unity of existence

The article aims to answer the main question, "How is Sheikh Mohammad Javad Khorasani's method of critiquing the doctrine of Unity of Existence analyzed and critiqued?" Addressing this question essentially organizes the most significant aspect of worldview, which is ontology. In this context, the present essay utilizes library resources to analyze and critique Khorasani's methods in critiquing the doctrine of Unity of Existence. After examining and analyzing Khorasani's thoughts on this doctrine, it was concluded that his definition of Unity of Existence is flawed.The results of the critique of the rational method indicate that the existence of arguments for Unity of Existence undermines its indefensibility. Considering the mystics' definition of Unity of Existence and the negation of duality, issues such as the unity of Creator and creation, as well as the influence of creation on the Creator, do not arise; furthermore, the simplicity of God is proven since denying it would imply a composite and contingent existence for God. The objection regarding the validity of all religions is also addressed by asserting that true monotheism is the only religion based on unity. Therefore, none of the mystics claim that all religions are valid.The result of critiquing the transmitted method is that revealed sources not only do not deny Unity of Existence but some sources also indicate its affirmation. The result of critiquing Hafiz's behavior indicates that Khorasani's criticisms are based on a superficial interpretation of his words, and since this interpretation has not been substantiated by historical evidence, it cannot be relied upon. Overall, Khorasani's criticisms appear to be non-ontological and seriously critiqueable, and they are not deemed sufficient to refute the doctrine of Unity of Existence.

The term "negation of negation" is a description Meister Eckhart employs for the "hidden essence of divinity." Through a precise analysis of Eckhart's works, in which he addresses the concept of "negation of negation," it becomes clear that although Eckhart sometimes uses the term "the One"—borrowed from Neoplatonism—as synonymous with "negation of negation," his understanding of "the One" significantly differs from that in Neoplatonism. For Eckhart, "the One" is not only beyond "being" and beings, but also manifests as "negation of negation" throughout the world. Furthermore, a proper understanding of the concept of "negation of negation" can serve as the key to resolving many apparent contradictions in Eckhart's works or conflicting interpretations of his writings. One such contradiction is the issue of the relation of "being" to God. "Negation of negation" teaches us that, for Eckhart, "being" holds two distinct meanings: in one sense, attributing "being" to God is permissible—though not ideal—while in another sense, applying the term "being" to God is nothing but error and a deviation from the truth.

The issue of the unity of existence is one of the key topics in Islamic theology, mysticism, and philosophy. It is the central subject in mystical thought and one of the most controversial issues in the history of Islamic theology and mysticism, even among Western scholars. Almost all other discussions around mysticism and theology in some way return to this issue. Some theologians, such as Mohammad Taher Qomi and Mirlohi, were fundamentally opposed to the ideas of mystics. On the other hand, scholars like Sayyed Haydar Amoli, Feyz Kashani, and Mulla Sadra sought to use mystical theories in interpreting religious texts. The late Allameh Mohammad Baqir Majlisi adopted a middle-ground approach between these two groups of scholars. In his engagement with the leading figures of mysticism, he accepted their mystical interpretations based on the school of the Shiite Imams. This article compares the mystical monotheism of Sayyed Haydar Amoli with the theological monotheism of Allameh Majlisi and attempts to present a coherent and comprehensible understanding of the unity of existence theory.

The Oneness of Being (wahdat al-wujûd), which has a mystical root, has been proposed in the views of mystics and some philosophers. Ibn Arabî and Hegel have made this topic the focus of their discussions with different approaches. Ibn Arabî’s Oneness of Being is not the conceptual unity of being, but rather the unity of the external existence of beings that the mystics have achieved through intuition. According to this theory, there is no more than one true Being, and that is God, and everything that appears to exist other than God is only the determinations, attributes, and manifestations of the same Being. Hegel designs his philosophical system with the concern of finite and infinite connection. In his philosophical system, it is through this finite matter that one can speak concretely about the realization and realization of the absolute and infinite, and in a dialectical development, the unity of the real and the reasonable can be reached. Despite the similarities between the ideas of these two thinkers, their views in this field have a fundamental difference.

