وحدت وجود

وحدت وجود به همراه وحدت شهود دو اصطلاح فنی در صوفیگری اسلامی می‌باشند.[۱] در طول تاریخ تفاسیر متفاوتی از وحدت وجود توسط طرفداران، مخالفین آن و اخیراً شرق شناسان غربی داده شده‌است. معمولاً اولین توضیح با تفصیل این اصطلاح به ابن عربی نسبت داده می‌شود، هرچند ابن عربی خودش از لفظ «وحدت وجود» استفاده نکرد و افرادی قبل از او هم سخنان مشابهی گفته بودند. به عنوان مثال، غزالی بیان می‌کند که «هیچ وجودی غیر از خداوند نیست... وجود فقط به یکتا حقیقی متعلق است.» به گفته غزالی میوه معنوی صعود یک صوفی این است که «گواهی دهد که هیچ موجودیتی بجز خدا نیست و اینکه هر چیزی بجز چهره خدا نابود شونده‌است (آیه سوره الرحمن آیه ۲۶ و ۲۷ سوره الرحمن: کل من علیها فان و یبقی وجه ربک ذوالجلال و الاکرام)»[۲][۳]

از دیدگاه عرفا راه رسیدن به خدا نه از طریق عقل و تفکر، بلکه از طریق شناخت نفس، شهود قلبی و تامل در نفس می‌باشد، و به سخنی منسوب به حضرت محمد (ص) اشاره می‌کنند که می‌گوید «من عرف نفسه عرف ربه».[۴] در حالی که تمامی مسلمانان حقیقت خدا را یکی می‌دانند، منتقدین «وحدت وجود» استدلال می‌کنند که کلمه وجود برای وجود چیزهای در این عالم هم بکار می‌رود و اینکه این مفهوم تمایز بین وجود خالق و مخلوق را محو می‌کند. مدافعین استدلال می‌کردند که ابن عربی و پیروانش یک مبحث مربوط به علوم ماورا طبعیی را مطرح می‌کنند که دنباله دیدگاه اشعریان که «صفات خدا نه خدا هستند و نه چیزی جز خدا» می‌باشد.[۵]

منظور حکیمان و عارفان این نبوده که خداوند، مجموعهٔ جهان هستی است؛ چرا که «مجموع»، وجود و وحدت حقیقی ندارد. بعلاوه مقصود اتحاد خدا با موجودات هم نبوده چراکه «اتحاد» (به معنای اینکه دو چیز بدون تغییر ماهیت به چیز دیگری تبدیل شوند) غیرممکن است. بلکه مقصودشان این بوده که هستی در ذات خدا منحصر است و فراتر از خدا هر چه هست، تنها نمود و ظهور و تجلی او می‌باشد. یعنی خداوند هستی محض است، و شدت و کمال هستی او موجب عشق به ظهور و تجلی می‌گردد.[۶]

محتویات [نمایش]
پذیرش [ویرایش]

عرفا مدعی اند که وحدت وجود را تجربه و شهود کرده‌اند علیرغم اینکه نظریه وحدت وجود از دیدگاه منطقی تناقض آمیز و پارادوکسی به نظر می‌آید. عرفا معتقد بودند که توان تبیین و یا تعبیر عقلانی و فلسفی وحدت وجود را نداشته، و از روی ناچاری به تمثیل روی آورده‌اند.[۷] نویسندگان زیادی «وجود» یا «بودن» را اسم مناسب برای حقیقت خدا می‌دانند. در حالی که تمامی مسلمانان حقیقت خدا را یکی می‌دانند، منتقدین «وحدت وجود» استدلال می‌کنند که کلمه وجود برای وجود چیزهای در این عالم هم بکار میرود و اینکه این مفهوم تمایز بین وجود خالق و مخلوق را محو میکند. مدافعین استدلال می‌کردند که ابن عربی و پیروانش یک مبحث مربوط به علوم ماورا طبعیی را مطرح می‌کنند که دنباله دیدگاه اشعریان که «صفات خدا نه خدا هستند و نه چیزی جز خدا» می‌باشد. نشانهای (آیات) خدا و آثار او، یعنی مخلوقات، نه مثل خدا هستند و نه متفاوت از او، زیرا فهم از خداوند باید بصورت هم حاضر و هم غایب، هم برتر و هم مجرد باشد. در نظر مدافعین وحدت وجود «تعادل لازم را بین این دو دیدگاه درباره خدا فراهم می‌آورد».[۳] شاه ولی الّله دهلی استدلال کرد که مفهوم وحدت وجود بر اساس تجربه شخصی روحانی و خلسه‌ای بوده، و درباره کاوش ماهیات ذاتی خداوند نیست.[۵]

