Said Nursi and Science in Islam: Character Building Through Nursi’s Mana-i harfi 2019020936, 2019021126, 9780429019364, 9780429672934, 9780429671449, 9780429669958, 9780367028954

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Series
Title
Copyright
Contents
List of illustrations
Preface
Acknowledgments
Foreword
1 Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts on secular ideology and modern science
1. Introduction
2. Secular ideology and scientific knowledge
3. Defining mânâ-i harfî and mânâ-i ismî languages
4. Reading the book of the universe in the mânâ-i harfî language
5. Mânâ-i harfî language in the Qur’an
6. Misreading the book of the universe in the mânâ-i ismî language
7. Secular worldview and secular science
8. Secular knowledge and secularization of life
9. Secular worldview and worldly satisfaction
10. Conclusion
2 Knowledge, certainty, and science in mânâ-i harfî
1. Introduction
2. Importance of gaining and practicing knowledge in Islam
3. Pursuing true knowledge: objective vs. subjective truth
4. Four categories of objective and subjective knowledge
5. Role of the self in gaining subjectively objective knowledge
6. Certainty of transcendent knowledge in the mânâ-i harfî perspective
7. Nursi’s personal experience with verified transcendent knowledge
8. Pure vs. secular scientific knowledge
9. Causation, causality, and scientific knowledge
10. Conclusion
3 Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews
1. Introduction
2. Knowledge and worldview formation
3. Phenomenology within the secular worldview and secular language
4. Phenomenological method in the mânâ-i harfî perspective
5. Tawhīdī phenomenology and Tawhīdī language
6. Six pillars of the secular worldview
7. Six pillars of the Tawhīdī worldview
8. Teaching of the Tawhīdī worldview in the Qur’an
9. Role of worldview in perception and knowledge
10. Conclusion
4 Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî
1. Introduction
2. Meaning in modern science
3. Divine revelation and revealed meaning of the universe
4. Meaning of life through the mânâ-i harfî approach
5. Reading the meaning of physical and personal worlds
6. Meaning of life in the secular vs. Tawhīdī worldviews
7. Seeking the infinite through transcending the finite
8. Setting guiding principles for a meaningful life
9. Meaning of pain and pleasure in life
10. Conclusion
5 Character building with scientific knowledge through mânâ-i harfî
1. Introduction
2. Secular worldview and vice
3. Tawhīdī worldview and virtue
4. First dimension: filtering mânâ-i ismî perspective from science
5. An example of filtering mânâ-i ismî perspective (desecularizing knowledge)
6. Principles for presenting scientific knowledge through the Mânâ-i harfî
7. Adding six dimensions to scientific knowledge through the Mânâ-i harfî
8. Examples of scientific knowledge in the seven-dimensional approach
9. Instructional methods for the mânâ-i harfî approach
10. Conclusion
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

Through its unique perspective and meaning-acquiring (mana-i harfi) approach, this book fills an important gap in scientific literature by making sense out of seemingly senseless natural phenomena. It provides the means to go beyond the visible, and explore the rich and colorful invisible in the backstage. It attempts to compose a cohesive book out of the piles of words of sciences and shows that beings are meaningful sentences. It helps the reader to see the big picture which merges the physical and non-physical realms and guides them to author their own meaningful book of the universe. A must-read book for those trying to find meaning in life and creation. —Yunus A. Çengel, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus, University of Nevada, Reno, USA Dr. Aydin has written a thoughtful, engaging, and solid critique of the concept of character building drawing on Said Nursi’s Risale-i Nur. This is the definitive book on this subject; the research is impeccable, the argument intriguing, and the conclusions solid. It will be a landmark text for years to come. —The Very Rev. Ian S. Markham, Dean and President of Virginia Theological Seminary, USA Said Nursi and Science in Islam: Character Building Through Nursi’s Mana-i harfi by Necati Aydin is a systematic and thorough analysis on the comprehensive ideas on the nature of science and the Universe and personal secular and spiritual experiences of Said Nursi, one of the most powerful Muslim reformers in modern Islamic world who is still relatively unknown especially among English speaking audience including Muslims. The challenges posed by secular worldview, the various levels of knowledge, realities, and truth and the integrated method  – which the author calls  tawhīdī  – of attaining and teaching them are carefully discussed with the final objective of inculcating a multifaceted human personality who is deeply God-conscious and able to properly contribute to World Community. This admirable effort by Dr. Aydin on Nursi’s religious interpretation of science is a positive contribution not only for Muslims worldwide in their still unsuccessful attempt at facing the cultural challenges of modernity but also for many others who seem to view committed Islamic discourse such as Islamization from the limited prism of geopolitical and legal perspectives. —Wan Mohd Nor WAN DAUD Former Founder and First Director of Center for Advanced Study of Islam, Science and Civilization (CASIS), University of Technology Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur. This engaging addition to the field of pedagogical theory from the pen of Necati Aydin throws much-needed light on the epistemic binary of self-referentiality/Otherindicativeness, which runs like a leitmotif through the works and teachings of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi. Dr  Aydin is to be lauded for his timely gift to Muslim scholarship on the relationship between Islam and science. —Colin Turner, Director of International Foundation for Muslim Theology and Reader (retired) in Islamic Thought at Durham University, UK Necati Aydin’s new book offers a close philosophical analysis of the epistemic framework for Said Nursi’s critical engagement with modern thought. It provides the wider world a much needed, lucid and in-depth access to the ideas of one of the most under-appreciated geniuses of modern Islamic thought. —Edward Omar Moad, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Qatar University, Qatar

Necati Aydin offers especially the western scholar an approach to Said Nuri and the subtle relationship between science and religion. The globalization process is in need of such a book to provide an opportunity for a new orientation. It expands the narrow view, dividing science and religion, as being antithetical. Here we find cues that an alternatives perspective dealing with modern science and religiosity (and spirituality) is possible. —Ernest Wolf-Gazo, Professor of Philosophy, American University in Cairo, Egypt Bediuzzaman Said Nursi is a widely known but poorly appreciated giant of Islamic scholarship in the modern era. One way to misunderstand his thought is to interpret his engagement with science as a “scientist” take on modernity. The present study offers insights about both his critique of positivist science and the solutions he develops to escape its built-in entrappings. —Mustafa Tuna, Associate Professor of Slavic and Eurasian Studies, Duke University, USA This book is about one of the most important concepts of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi who is well known by his magnum opus, faith-based, Qur’anic commentary called The Risale i Nur, Epistles of Light. Nursi employs many new concepts and metaphors in his writings to provide a convincing argument for the existence and unity of God. He offers a new paradigm based on the combination of revelation, prophethood, and the reading of the universe. For Nursi, the universe is an elegant book of God to be reflected by the heart and mind. He offers the mana-i harfi approach to read the book of the universe. It might be fair to consider the mana-i harfi approach as a paradigmatic shift in the teaching of faith to the modern mind. I praise Said Nursi and Science in Islam for being instrumental in guiding those who search for God through science and revelation. —Faris Kaya, Professor Emeritus, Yildiz Technical University, Turkey This book presents Said Nursi’s vision of a God-conscious conception of the universe as an alternative perspective on modern science. As such it offers a Nursian formulation for a post-secular approach to undoing the alienation between science and spiritual meaning. A welcome contribution to the literature on Said Nursi. —Mucahit Bilici, Associate Professor of Sociology, John Jay College, CUNY, USA Bediuzzaman Said Nursi is a very prominent and influential Islamic scholar. However, his profound, complex and critical thoughts on the philosophy of science and the study of the universe are often misinterpreted and remain largely unexplored. That is why Dr. Necati Aydin’s present work is a welcome venture. It offers precious insights on a key concept, namely on ‘mana-i harfi’, lit. indicative meaning. This is a very powerful conceptual tool that provides a structural framework for organizing knowledge in a way that reveals the Transcendent dimension of reality. Mana-i harfi distills the Quranic approach of reading the signs of God in the world and uncovering the beautiful divine names reflected therein. In this book, Dr.  Aydin explores the significant process through which Mana-i-Harfi transforms various forms of knowledge into a knowledge of the Transcendent. —Dr. Yamina Bouguenaya, Director of Receiving Nur Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA

Said Nursi and Science in Islam

This book examines how the prominent Muslim scholar Said Nursi developed an integrative approach to faith and science known as “the other indicative” (mânâ-i harfî) and explores how his aim to reconcile two academic disciplines, often at odds with one another, could be useful in an educational context. The book opens by examining Nursi’s evolving thought with regards to secular ideology and modern science. It then utilizes the mânâ-i harfî approach to address a number of issues, including truth and certainty, the relationship between knowledge and worldview formation, and the meaning of beings and life. Finally, it offers a seven-dimensional knowledge approach to derive meaning and build good character through understanding scientific knowledge in the mânâ-i harfî perspective. This book offers a unique perspective on one of recent Islam’s most influential figures, and also offers suggestions for teaching religion and science in a more nuanced way. It is, therefore, a great resource for scholars of Islam, religion and science, Middle East studies, and educational studies. Necati Aydin is a professor of economics at Alfaisal University, Saudi Arabia. He has two doctoral degrees, one in education and the other in economics. He has taught at different universities in the USA, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, and has published several academic articles on Said Nursi’s ideas. He is a founding board member and executive director of the Nursi Society.

Routledge Studies in Religion

The Desecularisation of the City London’s Churches, 1980 to the Present Edited by David Goodhew and Antony-Paul Cooper Government Surveillance of Religious Expression Mormons, Quakers, and Muslims in the United States Kathryn Montalbano Religion and Human Security in Africa Edited by Ezra Chitando and Joram Tarusarira The Paranormal and Popular Culture A Postmodern Religious Landscape Edited by Darryl Caterine and John W. Morehead Religion and Politics Under Capitalism A Humanistic Approach to the Terminology Stefan Arvidsson American Catholic Bishops and the Politics of Scandal Rhetoric of Authority Meaghan O’Keefe Celebrity Morals and the Loss of Religious Authority John Portmann Reimagining God and Resacralisation Alexa Blonner Said Nursi and Science in Islam Character Building Through Nursi’s mana-i harfi Necati Aydin For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/ religion/series/SE0669

Said Nursi and Science in Islam Character Building Through Nursi’s mana-i harfi Necati Aydin

First published 2019 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2019 Necati Aydin The right of Necati Aydin to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Aydın, Necati (Economist), author. Title: Said Nursi and science in Islam : character building through Nursi’s Mana-i harfi / Necati Aydin. Description: New York, NY : Routledge, [2019] | Series: Routledge studies in religion | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2019020936 (print) | LCCN 2019021126 (ebook) | ISBN 9780429019364 (E-book) | ISBN 9780429672934 (PDF) | ISBN 9780429671449 (epub) | ISBN 9780429669958 (Mobi) | ISBN 9780367028954 (hardback) Subjects: LCSH: Islam and science. | Nursèi, Said, 1873–1960— Criticism and interpretation. | Nurculuk. Classification: LCC BP190.5.S3 (ebook) | LCC BP190.5.S3 A93 2019 (print) | DDC 297.2092—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019020936 ISBN: 9780367028954 (hbk) ISBN: 9780429019364 (ebk) Typeset in Sabon by Apex CoVantage, LLC

Contents

List of illustrationsx Prefacexi Acknowledgmentsxiii Forewordxiv 1 Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts on secular ideology and modern science 1. Introduction 1 2. Secular ideology and scientific knowledge  3 3. Defining mânâ-i harfî and mânâ-i ismî languages  10 4. Reading the book of the universe in the mânâ-i harfî language 13 5. Mânâ-i harfî language in the Qur’an  17 6. Misreading the book of the universe in the mânâ-i ismî language 19 7. Secular worldview and secular science  25 8. Secular knowledge and secularization of life  29 9. Secular worldview and worldly satisfaction  34 10. Conclusion 38 2 Knowledge, certainty, and science in mânâ-i harfî 1. Introduction 45 2. Importance of gaining and practicing knowledge in Islam  46 3. Pursuing true knowledge: objective vs. subjective truth  49 4. Four categories of objective and subjective knowledge  55 5. Role of the self in gaining subjectively objective knowledge 56 6. Certainty of transcendent knowledge in the mânâ-i harfî perspective 58

1

45

viii  Contents 7. Nursi’s personal experience with verified transcendent knowledge 61 8. Pure vs. secular scientific knowledge  63 9. Causation, causality, and scientific knowledge  68 10. Conclusion 80 3 Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 1. Introduction 84 2. Knowledge and worldview formation  84 3. Phenomenology within the secular worldview and secular language  89 4. Phenomenological method in the mânâ-i harfî perspective 91 5. Tawhīdī phenomenology and Tawhīdī language  97 6. Six pillars of the secular worldview  101 7. Six pillars of the Tawhīdī worldview  104 8. Teaching of the Tawhīdī worldview in the Qur’an  109 9. Role of worldview in perception and knowledge  111 10. Conclusion 116 4 Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî 1. Introduction 120 2. Meaning in modern science  120 3. Divine revelation and revealed meaning of the universe  122 4. Meaning of life through the mânâ-i harfî approach  126 5. Reading the meaning of physical and personal worlds  130 6. Meaning of life in the secular vs. Tawhīdī worldviews  134 7. Seeking the infinite through transcending the finite  138 8. Setting guiding principles for a meaningful life  142 9. Meaning of pain and pleasure in life  149 10. Conclusion 153 5 Character building with scientific knowledge through mânâ-i harfî 1. Introduction 158 2. Secular worldview and vice  160 3. Tawhīdī worldview and virtue  161 4. First dimension: filtering mânâ-i ismî perspective from science  163 5. An example of filtering mânâ-i ismî perspective (desecularizing knowledge)  167

84

120

158

Contents ix 6. Principles for presenting scientific knowledge through the Mânâ-i harfî 174 7. Adding six dimensions to scientific knowledge through the Mânâ-i harfî 177 8. Examples of scientific knowledge in the seven-dimensional approach 193 9. Instructional methods for the mânâ-i harfî approach  196 10. Conclusion 202 Bibliography205 Index209

Illustrations

Figures 1.1 Secular language leading secular life 34 1.2 Tawhīdī language leading spiritual life 35 1.3 From mânâ-i ismî language to secular wordview and worldly aspiration 39 1.4 From mânâ-i harfî language to Tawhīdī wordview and otherworldly aspiration 39 3.1 Phenomenology within secular paradigm and secular language92 3.2 The Tawhīdī perspective of phenomenology and Tawhīdī language 99 3.3 The six pillars of the secular worldview 102 3.4 The six pillars of the Tawhīdī worldview 105 3.5 Role of words and works of God in establishing Tawhīdī worldview and good character 117 5.1 Six steps of writing science through the cosmic language (the mânâ-i harfî)178

Table 5.1 Learning steps and expected learning outcome

178

Preface

Ever since the Enlightenment, the relationship between science and religion has been highly strained. While a considerable group of scientists, philosophers, and theologians consider religion to be simply dogma, most theologians would consider scientific views on certain subjects as heresy. Whereas the first group of scientists dominates today’s scientific enterprise, thus offering a completely secular understanding of science to the exclusion of any metaphysical frame of mind, the second group of religious scholars is struggling to gain ground for desecularizing science and reinstituting a theistic understanding of the scientific enterprise. Therefore, it has been quite difficult for both sides to embrace one another. Within the Muslim world, the story is not very different. With advancements in science, we see three groups of scholarly reaction in the Muslim countries: (1) a rejection of science to protect the faith, (2) a consideration of science and religion as two different, independent disciplines, and (3) the argument that modern science comes with an embedded secular ideology. The first group considers science to be anti-religion, pointing to the increasing number of scientists who have lost their faith once they began to study science. They therefore call for a complete rejection of science. The second group considers science and religion to be two different disciplines, arguing that it is possible to have them both. For them, science is an important tool for this life while religion is for the hereafter. They suggest that Muslims should embrace science – as it is – if they want to flourish in this life, independent of their adherence to faith for the afterlife. The third group of scholars argues that modern science has an embedded secular ideology and advocate for desecularizing scientific knowledge before embracing it within the Islamic worldview. This book is based on the works of a prominent 20th-century Muslim scholar from Turkey, Said Nursi, who could be considered within the third group of Muslim scholars mentioned earlier. Nursi neither rejects science nor proposes to have segregated fields between the two essential human domains of life, but rather a joint scientific and religious education. He suggests, therefore, an integrative approach that harmonizes scientific and religious knowledge. Nursi believes that ideology-free science and authentic

xii  Preface Divine messages do not contradict each other, as they both come from the same source. However, it is possible that when interpreters do not precisely understand the pertinent meaning of a religious text, their interpretation may contradict an ideology-free scientific datum. Indeed, Nursi believes that pure science is a great way to reveal the Divine signs (ayaat) in the book of the universe. Therefore, Nursi dedicated his entire life to developing an integrative approach known as “the other indicative” (mânâ-i harfî) approach. This unique approach aims to harmoniously incorporate scientific and religious knowledge. As stated in one of his books, it took Nursi thirty years to come up with his methodology (Nursi, 2012f). He considers the universe to be a book with deep meaning and argues that one can read the book of the universe through the mânâ-i harfî language. He praises true scientific works as efforts to unravel the hidden Divine signs in the book of the universe. However, he argues that most scientists do not know how to read what is beyond the visible. Moreover, he argues that each scientific discipline is linked to a particular Divine name. Therefore, in his view, ideology-free science and Islam complement each other in helping humans to excel in life. This book covers Nursi’s views of science and Islam in five chapters with a foreword by Dr. Acikgenc, who neatly analyzes the background of Nursi’s mânâ-i harfî approach as a worldview. The first chapter describes the root cause of the problem of modern societies as the secularized mind and life due to secular knowledge and worldview. The second chapter points to the solution through filtering secular ideology and acquiring truth, wisdom, and virtue in the mânâ-i harfî perspective. The third chapter  helps develop a holistic worldview based on the mânâ-i harfî approach. The fourth chapter shows how to read the meaning of beings and life from the mânâ-i harfî perspective. Finally, the fifth chapter offers a seven-dimensional knowledge approach to derive meaning and build good character through understanding scientific knowledge in the mânâ-i harfî perspective. This book seeks to help the prospective scientists as well as students, teachers, and parents develop positive views of science from an Islamic perspective, as a means for building better character.

Acknowledgments

I shall begin with special thanks to high school friends, Ihsan Turgut, Ilyas Sogutlu, Enes Gunduz, Mehmet Parlak, and Murat Zengin, who introduced me to the works of Said Nursi. Although I have read over three thousand books since then, Nursi is still one of my favorite intellectual and spiritual giants. Second, I extend my heartfelt thanks to Dr. Alparslan Acikgenc for his thoughtful foreword. He almost co-authored this book through his constructive feedback on each chapter. I consider him a genuine friend and great mentor. Third, I thank the board members of Nursi Society for their input and intellectual discourse on the Nursi’s mânâ-i harfî approach. Special thanks to Dr. Faris Kaya for his three-decade-long leadership and support for Nursi studies. Fourth, I would like to thank Dr. Colin Turner, Dr. Yunus Cengel, Dr.  Ian Markham, Dr.  Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, Dr.  Mustafa Tuna, Dr. Mucahit Bilici, and Dr. Ernest Wolf-Gazo for endorsing the book through their kind words. Fifth, I am really in debt to Ms. Nadine Kamal for making the book readable through her great editing on very short notice. Finally, many thanks to Jack Boothroyd for his kind support during the review and publication process. While I  acknowledge with gratitude my debt to these colleagues, I must emphasize that I, alone, am responsible for any mistakes and shortcomings in this book.

Foreword

Contemporary scientific tradition vies desperately for a fresh outlook, though many scientists are not aware of this. In the past and well into the 18th century, scientific traditions were confined to their own civilizational contexts, and interaction was limited to solely scientific knowledge. We can hardly find any borrowing of mental frameworks through which scientific activities are carried out. A mental framework as the conceptual foundation of scientific activities is based within the worldview of the scientist, and since it is the worldview which endows the scientist with the identity of his civilization, he would not be interested in the identity of another foreign scientist. This means that those scientists would not be interested in the scientific mentality of a fellow scientist from another civilizational background. Today when we study the history of science, we do not notice this phenomenon because scientific frameworks as mental outlooks are not visible and not so readily available to physical observation. We need a penetrating analysis to decipher these mental scientific frameworks. Another reason why mental outlooks remain concealed from a cursory observation today is a new phenomenon that has arisen as a result of globalization. The scientific tradition used by all scientists throughout the world today is the globalized, Western scientific tradition. Only keen eyes can see this and that its widespread practice is based on a secular and atheistic mental outlook. However, we must distinguish the classical Western scientific tradition – or what they call the scholastic tradition – from the globalized secular scientific tradition that represents the contemporary phase of the former. The classical Western scientific tradition is based on Christian values, which are similar, if not identical, with the foundation of Islamic scientific tradition. Moreover, it was very much influenced and shaped by Islamic scientific tradition, and as such, it conformed to its values. But beginning with the rise of modernity and as a result of the European scientific revolution, the classical Western scientific tradition was gradually transformed from its traditional values to what they call “modern” values based primarily on secularism and in turn, with the development of evolutionary biology, on scientism. The culmination of this development was positivism, which began to hold science as the only source of truth by itself excluding thereby any other metaphysics.

Foreword xv Based on this general analysis of the history of science in the West, we may distinguish three phases in Western scientific tradition: the classical phase characterized by scholasticism (approximately between the 900s and 1500s); the modern phase which started after the 1500s and reached its peak by the 1950s. This period is characterized with secularism in the social sphere but with mechanical conception in the physical realm. Finally, the global phase, when after the second half of the 20th century humanity entered a new age of atheistic positivism, which began to defend the socalled scientism. What distinguishes this phase from the modern age is the anti-religious attitude and the outraged war against all religions. The modern age had a plain, secular outlook to science and life characterized by an attitude of indifference to religion, which grew gradually into a new state of mind and reached its peak in the first half of the 19th century. This resulted in scientific atheism (with such new theories as evolutionism in the physical sciences and its implications in other sciences, etc.). The present study is an evaluation of the mental framework of the modern, Western scientific tradition, represented in its third phase that has been trying to eliminate all other alternative scientific paradigms, particularly those based on mental frameworks that respect sacred perceptions or leave room for belief and theistic scientific outlooks. Largely inspired by the late Muslim thinker Bediuzzaman Said Nursi’s (d. 1960) letteral approach (mânâ-i harfî), the author, Dr.  Necati Aydın, is introducing in this book a seven-dimensional knowledge approach to derive character lessons from scientific knowledge within a holistic worldview that is congenial to both Christianity and Islam, indeed to all theistic religions. There is no doubt that all of these dimensions are very useful in showing how we can benefit from scientific knowledge based on a proper outlook. In this brief forward, rather than discussing these dimensions, as the author elucidates these in detail in the following chapters, I feel the need to discuss first the epistemology of science in order to show the mental frameworks utilized by scientists when they are engaged in their scientific enterprise. The second issue I  would like to bring to the attention of readers is the context and conceptual background of Nursi’s approach in letteral meaning (mânâ-i harfî) as opposed to the literal signification (mânâ-i ismî). This second issue involves an all-important perennial problem of philosophy, which is an explication of the meaning of existence. I think without setting the ground for Nursi’s ideas, the letteral signification of science will not be complete. Be that as it may, let us now attempt the first issue, epistemology of science. As human beings, whatever activity we carry out, we perform it in accordance with the mental framework we have; for example, when we cook a dish we cook it according to our understanding of cooking that we acquire throughout our life from our culinary tradition. Without such a framework, we cannot cook a specific dish. In this ordinary performance, we can clearly analyze at least two mental frameworks: the general culinary

xvi  Foreword experience we acquired throughout our eating habits in life and also our specific taste habituation for that specific dish and the way of cooking it. Both of these two frameworks are related to each other and in fact, the latter is more specific than the former, and as the first is more general – it includes the specific framework in itself. However, after a careful and penetrating analysis of these two frameworks, we can reach a more fundamental outlook consisting of systematically organized clusters of concepts that make up our worldview. Similarly, there are also three frameworks in the mind of a scientist, which s/he utilizes when engaged in scientific activity. The first framework is the worldview of the scientist, which provides the perspective for her/his scientific activities as well as for all of her/his daily life and other activities. A  worldview is composed of certain clusters of concepts, and each cluster is united with a higher set of clusters. Since the concepts in a cluster are all logically and internally related to each other, they reflect a certain understanding of the area from which concepts are derived. In the above example, the cooking of the dish represents the area of the concepts uniformly brought together in a cluster, which reflects the understanding for that dish. In the same manner, higher clusters made up of the included clusters of concepts reflect the higher understanding of its area which is, in this case, the culinary culture of the person. The worldview of a person is formed in this way by logically related concepts and clusters of concepts. It is clear that the values and beliefs of a person are also included in the worldview as clusters of concepts. Therefore, the perspective of the scientist will reflect her/his values and beliefs whatever they may be; a secular perspective will lead the scientist to a secular understanding of science and her/his scientific activities will be carried out in that fashion. A Muslim or a Buddhist or a Christian’s perspective will reflect – in the same manner – their own beliefs and values in their relative scientific activities. Since we argued that a worldview is composed of higher clusters of concepts, we can distinguish one set of clusters that affords the adequate ground to carry out our scientific activities. This is the framework that is similar to the framework given in the above example as “the general culinary experience we acquired throughout our eating habits in life.” But now, we shall identify this framework in its area as “general scientific conceptual scheme” acquired from the scientific tradition, which we practice in our scientific activities, through our educational training. The second framework in the mind of the scientist is the general scientific conceptual scheme, and as such, it is directly connected to its worldview. The doctrinal concept which holds together all the clusters of concepts in this framework is “knowledge.” Since this is the way our knowledge system works, it is strikingly the same in all civilizations. This may also explain the fact that at least in three major civilizations, viz., Ancient Greek, Islam, and Western civilizations, the word for science is also derived from this concept. Some other fundamental concepts of this general scheme as the ground of all

Foreword xvii our scientific activities are truth, method, theory, and the very concept of science itself. Each of these concepts forms around itself multi-layered clusters of concepts, all of which reflect the scientific tradition of the scientist who receives these clusters of concepts as ideals and models of scientific practice through her/his educational training. In other words, they are formed in her/his mind as s/he receives scientific training in her/his scientific tradition. The third framework in the mind of the scientist corresponds to the one in our example above that is expressed as “specific taste habituation for that specific dish and the way of cooking it.” This is the framework which is directly attached to the activity itself, and as such with regard to the epistemology of science it should be named “specific scientific conceptual scheme.” This mental framework includes the multi-layered clusters of concepts in the field of the scientist, whether they are physics, chemistry, and astronomy or philosophy, sociology, and psychology. We may refer to each of these frameworks with a concept that expresses, at least approximately, their epistemological functions: the worldview is the “perspective,” the general scheme is the “frame,” and the specific scheme is the “outlook.” Now if we compare these frameworks, we may observe that it is primarily the perspective which is value-laden. The frame also has certain science- and truth-related values taken from the perspective. But the third framework is further from the value structure of the perspective and thus has the least values, if any. Usually, those who claim that science is value-free have this specific mental framework of the scientist and make such a claim. However, they neglect the other two frameworks that are primarily shaped by values. When a scientist is concerned with a specific subject in her/his field, such as quantum mechanics, because of the nature of the issue, her/his study has no relation whatsoever to values. Obviously, her/his findings will also be valuefree. However, her/his own conception of a specific issue in this field and her/his solutions will be assigned a place in her/his frame and perspective thereby gaining value structures. In that case, values in the outlook diminish, but as we move from there to the other frameworks, value clusters begin to increase. The crucial issue in this context is that in everyday life what is operative is not the outlook as a mental framework, it is rather the frame and perspective. That is why the approach to outlook is essential, as it may affect the other two mental frameworks. It is the purpose of this work to propose a new approach, which was actually applied in Islamic scientific tradition throughout history, and as it is human-friendly it is as such more adequate for good character development. We may suffice with this brief explanation of our understanding of the epistemology of science. We shall leave the details of these to our work published earlier.1 The present work by Dr. Aydin, without neglecting the other frameworks, especially worldview as perspective, is concerned essentially with the frame, namely the second mental framework which we also expressed as general scientific conceptual scheme. He argues that today we need to change the present existing frame, which most of us inherit from the positivist

xviii  Foreword understanding of science that has become prevalent in Western scientific tradition in the 19th and 20th centuries. This frame holds the secular approach to nature and the subjects investigated in all sciences as its main value. This secular approach also has other implications, among them the chief presupposition as the corollary of this approach that leads to an atheistic conception of existence. This is because the global frame of scientists is to look at things with a literal meaning. This is the original frame developed by Nursi based on Islamic scientific tradition, which makes a distinction between literal (ismî) and letteral (harfî) meanings. The first phenomenon expressed as literal meaning is an approach which looks at things singly taken as the only reality beyond which no other reality exists. The distinction between these two frames is linguistic, but it is applied to the epistemological approach to scientific studies and research. The term “ism” in Arabic or as used in Turkish, the language in which Nursi composed his works, “isim” means “noun,” which refers to itself and reveals a complete meaning by itself. But “harf” means “letter,” which, although it also refers to itself, has no meaning by itself and thus when it comes together with other letters it refers to something other than itself.2 According to this doctrine then, mana-i harfî means letteral meaning, and thus every being is taken as a letter that is united with other letters as beings to yield a meaning which no longer refers to themselves only but to a Being beyond them as well, namely the reason of their existence: God. In fact, the primary meaning of all beings is the letteral meaning. But if the scientist has a mana-i ismî (literal meaning) approach, then s/he will see things as in themselves namely having an independent meaning as their reality. Therefore, in this study, the doctrinal concept is expressed as the mana-i harfî, namely letteral approach. A scientist having this frame of mind in her/his scientific activities will not see things as independent realities and go beyond them. An object in this conception is an indicator of its origin, which shows the One who establishes that origin continuously. There is only a new development we need to consider: it is the fact that today there are no more scientists working in their isolated traditions as they did in the past. A scientific tradition is a context in which the scientific activities of that civilization is carried out, and as such that tradition also has its civilization as its own environmental context. These social contexts also serve as the epistemology of specific scientific activities. But today globalization almost totally forces us to neglect the contextual backgrounds of scientists. The framework used in globalized scientific activities, represented by the third phase of the Western scientific tradition, is taken by scientists and hinged onto certain frameworks within their worldview, thus having a connection only to a few clusters of concepts in the scientists’ worldview. For example, a Hindu scientist working with the framework of the present global scientific tradition may find a contradiction between her/his worldview and the approach of this framework, but without any other choice available to her/him, s/he tries to reconcile it with her/his worldview. With

Foreword xix the traditional Hindu worldview, this framework cannot be reconciled; the scientist has to bring a double interpretation in her/his mind, one related to her/his own worldview, and the other related to the framework s/he is utilizing in her/his scientific activities. But if s/he fails to somehow connect this frame with certain modifications to her/his worldview, s/he gradually succumbs into the assumptions of the perspective of this frame. As Dr. Aydin analyzes this frame in detail; I shall concentrate on the perspective of the mana-i harfî frame, which we believe is what humanity needs to save itself from the very dangers of the mana-i ismî (nominal or literal understanding of reality) approach imposed upon the scientific world of today. I would like to emphasize that our purpose is not to impose a certain worldview on our fellow scientists, but to try to show how this frame is easily adaptable to any worldview, and thus scientists of all civilizational backgrounds can utilize it in their perspective. They can adapt it to the related concepts and clusters of concepts available in their worldview. This is the meaning of existence, which is elaborated by Nursi as an approach to build the letteral meaning in our scientific activities. As we presented in the epistemology of science, the conceptual context of Nursi’s view of existence from the perspective of the letteral meaning is his worldview. How can we decipher his worldview from his works? This requires a brief presentation of the structures of a worldview, and if we can find a fundamental structure within it, then we shall proceed to find out the foundation of Nursi’s worldview (that is obviously an Islamic worldview). First of all, we should understand that a worldview is a supercluster of clusters of concepts, all of which endows the person with an outlook to existence, life, and all other activities. Everything we do, we perform based on our worldview, which also functions as an epistemological mechanism in our knowledge acquisitions. I believe that our mind registers all our mental acquisitions as concepts right after we are born. In this way, concepts are connected according to certain relevancies which could be logical, belonging to the same group, or relational and so on. Relevant concepts begin to form a cluster with each other, but if there is no relevance, then they form another group and so on. All of these begin to unite with each other to form superclusters and so on to form the person’s worldview. This worldview is very concrete in its early formation, but as the person grows older, more concepts of abstract nature begin to emerge in the worldview of the person. These abstract concepts are put in relation to the concrete ones; but as they begin to accumulate to form like the former ones in clusters, they then unite with other clusters and superclusters. These clusters of concepts begin to form a separate entity in the worldview, and in a sense now it is possible to affirm the existence of independent and abstract superclusters of clusters of concepts which express the identity of the person, allowing to yield an understanding of reality and meaning of life. This combination of clusters and superclusters can thus be distinguished from former combinations that are concrete and related to our

xx  Foreword daily life and culture. Since it was the former formation, which we called our early worldview but now call it “structure,” to distinguish between these two formations we shall name them “life structure” and the later abstract one “world structure.” Now the worldview consists of these two structures only. As we have defined these structures, we should be able to surmise that the world structure has become the foundation of the worldview. Avoiding the details, I  dare to claim that in a sophisticated worldview (which is usually in the minds of individuals belonging to higher civilizations), there are three more structures bringing the number of structures in a worldview to five: (1) knowledge structure, which governs our knowledge and scientific activities; (2) value structure, which acts as the ground of moral and legal dealings; (3). human structure, which performs the same function as the other structures but with reference to human, social, political, and economic dealings; and the structures described earlier, (4) world structure and (5) life structure. We should also see that these structures are not only functioning as the ground of such activities but at the same time including our understanding of the ideas concerning those activities and dealings. Among these structures, the ones that concern us are world structure, as the foundation of worldview, and the knowledge structure, as the ground of our scientific activities. Since no structure operates by contradicting the concepts found in other structures, they form together a unity (which is the totality of the worldview itself). In that case, every structure is related and included partially in and indeed connected to the other structures according to its relation to that structure.3 Inclusion will be more if the relation is higher, but if the relation is lower, then inclusion will be less but the connection will be more. Based on this understanding of worldview as the background of our ideas, we can try to understand the foundation of Nursi’s worldview. I think that the following quote will set the initial point for deciphering his worldview: The children of Adam as a huge caravan and a great procession has been advancing from the valleys and dwellings of the past into the province of existence and life is striding gradually in convoys heading to the lofty mountains and ornamented gardens of the future. [This great phenomenon stimulated the universe and thus] Certain interactions began to mobilize [between the humans and the cosmos], the universe (kâ’inat) thus encountered them. Wondering “who these unfamiliar and strange creatures are, where they are coming from, and where they are heading to”, as if, the judge of creation (hukûmat al-khilqah) sent the science of wisdom (fenn-i hikmet) to converse with and ask them: •

O children of Adam! Where are you coming from and where are you going to? What are you going to do [here] and who is your Lord, who is your leader?

Foreword xxi As this conversation was taking place between them, from among the children of Adam, the Prophet Muhammad (sawm),4 just as the other prophets of great stature, stood up and gave the following reply with the language of the Qur’an: • O Wisdom! We, the troops of creatures, are coming conspicuously from the darkness of nothingness into the light of existence by the omnipotence of the Eternal Sovereign. We, the troops of the Children of Adam, are brought up with the capacity of an assignment for which we are chosen amongst our brother creatures for bearing The Great Trust (emanet-i kubra). We are moving towards the eternal bliss by way of resurrection. We are, therefore, busy at the moment to acquire the means for this eternal bliss and to develop our capacities that are our principal assets. And I am their leader and speaker. Here you are my certificate which is the Word of the Supreme Ruler over which glitters the miracle evidence [for its inimitability]. The respondent’s answer to this question cannot be true unless it is the Qur’an. Here is the book [read it if you are in doubt about it].5 Nursi draws on four concepts from this metaphorical expression of the meaning of existence which are, according to his interpretation, the main and foundational concepts of the Qur’an: existence and oneness of a creator (tawhîd); messengers and the institution of revelation (nubuwwah); and the phenomenon of re-creation, which includes human accountability (hashr or resurrection) and justice (adalah), a concept which has moral and legal implications based on religion. These concepts are doctrinal concepts under which many clusters of concepts are situated. Hence, a concept which manifests as a doctrine with a host of cluster concepts under it, each representing an idea, is called “doctrinal concept.” The comprehensive doctrine articulated within these four concepts is articulated in the above-quoted paragraphs by expressing reality with allegorical interpretation, which Nursi calls “tamthîl.” We may express this as “metaphorical hermeneutics,” which is a kind of interpretation that includes multiple allegories in itself. Therefore, we need to interpret the allegories so that our mind captures reality as it is. Why do we need an explanation based on metaphorical interpretation? This approach is used in order to bring reality, which is not readily available to our experience, closer to our mind’s eye that can see things which are concrete, and thus can perceive them more easily. As it is known, an abstract idea can be understood better and more easily if it is brought to our eyes after it is concretized. This is achieved in the best possible way through metaphorical hermeneutics. Nursi sometimes refers to this within the Turkish language with the phrase “temsilî hikayecik” (metaphorical narrative or short story). The above narrative also tells us the reality as perceived by Nursi of which I shall now attempt a brief

xxii  Foreword interpretation, because this is the foundation of his worldview representing the perspective of the letteral meaning. In the hermeneutical metaphor, humanity is represented by the progeny of the first human being, which is named in the Holy Books, Adam, hence the children of Adam. They come from the past, which is represented with a simile of “valleys and dwellings of the past.” This means that before they reached here, there were many other existing realities and creatures. But since this is unknown to us, they are as if in “darkness,” which becomes enlightened through “existence and life.” But they are here for a certain purpose and, therefore, they shall not stay here as they stride again in convoys “heading to the lofty mountains and ornamented gardens of the future.” These metaphors refer to life after death, which is prepared primarily as a reward for those who realize their purpose in this life and live accordingly. But as these events are unfolding, something incredible is taking place: the universe is stimulated, and it is as if it is excited to see these new creatures. It realizes that they would need certain things and in order to welcome them started certain interactions with them that are needed for their livelihood. On the other hand, this raised the curiosity of the universe, which then decided to send a representative to ask questions of humanity. Since these questions are dealt with in philosophy, the metaphorical representative is also called the “science of philosophy.” In this crucial conversation, the interesting point is the metaphorical personality of the Prophet Muhammad, as representing human beings, who gives the answers to the questions of philosophy but with the language of the Qur’an. This means that the answers are not philosophical, and in fact, philosophy is unable to answer these questions. Only the creator can provide us with conclusive answers. The way these are expressed in this expression of metaphorical hermeneutics is also taken from the Qur’an. In this journey, human beings are given a responsibility that is expressed as “The Great Trust, because we are chosen amongst our brother creatures for bearing it,” as taken from the Qur’an: “Indeed, we offered the Trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they refused to bear it and feared it; but man undertook it. Indeed, he was unjust and ignorant” (33/72).6 After this explanation, we can see that his worldview also gathered around these basic concepts. Nursi brings thus this explanation home with a profound analysis of human nature with the delicate terminology of the Qur’an as follows: Know O dear brother! You are fruit or rather a kernel of the tree of creation. You are a tiny, decrepit and weak individual. On the other hand, the Wise Creator through His grace and subtle art raised you from individuality to universality. Yes, by means of the life given to your corporeal body and immense feelings you are able to roam throughout the visible universe (‘âlam al-shahâdah) and thus left behind the bond of individuality. In the same way, with the gift of humanity [given to you] you are in effect a

Foreword xxiii potential whole (kull). Moreover, with the given bounty of belief and Islam you have become potentially a universal (kullî). Furthermore, you have become a surrounding light (nûr) through the blessings of knowledge (ma’rifat) and love (mahabbah). Therefore, if you incline to this worldly life and pleasures, you will be an impotent, disgraceful individual (juz’î). If, on the other hand, you utilize your abilities in the way of Islam, which is indeed the Greater Humanity, you will be a universal and a whole.7 The main point in this mental framework is the perspective used for the letteral meaning, which is also used as metaphorical interpretation. These points start from a creator who is real and brought everything to light. But man is given special responsibility that is moral. He is tested here in this world, and he faces grave consequences if he fails to guard the Trust which he undertook willingly. He thus declares, this means that man came to this world to be perfected by means of knowledge and supplication. In regards to his nature and abilities, everything is tied to knowledge. And the foundation, source, light, and spirit of all true knowledge is knowledge of God, and its essence and basis is a belief in God.8 But what is the significance of this mental perspective which is taken as the foundation of letteral meaning? First of all, the idea of a creator and an idea of meaningful creation are necessary for the perspective of letteral meaning. For that is what this approach represents and signifies – a creator who creates meaningfully for a purpose. Second, we now try to understand that purpose which can only be known through revelation, but as such it must be explained with the same method of metaphorical interpretation. Nursi sets the scene by first explaining his purpose, which is to bring home an authentic understanding of this world, man’s place within the world, and the “nature and value of religion for man, and how the world is a prison if there is no True Religion, and that without religion man becomes the most miserable of creatures.” This way, as he develops the proper state of mind, he wishes to deliver the human spirit from the darkness.9 In this allegorical story, which is also told by Tolstoy and related by some other Eastern religions in other versions, two brothers are going on a long journey. They travel together until they reach a crossroads. As they do not know which way to go, they seek help and find someone there. They asked him which way to go, and he said, “On the road to the right one is compelled to comply with law and order, but within that hardship is security and happiness. However, on the left-hand road there is freedom and no restraint, but within its freedom lie danger and wretchedness. Now, the choice is yours!” As there are in such stories two persons, one good and the other evil, in this metaphor also the brother with a good character

xxiv  Foreword decided to go on the road which is law and order. “The other brother, who was immoral and a layabout, chose the road to the left just for the lack of restrictions. With our imaginations, we shall follow this man in his situation, which was apparently easy but in reality burdensome.”10 Here we find a significant indicator to the tasawwuf (Islamic mysticism) epistemology: the central faculty to capture the meaning of metaphorical hermeneutics is “imagination.” But in this signification, imagination performs three epistemological functions. I tried to explain this in another study comparing al-Ghazali’s (d. 1111) notion of imagination with that of Kant’s (d. 1804). The important point here is that imagination fulfils three important epistemological functions, two of which are acknowledged by Kant but the third is missing: The first is the imagination as spontaneity, whose function is to represent “in intuition an object that is not itself present”, which is called by Ghazali “tasawwur” and by Kant “productive imagination”. The second is to reproduce images with the aid of experience, is called by Ghazali “takhayyul” and by Kant “reproductive imagination”. The third that is not recognized by Kant is what can be called “tamaththul” which is the function of imagination that transcends the limitations of other faculties of knowledge by spiritual ascent. This is sometimes called “creative imagination”.11 This is, in fact, the major difference not only between Kant and Ghazali but also between Islamic and Western epistemologies.12 We should realize that Nursi is applying the third function in this story and realities perceived through tamaththul which can be expressed in English as “a spiritual embodiment.” This makes it possible to interpret the metaphors in the story. We can see this at the end of this story, which continues in the following manner. As he continues the journey, he reaches a desolate wilderness where he suddenly hears a terrifying sound. When he looks back, he realizes that it is a ferocious lion chasing him. Naturally, he runs as fast as he can trying to see where he can take refuge, and he finds a well which is about 60 yards deep and no water inside. As he has no other choice, in order to escape from the lion he decides to jump into the well. As he falls, his hands touched a tree and he grabbed it. He then started to look around and noticed that the tree is growing out of the wall of the well. But then there were two rats gnawing through the roots of the tree. He tried to analyze his situation, which was quite grim: on top of the well he saw the lion and the tree being gradually eaten up, and in the bottom of the well he saw a frightening dragon, which raised his head and tried to reach him, moving closer and closer. His mouth looked like a big cave entrance. Nowhere could he see something comforting him, because now he noticed that on the walls of the well and he is surrounded by stinging, poisonous insects and vermin. Then as he looked up at the mouth of the well, he saw

Foreword xxv a huge fig tree. “But it was not an ordinary tree; it bore the fruit of many different trees, from walnuts to pomegranates.”13 All this was in fact a set of allegories for the person to apprehend the reality behind them, because this person is looking at all these events from the literal perspective and thus realizing only their literal meaning (mana-i ismî). But this brother with an ill character, “due to his lack of thought and foolishness did not understand that this was not just some ordinary matter, these things were not here by chance, and that there were mysterious secrets concealed in these strange beings. And he did not grasp that there was someone very powerful directing them.”14 Now, in such a dire condition, although this man’s heart, spirit, and mind were secretly weeping and wailing at this grievous situation, his carnal soul pretended that it was nothing; “it closed its ears to the weeping of his heart and spirit, and deceiving itself, started to eat the tree’s fruit as though it was in a garden. But some of the fruit were poisonous and harmful.”15 Because this man’s faculties were closed to go beyond what he saw, and because of his foolishness and lack of proper understanding, he thought all that he saw were just ordinary events; he was unable to go beyond them to see the actual truth. He falls into such a situation that, he thinks, if he dies he may be saved from this situation, but he doesn’t. “He is in such torment.”16 Let us see now what happens to the other brother with a good character. He also went through the same troubles, but due to his understanding and good thinking, he “imagined good things.”17 He realized that everything he saw was friendly and familiar to him. Therefore, “he did not suffer any difficulty and hardship like his brother, for he knew the order and followed it.”18 He also, like his brother, went into a desert and lived exactly the same events, the lion, the well, and the tree inside the well, the dragon and so on. He is also frightened but not as much as his brother because of his good thoughts and positive attitude. For he understood that the desert could not have been without a ruler, and it is perhaps the case that the lion serves that ruler and all these events are taking place under his control. So, because of this, he thought that these bizarre happenings were taking place under the control of someone, because they could not have been just a coincidence. He then begins to think in the following manner: In that case, I am not alone in this great land of turmoil, and therefore, these events must contain a talisman. If all these things take place with the command of a hidden ruler, then it may be the case that he is watching me and he is testing me so that “he is impelling me somewhere for some purpose, and inviting me there.”19 Then as a result of “this pleasant fear and these agreeable thoughts,”20 he becomes curious to find who is testing him and what his purpose is for sending him on this strange road. He definitely understood that there is a ruler who wants to be known through these events. Then, love for the owner of the talisman arose out of the desire to know him, and from that love arose the desire to solve the talisman. And from

xxvi  Foreword that desire arose the will to acquire good qualities which would please and gratify the talisman’s owner. Then he looked at the tree and saw it was a fig-tree, but it was bearing the fruits of thousands of trees. So then all his fear left him, for he understood that for certain the fig-tree was a list, an index, an exhibition. The hidden ruler must have attached samples of the fruits in the garden to the tree through a miracle and with a talisman and must have adorned the tree in a way that would point to each of the foods he had prepared for his guests. For there is no other way, a single tree could produce the fruits of thousands of different trees. Then he began to entreat that he would be inspired with the key to the talisman. He called out: “O ruler of this place! I have happened upon you and I take refuge with you. I am your servant and I want to please you. I am searching for you.” After he made this supplication, the dragon’s mouth was transformed into a door; indeed, it was just a door, but because of heedlessness he did not take notice of it and in his imagination, it appeared to him as the mouth of a dragon. He then walked slowly into the door and noticed that both the lion and the dragon took on the forms of two servants; they invited him to enter into a wonderful, pleasant, quiet garden. The lion even became a submissive horse for him. Now, what is the interpretation of this metaphorical story? Some of the allegories are clear in their references; we may thus omit these. Now, the good-hearted brother is the righteous one who looks at things with the perspective of letteral meaning and is thus able to interpret the events in the authentic sense. Whereas the other brother is the one who looks at those things and events as reality in themselves, because he sees them from the perspective of literal meaning. Therefore, he is unable to interpret those events in the true sense. The roads represent our choice in this world; one is the road of belief and religion which prescribes certain rules and regulations; the other is the choice of unbelief which appears to be the way of freedom, but indeed is the way of misery. Now this person sees things from a perspective of the literary meaning. We may then continue to interpret the rest of the story: the desert represents this world; the lion is death which constantly follows us in this life. The well is the allegory for our life which is usually around 60 years or so, and that is why it is represented as 60 yards in depth. The white and black animals represent day and night, which, as they pass by, our life is diminished. The dragon represents the road to our life after death; if we see this metaphor, we should realize that its mouth refers to the grave which is the gate to another life but as it seems dreadful, it is likened to a dragon. Hence, he points out, But for the believer, that mouth is a door opening from prison onto a garden. As for the poisonous vermin, they are the calamities of this

Foreword xxvii world. But for the believer they are like gentle Divine warnings and favors of the Most Merciful One to prevent him slipping off into the sleep of heedlessness. The fruits on the tree are the bounties of this world which God has made in the form of a list of the bounties of the hereafter. And the tree producing numerous different fruits despite being a single tree indicates the seal of God’s power. For . . . to make one thing everything, and everything one thing is a sign, a mark, peculiar to the Creator of all things . . . The savage lion turning into a friendly servant and a submissive mount is a sign that, although for the people of misguidance, death is a bitter, eternal parting from all their loved ones, and the expulsion from the deceptive paradise of this world and the entry in desolation and loneliness into the dungeon of the grave, for the people of guidance it is the means of joining all their old friends and beloved ones who have already departed for the next world, and the means of entering their true homeland and abode of everlasting happiness. It is an invitation to the meadows of Paradise from the prison of this world, and . . . a discharge from the hardship of the duties of life. We can find many indications of the meaning of life and death in this metaphorical story. Nursi develops these themes in his works not only in this metaphorical interpretation but also in deductive manners tries to explain how life and reality in this world should be perceived. The correct vision will lead us to the correct perception and perspective, which will assist us to develop a kind of a character that looks at things not just in themselves but as symbols of a reality beyond. Since science studies reality in this world, it is extremely important for the scientist to develop an authentic perspective so that this reality is not misrepresented in scientific knowledge. Nursi urges scientists to notice that no matter how much they learn and discover as scientific truth, if that truth is not put into the proper perspective, it may lead others into a false idea. Moreover, the fact that there is at the end an inevitable departure waiting for us, we should be prepared for that and live a kind of life which also prepares us for this end. In conclusion, I will candidly state first of all that any scientist can suitably adopt this scientific frame in her/his studies by simply omitting the Islamic background, which we tried to reduce as much as we could without totally neglecting it. This background is used here only as an example for the foundation of a letteral approach. This means that there is a minimum conceptual framework that must be built as a foundation upon which the letteral meaning as a perspective can be established. These are given above as four fundamental concepts: existence and oneness of a creator; in order to know the creator there is a need for teachers who receive knowledge from the creator; the concept of responsibility based on belief in the hereafter; and finally the sense of justice so that one does not commit injustice to another. Nursi states that if there is injustice in this world, there must be a final, just

xxviii  Foreword judgment in the other world. By following the character of the good brother in the metaphorical story above, we may be guided through our most significant venture in understanding the universe and meaning of life. Istanbul, January 27, 2019 Prof. Alparslan Acikgenc A Member of Turkish Science Academy Author of Islamic Scientific Tradition in History (2017)

Notes 1 Alparslan Acikgenc, Islamic scientific tradition in history (Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit IKIM, 2014), especially Introduction and Chapter I. 2 Let it be known that in classical Arabic works by linguists on grammar, “word” is defined as “a saying which is appointed to a specific meaning.” Then, words are divided into three: noun (ism), verb (fi’l), and letter (harf). On this basis, they argue that when a word does not signify a meaning by itself it is called “harf.” The definition of noun is also interesting: a word which has a meaning by itself in reference to none of the three times (past, present, and future) is called “noun.” This tells us exactly what a verb is. See for example, Abû ‘Amr Jamâluddîn ‘Uthmân ibn ‘Umar ibn Abî Bakr ibn Yûnus, known as Ibn al-Hâjib (d. 1249), alKafiyah in Kitâb al-Nahw (Istanbul: Al-Matba’at al-Mahmudiyyah, n.d.), p. 1. Now, the definition of “letter” as a word indicates that what is meant here is not the letters of the alphabet, but rather particles such as “the” (“al” in Arabic) or the indefinite article “a” (in Arabic all the articles are called “hurûf al-jarr”) because these words are written independently like a word but by themselves have no meaning. Therefore, what is meant here by Nursi actually refers to this classification; however, it is easier to provide an explanation if we take the word harf as we commonly understand it from the letters of the alphabet, as we preferred above. 3 For a detailed exposition of worldview, see Islamic scientific tradition, cited above, pp. 49–58. 4 Arabic abbreviation for the honorific prayer “peace be upon him.” 5 Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, Ishârât al-I’jâz fî Mazânn al-Îjâz (Indications of miracles where conciseness are found) (Ankara: Türkiye Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı Yayınları, 2014), pp.  30–31. Translation from the original Arabic is by the author. 6 Qur’an translation is adopted from Abdullah Yusuf Ali, The holy Qur’an: Text, translation and commentary (Brentwood, MD: Amana Corporation, 1983), pp. 1129–1130. 7 Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, Mesnevi-i Nûriye (Istanbul: Söz Basım Yayın, 2006), p. 280 [10th Risâle, 22nd I’lam]. Translation from the Turkish version by the author. 8 The Words, “Twenty Third Word,” First Chapter, Fourth Point, translation by Şükran Vahide. Retrieved January  17, 2019, from http://erisale.com/index. jsp?locale=en#content.en.201.324. 9 This metaphorical interpretation is given in The Words, Ibid, “The Eighth Word.” It is also retrieved from this website. http://erisale.com/index.jsp?locale= en#content.en.201.45. 10 Ibid. 11 For a detailed exposition, see Henry Corbin, Creative imagination in the Sûfism of Ibn ‘Arabî (Ralph Manheim, trans., Princeton: Bollingen Series, 1981).

Foreword xxix 12 Kant  & Ghazali, On human nature: A  comparative philosophy of man. In Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud and Muhammad Zainiy Uthman (Eds.), Knowledge, language, thought and the civilization of Islam: Essays in honor of Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas (Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit UTM, 2010), p.  172. See I. Kant’s, Critiques of pure reason (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 152–165. 13 The Words, 8th Word. 14 The Words, 8th Word. 15 The Words, 8th Word. 16 The Words, 8th Word. 17 This is a quotation italicized by me to indicate the usage of the concept of “imagination.” 18 Ibid 19 Ibid 20 Ibid

1 Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts on secular ideology and modern science

1. Introduction Said Nursi (1877–1960) certainly deserves great respect, with an entire life dedicated to serving his fellow human beings. He gave up many worldly opportunities and comfort for the sake of helping humanity in modern times. Said Nursi was born in 1877 in the village of Nurs in Eastern Turkey. He foresaw the upcoming malaise of modern and post-modern society. After initially attempting to save Turkey (then the Ottoman Empire) through active political engagement, he realized that politics was not going to help counter the sweeping effect of secularization at the global level.1 More importantly, he recognized that the core problem of modern human beings was not ignorance, but knowledge. Modern minds were being transformed through a Western, secular worldview. Science, technology, and free-market capitalism were being utilized to secularize human minds. Nursi acknowledged that even he was not safe against such a powerful secularization wave, although his entire life was dedicated to Islamic causes. Rather than surrendering to the global wave of secularization, Nursi chose to commit his life to the struggle against secular ideology and secularized life.2 In the early years of his life, Nursi was fascinated with scientific knowledge. He committed at least 90 books to memory along with extensive deliberation and study in a bid to understand the modern sciences, philosophy, and religion. At the time, Nursi considered this newfound source of knowledge as the means for intellectual awakening: Tahir Pasha, the Governor of Van, assigned me a room in the upper story of his residence. I used to stay there. Every night when I retired to my room I would recite for three hours the ninety books, of the Realities (haqâiq), I had memorized. It used to take three months to get through all of them.3 Unlike most Muslim scholars of his time, Nursi was intensely involved in science and philosophy in addition to Islamic teaching. He considered science a stairway to the knowledge of God, assuming that it was an objective

2  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts study of God’s works. However, it took some time for him to realize that scientific knowledge was not pure. Rather, he found it contained the secular trio of apparent causes, nature, and chance. What he once considered a means for a better understanding of God became an obstacle to his spiritual progress. That is when he changed his attitude toward secular science and philosophy. Rather than completely rejecting science, Nursi decided to first filter out secular ideology from scientific knowledge and then use the desecularized scientific knowledge as a means to get to know God (ma’rifatullah). For him, pure science was an ideal way to reveal the Divine signs (pl. ayaat) in the book of the universe. By removing secular ideology from science, Nursi could now read those signs. He showed how each scientific discipline links to a particular Divine Name. His entire life and work was dedicated to this endeavor. Indeed, he considered this project one of the three duties expected from the Mahdi (the Islamic version of Messiah). In his words, the primary task of the Mahdi is “to help people to save their faith by first and foremost silencing (atheist) philosophy and materialist ideology which spreads a plague-like disease of materialism and naturalism through (secular) science and philosophy” (Nursi, 2012b, p. 337).4 He thought of himself as a physician dealing with a fatal disease: “I am prescribing a medicine integrating experiential knowledge with scientific knowledge” (Nursi, 2012d, p. 445). Indeed, since the Enlightenment, materialism has become the dominant scientific ideology. Reality has been reduced to matter with no meaning. However, as argued by Taylor, “materialism itself is an ontological thesis: everything which is based on ‘matter,’ whatever that means. But the argument here is ultimately epistemological, in that the ontological thesis appeals to the successes of science” (Taylor, 2007, Chapter 15).5 The driving force for scientific learning is not the truth. It is power and pleasure. The overarching goal is to gain control over matter and manipulate it for greater pleasure. This completely eliminates any sacred meaning from matter. It removes God from a scientific understanding of the universe and then replaces Him with material causes, nature, and chance. It formats the mind with a secular worldview, which leads to secular aspirations and secularization of life. In this chapter, we will outline Nursi’s lifelong struggle with secular ideology and secularization of life. We will first discuss why many of Nursi’s followers do not consider his work within the Islamization of knowledge. Second, we will define Nursi’s concepts of mânâ-i ismî and mânâ-i harfî. Third, we will provide examples of reading the book of the universe in mânâ-i harfî. Fourth, we will discuss verses from the Qur’an that are relevant to the mânâ-i harfî approach. Fifth, we will show how the knowledge of the universe differs in mânâ-i ismî. Sixth, we will explore the relationship between the dominant worldview and secular science. Seventh, we will discuss the role of secular knowledge in the secularization of life in modern

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 3 times. Finally, we will compare satisfaction through secular aspirations and spirituality.

2. Secular ideology and scientific knowledge An overview of the secularization problem Secular comes from the Latin word “saeculum,” meaning a century or age. In his masterpiece, A Secular Age, Charles Taylor (2007) provides in-depth analysis of secularization. He defines secular as aiming to live the life of ordinary time rather than aiming for eternity. In other words, being secular is being worldly and seeking satisfaction in this world. Taylor puts secularization in three forms: (1) secularization of public spaces in which we see the diminishing impact of God in social and political arenas, (2) secularization of people in terms of declining belief in God and practice; and (3) secularization of religious people in terms of pursuing fulfillment in this world. In Taylor’s terms, “secularity is a condition in which our experience of and search for fulness occurs; this is something we all share, believers and unbelievers alike. . . . Modernity brings about secularity, in all its three forms” (Taylor, 2007, Introduction). Secularization changes the way we perceive the world. According to Taylor, for centuries, the West perceived the world within the prism of an ordered Aristotelian Cosmos of Aquinas. To secular minds, the world is “no longer a matter of admiring, normative order, in which God has revealed himself through sings and symbols” (Taylor, 2007, Chapter  2). Thus, the purpose is not to derive any meaning while studying the world. Rather, it is to bring the world under “the instrumental control of reason” (Taylor, 2007, Chapter 2). It is to disconnect any experienced phenomena from transcendent sources and consider them “purely natural.” It is a purification of nature from any sacred or transcendent meaning. Thus, we end up with “the natural order, the universe, purged of enchantment, and freed from miraculous interventions and special providences from God, operating by universal, unrespondent causal laws” (Taylor, 2007, Chapter 7). Science becomes a new religion dominating the mind and life of people.6 It is not “just one road to truth, but becomes the paradigm of all roads” (Taylor, 2007, Chapter 14). Indeed, as people believe in science, they give up on God. “The modern sciences, mainly physics and biology, have weakened belief in God by assuming that the universe can be explained by a collection of laws that can be expressed in logical and mathematic forms” (Altaie, 2016, p. 32). The increasing percentage of educated people who define themselves as atheist or agnostic is clear evidence that modern science destroys faith in God. Indeed, in some European countries, nearly half of people have no belief in God.

4  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts Nasr is a leading scholar who studies the secularization of the Muslim mind. He argues that secular ideology was systematically injected into the Muslim world from the 13th century to the 19th century onward: nowhere is the intrusion of secularism into the Islamic world is more evident than in the field of education . . . this is especially true not so much because of the subject matter taught but because of the point of view from which the subjects are taught. The medieval Muslim schools also taught mathematics, the natural sciences, languages, and letters, besides theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. However, the modern subjects bearing the same name are not simply the continuation of the Islamic sciences. (Nasr, 1981, pp. 12–13) Nasr describes the Islamic scientific approach as follows: The Islamic sciences breathed in a Universe in which God was everywhere. They were based upon certainty and searched after the principle of Unity in things which is reached through synthesis and integration. The modern sciences, on the contrary, live in a world in which God is nowhere or, even if there, is irrelevant to the science. They are based on doubt. Having once and for all turned their back on the unifying principles of things, they seek to analyze and divide the contents of Nature to an ever greater degree, moving towards multiplicity and away from Unity. (Nasr, 1981, p. 13) Al-Attas seems to agree with Taylor and Nasr that secularization goes far beyond politics and public domain. He defines three dimensions of secularization as “the disenchantment of nature, the desacralization of politics, and the deconsecration of values.” He defines the first type as “freeing of nature from its religious overtones;  .  .  . the dispelling of animistic spirits and gods and magic from the natural world, separating it from God and distinguishing man from it, so that man no longer regard nature as a divine entity, which thus allows him to act freely upon nature, to make use of it according to his needs and plans, and hence create historical change and development. (Al-Attas, 1993, p. 18) In other words, secularization means depriving any transcendent meaning from the scientific studies of cosmic phenomena. The secular scientific approach is a problem because, from the Islamic point of view, we should read the book of the universe to learn about its Author and live accordingly:

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 5 If nature is like a great, open Book, then we must learn the meaning of the Words in order to discern their tentative and final purposes and enact their bidding and invitations and instructions to beneficial use in such wise that we might come to know and acknowledge in grateful appreciation the overwhelming generosity and wisdom of incomparable Author. (Al-Attas, 1993, p. 39) The secular scientific approach7 aims to distance a person from “the God of the universe so that he might act freely upon the nature confronting him” (Al-Attas, 1993, p. 36). Al-Attas argues that the corruption of the Muslim mind through secular knowledge is the core problem, not corrupt political leadership. If we ask ourselves what is it that is corrupt about their leadership we will recognize at once that it is their knowledge that is corrupt which renders their leadership corrupt. Corrupt leadership is the effect and not the cause; it is the effect of confusion and error in knowledge of Islam and its worldview. (Al-Attas, 1993, p. 114) Al-Attas vigorously fights against secularization of knowledge and values, because he thinks it is detrimental to the Islamic worldview: “not only is secularization as a whole the expression of an utterly unislamic worldview, it is also set against Islam, and Islam totally rejects the explicit as well as implicit manifestation and ultimate significance of secularization” (Al-Attas, 1993, p. 41). He makes compelling arguments that believers are not supposed to forget the hereafter for the sake of this world (dunya). He refers to the verses on worldly life (al-hayatul al-dunya) as the equivalent of secular. He defines Islamization of knowledge as the liberation from the secular worldview and language. Nasr and Al-Attas elegantly and accurately diagnose the malaise of modern society with its major symptoms. They also portray a great picture of a healthy civilization. They have not succeeded in freeing the Muslim minds from secular ideology. Nursi did come up with a similar diagnosis long before Nasr and Al-Attas.8 However, he believed that Sufism is not a viable option in modern times. Instead, he offered a Tawhīdī worldview based on the mânâ-i harfî through the proper use of the self. Nursi’s view of the secularization problem Nursi would agree with all three scholars discussed earlier regarding the secularization of mind and life coming through modern science and technology. “For sure,” he said, “at the end of time, mankind will pour into science and technology. It will obtain all its power from science. Power and

6  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts dominion will pass to the hand of science” (Nursi, 2012g, p.  275). Even though Nursi initially embraced science with great enthusiasm, it did not take long for him to reject the embedded secular ideology. Then, he dedicated his life to fighting against this ideology.9 Although it is clear that Nursi considered secular ideology the greatest enemy of humanity, his followers and some scholars10 miss this point because of four reasons. First, Nursi has always emphasized that “Our enemies are ignorance, poverty, and conflict. We shall fight against these three enemies with the weapons of knowledge, technology, and unity respectively” (Nursi, 2012d, p. 387). Thus, it seems that he believed that the greatest enemy was ignorance, not knowledge. However, it is important to note that Nursi made the above statement to the Kurdish community, whose main problem was, indeed, ignorance. However, for the educated in modern times, that is not the main problem. In several places, Nursi explicitly mentions secular knowledge as the greatest danger to believers. “The greatest danger facing the people of Islam at this time is their hearts being corrupted, and belief harmed through the misguidance that arises from science and philosophy” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 144). Indeed, he saw secular scientific knowledge and life as a systematic Western project conquering the minds and hearts of Muslims: When I went to Ankara in 1922, the morale of the people of belief was extremely high as a result of the victory of the army of Islam over the Greeks. But I saw that an abominable current of atheism was treacherously trying to subvert, poison and destroy their minds. “O, God!” I said, “this monster is going to harm the fundamentals of belief.” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 233) Notice that Nursi was not applauding military victory. He was convinced that the ultimate victory lay in the intellectual battle. He believed that even though the Muslim army was able to win a victory against the invading forces, they were in danger of losing the intellectual one, which came through modern, secular science. Nursi clearly states that increasing disbelief in modern times mostly comes from science and philosophy, not from ignorance. In former times, compared with the present there was very little absolute disbelief, or misguidance arising from science, or the disbelief arising from stubborn wrong-headedness. The instruction of the Islamic scholars in those times and their respective arguments were therefore sufficient for the general population, quickly dispelling any unbelief arising from doubts. Belief in God was widespread, and the scholars could persuade most people to give up their misguidance and wrongdoing through teaching them about God and reminding them of Hell-fire. But now, there may be a hundred absolute disbelievers in one small

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 7 town instead of perhaps one in an entire country. Those who lose their way due to science and learning and stubbornly oppose the truths of belief have increased a hundredfold in relation to former times. With pride like that of the Pharaoh and their terrible misguidance, these willful deniers oppose the truths of belief. (Nursi, 1996d, p. 643)11 Even though Nursi does not use the term “secular science,” it is very clear that he considers secular ideology within science as the root cause of the problem. In this book, we use “secular science”12 to represent scientific knowledge with the misguided secular ideology referred to above. It is clear that Nursi was at war with such ideology. Nursi considered that the only way to win this intellectual war was to use the power of truth. “A sacred truth is therefore much needed that will completely destroy the bases of their disbelief in this world, like an atom bomb, and will halt their aggression and bring some of them to belief” (Nursi, 1996d, p. 643). It is important to note that while everyone considered the atomic bomb a weapon of ultimate victory, Nursi considered truth (verified knowledge) as the atomic bomb that would defeat the enemy. This analogy clearly reflects Nursi’s preferred method of winning the war against secularism. It indicates that he perceived the intellectual battle as the key to victory, not political or military ones. The second reason why most Nursi scholars do not recognize Nursi’s view of secular knowledge as the greatest enemy is evident through the following story reported in Nursi’s writing: In Kastamonu a group of high-school students came to me, saying: “Tell us about our Creator, our teachers do not speak of God.” I  said to them: “All the sciences you study continuously speak of God and make known the Creator, each with its own particular tongue. Do not listen to your teachers; listen to them.” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 226) Nursi readers mostly consider this statement as support for science. They think science speaks of God even if teachers do not. Thus, they think that the problem lies with the way teachers convey scientific knowledge. What they miss is the fact that teachers simply convey modern, secular, scientific knowledge. If Nursi was saying “do not listen” to your secular teachers, how would he support listening to secular science? In reality, neither secular science nor secular teachers speak of God. Thus, Nursi has a problem with both. He was not saying that science written in secular language speaks of God. Rather, he was saying science “in its own particular tongue” (science written in the language of the mânâ-i harfî) speaks of God. Thus, it is unfair to Nursi to claim that he had no problem with the contemporary understanding of science.

