Series of Philosophical Arguments for The Existence of God [1]

The Argument From Motion and Huduth

By Ayatullah Javadi Amuli

---

Premises of the Argument from Motion and Hudūth

Due to lack of familiarity with the central elements of the demonstration (burhān), which proceeds from the world’s contingency, the Judeo-Christian theologians have considered another set of arguments—such as the argument from motion (burhān al-haraka), which has no relationship with the argument based on contingency—of the category of the demonstration of contingency and necessity.

The argument from motion has been used in the works of Plato and Socrates, and subsequently, it has been analyzed in the books of Islamic philosophers.  The argument from hudūth has been advanced in major kalāmi works.

Motion  (haraka) is an entity’s gradual transfer from potentiality (qūwwa) to actuality (fe‛liyya).  Transfer from potentiality to actuality requires an external causal efficacy, because actuality is an existential perfection (al‑kamāl al‑wujūdī) for the mobile entity (al‑mutaharrek); and a mobile entity, which lacks an existential perfection, cannot come to possess it without an external cause.  Therefore, in order to attain actuality, everything that is marked with motion is in need of an agency other than itself.  If the agency that is giving motion, that is, the mover (muharrek), to the mobile is something that itself is characterized by being in motion, then it will need an external causal efficacy as well.  And since it has been proved that infinite causal regress  (tasalsul) is impossible, the series of efficient causes ends at an agency, which is not itself in motion and gives motion to others.

The proponents of the argument from hudūth argue that if something is hādith, it requires an external efficient cause.  They consider hudūth as the criterion of need for an external causal efficacy.  They maintain that every hādith, that is, everything that has a temporal origin, must come into existence through an external cause, and since regressive (tasalsul) and circular causality (daur) are impossible, therefore, the succession of hādith entities concludes at a non-hādith entity.

The argument from hudūth revolves around the notion that hudūth is a sufficient reason for an effect’s “causedness” (ma‛lūliyya) or need  (ehtiyāj) to external causal efficacy.  That is, the mutakellimūn not only assert that everything that is hādith and has a temporal origin is an effect, since this assertion is a matter of consensus by all, rather they also contend that everything, which is an effect (ma‛lūl) is hādith and that no effect can be eternal (azalī).

Evaluation of the Argument from Causality

Along the other arguments for the existence of the Deity, which St. Thomas Aquinas mentions in his Summa Theologica, he articulates an independent argument, which proceeds from the principle of causation and the impossibility of causal regress.[1]  However, as indicated earlier, the principle of causation is relied upon in every argument that is meant to prove God’s existence, and without presupposing its truth, no argument can yield any conclusion, because if the principle of causation is doubted, the gateway of rationality, namely the certainty of attaining a conclusion from certain premises, is closed.

Therefore, regardless of concepts such as contingency, hudūth, and motion, which provide the grounds whereby causation is used; causation is not an independent philosophical argument.  In addition to the reliance of every argument on the principle of causation, most of the named arguments further depend on another general rule of causality, which is the impossibility of regressive and circular causation.  In certain instances in Islamic philosophy that causation has been the axis of argumentation, it is either in view of the fact that the notions of contingency of impoverishment (al-imkān al-faqrī) and “causedness” apply to an entity from the same sense, or it is in consideration to the essential independence or absoluteness of the Necessary.  Such arguments are, in fact, reducible to the demonstration of contingency of impoverishment (burhān al-imkān al-faqrī), which will be discussed later.

 

Limitations of The Arguments from Motion and Huduth

The arguments from motion and hudūth do not have the cogency of the demonstration of contingency and necessity.  First, because these two arguments rely on the impossibility of regressive and circular causation, whereas the demonstration of contingency and necessity, as we articulated, is above such reliance.  Second, they do not prove the Almighty Necessary, and in order to do so, they have to be adduced by the demonstration of contingency and necessity.

After the dismissal of causal regress, the argument from motion entails the existence of a non-moving mover.  Likewise, the argument from hudūth indicates an eternal creator.  Nevertheless, neither of the two indicates whether the non-moving mover or the eternal creator has necessity of existence.

The non-moving mover, as proved in Peripatetic philosophy, or the eternal creator, as discussed in kalāmi books, can be a body (jism) or a physical form (al‑sūra al‑jismiyya), since motion according to Peripatetic philosophy, and hudūth according to the mutakellimūn are found in certain accidents (‛awāridh) of physical entities.  Therefore, the arguments from motion and hudūth prove the need for a mover or creator in accordance with these accidents.

Hudūth is in the context of change, and if change is restricted to some accidents of the physique, a creator is needed only with respect to those accidents.  For this reason, rational analysis of the celebrated argument of the mutakellimūn,

The world is changing.

Everything is changing is hādith.

Therefore, the world is hādith.

would indicate, in effect, that the argument should run as follows:

The world’s accidents are changing.

Anything the accidents of which are changing, is hādith in its accidents.

Therefore, the world is hādith in its accidents.

Thus, the second syllogism of the mutakellimūn,

The world is hādith.

Every hādith has a creator.

Therefore, the world has a creator.

would indicate that since the essence of the physical world is not subject to change and hudūth, it does not require a creator.

The world is hādith in its accidents.

Anything that is hādith in its accidents has a creator for its accidents.

Therefore, the world has a creator for its accidents.

Thus, the proponents of the arguments from motion and hudūth cannot respond to the paradox of eternity of matter or physical form.  Given the physical body, which is made up of form and matter, undergoes change in things that are outside its essence, such as accidents and kind forms (al‑suwwar al‑naw‛iyya), it follows that it only needs a creator or mover with regard to them.

Kind forms can change infinitely one after another by generation and corruption (al-kaun wa al-fasād); and accidents, which according to the mutakellimūn are changing, can be in motion in a successive regress (al‑tasalsul al‑ta‛āqubī)[2].  In both instances, motion and hudūth are outside the essence of body (jism), and therefore, the body’s need to a mover or creator is proportionate to the area of its need.

To extend hudūth from accidents and kind forms to the essence of physiques, the mutakellimūn argue that anything that bears a hādith accident is hādith.  However, they have failed to notice that if an entity bears a hādith accident, it is only hādith with respect to that accident.  And if hudūth is ascribed to the essence of the physique, such an ascription is figurative.

The need of a creator or mover can be proved for matter and kind forms only from the position of substantial motion (al-haraka al-jawhariyya), where change and hudūth are extended from accidents and kind forms to the essence of physiques.

Ibn Sīnā argues that if everything that bears a hādith is hādith, as asserted by the mutakellimūn, then God, the Exalted, must be hādith as well.  That is because on the one hand, the mutakellimūn believe that the world is hādith—that is, there was God and nothing else and then He desired and began creating the world—and on the other, they maintain that the Divine will is a practical attribute, and therefore, like the world, it is hādith.  From this perspective, God bears hādith accidents, since before creating the world, He was not the Purposer (al-Murid), and then He willed to create the world.  Though the hādith will is not an Essential attribute, since they maintain that it is established by the Divine Essence and the Essence is its recipient (mahal), the will is born by the Essence.  According to their principle that everything that bears a hādith is hādith, the Divine Essence must be hādith, as it bears a hādith phenomenon.  Should the mutakellimūn recourse to deny a mutual necessity between hudūth of the Essence and hudūth of its will, their argument for the hudūth of the physical world will fall apart, as they will lose their rational grounds for tracing the hudūth of the world to its Creator.

Therefore, the principle “Something which bears a hādith is hādith” fails to lead to the hudūth of the essence of the physical world.

Hudūth of the physique’s essence can only be established through substantial motion (al-haraka al-jawhariyya).  Since according to substantial motion, motion, and hudūth are extended from accidents and kind forms to the essence of the physique.

With the establishment of substantial motion, Sadr al-Muta’allihīn al‑Shirāzī ascribes motion and hudūth to the essence of the natural world.  From this vantage point, the natural world is characterized by a universal and continuous hudūth; and thus, motion and hudūth are reflected in the essence, as well as the accidents, of natural entities; and this yields to the existence of a metaphysical Mover and Creator.

Expanding the grounds these arguments proceed from, though substantial motion enhances the tenability of the arguments from motion and hudūth, it still does not alleviate the main defect of these arguments on the score of their incapacity to indicate the necessity of existence of the First Mover or the Creator.  Substantial motion emancipates these arguments from the narrow boundaries of the natural world and elevates them to incorporeal and metaphysical realities; although an incorporeal origin—that bestows existence on the natural entities or gives them motion—is definitely an incorporeal and eternal entity, yet in the mean time, it has not been proved that is not contingent.  Therefore, in order to indicate such mover or the creator’s necessity of existence, one will have to resort to further arguments such as the demonstration of contingency and necessity.

Therefore, the arguments form motion and hudūth, in addition to the fact that their conclusiveness is indebted to inclusion of the impossibility of regressive and circular causality in their articulations, are associated with having two additional defects.  Substantial motion removes the first defect, but its major defect still cannot be abolished without assistance from the demonstration of contingency and necessity.

Evaluation of Criticisms of the Arguments from Motion and Hudūth

The arguments from motion and hudūth have been subject to criticisms that either pertain to both arguments, or are exclusively directed at one of the two.  Many of these criticisms are due to unfamiliarity with the central notions these arguments revolve around.  For instance, owing to misunderstanding of the difference between receptive (al‑‛illa al‑qābiliyya) and supplementary causes (al‑‛illa al‑mu‛idda) and the efficient cause (al‑‛illa al‑fā‛iliyya), some critics have questioned the impossibility of regressive causation; and for the same reasons, some writers have considered it possible that an inferior and weak cause produce a higher and superior effect.

Another criticism that stems from inattentiveness to the meanings of motion and inaction/rest (sukūn) and overlooks the existentiality of motion and non‑existentiality of inaction, states that the argument from motion does not treat motion and inaction/rest on equal merits and only considers motion as dependent and needful of a cause.

The reason that the mutakellimūn have employed the argument from hudūth is that they think if Divine grace were eternal, then it will invite two contradictions.  First, God would be a constrained cause (al‑fā‛il al‑mūjab)[3], whilst His autonomy (ikhtiyār) is not deniable.  Second, Divine grace will not need an origin.  These false presumptions, however, are due to the mutakellimūn‘s lack of understanding of why an effect needs a cause, and what do power and autonomy mean.

Mutakellimūn hold that an autonomous cause is an agency that has temporal precedence over its effect.  In other words, the effect of an autonomous cause does not exist in the past, and after the cause weighs the different options before him, he decides that the effect should exist.  They maintain that a constrained cause, like fire that produces heat, is an agency that has no temporal separation from its effect.  An autonomous cause in the view of philosophers and philosophy-oriented mutakellimūn is an agency, which acts if he desires to act and does not act if he does not desire to.  From this position, should an agency, because of his eternal knowledge and wisdom, desire the perpetual and eternal performance of an action, this will not violate his autonomy and would not mean that he is constrained.

Since hudūth is not the reason, which determines why an effect is needful of its cause, the eternity of grace, contrary to the mutakellimūn‘s assumption, does not amount to the effect’s independence and lack of need to its cause.  For instance, the everlastingness of human beings in the hereafter, which is a matter of consensus among many faiths, does not imply their lack of need to their existential cause.

Since hudūth is an attribute of existence, in rational analysis its degree is posterior to existence.  Moreover, rational analysis indicates that existence is after creation and creation after necessitation (ijāb) and necessitation after needfulness.  In the light of this, should hudūth be the reason of needfulness and dependence of an effect on its cause, it must exist a few degrees antecedent to itself.  Although this indirect circularity (daur) is not as obviously void as direct circularity, the corruption of its corollaries is greater than in direct circularity.  This is because supposing that hudūth is the reason for need, after an effect comes into existence it is not marked by hudūth, which follows that the reason for its need to a cause does not exist.  It further follows that an entity that has become hādith has no need to its cause in order to continue to exist.

From the Peripatetic and Illuminationist (Ishrāqiyyūn) philosophers’ perspective, the reason and criterion of an effect’s need to its cause is its contingency (imkān); and since contingency never separates from the essence of the effect, its need to its cause is inseparable from it.  The eternity and everlastingness of an effect does not imply that it is not needy and dependent on its efficient cause; rather, an effect’s eternity and everlastingness indicates the continuity and everlastingness of its need to its cause.

Due to these deficiencies of the arguments from motion and hudūth, the Peripatetic and Illuminationist philosophers have not sufficed on them and have established the demonstration of contingency and necessity (burhān al-imkān wa al-wujūb), which enjoys an exceeding strength and tenability.[taken from Ansariyan Publications, Qum]

 

---

[1] Taken from Summa Theologica, trans. Laurance Shapcote.  (London: O. P. Benziger Brothers, 1911).

[2] Successive Regress (al‑tasalsul al‑ta‛āqubī) It is a sort of regress in which the units of the series do not exist at the same time, but rather the existence of the coming unit coincides with the nonexistence of the former unit.  Therefore, such regress is not impossible.

[3] Autonomous Cause and Constrained Cause: If an agency is such that it does have a choice to produce its effect, such as the human being, it is an autonomous cause (al-fā‛il al-mukhtār).  And if it does not have a choice to produce its effect, like fire that does not have any choice in burning and producing heat, it is a constrained cause (al-fā‛il al-mūjab).

The Fundamental Problems of World-View

By: Ayatullah Misbah Yazdi

---

The world evidently consists of various kinds of phenomena, the study of whose characteristics has given birth to specialized fields of science. Moreover, despite the expansion in different spheres of knowledge and the vast number of wonderful and valuable discoveries made in various disciplines, there still remain, in our immediate surroundings and on this very planet, many things unknown, the effort to solve whose mystery has occupied our inquisitive scientists.

