By Ustad Muhammad Taqi Sobhani | Translated by Sayyid Ali Imran

Sources of Tawhidic Knowledge and the Rational Method in Proving the Existence of God

In the previous session, it was explained that from the perspective of revelation, there are three sources of knowledge: reason (‘aql), innate nature (fitrah), and revelation (wahi). It was emphasized that these three sources must be employed together, since no single one of them alone leads to complete knowledge. Each of these sources plays its own particular role and occupies its own particular place in epistemology.

Knowledge of God (Ma’rifat Allah)

In the discussion of divine knowledge, which stands at the summit of all knowledge, there are two principal methods: the rational method and the innate (fitri) method. Fitri knowledge, although God-given, still requires reason, and rational knowledge likewise cannot be complete without fitrah. More importantly, both methods stand in need of revelation. In this session, the focus will be on rational knowledge.

Fundamental Questions

In examining the rational knowledge of God in the Qur’an, three main questions arise:

1. Is knowledge of the Exalted God possible?

The answer is affirmative, because if knowledge of God were not possible, the foundation of religion and the sending of the prophets would be meaningless.

2. Is rational knowledge of God possible?

This question examines whether reason is capable of knowing God, or whether one must instead resort to fitri or intuitive (shuhudi) methods.

3. Is rational knowledge of God necessary?

Some hold that even if rational knowledge is possible, given the clarity of knowledge attained through other paths, there is no need for rational argumentation.

In this discussion, the focus will be on the second and third questions, and the answers will be drawn from the Noble Qur’an and the narrations of the Ahl al-Bayt (a).

The Possibility and Necessity of Rational Knowledge from the Qur’anic Perspective

In brief, it must be said that no exegete holds rational knowledge of God to be impossible; all consider it possible. However, there is a difference of opinion regarding its necessity, that is, whether knowledge of God is [rationally] necessary or not. The reason for this disagreement lies in the multiple Qur’anic verses on which there is disagreement concerning this issue. Some hold that these verses are purely for proving Tawhid, [divine] knowledge, or power, or are concerned with the discussion of resurrection, and so on, and that the existence of God is presupposed [rather than argued for] in them. In contrast, a group holds that the Qur’an does offer arguments for proving the existence of God, though these arguments have a distinctive style; some of these arguments are, in fact, very clear and decisive, and lack the complexity of philosophical proofs.1

In brief, it may be said that the correct view is that a rational demonstration for the existence of God is indeed presented in the Qur’an, but the Qur’an’s method is a distinctive one, whose details have been explained by the Ahl al-Bayt (a). For a more precise examination of this matter, it is necessary to address the precise positions in detail:

The View of Those Who Oppose the Necessity of Rational Argumentation

Those who deny the necessity of rational argumentation rely on two verses:

1. Surah Ibrahim, verse 10

“Their messengers said, ‘Can there be doubt about Allah, Creator of the heavens and the earth? He invites you that He may forgive you of your sins, and He delays your death for a specified term.’ They said, ‘You are not but men like us who wish to avert us from what our fathers used to worship. So bring us a clear authority.'”

The apparent sense of this verse shows that all the prophets said to the people: “Is there any doubt about the existence of God?” This statement implies that the existence of God is self-evident and requires no argumentation, since there is no doubt about it.

2. Surah al-Zumar, verse 38

“And if you asked them who created the heavens and the earth, they would surely say, ‘Allah.’2

Likewise, in another verse (Surah al-‘Ankabut, verse 63):

“And if you asked them, ‘Who sends down rain from the sky and gives life thereby to the earth after its lifelessness?’ they would surely say, ‘Allah.’ Say, ‘Praise to Allah’; but most of them do not reason.”

These verses show that even the polytheists acknowledged the existence of God, and that rational argumentation was not needed with respect to the existence of God.

Against this view, there is another position, which holds that the Qur’an does affirm the very existence of argumentation, and that it likewise establishes a proof for the existence of God. This group has raised objections to the arguments of the previous group and, in turn, has cited Qur’anic verses in support of its own claim.

Critique of the Opponents’ View

Two critiques are raised in response to this view:

The first verse (Surah Ibrahim, verse 10) is addressed to the polytheists, as is indicated further on in the same verse by their objection: “They said, ‘You are not but men like us who wish to avert us from what our fathers used to worship. So bring us a clear authority.'” Therefore, in this verse the prophets are addressing polytheists who, in keeping with the beliefs of their forefathers, worship something other than God; in fact, the argument of the divine prophets to them concerns Tawhid [i.e., the oneness of the object of worship], [not the bare existence of a deity]. Had the addressees been outright deniers of God (dahriyyun), and had the prophets then said to them, “Is there any doubt about God?” and the Qur’an had given that a negative answer, then your argument would be complete, and it would be established that no rational argumentation is necessary to prove the existence of the Exalted God. But the addressees of these verses are polytheists, and it is as though the prophets are saying to them: “O polytheists, even though you yourselves worship idols, you yourselves have no doubt about the existence of Allah.”

