Abstract

The oneness of being is one of the most famous and, at the same time, most controversial problems in theoretical gnosis. It is also considered to be the most fundamental problem of this field. Researchers in the fields of philosophy and gnosis have always asked the question of whether the oneness of being is a gnostic problem, a philosophical problem, or both. Some believe that the theory of the "oneness of being" is a purely intuitive one related to revelation and unveiling and has no meaning for anyone except for the gnostic who feels it and perceives it by means of mystic taste. In fact, the human intellect and wisdom are incapable of perceiving it. Sometimes, it is referred to as "something beyond the level of the intellect". Some others say that, if it is merely an inner and taste-related problem, why have its defenders tried so much to demonstrate it based on philosophical arguments and logical syllogisms and borrow the terminology of philosophers, mutikallimun , and logicians when explaining and interpreting it? On the other hand, if the theory of the "oneness of being" is a purely intuitive problem, what is the difference between a gnostic believing "in intuitive unity" and a gnostic believing in "ontological unity"? Another question is: what is the difference between the gnostics before the rise of Ibn Arabi and those after him? In this paper, the writer has presented the ideas of those who are for and against this issue and provided the answers to some of the related ambiguities. He has also indicated that this problem is both gnostic and philosophical