The Book of Baha’u’ddeen
(ألعلم الخامس الخاص)
The Privileged Quintessence
This is a
Book of Wisdom, descended from the Guarded Tablet, given to people over past
and present eras of time, who perhaps were unable to discern it,
it to English, so it makes its way into their minds in future times,
privileged individuals were able to make sense of it,
There are no
secrets in it,
people’s inventions and discretions,
But there is
Knowledge, and Knowledge is The Quintessence, told by Plato, Aristotle and
is esoteric: if you have peaked to its highs: it is a confirmation,
Else, it is
Hence it was
kept secret for a few centuries,
reading of it does not overcome its high mountains,
can continuous meditation deliver one to existential awareness,
The study of
language cannot make it lucid,
can the mastering of yoga techniques remove the veils of one’s vision.
It was not
divided into chapters, so we shall post it by sections where a retreat is needed,
until the quotation is closed,
Here is the
branch of the Tree of Being, irrigated by the River: summing all the Summums.
It is upon you:
Do eat it
happily, and drink its palatable milk,
And do feed
the unambitious and the unwanting needy,
For it to be relief
from corrupt beliefs.
It is a
branch of the Privileged Quintessence,
the people not of Union: of the close ones of His family,
To enter you
the in vale of the ants: the gate to the city of non-existence.
Lord The Sovereign, transcends He in His Godliness, Sublime is He in His Excellence,
Lofty above the deficiency of the deficient, and the vanity of the vain,
We have in
His Signs and Allusions superfluousness from articulation,
And it is the
Say Decisive, and not derisive, only the knowledgeable and those who have a
heart discern it, or those who have lent an ear when they witnessed.
“So He began
with Eternal Existence and non-Existence, and in their definiteness by the
constantly eyed and non-eyed that is non-existence: or, what can be spoken of,
and its opposite, or by other means,
an apparent cycle,
purpose is to define the terms,
For, none is
more knowable than Existence. And the pointers are to negate, to nullify and to
falsify the definition of Existence:
dependence of the trust on the mutual exclusiveness of existence and
non-existence, which is self-evident to Him, for this is false,
Or by the
dependence of a thing upon itself,
Or by the
compoundedness of existence while supposing it compounded, and dropping the
to-and-froing of the intellect: in the case of affirmation of the absoluteness
of existence, and the bonding with the concept of its opposite, while admitting
division: lead to affixism (from the verb to affix: to attach something to
existence is divided into inevitablenss and potentiality, and essence and
incidence, and so on.
Existence not shared by them: the division would be meaningless.
admittance of division provides affixism,
And the whatness
(noun from what) is thus variable,
whatnesses unite, or that all their parts are not reduced,
To their dual
nature there is discernibility, and for the realisation of potentiality and the
outcome of conception,
And the need
for evidence to the confirmation of the existence of whatness, and the
obsoleteness of contradiction and the compoundedness of the Inevitability and
its Ubiquity by Whatness by itself to itself, hence the addition to it is by
existence is divided into intellectual and external, else the truth could not be
in the intellect is none but the image in congruence with many components.
existence is not an additional essence, by means of which the whatness occurs
in the eye: rather [it is] the occurrence without an addition or emphasis.
And It, that
is Existence: Mere Good, and non-Existence is mere evil by deduction: for there
is nothing about which goodness can be said unless it is existent, and there is
nothing about which evil can be said unless it is null.
is no constant opposite of Existence, and no equal to it by this previous
For, the two
equals are existent identities, each of them affords/satisfies itself, and the
discernible by one of them is so much discernible by the other.
Thus the Word
dawned from the letters of KUN of existence caused by the causality of The
Cause of Affinity,
and OM in the Hindu philosophy, although OM does not translate to “be”
linguistically, but it is the sound of the beginning which still echoes in
one’s mind if one listens.
And the word
that I translated to “affinity” appears in the text as (المعز), as a
it is a correction, and that the word traditionally used in Hikmah to point to
love and affinity is (محبة), and that 3izz and 3izzah and 3izzaa have been a
word of the liberal builders for many centuries: raises eyebrows: was it an
attempt by the triumphant one to claim ownership of it, as he did before and
was said to be the seal of the messengers?
I would hope
that all his attempts, covert and overt, are recognised. He can only triumph in
peoples’ dark minds and passions, to precipitate once again with him in
physicality, where he is most comfortable]
“And it is,
according to what has preceded that existence is not self-sufficient and neither
Existential, else there would have been Existence for existence.
Hence it has
been the argument that the source of this Existence: there is no equal to it
there, since non-existence and whatness are not self-sufficient, and neither
existential, and nor equal to It,
So that the
discernible, that is earned from Existence/existence is the very one
discernible by either one of the two [previous ones].
remains oppositeless and equalless,
And thus Its
inaccordance with such arguments is
realised, while it nullifies none of them.
existence is paralleled by objectification, so every time existence truths so
does objectification, and behind this too and also its converse.
existence is an object and every object is existent, and existence is not
realised without it, and the contender is only denying his mind’s judgement.
objectification is realised: below Existence, while maintaining perpetual
capability to exchange bodies for those souls eternal, that is determined for
them originally and eternally, so long as they remain in the sublimeness of
those who went and turned upside-down back-to-front, and dwelled in the rock
bottom of the darkness of null.
Thus was the
nullification of attribution, and the reduction of existence to the absence of
discernment of augmentation.
reason why this was deemed to be opened is because it has been reduced to
natural existence. And by opening it this is refuted.
capability to climb up its mountains: this one remains unrealised, as long as
one’s existence is reduced to natural existence in the upside-down world,
embellished with intellectual pretention and tribal considerations: which do
not constitute an attribution]
singularity necessitated affirmation by vision: it would entail impossibilities
and absurdities, since potentiality is a mental construct.
As for our
Master the Mind, He is above this by a major and transcending highness.
Else, if the
Verity: The Contriver, transcends He, needs considered adjectives of His Clear (لطيف)
Station, then a partner and an assistant and an opposite would be deemed
necessary for this Lord The Unity The Causer, that is by His Attribute of
And that edge
was descended, saying that the excuse for not admitting identicalness and
inconsistence and the necessary consequentiality: is false,
For, what is
split is falsified by the suspicion about it, regarding the realisation of infinite
identities within the null, and the nullification of the influence of any
influence in both of them [the identities and the null].
And there is
no need here to re-descend what the kingdoms of the spiritual worlds descend to
the world of the orbits around the circle of the images, since in its
re-descent a return is not necessitated, and this will be re-cast later.
man in charge and in the case summarised the splitting and the division of the
affirmation of the inexistent, and he atomised  by dividing the case into the
caused and everything else, and [by] explaining the inconsistency by it and
[He who has
ears capable of hearing: that he listens]
Existence can be taken as Absoluteness, so a non-existence of the same kind has
to mirror it. And they might meet, not by the consideration of mirroring, and
they are conceived together.
anyone with a heart discern this, and let him lend an ear while witnessing
before this Truth, else, the message is to no avail.
“Then We recapitulate
and We say of Our Council: and hypothetically Existence can be taken
non-Existence similar mirrors it, lacking the subject attributed to It, like
lacking a property. And the subject is taken as a person or as a kind or as a
Hence it is
Nay, it is
simple, having no part or partition, and it multiplies by the multiplication of
the subjects, and doubt over its incidentals is said, like this was itemised in
the Tablet of The Spiritual Law, and removed from “The Solitary in His
Identity” (a Book of Hikmah), by Our Command, for, the lower comprehension
cannot grasp it.
“Invested Monitor” (a title of our Master the Mind) did add, saying what was
inspired to him: since it is not a part of an absolute source, other than him,
and objectification is secondary discernibility, not rooted in Existence,
absolutely no thing is constant, rather
they are projected to [by] the peculiarities of whatnesses,
might differ, hence the null of a caused thing is referred to the null of the
cause and nothing else, and let this too be discerned.
existence of conditions nullifies the non-existence thereof, and the presence
of an opposite corrects, by assumption and potentiality, the non-existence of
the [other] opposite, variably with other nullities.
non-Existence might be exhibited to itself, so it qualifies for kind and
mirroring by two [itself and itself] considerations. And the null of a caused
thing is not a cause of the inexistence of a cause outside [it], even if it
does cross the mind that it is proof, [as in] “I am” and the converse “why me”.
[One way to
conceive this is by this exercise: stand in front of a mirror, and consider
your reflection as existence caused by you,
This is the
null of you, that has no conceivable cause other than you in this instance,
that your reflection asks you the question: why me?
answer you can afford is: I am,
is a logical answer: it proves nothing]
ordered by generality and particularity in existence: are opposed to one
another in inexistence, and the share of each of them of need and needlessness
Existence is lifted or made to be a connection between the lifted and the
subject: three substances/faculties are asserted; in their identities are
directions/modes of discernment pointing to the strength of the tie and its
inevitability, impossibility, potentiality, and likewise for non-existence and
the inquiry as to its definition as existence.
inevitability and potentiality and possibility could be considered
reflexive/self-sustaining, hence their share of reasonableness is truth, and
cannot be turned over.
