Chapter Twenty-Four: Showing That the Spiritual Pleasures Attained by the Soul After Its Dissolution Are Greater Than Corporeal Pleasures and Bodily Desires

The Twenty-Fourth Chapter

On the demonstration that the spiritual pleasures which accrue to the soul after the dissolution are greater than the corporeal pleasures and the appetites of the body

We say: many ignorant people, and some who make themselves out to be men of learning, have claimed that pleasure in its entirety is the bodily kind, and that there is no bliss but the material (hayūlānī); and for that reason they ask (1) nothing of the Creator, exalted be He, save that He not deprive them of anything of these pleasures — I mean foods and drinks and what resembles them — in this world and in the world to come. This opinion is exceedingly far from the truth, and is a species of sheer madness. And the rational proofs of its impossibility are many:

[57] The first proof: if real pleasure were this, the ape would be greater in pleasure than man on account of the abundance of its eating, and the ravening wolf on account of the swiftness of its seizing, and the sparrowhawk (2) on account of the frequency of its coupling. And since these and their like are of manifest falsity and impossibility, the adopting of them is impossible (3). So it is known that real pleasure is not (4) the base things here mentioned; therefore it is spiritual.

The second proof: if these were a condition of man's perfection, then the further he pressed on in increasing them, the more they would increase his perfection; but it is not so, and so it is not. For the intellect bears witness that one who presses on in these inclines to resembling the beast more than the man, and often he has fallen away from the intellectual thinking that is the ornament of the human constitution.

The third proof: if these pleasures were the real ones, man would have to be baser in worth than the animal, for man's intellect always restrains him [58] and rebukes him away from (1) the cravings for these, either from a shame that attaches to him or from fear of a punishment that may befall him; whereas the animal is bare of all these charges in its conditions, and has no restrainer to oppose it nor suppressor to turn it back, and therefore the animal would have to be superior to man. And since man is greater and nobler than the animal, it follows that his pleasure is greater and more upright (2) than the animal pleasures.

The fourth proof: these bodily pleasures are not pleasures in truth, but only causes of the inclination of bodily appetite. The indication of this is that the more intense the pain of hunger (3), the more intense the pleasure of eating; and so likewise with the pain of cold together with the intensifying of the pleasure of clothing; and likewise when the craving for intercourse intensifies from an increase of matter and a sharpness of temperament, the measure of the pleasure grows great. And since these kinds and their like are not real pleasures, and do not entail [59] the delight that removes (4) dejection and sorrow, how can they truly be called pleasures? Therefore the pleasure of man is a thing other than these contemptible things mentioned, and other than what resembles and matches them; for these are bodily and brutish, while that is intellectual and spiritual, and is not attained by the corporeal instrument, since it is the intellecting knowledge (1) of the greatness and the majesty of the intelligible. And how far apart are the pleasure of camel-drivers and wolves and the bliss of dwelling near the Lord of lords!

The fifth proof: the intellect bears witness that the rejoicing of the angels in intelligible matters is greater than that of the beasts in base and despicable foods. And it is evident that the angels have no delight through the senses; and were it otherwise, the pleasure of the mute animals would have to be greater and more upright than that of the angels, and that is impossible. And since man is intermediate between the angel and the animal, his pleasure must not be tied to either of the two divisions mentioned; rather it is below the first in majesty and perfection, and greater than the second in all conditions and qualities.

[60] The sixth proof: if there were no pleasures other than these bodily ones, the players of backgammon and chess would not attain patience and forbearance under hunger and thirst and the rest (2), in proportion to the pleasure that accrues from these things. And if the pleasure of play distracts from the pleasure of eating and the rest, and in it there is but a slight intellectual pleasure (3), how much more the pleasure that accrues with the separate substances and the piercing lights, through knowledge of their majesty and the majesty of their Creator, or of the mystery of the Holy Trinity and of the favours overflowing continually and perpetually? Therefore there is no proportion between the bodily and the intellectual pleasures except as the proportion of darkness to light, or of non-existence to existence.

The seventh proof: if there were no intellectual pleasure, the hunting dogs would not keep

— Notes —

[48] 1) In the original: lā yaṭlubū.

[48] 2) In the original: wa-al-ʻuṣfūr al-bāshiq.

[48] 3) Sic.

[48] 4) Fallen out in the original: laysat.

[49] 1) In the original: min.

[49] 2) In the original: wa-aqyam.

[49] 3) In the original: wa-al-shajb.

[49] 4) In the original: yazīdu.

[50] 1) In the original: al-mutaʻaqqil.

[50] 2) In the original: wa-ghayrihā.

[50] 3) Put « ʻaqlīyah » before « yasīrah ».