BEDIUZZAMAN SAID NURSI THE REPRESENTATIVE of CONTEMPORARY ISLAMIC THINKERS: HIS APPROACH to THE QUESTIONS of SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY

The search for the truth in societies

Ever since he first appeared on earth, man has shown a close interest in his environment and has tried to understand and discover the laws to which things are subject. The aim of these endeavours has been to establish the way to both worldly and eternal happiness by gaining mastery over the physical world.

While doing this, he has either proceeded under the leadership of the reason and in the light of philosophy, or leaving the reason in second place, has acted in accordance with the principles of Revealed Books and Scriptures that are corrupted, or he has taken the Highway of the blending of the reason and the final Revealed Book.

The first group yielded the fruits of the schools of philosophy like the Materialists, Dehriyyun, and Sophists. And among individuals these sowed the seeds of enmity, envy, hatred, and vengeance, and were the cause of great gulfs emerging between the classes of societies; they made humanity live the life of Hell while still in this world.

The second way, in which reason and logic are rejected, drove societies into the valleys of bigotry and misguidance, and made lawful oppression and injustice between individuals.

On third way, the Highway, ease and plenty was promised in this world, and happiness in the next. In this field humanity lived an age like the Age of Bliss.

Communities which have been formed around the former ideas, opinions, and beliefs have not held back from having recourse to force in order to make accepted their own views. But in present times when reason and logic have come to predominate, proof and argument, persuasion and explanation have taken the place of force in making accepted scientific and philosophical matters in particular.

The exploitation of science and technology and its progress for ideological purposes

To a large degree materialist philosophy has made progress in the fields of science and technology the tool of its own ideo-logy and the view which is its basis. This basis is the denial of a creator and belief in the pre-eternity of matter. This doctrine has attributed the creation of animate and inanimate beings and their coming down to the present day, and the functioning of all the laws in the universe, entirely to chance and nature. It has studied them as their works, and has claimed that man too emerged as a product of chance.

A method in conformity with the understanding of this age

In the face of these pragmatic and materialist currents of thought, Islam’s own particular world view had to be presented by positivist methods. The necessity arose to present Islam by a new method appropriate to the level of understanding of the present century.

It was this that Bediuzzaman Said Nursi did. He stated that no matter of Islam was contrary to reason. On the contrary, it was possible to prove and explain all its matters rationally. As while comparing Islam and Christianity, he saw that the great error of Christianity lay in its attaching no importance to reason and proof, and in its blind imitation of the clergy:

“What has cast Christians and their likes into misguidance is none other than their dismissal of the reason, rejection of proof, and blind imitation of the clergy.” 1

Islam relies on reason and proof

Bediuzzaman states that according to his nature, man always seeks renewal, that he is “inclined towards renewal,” 2 and that Islam is in conformity with this:

“What continually makes Islam manifest and makes it develop in relation to the advancement of thought is its being founded on reality, relying on proof, being in agreement with the reason, established on reality, and being in conformity with the principles of wisdom, which are bound to one another from pre-eternity to post-eternity.” 3

Bediuzzaman says that Muslims consider everything through reason and thought:

“We Muslims, who are students of the Qur'an, follow proof. We approach the truths of belief through reason, thought, and our hearts. We do not abandon proof for blind imitation of the clergy like some followers of other religions. Thus, in the future when reason, science, and technology prevail, the Qur'an will surely then rule, which relies on reasoned proofs and makes the reason confirm its pronouncements.” 4

Bediuzzaman knew that in the future all power would lie in science:

“For sure, at the end of time, mankind will pour into science and technology. It will obtain all its power from science. Power and dominion will pass to the hand of science.” 5

According to Bediuzzaman, in the future, truth will take the place of force, and proof the place of sophistry:

“Through the endeavours of science, what will prevail entirely in the present and totally in the future, is truth instead of force, proof instead of sophistry, and reason instead of nature.” 6

Or in other words, he is pointing out that in the future the immaterial swords of truth and justice will take the place of the gun and the sword:

“Yes, just as in former times Islam’s progress was obtained through weapons and the sword, by smashing the enemy’s bigotry, destroying their obstinacy, and repulsing their aggression, in the future the immaterial swords of true civilization and material progress and truth and justice will defeat and rout the enemy in place of weapons and the sword.” 7

Bediuzzaman explains the main reasons for this as follows:

“Conquering the civilized is though persuasion, not by compulsion.” 8

The originality of Bediuzzaman’s thought

Bediuzzaman showed through the originality of his thought and method of presenting it that he had not fallen into the swamp of scholastic thought. He said in connection with this:

“They suppose me to be a medrese professor sunk in the bog of scholastic thought, but I was occupied with all the modern sciences and the philosophy and learning of the present age.” 9

Bediuzzaman believed in the necessity of specializing in science. His sentences reflecting this idea are striking:

“One individual cannot be proficient and a specialist in many sciences... to attempt all is to abandon all.” 10

He stated that science and technology, which had been made the tool of materialism and irreligion, at base demonstrated Divine Unity with all its evidences. He was distressed at the matter not having been put forward in an Islamic perspective.

Islam is the father of all the sciences

According to Bediuzzaman, progress is the right of Islam, the guide, chief, and father of science:

“Islam is the lord and guide of knowledge, and the chief and father of all the true sciences.” 11

And he seeks the reason for our backwardness in our distance from Islam:

“History testifies that whenever the people of Islam have adhered to their religion, they have progressed relatively to former times. And whenever they have become slack in their adherence, they have declined. As for Christianity, it is the opposite of this.” 12, 13

No despair

Bediuzzaman was never in his whole life carried away by despair, and he vehemently opposed despair and hopelessness in his works:

“And you are making a grievous error if you suppose in despair and hopelessness that the world is the world of progress for everyone and the Europeans, but the world of decline only for the unhappy people of Islam.” 14

And he makes a similar evaluation like this:

“Why should the world be the world of progress for everyone, and the world of decline only for us?” 15

He states that in the course of time states and nations sometimes rise and sometimes fall, and that Islam is therefore destined for the true civilization of the future, which will being peace and happiness to mankind.

“Consider this: time does not run in a straight line so that its beginning and end draw apart from one another. Rather, it moves in a circle, like the motion of the earth. Sometimes it displays the seasons of spring and summer as progress. And sometimes the seasons of storms and winter as decline. Just as every winter is followed by spring and every night by morning, mankind, also, shall have a morning and a spring, God willing. You may expect from Divine Mercy to see true civilization within universal peace brought about through the sun of the truth of Islam.” 16

The secret of progress

Bediuzzaman considered the secret of progress to lie in self-sacrifice, and in holding the nation’s benefits above personal benefits. According to him, a Muslim should expend all his effort and energy for society, for such sacrifice would be rewarded not only in this world, but also in the next. But he says that our fine characteristics have passed from us to the Europeans, and laments that we have acquired their immorality:

“I say this to you with regret and sadne... that certain Europeans have taken our most valuable possessions and country from us and have given us a rotten price in return. And in the same way, they have taken from us our elevated morals and a part of our fine character that touches on social life. They have made them the means of their progress. And it is their corrupt morals and dissipated character that they have given us as their price.

“For example, because of the fine national feeling they have taken from us, one of them says, ‘Should I die, let my nation live, for I have an everlasting life in my nation.’ They have taken these words from us and it is the firmest foundation in their progress. These words proceed from the religion of truth and the truths of belief. They are our property, the property of the believers. However, because of the obscene and bad character that has infiltrated us from Europeans, a selfish man from among us says, ‘If I die of thirst, it should not again rain in the world. And if I do not experience happiness, let the world go to rack and ruin as it wishes.’ These ridiculous words arise from lack of religion and from not recognizing the Hereafter. They have entered among us from outside and are poisoning us.” 17

What sort of civilization?

Bediuzzaman argued strongly that science and technology, which are beneficial for mankind, should be acquired in civilization, and he opposed vice and evils, which are harmful, to the same degree:

“You should understand that what I mean are the good things that are civilization’s virtues and its benefits for mankind. Not its iniquities and evils that idiots have imagined to be its virtues, and imitating them have devastated our possessions. And even giving religion as a bribe they have not gained the world.” 18

Bediuzzaman wanted the Japanese to be taken as examples in progress. He noted that in taking science and technology they had remained bound to their own national customs and practices:

“In acquiring civilization we have to follow the Japanese, for together with taking from Europe the virtues of civilization, they preserved their national customs, which are the means by which every people is perpetuated.” 19

Bediuzzaman was certain that in the race for civilization, we would close in a short time the distance it had taken Europe a long time to cover, and that we would even overtake them:

“O partriotic brothers of this land!...God willing, through a miracle of the Prophet, from the hundred-year distance we have remained backward in progress we shall mount with our actions the train of the Constitution, which is accordance with the Shari'a, and shall mount with our minds the Buraq (the Prophet’s mount) of Islamic Consultation, and perfecting our means and crossing in a brief time this fearsome vast desert, shall compete neck and neck with the civilized nations. For they mounted ox-carts and set off; we shall straight away mount vehicles like trains and balloons, and shall overtake them.” 20

The scientific matters to which Bediuzzaman attached importance

Thus, Bediuzzaman Said Nursi’s view of the world and his spiritual make-up was as desribed above. And now we shall put forward his approach to questions of science and technology with its Islamic perspective, quoting passages from his collected works, which exceeds six thousand pages.

When Bediuzzaman’s works are considered from a scientific point of view, it is clear he gives importance to the matters which Naturalists and Materialists attribute to chance and nature, like the creation of the earth and other planets, the pre-eternity of matter, the question of ether, the creation, nature, and purpose of biological beings and in particular man, and the motion of particles and matter. With an Islamic perspective, he frequently states that biological beings are not the work of nature and chance as is imagined, but the works of a Creator posse...ing Knowledge, Will, and Power. He presents the most difficult and complex matters of biology in a way everyone can understand and is not wearisome together with examples with which he was familiar.

Bediuzzaman addresses his readers according to their level

A work written for some purpose generally addresses a particular section of society and those of an adequate cultural level. But people of all ages and every level can benefit from Bediuzzaman’s works. The reason for this should be sought in his ability to analyse thoroughly people’s inner and emotional worlds, and in the works being a sort of commentary on the Holy Qur'an, in addition to his mastery of the subject. An excellent example of this is the following simile used in proving the universe’s Creator:

“You know that a village cannot be without a headman, a needle without the one who manufactured it, and a letter without its writer, so how is it that this country so infinitely well-ordered should be without a Ruler?” 21

For sure, all his works are not at the same level, but according to Bediuzzaman, even if everyone does not understand every matter completely, so too they will not remain without a share:

“Everyone will benefit according to his own degree, although everyone will not understand every matter completely. Furthermore, since they are explanations of the truths of belief, they are both knowledge, and learning, and worship... According to the rule of ‘even if a thing is not wholly obtained, still it may not completely slip from one's grasp,’ it is not reasonable to abandon such a matter altogether, saying, ‘I cannot pick all the fruits in this immaterial garden.’ However many fruits a person may pick, that amount will be of benefit. For just as the matters concerning the Greatest Name are extensive to the degree that they cannot be comprehended, so are they also subtle to the degree that the intellect cannot distinguish them.” 22, 23

Creation

Bediuzzaman Said Nursi studied Islam within the conceptions of the present age, and was highly successful in explaining the creation of all the beings in the universe by blending Islamic theology and the physical sciences.

Today, various theories are put forward for the creation of the universe. Their shared point is that the universe was created. That is, it emerged into the world of existence from non-existence. According to Bediuzzaman, for a being to come into existence, knowledge, will, and power are necessary. He expresses it like this:

“Existence necessitates the attributes of knowledge, will, and power, as that which distinguishes, specifies, and chooses.” 24

Knowledge is the attribute by which something that is going to be created is considered between various possibilities. The attribute of will chooses and distinguishes the most suitable among those various possibilities. And power is necessary to bring the manner chosen and decided upon into existence. According to Bediuzzaman, the creation of beings occurs in two ways at Allah's disposal:

“The All-Powerful One of Glory has two ways of creating: The first is through origination and invention. That is, He brings a being into existence out of nothing, out of non-existence, and creates everything necessary for it, also out of nothing, and places those necessities in its hand. The second is through composition, through art. That is, He forms certain beings out of the elements of the universe in order to demonstrate numerous subtle purposes, like displaying the perfections of His wisdom and the manifestations of many of His Names. Through the law of Providing, He sends particles and matter, which are dependent on His command, to these beings and employs the particles in them.” 25

The first sort of creation is bringing into existence out of nothing. Like the first creation of the universe. All things were brought out of non-existence into the world of existence. For certain purposes, Almighty God made the raw material produced subject to composition and dissolution, and constructed the creatures that flow in the stream of time from these elements, and wrote them on the stage of life, and is writing them.

The earth’s creation

Bediuzzaman explains the creation of the world relying on Qur'anic verses. There are many parallels between these explanations and those of modern science.

Bediuzzaman explains that in the beginning the solar system and earth were in the form of a dough-like paste kneaded from matter called ether:

“...The solar system and the earth were in the form of a dough-like paste which the Hand of Power kneaded from ethereal matter.” 26

In another place he states that Almighty God created matter from a substance that was in a state of gas and liquid, and that He created all the stars and planets from these:

“In the view of what the Shari'a relates, Almighty God created a substance, some matter. Then through a manifestation, He made part of that substance gas, and a part of it liquid. Then through His manifestation He condensed the liquid part and made it into foam. Then He created the earth and the seven earth-globes from that froth. And in regard to this, a heaven was obtained for each earth from the wafting atmosphere. Then expanding the vaporous matter, He arranged the seven heavens and planted the stars in them. And the heavens were tied up which contained the stars, and came into existence.” 27

Based on the twenty-ninth verse of Sura al-Baqara, he describes their creation like this:

“Our globe and the other planets which form the solar system were in the form of unrolled-out dough in the beginning combined with the sun. Then the All-Powerful and Self-Subsistent One rolled out the dough, and placing each of the planets in their places, He left the sun where it was and brought the earth here.” 28

Bediuzzaman states that in time the earth hardened and became solid, and the rocks obtained from this produced the soil:

“The original creation of the earth was like this: at the Divine command some liquid matter solidified and became rock. With Divine permission the rock became soil.. the word earth means soil. That means the liquid matter was very soft and could not be dwelt on. And the rock was very hard and could not be benefited from. So the All-Wise and Compassionate One spread earth over the rock, and made it the dwelling place for living beings.” 29

The creation in six days

Verse 7 of Sura Hud, verse 54 of Sura al-Hadid, and verse 59 of Sura al-Furqan in the Holy Qur'an indicate that the heavens and earth were created in six days. Bediuzzaman says that the word ‘day’ in the Qur'an may refer to between a thousand and fifty thousand years.

“... rather, in order to convince of the elevated truth that indicates through the Qur'anic days, which consist of a long period of time like a thousand or fifty thousand years, that the human world and animal world will live in six days, we point out the flowing worlds, the travelling universes, and transient cosmoses which the All-Glorious Creator creates each century, each year, and each day, each of which is like a day...” 30

As is clear, Bediuzzaman says that the creation of some beings is completed in a day, some in a year, or in a century, and that these periods of time are explained in the Qur'an with the concept of “day.”

Bediuzzaman discusses which was created first, the earth or the heavens. Relying on verse 30 of Sura al-Anbiya, he states that the earth’s forming a crust and reaching a state suitable to animate beings other than man was before the creation of the heavens:

“Thus, in regard to the earth swiftly forming a crust by solidifying and hardening before everything, and for a long period of time being the source of life, its creation and formation was before the heavens. But in respect of the earth acquiring a state whch was suitable to sustain humankind through its being spread out, it was after the arrangement and ordering of the heavens. Even if its creation started after the heavens, at the beginning they were together... In this way the apparent contradiction between those three verses is transformed into agreement.” 31

The impossibility of matter being pre-eternal

Up to ten years ago, the idea that matter did not appear later in time and was pre-eternal was the dominant opinion among numerous philosophers and scientists. Supporters of Marxism in particular were among those who defended this idea fervently. The Big Bang being widely accepted now, which asserts that the first matter of the universe appeared with a great explosion, has largely destroyed the former view.

