Wahdat Al-mawjud

[Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki]

(salam)

Thecontentedself & EndlessEndeavor

Refer to the entire thread, and notice the following below:

From al-Kafi:

4 - عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد البرقي، عن أبيه، عن النضر بن سويد، عن يحيى الحلبي، عن ابن مسكان، عن زرارة بن أعين قال: سمعت أبا عبدالله (عليه السلام) يقول: إن الله خلو من خلقه وخلقه خلو منه، وكل ما وقع عليه اسم شئ ما خلا الله فهو مخلوق والله خالق كل شئ، تبارك الذي ليس كمثله شئ وهو السميع البصير.

4 – A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid al-Barqi from his father from an-Nadr b. Suwayd from Yahya al-Halabi from Ibn Muskan from Zurara b. A`yan. He said: I heard Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام saying: Verily Allah is devoid of His creation and His creation is devoid of Him. And all upon which the name of “thing” befalls – apart from Allah – it is created. And Allah is the creator of everything. Blessed be the one who nothing is like unto Him. And He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing. (sahih)

(bismillah)

(salam)

To MacIsaac

Yes, the Imām is right.

To Dawud

The Imām is right.

Also, forget about waḥdat al-wujūd. You are right. It's false.

(wasalam)

Just admit when you're wrong about Wahdat al Wujud like dear brother Jebreil.

You're grappling at thin air, pulling theories out of nowhere, now you need to just stop grappling at the air, we flipped on the light, open your eyes and look around you.

I don't care if Khomeini, Sadra, 'Amuli, Tabataba'i, or Behjat all believed in Wahdat al Wujud.

If all of the scholars in the entire world got together and voted that Ali (as) is a Prophet, we would reject them as kuffar.

Truth is not a democracy. We do not vote on truth; Mullahs do not establish truth, they merely profess it or not.

All we need is in the Qur'an and Riwayah. We don't need Ibn Arabi's writings, or the pedarest writings of Hafez and other Persian poets.

Al-Kafi H 970, Ch. 86, h 1

A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad (from) ibn abu Nasr from abu al-Hassan (a.s.) who has said the following.

"The words of Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, "Who strays more than one who follows his desires without guidance from God?. . . "(28:50) The Imam (a.s.), "It refers to those who take their own opinions as their religion without an Imam from the Imams of guidance (Leadership with Divine Authority)."

Al-Kafi H 273, Ch. 10, h 10

Sahl has said that I wrote to abu Muhammad al-Hassan al-‘Askari (a.s.) in 255 AH.,

"Our people (ashabuna) differ on the issue of the Oneness of Allah. There are those who say he has a body and others say He has a certain form. If you would consider to instruct me in thismatter on which I would rely without excess it would be a great favor to your servant." The Imam answered in his own handwriting, "You have asked about the Oneness of Allah. It is not your duty to find Allah’s self. Allah is One, the Only One. He has no children and is not anyone’s child. There nothing similar to Him. He is the Creator and is not created. He, the Most Holy, the Most High, creates whatever He wants of the bodies and non-bodies. He is not a body or a certain form. He gives form to whatever He wills but Himself is not a form, Majestic is His praise and Holy are His names and is far above being similar to other things. Only He, and not others, is the One to Who no one is similar and He is all-hearing and Allseeing."

The above evidence crushes any argument any scholar can bring.

[Shia_Debater]

If you do good, you do not do good, but God does good.

If you create, you do not create, but God creates.

If you exist, you do not exist, but God existentiates.

(bismillah)

(salam)

al-`Allamah al-Majlisi [ar] relates that once Abu Hanifah happened to call upon the holy abode of Imam Jafar as-Sadiq [as] to ask him about some religious matters (masa'il) . The Imam [as] was asleep and so he kept waiting outside till the Imam's [as] awakening. Meanwhile, Imam Musa al-Kazim [as], who was then five years old, came out of his house. Abu Hanifah, after offering him his best compliment, enquired: "O the son of the Holy Prophet! what is your opinion about the deeds of a man? Does he do them by himself or does God make him do them?'' "O Abu Hanifah'', the five years old Imam [as] replied at once, in the typical tone of his ancestors, "the doings of a man are confined to three possibilities. First, that God alone does them while the man is quite helpless. Second, that both God and the man do equally share the commitment. Third, that man does them alone. Now, if the first assumption is true, it obviously proves the unjustness of God who punishes His creatures for sins which they have not committed. And if the second condition be acceptable, even then God becomes unjust if He punishes the man for the crimes in which He is equally a partner. But the undesirability of both these conditions is evident in the case of God. Thus, we are naturally left with the third alternative to the problem that men are absolutely responsible for their own doing.''

