Subtleties and Allusions

1) How the Names were taught

In the context of the teaching of the divine names, it is important to note that teaching can occur in different ways. One method is through teaching each individual item separately, thereby maintaining their external multiplicity. Another method involves imparting some general principles or comprehensive statements from which countless details can be deduced. In this approach, a general and comprehensive matter, despite its simplicity and unity, encompasses all compounds and multiplicities.

A well-known ḥadīth from the Commander of the Faithful (a.s.) regarding the teaching of the Prophet (s.a.w.) illustrates this latter type of teaching. According to this ḥadīth, the Commander of the Faithful (a.s.) said:

“When the Noble Messenger (s.a.w.) was about to pass away, He taught me a thousand doors of knowledge, behind each door of which a thousand doors were opened for me.”(231)

In other words, aside from detailed teaching and presenting actual multiplicity, there are two ways to demonstrate the opening of many doors of knowledge from one door:

a) A comprehensive rule is taught, from which many subsidiary issues can be deduced. Since multiple rules branch out from one comprehensive and general rule, all those deduced subsidiary issues trace back to specific rules, and all those rules ultimately converge on a single, overarching rule, which serves as the foundation for all others. This concept is akin to the example given by Shaʿrānī with the sector of a circle, from which numerous geometric subsidiary issues can be derived.(232) With advancements in mathematics and the invention of supercomputers, it is not only possible to derive more subsidiary issues from certain geometric principles, but time can also be transcended, allowing complex equations that once required extensive calculations to be solved instantaneously.

b) A simple reality is witnessed through presential knowledge (ʿilm ḥuḍūrī), where this simple reality, despite its simplicity and unity, encompasses numerous realities. This concept is similar to the idea that the Simple Reality (basīṭ al-ḥaqīqa) is all things while not being any one of them. Of course, what is discussed regarding the Necessary Being (wājib al-wujūd) is in an unlimited manner, whereas what is discussed regarding the simple contingent beings (mumkin) is in a limited manner. The point is that if the reality of the Great Name (ism ʿaẓīm) is witnessed by the Perfect Man (insān al-kāmil) through presential knowledge, and God, the Exalted, causes him to witness the essence of the Great Name, all the realities of the Beautiful Names (asmāʾ ḥusnā) that fall under that Great Name and within the scope of this Great Name will be witnessed by the human being through presential knowledge.

The difference between these two methods lies in the distinction between acquired knowledge (ʿilm ḥuṣūlī) and presential knowledge. The first involves subsuming numerous branches under a comprehensive principle, which requires inference, while the second is a form of detailed unveiling (kashf tafṣīlī) within summary knowledge (ʿilm ijmālī). However, the term “summary knowledge” in this context differs from its common use in the principles of jurisprudence (uṣūl al-fiqh).

Note: The teaching of numerous names is sometimes discussed in terms of being summary or detailed, as extensively mentioned earlier, and sometimes in terms of being instantaneous or gradual. The word “taught” (ʿallama), whether read in the active or passive voice, comes from the form tafʿīl, which often indicates gradualness. This is similar to the distinction between the revelation of the Qur’an as inzāl or tanzīl, with the difference being in its instantaneous or gradual nature.

Was the teaching of the Divine Names to Ādam (a.s.) done all at once or gradually? Although the apparent meaning of the verbal form (tafʿīl—i.e., taʿlīm) suggests gradualness, the context and apparent meaning of the situation indicate that it was instantaneous, to the extent that it overrides the apparent meaning of the verbal form. Of course, it is possible that the external manifestation of the Names occurred gradually. If we consider the scope of divine vicegerency to be expansive and include righteous human beings as recipients of this grace, and if we consider the knowledge of the Divine Names to be their share in a distributed, diversified, and apportioned manner, there would be no issue in accepting the gradualness of the teaching of the Names. However, what can be inferred from the dialogue between God and the angels, as well as from the divine teaching and Ādam’s learning, is that the teaching of the Names was instantaneous.

2) The Role of Knowledge of the Names in the Station of Vicegerency

The significance of the station of vicegerency is highlighted by the prostration of the angels and their submission to Ādam after they received the answer to their question and understood the secret of vicegerency. Among the Beautiful Names of God, the name ʿAlīm (All-Knowing) plays a pivotal role in the station of vicegerency. This is evident in how God, the Glorified, emphasizes knowledge in both His concise response to the angels—”Indeed I know what you do not know”—and in the detailed proof, where He highlights the teaching of the names. This implies that the perfect human possesses a quality essential for divine vicegerency that the angels lack: the knowledge of things unknown to them.

In essence, human vicegerency is fundamentally tied to knowledge, with the other Beautiful Names serving as the foundation or complement to this perfection. Even though all the names are identical to each other in the station of God’s Essence, any human who is more knowledgeable exemplifies divine vicegerency more fully.

It is important to note that not all knowledge serves as the criterion for vicegerency; rather, it is specifically the knowledge of the names that has this effect. For example, if a person excels as a geologist, biologist, or astronomer but lacks belief in monotheism and does not recognize the names of God, the All-Knowing, they have no share in vicegerency. A geologist, for instance, would partake in the station of vicegerency if they view the earth as a name of God, a sign of the Truth, and a manifestation of the Divine. Conversely, knowledge that focuses solely on the essence of the earth without acknowledging its connection to God does not only fail to make a person God’s vicegerent, but it also distances them from the sacred realm of God.

The Qur’an condemns materialistic scholars who, when confronted with divine messages brought by the messengers, were content with their own material knowledge and took pride in it, such as in medicine or geometry. They were satisfied with what they already possessed and ridiculed the divine signs: “But when their messengers brought them clear proofs, they [merely] rejoiced in the knowledge they [already] possessed, but they were enveloped by what they used to ridicule” (40:83). Regarding Qārūn, the Qur’an also highlights how his knowledge of economics led him to arrogance instead of gratitude, as he boasted, “I was only given it because of knowledge I have” (28:78).

This attitude reflects a subtle form of shirk (polytheism) that exists within many people, causing them to believe that their success and knowledge are solely due to their own efforts, “And most of them do not believe in God except while they associate others with Him” (12:106). They are unaware that this hidden shirk will eventually become apparent, emerging from within and entrapping them.(233)

Expressions like “God first, then you” are manifestations of this hidden shirk. These satanic expressions often surface during critical moments and significant tests, which occur once or twice a year, as the Qur’an mentions, “They are tried once or twice every year” (9:126). These trials reveal the underlying shirk and devour the individual, making them forget that all blessings are from God: “And whatever blessing you have is from God” (16:53). A true monotheist (muwaḥḥid) is one who acknowledges that neither they nor others are the source of blessings; all praise is due to God alone, as the prophets (a.s.) constantly proclaimed, “al-ḥamdu lillāhi rabbi l-ʿālamīn” (All praise is due to God, Lord of the worlds).

The fundamental role in divine vicegerency is anchored in knowledge, with the other names illuminated by the light of knowledge. This is why, when the angels mentioned glorification (tasbīḥ) and sanctification (taqdīs) during the creation of Ādam, God did not respond by highlighting that humans also engage in glorification and sanctification. Instead, He emphasized Ādam’s knowledge. Although God often praises prophets and other perfect human beings with active names such as glorifier (musabbiḥ), oft-returning to God (awwāb), penitent (munīb), and grateful (shakūr), these names were not mentioned in His discourse with the angels. This is because none of these names are on par with gnosis (maʿrifa) and knowledge.

The value and luster of all these active names, and the means by which they are attained, are rooted in knowledge. Similarly, the value of worship lies in knowledge and gnosis because the perfection of worship is achieved through sincerity (ikhlāṣ), which is, in turn, brought about by gnosis.

