the teaching of one of them, this helps him understand that of another, guard himself against them, and expose their misguidance, given the many errors they have spread in the world.

For Ibn ‘Arabī, according to his claim, the self-disclosure of the Essence is nothing more than an absolute witnessing, which is the existence of existing things, abstracted and unqualified, without name or attribute. It is well known that anyone who conceives of this cannot be addressed by it. Hence his claim that no address occurs when the Essence discloses itself.

Abū Hafs al-Suhrawardī, however, was more knowledgeable about the Sunnah, more faithful to it, and better than him. He had encountered the hadiths stating that Allah reveals Himself to His servants and addresses them when He reveals Himself to them, and he believed this. Yet Ibn ‘Arabī was more renowned for his philosophy than al-Suhrawardī was for his adherence to the Sunnah. Thus, the followers of both held Ibn ‘Arabī in greater esteem, despite acknowledging that al-Suhrawardī followed the Sunnah more closely.

This was related to me by a visiting shaykh known as Husām al-Dīn, who followed the path of Ibn Hamawayh, whom his followers called “Sultan of the Spiritual Poles.” He held Ibn ‘Arabī and Ibn Hamawayh in immense reverence and went to great extremes in exalting them. I explained to him much of the corruption, heresy, and hadiths falsely attributed to the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, contained in their writings. Lengthy discussions ensued on this subject because of his reverence for them, despite his failure to understand the true nature of their statements and the errors they contained.

He was also among those who related to me, from his shaykh al-Tāwūsī, who was in Hamadan, on the authority of Sa‘d al-Dīn