The same applies to doing good deeds.

If I have mistaken what you are trying to say, and replied with something off topic then forgive me for my ignorance.

(wasalam)

[Rohani]

Allah don't force us to do good or evil he has giving us the ability to make the choice, but the question would be is the good from the creation once it uses it or does it only belong to Allah. as example if someone hands you some money do you say the creation gave me that money or do you say Allah gave me what i needed, if Allah is not Rabb al AALamin (sustainer of all that is) then i guess you can say the creation is the one that the good belongs to. now since Allah is mercy in his essence in teh aboslute sense that we cannot comprhend how can we claim that a mercy to us is belong to any other than him and is sperate form him? there is a hadith saying Allah's knowldge is his essence, the thing is we cannot comprehend aboslute knowldge. i am also assuming the ability to make the choice is also an ability loaned to us by Allah (my words are faulty so i shall use that is through Allah) and don't actually belong to us at all.

To be honest these things that are being talked about (whadatul wujud) are something that needs a very high prehension in which may Allah help both me and you all in it ameen. when i first heard this explained ( this concept ) through watching philosphy classes by shaykh abdulhussien the idea may have been a bit hard to digest at first. and is something i still hope to find all refrences form Ahlul bayt (as) on this concept and with Allah's grace can be able to understand them. like i said tawheed is deep. plus there are still many questions.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Maitham

[Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki]

Allah don't force us to do good or evil he has giving us the ability to make the choice, but the question would be is the good from the creation once it uses it or does it only belong to Allah. as example if someone hands you some money do you say the creation gave me that money or do you say Allah gave me what i needed, if Allah is not Rabb al AALamin (sustainer of all that is) then i guess you can say the creation is the one that the good belongs to. now since Allah is mercy in his essence in teh aboslute sense that we cannot comprhend how can we claim that a mercy to us is belong to any other than him and is sperate form him? there is a hadith saying Allah's knowldge is his essence, the thing is we cannot comprehend aboslute knowldge. i am also assuming the ability to make the choice is also an ability loaned to us by Allah (my words are faulty so i shall use that is through Allah) and don't actually belong to us at all.

To be honest these things that are being talked about (whadatul wujud) are something that needs a very high prehension in which may Allah help both me and you all in it ameen. when i first heard about this concept through philosphy classes by shaykh abdulhussien the idea may have been a bit hard to digest at first. and is something i still hope to find all refrences form Ahlul bayt (as) on this concept and with Allah's grace can be able to understand them. like i said tawheed is a deep ocean.

(salam)

This is just like a Christian who has been shown the evidence that God is Unique and God is not part of a Trinity...

Then after his ideology has been thoroughly exposed as false, his natural defense mechanisms come in to play and he says:

"Well the concept of the Trinity requires very high prehension, it is a deep ocean... may Jesus Christ give us the understanding to know it."

Point-in-case Maitham, don't confuse misguidance with deep unobtainable wisdom.

If you're so confused about something that it requires 50 years of being brainwashed and reading poetry about little boy's lips then that means Shaytan is playing you like the fool that you would be.

[eThErEaL]

Jazaka Allah. "to be in need of" ? or to not be in need of ?

In other words all of creation is empty of the Absolute. It is nothing, and only the Absolute is. Kullu man alayha fan wayabqa wajhu rabbik... :)

Jazaka Allah. "to be in need of" ? or to not be in need of ?

The creation is nothing but a pure need itself. It is impoverished by its very essence. This is precisely why only the Absolute exists and why creation does not.

