Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

(bismillah)

(salam)

I'll try my best to answer with my limited knowledge. Essence is not fundamentally real because neither existence nor non-existence are required for it. For example, the essence of man is rational animal. There is nothing inherent in the concept of rational animal that dictates whether it should exist or not therefore it is indifferent to existence and non-existence and it is for this reason everything with an essence requires a cause in order to come into existence. Therefore, it is existence which represents fundamental reality and not essence. Hope this helped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam alaikum,

its a very interesting topic uve chose, its been discussed a lot and i have to recommend only one book - Our philosophy by the great sayyid Muahmmah baqir al sadr. Basically il summarise wot little i could actually understand:

- uve grasped the concept of cause and effect very well, every effect has a cause, every cause produces an effect. We use this argument to prove the atheists wrong. they try 2 use this to prove us wrong by sayin wat is the cause of Allah.

- ok i only managed 2 grasp 2 theories tho there r many more. One is not liked and few, if any, muslim scholars except it, the second is widely accepted and last time i checked noone cud provide any real argument against it.

1) Theory of creativity: I ask wot is the cause of somthin - wot is it that is being questioned? for example i say wot caused this world? i am askin what happened (cause) in order to make this world come about ( exist) since i kno it didnt exist. It came from a point of non existance to existance and hence it must have a cause. The question is valid and has an answer. An event occured (comin from non-existnec to existence) and hence there must b a cause. Now we come to Allah (swt). What caused Allah? well Allah has existed continuesly, from eternity to eternity to the depths of infinty. There is no effect. Allah is the UNCAUSED CAUSE of all creation. No effect means no cause. End of story. Of course the question can still b asked, but that is not proof it is valid. i can say wot does a square-circle look like? but how can it b square and circle ?? u c the question is nonsence but looks valid. the same applies to askin wot caused Allah (swt).

This is one theory. Muslim scholars are not very keen on this one. their argument against it is a lil bit complex so il jus keep it as such.

The second, more accepted arguemnt, i shall post another time inshalllah. im jus bit short on time. I hope this has helped a litlle bit.

will post soon.

wasalam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

I'll try my best to answer with my limited knowledge. Essence is not fundamentally real because neither existence nor non-existence are required for it. For example, the essence of man is rational animal. There is nothing inherent in the concept of rational animal that dictates whether it should exist or not therefore it is indifferent to existence and non-existence and it is for this reason everything with an essence requires a cause in order to come into existence. Therefore, it is existence which represents fundamental reality and not essence. Hope this helped.

(salam)

Thanks for the ellaboration... But that kind of just comes off as a re-iteration of the contingency argument in different terms- that there are contingent beings (beings that could have failed to exist) and a necessary being (a being that could not have failed to exist). What would be the distinction b/w the two arguments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this question troubles many people especially atheists, the question is asked mostly by the atheist who are not ready to accept any of the worlds religion unless and until their questions are answered logically ,rationally and satisfactorily.

The question actually goes like this : If God is the Creator of everything ,then who created God?

Answer:

I do not agree with the premise that everything must have a Creator . If you keep my response to your previous question in perspective , you shall see that it is not that we are fond of finding a Creator and a Designer for everything .On the contrary , we are interested in finding the artist, only when we see a piece of work or art ; We are interested in searching for the writer ,only when we read a letter ; and we are interested in looking for the architect and the engineer, only when a building stares down at us. Obviously ,our search for the writer ,at being delivered an anonymous letters does not necessitate that the writer , in turn ,should also be written by someone.Similarly, our search for the artist and the engineer or the architect ,at seeing a piece of art or building ,does not,by itself, necessitate that the chain of searching for architects,would go on indefinitely.

It is not that everything must have a Creator; on the contrary, every created thing must have a Creator.No reasonable person would start looking for the writer ,at observing a building; or the architect at observing a piece of art . What we look for at observing something depends on the properties, the features and the attributes of the being observed.

