Analysis and Critique of Mohammad Javad Khorasani's Method in Critiquing the Teachings of 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.