International Mevlana Symposiuın Papers
,. Birleşmiş Minetler 2007 Eğitim, Bilim ve Kültür MevlAnA CelAleddin ROmi Kurumu 800. ~um Yıl Oönümü United Nations Educaöonal, Scientific and aoo:ı Anniversary of Cu/tura! Organlzatlon the Birth of Rumi
Symposium organization commitlee Prof. Dr. Mahmut Erol Kılıç (President) Celil Güngör Volume 3 Ekrem Işın Nuri Şimşekler Motto Project Publication Tugrul İnançer
Istanbul, June 20 ı O ISBN 978-605-61104-0-5
Editors Mahmut Erol Kılıç Celil Güngör Mustafa Çiçekler Katkıda bulunanlar Bülent Katkak Muttalip Görgülü Berrin Öztürk Nazan Özer Ayla İlker Mustafa İsmet Saraç Asude Alkaylı Turgut Nadir Aksu Gülay Öztürk Kipmen YusufKat Furkan Katkak Berat Yıldız Yücel Daglı Book design Ersu Pekin Graphic application Kemal Kara
Publishing Motto Project, 2007 Mtt İletişim ve Reklam Hizmetleri Şehit Muhtar Cad. Tan Apt. No: 13 1 13 Taksim 1 İstanbul Tel: (212) 250 12 02 Fax: (212) 250 12 64 www.mottoproject.com 8-12 Mayıs 2007 Bu kitap, tarihinde Kültür ve yayirı[email protected] Turizm Bakanlıgı himayesinde ve Başbakanlık Tamtma Fonu'nun katkılanyla İstanbul ve Konya'da Printing Mas Matbaacılık A.Ş. düzerılenen Uluslararası Mevhiııfı Sempozyumu bildirilerini içermektedir. Hamidiye Mahallesi, Soguksu Caddesi, No. 3 Kagıtlıane - İstanbul The autlıors are responsible for tlıe content of tlıe essays .. Tei. 0212 294 10 00 Shams and Mawlana: Who annihilated into whom?
Yanis Eshots 1 Latvia
--4..;; j~ )15':..::. );, .:/' J;, ; _,$'
-.41 j ~ .) 15':..::. j 1 ~ ~Lo j .5.:.:>-
1 ('952 J}:- '~ Jly.:J)
PERHAPS Rumi states most explicitly his understanding of annihi lation (fanl') in the third book of the Matlınaw'i, in the following lines:
~ ~j_;:J 04>-- _;:J J-1.9 d
~ ~j.):J Jl ~j_;:J :J y. JJ
J 1 ...:;_,\~ <.SÜı <.S j.) jl ~
.r ....;...,.:, J _;:J Jl ....;...,.:, J d~
y\;:;\ ..r.:, c! .ı.j~j J y.;
yL...... - _;:J ..L:;.~ ~ ..L:;. ~ ~
Soınebody said: "There. is no dervish in the world. And, if tlıere is a dervislı, that dervis/ı is non-existent. "2 He exists in respect of the subsistence of his essence, [But] his descriptioıı is annilıilated into the descriptioıı of [God's] "He", 3
1 Jalal al-DT n Rümi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams-i Tabrizi, ed. Bad i' al-Zaman Furüzanfarr, ghazal 952. 2 As Prof. Karim Zamani informed me during an informal conversation in Konya on 11 May 2007, it is thought that this verse belongs to Abu 'i-Hasan Kharaqani (d. 425/1 033]. 3 Cf. also:His Attributes have naughted my attributes; /He gives me both purity and Attributes. (Rümi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 1154. The English translation by W. C. Chittiı;k is taken from: W.C. Ch itti ek, The Sufi Path of Love: The Spiritual Teachings of Rumi, Albany, NY: SUNY Press 1983, p. 179.] 1162 Like the tongue of a candie bejare the sun Is non-existent, but is counted as [being] existent.4
The above quoted verses seem to allow us to treat the issue of annihilation in two different ways. The second bayt
_,ı d~ e..>lö.ı c.> ).J jl ~ Y' ~_,.):;)_,ı~_, d~
He exists in respect of the subsistence of his essence, [But] his description is annihilated into the description of [God's] "He"
refers to the classical Sufi teaching (favoured by Abü Hamid al-Ghazali: and Muhy al-Din Ibn al-'Arabi) of the mystic's "assuming the character traits of Go d" (takhalluq bi akhl_q Allah). In turn, the third one
y bT ._r.; t!' .ı..il;j 0 y.;
__, L-:- :;) .w.\., ~ .w.\., -.::...... -.j . .) . . -
Like the tongue of a candie bejare the sun Is non-existent, but is counted as [being] existent.