It means that there is nothing divine whatsoever about creation. And that only God alone is divine. So all the divine qualities (like mercy, beauty, love, compassion, knowledge, power) we see in creation and which we mistake to be as part of creation are in fact only God's because only God is divine. So all divine qualities (like knowing, powerful, loving) only belong to God who is All-Knowing, All-Powerful, All-Loving, All-merciful, etc etc.

There is no god but God.

This is why there is no lover but the All-Loving

none powerful but the All-Powerful.

etc etc

Just admit when you're wrong about Wahdat al Wujud like dear brother Jebreil.

If you think Jebreil admitted he was wrong about wahdatul wujud then you are seriously deluded. He is trying to make you think and open your mind. But as I had expected, it didn't work.

Edited February 9, 2012 by eThErEaL

[Abu Nur]

I don't care if Khomeini, Sadra, 'Amuli, Tabataba'i, or Behjat all believed in Wahdat al Wujud.

Why you actually choosed these scholars and what you have really understand from their works? and do you implying here that they were wrong in understaning the reality that our Imams (as) have teached us?

All we need is in the Qur'an and Riwayah. We don't need Ibn Arabi's writings, or the pedarest writings of Hafez and other Persian poets.

Allah (SWT) gives knowledge to guide us, even if the light of knowledge travel throught of these writings.

Wahdat al-Mawjud is the teaching of Irfan mysticism that "all things are One", part of this "Oneness" of Allah. Ultimately, once you reach the final level of mysticism (Irfaan) and realize Wahdat al-Mawjud, you believe you are Allah.

No, that is not what Irfan teach us. And no you will not become Allah سبحانه وتعالى (Astagfurullah). If you look at our Imams (as) they have reached to stage that they only obey what Allah (SWT) says. They will see sins as ugly and good deeds as beauty. They have surrended fully to Allah will and they obey fully what Allah wills and they only manifest His goodness.

[Yusufali 9:111] Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Dhulfikar

[Abu Nur]

So this is the mysticism (Irfan) of Ibn Arabi which is studied in Howza's of the Aarafa such as Behjat and Khomeini. There's no tafseer and ahadith quoted from the infallibles, just pure conjecture leading to kufr.

For example Tabatabai (ra) teaching of Irfan does not depends on Ibn Arabi works, but it depends fully to Quran and Ahlulbait (as) teaching. What they quote from Ibn Arabi or from Haafiz or from other source are already teached by Ahlulbait (as) and Quran, but they use these works for giving more detail of understanding these concepts.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Dhulfikar

[Guest Jebreil]

(bismillah)

(salam)

To Dawud

You asked what I mean by waḥdat an-nūr.

Waḥdat an-nūr means that Allāh is like the Light which shines through the Heavens and the Earth. (except that Allāh is not physical light)

The waḥdat means that the Heavens and the Earth appear because of One Light, not multiple lights. One Light shines through the heavens and the earth. So, only one God, Allāh, shines (metaphorically) through the heavens and the earth.

Do you find saying "Allāh is like the Light shining upon the Heavens and the Earth" to be kufr?

(wasalam)

[Muhammed Ali]

By in believing in this ludicrous notion, the Sufis, Aarifs, and whoever "Shi'a scholars" believe in wahdat al-wujood have abandoned the most basic principle and teaching of Islam, and therefore have become completely deviant from this pure and beautiful religion. For example, in his tafsir al-Mizan, Sayyid Muhammad Hussein Tabataba'ie states something that reveals how deviant they have become. In volume 1, pp28-29 (Beirut edition, 1980) under commentary of surah al-Hamd, he states, "the path to Allah is two paths; the path of the believers, which is the shorter one, and the path of the non-believers, which is the longer."

We shall make no comment on this astonishing statement of his and leave you to contemplate on it.

So he is implying that Ayatullah Tabatabai believes that the non-believers will also be rewarded?

Here is a section of the tafsir that he is referring to:

QUR'AN: Guide us to the straight path... nor of those gone astray: The meaning of "al-hidayah" (guidance, to guide) may easily be understood, if we consider first the significance of the "path." "as-Sirat" (path) is synonymous with "at-tariq" and "as-sabil. In these verses, Allah has commended the path that it is straight and that it is the path taken by those upon whom Allah has bestowed His bounties and favors. It is this path guidance to which has been asked for. And it is the ultimate goal of the worship: The servant prays to his Lord that his worship, clean from all impurities, be performed in this path.