8  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts The third reason behind the failure of some Nursi scholars to understand the danger coming from secular science lies in the portrayal of the early life of Nursi. In his early life, Nursi memorized around 90 reference books, which included many books on science, logic, philosophy, and theology. He used to recite those books by heart every three months. This fact may be one of the reasons why Nursi’s followers have a positive attitude towards secular science. However, Nursi later acknowledged his mistake in his former preoccupation with the science and philosophy of the time and explicitly pointed to the danger of secular ideology. He said that until his return from captivity in Russia, he thought of science and philosophy as a means for a better understanding of God: up to that time I  had filled my mind with the sciences of philosophy as well as the Islamic sciences, and quite in error had imagined those philosophical sciences to be the source of progress and means of illumination. However, those philosophical matters had contaminated my spirit and been an obstacle to my spiritual development. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 304) Nursi also acknowledged that he once thought of the scientific approach as the best way to defend the truth of Islam. However, he later realized that it was a mistake to seek help from secular knowledge to support the Divine truths: The Old Said and certain thinkers in part accepted the principles of human and European philosophy, and contested them with their own weapons; they accepted them to a degree. They submitted unshakably to some of their principles in the form of the physical sciences, and therefore could not demonstrate the true worth of Islam. It was quite simply as though they were grafting Islam with the branches of philosophy, the roots of which they supposed to be very deep; as though strengthening it. But since this method produced few victories and it reduced Islam’s worth to a degree, I  gave it up, and I  showed in fact that Islam’s principles are so profound that the deepest principles of philosophy cannot reach them; indeed, they remain superficial beside them. The Thirtieth Word, Twenty-Fourth Letter, and Twenty-Ninth Word have demonstrated this truth with proofs. In the former way, philosophy was supposed to be profound and the matters of Islam, external; it was supposed that by binding it with the branches of philosophy, Islam would be preserved and made to endure. As if the principles of philosophy could in any way reach the matters of Islam! (Nursi, 1996c, pp. 505–506) In other words, Nursi preferred a purely Qur’anic worldview to a Western, secular worldview in his quest to understand reality and support Qur’anic truth.

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 9 The fourth reason behind the fallacy among Nursi scholars regarding the people’s greatest enemy comes from some scientific examples mentioned in the writings of Nursi. It seems that Nursi was just referring to scientific knowledge to support his arguments. In reality, Nursi’s use of scientific examples is quite different. For example, after Nursi heard a Sufi person claiming that “Nursi speaks of the sun and moon no different than that of science and astronomy,” he invited that person to explain to him the difference, read the relevant part, and explained how it was completely different from the secular, scientific approach (Nursi, 2012e, p. 286). Indeed, Nursi provides a unique way that integrates science and revelation through the mânâ-i harfî approach, unlike the common approach of inserting religious texts into secular scientific knowledge. Secular science talks about the sun and other celestial systems and objects as if they are the product of certain physical laws, nature, and chance. It leaves no room for God. Indeed, you could explain everything about them without invoking God at all. It is like covering the news about Juno13 without mentioning the role of NASA scientists and engineers. It is ascribing the entire process of building and sending Juno to space to its material components and properties and their interaction within certain natural laws. Thus, inserting God into such a narration will not make a big difference. It just creates confusion. In Nursi’s view, it is much more difficult to fight misguidance associated with secular knowledge than with what comes from ignorance, because educated people have rigid belief systems. You know that if misguidance arises from ignorance, it is easy to dispel. Whereas if it results from science and learning, it is difficult to eliminate. In former times, only one person in a thousand was in the latter category, and only one in a thousand such people would be reformed through guidance. For such people fancy themselves. They do not know, but they think they do know. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 39) Nursi gives the utmost importance to setting a right worldview from an early age. Even in Muslim countries, he argues that after minds have been shaped by a secular worldview through secular education, the acceptance of the true Qur’anic message by a Muslim child could be as difficult as the acceptance of Islam for non-Muslims: That is because if a child does not receive strong Tawhīdī education at an early age, it would be hard and challenging for him to embrace principles of faith and Islam. It would be alien and difficult as embracing Islam by non-Muslims. Particularly, if his parents are not religious and he only receives secular scientific education, it would be much difficult. (Nursi, 2012b, pp. 66–67)

10  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts In short, although Nursi does not use the term “secular” in regard to philosophical secularism, he uses several other words with similar meanings. He defines his struggle as the one against “ideology of unbelief” (fikr-i küfri), “corrupted movements” (ifsad komiteleri), “materialist/atheist philosophy” (dinsiz felsefe), and “mânâ-i ismî” as umbrella words referring to the secular worldview that is widespread in our era. For this reason, we think it is fair to categorize his efforts as a struggle against the secularization of knowledge and life. Indeed, a careful study of Nursi’s life and writings would clearly reveal that his lifelong project was to filter secular ideology from scientific knowledge and read the book of the universe through the “mânâ-i harfî” approach. Thus, he should be considered as a pioneering scholar of Islamization of knowledge, although he follows a significantly different approach from S. M. Naquib al-Attas14 and Ismail al-Faruqi.15

3. Defining mânâ-i harfî and mânâ-i ismî languages Four words learned in 40 years Nursi explicitly states, during the 40 years of my life and 30 years of study, I have learned four phrases and four sentences. The phrases are: 1) the mânâ-i harfî (being, like a letter, pointing to God rather than to itself); 2) the mânâ-i ismî (beings are disconnected from God. They indicate none other than their own existence); 3) niyyah (intention); and 4) nazaar (viewpoint). (Nursi, 2012f, p. 67) The “mânâ-i ismî” and “mânâ-i harfî” could be considered “ontic languages” through which we read/comprehend beings. Literally speaking, mânâ-i ismî means “self-referential” while mânâ-i harfî means “other-­ indicative.”16 According to Nursi, every being is a sign pointing to something else other than its own self. For instance, when we see a stop sign, we know that the sign refers to a traffic rule. Therefore, we read the meaning indicated through the sign rather than the sign itself. Similarly, once we learn the mânâ-i harfî, we should be able to read the referred meaning through the beings we encounter as we reflect on them. We can reduce the four phrases above to three by combining viewpoint (nazaar) with “mânâ-i harfî” and “mânâ-i ismî.” Thus, a person can look at everything in life through either a mânâ-i harfî viewpoint or a mânâ-i ismî viewpoint with a certain intention (niyaah). In reality, these phrases summarize Nursi’s entire life’s struggle against secular knowledge and secularized life. One can argue that it took half of his life for Nursi to come to this realization. After that, Nursi spent the rest of his life teaching and practicing these four issues.

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 11 According to Nursi, even though everything in the universe has a certain meaning, secular scientists miss  the truth altogether, because they do not know the true language of the book of the universe. Indeed, they only know the secular language, which Nursi refers to as the reading of the universe through the mânâ-i ismî with the self-referential method. Therefore, secular scientists do not understand the true meaning of what they study. In a selfindicative reading of the universe, every being is seen as it is in itself, devoid of any other reference embedded in its reality; no sign in the universe is deciphered as referring to a Maker (creator). On the other hand, the mânâ-i harfî with the other-indicative lettering is the language of the universe through which we can read the universe and see every being therein as an independent being. Such independent beings are then seen as symbols or signs referring to their creator and Artful Maker. Using this description, the other-indicative lettering can be called a “cosmic language.” Just as a letter has no meaning by itself, when combined with other letters it reflects a meaning that does not refer to itself, but a phenomenon within the cosmos. According to Nursi, the mânâ-i ismî approach ascribes the very existence of beings to a trio of material causes, natural laws, and chance. The mânâ-i ismî approach considers this trio as the source of all observed phenomena.17 The mânâ-i harfî approach reads the beings in the name of God. To adopt this approach means to consider the observed phenomena as the creative works of God. Transcendental self or “I”: one letter for two languages Though mânâ-i harfî and mânâ-i ismî are very different ontic languages, they both consist of the same letter, “I,” the transcendental self. Nursi wrote a treatise on this subject. We will discuss it in detail. In Nursi’s understanding, the transcendental self is the key to human experience and understanding of the phenomenal world and beyond. The term overlaps to a great extent with the transcendental ego used in the Husserlian phenomenology to refer to the unifying element of human experience.18 For Husserl, our perceived world is nothing but being constituted by the transcendental ego’s intentional acts (Husserl, 2012, p. xl). The transcendental ego is the “sense-giving consciousness” which perceives reality in terms of its meaning. Thus, for Husserl, “all real unities are ‘unities of meaning’ ” (Husserl, 2012, p.  108). Absurdity arises when we fail to notice “the whole being of the world consists of a certain “meaning” (Husserl, 2012, p. 108). For Nursi, the transcendental self is the key to read the disclosed meaning in life and beings. Nursi considers intention (niyyah) as a prerequisite for reading the meaning of the beings through the mânâ-i harfî approach based on the proper use of transcendental self. Again, in phenomenology, the concept of intentionality is perhaps a good match for niyyah in Nursi’s writings. Phenomenologists

12  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts argue that we have an infinite amount of potential factors to direct our consciousness to. We cannot handle everything all at once given our physical limitations. Therefore, we direct our consciousness towards whatever we intend to know. Interestingly, once we set our intention, we do not have to consciously ignore others. We can do that subconsciously. For instance, the famous “invisible gorilla” experiment revealed that when people were asked to focus on one object, they failed to see other seemingly obvious things. In an experimental study conducted at Harvard University, people were shown a short video in which six people – three in white shirts and three in black shirts – pass basketballs around. The participants were asked to count the number of passes made by the people in white shirts. During the game, at some point, a person wearing a full gorilla suit walked among the players, faced the camera, thumped its chest and left after nine seconds. Surprisingly, half of the people who watched the video and counted the passes failed to notice the gorilla. The repeated experiments confirmed the results. This experiment shows that we see what we intend to see. Intention becomes a prerequisite for perception. Thus, those who do not want to believe in God and His actions in the universe would not be able to read the meanings of the phenomena in His name. Perhaps, for a reason mentioned above, Nursi describes his four key concepts in the following sequence: mânâ-i harfî, mânâ-i ismî, niyyah, and nazaar. The mânâ-i harfî is the default one: if one follows his given nature (fitrah) through using the transcendental self (anah) properly, one should conclude that there must be an agent behind the workings of the universe. The mânâ-i ismî comes second because that is what we are given by culture and education. Thus, if we follow the given nature or realize the mistake in the mânâ-i ismî approach, we will see that the proper way to explore the universe is through the mânâ-i harfî approach. At this point, free will comes into the picture. If we have an intention (niyyah) to read and learn the meaning, we will wear the lens (nazaar) with the mânâ-i harfî approach and explore the meaning. Intention is a key to set the telos for our life. It is the key determinant of our ultimate objective in our life’s journey. As we read the universe, we will make choices not for the sake of our carnal desires, but for the sake of God. We will pursue pleasure through God’s pleasure by living a virtuous life. That is why Nursi calls the purity of intention (ikhlas), in the form of seeking God’s pleasure alone, the epitome of good deeds. Nursi considers the mânâ-i ismî and the mânâ-i harfî perspectives embedded with their corresponding intention as the key determining factors of two distinct worldviews. With those phrases, Nursi both decodes the secular worldview and offers an alternative one  – the Tawhīdī worldview.19 The secular worldview consists of the mânâ-i ismî perspective and secular aspiration (niyyah) for worldly pleasure. On the other hand, the Tawhīdī worldview consists of the mânâ-i harfî perspective and transcendent aspiration (ikhlas) to gain God’s pleasure. Through those worldviews, one can perceive

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 13 and establish his/her understanding of reality about the self, others, and God. Thus, in Nursi’s view, the main mistake in secular science lies within its approach of seeing everything through the mânâ-i ismî (self-referential) perspective without contemplating its signified meaning. The mistake begins with considering the self as the real owner of its actions. Then, the self repeats the same mistake in understanding the universe and God. In other words, the mânâ-i ismî becomes like a faulty language that scientists use to read the book of the universe. It is a secular hermeneutic ascribing everything to one of the three philosophical principles: cause, nature, and chance (rather than to God). Nursi wrote extensively on the differences between the secular and the Qur’anic approach to the universe.

4. Reading the book of the universe in the mânâ-i harfî language In an allegorical story published in the 12th Word, Nursi likens the universe to a beautifully written Qur’an and explains how secular scientists and Muslim scholars differ in their understanding of this sacred book of the universe: One time, a renowned Ruler who was both religious and a fine craftsman wanted to write the All-Wise Qur’an in a script worthy of the sacredness in its meaning and the miraculousness in its words, so that its marvel-­displaying stature would be arrayed in wondrous apparel. The artist-King, therefore, wrote the Qur’an in a truly wonderful fashion. He used all his precious jewels in its writing. In order to indicate the great variety of its truths, he wrote some of its embodied letters in diamonds and emeralds, and some in rubies and agate, and other sorts in brilliants and coral, while others he inscribed with silver and gold. He adorned and decorated it in such a way that everyone, those who knew how to read and those who did not, were full of admiration and astonishment when they beheld it. Especially in the view of the people of truth, since the outer beauty was an indication of the brilliant beauty and striking adornment in its meaning, it became a truly precious antique. (Nursi, 1996e, 12th Word) From the Qur’anic perspective, all events including physical, social, and psychological are signs (ayaat) from God signifying a certain meaning. Therefore, Nursi, in the metaphorical story above, portrayed God as the Ruler, who creates the universe like a book full of signs to make Himself known. Semantically speaking, a sign goes beyond a gesture produced for the sake of communication. It consists of a signifier and a signified. For instance, a car as a word is a sign signifying an object with certain properties. Thus, the object is signified and the word, car, is signifier. We can use a word or pictorial as a sign to signify certain meanings to others (Eco, 1986,

14  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts p. 8). Indeed, the symbolic language is a key difference between human and animal. We convert our experience to words or symbols to communicate meaning with others. For us, as a signifying being, even “any natural event can be a sign” (Eco, 1986, p. 15). Indeed, anything can be a sign as long as it can be interpreted. In the mânâ-i harfî approach, everything in the universe is a sign with a certain meaning signifying its Maker. The design and composition of those signs help us to reach the signified meaning without any difficulty. For instance, the primary purpose of a flashing stop sign on the road is to attract our attention and stop. If we pay attention to its art, color, and material composition without thinking about its meaning, we are likely to pay a great price with our life or our money. Similarly, we should look at the universe as a book with meaningful signs signifying something other than themselves. In reality, secular and Muslim scientists differ in their reading of the universe. In the story above, Nursi compares their views of the Qur’an (which represents the universe) as follows: Then the Ruler showed the artistically inscribed and bejeweled Qur’an to a European philosopher and a Muslim scholar. In order to test them and for reward, he commanded them: “Each of you writes a work about the wisdom and purposes of this!” First the philosopher, then the scholar composed a book about it. However, the philosopher’s book discussed only the decorations of the letters and their relationships and conditions, and the properties of the jewels, and described them. It did not touch on their meaning at all, for the philosopher had no knowledge of the Arabic script. He did not even know that the embellished Qur’an was a book, a written piece, expressing a meaning. He rather looked on it as an ornamented antique. He did not know any Arabic, but he was a very good engineer, and he described things very aptly, and he was a skillful chemist, and an ingenious jeweler. So, this man wrote his work according to those crafts. (Nursi, 1996e, 12th Word) The philosopher in the story represents secular scientists who hold the mânâ-i ismî perspective of beings. According to Nursi, even though everything in the universe has a certain meaning, secular scientists miss the true meaning altogether because they do not know the language of the book of the universe. Indeed, they only know the secular language (the mânâ-i ismî). Therefore, they do not understand the true meaning of what they study. Nursi acknowledges the expertise of those scientists by calling the fictitious secular scientist in the story as a “very good engineer,” “skillful chemist,” and “ingenious jeweler.” The scientists do a great job in revealing the material composition and properties of the universe. However, in their interpretation, they get everything wrong because they do not know the language of the book (the mânâ-i harfî). They do not understand the true meaning and properties of the universe. They provide a descriptive understanding of

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 15 observed phenomena embedded within their misleading interpretation. It is like unearthing the lost book of Pythagoras, but not knowing its language; missing its meaning completely. Nursi continues his allegorical story showing how Muslim scholars read the book of the universe through the mânâ-i harfî language: As for the Muslim scholar, when he looked at the Qur’an, he understood that it was the Perspicuous Book, the All-Wise Qur’an. This truth-loving person neither attached importance to the external adornments nor busied himself with the ornamented letters. He became preoccupied with something that was a million times higher, more elevated, more subtle, more noble, more beneficial, and more comprehensive than the matters with which the other man had busied himself. For discussing the sacred truths and lights of the mysteries beneath the veil of the decorations, he wrote a truly fine commentary. (Nursi, 1996e, 12th Word) Indeed, the Qur’an refers to both Qur’anic text and cosmic phenomena as signs (ayaat) full of meaning and wisdom. It encourages people to read those artifacts of God through the Tawhīdī perspective. It mentions the sun, moon, stars, birds, camels, cows, bees, etc. as signs for those who ponder.20 Thus, Muslim scientists are supposed to read everything in the universe as verses revealing the attributes of their Maker. Nursi concludes the story by comparing the value of the secular and Tawhīdī knowledge about the universe: Then the two of them took their works and presented them to the Illustrious Ruler. The Ruler first took the philosopher’s work. He looked at it and saw that the self-centered and nature-worshipping man had worked very hard, but had written nothing of true wisdom. He had understood nothing of its meaning. Indeed, he had confused it and been disrespectful towards it, and ill-mannered even. For supposing that source of truths, the Qur’an, to be meaningless decoration, he had insulted it as being valueless in regard to meaning. So, the Wise Ruler hit him over the head with his work and expelled him from his presence. Then he looked at the work of the other, the truth-loving, meticulous scholar, and saw that it was an extremely fine and beneficial commentary, a most wise composition full of guidance. “Congratulations! May God bless you!” he said. Thus, wisdom is this and they call those who possess it knowledgeable and wise. (Nursi, 1996e, 12th Word) In other words, the secular scientific understanding of the universe is a complete insult to its meaning and Maker. It deals with the appearance of meaningful signs (ayaat) without thinking about their meaning. On the other hand, the Qur’anic understanding of the universe is a true understanding

16  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts and interpretation full of wisdom through the linking of observed phenomena to their Maker. Nursi is not the only thinker who perceives the universe as a meaningful book. In recent decades, we have seen increasing philosophical works on the meaning of being. Indeed, the entire field of phenomenology, which was established as a discipline by Husserl, deals with the meaning of lived experience from the perspective of human subjects. Likewise, deconstructivism and existentialism contribute greatly to the topic. Heidegger (2005) calls the meaning of beings as the forgotten question since the times of Plato and Aristotle. Wilczek, the 2004 Nobel Laureate in physics, confesses that the book of the universe is much more impressive than that of old revealed books: “I came to think that if God exists, He (or She, or They, or It) did a much more impressive job revealing Himself in the world than in the old books” (Wilczek, 2010, p. 7). Here is a recent example from Tyrell who uses a similar metaphor to Nursi describing the degree of significance of a book to different levels of consciousness: Take a book, for example. To an animal, a book is a merely colored shape. Any higher significance a book may hold lies above the level of its thought. And the book is a colored shape; the animal is not wrong. To go a step higher, an uneducated savage may regard a book as a series of marks on paper. This is the book as seen on a higher level of significance than the animal’s and one which corresponds to the savage’s level of thought. Again, it is not wrong; only the book can mean more. It may mean a series of letters arranged according to certain rules. This is the book on a higher level of significance than the savage’s . . . or finally, on a still higher level, the book may be an expression of meaning. (Tyrrell, 1930) Indeed, Nursi agrees that secular scientists treat the book of the universe as an arrangement of letters (elements) with certain rules of grammar (natural laws). They pay attention to its appearance (phenomenal reality). However, they miss the fact that it is a book with a deeper meaning. Rather than acknowledging their ignorance of reading this book, they pretend as if they know how to read. They end up presenting their own ideas of the message scripted in the book. Tyrrell’s further reflection on the book metaphor is very similar to what Nursi has in the 12th Word: A book, we will suppose, has fallen into the hands of intelligent beings who know nothing of what writing and printing mean, but they are accustomed to dealing with the external relationships of things. They try to find out the laws of the book, which for them mean the principles governing the order in which the letters are arranged . . . they will think

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 17 that have discovered the laws of the book when they have formulated certain rules governing the external relationship of the letters. That each word and each sentence expresses a meaning will never dawn on them because their background of thought is made up of concepts which deal only with external relationships, and explanation to them means solving the puzzle of these relationships . . . their methods will never reach the grade (of significance) which contains the idea of meanings. (Tyrrell, 1930) As it is not possible to understand the meaning of a book by studying the width and color of the letters, it is also not possible to read the book of the universe by simply exploring its material components. It is important to learn what those signs signify to understand the encoded meaning. For Nursi, the mânâ-i harfî approach is a language through which one can understand the meaning of the book of the universe. It is important to note that Nursi does not disregard scientific studies altogether. Indeed, he is very much in favor of scientific studies as long as it is not presented through a secular worldview. His objection is to the scientific approach of limiting the entire reality to the phenomenal dimension. He wants to take readers to a deeper meaning. He urges people to go beyond instrumental knowledge and seek meditative knowledge to discover different layers of significance. As Seyyed Hossain Nasr claims, “nature is altogether richer than the knowledge which physics arrives at through its quantitative methods which are selective in both their data and the interpretation of these data” (Nasr, 1997, p. 119). “[T]he very qualities, forms, and harmonies which physics leaves aside from its quantitative point of view, very far from being accidental or negligible, are the aspects most closely tied to the ontological root of things” (Nasr, 1997, p. 120). In short, from Nursi’s perspective, knowledge represented using the wrong perspective is not just ignorance but also misguidance. It is not just the absence of knowing the true meaning; it is also a misreading by giving wrong meanings to the signs. It confuses those who seek the true meaning of the book of the universe rather than illuminating them. It deals with phenomenal reality as if it is the sole reality. It ascribes observed miraculous works to causes, nature, and chance. On the other hand, Tawhīdī knowledge leads to truth and wisdom about the universe. It helps to understand the true meaning of the book of the universe. Therefore, it is extremely important to re-establish the proper view of the universe in the mind of believers through teaching them the Tawhīdī language and helping them to read the universe using it.

5.  Mânâ-i harfî language in the Qur’an The Qur’an provides a strong basis for Nursi’s view of the mânâ-i harfî. Indeed, the very first verse which was revealed to the Prophet Mohammed

18  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts explicitly inviting him and believers to read (iqra!). When the Prophet said he does not know how to read, he was told to read in the name of God who creates. This is a perfect definition of the mânâ-i harfî. The Qur’an repeatedly invites people to reflect on God’s creation in the universe to read (perceive) the signs (ayaat): Do they not look at the Camels, how they are made? And look at the Sky, how it is raised high? And at the Mountains, how they are fixed firm? And at the Earth, how it is spread out? (Q, 88:17–20) In many verses, the Qur’an refers to the works of God in the universe as signs (ayaat) and invites people to read and take their lessons from those signs: Verily, in the creation of the heavens and of the earth, and the succession of night and day: and in the ships that speed through the sea with what is useful to man: and in the waters which God sends down from the sky, giving life thereby to the earth after it had, been lifeless, and causing all manner of living creatures to multiply thereon: and in the change of the winds, and the clouds that run their appointed courses between sky and earth: [in all this] there are messages indeed for people who use their reason. (Q, 2:164) The Qur’an refers to the cosmic phenomena as a dynamic discourse constantly unfolding the Divine messages. In a sense, the Qur’an makes a creation to speak of its Creator: Among His Signs is this, that He created you from dust; and then,  – behold, you are men scattered (far and wide)! And among His Signs is this, that He created for you mates from among your-selves, that you may dwell in tranquility with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): verily in that are Signs for those who reflect. And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variations in your languages and your colors: verily in that are Signs for those who know. And among His Signs is the sleep that you take by night and by the day, and the quest that you (make for livelihood) out of His Bounty: verily in that are signs for those who hearken. And among His Signs, He shows you the lightning, by way both of fear and hope, and He sends down rain from the sky and with it gives life to the earth after it is dead: verily in that are Signs for those who are wise. (Q, 30:21–26) The Qur’an states that the truth shall be known with certainty through reading the signs within one’s own self outside the self:

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 19 Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that your Lord does witness all things? (Q, 41:53) Indeed, the Qur’an says that everything on this earth praises God even if we do not understand the language by which He is glorified. This is a semiotic way of looking at beings. It is like an audio version of the book of the universe: “The seven heavens and the earth, and all beings therein, declare His glory: there is not a thing but celebrates His praise; And yet you understand not how they declare His glory! Verily He is Oft-Forbear, Most Forgiving!” (Q, 17:44).

6. Misreading the book of the universe in the mânâ-i ismî language Since the Enlightenment, science has become dominant around the world, shaping the worldview of individuals. It is a kind of scientific imperialism colonizing the minds at a global level.21 It directs human endeavors toward studying and mastering matters rather than understanding their true meaning. Modern science, as Schumacher calls it, is the “science of manipulation” rather than the “science of understanding.”22 It emphasizes quantitative methods to gather data about material beings for control and manipulation. However, it denies any reality beyond the material one. Particularly, it fails to help human beings gain the knowledge of the self. Thus, a modern human is very rich in term of means, but extremely poor when it comes to meaning. “He (modern human) has lost the paradise of a symbolic world of meaning to discover earth of facts which he is able to observe and manipulate at his will” (Nasr, 1997, p. 38). He knows how to make money, but does not know how to live a happy life with that money. He also fails to know and live with others, because it is only possible to know others through self-knowledge. He pursues power, praise, and pleasure rather than truth and wisdom. However, given his nature, man cannot be happy with money without meaning. From Nursi’s point of view, we may argue that secular science fails to reveal reality because it reads beings in a secular language (the mânâ-i ismî). It is a misreading of the universe. Actually, it is an insult to the great meaning of the universe. Secular science “plunges into the decorations of the letters of beings and into their relationships, and has become bewildered; it has confused the way of reality” (Nursi, 1996e, 12th Word). Rather than reading the meaning of beings/verses as signifiers to their Maker, secular scientists have looked at beings as signifying themselves. They treat the universe like a poorly read picture book.

20  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts Covering up truth with falsehood With the success of science in tool making (modern technology), the scientific method is considered the only way to the truth if there is any. This is known as scientism, which is to believe that the scientific method is the only way to understand reality and accept scientific knowledge as objective truth. “Enlightenment is a philosophy which equates truth with scientific systemization” (Adorno & Horkheimer, 1979, p. 85). In Nursi’s view, secular science through the use of the mânâ-i ismî does not reveal the truth about the universe. Rather, it covers it with falsehood. This is not a new phenomenon – it has been happening throughout human history. Indeed, the Qur’an openly calls people to avoid concealing the truth with falsehood: “And cover not the Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when ye know (what it is)” (Q, 2:42). Covering the truth with falsehood is not just concealing the truth, but also misleading people by presenting falsehood as truth. Since the Enlightenment, scientists have been doing this more systematically. The mana-ismi is “considering the universe in terms of itself or material causes” (Nursi, 2012f, p. 72). Rather than considering everything in the universe as the work of God, it assumes that everything is a result of material causes, nature, or blind chance. In other words, it is a way of disassociating everything from God and associating it a secular trio of nature, causes, and chance. In Nursi’s terms, the scientific approach of “considering the universe in terms of itself or material causes is wrong” (Nursi, 2012f, p. 72). A material cause is nothing but a “transparent veil” or “glass” which shows the Divine Hand behind everything. Material causes are not real (efficient) causes, but only visible ones. They are not inherently effective at producing results. They are not given any productive ability by God either. Rather, God directly creates and maintains everything from the smallest to the largest things and events in the universe. This is how He makes Himself known to us. But when God creates something together with another thing, it is our mind that perceives one as cause and the other as its effect. Secular science covers the signs (ayaat/verses) of God by ascribing God’s works to causes, nature, and blind chances. Nursi compares the Qur’anic and scientific approach to physical phenomena as follows: Qur’an speaks about creation only as signs of God. It does not mention them for their own sake. In this regard, the most important thing from Qur’anic perspective is how creations refer to their Creator. Science does not consider God at all when explaining natural phenomena. Rather, it speaks of creations for their own sake independent of God. (Nursi, 2012f, p. 302) Indeed, contemporary science adopts naturalism along with its deterministic laws and materialistic causation. The core belief in naturalism is that

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 21 even if there is a God, He would not intervene in the creation and care of the world. “Nature should operate primarily, or even exclusively, via natural laws” (Hunter, 2007, p. 20). Thus, if God is real, he is nothing but a sort of “clockmaker” creator “where God created the universe and its laws and then let it run like a clock without interference” (Hunter, 2007, p. 24). God has nothing to do with so-called natural phenomena. Nasr blames Newtonian physics for separating God and the universe: The genius of Newton was able to create a synthesis from the works of Descartes, Galileo, and Kepler and to present a picture of the world which Newton, himself a religious man, felt was a confirmation of a spiritual order in the Universe. . . . Yet the Newtonian world view led to the well-known mechanistic conception of the Universe and totally away from the holistic and organic interpretation of things. The result was that after the seventeenth century science and religion become totally divorced. (Nasr, 1997, p. 70) Indeed, Newton, in the very last chapter of his masterpiece, Principia, concludes, “the most elegant system of the sun, planets, comets could not have arisen without the design and domination of intelligent and powerful being” (Newton, 1999, p. 940). For Nursi, naturalism is not logically acceptable. As it is irrational to think that carved faces of people on a mountain could be the works of natural process or chance, it is absurd to ascribe the different faces of billions of human beings to nature, causes, or chance. Nursi perceives the scientific reading of the universe in the language of the mânâ-i ismî is nothing but an attempt to hide the work of God in the name of science. For instance, attributing a fruit’s existence to its tree, seed, DNA, atoms, and so on is akin to denying the miraculous acts of God in the creation of tree and fruits. It is like explaining how delicious food is made by referring to its ingredients, the cooking process, and the tools used without mentioning the skillful chef at all. It is like a poor person being hosted by a very generous and skillful host who miraculously prepares various kinds of food for his guest from a simple piece of wood. In addition, the host transforms some of that wood into beautiful fabrics, which he gives to his guest as a gift. Now, if the guest attributes the miraculous work of his host to the existence of raw materials, the design and manufacturing process and tools without even mentioning the host, his skills, and kind will, it would be ridiculous.23 In Nursi’s view, secular scientists are no different from this ungrateful person: if a wonder-working craftsman produces a hundred kilos of various foodstuffs and a hundred yards of varying cloths from a chip of wood the size of fingernail, like the creation of a fruit-bearing tree from a seed,

22  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts and someone points to the chip of wood and declares that these things have come into being out of it “naturally” and “through chance,” reducing to nothing the craftsman’s wondrous arts and skills, what utter lunacy it would be. It is exactly the same as that. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 189) Covering up truth with causes It is nonsensical to ascribe the miraculous works of God in creating something such as fruit to its material causes. Arranging chemical elements into a fruit requires the delicate work of many factories and machines. Causes are just veils. They do not have knowledge, power, or the will to arrange material inputs into fruit. Indeed, they do not even have a conscious mind. The famous quantum physicist John Wheeler made a compelling argument for the existence of consciousness to make sense of quantum weirdness. He argued that “quantum mechanics has led us to take seriously and explore the view that the observer is essential to the creation of the universe as the universe to the creation of the observer” (Scheibe & Falkenburg, 2001, p. 52). Thus, fruit comes from the power and mercy of God. Due to a boundless ignorance resulting from misguidance and an ugly obduracy arising from aggressive atheism, they do not know that causes are only each a pretext and a veil. A small seed taking the place of a village full of factories and looms to weave and produce the members of a pine-tree as large as a mountain shows this. By saying, “The tree emerged from the seed,” they in effect deny a thousand miracles displayed in the pine tree and put forward a number of apparent causes. They reduce to nothing a huge dominical act worked through the Creator’s will and wisdom. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 188) Nursi points to the composition of seed to argue that the amazing works in that seed could not be attributed to its simple components and similar elements. Nursi encourages us to engage in critical thinking of seeds, eggs, sperms, etc. Indeed, if we explore the inner world of those apparent sources of new living beings through the modern electron microscope, we would see that “they consist of an order-less, formless, paste-like mixture of oxygen, hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen” (Nursi, 1996b, p.  240). Those elements themselves are composed of other basic components such as electrons, protons, and neutrons. At the subatomic level, the only difference behind all elements is the number of electrons and protons. Those elements work with the sunlight, water, and soil to produce plants. They are simple and unconscious, but they produce plants in very a “well-ordered and artistic fashion” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 240). Therefore, if we attribute those plants to seeds, soil, and light, we have to assume that in every bit of soil, there are

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 23 “miniature printing-presses and factories to the number of presses and factories in Europe so that they could weave this great number of living fabrics and thousands of various embroidered textiles” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 240). It is hard for any reasonable person not to accept such an idea. Covering up truth with fancy concepts Nursi also criticizes hiding the acts of God through fancy scientific concepts. For instance, water is created through the combination of hydrogen and oxygen atoms. Each of those elements has its own properties. Strangely, when they come together, they gain new properties that do not exist in either of them.24 Scientists use a fancy name (emergent properties), giving the impression that this miraculous Divine act is just an ordinary thing. In reality, the concept does not offer any explanation to the phenomena. It is just a name. Sometimes they attach a scientific name to a most profound, unknowable, and important truth which has purposes in a thousand respects, as though through the name it has been understood. Whereas it is merely made commonplace, and without purpose, wisdom, or meaning. So, come and see the innumerable degrees of stupidity and foolishness! They attach a name to a truth so profound and broad and unknown it could be completely understood only if it and its purposes and instances of wisdom were described in a hundred pages. As though it were something obvious they say: “It is this.” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 188) Schumacher, in A Guide for the Perplexed, also provides a strong objection to material determinism. He defines four levels of beings: minerals, plants, animals, and humans. He argues that minerals turn to plants when the property of life is added; plants turn to animals when the property of consciousness is added, and animals turn to humans when the property of self-awareness is added. He claims that the jump between those four levels of beings cannot be attributed to any material causes. In his words, to say that life is nothing is but a property of certain peculiar combination of atoms is like saying that Shakespeare’s Hamlet is nothing but a property of a peculiar combination of letters. The truth is that the peculiar combination of letters is nothing but a property of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. The French or German versions of the play “own” different combinations of letters. (Schumacher, 1977, p. 19) Most atheists accept that they would believe in God if they witnessed miraculous natural phenomena. For instance, if they are shown a fly suddenly

24  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts emerging from water miraculously, they would accept that it must be the work of God. Nursi argues that in reality, everything is miraculous. Scientific knowledge with the mânâ-i ismî approach presents those miraculous acts of God as ordinary phenomena. However, once we look at phenomena through the mânâ-i harfî lenses, we shall see that nothing is simple and ordinary. We shall read the traces of the Divine Hand behind everything. Indeed, Richard Feynman, a well-known Nobel Laureate in physics, clearly defines the role of science to be descriptive in the understanding of the quantum mechanics. Because atomic behavior is so unlike ordinary experience, it is very difficult to get used to, and it appears peculiar and mysterious to everyone – both to the novice and to the experienced physicist. . . . We cannot make the mystery go away by “explaining” how it works. We will just tell you how it works.25 In Nursi’s view, not mentioning God in explaining a phenomenon in the universe would not make knowledge scientific. It makes it nonsensical by ascribing the works of God to the blind, deaf, and ignorant secular trio of causes, nature, and chance: they ascribe a particular and intentional dominical event to one of the natural laws, which are each the titles of universal and all-encompassing will and universal sovereignty, and are known as “Divine laws.” And by doing this, they sever its connection with Divine will and choice, then refer it to chance and nature. They display an ignorance more profound than Abu Jahl. It is rebellious foolishness like attributing the victorious battle of an individual soldier or a battalion to military regulations and discipline and cutting its connection with the commander, king, government, and purposeful action. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 188) Covering up truth with a mistaken approach: Mânâ-i ismî In Nursi’s view, the mânâ-i ismî approach gives readers nothing in terms of the meaning of the universe. This is because it is a mistaken approach. Nursi believes that mânâ-i harfî is the way to read the universe. Thus, mânâ-i harfî is not an ideology. It is for everyone (including nonbelievers) if they want to read the universe correctly. For instance, if a book is written in English, but we try to read it as if it were written in Spanish, we would understand nothing. Reading the book in English would not be considered “subjective,” it would be reading it correctly. For Nursi, the mânâ-i harfî is the right language whereas the mânâ-i ismî is the wrong one to decode the meaning of the universe. Of course, this is saying, by default, that you cannot read the universe until you believe in its Author.26 Thus, people have to at least assume the existence of the Author in order to read in His name.

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 25 It is possible that some people do not want to read the universe as a book, because they do not believe that it has any meaning. Through secular education, they may have been blinded to the meaning. Therefore, they might end up approaching the universe with corrupted intentionality. From Nursi’s perspective, those people need a surgical operation to open their eyes to the meaning of the universe through the mânâ-i harfî approach before purifying their intention to read the meaning. Once they are presented with the mânâ-i harfî approach, they might change their intention (niyyah) if they want to do so. After all, Nursi believes people always have the freedom to choose whatever they want to choose. Even God does not intervene in free will, as clearly stated in the Qur’an: “Say, ‘The truth is from your Lord’: Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it)” (Q, 18:29). Once a person is shown the truth, it is up to him/her to accept or reject it. Given the ontological necessity of free will in accepting the truth, no one can be forced to believe. They could only be forced into hypocrisy. It is possible that someone might know the mânâ-i harfî but might still use the mânâ-i ismî approach due to heedlessness or misguidance. Having glasses or even eyes does not necessarily mean we always use them. Even if we have them, we cannot benefit from them until we use them. Similarly, knowing mânâ-i harfî is not sufficient. It is important to overcome heedlessness through contemplative thinking in order to examine life’s events and beings through the mânâ-i harfî. In short, it is very important to first desecularize knowledge by removing any reference to the “secular trio” of nature, causes, and chance. Then, everything should be explained based on its ontic reality, which is God’s names. Adding verses or Hadith to secular knowledge does not eliminate the problem. Indeed, it is like adding sugar to salty or poisonous water. Even though it would taste better, the ultimate outcome might not be significantly different.

7. Secular worldview and secular science As Acikgenc explains in the foreword, we all explore the world based on a worldview. A worldview is like a lens through which we receive the data on the universe. The secular paradigm provides a secular lens (worldview) while the Tawhīdī paradigm comes with a magnifying glass (worldview). The secular lens shows everything through the mânâ-i ismî while the magnifying glass shows everything through the mânâ-i harfî. Thus, our experience of reality depends on the glasses that we wear. In modern times, the dominant worldview is the secular one. It almost completely blinds us to any possible alternative. As Charles Taylor puts it: “we are in fact all acting, thinking, and feeling out of backgrounds and frameworks which we do not fully understand” (Taylor, 2007, Chapter 14). In Nursi’s view, the secular worldview is “a dark pair of glasses which shows everything ugly and frightening” (Nursi, 1996b, p.  487). Thus, if we wear such glasses, we cannot avoid misery even if we accomplish great

26  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts material well-being. We will keep chasing different possessions in the pursuit of happiness in this life. Worldview and the world we live in In Nursi’s view, it is perception, not a possession, that determines the kind of world we live in or how happy we become. In another place, Nursi uses the mirror as a metaphor to describe the importance of viewpoint for a happy life: Indeed, everyone sees the world in his own mirror. God Almighty created man as a measure and scale for the universe. And from the world, He gave a particular world to each person. This world He colors for him in accordance with his sincere beliefs. For example, a despairing, lamenting, weeping person sees beings as weeping and in despair, while a cheerful, optimistic, merry person sees the universe as joyful and smiling. A  reflective man given to sincere worship and glorification discovers and sees to a degree the certain, truly existent worship and glorification of beings, while a person who abandons worship through either neglect or denial sees beings in a manner totally contrary and opposed to the reality of their perfections, and so transgresses their rights. (Nursi, 1996a, p. 249) The glasses or mirror is like a priori knowledge given to us by society. We use this knowledge to logically judge other given knowledge. We could not establish our view of this world without having a priori knowledge. We can later on question what we see through our glasses. However, we cannot avoid glasses altogether. We can change or fix our glasses, but we cannot remove them. A secular worldview (nazar with mânâ-i ismî) perceives everything in the universe as works of the secular trio, which have no compassion, love, or care. While the Tawhīdī worldview (nazar with mânâ-i harfî) shows everything as the works of God, who is All-Good, All-Knowing, All-Powerful, All-Wise, Most Kind, Most Merciful, and Most Beautiful. In Nursi’s terms, “belief is transparent, pure, and enlightening eye wear which shows beauty and friendliness in everything” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 487). Thus, for true believers, everything looks good, welcoming, and beautiful, even if it appears otherwise. For a secular person, life is full of misery, calamity, and adversity. Therefore, for those with no belief in God and the hereafter, it is almost impossible to accomplish sustained, pure, and authentic happiness in this life. Indeed, as Schopenhauer strongly argues, the examined life is not worth living given the fact that pleasures are transient and pains are not avoidable. Even those who never experience pain and misery, death itself would be the ultimate misery. Since no one can escape from death, life is ultimately nothing but misery if there is no belief in an afterlife.

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 27 Secular worldview and science If we consider the human brain like a complex computer, worldview would be the main operating system on which everything runs. Thus, every human endeavor, including scientific activity, is embedded within a worldview. It is not possible to consider them separately. Science can only be produced within a worldview, and scientists can shape a default worldview for others through building a deliberate worldview for themselves. Scientists are no different from ordinary people in their acquisition of knowledge. The main difference is in their methodology of seeking and organizing knowledge of phenomenal reality. Thus, a scientific theory is an attempt to define/conceptualize an unknown phenomenon by following a method accepted among the scientific community. However, scientists like other human beings cannot avoid coloring their observation with their worldview.27 They have to rely on the scientific conceptual scheme that is the worldview of scientists in their understanding of the data. In modern times, secular science consists of secular knowledge formed through the secular worldview. It is driven by an instrumental mind that provides excellent tools to facilitate human life. As Nasr states, “with the help of the new science, the only role left to man was to conquer and dominate nature and to serve his needs as an animal endowed somehow with analytical reason and thought” (Nasr, 1997, p. 72). However, it cannot guide humanity to the truth, wisdom, and authentic happiness because it ignores the meditative mind. It does not provide any meaning for life. Rather, it claims that everything is ultimately meaningless. In Nietzsche’s words, it promises “infinite nothing” (Nietzsche, 1974, p.  181). This is because if God does not exist, life will be limited to this world. Since we cannot escape death, everything we gain will eventually be taken away from us. Thus, we will be left with nothing at the end. Secular worldview and reality The light and light switch metaphor discussed earlier is a great example to explain the success and failure of secular science. It is ontologically false to claim that the light comes from the light switch, even though one can prove this claim by empirically testing the relationship between the light and light switch. Furthermore, we would not pay our dues to the utility provider if we believed the light comes from the light switch. Still, we cannot deny the improvement in the quality of human life due to scientific discoveries. However, it is a fallacy to credit all of God’s amazing work to the secular trio of Mother Nature, causes, and chance. Indeed, the relationship of material causes and their effects are no different from that of the light and the light switch. Yes, we could not obtain anything without using causes. However, causes are inadequate providers. When we examine these so-called “causes,” we discover that they are incapable of producing their apparent

28  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts effects; this leads us to see another “hand,” as Nursi contends, which governs and capacitates these causes at every unimaginably brief moment. Secular science also makes everything ordinary. Thus, we are led to believe that it provides the full explanation of universal phenomena. Thus, the element of mystery no longer exists. In reality, everything is extraordinary and miraculous. Indeed, the simplest God-made object in the universe is more complex and amazing than the most complex human-made objects. If we define complexity by the number of components and their relationship, hydrogen would be the simplest God-made object with only one electron and one proton. On the other hand, an airplane is a combination of thousands of delicate parts expertly arranged using advanced science and engineering. However, modern science considers the hydrogen atom more complex than any aircraft. Scientists are still working to solve the mystery of how hydrogen works. They are in no way close to building hydrogen from scratch by combining all of its subatomic components delicately. Thus, if the simplest God-made object is more complicated than the most complex human-made object, for sure, everything in the universe has to be extraordinary. We get used to those miraculous works of God and consider them ordinary. Saving science from secular ideology Having mentioned the downside of science, from Nursi’s perspective, we shall not reject science altogether. Separating the useful from the poisonous sides is important. We should recognize the importance of science but reject its embedded secular ideology. We should acknowledge that science is essential for human development. Perhaps, it is like water. We could not live without water. We cannot endure a good quality of life without any scientific knowledge. However, secular ideology is like salt within the water. For a thirsty person, salty water might appear to be a lifesaver. However, rather than killing thirst, it will eventually destroy the person who keeps drinking it. Likewise, secular knowledge might seem neutral, even beneficial. However, it ultimately kills real human advancement. Thus, we need to desalinate secular science before quenching our thirst. One might think that science is as important as light for our enlightenment. We could not see without light. We cannot understand the reality around us without scientific knowledge. From Nursi’s perspective, secular science blinds us. Thus, it is not possible to see any reality with blind eyes. We need to go through surgery to remove the secular veil on our eyes before being able to see the reality unveiled by scientific studies. Science reveals unseen pages of the book of the universe. It helps us obtain more mysterious pages to read. As elegantly said by Galileo, “philosophy (science) is written in this grand book, which stands continually open to our gaze. But the book cannot be understood unless one first learns to comprehend the language

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 29 and read the letters in which it is composed” (The Assayer, 183–84).28 We cannot read the book of the universe because modern sciences teach us using the wrong language. Thus, we first need to learn the right language to read the unveiled pages of the universe. In short, secular science brings many calamities for humanity. It fosters atheism, individualism, secularism, nihilism, hedonism, etc. It disconnects us from the rest of the universe. It makes us lose the holistic perspective of being human. It tells a person that he is a separate individual who owns his life and is in charge of his life alone. Thus, he has the right to pursue his self-interest at all costs. He does not have to think about the interest of others in the universe. Secular science fosters secularism because if there is no God and no life after this one, one has to think about everything only from the worldly life perspective. One has to focus on now and this world, rather than pursuing the goals beyond what is visible or pursuing fulfillment beyond this life.

8. Secular knowledge and secularization of life Nursi connects secular aspirations to the secular worldview driven from a misunderstanding of the self through the mânâ-i ismî approach. Thus, a secular person perceives the world through secular glasses that show only worldly outcomes. Therefore, even if a believer wears these glasses, he/she cannot avoid giving priority to worldly aspirations. In Nursi’s view, secularization in life is the product of belief in the secularization of the mind. Once people lose their real faith in God and the afterlife, they have no option but to consider this world as their primary or only goal. Thus, the real intention/ goal (niyaah) of the secular mind is to reach satisfaction in this life through material consumption. Indeed, Nursi shares a similar view to Charles Taylor in defining secularization as fulfillment in worldly experiences rather than otherworldliness. He calls those who seek worldly satisfaction as worldly (ehl-i dunya) and world-worshiping (dunyaperest). He argues that bounties in this world are merely samples of the real bounty in the hereafter. Therefore, they are supposed to be tasted, not indulged in hoping to be satisfied. In an allegorical story, Nursi resembles earth to a tree and earthly bounties as the fruits of that tree. He argues that those bounties are just samples. “[T]here is permission to taste them so as to seek the originals (in the paradise) and become customers for them, but there is no permission to devour them like an animal” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 48). It is a grave mistake to think that we could be ever satisfied with those samples. As the Prophet says, If the son of Adam were given a valley full of gold, he would love to have a second one; and if he were given the second one, he would love to have a third, for nothing fills the belly of Adam’s son except dust. (Bukhari, V.8, Book 76, Hadith no. 446)29

30  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts Nursi is shown to be adamantly against secular knowledge, because he foresaw secularization (worldliness) in life would come after the secularization of the minds. He defends desecularization of this knowledge in order to make it beneficial for human advancement. Using a Qur’anic analogy, one might resemble secular knowledge as a veil blinding the eyes of humanity to the ultimate truth. Therefore, to consider Nursi as being impartial towards secular science, it is like saying he would contend to remain blinded first because he has the tools to conduct surgery to open his blinded eyes again. Indeed, Nursi worked very hard to take preventative measures. Once he failed to prevent the unfolding secularization of Muslim minds, he published his books in a quest to conduct surgical operations for opening blinded eyes. He defines his mission as helping those whose hearts are “sickened and souls spoilt, by matters which though called Western philosophy or the sciences of civilization, are in part misguidance and in part trivia” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 305). Secularization and satisfaction Nursi warns that if it is not countered, secularization will be the end of humanity. That is because the overall nature of human being cannot be satisfied by anything transient. Since secularization is essentially the end of transcendent goals beyond this world, it is the end of the human desire for eternity. It is an end for human ambition to self-transcend his animal desires. In Nursi’s words, secularization is an animalization project, degrading human value to a degree of a pitiable animal.30 It even brings a human being to a level lower than that of an animal in terms of pleasure: If you make the life of this world the aim of your life and work constantly for that, you will become like the lowest sparrow. But if you make the life of the hereafter your aim and end, and make this life the means of it and its tillage, and strive in accordance with it, then you will be like a lofty commander of the animals, and a petted and prayerful servant of Almighty God, and His honored and respected guest. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 35–36) Qur’anic admonition of secularization Long before Taylor ever did, Nursi paid great attention to secularization as a love for this world in the name of worldly pleasures. He argues that the Qur’an foresaw consumerism and secularization in modern times in the following verse: As implied in the verse, “awaits those who choose the life of this world as the sole object of their love, preferring it to [all thought of] the life to come” (Quran, 14:3), one of frightening disease and calamity of our time is that even those who know and believe in the hereafter, knowingly

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 31 and willingly prefer this world over the hereafter. This is like preferring breakable glasses over an eternal diamond or preferring one unit of present pleasure over a thousand units of future pleasures due to the influence of animal spirit which is blind to the future. (Nursi, 2012e, p. 39) Nursi argues that secularization has made worldly pleasure as a primary goal in life even for believers. However, he reminds us that unlike Muslims in modern times, the primary goal for the Prophet and his companions was not worldly happiness or success: The view at the present time looks primarily to worldly happiness, whereas the view of the Shari’a looks primarily to happiness in the hereafter, and to happiness in this world in second place and indirectly as the means to the hereafter. That is to say, the view of this time is a stranger to the spirit of the Shari’a; in which case, it may not make interpretations in its name. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 497–498) The Qur’an points to the disbelief in life after death as a leading cause of worldliness. It also refers to the lack of God consciousness being due to heedlessness to the signs (verses) in the book of the universe. In other words, those who do not have certainty in life coming after death and who do not read the signs through the mânâ-i harfî approach seek satisfaction with worldly pleasures: As for those who do not hope to meet Us on the Day of Judgement, being well pleased and satisfied with this worldly life and those who give no heed to Our revelations. (Q, 10:7) Nursi mentions greed, consumer culture, and the encouragement of decadence as the key factors behind secularization (worldliness) in modern times: Indeed, in this time, people prefer a small worldly benefit over a major religious one for the following reason: in this age, due to wastefulness, greed, the attention by misguided people to this worldly life, and lack of thrift and contentment which result in the absence of blessing and increase in the cost of living, and, everyone gives a great importance to economic benefit. (Nursi, 2012e, p. 73) In other words, people think about everything through the prism of money because they mistakenly believe that they can buy happiness. This contagious culture seems to affect everyone around the world.

32  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts Secularization of religious people Nursi agrees with Taylor that even religious people are not exempt from the plague of secularization. They can be worldly as well in terms of making worldly satisfaction as their primary objective. Indeed, he argues that religion is even used as a means for worldly satisfaction by some religious people: I saw that some religious and God-fearing people are seriously engaged with us. I saw in one or two of them; they like to be religious because they think it will help to be successful in this world by giving them better luck in their worldly affairs. They even like Sufism because of extraordinary events (karamat). This means that they see belief in the hereafter and reward for worship as a means for the worldly benefit. They do not understand that worship with the primary goal of worldly benefits would invalidate that deed. (Nursi, 2012c, p. 77) Nursi’s experience of secularization Nursi describes his intellectual and spiritual battle against disbelief in detail. He became aware of his infliction with the secularization wave after his difficult time as a prisoner of war in Russia for two years. He describes his realization of worldly aspiration as follows: After my return from captivity, I  was living together with my nephew Abdurrahman in a villa on the hill at Çamlıca in Istanbul. From the point of view of worldly life, my situation could have been thought to be the most fortunate for people like us. For I  had been saved from being a ­prisoner-of-war and in the Darü’l-Hikmet in Istanbul. We were successful in propagating knowledge in an elevated way suitably to my profession, the learned profession. The honor and esteem afforded me were far greater than my due. I was living in Çamlıca, the most beautiful place in Istanbul. Everything was perfect for me. I was together with the late Abdurrahman, my nephew, who was extremely intelligent and self-sacrificing, and was both my student, and servant, and scribe, and spiritual son. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 303) Not only was Nursi finally safe from the torturous life as a POW, but he had also reached the peak of his career, acquiring great respect and living in a great house located in one of the best places in Istanbul. He was a welleducated, highly accomplished modern person. He was essentially living in a worldly paradise. He then began to reflect on whether material aspirations such as money, fame, and wealth could bring authentic happiness. But whichever of them I  studied, I  saw that it was rotten; it was not worth the attachment, and it was deceptive  .  .  . I  felt disgust at the

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 33 world. I  said to myself: “Have I  been altogether deceived? I  see that many people look with envy at our situation, which in reality should be pitied. Are all these people crazy, or is it me that has gone crazy so that I see all these worldly people as such?” (Nursi, 1996a, pp. 303–304) In the passage above, Nursi shares his story of pursuing happiness. He acknowledges that he once thought that he would be happy with possessions and position. However, after accomplishing his dream, he realized that the promised dream of a secular worldview was nothing but a nightmare. Rather than pretending as if he had a successful and happy life, Nursi confessed that he was living in misery while seeking satisfaction with worldly aspirations. He argued that whatever modern life offered to humanity for the attainment of happiness was not even worthy of attention. It was rotten and deceptive, bringing misery rather than happiness. As stated before, Nursi does not use the modern Turkish word sekuler for secular in his writing mainly because the word was not in use at the time. However, he uses other related words, which show that he was well aware of all three meanings of secularization. He uses the word of laicism (laiklik) referring to political secularism. In his legal defense at the court, he argued that laicism means the separation of religion and politics. Nursi repeatedly asked for the freedom of religion under the secular government regime (Nursi, 2012j, p.  288). However, his main focus was not on political secularization. Rather, it was on personal secularization. He uses several different words to refer to this type of secularization in his writing. For instance, he uses phrases like “the world-worshipping” “worldly,” and “love of this world” to point to the danger of secularized life in terms of making the worldly objectives the primary motive in life. Nursi’s rejection of secularization was not just using words. He rejected worldly pleasures by his actions as well. As discussed above, after escaping from the prison camp in Russia, he had the opportunity to live a comfortable life while pursuing his ideals. He had a high-earning job that earned him an excellent reputation and respect. He was living in one of best districts in Istanbul. He earned all of this through hard work and a clean work ethic. He had every reason to enjoy his life, considering those worldly opportunities as a blessing from God. Instead, he considered this way of life as an invitation to fall in love with this world while he was supposed to pursue the love of God and the hereafter (akhirah). Once he came to this realization, he wrote an elegant poem rejecting the inviting world and claiming that the love of this world brings nothing but misery if it is for the pleasure-seeking animal spirit. Don’t call me to the world; – I came, and saw that it was all transient. As heedlessness became a veil; – I saw the light of truth was being concealed. . . .

34  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts If you say, life, I tasted it; – I saw it was torment upon torment. The mind became pure torture; – I saw permanence to be tribulation. Life became pure whim; – I saw attainment to be a pure loss. Deeds became pure hypocrisy; – I saw hopes to be pure pain. . . . If you say the Beloved, I found him; – Alas! On separation I suffered grievous pain. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 231)

9. Secular worldview and worldly satisfaction Nursi considers the secular trio the root cause of secularization. Indeed, after talking about his personal experience above regarding the failure of reaching happiness in the secular dream, he discusses causation and Tawhīd. In his view, secularization is the product of losing/weakening faith in God and the hereafter. In his interpretation of the third verse of Surat Ibrahim, he argues that atheism in modern times differs from atheism in ancient times because modern atheism relies on science and philosophy. Notably, due to the success of science and technology, atheist scholars develop a Pharaohlike ego in denial of God. They inject their secular worldview into people through secular education. Therefore, many people lose certainty in their belief in God and the hereafter.31 As a result, they pursue worldly secular aspirations to attain fulfillment in this life. Nursi argues that if believers genuinely understand the true nature of this world versus the hereafter, they would not indulge in worldly pleasure. In other words, it is not reasonable to pursue transient satisfaction if one truly understands that everything in this world is nothing but shades of the Divine names. It is like seeking satisfaction in chasing shadows of what we desire. Thus, weakness in belief in God and the hereafter is the leading cause of secularization that leads to pursuing fulfillment with worldliness. As shown in the figure below, secular language leads to a secular worldview because it reveals phenomenal reality while missing transcendental reality. Those who see nothing beyond phenomenal reality are doomed to pursue an earthly paradise through a secular lifestyle.

Secular language

Secular worldview

Phenomenal reality

Figure 1.1 Secular language leading secular life

Secular life

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 35 The Tawhīdī paradigm is based on the Tawhīdī language as shown in the figure below. The Tawhīdī language leads to a Tawhīdī worldview through seeing a transcendental reality behind the phenomenal one. Those who witness transcendent reality will not have worldly aspirations through secular life. Instead, they will pursue fulfillment beyond this life through spiritual aspiration.