Bediuzzaman repeatedly states and explains that matter is not pre-eternal and came into existence subsequently:

“Yes, the universe is created, for we see that each century, rather each year or each season a universe, a world, goes, and one comes. That means there is an All-Powerful One of Glory Who creating the universe from nothing, creates one each year, rather each season, and even each day, and shows it to the conscious and then takes it, and brings another in its place. He attaches one after the other, hanging them in chain-like form on the string of time... For sure, the One Who all the time creates and changes worlds within worlds must certainly have also created this world...

“..If non-existence and existence are equal, one who will specify, choose, and create is necessary. Because contingent beings cannot create one another in succession. Neither can this one create that, and that the next in chains of causes.” 32

Can’t things come into existence of themselves?

The law of the conservation of matter or mass put forward by Lavoisier states that: “That which exists cannot be made non-existent, and that which does not exist cannot be made existent.”

By presenting this law in absolute terms, certain demagogues have made it a tool to their ideologies. Whereas this law finds its expression under particular conditions and in closed systems:

“The conservation of matter is a law which is applied to a closed system the framework of which is defined, and shows the relations connected with weight during the transformations of matter.” 33

Bediuzzaman strongly opposes this law being made general:

“Philosophers, who have made many advances these days, claim that nothing is created out of nothing, and nothing is annihilated and goes to nothing; there is only composition and decomposition, and this makes the factory of the universe run.....

“... Since these unfortunates are absolutely impotent and have absolutely nothing at their disposal apart from partial will, and although they are inflated like Pharaohs, can neither annihilate nor create anything from nothing, even a minute particle, because nothing comes into existence out of nothing at the hand of causes and Nature on which they rely, out of their stupidity they say, ‘Nothing comes from non-being, and nothing goes to non-being.’ And they even extend this absurd and erroneous principle to the Absolutely All-Powerful One....

“Yes, the Absolutely All-Powerful One creates in two ways: He both originates, and He composes. To annihilate what exists and to make exist what does not exist is most simple and easy for Him. It is one of His constant and universal laws. The man, therefore, who says, ‘He cannot give existence to what does not exist’ in the face of a power that in one spring makes exist out of nothing the forms and attributes of three hundred thousand animate creatures, and, besides their particles, all their conditions and states, such a man should himself be made non-existent.” 34

As is understood from this, just as creation from nothing in the form of origination occurred in the first emergence of the universe, so also it still continues. For example, things like the forms, smells, and tastes of the leaves and fruits of trees “composed” through the coming together of the elements of earth, water, air, and sunlight in the spring are not existent in the elements; they are created from nothing. In the same way, all the particularities which man possesses, from his features to his voice, like mind, memory, imagination, and anxiety, are not present in the atoms and molecules; they are the fruits of creation out of nothing. Moreover, it has been established today that non-being appears in the physical world too. Just as deficiencies may occur in its physical structure with matter turning into energy, so too it is a fact that certain stars whose masses are many times greater than that of the earth gradually disappear into places called ‘Black Holes’ the nature of which is unknown.

What is Nature?

As is frequently stressed today, Bediuzzaman insists that the creation and direction of the beings in the universe cannot be attributed to causes, chance, or Nature. He defines Nature like this:

“The imaginary and insubstantial thing Naturalists call Nature, if it has an external reality, can at the very most be a work of art; it cannot be the Artist. It is an embroidery, and cannot be the Embroiderer. It is a set of decrees; it cannot be the Issuer of the decrees. It is a body of the laws of creation, and cannot be the Lawgiver. It is but a created screen to the dignity of God, and cannot be the Creator. It is passive and created, and cannot be a Creative Maker. It is a law, not a power, and cannot possess power. It is the recipient, and cannot the source.....Since everything’s existence is in need of numerous members and faculties, there is a Possessor of Absolute Power Who creates the nature and the cause.” 35

Thus, Bediuzzaman deals with Nature as the totality of the laws put by Allah. Nature is the work of art, the embroidery, of a Creator possessing a knowledge, will, and power greater than Nature.

“If beings, which are most well-ordered and well-measured, wise and artistically fashioned, are not ascribed to One Who is infinitely powerful and wise and instead are attributed to Nature, it becomes necessary for there to be present in every bit of soil as many factories and printing-presses as there are in Europe so that each bit of soil can be the means for the growth and formation of innumerable flowers and fruits, of which it is the place of origin and workshop.” 36

Bediuzzaman explains in various examples the impossibility of the elements performing duties in living structures either of themselves or by chance.

“Indeed, since beings exist and this cannot be denied, and since each being comes into existence in a wise and artistic fashion, and since each is not beyond time but is being continuously renewed, then, O falsifier of the truth, you are bound to say either that the causes of the universe create beings, for example, this animal; that is to say, it comes into existence through the coming together of causes, or that it forms itself, or that its coming into existence is a requirement and necessary effect of Nature, or that it is created through the power of One All-Powerful and All-Glorious. Since reason can find no way apart from these four, if the first three are definitely proved to be impo...ible, invalid, and absurd, the way of God's Unity, which is the fourth way, will necessarily and self-evidently and without doubt or suspicion be proved true.” 37

The following is one of many examples showing the impossibility of the first way:

“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 consciousness of a thousand Plato’s to a single particle of one such as you who does not possess even a particle’s worth of intelligence in mattters of this kind is a crazy superstition a thousand times over!” 38

By stating that Almighty God makes the centuries, years, days, and even the hours a model, and adorns all creatures with his artistic works on the string of time, Bediuzzaman points out that all these cannot be explained by chance:

“Also, just as the Possessor of Absolute Power makes each century, each year, each day a model, so too He has made the face of the earth, and each mountain and plain, and garden and orchard, and each tree a model. Continuously He establishes a fresh, new universe on the earth and creates new worlds. Each world He takes, and brings another well-ordered world... Each spring He clothes each tree in its new brocade dress... Thus, the One Who performs these works with infinitely fine art and perfect order, and changes with infinite wisdom and grace, and perfect power and art these travelling worlds that follow on one after the other and are attached to the string of time is surely most Powerful and Wise, and Seeing and Knowing to an infinite degree. Chance could not interfere in His works.” 39

The motion of atoms

Bediuzzaman points out that the motion or rest in atoms is not haphazard, but rests on the strength and power of one possessing all-embracing knowledge:

“In every facet of the motion of every particle the light of Unity shines like the sun. Because....if every particle is not an official of God acting with His permission and under His authority, and if it is not undergoing change within His knowledge and power, then each must have infinite knowledge and limitless power, it must have eyes that see everything, a face that looks to all things, and authority over all things.” 40

He explains the reason for this as follows:

“Each particle of air can enter the bodies of all animate beings, the fruits of all flowers and the structures of all leaves. They can act within them, although the forms of these beings are all different and the order of each quite distinct from the rest. A fig may be likened to a textile mill, for example, and a pomegranate to a sugar factory, and so on..... In which case, the particles which perform these duties, either work with the permission and at the command of One possessing comprehensive knowledge, and through His knowledge and will, or a similar all-embracing knowledge and power has to be present in itself.” 41

According to Bediuzzaman, someone who does not accept one God is compelled to accept gods to the number of particles. For the work which each atom performs is only possible through a comprehensive knowledge, will, and power. He describes this matter like this:

“To attribute a most well-ordered creature with unity, which, through the mystery of unity, can only be the work of a Single One of Unity, to innumerable particles, anyone with even a particle's amount of consciousness will realize is a most obvious impossibility, rather, a hundred-fold impossibility.” 42

“If everything is not attributed to the Possessor of Absolute Power, it is necessary to accept an impossibility compounded a hundred times like accepting innumerable gods in place the single God, rather, gods to the number of the particles in the universe; it means descending to the ravings of a lunatic.” 43

Progress from the inanimate to the animate world

Bediuzzaman states that with performing duties in the bodies of plants, animals, and humans, the elements rise to an animate level from the inanimate world and acquire a state worthy of the Hereafter:

“...a further instance of wisdom of the thousands contained in the transformations of particles and their motion in the bodies of animate beings is to illuminate the particles and to make them alive and meaningful in order to be fitting for the construction of the world of the Hereafter. It is as if the bodies of animals and humans, and even plants, are like guest-houses, barracks, and schools for those who enter in order to take lessons and be trained; inanimate particles enter them and are illuminated. Simply, the particles receive training and instruction and acquire a fineness. By fulfilling different duties, they become worthy to be particles in the world of permanence and the realm of the Hereafter, which is alive with all of its elements.” 44

The transformation of particles from the point of view of the Qur'an

Bediuzzaman describes the motion and transformations of particles like this:

“From the point of view of the wisdom of the All-Wise Qur'an, the transformations of particles have many purposes and duties, and demonstrate many instances of wisdom.....We shall mention several of these by way of example:

“The First: The Necessarily Existent and Glorious Creator causes particles to move and employs them through His power by taking each spirit as a model and every year clothing it in a fresh body. He performs this through miracles of His power in order to renew and refresh the manifestations of His act of creating, to transcribe with His wisdom from each book thousands and thousands of different books, and to demonstrate a single truth in ever-differing forms, and also in order to prepare the ground and make way for the beings, worlds, and universes which follow on one after the other, group by group.

“The Second: The Glorious Lord of All Dominion created this world, and especially the field of the face of the earth, in the form of a cultivated property..... Thus, by causing the motion of particles with wisdom and employing them in an orderly fashion in His field of the face of the earth, He displays every age, every season, every month, indeed every day, and every hour, through miracles of His power, endless beings, each of which is a cosmos, and causes His field to produce ever-differing crops...

“The Third: The Pre-Eternal Inscriber caused the motion of particles with perfect wisdom and employed them with perfect order so that, through displaying the embroideries of the endless manifestations of the Divine Names, He might exhibit the endless embroideries in a limited field, and in order to set forth the manifestations of those Names, and so that He might write the infinite signs, which will point to infinite meanings, on a small page. Indeed, in essence this year's crops are like those of last year, but their meanings are all different...

“The Fourth: The All-Wise and Glorious One causes the motion of particles in the narrow tillage of this world, in the workshop and field of the face of the earth, thus making the cosmos as flowing and beings as travelling, in order to grow things like crops or things for decoration or provision suitable for the most broad World of the Inner Dimensions of Things and endless other worlds of the Hereafter, like the infinite World of Similitudes...

“The Fifth: By causing the motion of particles with perfect wisdom through His power and employing them with perfect order in order to display infinite Divine perfections, endless manifestations of Beauty and Glory, and countless dominical glorifications in this narrow and limited field and finite and short time, He causes endless glorification in finite time and in a limited field...

“Those brainless philosophers suppose to be purposeless the transformations of particles, which occur with wisdom not limited to the five above examples but with infinite wisdom. They fancy those particles, which revolve like Mevlevi dervishes glorifying God and reciting His Names in two ecstatic movements, one turning on their own axes, the other describing circles, to be reeling around as though stunned and aimless. It may be understood from this, then, that their knowledge is not knowledge, it is ignorance, and their philosophy, futility.”{NOTE45}45{/NOTE45

As is seen from this, Bediuzzaman situates the purpose of the motion of particles, both within themselves and among others, on five main bases, and says that Almighty God causes their motion in order to renew His creation each century and even each hour and make the field of the face of the earth produce crops; to display the manifestations of His Names, and to produce things suitable to the world of the Hereafter, and to make them offer infinite praise and glorification.

From the Manifest World to the World of the Unseen

Bediuzzaman wants it to be known that creative power is only from God, and points out that beings come from the World of the Unseen, pass through the present, and return to that world:

“At its Sustainer's command, the universe is in continuous motion. With divine permission, all creatures are unceasingly flowing in the river of time. They are being sent from the World of the Unseen, being clothed with external existence in the Manifest World, and are then being poured in orderly fashion into the World of the Unseen, and it is there that they alight. And, at their Sustainer’s command, they continuously come from the future, stop by in passing pausing for a breath, and are poured into the past.” 46

Thus, Bediuzzaman is reminding that according to the people of the 18th century, those of the future and now breathing the present, will pass on to the past of the coming century, that they will pass on to the World of the Unseen. He is stating that in both being brought to this world and being sent to that one, all creatures including man are willy-nilly subject to the laws Almighty God has put and by which He governs. He wants it to be known that one who cannot rule the past and the future, cannot claim power over life and death:

“Thus, is it at all possible that one who does not have the ability to administer the universe in its totality, whose authority does not stretch throughout time, whose power is not sufficient to make the world manifest life and death like a single individual, who cannot bestow life on the spring as though it was a single flower, attach it to the face of the earth and then pluck it from it with death and gather it up, could such a one be the owner of death and the granter of death? Indeed, the death of the most insignificant animate being, even, like its life, must necessarily occur according to the law of One of Glory in whose hand are all the truths of life and varieties of death, and with His permission, and at His command, and through His permission, and at His command, and through His power, and with His knowledge.” 47

That is to say, Bediuzzaman considers that however necessary knowledge, will, and power are for the continuation of life, those attributes are necessary to the same degree for death. Because if such an order did not prevail, the oceans would have been choked with dead fish and the land with dead plants and animals, and the elements, which are the raw materials which will manifest life, could not have hastened to this duty.

The strange caravan which comes from the Unseen

Bediuzzaman describes the trees and flowers coming to life in the spring, and their being sustenance for humans and animals like this:

“Look! A strange caravan has appeared and is coming from the Unseen; it is the caravan of plants and trees, which bear the animals’ foods. Their mounts resemble trees, plants, and mountains. They are each bearing trays of provisions on their heads. Look! They are bringing the food of the various animals which are waiting here. And look! The vast electric lamp of the sun in this dome is providing light for them, and is cooking beautifully all their foods. The foods that are to be cooked are each attached to a string by a hidden hand. Those foods attached to the string are the slender branches of the trees and their delicious fruits. They merely hold them up to the sun.” 48

Bediuzzaman likens fruit-bearing trees to machines:

“...each bears on its slender branches hundreds of looms and factories, and weaves its leaves, blossoms, and fruits, and adorns and cooks them, and holds them out to us. However, majestic trees like pines and cedars have set up their looms on dry rock, and work away there.” 49

“See how before our eyes a tiny poppy seed, a tiny apricot kernel, a melon seed bring forth from the treasury of Mercy leaves more finely woven than broadcloth, flowers whiter than linen, and fruits sweeter than sugar, and finer and more delicious than köftes and preserved foods; see how they present them to us.”

Bediuzzaman points out the creation of animals from the elements in this way:

“And look, He has taken this iron, earth, water, coal, copper, silver, and gold to His hidden hand and made a piece of flesh.”