Allah has mentioned in His Book that He has laid down a path for man, nay, for all the creation, a path upon which they are proceeding. He says: 0 man! surely thou artstriving to thy Lord, a hard striving, until thou art to meet Him (84:6); ...and to Him is the ultimate resort (64:3); ...now surely to Allah do all affairs eventually come (42:53). There are many such verses, showing that all are proceeding on a prescribed road and that their destination is Allah.

So far as the way is concerned, Allah has said that there are two ways, not one: Did I not enjoin on you, 0 children of Adam! that you should not worship the Satan? Surely he is your open enemy. And that you should worship Me; this is the straight path (30:60-61). So, there is a straight path, and also there is another path. Again He has said: ...then verily I am near; I answer the prayer of the suppliant when he calls on Me, so they should answer My call and believe in Me, that they may walk in the rightway (2:186); Call upon Me, I will answer you. Verily, those who are arrogant to My worship shall soon enter hell, disgraced (40:60). Obviously, Allah is near to Ms servants, and the nearer path to Him is that of worship and prayer. Compare it with description of those who do not believe in Him: ...these shall be called to from a far-off place (41:44). Obviously, the station of unbelievers is far-off place.

There are thus two ways to Allah, a near one - the way of the believers - and a distant one, that of the others. It is the first difference between the ways.

Second difference: ....

If you read those words and those that follow them, you would see that Ayatullah Tabatabai is in no way suggesting that the non-believers will be rewarded.

[Muhammed Ali]

[in his book “Insan-e Kamel”, p126, Sheikh Murteza Mutahari states: “. . . and some of those who believe in ‘Irfan and wahdat al-wujood, at certain stages, declare that they are God”!!]

Lets have a look at what Ayatullah Mutahhari says:

2) Another school is the school of love or Gnosticism. By love is meant affectionate devotion to God. Unlike the intellectual school which is the school of reflection and not movement and in which all movements are intellectual, the school of love is all movement, a vertical rather than a horizontal motion, though at a later stage it assumes a horizontal direction. At first it is an upward flight towards God. They do not believe in reasoning and reflection as the means of advancement; it is the spirit of man that moves ahead until it reaches God. It berates the school of intellect, and this attitude is the basis of one of the finest debates in literature between love and intellect, and those who are engaged in such discussions are themselves mostly Gnostics who have given love victory over intellect. This school considers intellect as a small part of man’s existence and only a means, whereas the essence of man is his spirit, which belongs to the world of, love involving nothing but moving towards God. That is why the followers of this school, such as the poet Hafiz, prefer love and its intoxication to intellect.

Their monotheism is the unity of existence, which takes the form of absolute truth once a human being attains that position. It means that a perfect man becomes ultimately God or a part of Him.

If you read the rest of the text you will find Ayatullah Mutahhari refuting that school of thought:

In Gnosticism, knowledge and intellect have been much scorned. Islam while accepting love and heart does not scorn intellect, reasoning and logic but respects them.

Another matter that is found in Gnosticism and is unacceptable to Islam, is its introvert nature which dominates its extrovert side, and its individualistic aspect which almost obliterates its social side. In Gnosticism, a perfect man is engaged with his own self and that is all. But in Islam, in addition to love, righteousness, self-purification and spirituality, a perfect man is also an extrovert and sociable.

There is another aspect and that is mortifying the self, by which is meant purification and avoiding selfishness, egotism and egoism, but the Gnostics, in emphasizing these things, have forgotten the positive aspect of purification which is magnanimity and qualities that are beyond materialism and biology, that is, non-material human values.

What we say is that if we place the view of the Qur'an on one side and the Gnostic view of intellect on the other, we would realize that they are incompatible. The Qur'an attributes a great worth to and respect for intellect, reflection and even pure intellectual reasoning as compared to Gnosticism.

Thus, the perfect man of Islam differs from the perfect man of Gnosticism in its growth of intellect.