It has been said that “A single strike from ʿAlī is better than all the worship of the humans and the jinn”,(234) because the gnosis and sincerity of the Commander of the Faithful, ʿAlī (a.s.), were of the highest order. For the same reason, the ink of scholars is considered superior to the blood of martyrs, as the gnosis of scholars is greater, and consequently, their sincerity is greater. Worship is something that comes to an end because, with the conclusion of the world, which is the realm of obligation, the ruling of worship ceases, even though its effects endure. But gnosis has no end and no limit. The more one ascends in the degrees of witnessing (shuhūd), the more witnessed realities (mashhūd) are revealed to them, and in this respect, the encounter with God (liqāʾ Allāh) has no limit.

If someone desires their worship to have true value, they must strive for sincerity (ikhlāṣ) in it. To achieve sincerity, it is essential to seek knowledge (maʿrifa), for without knowledge, one may unknowingly be under the influence of Satan, believing themselves to be serving religion and society. However, through self-monitoring and self-accounting, it may become evident that due to a lack of knowledge or weakness in it, their actions have been driven by satanic motives. Distinguishing between sincere and insincere actions is impossible without deep knowledge.

To avoid being addressed like Satan with the command, “Get down from it! It is not for you to be arrogant therein. So get out; indeed, you are of the debased” (7:13), meaning to attain true servitude and humility, and to never feel independent of God Almighty, it is crucial to see ourselves as always indebted to His grace. We must understand the profound meaning of “And whatever you have of favor—it is from God” (16:53) in every aspect of our lives. This understanding can only be achieved through attaining divine knowledge and gnosis.

The path to honor is found in seeking the Honorable One. As stated in Sūrah Fāṭir, honor is attained through good words, sound beliefs, and true knowledge: “Whoever desires honor [through power]—then to God belongs all honor. To Him ascends good speech, and righteous work raises it” (35:10). According to this verse, sound knowledge leads the way, and righteous action drives the journey. If one seeks honor, they must progress with the guidance of good words—sound knowledge—and with the support of righteous actions that propel them forward.

The reason why God Almighty, in response to the angels, uses the knowledge and gnosis of the names as the proof of divine vicegerency is that all other practical attributes of God are encompassed within His knowledge. The value of glorification, sanctification, and worship is rooted in sincerity and servitude, which are realized through knowledge.

Thus, the secret of vicegerency lies in the knowledge of all names, realities, and gnosis—benefiting from divine knowledge and becoming a direct student of God.

Awareness of all the realities within the world of possibility is what sets the perfect human apart from the angels, thereby excluding them from the station of vicegerency. While the angels are adorned with divine glorification, sanctification, and possess attributes of transcendence and majesty, they lack the praiseworthy station and the attributes of immanence and beauty.

The perfect human, however, can both manifest divine beauty and seek out all the manifestations of God’s beauty that have reached the world of possibility, saying, “O God, I ask You by Your beauty in its entirety, and all Your beauty is beautiful.”(235) Similarly, the perfect human can also embody divine majesty, seeking out all the manifestations of God’s majesty, and saying, “O God, I ask You by Your majesty in its entirety, and all Your majesty is majestic.”(236) It is this perfect human who can serve as God’s vicegerent in both beauty and majesty, thereby attaining the praiseworthy station, as indicated in the verse: “Perhaps your Lord will raise you to a praiseworthy station” (17:79).

The vicegerent of God is entrusted with the management of the orderly system of existence. The creation of angels, the establishment of the cosmic order in six stages of evolution, the determination of sustenance through the four seasons, and the creation of jinn, animals, and other beings within the universe, all form a coherent system that can be regarded as an orderly institution. Yet, the identity of the manager that this coherent system requires did not occur to any being, whether angelic or otherwise. If the angels, with their exalted status, were unaware of this crucial matter, it is even more so for other beings.

The creation of the vast universe serves to establish the domain of the vicegerency of the perfect human being. The existence of other entities was neither desired nor is it intended in the divine plan of action. Consequently, when the perfect human being transitions from this worldly realm to the Hereafter, the world will also undergo transformation into the Hereafter. Should another world come into existence, it too will require a vicegerent to oversee it. Ultimately, the only straight path to existential perfection is the path that aligns with God’s vicegerent, the perfect human being. Even angels, if they seek to attain existential perfection, must adopt the fundamental principles of humanity, as beautifully articulated by Ḥāfiẓ in his poetic verse:

“O angel reciting tasbīḥ at the door of the tavern of love,

For therein they ferment the clay of Ādam.

Last night I saw the angels beating on the door of the tavern,

The people of Ādam became intoxicated and took to the cup.”

The vicegerent of God (khalīfat Allāh) is the one who is truly aware of all the realities of the world or possesses the capacity to be informed of them. This individual is the manifestation of all the beauties and majesties that have emanated from God within the realm of possibility or possesses the potential for them. In essence, the vicegerent is the concise manifestation of divine beauty and majesty, whereas the world—of which the perfect human being is a part—is the detailed manifestation of all beauty, majesty, and the divine names.

The vicegerent of God is the perfect human being who not only educates individuals and imparts knowledge that they could never acquire on their own—”and he teaches you that which you did not know” (2:151)—but also serves as the teacher of angels, instructing them in matters beyond their understanding, which they could not grasp without his guidance.

This vicegerent is the distinguisher (fārūq) between truth and falsehood, the separator of beauty from ugliness, embodying the divine command that separates the impure from the pure: “that God may separate the impure from the pure” (8:37). Had the perfect human being and vicegerent of God not manifested in the form of Ādam (a.s.), and had the divine test in paradise not occurred, the distinction between truth and falsehood would have remained unclear. The angels’ true nature and Satan’s falsehood—who had concealed himself among the angels—would not have been revealed. The angels realized that their existence was not fully capable of achieving complete union, and they must seek assistance from the cup of Ādam. In this journey, the inhabitants of the celestial sanctuary of purity and chastity become fellow travelers with the earth-dwelling human, as expressed in the following composition by Ḥāfiẓ:(237)

“In pre-eternity, a ray of your beauty breathed from the theophany

Love appeared and set the entire world aflame

Your countenance displayed a glimpse, the angel of love saw it and could not bear it

It became the essence of fire out of this jealousy and struck Ādam.”

This verse poetically reflects the profound impact of divine beauty and love on the cosmos, suggesting that even the angels, with all their purity and sanctity, could not withstand the intensity of this divine manifestation. The jealousy that arose from this divine love ultimately led to a transformation, striking Ādam and symbolizing the profound effect of divine love and beauty on creation.

All of this is due to the fact that the angels, who are only manifestations of God’s transcendent names (asmāʾ tanzīhī), cannot be the locus of manifestation for God’s all-encompassing name. However, Ādam, meaning God’s vicegerent (khalīfat Allāh) and the perfect human being (insān al-kāmil), since he combines transcendence (tanzīh) and immanence (tashbīh), can be the perfect locus of manifestation for all of His names. That is why he says again:

“The angel does not know what love is, O cupbearer! Seek the cup and pour rosewater on Ādam’s dust.”

Note:

a) Knowledge and power are the central elements of divine vicegerency. This is because one who is not aware of the realities cannot manage and employ them in a timely and appropriate manner. Similarly, if someone is aware of them but lacks the ability to employ them, he will not have a share in the vicegerency of management. God introduces Himself as the one who has made man His vicegerent on earth: “and has made you vicegerent therein” (11:61). Therefore, man must first be aware of the realities of the world, which are manifestations of God’s beautiful names, and second, have the ability to manage them.

Those who have not engaged with religious teachings are outside the house of divine knowledge. Those who have engaged with them but have not found all the affirmative principles of the faith through pure proof are in the entrance way of the house of religious knowledge but are not yet fully acquainted with the master of the house. He considers those who have excelled in this knowledge and have gathered all the necessary proofs to be fully acquainted with the master of the house, and he considers the pinnacle of such knowledge, companionship, and acquaintance to be the share of the prophets, with the lower degrees of it belonging to their true followers and the sages. Just as the prophets also have different ranks—some of them have observed their Lord from afar, as he said, “From afar, the Lord appears to me,” and some of them have witnessed their Lord from near—he says that one who does not have a realization in the knowledge of God, but rather utters the name of God based on imitation or imaginary perception, is, in his view, outside the house of knowledge and far from it.