Tawhīdī language

Tawhīdī worldview

Transcendental reality

Spiritual life

Figure 1.2 Tawhīdī language leading spiritual life

The Qur’an refers to belief as light and disbelief as darkness. Thus, through Divine guidance, believers are guided to see transcendental reality while disbelievers are kept in the darkness of phenomenal reality: God is the Protector of those who have faith: from the depths of darkness He will lead them forth into light. Of those who reject faith the patrons are the evil ones: from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness. They will be companions of the fire, to dwell therein (Forever). (Q, 2:257) The Qur’an defines the transcendental reality of all creation as full submission to God. It invites people to see the submission of sincere believers and other creations: Are you not aware that before God prostrate themselves all [things and beings] that are in the heavens and all that are on earth the sun, and the moon, and the stars, and the mountains, and the trees, and the beasts? And many human beings [submit to God except you], whereas many [others, having defied Him,] will inevitably have to suffer [in the life to come]. (Q, 22:18) Transcendental love and the three faces of worldly life Nursi argues that fulfillment by loving this world can be transformed to transcendental love and fulfillment if a person who loves with passing love the transitory face of the world sees the ugliness of the decline and transience on that face and turns away from it; if he searches for an immortal beloved and is successful

36  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts in seeing the world’s other two, beautiful, faces, of being a mirror to the divine names and the tillage of the hereafter, his illicit passing love then starts to be transformed into true love. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 25) Nursi does not holistically condemn love for this world. Indeed, he considers no problem in loving this world as a reflection of God’s Names and as an arable field for the hereafter. Such love, in essence, is not loving for this world. It is spiritual love. It is important to distinguish the three faces of the world: Its First Face looks to God Almighty’s Names; it displays their impress. It is a mirror to them, reflecting their meanings. This face of the world consists of innumerable letters or missives describing the Eternally Besought One. This face is utterly beautiful and is worthy of love, not loathing. Its Second Face looks to the hereafter. It is the seed-bed of the hereafter and arable field for Paradise. It is the flower-bed of mercy. This face is also beautiful like the first one and is deserving of love, not contempt. Its Third Face looks to man’s base appetites. It is a veil of neglect and a plaything for satisfying the desires of the worldly. This face is ugly because it is transient and mortal; it is full of pain, and it deceives. The contempt described in the Hadith and the loathing of the people of truth, then, is for this face. The importance and approbation which the All-Wise Qur’an demonstrates towards the universe and all beings is towards the first two faces. It is the first two faces of the world that the Companions of the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) and other people of God seek. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 653–654) Believers are not supposed to love the third face of this world. Nursi does not accept duality even when it comes to the love for this world. He believes there should be a unified purpose. There should not be a duality in the affairs of believers. Everything should be for a transcendental purpose. Indeed, in the same treatise, Nursi discusses how love for worldly things such as food, friends, one’s wife, children, spring, and other things can be transcendent. Thus, there is no need for duality in life. Painful pleasure in the secular worldview In Nursi’s view, secular worldview offers decadence as a painkiller to the pain brought on by modern life. Since human beings can only be satisfied with eternity, they are inflicted with enormous pain should they lose faith or hope for eternity. This is why secularism puts an emphasis on transient entertainment to lessen the misery of the modern man. Nursi raises serious questions regarding material progress at the cost of spiritual advancement: Can a man who is suffering torments and is afflicted with ghastly calamities in both his spirit and his conscience and his mind and his heart be

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 37 happy through his body wallowing in a superficial, deceptive glitter and wealth? Can it be said that he is happy? (Nursi, 1996b, p. 160) Nursi responds to his questions arguing that it is impossible to make people happy by providing material progress alone. He claims disbelief renders life into hell and, therefore, a person in such a state of mind while living in his fancy, false paradise is, in reality, suffering in utter nothingness. Don’t you see that on feeling despair at some minor matter and his hope for some illusory wish being lost and his being disillusioned at some insignificant business, such a person’s sweet imaginings become bitter for him, what is pleasant torments him, and the world constricts him and becomes a prison for him? But what happiness can you ensure for such a wretched person who through your ill-advised has suffered the blows of misguidance in the deepest corners of his heart to the very foundations of his spirit, and because of this whose hopes have all been extinguished and whose pains all arise from it? Can it be said of someone whose body is in a false and fleeting paradise and whose heart and spirit are suffering the torments of Hell that he is happy? See, you have led astray wretched mankind in this way! You make them suffer the torments of Hell in false heaven! (Nursi, 1996b, p. 160) Seeking satisfaction with shadows In Nursi’s view, it is impossible for a person to reach authentic happiness without verified belief in God. This is because of failure to perceive “transcendental reality.” A  person wearing secular glasses cannot go beyond “phenomenal reality.” He will perceive the shadow-like phenomenal reality as the ultimate one. Thus, he will spend his life pursuing the possession of shadows. Eventually, he will lose everything and face a grievous penalty: “And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of God. Announce unto them a most grievous penalty” (Q, 9:34). On the other hand, a person wearing Tawhīdī glasses can see “transcendental reality.” He will gain a cosmic perspective. He will not make the entire planet worthy of his aspiration. In the same way that it does not make sense to fight for a grain of sand in this planet, for a person with transcendental reality, it does not make sense to pursue ultimate fulfillment with this world which compares to a grain of sand in the universe.32 Indeed, the Qur’an warns believers: Say: If it be that your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your mates, or your kindred; the wealth that you have gained; the commerce in which you fear a decline: or the dwellings in which you delight – are dearer to you than God, or His Messenger, or the striving in His cause; – then

38  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts wait until God brings about His decision: and God guides not the rebellious. (Q, 9:24) From a Tawhīdī perspective, it is necessary to have the self-knowledge to reach authentic happiness.33 Otherwise, it is not possible to know with certainty what it takes to be happy. Indeed, Kant argues that a person “never can say definitely and consistently what it is that he really wishes.” Furthermore, he cannot “determine with certainty what would make him truly happy; because to do so he would need to be omniscient” (Kant, 2002, p. 78). In other words, the best choice for an authentic, happy life is only possible if it is done through the guidance of the All-Knowing. In short, secular knowledge is the root cause of secular life because as the belief in the existence of God and the hereafter gets weaker, people are likely to pursue fulfillment in this life rather than the hereafter. Therefore, it is not surprising to see secular aspiration and sensory indulgence in modern times. Paradoxically, the more we seek satisfaction through worldly indulgence, the more we become dissatisfied. The dream of a promised paradise turns to a true nightmare for many people. The more we gain material possessions, the further we move from human perfection. Indeed, the Qur’an repeatedly portrays worldly life as nothing but a transient delusion in terms of its fleeting pleasure: “for the life of this world is nothing but an enjoyment of self-delusion” (Q, 3:185). From the Qur’anic perspective, true satisfaction is only possible through God: “Those who believe, and whose hearts find satisfaction in the remembrance of Allah. For without doubt in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find satisfaction” (Q, 13:28). Nursi blames consumer culture driven by a secular worldview which ignites lust and the appetites of the soul and facilitates the gratification of impulsive desires (hevesaat), and their result is vice. The mark of lust and passion is always this: they transform man into a beast, changing his character; they deform him, altering his humanity. If most of these civilized people were turned inside out, you would see their characters in the form of apes and foxes, snakes, bears, and swine. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 745)

10. Conclusion We argue that it is long overdue to credit Nursi for his pioneering and innovative approach to the Islamization of knowledge. Unfortunately, even most of Nursi’s followers do not see Nursi’s problem with secular science. We discussed four factors behind this misunderstanding. We attempted to make a strong case that secular knowledge in general and secular science, in particular, is the greatest enemy against which Nursi fought an intellectual battle throughout his life. We put an emphasis on four key words (mânâ-i ismî,

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 39 mânâ-i harfî, nazar, and niyyah) in explaining Nursi’s approach to diagnose the problem and provide a prescription.

Word (mânâ-i ismî)

Worldview (nazar through mânâ-i ismî)

Worldly Aspiraon (niyyah)

Worldly Outcome (Vice and Misery)

Figure 1.3 From mânâ-i ismî language to secular wordview and worldly aspiration

As shown above, Nursi traces the root cause of the secularization problem to a word, mânâ-i ismî. It is a secular language through which modern science reads the meaning of beings in the name of causes, nature, and chance. Even though secular language can be used to gain instrumental knowledge, that is purely scientific; it is useless when it comes to gaining meditative knowledge. It leads to ignorance rather than to the truth and wisdom behind the phenomenal events in the universe. Rather than guiding people, it misleads them by attributing the observed miraculous works to material causes, nature, and chance. The mânâ-i ismî language leads to the secular worldview (mânâ-i ismî nazaari). The intention/aspiration (niyyah) of those who embrace the secular worldview is to seek worldly satisfaction. However, Nursi argues that the outcome would be vice and misery rather than happiness.

Word (mânâ-i harfî)

Worldview (nazar through mânâ-i har)

Otherworldly Aspiraon (niyyah)

Worldly Outcome (Virtue and Happiness)

Figure 1.4 From mânâ-i harfî language to Tawhīdī wordview and otherworldly aspiration

As shown above, Nursi offers a solution based on the mânâ-i harfî language in which believers would penetrate into the deep meaning behind observed phenomena in the universe. The mânâ-i harfî language helps them read the universe as an extremely meaningful book conveying messages from its Author. It leads to the Tawhīdī worldview (mânâ-i harfî nazaari) which will reveal to the transcendental reality behind the apparent phenomenal one. The intention/aspiration (niyyah) of those who embrace the Tawhīdī worldview is to seek God’s pleasure (ihklas). The outcome would be virtuous life and happiness in this world and the hereafter. According to Nursi, mânâ-i ismî is a mistaken approach to reality. It should be corrected through the mânâ-i harfî perspective with otherworldly aspiration and purified intention through reflecting on one’s nature with a sense of absolute impotence and poverty. Nursi links secularization of life to the secularization of the mind and knowledge. He realizes that the human mind is being reformatted to install a secular worldview. He understands

40  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts that secularization was a hidden agenda embedded in science and education. He waged his own war against this worldview and shared with us his successful strategy. He did not think it would be possible to win a war against such a worldview through the use of force or politics. He realized that a successful war is possible at the intellectual and spiritual level. He calls his intellectual battle as a “pitched battle” with his internal enemies of a carnal soul (nafs) and Satan who are both in favor of a secular worldview. Nursi believes that it is a waste of time to wage a political or military battle against domestic enemies if you are defeated by their worldview internally. He seems to agree that real change only occurs if people change their minds and hearts through evidence. It was not easy for him to come to such an understanding. He came to such a realization in his 40s after 30 years of intellectual endeavor. He waged an intellectual battle against the Kemalist secularization project in Turkey. In Fred Reed’s words, “This powerless man employed no force, relied on the strength of no army, and had no worldly possessions other than a prayer-rug on which to prostrate and a tea-pot and kettle.” Yet, the movement that grew up around Nursi and his works represented “the triumph of humility over pride, of wisdom over force, of sincerity over sycophancy, of belief over disbelief, and impotence over power” (Reed, 1999, p. 125). In short, Nursi provides a unique approach to learn the right ontic language and read the deep meaning in the book of the universe. He dedicated most of his life to the project of desecularizing and resacralizing knowledge through the mânâ-i harfî approach. We think that Nursi’s lifelong ambition of establishing Madrasat al-Zahra (Zahra University) was nothing less than a vehicle for Islamization of knowledge. In the next chapter, we will explore the phenomenological and epistemic foundation of this approach.

Notes 1 Interestingly, Nursi uses “global village” as an expression to define the globalization in his book written during the World War I: “indeed, the world becomes like one country, or perhaps one city, or one village” (Nursi, 2012k, İşaratü’l Î’caz, p. 52). 2 For more information on Nursi’s life and works see the following books: (1) Sukran Vahide, Islam in modern Turkey: An intellectual biography of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi (New York: SUNY Press, 2005); (2) Ibrahim M. Abu-Rabi, Islam at the crossroads: On the life and thought of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi (New York: SUNY Press, 2003); and (3) Colin Turner & Hasan Horkuc, Said Nursi: Makers of Islamic civilization paperback (London: Oxford University Press, 2009). 3 The quote is a translation from Rahmi Erdem, Davam (Istanbul: Timas Yayinlari, 1993), p. 94. 4 Said Nursi’s books are known as the Risale-i Nur Collection exceeding over two thousand pages. They have been published in various forms. Unless otherwise noted, we will use the English translation by Sukran Vahide. Any revision of English translation based on the Turkish original text will be provided in italics. For those books that are not translated, we will provide translation based on the

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 41 original source. Please note that the original and English translation of Nursi works are available on www.erisale.org 5 The reference to Taylor’s book is based on the Kindle version without any page number. Instead, we provide the relevant chapter title. 6 In secular scientific discourse, the trio of nature, cause, and chance are very much connected to each other. In fact, modern metaphysical foundation is established on this trio. “Through science we now know that nature, of which we are recently evolved part, really is a closed system of material causes and effects, whether we like it or not” (Johnson, 1995, p. 46). Generally, “nature” is used in two meanings: the inner properties (Ar. tab’) or the whole of the physical world, while “cause” means an ontological entity that leads to the associated effect. 7 Although modern science is the inheritor and successor of Islamic science, it differs significantly in terms of its underlying worldview and ultimate purpose. For further information on the comparison of Islamic and Western sciences, refer to the following book: Osman Bakar, Tawhid and science: Essays on the history and philosophy of Islamic science (2nd ed., Kuala Lumpur: Arah Publication, 2008). 8 Wan Daud who wrote a comprehensive book on the life and accomplishments of Al-Attas points striking similarities on knowledge and education between Al-Attas and Nursi in an academic article published in Al-Shajrah (Wan Daud, 2001). 9 Please see the brief biographical article by Sukran Vahide, Said Nursi from the Ottoman to republican periods: A short biography, pp. 23–41, published The companion to Said Nursi studies (I. Markham  & Z. Sayilgan, Eds., Eugene: Pickwich Publication, 2017). 10 For instance, Şerif Mardin, Religion and social change in modern Turkey: The case of Bediüzzaman Said Nursi (New York: SUNY Press, 1989) remains a key reference to understand Said Nursi and his movement within social and historical context of Ottoman-Turkish continuum, but it does not present Nursi’s novel contributions to the Islamic thought. The book presents Nursi as pro-science without any reservation. Similarly, Hakan Yavuz, in his book, The political identity in Turkey (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), makes a similar argument claiming that “In the case of Nursi, science and sacred text mutually read to decode the other” (p. 160) without making any reference to secular ideology embedded in science. 11 A few decades later, Al-Attas would echo Nursi in his diagnostic statement: “I venture to maintain that the greatest challenge that surreptitiously arisen in our age is the challenge of knowledge, indeed, not as against ignorance; but knowledge as conceived and disseminated throughout the world by western civilization; knowledge whose nature has become problematic because it has lost its true purpose due to being unjustly conceived, and has thus brought about chaos in man’s life instead of, and rather than, peace and justice . . . it seems to me important to emphasize that knowledge is not neutral . . . but its interpretation through the prism, as it were, the worldview, the intellectual vision and psychological perception of the civilization that now plays the key role in its formulation and dissemination” (Al-Attas, 1993, p. 133). 12 We understand that some scholars might object to our use of “secular science” because it is possible that science is developed independently of religion and hence is secular (but neutral when comes to religious issues). In the next chapter, we call this type of science “pure science.” We argue that it is theoretically possible, but practically very difficult if not impossible for scientists not to inject their worldview into their scientific understanding. In any case, we think contemporary science is not ideology-free. Therefore, it is fair to call it “secular science.”

42  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 13 Indeed, Juno is one of the greatest human projects. It is the product of many highly educated people and cost over a billion dollars. It began its journey five years ago at the speed of 130,000 miles per hour. It arrived at the orbit of Jupiter five years later, using solar energy as fuel. After Juno successfully reached its destination, NASA arranged a press conference to announce their great accomplishment. Obviously, any news network that attributes the accomplishment of Juno to material causes, natural properties, and chance would be seen as showing great disrespect to NASA and as complete ignorance. 14 Syed Muhammad al Naquib Al-Attas is a Malaysian Muslim philosopher who is considered to be the pioneer in proposing the idea of Islamization of contemporary knowledge. He is the author of 27 works on various aspects of Islamic thought and civilization. Perhaps his most important book on the why and how of Islamization of knowledge is the following one: Prolegomena to the metaphysics of Islam: An exposition of the fundamental elements of the worldview of Islam (Kuala Lumpur: International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC)). 15 Ismail al-Faruqi was a Palestinian-American philosopher who was also one of those who proposed the idea of Islamization of knowledge and founded the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). 16 We borrow this translation from Colin Turner, The Qur’an revealed: A  critical analysis of Said Nursi’s epistles of light (Berlin: Gerlach, 2013). This book provides an excellent introduction to the deep thought of Nursi for those who cannot read him in the original Turkish. 17 Indeed, secular scientists ascribe everything, including consciousness, to the trio of nature, causes, and chance. For instance, Francis Crick, Nobel Laureate in chemistry who discovered the structure of DNA, presents his materialistic view of consciousness in the book titled the Astonishing Hypothesis: “The Astonishing Hypothesis is that ‘You’, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules.” 18 Husserl describe the role of the transcendental ego as follows: “When observing, I perceive something; similarly in recollection I am often ‘busied’ with something; again, observing in a sense, I follow in imaginative fancy what goes on in the world of fancy. Or I meditate, draw inferences; I revoke a judgment, ‘refrain’ if need be from judging at all. I approve or disapprove, I am glad or grieved, I wish, or I will and do; or again, I ‘refrain’ from being glad, from wishing, willing, and action. In all such acts I am present, actually present. In reflection I apprehend myself herein as the human being that I am” (Husserl, 2012, p. 163). 19 We prefer to call the Islamic worldview the Tawhīdī worldview because Tawhīdī is the core principle stating the Divine Unity. It is to accept the oneness of God as Creator and Sustainer of everything. To become a Muslim, it is required to affirm the Divine Unity by stating, “I  bear witness that there is no deity, but God.” From the Qur’anic perspective, this is the core of messages sent to all prophets: “Not an apostle did We send before you without this inspiration sent by Us to him: that there is no god but I; therefore worship and serve Me.” (Q, 21:25) As stated by Nasr, “The formula of Unity is the most universal criterion of orthodoxy in Islam; that doctrine may be said to be Islamic that affirms this in one way or the other. The Prophet of Islam did not come to assert anything new but to reaffirm the truth which always was to re-establish the Primordial Tradition (al-din al-hanif), and to expound the doctrine of Divine Unity, a principle that is reflected in one way or another in all the traditions before Islam.” (S. H. Nasr, An introduction to Islamic cosmological doctrines (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964), p. 5).

Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 43 20 Here are just few examples of relevant verses in the Quran: “Do they not look at the camels, how they are made?” (Q, 88:17) “Do they not observe the birds above them, spreading their wings and folding them in? None can uphold them except (Allah) Most Gracious: Truly ((Allah)) Most Gracious: Truly it is He that watches over all things” (Q, 67:19). He has made subject to you the Night and the Day; the sun and the moon; and the stars are in subjection by His Command: verily in this are Signs for men who are wise (Q, 16:12). 21 Syed Hussein Alatas calls it “the captive mind.” His concept particularly refers to the mind of Muslims in relation to Western dominance in the social sciences and humanities. He defines the captive mind as an uncritical and imitative mind dominated by Western thinking (Alatas, 1974). The captive mind is the Western, secular worldview, therefore it could not come up anything different than the secular paradigm. 22 E. F. Schumacher, Small is beautiful (New York: Harper and Row, 1975). 23 Indeed, in Suratul Kahf, the Qur’an provides a parable of a rich man and a poor man. The rich man had two gardens full of fruit. He considered the gardens the products of his efforts and claimed that he was better than the poor man. The poor man warned the rich one that by attributing the gardens to his personal efforts, he was in a state of denying God and associating partners with Him: “Dost thou deny Him Who created thee out of dust, then out of a sperm-drop, then fashioned thee into a man? ‘But (I think) for my part that He is Allah, My Lord, and none shall I associate with my Lord’. –Why didst thou not, as thou wentest into thy garden, say: Allah’s will (be done)! There is no power but with Allah. ‘If thou dost see me less than thee in wealth and sons’ ” (Q, 18:39). This story is a reminder that all bounties are granted directly by the will and power of God. Ascribing the outcome to causes is the denial of God as the Creator. All things come through material means, but not from them. 24 Johnson, in his book titled Reason in Balance, states that “no one argues that water contains, in addition oxygen and hydrogen, something else that is not reducible to chemistry” (Johnson, 1995, p. 127). 25 See the Feynman lecture, www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/III_01.html 26 Stephen Hawking might a good example of a person who seems to want to read the universe. In A Brief History of Time, referring to the dream scientific goal of developing a unified theory of everything, he says, “Then we shall all, philosophers, scientists and just ordinary people, be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind of God” (Hawking, 1998, p. 193). In his later writings, he failed to even find God due to his mânâ-i ismî approach. 27 We argue that the following verse invites the believers to declare their worldview by saying: “(We take our) color from God, and who is better than God at ­coloring. We are His worshippers” (Q, 2:138). 28 The excerpt is taken from the following website. Retrieved January 30, 2019, from www.princeton.edu/~hos/h291/assayer.htm 29 Unless otherwise noted, all Hadiths (sayings) of Prophet Mohammed are from the following website: www.sunnah.com/ (retrieved January 30, 2019). 30 Charles Taylor describes the degradation of human being from the secular scientific perspective in following terms: “the universe which this science reveals is very different from the centred hierarchic cosmos which our civilization grew up within; it hardly suggests to us that humans have any kind of special place in its story, whose temporal and spatial dimensions are mind-numbing” (Taylor, 2007, Chapter 14).

44  Said Nursi’s evolving thoughts 31 Many stories can be found on how people lost their faith through college education. In 1934, the Atlantic Monthly published an essay by Philip Wentworth titled “What college did to my religion.” The article provides a journey of the author in losing his faith while gaining secular education at Harvard University. 32 Indeed, according to modern astronomy, the number of stars in space is more than the number of sand grains on earth. Thus, it does not make sense to make even the entire earth as life’s goal. For a true believer, the ownership of the entire planet is not worthy of a goal compared to the visible and invisible universes. Life’s significance comes from being a means for gaining eternal life. 33 For further discussion three distinct models of happiness, please refer my upcoming book: 3D of Happiness: Pleasure, Meaning, and Spirituality, James Morgan Publishing (forthcoming).

2 Knowledge, certainty, and science in mânâ-i harfî

1. Introduction In Islamic tradition, knowledge (‘ilm), truth (haqiqah) and gnosis (irfân) are approached with three methods of inquiry: theosophy (hikmah), jurisprudence (fiqh), and Islamic philosophy (kalam). Additionally, the process of knowledge acquisition involves two processes – individual view (ra’y) and consensus building (ijtihad). Fiqh is practical knowledge gained through the use of the intellect to understand the application of knowledge to practical issues in life. It is an intellectual discourse in terms of how to solve practical problems through the guiding principles of the Qur’an and Hadith. Kalam is intellectual discourse (in which one takes the mind as the main guide to reach ‘ilm). In modern Western terms, kalam is the equivalent of philosophy. Ra’y would match theory (Acikgenc, 1996). In the Qur’anic usage, ‘ilm mostly refers to the absolute knowledge which belongs to God. Perhaps, it is possible to consider ‘ilm as the knowledge of haqiqah (ultimate reality). Thus, it has the highest value. However, human beings could gain ‘ilm as well through hikmah, fiqh, and kalam. That would be limited knowledge included in the absolute knowledge (as long as it is not false). From this perspective, truth is the conformity of human knowledge with the ultimate reality or with God’s knowledge (‘ilm). Hikmah is to seek the knowledge through the guidance of revealed knowledge (mainly in the Qur’an and Hadith). It is a sound judgement through the revelation. Hikmah also refers to knowledge of purpose and benefit in certain phenomena. Thus, irfân in Nursi’s writing means ‘ilm gained through hikmah. In the Sufi tradition, irfân refers to ‘ilm gained through subjective experience. Those who gain the knowledge of Allah (ma’rifatullah) are called the knowers of Allah (arifibillah). While ‘ilm can be practical and theoretical, ma’rifah can only be experiential; . . . ma’rifah is not a dry piece of knowledge, it is rather necessarily a state of the soul in which an experiential certainty is entertained. Ma’rifah is that kind of certain knowledge which is attained through an experiential journey of the qalb, which thus reaches satisfaction, i.e., the state of the soul as expressed in the Qur’an as al-nafs al-mutma’inah. (Acikgenc, 1996, p. 49)

46  Knowledge, certainty, and science Nursi uses the term ma’rifah in the 20th Letter in describing the highest level of belief (iman). Nursi is not suggesting that the Sufi method be used to have experiential knowledge for ma’rifah. For Nursi, ma’rifah means reaching certainty about God through reflection (tafakkur) on the creation. This is accomplished through proper use of the transcendental self. As we reflect on the works of God and turn them to ma’rifah through the mânâ-i harfî approach by using the self (anah) properly, we will progress in ma’rifetullah. We will internally (through anah) reach self-certainty about His presence. However, this is quite different from the Sufi’s path to marifaah. Nursi uses the same phrase because both paths give self-assurance about God’s presence. However, marifaah in the Sufi usage is gnostic gained through riyazat (ascetic) and zikr (remembrance of God), while in the Nursi usage it is gained dominantly through reflection. It is important to note that the Qur’an uses God’s name Al-Aleem referring to His ‘ilm. It does not use arif or marif’ah for God, because marif’ah is the type of knowledge gained through experience. God does not need any experience to gain knowledge. Indeed, from an Islamic perspective, God does not gain any knowledge because everything is already in His ‘ilm. Therefore, it is not proper to use ma’rifah for Him. The Qur’an refers to an infinite knowledge of God in the following verse: And if all the trees on earth were pens, and the sea [were] ink, with seven [morel seas yet added to it, the words of God would not be exhausted: for, verily, God is almighty, wise. (Q, 31:27) In this chapter, we will explore different categories of knowledge along the way to reach them through an objective or subjective path with different levels of certainty.

2. Importance of gaining and practicing knowledge in Islam As discussed above, from an Islamic perspective, true knowledge (al-ilm) is with God. He is Al-Aleem. Human knowledge with all its kinds is just a small part of the infinite knowledge. In both the Qur’an and Hadiths, believers are encouraged to seek good knowledge for the sake of practicing it. In this section, we will cite some Qur’anic verses and Hadiths to support our argument. There are many verses in the Qur’an and Hadiths regarding the importance of knowledge and value of those who possess true knowledge. The very first verse revealed to the Prophet Mohammed was about reading and learning: Read in the name of your Lord Who created. He created man from a clot. Read, and your Lord is Most Honorable, Who taught (to write) with the pen. Taught man what he knew not. (Q, 96:1–5)

Knowledge, certainty, and science 47 The Qur’an clearly points to the fact that those who are knowledgeable could not be the same as ignorant people: Are those who know, to be considered equal to those who do not know? Only prudent men reflect [on this]. (Q, 39:9) The Qur’an promises a great reward to those who seek knowledge: God will raise in rank those of you who believe and those who are given knowledge. (Q, 58:11) The Qur’an points to the relationship between being God-fearing and having knowledge: Those truly conscious about God among His servants are the ones who have knowledge. (Q, 35:28) Indeed, in the Qur’an, the scholars are honored by being mentioned in rank next to the angels: God is the witness that there is no deity except Himself, and so are the angels and those endued with knowledge, standing firm on justice. (Q, 3:18) In a well-known Hadith, the Prophet defines the three dimensions of belief as islam, iman, and ihsan (Bakar, 2008). Islam means submission to the Divine Will in regard to ethical and legal principles related to individual and social life. Iman refers to the acceptance of fundamental beliefs regarding the divine and cosmic realities.1 Ihsan is the highest dimension of faith in which one submits to God with the highest level of certainty in feeling His presence. The Prophet says that at the level of ihsan “you should serve God as though you could see Him, for though you cannot see Him yet (know that) He sees you” (Muslim). Thus, the goal is to feel the presence of God through observing His ongoing creative actions in the cosmos. This is why, in many verses, the Qur’an points to the lessons in God’s creative acts for those who have knowledge: Most surely in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day there are signs for men who understand. (Q, 3:190) Given the high importance of knowledge, the Prophet was asked to supplicate for more knowledge by saying: O my Lord! Increase my knowledge. (Q, 20: 114)

48  Knowledge, certainty, and science The Prophet Mohammed also points to the importance of seeking knowledge. For instance, he said, “Seeking knowledge is a duty upon every Muslim” (Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith no.  224). It was narrated that Zirr bin Hubaish said, I went to Safwân bin ‘Assâl Al-Murâdi and he said: “What brought you here?” I said: “I am seeking knowledge.” He said: “I heard the Messenger of God say: ‘There is no one who goes out of his house in order to seek knowledge, but the angels lower their wings in approval of his action.’ ” (Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith no. 226) In another Hadith, the scholars are mentioned as the heirs of the Prophets: If anyone travels on a road in search of knowledge, God will cause him to travel on one of the roads of Paradise, the angels will lower their wings from good pleasure with one who seeks knowledge, and the inhabitants of the heavens and the earth and the fish in the depth of water will ask forgiveness for the scholar (‘âlim). The superiority of a scholar over a pious (zâhid) is like that of the moon on the night when it is full over the rest of the stars. The scholars are the heirs of the Prophets who leave neither money nor property behind, but only knowledge. He who takes it, takes an abundant portion. (Abû Dâwûd, Sunan, 3634) Good and bad knowledge When we study the verses and Hadiths about knowledge, we recognize two important points regarding the moral dimension of knowledge. First, people are reminded that knowledge could be exploited for good as well as bad uses. For instance, the Qur’an mentions those who seek harmful knowledge “They learn what is harmful and not useful to them” (Q, 2:102). Believers are encouraged to seek beneficial knowledge while avoiding useless or harmful knowledge. Indeed, one of the famous supplications of the Prophet Mohamed was the following: O God, I seek refuge with You from knowledge that is of no benefit, from a supplication that is not heard, from a heart that does not fear (You) and from a soul that is not satisfied. (Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith no. 250) The second point is about the practice of learned knowledge. The Qur’an clearly points that obtaining knowledge without practicing it is nothing but a burden: The similitude of those who were charged with the (obligations of the) Mosaic Law, but who subsequently failed in those (obligations),

Knowledge, certainty, and science 49 is that of a donkey which carries volumes of books (but understands them not). (Q, 62:5) That is why the Prophet used to supplicate for being able to practice what he learns: O God, benefit me by that which you have taught me, and teach me that which will benefit me, and increase me in knowledge. (Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith no. 251) The Prophet reminded people that they would be questioned in the day of judgment on whether they practiced what they learned: The feet of the son of Adam will not move away from his Lord on the Day of Resurrection till he is asked about five things about his life, how he spent it; about his youth, how he passed it; about his wealth, how he earned it; and on what he poured it; and what he did with that which he learned. (Jami Tirmidhi, Hadith no. 2424) In another Hadith, the Prophet mentions beneficial knowledge among the best inheritance: “the best things that a man can leave behind are three: A righteous son who will pray for him, ongoing charity whose reward will reach him, and knowledge which is acted upon after his death” (Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith no. 241). In short, it is quite clear that Islam values knowledge due to its importance in living a virtuous and God-conscious life through good character. Therefore, we argue that scientific knowledge should be taught through a multi-dimensional approach in order to derive character-building lessons.

3. Pursuing true knowledge: objective vs. subjective truth The existence of objective truth If, as Aristotle claims, we all are born to know, then we would want to know the truth of whatever matter we find to be interesting. Therefore, it is important to know whether we are deceiving ourselves or being deceived in pursuit of truth. We face two important questions in pursuing the truth: (1) Is there an ultimate reality behind the observed phenomena? (2) If yes, how can we know whether our knowledge corresponds to reality or vice versa? There were two competing views on those issues up until Kant: idealism and realism. The idealists claim that knowledge is the product of the mind, thus experience is not necessary (Guyer & Horstmann, 2018). Idealists also consist of two groups: hard and soft idealists. The hard idealists claim that the ultimate reality is the mind. In other words, the reality is what

50  Knowledge, certainty, and science we construct in our mind. Therefore, there is no need to prove external, objective reality. Soft idealists accept the external reality outside the mind. However, it is still not necessary to explore the external reality because knowledge about this reality is from the mind. On the other hand, realists accept the very existence of beings independent of anything or anyone. They argue that we establish a knowledge based on experience. Nothing can be known without experience. Ontological realists believe in the existence of the objective world. Kant (1998) somehow came up with a compromising approach merging idealism and realism to a certain extent. His theory of truth includes a priori knowledge that could be known without experience and a posterior knowledge that depends on experience. Thus, he postulated that there might not be any knowledge without sensation. However, sense data alone cannot produce knowledge. For Kant, it is important to know that we are hardwired to perceive reality in a particular way. In other words, whenever we think about anything, we think in a certain way due to the given set of mind. For instance, we think in terms of time, space, cause, effect, existence, nonexistence, etc. Therefore, we could never access noumenon (the thing-initself); we can only perceive the phenomenon (the thing as it appears to us). Reality and truth in Islamic thought Long before the Enlightenment thinkers, Muslim scholars engaged in fierce debates on reality and truth. Indeed, the debate on essence and existence dates back to scholars such as Ibn Arabi in the 9th century and Avicenna in the 11th century (Groff, 2007). For instance, Ibn Arabi famously denies the reality of existence other than God with his famous terms of “wahdat al wujud” (usually translated as “unity of existence”), claiming nothing has real existence but God. Nursi disagrees with Arabi, claiming that the denial of phenomenal reality would be the denial of the manifestation of the Divine names. For instance, the name of Al-Razzaq (the Provider) requires the actual existence of beings to be provided. Otherwise, it is illusionary to claim that God is the Al-Razzaq. In Nursi’s view, beings are real, although they are contingent on Divine manifestation. “The realities of all beings and the universe are based on the Divine Names. Each being’s reality is based on one Name or many. The attributes of things and the arts they display are also based on and rely upon a Name.” Therefore, the disciplinary knowledge derived from studying the universe is also connected to certain Divine names: True natural science is based on the Name of All-Wise, true medicine on the Name of Healer, and geometry on the Name of Determiner, and so on. In the same way that all the sciences are based on and come to an end in a Name, the realities of all arts and sciences, and all human attainments, are based on the Divine Names. Indeed, one group of the

Knowledge, certainty, and science 51 most learned of the saints stated that the Divine Names constitute the true reality of things, while the essences of things are only shadows of that reality. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 655) Knowledge of objective truth The truth related to our understanding of objective reality has been widely debated as well. There are several competing theories of truth such as correspondence, coherence, and pragmatic theories (Fieser & Dowden, 2018). According to correspondence theory,2 there is an objective reality. Thus, truth can be defined as knowledge that corresponds to reality or vice versa, as argued by Kant. The coherence theory of truth argues that since we cannot know the ultimate reality, we should accept something as truth if it is consistent with our overall network of beliefs. For instance, a claim is true if it meets the overall body of scientific knowledge. On the other hand, the pragmatic theory of truth defines truth as based on the usefulness of knowledge. Anything should be treated as truth as long as it helps. In short, both the reality and our conceptual understanding of reality are considered truth as long as they meet certain criteria (depending on our theory of truth). Nursi follows the established Sunni tradition in defining truth. He accepts that “the reality of things is constant (unchanging, real)” as stated in the ‘aqaid of al-Nasafi. In other words, he agrees that there is objective reality.3 The universe is not an illusion. However, the beings are not part of the Divine: Almighty God has absolutely nothing that resembles Him. He is utterly beyond being comprehended in place or class and being divided into parts. His relation with beings is creativity. Beings are not imaginings or fancies as those who followed the way of the Unity of Existence said. Visible things too are Almighty God’s works. Everything is not “Him,” everything is “from Him.” (Nursi, 1996c, p. 104) Therefore, our true knowledge must conform to objective reality as it is stated in the correspondence theory. However, that is not sufficient in Nursi’s opinion. We are equipped with a certain mental ability to confirm the truthfulness of sense data as well. The mind, along with the heart, the self, and the conscience (wijdan) should confirm the truth. Thus, there should be no room for skepticism. The three categories of truth Nursi thinks that we have access to certain parts of truth. However, for a proper verification process, it is important to know that truth is categorical.

52  Knowledge, certainty, and science Acikgenc (2014) puts truth into three categories: (1) factual truth, (2) transcendent (or metaphysical) truth, and (3) pragmatic truth. Acikgenc argues that the never-ending debates among philosophers regarding the relativity of truth is because of a failure to classify the realms of truth before discussing its nature. Dewey, for instance, argued that there was no eternal truth as such. He was, of course, right especially when the third kind of truth is concerned. But this kind of truth is related to the practical applications of human life and behavior; therefore, it must change when circumstances change. On the other hand, in the realms of the Factual and Transcendent Truth circumstances do not seem to change which leads us to the fact that truth, as applied in these spheres, is also permanent. (Acikgenc, 2019, Chapter introduction) The factual truth is verifiable, and as such, it is an expression of static facts. It can be tested through experiments. For instance, “the sun rises from the east” is a factual truth. It is derived from our sense experience. Anyone can test it. Therefore, it can be considered an objective truth. If we are not pure skeptics about reality, we could not refute this factual truth. However, as argued by Karl Popper, this factual truth is true only until it is falsified. In fact, there will be a day in which the sun will not rise at all. Thus, what makes factual truth objective is universal verification through empirical testing. Once it is discovered and verified through repeated empirical evidence, it cannot be rationally rejected unless we find counter-evidence. Thus, factual truth has a mathematical exactitude and a quantitative character. Therefore, it leaves no room for human freedom so as to accept it or to refute it . . . The fact that the earth revolves around the sun is a factual truth. But this truth is an exact, quantitatively expressible and empirical truth. That is why we are not free in accepting or refuting it without seriously contradicting the external state of matters (or out of sheer ignorance, or stubbornness etc., one may claim otherwise). (Acikgenc, 2019) Pure science and factual truth Although factual truth is firm about observed phenomena, it fails to tell us about ultimate reality. Reality is not limited to observed facts. The ultimate reality behind the factual truth should fall within the subject matter of philosophy of science. As long as science adheres to factual truth without injecting any interpretation about the exact nature of the discovered facts, we can consider it “pure science.” As discussed before, contemporary science is not pure science because it comes with a secular interpretation of

Knowledge, certainty, and science 53 facts. We believe interpretation should be provided separately from factual knowledge. However, we understand that it is practically very difficult, if not impossible, for scientists to withhold their judgment while explaining the facts. Therefore, it is important to distinguish the facts from philosophy/ ideology while using contemporary scientific knowledge. Transcendent truth and empirical testing The transcendent truth is also as absolute as factual truth in terms of being immutable and unchanging in its essence. However, transcendent truth is not static and fixed like factual truth, because it has a changing character, or an unfolding, developing, renewing itself in ever original and new explanatory formulas. We must, thus, distinguish its dynamic and everchanging character from its fixed, immutable and absolute aspect. (Acikgenc, 2019) For instance, the knowledge regarding the existence of God is an example of transcendent truth. Therefore, the answer to the question pertaining to the existence of God must be absolute – whether by affirming or denying. However, it cannot be tested through experiments like factual, scientific truth can. That would be possible only if miracles are accessible to everyone. In other words, if we ask God for an extraordinary event and He responds to our request right away, that would be direct evidence. It would be part of empirical evidence if this miracle act were repeated every time we conduct the test. Though it is possible for God to provide such direct evidence, it is not possible to have direct evidence and freedom at the same time. Thus, it is a mistake to expect direct empirical evidence for transcendent truth. This is because its rigid, quantitative, “unfree” characteristics, the empirical means cannot determine transcendent truth whose sphere surpasses that of the factual truth. Transcendent truth is not objectively empirical (although it may have an empirical aspect in another sense), nor is it quantitative: it is thus not empirically scientific, nor scientifically experimental. Therefore, it leaves room for human freedom; hence, we are free to affirm or negate the transcendent truth without any serious logical contradiction of the kind found in the case of a factual truth. (Acikgenc, 2019) Indeed, Nursi argues that even the prophets are not supposed to show evidence to the level of almost forcing people to believe. Rather, they should show evidence to the mind, but leave the door open to interpretation if the person does not want to believe. In Nursi’s terms, the nonbeliever shall be shown evidence “without depriving him of his will; the door has to be

54  Knowledge, certainty, and science opened to his intelligence without snatching its freedom from its hand” (Nursi, 1996c, p. 149). Transcendent truth is absolute, like factual truth; however, its conceptual understanding may change from time to time or from place to place. Transcendent truth is not rigid and quantitative like factual truth. It does not “have a mathematical exactitude.” Rather, it has a sort of “subjectively objective exactitude,” called yaqeen, i.e., “certitude” (Acikgenc, 2014, p.  127). In other words, since transcendent truth cannot be empirically proven, this does not mean it is subjective and unprovable. It just requires different ways of verification. Nursi argues that God is constantly revealing Himself through everything. There is infinite evidence verifying His existence. All evidence is through His creative acts, not through direct responses. He does not directly reveal Himself to us because it will take away from us the freedom of belief. We will have no room to refute Him if we directly observe Him. However, we are created with a certain mental capacity to assess the revealed evidence and reach certainty about His existence. If we use our spiritual and intellectual faculties properly, we can reach absolute certainty regarding His existence. Thus, there will be no room for doubt about His existence. The Qur’anic approach and transcendent truth It is important to highlight the Qur’anic approach in delivering the transcendent truth to human beings. The Qur’an prepares its readers for the transcendent truth by first softening any existing prejudice. That is because the Qur’an takes human nature into consideration in terms of the importance of mental and emotional states in accepting the truth. It is clear that the receiver must be willing to accept the truth since he has the freedom to choose not to do so. Though at birth, the mind is ready to take any form, it begins to harden as it establishes its own worldview. While initially, knowledge is all content of the mind, as the worldview is developed, the human mind becomes the content, and the knowledge as worldview becomes like a mold and a receptacle for the mind. In this way, the mind takes the form, more specifically the shape, of that knowledge. The mind in this state may become so hardened that it can no longer adopt itself to understanding another explanation offered for reality. Sometimes human mind may become so blind that it will not even consider the alternative view no matter how close this view may be to the truth. This is, then, the “prejudiced mind” in its hardened state. (Acikgenc, 2014, p. 128) Therefore, in the Qur’an, it is important to first soften the prejudiced mind in order to make it receptive to its message.

Knowledge, certainty, and science 55

4. Four categories of objective and subjective knowledge The essential task for a reader is to be sincere in searching for the truth. In other words, s/he should be willing to accept the transcendent truth if s/ he finds evidence to be compelling. However, that is not sufficient, since a human being is not his/her mind alone. The person should also be emotionally ready for the truth. This “requires the sharpening of human feelings making them receptive to (Truth). . . . Both, human mind and feelings must be affectionately directed to Truth” (Acikgenc, 2014, p. 130). It is important not to confuse the involvement of feelings in the search for truth with extreme mysticism that is purely subjective. Acikgenc is not talking about an “utterly subjective” experience, since it cannot be communicable. Rather, he refers to an “objectively subjective” experience, which can be communicated and experienced by others if they want. Acikgenc (2014) categorizes knowledge in terms of objectivity and subjectivity as follows: (1) purely objective; (2) objectively subjective, which is objectivity mixed with subjectivity; (3) subjectively objective, which is subjective but mixed with objectivity; and (4) purely subjective, which can never be captured by other minds. While the first three forms of knowledge could be communicable, the last one is utterly incommunicable. Acikgenc argues that transcendent truths belong to the last two levels. Factual truths belong to the first two kinds, but pragmatic truths belong primarily to the first one and partially to the second one. Nursi agrees that sincerity (ihklas) is necessary to find the transcendent truth. He claims that anyone who sincerely wants to know the truth about the Maker of the universe could find it with certainty by using the mânâ-i harfî approach in their quest. For that matter, he differs from the Sufi tradition in which everyone can reach certainty through subjective experiential knowledge. Though Nursi does agree that it is possible to have a personal conviction through such subjective experience, he thinks that it is not easy to sell this path to the modern minds who are skeptical about anything that is not objectively verified. The certainty of transcendent truth The knowledge gained through the mânâ-i harfî approach could be considered subjectively objective because it could be verified by anyone who genuinely uses it. In Nursi’s view, knowledge provided through mânâ-i harfî could give a higher degree of certainty compared to empirically verified, objective knowledge. That is why Nursi is not shy to claim that he helps sincere readers learn the truth about God with a hundred percent certainty. For instance, after providing evidence for God through the mânâ-i harfî approach, he concludes, “thus, all of those show with certainty of two times two equals four that everything is under direct control of the Maker of

56  Knowledge, certainty, and science this amazing palace and the owner of this strange universe” (Nursi, 2012a, p. 239). In many other places, he repeatedly uses “it is proven with the certainty of two times two equals four.” He believes that not only the existence of God but even the existence of the hereafter could be proven through this approach. Therefore, it is important to understand what Nursi means by proof and how he helps his readers reach objectively verified evidence for something that is beyond the empirical realm. It is clear that Nursi is not following empiricism when he claims to provide evidence and prove his arguments regarding transcendent truth. For him, certainty comes through the use of anah (the transcendental self). Thus, his approach is quite similar to the phenomenological approach. Nursi thinks that the transcendental self is the best way to test the certainty of our knowledge. In a sense, the transcendental self works like an empirical scientist; when anything is provided, it is tested through self-experiential knowledge. If the evidence is affirmed, a feeling of certainty is reached by the self. If not, the self professes doubt or rejects it. Though this affirmation is subjective, it can be confirmed by everyone since the transcendental self is common across humanity. Thus, learned knowledge is not purely subjective anymore. It is “subjectively objective” because it can be verified by everyone with a transcendental self as long as they are all sincere in their pursuit of truth. As mentioned above, even purely objective, scientific knowledge is somehow subjective given the role of a worldview in conceptualization.

5. Role of the self in gaining subjectively objective knowledge Transcendent truth through the mânâ-i harfî is “subjectively objective” because of being communicable and verifiable. For instance, the transcendental self (“I”) first develops certain experiential knowledge based on reallife experience, then uses this knowledge as a reference in understanding the existence and attributes of God through His actions: And with its apparent ownership, it may understand the true ownership of its Creator, saying: “Like I am the owner of this house, so too is the Creator, the owner of the universe.” And with its partial knowledge, the transcendental self may understand His knowledge, and with its small amount of acquired art, it may understand the originative art of the Glorious Maker. For example, the “I” says: “As I made this house and arranged it, so someone must have made the universe and arranged it,” and so on. Thousands of mysterious states, attributes, and perceptions which make known and show to a degree all the Divine attributes and functions are contained within the “I.” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 559) For Nursi, the affirmation of the transcendental self is the key to learn the truth about the universal phenomena. In Nursi’s terms,

Knowledge, certainty, and science 57 through the telescope of his “I”, he sees what the universe is and what duties it is performing. When he obtains information about the universe, he sees that his “I” confirms it. This knowledge will remain as light and wisdom for him, and will not be transformed into darkness and futility. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 559) However, if the self does not have a proper understanding of itself, it could not lead us to the truth and wisdom. Thus, while in this treacherous position, the “I” is in absolute ignorance. Even if it knows thousands of branches of science, with compounded ignorance, it is most ignorant. For when its senses and thoughts yield the lights of knowledge of the universe, those lights are extinguished because such an “I” does not find any material within itself with which to confirm, illuminate, and perpetuate them. Whatever it encounters is dyed with the colors that are within it. Even if it encounters pure wisdom, the wisdom takes the form, within that “I,” of absolute futility. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 560) Certainty and skepticism It is important to compare verified knowledge through the transcendental self versus that obtained through the empirical scientific method. For Nursi, the former is even stronger that the latter. That is because we have certain faculties, such as “al-wahmiyah” (estimative faculty),4 which makes us skeptical of our knowledge. We are hesitant to take action if we are not certain about the truthfulness of what we learn. Thus, Nursi thinks that people do not practice what they preach because they do not really believe in it. For Nursi, reaching certainty through the transcendental self is essential for personal transformation and ethical behavior. That is why he put all his effort towards providing verified knowledge to believers in order to overcome the gap between what they believe and what they practice. For Nursi, this is the essential difference between early Muslims and contemporary ones. While the former had faith with the utmost certainty of knowledge, the latter largely have imitative knowledge. Particularly, with the advancement of secular science and atheistic philosophy, many believers began having serious doubt in their belief: Formerly, the fundamentals of belief were protected, the submission was strong. Even if the intuitive knowledge of those with knowledge of God lacked proof, their expositions were acceptable and sufficient. But at this time . . . the misguidance of science has stretched out its hand to the fundamentals and pillars of belief. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 434)

58  Knowledge, certainty, and science Analogy and understanding Nursi claims that the success of his writings against atheistic and agnostic ideas come from his use of Qur’anic method of “analogical parable” (kiyas-i temsili). This method works like a telescope helping readers understand difficult topics. It works like a unifier helping to see topics in a holistic manner. It is like a stair helping people to step into the deeper truths easily. Through the window of the mystery of comparisons, certainty of belief in the truths of the Unseen and fundamentals of Islam was obtained close to the degree of witnessing (shuhûd). The intellect, as well as the imagination and delusion (vahm), and the animal soul (nafs) and caprice, were compelled to submit, and Satan too was compelled to surrender his weapons. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 435) In other words, the analogical parable gives the highest sense of certainty because it is convincing to other human faculties such as vahm, animal soul (nafs), and mind.

6. Certainty of transcendent knowledge in the mânâ-i harfî perspective Nursi tries to help believers gain certainty in their faith (transcendent knowledge) through the mânâ-i harfî approach. He claims that his method could help people reach the highest level of certainty (haqqal yaqeen) within reflective knowledge (ilm al-yaqeen). It is the transcendental self that helps believers reach this level of certainty. Following the Islamic tradition,5 Nursi puts certainty (yaqeen) in knowledge in three categories: ‘ilm al-yaqeen (certainty by reason), ‘ayn al-yaqeen (certainty by sight), and haqqal al-yaqeen (certainty by experience). Analogically speaking, if we see smoke behind a big mountain, we will logically conclude that there must be a fire. This is causative thinking based on our previous experience. We may say in this case that we are certain at the level of ‘ilm al-yaqeen. We cannot be absolutely certain about our judgment, because it is possible that the smoke is just a cloud of dust. It might be illusionary smoke generated through modern technology. Once we reach to the top of the mountain and see the flames of the fire, we will have higher sense of certainty about the truth of the matter. That is called ‘ayn al-yaqeen. We will have stronger observational evidence to conclude that it is indeed fire. However, it is possible that we may have been deceived by our eyes as well. Therefore, we might think it is just fireworks with illusionary flames. If we get to the actual fire and touch it, we will reach the highest level of certainty that it is, in fact, fire. That is because we have confirmed all the properties of fire through compelling evidence. We would

Knowledge, certainty, and science 59 have no doubt that what we are experiencing are the flames of the fire. We will not walk into this fire even if the entire human race claims that it is just an illusion. We reach the highest certainty about the fire through the verified experience of the conscious self. In other words, the transcendental self has a certain knowledge of the fire from experience. Once we compare the new sensory data with that in the conscious-self repository, we will reach certainty. Thus, for us, the truth lies in the conformity of the observed data with what we have in our repository of the conscious self. As long as we can confirm the new data with what we have, we believe in it as truth with certainty (itiqad). This is a subjective truth derived from verifiable objective evidence. However, if what we believe can be tested and confirmed by others through their own experiences of their conscious selves, we can call this belief about the experienced internal or external phenomena as objective truth, because it does not depend on the subject anymore. That is what we call “subjectively objective” knowledge. Highest certainty and self-experience For Nursi, the highest level of certainty comes through the confirmation of the transcendental self. In other words, what we know through the transcendental self is more certain than any other theoretical or abstract knowledge to us. It is important to note that the experience by the transcendental self is not limited to empirical experience. Instead, it covers experience through both internal and external senses. It is close to the concept of experience used by phenomenologists. For Nursi, no matter how subjective it is, this is the highest level of certainty because no one can give us any doubt. For instance, we can logically conclude that, like all living beings, we are mortal. We can gather empirical evidence that all living beings experience death. We can even learn from empirical evidence that non-living beings experience death-like experiences through entropy. However, a purely logical or empirical knowledge of death is not sufficient to accept the reality of our own death with certainty. Though we do not deny the fact that we are mortal, we live our daily life as if we are immortal. Indeed, we almost completely deny this obvious fact when we live our daily lives if we are healthy. In other words, we do not really believe in our death as absolute truth because of the intervention of other faculties such as wahm. However, if we hear the news of the death of our most beloved person, our knowledge of death will be almost certain at that time. We would know with certainty that we are mortal. Similarly, if we were diagnosed with a mortal disease such as cancer, the statement of “all living beings are mortal” would carry a very different meaning. We would confirm the truthfulness of the statement with almost absolute certainty because of the experience of the conscious self. We would know for sure that we are mortal. We might still have doubt at the beginning if we do not experience the signs the

60  Knowledge, certainty, and science disease is killing us. However, as we go through the process of dying day by day, we will have the utmost certainty about death as truth. Again, what gives certainty is not rational truth. It is the truth that is confirmed through the transcendental self with experience based on internal and external data. When Nursi talks about the factual truth in the domain of the physical sciences and the transcendent truth concerning God, for example, he indicates, in a sense, to the strength of subjective truth: In the first class of knowledge concurrence of ideas by conjoining may be helpful, and indeed the progress of this kind of knowledge depends upon conjoining of ideas. This is just like helping each other in the material world to lift a very big, heavy rock. However, in the other class of knowledge, the concurrence of any previous accumulation of whatever it may be and cooperation is essentially not effective. It is the same whether one thousand persons helping each other or just one person trying to achieve the purpose. This is just like in the external world crossing over a cliff by jumping, or passing through a very narrow tunnel in which case one and many are the same. Cooperation is of no avail. In this way some of the sciences resemble like the lifting of heavy rock, accumulation of previous knowledge is very helpful and indeed depends upon it. These are mostly material sciences (ulûm-u maddiye). But the other class resembles the second example: Progress in this kind of knowledge is spontaneous (def’î) or similar to it. Most of this kind of knowledge is spiritual. On the other hand, although accumulation of knowledge does not change the nature of this second class, complete and augment it, it will help strengthen its proofs, explanation, and clarification (Nursi, 2012g, p. 7) Analogical reasoning and realization We find an indication to this truth in another work where Nursi says, Man came to this world to be perfected by means of knowledge and supplication. In regard to his nature and abilities, everything is tied to knowledge. And the foundation, source, light, and spirit of all true knowledge is knowledge of God (ma‘rifetullâh), and its essence and basis is a belief in God. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 324) We think it is precisely for this phenomenological reason that Nursi intensively uses analogical reasoning to accomplish certainty in regard to the essential, religious truth. He argues that it is possible to reach certainty through analogical reasoning. He responds to the objection that analogical reasoning is a weak type of syllogism that could not give certainty:

Knowledge, certainty, and science 61 Although in the science of logic it is stated that analogical reasoning does not connote precise certainty there is yet a kind of analogical reasoning which is stronger than demonstration of certainty in logic and indeed it provides more certainty than the first mode of the first figure of syllogism. It is the following: It bases its judgment on that truth the tip of which is shown by a universal truth via a particular analogy. This form of analogy shows the law of that truth within a specific issue so that the supreme truth may be known and particular matters may be referred to it. For example, although the sun is a single being, by means of luminosity it is present in every shining object. A law of truth is demonstrated by means of this analogy which states that light and luminosity cannot be restricted: for them, distance and proximity are the same, many and few are equal, and space cannot subjugate it. Also, for example, the analogy given for “the fruits of trees and their leaves created at an instant, in a single manner, from a single center, is done with a commanding law and formation” is a comparison which represents the tip of a tremendous truth and a universal law. In the same way, even this grand universe is a manifestation of that law-of-truth and that mystery of Divine oneness, as such it is a great field. Thus, all analogical reasoning used in all the Words, are of this kind, as such they are stronger and more certain than the precise, logical demonstration. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 643) Basically, in the examples above, Nursi argues that once we show a sample of certain universal truth, we could use it as a reference point to support our universal argument. This connection is established through the conscious self. Analogical reasoning provides comparative examples to the transcendental self to confirm the unknown through what is already known to him. For instance, as we learn to make a good dessert, we build our understanding of how a delicious dessert comes to be. Thus, as we reflect analogically on fruit such as strawberry as a ready-made dessert, we will know with certainty that the existence of such a tasty, crafty, nutritious fruit could not come from dirty soil and disgusting animal waste (fertilizer). Relying on the experience of the conscious self, we can affirm with certainty that the existence of such fruit is possible due to a great amount of knowledge, power, and will. The more we study the strawberry, through analogical reasoning, the more we learn about its Maker.

7. Nursi’s personal experience with verified transcendent knowledge Nursi did not accept transcendent knowledge without having certainty about its truthfulness. He practiced what he preached in terms of judging

62  Knowledge, certainty, and science the ideas presented to him. He claims that that in his writing, he proves the essentials of faith with certainty. In his words, those proofs are as powerful as the interconnected beings and numerous as minute particles, they give rise to infinite submission and strength of belief. On certain occasions even, when testifying to belief while reciting the invocations of Shah Naqshband, and when saying: “In accordance with that we live, in accordance with it we shall die, and in accordance with it shall we be raised up on the morrow,” I have experienced an infinitely strong submission. If the whole world were given me, I would not sacrifice a single truth of the belief. It causes me extreme distress to imagine the falsehood of a single truth for a minute even. Were the whole world to be given me, my soul would sacrifice it unhesitatingly for the sake of achieving a single truth of the belief. I feel in complete submission when I say, “We believe in what You have sent through the Prophet, and we believe in what You have revealed through the Book, and we assent to it.” I consider the falsification of any of the truths of belief to be rationally impossible, and I  look on the people of misguidance as infinitely foolish and outrageous. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 51) We understand from this that Nursi is arguing, in a way as Kierkegaard argued, for the strength of subjective certainty that is acquired through analogical reasoning (as applied in this case). This kind of reasoning is based on subjective experience, which may be held as “experiential reality” objectively communicated through subjective living. This is what Acikgenc termed “subjectively objective,” which may be an experience of the truth at the level of haqq al-yaqeen. Undoubtedly, Nursi is aspiring for this kind of an experience which everyone may live if she/he strives for it. Reality and Divine names If the reality of everything comes from the Divine names, the objective truth, which corresponds to reality, could be defined as the knowledge of the manifested Divine names. The mânâ-i harfî approach is the way to reach subjectively verified objective truth. Nursi does not claim that he has the truth through his own subjective experience such as karamaat. He is not asking the readers to trust his words because of his pious life and any subjective experience of extraordinary events, and in this way lose oneself in the total oblivion of subjectivity. Rather, he invites his readers to engage in critical thinking before embracing any ideas: No corrupt person acknowledges his corruption. Rather, he would always portray himself as a righteous person. He might perceive falsehood as truth. Indeed, no one would accept his shortcoming. Therefore,

Knowledge, certainty, and science 63 you shall judge any idea before accepting. That is because there are many junk ideas among people. By having a positive view of me, you shall not even accept my words completely just because I said them. It is possible that I might also be a corrupting person. Or I might corrupt you unknowingly. Thus, you shall not let every word to get to your heart. Here are my words to you. Keep them in your imagination. Judge them first. If you find them to be gold, then hide them in your heart. If it turns out to be copper, send them back to me with backbiting and cursing. (Nursi, 2012h, p. 16) Nursi dedicated most of his life to revealing evidence supporting the essentials of belief. That is because he believed in the power of truth. He argues that in the long run, truth always prevails over falsehood. He claims that the true success of Islam in the early ages was because of its authentic message that is rooted on truth (haqiqah) and sincerity (ikhlas). In his famous Damascus sermon in 1911, he asked believers to be hopeful for the future because of the power of truth in the Qur’anic message. “In the future, when reason, knowledge, and science rules, for sure, the Qur’an will rule because it relies on the demonstrative reasoning, and makes the reason to affirm its principles” (Nursi, 2012c, p. 26). While pursuing his agenda, Nursi always preferred honesty over deceit because he strongly believed that “the greatest deceit is honesty” (Nursi, 1996c, p. 81). In other words, if one needs to accomplish a certain objective, the best trick to do so is with honesty (sidq) or sincerity (ihklas). Though cheating might bring success in the short run, it will always bring defeat in the long run. Nursi defines his way as “the way of truth.” He argues that he gives priority to the truth over everything. He dedicated his life to unveiling the reality behind observed phenomena. He was very convinced that he had discovered the truth of the matter through the mânâ-i harfî approach. He believed in the power of truth over economic and political power. His life attitude correlates with Carl Jung’s statement that “people do not have ideas. Ideas have people.” For him, the ideas that will rule over people in the long run are nothing but evidence-based truth.

8. Pure vs. secular scientific knowledge Defining pure vs. secular science It is important to start with the basic definition of science. What is pure science? What is the embedded ideology (or philosophy of science) that comes with scientific knowledge? What is secular science? We define the main subject matter of science as a cause-and-effect mechanism in the universe. As argued by some philosophers and theologians alike, this mechanism is not the ultimate reality. It is what our mind perceives

64  Knowledge, certainty, and science when we explore observed phenomena. Thus, the discovery of the apparent causal mechanism is pure science. This body of knowledge is useful as an instrument to achieve the desired effect. In a way, it is a purely technical type of knowledge providing better tools for manipulating the universe for our objectives. However, this scientific knowledge is not science. It is an interpretation of science. From Nursi’s point of view, this interpretation could be in two ways: the mânâ-i ismî or mânâ-i harfî perspective. The mânâ-i ismî is to describe the observed phenomena based on cause-effect, nature, or chance. In other words, it is to attribute the discovered mechanism and outcome to this trio without any reference to God. In this book, we call the use of mânâ-i ismî in describing pure scientific knowledge as “secular science.” Thus, we define scientific knowledge with an embedded description of mânâ-i ismî interpretation as science through the secular perspective. The mânâ-i ismî approach is a secular approach. It does not matter whether it is used by believers or nonbelievers. It is a pair of glasses. If believers use it, they will see the same thing as nonbelievers. Out of ignorance or heedlessness, believers might look at it through mânâ-i ismî. They would be mistaken. They would not see anything different from nonbelievers. Therefore, it is very important for believers to make sure they have the right pair of glasses in exploring the universe. On the other hand, the mânâ-i harfî approach is to consider the observed phenomena as works of God and gain knowledge about attributes of God through reading pure scientific knowledge as unveiled signs (ayaat) in the book of the universe. We call this science through the Tawhīdī perspective. Thus, we think that science as a study of apparent causal mechanisms could be independent and neutral as long as it does not include any interpretation. Nursi does not have any problem with such pure science. Indeed, he is in favor of pure scientific works. However, Nursi was well aware that contemporary science comes with an embedded secular perspective. Nursi was adamantly against the idea of selling the secular perspective as scientific knowledge. In this book, we use “secular science” to mean contemporary science because of the fact that dominant scientific knowledge in modern times comes with an embedded secular ideology. Comparing pure and secular scientific knowledge Let us explain the important difference between pure science and science embedded with secular or religious perspectives through an example. Studying plants and discovering the causal mechanism of photosynthesis is pure science as long as this mechanism is not attributed to apparent causes, natural properties, or so-called natural laws. The knowledge that explains how apparent causal mechanisms work is pure science. It is a useful body of knowledge, because it helps us give more importance to plants for our own life. However, as soon as this mechanism is described implicitly or explicitly

Knowledge, certainty, and science 65 as an outcome of cause, natural laws, or chance, it becomes a science with a secular perspective. Nancy Cartwright, a former president of the Philosophy of Science Association, makes a logical argument that without God it does not make sense to talk about the laws of nature. She objects to the mission of science as discovering the laws of nature. She argues that there cannot be any law without God. Laws of Nature are prescriptive, not merely descriptive, and  – even stronger  – they are supposed to be responsible for what occurs in Nature. Since at least the Scientific Revolution they are also supposed to be visible in the Book of Nature, not writ only on stone tablets nor in the thought of God. My claim here is that neither of these features can be made sense of without God; this despite the fact that they are generally thought to provide some autonomy of the world order from God. (Cartwright, 2005, p. 2) Altai (2016, p. 43) agrees that it is not possible to ascribe creative acts to physical laws: Can the laws of physics stand as sufficient cause for our existence? This is by no means a trivial argument. It could be accepted that the laws of physics become sufficient cause for our existence if we can prove that these laws have the power, intelligence, planning, and hindsight to act and produce the results that they are acting for. Given the fact that contemporary science implicitly or explicitly attributes the discovered mechanism to causes, nature, or chance, it is secular. Nursi is against this approach. He thinks secular ideology should not be injected in pure scientific knowledge. As nonbelievers provide science through their secular lens of mânâ-i ismî, believers have the right to do the same through their own lens of mânâ-i harfî. For that matter, he thinks very highly of pure scientific knowledge because it could be used with the mânâ-i harfî approach to learn about God and reach certainty about His presence. This is what we call science with a Tawhīdī perspective in the book. Knowledge in neutral vs. ideology-laden science Of course, the key question is whether scientists could provide pure scientific knowledge without injecting their interpretation.6 Phenomenologically speaking, this is not possible because the very perception of phenomena is a subjective experience. In a way, using Heideggerian terminology, the Beings reveal themselves to us. The universe is unfolding its meaning to intelligible beings like us. On the other hand, we are equipped with a conscience to perceive everything as a meaningful expression. However, we have a particular

66  Knowledge, certainty, and science lens through which we perceive the revealed phenomena. What we perceive is to a certain extent the mix of projected consciousness and unveiled meanings of beings. It is important that we become aware of our projection as much as the revealed meaning. Some philosophers such as David Hume argue that the very perception of cause-effect is our projection (Bradley Monton, 2014). It is a priori knowledge. It is not empirical. This means that it is wrong to assume that perceived causal mechanisms are the forces behind the observed phenomena. In this sense, we believe that pure science should acknowledge the fact that scientific discovery is based on nothing but apparent mechanisms. The job of a scientist is to discover these apparent phenomena. The meaning or the ultimate reality behind the observed phenomena shall be left to philosophers or theologians, because the rest is interpretation. It is not pure science. Interpretation depends on the worldview of the interpreter. Nursi in his writing provides ample examples of how pure scientific knowledge could be viewed through the mânâ-i harfî approach to better understand God and His attributes. The scientist should describe only what he observes, sees, or discovers in his inquiry. If he can withhold himself from bias, pure science may be possible. However, in his mind, he will always make a judgment, which could be either secular or theistic, Tawhīdī, and so on. In theory, we can call for ideology-free science although we know that it is very difficult for scientists to detach from their personal judgments. However, as long as they do not reveal their biases in their writing explicitly or implicitly, ideology-free science is possible. For instance, when explaining causal relationships, scientists can say “it appears . . .” rather than “it is.” They shall explicitly refer to philosophers and theologians to discuss the ultimate reality instead of pretending as if they know everything. The knowledge gained through the mânâ-i harfî approach could be considered subjectively objective because it could be verified by anyone who genuinely uses it. In Nursi’s view, knowledge provided through mânâ-i harfî could give a higher degree of certainty compared to empirically verified, objective knowledge. That is why Nursi is not shy to claim that he helps sincere readers learn the truth about God with a hundred percent certainty. Let us think of an allegorical example to show how it is possible to have ideology-free “pure science.” Assume that for an experimental purpose, we took some people with no knowledge of electricity and placed them in a village with modern housing. We did not tell them about the electricity. Furthermore, we hid the light switches within the wall. Let us assume a curious person with a scientific spirit discovered the light switch by serendipity while tapping a nail into the wall. As the nail turned on the light switch, the bulbs in the room lit up. He called it “the switch theory.” Through his experiments, he gained a very good understanding of how the system works. He even learned how to fix any of the discovered components if they happened to break. However, our explorer could not go beyond the circuit

Knowledge, certainty, and science 67 panel. Therefore, he did not know the true source of electricity. We would call this knowledge “pure scientific knowledge” as long as the explorer did not inject his view about the source of electricity into his description. Essentially, what the scientist in the example above gained is instrumental knowledge. It helps people to be aware of the mechanism and benefits from it. However, it does not tell them anything about the ultimate source of the electricity they enjoy. If the explorer argues electricity comes from the light switch or breaker panel or through the well-connected mechanism discovered, it would be misleading. If the explorer were to insert his idea based on a mânâ-i ismî approach into the instrumental knowledge, then it would be ideology-laden scientific knowledge, not pure science. In reality, a careful study of the electrical circuit would reveal that even though the electricity seems to come from the discovered mechanism, neither wires, nor light switch, nor breaker panel has the necessary properties to produce electricity. They are the means through which electricity is delivered. They are not the source of power. Even though people could not get electricity without functioning circuitry, it does not mean they should assume that power comes from the discovered circuitry. This ideology-laden knowledge is still useful in terms of improving people’s material life. However, it is misleading if they want to know the ultimate reality. It will lead them to deny the existence of the provider. Thus, it would make them use the electricity without paying the due bill to the kind provider. We can apply the example above to any real scientific discoveries. For instance, the discovery of photosynthesis as instrumental knowledge is beneficial for us to know how to get more oxygen. However, ascribing photosynthesis to certain causal mechanisms or natural properties and laws is not science. It is secular ideology coming from the mânâ-i ismî approach used by the scientists. This materialistic and deterministic interpretation is rejected by many philosophers as well as theologians. Even the field of quantum mechanics shows that the occurrence of any physical phenomenon is probabilistic, not deterministic. Indeed, quantum mechanics does not accept prediction with certainty. The famous Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle clearly states that even if we determine the position of a subatomic particle, we cannot know its momentum with certainty, and vice versa. In other words, nothing is absolutely certain until it actually happened. Given the indeterministic nature of the subatomic world as understood by quantum mechanics, some scholars propose including God into the equation  to overcome the problem of uncertainty (Bradley Monton, 2014). Basil Altaie, a quantum cosmologist, postulates that the indeterministic nature of the quantum world is due to the re-creation of particles at every moment. Re-creation is a process of change. Once a given parameter has been re-created, others related parameters of the system will be affected, thus

68  Knowledge, certainty, and science changing their value according to the laws of nature concerned . . . since the re-creation frequency is very high (for an electron is about 1021 Hz), the re-creation period is very short (1021 s), so, when we measure any event practically, we measure average values every time we perform a measurement. (Altaie, 2016, p. 105) It is not possible to explain subatomic phenomena through materialistic causation. For instance, If you bang protons together really hard, what you find coming out is  .  .  . more protons sometimes accompanied by their hadronic relatives . . . the total mass of particles that come out is more than what went in . . . it is as if you smashed together two Granny Smith apples, and got out three Granny Smiths, a Red Delicious, a cantaloupe, a dozen cherries, and a pair of zucchini! (Wilczek, 2010, p. 31) However, despite this rejection of materialistic causation, contemporary scientific knowledge delivered in schools is fully loaded with such secular ideology which claims that all natural events are the products of material causes or natural laws. While Nursi rejects this ideology, he embraces pure scientific knowledge as unveiled meaningful signs (ayaat) in the book of the universe. He shows how to read the discovered those signs through the proper language of mânâ-i harfî. In short, we argue that scientists should provide instrumental knowledge with an explicit disclaimer that they have no idea about the ultimate reality behind the discovered phenomena. Then, it would be up to readers to use this knowledge through their perspectives of mânâ-i ismî or mânâ-i harfî to come up with their own understanding of the ultimate reality.