Mullā Ṣadrā’s attempt to reconcile philosophy and mysticism has faced him with several difficulties, of which some are noticed by him and some could be explained according to his taste and principles. One of the difficulties is the incompatibility of the mystical theory of Unity of Existence with the law of contradiction. This perception of presence, which claims the oneness of creatures with the Creator and at the same time their duality, challenges the logical-philosophical law of noncontradiction.The purpose of this paper is to answer the question of what solution could Mullā Ṣadrā have for such a problem. Although he has emphasized on the theory of Personal Unity of Existence in his late works, it seems that the theory of Analogical Unity of Existence –despite Ṣadrā’s lack of clarification– was a solution from his side to get rid of this problem. The authors’ descriptive method and critical analysis, however, indicates the insufficiency of this theory for solving this paradox. The logic of belief, also, cannot be a a solution for this problem. The authors, finally, have shown that on the basis of Mullā Ṣadrā’s principles in the issue of mental existence, the rule of impossibility of coexistence of two contradictories in immaterial worlds has been narrowed down and the possibility of coexistence of some incommensurable things is available in that arena. This way, he can solve the paradox of the unity of existence. All in all, it is clear that Mullā Ṣadrā neither wanted nor - –considering his intellectual foundations– was capable of accepting dialetheism and the violation of the law of noncontradiction.

Ibn Khaldun (732-808 A.H.), as the founder of civil engineering, is often known as a philosopher of history, sociologist and civilizational scientist; however, his research is extended to many fields of knowledge of his era with valuable outcomes one of which is the philosophy of mysticism, which has not yet received due research attention. In this article, his specific point of view in this field is analyzed; the issues dealt with are originality, epistemology and mystical perceptions, and the unity of existence from the standpoint of his specefic mystic philosophy with a special analytic focus on his major views on these issues. The purpose of this descriptive study is to understand Ibn Khaldun’s sympathy with mysticism adopting a library research methos with reference to his major works. The results clearly show that Ibn Khaldun, though not a formal mystic, had a great tendency towards mysticism.

One of the important issues in philosophy and mysticism, with considerable ontological and epistemological effects, is explaining the truth of fact-itself (nafs al-amr). This is because the truth of fact-itself is directly related to affirmation and falsification of epistemic propositions and statements. The subject of the present inquiry is a comparative investigation of the views of Islamic philosophers and mystics regarding the truth of fact-itself in a descriptive-analytical method. The related data were gathered through library studies. The inquiry aims at a general expression and stating the common and different points among the views of most philosophers and mystics regarding the fact-itself and presenting a brief analysis on them. The most important findings of the inquiry are as follows: the mystics’ interpretations of the fact-itself are focused on the ontological sphere and are proposed for explaining the existential unity of the universe. But the philosophers’ interpretations are focused on the epistemological sphere and aim at explaining the verity and falsity of the epistemic propositions. According to this approach, some of the philosophers’ interpretations such as ‘fact and outside in particular sense’, ‘active intellect’, and ‘existence-self’, are not the precise and right interpretations of fact-itself. But, some others such as ‘general affirmation’ or ‘absolute container of affirmation of external realities’ and ‘container of rational affirmation of the facts’ are justifiable. It seems that ‘thing-itself’ (nafs al-shayʾ) is the most precise and most comprehensive interpretation that enjoys the capability to explain the verity and falsity of any epistemic proposition.

The individual unity of existence is one of the most important and decisive issues in philosophy and mysticism, which can fundamentally and essentially influence our approach to ontology, theology, God-world relationship and other issues. At the same time, incorrect understandings of this doctrine may cause at least two problems: due to their misunderstanding, some of those influenced by this doctrine (whether in the West or in the East) may fall into intellectual and ideological deviations, and some others, having a weak understanding of this concept, will make unfair criticisms against it. Among the famous misconceptions are: “God’s immanence”, “unity of God and world”, “considering the multiplicity as nothingness or illusion”, “pantheism”, “mutability of the Real”, “negation of causality”, “determinism” and “antinomianism”. In this article, based on the rational arguments and the Islamic revelational texts taken from the thoughts and works of the divine sage, jurist and exegete, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, we will criticize these false ideas and prove their weakness, absurdity and invalidity.