In the course of the vicegerency, only human knowledge of the names was mentioned, with no reference to power. This brevity is either due to the clarity of human capability—otherwise, the angels would have said, “Would you appoint the incapable as your vicegerent to manage the world?!”—or it is because one of the characteristics of knowledge of the divine names is attaining power; meaning that this knowledge inherently leads to the acquisition of capability.

b) The group that considered the meaning of teaching the names to be informing about the meanings of words and vocabulary have elevated lexicology to such a degree that they considered it the most important knowledge after the knowledge of tawḥīd (divine unity). They argued that the most deserving knowledge to learn after tawḥīd is lexicology because God declared Ādam’s virtue in his knowledge of language,(238) and it was through this that the angels became aware of Ādam’s superiority.

This inference is subject to criticism from several aspects. Firstly, it is rationally proven that the advantage of any knowledge is either due to the superiority of its subject and object or its method and manner of reasoning. The knowledge of philosophy and theology, both in terms of the nobility of their subject and object and in terms of the reliability of proof regarding their issues, has a distinct advantage. Mathematical knowledge, apart from its scientific usefulness in the realm of nature, is also superior in terms of the reliability of proof. However, the knowledge of literature, lexicology, and the like, which is only concerned with the examination of words and their conventional meanings, neither possesses the sanctity of subject and object nor shares in the reliability of proof. It can never be distinguished above sciences that have such sanctity or reliability, nor can it have an advantage over them.

Secondly, from the perspective of verbal inference, it has been established that in terms of the appropriateness of the ruling and its subject matter, the criterion for divine vicegerency and the basis for the superiority of the perfect human over the angels is knowledge that possesses both the sanctity of the known and the reliability of proof.

3) The Main Foundation of the Perfections of the Perfect Human

The attributes and characteristics that were established for Ādam (the perfect human) can be categorized into two aspects: some are positive, such as being God’s vicegerent, becoming a teacher of the angels, being prostrated to by them, becoming a direct student of God, hearing God’s speech, and witnessing the divine beauty with the eye of the heart. Others have a negative aspect, such as being subjected to the enmity of Satan, being envied by others, and being commanded to seek refuge and repel Satan.

It seems that these multiple attributes are not parallel to each other but rather are aligned with one another, rooted in the sublime station of divine vicegerency. Since the main reason for God’s vicegerency is knowledge and the beautiful names of God, and since God’s names are aligned with one another rather than parallel, what makes the perfect human a comprehensive being, an absolute and general vicegerent of God, is the knowledge of the greatest name (al-ism al-aʿẓam) and becoming the manifestation of that supreme name. Therefore, the main foundation of all these perfections should be considered to be the manifestation of that greatest name.

Since Satan, apart from his inauspicious arrogance towards Ādam, has fallen into ominous arrogance towards God the Glorified, he has sought to show enmity towards God (in the realm of manifestation and action). And since the vicegerent of God is His complete manifestation, Iblīs, who is the enemy of God, will also be the clear enemy of His vicegerent.

The Holy Qur’an considers a group to be the enemy of God and the enemy of God’s friends, as it states: “My enemy and his enemy will seize him” (20:39); Pharaoh is My enemy and the enemy of Mūsā (a.s.). “O you who believe! Do not take My enemies and your enemies as friends” (60:1), “To frighten thereby the enemy of God and your enemy” (8:60), “Whoever is an enemy to God and His angels and His messengers...” (2:98). The meaning of enmity with God is enmity with His religion, and the meaning of enmity with God’s friends is enmity due to their propagation, teaching, and religious realization. The source of all enmities of the disbelievers, hypocrites, and obstinate ones is also the temptation of Iblīs. Therefore, the most dangerous enemy of man is Satan: “Indeed Satan is an open enemy to man” (12:5).

4) Analysis of the Knowledge of Names and its Impact

With the analysis presented about the knowledge of names and the impact of knowing them, it becomes clear that what has been mentioned in some exegeses of the Qur’an, despite enjoying some merits, is not without flaws. For example, some have said:

The general wording implies that whatever names there were, God taught Ādam; both the names of the Creator and the names of the creatures. Thus, Ādam became distinguished from the angels by knowing the names of the creatures, and his superiority over them became evident. His knowledge of the names of his Creator was a secret between him and the Truth, which the angels had no knowledge of. Therefore, the fruit of knowing the names of the creatures for Ādam was that he became the one to whom the angels prostrated, and the fruit of knowing the Creator was that he reached the witnessing of the Truth and heard the speech of the Truth.(239)

The weakness of such a restriction on the meaning of the verse lies in the fact that neither a rational proof nor a transmitted proof has been presented for the impact of the knowledge of the names of the creatures on being prostrated to, and there is also no clear appropriateness for such a specification.

4) The Special Existence of Knowledge of the Divine Names

The reality of knowledge has its own special existence, distinct from the acts of teaching and learning, just as the reality of motion has a special mode of existence separate from causing motion and being moved. Just as it would be incorrect to imagine the negation of the special existence of motion—thinking that, in relation to the agent and mover, motion is identical to causing motion, and in relation to the recipient and the moved, it is identical to being moved—it is also incorrect to imagine that knowledge, in relation to the teacher, is identical to teaching, and in relation to the learner, is identical to learning. Rather, knowledge has a reality completely separate from teaching and learning, just as motion has a reality completely separate from causing motion and being moved, even though they are found together.

Since the reality of knowledge is different from teaching, it is possible for that reality to have existed previously and for the teacher to transmit that existing reality to the learner. It is also possible for that reality to be found together with teaching and learning. The knowledge of the divine names has a reality that existed beforehand, and Ādam (the perfect human being) later learned it from his true teacher, God the Glorified. However, the knowledge of literary and linguistic names and terms of things came into existence together with the teaching of the first human being. It was not the case that the knowledge of literature and language existed previously and then the first human being, whoever that may have been, became aware of it. This is because such conventional and nominal knowledge is found together with the human being who necessarily has a nominal existence and makes use of it. Of course, for later generations, teaching such knowledge while preserving its existential precedence is possible without any problem, but for the first human being, the realization of such knowledge occurred simultaneously with teaching and learning.

5) The Absolute Vicegerent of God, the Absolute Manifestation of the Names

The criterion for vicegerency is not merely the knowledge of the Names, but the knowledge of all the Names; meaning that the vicegerency mentioned in the verse under discussion is the manifestation of all attributes, each maintained at its respective level.

It is important to note that the vicegerent of God is the manifestation of all the Names that have been revealed and have emerged from the absolute hidden treasure and the absolute unseen. However, matters that remain in the unseen of the Essence, those exclusive Names that have not been and will never be manifested—meaning they are part of the innermost Essence of God and have not and will not appear in the world of contingency—are beyond the capability of the perfect human being to manifest.

The vicegerent of God, who is the absolute encompasser, the knower of all things, who has power over all things, and who is the ever-living, who never dies, must possess these attributes. Otherwise, within the limits of ignorance, weakness, and absence, there is no trace of divine vicegerency to that extent.

For this reason, the angels are not fit to be God’s vicegerents, as they are manifestations of only some of the divine Names, not all. In other words, they cannot be the absolute and unmediated vicegerents of God. Rather, to the extent of their manifestation in relation to the Names, they are limited and mediated vicegerents of God. This means they are vicegerents of the vicegerent of God, and this statement holds true for other pious human beings who have manifested some of the Names. That is, their vicegerency is mediated and under the cover of the vicegerency of the perfect human being. All of them, including the angels, are under the dominion and encompassment of the perfect human being and are guests at his table. All of them subsist by the grace and blessing of the perfect human being, and all the heavens and earth are stable and established by the existence of the absolute vicegerent of God: “By his grace, sustenance is provided to the creatures, and by his existence, the earth and the heavens are established.”(240)

It may be said that after Ādam informed the angels, they too became aware of all the names. So why did they not attain the status of absolute vicegerency?

