WAHDAT UL WUJUD AND IBN ARABI

The name of Ibn Arabi has always been associated with the doctrine of wahda tul wajood.
Wahdatul Wujud the “Unity of Being” is a Sufi philosophy emphasizing that „there is no true
existence except the Ultimate Truth (God). Or in other phrasing that the only truth within
the universe is God, and that all things exist within God only. Although the phrase refers to a
subjective state or direct, inward experience attained by Sufis, it has also been understood and
discussed as a philosophical concept and, as such, interpreted in different ways all of his
creations emerge from `adim (non-existence) to wajud (existence) out of his thought only.
Hence the existence of God is the only truth (Haqq), and the concept of a separate created
universe is falsehood (Batil).This doctrine has played metaphysic role in his life, both his life
and his teaching point that the Principle of the Truth and the Way to the Truth are esoteric.
After his death in 1240, Ibn „Arabi‟s writings (and teachings) quickly spread throughout the
Islamic world have been the subject of numerous commentaries in many languages. His
teaching on wahdat ul wujud is the mostly discussed and debated among scholars. He has
more influence on the way Muslims have thought about God. Even though he has no any
particular tariqa, but his teaching on wahdatul wujud has influenced many Sufis and
philosopher after Ibn Rusyd, and he is the next important figure after Al-Ghazali. His
teaching could be best categorized as tasawwuf falasafi. And he is known as „the greatest
sheikh‟ or al-sheikh al-Akbar.

WHO IS IBN ‘ARABI?

Mystic, philosopher, poet, sage, Muhammad b. „Ali Ibn Arabi is one of the world‟s great
spiritual teachers. Known as Muhyiddin (the Revivified of Religion) and the Sheikh al-Akbar
(the Greatest Master), he was born in 1165 AD into the Moorish culture of Andalusian Spain,
the center of an extraordinary flourishing and cross-fertilization of Jewish, Christian and
Islamic thought, through which the major scientific and philosophical works of antiquity
were transmitted to Northern Europe. Ibn Arabi‟s spiritual attainments were evident from an
early age, and he was renowned for his great visionary capacity. He travelled extensively in
the Islamic world and died in Damascus in 1240 AD.
He wrote some 400 works His major contribution was in the field of tasawwuf. Of his 20
main Sufi works, the most important two are: 1.al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya fi asrar al-Malikiyya
wal’l-mulkiyya (The Meccan revelations). The autograph text in 37 volumes is preserved in
Istanbul. 2. Fusus al-Hikam wa khusus al-kilam (The Bezels of Wisdom). These two
collections constitute the standard Sufi encyclopedia on mystical doctrine. In
his Diwân and Tarjumân al-Ashwâq, he also wrote some of the finest poetry in the Arabic
language. These extensive writings provide a beautiful exposition of the Unity of Being.
HIS DISCIPLES
Ibn Arabi is most often characterized in Islamic texts as the originator of the doctrine of
wahdatul wujud, however, this expression is not found in his works. According to Chittick,
this term was firstly introduced by Shadruddin al-Qunawi (d. 637 H/1274 M) and mostly
repeated by Ibn Sab„in (d. 646 H/1248 M) and Afifuddin at-Tilimsani (d. 690 H/1291).
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.
Ibn Arabi‟s ideas have been disseminated via commentaries on his work and by his disciples
such as Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi (d. 1274). His doctrines were taken up in Persia by the great
Sufis Abd al-Karim al-Jili (d. 1417), the Imam Shadhili, and Jalal ad-Din Rumi. Through
them his teachings extended to all parts of Islam. And trough Muhammad ibn Fadl Allah al-
Burhanpûrî (d. 1029), the teaching of Ibn Arabi widely extended to the South Asia. In
Nusantara the Ibn Arabi‟s teaching has been introduced and analyzed by Sufi scholar, such
as: Hamzah Fansuri, Shamsuddin al-Sumatrani, „Abd al-Shamad al-Palimbani, Dawûd al-
Fathânî, Muhammad Nafîs al-Banjârî, and others. And today, some Sufi Orders, notably
the Bektashi sect and the non-traditional sects ofUniversal Sufism, place much emphasis on
the concept of wahdatul wujud.
WAHDATUL WUJUD AND ITS RELATION WITH THE CONCEPT OF ISLAMIC
TAUHID
Tashbih (the declaration of similarity) and Tanzih (the declaration of incomparability)
The contents of Islamic faith, roughly speaking, become the specialty of Kalam, Sufism, and
Philosophy groups of scholars. While the kalam specialists focused on God and His
attributes, the philosophers focused on reality itself. And in practical, every form in which
Islamic philosophy developed, tawhid was an underlying theme.
Ihsan is to do what is beautiful is to worship God as if you see Him, because if you do not see
Him, He sees you. The attitude demanded by ihsan may be dominated by tanzih or by
tashbih, or it may combine the two qualities in equal measure. Here Ibn Arabi explains that
this is only a manner of speaking. In fact those characters are all latent within human beings
because of the divine form, but they belong to God, and as long as people remain heedless of
their own nature, the divine qualities within them will not become manifest in proper
harmony and balance.
Theoretical Sufism offers a vision of tawhid based on unveiling, firmly grounded in the
Qur‟anic revelation, and in many of its manifestation, respectful toward, though not
enthusiastic about, rational investigation. And Ibn Arabi considered that Sufism is to assume
God‟s character traits as one‟s own (takhalluq bi akhlaq Allah). The doctrine ofWahdatul
Wujud asserts that everything that exists can only exist because it is an aspect of Divine
Reality, hence an aspect of Divine Unity itself. However, Sufi scholars assert that
although Wahdatul Wujud may be interpreted that Sufism see the face of God everywhere, it
does not mean that it has reduced God to everything. God remains supremely transcendent,
even though everything which arises and exists resembles him (tashbih). He resembles
nothing but himself (tanzih).
Those who uphold the teaching of wahdatul wujud distinguish three modes of tawhid:
1. Tawhid al-af’al (oneness or unity of the Agent): Meaning that, of every act, the sole and
only, the absolute, Agent is God. It follows from this view that there is no need to look for
any cause for whatever exists or happens in the universe; everything everywhere is directly
the work of God. (Since we dealt with the issue of kasb (the performance or doing of acts)
and khalq (the createdness of acts), matters pertaining tokalam, in the questions related to
destiny. Those who argue for tawhid al-af’al cite the following verses to support their view:
But God has created you and what you do. (Saffat 37:96) . . . All is from God . . . (Nisa 4:78)

