As we have seen, there are no traces of the Central Asian origin of the work ; does it belong to the pen of a follower of the Western Ismaili school in Persia ? We know almost nothing about the fate of Ismailism in Persia after the fall of Alamut in 654/1256, and it is impossible to ascertain whether the followers of the Musta'lian branch were found there in the eighth c. A.H., or later, when the Gulshani raz was in existence. The Western Ismaili authors, being Arabs themselves, were not in the least concerned with the matters of Ismailism in "Khorasan " (as they vaguely called Persia), even under the fatimides, when the Da'wat was still united and when most vigorous propaganda was carried in the East. (1) After the fall of the Fatimides, when the centre of the ismaili western da'wat was transferred to the Yemen and the connections with Persia completely severed, the Western Ismaili works of historical interest were completely absorbed in the petty quarrels and intrigues of local Arabs, and the stagnant life of this remote corner of the Islamic world. In the seventh volume of his great Ismaili history, the Uyunu'l-akhbar, Sayyid-na 'Imadu'd-din Idris (d. the 19th Dhi Qa'da 872 /the 10th, June 1468) mentions with a feeling of surprise and great disapproval a Nizari whom he met in Syria in 839/1435. The man was from Samarqand.
In full accordance with the spirit of the Eastern Ismaili tradition the author chiefly deals with the question of the moral perfection and the salvation in the spiritual sense, from the tortures of doubt and internal struggle. He entirely omits the philosophical and gnoceological portions of the Gulshani raz, and the chapters dealing with Sufic poetical terminology. We cannot be quite sure that the work is complete in the present Manuscript ; but there are no clear indications as to its incompleteness. The author picks up isolated verses from the poem, and recombines them, often even in very short quotations. In addition to this,he sometimes quotes verses by different authors, mostly from Rumi's Mathnawi, never, however, mentioning their religion. On the whole, the work is written smoothly and indicates a considerable literary skill and theological learning of the author.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. It is remarkable that such an important phenomenon as Nasiri Khusraw, who left much traces even in general Persian literature,remained quite unknown to the Western Ismaili literature, in spite of his being an orthodox follower of the Fatimide doctrine.

The name of the author and the date of composition are not mentioned in the work, and there is not the slightest key to this. We may place thus the date of the composition of the work anywhere between 710/1311 and 1312/1895, which latter is the date of the present copy.. The language is good Persian, without any trace of the Badakhshani or Central Asian peculiarities. The author seems to be a highly intellectual man, of good learning. All this seems to indicate that the work was not produced somewhere in the Oxus region. And yet there is a great puzzle in it, if we analyze the Ismaili terminology which we find in the author's references to the doctrinal matters. In his speculations the author continually refers to the terms like Natiq, Asas and hujjats (in Plural ). This terminology does not belong to the Eastern, or Nizari branch of Ismailism as it developed in Persia, ,and as it is found in different authentic works of the community in question.(1)

These terms are used only in those Persian Ismaili works which continue the tradition of Nasiri Khusraw, and which are produced in the Oxus area, where the earlier form of Ismailism, as it was under the Fatimides, was mixed together ,with the more advanced forms of the Alamuti period. It continues there up till now only because of the absence of education amongst the followers of the religion which does not permit them to see the inconsistency of this mixture of the un-reformed , and of the reformed systems.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In the Eastern Ismaili works instead of the term Natiq is used Payghambar, Rasul, etc. The term Asas, which is originally applied to Ali ibn Abu Talib, to distinguish him from his descendants, the Imams (it is in reality the Asasu'l -imamat, i.e. " the foundation of Imamat") is entirely forgotten, because the doctrine recognises the equality of all Imams, amongst whom there are no greater and ones,and no lesser ones. The term hujjat in the earlier Ismailism correspond to something like a " bishop" of the Ismaili church ; there were officially 24 or 12 of them. In the Eastern Ismailism the Hujjat is mostly one, and is endowed with as supernatural qualities as the Imam himself, to whom he is a subordinate.

