Table of Contents
 |
| Exploring Islam as the ultimate truth through reason, belief, and the prophetic path |
Continuing from the previous discussion…
What is the Criterion for Determining Truth?
I understand, brother, that Islam is the true religion. But how can we understand that Islam alone is the ultimate true religion? In other words, this is a metaphysical matter. In such a situation, the question arises: “What is the criterion for determining truth?” or “How can it be recognized?”
Mushir noticed that a kind of respect had developed in Awham toward Ihtijaj. When he first came, there was an “ignoring” attitude, but now that is no longer there.
Ihtijaj said, “Awham da, you are a science student, right?”
: Yes.
: Then tell me, how is water created?
Mushir could not find any connection between Awham’s question and Ihtijaj’s statement. Still, he continued listening like a silent observer, because he could understand that there must be some mystery behind such a question.
: Awham said, “Why! Hydrogen and oxygen gases combine in a specific ratio and through a specific process to produce water.”
: Right, and thank you for presenting the correct answer concisely! But now the point is, you may have proven experience regarding this method of producing water. So it can be said that your idea about water is based on your experience, since you study science. But how should I accept that water is produced this way? I have no experience regarding this matter.
: Awham said, “You have to believe in the well-established theories provided by scientists.”
: Exactly. That means, the idea that water is produced this way is knowledge based on belief for me. So it appears that there are two methods for proving the truth of a material object—one is experience, the other is belief.
Experience and Belief: Two Ways of Acquiring Knowledge
But if I do not believe in this method of producing water, what will you say? Since it is not proven to me, I may choose not to believe it. In that case, what would you suggest to me?
: I would say, you should believe in the information given by scientists. And if you do not, then conduct experiments on water following the methods they have shown. Then you will understand for yourself how water is produced.
: If someone does not accept either of these two methods—that is, does not accept the words of scientists, nor agrees to test their claims—then what would you say? asked Ihtijaj.
: Such a person can be considered nothing but ignorant, foolish, rigid, and stubborn! Awham replied plainly.
Now understand, brother, even regarding simple material objects, not everyone is capable of acquiring knowledge by directly confronting reality. Rather, there are two ways of gaining knowledge about them—experience and belief. So, someone will possess experiential knowledge, and someone else will have to believe based on those who have experienced it.
When this is the condition of the sensory material world, is there any logic in demanding that everyone should directly and equally know about religion that comes from the metaphysical world? Such a demand was made by the disbelievers of Mecca. They wanted Jibreel to come with revelation and meet them directly. This demand of disbelief is nothing new.
Anyway, my question is—can we not apply experience and belief as methods of verifying truth in this case as well?
Science and Religion: The Same Method of Verification
Just as in science, the people of the scientific world know things directly, and others have to rely on belief; similarly, in the religious world, the prophets have direct experience, that is, direct knowledge. On the other hand, we have to believe.
If we do not do so, then according to your own statement—just as scientific matters must be tested through the methods shown by scientists to determine truth or falsehood—likewise, religion must be examined through the methods shown by the prophets.
Am I speaking the truth, brother?
: It seems so.
Look, scientific matters must be verified through the methods prescribed by scientists, or otherwise one must believe in them. There is no third way.
If someone neither believes the scientists nor tests their methods, and instead rejects their discoveries, then that person is labeled ignorant, rigid, and reckless. In the same way, if someone behaves like this in the case of religion, what title do you think he deserves, brother?
Therefore, the way to verify the truth of Islam is the path and method shown by Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Through this, anyone can try and see—“What is the truth?”
The Trustworthiness of the Prophet (PBUH) and the Acceptance of Metaphysical Knowledge
You are saying, brother, that Islam is proven through metaphysical knowledge, so how can we understand it? I want to ask you—would you dismiss the statements of Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, Karl Marx, René Descartes, Immanuel Kant as false or meaningless?
: Certainly not.
: Why?
: Because they are inherently trustworthy individuals. Their words have value.
: Well said. Now tell me, has anyone ever been called “Al-Amin” or “the trustworthy” from childhood among them? Have you heard such a thing?
: No, I have not.
: Then see, brother—when someone becomes trustworthy after growing up, his words cannot be dismissed as false or unacceptable. So if someone is known as “Al-Amin” from childhood, how can you reject his words, and on what basis?
You know that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was called “Al-Amin,” meaning “the trustworthy,” by the disbelievers of Mecca from his childhood. Now think, how trustworthy he must have been.
Not only that, even after becoming a prophet, those disbelievers of Mecca who did not accept him called him mad, a magician, and so on—but not a single disbeliever called him a liar. Because they knew that Muhammad (peace be upon him) could not lie.
Yet, out of stubbornness, many of them did not accept him as a prophet.
George Bernard Shaw wrote in his book The Genuine Islam:
“I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high esteem because of its remarkable vitality. It is the only religion which, in my opinion, possesses the capacity to adapt itself to the changing phases of the world. It can appeal to every age. I have tried to understand this extraordinary man, and in my view, far from being an anti-Christ, he should be called the savior of humanity. I believe that if a man like him were the leader of today’s world, he would be able to solve its problems in a way that would bring peace and happiness to mankind. I predict that the religion of Muhammad will be accepted by the Europe of tomorrow, just as it is beginning to be accepted in the Europe of today.”
In the same way, Thomas Carlyle, Gurudutt Singh, Philip K. Hitti, Karen Armstrong, Edward Gibbon, Alphonse de Lamartine, Gustav Weil, Marcos Wood—along with many other non-Muslim intellectuals—have been compelled to acknowledge the Prophet’s honesty, truthfulness, justice, and magnanimity, as well as the authenticity of his message. They could not dismiss or ignore him; reality and objective reasoning did not allow them to.
Think about it: why would non-Muslims describe Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as a bearer of truth—unless they had genuinely come to recognize his greatness?
You speak of transcendental knowledge. But have you noticed that many of the world’s most transformative discoveries and creations originate from such unseen insights? Isaac Newton’s concept of gravity, Thomas Edison’s work on electricity, Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity—none of these are directly visible to the senses, yet they are widely accepted.
Newton saw apples fall countless times, but one day a question arose in his mind: why do they fall downward? From where did that question emerge? Is gravity itself something you can see? Has anyone ever “seen” relativity? Has anyone physically touched Karl Marx’s theory of surplus value? No. Yet these ideas are respected and believed.
So rejecting the Prophet of Islam and his message on the grounds that they involve transcendental knowledge is no different from dismissing Newton, Edison, or Einstein as mere dreamers or storytellers.
In reality, there is no valid basis to reject Islam simply because it involves the unseen. Much of what we consider knowledge is itself not directly tangible. Does that make it false? Does it render our thinkers ignorant? Of course not. Then why should the truth of Islam be singled out for doubt?
Therefore, the ultimate truth established through divine revelation is Islam. And if someone still hesitates to accept it, then the only fair path is this: to examine the message of the Prophet through the very method he himself presented.
Comments