Wahdat Al-Syuhud : Ahmad Sirhindi's Criticism on The Concept of Wahdat Al-Wujud Ibn 'Arabi

This paper presents Sirhindi's criticism of the concept of Wahdat al-wujud Ibn 'Arabi which is called Wahdat syuhud. Comparing these two concepts will encounter obstacles, because the basis of thinking of Sufism for the two Sufis is different, IbnArabi emphasizes philosophical Sufism and Sirhindi emphasizes Sunni Sufism. However, the thoughts of both can be compared by presenting reasoning arguments that support constructing the two concepts as they are. This type of research uses descriptive qualitative, bibliographic data collection methods and data analysis uses comparative critical analysis with content analysis techniques. The results showed that Ibn 'Arabi in the doctrine of Wahdah al-wujud believes that the state of union with God is the peak stage and the highest point of attainment of a Sufi, tawhid - when understood in the sense of union with God - is the highest stage of Sufi life. However, Sirhindi sees tauhid - in the same sense - only as one of the suluk stages of a Sufi. The final stage is servitude and the final truth is difference. A different state after union which is completely different from that of pre-union is the highest state in the life of Sufism. The implementation of the research shows that intellectual dynamics is a characteristic of Muslim life, including the field of Sufism. Constructive discourse dialectics like this must be developed so as to enrich the treasures of Sufism in contemporary times. Abstract Tulisan ini mengetengahkan kritikan Sirhindi terhadap konsep wahdat al-wujud Ibn ‘Arabi yang disebut dengan wahdat syuhud . Membandingkan dua konsep ini akan menemui kendala, karena pijakan pemikiran tasawuf kedua sufi itu berbeda, Ibn Arabi menekankan tasawuf falsafi dan Sirhindi menekankan tasawuf sunni.Namun, pemikiran keduanya bisa dibandingkan dengan mengetengahkan argumen-argumen pemikiran yang mendukung bangunan kedua konsep tersebut dengan apa adanya. Jenis penelitian menggunakan deskriptif kualitatif, metode pengumpulan data bersifat kepustakaan dan analisis data menggunakan analisis kritis komparatis dengan teknik content analysis . Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Ibn ‘Arabi dalam doktrin wahdah al-wujud meyakini bahwa keadaan menyatu dengan Tuhan merupakan tahapan puncak dan titik tertinggi dari pencapaian seorang sufi, tauhid -ketika difahami dalam arti kebersatuan dengan Tuhan- adalah tahap tertinggi kehidupan tasawuf. Namun Sirhindi memandang tauhid -dalam pengertian yang sama- hanya sebagai salah satu tahap suluk seorang sufi. Tahap terakhirnya adalah penghambaan dan kebenaran terakhirnya adalah perbedaan. Keadaan berbeda sesudah menyatu yang sepenuhnya berbeda dengan keadaan pra-menyatu adalah keadaan tertinggi dalam kehidupan tasawuf. Implementasi penelitian


INTRODUCTION
The term Sufism as the development of piety ascetic (zahid) which clustered in the foyer of the Medina mosque has been widely known in the Islamic region since the end of the 2 nd century AH This pattern of life of asceticism was at least until the 2 nd century H and entered the 3 rd century AH It has been seen that there has been a concrete transition from asceticism to Sufism which was marked by, among other things, the change from the term zahid to Sufi. The study of Sufism at that time had arrived at the problem of a clean soul, morals and methods of guidance until a theory emerged about the levels that a Sufi (al-maqamat) must take and the characteristics of a Sufi at a certain level (al-ahwal). 1 Meanwhile, in the 3 rd century AH, Abu Yazid al-Bistami also stepped forward with the doctrine of al-ittihad through al-fana, which is the change in one's human nature into divine nature so that the union of man and God occurs.
If Sufism is seen as a science, then this phase is a new phase marked by the beginning of elements outside of Islam, such as Greek philosophy and the use of philosophical terminology, which acculturates Sufism. Another important feature of this phase is the emergence of tensions between the orthodox and the Sufi group with the ideology of al-ittihad on the other. And Sufism has reached its maturity phase which is marked by the emergence of two schools of Sufism, namely Sunni Sufism and philosophical Sufism 2 .
Among the teachings of Sufism is discussing how the system of recognition, the study of the line of the relationship between God and creatures, especially the human relationship with God and what it means to be close to God. With regard to the meaning of being one with Allah, there is a theory that is stated by a Sufi based on his mystical experience. Among them emerged the concept of Wahdat al-wujud Ibn 'Arabi which has been discussed and discussed a lot by Sufis, both agreeing and opposing. One of the next generation of Sufis who disagreed with the concept of Ibn 'Arabi was Ahmad Sirhindi with the concept of Wahdat al-syuhud.

