Similarly, the punishment of the grave or our suffering in Hell cannot be understood unless we believe in the existence of our bodies after death. How is it that the corpse which is dismembered, scattered and finally reduced to dust is restored to life in the grave or Hell? And it it is impossible to conceive of spiritual pain or pleasure independent from our bodies, how could you prove that a bald-headed serpent will devour the defaulter who does not pay the poor-tax or that ninety-nine snakes will bite an infidel in his grave, as laid down in the traditions, when it is an established fact that, after death, both imaginative power as well as spiritual perception are eliminated because of the death of the body? You should know that God's power is mighty and He is the doer of whatever He wills. There seems little doubt that absolute truth is unattainable by the human mind. That is why God sent His Apostles and showed their veracity through explicit miracles, and they conveyed His commands and prohibitions as well as His promises and threats, so it became obligatory upon all creatures to believe in what they brought. Refrain from speculations on the decrees of God. To add to what the teacher set forth is disloyal and unfair. The Prophet (peace be upon him) is our teacher and our example, and we are his followers. This question disturbs the minds of those who deny Resurrection and believe that it is impossible for the soul to return to the old body, once it has severed its relations with the latter. They have no sound reasons to support their belief, and it seems they believe in the transmigration of soul, which is indivisible and which does not become incarnate or united with phenomena. A fact which is based upon the scriptural texts or upon the traditions should, therefore, be accepted. Some of the ancient philosophers have refuted the return of soul to body, but their arguments are not convincing and difficulties arise from their theories. On the contrary, the proofs of the soul's return to body have been definitely mentioned in our religious books and we should believe in them. Some of the greatest philosophers have not denied the soul's return to body. In the general histories of Islamic philosophy, one usually turns to Abu `Ali ibn Sina' (Avicenna) as the most important figure. He has mentioned in his Peripatetic masterpiece al-Shifa' ("The Book of the Remedy") that it is possible that some of the heavenly bodies might have been created as abodes to which the souls will return after the death of the bodies. He has reported one of his ancestors to have said that some of the learned who are not irresponsible and do not lack reliable integrity do believe in the return of soul to body. Had he not himself contributed to this view, he would not have regarded such learned persons responsible and of reliable integrity, for there is nothing more unreliable than falsehood. Some of the research scholars have reported that Avicenna has merely mentioned this as a trick for escaping trouble or something unpleasant, for in his book of "Psychology," he has devoted a whole chapter to the discussion of transmigration of soul, wherein he has proved the impossibility of the return of departed souls to dead bodies. It has already been stated that when matter is fit enough to attract soul, the latter comes to the former. It is possible to effect resurrection by restoring the soul to a body, whether made of the same matter, as the original was, or made of the matter of any other body or of a matter created for the first time. For it is the soul, and not the body, which makes us what we are. Two sperm drops begetting twins may be within the same womb and at the same time equally prepared to receive souls. These two souls emanate directly or through intermediaries - from the first Principle, to be related to the embryonic bodies. Thus the soul of this body cannot be the director of that body, nor the soul of that body, the director of this body. This special relation can arise only from special affinity between a particular soul and a particular body. For instance, the body of one of the twins would not be more apt than that of the other to receive this particular soul, because they were two souls which came into existence simultaneously and there were two sperm drops equally prepared to be directed by souls. The question arises: What is the cause of special affinity between a particular soul and a particular body? lf it is a soul's being impressed upon body, then the elimination of the body will eliminate the soul as well. But if there is some other cause to explain the connection between this particular body and this particular soul (so that the connection is a condition for the soul's coming into existence), then how can it be improbable that this very connection should also be a condition for the soul's survival? Therefore, when this connection is severed, the soul will perish. And its existence will not reappear until God (Holy and Exalted be His Name) causes such reappearance by way of the re-infusion or resurgence of life, as religion teaches us in the doctrine of Resurrection. An exhaustive argument of this point would be extremely long, but what has been explained is sufficient and adequate. Suffice it to say that there is no proof for the denial of Resurrection, and when one cannot deny it, it follows that one has to believe inevitably in the punishment of the grave and Hell. If someone says: We cannot understand how the dead man's corpse sufferers when it lies still and motionless, tell him that the punishment is possible, and neither the apparent stillness of the dead man's corpse, nor our failure to understand it will refute it, for a person in a coma or a sleeping person is outwardly still and motionless but he perceives inwardly pains and pleasures, the effects of which he feels once he is recovered or awake. Furthermore, the Prophet (peace be upon him) used to hear the voice of Gabriel and to see him, while those who were around neither heard nor saw him.

