--
LESSON FIVE
KNOWING GOD
Introduction
The foundation of religion is the belief in the Supreme Creator of the universe. This point constitutes the divisive element, which separates the divine worldview from the materialistic worldview. The primary factor to be established in the search for reality is whether or not God exists. We have to arrive at a positive or negative conclusion through the utilisation of the intellect.
If the conclusion is positive then we proceed to review the secondary issues (such as unity, justice and other divine qualities). If on the other hand the result proves to be negative, then we accept the materialistic worldview and there is no further need to investigate into religion.
Cognition through knowledge by presence and knowledge by acquisition
There are two ways of knowing God; one way through acquired knowledge and the other way through knowledge by presence. The meaning of knowledge by presence means that an individual knows God through a type of inward witnessing, without any intermediary or mental concepts. It is self evident that if someone has conscious witnessing with regards to God - the way that the great gnostics have claimed – then he does not require any intellectual proof or reasoning. However for the average individual this type of knowledge and vision is only possible through self-building and spiritual wayfaring. Although a weak version of it is present in the average man it is not combined with awareness and is not considered sufficient enough to acquire a worldview.
The meaning of knowledge by acquisition is that an individual with the help of universal concepts –such as the Creator, All Knowing, Omnipotent, etc –realises intellectually the existence of God.
However this understanding is limited and inadequate because it adheres upon the intellectual capacity of that individual and subsequently he associates the additional acquired knowledge to this base in order to establish a harmonious system of belief (worldview).
Acquired knowledge is established upon intellectual proofs and philosophical reasoning. Once acquired man can enter the realm of understanding and realising knowledge by presence.
Cognition through intrinsic nature
In most of the discourses of the saints, gnostics and philosophers we find that knowing God is a natural instinct of man, and something that is inherent to him through his intrinsic nature. In order to understand these definitions one has to define the meaning of intrinsic nature.
In Arabic the word ‘fitrah’ is used to imply a ‘type of creation’. Such things, which are related to this intrinsic nature, are called ‘fitri’, and are those things whose creation depends on something already existent.
We consider those things, which are fitri to have three distinctive features:
1. Different creatures all have a similar intrinsic nature within their species, although there may be variations with regards to it being strong or weak.
2. Things related to the intrinsic nature in the course of history have been determined as being permanent and perpetual. “The origination of Allah according to which he originated mankind (there is no altering Allah’s creation)”. (al-Rūm:30)
3. The intrinsic nature is self-sufficient from education and training; however it can be intensified and guided through the assistance of discipline. This intrinsic nature of man can be divided into two parts:
a. Cognition related to the intrinsic nature endowed to man and not acquired through learning.
b. Those tendencies and impulses, which are related to the intrinsic nature and are essential elements in the creation of every individual.
On this basis, if awareness of God is established within every human being and is nota thing that man needs to acquire through research, then it can be called, ‘Knowing God through intrinsic nature’. If all humans have the tendency towards worshipping God, then it would be known as, ‘Worshipping God through intrinsic nature.’
In lesson two we have indicated that most of the experts in the fields of anthropology and psychology have regarded the tendencies towards religion as psychological and have labelled it as a ‘sense of religiosity’ or as ‘religious sentiment’. We must emphasise that ‘knowing God’ is based on man’s intrinsic nature. However the intrinsic nature of knowing and worshipping God is not with full awareness in a manner that it will suffice ordinary men from intellectual reasoning.
One should not forget that the element of knowledge by presence exists in every individual to a lower degree and is perfected through intellectual reasoning. In conclusion, cognition of God based upon intrinsic nature means that man’s heart is aware of God, and his spirit has the potentiality of knowing God with full awareness.
Questions
1. Name the most fundamental issue of a worldview? Why it is considered the most fundamental?
2. Explain the meaning of knowledge by presence and knowledge by acquisition?
3. Is it possible to acquire knowledge by presence through intellectual reasoning and philosophical proof? Why?
4. What is the role of acquired knowledge for an individual, who wants to arrive to knowledge by presence?
5. What is the meaning of intrinsic nature – fitrah?
6. Explain the specialties of those things, which are related to the intrinsic nature of man.
7. Explain the different types of things considered as fitri?
8. Which particular aspect of intrinsic nature is in relationship to God?
9. Define cognition through intrinsic nature. Is the intrinsic nature of man sufficient in itself for the average man to know God, without resorting to intellectual reasoning? Why?