[Muhammed Ali]

The source: http://www.al-islam.org/perfectman/2.htm

[eThErEaL]

Do you find saying "Allāh is like the Light shining upon the Heavens and the Earth" to be kufr?

the verse says : Allah is the light of ....

Al-Ghazali has interesting things to say about this.

We start with what light is. Because light is that which is manifest in itself and makes other things manifest the word light is not physical. It is the eye with is light not the fire (for example). This is because the eye is what makes the light manifest. if we compare the eye to the soul then the soul is in fact light because the soul is what makes the eyes manifest. if we compare the intellect with the soul then it is the intellect which is light since the intellect is what makes the soul manifest in the intellect. And if we compare the Intellect to God Himself then it is God who is light since God makes even the intellect manifest. So if we carefully consider the very essence of light, its definition, then we cannot help but say that God is in fact Light and not just light in a metaphorical way. love it!

[Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki]

(bismillah)

(salam)

To Dawud

You asked what I mean by waḥdat an-nūr.

Waḥdat an-nūr means that Allāh is like the Light which shines through the Heavens and the Earth. (except that Allāh is not physical light)

The waḥdat means that the Heavens and the Earth appear because of One Light, not multiple lights. One Light shines through the heavens and the earth. So, only one God, Allāh, shines (metaphorically) through the heavens and the earth.

Do you find saying "Allāh is like the Light shining upon the Heavens and the Earth" to be kufr?

(wasalam)

(wasalam)

Alhamdulilah I don't need to use my personal opinion or any Sufi's either. The `Aimmah (as) have explained this to us in Al-Kafi for example:

Al-Kafi H 499, Ch. 13, h 5

Ali ibn Muhammad and Muhammad ibn al-Hassan have narrated from Sahl ibn Ziyad from Muhammad ibn al-Hassan ibn sham?? From ‘Abdallah ibn ‘Abd al-Rahmanal-Asamm from ‘Abdallah ibn al-Qasim from salih ibn Sahl al-Hamadani who has said that abu ‘Abdallah (a. s.) has said the following about the verse of the Holy Quran below.

"God is the light of the heavens and the earth. A metaphor for His light is a lantern in which there is a lamp placed in a glass. The glass is like a shining star which is lit from a blessed olive tree that is neither eastern nor western. Its oil almost lights up even though it has not been touched by the fire. It is light upon light. God guides to His light whomever He wants. God uses various metaphors.

He has the knowledge of all things." (24:35) The Imam (a.s.) said that the lantern metaphorically stands for the Holy lady, Fatima (a.s.), the lamp stands for Imam al-Hassan (a. s.) and the glass stands for Imam al-Husayn (a.s.). The shining star stands for the Holy lady Fatima (a.s.) who shines among the ladies of the world. The blessed olive tree stands for Prophet Abraham. Neither eastern nor western means not Jewish nor Christian. ‘Its oil almost lights up’ means that it almost bursts up with knowledge. ‘Light up on light’ means that there will one Imam after the other Imam (a.s.) ‘God guides to His light who ever He wants’ means that Allah guides through the Imams whomever He wants." About ‘God uses various metaphors’ I said, "Or it (the deeds of the unbelievers) are like the darkness of a deep, stormy sea with layers of giant waves, covered by dark clouds. It is darkness upon darkness whereby even if one stretches out his hands he can not see them. One can have no light unless God gives him light. (24:40)

The Imam (a.s.) said, " ‘darkness’ refers to the first and his friend, ‘with layers of giant waves’ refers to the third, ‘covered with darkness’ refers to the second. ‘it is darkness up on darkness’ refers to Mu‘awiya and the disasters caused by the Amavides. ‘even if one stretches out his hands’ means that even if a true believer would stretch his hands in such disastrous condition ‘he can not see them’. ‘One can have no light unless God gives him light, means the light from the children of the Holy Lady, Fatima (a.s.) ‘Can have no light’ means an Imam on the Day of Judgment." The Imam (a.s.) said that, "On the Day of Judgment you will see the believers with their light shining in front of them and to their right. They will be told,

"Paradise wherein streams flow is the glad news for you today. You will live therein forever. This is the greatest triumph." (57:12), the shining light in front . . .’ is a reference to the Imams (a.s.) whom would walk in front and on the right of the true believers until they all enter paradise."

