Reason and Revelation

Note: This

article was in fact a lecture delivered at the Civil Services Academy, Walton

Road, Lahore in 1990. It was later edited by Mr. Shehzad Saleem and was

published in Monthly Renaissance in the year 1991.

The Need for Revelation

Before explaining the relationship between Reason and Revelation, a logical

starting point would be to affirm at the outset whether or not Revelation is an

established need for the human mind. Only if it is proved that there is an

actual requirement in the mind for Revelation, should we proceed to study the

relationship between them, as otherwise, if the requirement does not exist, no

relationship can be established between the two.

How do we ascertain a need or a requirement in one

thing for another? Through a slight analysis we see that a need for ‘A’ in ‘B’

can only be established if some characteristics or features of ‘B’, as an

individual entity, are incomplete and when combined with ‘A’ such

characteristics or features are completed. Consider, as an example a man’s

requirement of a woman, or vice versa. By a simple analysis, we see that there

are a number of features – physical, psychological, emotional in one which if

considered independent of the other, stand out as incomplete. By combining the

two we see that such incomplete features and voids are mutually filled by their

interaction. In short, it can safely, be stated that where a requirement exists

in ‘B’ for ‘A’, ‘A’ has a complementary relationship with ‘B’.

Now let us consider the human faculty of Reasoning

and see whether, in any way, it is incomplete or its functioning imperfect,

because in case no such imperfections exist, the need for Revelation cannot be

established.

For this purpose, we begin our discussion with a

brief analysis of the working of the human mind.

How Does the Mind Work

To fully comprehend the working of the human mind, we must first, make an

investigation regarding the sources from which the human mind receives its

information.

All human information is received through two

major sources:

1. a Priori Information:

   A Priori Information relates to t he knowledge which is not learned through

   sense experience but which is innate and inborn in an individual.

The idea of ‘A Priori’ is not

new in philosophic literature. It is referred to though in a slightly different

sense, even by Socrates, Platoand Aristotle. Aristotle refers to it as the

‘Divine Spark.’ The idea was developed, later, by the German philosopher

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804 AD), in his ‘A Critique of Pure Reason’. The ‘Critique’

is not precisely a criticism, but a critical analysis; Kant is not attacking

‘Pure Reason’ (meaning knowledge that does not come through our senses, but is

independent of all sense experience, belonging to us by the inherent nature and

structure of the mind), rather he hopes to show its possibility and to exalt it

above the impure knowledge which comes to us through the senses. Kant firmly

believed that some of our ideas are A Priori, independent of experience, in t he

sense that their content is not derived solely from experience. His widely

quoted maxim regarding the two wonders of life ‘The starry heavens above, the

moral law within’ refers to the same idea.

The innate ‘A Prior Information’

or ‘Pure Reason’ consists of broad concepts which, as has been stated earlier,

are not learned, but exist at inception. Examples of such information include

the concepts of contradiction and harmony, part and whole, unity, cause, space

(up, down) time (before, after) etc. It also includes human emotions like love,

hatred etc.

2. Sense Experience:

   The other major source of human information is the one received through our

   five senses from the external environment. This source of information is

   physical in nature. We see, hear, touch, smell or taste a thing and get

   information about it.

There have been philosophers who

have tried to create doubt regarding the accuracy of information received thus,

but it is a fact, all the same, that man has always depended upon the

information received through his senses, and has never really accepted this

skeptical view regarding his sense experiences.

The working of the human mind or the human faculty

of Reasoning may now be summarized thus:

1. The mind combines the

   information that it receives through the sense experiences with the innate or

   A Priori information that it already possesses.

2. The two are internally analyzed.

   If there is a complete harmony between the information received from the two

   sources, it is stored in the mind, a s a fact. In case any contradiction is

   found between the information from t he two sources, the process of analysis

   is carried forward till such a contradiction is removed or an explanation

   thereof is established.

3. Hypothesis and theories are

   formed on the basis of this explanation.

4. Theories are either rejected or,

   if accepted, become facts.

A theory becomes a fact when:

• It explains the phenomenon completely, and no

  part of it remains unexplained or inadequately explained; and

• It is not possible to give an alternative

  explanation. In case, although such a case can only be assumed theoretically,

  two or more theories explain a given phenomenon completely and adequately,

  then all such theories maintain the status of ‘theory’ and non of them becomes

  a fact, as there can only be a single fact for a given phenomenon.

