphasis on the

material side of life at the expense of the spiritual.
Ibn Khaldun sees the later tendency as an aspect of civilization
(hadara) itself. 13 He elaborated his analysis of sufism as it bears on
the question of the spiritual guide by outlining a three-fold scheme of
historical cycles which account for the emergence, development and
decline of sufism. At the outset, sufism was simply an interior
understanding of religion (fiqh al-batin). This he identified with an
inner combat (mujahada) in which the seekers stood in fear of Allah
and calls it mujahadat al-taqwa.
In this first ‘cycle’ the individual seeker must—just as did the
early Muslim community—seek to avoid all transgression of the
shari‘a and strive all-out for righteousness. This leads into the second
cycle, mujahadat al-istiqama, the attainment in the constancy of
righteousness, i.e. of being established in moral rectitude and
virtuous behaviour. Some of those believers, according to Ibn
Khaldun, who had achieved such constancy moved to a third and
final cycle of struggle, mujahadat al-kashf, in which the the veil
separating the sufi from his Lord is finally lifted. However, according
to Ibn Khaldun, these sufis failed to sustain the tradition of careful
approach toward truth as exemplified in the first two cycles. Due to
this neglect, some later sufis pursued the third mujahada outside of
the protective perimeter of the rigorous adherence to shari‘a which
was so strongly cultivated in the first two mujahadas. This led to a
proliferation of speculations and abstractions which had no relation
to spiritual truth because they were not the result of genuine spiritual
practice and thus, many went astray. 14 In the Muqaddima, Ibn
Khaldun singled out for censure this elaborately speculative sort of
sufism, particularly the rigorously uncompromising monism
associated with Muhyi al-Din Ibn al-‘Arabi (d. 638/1240) 15 and
13
Ibid. 146–147.
14
Ibid. 208.
15
The best biography of Ibn al-‘Arabi remains Claude Addas, Quest for the Red
Sulphur: The Life of Ibn ‘Arabi (Cambridge, UK: Islamic Texts Society), to which
should be added the papers of Gerald Elmore, New Evidence on the Life of Ibn
al-“Arabi,” JAOS 117 (1997): 347-349; “New Evidence on the Conversion of Ibn
al-‘Arabi to Sufism,” Arabica 45 (1998): 50-72; “Poised Expectancy: Ibn al-‘Arabi’s
Roots in ‘Sharq al-Andalus;’” Studia Islamica 90 (2000): 51-66; and “Shaykh ‘Abd

62
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

‘Abd al-Haqq Ibn Sab‘in (d. 699?/1270?), 16 as well as the

antinomian tendencies associated with ecstatic utterances (shatahat)
related to figures such as al-Hallaj (executed in Baghdad, 310/922). 17
How does his theory of combative cycles relate to the need
for a spiritual guide? Here Ibn Khaldun invokes the hadith. He
identifies these three cycles of mujahada with the three levels of
islam (submission), iman (faith) and ihsan (excellence in worship) as
mentioned in a very well known statement of the Prophet
Muhammad. 18 In the combative cycle of mujahadat al-taqwa, which
corresponds to the level of islam, a spiritual guide is not absolutely
necessary and one may traverse this stage with the aid of books,
although it is more difficult to do so without a shaykh. Thus, though
not an absolute necessity, the significance of the shaykh is in no way
diminished. In the second combative cycle of mujahadat al-istiqama,
which corresponds to the level of iman, the seeker must actualize the
virtues of the Qur’an in him or herself and thus rid the heart of its
imperfections. This form of struggle—unlike the first one—is not an
obligation on every person and here too the shaykh is not an absolute
necessity as there are some who may traverse this stage by
themselves through recourse to the relevant books dealing with the
Qur’an and the hadith but it is once again better to have a shaykh and
this is more so than in the first mujahada. In the third and final
combat, mujahadat al-kashf, which corresponds to the level of ihsan
and is also not incumbent on all Muslims, a shaykh is absolutely
necessary. None can pass through this stage without the guidance of a
spiritual master.19 The response of Ibn Khaldun to the controversy

al-‘Aziz al-Mahdawi, Ibn al-‘Arabi’s Mentor,” JAOS 121 (2001): 593-613.

16
His death date is uncertain and was either 668 or 669 H, corresponding to the
period 1269-71 CE. On his life see EI² 3:921 (A. Faure) and Abu’l-Wafa’
al-Taftazani, Ibn Sab‘in wa falsafatuhu al-sufiyya (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-Misri
al-Lubnani, 1973).
17
The Muqaddimah. An Introduction to History. 3 vols. 2nd ed. Trans. Franz
Rosenthal. Bollingen Series XLIII (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967),
2:187–88, 3:92. 101–2, 278.
18
It is a very widely reported hadith. See for example Abu’l-Husayn Muslim b.
al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naysaburi, al-Jami’ al-Sahih, 2 vols. (Vaduz, Lichtenstein:
Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation, 2000), 1:23–25, kitab al-Iman, bab 1–2, hadiths
102–107 [the first five hadiths from the beginning og kitab al-iman];
19
Shifa’ al-sa’il, 241-244.

63
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

which began in Granada is not terribly different from those of

al-Qabbab and Ibn ‘Abbad. All of them indicate that the shaykh may
not be entirely dispensed with and emphasize a sort of sober
spirituality based on a practice of superogatory worship (nawafil). In
the case of Ibn Khaldun this was described by his three cycles of
mujahada. It is also true that none of the three scholars completely
denounced books as a source of mystical knowledge either, although
all of them consider books to be subordinate to personal instruction
especially regarding ultimate truths, the cycle Ibn Khaldun called
mujahadat al-kashf, which he saw as the most perilous in its potential
for leading to deviation from the shari’a. Books purporting to deal
with such ultimate truths were deemed particularly misguided and are
the subject of his fatwa.

Ibn Khaldun’s censure of a certain species of Sufism in his fatwa

We have seen that for Ibn Khaldun it is not simply a question of yes
or no to the need of a spiritual guide. Books have their place but the
master is paramount especially in the final combative cycle of
mujahadat al-kashf. However, apparently some masters and their
books were both regarded with more than a little suspicion. At the
very end of the critical edition of the Shifa’ al-sa’il, prepared by Ibn
Tawit al-Tanji, we find, in the form of an appendix, a fatwa which
has not received much attention. It is a very forceful text of the genre
of what are known as “fatwas of condemnation” to which genre we
have devoted a major study. 20 Ibn Khaldun calls for the physical
destruction of books by Ibn al-’Arabi and other sufis associated with
the mystical tendency personified by him which Ibn Khaldun deemed

20
Saiyad Nizamuddin Ahmad, Fatwas of Condemnation: Islam and the Limits of
Dissent (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 2006). The first and second versions of this fatwa
were first translated into English and studied in the latter work. Another translation
of the first version of the fatwa appeared in an article by James Morris entitled “An
Arab “Machiavelli”? : Rhetoric, Philosophy and Politics in Ibn Khaldun’s Critique
of “Sufism.’” Apparently the article was published in the Proceedings of the
Harvard Ibn Khaldun Conference edited by Roy Mottahedeh. Unfortunatley, I have
not seen this published version but have been compelled to rely on the version
publically posted by the author on the Muhyiddin Ibn ‘Arabi Society webiste:
www.ibanrabisociety.org. Knysh also discuses the fatwa in its third version in Ibn
‘Arabi in the Later Islamic Tradition, 191–92,

64
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

dangerous to the public good. 21 The text speaks for itself and is
translated below.

