SEARCH FOR THE SUPREME REALITY
The history of the philosophical pursuit of God goes back to ancient Greece. In terms of its actual reality, philosophy is the search for the Creator. However, philosophy could never succeed in discovering God. The subject matter of philosophy is Existence. It studies general and fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.
This is, as it were, an ‘external description’ of the subject matter of philosophy. However, in terms of its reality, philosophy is but another name for the search for the Supreme Reality or Truth, or, in other words, God. All philosophers were engaged, in some way or the other, in search of the Ultimate Truth. However, no philosopher was able to succeed in his quest.
Failure of the Philosophical Search
The case of all philosophers was the same—that is, they set out on the search for Reality. All philosophers sought to know the Truth through the path of knowledge. However, experience tells us that every philosopher failed in this regard.
Let us take the case of one of the most well-known philosophers of modern times, the British scholar Bertrand Russell (1872-1970). One of his biographers has written that he was a ‘philosopher of no philosophy’. Despite studying for much of his life, Russell failed to discover the Truth. The case of all other philosophers has been just the same.
Few of them acknowledged this fact, though, in contrast to Russell, who confessed in his autobiography:
“When I survey my life, it seems useless, devoted to impossible ideals. My activities continue by force of habit, and in the company of others, I forget the despair which underlies my daily pursuits and pleasure. However, when I am alone and idle, I cannot conceal that my life has no purpose and that I know no new purpose to devote my remaining years. I am involved in a vast mist of emotional and metaphysical solitude from which I can find no exit.” (The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell, 1950, p. 395)
This is not the story of just one philosopher alone. Instead, it is the case with all philosophers. All philosophers had made the Supreme Reality the subject of their research, but not one of them could obtain the answer to their quest.
Correct Methodology
This failure is because the philosophers could not discover the correct methodology for their search. This methodology has been indicated in the Quran. It is reflected in the following narrative in the Quran, which is related to the Prophet Moses and may have occurred around 3500 years ago:
“And when Moses came at Our appointed time, and his Lord spoke to him, he said, ‘My Lord, show Yourself to me so that I may look at You.’ He replied, ‘You cannot see Me, but look at the mountain; if it remains firmly in its place, then only will you see Me.’ And when his Lord manifested Himself on the mountain, He broke it into pieces, and Moses fell unconscious. And when he recovered, he said, ‘Glory be to You, I turn towards You, and I am the first to believe.’” (7:143)
Reflect on this verse of the Quran. At the beginning of this verse, God says, “You cannot see Me,” at the end of the verse, the Prophet Moses says, “I am the first to believe.” If one reflects on these two sets of words, it will be evident that while man cannot see God directly, he can still obtain God’s realization indirectly. By pondering on the creation and discovering its properties and laws—which is what science does—one can realize the Creator’s existence and grow in understanding and appreciation of God’s attributes.
As indicated earlier, a key event in using this indirect methodology started in the early 17th century, when Galileo used the telescope to study the solar system. The telescope symbolizes a scientific reflection on God’s creation, which is the scientific method of obtaining the realization of the Creator. Reflecting on the marvels of the creation provides sufficient evidence for the Creator’s or God’s existence. In other words, science can be of great use in the realization of the existence of God through the indirect or inferential method or the indirect methodology.
In the age of Quantum Physics, it was proved that the final particle of matter is a subatomic particle. A subatomic particle is not directly observable. It cannot be seen, and it is always in a state of motion. While moving, it generates heat, which is its directly observable effect. We cannot see a sub-atomic particle but infer that it exists through its effect, heat. In this way, as its effect—heat—is observable, the final particle of matter becomes discoverable. In other words, as the effect of the final particle of matter is observable, it is discoverable indirectly, not directly.
The same is the case with the Creator of the universe. The Creator undoubtedly has His separate existence. However, concerning man, He is indirectly discoverable through reflection and contemplation on His creation. We cannot see God directly, but we can infer that God does exist by studying its effect—His creation or the universe. This is the inferential argument or the indirect methodology to discover something.
The philosophers were engaged in the search for God but could never discover Him at the level of certainty. The reason that philosophers were not able to discover God was that their approach or method was impractical. Scholars have failed to find the correct method to know God despite their philosophical endeavours. Many of these individuals sought to observe God directly like they were exploring other phenomena in the universe. However, this method proved inapplicable to discovering the Creator (God), leading to their ultimate failure. The situation regarding secular philosophers and religious theologians is similar in this regard.
All the intellectuals who tried to arrive at the discovery of God through the philosophical method or the direct argument could not discover the right approach to finding God. They all wanted to see God directly, whereas the realization of God is possible only indirectly. Therefore, they kept up their fruitless effort of trying to discover God directly. However, the direct method they sought to use can discover things in the created realm but is not workable concerning the Creator or the Ultimate Truth. That is why secular philosophers and scholastics failed in their quest for Truth or their search for the Ultimate Reality—God Almighty.
