The melancholic vastness of the corporeal realm

The inner self remains perpetually disturbed by deep contemplation and sorrow, while laughter functions merely as a transient mechanism to evade this inner unrest. It is essential to critically examine the underlying cause of this condition, which fundamentally stems from the inhuman nature of our actions. Were our deeds truly aligned with genuine humanity; the current existential condition would differ significantly. A rigorous investigation into these dynamics is imperative to elucidate the essential reality and unveil what lies concealed behind the veil. Continued disregard of this inquiry will inevitably culminate in adverse consequences.

For instance, the prevailing cognitive framework assumes that the world exists in its current state and will perpetuate unchanged. Human beings proceed through life under this assumption, accepting comfort and suffering as concomitant and mutually constitutive phenomena. This rationale often serves to rationalize conscience; however, can genuine tranquility be attained through acts of disobedience, injustice, and inhumanity? Is the conscience truly appeased by such means? Does not this mode of reasoning engender cognitive dissonance within the moral faculty? Do individuals not endeavor to evade the conscience’s admonitions? Are not spiritual exertions undertaken to shield oneself from the consuming fire of inner turmoil? Following the suppression or denial of conscience, does the individual remain ontologically unchanged? Is there no transformation within the human condition? Furthermore, does one not seek to obfuscate inhumane conduct through superficial adornments—manifested as discordance between verbal expression and inner disposition? Moreover, how can one justify deriding others for behaviors one oneself perpetrates? Under what ethical framework does such duplicity hold legitimacy?

This was merely a parenthetical remark arising naturally during the discussion; it was not intended as an objection.

The explanation concerns the lower space, as present within the twelve trillion gates of our brain, yet it simultaneously maintains a connection with the higher space. When a slight illusion occurs, there is a second gate within its depth, followed by a third—both the gates of thought and feeling lie within this depth, while movement, action, and consequence reside in the second depth. In other words, these three gates exist as nested layers within the depth itself.

The ultimate gate converges with the realm of “Kun.” Commonly, illusion is dismissed simply as illusion; however, embedded within its depths are the gates of cognition and perception, each succeeded by another in hierarchical order. Progressing through these layers culminates in an outcome aligned with the supreme realm of “Kun.” Frequently, the admonition to “dismiss this as mere illusion” overlooks the underlying presence of certainty and trust, intrinsically linked and resolved within the exalted domain of “Kun.”

If the process remains unfinished, the subject of our doubt stays unresolved; conversely, upon penetrating deeper, we may dismiss the notion—formerly classified as mere illusion—at the level of cognition, sensation, or subsequent action. A critical reflection reveals that these constitute the primary causes of failure. Doubt cannot be ascribed to the Supreme Realm unless a definitive conclusion is reached. The consummation of the divine command “Kun Fayakun” depends on the completion of this process. Allah the Almighty declares:

“When He intends a thing, He merely commands it to ‘Be,’ and it comes into existence.”

It is critical to observe that the expression “when He intends a thing” signifies intentionality directed toward a singular object, rather than multiple objects simultaneously. The simultaneous emergence of numerous doubts or concepts activates all corresponding gates concurrently, resulting in intrinsic contradictions among the entities involved. Such conflict manifests as certain gates remaining open while others close, precluding any definitive outcome. In this context, the emphasis on command by Allah the Almighty underscores that intentionality must be concentrated exclusively on a singular entity. When the focus is on one object, no opposing force should arise to negate it. The sequential process of affirming followed by negating is thus fundamentally erroneous and stands in opposition to the Quranic paradigm.

The immutable nature of the Divine order, as decreed by Allah the Almighty, admits neither alteration nor suspension. As explicitly stated in the Qur’anic proclamation, “There is no change nor cessation in My Sunnah,” it becomes categorically clear that within existence’s structure, only the Divine ordinance remains eternally operative. Any deviation from this metaphysical principle is inherently destined for failure. This elucidation affirms that between the lower space realm of corporeality and the higher space, there exists intrinsic continuity—a metaphysical alignment and interdependence. The lower space is not autonomous; its constitution is contingent upon the ontological precedence of the higher space. Every instance of lower space reality is ontologically affiliated with a corresponding reality in the higher metaphysical order.

In the Qur’an, Allah the Almighty declares that His divinely appointed guides shall come, and those who adhere to their direction shall be restored to the primordial abode of their forefathers—namely, Paradise. Implicit within this Divine articulation lies a profound metaphysical principle: that lower space is not merely temporally bound but cosmologically tethered to higher space. The transition from the plane of nāsūt (corporeal world) to the paradisiacal station—whether through ʿIlliyyīn or the precincts of al-Maḥshar—is governed by an ontological pathway marked by relational continuity, spiritual dependency, and metaphysical correspondence.