Regarding the second verse, the same critique holds. Although some verses are indeed addressed to polytheists, one cannot claim that all such Qur’anic verses are of this kind. But by examining the verses that precede and follow it, it becomes clear that the addressees in these verses, too, are polytheists.

Qur’anic Evidence for the Necessity of Rational Argumentation

Against the first view, certain verses of the Qur’an are cited as demonstrating a rational argument for proving the existence of God:

First Category: Verses of the Horizons and the Souls (Afaq wa Anfus)

1. Surah Al ‘Imran, verse 190

“Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of the night and the day, are signs for those of understanding.”

2. Surah al-Baqarah, verse 164

“Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of the night and the day, and the [great] ships which sail through the sea with that which benefits people, and what Allah has sent down from the heavens of rain, giving life thereby to the earth after its lifelessness and dispersing therein every [kind of] moving creature, and [His] directing of the winds and the clouds controlled between the heaven and earth are signs for a people who use reason.”

These verses first state a set of evidences and conclude by emphasizing that these evidences are for those who exercise their reason (ta’aqqul). This shows the Qur’an’s reliance on reason for proving the existence of God.

Second Category: The Practice of the Prophets in Rational Argumentation

The practice (sirah) of the Prophet Ibrahim (p) is a striking example of rational argumentation. In the following verses, his argument for proving the existence of God is presented:

1. Surah al-An’am, verses 75-79

“And thus did We show Ibrahim the realm of the heavens and the earth so that he would be among the certain [in faith]. So when the night covered him, he saw a star and said, ‘This is my Lord.’ But when it set, he said, ‘I like not those that set.’ And when he saw the moon rising, he said, ‘This is my Lord.’ But when it set, he said, ‘Unless my Lord guides me, I will surely be among the people gone astray.’ And when he saw the sun rising, he said, ‘This is my Lord; this is greater.’ But when it set, he said, ‘O my people, I am indeed free from what you associate [with Allah]. Indeed, I have turned my face toward He who created the heavens and the earth, inclining toward truth, and I am not of those who associate others with Allah.'”

In these verses, the Prophet Ibrahim (p) argues by appealing to the reason of his own people. By provisionally granting the claim of his interlocutors (the worship of the stars, the moon, or the sun), he arrives at a false consequence (the setting and disappearance of these bodies); in this way, a rational argument is established for the existence of God.

2. Surah al-Anbiya’, verses 66-67

Likewise, in his confrontation with the idol-worshippers and the episode in which he smashed their idols, the rational argument of the Prophet Ibrahim (p) is also found in Surah al-Anbiya’:

“They said, ‘Have you done this to our gods, O Ibrahim?’ He said, ‘Rather, this — the largest of them — did it, so ask them, if they should [be able to] speak.’ So they returned to [blaming] themselves and said [to each other], ‘Indeed, you are the wrongdoers.'”

The Prophet Ibrahim (p), through a rational argument, brought the idol-worshippers back to their own reason so that they would recognize their error. On its face, this episode is a rational demonstration, mounted by the Prophet Ibrahim (p) against idol-worship and polytheism, the result of which is the establishment of the existence of God as the true, primary agent.

Key Objection: The Addressee of the Verses and the Content of the Argument

Opponents of the rational argument might claim that these verses, too, are addressed to polytheists, and merely establish Tawhid, not the [bare] existence of God!

The answer is that the content of the verses must also be examined, not merely their addressees. The claim is that, at the very least, in a number of these noble verses, the prophets, in the course of refuting polytheism, at times do establish the existence of God. That is, it appears that in these verses, those who worship the sun are not people who had no belief in a god (‘Allah’) at all; rather, they held that all the events of this world arise from the sun.

So, in answering this question, rather than focusing solely on the addressee of the verse, we must also examine what the Qur’an’s own statement is meant to establish. In response, we say that in some of these verses, it is the very existence of God that is being established.

For example, in the verse of Ibrahim, verse 10, “Their messengers said, ‘Can there be doubt about Allah, Creator of the heavens and the earth?'”, a rational argument is embedded: God, by virtue of being the Creator (Fatir) of the heavens and the earth, is worthy of worship, and there is no doubt about Him. Therefore, even if the addressee is a common one [i.e., polytheists], the content of some of the verses does indicate the establishment of the existence of God.