Ali ibn Muhammad and Muhammad ibn al-Hassan have narrated from Sahl ibn Ziyad from Musa ibn al-Qasim al-Bajali and Muhammad ibn yahya from al-‘Amrakiy ibn Ali altogether from Ali ibn Ja‘far (a.s.) from his brother a similar Hadith.

Al-Kafi H 500, Ch. 13, h 6

Ahmad ibn Idris has narrated from al-husayn ibn ‘Ubadallah from Muhammad ibn al-Hassan and Musa ibn ‘umar from al-hassan ibn Mahbub from Muhammad ibn al-Fudayl who has said that he asked abu al-Hassan (a.s.) about the meaning of the words of Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, in the following verse of the Holy Quran.

"They want to put out the light of God with their mouths, but God will certainly make His light shine forever - even though the unbelievers may dislike this." (61:8) The Imam (a.s.) said, "They want to put out the divine authority of Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s.) with their mouths. ‘but Allah completes His light’ means the Imams (a.s.) as mentioned in, "Those who believe in him, honor and help him, and follow the light which is sent down to him, will have everlasting happiness." (7:157) The light stands for Imam (a.s.)."

Al-Kafi H 312, Ch. , h (between ch. 16, h.3 & ch. 16, h.4)

Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from Sahl ibn Ziyad from Ya‘qub ibn Yazid from al-‘Abbass ibn Hilal who has said the following.

"I asked Imam al-Rida (a.s.), about the words of Allah, ‘Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth’" (24:35). The Imam replied, "Allah is the Guide for all that is in the heavens and the Guide for all that is on the earth." According to another Hadith narrated by al-Barqi,(the Imam said), "Allah has guided everyone in the heavens and every one on the earth."

[eThErEaL]

(wasalam)

Alhamdulilah I don't need to use my personal opinion or any Sufi's either. The `Aimmah (as) have explained this to us in Al-Kafi for example:

That is good, Mashallah. May God reward you for following the authority of the Quran and Aimmah in the strictest way you can. ..

[Guest Jebreil]

(bismillah)

(salam)

To Dawud

Akhi, see whether you accept the following statements as correct:

Do you believe that God is the sole thing which makes other things exist? That objects have no existence from themselves or something else, but God alone makes them exist?

If yes, then that is waḥdat al-wujūd. God makes the creatures exist. He doesn't give objects an element called 'existence' and make them exist. Before creating, there was nothing but Him. He created ex nihilo. They exist by Him, because there is nothing else.

(wasalam)

[Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki]

(bismillah)

(salam)

To Dawud

Akhi, see whether you accept the following statements as correct:

Do you believe that God is the sole thing which makes other things exist? That objects have no existence from themselves or something else, but God alone makes them exist?

If yes, then that is waḥdat al-wujūd. God makes the creatures exist. He doesn't give objects an element called 'existence' and make them exist. Before creating, there was nothing but Him. He created ex nihilo. They exist by Him, because there is nothing else.

(wasalam)

(wasalam)

Akhi, it's like me saying "Do you believe we must rebel against oppressors and not let them kill us?" And you say "Yes" and I say "That is Satanism"

No, that's not satanism. And I don't agree with your definition of Wahdat al Wujud.

Please cite your most authentic works on the explanation of Wahdat al Wujud. The concept ultimately leads to "I am Allah".

You're touching on the basics of it which is the basics of every faith, that Allah is the originator. I agree, He is the originator, but He doesn't create us the way that a male and female create a baby, that baby is part of us, but we are not part of Allah in any way to even say it, it is blasphemous to think it, we were commanded not to think of Allah in these ways.

I will look for some quotes from the books on Sufism and Irfan to define Wahdat al Wujud according to the greatest `Aarafa's definitions, not our own... Beacuse as I said, that's like changing the meaning of "satanism" or "christianity" or any other thing which we want to alter to make it more appealing or change its reality.

