Faith and Reason: The Junction of the Two Seas - 1
By Professor Nazeer Ahmed
Concord, CA
Ask a Muslim and he will emphatically affirm that there is no conflict between faith and reason in his religion. Ask a Christian and he will make the same assertion. Indeed, both sides will point the finger at the other claiming that it is the faith of “the other” that is irrational. Yet, a Muslim is hard pressed to explain why the rationalists were discredited, punished and sidelined in the eighth century Abbasid courts and why the Islamic world fell behind in scientific inquiry. And a Christian will fall back on his faith to explain his belief in the Trinity.
A critical outlook is a pre-requisite for human progress. The interface of faith and reason is at the heart of scientific inquiry. In this article, we take a fresh look at this age old question using the guidance of the Qur’an. Our objective is to encourage the study of the natural sciences within a paradigm of faith. This narrative is reinforced with a few examples. The essential vocabulary that permeates the debates between reason and space is summarized. The broad contours of how the Qur’an guides humankind towards a dynamic balance between faith and reason is outlined. Those who wish to pursue this subject may use these insights for further work.
Nature loves simplicity. It is man who makes things complex. Physicists have long searched for a single unifying element that integrates different phenomenon. Recently, claims have been made about the discovery of a so-called “God-particle” that unifies space-time, gravity, electromagnetism, weak atomic forces and strong atomic forces. Future generations may yet discover smaller particles that provide further insights. The question is: Is there a similar single unifying element that integrates faith and reason? We affirm that the answer is, yes.
Summarily, The Qur’an accords the same sanctity to the Ayahs (passages) in the Qur’an as the Ayahs (Signs) “on the horizon”, namely nature, history and the soul. These Signs point the way towards Asma’ ul Husna (the Most Beautiful Divine Names) and provide the basis for an integration of faith and reason.
The Limits of Reason
There are several laboratories around the world that are actively engaged in research on the extraordinary maneuverability of dragonflies. The dragonfly has extremely complex eyes, made up of about 50,000 eyelets, wrapped around its head, so that it can see in every direction. Bees have similar compound eyes. The honey bee, which is mentioned in the Qur’an, has two sets of eyes. One set has two compound eyes and the other has three simple eyes. The compound eye consists of a large number of individual eyelets, like a honeycomb, each connected separately to a neuron in the tiny brain of the bee. It is like a miniaturized version of a giant segmented optical telescope. These eyes enable the bee to lock onto a target. The three simple eyes are like a fine guidance sensor, fixing directionality through triangulation just as is done in space sensors.
The dragonfly, and the bee, can fly in six degrees of freedom, meaning, up and down, sideways and rotate along three axes. How does the bee do it? Enormous research has been done in this direction but we still do not understand how such a small creature can see in three dimensions. In addition, it can see in a rather large electromagnetic spectrum, from yellow to ultraviolet, lock onto a target through a calculated and projected understanding of the trajectory of its prey, and fly like a missile in six dimensions to kill its prey.
The research about dragonflies and bees is not just for scientific curiosity. It is directed towards the development of highly maneuverable miniaturized homing devices and defensive measures against them. It is the onset of the age of robots which will challenge the worldview, the culture and ethics of our grandchildren.
The tiny dragonfly teaches us humans a lesson in humility and the limits of reason. We do not even understand how a bee sees or how it flies. Yet, man dares to confront and question his Creator, He who creates billions of universes, and creates them out of nothing!
Reason is limited in its reach. Faith is not. This is the first difference between the two.
The Constraints of Space-Time
I have heard illuminating lectures from some of the most brilliant people in the world from the celebrated Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman at Caltech to religious scholars such as Maulana Maududi. Yet, “space-time” remains an enigma within a riddle within a mystery.
The most thought-provoking insight I have received about the meaning of time was from the renowned Sufi Shaikh Nazim al Haqqani al Qubrusi (1922-2014) of Turkey. In the year 2000, I travelled with the Shaikh as part of a delegation to Uzbekistan. One quiet morning, I caught up with the Shaikh in the courtyard of a masjid in Samarqand after fajr prayers, and asked him about the hidden meaning (the asrar) of time. “Time is like a fish in an ocean”, he said. He gestured with his right hand simulating a serpentine movement, like the fish lost by Prophet Moses (pbuh) at the junction of the two seas. “This wisdom is from Grand Shaikh Abdullah Dagestani (1891-1973)”, he continued, “He received this wisdom from his Shaikh. It is a special gift for you”. In that moment I grasped the essence of the classical debate between al Gazzali and Ibn Rushd. Ibn Rushd was riding the fish; al Gazzali stood in the ocean.
Reason is bound by space-time. Faith is not. This is the second difference between the two.
Ilm ul Ibara and Ilm ul Ishara
Broadly speaking, human knowledge is of three kinds:
• Knowledge that is descriptive and can be taught
• Knowledge that cannot be taught but can only be alluded to
• Ilm al Laduni that is bestowed by Divine Grace only upon the Prophets.
Knowledge that can be taught or acquired through books is called ilm ul ibara (root word ‘abara, meaning, to wade as if in a stream from one shore to the other). In this category belong physics, chemistry, biology, history, mathematics, geometry, civics and languages. In philosophy, this is also called discursive knowledge.
Knowledge that cannot be taught but can only be alluded to is termed ilm ul ishara. In this category belong faith, love, honor, valor, courage and compassion. Ilm ul Ibara can be measured and taught in a school. Ilm ul Ishara cannot; it is a Divine gift, a moment of Grace.