9. Causation, causality, and scientific knowledge A scientific study is a search for a causal mechanism. Therefore, it is important to explore different views on causation and causality and their relationship to scientific knowledge. The question of causation was a hot topic of debate among Muslim scholars a thousand year ago. Some prominent scholars such as Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and Ibn Rushd (Averroes) defended Aristotelian causality, while others such as al-Ashʿari and Al-Ghazali considered God alone as the creative agent.7 In the Western world, the debate on similar issues mainly emerged with David Hume. Unlike Hume who denies God as the first cause since he concludes that there is no causation, Nursi ascribes everything to God. Before presenting Nursi’s view on filtering the mânâ-i ismî knowledge (desecularizing) in pure science, we would like to discuss causation and causality.

Knowledge, certainty, and science 69 Causation in the Western thought Causality is the idea that every effect comes from some causes. In other words, when we observe anything happening, we ask “why” it is happening. Causality is to accept some causes behind the observed phenomena. On the other hand, causation means that what we observe as the cause, in reality, has a property or power to produce its associated effect. The agent is considered to be an “efficient cause” for the associated effect. Aristotle is the first known philosopher who pondered deeply on the causal mechanism in the universe. He put causes into four categories: material, formal, efficient, and final. He considers God as the final cause but argues that observed physical phenomena have sufficient properties to produce their effects. Hume was the first Western philosopher challenging causation. Hume argues that our understanding of reality is nothing but our perceived cause and effect. We think the perceived effect is the product of some observed or unobserved causes. Indeed, from Hume’s perspective, our very concept of cause and effect comes with the embedded belief regarding a connection between the two: “We then call the one object, Cause; the other, Effect. We suppose that there is some connexion between them; some power in the one, by which it infallibly produces the other, and operates with the greatest certainty and strongest necessity” (Hume, 2000, p. 57). Therefore, it is vitally important to know how to establish our ideas of cause and effect. If we get it wrong on cause and effect, we will miss the reality altogether. For Hume, it is very important to know how we arrive at our understanding of efficient cause that produces the observed effect. He argues that it is impossible to infer the fact that water could suffocate or fire could burn if we study causes in terms of their properties without ever observing their effects. Adam, though his rational faculties be supposed, at the very first, entirely perfect, could not have inferred from the fluidity, and transparency of water, that it would suffocate him, or from the light and warmth of the fire, that it would consume him. No object ever discovers, by the qualities which appear to the senses, either the causes which produced it or the effects which will arise from it; nor can our reason, unassisted by experience, ever draw any inference concerning real existence and matter of fact. (Hume, 2000, p. 20) Hume seems to expand his argument above to all types of cause and effect in the universe. For instance, he argues, we could not give the ultimate reason, “why milk or bread is proper nourishment for a man, not for a lion or a tiger?” (Hume, 2000, p. 20). Furthermore, he claims that eating food seems to provide nourishment of the body. However, that is just appearance. The secret power behind nourishment is not revealed to us: From causes, which appear similar, we expect similar effects. This is the sum of all our experimental conclusions. Should it be said, that,

70  Knowledge, certainty, and science from a number of uniform experiments, we infer a connexion between the sensible qualities and the secret powers . . . It is confessed, that the colour, consistence, and other sensible qualities of bread appear not, of themselves, to have any connexion with the secret powers of nourishment and support. (Hume, 2000, p. 27) Hume argues that it is repeated observation resulting in the belief in cause and effect. He gives an example on how we come to the understanding of how one billiard ball pushes another one. Though it seems common sense to everyone that one ball is causing another to move, Hume argues that we would not have such an understanding if we were suddenly brought to the world: We fancy, that were we brought, on a sudden, into this world, we could at first have inferred, that one Billiard-ball would communicate motion to another upon impulse; and that we needed not to have waited for the event, in order to pronounce with certainty concerning it. (Hume, 2000, p. 21) Since the Enlightenment, the dominant Western paradigm leaves no room for God in studying the universe. Secular scientists think that they do not need God’s hypothesis8 in understanding the universe. In a sense, the mission of secular science is to find out an explanation through “efficient cause” for observed phenomena to negate any Divine involvement in the cosmic events. Despite some serious objections from scholars of quantum physics, material determinism and positivism is still the dominant ideology in modern science. Causation in the Islamic thought Ghazali is a dominant figure when it comes to the discussion on causation. He explicitly rejects all notions of effective cause and describes the relationship between cause and effect as togetherness in creation (iqtirân): The connection (iqtirân) between what is habitually believed to be a cause and what is habitually believed to be an effect is not necessary (darûrî), according to us. But [with] any two things [that are not identical and that do not imply one another] [. . .] it is not necessary that the existence or the nonexistence of one follows necessarily (min darûra) from the existence or the nonexistence of the other. For example, the quenching of thirst and drinking, satiety and eating, burning and contact with fire, light and the appearance of the Sun, death and decapitation, healing and the drinking of medicine, the purging of the bowels and the using of purgative, and so on to (include) all (that is) observable

Knowledge, certainty, and science 71 among connected things in medicine, astronomy, arts, and crafts  .  .  . Their connection is due to the prior decision (taqdîr) of God, who creates them side by side (‘alâ al-tasâwuq), not to its being necessary by itself, incapable of separation. (Ghazālī, 2000, p. 166) Nursi follows the Ash’ariat tradition in rejecting causation and perceiving God as the only agent behind observed phenomena.9 His view of causation is very much similar to that of Ghazālī10 who believes in occasionalism. For Nursi, it is necessary to remove the dark veil set by ineffective causes, material nature, and blind chance, which we have formerly identified as the secular trio, in order to see the Divine hand behind everything. In other words, it is important to realize that causes and nature are not the actual sources of effect. They are not active and effective, but passive and receptive. Nursi derives his views of causation from certain Qur’anic verses. From a Qur’anic perspective, it is necessary to go beyond apparent causes to realize God’s bounties and offer sincere thanks. Indeed, the Qur’anic term of ingratitude (keffar) comes from the same root word with disbelief (kufr). In other words, from the Qur’anic perspective, disbelief is the denial of God’s bounties by covering up them with veils such as causes, nature, and chance. Nursi uses several arguments to reject causation. First, Nursi rejects causation based on the Tawhīdī paradigm behind the Qur’anic message. From this perspective, God does not need any assistance since He is the All-­Powerful. It does not make any difference if He does all work Himself or creates his works through causes and nature. It is true that He almost always creates through a cause-effect mechanism. However, those causes are not real (efficient), but apparent (inefficient) causes. Indeed, from the Tawhīdī perspective, God is the only cause, not just the First Cause. In reality, everything is God’s work. The Qur’an warns believers against ascribing partners with God (shirk). It provides many examples to make it clear that God alone is in charge of everything. For instance, the Qur’an repeatedly refers to God as “the Creator of everything” (Q, 6:102; 13:16; 39:62; 40:62). He is not just creating everything, He also maintains them from moment to moment. This depiction of God is very different from the Aristotelian concept of God as the prime mover. God does not need to create factory-like mechanisms for mass production. The use of means like factories only makes sense for those who have limited power. Since God has infinite power, there is no need for any assistance or factory. Since God is also All-Wise, the use of causes and nature as assistants would be nonsense. Therefore, Nursi rejects the idea that God creates seeds and eggs with the ability to work like a factory. It makes sense to use such means only if they help reduce hardship or speed up the outcome. Humans use machines because they increase efficiency and produce better outcomes. For the Infinite Power, none of those benefits is needed. Thus, it is useless for the Infinite Power to employ effective causes in the form of an

72  Knowledge, certainty, and science assistant or factory. From the Qur’anic perspective, we should directly link the seeds and eggs to the All-Mighty. We should realize that through His direct connection to the seed, God makes everything possible. “Through this connection (intisab), a seed receives an order from Divine Determining and displays those wonderful duties” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 241). Second, in Nursi’s view, God is the direct creator of properties, essence, cause, and effect. Creation is not a one-time ex nihilo; it is a constant creation of both properties, causes, and effects. Since the nature of each thing, like all things, is created, for it is full of art and is being constantly renewed, and, like the effect, the apparent cause of each thing is also created; and since for each thing to exist there is need for much equipment and many tools; there must exist a Possessor of Absolute Power who creates the nature and brings the cause into existence. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 244) In reality, there is no efficient causation in the universe. It is just co-creation (concurrence). It is an association of cause and effect. He creates cause and effect together directly. In order to demonstrate His wisdom and the manifestation of His names, by establishing an apparent causal relationship and connection through order and sequence, He makes causes and nature a veil to the hand of His power. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 244) Third, Nursi rejects deterministic causation based on his understanding of the dynamic creation. He argues that everything is constantly created through the Divine power. The entire universe is like live broadcasting. Even if pictures on TV screen stay still, they are being renewed 30 times per second. We do not see renewal of streamed images because of the high speed of change. Quite similar to what some quantum physicists argue, Nursi believes that the entire universe is constantly being created. Making every century a model, the Pre-Eternal Inscriber clothes them with bejeweled new worlds through the miracles of His power. And making every year a scale, He sews skillfully fashioned new universes through the wonders of His mercy according to their stature. And making every day a line, He writes the decorated, constantly renewed beings in them through the subtleties of His wisdom. Furthermore, just as that Absolutely Powerful One makes each century, each year, and each day a model, so He makes the face of the earth, and the mountains and plains, gardens and orchards, and trees each a model. He continuously sets up new universes on the earth and creates new worlds. He removes one world and replaces it with another,

Knowledge, certainty, and science 73 well-ordered world. Season after season He displays the miracles of His power and gifts of His mercy in all the gardens and orchards. He writes them all as wisdom-displaying books, establishes them as kitchens of His mercy, and clothes them in ever-renewed garments full of art. Every spring He arrays all trees in costumes of brocade and adorns them with fresh jewels like pearls. He fills their hands with the star-like gifts of His mercy. Thus, the One Who performs these matters with infinitely fine art and perfect order and changes with infinite wisdom, bounty, and perfection of power and art the traveling worlds which follow on one after the other and are attached to the string of time, is certainly AllPowerful and All-Wise. He is All-Seeing and All-Knowing to an infinite degree. Chance cannot interfere in His works. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 213) In the statement above, Nursi presents constant creation as the unequivocal evidence for the existence of God. Constant acts of construction and destruction of the entire universe is only possible with Infinite Power.11 Indeed, Nursi’s description of constant creation at a subatomic level is quite similar to what modern physics12 says about subatomic particles: the making of the world of minute particles into a boundless, broad arable field and every instant sowing and harvesting it and obtaining the fresh crops of different universes from it, and those inanimate, impotent, ignorant particles being made to perform innumerable orderly duties most consciously, wisely, and capably – this also shows the necessary existence of the All-Powerful One of Glory and Maker of Perfection, and His perfect Power and the grandeur of His sovereignty and His unity and the perfection of His dominicality. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 689–690) Nasr agrees, from the metaphysical point of view the effect can never be divorced from its cause. The world can never be totally separated from its Creator, and there is no logical or philosophical reason whatsoever to refuse the possibility of continuous creation or a series of creations as all traditional doctrines have held. (Nasr, 1997, pp. 124–125) Indeed, nothing appears as it is. The entire universe is being constantly created and renewed. As attributed to Heraclitus, perhaps “the only thing constant is change.” There are different layers of dynamic changes from macro to micro levels. At the macro level, even galactic systems and stars are born and die over a long period of time. The earth goes through major changes every season. Plants and animals change through birth and death.

74  Knowledge, certainty, and science At the micro level, each living organism goes through layered changes and transformation. At the cellular level, change is constant for all living beings. As we go lower on the scale, the speed and size of changes gets even bigger and faster. At the subatomic (string) level, change takes place in the form of constant annihilation and creation. Fourth, Nursi also rejects any mass production. He argues that God creates everything in the universe in unique forms. There is no duplicate of anything. Thus, there is no need to use machines if everything is unique: Through His limitless power, the Pre-Eternal Inscriber continuously renews the infinite manifestations of His names so as to display them in ever-differing ways. And through this constant renewal, He creates the identities and special features in things in such a manner that no missive of the Eternally Besought One or dominical book can be the same as any other book. In any case, each will have different features in order to express different meanings. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 245) Causation as a substitute for God As shown below, Nursi argues that science with the perspective of the “selfindicative” elevates the role of causes to the level of godhood. Those who blindly follow this heedless perspective of teaching causality would be considered worshipers of causes, because they consider causes the real source of effects. In Nursi’s view, God uses a cause as a veil to emphasize His dignity in the eyes of ignorant who do not see the transcendental beauty behind everything: O heedless worshipper of causes! Causes are a veil; for, Divine dignity and grandeur require them to be thus. But that which acts and performs matters is the power of the Eternally Besought One; for Divine unity and glory require it to be thus, and necessitate their independence. The officials of the Pre-Eternal Monarch are not executives of the sovereignty of dominicality (rububiyyah); they are the heralds of His sovereignty and the observers and superintendents of His dominicality. Their purpose is to make known the dignity of power and majesty of dominicality, so that power should not be seen to be associated with the base and lowly matters. Not like a human king, tainted by impotence and indigence, who therefore takes officials as partners. That is to say; causes have been placed so that the dignity of power may be preserved in the superficial view of the mind. For like the two faces of a mirror, everything has an outer face that looks to this manifest world, which resembles the mirror’s colored face and may reflect various colors and states, and an inner face which looks to its Maker, which resembles the mirror’s shining face. In the outer face which looks to the manifest

Knowledge, certainty, and science 75 world may be states incompatible with the dignity and perfection of the Eternally Besought One’s power, so causes have been put to be both the source and the means of those states. But in the inner face, that of reality, which looks to their Creator, everything is transparent and beautiful; it is fitting that power should itself be associated with it. It is not incompatible with its dignity; therefore, causes are purely apparent and in the inner face of things and in reality have no true effect. (Nursi, 1996b, pp. 300–301) The logical fallacy behind causation The logical fallacy in attributing effects to causes in materialist determinism can be understood through the switch theory of the fictitious scientist we discussed earlier. Even though his “switch theory” is useful to fix some problems and explains the mechanism inside, it is completely wrong in terms of explaining the real source of electricity. Furthermore, it makes the villagers use electricity like thieves without paying any bills to the owner of the power generator.13 Everyone is fine with the “switch theory” because it works in terms of helping people get electricity. In reality, the theory does not prove the true source of electricity. It makes people stop searching because of its misleading claim. Schumacher says this scientific way of proving is nothing but descriptive pragmatism: We can see right away that it is possible to “prove” a recipe or any other instruction which takes the form of “if you do X, you will obtain Y.” If such an instruction does not work, it is useless; if it does work, it has been “proved.” Pragmatism is the philosophy which holds that the only valid test of truth is that it works. (Schumacher, 1977, p. 106) In Nursi’s view, everything in the universe comes through a certain mechanism like the power distribution system in the example above. However, everything is created directly by the All-Powerful. Causation is just a delivery system; not the source of things we get. In Nursi’s words, all things act in the name of Almighty God, for minute things like seeds and grains bear huge trees on their heads; they raise loads like mountains. That means all trees say: “In the Name of God,” fill their hands from the treasury of mercy, and offer them to us. All gardens say: “In the Name of God,” and become cauldrons from the kitchens of Divine power in which are cooked numerous varieties of different foods. All blessed animals like cows, camels, sheep, and goats, say: “In the Name of God,” and become like a fountain14 in which comes milk from the abundance of mercy, offering us a most delicate and pure food like the water of life in the name of the Provider. The roots and rootlets, soft as

76  Knowledge, certainty, and science silk, of plants, trees, and grasses say: “In the Name of God,” and pierce and pass through hard rock and earth. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 16) In Nursi’s view, one who goes beyond the veil of causation should not see fruit-bearing trees as fruit factories but as waiters carrying the fruits of Divine mercy in their hands like branches. Likewise, gardens do not produce vegetables; rather they are like cauldrons in which vegetables are cooked by the Divine power. Cows, camels, sheep, and goats do not work like Divine factories with the capability of making milk. Rather, they work like fountains through which milk comes to us. Similar to the electricity parable, we need to understand the causal mechanism involved, but we should never claim they are efficient causes capable of producing effects. That is how secular knowledge “draws a curtain of ingratitude over the earth” while Qur’anic “guidance scatters the light of thanks.” Science with the “selfindicative” perspective is “deaf and blind” while Qur’anic “guidance is hearing and seeing.” From the secular perspective of viewing things with the mânâ-i ismî, “the bounties of the earth are ownerless booty.” Therefore, “It provokes the desire to seize and steal them thanklessly, to savagely snap them off from Nature.” From the Tawhīdī perspective of viewing things with the mânâ-i harfî, “the bounties scattered over the breast of the earth and face of the universe are the fruits of mercy.” Thus, it encourages believers to see “a gracious hand beneath every bounty and has it kissed in gratitude” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 748). Qur’anic examples of negating causation The Qur’an is full of examples of negating causation while encouraging readers to reflect on the Divine bounties. For instance, the Qur’an refers to cattle as tray bearers of Divine bounty: And, behold, in the cattle [too] there is indeed a lesson for you: We give you to drink of that [fluid] which is [secreted from] within their bellies between that which is to be eliminated [from the animal’s body] and [its] life-blood: milk pure and pleasant to those who drink it. (Q, 16:66) The verse negates the secular trio in two ways. First, it refers to milk as pure and pleasant nutrition that comes from within an impure and bloody body. Thus, the apparent causes are not capable of making milk. Second, the verse does not say that we create cattle to give you milk. Instead, it says that we give you pure milk through cattle. Another example of negating causation is the creation of honey. The Qur’an does not refer to honeybees as honey workers with given knowledge of collecting pollen and making honey. Rather, it refers them as

Knowledge, certainty, and science 77 passive receivers of Divine inspiration to collect pollen: “And [consider how] your Sustainer has inspired the bee: ‘Prepare for yourself dwellings in mountains and in trees, and in what [men] may build [for thee by way of hives]’ ” (Q, 16:68). The wisdom behind causality As stated above, causality is recognizing the existing linkage of effect and its apparent cause even if the cause is not an effective one. Though Nursi strongly rejects causation, he puts emphasis on respecting the existence of causality as the Divine mechanism for requesting effect from God. Besides being necessary as a means for human trial in life, as stated above, in Nursi’s view, causality is created to protect God’s dignity. In other words, God is all-good. Therefore, anything that comes from Him is good. However, we do not always see the goodness in His actions. For instance, death is not bad in reality. It is a ticket to a better world. However, when we do not see the goodness in death, we might blame God for such an act. Thus, God creates diseases and even the angel of death as apparent causes to protect His dignity. People direct their blame to apparent causes during unpleasant calamities. Nursi also thinks that apparent causes are used to “demonstrate subtle instances of wisdom, such as displaying the perfections of His wisdom and the manifestations of many of His names” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 253). For instance, if an apple were to be created without a tree or seed, we would understand the Infinite Power, not the other Names. Through the use of seed and tree, we witness the manifestation of many Divine Names including All-Knowing (Al-Aleem), Al-Wise (Al-Hakeem), the Maker of Order (Al-Bari’), the Shaper of Beauty (Al-Musawwir), the First (Al-Awwal), the Last (Al-Akheer), etc. Therefore, for Nursi, scientific studies are indeed very important. They reveal the manifested names behind apparent causation in the creation. Furthermore, by understanding God’s creation, we can better appreciate His bounties. Otherwise, we might just take them for granted. Denying efficient causation does not mean the denial of the role of causality according to Nursi. Indeed, he clearly states the necessity of following the established causality when one wants anything from God. However, one shall always know that compliance with the causal mechanism is just a form of supplication. The effect is directly created by God once one complies with this established order. It is necessary for everyone to follow this order (complying with causal chains) while asking anything from God: by relating causes to effects, God has deposited an order in the universe through His will, and obliged man through his nature, illusions, and imagination, to comply with the order and be bound to it. Moreover, He directed all things towards Himself and is far above the effect of the causes in His dominions (mulk). He charged man in belief and faith,

78  Knowledge, certainty, and science to comply with this sphere with his conscience and his spirit, and be bound to it. (Nursi, 1996a, p. 26) Nursi carefully avoids the word submission (muracaat) when referring to causes. He prefers recognition (muraat) of causes as means of supplication when requesting anything from God. For example, having recourse to causes is an active prayer. To gather together causes is not in order to create the effect, but through the tongue of disposition to take up an acceptable position in order to seek the effect from Almighty God. For instance, for a farmer, ploughing a field is a form of active supplication to God. It is like “knocking at the door of the treasury of mercy.” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 327) Nursi warns believers to not confuse the “sphere of causes” with the “sphere of belief.” While it is necessary for a believer to understand everything is directly created by God, it is also necessary to know that in this world almost everything is created through causal chains. Thus, a farmer who wants wheat has to plant wheat seeds and fulfill other requirements to reach his goal. However, he should consider his acts as compliance to the Divine order in this world rather than deterministic causation in the creation of wheat. Causation and certainty of knowledge Once we negate causation, it is hard to establish any certainty for our knowledge. This is because our understanding is based on causation. David Hume makes a compelling case that we just rely on our past experience and believe the future will be alike. For instance, if pressing on the brakes is not the effective cause that makes the car stop, we cannot use a car with confidence. Just because in the past we were able to stop the car by using the brakes is no guarantee that they are going to work again. For Hume, we have to have a leap of faith in causation with no justification. From the Tawhīdī perspective, it is trust in God who would sustain His creative acts though the constant creation of causes and effects. Indeed, the Tawhīdī worldview reveals a very different picture of reality compared to the secular one. The latter treats the shadow like “phenomenal reality” as the ultimate reality while the former aims to see the beyond, which is a “transcendental reality” behind the phenomenal one. We can explain the difference between the two worldviews through the understanding of a tree.15 Since everything is seen as sufficient in and of themselves within this self-signifying view of the universe, in the secular perspective, the ultimate reality of a tree is perceived as nothing but what we

Knowledge, certainty, and science 79 observe through our senses. Depending on our level of knowledge, we could define a tree based on its physical, biological, genetic, chemical, molecular, or atomic structures. We could explain everything about a tree through material causes, natural properties, and/or chance. There is no need for God in understanding a tree. Indeed, the whole universe could be understood without invoking God. From the Tawhīdī perspective, trying to understand a tree without God is like understanding a shadow without its origin. Even though cause and nature seem to be sufficient, they lack of innate essence to be adequate. Indeed, causes and nature only “appear” to be the source of their effects. Ontologically speaking, God is the only cause of everything happening in the universe. Thus, a tree appears to come from a seed/DNA/genes/molecules/atoms while its ontic reality directly originates from the power and knowledge of God. It is being created from moment to moment. Thus, a tree is a Divine expression (sign) revealing the names and attributes of its Maker. Epistemologically speaking, we are expected to read this sign to better develop our epistemic understanding of God (maarifatullah). Teleologically speaking, we are expected to explore the benefits of trees for living beings. Anthropologically speaking, we are supposed to reflect on a tree as a purposeful, fitting gift from God. Axiologically speaking, we are expected to appreciate this gift among countless others and use them all in gaining God’s pleasure by increasing our good deeds. Inserting God’s name into secular knowledge is not a solution. In Nursi’s understanding, we need to first disconnect works of God from causes, nature, and chances. Given the fact that modern science relies on causation in explaining cosmic phenomena, we need to first show the fallacy in causation. Then, we can show the errors in the secular scientific approach that is based on the inductive method of generalizing observed causation. In Newtonian physics, changes observed in the world are nothing but the rearrangement of basic particles. In other words, since the Big Bang, the material world has been made of a fixed amount of elementary particles. What we refer to as change is nothing but a rearrangement of the same particles. Quantum physics challenges this depiction of the universe and provides an extremely complex, dynamic, and peculiar nature of reality. However, as Nobel Laureate Wilczek complains in The Lightness of Being, our curriculum still provides the Newtonian version of reality, rather than a welltested quantum version. He argues that “to do justice to our best modern understanding, we’ll need to qualify, modify, and refine almost every word” of the depiction of the reality in our textbooks. “For example, we’ve come to understand that protons and neutrons themselves are complicated objects, made from more elementary quarks and gluons” (Wilczek, 2010, p. 25). Subatomic particles are not just simple components. Indeed, When properly understood, they change our understanding of the nature of physical reality in a fundamental way. For quarks and gluons

80  Knowledge, certainty, and science are bits in another and much deeper sense, the sense we use we speak bits of information. To an extent that is qualitatively new in science, they are embodied ideas. (Wilczek, 2010, p. 33). Wilczek compares the computing power of a thousand connected computers around the world to the dynamic activities within a single proton. He concludes that the collective works of those computers for months on end could not be equal to the activities of a single proton. “At the end, what they have done what a single proton does every 10–24 seconds, which is figure out how to orchestrate quark and gluon fields in the best possible way so that they . . . make a stable equilibrium” (Wilczek, 2010, p. 113). Therefore, in reality, it is beyond our existing computation power to simulate the activities in a single proton. Interestingly, “On the one hand, the interior of a proton is a dynamic place, with things changing and moving around. On the other hand, all protons everywhere and everywhen behave in exactly the same way” (Wilczek, 2010, p. 113). In short, from the mânâ-i harfî perspective, everything is the product of God’s direct acts, which appear to come from causes and natural properties. As we have to use the “light switch” to get the light, we have to utilize the apparent causes to invoke the Divine acts. However, as the source of the light is not the light switch, the source of what we receive is not its apparent cause. Thus, we should consider everything as Divine expressions (signs) helping to better know God’s names and attributes.

10. Conclusion Scientism considers scientific knowledge to be the only verifiable truth. It raises doubt about everything else. Particularly, religious knowledge is neither scientific nor reasonably acceptable for the secular mind. In this chapter, we attempt to refute scientism on several grounds. First, we point to several categories of knowledge. While modern scientific knowledge largely deals with instrumental knowledge, the mânâ-i harfî approach puts emphasis on other types of knowledge, including wisdom and virtue. Second, from the phenomenological perspective, we argue that it is almost impossible for scientists to be purely objective. The mânâ-i harfî approach has a problem with modern scientific knowledge due to the embedded secular ideology. Third, the truth does exist from an Islamic perspective. However, we argue that the access to the truth varies based on the categories of truth. Fourth, we also categorize truth based on objectivity and subjectivity. We consider transcendent truth as subjectively objective. Fifth, following the phenomenological approach, we argue that the transcendental self shall be used to reach certainty about knowledge. In short, truth is not limited to scientific knowledge. In the mânâ-i harfî approach, it is possible to gain verified knowledge about transcendent truth.

Knowledge, certainty, and science 81 Using Nursi’s mânâ-i harfî approach, we argue that modern science deals with instrumental knowledge while ignoring or denying other dimensions of knowledge, mainly, wisdom (hikmah), truth (haqiqah), gnostic (marifaah), human nature (fitrah), and virtue (fadhilah). Furthermore, instrumental knowledge comes with embedded secular ideology, which misguides humanity in the search of absolute knowledge (‘ilm). From a Nursian perspective, we have two important tasks ahead to challenge scientism. First, we need to desecularize contemporary science by removing any explicit and implicit reference to secular ideology. Then, we will be left with “pure science.” Once we do this, we can be in favor of promoting pure science, because it does not come with embedded ideology. For that matter, we think that Nursi is not against “pure science.” He is fine to have science without reference to either God or causation, nature, and chance. He is against atheism, materialism, and philosophical naturalism, which are the pillars of modern atheistic secularism. Thus, Nursi is not antiscience if it only provides instrumental knowledge that helps to potentially improve our worldly life. He is against the embedded ideology in contemporary science. The second important task is derived from Nursi’s belief that believers should use pure science with a mânâ-i harfî approach to go beyond instrumental knowledge to acquire other types of knowledge such as truth (haqiqah), gnostic (ma’rifah), wisdom (hikmah), and virtue (fadhilah). That is what he wanted to do with his well-known university project. Thus, it would be wrong to argue that Nursi would be in favor of teaching pure science without mânâ-i harfî. Historically speaking, this was the main perspective of Islamic scientific tradition. For him, that would be a great loss since the ultimate objective for believers is to work for the well-being in this world and the hereafter. Once scientific knowledge is purified from the secular ideology and presented through the mânâ-i harfî approach, it will help to learn about God, reality, truth, wisdom, and virtue. At that moment, science and religion will cross paths with each other, as astrophysicist Robert Jastrow wrote in the last paragraph of his book, God and the Astronomers: it seems as though science will never be able to raise the curtain on the mystery of creation. For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries. (Jastrow, 1992, p. 107) In short, in the last chapter, we will show how to use the seven-dimensional approach to go beyond instrumental knowledge. We will provide a phenomenological interpretation based on Nursi’s concept of transcendental self

82  Knowledge, certainty, and science (anah) to come up with the mânâ-i harfî language in order to explore other dimensions of instrumental scientific knowledge. We will derive some character-building lessons based on the knowledge (‘ilm) gained in the previous dimensions as a guide for a virtuous life. Thus, the ultimate inquiry in the seven-dimensional knowledge approach is to gain true knowledge (‘ilm) and live a prudent life accordingly. This new approach does not deny the importance of instrumental knowledge provided by modern science. Rather, it helps believers to use this very knowledge in becoming better human beings in terms of improved characters.

Notes 1 It is important to note that “religion and belief (īmān) are not identical but they are mutually inseparable and indispensable. Belief in the sense we mean is to have faith, not quite in the sense faith is understood in English, but in the sense that it involves the becoming true to the trust by which God has confided in one, not by profession of belief with the tongue only, without the assent of the heart and action of the body in conformity with it; and this is more than knowledge, which is prior to faith, so that it is also verification by deeds in accordance with what is known to be the truth” (Al-Attas, 1989, p. 2). 2 As Aristotle claims in his Metaphysics: “To say that that which is, is not, and that which is not, is, is a falsehood; therefore, to say that which is, is, and that which is not, is not, is true” (Aristotle, Metaphysics, 1011, p. 26). 3 There is a very good statement in al-Maturidi’s work to express this Sunni approach to both reality and knowledge: “the object of knowledge is outside the subject, namely the knower.” We may express this as “the known is outside the knower.” This is a clear expression of realism. See Abu Mansur al-Maturidi, Kitabü’t-Tevhid / Açıklamalı Tercüme (Turkish by Bekir Toplaoğlu, trans., Istanbul: ISAM, 2018). See also Hanifi Özcan, Matûrîdîde Bilgi Problemi (İstanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı Yayınları, 1993, p. 51). 4 It is an essential human faculty, which has both good and bad usage like other faculties. An example of a bad use of wahm would be baseless fear from something that is not likely to happen. An example of a good use of wahm would be the feeling of ownership of power and knowledge by the self in order to understand the power and knowledge behind the creative acts in the universe (vahid-i kiyasi). 5 For further information on the categorization of knowledge in Islam, see Wan Mohd. Nor Wan Daud, The concept of knowledge in Islam and its implications for education in a developing country (London and New York: Mansell, 1989). 6 It is important to credit Seyyed Hossein Nasr for his pioneering work among modern Muslim scholars. Nasr makes a compelling case that modern science is neither objective nor secular in terms of being free from any sacred meaning. For further discussion, see The need for a sacred science (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993); Science and civilization in Islam (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968). 7 Kara Richardson, Causation in Arabic and Islamic thought. In Edward N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter, 2015 Edition). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/arabicislamic-causation 8 Laplace (1749–1827) was one of the great French scientists. He is credited with being the first to develop a model explaining the stability of planetary orbits.

Knowledge, certainty, and science 83 When he presented his definitive work on the properties of the solar system to Napoleon, he was asked if it was true that there was no mention of the solar system’s Creator in his works. Laplace replied, “I had no need of that hypothesis.” Quoted in A De Morgan, Budget of paradoxes. 9 For further discussion see, for instance, Mermer, The hermeneutical dimension of science: A  critical analysis based on Said Nursi’s Risale-i Nur. The Muslim World, 89(3–4) (1999), 270–296; Ameur, R. and Mermer, Y., Beyond “Modern”: Sa’id al-Nursi’s view of science. Islam & Science, 202(2), 119–160; İsra Yazıcıoğlu, Perhaps their harmony is not that simple: Bediuzzaman Said Nursî on the Qur’an and modern science. Theology and Science, 11(4) (2013), 339– 355; and Turner, The Qur’an Revealed, pp. 95–131. 10 On Ghazālī’s position on causality and the reconciliation of reason and revelation, see Frank Griffel, Al-Ghazālī’s philosophical theology (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 111–234. 11 In 2015, physicists at the Australian National University (ANU) conducted John Wheeler’s delayed-choice thought experiment using helium atoms to find out at how at which point does the atom decide to act like a particle or a wave. The result was shockingly weird, showing that the choice is based on the measurement. The research concluded, “The atoms did not travel from A to B. It was only when they were measured at the end of the journey that their wave-like or particle-like behavior was brought into existence.” In other words, the creation is subject to the observing consciousness. If there is no observing consciousness, there is no creative act. Perhaps, the experiment also confirms what Sir James Jeans once said, “The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine” (Jeans, J., The Mysterious Universe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1930), p. 137). 12 An article published in Scientific American (October  2006) by Gordon Kane, Director of the Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, talks about constant creation of virtual particles with the following title: “Are virtual particles really constantly popping in and out of existence? Or are they merely a mathematical bookkeeping device for quantum mechanics?” 13 It is not coincidence that in Greek mythology fire is stolen from God to help humanity while in the Qur’anic stories, fire and everything else are granted to humanity by God so that it may flourish through good deeds. 14 This is a revised translation based on the original source. The original word in Turkish is “cesme” which means fountain within the context. The translator prefers to use “spring” which is a wrong translation because it does not remind us of a real source of water. 15 Interestingly, in Ancient Greek philosophy, the tree was not just a tree. It was believed to have mana, the moving spirit (Horkheimer & Adorno, 1976).

3 Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews

1. Introduction Aristotle argues that “all men by nature desire to know.” This means that we are born to learn. Once we gain mental awareness, we cannot help but ask questions of ourselves or others such as, “What is learning? How do we form our worldview? What is the role of worldview in acquiring our knowledge of the universe?” These are some of the key questions we will try to tackle in this chapter. We will compare secular and holistic paradigms in terms of their phenomenology, ontology, epistemology, teleology, anthropology, and axiology based on the writings of Nursi. We will start with the general framework for knowledge and worldview formation. Second, we will discuss how phenomenological understanding within different paradigms leads to different languages that shape our understanding of the universe. Third, we will explore the main pillars of secular and holistic paradigms (the Tawhīdī understanding in Islam) within their corresponding phenomenology. Fifth, we will provide evidence of the Tawhīdī worldview from the Qur’an. Finally, we will discuss the role of worldview in perception and knowledge acquisition.

2. Knowledge and worldview formation Knowledge and mind How do we gain knowledge? The answer varies. David Hume puts experience at the center of knowledge. He explains knowledge acquisition in three stages. First, we receive an impression through sensory experiences. Second, we develop our ideas of the impressions. Third, we complete our understanding by connecting our ideas to make sense. Our understanding is based on self-experience. Without prior experience, we cannot make any sense: A man, who should find in a desert country the remains of pompous buildings, would conclude, that the country had, in ancient times, been

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 85 cultivated by civilized inhabitants; but did nothing of this nature occur to him, he could never form such an inference. (Hume, 2000, p. 35) Acikgenc puts the mind prior to experience in knowledge acquisition. He defines knowledge as “all the contents of the human mind” (Acikgenc, 2000, p. 25).1 This is a comprehensive definition of knowledge covering all kinds of information acquired by the human mind. It treats the mind as the core of knowledge acquisition. Then, what is the mind? How does the mind gain knowledge? Again, it was Kant who first paid attention to the mind in his epistemic inquiry. He places mental cognition at the heart of epistemology. He reminds us that we learn only through the prism of our mind, which is the ultimate sense organ. Since the mind has a limited ability to penetrate reality, it is impossible to claim universal truth based merely on perception. Furthermore, if the mind perceives reality based on worldview, then scientific knowledge produced by scientists cannot be universal. Formation of worldview As Acikgenc (2000) outlines in detail, a worldview is a universal phenomenon in the acquisition of knowledge. Its formation begins once we gain mental consciousness of our surroundings. It is a dynamic process of establishing a mental framework to experience reality. What we may term the “default worldview” is the dominant one given to us by our society. However, once we become aware of our worldview and do not become satisfied with the default one, we may begin to modify it and develop our own. We call the second type “chosen worldview.” Through employing our worldview, we form our understanding of experienced reality. Scientific knowledge is not absolute truth matching reality; rather, our mental perception of reality shaped by our worldview gives us a conception of reality. Worldviews, therefore, function primarily as general schemes through which we perceive everything, including ourselves. In this respect, their function is to put our conception into a unified whole. Whenever we philosophize or construct a theory, we inevitably and necessarily, by the very nature of our mind, presuppose worldview. (Acikgenc, 2000, pp. 25–26) Worldview and knowledge Since knowledge acquisition depends on worldview, it is crucial to understand the nature of worldview and its role in shaping our understanding. Once we gain knowledge, we can talk about the universal theory of knowledge

86  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews acquisition. However, if our perception is shaped by our worldview, then it is essential to study worldview. In Critique of Pure Reason, Kant argues that we gain knowledge through the faculty of sensibility. Thus, our experience is based on sensory datum we receive through sensation. Since our mind cannot comprehend anything without space and time, we have to have such a priori forms of intuition before any experience. In this way, Kant establishes a bridge between empiricism and rationalism. Empiricism claims knowledge primarily based on sensory experience while giving no role for the a priori knowledge of the mind. Rationalism, on the other hand, claims knowledge only based on the mind. Kant finally proved in the West that the knowledge process is possible only based on both aspects of human knowledge faculties. Due to Islamic intellectual tradition, Muslim thinkers from the very beginning have accepted the possibility of knowledge based on these two faculties of human nature: sensory experience and intellect. Objects of knowledge Acikgenc (2000) places objects of knowledge into two main categories: mental objects and external objects. In other words, we learn from what we already have in our mind and what is external to our mind. External objects could be external to mind (such as feelings and emotions) or external to the knowing subject. What we have as knowledge is nothing but a mental representation of the objects of knowledge. It is the meaning we ascribe to objects of knowledge. Our cognitive understanding of objects of knowledge is based on our impressions. In other words, we must have certain experiences of those objects to have any impression. Acikgenc defines experience as “all the empirical impressions of an object of knowledge, whether it be mental, or psychological, or external” (Acikgenc, 2000, p. 29). In this statement, the term “external” refers to sensory perception, defined by Ibn Sina as “external senses.” Through such experience, our mind constructs a “representation” of the objects of knowledge. Thus, we can define the mind also as a “faculty of experience” but with some reservations: We cannot experience our internal faculties of knowledge directly. If, however, the object of knowledge is internal, there is no faculty of representation which gives us the experience of that object, except the mind itself, in which case the mind acts as a faculty of experience. But since such mental experiences are customarily called “thinking”, we do not refer to it as experience. Since mental representation is possible through analysis this is in itself nothing but thinking. Therefore, in our terminology, the term “experience” is reserved for representation of only internal and external objects of knowledge, and it cannot thus be applied for mental representation in the form of thinking. (Acikgenc, 2000, p. 11)

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 87 According to Acikgenc, the knowledge process begins from the external experience of the objects of knowledge and continues through internal processes of the mind. Our external experience is awareness of external objects of knowledge through sensory perception. In other words, knowing is simply gaining awareness, which could be in one of two ways. One is to become aware of physical existence through the senses without knowing about the properties of the object of knowledge. This is called “physical consciousness.” The other is to conceptualize the meaning of experience through mental representation, which can be called “mental consciousness” (Acikgenc, 2000, p. 32). This inner perception of an object of knowledge creates “epistemic emotion” (Acikgenc, 2000, p. 32). Perhaps we can call this pleasure or pain of learning. For instance, when we see a lion (having physical consciousness), we will simultaneously develop a certain emotion, such as fear. The emergence of emotion is evidence of the “faculty of internal experience.” Acikgenc calls this faculty “sensible intuition,” which intuitively perceives an object of knowledge without physical perception. Indeed, Acikgenc, following the general Qur’anic outlook as maintained in Islamic scientific tradition, introduces the heart (qalb), a Qur’anic concept, as the central faculty of inner experience that provides the mind with representations of ethical and spiritual realities. Thus, we can experience moral and religious realms through the heart and psychical realms through our senses. Other internal experience faculties include emotions, conscience (wijdan), and inner consciousness (the transcendent self). Acikgenc also acknowledges spiritual faculties discovered by the great Sufi philosopher Ibn al-‘Arabi (Chittick, 1989), such as spirit and sir to which Nursi also adds sir al-sirr (Nursi, 1996e, p.  477). The former is based on sensory representations, while the latter is experiential. Both external and internal experiences are captured through the mind, which can be defined as a comprehensive faculty of conceptual experience. To use Kant’s term, both external and internal experiences furnish raw material for the mind, which then conceptually processes these into what we call knowledge. For Acikgenc, the mind consists of several faculties including memory, imagination, intellect, will, and intuition (faculty of inference). The mind receives both internal and external data of experience through mental consciousness. Then, it converts them to mental entities, which are stored in memory. The imagination makes copies of those entities for the intellect, which converts them to concepts with the aid of imagination and then assesses them by using the faculty of will to reach a conclusion (making judgment). Then by using mental intuition (Acikgenc, 2000, p. 47), our mind is able to reach inferences. While analyzing mental entities, the intellect performs the following functions: (1) finding a causal link, (2) universalizing and abstracting, (3) classifying, (4) naming, (5) associating, (6) arguing, (7) perceiving in unity, (8) perceiving in plurality, (9) proportioning, and (10) corresponding (Acikgenc, 2000, pp. 55–56). It seems that Acikgenc agrees with Kant that scientific knowledge is empirical, which is possible through sensory experience. While moral and religious

88  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews knowledge is experiential, it cannot be captured through senses. However, Acikgenc does not agree with Kant on the possibility of moral metaphysics, because for him even morality is possible if there is a grounding experience supporting our judgment.2 Kant also does not accept the possibility of experiential knowledge based on the faculty of the heart. This is indeed the difference between Islamic epistemology and the Western approach. Nursi also proposes three kinds of potentialities of humans for knowledge: (1) senses (organs of external experience), (2) faculties (kuvveler, quwâ in Arabic), and (3) subtle faculties (latifeler, latâif in Arabic). Each one of these has their own field of application: for example, the subtle faculties provide no experience of the physical realm, which is perceived by the faculties of external experience, i.e., senses. Faculties are operative in the mental realm, but the subtle faculties are able to receive representations from the spiritual realm.3 In short, according to Acikgenc, we form our worldview through utilizing the knowledge acquisition process described above. When we are born, we do not have any worldview. Once we gain mental consciousness, we begin to build our worldview. The default worldview we acquire is the dominant one in our society. However, we can adjust our worldview as we learn. The knowledge that we embrace shapes our worldview, whereas the knowledge we gain but do not approve has no impact on our worldview. A worldview can be defined as follows: “vision of reality and truth, which, as an architectonic mental unity, acts as the non-observable foundation of all human conduct, and as the general framework out of which follow scientific and technological activities” (Acikgenc, 2000, pp. 82–83). Knowledge formation in Nursi’s epistemology Even though Acikgenc’s theory of knowledge and worldview mostly overlap with Nursi’s epistemology and worldview, there are a few missing elements. First, for Nursi, the heart is more than an internal faculty for spiritual and moral representation. He defines the heart as the ultimate faculty of verified knowledge. Second, Nursi considers the human self as an essential faculty of knowledge acquisition. Third, Nursi uses both the mind and the heart in explaining religious and moral knowledge. Let me elaborate further on those differences. Nursi agrees that we gain knowledge through external and internal senses. However, he considers that many internal faculties play a role in experiencing objects of knowledge. He also accepts that emotions are the products of the heart in addition to inspiration. More importantly, he defines the heart as the ultimate source of verified knowledge. He describes six-layered steps in processing knowledge: takhayyul (imagination), tasavvur (conception), taakkul (reasoning), tasdiq (judgment), iz’an (assent), iltizam (commitment), and itiqad (dedication). Takhayyul and tasavvur are the work of imagination, while taakkul is reasoning by the intellect. Tasdiq, iz’an, iltizam, and itiqad are stages in the heart. Tasdiq and iz’an require the involvement of the human self.4

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 89 Indeed, if we find the equivalence of external or internal data in the selfreferential dictionary, which will be discussed later on, we will confirm this knowledge and send it to the permanent folder in the heart. This confirmation and conviction occurs in our heart. Once it is confirmed, we embrace it as ours. We keep it in our heart. That is how we form our belief, which can be defined as our personal truth. For that matter, everyone has a particular belief (even atheists). Of course, we are not talking about religious belief. We mean our set of beliefs about external reality. For instance, we have to believe in material causational relationships in the universe even if there is no logical necessity for their existence. We have to believe in the laws governing micro and macro universes. The verified knowledge in the heart is possible through the confirmation by the self. Thus, for Nursi, the self plays a crucial role in acquiring our beliefs, which is indeed a kind of knowledge. However, there is a need to fully elaborate Nursi’s understanding of the self for which he uses the Arabic term “anah” (transcendental self). An exploration of the ego should tell us in what kind of knowledge (as belief) it plays a key role. Therefore, we shall embark upon a brief discussion of the self by Nursi in the following two sections. In short, in Nursi’s view, we should first and foremost know about the human self. If we get this wrong, we will get everything else wrong as well, because our understanding of the human self serves as the basis for our knowledge of the universe and even God. Thus, we can argue that the main problem of the secular worldview arises from the misunderstanding of the human self. In the next two sections, we will discover the concept of the human self and its role in the formation of knowledge within the realm of phenomenology.

3. Phenomenology within the secular worldview and secular language Defining phenomenology Phenomenology is the study of phenomena (appearance) and reality (noumena) concerning how we perceive things and what their true nature is. As such, it is the study of consciousness as experienced by the subject (human self). It is the experience of the self towards the self and others. The purpose of this study is to understand how we derive meaning from what we experience. Indeed, any person perceives reality in dual perspectives: The perspective of the “I” (the transcendental self) and that of the world (the universe). For each one of these, we have two dimensions: inner experience and outer appearance. As Schumacher (1977) outlines, we have four fields of knowledge: (1) inner knowledge about the self, (2) inner knowledge about the world, (3) outer knowledge about the self, and (4) outer knowledge about the world. Even though we can reach outer knowledge through sensory data, we can only know the inner knowledge of others through our inner knowledge. Therefore, self-knowledge plays a crucial role in learning about others.

90  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews Phenomenology puts self-knowledge at the center of epistemic understanding. As a discipline, it was developed by major thinkers of the previous century, such as Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre. They consider phenomenology to be the foundation of all philosophy, because it provides the key to the human understanding of everything. It goes beyond experiencing data received through the five senses. It includes all types of experience, including perception, thought, memory, imagination, desire, various awareness, etc. It is consciousness of or about the self and everything else. It is self-awareness – meaning to be conscious of its consciousness.5 It is the ability to say “I” and “will” to direct consciousness in accordance to its purposes. It is the “apparent inner power” of controlling and moving objects for its purposes. In short, phenomenology puts the self at the center of our understanding. It reveals the fact that it is almost impossible not to be subjective since everything is just an understanding of the self. The essence of the phenomenological method is making sense of everything through experiences. It is to understand the essentials of experiences and communicate them with others for verification. It is categorizing everything based on experiences by the transcendental self. Thus, we need to identify a distinguishing quality of each experienced phenomenon to differentiate it from others. We build our understanding of the world based on our experiences. Phenomenology and scientific knowledge Phenomenology plays a key role in helping us see the subjective and objective sides of scientific knowledge. It puts the self as first-subject order – as the source of giving meaning to something. Indeed, phenomenology deals with the nature and meaning of phenomena based on the perceptions of an individual. It is a structure of consciousness of something by the self. Still, we are in the dark when it comes to the ontic reality of consciousness. In a 1992 issue of The Times Literary Supplement, the philosopher Jerry Fodor (1992, p.  6) complained, “Nobody has the slightest idea how anything material could be conscious. Nobody even knows what it would be like to have the slightest idea about how anything material could be conscious.” Despite many studies in brain and cognitive science, we are still far from understanding consciousness. Spinelli (2006, p. 2) defines “phenomenology as a method of inquiry into all aspects of lived experience and mental activity.” He argues, “the task of phenomenological investigation became that of illuminating and disclosing the meaning structure of lived experiences.” In other words, we are the meaning-makers. We give meaning to everything we experience through experience by the self. It is also not simply understanding by the mind. It is a full experience of the self through reasoning, feeling, imagining, etc. Through self-experience, we create our meaning of experienced phenomena. The meaning to us is based on our ontic language. Indeed, “people give personal meaning to each situational experience, and people interpret the same

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 91 event in different ways” (Aoki, Pinar, & Irwin, 2005, p. 143). Therefore, as stated by Heidegger, “language is the house of the Being. In its housing man is at home” (Martin Heidegger, 1976). In other words, our gateway to the reality is language. Our understanding of the reality is built on words. We argue that the house of language is the self. We establish our ontic language through self-experienced phenomena. As shown in the above figure, although the self is the key to understanding, it is essential to understand the human self, first, before understanding the other. The self as a psychological faculty provides a sense of distinctive existence separated from the environment. Indeed, an autistic child with no such feeling could not know where his body ends in relation to his environment. He cannot identify himself as separate from his surroundings. “Me,” “I,” and “mine” are all expressions of the self that defines its relationship with the other. We think of ourselves as conscious of what the self is experiencing. Furthermore, as acknowledged by prominent scholars of modern psychology such as Baumeister, the human self is a distinctive faculty of any human being providing the ability for self-reflection, social identity, and executive power of making choices, exerting control and self-regulation. Indeed, Baumeister argues that “Without selves, human society and culture would be impossible” (Schroeder, 2013). The human self receives external data through the senses and internal data through inner faculties. Then, it begins to make sense of itself through self-reflection. According to the phenomenology within the secular paradigm, the self perceives itself as a signifier. It considers its experience as its acts. Then, it establishes its own self-reference dictionary (SRD) based on this perception. It defines its mission as self-advancement reflecting its own qualities rather than reflecting the beautiful names of God. The self explores others within its own SRD. Using an analogy, it perceives other phenomena in a similar way. It does not think about their meanings as signified. Rather, it sees everything as a self-signifier. It forms its own belief about phenomena as reality. It acts like the chained cavemen in Plato’s allegory who believe the shadows are real because they are not able to get out to see reality. Once the self forms the belief that the shadow is real, it begins to perceive everything within that perspective.

4. Phenomenological method in the mânâ-i harfî perspective Interestingly, even though Said Nursi was not aware of phenomenology, he puts the human self at the core of knowledge formation. Nursi considers the “human self (I)” as a key component of trust (amanah) mentioned in the following verse: “We did indeed offer the Trust to the heavens, and the earth, and the mountains; but they refused to undertake it being afraid thereof. But man assumed it; indeed, he is most unjust, most foolish” (Q, 33:72) The verse clearly states the importance of trust and its consequences once

92  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews misunderstood. Therefore, it is essential to have a correct understanding of the “human self” to avoid being unjust and foolish. From an Islamic perspective, we should begin our reading from the self because knowledge of the self will help us to know God. As the Prophet said, “he who knows himself knows his Lord.” In other words, knowing one’s self is the key to knowing God. Nursi defines the “human self” as the epistemic key to establish our knowledge of God and the universe. However, this key is a mystery. Once we solve the puzzle of the “human self (I),” we can unlock the reality of the universe and develop a proper understanding of God. Just as the “I” is the key to the Divine Names, which are hidden treasures, so is it the key to the locked talisman of creation; it is a problem-solving riddle, a wondrous talisman. When its nature is known, both the “I” itself, that strange riddle, that amazing talisman, is disclosed, and it discloses the talisman of the universe and the treasures of the Necessary World. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 558) The Qur’an particularly emphasizes the importance of giving examples from human self-experience: “He does propound to you a similitude from your own (experience): . . . Thus do we explain the Signs in detail to a people that understand” (Q, 30:28). Nursi argues that our perception of the phenomenal world is not reality. Even though we think we know the universe through our sensory perception, we do not know reality until we utilize the epistemic key of the “I.” In Nursi’s terms, The key to the world is in the hand of man and is attached to his self. For a while being apparently open, the doors of the universe are in fact closed. God Almighty has given to man by way of a Trust, such a key, called the “I,” that it opens all the doors of the hidden world; He has given him an enigmatic “I” with which he may discover the hidden treasures of the Creator of the universe. (1996e, p. 558)

External (sensory) datum

Other

Internal (experienal) datum

SRD (secular diconary) secular perspecve

Human Self (I)

Self-experience as signifier (able actor)

Figure 3.1 Phenomenology within secular paradigm and secular language

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 93 As shown in Figure 3.1, the human self is at the core of all human knowledge. It is an alphabet through which we can establish our dictionary to read everything else.6 Nursi argues that our sense of self does not change even if we have gone through a substantial biological, intellectual, and spiritual transformation. We always feel that we are the same “self.” Once we become aware of the “self,” we establish certain possessive feelings over our knowledge and actions. At an early age, we draw a line between what we possess and what others have. “It is mine” is a common expression we use when we gain awareness of our “self.” Thus, we pay distinctive attention to what we have and do. We treat our knowledge linked to the “self” differently than other knowledge. We consider knowledge generated through the “self” as an apparent doer differently than knowledge provided by others or coming through sensory perception. Indeed, we use the former as a yardstick for the latter. Thus, we assess all knowledge by using the knowledge of the “self.” In Nursi’s view, the function of the “self” described so far is universal. The problem arises when we fail to understand the true nature of the “self” or when we use it to form a false dictionary. We shall now attempt to explain what concepts are included in this dictionary. Self-understanding by the self The first task for the human self is to form its own understanding through self-reflection. It is to solve the nature of the self. However, as stated by Nursi (1996e, p. 558), “the ‘I’ is also an extremely complicated riddle and a talisman that is difficult to solve. When its true nature and the purpose of its creation are known, then its riddle is solved, so is the riddle of the universe.” In other words, the default impression of “I” does not show its true nature. Once we overcome this illusion and construct a true understanding of the “I,” the key will be accessible for us to unlock the reality of the universe and understand the names and attributes of God. Like everything else, “I” is a sign, too. It is both the signifier and the signified. Nursi comes up with his own terminology, naming two aspects of this sign: the mânâ-i ismî (self-signifier) and the mânâ-i harfî (Other-signifier), in other words, its true signification, “indicating God.” That is the breaking point between secular (mânâ-i ismî based) and holistic (mânâ-i harfî based) knowledge formation. Secular phenomenology perceives the self as signifier and attributes what appears to be from the self to the self itself. It considers the self as an “able doer” of its own acts. The Tawhīdī phenomenology perceives the self as signified with absolute impotence and dependence on God. Thus, the self is a “disabled agent” manifesting the acts of God. It is not a doer, but the receiver of its own “supposed acts.” In an allegorical story, Nursi resembles humans to a soldier who is sent into a critical battle. This soldier is inflicted with two life-­threatening wounds. “Of the two wounds, one is man’s infinite and troublesome impotence, while the other is his grievous and boundless poverty” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 42). Thus, it is essential to be aware of those wounds and seek treatment for them. Nursi,

94  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews in many places, argues that every human being is created with the utmost impotence and poverty, not even able to feed himself. While a man sometimes appears to be in power, it is not his power. It is the Divine power working through him. Man is also absolutely needy because he owns nothing. As the Qur’an repeatedly reminds us, everything belongs to God, we are simply given the temporary use of things around us. Going back to the analogy of the wounded soldier, we need two medicines to treat those wounds: “one is trusting in God and patience, and the other is relying on the power of one’s Creator and having confidence in His wisdom” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 42). Able vs. imaginary self Nursi uses certain metaphors to facilitate our understanding of the human self. He argues that the “self” is like a unit of measurement to be used as a yardstick in understanding the reality of the universe and the names and attributes of God. It is an imaginary measurement similar to a thermometer or barometer. It is not necessary for a unit of measurement to have actual existence; like hypothetical lines in geometry, a unit of measurement may be formed by hypothesis and supposition. It is not necessary for its actual existence to be established by concrete knowledge and proofs. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 558) The perception of “I” as real existence is just an illusion. The real nature of the “I” is indicative; it shows the meaning of things other than itself. Its dominicality (rububiyah) is imaginary. Its existence is so weak and insubstantial that in itself it cannot bear or support anything at all. Rather, it is a sort of scale or measure, like a thermometer or barometer that indicates the degrees and amounts of things; it is a measure that makes known the absolute, all-encompassing and limitless attributes of the Necessary Being. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 559) In Nursi’s view, even though our sense of the “self” gives us perception as if we are the owner of our actions or knowledge, in reality, this is just illusionary. When we talk or walk, we think these are deliberate acts controlled by us. When we build an elegant place, we become proud of our work assuming that we are the doer. According to Nursi, we are absolutely impotent. We have no power. Thus, we could not claim any possession. We own nothing. As we are created, our actions are created, too. The only thing we can claim as ours is limited free will. We can only will for something. When we walk, we do not create or control the complex process of walking. We desire to walk, and God directly makes us walk. Thus, our sense of “self” is

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 95 an able agent, but the self itself is nothing but an illusion. However, the self believes that “it owns itself, then it betrays the Trust, and it comes under the category of, ‘And he fails who corrupts it’ ” (Q, 91:10). “It was of this aspect of the Trust, therefore, which gives rise to all ascribing of partners to God, evil, and misguidance, that the heavens, earth, and mountains were terrified; they were frightened of associating hypothetical partners with God” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 560). Thus, if we fail to understand the true nature of the “self,” we will claim ownership over the acts of God in our personal life. This is a partnership with God. Once we think we are the owner of our actions, knowledge, and power, we will assume that other beings have similar possessions. This will lead to partnership with God (shirk) at the macro level. The “I” will permeate all parts of a human being. Like a gigantic dragon, it will swallow up the human being; that entire person with all his faculties will, quite simply, become pure ego. Then too, the ‘egotism’ of the human race gives strength to the individual ‘Egotism’ as self-esteem and topped up pride, by means of human racialism and national racialism, and the ‘I’, gaining support from the ‘egotism’ of the human race, contests the commands of the Glorious Maker, like Satan. Then, using itself as a yardstick, it compares everyone, everything even, with itself; it divides God Almighty’s sovereignty between them and other causes. It falls into ascribing partners to God on a vast scale, indicating the meaning of: “To assign partners to God is verily a great transgression.” (Q, 31:13). It is just like a man who steals a brass coin from the public treasury; he can only justify his action by agreeing to take a silver coin for each of his friends who is present. So the man who says: “I own myself,” must believe and say: “Everything owns itself.” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 560) Knowing self or nothing Once we have the wrong perception of the “self,” by perceiving it as real, we will get the wrong idea about everything. It does not matter how knowledgeable we are; we are absolutely ignorant due to our lack of understanding of the ultimate reality. This is because we use the true knowledge of the “self” as a yardstick to understanding reality. If we do not have such a measure, we cannot reach reality. In Figure  3.1, we call this yardstick SRD (self-reference dictionary). We make sense of everything by comparing (using an analogy) with words in SRD. If we use a wrong dictionary, we will get everything wrong. We will miss the meaning of everything altogether. If we establish our SRD based on the self-signifier perspective, we make a fatal mistake. It does not matter how much we learn about the “other,” we are still absolutely ignorant because we assign wrong meanings. We do not have right dictionary to properly understand inflowing data. In Nursi’s terms, the self-referential “I” is in absolute ignorance:

96  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews while in this deceitful position. Even if it knows thousands of branches of science, with compounded ignorance it is most ignorant. For when its senses and thoughts yield the lights of knowledge of the universe, those lights are extinguished because the human self does not find any material within itself with which to confirm, illuminate, and perpetuate them. Whatever it encounters is dyed with the colors that are within it. Even if it encounters pure wisdom, the wisdom takes the form, within that “I”, of absolute futility. For the color of an “I” that is in this condition is atheism and ascribing partners to God, it is denial of God Almighty. If the whole universe is full of shining signs, a dark point in the “I” hides them from view, as though extinguished. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 560) Human history or the history of self Nursi considers the “self” as the seed of two essential movements in the entire history of human civilization. The two movements are like two mighty trees with branches covering every class of humanity. “One of them is the line of prophethood and religion, the other the line of (materialist) philosophy in its various forms.” In reality, they are just “the two faces of the ‘I’ as the root and pivot and as a principal seed of those two trees” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 561). In other words, the key difference between those movements originates from their understanding of the “I.” The line of materialist philosophy reads the “I” as self-signifier. It regards the “I” as carrying no meaning other than its own. That is to say, it declares that the “I” points only to itself – its meaning is in itself. It considers that the “I” works purely on its own account. It regards its existence as necessary and essential, that is, it says that it exists in itself and of itself. It falsely assumes that the “I” owns its own life and is the real master in its sphere of disposal. It supposes it to be a constant reality. And it considers the “I’s” duty to be the perfection of self, which originates from love of self, and likewise, philosophies have constructed their modes of thought on many such corrupt foundations. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 561) In Nursi’s view, it is the misperception of the self that makes people deny the existence of God or associate partners with Him. Once a person forgets his/her intrinsic nature of being impotent, deficient, and imperfect, it is hard for him/her to realize the need for submitting to God. As the Qur’an says, once a person sees he is self-sufficient, he does not feel that he needs God: “Nay, but man doth transgress all bounds. In that, he looketh upon himself as self-sufficient” (Q, 96:6–7). “And do not be like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget their selves. Those are the defiantly disobedient” (Q, 59:19).

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 97 In short, the key to understanding the universe and God lies within our understanding of the self. If we get the self wrong, we will establish the wrong reference dictionary. Thus, we will assign incorrect meanings in our reading of universal phenomena. We will be deceived by appearance. We will not be able to go beyond the appearance of objects and unlock their true meaning. Similar to Plato’s cavemen, we will treat shadows as reality and spend our entire life chasing shadows. In the end, we will have nothing but a wasted life. We will deny the fact that there might be an ultimate reality. This is precisely what secular science does for humanity. It fails to unveil the truth behind phenomena. It denies the existence of any meaning. It treats the book of the universe as a picture book with no meaning. It gives a wrong meaning to the signs (verses) of this book. It causes a worse kind of ignorance in which its disciples do not even know that they do not know. It turns the meaningful book of the universe into meaningless toys. It promises great pleasure while denying the fact of the fleeting nature of human life. It asks people to close their eyes to the reality of their inevitable end.