(wasalam)

[Guest Jebreil]

(bismillah)

(salam)

To Dawud

Akhi, I know what you are saying, but my point is, you are mistaking waḥdat al-wujūd as saying that the creature is the Creator. What waḥdat al-wujūd is rejecting - which some Muslims mistakenly believe - is that God gave creatures the element of existence. Waḥdat al-wujūd says that is Shirk.

A chair, for example, does not exist because of itself, or because it dwells in some sort of reality. Allāh is what existentiates the chair. Nothing else. That which exists and existentiates everything else is one being: Allāh. Much like Light, and how it colorates the world. Do you really find this kufr, akhi?

--------

This "I am Allāh" can be meant in 2 ways, 1 false and 1 true, but metaphorical. The false way is to say a human being becomes or is Allāh. The true way is to say that the human being is God's Khalīfa, such that the Qur'ān can say, "you did not throw when you threw, but Allāh threw." Thus, your actions are in fact God's, because he inspires them into you. You don't act in accordance to your whims, but according to His commands. Thus, you are an extension of His will.

Do you really find this second point kufr, akhi?

(wasalam)

[beardedbaker]

(wasalam)

Akhi, it's like me saying "Do you believe we must rebel against oppressors and not let them kill us?" And you say "Yes" and I say "That is Satanism"

No, that's not satanism. And I don't agree with your definition of Wahdat al Wujud.

Please cite your most authentic works on the explanation of Wahdat al Wujud. The concept ultimately leads to "I am Allah".

You're touching on the basics of it which is the basics of every faith, that Allah is the originator. I agree, He is the originator, but He doesn't create us the way that a male and female create a baby, that baby is part of us, but we are not part of Allah in any way to even say it, it is blasphemous to think it, we were commanded not to think of Allah in these ways.

I will look for some quotes from the books on Sufism and Irfan to define Wahdat al Wujud according to the greatest `Aarafa's definitions, not our own... Beacuse as I said, that's like changing the meaning of "satanism" or "christianity" or any other thing which we want to alter to make it more appealing or change its reality.

(wasalam)

I've changed my mind about responding to you, because you don't know the basic concepts from the science of logic and fundamentals of islamic philosophy, so there's no point in debating or even trying to explain the concept of wujud let alone wahdat al wujud. Seyyed kamal tried to explain it for the general public consumption in the above video but you've obviously either ignored it completely or avoiding its analysis, therefore remianing in your ignorance and blind following of your marja.. but I'll tell you this much, just FYI: what you view to be wahdat al wujud has been superseeded by more advanced explanations, and I advise you to research and look into that.

[The Holy Quran]

Salam

Bismillah

"Allah is the friend of those who believe, who extract themselves from darkness into light..."

"And those who disbelieve, the people, whom extract themselves from light towards darkness, they are the people of the Fire, and they will stay there forever." - 3rd Ayah of Ayaat Al-Kursi

Inshallah many will go from darkness towards light as many have.

Some say using certain verses can be 'disrespectful'. Well, that depends on how you use it. It can be harmful if it is used as propaganda to harm Islam. It all depends on your intentions.

"Yes, the verse "La Hukm illa Lillah" is true. But you are misunderstanding it. " Imam Ali (as)'s reply to Enemies of Islam.

Like Imam Ali (as) has said, you might be misunderstanding the meaning for why I present a verse. I say that I am not using these verses to condemn or intend to attack anyone specifically in this forum, and only to condemn enemies of Islam.

Does the reciter of the verse know more of his own intention for reciting it, or do the (quite neutral) people who he is reciting to?

- For the words from the Quran: "The Face of Allah."

I do not accuse anyone presently for thinking that "Face" used here is physical. Insha-Allah no one thinks that.

But 'materialistic science' is based on materialism, and materialism rejects any non-physical objects/existences.

The 'mind' and other soul-oriented existences are rejected by materialism because materialism is solely based on physical material.

Soul does not exist in the materialistic point of view, so non-physical things (mind is non-physical) do not exist in that point of view.

Allah's "Face" is not physical so according to the concept of materialism or 'materialistic science' which is based on materialism, it does not exist.

But materialism is false. I am not still accusing anyone here for believing in materialistic science. Insha-Allah none of us are and will never adopt any concept like materialism or materialistic science.

