The AMI Podcast

The revival of Shi‘ite Sufism, after the destruction of Safavid empire, occurred during the Zand dynasty (1163-1209/1750-1794) and continued through the Qājār era. As Zarrīnkub has pointed out, the Qājār era was a time of nostalgia for the noble past. Of course, their mystical philosophy had to fit the theological standards of Shi‎‘ite society. The two leading Sufi orders in this revival movement were the Ni‘matullāhīs and the Dhahabīs. These two orders had much in common, as both of them highly emphasized the importance of following Islamic laws and Shi‎‘ite beliefs. They were known to be the propagators of Akbarian philosophy in Persia. Dhahabīs and Ni‘matullāhīs were strong promoters of the school of “Unity of Being” (Waḥdat al-wujūd). Mīrzā Muḥammad Taqī, with the spiritual title of Muẓaffar ‘Alī Shāh (d.1215/1800) is one of the most influential masters in the history of Ni‘matullāhiyya order. This Shi‘ite Sufi master is one of the most active and knowledgeable masters of the Ni‘matullāhīs during this era. He is the first master after the return of the order to Persia who wrote about its cosmological views, based on the philosophy of “Unity of Being”. In his youth, he began studying the rational and traditional seminary sciences (‘ulūm ‘aqlī wa naqlī) and became well-versed in them. Muẓaffar was more of a mystic philosopher (ḥakīm) than a jurist (faqīh), and extremely well-versed in speculative Sufism, following the school of “Unity of Being”. Muẓaffar ‘Alī Shāh’s mystical poetry had in-depth mystical meanings, with heavy reliance of Ibn ‘Arabī’s philosophy and terminology. Muẓaffar was very influential for the development of the Ni‘matullāhī order and as a propagator of Ibn ‘Arabī’s thoughts. His beliefs about the perfect man, insān-i kāmil, were highly influenced by Akbarian (Ibn ‘Arabī’s) philosophy. Muẓaffar passed away in 1215/1800. He wrote numerous books and literary papers, which are tremendously valuable for a better understanding of Ni‘matullāhī thought. Muẓaffar ‘Alī Shāh wrote poetry lamenting over his separation from his master, Mushtāq, to whom he dedicated a compendium of his poetry, calling it Diwān-i Mushtāqīyya. In this paper, we will examine two of Muẓaffar's writings: “Sea of the Secrets” (baḥr al-asrār) and “Compendium of the Seas” (majma‘ al-biḥār) which are both interpretations of the first chapter of Quran. “Sea of the Secrets” (baḥr al-asrār) is in verse form of Mathnawī and “Compendium of the Seas” (majma‘ al-biḥār) is written in prose. In these two works, Muẓaffar ‘Alī Shāh heavily relied on the chapter of Prophet Adam in Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam of Ibn ‘Arabī. He had numerous references to Ibn ‘Arabī and his writings. Muẓaffar ‘Alī Shāh explains the relationship between Nubuwwa (prophethood), Risāla (apostleship) and Wilāya (sainthood) based on Ibn ‘Arabī’s teachings using his terminology like the disclosure of Attributes of Divine Majesty (jalāl) and disclosure of Attributes of Divine Beauty (jamāl). This paper investigates the importance of Muẓaffar ‘Alī Shāh for survival of the school of “Unity of Being” among practicing Shi‘ite Sufis in general and the Ni‘matullāhī Sufi in particular as one of the most important Shi‘ite Sufi orders in Iran.

The metaphysical perspective of Ibn ʿArabī oscillates constantly between the distinction of the different relations that determine being, and the constant return to the indistinction of being itself. According to Ibn ʿArabī, only perplexity (ḥayra) is suited to the apperception of being, while the distinction and articulation of the relations that weave themselves into being seem, for their part, to require a mode of knowledge that allows for differentiation. This presentation will show how the articulation of the various elements of Ibn ʿArabī’s metaphysical system is based on a “correlative ontology”, according to which existing realities are distinguished within a web of relations woven within the single being, while having no existence of their own, since they ultimately refer to the relation that being maintains with itself. It will then explain how this correlative ontology allows Ibn ʿArabī to found different levels of relationships, within which the notions of Creation and Divinity and their different modalities of correlation emerge. This circular conception of being, in which the fundamental status of existing things is qualifiable only by perplexity, corresponds also to the circular movement that Ibn ʿArabī associates with “the perplexity of the muḥammadan” (ḥayrat al-muḥammadī). This movement of rotation around the pole of being, by which the latter is envisaged in an infinitely renewed way, is opposed by Ibn ʿArabī to the “linear” path (mustaṭīl), which for its part always necessarily relates to a particular determination of being, and thereby prevents it from being envisaged in itself.