The answer is that, firstly, informing (inbāʾ) means reporting and is different from teaching (taʿlīm). Therefore, even after Ādam informed them, the angels still acknowledged their ignorance.

Secondly, even if we assume that they became knowledgeable through Ādam’s report, their knowledge is mediated and not direct (ladunnī), which differs from Ādam’s knowledge, which is direct (from ladun, meaning the divine presence) and unmediated. Such knowledge cannot be the criterion for unmediated vicegerency, because the criterion for unmediated vicegerency is unmediated knowledge.

It may also be asked why the perfect human became the manifestation of all attributes and consequently attained absolute vicegerency, while the angels manifested only some of the attributes, making their vicegerency limited. If they too had been created from the beginning as manifestations of all attributes, they would have been worthy of absolute vicegerency.

The answer is that the system of the universe operates on the principle of cause and effect, as described in the terminology of philosophers, and on the system of more complete (atamm) and complete (tāmm) manifestation (tajallī) in the terminology of the mystics. Either the angels had to be the more complete manifestation and the manifest (ẓāhir) or the first emanation (ṣādir-i awwal), and the human being the complete manifestation and the caused (maʿlūl) and manifest, or second emanation—or vice versa. But God’s will was attached to the opposite of that.

God’s will has ordained that the perfect human being should possess sense perception, imagination, estimation, and intellect, thereby benefiting from all manifestations of knowledge and action. As a result, they have the ability to understand all things and can be the unmediated student of God, the Glorified. However, the angels do not possess faculties at the level of estimation, imagination, and sensation in terms of knowledge, nor do they have abilities such as desire and anger in terms of action. Their knowledge and power are identical to each other and are confined within a closed domain at the level of intellectual abstraction. Other beings, like the angels, are also subject to the law that “There is none among us but has a known station” (37:164), possessing a portion of the divine secrets and names that have been manifested in the world of creation.

God’s will has further ordained that earthly and heavenly beings are either immaterial or material. Material beings do not engage in intellectual and immaterial activities, while immaterial beings do not engage in sensory and material activities. However, the being that is present in the realm of nature and performs natural work, is also present in the realm of the imaginal world (ʿālam al-mithāl) and the intermediate realm (barzakh) and undertakes the work of these realms. This being is also present in the realm of the intellect, carrying out the work of completely immaterial beings—the perfect human being.

Only the perfect human being is addressed as: “O man! Verily you are ever toiling on towards your Lord—painfully toiling—but you shall meet Him” (84:6). This signifies that, O man, you began from a state of “You were not a thing” (19:9), then you became a sperm-drop and a clot until you emerged as “Verily you are ever toiling...” This means you are a being with one end tied to the natural world and the other end tied to meeting God, without a defined limit or a known station. Such a being, in the state of perfection, can be the manifestation of all the active names of God the Glorified. In other words, what appears in the world of creation in terms of creation, contraction, expansion, healing, giving life, causing death, and the like (which are derived from the station of God’s action and are contingent, not necessary) requires a manifestation, which is the vicegerent of God and the perfect human being.

Imām al-Ṣādiq (a.s.) said regarding the verse “And to God belong the most beautiful names,”(241) that such a perfect human being has the two corners of the world under his feet. One end of him is tied to the earth: “I am creating a human being from clay” (38:71), and the other end is tied to the special meeting mentioned in the verse “O reassured soul!...” (89:27). This means that he is a being who, while present in the material world, maintaining all the faculties related to material knowledge and controlling it, can also ascend to the stage of the reassured soul and go beyond it.

It is this perfect human being who can be the bearer of the trust of the divine names. The Noble Qur’an sometimes states: We presented the names and realities to the angels, but they were unable to bear them. And sometimes it states: We presented the trust to the heavens and the earth (which, by the context of its contrast with humans, includes the beings of the world except humans), and they refused to bear it. One who can be God’s vicegerent is one who is both the bearer of the names presented to the angels and the bearer of the trust that was presented to the heavens and the earth. Of course, it is possible that this trust is a part of those very names and realities.

6) The Deprivation of the Wretched from Divine Vicegerency

If the attributes of human beings such as freedom, independence, equality, and fraternity are established for the wretched, it is due to the innate dignity of the human being. And if any honor is established for them, it is due to their divine vicegerency. If any vicegerency is registered for them, it is due to their knowledge of the beautiful names of God, the Glorious.

As previously mentioned, vicegerency, like prophethood, messengership, wilāya, and imāma, is subject to gradation. However, what encompasses all of them is true knowledge of the divine names and righteous deeds within the domain of vicegerency. God, the Glorious, has made the development of the earth a part of the mission of His vicegerent, stating: “...and settled you therein” (11:61). Just as the development of places of worship is carried out by the believer in the beginning and end of the world: “The mosques of God are only to be maintained by those who believe in God and the Last Day” (9:18), the development of the earth in various dimensions—economic, cultural, environmental, health, etc.—is carried out by the divine vicegerent.

The group that is considered human in terms of statistics and numbers, but are not human in terms of conduct and tradition, will not have a share in the actual vicegerency of God. The angels initially avoided the plan of divine vicegerency, considering it to be corrupting and bloodthirsty: “Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood?”

And God implicitly deprived that group of the lofty station of vicegerency, and in other instances, He stated their painful rulings and conditions in such a way that there would be no share of the actual divine vicegerency for such a corrupt, corrupting, and bloodthirsty group. God has censured a group and said about them: “And when he goes away, he strives throughout the land to cause corruption therein and destroy crops and animals” (2:205). He also says: “Slaughtering your sons and keeping your women alive” (14:6). And “they kill the prophets without right” ( 3:21). “Indeed, when kings enter a city, they ruin it and render the honored of its people humbled. And thus do they do” (27:34).

Regarding a group deprived of the grace of divine unity (tawḥīd) and the success of servitude, He says: “Indeed, those who disbelieved and died while they were disbelievers—upon them will be the curse of God and the angels and the people, all together” (2:161).

This same bloodthirsty group that prided themselves on corruption is seized by the striking of the angels at the time of death: “...striking their faces and their backs...” (47:27). And at the stage of retribution in the Hereafter, they are also seized and shackled by the angels: “Seize him and shackle him. Then into Hellfire drive him. Then into a chain whose length is seventy cubits insert him” (69:30-32).

There are many verses that mention the vices and reprehensible actions of this group and recount their bitter consequences. What is intended here is that the vicegerent of God is the one to whom the angels prostrate, and the group that is cursed, struck, seized, and shackled by the angels will never be the ones to whom prostration is made. The result is that just as the divine message does not reach everyone and God knows where to place His message: “God knows best where to place His message” (6:124), the same is true for divine guardianship, Imāmate, and vicegerency; because each of these positions is a divine covenant, and the divine covenant does not reach the wrongdoers and the polytheists: “He said, ‘My covenant does not extend to the wrongdoers’” (2:124), and God disassociates Himself from them: “that God and His Apostle are free from [any obligation to] the polytheists.” (9:3). How is it possible for the One who is being represented (mustakhlaf ʿanhu) to appoint someone from whom He disassociates Himself as His vicegerent? And while He announces that His relationship with him is severed: “And indeed, the disbelievers have no guardian” (47:11). He announces that he is under His special guardianship.

In other words, it is as if God, in response to the angels who raised the issue of Ādam’s corruption and bloodshed on the one hand, and their own glorification and sanctification on the other, points out two things: First, that those who are prone to corruption and bloodshed have no share in My vicegerency and covenant, and second, that in the divine vicegerency, a knowledge superior to glorification and sanctification is necessary, and that special knowledge is not present in you angels.

