This letter, written for
Muhammad Sâdiq, a son of Khwâja Muhammad Mu’min, provides information on
wahdat-i-wujûd [pantheism]:
I offer my hamd to
Allâhu ta’âlâ. I pray to Him to give salvation to His slaves whom He likes and
has chosen! You ask: “People of Tasawwuf talk about wahdat-i-wujûd. Scholars,
on the other hand, say that that expression is kufr (disbelief, unbelief) and
that a person who holds that belief becomes a zindiq. However, both of the
groups are Ahl as Sunnat Muslims. What would you say about that?”
My dear child! I have
explained this matter at length in my various letters and booklets. I have
said that the two groups differ only in words. However, since you, too, ask,
the question has to be answered. I am willy-nilly writing
a few words. You should know that the Awliyâ who belong to the group of (great
Awliyâ called)
Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya and who say, “Wahdat-i-wujûd is a fact. We see Allâhu ta’âlâ in everything, and
everything is Him,” do not mean to say that everything has been united with
Haqq ta’âlâ or that He is not separate from everything or that He is similar to
everything or that He has existed with this ’âlam or that He is seen now.
Saying so would make a person a disbeliever, a zindiq, an atheist. Allâhu ta’âlâ is not united with His
creatures. He is not the same as they are. He is not similar to them. He always
existed, and He is always so. No change ever takes place in His Person (the
Dhât-i-ilâhî), in His Attributes, or in His Names. Neither do they change when
He creates something. He is not similar to His creatures in any respect. His
existence is necessary. Anything other than Him may or may not exist; it will
make no difference. Those great people’s saying, “Everything is Him,” means,
“Nothing (other than Him) exists. He, alone, exists.” As a matter of fact,
Hallâj-i-Mansûr ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihi’, (martyred by execution in 306
[919 A.D.], in Baghdâd,) said, “Ana-l-Haqq [I
am
Haqq].” His purpose in saying so was not to mean that he is Haqq or that he has
been united with Haqq ta’âlâ. A person who said so would become a disbeliever
and would deserve to be killed. The meaning of his statement was: “I do
not exist;
Allâhu ta’âlâ does.” As is seen, the Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya know everything as the appearance, the mirror of the Names and Attributes of
Allâhu ta’âlâ. They do not say that His Dhât [He Himself] has united with them or that changes have taken place in His Dhât. For instance, a person’s shadow
is a phenomenon that takes place owing to his existence. It cannot be said that the shadow has united with that person or that the shadow is the same thing as
that person or that that person has crouched on the ground to assume the shape of the shadow. That person exists by himself. The shadow is merely an appearance
from him. Someone who loves that person excessively will not even notice the shadow or anything else other than that person. So he may say that the shadow is
the same as that person, which means that the shadow does not exist and that that person alone exists. Then, the Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya’s saying that “Everything is
Him,” has been intended to say that “Everything comes from Him,” which in turn is the very thing said by scholars. The two groups do not differ. Only, whereas
the Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya say that other things are the appearance of Haqq ta’âlâ, scholars avoid saying so lest it should be construed as a state of unity with
those things or being contained in those things.
Question: Not only do the
Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya say that things are
the appearance of Haqq ta’âlâ, but they
also argue that nothing other than Allâhu ta’âlâ exists in the outside. Scholars, on the other hand, hold the
knowledge that things also exist, in the outside. Then, don’t the two groups
differ in their knowledge as well as in the words they use?
Answer: When the Sôfiyya say
that nothing exists in the outside, they mean to say that things exist in the
outside in a nature termed wujûd-i-wahmî (existence at the level of imagination). They do not argue that
things do not exist at all in the outside. They say that there is
kethret-i-wahmiyya (plurality at the level of imagination) in the outside.
However, this apparent wujûd-i-wahmîin the outside is unlike the wujûd, i.e. existence, which takes
place in our fancy, imagination, and thoughts. That is, supposing we stopped
our imagination and fancy; the beings there would disappear and cease to exist.