Under circumstances like these it is not surprising to find that a similar claim is raised against the famous exposition of the Sufic system, the well-known versified treatise Gulshani raz. It was composed in the month of Shawwal 710 A.H. (beg. 1311 A.D.)(1) by Sa'du'd-din Mahmud Shabistari (or Chabustari), a Sufic philosopher of Adharbayjan, who died circa 720/1320.(2) The work is probably one of the most popular books on Sufism; its manuscript copies are very common; it was often lithographed and printed in the East. A great number of commentaries on it were composed, and a great number of imitations written by different poets of Persia. Its full english translation with the original text was published in 1980, by E. Whinfield, in Trubner's Oriental Series (unfortunately, I could not find any copy of it in the Bombay libraries to give reference to it in the present paper). On the whole, the work is very incomplete and superficial, the author was badly upset by the requirements of the metre and rhyme ; but the most valuable feature of the work which made it so popular and so well-known in the Muhammadan world is its conciseness, which is particularly welcome in view of the usual profusion of the Sufic writers.

Amongst some Persian Ismaili manuscripts, which I could examine, I found a short work (3) with
the title of Ba'di az ta'wilati Gulshani raz(4), which gives some Ismaili explanations of selected passages of the treaties, thus implying its being recognised as an Ismaili work. This, however, is not explicitly stated in the text itself. The work is not a real commentary, and it is not concerned with the whole of its text. It is better to regard it as an original and independent work based on the Gulshani raz.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In some Manuscripts the date of composition is 717/1317, cf. H. Ethe, Gr. d. Iran. Phil., vol. II, p. 299.
2 For an account of the author's biography, his works, and details of the Gulshani raz, see E. G. Browne's Literary History of Persia, vol. III, pp. 146
150.
3. The copy is dated 1312/1895, 28 pages of 14 lines each, 4,5 inches by 2,5 in fairly good Persian nasta'liq. It is not free from bad orthographical errors.
4. Here the term ta'wil is used in a peculiar sense which it probably acquired in Persian-speaking countries in fairly modern times. According to the earlier ideas of Ismailism, ta'wil can be given only by the Imami, and can refer only to the Coran and fundamental ideas of the religion, not to any ordinary book.

It is a well-known fact that many persecuted sects in Persia not rarely tried to veil their tenets by adopting the terminology of Sufism. The vagueness of the doctrine of the latter, and the difficulty of its proper formulation usually gave great opportunity to write for those initiated into the real meaning of the doctrine, while preserving the outer semblance of the highly mystic Sufic piety. There were probably also cases of a genuine " coalescence" of the Sufic idea with ideas of the sect which used them for disguise. Especially complete, probably, it always, was in the case of Ismailism, which is based exactly on the same Plotinian philosophy as the Sufic theories. Thought the Persian Ismaili literature is very little known, we may see from those works which are available often it is very difficult to decide whether one has to deal with, so- to-say, "Ismailised Sufism " or with Suficised Ismailism ." The great extent of the practice of the taqiyyah, or lawful precautionary concealement of one's religion, often was carried to such a degree that in the case of some poets it is impossible to decide whether the ideas dealt with by them were really Sufic or Ismailitic. Some of those poets and philosophers whose belonging to Sufism seems indisputable to every student of Persian or Arabic literature, are regarded by Ismailis as their own co-religionists who wrote with great degree of concealment. For instance Sana'i, Attar, and Rumi, who are the principal Sufic poets of Persia, are claimed to be Ismailis. We need not take up the most difficult, and probably quite hopeless task of ascertaining who is right, and may be content with the observation that in their higher and more philosophic forms the Sufic and the Ismaili ideas are exactly the same.(1) Both these systems had to adapt the Neo-Platonic theory to the dogma of Islam by finding compromise, and there is nothing extraordinary if both were compelled to introduce the same formulas.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Already Ibn Khaldun, the famous Islamic historian (d. 808/11406), paid attention to this coincidence in the ideas,see Prolegomenes, vol. II, P. 190, and vol. III, pp. 103-106.