7) Various Rulings on the Ranks of the Perfect Human Being

It was mentioned that the perfect human being is the teacher of the angels, and divine grace reaches the world of possibility through the channel of the perfect human being. This does not contradict the fact that the angels are the channels of grace for all human beings, including the perfect human being. Just as all human beings, even the perfect human being, receive life from Isrāfīl, knowledge from Jibrāʾīl, and sustenance from Mīkāʾīl, or these three from other angels under their management. This is because the perfect human being’s role as the channel of grace pertains to the lofty stage of the perfect human being, which is the highest level of the world in relation to the realities of the world and the one to whom the angels prostrate. The angels’ role as the channel of grace pertains to the intermediate or lower ranks of the perfect human being, who is earthly in the sense of “Say, ‘I am only a human being like you’” (18:110).

From the perspective that the perfect human being “eats food and walks in the markets” (25:7) like other human beings, he is under the management of the angels. However, from the perspective that he is the direct student of God and knowledgeable of all the realities of the world of possibility, he is the intermediary of grace in everything, even in revelation. That is, even divine revelation, before reaching the angels, reaches the lofty stage of the perfect human being, and then by virtue of that supreme stage, it descends upon the angels.

8) The Levels of Vicegerency based on the Levels of Knowledge of the Names

With the clarification of the axis of divine vicegerency, meaning knowledge of the Names, the levels of God’s vicegerency also become apparent. Just as knowledge of the Names, in the sense that was discussed, has levels, divine vicegerency also has levels, where each higher level overshadows its lower level. Although the referent denoted in the verse is the absolute vicegerent, meaning the perfect human being, the perfect human being who has knowledge of all the Names is the vicegerent of God (khalīfat Allāh), and others who have less knowledge of the Names are vicegerents of the vicegerent of God. Therefore, it is mentioned in a ḥadīth that the noble Messenger of Islam (s.a.w.) said three times: “O God, have mercy on my successors (khulafāʾī).” It was asked: “Who are your successors?” He said: “Those who come after me and carry my ḥadīths and sunnah and then convey them to the people after me.”(242)

From this statement, it becomes clear that the Messenger of God is the vicegerent of God, and the scholars from his ummah are vicegerents of the vicegerent (khalīfat al-khalīfah), and in other words, they are vicegerents of God with intermediaries. Lesser knowledge, or in other words, knowledge with intermediaries, is the criterion for vicegerency with intermediaries, meaning the criterion for vicegerency from the vicegerent of God, just as it is also the criterion for inheriting from the vicegerent of God.

Therefore, it is stated in another narration: “The scholars are the inheritors of the prophets”;(243) meaning that inheritance, like succession (khilāfa), requires a connection without which it will not be realized. In inheritance, one owner replaces another owner (unlike in a sale where one property replaces another property), whether the inherited item is wealth and something material, or knowledge and other spiritual matters. The connection that causes this substitution and leads to the heir taking the place of the inherited or the manifestation of the inherited in the heir, according to the aforementioned ḥadīth, is knowledge, an important part of which is the knowledge of the names (_ʿilm al-_asmāʾ).

In any case, becoming the successor (khalīfa) of the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) and inheriting from him—meaning a succession and inheritance that accompanies the successor and inheritor in all three realms of this world, the intermediate realm (barzakh), and the Hereafter—requires that such a successor be endowed with deep knowledge and true gnosis (maʿrifa).

9) Characteristics and Attributes of the Names

From what has been said about the names discussed in the verse, the following characteristics can be deduced:

a) The true possessor of these names is God, meaning the intended names are the names of God, not the names of the world. The difference between the names of God and the names of the world is the same as the difference between creation and existence. These names, from the aspect of creation, are the names of God, and from the aspect of existence, are the names of the earth and the heavens. In other words, from the aspect of granting grace and bestowal, they are the names of God, and from the perspective of receiving, they are the names of man and angel. This does not mean that there are two separate realities, one called the names of the world and the other called the names of God. Rather, when the names of God manifest, their manifestation is the names and realities of the world. So, the realities of the world are the manifested divine names.

b) Based on the evidence of what comes in the following verses, where God, after the angels’ inability to report the names became clear, said: “Did I not tell you that I know the unseen of the heavens and the earth?” These names are related to the world of the unseen, not the seen. Because the unity of the context of these verses, as mentioned before, necessitates that this unseen is the same as “what you do not know” at the end of the previous verse and the same names taught in the verse under discussion. The conclusion is that the presented names constitute the unseen and the inner reality of the heavens and the earth (considering the possessive case of the addition of “unseen”).

Of course, this unseen of the heavens and the earth also includes the stage of the seen, because the world of the seen and all the heavens and the earth are the descended form of that same unseen. As it is said, “whoever has a hundred, also has ninety with them.”(244)

c) Considering the connection established between the verse under discussion and the two verses “And with Him are the keys of the unseen...” (6:56) and “And there is not a thing but that with Us are its depositories” (15:21), which Allamah Tabatabai (may his soul be sanctified) has also pointed out,(245) it may be said that the “names” in the verse under discussion are the same as the “keys of the unseen” and the same as the “depositories.” Due to their being with God (ʿindallāhī), firstly, they do not perish or come to an end; secondly, they are the collective existence of all the realities of this realm; and thirdly, by descending to this realm, they take on limits, boundaries, and multiplicity.

It may be the “likeness” (timthāl) referred to in the narration of Imām Sajjad (a.s.): “Indeed, in the Throne is the likeness of all that God has created of the land and the sea, and this is the interpretation of His saying, ‘And there is not a thing but that with Us are its depositories.’”(246) And it is that which only the perfect and godly human beings have knowledge of. That is why the Commander of the Faithful Ali (a.s.) said: “By God, if I wished to inform each of you of his outcome, his entrance, and all of his affairs, I could do so...”(247)

Of course, it is possible that the friends of God (awliyāʾ Allāh), in accordance with the various degrees they possess, may gain knowledge of some of the degrees of the unseen and some of the unseen depositories. Just as the angels who manage the affairs (mudabbirāt al-amr) are aware of some of the keys and depositories of the unseen. But the one who is aware of all the depositories and keys is the perfect human being, because he is the first emanation (ṣādir al-awwal), the first grace (fayḍ), and the first determination (taʿayyun) of God. It is not possible for something to exist in the realm of contingency and be counted among contingent creatures, yet not fall under the encompassing knowledge of the first emanation.

In other words, the Divine Names that were taught to Ādam and presented to the angels are, in one sense, of three types: the realities of the angels themselves, the realities below them, and the realities above them. What had been taught to the angels before was of the first two types; meaning they were unaware of the third type, which was higher than their level of existence. Therefore, their glorification and sanctification were also in relation to these two known types, and they had no glorification or sanctification for the third type of which they were unaware, except after learning about it and being taught by Ādam (a.s.). Of course, that too was to the extent of being informed and made aware through an intermediary, while what was taught to Ādam and to the Perfect Man in general was all the aforementioned threefold realities. The glorification and sanctification of the Perfect Man in relation to the third type is higher than the sanctification and glorification of the angels in relation to it, because the value of sanctification and glorification is proportional to the level of knowledge and gnosis, and the direct knowledge and gnosis of the teacher is superior to the indirect knowledge and gnosis of the student.

d) As mentioned before, what is meant by these Names are realities, not words and concepts, because the relationship between words and concepts is a conventional one, and in the Divine Presence there is no talk of assigning or determining the relationship between a word and its meaning, and concepts have no place there. This is because knowledge of concepts is acquired knowledge (ʿilm ḥuṣūlī), and in the pure immaterial realm, there is no acquired knowledge, conception, assent, or logical intelligible.

Conception, assent, proposition, and syllogism are at the level of the soul that governs the body, not at the level of the pure intellect that is free from governing the body. Based on this, meaning that the name is the reality, not the word, and it is witnessed, not conceptualized, and in the terminology of the people of gnosis, the name is the essence with a specific determination (which is also referred to as an attribute), this discussion has been raised as to whether the name is the same as the named or different from it. Otherwise, if what is meant by the name is the word or the concept, there is no place for this discussion as to whether the verbal name is the same as the named, or the mental concept is the same as the external instance or different from it. The answer that has been given, that the name is the same as the named in one aspect and different from it in another, is because the discussion is not about the word and the concept.

