Hallaj al-Mansur was inspired by the philosophy of Unity of Being (wahdat al-wujud), which he followed. When looking at his words we can understand love in two ways. First, love is an irrevocable desire for truth and the quest to discover it. Second, love is being preoccupied with someone, expecting favor from them, and not accepting any other rivals for their affection. Selfishness and egoism can easily be sensed in this second type of love.

As a matter of fact, Satan can be said to be superior to humankind in terms of its extensiveness in time and space – at least as far as its nature is allowed to reach. Being so blessed, one could think highly of oneself. Satan thought, “I will not prefer Adam to myself.” If we call this “love,” this is the kind of love Satan possesses.

Instead of such an impaired love, a love that expects reciprocity, we should follow a love of obedience, which takes a person to perfection. This obedience refers to doing everything for the sake of God’s good pleasure and expecting nothing in return. It means remaining remote from worldly grudges, never making one’s relation to God a matter of negotiation with God, and always behaving with submission and surrender.

Hallaj was referring to these considerations, which are by all means restricted by various boundaries, when he said, “Love should be learned from Satan and obedience from Adam.”

Love is associated with one’s weakness and neediness; as such, there are some gateways in its nature that are open to abuse. Perhaps, this was the case with Satan.

Causality

For this reason, it is very important to follow the Prophetic path in regards to love, enthusiasm, and gratitude. Sometimes a person may not find the things he has been seeking. This person may consider causes as absolute values, and may say, “These causes should have given certain results.” This person doesn’t understand that there is a distinct mercy and justice in God dragging us through compulsory situations. Of course, He is not required to create a result according to our causes. The Prophetic path teaches us this truth. As Ali al-Qari said, nothing is incumbent on God, Who is All-Transcendent. In some of the covenants He condescends to make with His servant, His saying, “This is your right and this is Mine,” is characteristic of the language as it occurs in a mutual communication. Otherwise, what right do we have to try and determine the result of something with our will, all the materials of which belong to Him? Getting a result is not in our hands, nor is passing judgment on the result.

Yes, there actually is a relationship between causes and results, and within the principles of Divine practice when those causes are observed, a certain result occurs. However, people representing those causes have no right to think of the result and say “It has to be like this…”

For even if there is a connection between cause and effect, in reality, effects are not built on causes. For example, if to put forth His will, God said to people, “When you blow on the solar system, I will disperse it,” and we blew on the solar system and God dispersed it, then we thought we were the cause of this, we would be mistaken. Our blowing would not have caused the solar system to disperse.

Servanthood

It is better to follow the path of Adam’s servanthood instead of Satan’s love. For love can sometimes cause a person’s foot to slip from the true path. But obedience on the Prophetic path will never slip!

Let’s also look at Hallaj al-Mansur’s point from the perspective of a comparison between love and obedience. Actually, what made Hallaj say this was that he thought Satan had fixed his heart on God; he gave his heart to no one else. However, when he saw man between himself and God, Satan’s love prevented him from prostrating to anyone but God.

It is not possible to fully agree with these ideas. Even if it were true, there is something that Hallaj and Satan overlooked; that is the fine point of the command to obey. Adam understood this fine point, and after his lapse, he pleaded and prayed, “Our Lord! We have wronged ourselves, and if You do not forgive us and do not have mercy on us, we will surely be among those who have lost” (A’raf 7:23).But Satan did not learn; he did not understand God’s command to bow down to Adam.

In comparing love and obedience, it was stated that if love is based on obedience, then it means something. If there is no obedience in love, then just as intoxication can be born from it, so, too, can hopelessness, vexation, and even rebellion. In fact, intoxication grows in proportion to the size of the love, which may lead to estrangement from God, even while one may assume he or she is on the Divine path. Worthy things can suddenly lose their value.

These results do not prove that love is unimportant. As stated in “The Emerald Hills of the Heart” series, love is very important. In fact, some have even given great importance to metaphorical love, even considering those who died for physical love as martyrs. Folk stories like Laila and Majnun, Shirin and Ferhat, and Aslı and Kerem all turned this kind of obsession into legend. However, love is meaningful only when it is endowed with the merits explained above. If these requirements are not fulfilled, then when one’s expectations from love are not fulfilled, and reunion does not take place, love can turn into resentment.

