Seventh Chapter

Or

163

(Inilf ©f cxistcnce

@r Walid^t ahWmla4

The aim of all Sufism is union with the divine which comes as a

result of the love created in man for divine beauty. This union is

generally conceived in terms of a gradual purification of the heart

and the attainment of various spiritual leading finally to the state

of annihilation (Fana) and subsistence (Baqa) in the divine. In the

state of union the individuality of man is illuminated and so

becomes immersed in the divine light. The world and man are

like the shadow of God. This union is the supreme experience

which according to Ibn 'Arabi is impossible to describe in any

adequate formulation. In fact knowledge o f God and union with

him means to realize that our existence from the beginning

belonged to God. It means the realization that all existence as

such is a ray of the divine being and that nothing else possesses

any existence what so ever.(l)

This supreme state of union, which is the ultimate goal of the

Gnostic and perfection of human life, is interpreted as unity of

ex istence or W ahdat u l-W ujud, wh ich its m ost fam ous

164

representative is Ibn ul-'Arabi. According to Wahdat-ul-Wujud

doctrine all fin ite th ings are regarded as m ere aspects,

modifications, or parts of one eternal self-existing being. Then all

material objects and all particular minds necessarily derived from

a single infinite substance the one absolute substance. The

all-comprehensive being is called God. Thus God, according to it,

is all that is, and nothing is which in not necessarily included in,

or which has not been necessarily evolved out of God.

In Wahdat-ul-Wujud monism and determinism are combined so

that, the all of nature is believed to be co-extensive with God and

the divine being is supposed to be fu lly and exhaustively

expressed in the divine manifestation. We and the rest of the

universe are but the phases o f his being. Nothing can be

conceived as having even temporary separation from him.(2)

According to Jami, Dhu'n-nun of Egypt (d. 234 A.H/857 A.D) was

the first to preach the Sufi doctrine of Wahdat ul-Wujud openly.

He was denounced as a Zindiq in the presence o f Mutawakkil

and imprisoned and then released.(3) Another very eminent

Wujudi Sufi was Abu Yazid al-Bastami who died about 262

A;H/875 A.D. His doctrine is only known to us from occasional

utterances handed down by Attar, Ghazali and others. He is

reported to have said on one occasion: praise be to me, I am the

truth.(4) Junayd of Baghdad, well known as Sayyid ul-Taifah (the

Chief of the Sufi sect) (d 298 A.H/910 A.D) spoke much in the

same fashion, there is noting under my gown except Him. The

first hero in Islam to give at his Wujudi views and suffer a terrible

165

death was H u ssa in Ib n -i- M unsur a l-H a lla j (244^3 11

A.H/858-922 A.D). The famous saying "I am the truth" is

ascribed to him.(5)

By the close of forth century, Wahdat ul-Wujud spread widely

among the Muslim populance and almost all the scholars were

familiar with it. Many tried to improved and amplify it. By 390

A .H /1000 A.D it was firmly established in a system atic way

throughout the Muslim countries and Muslims were fairly

fam iliar with it and they produced certain genuine Wujudi

Sufists of a high order. Abu S'aid Abi'l-Khayr (357-440 A.H/

967-1049 A.D) is one of them. He is reported to have said that

there is nothing other than God and there is further said of him

that he saw all creatures with the eye of creator, not with the eye

of the creature.

The sixth century was a watershed in the histoiy of Sufism. The

concept of the Whadat ul~Wujud by Abn uT'Arabi was founded

on a primordial belief in the ultimate nature o f unity which

reduced to nothing, ideas of the existence of entities other than

God. According to Ibn ul-’Arabi, the absolute being is inseparable

from the absolute-existence and is the ultimate sources of all

existence. (6)

