Ibn Arabi’s concept of Wahdat –i- Wujud (Unityism)

Ibn Arabi’s concept of Wahdat –i- Wujud (Unityism)

Ibn Arabi is the most exponent and greatest mystic and he is called leader of pantheistic mystics of Muslim world. He has shown great depth, insight and comprehensiveness of argumentation on the subject therefore he is called Shaikh e Akbar in circles of mystics.

Ibn Arabi considered Tauheed as that Being is One and this Being is Allah. Everything else is His manifestation. Hence the World is identical with Allah and this identity is realized on the basis of His Zat o Sifat. The world is only His tajalli (manifestation of His sifat or attributes). According to this the creation of the world is a form of emanation and this theory of emanation was elaborated by later mystics notably – Jami. According to this theory, the Being is indeterminate, it is the stage of La-ta;ayyun (indeterminateness of the unity). In its descent it passes trough the five stages.

The first two are ‘Ilmi or Cognitive and the last three are Khariji (Existential).

1-In the first descent, the unity becomes conscious of itself as pure being, and the consciousness of Sifat is only Ijmali (general)-it is implicit.

2-In the second descent, the Unity becomes conscious of itself as possessing the attributes, and that is the stage of Sifat e tafsili (attributes in details)-it is explicit. These two stages are apparently logical or conceptual rather than actual, for they are out of time, and the distinction of Zat and Sifat or its attributes is only logical. Then began the real actual descents.

3-The third descent therefore is Taayyun –i- ruhi ; the Unity has broken itself up into so many spirits, for examples angels.

4-The fourth of its decents is Taayyun –i-misali (ideal determination), thereby the world of Ideas comes into being.

5-The fifth decent is Taayyun –i-jasdi (physical determination), it yields the phenomenal or physical beings.

These stages are only gradual realization of the capacities that were already hidden in the attributes.

Thus for Ibn Arabi, Zat is identical with Sifat which express in Tajalliyat. Ibn Arabi maintains that Asma –i-Ilahi (divine names) are identical with the Musamma or the named, and it is very being of Allah: and all the Asma-i-Ilahi denote the same entity and whatever is denoted by each name separately is denoted by all of them together. Allah can be remembered and praised with any or with all the names.

Just as He is manifold as regards His Names, and One as regards His being, so He is Ahdiyyat-i-Ma’-qulah like Hayula or ‘matter’ or a conceptual unity as regards His being, and manifolds as regards His existence, because the created beings are nothing but He (Himself) in self-emanation. According to Ibn Arabi, this identification of Asma and Musamma is only another name for the identification of Zat and Sifat, because “Ism” (name) is nothing but the description of the object in virtue of an attribute of the being.

As to the relation between the world and Allah, either from the negation of the world or from the affirmation of Allah, Ibn Arabi holds that it is one of identity.

From the negation of the world: He considers that world as unreal, imaginary and objectively non-existent, and that Allah alone exists. The world or multiplicity exists only as the modes of the Unity-as His modes.

From the side of affirmation of Allah: Ibn Arabi, while proceeding from this side, maintains that the World is Allah. It is the modes in which the Unity has differentiated itself and these modes exhaust the Unity wholly. The Unity has no existence over and above them: there is absolute nothingness beyond these modes and the mystic should not take the trouble of seeking Allah beyond this World.

But the fact is that experience of identity is not permanent hence Ibn Arabi speaks of a new experience called Farq –ba’d-al-jam’ (Difference after identity). Now what really exists: Allah or one may call it world, or one is unable to differentiate between the two?

Ibn Arabi denies transcendence and immanence as these conceptions imply duality of existent. He stresses that if Allah is posited either of one only His infinitude would be lost. Hence Tawheed should be affirmed with Tanzih and Tashbih both. He also holds that Allah is Asl (Thing) and the world is His Zill ,(adumbration) and the latter is appearance of former; Hence the world is identical with Allah.

Allah says, “We are nearer unto him than his life-artery,,” considering the relation between Allah and man, Ibn Arabi deduces that Allah Himself is the very essence of the limbs and parts of man. It is also said that, “He created man after His own image” so Ibn Arabi concludes that man possesses all the attributes of Allah. He further thinks that His attributes that are manifested in man are bodily there in man. He reasons on, “one who comes to cognize his own self comes to cognize his God”. In other words, knowledge of self is knowledge of Allah.

Ibn Arabi’s relates his concept of Wahdat –i-Wajod with his theory of the “Purpose of Creation”, according to which, is the yearning on the part of Allah to know Himself: “I was hidden Treasure; I wished that I should be known, so I created the creatures,,” The yearning to know Himself is the yearning for self-perfection and this consists of expression of His own self through the temporal and eternal qualities that manifest themselves in world-process.