Allah's face is non-physical, but all the things around us that we can touch, see, and hear are all physical, so Allah's Face cannot be or be consisted made of these things.

I have not accused anybody of thinking that Allah's face is physical. I am just presenting facts or anything based on fact/truth.

My intention is not to attack any specific ideology (other than that ideology which is based on 'kufr' or 'shirk'.)

I am just warding off any traces of evil that may enter this forum. (traces of evil are doubts, misconceptions.)

I did not specifically name anybody or any ideology or belief (other than 'kufr' or 'shirk' which is evidently wrong) to which I am attacking or accusing of error.

As I have said before, I am just warding off any traces of evil.

I did not name any ideology other than kufr and shirk. (materialism is kufr since it rejects the concept of Allah)

Some ideologies have different views from different people. That is the reason I do not intend to name an ideology.

If I accuse a certain ideology, someone else who has a different opinion about the same ideology will confront me.

I know my intentions better than anybody else, and Allah knows my intentions better than myself. May Allah Forgive Me as well as You.

May Allah Forgive Me as well as You, and Guide Us All To The Right Path.

[Guest Jebreil]

(bismillah)

(salam)

To Holy

Some say using certain verses can be 'disrespectful'.

No, akhi, some don't say. Jebreil says. You don't have to worry about naming me. I suggest that saying to the Prophet "ittaqullāh" (fear Allāh) is disrespectful.

Like Imam Ali (as) has said, you might be misunderstanding the meaning for why I present a verse. I say that I am not using these verses to condemn or intend to attack anyone specifically in this forum, and only to condemn enemies of Islam.

There were no enemies of Islām in this discussion, so the verse was irrelevant to the discussion. It was as relevant as reciting "alif lām mīm" or "And Solomon inherited from David."

Does the reciter of the verse know more of his own intention for reciting it, or do the (quite neutral) people who he is reciting to?

Your intention may have been good, but what you said was hurtful. Do you recite, in a debate with a fellow Shī`ī Muslim, "but they are like cattle, nay even more astray", and say that you did not intend to upset one who disagrees with you? Or do you recite the sūra kāfirūn?

Allah's face is non-physical, but all the things around us that we can touch, see, and hear are all physical, so Allah's Face cannot be or be consisted made of these things.

Well, if the ḥadīth is correct that the Ahlulbayt are the Face of Allāh, then I suppose the Face can be physical, seen, touched, heard, since we can see, touch and hear the Ahlulbayt.

Could both East and West be the Face of Allāh? Perhaps.

And to Allah belong the east and the west, so wherever you turn yourselves or your faces there is the Face of Allah.

(wasalam)

[Hagop]

Salaams

I apologise in advance for any repetition of what others have said in defence of the (oft-misunderstood) concept of Wahdat al Wujud.

Pantheism holds that All is God, that the universe (a created thing) and the divine (the Creator) are identical. Wahdat al Wujud IS NOT this.

On the highest level, Wujud (being) is the absolute and non delimited reality of God, the "Necessary Being" (Wajib al Wujud) that cannot not exist. In this sense, wujud designates the Essence (Dhat) of God or of the Real (Al Haqq), the only reality that is real in every respect.

For creatures (makhluq), Being is not part of their essence because a creature does not own its being, it can never be independent in and of itself. In this sense, the created does not deserve the attribution of Being. Only God is Being, and all the rest is in reality a possibility, a relative, possible non-existence.

Ultimately, what Ibn Arabi is saying is the following: Only He who possesses Being in Himself and whose Being is His very essence, merits the name of Being. Only God can be like that.

Wahdat al Wujud is Tawheed (or the understanding of) at its purest.

Peace.

[ShiaPoet]

Salam

Bismillah

Why make a name?

What is your claim?

If Oneness is your aim,

then don't cause a game

Why branch it off, or make it theory-style?

cause confusion doesn't make us smile

If 'wahdat mawjood' means Tawheed,

then why another name?

Its not the same?

That's too lame.

Just keep it the same.

I'm in favor of Tawheed, but not the so-called 'similar to tawheed' form of 'Wahdat Al-Mawjood".

Who cares.

Just stick to Tawheed.

Wassalam