The Names of God (5)-al-Raheem, "the Compassionate"

Adnan Husain: Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim. salam hello peace to you all and welcome back to another edition of the continuing series of the names of god this is the fifth episode in our series i'm adnan hussein a historian of the medieval mediterranean and islamicate worlds here with my friend colleague and co-host dr mark applebaum uh mark um it's great to see you why don't you tell listeners who um have not uh spoken with us uh for a while or listened to us speaking to one another for a while on this series um who you are let's reintroduce ourselves oh great so um happy to be back and

Marc Applebaum: I'm a phenomenological psychologist. That's a whole mouthful, isn't it? Basically, it's exploring the meaning of lived experiences, whether those are experiences that are related to consciousness or religious experiences or everyday experiences. So that's my background in terms of scholarship. And in that context, I've particularly focused on meditative experience. And been both engaged in phenomenology and in Sufism for more than 30 years at this point.

Adnan Husain: Yes, and that's the special insight that you bring to the discussion of the names of God that we've been considering for the last four episodes. These are, of course, the designations that you find in the Islamic devotional Sufi mystical tradition of spirituality. of the names that you can call upon God. We had in our introductory episode a bit of a survey about what these are and our approach. We don't need to remind listeners completely, but just since it has been a while, we've been considering various ways of thinking through The 99 names is the traditional number, but of course, they are limitless and infinite. Even in the tradition, we have been following The incidences and appearances and mention of names and descriptions or attributes describing God that are recognized by Afif ad-Din al-Talim Sani in his major work, The Divine Names, A Mystical Theology of the Names of God in the Quran that follows. And here's just a... You can see one of the sources that we've been using, we've been following more or less his order that goes in the appearance of the name from the beginning through the Quranic text, the sacred scripture of Islam. And we've also been talking almost, I believe one listener even sort of put it that in a way we were kind of almost as if we were a dialogue mediating or ventriloquizing an imagined dialogue between a Tlemceni on the one hand, that being you, Speaking from a particular orientation tradition and me, Al-Ghazali, in his famous 99 names, the 99 beautiful names of God, al-maqsad al-asna fi shar, asma al-husna.

Marc Applebaum: Yeah, well, you know, that's very funny. I mean, in a sense, they were in dialogue with each other. They weren't strictly contemporaries. But for our listeners, Tlemceni was a direct student of Ibn al-Arabi and Sadruddin Konevi. So he's right at the beginning of the whole Akbarian stream in Sufism. and uh goes cites al-ghazali repeatedly throughout his book because he's there's a lot of reverence for al-ghazali in the text so um these they're in dialogue with each other automatically anyway

Adnan Husain: Well, that's right. I mean, it's evident that he had read Al-Ghazali's text closely and cites it when he's designating a name at the very beginning of every chapter dealing with a new name to discuss. He indicates whether al-Ghazali and a couple of other important Andalusian mystical authorities had designated this name as one of the names of God. And they don't always agree with one another about what counts as a name or not. That isn't the case, of course, for what we'll be discussing today. Right. It's evident that he has studied al-Ghazali's work closely. So in a way, you're absolutely right, is that this dialogue is already implicit, you know, in the connection between these texts and sources.

Marc Applebaum: Yeah, and I think it's also useful to remind our listeners that what we're bringing is really a personal and practice-related interest in these names, even though either of us is fully capable of going down a very, to us, fascinating rabbit hole in terms of the scholarship. But the interest relates to lived experience in relation to the tradition as a whole. We may even engage in other religious traditions around divine names, but all of which is in the context of how would human beings relate to these things in their own lives, not only elucidating kind of the details of medieval mysticism on its own, so to speak.

Adnan Husain: That's right. I mean, this isn't a podcast series about these two authors and their writings on the subject. It is about how we might, in our contemporary world, engage with the spiritual resources, the psychological resources, the emotional resources that are available in this tradition of the 99. names or the divine names the names of god that are across many different religious traditions but we've taken as the core beginning point for these explorations and already existing devotional and spiritual tradition and so we turn to some of these authorities who have worked with this tradition and elaborated a discussion in mystical vocabulary that we hope through our dialogue and discussion together, we might be able to elucidate and elaborate how these may be reference points or touchstones for us to continue on our own journeys, psychologically, spiritually. And as you were pointing out, it's very important to connect it to experiences in the world. And we have tried on occasion where it's possible to reflect on these names in relation to what we are experiencing even today. It's, I think, continues to be relevant for the name that we're going to be discussing today because it connects with the subject of our last episode together. You know, Ar-Rahman, the merciful. We had a chance at that time when we were discussing a few months ago about know the providential kind of dimension of it of mercy being um wired into the very fabric of existence in this tradition that the name ar-rahman was a kind of cosmological one that uniquely described the divine and unlike some of the other names of God that could be seen as attributes or characteristics that could also describe human personality or experience. Ar-Rahman is a very unique, like the name Allah, a very unique one that relates to this kind of universal cosmological existence. and yet if that is founded in some sense of mercy um you know we were struggling and discussing with how to deal with emotionally the ever-existing palpable experience of suffering existentially um but also even specifically in the world that we inhabit yeah um yeah so

