Sufi Aesthetics: Beauty, Love, and the Human Form in the Writings of Ibn 'Arabi and 'Iraqi

Preface

Preface The following book considers closely the writings of two thirteenth-century Sufis, Muhyi al-Din ibn al-‘Arabi and Fakhr al-Din ‘Iraqi. Patience is the reader’s only prerequisite , for a study of the “aesthetics” of vision and the human form in the complex thought of these mystics often requires extensive explanation until we can finally reach the interpretive heart of the matter toward the end of the book. If you, like me, have long marveled at the human experience of beauty, then I hope you enjoy, as much as I did, discovering a perspective that is so distant yet so insightful and relevant. A Note about Readings I have avoided a biography of either Ibn ‘Arabi or ‘Iraqi, mainly in hopes of relative brevity, but also in recognition of the efforts of others in this regard. In English, Julian Baldick, William C. Chittick, and Peter Lamborn Wilson have considered closely the life of ‘Iraqi, and Claude Addas’s carefully researched biography of Ibn ‘Arabi has been translated from the French, among others who have concerned themselves with one or even both of these mystics. For an astute overview of Ibn ‘Arabi’s ontological and cosmological insights, one can refer to the writings of William C. Chittick, since I have concentrated on one particular aspect of this worldview and, thanks to his efforts, can avoid reiterating what would have to be a long discussion. I also have been able to avoid a broader discussion of aesthetics as founded in classical Sufi thought, on account of the accomplishments of Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Titus Burckhardt, and others. There are other important and related topics, such as sama‘, the Sufi practice of “audition,” and wine imagery, that are intimately connected to the thematic and historical contexts of this book yet covered only briefly herein because of limitations. Again, I refer inquisitive readers to the bibliography for resources. Text Editions As for the most relevant primary texts, the edition of Ibn ‘Arabi’s Fusus al-Hikam I have used corresponds to the A. E. Affifi edition, printed in Beirut in 1946, here reprinted in Tehran in 1991, although all page numbers correspond. The edition of al-Futuhat al-Makkiyah used throughout this book is the one published in 1997 in x Preface Beirut by Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-Islami. It is a reprinting of the Dar Sadir edition, based on the Bulaq edition published in Cairo in 1911, which is often cited in studies of Ibn ‘Arabi. Unfortunately the Dar Sadir edition is no longer in print or in the market, so those introduced more recently to Ibn ‘Arabi often do not have ready access to it. In order to make citations accessible to most, I have cited both versions but have placed the more available Dar Ihya’ edition first in every instance and have included its line number. The Tarjuman al-Ashwaq cited throughout was also published by Dar Sadir in 1961, which I have favored mainly because of its conformity with the commentary and a dearth of more authoritative, carefully edited versions. The edition of Ibn ‘Arabi’s commentary on his Tarjuman al-Ashwaq, the Dhakha’ir al-A‘laq, Sharh Tarjuman al-Ashwaq, is that of Muhammad ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kurdi (Cairo, 1968), an edition used by Michael Sells, Chittick, and others. Sometimes, however, the edition of Tarjuman al-Ashwaq published by Reynold A. Nicholson in 1911 seems to have been more discerningly edited than the Dar Sadir edition—such instances are indicated in the endnotes. As for ‘Iraqi, the main text used throughout for the author’s complete works is a critical edition published as a second edition in 1382 shamsi-hijri/2003–4 by Nasrin Muhtasham. This is, as far as I know, the most recent edition of ‘Iraqi’s collected works, and the editor has carefully compared fifteen manuscripts, eight of which pertain to ‘Iraqi’s diwan. This edition is referred to as Kulliyat. Despite its strengths, because of difficulties inherent in editing ‘Iraqi’s collected works, this text has been complemented by two other editions. For the Lama‘at, this study makes use of Muhammad Khwajawi’s 1992 critical edition as a second reference. For all other instances, a reprinting of Sa‘id Nafisi’s revised edition of ‘Iraqi’s collected works has been employed; this edition is cited as Diwan. Important textual variances are indicated in the notes. All translations are mine unless otherwise indicated. Diacritical Markings I hope that the lack...