From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|This article needs attention from an expert in Islam. (December 2007)|
|This article is part of a series on:|
 Wahdat al-WujudIbn Arabi is most often characterized in Islamic texts as the originator of the doctrine of wahdat al-wujud, however, this expression is not found in his works and the first who employed this term was perhaps, in fact, the Andalusian mystical thinker Ibn Sabin. Although he frequently makes statements that approximate it, it cannot be claimed that "Oneness of Being" is a sufficient description of his ontology, since he affirms the "manyness of reality" with equal vigor.
In his view, wujūd is the unknowable and inaccessible ground of everything that exists. God alone is true wujūd, while all things dwell in nonexistence, so also wujūd alone is nondelimited (mutlaq), while everything else is constrained, confined, and constricted. Wujūd is the absolute, infinite, nondelimited reality of God, while all others remain relative, finite, and delimited.
Since wujūd is nondelimited, it is totally different from everything else. Whatever exists and can be known or grasped is a delimitation and definition, a constriction of the unlimited, a finite object accessible to a finite subject. In the same way, wujūd's self-consciousness is nondelimited, while every other consciousness is constrained and confined. But we need to be careful in asserting wujūd's nondelimitation. This must not be understood to mean that wujūd is different and only different from every delimitation. The Shaykh is quick to point out that wujūd's nondelimitation demands that it be able to assume every delimitation. If wujūd could not become delimited, it would be limited by its own nondelimitation. Thus "He possesses nondelimitation in delimitation" Or, "God possesses nondelimited wujūd, but no delimitation prevents delimitation. Rather, He possesses all delimitations, so He is nondelimited delimitation, since no single delimitation rather than another rules over Him.... Hence nothing is to be attributed to Him in preference to anything else" . Wujūd must have the power of assuming every delimitation on pain of being limited by those delimitations that it cannot assume. At the same time, it transcends the forms by which it becomes delimited and remains untouched by their constraints.
Only He who possesses Being in Himself (wujûd dhâtî) and whose Being is His very essence (wujûduhu 'ayn dhâtihi), merits the name of Being. Only God can be like that.
On the highest level, wujūd is the absolute and nondelimited reality of God, the "Necessary Being" (wājib al-wujūd) that cannot not exist. In this sense, wujūd designates the Essence of God or of the Real (dhāt al-haqq), the only reality that is real in every respect. On lower levels, wujūd is the underlying substance of "everything other than God" (mā siwā Allāh)—which is how Ibn Arabi and others define the "cosmos" or "universe" (al-'ālam). Hence, in a secondary meaning, the term wujūd is used as shorthand to refer to the whole cosmos, to everything that exists. It can also be employed to refer to the existence of each and every thing that is found in the universe.
God's 'names' (asma') or 'attributes' (sifat), on the other hand, are the relationships which can be discerned between the Essence and the cosmos. They are known to God because he knows every object of knowledge, but they are not existent entities or ontological qualities, for this would imply plurality in the godhead.
For the creatures, Being is not part of their essence. So a creature does not own its being, that it can never be independent in itself . In this sense, the created does not deserve the attribution of Being. Only God is Being, and all the rest is in reality a possibility (imkân), a relative, possible non-existence.
Ibn 'Arabî used the term "effusion" (fayd) to denote the act of creation. His writings contain expressions which show different stages of creation, a distinction merely logical and not actual. The following gives details about his vision of creation in three stages: the Most Holy Effusion (al-fayd al-aqdas), the Holy Effusion (al-fayd al-muqaddas) and the Perpetual Effusion (al-fayd al-mustamirr).
Wahdat-ul-Wujood spread through the teachings of the Sufis like Qunyawi, Jandi, Tilimsani, Qayshari, Jami etc. It is also associated with the Hamah Ust (Persian meaning "He is the only one") philosophy in South Asia. Sachal Sarmast and Bulleh Shah two Sufi poets from Pakistan, were also ardent followers of Wahdat-ul-Wujood.