apparently, po in ts to the Illuminationist (Ishraqi) doctrine of tJ:ı.e analogkal gra dation of light (or existence) through intensity and weakness. I shall first address the issue of the mystic's assuruing the traits of Go d. The precondition for the assumption of the traits of Go d is the assumption of the tra its of the sp iritual tea ch er (shaykh), as far as he is a manifestation of the Perfect Man and an intermediary between the Real and the creation and has himself as 5 sumed the traits of the Real • Rumi' s annihilation into Shams-i Tabrizi, from this
4 Jalaluddin Rumi, The Mathnawi, books 1 - 6, ed. R. A. Nicholson, London: Luzac and Co, 1925- 1940, book 3, verses 3669- 3671. 5 As stated, for example, in the fallawing bayt: ..s_r:..ı "-'JJ•-".., ..ı,t.<-"' <;;-JJ .ı..::.t, .r .;_,u.., _,..ı_,.. -"' ~ Yanis Eshots Slıams and Maıvlaııa: Wlıo amıilıilated iııto ıvlıom? point ofview, needs to be treated as the former's assumption of the c:harac:ter tra its of the latter. Let us now ask, what Shams' main c:harac:ter traits were. Out wardly, they were his harshness and immense self-esteem, whic:h made it diffi c:ult to associate with him.6 Did Rumi inherit Shams' harshness? By no means. Perhaps, then, Shams pessessed some other - more hidden - c:harac:ter traits, whic:h were inherited by Rumi? We c:an, perhaps, point to his suspic:iousness and distrust (su' al-zann) - more of the Real than of any partic:ular human (or other) being - whic:h made him always to expec:t the worse. And, indeed, Rumi also hold that suspic:iousness is an essential attribute of Iover, sinc:e he must always beware of the c:unning of the Real (makr-i haqq). y t5:! ~ ..\.,.<' f yJ ı_}y ...:;:- .r<_. j y ~ )..1.;; "-; f 1.) \.;, ~ J-1 JLc. ..:....i b o...\;.:ı c.S J § ...:...,.....1 ..L;j ı)~ ...:;>- .r<_. tS" y ~ j ~lı f J Jl ..~;li ~ f 1.) y Do not be careless of the cwıning of the Real [eveıı] if thou experieııcest a h undred of lucks. Rub these eyes [of thine] if thou art c:ertain through a supposition, Bec:ause the Real's c:unning is so subtle that, through it, the eye of thy soul Shows thee [to thyself] [as] [a being] of the Throne, even if thou art [one] of the earth? c.S ..L:;. ı) Jfi ı.?\.;.:. _j. J .:ı J ı)\>.. J ~ j ı) y:; .r; c.SI ...:...,.....1 0\..S' .J.:ı ~ 0~ J-1 J ~ J-1 6 As it is well known, Rumi and Sultan Walad believed Shams' harshness to be a proof of his being the beloved (ma'shüq) and chosen one of God. Shams' harsh and unbearable character was interpreted as the radiance of the lig ht of God's magnifıcence (kibriyii1.) e.g.: ...,. yT ')l> J, ,.;lk.. .}~ .r" /'J y _.,_ .j_ ...... :.ıT .:.ıt,; _...... :.ıı.,.. jJ And, amongst the Sufis, to that beloved one/ The mystery of nan-delimited belavedness thou tought in seeret (Rumi, Kul/iyiit-i Shoms, ghazal 2362.) 7 Rumi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 2169. 1164 When thou hast given up [thy] intellect, soul and heart, This certainty and this evidence also pertain to [thy] suppositioıı, o [my] soıı!8 i_;;!\.; ) i_;;:. lı ~ J1 ...t.:S" ı_}.)'.).J ~ ~ ~ .ıS' ~./' o..L:; ı))Ü ~./' He is veiled from the intima te and non-intimate. When told: "Such and such a servaııt [of yours]", he says: "Amazing! Who is that?'>9 The last two verses He is veiled from the intimate and non-iııtimate. When told: "Such and such a servant [of yours]", he says: "Aınazing! Who is that?" refer to the issue of the Real's self-disclosure and the dialectics of i ts face and veils - an issue, which is dealt with in great detail by Ibn 'Arabi (as well as by some early Sufis, e.g. Niffari). However, unlike Ibn 'Arabi, Rılmi endows the Real with human attributes and believes the veiling of i ts fa ce to be a voluntary and intentional act, wherefore it is qualified as "cunning". But this is a typical feature of the so-called "School of Love", to treat the Real or the Absolute Reality as the Beloved and to deseribe the manifestations and self-disclosures of that non-delimited reality to the delimited reality of the mystic in terms of relationship between lover and beloved. What is perceived by the lover as the beloved's "cunning", howe;ver, is possibly per ceived as such due to lover's lack of experience and simplicity. However, In thy cunning teaching love many a simpletons have become crafty!10 In brief, suspicion and distrust towards beloved is experienced by all (or al most all) lovers. In Sufi mysticism, it apparently testifies to the narrowness of the 8 Rümi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 1082. 