However, as already mentioned, man has always been confronted with a series of fundamental questions. The need to find correct and convincing answers to such questions is a pressing demand of his inner­most nature. Furthermore, since these problems concern matters outside the realm of the senses and empirical experience, their solution cannot be expected from the experimental sciences and must be provided by reason and logic alone.  [1]

It so happens that the correct solution of the aforementioned problems is of fundamental importance in giving meaning and value to human existence, and directing man’s voluntary activities into proper channels. The opposite of this is also true, in that giving wrong answers to these questions makes life empty, meaningless, and devoid of worthwhile goals, dragging man into the abyss of irreparable loss. Nor can man afford to ignore these fundamental questions, since by doing so he would, in addition to having to endure the pain of doubt, perplexity, and anxiety, deprive himself of the opportunity of attaining the ultimate aim of creation: perfection and everlasting felicity.

One of those fundamental questions which man must answer is whether the phenomena we encounter in our world owe their existence solely to material actions and reactions, without any participation or intervention of a nonmaterial power. Is there no nonmaterial power involved either in the emergence of the phenomena or in the existence of matter itself? Or, to put it another way, does matter constitute the totality of being, or does it constitute only a part of existence and relies on something beyond itself for its being?

The above question, which itself can be analysed into a number of other questions, is not limited to the properties and characteristics of any particular group of physical creatures, so that it may be answerable by some specific science through its own particular method. It is, on the contrary, a philosophical question, which must be studied by reason through intellectual speculation and analysis, even though the starting point for such speculation is empirical knowledge in its widest sense, which includes inner and direct experience as well.

The answer to the above question, whether in the positive or the negative, constitutes a part of one’s world-view, plays an important role in forming a basic aspect of a person’s intellectual approach which may be called “ontology”.

Another basic question is whether the life of each individual human being is limited to the few years he lives in this world, or whether there is another life for him after he passes away, much longer and probably even an everlasting one. And this question in turn raises another one: Does man, beside possessing a physical body, also possess a soul which can continue to live after the death of the body or not? Then, there is the last question, which is also related to the first ontological question, whether being is equivalent to material existence or is wider than that.

The solution to the above-mentioned problem also, whatever it may be, constitutes another aspect of an individual’s world-view, which may be called here `anthropology’.

And finally, the third fundamental issue to be settled before turning one’s attention to the details and selecting a particular course for one’s life is: What is the most certain way of knowing the best programme for individual and social life? Is there any fool-proof way beside the usual ways commonly adopted by most people which so often lead to contradictory results, which would guarantee the certainty of results?

The importance of the last question becomes more evident when the answer to the second question is in the affirmative; that is, when we conclude that man is immortal and that one must prepare beforehand for the felicity of afterlife through conscious effort during the limited period of this life. When such a belief is accepted, the need for a sure way of determining the relationship between the two lives, and an elaborate plan that would guarantee everlasting felicity becomes clearer. And the more the importance ascribed to the everlasting life, the greater is the significance of the path leading to felicity in it. This issue may therefore be called the problem of “methodology.” Accordingly, the fundamental problems of world-view are: ontology, anthropology, and methodology.

Notes:

[1]. This matter shall be discussed in greater detail later on.

Evaluating the Fundamental problems

---

The solution of the aforementioned fundamental problems is of foremost importance, because it plays a basic role in shaping and giving direction to man’s personal and social life, and, logically, should be taken up before any other issue. Also, it is of special significance because it involves unlimited gain and loss. In other words, if the answer to the fundamental questions raised is in the affirmative, the possibility is opened up for man of deriving infinite benefit from his life.

If it is proved that being is not coextensive with matter, and that the world has a supreme Creator who is the Maker, Sustainer, and Nourisher of all things, and possesses infinite power, knowledge, and mercy, and if it is proved that man’s life is not limited to this short, worldly existence, but that it is followed by an everlasting life accompanied either by felicity or misery, and that our life in this world is a preliminary stage in which we determine the course of our life in the Hereafter through our voluntary actions, and if it is proved that there is a guaranteed method for obtaining the knowledge of a correct life-programme that can take care of our felicity in both the lives, and that this method has been communicated by the Almighty God through His chosen messengers to mankind in general, it will have a tremendous impact on man’s life. In fact, the value given to the vital human activities by such a view of reality is incomparably greater than the combined worth of all the advancements made by science and the discoveries and inventions made by man. This is so because however great the value of these inventions and discoveries may be, it is still finite and limited, while the value of this view is unlimited since it makes it possible for man to attain unlimited and everlasting felicity. And it is obvious that the unlimited cannot be compared with the limited.

The objection may be raised here that the probability of the fundamental questions being answered positively is so small that it is not worth considering. It should be kept in mind, however, that however small this probability may be (1/n), it would still retain its positive value since its multiple is infinity; (infinity x n = infinity). To put it in the language of economics, the `expected value’ of any investment depends on two factors: (1) the percentage of probability of success, and (2) the estimated amount of the profit. It is the product of these two that determines the `expected value.’ For example, if we want to see which of two business ventures is more profitable for investment, it is not enough to take into account the percentage of probability of each one alone. We should also consider the estimated amount of profit each venture is likely to yield. Thus, if the percentage of the probability of success in the first venture is 10%, while that of the second venture is 20%, but if the amount of the profit the first venture is likely to yield is ten times that of the second venture, then we must conclude that the expected profit in the first venture is five times greater than that in the second one, despite the fact that the probability of success in the first venture is half of that of the second one. This is so because the product of the two multiples in the first case (0.1 x 10 = 1) is five times greater than that in the second case (0.2 x 1 = 0.2).

The conclusion that may be drawn from the above example is that it is highly preferable to handle problems whose solution promises unlimited benefit, even if our chances of solving them be very small. Furthermore, the value of insight into such problems cannot be compared to that of any other science, even if the results produced by these sciences be one hundred per cent certain and reliable. Thus, indifference to the various aspects of one’s world-view and negligence of its fundamental problems is not a reasonable and rationally justifiable attitude. Answering these fundamental questions in the negative without any sufficient evidence is even more unjustifiable.

$$SECTIONThe Spiritual and Materialist Philosophies]

Although the fundamental questions facing man have been answered in different ways and the differences in these answers have created various philosophies and schools of thought, yet by taking into account the positive and negative answers, we can distinguish and divide the various philosophies into the two general categories of materialist and spiritual. Islam is a perfect example of the spiritual schools of thought [2], whereas the most prominent contemporary example of the materialist schools is Marxism.

The tenets of the Islamic world-view are none other than the well­known threefold doctrines of the faith. [3] These are: the belief in the One God (al-tawhid); the belief in resurrection on the Day of Judgement (al-ma`dd); the belief in what God has revealed to His prophets (wahy, nubuwwah). In other words, Islam answers in the affirmative to each of the fundamental questions, and considers faith in them to be the real basis of man’s happiness and felicity. It undertakes the solution of life’s all other problems by relying on these three basic doctrines. In fact, it considers all solutions as the branches of a tree whose roots are these three principal beliefs. On the contrary, the materialist philosophies deny the existence of anything nonmaterial, do not believe that man has any life except this brief earthly existence, and deny the assurance held out by revelation.

Although the fundamental doctrines of the Islamic faith have been expounded and proven throughout the past centuries and on various levels, and there does not remain any doubt or uncertainty about any of them, this does not affect the basic fact that the contemporary strength of any set of beliefs hinges on two sorts of studies: one devoted to proving the validity of those beliefs, and the second, devoted to refuting contrary viewpoints. In other words, a double insight is necessary. In the case of Islam, unless the points of disagfee­ment with other ideologies are identified, the areas that are made the targets of the opponents’ criticisms and attacks are pinpointed, and a proper defence consisting of clear and logical answers is provided to the common Muslim individual, we cannot be sure of the stability of the faith on the level of the general public, and be certain of the people’s steadfastness in the face of the waves of challenging ideologies. More­over, just as in the past ideological and theological books were written in accordance with the intellectual challenges of the times and with the aim of answering their prevailing doubts, so must the ideological discussions of today be formulated in accordance with the philosophies and schools of thought now current, and with the aim of repelling their ideological attacks.

What makes defensive discussions specially essential today is that materialist philosophies are not being set forth for the mere purpose of proposing solutions to the fundamental theoretical questions, but are, in fact, being propagated in order to serve the political interests of the superpowers who consider exploitation of the emotions of the world’s hardworking and simple people as the best means of attaining their colonialist aims. Thus in order to disarm the people of their deep­rooted, liberating spiritual world-view, they have taken recourse in a philosophy tuned to the shallow understanding of the majority of workers and farmers. At the same time, they have tried to adorn materialism, which is one of the most reactionary and baseless of the ancient dogmas, with scientific embellishments, and pretend that it is a modern and “scientific” philosophy. Nor have they spared the use of all sorts of sophistry, paralogism, and misrepresentation to achieve this end.

The truth of the matter is that the superpowers have used materialism, which is based on empiricism, as a means of attracting the uneducated masses and as an excuse for sanctioning their propensities for improper and unethical conduct. In order to deceive the educated classes, they have borrowed some of the postulates of the experimental sciences and incorporated them into materialism. Moreover, to make sure that the probable rejection of these postulates does not destroy the foundations of their philosophy, they have taken refuge in “dialectical logic,” presenting all truths to be relative and variable, so that scientific progress not only would not invalidate their doctrines, but would, on the contrary, appear to support them.

We may maintain, therefore, that defending the positions of Islamic ideology, clarifying any of its ambiguities which may lend themselves to misrepresentation, and exposing all those who have made spiritual philosophy the target of unfair and dishonest accusations, is not only an authentic philosophical and intellectual duty and a divinely ordained obligation in regard to guiding the Muslims and strengthening the foundations of their faith, but is also an Islamic social responsibility in regard to defending Islam and the existence of the Muslim countries, which have become targets of ideological, political, and colonialist attacks by the communist block.

It must be pointed out here that by emphasizing the necessity for `double insight’ and `two-faceted defence’ we do not mean to say that such insight and understanding is the `sufficient cause’ for creating faith and inclination towards the right path, or that the only reason for being drawn towards atheism and other devious paths is ignorance about correct, logical, and convincing answers to criticisms. Our purpose is simply to indicate the importance of defensive arguments alongside the affirmative ones, and to emphasize that these two activities are some of the necessary conditions for creating a stable faith, though are not the sufficient condition for it. There are other conditions necessary for the stability of faith, specially in regard to the masses of people, the most important of which is spiritual readiness and freedom from moral corruption. Just as hedonism and moral irregularities may be caused by belief in materialism, belief in materialist philosophies may also be occasioned by strong attachment to bodily pleasures and moral corruption; since one’s love of pleasures and lusts may lead him, unconsciously, to search for and be attracted by philosophies which promote and sanction such conduct, and to avoid all schools of thought which teach abstinence from such endless pursuit of carnal pleasures.

It is, therefore, necessary that the real seeker after truth should cleanse himself of all moral impurities and all selfish and carnal desires, and, relying on nothing except logic and reason for guidance, liberate himself from the bondage of blind imitation of individuals, groups, or nations, simply because they possess some kind of social, political or technical superiority.

Notes:

[2]. This is not to say that Islam is one kind of philosophy; what is meant is that the basic principles of Islamic faith concern issues which fall into the same category as philosophical ones. To put it another way, Islam has philosophical foundations just as Marxism does.

[3]. The two other principles of Islamic belief, that is, `adl (justice) and imamah, are in fact implicit in the doctrines of al-tawhid and nubuwwah (prophethood).

Spiritual Philosophy and Scientific Truths

---

A glance at the fundamental philosophical questions, to which spiritual and materialist philosophies give contradictory answers, clearly shows that the areas of contention between the two opposing points of view have nothing to do with experimental matters. Whatever the solutions found to scientific problems, they would not in any way affect the way these philosophical questions are answered. For example, accepting or rejecting Euclid’s theory of space, holding to the view that mass is absolute or relative, or the validity or invalidity of the theory of mutation in biology, and other conflicting theories in the various sciences-none of these tell us anything about whether the divine or the materialistic philosophies are true; since the subject of discussion in philosophy is not the same as that of the experimental sciences, and the methods of investigation used in the two fields are completely different from each other.

It is wrong to imagine, therefore, that it is materialistic philosophy alone that accepts scientific facts and affirms the validity of the laws governing the transformations and interactions of physical phenomena, while spiritual philosophy denies them and sets forth the theory of creation in their place. The materialists hold that belief in the theory of creation finds its genesis, in the distant past, in man’s ignorance of the physical causes of phenomena. Therefore, now, when due to the advances in the experimental sciences, the system of physical causation has been fully discovered, there is no room left for such notions as that of creation or the dependence of phenomena on the will of the Creator . [4]

We know, however, that the dispute between the spiritual and the materialist points of view is not about affirming or denying the relation­ship between various phenomena, the nature of such relationships, or the laws which govern nature. What the dispute is about is whether the material world, with all the relationships existing between its various parts, be they known or as yet undiscovered by us, depends on a Being which transcends matter or not.

It is obvious that if such a dependence does exist, it would not be of the sort that exists between material bodies, and, therefore, cannot be studied by experimental methods; because just as the nonmaterial Being (if it exists) cannot be known through sense experience, the dependence of material phenomenon on it, also, cannot be studied through laboratory instruments. In order to make this point even clearer, we must briefly discuss philosophy and the experimental sciences, the fundamental differences between the problems with which they deal, and the methodologies which they employ.

Notes:

[4]. This is one of the most notorious fallacies propagated by the Marxists.

Philosophy and Science

---

By the way of an introduction we would like to remind the readers that there are many words which have a number of meanings. At times one of them has a wider and more general signification than the others. Sometimes the use of such words may lead to misunder­standing, and it is necessary to make sure that one understands the exact sense in which a word is being used. In philosophy, there are a number of such terms; for example, `potentiality,’ `possibility,’ `soul,’ `reason,’ and so on.