The sufi path consists of two methods: The first, which

is the path of the [adherents to] the Prophetic Norm
(Sunna) is the path of their forebears, that was in accord
with the Qur’an and the Prophetic Norm (Sunna), and
consists of adhering to the Pious Forbears (al-salaf
al-salih) from among the Companions (sahaba), and the
generation that immediately followed them (tabi‘un).
The second method—which is contaminated by
innovations (mashubatun bi’l-bida‘)—is a latter day
tendency on the part of some to render the first path
merely a means to lift the veil of sense perception (kashf
hijab al-hiss), as that is one of its results.
Among such sufis are Ibn ‘Arabi,22 Ibn Sab‘in, 23
Ibn Barrajan, 24 and their followers who adopted their
method and embraced their doctrine They have authored
numerous works filled with clear expressions of unbelief
(mashubatu bi sarih’il-kufr), conspicuous innovations
21
Shifa’ al-sa’il, 110–11 and footnote 2 of this paper.
22
His Fusus al-hikam was critically edited by Abu’l-‘Ala al-‘Afifi (Cairo:
1365/1946), however the latter was not based on the most important MS, namely
Evkaf Musesi 1933 which was dictated by Ibn al-‘Arabi to his disciple Sadr al-Din
al-Qunawi at Damscus in 630 H. We have prepared a critical edition of it based on
this MS to be published by the German Oriental Institut, Beirut (OIB) in 2014. His
most important work, al-Futuhat al-makkiya, was being edited by Osman Yahia until
his death a few years ago. To my knowledge, fourteen volumes appeared under the
auspices of the General Egyptian Book Organisation from 1972–1991. The 4 volume
Bulaq edition of 1293/1876 is available in a number of pirated printings. The most
relevant work on the reception of Ibn ‘Arabi’s though is Alexander D. Knysh, Ibn
‘Arabi and the Later Islamic Tradition. The making of a Polemical Image in
Medieval Islam ( Albany: Satte University of New York press, 1999) to which must
be added Haji Muhammad Bukhari Lubis, The Ocean of Unity: Wahdat al-Wujud in
Persian, Turkish, and Malay Poetry (Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa, 1994).
23
Abu Muhammad Qutb al-Din ‘Abd al-Haqq b. Ibrahim b. Nasr al-‘Akki al-Mursi,
known Ibn Sab‘in (d. 669/1270).
24
‘Abd al-Salam Ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Muhammad Ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman
al-Lakhmi of Seville, known as Ibn Barrajan (d. 536/1141). On him see EI² 3:732
(A. Faure).

65
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

(bida’) and interpretations that could not be more

repulsive and remote from the apparent meaning of
texts, so much so that one is at a loss to ascribe such
works to Muslims or consider them to be works of
Shari‘a. The esteem in which these people are held by
some is of no value-regardless of how eminent such an
admirer might be, because the Qur’an and the Prophetic
Norm (Sunna) are ever more eminent and authoritative
than anyone.
As for the ruling regarding these books containing
those misguided doctrines and their copies in circulation
among the people (wa ma yujadu min nusakhiha bi
aydi’l-nasi), such as the Fusus, and al-Futhat
al-makkiyya of Ibn ‘Arabi, the Budd of Ibn Sab‘in, 25
and the Khal’ al-na‘layn of Ibn Qasi 26 These books and
those like them are to be physically destroyed (idhhab
a’yaniha), whenever copies are found by consigning
them to the flames, or washing away the ink of their
texts so that no trace of the writing remains visible. This
is to safeguard the general welfare of the religion
(al-maslaha al-‘amma fi’l-din). It is incumbent on the
ruler (waliy’l-amr) to burn these books in order to

25
Budd al-‘arif, Ed. Jurji Kattura (Beirut: Dar al-Andalus/Dar al-Kindi, 1978).
26
Ahmad Ibn Qasi (d. 546/1151). On him see Ibn Khaldun, Kitab al-‘Ibar wa diwan
al- mubtada’ wa’l-khabar fi ayyam al-‘arab wa’l-‘ajam wa’l-barbar wa man
‘asarahum min dhawi’l-sultani’l-akbar, 7 vols, (Bulaq: Amiriya Press, 1284/1867),
6:485; ‘Umar Rida Kahhala, Mu‘jam al-mu’allifin 15 vols. (Damacus: Matba‘at
al-Tarraqqi, 1957-61), 2:51; Khayr al-Din al-Zirikli, al-A’lam, 8 vols., (Beirut: Dar
al-‘Ilm li’l- malayin, 1979), 2:58; Hajji Khalifa (Kâtib Çelebi), Kashf al-zunun ‘an
asami al-kutub wa’l funun  YROV (GV ùHUHIHWWLQ <DOWNaya and Kilisli Rifat Bilge
(Istanbul: Maarif Matbaasi,1941-3), 1:722; EI² 3:816-17 (A. Huici-Miranda); Carl
Brockelmann Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur, Supplement, 3 vols., (Leiden:
E.J. Brill, 1937-42), 1:776; his Khal‘ al-na‘layn remains unpublished in a unique
06ùHKLW$OL7KHODWWHUVHHPVWREHWKHRQO\FRPSOHWH06RIWKLVZRUNDQG
also contains the commentary of Ibn al’Arabi. The Arabic text minus the
commentary appeared in David Richmond Goodrich, “A ‘Sufi’ Revolt in Portugal:
Ibn Qasi and his “Kitab Khal‘ al-na’layn” (Arabic Text)”, Ph.D. diss. Columbia
University, 1978. This researcher is preparing a critical edition Khal‘ al-na‘layn of
the latter with Adam Sabra based on additional manuscript sources.

66
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

safeguard the general welfare. Moreover, whoever has

them should offer them for burning.

The authors condemned above, Ibn al-‘Arabi, Ibn Sab’in, Ibn

Barrajan, and Ibn Qasi all evince similar concerns in their writings,
namely the notion of the absolute unicity of Allah and the utter
nothingness and illusory nature of all that is other than God. In
addition, each one espoused a cosmology and Qur’anic theurgy based
on the Divine Names. Indeed, Ibn al-‘Arabi speaks highly of both Ibn
Barrajan, and Ibn Qasi in his works. We will examine these
dimensions further in our concluding reflections, but first we must
present the other versions of this fatwa.

