M6:3678 — گر ببندی در صطبلی گاو نر / باز یابی در مقام گاو خر

Translation: If you tie a bull in a stable, you may find a donkey in the place of the bull. Meaning: This verse highlights the apparent instability and unpredictability of natural phenomena, questioning conventional notions of causality.

I encounter here a profound and foundational point in the Masnavi that stems from Rumi’s understanding of causality and divine governance. This verse, at first glance, might seem strange and arbitrary, but at its heart, it carries the wisdom of negating natural causality and emphasizing the absolute agency of the Divine.

Maulana employs this example—which, as I explicitly state, comes from Ghazali and his Tahafut al-Falasifa—to challenge our belief in the continuity and certainty of natural causes. Ghazali, in opposition to the philosophers and aligned with the Ash'arite viewpoint, argued that there is no accidental causality in nature; meaning, no object in the world is inherently the cause of another. Fire burning cotton, for instance, is due to God’s habit (ʿādat) and not an intrinsic property of fire. Thus, if God does not will it, fire will not burn cotton, just as Abraham remained unharmed in Nimrod’s fire.

This verse of Rumi refers to precisely this 'discontinuity' and 'lack of succession' in natural causations. We are accustomed to expecting that if we stable a bull, we will find the same bull there the next day. But Rumi, following Ghazali, states that there is no inherent guarantee in nature for this continuity. If, one day, we were to find a donkey instead of a bull, we should not be surprised; for this entire world is under the disposal and governance of the savār-e dūst-kām (the skilled Rider upon the horse of nature).

In this discussion, I find a deep connection to Kantian philosophy. Kant, too, believed that continuity and causality are not intrinsic features of nature; rather, it is our mind that imposes these concepts upon phenomena. We do not apprehend the world as it is, but rather construct it according to our mental categories. However, the difference between Rumi and Ghazali on the one hand, and Kant on the other, is that they attribute the 'next day's difference' and the 'change of bull to donkey' not to the actions of our mind, but to hidden divine will and governance. This is the khofya-kār (hidden worker) who manages affairs, whose hands are concealed behind the veil of apparent causes.

The outcome of Rumi’s insight is a grand lesson in intellectual and practical humility. Although in daily life we must rely on common causes and effects, this reliance should not be absolute or one hundred percent. The possibility always exists that 'the arrow you shot straight, has gone to the left.' To disregard divine governance and surrender entirely to apparent causes is 'donkeyishness' (kharī). Rumi teaches us that we must always be aware that behind the curtain of apparent causes, an active and hidden will is at work, which sometimes reveals itself by the 'nullification of intentions' (fasḵ-e ʿazā’em) and the disruption of plans, so that we may know that the reins of the world's command are not entirely in our hands. This is a great lesson for scientific humility and also a reason for the definite unpredictability of the future, as well as a critique of any historical determinism.

Key takeaways

• Natural phenomena and their causes lack inherent continuity and certainty; events can be unpredictable.
• This verse negates accidental natural causality, a concept Ghazali proposed in Tahafut al-Falasifa; fire does not inherently burn, but burns by 'God's habit' (ʿādat).
• Kant also saw causality and continuity as mental impositions on nature, but Rumi attributes them to hidden divine will (the khofya-kār).
• Absolute reliance on apparent causes, while neglecting the 'skilled Rider' (savār-e dūst-kām) upon the horse of nature, is 'donkeyishness' (kharī) and a form of blindness.
• The lesson of this verse is intellectual and practical humility; nothing in this world is definite or guaranteed, and the future cannot be absolutely predicted (a critique of historical determinism).
• The disruption of plans and intentions (fasḵ-e ʿazā’em) is a sign of the active hand of divine will, reminding us that the world is not self-sufficient.