You prove to me, he said, "beyond all doubts, the existence of some one who has created these things. Your arguments about the tree's growth, its development, its mode of bearing fruit, the
shape of that fruit, have convinced me. But why make it a distinct creator? Why not say these things have created themselves of their own accord!"
Because, replied I, the design points to a perfect intelligence. Does it not? "Yes, it does", He admitted. "It is obvious". Then, I asked, "do you think it consistent to say that perfect
intelligence and wisdom came into existence from non-existence?" "No", he replied.
"Do you not know", I asked, "that this halila is 'haadith', i.e. it did not exist before, but came into existence afterwards? And that it also perishes, and returns to
non-existence.
"Yes, I do know this, he replied This halila may be haadith. But I did not say that its creator was 'haadith', and that he could not create his own being. It is possible that he may be
'haadith', or he may be 'Wajib-ul-wujud' (self-existing from all eternity)".
"A little while ago", said I, "you admitted that the creator could not be 'haadith', but the 'halila' was 'haadith'. Tell me then, how the fruit which is a created thing (haadith), created
itself. When you declare halila fruit to be a created thing, it necessarily follows that you do not think it to be its own creator. If, however, you resume your old standpoint of argument,
persisting in saying the fruit to be its own creator, you are admitting what at first you denied, You have possessed consciousness of perfect intelligence, though the proper name and its
attributes are not known to you."
How is it, he asked, that I now admit what I first denied?
It is thus: I replied. When you admitted the existence of some wise and perfect intelligence, you admitted Allah. But called it by the name of 'halila', instead of calling it Allah. If you
had used but a little discretion and reflection, you must have realized that the halila had no power to create or design itself.
Have you other proofs besides this?" he asked, or this is all?
I have many, I replied. 'Will you tell me why this halila which you say to have created itself, is so insignificant and powerless a thing that it can not save itself from being plucked,
squeezed and devoured?
Because it has only the power of creating itself he said.
If you are inclined to persist in your obstinacy, do so; but at least assure me as to when this halila created itself-whether it did it before it came into existence, or afterwards? If you
say afterwards, your assertion is absurd. Because it is impossible for a thing to create its own self when it was already created.
The purpose of your assertion would be that the halila made itself twice. It would mean that its first endeavours consisted in creating itself, and when it was quite ready and created, it
created itself again. This is the most absurd and impossible theory-the acquisition of what is already acquired (tahsil-e-hasil). If you say that it created itself before it came into existence,
it is really stupid. Because it was absolutely nothing before it came into existence.
How is it possible for a non-existing thing to create another thing? You consider my belief in an existing thing that creates another non-existing thing as absurd. But you do not consider
your own, as to the non-existing thing having the power to create an already existing thing, as absurd and stupid. Be yourself the judge, and tell me whose theory is absurd and
irrational.
"Yours", said he, "is the most correct.
"Then why do you not accept it? said I. "I do accept he replied. "I am quite clear about the truth and veracity of the fact that the things, including halila, are neither created by
themselves nor depend on themselves for their growth and functioning. But a doubt arises in my mind that the tree may perhaps be the creator of the 'halila'; because 'halila' is the product of
the tree. Well, asked I, who made the tree then?
Another halila. This is all the same said I, "Rather fix a limit. Else our arguments must go round and round in a circle, having no goal or termination. If you want to come to any
conclusion believe the creator to be Allah, and terminate the chain of arguments. If you prefer your own belief for the sake of not arriving at a final decision I will question you once more upon
it." "Do question me, said he.
Is it not right, I asked, "that the tree springs up from the halila, after the halila becomes extinct? Yes, he replied.
"The tree lives about a hundred years after the death of halila, (which you think is the creator of the tree). Tell me then, who preserves the tree and makes it thick and strong? Who
nourishes it, guards it and provides the leaves? Surely you must say that it was He Who created it. If you call the 'halila' the creator, and say that a dead thing manages the above mentioned
things, your words convey no meaning. Because the words 'creator' and 'guardian' mean one and the same, and it is impossible for a dead creator to be guardian. Moreover, the tree begins to grow
only when the halila begins to dissolve and annihilate itself. When the tree attains full growth, the halila seed is dead. In this case tell me who remains to guard, nourish and design the
tree?
That I cannot say, said he.
Why don't you believe, I asked, that it is Allah, the Almighty? Surely you can have no more doubts lingering in your mind. I have some, he said. You have not yet given me convincing proofs
of His existence.
If you will still persist in your absurd theory that existing things must be known through the medium of five senses, let me tell you that the senses can not know anything except through
the mind's medium. The mind is the true guide. It is the mind which brings all things into close affinity. Your assertion is quite the reverse of this. You hold that the mind has no power
whatsoever to know anything without the intermeddling of the senses-quite a wrong assertion.
Your argument is quite new, he said, Before I admit it, I must have details. "Then I begin to give you some." I said. You must know that when one sense or even if all the senses become
useless, ears deafened, eyes blinded, smelling power vanished, the mind alone regulates the respective functions of the senses. The mind only guides one to perform a particular thing or avoid it;
and things done by its suggestion bring about a very wholesome result.
"Your argument, he said, "seems a very strong one, but explains it to me more distinctly and concisely. "Alright, asked I. "Do you know that the mind survives the death of the
senses?"
Yes, he replied. "But its feeling and knowledge of things vanish with the senses. For instance, ears can hear but not so the mind; it is deaf with the ears "Do you know'? Asked I, that when
a mother gives birth to a child, that child's senses have no power to act. The senses are quite unfit to perform any function at that period of life.