A Second Version of Ibn Khaldun’s fatwa of condemnation

A second version of this fatwa exists. Although nearly identical, the
text singles out additional figures and their works for censure. We
have had to rely on Alexander Knysh’s study of Ibn ‘Arabi for the
text of this fatwa and it is his translation that we cite below.27

Among those Sufis (mutasawwifa) were Ibn ‘Arabi, Ibn

Sab‘in, Ibn Barrajan, and those who followed their
creed. They composed many works which they
circulated among themselves These works reek of
downright unbelief and reprehensible innovation. [Any
attempt to] explain their underlying meaning
allegorically produces results that are as far-fetched as
they are abhorrent. This makes the inquirer wonder
whether these people can at all be treated as members of
this [Muslim] community and counted among [the
followers of] the shari‘a… Now, as regards the books
which contain these erroneous beliefs and are passed
around by people, for example, the “Bezels” and the
“Revelations” of Ibn ‘Arabi, the “Removal of the
Sandals” of Ibn Qasi, “The Eye of Certainty,” 28 and
27
Knysh, Ibn ‘Arabi in the Later Islamic Tradition, 191–92.
28
Arabic: ‘Ayn al-yaqin. A work by Ibn Barrajan. We have not been able to locate
this work. Either it is lost or remains in MSS.

67
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

many poetic lines by Ibn al-Farid and al-‘Afif

al-Tilimsani, as well as the Ibn al-Farghani’s
commentary on the “Ta’iyya” of Ibn al-Farid. The
judgment with respect to these and similar books is as
follows: When found, they must be destroyed by fire or
washed off by water until the traces of writing disappear
completely. Such an action is beneficial to the religion
[of Islam] because it leads to the eradication of
erroneous beliefs.

As in the first version, here we also meet Ibn al-‘Arabi, Ibn

Sab’in, Ibn Barrajan, and Ibn Qasi, but the second paragraph includes
‘Umar Ibn al-Farid (d. 632/1234), ‘Afif al-Din al-Tilimsani (d.
690/1291), and Sa‘id al-Din al-Farghani (d. 699/1300). Of these three
figures al-Tilimsani was a disciple of Ibn al-‘Arabi and wrote a
commentary on his Fusus al-hikam (which remains in manuscript); in
addition to being an accomplished sufi poet.29 ‘Umar Ibn al-Farid is
considered by many to be the finest sufi poet in the Arabic
language. 30 al-Farghani was a student of Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi (d.
672/1274) who was perhaps Ibn al-‘Arabi’s most eminent disciple.
At al-Qunawi’s behest, al-Farghani wrote an important commentary
on Ibn al-Farid’s most celebrated poem, which is known as the
Ta’iyyat al-suluk or “Ode Rhyming in the Letter Ta’ on the Spiritual
Path.” Ibn al-Farid’s poetry was highly esteemed by the school of Ibn
al-‘Arabi. Thus, all three additional figures are closely linked with
Ibn al-‘Arabi and his school as well.
29
An edition of his diwan was published by Yusuf Zaydan as Diwan ‘Afif al-Din
al-Tilimsani (Cairo: 1989). His commentary on the Fusus may well predate that of
Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi which is usually regarded as the first commentary by a
disciple of Ibn al-‘Arabi. Until all the known manuscripts of al-Tilmisani’s
commentary on the Fusus are located and studied it will not be possible to say. We
know of 2 MSS in Turkey: Haci Mahmud Efendi 2654 and ùHKLW $OL 3DúD 
Unfortunately, neither bears a dated colophon.
30
See Muhammad Mustafa Hilmi, Ibn al-Farid wa’l-hubb al-ilahi (Cairo: Dar
al-Ma‘arif, n.d.). Hilmi mentions the same fatwa, citing his teacher, Abu’l-Wafa’
al-Taftazani, Ibn Sab‘in wa faslsafatuhu al-sufiya (Cairo: Dar al-Lubnani, 1973), 156
to illustrate the hostility toward Ibn Sab‘in. See also Ibn al-Farid, Diwan Ibn
al-Farid, 3rd revised edition, Ed. ‘Abd al-Khaliq Mahmud (Cairo: Maktabat al-Adab,
1428/2007).

68
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

A Third Version of Ibn Khaldun’s fatwa of condemnation

We first came across this version in a work on the life of al-Farid.
The author cites the fatwa to illustrate the controversy generated by
his work even centuries after his death. He gives as his source
al-‘Alam al-shamikh fi ithar al-haqq ‘ala al-aba’ wa’l-masha’ikh of
the 11th/18th century Zaydi scholar Salih Ibn Mahdi al-Muqbili.31
The version quoted by al-Muqbili differs from the other two versions
and also seems to be an incomplete quotation. The differences
between it and the other versions are also of interest.

… As for the ruling regarding these books containing

those misguiding doctrines and the lofty rank acquired
by them among the general populace, namely the Fusus,
and Futuhat of Ibn ‘Arabi, the Budd of Ibn Sab‘in, Khal’
al-na‘layn of Ibn Qasi, ‘Ayn al-yaqin of Ibn Barrajan, 32
also worthy of mention is much of the poetry of Ibn
al-Farid, ‘Afif al-Tilimsani not to mention the
commentary of al-Farghani on The Ode Rhyming in Ta’
by Ibn al-Farid. The ruling regarding these books and
those like them is that they should be physically
destroyed wherever copies are found by consigning
them to the flames or washing away the ink of their texts
so that no trace of the writing remains visible in order to
safeguard the general welfare of the religion
(al-maslaha al-‘amma fi’l-din). It is incumbent on
whomever has them to offer them for burning, and if not
then the ruler must confiscate them and punish him for
opposing him in not allowing them to be burnt, since the
ruler cannot be opposed in matters of general welfare
(al-maslaha al-‘amma). 33

Here the two introductory paragraphs seem to have been

omitted altogether. Clearly, al-Muqbili is only quoting the portion he
31
al-Muqbili, al-‘Alam al-shamikh (Cairo: 1328), 428.
32
As noted above, a work by Ibn Barrajan. Which is either lost or remains in
manuscript.
33
al-Muqbili, Ibid., 428.

69
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

is interested in. Nevertheless, all of the persons mentioned in the

other two versions appear in this one. Recall that passages in Ibn
Khaldun’s Muqaddima corroborate the negative attitude toward Ibn
‘Arabi and these poets. 34 This leads me to believe that these three
versions of the fatwa are not mutually exclusive and, taken together,
give an indication of examples of the sort of sufism that Ibn
Khaldun’s considered to be deviant. We may conjecture that Ibn
Khaldun included all of Ibn al-‘Arabi, Ibn Sab’in, Ibn Barrajan, Ibn
Qasi, Ibn al-Farid, ‘Afif al-Tilimsani, and al-Farghani in the originl
text of his fatwa of condemnation, and that the MSS relied on by Ibn
Tawit al-Tanji in his critical edition are incomplete in this regard.
Finally, al-Muqbili’s version ends on a more severe note. In this
redaction, those who possessed copies of the condemned works were
to hand them over and if they did not, they were to be punished by
the ruler for he was not to be opposed in matters of public welfare. In
the first version, although Ibn Khaldun is quoted as saying that those
that have the proscribed books should offer them for burning (wa
yata’ayyanu ‘ala man ‘indahu’l-tamkinu minha lil-ihraq), one is at
least left with the impression that this is somewhat voluntary; there is
no explicit indication here of the ruler using coercive authority to
confiscate the books for destruction. Conspicuously absent from both
versions is the text of the istifta’ – if indeed there was any – which
would have been indispensable in reconstructing the immediate
historical context of this fatwa. It does not appear that Ibn Khaldun’s
fatwa gave rise to any kind of official hunt for the works of Ibn
al-‘Arabi in his time, but it is certain that Ibn al-‘Arabi continued to
be controversial and remains so to this day. 35 We may now approach
the matter of Ibn Khaldun’s motivations for his strong condemnation
of these Sufis and their works, as well as the most relevant