The principles of the “unity of the world” in physics and the “unity of existence” in mysticism are two important and basic principles. Considering that both areas of knowledge are based on rational research and analysis, we will examine the similarities and differences of these two principles with this shared method. In fact, the unity of the world and the unity of existence represent the unity of the entire universe from the matter to the immaterial However, each one includes a specific realm and has its own rules, since the unity of the world is accidental, conventional, and physical, but the unity of existence is essential, real and metaphysical.

Mulla Sadra has based his philosophical system on a number of principles, which will have important implications for each of them; the most important of which is the "Originality of Being", whose belief will lead to the adoption of the well-known theory of "unity of existence"; A view that is based on the denial of the full difference. On the other hand, the basis of "Hierarchy of existence" is one of the pillars of Mulla Sadra's philosophy, which plays a major role in explaining the plural theory of the beings of the universe. Sadra has attempted to explain two of the aforementioned foundations that do not fall into the paradox of the unity and plurality; what has made him successful for the first time in providing a rational explanation of the theory of “Multiplicity While Unity” is his particular reading of the theory of unity of existence using the viewpoint of Hierarchy of existence that is formed in the context of the two bases of the Originality of Being and the existence of a disabled interface.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between the world of unity and the world of plurality based on Quranic reading and tries to reject the rival theory and the hypothesis of "establishing a relationship between unity and plurality based on the personal unity of existence" based on studies and analyzes. Examine the basic Qur'an. The body of research consists of: explaining the personal unity of existence and critique of rival theories and reciting and explaining the Qur'an the chosen theory. By studying the relative interactions of the world of plurality with the world of unity, several studies have been conducted, including: the article "The possibility of personal unity of existence in transcendent wisdom" by Hossein Suzanchi; The article "A method and in proving the content of the personal unity of existence" written by Vahid Vahed Javan et al .; Article "Unity and plurality of existence in transcendent wisdom and mysticism" by Seyyed Hamid Reza Hassani; The article "Reflections on the Evidence of Personal Unity of Existence" written by Mohammad Ali Mohiti Ardakan and Mohammad Fanaei Eshkevari. Although these articles have somehow dealt with the relationship between the world of unity and the world of plurality and the analysis of the personal unity of existence, they have never targeted the basic and documented reading of the Qur'an, which is the mission of this research.

Material:

The present research is a research, theoretical and its method is descriptive-analytical. The research approach is also qualitative; Qualitative research requires identifying sources related to the research topic, studying texts, understanding the meaning of the text and extracting the desired content from these sources, establishing a relationship between the content and describing and analyzing them, and discussing and concluding the collected information.

Based on research and referring to the Holy Quran, it was found that the relationship between the world of plurality and the world of unity is of the type of relationship "was" and "appearance" or the relationship of "truth of existence" and "manifestation of existence" called "personal unity of existence" Is summarized. There are many verses to prove this mystical approach in relation to the world of plurality and the world of unity. With the mystical analysis of the relevant verses, the strategic statement "Existence is unique in the Almighty and the world of possibilities is its manifestations, manifestations and events" was extracted, which can be the basis for further research on the system of Qur'anic mysticism.

In mystical ontology, how the world of plurality relates to the world of unity is one of the main axes. The relationship between the world of unity and the world of plurality has long been the subject of controversy among philosophers and sages. Different views are presented in this regard. What has been considered most of all is the theory of the personal unity of existence in these proportions. Mystics try to develop this theory with rational and intuitive analysis and base it on other scientific theories. Based on research and referring to the Holy Quran, it was found that the relationship between the world of plurality and the world of unity is of the type of relationship "was" and "appearance" or the relationship of "truth of existence" and "manifestation of existence".