METHODS
This study uses descriptive methods and comparative critical analysis. The descriptive method is a discussion that seeks to provide a complete and systematic picture in uncovering the concept of 1 HA. Rivay Siregar. Sufism from Classical Sufism to Neo-Sufism. (Jakarta ;Raja Grafindo, 2000), p. 38. 2 Sunni Sufism or akhlaqi is a form of Sufism that strictly encloses itself with the Qur'an and hadith and associates ahwal with maqamat. Meanwhile, falsafi Sufism is Sufism that is mixed with philosophical teachings. From here was born dzauq sufiyah through the perspective of reason. Amin Syakur, Rationalism in Sufism (Semarang: IAIN Wali Songo, 1999), p. 22. See also Andi Muhammad Ridwan, Baso Pallawagau, "Falsafat al-Wujudiyah al-Sufiyah; Asluha al-Diniy wa Mauqif al-Ulama 'Minha". Journal of Adabiyah The Journal of Humanities and Islamic Studies Vol. 20, no. 2 (2020): p.263 Sufism. Comparative criticism is an attempt to compare the concepts of two Sufi figures; Ibn 'Arabi and Ahmad Sirhindi on the concepts of wahdat al-wujud and wahdat al-syuhud. Comparative here is a comparative model of analysis philosophy where the thoughts of two Sufi figures will be compared with what they are, because eapch Sufi figure departs from a different starting point. 3 The purpose of comparing the two concepts is to find out some similarities and differences between the two concepts. To know and understand the concept of the two characters, a content analysis technique is used, which is a research method used through the meaning of words or messages contained in documents, films, art, music and other cultural works and media. Cole R.
Holsti articulates content analysis as a technique for making inferences objectively and systematically by identifying specific characteristics of the message 4 . Content analysis is used to sharpen the meaning and essence of the data so that it can immediately provide a solid summary of the main focus of the two figures' concept of thinking above. 5 Analysis of the content is very important to provide signs so that the description written in this study does not go too far from the point of discussion. The focus of research lies in explaining some of the Sufism thoughts of the two Sufi figures mentioned above.

Wahdat Al-Wujud
Studying the thoughts of Ibn 'Arabi's Sufism, including the concept of wahdat al-Manifestation, will experience difficulties in understanding them. William Chittick states in the introduction to his book; "To find God is to fall into confusion (1989; 3), there is no sentence that more accurately sums up the Sufi attitude towards confusion. 6 For Ibn 'Arabi, confusion is a semantic fact of God. 7 In the study of Sufism, the doctrine of Wahdat al-wujud has been regarded as a concept created by Ibn 'Arabi. However, investigations carried out by several figures recently stated that 3 Philosophy of analysis here is interpreted as an attempt to capture little by little through analysis of the problems themselves into manageable parts rather than constructing all systems from solutions to problems that arise. Although he never used the term wahdat al-wujud, he is considered to be the founder because his teachings contain the idea of wahdat al-wujud written in his statement, such as; "Existence is none other than al-Haqq because there is nothing in a form other than Him", 9 "the entity of existence is one, but the laws are diverse", 10 "nothing is seen in form through form except al-Haqq, because form is al-Haqq and He are one ". 11 Wahdat al-wujud doctrine is built on several teachings as supporting pillars, including;

