A Commentary on the Hamd Surah - Part 7
There is a great controversy about the word, the derivation and meaning of the worlds. Some say that the worlds is, plural, covering all kinds of creation, material and abstract, and each kind is a world in itself. It is a plural that has no singular of its root. This is a well-known opinion. Some others say that “world “is passive participle and “world”? is active participle. So, the worlds mean the known. But not only that this opinion has no proving evidence and is unlikely, it is also quite silly and irrelevant to say the Lord of the known.
Some say that “the worlds” is derived from sign, which covers all being, since everything is a sign and a verse of the Sacred Essence. The letters “waw” and (nun) refer to the rational beings, giving them priority to the other beings.
Others say that it is derived from knowledge. At any rate, regarding it to embrace all creation is correct, as it is justified to take it to cover the rational beings. But is used for everything other than Allah, and is also used for every individual or category. If the one who uses it for every individual and category is of people of tradition and language, he considers everything to be a sign of the Creator: “In everything He has a sign… And if he is a divine Gnostic, he considers every being to be the appearance of the all-embracing Name covering all the truths, by way of the appearance of the Collective Oneness and the Secret of the Existence. According to this consideration, the entire world and every part of it can be regarded as the Greatest Name in the state of the Collective Oneness. “The Names are all in all, and such are the signs.”?
Consequently, the objection of the great philosopher, Sadr al-Millat wa’d-Din [Sadr al-Muta’allihin] (may his soul be sanctified), to those like al-Baydawi is applicable, because they have not tasted of this drink [school]. But to the ways of the people of Gnosticism it is inapplicable. However, as the argument of al-Baydawi and that of the philosopher, on this topic are too lengthy, we refrain from mentioning them. The interested readers may refer to the exegesis of the said late philosopher on verse praise.
If “al-Rabb”? is of the Names of Attributes, meaning “Master”? or “Owner”? and the like, the meaning of the worlds may be “everything other than Allah,”? whether the owned were the beings of the kingdom of the world, or the abstract invisible beings. If it is of the Names of Acts” as it apparently is”the meaning of the worlds will only be the kingdom of the visible world, as, in which case, “al-Rabb”? will mean “the Educator ”?a meaning which is of gradual effectiveness, while the abstract worlds are innocent of gradualness, though, to the writer, the spirit of “graduation”? in the world of eternity, perpetual duration is, in a way, certain; and in the same way, we have also proved the temporal contingency meaning the spirit of time and the eternity of graduation in the abstract worlds. In the Gnostic way, the temporal contingency is also proved for all worlds, but not in the same way as referred to by the theologians and the people of hadith.
Adapted from: "A Commentary on the Chapter of ‘Praise’" by: "Ayatullah Khomeini (R.A)"
Share this article