Abstract:
This paper will compare two of the most prominent mystics of Islam and Hinduism on what may be called the “end of the mystical journey,” or mokśa in Hindu spirituality and fanā in Islamic mysticism. The interpretations of these two mystics are naturally developed according to their own epistemological and ontological bases. Thus, referring to their most significant principles of thought, the author has tried to examine three aspects of those concepts, i.e., the nature of mokśa and fanā, how these states can be attained, and whether or not religious obligations still need to be practiced after they have been attained. Having compared and summed up mokśa and fanā within the above contexts, the author has shown some striking similarities and considerable differences between them, both in their principles and in the three above aspects relating to their nature, attainment and obligations.
Machine summary:
For the self- disclosure is light, and the soul‘s witnessing is a shadow, since the viewer for whom the self-disclosure occurs is annihilated form the witnessing of himself during the vision of God. 26 Following the Sufis, Ibn Arabi describes seven stages of fanā in his al-Futuhat:27 1.
In his various works, such as al-Futuhat-u al-Makkiya, Risalat-u Hilyat-i al-Abdal, and Risalat-u al-Anwar, Ibn Arabi has discussed the method of the spiritual journey, its requirements, the different stations of the wayfarers, and the variety of gifts and intuitions which occur at each station.
From the very beginning of their coming into existence, Ibn Arabi holds, human beings are wayfarers39 of a spiritual journey that aims at the annihilation of one‘s human name or characteristics in order for them to be exposed to divine epiphanies.
For obligations are imposed with reference to things to be avoided or desired; how then should he, who sees nothing, either to be wished or avoided, beyond the universal Self, stand under any obligation?58 In his introduction to the Commentary on Chandogya Upanishads, Śankara has solved this issue by explaining the difference between ordinary believers and those wayfarers who have reached the knowledge and state of deliverance.
64 Accordingly, Ibn Arabi does not seem to exempt the wayfarers from shari‟ah obligations in the highest stages of their journey of reaching the Truth unless they are in a state of unconsciousness – a fact which is agreed by all jurists and scholars.