Muḥyī al-Dīn Ibn ‘Arabī (d. 638/1240) is regarded as one of the foremost mystical thinkers in Islam. This paper explores the ways in which he and his followers distinguish between the reality of Muḥammad (al-ḥaqīqa al-Muḥammadiyya) or the light of Muḥammad (al-nūr al-Muḥammadī), as the metaphysical reality of Muḥammad, and his metahistorical manifestation as Muḥammad Ibn ‘Abd Allāh. In his metaphysical reality, Muḥammad is the manifestation of the qur’ān, which ‘brings together’ the divine and His creation. Muḥammad’s metaphysical reality, as (...) the primary recipient of the divine outpouring, enables further differentiations of the divine to emerge in the form of the universe, and establishes his connection to the divine. Yet the Qur’an is also temporal in terms of being an historical act of revelation. Likewise, Muḥammad Ibn ‘Abd Allāh, in terms of his physical reality, was temporally circumscribed. It is in these ways, argues Ibn ‘Arabī and his acolytes, that Muḥammad, as reality and personality, brings together the divine and the temporal, in the same manner as the qur’ān/Qur’an respectively. (shrink)

In _Knowing God_, Ismail Lala investigates the nature of God and whether we can truly know Him according to the influential mystic, Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ʿArabī, and his disciple, ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Qāshānī.

ABSTRACT The connection between the unity of God and the multiplicity seen in the universe represents the central concern for the Sufi thinker, Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ‘Arabī (d. 638/1240). It deeply affected the thought of the Southeast Asian mystic, Ḥamza Fanṣūrī (d. 1590?), and his alleged disciple, Shams al-Dīn al-Sumatra’ī (d. 1630). Traces of this idea, through its popularisation in the poems of Fanṣūrī, exert a powerful influence on the Indonesian intellectual topography to this day. This article investigates the concept (...) of unity and multiplicity, of the One expressed as the many in the phenomenal world, in Ibn ‘Arabī’s Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam (Ringstones of Wisdom). Through a close textual reading of the chapters of Ādam (Adam) and Ibrāhīm (Abraham) and their various commentaries by the most influential followers of Ibn ‘Arabī, it concludes that the representation of ‘oneness of being’ (waḥdat al-wujūd), which was extensively taught by Fanṣūrī in Aceh, as an erasure of the God-Man divide, is untenable. (shrink)

This study investigates the prophetic tradition in Islam, which states that the fabric of time will become erratic with the coming of the Antichrist. The temporal ontology of one of the most influential philosophical thinkers in the Islamic tradition, Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ‘Arabī (d. 638/1240), is employed to decode the tradition and expatiate on the nature of time and how it will manifest in the apocalyptic future. Ibn ‘Arabī explains that there are three modalities of temporal reality: ‘the day of (...) rest’ (yawm al-sabt), ‘the omitted days’ (ayyām al-salkh), and the ‘rotary days’ (ayyām al-takwīr). While the first is entirely beyond human perception, the others are not. These three types of days delineate the nature of the future during the apocalyptic days of the Antichrist when the first day of his emergence will be the length of a year, the second a month, and the third a week. (shrink)

The night journey (isrā’) and ascension (mi‘rāj) represent arguably the most significant and unique events in the life of Prophet Muḥammad. However, the influential Sufi thinker Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ‘Arabī (d. 638/1240) argues that the Prophet had thirty-four night journeys of which only one was physical. This physical night journey, and the ascension that took place with it, was the one in which he was given the five daily prayers. Ibn ‘Arabī thus employs the secondary night journeys and ascensions of (...) Prophet Muḥammad to delineate a point of emulation between the Prophet’s spiritual experience and those of his nation. Muslims can also have their own ascensions, but their journeys cannot be physical, and, analogously, cannot have autonomous legislative authority. They can, nevertheless, cause a change in their perception that allows them to see the world as it truly is: a manifestation of the divine Names. (shrink)

Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ‘Arabī (d. 638/1240) is arguably the most influential philosophical mystic in Islam. He is also a presentist. This paper responds to the arguments of contemporary philosophers, Norman Kretzmann, William Lane Craig, Garrett DeWeese, and Alan Padgett, who argue that divine atemporality and temporal presentism are incompatible, through the temporal ontology of Ibn ‘Arabī. Ibn ‘Arabī asserts that all entities in the universe are loci of manifestation of God’s most beautiful Names. These divine Names constitute sensible reality. The (...) principal response of Ibn ‘Arabī to the arguments of contemporary scholars is that the divine Names as they are manifested in the cosmos cannot be conflated with the divine Names as they are in themselves, which, in turn, cannot be conflated with God in His numinous essence. This allows him to simultaneously maintain the atemporality of God and temporal presentism. (shrink)

Kierkegaard raises many issues in his account of the near sacri­fice of Isaac by his father. Responding to and critiquing Hegelian and Kantian depictions of Abraham, Kierkegaard moves to elevate Abraham into a position as a knight of faith. The Sunnī perception of the incident in the exegetical tradition is far more ethically unequivocal than that of the Latin philosophical tradi­tion. The ubiquitous Sufi theorist, Ibn ʿArabī, however, in a single act of interpretive ingenuity, managed to extirpate the central root (...) of contention raised by the philosophers when he alleges that Abraham was only ever commanded to sacrifice a ram. Despite his abiding commitment to spiritual unveiling and his insistence on the personal nature of God, Ibn ʿArabī advo­cates the employment of a Kantian criterion of universal ratio­nality to adjudicate between literal and metaphorical dreams. (shrink)

The renowned mystical thinker Muḥyī al-Dīn ibn ‘Arabī (d. 638/1240) believes uncertainty (ḥayra) has a higher epistemological value than certainty. This is because certainty is only of ostensible reality, which ignores the true ontological underpinnings of phenomenality. To become cognisant of the reality that palpitates beneath the facade of the sensible world, we only have recourse to uncertainty. Uncertainty makes us realise that all existents are loci of divine manifestation. Nevertheless, God is simultaneously transcendent and immanent, which means we can (...) only know God through discarding the rule of the excluded middle. This, says Ibn ‘Arabī, gives rise to metaphysical uncertainty. Ibn ‘Arabī’s notion of uncertainty was subsequently taken up by an important commentator, Nūr al-Dīn al-Jāmī (d. 898/1492), who systematises uncertainty into different levels and offers an original hierarchy that defines which types of uncertainty are positive and which are negative. (shrink)