To understand the working of the mind, consider

the following example: As we have stated earlier, one of the A Priori concepts

is ‘Space’, or the concept from this (concept of space) is that in normal

circumstances (in the absence of any force) things transfer or change positions

from up to down, or in the other words things fall. All our sense experience

were in perfect harmony with this concept, till the time that man started

studying the stars and other heavenly bodies. Here, there was obviously a

contradiction between our concept and the information provided by our sense

experiences. Theories were coined to explain such contradiction and ultimately

one such theory (law of gravitation) explained this contradiction so adequately

that it became accepted as a fact.

Importance of the Mind

The Bible Says:

And God Said, let Us make man

in Our image, after Our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of

the sea and over the fowl of the air, and over all the earth and over every

creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God blessed them, and God said

unto them, Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth and subdue it,

and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air and

over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. (Genesis, Chapter 1,26-28)

There is no doubt that today man has established

his dominion over ‘the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over

every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth and every living thing that

moveth upon the earth, and has subdued the earth.’ But what is it that man

possesses which gives him the power for this dominion? It obviously is not his

physical strength, for is it not that an elephant or a lion is much stronger

than him? Nor can it be his sight or his power of hearing for in these faculties

he is much weaker than even an eagle or a dog. There is no doubt that the only

thing that makes him superior to other living things is the faculty of Reasoning

that he possesses. It is the mind alone which guides him and shows him what

cannot be heard through the ears and even causes him to touch what his hands are

incapable of touching.

Man has invented languages, established cultures,

developed social, political and economic guiding principles, constructed

skyscrapers, discovered neutrons, protons, electrons and what not. He has

progressed from where he was and his hopes are still high. No such development

or progress can be found in any other creature of the earth. A dog or a cow or a

bull is still where it was. Man has become the master of the earth, and all this

is due to his own master, The Mind.

Look at it from another angle. It is not very

unusual to come across people who are deaf, dumb, blind or have someother

physical handicap. We see that, though not insignificant, such deformities are

overcome, at least to some extent, through special training and education, and

such ill-fated persons can thus become responsible members of a society and

contributing citizens of a state. But a person who loses his mind is not like a

deaf, dumb or a blind person; he not only loses his relationship with the

outside world but even with himself. Religions impose no duties upon him, the

state no long holds him responsible for his actions, the society has no

expectations from his, he is even looked upon as a burden by the closest of his

relations.

The importance of mind in the eyes of man himself

is seen from the fact that if a man is forced to lose any of his faculties, he

would first of all save his mind and make choice later. Importance of the mind

or the human faculty of Reasoning cannot be over emphasised. Man is the superior

being on this planet only due to his analytical powers. It would not be

incorrect to say that without the mind man would have been among the worst and

weakest of animals.

Limitations of the Mind

There is not doubt that it is the mind that gives honour to the human race

and makes man the superior being on this planet. All developments and

achievements that he has made can rightly be, solely, attributed to his faculty

of Reasoning. But a slight analysis of even the mind shows that it is not

without its limitations. We discuss here two kinds of limitations of the mind.

1. Shortcomings of the Reasoning

   Faculty: This refers to a particular kind of weakness in the human

   faculty of Reasoning, where the mind although is fully capable of getting to

   the results, refuses to do so. Such a situation arises because the mind does

   not work alone. A human being is a complex compound of extremely strong

   emotions and feelings like love, hatred, friendship, enmity etc., which come

   into action as soon as the mind starts its functions, and thereby influence

   decisions in such a manner that a person intentionally takes a wrong step.

   Innumerable examples of such shortcomings can be quoted from human history as

   well as from our daily experiences. Here we point our some of the major

   shortcomings of the Reasoning faculty:

Prejudice: It is not

unusual to see people resist and refuse to listen to a person who speaks against

their established beliefs. Rather than listening to his reasoning, people unite

against him and strive to the utmost to quiet him down. For example, in the days

when Copernicus lived, everybody believed that the earth was fixed at the centre

of the universe, and that other heavenly bodies, including the sun, and went

round the earth in circles. Copernicus claimed that the sun was fixed at the

centre of the solar system, and that the earth revolved around the sun once a

year. He also believed that the earth turned completely round on itself once in

a day. Not until a century and a half after his death in 1543 AD, did scientists

abandon the earth centered universe of the ancients and accept the sun-centered

universe Copernicus had conceived.

Hedonism: Another

shortcoming of the Reasoning faculty is that at times one refuses to accept the

truth or to get to the right conclusions for the sake of his personal pleasures

of self interest. Common examples of such cases are corruption and the

acceptance of bribery whether material or psychological.

