From transcendence to immanence: translating the untranslatable

ABSTRACT

This intercultural research addresses the challenges of standardizing translation of mystical philosophical terminologies. Mystical texts make a connection between the transcendent, the essentially unknowable Absolute, and the finite human being. They attempt to communicate through words what is indescribable. As such, the language they employ is symbolic and ambiguous. This leads to inconsistent and at times conflicting translations of terminologies. A text, “Commentary on the Tradition of the Hidden Treasure,” which summarizes and comments on various Sufi perspectives on the process of creation and the ontological relationship between the world of existence and its divine origin, as well as providing psychosocial interpretations, is used as a case study for explaining contexts of important mystical terminologies. Comparing various English and Chinese translations of terms by prominent translators and scholars of Sufi texts should help translators of such texts appreciate the complexity of mystical language, adopt certain existing translations, or propose alternatives.

KEYWORDS:

• Mystical metaphor translation
• Sufi ontological paradigm
• Ibn `Arabi
• perpetual creation

Acknowledgement

Research for this paper was conducted by the Hermeneutic Research on Eastern Philosophy Project team members led by Professor Yan Haiying, Director of Institute of Ancient Civilizations, Peking University.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Koran 57:3. See Ibn `Arabi Tafsír al-Qur’án al-Karím Vol. 2 (1978, 597) for a mystical interpretation of these.

2. Koran 55:19–20.

3. A poem by Hafiz, the 14^th century Persian poet.

4. Mathnaví is a style of Persian poetry best suited for lengthy narratives.

5. Oral tradition or hadith is a saying of the Islamic holy figures that is not included in the Koran.

6. E.g. Shaykh Bálí Khalífat as-Şúfíyyah of the 15^th Century wrote a commentary on the hadith (Rádmihr 2003, 185). Also, Najmid-Dín Rází, a prominent Persian Sufi of the 13^th century in his Marmúzát-i-Asadí dar Mazmúrát-i-Dáwúdí, (2006) on page 12 (Rádmihr 2002, 206).

7. See Chittick and Wilson (1982, 30, footnote 15) for examples of inconsistencies in application of certain key terms.

8. English translations and editing of this work is available (see Bayrak and Terri 1992, 88–112).

9. A variation of the image in https://media.bahai.org/administration-agencies/bahai-symbols/ (Copyright © Bahá’í International Community). Although certain Bahá’í texts explicitly or implicitly allude to Sufi terminologies, symbols, and concepts, they vary in substantial ways from Sufi perspectives and practices.

10. Dealing with traditional literature, I have taken the liberty of ignoring gender signification of words, using “man” for humankind (male or female), “He” referring to God, etc.

11. According to another definition, the character wang is in the shape of an axe, symbolizing the authority of the king, carrying an axe.

12. In my personal conversation with William Chittick at Peking University, he pointed out the 10 or more levels of existence between the transcendent and the immanent defined by Ibn `Arabi.

13. See (`Abdu’l-Bahá 1912, 141–143) for a discussion of the three realms vs. the two realms paradigms of existence.

14. Corbin defines three stages of theophany or tajallí (1981, 295), but many others identify two.

15. “Amá” can refer to the first realm as well, symbolizing the hiddenness of God’s names and attributes (Ghadimi 2002, 1189–90), depicted in Figure 2 as realms one and two overlap.

16. This category of names and attributes is called “essential attributes” (ṣifát dhátíyya).

17. See Chittick (1989), 34–7 for a detailed discussion of this topic.

18. “First Isthmus-Nature” is also referred to the reality of the Perfect Man (Chittick and Wilson 1982, 22) because this reality hold in it divine qualities.

19. To certain Sufis “Perfection of Distinct-vision” also means that the “other” must “contemplate itself in itself inasmuch as it is differentiated from its source, and likewise it must contemplate God with its own eye and with God’s eye as well” (Chittick and Wilson 1982, 21). All these take place subsequent to the appearance of the third realm, the realm of creation.

20. Refer to explanations in `Abdu’l-Bahá (1912), 41–43.

21. Ṭáhirih is probably taken this concept from the texts by the Báb, Siyyid Alí Muḥammad, such as in Bayán-i-Fársí pages 85, 107.

22. Qur’án 6:103.

23. The commentary (11–12) ascertains that certain insightful mystics, consider the Essence of God to be sanctified from the existence of “archetypes,” “essential natures,” “realities,” and “recipients” within it. They consider these to be phenomena associated with the second realm only.

24. “19” seems to be the manuscript or chapter number (page 17 of Chapter 19).

25. Whinfield-Kazviní uses “appearances” and “characteristics” interchangeably for ta`ayyunát and tashakhkhuṣát, and “epiphany of Very Being” for ta`ayyunát wujúd (37,38)