Aba (Ba) Bakr, 13v.
Abu Dharr, 7, 7v.
ada, i.e., ada'i ta'lim, 6, 6v.
ada'i ithbat-i Imamat, 15v.
ada kardan, 6v.
ahkam-i aqli-yi shari'at, 15v.
ahkam-i hazara, 13.
ahkam-i shari'at, 13v.
ahl-i batin, 6v.
ahl-i haqiqat, 9.
ahl-i haqq, 6v.
ahl-i tadadd, 1v, 3v, 5, 14, 14v, 16, 16v.
ahl-i tadadd (ithbat-i), 16.
ahl-i tarattub, 2, 2v, 3v, 4, 5, 6, 8v, 11, 14, 14v, 15, 15v, 16, 16v; din-i a.t., 11;
ki da'iyan wa baqi hudud zir-i hujjat, 3v; da'ifan, 4; jism-i a.t., 4; madar wa
rawnaq-i a.t., 14; qawi-tar-i a.t., 8v; qawiyyan, 4; qawiyyan wa da'ifan, 15;
shinakht-i a.t., 15.
ahl-i wahdat, 5, 7, 16v; (= hujjat, 7).
ahl-i zahir, 8, 9, 10v.
ahlu'l-bayt, 7v.
Aisha, 8v.
akhirat, 6; kamal-i a., 6.
akwan (cf. kawn), 4v, 5, 5v, 6.
akwan-i haqiqat, 11.
alam-i amri, 5.
alam-i khalqiyyat, 12.
alam-i zahir wa batin, 15.
Ali, 9v; Mawla-na, 7v, 8; khaliq wa musawwir-i alam, 7v.
Ali-yi Wa'iz, Amir Sayyid, 8.
Amir, hadrat-i, cf. Ali, 3, 7v, 8, 13v, 14.
Amir Sayyid Ali-yi Wa'iz, 8.
amr, mazhar-i, 1v, 5v, 6; = teaching, 6.
amr-i amm wa khass, 4v, 15.
amr-i hujjati, 4.
amr-i khass=haqiqat, 12; amm=shari'at, 12.
amri, alam-i, 5; kawn-i a., 5, 5v.
anbiya', 9v.
anwar-i Kardgar, 5v.
aql, 5v.
aql-i kull, mazhar-i, 1v, 5v.
ashab-i kahf, 16v.
Attar, Shaykh, 6v.
( azizi darad), 2v, 16, 16v.
Azra'il, mihtar, 7.
Ba (Aba) Bakr, 13v.
bab min abqab al-Jannat (=salman), 9.
bab-i ma'rifat, 3.
bab-i ma'rifat-i Imam, 10.
bab-i Mawla-na, 10.
bab-i rahmat,3.
baha'i haqiqat, 15v,16.
baha'i shari'at, 15v.
bandagan, 26v.
ba'th, ruz-i, 6.
batin, 5v, 6v, 9v; ahl-i b., 6v.
batin-i haqiqat, 7, 12v.
batin-i mutlaq, 4v.
batiniyan, 4v.
bay'at, 13v, 14.
Bihisht, 9, 15; jan-i B., 9; dar-ha-yi B., mard-i B., 9.
Bihisht wa Duzakh, 14v.
Bu Dharr=Abu Dharr, 7, 7v.
Coran, see Qur'an.
Daddan, 13v.
da'i, 1v,6, 7; wa 3 hadd zir-i u, 6; = payghambar, 7.
da'iyan, 3v; d. qa hujjatan, 12v; d.=qawiyyan, 15v; d. ba-haqq, 3v; d. na haqq,
3v.
da'ifan (-i ahl-i tarattub), 4, 15v.
dalil (-i Imamat), 3v.
dar-i Bihisht (=mard), 9.
dar-i rahmat, 3, 10.
da'wat, 2v, 3, 9v, 10v, 11, 15v, 16; d. wa din, 11; d. wa ta'lim, 15v; d. ba
hujjat, 15v; sur-i d. 16.
da'wat-i haqiqat, 13v.
da'wat-i hujjat, 8v, 15v.
da'wat-i Imam, 3.
da'wat-i zuhur-i ma'nawi, 2v.
dawra, 13, 13v; sar-i har d., 13.
dawra'i Muhammadi, 13v.
Dharr, Abu, 7, 7v.
dhat, 9, 10, 16; d. wa ma'ni, 10.
didan-i Ibrahim, 8.
din, 1v, 2, 11 15v; ruz-i d., 1v, 2; shab-i d., 11; d. ba haqiqat- Mawla-na, 11.
din wa da'wat, 11.
din-i ahl-i tarattub, 11.
din-i haqiq-yi Mawla-na madhhab'i in firqa, 11.
Duzakh, 14v, 15; D. wa Bihisht, 14v.
Farzand-i Imam, 4.
Farzand-i ma'nawi-yi Imam, 4.
farzandan=i jismani-yi Imam, 4.
Farsiyan, 14.
firishta, 7, 8; f. ba surat-i murgh, 8.
firqa, in, 10, 10v, 11, 15v.
firqa-ha-yi nazariyya, 10v.
fusul, 10, 11, 12v (cf. fasl); akthar-i fusul wa qasa'id, 10.
fusul-i mubarak, 11.
Ghuluww, 13v.
Hadd, 6 (cf. hudud); 3 hadd. zir-i da'i, 6.
hafta'i din, 1v.
hajj, 15v.
hakim Nizari, 3, 7v, 9v, 12v.
hakim Sana'i, 6v.
hakim Thana'i, 9v.
hakim-i shari'at, 13v.
halal-ha-yi shar'i, 12v.
haqiqat, 2, 4, 5v, 7, 11, 12, 12v, 13, 13v, 15v, 16; akwan-i h., 11; baha'i h.,
15v, 16; batin-i h., 12v; da'wat-i h., 13v; kalima-i shahadat dar h., 13; kawn-i
h., 13; qawl-i h., 13;; h. ki amr-i khass ast, 12; h. ki hujjat ast, 16.
haqiqat-i Mawla-na, 11.