Human agency, both in creation and in recognition of architectural space and their interaction with the space, has been affected by the hidden harmony that is generated in the space, which turns the architectural space away from its static state, stillness, and lifelessness, and the core of the harmony is indeed the “unity”; that is, multiple parts find unity and totality within a whole that creates a sense inside, which fits the aesthetic desire and indeed the internal human self, because the human self seeks unity and suffers from multiplicity, diffusion, and conflicts (Ardalan et al., 2011). In fact, it might be acknowledged that architecture as a created work secretly involves the creation of multiplicity and turning it into unity in interaction with humans. Given the idea of the unity of existence (waḥdat al-wujūd) in Islamic mysticism, a world is portrayed that is, first, divine and spiritual, where the song of holiness resonates, and second, it involves a unity by which all multiple parts are unified, or more precisely speaking, all that exists is a manifestation or representation of the one unified reality. In this way, art in general and architecture in particular might come to have a different color. Unity of existence is evident in architectural work in the Islamic world, but the character of this unity is not adequately discussed. A genuine perception of unity in architectural space is not confined to external senses. To the contrary, in its higher degrees, i.e., internal senses, it affects the observer. The goal of the present research to identify the nature of this unity and how it occurs. The question of our research is as follows: are Ibn ʿArabī’s views of unity applicable to architectural space, and what material grounds are prepared in architectural space to attain the unity? To answer the question, we begin with an overview of Ibn ʿArabī’s mystical view, where the question of existence and knowledge of unity is discussed as the foundation of Ibn ʿArabī’s mysticism.According to our surveys, the issue of whether Ibn ʿArabī’s account of unity is applicable to architectural space has not been properly addressed in the past research. Instead, issues of the unity of existence and multiplicity within unity have been discussed separately in philosophy and architecture. Moreover, the architectural literature tends to focus on corporeal, visual, and symbolic aspects of architectural parts in the realization of unity. In the present research, we drawAssociate Professor, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran (Corresponding Author). This article has been extracted from the course "Wisdom in Islamic Architecture" in the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism of Tabriz Islamic Art University. on Ibn ʿArabī’s views about the questions of existence and knowledge of unity as the foundation of his mysticism to tackle material and perceptual grounds in the Islamic architectural space to examine the move from multiplicity to unity.

Methodologically speaking, the present research is descriptive-analytic, adopting the qualitative research approach. Qualitative research involves identification of the relevant references, studies and overviews of the written sources, comprehension of their meanings, and extraction of the relevant material, establishment of relations between issues, and providing descriptions and analyses of them.

Creation of multiplicity in architectural space and its transformation into unity has been effective in attaining an understanding of the existential unity, such that this understanding in architectural space was a determinant of the degree of the work’s life, and was somehow a cause of its existence. In fact, to attain such a unity, the human presence and existence in the space is undoubtedly what engenders a motion toward its recognition. Accordingly, the move from multiplicity to unity in architectural space implies physical movement (translocation – ocular) and semantic movement (mental movement). During the movement in architectural space, the observer’s physical movement turns into visual movement, which in turn results in reception of a series of regression and connections in the observer’s mind, leading to his or her mental movement. However, once the observer begins to recognize and see signs, it enables him or her to move in the world of imagination to attain unity. In fact, genuine unity is obtained through human imagination.

There is a remarkable correspondence between perceptions of existential unity in both philosophy and architecture. On Ibn ʿArabī’s account, imagination is perception of images in the soul after having seen something. Indeed, imagination is the intermediary between dualities. So in his view, human imagination is capable of attaining unity in the world that is abstracted or detached from the sensible world (existence of multiplicity). Furthermore, in the unity of existence, finding the existence is the same as coming to exist, where the finding is through intuitions and revelations. In the Imam Mosque of Isfahan (or the Shah Mosque), manifestation of the pairs [imagination being in pair] in space provides a bedrock for the observer’s intuition and revelation of unity through a definition of hierarchies and qualitative geometry based on the principle of the centrality and symmetry and existence of light.

One of the most important and fundamental philosophical issues with important consequences and implications is the individual unity of existence; Through it, philosophy enters the horizon of mysticism and thus all philosophical issues and discussions find a new taste.  In this article, based on the view of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli (fully qualified in philosophy, mysticism and exegesis), we prove the individual unity of existence and also criticize a conception of infinite truth (which is consistent with gradation of existence) by referring to the infinity of the Almighty. Then we will discuss the consequences and implications of this understanding of the infinity of God, some of which are: “transformation of gradation of existence into gradation of manifestations of existence”, “transformation of causality into manifestation of existence”, “the doctrine that things are signs of God”, “alteration in “rule of one” (qāʿida al-wāḥid)”, “increase in the types of predication”, “alteration in the rule that states: the Simple Reality is everything”, “impossibility of witnessing the essence and essential attributes of God”, “God’s equal relation to everything”, “impossibility of  God’s incarnation in and unity with the existents”, “alteration in the division of existence into independent and sheer dependent”, “impossibility of change in God”, “the fact that the illuminative relation is a kind of manifestation”, “transformation of temporality and eternity into appearance and hiddenness”, etc. Hence, this work can be considered as a strategic source for explaining important philosophical and mystical issues, as well as refining the border between the two and turning the former into the latter.