34
The Muqaddimah, 2nd ed. Trans. Franz Rosenthal, 2:187–88, 3:92. 101–2, 278.
35
The reactions to Ibn al-‘Arabi have been examined in detail in the already cited
study by Knysh, Ibn ‘Arabi in Later Islamic Tradition: The Making of a Polemical
Image in Medieval Islam, passim. For a listing of fatwas both for and against Ibn
al-‘Arabi, see Osman Yahia, Histoire et classification de l’oevre d’ibn ‘Arabi, 2
vols. (Damascus: Institut Francais de Damas, 1964), 1:122–135. For a treatment of
more recent reactions see Th. Emil Homerin, Ibn Arabi in the People’s Assembly:
Religion, Press, and Politics in Sadat’s Egypt, Middle East Journal 40.3 (Summer
1986): 462–77.

70
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

dimensions of their doctrines in our concluding reflections.

Concluding Reflections
Ibn Khaldun is certainly no salafi of the Ibn Taymiyya (d.
728/1328) 36 or al-Barabahari 37 variety. However, Ibn Khaldun was
opposed to much of the Sufism of his day, and particularly the type
inspired by Ibn al-‘Arabi. All of the figures mentioned in his fatwa in
its three versions, as well as in passages in the Muqaddima have
some association with Ibn al-‘Arabi whether directly or indirectly or
with his school. 38 Ibn Sab’in — while not associated with Ibn
al-‘Arabi and his school — is regarded as having espoused a “radical
monism” of the wahdat al-wujud (unicity of being) variety associated
with the name of Ibn al-‘Arabi.
‘Afif al-Din al-Tilmisani was also a disciple of Ibn al-‘Arabi
and also authored a commentary on the Fusus al-hikam which
remains in manuscript.
Sa‘id al-Din al-Farghani was a student of Sadr al-Din
al-Qunawi who maybe regarded of as Ibn al-‘Arabi’s chief disciple.
Farghani authored a commentary, one version in Persian and another
in Arabic, at the behest of Sadr al-Din on the Ta’iyya of ‘Umar Ibn
al-Farid who although not a disciple of Ibn al-‘Arabi, had his poetry
highly esteemed by Ibn al-‘Arabi and his followers. 39
Ibn al-‘Arabi speaks favourably of Ibn Qasi in his Fusus 40 and
also wrote an entire commentary on his Khal‘ al-na‘layn (“Doffing

36
On him see Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed, Ibn Taymiyya and his Times
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).
37
al-Hasan b. ‘Ali b. Khalaf al-Barbahari (d. 329/941). See E12 1:1039 (H[enri].
Laoust) and E13 (ChristopherMelchert), www.brillonline.nl.
38
See William C. Chittick, “Ibn ‘Arabi and his School” in Seyyed Hossein Nasr,
Ed. Islamc Spirituality. Manifestations (New York, Crossroads Publications, 1991),
49–79.
39
The Arabic commentary was published as Muntaha al-madarik, 2 vols. (Cairo:
1293) and subsequently in a critical edition by Wisam al-Khattawi also in two
volumes of which we have only seen the first volume, Muntaha al-madarik wa
muntaha kulli kamil wa ‘arif wa salik (Qum: Matbu’at-i Dini, 1386 hijri solar).
40
Fusus al-hikam MS Evkaf Musesi 1933 fol. 15v, line 12. This MS was dictated by
Ibn al-‘Arabi to his disciple Sadr al-Din Qunawi and contains a statement to that
effect in his handwriting with his signature. See fol. 1r of the same.

71
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

of the Two Sandals”). In fact, it appears that the latter is transmitted

solely by Ibn al-‘Arabi.
Ibn Barrajan’s prowess in the occult noetic theurgy of the
Arabic letters (‘ilm al-huruf) 41 is highly esteemed by Ibn al-‘Arabi in
his own treatment of the subject in the second chapter of the Futuhat
where he mentions that Ibn Barrajan unambiguously predicted with
mathematical accuracy the year of the victory of the Salah al-Din
over the Crusaders occupying al-Quds on the basis of the opening
verses of the Thirtieth Sura of the Quran (al-Rum (30): 1–4).42 Ibn
Barrajan made this prediction in 520 H. Salah al-Din attained victory
in Rajab 583/1187. Ibn Barrajan died in 536 or 537 of the Hijra.
Moreover, the figure most associated with recondite arcana of the
Islamic occult sciences, namely Abu’l-‘Abbas Ahmad Ibn ‘ali Ibn
Yusuf al-Qurashi known as al-Buni 43 while not mentioned in any of
41
On ‘ilm al-huruf see Saiyad Nizamuddin Ahmad, “Glimpses of ‘Ilm al-Huruf”,
unpublished manuscript.
42
See Matthew Melvin-Koushki, “The Quest for a Universal Science: The Occult
Philosophy of Sa’in al-Din Turka Isfahani (1369-1342) and Intellectual
Millenarianism in Early Timurid Iran,” Ph. D. diss., Yale University, 2012, 284-306.
43
The entry on al-Buni in the Supplement to EI2 12:156 by A. Diterich is now
obsolete, as are the following: Mohamed M. El-Gawhary, Die Gottesnamen im
magischen Gebrauch in den al-Buni zugeschriebenen Werken. Bonn: 1968;
Dorothee Anna Maria Pielow, Die Quellen der Wiesheit: Die arabische magie im
Spiegel des Usul al-Hikma von A‫ۊ‬mad Ibn ‘Ali al-Buni. Band 8. Arabistische Texte
und Studien Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1995; Edgar Walter Francis IV,
“Islamic Symbols and Sufi Rituals for Protection and Healing: Religion and Magic
in the Writings of Ahmad ibn Ali al-Buni (d. 622/1225)”, Ph.D. diss. University of
California, Los Angeles, 2005; Jan Just Wikam, “Gazing at the Sun. Remarks on the
Egyptian Magician al-Buni and his Work” in Arnoud Vrolik and Jan P. Hogendijk
(Eds.), O Ye Gentleman. Arabic Studies on Science and Literary Culture in Honour
of Remke Kruk, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2007, p. 183–199; and Jaime Coullaut Cordero,
“El-.LWƗE 6DPV DO-Ma‘arif al-Kubra (al-yuz al-awwal) de Aতmad b. ‘Ali al-Buni:
Sufismos y ciencias ocultas,” Ph.D. diss., Universidad de Salamanca, 2009. I am
grateful to Dr. Sajjad Rizvi, University of Exeter for giving me a copy of this work.
There have been several new studies which now call for revision of these earlier
attempts. These new studies on al-Buni are: John D. Martin III, “Theurgy in the
Medieval Islamic World: Conceptions of Cosmology in al-Buni’s Doctrine of the
Divine Names,” MA diss. American University in Cairo, Dec. 2011, Noah Gardiner,
“Forbidden Knowledge? Notes on the Production, Transmission, and reception of
the Major Works of Ahmad al-Buni,” Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 12
(2012): 81–142; Saiyad Nizamuddin Ahmad, “Navigating the ‘Corpus Bunianum’ I:

72
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

the versions of the fatwa, is singled out for censure together with Ibn
al-‘Arabi in the Muqaddima. 44 al-Buni is strongly associated with
Ibn al-‘Arabi not just in “spirit,” so to speak, but through a common
teacher as well. In a seminal paper on al-Buni just published by Noah
Gardiner, we learn that al-Buni and Ibn al-‘Arabi shared the same
spiritual master in the person of Abu Muhammad ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Ibn
Abi Bakr al-Qurashi al-Mahdawi (d. 621/1224). 45 Both Ibn al-‘Arabi
and al-Buni, not to mention Ibn Qasi as well as Ibn Barrajan,
espoused both a doctrine of the theophany of the Divine Names as
well as a theurgy of the Divine Names which enabled the adept to
perform directly manipulate the underlying forces and principles of
the cosmos. Clearly there are strong links and similarities between
the figures singled out by Ibn Khaldun for censure. It would seem
that the reason Ibn Khaldun so strongly opposed these figures was
because of the allegiance of all of them to the doctrine of the unicity
of being (wahdat al-wujud) with which Ibn al-‘Arabi is strongly
associated. This is indeed true, but in our view neither the sole nor
decisive reason for Ibn Khaldun’s condemnation: the decisive reason
is Ibn al-‘Arabi’s doctrine of the Perfect Man (al-insan al-kamil). To
better understand the rationale behind Ibn Khaldun’s condemnation
we must discuss this doctrine in some detail.
The locus classicus of the doctrine of the Perfect Man in Ibn
al-‘Arabi is the opening paragraph of his Fusus al-hikam (The Bezels
of Wisdom) and it is with a key passage from the Fusus that we shall
begin. 46 Before doing so, I should like to note the lamentable fact of

A Survey and Analysis of Key MSS ascribed to Ahmad b. ‘Ali al-Buni (d.
622/1225),” unpublished, an earlier version of it was presented at the Eighth Annual
Islamic Manuscripts Conference of the Islamic Manuscript Association, July 9-11,
2012 at Queens’ College, University of Cambridge; Saiyad Nizamuddin Ahmad,
“Navigating the Corpus Bunianum II: An Inquiry into the Art and Science of
Talismans in the Occult Technology of AতPDGE‫ޏ‬$OƯDO-%njQƯG"´The
Occult Sciences in Pre-Modern Islamic Culture, Beirut: Beiruter Texte und Studien,
forthcoming 2014.
44
Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah, 2nd ed. Trans. Franz Rosenthal, 3:172.
45
Gardiner, Ibid., 87.
46
According to Masataka Takeshita, the Arabic term for the Perfect Man (al-insan
al-kamil) occurs seven times in the Fusus, see his “Ibn ‘Arabi’s Theory of the
Perfect Man and its Place in the History of Islamic Thought,” Ph. D. diss., University
of Chicago, 1986, 49.

73
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

this important work having never been properly critically edited until
now despite the existence of a MS dictated by the master himself to
one of his chief disciples, Sadr al-'ƯQ DO-4XQDZƯ. 47 None of the
published editions prior to ours (which will appear soon) are to be
trusted. 48 We have relied upon the aforementioned MS in all of our
work. We will begin by quoting our translation of the opening
paragraph in its entirety: 49

The Transcendent Wisdom of Divinity in the Matrix of Adam.

Whereas the Absolute (may He be glorified), in respect
of his Most Beautiful Names which are beyond number,
wished to see their essences—or in other words to see
Himself—in an all inclusive object encompassing the

47
(YNDI0XVHVLFXUUHQWO\LQWKH0XVHXPRI7XUNLVKDQG,VODPLF$UWøVWDQEXO
All references in this paper will be to Evkaf Musesi 1933. Other highly significant
MSS have also been examined but will not be cited: Carullah 986, Carullah 1070,
.ÕOÕo $OL 3DúD  5DJLE 3DúD  ùHKLW $OL 3DúD  DOO LQ WKH 6OH\PDQL\H
.WSKDQHVL øVWDQEXO )RU IXUWKHU GHWDLOV RI WKH 066 RI WKH Fusus, see Osman
Yahia, Histoire et classification de l'œuvre d’Ibn ‘Arabi, 2 vols. (Damscus: Institut
Français de Damas, 1964), 1:240–241.
48
The most well-known published editions are: Abu al-‘Ala’ al-‘Afifi, Fusus
al-hikam (Cairo: 1365/1946) Shar‫ ۊ‬Fusus al-hikam min kalam al-Shaykh al-Akbar
Mu‫ۊ‬yi al-Din Ibn al-‘Arabi, Ed. Maতmud Maতmud al-Ghurab (Damascus:
self-published, 1405/1985), Fusus al-hikam, Ed. Nawaf al-Jarraত (Beirut: Dar ৡadir,
1426/2005). Only al-Afifi’s is a critical edition, but it is based on a very late MS of
no real significance.
49
Evkaf Musesi 1933, folio 2r, lines 11–20 to folio 2v, lines 1–3. In preparing our
translation we have benefited greatly from Ibn al-‘Arabi. The Bezels of Wisdom,
Trans. and Introduction by R. W. J. Austin. Preface by Titus Burckhardt. The
Classics of Western Spirituality (New York: Paulist Press, 1980), p. 50. Austin’s
translation reads the best in English. It is also the only one in which the translator
also consulted the MS Evkaf Musesi 1933 in addition to the published edition of
al-‫ޏ‬$IƯIƯ 7KHUH DUH RQO\ WZR RWKHU (QJOLVK WUDQVODWLRQV GRQH GLUHFWO\ IURP WKH
Arabic: Aisha Bewley, The Seals of Wisdom. The latter is now out of print and I no
longer have my personal copy. If I am not mistaken, it was first published in the
mid-1980s after Austin’s translation. It is now available online, for some reason
minus not only the translation of Ibn al-µ$UDEƯ¶V SUHDPEOH EXW DOVR PLQXV WKH
introduction by Abd al-Qadir al-Murabit which were both in the published version,
at http://bewley.virtualave.net/fusus.html; and Caner K. Dagli, The Ringstones
Wisdom (Fu‫܈‬nj‫ ܈‬al-‫ۉ‬ikam). Great Books of the Islamic World. Series Editor: Seyyed
Hossein Nasr (Chicago; Kazi Publications, 2004).

