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.

If some one should ask why they are the same as regards their nature but exist
separate in the bodily form, he may be answered in two ways.

(The first) explanation is this. If their persons were not different so that one of
them might preach in favour of the other, a suspision might arise amongst the
common people and they might think that he is doing this for a mean purpose if
he were to call them to join his own cause. But as long as he preaches
apparently in favour of someone else, the mob does not consider him [Fol. 11)
as doing this is his own favour, being ingnorant of the fact that both of them
are one. They live in the world of multitude and find a proof of the Truth of
the religion of our Lord and his Hujjat in what is said in the "blessed books"
(fusul-I mubarak). At the same time if the Imam and his Hujjat were not the
same in their religion and preaching, the result necessarily would be that this
their religion and the Truth are different, manifold. And as soon as the (true)
religion becomes manifold, it makes no difference whether there be two (sects)
or seventy-one.

The second reply is as follows: If their persons were not different, so that one
could manifest himself in all the three worlds and the other observe the Truth
only, a doubt might appear in the religion of the "people of order," who are the
seekers after the way to the Truth, about the real character of his preaching.
By these logical proofs and the evidence of tradition it is explained why in the
six thousand years of the "night of the religion" the knowledge of Imam cannot
be acquired without the help of his Hujjat.

The proof of tradition (can be derived) first from the orthodox teachings of
shari'at, which are called by their followers "the word of God and of the
Prophet," and also from the teachings of the "worshippers of the Truth," who
are opposed to the orthodox, as Hakim Sana'I, (Jalalu'd-Din) Rumi "the
revealer of the Truth," Shaykh Attar, and others. And even from the words of
the Batinis, which God inspires to them. (Fol. 7). They all cannot understand,
and even fall into contradictions with themselves. There are also teachings of
the mystery of the (eternal) Truth, revealed by the Imam, in the time of his
perfect incarnation, or by his Hujjat who is always completely manifested.
Whenever in the plain taching of shari'at the Coran, the Lord (mihtar) Jabra'il,
Mika'il, Israfil and Azra'il are spoken of, their real meaning and archetype, as
can be explained, is the Hujjat, because in allegorical interpretation, ta'wil, the
meaning of the "angel" is the "people of unity" (ahl-I wahdat), i.e., the Hujjat,
nobody else. And wherever da'I mentioned, it means the prophet, as in the
Coran (XXXIII, 45) there is a verse (let His word be exalted!)-- ". . . calling
towards God, by His order, as a burning candle." And as regards (his
statement) that he (Muhammad) was receiving revelation from Jabra'il, i.e.,
that he was a da'I, he received instruction from Salman, and the words which
he uttered prove this: "If Abu Dharr could know what is in the mind of
Salman, truly he would call him an unbeliever," which means that should Abu
Dharr be aware of what is in Salman's heart, he would kill him. When our
Lord (Sayyid-na) was asked about the meaning of this tradition of the Prophet
[Fol, 7v], he said in reply that if Salman were to say to Abu Dharr that his,
Salman's, position is superior to that of the Prophet and that Mawla-na Ali is
the creator and the architect of the world, the former would look upon these
words as heresy and slay Salman.

There are (words) of the Amiru'l-mu'min ( Ali): "Salman is with us (as one)
of (our own) family, the sun from the Light of God, a part of us (and) from us.
The heart of a true believer is the Light of God, but no believer is as powerful
as Salman, although a believer is eternal in the two worlds."

Rumi, the revealer of the Truth, says about Khidr and Moses that the latter was
learning perfection from the former. And in the beginning when Moses had not
received from him a (revealed) instruction, he could not realise the mysterious
meaning of Khidr's actions. So Rumi sayd in his Mathnavi: -

That boy whose throat Khidr has cut
The common people will not undestand his mystery.
Even from Moses with all his wisdom and wit
It remained hidden. Thou, o wingless, do not try to fly![1]

Hakim Nizari says (alluding to this story):-

If it had been an easy thing to penetrate to that source (of mystery),
How could Moses turn back from Khidr in confusion?

The Paradise of Adam, the Ark of Noah, the vision [Fol. 8] of Abraham,
Jesus and Mary, the mount Sinai of Moses, Gabriel of Mustafa - all these are
(forms of ) the Hujjat. All the orthodox believe in this (tradition), but they do
not know about its interpretaion (ta'wil). Just as Amir Sayyid Ali-I Wa'iz
(Kashifi), one of the orthodox, ina poem composed in praise of Ali says that
once (the Prophet) was sitting and Jabra'il was by his side. At this time the
Amiru'l-mu'minin ( Ali) entered the house and Gabriel paid respect to him.

The Prophet asked: "Why hast thou such veneration for my little boy?" To
this Gabriel replied: "He, was my teacher in the beginning of my existence."
Then the Prophet asked: "How much time passed since thy creation?" Gabriel
replied:-

"Although I do not know the (exact) number of my years,
I know a star, an ornament of the Divine Throne,
It is a star which only once in every thiry thousand years
Rises over the greatest and the highest Throne (of God)
Since the time when I came into existence by His might,
That star thirty thousand times appeared to me."

