Similarly, Attar conflates true knowledge with sight, rendering direct
teaching impossible–sight must be perceived rather than learned.^64
Like the insufficient icon of the Simurgh; much like the need for glass in
Solomon’s exemplary conversion of Bilqis; just as Nizami purifies decep-
tion through the broken jug–Jalal al-Din’s rendition necessitates painting
as a means of indicating the impossibility of representing the Real. The
image becomes not simply an image, but an image reflecting the absence of
the real. This awareness becomes the space in which the Real can be
experienced. The image represents not despite its deception, but because
of it; not through mimesis, but through reflection. Like materiality as
discussed by Plotinus and al-Ghazali, the deceptive nature of the image
emerges not as a deficiency so much as a fortuitous necessity: only through
it can reflection enable access to hidden truth.
While these ideas about the mirror reverberate, how contact may have
taken place between theoretical and poetic mystics is unclear and probably
unknowable. Nizami must have been well integrated in the scholarly circles
of the southern Caucasus where he worked under the patronage of various
courts. Suhrawardi gained acceptance at the Great Seljuq court, then
traveled to Aleppo in 1183. There he wrote his Philosophy of
Illumination, but was executed as a heretic in 1191.^65 The two could not
have met. Correlations in their work may be referential (Nizami may have
read Suhrawardi’s writings), involve shared sources, or reflect intellectual
conversations of the era. Texts often fail to fully document oral discourses
considered trustworthy conveyors of knowledge.^66
It is likewise unclear whether the encounter between ibn Arabi and
Rumi was worldly or gnostic. Anatolian followers of ibn Arabi did become
close friends with Rumi. This does not mean, of course, that they read the
books we read.^67 Within the rational system of gnosis, knowledge emerges
through inspiration. Texts make it clear that study enables the purification
of the heart. However, the profound knowledge intended to guide human-
ity toward the absolute truth of the divine comes through visionary experi-
ence. To look for an attribution would be absurd. Even looking at the times
and places of meetings becomes untenable as long as we respect non-
modern, non-empirical epistemes. Visionaries transcend time and place
by visiting each other’s dreams. The greatest shaykhs report their erudition
as emerging from visionary apparitions of much earlier shaykhs and
prophets. Even when great mystics are said to meet physically, they are
not described as talking or sharing texts. For example, when ibn Arabi is
(^64) Dabashi, 2003 : 970. (^65) Yalman, 2012. (^66) Terzioğlu, 2002 ; Green, 2010. (^67) Safi, 1999.
Jalal al-Din Rumi between the Mirrors and Veils of ibn Arabi 155