It is also mentioned in the traditions that the virtues of the cruel person would be recorded in the deed sheet of the oppressed person and that the vices of the oppressed would be included in the record of the cruel. Sometimes a man who lacks the proper insight into the secrets of Prophethood fails to understand how and why this is done, and maintains that when virtues and vices do not exist any longer consequent upon the death of the virtuous or the evil-doer, how can it be possible for these opposite qualities to exist or to move from one record to another? If it is said that "deeds" being the substance are immortal, and they can exist independent of bodies, yet it is inconceivable how they can replace each other, we say that this happens even in this world, but we cannot see the effect here. It will be seen in the Hereafter as God says: "..." [Whose is the sovereignty this day? It is Allah's, the One, the Almighty (al-Qur'an, xl. 16)]. The trouble with most people is that they do not believe in things unless they know them, although the things unknown to them exist in reality (regardless of their knowing or not knowing) and the true believer sees with his spiritual discernment that which the surface investigator cannot see with the eye of his head. It should never be forgotten that by the mutual exchange between virtue and vice is meant the effects of virtue and vice and not virtue and vice in themselves. The knowledge that in such cases there are inner meanings which differ from the outward signification can be determined only by rational or legal evidence. The rational is when any interpretation, according to the outward meaning, is impossible. The cases where the inner meaning is determined by means of legal evidence are those which can be interpreted according to their literal and outward significance, but, on the authority of traditions, a meaning other than the outward was intended. The feeble-minded will regard the literal and exoteric meaning sensible and will not go beyond it, but a wise man will comprehend the secret it contains. There is a Divine Light which shines into the very deeps of man's heart, provided he separates himself from the followers of error and heresy and does good deeds. When he has attained to this supernatural light, he necessarily becomes free from all that is evil and is adorned instead with every good and noble quality. God and the world of spirits are usually interpreted as light and our process at cognition as illumination from above through the intermediary of the spirits of the spheres. Evil, the opposite of good, is unreal and dark and an obstacle between the supreme good and the individual soul. Good brightens the human heart, while evil darkens it. Renunciation and contemplation give forth the true light, until the mind, eye of the mediator, perceives the vision of the beauty of the presence, which at one glance fills his mind to the exclusion of all other sights. The sensible world is a shadow and sin a thick veil between man and God. Worldly virtue and vice are stages in the development of the soul in attaining harmony. Since virtue and vice are of opposite natures God says: "..." [Lo! good deeds annul ill deeds (al-Qur'an, xi. 114)]. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "..." [After every evil deed, do good deed, the latter will annul the former. He also said: "..." [Man is rewarded for everything, even for the thorn which pricks his foot]. He further said: "..." [Good deeds are ransom for bad deeds). Every human soul can split itself into two parts at its own discretion - one of which is Divine and high and is his true self; the other part is called lower or animal. Thus the cruel man wants to achieve the objects of his carnal desires which harden and darken his heart. As he was endowed with the light of good, which he did not make use of, he is deprived of the light. Since the oppressed person, being a victim of cruelty, suffers from serious difficulties, and is deprived of selfish desires, his heart becomes luminous, as the darkness of personal malice and greed, etc.; is removed from his heart. This means that the light has traveled from the cruel man's heart to that of the oppressed or that the blackness in the heart of the oppressed has moved to the heart of the cruel. This is how vice changes to virtue and vice versa. If you say that the change does not actually take place and that it is the effect of these qualities which makes itself felt, you should know that, as already, certain things are expressed through a simile, a metaphor or an allegory, so that its impression on the heart of the listener may be deeper. Its value is that it leaves a greater impression on the heart. That is why sometimes it is said: "..." [The shadow has moved from one place to another] and it is also said: "..." [The light of the sun or the lamp has moved from the earth to the wall and vice versa]. For instance there is an excessive heat on the earth during the summer. A metaphysician would say: "..." [Cold has disappeared beyond the inner layers of the earth]. This inhizam is nothing but a change. Similarly, people sometimes say: "..." [The supreme justiceship or caliphate has moved from Mr so and so to Mr so and so]. The true change is that which does not lose any of its properties, when it leaves its original possessor in favor of a new one, but there is another form of change which we call imitation change. This is permissible in the case of virtue and vice. To this subject an attribute is attributed, and as long as the connection lasts, it is said that the contrary of this attribute is impossible for the subject. Therefore, he who subscribes to all this and believes in it without doubting will be of the people of truth and law.