As I had clarified in my previous response ,it is primarily the nature of what surrounds us ,and what lies within us, which initiates our search for a Wise Artist, a Magnificent Designer and a Providing Creator.

Had the world that Surrounds us and that which is within us been devoid of all design ,wisdom or providence,then, obviously ,we wouldnot have initiated this search, in the first place. The fact that the world which surrounds us and that which is within us entail a beautiful design,gracious providence and deep wisdom, coupled with the fact that neither ourselves nor the material world is capable of inculcating the design, the wisdom or the providence within itself, is what drives us to search for a Creator,which exists independently. On the basis of the same reasoning ,the question as to who created the Creator,deserves entertainment only if at observing the Creator, we find that He is also one of the created thing.

Till such time , the question is absolutely absurd and misplaced.

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your response Syed, but I'm not sure if you read the entire thread. "Who created God?" wasn't actually my question, at least not in the manner you responded. Please see my clarifying post on page 1.

Also,

  If you keep my response to your previous question in perspective 
As I had clarified in my previous response 

I don't see any previous response from you- perhaps under another name? Please kindly clarify or repost your initial response.

Thanks.

Edited by ~*~GuestSister~*~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2004-4-11 at 2:03 PM, GuestSister said:

Now that I've gotten your attention, yes I know God is by definition Uncaused, The First, the Last, etc... However, I would like to know if there are any suggested explanations for how God is Uncaused and Infinite, or if a 5 year old were to word it- "Who created God?". I'm only aware of one explanation.

We know a common argument for the existence of God is one that argues for a cause or explanation for the existence of the universe (cosmological arg.). Put rather simply, it looks something like this:

(1) Everything that exists has a cause of its existence.

(2) The universe exists.

Therefore:

(3) The universe has a cause of its existence.

(4) If the universe has a cause of its existence, then that cause is God.

Therefore:

(5) God exists.

The common rebuttal to this is #1 must also apply to God- why make an exception for Him when we can just make a similar exception for the universe, and thus eliminate the need for a Creator? Although there are various answers to that question, the answer to the bolded question is part of the answer. Any explanations any of you have come across by Muslim or other scholars would be great. Please cite a reference only if it's handy.

I SHOULD PREFACE THIS THREAD BY SAYING I AM LOOKING FOR SUGGESTED THEISTIC EXPLANATIONS HERE. ATHEISTS ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE, BUT I ASK THAT EVERYONE NOT DEVIATE FROM THE FOCUS OF THIS THREAD. IF AN EXPLANATION IS SUGGESTED, FEEL FREE TO CRITIQUE.

Claiming that Allah has a creator is primitive thinking. Our brains dont have the capacity of imagining Allah. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Sunday, April 11, 2004 at 11:03 PM, GuestSister said:

Now that I've gotten your attention, yes I know God is by definition Uncaused, The First, the Last, etc... However, I would like to know if there are any suggested explanations for how God is Uncaused and Infinite, or if a 5 year old were to word it- "Who created God?". I'm only aware of one explanation.

We know a common argument for the existence of God is one that argues for a cause or explanation for the existence of the universe (cosmological arg.). Put rather simply, it looks something like this:

(1) Everything that exists has a cause of its existence.

(2) The universe exists.

Therefore:

(3) The universe has a cause of its existence.

(4) If the universe has a cause of its existence, then that cause is God.

Therefore:

(5) God exists.

The common rebuttal to this is #1 must also apply to God- why make an exception for Him when we can just make a similar exception for the universe, and thus eliminate the need for a Creator? Although there are various answers to that question, the answer to the bolded question is part of the answer. Any explanations any of you have come across by Muslim or other scholars would be great. Please cite a reference only if it's handy.

I SHOULD PREFACE THIS THREAD BY SAYING I AM LOOKING FOR SUGGESTED THEISTIC EXPLANATIONS HERE. ATHEISTS ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE, BUT I ASK THAT EVERYONE NOT DEVIATE FROM THE FOCUS OF THIS THREAD. IF AN EXPLANATION IS SUGGESTED, FEEL FREE TO CRITIQUE.