9 Rümi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 2568. 10 Rümi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 531. Yanis Eshots Slıams aııd Mawlaııa: WJıo amzilıilated iııto zvlıom? mystic's preparedness and his inability to perceive the etemal self-disdosure of the Beloved to its full extent. It can hardly be regarded as a peculiar dıaracter trait of Shams, inherited by Rı1rn1. Does this mean that there was no annihilation at all and that neither of them was, in any sense, annihilated into another? This seems unlikely as well. Sultan Wala d states in his Intihiiniime: ... the celebrated "uni.fied ones" Sought the men {of God] in every land. If seeking tlıem did not constitute the substance of the affair, Had the kings regarded this as a great honour to meet them? In spite of their ran k, [they were] always in the prayer, Asking God for a meeting with [His] man, In order to achieve a new union [ıvith God] by means of this, And to receive a new lig ht from His radiance, Because eaclı of them {the "unified one s" - Y.E.) had a differeııt kin d of union. The Just Judge does not give to eveıyone the same. The Real shoıvs its beauty in accordance ıvith everyone's worth, The union is given by the Real in congruence with the rank. God's friends or the "changed ones" perceive each other not as physical en tities and material bodies, but as rays, turned in different directions, and lights of different intensity, believes Sultan Walad: Radiant lights from that turbulent sea Come from the zenith of no direction, wave after ıva ve. ı ı All tlıese he-nesses (lı_ -h_j of creatures are His artefacts. His he-ness is the core and all the rest is [but] a peel. Not an artefact (san') wlıiclı is subject to corruption, [But] a subsisting artefact [made] of God's lights. He has artejacts beyand the two worlds, 11 Baha' al-Din Muhammad Sultan Walad, lntihiiniime, ed. M.A. Khaz_ned_rlu, Tehran: Ra~·izana 1376 S. H., verse 378. 1166 Wlıich are perpetually in move through His lights. The source of this lig ht is the soul of the saints, The locus of the Real's ıvitnessing are the gardens of [the souls o.fl the saints. 12 These lights of God perrnanently seek each other and flee from each other, mix with each other, repulse each other, unite and separate, merge and divide. The interaction which we observe in the world of material bodies is but a pale retleetion of the interaction in the world of meaning, i. e., the world of immate rial lights. From this standpoint, God's friends' search for each other can be tre ated as light's seeking anather (stronger and more intense) light. In other words, this is only one of the countless manifestations of the universallaw of the jour ney in God. It is not a saint's own choice to unremittingly seek for other saints - it is incumbent upon him, by virtue of his being light, to seek light. The lights of the saints differ from each other by intensity and weakness. The stronger and mo re intense liglıt, apparently, contains in itself the weaker one. Though the radiance of the sun consists of one lig ht, knoıv that Its rays {found] in this world are of dif.ferent kinds. Wlıen you go upıvards, the radiance is intense; The loıver and the upper radiance are never equal. The radiances of the sun are like ladders, Step by step leading from the earth to the heaven. Sultan Walad warns that, for God's friends of the lowest degrees, direct enco unter with the saints of the higlıest ranks is unbearable and extremely dangerous: The radiance ıvhich radiates from the proximity of the sun Will bunı thee immediately if it touches thee. Loıver [,though,] the radiance is not of that strength - [So,] look at the one, and see [in it] an infinite number. K now for su re that men 's union in lig h ts of God Is (i.e., can be explained - Y.E.) like this, o chieftain/13 12 Sultan Walad, lntihönöme, verses 947- 951. 