Wujud and Adam
Ibn 'Arabi distinguishes the ontological categories of being into three. First, that which exists by its own being in its entity is identified as Allah. Second, those that exist with God or are manifested by God (form muqayyad) are identified as nature and everything in it. The third is that which is neither manifest nor 'adam, not holy nor qidam. It has existed with God and nature since ancient times. Ontologically it is God and nature, but at the same time it is not God and nature. Thus, it has a middle position between the first category and the second category. The relationship of the first and second categories, God to nature, is the relationship between what is manifested and what is manifested. God could not have created nature without the inclusion of a third category. Nature creation is synonymous with tajalli. Tajalli could not have happened without the third category.
For this reason, the third category (called al-maddah al-'ula) has a very important position in Ibn 'Arabi's ontological theory. 12 The word wujud is more specifically used by Ibn 'Arabi to denote the form of God.
However, Ibn 'Arabi also uses the word form to denote everything other than God But he uses it in a metaphorical sense (majaz) to maintain that form belongs only to God, while the existence that exists in nature is essentially the form of God which is loaned to him. Since form belongs only to God so 'adam (nothingness) is "belonging" to nature, therefore Ibn' Arabi states that form is light and 'adam is darkness. 13

Al-Haqq and al-Khalq
Ibn 'Arabi in some of his works defines the word al-haqq with different meanings in different contexts. Here the meaning of al-haqq discussed is limited in the context of the ontological relationship between al-haqq and al-khalq. In this context, al-haqq is Allah Almighty, the Creator and the Obligatory of al-Wujud, while al-khalq is nature or creature, al-mumkinat and al-mawjudat as it says; "So there is nothing in form except Allah and the attributes of the entities and there is nothing in 'adam except al-mumkinat entities which are prepared to be assigned the nature of the form. Because that in the form is he (al-mumkinat) and not him.
Because what is visible are his properties, then he is he in form. But it does not have an entity in form because it does not exist in form. In the same way, it is Allah and not Him, because He is what appears, it is Him. But the difference between mawjudat is captured by the mind and the five senses because of the different characteristics of the entities, so it is not Him " 14 In explaining the relationship between al-haqq and al-khalq, Ibn 'Arabi uses symbols, among which he uses mirror symbols in explaining this reciprocal relationship. Al-khalq is a mirror for al-haqq which has two functions; first to explain the cause of nature's creation. Allah created nature not only to see Himself, but also to show and introduce Himself through nature. the second is to explain how the multiple of the One arose and the relationship between the two. These two functions are the cause of the tajalli or creation of nature. 15

Tajalli al-Haqq
The ontological relationship between God and creatures in the doctrine of wahdat al-wujud cannot be explained without referring to the concept of tajalli. Ibn 'Arabi also uses the term emanation (al-fayd) as a synonym for tajalli. For him, emanation means tajalli in which God appears in different forms from the less concrete to the more concrete. Tajalli occurs continuously without beginning and without end, which is forever there and will always be (al-daim alladhi lam yazal wa la yazal). 16 14 Ibn 'Arabi,2: p. 160. 15 Noer, Ibn al- 'Arabi.., Ibn 'Arabi,1: p.49. Tajalli is the process of the appearance of God in concrete and tangible forms that have been determined and specified which is called ta'ayyun (entification). 17