Emotions: Emotions like

love and hatred also reduce the accuracy of the decisions made by a person. The

maxim ‘Every thing is allowed in love and war’, adequately describes this

shortcoming of the Reasoning faculty.

2. Shortcomings of the Working

   Faculty: These refer to the limitations which arise out of the way

   the mind works; in other words which are inherent in the working of the mind.

   The limitations of the mind can be broadly classified into two categories:

The First Limitation is

where the mind itself cannot get to the conclusions but if some one points out

the right conclusions, the mind is fully capable of understanding them. We can

give here one of the reasons why the mind is sometimes prone to such a

limitation. As has been stated earlier that the mind combines the information it

receives through sense experiences with the concepts it already has, but before

this process can start, the mind must perceive the sensations it receives

through the five senses as ‘an information’ or, else, rather than analyzing such

information, the mind would ignore the sensations, and thus the process of

‘internal analysis’ and ‘Hypothesis and theory formation’ etc, would not even be

initiated. For example, we know that Isaac Newton [1642-1727 AD] perceived his

sense experiences as information to be analyzed and drawn conclusions from, but

the same sense experiences were ignored for thousands of years and were never

perceived as information.

To understand this limitation

consider, for example, the general variance in the intelligence level – the

power of analysis and reasoning of different people. We know that not everybody

is capable of achieving what Newton and other great thinkers achieved and

discovered, but with a little effort, their achievements and discoveries can be

explained to even persons of average intelligence. The above mentioned

limitation of the mind refers to a situation where, due to some reasons, the

mind cannot draw conclusions, although the information on the basis of which,

the conclusion is drawn is available to it.

The Second Limitation

refers to a situation where even the information is not available to it, that

is, a situation where neither do the five senses (due to their inherent

limitations) provide any information to the mind, nor are such sources available

to the mind on the basis of which it could draw analogies and thereby reach the

conclusions. In this case, the mind is not only incapable of reaching the

correct results but is also incapable of understanding them. To understand this

situation, consider the development of the human mind itself. An infant is

incapable of understanding even the simplest of facts, but as his mind develops

and is exposed to more and more information, it becomes easier for him to

appreciate such facts, but now there are other things which he is still

incapable of understanding, and so the process carries on in life.

The Need for Revelation

As we have seen from the discussion so far that although it is the human

mind that distinguishes man from animals, and due to it alone has man

established his rule and dominion over all the other creatures of the earth, but

a simple analysis shows that even the mind is not without its weaknesses

shortcomings an limitations. We see that the mind with all its achievements and

importance is incomplete as an individual entity, and needs to be complemented.

Thus, a need for something, whatever name we give to it, is established.

The ‘something’ that complements the mind and is

complemented by it is Revelation. How does Revelation complement the mind would

be discussed in a later section (‘What Revelation Does’), for now it should be

fully understood that the mind is a pre-requisite for the understanding and

appreciation of Revelation, because Revelation addresses the minds. A man who

loses his mind no long remains an addressee to Revelation. The Qur’an

clearly says:

[This is] a scripture that we have revealed unto

thee, full of blessings, that they may ponder upon its revelation, and that

mindful men may grasp its message. [38:29]

And:

But non will grasp the

message except men of [wisdom and] understanding. [2:269]

Opinions on Revelation

Let us next examine the views of some of the philosophers on Revelation. For

the purpose of simplification, we can divide them into three groups.

The first group of philosophers includes those who

say that we are well acquainted and have experienced the working of the mind,

but Revelation is something that we have never experienced. Thus it would be

irrational for us to believe and have faith in Revelation and to obey its

commandments.

The second group includes those who say that the

mind and what it can achieve are extremely limited. The mind has simply nothing

to do with matters relating to mataphysics and religion. In these matters s it

has to depend completely on a supernatural and superhuman guidance. Such

metaphysical and religious matters are not, and cannot be, understood by the

mid. They are rather appreciated through the heart (standing for feelings and

emotions). The mind, therefore, cannot have anything to do with such matters.

The Third group recognized the importance and

capabilities of the mind but declares that the problems and difficulties facing

life are so numerous that without the guidance of Revelation, no one can

successfully go through such problems and difficulties.

The First Group: We take Thomas

Hobbes (1588-1679 AD) as a representative of the first group. According to him,

a man cannot and should not believe what he is unacquainted with and what he

himself has not experienced. If an individual, himself, does not receive

guidance through some supernatural sources – Revelation, how can he be made to

obey such guidance? Thus, according to him, there is no room in the mind to have

faith or to believe in such supernatural guidance.