And the first
two [inevitability and potentiality] could be considered by reference to
[something] else, for, the separation is a preventer of combining the two,
albeit could be turned over, and a preventer of the absence of the three: as a
Since it is
inconceivable that the potential is devoid of any of those three.
potentiality adheres to the possible, while its voidness of the other two is
its cause is present, it becomes inevitable, else it is impossibility,
And the issue
of separation negates not the combination,
For, it is
conceivable to combine reflexive potentiality with one of the other two.
inevitability and inexistence share the name/essence of necessity, so of each
of them necessity is said, which has the essence of adherence, not the essence
of self-evidence, even though they differ by negation and affirmation;
before providing examples, because the generality of these statements dwarfs
all the examples below them,
But here is
an example of the last statement:
that the existence of a god is inevitable, and some believe that god is
In each case
the belief is a necessity, asserted by observations and convictions, which are
true in the believer’s perspective,
None of which
the two assertions differ by the negation and affirmation of the existence of a
And in the
previous post we started by this statement:
ordered by generality and particularity in existence: are opposed to one
another in inexistence, and the share of each of them of need and needlessness
So here is an
general statement: every man is mortal,
particular statement drawn from it: Aristotle is mortal,
Now take the
opposite of the first: no man is mortal,
Which is an
opposite of the second: Aristotle is immortal,
oppose one another, because the actuality is that Aristotle has died,
And such "truth
values" can be reached using the modern Boolean Algebraic methods and
starting those statements: one expresses a need for describing an observed
inevitability is the necessity of existence, and inexistence is the necessity
And each of
inevitability and inexistence truths [says the truth] about the other if they
face one another as predicates.
potentiality can be considered in the sense of taking necessity away from the
two [opposite] ends, so it dominates the other;
example: if one wants to be “open-minded” about the existence of a god, one has
to drop all preconceptions, so that such an existence becomes a potentiality,
bringing the two perspectives close, for each to dominate the other]
potentiality is particularity, and can be considered with regard to the future,
and inexistence is not set as a condition in the matter, else the two opposites
of this philosophical Discourse of the Highest Order is to free one’s mind from
all the fetters of beliefs, preconceptions and intellectual observations, by
taking a view of them from above them, so they all fall in the obsolescence,
is more knowable than Existence”,
But if it is
read with preconceptions and for the purpose of asserting or negating a concept
or a belief ... then the upside-down back-to-front turn is emphasised, as it is
the case in all the Discourses]
three [inevitability, potentiality and inexistence] are considerers of their
truthfulness about inexistence and the impossibility of consequentiality [the
chain of cause and effect in a linear fashion culminating, in this case, in the
occurrence of impossibility].
inexistence were affirmable, the potentiality of inexistence is necessitated.
potentiality is affirmable, the pre-existence of every potential to its
potentiality is necessitated, and the parting from negating potentiality,
And a negated
potentiality requires not its affirmation.
of those statements is meant to put the reader’s mind to the test of
self-assuredness and faith in itself,
If the reader
is in a belief of irrationality as a basis of faith, the statements as phrased
in Arabic become self-contradictory and illogical,
takes the attitude of believing that there are secrets in them,
This has been
the case of every Discourse of Truth in the hands of religious institutes,
whether their self-classification is or not religious.]
inevitability comprises reflexivity and else, and so with inexistence, and the exhibit
of what is other than by the two [the inevitable and inexistence] is potential.
And there is
no potential by other than what has preceded [an incidence] in the true
division [between inevitability and inexistence].
exhibits of potentiality when no consideration is given to existence and
inexistence, with regards to the whatness and its cause,
And when the
two are considered by regarding them: what is other [than the potentiality] is
affirmed, and there is no mutual exclusiveness between potentiality and
is when a concept is taken for granted,
examination of it, which is usually prompted by the exposure to another concept
contradicting it, the examiner has a natural tendency to regard one of the two
concepts as true,
consideration is given to the causes and the nature of the concept, it is
narrowed down to a potentiality, revealing a truth above its existence or
cease to be mutually exclusive, but rather coexistent as opposing things which
are exhibited from a reality above them.]
every potential exhibit is a reflexive potential, and there is no converse.
exhibits are caused by potentials which are not capable of creating existence
“Then, and if
potential intellect observes existence, it demands [to know] the cause, even if
it did not envisage anything else; and it might envisage the existence of an
incident, but demands not it: and this is the cause.
this. Because an example cannot be envisaged: because every exhibit is such an
incidence is the howness [noun from how] of existence, so it is not a cause of
what precedes it by stages.
everything is a cause, so it follows a cause,
To him are
the Connections of The Lord, when he rounded the light in the cycles, so it was
made a determination. And our Lord glorified what has been said by His
then, incidence is a howness of existence, so it lags behind it by its lagging
adjective lags behind its noun, and existence lags behind observation,
observation is referred to the subject/doer, and existence to the
observation lags behind need, since the needless cannot observe it.
And need lags
behind the cause of needing,
were the cause of need, the antecedence of a thing over itself by stages
becomes a necessity.
judgement as to the potential’s need to a cause that is caused by itself is
necessary, and it [the judgement] envisages not the priority of either side,
with respect to itself [the side].
first judgement is His Say:
is not permitted to a servant until the response has been permitted to him.
is to the Alexander the Two-Horned one, the Connections are to him, and the
Peace be him,
In all his
comings he is allowed vision of Time, so he follows a lead/cause,
previous orbs of existence he rounded, like place is rounded over a sphere, so
a moment of time can be seen from either side of the time line,
Relativity today theorises that technology should be capable of time travel in
the future, but it assumes that the manifest exists per se, and this creates a
philosophical and logical dilemma: if the future and the past can be visited
from the present, can they be altered? Which would imply that the manifest does
not exist per se,
of the Discourse hints to the reality that an event exists prior to its
manifestation, without admitting predetermination.
While this is
unpalatable for the intellect, which is accustomed to linear time, it can only
be experienced in one’s own mind,
another branch of the Quintessence, which can be known by training and
philosophical and moral development,
realise its Humanity, by opening those corridors of the mind which have been
closed for millions of years, bogged down by petty causes of hatred and
self-righteousness, created by ignorance and uncontrolled passion, fuelled by
insane religious and political leaders, who can barely understand the natural
causes and their effects ...?? Or will mankind remain just an intelligent
questions only people can answer, because their destinies are dictated by the choices
they make, which are available to them from the skies and its objects above
them, and the physical bodies which host them.
For more on
the journey of Alexander please refer to Surah of Al-Kahf (The Cave) of the
Qur’an and Alexander under the sub-page of Prophets, in our website
priority externally is not saturated by the actualisation of one of the two
sides [the potential and the cause] until it has reached the limit of
decreeing it does not put the other side to priority,
And here is
an example: so if the cause of moving the stone off the ground is ten men, the
one man would be an external priority,
And this is
not sufficient in the movement as it is in the thought,
[the stone’s] state is not free of being existence of cause of impossibility of
absence of movement – by this, it is a cause complete and external to movement
– and that its existence is not a cause of impossibility of absence of
movement remains impossible after the presence of this man,
And this is
what was meant by the insufficiency.
And the sun
of its proof to clarify its state does rise, in whether the existent
potential’s insufficient cause has been measured by the two pans of a balance,
which is in need of one penny to tip, while ten pennies are [already] in it.
[This is the
Quintessential approach to understanding eventuation, as opposed to the
experimental scientific one,
latter, the question is about estimating the weight of the stone, to determine
how much force is needed to move it,
former, the stone cannot be moved until the cause of its movement is satisfied:
from the point of view of needing to move it, and from the point of view of the
natural forces necessary for moving it, and from every other point possible,
impossibility of moving it remains present: if the empirical scientific
conditions are not identified, and if the force deemed necessary for moving it
is not available, amongst other things ...
of the stone is not the cause of this inquest, and the stone could stay there
for millennia perhaps unnoticed if no one needs to move it,
The whole is
an event from potentiality to eventuation in someone’s observation, the
components of which need to be satisfied and balanced, for it to occur,
quintessential approach is needed for solving personal problems and those of
apparent physical causes of things are only an exhibit of an existence,
be achieved by setting methods and procedures which can be universally applied,
as in the case of science, but it is a state of awareness.]
is no escape from culmination to Inevitability, so it makes the potential
Inevitability is Inevitability preceding the howness by its Identity, not by
Time of Existence of a caused [thing] comes not after the time of its
eventuation goes side-by-side with its Existence, and follows it, after
Existence: another occurrence latent to the actualisation of judgement.
occurrence is not devoid of a judgement of actuality, and this is named/summed
by necessity: by the condition of the potent [existence].
“So it has
been summarised that every existent is bordered by two Inevitabilities: a
former and a latter.
By those two Inevitabilities
the Forerunner and the Follower have been dimensioned, and unto them the Suns
of The Throne dawned,
And thus was
the diversity of the Godly Attributes, in times and circumstances, and
movements and orientations, and Aims and Manifestations, and laws: [mundane and
mysticism and mythology, these are the dimensions of human thought and faith,
as was explained in an essay on this page,
When Faith is
invested in the mind and its capability to fathom and understand its
existential experience: the intellect takes over to perform the actual tasks of
self-discovery, be they abstract or practical, bearing in mind that every
abstract has a potential physical presence,
Renaissance in Europe, the human experience has been directed in such a
This had the coming
of Hamzah and the Manifestation to all humanity as precursor,
And the human
intellect was turned around by the coming of various philosophers,
mathematicians, scientists and artists, because the heavens opened those doors
was freed from religious beliefs and practices, and followed reason and virtue
as a guide in every aspect of its journey,
religious thought, old and new, remains static by its nature,
resides in the contours of its identity.]
potentiality adheres to the howness of the potential, so that this description
can disconnect from the potential; else, if its disconnection persists, then
upon disconnecting: howness eventuates or recedes, due to the negation of a
forth branch [the three being invevitability, potentiality and impossibility].
And the flip is where it was impossible, since the disconnection is impossible
[So here is
an example: in the past the verse of the Qur’an which says that only God knows
what is in the womb was understood to be saying that it is impossible for
mankind to know the sex of the baby before it was born,
“three layers of darkness” were understood to be referring to the anatomy of
the pregnant mother which prevents the vision from looking inside the womb, and
science and the technology did develop, and the sex of the baby can now be known
before it is born, and what was once impossibility is now a potentiality.
and many others that one can think of: should have prompted the religious
authorities to re-visit their understanding of the Books,
has been a barrier between them and the pursuit of knowledge,
discourse is not meant to intimidate the people by indiscernible literature,
but indeed to open the avenues of their minds which have been sealed off by
inevitability of actualities is paralleled by the admission of nullity, and is
[the nullity] not adhering to the howness of potentiality,
goes upon enforcing the absence of the cause.
relation of enforcement to potentiality is the relation of completion to
incompletion, and since enforcement is related to the strength of the
enforcement, and potentiality is also its [the enforcement’s] weakness,
disconnection of the first is not possible, contrary to the second [the
inevitability and the nullification thereof].
[So here is
an example: we all perceive the rising of the sun as inevitability, and once it
has risen, its journey in the sky to sunset is also inevitable,
inevitability is potentially nullified by an eclipse, or by other factors that
we have not yet identified,
inevitable occurrences have nullifying factors, by extrapolation on this
example, although such nullifications may not have eventuated in our knowledge,
conditions are there in potentiality, and they will cause an occurrence once
their presence is actualised.]
subjected potentiality, which is the readiness for completion by the
actualisation of some conditions and the suspension of some preventers: is
subject to strength and weakness.
