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.