There is no doubt in the claim that the foremost interpreter of Ibn ‘Arabi (d. 638/1240) within Twelver Shi’ism is Sayyid Haydar al-Amuli (d. 787/1385), who in his Jami’ al-Asrar thoroughly filtered the Akbarian doctrine in such a way that it emerged in accordance with the theological demands of the Twelver tradition. While Amuli’s accomplishments in these regards are acknowledged, it is not known whether any schools arose within the intellectual centers of Iran and Iraq loyal specifically to his ideology; it is instead in the Islamic periphery of India, where demonstrable evidence exists to indicate the existence of such a school therein. Sayyid Nur Allah Shushtari (d. 1019/1620), the martyred Mughal chief justice, quite openly aligns with Amuli in his Majalis al-Mu’minin (Gathering of the Believers), labeling him as Sayyid al-Muti'allihin (Lord of the heavenly ones) whilst openly appropriating ideas from Amuli’s Jami’ al-Asrar to develop the thesis of his majlis-i shishum (sixth gathering) on Sufi believers. Shushtari argues that in essence Sufism and Shi’ism are one and the same, one is an inward expression whereas the other is outward. Furthermore, in his Majalis al-Mu’minin, Shushtari includes a lengthy entry on Ibn ‘Arabi, providing illumination on his supposed hidden Shi’ism, as well as a defense of Akbarian monism. Shushtari’s views have routinely been categorized as aberrational by mainstream Usulis, like al-Wahid al-Bihbahani (d. 1205/1791), who decried him as a Shi’ah-tarash (Shi’ah fabricator); it is thus of great intrigue that when Bihbahani’s student, Sayyid Dildar ‘Ali Naqawi Nasirabadi (d. 1235/1820), returned to North India in 1781 with the aim of spreading Usulism, he met stiff resistance by Twelver Chishtis (Sufis), who claimed to follow a supposed ideological school of Haydar al-Amuli linked with Shushtari. This occurs more than 150 years after the execution of Shushtari, indicating that such an Akbarian-Amulian lineage potentially existed in North India; also giving credence to the Sufi-Shi’i nexus claims of majlis-i shishum. In order to delve further into this matter, Nasirabadi’s polemic against this group, titled al-Shihab al-Thaqib, and the rejoinder prepared by this Akbarian-Amulian group, Radd-i al-Shihab al-Thaqib, will be analyzed and expounded upon in this paper.

In this discussion, Shaykh Arif Abdulhussain, a scholar of philosophical and theological concepts, teams up with Mahmood Dawud al-Qaysari, a noted interpreter of Ibn Arabi. They delve into the profound notion of the unity of being, examining how it juxtaposes with the emanationist view of God. The guest speakers explore the relationship between the unknowable ipseity and its manifestation as Allah, emphasizing the absence of a clear distinction between God and the world. Their insights reveal how understanding these dynamics reshapes perceptions of existence and divine recognition.

This study delves into "Risāla-yi Nūr-i Waḥdat" (Treatise of the Light of Oneness) by Khwāja Khurd (b. 1010/1601), a seminal work in the Naqshbandi Sufi tradition that has also been influential in the Sufi School of Najaf within the Shia Seminary. Renowned for its eloquent yet accessible language, Khurd's treatise advocates the Akbarian doctrine of Waḥdat al-Wujūd (Unity of Being) over Sirhindī’s Waḥdat al-Shuhūd. A central tenet of the Sufi School of Najaf is the understanding of self-knowledge as the gateway to the Gnosis of God. Khurd’s treatise deeply explores this concept, suggesting that the journey (Suluk) to recognizing the Real Being in the universe is through understanding the self, which is inherently intertwined with the Divine. Through his poetic language, Khurd captures the essence of this transformative realization, offering insights into the relationship between lover and beloved, and their union in the divine context. Under the influence of figures like Sayyid ʿAlī Qāḍī Ṭabāṭabāʾī (1866-1947) and ʿAllāmah Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn Ṭabāṭabāʼī (1321/1904-1402/1981), the Sufi School of Najaf has integrated Khurd's treatise into its spiritual pedagogy. This work serves as one of the foundational texts for spiritual development, emphasizing meditation, memorization, and the internalization of its teachings. It guides disciples in practices such as Muraqabah (meditation), Khalwah (seclusion), and Arba`in (the forty-day spiritual retreat), facilitating their journey in embracing the concept of Unity and transcending the self within the framework of Waḥdat al-Wujūd. Finally, this paper examines the role of "Risāla-yi Nūr-i Waḥdat" in the Sufi School of Najaf, its impact on the spiritual formation of practitioners, and its broader implications in expanding the Akbarian doctrine of Waḥdat al-Wujūd in the Shia Irfān.

Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī was one of the most important, overtly Twelver, pre-Safavid interlocutors of the theoretical strand of mysticism developed by the school of Ibn ʿArabī. He critically contributed to the development of a more precise articulation of waḥdat al-Wujūd and elucidated a project which sought to bridge the gap between Ṣūfism and Shīʿism. Yet his inclusive, synergistic contribution remains understudied, despite an increasing stream of works of varying scope and depth, both within traditional Twelver circles and in modern scholarship. In this paper I trace Āmulī’s use of waḥdat al-Wujūd in his largest surviving work of Qurʾānic exegesis, Al-Muḥīṭ al-aʿẓam fī taʾwīl kitāb Allāh al-muḥkam (completed in 777/1376) which remains an under investigated yet significant contribution to esoteric exegesis (taʾwīl) of the Qurʾān. This paper will show how dependant Āmulī’s esoteric method of exegesis is on the framework of manifestation and correspondence which are key presuppositions of waḥdat al-Wujūd. For Sayyid Ḥaydar, the centrality of waḥdat al-Wujūd to esoteric interpretation is such that an exegete cannot be considered of those who are firmly established in knowledge (al-rāsikhūn fī al-ʿilm), the group identified in the Qurʾān (3:7) as knowing the esoteric meaning, without a sound knowledge if its principles. Thereafter, the paper will show the explanatory power of waḥdat al-Wujūd in positing alternative meanings to the scriptural sources in specific surviving sections of Āmulī’s exegesis.

This paper proposes to delve into the profound legacy of the Akbarian tradition, an intellectual tradition rooted in the works of Ibn ʿArabī, which extensively contemplates the central doctrine of tawḥīd (the oneness of God) and has exerted a lasting influence on subsequent Islamic theological discourse. However, the reception of this tradition within Muslim scholarship has engendered multifarious responses, sparking contentious debates primarily revolving around the perceived incompatibility of distinguishing between the Creator and the created. These ongoing debates have seen scholars either championing Ibn ʿArabī as the "The Greatest Saint" (Shaykh al-Akbar) or denouncing him as a heretic. Within this context, Qāsim Nānotwī, a pivotal figure in the formation of the Deobandi school of thought, emerges as a noteworthy scholar who engages with the Akbarian tradition. His scholarly pursuits are steeped in the kalām tradition, where he seeks to reconcile apparent theological inconsistencies in revealed texts, the Quran and hadith literature, employing the methodology of burhān (demonstrative logical knowledge) while also incorporating a mystical perspective. Nānotwī's writings unveil not only his profound reverence for Ibn ʿArabī but also his intimate familiarity with the conceptual paradigms of the Akbarian tradition. It is this reverence for Ibn ʿArabī that motivates Nānotwī to offer a rejoinder to prevalent misconceptions surrounding the doctrine of waḥdat al-wujūd (oneness of being) and to clarify its differentiation from waḥdat al-mawjūd (oneness of existents). This presentation aims to explore Nānotwī's writings, not only in terms of his comprehension of waḥdat al-wujūd but also in his innovative use of this concept to establish the existence of God, elucidating how all facets of creation are inherently ontologically dependent on their Creator and derive their reality from the Divine existence. As a scholar hailing from the Indian subcontinent during the late Mughal and early British Raj era, this paper endeavours to illuminate the interpretation and integration of the Akbarian tradition within the corpus of Sunni Muslim literature, particularly through the lens of one of the founding figures of the Deoband school of thought.

Numerous studies have explored the concepts emphasized by the School of Ibn al-ʿArabī, with a particular focus on Waḥdat al-wujūd as the central ontological theory of the School. However, only a small number have delved into the analysis of the scriptural hermeneutics within the School. This paper seeks to contribute to scholarly discussions by elucidating Akbarī hermeneutics in relation to the foundational concept of Waḥdat al-wujūd. Through an examination of key writings, including Ibn al-ʿArabī’s al-Futuḥāt, Ṣadr al-Dīn al-Qūnawī’s Iʿjāz al-bayān, and Shams al-Dīn al-Fanārī’s ʿAyn al-aʿyān, this paper traces the evolution of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s exegetical and ontological ideas within subsequent Akbarī writers. This evolution culminates in a comprehensive hermeneutical theory that integrates Akbarian ontology, epistemology, and spirituality. The argument suggests that upon close investigation, Akbarī exegesis harmonizes seamlessly with the concept of Waḥdat al-wujūd, not only justifying this concept through Qur’anic interpretation but also establishing a synthesis of ontology, epistemology, and spirituality. The paper not only sheds light on the ontological and exegetical ideas of the School of Ibn al-ʿArabī but also addresses Akbarī prophetology. Akbarī scriptural hermeneutics and prophetology, which emphasize the dynamic role of the Muslim community in the interpretative process, are presented as potential solutions to contemporary challenges faced by modern Muslims.