5.  Tawhīdī phenomenology and Tawhīdī language Secular phenomenology perceives the self as a signifier without considering what it signifies, while Tawhīdī phenomenology pays attention to the self as God-signifier. Tawhīdī phenomenology argues that the self appears to own (or do) certain things. However, in reality, everything is an act of God. He just makes us feel as if we are the doers. We have no power over our actions. We can only “will” for something. For instance, we think we can feed ourselves. In reality, feeding ourselves requires many complicated processes that are beyond our knowledge and power. What we do is just place food in our mouth, chew it, and swallow it. In reality, even these actions are not ours. We cannot place food in our mouth without controlling the multitude of entangled processes in our body and in the universe. For instance, as we try to get food to our mouth, the systems at the micro levels such as the ones in atoms or cells of that food and at the macro levels such as solar and galactic systems are in place. If these systems collapse, we cannot feed ourselves. Even if we take a bite and swallow, it is just the beginning. We need to know how to process this food and distribute the nutrients to every single cell in our body. This is an extremely complicated process. Indeed, the scientist who first discovered this system was awarded the Nobel Prize. Qur’anic depiction of the self The Qur’an clearly states that God is both the creator and sustainer of human being and her works: “But Allah has created you and your handwork!” (Q, 37:96). God; there is no deity save Him, the Ever-Living, the Self-Subsistent Fount of All Being. Neither slumber overtakes Him, nor sleep. His is all

98  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews that is in the heavens and all that is on earth. . . . His eternal power overspreads the heavens and the earth, and their upholding wearies Him not. And he alone is truly exalted, tremendous. (Q, 2:255). The Qur’an ascribes all creative acts to God. For instance, the Qur’an mentioned that the Prophet threw dust to his enemies when he escaped from the assassination attempt, but it is declared, And yet, [O believers,] it was not you who slew the enemy, but it was God who slew them; and it was not thou who cast [terror into them, O Prophet], when thou didst cast it, but it was God who cast it. (Q, 8:17) It is clearly stated that it was not the prophet, but God who threw the dust. Indeed, the Prophet never claimed credit for his good actions. He always acted with consciousness that God is in control of everything including his acts. Indeed, it is reported in several Hadiths that the Prophet used to swear in the following way: “By the One in Whose hand is my soul.” Nursi argues that this statement is a sheer reminder that nothing in the universe – even the soul of the most beloved creation – is not beyond the control of God. Thus, from both the verses and the Hadith, it is clear that the Tawhīdī understanding of the self differs from the secular one. As seen on Figure 3.2 two things differentiate the Tawhīdī perspective of phenomenology: First, the self perceives itself as signified with absolute impotence and dependence. It does not claim any ownership over its actions. It ascribes them to God. In other words, it realizes that it has no power and knowledge to create its own actions. It has a shadow-like contingent nature entirely depending on the All-Mighty. It sees itself as a completely disabled agent with no power and knowledge but only endowed with a limited will to choose an option among options set in front of it. Second, the self builds an SRD based on what is signified. It creates a Tawhīdī dictionary with words describing the acts of God in everything. Then, the self uses this dictionary to give meaning to everything in the universe. It observes the universal phenomena through the glasses of the Tawhīdī perspective. Once the self realizes that it is not a doer, but a passive receiver, it cannot accept anyone but God as the real Doer. It will know from its SRD what it takes to be the Doer. It recognizes that no other entity has the power, knowledge, and wisdom to claim ownership over the acts in its body and the universe. It confirms the fact that the Necessary Existent One with infinite power and knowledge is creating and sustaining everything from moment to moment. It reads the book of the universe using the Tawhīdī language. It perceives everything as a sign with appearance being the signifier and real meaning being the signified. It goes beyond the signifier and penetrates its meaning (the signified). It finds the true meaning of the inflow of data

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 99

External (sensory) datum

Other

Internal (experienal) datum

Human Self (I)

SRD (Tawhīdī diconary)

Self-experience as signified

Tawhīdī perpecve

(disabled agent)

Figure 3.2 The Tawhīdī perspective of phenomenology and Tawhīdī language

through its signified SRD. In Nursi’s terms, a person with such an understanding will use SRD like a telescope: through the telescope of his “I”, he sees what the universe is and what duties it is performing. When he obtains information about the universe, he sees that his “I” confirms it. This knowledge will remain as light and wisdom for him, and will not be transformed into darkness and futility. When the “I” fulfills its duty in this way, it abandons its imaginary lordship and supposed ownership, which are the units of measurement, and it says: “His is the sovereignty and to Him is due all praise; His is the judgment and to Him will you all be brought back.” It achieves true worship. It attains the rank of “the Most Excellent of Patterns.” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 559) The true nature of the self Again, the main difference between the secular and Tawhīdī worldview is in the understanding of the self. The Qur’anic teaching presents the “I” as signified as discussed in detail by Nursi: That is to say, the “I” knows itself to be a bondsman. It realizes that it serves one other than itself. Its essence has only an indicative meaning. That is, it understands that it carries the meaning of another. Its existence is dependent; that is, it believes that its existence is due only to the existence of another, and that the continuance of its existence is due solely to the creativity of that other. Its ownership is illusory; that is, it knows that with the permission of its owner it has an apparent and temporary ownership. Its reality is shadow-like; that is, a contingent and insignificant shadow that displays the manifestation of a true and

100  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews necessary reality. As to its function, being a measure and balance for the attributes and functions of its Creator, it is conscious service. It is in this way that the prophets, and the pure ones and saints who were from the line of the prophets, regarded the “I”, they saw it in this regard, and understood the truth. They handed over the sovereignty to the Lord of All Sovereignty and concluded that that Lord of All Glory has no partner or like, neither in His sovereignty, nor in His lordship, nor in His Divinity. He has no need of assistant or deputy. The key to all things is in His hand. He has absolute power over all things. They also concluded that causes are but an apparent veil; nature is the set of rules of His creation, a collection of His laws, and the way in which He demonstrates His power. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 562) The ultimate goal is not seeking praise for the self by assuming that it is the source of its acts. Rather, it is to recognize God as the Creator of everything including the actions of the self. Thus, real success lies in the understanding of the self as impotent, needy, faulty, and dependent. Therefore, the self needs to seek the Divine power, Mercy, Bounty, and Forgiveness to excel in this life. The self is supposed to create its own reference dictionary to understand God and His acts in the universe. For instance, a contractor or construction engineer who built a house will for sure know what it takes to make a house. Through the self, the engineer knows that it requires a certain amount of knowledge, tools, materials, and power to build a house. The engineer also knows that the degree of knowledge and power needed depends on the complexity of the house. This is self-experiential knowledge that cannot be denied by the contractor and engineer. Through analogy, they know with near certainty that the construction of a house requires a certain level of knowledge, power, and will. Even if the entire human race claims that monkeys can build skyscrapers, they would not be believed. They know that monkeys do not have the minimum amount of knowledge, intelligence, and power to build a skyscraper. Given our experience of construction, we will infer that there must be a builder whenever we see a building. For us, this is certain knowledge until we experience otherwise. If we see a tower rise up after a storm in a desert, that would be shocking to us. This is unexpected given our self-­ experiential knowledge. It will shake our belief that a building requires a conscious builder with knowledge, will, and power. However, if we never see an example of a complex structure such as a house being built without the use of knowledge, power, and will, whenever we see a house we will also believe that it must have builders with certain attributes. This shows that self-experiential knowledge is the key to our conviction. Through the Tawhīdī SRD, a person can both know the Maker of the universe and His attributes. Using an analogy, as Nursi (1996e, p.  559) explains, “such a person can say, ‘As I made this house and arranged it, so

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 101 someone must have made the universe and arranged it,’ and so on. Thousands of mysterious states, attributes, and perceptions that make known and show to a degree all the Divine attributes and functions are contained within the ‘I.’ That is to say, the ‘I’ is mirror-like, and, like a unit of measurement and tool for discovery, it has an indicative meaning; having no meaning in itself, it shows the meaning of others.” In short, from the Tawhīdī perspective, the ultimate purpose of human awareness of the self and other is to develop a proper self-reference dictionary to understand God, His actions, and attributes. We are born with the ability (the human self) to build such a dictionary. Once we understand that the human self is not the actual doer, we will give credit to God for everything we experience through “the self.” Rather than claiming ownership over our good work, we will praise God for granting that ability to us. Thus, understanding the self as intangible and God as the Creator of our acts is the necessary first step to build our dictionary. Then, we may use this dictionary to understand the work of God in the universe. We will read the universe and learn about God. Everything we experience, not just religious rituals, will become the means to better understanding God. Our entire life journey will be a means to reach transcendental reality. We will go beyond shadowlike material causation and through SRD affirm the existence and attributes of God. Once we perceive this transcendent reality, we will live accordingly. We will give up pursuing shadow-like worldly things for fulfillment. Instead, we will seek God through everything we experience in our life journey.

6. Six pillars of the secular worldview As discussed before, we use our established phenomenology to develop our complete view of the universe. In other words, we build our own paradigmatic pillars based on our phenomenology. As shown in Figures  3.3 and 3.4, each paradigm develops its own perspectives to build its corresponding worldview with self-structure (phenomenology), world structure (ontology), knowledge structure (epistemology), wisdom structure (teleology), human structure (anthropology), and value structure (axiology). In this section, we will comparatively discuss the six pillars of secular and Tawhīdī worldviews to reveal the differences between them. As seen in Figure 3.3, secular phenomenology is the key to the other components of the secular worldview. Using the secular language and SRD as signifiers, individuals establish a secular worldview from their understanding of ontic reality, episteme, telos, human nature, and moral axioms. As secular phenomenology considers the self as the source of its actions, it also considers others to own their actions as well. It does not leave any room for God. The ontic reality cannot go beyond material substances. Likewise, there is no transcendental telos. They are simply interactive actions of material causes under certain natural laws. The human being is seen as an accidental product of the evolutionary process with no telos beyond this life. The goal of

102  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews

Secular Ontology

Secular Axiology

Secular

Epistemology

Secular

Phenomenology

Secular

Anthropology

Secular Teleology

Figure 3.3 The six pillars of the secular worldview

the secular worldview is to develop an instrumental mind that controls and manipulates material causes for world outcomes. The goodness lies in the utility for maximization of each individual given their own choices. Secular phenomenology is blind to any reality beyond a purely materialist one. Given its approach to everything as a signifier without any transcendental meaning, it does not accept anything beyond material reality. In Schuurman’s (2008, p. 75) terms, “the Enlightenment represents the religion of the closed material world that is blind to the non-material dimensions of reality.” Secular phenomenology considers the self as the real actor and the human being as the creator of his/her acts. Indeed, the secular paradigm puts the self at the center of the market and meaning. Its motto is belief in the self, not in God. It encourages its followers to rely on selves, not on God. Secular ontology provides two competing views: realist and subjectivist (Johnson & Duberley, 2003). The realist ontology assumes that social and physical realities are independent of human perception. In other words, there is an ultimate reality even if we have different perceptions. On the other hand, subjective ontology denies the existence of objective reality and argues that reality is just the product of human perception. However, both realist and subjectivist ontology agree that God does not really exist but is

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 103 socially constructed by human cognition. It ascribes everything to a secular trio of material causes, nature, and chance. Secular epistemology, which shapes the way modern people think, argue, infer, and derive meaning, does not accept any truth beyond the material reality. Using secular phenomenology, both objective and subjective ontologies are attributed to material causes, nature, and chance. The objective epistemology, as posited by Johnson and Duberley (2003) and Hindess (1976), presupposes the existence of independent and objective knowledge of reality and argues that the only way to access this reality is through our sensory experiences. In contrast, the subjective epistemology rejects the existence of objective truth. It argues that truth is subjectively constructed through language games (Wittgenstein  & Rhees, 1975), discourses (Foucault, 1979), interests (Habermas, 1978), traditions (Gadamer, 1975), and worldviews. In both cases, there is no need to seek guidance from divinely guided individuals because in reality there is no evidence for any Divine Being. Most Enlightenment thinkers had difficulty embracing the logically inconsistent Trinitarian idea. They came up with an alternative explanation. I call it the “secular trio” because it mimics the Christian Trinity to a large extent. The secular trio consists of causation, nature, and chance. In other words, rather than explaining the reality as the work of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the Enlightenment thinkers offer deterministic cause-effect chains, Mother Nature, and chance as the determining forces behind the reality of the universe. Secular anthropology does not accept the existence of human nature. Instead, it considers nature to be socially and environmentally constructed. Indeed, Macintyre (2013) argues that it is the Enlightenment thinkers who replace Aristotelian ethics with Kantian ethics by dismissing any reference to a dual human nature. Therefore, we assume that human nature is socially constructed, rather than teleologically designed. Thus, we are entirely free to set whatever goal we have in life. Macintyre claims that Enlightenment morality has failed because it does not consider human nature in formulating its moral philosophy. Since Enlightenment morality does not accept the conflicting duality of human nature (which is capable of both good and evil), it does not provide any moral restraint to the evil capacity nor serves to cultivate the capacity for good. Secular axiology differs from Tawhīdī axiology in terms of defining what is “good.” The latter considers the human mind as limited in its understanding of the ultimate good, while the former describes good based purely on a practical mind. Indeed, secular axiology is an attempt to set moral laws without any Divine decree. It argues that as rational beings, we are perfectly capable of understanding what is good for us and can set moral codes to live accordingly. In other words, it takes God out of the moral equation and tells us how to be moral without God. It defines goodness based on either utility or consequences in this world.

104  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews Indeed, Sigmund Freud describes the defining characteristics of secular morality as follows: “This alone I know with certainty, namely that men’s value judgments are guided absolutely by their desire for happiness, and are therefore merely an attempt to bolster up their illusions by arguments.”7 Secular axiology considers utility/happiness as the end. Thus, it encourages individuals to live a life for the greater good (higher utility). It allows individuals to set their own moral compass without recognizing the conflicting interests of human nature. Charles Taylor calls this notion of morality “atheist humanism or exclusive humanism” in which materialism is mixed with a moral outlook (Taylor, 2007, Chapter 14). Macintyre in After Virtue provides an in-depth analysis of how our morality has even been secularized since the Enlightenment. In other words, reason has been used to judge what is good and what is bad. The problem, Macintyre argues, “reason is calculative; it can assess truths of fact and mathematical relations but nothing more. In the realm of practice, therefore, it can speak only of means. About ends, it must be silent” (MacIntyre, 2013, p. 64).

7. Six pillars of the Tawhīdī worldview As seen in Figure  3.4, Tawhīdī phenomenology is the key to other components of the Tawhīdī worldview. Using the Tawhīdī language and SRD as “signified,” a believer will understand that God does exist and that His existence provides an ontic source for the existence of the universe. Then, he will consider everything as signs (ayaat) providing various types of information about God. He will realize that knowledge about God is the highest objective truth verified by both the revealed books and the book of the universe. He will seek to understand the telos behind God’s work in the universe. He will learn about human nature and the expected Divine mission. He will understand that a human being is not a random product of the evolutionary process; he is God’s greatest project. Finally, he will follow Divine guidance to live a good life. Thus, the Tawhīdī paradigm provides a holistic worldview to understand transcendental reality and live a virtuous and fulfilled life. Ontologically speaking, God is real and the source of reality. He is the necessary existence upon which everything else is contingent. We know about His existence through His words and works. Yet knowing God is different than believing in the existence of God. Whereas the latter is a form of belief in the existence of God, the former is much more than a belief in God. It is getting to know God. In this context, belief is a means that “connects man to the All-Glorious Maker.” In other words, belief is not acceptance; rather, “it is a relation” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 319). It connects humans to God. Many verses in the Qur’an, like the followings ones, explicitly point to God as the source of ontic reality: “There is not a moving creature, but He hath grasp of its fore-lock” (Q, 11:56). “And there is no living creature on earth but depends for its sustenance on God, and He knows its time-limit [on earth]

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 105

Tawhīdī Ontology

Tawhīdī Axiology

Tawhīdī Epistemology Tawhīdī Phenomenology

Tawhīdī Anthropology

Tawhīdī Teleology

Figure 3.4 The six pillars of the Tawhīdī worldview

and its resting-place [after death]: all [this] is laid down in [His] clear decree” (Q, 11:6). Say: “In whose hand rests the mighty dominion over all things” (Q, 23:88); “God is the Light of the heavens and the earth” (Q, 24:35). The Qur’an refers to a very active God who manifests Himself every day, perhaps every moment through His work in the universe: “On Him depends all creatures in the heavens and on earth; [and] every day He manifests Himself in yet another [wondrous] way” (Q, 55:29). The Qur’an makes it clear that nothing, even a leaf, could move without His knowledge, power, and will: For, with Him are the keys to the things that are beyond the reach of a created being’s perception: none knows them but He. And He knows all that is on land and in the sea; and not a leaf falls, but He knows it, and neither is there a grain in the earth’s deep darkness, nor anything: living or dead, but is recorded in [His] clear decree. (Q, 6:59) Through the Tawhīdī phenomenology, once we understand that we are absolutely impotent and needy, we will realize that nature and material causes could not produce anything on their own. Everything from an atom

106  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews to the galactic system is the work of God, and it is under His control at every given moment. He is not the god of gaps. He is the God of everything at every moment, according to the Qur’an. The ontic reality of everything in the universe comes directly from the manifestation of God. Tawhīdī epistemology helps us know God by reading His verses in the book of the universe through the Tawhīdī language established by Tawhīdī phenomenology. For the Tawhīdī paradigm, objective truth does exist. God is truth and the source of truth. The ultimate source of everything comes from God’s names. From an Islamic point of view, it can be said that God makes Himself known to humanity through His words and works. If we listen to the Divine revelations and read His works in the universe, we will know His attributes. Thus, once we learn how to read in the name of God, we will see everything as meaningful verses testifying to the names and attributes of God. We will explore the universe not just for an instrumental purpose, but also for a meditative purpose. We can induce the names and attributes of God from His works in the universe as mentioned repeatedly in the Qur’an: “He is God, the Creator, the Evolver, the Bestower of Forms (or Colours). To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names: whatever is in the heavens and on earth, doth declare His Praises and Glory: and He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise” (Q, 59:24). “EXTOL the limitless glory of thy Sustainer’s name: [the glory of] the Al-Highest” (Q, 87:1). “For to God belong the Forces of the heavens and the earth; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Full of Wisdom” (Q, 48:7). “For God is He Who gives (all) Sustenance – Lord of Power, – Steadfast (forever)” (Q, 51:58). Tawhīdī teleology states that everything is created for a certain purpose. That is the case because everything is the work of the All-Wise God. Thus, the infinite wisdom of God necessitates wisdom in all of His actions. The Qur’an clearly says that the creation is not frivolous: “And [know that] We have not created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in mere idle play” (Q, 21:16). Likewise, the creation of human beings is not without purpose. “He who has created death as well as life, so that He might put you to a test [and thus show] which of you is best in conduct, and [make you realize that] He alone is almighty, truly forgiving” (Q, 67:2). Thus, according to Tawhīdī teleology, the pursuit of knowledge should not be only for instrumental purposes. Rather, it should be for the understanding of the Divine telos (hikmah/wisdom) in everything. The Qur’an praises wisdom as the highest good in the following verse: “He giveth wisdom unto whom He will, and he unto whom wisdom is given, he truly hath received abundant good. But none remember except men of understanding” (Q, 2:269). Tawhīdī anthropology encourages believers to read themselves using the Tawhīdī language. That is – to know our nature in terms of both weaknesses and strengths as stated in the Qur’an: “We have indeed created man in the best of molds, Then do We abase him (to be) the lowest of the low, – Except such as believe and do righteous deeds: For they shall have a reward unfailing” (Q, 95:4–6).

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 107 Indeed, human nature is composed of complex characteristics. It contains an animal’s characteristics in terms of eating, drinking, sleeping, and reproducing. It includes a beast’s attributes like harming others for personal benefit. It also includes satanic and angelic attributes. In other words, humans have the propensity to become animals, devils, or angels. The Qur’an and Hadith provide extensive discussions of the critical elements of human nature that consist of multiple, competing selves such as intellectual, spiritual, moral, animal, social, egotistic, oppressive, and decisive selves. From a Qur’anic perspective, we cannot talk about a single self and its pursuit of interests. Instead, we have to be aware of multiple selves with competing and, sometimes, conflicting interests. We cannot reach happiness by pursuing the interests of the animal soul (nafs) and self-centric ego. Rather, we should give priority to spiritual, intellectual, and moral needs. We should learn how to control animal and egotistic desires. We cannot be happy by bread alone. We desire to learn the truth about the universe starting from the self. We need to gain our freedom from both internal and external oppressors to live a life through choices made by our heart and mind. As Nasr argues, an inner detachment and spiritual poverty (faqr) which alone make inner freedom possible, for men lose their freedom to the extent they become enslaved not only by external factors but also by passionate attachments and by their needs, whether these be artificial or real. (Nasr, 1981, p. 21) Thus, freedom is to act out of one’s own will rather than out of necessity imposed by inner or outer forces. Thus, the secular “harm principle” of justifying interference only if there is harm to others, but not to oneself, is not true from the Tawhīdī perspective. Tawhīdī axiology is a guide to a good life. It is directly linked to Tawhīdī ontology and epistemology. As discussed before, from the Tawhīdī ontological perspective, everything that happens is the creation of God. However, God creates everything as a response to our will or from His own will. God is the “Absolute Good” (Al-Khayr al-Mutlaq). Therefore, everything He creates must be good. That is because Absolute Good only does whatever is good. In other words, whatever He wills, it has to be good. However, since He gives us free will, if we choose what is bad for us, we will bring bad to ourselves. For instance, God creates fire for many good reasons. However, if we choose to let fire burn our body, we can only blame ourselves even though God creates the act of burning. Thus, Nursi argues, “the creation of what looks to evil is not evil. The choice of evil is evil” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 63). He discusses the creation of Satan8 to support his argument. Even though Satan is considered to be the most evil creature, in Nursi’s view, the creation of Satan is good when considering all the consequences. This is because what makes Satan evil for people is their choice to follow Satan.

108  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews Indeed, from the Tawhīdī perspective, anything that happens to us, other than what results from the bad choices we make, is good. For instance, it is our obligation to protect our health. However, if we get sick despite our healthy lifestyle, we should be patient and even thankful because of learned lessons through such a painful, but fruitful, experience. Therefore, the Qur’an explicitly states that only good comes from God: “Whatever good happens to thee is from God; and whatever evil befalls thee is from thyself” (Q, 4:79). The Qur’an clearly states that everything given to human beings is nothing but a test to see how they respond. It is impossible to keep what is given, because everything will eventually perish (except good deeds): Behold, We have willed that all beauty on earth be a means by which We put men to a test, [showing] which of them are best in conduct; – and, verily, [in time] We shall reduce all that is on it to barren dust! (Q, 18:7–8) Thus, it does not really matter whether we have questions about wealth or poverty in an exam. What matters is how we respond to those questions while taking the exam. The Qur’an mentions the Divine laws in the universe as examples of moral laws in human relationships. It refers to balance and measurement in the universe and asks people to follow the same universal laws in their relationships: And the skies has He raised high, and has devised [for all things] a measure, so that you [too, O men,] might never transgress the measure [of what is right]: So establish weight with justice and fall not short in the balance. (Q, 55:7–9) In short, from Tawhīdī axiology, pleasure can be bad and pain can be good. Transcendental good is the recognition of absolute goodness in everything in relation to the Absolute Good. Everything that appears to be good is only the shadow of the Absolute Good. So, one should look at the goodness in relation to God, rather than from his or her personal dimension. If God is real, and if He is all-good, and if everything is His dynamic creation, then everything must be good (directly or indirectly). As Montaigne (1877) says, “Life in itself is neither good nor evil. It is the place of good and evil, according to what you make it.” In other words, what makes life good or bad is nothing but our choices. If we make good choices, we can have a good life and vice versa. This is particularly true from Tawhīdī axiology, because whatever we do not choose is the choice of God for us. Since God is All-Good, He only chooses good. Thus, we may have a good life as long as we make good choices under the Divine guidance.

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 109

8. Teaching of the Tawhīdī worldview in the Qur’an Worldview in the first revelation We argue that the Qur’anic message is set around the Tawhīdī paradigm with its six pillars. At the core is Tawhīdī phenomenology. Indeed, the very first message revealed to the Prophet (and humanity) was not about worship or belief. It was “Iqra!” (read!).9 The angel repeated the same message three times: read! The prophet responded each time: I do not know how to read. Perhaps, the repetition of the command was an instruction of how and what to read (recite). The first “read” refers to the necessity of the Divine light; the second “read” refers to necessity of the Divine instruction; and the third “read” refers to the book of the universe. In other words, the angel was implicitly saying to the Prophet, you could read (recite) the book of the universe with the Divine light of the Qur’an under Divine instruction. On releasing him the third time, however, the Archangel Gabriel said explicitly what and how to read: Read in and with the Name of your Lord, Who has created  – Created human from a clot clinging (to the wall of the womb). Read, and your Lord is the All-Munificent, Who has taught (human) by the pen – Taught human what he did not know. (Q, 96:1–5) The very first verse above clearly refers to Tawhīdī phenomenology: “Read in and with the Name of your Lord (Rabb).” Reading in the name of God is to see everything as the work and creation of God. It is to go beyond appearance and see the hand of God behind everything. It is to ponder on the meaning behind everything as signified. Then, the verse reminds us of the ontological reality by referring to God as the Creator. It means everything is created and sustained directly by Him. Particularly, the word choice of Rabb reminds us of God as Sustainer who provides everything to sustain the existence of His creation. The verse, “Created human from a clot clinging (to the wall of the womb),” refers to human nature (Tawhīdī anthropology) reminding us of our impotence and dependence. The verse, “Read, and your Lord is the All-Munificent,” refers to Tawhīdī epistemology telling us how we learn about God by reflecting on His kind and wise acts in the universe. The verse, “Who has taught (human) by the pen – Taught human what he did not know,” refers to the Tawhīdī telos given to human beings through the Divine message. Indeed, the Qur’an constantly reminds us that everything is created for a certain purpose. Everyone will be held accountable in front of God on the Day of Judgment. However, the Qur’an is not in delusion in terms of how we follow the Divine guidance. The following verses lay out the foundation for Tawhīdī axiology and tell us why most people fail in living a good life: “No indeed, but (despite all His favors to him), human

110  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews is unruly and rebels. In that he sees himself as self-sufficient, independent (of his Lord). But to your Lord, surely is the return (when everyone will account for their life)” (Q, 96:6–8). In other words, seeing oneself as self-sufficient is the root cause of the failure. It means that if we make a mistake in the phenomenological reading of the self, we will get everything else wrong. Tawhīdī worldview in the most recited verse We argue that Surat Al-Fatiha, which is mandatory for Muslims to recite in every rakat (unit) of their five-time daily salat (prayer), elegantly refers to the Tawhīdī worldview with its six components. The surah begins with basmalah: “in the name of God, the Most Gracious, and The Dispenser of Grace.” This refers to Tawhīdī phenomenology. It means that we should look at everything in the name of God. We should read everything with the Tawhīdī language. We should consider everything as signified conveying a deep meaning about God. The second verse reminds us of Tawhīdī ontology: “All praise is due to God alone, the Sustainer of all the worlds.” He not only creates, He also sustains everything from moment to moment. Ontologically, everything depends on His creation. Therefore, we need to remember this continuous blessing and offer our sincere thanks. The third verse refers to Tawhīdī epistemology: “The Most Gracious, the Dispenser of Grace.” Everything not only points to the existence of God, but it also speaks about His attributes. Everything tells us what kind of God He is. Once we read both the book of the universe and the book of the Qur’an, we will definitely understand that God is the Most Merciful and the Most Kind. He grants everything to us at every moment out of His kindness and mercy. The fourth verse speaks about the Tawhīdī telos: “Lord of the Day of Judgment.” It means that God did not create the universe in vain. Instead, He creates everything with specific telos. He will hold conscious beings accountable in the Day of Judgment in terms of how they used their given resources/potential. The fifth verse reminds us of two essential weaknesses of human nature according to Tawhīdī anthropology: impotence and neediness. We need to acknowledge our shortcomings and seek God’s power and bounty by declaring, “You alone do we worship, and unto You alone do we turn for aid.” In other words, we cannot rely on ourselves. We cannot rely on anyone else either. We know that everything is absolutely impotent and dependent. Thus, we have no option but rely on the Divine power and Mercy to sustain our lives. The last two verses are related to Tawhīdī axiology, reminding us that we need guidance from God to know what constitutes a good or bad life: “Guide us the straight way. The way of those upon whom You hast

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 111 bestowed Your blessings, not of those who have been condemned [by You], nor of those who go astray!”

9. Role of worldview in perception and knowledge Secular and Tawhīdī worldviews inversely affect perception and knowledge. Let us first consider how we would perceive a human-made dessert like baklava from a secular and Tawhīdī worldview. Even if we are not cooks, we can still understand what it takes to make good baklava. We know that it is necessary to have certain ingredients along with knowledge and power to make baklava. We also know that the better knowledge a chef has, the better the baklawa will be. Given our personal experience, whenever we taste a delicious piece of baklava, we establish a firm belief that it must be the great work of an intelligent being with power. According to secular phenomenology, baklava is the direct or indirect works of human beings. Thus, the person who cooks baklava deserves to get full credit. Therefore, we credit the act of making baklava to the self. From a Tawhīdī perspective, this is a significant mistake that results in many other associated mistakes in our understanding of the universe. Tawhīdī phenomenology avoids such a grave error. Instead, it tells us that baklava is actually created, cooked, and delivered to us by the knowledge, power, and mercy of God who is not just the first cause, but the only cause. It is an acknowledgment that cooking baklava requires knowledge and power over millions of things at both the micro level and the macro level. Given the fact he/she cannot claim control over even his/her body in real sense, it is impossible to claim ownership of the acts of his/her body and mind. He/she can only be thankful to be the means to the Divine mercy and acts. According to Tawhīdī phenomenology, God makes us feel as if we are doing the work in order to help us to appreciate His acts. Thus, with our phenomenal acts of making baklava, we clearly understand what it takes to make baklava. We establish our SRD through this experiential knowledge. Perception of grapes from two perspectives Next, let us consider how we would perceive a natural dessert like grapes from a secular and Tawhīdī worldview. The secular phenomenology would not be able to find the meaning of grapes in its SRD. Thus, it will consider it as a self-signifier. It sees nothing but natural phenomena in that grapes are products of material causes. Tawhīdī phenomenology will find an equivalent of the so-called natural dessert. It will compare it with the established meaning of a human-made dessert. It will consider it as an extremely meaningful sign in the book of the universe (signified). It will then help in reading and understanding its deeper meaning through the Tawhīdī language.

112  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews The Qur’an compares the importance of Tawhīdī phenomenology versus secular phenomenology through an interesting parable of two men who own gardens of grapevines: Set forth to them the parable of two men: for one of them We provided two gardens of grape-vines and surrounded them with date palms; in between the two We placed corn-fields. Each of those gardens brought forth its produce, and failed not in the least therein: in the midst of them We caused a river to flow. (Abundant) was the produce this man had: he said to his companion, in the course of a mutual argument: “more wealth have I than you, and more honor and power in (my following of) men.” He went into his garden in a state (of mind) unjust to his soul: He said, “I deem not that this will ever perish, Nor do I deem that the Hour (of Judgment) will (ever) come: Even if I am brought back to my Lord, I shall surely find (there) something better in exchange.” His companion said to him, in the course of the argument with him: “Dost thou deny Him Who created thee out of dust, then out of a sperm-drop, then fashioned thee into a man? But (I think) for my part that He is God, My Lord, and none shall I associate with my Lord. Why did you not, as you went into your garden, say: God’s will (be done)! There is no power but with God.” If you do not see me less than thee in wealth and sons, – It may be that my Lord will give me something better than thy garden, and that He will send on thy garden thunderbolts (by way of reckoning) from heaven, making it (but) slippery sand!” Or the water of the garden will run off underground so that thou wilt never be able to find it. So his fruits (and enjoyment) were encompassed (with ruin), and he remained twisting and turning his hands over what he had spent on his property, which had (now) tumbled to pieces to its very foundations, and he could only say, “Woe is me! Would I had never ascribed partners to my Lord and Cherisher!” (Q, 18:32–42, emphasis added) The story clearly reveals that both the rich and poor men are believers. The rich man thinks that the wealth is the product of his efforts and feels that he is better than the poor one because of this wealth. Although the rich man does not seem to deny the Day of Judgment, he seems to believe as if his wealth will continue forever. Indeed, he thinks that he will be treated differently even in the hereafter because of being rich. When he dies, he thinks he will find something even better. Hearing

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 113 the attitude of the rich man towards his given wealth, the poor man argues that the rich one is in denial of God. In reality, the rich person is a believer. However, his attitude of thinking about the garden makes the poor friend believe that he associates partners with God. The poor man says that the rich man should consider the following when he sees his garden loaded with abundant fruit: “God’s will (be done)! There is no power but with God.” Thus, the poor man thinks that the rich man ascribes his fruit to natural causes and personal efforts rather than to God. This is a clear mistake. Using our SRD, if we ponder on the grapes in the aforementioned example, we will definitely understand that it is a dessert made out of water and dirt. Since it is beyond the knowledge and power of any chef to create such a sweet, it cannot be the work of a vine plant either. The rich man in the story also failed to understand this reasoning. Ontology of grapes Secular ontology considers material substances as the ontic source of the grapes. It does not accept anything beyond materialistic reality despite contradicting discoveries in quantum physics. A  person with a secular worldview will consider the apparent causes of grapes (vine plant, seed, or DNA) to be their source. From the Tawhīdī perspective, this is just an association. The real cause is neither the plant, nor seed, nor DNA – it is God himself. A secular person misconstrues the association as causation as he did for the baklava. In other words, all things that are associated by God with the production of grapes are interpreted as real causes whereas they should be recognized, with the aid of monist phenomenology, as associations. Tawhīdī ontology perceives God and His manifested names as the direct ontic source of everything in the universe. The universe is not a one-time creation. Rather, it is a dynamic creation from moment to moment. Indeed, according to quantum mechanics, when we try to observe the creative activities in the subatomic world within the quantum fluctuations, we find different things. “Each time we look we see something different. Each observation uncovers a piece of the wave function that describes a typical, very small region of space” (Wilczek, 2010, p. 121). Similarly, from the mânâ-i harfî perspective, a grape is being created every second. It comes from God and relies on His existence. The Qur’an negates material causes by asking us to ponder on the simplicity of causes. Given our experience, if we see a chef making many types of dessert by transforming water and dust into delicious food, we will for sure acknowledge that he/ she must be a miraculous person with extraordinary power and knowledge. We never believe that a blind, deaf, and mindless person can make delicious desserts out of water and dust. Then, how can we believe that natural

114  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews desserts such as grape and dates are the products of a plant with no eyes, ears, or mind? And in the earth are tracts (diverse though) neighboring, and gardens of vines and fields sown with corn, and palm trees – growing out of single roots or otherwise: watered with the same water, yet some of them We make more excellent than others to eat. Behold, verily in these things there are signs for those who understand! (Q, 13:4) It is He who sends down rain from the sky: from it, ye drink, and out of it (grows) the vegetation on which ye feed your cattle. With it, He produces for you corn, olives, date-palms, grapes and every kind of fruit: verily in this is a sign for those who give thought. (Q, 16:10–11) Epistemology of grapes Secular epistemology does not read the true meaning of grapes. Instead, it assigns wrong meanings due to its wrong reference dictionary. It derives secular knowledge based on the secular trio of material causes, nature, and chance. When thinking of grapes, a secular person finds no place for God in his SRD. Rather, he finds phenomenal causes as the source of the effect. Thus, he would claim that the grape is nothing but a product of its plant, seed, and/or DNA. He would argue that it is the nature of the seed or DNA that produces the grape. The Qur’an points to the names of God from His bounties. Just as we derive knowledge about the skills of a chef when we eat a dessert, we should also think about the names and attributes of God when we eat fruit. When we ponder upon the creation of grapes, we understand that its Creator has enormous power, knowledge, and wisdom. We also understand that through such gifts the Creator wants to reveal His mercy, care, love, and kindness to us. NOW, INDEED, We have conferred dignity on the children of Adam, and borne them over land and sea, and provided for them sustenance out of the good things of life, and favored them far above most of Our creation. (Q, 17:70) When visiting a friend, if we are offered a special dessert that is unique and specially prepared for us, we will conclude that that friend shows his friendship, care, and love to us through such a kind act. Similarly, Tawhīdī epistemology helps us reflect on the names and attributes of God through His kind actions in the universe.

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 115 Teleology of grapes Secular teleology does not accept any telos. Therefore, it does not explain the wisdom in the creation of a vine tree, for example. It completely rejects the notion of telos in creation. Tawhīdī teleology attracts our attention to the wisdom in the creation of all food. It wants us to think of the intentional acts of God in giving us many bounties. Then let man look at his food, (and how We provide it): For that We pour forth water in abundance, And We split the earth in fragments, And produce therein corn, And Grapes and nutritious plants, And Olives and Dates, And enclosed Gardens, dense with lofty trees, And fruits and fodder, For use and convenience to you and your cattle. (Q, 80:24–32) The above verses ask people to reflect on their sustenance. By doing so, we are expected to see that it is not a coincidence to get food and drink that contains vitamins and minerals. It is not a coincidence that the grape has a particular taste that can be pleasantly detected by our tongue. It is not a coincidence that it has different colors signaling whether it is raw, ripe, or rotten. Thus, the Qur’an urges us to explore how we and other living beings are provided proper sustenance with the utmost care, knowledge, and wisdom. Nursi, in his interpretation of the verses above, points to the last part, “For use and convenience to you and your cattle.” He argues that by highlighting the purpose behind the growth of plants, the Qur’an encourages us to see the hidden agency of God in natural phenomena (Nursi, 1996e, p. 178). Anthropology of grapes Secular anthropology does not accept universal human nature. Instead, it argues that everything is just nurtured by society or the evolutionary process. Thus, it does not see any intentional harmony between the human body and the grape. Tawhīdī anthropology, on the other hand, recognizes the connection between human nature and the vine. It considers the grape as a special Divine dessert to nurture the human body, its emotions, mind, and heart. It appreciates the complementary nature of the human tongue and the taste of grapes, the human eyes and the colors of grapes, human teeth and texture of grapes, in addition to the grapes’ nutritional values for the human body. “And from the fruit of the date-palm and the vine, ye get out wholesome drink and food: behold, in this also is a sign for those who are wise” (Q, 16:67).

116  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews Axiology of grapes Secular axiology defines good and bad based on self-interest and utility. Thus, it is good to eat grapes as long as they provide healthy nutrition. There are no ethical lessons that can be learned through vines. Tawhīdī axiology considers grapes as Divine gifts. Thus, it asks for appreciation by words and actions. Since the Owner of grapes requires recognition and gratitude, Tawhīdī axiology considers eating grapes without offering thanks as immoral because of the Owner of the grapes the One who permits us to eat them. The waste of grapes is not right either, because it is like throwing a special gift into the garbage. Apparently, it does not matter how much we verbally offer thanks to the giver of a gift if he/she then sees us throwing it away. Furthermore, Tawhīdī axiology states that grapes are granted to us to maintain our life so that we can perform good deeds. For it is He who has brought into being gardens – [both] the cultivated ones and those growing wild  – and the date-palm, and fields bearing multiform produce, and the olive tree, and the pomegranate: [all] resembling one another and yet so different! Eat of their fruit when it comes to fruition, and give [unto the poor] their due on harvest day. And do not waste [God’s bounties]: verily, He does not love the wasteful! (Q, 6:141)

10. Conclusion Since the Enlightenment, the dominant worldview is a secular one with a paradigm that directs the mind to establish an earthly paradise. Islam offers an alternative paradigm (Tawhīdī) with its own worldview that brings happiness in both this world and the hereafter. The main difference between the two worldviews lies in their corresponding languages. The secular worldview advocates for the reading of the self and the universe in the name of the secular trio. On the other hand, the Tawhīdī worldview allows for reading of the self and the universe in the name of God. The knowledge of the self becomes the alphabet for both languages  – secular and Tawhīdī. Secular language perceives the self as the owner of its acts, while Tawhīdī language treats the self as sign signifying the Doer with knowledge, power, will, and wisdom. The secular worldview treats both the self and the secular trio of causes, nature, and chance as a kind of god. It gives them the attributes of God. As a result, scientism and humanism become the religion for modern men. While secular science emphasizes instrumental knowledge to control and manipulate, Tawhīdī science directs our attention towards meditative knowledge to learn the meaning of the book of the universe. The Tawhīdī worldview points to the infinite impotence and neediness of the human being and urges him to rely on the All-Mighty for his needs and desires. Once a person learns the Tawhīdī language through knowing

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 117 his true nature, he is expected to read everything in this language. Thus, he will transcend beyond phenomenal reality and penetrate into ultimate reality. He will learn the meaning of the universe in the pursuit of knowledge. He will realize that the Divine names are the source of ontic reality. He will pursue the meaning of Divine power in everything. He will get to know the Divine power through His works in the universe. The more he explores the universe, the more he will get to know God through His manifested attributes. A student of Tawhīdī science is expected first to learn the Tawhīdī language through Tawhīdī phenomenology. Second, he is supposed to learn how to read the universe through Tawhīdī teleology. Third, he is expected

GOD

Works (ontological

Tawhîdî ontology knowledge)

The self/human

The universe (Macrocosmos)

∞ power/knowledge ∞ bounty/mercy

(Microcosmos)

Zero power Zero property

Bearwitness / Submit / Appreciate

(All-powerful, All-knowing, All-wise, All-present, Mostholy, Most-merciful…)

A believer Read Realize

Remember

Humble Honest Thankful Peaceful Caring Sharing Praying

Words (epistemological

Tawhîdî epistemology knowledge)

Messengers

Messages

“Read in and with the Name of your Lord, Who has created human from a clot clinging (to the wall of the womb). Read, and your Lord is the All-Munificent, Who has taught (human) by the pen. Taught human what he did not know. No indeed, but (despite all His favors to him), human is unruly and rebels, In that he sees himself as self-sufficient, independent (of his Lord). But to your Lord, surely is the return (when everyone will account for their life).”(Q96:1-8)

Respond

Figure 3.5 Role of words and works of God in establishing Tawhīdī worldview and good character

118  Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews to realize the ultimate ontic reality behind the phenomenal reality through Tawhīdī ontology. Fourth, with the help of Tawhīdī epistemology and anthropology, he is encouraged to read the book of the universe to learn about Divine power and Mercy. Finally, he is expected to derive lessons from his reading of the self and the universe to give up his ego completely and rely on Divine power. While he is utterly powerless with infinite needs, he should be empowered with Divine power and Mercy for his needs and desires. He should do his parts in the form of supplications and fully trust in God to give him the best outcome whatever it may be. He should perceive his sole capital as sincere supplication. He should set Divine pleasure as the ultimate sole aspiration for his deeds. While secular science produces “roboapes” with instrumental knowledge and an animal way of life, Tawhīdī science is expected to provide graduates with both instrumental and meditative knowledge to become experts in their respective fields as well as building good character. In short, as shown in the diagram above, Tawhīdī worldview is rooted in the concept of Tawhīdī (unity) which places God at the center of both ontic (Divine works) and epistemic (Divine words) understanding of the reality. A believer is expected to develop his/her Tawhīdī worldview through reading the works of God through the light of His revealed words. Then, he/she shall remember and appreciate the countless Divine bounties on daily basis and respond through good character such as kindness, compassion, and honesty.

Notes 1 This section is mostly based on the relevant writings of Acikgenc because he greatly benefited from Nursi in developing his theory of knowledge and worldview formation. 2 Taylor argues Kantian morality is another way of denying Divine norms and laws: “The man of humanism is the one who no longer receives his norms and laws either from the nature of things (Aristotle) nor from God, but who establishes them himself on the basis of his reason and will” (Taylor, 2007, Chapter 15). 3 “What is meant by the heart is the dominical subtle faculty – not the piece of flesh shaped like a pine-cone – the emotions of which are manifested in the conscience and the thoughts of which are reflected in the mind. The term heart indicates that the dominical subtle faculty is to man’s spiritual dimensions what the coneshaped piece of flesh is to the body. For just as the physical heart is a life-machine that pumps the water of life to all the parts of the body, and if it is obstructed or ceases from activity, life departs and the body stiffens; so the subtle inner faculty dispenses the light of true life to all the parts of the corpus composed of man’s spiritual aspects, and his mental states, and hopes” (Nursi, 1996a, p. 86). For further details, see Nursi (1996e, The words, gleams). 4 According to Farabi, the absolute certainty requires three types of belief: “1) the belief that something is or is not in a specific condition 2) the belief that the thing can not be other than it is, and 3) the belief that belief (2) can not otherwise” (Bakar, 1998, p.  86). We think the first type is equivalent to iman, the second tasdiq, and the third iz’an.

Secular and holistic (Tawhīdī) worldviews 119 5 Schumacher (1977) argues that both animals and human beings have consciousness (although at different levels). However, what makes human beings superior to animals is self-consciousness (self-awareness). It is the ability to know oneself as knower. 6 See Kant’s, Critique of Pure Reason, B 68: “The consciousness of self (apperception) is the simple representation of the ‘I’, and if all that is manifold in the subject were given by the activity of the self, the inner intuition would be intellectual. In man this consciousness demands inner perception of the manifold which is antecedently given in the subject, and the mode in which this manifold is given in the mind must, as non-spontaneous, be entitled sensibility.”   Also A 107: “This original and transcendental condition is no other than transcendental apperception. Consciousness of self according to the determinations of our state in inner perception is merely empirical, and always changing. No fixed and abiding self can present itself in this flux of inner appearances. Such consciousness is usually named inner sense, or empirical apperception. What has necessarily to be represented as numerically identical cannot be thought as such through empirical data. To render such transcendental presupposition valid, there must be a condition which precedes all experience, and which makes experience itself possible. There can be in us no modes of knowledge, no connection or unity of one mode of knowledge with another, without that unity of consciousness which precedes all data of intuitions, and by relation to which representation of objects is alone possible. This pure original unchangeable consciousness I  shall name transcendental apperception.” 7 Quoted by Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958). 8 From the Qur’anic perspective, Satan has no power to force people toward particular choices. Satan can only give bad suggestions. Eventually, it is up to people to listen or not. 9 It is interesting to note that the opening verses of the Gospel of John also describes the creation as word: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being” (John, 1:1–3).

4 Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî

1. Introduction What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of beings? How can we find the meaning in the scientific knowledge of beings and personal experience? In this chapter, we will explore those questions through the mânâ-i harfî approach. We need to first start with very definition of meaning. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) defines “meaning” in something as “The significance, purpose, underlying truth, etc., of something.” Meaning also means “signification; intention; cause, purpose; motive, justification, . . . [o]f an action, condition, etc.” Particularly, for human beings, meaning means “Something which gives one a sense of purpose, value, etc., esp. of a metaphysical or spiritual kind; the (perceived) purpose of existence or of a person’s life. Freq. in the meaning of life” (OED). Thus, linguistically speaking, meaning is often conceived of as something non-obvious and somehow secretive, which could be decoded by a conscious being. From the mânâ-i harfî perspective, that is true both for life events as well as for cosmic phenomena. Thus, seeking meaning in life and beings is to consider them to be like a story, puzzle, word, or sign with some deep inner essence that we endeavor to know. After exploring the missing of meaning in modern science, we will discuss the connection between the Divine revelation and revealed meaning in the universe. Then, we will show how to reveal the meaning of the universe through the mânâ-i harfî perspective. Finally, we will examine how to live a meaningful life through reading the meaning of physical and private worlds in the mânâ-i harfî language.

2. Meaning in modern science Modern science removes the meaning from the universe by reducing it to a pure instrument. According to Heidegger (2005), this is the result of the objectification of things. We treat everything as an instrument while forgetting its underlying reality, which is the very essence of being. Heidegger explains objectification and the forgetfulness problem through the carpenter

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  121 and hammer metaphor. For a carpenter, a hammer is nothing but a tool. He does not see anything beyond that. He is only aware of the technical value of this ready-made tool. While using the hammer, the carpenter gets lost in work to the degree that he is not even conscious of himself as a subject. He becomes an object in doing the hammering. Only if the tool breaks down, the carpenter might able to see the reality behind the hammer as a tool. Even at this stage, he might just approach the tool as a reparable object rather than as a being. That is what Heidegger calls objectification, which comes with modern science and technology. Since we see everything as an instrumental object, we also see ourselves and other human beings as nothing but objects with a certain useful value. We forget about the very existence of the object. In other words, we forget the being’s existence. Though the being is visible, we take it for granted and never reflect on its meaning. For Heidegger, observed phenomenon is not the ultimate reality behind existence itself. Rather, the meaning behind the phenomenal being is what we should look for.1 He calls it Being with a capital B because he wants to make sure that we are not confusing it with the perception of being. We get lost in dealing with beings as instruments while it is evident that neither existence nor our experience is possible without Beings. Furthermore, the beings constantly reveal themselves to us. For us as intelligent subjects, everything has a meaning. Phenomenologically speaking, we ascribe meanings to everything that is experienced. There cannot be anything without meaning. Indeed, knowledge is only possible for meaning-making intelligent beings. There is no knowledge for a machine. Even a computer with knowledge of the entire human race is completely ignorant. Everything is nothing but a series of electrical signals to the computer. It is only when humans use a computer that they can give meanings to those signals and conceive the revealed signals as knowledge. Heidegger defines truth and falsehood based on his etymological understanding of phenomenology, which consists of phenomenon and logos. The word phenomenon is originally derived from the Greek words “phainein” meaning “bring to light” and “phainesthai” meaning “to appear.” The most recent usage comes from the Late Latin word “phænomenon” meaning “that which appears.” The second word logos is also a Greek work with various meanings, such as “opinion,” “expectation,” “word,” “speech,” “account,” “reason,” “proportion,” and “discourse.” Heidegger uses logos in its meaning of “word” or “discourse.” Thus, the beings are not the instrument. They have revealed words or discursive statements to the Dasein, the conscious being for whom everything has a meaning. Heidegger urges us to go before the pre-Socrates era to read the beings rather than perceive them as sheer instruments. Thus, in a Heideggerian term (Rehman  & Askari, 2010), truth lies within the beings. It is the disclosure of meaning through beings. Falsehood is covering up the meaning.

122  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî Nasr agrees that the lost meaning of beings is a relatively new problem: It must never be forgotten that for non-modern man  – whether be ancient or contemporary – the very stuff of the Universe has a sacred aspect. The cosmos speaks to man, and all of its phenomena contain meaning. They are symbols of a higher degree of reality which the cosmic domain at once veils and reveals. The very structure of the cosmos contains a spiritual message for man and is thereby a revelation coming from the same source as religion itself. (Nasr, 1997, p. 21)

3. Divine revelation and revealed meaning of the universe The Qur’anic description of kāfir (disbeliever) is very similar to the Heideggerian perspective of truth and falsehood. It is a descriptive word rather than a derogatory one (as it is sometimes used erroneously to mean infidel). The word kāfir comes from the root K-F-R. In the pre-Islamic era, farmers would use this word to describe planting seeds in the ground. It meant to cover up the seeds with soil. The Qur’an uses the same term in reference to covering up the truth by disbelievers. The Qur’an makes an explicit call to them: “And cover, not the Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when you know (what it is)” (Q, 2:42). Indeed, the verb kufr is used in the Qur’an to refer to believers and nonbelievers in terms of being ungrateful to the bounties of God. Nasr argues that God reveals Himself in the universe through symbols. Thus, it is important to perceive everything as a symbol with a transcendent meaning: Symbolism, in the essential meaning of the term we have in mind, is concerned with the process of sacralization of the cosmos. It is through the symbol that man is able to find meaning in the cosmic environment that surrounds him. It is the symbol that reveals objective reality as sacred; in fact, all that is objective reality is sacred and symbolic of a reality that lies beyond it. Only the Origin or the One is completely real and totally Itself and not the symbol of something other than Itself. Everything else is a symbol of a state of being that transcends it. (Nasr, 1997, p. 131) Once we read the cosmic phenomena as symbols, we would see God everywhere through those symbols. This is “a way of making all things sacred.” In order to gain such a perspective, we need an education in the deepest meaning of the word, a re-orientation of a man so that he becomes aware of the transparent nature of the world that surrounds him and the transcendent dimension that is present in every cosmic situation. To instruct men to understand symbols in this

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  123 manner does not mean a negation of the factual aspect of things. Rather, it means a revelation of the knowledge of another aspect of things which is even more real and more closely tied to their existential root than the sensible qualities and the quantitative aspect with which modern science is concerned. (Nasr, 1997, p. 131) Nasr accepts that revelation, through the Divine books and the cosmic revelation, share the same message. He argues, “revelation to men is inseparable from the cosmic revelation which is also a book of God. Yet, the intimate knowledge of nature depends upon the knowledge of the inner meaning of the sacred text or hermeneutic interpretation (ta’wil)” (Nasr, 1997, p. 95). In other words, the revelation through the Divine books helps to decode the cosmic revelation and derive the symbolic meaning. From a phenomenological perspective, it is the self with consciousness that gives meaning. Being conscious is always relational. It means we are conscious of something. Whatever we take to our consciousness is our experience. Thus, we give meaning to experience ignited by inner or outer stimuli. Our epistemic understanding is our consciousness of the Beings. We see everything through the lens of our consciousness by the self. However, we are quite complicated beings. Therefore, for Heidegger, a human being is not just a kind of being among all beings. He/she is a unique being with the ability to be aware of himself/herself and others in relation to himself/herself. Heidegger uses the German word Dasein to point out uniqueness in the human being, which is rooted in the physical, social, cultural, and historical totality. Perhaps, we can call Dasein as being with a worldview. We cannot be separated from our worldview in our experience. Unlike animals, we are fully conscious of ourselves and our surroundings. Animals have limited consciousness of their surroundings for survival purposes. However, they do not have self-consciousness. Therefore, they cannot relate their experience to themselves. For instance, as elegantly explained in Denials of Death by Ernest Becker (1997), death does not exist for animals because they are not aware of such an end. It has meaning only for humans because we are conscious of our death. Meaning of beings in the mânâ-i harfî Though Nursi never explicitly refers to phenomenology, his mânâ-i harfî approach of deriving meaning from the universe has a lot in common with the phenomenological approach. First of all, Nursi puts great emphasis on the universe as an elegant book. Indeed, he argues that even a single cell contains thousands of books of meaning. A book, particularly one in each word of which a minute pen has inscribed another whole book, and in each letter of which a fine pen has traced a poem, cannot be without a writer; this would be entirely

124  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî impossible. So too this cosmos cannot be without its inscriber; this is impossible to the utmost degree. For the cosmos is precisely such a book that each of its pages includes many other books, each of its words contains a book, and each of its letters contains a poem. The face of the earth is but a single page in the book of the cosmos. See how many books it contains. Every fruit is a letter, and every seed is a dot. In that dot is contained the index of the whole tree in its vastness. A book such as this can have been inscribed only by the mighty pen of a Possessor of Glory Who enjoys the attributes of splendor and beauty, and Who is the holder of infinite wisdom and power. Faith, then, follows inevitably on the observation of the world, unless one is drunk on misguidance. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 70) Interestingly, scientists discovered four molecules that form the DNA of all living cells and named them A, T, C, and G, long after Nursi used an analogy of letters and books in referring to living beings. Francis Collins, who was the head of Human Genome Project that counted human genes for the first time in history, published a book titled The Language of God, which became a bestseller. In that book, he describes his amazement of reading the book of life as follows: The human genome consists of all the DNA of our species, the hereditary code of life. This newly revealed text was 3  billion letters long, and written in a strange and cryptographic four-letter code. Such is the amazing complexity of the information carried within each cell of the human body, that a live reading of that code at a rate of one letter per second would take thirty-one years, even if reading continued day and night. Printing these letters out in regular font size on normal bond paper and binding them all together would result in a tower the height of the Washington Monument. (Collins, 2006, pp. 1–2) Collins affirmatively quoted the speech given by Bill Clinton when the result of one decade long of decoding human genome was announced: “Today,” Clinton said, “we are learning the language in which God created life. We are gaining ever more awe for complexity, the beauty, and wonder of God’s most divine and sacred gift” (Collins, 2006, p. 2). Indeed, Collins2 describes his experience of “uncovering this most remarkable of all texts” as both “a stunning scientific achievement and an occasion of worship” (Collins, 2006, p. 3). Nursi uses the book analogy, again and again, to attract the attention of his readers to the deep meaning in the book of the universe. However, one can read this book in two languages: mânâ-i ismî and mânâ-i harfî. For Nursi, the mânâ-i ismî language is a false one that conceals the meaning

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  125 and turns everything into meaningless signs. On the other hand, the mânâ-i harfî language helps to read the true meaning of the book and learn lifetransforming lessons. For Nursi, one way of reaching certainty about the truth revealed in the book of the universe is possible through the self that works like an observant, conscious agent. The transcendental self functions like transcendental apperception. We perceive everything in relation to the self. We make sense of everything through a coherent, conscious self. Out of our experiences, we establish our lens. As discussed in the previous chapter, we call it the self-referential dictionary. We use this dictionary to give meaning to everything. For Nursi, the self is given to us to decode the meanings in the book of the universe and to learn about the Author of that book with certainty. The self helps us to build our dictionary through the meanings that are given to everything. The key is to establish a correct dictionary by having a proper understanding of the self by the self. This is where Nursi both agrees with and diverges from phenomenologists. For Nursi, the possessive experience through the self is illusionary but extremely crucial to understand God. It is the means to the true meaning of the universe with certainty. Phenomenologically speaking, nothing is more certain than what we actually experience through the self. For instance, as we learn that fire burns, we will run away from the fire without engaging in discussion on the properties of fire. We take nothing as more assured than what we learn through self-experience. This is what Descartes was referring to when he famously said, “I think therefore I am.” We can doubt everything. However, we cannot doubt our self-consciousness. Thus, if the transcendental self is the key to know with certainty what is unknown to us, it is important to relate our experience to the self to gain certainty. For Nursi, our entire experience through the self is supposed to help us understand the actions of God in the physical universe as well as in our personal lives. As long as we have the right dictionary, we will uncover the meaning of everything. This is the message that God is constantly revealing to us through His actions in the universe and in our personal life. Thus, once we use the self properly, the entire universe will reveal itself as messages from God. Even what appears to be random events in our personal lives will become meaningful messages from God. Wherever we look, we will see this message. Whatever we listen to, we will hear this message. [T]he true affirmation of Divine unity which, through seeing on everything the stamp of His power, the seal of His dominicality, and the inscriptions of His pen, is to open a window directly onto His light from everything and to confirm and believe with almost the certainty of seeing it that everything emerges from the hand of His power and that in no way has He any partner or assistant in His Godhead or in His dominicality or in His sovereignty, and thus to attain to a sort of perpetual awareness of the Divine presence. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 300)

126  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî

4. Meaning of life through the mânâ-i harfî approach It is reported that Heidegger wanted to write the sequel of Being and Time as a guide for a good life. What he accomplished in Being and Time was to attract our attention to the very essence of being for Dasein (a term that he uses to refer to human reality as a unique being). Thus, it is important to first understand the meaning of being and Dasein before attempting to live a good, meaningful life. Heidegger could not fulfill his dream of writing the sequel, perhaps because he could not discover any viable ground to write a guide for a good life. Like Heidegger, Nursi was also very interested in the meaning of beings in general and human beings in particular. He developed the mânâ-i harfî approach to decode the meaning of all beings. Unlike Heidegger, Nursi came up with a clear guide for a meaningful and fulfilled life. Below, we will explore what constitutes a meaningful life through the mânâi harfî approach in comparison to the mânâ-i ismî approach. Learning the right language As we stated before, according to the mânâ-i harfî perspective, the physical, social, and psychological phenomena we experience are nothing but meaningful messages disclosed to us. The most important thing for a good life is to learn the right language to decode the meaning of experienced phenomena. For Nursi, the mânâ-i harfî must be taken as the right language to read the meaning of beings and the self. The primary goal in life is to learn the language of mânâ-i harfî in order to read and respond to these disclosed messages. Once we learn the mânâ-i harfî language, we may begin to discover the most important things. In other words, we should seek the answers to existential questions such as Who am I? How did I come into existence? Where did I come from? What are those beings around me? Why are they the way they are? Why have I been thrown into the universe? What is the meaning of my life, if any? What is the meaning of beings around me? Where am I heading to? And so on. The answers to these questions should have the highest priority in life because if we get them wrong, we will get everything wrong. If we do not find answers for them, we will find nothing at the end. Even if we gain the entire planet with all its wealth, fame, and pleasure, we are doomed to lose it all. Thus, everything will become ultimately meaningless. Of course, we might be mistaken in our answers. That is not a problem as long as we understand the importance of those questions and do our due diligence to assure the accuracy of our answers. In other words, given the absolute vitality of those questions, we need to make sure that we have sound evidence for our answers. Furthermore, we should always be open to revising our answers if we find better ones. However, we should not give up exploring the answers for those questions regardless of how busy we are with other important events

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  127 in life. That is because nothing could be more important than the existential questions. For Nursi, the first existential issue we need to tackle is the meaning of the self. Once we learn the language, we need first to read the self to understand our true nature (fitrah) with both its shortcomings and its great potential. In his collection of treatises, Nursi provides an extensive reading of human nature, which is infinitely needy and impotent while also having enormous potential to transcend all beings and be friends with the Divine. Once we establish a proper understanding of the self and become aware of our nature, we may explore the universe to find out answers to other important existential questions. We should also explore the messages that are claimed to be from the Supreme Being. We first need to examine the evidence to validate the authenticity of those messages. Additionally, we should compare the messages revealed in other religions or disclosed works in the universe for confirmation. We should expect an overlap between these messages. Understanding human potential From the Qur’anic perspective, a human being has the highest cosmic significance, having been created in the best form (ahsenul takwim). He/she is considered to be the vicegerent (khalifa) of God on the earth. Nursi interprets the allegorical story of Adam being taught “all the names” (Q, 2:31) as representing an important message regarding human mission and potential. He argues that the human superiority to the angels comes from his/her ability to comprehend the names of God manifested in the cosmic phenomena. In other words, a human could derive transcendental truth from the universe and gain an even higher position in the eyes of God. Therefore, the purpose of studying the universal phenomena should not be limited to instrumental knowledge. Nursi argues that to unleash this potential, human beings should strive every day to become better through our knowledge and deeds. In Nursi’s terms, human beings came to this world to be perfected by means of knowledge and supplication. In regard to human nature and abilities, everything is tied to knowledge. And the foundation, source, light and spirit of all true knowledge is the knowledge of God (ma’rifatullah), and its essence and basis is a belief in God (imanbillah).3 (Nursi, 1996e, p. 324) For Nursi, knowledge and belief in God are essential for a fulfilled life, because through this knowledge one can find answers to the existential questions. Nursi likens human potential to that of a seed. Each human is like a miniature universe in terms of his/her potential. For the potential to be

128  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî realized, the seed needs to be planted, nurtured, and protected. Otherwise, it is doomed to decay. Indeed, man resembles a seed. This seed has been given significant immaterial members by Divine power and a subtle, valuable program by Divine Determining, so that it may work beneath the ground, and emerging from that narrow world, enter the broad world of the air, and asking its Creator with the tongue of its disposition to be a tree, find a perfection worthy of it. . . . Similarly, significant members and valuable program have been deposited in man’s nature by Divine power and determining. If man uses those immaterial members on the desires of his soul and on minor pleasures under the soil of worldly life in the narrow confines of this earthly world, he will decay and decompose in the midst of difficulties in a brief life in a constricted place like the rotted seed, and load the responsibility on his unfortunate spirit, then depart from this world. If, however, he nurtures the seed of his abilities with the water of Islam and light of belief under the soil of worship and servitude to God, conforms to the commands of the Qur’an, and turns his faculties towards their true aims, they will produce branches and buds in the World of Similitudes (‘âlam-i mithâl) and the Intermediate Realm (alem-i berzakh); he will be a seed of great value and a shining machine containing the members of an everlasting tree and permanent truth which will be the means to innumerable perfections and bounties in Paradise. And he will be a blessed and luminous fruit of the tree of the universe. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 330–331) The success of life should be measured based on the learning of the right language to read the meaning of everything and live a meaningful life. The fulfilled life should be defined based on the potential to make good choices. Thus, the mânâ-i harfî approach provides guidance in terms of how to read one’s enormous potential, how to unleash this potential through learning the lessons in the book of the universe, and how to live a meaningful life through making good choices. Nursi points to the human potential for both good and evil depending on the path that he/she chooses: Since man has been created on the most excellent of patterns and has been given the most comprehensive abilities, he has been cast into an arena of trial and examination in which he may rise or fall to stations, ranks, and degrees from the lowest of the low to the highest of the high, from the earth to the Divine Throne, and from minute particles to the sun. He has been sent to this world as a miracle of Divine Power, the

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  129 result of creation, and a wonder of Divine art before whom have been opened two roads leading either to infinite ascent or infinite descent. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 328) In order to avoid the infinite descent, it is essential that a person becomes aware of his/her shortcomings in terms of complex elements of human nature. As it is well documented in recent experimental studies, we are not just made of intellect. We do not always follow our rationality. Indeed, we are predictably irrational (Ariely, 2008). That is because we have many other faculties beyond the intellect. They might have conflicting interests. For instance, when we are under the influence of the animal spirit, we prefer short-term pleasure to long-term ones. We sacrifice greater long-term benefits for the sake of smaller, short-term ones. This means that living a virtuous life is not an easy task. It requires a constant awareness of inner and outer dangers. That is why it is important to engage in mânâ-i harfî reading in order to establish a constant awareness of God’s presence. Whenever one fails to stay conscious of the Supreme Being, he/she shall fall into forgetfulness defined by the Qur’an as “ghaflah.” Understanding innate human worth The mânâ-i harfî approach, in relation to deciphering the meaning of life, provides a significant foundation based on the understanding of human nature. Nursi utilizes this foundation very well by giving a hermeneutical analogy in order to explain the meaning of life. Nursi’s analogy is of a welldeveloped piece of art that is created for a specific purpose. Firstly, this piece of art is so beautiful that whoever sees it becomes astonished. It is a marvel that fills everyone with awe and reverence. But this amazing work of art is also created to be used in a specific way by human beings. If it is used it for something that is not suitable for the purpose of its creation, then its creator becomes offended. The improper use of this art piece is an insult that denies the wisdom of the creator. Secondly, its improper usage will reduce its value. Nursi perceives human beings as great pieces of art with meaningful inscriptions that gain value if they are correctly related to their Artist and decoded through the mânâ-i harfî language: Thus, man is such an antique work of art of Almighty God. He is a most subtle and graceful miracle of His power whom He created to manifest all his Names and their inscriptions, in the form of a miniature specimen of the universe. If the light of belief enters his being, all the meaningful inscriptions on him may be read. As one who believes, he reads them consciously, and through that relation, causes others to read them. That is to say, the Divine art in man becomes apparent through meanings like, “I  am the creature and artifact of the All-Glorious Maker.