The case with Satan is – perhaps – that when he did not find reciprocation from God, he was disappointed and ruined; as such, he did not rise up again. With respect to obedience, this kind of mistake can never be made. Obedience is a heartfelt and active deed made in line with the approval of the One who must be obeyed because His wishes and desires must be obeyed. On the other hand, love affects the balance of a person. It opens the door to unbalanced behavior. In other words, it can make a person insane. In this regard, Satan is an unbalanced creature. It is mandatory to conform scrupulously to rules imposed by obedience. This is balance. Adam preferring obedience shows he was a balanced creature.

A final point: I initially mentioned, with just one sentence, that Hallaj believed in the philosophy of the Unity of Being. He and people like Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi often evaluated matters from the angle of the vastness of God’s mercy. They do this and even seek a road to salvation for Satan and the pharaohs. In this respect, their kind of interpretation is a necessity of their basic philosophy. For according to them, “Everything is He,” and Satan is a different manifestation of Him. Whereas according to me, “Everything is from Him.” Consequently, Hallaj’s saying, “Love should be learned from Satan and obedience from Adam,” should be accepted as normal in respect to his philosophy of Unity of Being.

The Hebrew Bible makes general demands that we should treat our parents with respect and reverence. “Honor” is a word used frequently in the Bible to describe how we are to show respect to God. Respect of parents is a primary and sacred obligation. If we fail to respect our parents, we have disobeyed God Almighty. In some deep and mysterious way, the family is bound up with faith in God: the two are interdependent.

From the very moment of conception, the child, as it grows and develops, is a care and responsibility for its parents. It is not possible to estimate the depth of attachment and compassion parents feel for their children and to calculate the troubles and hardships they go through as parents. For this reason, respecting them is a debt of human gratitude as well as a religious obligation.

Those who can judge the value of their parents rightly and regard them as a means to obtain the mercy of God are the most prosperous in both worlds. Those who, by contrast, regard their parents’ existence as a burden to themselves or who become wearied of them are the unfortunate ones.

The more respectful you are to your parents, the greater the respect and awe you feel before your Creator. Yet, it is a curious thing today that not only those who are disrespectful to God but also those who claim that they love God do not defend themselves from disobedience to their parents. As Martin Luther said, “we must respect and love God, so that we will neither look down on our parents or superiors, nor irritate them, but will honor them, serve them, obey them, love them, and value them.”¹

Under the Old Testament law the son, who was rebellious against his parents was stoned for this rebellion (Deuteronomy 21:18-21). It is important to stress the fact that God is opposed to rebellion and disobedience toward one’s parents. God also promises a long life to the individual who is obedient to his father and mother (Exodus 20:12). No doubt this is because the kind of life which is a life of obedience will involve self-discipline and restraint that would enable one to have a long life and good health. This not only refers to the chronological extension of time, but indicates the rich blessing which comes to a society that keeps God’s ways.

The importance of this commandment, however, extends beyond social welfare to the very welfare of society itself, because the family is the basic unit of society. Just as a body’s health is dependent on the health of its cells, so the vigor of a nation, the body politic, is directly related to the health of the families that make it up. Families form the foundation of a society. Where there is reciprocal respect of rights and obligations within a family, the society is healthy and strong. It is vain to look for compassion and respect in a society once these have been lost from the relationships within the family.²

The fifth commandment also shows that the way we treat our parents is how our children learn to treat us. Obviously, we too will become old. If we do not honor our parents, in accordance with the meaning of, “the punishment is similar to the act that required it,” our children will not be dutiful towards us. If we love our life in the hereafter, this is an important treasury for us: let us be dutiful towards them and gain their pleasure. While if it is this world that we love, let us try to please them, so that through them our life will be easy and our sustenance plentiful. If we want the mercy of the Most Merciful One, we should be merciful towards those in our house whom He has entrusted to us.

Likewise in Christianity, in Islam, parents’ rights are the most venerable rights after those of God. The Qur’an has many verses urging Muslims to treat their parents with utmost kindness, to be grateful for the care they have given them, to obey them, and to care for them when they grow old. The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, once said: “Paradise lies under the feet of the mother. The contentment of the father is the door to paradise.” There are many days set aside in societies to honor and appreciate parents; Father’s Day, Mother’s Day… In Islam, however, respecting, honoring and appreciating parents is not just for a single day of the year, but rather for each and every day.