On the other hand, because the imaginary beings at the level of wujûd-i-wahmîin this universe are
not in our imagination and fancy, for they are (separate) creatures of Allâhu ta’âlâ which exist with His
kâmil [infinite] Power, they do not cease to exist. They continue to exist. It
is on this existence do the eternal happenings in the Hereafter depend.
Sophists, a school of ancient Greek philosophy notorious for their fallacies
and casuistries, supposed that the universe was a mere fancy, a phantasm. “Were
it not for our imagination, nothing would exist. Existence of things is
dependent on our imagination; nothing actually exists. Heavens would be the
earth if we accepted them to be so, and the earth would be heavens if we
believed it to be so. Sweets would be bitter if we deemed them to be so, and
bitter things would be sweet if we knew them so,” they said. Those idiots
denied the Creator, Who has Will and Option. They went wrong, misguiding many
other people as well. The Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya hold the knowledge that things
exist in the outside in a nature termed wujûd-i-wahmî. Such wujûd (existence)
is continuous. That is, it would not cease to exist if our imagination ceased
to exist. They know that the eternal life in the Hereafter will revolve around
this existence. Scholars hold the knowledge that things exist in the outside.
They say that the endless life in the Hereafter will be in accordance to these
things. However, in their view, existence of things in the outside is weak and
powerless, a mere nothing when compared with the existence of Haqq ta’âlâ. As
is seen, both groups say that things exist in the outside. Both of them say
that happenings in this world and in the Hereafter are based on this existence.
They say that it will not cease to exist when imagination
-303-
ceases to exist. Only, the
Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya say that this existence is wahmî (imaginary). For, those
people, (i.e. the Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya,) see nothing as they progress in a path of
Tasawwuf. There is nothing but the existence of Allâhu ta’âlâ in their sight. Scholars, on the other
hand, avoid calling those existences ‘wahmî’ because they fear that ignorant
people may misunderstand them and fall into a state a misconception that those
existences will cease to exist when imagination ceases to exist, in the
aftermath of which lurks the horrifying danger of denying the eternal, endless
torment and felicity.
Question: By saying that things
exist at a level of imagination (wujûd-i-wahmî), the Sôfiyya argue that their
existence is imaginative and not real, although they admit that it is a
perpetual existence. Scholars say that things exist in the outside, i.e. in
actual fact. Doesn’t that mean difference between them?
Answer: Since the wujûd-i-wahmî, the appearance in imagination, would not cease to exist if fancy and
imagination ceased to exist, it should be existent actually. For, this existence is perpetual. It will not cease to exist if all the fancies cease to exist,
which in turn means real existence. Only, the real existence of creatures is like non-existence, like fancy and imagination, when compared with the real
existence of Allâhu ta’âlâ, who is Wajib-ul-wujûd (indispensable existence). Hence, the two groups do not differ.
Question: When the
wujûd-i-wahmî of things is real, there will be two real existences, which in
turn is contradictory to wahdat-i-wujûd. Doesn’t wahdat-i-wujûd mean unity of
existence?
Answer: Both existences are real.
There are also two realities existent: [Creator and creatures.] However, it is
not in the same respect that either existence is real. For, when a person’s
image appears in a mirror, an object does not actually exist in the mirror. The
image seen is neither on the mirror, nor in the mirror. The image in the mirror
exists in our imagination. It is a wujûd-i-wahmî and imaginary appearance which
is not a dream. It actually exists. If a person says that he has seen, say,
Ahmad in the mirror, reason and convention will believe him. He will not be
sinful if he swears (that he has seen Ahmad in the mirror). As is seen, Ahmad
is not actually in the mirror. In respect of fancy and imagination, his being
in the mirror is real as well. However, whereas the former is real in every
respect, the latter is real with respect to fancy and imagination. It is a
marvel that fancy and imagination, which are
-304-
the opposites of reality, are in this case causes that make an
existence real. For, the image in the mirror would not be real if we did not
add the phrase “with respect to fancy and imagination.” A second example is the
nuqta-i-jewwâla, [i.e. a dot turning
fast with a circular movement.] Fancy and imagination see it as a circle in the
outside. In actual fact there is not a circle. There is a dot. Yet, with
respect to fancy and imagination, existence of a circle in the outside is real.