Among the terms that share common significations are the words `philosophy’ and `science.’ In the past the word philosophy (lit. `the love of wisdom’) was applied to all branches of knowledge, including the natural sciences, mathematics, divinities, ethics, and politics. Every branch of knowledge had a special methodology of its own, although sometimes it happened that inappropriate methods were used; for example, a problem belonging to the natural sciences was investigated through a purely rationalist approach, whereas it should have been studied through the experimental method.

In the Middle Ages other branches of learning were added to the aforementioned list, until it came to include almost all the thinking of that age.

After the Renaissance, and specially from the seventeenth century onward, those sciences whose method of enquiry was experimental, gradually separated from philosophy, and the term eventually came to be applied exclusively to that branch of learning the problems of which lay outside the realm of experiment and could be solved only through a purely rational, theoretical method. This branch of learning is called “metaphysics” or “the first philosophy”. The term “philosophy” is also used to refer to the process of explaining the basic principles necessary for investigating the problems of a particular science, such as the philosophy of science and the philosophy of ethics.

The word “science,” which literally means “knowledge,” is technically used to mean systematized knowledge of problems dealing with a particular subject. According to this definition, the term “science” could also be applied to metaphysics. In recent centuries, however, the usage of the term has become more limited, and has come to refer to the experimental sciences alone, in opposition to philosophy.

According to the latter definition, philosophy and science each possesses its own distinct subject matter and methodology. That is, philosophy’s subject of study consists of the general problems of existence, which are in the main part abstract and are also called, “secondary concepts,” [5] and its method is rational and theoretical. Science, on the other hand, is concerned with the study of the accidental properties of particular objects the existence of which is taken for granted; its method is experimental. For example, physics deals with matter and energy and their interactions in the fields of mechanics, acoustics, optics, heat, electricity, magnetism, radiation, atomic structure, and nuclear phenomena; chemistry studies the composition, structure, and properties of substances and the trans­formations they undergo. Physiology investigates the organic processes and phenomena of living organisms, while psychology discusses mental conditions and characteristics. However, none of these sciences has any­thing to say about the essential nature of the subject it studies or the fundamental principles underlying its methodology. In other words, neither physics and chemistry express any opinions about the existence of matter, nor physiology and psychology discuss the reality of life and the soul. Nor does any of these sciences examine the principle of causal­ity and its subordinate laws.

What philosophy concerns itself with are general abstract questions such as: cause and effect, permanence and change, the material and the abstract, the contingent and the necessary, etc. And since these issues are not directly connected with sense perception, the problems related to them cannot be settled empirically. The key to their solution must be found in rational investigation and analysis. The way these rational investigations are carried out and the value of their findings constitute the subject matter of an important part of modern philosophy known as “epistemology.” It follows then that we cannot expect scientific progress to help us in resolving philosophical disputes, and science to act as a referee in the quarrel between spiritual and materialist philosophies.

Unfortunately, there have been numerous attempts in the history of science and philosophy to invoke scientific laws or theories for help in the solution of philosophical problems, or to tip the scale in favour of a particular metaphysical position. On the contrary, others have sought refuge in the philosophical mode of reasoning and the rational method to help them solve a scientific problem. This, despite the fact that such intrusions are dangerous for both philosophy and science, and keep them from following the paths appropriate to their fields of study and solution of their problems through the use of methods prescribed by the nature of those problems.

As an example of such unjustified intrusion, we can mention the sort of argument some modern physicists have used to “prove” the existence of necessity in the relationship between cause and effect (determinism) by referring to findings in the field of macro-physics, while other physicists have pointed to certain phenomena observed in micro-physics as evidence that no such necessity exists. There is yet a third group that has endeavoured to reconcile the two positions by proposing that determinism is valid in the case of macro-physical phenomena and invalid in the case of micro-physical ones. All this while any philosopher knows that the law of causation is a general philo­sophical and metaphysical law which is, according to the definitive judgement of reason, fixed and unchanging.

What we must do is to search in nature for cases which would verify the law of causation through experimental investigations. What we definitely shouldn’t do is to consider the discovery of a few examples of its applicability as a proof of its validity, or the inability to apply it in few cases as evidence of either its invalidity or lack of generality; since such failure is definitely a result of the inadequacy of our instruments. In fact, it is the self-evident principle of causality that has moved scientists to seek the causes of phenomena and to discover the laws and secrets of nature. To attempt, therefore, to prove this metaphysical principle through reference to physical phenomena and the discoveries of the experimental sciences is like trying to play the flute by blowing through its wrong end.

It should not go unsaid, however, that philosophy and science are related to each other in a number of ways, the most important of which is that philosophy proves the existence of the subject matter and the validity of the fundamental principles of the sciences, while the sciences provide a widening background for philosophical inquiry. In any case, there should be no mixing of either their problems or methods and no expecting of solutions to scientific problems from philosophy or of philosophical problems from science.

Notes:

[5]. That is, concepts that are formulated as a result of rational analysis; such as, necessity, contingency, and causation.

Scientific Philosophy

---

Admitting the existence of problems that must be investigated on a philosophical plane, Marxism has tried to pretend that these problems can be solved by using the discoveries made by the experimental sciences. The way Marxist writers go about doing this is that they first give an example from nature, and follow it with an example drawn from social or historical phenomena. Their third step is to draw a general conclusion by forcing a connection between these two examples, thereby, in their own imagination, proving the philosophi­cal principle in question. Supposedly, the whole exercise authorizes them to call their philosophy as “scientific” and as based on discoveries made by the experimental sciences. Although this procedure may have some effect on those who are unfamiliar with philosophical problems and scientific methodology and are, therefore, unable to distinguish the weak points and fallacies hidden in this line of reasoning, it has no philosophical value and is considered a form of sophistry and public fraud by those who are knowledgeable in such matters.

We do not deny that there has been a fragmentation in the sciences caused by the extensive specialization of the various fields, and there is, therefore, a need for synthesizing the results of their investiga­tions and bridging the gaps separating the numerous fields of science. Nor do we have any objection to such an endeavour’s being called “scientific philosophy,” since there is no ethical or legal injunction against coining new terms and names. What we do object to, however, is the abuse of terms and covering up of facts under misleading labels. This, we believe, is reprehensible and must be fought against.

It should be kept in mind that Marxist writers have not created their so-called “scientific philosophy” in order to serve the world of science and scholarship, by making a synthesis of the results of the investigations of the different sciences, and by connecting the endeavours of the diverse fields with one another. Far from such altruistic aims, their real motivation is to provide a justification for their baseless ideology and a philosophical foundation for their immature and inconsistent ideas. Moreover, even though the very

notion of relying on scientific findings for finding solutions to metaphysical problems is incorrect and unfruitful-and as it has been stated before, philosophical issues cannot be settled in such a manner­the Marxists are not even loyal to this misguided approach, since they ignore many irrefutable scientific facts, and rely, instead, on weak and unproven theories lacking any scientific value whatsoever. And when the fallacy of these theories is proven, instead of learning a lesson from all the wasted effort and recognizing the futility of their approach, or having recognized it, admitting it, they move on with undaunted courage to grasp at another theory, and through peculiar intellectual acrobatics at which they are so adept, set it forth as further proof of the validity of dialectical materialism.

We shall leave an examination of the fumblings and public deceptions of the Marxists to some future occasion and simply state the fact that the notion of a “scientific philosophy”-in the sense of a philosophy that attempts to solve philosophical problems through the application of the methodology of the experimental sciences with reliance on scientific discoveries alone-is an anomaly unacceptable to any competent thinker. And the adjective “scientific” for philosophy not only does not add anything to its worth, since it ascribes to it a characteristic inappropriate to philosophy, but it simply exposes the bankruptcy of its originators which proves that they were unable to distinguish the boundaries separating science from philosophy and the correct method of tackling philosophical problems. It seems that our Marxist wizards justify this blatant contradiction as an example of “dialectical contradiction,” and set it forth as a highly advanced philosophical phenomenon to the credulous devotees of “dialectics.”

Another point to be noted here is that just as ascribing the term “scientific” to discussions of philosophical issues is caused either by ignorance, or intentions to deceive the public, to denigrate and condemn them as “unscientific” is also a form of distortion and abuse of the prestige of the word “scientific”. And just as being characterized as “scientific” adds nothing to the value of metaphysical investigations, their being labelled as “unscientific” does nothing to bring down their value either. Since, as we mentioned before, being “scientific” means that a subject must lend itself to empirical verification, whereas the quality that purely theoretical problems transcend the realm of sense experience is essential to them, and is not a shortcoming or defect on their part. In other words, just because something is outside the realm of sense experience and cannot be proved through experimental methods, it does not mean that it is worthless or unverifiable. It means, rather, that it should be analysed with the help of the rational method and by the means of the self-evident axioms -of reason. Moreover, as shall be demonstrated later, scientific problems themselves are in need of metaphysical and rational principles.

 

 

Metaphysics

---

We said earlier that the word “philosophy” has a number of meanings one of which is synonymous with “metaphysics”. It should be kept in mind, however, that the word “metaphysics” itself has various meanings-a fact that may give rise to confusion and misunder­standing.

Derived from the Greek term meta physika, [lit., the (works) after the physical (works)], metaphysics is the name given to that part of philosophy which concerns itself with the general principles of existence, and it appears that the ancient philosophers dealt with this subject after the section dealing with the natural sciences (physics) as a matter of didactic convenience. Thus it came to be called “after physics.” As we said earlier, when all the other fields of learning separated from philosophy, what was left behind was metaphysics.

Since metaphysics deals with nonmaterial existence, a misunder­standing has arisen that metaphysics deals with supernatural phenom­enon, and this misunderstanding has in turn caused spiritual philos­ophies to be branded as “metaphysical.” The fact of the matter is that metaphysical considerations are not limited to theistic philosophies; the materialist schools are in as much need of metaphysics as others. This is the case because anyone who wishes to discuss the general and fundamental principles of existence-principles which do not fall within the exclusive domain of any particular science-must enter the realm of metaphysics, irrespective of the sort of conclusions he might reach. For example, a discussion of the principle of causality is a philosophical and metaphysical one, and although it is considered to be an axiom and used as such by all the experimental sciences, they cannot investigate it through the use of the scientific method and prove its validity. This is so even though their investigations are based upon it, and the formulation of universal scientific laws is possible only because of the law of causation. Even if someone wants to reject the principle of causality or any of its subordinate laws, he would still have to engage in a metaphysical discussion, and as they say, “philosophy can be refuted only through philosophy.”

Recently an English philosopher, Robin George Collingwood, has written a treatise on metaphysics in which he has described it as a series of presuppositions which can neither be proved nor disproved. He says that these presuppositions are accepted unconsciously under certain conditions and rejected under a different set of conditions.’

Mr. Collingwood’s treatise is a jumble of confused ideas, a product, according to one commentator of his works, of his days of illness. It represents a subjective statement or hypothesis devoid of any philosophical value, and cannot be counted as an inquiry into the nature of metaphysics.

Considering what has been said above, it becomes clear that issues of importance in the First Philosophy are also relevant to the physical sciences, and whatever general issues fall outside the framework of science, would be considered as metaphysical. Moreover, even if the doctrine of dialectical materialism should be proven to be true, it would also be a metaphysical principle; since dialectical materialism, as its adherents claim, is not limited to any specific sphere or science, but applies to all natural, social, political, historical, or intellectual phenomena. Therefore, there is no opposition between dialectical materialism and metaphysics. There would, however, be opposition between materialism and metaphysics if the latter is taken to signify the `realm of the supernatural.’ Thus the opposition assumed by the Marxist writers between dialectics and metaphysics is completely groundless and without foundation.

The nature of metaphysical problems is such that they have given rise to differing and even contradictory judgements regarding them. And even though man’s nature thirsts for answers to them and, as said before, the human character of man’s existence depends on correctly solving some of these problems, yet some European thinkers have judged them as insoluble, while others have considered them useless and even meaningless.

It is obvious that a thorough examination of the aforesaid characteristics of its problems and the numerous opinions expressed on the subject of metaphysics, is outside the scope of this work, requiring far more space. I hope to undertake such an attempt in the future, when I shall examine in detail the misunderstandings that have given rise to such judgements, and explain the issues in simple terms. Here, I shall content myself with mentioning the following points:

A. Since man’s immediate and ordinary perceptions are acquired through the medium of the senses, shallow thinking people imagine that there is nothing beyond the perceived world, or, more precisely, beyond the range of our sense perceptions. And if, supposedly, such a thing did exist, it cannot be verified. It was this kind of shortsighted­ness that caused the Children of Israel to say to Moses:

…We shall never believe in you [and affirm your prophethood] until we see God manifestly (with our eyes) ….(2:55)

The position of those who say that the soul does not exist since we cannot find it through surgery is similar.

In answer to such shortsighted views, it would suffice to say that there are many things in this very physical world that cannot be perceived through the senses, such as electricity, electromagnetic waves, and other things, whose existence is considered certain by the con­cerned sciences. People who deny the existence of anything beyond the range of our senses must either deny all these realities, or admit that knowledge is not limited to that gained through direct sense perception; and that reason can apprehend the existence of the supersensible through the knowledge of its perceptible effects.

B. Exclusive reliance on sense perception (despite its errors and shortcomings) can justify only abstinence from making any judgements regarding the supersensible world. It certainly cannot justify any categorical denial of the supersensible world. It follows, then, that the empiricists have no right to deny the existence of a world lying beyond the range of senses. They must adopt an agnostic attitude towards the subject, allowing the probability of its existence, and act in accordance with the deny znd of such a probability.

