Ibn Arabi uses “translation” (tarjama) to describe the transmission of meaning from speaker to hearer. The meaning belongs to the heart, while the tongue acts as its interpreter [I 105.34]. In this sense, translation occurs even when both people speak the same language. He extends the idea to many forms of communication and even to relations among the divine Names [I 216.35]. His account ultimately relates the communication of meaning to the Real, Allah. The divine speech addressed to Moses, peace be upon him, raises a distinct question within that discussion.
We turn experience into remembered meaning and, when we speak or write, try to express that meaning in words. The hearer or reader then understands those words in light of another set of experiences. Language may therefore convey only part of what the speaker intends, especially when the subject is a personal spiritual experience. This limitation makes attentiveness to context and to the limits of one’s own understanding essential to translation.
For Ibn Arabi, faithful transmission requires the translator to convey the speaker’s words as accurately as possible. Where another expression must be used, the translator is also interpreting [I 403.32]. Elsewhere he writes that “honesty in speaking is extremely difficult and very few people may fulfill it except when one tells the hearer that he is actually conducting the meaning (that he understood, and not the speakers' actual words)”. He connects this difficulty with the Qur’anic statement that Allah ﴾shall ask the honest for their honesty﴿ [33:8], and adds that “the Honest is Allah” [II 28].
The example he gives concerns a knower who expresses an insight and later discovers a further meaning in the same expression. If asked what was originally intended, the knower should not present the later understanding as though it had already been present at the first utterance. The later interpretation may be true, yet the account of the earlier intention would still be inaccurate.
Ibn Arabi’s proposed safeguard is that, when the knower speaks, he should intend to transmit all the meanings that the expression contains in Allah’s knowledge, including the meaning apparent to him at that moment [II 28]. For the translator, this discussion is also a reason to distinguish the wording of a passage from the interpretation offered in a note.
Mystical writings, and the Futuhat in particular, often admit several levels of understanding. Ibn Arabi relates this to the reader’s preparedness, spiritual state, and the understanding bestowed by Allah. In my own reading, a passage has sometimes become clearer only when another passage brought an earlier experience or argument into focus. Such connections can deepen interpretation, but they do not remove the need to explain how a proposed reading relates to the words of the text.
Many passages in the Futuhat are direct, while others remain difficult in Arabic. Repeated reading across its 560 chapters can reveal connections that a first reading misses. A subject introduced briefly in one place may be developed much later, and a technical expression may be clarified by its use elsewhere. The scale of the work requires patience and makes cross-references especially valuable.
The differences between Arabic and English add to these difficulties. A compact Arabic expression may combine grammatical, rhetorical, and technical implications that cannot all be reproduced in one English phrase. A responsible translation therefore requires decisions that can be explained and reconsidered. Its adequacy must be judged passage by passage, with reference to the Arabic and to the interpretation stated in the accompanying notes.
Ibn Arabi often brings out possibilities in a familiar Arabic word that a dictionary gloss alone does not explain. Related roots, grammatical forms, and recurring contexts can help reveal these connections. Following them across the Futuhat and his other works is therefore part of choosing an English equivalent. Consistency matters, but it should follow the sense of a term in context rather than impose the same English word on every occurrence.
For these reasons, work on the English translation begins with close study and preparation of the Arabic text. I explain difficult passages in notes, examine the sequence of the argument, and compare relevant uses of its terms. The Arabic wording remains the source to be translated; my explanations record my understanding of it. Where a passage supports more than one substantial reading, I try to make those alternatives intelligible rather than conceal them behind a single unqualified rendering.
I have added explanatory headings and subheadings to help readers locate subjects that extend beyond the scope suggested by a chapter’s main title. These editorial headings appear in parentheses so that they can be distinguished from Ibn Arabi’s own headings. They describe my reading of the passage and should be checked against its contents. A shared system of references is intended to help readers move between the Arabic edition and the English translation; any change in division or numbering requires those references to be checked again.
The English notes are adapted to their readership and need not reproduce every Arabic note. I use explanatory parentheses for necessary additions within the translated sentence and footnotes for fuller discussion, alternative readings, and references. When the Arabic can be conveyed clearly in ordinary English syntax, I do so. Where its form carries a significant distinction, I retain that distinction and explain it as needed.
Fidelity includes attention to the way Ibn Arabi expresses an argument, as well as to the meaning I understand from it. This calls for care with small verbal distinctions, repetitions, and changes of address. Ibn Arabi himself emphasizes the deliberateness of his wording:
My procedure in all that I adduce is that I only intend by (each) particular expression I employ—as opposed to other words expressing their (different) meanings—that (single, specifically intended) meaning. I do not ever add (even) a single letter except to express a (specifically intended) meaning. So in my words, with regard to (their expressing) my intentions, there is no ‘stuffing’ at all, but if some reader should imagine (that there is such redundancy), then the mistake in (understanding) my intention is because of him, not me! [FM, I 391.3]
This attention to wording should enable readers to examine the interpretation as well as follow it. When an important conclusion depends on a particular expression, the Arabic passage should be consulted directly. The references described below are intended to make that comparison possible without confusing a chapter number, a manuscript location, and the pagination of a printed edition.