Yes, I do know he replied. "Tell me then, said I which of the senses suggested the child to cry for milk, and to be cheerful and jolly when it sucked it? Which of the senses excited the
birds of prey, and the birds that feed on grain to supply their young ones with flesh and grain respectively? Why does one feed on flesh, and the other smaller kind on grain?
Again regarding 'water fowl'-why are they able to swim, on the surface of the water, and those inhabiting the land drown and die when thrown into water? When all the creatures have the same
senses, how is it possible for the water fowl to derive greater benefits than the land fowl? Why do the birds of the air die, if kept in water for a short time, and the fish, those inhabiting the
sea, die if kept out of water for a while? Do not these different characteristics of senses refute your theory of their all-powerfulness;
and suggest a greater intellect, an intellect that has created these species of birds and fish, intentionally ordained that one should live on land and the other in water-that has created
circumstances to suit their necessities? If senses were consistently powerful they would have shown a similarity of action in all the species.
Also have you not observed the ant which has never seen water, begins to swim when thrown into it, and the strong and clever man who does not know the art of swimming, sinks down to the
bottom, and comes to the surface a dead body? Now if the theory that all things are known by the senses be correct, why does not the wise experienced stout man use his senses in order to save his
life as the ant does? Do you not also know that the mind-the treasure house of wisdom-is present in a brute child as well as in a human-child? That it is the mind that suggests the child to cry
for milk, the birds of grain to feed on grain, and the carnivorous to prey upon flesh.
'I know only this said he, that the mind can only know things through the senses.
You still adhere to your argument in favor of the senses, though once you admitted that it is the mind that guides the senses. Very well; now I shall prove to you in connection with these
senses that they are unable to know anything but external things. They can in no way know the existence of invisible things such as the Almighty Allah and the soul. It is for this reason that the
Creator gifts us with a mind and establishes through its medium His 'Hujjat' (proofs of His existence).
He has created the senses that they may observe external conditions and argue in favor of Him. When the eye observed creation in all its parts, it drew the attention of the mind to it. The
eye saw the celestial sky retained in a position without obvious support, their regularity of motion, rotation, and revolution,-they neither lacked behind that they come in closer proximity to
us, nor proceeded further that they might undergo any damage. Their distance from us remains unchanged and so their condition. They do not get old or decayed though centuries of successive nights
and days have passed. Their corners or ends do not fall down.
The motion of the seven planets also depends on rotation of the sky. They change their places every day, every month, and every year. Some are very rapid; some are very slow in their
movement, but none too slow in their movement, but none too slow. They all return to the same place after performing their fixed duties with unswerving some of them take their courses towards the
North, and sometimes towards the South. They remain obscure during day and visible at night. The appearances of the Sun and the Moon at certain places at certain times as understood by those men
well-versed in the Science of Astronomy, the men endowed with thinking power are surely not the results of any human experience or will.
Nor do they think that the investigations, searches or researches of any human being can produce a like phenomenon. Thus putting everything to severe test and scrutiny the mind reasons, and
concludes that there must be some one Who has created this most wonderful Universe, Who his preserved the skies in their natural position, prevented them from falling down upon the Earth. Along
with the skies he has created the planets and the stars.
Again when the eye observed the earth to be convex, and informed the mind of its observation, the mind felt that the upholder of this Earth in its present form must be He who kept it in its
fixed place and prevented it from slipping into space, and that He must be the same, Who retained the skies overhead in firm position.
The mind also felt that if there had been no upholder of these things, the Earth with the weight of all it possesses such as mountains, trees, seas, sands, etc would have easily crumbled
down. The mind with the eye's help decided that the creator of the Earth must be He Who created the skies….. Then again the ear heard the noise of boisterous whirl-winds, and that of soft and
pleasant breezes. The eye saw that the former uprooted mighty trees, demolished strongest buildings and swept sand hills to the ground carrying them from one place to another. Though the eye
observed all these movements, it could see none who performed them. The ear could hear no one.
Nor could any of the senses detect His presence. The eye could not see the air because of its extent; hands could not hold it, because it was not solid. The eye, the ear and the senses
could know nothing without the mind's assistance. It was the mind that said that there was some one, Who controlled all these things. When the senses conveyed their impressions to the mind, the
mind sensibly thought that the wind did not blow of its own accord.
It thought, if it blew of its own accord, it would blow on continuously and would not pause. Because it is proved in science of natural philosophy that a natural force does not stop, unless
resisted by some stronger force, Again it would not have demolished one thing and left another unmolested, and pulled down one tree and not the next one- it would have over one portion of land
and not another.
Cogitating thus, the mind concluded that someone controlled the wind, moved it or stopped it just as He pleased, sent or withdrew its currents from whomsoever He liked again when the mind
saw that the wind was connected with the sky and its wonders, it unhesitatingly decided that the creator of the wind is He Who has created and upheld the skies, earth and all their wonders.
Likewise when the eye, the ears and other senses unitedly informed the mind of an earthquake, it reflected upon the quaking of a mighty earth, with its mountains, seas and other great
appertainances, and upon the fact that the earth is one solid body without fissures or disunited parts, yet one part shakes and the other remains unaffected, demolishing buildings on one
hand.
and not on the other; and as a result it concluded that the One Who shook one portion of the Earth and saved the other is He Who moves the wind and controls the air withholding them or not,
according to His pleasures. He is the designer and organizer of the skies and the earth and all things pertaining to them. The mind guessed for certain that it was quite impossible for the Earth
to quake by itself. Because being naturally firm it should never have shaken at all.
