Indeed, the pantheistic ittiḥādī heretics (1) assert that the Lord is identical with “existence,” and within that assertion they advance two positions.
The first: they claim that He is the undifferentiated, absolute existence that admits of no particularization; this is the view of al-Qūnawī (2). According to this view (3), existence is subdivided into animal, plant, spirits, and bodies, yet it is not divided into Necessary and contingent, Creator and created. Rather, absolute, universal existence itself is the Necessary Creator. Such a claim nullifies and denies the Maker—glorified and exalted is He, far above what the wrongdoers allege.
No rational person would maintain that (4) this absolute existence is the very existence affirmed of the Necessary Being, distinguished in His own essence from the contingent; the only reason its proponent makes such a claim is his refusal to concede that the Necessary Being is, in and of Himself, distinct from the contingent. When he is forced to acknowledge a Necessary that is distinct, contradiction overtakes him. Yet they remain among the most self-contradictory of people, mired in profound confusion, even while sharing in that which makes them among the most unjust of creation—
(1) The discussion of these figures appears on p. 193; they maintain that al-Rabb (the Lord) is al-wujud (existence), so His attributes are attributes of God and His speech is God’s speech—exalted is He. For further treatment of their views and their atheism, in addition to the above, see: Compendium of Fatwas (Majmu‘ al-Fatawa) by Ibn Taymiyya, vol. 2, pp. 98–104, 124, 134–285; Collection of Treatises and Questions (Majmu‘ al-Rasa’il wa-l-Masa’il) by Ibn Taymiyya, vol. 1, pp. 178–187; Philosophical Lexicon (al-Mu‘jam al-Falsafi), Arabic Language Academy in Cairo, p. 2; Encyclopedia of Islamic Knowledge (Dawirat al-Ma‘arif al-Islamiyya), vol. 2, pp. 43, 54; Definitions (al-Ta‘rifat) of al-Jurjani, pp. 8–9.
(2) He is Sadr al-Din Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Muhammad ibn Yusuf ibn Ali al-Qunawi al-Rumi, a Sufi and one of Ibn ‘Arabi’s principal disciples; he died in 673 AH. See: Tabaqat al-Shafi‘iyya of al-Subki, vol. 8, p. 45; al-Wafi bil-Wafayat of al-Safadi, vol. 2, p. 200; al-A‘lam of al-Zarkali, vol. 6, p. 254. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya also cited the views of al-Qunawi and other heterodox Sufis such as Ibn ‘Arabi, Ibn Sab‘in, and Ibn al-Farid, refuting them and exposing their deviations in Refutation of the Contradiction between Intellect and Revelation (Dar’ Ta‘arud al-‘Aql wa-l-Naql), vol. 1, pp. 290–295.
(3) The text within angle brackets is an addition found in manuscripts S and T.
(4) The original reads “inna”; manuscripts S and T have supplied the word that best fits the context.