Tamseel Mushtaq, Graduate, Jamia Ahmadiyya UK
Muslims may reach a point where they think that reason, i.e. the ability to think and make judgments, may not be able to prove all aspects of faith. There are very clear limitations of reason. However, the teachings of Islam, in particular, can bring us closer to an absolute and objective reality, thereby surpassing the limitations of reason. This claim may unsettle the modern secular mind, so before dismissing it as a blind, medieval or irrational belief, hear me out.
First, it must be made clear that Islam is not opposed to reasoning at all. In fact, Islam encourages its followers to ground their beliefs and doctrines in clear evidence and sound reasoning, in accordance with the laws of nature and shariah. Beliefs are not meant to rest solely on hearsay or unexamined tradition.[1] The English dictionary defines reason as: the ability of a healthy mind to think and make judgments, especially based on practical facts.[2] This is precisely the kind of reasoning that Islam promotes, as the Islamic faith is aligned with the very nature of man.[3]
Historically, religious and political ideologies have opposed reason through the absolute authority of clerics and those in power. This oppression contributed to the rise of movements such as the Enlightenment.[4] The Enlightenment gave society the capacity to reason and to critique religious beliefs, among other things. Consequently, it led many laypeople to believe that faith and reason cannot coexist and gave rise to a popular mindset: “I don’t believe in God, I believe in science.”[5]
However, Islam actually praises the ability to reason. The Promised Messiahas said that the power of reason is the very crown of humanity; its proper use makes a person truly human and opens the door to excellence and limitless progress.[6]
It was Galileo’s use of reason that led to the development of the advanced telescope. Galileo’s observations proved that the sun is the centre of our universe and not the planet Earth. Despite the Inquisition’s suppression of his arguments and proofs for heliocentrism, Galileo’s reasoning eventually overcame these obstacles.[7]
Marie Curie’s commitment to rational inquiry led her to endure extreme fatigue, working long hours in the laboratory to achieve groundbreaking results.[8] Her dedicated scientific approach led to the discovery of Polonium and Radium. Two very important elements for the use of medical treatments and nuclear weapons. The results of her reasoning earned her two Nobel Prizes, lasting recognition and the title “Mother of modern physics.”[9]
Likewise, Prophet Ibrahim’sas ability to reason led him to challenge his own people and even stand in opposition to his own paternal uncle. He defied convention and opposed idolatry. His reasoning made him break all the idols except the chief of them. When the people inquired what happened, his response made the so-called believers ultimately use their minds. He said, “[…] Somebody has surely done this. Here is their chief. But ask them if they can speak.”[10]
The first two sources of knowledge (out of three)
The Promised Messiahas has shed light on the manner in which human reasoning arrives at conclusions in his magnum opus, Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya. He explains that reason is deeply dependent on external factors. Upon closer analysis, our reasoning can be narrowed down to three main stages, which we will refer to as our sources of knowledge. Any example of reasoning ultimately falls within one of the first two categories, while the third will be discussed later:
(1) Historical testimony and established facts
(2) Physical observation and repeated experimentation
To understand the first source of knowledge, we must travel back to our school desks. The structure of teaching and learning is based on this very first stage. In the early phases of acquiring knowledge, a student believes what has been taught with trust and confidence. If this weren’t the case, then intellectual and academic advancement wouldn’t be possible.
A student of geography believes with no further questions that a river is a natural watercourse, whereas canals are artificial channels constructed by man. A student of biology readily learns that the cell is the fundamental building block of all living organisms.
In the same manner, a student of the Islamic faith begins with the foundational belief that the Holy Quran is the word of God, revealed to His messenger, Prophet Muhammadsa.
As our knowledge expands, the human mind naturally begins to question and recognise gaps in understanding. We realise that there is more than what we know. Our reasoning feels the need to rely on a higher stage or seek another source of knowledge. This leads to the second stage: physical observation and repeated experimentation. Through this stage, discoveries emerge. Whenever a discovery is verified, it is preserved as a fact for future generations to build upon.
To rephrase it even more clearly, it is not wrong to say that all the historical testimonies and established facts belonging to the first source of knowledge are, in essence, the outcomes and results of people who acquired that knowledge through the second stage, namely, physical observation and repeated experimentation.