Assalam.The question itself is in a way evidence of the existance of God.Human mind structure is of that kind or has been created that cannot go beyond cause and effect and time and space.What can not come to human mind we call it nothingness .human knoledge is confined our five senses .We receive sensations and perceptions through our five senses and mind.We can not assigne a cause for God.We can think of things that only come into our mind and can not that can not come come to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our mind is simple and limited,it is not capable of thinking of more developed/advanced entity such as God,

A scientist that happens to know some sciences is not capable of defining God and validating/refuting his existence.

Cyclic universe is a wrong theory,one of the wrongest theories created by teen atheists,even Scientists who study Physics and Astronomy and Cosmology don't believe in that,much more developed by teen atheists who wanted to "show" they are smart and talk with things they don't understand.

 

I am also not a scientist,but I know a bit of science,unlike much atheists....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Waseem162 said:

The problem with creation is - It evaluates everything that come to its mind in its own frame, that is the frame of creation!

Above all the creation, there is a Creator. And a finite creation can never define an Infinite Creator!

I loved this one,Thanks brother :) 

Edited by M.IB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎11‎/‎2004 at 2:03 PM, GuestSister said:

Now that I've gotten your attention, yes I know God is by definition Uncaused, The First, the Last, etc... However, I would like to know if there are any suggested explanations for how God is Uncaused and Infinite, or if a 5 year old were to word it- "Who created God?". I'm only aware of one explanation.

We know a common argument for the existence of God is one that argues for a cause or explanation for the existence of the universe (cosmological arg.). Put rather simply, it looks something like this:

(1) Everything that exists has a cause of its existence.

(2) The universe exists.

Therefore:

(3) The universe has a cause of its existence.

(4) If the universe has a cause of its existence, then that cause is God.

Therefore:

(5) God exists.

The common rebuttal to this is #1 must also apply to God- why make an exception for Him when we can just make a similar exception for the universe, and thus eliminate the need for a Creator? Although there are various answers to that question, the answer to the bolded question is part of the answer. Any explanations any of you have come across by Muslim or other scholars would be great. Please cite a reference only if it's handy.

I SHOULD PREFACE THIS THREAD BY SAYING I AM LOOKING FOR SUGGESTED THEISTIC EXPLANATIONS HERE. ATHEISTS ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE, BUT I ASK THAT EVERYONE NOT DEVIATE FROM THE FOCUS OF THIS THREAD. IF AN EXPLANATION IS SUGGESTED, FEEL FREE TO CRITIQUE.

My perspective is that we can't apply human concepts/realities to beings/ideas beyond our comprehension.  Logic has always been an observed quality and is limited to the human capacity to see/interact and understand.  

The idea of being "created", having a "beginning" is a limitation or confinement manifested through how human beings see things.  

One example is that we always see processes as having beginnings and end, like a life cycle of a newborn, or a star.  But we don't apply the concept that the atoms/energies used in those processes, have just been shifting from one place to another, in short, that matter/energy has not been created nor destroyed.

In other words did the Universe just always happened to be a finite amount of energy/space/matter, and all fluctuations, events that transpire inside of it just move and transfer afterward?  In this case, are all forms of matter/energy just external limbs/forces connected to some superior entity that does not have a need for a central nervous system beyond our comprehension?  (holy crud this post was made 14 years ago)

 

 

EDIT: @Waseem162 put this much more elegantly and concisely than I did.

Edited by wmehar2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2004 at 2:03 PM, GuestSister said:

Now that I've gotten your attention, yes I know God is by definition Uncaused, The First, the Last, etc... However, I would like to know if there are any suggested explanations for how God is Uncaused and Infinite, or if a 5 year old were to word it- "Who created God?". I'm only aware of one explanation.

We know a common argument for the existence of God is one that argues for a cause or explanation for the existence of the universe (cosmological arg.). Put rather simply, it looks something like this:

(1) Everything that exists has a cause of its existence.