This article on Mulla Sadra's philosophy seeks to answer the question: Where is the place of God in human life according to the theory of existential expansion? According to Mulla Sadra, the foundation of creation is the manifestation and existential vastness of a single and absolute existence. Caused (Ma'alool) is abstracted from existential expanded ranks and has no independence. According to Sadra, the life of any creature is how it exists; Because life is the existence of an object in such a way that actions are issued from it. In other words, the stronger his perception, the stronger his life, and the higher his level of existence. Existence is one and non-existence is non-existence, and all beings exist in the existential circle of expanded existence; Therefore, by analyzing Mulla Sadra's view, it can be concluded that God is present in every moment of human life, and because human perceptions are different, the manifestation of God in their existence is also different. In this view, God's activity is not longitudinal but vast action. The present article, with a descriptive-analytical view, seeks to examine the position of God with the view of the expansion existential in human life.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between the world of unity and the world of plurality based on Quranic reading and tries to reject the rival theory and the hypothesis of "establishing a relationship between unity and plurality based on the personal unity of existence" based on studies and analyzes. Examine the basic Qur'an. The body of research consists of: explaining the personal unity of existence and critique of rival theories and reciting and explaining the Qur'an the chosen theory. By studying the relative interactions of the world of plurality with the world of unity, several studies have been conducted, including: the article "The possibility of personal unity of existence in transcendent wisdom" by Hossein Suzanchi; The article "A method and in proving the content of the personal unity of existence" written by Vahid Vahed Javan et al .; Article "Unity and plurality of existence in transcendent wisdom and mysticism" by Seyyed Hamid Reza Hassani; The article "Reflections on the Evidence of Personal Unity of Existence" written by Mohammad Ali Mohiti Ardakan and Mohammad Fanaei Eshkevari. Although these articles have somehow dealt with the relationship between the world of unity and the world of plurality and the analysis of the personal unity of existence, they have never targeted the basic and documented reading of the Qur'an, which is the mission of this research.

The present research is a research, theoretical and its method is descriptive-analytical. The research approach is also qualitative; Qualitative research requires identifying sources related to the research topic, studying texts, understanding the meaning of the text and extracting the desired content from these sources, establishing a relationship between the content and describing and analyzing them, and discussing and concluding the collected information.

Based on research and referring to the Holy Quran, it was found that the relationship between the world of plurality and the world of unity is of the type of relationship "was" and "appearance" or the relationship of "truth of existence" and "manifestation of existence" called "personal unity of existence" Is summarized. There are many verses to prove this mystical approach in relation to the world of plurality and the world of unity. With the mystical analysis of the relevant verses, the strategic statement "Existence is unique in the Almighty and the world of possibilities is its manifestations, manifestations and events" was extracted, which can be the basis for further research on the system of Qur'anic mysticism.

In mystical ontology, how the world of plurality relates to the world of unity is one of the main axes. The relationship between the world of unity and the world of plurality has long been the subject of controversy among philosophers and sages. Different views are presented in this regard. What has been considered most of all is the theory of the personal unity of existence in these proportions. Mystics try to develop this theory with rational and intuitive analysis and base it on other scientific theories. Based on research and referring to the Holy Quran, it was found that the relationship between the world of plurality and the world of unity is of the type of relationship "was" and "appearance" or the relationship of "truth of existence" and "manifestation of existence".