In conclusion he shows that these ways of being formed are each an evidence pointing to Divine Unity:

“In each of these are works which tell of that hidden Being. Quite simply as if each was a stamp or seal making known that unseen One.” 50

Bediuzzaman likens the universe to a garden and the earth to a tree:

“That is to say, each fruit is a seal of Divine Unity that makes known the Maker of the earth which is its tree and the Inscriber of the book of the universe, which is its garden, and demonstrates His Unity.” 51

“A crocus in a garden is like a seal of the garden’s Inscriber. To whomever that flower-seal belongs, all the flowers of that sort on the face of the earth indicate clearly that they are like the words of that person and that the garden too is his writing.” 52

The seas do not spill over

Bediuzzaman describes the spinning of the earth and state of the seas in this way:

“Although the seas, which like living beings are continuously being shaken and in whose nature it is to spread and pour forth and invade, encircle the earth and are being made to hasten at extreme speed in a twenty-five thousand year circle in one year, they neither spread, nor spill over, and nor do they encroach on their neighbouring earth. That means they remain, and travel, and are preserved through the command and power of One most Powerful and Mighty.” 53

Genetic characteristics

Bediuzzaman expresses the relationship of man and the universe and the genetic characteristics of animate beings like this:

“.. whatever the pen of Power has written in the mighty book of the world, it has written its summary in man’s nature. And whatever the pen of Divine Determining has written in a mountain-like tree, it has also written it in its fruit the size of a fingernail.” 54

He draws attention to the genetic structure of eggs and sperm which he calls the programme of Divine Determining, despite their resembling one another in regard to matter:

“And just as the spirit is dominant over the body, so too the creative commands which Divine Determining writes in inanimate matter are dominant over it. The inanimate matter can take up a position and order according to the immaterial structure of Divine Determining. For example, in regard to the creative commands which Divine Determining has written differently in all the varieties of eggs, sorts of sperm, categories of kernels, and species of grains, it possesses ranks and lights which are all different. And the inanimate matter which is of the same nature with regard to matter becomes the source of innumerable different beings.” 55

Bediuzzaman states that in regard to physical and spiritual make-up man is a miniature sample of the universe, and whatever there is in the universe whether material or immaterial its like is to be found in man:

“Just as the elements in man allude to and point to the elements in the universe, and his bones to its stones and rocks, his hair to its plants and trees, and the blood that flows in his body and fluids that issue from his eyes, ears, nose and mouth to the spring and mineral waters of the earth, so too does man’s spirit allude to the Spirit World, his faculty of memory to the Preserved Tablet and his power of imagination to the World of Similitudes, and so on. Each of his members and faculties alludes to a different world and bears decisive witness to its existence.” 56

What is life?

One of the subjects today’s biology has remained impotent before is the definition of life; it has been unable to describe its true nature. Bediuzzaman approaches the subject from various angles, and more often notes the purpose of the giving of life. He says that an inanimate creature’s relationship with its surroundings is only in regard to the place in which it is situated, but on life entering it, it attains a state whereby it is connected with the whole universe:

“Life is the most important aim of the universe... and its greatest result...and it is a miraculous truth that makes a tiny creature like a universe...and it is a most wonderful miracle of Power which, just as it is the means of the universe being situated in an animate creature, so too it shows a sort of index of the vast universe in that creature, and connects it with most beings and makes it like a miniature universe.” 57

The question of the purpose of life, and man’s life in particular, and what the function of this majestic universe is have occupied all humanity since the time of Adam. Bediuzzaman provides the answer most concisely and succinctly:

“Since this life is the greatest result and vastest purpose and most valuable fruit of the universe, life too certainly has to have a purpose and result as great as the universe. For just as a tree’s result is its fruit, the fruit’s result by means of its seed is a future tree. Yes, just as the purpose and result of this life is eternal life, so too one of its fruits is thanks, worship, praise, and love for the Ever-Living Giver of Life, who bestows it. And just as this thanks and love and praise and worship is the fruit of life, so too is it the purpose of the universe.” 58

As is shown by this, Bediuzzaman says that the primary purpose of life is to offer thanks to and praise of Almighty God, and another is eternal life. The factory of the universe runs to secure these.

He also considers life from a different angle, approaching it in regard to the balance on the earth and the biological purification in the universe, and points out the perpetual motion of the elements:

“Also, life is a transformation machine in the vast workshop of the universe which continuously purifies on all sides, and cleanses, and produces progress, and illuminates...And it is as though the place where life dwells is a guest-house, a school, a barracks for the caravans of particles, in order to serve, and illuminate, and train them. Quite simply, by means of the machine of life, the Ever-Living Giver of Life makes subtle and illuminates this dark, transitory, lowly world and gives it a sort of permanence, preparing it to go to another perpetual world...” 59

Bediuzzaman establishes the following connection between consciousness and feeling, and life:

“Life is the clarified essence of the universe; consciousness and feeling are the clarified essence of life; the intellect is the clarified essence of consciousness; and so too is the spirit the pure and sheer substance, the stable and autonomous essence of life.” 60

Is there life on other planets?

Bediuzzaman refers to the existence of life on the stars and other planets like this:

“If it was not for life, existence would not be existence... Life is the light of the spirit. Consciousness is the light of life. Since life and consciounsess are important to this great extent... And since this wretched globe, this giddy earth of ours, is filled with uncountable numbers of animate beings, and beings with spirits, and percipient beings, it may surely be judged by truthful conjecture and with certainty that the heavenly palaces, the lofty constellations have living and conscious inhabitants appropriate to them. Like fishes live in water, so too those luminous inhabitants are to be found in the fire of the sun. Fire does not consume light, it rather assists it. Since Pre-Eternal Power observedly creates innumerable living beings and beings with spirits from the most common substances and densest elements, and giving it great importance, transforms dense matter by means of life into subtle matter, and scatters the light of life everywhere in abundance, and gilds most things with the light of consciousness, for sure, with His perfect power and faultless wisdom, that All-Powerful and All-Wise One will not neglect other subtle flowing matter like light and ether, which is close to and appropriate to the spirit; He will not leave it without life, inanimate, without consciousness. Indeed, He creates living and conscious beings in abundance from light and from darkness, from ether, and even from meanings, from air, and even from words. Just as He creates numerous species of animals, so too He creates numerous different spirit beings from those subtle flowing sorts of matter. One kind of them are the angels, another are the kinds of jinn and spirit beings.. The infinite vastness of space and the majestic heavenly constellations with their stars are full of conscious beings and living beings and beings with spirits.” 61

According to Bediuzzaman, all the stars and planets in the universe are inhabited by living creatures. Almighty God has created beings with consciousness, life, and spirit appropriate to each place. Even in the sun, the temperature at the centre of which is 15 million degrees, are creatures appropriate to it manifesting life. With a brilliant logical analogy, he demonstrates clearly that just as fish live in water and humans on land, the airless stars too can be lived on. He shows as an evidence the fact that millions of living beings are created from dense, solid, inanimate earth.

When it is recalled that animate beings exist in anaerobic conditions on the earth, and that one gramme of soil contains close on seven thousand million living creatures, it may be understood how apt Bediuzzaman’s assertions are.

The earth resting on an ox and a fish

One of the questions disputed by science and Islamic philo-sophy in the past was the earth resting on a fish and an ox. Bediuzzaman explained this too in a way that would satisfy both sides:

“This time you ask in your question: ‘The religious scholars say that the earth rests on an ox and a fish. Whereas geography sees it hanging in space and travelling like a star. There is neither an ox nor a fish?’

“The Answer: There is a sound narration attributed to people like Ibn Abbas (May God be pleased with him) which is that they asked The Most Noble Prophet (PBUH): ‘What is the world on?’ He replied: ‘On the ox and the fish.’ In one narration, he said one time, ‘On the ox,’ and on another occasion he said, ‘On the fish.’” 62

Bediuzzaman is stating here that the reason for the matter being misunderstood is the ignorant supposing certain alleg-ories and figures of speech to be literal:

“On comparisons and metaphors falling from the hands of learning to those of ignorance, they are imagined to be literally true with the passage of time.. Thus, with a subtle, sacred comparison and meaningful allusion, two mighty angels were called Sevr and Hut (Ox and Fish). On this entering the common language from the sacred elevated tongue of Prophethood, the comparison was transformed into the literal meaning, and quite simply they took on the form of a truly enormous ox and awesome fish.

“Just as the Qur'an has allegories and comparisons, and teaches most profound matters by means of comparisons and similes to the ordinary people, so too do Hadiths have comparisons and allegory; they express most profound truths through familiar comparisons.” 63

Bediuzzaman states that this Hadith can be understood in three ways:

“The First: ...Almighty God...also appointed to the earth two angels as supervisors and to bear it. The name of one of them is ‘Ox,’ and the name of the other is ‘Fish.’ The reason for His giving these names is this: there are two parts to the earth, one is water, and the other is earth. It is fish that inhabit the part that is water. While agriculture, which is the means of man’s life is with oxen, which inhabit the part of the earth which is earth, and it is on the shoulders of oxen...

“The Second: For example, if it is said: ‘What does this state and rule rest on?,’ it will be said in reply: ‘On the sword and the pen.’ That is, it rests on the courage of the soldier’s sword and the perspicacity and justice of the official’s pen. In just the same way, since the earth is the dwelling-place of animate beings and the commander of animate beings is man, and fish is the means of livelihood of the majority of men who live by the sea, and the means of livelihood of the majority of those who do not live by the sea is through agriculture which is on the shoulders of oxen, and fish is also an important means of trade, for sure, just as the state rests on the sword and the pen, so too it may be said that the earth rests on the ox and the fish. For whenever the ox does not work and the fish does not produce millions of eggs, then man cannot live, and life falls...

“The Third Aspect: In the view of ancient cosmology the sun travelled, and they defined a constellation every thirty degrees of its journey. If hypothetical lines are drawn connecting the stars in the constellations with one another, when a single situation results, sometimes they show the form of a lion, sometimes the form of a fish. Names were given to the constellations as a consequence of those relationships. But in the view of astronomy this century, the sun does not travel...the globe of the earth travels instead of the sun... Each month the earth is in the shadow and likeness of one the heavenly constellations. It is as if the heavenly constellations are represented in the mirror-like yearly orbit of the earth...

“Thus in this respect, indicating to a most profound truth which would be understood many centuries later, the Most Noble Prophet (PBUH) said one time, ‘On the ox,’ because at the time of the question, the earth was in the likeness of the Constellation of the Ox. And on being asked one month later, he said: ‘On the fish.’ For then the earth was in the shadow of the Constellation of the Fish.” 64

Twelve planets

Today it it still claimed that there are eleven planets. Whereas nearly fifty years ago Bediuzzaman Said Nursi spoke of twelve planets, and by pointing the finger of proof where science cannot reach, he demonstrated the far-sightedness of Islam.

“The universe’s lamp, the sun, forms a window onto the existence and Unity of the universe’s Maker that is as brilliant and luminous as the sun itself. Indeed, despite their great differences with regard to size, position, and speed, the twelve planets including our globe known as the solar system are in motion and revolve with perfect order and wisdom and perfect balance without a second's confusion, and are bound to the sun through a Divine law known as gravity, that is, they follow their leader as though in prayer. This demonstrates on a vast scale the tremendousness of Divine Power and the Unity of their Sustainer.” 65

Ethereal matter

Bediuzzaman gives considerable space to subjects like ether, the nature of which is debated in scientific circles. He states that the universe is not empty, but full of matter called ether which transmits electricity, heat and light:

“It is established by science and philosophy that this infinite space is not an endless vacuum, but filled with matter they call ‘ether’... Some matter fills space which is the bond of the laws of the lofty bodies like the laws of attraction and repulsion, and is the transmitter and diffuser of the forces in matter like light, heat, and electricity.” 66

He discusses ether in one respect as a refined ink in which the beings in the universe are written, and in another, as a seed-bed:

“The matter known as ether, which is ......a refined ink for the Glorious Maker’s writing, a most fine raiment for His creating, a leaven of His artefacts, and a tillage for His seeds....” 67

“After the matter ether had been created, it became the centre for the manifestations of the Maker’s first creations. That is to say, after creating the ether, He transformed it into atoms.” 68

According to Bediuzzaman, the origin of atoms is the matter ether.... He accepts that it frequently changes its form:

“Ether, which is matter that is material, unbounded and numerous, is the least stable level of existence and the least tangible, the most changing and the most varying, and the most dispersed through space...” 69

He states that the stars in space are within the ether and that all space is filled with it:

“...of milions of globes and stars thousands of times larger than the globe of the earth some have been made in part stationary in the matter known as ether, which is subtler than air, while others have been made to travel in part as their duty.” 70

“In regard to beings, the matter ether penetrates between them like a flowing liquid... Ethereal matter, on condition it remains as ether, has different states and is of different sorts. Like steam and water and its different states.” 71

Bediuzzaman also says that the seven heavens are made from this ether:

“Indeed, just as three sorts of things, gas, liquid, and solid, occur from the same matter, like steam, water, and ice, so too there is nothing to reasonably prevent there being seven levels of ethereal matter; there is no reason for it to be objected to.... The All-Powerful and Glorious One created the seven heavens from the matter ether, and arranging them set them with an extremely fine and wonderful order, and sowed the stars in them.” 72

Bediuzzzaman states that ether is so fine that a Qur'an could be written with its particles on an atom:

“...Rather that matter’s particles, which are far smaller than an atom...” 73

“If a Qur'an was written by the Pen of Power with particles of ether on an atom..” 74

Bediuzzaman’s views concerning ether may be summarized like this:

1. Ether is the tillage and origin of the atoms and elements.

2. The matter ether is so fine a Qur'an could be written in its particles on an atom.

3. The stars which form the galaxies swim within ethereal matter.

4. Ether is extremely fine and fluid and enters between everything like water. It even fills the space between the nucleus and electrons of an atom.

5. Ether carries out the duty of transmitting and diffusing forces like light, heat, and electricity, and acts also as the bond of the laws of attraction and repulsion.

The coccyx ('ajb al-dhanab)

It is said in a Hadith about the resurrection of the dead that a tiny bone which is part of the coccyx ('ajb al-dhanab) will form the base of the second creation. A physical bone has generally been understood from this Hadith, and it has been a point of dispute. However, Bediuzzaman’s approach to the subject is in keeping with contemporary considerations, and he studies the 'ajb al-dhanab at the atomic level:

“Essential parts and fundamental particles which are like nuclei and seeds and are called the 'ajb al-dhanab in Hadiths, are a sufficent base and foundation for the second creation. The All-Wise Maker will construct the human body on these.” 75

In another work, he likens the resurrection to the creation of a tree from the seed, and a complex animate being from a single-celled being:

“Like the seeds of plants, certain particles known as the 'ajb al-dhanab will be like the seed of man, and at the resurrection the human body will be formed on those particles and will grow.” 76

Evolution

Debate on the question of how animate and inanimate beings appeared and what sort of changes they have undergone till the present time have continued unabated for the last two centuries. The widespread opinion put forward primarily by evolutionists is that complex animate beings have been formed in continuous sequences like chains, and by chance.

Bediuzzaman points out the stages the human embryo undergoes. He recalls that the greater part of the body’s cells are changed every year, and says that this can only occur through purpose, knowledge, and will:

“Look first at the human body. See how under a purpose, a will, a choice, and through particular laws and a specific order and regular movement it progresses from stage to stage, that is, from sperm to a clot of congealed blood, from the clot to a foetus lump, from the lump to flesh and bone, and from flesh and bone to the form of a human being; see how it enters and emerges from mould after mould. Then note carefully how man is perpetuated. He changes the dress of his body each year. This changing of the body occurs through the destruction and remaking of the body’s cells...Indeed, if it is studied with a scientific eye, it is understood that the motion of those particles is not the work of blind chance, for whichever stage a particle enters, it follows the order of that stage. And whichever stage it progresses to, it acts in accordance with that stage’s specified law.” 77

Bediuzzaman states that each species is created independently and in the most perfect form:

“Almighty God gave an existence independent and particular to each individual and species, so that they would be the source of His particular works and the means to the perfections worthy of Him. There is no species that goes back infinitely to pre-eternity, for no species have ascended from the sphere of contingency to that of necessity. And it is well-known that causality in the form of causal sequences is invalid. Also the creation of some things though the change and mutation apparent in this world, that is, their coming newly into existence, is clearly observable. And the creation of some of these is established through reasonable necessity. That means, nothing at all can go back to pre-eternity.

“Likewise, as is proved by biology and botany, the number of species exceeds two hundred thousand. An ‘Adam’, a progenitor, is necessary for these species. In respect of the fact that these ‘Adams’ and progenitors are not in the sphere of necessity and only from that of contigency, they must in any case have come into existence through Divine Power, without intermediaries. For these species following on in continous succession and stretching on to eternity is absurd. And the fancy that some species came into existence from other species is also absurd. For a species born of two other species is generally either barren and or its issue becomes extinct; reproduction cannot be the start of a successive chain.