The realm of Nāsūt corresponds to the lower space dimension, whereas Paradise pertains to the higher space. The disparity between these existential modalities is immense—comparable to the distance between earth and the celestial spheres. As previously indicated, upon transgressing the Divine command, Prophet Ādam (P.B.U.H.) and Hazrat Ḥawwā became consciously aware of their state of bareness.

Certain tiers within the lower space exhibit relative proximity to the higher space—specifically, motion, action, and consequence. These states maintain closer alignment with the higher ontological plane. By contrast, supposition, thought, and emotion remain at a greater existential remove. The final triad is more conducive to the emergence of the space of hope, whereas the initial triad typically gravitates toward the space of doubt. Consequently, upon the occurrence of supposition, one must proceed without delay toward conclusive realization. That which aligns with the higher space affirms the certainty of success. Furthermore, movement, action, and outcome lie in proximity to the domain of certainty, which is inherently linked to the higher space.

Consequently, the lower space is divided into two trajectories: one inclining toward doubt and delusion, and the other ascending toward ḥaqq al-yaqīn (the realization of truth through certainty). Accordingly, within the framework of Sufism (taṣawwuf), the lower space is classified into three structured degrees.

The stage of movement facilitates entry into the realm of ʿilm al-yaqīn (knowledge of certainty), while the stage of action culminates in ʿayn al-yaqīn (experiential certainty), and the stage of result ultimately leads to ḥaqq al-yaqīn (definitive truth of certainty). This triadic progression represents a paramount achievement in the spiritual journey. Conversely, if at the outset one becomes entrenched in doubt or delusion, or stagnates at the level of sensory perception, it incurs divine displeasure. This is due to the immediate closure of the corresponding gates, causing the devotee’s attention to disperse and be diverted, constituting a profound failure in spiritual realization.

Allah Almighty, in the Holy Quran, consistently exhorts believers to engage in deep reflection and contemplation. However, when encountering the narrative of Prophet Adam (A.S.) and his experience in Paradise, profound consideration is often lacking; readers pass over the account without thorough analysis. Allah states:

“O Adam, dwell you and your spouse in Paradise and eat freely therein from wherever you wish, but do not approach this tree, lest you become among the transgressors.” (Quran 2:35)

This verse contains several exegetically significant elements. The injunction “eat freely wherever you desire” (ḥaythu shi'tum) directs attention to the expansive and unrestricted nature of the paradisiacal domain. The specific identity or nature of the forbidden tree is not the principal concern; rather, the phrase underscores the vast space latitude granted within the celestial realm.

Upon disobedience by Prophet Adam (A.S.), an acute awareness of nakedness emerged. As noted, the sensory faculty within Adam’s spatial condition was either dormant or intermittently active—the precise ontological status of which is not definitively ascertainable. Nonetheless, it is evident that the locus of disobedience corresponded with the activation of this sense, linking the space of transgression to the awakening of sensory awareness. Secondly, the domain of disobedience was so pervasive that it effectively subsumed the lower space; consequently, even after Adam (A.S.) entered the realm of manifest, the influence of disobedience remained operative. This enduring presence is substantiated by the continued manifestation of disobedience within his progeny, demonstrating the persistence of this space condition across generations.

The vastness of the space of disobedience can be inferred from the fact that in the manifest world, every virtue is met with a corresponding vice. When a virtue enters our mind, we often perceive it devoid of pleasure or benefit, appearing as a desolate form. Consequently, we are reluctant even to glance at it. Instead, our attention shifts toward vice, where gratification, interests, and perceived benefits arise. This very aspect becomes attractive to us.

This phenomenon arises from the predominance of the space of disobedience over virtue, wherein the latter remains comparatively subdued. Reflect attentively: even momentary engagement with the benefits inherent within the space of virtue is often averted. This disposition epitomizes the domain of disobedience, which ultimately directs one toward vice. Consequently, the space of disobedience exercises dominance over all forms of the lower space, manifesting a power surpassing any counterpart. It is therefore imperative that, regardless of the minuteness of the space of virtue, it must not be neglected; neglect results in inability to perceive the latent benefits concealed therein. The subtlety of this dynamic is discernible through sensory perception, by which the influence of disobedience becomes manifest.