One becomes absent from their dhikr (dhikr, remembrance of God), from the existence of what is present, from their maḥbūb (beloved), from their love, and from their mushāhada (direct witnessing) of what is witnessed.
Although there is a distinction among these meanings, the state of such a person is called sukr (spiritual intoxication). Love dominates the qalb (qalb, the heart) until one becomes absent and annihilated (fanāʾ) through it; istilām (overwhelming love), maḥw (obliteration), and jamʿ (union) also occur.
It becomes dominant to witness what one loves and remembers. Thus, one unites and merges with it, to the extent that one may even mistake it for oneself.
The following story illustrates this state: When a person's beloved threw themselves into the water, the lover also threw themselves in after them. When the beloved asked, "Why did you jump into the water?" the lover replied, "I became lost in you, so I thought you were me." A person in this ḥāl (ḥāl, spiritual state), upon regaining their senses, realizes their error, and the ḥaqāʾiq (ḥaqīqa, inner realities) begin to be distinguished within themselves. The Lord is the Lord, and the servant is the servant. The Creator is distinct from the created. Accordingly, there is nothing of the created in His essence, nor of His essence in the created. However, in the state of sukr, maḥw, istilām, and fanāʾ, one becomes absent from this distinction (is unaware of this separation). In this state, some of the utterances of certain people of ḥāl, which would be considered deviant if said in a state of sobriety, are of the type known as shaṭaḥāt (ecstatic utterances). Yet, when distinction and consciousness return, this state disappears, so why should one be held accountable for such words? There is a praiseworthy, a blameworthy, and a pardonable form of fanāʾ. The fanāʾ that is praised is that of one who ceases to love, fear, hope in, rely upon, or seek help from anyone other than Allah, so that both outwardly and inwardly the servant turns to Allah alone. The absence of consciousness and knowledge to the extent that one cannot distinguish oneself from others is never praiseworthy and is not considered a quality of kamāl (kamāl, spiritual perfection). Therefore, it is neither desired nor commanded. Rather, the aim of its possessor is to see realities as they are, in accordance with knowledge and ḥikma (ḥikma, wisdom), so that the intellect can bear distinction and assign every station its due, and to be excused for not being strong enough to distinguish between the Eternal and the contingent, or between worship and the One worshipped. For this reason, one reduces worship to its levels, observes its degrees, gives each level its due of servitude, and witnesses that they have fulfilled it. (Bughyat, 28)
Nihāyāt (final stations), maʿrifa (maʿrifa, gnosis), fanāʾ, baqāʾ (baqāʾ, subsistence in God), taḥqīq (realization), talbīs (talbīs, spiritual confusion), wujūd (existence), tajrīd (tajrīd, abstraction), tafrīd (tafrīd, isolation), jamʿ (union), and tawḥid (tawḥid, the oneness of God) are all included. (Rihla, 207)
The leading figures of the Sufiyya (Sufi masters) have warned that there are dangers related to tawḥid in the maqām (maqām, spiritual station) of jamʿ. For in this state of absence, when the rūḥ (rūḥ, the spirit) overcomes, the tawḥid of aḥadiyya (absolute oneness) becomes a source of fear, as seen in the case of Ḥallāj and others.
Shaykh Maḥmūd Abū Shāmmāt said: In this station, it is feared that the sālik (sālik, spiritual traveler) may fall into and flounder in the mud of tawḥid. This occurs in many cases, as has been heard from various sources.