74
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

Divine command in its totality, which qualified by

existence would reveal to Him His own mystery—for
the seeing of a thing, itself by itself, is not the same as
its seeing itself in another, as it were in a mirror, for it
appears to itself in a form that is invested by the location
of the vision by that which would only appear to it given
the existence of the location and its self-disclosure to
it—the Absolute bestowed being upon the whole
cosmos as an undifferentiated thing not having anything
of the spirit in it. So, it was akin to an unpolished mirror.
And it is in the nature of the Divine determination that
He does not set out a locus (mahall) except to receive a
divine spirit, which He describes as the breathing into
him [Qur’an 21: 91]. The latter is nothing other than the
coming into operation of the undifferentiated form’s
innate disposition to receive the inexhaustible
overflowing of self-revelation which has always been
and will ever be. There remains only the receptive and
the receptive can only be from the Most Holy
Superabundance (al-Fayd al-Aqdas), for the whole
affair, in its entirety, is from Him (minhu), in the
beginning and the end—and to Him returns the whole
affair [Qur’an 2: 210]—just as it began with Him. {NB:
An alternative reading: “for the whole affair, in its
entirety, is from Him in its beginning and its end—and
to Him returns the whole affair [Qur’an 2: 210]—just as
it began with Him”}.

As noted earlier, the Arabic term for the Perfect Man (al-insan
al-kamil) occurs seven times in the Fusus. 50 Whilst the term itself
does not occur in the paragraph quoted, the essence of the doctrine is
expressed therein. Moreover, Ibn al-‘Arabi authored his own brief
commentary on the Fusus, known as the Naqsh al-Fusus (The
Imprint of the Bezels). His remarks on the entire chapter are both
brief and highly significant and thus also deserve to be quoted in

50
Masataka Takeshita, “Ibn ‘Arabi’s Theory of the Perfect Man and its Place in the
History of Islamic Thought”, 49.

75
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

full. 51 After an analysis of these passages we shall consider the

explicit occurrences of the term in the Fusus.

The Transcendent Wisdom of Divinity in the Matrix of Adam.

Know that the Most Beautiful Divine Names entail by
their very nature the existence of the cosmos, for Allah
bestowed being on the cosmos as an undifferentiated
body and made its spirit “Adam”. By “Adam”, I mean
the very being of the realm of humanity. And he taught
him [i.e. Adam, primordial man] the Names, all of
Them. [Qur’an 2:31]. For truly the spirit is none other
than that which governs the physical body by its
faculties. Similarly, the Names are for the Perfect Man
as faculties. Thus is it said concerning the cosmos that it
is the mega-anthropos but only on condition of the
existence of Man therein. Man, then, is the epitome of
the Divine Presence and it is for this reason that he was
singled out for “the Image” for thus did he [i.e. the
Prophet Muhammad] say: “Verily, Allah created Adam
in His own Image” and in another narration “in the
Image of the Infinitely Compassionate (al-Rahman)”.
Allah made him [primordial Man] the sought-after goal
[telos] of the cosmos, just as the rational soul is in the
individual human being. Therefore, the cosmos is
destroyed with his demise, and the entire [cosmic]
51
The version in the Hyderabad edition of the miscellaneous treatises of Ibn
al-‘Arabi is quite useless: Rasa’il Ibn ‘Arabi (Daiirat al-Ma‘arif al-µ8WKPƗQL\D LQ
1361/1948). The latter is based on Asafiyah 376 (dated 997/1589). We have
prepared a critical edition of the latter based primarily on Carullah 2080 (dated 791
H, copied from an original in Ibn al-‘Arabi’s handwriting) which is to be published
together with our edition of the Fusus. There are some significant differences
between it and the text that William. C. Chittick printed in his critical edition of
‘Abd al-Rahman Jami’s (d. 898 H) Naqd al-nusus, a commentary on Naqsh
al-Fusus, which was embedded in the MSS he used. We relied on the following
additional MSS all in the 6OH\PDQL\H .WSKDQHVL øVWDQEXO ùHKLW $OL 3DúD 
GDWHG+%D÷GDWOÕ9HKELGDWHG+ùHKLW$OL3DúDGDWHG
+DQG1DIL]3DúDGDWHG+)RUIXUWKHUGHWDLOVRIWKH066RIWKHNaqsh
al-Fusus, see Osman Yahia, Histoire et classification de l'œuvre d’Ibn ‘Arabi, 2
vols. (Damscus: Institut Français de Damas, 1964), 2:407.

76
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

edifice will pass into the End (the Hereafter) because of

him [i.e. by reason of the Perfect Man being transferred
there]. Thus, he is the first in intention, yet the last in
existentiation; the outwardly-manifest in form, yet the
inwardly-hidden in rank; [but] a [mere] servant in
relation to Allah, yet a lord in relation to the cosmos. It
is for this reason that He made him a vicegerent
(khalifa) and his offspring vicegerents (khulafa’). And
therefore none of the creatures of the world has claimed
lordship for themselves but Man due to the power he
possesses and [in the same fashion] none of the
creatures of world has mastered the station of [divine]
servanthood (‘ubudiyya) but Man. Thus, did he worship
stones and [other] inanimate objects which are the
lowest of existing things. Hence, there is nothing more
exalted than Man in lordship; yet none more lowly than
him in his servitude. If you have understood, then I have
made clear to you what is intended by “Man”, look then
to his grandeur by virtue of the Most Beautiful Names
and the fact that they seek him. From the fact of their
seeking him is known his grandeur and from his
manifestation by them, is known his lowliness. So
understand! And thence it is revealed that he is a
paradigm of the two images: the Absolute (al-Haqq) and
the cosmos (‘alam).

Careful consideration of the foregoing passages, as well as an

understanding of the relevant portions of the Qura’n as well as the
relevant hadiths to which Ibn al-‘Arabi only gives the slightest of
allusions, leads to a number of important conclusions. First, Ibn
al-‘Arabi is expounding a metaphysical cosmology in which the
Perfect Man is identified with the Qur’anic Adam. The second
chapter of the Qur’an (2:30–34), speaks of the creation of Adam.
God informs the angels that He is to create and place upon the Earth
a vicegerent (khalifa). The angels reply by saying that the new
creature will make mischief upon the Earth and shed blood therein,
whereas, in contrast, they constantly glorify God and sanctify His