Tanzih and Tasbih
God, when viewed from the point of His essence, is completely different from creatures. But when viewed from the point of view of His names and attributes which are manifested in nature, God is similar to nature, because it is through nature and natural forms that God appears, introduces and announces Himself. Humans can know and know God through nature. Ibn 'Arabi's view has two sides; namely tanzih (kemisterian) and tasbih (likeness). In general Ibn 'Arabi argues that God is understood in relation to tanzih insofar as He is inaccessible, but that He is understood to be related to prayer beads insofar as He is closer to man than the jugular vein.
The concept of tanzih and tasbih interpreted by Ibn 'Arabi in accordance with the doctrine of his wahdat al-wujud which rests on the formulation of ambiguity; "He and not Him" as an answer to the question whether nature is identical with God. In the formulation of the answer, there are two parts, positive and negative parts. The positive part is "Him" which emphasizes the aspect of tasbih where it states that nature is identical with God. While the negative part is "not Him" which emphasizes the tanzih aspect where it states that nature is not identical with God.
Thus it can be said that Ibn 'Arabi's interpretation of tanzih and tasbih is in line with the principle of al-jam' bayn al-a'dad which combines contradictions such as between the One and the many. 18 Some of the concepts above are the main pillars that support the building of the Wahdat al-wujud doctrine. In this understanding it is stated that everything that exists has two aspects. In other words, in every manifestation there is a divine nature (haqq) and a quality of conquest (khalq).
Thus it can be seen that the most important aspect is the haqq aspect which is the substance and essence of everything that is tangible. 19 In the concept of wahdat al-wujud, God wants to see, know and introduce Himself and therefore He makes nature. God wanted to see the entities of His names and attributes, so He created nature. So nature is a mirror for God. It can also be said that nature is an address or sign to know God. When He wants to see Himself, He looks at nature. In the things that exist in nature where in each of these objects there is a divine nature, God sees Himself. This is where the understanding of unity arises. There are many things in nature, but it is actually one. 20 God is imminent as well as transcendent. God is imminent insofar as He is one with nature, He is one with nature in a form where He is the real subject. And He is transcendent insofar as He is different from nature, He is different from nature insofar as in the qualities that cannot be united with nature, for example He is infinite and eternal, All-Creator, All-Regulating and so on. 21 Sirhindi's position is quite unique in the intellectual history of the Naqshabandiyah order.

Biographical sketches and works of Ahmad Sirhindi
Even though it followed the basic and fundamental principles of this tarekat, it gave a new orientation to its doctrines by discarding the doctrine of the unity of being (wahdat al-wujud).

Wahdat Al-Syuhud; Criticism of Ibn Arabi's Wahdat Al-Wujud Concept
During his suluk journey, Sirhindi stated several thoughts of Sufism that support the concept of Wahdat al-syuhud, including:

The Meaning of Sufism
In starting a study of Sirhindi's thoughts and efforts to renew Sufism, first begins with an explanation of Sufism itself. Sirhindi, as someone who really adheres to syari'ah, in his efforts to understand and interpret Sufism in the mainstrem of syari'ah emphasizes more Sunni Sufism. Sufis in the early days usually in defining Sufism (Sufism) only emphasized one aspect of Sufism itself.
Sufism's main concern is with one's inner state and soul and not on one's outward behavior. This is reflected in several statements by early Sufis such as al-Nuri, al-Junayd and al-Tustari 29 . However, 25 Ansari, Sufism and Shari 'ah..,p.29. 26 Ansari,Sufism and Shari'ah..,p.12. 27  the same concern is expressed by some contemporary writers, especially those who consider and detail Sufism as a code of inner behavior (fiqh al-Inner), or purification of the soul (tazkiyah alnafs), or a feeling of Divine presence (al-ihsan). 30 The second approach to Sufism seems more to seek knowledge of reality, enlightenment or knowledge (gnosis). R.A. Nicholson quoted Ma'ruf al-Karkhi's statement which he translated that "Sufism is the recognition of Divine reality". 31 Such an approach is found in the utterances of the Sufis, but sufficiently clear and sufficient details have not been found in the period before al-Ghazali. The Sufis' view of makrifat is very popular among modern scholars in the West and the East. It is even explained in several studies that Sufism has developed in the archipelago, like Aceh, around the 16-17 century AD. 32 The teaching of Islamic teachings by preachers who brought Islam in several areas was the epicenters of Islam's development in the archipelago such as Aceh, Minangkabau, Palembang, Banten Demak, Banjar, Gowa, Bone, and Ternate was influenced by the teachings of Sufism. This study gives rise to contestations and clashes between the colors of Ibn 'Arabi's philosophical Sufism and Al-Ghazali's Sufism. In its development, there was a reconciliation of these two domains, which was later called neosufism. 33 Another approach defines Sufism in the application of experiences about fana' and baqa.
The Sufis stated that, including al-Junayd when he said; "Sufism is to make you die in yourself and live in Him (Allah)". 34 For Sirhindi, to understand that walayat means human transience (fana ') and immortality (baqa') in Him, one has to separate the experience of mortal 'and baqa' from the makrifat which it engenders. According to him, the main element in Sufism is the experience in fana 'and the baqa' itself, in which the characteristics and values are felt differently by different