The closer a
thing is to existence, upon the aggregation of most of its conditions, and the
suspension of most of its preventers: the stronger is its readiness for
further a thing is from existence, the weaker is its potentiality.
So the sperm,
where most of the conditions of a human are present – as he moved, by
characterisation and excellence, from clay to vegetation, and from vegetation
to animal, and from animal to blood and semen, which are all stages preceding
the human – the potentiality of its human is stronger.
animal, when most of the conditions for it to be human have not aggregated:
hence the potentiality of it being human is weaker.
accordance with all Discourses, this Discourse also hints to the oneness of
life, be it plant, animal or human, and the evolution or devolution from one
form to another,
hasten to say that this does not imply that humans and animals and plants
constantly exchange bodies, as is the belief in some religions,
This is a
gradual process which occurs over many cycles of existence,
And at the
beginning of a new creation the form of existence is an expression of character
and awareness gleaned from previous lives and cycles. This form has to persist
throughout the cycle for the experience to be meaningful.]
subjected potentiality is nullified as if it was of clay, as it annuls all the
conditions of its humanity, and exists as though it has become an animal,
For it has
folded some stages, and some conditions of potentiality are existent in it.
And it is
unlike subjective potentiality, which is considered by the considerations of
[its] very whatness.
So we may
notice the potential of the human in his self, and we may notice the potential
of the clay and the sperm and the like becoming human.
The first is
called subjective potentiality and exists constantly and is not subject to
weakness and strength,
second which exists and is annulled and is subjected to weakness and strength.
And between them are other differences, as it is obvious.
existent is of two kinds: the first is the ancient, and the second is the
because if the existent is taken unpreceded by other [things] or by
inexistence, then it is ancient; and if the existent is not so, but was
preceded by other [things] or preceded by inexistence, then it is incident.
And it is
known that the ancient: if taken in the sense of unprecedence by other
[things], then it is called subjective,
And if taken
in the sense of uprecedence by inexistence, then it is called chronological,
And so too
existence is not distinguishable from the human, and as it has been said on this
page that the human is the universe and the universe is the human,
pursuit of knowing what preceded the universe and mankind is to no avail; it is
rather precipitation in the dust of the universe, or vanishment in an
illusionary god of inexistence.
Quintessence is the only knowledge that sums the human experience in direct
union with Existence, albeit at various degrees and heights, and without
separation from incidental existence necessarily.
this Discourse also hints to the existence of “two worlds” (ألعالمَين) , the ancient and the
incident, or the subjected and the subjective, and although it hints to that
the difference can be obvious, it should not be taken as a permission to grade
the people according to one’s own observation,
serves only the egos which would like to take their self-classification as an
excuse for their arrogance and their unwillingness to further their knowledge.]
forerun and its two mirrorings, that is the follow and the togetherness, are of
Because it is
either by causality, and this is the forerun of the complete cause, like the
precendence of the movement of a finger over that of a ring;
Or by nature,
and this is the precedence of [things] other than the complete cause, and these
are sundry incomplete causes, such as the precedence of vinegar over rust;
Or by time,
and that is the forerun exists in time forerunning the existence of a latter,
such as the forerunning of a cause over its effect;
[This one is
not to be confused with cause and effect such as the vinegar and the rust. This
is consequentiality, such as midday is preceded by morning.]
Or by rank,
and that is the order of the forerunner and the forerun,
[Such as the
parents and the child.]
And it is the
rank [observable] by the senses or the mind, such as the qualities and the
essence precedes the growing body if you start from the essence down, and the
growing body precedes the essence if you start from the essence up;
Or by honour,
that is the Forerun and his two mirrorings;
should not escape the mind that the exclusiveness between these divisions is
deductional, not of mind, and its argument is by validation/doubt.
where all scientific and intellectual and religious inquests reside.]
addition/following is guarded between the two added/followed, by its kinds,
that is the three kinds of verification/doubt: priority, primariness and
wherever there is inconsistency between the divisions of forerun and: priority,
primariness and intensity, its quality is prevented, and quality is part of
truth, and the part in the kinds is one rank:
So the animal
is in the man and the horse and the cow is in the same rank, so it is
pimariness and priority.
So too the
intensity, since the two parts of one howness: one of them cannot be more
containing of the howness than the other.
[It would not
be an overstatement, if we say that this is the Forerun to Tawheedic
So that every
occurrence is viewed as a materialisation of an existent essence, which in turn
is the abstraction of a model,
being an Image (the Self) and its Expression/Movement (the Word),
All of which
are One in Existence, that is the Inevitability by Its Identity,
Absoluteness (ألمحض), This is not a subject of discussion in any Discourse, although
religious authorities old and new proclaim to have exclusive knowledge of It
Discourses have come one after the other, to speak of the same Truth in their
time and circumstances, and by the nature of this world, the truths have to be
reflected in the clay,
gods of causality are deducted from it by validation/doubt, in images,
incidences and historical events ...]
precedence is perpetuated by temporal, spatial or other incidences,
Then, let it
be known, that both of ancientness and incidence could be taken as truth.
ancient is what is not preceded by other [things], or by what is more precedent
chronologically, and this is what has been preceded,
incidence is to the contrary.
And it [the
incidence] can be taken and known as an addition: for, the ancient is the one
whose time is more,
So, Zayd who
is one hundred years of age is ancient, and Amru who has its half is incident.
ancientness and incidence are not considered by reference to time.
So it cannot
be said: the ancient is that the existence of a thing is continuous at all
the incidence is that the existence of a thing is preceded by inexistence in
Else, if time
is considered in them for the purpose of transporting the words in time and
that whether it is incident or ancient, and regardless to whether it was incident
or ancient: it would be lacking another time.
Because it is
required to consider time in every incident and ancient, in it [time], else the
matter would roll on forever.
ancientness and incidence and the two additions [the follow and the togetherness],
they cannot be actualised without time, and consequentiality does not adhere
upon taking the time out of their concept,
Since Time is
neither ancient nor incident by this additional metaphorical sense.
meant to open a window in one’s mind to Time that is not linear, above
Existence is simultaneous,
This is where
truths can be known, and the Truth can be witnessed,
have failed to discern this have taken the easy way of precipitation in nature,
where the only truth they know is observable by the senses,
wait for the birth and death of a man and the emergence of objects, contrary to
what they were told in the Books in simple plain language,
The Truth is
too high to their reach,
left Atlantis and were dazzled by the monuments of Hiram abu l3izz,
fell down his traps after the previous messages should be an example,
same destiny will await them.]
spontaneous incidence is actualised,
of this actualisation is that the potential per se requires not existence and
nonexistence, and with respect to the cause it requires one of them, and what
is in the identity is affront of what is in the other.
existence of a potential is preceded without it requiring existence, and this
is spontaneous incidence;
actualisation occurs in the phase of identity after a condition there is no
actualisation in it.
to the entire of the physical world, being existent spontaneously without a Big
Bang or anything else preceding it, and without any conditions preceding its
And as soon
as the Self looked at Her Self there was the Universe, spontaneously and at
This state of
awareness can be experienced by the practice of yoga techniques and
self-hypnosis, which I prefer to call hypno-vigilance, whereby a universe can
be visioned upon the barring of all stimuli and focusing one’s mind onto one’s
mind. In Far Eastern languages it is called Samadhi, but the word has religious
ancientness and incidence are two mental considerations.
thing that is not preceded by another or by inexistence: the intellect strips
ancientness from it, and from its opposite it strips incidence,
The two are
not external, else, consquentiality is required; the two are two mental
considerations which cease upon the cessation of the consideration.
truths about the Existent: the matter veritable separable amongst the two: that
is the ancient and the incident.
existent: it is either preceded or not. The first being the incident the second
being the ancient.
concurrence is not possible, and neither their suspension, and hence does the Verity
truth [say the truth]: that is in the Existent.
this is alluding to Existence that is above the linear progression of time, by
means of which incidence and ancientness are conceived and understood mentally.
Discourse has been a “hefty say” (قول ثقيل), not unlike every Discourse before
been taken to emphasize their opposite in the minds which have plunged in the
of transcendence in the Qur’an were
taken as a law governing food, war, money and marriage, and the verses of this
one have been taken by some to point to their opposite.]
“Then, of the inevitable, there is the
spontaneous/per se and the inevitable by another.
existent is either dependant, which is inevitable by another, or independent
And the two
cannot concur as this necessitates the concurrence of two opposites, and
neither can they be both lifted as this necessitates the lifting of two
the inevitable per se are three necessities:
The first is
that inevitability per se can never be said about the compound. Because every
compound needs its parts, and every needing thing is a potential.
As for the
compound being needy: it is self-evident, since the compound is the parts
themselves with a third incidental uniqueness: of action and reaction.
As for the
needy being potential: it is lucid, since the needing of other [things] for its
existence is not self-sustaining existence. And every time the existence of
something is not self-sustaining it has to be potential.
The second is
of the properties of the existent per se is that it is not a part of another
thing, and that something is a compound of the inevitable and another,
Since a compound is the effect of every part
on the other (which is expressed by action and reaction).
effect of the non-inevitable in the inevitable is either by incrementing if or
by diminishing it, or by altering a status of it to another status, all of
which is impossible.
increment is not inevitable, else it would not have been inexistent;
And the decrease
is not an inevitability, else it could not have been nullified,
changing [thing] is not inevitable by its past status, else it would not have
been supplemented as now, and neither could it be inevitable by its forthcoming
status, else it would not have relinquished it beforehand.
And the third
is that its existence and the relative existence to the identity (which is
expressed by the inevitability) do not increase the inevitable, else it would
existence to us is the general existence, arguable with scepticism, and does
not enter in Verity until the knowledge of it is twinned with some Knowledge of
Truth, necessitated by the inconsistency of part known truth to its part
unknown. As for the existence particular to it, which is the Inevitable, it is
not known, as well its Identity is not known.
truths become self-evident and lucid, as this Discourse states, upon one’s
Discourses, old and new, come as confirmation, as we said at the start in an
meditation techniques of the Far East are to no avail if the philosophical
foundation is on quicksand,
Discourses and “meditation” precipitate in natural existence.
the Discourses, with a belief in the back of one’s mind, and preconceived
convictions will serve those beliefs and preconceived convictions and nothing
This is the
mistake of all religious thought, whether its self-classification is religious
But a person
with faith in his/her mind is not afraid of relinquishing beliefs and
preconceived convictions: their minds are their guide, in any case,
of you who feel they are going through a process of transformation should
rejoice. This is Forgiveness bestowed on them. Otherwise the darkness and
narrowness of the cave offer the familiar comfort, and trigger resentment of
any call challenging it.]