C. There is a set of metaphysical principles the validity of which cannot be denied by any reasonable man although they cannot be verified by the senses. The nature of these principles is such that even if someone does try to deny them, he will end up by unconsciously affirming them. For example, the law of contradiction is a metaphysical conception, which cannot be perceived through any of the senses. Not even the individual concepts which constitute it can be apprehended through any of the senses. That is, the idea of contradiction is not `perceived’ by the senses. Despite it, however, no reasonable person can deny the validity of this self-evident principle, and even the claim that it is invalid proves its validity.

If someone says that contradiction is possible, can he, at the same time, believe that it is impossible and that it is possible? And if he is told that his claim, although one hundred per cent correct, is also one hundred per cent wrong, would he accept it? Of course not. It is thus proven that the very claim that this principle is invalid proves its validity.

It is clear that all those who have stated the view that contradic­tion is possible or necessary, either had some other meaning of “contradiction” in mind, or have not understood the meaning of the concept correctly. Otherwise, the impossibility of contradiction-if its meaning is correctly understood-is far too obvious to be questioned by any reasonable person.

The existence of such principles as mentioned above proves that man possesses a faculty of apprehension other than the senses, a faculty that can apprehend certain realities independently. Thus we cannot say that the content of a particular proposition is unknowable or unverifi­able just because it is outside the range of perception.

It follows, therefore, that the solution to metaphysical problems must be found through the rational method; that is, through the application of self-evident axioms, solutions to nonempirical problems are found. Moreover, if used correctly, this method can lead to results even more definite than those attained in the empirical sciences. In fact, as already pointed out, the certitude of the results attained by the empirical sciences and their generality depend entirely on metaphysical principles.

Every human being, throughout life, perceives things both inside and outside himself. Mostly these perceptions are attained through natural means, and sometimes through artificial devices. In any case, neither an isolated perception nor all of them could be said to consti­tute a “science,” in the sense of a set of general principles. Perception acquires scientific value only when it transcends the limits of the particular and the personal and enters the realm of generality. Moreover, these generalities cannot be in the form of simple concepts, but must take the composite form of postulates consisting of a number of concepts possessing a special relationship amongst them.

For example, the seeing of different colours and shapes, the hearing of various sounds, and other sense-data, give man some knowl­edge about objects existing in his environment; but this knowledge is not what is meant by the word “science.” In other words, the partic­ular bits of information thus obtained do not constitute the science of physics or chemistry, or any other science, even though they are more or less connected with scientific issues. Such postulates, for instance, as “the sum of the angles of a triangle is equal to two right angles,” “metals expand when exposed to heat,” and “the atoms of one element can be changed into those of another element,” etc. are scien­tific statements. As it can be clearly seen, these notions do not represent particular perceptions of any particular individual, and are not subject to any limitation of time or space. That is, just as they are true of the triangles, metals, and atoms of the past and the present, they are also true of the triangles, metals, and atoms of the future. Nor are these truths in any way affected by spatial considerations. This is the characteristic which distinguishes scientific concepts from particular perceptions.

Now we have to see how man can come to possess the faculty of being able to pass judgement equally on past, present, and future. It is obvious that none of the senses has the ability to look into the past and the future in the manner mentioned above, and the sense percep­tions, if they be in accordance with reality, can portray only such phenomena as exist at the time of perception, not those which have long ceased to exist or have not yet come into existence.

There is no doubt that these general postulates, which are based on particular perceptions and are abstracted from them, are trans­formed through a certain intellectual process into general, definite, and necessary laws. This being so, the next question that presents itself is: how and according to what laws does the human mind extend particular perceptions and turn them into general postulates, and that too in a definitive form, invulnerable to scepticism?

In answer we can say that whenever we perceive two phenomena either together or following one another, we realize that there exists a relationship between them called “the causal relationship,” and thus foresee that whenever the cause is present the effect would also be present. For example, whenever heat is produced in metals, their expansion would also follow.

However, without going into meticulous philosophical considera­tions, it can be said that what we can perceive through the senses is either the simultaneous existence of two phenomena or the fact that one of them follows the other. But by what means do we perceive that the existence of one phenomenon depends on that of another? And, secondly, even if we determine that such a dependence does exist in a particular case, how do we know that such a dependence has existed in the past and will exist in the future, in all locations?

Of course, we admit that all scientists do understand the things just mentioned, and it is on the basis of this understanding that they pursue scientific research and seek for the causes of various phenomena and their interrelationships. We should know, however, that this under­standing is not the work of sense organs and the perceptual faculties related to them, -but is the work of another inner faculty called “intellect” which is capable of comprehending fixed realities uncondi­tioned by spatial and temporal limitations. One such unchanging reality is the law of causality and its corollaries to which all scientific laws owe their generality and certainty. Moreover, since these perceptions (rational truths) have not been apprehended through the medium of sense and experience and cannot be verified by any of the experimental sciences, they are therefore metaphysical truths.

In conclusion we can say that not only man’s knowledge is not limited to perceptions gained through sense and experience, but the laws of the empirical sciences are themselves in need of nonempirical knowledge and metaphysical principles.[]

 

 

Holy Quran 6:88

I do not intend to bore you with preaching or beg for sympathy with this story. My intention is simple: To inform Muslims as well as non-Muslims that there is a greater realm of Islam other than that what you witness by some misguided Muslims and what you see from the television. I also do not intend to ruin the reputation of anyone mentioned in this story. It seems like yesterday when I was a little boy growing up in the inner city of Chicago. Mom and Dad would both work full-time jobs trying to support a family of ten. Things just didn’t work out the way they planned. Dad began drinking heavily and soon took up a habit of gambling and abuse. Whenever dad was around he was either drunk or on his way to jail; dad would frequent the Chicago jails many times a month. In my opinion my father had been arrested about 200-300 times in his lifetime. Whenever mom and dad were together in the same house there would always be a fight and one of the two would need medical attention. There were a few incidents that I recall when dad pushed mom and mom split dads head open with a hammer…and yet another incident when mom slammed an iron in dads face…then another time she broke a beer bottle over dad’s head. Maybe he deserved it; I do not know. When the fighting between mom and dad would end, the children got the end results. My brother and I have been whipped with hangers, wires, poles, glass, pots and pans, sticks, bottles, cables…. Whatever they could get their hands on we were hit with it. One time my mother had caught my brother and I playing with matches. I told the truth and she only slapped me, my brother lied and had his hand stuck in an open flame on the stove until his skin boiled. The level of stress in our household was so extreme my mother had suffered from two maybe three miscarriages; one of the miscarriages she had reached passed six months of her pregnancy when the fetus exploded in her stomach – dad was in jail. My parents had gone through a lot. There were times when there was practically nothing to eat. Many nights mom would only have eggs and bread to prepare for dinner. I remember she would prepare our dinner and whatever we didn’t eat that was her meal, if we ate our entire share she would go to bed hungry. This happened for many years. Before I reached the age of 10 I began feeling the need to commit suicide. With everything happening around me I felt as if there was no reason to live at all. Although my parents had sent us to weekly Catholic school and frequent the Church, my heart didn’t feel alive. I would simply feel the need to go in order to get away from what went on at home. In school I wasn’t the brightest child. As a 6^th grader I had a reading level of a 1^st grader. Every year throughout elementary school I was ordered to take summer school in order to pass to the next grade. I had failed the 2^nd grade and hardly made through the remaining next 6. It was in the elementary school when I learned how to steal. It would become a constant habit. Whenever I had the chance I would steal anything and everything I could get my hands on. Sooner than later my brother had joined me. We went to Gas Stations and stole candy, then to Department stores and stole toys. There was one time when mom gave us a few dollars to buy dad a “Father’s Day” gift. My brother and I decided to spend the money on popcorn and nachos and stole his gift…Evidently we were caught and were about to be arrested; Mom came to our rescue.A few years later my brother had went in his direction and I went my own way. I gave up on stealing and began writing music/poetry and playing guitar. I eventually joined a band and would use the “jam” sessions as a scapegoat to get away from my problems. In High School my brother had befriended many drug addicts and soon he began doing drugs. I am not saying he was a drug addict but he did drugs like the rest of them. When I was about 12 maybe 13 I began working as an electrician helper with my uncle. I held that job until I was about 16, then I began working on my own doing electrical, carpentry and painting contract jobs. This helped me move out of my parents’ home and move into my first apartment. Around this time I had met a girl who would become my fiancé within a matter of months. I was the extremely shy type. As matter of fact she had asked me out on a date instead of the other way around. Needless to say, we were together and wanted to get married. About a year or 2 into our relationship she began practicing Islam. She was born into a family where her father was Muslim and her mother was Catholic. My fiancé was jammed in the middle; simply confused. She began informing me of the Muslim religion and I was completely turned off by the whole idea. The more she spoke of it the more I pushed her away. There was a period of time where I didn’t want to have anything to do with her simply because she was practicing a foreign thing. The reason of my hate toward the Muslims is due to my upbringing, the actions of the majority of Muslims and the news media. Every Arab/Muslim that I had ever met was no different than me, if they were different they were worse. I knew Muslims who did drugs, attempted murder, fornication, lesbians, etc. At this period in time I was in a prime time of arrogance and didn’t even know it. I felt as if I was a living piece of God and nothing could destroy me. I felt as though I were better than everyone else. Nevertheless, I was a lonely person who needed someone by his side. My fiancé had given me a Qur’an as a gift for my 18th birthday. As I received the gift I cringed and felt like throwing it away. However, I simply stored it away in my closet not feeling the need to disrespect her. A few years earlier I got the urge to read. Once I began reading I couldn’t stop. My father had once told me…”When you were a younger we couldn’t get a book in your hands for anything in the world, now we can’t get a book out of your hands.” Now at this point of my life I had read numerous books and I was feeling that my philosophy of me being a part of God was a little shaky. While the Qur’an was accumulating dust in my closet I had prayed to God that He would send me a book or a sign with a key to all of the answers in the world. May I remind you that I knew nothing what the Qur’an was and never before have I even touched a Qur’an let alone hear about it. One night, after I had cleaned the house, I stood in the kitchen looking onward toward the living room. The house looked beautiful. The round glass table to my right; the soft tender gray carpeting below my feet; the smooth arch dividing the dining area from the living area; then finally a comfortable dim light illuminated the setting. I suddenly had an urge to pick up the Qur’an and read it. I sat in my favorite tan colored recliner next to the end table. With the Qur’an in my hands I began to read the introduction of Abdullah Yusuf Ali. Before I knew it tears had flowed from my eyes. I wanted to beat myself senseless from how stubborn I was not to read this earlier. I read the same thing I believed all my life with a fine-tooth comb laying it all out straight. My heart overfilled with satisfaction and pain at the same time. Immediately I had called my fiancé and apologized for being an imbecile. We then agreed that our lives would indeed change and we would have to either get married or separate for good. I was starving to learn more about Islam. Now that I had read the entire Qur’an I wanted to learn how to pray. I then began reading books about prayer and basically taught myself how to pray. For a person who felt that they were a piece of God and now bowing down to God this was probably the hardest thing I could do. I was embarrassed toward myself for praying to a thing that wasn’t even there. I then found books with English transliteration (followed along with the audio) and taught myself how to recite Qur’an. It was at this point where I wanted to go to the Mosque. I was given directions and hesitated many times. I would drive up to the Mosque, circle around a few times and turn back home. Then I started having dreams. May I point out that I had never seen a Mosque before this, nor have I ever been inside one. I didn’t even know what a Mosque was. Needless to say, I began having dreams that would twist my soul yet wake me with passion. I had a dream the night after I circled the Mosque. My dream began…I was walking in a well-lighted, flat levelled building. The carpet was soft and green and there were pillars/columns throughout this structure. Inside this building were friends from school and relatives that made my brief stay welcoming. The next morning I woke and went to the Mosque. And just like inside my dream I saw the very same setting; Green carpet, pillars/columns and people that made me feel at home. Some time later I had yet another dream of myself running through a field of grass. An army was behind me chasing me and chanting “Kill him, Kill him!” I then came to a safe ground and prayed to God that I would be safe. I was then given 9 men to help me defeat this army of thousands. Each man was given a stick for battle except me; I held a double-sided axe. As the opposing army grew nearer I closed my eyes and swung. When my eyes opened the opposing army was defeated. My army hadn’t a single scratch on them. I then appeared all alone in a Mosque contemplating on the victory. As I sat on a bench at the backside of the Mosque with my head down I felt a sudden presence. A hand touched my thigh. His perfect voice said “Victory.” I replied, “yes, with ten men.” He commented by adding, “With God you were limitless.” I then picked up my head and saw the most beautiful man I could ever imagine. His skin was the most perfect tone, his voice was gentle and soft but manly, and his presence was clear and comforting. He was clean from head to toe. His teeth shinned gleaming white and his beard covered his cheeks with style. — I would have many dreams like this one for about 2 years. In the summer of 1998 I had went to a Mosque on the North side of Chicago called the “Muslim Community Center (M.C.C.)” for a conference. At the conference I had publicly declared that I was Muslim. The man who had walked me through the testimony of faith was Jamal Badawi, whom I had no idea who he was. I knew that I just put a huge responsibility on my shoulders and my entire life would completely change. By the spring of 1999 there was a Mosque being built from a tavern about 3-4 miles away from my home. The only problem, it was in a neighborhood I didn’t belong. The fact of the matter is I lived in an all white neighborhood and the Mosque was in an all black neighborhood. The whites and blacks are not allowed to walk through each other’s neighborhoods unless it’s for drugs, prostitution, or briefly passing through by car. I was the type that didn’t care. I walked the 3-4 miles to help the Muslims refurbish the Mosque. Throughout the whole summer of 1999 I walked back and forth at least twice a week. During this period I was harassed, spit at, rocks were thrown at me, children cursed at me…one of the many times I was harassed it was by the Police. I had just left the Mosque from the Friday prayer and I didn’t reach 2 blocks and an unmarked Police car pulled up next to me, and 2 uniformed men began shouting at me. “Turn around and put your hands on the car, now!” I slowly turned and placed my hands on the car. As one officer stuck his hands in my mouth and searched my entire body the other officer asked, “What are doing in this neighborhood boy?” I said, “It is my Sabbath day. I came to pray.” He replied, “You’re not suppose to be in this neighborhood. Now go back to your neighborhood and I don’t wanna see you back here.” I then walked home and returned back the following week. I continued to do this until the winter of 1999. This is the winter that changed my family forever. Up until this point I hadn’t been completely open with my family about my conversion. I knew that they would take it hard and probably beat me and throw me out so I felt that taking it step by step would be the best idea…it wasn’t. One night my father came home from work with snow all over his body and shoes. He didn’t bother brushing it off. He charged through the door like a madman and darted after me yelling and threatening my life. I just sat on the couch gripping the cushions hoping he wouldn’t smash my head into the wall. With his fist locked he brought it up to my face with extreme torment. Something held him back from knocking my head off. I know if it were a few years earlier I’d be in the hospital. My father just doesn’t stop when he reaches his boiling point. After he yelled and said he’d kill me I was no longer welcome in his home, my mother felt the same. I had nowhere to go. I began sleeping in my car and spending most of my time in libraries. It was very hard for me to get around because that winter Chicago had endured the worst blizzard since the 1970’s. Many nights I thought I was going to die due to the cold and hunger. I finally went back to the original Mosque I had dreamed about and slept there for one night; that’s all they allowed. Soon after that a friend had made a deal with me. I would build a prayer area in the 2^nd level of his muffler shop and in return he would let me live there until I found a place of my own. As I built the prayer area I found a job and paid my way through college and eventually joined the Muslim Student Association (M.S.A.). By January 2000 a friend of mine asked me if I wanted to share an apartment paying 1/3 of the rent. I agreed. By the next month I was on my way to Saudi Arabia to make my pilgrimage. There is no other way to explain my experience other than…making the pilgrimage is like reliving and witnessing the history of Islam replay all over again. You’ll look at the mountains and catch a glimpse of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad journeying into the night; you’ll look at the Ka’ba and witness the destruction of the idols by the Prophet Abraham; you’ll stand on the mountain of Arafat and hear the final sermon of the Prophet Muhammad…When I left Saudi Arabia my heart cried to go back. A few months after my return to the United States I was engaged for the second time. The engagement lasted about 5 months. At the ending of 2000 I was engaged for the 3^rd time. This time there was more chemistry between the two of us and our level of understanding life was mutual. We had scheduled our wedding to be in the spring of 2001. Early February my fiancé had called me to inform me that she had cancer and was calling of the wedding and our relationship. More than anything I was hurt for her, not by her, but for her. She was a new convert, like myself and her family wasn’t supporting her at all. I knew what she was feeling and I knew the loneliness she was feeling. That was the end between us. It seemed as if every time I tried to plan out my life and make the decision it never worked out. I just gave up on trying to get married and left it all up to God. March 2001, I had just returned from a week vacation in Florida and went to my favorite pizza restaurant. I developed a relationship with the owner from going there almost daily for about a year. Her and her husband had asked me if I wanted to get married and I told them, “no.” I said that I gave up on it. They told me to go home, take a shower and come back because they had some one for me to meet. Again, I left it all up to God. I went home prayed to God and did what they asked me to do. It was March 8^th 2001 at 9 p.m. when I arrived at her house. I was engaged 3 times before and on each engagement I was nervous, but not this time. I was as calm as I would be if I were to hang out with my friends. I entered into the house with my two friends (later to find out they were the girls’ aunt and uncle) and I met a man who greeted me at the door, “Asalamu Alaykum.” I replied, “Wa Alaykum Salam.” I sat down and chatted with this man for a few moments and out came his daughter. We spoke for a few hours and I found myself beginning to wonder how I got where I was. Not so much the place and time but about a year prior to this I was homeless, living in my car. Needless to say, this woman that I had just met had became my wife. We were married July 8^th 2001. In the early weeks of November 2001 our lives had changed. Due to the actions of a few delusional people smashing into the world trade center building two months prior, the United States government went out on a full fledge war on Islam. The FBI paid many Islamic charity organizations a visit and shut them down; the Global Relief Foundation was one of them, I worked there since 1999. When the FBI raided the foundation they just didn’t shut down the organization under false pretences they ruined our reputation. They took everything from our organization including extension cords, hairbrushes, hair spray and moose, computers that were never used, fax machines, copy machines, cell phones, poems, personal files, etc. They took my house and car keys and refused to give them back. They drained our personal checking accounts from every last penny. They left us with nothing. And after they did that they raided our homes and invaded our privacy. Still to this day they have not found one penny used in the wrong way or used in any way other than that of supporting humanitarian aid. Their case is bogus. My wife and I were only married 4 months when all of this took place. The FBI had left us with only $30, that’s what was in my pocket. We had bills that needed to be paid, rent was due; almost no food in the house and Eid Al Fitr was in a day or so. But like always Allah was there to help.I worked two jobs, sometimes 3 to get back where we needed to be. At the same time I had reunited with my mother and sisters after a few years of silence. On November 6^th 2002, the first day of Ramadan, my son Amir James Farrell was born. My heart melted the first time I held him. I was there throughout the entire delivery and helped every step of the way. I cut the umbilical cord the first chance I got I kissed the person whom Allah has allowed me to raise, my son. Amir is my pride and joy and Laila (my wife) is my strength and comfort. Many people do not realize the importance a woman has in Islam. To conclude on this, I came to respect my mother so much more due to Islam and the birth of my son. Early February 2003 I had reunited with my father. The last time I had seen or spoke to him was when he had threatened my life…I was happy to see him again. There is so much more I can write and so many details I had left out but I did not want to bore anyone. My wife always tell me, “When you are feeling down just pick up a pen and write all the things you are grateful for…”This brief story is a sample of just that.