Fana 'and Baqa'
Fana 'literally means leaving and perishing, and baqa' means life and forever. In the Sufi world these two terms are usually used with the prepositions fana '' an (empty of everything, forgetting or not realizing something) and baqa 'bi (living, with something and filled with something), then when a person performs good deeds or if he is attractive oneself by staying away from Allah's 30  This view of Sirhindi was strengthened by the statements of previous close-knit Sufis, such as al-Ghazali, al-Sarraj, al-Qushairi and al-Hujwiri, which essentially rejected the notion that a Sufi is involved in the essence of God's attributes and then becomes a soul like Him. , or these qualities flow into him, or that the Sufi is one with his God (ittihad), or that God permeates him (hulul).
There is only one interpretation that is considered correct, namely that the Sufi leaves the ignorant qualities which are the main characteristics of his humanity and then attains a level of glory under God's auspices. In this case, al-Ghazali further explained, there is nothing but conformity in name (al-musyarakah fi al-ism), that is, the Sufi can never overcome his human limitations and can never, for example, become the Omniscient. 38 On one occasion Sirhindi wrote; True "mortal" is to forget everything that is not-divine, to negate the love of the world and to cleanse the heart of all favors and desires as a servant should do. And true baqa 'is carrying out God's will, and making His will his will without losing his identity as a servant. 39

Conjoined Experience
Sirhindi calls the state of unity as kufr al-tariqah and the different state as Islam al-tariqah. The reason for calling the unified experience the kufrof tariqah is because it blocks the difference between God and the world, between Khaliq and creation, between faith and disbelief as stated 36 Ansari, Sufism and Shari'ah.., p. 33. 37 39 Sirhindi, Maktubat, Vol, I: 99, p. 1172-3. by the shari'ah. On the other hand, different circumstances will emphasize the differences, therefore it deserves to be called Islam from tariqah.
The concept of the philosophy of wahdat al-Manifest is alleged to have implications for understanding the Jabariyah school, which led to the negation of sharia teachings. 40 The experience of unity will hide the truth from the differences, so that it will conflict with the shari'ah, and this is also widely recognized by Sufis. 41 This is supported by the general statement in the Sufi literature, that unity (al-jam ') without separation (tafriqah) is heresy (zandaqah). 42 According to Sirhindi, Sufis in interpreting the experience of unity, how their nature and position are divided into three groups. The first group is a simple view of the experience. They do not say anything about the meaning of the experience but only pay attention to the description and do not make any observations about its status. The second group is those who feel they have a true experience of being with God. In ordinary life they forget the reality and belief that they are really different from God. they are shackled in the experience of unity even at the moment of postunited separation. This experience only gives a glimpse of the relative difference between God and human beings who are sheltered in the experience of unity. The third group believes that the experience of oneness is only a matter of shuhudi (perception) and not 'aini (reality). 43