2. Tawhid al-sifat (oneness or unity of the Subject): Meaning that of all predicates the sole
and only Subject is God. According to this view, all volition, all forces and powers, all
knowledge and faculties, belong to God only; they are an intelligible expression, or a work,
or a realized state of Him.

3. Tawhid al-dhat (also, tawhid al-wujud) (oneness or unity of Essence or of Being): Meaning
that in essence all existence is One; and everything visible or knowable around us, other than
Him, is a manifestation and disclosure of Him in certain states.

Given that such a view of tawhid, as noted above, is the result of an inward state or direct,
inward experience (dhawq), many scholars do not consider the subject amenable to rational
discussion. In fact, when existents and events are not referred ultimately to God and His
Names, it is impossible to explain them fully. That is acknowledged by all people of sound
learning who reflect seriously and pursue their reflections fully. There is considerable
similarity between the understanding of tawhid of those who use rational methods of inquiry,
and those who follow the disciplines of Sufism.
Reasons understand tanzih, and without tanzih there can be no Islam and no servant, and
hence there can be no tashbih and no vicegerent. But imagination allows for the realization of
tashbih. Excessive stress upon tashbih leads people to serve many objects and concern or to
serve their own egos in place of God. In either case this is shirk, the loss of tawhid. The net
result of focusing too much on tashbih is practically the same as paying exclusive attention to
tanzih.

Moreover, the major issue that immerges in the tasawwuf falasafi discourse is wahdatul
wujud or wujudiyah. This doctrine centered on the teaching of universe and human being
creation through the God appearance in seven dignities (martabat). This concept, later, known
as the theory of seven dignities that consist of ahadiyah, wahdah, wahidiyah, alam mitsal,
alam arwah, alam ajsam, and insan kamil.
Ahadiyah is the haqiqa of Allah; the dignity of Dhat Allah and wahdah are called Haqiqa
Muhammadiyah or the attributes of Allah; wahidiyah is the haqiqa of insan: Adam `alaih al-
Salam and all human being or asma Allah; alam arwah is the haqiqa of all souls; alam mitsal
is the haqiqa of all shapes; alam ajsam is the haqiqa of all body; and insan is the haqiqa of all
human being. Whereas, martabat ahadiyah, wahdah and wahidiyah areanniyyat Allah, alam
arwah, alam mitsal, alam ajsam and alam insan are martabatanniyyat al-makhluq.
THE CRITICS TOWARD IBN ‘ARABI