130  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî I manifest His mercy and munificence.” That is, belief, which consists of being connected to the Maker, makes apparent all the works of art in man. Man’s value is in accordance with that dominical art and by virtue of being a mirror to the Eternally Besought One. In this respect, insignificant man becomes God’s addressee and a guest of the Sustainer worthy of Paradise superior to all other creatures. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 320) However, if a human being is disconnected from his/her Maker, his/her value would be limited to transient material reality. He/she would be nothing but just an accidental chemical concoction of the evolutionary process. The meaning of his/her existence and life could not be understood due to the use of the wrong language – mânâ-i ismî. Nursi describes the lost value and meaning of human beings through disbelief as follows: Should unbelief, which consists of the severance of the relation, enter man’s being, then all those meaningful inscriptions of the Divine Names are plunged into darkness and become illegible. For if the Maker is forgotten, the spiritual aspects which look to Him will not be comprehended, they will be as though reversed. The majority of those meaningful sublime arts and elevated inscriptions will be hidden. The remainder, those that may be seen with the eye, will be attributed to lowly causes, nature, and chance, and will become utterly devoid of value. While they are all brilliant diamonds, they become dull pieces of glass. His importance looks only to his animal, physical being. And as we said, the aim and fruit of his physical being is only to pass a brief and partial life as the most impotent, needy, and grieving of animals. Then it decays and departs. See how unbelief destroys human nature and transforms it from diamonds into coal. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 320) In short, the meaning of life can be seen in the purpose of its creation; why there is life in the first place and how it should be used so that we can meaningfully understand its purpose. The knowledge of the self in particular and human nature in general play important roles in understanding the value and meaning of life. In Nursi’s view, the human being with the conflicting elements of his/her nature could lead to the highest of the high or the lowest of the low in terms of conducting good or evil acts. Therefore, it is essential to develop the right code of conduct for a good life with the constant awareness of internal challenges. Thus, the reading of all experienced phenomena through the mânâ-i harfî approach is expected to guide us towards a good, meaningful life.

5. Reading the meaning of physical and personal worlds As we have tried to elaborate in this book, Nursi believes that the answers to the existential questions are found in authentic Divine revelation and in

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  131 the accurate reading of the book of the universe authored by the Divine’s actions. Furthermore, Nursi thinks that we are equipped with the right tools to confirm those answers through an inner compass, called the “conscience” (wijdan). Therefore, we should sincerely and comparatively read the revealed messages in Al-Qur’an Al-Karîm (the Holy Book of Islam) and Al-Qur’an Al-Kabîr (the elegant book of the universe) to find our answers. As we read the meaning in both books, we shall learn the lessons to live a good life. Since in life we make critical choices, we need to develop ethical codes to make these choices. From an Islamic perspective, there are two types of choices shaping our life: God’s choices and our own choices. In other words, we are born with specific pre-determined facts that we could not change. For instance, we are born in a particular time and place to particular parents. We could not change those. Similarly, there are many things in our life that are determined beyond our choices and power. We have no freedom to change them. Those are God’s choices for us. We do not need to worry about them since God is AllGood. God’s choices are essentially good for us as long as we chose not to make them bad. God’s choices are known as fixed destiny (izdirari kader).4 We are supposed to read the meaning of those choices through the mânâ-i harfî to see the goodness in them. Unlike other living beings, we are given free will to make our own choices as well. The part of destiny that depends on our free will is called malleable destiny (ihtiyari kader). We are not just passive readers. We are the co-authors of our life story. Thus, the mânâ-i harfî approach provides guidance both in reading the meaning of experienced phenomena and writing (living) a meaningful life through developing good codes of conduct. Nursi argues everything determined by God must be directly or indirectly good for us. For instance, diseases do not seem good. However, the outcome of sickness in terms of realizing one’s true nature of being impotent and needy is very good. Likewise, there are many other good outcomes of getting sick. As long as we become patient and do not complain while being sick, we would reap benefits in this life and in the hereafter. However, if we do not see the good sides of sickness and complain, we will make it bad for ourselves through psychological outcomes and spiritual ones. In Nursi’s terms, “when we do not accept what is ordained from All-Good in a good manner, we will make it bad for ourselves” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 239). Worlds within the world For Nursi, the world is not just the external, physical one. We all have our own special worlds. Though we all live in the same physical world (universe), we construct a separate private world. This is the experienced world. It is very similar to the “lifeworld” in Husserl. There is, however, a fundamental difference between the two that is determined by “intention” (niyyah) and “perspective” (nazaar). For Husserl, both intention and

132  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî perspective are based on mânâ-i ismî, while for Nursi they are shaped by the mânâ-i harfî approach. This difference makes the Husserlian approach secular and this-worldly and Nursi’s approach spiritual and otherworldly. Nursi describes our special world as follows: everyone has his own vast world within this world. Simply, there are worlds one within the other to the number of human beings. The pillar of each person’s private world is his own life. If his body gives way, his world collapses on his head; it is doomsday for him. Since the heedless and neglectful do not realize that their world will be so quickly destroyed, they suppose it to be permanent like the general world and worship it. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 297) In another place, Nursi further describes this private world, explaining how it is built through our sense experiences: In this world, everyone has his private and temporally limited world as broad as the world, the pillar of which is his life. He makes use of his world through his inner and outer senses. He says to himself, “the sun is my lamp, the stars are my candles.” (Nursi, 1996a, p. 210) For Nursi, both the physical and personal worlds are the domains of the Divine acts. Therefore, it is very important to learn how to read the signs (ayaat) in the personal world through the mânâ-i harfî approach. While reflecting on his personal life, Nursi defines the ontic meaning of his life and its happiness as follows: The appearance of your life is this: your life is written letter and audial message. It reveals Beautiful Names of God. The reality of your life is this: it is the mirror to the reflection of Divine oneness. The happiness and perfection of your life is to love and worship knowingly to the One who manifested in the mirror of your life. (Nursi, 2012i, p. 73) Given the potential of human beings, Nursi thinks that it does not make sense to pursue animal pleasures: O hopeless Said! Considering such objectives of your life, how do you find reasonable to spend your life on the animalistic pleasures which are completely baseless? Other living beings, even plants, share some of those life objectives with you. Indeed, artful fruit such as pomegranate, apple, and berry are the words of Divine Power. They declare the beautiful names of God and make them readable. The objectives of

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  133 their lives are such sublime outcomes. Their appeared objective of being eaten is not their life real life objective. Being eaten might be the objective of their death, not life. Though other living beings could not be equal to you in terms of your life objectives. That is because you have the most comprehensive mirror. Thus, you shall not go lower than them in your life. (Nursi, 2012i, p. 73) Reflecting on the personal world For Nursi, both the physical and personal worlds are the domains of the Divine acts. Therefore, it is imperative to learn how to read the signs in the personal world through the mânâ-i harfî approach. Nursi provides many examples of how he understood his life events as meaningful signs. For instance, in the “13th Letter,” he was asked to give an overall assessment of his private world while going through many years of unfair exiles, isolation, and imprisonment. Rather than counting the unfortunate events in his life, he began with endless thanksgiving as if he had an excellent life with no trouble whatsoever: “I offer endless thanks to the Most Merciful of the Merciful that He has transformed the various wrongs the worldly perpetrate against me into various forms of mercy.” Nursi was not in self-delusion. He was well aware of countless wrongdoings by the authority against him. However, through the mânâ-i harfî approach, he perceived them to be converted into blessings by the Most Merciful. Thus, for him, God is always in control of everything. Though for some good reason, God does not prevent the evil acts of bad people in the physical world, He would do that for good people in their private (experienced) world. Nursi gives a few examples of such Divine intervention and mercy from his own life: Having given up politics and withdrawn from the world, I was living in a mountain cave and thinking of the hereafter when the worldly wrongfully plucked me from it and sent me into exile. The All-Compassionate and Wise Creator turned the exile into mercy; He transformed the solitude on the mountain, which was unsafe and exposed to factors that would harm sincerity, into a retreat in the safe and sincere mountains of Barla. While a prisoner-of-war in Russia I made up my mind to withdraw into a cave towards the end of my life and prayed for it. The Most Merciful of the Merciful made Barla (the small town in which he had lived eight years in exile) the cave and bestowed the benefits without burdening my weak self with the difficulties and troubles of a cave. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 63) Nursi perceived the exile as the acceptance of his prayer for the retreat. It was terrible for the authority because they intended harm by exiling Nursi

134  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî for an unjust reason. Therefore, they would be held accountable in the hereafter. However, from Nursi’s perspective, God converted the evil act of the authority into a great opportunity. Nursi’s exiled life turned out to be an excellent place for the retreat he had prayed for, and for reflection and writing. Nursi further elaborates on his exile, explaining how God made it fruitful through the evil acts of the authority: Although the worldly government authority gave the document in question to all the exiles, and released the criminals from prison and offered them amnesty, they wrongfully did not give it to me. However, in order to further employ me in the service of the Qur’an and make me write to a greater extent the lights of the Qur’an called the Words, my Compassionate Sustainer left me untroubled in this exile and transformed it into a great instance of compassion. In addition, although the worldly left all the influential, powerful leaders and shaikhs who could interfere in their world in the towns and cities and permitted them to meet with their relatives and everyone, they unjustly isolated me and sent me to a village. With one or two exceptions they allowed none of my relatives and fellow-countrymen to visit me. But my All-Compassionate Creator transformed that isolation into a vast mercy for me, for it left my mind clear and I was able to receive the effulgence of the All-Wise Qur’an as it is, free of malice and ill-will. Also, the worldly deemed excessive the two commonplace letters I wrote in two years at the beginning of my exile. And now even, they are displeased at one or two people visiting me purely for the sake of the hereafter once every week or two or once a month; and they have harassed me because of this. But my Compassionate Sustainer and AllWise Creator transformed their tyranny into mercy, for He transformed it into a desirable solitude and acceptable retreat for me during these Three Months, which may gain for a person ninety years of spiritual (manevî) life. All thanks be to God for all situations, my situation and comfort are thus. (Nursi, 1996c, pp. 63–64, emphasis mine)

6. Meaning of life in the secular vs. Tawhīdī worldviews The purpose of reading the disclosing books of the physical world and experienced world is to get answers to existential questions and learn lessons to live a fulfilled life. Thus, as we develop codes of conduct, we need to determine our objectives in life. In other words, we need to know the meaning of life. What shall we pursue in life? The ultimate meaning of life is defined quite differently in the Tawhīdī worldview as compared to the secular worldview.

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  135 Meaning of life in the secular worldview From the secular perspective, we are fortunate in terms of being on the top of the animal kingdom. Since there is no belief in life after death, we need to define the meaning of life within our limited time in this world. Therefore, it is quite difficult, if not impossible, to come up with an ultimate meaning. Many philosophers have attempted to define the meaning of life from a secular perspective. As an example, we want to discuss Heidegger’s view on this matter since he was deeply engaged with the question of meaning. Heidegger argues that we have to accept certain things in life as given facts that are determined beyond our power and will. Dasein is different from other beings because it is the only kind of being whose being is a question for it. Therefore, it is essential for Dasein to know how it comes to be. Thrownness, according to Heidegger, is a concept which describes humans’ individual existences as “being thrown” (geworfen) into the world. In a sense, this is a secular idea of qadar described further as “Dasein’s nonmastery of its own origin and its referential dependence on other beings, by the single term, ‘thrown-ness’ (Geworfenheit), which must be understood in a purely ontological sense as wishing to signify the matter-of-fact character of human finitude. Furthermore, this thrownness is not merely a characteristic of Dasein’s coming-into-existence but permeates the Dasein as such – the entire comingto-pass of its transcending comprehension. Heidegger will describe this abiding character of thrownness by another term  – Dasein’s ‘fallen-ness’ among beings (Verfallenheit).”5 This explanation, in fact, gives an idea that we are thrown and as such we do not know by whom and for what reason. Heidegger is well aware of the fact that we are mostly immersed in daily activities. Therefore, our own being is not a question for us. He calls such a life “inauthentic” or “falling.” It is a fleeing of Dasein from the authentic self. It is a kind of fear, though a different one. The common fear is from other beings, while the fear in the case of falling is from itself. Heidegger calls the second type of fear “anxiety,” which is a mood of Dasein in the running from itself. The individual Dasein is anxious about itself as being in the world. Strangely, in case of fear, one flees from the thing or person that possesses the danger whereas, in the case of anxiety, one moves towards things and persons in order to escape from oneself. When everything goes wrong, and the world collapses, nothing is left but oneself. One would be thrown back upon oneself to think about the real meaning of life. In reality, what tortures the individual Dasein is the nothingness of the world in which he is immersed. Despite a very compelling argument of the need for a meaningful life, Heidegger fails to provide a guide for such a life. Ironically, when the world turned against him after the collapse of Nazism, Heidegger experienced big anxiety in facing his being. At the end of World War II, he faced accusations

136  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî of the French occupying force and the university’s own denazification commission because of his ties to Nazism. He was expelled from the university and forbidden from teaching in Germany for six years by the French Occupation Authority. During those years when the world collapsed on him, he had difficulty finding the meaning of life while turning to his own Dasein. He tried to escape from this anxiety by attempting to commit suicide. He spent some time in the hospital after the suicide attempt.6 The miserable life in the mânâ-i ismî perspective Interestingly, Nursi also puts a great emphasis on anxiety for those who immerse themselves in this world. However, for Nursi, that is due to the mânâ-i ismî perspective. Phenomenologically speaking, those who perceive through mânâ-i ismî could not escape from anxiety because of the perceived reality. For instance, when one thinks about the past through the mânâ-i ismî, “what is seen is a vast, dark, terrifying, overturned graveyard, where the doomsday of the land of the past has come to pass. There can be no doubt that this sight casts man into great terror, fear, and despair.” When one thinks of the future, “it appears in the form of a huge, black, terrifying grave which is going to rot us and make us prey to snakes and scorpions which will eliminate us.” When one thinks of the vast space above, “he feels an awful terror at the great speed and variety of the motions – like horse races or military maneuvers – of the millions of stars and heavenly bodies in endless space.” When one reflects on the planet earth, “he sees it as an unleashed, unhaltered animal wandering aimlessly around the sun, or like a holed and captainless boat, and he is carried away by fear and anxiety.” When one reflects on animate beings, he sees that all living creatures, whether human or animal, are disappearing group by group and with great speed towards it. That is to say, they are going to non-being and ceasing to exist. Since he knows that he too is a traveler on that road, he goes out of his mind with grief. Finally, when one thinks about the mysterious journey of beings coming into existence, “he naturally remains in a torment of bewilderment and doubt” (Nursi, 1996d, pp. 649–650). Nursi argues that the phenomenological world built through the mânâ-i ismî approach leads to anxiety. This is precisely a subconscious realization of “ownerlessness” (sahipsizlik) as opposed to an eternal Owner (Sahib-i Bâki): “The view of unbelief sees human beings, powerless as they are to secure their desires, as ownerless and without protector; it imagines them to be grieving and sorrowful like weeping orphans on account of their impotence” (Nursi, 1996d, p. 652). Modern people try to escape from this existential anxiety through entertainment and worldly engagement. However,

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  137 this is not a real solution. It is just self-deception for a short time. Sooner or later, they have to face the meaning of being they are fleeing from. The meaningful life in the Tawhīdī worldview According to Nursi, the mânâ-i harfî perspective within the Tawhīdī worldview provides a different picture of reality. The believers who see through this perspective view themselves “not as orphans but officials charged with duties; as servants glorifying and extolling God” (Nursi, 1996d, p.  652). The mânâ-i harfî perspective is a real solution for anxiety because it provides meaningful answers to existential questions. From this perspective, we are not thrown into, but in fact, we are sent here to this world for a very special purpose: Man has been sent to this world as an official and guest, and has been given abilities of great significance. And he has been entrusted with important duties in accordance with those abilities. In order to employ a man in fulfilling those aims and duties, powerful encouragement and severe threats have been made. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 338) In Nursi’s view, the meaningful life is not the one chasing pleasure, power, and possession. We cannot be happy even if we manage to acquire them. For instance, if we pursue possession, the highest possible we could go is the possession of the entire planet. Assuming we work very hard and earn the ownership of the entire planet, would that be a meaningful accomplishment? If we think at a cosmic level, the answer would be “no.” The entire planet is nothing but a speck of dust in the universe. As it does not make sense for someone to spend his/her entire life striving for the possession of one grain of sand, it is also meaningless at the cosmic level, even if they succeed in possessing the entire planet. It is also meaningless to pursue power and pleasure as the ultimate objective. Given the insignificance of our planet, even if we manage to gain power over the entire planet, it will still be nothing at the cosmic level. Furthermore, our success will be limited to a certain number of years. Even if we live 100 years with such accomplishments, it would mean absolutely nothing compared to infinity. As it does not make sense to make a five-second dream of pleasure as the purpose in life, it also does not make sense to pursue brief worldly pleasures. Even if a person realizes his/her dream of the highest pleasure for five seconds, it would not be considered a success. Similarly, for human nature and consciousness, which is not satisfied with anything less than eternity, worldly objectives of pleasure, power, and possession could not be meaningful. They are all doomed to be ultimate failures if they do not go beyond this world.

138  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî The Qur’an portrays the dissatisfaction of human nature with the transient through the story of Prophet Abraham, who said, “I  love not those that set” (Q, 6:76). Since everything in this world will set (disappear) one day, it is not worthy of being the ultimate goal. Nothing could satisfy the human heart that seeks eternity. Nursi argues that without hope for eternity, one cannot enjoy life: Included in human nature is an intense love of immortality. Even, because of his power of imagination, man fancies a sort of immortality in everything he loves. He cries out from the depths of his being whenever he thinks of or sees their passing. All lamentations at separation are expressions of the weeping caused by the love of immortality. If there were no imagined immortality, there would be no love. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 31) If we think we are not equipped with the right tools to find the truth, we need to assume that God is the evil genius deceiving us with every possible tool. In such a case, as it is stated by Descartes, I shall think that the sky, the air, the earth, colors, shapes, sounds and all external things are merely the delusions of dreams which he has devised to ensnare my judgement. I shall consider myself as not having hands or eyes, or flesh, or blood or senses, but as falsely believing that I have all these things. (Descartes, “First Meditation”) Obviously, for such extreme skeptics, it is hard to prove anything. For Nursi, the notion of very existence is a clear sign of God’s mercy. As we read the universe, we will bear witness to His infinite mercy. God will provide every possible means for us to find answers to the most important questions. It is stated by Nursi that “khulf al-wa’d” is impossible for God; namely God does not give up His promise. In this case, His promise is an eternal life for which he will never deceive us.7

7. Seeking the infinite through transcending the finite The mânâ-i harfî approach establishes a connection between the human as finite being to the Infinite Being. As we read the beings, we will understand that their Maker must have infinite power, infinite knowledge, infinite wisdom, infinite mercy, and infinite love. The more we read and gain certainty about the existence and presence of the Infinite Being, the more we will desire to establish direct communication with Him. According to Nursi, prayer is nothing but a direct connection and communication between the finite and the Infinite. Thus, we do not pray to score for Jannah. Instead, we

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  139 pray to directly communicate with the Infinite Power who speaks through His constant acts of creation. In their five daily prayers, Muslims are asked to reflect on the manifestation of the Infinite Power and the countless bounties granted within this manifestation. In the Ninth Word, Nursi engages in deep reflection on the meaning of prayer in terms of connecting human beings to the Infinite: The meaning of worship is this, that the servant sees his own faults, impotence, and poverty, and in the Divine Court prostrates in love and wonderment before the perfect Divine lordship, Divine mercy, and the power of the Eternally Besought One. In other words, worship is an act of recognizing one’s own true nature through the mânâ-i harfî in terms of being absolutely impotent and absolutely needy, then being connected to the source of absolute perfection, absolute power, and absolute mercy manifested in the universe. Thus, worship is the logical outcome of one’s understanding of the self and the universe through the mânâ-i harfî. In Nursi’s terms, That is to say, just as the sovereignty of the Divine lordship demands worship and obedience, so also does the holiness of the Divine lordship require that the servant sees his faults through seeking forgiveness, and through his glorification and declaring “Glory be to God” proclaims that his Sustainer is pure and free of all defects, and exalted above and far from the false ideas of the people of misguidance, and holy and exempt from all shortcomings in the universe. Also, the perfect power of the Lordship requires that through understanding his own weakness and the impotence of other creatures, the servant proclaims “God is Most Great” in admiration and wonder before the majesty of the works of the Eternally Besought One’s power, and bowing in deep humility seeks refuge in Him and places his trust in Him. Also, the infinite treasury of the Divine Lordship requires that the servant makes known his own need and the needs and poverty of all creatures through the tongue of appeal and supplication, and proclaims his Sustainer’s bounties and gifts through thanks and glory and uttering “All praise be to God.” That is to say, the words and actions of the prayers comprise these meanings. For that reasons, the five times prayer has been ordained from the Divine. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 51) In Nursi’s understanding, worship is not a certain ritual for earning good deeds. It is a reflection on the self and the acts of God in life through the mânâ-i harfî approach. Such a way of worshiping leads to certainty (yaqeen) about the existence and presence of God. Through remembering the nature of the self and reading the meaning of God’s actions in the experienced daily phenomena, one can feel the presence of God while worshiping. Perhaps

140  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî that is the reason the Qur’an invites believers to worship until they reach certainty (al-yaqeen): “and worship your Sustainer till al-yaqeen (death) comes to you” (Q, 15:99). It is interesting to note that despite the explicit word of certainty (alyaqeen) in the verse, many translators just use death without using yaqeen. That is because they think it is possible to reach to yaqeen through the remembrance of death or after experiencing death. For Nursi, the yaqeen is also possible through reflection on life events by using the mânâ-i harfî approach. Thus, it is better to understand the meaning of the above verse in terms of reflective worshiping in daily prayers that establishes a special relationship between the transcendental self and God with the sense of certainty on His presence. Satisfaction and certainty in faith In an interesting way, the Qur’an seems to connect this feeling of certainty in faith with the feeling of “satisfaction” (itmi’nan). “Those who believe, and whose hearts find their rest in the remembrance of God – for, verily, in the remembrance of God [men’s] hearts do find their rest” (Q, 13:28). The Qur’an repeats the same message in another place, telling people they can only find true happiness in the remembrance of God. The following verses declare that a satisfied person is the one from whom God is also pleased; hence, God makes him/her happy: “[But unto the righteous God will say,] ‘O thou human being that hast attained to inner peace! Return thou unto thy Sustainer, well-pleased [and] pleasing [Him]: enter, then, together with My [other true] servants – yea, enter thou My paradise!’ ” (Q, 89:27–30). Elsewhere,8 we compare three happiness models: hedonic, eudemonic, and G-donic. We argue that interpersonal happiness markers shall be indicated based on dimensional differences. Our multi-dimensional happiness model suggests that we need to move to higher dimensions for higher life satisfaction. The model assumes that being in higher dimensions brings higher life satisfaction regardless of how much we achieve in terms of having, doing, and being. The first dimension is hedonic, in which we pursue happiness through higher hedonic pleasures from having, doing, and being. We go through four phases while pursuing hedonic happiness: deprivation (D), emulation (E), achievement (A), and disappointment (D). Referring to the initials of those phases, we call it a DEAD loop. We argue that it is not possible to reach genuine life satisfaction in the hedonic dimension, because we will eventually realize that we are in the DEAD loop after trying many different things. This phenomenon is well captured in the literature under the concept of the “hedonic treadmill.” Most people come to the realization of the DEAD loop when they reach mid-life. We think such a realization might be the driving force behind the “mid-life crisis.” The second dimension is eudemonic, in which we pursue happiness through giving priority to meaningful engagement in life. Our objective here

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  141 is not pleasure maximization. Rather, meaning maximization is pursued through having, doing, and being. We will still gain pleasure in our activities, though it is not our primary objective anymore. We will be fine with something meaningful, but painful. We argue that life satisfaction in the second dimension is higher compared to the first dimension. However, we argue that ultimate life satisfaction is not possible within this dimension, either. We will eventually hit a dead end, because it is not different from the hedonic loop in terms of its phases of deprivation, emulation, achievement, and disappointment. Perhaps the loop is longer; therefore, it takes more time to realize that it is a treadmill. As we give more importance to meaning, we will explore the ultimate meaning of our efforts. If we have no belief in the afterlife, we will soon realize that we face an ultimately meaningless life. We will not be satisfied with temporal meaning, but with ultimate meaninglessness. Therefore, we shall seek to move to the third dimension. The third dimension is G-donic, in which we pursue life satisfaction through God consciousness and God’s pleasure. We define the G-donic dimension based on the transcendental reality behind the observed phenomena in this world. Using the shadow metaphor, it is like finding the origin of the shadow-like reality. Once we reach certainty about the existence and presence of God through His creative acts in the universe, we will live a life that pleases Him. We consider belief as connection and communication with the Infinite. We argue that once we reach such a realization, we will change our attitude towards the worldly having, doing, and being. We will not seek satisfaction with shadow-like worldly realities. Instead, we will seek satisfaction through the transcendental reality. Satisfaction in this world and beyond Unlike many scholars, Nursi argues that gaining certainty about God’s existence and presence through reading His signs (ayaat) in the universe will bring happiness in this world and in the hereafter. In his words, “The person who knows and loves God Almighty may receive endless bounties, happiness, lights, and mysteries. While the one who does not truly know and loves him is afflicted spiritually and materially by endless misery, pain, and fears” (Nursi, 1996c, p. 262). He supports his argument by pointing to the ultimate meaningless in having, doing, and being, if one does not find the ultimate reality: Even if such an impotent, miserable person owned the whole world, it would be worth nothing for him, for it would seem to him that he was living a fruitless life among the vagrant human race in a wretched world without owner or protector. Everyone may understand just how forlorn and baffled is a man among the aimless human race in this bewildering fleeting world if he does not know his Owner, if he does not discover his Master.

142  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî On the other hand, if one reaches to the third dimension in finding God, one would accomplish true life satisfaction in this world and the hereafter: if he does discover and know Him, he will seek refuge in His mercy and will rely on His power. The desolate world will turn into a place of recreation and pleasure, it will become a place of trade for the hereafter. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 262) Indeed, the daily connection with the Divine power and Mercy with the sense of yaqeen is expected to bring tranquility and satisfaction to the life of believers through providing transcendental meaning. As explained above, the prayer is a time of reflection for the countless blessings given at any moment of life. Thus, as people understand the interconnectivity between everything in the universe, they would realize that they benefit from the entire universe at every moment. They are being blessed with countless bounties. That is why the Qur’an reminds people they have already received countless bounties: And He gives you of all that you ask for. But if you count the favors of God, never will you be able to number them. Verily, man is given up to injustice and ingratitude. (Q, 14:34) The verse above clearly means that if people are not thankful, they are not aware of the countless blessings. If so, they shall count the bounties to realize that they are countless. In other words, the verse invites people to engage in reflection on the bounties received through the creative acts of God in daily life. In another verse, the Qur’an explicitly refers to the rejoice that is found within God’s grace rather than material aspiration: Say: “In [this] bounty of God and in His grace – in this, then, let them rejoice: it is better than all [the worldly wealth] that they may amass!” (Q, 10:58)

8. Setting guiding principles for a meaningful life The ultimate purpose behind learning from an Islamic perspective is to develop specific ethical codes of conduct (akhalq) for meaningful and flourishing life. Al-Attas (1993) argues that the purpose of Islamic education is not tal’im (instruction). Rather, it is ta’dib, which includes knowledge (‘ilm), instruction, and good breeding (tarbiyah). In his view, the core problem of Muslims is the lack of adab (good character). He defines good man as follows: A good man is the one who is truly conscious his responsibilities toward the true God; who understands and fulfills his obligations toward

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  143 himself and others in his society with justice; who constantly strives to improve every aspect of himself towards perfection as a man of adab (insan adabi). (Wan Daud, 1989, p. 133) The adab cannot be taught through dictating specific values. It shall be presented within the Islamic worldview along with the relevant concepts of wisdom (hikmah), justice (‘adalah), reality, and truth (haqiqah). That is why the Qur’an defines the pious believer as not just the one who worships God continuously, but also one who gains the consciousness of the Divine presence and behaves accordingly in his personal and social life domains: truly pious is he who believes in God, and the Last Day; and the angels, and revelation, and the prophets; and spends his substance – however much he himself may cherish – it – upon his near of kin, and the orphans, and the needy, and the wayfarer, and the beggars, and for the freeing of human beings from bondage; and is constant in prayer, and renders the purifying dues; and [truly pious are] they who keep their promises whenever they promise, and are patient in misfortune and hardship and in time of peril: it is they that have proved themselves true, and it is they, they who are conscious of God. (Q, 2:177) The ultimate purpose of the individual, from an Islamic perspective, is to recognize reality as transcendent and to live life as a vicegerent of God with wisdom, justice, courage, appreciation, and temperance. While the awareness of one’s countless blessings results in sincere appreciation, the understanding of the Infinite Power and Mercy assures the believers that an eternal blessing is possible with God alone, as long as He is pleased with them. Thus, the meaning of life for believers is directly linked to God’s pleasure. They may define codes of conduct in terms of ethical principles leading to God’s pleasure. The mânâ-i harfî approach helps believers affirm the codes of conduct outlined in the Divine book through reading the same principles in the book of the universe. For instance, the Qur’an asks believers to stay on the “straight path,” which is the path of honesty, fairness, justice, etc.9 It tells them that in the long run, the best way to accomplish their goal is through the straight path. Similarly, if we study the universe, we learn that indeed the shortest path between two points is a “straight line.” Thus, the universe also gives a message that the shortest path to our objective is to go straight. Ethical lessons from the universe The Qur’an tells people not to waste and says that God does not love those who waste. When we study the book of the universe, we will see that at the

144  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî macro level, nothing is wasted. For instance, the water cycle reveals to us that not a single drop of water is being wasted. Water molecules are being recycled again and again. The same is true for the carbon and nitrogen cycles as well. Thus, the book of the universe confirms the ethical principles in the Qur’an. Seeing such a connection between the revealed words (such as the Qur’an) and the revealed works (such as the creative acts in the physical universe and in one’s life) assures believers that they are on the right path. Therefore, they should follow those ethical principles in their daily relationships without any hesitation. Nursi argues that God reinforces moral principles through His acts in the physical realm. Thus, we might understand how basic to human life are the principles of justice, frugality, and cleanliness, which are truths of the Qur’an and Islamic principles. And know how closely connected with the universe are the injunctions of the Qur’an, having spread their firm roots everywhere, and that it is as impossible to destroy those truths as it is to destroy the universe and change its form. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 399) Nursi cites Surat al-Rahman to support his argument: And the Firmament has He raised high, and He has set up the balance of justice. In order that you may not transgress due balance. So establish weight with justice and fall not short in the balance. (Q, 35:7–9) The above Qur’anic surah first refers to justice and order in the physical universe. In preceding verses, it talks about the balance and order of the sun and moon. Then, it mentions the full submission of all beings to this order. It points to the order and balance in space. Then, it asks believers to be just in their social and economic relations. This is a very clear example of how the Qur’an gives ethical lessons through the reading of the universe. Following the Qur’anic method, Nursi derives the following ethical lessons in the verses above: O wasteful, prodigal  .  .  . wrongful, unjust  .  .  . dirty, unclean  .  .  . wretched man! You have not acted in accordance with the economics, cleanliness, and justice that are the principles by which the whole universe and all beings act, and are therefore in effect the object of their anger and disgust. On what do you rely that through your wrongdoing and disequilibrium, your wastefulness and uncleanliness, you make all beings angry? Yes, the universal wisdom of the universe, which is the greatest manifestation of the divine name of All-Wise, turns on the economy and lack of waste. It commands frugality. And the total

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  145 justice in the universe proceeding from the greatest manifestation of the Name All-Just administers the balance of all things and enjoins justice on man. Mentioning the word balance four times, the verses in Sura al-Rahman. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 399) Linking worship to daily works It is important to note how Nursi links worship to ethical codes. In modern times, we see a big gap between what is religious and what is ethical. For instance, a study revealed that when it comes to certain ethical principles, non-Muslim countries are more Muslim than Muslim countries. This is because of separation between worship (ibadaat) and social behaviors (muamelaat). Many people perceive the former as the primary while the latter as secondary for being religious. Perhaps, it is better to call this “individual laicism” in terms of separation of religion and worldly matters in mind. Nursi is clearly against such an interpretation. In fact, he puts muamelaat at the core of religion. In his book Signs of Miraculousness, Nursi explains the relationship between muamelaat and ibadaat as follows: “Due to the multiplicity of needs and desires, human beings have to live in social life in which there will division of labor and trade.” However, since human faculties are not restrained by God, they are likely to go the extreme and commit injustice in their social and economic relations. Therefore, they need to be restrained through laws. “But because the intellects of single members of society are incapable of comprehending justice, the human race as a whole needs a general or universal intellect to establish justice from which all may benefit; and that intellect is the universal law, and that law is the Shari’a.” Then, in order to make people to follow that law, it is necessary to strengthen their faith in God through helping them to see the signs of His greatness through His creative acts in the universe. “Then in order to perpetuate this idea and fix the tenets of belief firmly in their minds,” we need “a constantly repeated reminder and renewed act, and that reminder is nothing but worship” (Nursi, 2012k, p. 194). In Nursi’s understanding, we are ordered to worship not because God needs our worship, but because we need to worship to avoid injustice in our social and economic relations. Indeed, the following Qur’anic verse clearly points to the role of learning revealed knowledge and performing the five daily prayers for restraining from unjust and sinful deeds: Recite what is sent of the Book by inspiration to you and establish Regular Prayer: for Prayer restrains from shameful and unjust deeds and remembrance of Allah is the greatest (thing in life) without doubt. And God knows the (deeds) that you do. (Q, 29:45)

146  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî In other words, believers are supposed to behave justly because reading the Qur’an (the book of the universe) helps them become God-conscious. As a result of this remembrance, they are expected to behave with an awareness that their deeds are being monitored by God. Thus, they would be held accountable if they engaged in unjust and sinful behaviors. The Prophet Muhammad also puts a great emphasis on fair deeds in social relations. It is reported that he once asked his companions, “Do you know who is bankrupt?” They said, “The one without money or goods is bankrupt.” The Prophet said, Verily, the bankrupt of my nation are those who come on the Day of Resurrection with prayers, fasting, and charity, but also with insults, slander, consuming wealth, shedding blood, and beating others. The oppressed will each be given from his good deeds. If his good deeds run out before justice is fulfilled, then their sins will be cast upon him, and he will be thrown into the Hellfire. (Sahīh Muslim, # 2581)10    Straight path and success Nursi considers sincere moral conduct along with strong faith as the secret of the success for the Prophet and his companions in creating a civilized society out of a savage one. They did not rely on the use of political or military power to change people. Instead, they reached out to the heart and minds of people to voluntarily change themselves. Here is how Nursi describes the success of the Prophet: Now, consider how, he swiftly eradicated from the various tribes in the Arab Peninsula, evil, savage customs and habits to which they were fanatically attached. He replaced them with all the finest virtues. He made those people teachers of all the world and masters to the civilized nations. See, it was not outward domination, he conquered and subjugated their minds, spirits, hearts, and souls. He became the beloved of hearts, the teacher of minds, the trainer of carnal souls, the ruler of spirits. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 245) Nursi considers the time of the Prophet as the best example of what true Islamic teaching is supposed to have in terms of sincere worship/prayer (ibadaat) and good deeds (salihât). He believes that Islam brought a real transformation to the life of the individual through its faith-based moral principles. He challenges philosophers and social scientists to have any accomplishment similar to that of the Prophet: You know that a small habit like cigarette smoking among a small nation can be removed permanently only by a powerful ruler with great effort.

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  147 But look! The Prophet Mohammed removed numerous ingrained habits from intractable, fanatical large nations with slight outward power and little effort in a short period of time, and in their place he so established exalted qualities that they became as firm as if they had mingled with their very blood. He had very many extraordinary accomplishments like this. Thus, we present the Arabian Peninsula as a challenge to those who refuse to see the testimony of the blessed age of the Prophet. Let them each take a hundred philosophers, go there, and strive for a hundred years; would they be able to carry out in that time one-hundredth of what he achieved in a year? (Nursi, 1996e, p. 245) Qur’anic character lessons from the universe One of 114 chapters in the Qur’an is named “Al-Hadid” (iron), perhaps as a reminder of the importance of iron for humanity. As our body relies on iron (hemoglobin molecules contain iron to transport oxygen), our civilization is also built on iron, which is the key ingredient in the production of steel. We would like to reflect on the first six verses of that chapter as an example of character education through the mânâ-i harfî approach in the Qur’anic teaching. “ALL THAT IS in the heavens and on earth extols God’s limitless glory: for He alone is almighty, truly wise!” (Q, 57:1). The praise is through the disclosed meaning. As a well-functioning, useful, and elegant device such as iPhone is a testimony to the great human skills, so are the elegant and miraculous beings on the earth and heavens the testimony to the Divine power and Wisdom. “His is the dominion over the heavens and the earth; He grants life and deals death, and He has the power to will anything” (Q, 57:2). This verse points to the key principle of Tawhīd, which is a belief that God is in control of everything. He is the One who creates and sustains everything in the universe. The creation of life and death is mentioned as an apparent sign of such power. In other words, since life relies on almost everything in the universe, the One who has power over everything can create life. As we see abundant examples of living beings, we shall logically conclude that the Creator must have power over everything. “He is the First and the Last, and the Outward as well as the Inward: and He has full knowledge of everything” (Q, 57:3). This verse rejects the role of apparent causes and refers to God as Sustainer who directly shapes the inner and outer dimensions of beings. By referring to the infinite knowledge of God, the verse reminds us that all beings are shaped with infinite knowledge that could not be attributed to their ignorant material causes. He it is who has created the heavens and the earth in six aeons, and is established on the throne of His almightiness. He knows all that enters

148  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî the earth, and all that comes out of it, as well as all that descends from the skies, and all that ascends to them. And He is with you wherever you may be; and God sees all that you do. (Q, 57:4) This verse explicitly refers to God as the Creator of the heavens and the earth. It highlights the active ongoing creation from soil and sky. In other words, it refers to so-called natural phenomena covered in science as acts of God happening through His infinite knowledge. The reference to God’s knowledge is a clear challenge to arrogant scientists that those natural events, like the growth of plants on the earth, cannot be possible without infinite knowledge. Then, the verse ends with a reminder of God being watchful of our deeds. It means that as we observe God’s acts in the universe, we shall be mindful of His presence wherever we go. We shall behave accordingly. “To Him belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth: and all affairs are referred back to God” (Q, 57:5). This verse reminds us for the second time that everything in the earth and the heavens belongs to God. It means that our efforts of possessing them are meaningless. We can only use them. However, we can never keep them since we will eventually die and leave everything behind. Thus, the verse ends with the message that what matters are our affairs with what we are given, not our possession. Therefore, we shall live with the awareness that we will be fully accountable in terms of our affairs. “He makes the night grow longer by shortening the day, and makes the day grow longer by shortening the night, and He has full knowledge of what is in the hearts [of men]” (Q, 57:6). Again, this verse first refers to God’s knowledge in creating the day and night through an extremely delicate system. Then, it reminds us that the One who has the knowledge of making such amazing physical phenomena also knows what is in the hearts. In other words, we shall be careful in our choices because God knows them when they emerge as intention even before turning to actions. BELIEVE in God and His Apostle, and spend on others out of that of which He has made you trustees: for, those of you who have attained to faith and who spend freely [in God’s cause] shall have a great reward. (Q, 57:7) The verse ends with even more explicit moral lessons telling believers that belief in God is not just acceptance of the truth, but also an expression of this truth through their interactions with fellow human beings. Believers shall follow the best example of the Prophet by knowing that they are just trustees of what they possess. Therefore, they shall spend them for good causes if they want to gain great reward. We argue that the Qur’an provides many examples of the mânâ-i harfî approach. It invites us to read the meaning in the beings and apply them to

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  149 our life to make it meaningful. It guides its followers to decode the Divine attributes such as mercy, knowledge, power, and wisdom reflected through the creative acts of God in the cosmos. It is like a treasure map guiding the readers to discover the treasure-like transcendent truth manifested in the cosmic phenomena. Thus, it is very much in line with our seven-dimensional knowledge approach, as we will further explain in the last chapter. In short, from Nursi’s perspective, both the Qur’an and the book of the universe provide guiding principles for a flourishing life. Thus, we shall derive character lessons from the study of cosmic phenomena.11 Like a seed, we are planted in this world with great potential. In order to unleash our potential for moral, spiritual, and intellectual excellence, we shall follow examples in both guiding books.

9. Meaning of pain and pleasure in life Conventional economics defines life’s objective as net pleasure maximization through the utility function. Thus, the happy life is the one with maximum pleasure and minimum pain. Nursi does not agree with such a philosophy of life. Instead, he thinks “Ease lies in hardship, and hardship in ease” (Nursi, 1996b, p.  172). Thus, paradoxically, one needs to pursue pain maximization for a happy and fulfilled life. Indeed, from Nursi’s perspective, we can put painful and pleasant experiences into four categories: (1) painfully pleasant experience, (2) painfully painful experience, (3) pleasantly painful experience, and (4) pleasantly pleasant experience. Painfully pleasant experience This includes any worldly pleasure if there is no belief in God and in the hereafter. For Nursi, all pleasant events in life are ultimately just misery-inthe-making due to ultimate separation and termination. Whatever we like, we want to last forever. At the very least, we want to have what we like whenever we desire it again. For instance, if a watermelon is our favorite fruit, we would not enjoy tasting it for the last time ever. Since all worldly pleasures are doomed to end one day, we could not enjoy them as long as we are conscious of their temporary nature. That is why Nursi argues that sinful, pleasant experiences are like eating poisonous honey. Even though we receive an initial pleasure when experiencing them, we cannot escape the painful feelings associated with them later on. For example, the pains of jealousy, separation, and unreciprocated love transform the partial pleasure to be found in illicit love into poisonous honey. If you want to know how they end up in hospitals due to illnesses resulting from their misspent youth, and in prison due to their excesses, and in bars and dens of vice and the graveyard due to the distress arising from their unnourished hearts and spirits not performing

150  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî their right functions, go and ask at the hospitals, prisons, bars, and graveyards. More than anything, you will hear the weeping and sighs of regret at the blows youths have received as the penalty for abusing their youth, and their excesses, and illicit pleasures. (Nursi, 1996d, p. 225) Therefore, it is not possible to gain lasting happiness through aiming for the maximization of pleasure. Painfully painful experience This includes any severe hardship in life such as disease, hunger, or calamity. It is impossible for anyone to avoid painful events in life. The human body and soul are vulnerable to many calamities. Even though we have discovered many painkillers, we have no way to eliminate pain from the human experience. Indeed, some philosophers such as Schopenhauer argue that painful experiences in life are more numerable than pleasant ones. Nursi seems to agree that life is full of suffering if there is no belief in God because of the perception through the mânâ-i ismî approach. In Nursi’s terms, the world in the eyes of nonbelievers or heedless believers is a house of universal mourning. All living creature are orphans weeping at the blows of death and separation. Man and the animals are alone and without ties being ripped apart by the talons of the appointed hour. Mighty beings like the mountains and oceans are like horrendous, lifeless corpses. Many grievous, crushing, terrifying delusions like these arise from his unbelief and misguidance, and torment him. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 28) Therefore, it is not possible for nonbelievers and heedless believers to have lasting happiness. Furthermore, Nursi argues that without realizing the meaning (benefit) of painful experiences, one would double his/her pain through thinking. For instance, once a person falls ill or has to go through surgery, he/she would experience greater pain by considering disease as a bad calamity with no benefit. If the same person could read the meaning of disease in terms of its benefits in this life and the hereafter through the mânâ-i harfî approach, he/she would become patient and experience relatively less pain. This applies to any adversities in life. For instance, while waiting for the departure of our plane, if we hear the announcement of a five-hour delay, we are likely to feel the pain of waiting for no reason. By questioning the delay, we will increase our pain. In short, for those who cannot read the meaning of life events through the mânâ-i harfî approach, any painful experience hurts even more. Thus, painful experiences would become painfully painful.

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  151 Pleasantly painful experience This occurs when we realize the good outcome of painful experiences through the mânâ-i harfî approach. For instance, getting sick and experiencing pain while being sick affects anyone with a functioning neural system. As explained above, the mânâ-i harfî approach would help us remain patient. Thus, it would prevent additional pain. As we deepen our reading of the meaning of disease and realize the great benefit of illness, we might feel thankful for having such a gift from the All-Good. That is because sickness is for spiritual purification and sincere worship. In the treatise for the sick, Nursi provides 20 compelling arguments on the potential benefits of illness. For instance, he directly calls on sick and unhappy persons: Unhappy sick person! Do not be anxious, have patience! Your illness is not a malady for you; it is a sort of cure. For life departs like capital; if it yields no fruits, it is wasted; and if it passes in ease and heedlessness, it passes swiftly. Illness makes that capital of yours yield huge profits. Moreover, it does not allow your life to pass quickly, it restrains it and lengthens it, so that it will depart after yielding its fruits. . . . Be patient, indeed, offer thanks! Your illness may transform each of the minutes of your life into the equivalent of an hour’s worship. . . . I have formed the opinion at this time that for some people sickness is a divine bounty, a gift of the Most Merciful. (Nursi, 1996b, pp. 266–268) Likewise, all life’s painful experiences would become pleasantly painful ones for those who perceive them through the mânâ-i harfî approach. For instance, if we experience unpleasant events, such as a delay in our flight as discussed above, we will not feel that much pain. That is because if we believe that all life events are controlled by the One who is All-Knowing, All-Wise, and Most Kind, we will not have any objection to His decision of delaying our flight. Even if we do not know the true reason behind His decision, we will believe that it is a good one. Thus, all painful experiences in life would be pleasantly painful. In Nursi’s terms, as believers, we shall look favorably on old age, death, and illness, and even love them in one respect. Since we have an infinitely precious bounty like belief, old age, and illness, and death are all agreeable. If there are things that are disagreeable, they are sin, vice, innovations, and misguidance. (Nursi, 1996b, p. 303) Pleasantly pleasant experience This occurs when we realize that anything that gives us pleasure is a special gift from the All-Kind, Most-Compassionate, and Most Generous One.

152  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî Since we have no real power to make anything, whatever we acquire is, in reality, a gift from the All-Powerful. Since He gains no benefit in granting us whatever we like and need, He gives to us purely out of His kindness. Thus, everything we receive is a precious gift. Thus, the more we realize the value and importance of the pleasant gifts, the more pleasure we will receive. For instance, if we enjoy food, we should be extremely thankful for having delicious food. If it were not for His mercy, it would cost billions to obtain a single apple considering the cost of making an apple from scratch. Actually, it is currently impossible to make a human-made apple even if we are ready to pay a trillion dollars. In short, through the mânâ-i harfî approach, we can gain even higher pleasure from pleasant life experiences through recognizing them as gifts. Furthermore, Nursi argues that verified belief brings true happiness in this life through the perceived goodness in everything if we use the mânâ-i harfî perspective. Thus, for a believer, this world is an abode where the Names of the All-Merciful One are constantly recited, a place of instruction for man and the animals, and a field of examination for man and jinn. All animal and human deaths are a demobilization. Those who have completed their duties of life depart from this transient world for another, happy and trouble-free, world so that place may be made for new officials to come and work. The birth of animals and humans marks their enlistment into the army, their being taken under arms, and the start of their duties. Each living being is a joyful regular soldier, an honest, contented official. And all voices are either glorification of God and the recitation of His Names at the outset of their duties, and the thanks and rejoicing at their ceasing work, or the songs arising from their joy at working. In the view of the believer, all beings are the friendly servants, amicable officials, and agreeable books of his Most Generous Lord and All-Compassionate Owner. Very many more subtle, exalted, pleasurable, and sweet truths like these become manifest and appear from his belief. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 28) Pain and pleasure in different happiness models The hedonic model is limited to the first two categories of pain and pleasure, because it does not see any meaning of having pain. Thus, the objective in that model is to minimize pain and maximize pleasure. Since the pain in a pleasant experience is not imminent, it is hard for short-sighted hedonists to see the pain. According to Nursi, hedonists cannot escape the ultimate misery in this life since they will sooner or later realize the true nature of their pleasant experiences. The eudemonic model attempts to overcome the ultimate misery by adding the third and fourth categories through showing some temporal meaning. However, according to Nursi, since everything is

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  153 ultimately meaningless if there is no God and the hereafter, lasting happiness cannot be achieved. In the G-donic model, true happiness is possible through the third and fourth categories. Thus, the objective here is not pleasure maximization through avoiding painful experiences. In Nursi’s terms, a human being did not come to “this world to live in a fine manner and pass his life in ease and pleasure. Rather, he possesses vast capital, and he came here to work and do trade for an eternal, everlasting life” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 267). Therefore, the objective is to maximize meaning through both pleasant and painful experiences. Thus, life is not frivolous. It is not the place of pleasure maximization. Life is both pain and pleasure. Indeed, it is necessary to experience some pain whether by our choice or God’s choice in order to be free from worldly enslavement. According to Nursi, the Qur’anic stories of the pharaoh are relevant to everyone, because we all have our internal pharaoh which is the nafs (animal soul) and ananiyah (egotistic self). We have to declare jihad with our internal pharaoh to gain our freedom. Therefore, it is necessary to go through specific pain to gain ultimate pleasure. For instance, if we are healthy and wealthy, we might not realize our vulnerable nature. The egotistic self might consider itself as self-sufficient and eternal. We can gain our freedom either through self-imposed, painful experiences such as fasting or through imposed calamities such as diseases. Indeed, when we get sick, we feel our impotence and poverty. The nafs and anah are likely to give up their claim of godhood.

10. Conclusion Why is it so important to read the true meaning of being through mânâi harfî? For Nursi, this will help make us better beings. It will lead us to understand the meaning of our life. It will make us live a meaningful life. Perhaps, that was the reason that the very first verse revealed to the prophet Mohammed was “read!” (iqra). As we read the signs (ayaat) in the book of the universe, we will know about the universe’s Author. We will reach certainty about His existence everywhere. We will see His manifestation in everything including in personal and social phenomena. We will know with certainty that He is with us. We will understand His attributes such as infinite knowledge, power, will, wisdom, mercy, and love. We will know that it is Him who creates everything. We are not just accidental outcomes of the evolutionary process. We are intentional artifacts of the Infinite Mercy. As we see the signs of His infinite power, knowledge, wisdom, and mercy in everything, we should conclude that He is able to give us the eternity we desire. Thus, as we feel His presence through reading His signs in the book of the universe, we will be full of appreciation for what he has given us. We will also have hope for the eternal prolongation of those blessings. We

154  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî will try to live a life following His path based on the learned lessons. As we learn that He is not wasteful in the universe, we will try our best to avoid any waste. As we feel His mercy and kindness, we will show our mercy and kindness to other beings. As we understand His wisdom in His acts in the universe, we will try to act wisely. Thus, the ultimate purpose behind the knowledge gained through the mânâ-i harfî approach is becoming better human beings through developing good characters. Pure scientific knowledge is nothing but unsealing the hidden signs (ayaat) in the book of the universe. Once we know the mânâ-i harfî language, we can read and understand the meaning of those signs and derive character-forming lessons for a better life. For instance, without scientific knowledge, we would have a very limited understanding of a tree. Our knowledge would be limited to what we observe in terms of its outer beauty and visible fruit. Using scientific inquiry, we are able to gain more knowledge about the inner structures and workings of the tree. For instance, it is amazing to learn how a huge tree is decoded within its DNA. It is fascinating to learn how a seed contains the entire blueprint of a tree.12 As we study the functions of trees within their environment, we will learn that they work like air purifiers absorbing carbon dioxide. They produce oxygen for living beings. They become habitats for animals. They provide many uses for human beings. Frank Wilczek, a Nobel Laureate in physics, in A Beautiful Question makes a compelling argument that beauty is the essence of the entire creation. He states his question as follows in the beginning of the book: “if an energetic and powerful Creator made the world, it could be that what moved Him – or Her, or Them, or It – to create was precisely an impulse to make something beautiful” (Wilczek, 2016, p. 2). Later on, he mentions symmetry at the micro and macro levels as compelling evidence for beauty. As Feynman rightly states, such beauty is only accessible to knowledgeable people. Just as the light reveals beauty in physical objects, enlightenment, through gaining knowledge, reveals abstract beauty in terms of meaning in the cosmic phenomena. The one without access to the meaning will miss the endless beauty of various colors in the form of expressed meanings in the cosmic creation. It is a big mistake to attribute the tree to its apparent cause (seed). Likewise, water, heat, and light could not be considered efficient causes. They are just forms of supplication for the creation of a tree. As Nursi says, For example, water, heat, earth, and light take up positions around a seed, and their doing this constitutes a tongue of supplication which says: “O Our Creator, make this seed into a tree!” For the tree, a wonderful miracle of power, cannot be attributed to those unconscious, lifeless, simple substances; that would be impossible. This means the coming together of causes is a sort of supplication. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 347)

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  155 As we study the biology and chemistry of trees, we will learn about the elegant internal structure that produces many fruitful outcomes. As we study physics, we will see the incredible underlying physical structures and their interconnectivity with the rest of the universe. As we study art, we will come to appreciate the outer beauty of a tree as a great artifact with its color, design, and decoration. Thus, a tree will speak to us about its Maker as having great knowledge, power, wisdom, mercy, and so on. We will feel as if the Maker of trees is speaking to us directly through His elegant and dynamic actions in creating and sustaining trees. We will feel enormous appreciation for the countless fruits. We will try to mimic those good acts through our choices in life to be kind, fruitful, wise, and knowledgeable. Yes, each flower, each fruit, each leaf, each plant, each animal is such a seal of Divine Ehadiyah and a stamp of Eternal Sammadiyah that it transforms each tree into a Rabbani letter, each species of creatures into a Rahmani book, and each garden into Divine decrees. It places stamps on the letter of the tree to the number of its blossoms, and signatures to the number of its fruits, and seals to the number of its leaves. In order to show its Author, stamps have been put on the book of the species and group of creatures to the number of individuals. And in order to announce and describe its ruler, stamps have been set on the decree of the garden to the number of the plants, trees, and animals it contains. In fact, there are four stamps of Divine unity on each tree; on its origin, outcome, exterior and interior, alluded to by the Names of “. . . He is the First, and the Last, and the Outward, and the Inward (Q, 57:3).” As the Name of Al-Awwal (the First) suggests, the original seed of each fruit-bearing tree is like a casket containing the program, index, and plan of that tree; or a workbench with its production tools, necessary equipment, and system; or a tiny machine with its delicate inputs and outputs within an elegant order. As the Name of Al-Akhir (the Last) suggests, through the seed in its center, the outcome and fruit of each tree is an instruction manual describing the trees’ shapes, attributes, and growth; or a declaration stating its functions, benefits, and characteristics; and a brief announcing the tree’s peer, ancestor, and offspring. As the Name of Az-Dhahir (the Outward) suggests, the outlook and shape of each tree is like a skillfully fashioned and embellished garment that has been tailored, trimmed, and decorated exactly according to its branches, members, and parts. They are so delicate, well proportioned, and meaningful that they transform the tree into a book, a letter, or a eulogy. As the name of Al-Bātin (the Inward) suggests, the workbench within each tree is like a factory that produces all the parts and components of the tree, and manages and runs them with the very delicate balance. It also distributes, dispatches, and delivers the food and substances necessary for

156  Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî all parts of the tree with perfect regularity and order. This wondrous factory runs with the speed of lightning, the ease of setting a clock, and the uniformity of commanding an army with a single order. In short, the origin of a tree is like casket and program; its outcome is like an instruction manual and sample; its outward appearance is like an artistically fashioned and embellished garment; its inward is like a factory and workbench. These four aspects are well connected to each other and as a whole, they form a supreme stamp. Indeed, a Greatest Name becomes apparent through them, for self-evidently none other than the Creator, who is al-Wahid and al-Ahad, who administers the whole universe, could perform these works. Like a tree, the origin, end, and outer and inner aspects of all living beings bear seals of Divine oneness and stamps of Divine unity” (Nursi, 1996d, pp. 42–43).

Notes 1 Al-Attas argues the process of thinking is nothing but seeking for meaning: “Thought (al-fikr) is the soul’s movement towards meaning, and this needs imagination (al-khayal). Intuition, that is either the sense of sagacity (al-hads), or in the sense of illuminative experience (al-wijdan), is arrival of the soul at meaning, or the arrival in the soul of meaning, either by acquisition through proof as in the former case, or it comes by itself as in the latter case” (Al-Attas, 2001, p. 124). 2 The book also provides an interesting spiritual journey of Dr. Collins. He was raised as a Christian. He lost his faith during his college years when exposed to secular scientific knowledge in the mânâ-i ismî perspective. Many years later, through the careful and critical reading of the book of life, he felt that logically he had no choice but returning back to God despite some serious questions he had about his former Christian faith. 3 We need to make a distinction here between our knowledge of God, which is known in Islamic tradition as “ma’rifatullah” on the one hand and God’s Knowledge on the other. The second may also be referred to as “Divine Knowledge” (al-‘ilm al-ilâhî). On order to maintain this distinction, we shall use these expressions as indicated in this footnote. 4 The concept of pre-determined fixed destiny is very similar to the concept of “facticity” and “thrownness” (Geworfenheit) in Heidegger. 5 Richardson uses “There-being” for Dasein. See William J. Richardson, Heidegger. Through Phenomenology to Thought (Martin Heidegger, Preface, 4th ed., The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and New York City: Fordham University Press, 2003), p. 37. 6 For further info, please visit www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_heidegger. html (retrieved August 8, 2018). 7 In fact, this is stated in the Qur’an: “A  promise that We shall not break Our Promise,” 2/Al-Baqarah, 80; “A Day about which there is no doubt; for God never fails in His promise”; 3/Âl ‘Imrân, 9; also see 13/Al-Ra’d, 31 and so on many other verses. 8 This is the theme of my upcoming book titled 3D Happiness: Pleasure, Meaning, and Spirituality, James Morgan Publishing. The book is expected to come out in 2019. 9 Indeed, the Surat al-Fatiha that Muslims are ordained to recite in their five daily prayers includes the following prayers “Guide us the straightway.” It is also reported the Prophet said that the following command made his hair gray: “Therefore stand firm (in the straight Path) as you are commanded” (Q, 11:112).

Science and meaning in mânâ-i harfî  157 0 https://sunnah.com/muslim/45/77 (retrieved April 10, 2019). 1 11 Indeed, Muslim scholars always try to derive certain ethical and spiritual lessons from studying cosmic phenomena. For instance, some Muslim philosopherscientists such as Al-Farabi and Al-Shirazi argue that learning mathematics is necessary for comprehension of sound spiritual truths (Bakar, 2008). 12 Francis Collins, the head of Human Genome Project, after reading human DNA, stated that the mystery is not over: “Do not fear, there is plenty of divine mystery left. Many people who have considered all the scientific and spiritual evidence still see God’s creative and guiding hand at work. For me, there is not a shred of disappointment in these discoveries about the nature of life – quite the contrary! Now marvelous and intricate life turns out to be! How deeply satisfying is the digital elegance of DNA! How aesthetically appealing and artistically sublime are the components of living things from the ribosome that translates RNA into protein, to the metamorphosis of the caterpillar into the butterfly, to the fabulous plumage of the peacock attracting his mate!” (Collins, 2006, p. 107).

5 Character building with scientific knowledge through mânâ-i harfî

1. Introduction Our knowledge of the self and the selves of others is shaped by our personal worldview, which works like the glass through which we see reality. Ever since the Enlightenment, the secular worldview has been the dominant one among scientists. Therefore, modern science is almost completely shaped by this secular worldview, which includes its secular phenomenology, teleology, ontology, epistemology, anthropology, and axiology. In this chapter, we present the idea of desecularizing scientific knowledge and reconstructing it through a holistic approach that is largely based on the writings of Said Nursi. Nursi’s holistic approach is based on a significant notion that was originally introduced by the holy book of Islam, the Qur’an. The Qur’an refers to the absolute oneness of God through the use of the Arabic word “Tawhīdī.” The comprehensive meaning of Tawhīdī goes beyond a simple definition of unity. Rather, it includes human comprehension in its totality, whether it is a physical phenomenon or something else involving a teleological, ontological, anthropological, and axiological conception. Hence, Tawhīdī considers existence as a whole rather than simply something that is limited to our sense-dependent comprehension. This holistic approach to existence reveals a worldview that leads to a systematic, conceptual unity that can be used to interpret scientific knowledge. Thus, this concept can be termed the “Tawhīdī worldview.” The holistic approach is very different from the reductionist approach that dominates modern science. The former assumes that everything is connected to everything else in the universe, whereas the latter explains the parts without necessary reference to the whole. From the holistic perspective, an apple is the fruit of the entire universe in terms of the interconnected, apparently causal mechanism behind its creation. The reductionist perspective disregards this interconnectivity and explains the apple through its isolated causal mechanism. The reductionist approach compartmentalizes the universe in order to divide it among causes, nature, and chance. It attempts to reduce everything to small fragments and ascribes them to simple material causes.

Character building with scientific knowledge 159 Fundamental to that revolution was the vehement rejection of the forms and essences where were the basic components of the classical cosmos. These were replaced in the new natural philosophy by what were presumed to be the discrete and simple parts or building blocks out of which all complex wholes in the world were composed by process of combination or aggregation. (Spragens, 2001, p. 51) Secular science ignores the indivisible unity and interdependence of everything in the universe. It removes teleology from natural events and attributes everything, even human behavior, to simple material causes and natural forces: “Natural events occurred, on this account, as the causal products of basic natural forces; and human behavior was properly understood as a subset of these natural events” (Spragens, 2001, p.  51). As argued by D’Holbach (1820, Chapter 6), in such a deterministic universe, a human being is “nothing more than a passive instrument in the hands of necessity.” It is important to note that some prominent scholars of quantum physics, such as David Bohm, support the holistic view, which argues that the whole comes before, or sets the foundation for, the parts. Bohm states, Ultimately, the entire universe (with all its “particles,” including those constituting human beings, their laboratories, observing instruments, etc.) has to be understood as a single undivided whole, in which analysis into separately and independently existent parts has no fundamental status. (Bohm, 1980, p. 221) This contradicts the mechanistic picture of the whole as the sum of the interaction of independent parts (Seager, 2018). Notably, the entanglement theory envisions an integrated, holistic world rather than interacting particles (as envisioned by atomism). We argue that the secular conception of science deals with instrumental knowledge, while science based on the Tawhīdī paradigm pursues a multidimensional, holistic approach to understanding the universe. In other words, a secular conception of science aims to acquire knowledge as an instrument to be used for controlling nature and pursuing pleasures. The objective is not to seek truth or wisdom; instead, it is to pursue power and pleasure. Indeed, the famous phrase “knowledge is power,” presented by Sir Francis Bacon, is an excellent expression of the secular approach to knowledge. On the other hand, a holistic approach goes beyond the instrumental goal of the pursuit of knowledge. It encourages people to seek out wisdom (hikmah), truth (haqiqah), gnostic (ma’rifaah), God-given nature (fitrah), and virtue (fadhilah), which are dimensions of knowledge achieved through self-knowledge (anah).