After having given the definition of the "people of order," I shall proceed to
the description of the adversaries. They are divided into two classes: the
unbelievers and the hypocrites (dissemblers). The hypocrites [Fol. 16v.] are
worse than unbelievers, because the last-mentioned are called the men who
preserve the same attitude in the presence as well as the absence (of the
believers), and do not make an appearance of accepting the instruction of the
teacher of this community, denying it, however, in secret. The believers thus
may keep themselves safe from their intrigues, being warned by the statements
which they (the unbelievers) make in the presence of the instructor. They will
not fail in practising all sort of hostile actions in their power, but at the same
time they will not keep their real intentions secret so that the believers can take
their precautions. A poet says:-

A faithful dog is much better than a brother who is a dissembler.
In another poem it is said:-
Be either a plain unbeliever or a faithful believer.
In another place it is said:-
Rather be a (complete) unbeliever, than a dissembler.

Another verse:-

Be either a Negro from Zanzibar, or a pure believer,
Be either quite hard as a stone or as absolutely soft as wax.
This is the exposition of the (real) properties of the Imam, the "people of
unity," the "people of order" and the adversaries, explained in a language
understood by everybody in order that the common people may more easily
learn about it and not remain without their share in its benefit.
By the golry of His Essence!
A dog which is trained, becomes alert and swift,
And when it acquires a (mystic) knowledge, shares the company of the Seven Ephesians.
The dog that is trained, abandons mischief
And chases in the groves only lawful game.