The Qur’an uses parables and similes to convey transcendent ideas that are difficult or impossible to communicate through discursive language. Transcendental ideas such as love, grace, beauty, wisdom and peace are best felt, not expressed. I have provided a detailed description of the origin, nature, methods and limits of knowledge (the epistemology of knowledge) in the Encyclopedia of Islamic History ( www.historyofisloam.com ). Interested readers may please refer to it.
Reason and faith are two different branches on the tree of knowledge. This is the third difference between the two.
What is time?
There are at least sixteen different descriptions of time in the Qur’an. The meaning depends on the context.
• Clock time: “Those who give in charity by night and by day” (2:274)
• Relative time: “The Angels and the Spirit ascend to Him in a moment, whose measure is fifty thousand years” (70:4)
• Timeless time: “Has there transpired upon humankind a time from ad Dahr (timeless time) when he was not even an item mentioned?” (76:1)
• Transient time: “So, leave them in their confusion for a time that is transient (fleeting). (23:54)
• Pre-ordained time: “And He made the sun and the moon follow the Command.
They all move in their orbits for a time determined.” (13:2)
• Time as a moment: “There is a term decreed for every spiritual community. When the decreed time arrives, they cannot hold it back one moment or move it forward (one moment)” (7:34)
• Perceived time: “One of them said: How long have you stayed (here)?
They said: We stayed a day or part of a day.” (18:19)
• The passage of time: “By the passage of time” (103-1)
• Illusory time: “Nay! The (deceptive) impressions of the life of this world
(have distracted you)” (87:16)
• Time as in the Day of Judgment: “Of no benefit will be your relatives, nor your children,
on the Judgment Day” (60:3)
• Time as a Sign from Allah: “And remind them of the days of Allah.
Indeed, in these are Signs for all those who persevere and are grateful.” (14:5)
• Cyclical time: “Lo! In the alteration of the night and the day, and in what Allah has created in the heavens and the earth are Signs for a people who are conscious of the Divine.” (10:6)
• The unknowable present: “He knows what is in between before and after” (2:255)
• The unknowable beginning and the unknowable end: “And verily, Ours is the beginning and the end.” (92:13)
• The impenetrable space-time bubble: “O assembly of jinns and humans! If it be within your power to escape the layers of the heavens and the earth, then escape! You shall not escape without the authority (of your Creator).” (55:33)
• Time as an infinitesimal, imperceptible small measure: “Are they only waiting for the Moment that it should descend on them suddenly, while they perceive it not? (43:66) (To put this Ayat in context, one should remember that time as energy is 10E-45 seconds in quantum physics)
The assumptions of “before and after” and “cause and effect”
Reason depends on the assumption of a linear flow of time from “before” to “after”. The arrow of time in rational discourse points “forward”. A consequence of this assumption is the notion of cause and effect. Al Gazzali attacked this assumption, postulating that what humans perceive as “cause and effect” are illusory. In his schema, cause and effect take place “at the same time”. However, he did not explain what “at the same time” means. He left it dangling in the air.
The “present” is beyond human perception. It is at the intersection of “before” and “after”. It is a moment of Divine Grace and is known only to God. It is an imperceptible mystery. The “present” belongs to ilm ul ishara whereas “before and after” belong to ilm ul ibara. By the time the mind reaches this junction, it is past. It is for this reason that the correct translation of “Kun fa Yakoon” cannot be: “Be, and it is”. It is: “Be, and it was!”
The Principle of Objectivation
In addition, rational perception depends on the assumption of objectivation, namely, that we as human beings are separate from the rest of creation and as “subject” are able to view the cosmos as an “object”. This assumption is open to question. The human is a part of nature, not separate from it. Humankind is subject to the same physical laws as is all other creation with the exception that the human is infused with the spirit from God (the ruh) and is able to “know” the world.
How We Simplify our World View
Now that we have documented the assumptions that govern our rational perceptions, we are in a position to ask if our world view that rests on the foundation of these assumptions is “valid”.
The answer to this question is “yes, it is valid” as long as those assumptions are kept in mind. We make assumptions to simplify an enormously complex cosmos. Without these assumptions the cosmos becomes overwhelmingly complicated and incomprehensible. The simplifications enable us to gather some knowledge about the world that we are a part of and use that knowledge for our benefit.
For instance, Newton’s laws of classical physics are valid on earth when the velocities are small compared to the speed of light. They break down when the velocities are large and approach the speed of light.
What is important is to remember the assumptions as well as the initial and boundary conditions and the limits of our assumptions when we make a statement about the nature of things. One must always be conscious that the human is not separate from nature. He is not a subject and the cosmos is not an object. We are a part of nature and are subject to the same physical laws. The laws of dynamic balance that govern the cosmos also govern the physical world of man. These laws are built into the structure of the cosmos. The interface between the two is “built in” and cannot be rent asunder.
The journey towards the Truth of a believer as opposed to that of a disbeliever is guided by a different perspective. In his research, a believer asks himself: What is the will of God? And when he makes a discovery, he exclaims “subhanallah” (how great is Allah). He continues his journey towards further discoveries until he reaches the Arsh (the Divine throne). A secular man asks himself: What is the law of nature? And when he makes a discovery, he exclaims, “Eureka” (I have found it). It is a matter of perspective. The first perspective keeps one humble and takes one towards divinely presence; the second one takes one towards Anayah (the insatiable ego), self-adoration and self-glorification. It is a pharaonic attribute.
Muslims fell behind in scientific work because they forgot to ask, as they were commanded to in the Qur’an: What is the Will of God? (Yas’al Bihi Khabeera, Ask about it from Him Who knows). Instead, they said, “It is the Will of God”, and went to sleep. (Continued next week)
Back to Pakistanlink Homepage