77
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

Name. God responds by saying that He knows what they know not.
He then proceeds to teach Adam—and we must not forget that Ibn
al-‘Arabi is reading “Adam” in the sense of primordial
humanity—“the names, all of them” (al-asma’a kullaha, Qur’an
2:31). This is considered by Ibn al-‘Arabi to mean the Divine Names
which are beyond number. At this point God commands the angels to
prostrate to Adam in acknowledgement of his superiority. This
knowledge of the Divine Names is how he also construes the তadith,
quoted in the Naqsh al-Fusus (the second passage above) which
states that God created Adam in His Image. 52 It is against this
backdrop that the Fusus opens. Ibn al-‘Arabi indicates that Adam,
who is, once again, a symbol for man qua man or if one prefers the
human being per se, was created by God through an act of self
contemplation “when”—(quotation marks to indicate the latter word
must be construed non-temporally since time as we know it did not
yet exist)—He wished to contemplate his own visage, so to speak, in
another. The latter is likened by Ibn al-‘Arabi to a mirror. Since man
is the reflection of the Divine Names, he is created in His Image and
is thus worthy of being his vicegerent. Another Qur’anic passage and
image is evoked when he speaks of God breathing into man of his
Spirit. This too is taken as symbolizing the Divine Names, which,
through a sort of Divine “exhalation”, animate not only Adam, but
Adam himself by virtue of his existence in the cosmos as the
vicegerent of God, in turn, animates the world. Thus, the Perfect Man
is the very soul of the cosmos (anima mundi) and, through God,
sustains it. The existence of the Perfect Man is entailed by the Divine
Names, and it is through the existence of the Perfect Man in the
world that it is sustained. The cosmos is incomplete without the
Perfect Man whose existence is its ultimate teleological end, and the
cosmos will cease to exist with the demise of the Perfect Man. Who
52
See Muতammad b. Isma‘il al-Bukhari (d. 256 H), al-Jami‘ al-sahih, 3 vols.
(Vaduz, Lichtenstein: Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation, 2000), kitab al-isti’dhan, bab
bad’ al-salam, v. 3, p. 1268–1267, no. 6299, kitab ahadith al-anbiya’, bab qawl Allah
wa idh qal rabbuka li’l-mala’ika… , v. 2, p. 648, no. 3361; and Muslim b. al-ণajjaj
al-Naysaburi (d. 261 H), al-Jami‘ al-sahih, 2 vols. (Vaduz, Lichtenstein: Thesaurus
Islamicus Foundation, 2000), kitab al-MDQQD ZD VLIDW QDµLPLKƗ ZD DKOLKD EDE
yadkhul al-janna aqwam af’idatuhum mithl af’idat al-tayr, v. 2, p. 1198–1199, no.
7342.

78
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

is this extraordinary being? If Adam signifies primordial humanity,

man qua man, the human being per se, does that mean everyone is
the Perfect Man? In order to answer this and other questions we must
examine how Ibn al-µ$UDEƯ KDV XVHG WKH WHUP HOVHZKHUH LQ WKH
Fusus. However, we will not burden the reader with further
quotations.
The first occurrence of the term in the Fusus is in the first
chapter after Adam has been identified with the macrocosm as the
“great man”, mega-anthropos (al-insan al-kabir) as well as God’s
vicegerent. Here the Perfect Man is likened to the seal (khatm) which
a king places on his treasury and thus, just as none dare opens his
treasury as long as the seal remains and the treasury is protected
thereby, so too is the existence of the Perfect Man the means by
which the cosmos is preserved. 53
The second occurrence refers to how the Perfect Man has been
fashioned by the Divine Attributes of Majesty (al-Jalal) and Beauty
(al-Jamal) which are symbolized as the “two hands” of God. 54
Shortly thereafter we have the third occurrence of the term
where we find the explicit declaration that none maybe the vicegerent
of God but the Perfect Man. Here another তadith is alluded to in
which God Himself declares that He becomes the very sight and
hearing of the Perfect Man. 55
The fourth use of the term unequivocally declares the Perfect
Man to be at the apex of the hierarchy of engendered existence (a’la
al-mawjadat). 56
The fifth instance of the term is in the context of the heart of
the gnostic (qalb al-‘arif). Here it is stated, somewhat elliptically,
that whilst the Perfect Man is the locus of manifestation of the Divine
1DPHV ʊ ZKLFK E\ WKHLU YHU\ QDWXUH HQWDLO KLV H[LVWHQFH ʊ WR EH
more precise it is the heart of the Perfect Man which is the physical
locus of these Names. The sixth and seventh occurrences of the term
elaborate this idea further and indicate that the [heart of the] Perfect

53
Evkaf Musesi 1933, fol. 3r, line 3.
54
Evkaf Musesi 1933 fol. 5r, line 6.
55
Evkaf Musesi 1933 fol. 5r, line 20.
56
Evkaf Musesi 1933 fol. 14r, line 10.

79
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

Man epitomizes all of the Divine Names. 57 This is highly significant

since Ibn al-‘Arabi indicates in the opening words of the Fusus that
the Divine Names, are beyond enumeration. Moreover, for this
reason the entire cosmos is subjugated to the Perfect Man and subject
to his command. That the whole universe has been subjugated to the
will of the Perfect Man is also stated in Ibn al-‘Arabi’s ‘Uqlat
al-mustawfiz. 58
There is another dimension in the use of the term in the latter
text as well as in the seventh occurrence in the Fuৢnjৢ which allow us
to answer the question posed earlier, namely who is the Perfect Man?
These two citations contrast the “Perfect Man” with what Ibn
al-‘Arabi calls the “Animal Man”. The latter signifies all those
human beings who, despite being made in the image of God, fail to
actualize this dei-formity which is only potential. Thus, the Divine
Names were “blown” into the physical matrix of the Qur’anic Adam,
as well as into all humans since Adam symbolizes all persons. The
Divine Names then exist in a potential state in all people, but must be
made actual. Therefore, it is not given to the ordinary man to reach
the station of the Perfect Man. In the third occurrence of the term in
the Fusus, Ibn al-‘Arabi alludes to a hadith which he identifies with
the path of sainthood that culminates in the station of the Perfect
Man. The তadith is a well known one and implies that only those who
wholeheartedly draw nigh to God through acts of supererogatory
worship reach this station and God becomes their very hearing by
which they hear and sight by which they see. 59 Thus, only the
57
Evkaf Musesi 1933 fol. 66r, lines 14, 19.
58
Cited in Masataka 7DNHVKLWD ³,EQ µ$UDEƯ
V 7KHRU\ RI WKH 3HUIHFW 0DQ DQG LWV
Place in the History of Islamic Thought”, 112. See also ùHKLW $OL 3DúD 1341, fols.
151-165. This is an important manuscript of ‘Uqlat al-amastawfiz which bears a
colophon dated 18 Rabi‘ al-Awwal, 625 H which means it was copied in the lifetime
of Ibn al-‘Arabi. However it is not in his handwriting. The scribe gives his name as
Muzaffar Ibn Sayyid ‘Ali al-Huwayni (or al-Juwayni as there are no dots here). It
was copied in the city of Sivas in what is today central Turkey.
59
Muতammad ibn Isma‘il al-Bukhari (d. 256 H), al-Jami’ al-sahih NLWƗE DO-riqaq,
bab al-tawadu‘, v. 3, p. 1319, no. 6581. Ibn al-‘Arabi also quotes it in his own তadith
collection. See his Mishkat al-anwar published with facing-page french translation
as La niche des lumières, Ed. Michel Valsan (Paris: Les Editions l’Œuvre, 1983),
119–120, no. 91. On Ibn al-‘Arabi and hadith see Ali Vasfi Kurt, Endülüs’de Hadis
YHøEQ$UDEL ,VWDQEXOøQVDQ<D\LQODUÕ"