Marc Applebaum: In fact, in Tlemceni, as in the other Akbar, it's the Rahman, or specifically the Nafsa Rahman, the breath of the merciful, that is said to bestow being on all beings, on all existence. So from that point of view, and this is what we were getting into last time, what does it mean to conceive of Allah? all the beings and ourselves and everything we see in this world as a kind of an endowment or a gift from an outpouring that's merciful, that's intrinsically merciful.

Adnan Husain: You know, that's wonderful to recall that discussion. And I think you pointed out to me a passage that we might have discussed last time, but that you wanted to bring to attention again in this conversation that is from Tlemceni's Rahman. Maybe I'll just read what you pointed out, and you might want to elaborate on the comment you just made in relation to this quotation. So Tillam Sani says, "...the closest thing that is ascribed to the All-Merciful, that is our Rahman, is the breath." which the blessed prophet called the breath of the all merciful or it is a movement of being through which from which and in which all existence all existent things are determined keeping in mind that all does not really pertain to existence since all denotes infinity right

Marc Applebaum: wow well this is already like jumping into the deep end uh for anyone listening right now yeah so so the um the dynamic outpouring or bestowal through this breath of uh being wujud being on all the beings is through this um through the rahman according to David Plylar, Ph.D.: flim sunny here. David Plylar, Ph.D.: And I love that phrase. David Plylar, Ph.D.: Through which so by means of this outpouring of mercy from which so it's from this merciful source and in which. So in which all existent things are determined. So somehow we're in a field, you could say, if I'm reading him properly, that's both originating in this outpouring of mercy, of being merciful, being as mercy, from the divine source but it's not this is again not a view that we are separate entities that have our own self-subsistence in in in among the akbaris we have a kind of provisional existence that's being gifted to us in a moment-to-moment basis from the source of being. And so this is a very dynamic process that they view as going on repeatedly. So there's this constant creation idea in Sufism of... always being at the receiving end of existence, of our personal existence and the witness to the ongoing existence of everything else that's constantly arising around us. So that's the bigger picture. And being itself, which he points out, is not comprehended, not contained with any of this because the source of that being is infinite and beyond us, transcendent to us. Something like that. How's that?

Adnan Husain: Yeah, yeah. Well, I mean, you know, we're talking... Theosophy, cosmology, this is very difficult to grasp in a programmatic sort of way. And that isn't necessarily the goal to elucidate it programmatically, but more as you're pointing out experientially. And something we had said when we were talking about this passage, at the end of that paragraph, And something that maybe captures a little bit of the relationship between Ar-Rahman as a name that we discussed in our last episode and the subject of this episode is Ar-Rahim, the compassionate, you know, it's very closely connected and has the same root. And both our commentators notice this and found a lot of their discussion and association of the two names and the distinction to be made between them on the root, ar-rahmah, mercy, which comes from that three-letter root, rah-ha-mah-meem, rah-ha-meem, as rahm, the womb, this maternal, encompassing, enveloping sort of sense of mercy. Also, I think, you know, also for within the womb, it is the universe as well. And so that's maybe in some sense, the way in which that or outflowing of mercy as part of the very fabric of existence. You know, there's a palpable way in which that could be experienced, you know, even preconsciously.

Marc Applebaum: Well, absolutely. I mean, I think, in fact, that's that's a great point, because for any Gnostic tradition or meditative tradition like Sufism, the claim that's being made is not that this is a doctrine that simply stays at the level of ideas or doctrine, but rather that what's being outlined is to be discovered and verified through, well, marifa would be the term, but one of the terms would be marifa, which we could render as like personal acquaintanceship. So everything that we're talking about that might sound incredibly abstract or difficult in terms of the outpouring of being and that being merciful, the claim within traditions like Sufism is that that is to be verified personally through the path itself. through the path that involves meditative practice, but also character refinement and also community of a certain kind and all of those things taken together. So, yeah. So thank you for mentioning that part of it. It's not meant to hang out in outer space as an idea.