This is the guidance of Allah(swt), He guides thereby whom he pleases of His servants; and if they had set up others (with Him), certainly what they did would have become ineffectual for them.

(taken from Ansariyan Publications, Qum)

The sweet flavor of milk and honey is originally the reflex of a tender heart. Thus any joy is originated from that heart which is actually the essence of the Accidental universe. The shadow of such a heart cannot represent the true significance of it.”  Mowlavi

 Do not follow your own shadow, if you are looking for the objective of your life.

As an imaginary choice or a selection of the best written works which have been prepared in the course of man’s history and his culture, ten books, excluding the divine scriptures, are to be supposedly introduced as the best ones from the viewpoint of their rich and exalted contents.

Among these ten the great poetical composition and attempt of Mowlavi, Rumi under the title of “Mathnavi” should undoubtedly receive a seat of Honour. Our of ten selected couplets which convey the pure originality of analyzing man’s status in this work, one is definitely allowed to choose the formerly mentioned lines and verses of the great poet who has precisely tried to accomplish his mission of writing. In other words these couplets are actually the condensed materials with an exalted message for the welfare of mankind and his eternal prosperity that are based on the object or objective of his life which will provide for him those blessing and privileges. The poet emphasizes that one has got to be a good thinker in order to be able to understand the very important point of the question which is set forth and the raised concept.

The celebrated poet also intends to discuss the validity of man’s intrinsic structure, that is naturally a criterion for the cognition of the different values found in inanimate objects and materials like the two examples and instances of milk and honey which are by themselves but two indifferent useless substances.

Every beauty found in nature is therefore predestined to appeal to man’s eyes.

A dog, a tree, or an ordinary animal cannot enjoy the scenery of an invaluable painting: termites will bite and destroy that precious painting draw on a piece of cardboard or on wood.

As has been previously stated and proved all the privileges and worth of inanimate objects will find their true concepts through man’s status in nature, they are but shadows which cannot be real ideals to quench man’s thirst for Perfection.

Now let us examine the question of man’s objective in his lifetime:

Philosophy and Object Life

 The question which implies the above subject is not however a new discussion.

Many individuals living in their own societies have in different ways been investigating this often raised question for years.

They have eventually found convincing answers for it on the basis of remaining beliefs and behaviour, or some relics which originally belonged to the past epochs. Thus wise people have especially tried to examine the true concept of the philosophy and object of life without being involved in the joys and sorrows that might have some impact on them.

The Greek philosophers and the Roman thinkers have also endeavoured to deeply study the same problem or question of man’s Objective of life.

Qualified erudites, with their broad knowledge and information of the details of the philosophy of Creation and man’s existence, humbly admit that their views are actually restricted to their personal impression of the subject. These people say that they are in fact parts of an extended whole.

Islamic authorities and Muslim Pioneers have already discussed the related question.

The Holy Qur’an contains about a hundred instances concerning the Phenomenon of life and its function or destination with respect to mankind. Some of these references will be quoted in later passages as available data for the dear readers of this helpful pamphlet.    

Chronological studies on the philosophy and the objective of life could therefore be appraised and compared with the standard and level of man’s awareness and his initial consciousness as a living creature.

The strict belief of the greatness of the creation of the universe caused thinkers to give both sober and highly evolved answers in those bygone years.

On the contrary “The Existence” in general does not convey to day the exalted concept of its identity on account of man’s new relationship with the mysteries of nature.

The formerly mentioned question is therefore more explicitly raised from the side of curious thinkers:

People seem to want know about the philosophy and the objective of live with the same eagerness they have towards acquiring information about the aim of drinking water when they feel thirsty.

The emergence of machines in the last decades of the 18^th century was another reason for raising such questions.

The opportunists now began to make things seem more complicated rather than offering their help to solve the problems.

These people had actually lost their own lives for the sake of fame and fortune, and they viciously intended to deceive simple-hearted people who lived in ignorance in certain societies.

The consequence of all this was that the latent truth was going to be forgotten for ever. People themselves can easily find the clear concept of the facts that may concern the objective of living in this world.

The phenomenon of the philosophy of life, that covers an extensive field of man’s various walks of life and his final goal, should be taken into consideration in every period and phase of personal tendencies towards a more exalted status. To clarify this problem we found it useful to give the following account concerning the contents of those lines.

Two important subjects will be discussed for the attainment of a satisfactory response:

1)    What is meant by “The Objective”?

2)    What is “Life” by itself?

It is certain that the ultimate objective of a phenomenon lies in the fact the attainment of which gives eagerness to the struggling person who is sincerely after that achievable goal. Thus every objective conveys two aspects:

A)         Its inner or natural qualifications that are intrinsically in accordance with man’s nature and his conscious desires.

B)         Its outer aspect that represent the real being of an objective the possession of which means much to the man who is after his ideals in life.

        Man’s struggles are moving along under the supervision of these two aspects. Activities for attaining objectives are based on pleasures and awareness. They are actually exerted for the achievement of the worthy objectives.

It must be taken into consideration that these phases of struggle depend on the existing conditions found in their respective environments whether physical or spiritual.

Two other Aspects of an Objective

The other two aspects of an objective are actually related to the outer condition of that special objective.

Further explanation will clarify the above stated subject:

An objective is indeed something apart from man’s natural tendencies towards his assumed ideals.

This external object may automatically follow the function of the laws of nature which are not within man’s domain of power.

The season for the fertilization of trees can be mentioned as a proper example for the proof of this phenomenon.

The attainment of this objective would be however wrongfully accomplished had a good gardener not looked after that orchard. An objective therefore conveys two aspects: It may be either optional or fatalistic. The true visage of an objective lies in its optional aspect:

Detailed discussions will be set forth at the proper time and place.

What is life general?

We are all in need for different pairs of glasses to wear and then observe the true concept of “Life” which is to some extent a very easy and perceivable phenomenon, while at the same time and position it may appear as the darkest of all created items. Here we do not intend to examine the biological, physiological, or philosophical aspects of life.

The study of the natural aspect of life which is something observable will provide adequate material for our discussion about the philosophy and objective of life in general:

Physical movements, human senses; tasting and enjoying different pleasures, feeling pain, acquiring knowledge, possessing instincts, looking for perfection being a member of the society and finally predestined or optional gestures are all placed in the category of the question of the perceivable aspect of ordinary life…

It must be undoubtedly taken for granted that these phenomena do not cover the details of the concept of life, but they may provide facilities for the minds of those who are after the key to the objective of life.

We should not forget that the position of the question concerning an objective and its motive holds direct connection with the way life itself is going to be interpreted:

The question raised by an honest man concerning the philosophy of life will no doubt be different from the question asked by a wicked person who is inquiring aimlessly or viciously.

Such questions have to be carefully studied before being answered.

Questions are similar to the stop signals which lead the wanderer to the safe road.

Think of a worker who is busy molding bricks and is at the same time watched by a four-year-old boy who is eagerly asking his father about the laborer’s job.

“What is this man doing dear dad?” The young lad asks.

“He is working. He is moulding bricks. “Answers the father.

“Why is this man working?” Continues the boy.

“To get some wages.” Replies the father.

This reasonable answer convinces the inquiring boy.

Imagine that the same above question is raised in order to be answered by the famous men like Ibne Khaldoon, or Ricardo and by Karl Marx:

“What is the concept of ‘WORK’, and what is its role in merchandise?”

Their satisfactory answers will be attainable after the passage of the time and era of the man’s history in the world!?

The proper answer to a question therefore depends on the intention of the person who asks it: In other words answers vary in different cases.

Motives of Question Concerning The Objective of Life

Too many motives for the question raised round the objective of life are found here and there.

Four of them are supposed to be basically the most important ones as follows:

a)    Motives with negative function.

b)    Motives with positive function.

c)     Motives concerning accidental function.

d)    Impartial motives to study life in general in orgder to achieve the ideal goal of living.

These four have a common aim or target which is nothing but the cognition of the nature of life and the related objective of this phenomenon:

a)    Motives with negative function

Dynamic motions along with the power of innovations are originally permanent activities of a living man who is naturally granted some potentialities.