“In short: just as the source of the successive chains which mankind and the other animals form are cut at the beginning by a progenitor, so too they are cut at the end with a descendent and come to an end.” 78

According to Bediuzzaman, it is not a question of the species coming into existence out of one another in the form of chains. Each species has a progenitor and it was created directly. Their ends too are a descendent. It cannot be the progenitor of another species.*

Bediuzzaman does not stop at stating only that the species were created independently, he points out that each individual too has independent characteristics particular to it. Together with all human beings sharing the attribute of humanity, each individual human being possesses differences both in his features and in his spiritual make-up. And he notes that these cannot be explained by Nature or chance either.


Sualar, 174.
1. Nursi, Bediüzzaman Said, Muhakemat, Sözler Yayinevi, Istanbul 1977, 34.
2. Sünuhat, Sözler Yayinevi, Istanbul 1977, 18.
3. Muhakemat, 35.
4. Bediüzzaman Said Nursi, Tarihçe-i Hayati, Sinan Matbaasi, Istanbul 1960, 77.
5. Nursi, Bediüzzaman Said, Sözler, 275.
6. Muhakemat, 32.
7. Tarihçe-i Hayat, 79.
8. Ibid., 57.
9. Ibid., 523.
10. Nursi, Bediüzzaman Said , Muhakemat, 24.
11. Ibid., 18.
12. Mektûbat, 451.
13. Hutbe-i Samiye, 19.
14. Tarihçe-i Hayat, 80.
15. Ibid., 71.
16. Ibid., 80.
17. Ibid., 84.
18. Ibid., 79.
19. Nursi, Bediüzzaman Said, Divan-i Harb-i Örfî, Sözler Yayinevi, Istanbul 1978, 62.
20. Ibid., 59.
21. Sözler, 51.
22. Lem’alar, 321.
23. Sikke-i Tasdik-i Gaybi, 7.
24. Isârâtü’l-I’caz, 15.
25. Lem’alar, 182.
26. Isârâtü’l-I’caz, 215.
27. Ibid., 216.
28. Sözler, 365.
29. Ibid., 261.
30. Ibid., 170.
31. Isârâtü’l-I’caz, 216.
32. Sözler, 727-728.
33. Kaha, Edip, Yoktan Var Edilemez Mi? Merak Ettiklerimiz, Ed., Tatli, A., 1985.
34. Nursi, Bediüzzaman Said, Lemalar, 182-3.
35. Ibid., 178, 322.
36. Ibid., 172.
37. Ibid., 167.
38. Ibid., 170.
39. Sözler, 204-5.
40. Ibid., 582.
41. Ibid., 582-3.
42. Lem’alar, 170.
43. Sözler, 309.
44. Ibid., 588.
45. Ibid., 584-6.
46. Mektûbat, 220.
47. Ibid., 221.
48. Sözler, 297.
49. Ibid., 294.
50. Ibid., 293.
51. Sualar, 174.
52. Lem’alar, 301.
53. Sualar, 112.
54. Sözler, 295.
55. Ibid., 590-1.
56. Lem’alar, 336.
57. Ibid., 310.
58. Ibid., 311-2.
59. Ibid., 310-1.
60. Ibid., 317.
61. Sözler, 536.
62. Lem’alar, 83.
63. Ibid., 84.
64. Ibid., 85-6.
65. Sözler, 714.
66. Lem’alar, 60-1.
67. Ibid., 323.
68. Isârâtü’l-I’caz, 215.
69. Lem’alar, 322.
70. Ibid., 332.
71. Ibid., 323-4.
72. Ibid., 60-1.
73. Ibid., 323-4.
74. Sözler, 774.
75. Ibid., 555.
76. Isârâtü’l-I’caz, 62.
77. Ibid., 61-2.
78. Ibid., 98-9.

Beyond the ‘Modern’: Said Nursi’s Qur’anic View of Science

The Ottoman architects of the reforms that came to be known as the tanzimat (1839- 1876) were quite impressed by the success achieved by Western Europe, particularly in the military field, in the economy and in the field of science and technology. They, thus, came to be convinced that the very survival of the Ottoman state could only be secured by following the pattern of countries like France or England. With resolve, they had launched a program of modernisation and secularisation of a scope hardly matched by other part of the Muslim World. Indeed, by the 1840’s Turkey, or at least, its capital Istanbul, was a bustling laboratory for western experimentation of a scale hardly witnessed outside Europe if one excluded Russia. The Modernisation that the early reformists hoped to achieve depended heavily on the upward participation of the citizens. For that participation to be effective, it was an imperative that the state took steps towards ‘ameliorating’ the education of its citizens in such ways that it could in turn recruit from their midst cadres to fill in executive positions in the administration, or in the corps of the army. To this end, new institutions of learning, a new concept of education, that of education ‘as a means for progress’, and a new concept of knowledge, that of ma’arif as opposed to the traditional concept of ilm began to emerge.
This bifurcation marked the beginning of a gradual secularisation process of education that continued on unabated well after the tanzimat period. Beginning from the early 1870’s, an intensive publishing activity combined with a more accelerated translation movement contributed to an unprecedented popularisation of modern science as well as modern western philosophy. By the end of the 1890’s, Turkish litterateurs and intelligentsia in the Ottoman capital were inclined to accept the premises of Western scientific thought en masse and unquestioningly, leading to the appearance of a new class of intellectuals, and new trends of thought that were about to mount the most serious challenge to the Islamic culture and values.

As opponents to the ‘westernist’ reforms of the tanzimat (New Regulations), both Young Ottomans and the regime of Sultan Abdulhamid II (1876- 1909) were aware of the growing disdain for religion and carried many attempts to counter the intellectual encroachments of the West. However, neither had any hesitation about acquiring western science and technology, as both did not see any conflict between the principles of Islam and those of modern science. When Said Nursi (1873 - 1960) first stayed in Istanbul from 1907 to 1909, and later during the Young Turk rule, he was often in the thick of these apologetic debates. This early period of his life, he named the ‘old Said’.
Following the fall of the caliphate, and the birth of the New Republic, the process of secularisation that began almost a hundred years ago, had become almost comprehensive, and had taken quite a radical turn by comparison to earlier times. The unprecedented zeal with which the Kemalist regime had gone about implementing its western model of society had far reaching consequences on education. The year 1924 saw the dissolution of the medreses and all other kinds of religious schools, and the proscription of the teaching of religion in all state schools. In 1925, laws were passed to officially close all Sufi orders; the little religious education that remained at the higher level was effectively terminated with the closure of the Faculty of Theology at the University of Istanbul in 1933.[1] In 1928, a prominent thinker of the Kemalist period would thus write:
The function of religion is not to provide men with knowledge but with the will and power to live…The more religion leaves explanation of the events of the universe and the search for the means of influencing them to science, the more it assumes this pragmatic and moral appearance….Then, it is faith which manifests itself as an absolute subjugation to a moral ideal that can develop in harmony with the present-day conditions of civilization and science.[2]

If this trend of secularism had, somewhat, looked askance, at the Islamic intellectual tradition, in other intellectual quarters, though, a kind of atheistic rationalism using the claim of modern science was about to launch a more aggressive onslaught on religion and its scriptures. The very essentials and springs of religion; such as the belief in the existence of God, His power to create, in prophecy, and the ‘Day of Judgment’ began to be painted as mere ‘superstitions’ in many intellectual circles and schools. Said Nursi’s résistance to the western intellectual infringement presented by positivism, materialism, or atheistic rationalism took place against the background of these important transformations and polarized intellectual atmosphere. In what follows, emphasis is placed on some of his arguments against the premises of modern scientific thought, which formed the basis of those philosophies.
Understanding the position of Said Nursi vis-à-vis modern science and philosophy is not a straightforward task and can be quite a source of confusion. Chief among these sources of confusion may arise from oversights related to the development of the intellectual history of the author of the Risale-i- Nur[3] (The Epistles of Light). Nursi had divided his life into two distinct parts: Old Said, a person devoted to ‘politics’ and ‘speculative philosophy’, and ‘New Said: who repudiated the ‘old Said’, taking a new intellectual direction.[4] Another source of confusion might arise from the discourse of the Risale itself. Although, the text of the Risale is replete with the poetry and terminology of the Sufi narrative, it boasts with myriads of proofs, arguments and demonstrations. Nursi warns us against rushing to judge his demonstrative proofs (al burhan al-istidalali) as nazar (speculative thought). He says,

Know that the issues you come across upon studying my work, although they present themselves in the forms of demonstration and proofs, they can hardly be called speculation or ‘nazar’. No! They are but intuitive (hadsiyya) insights which were recorded, bound and then retained by the lights of certitude that overflow from the Generous Qur’an.[5] .
The ‘rational mood’ of the Risale could easily lead one to label its author with a rationalism or for that matter a ‘modernism’ that is far from being accurate.[6] Indeed, this confusion may very well arise from the modern understanding of ’aql (intellect) that has become preponderant in Muslim scholarship, which is generally alien to Nursi’s particular type of intellection i.e. al’aql al - imani.
The Risale is an exegesis and elucidation of the message of the Qur’an during an age in which ‘disbelief and misguidance are advocated in the guise of science and knowledge’[7]. The discourses of Nursi set up arguments with the aim of showing the absurdity and ‘illogicality’ of the modern paradigm and the truth and universality of the Qur’anic worldview. From this point of view, Nursi is really addressing a crisis of meaning. Consequently, his critique of science could not confine itself to an ‘offense’ but had to serve as a means for ‘collective salvation’[8]. Hence, it had to go beyond ‘offence’ and attempt to ‘redeem’[9] this modern scientific mind. This semblance of ‘rational discourse’ Nursi argues, ought not be seen as ‘acquiescence’ to the demands of the modern mind, but rather as a ‘mercy’ and a ‘cure’ to the ills of the ‘modern mind’ caught in the webs of ‘human’ philosophy. Nursi says, ” given that the issues [of the Risale], present themselves in the guise of demonstrative proofs (ke’ennaha muberhana istidlaliyya), they could serve as ‘rescue ladders’, saving those who have erred in the path of thought and knowledge (min jihati al-fikri wa l’ilmi) from slipping into the abyss of philosophy.”[10] Nevertheless, the difference between the ‘offensive’ and the ‘redemptive’ approaches may seem quite blurry in the Risale. Thus, statements such as, “At the end of time, mankind will spill into science and learning. It will obtain all its strength from science (‘ilm).Power and rule will pass to the hand of science (‘ilm),”[11] may be more problematic than meet the eye and deserves careful attention.

The Crucial role of the Universe in the Risale
In one of his early works, Muhakamat first published in 1911, Nursi lays down the methodological principles for understanding the Qur’an. One important principle that is directly related to the issue of science[12] is the role of the universe in confirming the veracity of revelation since imitation in matters of faith is regarded as unacceptable by many quarters in Islam. Nursi, asserts that the Qur’an and the cosmos cannot be understood separately; he describes the Qur’an as “the eternal interpreter of the various tongues reciting the verses of creation” and as “The revealer of the treasuries of the divine names hidden in the heavens and on the earth; the key to the truth concealed beneath the lines of events.”[13] That is, the Qur’an recites the cosmic signs (ayat)[14], which pervade the world, in such a way that it turns the cosmos’ constant motion, changes and renewal, into ‘meaningful’ activities. For Nursi the cosmos is not just a metaphor for the Qur’an: it is the Quran in viva vox. The Risale spares no effort, through proofs and cogent arguments, to demonstrate that the meaningful activities in the cosmos are a kind of speech; each being each event, each change is like a word and their being in constant motion is an infinitable speech glorifying God.[15]
In short, just like the Qur’an is God’s speech through word and discourse, the cosmos is His speech through deed and act.[16] Nursi says that the Creator makes the cosmos speak through the Qur’an, which is “the tongue of the unseen world in the manifest world.” Both have a common origin: the preserved tablet, which contains the heavenly Book, but whereas one proceeds from God’s attribute of speech, the other proceeds from His attribute of ‘will’. In other words, what He says is what He wills in “kun!’ (Be), and what He wills is what He says in ‘qul!’ (Say).
Nursi explains that ‘in order to describe His act to both eye and ear, the Maker describes His act while performing it: as a true artist, He unravels His art as He works it, and as a true Bestower of bounties He displays His boons in the very act of bestowing. As such, His very word constitutes His very act and vice versa. The Creator speaks as He creates; and thus He unites word and act through the ‘audible’ Qur’an and the cosmic Qur’an in one revelation. Following this vision, it can be said that on the one hand the Qur’an interprets or rather translates the speech of the cosmos and its ayat al- takwiniyya (cosmic signs/verses), while on the other, the cosmos witnesses to the truth of the ayat al-tadwiniyya (Qur’anic verses) and reveal their import. Given the importance of the cosmos for Nursi, it is not difficult to understand that up to the First World War, he was favorable to science through which he sought to mediate the revelation of the Qur’an in the hope that it would eventually help uncover the signs of God in the world.[17]

The Old Said and the Islamic Tradition of Knowledge
The Qur’an speaks extensively of the cosmos and invites its readers to seek God’s signs ‘in the horizons,’ that is, in the outer world, ‘and in themselves’ (41:53). Annemarie Schimmel notes that this verse could legitimately be understood as encouraging Muslim scholars and scientists ‘to look deeper and deeper into the marvel of nature, as well as the marvels which the human being contains in himself, and to invent ever new ways for a profounder understanding of the world.”[18] She also mentions al-Ghazzali (1058-1111), who wrote in his Ihya ‘ulum al-din that the real muwahhid (monotheist) is the one who looks at the world because it is created by God, and because it gives him the possibility of seeing God in His signs and worshipping Him.[19]
Al-Ghazzali, a representative of the Ash’ari school of kalam (theology), is well known for his critique of Greek metaphysics because it was incompatible with fundamentals of the Islamic beliefs. Osman Bakar contends that al-Ghazzali disagreed with the Muslim philosophers on some metaphysical issues: he had argued against the use of the philosophical method of the falasifa, which he found wanting particularly when it was brought to bear on issues of a metaphysical order. However, Bakar reminds us that al-Ghazzali warned the Muslims not to oppose science just because it had been associated with the philosophers.[20] Al-Ghazzali thought that the Muslim philosophers’ influence was due to their pragmatic success in the natural sciences. In order to solve this problem, he excluded philosophy from his classification of the sciences.[21]
His approach was to put forward the a priori and a posteriori character of science and establish the speculative character of philosophy. From this stand point, al-Ghazzali maintained that the philosophers were right as far the mathematical and natural sciences were concerned but wrong in the field of philosophy. In his Munqidh min al- dalal, al-Ghazzali accepted science on the ground that it can be useful to mankind, and referred to the services of medicine to make his point. Hence, in his classification, science fell under the category of ‘fard al-kifaya’, i.e. a knowledge that a section of the population was required to acquire. As opposed to philosophy, he viewed the pursuit of this knowledge as ‘harmless’, in that science was inherently relative (i’tibari) with no claim to ultimate knowledge of reality or haqiqa. What is noteworthy though is that al-Ghazzali in spite of his criticism of the philosophers, accepted Aristotelian logic as universally valid and most of all neutral. This position casts a different light on al-Ghazzali’s final stance on science particularly from the vantage point of the modern era.
Al-Ghazzali’s position on logic continued to have a significant influence over the intellectual development of the Muslim world, despite the important critique of Ibn Taymiyya. Indeed, its epistemological traces can be gleaned from Nursi’s early works.[22] The end of the First World War and that of the Ottoman Caliphate terminated the first part of Nursi’s life[23], the period of the “Old Said”, as he himself called it later. For many reasons that exceed the scope of this paper, Nursi entered a completely new phase in his life; he was as he himself confessed, a ‘New Said.’ New Said admits that Old Said was not very aware of the philosophical underpinnings of modern science, and like al-Ghazzali, had taken its logic prima facie. Unwittingly, he came to view science as a ‘candid student’ of the universe and hence as potentially helpful in uncovering the cosmic signs and verifying the veracity of the cosmic reality of tawhid. Like the Muslim philosophers Old Said too, took the principle of combining human philosophy with Qur’anic wisdom for granted.[24]
Nursi describes one of his spiritual awakenings right after the First World War. He searched the Islamic sciences and also philosophy and the sciences he had learned up to that time for consolation and hope. He describes the sciences and Western philosophy as “in part misguidance and in part trivia or superfluous.” He says,
“Quite in error I had imagined those philosophical sciences to be the source of progress and means of illumination. However, they had sullied my spirit and been an obstacle for my spiritual development. Suddenly, through God’s mercy and munificence, the sacred wisdom of the Qur’an came to my assistance. As is explained in many parts of the Risale-i Nur, it washed away and cleansed the dirt of those philosophical matters. The spiritual darkness arising from science had drowned my spirit into the universe. Whichever way I looked seeking a light, I could find not a gleam in those matters, I could not breathe. And so it continued until the instruction in divine unity (tawhid) given by the Qur’anic phrase ‘There is no deity but He’ dispersed all those layers of darkness. ”[25]
It is here that the New Said starts. Nursi had by then “shed his old philosophical guise, and put on a new one, the robe of wisdom. Here we see the death of Nursi the philosopher and the birth of Nursi the sage”[26].
One of the radical changes that New Said had undergone has a direct bearing on his views on modern science. He now felt the need to get deeper at the roots of the philosophy underpinning this science. Al-Ghazzali’s stance on science coupled with his convictions about Aristotelian logic might have constituted a, somewhat, ‘acceptable’ position in an intellectual climate in which medieval science was at least searching for an anchor in religion. Eight centuries later, however, in an age where secular modern science became the dominant paradigm, science, as it developed in the West, has been in the main identified with ‘truth and objective reality’ and religion with ‘superstitions and subjective faith’. Al-Ghazzali’s approach to logic and by extension to science needed, therefore, an overhaul revision. As for the approaches professed by such philosophers as al- Farabi, Ibn Sina, and Ibn Rushd, they needed to be ‘repudiated’. Although abstract rational inquiry allowed for the combination of philosophy and wisdom at some point in history, the social and political upheaval that shook history and undermined society with a shocking effect on humanity refuted the possibility of such combination.
Nursi was aware that this sociopolitical upheaval was but an effect of the impact on Western societies of the intellectual revolution carried out by modern philosophy against religion. Taha ‘Abdel Rahman says that:
Such strange contradiction between reason’s permission for the combining of philosophy and wisdom and the refutation of this possibility by the lived reality preoccupied Nursi’s thought for a long time, prompting him to review his philosophical position and, consequently, to reconsider the established view among Islamic philosophers that philosophy and wisdom are connected interpenetratively like sisters or associatively like friends.[27]
One of the major merits of New Said’s new intellectual journey is his impeccable refutation of the very logic of modern science and the cognitive claims of its philosophy[28]. His critique of causation[29] on which the ontology of modern science rested is unique. [30]