O Ishmael! Honor Your Father Abraham

There are different types of parents but regardless of how they treat their kids, they are still a parent. Parents make mistakes too, but that does not decrease their value as parents. When we are still under parental guidance, then we will have to follow what they want us to do, even if it is against our heart. When we are on our own feet, then we are free, but we still have the responsibility to respect them. We have to look at the situation, rather than concentrating on our own satisfaction. We have to be kind to them because most of the things they do are all for us.

A child should show respect for his parents by preferring their preferences. For instance, even though some sources say that when Ishmael reached the age of puberty, his tribe made him marry a woman from among them, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt. We do not know whether Ishmael liked her or not. He probably might have preferred to keep silent in order to please his mother. What we know is that he respected his mother’s wishes.

We can give another example. Esau saw that the Canaanite women did not please his father, and his mother, Rebekah complained about these women. In order to please his parents, Esau went to Ishmael and took Mahalath, the daughter of Ishmael.

As mentioned above, Hagar got a wife for Ishmael from the land of Egypt (Genesis 21:21). His wife’s name is not mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, but in the book of Jasher, a Hebrew midrash.³ Ishmael’s first wife, Ribah, was rude to Abraham when he came to visit Ishmael. She did not even ask him who he was. But all the while, she was beating her children in the tent, and she was cursing them, and she also cursed her husband, Ishmael, and spoke evil of him, and Abraham heard the words she spoke to her children, and it was an evil thing in his eyes. Abraham left a message, “When your husband returns, convey my salutation to him and tell him to change the threshold of the gate (of his house).”⁴ Ishmael understood his father’s words, complied with his father’s wish, and divorced his wife. Ishmael did not even come to Abraham and ask what happened because he thought that as a prophet, his father would know better than he, and all Abraham had done was for his son.

Proper respect for parents includes their being addressed and greeted properly. The modern idea of calling fathers and mothers by their first names certainly is promoting a familiarity that will not lead to respect, obedience, or honor. Abraham stayed away from Ishmael and his family for a period as long as God wished, and called on them afterwards. He saw Ishmael under a tree, sharpening his arrows. When he saw Abraham, he immediately rose up to welcome him and they greeted each other. Abraham said, “O Ishmael! God has given me an order.” Ishmael said, “Do what your Lord has ordered you to do.” Abraham asked, “Will you help me?” Ishmael said, “I will help you.” Abraham said, “God has ordered me to build a house here,” pointing to a hillock higher than the land surrounding it. Then they raised the foundations of the Ka’ba.

Respect for parents should remain in force even in relation to parents who may have lost faith. If a faithful person has unfaithful parents, he should treat them respectfully in his dealings and advice, while remaining aloof from their polytheistic lives. He should neither be harsh nor vulgar. Islam instructs Muslims to pray to God for the forgiveness of their parent’s sins, if any, and present their good deeds for the benefit of their parents’ souls. In Islamic and Jewish tradition, Abraham’s treatment of his father, Terah, is a certain testimony to this.

As the Book of Joshua reports, the father of Abraham, Terah, worshipped other gods (Josh. 24:2). Terah was a well-known idolater; he not only worshipped idols but sculpted and sold them as well. Abraham was engaged in debate with his father to convey the truth to him; “O my father! Why do you worship that which does not hear, see, nor can it profit you anything? Do not worship idols and therefore follow me. I will guide you to the straight path. Otherwise, I fear that a punishment from God may afflict you so that you will become a friend of Satan. Nevertheless, I will seek forgiveness for you from God.”

The New Testament is very plain concerning obedience to parents. “Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord” (Colossians 3:20); “Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right” (Ephesians 6:1). Obedience is the foundation for all character. Parents do not have to convince children of the logic behind their orders because parents are experts on their children, and possess a great deal of information that even teachers do not have, so a child must maintain the parent’s dignity and respect at all times, even when disagreeing. Obedience to parents should always be immediate, instant, without question or argument. What the father says do, the son does. He does it well, he does it immediately, and he does it without argument.