LESSON SIX
THE SIMPLE WAY
The ways of knowing God
There are numerous mediums through which man can know God, many of which are mentioned in the different books of philosophy, theology and in the discourses of saints. These mediums or ways have used distinctive forms of reasoning and proofs: for example some have utilised (corporeal) senses and experimental sciences, on the other hand some have applied only intellectual arguments as a premise for knowing God. Certain schools attempt to prove God directly and certain schools to only prove His existence, which does not depend on any existent (necessary existent). In order to understand His complexity (attributes), the establishment of other arguments is required.
The proofs and reasoning of knowledge about God can be compared for example to the multiplicity of ways by which one can cross a river: some are like simple wooden bridges which are drawn over the river, by which a light-weight traveller can easily cross and reach his destination. Other bridges may be built of stone, which results in them being strong but also longer, the way thus becomes lengthier. Finally, some bridges such as intricate iron bridges, which contain tunnels for trains, provide a more complex way of travelling.
An individual with a simple mind can recognise God through a very simple way and fulfil his responsibilities of servitude. If one has encountered many criticisms, which caused him to doubt, then he should prefer the stone bridge. The man who is entangled with extreme doubts and questions must choose the complex path; it is essential for him, even though his path may be lengthened.
We now aim to outline the three different levels by which man can know God. Firstly by defining the simple way, then the intermediary way and finally the more complex way, this way resolves several fundamental issues of philosophy and is for those minds, which are full of doubts and that have become deviated from the reality and goal.
a. Specialties of the simple way
The simple way of knowing about God is bestowed with different merits and peculiarities, the most important of them are mentioned as follows:
1. The initial way is the most simple of all and does not require any intricate or proficient premises. It is easily understood by all degrees of mind.
2. This path directly accepts God as the Wise Creator. In this way it is unlike philosophy or theology (kalam) where the proof for the existence of God is first accomplished and then followed by the proof for the establishment of His attributes through intellectual reasoning.
3. This way is based upon and emphasises upon the intrinsic nature of man. Through reflection man will come to witness the beauty of God in the creation as well as in other manifestations.
4. The saints for guiding the masses utilise this path, which is based upon the intrinsic nature of man. However, when discussing or debating with atheists, materialistic philosophers or sharp-minded individuals, the leaders would choose a different method by which to debate.
b. Familiar signs.
By reflecting upon the signs (ayat) around us, man can arrive at an understanding of his Creator. In Quranic terminology such reflection is termed as ‘contemplation upon the signs of the Lord’. Hence everything that is in the heavens and the earth and within man himself reflects God and channels the heart to feel the presence of God’s guidance in the universe.
This very book that you have in your hand is a sign from the author. Is it not true that by reading it you are becoming aware that the writer is intelligent and has a purpose? Have you ever thought that this work is the result of a chain of reactions without any intent? Is it not an absurd idea that an encyclopaedia of a hundred volumes could have come into existence as an effect of an explosion which came to occur in a metal mine, the fragments of which took the form of letters and through accidental encounters with pieces of paper made writing appear and then the papers also accidentally became arranged and bound into volumes?
To accept blind accidents as a means of explaining the vast universe as a phenomenon, with all the hidden and uncovered secrets and wisdoms behind it is a thousand times more absurd than the above-mentioned idea!
Every determined order is the sign of a determiner who is orderly and has a determination. This type of order can be perceived all over the universe. These orders bring together a universal orderliness, which has been brought about by a wise creator who perpetually manages it.
Shrubs of rose stem out from mud and clay in a beautiful garden, with distinctive colours and a variety of fragrances, an apple tree originates from a small seed and every year gives a good amount of apples which are fair in taste, colour, and fragrance.
Furthermore the song of the nightingale, the chicken hatching out of an egg, by beating the ground with the beak, and the newborn calf suckling its mothers for milk, at the same time the breasts are ready with the supply of milk for the baby etc. These are all signs from Him.
Is it not surprising that the honeybees, cows, and goats provide man with honey and milk especially for his use and in unlimited quantity? Ungrateful man however does not recognise these familiar bounties and encounters them with confrontation and dissidence.
In his very body man can see the outstanding effects of wise supervision: the shape of the body with balanced functional division, the external vital structure with harmonious internal organs composed of millions of cells, which are all from a mother cell, each cell containing a specific portion of special material to function properly, such as breathing oxygen through the lungs, which is then transported by the red blood cells, and the liver which produces sugar necessary for the human body, and the replacement of destroyed cells with new cells, and the protection of the human body by the white blood cells against viruses and microbes, and the various hormones -which are produced by different glands- organising the physiological tasks of human body, all the abovementioned are signs reflecting Almighty God.