[the inevitable per se] is not a nature of a [certain] kind, [based] on what
has preceded, so upon its projection/manifestation its parts/manifestations
influence of the whatness as it is in existence [the inexistent one] is inconceivable,
and the lack of the accepter [of such influence] is of obvious absurdity.
existence is of the mental possibilities, because of the inadmissibility of its
needlessness of place and its occurrence in it,
[existence] is of the conceivable things which are caused and secondary,
inexistence in their two [existence and inexistence] directions,
Also, the whatness
and the totality and the partiality and the identity and the incidentalness and
the the gender/nature and the branch and the kind.
“Then, it is
to the mind to consider a pair of opposites, envisaging the existence of
something and its absence for example, judging between them externally not
For, if there
was oppositeness between them in the mind they would not convene in it,
And there is
no absurdity in envisaging two opposites, since the oppositeness is between the
truth of the two opposites, not between their images, of it is known that the
existent in the mind is the image disagreeing with many of the adhering
[things], else the mind would burn upon imagining fire and so on.
[So no stone
is being left unturned, and from whichever angle you look at the manifest in
nature: it cannot be Existence,
If it were it
would not have to be in particular images,
The whole of
the manifest is then proof of Existence,
knowledge of Existence is immediate,
And the cause
of the creation and the cycles of time is achieved and annulled.
This is the
Reality that is to be reached,
cannot reach yet it is fine, but they should continue their journey,
aren’t supposed to force everyone else to stay with them,
It does not
threaten anyone if the very few uncover it in their minds and to the world,
throughout the ages there have been those who love their stay in impermanence,
Knowledge uncovers the falsehood of their claims,
This has been
the case of most religions, old and new.]
similarly, hence, that the mind envisage the inexistence of all things, so it
might envisage the inexistence of man, the inexistence of existence, the
inexistence of white [colour] and so on, and even the inexistence of itself,
and would envisage the inexistence of the mind that is an earned intruder, and
can [even] envisage the inexistence of inexistence, that is by imagining the
inexistence of itself in the mind, then lifting it, and this is necessary to
“And there is
undeniable difference between inexistence and everything else,
else the mind envisages an image, and in inexistence the mind envisages the
sound/word/pronunciation, since there is no image for inexistence.
inexistence absolutely: that the mind envisaged primarily, and it is the
[thing] to which it added the null, is constant, because of it being a matter
envisaged thing is constant, and the matter is of consideration only, and then
partner with the constant by another consideration which is the consideration
of it being null. And the judgement about it holds from the standpoint of it
not being constant, and there is no contradiction.
This is why existence
is divided into constant in the mind and inconstant in it, and judgement
between them is carried out by protrusion/distinction.
And it does
not call upon the identity for each of the two protrusions/distinct [things];
and if identity was presumed for it then its judgement would be that of a
are theories about the inexistence of all things, which would not have been
conceived were the existence of those things not conceived/considered,
exist in the mind, and one of them does not make the other one vanish,
maintain each other’s existence, they are thus constant,
And here is
an example: people have argued for millennia about the existence or the
inexistence of a soul. So science has proclaimed it inexistent, and this is
constant in the mind of a scientist.
The denial of
the existence of a soul is thus by itself a concept about the inexistence of
may see the different theories and descriptions of a soul as inconsistent and
variable; although the inexistence of the soul is a constant concept in his/her
“Then, if the
mind judges things external by their own likes, congruence is inevitable in its
correctness, else, not.
correctness occurs upon consideration of what is in the subject itself, not
where untruths are envisaged.
Hence it is
necessary that the reference about the ancientness of the world be correct for
its congruence with the truthfulness of the minds of the Philosophers and the
approval of the wise men of them;
judgement about the Inevitability of the First Initiation, High is He and Lofty
[our Master The Whole Mind] and so on and what has branched from Him in its
form and duenes.
[So to those
who still believe that the Message was given by instalments, and hence their
Book(s) are complete and overriding the previous ones, here is an answer from
this Discourse to them,
And if they
had thought correctly, the Truth is Whole, and whatever is broken up into
instalments or part truth is not truth, rather the precipitation of their minds
in the exhibits of nature.]
inexistence and existence may be potential, and to them possibilities might be
connected. And potentiality requires the union of two extremities from one
aspect, and the distinction between them from another.
aspect of union could be one of them, and could be a third one.
distinction requires not that one upholds the other, and neither does it
[require] the consideration of the idle one in the upholding if it was called
upon [by the distinction].
evidence of existence of whatness requires not its pre-existence, and the
withdrawal of it from it necessitates not its [the whatness’s] uniqueness and
withdrawal necessitates] its negation, not the confirmation of its inexistence,
and its confirmation in the mind, [which] although necessary, it is not a
truths become clearly known, if one invests an effort in trying to reconcile observable
things with abstract thought,
Until all the
representations are dropped, and there is no thing left, there is only One.
No concept of
a god, or a book or a belief can do this on one’s behalf. This is
reference of existence to the whatness requires not its [the whatness’s]
pre-existence, and stripping it [existence] from it [whatness] does not entail
its distinction and constancy,
entails] its negation, not the proof of its inexistence, and [it entails] its
constancy in the mind, [which is] albeit necessary, but not a condition.
might witness a natural phenomenon for the first time, without prior knowledge
of it, so they witness an existence having no “whatness” in their minds.
On the other
hand, if the whatness of something is known, but that thing does not manifest,
it does not mean that it does not exist, such as the knowledge of snow to
desert people, who have never seen it in their lives.]
probability/conception and the actuality/delivery are not of external matters,
existent outside is the identity of the actual and the probable only.
The two are
hence of the discernible, secondary to the primary discernible, since they are
taken in the mind like fatherhood and childhood and their current
multiplications, they are hence spoken of with doubt, and discernibleness is
Else, if it
was provability, It [Existence] would be linear.
if they were [probability and actuality] external constancy they would be an
incident substituting permanence.
[I can see
how this passage might have been taken in its natural sense, hinting to the
conception and birth of the supernatural, when in fact it is guiding the mind
to rejecting the concept completely as false, so it continues in the following
passage discussing its disappearance after manifestation,
All this was
delivered to us by the Glorious Pen of Baha’u’Ddeen, the Peace be him, to
refute the deification of the personality of al-Mansoor at that time.]
existence can be of identity, and can be of exhibition. As for existence by
wording and expression, it is metaphorical.
made inexistent cannot be reinstated, since pointing to it has been suspended.
Hence, judgement about it cannot hold true by the correctness of the
And if it was
reinstated: inexistence would make its way through between the thing and
itself, leaving no difference between it [the inexistence] and the beginning,
and the mirrorings say the truth about it simultaneously, and consequentiality
of time adheres, also the judgement about the inadmissibility of re-instatement
adheres to the whatness.
“Then, the separation of existence between inevitable and potential is
It comes across existence from its acceptability of the copying and erasure
“Then, the judgement about the potential, as to its possibility of existence,
is a judgement about the whatness, not by consideration of inexistence and
“Then, potentiality could be a vehicle for reasoning, and could be
rational/discernible by consideration of itself.
“And to clarify this: a person might look in a mirror accidentally to see
himself in it.
[“Accidentally” in this context does not mean unintentionally, because
any event in this Discourse is spoken of as an incident or an accident].
So a mirror is a vehicle by which vision is actioned, not in it;
And a person might look in a mirror accidentally to find out whether it is good
So a mirror is a vehicle in which vision is actioned, not by it.
And thus is the potential: it could be a vehicle for reasoning by it, for him
to know the condition of something, in that: its existence: upon which
skirts/ends/regions is it impossibly ceasing or adhering to ceasing or possibly
And it could be discernible by itself, so he looks at it in order to consider
the state of potentiality itself, and that it is/whether it is existent or
nullified, an essence or an incident.
And the mind’s judgement about the possible by potentiality is a mental
consideration and an external issue. For it is unlike the judgement of the mind
for the human about whiteness, therefore there is no exterior to it until the
congruence with the external judgement is due/ruled.
So he has to consider its congruence with what is in the mind.
[An example of this: weather forecasting
did not cross religious people’s minds, and weather patterns were thought to be
an arbitrary decision of their god, until the science of meteorology was
developed, and satellite images became available, giving us a glimpse of what
the weather might bring about in the near future,
The assessment of the data collected is analysed logically according to rules
and known laws which are constantly evolving, and the weather forecast gives us
a list of possibilities which are most likely to occur.
In contrast with that is the recognition of the current condition of the
weather, as to whether it is sunny or rainy for example.
Those routes of mind were explored in this Discourse, and although the
Discourse itself was kept closed and secret, the routes were open anyway, and
became walkable by whoever has been able to recognise their presence.
And the advancement of empirical science in Europe could not have happened had
it not been for the Greek Philosophy and the Hikmah.
The Knowledge that Messengers bring down is open, and no one can hide it. And
whoever is tuned to the inner voices of his/her mind can tap it. After all, the
Messengers are the Dimensions (Hudood) of everything that is existent, whether
this is recognised or not.
But if the mind is trapped in religious belief, it is at the mercy of a god,
and any inquisition is considered heretical].
“Then, as for the self-evident
need of the potential for an effect, it is that the judgement about the
potential’s need for an effect is a necessity that the mind affirms as soon as
the mind envisages that it is the potential that has self-sustaining existence
and no inexistence.
And that the discreteness of the
trust of the need for an effect: to some [because] of the obscurity of
envisagement, does not impinge the judgement about it being necessary.
Then, effectivity is a mental
consideration, and the effective makes an effect in the effect: not from the
standpoint of it being present, and neither from the standpoint of it being
And its effect is in the whatness,
and a following dueness follows it.
And the inexistence of the
potential hinges on the inexistence of its cause, as it is known by what
“Then, like a potential needs a
cause in its eventuation, it also needs a cause for its perpetuation.
To clarify this: the perpetual
potential needs an effect, because the cause of need is potentiality, not the
eventuality. And this cause exists. Since the potential after existence remains
on what it was on before potentiality.
