Questions about God and the answers 
provided by Ilm al Kalam - PART 2

by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi

[Hassan Ilyas] Yesterday, I asked you a 
question related to hypothetical sentences

that we often use in relation to God, 
nauzubillah (I seek refuge with Allah)

that can Allah lie, or can He make a rock
that even he cannot Himself lift.

You detailed out your views on these 
discussions.

There is a related aspect to it as well 
as a doubt,

I want you to explain it to us in detail.

When you are in a discussion related to
the existence of God,

the argument behind the proof for 
God's being,

or the various aspects of atheism or 
agnosticism that are put forward.

It is said that you logically refute
the arguments with intellectual evidence.

And the other party to the discussion is
defeated by your refutations.

My question to you today is that,

Even you include these intellectual 
evidences & arguments in your discussions,

Also, one has an impression, I would 
request you to include it in your answer

People often say that Ghamidi Sahib 
conversation is very rational,

logical, enlightened and intellectual.

So, in your paradigm provides answers to 
these contemporary suspicions and doubts

by way of intellectual and logical 
arguments.

Then what happens to the natural, inherent 
arguments given by the Quran

as you often claim?

[Javed Ahmad Ghamidi] Don't you consider 
the simple, 'fitri' arguments given

by the Quran as being rational?

What I had earlier mentioned was that:
things that evolve from a specific

philosophical or logical background.

People present these questions just so as
to derive some enjoyment from them

and in the process ridicule religion.

These are the things that clearly convey 
that your addressee does not have the

perception, attitude, or an acumen of 
interest to understand or

dive into something of this kind of
discourse.

In that case you should try to ignore or 
excuse yourself from such arguments.

Arguments will have there own 
significance.

The Quran itself is full of 
reasoning,

But what sort of reasoning?

All I had explained was the reasoning
within the Quran itself.

I have often explicated the reasoning
that the Quran puts forth.

Infact, I have penned it down 
in my book Meezan.

If you read the chapter on 
"Belief in Allah" in my book, Meezan.

I have explained in detail that how

God has presented arguments 
about his own existence.

That is the form of reasoning that I term 
as Fitri "intuitive" reasoning.

The argumentation that is based on 
common sense premises.

It is evident that when we focus our 
attention towards God's Being and say that

look around the world, try to comprehend 
what is around you,

try to look at your own existence and
understand how God has bestowed

different abilities and wisdom to 
different creatures in the universe.

So, aren't we engaging in a reasoning
process?

I was actually making a comment on the 
method of reasoning.

I have never said that you should
accept the premises of religion

without even thinking.

Rather, I was trying to throw light on 
how the Quran educates us

to engage in reasoning in religion and 
religious affairs.

There are two types of things: the 
first one is the knowledge that is

limited to our own understanding, and 
the basis of argumentation is only

our own observation or experience.

In fact, this way of argumentation
is also adopted in the religion.

For instance, there are few things that 
have been prohibited in the religion.

Why are these things prohibited in the 
religion?

What are the basis for it?

If you can base your argument on 
why certain things are prohibited

in religion on experience or 
observation, then you may do that.

Certain things are related to the world 
that is hidden from us and

we cannot see it, or else we cannot 
observe or experience it.

Similarly, same is the case with the being
of God.

Although, it is not possible the God can 
be shown or else you can

be called up to the heavens to observe 
God or his being.

So, here in this case we will make use
of deductive reasoning

How does the Quran educate us as 
to how we can make

a deductive inference in relation to God?

The methods employed by our Kalam
theologians and the experts of logic

do not relate to what has been 
mentioned in the Quran.

Of course I was not having a detailed 
discussion at that point in time,

you had asked me a question and I was 
answering that briefly.

In reality, ancient philosophy paved the
way for discussions and

assumptions in this matter.

If you pay attention, modern 
science has rejected all of it.

These things were neither based
on experience nor observation,

then what was the real basis of 
these things?

For instance, look at the philosophy of
idealism by Plato,

even Aristotle denied it immediately
after him.

And he clarified that in the philosophy 
of idealism,

ideas or mental images are considered at
par with reality.

If we try to culminate all the 
philosophies of metaphysics in one word,

then this is it.

In the philosophy of idealism, majorly 
mental states or realms are

considered as real.

And there has been such a logical
connection among the mental state

and the reality which corresponds to that
of a fictional author.

What does he do?

He creates the plot, circumstances out of
his own intellectual imagination and

also tries to visualize the characters 
from his mental images and creates

such a mutual relationship that just like
when we read a novel or a story we feel

like we are living a real world and 
all the characters in it are real.

Therefore, the philosophy of metaphysics
which was even adopted by the

masters of Sufism was based on this fancy
and imaginative interpretations.

[Ilyas] Please elaborate about takhayul 
(imagination)?

[Ghamidi] Those things that do that
encompass your experience or observation,

it is an imaginative world that you create
on your own.

All of poetry is based on Takhayul 
(imagination).

Imagination has its own beauty, but
for poetry.

Not for the discovery of facts and 
reality.

So, when this method was adopted then
these sort of logical questions were also

included in it, i.e. to measure the 
divinity of God.

To define the knowledge of God.

To contain the existence of God, who is
transcendent,

within the limit of space and time.

I have quite often tried to throw some
light and make people pay attention

to these sort of things.

"Ayaz Qadr-e-Khud Ba-Shanas"

The Quran has taught us a great lesson,

When people started to raise questions
on a very serious issue then the Quran

gave a response to it in a concise way.

wama uteetum minal-ilmi illa qaleela

i.e religion never proclaims that
"come we will show you God"

You would experience the divinity
of God.