This physiological system is mysterious, and even though dozens of centuries have passed, man still has further ground to discover. If one investigates the smallest details of the living cell, he would undoubtedly question as to who was the administrator and originator behind it all.
It is the Wise Creator who holds the utmost perfection and orderliness, who manages such affairs: “That is Allah! Then where do you stray?” (al-Anam: 95)
It is apparent, that as knowledge expands and grows resulting in more discoveries of natural laws and their relationships, it will result in the unveiling of the secret wisdom behind the creation. However contemplating on these simple, visible, and clear signs is sufficient enough for pure and uncontaminated hearts.
Questions:
1. Explain the different ways of knowing God and what their peculiarities are?
2. Define the simple way of knowing about God and its peculiarities.
3. Explain the determined signs of creation.
4. Give the logical proof for ‘order’.
LESSON SEVEN
PROOFS OF NECESSARY EXISTENT
Introduction
In the previous lessons we have indicated that the philosophers and the scholars of theology (mutakallimin) have established several arguments for the proof of God. In this lesson we have brought one of their many arguments, because of the fact that it is elementary, simple and requires less of an introduction in order to establish an existence as necessary (wajib). However the validity of this argument is only for proving necessary existent (wajib al-wujud), i.e. an existent which does not need, require or depend upon any other existent for coming into being and in order to proof its positive attributes (knowledge, omnipotence, and being above time and space)requires additional arguments.
Text of the proof
Existence through intellectual perception is either necessary existence or possible existence. Intellectually, no existent lies outside these two assumptions and every existent cannot be known as a possible existent because a possible existent always needs a cause (illah). If all the causes were possible existents, each one of them in turn requiring a cause, no existent would ever come into being, in other words an infinite series (tasalsul) of causes is impossible (muhal). Therefore an infinite series (back wards) of causes is compelled to terminate in an existent (mawjud), which is nota caused thing (malul) of any other existent, i.e. the necessary existent.
This argument is the simplest argument in philosophy for proving the existence of God. This argument has been constructed with a few intellectual syllogisms and does not need any form of sense perception or experimental sciences as premises. However it has used philosophical concepts and terminologies, hence it requires an explanation about these premises and terminologies mentioned in the argument.
Possibility and necessity
All propositions have two fundamental concepts (subject and predicate) regardless of them being simple or complex, for example in the following axiom, ‘The sun shines’, which establishes shining for the sun, ‘sun’ is the subject and ‘shining’ is the predicate. The establishment of a predicate for the subject has no more than three states: it is either impossible, such as ‘the number three is greater than the number four,’ or it is necessary, such as, ‘the number two is half of four’ or it is neither impossible nor necessary, for instance, ‘the sun is above our head’.
In logical terminology the first proposition has the state of impossibility (imtina), the second proposition is given the attribute of necessity (wujub), and the third state is considered as possible (imkan).
However in philosophy only existence is discussed and those things, which are being incapable of being or of occurring and impossible (mumtani) will never have an existence (al-wujud al-khariji). For this reason philosophy regards existence from an intellectual perception as being either necessary existence or possible existence.
Necessary existence is known as an existent, which exists in-itself and does not depend upon another existent. Naturally such an existent will have no beginning and no end, because the non-existence of something in a particular time is an indication that its existence is not from itself. In order for it to come into existence it needs another existent, which, is the cause or the condition for its realisation. The absence of this condition or cause would be the reason of annihilation.
Possible existence (mumkin al-wujud) is known as an existent, which does not exist in-itself and depends on another existent in order for it to be realised.
This division, which has taken place through intellectual perception, essentially disregards the existence of the impossible (mumtani al-wujud), but it does not have any indication whether the existent is either a possible existent or necessary existent.
In other words the genuineness of this perception can be conceptualised in three essential forms:
1. Every existent is a necessary existent.
2. Every existent is a possible existent.
3. Some existents are necessary existents and some are possible existents.
On the basis of the first and third assumptions, the existence of a necessary existent is established, therefore the assumption that should be reviewed is whether all existents are possible existents or not?
However by disproving this assumption (that all existents are possible existents), the existence of the necessary existent is definitely and confidently proven. The establishment of unity and other attributes must be proven with other arguments.
Therefore in order to disprove the second assumption additional arguments must be utilised one of which, is that it is impossible for all of the existents to be possible existents.
As this argument is not self-evident, it will be explained as follows: Every possible existent needs a cause and it is impossible to have an endless chain of causes. Thus the endless chain of causes is compelled to terminate at an existent, which is not in need of a cause, i.e. the necessary existent. This argument has introduced other philosophical concepts, which require a brief explanation of it and things related to it.
a. Cause and effect
If an existent requires another existent and depends upon that other existent for its being, then in philosophical terminology the caused existent is known as the effect and the other existent is known as the cause. However it is possible that a cause can also be an effect, and be a dependable existent, not absolutely free from need. If a cause is absolutely free from need and does not depend upon any other existent then it will be the Absolute cause.