The Weight of Science in the Scales of the New Said
Historically, the horizontal dimension of life refers to the point in time when Man has forsaken his vertical dimension: heaven, to realize his ‘earthly’ utopia instead. The horizontal dimension, whose origin may be traced back to the renaissance, marks the time when human fulfilment was seen as no longer above the cosmos but ‘down here’ in time and space. The way nature has been studied and understood in the context of this ‘horizontal’ dimension typifies the modern mind whose main characteristics are “its going ahead in the world which is determined by time and space, causality and substance…indefinitely, without any termination”, and its endless attempt at “controlling nature… without ever asking about the purpose of this controlling.” Typical of this mind are also its obsession with “making everything into calculable objects which can be described in terms of numbers, [so that] they can be managed, divided, and put together again… it is a calculating reason…a tool [in the hand] of the business man, the technician, or of scientific analysis.” [31] Hence, for the modern mind nature is not to be contemplated, but coerced. Things that lie therein this ‘open Book of Nature’ are truncated and cut off from their vertical connection, causing them disfiguration and loss of their ‘symbolic’ meaning.
Nursi argued that the modern scientific formulation and vision of reality is anchored in a faulty understanding which delivers a distorted meaning of being. As early as 1926 the New Said took the hermeneutical dimension of science to task. Commenting on the verse, “And he who has been given wisdom has been given great good.” (2: 269), he compared ‘sacred Qur’anic wisdom’ with the philosophy of science at an ontological level and used a parable to illustrate the great difference between the knowledge imparted by ‘human’ philosophy and the one diffused by revelation. A king, he relates, showed one day an artistically bejewelled ‘heavenly’ book to a ‘philosopher’ and a ‘sage’ and asked them to both write a paper about its value and wisdom. As the ‘philosopher’ in the parable had hardly any knowledge of the language in which the book was written, he confined his deliberations to the shapes of the letters, their numbers, their inter-relationships, and to the chemical composition of the ink and paper and so on.[32]
The upshot of Nursi’s parable is that unlike the sage, the student of ‘human’ philosophy does not realize that words are symbols and views them as ‘words’ per se, or as essences pointing to their selves. In this way, it does not even dawn on him that he is before a ‘Book’ whose words convey meanings beyond their apparent shape, size and so forth. Having failed to be aware that ‘words’ have significations, let alone grasping their meaning, whatever ‘human’ philosophy advances, it cannot be said that it has knowledge of the ‘Book of Nature’. Hence, for Nursi
‘Human’ philosophy, [be it natural philosophy, the philosophy of life, existentialism or modern science], looks at things from that aspect that pertain to their essences and their causes. It regards them as objects or concrete beings bearing meaning in themselves (ma’na ismi). Wisdom [the knowledge revealed by God] on the other hand, perceives beings as bearing the meaning of another (ma’na harfi): they are collocations or ‘letters’ of a ‘mighty Book’. Confined to its ismi method, modern science ‘sunk’ into the ‘decorations’: the external and literal meaning of the cosmic text. Eventually, it veered away from the path of the truth.”[33]

For Nursi then a philosophy that is not guided and ‘reigned in’ by Divine wisdom “is a sophistry divorced from reality and an insult to the Universe.”[34]
During that period which saw him fall into a deep existential and spiritual crisis, the old Said had often revisited modern science and philosophy to see if he could find a light or a cure. But, in the end he deplored the utter poverty of these branches of learning, as they hardly addressed the ‘ultimate’ questions facing mankind or if they did they soon fell into the quagmire of doubts, making his struggles even more difficult.[35] “Astronomy”, he says, “ is busy with ‘learning what the rings around Saturn are like’, while statistics frets over ‘how many chickens there are in America’,[36] and so are other branches of knowledge according to Nursi engrossed in the same vein in other non-essential issues. However, to the primordial questions that arise from our existential predicament such as: ‘What is the meaning of my being and of all being which I am surrounded by? Where do I come from and where am I ultimately going? How can I save my self and brake free from the mechanic chain of causes and their determinacy? Modern science and the philosophies that embrace it are utterly bankrupt, offering neither solace nor human perfection.[37]
Nursi says that in older times misguidance came from ignorance and hence it was easy to eliminate. In modern times, misguidance is not easy to eradicate because it arises from science and learning, and so he felt the need to expound the truths of belief at great length with many comparisons “proceeding from the effulgence of the Qur’an”. The Qur’an urges the intellect to investigate the signs in the universe and calls on the heart to testify to the divine messages they bear.[38]
The darkness and ‘nihility’ of ‘human’ philosophy is often for Nursi the most effective contrast to bring into relief the light of the wisdom of revelation, therefore it is no surprise to find in the Risale numerous comparisons between those two avenues of knowledge. How each views and understands being is often the main theme of this type of expositions. For example, the Qur’an, he says, speaks of the sun as a revolving lamp; it does not speak of the sun for itself, but as center of a system, that mirrors the Maker’s attributes of perfection. By declaring, “And (We) set the sun as a lantern” (71: 16) the Qur’an depicts the world as a home prepared for man and the living-created beings. It infers that the sun is a subjugated servant, and thus reveals the mercy and bestowal of the Creator. As for the ‘foolish and prattling’ philosophy and science, it speaks of the sun as “a vast burning liquid mass that storms through the universe, causing the planets which have been flung off from it to revolve around it. Its mass is such-and-such. It is this, it is that.”[39] Apart from terrible dread and bewilderment, Nursi wonders whether the human spirit can derive anything else from such ‘delirious’ expositions.
As we will see, Nursi does not so much object to the subject of science as he does to the way it deals with it. Modern Science just misses the meaning of the world and that is why, despite all ‘its pretentious claims, its inside is hollow’.[40] For Nursi only revelation can impart on man knowledge of the reality of the world. Human reason is not a source of knowledge but a tool only, as to the sound intellect, ‘the intellect of faith’, it commands that revelation be followed because all that revelation says is ‘reasonable’ since what its witnesses can be observed in the universe, and attested by the heart[41].

The Way of Prophethood vs. The Way of Human Philosophy
For Nursi there have always been two main avenues to knowledge, two main currents in the world, from the time of Adam up to now: one which he calls the way of prophethood and religion, the other the way of human philosophy in its various forms: Whenever those two ways have been in agreement and united, that is to say, whenever philosophy sought refuge with religion and obeyed it, humanity has experienced happiness and a blissful social life. But whenever the gap between them widened and they reached a bifurcation and separated, all the light and goodness rallied around the way of Prophethood, religion and wisdom on the right side, and all evils and misconceptions gathered to follow the way of ‘human’ philosophy on the left.[42]
From Nursi’s works it is understood that philosophy or science become wisdom when they serve the line of prophethood, that is when they study the universe in accordance with the purpose of creation as taught in revelation. Nursi contends that given the limitations of human reason, there is no other way to reach reality. The line of prophethood teaches that man’s ownership of his life is only apparent and temporary. The continuance of his existence depends on the creativity of another. When one accepts that the essence of his existence has a harfi (symbolic)[43] meaning, he understands that his being does pertain to his ‘self’ but carries the meaning of another. Consequently, he realizes that all things have a harfi meaning; they are like mirrors to the attributes of the ‘wholly-other’. As darkness is the mirror to light, so beings act in many respects as mirrors to the Maker attributes due to the contrast of opposites; they reflect His power through their intrinsic powerlessness, and His perfection through their deficiency.[44]
No sooner than Man listens to the ‘cosmic prayers of inherent powerlessness’ that these beings immaculately murmur in concert, he witnesses how these prayers are instantly and constantly answered to with ‘cosmic sustenance and mercy’. He himself is then beckoned to open up to ‘the grace of the Divine Names’, and begins to prepare himself to hand over all things to their real owner and attain true affirmation of tawhid.[45] Whoever is blessed with this ‘living faith’ understands the reality of divine unity in the cosmos and in the Qur’an because that one lives it and witnesses it.
To be sure, the harfi meaning is no mere cogitation, nor is it a produce of speculative thought, although, as we mentioned at the beginning, the Risale often appears in the garb of demonstrative arguments and proofs. Harfi meaning is an outcome of ‘fruitional tastes’ (fuyudhat qur’aniyya) unbossomed from the Qur’an whose lights have shun on ‘impotent intellect of one who accepts one’s intrinsic weakness’. It is an outcome of divine ‘grace’, and not ‘genius’, for the intellect that is candidate to witness to the truths of the harfi meaning is not the intellect that knows ‘by and of itself’ but one that ‘knows by and from God’. Not only does this intellect follow the guidance of the revelation, it is in constant experience and witnessing of its lights.
The way of philosophy, which has not melted into the way of prophethood, represents him who forgets the wisdom behind his creation, and assumes his existence purports strictly to an ismi (nominative) meaning. This one claims that he owns his existence and his life and imagines himself to be the real master in his sphere of disposal. This second attitude echoes Heidegger‘s Dasein who is unable to stand the thought that he is not his ‘own’ creation. Richard Rorty explains that when Heidegger says that Dasein is guilty, he has in mind the fact that it speaks somebody else’s language rather than one of its own, and lives in a world it never made, a world, which, for this reason, is not his home. Dasein knows it is only contingently there, ‘thrown’ in the universe as it were, where it is ‘not meaning’ what it is speaking.[46]
Nursi explains that when one does not accept to surrender to this reality and pretends that one’s existence is independent of one’s sustainer, one is bound to compare everything to oneself and claims that everything owns itself. This one assumes that beings have an ismi (nominative function); they carry no meaning other than themselves. Dasein estrangement in the world stems from this self-understanding and essentialism. He fails to see their divine origin and vertical connection, he cannot but see them as objects ‘thrown’ in the world, left to their own devices, like orphans having to fight for their own survival. This represents for Nursi the typical predicament of the Man of shirk (i.e. ascribing partners to God and dividing His sovereignty among things), which leads Man to fall in great darkness committing not only “a great transgression” (91:10) against himself but against the whole of creation by relegating them to meaninglessness. Under the sway of his delusion, Man is in absolute ignorance even if one knows ‘thousands of branches of sciences.’ For, whatever lights one’s senses and thoughts may yield from the cosmos while in this state, “those lights are soon extinguished because one does not find anything within oneself by which to confirm, illuminate and perpetuate them [47]Even if one encounters pure wisdom as claimed, that ‘wisdom’ takes the form of futility, due to its ascribing partners to God or denying Him”.[48]
Comparing the ‘great genius’ of modern science and the ‘guidance of revelation’, Nursi asserts that they cannot be reconciled, for their different origins:
“Guidance descended from the heavens, genius emerged from the earth. Guidance enlightens the heart, which then releases the intellect to work. Genius works in the mind and confuses the heart. Guidance illumines the spirit, making its seeds sprout and flourish; dark nature is illumined by it. Its potentiality for perfection suddenly advances; it makes the carnal soul a docile servant; it gives aspiring man an angelic countenance. As for genius, it looks primarily to the soul (nafs) and material being, it plunges into nature, making the soul an arable field. Under its sway, the animal potentialities develop and flourish; it subjugates the spirit, desiccating its seeds; and brings up the evil in mankind. As to guidance, it gives happiness to life, it spreads light in this life and the next; it exalts mankind.[49]

If Old Said had sought to establish a connection between human philosophy and divine wisdom, the Qur’anic inspiration of the New Said brought him to see their ‘disjunction or subordinatory separation’ as Taha ‘Abdel Rahman puts it. The New Said makes philosophy subservient to wisdom in cases where they agree and wisdom the substitute for philosophy when they contradict each other.[50] Nursi’s critique of ‘human’ philosophy has three dimensions: logical, moral, and figural for the reason that the sage is not content with logical criticism alone.[51] In the following, however, the focus will be on the logical aspect of Nursi’s arguments since allusions to the other dimensions have been touched upon in the previous sections.