شرق وغرب [ویرایش]

از فلوطین تا اسپینوزا واز ابن عربی تا ملا هادی سبزواری مطالب بیشمار وگاه متناقض راجع به وحدت وجود گفته شده است.آنچه عرفا بخصوص عرفان اسلامی در مورد وحدت وجود بیان می کند از منظر عرفا وفلاسفه غربی بیشتر منطبق با خدافراگیردانی panentheism می باشد وکمتر مفهوم همه‌خدایی یا pantheism را دارد هرچند در هردو خدا در همه کائنات جاری است وچیزی جز خدا وجود ندارد، ولی در خدافراگیر دانی، خدا در مرتبه ای بالاتر و والاتر قرار داشته و سایر موجودات انعکاس وتجلی او در اعیان هستند.

از این منظر اسپینوزا می گوید: " همه چیزهای جهان یکی بیش نیستند و آن یکی کل در کل است...آن که کل درکل است خداست که ازلی و عظیم است و نه زاده شده ونه می میرد." [۸] [۹]



پارادوکس «وحدت و کثرت» در عرفان [ویرایش]

عارف با تکیه به عقل و ادراک خود، فنای خویش و فنای عالم رامیبیند و از طرف دیگر معتقد است که غیر از «حق» که وجود مطلق است، چیزی وجود ندارد و ذات الهی از هر کثرتی مبرا است. از سوی دیگر با حس خویش- که منکر آن نیز نمی‌تواند باشد- کثرت را ادراک می‌نماید. در این منازعه عقل باید بین این دو داوری نماید که آیا کثرت واقعی است و وحدت پرداخته ذهن ما می‌باشد و یا بالعکس و یا هر دو واقعی اند.[۱۰]

اختلاف علاءالدوله سمنانی با ابن عربی

علاءالدوله سمنانی بدلیل مخالفت شدیدش با برخی از آرای وحدت وجودی ابن عربی شهرت یافته‌است.[۱۱]

پانویس

↑ W.C. Chittick, Waḥdat al- S̲h̲uhūd, en:Encyclopaedia of Islam
↑ Amin Banani, Richard G. Hovannisian, Georges Sabagh (۱۹۹۴), p.۷۱
↑ ۳٫۰ ۳٫۱ William Chittick, Wahdat Al-Wujud, Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, p.۷۲۷
↑ مقاله دکتر قاسم کاکایی، دانشیار دانشگاه شیراز، فصلنامه اندیشه دینی بهار ۱۳۸۰; ۳(۱):۶۷-۹۴
↑ ۵٫۰ ۵٫۱ John Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path. Oxford University Press, ۱۹۹۸, p.۱۲۱
↑ «وحدت وجود» ‎(فارسی)‎. اسلام‌پدیا. بازبینی‌شده در ۱۲ آبان ۱۳۹۰.
↑ مقاله در فصلنامه اندیشه دینی تابستان و پاییز ۱۳۸۰; ۳(۴-۳):۷۹-۱۱۲، دکتر قاسم کاکایی، دانشیار دانشگاه شیراز
↑ کاکائی، قاسم. وحدت وجود به روایت ابن عربی و اکهارتانتشارات هرمس تهران ۱۳۸۱ صفحه ۶۸
↑ Panentheism در ویکی انگلیسی
↑ مقاله دکتر قاسم کاکایی، فصلنامه فلسفه دانشگاه تهران، شماره ۳، زمستان ۱۳۸۰
↑ مقاله دکتر قاسم کاکایی، فرهنگ قومس، سای ششم، شمارهٔ ۲۰
رده‌های صفحه: خداعرفان اسلامی
از ویکی پدیا
همچنین:
وحدة الوجود وحدة الوجود وتعرف أیضا باسم الواحدیة هی النظرة التی تقول أن الکون (الطبیعة) والله هما واحد. لا یؤمن موحدی الوجود فی الله الخالق، الشخصی أو الخارق. یرى موحدی الوجود أفضل رؤیة لله هی أنه مرتبط بالکون. رغم وجود اختلافات فی وحودة الوجود فإن الأفکار الرئیسیة فی معظم مذاهبها هی أن الکون کطوق موحد وتقدیس الطبیعة.
محتویات [اعرض]
[عدل]تاریخها

