M6:371 — صنعت خوب از کف شل ضریر / باشد اولی یا بگیرایی بصیر

Translation: Is good craftsmanship more fitting to come from the hand of a lame, blind one / Or from a perceptive, skilled one? Meaning: This rhetorical verse presents an argument that excellent creation can only originate from a capable and knowing Creator, rather than from a weak or ignorant source.

Here, Rumi articulates one of the oldest and most fundamental arguments for the existence of God: the Argument from Design, or Burhan-i Nazm. He, like many theologians and philosophers before and after him, derives the existence of a knowing and capable Orderer from the inherent order and perfection of the cosmos. This particular verse, framed as a rhetorical question, appeals directly to common sense: would excellent craftsmanship ('صنعت خوب'), a perfect work of art, or a robust structure, ever originate from the hand of a 'شل ضریر' — one who is both lame and blind? Or must such a masterpiece necessarily be the product of a 'بصیر,' someone endowed with both clear sight and complete skill ('گیرایی')? The answer, for any sound mind, is unequivocally clear: fine artistry demands a perceptive and capable creator.

I have often noted that Rumi frequently distills profound philosophical and theological discussions into accessible parables and analogies. This verse is a prime example of such an approach. In preceding verses, he points to the predictable and lawful recurrence of day and night, and the precise creation of human body parts (ears shaped like the Arabic letter 'jīm', eyes like 'ʿayn', and mouths like 'mīm'), all to establish the necessity of a conscious 'Director' or 'Mover.' Such arguments are highly persuasive for a general audience.

However, it is crucial to remember that this particular argument faces significant critiques in contemporary philosophy. Philosophers like David Hume centuries ago, and more recently Richard Dawkins, have fundamentally challenged these analogies, deeming them flawed at their core. They contend that equating the universe to a building, a watch, or a work of art is a false equivalence; the universe cannot be simplistically regarded as a manufactured object from which one infers a maker. Yet, Rumi, within his specific intellectual and historical context, achieves his aim through these direct and straightforward arguments. In my view, this is a feature, not a bug, in his discourse. His purpose is not to write a philosophical treatise, but to enlighten hearts and invite contemplation of divine signs.

For Rumi, it is vitally important that human beings also seek this 'perceptive Creator' and 'fire-kindler' within themselves. If we harbor a hidden 'thief' ('دزد') within that extinguishes sparks of awakening and insight, how can we truly comprehend the order of the cosmos? If we remain heedless of the 'strangers' ('بیگانگان') within us and mistakenly identify with them, this 'amash' — this blurriness of inner sight — will prevent us from perceiving greater truths. Thus, external knowledge of the world is inextricably linked to our internal self-knowledge: 'He who knows himself has known his Lord' ('من عرف نفسه فقد عرف ربه').

Key takeaways

• Rumi articulates the Argument from Design in simple, accessible language for universal understanding.
• Rhetorical questions serve as powerful tools in the Mathnawi to guide the listener's thought.
• Order and perfection in creation point toward a knowing and capable Creator.
• Rumi explicitly cites the intricate order of the ears, eyes, and mouth as evidence.
• The Argument from Design, though critiqued in modern philosophy, is effective and illuminating within Rumi's theological framework.
• Inner perception and the expulsion of internal 'thieves' are prerequisites for grasping external order and the world's design.