Nursi and the Classical and Contemporary Muslim Philosophical Debates

Know O Dear friend! There is an important difference between the path I have followed in the epistle “droplet”, a boon unbosomed from the Qur’an, and the path of those professing ‘thought’ and ‘human’ philosophy. In my way, that most precious water of life is urged to gush out whenever and wherever I choose to dig and beat my staff, while those who are besotted by the glitter of philosophy cling to the idea of putting up pipes and aqueducts to bring in the water from the confines of the universe if not beyond. To this end, they tie up chains and set up ladders and more: having succumbed to the principle of causation, they are compelled to erect and post millions of waterproofs to protect their hush proofs against the destructive attacks of doubts and misgivings. Praise be to God, the Qur’an has given to us the equivalent to the “staff of Moses”, and taught us how to use it that we may extract that aqua vita from anywhere, even from underneath a rock. Hence, the proof of the Qur’an has saved me from undertaking that futile journey beyond the world. It has exempt me from the impossible task and officious chore of ensuring the up-keep of those long pipes and has removed from my heart the fear of falling from braking ladders or jagging pipes in that long and winding road.[52]

Nearly a thousand years ago, the Muslim world was confronted with philosophical and scientific views that seemed to reduce the role of God to a prime mover, a view of Deity that was far from being compatible with the Qur’anic notion of deity. The Muslim philosophers were dedicated to Greek philosophy, which depicted the world as a system operating on natural principles.[53] The God described by al-Farabi and Ibn Sina (Avicenna) is very unlike the God of Islam. The God of the Muslim philosophers is “not capable of listening to his creatures or even knowing what they do, he does not resurrect the dead.”[54]
Leaman compares the role of this God to that of a monarch in a constitutional monarchy who has no significant power to influence events. “No law in Britain is a law unless the Queen signs the necessary documents, but the Queen always signs whatever has been approved by the parliament.”[55] The philosophers believed in a deterministic view of the world, which left little for God to do. Majid Fakhry notes that the determinism of Ibn Rushd (Averroes) “can hardly leave any scope for the belief in an effective providence of God. Averroes, it is true, concedes that God plays the role of Author and Preserver of the universe; but it is difficult to see how this role can be interpreted in any but deistic terms.”[56]
The Ash’ari theologians and among them al-Ghazzali reacted strongly to the philosophers understanding of the world and therefore of God. They refuted horizontal causation because it is incompatible with the omnipotence of God as stated in “God is powerful over all things”[57] a phrase that appears in the Qur’an many times. They rejected that causes had an efficient role in creation but they did not deny causality and order in the world.[58] They endorsed a kind of vertical causation, according to which, every thing is directly related to an effective agent who creates both the cause and the effect in an orderly way.[59]
Ash’arism, “not only survived all criticism levelled at it, but succeeded in attaining a key position in Sunni Islam”[60]: admittedly, it based its doctrines primarily on Qur’anic precepts. What Ash’arism had done though was to merely project the Qur’anic conclusions onto the world without justifying them. They did not engage in a parallel reading of the cosmic signs even though the Qur’an constantly refers the interlocutor to the world and teaches how it should be looked at in order to gain knowledge of the cosmos, himself and God. Unwittingly, in their drive to assert God’s sole agency, the occasionalism that Ash’arism erected as a counter to causation served to undermine knowledge of God that can be gained through knowledge of ‘causal relations’.
Nursi, following the Ash’arite tradition states that to attribute the effects[61] to causes (i.e. created things) is to ascribe them the power to create and thus to associate partners with God. However, Nursi does not refute causation and determinism merely on the ground that they are incompatible with divine unity and omnipotence. Rather, he moves to show that the very horizontal logic of causation is unsubstantiated and that it is in fact a corollary dogma of the ismi approach, which ventures to act as a pressio veri to the ‘speech of the universe’. In doing so, he does not feel the need to abandon knowledge (ma’rifa) that can be gained through the eliciting of causal relations, nor does he feel the need to bestow ‘agential power’ to causes. His, is not about imposing a logic on the cosmos, but ‘listening’ to its logic: the harfi logic. Although, the ismi attitude ventures to act as a blind to the harfi logic, this in the end ransacks it and illumines its dark chains with the bursting light of the vertical ‘lightenings’ of the meta-cosmic text. Nursi’s harfi approach is based on a parallel reading of the world under the light of revelation, which is the light that supplies the intellect with intuitions which in the case of Nursi are unravelled proofs. The conclusions of the Qur’an are not taken for granted but verified through observation of the world.[62]
Nursi establishes that the uniformity of causal sequences is evidence for the significative, symbolic quiddity of things; it does not justify belief in a horizontal causal nexus. The proponents of the ismi approach among contemporary Muslims thinkers react vehemently to the refutation of causation. Their reason is exactly the same as that of Ibn Rushd’s who objected to al-Ghazzali some eight centuries earlier under the alleged reason that knowledge was the necessary concomitant of causation. A contemporary Muslim scholar, Mehdi Golshani contends that the negation of causation, which he identifies as the corollary of determinism, implies that “nothing would be the requisite of another, and anything could be derived from anything, so there would be no room for science.”[63]
Golshani’s view is that God creates through intermediary causes. But if the world operates on natural principles, and if causes are necessarily connected to the effects, where does God fit in except as prime mover or first cause? If causes produce the effects naturally, necessarily, and immutably, how are then things in the world to lead us to witness to the reality and ‘Life’ of their Creator? In other words, if things do not function as signs and symbols to the constant renewal of the divine reality, as in this ismi model of the world, how can we then turn and say that ‘everything’ is a sign of God as held by Golshani? If we say ‘because the Qur’an says so’, there is then some difficult reconciling to do? The harfi meaning of things is not an inherent feature of the ismi model, unless it is introduced ad hoc with no precise role to fulfil[64].
The Muslim proponents of the ismi approach recognize the significance of causality in connection with knowledge, but they, too, like the falasifa start, according to Nursi, with their pre-conceived notion of causation and interpret experience and the world accordingly. But Nursi believes that such interpretation is akin to putting the cart before the horse, since we cannot say anything about the status of causation before we observe the world. Observation however, does not seem to suggest that causation is true. That is why attempts to reconcile causation with the Qur’anic concept of divine unity and omnipotence involve great difficulties and remain conjectural and paradoxical.
‘Allamah Sayyid Tabataba’i writes that “whatever is caused by natural causes is really caused by Allah…The causes do have causality (which he defines as natural causation) because Allah has given it to them…Every cause has been given the power to create the relevant effect; but the real authority is yet in the hands of Allah.”[65] From Nursi’s harfi perspective this last statement is paradoxical: if a cause has the power to create an effect, it has necessary properties with which it produces the effect. But if something is necessary, it exists of itself and from itself; it has not been given existence at any point in time i.e. it is not contingent. However, all observed causes are contingent.[66]
The harfi approach does not deny causality and the order in the world, which is one of the major designata of unity, but it refutes the fact that a cause could create anything, i.e. causation, as groundless. It does not dismiss causes but employs them as signs in attaining knowledge, in the way revelation teaches. It is concerned with showing how every cause and effect and particularly their relationships are signs pointing to the knowledge of the divine attributes and to the laws of the manifestation of those divine names in this world. In other words it is by showing that causation is untrue because unfounded, that Nursi’s approach reveals the harfi nature of things and hence the truth of the teachings of the Qur’an. For Nursi things are not signs (ayat) just because the Qur’an states so, rather the Qur’an says so because things actually function as signs as it can be verified through observation.

Nursi’s Analysis of Ismi Science

Know that most of Man’s ‘earthly’[67] cogitations, his incontrovertible and even self-evident truths are built on ‘customariness’ (ulfa), the source of compounded ignorance. A corruption of serious consequences therefore resides in the very foundations of his knowledge. It is owing to this almost perpetual state of affair, that the Qur’an constantly directs the gazes of mankind towards the recurrent vicissitudes (‘adiyat), beckoning them fervently to look closer at the veils of the ‘ordinary’. For the recurrent, the ordinary and the mundane conceal beneath that ‘extra-ordinary’ activity transiting the very vicissitudes (‘adiyat) of life and the world. Indeed, it is through these that the lights of the Qur’anic stars pierce the dark vaults and tenebrous shrouds of the mind succumbed to ‘customariness’ (ulfa).[68]

Know that due to ‘customariness’, many have ceased to mull over the recurrent vicissitudes (‘adiyat’)[69] of the world, although, these are but inroads of the miracles of Divine power. Having instead confined their gazes to the surface of these perpetually flowing manifestations, they have taken an attitude similar to those who upon perusing the surface of the ocean have failed to bring themselves to see in the sea anything beyond the mere undulations brought about by the caressing of the air and the twinklings of the sunshine. How can they relying only on these superficial observations reach conclusions about the depth of the ocean, the might of its Owner and Creator whose tremendum reins the heavens and the earth and all that lies between?[70]

To be sure, understanding and interpretation of the world for Nursi is a mode of being. Ismi science, i.e. science that proceeds from the intellect of philosophy is based on a flawed understanding of being, dictated by the whims of the soul and cannot lead to reality. Its so-called scientific knowledge is ignorance masquerading as knowledge.[71] Scientific knowledge is based on causation, which is a corollary dogma of ismi (the nominative) meaning. Causation is neither elicited by experience, nor logically justifiable. While dealing primarily with the ‘ills’ of his own soul, Nursi argues extensively against its intellectual claims, demonstrating in various contexts and from many perspectives that there are challenging difficulties in accepting both its claims to ‘divinity’ and its consequent teaching, namely, causation: knowledge presupposes universality, but there can be no universality if the horizontal line of causation is assumed.
Causation is taken to mean that the existence of an effect is necessitated by its causes; it is more than just causality. The ismi meaning takes it for granted that causes are efficient i.e. they produce the effect and sustain its existence. However, Nursi argues that the occurrence of one effect calls for the existence of the whole cosmos and not only its apparent causes, because things are inseparable and inter-related in the cosmos.
Know that an atom may bear the sun and run with it while it could not, in essence, accommodate another atom as attested by evidence. Being similar to the rain drizzles blazing in the sun, atoms of these living beings and their compounds are fit to become vessels for the flashes of the manifestations of the luminous, pre-eternal, absolute, and encompassing power of His pre-eternal infinite knowledge and absolute will. Or else, how could an atom of one of the cells in your eye be the source and origin of the potency, the sensibility and the volition enabling it to carry out its ever-increasing duties in the complex arenas of its operations? Particularly, as we bear in mind that atoms carry out numerous functions and duties. Indeed! Doesn’t it travel in the sensing nerves of the eye, in the veins, and the arteries, and is involved in the operations of visualizing, and intercepting visuals and many more bewildering activities like these? Seeing this wonderful and precise work, this orderly and adorned sculpting, this profound and far-reaching wisdom one is left with the following question. Either every atom and every compound in creation are the origin, and the source for this comprehensive, and perfectly consummate attributes, or else they are the locus and mirrors to the rays of the manifestations of the ‘Pre-eternal Sun’ to whom appertain these Attributes? The first consideration entails difficulties by the number of atoms and their compounds in the world.[72]

In other words, the production of the tiniest effect requires a knowledge, power, will and so on that encompass the whole world, not only in space but also in time. “The one who created the mosquito created both the sun and the Milky Way; and the one who ordered the flea’s stomach clearly set in order the solar system.”[73] If it is not accepted that causes and effects are being made and cannot produce anything[74] it has to be accepted that within each contingent cause there reside infinite creative power, knowledge and will, which is nonsensical and contradictory because each cause being also an effect would have to be both dominant and subjective to all the rest of beings.[75]
From another point of view, Nursi refers to the countless events (creative acts) occurring in countless places all at the same time and without intermediaries, e.g. spring, hatching of eggs and so on. These events, these creative acts proceed from a law of creativity that encompasses all those events. That is the one who gives life to an insect must be the one who creates and gives life to all insects and animals, and whoever spins particles must be the one who sets the celestial bodies in motion, for the law of creativity is a chain and creative acts are tied to it. Nursi concludes that each thing ascribes every other thing to its own Maker, and each creative act attributes all acts to its author.[76]
In respect to the ismi meaning beings in themselves are transitory and accidental. They do not possess in themselves anything that can perpetuate and sustain their existence. But in respect to the harfi meaning, the existence of every thing is directly connected to its Maker and through that connection it is related to all other things in space and in time: each particular gains universality through that vertical connection. Nursi affirms that it is through its connection to the Creator that ‘a fly did away with Nimrod, an ant destroyed Pharaoh’s palace, and a fig seed bears the load of a fig tree.’[77] Within the context of the harfi approach, we may say that universality exists only in relation to the Creator. Were it not for that connection, things would all be like orphans, alien to all the rest of beings and they all would become ‘estranged particulars’ and ‘logically nothings’.[78] The so-called causes and effects would have been horizontally related to each other if they had been necessarily related i.e. if it had been possible to deduce the effect from its cause(s) through a purely rational process, without referring to past observation, which is obviously not possible.
In science, universal statements are inferred from particular ones inductively, while from a logical point of view, universal statements cannot be inferred from particular ones, no matter how numerous and ubiquitous. Inductive inferences could have been justified if the empirical relation between a cause and effect were necessary i.e. a purely logical truth. Inductive logic conjectures that induction is valid, and then concludes that horizontal causation is true; whereas, induction can only be justified if causation i.e. the relation between cause and effect is true. According to Karl Popper, the difficulties of inductive logic are insurmountable. To justify induction, inductive inferences should be employed, and then these will have to be justified by invoking a new principle of induction, and so on ad infinitum. The attempt to base the principle breaks down since it leads to infinite regress.[79] This means that science has no valid method to move from the particular to the universal. A scientific law is the recurrence of particular events, but there is no reason why a collection of contingent particulars should result in a universal law. One of the most important results of the problem of induction is that the cognitive claims of inductive logic, in other words the scientific method, are unjustifiable.
The point Nursi makes is not only that scientific laws are unjustifiable, but more importantly, that every single statement of the form ‘A causes B’ is also unjustifiable. This, nevertheless, neither leads him to deny ‘causes’ and ‘effects’, nor their relations. His concern and arguments are against the nature and interpretation of such relations: the uniformity and order in the universe is wrongly attributed to causation. What is observed is causality, the principle that nothing happened without being caused, and not causation i.e. causes produce the effects.
For Nursi an ‘ordered’ and ‘orderly’ act indicates a proficient agent, but it is not evident at all how unconscious, conflicting, deaf and blind causes can be the agents of effects full of meaningful art and adornment, whilst maintaining le hazard and a theory of chaos at the same time. The wise aims and benefits in effects dismiss causes from ability to create, and instead reveals them as the aqueducts[80] of His mercy and will, handing them over to a Wise Maker Who wants to make Himself known and loved through His ‘cosmic personal and intentional mercy’.[81] Although causes seem adjacent to effects, they are far from reaching one another although they reach out to each other through His mediation. Effects have been tied to causes so that great numbers of Divine Names may be manifested along the distance that separates them, when it is ‘realized’ that causation is an illusion of the ismi vision. Then, it becomes clear that infinite essential power, knowledge, will, compassion, and many other Divine Names are manifestly involved in those relations. [82]
Nursi repeatedly states that causes and things are not efficient, and that to maintain the contrary amounts to attributing a kind of divinity to them[83]. Moreover, horizontal causation is an impediment to the true knowledge, which is the knowledge of God and not the detailed knowledge of the things themselves. But as mentioned earlier, Nursi’s harfi approach is not in favor of abandoning the search for causes. On the contrary, it is in uncovering the relations between causes and effects that one may witness to the Divine Names and obtain knowledge of God, which is according to the Qur’an the aim in the creation of humanity. Nursi often quotes “Read and ponder carefully the lines of this creation;
For, they are sent to you as missives from the supreme heavenly realm.”[84]
The ismi meaning looks to things in their horizontal relations and thus ignores the many other levels of existence. The harfi meaning looks at the ‘effects’ of beings as windows to infinity, to the infinitable Divine Names and Attributes of their Maker. [85]
The Qur’an does not bring out the conditions of the things in existence insofar as they point to their ‘selves’, but in so far as they point to the One who endows them with existence: what is of ‘essence’ in its eyes are those conditions in which they are looking up to their endower. ‘Human’ philosophy and modern science, on the other hand, exploit them for their own dead end, and masquerade them as ‘reals’, objects and nomen agentis, so much, that what gains utmost importance in the eyes of their devotee, ought to be devoted to the conditions in which they are pointing to their own essences. What a world of difference is there between the two schools! [86]
Qur’anic wisdom teaches that an atom or a bee or a flower are signs bearing the meaning of another and therefore they should be looked at on account of that ‘wholly-other’ according to the meaning of “There is nothing but extols His limitless glory and praise” (17: 44).

