This article deals with philosophical dimensions of various ideas in Sheikh Bedreddin’s work Varidat in relation to those of various currents of thought that are claimed to underlie Bedreddin’s work. First, Neo-platonist notions that are presumed to underpin Sheikh Bedreddin’s views will be presented with reference to Plotinus and Sühreverdi’s works, before pointing at several critical points that distinguish Varidat from the neo-platonist philosophy.At first, the basic difference between Bedreddin and Neo-platonism is based on a thought according to which a body that is a manifestation of God is never be “evil”. Besides, contrary to Sühreverdi’s view, Bedreddin wants to get rid of all transcendent conception of being in his thought. Secondly, considering those claims that Bedreddin was influenced by the Hurifi thought and materialism, the materialist standpoint (Dehrîyyun) represented by İbn Ravendi, and El-Maarri will be discussed to show how Bedreddin’s vision ties in and also differs from it. Bedreddin’s basic difference from materialism (Dehriyyun) stems from a fact that he asserts a mystical conception of being whereas materialism is based on a rationalist perspective in which all things can be explain in a rational way. In contrast to the messianic understanding of Hurufism, for Bedreddin such messianic inclinations and hopes are not important in respect of Sufi thought. Thirdly, Sheihk Bedreddin will placed at midway between the philosophies of İbn Arabi and Spinoza, and Sheikh Bedreddin will be argued to stand closer to Spinoza. On the other hand, it will also be argued that Sheikh Bedreddin departs from Spinoza particularly in terms of methodology. In conclusion, it will be claimed that Sheikh Bedreddin’s Varidat can be considered an anomaly as it stands apart from those all those views despite its resemblances.