In case such dynamic activities begin to stagnate, the concept pf life will be merely restricted to man’s affairs and his environment. Thus the question of the objective of life will be seriously raised in the critical condition of stagnation in which one is desperately involved.

Now the helpless victim of this troublesome condition will be permanently tortured by horrible nightmares and by other menacing illusions and the like.

In short the emergence of stagnation in man’s developmental activities will be definitely the cause and motive of creating despair at the time of asking about the final goal of his life.

The negative motive will not affect equally: There are many people who live in the present century and have different reactions in response to this so-called negative motive:

1)          Some believe that the stagnation prevailing upon their lives should be some predestined catastrophes that do not do any harm to others who are permitted to taste the sweet flavour of life and the related objective of this phenomenon.

Such narrow-minded people are place in the category of ” Mentally underdeveloped individuals.

2)          There are others who imagine that the emergence of such stagnation originates from the birth of the world of machine and technology.

3)          The third group of people endeavour to find out the reason of life’s stagnation. They will try to discover some helpful alternative for this standstill. There could be found too many of these types of people in east or in west. The actually contrive to realize the factors which have already caused stagnation in the dynamic life of mankind. They sincerely intend to help human societies. Soon they will certainly achieve their ideal goal which is something compatible with the laws of existence.

         b)  Motives with positive function:

When life is continually prosperous, it will naturally face a sort of stagnation. The superficial successful man must now recognize his ‘false self’ in this brilliant situation. The real or ‘true ego’ is actually absent in this ‘happy banguet’.

Such a person is not truly an industrious soul if he is in actuality ignoring the poor living conditions of his fellow country men.

This careless man cannot definitely understand the true message of life and the related objective of this phenomenon.

Temporal joys and other secular entertainments prevent this very person from thinking profoundly about the object of life.

He seems to be deaf, dumb and even blind; not being able enough to talk about what is going on around him in this world.

C)        Motives concerning accidental function:

We have previously mentioned that the most fundamental element of life lies in the dynamic aspect of this phenomenon.

This element may continue its normal movement in the path of the natural process of life.

Some casual or accidental motives in the disguise of ideals of life may sometimes appear to raise the question concerning the objective of life. Persons with these aspirations are divided into different groups:

1)          Those who are eager to acquire knowledge as their final goal and objective of life. Upon encountering dead-lock in giving proper answers to the questions which have been set froth they indifferently draw ridiculous result and conclusion and talk about the absurdity of the phenomenon of life.

      These roughly ignorant people now and then decide to raise the question of the philosophy of life for their own selves to be answered aimlessly or imitatively by them.

      A simple example can clarify the above statement. Imagine the eight year-old son of Max Planck the famous physicist, taking a book on quantum theory from his father’s library in order to learn, by rote, a few words concerning the phenomenon of radiation.

      “Is an electron some wave or a mass?”

      The boy may utter!?

2)          There are some other people who take the necessity of a change in life condition for the question of life objective. They, for instance, think of indulging in entertainments or flight from agonies as their ideals of living.

They are not actually after the object of life; they appear to be seeking another kind of life.

These people do not like to be questioned by others about the choice they have made. They prefer to maintain their afforded popularity, and not to be accused of being lovers of an animalistic way of life!

They say that mankind is just like that fish which is wandering about to find the fresh water in a safe corner of the sea. This is the final goal of that fish in the extended phenomenon of the creation of universe.

3)          Another group of people think of nothing but the comic aspect of life.

These people make themselves compatible with any accidental condition of living, and look at their environment from behind the fancy glasses they are wearing.

“Life is but fun and games. “They say.

These happy people who avoid the serious aspect of life prefer to be always jolly, their ultimate fate will be however tragic due to the nature of life itself.

The commander of the faithful Ali (AS) says:

“The ignorant jolly person who is indulging himself in extravagant entertainments, will soon collapse and perish by an unexpected catastrophe”

Here the ignorant clown complains about the occurred calamity and begins to grumble at the evil incident.

He does not think of that unpleasant event as a natural phenomenon which may appear in the path of one’s lifetime.

Such an involved person is more surprised rather than being awakened and becoming aware of the true facts that are happening around him.

Thus the depressed persons think of the philosophy and object of life in such pessimistic way due to the mental disease from which they so seriously suffer.

They are actually after the attainment of a healthy mental condition that seems to be their ideal objective in life.

4)            There are some other people who try to choose and adopt some particular motto and object of life for themselves and for others too.

        These people endeavour to explain the doctrine of the philosophy of life on the basis of the phenomenon of life itself. In other words they prefer to enjoy some indulgence in their daily activities under the disguise of freedom. They also believe that they can manage to eliminate the conflict and confluence of matter and life through the development of these two.

5)                There are other groups of the people who look for the natural life in the strict laws of ” the matter” with which they feel happy. These people start a search to obtain the different dimensions of the phenomenon of life in order to quench their thirst for its possession.

        Such persons have stuck to the opposite position of those who prefer to be totally jolly. The true countenance of life cannot be observed by these two groups of people.

        The philosophy and objective of this phenomenon will not be therefore known to them.

        They seem as if they are not able to understand the true concept of these questions:

        The reason lies in their restricted impression of life with which they are naturally blessed. No further attempt will be exerted by them to go deeply into the philosophy and object of living.

        To sink in the ocean of life hinders the living diver from deeply studying the final aim of his swimming.

        When a man is fond of a certain condition of living, he cannot actually examine and judge his environment impartially. Such a person fails to determine which objective should be the true ideal in the course of his lifetime.

        We may, for instance, suppose that a man has adopted the learning of different fields of knowledge as his ideals in life.

        This acquired knowledge will definitely colour all the aspects of his daily activities.

        In others words life is not naturally changed into a new phenomenon in the phase where it is adorned with the jewels of knowledge nor has acquired knowledge lost its original quality in this coalition with life.

        The aforementioned man is therefore floating on the stream of an enriched life that is blessed with the gift of knowledge. To swim and dive in an ocean lighted up with fantastic projectors of knowledge will remind us of the swimming of a wandering fish in this bright water.

        Neither the diver nor the fish can manage to understand and discover what would be the final objective of the creation of this boundless sea!?

        There are lots of beautiful and charming masks fixed on the visage of life.

        These attractions are not supposed to be believed as the true objectives of life.

        Facts do not lose their functional validity in the scale of man’s ignorance. In short a colourful life that looks glittering, even from the viewpoint of spiritualities, does not represent the true philosophy and objective of this phenomenon.

        Cogitation and reasoning are not also sufficient means of the cognition of life objective and the philosophy of this phenomenon.

        Knowledge, intellection, astonishment, and rapture are but superficial privileges of man’s life: They will fade away just like the sparks from burning metal.

6)                There are some other people who like to contest unceasingly with the philosophy  and objective of life.

This so-called fight can be divided into two  categories:

a)    Those who seriously struggle to exploit others for the purpose of acquiring personal interests for themselves.

They endeavour to have their names recorded in the pages of human history.

These people also try to ridicule others with the help of some alluring craft and glossy art that are nothing but mere deceits.

Such people try to veil their eyes and shut their ears in order to be unaware of the adversities of others.

Were they honest living creatures, they would have offered some service to the needy and helpless victims of poverty and calamity; those who are supposed to be definitely of their own flesh and blood.

These antagonists of humanity are but lifeless mobile creatures that prefer to wage war upon the reality of life.

These say that life is but an absurd phenomenon, and that is why they cause their own failure together with the breakdown of the others them.

b)    Since the emergence of the establishment of cooperative social living, men have been in need of a ruling class that has been in charge of directing their affairs.

This ruling stratum was expected to accomplish two feats:

1)       Enactment of laws, along with the issue of the necessary social principles and articles.

2)       Execution of the approved legislation and the stabilization of the concerned opinions. Excluding the messengers of God no other authority or leader has been qualified enough to explain the true philosophy and objective of life for the inquisitive minds of people.

In fact men in charge of managing and directing people’s social affairs are actually involved in some predestined tasks and toils.

These so-called heads and principals have observed natural phenomena of people’s birth and their doomed death. They have also witnessed the usual process of the undulating movement found in man’s behaviour: He is fond of joys and detests agonies. He makes his choice in “Struggling for survival.”

Man is sometimes a good mason, and he may be a destructive creature too. He establishes a civilization now and destroys it later.

He is also in need of food and abode. He likes to wear clothes and have fun. He is interested in acquiring knowledge, and in enjoying power and beauty.

Men have been forced to enact laws and regulations to be executed by all. Administration of justice and avoidance of oppression have been indeed some necessary means of the propagation and development of those enacted laws.

Being plunged in a pond of superficial ecstasy the ruling class of the elite of a community cannot taste and the feel the true flavour of the life run by the common folk.

We should not forget the exceptions in this social process.

In other words the relationship between the pioneers in their general sense, and the related followers has been destined to put men’s life in good order, no matter how and what the concept and comment of lie might have been determined by those two groups of people.

Life was meant to be a phenomenon conveying the utmost pleasures and the least agonies.

Here men should not hurt on another, but should all be jolly people and enjoy life as much as possible.

Such a process is not however a successful practice in the course of those people’s lifetime. A man involved in some problem cannot actually find a helpful solution for that dilemma.

He has therefore to abandon his low status and then perch on a higher branch in order to successfully surprise what takes place below.

Absurdities are the effects of certain causes.

In the 18^th and 19^th centuries (A.D) some thinkers claimed that the phenomenon of “Struggle for Survival” was but a scientific problem.

Those so-called scholars used to advocate indulgence in their views.

The rich class also used to monopolize the commodities of life ignoring others in the bargain.

Thus life seemed to be nothing but some absurdity defore  the eyes of the wanderers.

7)                             Another group of people have adopted some confused events and procedures as the concepts of life the objective of which must be traced and discovered. They look at other’s life as a vain or void phenomenon, and at the same time they do not care about their own life’s career.

Young people are generally the individuals who are the organs of this body or group. Such people will first study the careers of the others while the aged usually find their own ” egos” in the course of the passing time. The latter group will study their own situation, and then will examine that of the others: Most of the youth of the corrupted society are objective of life.

These ignorant people form a majority in the world  of today.

They are potentially deprived of possessing logical reasoning to discuss the accidental phenomena of life, and that is why they think living is but absurdity. The afore – mentioned seven groups of people can be abundantly found in the present human societies.

With regard to the questions raised in the previous pages, facts can be obtained to attest to the the disabilities of these strata of people who insist upon setting forth questions concerning objective of life and the like.

They will never receive a convincing answer in this respect due to their refusal in asking about the true concept of the object of life in its broad sense.

The achievement of the purpose of a question which is the attainment of the purpose of a question which is the attainment of a good answer is actually based on the following principle:

One should study the chosen subject from an overlooking high position outside his own ” Self”.

Thus he who asks a question must possess privileges, and in short he has to be more qualified compared with the qualified compared with the quality of the concerned question.

All this proves that those seven groups of people do not truly raise proper questions concerning the real objective of life, and the true philosophy of this phenomenon. Life by itself cannot ask about and inquire into its own philosophy and objective. He who can realize the magnificence of the phenomenon of life is freely allowed to criticize the person who is unaware of such a grandeur and still insists on enquiring about the object of life.

As far as available finding are concerned children, animals and superficial people have never asked about the philosophy and objective of life:

A God seeking person who is perfectly devoted as an immaculate pious man can really determine and understand the true concept of the philosophy and object of living.

Thus the qualified and purified souls are only permitted to raise questions about the final aim and goal of living: Reason, intellect and conscience are the best means for self cognition. These will help man to make progress in the course of his lifetime; to become spiritually refined and reach the stage of culmination upon the peak of everlasting happiness. His holiness Ali (A.S.) said: “I swear I will not hurt a tiny ant by taking its small bait out of its mouth, even though I may be given the promise of possessing the whole secular world with the exiting attractions and privileges in it”.

The commander of the Faithful continued:”I like you and I train you for God’s sake while you intend to attend me for yourselves and for your own good.”

Love in its general sense and with its functional concept can clearly and even strongly overcome materialistic or temporal hinderances which may emerge in the straight path towards the Divinity.

Distinguished heroes and celebrated nobles who are actually known to be as shining stars in the sky of man’s history have peacefully undergone life’s sufferings accompanied by sweet smiles on their manly lips: They seem to have attained to the true objective of life.

One has to discover his real “self”, if one intends to realize the true object from its vague shadow.

Ali(A.S.) is an example of a qualified person who can bravely discuss the question of life’s objective and can understand the philosophy of the creation.

Tyrants are too blind to see the celestial light, and to feel what is meant by the phenomenon of life.

We should, then, ask the qualified pious authorities and broad-minded individuals about the true concept and function of the philosophy and objective of life, if we think we are in need of acquiring such a necessary answer and information.

Those men of distinction will first raise question about our personal status and phase of realization:

Are we able enough to recognize a shadow of life from life itself in our interrogative statement. Then we may ask about the object of life.

“The shadow of a heart fails to convey the true significance of this organ.”

Djalale-Ddin Mowlavi the composer and poet of this invaluable line should have certainly perceived the rich meaning and comment of his own beautiful couplet.

At any rate we believe that the aforementioned piece of poetry (the very couplet) conveys an exalted concept to examine and appoint the attainment of life’s objective and the related philosophy of this phenomenon.

A superior reality will be helpful to explain the true philosophy and the just objective of man’s life on the earth.

Thus the related question concerning the subject which has been set forth will be transmitted to a dynamical phase where it can float and dive in the real stream of life.

Now the existing complications about the question of life’s objective and easily solved or removed:

It seems as if the lost key is found and the useful method of research is within reach as an available solution.