Abraham was commanded by God to sacrifice his only son Isaac (or Ishmael). This indeed was a clear test. Therefore Abraham carefully prepared to carry out the order of God. In the Quran, Abraham has a dream, mentions the dream to his son, and asks Ishmael his opinion: “‘O my son! I have seen in my dream that I should offer you in sacrifice so think about that and tell me your view.’ He unhesitatingly said: ‘O my dear father! Do as you are commanded, by the will of God, you will find me of the patient ones,’ and Abraham laid him down on the side of his forehead.” ⁵ As you have seen, Isaac (or Ishmael) does not resist his father, obeys his wishes, and lies down like a ram. In addition, in the Bible, the sole dialogue between the two (Abraham and his son) repeats the words father and my son (twice each), expressing their emotional bond.

The parents continue to have rights over their children after death. People are expected to visit their parents’ graves, to maintain contact with their friends, and to conduct themselves well so as to show that their parents have provided them with a good education. One can honor his parents after their death through the following methods: Praying for them, giving charity on their behalf, instituting a perpetual charity on their behalf, such as a library, hospital, or orphanage.

Coming back to Ishmael and Isaac, destiny had separated the two brothers from each other. After years, Isaac and Ishmael were rejoined at their father’s burial (Gen 25:9). They showed proper filial piety, despite earlier disagreements, in joining together to bury their father.⁶ The burial is supervised by both sons. While Isaac placed the headstone, Ishmael placed the footstone of the grave. Although Ishmael had long ago been dismissed, he was not utterly alienated from his father because he performed the office of a son in celebrating the obsequies of his deceased parent. Ishmael, rather than the other sons, did this, as being nearer.⁷ As a child, Ishmael had a last duty due to his father, and he carried out this duty, attending Abraham’s funeral and burying him.

The obligation to honor one’s parents is an obligation that one owes to God and fulfills this obligation through one’s actions towards one’s parents. In the Hebrew Bible, our relationship with God is continually compared with a parent-child relationship. God tells us in the Ten Commandments to obey and have respect for parents. This does not mean that we only obey our parents when we agree with them or fully understand why they are telling us to do something. We must obey them at all times. We must also honor and have respect for parents. God does not want us to put our parents above Him, but he does desire for us to treat them as He desires for us to treat Him.

Notes

1 Martin Luther, Martin Luther’s Large and Small Catechism, Translated by F. Bente and W.H.T. Dan, (Sioux Falls, SD: Nuvision Publications, 2007), 67.

2 Niyi Taiwo, Respect: Gaining It and Sustaining It. (Philadelphia, PA: Xlibris Corporation, 2007), 25.

3 J. H. Parry, The Book of Jasher, (New York: Cosimo, Inc, 2005), 68.

4 Muhammad Muhsin Khan, The English Translation of Sahih Al Bukhari with the Arabic Text, (Al Saadawi Publications, 1996), Volume 4, Book 55, Number 583.

5 Ali Unal trans, The Qur’an with Annotated Interpretation in Modern English, (New Jersey: The Light, 2006), Saffat 37:102.

6 Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16-50: Word Biblical Commentary, ed. David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker, (Dallas: Word Books, 1994), 165.

7 John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries on Genesis. trans. John King, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1963), 2:38.

References

• Calvin, John. Calvin’s Commentaries on Genesis. trans. John King. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1963.
• Khan, Muhammad Muhsin. The English Translation of Sahih Al Bukhari with the Arabic Text, Al Saadawi Publications, 1996.
• Luther, Martin. Martin Luther’s Large and Small Catechism. Translated by F. Bente and W.H.T. Dan. Sioux Falls, SD: Nuvision Publications, 2007.
• Parry, J. H. The Book of Jasher. New York: Cosimo, Inc, 2005.
• Taiwo, Niyi. Respect: Gaining It and Sustaining It. Philadelphia, PA: Xlibris Corporation, 2007.
• Unal, Ali, trans. The Qur’an with Annotated Interpretation in Modern English. New Jersey: The Light, 2006.
• Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis 16-50: Word Biblical Commentary. ed. David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker. Dallas: Word Books, 1994.