Ibn ul-'Arabi's main theory is that the one is the all. It is the one

God who appears in all these forms. There is nothing in the

universe except God, and in fact the existence is only the

manifestation o f Him. Absolutely the meaning of this statement

"All is one" is not that one is all. According to Ibn uTArabi, All is

166

one and the one is God. This cardinal doctrine, which is not

pantheism, not pan-enthism nor natural mysticism as western

orientalists have called it, is the direct consequence of the

Shahadah. It asserts that there cannot be two com pletely

independent orders o f reality or being which would be sheer

polytheism or shirk. Therefore, to the extent that anything has

being it cannot be other than the absolute being. The Shahdah in

fact begins with the La, or negation, in order to absolve reality of

all otherness and multiplicity. The relation between God and the

order of existence is not just a logical one in which if one thing is

equal to another the other is equal to the first. Through that

mystery that lies in the heart of creation itself, everything is, in

essence, identified with God while God infinitely transcends every

thing.(7)

Ibn ul-'Arabi says "The whole is for God and by God, rather it is

God. Whatever you comprehend is God. God is essence of the

possibles. In His absolute capacity He is existence and with

reference to the deference of forms in existence, He is the essence

of the possible.

( v Y ' (jAi) <dJ! Jj <ilLj <ii (jLi

6 ^ fjjtj JjAj jA JaJI ds^ cAjSmJ] (jUxl ^ (3^1 J^jJI L J i j

{ « T s'ylxu^ luill

There is only one being. There is not nothing in existence except

God. The Prophet Said "There is God and nothing with H im "(gL_

^ 4JJI) This saying is generally interpreted to mean that God

167

was alone accom panied by anything before He created the

universe. The Shaykh contends that the word Kana does not

denote any tense, and he interprets the saying to mean that

there is nothing in existence besides God.(8)

The word Kana often denotes time. That is not intended here. But

what is intended is the timeless being which is identical with the

universe. Kana in its true significance, denotes existence (without

the limitation set by time). It is not a verb with a tense. It is on

this account that what the cerem onial scholars say is not

intended. They add that he is what He was. This is an addition

which has been interpolated into the saying of the prophet by one

who had no knowledge of the significance of Kana, specially in

this place. Of this set are the verses like "God is (Kana) most

gracious and pardoning. (Ijjie Ijic <dll jK )

Ibn ul- Arabi holds that God is identical with the universe.

Though the universe is a single entity yet there are many modes

and aspects o f it. The universe has the apparent (corporeal)

aspect and the hidden (incorporeal) aspect. When God is called

the apparent, the corporeal of the universe is meant. Thus all the

names and qualities of God are to be interpreted as the different

modes and aspects of the universe.

The identity of the universe with God is expressed by the Shaykh

in a peculiar way. He says that the universe becomes the food of

God and God the food of the universe, meaning thereby that

when we look at God the universe is swallowed up in God, and

that when we look at the universe God is swallowed up in the

168

universe. According to him there is only one existence and it is

God.(9)

Ibn ul-'Arabi speaks of the immanence of God in everything. His

idea of immanence seems to be that God has expressed Himself

in each and every form. He denies plurality in existence but

believes in different modes and aspects of it. He contends that

God is to the universe what life is to the body, and just as life

cannot be identified as apart from the body, so also God cannot

be identified as apart from the universe except in thought.

His idea of immanence is quiet different from that of Hallaj who

advocated hulul-lahut fin-nasut, that is the indwelling of the

divine in the mundane. Ibn ul-'Arabi's siryan should be taken as

identity, that is, that God is identical with the universe. The

Shaykh is against the idea of hulul, for he contends, if we grant

hulul, there must be a hall (entrant) and a mahall (receptacle) -

two different things - which is impossible. There is only one

being, and according to him it is foolish to say that a thing

entered itself. (10)

According to Ibn ul-'Arabi the world is not nothing but an illusion

which he considers it to be a dream (manam).

y i ( j L u u V I (^j j L 4 j l j i ^ L u J I «u J L c i u I j j L I j U o J - c J l J