People disagree among themselves as to the real nature of seeing God literally. God, although removed from quantity and unlimited by directions and climes, is nevertheless seen with eyes in our dreams, just as we see the Prophet (peace be upon him) in the same manner. God's vision also is possible, just as it is possible to know Him without modality or form. One of the so-called learned men once reported that he saw the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) in a vision, coming out of his grave in Medina, and visiting one of the houses in the adjoining suburbs. None is more ignorant or misguided than such a learned man, for a thing or a person can be dreamt of in a thousand different ways at night. One can see the same man in a dream assuming various forms, i.e. young and old, tall and short, well and ill during short intervals, and the presence of all these dualities in a person at a time is impossible. Because of their stupidity no notice should be taken of such learned men. If it is said that the enjoyment of the vision of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is confined to those who see the example of the Prophet and not his real body, now this example would relate either to his body or his soul which is formless. If by the example his body composed of flesh and blood is meant, then the question arises: Why is the reference to his physical example necessary, when his body is already lying buried in a tomb in Medina? One who claims to have seen in a dream the example of the body of the Prophet (peace be upon him) has certainly failed to see him, for a Prophet is a Prophet because of his spiritual attainment and not because of his physical existence. It is possible for a person to have a vision of the example of the soul of the Prophet (peace be upon him) for that is his essence and his spirit and not his bodily existence. If you say: If this is so, how would you interpret the tradition: "..." [He who has seen me in a vision, has actually seen me]? - our answer to your question would be: The acceptance of the tradition which speaks of seeing the Prophet (peace be upon him) literally is justified, because it does not lead to anything impossible, for sight (ruyah) is a kind of revelation and knowledge, although it is more complete and clearer than knowledge. This vision is a supernatural light and its radiance has lighted the spiritual trail for hundreds of lives. The vision of his blessed and departed soul, to which form and color cannot be attributed, is of an overwhelming nature and is an eternal gift which God has reserved for His pious and elect, who have been singled out for their extraordinary spiritual capacity.

If someone says that he has seen God in a vision, this does not mean that he has seen the personality of God or the Universal Soul. This means that he has seen the example of God. It it is said that the example can be supposed in respect of the Prophet (peace be upon him), but it is unimaginable in case of God, we say that it is a misunderstanding arising out of the difference between the meaning of an example and resemblance. Resemblance is a thing which is equal in all its attributes, and it is not necessary for the example to have the same attributes in equal quantity, because human intellect is a thing which cannot be identical with any other thing in the world. It is reasonable for us to compare it with the sun, because both intellect and sun have a common attribute - the light of the sun reveals to us the reality of the physical things, while the light of the intellect leads us to the realization of intellectual realities. You can compare the sultan or the king with the sun, and the vizier with the moon. The sultan or the king is not identical with the sun, in view of his body and attributes, nor is the vizier comparable with the moon in this regard. But the truth of the matter is that all the people have been placed under the control of the sultan, as all objects that are in need of light are inescapably in need of the sun. That is why the sultan is compared with the sun. The moon is an intermediary body placed between the sun and the earth, so as to attract light, just as the vizier is an intermediary between the sultan and his subjects, in so far as the light of the administration of justice is concerned. This is an example and not resemblance. God says:

"..."

[Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth. The similitude of His light is as a niche wherein is a lamp. The lamp is in a glass. The glass is as it were a shining star. (This lamp is) kindled from a blessed tree, an olive neither of the east nor of the west, where oil would almost glow forth (or itself) though no fire touched it, light upon light" (xxiv. 35)).

Now obviously there is no connection between the Divine Light and the tree and oil. God also says:

"..."