It is also said that although Gabriel has the form of a bird, as the other angels,
on that day, however, he appeared [fol. 8v.] to the Prophet in the form of a
man, and as a man was sitting by the side of Mustafa. In fact the Imam, who is
the "origin" (asl), and Gabriel, who follows him, as well as Mustafa, who
follows Gabriel, all of them always have the appearance of a man; and later,
when Mustafa accepted the teaching of the Hujjat, their real essence became
(also) one. Not only can Mustafa, the "strong one" (qawi) amongst the
"people of order," join them, but the other degrees which are inferior to him
can become joined with them as soon as they receive the same knowledge.

Amidst the traditions current amongst the orthodox there is one in which it is
related that somebody asked A'isha if it is true that the Prophet says that on a
certain night he went to heaven and saw those things (of which he told).
A'isha said in reply: "I saw only that he went out from the house and came
back so soon that water was still flowing from the jug which he struck with the
skirt of his cloak when going out. And I do not know anything as regards
what he says that Gabriel brings messages to him. I know only that occasionly
the barefooted Salman comes and tells something secretly, and [Fol. 9v.] after
a short time the Prophet begins to say that Gabriel descended and told him
from the mouth of God this or that."

In short, all the tradition of the orthodox gives evidence that Gabriel is (in
reality) Salman, but they cannot understand this. And what the "people of
Truth" say is as well absolute evidence that the Imam has said: "Salman is
from me and I am from Salman." In another place he said: "Salman is one of
the gates of Paradise," because the door of Paradise is a man, and therefore the
whole place of it must be a man. In another place he says: "Salman is the door
of Paradise," but (he does) not (say): "soul of Paradise." In some other place
he says: "I am with my friends everywhere they would seek for me, in the hills,
on the plain, in the desert," etc. And everybody to whom he revealed his
essence, i.e., the knowledge of him, is not in need of being physically
connected with the Imam. This is the Great Resurrection.[1] In another place
he says: "Be obedient to me, and I will make thee like myself," i.e., [Fol. 9v.]
"obey me and thou wilt be similar to myself as Salman."

Ra'is Hasan says:-

Thou art one whose "Door" is the Hujjat in this world;

(It can be said) by a hundred thousand mouths there is none similar to and of
the same origin as thee.

(About) his position which is so close to God as that of the "two bows' length,"
Wisdom tells in Kenoma (Emptiness) and Pleroma (Fulness), i.e. the whole of the Universe.

And the same author in another place says:-
Salman-I Farsi, through whom the world was created.
Is the "door" (to the knowledge) of Ali. Let us begin (this poem) with mention of his name.
He prostrated himself in veneration of the face of God for the reason
That we would do prostration for the worship of the face of God.

Hakim Nizari says:-
O Lord, in the great revelation,
In which thou hast unveiled the hidden mystery,
If thou hast manifested in secret,
It is because thou hast caused the trumpets (of the Resurrection) to be blown by thy Hujjat.

The same poet in these munajat says:-

By the truth of the prophets and thy Hujjat,
Who made ready the way to thy teaching (da'wat).

Hakim Thana'I says in a poem (composed in praise of ) Iskandar regarding the
circumstances of his joining the teaching of the Hujjat: [Fol. 10].

The true belief became glorious in the world in my eyes because it was told me
That the exalted guide (to it) is he, the "gate of Mawla-na."

Khwaja Nasir says[1]:-

When his Hujjat will blow the first of his trumpets, He will kill all those who
are still living in posession of knowledge.

And when He in His own person will blow the trumpet of the Resurrection,
[1] This may be Nasiru'd-din Tusi whose poetry is apparently not preserved.

In another poem it is said:-
Whoever does not know without doubt the Hujjat of the Truth in this world,
He has no eye which can see, he is the most blind of all the blind.

Khwaja Qasim from Tushtar[1] says:-

I have acquired the knowledge of the Imam of my time with the help of a man
Who is himself the incomparable name of One God.

That man is the Hujjat and the "incomparable name," which is the name of the
Imam, is the Hujjat as well, because (only) he is the Imam's real name and only
from him is it possible to acquire a knowledge of the Imam, and not from those
fictitious names. The teaching, concealed in the majority of the books and
poems current amongst this community, is that the "door of mercy" and the
"gate of knowledge" of the Imam is the Hujjat, leading to the prson and the
name of the Imam, and (as in ordinary life) whoever comes through the door
enters the house, and who does not do so cannot come into it.

The nature and the real essence of both [Fol. 10v] are the same. This doctrine
was explained several times. And if it were not so and they both were not the
same, in such a case one of them would be God, and the other a creature. But
God cannot be recognised from the creature. This is the difference in the
teaching of this community and of intuitive systems.[1] The doctrines of the
orthodox say the same, although they cannot understand these implications.
O, my pir, my God, with thy help I knew the Truth,
O, my guide and leader, with thy assistance I have found the Truth.

And it is said:-
The men of God are not God himself,
But they are not distinct from God.
(And another verse):-
For the reason that thy eyes are weak,
Thy first object of worship must be the pir.