D)    Impartial Motives –A Glance at the Philosophy and Objective of life in the Chronological Phases of Man’s thoughts

Despites the monotonous standstill of the position and condition of men’s psycho-natural existence due to their symbiotic mode of living, the related data and findings are proofs of the emergence of the variations in their miscellaneous philosophies and objectives.

Previous discussions were relatively of good help and benefit for the study and understanding of such human tendencies  and manifestations. Some hermits and yogis or those who are really in favour of a monastic life think and believe that physical abstinence will provide eternal prosperity for them.

“The soul or the spirit will be purified ” they say.

The contiguity or the attachment of the Nirvana (Perfect or exalted man) is known to be the ideal objective in the doctrine and philosophy of Buddhism. The followers of the doctrine of hedonism have been permanently trying to enjoy life and the secular attractions of this phenomenon. They actually think of nothing but the existing amusements and pleasures found in their environment:

Glossy ecstasy conveys the ideal aim of living for them.

Some other people are after peace of mind and soul in life.

This state of living is actually their favourite objective.

There are other people who do not believe in the facts and realities, and prefer to deny or ignore any kind of truth. These aimless wanderers are called “The Nihilists”.

Some say that man should be merely studied from the viewpoints and dimensions of his biological and natural tendencies as well as his intrinsic inclination. He is supposed to or predestined to create most of the pleasures and facilities of his divinely endowed lifetime.

A Brief Research of the Previous topics

1) The abandonment of all temporal pleasures, and the adoption of the state of physical abstinence will not provide an ideal life objective in the school of philosophy of Buddhism that introduces ” The Nirvana” as “The Exalted man”.

Yogis or the ascetic hermits will definitely fail to reach The Devine Threshold of God The Almighty:

The biological needs of a man must be reasonably satisfied within the limits of moralities.

2) Hedonism urges man’s instincts to be satiated by the acquisition of worldly pleasures, and thus the aim of living will be restricted to the attainment of superficial joys and amusements.

The detailed account of this subject has been discussed in the previous pages.

3) Men blessed with normal mentality are always after peacefulness and tranquility of mind as their ideal objective of life. Such a tendency is however an incomplete inclination towards the true object of life.

4) Nihilists, as we have already introduced them, say that the phenomenon of life is nothing but a “Blunder of nature”.

They deny or refuse any reality that may exist here and there in this created world.

Here the surprising question can be raised about their own views:

They say that everything is but an absurd phenomenon without including their personal doctrines in this field of argument.

Thus they are not qualified to examine the philosophy of life and the status of man on the Earth:

These ignorant people are actually busy fighting with themselves rather than against others and the outside opinions.

5) To create a happy and developed society in which successful members may attain a comfortable life cannot imply the ideal objective of living with its final aim. Being involved in his physical abilities and his natural potentialities the wise and honest man will try to acquire something beyond materialistic pleasures.

He is usually expected to justify his mission in this temporal world.

The Majority of the people who are living at present as the inhabitants of the world of today will undoubtedly refuse to offer their help and service for the establishment of an unknown society which is going to emerge in the coming centuries:

“It is none of our business and of what benefit is it for us?” They will state.

Nature itself will manage things in good order according to its chronological routine that will provide accommodations and facilities for the coming generations.

There is no need of self-sacrifice from the side of the present generation. This process should not be counted as or taken for the ideal objective of life. Despite its richness of content the above category lacks the necessary convincing answer to the role of man in this play of life.

Life Objective In the View of Religions

Master of religions believe and propagate that man with his boundless potentialities should be after an infinite objective in the course of his lifetime:

An imaginary ideal aim will lode its validity after being attained. This is something natural, and it is proved by experiences that the searching man with his intensive eagerness will be appeased as soon as he is given his ideal object, which before was not easily accessible for him to enjoy.

Now he feels that he is in need of something else; some more interesting or important goal!

“This wide world cannot provide enough room for me to live and relax happily.” Says Djalalid-din Mowlavi.

Man is naturally a dynamical creature; not being contented with all the acquired material objects and privileges, he is constantly looking for the best to possess.

According to the opinion of Mowlavi an ideal objective should be found beyond the bounds and borders of man’s worldly “self”:

“The shadow of a heart fails to introduce the significance of the real being of that organ.”Says the poet.

This is truly the introduction of life’s objective in the divine message of all religions. Other aims and goals with their useful secular concepts are indeed gateways into The Eternity where everlasting prosperity will be available for the wandering mankind. The promised Paradise may be an abode in which we would witness the results of our worldly deeds.

Some Helpful Explanations

1)    Let’s once again raise the question of the philosophy and  the objective of life:

Since the earliest time of their existence, men have been naturally or intrinsically aware of the aim and intentions of their personal deeds, and have been able to realize their biological wants including provision of foods, clothes, dwellings, and acquisition of knowledge. Such actions or activities do not directly imply the phases of life, but engaging in deep studies will help us to make a bridge between these matters and phenomenon of life.

    Self-defence against a cruel enemy, for instance, connotes the phenomenon of survival. The reaction against agonies, and the tendency towards pleasures are also some phenomena found in the life of one who is after the best objective in his struggle for living.

The general question concerning the objective of life should not be therefore set forth within a limited area in which ordinary needs and common aspects of man’s desires are placed. Sins, fouls and blunders are exceptions in this discussion of ours.

2)    Outside the physical being of the living man there exists another world or phase of life whose criteria and characteristics are completely different from those of the former: The objectives of this spiritual existence seem to be rather exalted aspirations that cover the long history of the creation from its very beginning up to the present time.

Celebrated thinkers of the west as well as distinguished philosophers of the East do have an opinion in common in favour of the above-mentioned expression.

The glory of life that is an outcome of the dignity of the great men of history can be another witness for the proof of our previous discussion.

The phenomenon of human life will gradually ascend until it is absorbed  in an exalted stage where latent mysteries of the creation may be disclosed to the purified man.

The superficial phase of living cannot actually represent the philosophy and objective of such an elevated phase of life.

3)    Developed minds try to give a good answer to the question raised by those who intend to examine the inward feelings and intrinsic inclination of man towards the superficial phenomenon which can be found and observed in his environment.

“We are actually similar to that deaf person who has occupied a seat in a public hall where a band of musicians are busy playing different pieces of music:

The deaf spectator will naturally not hear any sound, but his common sense or his sound judgment induces him to perceive and understand some other existing reality behind the apparent gestures or the visible motions of the physical organs of those musicians who are playing on their musicial instruments. Here the broadcast tune or melody cannot be ignored.” Says Russel.

The same case is true for man’s inner comprehension in connection with the study of the philosophy and object of life: He believes that the superficial phenomena cannot represent the true concept  and significance of life objective: In short, biological needs and their satiations, and the eventual end of the story of life ( death) do not convince the curious mind of the dynamical man who endeavours to discover the unknown world in the order to touch the Truth.

These questions like: Where have I come from? Where am I supposed to go ? and why am I here?” are not therefore logical on the basis of some natural motives.

Such questions, in reality, have originated from some  supernatural sources, the reflections of which can be observed in ossur secular mentality and in nature.

The true answer are to be found and will be available from their original phase that is called and commonly known as ” Metaphysics.”

The Holy Qur’an is the best reference and the most helpful means in this respect.

Concept of Life In the View of The Glorious Quran

The study of the objective of life in the view of the Holy Quran is inevitable based on the description of the phenomenon of life as it is examined in this Divine Scripture:

Different aspects of life are explained in The Glorious Quran, but these dimensions are not surveyed within the limits and concepts of scientific slaws and regulations.

Other phenomena found in nature are not also scientifically dealt with in this Holy Book: The believers are however allowed to study and research these fields of discussion in order to attain some useful knowledge for themselves. Despite all this let’s not forget the limited potentiality of man who is not supposed to discover any latent or hidden mystery  which may exist in the Divine philosophy of ” The Creation”.

Analysing the concept and object of the phenomenon of life, the views of the Holy Quran in this respect are as follows:

1)    The temporal phase of life as a natural or a materialistic phenomenon is absolutely disregarded by the Glorious Quran. Sixty nine blessed verses of this Holy Scripture confirm the validity of the above-mentioned statement concerning the mean or base aspect of worldy life. Thus the secular phase of life is relatively ignored by the concepts of those blessed verses of the Holy Quran :

“And there is life for you in retaliation, O men of understanding…” (Surah II Verse 179.)

2)    Secular life cannot be describe and accepted as an ideals phase of living:

It is naturally a trifling phenomenon even though it may contain attractions.

“…The comfort of the life of the world is but little than in the Hereafter.”(Surah 9. Verse 38 Pickthall.)

“Naught is the life of the world save a pastime and a sport…”(Surah 6. Verse 32. Pickthall.)

“O my people !Lo! this life of the world is but a pasting comfort, and lo! The Hereafter, that is the enduring home.” (Surah 40 Verse. 39. Pickthall.)

The scorned aspect of the secular life described by the philosophers and writers or poets from the east or west has been more clearly explained by the Creator of the Universe…”

There is no need to refer to “Kamo” and “Kafka” in order to acquire further congnition and more information in this field of research concerning the worldly visage of life.

“With closed eyes and hot drops of tears running down our faces we imagine we are drinking sweet wine out of goblet of life, but at the time of our departure we will finally realize that the cup of life had been empty from the very beginning of the banquet.

We have been drinking some illusive wine since the start of the bottle party!!” Writes Lormantuf.

3)    We do not have the necessary knowledge and adequate information about our natural life nor our biological status, then how can we claim that we know a lot about the position of real life. “They know only some appearance of the life of the world, and are needless of the hereafter.”(Surah 30,Verse 7. Pickthall.)

This is why people rely on this aspect of life and inquire about the philosophy and objective of  their lives from this dimension of the subject. Maybe it is our fault that we fail to acquire enough information and data about the biological aspect of life and consequently we seem to be bewildered about the world around us.

4)    The Holy Quran’s views of life:

“And coin for them the similitude of the life of the world as water We sent down from the sky, and the vegetation of the earth mingleth with it and then becometh dry twings that the winds scatter.

Allah is able to do all things.”(Surah 18. Verse 45. Pickthall.)

Another quotation from the Holy Quran will clarify the validity of the related examples revealed in favour of the question raised concerning the superficial aspect of life:

“The similitude of the life of the world is only as water which we send down from the sky, then the earth’s growth of that which men and cattle eat mingleth with it till, when the earth hath taken on her ornaments and is embellished, and her people deem that they are masters of her. Our commandment cometh by night or by day and We make it as reaped corn as if it had not flourished yesterday. Thus do we expound the revelations for people who reflect.”(Surah 10. Verse 24. Pickthall.)

Water is described as avery useful factor in the phenomenon of creation in the above-mentioned blessed verses of the glorious Qur’an.

It seems as if the creator sayeth:

“Life is but a heavenly phenomenon.” This may imply the creation of man’s life on earth just like the growth of plants which is related and based on the efficiency of water.

“Know that the life of this world is only play, and idle talk, and pageantry, and boasting among you, and rivalry in respect of wealth and children; as the likeness of vegetation after rain, whereof the growth is pleasing to the husbandman , but afterward it drieth up and thou seest it turning yellow, then it becomenth straw.

And in the Hereafter there is grievous punishment, and (also) forgiveness from Allah and His good pleasure, whereas the life of the world is but matter of illusion.”(Surah 57. Verse 20. Pickthall.)

These similitudes are easily understandable in those  Qur’anic verses which convey the concept of the chronological stages of man’s life on earth.

True thinkers do not actually waste their time and their potentialities on the pleasures of this passing world.

“In short life with its natural aspect cannot take mankind to the ideal objective of living on earth.”

Announces the Glorious Qur’an.

5)    Now let’s examine the main cause of creating this so-called absurd life. In the view of the Holy Quran one should not attach himself to this worldly life: He must prepare himself to cross this bridge (temporal life) and enter an eternal phase of living.

Such a person has successfully gained his ideal object of life.

“To warn whosoever liveth, and that the word may be fulfilled against the disbelievers.” (Surah 36. Verse 70. Pickthall.)

Those who are ready to embrace the message of the prophets, and are also prepared to use their intellect and their conscience will manage to live a happy life in this world created by God.

“Whosoever doth right, whether male or female, and is a believer, him verily We shall quicken with good life, and We shall pay them a recompense in proportion to the best of what they used to do.”(Surah 16. Verse 97. Pickthall.)

“…Allah might conclude a thing that must be done; That he who perished (on that day) might perish by a clear proof (of His sovereignty) and he who survived might survive by a clear proof…”(Surah 8. Verse 42. Pickthall.)

“Is he who was dead and We have raised him unto life, and set for him a light wherein he walketh among men, as him whose similitude is in utter darkness whence he cannot emerge?…”(Surah 6. 122.Pickthall.)

“O ye who believe; obey Allah, and the messenger when He calleth you to that which quickeneth you…”(Surah 8. Verse 24. Pickthall.)

“Say: Lo! My worship and my sacrifice and my living and my dying are for Allah, Lord of the wordls.” (Surah 6. Verse 162. Pichkthall.)

“I created the jinn and humankind only that might worship Me.”(Surah 51. Verse 56. Pickthall.)

The worship of God is not course restricted to the mere utterance of special words nor is it confined in a series of physical movements and bodily gestures like superficial prostrations. Every created phenomenon, no matter how tiny or gigantic it may be, is divinely forced to worship the Creator of the universe.

“Then turned He to the heaven when it was smoke, and said unto it and unto the earth: Come both of you, willingly or loth, They said: We come, obedient.”(Surah 41. Verse 11. Pickthall.)

“Seek they other than the religion of Allah, when unto Him submitteth whosoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly, or unwillingly, and  unto Him they will be returned.”(Surah 3. Verse 83. Pickthall.)

“And unto Allah falleth prostrate whosoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly, as do their shadows in the morning and the evening hours.” (Surah 13. Verse 15.Pickthall.)

