Since Adam after the loss of Abel sought a gift from the ontological level of God as “the Giver” to alleviate his grief, God bestowed upon him Seth purely as a gift and bestowal. In addition, everything which Seth attained came purely as a gift. Therefore the inevitable speak about gifts and some of their kinds in this fass is: Know that gifts of God are comprised of numerous kinds: among them is that He should give a gift especially to manifest His bounty, without expecting anything in exchange from him who benefits, in terms of praise, thanksgiving, or what have you, by means of His Name “the Giver”. And it, or the gift received from the Name “the Giver”, is of two kinds: one is the gift of the Essence, pertaining to the Unity of all of the Names, for the Essence as It is in Itself does not bestow gifts or manifest Itself through theophanies, and the second is the gift of a Name.
Now if you should say, “The gifts pertaining to the Name ‘the Giver’ are gifts of a Name, so how can they be divided into gifts of the Essence and gifts of a Name?” I would reply, “What is meant by ‘gift of the Essence’ is the gift whose source is the Essence without taking into account any one of the divine Qualities along with it — even though such a gift is not given without the intermediary of the Names and Qualities, for God does not manifest Himself in terms of His Essence to the existent beings except from behind the veil of one of the Names. And what is meant by ‘gift of a Name’ is a gift whose source is one of the Attributes in respect of its being distinguished and differentiated from the Essence.” The gifts of the Essence occur only through a “divine” theophany, i.e., through the theophany of the Presence of the all-embracing Name “God”, which is the comprehensive Unity of all of the Names, not through the manifestation of the Essence, since there are no properties, designations, names, theophanies or anything else within the Unity of the Essence.
Therefore the determination of the theophany comes from the ontological level of the divinity, and for this reason, the theophany is attributed to the divine Essence, not to the Essence without restriction. And the theophany from the Essence can only be according to the form of the locus of theophany – which is the servant — and according to his preparedness, just as God appears in the mirrors of the beings according to their preparednesses and receptivities, by manifesting His properties within them. Other than this is impossible. But as for the gifts of a Name, they always are accompanied by a veil, i.e., the veil of determination according to a Name, according to which a particular Name becomes differentiated from the others. And the recipient does not receive this gift, whether of the Essence or of a Name, except according to his actual preparedness, for the theophanies in the Presence of Holiness and the Spring of Oneness is one and whole in the description, but they become colored when they descend according to the preparednesses of the recipients, their spiritual ‘and physical levels, their times and places, and all of the concomitances of these things, like states, constitutions and particular attributes. So people think because of the diversity of effects that the theophanies themselves are multiple in reality, but this is not so. God said, “Our command is but one, as the twinkling of an eye” (cf. Qur’an).
Just as God is one in every respect, so also His effusion and His command have no multiplicity except in relation to the recipients. It, or the preparedness, is what is meant by His words, “He gave everything its creation” (cf. Qur’an). So from that is the preparedness, It may be that the gift, whether from the Essence or a Name, is due to asking on the part of him who has received it by the state of his preparedness, or the state which causes man to ask verbally. There is no escape from it, or from asking by the state. Or it may be that the gift is due to asking verbally. Verbal asking is of two kinds: one is asking according to nature, in that the reason for asking is man’s natural wish to hurry, for man was created ever hasty, and the second, which is asking but not according to nature, is also divided into two kinds. The first is asking in obedience to the divine command, according to His words, “Call upon Me and I will answer you” (cf. Qur’an), and the second is asking according to the demands of wisdom and gnosis, for he, or the asker according to the demands of wisdom and gnosis, is a commander who directs his subjects — whether they be all the inhabitants of the world, or those of a kingdom, or his family, or his body, and a master of the reins of their affairs, a protector of their interests, and one who knows that there are certain of their interests which divine Providence has ordained to be dependent upon asking. So he asks God and prays to Him to take care of these affairs. It is obligatory for him, or that asker, to strive to the extent possible to see that every one of his subjects who has a right receives it; what indicates this obligation is like his, i.e. the Prophet’s, words, “Verily you have a duty toward your family” i.e. those who are worthy of your instruction and education, like wives and children in the macrocosm and like physical and spiritual faculties in the microcosm, “your soul, your body and your guests.”