By now we have become familiar with the definition of the terms cause and effect. We will now provide an explanation of the premise mentioned (every possible existent needs a cause).
Possible existence does not exist in-itself and has no alternative other than to depend upon another existent. Thus every predicate, which is recognised for the subject is established either by itself ( bi-l-dhāt ) or by means of other than itself (bi-l-ghayr ). For example every thing either shines in and of itself or requires something else for its illumination, or every body is oily in itself or needs oil for becoming oily. It is impossible for something in itself to not be illuminating or oily and not receive light or oil from something else, and at the same time be oily and illuminating!
Hence the establishment of existence for a subject is either through its essence or by means of other than itself, and when it is not through its essence then it has to be by means of other than itself. Therefore every possible existent, which is not realised through its essence, is bound to be realised by means of other than itself, which implies that it is an effect. This provides us with the fundamental principle of the intellect, that every possible existent needs a cause.
However, some have conceived that the principle of causation means that all existents need a cause and therefore God needs a primary cause. They have overlooked the fact that the subject of the principle of causation is existence in the possible sense and its effect and not in the absolute sense. Not all existents require a cause, only those which are dependable and in need.
b. The impossibility of an endless chain of causes
The last premise used for this argument is that the chain of causes should terminate at an existent, which is not an effect. In technical terms an endless chain of causes is impossible. It is thus established that the necessary existent is the initial cause, which is self-subsistent depending on no other existent.
Philosophy has come up with many arguments in order to disprove infinite series (tasalsul); nevertheless with the minimum of reflection infinite series would almost seem to be self-evident. That is to say, considering the existence of an effect requires a cause and is conditional upon that cause. Furthermore if this state of being caused (maluliyyah) and this conditionality is universal, then no existents would be realised anywhere. This is because the assumption of a few existents that are dependent without the existence of an existent is against the intellect.
Let us assume that a group of runners are waiting to begin a race. They have all decided that they will not commence running until the others have. If this decision prevails among all of them, then none of them would begin to run.
In the same manner if the existence of every existent is conditional upon the realisation of another existent, never would an existent come into being. The realisation of an external existent indicates that there is an existent, which is needless and unconditional.
c. Affirmation of the argument
At this moment, with the understanding of the premises mentioned, we would like tore-affirm our argument: Every thing that can be considered as an existent has no more than two states:
1. The existent for which existence is necessary and exists by means of its own essence. In technical terms this is known as the necessary existent.
2. The existent for which existence is not necessary and depends upon another existent in order to be realised. In technical terms this is termed as the possible existent.
It is self-evident that if the realisation of a thing is impossible, then it will never come into being; hence every existent is either a possible existent or a necessary existent.
By focusing upon the concept of possible existence it becomes clear that the every referent of this concept is an effect and requires a cause. Furthermore if an existent does not exist by means of its essence then it becomes necessary that it came into existence through another existent, because every attribute that is not existent by means of its own essence has to exist by means of other than itself.
The principle of causation affirms that every existent that is dependent and possible requires a cause. But not every existent requires a cause; otherwise one would conclude that there must then be a cause for God.
From another angle it must be seen that if all existents were possible existents, an existent would never then be realised. This is like assuming that a group of people had conditioned their actions upon each other, which implies no activity. However the external activity of existents establishes the existence of the necessary existent.
Questions:
1. Give the philosophical and logical definition of possibility and necessity.
2. Define necessary existence and possible existence.
3. Define cause and effect.
4. Why does every possible existent need a cause?
5. Explain the principle of causation.
6. Is God subject to the principle of causation? Why?
7. Explain the impossibility of infinite series.
8. Does the belief in a non-created God contradict the principle of causation?
9. Elaborate more on the impossibility of the infinite series? And explain the aim of this argument!
10. How is the logical form of the argument of impossibility of the infinite series?
--
Source:
[Book: "Amuzish-e-Aqaid" 1986.]
“THEOLOGICAL INSTRUCTIONS”
An Introduction to Contemporary Islamic Theology
By: Ayatollah M.T.M. Yazdi
[The University of Knowledge , Holy City of Qum , Iran
Translated by: M.M.A. Rida, 2006, Iran.
[Note: On this website, only lessons 5-7 are given.
All other chapters from the original book are omitted here. AO 2012.]
--
No comments:
Post a Comment