So if it is said about this: why?
The answer: because of the
existence of its cause, that is the existence of cause of neediness.
“And if it is said: that the
perpetual potential needs no cause, because: the cause either makes an effect
in the existence that was a result of it, and this is impossibility, because it
is the outcome of the outcome,
Or it makes an effect in a new
thing, so that the cause makes an effect in the new not in the remaining.
Its answer: that the effect
benefits the perpetuation after eventuation.
[So when people ask: what is the
purpose of the universe?
The religious thought old and new
dwells in the potential: which is the physical understanding of existence,
without it being aware of it,
So for example they say: god
wants to test the people in order to reward them and punish them,
All of which is a mental
consideration, which is the effect of the existence of the potential universe
that has a cause.
And then other arguments arise:
that the universe has no cause.
So all those arguments have been
fathomed at their highest level of abstraction, which I should say, was
interpreted to be dealing with physical images of existence.
And because of existence’s
capability of copying and erasing, all the Discourses have been taken to create
a belief as their effect.]
“So there are two things:
incidence and perpetuation.
For, effect makes an effect in perpetuation, and this is a new matter other
than eventuation, and no outcome adheres to it.
“And the closest model [to the eventuation] is an example of effectivity in
If a person envisaged an image in his/her mind, so
long as he turns/looks at it, it remains; and if he turns his vision away from
it, it disappears.
So the continuation of vision is an effect in the
perpetuation, and it is not a new existence, as well it needs continuation, for
it has no self-sustaining perpetuation.
“Hence, and according to what was mentioned
regarding the perpetual potential’s need for an effect, it is admissible to
refer the ancient potential to the incurred/incurring effect, that if the
ancient potential is possible/actualised.
To make this dawn and to elucidate it: it is that
when it was proven that the potential is needy for an effect on two fronts:
occurrence and perpetuation, it is due on it to become the ancient potential –
this is by assumption – needing an effect.
For, even if it did not need an effect for
occurrence – by the assumption of its ancientness – it needs it for
perpetuation – by the assumption of its potentiality.
And this is contrary to saying: that the potential
needs no cause for perpetuation.
Because such an ancient potential needs no cause
from the beginning: as for eventuation, it is because the assumption is that it
is ancient it has no eventuation; as for perpetuation it is because the
assumption is the potential needs no cause for perpetuation.
[This is how the intellect falls in
self-contradiction immediately when it builds philosophical theories on
observable things, where cause and effect overlap in the mind.
The model of a person looking in the mirror is indeed of the highest
representation, because it is the model that is constantly being copied and
So when an image is not looked at any more, it should not be substituted by
another image, because the logic that has been canvassed in this Discourse will
apply to any image.]
“Then, the ancient referenced to a
discretionary doer cannot be reasoned, because a willing [thing] acts
intentionally, thus the intention precedes the caused [thing], hence it is not
Rather, the ancient is referenced to
the inevitable doer, because the inevitable requires a caused [thing], like
parity requires four.
And to this difference between the
inevitable and the discretionary Our say has come: and it cannot be referenced
to the discretionary.
“Then there is no Ancient except The
Lord High is He, since everything else is potential, and every potential requires
a cause, and the Cause of what is is the Lord High is He,
He doeth what He willeth, so His object
is after the Will, for there is no Ancient in the beginning except He, High is
He. And allusions to proof of evidence to miracles will come.
[The allusions to the Inevitable
Existence that is the Cause of all the causes, and to The Absolute that is The
Cause of the Cause of all the causes: are in all the Discourses,
How religious authorities explain the
Discourses to their followers is a different matter.
And while it is undeniable that the
masses require such explanations, I should hasten to say that a person who
seeks Knowledge should take those explanations only as stepping stones, past
which he/she will be able to advance, if he/she is honest in his inquest.
The words “proof” and “miracles” have
featured in all the Discourses too. Often they were used by religious
authorities, or explained to point to physical manifestations and
But it is to the true faithful to the
truth of his/her mind to be certain that physical manifestations and
representations are a proof by choice not by reality,
For, everything that is physical is not
real, as this Discourse and all the Discourse put it unequivocally.
But the Word of the Messengers has to
make its way to all the minds, to inspire an existential experience,
Whether the masses take the Word from
the Messengers or from belief systems, or by intellectual reasoning ... is a
reflection of their rank of awareness.
So as we have said it on this page and everywhere
else, that Knowledge is not referenced to events or physical manifestations,
and that it is one’s own reach,
And when one persists on the way to it:
it reaches one,
And whether the senses are being used
or not ... it makes no difference, because Knowledge reaches vision without a
medium. This is Tawheed, as taught in all Discourses.]
“Then, the incident is needy of an
interval of time and substance. Since, if potentiality is an existential matter
it would have to have substance preceding it, that is by the causality of
“Then, the ancient: inexistence is
inadmissible to its existence per se, or by reference to it. What excludes this
is that the ancient: is either the causer of Inevitable Existence that is the
causer, and this does not admit inexistence due to it being Inevitable per se, where
the knowledge of impossibility of turning the inevitable to potential or
non-existence [is], by negation or oppositeness;
Or that it is inevitable by another
[agent], then: what causes an effect in it cannot be discretionary, and this is
the aforementioned discretionary act by intent and will,
Thus the object of the discretionary is
preceded by will, and hence [it] is not ancient.
And thus the causer of effect in the
ancient is bound to be inevitable, and the doer by initiation: its object
cannot separate from it, and wherever is the doer permanent the object is
permanent timeless and eternal.
[Such high mountains of abstraction can
be climbed by dedication and perseverance, and there are no secrets in them,
And as the next passage states, this is
every person’s purpose, so long as he/she doesn’t have a purpose other than the
encounter of Truth.]
“Then the return to the lamp of the
heart [is] to the whatness and its paraphernalia [to achieve]. And it [the
paraphernalia] is what was derived from [what It is] (the square brackets being
the Writer’s) while He is/is not in Him, the question is answered by [what It is]
(also in this case),
And it is said
overwhelmingly/exoterically and inclusively/esoterically about the matter that
is an object of action, and the Identity and the Truth are said about it, while
the external existence is being considered, and the whole is of the
seconds/twos of discernible [things].
“Then the Truth of everything is
inconsistent with what it is exposed to of considerations. Else, it would not
[say the] truth about what negates it, and whatness alongside with every
incident faces it with its opposite. While it, from its own standpoint is none
[And I can see here again how those
timeless statements were perhaps taken to point to their opposite, as the last
This is why it has been Law to open
them, as we announced when COB was first opened to open the Books which have
been covered by falsehood and dust,
So those whose heart’s lamp has not
been put out can return to it. It will glow brighter than it ever did.]
“Then, the truth of everything is
inconsistent with what it [the thing] exhibits of/from it of considerations.
Else, it would not say truth about what annuls it,
And whatness remains with every
exhibit/incidence mirroring its opposite.
While it, from being it, is none but
And if it was questioned, by the two
extremities of the opposite, the answer is negation to everything before
whenness [noun from when], not after it.
[Hence this Discourse and other
Discourses annul the exegesis thereof,
And hence all expressed truths, whether
by action or inactions, whether covert or overt, whether secret or open ... are mirrorings,
Which begs the question: can any action
be totally virtuous? Or equally, can judgement transcend relativity?
And this is the subject of discussion
between Arjuna and Krishna since the beginning of this time,
But Krishna’s Answer was swift, any
action that is karmic will generate more action, and action that is in full
Knowledge of the Whatness of all actions is pure joy and virtue.]
“Then, whatness could be taken stripped
from anything excluding it, so that if anything joins it, it would be
superfluous, and it [the joining thing] cannot be said about the sum [of the
whatness and what was added], which is the whatness, by the condition of
negating the thing, and it can only be in the mind.
And it can be taken not by the
condition of anything, and this is whole, intrinsic and existent externally,
and it is a part of the people [as in their ideologies], and it [the whatness]
truths about the sum that is obtained from it and what was added to it.
“Then, the wholeness incidental to the
whatnesses [alluding to natural whatnesses with slightly different Arabic
spelling] is said to be: a logical wholeness.
And it is said about the compound:
mental wholeness and they are both mental.
Thus those are three considerations,
they are the intrinsicly whole, the logically whole and the mentally whole;
which must be gleaned in/from every discernible whatness.
“Then, of the whatnesses there is the
simple which has no parts like essence; and of it is the compound which is what
does have parts, like a human, being a compound of the animal and the speaker,
And those two exist by necessity, since
the existence of the dense compound is self-evident, and it does not consist
except of simple [things].
“And the two adjectives of
simplicity and the denseness of compoundedness are by consideration
contradictory [to one another], and they might host one another to oppose one
another in generality and specificity, by consideration of them by what has
For, the simplicity of the predicate is more general than the simple truth, and
the compound truth is more general than the compound predicate.
[So let’s say that diamond cuts through
Diamond as a simple mental construct is in fact a compounded molecular
structure of carbon atoms,
So the simplicity of diamond and the compoundedness of its molecular structure
oppose one another,
On the other hand, “cuts through metal” is a general statement applicable in a
Such generality is more perceivable than simple truths such as: matter consists
of compounded molecular structures.]
“Then, as need is
actualised in the denseness: of the compound, so too is the simple,
The two might stand on their own, and might require space/manner.
“Then, the dense compound,
as such, it is compounded and made dense by what precedes it in existence and
inexistence relatively to the mind and the exterior, and this is the cause of
needlessness for a cause, considering that the mind is lucid and the exterior
[The allusion here to the
theories of matter and complex material structures being taken as existent per
And it is impossible to
push it away from what is intrinsic to it, then three aspects/modes occur, one
is self-opposition and two are more general.
[For, if you say that the
hardness of diamond is an illusion your mind would not be convinced. So a
theory justifying the oppositenss is required, and the mind has to accommodate
two concepts now, which have to be generalised on matter: that although it is
perceivably real, it is an illusion.]
“Then, there is certain
indispensable need of some parts to one another, and it is not possible to
comprise it by one consideration.
“Then, they/it may be singular externally and may be singular mentally.
“Then, if the exhibits of the general are considered, also its predicates, they
might differ and might intertwine.
“Then, they/it may be taken as substances and might be taken as potentialities,
Hence, kind, branch and matter/origin are exhibited. Then the two [the general
and the predicates] make the two one.
