M6:2030 — ای محال و ای محال اشراک او / دور از آن دریا و موج پاک او

Translation: Oh, how impossible, how impossible is His partnership! Far be it from that sea and its pure wave! Meaning: This verse stresses the absolute and indivisible oneness of God, symbolized by the "Sea" and its "waves," emphatically rejecting any form of duality or multiplicity in His essence.

In this verse, Rumi speaks of the 'Sea of Unity,' a concept I have frequently emphasized as a symbol of the higher realm and the singular truth of existence, not merely a geographical notion. He describes this Sea as waḥdānī—unified, indivisible, and inseparable. Within this Sea, number, multiplicity, and contradiction have no place. This truth stands in stark contrast to the material world, which Rumi terms the 'world of numbers and opposites.'

The phrase 'Its gem and fish are naught but waves' encapsulates one of the deepest insights of this couplet. Although we may perceive gems and fish in the sea, Rumi states that these are nothing but the waves of that very sea. A wave is not separate from the sea; it is the sea itself undulating. This analogy teaches us that our relationship with God, and that of creation to the Necessary Existent, is akin to a thinker's thoughts: they are not distinct from their originator's being. These waves are merely manifestations and appearances of the singular truth, introducing no genuine multiplicity into the heart of the Sea.

However, Rumi was aware of the difficulty in expressing this absolute unity. Our language, a tool for analysis and categorization, is inherently unsuited for articulating unity. Language's function is to branch off and fragment. To understand, we are forced to analyze. Thus, Rumi laments with deep pathos: 'Oh, how impossible, how impossible is His partnership!' To posit a partner, to perceive duality, or to ascribe multiplicity to that singular truth is utterly impossible. Far be it from that pure Sea to fall into partnership or duality.

But why, then, do we speak of twos, threes, and multiplicity? Rumi replies that this stems from our 'aḥwal' (double-visioned) eye. An aḥwal is one who sees one thing as two. Many scholars, philosophers, and thinkers suffer from this double-vision, and consequently, they perceive multiplicity in a singular reality. Rumi remarks with sorrow: 'What can I say to the double-visioned? Nothing, nothing!' I cannot speak of unity to one who sees one as two, for they will invariably interpret every word through the lens of multiplicity and fragmentation.

Therefore, Rumi confesses that he is compelled, by necessity, to 'speak polytheistically' (moshrekāna dam zadan). That is, because he 'keeps company with the double-visioned' (jofte aḥwalānīm), he is forced to speak in terms of duality and multiplicity in his discourse, even if in his heart, he perceives nothing but unity. This is where we grasp that the Masnavi, for all its apparent multiplicity, is a 'shop of unity.' What fits into the realm of our language and discourse is multiplicity and duality; but what can be apprehended in the realm of ḥāl (experiential state) and intuition is that total and absolute unity, which intellect fails to grasp and language is powerless to express. This is the same oneness achieved between lover and Beloved, the understanding of which 'depends on the death of man' (marg-e mard), demanding a transformation and a new way of seeing.

Key takeaways

• The absolute unity of the Divine Sea and the rejection of any duality or partnership within it.
• The fish and gems within this Sea are merely the waves of that very unified Sea.
• Language is limited in expressing unity; speaking in terms of multiplicity is a necessity when addressing those with 'double-vision' (aḥwal).
• The perception of multiplicity in a singular reality stems from humanity's 'double-visioned' eye, not from reality itself.
• True understanding of unity requires transcending intellectual apprehension to reach experiential 'state' (ḥāl) and intuitive insight.