Adnan Husain: Right, right. Yeah, that point about verifying, I think, through experiential knowledge, knowledge that comes through traveling the path, which is the metaphor, of course, that Sufis so often use, I think is important as well. And going back to discussion in Ar-Rahman, before we even get to a Rahim, but is the kind of paradox of how to relate and understand divine names that are linguistically and conceptually framed somehow as other than the human. It's the divine. It's outside. um and especially in the case of our rahman that is so closely associated with this universal uh being and creation and the very kind of flow of mercy is what gives existence uh um uh it's it's existed you know it's it's it's quality there um is uh know a curious passage um that we had in al-ghazali's discussion of ar-rahman and one would say that he works with the language that you know in theological language even though he's moving beyond it or troubling it or deepening it in it from a different perspective is nonetheless he's beginning from the place of working with theological concepts of the human and the divine the transcendence of the of the divine But of course, the whole project of studying the names of God, even for him, is somehow how the human would relate to these attributes, to these names, and somehow make them part of their spiritual existence. And I think you've characterized, I think, that the dominant approach or mode would be How can the human, and I think we discussed it, that Al-Ghazali himself in his prefatory remarks before discussing individual names lays out some of these approaches and says, you know, it's about how do you imitate in the way that's appropriate the divine name, right? The human imitation of the divine name. in some in some fashion where where it's possible where it's appropriate you know what that means to make to acquire the name right that's that was the language i recall from the outset how does one acquire the name and what does that mean how could one possess the divine name this is something that already you know might trouble some of his audience or uh you know conventional theological sort of understanding but he you know himself um at times has hints and illusions or passages that he might not develop in great detail and elaborate on, but that give a sense that for him, the reality he's speaking of goes well beyond this dichotomous kind of set of terms.

Marc Applebaum: Let me ask you a question about that. Do you think that, I mean, I think that both Ghazali and maybe Maimonides differently They're definitely operating in a medieval society that believes that most people are not qualified to really enter into a discussion at this level. It's only the few. I mean, that might be because only the few are interested, but I think it's also because in those societies, you ran a huge risk in opening up questions that might get you into theological hot water.

Adnan Husain: your community well and i would say even also that there is despite an egalitarian ethos of the universal human mission of islam as this uh you know alignment of oneself with the will of god and everyone should have access and be capable of doing so and the fact that these societies also didn't have for example a hereditary aristocracy and nobility Nonetheless, despite those components that would tend toward the egalitarian, they're full of hierarchies. And it's just understood that some people have and that people have maybe even different positions. Maybe you wouldn't think of it as hierarchical, but they have different roles in the social division. uh of of society you know the the division of human beings in society and those look a little hierarchical you know some people are rulers and others are ruled and so on and they accept that that's the way the world is and they naturalize that in their kind of conception so so do you do you think so i don't want to take you away from the point that you're that you're about to go to and ghazali but uh which seems to be about um

Marc Applebaum: the relationship with the names or a name that might have been controversial at his time and the way in which he talked about that. Is that where you're going with?

Adnan Husain: Yeah. Well, just that, I mean, he does seem nonetheless to have moments where if you're reading carefully and closely, you notice that this might undermine some of the conventional understandings. That could be, you know, and from his terms, could be misunderstood, which is perhaps why he says them briefly, elusively, didn't expect like this work to necessarily circulate. um, incredibly widely in certain, you know, more conventional theological circles perhaps. Yeah.

Marc Applebaum: And isn't the risk there that, that if he's understood as painting a picture that brings the human being closer to God and closer to participating in a oneness, something like, um, not unification, cause that would not unification, but I think bringing the human being closer into more intimacy would be seen as a threat to the idea of God as strictly transcendent to us, strictly separate from and above us, an authority that's unquestionable and distant, something like that. A more dualistic conception.

Adnan Husain: Right, right. Except that I think we don't want to overdraw the spiritual, religious, and intellectual environment as so starkly contrasting between a few who might understand that this understanding of God's transcendence has to be mediated by a sense of the human's connection to the divine, Sufism as a devotional and spiritual orientation is increasingly well-known, popular, reconciled in various ways with aspects of Orthodox religious culture. So there's already been, it seems to me, something of a revolution of recognizing and understanding that uh god is closer to you than the jugular vein right these kinds of hadith and verses that sufis were uh um interested in because they opened up possible ways of connecting with the divine these are becoming you know more commonly interpreted perhaps in ways that allow for this exploration it's just that when you talk it seems to me uh about something like the passage that i wanted to remind us that we had briefly discussed last time that definitely opens up disconcerting potentially possibility well even even to somebody who would be open to it it's an awesome suggestion uh that he's proposing here that You know, it, and that sense of awe, you know, is both wonder amazement, you know, it troubles the boundaries of our conceptions and it dislocates you from your normal everyday sense of, of, of reality and existence. And that, you know, you know, you can embrace that. You can pursue it, but you can also feel like, wow, this is I'm on the cusp of something that, you know, has possibilities that I cannot even fathom what those might be. And that can be, you know, a little both both exciting and a little, you know, scary for people.

Marc Applebaum: Destabilizing, scary, threatening. Is this OK? Like, does this actually fit? Like, dare I?