13 Sultan Walad, lntihönöme, verses 693 - 698. Yanis Eshots Slıams and Mawlana: WJıo amzilıilated into wlıom? But w hat has this difference of lights by intensity and weakness to do with Rılmi and Shams? Can we assert that Rılmi's spiritual light, being of a lower in tensity, was annihilated into the light of Shams? What can be said, is that cer tain verses found in the Divan-e Shams, seem to testify to this: ~;).f 0y jl ~ JY lS~~ ~ ~ 0T y ..r., jl _,.j JY .;).;) .f y- ~ S-;lj J (..$\ o...l=,..... J d j y T ;) J) Jj ~~ }•~ ...:P u-i" t.ı...... ;, 0T Suddeııly dust ıvill rise from the other side of the erasiııg of aııııihilatioıı (mahıv-e fanii'), Wlıile thou hadst no idea about [the existeııce o.fl this ıvay beyoııd .. Thou ıvilt see sparks of lig ht among the dust And thy [oıvn] lig ht ıvill disappear in the radiaııce of those sparks. [Theıı,] ıvithout hesitatioıı, com e dow n from thy throııe and prostrate thyself [before this light], because This is the radiance of Shams al-Din, the King of the Chosen. 14 Thus, from a certain aspect, the relationship between Shams and Rılmi can be deseribed as relationship between the doruinating and dominated lights or exis tences, w hi ch presupposes a complete inclusion of the weaker and less intense light into the stronger and more intense one. Moreover, the weaker light/ existence can be treated as an illuminative relation (idiifa islıriiqiyya) 15 of the stronger one. The disappearance of the weaker light into the stronger one, however, can hardly be interpreted as its assuruing the character traits of the latter. Or can it? 14 Rumi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 155. 15 Cf. : The veils af lig ht pertain ta Gad's lig h ts./ When has been the Real (elevated be He!) separated from His lig h ts?! (Sultan Walad, lntihiiniime, verse 691.). 1168 --4..;; jl.; J~ J:ı ıY J:ı ; y? --4 T j\.ı J~ jl ..~s _;L.. j ..>.:.>- The dave of my Jıeart jlew to lı u nt dowıı a falcon. [Be] blessed the time, when she retunıs from the Jıuııt/ 16 What happened to the dove? Di d sh e assume the character traits of the fal con? I guess she was consumed by him, i.e., experienced the self-disclosure of falcon's essence, not that of his attributes. It seems that in the D!viin-i Shams and the Mathııawı Rumi talks ab out two different kinds of annihilation - annihilation of essence in the first case and an nilıilation of attributes in the second one. The lines from the third book of the Mathııawf, which I quoted in the beginning of my paper, apparently, deal with the second one. Presumably, this is just one difference of many that can be de tected between two major stages of the development of Rumi' s mystical doctri ne, to which pertain Dfviiıı-i Slıams and the MatJınawf. The bulk of the teachings of the Matlıııawf, it seems, represents a moderated and mitigated version of the set of more radical ideas, put forward in the Dfviin (or, at least, an attempt to mi tigate them). As w e have just seen, it was impossible to satisfactorily explain the character of a particillar spiritual affair (mur_d's annihilation into his mur_d) which took place at an earlier stage of Rı1mi's spiritual joumey by means of the interpretation of that affair (faııf'}, given in the Mathııawf. Altematively, using the distinction between two kin ds of joumeys offered by Sult~ Walad ("the jo 17 umey towards God" (sayr ilii Allah) and "the joumey in God" (sayr fi Alliih) ), we can perhaps assert that the Dfviin deals predominantly with the second, whi le the Mathnawf is mainly concemed with the first. Returning to the dave: after its annihilation into the falcon, in a way, it did become the falcon. What does it mean, to be a falcon? :ı..;; L.. ı..::..,...... :ı <.S y "-! :ı J-lı ..l;; Jl)_rı _;l.k.L ı..::..,..... <.S j\.ı Jl .s' :ı :ı _f J y>.-IJ yi 16 Rumi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 952. 17 .)\.!.; <.S- .:ıl..::..-..> J .ı,,.} .:;;?l 1 .:ıı.,.. .ı..;. .