Today, some Sufi Orders, notably the Bektashi sect and the non-traditional sects of Universal Sufism, place much emphasis on the concept of wahdat-ul-wujood.
 TashkeekTashkeek or gradation is closely associated with Sadrian interpretation of wahdat al-wujud. According to this school, not only there is gradation of existence that stand in a vast hierarchical chain of being (maratib al-wujud) from floor (farsh) to divine throne (arsh), but the wujud of each existent maahiya is nothing but a grade of the single reality of wujud whose source is God, the absolute being (al-wujud al-mutlaq). What differentiates the wujud of different existents is nothing but wujud in different degrees of strength and weakness. The universe is nothing but different degrees of strengths and weaknesses of wujud, ranging from intense degree of wujud of arch-angelic realities, to the dim wujud of lowly dust from which adam was made.
 Criticism of the conceptSome Muslims, including both Sufis and Salafis, have made comparisons between wahdat ul-wujood and Pantheism, the concept that all is God. This criticism has come both from Salafis and from Sufis as well.
Some, however, will counter that the two concepts differ in that wahdat ul-wujood states that God and the universe aren't identical. They hold real existence to be for God only and the universe to have no existence on its own (without God).
 Salafi criticismSome Salafis criticize the concept of wahdat al-wujud on the grounds that it was a product of Arab interaction with Hindu philosophy, and is not a purely Islamic concept. However, this is highly improbable simply because Muslims did not begin their interactions with the Hindus of India until the 12th century whereas prominent Sufis had already openly published some of their writings as early as the 6th century, including Al-Hallaj, Dhul-Nun al-Misri, and so on. Although Salafis cite similarities with Kabbalah as a criticism, even a cursory study of the history of Kabbalah would indicate that the formulation of Kabbalah was based on Sufi doctrines as espoused through secret publications by the Brethren of Purity.. For example, Brethren of Purity discussed the doctrine of emanations which mention there being eight sephiroth, whereas in Kabbalah it is mentioned that there are ten sephiroth. However, the writings of the Brethren of Purity did not reach the Jews until during the time of the Muslim rule of Spain and the time of the Crusades. Before then however such doctrines already existed and were well established.
 Sufi criticismSome Sufis, such as Ahmad Sirhindi (Mujaddid Alif Sani), have criticised wahdat ul-wujood. Ahmad Sirhindi wrote about the sayings that universe has no existence of its own and is a shadow of the existence of the necessary being. He also wrote that one should discern the existence of universe from the absolute and that the absolute does not exist because of existence but because of his essence.
 Wahdat al-ShuhudWahdat al-Shuhud (or wah-dat-ul-shuhud, wahdat-ul-shuhud, or wahdatul shuhud) has often been translated into English as Apparentism. In Arabic it literally means "unity of witness", "unity of perception" or "unity of appearance"..
Out of those who opposed the doctorine of wahdat al-wujood, there were those who substituted the pole of subject for the object, formulating the doctorine of Wahdat ul-shahood. This school was formulated by `Ala al-Dawlah Simnānī, was to attract many followers in India, including Ahmed Sirhindi who provided some of the most widely accepted formulations of this doctorine in the Indian sub-continent.
According to Ahmed Sirhindi's doctrine, any experience of unity between God and the created world is purely subjective and occurs only in the mind of the believer; it has no objective counterpart in the real world. The former position, Shaykh Ahmad felt, led to pantheism, which was contrary to the tenets of Sunnite Islam. He held that God and creation are not identical; rather, the latter is a shadow or reflection of the Divines Name and Attributes when they are reflected in the mirrors of their opposite non-beings (a'dam al-mutaqabila).
Abu Hafs Umar al-Suhrawardi and Abd-al-karim Jili were also proponents of apparentism.
 Shah Waliullah's view of WahdatShah Waliullah made the first attempt to reconcile the two (apparently) contradictory doctrines of wahdat al-wujud (unity of being) of Ibn Arabi and wahdat al-shuhud (unity in conscience) of Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi.