[He sendeth down water from the sky, so that valleys flow according to their measure and the flood beareth (on its surface) swelling foam from that which they smelt in the fire in order to make ornaments and tools riseth a foam like unto it - thus Allah coineth (the similitude of) the true and the false. Then, as for the foam, it passeth away as scum upon the banks, while as for that which is of use to mankind, it remaineth in the earth. Thus Allah coineth the similitudes (al-Qur'an, xiii. l7)]

In this verse the example of the Qur'an has been mentioned, although the Qur'an, being the most ancient sacred book, has no resemblance with anything. Then how did water resemble it? Many visions were revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon him) wherein he was shown milk and rope. He interpreted milk as Islam and the rope as the Holy Qur'an. There are innumerable examples which can be safely cited in this regard. Now obviously there is no likeness between milk and Islam, just as there is no connection between the rope and the Qur'an, but a man with an insight arrives at the conclusion that with the help ot the rope we can get a far-flung object attached to the top of a tree or a hill. Similarly, by following the instructions contained in the Qur'an we can attain our salvation in the Hereafter. Milk is a perfect food, which is essential for our health. In like manner Islam is a spiritual food for our spiritual well-being. All these are examples and not objects of resemblance, for there is no possible resemblance between these things. Nothing can resemble God, though He has a number of examples, which, owing to their spiritual capacity, lead us to His knowledge as well as that of His attributes. The First Principle, i.e. God, knows Himself as the Principle of the emanation of all that emanated from Him. He is the knower, the knowledge and, the object of knowledge. His self-knowledge being identical with His essence, He knows Himself as the original cause of all causes. In the state where the gulf is bridged, the Sufi realizes that his own attributes are in reality the attributes of God and so his own attributes vanish. He further realizes that all attributes of men are only attributes in image - in secondary and derived sense - but that they are in reality the attributes of God. If man fails to understand the nature of his own attributes, he would also fail to realize the Divine Attributes. Example is permissible in respect of God, but resemblance is forbidden, as it is false. If you say that from our discussion it follows that God and the Prophet (peace be upon him) cannot be seen in a vision in their real forum, what we actually see is their example and not their true self; therefore the meaning of the tradition "..." would be that "Who sees me in a vision sees my example," we will say that this type of existence, then, is without doubt the most perfect. This is because no human quality survives, nor does normal human existence continue in respect of the Prophets. As regards the vision of God, man is aware of his own failings and recognizes his hidden fallibilities, but, none the less, continues to interpret indirectly and to rely on fallible knowledge, for God is unique. is single and exalted, and removes the true nature of His existence in the sight of man by denying him His vision. Meanwhile He has allowed his worshippers to see His example in a vision. This is since God has taken complete possession of them. He has obliterated their personality and annihilated their individual qualities, thereby removing from them both their physical and their spiritual perceptions. If it is said that the example of the Prophet (peace be upon him) can be seen in visions in accordance with some of the provisions laid down in the traditions, but there is nothing to show that the example of God could also be seen, we say that there is a tradition, according to which the Prophet (peace be upon him) is reported to have said: "..." [I have seen God in the most beautiful form]. The Prophet also said: "..." [God made Adam like Himself]. This does not mean that God has an individuality, for He has no form or body. This means that it is possible for the light to throw upon the earth a shadow of an object that has a being. For instance, Gabriel appeared several times in the form of Wahyah Kalbi, and the Prophet (peace be upon him) saw him on many occasions, although Gabriel appeared only twice in his original form before the Prophet. This does not mean that Gabriel changed to Wahyah Kalbi. The only reason that appeals is that the body of Wahyah Kalbi served as an example of Gabriel, for the revelation of the Divine message. Similarly, it is not impossible for man to have the vision of the example of God. God said: "..." [Gabriel appeared before Mary in the form of a perfect man (al-Qur'an, xix. 17)]. Actually Gabriel did not change to man, in spite of his assuming the human form, before the Prophet and Mary. It is God Who guides man and Who gives the vision of what He wishes in the manner. He wishes, so that man achieves rightness and is in accord with Truth. Many reports of the Prophet's descendants have been recorded to the effect that God, though formless, can assume any form at any time at His own discretion and there is none to prevent Him from doing so, but it must be made clear that God can never be seen in a physical form in a vision. The contact with Him is possible only through His example. This can never be achieved by any individual in whom anything earthly still survives, in whom the potentiality of an inclination to sin still exists. The vision of the example of God is the most precious of His gifts. It is reserved by God for His elect and pious. Their vision of His example is that which God inspires in them. Then they attain true intimacy with Him and there grow up in them from God the qualities of existence and non-existence. Some of the learned disagree among themselves regarding the vision of God. Some hold the view that it is rude to say that one can have the vision of Him, while others maintain that it is permissible to speak of His vision. Those who believe that it is impossible for God to have an example end by saying things which are doubtful. But we do believe in the example of God, as well as that of His Attributes, and regard His personality free from all those things which could resemble Him.