The term Huwiyya in Muhyi al-Din ibn ‘Arabi and ‘Abd al-Razzaq al-Qashani’s Sufi thought: analysis of ideas and methods

Huwiyya is a term that essentially denotes the non-manifest aspect of God, His essence. But in the works of Ibn 'Arabī and al-Qāshānī, this term has many different applications corresponding to the many different facets of God and the many different modalities of His interaction with the Cosmos. God is fundamentally non-manifest, unfathomable to a creation that is ontologically and epistemologically incapable of comprehending Him—upon this primary signification both Sufis agree. However, al-Qāshānī discreetly breaks ranks with his master when he emphasises God's connection to His creation more than His dissociation from it in the context of this term, and though this aspect is also present in Ibn 'Arabī's usage of the term, in al-Qāshānī it is far more prominent. Moreoever, his scientific style and analytic approach stand in stark contrast to that of his predecessor. Both are the result of a pedagogical concern that supercedes commentative fidelity. However, though it is undeniable that al-Qāshānī's style is far more didactic, it more than just that, it is the forging of a new worldview—one that is completely congruent with, but still subtly different from, that of Ibn 'Arabī. But in order to elucidate this, it is necessary to analyse relevant aspects of Ibn 'Arabī's thought. In attempting to excavate these and other nuances of difference, I have been influenced by the method of Toshihiko Izutsu in using a term, huwiyya, as a window in to the thought and cosmology of Ibn 'Arabī and al-Qāshānī. I have also been influenced by Ronald Nettler’s approach in Sufi Metaphysics and Qur'ānic Prophets, where Ibn 'Arabi's thought is rigorously pursued to expose underlying assumptions and arguments. I have used these approaches in my own way, and towards my own interpretative analysis which compares the works of Ibn 'Arabī and al-Qāshāni. Furthermore, I have supplemented this type of analysis, which is primary source based (and appears as such in the works of both Izutsu and Nettler) with secondary material to provide a broader context of the rationale behind the differences in style and content between the master and his disciple.