[As in regarding diamond
and its hardness as one mental perception,
And I suggest that the reader try to find his/her own examples, non-similar to
the examples provided, as a mental and philosophical exercise.]
“Then, the kind amongst the
two [kind and branch] is like matter, and it is caused, and branch is like
image and it is a cause.
“Then, whatever has no kind
has no branch.
“Then, every branch that is
complete is one, and there can be no two kinds in the one rank of one whatness.
“Then, any mental construct
is from those two.
“Then, it must be the case
that they are finite.
“Then, they can be mental,
natural/characteristical and logical according to their kind.
“Then, of them are lofty
and low [things] and in between, so the essence is a lofty kind, and the
animate/animal is a low kind, and a growing body and any body are in between
kinds, also the branch [as in: in between branches].
Nay, also kind and the
particular and the general exhibit [being in between]. And this is included in
the Four Knowables. As for the Fifth Knowable that is honourable and high, in
It everything is One, remaining and simple, permanent and eternal, where there
is no denseness or darkness, but only clarity and simplicity.
[So the question echoes
across time and place, what do humans need to know?
The word “ألعلم” which
features in the Qur’an and the Hikmah refers to the Khowledge of the Hudood “ألأسماء”,
that are the Dimensions of Existence, and metaphorically the Branches, as this
This structure branches and
is reflected in the dense, and this Discourse, like all the Discourses, makes a
way for the mind to climb up those branches back to the Origin, on the abstract
routes of the Mind.
But the confusion between
information and knowledge has been happening since the beginning of this
At first it was thought
that mythology is knowledge,
And this is no more than
fairytales in today’s understanding,
Then recently science was
And this one is about the
understanding of the working of nature,
Religious authorities were
derisive of it and even thought it was the work of the devil,
Until it became very
convincing, and proved that it actually can be beneficial,
Moreover, if taken to a higher
degree of abstraction it can even point to the Oneness of everything,
So religious authorities,
perhaps in the last fifty years, had no choice but to accept its dominance,
They even went further, to
suggest that their Books taught science,
So we now hear of Vedic
science, transcendental science, Qur’anic science,
And some Buddhist preachers
say that Buddhism is like science,
By making such statements,
they believe they can elevate their beliefs to the rank of truth and
If fact it only shows that
their understanding of the Message is wrong,
And some modern
philosophers have written about the difference between knowledge and
non-knowledge, suggesting that knowledge is beneficial, whereas non-knowledge
By this they obviously
meant to point to the uselessness of religious fallacies and mythology, to tell
us that only natural facts and sciences are knowledge,
But they all have missed
And in the Surah of
al-Baqarah of the Qur’an, we have explained the allusion of the verse:” And
Adam educated all the Summa, and when He paraded them to the angels said He:
inform me of the names of these if you were honest. Said they: Thy Okeanos (سبحانك),
we know none but what Thou hast taught us, Thou art the Knower The Wise. Said
He: Adam, inform them of their names. And when He informed them of their names,
said He: did I not tell you that I know the unseen of the heavens and the earth
and what you secret and what you disclose?”
And the Ghita said
repeatedly that knowing Ishwara, The Whole Mind is Knowledge, below which every
bit of information is to no avail,
And here in this Discourse,
it takes the reader who has not lost the light of his/her heart to his/her
Beginning, to witness The One in his/her vision, not by hearsay and not by
names and adjectives.]
“Then, of the kind there is
the Solitary, It is what has no kind above It or below It like the Mind, from
It and to It is the beginning and the connection/prayer.
“Then, the two are
predicates [the Self and the Word], and they combine upon mirroring.
“Then, kind cannot be taken
with reference to the Branch.
“Then, when the two
reference [things] to what they are predicated – that is the species – then
kind would be more general, and branch is equal.
“Then, personalisation is
of the matters of consideration. If it is regarded from the standpoint of it
being a mental issue, it is found to be sharing other than it the
personalisation in it. And it does not carry on consequentially but ceases upon
the cessation of the consideration.
“Then, as for who/what has
the personalisation, it could be the Self of whatness, hence it multiplies not.
And it may refer to the personalised substance by the peculiar exhibits cast in
“Then, personalisation does
not occur upon total mental union of its like.
“Then, singularity differs
from personalisation, and each of the two is admitted to singularity by the
other, and the personalised may not be considered by contribution/partnership,
and the whole may be a predicate so it stands out, and personalisation subject
to other than it is singular.
differs from solitariness which consists of Indivisibility.
“Then, it is the
versatility of existence, because of its truthfulness about the numericalness
from the standpoint of it being numerous, unlike the One and Its consistency.
[Yet another question which
never ceases to beg for answers in the human mind, across time and place and
all beliefs: is the personalisation of the Dimensions of Existence admissible?
Again all the messages
answer by the affirmative, and messengers hinted to this truth or declared it
Hence the dilemma: how can
the immutable branches and the very origin take a living form?
And in the Qur’an, they
asked: is He The Law (al-7aqq), about Gabriel, in his personalisation as
And the Messiah said: I am
So theories were
elaborately written and promulgated to the followers of beliefs old and new,
But it is an awareness of
the diversity of existence that one has to reach, to be able to recognise any
Some reject it outright, so
they introduce the supernatural in order to allow the divine some degree of
presence in the world,
Some surrender their minds
and take one particular image as a god, and make their belief a condition for
These are the mental
constructs that people have to overcome. It is the Knowledge that was meant to
be acquired since the early days of existence, when the Self plunged in the
world of darkness and witnessed the apparent chaos, and she and her Brother the
Word had curiosity to find order and essence in it, and to help the miserable
ones who trapped themselves in it.]
“Then, the two cannot be
defined unless the vocabulary is taken into consideration.
[Two in this passage and
the previous refer to the abstract duality of existence in distance from the
Single Point. Hence viewing them as Self and Word, that is image and
animation/expression is perhaps the easiest approach to the intellect in our
place and time.
And the number two becomes
incidental, upon considering that the two is in fact three. The three vertices
of the equilateral triangle become thus a visual representation of Existence in
duality. And its reflection in the Helium, that is the Water which was an
effusion of the Love of the Self and Her Father, constitutes a six-headed star,
representing the necessity of existence of oppositeness.]
“Then, it is the
numerousness in the Mind and the Imagination, the tow equal in their being each
more knowledgeable than its companion in the divisibility.
“Then, unity is not a
matter of sight, it is rather of seconds/twos of discernible [things], also
“Then, it mirrors the two
for the purpose of adding causality [as in cause and effect], and measure and
measurability, not because of essential mirroring between the two.
[Hence the concepts of
natural existence are modelled according to this: distance, space, time, size,
comparability ... this is the repository of mathematics and physics in its
highest abstract model and indeed the repository of religious mythology.]
“Then, the exhibit of the
two could be one; so it has two facets by necessity. The facet of unity [is so]
if it heads not the facet of numerousness and obstructs/exhibits it not.
For unity is incidental,
and if it obstructs/exhibits it would be of subjects and probabilities
incidental to one subject, or conversely, formed [hence] a unity of kind or
species or branch, and it [the subject] might diversify.
“So the subject of the
absoluteness of the indivisibility and nothing else, is a unity personalised by
a said word, else [it is] a point if it has an additional concept having a subject,
or differing if it had no subject.
“So, this, if it does not
admit divisibility, else, it is a measurement, or a mass simple or compound.
“Then, some of these are
more worthy than each other of unity.
[Hence the unity as a
mental construct is none but a mental construct. This is the egg from which the
gods of monotheism hatch, because the concepts in which it was conceived
deliver a variety of them.]
“Then, the He [the third
person], it is in accordance with that [what has been said].
“Then, the unit as an
adjective incidentally and reflexively: its names differ by the difference of
“Then union is
impossibility; for the He is it, requiring two sides of difference and union,
by what has preceded.
“Then, unit is the
beginning of numeration that is based on it, and nothing else.
“Then, if its like is added
to it the twoship/twoness occurs, and is a kind of number.
Then infinite kinds occur
by the addition of one by one, of different truths, it is the kinds of numbers.
“Then, each one of them is
a matter of consideration, the mind makes judgement about it according to the
truths, if some joined others: it is in the mind that the joining is
“Then, unit might
obstruct/exhibit to itself and its mirroring, and ceases upon the cessation of
“Then, partnership might
also obstruct/exhibit to it, so it is privileged by exposure, and so too the
“Then, it is added to its
subject by two considerations, and to its mirroring by a third one, and so too
“Then, let us get into the
wick of the lamp/light, in search for mirroring and its four kinds.
“Then, [every] multi-kind
[thing] is [so] by its four kinds, that is the mirroring negatively and
positively, and it is referred to the verb/say and the tie/connection, and to
the null and the prevalence, and it is the first: taken by the consideration of
a certain peculiarity, and the mirroring of two opposites, and they are both
[The allusion is to the
self-recognition of Existence in the mirroring, which we represented by the
equilateral triangle, with the He being to top vertex,
Then the verb/say “be” [kun
or om] is initiated giving each image the liberty, while the connection is
never severed, and this is the positive mirroring in this Discourse,
As for the null, as was
said on COB, this is the mirroring of the Self in darkness, created by
necessity in the distance, lit by reflection of her light, so that essence is
bestowed on it, and this is compassion, and it is the prevalence of the light
And there is no opposite to
the Mind. From the Mind the Self and the Word are begun, then they are mirrored
in the darkness, where they face the challenges of activity in existence.
This is indeed the wick of
“And He/It is reflected,
and it [is a reflection of] what is in front of it by realisation and exposure
and the mirroring of hospitability.
“Then, under it kind is
employed by an incidental consideration.
“Then, Its argument about
it is by doubt, and in its strongest it is dismissal.
“Then, it is said to the
First: contradiction, and it is actualised in the judgements/matters by eight
conditions [being: the status, the time, the movement/expression, the
direction, the aim, the manifestation, the law, the divine references, as has
come in The Solitary in His Identity].
As for the exclusive ones,
a ninth is set as a condition, which is the difference in it by the quantum,
For, the two wholes are
untrue, and the partial ones are true.
And in the directors is a
tenth, and it is the difference in the direction too, so the two are impossible
to concur truthfully or untruthfully.