It is to be understood also that the religion of this community is the true
teaching of the Lord (Mawla-na) and his Hujjat, and therefore the (material)
value of the Truth which they both know (must be) everything (one possesses),
not only the one-tenth (of the income) prescribed by the shari'at. This one-tenth
is the price of the shari'at which is not worth more. Therefore in these
times of the "night of the Faith" the Truth can be obtained only by those of the
"people of order" who will sacrifice every thing they possess for the sake of
Truth. But whoever will keep for himself even a trifle, shall not acquire the
Truth because he will not obtain the consent of the Hujjat and his wisdom and
knowledge, and none of those who do not [Fol. 16] possess these will acquire
salvation. A poet says:-

If thou wilt remain in possession even of a trifle (value of property) thou art
not the man of the "way."

Khwaja Nasir says[1]:-
When his Hujjat shall blow the trumpet of the preaching, he will
Kill all who are (still) living in possession of the knowledge.
But when he (the Imam) shall blow the trumpet of Resurrection in his own essence,
He will make alive all who died in ignorance.
to those who will be alive by the sound of his teaching,
He will give a place on the throne of his eternal kingdom.
But those who remain dead on the day of His mission
He will burn in the fire of the eternal non-existence.
The sign of life in Him in this world is this:
That man should free his heart from whatever is not He.
The sign of death in Him is opposite to this,
And he will destroy that man's place to dust.
If He breathe to thee, both worlds will come into thy possession,
But if not, He will take from thee even thy essence.
Therefore if any one will keep for himself from the "price of Truth (i.e.
Hujjat)" anything, however small it may be, he will not attain the true teaching.
Failing in this, he will fail in every thing, because all the things are in Him and
without Him nothing. And if he will hand to Him all he possesses, keeping
nothing for himself, he will become a king and lord of both worlds.

--------------------------------------

[1] See also above, fol. 10, where the same poem is quoted, and even the first
two bayts repeated.

Having given a definition and the signs of the Hujjat, I will proceed to the
description of the "people of order."

They are divided into two categories- the strong and the weak. The "strong"
(obviously for "weak") are those who acquired the knowledge of the Hujjat
[Fol. 15v.) and preach in his favour amongst the new converts. the sign of
their activities consists in the acceptance of the teaching of the Hujjat, which
they transmit to the weak, living in accordance with the rules of the shari'at.[1]

--------------------------------------

[1] Here obviously the author, or, mor probably, later scribes, have altered the
order of words at the beginning, which should have been "weak" first, and
"strong" last, as otherwise there is no sense in the passage.

--------------------------------------

Those called "the weak" (strong?) are the people who resign themselves
entirely in accepting the teaching, instruction and interpretation (of religion).
They must live in accordance with the spiritual ( aqli) prescriptions of the
shari'at. The strong are the da'is, senior ma'dhuns, the teachers, junior
ma'dhuns, and the weak are the mustajibs. Whichever he may be, strong or
weak, a believer cannot attain to the Divine guidance (ta'yid) until he acquires
the degree of the Hujjat in the acknowledgement of the Imamat.[1]
What are the spiritual ( aqli) prescriptions of the shari'at? Will not the
prohibition of eating grapes and drinking wine, etc., be removed? Yes, the
ritual prescriptions, as reciting the formulas of the profession of the religion,
ablutions, fasting, prayers, paying the tithe, pilgrimage and religious war, may
be cancelled if the believer is acting in accordance with the interpretation
(ta'wil) of these commandments, but only when there is no necessity for the
taqiyya.

--------------------------------------

[1] This obviously does not mean that anyone can become a Hujjat, but simply
would acquire the knowledge of the Hujjat's wisdom, by accepting his
teaching.

Now, when the miracle and sign of the Hujjat, which are "the word of
Truth,"are explained, one must know why he becomes manifested in the
haqiqat (the eternal Truth) only and why, as every body says, his actions point
out to the fact that he absolutely does not observe the prescriptions of the
shari'at. The reason is that in the beginning of every millennial period, when all
the institutions governing that period are formed [Fol. 13v.], there are, besides
the Hujjat, only three persons (taking part in the establishing of the doctrine),
not more. They are the prophet, the Imam and the orthodox ruler. The prophet
has to appear in the two aspects, kawn, of the religion, because he does not
possess the position of the Hujjat. The Imam must be manifested in the three
worlds (kawn) and the ruler of the orthodox only in the shari'at.