ı,, Jl _;,- .;,;1 J' Thejaurney tawards Gad appeared as the first ane; [Thejaurney] in Gad [appeared] as the last ane and it has na sign. (Sultan Walad, lntihönöme, verse 1518.) Yanis Eshots Slıams and Maıvlaııa: Wlıo amıilıilated into ıvlıom? Be silent and watc/ı the king, because thou art a white falcan - 11ıou art not a chattering nightingale that has spent her jorce in her dıatter. 18 ~\ ı)b _r v o~ j:.y.S ~ f ):> .:.ı~ _r. J ..::.....>.-->- .:.ı t.p.. ..,...W .:.ı Tjl ı... He will snap thousands ofjetters and jly to our ha nd. He will become "To Us they s hall retunı" (21 :93}, for lı e is a royal fal co n. 19 Apparently, it means to possess a high aspiration (himma) and ability to ke ep one's look permanently focussed on the Real (to "watch the king", whose fa vourite he is). 20 Even if the falcan leaves the king in order to seek foo d and, w hi le seeking it, falls into a trap, he is strong enough to snap the fetters that are put on him and to returu to his master. The dove that has been consumed by the falcan finds subsistence (baqii') in him and now treats herself as the falcon: I am a white falcan of my lord. W1ıat is an owl compared to me?P1 There is no doubt that, at certain stages of his spiritualjoumey, Rfuni felt him self being completely annihilated into Shams, after the apparent self-disclosure of the latter's essence to him (the essential self-disclosure is known to fully destroy its locus). But was it indeed an essential self-disclosure? And, ifyes, which Shams ilisc losed himself to Rfuni - or, in other words: w hat did Rumi m ean by Shams? In order to better explain the question, I shall have to briefly introduce a the ory of perception that belongs to a seventeenth century Iranian philosopher MulHi 18 Rumi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal1316. 19 Rümi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 2509, the English translation by Ch itti ek is taken from: Chittick, Sufi Path af Love, p. 303. 20 lt is not, therefore, surprising that several Sufıs, in particular qalandars (e. g., Rümi's contemporary Lal Shahbaz Qalandar (Uthman Marwandi) (d. 673/1274)), have been called "royal falcons". 21 Rumi, Kuiliyiit-i Shams, ghazal 1141. 1170 Sadra (1572- 1640). According to this theory, the extemal plıysical objects are not really perceived by the soul. However, they serve as preparatory devices for the soul, by means of which it creates in itself lurninous likenesses of these ob jects. These likenesses gradually increase in intensity, until eventually they beco me stronger than the objects perceived by sense perception. Then the soul can dis pense with the latter. Was the wondering darvish from Tabriz, who arrived in Konya on 23 October 1244, left it on 15 February 1246, was brought back by Sultan Walad on 8 May 1247 and finally disappeared on 5 December, the falcon, w hi ch consumed the dove of Rılmi's heart? Or was this Shams in flesh and blood a device for creation of anather Slıams - a lurninous likeness - in Rfuni's soul? The Shams whom we know from the Dfviin-i Shams and the one with whom we become acquainted in the Maqiiliit-i Shams are two quite different be ings. How can one establish this? Shams whom we meet in the Dfviin is the po le of his time, an absolute spiritual ruler, unlimited in his power and inaccessib le in his magnificence. ~ J~ ı$. .)~ ı)\.>.. ~L... ı) ft ~ J.J c..> j;.~ ~ ı) ft c..> ..ur _;.f j>S t. lJ _,; ._;S~.:;.. o--4~ _;~ The Shams of Tabriz is the king of king s of all men. W e have our proof and demonstration from him. 22 ıJiy ı..s' j;.~ \..; LJ:!..UI ~ o\..;. ı.;; .J~ c..>~ jr_,; ..s- J.J ~ c.Sj Lı~~ When Shams of Tabriz goes, the Izeart follows him like shadow. In the eyes, the dust of his feet is calanıine or collyrium of the eternallight. 23 Rumi believes Shams to be the commander of the army of love, while he counts himself as just one of his so Idiers - apparently, an unworthy one that has fled 24 from the camp, fearing the fight: 22 Rümi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 1651. 23 Rümi, Kul/iyiit-i Shams, ghazal 2434. 