Therefore, in the supplication of Jawshan Ṣaghīr, it is stated: “I adjure You by the name that You placed upon the heaven and it was raised, and upon the earth and it became stable, and upon the mountains and they became firm, and upon the night and it became dark, and upon the day and it became bright; ‘I ask You by Your name which You placed upon the heaven and it was raised, and upon the earth and it became stable, and upon the mountains...’.” And in the supplication of Kumayl, it is also stated: “I adjure You by the names that have filled the foundations of all things; ‘And by Your names which have filled the foundations of all things’.”

e) The names of God are ordained, and what is meant by ordainment in wisdom and mysticism is that realities are ordained; that is, each name and each reality, according to the system of cause and effect discussed in philosophy and the system of the apparent and the manifestation discussed in mysticism, has a specific degree of existence or manifestation that it does not transgress, and all names, meaning realities and existents, are subject to the law that “each of us has a known station” (37:164), and each one is confined to its own specific station, except for a being that is the Greatest Name and the perfect manifestation of the names; that is, the Perfect Man, who is not ordained; meaning he does not have a specific place, known station, or limit, and can be present everywhere. Of course, this very meaning is the specific limit of man, in which neither negligence nor excess is permissible.

So the ordainment of names is in the sense that was mentioned (and on this basis, ordainment is not subject to specification), not ordainment in the sense that is discussed in theology and has entered jurisprudence from theological discussions, and its concern is with the word and concept, and it is asked whether it is permissible to apply a name (word) to God that has not been applied to Him in the Book and Sunnah or not? In response, it is said: firstly, there is no problem in applying to God a name that does not imply any conceptual deficiency. Secondly, what may be problematic is naming God, not describing Him; that is, as Muḥaqqiq Dāmād said, there is no prohibition in describing God with attributes such as the Cause of Causes (ʿillat al-ʿilal) and the Necessarily Existent (wājib al-wujūd), and what may be prohibited is naming God with names that have not been mentioned in the Book and Sunnah, but instead of the Cause of Causes, for example, the Causer of Causes (musabbib al-asbāb) has been used.(248)

f) The names of God are both blessed and abundant in goodness and blessings: “Blessed is the name of your Lord...” (55:78) And they are glorified and free from any flaw or deficiency: “Glorify the name of your Lord, the Most High” (87:1).

g) The names of God are out of reach for those who are not sincere, and only the sincere servants (ʿibād) of God are allowed to describe God with them: “Glory be to God, above what they describe, except for the sincere servants of God” (37:159-160); because they have attained a station and knowledge that enables them to describe God with His names in a way that does not harm the firm principle that “There is nothing like Him” (42:11), and this principle is manifested throughout the description. Apparently, this is the most important station that the Noble Qur’an has stated for the sincere servants; meaning it is even more prominent and higher than the description of their being sincere and not being within the reach of Satan’s whisperings, as well as the description of their immunity from being summoned for reckoning: “For they will surely be summoned, except for the sincere servants of God” (37:127-128).

It could be said that this statement implies that ordinary people cannot describe God with attributes such as the Cause of Causes or the Necessarily Existent, while the possibility of this was previously mentioned. It was also quoted from Qabasāt that assuming the names are tawqīfī (in the juristic sense), the impermissibility is limited to naming and does not extend to description.

This sage considers those who have not engaged in religious knowledge to be outside the house of divine knowledge. He regards the group that has engaged in it but has not found pure demonstrative proof in all the principles to have entered the vestibule of the house of religious knowledge, but not to be fully acquainted with the master of the house. As for those who have excelled in this knowledge and gathered all the necessary demonstrative proofs, he considers them to be fully acquainted with the sultan of the house. He believes the pinnacle of such knowledge, companionship, and acquaintance to be the share of the prophets, while the lower degrees are the lot of their true followers and the sages. Just as the prophets have different ranks, some of them have beheld their Lord from afar, as he said: “From afar, the Lord appeared to me,” while some of them have witnessed their Lord from near. He says: One who has no realization in the knowledge of God, but merely utters the name of God based on imitation or imaginary perception, is, in my view, outside the house of knowledge and far from it.

This issue is supported by the verse “Exalted is God above what they describe, Except the sincere servants of God” (37:159-160). This verse can be interpreted in the following way: First, based on the context, we should consider the disbelievers as the subject of “describe” (especially since the previous verses were about how the disbelievers described God as having daughters). Second, we should consider the exception “Except the sincere servants of God...” as an exception to “will be brought [for account]” in the previous verse, not as an exception to the subject of “describe.” As a result, the meaning of the verse becomes: The jinn know that they will be brought for reckoning on the Day of Judgment, except for the sincere servants of God who will enter Paradise without any reckoning. In addition, the verses “Indeed, they will surely be brought [for account], Except the sincere servants of God” (37:127-128) in the same chapter provide further evidence for this interpretation. Consequently, the sentence “Exalted is God above what they describe” is a parenthetical clause, and although this interpretation goes against the apparent meaning, the two aforementioned contextual clues override that apparent meaning.

The response to that, with some underlying and introductory principles established in their proper place, is this: First, just as the faith of most believers is mixed with subtle polytheism: “And most of them believe not in God without associating (others as partners) with Him!” (12:106), describing them is also like this. Second, since the sincere ones, as a result of drawing near through supererogatory acts, reach a point where God, in the station of active manifestation, becomes like their tongue: “And his tongue with which he speaks,”(249) so the sincere ones describe Him with the divine tongue, and such a description befits God, not that He is exalted above their description. Third, the focus of the current discussion is on description and describers, not on the words and concepts that are applied to God; meaning, one must discuss in two stations: one is with what word and concept can God be described, and the other is who is the describer and who describes God as He deserves.

Fourth, with the previous explanations, the meaning of the verse “Glory be to God, (High is He) above what they describe, save the servants of God, sincere and purified” became clear, and the connection of the exception is preserved, and the verse should not be interpreted contrary to its apparent meaning.

10) The Condition for Attaining the Names of God

As mentioned earlier, it is possible that the names under discussion are the same as the keys and treasuries of the unseen that are with God (ʿindallāh). Due to being with God, they are protected from decline and change. Therefore, the person who can attain these names is one who has become detached from time, motion, and change, and has attained an existence with God (ʿindallāhī). The perfect human being differs from other human beings who have reached a degree of detachment and proximity to God in that the perfect human being, due to the completeness of his detachment, has attained all the treasuries, keys, and names. In contrast, others have attained only some of these treasuries. This is because the word “treasuries” (khazāʾin), being plural, indicates the multiplicity of treasuries, and their plurality is hierarchical.

Therefore, there is room for gradational difference (tafāwut tashkīkī) among them.

11) Learning the Names to Soothe the Pain of Separation

Just as the ascent of a descending entity to the station of perfection brings joy through traversing stages, the descent of a lofty entity from the pinnacle of perfection due to gradual decline is accompanied by pain. However, this pain can sometimes bring with it abundant treasure—the nurturing of liberated souls, ensuring their ascension to the station of perfection, and the return of both the nurtured souls and the nurturer to the divine sacred realm.

This author considers those who have not delved into religious knowledge to be outside the house of divine knowledge. Those who have delved into it but have not attained pure proof in all principles are regarded as being in the vestibule of the house of religious knowledge, not yet fully acquainted with the master of the house. Those who have excelled in this knowledge and gathered all the necessary proofs are considered to be fully acquainted with the sultan of the house. The peak of such knowledge, companionship, and acquaintance is the share of the prophets, while the lower degrees belong to their true followers and the sages. Just as the prophets have different ranks—some have observed their Lord from afar, as the Prophet said, “From afar, the Lord appeared to me,” while others have witnessed their Lord from near—those without realization in the knowledge of God, who merely utter God’s name based on imitation or imaginary perception, are, to me, outside the house of knowledge and far from it.