Therefore if the Hujjat should obey the orthodox laws, doubts as to his
preaching (da'wat) of the Truth would arise amongst his followers. And if he
should like to be manifested in the orthodox world (as well as amongst the
believers of the Truth) he would be a sinner, perhaps worse than a sinner. This
is why in the beginning of the period of Muhammad in which we are living, the
Hujjat was Salman, who by no means followed the prescriptions of the shari'at,
but intentionally and in the presence of every body was doing unlawful things.
This is why all the adversaries blamed him.

But the Hadrat-i Amir ( Ali) observed the commandments of the shari'at and
after the death of the Prophet took the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr,
although he did not allow Salman to do this. When Umar, having grasped the
collar of Ali, was dragging him to swear allegiance, some one of the
adversaries came forth and, turning to Salman, said: "How comes it that the
person about whom thou tellest all these (stories) and to whom thou ascribest
such extraordinary qualities, is now dragged in such humility to take an oath of
allegiance to Abu Bakr?" Salman in reply said: "If he liked [Fol. 14] he
could make this that, and that this," pointing at the same time to the earth and
the sky. But the Amir, having looked upon him angrily, said: "One must not
say everything he knows." But when ( Umar)grasped the collar of Salman
and dragged him with all the Persians[1] to take the oath, the Amir came, freed
him from the hands of Umar, and did not permit this.

The secret why he himself swore was that in the time of Mustafa his religion
(shari'at) had not yer reached everywhere and ( Ali) wished that it should
spread so that the "completer"[2] should not remain in the same condition as
the adversaries, this he thought to be the most important. The plain religion
(shari'at) could not be complete, however, unless he were himself to follow
that "completer" (because otherwise) the adversaries would not follow him
(the "completer"). But as was already explained, the adversaries have to exist,
because, if, being wrong, they should not exist, nobody would know about
their real position. Therefore the "people of order" would remain without their
goal (madar) and merit and would cease to seek for the (true) knowledge. If
therefore it is clear that the adversaries have to exist as well, then without
shari'at which prevents them from their depravity and cruelty, they would not
leave a single man alive [Fol. 14v.], the world would be devastated and there
would be no advantage for the "people of degrees."

--------------------------------------

[1] It is worth while noting this legendary development. Indirectly it
corroborates the theory of the Persians, not Badakshani, origin of the work,
because, for the author, the Persians were all shi'ites. Note also that the author
uses the term Farsiyan. This, of course, may be merely an extension of the
surname of Salman, but it is not entirely impossible that for the author the
Persians were chiefly the people of Fars because he himself belonged to that
province.

[2] The expression tamam-kunanda is quite enigmatic. This obviously has
nothing to do with the ancient Ismaili term Mutimm, in the sense of the Imam,
i.e., the persons who brings to completion the mission of the Prophet. Here,
most probably, it means the Khatimu'l-anbiya', i.e., the Prophet himself.

--------------------------------------

So Sayyid (Nasir-i Khusraw) says:-

Amongst them there is a handful of the wretched and villains,
Whom a clever man calls the "devilish people."
They are Satan in their deeds although in the shape of men,
Being a hundred degrees lower than a horse, cow or ass.
Their hearts are not awake because they have not soul,
They have nothing to do except to criticise the chosen.
Yes, they exist, this handful of the perverse,
They are the cause of the humility of the world.[1]

This is why the adversaries are (usually) compared to an obstinate mule and the
shari'at to a chain and rope. As an obstinate animal is led along the road with
the help of the rope and chain, so the adversaries can be led by the (proper)
way with the help of the shari'at.

--------------------------------------

[1] This is from the Rawshana'i-nama by Nasir-i Khusraw, cf. H. Ethe's
edition in the ZDMG, Vol. 34 (1880), pp. 453-454. The passage refers to the
uncivilised and morally low people in general.

