Scholars who held opinions on this matter differed regarding the reality of wahdat al-wujūd (the oneness of being) and the gnostics (ʿārifūn) who have attained it and advocated for it. Some of them hastily claimed that the proponents of wahdat al-wujūd were in kufr (disbelief) and misguidance, misunderstanding their words outside of their intended meaning. Another group of these scholars, however, did not go to extremes in attacking them; instead, they sought to ascertain their states and approached them in order to understand their intent. For although the gnostics possessed extensive knowledge on this matter, they did not undertake research to resolve the disagreement among these scholars. This is because they discussed and wrote about these matters for themselves and their disciples, not for those who had not witnessed the unity themselves! In this situation, there was a need for the explanations of knowledgeable scholars so that the hearts of the people of submission could be at ease.
Some scholars examined this issue and understood their intent. One of them, Sayyid Mustafa Kemal al-Sharif (may Allah have mercy on him), taking this situation into consideration, says: “Existence (wujūd, the attribute of being of Allah) is one. For it is an essential attribute of the Exalted Truth (al-Ḥaqq), Glorified and Exalted is He, and it is necessary (wājib). Multiplicity is not valid. That which exists is contingent (mumkin) and is the world. In reality, the multiplicity of the world is valid. Allah’s subsistence is by the attribute of wujūd, which is necessary for His essence. Whenever the existent (mawjūd) ceases to be, wujūd itself remains as it is. The existent is other than wujūd. It is not valid to divide wujūd into eternal (qadīm) and originated (ḥādith). However, if we use the second wujūd as a verbal noun in the passive sense, that is, if by wujūd we mean the existent, then it is valid. In this case, the warning mentioned by the scholars regarding wahdat al-wujūd does not arise. The people of reality (ahl al-ḥaqīqa) say this. After these statements, he says: “The senses perceive only forms, that is, things that exist. The spirit (rūḥ) bears witness only to wujūd (the being of Allah). Whenever it bears witness to the existent, it is only bearing witness to the second.” As someone said: “Whatever I saw, before it I saw Allah.” Here, by ‘seeing’ (ruʾya), he means witnessing (shuhūd), not seeing with the eyes! For seeing is a property of the eye, while witnessing is a property of seeing with basīra (the eye of the heart). Thus, it has been transmitted, for example: “I bear witness that there is no deity illā Allah,” meaning, I bear witness that there is no true object of worship except Allah. However, it has not been transmitted to say: “I see that there is no deity except Allah.” Perhaps even the word ‘I see’ (arā) is not valid in this context.[2]
Thus, the fair-minded scholars were careful and defended the noble sharia (sharīʿa garrāʾ). They acted cautiously and did not hastily accuse any of the believers of kufr. They referred to experts in understanding the reality. For some scholars have attached great importance to the matter of wahdat al-wujūd, and many minds have been preoccupied with it. We, too, wishing to serve the sharia and to illuminate understanding, say for the sake of clarification and simplification that wujūd is of two kinds:
The first: The eternal and pre-existent wujūd. This is necessary (wājib) and belongs exclusively to the Exalted Truth, Glorified and Exalted is He. Allah, the Most High, says in Sūrat al-Ḥajj 22:6:
“Indeed, Allah is the Truth.” That is, the established Wujūd al-Ḥaqq is certainly He Himself.
The second: The possible, accidental, and contingent wujūd: that is, the existence of created things other than Allah.
As for wahdat al-wujūd, it is understood that existence is one, and that is the Exalted Truth. This can have two meanings: one is correct, the other is kufr. Thus, those who speak about wahdat al-wujūd are of two groups.
The first group: By the phrase wahdat al-wujūd, they mean that the Creator and the created are one. They say that in existence there is nothing but Allah, “Allah is everything, and everything is He.” He is the very essence of things, and in everything there is a verse indicating His essence. This statement and view is kufr and heresy. In fact, this misguidance is more severe than the false views of the Jews, Christians, and idolaters.