Among the scholars condemning Ibn `Arabi as an innovator or even an outright heretic
(zindiq) and disbeliever because of Fusûs al-Hikam: Ibn `Abd al-Salam, al-Jazari, Sharaf al-
Din ibn al-Muqri, Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi, Sa`d al-Din al-Taftazani, Jamal al-Din
Muhammad ibn Nur al-Din, Siraj al-Din al-Bulqini who supposedly ordered his books burnt,
Burhan al-Din al-Biqa`i, Ibn Taymiyya, and his student al-Dhahabi.
The Hanafi shaykh `Ala‟ al-Din al-Bukhari, like Ibn al-Muqri, went so far as to declare
anyone who did not declare Ibn `Arabi a disbeliever to be himself a disbeliever. This is the
same `Ala‟ al-Din al-Bukhari who said that anyone that gives Ibn Taymiyya the title Sheikh
al-Islam is a disbeliever. And some other scholars label him as liberalist and pluralist.[16]
Ibn Taymiyya attacked the idea of emanation not only in its philosophical but also in its
mystical context, as adopted by the Sufis. He felt that the beliefs and practices of the Sufis
were far more dangerous than were the ideas of the philosophers. The latter were a small elite
group that had little direct effect on the masses. The Sufis, however, were widespread and
had a large popular following. However, Ibn Taymiyya saw a link between the ideas of the
philosophers and those of the Sufis, even though apparently they had little in common.

The main tenet of Sufi thought as propounded by Ibn al-„Arabi is the concept of the oneness
of existence (wahdatul wujud). Through this belief, Sufis think they are able to effect a
merging of their souls with God‟s essence. That is, when God reveals his truth to an
individual, that person realizes that there is no difference between God and the self. Ibn
Taymiyya saw a link between the Sufi belief of wahdatul wujud and the philosophical
concept of emanation. Although the philosopher would deny that a human soul could flow
into, and thus be, the First Cause, the mystical experience of the Sufis took them beyond the
realm of intellectual discourse. According to the mystic, a merging occurred but could not be
expressed in rational terms. For Ibn Taymiyya, both the philosopher and the mystic were
deluded, the former by reliance on a limited human intellect and the latter by excessive
emotions.
Ibn Taymiyya‟s argument against the Sufis is on two levels. First, there is the theological
position that God has attributes and that one of these attributes is God as creator. Ibn
Taymiyya believed that the Qur‟an firmly establishes that God is the one who created,
originated and gave form to the universe. Thus there exists a distinction between God the
creator and the created beings. This is an absolute distinction with no possibility of merging.
He then went on to say that those who strip God of his attributes and deny that he is the
creator are just one step away from falling into the belief of wahdatul wujud. This is the basis
for the second part of his argument. Ibn Taymiyya believed that a Sufi is simply someone
who is overcome by an outburst of emotion. For example, someone may deny God‟s
attributes but could then be overwhelmed by a feeling of love for God. However, the basis of
that person‟s knowledge is not the authentic information from the Qur‟an, and so their weak
intellectual foundation collapses with the onslaught of emotion. According to Ibn Taymiyya,
sense perception and emotions cannot be trusted, and the likelihood of being led astray by
them is compounded when one has a basis of knowledge which is itself errant and deviant.
One holds a proper belief in God and maintains a proper relationship with him, Ibn Taymiyya
argued, by establishing a foundation of knowledge based on the Qur‟an and authentic sunna.
It is also speculated that the concept of wahdatul wujud could be product of Arab interaction
with Hindu mystics and literature, specifically in reference to the non-dualistic teachings of
the Upanishads, which preaches very similar concepts in regards to reality being
an illusion and the only true existence being Brahman. Furthermore, there are some other
critics on wahdatul wujud of Ibn Arabi. They argue that wahdatul wujud is similar to
pantheism.