فی العصور القدیمة یعتبر السقراطیین موحدین بالوجود، وکذلک الرواقیین. فی مرحلة الامبراطوریة الرومانیة، الرواقیة کانت مدرسة بارزة. کذلک الطاویة تعتبر فلسفة موحدة بالوجود. فی الغرب، یعتبر سبینوزا من أبرز فلاسفة وحدة الوجود، وکذلک جون تولاند الذی تأثر بسبینوزا. فی القرن العشرین، لم یکن هناک ظهور لوحدة الوجود بسبب هیمنة کل من الفاشیة والشیوعیة خلال الحربین العالمیتین، ولاحقا بسبب فلسفة الوجودیة، وما بعد الحداثة. ولکن کان هناک مشاهیر موحدین بالوجود من أمثال روبینسون جییرز، ألبرت أینشتاین، فرانک رایت، وأرنولد توینبی. ولکن فی أواخر القرن العشرین، تصاعدت وحدة الوجود مع نمو الوعی البیئی فی الاعلام والمجتمع. وکانت غالبا توضع تحت المعتقدات الوثنیة. وفی العام 1975، نشأ المجتمع الکونی الموحد بالوجود، رغم أنه بقی صغیرا. وفی العام 1999 نشأت الحرکة العالمیة الوحدة بالوجود الطبیعی، التی استخدمت الإنترنت والشبکات الاجتماعیة. قدم ریتشارد دوکنز وحدة الوجود الطبیعیة فی عمله وهم الاله حیث لفت نظر الملحدین عبر ذکرها أنها کنوع من الالحاد.
[عدل]الاختلافات

کل مذاهب وحدة الوجود المختلفة تشترک فی الإیمان بالطبیعة بلا من أی اله خالق أو شخصی، وکلها ترکز على التوقیر والأخلاق. هناک ثلاث مذاهب کبرى والتی تختلف فی تعریف الطبیعة وتکوینها:
[عدل]وحدة الوجود الطبیعیة
والتی تقول أن المادة واحدة وهی المادة ذات طبیعة فیزیائیة. تاریخیا یعود هذا المذهب للرواقین، وحدیثا لجون تولاند، بول هاریسون. تتبنى هذا المذهب الحرکة العالمیة الموحدة بالوجود. یستخدم مصطلح الله کمرادف للطبیعة أو الکون، وتعرف هذه أیضا باسم الواحدیة العلمیة.
[عدل]وحدة الوجود المثالیة
والتی تقول أن المادة واحدة وهذه المادة ذات طبیعة روحیة. تسمى أحیانا بالطبیعیة الروحیة، وهذه موجودة فی الفلسفة البوذیة والهندوسیة. وهی قریة لوحدة الربوبیة عدا أن الأخیرة تقول أن المادة کانت فی وقت ما مدرکة.
[عدل]وحدة الوجود الثنائیة
والتی تقول بوجود مادتین، واحدة روحیة وواحدة فیزیائیة، ولکنهما متحدتان.
[عدل]استخدام المصطلحات الدینیة

هناک نقاشات داخل المجتمع الموحد بالوجود حول استخدام مصطلح اللـه. لا یؤمن موحدی الوجود بالله بالمعنى السائد کخالق شخصی. ولکنها تستخدم للتعبیر عن حجم المشاعر اتجاه الطبیعة والکون. هناک نقاشات فی إذا کان موحدی الوجود ملحدین أو لا، حیث یرى البعض أن الاله غیر التوحیدی لدى موحدی الوجود لیس الها.
[عدل]المصادر والمراجع

عنویکبیدیاالإنکلیزیة
تصنیفات: وحدة الوجود نظریات روحیةروحانیةلادینیة
همچنین:
Major ideas in Sufi metaphysics have surrounded the concept of wahdat (meaning "unity"). Two main Sufi philosophies prevail on this controversial topic. Wahdat al-Wujud literally means the unity of existence. Wahdat al-Shuhud (Apparentism, or Unity of Witness), on the other hand, holds that God and his creation are entirely separate. Some Islamic reformers have claimed that the difference between the two philosophies differ only in semantics and that the entire debate is merely a collection of "verbal controversies" which have come about because of ambiguous language. However, the concept of the relationship between God and the universe is still actively debated both among Sufis and between Sufis and non-Sufi Muslims.
Contents [show]
[edit]Wahdat al-Wujud