Shah Waliullah neatly resolved the conflict, calling these differences 'verbal controversies' which have come about because of ambiguous language. If we leave, he says, all the metaphors and similes used for the expression of ideas aside, the apparently opposite views of the two metaphysicians will agree. The positive result of Shah Wali Allah's reconciliatory efforts was twofold: it brought about harmony between the two opposing groups of metaphysicians, and it also legitimized the doctrine of wahdat al-wujud among the mutakallimun (theologians), who previously had not been ready to accept it.
In his books Lamahat and Sata'at, he discusses stages of being, the perceptive faculty, the relation of the abstract with the universe, the universal soul and the souls of man, after death, essence, miracles, the scope of man, the soul of the perfect, universal order, source of manifestation, and the transformation of mystics from quality to quality. He also demonstrated that the long-standing assumption that Sufi doctrine was divided between Apparentism and Unity of Being was a difference of expression alone, the latter doctrine being seen as merely a less-advanced stage of projection.
In his opinion this whole universe has also self (nafs) as an individual person has a self, which is called the Universal Soul (an-Nafs-ul-Kulliyah). The multiplicity of the whole universe has originated from it. When Ibn Arabi says that everything is God, he thereby means the Universal Soul. This Universal Soul, or the Self-unfolding Being (al-Wujud-ul-Munbasait), subsists by itself. This existence pervades the whole universe, both the substance and the accident, and accepts the form of everything. It is both immanent and transcendental. Beyond this existence (al-Wujud-al-Munbasit : Universal Soul) towards the original existence (God) none has access to. In other words, man's progress ends with the Universal Soul or the Self-unfolding Being. He cannot move a step further. The Universal Soul and God are so intermingled that the former is often taken for the latter."
As for the question of the relation that this existencen (al-Wujud-ul-Munbasit) has with the essence of God itself. This relation is, however, known only in its reality (anniyyah : I-ness); its quality is unknown and can never be known. Thus when Ibn Arabi says that the realities of the existing things are the names and the attributes of the Universal Soul (Self-unfolding Being) in the stage of knowledge (Fi Martabat-il-'Ilm, in the Divine Consciousness) or when Imam Rabbani asserts that the realities of existing objects are sheer nothingness on which the lights of the names and attributes of the Universal Soul (al-Wujud-ul-Munbasit) are reflected is exactly the same thing. The difference in their language is so little that it needs no consideration.
 See also
- S.H. Nasr (2006), Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the Land of Prophecy, State University of New York Press, p. 156
- Imaginal worlds, William Chiittick(1994), pg.15
- Imaginal worlds, William Chiittick(1994), pg.53
- Souad Hakim - Unity of Being in Ibn 'Arabî
- Ibn al-'Arabi, Muhyi al-Din (1164-1240)
- Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present(2006), pg76
- Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present, pg 78
- Tehqiq ul Haq fi Kalamat ul Haq a book by Pir Meher Ali Shah
- Maktoobat Rabbaniyah
- Shah Wali Allah (Qutb al-Din Ahmad al-Rahim) (1703-62)
- G. N. Jalbani, The Teachings of Shah Waliyullah of Delhi, pg98
- God Speaks, The Theme and Purpose of Creation. Meher Baba, Dodd Meade, 1955. (second edition, p. 280)
 Further reading
- Thaqīq al-haqq fi'l kalamat al-haqq a book by Peer Mahr Ali Shah
- Letter on Wahdat-ul-Wujud by Ustadha Umm Sahl
- Wahdatul Wajood Kiya Hai by Sayyed Ahmad Saeed Kazmi (In Urdu)
- Index of articles related to Wahdat-ul-Wujood
- What is Wahdat al-Wujood
- Marefat Allah by Allame Tehrani (In Arabic)
- Tawhid Elmi va Eini by Allameh Tabatabaei and Allame Tehrani (In Persian)
- Wahdat Wujud by Ruhollah Khomeini(In Persian)
- Wahdat al-Wujood clarified
- Wahdat ul-wujud & Wahdat ush-shahood simplified
- Wahdat al-Wujud - The Oneness of Being? by Shaykh Hamza Karamali