Ibn Al-`Arabi`s Ontology

8/19/2019 Ibn Al-`Arabi`s Ontology

1/10

Abstract

The ontology of Ibn al-„Arabi is extensive and incredibly dense. This study uses previous workson „Arabi to provide an introduction to his ontology that is more comprehensible than the

primary sources and other works that are currently available. Existence, entities, Being,

imagination and manifestation of God are all covered here, as they are key concepts in „Arabi‟sontology. While this will in no way give a complete understanding, it is a good stepping stone tothe thoughts and philosophies of „Arabi.

Existence and Entities:

An Introduction

To

Ibn al-‘Arabi’s Ontology

Cory Fitch

Muhyi al-Din Muhammad ibn „Ali ibn al-„Arabi (1165-1240 AD) is one of the most

famous Muslim spiritual authorities throughout history. He was called al-Shaykh al-Akbar, the

Greatest Master, by his followers and is commonly referred to as “The Shaykh .” It has been

estimated that Ibn al-„Arabi wrote over seven hundred books, treatises and collections of poetry.

„Arabi‟s work covers hundreds of topics. Some of the major subjects include the Koran, Hadith,

the divine names and attributes, ontology, epistemology, and the Shari‟a.

In this paper, I will attempt to give an introduction to „Arabi‟s work concerning ontology.

Due to the shear amount of ideas and writings on the subject, this work will be an elucidation of

some of the key terms involved.

It is my hope that this paper will help to give a basic

understanding of some of the most important issues in „Arabi‟s ontology. Specifically, it will

cover Existence, existents, possible things, entities, Manifestation and the loci of manifestation,

and the Self-disclosure and receptivity of Being. This can only scratch the surface of „Arabi‟s


2/10

thoughts on ontology, but it will function as a stepping stone into not only the rest of his

ontology, but also his work in nearly every other topic. One of the main sources of power and

authority of „Arabi‟s writings comes from the way each of his theories is so perfectly meshed

and coinciding with the next.

The majority of the clarification of terms will come from William C. Chittick‟s

definitions and clarifications in his book, The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-’Arabi’s

Metaphysics of Imagination. Chittick bases the majority of his work on a reading of „Arabi‟s al-

Futuhat al-makkiyya, or The Meccan Openings. The Futuhat contains over five hundred and

sixty chapters and is an estimated seventeen thousand pages long. Chittick describes it as, “a

vast encyclopedia of the Islamic sciences within the context of tawhid , the profession of God‟s

Unity that forms the core of Islam. “ (xi) Considering the size of the text, the small scope of this

work is certainly insufficient for a complete understanding, but it will provide a way to ease into

the study of „Arabi‟s philosophy.

Ibn al-„Arabi‟s ontology begins with his belief in wahdat al-wujud , or the Oneness of

Being. Many people consider this a sort of pantheism. However, „Arabi was devoted to

following the Islamic tradition of tawhid , or profession of God‟s Unity. Oneness of Being is not

a simple pantheism that says God is everywhere. “When the Shaykh himself explains what he

means by the statement that Being is one, he provides one of the most sophisticated and nuanced

expressions of the „profession of God‟s Unity‟ to be found in Islamic thought.” (79)

Before any understanding of „Arabi‟s Oneness of Being is possible, a defining of some

key terms and ideas is necessary. I will proceed by attempting to discuss Being and Existence in


3/10

general. Then “possible things” will be touched on before moving into a more detailed

clarification of “entities.” Following this will be “loci of manifestation” and “manifestation.” A

brief discussion of “Self -disclosure and receptivity” will precede a final overview of Being and

Existence that will be more easily understood after a basic understanding of the terms has been

acquired.

„Arabi‟s Oneness of Being centers on the word wujud . This, in the case of ontology, is

translated as Being and existence. “Being” is used to refer to God‟s Reality and Essence, while

“existence” is used to signify everything that exists in the cosmos („Arabi uses the term

“cosmos” to refer to everything in the world that is not God, i.e. plants, animals, people, the

Earth, the galaxy, etc.). The “thing” that is said to exist in the cosmos can be distinguished from

the essence of that thing. Bob and Jim are separate things, but both are man, or have the essence

of man. This is true of everything that can be discussed except for God. According to „Arabi,

God‟s existence is the exact same thing as his essence. “We can distinguish between a man and

his existence; but we cannot distinguish between God and His Being, since He is Being as such.”

(80)

One of Ibn al-„Arabi‟s main tasks in his ontology is to explain the relationship between

the existent things and Being. The main question here is something like, “If God is Being, are

all the things Being as well?” (Chittick 81) „Arabi answers this question with what appears to be

an ambiguous “Yes and no.” One of the ways he often describes this is by saying that the things

are He and not He.


4/10

Before moving on, an important term should be understood. This is mawjud . It is

translated as existent or existent thing. Chittick defines it clearly by saying “An existent thing is

an entity which exists on any level or in any world which is envisaged… The objects that we find

in the world around us are all existents in the corporeal world, while our ideas are existents

within our minds.” (81) When „Arabi uses the word “nonexistent,” he is referring to anything

known by God that is not in the cosmos. It is not absolutely nonexistent, but is simply

nonexistent relative to what exists in creation.