Ibn Arabi is most often characterized in Islamic texts as the originator of the doctrine of wahdat al-wujud, however, this expression is not found in his works and the first who employed this term was perhaps, in fact, the Andalusian mystical thinker Ibn Sabin.[1] Although he frequently makes statements that approximate it, it cannot be claimed that "Oneness of Being" is a sufficient description of his ontology, since he affirms the "manyness of reality" with equal vigor.[2]
In his view, wujūd is the unknowable and inaccessible ground of everything that exists. God alone is true wujūd, while all things dwell in nonexistence, so also wujūd alone is nondelimited (mutlaq), while everything else is constrained, confined, and constricted. Wujūd is the absolute, infinite, nondelimited reality of God, while all others remain relative, finite, and delimited.[3]
Since wujūd is nondelimited, it is totally different from everything else. Whatever exists and can be known or grasped is a delimitation and definition, a constriction of the unlimited, a finite object accessible to a finite subject. In the same way, wujūd's self-consciousness is nondelimited, while every other consciousness is constrained and confined. But we need to be careful in asserting wujūd's nondelimitation. This must not be understood to mean that wujūd is different and only different from every delimitation. The Shaykh is quick to point out that wujūd's nondelimitation demands that it be able to assume every delimitation. If wujūd could not become delimited, it would be limited by its own nondelimitation. Thus "He possesses nondelimitation in delimitation" Or , "God possesses nondelimited wujūd, but no delimitation prevents delimitation. Rather, He possesses all delimitations, so He is nondelimited delimitation, since no single delimitation rather than another rules over Him.... Hence nothing is to be attributed to Him in preference to anything else" . Wujūd must have the power of assuming every delimitation on pain of being limited by those delimitations that it cannot assume. At the same time, it transcends the forms by which it becomes delimited and remains untouched by their constraints.[3]
Only He who possesses Being in Himself (wujûd dhâtî) and whose Being is His very essence (wujûduhu 'ayn dhâtihi), merits the name of Being. Only God can be like that.[4]
On the highest level, wujūd is the absolute and nondelimited reality of God, the "Necessary Being" (wājib al-wujūd) that cannot not exist. In this sense, wujūd designates the Essence of God or of the Real (dhāt al-haqq), the only reality that is real in every respect. On lower levels, wujūd is the underlying substance of "everything other than God" (mā siwā Allāh)—which is how Ibn Arabi and others define the "cosmos" or "universe" (al-'ālam). Hence, in a secondary meaning, the term wujūd is used as shorthand to refer to the whole cosmos, to everything that exists. It can also be employed to refer to the existence of each and every thing that is found in the universe.[2]
God's 'names' (asma') or 'attributes' (sifat), on the other hand, are the relationships which can be discerned between the Essence and the cosmos. They are known to God because he knows every object of knowledge, but they are not existent entities or ontological qualities, for this would imply plurality in the godhead.[5]
For the creatures, Being is not part of their essence. So a creature does not own its being, that it can never be independent in 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 (imkân), a relative, possible non-existence.[4]
Ibn 'Arabî used the term "effusion" (fayd) to denote the act of creation. His writings contain expressions which show different stages of creation, a distinction merely logical and not actual. The following gives details about his vision of creation in three stages: the Most Holy Effusion (al-fayd al-aqdas), the Holy Effusion (al-fayd al-muqaddas) and the Perpetual Effusion (al-fayd al-mustamirr).[4]
Wahdat-ul-Wujood spread through the teachings of the Sufis like Qunyawi, Jandi, Tilimsani, Qayshari, Jami etc.[6] This mystic sufi philosophy found conducive soil in many parts of South Asia as most of the saints and sages became dedicated disciples of Wahdat-ul-Wujood. It is also associated with the Hamah Ust (Persian meaning "He is the only one") philosophy in South Asia. Sachal Sarmast and Bulleh Shah two Sufi poets from Pakistan, were also ardent followers of Wahdat-ul-Wujood.
Today, some Sufi Orders, notably the Bektashi sect and the non-traditional sects of Universal Sufism, place much emphasis on the concept of wahdat-ul-wujood.
[edit]Tashkeek