160  Character building with scientific knowledge The root cause of the differences between secular and holistic scientific approaches is in their ontic languages, which are based on their worldviews. Naturally, a secular worldview teaches a secular language (mânâ-i ismî) that reads everything in the name of the secular trio: causes, nature, and chance. A holistic worldview based on the concept of Tawhīdī teaches a sacred language (mânâ-i harfî) that reads everything in the name of God. In this chapter, after brief discussion on the Islamic and Western civilizations, we will show how to derive character lessons from scientific knowledge through the seven-dimensional approach.1 In the first dimension, we will show how to provide scientific instrumental knowledge of a particular phenomenon after filtering the embedded secular ideology. In the second (critical thinking) dimension, we will provide a phenomenological interpretation based on Nursi’s concept of transcendental self (anah) to come up with the mânâ-i harfî language in order to explore other dimensions of the instrumental scientific knowledge. In the third (hikmah) dimension, we will show how to use the mânâ-i harfî approach to refute cause-affect, nature, and chance as the source of observed phenomena. In the fourth (haqiqah) dimension, we will use the mânâ-i harfî approach to understand the ultimate reality behind the observed scientific phenomena. In the fifth (marifaah) dimension, we will discuss the understanding of the Maker in terms of His names and attributes by using the mânâ-i harfî approach. In the sixth (fitrah) dimension, we will link the learned phenomena to human nature (fitrah) to gain a holistic and integrative approach to our understanding of reality. This will help to have a better sense of appreciation and ethical conduct. In the seventh fadhilah (good character) dimension, we derive some character-building lessons based on the knowledge (‘ilm) gained in the previous dimensions as a guide for a virtuous life.

2. Secular worldview and vice Using the corresponding secular and holistic languages, individuals establish their worldview with an understanding of ontic reality, episteme, telos, human nature, and moral axioms. Secular phenomenology considers the self as the source of its actions and considers that others own their actions as well; it does not leave any room for God. Ontic reality cannot go beyond material substances. Likewise, there is no transcendental telos. When it comes to phenomenal reality, it is simply comprised of the interactive actions of material causes under certain natural laws; human beings are an accidental product of the evolutionary process with no telos beyond this life. The goal, therefore, is to develop an instrumental mind that can control and manipulate material causes for worldly outcomes. Goodness lies in utility maximization of each individual, given their own choices. Because secular phenomenology perceives the self as the real owner of its acts, it is a unidirectional approach to the phenomena of this world, which therefore leads to the expression of a unidimensional perspective of

Character building with scientific knowledge 161 existence. It also considers material causes, natural properties, laws, and coincidences as being the determining variables in the universe. As such, it ascribes the works of God to the secular trio of nature, causes, and chance. Secular telos does not recognize any purpose in the universe beyond material interactions and causations. Perhaps, then, the only prescribed purpose is to survive, as argued by Darwinian evolution. Secular ontology considers the phenomenal universe as a self-contained reality and does not accept transcendental reality beyond matter. Therefore, its exploration of subatomic particles forms its understanding of reality, though this understanding can become quite confusing when recent discoveries in quantum physics are taken into account. Secular epistemology deals with instrumental knowledge and thus pays attention to only the material faculties of the physical body with a concentration on sense perception. It does not accept any ultimate reality beyond a material one.2 Thus, the purpose in gaining knowledge is to capture and control means for the maximization of pleasure. Secular anthropology does not accept the existence of human nature beyond the physical body. Rather, it considers a socially and environmentally constructed nature. Since it does not accept the conflicting duality of human nature that is capable of doing both good and evil, it does not provide any moral restraint on any evil capacity while focusing on the human capacity for good. In connection with that concept, secular axiology further attempts to define morality without any reference to God. It argues that, as rational beings, we are perfectly capable of understanding what is good for us and setting moral laws by which we should live. Secular axiology essentially defines “good” based on either utility or the consequences of our choices in this world and allows the individual to set their own moral compass without recognizing the conflicting interests of human nature.

3.  Tawhīdī worldview and virtue The Tawhīdī worldview teaches a holistic language using a multi-­dimensional approach. It perceives the self as a tool to understand the works of God. It also perceives everything as a sign (ayah) that symbolically signifies the existence and attributes of God through His manifested acts. This holistic dimension in this approach is thus reflected in this paradigm’s extensions as holistic phenomenology, teleology, ontology, epistemology, anthropology, and axiology. Therefore, holistic teleology encourages us to read the meaning of signs in the universe by understanding the purposes behind and the benefit in everything. A holistic ontology defines the names of God as the ultimate realities behind everything. It treats phenomenal reality as a shadow-like contingent existence that depends on the Necessarily Existent One from moment to moment. Following this, holistic epistemology reveals the Divine names in God’s acts in the universe so that He can be better

162  Character building with scientific knowledge known. Holistic anthropology then gives insights about human nature so that we can understand our potential for both good and evil, which leads to the holistic axiology that derives moral principles from the works and words of God. Such principles help us understand how to live a good life by unleashing our potential toward intellectual, spiritual, and moral excellence. In Nursi’s view, secular knowledge is not just ignorance, but also misguidance. This misguidance is not just the result of an absence of knowing a true meaning; it is also a misreading that gives the wrong meaning to the signs. It confuses those who seek the true meaning of the book of the universe rather than illuminating them. Theistic knowledge will lead to truth and wisdom about the universe through an understanding of the true meaning of the book of the universe. Therefore, it is extremely important to re-establish a proper view of the universe in the mind of believers by teaching them the holistic language and helping them to read the universe in this language. Nursi calls Islamic civilization “virtuous civilization,”3 since it causes the unfolding, through virtue, of man’s infinite potentialities, whereby he may rise higher than the angels. He acknowledges virtuous elements in the European civilization as well. Therefore, he is against the total rejection of Western civilization. Rather, he claims that the European civilization consists of two parts. First Europe “follows the sciences which serve justice and right and the industries beneficial for the life of society through the inspiration it has received from true Christianity” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 160). The distinguishing mark of this First Europe is in being beneficial to humanity. It has been a fountainhead of technological advancement, made possible the development of human potentialities, and allowed social developments opposed to despotism; it is a part of “virtuous civilization.” While Nursi proposes cooperation with First Europe, which is founded on Christian ethics, against vice and irreligion, he rejects the civilization he calls Second Europe, whose source is a philosophy rather than religion and claims that humankind can find happiness only in vice; this he calls “dissolute civilization.” It is because this Second Europe is characterized by its encouragement of vice that Nursi rejects capitalist culture and dissolute civilization. Nursi asserted that “absolute vice” was being called civilization and was severely critical of “dissolute civilization” (Nursi, 1996d, p.  312). In “Lema’at,” he says that the decadent civilization casts humanity down to the level of animals: its alluring service is to excite lust and the appetites of the soul and facilitate the gratification of whims, and their result is vice. The mark of lust and passion is always this: they transform a man into a beast, changing his character; they deform him, perverting his humanity. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 745) Although the various wars in the Islamic countries in recent years and the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center confirm to an extent Huntington’s

Character building with scientific knowledge 163 theory of the clash of civilizations, according to Nursi, essentially the clash is between dissolute civilization and virtuous civilization. The fiercest battles take place not on the battlefield but in people’s hearts, and the struggle is characterized by not being limited by geographical boundaries. Similar clashes occur in both Islamic societies and Western societies. Everyone witnesses the battle every day in his/her own small world.

4. First dimension: filtering mânâ-i ismî perspective from science In Nursi’s view, believers should appreciate pure scientific knowledge that is free from embedded secular ideology. Science is the study of the universe in terms of how apparent causes are established. As discussed before, from a holistic perspective, God uses apparent causes to teach His names and attributes. As long as one learns how to read those names and attributes through the cosmic language (the mânâ-i harfî), then the knowledge of apparent causes will lead to a knowledge of God. Therefore, in Nursi’s view, rejecting science altogether because of embedded secular ideology is a great mistake that will leave one unknowing of God. Nursi’s view is that the secular conception of science contains a subjective secular ideology along with objective knowledge. The secular perspective of a unidimensional reading of the universe, which is merely a self-indicative sign, adds subjective views to scientists’ scientific understanding. Thus, even though a purely scientific understanding of the universe is like water, a secular view is like salty water. One needs to filter out the embedded ideology (i.e., the salt) to enjoy truly objective knowledge. Indeed, one might argue that a secular conception of science puts quite a bit of emphasis on instrumental knowledge: it misreads the book of the universe. It covers up the embedded Divine messages by ascribing them to the secular trio of causes, nature, and chance. Following Nursi’s approach, we could eliminate the ideology embedded in instrumental scientific knowledge in the following ways. The mânâ-i harfî approach does not deny the importance of instrumental knowledge. It acknowledges the benefits of instrumental knowledge through well-developed modern technology. It just adds new layers of understanding. It encourages people to seek meaning, wisdom, and moral and character lessons in studying the universe. It does not reject contemporary science entirely due to its embedded ideology. It suggests filtering out secular ideology (mânâ-i ismî perspective) while keeping pure scientific knowledge. In this part, we will outline certain guiding principles based on the mânâ-i harfî approach to filter secular ideology from existing scientific knowledge and present them through the seven-dimensional approach. In the first place, in Nursi’s view, we need to be aware of the embedded, subjective, secular ideology within existing scientific knowledge due to the mânâ-i ismî approach of the secular worldview. The major fallacy is the misunderstanding of the self through the mânâ-i ismî approach. Thus,

164  Character building with scientific knowledge the starting point is the filtering of secular ideology embedded in the understanding of the human self. As discussed in the third chapter, the secular perspective treats the self as an able agent with almost infinite power. From the mânâ-i harfî perspective, the self is not an all-powerful or independent agent. It is not the owner or doer of its good acts. It is not even real in terms of its claim. It is an imaginary benchmark used to comprehend the Almighty Power behind everything. Therefore, any reference to the human “self” as an all-powerful being should be removed. The emphasis should be on the fact that human life depends on the entire universe. For instance, we rely on  millions of interconnected activities every moment to sustain our life. We cannot survive if the sun suddenly disappears or the laws governing the subatomic world suddenly collapse. As our lives depend on the sun, the life of the sun also depends on other stars and galaxies. Thus, our life depends on the entire universe at both the micro and macro level. In reality, we are not even aware of the billions of ongoing activities in our body, let alone able to control them. Second, any reference to self-reliance to sustain and maintain our life without God should be removed in the scientific writings. From an Islamic perspective, it is a false claim to say that we can maintain our life without God. We cannot even take a bite, walk a step, or speak a word without God’s constant help. Thus, we should eliminate ideas suggesting self-power. For instance, “if you are helpless, rely on your SELF” is commonly embraced by people who think that it promotes self-confidence. This phrase is wrong from the mânâ-i harfî perspective. A more accurate statement would be, “If you rely on your SELF, you are helpless.” For that matter, popular self-help gurus promote a secular view of self-reliance. Many Muslims embrace this idea because they find it helpful to succeed in life. From the mânâ-i harfî perspective, relying on God provides the highest empowerment for success in life. Therefore, we should explain how everything has a contingent nature and relies on God for everything at every moment. The relationship between God and His creations is like source and its shadow. Although we cannot deny the existence of the shadow, we cannot have a shadow without its source. Likewise, from an Islamic worldview, the entire universe is like a shadow of the Divine Names. The ultimate reality behind them is the Divine Names. Thus, we should acknowledge our complete reliance on God as opposed to self-reliance from the mânâ-i harfî perspective. Once we establish a daily connection with the All-Mighty, we should feel enormous power through God’s power of our goals. Third, for Nursi, the mânâ-i ismî approach ascribes the work of God to a secular trio of causes, nature, and chance. This is not acceptable from the mânâ-i harfî perspective. Actually, it is considered a form of assigning partnership (shirk) to God.4 Since this idea is implicitly injected into contemporary scientific knowledge, it is not easy for believers to even recognize its existence. Thus, it is necessary to reveal the inherent meanings behind causational and naturalistic explanations. Students should be encouraged

Character building with scientific knowledge 165 to question causes, nature, and chance as the sources or effective causes of observed phenomena. Then, any explicit and implicit references to “Mother Nature,” “materialistic causation,” or “random chance” should be removed from scientific writings. Finally, it should be shown through the use of examples that neither of these can actually be the true cause or creator of the observed phenomena. Fourth, secular science treats apparent causes as real and self-sufficient. From the mânâ-i harfî perspective, apparent causes are just a veil. God, in reality, causes everything. Thus, there is no efficient cause other than God. There is only an association, not real causation. For example, we cannot get light without using the associative mechanisms of bulb, wires, and light switch. The study of this mechanism is critical. However, it does not matter how elegant a light bulb or light switch is, they cannot be the source of the light. Thus, we should make the mistake of thinking that the light comes from the bulb, light switch, or wire. The mânâ-i harfî approach rejects material causes as effective causes. It perceives causes as only apparent causes. Nursi poses two distinct realms to interpret the mânâ-i harfî causation as follows: “might and majesty require causes to be veiling occasions of God’s omnipotence for the human mind.” This refers to the first realm of ours, where causes are simply apparent occasions, not real agents. On the other hand, as far as the second realm is concerned, “God’s uniqueness and glory require causes to withdraw their interference from the actual efficacy.” This is called the realm of “malakût,” whereas the former is known in Islamic thought as the realm of “mulk.”5 Fifth, secular science considers the existence of natural properties and laws as the ultimate explanation behind apparent causal mechanisms. From an Islamic perspective, even if one accepts that those properties were created by God, it would be a form of deism – as if the mechanical universe is created by God through given natural properties and laws. For instance, in the mânâ-i harfî perspective, it is false to claim that an apple tree is created with nature to work like an apple factory. The apple tree resembles a factory. However, it is not a factory. It is God who creates both the apple tree and apple together. The regularity in this association is wrongly perceived as causation. It is also wrong to claim that an effect comes from the natural properties of causes. For instance, the properties of water have nothing to do with the properties of its molecular components, hydrogen and oxygen. The differences in properties between water and its individual components are evidence that all properties are the work of Divine power. Nursi, in his treatise on nature, makes the following argument to negate naturalism: “nature of everything is being created like everything else because they are artifact and newly made . . . Furthermore, like all effects, apparent cause is also being made/created.” The first sentence negates the nature of being as a source of its outcome while the second sentence does the same for causes. The defeating argument is the same for both. They are newly made products, not factory-like producers. Thus, no given nature or properties

166  Character building with scientific knowledge produce anything. Nothing happens due to a substance’s given nature. Nature is being created every moment. The regularity in God’s creation is perceived as constant natural laws. Thus, in the mânâ-i harfî approach, the most important thing is to realize that nature and causes are being created every moment. God does not use them like factories or facilitating systems to ease His acts of creation because He has infinite power. Instead, He only apparently connects effects to causes for certain wisdom. In actuality, God is not First Cause; He is the Only Cause of all apparent causes. This idea has tremendous implications for scientific studies of the universe. From the mânâ-i harfî perspective, it is not right to claim that God uses factory-like systems to create something. For instance, an apple is a miraculous product. The more we study its features, the more we can appreciate them. An apple tree is a miraculous product, too. An apple tree appears to have the properties to produce an apple. And without such a mechanism, we cannot get an apple. It is wrong to think that God makes an apple tree like an apple factory to produce apples, in the same way that it is wrong to believe the light comes from the light switch. Sixth, secular science speaks of natural laws as if they are possible without a lawmaker and law enforcement. From the mânâ-i harfî perspective, laws without lawmakers and law enforcement cannot do anything. They cannot even exist. Natural laws are nothing but regularity in the acts of God. Just as it is absurd to claim that the order in a country comes from its laws without its lawmakers and law enforcement, it is also irrational to ascribe well-established and delicate orders in the universe to specific laws. Thus, we should not consider natural laws as able lawmakers or law enforcement. Instead, we should consider them as the regularity (adetullah) and consistency in the acts of God. Seventh, secular science attributes cosmic phenomena to randomness or chance. From the Qur’anic perspective, nothing is left to chance. Everything is happening through the knowledge, will, and power of God. For the mânâi harfî approach, we need to show, through examples, that chance could not possibly produce such a magnificent, harmonious universe. For instance, the probability of getting over three billion pairs of human genomes to match, to produce human cells with specific properties, is virtually zero. Thus, scientific writing should be free from any expression referring to chance, luck, coincidence, self-occurrence, or self-evolvement. Eighth, secular science gives a certain sacredness to scientific knowledge by claiming that it is objective. As discussed before, it is almost impossible for scientists not to brush their study of the universe with their worldview. Given the fact that a secular worldview is not compatible with the Tawhīdī worldview, we need to reveal and reject the contradictory subjective elements of scientific knowledge. We should keep the objective knowledge that can be agreed upon through human experience. For instance, we can all agree on the color of the sky because we all see through the same lens (unless we are color-blind). We can agree on the process of how a tree emerges

Character building with scientific knowledge 167 from a seed. Phenomenal descriptions that can be concurred by universal human observation should be accepted as objective knowledge. However, any comment about the reality behind observed phenomena depends on the observer’s worldview. Thus, we need to make clear that scientific knowledge cannot be as objective as it is claimed to be. Finally, secular science comes with its secular concepts of the mânâ-i ismî. As Nursi claims in his treatise on nature, there are many secular concepts that contradict the Tawhīdī worldview. Many Muslims use those concepts not knowing that it contradicts their worldview. For instance, calling gas a “natural gas” implies that such a valuable source of energy happened naturally. From an Islamic perspective, perhaps, it should be named as “Rahmanī gas” because it is a gift from the Most-Merciful. Thus, we need to remove any contradicting or misleading concepts that are derived by the mânâ-i ismî approach. In short, inserting God’s name into secular knowledge is not a solution. We need to first disconnect God’s works from causes, nature, and chance. Only then can everything be explained as the product of God’s direct acts. Just as we have to use a light switch to turn on a light, we have to utilize the apparent causes to invoke the Divine acts. However, as the source of the light is not the light switch, the source of what we receive is not its apparent cause and nature. Thus, we should consider everything as Divine expressions (signs) helping us to understand God’s names and attributes in better ways.

5. An example of filtering mânâ-i ismî perspective (desecularizing knowledge) For Nursi, the desecularization of knowledge (filtering knowledge coming from the mânâ-i ismî approach) is possible through realizing that the secular trio is not the source of transcendental reality. In other words, Nursi rejects the role of causes, nature, and chance as secondary causes. He provides several examples from science disqualifying the secular trinity in playing any real role in God’s works within science. Had there been in heaven or on earth any deities other than God, there surely would have been confusion in both. (Q, 21:22) There is no deity but God, He is One, He has no partner; His is the dominion, and His is the praise; He grants life and deals death, and is living and dies not; all good is in His hand; He is powerful over all things; and with Him all things have their end. (Bukhari, Athan, p. 155). In his interpretation of the verse and Hadith above, Nursi gives an example of a fictitious person who appears to be an atheist scientist believing in

168  Character building with scientific knowledge the secular trinity. Nursi provides an allegorical journey of this person in his claim of a partnership with God. In Nursi’s words, the minimum requirement of being a partner with God is to have real ownership of something. Thus, it is necessary for an atheist to prove that he is at least an actual owner of one thing in the universe. The fictitious person began his journey with a small particle, such as an atom/molecule, claiming that he is the owner of that minute being. The atom strongly rejected the claim, as follows: I perform innumerable duties. Entering many creatures which are all different I do my work in them. And there are, from among countless particles like me, those that move from place to place and work with me. If you have the knowledge and power to employ me in all those duties, and the authority and ability to employ and have at your command all those others as well, and if you are able to be the true owner of and to have total control over the beings of which I become a part in complete order, for example, over red blood-corpuscles, then you can claim to be master over me and ascribe me to something other than God Almighty. But if you cannot do all these things, be silent! And in the same way that you cannot have mastery over me, you cannot interfere in any way. For there is such complete orderliness in our duties and motion that one who does not have infinite wisdom and all-encompassing knowledge cannot meddle with us. If he did, it would cause chaos. However, a person like you who is thick, impotent, and unseeing, and is in the clutches of blind chance and nature, could not even begin to stretch out a finger to interfere. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 622) In his response above, Nursi likens an atom/molecule to a very skillful worker with various complicated duties. He points to the complexity of systems at the subatomic, molecular, and cellular levels and refers to the interconnectivity among those systems. Thus, it is impossible for an atom/ molecule with no conscience, knowledge, and power to perform extremely complicated tasks in those systems. Atoms and molecules are just the means through which Divine Knowledge, Will, and Power are being manifested. The fictitious person, representing the scientist reading the universe for their own sake whilst neglecting the cosmic language of the other-indicative meaning, suggests that the particle owns itself. The atom/molecule responds by reminding the scientist that he has to have the knowledge of the entire universe to claim ownership over its acts, because they are connected to everything else. The atom/molecule reminds him what it needs to own itself in the following statement: If I had a brain like the sun, and all-embracing knowledge like its light, and all-encompassing power like its heat, and comprehensive senses like

Character building with scientific knowledge 169 the seven colours in its light, and if I had a face that looked to all the places in which I  travel and all the beings in which I  work, and an eye that looked to them and words that carried authority with them, then perhaps I would indulge in foolishness like you and claim to own myself. Get out! Go away! You won’t get anything out of me! (Nursi, 1996e, p. 622) Then, the fictitious person went to a red blood cell, which is formed from certain atoms. He again claimed that he was the master and owner of that cell. Again, Nursi uses an analogy to appreciate blood cells. He compares them to a well-organized army and reminds us how each red blood cell works like an extremely disciplined soldier fulfilling his complicated duties in timely and organized manners. Thus, it is not possible to claim ownership over a single cell without mastering the entire system in which they are employed. Nursi makes the red cell reply to the fictitious person: I am not alone. If you are able to own all my fellows in the army of blood whose stamp, nature as officials, and order is the same, and if you have subtle wisdom and mighty power enough to own all the cells of the body in which we travel and are employed with perfect wisdom, and if you can demonstrate this to be the case, then perhaps some meaning might be found in your claim. But someone stupefied like yourself cannot be owner with your only support being deaf nature and blind force; indeed, you are unable to interfere in so much as an atom. For the order with which we function is so perfect that only one who sees, hears, knows, and does everything can have authority over us. And saying: “So, be silent! My duty is so important and the order so perfect that I have no time to answer garbled rubbish such as yours,” it repelled him. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 623) Following this, the fictitious person in Nursi’s story went to a cell in a human organ, again claiming ownership. Nursi reminded him that it is not possible to own a single cell of an organ without owning other similar cells employed in other organs. Again, Nursi uses an analogy comparing a cell to a worker. Thus, each organ is like a factory in which the various workers with different expertise perform incredibly delicate and complicated tasks. They all work together like a well-organized team. The cell responds, I am only a minute little thing but I have very important duties and very sensitive relations; I am connected to the body as a whole as well as to all its cells. For example, I perform complex and faultless duties in the veins, and in regard to the arteries, the sensory and motor nerves, the powers of attraction and repulsion and procreation, and the imaginative faculty. If you have the knowledge and power to form, arrange,

170  Character building with scientific knowledge and employ the whole body and all its blood-vessels, nerves and faculties, and if you have comprehensive wisdom and penetrating power with which to control all the body’s cells, which are like me, as regards qualities and artistry we are brothers, demonstrate it. Only then can you claim to be able to make me. If you cannot, then off with you! The red corpuscles bring my food, while the white ones combat illnesses which attack me. I have work to do, do not distract me! Anyway, an impotent, lifeless, deaf and blind thing like you cannot in any way interfere with us. For we have such an exact, subtle and faultless order that if the one who has authority over us was not Absolutely Wise, Absolutely Powerful and Absolutely Knowing, our order would be broken and our regularity spoilt. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 624) After failing to convince the human cells, the fictitious person goes to the human body, claiming ownership in the name of causes and nature. Again, Nursi reminds him that it is necessary to claim ownership on all living beings in order to be the owner of a single one, since they are all the same. Furthermore, it is necessary to create water, oxygen, food, and the sun in order to create a single living being. That is because a living body needs the assistance of many things, and perhaps the entire universe as a complete system, to stay alive. Thus, since a human body is connected to the entire body of the universe, the One who has power over the universe is the only one who can be the owner of the human body. In other words, it takes infinite knowledge and power to create or claim ownership over a human body. The human body refuted the ownership claim of the fictitious person as follows: If you possess the power and knowledge to have actual control over the bodies of all human beings, who are the same as me and on whose faces are the stamp of power and seal of creation which are the same, and if you have the wealth and jurisdiction to own, from water and air to plants and animals, the treasuries of my sustenance, and if you have infinite power and boundless wisdom with which to employ me with perfect wisdom and cause me to perform my worship, and the power and wisdom to lodge in a narrow, lowly vessel like me immaterial and subtle faculties like the spirit, heart, and intellect, which are extremely vast and exalted and for which I am merely the sheath, then demonstrate all these and afterward say that you made me. Otherwise, be silent! Moreover, according to the testimony of the perfect order in my body and the indication of the stamp of unity on my face, my Maker is One Who is powerful over all things, knows all things, and sees and hears all things. Someone aimless and impotent like you cannot meddle in His art. You cannot interfere in so much as an atom. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 622–624)

Character building with scientific knowledge 171 Through the allegorical story above, Nursi teaches how to reject the secular trio that is embedded in the secular conception of science. Thus, it is essential to recognize that material causes, natural properties, and chance cannot be the source of anything in the universe. From a minute particle to galactic systems, everything is connected. Everything works like a single body. It is impossible to claim ownership over a single part without being the owner of the entire body of the universe. Furthermore, the secular trio of cause, nature, and chance lack the necessary conscience, knowledge, will, wisdom, and power to be the owners of anything in the universe. 5.1 Establishing proper understanding of cause-effect mechanism Secular deistic science leaves room for God as the possible first cause; however, it assigns everything after the initial creation to material causes, nature, and chance. The Tawhīdī worldview considers God to be the only eternal cause of everything, even the cause of causes (musabbibul asbâb). According to Nursi, Tawhid-i Rububiyah leaves no room for causes to play any role in the creation of beings. They are just the veil on which the Divine names are manifested. Giving causes any role beyond being a passive receptor of Divine manifestation is a form of partnership with God. Since Tawhīd denies all forms of partnership, including effective causation, it is important to understand the role of causes at a phenomenal level. In the realm of malakût (transcendental realm), Divine power is the cause of everything. Tawhīdī worldview leaves no room for effective natural properties, as everything is an emerged property. For instance, as argued by Al-Ghazali (Mermer, 1996), fire does not have the property of burning – the property of burning emerges with fire. The quality of burning is the direct act of God. That is why in the story of Abraham being thrown into the fire, God did not put off the fire with something to save Abraham. Instead, it commanded the fire not to burn him. In other words, the property of burning comes as a result of the command (will and power) of God. If He wills the fire to burn, it does so. If He wills the fire not to burn, then it does not. Our mistake originates from the repeated perception. There is no logical, necessary connection between fire and its burning attribute beyond our psychological deception. In reality, the occurrence of burning cannot be attributed to a single cause anyway. Perhaps, starting from oxygen, it requires numerous conditions to occur. Therefore, it can only be the work of the One who controls everything. Nursi explicitly states the role of causes as follows: Effects have been tied to causes because Divine will and wisdom require them to be so, and so that great numbers of the Divine Names may be manifested. Everything has been tied to a cause, but we have decisively proved in numerous places, including many of the Words, that “causes have no actual power with which to create their effects.” (Nursi, 1996e, p. 636)

172  Character building with scientific knowledge In other words, God could have created everything directly without any cause. He uses the apparent causes to reveal His names and attributes to us, with purpose. For instance, He uses a tree when creating apples because through exploring the tree we can learn many of God’s names. We will understand what things, namely the causes, are required for making an apple. The more we study the apple tree, the more we can appreciate the apple as a great Divine gift. We will understand many of God’s other names, such as Al-Razzaq (The Sustainer) and Al Mun’im (The Benefactor) as well. When we see a tree with money attached to its branches, we will never think that the money is from the tree. Likewise, if we gain a proper holistic perspective, we would not think that fruit comes from a tree. Instead, each fruit comes with, not from, a particular tree. What we define as causality is actually nothing but the regularity of the creation of two things together. Nursi invites us to reflect on our experiences to understand that causes have no impact on the effects. He argues that even though we have the power to manipulate our surroundings (compared to other beings), we cannot have a real claim even over the simplest acts like eating, drinking, and talking. Yes, we seem to have the power to choose the food we like and place it into our mouth. But this is just the beginning of an extremely complicated process. In reality, feeding ourselves means that billions of hungry cells in our body have different dietary processes and purposes. Once we swallow food, we really have no idea what is happening. Indeed, the scientist who first discovered the food distribution mechanism after digestion in the stomach was awarded a Nobel Prize. It is important to note that he only discovered the mechanism  – nothing further. Here is how Nursi reflects on the impotent nature of human beings despite to being superior to other causes: For example, in the chain of actions concerning food, which stretches from the nourishment of the body’s cells to the forming of fruit, only moving the jaw and chewing the food is subject to man’s choice. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 637) Nursi concludes that if a human with superior power and will could not even feed himself, then no other cause could have any real effect. Apparent causes are just containers, gift wrappers, and tray bearers of God’s Divine gifts: Since among causes man is the most superior and has the greatest power of choice and yet his hands are thus tied from real creation, how should other causes, such as inanimate creatures, animals, the elements, and nature have any real power of disposal over other causes? Each of those causes is only a container; a cover for the dominical works; a tray-bearer for the gifts of the Compassionate One. Of course, the receptacle for a king’s gift, or the handkerchief in which it is wrapped, or the individual who brings the gift can in no way be partners in the king’s sovereignty.

Character building with scientific knowledge 173 Anyone who supposes that they are partners is imagining nonsensical absurdities. In the same way, apparent causes and intermediaries can have absolutely no share in God’s act of sustaining His creatures. Their lot is only to perform a service of worship. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 637) In other words, effects do not come from causes; they come with causes that are like the containers or tray bearers. Effects are created directly by the will, knowledge, and power of God. Nursi invites us to reflect on the properties of causes and effects to realize that causes do not have the necessary property to create their associated effects. If we think about the benefits, purposes, arts, knowledge, and power embedded in the effects, we will recognize that they are not from their apparent causes. Instead, they are from the Divine power, mercy, and wisdom. For example, it is going to rain. It is obvious how distant the causes that apparently result in rain are from thinking of animals and having pity and compassion on them. That means it is sent to their assistance through the wisdom of a Compassionate Creator Who creates the animals and guarantees their sustenance. Rain is even called “mercy”. Because, since it comprises numerous works of mercy and benefits, it is as if mercy has become embodied as rain, has been formed into drops, and arrives in that way. . . . In Short: Since causes are extremely commonplace and impotent and the effects attributed to them are most valuable and full of art, this dismisses causes. The aims and benefits of effects also discharge ignorant and lifeless causes, and hand them over to an All-Wise Maker. Also, the adornment and skill on the face of effects indicates a Wise Maker Who wants to make His power known to conscious beings and desires to make Himself loved. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 711–713) Indeed, the Qur’an reminds us that God alone is the creator of everything: God is the Creator of all things, and He is the Guardian and Disposer of all affairs. To Him belong the keys of the heavens and the earth: and those who reject the Signs of God – it is they who will be in loss. (Q, 39:62–63) Nursi uses an analogy to help readers confirm that apparent causes are not the efficient cause behind experienced phenomena: a microscopic organism so small it is invisible to the naked eye comprises an extremely fine and wonderful divine machine. Necessarily and self-evidently, this machine, which is contingent in both its essence

174  Character building with scientific knowledge and attributes and states, did not come into existence of itself without a cause. Like the pans of some scales, contingent beings are equal in respect of both existence and non-existence; if one preponderates, it remains in non-existence. Thus, as all reasonable people agree, there has to be a cause to make the choice. It is impossible that this should a natural cause. For the exquisite order of the machine necessitates infinite knowledge and perfect intelligence, and it is impossible to conceive of these in such causes, about which the Naturalists deceive themselves. The causes are simple, few, and lifeless and cannot specify their course or restrict their motions, hesitant as they are between thousands of possibilities, some of which have no primacy. So how does a cause follow a specific course and travel a defined path, and how can it choose certain aspects of the possibilities so that it produces this marvelous, well-ordered machine the subtlety of the instances of wisdom of which leave minds in astonishment? You could only convince yourself and feel happy at it if you ascribed to every single particle the intelligence of Plato and wisdom of Galen and you believed that all these particles communicated with each other. And this a sophistry that would put even the Sophists to shame. (Nursi, 1996a, pp. 164–165) In short, as long as we eliminate the secular ideology embedded within existing scientific knowledge, we can use it to understand Divine knowledge. Thus, the process must recognize the importance of scientific knowledge but not consider the scientific understanding of apparent causes as the ultimate reality. We shall add six other dimensions to the instrumental knowledge in a quest to learn the ultimate reality and reach excellence.

6. Principles for presenting scientific knowledge through the Mânâ-i harfî After filtering the secular ideology, we suggest adding six knowledge dimensions to the pure scientific knowledge to tap into the deeper meaning of beings and events through the mânâ-i harfî perspective. In this section, we will discuss some guiding principles to uncover the meaning of observed phenomena in the universe through scientific studies. The first principle, the proper understanding of the self as a reference dictionary, should be established to understand God and His actions in the universe. The concept of the self should be based on the Tawhīdī perspective of phenomenology. We should provide examples of how the self helps to understand God. Thus, the entire human experience through the transcendental self becomes the reference to understand everything else, including God. The second principle is that the self should be used as an alphabet for the mânâ-i harfî language. Teachers should teach the “Mânâ-i harfî Language”

Character building with scientific knowledge 175 to read the universe like a book with a deep meaning. They should provide examples of how to read the book of the universe in this language. The third principle, the analogy, should be used to refer to the selfreference dictionary (SRD) of the mânâ-i harfî language to understand the acts of God in the universe. Teachers should connect everything to their own experience. They should teach students how to understand the work of God through analogy with self-experiential knowledge. They should link everything to the self by self-contemplation. This is important for analogical reasoning (vahid-i kiyasi), or one-to-one comparison, in order to analyze the nature of the self. For instance, they should talk about the sun as a lamp and heater for living beings. This will help students make better sense of the sun and offer sincere appreciation as they realize that the sun is put in place to sustain our lives on earth. Therefore, they should present external phenomena through the use of analogy to help students read in the mânâ-i harfî language. The fourth principle is that teachers should present creation as an ongoing process and constantly renewed phenomenon, rather than an event happening for one time only. Both apparent causes and effects are being created from moment to moment. They are contingent, much like live broadcasting, depending on the reflection of the Divine names. Therefore, in the mânâi harfî approach, each discipline should pay attention to the dynamics of change within its field. It should highlight the purpose-driven process and benefits embedded in change. It should use an analogy to make it clear that change is not possible based on the trio of causes, nature, and chance. Instead, change is the work of God with infinite power, knowledge, wisdom, and will. The fifth principle is that teachers should point to the miraculous side of everything that is otherwise considered as “normal” or ordinary. From the mânâ-i harfî approach, there is no difference between a fruit falling from the sky vs. growing from the ground. Neither earth nor sky have the necessary knowledge, power, and will to create fruit. We mistakenly perceive regular occurrences of miraculous works as ordinary mainly due to ascribing them to deterministic material causes and natural properties. Once we remove the veil of causation and nature, we will see everything as a miraculous work of Divine power. Thus, teachers should help students see so-called ordinary events in the universe as miracles of God. The sixth principle is that teachers should teach students how to use different types of experiences to reach transcendental reality, from the extraordinary to the mundane. From the mânâ-i harfî approach, the entire life experience is a way to know the names and attributes of God. As long as we learn how to use our life experience as a means (through analogy) to understand God, we can value our entire life experience. Thus, we will find a sacred aspect of everything in our life experience. Teachers should help students develop a holistic life, one where they aspire to benefit from this world and the hereafter.

176  Character building with scientific knowledge The seventh principle is that teachers should present the unity of knowledge and eliminate duality by giving examples of how everything is a sign with a signified meaning. It is not right to divide knowledge as religious and secular. Teachers should present multiple layers of knowledge in the creation. They should emphasize that science only deals with the phenomenal dimension. However, they should teach students to go beyond the phenomenal (instrumental knowledge) dimension. In this way, scientific knowledge can set the initial stage towards higher levels of knowledge. The eight principle is that teachers should help students learn about the names and attributes of God through His acts in the universe. They should link scientific knowledge to the proper Divine names that are the ontic source of phenomenal realities. Indeed, scientific knowledge in every discipline should be presented in relation to a particular Divine name. For instance, the discipline of medicine should lead to a better understanding of God as The Healer. The ninth principle is that teachers should focus on the telos in the universe by providing examples of the intentional acts of God in creating certain benefits and doing everything for good reasons. They reveal how everything is created with a certain potential and is directed toward a specific purpose. Students should have a good understanding of knowledge (‘ilm) and wisdom (hikmah). The former is about knowing how to make something while the latter is making something in the right place, at the right time, and for the right reason. For instance, knowing how to make human eyes is ‘ilm while placing human eyes in the right place for the highest outcome is hikmah. Thus, students should be encouraged to see the hikmah (wisdom) behind everything. Of course, the ultimate hikmah for everything is to reveal certain Divine Names. Therefore, in the mânâ-i harfî approach, everything should be eventually linked to a particular Divine name. The tenth is that teachers should adopt a comprehensive theory of human nature, in line with the Tawhīdī worldview, that states that human beings are endowed with the ability to be the best or worst of creation. They should teach students the key elements of human nature with guidance to unleash the positive elements through good deeds (amaal-i saleeh) and control the negative elements through self-restraint (taqwa). They should help students understand how everything is created in harmony with the universe. The eleventh principle is that teachers should help students derive good characters from studying the universe. The learning process should aim at the meditative mind first, not the instrumental mind. The goal is to teach transcendental reality by understanding the meaning in life. Once students develop a proper understanding of the self, the universe, and God through the right phenomenology, ontology, teleology, epistemology, anthropology, and axiology, they should explore how to live a good life under the guidance of certain moral axioms. For instance, the Qur’an shows examples of balance and wisdom in the universe, before asking believers to be fair and just in their actions. Thus, the curriculum should derive moral lessons by exploring the physical universe.

Character building with scientific knowledge 177 Finally, for the mânâ-i harfî approach, a shared language that is acceptable to anyone who believes in a Supreme Being should be used. Teachers should point to the unifying messages in the book of the universe. They should consider the universe as an elegant book written with the pen of the Divine power. They should focus on how to teach the language (the mânâ-i harfî) and read the universe with this language.

7. Adding six dimensions to scientific knowledge through the Mânâ-i harfî Nursi argues that through the light of Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet, we are expected to bear witness (shahadah) to “transcendental reality.” Such witness is possible only if we learn the “holistic language” and read the universe and ourselves in this language. Nursi seems to agree with Heidegger in terms of emphasizing the importance of learning an ontic language to access the reality. Once we learn the Tawhīdī language, we can read the multi-layered messages encrypted in beings, thus going beyond instrumental knowledge that is based on phenomenal reality. Through the multi-dimensional perspective of phenomenology, we should start with a proper understanding of the self in forming holistic language. In doing so, we will understand the true nature of the self and become “‘âbid” (worshiper) by submitting to God. Then, through holistic teleology (kalam), we will learn how to read the micro and macro universes that are written in the holistic language. Through our multi-dimensional perspective of ontology, then, we will be able to realize the truth (haqiqah) of everything. The same perspective of epistemology will take us to where we can know God (ma’rifah) by His names by reading the elegant book of the universe with our newfound knowledge and understanding. The Tawhīdī perspective of anthropology will let us read our nature (fitrah) to understand what our given potential is for good and evil. Finally, through the multi-dimensional perspective of axiology, we can respond to the Divine bounties by performing good deeds and avoiding bad deeds, which will help us reach intellectual, spiritual, and moral excellence (fadhilah). As shown in Table  5.1, from the Tawhīdī perspective, knowledge must not be approached as merely an instrument. We have to gain instrumental knowledge, but also need to learn the six other dimensions to become abeed (worshipers), hakeem (wise), aleem (truth seeker), areef (God knowing), ‘âjiz (impotent and needy), and fadhel (virtuous). In the next section, we will present examples from Nursi’s writings to resacralize medical knowledge by adding those dimensions. 7.1 Second dimension: analogy dimension for comparison and comprehension In rewriting scientific knowledge, Nursi begins with a proper phenomenological understanding of the self within a multi-dimensional, holistic

178  Character building with scientific knowledge

Learning the language

Learning how to read

Seeking the truth

Reading the book of universe

Reading the book of human

Pursuing human excellence

Figure 5.1 Six steps of writing science through the cosmic language (the mânâ-i harfî)

Table 5.1 Learning steps and expected learning outcome Worldview Pillars

Learning Steps

Phenomenology Learning Tawhīdī language Teleology Learning how to read with Tawhīdī language Ontology Learning the truth through ontic language Epistemology Reading the universe to know God Anthropology Reading human nature to know God Axiology Pursuing moral, spiritual, and intellectual excellence

Knowledge Dimension

Expected Outcome

Self-knowledge Abeed (worshiper) Hikmah Haqiqah

Hakim (wisdom seeker) Aleem (truth seeker)

Ma’rifah

Areef (God knowing)

Fitrah

‘âjiz (impotent and needy) Fadhel (virtuous)

Fadhilah

paradigm. He argues that we cannot claim ownership over anything, including simple acts such as eating and speaking. And in the chain of speech, only exhaling air and blowing it into the mold of articulated letters. And while a word in the mouth is a seed, it becomes like a tree; in the air it yields the fruits of  millions of the same word and enters the ears of listeners along with millions of others. Man’s imagination can barely reach this metaphorical shoot, so how should the short arm of choice reach it? (Nursi, 1996e, p. 637) Thus, what we think is from ourselves is actually from God; we simply feel as if they are our own.

Character building with scientific knowledge 179 In Nursi’s view, it is this misperception of the self that causes people to deny the existence of God or associate partners with Him. Once a person forgets their intrinsic nature of being impotent, deficient, and imperfect, it is hard for them to realize the need to submit to God. As the Qur’an says, once a person sees that he is self-sufficient, he does not feel that he needs God: “Nay, but man does transgress all bounds. In that, he looks upon himself as self-sufficient” (Q, 96:6–7). Understanding that the self is not the owner of its acts leads to an easier understanding of the attributes of the true Owner of all acts in the universe. However, self-experience is what informs our self-reference dictionary. For instance, after we understand what it takes to make a good digital camera, we use this knowledge to make sense of our eyes as bio-cameras that are many times better than any existing mechanical camera. From self-reference knowledge, we know with certainty that a digital camera can only be the work of a maker with conscience, knowledge, sight, and power. The more we study the eyes and understand their complexity, the more we will understand the necessary attributes of its Maker. If we overcome the secular trinity, we will give credit to the Divine power for this miraculous gift. The second dimension is about comparing and contrasting an observed phenomenon in the universe with a human-made one for better comprehension through experiences by transcendental self. We shall ask questions such as: What does the new phenomenon look like compared to a human-made one? What are the similarities and differences between them? Which one is better? We need to choose a good analogy to make it clear the differences between so-called natural phenomena and human-made one. Nursi uses analogy frequently to explain his points. This is because of his phenomenological approach of learning based on the human self. He argues that people can affirm knowledge about the external world only if it can be compared with some internal experience. Since self-reference knowledge is the alphabet of reading the universe, Nursi thinks it is necessary to internalize external data through what is called introspective contemplation (enfusi tafakkur). For instance, when he speaks about the human body, he associates it to an elegant palace with many halls and huge rooms: Your being resembles a thousand-domed wondrous palace in which the stones stand together in suspension and without support. Indeed, your being is a thousand times more wonderful than such a palace, for the palace of your being is being renewed continuously in perfect order. Leaving aside your truly wonderful spirit, heart and other subtle faculties, each member of your body resembles a single-domed part of the palace. Like the stones of a dome, the particles stand together in perfect balance and order demonstrating the eye and the tongue, for example, each to be a wondrous building, extraordinary work of art, and miracle of power. If these particles were not officials dependent on the command of the master architect of the universe, then each would

180  Character building with scientific knowledge have to be both absolutely dominant over all the other particles in the body and absolutely subordinate to each of them; and both equal to each and, with regard to its dominant position, opposed; and both the origin and source of most of the attributes that pertain only to the ­Necessarily Existent One, and extremely restricted; and both in absolute form, and in the form of a perfectly ordered individual artefact that could only, through the mystery of unity, be the work of the Single One of Unity. Anyone with even a particle of intelligence would understand what an obvious impossibility. This is; to attribute such an artifact to those particles. (Nursi, 1996b, pp. 236–238) In the example above, Nursi thinks that in using the experiential knowledge of a palace, we would understand that an elegant palace like the human body could not come into existence without infinite power, knowledge, wisdom, and will. Just as it is absurd to ascribe the construction of a palace to its material components, it is also illogical to claim that the human body is the outcome of cells, molecules, or atoms without any involvement of their Maker. Indeed, some educators argue that we learn only through analogy. We always use our existing knowledge as a reference to make sense of the unknown. We call this “ana (self) first epistemology.” We develop our understanding of everything through self-based knowledge. Thus, the self becomes like an alphabet through which we develop our language and read the universe. The more we link the external data to the self, the more we will gain certainty (yaqeen) about God. That is why Nursi recommends engaging in enfusi (self-based) contemplation to overcome heedlessness and skepticism: Contemplation helps to overcome heedlessness. Careful observation and reflection destroy the darkness of skepticism. However, when you reflect on your inner self and personal experience, reflect deeply in detail. On the other hand, when you reflect on the external world and general events, do not go deep. Just be brief without going into detail. That is because you would not find overall value and beauty in detail. Furthermore, reflection on the external world is like a deep sea without any bottom. It has no shore. Do not dive deeply; you would drown. (Nursi, 2012f, p. 147) 7.2 Third dimension: the hikmah or critical thinking dimension Hikmah (wisdom) is a key defining attribute of humans. Indeed, Homo sapiens means “wise man.” The hikmah dimension of knowledge is also critical from the Qur’anic perspective. The Qur’an mentions hikmah as a great good that one can pursue as a human being: “He gives wisdom unto

Character building with scientific knowledge 181 whom He will, and he unto whom wisdom is given, he truly has received abundant good” (Q, 2:269). Scholars give hikmah a different meaning, however. For philosophers like al-Farabi and Ibn Sina, hikmah means “philosophy.” For Nursi, hikmah is to do good things for good reasons. It is to pursue purpose and benefit in everything. It is the way to solve the puzzle by putting the pieces together. In other words, it is to place everything in its proper place to see the revealed message. Perhaps the highest hikmah is to connect the acts of God in the cosmic phenomena to His Names and Attributes. Thus, wise people are expected to realize the Divine names in their life experience. Here, we define hikmah as a search for the truth, a way of examining everything to understand its ultimate meaning. The wisdom dimension perceives everything as a comprehensive book with layered, coded messages. Thus, the wisdom dimension requires continuous knowledge-seeking efforts. However, the goal is not just instrumental – it is to seek transcendental meaning. The hikmah dimension can be called a “critical thinking dimension” as well, because it requires critical thinking. We need to question the apparent sources of observed phenomena as follows: How is it possible that an observed phenomenon came to be? Is it possible through material causes, nature, or chance? Why? Why not? For humans, what does it take to make something like this? Through questioning, it should be clear that material causes, nature, and chance are not qualified to create the observed phenomena. We also need to look analytically to examine the universe from a critical state of mind in pursuit of the embedded hidden messages. As we reflect on the phenomena in the universe, we shall realize that wise acts are possible only through knowledge, consciousness, will, and power. Thus, manifested wisdom in the universe shall become clear evidence for the existence of God. Indeed, Nursi argues that wisdom, mercy, and compassion are manifested in the entire universe: Yes, a veil of wisdom demonstrating intention, consciousness, and will, has covered the whole universe, and upon that veil of wisdom has been spread a veil of grace and favour exhibiting beneficence, adornment, embellishment, and benevolence; and over that adorned veil of favour a garment of mercy displaying flashes of making known and loved, of bestowal and the granting of gifts has enveloped the universe; and spread over that illuminated veil of universal mercy is a table of general provisions showing kindness and bestowal and benevolence and perfect compassion and fine nurturing and dominical favour. Yes, all beings, from particles to suns, whether individuals or species, large or small, have been clothed in a magnificent shirt of wisdom embroidered with fruits and aims, benefits and purposes. Over this wisdom-displaying shirt, a garment of favour embroidered with flowers of grace and beneficence has been cut out in accordance with the stature of things; and

182  Character building with scientific knowledge over that ornamented garment of favour, a general table of sustenance has been set up, lit up with flashes of love, bestowal, affection, and the granting of gifts, to which the decorations of mercy have been attached, and which, together with bestowing those illuminated and jewelencrusted decorations, is sufficient for all the groups of living beings on the face of the earth, and meets all their needs. Thus, this matter points to an All-Glorious Provider Who is All-Wise, All-Generous, and AllCompassionate and shows Him as clearly as the sun. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 309–310) Thus, it is very important to include wisdom when teaching science by highlighting the intentional Divine purpose. Nursi refers to the Divine wisdom in the human body to prove that God acts in the universe using His infinite wisdom: Yes, it is apparent that the Being Who controls this world does so in accordance with infinite wisdom. Do you require proof? It is the preservation of interest and benefit in all things. Do you not see that numerous wise benefits are intended in all the limbs, bones and veins of man, even in the cells of his brain and in every particle of his body? Do you not see that from certain limbs wise benefits are to be had as numerous as the fruits of a tree? All of this shows that matters are done in accordance with infinite wisdom. The existence of the utmost regularity in the making of all things is a proof of the same truth. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 77) Science and wisdom Nursi argues that accurate scientific study reveals God’s miraculous work in the universe, even though secular scientists cover up those signs through their worldview. In his terms, each scientific discipline about the universe reveals comprehensive laws of order and perfection in every species, the human mind could not think better. For instance, like anatomy in medical science and knowledge about the solar system in astronomy, and scientific disciplines about plants and animals, each scientific discipline, through comprehensive principles in its field, speaks of the Divine order in that creation through revealing miracles of Divine power and wisdom. It affirms the truth in the following verse: “who makes most excellent everything that He creates.” (Q, 32:7). (Nursi, 2012d, p. 546) Nursi points to balance and harmony in the universe to ignite our interest in exploring the mysteries. He argues that if we ponder this all-encompassing

Character building with scientific knowledge 183 balance and harmony at the micro and macro levels, we will realize that it can only be the work of a just and wise Creator who holds everything using His power, knowledge, and wisdom. Thus, everything from the cells of an animate body, the red and white corpuscles in the blood, the transformations of minute particles, and the mutual proportion and relation of the body’s organs, to the incomings and outgoings of the seas, the income and expenditure of springs under the earth, the birth and death of animals and plants, the destruction of autumn and the reconstruction of spring, the duties and motion of the elements and the stars, and the alternations, struggles and clashes of death and life, light and darkness, and heat and cold, are ordered and weighed with so sensitive a balance, so fine a measure, that the human mind can nowhere see any waste or futility, just as human science and philosophy observe everywhere and demonstrate the most perfect order and beautiful symmetry. Indeed, human science and philosophy are a manifestation and interpreter of that order and symmetry . . . Especially the cells and blood-vessels in the bodies of animals, and the corpuscles in the blood and particles in the corpuscles; they have such a fine, sensitive, and wondrous balance that it self-evidently proves that they are being nurtured and administered through the balance, law, and order of a single All-Just and Wise Creator who holds the reins of all things, has the key to all things, for whom nothing is an obstacle to anything else, and directs all things as easily as a single thing. (Nursi, 1996b, pp. 397–398) For instance, secular conceptions of science explore human eyes only in an effort to discover better ways to fix problems that arise within them. Any knowledge reached in this manner is purely instrumental, whereas the wisdom dimension of the holistic paradigm requires the exploration of the human eye as a comprehensive book with a deeper meaning beyond their physical function. The wisdom embedded in the holistic paradigm includes meditative features that lead to specific Divine names. Causal chains discovered about the eyes’ functions are nothing but exhibitions of the Divine names at a micro level. Thus, the more we explore the eyes, the more we will learn about the attributes of their Maker. Therefore, a believing physician would be more enthusiastic about learning compared to a secular one who only pursues instrumental, limited knowledge. The wisdom in human anatomy As a whole, Nursi reflects on the human body in three stages. First, using contemporary knowledge, he helps us understand how the body works through the analogies of a well-ordered machine and a continuously renewed palace. Second, he reflects on the connection between the human body and the

184  Character building with scientific knowledge universe. Third, he questions whether the miraculous works in the human body can be ascribed to nature, causes, or chance. For you yourself are a being and not some simple substance that is inanimate and unchanging. You resemble an extremely well-ordered machine that is constantly being renewed and a wonderful palace that is undergoing continuous change. Particles are working unceasingly in your body. Your body has a connection and mutual relations with the universe, in particular with regard to sustenance and the perpetuation of the species, and the particles that work within it are careful not to spoil that relationship nor to break the connection. In this cautious manner they set about their work, as though taking the whole universe into account. Seeing your relationships within it, they take up their positions accordingly. And you benefit with your external and inner senses in accordance with the wonderful positions that they take. If you do not accept that the particles in your body are tiny officials in motion in accordance with the law of the Pre-Eternal and All-Powerful One, or that they are an army, or the nibs of the pen of divine determining with each particle as the nib of a pen, or that they are points inscribed by the pen of power with each particle being a point, then in every particle working in your eye there would have to be an eye such as could see every limb and part of your body as well as the entire universe, with which you are connected. In addition to this, you would have to ascribe to each particle an intelligence equivalent to that of a hundred geniuses, sufficient to know and recognize all your past and your future, and your forbears and descendants, the origins of all the elements of your being, and the sources of all your sustenance. To attribute the knowledge and intelligence of a thousand [Platos] to a single particle of one such as you who does not possess even a particle’s worth of intelligence in matters of this kind is a crazy superstition a thousand times over! (Nursi, 1996b, pp. 237–238) In short, as we study the purposes and benefits behind the constant arrangement of atoms in the universe, we should also ponder their existence and question the apparent causes, nature, and chance as possible sources of observed phenomena. We should also become certain of the necessity of knowledge, will, and power for the existence of such amazing wisdom within the phenomena. 7.3 Fourth dimension: haqiqah or hidden reality dimension The haqiqah dimension is about the ultimate reality. Once we negate causes, nature, and chance in the third dimension, we need to explore evidence for the ultimate reality in the fourth dimension by asking the followings:

Character building with scientific knowledge 185 Who can create this phenomenon if neither material causes, nature, nor chance can create it? How do we know the Creator with certainty? How can we show that He does everything Himself without any help and assistance? How does He create everything? Does He create directly or indirectly through machine/factory-like systems? Nursi argues that the essence of beings is not matter; instead, it is the Divine Names. Therefore, the scientific study of a particular discipline will lead to particular Divine Names. Thus, studying the universe will take us to the names of God: The realities of all beings and of the universe are based on the Divine Names. Each being’s reality is based on one Name or on many. The attributes of things and the arts they display are also based on and rely upon a Name. True natural science is based on the Name of All-Wise, true medicine on the Name of Healer, and geometry on the Name of Determiner, and so on. In the same way that all the sciences are based on and come to an end in a Name, the realities of all arts and sciences, and of all human attainments, are based on the Divine Names. Indeed, one group of the most learned of the saints stated that the Divine Names constitute the true reality of things, while the essences of things are only shadows of that reality. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 655) For instance, from a holistic perspective, medicine is just an apparent cause. The actual healing comes directly from God. Going back to the light switch analogy mentioned before, just as we have to use the light switch to receive light, we have to use medicine to receive healing. However, the light does not come from the light switch, just as healing also does not come from medicine. Indeed, the Qur’an explicitly states that believers should recognize that healing comes from God: “And when I am ill, it is He Who cures me” (26:80). In his interpretation of this verse, Nursi argues that “The True Healer is the one who gives medicines their properties and creates their effects” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 426). In other words, ontologically, God is the only cause of healing even though He provides healing through the apparent causes of medicine. Understanding the reality behind matter Nursi reflects on the universe as a dynamic place in which small particles such as subatomic particles, elements, or cells are continually being rearranged and recreated to manifest miraculous Divine artifacts. He invites us to ponder upon the manifested Divine knowledge, power, and will at God’s factory of minute particles. Mainly, once we understand how each particle works in perfect harmony and cooperation with every other particle in the universe, we will see the Divine Hand behind them. To use a familiar

186  Character building with scientific knowledge analogy – the whole universe is like a giant Legoland. Small particles are being used like Lego pieces to create new and different objects. In every particle there are two truthful evidences to the existence and unity of the Necessarily Existent One. Indeed, by carrying out its important duties consciously and by raising mighty loads despite being powerless and lifeless, a particle bears decisive witness to the existence of the Necessarily Existent One. And by conforming to the universal order peculiar to each place it enters, and by settling anywhere as though it was its homeland, it testifies to the unity of the Necessarily Existent One and to the oneness of that Being Who is the Owner of all things, with their apparent faces and their inner aspects which look to Him. That is to say, whoever owns the particles must also own all the places it enters. Thus, since its loads are extremely heavy and its duties endless, the particle demonstrates that it is mobile and acting at the command of One Possessing Absolute Power, and in His name. And, the fact that it conforms as though knowingly to the universal order of the cosmos and enters each place without obstacle shows that it acts through the power and wisdom of a single Being Possessing Absolute Knowledge. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 576) Nursi compares every particle to a soldier working alongside other soldiers (i.e., the particles) in perfect coordination under the command of Divine power and Will: A private soldier has relations with his squad, his company, his battalion, his regiment, and his division, and so on, and has duties in connection with each. Since he knows all those relations and duties, he will act in conformity with them. For, having received training and instruction under military discipline, he complies with the rules and regulations of a single supreme commander who commands all those sections. In the same way, all particles are suitably placed within compounds, and with every facet of the compounds have different beneficial relations and different well-regulated duties that yield wise results that are all different. It is therefore surely only One in the grasp of whose power is the whole universe who can place the particles in such a way as to preserve all their relations with and duties in all the facets of the compounds, and not spoil the wise results. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 577) In essence, what we call the natural laws are nothing but a description of God’s unified Divine command controlling everything. For instance, the command of cleanliness works at a cellular level as well as at a galactic level. Once God commands and wills something to be clean, the manifestation of that command is revealed in the universe in various ways.