One of the important questions in the field of moral attributes and behavior is what changes the monotheistic view makes in human morality and behavior? Can it change the meaning of actions and deepen them? Can it modify and improve their approach? If so, how and why do such changes occur? This study tries to explain the effects of mystical monotheism in the concept and approach of moral practices with a descriptive-analytical method. Focusing on some examples, the study explains that the knowledge of mystical monotheism, depending on the level of belief (in theoretical mysticism) or intuition (in practical mysticism), has moral developmental effects in human beings that leads to the modification and deepening of tendencies and practices.

Monotheism is one of the most important issues addressed by scholars of different Islamic sects and schools. Although in most of these schools, monotheism is a multifaceted truth, there are different views about the highest level of monotheism. This research, which has been written in an analytical-descriptive method, tries to compare and evaluate the true monotheism or the monotheism of the people of knowledge in their views after interpreting and analyzing the true monotheism from the perspective of Mulla Sadra and Ghazali. The result obtained from the studies is that despite the apparent similarities in the expressions of Mulla Sadra and Ghazali as well as the numerous references of the mullah to him in matters related to personal unity of existence, monotheism has different faces for these two thinkers. Mulla Sadra, in his final view, believes in the unity of existence, but al-Ghazali's view on this is not clear. However, the evidence is more based on the fact that from al-Ghazali's point of view, monotheism is the unity of intuition. Based on this difference, the reason for Mulla Sadra's numerous citations to Ghazali in the discussions of monotheism should either be due to Mulla Sadra's lack of attention to the difference between the unity of existence and the unity of intuition, or Sadr al-Muta'allehin's shrewdness in persuading the enemy

The late Sadra had a special scientific respect for Pre-Socratic Greek philosofer as far as he interprets them as the openers of the doors of divine wisdom and so on. Sadra considers wisdom to be specific to the sciences derived from the religion of the Prophets and names them as scholars who have absolute wisdom and the founders of wisdom who are separated from the sensible world due to asceticism and inner purity, And have become like the morality of omnipotence. They all believe in the creation of the universe.  He mentions the names of eight great men of wisdom and believes that they have reached the truth and their views on the creation and perdition of the universe are in accordance with the views of the Prophets. Three of them are Malta: Thales Anaximans and Agathazimon, and five of them are Greek. Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. He considers them wise to some extent, stating that through these sages the light of wisdom has shone in the world and the knowledge of God has been spread in the hearts and they have learned wisdom by the light of prophecy. They believe in the oneness of God and the divine scientific encirclement of things and they pay attention to the quality of the creatures' production and how to create the universe. In this article, we have examined and analyzed the encounter of the late Mulla Sadra with the beliefs of Pre-Socratic scholars.

All philosophical scholars in the Islamic world have ruled for the perfection of The Transcendent God and defects of other creatures and consider God as the just perfection and absolute perfection. But Sadr –ol-Motahlin believes that every existent is just perfection and no perfection of any creature can be denied. The view of Mulla Sadra has been met with two kinds of commentary from the Sadrai’s commentators that, of course, is the origin of these two interpretations of his own person. The first interpretation is that although all beings have all the perfections, but the way in which perfections are different and they have severity and weakness. The second interpretation, by denying this distinction, suggests the distinction between them in the hiding and appearing of perfections. The first interpretation is consistent with the system of modulation of existence and the second interpretation is more consistent with the look of existential unity and the system of modulation in the manifestations of existence. In this paper, which is provided by documentary and logical analysis, with the annulment of the first interpretation, the proof of the second interpretation is discussed. It also criticizes some of the contemporaries for reconciling these two interpretations.

This essay attempts to refute Ibn Taymiyyah's view of mystical ontology in a descriptive-analytic way; since the emergence of the theory of unity of existence in Ibn Arabi's works, it was not long before Ibn Taymiyyah raised it in Islamic society, so Ibn Taymiyyah It is considered as a pamphlet of the first opponents and critics of the doctrine of the unity of existence. Halal knows and all of his criticism is based on his belief in the appearance and likeness of God. It is. Ibn Taymiyyah's critiques of the unity of existence with the correct interpretation of the themes of manifestation, objectivity and non-reality of right and creation and the plural of simile and Tanzania are rejected. He has also failed to summarize and correctly understand the doctrine of unity of existence, just as the Qur'an could not solve the incarnation of the Qur'an in a proper way.