The Principle of the Self-Evidence of Existence
Abstract:
Addressing contemporary debates surrounding the validity and intersubjectivity of the Islamic humanities and Islamic philosophy, this article challenges the logical positivist claim that religious propositions lack cognitive meaning because they are not empirically verifiable. Drawing on the philosophical frameworks of Ibn Sina, Sheikh al-Suhrawardi, and Mulla Sadra, as well as Persian mystical poetry and Quranic revelation, the author demonstrates that the “self-evidence of existence” (Haqiqat al-Wujud) serves as the ultimate a priori (Burhan-e Limmi) foundation of all knowledge and cognition—a reality in which all beings are immersed and which requires no empirical proof beyond pure contemplation.
Critiques of Islamic Humanities and the Positivist Legacy
In the dossier on the humanities debates in the journal Asr-e Andisheh (The Age of Thought), some analysts have objected that since the Islamic humanities are a product of our “interpretations” of Islam, they are not truly “Islam.” They argue that our interpretations of Islam have created a distance between us and Islam, making direct access to it impossible. Consequently, the “Islamic humanities” are merely the “humanities of Muslims.” Furthermore, they assert that even if we concede the possibility of Islamic humanities, we encounter the problem that, by relying on “Islamic values,” these disciplines are only relevant to Muslims and Islamic society. Contrary to their claims, they are not universal or general, which is problematic because a fundamental characteristic of science is “intersubjectivity.” An endeavor that is not intersubjective cannot, by definition, be a science.
Even some sociologists have suggested that if we accept the Islamic humanities, they can no longer be subject to discourse and will not tolerate criticism from others, because Islam speaks of sanctity, devotion, and submission. They argue that religious principles, by their nature, cannot be subjected to the scientific standards of proof, falsification, and empirical testing. Such doubts and claims not only lack logical coherence but are also unphilosophical and unscientific positions. This very issue is also raised within philosophy and Islamic philosophy, where many believe that since Islam involves devotion and submission, it conflicts with the freedom of philosophy, which is pure reason. Therefore, they conclude, we do not have an “Islamic philosophy,” but rather a “philosophy of Muslims.” The same question is posed about religion and revelation: since religion is the prophets’ interpretation and reading of divine revelation, we do not possess a pure divine religion, but rather the religion of Muslims or Christians. For nearly four decades, we have been preoccupied with these questions and their contrived answers, while the highly demanded transformation of the humanities remains neglected in the maze of these fruitless questions and conceptualizations. In the words of Hafez:
For years our book was held in pawn for wine,
The tavern thrived on our lessons and our prayers.
These types of questions and arguments concerning religion and divine values are the product of the era of logical positivism in the West. Their common assertion is that religious propositions are not empirically verifiable and, therefore, lack epistemological meaning. They claim that the language of religion, being insusceptible to empirical proof or falsification, has no cognitive meaning.
Wittgenstein and his followers accepted the subtle mystical insight that some things cannot be expressed in language and can only be “shown.” However, this notion was completely dismissed in the aggressive and extremist thinking of the positivists. Therefore, to clarify our position in relation to positivist and even hermeneutic schools of thought—which adhere to specific rules for interpreting texts—I will outline several core principles of understanding and cognition common to all schools and disciplines:
The Self-Evidence of Existence
Mulla Sadra considered the concept of existence to be the most self-evident of all concepts, establishing it as the foundation of his philosophical thought. Similarly, Sheikh al-Suhrawardi, the Illuminationist thinker, termed it the “Light of Lights” (Nur al-Anwar) and based his Illuminationist philosophy upon it. This implies that without accepting a self-evident principle, we cannot possess a logical or foundational basis for philosophical thought. For instance, the French philosopher René Descartes stated, “I think, therefore I am” (the Cogito), making this premise the bedrock of his philosophy. A more accurate proposition, however, is “He is, therefore he thinks” (the Tawhidi or monotheistic argument), because the reality of existence itself transcends the mere concept of it. No matter how self-evident a concept may be, it remains a concept subject to mental and intellectual definition. In contrast, the self-evidence of existence is, in fact, pure existence and pure contemplation, which in the philosophical frameworks of Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and Mulla Sadra is referred to as the “Argument of the Truthful” (Burhan al-Siddiqin). This means that the moment a human being reflects upon the proposition of “is” (the act of existing) rather than “being” (as an abstract noun), they intuitively grasp this self-evidence. In the words of Saadi:
O Cupbearer, I am already intoxicated by this yearning I hold,
With one more draught, you would strip me of my senses entirely.
