Yunus Emre questions the relationship between existence and non-existence with expressions such as “Non-existence in existence, existence in non-existence.” Are existence and non-existence opposite concepts, or are they a complementary whole?

Being and Non-being: Opposition or Totality?

In philosophical thought, being and non-being are among the most fundamental ontological concepts. In ancient Greece, Parmenides considered being as an absolute reality and in a sense rejected non-being by saying, “There is no non-being, what exists exists.” According to him, non-being is something that cannot be thought of and grasped; because even thinking is a kind of being. However, this view establishes a sharp contrast between being and non-being and completely separates the two.

On the other hand, thinkers such as Plato and later Hegel argued that although being and non-being seem to be opposites, they have a dialectical relationship. In Hegel’s dialectical philosophy, being and non-being come together in a synthesis: Being encounters non-being and gives birth to “becoming.” According to this perspective, being and non-being are not mutually exclusive concepts; on the contrary, they are parts of a dynamic whole that complements each other and gains meaning through each other.

Yunus Emre’s Sufi Perspective

Yunus Emre’s expression “Non-existence in existence, existence in non-existence” is based on the understanding of “vahdet-i vücud” (unity of existence), one of the fundamental principles of Sufi philosophy. According to vahdet-i vücud, the entire universe is a manifestation of God (Haqq); everything that exists carries a reflection of His light. In this context, although existence and non-existence seem like a duality resulting from the limited comprehension of the human mind, they are united at the level of truth.

The “non-existence in existence” in Yunus’s expression refers to man transcending his own existence (self) and melting into the existence of God. This state, known in Sufism as “fana fillah” (non-existence in God), is the person’s abandonment of his own self, his ego, and reaching absolute existence. In other words, man’s existence becomes a “non-existence” in the face of the existence of God. On the other hand, “being in nothingness” describes the person finding the existence of God within himself after this annihilation. When a person eliminates his ego, he becomes the recipient of the manifestation of the real existence (God).

From this perspective, existence and nothingness do not constitute opposition, but a whole. Existence opens the door to nothingness; nothingness reveals the true meaning of existence. Yunus Emre’s lines express this dialectical unity in poetic language: When a person ignores his own existence (transcends his ego), he finds the real existence (divine truth).

A Comparison from the History of Philosophical Thought: Heidegger and the Problem of Being

In modern philosophy, Martin Heidegger’s thoughts on existence and nothingness present an interesting parallel with Yunus Emre’s mystical approach. Heidegger emphasizes that existence is a fundamental mystery with the question, “Why does existence exist, why is it not non-existent?” According to him, absence (das Nichts) provides a ground that reveals the meaning of existence. When a person is confronted with absence – for example, in the face of the inevitability of death – they grasp the value and fragility of existence more deeply.

For Heidegger, absence is not an absolute void; on the contrary, it is an “event” that allows existence to reveal itself. In this context, existence and absence are not in opposition to each other, but in a complementary relationship. Yunus Emre’s expression “presence in absence” coincides with Heidegger’s idea that absence reveals existence. Both ideas imply that some kind of encounter with absence is necessary to reach the truth of existence.

Unity or Separation?

Understanding the relationship between existence and absence is also related to understanding one’s own existential journey. If we see existence and absence as an absolute opposition, this duality leads us to a kind of division: Everything that exists loses its meaning in the face of absence. However, Yunus Emre’s Sufi approach and the dialectical perspective of philosophers such as Hegel and Heidegger allow us to overcome this duality. Being and non-being are two aspects of a whole that complement each other.

The “non-being in being” in Yunus’s expression refers to man’s transcending his own limited existence and turning to absolute being (God); while “being in non-being” refers to the manifestation of divine being as a result of this turning. This shows that being and non-being are not opposites, but concepts that melt into each other and gain meaning from each other.

Two Concepts Uniting in a Whole

Yunus Emre’s expression “Non-being in being, being in non-being” reveals that the relationship between being and non-being is not an opposition but a wholeness. According to Sufi philosophy, being and non-being are stages on man’s path to truth: A person reaches true being by destroying his own being (transcending his ego). In the history of philosophical thought, especially in the approaches of Hegel and Heidegger, it is seen that existence and non-existence are in a dialectical relationship. In this context, existence and non-existence are not mutually exclusive opposites, but parts of a whole that complement each other and reveal different dimensions of truth.

Yunus Emre’s lines express this philosophical truth in a poetic language: Existence finds meaning in non-existence; non-existence becomes visible in the light of existence. When a person grasps this unity, he transcends his ego and reaches the infinity of truth.