“(Pharaoh) said: Who then is the Lord of you twin, O Moses?”. “He said: Our Lord is he who gave unto everything its nature, then guided it aright.”(Surah 20. Verse 49,50. Pickthall.)

“All that is in the heavens and the earth glorifieth Allah; and He is the Mighty, the Wise.” (Surah 57. Verse 1. Pickthall.)

“Hast thou not seen that unto Allah payeth adoration whosoever is in the heavens and whosoever is in the earth…”(Surah 22. Verse 18. Pickthall.)

The name I am called by my Christian parents is Bobbie Evans, but the name I am known by in the Muslim community is Khadija Evans. This is the story of how my husband and I came to embrace Islam.

I can remember standing in the kitchen of the house I lived in when I was just seven or eight years old and looking towards the door that went outside. I prayed to a god whom I wasn’t sure existed and I begged Him to show himself to me if He was really there. Nothing happened.

I can remember being nine or ten years old and writing a letter to God and hiding it in the heat register in my bedroom, thinking God, if He existed, would come and retrieve it and answer my prayers. But the next day, the letter was still there.

I had always had a hard time accepting the existence of God, and of understanding the beliefs taught in Christian churches. Even though my parents weren’t very religious, and rarely went to church, they thought it was best that my two brothers and I go. We were allowed to choose our religion when we very young. I think I was about six or seven, and my brothers were one and two years older then I. I chose a Methodist church for no other reason then it was a few blocks away from our house, and my brothers chose a Lutheran church because it was also close, and I hadn’t chosen it.

I went to the church until I was thirteen years old. I was baptized and confirmed there when I was 11. I went along with the baptism and confirmation because all children who were 11 received confirmation, and if they hadn’t already been baptized, that was done at the same time. Even then I knew that doubts about God and Christian teachings were things best kept to myself.

When I was 13 my family moved to another town with no churches within walking distance, and my parents weren’t eager to get up early and drive us kids to church, and so our religious training stopped until I was 15 and my mom suddenly found religion. She began attending an Assembly of God church, occasionally dragging my dad along. I went willingly. I had already begun a search for God that wouldn’t end until I was 42 years old.

I remember being “born again”. Caught up in the fervor of the hell and damnation that the minister preached at the Assembly of God church. I became “high on religion” thinking I had finally found “Him.” Little did I know, but the high would be short lived, as I again began to have doubts and unanswered questions.

When I was 17 I met the daughter of an assistant Baptist minister and began going to their church. I had been sexually abused by my dad from the time I was at least six years old and I told the assistant minister about it. He arranged with my parents to let me live with him and his family in a type of “private foster care.” My dad paid him $100 a week. My parents also attended the church for a brief time, until the minister announced on the pulpit that my dad was a child molester. Before that though, my mom, dad and I were each baptized at the church.

One day after spending the day with my parents I returned to my foster home only to find the house empty. Cleaned out. Not a stick of furniture. We found out that the minister had been caught embezzling from the church and he and his family had left town in a hurry. I returned to my parents home and the abuse.

As a result of that incident what little faith I had in God was totally lost and I became an atheist. For the next 25 years I would fluctuate between believing, wanting to believe, and Agnosticism, and Atheism.

When I was twenty-six, I went to three months of Rights of Initiation for Catholic Adults and then was baptized and confirmed in the Roman Catholic Church. I had been allowed to by-pass the full year of classes because I hadn’t called the church to inquire about converting until three months before the Easter Vigil Mass when confirmation for adults was held.

I had entered the Catholic religion with the same philosophy that I had once heard Alcoholics Anonymous has, “Bring your body, your mind will follow.” I didn’t really believe in God, or in the core teachings of the Catholic Church, but I wanted so badly to believe in a power higher then myself, that I went faithfully to mass seven days a week, hoping that somehow I would start to believe. But after several months, I began to realize that it wasn’t going to happen, and my mass attendance became a once a week thing, then once a month, until when I was thirteen and met the man who today is my husband and who wasn’t Catholic, I stopped attending mass altogether.

I had never told anyone, before my husband, that I didn’t believe in God. I don’t think he took me seriously at first. I don’t think he had ever known an Atheist.

My husband is 29 years older then me. We’ve had a wonderful marriage for these last 10 years. When we first met, I still desperately wanted to believe, and kept making him promise me that “When you get to Heaven” he would ask God to give me the strength to believe, and he if at all possible, he would give me a sign, one that I couldn’t chalk up to my imagination, so I would know there really was a god. He always promised me he would.

We were living in rural Alabama when I was 32 years old. I developed ulcerations on both corneas and when they healed, I was legally blind. Because of damage from infection that had been done to the tissue that donated corneas would have to adhere to, I couldn’t find an eye surgeon who believed that transplanted corneas wouldn’t be rejected.

I was still searching for God. I was searching for hope of something better then what this world had to offer. Some kind of evidence of the chance for existence after death. Some way to achieve it. I listened to Christian programs on the Trinity Broadcasting Network, even though I couldn’t find any ministers on the station who’s opinion I trusted. I watched anyway, hoping that one would say something that would click in my mind, and I would finally know, that “Yes, there really is a god.” None of them ever said anything that caused that connection to happen, though many said things that confused me even more.

During the first 10 years after I became legally blind, I tried attending different churches, Baptist again, Assembly of God again, non-Denominational, Church of God, Mormon, and even studied up on Wicca. But I always lost interest after just a few months. Things the religions taught just didn’t add up. There were just too many things left to faith. Things that had no proof other then one’s faith. I couldn’t believe something when the only proof were some words in a book that in large part didn’t make sense.

I remember one night when I was about 35 years old, lying in bed and praying to God, whom I still wasn’t sure existed, and asking Him that if He did exist to lead me to someone who could help me to believe. But I found no one.

At age 36 I acquired a braille Bible and started reading it, once again hoping to find proof of God’s existence. But with the Bible being so hard to understand, with so much of it not really being explainable, I lost interest after reading just a few of its books.

At about that time, though still wanting to find God, I gave up my search. I had become completely disillusioned with religion.

On September 11, 2001 I was sitting at my computer. It was before 9 a.m. and as usual the television, which was sitting to my right, was turned on for background noise. I heard the sound that is made to notify viewers of an important news announcement. I stopped and turned towards the TV. A reporter began talking and one of the towers of the World Trade Center showed in the background. He said an accident had happened. A small plane had hit one of the towers of the World Trade Center. I’m legally blind, but I could see well enough to know that it wasn’t a small plane that had hit the tower. The hole was massive. And I didn’t think it was possible to accidentally hit something so big.

As I watched, another plane flew into the other tower. I couldn’t see the plane itself, it was too small for me to see, but I saw the fireball that exploded away from the building.

I jumped up and ran into the bedroom and told my husband to hurry and get up because terrorists were flying planes into the World Trade Center buildings! He immediately got out of bed and came in to the living room and sat in his recliner and began to watch. It was about 9 a.m.

As time went by it was announced that a plane had been flown into the Pentagon and another hijacked plane had crashed in Pennsylvania. I wondered when it would end? And what in the world was going on??? The reporter said it looked like “debris” was falling from the building. My husband said it was people jumping. Something he has never been able to forget. I was grateful that my vision was to bad for me to be able to make out what even looked like “debris”. “The reporter said a part of the first tower had fallen away from the building. He spoke in a kind of hesitant voice. Now I wonder if he was unsure of what he was seeing. Because we later found out that a part of the building hadn’t fallen away. The building had completely collapsed.

A female reporter was crying and a male reporter hugged her. I was crying too. And my husband hugged me.

For weeks afterward I would start crying for no apparent reason. I’d be riding on the bus and have to turn my head towards the window and pretend I was looking out so that others wouldn’t see the tears escaping my eyes.

When we were in a restaurant, I’d have to use my napkin to dab the tears welling up in my eyes before the other diners noticed and wondered if I was some kind of a nut.

I was Christian then and I cared. And I was devastated. I couldn’t understand how a religion could promote such violence, as the media was saying Islam did. It made no sense to me. So I decided to find out for myself. One way or another I wanted to know the truth. Because of my partial blindness I was limited to information from the internet. Finding braille books about Islam in braille or ink print that was large enough for me to read was impossible. I was able to use a computer because I had magnification software installed so I could enlarge the font on the screen to a size that I could read.

I did searches and I began to read about Islam. I went to web sites that taught the basics of Islam, and I joined Muslim women’s e-groups where I was able to ask and get answers that I confirmed through further research.

I’ve always been a sceptic. It’s always been hard for me to believe something that I didn’t understand. I was never one to believe something simply because someone said it was so. I had to know it in my mind as well as in my heart.

While studying Islam I learned that the god Muslims worship is the same god as that of Christians and Jews. The god of Abraham and Moses. I found that Islam doesn’t promote or condone hatred of non-Muslims, nor does it condone the killing of innocent people.

By studying Islam I found the answers that the media wasn’t telling us and I came to know that Islam is the True Religion. I read a lot of convincing evidence, but the things that proved to me that there is a god, and that Islam is the True Religion and that that the Qur’an is the Word of God, were those in the Qur’an itself. The things that are of a scientific nature. Things that have only been discovered by scientists in the last 100 years. The only one who could have known those things 1400 years ago was God.

For example, One day I was at a web site that was about some of the scientific proofs in the Qur’an. One of the verses in the Qur’an tells about the death of our own solar system. Al-Rahman 37-38

“When the sky is torn apart, so it was (like) a red rose like ointment. Then which of the favors of your lord will you deny?” There was a link that went to the NASA web site. When I clicked the link I had no idea what was going to be on the next page, but what I saw took my breath away. Tears came to my eyes. I knew – if I had had any doubts left – I knew at the moment, that Islam was the True Religion of God.

The page the link took me to showed what looked like a rose. It was the “Cat’s Eye Nebula.” Which was an exploding star 3000 light years away. It had been photographed with the Hubble Space Telescope. Scientists say that it is the same fate that awaits our own solar system. Muslims refer to it as the “Rose Nebula.” It had been described in the Qur’an 1400 years ago. People back then had no way of knowing about it. Only God could have known.

After accepting in my mind as well as in my heart that Islam is the True Religion, I knew that I was already a Muslim and the only thing left was to profess my faith.

I looked in an internet directory for mosques in my community. I called the one in the next town and told the person who answered the phone that I wanted to convert to Islam, and asked him when I could make my Shahada. He told me to be there at 4 p.m. on Saturday when the imam would also be there. I told him that I ride the bus everywhere and it wouldn’t be running late enough for me to be able to get back home and so could I come earlier? He said not to worry, someone would give me a ride home. I arrived as scheduled, and as God had scheduled, so began my new life. I have since come to realize that on that day, the greatest event of my life occurred. I had always thought that the most wonderful thing to ever happen to me was the day that I married my husband. But I now know it wasn’t. The most important day of my life was the day I made my Shahada and accepted Islam as the way of life God intended me to live. It was the day I acknowledged that Islam is the way to salvation, to Heaven, and I made a choice to practice it.

I can’t say my husband was thrilled by my reverting to Islam. He believed what the media was saying about Muslims and the religion. He didn’t like it that I went to the mosque several evenings a week and left him home alone to be bored. One night after he was finished complaining about me going again I sat down a few feet away from him and I calmly told him, “I will never ask you to practice a religion you don’t believe in. I love you too much to try and force that on you. But I do want you to learn about Islam so that you will at least understand what it is I believe.” I then stood up and went into the bedroom and finished dressing to go to the mosque. I kissed him goodbye and I left.

When I returned home I found his whole attitude had changed. He was bright and cheerful. That night, before going to bed, he began to learn about Islam.

My husband began going to the mosque with me. While I studied with the sisters, he would talk with a brother and ask him questions. At home he read things on the internet, and books that he had borrowed from the mosque. We would discuss different things he was learning, and I would point things out to him.

When the day came and he told me about how some aspect of Islam was to be practiced, in a “know it all” tone of voice, as if it were a fact, something that I myself didn’t know, I asked him to tell me “How do you know that??” and he replied, “Because it’s in the Qur’an!” I was stunned! He believed! He knew that Islam was True! If it was in the Qur’an, as far as he was concerned it was true! Thirty-six days after I publicly professed my faith in God and His messenger, prophet Muhammad, my husband professed his. We had an Islamic marriage ceremony the same evening. I cried when my husband made his Shahada. I knew we would be in Eternity together!

A month before, a brother had asked me what I thought the chances of my husband converting were. I told him, “Zero.” I said, “I can’t imagine someone so dramatically changing their beliefs after having believed something else for 70 years. But 14 days before his 71st birthday he embraced Islam as his religion and his way of life. In the Muslim community we have found another family. We have found friendship, love and acceptance that was taught in the Christian religions we practiced at different points in my life, but that we felt never actually existed among most of the members of the churches we went to.

Many of the Muslims in our area are immigrants, but we have found no intolerance of Americans whether they are Muslim or not. We were both welcomed into the family of Islam the very first time each of us went to the mosque. We’ve always felt welcome and accepted.

Since embracing Islam We have found direction and purpose for our lives. We have found the meaning for our existence. We have come to realize that we really are here only for a short time and that what comes afterwards is far better then the fleeting pleasures that this world has to offer us.

I have found a sense of security concerning life after death that I had never known before. We have both come to see the problems that we once saw as being major as actually being opportunities to grow. We thank God for what we do have, as well for what we don’t. Today we are Muslim. We still care about 9/11. I still cry when I think a little too much about the events of that day. My husband still remembers the people jumping from the buildings. We wish all we could say about that day was where we had been when we heard that the WTC had been attacked. But we did see it happen, and it was the most devastating thing to ever happen in our lives. But from tragedy came victory. From death has come the knowledge that we will have life after our death. And it will be spent together.

Holy Quran 3:138

This is a clear statement for men, and guidance and an admonition to those who guard against evil.