The Qur’an Reveals the meanings of the Cosmic Recitation

Among the signs of His absolute universal divinity and mercy towards mankind are the inscriptions of a word, or a locution or even a book in a large or a small letter in order that it becomes a ‘manifest’ sign for the thoroughness and comprehensiveness of His knowledge and caring. Take for instance, the creating of the fish in the large letter of the ocean, and the creating of the small ant in the lines of the trees, or the creating of the animal in this dot: the earth. So much so, you find the ants in places one would otherwise consider lifeless, unattended, and totally abandoned. Really, some of the Maker’s creatures bring to mind the calligraphy of the letters ‘Ya’ and ‘Sin’ within which is inscribed in miniature the whole of the Qur’anic verse Yasin. [87]

According to Nursi, the Qur’an interprets the cosmic speech in a way that is congenial to its interlocutors. The Qur’anic verses not only refer to the meanings of the signs in the universe but they also teach how to uncover those meanings. For Nursi, the true meaning of the universe can only be understood through a universal view that the Qur’anic verses and signs reveal. Reflection (tafakkur) for Nursi is not so much on the verses- but essentially by means of the verses (tafakkur bil-ayat). [88] In his view the interpretation of the cosmic signs should proceed under the guidance of the very logic of Qur’anic verses, and is effected by the operations and effulgence of its cosmic signs. Man reaches self-understanding and that of the beings around him when his intellect is in the ‘mode of listening’ to the Qur’an’s cosmic revelations.
The Risale does not claim that God is the creator of beings because the Qur’an says that ‘He is the Creator of everything’ (verses 6: 102; 13: 16; 39: 62; 40: 62). To use the conclusions of the Qur’an to support one’s views, which may or not be compatible with the messages of the Qur’an, is different from confirming the truth of the Qur’an. Although such claim refers to the Qur’an, it does not follow a Qur’anic approach but Aristotelian logic.[89] Similarly, to say that God creates ‘all’, without witnessing how ‘every single’ being is proclaiming to that reality, is no safeguard against the heedlessness (ghafla) and the nonchalance of the soul. Man’s primordial duty consists of “experiencing the meaning of the words concerning the Creator’s Unity and Maker’s Lordship uttered by each of the beings in the world in its particular tongue.”[90]
Nursi insists that true affirmation of divine unity requires that one sees the seal of divine power and lordship (rububiya) on every single thing, and opens up from every thing a window directly onto the light of the divine attributes of perfection or the divine names and thus attain to perpetual awareness of the divine presence.[91] Some of the salient arguments of this affirmation of tawhid as mentioned already are, “Nothing can exist without everything else,”[92] and “Without holding the universe in one’s hand, one cannot create a single particle.”[93] Moreover, Nursi appeals that his teachings on the nature tawhid are consistent not only with the spirit of the Qur’an, but with the path of walaya inaugurated by the Prophet. Commenting on the mi’raj, he says:
“There is within this particular journey a general one and universal ascent during which the prophet heard and saw the Dominical Signs and wonders of Divine Art that encountered his eyes and ears within the universal degrees of the Divine Names…”[94]

He adds further that this was an invitation by way of which God “made [the prophet] journey through both the external face of the world of existence and the face that looks to its Creator.”[95]

The world occupies a vital place in Nursi’s hermeneutical approach to the Qur’an: the world is referred to – in the manner the Qur’an itself instructs and not according to one’s pre-conceptions – in order to understand the Qur’an and confirm its truth. There are signs in every single thing, in every event in the universe; each thing recites through its mode of being, “Say, he is God, the One, the Besought”[96] (112:1-2) and glorifies God (17:44). The whole world recites the Qur’anic verses and express that “there is no deity but He” (9: 31)[97]. Therefore, to witness to the truth of tawhid is not without witnessing that reality in the cosmos.
Let us reiterate, nonetheless, that Nursi urges his readers not to interpret this cosmic text as mere ‘thinkers’ but as ‘witnesses’ (shuhada’). He urges them open with the ‘keys’ of faculties placed in their primordial nature, the secrets of the Divine names, of consciously witnessing the tasbihat and the takbirat of the living beings to their Creator, as they transit in and out of existence respectively, and of observing their worship of the Bestower of life and joining them. Surely this joining is not without worship and humility of heart and intellect, nor is the reading of this cosmic Qur’an possible and accessible without the effulgence of the ‘ideal reader’: the excellent Man of mi‘raj, to whom ‘all beings send their blessings and greetings of peace’. Ultimately, the tawhid journey that Nursi wants to evince reaches its peak through this tazkiya (purification) and awareness of the Prophet’s cosmic reality. Only then the objects of observation are no longer the outward ismi things,
but the soul of the experimenter itself. Nursi explains that through the insight of belief and one’s union with all beings through the connection to the Eternal One, one experiences a boundless existence apart from one’s personal existence.[98]

Harfi Science: Towards a Science of the Future

It is often argued that science explains how things occur in terms of causation but it cannot explain why they exist the way they are. Everything depends for its ultimate explanation on something outside the universe and that is God. Thus, the story goes that things are the way they are because God has so willed. To answer ‘how’ is the domain of science and ‘why’ is that of religion. Within the harfi attitude, we are part of the cosmos and hence we can learn only by asking ‘how’ questions. In order to answer a ‘why’ question that cannot be reduced to a ‘how’, we either have to go outside the universe and investigate it and that is impossible, or we have to accept that God has so willed, given that we know Him.
Since the harfi approach seeks knowledge of God by means of His signs in the world, it is concerned with answering ‘how’ questions. It proceeds in agreement with the Qur’anic verses, which repeatedly bid the reader to consider how things are created,
“Do they never gaze at the clouds pregnant with water, (and observe) how they are created? And at the sky, how it is raised aloft? And the mountains, how firmly they are reared? And the earth, how it is spread out?” (88: 17-20)
“Do they not look at the sky above them- how We have built it and made it beautiful and free of faults?” (50: 6)

The harfi approach is concerned with how things are being made for, as pointed out earlier, it is by establishing the relations between causes and effects that the divine names can be witnessed and knowledge of God reached. Belief in God as taught in the Qur’an is a confirmation of His attributes of perfection in every cause – effect relationship observed. The Qur’an does not restrict the realm of religion to the ‘unseen’ or ‘hidden’ so that belief in ghayb entails belief in the ‘unknowable’. Agreed ‘ghayb’ pertains in many ways to that which transcends human perception and the categories of speculative thought, but the Qur’an is not for blind faith, since in some other ways aspects of ghayb look to our condition, and there is a way ‘from God to humans’ (whether through the Qur’an, the cosmos or the prophets) called wajh Allah. In this sense, there is no bar between this world and ‘the transcendental world’.
The Qur’anic speech is described by Nursi as lisan al-ghayb fi ‘alam al-shahada i.e. ‘the tongue of the world of the unseen in the manifest world’. It clearly shows that there are cosmic evidences for the ‘matters of faith’ such as belief in resurrection. For instance, the Qur’an says,
“Behold, then, the signs of God’s grace - how He gives life to the earth after it had been lifeless! Verily, this Selfsame (God) is indeed the One that can bring the dead to life: for He has power to will anything!” (30: 50)
“And He it is Who sends forth the winds as a glad tiding of His coming grace - so that, when they have brought heavy clouds, We may drive them towards dead land and cause thereby water to descend; and by this means do We cause all manner of fruit to come forth. Even thus shall We cause the dead to come forth: (and this) you ought to keep in mind.” (7: 57)
In the context of the harfi approach there is no distinction between physics and metaphysics as it is the case with the ismi attitude. All attainments, all learning, all progress, and all sciences have for Nursi an eminent reality, which is based on at least one of the divine names, which are the ‘weft and warp’ of the tapestry of the cosmic text. Science finds its perfection and becomes reality when it serves the sacred aims of revelation and makes known the divine names that should constitute its roots matrix.
For instance, medicine fulfills its reality and embodies wisdom when it is based on the name Healer, and Man becomes a student of this science when he is seeking the grace and the healing of that lofty Name. Nursi says that “through observing that name’s compassionate manifestations in the vast pharmacy of the earth, medicine finds its perfection and becomes reality.”[99] Nursi emphasizes that ‘without these perfections, science, as that of today, is transformed into superstition and trivia, or else it gives rise to misguidance like the one spread by naturalist philosophy.’[100] Harfi science - whatever its subject, physics, anthropology or religion - instigates wisdom and perfection; ismi science in opposition, yields superstition and misconception.
At this point, we can safely conclude that science is not a neutral phenomenon for New said, neither is the cosmos as a matter of fact. So what did Nursi mean when he said to high school students who complained to him that their teachers did not mention God, “The sciences you study speak of God and make Him known, each with its own particular tongue. Do not listen to your teachers, listen to them.”[101]? As is clear from all he said to them, Nursi was actually inviting the students to forgo the ismi interpretation of the cosmic signs often force- fed to them by the academy. Indeed, he went on explaining to them how to ‘listen to science’, he was initiating them to the harfi science; he wanted to show them how to look critically with the harfi logic at the so-called natural phenomena and see that they are signs pointing to their Maker and glorifying Him. Given his critique of the very foundations of modern science, Nursi cannot have thought that ismi positive science speaks of God. He himself says, “Through the lights of belief, I have razed the sturdy bastions they call positive sciences and Nature.”[102]
Harfi science as Nursi understands it is an activity within the universal scope of religion.[103] It is not an alternative to religion but an integral part of it. Indeed, Nursi suggests that the Qur’anic verse, “And He taught Adam the names, all of them.” (2: 31) indicates that the greatest miracle upon which the supreme vicegerency of mankind revolves was the gift of true knowledge that can be gained by means of the grace of the Names. Hence, humanity’s most pressing duty is to rise to the heights of divine wisdom by means of spiritual progress and the harfi sciences. In his commentary Nursi argues the above Qur’anic verse addresses our age in the most particular terms, it is as if it were urging us to renounce our ways of understanding knowledge and beckoning us to other worthier directions:
Come on, step forward, adhere to all My Names and rise [it says]! Your forefather (i.e. Adam) was once deceived by Satan, and temporarily fell to the earth from a position like Paradise. Beware! In your progress, do not follow Satan and from the heaven of divine wisdom thus fall into the misguidance of ‘Nature.’ Continuously raising your head and studying carefully My beautiful names, make your sciences and your progress steps by which to ascend to those heavens. Then you may rise to My divine names, which are the realities and sources of your sciences and attainments, and you may look to your Sustainer with your hearts through the telescope of the Names.[104]

Nursi, it may be added, is inviting us to contemplate anew to reach a new understanding of ‘being’. The progress, which he now calls us to, is none other than ‘spiritual progress’ that leads Man towards fulfilling his perfections and raison d’etre. Science is not modern science but that ‘ilm which yields yaqin (certitude), dispels doubt, leading Man to the presence of the Divine and His ma‘rifa. The merit of Said Nursi in this task is his use of an intellectual discourse that is commensurate to our present predicament and cultural condition. This should not lead us in the end to see him as one who was mesmerised by the ‘modern Mind’, but as an intriguing ‘modern’ enigma, fittingly known by the sobriquet of Bediuzzaman, “the non-pareil of his time”.

[1] M. Pacaci; Y. Aktay, “75 Years of Higher Religious Education in Modern Turkey”, The Muslim World, vol. LXXXIX, No. 3-4, Jul-Oct 1999, 389.

[2] Niyazi Berkes, The Development of Secularism in Turkey (London: Hurst & Co, 1998), 497, quoting Mehmet Izzet, Yeni Içtimaiyat Dersleri (2nd ed.; Istanbul, 1928), .278
[3] Risale-i- Nur is the title Said Nursi has given to his Qur’anic commentary. Henceforth, it will be referred to as Risale.

[4] About fifty years ago, Old Said who had been steeped too deeply in intellectual and philosophical sciences tried to find the ultimate truth following the teachings of the great Sufis as well as that of the investigators of ultimate reality from among the philosophers (ahl al-tariqah ,ahl al haqiqah). He could not be satisfied like most of the followers of tariqah with an impetus coming from the heart because he was already under the spell of the ‘intellect’ of philosophy. He was confused as to which path to follow and had to be cured….The Imam al-Rabbani (Sirhindi) transmitted to him an encrypted message, urging him to ‘unify his qiblah’ and find a single master. The old Said surmised: “the true master is the Qur’an.”…Soon, His soul (al-nafs al ammarah) with its knack for refractoriness forced him to a spiritual and intellectual showdown. He confronted it not with his eyes closed; rather, he journeyed through his ordeal with his eyes open just as the Imam al Ghazali, Mewlana Jelaluddin, and the Imam al-Rabbani had journeyed with the eyes of their heart and intellect open in the places where others had closed them. Praise be to God…he found an unfrequented path to truth through the guidance of the Qur’an.
B. S. Nursi,, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri (Istanbul: Sozler Yayinevi, 1999), 29

[5] Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 318

[6] Professor Taha Abdel-Rahman argues that an erroneous differentiation is often made between al-hads al-’aqliyy (‘rational intuition) and al-hads al-mitafiziqiyy (metaphysical intuition), in that the latter could also be of a ‘rational’ nature, relying on peculiar forms of demonstration he calls al-istidlal al-matwiyy (a pregnant demonstration). The latter being a form of demonstration that does not lay out all the premises that are concomitant to that intuition. Intuition, he maintains, depend on the condition and intellectual ability of the interlocutors. While some might understand them without the mediation of premises and demonstrations, others would be in need of them, until these turn, in their case, into intuitions. Thus, he says, “if someone asked what was intuition, my answer to him would be: ‘it is an istidlal matwiyy (a pregnant demonstration), and if he then asked me: ‘what is dhawq (fruitional taste), my answer would be ’aql matwiyy (pregnant intellect), and if he went on asking what is istidlal in this instance? I would say: al-istidlal hads manshur (demonstrative proof is an unraveled or unpacked intuition), similarly, should he ask what is ‘aql, I would retort: al-‘aql dhawq manshur (the intellect is intuition in the mode of unraveling). On this point see, Taha Abdel-Rahman, Hiwarat min ajli l’Mustaqbal (Casablanca: Matba‘at Al-Najah Al-Jadida, 2000), 107-109.

[7]B. S. Nursi, The Supreme sign: The observations of a Traveller Questioning the Universe Concerning his Maker, Trans. By H. Algar (Istanbul: Sozler Nesriyat, 2002) 102-103.
B.S. Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati (Istanbul: Nesil Basim Yayin, 1996), 711; 1683.

[8] As opposed to personal salvation only since the misguidance spread in the name of science has become a collective issue. Nursi writes that, “the Risale-I Nur is not only repairing some minor damage or some small house; it is repairing vast damage and the all-embracing citadel which contains Islam, the stones of which are the size of mountains. And it is not striving to reform only a private heart and an individual conscience; it is striving to cure with the medicines of the Qur’an and belief and the Qur’an’s miraculousness the collective heart and generally-held ideas, which have been breached in awesome fashion by the tools of corruption prepared and stored up over a thousand years, and the general conscience, which is facing corruption through the destruction of the foundations, currents, and marks (sha ‘air) of Islam which are the refuge of all and particularly the mass of believers.” Nursi, the Supreme sign, 96.

[9] Here, ‘offense’ refers to that ‘offensive critique’ in which something like science is attacked and nullified, but without presenting the student of science or the age of science for that matter, with remedies and ways of ‘picking up the pieces’, as it were, resulting from the critique. As for ‘redemptive’, it is used in the sense that although Nursi’s concept of science is completely different from that of modern science, he still uses an intellectual discourse and displays a demonstrative ability, striving for ‘universality’ as contributions that can help science change its course because in some ways he addresses the issues it has failed to resolve in a way it ‘may’ understand.
[10] Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 226.

[11] B. S. Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 107.
It is important to highlight here a confusion that might arise as a result of relying solely on translation when dealing with Nursi. His use of the word ‘ilm, which is usually understood as knowledge, is often translated as science, whereas Nursi himself would use the word fen for modern science.

[12] Not necessarily modern western science for as we will see Nursi has his own Qur’anic understanding of science beyond the modern.

[13] B. S. Nursi, The Words, Trans. S. Vahide (Istanbul: Sozler Nesriyat, 2002), 376-377; 728.
B. S. Nursi, Isharat al-i’caz (Istanbul: Sozler Yayinevi, 1999), 22.