Even today this is the most advocated philosophy.

Most people maintain that the mind is fully capable and completely adequate for

human guidance, and even if it is not, they refuse to accept Revelation as a

source of guidance because they do not have any personal experience thereof.

The Second Group: Representative

philosophers of this group are Cornelius Jansen (1585-1638 AD) and Blaise Pascal

(1623-1662 AD). Pascal put forward the idea that in relation to God, the heart

has its reasons; reason proper (the mind) has a more limited place. In this

group, we also include the Christian as well as the Muslim scholastics like St.

Augustine and Imam Ghazali. The biggest group of the Muslim scholastics is the

one called ‘Ashaaira.’ They do not believe that any relationship exists between

mind and Revelation. Neither do they believe in any wisdom in the religious

commandments, nor do they believe that all of Allah’s actions are base don any

cause or wisdom. IN the eyes of this group, religious commandments are only to

be followed, not to be comprehended.

The Third Group: As far as the third

group is concerned, it although includes Socrates (470-399 BC) and Plato

(429-347 BC), we take Aristotle (384-322 BC) as its representative. According to

him, it is necessary for the human race that those facts which the human mind

cannot discover on its own, be revealed upon it. After the Renaissance, Immanuel

Kant (1724-1804 AD) and John Locke (1632-1704 AD) also advocated views similar

to Aristotle’s. In the nineteenth chapter of his ‘An Essay on Human

Understanding’, Locke says that there are some things which the mind cannot

discover on its own, and that they are revealed upon man. According to him, God

should and does guide man in these matters. He further states that Revelation

cannot be contradictory to human reasoning; it actually ‘enlarges’ the mind and

improve its capabilities.

Criticism

Let us now, briefly, analyze the opinions of the three groups of

philosophers, critically.

The basis on which the first group has negated

revelation is that they do not have any experience of revelation and therefore,

they should not be asked to believe in it. This is not a new philosophy; it has

been the philosophy of the rejecters of all prophets, including Muhammad (pbuh).

The weakness of their argument is quite obvious. It is like negating that the

earth is round or that it is revolving and rotating, because no one has ever had

a visual experience thereof. We regret to say that this objection on Revelation

is based purely on stubbornness and antagonism.

The second group, which says that the mind has

nothing to do with Revelation and that the revealed message are directed towards

the heart and can be appreciated by it alone have ignored that the heart is a

store of emotions, feelings, traditions and sometimes, wayward thoughts. In

fact, the heart is open for everything. A man should, logically, not believe in

everything that enters his heart, rather he should weight everything in the

scales of reason, before accepting it as the truth. The separation of the state

from he church was due to this philosophy. The idea that religion is, basically,

a group of illogical and unreasonable commandments and beliefs, is also an

outgrowth of this philosophy. In our opinion, therefore, the philosophy that

Revelation has nothing to do with the mind, is without any basis.

The philosophy of the third group, in our opinion,

is the one closest to reality. Here both the Reasoning faculty the mind, and

Revelation have been given balanced and just positions, in relation to their

importance. According to this group, although the importance and capabilities of

the mind are great, the problems facing life are greater and thus the need for

Revelation. Furthermore, Locke’s opinion in this respect, that Revelation

‘enlarges’, empowers and improves the capabilities of the mind and uncovers for

it such information which the mind itself is incapable of discovering, is

absolutely correct.

What Revelation Does

On the Qur’anic principle that in this world everything has been

created in pairs Revelation is a pair for the human faculty of Reasoning. A

natural corollary of this is that the relationship between the two should be

complementary. A slight analysis shows that Revelation has been perfectly

designed to complement the human mind; we see that:

Revelation has nothing to do in spheres where the

mind itself is fully capable of getting to and uncovering the correct results.

In those circles where the mind is fully capable

of getting to the correct results but refuses to do so due to emotions,

prejudices and other hindrances, Revelation only guides the mind to the right

way of thinking.

In areas where the mind is incapable of getting to

the correct results on its own, but is capable of understanding them if someone

points them out (what we have called ‘First Limitation’), Revelation not only

presents the conclusions but also substantiates them thoroughly.

Revelation has again nothing to do with spheres

where the mind is neither capable of getting to the conclusions nor of

understanding them (what we have called the ‘Second Limitation’). This is the

reason that none of the revealed scriptures provide any information about the

nature of God’s Being.