Experience To Be Different
In general, the experience of bonding is believed to be the peak experience of a Sufi and the highest point of attainment. As a result, his movement from an indifferent sense of oneness to awareness of his difference with God is regarded as "descending", considered a descent on a ridge that must be passed after passing its peak. There are several factors that influence this assumption, namely the statement of the Sufis who glorify unity, the characterization of the awareness of differences after reaching the stage of unification and considering them as returning (ruju ') and descending "After experiencing the hour 'al-jam' (absolute union), a holy state spreads out which the Sufis call al-farq al-sani (the second separation), namely the state of a Sufi where he returns to simplicity when he performs fardu prayers so he must carry out its obligations at that time. He returned to God, for God and with God, and not for himself and with him". 45 In the above statement, al-Qushairi clarified several issues. First, that the stage behind the stage of absolute unity, the difference with which the latter is marked by separation and distinction.
Second, the post-union distinction is completely different from the pre-united division. Third, the different state after union is the highest state, which al-Qushairi calls halah 'azizah, which is considered the greatest life experience. 46 When a Sufi goes through the stage of unity and then enters the stage of separation, then differences arise. He will distinguish between God and the world, God and His servants. He will be able to distinguish between good and bad, faith and denial, sin and obedience. This stage is what Sirhindi with Islam al-tariqah, he wrote; "Islam al-tariqah is the experience of difference after unity, in which the ability to distinguish emerges and truth is separated from what is not true, good from evil". 47 Different experiences are a matter of degree. At the lowest level, a Sufi begins to see differences, but is still unable to clearly distinguish between God and the world, good and bad. He acknowledges that there are similarities as well as differences. But if he develops further, the experience of difference will become stronger and soon he will reach the end of his wandering.
He will feel that the truth is basically God who is not at one with the world. At this stage the Sufi gets closer to his goal in that he is freed from the drunken influence of the experience of unification, gains awareness and is able to control his speech. He did not feel any contradiction between the shari'ah and the experiences he had been through or he did not see any contradiction between his experience with the Koran and the hadith and his actions did not contradict the shari'ah according to what the Prophet had implemented 48

Wahdat al-Syuhud
In the context of syari'ah, tawhid means recognition of the oneness of God, or organizing life according to the provisions stipulated by syari'ah. While in some Sufi references, monotheism has four meanings, namely to believe in and believe in the oneness of God, the two disciplines of inner and outer life based on this belief, the three experiences in unity and union with God and the four philosophical constructs of reality that originate from mystical experiences. 49 In his metaphysical terms Sirhindi marks three stages of his experience, namely; unity of dzat (tawhidwujudi / wahdat al-wujud); shadow (zilliyah) and devotion ('abdiyah). In pure mystical language, it describes the stages of unity (jam ') or indistinguishable stages (jam'al-jam'), separation after unity (farqba'da al-jam '), and absolute difference. The first two stages are commonly experienced by Sufis, but the latter are unusual or even very rare. Sirhindi mentions these stages repeatedly for two reasons; first he wanted to restore the mystique of his time, which mostly started from the first stage and stopped at the second stage, where at that time they would see that humans were one with God or the world and God was one Essence, whereas God was very different and absolute. Secondly, he wanted to underline that the truth of God's absolute majesty is not just a matter of faith as commonly believed or just an intellectual conclusion as theologians do, but a fact that is discovered through experience, obtained through will and hope. 50 The general term tawhid in the third sense of the Sufi reference is tawhid shuhudi which is simply defined as the perception (syuhud) of a single essence of mystical experience where the peak is the experience of unity. While the term tawhid in the fourth sense is often used as wahdat al-wujud, tawhid without including the adjective wujudi is also often used in the same sense.
Because the formulation and description of the doctrine of tauhid wujudi or wahdat al-wujud is based on Ibn 'Arabi, the term is always synonymous with its philosophy. In fact, there are several formulations of the doctrine.
Sirhindi formulated the concepts of tauhid shuhudi and tauhid wujudi with the following statements; "Tauhid martyrdom is seeing a single essence; in the perception of a Sufi there is nothing but a single essence. On the other hand, tauhidwujudi believes that there is only a single being, while others are considered non-existent, and other than that these others are considered as the manifestation and appearance of a single being ". 51 Sirhindi further views that tawhid shuhudi is seeing a single essence or declaring nothing but a single essence. But perceiving does not mean assuming something else does not exist or implies the belief that another does not exist. With such a mindset, of course people only see the sun and not the stars. Tawhid wujudi, on the other hand, only acknowledges that what is visible and what exists is only a single being, while nothing else exists. The existence of another world or being is not delusional, but their existence is a manifestation of a single being. Therefore tawhid wujudi offers a framework of belief ('ilm al-yaqin) while tawhid shuhudi offers a framework of perception ('ain al-yaqin). 52 Sirhindi sees tauhid -in the same sense -as only one of the stages of a Sufi's path of suluk.
A different state after union which is completely different from that of pre-union is the highest state in the life of Sufism