Or else come to us and we have the 
capability to let you observe

some of the attributes of Allah in 
the heavens, or that

we can inscribe the existence of God
by way of a sketch in front of you.

None of this is real, rather the Quran
clearly states that

There is nothing that can be compared 
with Allah,

And if there is none like him,
Laysa kamithlihi shay'un,

then how can you employ the
concept of similitude?

And without presumption and similitude,
how can you define something which

can neither be experienced or
observed?

Therefore, the Quran has guided us that
a person should be taught from a point

wherein he is compelled to think about God
in a natural, 'fitri' way.

Like his own existence, or that of other
creatures, the manifestation of wisdom

in those creatures, manifestation of 
nature, manifestation of divinity,

manifestation of mercy in them.

When a person tries to see this 
world, the more he dives into it,

the sooner he accepts that there must
be a creator of this universe.

It is pertinent to mention that

"It does not mean that there is a creator"
but there should be creator.

Only after that the call of the
Prophets make sense to him.

After that he comes to know about 
the inception, power, knowledge

of Allah, as there is no other 
intellectual method for it.

Prophets educate and introduce us in this
regard.

I had earlier explained that we
must adopt this method,

I tend to find reasons behind everything,
and all the time,

but what is the procedure for it?

It is similar to the fact that people
used to argue for centuries that

how can revelations be supported by
arguments.

How can it be?

A Prophet has an experience.

God tried to establish a connect with 
a person,

by appointing someone to develop
that relation.

The way something becomes an observation
for us, likewise many verses are

an act of observation for him.

Which among the aforementioned things are
ever shown to us by the Prophet?

None of it!

Then what do we see?

We listen to the voice and speech of
the Prophet.

We look at the character of the Prophet.

We listen and observe the instructions
about the religion from the Prophet.

And after analyzing the extraordinary 
character, personality and knowledge

of the Prophet, it becomes difficult to 
deny in light of knowledge and intellect

that he can be no other than 
someone authorized by God.

And when this thing is established
then, Rohe awaz e payambar mojiza ast

and only after that he brings 
the instructions of God to people.

The Prophet (pbuh) proclaims that 
he receives revelations from God,

he claims to have seen the angels.

None of this requires a logical 
argument for its justification.

However, this simple narration is 
explained to all, that when God

appoints his Prophet and declares that
he is the creator of this world.

Then whatever instruction God would give,
they would not be beyond his power.

If he created me, and thousands like me,

God even claims to have created djinns
and Angels.

God talks about the capabilities bestowed
upon his angels.

God talks about the way he created djinn.

What the reason to not accept this?

But, if in this case, we try to apply the 
logical argumentation to prove djinn,

then it would be wrong method employed.

Unfortunately, in our traditions these 
methods were adopted in order to

restrain your interlocutor by cooking up 
highly complicated and intricate texts.

That is the reason all this became 
meaningless and spiritless gradually

You can't find anything of this sort now,
otherwise it should been a part of

discussion, having a status of 
factual reality.

What is still in practice as a 
factual reality?

The innate argument of the Quran.

It makes you think about your 
internal values,

It related to you the story of the
'Ahd-e Alast' (Covenant with God).

It says that if the memory of the covenant
is forgotten by you, but its signs

would still be found in your existence.

And the Quran guides you to walk through 
these signs,

introduces the creator's creatures, 
likewise with the universe.

If you look in the Quran.

The Quran presents a beautiful model to us
by way of deductive logic

and/or intellectual argumentation.

This aforementioned argumentation is 
intuitive, deductive and also becomes

sensory, once the judgment is manifested
through the person of the Messenger.

This is the argument that I have explained
in great detail and I have even described

this argument in my book Meezan.

Where in my speech or in my book,
have I detailed out anything of this sort

in sync with what the kalam theologians 
say?

Did I ever say anything like, 
If God can lie or not?

[Ilyas] Thank You Ghamidi Sahab.

You have beautifully detailed out
your point of view.

In the last few seconds, I want you to
please comment on this as a whole.

In our society when some of our modern 
intellectuals and philosophers adopted

this interpretation, many religious 
scholars rejected their interpretation

if it didn't appear to be in line with
their own understanding. For instance,

Djin, Heaven and hell, like we discussed 
the works of Sir Syed, Parvez Saab, etc.

Is it the same reason that they just have
a scope of one possibility,

There is no room for any other 
interpretation,

and therefore they rejected it.

[Ghamidi] Exactly, this is the case.

The Quran has made it amply clear as to
how to know the limits of your knowledge,

to what degree one can rely on 
deductive logic.

To what extend you have to pay attention
towards your inner self and find

the innate kind of knowledge that exists
within you.

And to reach the place from where the 
Prophets would guide you further.

Each of these aforementioned situations
have a level of intellectual argument

and when this argument is ascertained,
only then you enter the world of

observation and experience.

This is a matter of method,
which method is to be employed?

The method of argumentation mentioned 
in the Quran must be adopted.

This method was adopted by Maulana 
Ameen Ahsan Islahi in his books,

like in Haqeeqat-e Shirk, 
Haqeeqat-e Tawheed.

This method was adopted in the 
his Tafseer Tadabbur-e Quran.

We can find a lot of examples of these 
adopted methods,

in the works of many scholars.

I have also adopted the same method.

It is a way to heal your heart.

It becomes a message from God for 
the existence of humanity.

The Quran has taught us this method.

Therefore, I have tried to focus your
attention on the

way of arguments based on the Quran.

Why would I not emphasize on the 
arguments that are backed by the Quran?

I keep on saying that Quran is 
complete and enough to prove

all its premises.

We don't need to focus our attention
towards anything else.