Adnan Husain: That's why so many of these accounts of Sufi mystics, their experiences when they relate them, and we have them preserved in the form of writing that we can consult hundreds of years later, they very often are accompanied by these doubts. You know, was that a real experience? How should I take that? If that's really real, what does that mean, you know, for everything else? I saw myself in this journey in other worlds, in meeting and having contact with beings and personages and identities that are not accessible to me in everyday reality. How did that happen? Why did that happen? You know, so it seems to me even the Prophet ﷺ in Muslim tradition, right, when he first received wahi, that is, you know, Sufis would talk about tajalli, theophany, or kashf, openings and unveilings. For the sense of revelation that becomes scripture, it's wahi. But the first encounter with that experience was so profoundly unnerving and disturbing for Muhammad that... He wondered, and we have Quran commentaries about it because there are verses that allude to it, that he said, am I going mad? If I tell anybody about this, people accuse me of being possessed by jinn or losing my mind or something because these are... unnerving experiences potentially. And so, you know, I mean, I guess one could respect the care and caution sometimes that some of these authors might have about, you know, you don't just talk about it in this casual sort of way. You need to prepare people because if they do experience these things, they may not know quite how to deal with it if they're not.

Marc Applebaum: Well, and I would say that carries straight through the tradition, that questioning of one's own experiences and the need for... Well, I mean, just to take an example from Ibn al-Arabi, he has a whole book, which is basically an index of different kinds of, well, today we would call just extraordinary kinds of experiences, right? Altered states, we might call them today. It's a whole list. It's like maybe more than 100 different examples of different qualities of experiences. And after each one, he says, if you have this experience, you can't rely on it. And what he's not saying is it's not truthful in some particular way. But in each of them, he's cautioning the reader that that on its own cannot be relied on. And this is part of a tradition that has, I think I'll just say two brief things about, one of which is that generally speaking, there's always a relationship with someone providing guidance to the seeker. Another human being who's providing guidance, generally, I won't say in every case. Generally, that's the case, that there's a safeguard of someone who's trustworthy, who's providing guidance. Secondly, again, among the akbares, I'll just keep it to that, there's levels of certainty around experience that are sort of classical. The first being the knowledge of certainty, ilmal yaqeen, which is like an understanding, but it's still understanding about. It's still understanding about the second being , which is an opening or an experience of certainty around, on the way, let's say. But it's still, it's like an opening into the life of that person that grants a different sense of certainty, but it's passing. I mean, it endures as a taste of something, but it's not the end. And the third level of certainty being or the actuality or the reality of certainty, which is more that the certainty is so thoroughly manifesting through that person that it sort of becomes the default, you could say, in more contemporary terms for their worldview, for the grasp of the world around them. So all of that might have seemed like an excursion, but it's just to say that everything that Adnan has laid out about the awareness of fallibility, the caution about inflation, what psychologically we would call inflation, getting overly grandiose, having had some opening in practice, it is built into the tradition, and I think that the prophetic model is right there for them, for sure, that you started with.

Adnan Husain: Yeah, yeah. Well, it's so interesting that these levels of certainty, I mean, that, of course, if we think about al-Ghazali and his biography, it was the kind of crisis about how to know and understand what could you really rely on as certainty of truth or certainty in knowledge led to the crisis that sent him on this path. for 10 years of exploration and abandoning his high-profile professorship and position at the center of the Muslim empire at the time, at the most elite academy of the time as the top professor. So he had a lot that he gave up. as a result of this kind of crisis and that he needed to experience and explore in order to feel any of those levels, you know, I think. So it's interesting then that he, you know, says when he's talking in the the passage that you know we come to that that um he says man's share in this name should be for him to become godlike to allah by which i mean that his heart and his aspiration be taken up with god great and glorious that he not look towards anything other than him nor pay attention to what is not he that he neither implore nor fear anyone but him how could it be otherwise for it had already been understood from this name that he is the truly actual existent and that everything other than he is ephemeral perishing and worthless except in relation to him. The servant sees himself, first of all, as the first of the perishing and worthless, as did the messenger of God. May God's grace and peace be upon him when he said, the truest verse uttered by the Arabs was Labid saying, surely everything except God is vain and every happiness is doubtless ephemeral. So I ended up reading a little bit more than perhaps I needed for the main point. But the main point there was that he introduces a kind of concept that I certainly didn't expect I would find in Al-Ghazali as really the apex of this method of like, well, what is the meaning of acquiring the name? In this case, he's saying is that it's an actual Arabic word based on the word Allah, you know, with the divine name, the uniquely divine name of Ta'allu, that is taking on some aspect of, for oneself, of being, right? So it's more than imitation. It's something else. And he goes on to describe it in a kind of interesting way that maybe in some ways tries to recover. You know, you've kind of stretched out to say, you know, that it's... becoming to Allah, but then, you know, making sure to sort of restore some sense of the proper

