required and demanded by obligation.
For imposing action cannot be from a Wise, Knowing one who says “Work and act” to someone He knows does not work or act because he has no power over it. The divine command for the servant to act is established, like “Establish prayer and give alms” [al-Baqara 2:43], “Be patient, vie in patience, and remain steadfast” [Al ʿImran 3:200], and “Strive” [al-Maʾida 5:35].
He must therefore have an attachment to what receives an effect from him, in respect of acting within it, through which he is called an agent and worker. In this case self-disclosure occurs within it to this extent of the relation. Through this path I affirmed it, a pleasing path of utmost clarity, indicating that originated power has a relation of attachment to what it is charged to do. This is necessary.
I saw the opponent’s argument as feeble, utterly weak and defective. One day this aforementioned son, Ismaʿil ibn Sawdakin, discussed this question with me.
(Ibn Sawdakin’s Alerting)
He told me, “What proof is stronger for ascribing the act to the servant, attributing it to him, and self-disclosure within it, since it is his attribute, than the Real’s creating the human being upon His form? Were action stripped from him, he could not be upon His form or receive the assumption of the names’ character. For you and the people of the path, without disagreement, the human being’s creation upon the form[18] is established, as is assuming the names’ character.”
(The Teacher’s Benefiting from His Pupil)
No one can know the joy that entered me through this alerting,
Notlar
[18]
(“الصورة,” “the form,” has been established as in the compared edition, instead of “السورة,” “the surah,” in the previous file, agreeing with the context of assuming the names’ character.)
Translator’s note TN6079-1: Fīhi, “within it,” provisionally refers to the act or what receives its effect. The agent is another possible antecedent; the compressed pronoun does not settle this.