Tashkeek or gradation is closely associated with Sadrian interpretation of wahdat al-wujud. According to this school, not only there is gradation of existence that stand in a vast hierarchical chain of being (maratib al-wujud) from floor (farsh) to divine throne (arsh), but the wujud of each existent maahiya is nothing but a grade of the single reality of wujud whose source is God, the absolute being (al-wujud al-mutlaq). What differentiates the wujud of different existents is nothing but wujud in different degrees of strength and weakness. The universe is nothing but different degrees of strengths and weaknesses of wujud, ranging from intense degree of wujud of arch-angelic realities, to the dim wujud of lowly dust from which adam was made.[7]
[edit]Criticism of the concept

Some Muslims, including both Sufis and Salafis, have made comparisons between wahdat ul-wujood and Pantheism, the concept that all is God. This criticism has come both from Salafis and from Sufis as well.[citation needed]
Some, however, will counter that the two concepts differ in that wahdat ul-wujood states that God and the universe aren't identical.[8] They hold real existence to be for God only and the universe to have no existence on its own (without God).
[edit]Salafi criticism
Some Salafis criticize the concept of wahdat al-wujud on the grounds that it was a product of Arab interaction with Hindu philosophy, and is not a purely Islamic concept.[citation needed] However, this is highly improbable simply because Muslims did not begin their interactions with the Hindus of India until the 12th century whereas prominent Sufis had already openly published some of their writings as early as the 6th century, including Al-Hallaj, Dhul-Nun al-Misri, and so on. Although Salafis cite similarities with Kabbalah as a criticism, even a cursory study of the history of Kabbalah would indicate that the formulation of Kabbalah was based on Sufi doctrines as espoused through secret publications by the Brethren of Purity.[citation needed]. For example, Brethren of Purity discussed the doctrine of emanations which mention there being eight sephiroth, whereas in Kabbalah it is mentioned that there are ten sephiroth. However, the writings of the Brethren of Purity did not reach the Jews until during the time of the Muslim rule of Spain and the time of the Crusades. Before then however such doctrines already existed and were well established.
[edit]Sufi criticism
Some Sufis, such as Ahmad Sirhindi (Mujaddid Alif Sani), have criticised wahdat ul-wujood. Ahmad Sirhindi wrote about the sayings that universe has no existence of its own and is a shadow of the existence of the necessary being. He also wrote that one should discern the existence of universe from the absolute and that the absolute does not exist because of existence but because of his essence.[9]
[edit]Wahdat al-Shuhud

Wahdat al-Shuhud (or wah-dat-ul-shuhud, wahdat-ul-shuhud, or wahdatul shuhud) has often been translated into English as Apparentism. In Arabic it literally means "unity of witness", "unity of perception" or "unity of appearance"..
Out of those who opposed the doctorine of wahdat al-wujood, there were those who substituted the pole of subject for the object, formulating the doctorine of Wahdat ul-shahood. This school was formulated by `Ala al-Dawlah Simnānī, was to attract many followers in India, including Ahmed Sirhindi who provided some of the most widely accepted formulations of this doctorine in the Indian sub-continent.[6]
According to Ahmed Sirhindi's doctrine, any experience of unity between God and the created world is purely subjective and occurs only in the mind of the believer; it has no objective counterpart in the real world. The former position, Shaykh Ahmad felt, led to pantheism, which was contrary to the tenets of Sunnite Islam.[citation needed] He held that God and creation are not identical; rather, the latter is a shadow or reflection of the Divines Name and Attributes when they are reflected in the mirrors of their opposite non-beings (a'dam al-mutaqabila).[citation needed]
Abu Hafs Umar al-Suhrawardi and Abd-al-karim Jili were also proponents of apparentism.
[edit]Shah Waliullah's view of Wahdat