David Julius, equipped with foundational knowledge of the nervous system, hypothesised that there must be specific molecules for detecting heat, cold and pain. He was able to identify the specific protein receptors by conducting experiments involving capsaicin and menthol. Concluding how physical sensations are biologically experienced through the skin.[11]
Paul Berg’s case follows the same pattern. Building upon his prior knowledge of DNA, he laid the foundation for modern genetic engineering. He developed safe methods for recombining DNA, enabling future scientific breakthroughs that were previously impossible.[12]
These examples illustrate how our reasoning operates through two principal sources. Both have driven humanity to several sociological, technological and economic advancements.
Conversely, certain discoveries appeared to contradict past religious doctrines, leading many to distance themselves from faith.[13] Humanity began to assume that perfect certainty, i.e. having a belief where no room for doubt is left, can be achieved through our reasoning.[14]
Yet, this way of thinking is itself a form of blindness. The unquestioning trust once placed in religious authority was simply transferred to human intellect. In doing so, society mirrored the very medieval clerical behaviour it sought to escape, not by suppressing reason, but by opposing religion altogether. Reason was merely a gifted tool to understand reality, and reality, on the other hand, is not limited to the boundaries of reasoning. Because reason holds independently not that much value, it is very dependent on external factors.
Conclusions reached through reasoning are based on existing facts and experiments and cannot anticipate all possible outcomes. Further evidence may always emerge through new experimentation under varying conditions. Even great people who mastered the art of reasoning far better than other people suffered from its limitations.
If reason had been sufficient to grant absolute certainty, Galileo would have foreseen the damage caused by the sunbeams. He would not have lost his eyesight by prolonged solar observations undertaken in defence of heliocentrism.[15] Likewise, if reason alone had been sufficient, Marie Curie’s understanding would have enabled her to determine the deadly exposure to her discovered elements. She would not have died from exposure to radiation in the course of her scientific work.[16]
This clarifies an important principle, which the Promised Messiahas defines as follows: “[…] Perfect certainty means a true and positive belief whereby no room for doubt is left, and one’s heart is fully convinced of, and satisfied with, the matter that was to be ascertained. Any belief that falls short of this criterion cannot be called perfect certainty.”[17]
Similarly, how can reason alone explain why a mother would be able to jump in front of a rushing car to save her young baby? How can reason alone validate why someone would give a portion of their hard-earned wealth to help strangers in distant countries whom they have never met? How can reason alone justify why soldiers would be willing to surrender their own lives and the future of their families out of love for their country?
A similar problem arises among those philosophers who attempt to comprehend the being of God through the lens of human reasoning alone. This approach has resulted in the gradual abandonment of belief in God altogether. They tried their best to fit religion within the limited boundaries of reason. Why?
Philosophers have defended their positions, which Time magazine summarises as follows: “God? Wasn’t he chased out of heaven by Marx, banished to the unconscious by Freud and announced by Nietzsche to be deceased? Did not Darwin drive him out of the Empirical world?”[18]
This reflects a broader failure in human learning: an unwillingness to take the first step toward experiential engagement. We try to adopt a secular framework and place undue confidence in the inherited claims of philosophers and their intellectual authority.
Earlier, I praised the very logical and reasonable stance of Prophet Ibrahimas, challenging the norms of his time. What we do need to understand, however, is that Prophet Ibrahimas was divinely guided.[19] His perception of reality exceeded that of other individuals who claim intellectual brilliance.
Otherwise, how could someone explain that the same Prophet Ibrahimas who urged his own people to ask their idols to respond, allowed himself to be thrown into the fire because he believed in God’s protection?[20] How could someone explain that the same prophet who told King Nimrod that if he were really God, he should make the sun rise from the west, that very same prophet would leave his wife and child behind in a barren desert to survive? Such things clearly oppose reason. [21]
This demonstrates that the chosen people, like Prophet Ibrahimas, have another source of knowledge which gives more, if not absolute, certainty than the above-mentioned two stages commonly relied upon by mankind.
Because our historical testimonies and human experiences would show that when a human body is thrown into fire, the skin would burn and split, body fat would fuel the flames for hours, muscles would contract, and the skeleton would be left charred and exposed.[22] Likewise, our historical testimonies and our human experience would indicate that “abandoning one’s family” constitutes a grave moral betrayal that causes profound and immediate emotional distress, often resulting in lasting psychological and existential harm.[23]
But were these the outcomes of Prophet Ibrahim’sas actions? No, certainly not. The Holy Quran bears witness that when Prophet Ibrahimas was thrown into the fire, God commanded it to become cool and harmless, an outcome that human reason could not have anticipated. [24] Likewise, when Prophet Ibrahimas left his family in the desert to survive, that very land was transformed into a sacred centre from which generations of prophets emerged and which later became the heart of the Islamic faith. Again, an event entirely beyond the predictive reach of human reasoning.