Character building with scientific knowledge 187 Another example Nursi provides about the human body shows how everything in the universe works synergistically. It is as if each particle knows its role within the entire system. For example, a particle located in Tevfik’s [a disciple of Nursi] eye is suitably placed with regard to the blood-vessels like the arteries and veins, and the motor and sensory nerves, and has a wise and purposeful relationship with the face, and then with the head, the trunk, and with the entire human body, and has beneficial duties in relation to each. This demonstrates that only one who creates all the members of the body will be able to place the particle in that position. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 577) 7.4 Fifth dimension: the ma’rifah or hidden message dimension While the haqiqah dimension is about proving the existence of Maker, the ma’rifah dimension is centered on knowing the Maker through His works. It is a way of reading the mind of the Maker and getting to know His attributes by asking the followings: Why did He create the observed phenomena? What does He speak in His creative acts? What can we learn about His attributes from His acts? It is assumed that the Maker is revealing Himself through His creative acts in the universe. The ultimate goal is to gain knowledge about God by reading His works in the universe and knowing God by perceiving one’s direct interactions with Him via His manifested works. Thus, the more we study His works, such as the human body, the more we can learn about Him as well. For instance, through the uniqueness of the human face, fingerprints, voices, and DNA, He reveals to us that He has infinite knowledge (that He is AlAleem) and power (that he is Al-Kadeer), in that He can create such unique features in infinite abundance. He is also Al-Ferd (the Unique), Al-Hakeem (All-Wise), and Al-Adl (All-Just). As related above, Nursi considers the entire universe to be a comprehensive book written by the pen of Power. Within this book, God has coded messages in both the micro and macro cosmos. A  careful reading of the book of the universe will clearly show us the Divine power. In Nursi’s terms, “a pen that inscribes in a tiny seed the index of the huge pine-tree, and the programme of its life, like writing the whole Qur’an in a chickpea, can surely be none other than the pen that writes the heavens together with the stars” (Nursi, 1996b, p. 432). Sustenance and the sustainer Nursi invites us to reflect on the sustenance of living beings through the services of a well-cooperating universe and refers to the maintenance of living beings as an excellent example of Tawhid-i Rububiyah. Furthermore, he

188  Character building with scientific knowledge argues that everything works like the well-connected components of a factory, rushing to assist each other. These components are designed to work together harmoniously towards common goals to Conform to a rule of mutual assistance which is in force from the sun and moon, night and day, and winter and summer, to plants coming to the assistance of hungry and needy animals, and animals hastening to the assistance of weak, noblemen, and even nutritious substances flying to assist delicate, weak infants and fruits, and particles of food passing to the assistance of the cells of the body . . . . . . like individual beings are in need of sustenance and all the necessities to continue their lives, we see that all the beings in the world, and especially living beings, whether universal or particular, wholes or parts, have many desires and needs, material and otherwise, for their existence, their lives, and the continuation of their lives. But their wants and needs are for such things that their hands cannot reach the least of them and their power is insufficient for the smallest of them. Yet, we see that all their wishes and material and immaterial sustenance is given to them “From where he could not imagine,” from unhoped for places, with perfect order, at the appropriate time, in a suitable fashion, with perfect wisdom. And so, does this want and need of creatures and this manner of unseen help and assistance not show an All-Wise and Glorious Nurturer, an All-Compassionate Beauteous Disposer? (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 309–310) The arts and the artist Materialistic evolution tries to provide certain justifications for the changes or emerging properties of living beings. However, it fails to provide any reasonable explanation for the artistic expression in almost every being. Indeed, as is confessed by the following scientist, it is painful to discuss that what a work of art in nature is about: Let us tell them the painful truth that most of these (great) works of art are about God, whom we never mention in polite society. Let us admit that if we are to offer an education in agreement with the innermost nature and eloquence of (these great works of art) themselves, that this will not be education in philosophy, in Plato’s and Aristotle’s sense of the word, for whom it means ontology and theology and the map of life, and a wisdom to be applied to everyday matters. (Coomaraswamy, 1956, Chapter 1) In Nursi’s view, just as the physical heart is the center of human biological life, the spiritual heart is the source of a virtuous life. Through the knowledge of God, human beings can work towards excellence in this

Character building with scientific knowledge 189 world and the hereafter. As we learn about God, we will seek help from Him through His various names to realize our goals and overcome challenges and calamities. As the biological heart sustains the life for the body, the knowledge of God in the spiritual heart which is the seed of spiritual life sustains human desires and tendencies which are in line with his many unconstrained faculties. . . . Thus, through reliance on God and seeking help from Him, a believer could challenge the universe. (Nursi, 2012f, p. 255) Memory and the master After reflecting on human memory through the library analogy, Nursi guides readers to see the hidden reality (haqiqah dimension) and the hidden message (ma’rifaah dimension) through the reflective thinking processes: the results, purposes, and benefits attached to effects demonstrate self-evidently that they are the works of an All-Generous Sustainer, an All-Wise and Compassionate One, beyond the veil of causes. For unconscious causes certainly cannot think of some aim and work for it. And yet we see that each creature which comes into existence does so following not one, but many aims, benefits, and instances of wisdom. That means an All-Wise and Generous Sustainer makes those things and sends them. He makes those benefits the aim of their existence. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 712–713) 7.5 Sixth dimension: the fitrah or gift affect dimension The fitrah (human nature) dimension reads human beings using the mânâ-i harfî language to know God better. This dimension focuses on understanding how human nature is linked to the entire universe and realizing how everything is a type of Divine gift. The goal is to learn how everything is specially tailored for certain beneficial outcomes. The following guiding questions help to realize that all things are specially made gifts for human beings and/or other creatures: How does the learned phenomena relate to me? How do I benefit from it directly or indirectly? Can it be a tailor-made gift for me or other creatures? The fitrah dimension is essential for two reasons. First, a human being is considered to be a microcosm. Thus, reading human beings is almost equivalent to reading the entire universe with the cosmic language. Second, the fitrah dimension helps to understand the key elements of human nature. It provides good insight in terms of the innate potential towards good or evil. Through the use of this knowledge, we can manage our life to unleash our potential for good and restrain our potential for evil. Through this, we

190  Character building with scientific knowledge will perceive the actual value of our Divine gifts, which are a great fit with our fitrah. Nursi argues that without deep reflection, we cannot truly appreciate the bounties we have been given by God. We take them for granted. For instance, we rarely think about our body and our bodily bounties as gifts from God. Nursi gives an example of how we can reflect on our body and become thankful: I noted next the “I” in the For us God suffices, that is, I  considered myself, and I saw that among the animals, He had created me miraculously from my origin, a drop of fluid, had opened my ear, attached my eye, and had placed in my head a brain, and in my breast a heart, and in my mouth a tongue containing hundreds of scales and measures with which I might weigh up and know all the gifts of that Most Merciful One stored up in the treasuries of mercy. He had inscribed on these, thousands of instruments for unlocking and understanding the treasures of the infinite manifestations of His Most Beautiful Names, and given instructions to the number of smells, tastes, and colours for the assistance of those instruments. He had moreover included with perfect order in this body the numerous sensitive feelings and senses, and subtle, non-physical faculties and inner senses. He had created with perfect art all the systems and members and faculties necessary for human life so that He might allow me to experience and understand all the varieties of His bounties, and make known to me the countless different manifestations of His Names. Like the bodies of all believers, He had made this poor body of mine, which appears so insignificant, a fine calendar and diary of the universe; an illuminated summary of the macrocosm; a miniature sample of the world; a clear miracle of His handicraft; a desirous seeker after every sort of His bounty, and the means of enjoying them; and a list and index, like a model garden, of the gifts and flowers of mercy; and the understanding recipient of His Divine pronouncements. He also had given me life, to expand and increase in my existence, which is the greatest bounty. For through life, the bounty of my existence may expand to the extent of the Manifest World. He had also bestowed humanity on me, through which the bounty of existence may unfold in the physical and spiritual realms, opening up the way to benefiting – through the senses particular to man – from those broad spreads of bounties. (Nursi, 1996d, pp. 76–77) Once we have a proper understanding of fitrah, with all its potential and dangers, we can make the choices to reach excellence. For instance, if we are not aware of our inner enemies, such as our animal spirit, we can end

Character building with scientific knowledge 191 up being prisoners to our animal desires. Indeed, Rank (1945) argues that humans make for themselves “out of freedom a prison.” 7.6 Seventh dimension: the fadhilah or character lessons dimension Fadhilah (virtue) is a very important concept in Islamic education. Al-Farabi6 describes Al-Madinat al-Fadhilah as an ideal society established by the Prophet Mohammed in the city of Madinah. He argues that the knowledge and practice of virtue resulted in authentic happiness for the believers during this era, which is known as the Age of Happiness (A’sr al-Saadah). Like Aristotle, he defines happiness as the ultimate purpose in life. He believes happiness in both this life and the hereafter is possible through virtue. He puts virtues into two main categories: (1) rational and (2) appetitive. The rational virtue also consists of two types: theoretical and practical. Farabi argues that theoretical virtue which could be achieved through ‘ilm and hikmah is the most important. Practical virtue, which includes gaining knowledge and skills for instrumental purposes, shall ultimately lead to theoretical virtue. On the other hand, ethical virtues are necessary to avoid excessiveness in following the appetitive faculty. The overarching purpose is to nurture certain qualities of the soul such as temperance (‘iffah), generosity (sakha), courage (shaja’ah), justice (adalah), humility (tawadu), and forbearance (hilm) (Bakar, 1998, p. 112). Nasr echoes Farabi’s ideals in his portrayal of human purpose in this world: the purpose of man’s appearance in this world is, according to Islam, in order to gain total knowledge of things, to become the Universal Man (al-insan al-kamil), the mirror reflecting all the Divine Names and Qualities. Before his fall man was in the Edenic state, the Primordial Man (al-insan al-qadim); after his fall he lost this state, but by virtue of finding himself as the central being in a Universe which he can know completely, he can surpass his state before the fall to become the Universal Man. Therefore, if he takes advantage of the opportunity life has afforded him, with the help of the cosmos he can leave it with more than he had before his fall. (Nasr, 1997, p. 96) As discussed in the first chapter, Nursi argues that Islamic civilization is built on virtue. Therefore, it is a virtuous civilization. Unlike the decadent part of Western civilization, in the view of a virtuous civilization, humans are not a rational animal, but a guest of the Most Merciful One, who may aspire to the highest perfection. The true purpose of someone’s life should not be to gratify his/her lusts and desires but to develop his/her innate

192  Character building with scientific knowledge abilities so to rise higher than the angels. Nursi is severely critical of those who think it progressive to frequent nightclubs, the breeding ground of dissolute civilization, and to consume alcohol and live a nightlife. Progress is not as the people of misguidance imagine, to plunge into the life of this world in all its minute details and in order to taste every sort of pleasure, even the basest, make subject to the evil-commanding soul all the subtle faculties and the heart and intellect, and make them assist it; to do this is not progress, it is decline. True progress is not to blunt all the senses in service of the soul, but to turn the heart, spirit, intellect, and even the imagination and other subtle faculties given to man towards eternal life and for each to be occupied with the particular duty of worship worthy of it. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 331) The fadhilah dimension derives ethical lessons from the works of God in the universe to build better character by asking the following: How can I  respond to Him? How can I  express my appreciation? What can I  do to have such bounties forever? What are the character lessons from the observed phenomena? The objective is to live a virtuous life through God’s fear (taqwa) and good deeds (amaal-i saleeh). For instance, Nursi derives ethical lessons from studying the human body, inviting us to see a mutual assistance and compassionate care that can be observed through the actions of food particles that support and sustain our body: Particles entering the body as sustenance in the caravan of food in particular make their journey with astonishing order and wisdom. On their way, they pass through modes and stages in an orderly manner, and progressing consciously without confusion carry on till they are strained through the four filters in the bodies of animate beings. They are then loaded onto the red blood-corpuscles in order to come to the assistance of the members and cells which are in need of sustenance, rendering this assistance according to a law of generosity. It may be clearly understood from this that the One Who drives these particles and causes them to pass through thousands of different states must of necessity be a Generous Sustainer, a Compassionate Creator, in relation to Whose power particles and stars are equal. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 578) Thus, the more we study and understand how each particle of nutrition is created and moves through our body like an experienced professional to sustain our lives, the more we will be filled with gratitude. Nursi argues that cooperation and mutual assistance are universal laws, while conflicts are the exception. He strongly rejects the Darwinian

Character building with scientific knowledge 193 argument of survival of the fittest, arguing that nothing could survive without universal mutual cooperation: For example, the elements hasten to aid animate beings; the clouds to help the vegetable kingdom; the vegetable kingdom, to help the animal kingdom; the animal kingdom, to help the human kingdom. Milk gushes forth from the breast, like the spring of Paradise, to succour the infant; the fact that animate beings are given their needs and sustenance in a manner that transcends their capacity, from unexpected places; the replenishing of the cells of the body with particles of food, through their being subjugated by their Sustainer and their employment at His merciful hands – all of these and numerous other examples of the truth of co-operation demonstrate the universal and compassionate dominicality of the Sustainer of All the Worlds, Who administers the cosmos like a palace. Solid, inanimate and unfeeling objects, that nonetheless co-operate with each other in a sensitive and conscious fashion, must of necessity be caused to rush to each other’s aid by the power, mercy, and command of a Compassionate, Wise, and Glorious Sustainer. (Nursi, 1996d, p. 166) Thus, if everything in the universe assists and works in coordination with each other, then we should help each other as well. We should live our lives in harmony with other creatures. Indeed, the Qur’an provides many examples of ethical lessons through the reflection on God’s acts in the universe. For instance, the following verses first refer to the glory of God by the entire creation on the earth and space. Then, they warn those believers who are disgraceful to God through breaking their promises: “ALL THAT IS in the heavens and all that is on earth extols God’s limitless glory: for He alone is almighty, truly wise! O YOU who have attained to faith! Why do you say one thing and do another? Most loathsome is it in the sight of God that you say what you do not do!” (Q, 61:1–3).

8. Examples of scientific knowledge in the seven-dimensional approach Though Nursi did not name his mânâ-i harfî approach as a seven-dimensional approach, we argue that he follows all dimensions in his writing. First of all, he provides a strong objection to the mânâ-i ismî approach. He is very careful in his wording so as not to ascribe the works of God to nature, causation, and chance. This is the desecularization dimension. Then, he practices the other six dimensions to provide scientific knowledge through the mânâ-i harfî approach as seen in the following example: For example, a well-equipped pharmacy with life-giving potions and cures in every jar weighed out in precise and wondrous measures

194  Character building with scientific knowledge doubtless shows an extremely skillful, practiced, and wise pharmacist. In the same way, to the extent that it is bigger and more perfect and better stocked than the pharmacy in the market-place, the pharmacy of the globe of the earth with its living potions and medicaments in the jars which are the four hundred thousand species of plants and animals shows and makes known to eyes that are blind even – by means of the measure or scale of the science of medicine that you study  – the AllWise One of Glory, Who is the Pharmacist of the mighty pharmacy of the earth. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 226) He begins with an analogy (the second dimension) comparing plants to a human-made pharmacy. In other words, he wants readers to use their selfexperiential knowledge of making medicine to understand how plants are made. Then, in the third dimension (critical thinking), he refers to the “precise and wondrous” measures in making of medicine in each jar as undeniable evidence for a “skillful, practiced, and wise” pharmacist. In other words, it cannot be works of unconscious causes, ignorant nature, and blind chance. In the fourth dimension, he asks to apply the same reasoning to the existence of plants, which are composed of many different ingredients with extremely precise quantities. He argues that even for those who are blind, it is impossible to deny the “Pharmacist of the mighty pharmacy of the earth.” In the fifth dimension, he refers to certain adjectives of the Creator by referring to Him as “All-Wise of One of Glory.” In other words, those medicines are made with a particular disease in mind with the purpose of helping those who are sick. Similarly, plants are wisely made to meet certain needs of human and animals. Reflecting on the benefits in the creation of plants, readers are taken to the sixth dimension in which they perceive plants as very special and extremely valuable gifts. Finally, the reading of the text above would lead to sincere appreciation in the form of responding to this Divine favor with good character. Indeed, in the same text, Nursi gives several scientific examples. He follows the same methodology for each one of them in using an analogy, comparing, and then concluding with certain attributes about the Maker. Then, he urges readers to appreciate the Divine gifts and respond with good character. He states that those examples “make God known and loved.” They cause “wonderment and acclaim, and makes Him loved and praised and glorified.” To show how we can practically follow the Nursi example, let us think about another example, photosynthesis, from the mânâ-i ismî and mânâ-i harfî approach. From a secular worldview, the mechanism of cleaning air was a mystery for thousands of years. People did not have any idea of how we get clean air. Thus, they used to think it was God directing the cleaning of air for them. However, after modern scientific discovery, the mystery was over! Scientists discovered and decoded the mechanisms responsible for the cleaning of the air. Bingo! It was called photosynthesis. There was no need

Character building with scientific knowledge 195 for mythological or religious explanations anymore. Even children could now explain this mysterious mechanism. Here is a brief, secular, scientific explanation of photosynthesis by plants: light enters into the chloroplasts of a plant. Chlorophyll in the plants captures light energy and uses some of it to split a water molecule into hydrogen and oxygen. The remaining energy is sent to the stroma. Oxygen is released into the air while hydrogen is transferred to the stroma. Meanwhile, the plant absorbs carbon dioxide from the air. The energy passed to the stroma is used to combine hydrogen and carbon dioxide to make carbohydrates. Finally, carbohydrates (sugars) are carried to the cells of the plant. Secular science does not invoke God at all because everything can be explained without God. Photosynthesis is a natural occurrence happening through specific cause-and-effect chains. The question of how we initially got this process is not essential. It might be out of lucky evolutionary molecular interactions. The secular scientific explanation above is correct, but incomplete and misleading. It is incomplete because it only provides a descriptive explanation at the level of phenomenal reality. It does not go beyond the apparent phenomena. It is misleading because it assigns the entire work of cleaning the air and producing food to material causes, natural properties, and chance. It credits the work of God to a secular trio. It talks about chlorophyll as if it innately knows how to manage the complex tasks involved in the process of photosynthesis. The mânâ-i harfî perspective does not deny the importance of the phenomenal dimension of photosynthesis. Indeed, it is very important to unearth this miraculous process. In the mânâ-i harfî approach, after filtering the secular ideology embedded in the current one-dimensional understanding of photosynthesis, we shall add six more dimensions to help students read the deep meaning behind the observed phenomena. We shall follow a problemsolving approach along with hands-on activities to reach additional layers of knowledge through self-experiential knowledge. Let us further explain how the added six dimensions help students better understand photosynthesis. First, phenomenologically speaking, the mânâ-i harfî perspective rejects that causes and nature can be responsible for any work. They are only veils and passive receivers of Divine power. From the self-reference dictionary, we know that if we cannot claim ownership over our actions, material causes with no intelligence or will cannot do so either. We are expected to use our self-experiential knowledge to understand photosynthesis. In other words, we need to make sense of photosynthesis by comparing it with our own human-made works. Doing so, we will realize that a plant works like an oxygen and food factory with well-connected delicate systems. Second, from a teleological perspective within the Tawhīdī worldview, we will explore this factory-like system and understand its inner works as much as we can. We will try to understand the purpose and benefit of working at this factory. We will examine the ultimate purpose and meaning of this

196  Character building with scientific knowledge factory-like system. We will try to read everything related to this process as a sign, signifying a particular meaning. Once we understand that photosynthesis is a wise work of amazing collaboration between the sun, seas, and wind that helps living beings by cleaning the air and producing food, we will reach a higher level of conviction that this work cannot be attributed to blind nature, ignorant causes, and aimless chances. Third, according to the ontological perspective within the Tawhīdī worldview, we will realize that the ontic reality of the plant and its components are nothing but a reflection of God’s names. Fourth, according to the epistemological perspective within the Tawhīdī worldview, we will learn about God as the Creator of photosynthesis. We will know Him as All-Knowing, All-Powerful, Most-Merciful, and MostKind through His manifested works. Fifth, according to the anthropological perspective, we will reflect on the benefits of photosynthesis for our life. We will realize that we could not survive at all without the production of oxygen. It will become clear to us that the One who creates photosynthesis is the one who creates our nature with the constant need for oxygen. Finally, according to the axiological perspective within the Tawhīdī worldview, we will feel sincere appreciation for the Divine gift of oxygen being specially made for us through miraculous works. We will bow down with great humility and happiness to express our appreciation. While secular science makes a person an arrogant atheist and narcissist, science within the Tawhīdī worldview makes a human being both a knowledgeable expert and humble believer trying to live a virtuous life with the sole aim of gaining God’s pleasure.

9. Instructional methods for the mânâ-i harfî approach Using an integrated approach Islamization of knowledge is not possible through an eclectic approach, as is the case in many Islamic schools. It is possible through an integrated approach. The eclectic approach considers scientific and religious knowledge as two different things. It inserts religious texts into scientific knowledge to Islamize it. For instance, it adds verses from the Qur’an or Hadith to secular scientific knowledge assuming it would make it Islamic. This is like adding sugar to poisonous food. It may change the taste, but the ultimate outcome will not change. This is a common approach used in many Islamic schools across the world. Nursi was adamantly against using a segregated approach. He offered an integrated approach with his Zahra University (Madrasat al-Zahra) project. He believed that the light of conscience is religious sciences (ulûm-u diniye). The light of the mind is civilized sciences (funûn-u medeniye). Reconciliation of

Character building with scientific knowledge 197 both manifests the truth. The student’s skills develop further with these two (sciences). When they are separated, from the former superstition and from the latter corruption and skepticism is born. (Nursi, 2012h, p. 65) Nursi found no difference between transcendent knowledge in the Qur’an and in the universe. They both contain the same Divine message – one using words, the other using actions. Therefore, he calls the universe as The Giant Qur’an (Qur’an-i Kabir). Referring to the literal meaning of Qur’an (“recitation”), Nursi claims that Quran-i Kareem (Noble Qur’an) is reciting the Quran-i Kabir. Thus, if we learn to read properly, we should be able to receive the same messages from both books. In the integrated approach, a student will learn about God and science at the same time. He will learn instrumental knowledge as well as meditative knowledge with its six dimensions of worship (ubudiyyah), wisdom (hikmah), truth (haqiqah), gnostic (ma’rifah), human nature (fitrah), and virtue (fadhilah). He will read everything as an ayah (sign) signifying the names and attributes of God. He will gain higher recognition of God as Al-Khalik, Al-Rezzak, Al-Rabb, Al-Shafii, Al-Aleem, Al-Kadeer, and Al-Mussaweer. Using a holistic approach Despite the recent discoveries in quantum physics, contemporary science still follows the reductionist approach, dividing the universe into small pieces and studying them as isolated parts, as if they work without support from others. Nursi puts a great emphasis on the interconnectivity between the parts. Wahdaniyah is unity in the form of mutual dependence, assistance, and interconnectivity. The name of Wahid is manifested in the universe through the unity between everything. For instance, a human body is made of 50 to 100 trillion cells. Even though each cell works independently, all the cells work collectively to produce unity in the entire body. Therefore, working like a single body is used as a metaphor to encourage teamwork among workers. Indeed, Nursi argues that an apple is not the product of an apple tree. Rather, it is the product of the entire universe. It is linked to everything in the universe. Thus, the One who has the power over the entire universe is the Only One who can create an apple. The one who creates an apple must of a certainty be able to create all the apples in the world and to bring the vast spring into being. Conversely, the one who cannot create a spring cannot create a single apple either, for the apple is made at the same workbench. But the one who makes an apple can make the spring. Each apple is an example in miniature of a tree, even of a garden or a cosmos. The apple seed that carries within itself the life-story of the huge tree is, from the point of view of artistry, such a miracle that the one who creates it thus is incapable of nothing. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 121)

198  Character building with scientific knowledge Every discipline should point to examples of interconnectivity in presenting its own topics. For instance, chemistry should point to the dependency of life on the properties of certain elements such as carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen. Environmental science should discuss the environmental conditions in the planet that are necessary for life. Astronomy should point to the necessary parameters for a habitable zone to support life. Physics should highlight the interconnectivity between everything at the subatomic level. It should use examples such as entanglement as evidence for such interconnectivity. Biology should explain the interconnectivity in the human body at various levels including the circulatory, respiratory, skeletal, muscular, digestive, endocrine, nervous, reproductive, and integumentary systems. Nursi argues that it is crucial to present scientific knowledge within a holistic approach. He considers departmentalization of knowledge as a secular strategy to make it easy to ascribe God’s works in the universe to a secular trio of causes, nature, and chance. Even though specialization helps to understand the parts of an object in question, it fails to capture the whole. Thus, the main problem is not specialization – it is the attempt to describe the whole without seeing the entire reality. As Schumacher (1977, p. 5) says, the problem is not “the fact that scientists are specializing, but rather the fact that specialists are generalizing.” As seen in the example below, Nursi invites us to see the whole picture when reflecting on the planet as a large pharmacy in which we can find a remedy for every illness. Thus, it should become clear that the thousands of different medicines in this pharmacy could only be the work of God who creates them with His mercy, knowledge, and power. For example; if being healed of a dreadful disease is considered from the point of view of the affirmation of Divine unity, on the face of the bestowal of healing on all the sick in the huge hospital called the earth, through the remedies and medicines from the vast pharmacy called the world, the beautiful compassion of the Absolutely Compassionate One and the acts of His mercy become apparent in universal and splendid fashion. If it is not considered from the point of view of the affirmation of Divine unity, that particular but knowledgeable, perceptive, and conscious bestowal of healing will be attributed to the properties of lifeless medicines and to blind force and unconscious Nature; its nature will be completely changed, and it will lose its wisdom and value. (Nursi, 1996d, p. 15) Nursi puts great emphasis in presenting the universe in a holistic way. He argues that God creates every single thing through the interconnectivity of the entire universe. He likens the cosmos to a tree and claims that as each fruit relies on the tree in its entirety, every single being relies on the entire universe. Therefore, we should teach the parts along with the whole

Character building with scientific knowledge 199 to have a true appreciation of the Divine bounties. Nursi describes the holistic manifestation of Divine power, knowledge, and will in the universe as follows: Since the cosmos is like a tree, all trees may be likened to the truths of the universe. So we shall take the mighty and majestic plane-tree facing this room as a miniature example of the universe and demonstrate with it the manifestation of Divine oneness in the universe. This tree has at least ten thousand fruits and each fruit has at least a hundred winged seeds. At one instant of time the ten thousand fruits and  million seeds display altogether one art and creativity. While the centre of the laws of the tree’s formation is present in its roots and trunk, through a manifestation of Divine will and a condensing of the dominical command, which may be described as particular, individuated, and a “knot” of life, it is also present at the ends of all its branches, within every fruit and every seed. No part of any member of the tree is lacking the laws, they are not obstacles to one another; the tree is formed through them. [. . .] Since, as is clear from observation, through a single partial manifestation of an attribute of the Single and Eternally Besought One like will, millions of events occur in millions of places without intermediary, one has to be certain, completely certain, that the All-Glorious One can have total disposal over the tree of the universe, together with all its parts and particles, through the manifestation of His power and will. (Nursi, 1996e, p. 639) The above ideas are in fact derived from the Qur’an expressed in verses such as this: “And among His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the variations in your tongues and in your colors; verily in that are signs for those who know” (Q, 30:22). According to Nursi, the verse above refers to heaven, earth and the variation of languages and faces together as signs for the existence of God, because they are all related to each other. The one who commands and controls the entire universe can create a living being such as a human being because of interconnectivity. All beings are in effect so interrelated that one who cannot subjugate all the stars and hold them in his hand, cannot make a particle heed his claims to be its lord and sustainer. It is necessary to own all the stars in order to be the true sustainer of a single particle. . . . one not capable of creating and arranging the heavens cannot make the individual features on the human face. That is to say, one who is not Sustainer of all the heavens cannot make the distinguishing features on a single human face. (Nursi, 1996e, pp. 713–714)

200  Character building with scientific knowledge Part-whole relations Part and whole are fundamental concepts for Nursi in understanding the relationship between beings. Nursi argues that each part (cuz) of the whole (kull) contains the whole at an absolute scale. Thus, the part becomes a small representative of the whole. This is called particular (cuz’i). The wellconnected parts become like one piece that is called universal (kullī). From the Tawhīdī perspective, it is important to ascribe cuz, kull, cuz’i, and kullī to God. In Nursi’s terms, God creates universals as easily as particulars. He creates particulars as full of art as He does universals. Indeed, whoever creates universals and the heavens and the earth must necessarily be the one who creates the particulars and animate individuals contained in the heavens and earth; it could be nothing other than him. For those tiny particulars are the fruits, seeds, and the miniature specimens of universals. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 294) Nursi further argues that the Maker of particulars must be the Maker of everything. Since everything in the universe is a different combination of the same particulars, they all must be from the same Maker. In Nursi’s terms, whoever creates the particulars must also be the one who creates the elements and heavens and earth, which encompass the particulars. For we see that particulars are each like a seed and tiny copy in relation to universals. Since this is so, the universal elements and the heavens and earth must be in the hand of the One who creates those particulars so that, according to the principles of His wisdom and the balances of His knowledge, He can insert the gist, the meanings, the samples, of those universal and all-encompassing beings in those particulars, which are like their miniature specimens. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 294) For instance, in a living body, a cell is both a part (juz’) and particular (juz’î) representing the entire body (kull). It contains the entire characteristics of the body in its DNA. Likewise, an atom is just a part of the physical universe. However, it contains a miniature universe within. For Nursi, the embedded whole in each part is clear evidence that the entire universe is the work of the One who has the infinite power to insert the whole in each part. If each part of the whole contains the characteristics of the whole in a particular form, then it is not possible for anyone to make even a single part of that being. Whoever creates the entire being is the One who creates each part of it. Indeed, even though as human beings, we are tiny parts of the entire universe, sometimes we feel as if the whole universe is within when we have a deep reflection.

Character building with scientific knowledge 201 Nursi argues that cuz and cuz’i are not less sophisticated than kull and kullī in terms of their complexity and perfection. Indeed, from the point of view of the wonders of art and marvels of creativeness, particulars are not behind universals; neither are flowers lower than the stars, nor seeds inferior to trees. Indeed, the tree’s meaning, which is the inscription of divine determining and is in the seed, is more wonderful than the physical tree, which is the weaving of divine power and is in the garden. And the creation of man is more wonderful than the creation of the universe. If a Qur’an of Wisdom were to be written in particles of ether on an atom, it would far surpass in value a Qur’an of Grandeur written in stars on the face of the heavens. Similarly, there are minute particulars which are superior to universals as regards the miraculousness of their art. (Nursi, 1996c, p. 294) Using hands-on activities From the phenomenological perspective, it is very important to teach new knowledge through hands-on activities. This will allow for the use of selfreference knowledge to verify new knowledge. For instance, when teaching the importance of the senses to children, teachers could ask students to first experience the absence of those senses through certain activities before discussing their great benefits. They can ask students to close their eyes while trying to locate a specific item in the classroom or to draw a picture of a flower while being blindfolded. Nursi himself engaged in some hands-on activities to better understand God: For example, in a garden of that All-Glorious and Compassionate One’s munificence, I  counted the bunches hanging from a grape-vine of the thickness of two fingers, which I saw to be like one little pip among the bunches of His miracles: there were one hundred and fifty-five. I counted the grapes in one bunch: there were around one hundred and twenty. I thought: if this vine was a tap from which flowed honeyed water and it produced water continuously, it would only just be enough for the bunches which, in the face of this heat, suckle those hundreds of little pumps of the sherbet of mercy. However, it only occasionally obtains a little moisture. The One Who does this, then, must surely be powerful over all things. Glory be to Him at Whose art minds are bewildered! (Nursi, 1996e, p. 309) Using inquiry-based learning The inquiry-based learning method is to start with questions rather than facts or answers. Nursi uses this method very intensively in his writing while

202  Character building with scientific knowledge presenting knowledge through the mânâ-i harfî approach. He believes that it is imperative for individuals to reach their own understanding of God through inquiry-based learning. He sometimes uses fictitious figures to present his subjects through an inquiry-based dialogue. Particularly, from a phenomenological perspective, if the learning is based on self-reference knowledge, individuals can only be helped to construct their own understanding. We cannot transfer our truth to the minds of others. We can only help others find the truth by themselves. In the mânâ-i harfî approach, different dimensions of knowledge can be built by asking certain questions. For instance, when we ponder anything in the universe, we can try to find the answers to the following questions: (1) Instrumental knowledge dimension: What is happening? What are the apparent causes and mechanism? How do they seem to work? What are the outcomes? (2) Analogy dimension: What is that? How does it compare to what I already know? What does it take to make it? (3) Hikmah dimension: How does it work? How does it help others? Can it be the work of causes, nature, or chance? (4) Haqiqah dimension: Who can do this work if neither me nor material causes, nature, and chance can do it? What is the ultimate reality beyond the phenomenal reality? (5) Ma’rifah dimension: Why does He do that? What does He speak in His actions? What can I  know about Him from His works? (6) Fitrah dimension: How does it relate to me? How do I benefit from it? (7) Fadhilah dimension: How can I respond to Him? How can I express my appreciation? What are the practical ethical lessons? Indeed, it is reported by Al-Tabari that the Prophet would only teach ten verses of the Qur’an at a time to his companions. The Prophet wanted to ensure that his companions could apply the requirements of these verses in their lives before moving on to teach them another set of verses (Al-Tabari, 1321 A.H., Vol. 1, p. 81). The Prophet (pbuh)’s teaching methodology indicates the importance of consolidating knowledge in the process of learning.

10. Conclusion Said Nursi was deeply engaged with the problems of Muslims in modern times. He dedicated his entire life to understand those problems and come up with effective solutions. Even though he tried politics and enlisted in the military in his early life, he soon came to the realization that neither political power nor military power could provide effective solutions. He eventually settled on education as a smart power to bring time-consuming but lasting changes. From his perspective, the core problem behind the malaise of modern society lies in the secular worldview that dominates the minds of individuals around the world, including Muslims. He came up with the mânâ-i harfî approach in a quest to rebuild the minds of Muslims through the Islamic worldview. Using Nursi’s mânâ-i harfî approach, we suggest that secular science, as it is conceived today, should first be desecularized by filtering out the embedded secular ideology. Then, it needs to be resacralized by introducing

Character building with scientific knowledge 203 multi-dimensional knowledge based on the Tawhīdī worldview with its holistic phenomenology, teleology, ontology, epistemology, anthropology, and axiology. We suggest taking an integrative approach, presenting both instrumental and meditative knowledge at the same time. As a result, a student will become a real expert in this subject in addition to making progress towards human excellence with a good character. For instance, if medical science is presented based on this holistic worldview, then a student will gain the sought after multi-dimensional knowledge. First, he/she will gain self-knowledge based on holistic phenomenology through his/her understanding of human impotence and poverty from a medical perspective. He/she will learn that we need many things to sustain our biological lives, as we have almost no power to do anything other than to exert our free will. The student will then use this medical knowledge to reach certainty about his/her contingent and God-dependent nature. Second, the student will gain the hikmah dimension-based holistic teleology. He/she will study phenomenal reality within medical science to understand how everything works at a phenomenal level. Then, he/she will explore the ultimate reality behind the phenomenal reality through critical thinking and pursue scientific knowledge in the form of reading the elegant book of life. The student will endeavor to question causation, nature, and chance as the true source of observed phenomena and filter secular ideology from pure science. Third, the student will gain the haqiqah dimension based on the Tawhīdī ontology. He/she will find out that it is only God who is All-Knowing, AllPowerful, and All-Wise, and no one or nothing could be behind the ontic reality. Thus, the ultimate ontic reality is nothing but an expression of the Divine Names. Everything radiates from these Divine Names at every moment. The universe works like a giant broadcast that is updated every second. Causes, natural properties, and laws function like a veil that, once removed through questioning by pursuing the hikmah dimension, allows us to see the Divine hand behind everything. The student will realize that God does not need to use causes, because it does not make any difference whatsoever. The causes are only used as a test to see whether we can go beyond their veil and discover the ultimate reality. For instance, although we are accustomed to using certain medications to treat specific diseases, we should be aware that healing does not actually come from medicine. The medicine is merely the medium through which healing occurs. Fourth, the student will understand the ma’rifah dimension based on Tawhīdī epistemology. He/she will read the meaning behind the phenomenal reality created by God. He/she will get to know God through His works by some questions about the attributes of the Maker. As a result, when a student learns about health science, for example, he/she will reach a high level of awareness in terms of knowing God as The Healer, All-Knowing, AllPowerful, All-Wise, etc. When he/she learns about the cleaning systems in the blood and cells, he/she will have an appreciation of God as Al-Quddus (The Divine). When the student learns about the hundreds of complicated

204  Character building with scientific knowledge tasks required of a simple body organ, he/she will know God as Al-Hakeem (All-Wise). When he/she learns how the body is protected from its environment through the design of a strong immune system, he/she will have a higher appreciation of God as Al-Shafii (All-Healer). Fifth, the student will understand the fitrah dimension based on holistic anthropology. He/she will learn about human strengths and shortcomings and will internalize this general knowledge by asking the questions: What does it mean to me? How is it related to me? How do I benefit from this particular act of God? As a result, he/she will gain a higher awareness of the Divine gifts given to him/her and others. The more he/she learns about how God helps him/her to sustain his/her life through thousands of compassionate and wise acts, the more he/she will appreciate his/her health. For instance, as the student studies how the eyes and brain work together in coordination with the sun, allowing him/her to see, he/she will realize that sight is a unique and precious Divine gift that is often taken for granted. Sixth, he/she will understand the fadhilah dimension based on holistic axiology. Once the student realizes the quantity and value of his/her Divine gifts, he/she will further explore the best way to express his/her appreciation through words and actions. He/she will try to live a good life by applying learned character lessons from scientific studies. He/she will be open to Divine guidance to live a life of intellectual, moral, and spiritual excellence through taqwa (avoidance and self-control) and amaal-i saleeh (good deeds and unleashing the potential).

Notes 1 With several international scholars of Nursi, we are currently working on three science workbooks based on the seven-dimensional knowledge approach. Those books will set practical examples for presenting scientific knowledge through the mânâ-i harfî perspective. 2 Indeed, David Hume argues that scientific knowledge could not tell us anything about the ultimate reality. That is because “all arguments concerning existence are founded on the relation of cause and effect; that our knowledge of that relation is derived entirely from experience; and that all our experimental conclusions proceed upon the supposition, that the future will be conformable to the past. To endeavour, therefore, the proof of this last supposition by probable arguments, or arguments regarding existence, must be evidently going in a circle, and taking that for granted, which is the very point in question” (Hume, 2000, p. 27). 3 Nursi is not the only scholar considering Islamic civilization to be based on virtue. For views of some other scholars on the nature of Islamic civilization and virtue, refer to the following article: “The Timelessness of Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) and Nature of Islamic Civilization” by Wan Mohd Nor Wan DAUD, presented at International Symposium on time in Islamic civilization, 8–11 October, 2015. 4 Refer to Q, 13:16. 5 Translation by Alparslan Acikgenc, Causation in Islamic philosophy. In Encyclopedia of philosophy (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), vol. 2, p. 114. 6 For in-depth discussion on virtue and happiness in Farabi’s perspective, see the following book: Osman Bakar, Classification of knowledge in Islam (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 2006).

Bibliography

Acikgenc, A. (1996). Islamic science: Towards a definition by Alparslan Acikgenc (1996–11–30): Amazon.com: Books. Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC. Acikgenc, A. (2000). Scientific thought and its burdens. Istanbul: Fatih University Publications. Acikgenc, A. (2014). Islamic scientific tradition in history. Penerbit IKIM. Acikgenc, A. (2019). A history of Islamic philosophy. Forthcoming. Adorno, T. W.,  & Horkheimer, M. (1979). Dialectic of enlightenment. London: Verso Editions. Alatas, S. H. (1974). The captive mind and creative development. International Social Science Journal, XXVI(4), 691–700. Al-Attas, M. N. (1989). Islām and the philosophy of science. Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC. Al-Attas, S. M. N. (1993). Islam and secularism (2nd ed.). Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC. Al-Attas, S. M. N. (2001). Prolegomena to the metaphysics of Islam: An exposition of the fundamental elements of the worldview of Islam. Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC. Al-Tabari, J. M., & Ibn, J. (n.d.). Tafsir al-Tabari (Vol. 1–9). Egypt. Altaie, M. B. 1952. (2016). God, nature and the cause: Essays on Islam and science. Dubai: Kalam Research & Media. Aoki, T. T., Pinar, W., & Irwin, R. L. (2005). Curriculum in a new key: The collected works of Ted T. Aoki. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions (1st ed.). New York: Harper. Bakar, O. (1998). C ​ lassification of knowledge in Islam: A study in Islamic philosophies of science. Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC. Bakar, O. (2008). Tawhid and science (2nd ed.). Kuala Lumpur: ARAH Publication. Becker, E (1997). Denial of death. New York: Free Press. Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the implicate order (1st ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Bradley, M. (2014). God acts in the quantum world. In Jonathan L. Kvanvig (Ed.), Oxford studies in philosophy of religion (Vol. 5, pp. 167–184). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cartwright, N. (2005). No God, no laws. In M. E. Sindoni & S. Moriggi (Eds.), Dio, la natura e la legge. God and the laws of nature. Milan: Angelicum-Mondo X. Chittick, W. C. (1989). The sufi path of knowledge: Ibn al-ʻArabi’s metaphysics of imagination. New York: State University of New York Press. Collins, F. S. (2006). The language of God : A scientist presents evidence for belief. New York: Free Press.

206  Bibliography Coomaraswamy, A. K., & Ananda, K. (1956). Christian and oriental philosophy of art. New York: Dover Publications. d’Holbach, B. (1820). The system of nature or the laws of the moral and physical world (Samuel Wilkinson, Ed.). London: Thomas Davison. Eco, U. (1986). Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Fieser, J., & Dowden, B. H. (2018). Truth. In The internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Pub. Retrieved from www.iep.utm.edu/truth/ Fodor, J. (1992). The big idea: Can there be a science of mind?. Times Literary Supplement (July 3), pp. 5–7. Foucault, M. 1926–1984. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison/ Michel Foucault; translated from the French by Alan Sheridan (1st ed.). New York: Vintage Books. Gadamer, H. G. (1975). Hermeneutics and social science. Philosophy Social Criticism/Cultural Hermeneutics, 2, 307–316. Ghazzālī. (2000). The incoherence of the philosophers = Tahāfut al-falāsifah: A parallel English-Arabic text (M. E. Marmura, Ed., 2nd ed.). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press. Groff, P. S. (2007). Islamic philosophy A-Z. Edinburg: Edinburg University Press. Guyer, P.,  & Horstmann, R-P. (2018). Idealism. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter). Habermas, J. (1978). Knowledge and human interests (2nd ed.). London: Heinemann Educational. Hawking, S. (1998). A brief history of time. New York: Bantam Books. Heidegger, M. (1976). Martin Heidegger Gesamtausgabe (Collected Works) (Vol. 9). Frankfurt: Klostermann. Heidegger, M. (2005). Being and time. London and New York: Routledge Hindess, B. (1976). Philosophy and methodology in the social sciences/Barry Hindess. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press. Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. (1976). The dialectic of enlightenment. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Hume, D. (2000). A treatise of human nature. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Hunter, C. G. (2007). Science’s blind spot: The unseen religion of scientific naturalism. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press. Husserl, E. (2012). Ideas: General introduction to pure phenomenology. London and New York: Routledge. Jastrow, R. (1992). God and the astronomers. New York: Norton. Johnson, P. E. (1995). Reason in the balance: The case against naturalism in science, law & education. Westmont: InterVarsity Press. Johnson, P. E., & Duberley, J. (2003). Reflexivity in management research. Journal of Management Studies, 40(5), 1279–1303. Kant, I. (1998). Critique of pure reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kant, I. (2002). Groundwork for the metaphysics of morals (A. W. Wood & J. B. Schneewind, Eds.). New York: Yale University Press. MacIntyre, A. (2013). After virtue. New York: Blumsbury Academic. Mermer, Y. B. (1996). Induction, science and causation: Some critical reflections. In Islamic Studies. Islamabad: Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University.

Bibliography 207 Montaigne, M. (1877). The essays of Montaigne, Complete, by Michel de Montaigne, https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3600/3600-h/3600-h.htm, accessed on April 10, 2019. Nasr, S. H. (1981). Islamic life and thought. New York: State University of New York Press. Nasr, S. H. (1997). Man and nature: The spiritual crisis in modern man/Seyyed Hossein Nasr. Dunstable, England and Chicago, IL: ABC International Group, Inc., Distributed by KAZI Publications. Nietzsche, F. (1974). The gay science: With a prelude in rhymes and an appendix of songs. New York: Vintage Books Newton, I. (1999). The principia, mathematical principles of natural philosophy (the authoritative translation by Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman). Oakland: University of California Press. Nursi, S. (1996a). Sign of miraculousness. Istanbul: Sozler Publications. Nursi, S. (1996b). The flashes. Istanbul: Sozler Publications. Nursi, S. (1996c). The letters. Istanbul: Sozler Publications. Nursi, S. (1996d). The Rays. Istanbul: Sozler Publications. Nursi, S. (1996e). The words. Istanbul: Sozler Publications. Nursi, S. (2012a). Asayi Musa. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012b). Emirdağ Lahikası. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012c). Hutbe-i Şâmiye. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012d). İlk Dönem Eserleri. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012e). Kastamonu Lahikası. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012f). Mesnevi Nuriye. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012g). Muhakemat. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012h). Münazarat. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012i). Nurun İlk Kapısı. Istanbul:Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012j). Tarihçe-i Hayat. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Nursi, S. (2012k). İşaratü’l Î’caz. Istanbul: Soz Basim. Rank, O. (1945). Will therapy; and, truth and reality. Oxford: Knopf. Reed, F. A. (1999). Anatolia junction: A  journey into hidden Turkey. Toronto: Talonbooks. Rehman, S. S., & Askari, H. (2010). An Economic Islamicity Index (EI 2)*. Global Economy Journal, 10. Berkeley Electronic Press. Scheibe, E., & Falkenburg, B. (2001). Between rationalism and empiricism: Selected papers in the philosophy of physics. New York: Springer. Schroeder, S. L. (2013). The remarkable human self. APS Observer, 27(1). Retrieved from www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/the-remarkable-human-self Schumacher, E. F. (1977). A guide for the perplexed. London: Harper & Row. Schuurman, E. (2008). The challenge of Islam’s critique of technology. The Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, 60(2). Seager, W. (2018). The philosophical and scientific metaphysics of David Bohm. Entropy, 20(7), 493. Spinelli, E. (2006). The value of relatedness in existential psychotherapy and phenomenological inquiry, Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, Special Edition on Methodology, 6 (August), 1–8. Spragens, T. A. (2001). Is the enlightenment project worth saving? Modern Age, 43(1), 49–60. Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

208  Bibliography Tyrrell, G. N. M. (1930). Grades of significance: The dependence of meaning on current thought. London: Rider and Company. Wan Daud, M. N. (1989). The concept of knowledge in Islam. London: Mansell. Wan Daud, M. N. (2001). Extending the Mutawatir, strengtening the IJMA’: A comparison between Bediuzzaman and Al-Attas on knowledge and education. Al-Shajarah, 6(2). Wilczek, F. (2010). The lightness of being: Mass, ether, and the unification of forces. New York: Basic Books. Wilczek, F. (2016). A beautiful question: Finding nature’s deep design. New York: Penguin Books Wittgenstein, L. 1889–1951,  & Rhees, R. 1905–1989. (1975). Philosophical remarks/Ludwig Wittgenstein; edited from posthumous writings by Rush Rhees; and translated into English by Raymond Hargreaves and Roger White. New York: Barnes & Noble Books.

Index

abilities xxiii, 60, 71, 90 – 91, 101, 119, 123, 127 – 128, 137, 168, 176, 192; comprehensive 128; given 137; limited 85; mental 51; productive 20 Abraham 171 Absolute Good 107 – 108 absolute goodness 108 absolute knowledge 45, 81 Absolutely Compassionate 198 Absolutely Knowing 170 Absolutely Powerful 72, 170 Absolutely Wise 170 Abu Jahl 24 Abu Mansur al-Maturidi 82 Abu-Rabi, Ibrahim M. 40 Acikgenc 45, 52 – 55, 62, 85 – 88, 118, 205 activities, creative 113 acts: miraculous 21, 24; miraculous Divine 23 acts of God 23, 94 – 95, 97 – 98, 139, 148, 166, 175, 181 – 182, 205 adab 142 – 143 Adam xx – xxii, 29, 49, 69, 114, 127 Al-Adl 187 Adorno 20, 83, 205 – 206 afterlife 26, 29, 141 agent, disabled 93, 98 – 99 Age of Happiness 191 Al-Aleem 46, 77, 187, 197 Allah 37 – 38, 43, 45, 48 – 49, 98, 106, 112 – 113, 142, 145, 173 All-Compassionate Creator 134 All-Compassionate Owner 152 All-Glorious Maker 104, 129 All-Just 187 All-Kind 151 All-Knowing 26, 38, 73, 77, 117, 151, 196, 203 All-Mighty 72, 98, 116, 164

All-Munificent 109, 117 All-Seeing 73 All-Wise Creator 134 All-Wise God 106 All-Wise Maker 173 All-Wise Qur’an 13, 15, 36, 134 Almighty God 30, 51, 75, 78, 129 Almighty Power 164 Alparslan Acikgenc xxviii, 204 – 205 Altaie, Basil 67 anah 12, 46, 56, 82, 89, 159 – 160 analogical parable 58 analogy 7, 58, 61, 91, 94, 96, 100 – 101, 124, 169, 173, 175, 179 – 180, 183, 186, 194; hermeneutical 129 analogy dimension 177, 202 Anatolia junction 207 Ancient Greek xvi, 83 animalistic pleasures 132 animal spirit 31, 129, 190; pleasureseeking 33 apperception 119 approach: eclectic 196; integrated 196 – 197; letteral xv, xviii, xxvii; multi-dimensional 49, 161; reductionist 158, 197; sevendimensional 81, 160, 163, 193 Aquinas 3 Aristotle 16, 69, 82, 84, 118, 191 Ash’ariat tradition 71 A’sr al-Saadah 191 atheism 6, 29, 34, 81, 96; modern 34; scientific xv atheist humanism 104 atheistic positivism xv atoms 21, 23, 83, 97, 106, 168 – 170, 180, 184, 200 – 201 Al-Attas 4 – 5, 41, 82, 142, 156, 205, 208 attributes, angelic 107

210 Index Averroes 68 Avicenna 50, 68 axiology 84, 101, 105, 108, 110 – 111, 116, 158, 161, 176 – 177, 203 ayaat 2, 13, 15, 18, 64, 68, 104, 132, 141, 153 – 154 Bakar, Osman 41, 204 Bediuzzaman xxviii, 40, 83, 208 beings: conscious 110, 173; contingent 174; existence of 11, 50; intelligible 65; interconnected 62; levels of 23; meaning of 16, 39, 120, 123, 126, 174 belief, verified 37, 152 belief systems 9 believers, pious 143 Bohm, David 159, 207 book of God 123 Book of Nature 65 captive mind 43, 205 causation 34, 68 – 71, 74 – 75, 77 – 79, 81 – 82, 103, 113, 161, 165, 193, 206; deterministic 72, 78; materialistic 20, 68, 165 cause: final 69; perceived 69; real 113; secular trio of 116, 163 – 164, 171, 198 cells 97, 124, 169, 180, 182 – 183, 185, 188, 192 – 193, 195, 197, 200, 203 character, good xxiii, xxv, 49, 117 – 118, 142, 160, 176, 194, 203 character lessons xv, 149, 160, 163, 192 Christian Trinity 103 civilization: decadent 162; dissolute 162 – 163, 192; virtuous 162 – 163, 191 Collins, Francis 124, 157 companions 31, 35 – 36, 41, 112, 146, 202 Compassionate Creator 173, 192 Compassionate Sustainer 134 conscience 36, 51, 65, 78, 87, 118, 131, 168, 179, 196 consciousness 12, 16, 22 – 23, 42, 89 – 90, 98, 119, 123, 137, 143, 181; inner 87 constant creation 72 – 73, 78, 83 cosmic language 11, 163, 168, 178, 189 cosmic phenomena 4, 15, 18, 120, 122, 127, 149, 154, 157, 181 creation, dynamic 72, 108, 113

creative acts 47, 54, 65, 78, 82 – 83, 98, 141 – 142, 144 – 145, 149, 187 Damascus sermon 63 Darwinian 192 Darwinian evolution 161 Dasein 121, 126, 135 – 136 deconstructivism 16 departmentalization 198 Descartes 21, 125, 138 desecularization 30, 167 deterministic 67, 103 Dewey 52 dimensions: fadhilah 202, 204; hedonic 140; hermeneutical 83; hidden reality 184; ma’rifah 203; phenomenal 17, 176, 195; spiritual 118; transcendent 122 disbelief 6 – 7, 31 – 32, 35, 40, 71, 130 Divine Determining 72, 128 divine gifts 116, 172, 189 – 190, 194, 196, 204 Divine Hand 20, 24, 185 Divine Names 34, 36, 50 – 51, 62, 77, 92, 117, 161, 164, 171, 175 – 176, 181, 183, 185, 203 divine oneness 61, 132, 199 divine signs 2 divine telos 106 divine unity 42, 155 – 156 DNA 21, 42, 113 – 114, 124, 154, 157, 187, 200 efficient cause 65, 69 – 70, 165, 173 egotism 95 egotistic 107 emotions, epistemic 87 empiricism 86, 207 enlightenment 2, 19 – 20, 28, 70, 102, 104, 116, 154, 158, 205 – 206 enlightenment morality 103 enlightenment project 207 entanglement 198 epistemology xviii, xxiv, 84 – 85, 101 – 102, 105 – 107, 109 – 110, 114, 118, 158, 161, 176 – 177, 203 evidence, verified 56 evil genius 138 evolutionary process 102, 104, 115, 130, 153, 160 evolutionism xv excellence: human 178, 203; intellectual 149, 178; moral 162, 177; spiritual 204

Index  211 existence: contingent 161; necessary 73, 104 existentialism 16 experience: inner 87, 89; lived 16, 90; painful 149 – 151; pleasant 149, 151 – 152; verified 59 experience reality 85 experiential knowledge 2, 46, 56, 88, 111, 180; subjective 55 external phenomena 59 factual truth 52 – 55, 60 faculties xxiv – xxv, 57, 59, 82, 86 – 88, 95, 128 – 129, 170, 190; appetitive 191; comprehensive 87; distinctive 91; estimative 57; imaginative 169; inner 91; intellectual 54; internal 86, 88; rational 69; spiritual 87; subtle 88, 118, 170, 179, 192 fadhilah 81, 159 – 160, 177, 191, 197 faith 2 – 3, 9, 35 – 36, 43, 47, 57 – 58, 62, 77 – 78, 81 – 82, 124, 140, 145, 148, 156, 193; real 29 fallacy 9, 27, 79, 163; logical 75 falsehood 20, 62 – 63, 82, 121 – 122 al-Farabi 157, 181 Farabi 118, 191 Feynman, Richard 24 fictitious scientist 75 first cause 68, 71, 111, 166 First Europe 162 fitrah 12, 81, 127, 159 – 160, 177, 190, 197 Foucault 103, 206 Fred Reed 40 freedom xxiii, xxvi, 25, 33, 53 – 54, 107, 131, 153; inner 107 free-market capitalism 1 Galileo 21, 28 G-donic 140 – 141 G-donic dimension 141 G-donic model 153 Generous Sustainer 189, 192 al-Ghazali xxiv, 68, 171 Ghazali xxiv gifts: precious 152; sacred 124 glorification 26, 139, 152 Glorious Maker 56, 95 Glorious Nurturer 188 Glorious Sustainer 193 gnostic 46, 81, 159, 197 goal, transcendent 30

God: knowledge of xxiii, 1, 57, 60, 79, 92, 127, 156, 163, 188 – 189; name of 11, 18, 106, 109 – 110, 114, 116, 127, 160 – 161, 185; remembrance of 46, 140 God Almighty 26, 93, 95 – 96, 141, 168 God-conscious life 49 God consciousness 31, 141 Gospel 119 Granny Smiths 68 Greek mythology 83 Greeks 6 Habermas 103, 206 happiness: authentic 26 – 27, 32, 37 – 38, 191; hedonic 140; true 140, 152 – 153 happiness models 140 harfî language 13, 15, 39, 120, 125 – 126, 129, 154, 174 – 175 Hawking 43, 206 hedonic 140 hedonic loop 141 hedonic treadmill 140 hedonists 152 heedlessness xxvi – xxvii, 25, 31, 33, 64, 151, 180 Heidegger 16, 91, 120 – 121, 123, 126, 135, 156, 177, 206 Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle 67 Heraclitus 73 hikmah dimension 180, 202 holistic anthropology 162, 204 holistic approach 158 – 159, 197 – 198 holistic axiology 162, 204 holistic dimension 161 holistic epistemology 161 holistic language 160 – 162, 177 holistic ontology 161 holistic paradigms 84, 183 holistic perspective 29, 158, 163, 185 holistic phenomenology 161, 203 holistic teleology 161, 177 holistic worldview xv, 104, 160 Horkheimer 20, 83, 205 – 206 human development 28 humanism 116, 118 human nature 81, 86, 101, 103 – 104, 107, 109 – 110, 115, 127, 129 – 130, 137 – 138, 160, 162, 176, 178, 189; universal 115 human self 88 – 89, 91 – 94, 96, 99, 101, 164, 179, 207 Hume, David 66, 68, 78, 84, 204

212 Index Husserl 11, 16, 42, 131, 206 Husserlian phenomenology 11 Ibn Arabi 50 Ibn Rushd 68 Ibn Sina 68, 86, 181 idealism 49, 206 IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought) 42 infinite ascent 129 Infinite Being 138 infinite power 71, 73, 77, 99, 138 – 139, 153, 164, 166, 175, 180, 200 Infinite Power and Mercy 143 instrumental knowledge 17, 67 – 68, 80 – 82, 116, 118, 127, 159, 161, 163, 174, 176 – 177, 197 instrumental mind 27, 102, 160, 176 intention 10 – 12, 25, 120, 131, 148, 181; purified 39 intentional Divine purpose 182 intentionality, corrupted 25 International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization 42 International Islamic University 206 interpretation: allegorical xxi; hermeneutic 123 iqtirân 70 Islamic civilization 162, 191, 204 Islamic civilization and virtue 204 Islamic cosmological doctrines 42 Islamic epistemology 88 Islamic perspective 46, 80, 92, 131, 142 – 143, 164 – 165, 167 Islamic philosophy 45, 204 – 206 Islamic thought 41, 50, 70, 82, 165 Ismail al-Faruqi 42 ISTAC (Islamic Thought and Civilization) 42, 204 – 205 Jean-Paul Sartre 90 Jung, Carl 63 Al-Kadeer 187, 197 kalam 45, 177 Kant xxiv, 38, 49 – 51, 85 – 88, 119, 206 Kemalist secularization project in Turkey 40 Kepler 21 Kierkegaard 62 knowledge: desecularizing 167; empirical 59; epistemological 117; factual 53; ideology-laden 67; inner 89 – 90; intuitive 57; meditative 17, 39, 116, 118, 197, 203; multi-

dimensional 203; ontological 117; posterior 50; practical 45; religious 80, 196; self-experiential 56, 100 – 101, 175, 194 – 195; theistic 162; verified 7, 57, 80, 88 – 89 knowledge formation 88, 92 – 93 knowledge structure xx, 101 laicism 33 language, sacred 160 language of God 124, 205 laws: deterministic 20; moral 103, 108, 161; physical 9, 65 laws of nature 65, 68, 205 laws of physics 65 learning, inquiry-based 201 – 202 life: good 104, 107 – 110, 126, 130 – 131, 162, 176, 204; meaningful 120, 126, 128, 130 – 131, 135, 137, 142, 153; pious 62; pleasant 152; prudent 82; secularized 1, 10, 33; virtuous 12, 39, 82, 129, 160, 188, 192, 196; worldly xxiii, 5, 31 – 32, 35, 38, 81, 128 life satisfaction 140 – 141 lifeworld 131 literal meaning xviii, xxv – xxvi, 197 logos 121 love: illicit 149; spiritual 36; transcendental 35 love of this world 33 lust 38, 162, 191 Macintyre 103 – 104, 206 Madrasat al-Zahra 196 Mahdi 2 manifestation 50, 61, 72, 77, 100, 106, 139, 153, 183, 186, 199 ma’rifah 45 – 46, 81, 177, 197 ma’rifatullah 2, 45, 127, 156 material, deterministic 175 material aspirations 32, 142 material causation 101 material determinism 23, 70 materialism 2, 81, 104 materialist 96, 102 materialist determinism 75 mathematical exactitude 52 meaning: inner 123; lost 122; ontic 132; symbolic 123; transcendental 102, 142, 181; ultimate 134 – 135, 141, 181 meaningful signs 14 – 15, 133 meaning maximization 141 meaning structure 90

Index  213 metaphysics 82, 206; scientific 207 mind, practical 103 miracles xxvi, xxviii, 22, 53, 72 – 73, 128, 175, 179, 182, 197, 201 miraculous beings 147 miraculous gift 179 miraculous interventions 3 miraculous works 21 – 22, 28, 175, 182, 184, 196 modernity 3 modern science 1, 3 – 5, 19, 28, 39, 41, 70, 79, 81 – 83, 120 – 121, 123, 158 Montaigne 108, 207 moral axioms 101, 160, 176 moral compass 104, 161 moral principles 144, 162 Mosaic Law 48 Most Beautiful Names 106, 190 Most Forgiving 19 Most Generous 151 Most Gracious 43, 110 Mother Nature 27, 103, 165 Muslim scholars 1, 13 – 15, 50, 68, 157 Muslim scientists 14 – 15 Muslim World 4, 83 al-nafs al-mutma’inah 45 Napoleon 83 NASA 42 natural forces 159 naturalism 2, 20 – 21, 165, 206; philosophical 81; scientific 206 natural laws 9, 11, 16, 21, 24, 64 – 65, 68, 102, 160, 166, 186 natural philosophy 207 Necessarily Existent 161, 180, 186 Necessary Being 94 Newton 21, 207 Newtonian physics 21, 79 Nietzsche 27, 207 objective exactitude 54 objective knowledge 55 – 56, 66, 103, 163, 166 – 167; subjectively 59 objective reality 50 – 51, 103, 122 objective truth 20, 49, 51 – 52, 59, 62, 103, 106 objectivity 55, 80 objects, mental 86 occasionalism 71 ontic languages 10, 91, 160, 177 – 178 ontic reality 25, 79, 90, 101 – 102, 105 – 106, 117, 160, 196, 203 ontological necessity 25

ontology 84, 101, 105, 107, 110, 113, 118, 158, 161, 176 – 177, 188, 203; realist 102 order: natural 3; normative 3; spiritual 21; universal 186 ordered Aristotelian Cosmos 3 Ottoman Empire 1 pain maximization 149 paradigm 3, 25, 34, 71, 101, 104, 106, 109, 116, 159, 178 particles, subatomic 67, 73, 79, 185 pen of power 184, 187 perception: inner 87, 119; mental 85; physical 87; sacred xv; sensory 86 – 87, 92 – 93 perspective: anthropological 196; axiological 196; cosmic 37; epistemological 196; literal xxv; multi-dimensional 177; ontological 107, 196; phenomenological 80, 123, 201 – 202; reductionist 158; religious 64; scientific 43; teleological 195; unidimensional 160 phenomena: apparent 66, 195; natural 20 – 21, 23, 111, 115, 148, 179; universal 28, 56, 85, 97 – 98, 127 phenomenal reality 16 – 17, 27, 34 – 35, 37, 50, 78, 117 – 118, 160 – 161, 176 – 177, 195, 202 – 203 phenomenological inquiry 207 phenomenology 11, 16, 84, 89 – 93, 97, 99, 101 – 102, 104 – 106, 109 – 112, 117, 121, 123, 156, 177, 207 photosynthesis 64, 67, 194 – 196 physical realities 79, 103 physics, quantum 70, 113, 159, 161, 197 Plato 16, 174, 184, 188 Plato’s allegory 92 Plato’s cavemen 97 pleasure maximization 141, 153 Polanyi, Michael 119 Popper, Karl 52 positivism 70 Pragmatism 75 a priori knowledge 26, 50, 66, 86 properties, emergent 23 Prophet Abraham 138 Prophet Mohammed 17, 43, 46, 48, 147, 153, 191 pure science 2, 41, 52, 63 – 64, 66 – 68, 81, 203 pure scientific knowledge 64 – 68, 154, 163, 174

214 Index purification, spiritual 151 purpose: final 5; instrumental 106, 191; meditative 106; transcendental 36; ultimate 41, 101, 142 – 143, 154, 191, 195 quantum cosmologist 67 quantum fluctuations 113 quantum mechanics xvii, 22, 24, 67, 83, 113 quantum weirdness 22 Al-Qur’an Al-Kabîr 131 Al-Qur’an Al-Karîm 131 Qur’an and Islamic principles 144 Qur’an and modern science 83 Qur’anic analogy 30 Qur’anic approach 13, 54 Qur’anic character lessons 147 Qur’anic method 58, 144 Qur’anic perspective 13, 20, 38, 42, 71 – 72, 107, 119, 127, 166, 180 Qur’anic stories 83, 153 Qur’anic worldview 8 Quran-i Kabir 197 Al-Rabb 197 Rabbani letter 155 Rahmani book 155 rationalism 86, 207 Al-Razzaq 50, 172 realism 49 – 50, 82 realists 50, 102 – 103 reason: analytical 27; phenomenological 60; pure 86, 119, 206 reasoning: analogical 60 – 62, 175; demonstrative 63 regularity 165 – 166, 172, 182 Al-Rezzak 197 robo-apes 118 sacralization 122 sacred book 13 sacred meaning 2, 82 Schopenhauer 26, 150 science and philosophy 1 – 2, 6, 8, 34 Scientific Revolution 65 scientism xv, 20, 80 – 81, 116 secular, secular language 34 secular age 3, 207 secular and holistic 84 – 119, 160 secular anthropology 103, 115, 161 secular aspirations 2 – 3, 12, 29, 38 secular axiology 102 – 104, 116, 161 secular education 9, 25, 34, 43 secular epistemology 103, 114, 161

secular ideology 1 – 2, 4 – 8, 28, 41, 65, 67 – 68, 81, 163 – 164, 174, 195 secularism xv, 4, 7, 29, 36, 205; philosophical 10 secularization 1 – 5, 29 – 34, 39 – 40 secularization of knowledge 5, 10 secularization problem 3, 5, 39 secular knowledge 2, 5 – 10, 25, 27 – 30, 38, 76, 79, 114, 162, 167 secular language 7, 11, 14, 19, 34, 39, 89, 91, 101, 116, 160 secular life 35, 38 secular ontology 102, 113, 161 secular paradigm 25, 43, 91, 102 secular phenomenology 93, 97, 101 – 103, 111 – 112, 158, 160 secular science 2, 6 – 9, 13, 19 – 20, 25, 27 – 30, 38, 41, 57, 63 – 64, 70, 116, 118, 165 – 167, 195 – 196 secular teleology 115 secular trio 2, 25 – 27, 34, 71, 76, 103, 116, 160, 171, 195 secular wordview 39 secular worldview 1 – 2, 5, 8 – 10, 12, 25 – 27, 29, 33 – 34, 36, 38 – 40, 43, 89, 101 – 102, 134 – 135, 158, 160 Secular worldview and reality 27 Secular worldview and science 27 Secular worldview and vice 160 Secular worldview and worldly satisfaction 34 self: egotistic 153; transcendent 87 self-awareness 23, 90, 119 self-consciousness 119, 123, 125 self-control 204 self-deception 137 self-delusion 38, 133 self-esteem 95 self-experience 59, 84, 91, 99, 125, 179 self-knowledge 19, 38, 90, 159 self-referential 10, 13, 96 self-signifier 92 – 93, 96, 111 self-transcend 30 sense data 50 – 51 sense perception 161 sensibility 86, 119 Al-Shafii 197, 204 Shah Naqshband 62 Sigmund Freud 104 signification: letteral xv; literal xv signifier 13, 19, 91, 93, 97, 99, 101 – 102 skepticism 51, 57, 180, 197

Index  215 soul 19, 38, 45, 48, 62, 98, 112, 128, 146, 150, 156, 162, 191 – 192; carnal xxv, 40, 146; evil-commanding 192 spiritual crisis 207 spiritual development 8 spiritual heart 188 – 189 spirituality 3, 156 spiritual life 35, 189 spiritual progress 2 SRD (self-reference dictionary) 91, 96, 98 – 99, 101, 104, 111, 113 – 114, 175, 179, 195 stamps of divine unity 155 – 156 Stephen Hawking 43 subjective experience 45, 55, 62, 65; objectively 55; utterly 55 subjectively objective 56, 62 Sufism 5, 32 syllogism 60 – 61 Tawhid 41, 205 Tawhîdî epistemology 117 Tawhîdî ontology 117 Tawhid-i Rububiyah 171, 187 telos, transcendental 102, 160 theology 4, 8, 83, 188 tranquility 18, 142 transcendent 36, 52, 143 transcendental 108, 171 transcendental apperception 119, 125 transcendental ego 11, 42 transcendental presupposition 119 transcendental reality 35, 37, 39, 78, 101, 104, 141, 161, 167, 175, 177 transcendental self 11 – 12, 46, 56 – 61, 80 – 81, 89 – 90, 125, 140, 160, 174, 179 transcendent aspiration 12 transcendent knowledge 58, 61, 197 transcendent meaning 3 – 4, 122 transcendent reality 101 transcendent truth 53 – 56, 60, 80, 149 truth: absolute 59; divine 8; empirical 52; eternal 52; evidence-based 63; pragmatic 52, 55; religious 60; sacred 7, 15; scientific xxvii, 53; spiritual 157; subjective 49, 59 – 60; supreme 61; transcendental 127; universal 61, 85 unidimensional 163 unity xx, 4, 6, 42, 51, 73, 87, 118 – 119, 158, 170, 176, 180, 186, 197 unity of existence 50

utility, higher 104 utility maximization 160 value clusters xvii value judgments 104 value-laden xvii values, lost 130 value structure xvii, xx, 101 vice 38 – 39, 67, 108, 149, 151, 160, 162 vice and misery 39 viewpoint 10, 26 virtue 39, 80 – 81, 104, 130, 159, 161 – 162, 191, 197, 204, 206; theoretical 191 virtue and happiness 39, 204 Wahdaniyah 197 weaknesses 34, 106, 110, 139 Western civilizations xvi, 41, 160, 162, 191 Western philosophy 30 Western sciences 41 Wilczek 16, 68, 79 – 80, 113, 154, 208 wisdom dimension 181, 183 wisdom seeker 178 wisdom structure 101 Wise Creator xxii, 133, 183 Wise Maker 173 wordview 39 world: objective 50; perceived 11; phenomenal 11, 92; phenomenological 136; physical 41, 131, 133 – 134, 206; private 120, 131 – 133; subatomic 67, 113, 164; transient 152 worldly aspirations 29, 32 – 33, 35, 39 worldly enslavement 153 worldly indulgence 38 worldly pleasures 12, 30 – 31, 34, 137, 149 world structure xx, 101 worldview: chosen 85; default 27, 85, 88; dominant 2, 25, 116 worldview formation 84 worship, sincere 26, 151 al-yaqeen 140 yaqeen 54, 58, 139 – 140, 142, 180 al-yaqeen: ayn 58; haqq 62; haqqal 58 yaqeen, haqqal 58 Zahra University 40, 196