24 Cf. the ta le of the prince of Bukhara and his trustee (Mathnawi, book 3, verses 3686- 3699; 3789- 3921; 4377 - 4420; 4601 - 4624; 4664- 4749). Yanis Eshots Slıams and Mawlaııa: W7ıo amıilıilated iııto ıvlıom? Run after the king Shams al-Din as far as Tabriz. The army of lo ve is with him - go, because you too belong to [that] annyP5 In turn, the Shams with whom we become acquainted with in the Maqalô.t is not quite sure whether he is the person Rumi believes him to be: "Apart from these manifest masters, who are famous among the creation (i.e., people - Y.E.), and are mentioned from pulpits and at gatherings, there are hidden servants, more perfect than the famous ones, and there is the sought one 26 (matlüb) - some ofthem find him and some do not. Mawlô.nô. believes me to be this [sought] one, but this is not my [own] opinion. But [even] if I am not the so ught one, I am a seeker (tiilib) and the furthest limit of the seeker comes into be ing from the sought one. "27 What is more, it seems that at a certain stage - during the last days before Shams' disappearance- Rumi himself was not sure that Shams was the one he earlier had believed him to be - or perhaps felt that he had already found in his heart a stronger and more real Shams than the Shams in flesh and blood, which had started to annoy him. Certain passages from the Maqô.lô.t seem to testifY to this - for example, this one: "Out ofMawlana's gerttleness, I refrained, on the day when he answered my greetings coolly and did not give me his hand... "28 "O Mawlana, come out! Out of [much] shouting, my throat aches - but thou comest not. "29 25 Rumi, Kulliyöt-i Shams, ghazal 2489. 26 Terms ma'shüq ('[God's] beloved) and matlüb ('sought'), when they appear in the writings of Rumi and Sultan Walad and in the discourses of Shams, apparent ly, should be treated as synonyms of the earlier term majdhüb ('[the one who is] drawn [near to God]'). (On majdhüb, see: Hakim at-Tirmizi, Khatm al-awliyii', ed. 'A. Muhammed 'Ali, Beirüt: Dar al-kutub al-'ilmiyya 1420/1999, pp. 74- 77 (chapter 24 "AI-Majdhüb") 27 Shams-i Tabrizi, Maqôlôt-i Shams, ed. J. M. Sadiqi, 3rd edition, Tehran: Nashr-i markaz 1378/1999, p. 184. 28 Shams-i Tabrizi, Maqôlôt, p. 280. 29 Shams-i Tabrizi, Maqôlôt, p. 280. 1172 AB it is well known, Shams' relationship with Rumi' s family was hardly ever good. During the last days (or weeks?) before his disappearance (in particular, af ter the death of his wife Kimiya khatun), they were just terrible. Judging from ~ the final chapters of the Maqillilt, even Sultan Walad, who was hitherto compa ratively loyal to him, began to treat him roughly and everybody wanted him to go.30 His belongings were thrown out of the room he used to live in and, it se ems, he was even beaten. Rumi himself, however, ignored Shams' desperate re quest to intervene. Why? Apparently, because he had become, to a degree at le ast, indifferent to Shams. Why had he become indifferent to him? Because he had replaced him with someone. With whom? I guess, with a stronger and more in tense Shams - namely, with the likeness of Shams that now lived in his imagi nation. Moreover, he had, to a degree, annihilated himself into that likeness, which he believed to be God's beloved or sought one. This annihilation was, ho wever, still incomplete, therefore, when the physical substratum of that imaginal Shams disappeared, Rumi experienced psychical anguish and agony. However, a go o d number of verses in the Divii n - for example this one: To the tower of the spirit of Shams al-Din [ o.fl Tabriz Will jly my spirit and ıvill not reınain [here (?)]for an instanf1 seem to testify that the wandering dervish Shams, which stayed in Konya for so me time, served as a Iocus for one or several intense self-disclosures of the Re al, witnessed by Rumi. 32 The "spirit of Shams", with which Rumi wants to unite, 30 See: Shams-i Tabrizi, Maqôlôt, pp. 290 and 278. 31 Rumi, Kulfiyat-i Shams, ghazal 683. 