What is the source of absolute knowledge and certainty?
Thus, we arrive at the central question of this discussion: What is the source of absolute knowledge and certainty? The answer lies in the third and highest stage of knowledge, which the Promised Messiahas identifies as revelation. Even if one does not immediately grasp the full depth of revelation, this in no way diminishes its completeness or perfection as a source of knowledge.
Islam claims that its book, the Holy Quran, is the ultimate revealed guidance for humanity towards truth, morality and salvation.[25] Since God is presented as the All-Knowing and the All-Wise, His revelation must be free from error as well.[26] The Quran offers numerous signs for its readers, giving assurance that if the Quran contains these statements, which are independently verified by non-Islamic people, the credibility of the remaining claims must be regarded profoundly as well. History shows that people abandon religion when its sacred text contains contradictions, inaccuracies or even falsehoods. From this, we may conclude that a defining quality of a true divine book is that it contains only verities.
Paul Berg was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1980 for opening the door to genetic engineering and the manipulation of DNA.[27] Yet, God Almighty warned us through His illiterate prophet that He will incite us, and we will try to alter Allah’s creation.[28]
David Julius got his Nobel Prize in physiology in 2021 for identifying the receptors for sensing pain through our skin.[29] Remarkably, the All-Wise God declared through His polyvalent verses that the skin feels the pain more than the flesh.[30]
In the early days of learning, a student accepts what he was taught without hesitation. This trust establishes a stable foundation upon which further academic and scientific progress is built. In the same manner, a student of Islam begins his spiritual journey by accepting the Holy Quran with conviction, and as his spiritual understanding expands, new doors of verities and certainties open.
Although the Holy Book of Islam is a moral and spiritual guide rather than a scientific manual, it contains numerous concepts that the modern world is only now beginning to discover. Are all these signs not a valid proof that revelation is the source of knowledge beyond our intellectual needs?
A student of biology learns the fundamental components of organisms. Yet, how could the Holy Quran, while illustrating the natural and instinctive state of man that acquires reflection for moral progress, remarkably describe the stages and development of human embryology?[31] Is elaborating an unseen biological process without any scientific tool not evidence of divine knowledge?
A student of geography understands that canals are man-made channels. Yet, how could the Holy Quran, while unfolding the conscience and making man comprehend the high moral qualities within us, foretell the formation of the Suez Canal?[32] How could the Holy Quran foretell us the meeting of the Red Sea and the Mediterranean from which pearls and coral emerge? This phenomenon, now called Lessepsian migration, directly reflects the Quranic description.[33] Is pointing to such a big phenomenon before humanity acquired the means for it, not a proof of our God’s revelation?
All the above-mentioned Quranic concepts have already been confirmed by human reasoning and scientific discovery, demonstrating that God revealed these truths 1400 years ago, long before modern humanity understood them. Logically, this also implies that revelation contains additional truths that we have not yet discovered, because our limited reasoning has not grasped them. While human reason can comprehend some aspects of reality, revelation encompasses all truths, including those beyond our current understanding. This is referred to in Islamic terminology as belief in the unseen.[34]
European philosophers, working with limited knowledge, could not fully comprehend divine revelation. As a result, their philosophical ideas about God Almighty and religion in general were incomplete and relied more on human imagination than on evidence or proof. What they failed to understand is that the laws of nature do not depend upon human understanding. Our understanding, however, does depend on the laws of nature.[35]
Darwin’s limited understanding led him to conclude that human existence occurred purely through chance or through his theory of natural selection.[36] Yet our Omnipotent God revealed that, in the latter days, a man (the Mahdi) would appear to bring humanity back to its Creator. The sign of this coming would be a sign that never occurred before: lunar and solar eclipses in the same month, occurring not once but twice. History records that these signs were fulfilled in 1894 and 1895 exactly as foretold.[37] Could Darwin’s imagination of random chance ever account for such precise events?