( iLdJj JL ^ jkjUil L jjJ I iJji&J Lajl LjiJt

( \ < r qaa} J < i U jJLsJU dJ L (jic. i jt j • • •

While things are as I have mentioned to you, the universe is a

169

fancy having no real existence.

jiikiaJ! i j j L|.Lal L yJx oLiisAlf jj! tHijjiAf! 6X& Jio ! jLa j-uJI

( 1 < -L|jL jj L|,mij! ^ ciLsiiuJl 4 ^ yA L JIjaIj j j ^ 3^®

The secret which is above this in similar problems is that the

possible in their very nature are non-existent, and there is no

existence except that of God as expressed in the forms and states

in which the possible appear both in themselves and in their

substances. (11)

Ibn ul-'Arabi says about unity in multiplicity and diversity that

there is only one essence which expressed itself in many forms,

in other word there is unity in multiplicity. Since there is onty

one expressed in all the divers forms. We say that there is unity

in diversity. There is absolutely no room for plurality. Although a

man has many limbs and diverse faculties, he is a single entity.

Similarly, though the universe consists of manj^ things and

diverse forces, it is a single entity with one essence.

The multiplicity of the names need not necessarily multiply the

named. The different names of God simply denote His different

aspects. He is merciful with reference to one and Avenger with

reference to another. There is no overlapping between the First

and the Last and or the Apparent end the Hidden.

According to Ibn ul-'Arabi the people who don't know that more

than one thing can happen from the same thing are ignorant.

Though the whole universe is different in forms, it has only one

essence. This essence does not change even if the form s

170

appearing on it do.

caaJaa,! (j!j jjl Jjj L« jj-s isj^ j_i.a.Lja3j

SjK “AaIj yj iJjiiUi &X.MJ 6Aa,lj (jx^ t^l OjS^J L^Li-a-

(\yi: Sj^Ij

(y.*uLJI fjAs) o^JLj AahljJi J j j ^ L joiXJ! wLa.ljJ! jJjiUI

^ y x 0 X (j,islUJI J i jAlkJl L a !A I j j i la t/ c5 - ^

U 4jLs>,.1x« (jl Lai 4jLa„4«ui 4J jAllaJ! jA j 4Ij^J “Cjjj-a jJbJl (j\ JL2 (j-«

)lLi jjLuij’ f! oa. yj 6 j j ^ jjdJ! (> >4 CfuaJ (>LLJ1

LLaj Vj H jJLaJl wLa. J£j JjJ-aw« .JjJ-a-a J yi dUiKj 6jALtij

^ 4i!i J,. JI Xa. J|AJ d j i l i ^Lc J£ j J*ao. L jJJ y ie V! L|I® A jju ^ cj^ J jdjx L-|J

(lA 0A&) JLau* l^\ kLaJ 4jj*oA JLa-a Sjj*« *Aa. Jju ’ i

The man of ascertainment sees multiplicity in unity just as he

knows that the names of God, though different and many, are

only one in essence. The multiplicity in this case is only inferred

and the essence is only one.

He is unity in multiplicity. He is multiplicity with reference to the

forms and unity with reference to the essence. There is a special

manifestain of God in every created thing. He is apparent in every

understood. He is hidden from every understanding except that

of one who says that the universe is His form and realit}^. It is the

external name of God just as God is the spirit of what is apparent

while He remains Hidden. His relation to what is apparent is just

like the relation of the circulating life to the form.

God arranged and balanced the universe so as to make it an

171

essence capable of accepting any form which God desired to

make in it. The form s are d ifferent. M inerals d iffe r from

vegetations and animals in form, still all these are one in their

physical essence. There for their essence has the same definition.

Their definitions vary only with reference to their forms. It is

unity in diversity and unity in multiplicity as in the case of the

essence and the named of God. The essence of the universe at

the root is one and its reality does not change. Of course changes

take place in the forms which are but temporary.