Pour your wine for the short-sighted ones,
For my rivals in the cup are drunk on wine, while I am drunk on contemplation.
Therefore, the “proposition of is”—or the self-evidence of existence—is the central axis of rational contemplation and mental focus for all human beings. This transcends the realm of empirical experience and scientific proof. Necessarily, this self-evidence is itself the proof for everything else. As Sheikh al-Ra’ees (Ibn Sina) stated: “The First, Exalted is He, requires no proof of Himself; rather, He is the proof for everything.”
Whoever does not speak of You is better left silent,
Whatever is not Your remembrance is better forgotten.
O You, from whom all existence has emerged,
The feeble dirt (human body) has found its strength through You.
The A Priori Proof of the Exalted Truth and Epistemological Alignment
In philosophical terminology, this is known as the a priori argument (Burhan-e Limmi), which proceeds from the cause to the effect. Imam al-Sajjad (peace be upon him) articulated this in the Supplication of Abu Hamza al-Thumali: “By You, I have known You, and You have guided me to Yourself…” For this reason, we address God as Haqq Ta’ala (The Exalted Truth), meaning He alone is the Truth. The Reality of Existence (Haqiqat al-Wujud) is the Blessed and Exalted Truth, and everything in the universe is a manifestation of this Truth. Humanity is not just a manifestation of the Exalted Truth, but a direct expression of Him. As Saadi beautifully expressed:
I see the entire world through You, and this is no wonder,
Through whom else should I look? For You are the sight within my eyes.
Consequently, in the realms of epistemology and ontology, we must accept the principle of the self-evidence of existence and establish pure and absolute knowledge of the Exalted Truth as the foundation for understanding all principles and inquiries. We, and all of existence, are manifestations of His existence, and the Exalted Truth has brought all immaterial and material entities into manifestation through His illumination and sacred lights. As the Quran states, “Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth”—meaning He is the Light, not merely that He illuminates them. Attempting to understand the truth of this Light is synonymous with pure contemplation on the self-evidence of existence. In this context, demanding empirical proof for the Truth or attempting to test the proposition of the self-evidence of existence is a fundamentally misguided and unscholarly endeavor.
One day, a school of fish went to the King of Fish and asked, “What is this ‘water’ from which, you claim, our very lives derive?” The King of Fish replied, “You are currently immersed in water; if there were no water, you would not exist.” Yet, the fish repeated their question. Positivists and empiricists are similarly submerged in the ocean of existence, yet they question the self-evidence of the Truth!
Therefore, we must differentiate epistemological and ontological discussions in theology from other branches of the humanities. In the domain of epistemology, the self-evidence of existence is an indubitable and axiomatic proposition. Concurrently, recognizing the Truth and submitting to Him brings our understanding into alignment with reality. As Hafez noted:
The pivot of my vision’s point stems from Your beauty mark,
For only a master jeweler knows the true worth of a unique gem.
Notes:
- This article is Part One of the series “Are Religious Propositions Not Empirically Verifiable?”, focusing on the philosophical principle of the self-evidence of existence (Badihiyyat al-Wujud).
- Burhan al-Siddiqin (The Argument of the Truthful) is a cornerstone of Islamic metaphysics, demonstrating the existence of the Necessary Being through the reality of existence itself rather than through empirical effects.
- Burhan-e Limmi refers to a causal demonstration reasoning from cause to effect (a priori in traditional Aristotelian-Avicennian logic).