32 Cf. the opinion of the Iate Sayyed Jalal al-Din Ashtiyanl: "Perhaps, regarding Mawlanii., we can say that, because of the purity of the spirit of Shams-i Tabrizi, and its remoteness from entifıcations, he (Ma wlana - Y.E.) sa w himself in the mirror of the saul of his beloved, and the affair remained unda ir to him" (i.e., he thought he was witnessing Shams while actually he was witnessing his own self - Y.E.) (S. J. Ashtiyani, "Dibache", in A.Schimmel, "Shuk_h-e Shams", translated into Persian by H.Lahuti, Tehran: Shirkat-i Entesharat-i 'ilmi wa farhangi 1370 S. H., p. 90 (of lntroduction). Yanis Eshots Slıams and Mawlana: W1ıo amıilıilated iııto wlıom? apparently, refers to the experience of that self-disclosure. Thus the thing, w hi ch is really at issue, is perhaps Rfuni's annihilation into his own experience. lS lT possible to talk of Shams' annihilation into Rumi and, if yes, in w hi ch sen se? If we adınit that it is possible to talk of a greater thing's annihilation into a sınaller one,33 then, in general terms, it can perhaps be said that the Real anni hilated itself into Rumi through/ in the form of Shams. As for Shams himself, it seems that he perceived Mawlfma as an occasion or secondary cause (sabab), through which his own hidden spiritual beauty became manifest: "I was water that was boiling in itself, tuming araund itself and getting a [bad] smell, until the being of Mawlana struck me (bar man zad) and it (water - Y.E.) started to flow, and now it flows cheerful, fresh and merry."34 "This (i.e., I, Shams - Y. E.) was an amphora of lordly wine, whose mouth was sealed with clay. Nobody was aware of its existence. I was listening to the world and I heard. This amphora was opened thanks to Mawlana. To whomever it does go od, it do es go o d thanks to Ma w lana. "35 Thus, according to Shams, a kind of collision between him and Mawlana took place, as a result of which the shell of his spiritual substance was broken and the wine of meanings begun to gush out of him. One notkes that the desc tiption of the affair, given by Shams, to so me extent, matches the definition of annihilation as a physical phenomenon: "annihilation is a reaction in which a particle and its antiparticle collide and disappear, releasing energy".36 In case of Shams, the collision he experienced was not sufficiently powerful to cause a complete destruction and disappearance of his spiritual substance, but a certain 33 Such usage, as remarks lbn ai-'Arabi, is not customary among the Sufıs (Muhyi al-Din lbn ai-'Arabi, ai-Futiihiit al-makkiyya, Beirüt: Dar ai-Sadir, non-dated, part 2, p. 512). 34 Shams-i Tabrizi, Maqôlôt, p. 282. 35 Shams-i Tabrizi, Maqôlôt, p. 285. 36 "Annihila_tion" in EncyclapCP.dia Britannica 2006: Ultimate Reference Suite DVD (accessed April 22, 2007). 117 4 amount of energy was released from it. Thus, we can talk ab out partial an nihilation of Shams into Mawlana - namely, the annihilation of his acts (afiil) (energies37 or lights) (but not essence and attributes) into those of Mawlana .. An annihilation of master into disciple, however, presupposes passing of the former's aspiration (Jıimma) to the latter. Presumably, in its entirety it can be passed to disciple only through the physical death of master. Can the drastic change, which, apparently, took place in Rfımi's behaviour soon after Shams' disappearance,38 be explained by the influence of the Jıimma which had passed to him from Shams (if we agree that the latter was killed)? Yes, it can. But, alt hough the belief in passing of him ma from muriid to muriid constitutes a part of Sufi creed ( 'aqida), the inheritance of aspiration cannot be proved by means of demonstration and logical reasoning. I slıall, therefore, stop my discourse here. 37 Here in a mystical sense (in which the term was used, for example, by the Hesychast authors (Gregory Palamas (1296- 1368) ete.). 38 Rümi himself deseribes this change in the following words: r.ı.ı i..SJ,...:.S .L>Ij y .:ıu j ...$ J "..:."''rJ> W:!,.? 1 r.ı.ı <.S.P ._,..,.t.,., 1was [known to bej the [strictest] renouncer of the country and the master of pulpit (i. e., the preacher - Y.E.)./ [God's] judgment made my heart thin e applauding (i. e., enthusiastic and intoxicated- Y.E.) /over. (Rümi, Kulfiyat-i Shoms, ghazal 2152.) Yanis Eshots Slıams and Mawlana: W1ıo amıilıilated iııto wlıom?