Marc Applebaum: you know boundary of i don't know how this is going i don't know how this is going to sound but i mean would godification be something like a a sloppy rendering for that word maybe you know what i mean that is the kind of like arabic form could be rendered something like that yeah yeah so what could this right so what could that possibly mean i mean the by the way the exact parallel there between ibn al-arabi and al-gazali is in the spirit to my mind at least of that statement that that of the relative emptiness of everything other than he. So it's like everything perishes except his face. It's like this sense. Now that could be read from a sort of a, let's say diminishing perspective as rendering humans worthless, Right. Like if we were in a if we were kind of in a blaming condition, we could say, oh, wow, that human beings are pretty lowly, aren't they? Right. This is not how I read it. And it's not how I know that the barbarians read it either. But it's it's it's our beings. are utterly reliant on the source of being. And we don't subsist in ourselves, but only through the connection to that source. But, you know, I mean, human psychology being what it is, the full range of interpretations is available to anybody. You know what I mean? So depending on one's own condition, like today we'd say one's own psychology, one's own psychological condition at a given moment, one can relate to these statements in a wide, wide range of ways. Everything from, wow, human beings are pretty lowly, empty creatures, to no, they're actually transparent to their source, which is, you know, another possibility.

Adnan Husain: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yeah, well, I think he's wrestling with how you get to talking about being transparent to the source without it seeming like he's just erasing all boundaries that might not work for many in his audience, right? So that's kind of the point.

Marc Applebaum: Just a footnote here, lest our listeners think we've strayed completely from Rahman and Rahim right now, we're actually, to my mind, following the trajectory of the way those two names are interrelated. Yes. At least according to Tlemceni. Because the outpouring of being is associated with Rahman, and for him, the return through remembrance of God's oneness and one's own relationship to that is through Rahim, and we'll get there.

Adnan Husain: Yes, and we probably, you know, should make a move there because it does recall, I do think that this discussion maps well onto the relationship between our Rahman and Rahim. Our Rahim, which is what we want to transition to, is really exploring now. you know, how to understand Rahim through the previous discussion that we've had. And we should note that, like, for example, for al-Ghazali, he actually treats the two names together in the same section. He doesn't dedicate a separate section because he sees them as so intimately connected through this fundamental rahmah. There are components and aspects that represent Rahim. So he actually treats them together, whereas Tulum Sani separates his discussion, but much of what he says in Ar-Rahman is necessary for appreciating the brief section that he has on Ar-Rahim. But it reminds me just what you were saying now, Mark. Yes. is the end of that paragraph that had the quotation that we talked about, about the breath of the all-merciful and the movement that it mentioned, a movement of being through which, from which, and in which, all existent things. The end of the paragraph comes back to this kind of movement in a way and mentions this expansion and contraction continue ceaselessly between these two levels of the infinity of God's power and the expanse of the presence of the divine qualities. And it was this expansion and contraction of the breath of I think that got us from the expansion of the flow of creation, and then the contraction is the moment of coming back, which I think is where you were trying to take us with where Rahim kind of has its particular qualities within this Rahmah. I'm wondering what you would say about Tlemceni's...

Marc Applebaum: Yeah, so what Limsani says, I'll quote him as best I can about Rahman and Rahim, is that he says, every Rahma, every, let's say, mercy that appears in existence is called Rahma, Rahman, as long as separateness or distinction still leaves a trace in the perception of the perceiver. So let me just say that again. So we call Rahma, we call mercy Rahman, as long as there's separateness or distinction, leaving a trace in the perception of the one perceiving. That's the human who's perceiving. So that applies to the manifestation that we could, any of us could have of being on the receiving end of Rahman. Then Tlemceni says, but if separateness leaves no trace, then it's Rahmania in that the witness is annihilated in the witnessed so again if sep now this is again imagine that he's speaking about people who are in a lifelong path of spiritual seeking a meditative path of spiritual seeking so if they have so returned like engaged in that return to their source that separation or separateness leaves no trace for them, no perceptual trace of separateness for them, then the witness is annihilated, and the word is fana, right? The witness is annihilated in the witnessed, in that which is witnessed, which is God, the real. So that's like where Rahim goes, see? So the second part is Rahim. So it's like Rahman is this beautiful, this outpouring, this bestowal of being. The Rahim is that effacement in the return to oneness. Now, this is not presented in this tradition as a permanent state of being effaced. That's always understood as transitory, as far as I understand it, among Clemsonian, the others. Because after that passing away, there's a return to one's own relative individuation, you know, as the human being who you are with an address, a name, et cetera. But this is a kind of milestone that Tlemceni is talking about. And so that's kind of like this circular, to me, at least for today, this shows up, I think, in our conversations as a kind of, an out-breath, in-breath, or in-breath, inhale, exhale sort of situation. So that's where we've been going with it.