The next step is to understand the concept of “possible things.” The possible thing can

either exist in the sense that it is in the cosmos, or not exist in the sense that it is only relatively

existent in the mind of God. It does not matter whether or not it exists, only that it has the

possibility of being brought into existence. God, when discussed with possible things, is

considered the Necessary Being, or “Preponderator .” Something is given existence when God

gives preponderance to that possible thing‟s existence over its nonexistence.

„Arabi writes,

“God gave preponderance to the existence of the possible things over their nonexistence because

they sought this preponderance by their very essences.” (82) This returns us to the cosmos,

which „Arabi here defines as all the possible things, regardless of whether or not they exist (83).

To continue on the path of understanding „Arabi, we will move to “entities.” The term

‘ayn is translated as entity, but has many meanings and different ways to discuss it.

The term is

often used to describe specificity, particularization, and designation. „Ayn also leads us to

“entified existence” and “mental existence.” Entified is anything that exists in the cosmos while

mental existence is the “existence of a thing as a concept in the mind, whether or not it is found


5/10

in the cosmos.” (83) “Entity of God” is another term used by „Arabi that usually means the

Essence of God.

So “Entities,” according to Chittick, “are, on the one hand, the possible things as they

exist in the cosmos, and on the other hand, the possible things nonexistent in the cosmos but

existent in God‟s knowledge.” (84) This entity that is existent in God‟s knowledge is known as

an immutable entity. Chittick points out that these are not to be confused with the Platonic

eternal forms. Instead, they are the entities that exist in God‟s knowledge and are fixed there for

eternity. The immutable entity is exactly the same as the existent entity; it has simply not yet

been given existence. “There is no difference between the entity known in God‟s knowledge

and the entity in the cosmos except that in the first case it is “nonexistent” while in the second it

is “existent. The immutable entity and the existent entity are the same reality, but one exists in

the cosmos and the other does not.” (84)

It is important to note that when an immutable entity is given existence, it does not leave

God‟s knowledge. “What God knows, He knows eternally and immutably.” (85) „Arabi makes

a point to say that an entity which is immutable and existent must be finite, but what is only

immutable is infinite. Nothing immutable can leave God‟s knowledge because something that is

infinite cannot be diminished. „Arabi writes, “The reason for this is that the thing in its

immutability is identical to the thing in the state of its existence, except that God has clothed it in

the robe of existence through Himself .” (85) The immutable object receives entification from

God to become existent in the cosmos, but does not lose its immutable quality.


6/10

The topic of existence and nonexistence is returned to with the existent and immutable

entities. It is said that the immutable entities are nonexistent, but this is the relative nonexistence

that was referred to before. „Arabi says, “The apparent situation is that their nonexistence is a

relative nonexistence. For in the state of their nonexistence, the things are witnessed by God.”

(87)

With the subject of entities rehearsed, our discussion can move on to “things.” Chittick

says that „Arabi uses the term “thing” as an equivalent of the philosophical term “possible thing”

and theological term “entity.” (88) The term indefinite, and „Arabi points out that it is applicable

to anything but God Himself . In the Koran, God says, “Everything is annihilated.” Since Ibn al-

„Arabi has shown that God is the Being as such, it is impossible for God to “not Be.” Therefore,

the Koran tells us that the word “thing” cannot be applied to God because He is not capable of

being annihilated. God is Being and Being cannot possibly take on the characteristic of

annihilated without losing its Being. This is impossibility, so it once again gives us a new way to

view the relationship between God and existence.

„Arabi goes back to entities and refers to their situation as their shay’iyya, or “thingness.”

(88) He distinguishes between the two types of entities by referring to their “thingness of

immutability” and their “thingness of existence.” „Arabi says:

The Prophet said, “God is, and no thing is with Him.” The meaning is as follows:He is not accompanied by thingness, nor do we ascribe it to Him. Such is He, and

there is no thing with Him. The negation of thingness from Him is one of Hisessential attributes… He is with the things, but the things are not with Him… (88)

The separation of “thingness” from God is important to understand so that we can see more proof

of God as Being or Existence.


7/10

The next step in „Arabi‟s teaching is “manifestation” and the “loci of manifestation.”

Before going directly into this subject, we must remember that, as Chittick puts it, “Few

teachings are as basic to Sufism — or to Islam, for that matter — as the idea that something more

real stands beyond the realm of appearances. In Koranic terms, all creatures are „signs‟ of God.”

(89) The truth of what appears to exist actually lies in Being Itself . What appears to us is the

Reality of Being that is only characterized by the nonexistent possible things.