[14] The Qur’an refers to its verses as well as to beings and events with the same word ‘aya’, which means sign The word aya and its plural form ayat occurs in the Qur’an 380 times, mostly referring to the creation, beings and events in it.

[15]B. S. Nursi, The Letters, Trans. S. Vahide (Istanbul: Sozler Nesriyat, 2001), 339-340.
There is a verse in the Qur’an that says, “They will reply: God, who gives speech to all things, has given speech to us (as well).” (41: 21).

[16] B. S. Nursi, The Rays, Trans. S. Vahide (Istanbul: Sozler Nesriyat, 199 8) , 146-149.

[17] Nursi, Isharat al-i’jaz in Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 1216.

[18] A. Schimmel, Reason and Mystical Experience in Sufism, in Intellectual Traditions in Islam Ed. F. Daftary (London: I.B. Tauris, 2000), 143.

[19] Ibid.

[20] O. Bakar, History of Islamic Philosophy (London: Routledge, 1996), Ed. S.H. Nasr and O. Leaman, Vol.II, 938-939.

[21] Al-Ghazzali, The Book of Knowledge,of Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din, Trans. N.A. Faris (Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1962), 36-37.

[22] Ta’liqat, an early work of Nursi, is in fact a commentary on Aristotelian logic.
[23] The years of destruction caused by the First World War, followed by the momentous demise of the Ottoman Caliphate pushed Nursi into an acute spiritual crisis that prompted the overall transformation of his intellectual outlook. The parallels between Nursi’s intellectual journey and that of al-Ghazzali are indeed beyond the scope of this paper, but is worth noting here that both had undergone a long spiritual crisis as a result of their accepting some of the precepts of philosophy. In both one takes notice of that spiritual struggle, that ‘dark night of the soul’, which ends in their case with the victory of the ‘heart’ over the ‘soul (nafs)’, culminating in a birth of a ‘new’ intellect, as it were, and a new Qur’anic Man.


[24] In a treatise written sometimes between 1928 and 1932, the New Said explains why his style differed from that of the Old Said as follows:
“The Old Said and certain (Muslim) thinkers in part accepted the principles of man-made Western philosophy. For even when they argued against the proponents of this philosophy they used their weapons, thus accepting those principles to a degree. They submitted to some of their principles in the form of the physical sciences, believing them to be unshakable and therefore could not demonstrate the true worth of Islam. It was quite simply as though they were grafting Islam with philosophy, the roots of which they supposed to be very deep; as though strengthening it.” Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 560-561
[25] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 711.

[26]T. ‘Abdel Rahman, The Separation of Human Philosophy from the Wisdom of the Qur’an in Said Nursi’s Work, in Islam at the Crossroads, Ed. I. M. Abu Rabi’ (Albany: SUNY, 2003), 202.

[27] T. ‘Abdel Rahman, The Separation of Human Philosophy from the Wisdom of the Qur’an in Said Nursi’s Work, in Islam at the Crossroads, Ed. I. M. Abu Rabi’ (Albany: SUNY, 2003), 201-202.

[28] One of the salient features of Nursi’s critique of science is that it does not confine itself to the ‘destruction’ (and deconstruction) of modern science. By showing that logic and the very processes of creation, for instance, point themselves to the Divine and to the truth of revelation, since it alone could explain creation. Nursi’s ‘offense’ combines an attempt to ‘redeem’ science and cure what Paul Tillich called the ‘schizophrenic split in our consciousness’.

[29]The Ash’ari tradition of refuting causation has been held not only by the scholars of kalam but also by the great Sufis like Ibn ‘Arabi and Rumi. The latter argued in his Mathnawi, that the main mission of the prophets had always been their resistance against the worship of apparent causes, since this delusion opened the gates of polytheism and ungratefulness.

[30] It should be made clear that a number of Muslim and non-Muslim scholars had been aware of the limits of the modern scientific mind and argued eloquently against a number of its claims. Aside of Nursi, we are not aware, however, that the ontology of the modern scientific mind, has ever been debunked on the basis of its very premises and on its own turf as concisely and as cogently. See for example Nursi’s treatise on ‘Nature’ and See also Y. B. Mermer, ‘Induction, Science and Causation: Some Critical Reflections’, in Islamic Studies, Vol 35, Autumn 1996, No3. Y. B. Mermer, The Muslim World, vol. LXXXIX, No. 3-4, Jul-Oct 1999, 270-296.

[31] Paul Tillich, The Irrelevance and Relevance of the Christian Message. Ed, Durwood Foster (Ohio: The Pilgrim Press, 1996), 24-25.

[32] Nursi, The Words, 143-145.
Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 456-457.

[33] Nursi, The Words, 145. Italics added.

[34] Ibid

[35] For a detailed auto-biographical account of these intellectual showdowns and spiritual struggles of Said Nursi, see his Al- Mathnawi al-’Arabi al-Nuri

[36] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 111.

[37] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 96; 711.

[38] Nursi, The Supreme Sign, 102-103.
Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 1683.

[39] Nursi , Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 96. The Words, 252.

[40] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 96; The Words, 252.

[41] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 171; 1963.
[42] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 242.

[43] To the extent that words serve to convey a meaning they are symbols like characters in musical notation. Thus, what is meant by ‘symbolic’ in this paper does not relate to what is conveyed by ‘token’ nor is it in any way related to symbolic logic or symbolism. Nursi borrowed the term ‘ma‘na harfi’ from the glossary of Arabic grammar. There, a preposition such as a harf jarr, like a collocation or an isolated letter, has no meaning in itself, but serves to point to a meaning beyond itself (Al-harf ma dalla ‘ala ma’na fi ghayrihi). Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 270.
Nursi uses harfi to allude to both the aspects of things, which looks to their Maker, as well as to the intellect, which as a result of its being cleansed of its ismi vision is made to witness their ‘symbolic’ activity. By contrast, ‘ma‘na ismi’, pertaining to ‘ism’ (noun), bears a meaning in itself and points to itself (ma dalla ‘ala ma’na fi nafsihi). Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 270.
As in the English language the nominative ‘ I’, for instance, is a pronoun denoting a case expressing the ‘subject’ of the verb, one may, in the figurative sense at least, propose ‘nominative mood’ as an English equivalent to ma‘na ismi’. Nursi uses ma‘na ismi or ‘nominative mood’ to allude to the view that holds that Man does actually exert power over things and produces effects. A view, which according to Nursi, leads Man to either ascribe some ‘divinity’ to himself or to the things in his horizon. Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 221. Thus in Nursi’s usage ma‘na ismi is often used to convey ‘ego-philosophy’, speculative thought (nazar), Greek philosophy and the like, all of which cause Man to view beings as independent agents or ‘essences’ contained within concrete objects.

[44] Nursi, The Letters, 286-287.

[45] Nursi, The Words, 557-559.

[46] R. Rorty, Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 108-111.

[47] While the things in the book of nature and the horizons are open, they are locked if the receptacle, the ‘I’ in Man remains hostage to the grip of ‘essentialism’. Nursi, The Words, 557-569. The secret for Nursi lies in unlocking this talisman through worship and prayers. He says: “Know that knowledge received from the horizon of the ‘outer world’ is not free from doubts and delusions. Only when it is remitted to the scanning filters of the heart and the fundus anima (wijdan) is it purified from the disturbing scruples and ascertained. Therefore, as you contemplate this world, perceive it from the centre to the circumference and then the outskirts, and be aware of the reverse, lest you retrogress.” Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 226.

[48] Nursi, The Words, 550.

[49] Nursi, The Words, 747.

[50] ‘Abdel Rahman, The Separation of Human Philosophy from the Wisdom of the Qur’an in Said Nursi’s Work, 206- 209.

[51] Abdel Rahman, The Separation of Human Philosophy from the Wisdom of the Qur’an in Said Nursi’s Work, 202.


[52] Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 170. Italics added.
[53] O. Leaman, Averroes and His Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 1-42. .

[54] O. Leaman, Nursi’s Place in the Ihya’ Tradition, The Muslim World, vol. LXXXIX, No. 3-4, Jul-Oct 1999, 315.

[55] Ibid.

[56] M. Fakhry, Islamic Occasionalism and its Critique by Averroes and Aquinas, (Great Britain: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1958), 121.

[57] There are other verses that attribute the creation to God, “Say: God is the creator of all things” (13: 16), and “Surely His is the creation and the command.” (7:54)

[58] R. M. Frank, The Structure of Created Causality According to al-Ash’ari: An Analysis of the Kitab al-Luma’ 82-164, in Studia Islamica XXV 1969, 14.

[59] M. Fakhry, A History of Islamic History, (New York & London: Columbia University Press, 1970), 234.

[60] H. Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy, Trans. L. Sherrad (London: Islamic Publications Ltd, 1993), 120.

[61] Note that each effect is also a cause and vice versa

[62] Nursi describes the proofs he expounds in his Risale to be at the degree of knowledge of certainty (fi martabati ‘ilm al-yaqin) at the level of witnessing (shuhud) and certainty. The resulting confirmation (tasdiq) of the truths of belief is the outgrowth of both the mind and the emotions of the heart which in this scheme unite and become one i.e. the Qur’anic intellect. B. S. Nursi, al- Malahiq fi Fiqh Da’wa al- Nur , Trans. I. Q. al-Salihi (Istanbul: Sozler Yayinevi, 1995), 112.

[63] M. Golshani, Philosophy of Science from the Qur’anic Perspective, in Toward Islamization of Disciplines ((Herdon: International Islamic Publishing House, 1995), 88.

[64] In relation to this point Nursi writes: “Know dear friend of mine! Sadly, the majority of mankind, it appears, has failed to give this great ‘visible book’, the cosmos, and this highly venerable ‘audible book’, the Qur’an, their due esteem, largely, as a result of ill-conceived thoughts diffused by some of the philosophers, and literati in our midst. Infatuated and absorbed by their ‘I am ness’, as is often the case, philosophers tend to accord “the Necessary Being” only the thin husk of His entire creation. Then, following this ‘wishful thinking’, and absurd ‘tokenism’ they overreach themselves daring to stretch their hands to divide the remains of His Kingdom among imaginary, if not impossible causes, and contrived names and shares that refer back to no real nominee“. Nursi, al-Mathnaw al- ‘Arabi al-Nuri, 307

[65] M. H. Tabataba’i, Al-Mizan: An Exegesis of the Qur’an vol. I, Trans. S.S. Akhtar Rizvi (Tehran: WOFIS, 1973), 112-113.

[66] “Know O friend still under the spell of causes! The creation of a cause with its precise determinations as well as its constant supply with the necessary requisites that makes it fit to bring into being the effect, is not at all easier and worthier, nor is it more perfect and loftier than the creation of the effect within the cause in an instant by the order ‘Be’, from He who, before Him stands equal the atoms, as well as, the solar system.” Nursi, al-Mathnaw al- ‘Arabi al-Nuri, 212.

[67] Nursi usually uses ‘Earthly’ to refer to ‘human’ philosophy, which resists the ‘heavenly knowledge’ or revelation.

[68] Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 324.

[69] This is an interesting passage showing that the author was keen to take the challenge of the materialist philosophers of his time into their own grounds, explaining that the Qur’anic appraisals of matter were more conclusive and ‘positive’ than those of the positivists.
Comparing the cognitive value of the wisdom of the Qur’an with that of the philosophy of science, Nursi holds that the Qur’an shatters the veil of customariness instigated by the ismi vision of modern science and makes us wonder at the divine names manifested in things and events. Nursi, The Words, 150-154.

[70] Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 323.

[71] Nursi, The Words, 576.

[72] Nursi, al-Mathnawi-al-‘Arabi al –Nuri, 226.
[73] Nursi, The Words, 732.

[74] The Qur’an says,
“Those they invoke beside God cannot create anything, since they themselves are but being created.” (16: 20-21)
“Will they, then, ascribe divinity, side by side with Him, unto that which does not create anything since they themselves are created?” (7: 191).
“And yet, some choose to worship instead of Him, (imaginary) deities that cannot create anything but are themselves being created, and have it not within themselves to avert harm from, or bring benefit to, themselves, and have no power over death, nor over life, nor over resurrection!” (25: 3).

[75] Nursi, The Words, 303.
Nursi presents this line of argument as a development of the logic of the Qur’anic verse, “Which is more reasonable: belief in the existence of numerous divine) lords, each of them different from the other-or (in) the One who holds absolute sway over all that exists?” (12:39).

[76] Nursi, The Letters, 392-393. al-Mathnawi-al-‘Arabi al –Nuri, 240.

[77] Nursi, The Flashes (Istanbul: Sozler Nesriyat, 1995), 241.

[78] Nursi, al-Mathnawi-al-‘Arabi al –Nuri, 107; 271.

[79] K. R. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery (London: Hutchinson & Co. Ltd., 1959), 37.

[80] When causation is removed whilst causal relations are maintained, what remains are aqueducts of mercy and will.
[81] Nursi, The Words, 172; 687; 712-713.

[82] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 312-313; 191-192.

[83] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 121; 122; 320; 501; 570; 813; The Letters, 542.

[84] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati,482. al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 227.
[85] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 244; The Words, 565.

[86] Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 74.
[87] al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi al-Nuri, 323.
It has been reported in many a prophetic tradition that the surah Yasin is the heart of the Qur’an. Many calligraphers have put themselves to the task of writing the full content of this verse in miniature inside a larger Arabic letter ‘Ya’ and ‘Sin’. Through this imagery, the author expresses the fact that as a small surah of the Qur’an may comprehend the whole content of the Book; also a small particular creature from the cosmic Qur’an may contain the whole truth of the universe and be an aya or a major sign of God. This is following the logic that the particulars are in Nursi’s tawhidi system ‘particular universals’ enjoying a value akin, and identical to that of the universal.

[88] Nursi, al-Mathnawi al-‘Arabi an-Nuri , 257.

[89] Nursi believes that Greek philosophy springs from a mythological and speculative worldview, and for this reasons it is essentially alien to the Qur’anic spirit of inquiry and the nature of tawhid (divine unity) that nurtures and enlightens that spirit. For Nursi, Greek thought has been an impediment to Islamic thought and “has opened a way from tahqiq (realisation) to taqlid (imitation)”. He says that, “They (some Muslim thinkers) conjured up a resemblance and compatibility between the true logic of the Qur’an and the Hadith, and this fictitious and false (Greek) philosophy and interpreted the Qur’an accordingly. However, the meaning of the Book of Miraculous Exposition is within it. So seek the meanings of the Qur’an in its luminous words, rather than those gimmicks and artifices you sneak in the back-pocket of your mind.” Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 1989.

[90] Nursi, The Words, 140-141
[91] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 121.

[92] Nursi, The Words, 731.

[93] Nursi, The Words, 733.

[94] Nursi, The Words, 584. Italics added.
[95] Ibid.
[96] Nursi, The Words, 304.

[97] Also, 2: 163; 2: 255; 3: 2; 3; 6; 3: 18; 4: 87; 6: 102; 6; 106; 9: 129; 11: 14; 13: 30; 20: 8; 20: 98; 23: 116; 27; 26; 28: 70; 28; 88; 35; 3; 39;6; 40: 3; 40; 62; 44; 8; 59: 22; 64: 13; 73: 9;
Nursi, The Words, 728.

[98] Nursi, The Rays, 72.

[99] Nursi, The Words, 270-271.

[100] Nursi, The Words, 271.

[101] Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati, 954.

[102] Ibid, 379.

[103] The word for ‘religion’ in Arabic is ‘din’; it means primarily “obedience, in particular obedience to a law or to what is conceived as a system of established usages, i.e. something endowed with moral authority.” In this sense everyone has a ‘din’ of moral law as the Qur’an states when it says, “Unto you your din and unto me my din!” (109: 6)
M. Asad, The Message of the Qur’an (Gibraltar: Dar al-Andalus Ltd, 1980), 981.

[104] Nursi, The Words, 270.