Sirhindi's Critique of Ibn Arabi's Sufism
In understanding form, Ibn 'Arabi views that there is nothing other than the form of God, in other words the word form cannot be given to other than God as a real form. But Ibn 'Arabi also uses the word wujud in nature but in the meaning of majaz. In form there is only one reality which can be viewed from two aspects; Creator, God and creation, creature. Thus God and being are two aspects to one being or reality. Sirhindi in his concept states that tauhid shuhudi is seeing only one Essence which is a Sufi perception. He criticized the monotheism of Ibn 'Arabi's wujudi as the belief that there is only a single Dhat, while other than Him does not exist and is only His manifestation. Thus, in Sirhindi's view, tauhid shuhudi offers a framework of perception while tauhid wujudi offers a framework of belief.
Regarding the ontological relationship between Khaliq and makhluq, Ibn 'Arabi considers reality to be one but two different; divinity and supremacy present in everything in nature. In existence there is only one reality which can be viewed from two aspects; Creator and creation.
The duality between the two is artificial because what exists is the oneness of God. As for Sirhindi, even though he views the existence of nature as virtual and unreal existence and that the unreal image of nature does not threaten the oneness of God, he believes that God is separate and not one with nature.
Likewise in the case of a single subject. Ibn 'Arabi believes that God is the sole actor, so whatever a servant does or chooses is essentially done or chosen by God. God is the subject of every predicate, activator and executor of all actions whether good or bad. Sirhindi states that the existence of an unreal natural identity cannot be compared and opposed to God. According to him, natural objects have power and movement over themselves, including humans. It only negates self-sufficiency and freedom. Human beliefs and actions are his own and do not belong to God.
However, even though humans have the knowledge and strength bestowed by God, they actually act within the limits given by Him. Therefore, people who do good actions will be rewarded and vice versa who do wrong will be responsible for their actions and will receive punishment

CONCLUSION
The concept of Ibn 'Arabi in the doctrine of wahdah al-wujud in interpreting the position of being' close 'to God, believes that the state of union with God is the peak stage and the highest point of attainment of a Sufi. Meanwhile, Sirhindi's criticism in Wahdah al-syuhud states that union with God in a state of syathahat may be attained by a Sufi and only as a stage of suluk. The final stage is servitude and the final truth is difference. The state of a separate / distinct Sufi after union which is completely different from the pre-union state is the highest state in the life of Sufism. This can be taken ibarah from the Prophet Muhammad doing isra 'to sidrat al-muntaha until he meets God, but eventually returns to the world.
Although there are differences in understanding and thinking of Sufism between the two Sufis above, there are similarities between the two. They both believe that the purpose of Sufism is to serve and get closer to God, to gain a higher degree with Him. They also believe that there is only Dhat that is real and one namely God, while the existence of nature or the imaginary world is pseudo and unreal.
The difference in thought between Ibn 'Arabi and Ahmad Sirhindi is a common practice which illustrates that the intellectual dynamics and differences that characterize the life of Muslims are included in the field of Sufism. This kind of healthy, conducive and constructive dialectic of discourse needs to be cultivated so that in turn it can enrich the treasures of Sufism in the future.