[This is a reference to the
cycles of the human existence, from the view of awareness, belief and activity,
which are the drivers of human civilisation,
And the phrase “it is said
to the First: contradiction” is hinting to the fact that only in awareness of
the First that contradiction can be observed in all human philosophical and
And this say is actualised
by the eight Judgements as mentioned,
Then a reference is made to
the two opposites, which can take a partly true argument.
The two opposites cannot
concur, neither ideologically and nor in any other way, and an example of this
is to look at something through two different lenses which each cannot deliver
the entire image,
The two images conveyed by
them are different existentially.]
“Then, if the null is
fettered by the Prevalence [reference to the previous passage] with respect to
the judgements/matters they are called vindicated, which is the mirroring of
existentiality truthfully not untruthfully to the potentiality of the negation
of the subject [being the incidental presence in matter and events], so that
the mirroring of the two is true.
“Then, the subject might
necessitate one of the very two opposites, and it might not necessitate
anything from the two: upon reposing in the adjective of a median/middle way.
[I hope this can inspire
some calmness in the minds which seek reasonable exit from the quagmires of
politics and conflict. But the awareness of the First has to be first, for the
opposites to be recognised as such, as this Discourse puts in no uncertain
terms at the highest level of abstraction.]
“Then, it is not
discernible for the One to have two opposites. Because the opposites, even if
many, the purpose of difference is envisaged by two of them only. By this the
image of weirdest [things] emerged, as well as the new ones of black and white,
and the hot white and the cold black.
[Hence the middle way
cannot be a choice between the many opposites, although as hinted that the
subject might necessitate one of the two.
So if it is found that this
is too difficult to understand, let alone practise, no one has ever said that
it is easy,
Ever since the beginning
this has been humanity’s struggle in the distance in darkness,
But now people can see
skies, mountains, animals, trees ...
All this has been value
added to the null. That’s why the Qur’an keeps reminding the people to be
thankful for everything that they take for granted, such as day and night, and
solid earth to walk on, and rivers and oceans ... and skies above them ...
Dark matter without the
light has nothing but suffering.]
let it be known that oppositeness is devoid of kinds, so there are no opposites
amongst the kinds, and they are subject/condition to the species by the union
of the kind [with the species], and that is by the pair of opposites being of
two kinds employed under a close kind, like blackness and whiteness which are
employed under colour which is their close kind.
“Hence, this requires lifting oppositeness from its origin, and this is why it
was said: and it is subject/condition to the species by their union with the
kind, and making the kind and the branch one.
“Then, that the vision in the eye be returned twice: once in the eye of the
Cause, and once in the eye of the caused, else the vision is turned back
disappointed and lamenting.
And that it [the vision] be sheltering from Sovereignty by the Sovereignty.
For, everything issued from It is a command of either independence or re-union,
for it is a cause of this command and is caused by it, and such is
effectiveness and materialisation and illustration and intention.
experience of Union (Tawheed) cannot be described by any expression,
But the Discourses have hinted to it, only to confirm to those who have
witnessed it that It is True.
And those who have not experienced it: in their minds the words are reduced to
their natural causes, and different beliefs and ideologies hence emerge from
And Tawheed is not a matter of species, this is why it is said it is
subject/condition to the species by their union with the kind,
And the people of the Book and the Hikmah can claim exclusiveness of Tawheed to
their species, and can document their births and their beliefs for their own
convenience, but the true records are by the Law, hence it is said that they
should shelter from the Sovereignty by the Sovereignty in this Discourse, and
to shelter in God (إتقوا الله) in the Qur’an, and to take refuge in the Truth
from the distractions of the low world, in the Ghita and the Dharma,
Because independence, whether intentional or otherwise, is only an illusion
which will be shattered by the Sovereignty.]
the doer is the principle of effect, because effect issues from him, not from
the intention and the materialisation and the illustration.
“And when [it is] existent by all the directions of effect by being
satisfying/summing all the conditions, then the existence of the caused/effect
“Then, it is not admissible that the complete cause be comparable to the
absence of the effect/caused, because the doer by obligation is accompanied
with the effect/caused, so the cause does not precede its caused, and the
ancient refers not to the due effect.
[Hence all the people of beliefs, old and new,
cannot claim that their belief is their assured connection which will be
fulfilled in place in time of their understanding,
And anyone who has witnessed the eye of the Truth is aware of this reality, while
the people of beliefs are competing with one another over parts.
However, who are in the best position to progress are those who have opened
their eyes and ears to the Word of Truth across time and place, present and
“Then, it is no admissible
that the caused is perpetuated without the cause, because the cause of need is
potentiality, and the caused past existence is potential, hence it needs the
“And if there was an objection that we see the builder dead while the structure
still stands up, so how come the caused has been perpetuated while the cause
has gone? I answer: the structure is calculated, as for the provider of the image It is our Lord The Beginner Manifest, hence the
perpetuation of the caused is admitted while the cause has gone in the
calculation, that is the image provided by our Lord The Beginner remains after
the annihilation of the calculator. Because the calculator is not the cause of
the image really.
[And this very model was presented by
COB in an essay by the title "أين توجد الكلمات", to demonstrate this
very truth, as an answer to why the Dimensions of Existence can exist in
spatiotemporal bodies, oblivious of every phenomenon and every activity in the
cosmos, and without having to intervene consciously in anything except the
events of their spatiotemporal lives.
And as we read this for the first time we write it in English as quickly as it
is read, and the vision goes only one word at a time, except if the grammar
requires a pre-reading. This is proof that this is from the Guarded Tablet that
it is read and written, and it has existed in non-verbal form since the
beginning, despite our coming and going many times over.]
“Then, with its uniqueness
the caused [thing] unites/combines by considering the multiplicity of the additions
and His Dawning: that one thing is issued from The Beginner of the world that
is the Primary Caused – the Master – and to this Master [the Whole Mind] there
is unreal multiplicity. Because the Primary Caused, with regards to Himself,
potential, and with regards to His Cause: Inevitable, and He is conscious of
himself and is conscious of his multiplicity, that is to other than that: of
the directions/facets of considered multiplicity. Hence a caused [thing] is
issued from Him upon considering every direction.
“Then, this judgement is self-reflective, so with the uniqueness of the caused
the cause unites/combines, so no two causes can concur over one caused, also no
two caused [things] can be issued from one cause. And in the uniqueness of kind
there is no converse.
[So an example of
uniqueness is that the essence of sunrise is one cause, but no two sunrises are
“Then the two references
are of the seconds/twos of discernibles.
“Then, between them is the
mirroring of hospitability. And they might concur in one thing, thus it becomes
cause and caused, but with reference to two matters, like Zayd who is cause of
his son Omar, and is caused by his father Abraham, and they do not oppose one
another in the two [cause and caused].
“Then, the exhibits of the
two do not integrate in an infinite sequence, because each one of them ceases
to occur without an enforcing cause. But whatever is due by other [things] is
also of a ceasing occurrence; for, there should be a self-enforcing cause,
[and] it is a party [in the occurrence]; also for mapping/corresponding between
a finite totality from which some units have been separated, and another from
which nothing was separated.
And because the mapping/correspondence
is by consideration of two references, so that each one of them multiplies by
consideration of the two: by the inevitability of their finiteness due to the
superlativeness of one of the two references over the other from the standpoint
And because the effect in
the total, if it was some of its parts then the thing becomes effective in
itself and its causes;
And because the total has a
complete cause, and each [individual] part is not a complete cause, since the
entirety is not enforced by it, and how can it enforce the entirety, it is
[only] a thing needing the entirety infinitely.
“And the two references
equal on the extremities of the contrary, for in this is the reference to the
causation and causality. So every time fire is actualised burning is
actualised, and every time burning is actualised fire is actualised, and every
time the absence of fire is actualised the absence of burning is actualised,
and every time the absence of burning is actualised the absence of fire is
actualised. And this is in the completeness of the dawning of clarity needing
[This is not stating the
most obvious. But as this passage started, it is the mirroring of hospitability
of cause and effect of one another, so that an event is seen in the mind as one
complete cycle, rather than the linear occurrence. Because in the end everything
is observed in the mind where clarity needs no proof, and the sensory
information is only a physical actualisation.]
“Then, acceptance and
action are mutually contradictory. For there cannot be a single matter relative
to a single thing accepting and acting upon the union of reference, which is
the reference of acceptance and action, that is because of the mutual negation
of what adheres to the two of them.
[None of these statements
refer to supernatural phenomena or religious mythology, as I can see might have
been interpreted by some interpreters. It is the examination of the content of
one’s mind. Whatever is in one’s mind is exposed by the Word of Truth, because
from it everything is projected, and only those who can climb up those high
mountains of abstraction can reach the Summum.
And an example of the
previous statement is a lake and a river. What adheres to the river is the flow
which ends up in the lake, and what adheres to the lake is the stillness within
“Then, there ought to be
difference made between the cause and the caused, if the caused were needing
for itself for that cause, else not.
[So in the previous example
the lake needs the river as its cause. But if the lake is replenished by rain
water and other sources, the river ceases being its cause.]
“Then, the truth of one of
the two references [acceptance and action] is not due over the companion.
[So the truth of acceptance
in the lake is not due over what accompanies it of exhibits, hence the lake can
seem totally independent of the river]
“Then, the person of all
the elements is not a self-causing [thing] for another person, from the two of
them the persons have not disintegrated/sprawled out,
And because of his
needlessness of him by another, and because of his lack of superiority [over
him], and because of their evenness, and because of the perpetuation of one of
them while his companion has gone.
[This is another approach
to viewing existence as not being caused by sequential events, a whole view in
which the universe and the man are one, not caused by one another or occurring
sequentially: randomly or by the will of a god.]
“Then, action from us is
needing of partial envisagement for the action to personalise by it, then
longing, then will, then motion from the muscles for the action to be carried
[The hint which stands out is in the
mention of longing. As once said on COB that in fact nothing can be done
without passion. It is the fuel which fuels every activity or inertia. Hence
cursing passion altogether does not progress one on the road to
self-realisation, and the pretentious abandoning of passion is by itself a form
of passion. When people become aware of this passion can be used for the good
purposes of their present constantly.]
“Then, voluntary motion to
the place of tracking some will accordingly, and the parts of such a motion
follows the imaginations of partial will, the forerunner of such imaginations
is a cause for the forerunner of this plan for the actualisation of
imaginations as well as other [forms of] will, so that the will connect in the
self and in the motions along the distance until its end.