These arguments have their own distinctive method, one that has been explained in greater detail in the narrations of the Ahl al-Bayt (p).

The Rational Method in the Practice of the Ahl al-Bayt (a)

A question that arises here is whether this method of rational argumentation, in the practice of the Ahl al-Bayt (a), was [also] used to establish the existence of God, or not. It can be said that, due to the limited scope of the hadith sources [available to them], the Sunni tradition may face a challenge in establishing the existence of God rationally; the Shi’a, however, by relying on the practice of the Ahl al-Bayt (a), can easily establish this matter. The rational arguments of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) are not only present and well-attested, but also strong and suited to the mind of the addressee. The book al-Ihtijaj by [al-Shaykh] al-Tabrisi has gathered together a collection of these arguments, part of which is devoted to establishing the existence of God. For further detail, one may also refer to Bihar al-Anwar and its section on disputations.

Likewise, in al-Kafi, the late al-Kulayni has presented the first chapter of Kitab al-Tawhid under the title “The Chapter on the Origination of the World and the Establishment of the Originator.” This chapter contains six narrations, most of which are addressed to unbelievers (mulhidun), such as Ibn Abi al-‘Awja’, who debated with Imam al-Sadiq (a).3 The points of the rational method of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) in these narrations are as follows:

1. Creating Doubt and Bringing a Person Out of Blasphemous Certainty

The Ahl al-Bayt (a) first bring the addressee out of a state of [blasphemous] certainty and into doubt. They emphasize that there is no decisive proof for negating the existence of God. A claim of atheism is generally rooted in the absence of a proof for the existence of God, not in the existence of a proof against the existence of God. In some narrations, the Ahl al-Bayt (a) grant, for the sake of argument, that neither side has any proof, and then, by appealing to rational caution (ihtiyat ‘aqli), demonstrate the superiority of belief.4

2. Attention to the “Horizon” and “Soul” Verses

The Ahl al-Bayt (a) establish the existence of God by appealing to the signs of creation in the world and in the human being. In the second narration of this chapter, the following expression is found:

“He said to me: ‘Woe to you! How could He who shows you His power in your own self be veiled from you? [He shows you] your growth, though you did not exist; your becoming great after being small; your strength after your weakness, and your weakness after your strength; your sickness after your health, and your health after your sickness; your contentment after your anger, and your anger after your contentment; your grief after your joy, and your joy after your grief; your love after your hatred, and your hatred after your love; your resolve after your hesitation, and your hesitation after your resolve; your desire after your aversion, and your aversion after your desire; your longing after your fear, and your fear after your longing; your hope after your despair, and your despair after your hope — until it becomes manifest to you what lies between me and you.'”5

This last expression is another indication of the strength of the rational argumentation of the Ahl al-Bayt (a).

3. The Argument from “Being Made” (Masnu’iyyah)

Some narrations take the form of the Imam, in confronting an opponent, establishing a demonstration that we may technically term the “argument from being made” (bayan al-masnu’iyyah). For example, in the debate with Ibn Abi al-‘Awja’, Imam al-Sadiq (a) says:

He said to him: “Are you made (masnu’), or not made?” ‘Abd al-Karim [Ibn Abi al-‘Awja’] said: “Rather, I am not made.” The Learned One (the Imam) said to him: “Describe for me — were you made, how would you be?” ‘Abd al-Karim remained silent for a long while, unable to answer, and began fidgeting with a piece of wood before him, saying: “Long, wide, deep, short, moving, still — all of these are attributes of what He has created.” The Learned One said to him: “If you know no attribute of being made other than these, then you must regard yourself as made, on account of what you find occurring within yourself among these very matters.” ‘Abd al-Karim said: “You have asked me a question that no one before you has asked me, and no one after you will ask me its like.”6

Ibn Abi al-‘Awja’ claims that he can state the characteristics of being un-made (ghayr-masnu’). But the Imam wants him to state the characteristics of being made (masnu’). Every characteristic he mentions turns out to apply to himself as well. By proving that the human being is “made,” the existence of a Maker (sani’) is likewise established. The question now arises: can reason discover the characteristics of “made” things? The answer is affirmative, because these characteristics exist throughout the whole world, and these very characteristics point to a Maker.

This is important, because in this argument, unlike Aristotelian [philosophical] arguments, reason does not need to first establish the “principle of causality” (asl-i ‘illiyyat) and then apply it — reason directly perceives the existence of a Maker through the very characteristics themselves.