(2) The universe exists.

Therefore:

(3) The universe has a cause of its existence.

(4) If the universe has a cause of its existence, then that cause is God.

Therefore:

(5) God exists.

The common rebuttal to this is #1 must also apply to God- why make an exception for Him when we can just make a similar exception for the universe, and thus eliminate the need for a Creator? Although there are various answers to that question, the answer to the bolded question is part of the answer. Any explanations any of you have come across by Muslim or other scholars would be great. Please cite a reference only if it's handy.

I SHOULD PREFACE THIS THREAD BY SAYING I AM LOOKING FOR SUGGESTED THEISTIC EXPLANATIONS HERE. ATHEISTS ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE, BUT I ASK THAT EVERYONE NOT DEVIATE FROM THE FOCUS OF THIS THREAD. IF AN EXPLANATION IS SUGGESTED, FEEL FREE TO CRITIQUE.

The simplest answer is that the first premise is incorrect.  It should say, anything that is contingent has a cause.  What makes a thing contingent? Answer: A contingent thing is something that can be distinguished from other things (or anything that has a distinguishing mark), anything, the essence of which, that you can mentally set apart from other things.  So that is practically anything you find in the universe, anything you can even conceptualize!  So all such things, are contingent.  And because they are contingent are in need of a cause.  

God is Non-Dual Reality.  Which simply means that He is distinguished from other things only in not being able to be distinguished from everything else.  He is not only pure being but He is beyond being. He is not only infinitely knowing but He is also beyond knowing.  Etc etc...

It is very important to realize that this understanding of God cannot be grasped conceptually because the moment you put God in concepts you end up with such paradoxes (which is the maximum our minds can come to when it comes to knowing God).  This is why God can only be "intimately" understood through the human heart, not the mind.  It is hearts which intellect (the Quran says), not our minds!  It is hearts which are blind, not the mind.  

So just by having a proper and non-conceptual witnessing of this Non-Dual Reality (aka God), will we find that we don't need any argument for His existence.  Because this understanding is itself Mysteriously One with God.  This is what our religion demands from us.  It demands knowing God in this way (the way of the heart).  Knowing God conceptually is hardly going to be of much help.  When we pray we are getting to know God (or we are supposed to be getting to know God). This is because when we pray we are supposed to go beyond our mind (beyond our thinking), in fact we are supposed to pacify our thoughts and thinking (or at least see what lies beyond it).  When we pray we are supposed to be accessing our heart's center, we are supposed to be knowing God intimately.     

 

 

 

     

 

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • What racist comments?
    • Hello, Not a single rebuke from fellow Shia Chat members or Edits from Shia Chat Moderators?  But, to date, there are two likes? This post clearly violates Shia Chat rule number 4, No swear words, unmannered replies or racist comments, especially when directed at other members. A warning followed by a temporary ban shall be met. If a member repeats their offensive or racist language, a permanent ban will take place. No excuses. Overt slogans of "death" or "destruction" (or similar wording) of any specific government, nation, people, group, or religion is not permitted. However, constructive criticisms of the above are welcomed and encouraged. And, I question the morals of those that would allow a post such as Darth Vader's to go unanswered.  Many of you like to lament about the irrationality of "Islamaphobia."  Yet, you only clap and praise such racist and divisive post. It has been nice chatting with you all.  I have learned what I came here to learn. All the Best, David
    • Wasalam  Are you not allowed to see your daughter anymore sister?  If Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى can understand our thoughts I have no doubt that the creator of heaven, earth and hell can determine our dreams. Anything is possible sister and this very much could be a mercy of Allah bestowed upon you. 
    • Jungle main mor nacha kis ne dekha?? @shiaman14
    • I heared a scholar saying that every sinner will burn in hell. And this burning is to cleanse him from sinns he committed. And this burning of sinner is mercy of Allah. Once he is cleansed from sins he will be send to paradise. 
×