Shah Waliullah made the first attempt to reconcile the two (apparently) contradictory doctrines of wahdat al-wujud (unity of being) of Ibn Arabi and wahdat al-shuhud (unity in conscience) of Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi.
Shah Waliullah neatly resolved the conflict, calling these differences 'verbal controversies' which have come about because of ambiguous language. If we leave, he says, all the metaphors and similes used for the expression of ideas aside, the apparently opposite views of the two metaphysicians will agree. The positive result of Shah Wali Allah's reconciliatory efforts was twofold: it brought about harmony between the two opposing groups of metaphysicians, and it also legitimized the doctrine of wahdat al-wujud among the mutakallimun (theologians), who previously had not been ready to accept it.
In his books Lamahat and Sata'at, he discusses stages of being, the perceptive faculty, the relation of the abstract with the universe, the universal soul and the souls of man, after death, essence, miracles, the scope of man, the soul of the perfect, universal order, source of manifestation, and the transformation of mystics from quality to quality. He also demonstrated that the long-standing assumption that Sufi doctrine was divided between Apparentism and Unity of Being was a difference of expression alone, the latter doctrine being seen as merely a less-advanced stage of projection.[10]
In his opinion this whole universe has also self (nafs) as an individual person has a self, which is called the Universal Soul (an-Nafs-ul-Kulliyah). The multiplicity of the whole universe has originated from it. When Ibn Arabi says that everything is God, he thereby means the Universal Soul. This Universal Soul, or the Self-unfolding Being (al-Wujud-ul-Munbasait), subsists by itself. This existence pervades the whole universe, both the substance and the accident, and accepts the form of everything. It is both immanent and transcendental. Beyond this existence (al-Wujud-al-Munbasit : Universal Soul) towards the original existence (God) none has access to. In other words, man's progress ends with the Universal Soul or the Self-unfolding Being. He cannot move a step further. The Universal Soul and God are so intermingled that the former is often taken for the latter."
As for the question of the relation that this existencen (al-Wujud-ul-Munbasit) has with the essence of God itself. This relation is, however, known only in its reality (anniyyah : I-ness); its quality is unknown and can never be known. Thus when Ibn Arabi says that the realities of the existing things are the names and the attributes of the Universal Soul (Self-unfolding Being) in the stage of knowledge (Fi Martabat-il-'Ilm, in the Divine Consciousness) or when Imam Rabbani asserts that the realities of existing objects are sheer nothingness on which the lights of the names and attributes of the Universal Soul (al-Wujud-ul-Munbasit) are reflected is exactly the same thing. The difference in their language is so little that it needs no consideration.[11]
[edit]See also

Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi (1153–1191).
Emanationism
Illuminationist philosophy
Ibn Arabi
Al Akbariyya (Sufi school)
[edit]References

^ S.H. Nasr (2006), Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the Land of Prophecy, State University of New York Press, p. 156
^ a b Imaginal worlds, William Chiittick(1994), pg.15
^ a b Imaginal worlds, William Chiittick(1994), pg.53
^ a b c Souad Hakim - Unity of Being in Ibn 'Arabî
^ Ibn al-'Arabi, Muhyi al-Din (1164-1240)
^ a b Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present(2006), pg76
^ Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present, pg 78
^ Tehqiq ul Haq fi Kalamat ul Haq a book by Pir Meher Ali Shah
^ Maktoobat Rabbaniyah
^ Shah Wali Allah (Qutb al-Din Ahmad al-Rahim) (1703-62)
^ G. N. Jalbani, The Teachings of Shah Waliyullah of Delhi, pg98
God Speaks, The Theme and Purpose of Creation. Meher Baba, Dodd Meade, 1955. (second edition, p. 280)
[edit]Further reading

Thaqīq al-haqq fi'l kalamat al-haqq a book by Peer Mahr Ali Shah
[edit]External links

Letter on Wahdat-ul-Wujud by Ustadha Umm Sahl
Wahdatul Wajood Kiya Hai by Sayyed Ahmad Saeed Kazmi (In Urdu)
Index of articles related to Wahdat-ul-Wujood
What is Wahdat al-Wujood
Marefat Allah by Allame Tehrani (In Arabic)
Tawhid Elmi va Eini by Allameh Tabatabaei and Allame Tehrani (In Persian)
Wahdat Wujud by Ruhollah Khomeini(In Persian)
Wahdat al-Wujood clarified
Wahdat ul-wujud & Wahdat ush-shahood simplified
Wahdat al-Wujud - The Oneness of Being? by Shaykh Hamza Karamali
[show] v t e
Sufism and Tariqa
[show] v t e
Philosophy
View page ratings
Rate this page
What's this?
Trustworthy
Objective
Complete
Well-written
I am highly knowledgeable about this topic (optional)

Submit ratings
Categories: Arabic words and phrasesSufi philosophyMonismMetaphysicsNondualism