Marx offered a different perspective, claiming that God is the product of dialectical materialism.[47] In doing so, he reformulated Darwin’s theory of the struggle for existence. He understood the necessity of morals for a functioning society, yet his framework contradicted itself because morals ultimately depend on God. Compare his human theory with God’s revelation: one book, revealed over 23 years, consisting of 30 parts, 114 chapters, and 6348 verses, yet perfectly consistent and free from contradictions.
God challenged humanity to produce even a single chapter like it.[38] A challenge that no one, not Darwin, Nietzsche, Freud, or Marx, has ever met. Their reasoning is limited; God’s knowledge is infinite.
Revelation and reason are two ways of understanding the world, both from God. The Quran, God’s word, reveals truths beyond our full comprehension, while science, God’s work, uncovers creation through observation and experiment.
Human understanding is limited; therefore, saying “I don’t believe in God, I believe in science” is misguided, as science itself points to divine order. Just as the Quran revealed truths before they were observable, science gradually uncovers the wonders of creation. The proper approach is to recognise the Quran as God’s word and science as God’s work: both reflecting the same ultimate truth.[39]
(Based on Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya, Part III and IV)
[2] “Reason, noun, (judgement)”, dictionary.cambridge.org
[4] “Enlightenment”, www.britannica.com, 16 January 2026
[5] Hess, J. & Black, J., Nacho Libre, 2006, Mexico; United States: Paramount Pictures.
[6] Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Brahin-e-Ahmadiyya Part I and II [English Translation], 2012, pp. 109, footnote
[7] Sara Bonechi, How they make me suffer… A short biography of Galileo Galilei, 2008, pp. 52
[8] Eve Curie [Translated by Vincent Sheea], Madame Curie, 1937, pp. 355
[9] “Personal effects of ‘the mother of modern physics’ will be radioactive for another 1500 years, www.businessinsider.com, 24 August 2015
[10] Surah al-Anbiya, Ch.21: V.59-68
[11] “David Julius – Biographical”, www.nobelprize.org, 2023
[12] “Paul Berg – Biographical”, www.nobelprize.org, March 2004
[13] “Does the Empirical Nature of Science Contradict the Revelatory Nature of Faith?”, www.edge.org, 21 January 2009
[14] “Rational religion?”, www.theguardian.com, 27 August 2000
[15] “Galileo: the Telescope & the Laws of Dynamics”, www.pas.rochester.edu
[16] Eve Curie [Translated by Vincent Sheea], Madame Curie, 1937, pp. 193
[17] Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Brahin-e-Ahmadiyya Part III [English Translation], 2014, pp. 40
[18] “Religion: Modernizing the Case for God”, time.com, 7 April 1980
[19] Surah al-Anbiya, Ch.21: V.52
[20] Surah al-Anbiya, Ch.21: V.69
[21] Surah al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.259; Sahih Al-Bukhari, Kitab Ahadith al-Anbiyah, Bab yazifun an-naslanu fi’l mashyi, Hadith 3364
[22] “Body burners: The forensics of fire”, www.newscientist.com, 20 May 2009
[23] “The Moral Injury of Wife Abandonment”, www.psychologytoday.com, 5 January 2026
[24] Surah al-Anbiya, Ch.21: V.70
[25] Surah Bani Isra’il, Ch.17: V.10
[26] Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Introduction to the Study of the Holy Quran, 2016, pp. 20
[27] “Paul Berg – Facts”, www.nobelprize.org
[28] Surah an-Nisa, Ch.4: V.120
[29] “David Julius – Facts”, www.nobelprize.org
[30] Surah an-Nisa, Ch.4: V.57
[31] Hazrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad, Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge and Truth, 1998, pp. 287
[32] Surah ar-Rahman, Ch.55: V.20-23
[33] “Lessepsian migration in the Mediterranean Sea in an era of climate change: Plague or boon”, www.sciencedirect.com, March 2025
[34] Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Tasfir-e-Kabir, Vol. 1, pp. 147-148
[35] Surma-e-Chashm-e-Arya, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 2, pp. 72-73
[36] “Philosophy of Science”, joelvelasco.net, June 1984
[37] “The Advent of the Promised Messiah as Vindicated by the Signs of the Lunar and Solar Eclipses”, www.alislam.org, 1998
[38] Surah al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.24
[39] Inqilab-e-Haqiqi, Anwar-ul-Ulum, Vol. 15, pp. 78