What, then, is the correct method for discovering God? Guidance in this regard is provided in the narrative about Prophet Moses in the Quran referred to earlier.
According to the above verse of the Quran (7:143), an incident of great significance occurred to Prophet Moses on a mountain in the Sinai Desert. The words of the Quran: ‘You cannot see Me, but look at the mountain; if it remains firmly in its place, then only will you see Me,’ indicates that the knowledge of God’s existence can only be obtained indirectly by contemplating on the creation—the effect of the Creator— to arrive at an understanding of the Creator.
Reflecting on this incident, one learns that man cannot see God directly. Knowledge of God’s existence can only be obtained indirectly by contemplating His creation and reaching an understanding of the Creator. This guidance, exemplified by the experience of Prophet Moses, has existed for thousands of years, yet scholars have never truly embraced this approach. Instead, they persisted in their pursuit of directly discovering the Creator. According to the Quranic and scientific methods, man can obtain knowledge of the existence of God only indirectly—that is, using the inferential argument, which is a scientifically valid argument, we can arrive at the knowledge of the Creator through contemplating His creation.
The fact remains that philosophers have long been pursuing God, yet they have never been definitively able to discover God. This is primarily because their approach has been impractical. Scholars have failed to find the correct method to know God despite their philosophical endeavours. Many of these individuals sought to observe God directly, like exploring other phenomena in the universe. However, this method proves inapplicable to the Creator (God), leading to their ultimate failure. The situation regarding secular philosophers and religious theologians is similar in this regard.
A tradition in the books of Hadith states: “God will certainly make a non-religious person support this religion.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 3062 I Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 4203). In this Hadith, the term ‘al-Rajul al-Fajir’ refers to a secular person. This authentic clue suggests that a secular figure would provide initial guidance in this matter. As we have seen, philosophers and Muslim theologians have failed to find the correct guidance.
I have contemplated this topic extensively and realized that the ‘al-Rajul al-Fajir’ (secular person) mentioned in Sahih al-Bukhari is most likely the Italian scientist Galileo Galilei, born four hundred years ago. Galileo’s contribution in this matter was not direct but indirect. His discoveries indirectly answered the question of how to obtain knowledge of God.
A significant event occurred about the telescope’s discovery during Galileo Galilei’s time. Galileo played a crucial role in enabling the indirect discovery of God through the observation of the Creator’s creation. The telescope was initially developed in 1608, and Galileo improved it the following year. Using this instrument, he partially observed the solar system. Through his studies, he refuted the ancient theory of the sun revolving around the earth and established that it is, in fact, the earth that revolves around the sun.
Consequently, the “heliocentric theory” replaced the “geocentric theory.” This event marked the dawn of modern science. Galileo is often hailed as the founder of modern science because he separated the quantitative from qualitative aspects. This separation allowed science to focus primarily on the quantitative aspects while relegating the qualitative ones.
Separating the qualitative and quantitative dimensions of matter led to significant scientific transformations. It opened doors to scientific research that had previously been closed under the influence of philosophy. Various fields of science began advancing as a result. While this research was not directly linked to religion, religion indirectly benefited. The discoveries provided scientific data that could indirectly prove the existence of God and other religious truths. Using the scientific data about the universe generated through the separation of quantitative and qualitative aspects, it became possible to offer scientific evidence for religious truths.
Galileo’s method, in empirical terms, involved separating the observable aspects of things from their unobservable aspects. Previous scholars had struggled to separate the two, consumed by the quest to discover the unobservable aspects. After Galileo separated the observable from the unobservable, people could indirectly reach the unobservable aspects by shifting their focus to the observable aspects. This intellectual approach, often called the inferential argument or indirect method in science, allowed for discovering objects and their features in the created realm, like the sub-atomic particles, which cannot be directly observed but can be discovered by observing their effect. Similarly, the inferential argument can also be used to find out the unobservable Creator by observing the effect of His creation—the universe, which is observable to all. This method has indirectly enabled the discovery of God and other realities. In recent decades, numerous writings have been published on this subject.
The inventions of the microscope and the telescope propelled the search for Reality to new heights. Science has significantly advanced in understanding quantitative and observable aspects of reality. However, the qualitative aspects, particularly the “why” questions concerning the universe and humanity, remained outside the realm of science. Nevertheless, these questions are crucial in the search for Reality, and this book strives to reflect upon them.
I have written extensively on God, Religion, and Science. My writings include numerous articles and a full-length book in Urdu titled “Mazhab Aur Jadeed Challenge” (Religion and Modern Challenges), published in 1965. It was later translated into English and published under “God Arises: Evidence of God in Nature and Science” (1985). As seen in this book, I have made this subject one of my primary concerns.