--------------------------------------

So it is clear that the shari'at is conductive also to the (common) benefit and
therefore undoubtedly the Imam must manifest himself in it as well. In a
portionof a book[1] it is said that Malik (i.e. Devil) and Ridwan, the symbols
of Hell and Paradise, are self-existent. No, this is wront. They both exist by
him (the Imam), i.e., by his manifestation in the esssence of each.[2] As
Ridwan is paradise and in his hands are the ways of mercy, so Malik is Hell and
he has in his hands the ways of punishment. As, for this reason, the people
make Ridwan [Fol. 15] (in their belief) to take upon himself the protection of
the good, which is (simply the idea of the) kindness of men, so Malik only for
the reason of his wickedness, which (in fact) is the wickedness of men, is
believed to protect the wicked. As Paradise is better for the good, so Hell is
worse for the bad.

It is therefore clear that even the falsehood cannot have an illusory existence by
itself. There are always two principles,[3] Paradise and Hell. The first is
destined for those who deserve it, and the second for the wicked. For the first
the teaching of the chosen is commanded, and for the second the teaching of
the common people. But he (the Imam) acts in accordance with the principles
of both in order that they may exist, although he did not command one of them
to follow the teaching of the other, because their followers may fall in doubt
and abandon their religion, leaving therefore the exoteric and the esoteric
persuasions without their purity. So it is proved undoubtedly that the Hujjat
necessarily must abandon following the teaching of the shari'at.

--------------------------------------

[1] It is a strange expression: dar qit'a'i fasli, literally "in a fragment of a
pamphlet." Perhaps here qit'a is used in the technical sense of a special variety
of poem?

[2] This does not mean, of course, that the Imam should manifest himself in
Hell, or realm of evil. The author obviously means that the Imam should also
be connected with the people of plain religion who, as sinners, are bound to go
to hell.

[3] The author uses the term shakhs, person, in a strange sense, just as
mushakhkhas. He apparently wants to emphasise individuality, independent
existence.

Now it is necessary to know what is the sign of his miracle and why he is
manifested in the world (akwan) of the Truth (only). The first reason is as
follows. I begin to explain the sign of his miracle. [Fol. 11v] The Hujjat
necessarily must posess a sign or a miracle which could not be performed as
well by any created or spiritual being. The miracles (in general) are usually of
two kinds. One is that performed by the action of physical power and the
other by (miraculous) knowledge and argument. Each of these kinds can be
imitated, i.e. (an action may be done which is) similar to it but is not the same
in reality.

The miracle which depends on an action of the physical power is called that
which happens in the material world, while the miracle of knowledge and
persuasion appears in the mental sphere. In all beings action and power belong
to their material side which they as well as the Hujjat possess. There could be
no greater power than if a man were to subdue to himself the whole world and
slay all mankind. And he may abide in such condition (of greatness), but a lion
or a snake may kill him although nobody can say that a lion or a snake is better
than that man, they being only animals. And as (a physical miracle) can come
from an animal, (it can happen also from other categories of the material
world), as from a plant in (the power ) of producing fruits, from minerals in
affecting senses, from fire, wind, water, earth (in short) no wonderful and
strange peculiarity of the material qualities or action can be possessed by any
single individual object in the world which cannot [Fol. 12] be shared by
others.

The imitation of the miracle of knowledge can also be shared by many (living
beings). Such are sorcery, incantation, the miracles of the saints, astrologers,
fortune-tellers, "comb-seers,"[1] and so forth, who (also) reveal the secrets of
the created world. Therefore it is clear that the miracle inimitable and the sign
the like of which nobody can produce is the Hujjat's true knowledge which he
possesses for the negation of the un-truth and the establishment of the Truth,
which is (the teaching about) the Imam. And no one who is reasonable and
just can deny it.

This is the miracle which nobody else can perform and this wonderful power
belongs only to the Hujjat. There are also many indications proving that the
knowledge of the Hujjat is the "word of the Truth," and that his miracle is the
same, not a physical action. These indications can be found in the teachings of
the orthodox, which is the "commandment to the common," as well as in the
"secret wisdom," or the teaching of the Truth, which is the "commandment to
the chosen."