Adnan Husain: Yeah, yeah. I guess what I'm wondering is if we understand this dynamic and the way it's reflected in the relative relationship between the all merciful and the compassionate or the ever merciful, which is a translation that uh it's given um you know in the tlimsani translation yeah yeah yeah um that if if we if we think of if we understand that dynamic as two components of this larger circle um that is uh you know uh pretty um you know, rooted in like, in experience, you know, we talked about, you know, the creative, encompassing, existential, kind of feeling of mercy and love, nurturing you, giving life, you know, as one, and then this kind of return after, you know, perceiving separation, you know, as its own kind of mercy. How would one translate some of this dynamic into a kind of psychological self-understanding? Sure. Great question.

Marc Applebaum: Yeah, I mean, I think the first thing I would say is that the way, at least just speaking personally, the way that I would understand what they would call the ascending arc, the arc of ascent, is What Tlamsani referred to as effacement or fana, to my understanding, requires psychologically, it's progressively retracing to its origin point, the ground of one's own I-ness and consciousness. That's a big statement, but it means gradually witnessing the flow of one's own consciousness moment to moment. This is the meditative part, right? Over time, to the point where one lets go of the very tight grip that we normally have on everything that's occurring to us consciously moment to moment, right? We're usually, for very good reasons, heavily invested in... in in navigating our life right moment to moment and that means being attached to what we're feeling what we're thinking what we're aiming to do you know all of these things but as anyone in in any um who's had any meditative experience even even at the very simple level of kind of a mindfulness practice would know that uh that involves from everyday activities long enough to begin to notice from a more disengaged witnessing perspective, those contents that normally we're engaged with and glued to all the time. And progressively in a process of deepening that capacity to witness and to disengage from temporarily, I guess I'm saying during meditative practice, but it has after effects. to progressively witness and let go of that tight grip. Whatever are the most compelling parts of one's conscious life that one is typically really attached to, for good or bad, it could be hopes or fears. It could be aims or aversions. Psychologically, you can see, you could imagine how becoming increasingly aware in a more disengaged way, meaning a more witnessing way of what normally grabs you, what normally compels you, requires becoming psychologically very deeply self-aware and taking the risk that one can loosen one's grip on what it normally means to be Mark or Adnan. Because psychologically, we're always in the act, you could say, of playing the character in life that we take ourselves to be. Right. And there's good reason for that. Again, like if I, you know, if I had meetings with students earlier, if I didn't show up as Mark, the professor, Applebaum, the professor, do you see what I mean? Like there's a, there's a good reason to be attached to being the person who pays my rent check or whatever it is. Right. So functionally there's a good reason to be attached to the character we take ourselves to be in everyday life. But, um, if we believe in the possibility as a real experience, so what Tlemceni is talking about as annihilation, then that requires a great deal of just bare attention to the ground of our consciousness itself and the letting go of the ways that we're normally identified with continually performing the character who we are. So I hope this is a good thumbnail sketch. And this is on the arc of what would be called the arc of ascent, according to the Sufis, which, again, just to remind our listeners, that's just the first half of the journey. It's just the beginning, actually, of the journey, according to them.

Adnan Husain: Right, right. I'm wondering if this relates at all to some of the other ways that you could see difference between ar-Rahman and ar-Rahim. And I'm thinking about completion versus process in this. You know, there was one quotation, I think, from K. Switz's translation of Talim Sani that you had highlighted that, you know, raised some interesting points or questions here. Mm-hmm. The difference between it and the name Ar-Rahman, so this is coming to the name Ar-Rahim, so to give it greater specification, in addition to this dynamic that you mentioned about the parts that they might be in this dynamic, the way that it might relate and how that translates to psychological understanding. is the difference between it and the name of Ar-Rahman. Name Ar-Rahman is that the name Ar-Rahman pertains to the completion, the kamal, or it could be the perfection, the kamal of mercy. So the completion of mercy, the perfection of mercy, whereas Ar-Rahim pertains to perfecting-ness. state of bringing to completion or perfection, akmaliyah. Yeah. So kamal, which is the verbal noun, abstract noun, perfection or completion, and akmaliyah, Akmal meaning more perfect, more complete, which already sounds like a paradoxical thing to say. So that's what gets the process component of it, because how can something be more complete? It's either complete, you would imagine, or not. It's either perfect or imperfect. But the text uses akmaliyya, so more perfect. And also a process, iya, like the process of it being more perfect.

Marc Applebaum: Yeah, the activity, the dynamic activity of being in that activity. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Adnan Husain: Yeah. So I'm wondering, you know, what did you think about this distinction and how might that also translate into some sense of... the psychological experience through the name of mercy? Like one is perfection of mercy and one is a perfecting-ness of mercy?

