The Shape of Light: Hayakal al-Nur

Love this

goodly

Whilst it is true that Imam Suhrawardi attempted to reconcile Zoroastrian philosophy with Islamic beliefs, I suspect the previous reviewer did not even read this book. In terms of it's philosophy, it is very similar if not identitical to the schema outlined in Shaykh Abd Al Qadir Al Jilani's book the Secret of Secrets. It explains the relationship between Allah as Al-Nur- The Divine Light with the light of the Angels, the light of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and the light of the souls of humanity. Not a mention, nor even a hint of zoroastrianism nor any of it's terminology in this book. It is lucid and easy to follow with plenty of scriptual references.

Just a little warning that this book was written by an author who was heavily influenced by Zoastrian light theroy so expect a strange read. It might be better to read something else like anything by or on Sheikh Abdulqadir Jilani.

Very deep in meaning, best read with a Shaykh or Ustaadh. Very difficult for the layman to comprehend. However the book as a whole is very beautiful.

Sufi metaphysics is not an easy field to get into. There are a great deal of terms of art which require explanation to the novice. If one reads enough, one can get something of an intuitive understanding of these terms, though having a teacher explain them is a much easier route. This book gets docked 2 starts for a reason. The first (and less compelling) reason is that ideally, this book would have greater commentary to help those not familiar which much of the Sufi terminology. This, however, is a general "flaw" of most translated Sufi works today (also, commentary tends to lead people in certain interpretive directions which may or may not be correct so a lack of commentary is positive in the sense that it does not bias the reader). The more compelling reason for docking the book a star, however, is that many words really are simply not translated precisely. The translator's word choices just seem "off" at many points in the book. I doubt there is any sort of malevolent intent behind this, but it just does not seem proper. As to the actual content of the work itself, like all of Suhrawardi's works, it is a highly layered composition and needs to be digested slowly. He says a lot in the small space of this book.