The Noble Qur’an, which is described in the divine presence as ʿalī (exalted) and ḥakīm (wise), was revealed for the guidance of human societies. It traversed the degrees of the arc of descent one after another in a manner of manifestation, not separation, until it was poured into the cup of words, donned the garment of expressions, and was veiled in the guise of clear Arabic: “Indeed, We have made it an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand. And indeed it is, in the Mother of the Book with Us, exalted and full of wisdom” (43:3-4). This process allowed it to once again, in the arc of ascent, attain the presence of divine sanctity in the form of supplication and worship, each of which is an ascending Qur’an.

If it were possible to converse with the Qur’an and ask that descending light, “What feeling do you have of being separated from the divine presence and the realm of the Glorified God?” Perhaps it would answer, “I am sorrowful and grieved by the separation from the God whose speech I am, from the Speaker whose words I am, and from being far from my original abode, which is with God, the Glorified.”

According to this principle, although Ādam, who is God’s vicegerent, possesses a natural body, his true identity is defined by his supernatural spirit. This spirit has an honorific relation to God, the Glorified, and the nobility of this relation is the result of the illuminative attribute of the spirit of Ādam, who is the vicegerent of God. The verse “...So when I have proportioned him and breathed into him of My spirit...” (38:72) alludes to this. The descent of such a divine spirit and the separation from such a station of nearness and union is painful, although in the arc of ascent, after fulfilling the covenant and carrying out the duty of prophethood, messengership, nurturing, and guiding the community, it returns to its former exalted station.

What can mitigate some of the anguish of separation, serve as a remedy for the sickness of parting, evoke the sweet memory of union, and crystallize the original spark in its branches, is the very title of vicegerency (khilāfa). Through this title, the vicegerent (khalīfa) feels himself under the care of the One who appointed him (mustakhlaf ʿanhu) and recognizes his perceptive and motivational faculties as manifestations of Divine knowledge and practical success. Ādam’s engagement with vicegerency began with learning the Beautiful Names of God, and by acquiring knowledge of the Names of the One who appointed him, the title of vicegerency was established for him. By virtue of this divine vicegerency, he informed the angels and reported the Beautiful Names to them, subsequently becoming the object of their prostration—all of which carried the character of vicegerency. In reality, it was God who taught the angels and was the true object of their prostration, for every attribute established for the vicegerent originally belongs to the One who appointed him, except for those denoting deficiency, shortcoming, languor, and imperfection, which are His apophatic attributes. Thus, Ādam’s engagement in learning the Names, informing the angels, and becoming the object of their prostration, among other matters, were all meant to soothe the pain of his separation and to quell the blaze of his yearning for the beauty of the Divine Presence, as some have alluded to.(250)

It is crucial to understand that the gradual descent from the higher to the lower is painful when the descending being retains consciousness and thought but does not reach the stage of inanimate objects. At that final part of the arc of descent, there is no trace of the pain of separation because the suffering and sense of separation depend on the perception of the being. If a being lacks common perception and is unaware of the sweet past and the bitter future, it experiences neither longing for the past nor aversion to the future.

Depicting the separation of the vicegerent of God and portraying his suffering from being apart from the beauty of the One, based on the concept of the soul being spiritual in origination (rūḥāniyyat al-ḥudūth), aligns well with verses like “I breathed into him of My spirit” (38:72) and similar ones. This perspective is consistent with traditions that emphasize the precedence of souls over bodies. However, explaining this separation based on the soul being physical in origination (jismāniyyat al-ḥudūth), which is in harmony with verses like “Then We developed him into another creation” (23:14) and others like it, becomes challenging.

This difficulty can be addressed by considering that, according to verses of glorification (tasbīḥ)(251), praise (taḥmīd)(252), submission (islām)(253), prostration (sujūd)(254), obedience and desire,(255) every being knows God to the extent of its own realm of existence and is aware of the precedence and subsequence of its own affairs. This is why, for example, a stone may fall out of fear of God: “And indeed, there are some of them that fall down for fear of Allah” (2:74). When the human soul, at the end of the arc of descent, which occurs through manifestation (tajallī) and not alienation (tajāfī), is placed in the realm of inanimate matter, the essence of knowing God, witnessing the divine encounter, and similar experiences are instilled within him.

As he reaches the court of “Then We developed him into another creation” in the arc of ascent, his hidden longing and consciousness are stirred, bringing forth the suffering of separation. In this state, God Almighty keeps him occupied with purposes and instincts on one hand, and with forgetfulness, oblivion, and heedlessness on the other, so that he does not refrain from developing the natural world. This ensures that the restlessness of yearning for what is beyond nature does not lead to the ruin of the body or the destruction of the civilized world.

The point is that many topics related to vicegerency and discussions about the human soul are consistent with the soul being spiritual in origin. However, applying these concepts based on the soul being physical in origin requires deeper contemplation and the search for solutions.

12) Representation or Reality?

The question arises whether the teaching of the names to Ādam, the subsequent presentation of these names to the angels, the command for them to report the names to God, their inability to do so, and finally, the command for Ādam to report the names to the angels—all of which constitute the entire conversational process apparently taking place between God, the angels, and Ādam as described in these verses—actually occurred externally and were realized concretely, or if this narrative is merely a representation. By representation, we do not mean a mental story that has no real external correspondence and is presented merely as a symbolic tale, but rather a depiction of a reality in a visible form. This is akin to what is mentioned regarding the prostration of the angels and the refusal of Iblis. If neither the creative command to prostrate nor the legislative command for it can be correctly depicted, then it must be accepted that the command to prostrate is merely a portrayal of a reality, presented in the form of a parable.

To elaborate, the most exalted station in the realm of contingency is the station of humanity and divine vicegerency, before which the angels humble themselves, and Satan is the adversary of this station, striving to prevent ordinary humans from traversing the straight path altogether and to distract those who are advancing on this path from maintaining their speed and precedence. The Glorious God, in order to make this reality well understood to humans, presented it in the form of a parable, meaning He depicted it as the command to the angels and Iblis to prostrate before Ādam, the obedience of the angels, and the rebellion of Iblis against that command.

Now, the question is whether the story of vicegerency, the inquiry of the angels, the teaching of the names to Ādam, the conversation between God and the angels, and their learning from Ādam—was this also of the same nature?

Some contemporary exegetes, after considering two approaches for Muslims in understanding this story—one being the way of the predecessors (salaf), which emphasizes submission and delegation in such matters, and the other being the way of the successors (khalaf), which is based on interpretation (taʾwīl) and justification—emphatically declare that in matters related to God, His attributes, and the unseen realm, one must submit. In cases where our intellect is incapable of comprehending the reality, they suggest that one should entrust the matter to God, rather than resorting to denial merely due to lack of understanding. They state:

“I am on the way of the salaf. However, in cases where the apparent meaning of a transmitted text contradicts the definitive judgment of reason, one must abandon the apparent meaning and justify it, and in this, I am on the way of the khalaf.”(256)

After this clarification, which serves as a reconciliation between the two approaches of salaf and khalaf, and after presenting several points regarding the story of teaching the names and the discourse between God and the angels, they hold the view of allegory, in the same sense as previously mentioned, saying:

“It is God’s way to reveal spiritual matters in the form of verbal expressions and to explain intelligible concepts through sensible forms to make them more comprehensible. The story under discussion is of this kind, where God, through the expressions He has employed to explain it, has made known to us the value of the human being and his inherent potentials—potentials by virtue of which he has been distinguished from other creatures....”(257)

Let it be understood that representation and analogy have multiple meanings. Some of these are absolutely and universally true and correct, while others regarding divine revelation are absolutely and universally false and incorrect. There are also instances where they are true and correct to some extent but not entirely. Proving the truth and correctness of each one and distinguishing it from falsehood and error requires rational or transmitted evidence, the testimony of internal or external contextual evidence, the witness of the situation and the statement, the confirmation of the context, the appropriateness of the ruling and the subject, and similar considerations. These are the tools that aid the mujtahid exegete in distinguishing between permissible and impermissible analogies.