Revelation Leaves no Excuses for Mankind

According to the Qur’an, Revelation is the ultimate source of

guidance after which neither any further guidance is required, or given, nor

can, mankind, on the Day of Judgment, have any excuse against being condemned to

the punishment of Hell. The Qur’an Says:

[Allah sent these] messengers who gave good news

as well as warning in order that mankind might have no plea against Allah,

after the messengers. [4:165)

We have called Revelation ‘the ultimate source of

guidance’, the first source being A Priori or innate knowledge, as the Qur’an

has clearly stated that the knowledge of One God as the sustainer of the world,

as well as knowledge regarding basic Goods and Evils were given to all mankind

prior to their birth. Regarding the knowledge of one God, the Qur’an

Says:

And remember when thy Lord brought forth from

the children of Adam from their loins their descendants and made them testify

concerning themselves [saying]; Am I not you Lord? They said: ‘Yes! We do

testify’, lest you should say on the Day of Judgment: ‘Of this, we were

completely unaware.’ [7:172]

Regarding the knowledge of Good and Evil the

Qur’an Says:

By the soul, and the proportions and orders

given to it. And its enlightenment as to its wrong and its right.’ [91:7-8]

Another fact that is obvious from these verses is

that those whom no prophets or messengers reached with revealed messages and

scriptures, would stand trial, on the Day of Judgments, on the basis of this

innate or A Priori knowledge alone.

Potential Contradiction in Reason and

After determining the relationship between the human faculty of Reasoning

and Revelation, a natural corollary of the discussion is that there can be no

contradiction between Reason and Revelation. Obviously the source from which we

receive our faculty of Reasoning is the same that provides us guidance through

Revelation, Allah the Most Gracious, then how can the two be contradictory.

There is not doubt that the two should be and are in absolute concordance. If,

at any time, there seems to be an apparent contradiction between the two, then

it must be found out why such a disharmony exists and how should it be resolved.

This has been adequately explained by Imam Ibni Taimyiah (661-728 AH). According

to him, there can only be two reasons for such a contradiction. Either the

premises of the so thought of, logical argument is false and without basis or

the meanings ascribed to the Revelation are incorrect. By concentrating on both

these actors one by one, it would be ultimately found that either of the two

reasons applies in all such instances where Reason and Revelation seem to

contradict. Thus contradictions are put away with.

Iman Bil Ghaib

From all the discussion thus far, we come to the conclusion that there

is perfect harmony between Reason and Revelation. The mind is fully capable of

understanding and appreciating the message and commandments that it receives

through Revelation. Those who believe that there is no relationship between the

faculty of Reasoning and Revelation, and that the mind in incapable of fully

appreciating and understanding the revealed messages substantiate their argument

by saying that the Qur’an itself says that only those people would be

successful who have ‘Iman Bil Ghaib‘ (a Qur’anic phrase, which

they hold to mean ‘faith in the Unknown or the Unseen’) Our answer to them is

that the phrase ‘Iman Bil Ghaib‘ (to believe without seeing) does not

imply that Revelation, (the Qur’an), requires us to believe in something

which we cannot understand, or which is contradictory to human reasoning. This

phrase only means that the facts presented by the Qur’an are those which

can be understand through the mental process of deduction and inference, but

which cannot be seen, felt or touched.

Revelation Addresses the Mind

In the end, we present some of the Qur’anic verses which would prove

beyond doubt that Revelation (Qur’an) addresses the Reasoning faculty

alone, and rather than imposing anything on the persons addressed, convinces

them by its arguments.

He giveth wisdom unto whom he will, and he unto

whom wisdom is given, he truly hath received abundant good. But none will

grasp the message except men of prudence. [2:269]

Behold in the creation of the heavens and the

alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of prudence.

[3:190]

[This is] a scripture that We have revealed unto

thee full of blessing that they many ponder over its verses and the prudent

ones may thereby be reminded.’ [38:29]

[The Book of Moses, Torah, was] a guide and a

reminder for men of prudence. [40:54]

In condemnation of those who do

not use their minds; the Qur’an says:

Most certainly the worst of

animals in Allah’s sight are the deaf, the dumb who do not use their brains.’

[8:22]

Those who, on the day of

Judgment would be thrown into the Hell Fire would say:

They would say: ‘Had we but

listened [carefully to the call of messengers], or had we been prudent, we

would not [now] be among the companions of the Blazing Fire. [67:10]