Marc Applebaum: Yeah, great. Well, I like how you brought that question all the way down to planet Earth, to the ground, which I like. So I mean, to me, the way he describes Rahim as pertaining to perfecting-ness, to be in the midst of the activity, of bringing to completion, akmaliyah, yeah. That would occur for someone. Someone would be in touch with that. I'm not saying comprehend it. There is no comprehending it, according to them. There's being in it. And the way one might recognize one's in that, and again, we've talked about rahim as having to do with the return, right? The return from more or less being convinced of one's separateness to something approaching. recognizing one's ground in the one, right? And God is one. So one would recognize that one is in contact with that akmalia, that process of being brought to completion, let's say, or being brought to greater perfection, because one would know that oneself, one would observe oneself in an increasing condition of integrity. I mean, integrity, meaning the oneness that one has with oneself as a human being are my, Are my feelings consonant with my ideas? Like, is there more congruence in me? A psychologist might say congruence. Is there more congruence between my core motivations and how I relate to people? Like the things I say to people every day on the street, how I handle conflicts. Am I more aligned with my core values in the way that I'm relating to people? Not in a mental way. Am I actually acting out of what I most deeply feel and believe to be true? greater integrity, and not just greater integrity in like a self-contained way, and this is something that's probably beyond the scope of where we wanna go today, but in a qualified non-dual view like this, like the one we're discussing right now, being more aligned with, in the most intimate way with what are the core values and core sense of reality that I have in this moment. It's not just within somehow myself as if the limits are of myself and meaning for me are my skin. For a non-dual perspective, that is simultaneously a sense, claimed to be a sense, of being aligned with being itself as it's expressing itself here as you. so there's a set there so akmalia would be a sense of not only am i experiencing more internal so to speak integrity as an agent like i'm acting in a way that feels better increasingly more intrinsically aligned not because i'm forcing it but because i'm experiencing greater uh intrinsic uh oneness in the way that i'm relating to others in the world but that in itself immediately gives me a greater sense of connection to the world as such to being as such in a way that is is life-giving it's meaning-giving it's um it's an affirming of my sense of what the world what the what the meaningfulness of this creation is that i live in it's not just my idea right that i'm doing better or something like that it feels interesting and when i say feel i mean literally you know in an embodied way in an emotionally embodied way that i um

Adnan Husain: have a greater sense of self-certainty precisely because that self-certainty isn't rooted in me as a cut-off solitary being but rather because i'm connected to the world around me how does that how does that do no that resonates so strongly with me because it also connects to something that i was hoping we would talk about which uh you know reconnects us with the conversation we did have about arrahman as well but there was more you know, in this kind of existential sort of level of like, how can we understand the very frame and substance in a way of the universe as being suffused with mercy and the merciful when what we experience is so much pain and suffering and, of course, genocide and tragedy and oppression and all of that. And what this conversation seems to open up for me is other components of Rahim being different from trying to describe this universal condition and more, at least more accessible to me of the subject experience of that kind of connection with others and the world that's grounded on a sense of mercy, on a sense of empathy, on a sense that the empathy, that the pain and the suffering that we are actually experiencing as we engage with the world and we feel and observe the suffering of others is because we have this empathetic kind of characteristic that opens us up to that pain and suffering it's really the and and so we cannot do away with that we cannot um you know say that that is just in contradiction in a kind of abstract principled way that like oh this this doesn't philosophically line up in fact actually what's more important is that they have to be there There has to be that mercy, that Rahim, in order for us to even actually experience and understand the suffering that others are experiencing and that we experience through empathy, through mercy. If you didn't have that as part of your human condition, then you you wouldn't think you know you wouldn't even recognize maybe you wouldn't even recognize that there is a problem that where is justice in the world why is there evil why is there suffering when there's all this mercy is supposed to be this first principle of actual existence yeah you would be cut off from that and you wouldn't have empathy or care and you wouldn't experience any suffering either from that connection, but there's this passage in Al-Ghazali that connects to this, which is in the section about kind of implications, which is sort of first takes, you know, divides sometimes the discussion into these four parts, you know, first an exposition of the name, you know, maybe sometimes even talking about the root and just kind of dictionary meaning kind of in theological meaning, but then implications, which is then some like, well, if this is the case, what might this lead to, which is a little bit deeper and more interpretive. Mercy is not without a painful empathy, which affects the merciful and moves them to satisfy the needs of the one receiving mercy. Um, Yet the Lord, praise be to him, most high transcends that. So you may think that this diminishes the meaning of mercy. And this is the kind of like, you know, contradiction in the problem. And this is what was relating to a Rahman. But then... In a slightly later section, he draws a distinction between Ar-Rahim and Ar-Rahman in this way, saying that they share in the name Ar-Rahim, meaning the human share, like how we might relate to this divine attribute. His share in the name Ar-Rahim lies in not turning away from any needy persons without meeting their needs to the extent of his ability, nor turning from any poor in his neighborhood or town without committing himself to them and ridding them of their poverty, either from his own wealth or reputation or by interceding on their behalf with another." And if he'd be unable to do all that, he should assist them by prayer or by showing grief on account of their need and sympathy and love towards them as though he were there by sharing in their misfortune and their need. And so that relates, it seems to me, what you would, in a social sort of, a kind of moral and social sort of way how you take on the meaning of the of the name rahim that is that um kind of different activity you know making more complete of mercy is by actually engaging and encountering and noticing and feeling yeah that pain and that suffering absolutely that makes a connection with others