He considers a group of people who have not delved into religious knowledge to be outside the house of divine knowledge. Those who have delved into it but have not validated all the necessary premises through pure proof are regarded as having entered the vestibule of the house of religious knowledge, but not fully acquainted with the master of the house. Those who have excelled in this knowledge and have gathered all the necessary proofs are considered to be fully acquainted with the sultan of the house. He considers the pinnacle of such knowledge, companionship, and acquaintance to be the share of the prophets, while the lower degrees are the share of their true followers and the sages. Just as the prophets also have varying degrees—some have observed their Lord from afar, as he said, “From afar, the Lord appeared to me,” while others have witnessed their Lord from near.

He says: Someone who has no real knowledge of God, but merely utters God’s name based on imitation or imaginary perception, is, in my view, outside the house of knowledge and far from it.

In summary, what has been alluded to can be expressed as follows:

First: The verbal existence of the Noble Qur’an, which possesses a material melody, is the embodiment and manifestation of the imaginal existence of the Glorious Qur’an, which, in the realm of the kingdom (malakūt), possesses quantitative determination, free from matter and body. That imaginal existence is a representation of the intellectual existence of the Noble Qur’an, which, in the realm of the dominion (jabarūt), free from imaginal quantity, possesses intelligible determination. That intelligible existence is a manifestation of the knowledge-based existence of the Wise Qur’an from the essential knowledge of God, the Glorified, which has not been determined by any determination. This quadruplicity of the stages of the codified Qur’an is also present in the existential Qur’an and the book of creation. Representation (tamathul), or rather embodiment (tajassud) in this sense, is absolutely and universally true and veracious.

Second: Representation and symbolization in the sense of fabricated myths that neither have a true basis to be the source of value for their conventional rulings and legislative laws nor have an external correspondence to be the foundation for the truthfulness of the stories of the prophets and nations mentioned in them—similar to what is presented in the myths woven in the workshop of storytellers and the fabrications of the companions of evening conversations and drinking sessions—is absolutely and universally false and untrue.

Third: Representation for definition and understanding, which is used in the field of logic. To explain, representation (tamthīl) in the context of proof and assent in logic is the same as analogy (qiyās) in jurisprudence (fiqh) and principles of jurisprudence (uṣūl al-fiqh), which involves reasoning from the particular. Since such evidence does not provide certainty and, at most, yields conjecture—and the conjecture resulting from juristic analogy is not considered valid, as the Noble Qur’an has warned against invalid conjecture(258)—it is far from the realm of revelation and the sacred domain of the Wise Qur’an.

Representation in the context of definition and conceptualization is one of the ways to understand and illustrate a matter. To define a theoretical concept, either a complete or incomplete definition is used, or a complete or incomplete description, the conditions of which are explained in detail in logic, or representation is used. The benefit of this approach is to facilitate relative and general knowledge of something whose conception is theoretical. For example, in defining the soul, it is said: “The relation of the soul to the body is like the relation of the sultan to the city and the captain to the ship.”(259)

The message of this analogical definition is: Just as the governor is responsible for managing society, and just as the captain is responsible for the ship, attending to their management and repair and fulfilling their needs, the soul does the same for the body. Although this example is neither a definition of the soul nor a description of it, it aids in its relative understanding. Representation in this sense is used in the Noble Qur’an to explain certain scientific concepts.

The Glorious God has no aversion to the principle of representation nor to the smallness and insignificance of the example, as He said: “Indeed, God is not ashamed to present an example—even that of a mosquito or what is smaller than it.”(260) The Qur’anic parables (amthāl) in such cases are sometimes for praising the likened thing (mumathil)(261), sometimes for criticizing it,(262) and sometimes for showing the importance of the likened thing, such as: “If We had sent down this Qur’an upon a mountain, you would have seen it humbled and coming apart from fear of God. And these examples We present to the people that perhaps they will give thought” (59:21).

Fourth: The parables of the Qur’an are sometimes prefaced or followed by the word “parable” (mathal), and sometimes, according to the independent reasoning (ijtihād) of the exegete (mufassir), they are considered as such. There is no disagreement about what has been presented as a parable, but when it is without mentioning “parable” at the beginning or in the course of the matter, considering it as a parable requires reflection. The conversation and dialogue of God, the Glorious, with the heavens and the earth in commanding and obeying them: “Then He directed Himself to the heaven while it was smoke and said to it and to the earth, ‘Come [into being], willingly or by compulsion.’ They said, ‘We have come willingly’” (41:11) is of this kind; some have considered it a parable, while others have viewed it as a reality, though considering it as a reality (not a parable) is more appropriate.

Fifthly, what relates to the incident of the angels being commanded to prostrate and their obedience, and the rebellion of Satan, will be discussed in its appropriate place. However, it is necessary to note that interpreting the incident of teaching the names as a metaphor is only done when a literal interpretation is not possible; otherwise, the primacy of the literal meaning precludes a metaphorical interpretation. This is because a metaphorical interpretation requires additional consideration and leads to forced inferences, as words are coined for the essence of meanings, not for their molds, and the specifics of an instance do not define concepts.

It is possible to consider comprehensive meanings for the terms mentioned in this incident, such as teaching, name, presentation, speech, informing, etc., which would include the angels witnessing it directly, without requiring any figurative interpretation. In this case, no evidence is found for a metaphorical interpretation that would serve as a contextual indication to divert from the apparent meanings of the aforementioned terms and words, leading to a departure from the literal and an inclination towards the metaphorical.

Sixth, although the apparent meaning of some verses suggests the use of the method of analogy (tamthīl) in explaining concepts, and in those verses that outline the method of teaching the Qur’an, general terms are used that imply all heavenly matters are analogical. Their message is to use any kind of example (mathal) in necessary cases, not to rely on analogy in all instances. To explain, the verse “And We have certainly diversified for the people in this Qur’an from every [kind of] example” (17:89), and the verse “And We have certainly presented for the people in this Qur’an from every [kind of] example” (30:58), and other similar verses that include the general use of the analogical method, their generalization is related to the example, not the thing being compared to the example (mumaththal); meaning that the possible analogical method is used to explain the Qur’anic matter, not that all Qur’anic matters and all concepts of divine revelation are expressed in the form of analogy and have an example. Therefore, it is possible that some Qur’anic matters are without an example, and the analogical expression is not necessary to explain their concepts.

Note: The story of Ādam, from beginning to end, is accompanied by truth, and there is no metaphor, myth, legend, mirage, or the like in it. The main challenge lies in how to combine the elements of the story—some of which are natural, some supernatural, some with objective realization, and some formed with the meaning of analogy—requires thorough investigation so that the right of each element is presented in its specific context, and the boundary of analogy is not mistaken for the realm of determination.

Such a task is resolved through sincere contemplation, with examples woven into the Noble Qur’an.

13) The Station of the Divine Scholar

Regarding the virtue of seeking knowledge, it has been narrated that the angels spread their wings under the feet of those who seek divine sciences: “...and indeed the angels lower their wings out of contentment for the seeker of knowledge.”(263) If the seeker of knowledge has such a station, then the divine scholar, who possesses the divine beautiful names, is worthy of the angels prostrating to him and deserving of being God’s vicegerent.

Note: Fakhr al-Rāzī, on the occasion of teaching the names, has presented an extensive discussion on the virtue of knowledge. This discussion, from a specific perspective, is also mentioned in the Sadrian exegesis (tafsīr). If the esteemed Rāzī had not provided unnecessary elaboration, and if Ṣadr al-Mutaʾallihīn had not followed or accompanied him, the pages of exegesis and its noble art would have been protected from unhelpful expansion and would have paid more attention to its primary mission.

Much of Fakhr al-Rāzī’s exegetical content has been included in Ṣadr al-Mutaʾallihīn’s exegesis and has been examined from the specific perspective of transcendent philosophy (ḥikmat al-mutaʿāliya). Similarly, many of Imām Rāzī’s theological and philosophical points are mentioned in his philosophical works and have been thoroughly critiqued and analyzed from the perspective of transcendent philosophy.