However, whereas the dot’s existence in the outside is real in every respect,
existence, in the outside, of the circle, which is consequent upon the
(rotation of the) dot, is real only in respect of fancy and imagination. By the
same token, the wahdat-i-wujûd is real in every respect. Plurality of
creatures, on the other hand, is real with respect to fancy and imagination. Of
the two existences, the former is real ‘in all respects’, while the latter is
so ‘in one respect only’. There is no contradiction.
Question: Why doesn’t
something that exists with respect to fancy and imagination cease to exist when
fancy and imagination cease to exist?
Answer: Why should that
wujûd-i-wahmî cease to exist together with fancy (and imagination), while it is
not something that has come into being from fancy (and imagination)? Allâhu ta’âlâ has created them,
(i.e. creatures, which are wujûd-i-wahmî,) at the level of wahm (fancy and
imagination). Yet they have been (created so as to be) established and
perpetual. They have been called ‘wujûd-i-wahmî’ because Allâhu ta’âlâ created them at the
level of wahm. Whatsoever the level (they have been created at), even if it is
the level of unreal beings, it is real that they exist at that level, since Allâhu ta’âlâ has created them. To
say that
Allâhu ta’âlâ has created those things at the level of perception and fancy
means to say that the level at which He has created those things is such as
exists only in perception and fancy. It does not exist in the outside. For
instance, a conjurer pratises tricks whereby things that are actually
non-existent appear as if they existed. He conjures up ten objects in the place
of one. The ten objects do not actually exist. They exist only at the level of
perception and fancy. There is only one object actually existent. If those ten
apparent objects gain strength and perpetuity owing to the endless power of Allâhu ta’âlâ and under His dominant
protection against evanescence, then their existence will become real at that
level. Now the ten objects will be both existent and non-existent, actually.
This ambivalence, however, ensues from two different settings considered.
Accordingly, if the level of perception and fancy is not
-305-
taken into consideration, they are non-existent. With perception and fancy kept in nonsideration they are existent. There is a tale widely known
in India. In an Indian city conjurers entertaining the people in the presence of their Pâdishâh (King, Sultân) conjure up orchards and trees in a mirror. They
make these actually non-existent trees appear to grow and yield fruits. They pick some of the fruits and offer them to the Sultân and to the spectators to eat.
Thereupon the Sultân orders that they be killed. So they are killed. For, he has heard, according to the story, that if the conjurers are killed during the
performance the tricks being watched will remain as they are and will not disappear, with the power of
Allâhu ta’âlâ. When the conjurers are killed the trees remain as they are in the mirror. The story says that the trees have stayed in the mirror and the
fruits have been being eaten by people ever since. Aside from whether the story is completely or partly true or false, we have narrated it here for the purpose
of adding clarity to our discourse.