Criticism of Wahdat e Wujud

Tawheed is a characteristic tenet of Islam. In course of time the Islamic mystics gave it to the form of Wahdat e Wujud or unityism. The influence of mysticism permeated so that Wahdat e Wujud became an accepted dogma. It affected religious, moral and aesthetic consciousness of the Muslim World and it became the real meaning of Islam’s teaching.

Ibn Arabi held that in God, Zat-o-Sifat, being the attributes are identical and that the world is the tajjali or emanation of Sifat, these two premises involve Wahdat e Wujud. The revelation, “verily Allah is wholly sufficient unto Himself, He needs none of the words” (Quran 29:5), holds that Sifaat are not identical with the Zat. He is perfect Himself. The attributes, by which He turns so the world and creates it, are other than HIS SELF, and it is also demanded by reason that the attributes must be other than His being.

The world is not a tajjali of the Sifaat of Allah otherwise it would have been identical with them but Sifaat are perfect while the world is full of imperfections. Moreover Quran says, “Thy Lord is holier than the qualities which they ascribe to Him.” ( Quran 37:180). Therefore, it could be established there is no likeness whatsoever between the Divine and the human attributes.

Now, Ibn ‘Arabi starts from the denial of world as such and maintains that ‘A’yaan i saabitah”-the existent essence of the world have not had the slightest touch of reality, and that it is Allah alone exists. It appears that Ibn ‘Arabi is talking at the stage of Fana or annihilation, at this stage mystic begins to deny the existence of everything else and affirms the being of Allah alone. In fact Ibn ‘Arabi does not seem to have realized Fana adequately, for he is aware of the world; that is how could identify it with Allah. Ibn ‘Arabi’s concept of ‘Kashf i sahih‘ (veridical intuition) is also not in accordance with Quran, but it is against it. Allah is wholly other than the world, and that the world exists. Had it not been so, “Awamir o Nawahi”, reward and punishment and life Hereinafter should have become meaningless and they have meaning only if the world really exists. Furthermore, denial of existence of the world is indeed denial of Allah’s attribute of “Ibda’ “. The popular usage of “mawhum” in mystic circles will not solve the purpose as in one sense “mawhum” (it has many meanings) means that the world is simply the invention of our imagination.

The above discussion leads us to conclude that it is impossible to hold that the world does not exist, or that it is identical with Allah.

When Ibn ‘Arabi stresses upon the sole reality of God, he speaks of the stage, “Tajalli –i- Zati”, where a mystic feels that he is directly apprehending the being of God. But the mystic discovers the error after crossing the stage by realizing that God is wholly other and beyond this world and that he cannot approach Him, and that the identity of the world and God was a fabrication of his own mind. Ibn ‘Arabi did not pass beyond this stage therefore he took the world identical with God. Had he outgrown further he would have discovered his error.

Another main aspect of Ibn ‘Arabi’s concept of Wahdat e Wujud is Farq –ba’d al jam’ (difference after identity). This is diametrically opposed to the Quran, as it says, “o ahle Kitab, come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not worship any but Allah and we shall not associate aught with Him, and some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah, but if they turn back then say: ‘bear witness that we are Muslims’.” (3:64) That means that ‘ahle kitab’ worshiped something other than Allah and that things and beings other than Allah there are.

Ibn ‘Arabi has based Wahdat e Wujud on the identity of Asl and Zill. But zill (adumbration) of anything can never be identical with the asl (being). I think no further explanation is needed here.

Ibn ‘Arabi propounded his identity with God, and he based it on the quranic injunctions, “We are nearer unto him than his own life-artery,” and “Allah created man after His own image.”

Certainly, Allah is nearer to us than our life artery, but His Qurb is beyond our comprehension and man is not embodiment of the attributes of the Creator. There is vast difference between man and Allah and simply man and Allah are not identical. Again knowledge of the self is the knowledge of Allah does not mean that therefore the self and Allah are not identical. It only means that one who has fully became conscious of the defects and imperfections in his own nature realizes that values and perfections are possible only through Allah and that Allah is the source and embodiment of all values and perfections.

As to the Purpose of Creation, Ibn ‘Arabi’s position implies that Allah was not perfect in Himself and that He had to depend on the world for His perfections. This is against Quran, as it says, “Verily Allah is sufficient unto Himself and needs no worlds”, “I have not created man and jinn but exclusively for ‘Ibadat, servce.”

On the basis of above discussion we conclude that Ibn ‘Arabi’s theory of Wahdat –i-Wujud is false and condemnable as its doctrines are against the basic tenets of Islam.

Asghar Mehdi.