The Moroccan Sufi master Aḥmad Ibn ʿAjība (d. 1244/1809) penned two small treatises that focus upon the oneness of being (waḥdat al-wujūd), Taqyīdān fī Waḥdat al-Wujūd. His other writings do not use the term frequently but are nonetheless infused with an understanding of waḥdat al-wujūd similar to that espoused in the writings of Ibn ʿArabī (d. 638/1240). Several passages within his major Quran commentary, al-Baḥr al-Madīd fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-Majīd, such as the commentary on Q 2:115, convey his understanding of the oneness of creation as a tapestry woven of divine attributes with all existents reflecting the unity of the Divine. For Ibn ʿAjiba perceiving this unity is essential to wayfaring upon the spiritual path, as it prevents the multiplicity of forms from distracting the spiritual aspirant. Progressing to the point where one witnesses all of existence as a single essence (dhāt wāḥid) reflecting the Divine and in complete servitude (ʿubudiyya) to It is thus essential for attaining connection with God. This paper goes beyond Ibn ʿAjība’s short treatises on waḥdat al-wujūd to examine his discussions within ¬al-Baḥr al-madīd and his little studied commentary upon the Ḥikam of Ibn ‘Aṭā’illāh al-Sakandarī (d.709/1309), Īqāẓ al-Himam fī Sharḥ al-Ḥikam. The central point of analysis is how Ibn ʿAjība perceives the understanding and witnessing of the oneness of being as a central component on the path of spiritual wayfaring, as elaborated in his exegesis of Q 6:103 and similar verses. Particular attention is given the process Ibn ʿAjība envisions for shifting one’s focus from the ephemeral existence of created beings to the divine reality within them such that one is able to witness the manifestation of the Divine in all the forms of creation.

The history of the concept of waḥdat al-wujūd finds its ‘point of rising’ (maṭlaʿ) with the ideas of Ibn ʿArabī (d. 1240) on the singularity of al-ḥaqq and the ways in which that unique and absolute being is manifest in its many theophanies. Its limits (ḥudūd) and extension (inbisāṭ), however, go far beyond and reach into the very aesthetics of literature traditions across Islamicate and Persianate languages and cultures. A generation ago William Chittick indicated the significance of the reception of Ibn ʿArabī (d. 1240) in this context, and the sheer number of commentaries, marginalia, paratexts, and independent treatises that engages the metaphysics and devotional tradition of the Andalusian master testifies to a major commitment. The earliest presence of Ibn ʿArabī was in the poetry of Fakhr al-dīn al-ʿIrāqī (d. 1289), a devotee in the presence of the Suhrawardī Sufi Bahāʾ al-Dīn Zakarīyā (d. 1262) in Multan, followed by Chishtī and Kubravī masters already in the pre-Mughal period. We still have much to do to consider the literary heritage of early modern pre-colonial and colonial South Asia in terms of the broad long tradition of ḥikma, taṣawwuf, kalām, and ʿerfān. One of the decisive elements in this tradition is the way in which Persian and vernacular literary traditions negotiated the influence of Ibn ʿArabī and read his ideas in ways that conformed to their own aesthetics of presence and metaphysics of beauty. I will consider four case studies that modify and read Ibn ʿArabī in their own ways: the Mughal prince Dārā Shukoh (d. 1659), Bēdil (d. 1720) perhaps the greatest Indo-Persian poet, Mīr Dard (d. 1785) one of the pillars of Urdu poetry and the pivotal thinker of the new ‘Muḥammadan way’ of Sufism, and the great Punjabi poet of the 18th century Bullheh Shah. None of these figures was a simple imitator or transmitter – literary traditions like philosophical ones acquire a dynamic that arises from creative misreadings and liminal interpretations as well as exciting new aesthetic formulations. In this way, we can consider how the metaphysics of the unity of existence and often its ethical and aesthetic implications were naturalised and transformed in the soil of Hindustān.