As for why they are called proponents of union, there are two explanations. They reject the first, because ittihād (union) follows the same morphological pattern as iqtirān (conjunction), and conjunction presupposes two things, one united with the other, whereas they never acknowledge two existences. The second explanation justifies this designation on the grounds that multiplicity has become unity, as I shall explain when discussing their inconsistencies.

This explanation can follow Ibn ʿArabī’s doctrine: he distinguishes existence from fixed reality and says that the existence of the Real governs the fixed reality of contingent things. Thus, union between existence and fixed reality can properly be spoken of. Alternatively, according to those who make no such distinction, imagined multiplicity has become unity after spiritual unveiling, or concrete multiplicity has become unqualified unity.