M6:205 — زین دو ره گرچه همه مقصد توی / لیک خود جان کندن آمد این دوی

Translation: Though through these two paths, Your destination is the one, Yet this duality itself is agony. Meaning: Mowlana states that even if both paths ultimately lead to God, the very act of choosing and vacillating between them is a profound torment, a form of spiritual agony.

This verse emerges within a series where Mowlana laments to God about the “vile two branches of free will” (do shākhe-ye ekhtiyārāt-e khabīth) and the indecision it brings. I hold that Mowlana presents a profoundly deep insight here: when a human being stands at a crossroads, even if both paths ultimately lead to the Beloved and the ultimate destination, the act of choosing between them is “soul-rending” (jān kandan). It is not that because the destination is one, the choice is easy; no, this duality, this hesitation, is torment itself.

Mowlana seeks refuge in God from this “free will” (ekhtiyār) that causes perplexity and “soul-rending” agony. He does not wish to strengthen this free will, which runs counter to the views of figures like Iqbal Lahori. Rather, he desires to be liberated from it. He yearns to reach a state “before the era of free will” or “beyond free will.” He explicitly states: “Grant me sanctuary from these two branches of free will.” This plea is reminiscent of the aspiration of some Sufis who wished to be like angels: good, yet not endowed with free will. Angels have no evil, for they have no choice to commit evil. Mowlana asks God to deliver him from this “duality” (doyī), because “being drawn to a single path, the Straight Path, is better than the hesitation of two paths, O Generous One” (jadhb-e yek rāhī ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm / beh ze do rāh-e taraddud, ey karīm). This hesitation, though seemingly a path to God, is inwardly nothing but hardship.

Indeed, Mowlana’s pain is not that one of these two paths is wrong; the pain is having to choose. This heavy burden of choice, even if both routes are virtuous, exhausts the human spirit. While human beings deem free will good, the consequences of this goodness, this treasure, can be “terrible and bone-breaking” (sahmgīn va ostokhwān-shekan). And this is precisely what Mowlana calls “vile free will” (ekhtiyār-e khabīth); not because free will itself is evil, but because it can be stained with vileness, corruption, and, most importantly, with the most agonizing forms of indecision.

Key takeaways

• Even if both paths ultimately lead to God, the anguish of choice and hesitation between them is a form of spiritual agony for the seeker.
• Mowlana seeks refuge from the heavy burden of free will, which leads to perplexity and indecision, calling it 'vile free will' (ekhtiyārāt-e khabīth).
• This verse expresses a longing for liberation from the compulsion of choice, aspiring to a state beyond it, akin to angels who are good but lack free will.
• Hesitation between two paths, even if both are righteous, is intrinsically a torment and spiritual hardship.
• Mowlana unequivocally prefers the 'Straight Path' (ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm) and a singular direction over vacillation and duality.