[If one can remember the
early days of childhood when one learns to coordinate imagination, will and
motion, and the early days of walking,
Or if one has had moments of hypno-vigilence, whereby one dreams while wakeful,
and tries to control one’s movement in the space and time of the “dream”,
This last passage becomes lucid.]
“Then, the subject is the
condition for the truth of the effect [ that is if the target of the motion is
“Then, disintegration is
subject to interval, provision and intensity, by the consideration of which:
disintegration and its negation, specific to the effect: truth [that is
Because the forcible one differs by the difference of the acceptor, and upon
the union of the beginning by the unevenness of its mirroring.
And the natural differs by the difference of the doer, due to the equality
between the major and the minor in the acceptance; so if they move upon the
union of the beginning, then disintegration exhibits [itself].
[So in the first instance,
the disintegration is forced, in the second it is “natural”, done by the
subject itself that is disintegrating, which has in it by the laws of nature
equal forces of perpetuation and self-annihilation, although they coexist
seemingly unequal. If those forces unite by the unity of the beginning of the
subject, then disintegration occurs,
Which, effectively means that disintegration is inevitability for every
“Then, the projection/place
formed by the dweller/projector of it is accepter of it, and is substance for
the compound [of the dweller and the dwelling], and its acceptance is inherent,
and closeness and remoteness might occur by the propensities which it earns by
consideration of the dweller.
“Then, this dweller is an image of the compound, and an active part in its
projection/place and it is one 
[Far from alluding to the dwelling of a
god in a physical body, this is about the illustration/figuration of any
existent thing, and any existent thing can have an image, and this image can be
personalisation by that statement.
And this was clearly expounded at the start of this Discourse and that the
Absolute is the Cause above the Cause of the causes. Otherwise the cosmos would
fall apart, from having The Cause of its Cause being subjected to causality.
But people’s beliefs have to evolve in their own minds. The Qur’an came to
correct the belief that god was born and died on a cross. And although the
Power of its Word was strong, many did not believe and still do not. Then
philosophy in the West refuted the concept and freed those who believed it from
surrendering their minds to irrational belief, but reasoning cannot counter
beliefs all the time, and many still take that concept as the basis of their
Although any image is a projection of Truth, and it is stated in the Qur’an and
the Ghita that wherever you turn your faces there is God’s Countenance, the
concept of god being born in a physical body goes beyond that,
This is a knife’s edge that people have to walk without falling on either side
of it, and words can go only so far.
Hence the two schools of thought have emerged: the god being born as a human,
and the god who is unknowable except by a Book.
There is no essential difference between the two schools of thought, and most
importantly there is no essential difference between the different schools of
thought born on one side of this divide,
Hence, whether it is this man or that man, and whether it is this book or that
book: the concept essentially does not change. The journey in abstraction, as
expounded in this Discourse of the highest order, takes one to Tawheed (Union),
like all the Discourses do, where the Truth can be witnessed without a medium,
So that ultimately the Summum is reached, and the body hosting this highest
rank of awareness is then the Human (al-naasoot) that is the God in the human.]
“Then, the aim is a cause
by its whatnesses [plural is added in order to reflect the Arabic word which
has a spelling pointing to natural “whatness”] for the causation of the cause
that is the actual, caused in its existence by the caused [aim], and it is
constant, as whatnesses for every aiming [person].
As for the animate/animal power which is the locomotive, its purpose is to
reach the ultimate, and it could be an aim of
longing as well, and it could be not. If this does not eventuate, the motion is
false. Else, it is either providence, or a habit or an essential aim or
absurdity and hazard.
“And they [scholars] have proven that there are
purposes for the [study] of natural [sciences], and the same for the systems
[of any art or mathematical or scientific discipline].
[It has been mentioned in the Ghita
that every activity can be a yoga, if done selflessly for the purpose of
knowledge, and it has been mentioned in COB that any activity is aimed at union
with its law, until the conscious person is one with it, and called it
Perseverance (ألجد) as a Dimension of Existenece,
Perseverance manifests itself in every activity people undertake, the ultimate
purpose of which is the aim of the person performing it. Hence people can excel
in arts and sciences and can set out on a journey of self-knowledge and discovery
in every pursuit they undertake,
And indeed activity can be wrong, aimless and hazardous ...]
“Then, the cause,
absolutely, could be simple and could be compound, also potential or actual,
and total or partial, and self-sustaining or accidental, and general or
particular, and near or far, and common or private.
“Then, the negation of an incidence is of the incidental principles, and the
doer on either side is one [that is the law of the incidence], and the subject
is like substance.
“Then, the shortage of
effect is indeed in one of its extremities, and the causes of whatness are
other than the causes of existence. And non-existence is bound to have a cause
also in the motion.
[So an example is the
effect of the sun which is reduced at the extremities of the day, although the
existence or the whatness of a source of light is not the cause of occurrence
of the sun and the phenomenon of day and night in the physical existence.
These can cease to exist,
if their causes of cessation materialise in the physical world that is
But this discourse goes to
the highest degree of abstraction, so that what is perceived in the world by
the senses culminates in awareness of its essence. Hence the title “Privileged
Quintessence”, because the quintessence of any existent thing is of the highest
rank of awareness.]
“And of the pre-conceived
causes are those which lead to a model or a defect or an opposite.
And the pre-conception:
some of it is near, like very hot water, pre-conceived to accept an aerial
figure, and some of it is far, like lukewarm water.
[So the “pre-conceived”
causes are those which are innate to the existence of something.
Although these were not
designed or conceived by humans, they were at an earlier stage of human
And the human mind today
would find the dreams and memories that the entire manifest being the outcome
of innumerable cycles of human existence: outlandish, and dismisses it
Hence, how close one is to
Existence materialises in one being able to communicate with Existence, so that
remembrance and foresight become possible, albeit unprovable to all other
Therefore water can turn to
steam if it has reached its boiling point, otherwise it stays in its liquid
form. And the word of Truth and the longing for it are like the fire which
elevates its temperature, so it reaches the boiling point.
Mind you, religious and
political beliefs do flare up emotions with the fire of passion ... but this
one is passion for perishable glory and unreal existence, it is false passion.]
“And of the incidental
cause: is that which is preconceived, and it is as though it is the adherer to
the inherent cause, and that is what is called incidental cause, as a cause
preconceived, bringing the inherent cause to the caused [thing].”
[So the incidental causes
have been rounded over their caused things, so that a complete isolation can be
Thus the manifest appears
to have its own incidental causes, seemingly independently of any presumed
power beyond them,
And hence the ideologies of
Divine Intervention: as in a god intervening in a self-ruling universe; and the
ideologies of materialism: as in the universe and the life in it occurring accidentally,
dismissing the existence of consciousness at all levels.
And thus the double quotes
have been closed, marking the end of the Discourse.
And many readers of it have
probably wondered, why it wasn’t ended with a statement or a summary of
But the summary and
conclusion were provided right at the beginning of it.
So two appendices were
added some time later, under the title of “The Essences and the Incidences”
With the author’s intent to
confirm a belief,
Because the Discourse has
been impossible to understand by the religious authorities who assumed
ownership of it,
The two appendices use
complex sentences, grand words and a poetic style,
Most importantly they are
fairly easy to read, although intentionally shrouded with mystery,
And this is has been the
complex of religious interpreters and explicators:
How can the Books sound so
grand and mysterious and informative ...
But neither of the
linguistic and poetic qualities of the Books were deliberately planned,
They are inherent in their
inspiration, and they adhere to it,
It is that certain things
cannot be expressed in any other way,
So when those qualities are
mimicked, the outcome impresses the reader who hasn’t witnessed the Truth of
And although they have an
inspiration that can go only so far: they can never take one all the way,
Hence the Qur’an and the
Hikmah call them: zukhruf, meaning decoration,
Because they are like the
decoration which ornaments the walls and the ceilings of buildings,
While the truth is in the
causes which keep the building standing up,
Decorations have been added
and appended to all the Books without an exception,
And until the believer in a
particular Book become aware of this fact: the decorations will be seen by
him/her as truth,
The second one of those
appendices starts with the use of the word "عز",
A word which was previously
inserted in the text, as a correction as previously mentioned,
This word has been one of
the identifiers of the liberal builders for millennia, although they might have
adopted a new one now,
And although the Books have
repeatedly refuted names and adjectives as identifiers of truth, the author
attempts to bypass all the Books by his introduction,
To declare that a person
and certain events were truth,
Not by a true approach,
Because the Discourse has
alluded by true approach to Existence and inexistence,
Rather, by listing the
theories and definitions of divine manifestation in a human image,
With the pretence of
But with the intent of
Not by a true approach,
Because the Discourse has
alluded by true approach to Existence and inexistence,
Rather by inspiring a state
of surrender of mind,
Not unlike all religious
So that a god is happy with
those who accept him in an image or a book of their choosing,
Hence there was no point in
keeping such a text closed,
Except to affirm that
belief requires no study and no investigation,
Because indeed belief does
not require any of those things,
But had the authorities
known any truth, they would have recognised the futility of secrecy, in as far
as the truth can reach the minds of people who accept it, and spread from them,
Because the truth does reach
and spread without human intervention,
The truth exists, and its
existence cannot be overridden or abolished by human decisions and discretion,
And this is proof to them,
before the doors are truly closed at the end of time of this cycle, when no
acknowledgement of truth is accepted from those who have rejected it all the
way, and no union is possible for them, as said in all the Books.
Secrecy of books serves
only as a protection from logical and philosophical scrutiny,
And allows the authorities
to preach anything they wish to their followers, empowered by secrecy,
And there was a time when
the profession of transcribing the Books was a monopoly of the liberal
Since biblical times,
And the campaign of John
the Baptist against the Pharisees and the Scribes, who copied the Books and
kept them secret to specific tribes ... was mainly aimed at them,
They have left their
insignia and vocabulary in every Book, to claim ownership of it, and to tell
their followers that Al3izz is the author of all of them,
And now many await for his
coming back, to salvage them,
But he will only come back
to shed more blood,
This is the destiny of
those who worshipped him in different names and forms that they cannot evade,
In one name and image they
worship him, and in another they curse him and stone him,
He has provided them with
two pairs of opposites to affirm his name and image in their minds,
Unless there is truth in
their minds and compassion in their hearts,
And the worlds are not run
by anarchy, except for those who believe only in them.]