WAHDATUL WUJUD (PANTHEISM)

The English word Pantheism means all is God that emphasizes that there is just a single being
in existence and this single being is God. One of prominent sufis who always been associated
with pantheism after Mansur Al-Hallaj is Ibn Arabi. Ibn Arabi‟s works are confused a lot
with Pantheist philosophy. That is why it is quite common to see even some Muslims
attacking to his works by introducing him as a disbeliever to the world. In fact the ones who
know his work will know that Wahdatul Wujud imputed to Ibn Arabi in his works, is nothing
to do with Pantheism. We may argue that wahdatul wujud may be closer to panentheism,
because it states that while the Universe is part of God or God‟s mind, God is still greater
than his creation.

WAHDATUL WUJUD and WAHDAT UL SHAHOOD

(Difference between Wahdat ul Wajood and Wahdatul Shahud)

According to some Sufis, such an understanding of tawhid is the result of that stage or degree
of union with God (maqam al-jam). But this is firstly a matter of ‘irfan, and then a matter of
experience or tasting (dhawq). In this degree, attributing real existence to things could not but
be contradictory to the Sufis‟ visions (mushahadat). That is why, to
acknowledge asbab (causes) in that state would be, in a sense, to acknowledge an associate
with God (i.e. to do shirk). On the other hand, to deny the asbab without really attaining such
a degree of consciousness, without really experiencing it fully, is hypocrisy and a merely
theoretical assertion. Therefore, one who denies union (jam’) is considered „irfan-less
(unknowing, unperceiving) and one who denies the difference between God and humankind
(farq) which the Sufi overcomes in the experience of jam’ is considered far away from the
secrets of servanthood to God. The mature person is one who comfortably accepts
both farq and jam’, each in its necessary place.
The second group comprises those who argue an absolute wahdatul wujud. For them Being is
One, which is nothing other than God. The multiplicity of the visible is only imaginary or
illusory. While wahdatul wujud is for the sufiyya a matter of affective state (hal) or direct
experience (dhawq), the mutasawwifa seem to hold to it as an established conviction and
philosophy.
As long as any believer in wahdatul wujud accepts his own answerability to God, his
servanthood to God, it means that he is acknowledging the difference of ‘amir (the superior)
and ma’mur (the subordinate). After acknowledging subordination, to insist literally on unity
of wujud is sheer self-contradiction. And, bar a few unbelievers who reject servanthood, no
believer has ever dared to reject servanthood to God. Therefore, whereas the understanding
of wahdatul wujud of the sufiyya—which in reality concerns wahdat ul shuhud (the unity or
oneness of witnessing)—is a result of the affective state in Sufism, istighraq (absorption in
ecstatic contemplation, beatitude), and of a lack of words and phrases to express what they
feel, the understanding of wahdatul-wujud of some of the mutasawwifa derives from the
frailty and insufficiency of rendering in philosophical concepts and arguments what the Sufi
experiences as inward consciousness and witnessing.
For proponents of Tawhid Shuhudi or Wahdatul Shuhud, the perception of the one Being
does not negate the existence of other beings as it does in Wahdatul Wujud. The Sufi in other
words sees only One Being but is cognizant of the fact that there are other beings in existence
as well. Wahdatul Shuhud does not necessitate the denial of the existence of other beings.
Thus the seeing of one Being is a mere subjective observation of the Sufi. The defining
feature of Wahdatul Shuhud is the recognition that God is above and beyond his creation and
therefore transcendent, not imminent as he is in Wahdatul Wujud. God therefore is One
Being who is distinct from his creations. He creates by the power of His words, not Ta‟aayun
as suggested by proponents of the doctrine of Wahdatul Wujud. The concept of wahdatul
shuhud was given by Sirhindi. He maintains that the world is not God but proceeds from God
and has an existence independent of the Divine Being, but that it is only an illusory existence.
In reality Sirhindi also asserts that there is only One Real Being who is God. The created
world being imaginary is therefore not of the same Divine essence. In Sirhindi‟s view, the
world is in essence non- existent and therefore unreal.
Perhaps, the distinctions between the doctrines of Wahdatul Wujud and Wahdatul Shuhud
can be better understood through a discussion of the concepts of “fana” and “baqa”. Fana and
baqa are both stages in the mystical experience. “fana billah” is understood as merging with
the Divine Essence or unification with God. Or the “existence of the self in God”. This is the
first stage in the mystical experience and only a stepping stone toward the ultimate goal of
attaining “baqa billah” or “eternal life in union with God”. When fana is experienced by the
mystic, he forgets himself but when he reaches the stage of experiencing “baqa” he regains
some of his individuality and therefore the distinction between him and the Divine again
becomes apparent to him.