In our essay, we will briefly introduce Wach’s basic understanding of each of the four concepts, namely teacher, student, master, and disciple, and then elaborate, examining in detail some of the perspectives. At the same time, we will try to look at some different aspects of the subject upon which Joachim Wach did not focus.

According to Wach, the teacher is the possessor of certain crafts, for example, knowledge in a certain subject or of a skill, and he teaches what he knows or possesses to his students. Therefore, he it is not his person itself that is respected by the student, rather it is his knowledge or skill. On the other hand, the very character and participation of the master are crucial in the learning process; therefore, it is not his knowledge or skill that is admired and esteemed by the disciple, but rather his very essence and individuality. Consequently, while the teacher is considered as a replaceable object in the educational process, the master is regarded as an essential component.

The teacher provides only knowledge, ability, or a definite subject matter, and his merit consists in his willingness to give freely. On the other hand, to give is also a kind of merit for the master, but he gives something different to his disciples from what the teacher gives to his students. The master gives himself to his disciples and consumes himself. However, the teacher lives for a certain task and gives a certain craft; consequently, he is consumed by his task.

The student respects the teacher as a body of knowledge and the teacher-student relationship exists in the common interest that is the subject matter. The disciple is interested in the personality of the master rather than his knowledge. For that reason, the master-disciple relationship survives in different interests; that is to say, while the master’s interest is the student himself, the student’s concern is the master’s very existence. On that ground, the master and disciple have an irreplaceable value for one another, while in the teacher-student relationship, both components are replaceable.

When the student opens himself to the teacher, he makes himself dear, and his value depends on his success or failure in the subject. The sharpness and intelligence of the student stimulates the praise of the teacher. On the other hand, for the master, the sharp eye or the intellect of the disciple makes no difference. Moreover, being a disciple is not based on personal worth, but is rather a relationship in which a fellowship of destiny is predominant.

After introducing the main nuances of the teacher-student and the master-disciple relationships, as Wach perceives them, let us elaborate on some points that are given only a brief mention in Wach’s paper.

One of the points that Wach explores concerning comparison between teacher and master is time. Wach asserts that the teacher is worried about time, especially its passing, while the master’s concern focuses on the moment. The teacher has much to teach and wants to have completed his task at the end of the course. He wants his students to graduate so that they can go out and teach what they have been taught. However, the master has no concern about when his disciples will complete his course, because the right time for the matriculation of the disciple cannot be determined in advance. In other words, the right time can be at any moment. Consequently, each moment is a treasure for both the master and the disciple in this learning process; the right knowledge or the gnosis-in the Sufi sense-can be given and obtained at any moment.

Moreover, the teacher teaches a certain type of knowledge or skill; therefore, his course must end at a certain time period. However, the master teaches of himself and provides knowledge of life; therefore, this teaching phase may last for a life time.

Approached from a different angle, time is a valuable concept in the teacher-student relationship only when the teacher teaches, as this relationship is based on teaching and learning. On the other hand, time is a valuable component in the master-disciple relationship, because even the master’s silence or a look can be a great method of teaching. In other words, the master-disciple relationship is not based solely on certain actions.

When we look at the issue from the perspective of the student and the disciple, we can determine that students plan that they will give a certain time period to their teacher, but the disciples are ready to sacrifice their whole life to their master. The students are worried about the passing of the time; this is not a fault. Yet, the disciples do not worry about time; if they do worry, it means that they feel a great need to spend much time with their master.

Another issue that Wach raises in his paper is about the future of students and disciples. He asserts that the student will become a teacher, but the disciple will never become a master. Wach states that as the master’s existence is irreplaceable, the disciple can never take the place of his master. On the other hand, the teacher is not unique; therefore, the student can replace him. Agreeing with Wach about this specific idea, we also would like to say that although the disciple cannot replace his master, he certainly can become a master and there are many examples of this in the history of the master-disciple relationship. For instance, one of the famous Sufi masters, Abdussalam b. Mashish, had only one disciple during his whole life, Shazili, through whom he gained fame. This was because Shazili, after his master Ibn Mashish, also became a great master and founded the Shazili Sufi order. As the example shows, the disciple can never be his master, but he can be a master who carries on the tradition.