Ibn al-Arabi uses the term mazhar , or locus of manifestation. This is beginning to show

how the “Yes and no” answer to whether or not the things are also Being along with God fits into

his ontology. „Arabi uses the Koranic verse, “He is the First and the Last, the Manifest and the

Nonmanifest.” When something comes into existence, it really only becomes, as „Arabi puts it,

“a locus of manifestation for the Real.” (90) Every thing that is said to be existent does not exist

in itself, but only exists through God. „Arabi goes on to show how there is Unity in God and that

plurality only comes from the entities:

So He is Manifest in respect of the loci of manifestation, while He is Nonmanifest

in respect of His He-ness. Hence the loci of manifestation are plural in respect oftheir entities, but not in respect of the Manifest within them. Therefore Unity lies

in their manifestation while plurality lies in their entities. (90)

The Oneness of Being is seen in that everything that exists, whether it is called an existent entity,

existent possible thing, or an existent thing, does not truly exist, but is the way God manifests

himself in the perceivable world.

Being is manifest only through the entities, but the entities are

not the Being that is manifest.


8/10

The term tajalli, or “self -disclosure” is used to mean nearly the same thing as self -

manifestation. God discloses Himself to everything, but something will only receive as much

disclosure as it is prepared to receive. Chittick writes:

Each receives Being‟s self -disclosure to the measure of its own capacity. The

receptiveness of things are given broad outlines by their situation in theontological hierarchy. Inanimate objects demonstrate one level of capacity, plants

a higher level, animals a still higher level and human beings the highest levelamong all created things. Perfect man alone has the receptivity to display Being

Iin Its fullness. (91)

Existence here is marked by how prepared something is to receive and manifest Being Itself .

There is no way to clarify this better than to allow Ibn al-„Arabi to use his own words: “The

existence attributed to each created thing is the Being of the Real, since the possible thing has no

existence. However, the entities of the possible things are receptacles for the manifestation of

this Being.” (92) Remember that God is Being and the Essence of existence. The entities do not

actually exist in the sense that God is Existence. These entities are merely the way in which God

manifests himself into the cosmos.

Self-disclosure is compared to illumination. It is never-ending because light cannot hide

itself . “It may be that darkness fails to comprehend the shinging sun, but the sun never ceases to

shine.” (Chittick 93) Even if He is not seen or perceived by that which is not Him (such as any

existent entity in the cosmos), He still discloses Himself to all.

With many of Ibn al-„Arabi‟s main tenets on existence and nonexistence now rehearsed,

the Oneness of Being idea is hopefully more illuminated. The importance of the Divine Names

has been left out until this point. This is mainly because, in order to have a true understanding

about the power of the divine names and how they work in „Arabi‟s ontology, someone would


9/10

comprehend a great deal more if the basic premises are understood and agreed with. The name

“Allah” is the all-encompassing name for Muslims that works to explain all the traits. Each of

the divine names is an attribute that becomes manifest in an entity. „Arabi sums up the

significance of the divine names that shortly describes how their effects relate to their existence:

“Since the effects belong to the divine names, and the name is the Named, there is nothing in

Being/existence except God.” (96)

Oneness of Being is not your everyday pantheism. It is an extensively thought out system

upon which everything stands. In a sense, God is this system. As the most capable existent

entities on Earth, it is human‟s job to find God and see him in all things. Immutable entities stay

forever in God‟s knowledge and have a sort of relative nonexistence. The cosmos has been

filled with God giving preponderance to the existence of a possible thing over its nonexistence.

In order to become fully aware of who and what we are, we must realize that our existence is

Being and simultaneously not Being.

We are He and not He.

In the sense that we exist through

God, we are Him. However, when we consider that we are actually only possible objects that

God has given existence to, we should recognize that we are not Him because we are not Being

Itself . All things in the cosmos reflect different levels of existence based upon how prepared

they are to receive God‟s self -disclosure.

Chittick‟s summation of the Oneness of Being is concise but effective once the general

ideas of Ibn al-„Arabi are comprehended:

Simply stated, there is only one Being, and all existence is nothing but themanifestation or outward radiance of that One Being. Hence “everything other

than the One Being”— that is, the whole cosmos in all its spatial and temporal


10/10

extension — is nonexistent in itself, though it may be considered to exist throughBeing. (79)

The complex ontology set down by Ibn al-„Arabi is based on brilliant logic, reasoning, and

careful interpretation of the Koran, Hadith, and Sufi traditions.

Even though this paper has

failed to due justice to the depth of „Arabi‟s philosophy, I hope that it provides an introduction

that is more easily understood than both Ibn al-„Arabi‟s full corpus and William C. Chittick‟s

comprehensive interpretation of „Arabi‟s works in The Sufi Path of Knowledge.

Bibliography

Akkach, Samer . “The World of Imagination in Ibn „Arabi‟s Ontology.” British Journal of

Middle Eastern Studies. Vol. 24, No. 1. May 1997. Pp. 97-113. JSTOR

Chittick, William C. The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-‘Arabi’s Metaphysics of Imagination.

Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1989.

Ernst, Carl W. The Shambhala Guide to Sufism. Boston, MA: Shambhala Publications, Inc.,

1997.

RURJ is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-ShareAlike License.To view a copy of this license go to creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Documents

Ibn Al-`Arabi`s Ontology