Indeed, the Sufis (ṣūfiyya) strongly reject these. They issued fatwas declaring them to be in kufr and warned people against attending their gatherings. The gnostic of Allah, Abū Bakr Muḥammad Bannānī (may Allah have mercy on him), says: “O my brother! Beware of sitting with those who say there is nothing but Allah and are carried away by the desires of their nafs (lower self). This is manifest heresy. For if a true gnostic has a sound understanding in sharia and ḥaqīqa (inner reality), when he says ‘There is no one here but Allah,’ his intent by this phrase cannot be to neglect obligations and abolish the sharia! Far be it from Allah that a perfect believer would intend such a thing!”[3]
The second group: They also said that these aforementioned things are false and kufr, and said: “The Creator is the same as the created.” By wahdat al-wujūd, they meant the unity of the eternal and pre-existent wujūd, that is, Allah. By these words, they did not mean the existence of accidental (non-essential) and multiple things. Knowing that these existences are not essential, they said that their existence is metaphorical, and in reality, they have neither harm nor benefit. The cosmos is not perpetual in itself, but is destined to perish and vanish in an instant. In this regard, Allah, the Most High, says in Sūrat al-Qaṣaṣ 28:88:
“Everything will be destroyed except His Face.” He manifested existence by creation and affirmed it by sustaining. For the cosmos is established by His affirmation (will), and is annihilated by the oneness of His essence. Only the secret of Allah’s sustaining (qayyūmiyya) upholds it. Those who hold this view are also divided into two groups:
1. They arrived at this understanding through belief and proof, and then attained this reality through taste and direct witnessing (mushāhada). Witnessing (shuhūd) overcame them. They were immersed in the depths of the oceans of tawhid (the oneness of God) and became annihilated (fanāʾ) in themselves, not perceiving others. Alongside their uprightness in the sharia of Allah, these words of theirs are true.
2. Others considered this to be a certain science based only on words, and busied themselves with reciting its expressions and formulations. They clung to the outward indication of the words, abandoning the witnessing of the Truth and becoming lost in the witnessing of others. Because they found pleasure in these words, the sharia appeared less significant in their eyes. For this reason, they fall headlong and begin to speak outwardly, saying: “The sharia is for the heedless, while the ḥaqīqa (inner reality) is for the people of gnosis (maʿrifa).” I swear that the claim of this group is pure falsehood and slander. For there is only the sharia and the station of ihsan (spiritual excellence).
In any case, in our time it is preferable for the Sufis to avoid such expressions, ambiguous terms, and obscure or suspicious statements that cause people to fall into ill opinion and to avoid interpreting their words outside of their intended meaning. Many among the heretics and those who have mingled with the Sufis have inserted false things into the words of the Sufis. The Sufis must certainly avoid such ambiguous expressions and explanations. The corrupt beliefs they conceal in their hearts, their considering forbidden things as permissible, their pretending not to commit evil and indecency, all serve to confuse the Sufis! For this reason, truth and falsehood become mixed, and sincere believers may end up adopting the remnants and false things of the wicked and the misguided.
For this reason, the Sufis have encompassed their outward and inward states within the framework of the noble sharia. They have also advised their disciples to adhere to the sharia in word, deed, and state. For in their view, the sharia is the entrance and the ladder to union (wuṣla). Whoever turns away from it and deviates will be among those who perish. The words of the Sufis regarding adherence to the sharia have already been mentioned. If you wish, refer to that section.[4]
In conclusion, we say: “Certain scholars and Sufis clarify these transmissions within themselves for the respected reader, so that he may know that the Sufis are free and innocent of things attributed to them such as incarnation (ḥulūl), union (ittiḥād), and wahdat al-wujūd. The ambiguous words of theirs should be interpreted in a manner that is in accordance with the sharia, sound, and in line with the people of sunnah and the community. In reality, they attained these degrees of gnosis only by adhering to the Book and the sunnah. In truth, they are the men of the pious predecessors (salaf al-ṣāliḥīn). For they have realized following the Messenger of God (peace and blessings be upon him). In this way, they have attained the felicity of both worlds and the pleasure of Allah. Allah, the Most High, says in Sūrat al-Nisāʾ 4:69:
“And whoever obeys Allah and the Messenger – those will be with the ones upon whom Allah has bestowed favor of the prophets, the steadfast affirmers of truth, the martyrs and the righteous. And excellent are those as companions!”
Notes
- Ibn Taymiyya, Majmūʿ al-Rasāʾil, p. 52
- ʿAllāma Mustafa Kemal Sharif, Risāla fī Wahdat al-Wujūd, pp. 27–28
- The great gnostic Muḥammad Bannānī, Madārij al-Sulūk ilā Malik al-Mulūk, died 1284 AH
- If you see that there is an ambiguous or suspicious statement established from the words of the prominent Sufis, I distance you from it for two reasons: a) They deemed it necessary to use reformulations, symbols, and allusions so that no one but themselves would understand it. We have indicated this in the section on interpretation. b) Or they uttered these words in states of overpowering spiritual ecstasy (galaba) and ecstatic utterances (shaṭaḥāt). For this reason, it is not permissible for those who have not tasted their delights and not attained their stations to speak these expressions in front of people.
- Ahmad Zarrūq, Qawāʿid al-Taṣawwuf, principle 35, p. 13