80
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

choicest saints (awliya’) are worthy of this station which is the

culmination of sanctity (wilaya). Yet, there is a hierarchy of sanctity
and of saints. At any given time there is only one supreme saint
called by the sufis, Ibn al-‫ޏ‬$UDEƯ LQFOXGHGWKHqutb or “axial saint”
around which the firmament of sanctity revolves. All saints however,
and the axial saint in particular, do not attain to sanctity directly since
the Divine aid does not flow to them directly. 60 It reaches them only
via the Prophet Muhammad. It is here that we encounter what is
known as the Muhammadan Reality (al-haqiqat al-Muhammadiya)
and also as the Light of Muhammad (al-nur al-Muhammadi). It is
held by Ibn al-‘Arabi that the Prophet Muhammad was not a mere
man like other men and that he existed prior to all other things as the
first delimitation of Being after the ontological plane of the Divine
Attributes. Ibn al-‘Arabi devotes the final chapter of the Fusus
al-hikam to the doctrine of the Light of Muhammad 61 as well as
making mention of it in innumerable number of places in his massive
al-Futu‫ۊ‬ƗW DO-makkiya a work of some four thousand pages in the
Cairo edition of 1293 H. The relationship between the doctrines of
the Light of Muhammad and the Perfect Man is nicely summarized
by M. Chodkiewicz: 62

These various expressions can strictly be applied only to

the haqiqa muhammadiyya, for it alone possesses these
attributes ab initio and in full measure. In another sense,
however, they are adequate to designate the qutb and
any beings who are able to assume his cosmic function.
In any case, the terms haqiqa muhammadiyya and insan
kamil are not purely synonymous, but express differing
views of man, the first seeing him in terms of his

60
This understanding expressed in this paragraph is heavily indebted to Michel
Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints. Prophethood and Sainthood in the Doctrine of Ibn
‘Arabi (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993), passim5HJDUGLQJKDGƯ@LWKVRQWKH
issue of the hierarchy of the saints see Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 911 H), al-Khabar
al-dall ‘ala wujud al-qutb wa’l-awtad wa’l-nujaba’ wa’l-abdal wa yalih al-qawl
al-jali fi ‫ۊ‬adith al-wali, Ed. ‘Abd al-Hadi Mansur (Dar al-Albab, 1426/2005).
61
Evkaf Musesi 1933, folios 72r–78v.
62
Seal of the Saints. Prophethood and Sainthood in the Doctrine of Ibn ‘Arabi
(Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993), p. 71.

81
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

primordiality and the second in terms of his finality. The

kamal or perfection of the insan kamil should not be
understood in a ‘moral’ sense (so as to correspond with
the ‘heroic virtues’), but as meaning ‘fulfillment’ and
‘completion’. Properly speaking, this perfection is
possessed only by Muhammad, the ultimate and total
manifestation of haqiqa muhammadiyya. Yet, on the
other hand, it is equally the goal of all spiritual life and
the very definition of walaya. Hence, the walaya of the
wali can only be participation in the walaya of the
Prophet.

Thus, the doctrine of the Perfect Man only finds its fullest
manifestation in the Prophet Muhammad. All who attain to any
degree of sanctity (walaya) no matter how great or small, do so only
through participation in the sanctity of Muhammad. Muhammad’s
sanctity has always been because the existence of his luminous
reality precedes all else. Indeed, it is through this very light that all
the subordinate “Perfect Men” are sustained, and thereby the cosmos
is sustained.
After this lengthy, but necessary examination of the doctrine of
the Pefect Man in Ibn al-‘Arabi, we are in a much better position to
comprehend Ibn Khaldun’s harsh condemnation of works like the
Fusus which espoused this doctrine. Ibn Khaldun was opposed to Ibn
al-‘Arabi and those closely associated with him or his school because
of the radical implications and potentialities of the doctrine of the
Perfect Man for uniting spiritual authority and temporal power. Ibn
Qasi made mahdist claims and led a rebellion against the ruling
Almoravids (al-Murabitun) in the Algarve region of Andalusia
(gharb al-Andalus) and created a short-lived polity. Ibn Barrajan
played an equally important and prominent role in the rebellion and
was acknowledged as imam in 130 villages. In addition to his
prowess in ‘ilm al-huruf he authored an esoteric commentary on the
Qur’an as well as a similar work devoted to the Divine Names, which
is the central concern in the arcane theurgy of all of these Sufis. Ibn
Khaldun was an expert in the history of Andalusia and the Maghrib
and was well aware of this revolt and others like it, including the role

82
 BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AND TEMPORAL POWER

played by chiliastic claimants and doctrines in generating the

necessary ‘asabiyya — as he called it — for the success of such
millenarian political adventures. 63 Ibn al-‘Arabi, especially in his
work entitled al-‘Anqa al-mughrib (“The Fabulous Gryphon”) had
himself made claims of being the seal of sanctity (khatm al-wilaya),
as well as of playing a key role in an apocalyptic vision of the future
heralded by the impending appearance of a world-redeemer. 64 Both
the Fusus as well as the Ta’iyya were read as extended commentaries
on the notion of the Perfect Man by the commentators on these works
singled out for condemnation by Ibn Khaldun. All of this leads one to
the conclusion that these figures all shared notions of a kind of
apotheosis of the saint much akin to the Twelver and Isma‘ili
doctrine of the Imamate. 65 Ibn Khaldun not only rejected all such
notions of spiritual authority, but even went so far as to dismiss all
hadiths regarding the Mahdi as either being weak or forgeries,
amounting to a rejection of the Mahdi doctrine itself.66 Also in the
Muqaddima, he explicitly identifies this sort of sufism with “shi‘a
extremists,” but does not mention the doctrine of the Perfect Man. 67
Ibn Khaldun’s position on the debate which arose in Andalusia
on the need for a shaykh as set out in detail in his Shifa’ al-sa’il
indicates he favoured a sober, ascetic sufism based on his three
cycles of mujahada. His rejection of the “monistic” teachings of Ibn
al-‘Arabi and Ibn Sab‘in in his fatwa and in key passages of the
Muqaddima, also amount to repudiation of Ibn al-‘Arabi’s doctrine of
the Perfect Man as well. Thus, Ibn Khaldun’s fatwa of condemnation
must be seen as a rejection of all notions of individual, saintly
63
Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah, 2nd ed. Trans. Franz Rosenthal, 2:195–96.
64
See Gerald T. Elmore’s monumental study and translation of this work, Islamic
Sainthood in the Fullness of Time. Ibn al-‘Arabi’s Book of the Fabulous Gryphon
(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1999), passim.
65
On the doctrine of the imamate see Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, The Divine
Guide in Shi‘i Islam, Trans. David Streight (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1996),
passim; and his The Spirituality of Shi‘i Islam (London and New York: I. B. Tauris
in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies, London, 2011), 103–304.
66
Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah, 2nd ed. Trans. Franz Rosenthal, 2:156–200, esp.
157, 195, 196.
67
Ibid. 3:92. See also Alexander Knysh, Ibn ‘Arabi in Later Islamic Tradition, 192–
97 and James Morris, “An Arab “Machiavelli”? : Rhetoric, Philosophy and Politics
in Ibn Khaldun’s Critique of Sufism,” 14–18.

83
SAIYAD NIZAMUDDIN AHMAD

apotheosis that he saw as resulting in the coinciding of spiritual

authority and temporal power.

84