Marc Applebaum: Making yourself available to feel to feel that and to respond Not you know making yourself available for the Rahim to move through you in that way, which is relational Right intrinsically relational already, right? So yeah, I mean I'm remote. I'm reminded of The The remark attributed to the Prophet the hadith could see and where God says, oh, my servant, I was hungry and you didn't feed me. And I won't try to paraphrase the whole Hadith, but in this Hadith, this expression, God is said to be saying, oh, my servant, I was hungry and you didn't feed me. I was thirsty and you didn't give me anything to drink. And the human being says, oh, my Lord, like you transcend all of this creation. How could you be hungry? And the answer is, well, my servant so-and-so was hungry. And if you had fed him, you would have found me with him.

Adnan Husain: for example this is again a bad paraphrase go to the original but but it conveys there's rahim right there well there's the whole rahima the whole circulation of rahima is right there actually in a way that's right yeah i like that example it really does encompass both the two in dynamic relation with one another yeah yeah yeah well um I think there's always so much more that one could say about these two. And these are so important. Ar-Rahman and Ar-Rahim are names of God that one would encounter as among the most commonly cited, invoked, repeated. And I think, you know, for good reasons, obviously, they have such prominence, and they are part of the formula for which every chapter, except for one in the sacred scripture of Islam, the Quran, begins with this, and it is also... in fact, used devotionally as, before beginning anything, begin with this phrase, in the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate. So these two names in particular can be repeated in the course of a day innumerable times, if you think about every action or activity that you're doing. And that process of dhikr that we've mentioned, invocation and repetition, that of course is one of the devotional uses of the names. ways that people engage devotionally with the names, you know, is to invoke them and to repeat them. So I think these two are so important, and there's so much more, of course, that one could talk about, about how people experience these names and their use. I don't know if you have any other thoughts about that, how they're they've become part of like many people's daily life, you know, which is almost to say that our Rahman and our Rahim are meant to be real touchstones of, you know, everyday existence.

Marc Applebaum: You know, I'll just say like when, just to follow up briefly, I think we're in a good place to conclude. But when you mentioned the basmala in the name of God, the beneficent, the merciful, as something that's repeated, when I was reading this chapter to Lamsani I thought wow like how he must have understood what that really implies to say that because that means every time one would recite that expression in a way one is remembering the whole cycle of that whole cycle of creation being created and the return to God for him would be like embedded every time in that expression. So it just added something to me. Nice.

Adnan Husain: That's great. Well, before ending, I do want to say I'm not sure when listeners and watchers, you will have access to this episode, but I know that it will be during the month of Ramadan. We're recording it right at the very start, the first evening of Ramadan, before the day of fast. It is a time in particular for Muslims to seek spiritual renewal through this practice, and to do more of dhikr invocation, to be mindful of these 99 names as they go about other aspects of their devotional practice as Muslims. But it also, I just wanted to say, is a time for charitable giving. And that is, of course, also an expression of this empathy. You know, the example that I just mentioned that Al-Ghazali was talking about as qualitatively distinguishing a Rahim from, say, a Rahman was this example that he was giving about empathy for those who are in need, who are suffering. So this would be a good reminder for us to try and enact how we relate to, you know, ar-Rahim, ar-Rahman and ar-Rahim through good works that we can do in being open to those who need assistance and support in our own lives, in our own communities. And so I do want to just mention Rahima Foundation, rahima.org. You can make an online donation to this organization that takes its name from this divine name of our Rahim. And also to just remember people in Gaza, they have... been suffering hunger, thirst, not by conscious act of engaging in an ascetic practice of their faith for 11 months of the year. Many of them will be fasting during this month of Ramadan and consciously you know um fasting from food and and and thirst um you can donate to the samir project they have a special they're a palestinian mutual aid organization that i've had fundraisers for in the past and am doing so in my office hours program weekly during this month as well their Ramadan iftar campaign to raise money to help support I know there's so many individual appeals that people come across, but I like and appreciate that this is a mutual aid organization that tries to have collective solutions to the problem and to support people on a large scale. So go check out this Samir project and participate if you can in the Ramadan Iftar appeal. Mark, it's always wonderful to spend some time with you and even better that we're doing so around something deeply meaningful and important to us spiritually, psychologically, and emotionally. I always treasure this time. So thank you so much. My pleasure. To everyone else, thank you for being with us and look forward to another episode coming soon. A little sooner than this last gap between Ar-Rahman and Ar-Rahim, which actually are so closely associated. We probably should have done them close together, but we will do another episode very soon in this series, The Names of God. Peace to all of you and solidarity until next time.