4. The Argument from Origination (Huduth)

The third argument stated in the narrations is the argument from “origination” (huduth). The Ahl al-Bayt (a) argue that everything changes through the addition or subtraction of something. This change is a sign of its not being eternal (qadim), because that which is eternal is characterized by permanence and changelessness. This is a purely rational argument. In another narration from Imam al-Sadiq (a), addressed to Ibn Abi al-‘Awja’, this argument, too, is presented:

On the third day he returned and said: “I put my question again.” Abu Abdillah (a) said to him: “Ask whatever you wish.” He said: “What is the proof of the origination (huduth) of bodies?” He said: “I have found nothing, small or large, except that when its like is joined to it, it becomes larger — and in that there is a passing away and a transition from its first state. Were it eternal, it would neither pass away nor change, for that which passes away and changes may [equally] come to exist or cease to exist; so, by existing after its non-existence, it enters into origination (huduth), and by being in [beginningless] pre-eternity, it would enter into eternity (qidam) — and the attribute of pre-eternity together with non-existence, and of origination together with eternity, can never combine in one and the same thing.”7

5. The Argument from Motion

In some narrations, the demonstration from “motion” (harakah) is used. The existence of motion in the world is itself proof of the existence of a mover (muharrik). Denying a mover is not possible.

Conclusion

On the basis of the Qur’anic verses and the narrations of the Ahl al-Bayt (a), the use of reason to establish the existence of God is not merely possible but necessary. The Ahl al-Bayt (a) have regarded doubt about the existence of God as possible and have answered it with strong rational arguments. These arguments are suited to the mind of the addressee and are at times different from philosophical methods. Denying the necessity of rational argumentation diverts the course of the discussion of tawhidic knowledge. God willing, in future sessions we will examine the rational method of the Imams (a) regarding the discussion of the knowledge of God — that is, in that discussion we will seek to uncover and examine the distinctive method of the divine prophets and the Ahl al-Bayt (a) on the question of the very existence of God.

Footnotes

  1. On this occasion, the esteemed teacher referred those interested to the book Shinakht-i Khudavand dar Qur’an (“Knowledge of God in the Qur’an”) by Shahid Beheshti.
  2. This same theme is stated in several verses.
  3. The narration referred to is, in summary, as follows: Hisham ibn al-Hakam relates that a heretic (zindiq) in Egypt sought out Abu Abdillah [al-Sadiq] (a) but could not find him, and was told that he had travelled to Mecca. He then went to Mecca, and while the narrator and others were with Abu Abdillah (peace be upon him) during the circumambulation, the heretic – whose name was ‘Abd al-Malik and whose kunyah was Abu Abdillah – encountered them and brushed against the Imam’s shoulder. The Imam asked him his name and kunyah, and then, based on the meanings of his name (“servant of the king”) and kunyah (“father/servant of Abdullah”), posed a probing question about whose sovereignty he served – of the kings of the earth or of the heaven – placing the heretic in a rhetorical bind. Over the following days, the Imam went on to engage the heretic (also identified with Ibn Abi al-‘Awja’) in a series of rational arguments, concerning what lies beneath and above the earth, the “made” nature of things, and the origination of bodies — portions of which are quoted directly in the numbered points above.
  4. For example, in the narrations above, the following passage points to this very idea: Abu Abdillah said to the heretic: “Do you know that the earth has a below and an above?” He said: “Yes.” He said: “Have you gone beneath it?” He said: “No.” He said: “Then how do you know what is beneath it?” He said: “I do not know, except that I suppose there is nothing beneath it.” Abu Abdillah said: “Supposition is a form of incapacity so long as you have no certainty.” Then Abu Abdillah said to him: “Tell me — if it has a below and an above, are you not incapable of attaining knowledge of that?” He said: “I am astonished at you — you have not reached the East, nor the West, you have not descended into the earth, nor ascended to the sky, so you do not know what is there, yet you deny what is in them! Does a rational person deny what he does not know?” The heretic said: “I do not suppose it is so, but perhaps it is.” Abu Abdillah (a) said: “O man, one who does not know has no argument against one who does know, and the ignorant has no argument [at all].”
  5. al-Kafi (Islamiyyah ed.), vol. 1, pp. 75-76.
  6. al-Kafi (Islamiyyah ed.), vol. 1, pp. 76-77.
  7. al-Kafi (Dar al-Hadith ed.), vol. 1, hadith 191/1, “Bab Huduth al-‘Alam wa Ithbat al-Muhdith,” p. 181.