There are many verses of the Coran in the "open" (zahir) teachings of the
orthodox (proving this statement). One of them says: "On the prophet
depends only preaching" (V, 99), which means that it is possible to demand
from the prophet, i.e., Gabriel, only this delivery of his message, which is
instruction in the explanation of the doctrine about the unity of the True Lord
(Khudawand-i Haqq), and nothing more.

--------------------------------------

[1] This is obviously a variety of divination, but I never heard of it in Persia.

--------------------------------------

There is also a tradition of the Prophet saying: "We made prohibited to . . . but
the right is reverted [Fol. 12v.] . . . [1] their food and drink until they know
their Creator and Lord." It means that to those who have not acquired the
knowledge (of the Imam) even the things are prohibited which are allowed by
the shar'at, but to the "knower" (shinasanda) even that which is prohibited by
the orthodox doctrines is permitted, as (drinking) wine, etc. But this "knower"
is only one, or those who are with him as regards the teaching.[2]
The proofs from the secret doctrines of the Truth are the utterances of the
Hujjats and da'is. First the saying of the Great ra'is:-

The wine which thou drinkest in this world by any body's order,[3]
Consider it in its degree as the "pure drink" of the Coran (LXXVI, 21).
If one drinks it by the order of the "man of the Truth" and gives it to others, it
may be lawful. Therefore how can it be prohibited!

Hakim Nizari says:-
Thou hast not recognised the Imam of thy time and hast not tried to find him.
Then know clearly that gold and property are unlawful to thee.

--------------------------------------

[1] Two short lacunas in the text.

[2] The theory that such a "knowing" person (Sufic arif, or as here,
shinasanda) may be absolved from the drudgery of going through the
prescribed forms of worship, was always very popular in highly devout circles,
and, as is well-known, was the basis of the sweeping accusations against the
Ismailis. It appears fully developed already before the rise of the Fatimids, as
in the Kitabu'l-Mahsul by an anonymous author, was attacked by Abu Hatim
ar-Razi, defended by Abu Ya'qub as-Sijistani in his Kitabu'n-Nusra, and finally
ruled out by Sayyid-na Hamidu'd-din al-Kirmani in his Kitabu'r-Riyad, as
inconsistent with the official Ismaili doctrine (qanun). It is, therefore,
interesting to note that, probably under the Sufic influence, it has been revived
at such a late period.

[3] Here the expression Kasi, some one, may mean the Hujjat, and the strange
word used to refer to him perhaps depends on the context which is not quoted
here.

--------------------------------------

Now, if it is impossible to see his actions in their real implications (and) he
cannot be recognised without (the evidence of) a miracle and sign, then what
can be an indication of him except his words? In the majority of books it is
stated in this way: the muhiqq, "revealer of the Truth," i.e. the "word of the
Truth," must be recognised by a "miracle of knowledge." In some other places
[Fol. 13] it is said that it is necessary to hear from the "revealer," i.e., the
Hujjat the "True Word" which is the "word of Truth," which is the Imam.
After this it is necessary to accept his Hujjat. And the purpose of listening to
this "word" is to learn its meaning, which is the negation of the false
affirmation of the (truth of the ) Imam. In the same way in the shari'at the
truth of the formula "There is no deity except Allah," has to be heard from the
revealer of the orthodox doctrines, i.e., Muhammad. The meaning of these
two formulas of the "evidence" (shahadat), of which one is in the shari'at and
the othet haqiqat, is refutaion of the falsehood and affirmation of the Truth.
But in this religion nobody can be recognised as a true believer until he proves
by (proper) arguments and indications (his) negation of the falsehood and
acknowledgement of the Truth, i.e., the Imam. Nobody will consider him a
true believer from the mere fact of his having pronounced the formula (of the
confession) although in the shari'at it is so. And so "the word of the Truth"
cannot be taken as the evidence except on that single occasion.