In the outside and in reality, there is no existence other than (that of)
Allâhu ta’âlâ. Allâhu ta’âlâ, with His Power, has shown the kamâlât of His Names and Attributes on the screen of the images of the
mumkînât, (i.e. dispensable beings, creatures;) in other words, He has created the things at the level of perception and fancy and in a manner compatible with
His kamâlât. Thus, creation appears in fancy and continues to exist in imagination. Then, creation exists because it appears in imagination. However, since Allâhu ta’âlâ has made that appearance perpetual, given firmness to the
construction of His creatures that He has protected against annihilation, and
made His eternal treatment dependent upon them, the existence in fancy and its
perpetuity in imagination have become real. Therefore, we say that creation
actually [not only in knowledge and in imagination] exists in the outside, in
one respect; and that it is nonexistent in another respect. This faqîr’s
father, (’Abd-ul-Ahad ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’, 927 - 1007 [1598 A.D.],
Serhend,) was one of the scholars who had attained to (the grade termed)
Haqîqat. He ‘quddisa sirruh’ related: Qâdî Jalâl-ad-dîn Eghrî ‘rahmatullâhi
ta’âlâ ’alaih’ was a profound scholar. One day he asked me, “Is nafs-ul-emr
(real existence) wahdat (unity) or kethret (plurality)? That is, is there only
one real existence, or more than one? If there is only one, who are all those commandments,
thawâbs (rewards), and ’adhâbs (torments) for? And why should there be a
commander and one to perform the commandment? If there are more than one, then
the Sôfiyya-i-’aliyya must be wrong in their saying that there is
wahdat-i-wujûd.”
-306-
My father answered as follows: “Both of them are nafs-i-emr.” In
other words, both the wahdat and the kethret are the case, actually. My blessed
father added an explanation for their answer. Yet I
do not
remember their exact words now. I have written for you
the pieces of information made to flow into this faqîr’s heart. That means to
say that those people of Tasawwuf who say that there is the wahdat-i-wujûd are
right. Also right and correct is the scholars’ saying that there is the
kethret-i-wujûd. The state in which the people of Tasawwuf are, goes with the
wahdat-i-wujûd, whereas the state the scholars are in harmonizes with the
kethret-i-wujûd. For, Islam has been established on the kethret-i-wujûd. The
various (Islamic) commandments are applicable with the kethret-i-wujûd. Prophets’
‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’ mission, blessings in Paradise, and
torment in Hell are dependent on the kethret-i-wujûd. Since Allâhu ta’âlâ has declared, “I have liked being known,” opted for the kethret-i-wujûd, and liked to be known, we have to believe in the level of kethret, too! For, this level has been chosen and liked
by Allâhu ta’âlâ. A great Sultân will have both servants and soldiers. His greatness will be judged by the multitude of the people who beg him, tremble with the
fear of him, need him. The wahdat-i-wujûd has more of the truth, while the kethret-i-wujûd is more of a metaphor in comparison. That is, it is similar to
reality. For that matter, that ’âlam has been called the ’âlam-i-haqîqat (world of reality,
truth), while this ’âlam has been termed the ’âlam-i-mejâz (world of analogy).
However, because Allâhu ta’âlâ has liked that (imaginal) appearance and perpetuated the
existence of (created) things and clothed His Power with hikmat and concealed
His work under causes, that haqîqat (truth, reality) has remained in the
secondary place, with the figurative existence dominating the foreground. What
exists in actual fact is the noqta-i-jewwâla (revolving dot). The circle that
appears as a result of its revolution is the figurative existence. However, the
actual existence (haqîqat) has disappeared and the figurative existence (mejâz)
has become seen and known.
You ask about the
meaning of the statement, “If Allâhu ta’âlâ loves a slave of His, sinning will not harm that slave.” You
should know that if Allâhu ta’âlâ loves a slave of His He will protect him against sinning. Yes.
Such people may be sinful. That is, they are not like Prophets
‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’. For, Prophets have been protected against sinning; they have been immunized
against sinning; they cannot commit sins. Likewise, because the Awliyâ will not
be able to commit sins, they have been
-307-
protected against the harm of sins. The ‘sinning’ used in that
statement may have been intended for the sins committed earlier, before the
grade of Wilâyat was attained. For, Islam eradicates one’s former sins. Allâhu ta’âlâ knows the true essence
of all things. Yâ Rabbî! Please do forgive us for what we have said and done as
a result of forgetfulness or mistakenness! Please do not punish us for them!
May Allâhu
ta’âlâ bless
you and other people in the right way with salvation! Âmîn.