Why do the deniers of God fail to apply the common principles

Life very clearly exists; we cannot possibly deny it. But how can we measure it and by what means can we measure the speed of thought and imagination?

From all this it is quite clear that to deny whatever lies beyond our vision and hearing is contrary to logic and the conventional principles of reason. Why do the deniers of God fail to apply the common principles of science to the particular question of the existence of a power ruling over nature? A certain materialist of Egypt went to Mecca in order to engage in debate and there he met Imam Sadiq upon whom be peace. The Imam said Begin your questioning.

The Egyptian said nothing.

The Imam: "Do you accept that the earth has an above and a below?"

The Egyptian: "Yes."

The Imam: "So how do you know what is below the earth?"

The Egyptian: "I do not know but I think there is nothing below the earth."

The Imam: "Imagining is a sign of impotence when confronted with what you cannot be certain of. Now tell me have you ever been up in the skies?"

The Egyptian: "No."

The Imam: "How strange it is that you have not been to the West or to the East that you have not descended below the earth or flown up to the heavens or passed beyond them to know what lies there but nonetheless you deny what exists there. Would any wise man deny the reality of what he is ignorant of? And you deny the existence of the Creator because you cannot see him with your eyes."

The Egyptian: "No one talked to me before in this way."

The Imam: "So in fact you have doubts concerning the existence of God; you think He may exist and He may not exist?"

The Egyptian: "Perhaps so."

The Imam: "O man the hands of one who does not know are empty of all proof; the ignorant can never possess any kind of evidence. Be well aware that we never have any kind of doubt or hesitation concerning the existence of God. Do you not see the sun and the moon the day and the night regularly alternating and following a fixed course? If they have any power of their own let them depart from their course and not return. Why do they constantly return? If they are free in their alternation and rotation why does the night not become day and the day not become night? I swear by God that they have no free choice in their motions; it is He Who causes these phenomena to follow a fixed course; it is He Who commands them; and to Him alone belongs all greatness and splendor."

The Egyptian: "You speak truly."

The Imam: "If you imagine that nature and time carry men forward then why do they not carry them backwards? And if they carry them backwards why do they not carry them forward?" "Know that the heavens and the earth are subject to His Will Why do the heavens not collapse onto the earth? Why are the layers of the earth not overturned and why do they not mount up to the heavens? Why do those who live on the earth not adhere to each other?"

The Egyptian: "God Who is the Lord and Master of the heavens and earth protects them from collapse and destruction."

"The words of the Imam had now caused the light of faith to shine on the heart of the Egyptian; he submitted to the truth and accepted Islam."

Let us not forget that we are imprisoned in the framework of matter and its dimensions; we cannot imagine an absolute being with our customary habits of thought. If we tell a villager that a greatand populouscity exists called London he will conceive in his mind of some big village maybe ten times bigger than his own and the same with respect to its buildings the way people dress their way of life and dealings with each other. He will assume that the characteristics of people everywhere are the same as in his own village.

The only thing we can tell him to correct the unrealistic way he thinks is that London is indeed a place of settlement but not of the kind you imagine and its characteristics are not of the same kind you see in your own village.

What we can say concerning God is that God exists and that He possesses life power and knowledge but His existence and knowledge and power are not of the kind familiar to us. In this way we can to some extent escape the restrictions placed on our understanding. For the materialist too it is impossible to conceive of the essence of primary matter.

Although it appears that sense objects are the things we know most clearly and precisely we cannot rely exclusively on such objects in scientific and philosophical matters. Laying aside all fanatical attitudes we must assess the true nature of sense objects and the degree to which they can aid men in uncovering the truth. Otherwise they will mislead us because sense perception relates only to certain qualities of the external aspect of sense objects. It cannot perceive the totality of those qualities or the essence and mere substance of sense objects let alone non-sensing objects.

The eye that is the surest means for the perception of reality is in many cases unable to show reality to us. It can observe lights only when their wave length is not less than 4% microns and more than 8% microns and therefore it cannot see lights higher than violet or lower than red. In addition the errors made by sense perception form an important section in books on psychology: the eye is known to commit numerous errors.

The colors we recognize in the external world are in fact not colors. They are vibrations on different wave lengths. Our visual sense experiences have different wave lengths of light in accordance with its own particular mechanism as colors. In other words what we perceive by means of our senses is limited by the structure and capacity of those senses. For example the structure of the visual sense in certain animals such as cows and cats causes them to see monotone external reality as colored. From the viewpoint of scientific analysis the nature of the mechanism in man's visual sense that permits him to see colors is not entirely clear and the theories put forward so far are all hypothetical. The question of man's ability to see colors is obscure and complex.

In order to see how the sense of touch may be deceived you can fill three bowls with water: the first with very hot water the second with very cold water and the third with lukewarm water. Then place one hand in hot water and the other in cold water and leave them there for a time. Then place them both in lukewarm water and you will see to your great surprise that you experience contradictory sensations. One hand will tell you that the lukewarm water is extremely cold and the other will proclaim that it is extremely hot. Of course the water is one and the same and its temperature is known.

Now reason and logic say that it is not possible for water to be both cold and hot at the same time to have two contradictory attributes. It is the sense of touch that is at fault having lost its self-control as a result of the two bowls of water in which the hands were immersed. What it feels is at variance with the truth and reason and the mind point out its error.

This being the case how can we rely on sense perception without the guidance of the intellect and mental criteria? Is there any way to protect ourselves against the errors of sense perception other than rational judgment?

Once someone asked the Commander of the Believers upon whom be peace Have you seen your Lord?

He answered: "I will never worship a Lord whom I cannot see."

The man then asked: "How did you see him? Explain it to us."

He replied Woe upon you! No one has ever seen Him with the physical eye, but hearts filled with the truth of faith have contemplated Him.

It is then the judgment of reason that is entrusted with the task of correcting the errors of sense perception and the source of that judgment lies beyond the sensory realm.