Session 32 Notes
The Qur’an invites us to reflect on the creation of the universe and whatever is in it. We reflect on the creation of the sky, stars, trees, ants, bees, human beings, one’s feelings and senses, etc. What do we reflect on by looking at them? In the observation of scientists matter is “melting”, constantly changing and decaying continuously. They realize that they cannot demonstrate and provide evidence for matter to be self-existent, even self-contained. Humans wonder what the source of existence is for all the multitude of things in the universe. What is the reality of these beings given existence? We should reflect on their “existence” and come to the conclusion of their source of existence.
The majority of the faiths having the understanding of God try to think of the Creator and then try to define and describe God. The methodology of the Qur’an teaches us that we cannot really describe God in His essence but we can reflect on creation. By looking at the beings, I can logically come to the conclusion that there must be a creator. Whenever one experiences an event, they always wonder what is the cause of the event. If I see cooked food on a table, I ask, who made it? The answer to “who made it” is transcendental, not of the nature of the being whose existence I am questioning. This is known in the Islamic tradition as negating (Salbiyyah), i.e. the source of existence of the created being must be unlike the created being.
For example, when I look at a house, I cannot say that any of the parts of the house have any qualities to give existence to that house. I cannot find the source of existence of the house to be inside the material elements of the house. The trick used by materialists is that this source of existence is a mystical or nonsensical, effectively ruling out any line of inquiry that points toward a transcendent reality. We discussed that by categorizing the source of existence as transcendent, Wittgenstein concludes that it is inherently mystical and therefore outside the bounds of rational inquiry.. However, that which is transcendent is not necessarily beyond inquiry: it simply requires a framework that exceeds the limitations of pure empiricism. That is why the Qur’an fundamentally has the message of negation with “la ila ha” (there is no god) which negates gods in creation -which is empirical- and then the logical conclusion of “illallah” (but God) which affirms God, who is transcendent, therefore, cannot be describable with any quality of the created world. This is the Quranic methodology where we cannot think about the essence of God but we can think about the qualities manifested in anything existing in the universe.
The Qur’anic method of negation uses a clear logic: if we ask who placed the door in a house (representing the universe), we know the cause cannot be found within the door itself. The house cannot be its own maker, as its defining qualities—order, purpose, wisdom, and symmetry—cannot be the product of unintelligent lifeless matter (la ilaha). Therefore, there must be a Maker whose qualities cannot be of the same order of existence as the qualities of what He creates (illallah). Our mind, consciousness, and feelings confirm this conclusion: the existence of a transcendent Being who endowed the universe with these attributes.
The Qur’anic method of “لا إله إلا الله” must always be remembered. Instead of saying that “God created me”, I must follow the method of the Qur’an to say: “I cannot exist by myself and nothing can exist by itself but we all must have a Creator. This Creator must be an Absolutely conscious Being who is called God “. I exist within the context of the whole universe where the universe cannot give me existence as it is like me, in need of being given existence. The universe does not have any quality to create itself. The Qur’an describes God as the Lord of this universe (ٱلِلَّهِ رَبِّ ٱلْعَـٰلَمِينَ), whoever created the whole universe is what we mean by God.
In section “Al-Ikhlas” of the Qur’an, the verses:
قُلْ هُوَ ٱللَّهُ أَحَدٌ ٱللَّهُ ٱلصَّمَدُ لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُۥ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌۢ
“Say, He is God, the One, God the Eternal Refuge, He neither begets [transfers any of His qualities to anything else] nor is He begotten [He has inherited His qualities from anything else], there is nothing like Him [He is a self-sustaining Absolute Being.] ” (112-1:4)
Ahadiyah -> Samadiyah -> “lam yalid wa lam yulad”
These are the stages of understanding the uniqueness and Absoluteness of God. The Qur’an begins with the simple word ‘He,’ then provides a proper name: ‘He is Allah.’ The human mind cannot help but ask: ‘Who is Allah?’ The answer follows: He is the One, Absolute Being (Ahad).
To deepen our understanding of this Absoluteness, the Qur’an describes Him as “As-Samad”: the One who is completely self-sufficient, needing nothing, while everything else depends on Him for existence. To help us grasp this further, it explains that He does not ‘transfer’ His divine qualities to anyone or anything else, nor does He inherit His qualities from anyone or anything.
Finally, to help us visualize ‘Absolute’ within a created world, the Qur’an clarifies that nothing in the universe possesses the power to bring things into existence on its own. The Creator cannot be like the creation; He cannot be defined by the conditions of this universe. We ultimately realize that the ‘Infinite’ can only be understood through negation: just as ‘Infinite’ means ‘not finite,’ ‘Absolute’ means He cannot be understood by comparing Him to anything He has made.
How reflective is the “self-contained theory” by the self claimed atheist scientist Steven Hawking? In other words, to what extent is this “self-contained” theory which is a theory without a transcendent cause, internally consistent, logically reflective, or capable of explaining reality when viewed from an atheistic or materialistic perspective?
Atheists try to justify internal consistency of their views by denying human inquiries which ask for the source of existence. If human questions are asked, atheists have no answer for them and their answers have no internal consistency. To avoid their inconsistency, they claim that they are “scientists” and the human questions are a matter of theology which they don’t deal with. That is why they are labeled by atheists as “mystical”, “illegitimate” or “supernatural”.
The philosopher of science Arthur Eddington (1882-1944) states in his book “The philosophy of science” written in 1939: “What my net can’t catch isn’t fish”. From this statement he emphasises that his net symbolizing the scientific method is limited, restricted to an extent with equations and symbols. The method cannot capture what reality is. The things not caught in the net doesn’t mean that they do not exist but they are not in the scope of the net (scientific methods) that they define it in a way that they avoid any human inquiries that they cannot answer within their materialistic interpretation of the universe. They claim that the source of existence of things points to a source that is transcendent and is beyond the scientific methods. Scientific methods will look for answers within the universe, they can measure how big the tree is, how fast the wind is, what materials are used for a thing, etc. Once one asks the source of the existence of the qualities manifested in the component parts of a tree, that is no longer a valid question for them as the answer is not found within the universe. What is the source of the existence of the universe becomes an invalid question in the scientific world; all human questions are denied.
What are the human questions, inquiries?
- What is the source of existence of the beings and the existence of any manifested qualities in them? What is the source of the existence of measurements, of beauty, art, harmony, balance, organization, etc.
- What is the meaning and purpose of existence?
- Why have this contradiction in human feelings yearning for infinite satisfaction whereas what is seen and experienced in the universe doesn’t provide it. Everything (matter, energy, electromagnetic fields, etc) in the universe is dependent on something else, transient, and is subject to an existing order.
Conclusion: Human logic, intellect, consciousness and feelings cannot accept the explanation that the materialist put forward: “The universe can be self-contained”. This explanation directly contradicts the inquiries of human qualities.
That is why the materialists avoid asking the question: “Why does something exist rather than nothing?” They claim that: “Our responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can, improve the solutions and pass them on” (Feynman, self declared atheist, agnostic). We see that the latest materialist scientists have no answer to which they acknowledge.