Ibn ul-'Arabi asserts there is no like or opposite in existence. The

reality of existence being only one there could be no like or

opposite to it.

b S L i s j ^ S i i j h l j JjA j J I ( j l i SjJs) w S j a j J I ( j i L s j ( J ^ J j A j J I L a i

There is no like or opposite in existence. The reality of existence

being only one there could be no like or opposite. Ibn uI-'Arabi

spins his idea round the famous saying "The creature continues

to approach me through good action till I love him. When I love

him, I become his hearing through which he hears and the sight

through which he sees, etc. He argues that it is God who

functions in the form of man and that man and God are not two

different entities. He utilizes several verses from the Quran for

his purpose and contends that there is nothing but God in the

form of man. He holds that the differentiation between God and

man is only imaginary without any substantial basis for it.

172

AiaU Jobdl y l j ^ l|L( JS 4j__jA 4jl jJLaj J aJI , _>Aa.l a J j

J j ^ ! Q j l j 5 i k J ! C i j l j ! j l i LlJLa. ^ U j 4j ' ^ *4 :®

( o Y.-^LoLy (jLLJlj jaLklljjA.'^lj

God has informed us that He is the reality o f every organ. No

faculty other than God functions brought it. The form is that of

the creature on whom His reality is stamped, that is, His name. It

is not otherwise, for God is the essence of all manifestations

which are named creation. When you see the creature you see

the First, the Last, the apparent and the Hidden.

<b |J£Ij (^iil <iLuJj <4 6djj ClI^ i i j i ^ f jlj

J4i 4K j L i j l Ja . 4K >«^I o J ii j j i J j j yA yXll I4 IU-SJ (5jJ J ! eUj >a£

-SaaIj ‘iijjjuj jA j iuifeu

If you examine the saying of God, I become his leg with which he

walks, his hand with which he grasps, his tongue with which he

speaks," so on about all the faculties and their seats (which are

the limbs) you shall not differentiate. You shall say that every

thing is God and everything is created. It is both the creature and

God relatively. The substance is one.

eL^VIj ^ yij L IIIaj JaJI ajuJI J jh uijLftJI djj AuJI J^Sj jiiJLi

I4J (jiiajj (jllI 6Jb j 4j ( IJI bjjjsxi j <b ajuu (^ill JjAi yilx» ^U! • • •

j 4 j^U a ail ij&i (^1 ^jfjoJI jA 4Lja (jl jSLs L j (j-aJ!

ti XLIL 6dj3klj fjji L|«aixJ jV! Jx ia-jLa- 4a1L3>.«

. . , 16-Ji usMIaL vMjLa tLJLS

j JaaJ! LacI <jjA (j! 4>9 uj3l Xfi ■ • cip“ 6^ u jJ! u-a—>j

( • V (joi) (3k (/ (5 (Sj^ L>^;

173

One who is not a knower says that the hearing is that of zayd

and the knower says that the hearing is God Himself. This is the

true of every faculty and limb...

God said "I am the hearing through which he hears, his sight

through which he sees, his hand with Vv hich he grasps, his leg

with which he walks" denoting thereby that His reality is the

substance of the limbs which are, in their turn, the substance of

man. The reality is one while the limbs are various. Every limb

has an aptitude peculiar to itself, derived from the same

substance, but differing as the limbs differ just like water which

differs as the places differ, although its reality is the same...

And we are nearer to him than the jugu lar vain ... There is

nothing nearer than His being the essence of the limbs of the

creature and his faculties. The creature is not other than these

limbs. Therefore, he is God perceived in an illusorj^ creation.(12)

174

References: (Details in Bibliography)

1- Nasr, 1964, p i 14 & Jami, N.A, p l9

2- Hussaini, 1970, 1

3“ Jami, ibid, 32-36

4~ Ibid, 56

5- Ibid, 80-83

6- Rizvy, 1975, 104

7- Nasr, 1966, 137

8- Hussaini, ibid, 175-177

9- Ibid, 179

10- Ibid, 181

11- Ibid, 187

12- Ibid, 204

175