One of the distinctions between discipleship and studentship that Wach makes is that while discipleship drives the disciples to envy and jealousy, studentship is usually a base for mutual love. This stems from the fact that in the master-disciple relationship, the master’s very existence is the sole interest of all the disciples; therefore, they are unable to share him. On the other hand, in the teacher-student relationship, the common interest of the students is the subject matter; therefore, students usually do not experience any problem in terms of sharing. Agreeing with these contentions of Wach, we also would like to add that although discipleship usually becomes a base for jealousy, the masters do not desire that their disciples feel jealousy towards each other.

One of the great masters was Said Nursi, who lived in Turkey and died in 1960. He had a very different approach to the disciple-master relationship. Nursi’s significance rests in the very core of his teachings. In his teaching, he creates a completely new concept called fana fi’l-ikhwan and according to this concept, disciples must annihilate themselves in their fellow disciples instead of annihilating themselves in the character of the master. This mutual annihilation that occurs between disciples is called tafani and both these concepts, fana fi’l-ikhwan and tafani are fundamental in the teachings of Nursi.

One of the points that Wach should have dealt with more clearly in his paper is the emotional nature of the master-disciple relationship. For us, the master-student relationship is a relationship of compassion-love. As Wach points out, the master’s very concern is humanity; it is through his sacred knowledge that the master can perceive the ability of humanity to live cheerfully and painlessly. Therefore, the master willingly takes on the role of savior and bravely says ‘Yes’ to his destiny. His soul is willing to be sacrificed. Apparently, the main emotion that rests in the soul that accepts sacrifice is compassion; the master’s group of disciples is a small sample of humanity, so therefore, the master is always compassionate to his disciples. He cares for them deeply; lives and dies for them. On the other hand, the disciple returns this compassion with his deep love.

To elaborate on the compassion of the master, we can say that the master’s compassion toward his disciples, thereby, toward humanity, contains three main emotions: protection, endurance, and sacrifice. The relationship of the master to his disciples is like that of a mother to her children. Therefore, the master is always worried about the security of his disciples. The security that we talk about here is generally not a physical one. Since the master is aware that the life of humanity is generally cheerful and painless, he wants to protect his disciples from this type of life style. The master knows and deeply believes that such an easy life is a dead and void life.

The master’s heart burns to protect his disciples, in particular the young disciples who are usually not aware of the great dangers that await them. It is due to this unawareness that they are sometimes unable to display obedience to the advice of the master. When this happens, the master’s position becomes a very heavy burden to bear, but his compassion towards the disciples provides for him the endurance that he needs.

The last main nuance of the master’s compassion is his saying “Yes” to his destiny. As soon as the master obtains his sacred knowledge, he becomes aware of his sacrificial destiny. He knows that his task is very difficult and this task may even drive him to his death. There is no other choice for him but to say “Yes” to his death. He is able to do this because of his incomprehensible compassion. At this point, although Wach sees death as the greatest sacrifice of the master, we disagree; perceiving rather that living for the sake of humanity and enduring the difficulties of the task is a greater sacrifice for the master than the acceptance of death. The difficulties that the master accepts and bears throughout his life are heavier than death itself. It is for this reason that Mawlana Jalaladdin Rumi and many others call death Shab-i Arus, “the wedding night.” It is on this night that the lover meets his beloved and the master meets his Lord; for the master, death is the end of suffering.

While the master’s compassion contains protection, endurance, and sacrifice, the love of the disciples contains respect and obedience. The following quote from Ibn Arabi symbolizes the respect of the disciples toward their master: “When I would sit before him [Abu Ya’qub al-Qumi] or before others of my Shaykhs, I would tremble like a leaf in the wind, my voice would become weak and my limbs would shake.” The respect that the disciples display for their master stems from their deep love. The other main reflection of that deep love is obedience. Although the disciples are aware of the benefits of obeying their master, these benefits are not the main reason for their obedience. Rather, such obedience arises out of their love.

Regarding this obedience, in Sufism the disciple is considered to be as a corpse in the hands of the person washing the body in preparation for burial.

In conclusion, the subject that Wach deals with in his paper is a complicated subject, and there may well be many other aspects that need to be discussed, yet it should be stated that Wach seems to have accomplished much in this field. A university professor, Wach, if not a master, certainly stands at the boundary between the realms of the master and the teacher realms.