God and logic

To say that I have recently become more religious would be an unfair and partially misleading statement, because the meaning of ‘religious’ is very vague and can be quite eclectic. More appropriate would be to say that I have of recent grown more spiritual. This recent change in spirituality has caused me to turn inwards more, requiring me to ask more from God, which in turn makes it easier for me to stay on the straight path. I mean to say that by asking God to guide me on the straight path and to make me of those who are patient, I am making myself live up to these standards, as my request is something which is desired by the heart, made aware of by one’s self, and put before God so as to be held accountable for doing one’s own part. The beauty and simplicity of this well structured system of support led me to wonder about the logic in God and the benefits of belief, most specifically guidance.

It seems that God wants only for one to be true to one’s self, by upholding those values and standards set by Him, for they are the map to the easiest life. If one follows these rules, he is much less inclined to ever feel depressed, alone, ashamed, regret, arrogance, worthless, troubled, embarrassed, etc. Rules are never in place without reason. Why am I not allowed to drink or gamble? Because it can consume me. Why can’t I eat pork? Because it is an unhealthy meat and when undercooked may be very harmful to one’s health. Why can I not date (especially without the intention of marriage)? Because people often become deeply and emotionally hurt after a break up, which complicates relations with anyone else afterward (‘the first cut is the deepest’). Obviously these are only some of the many reasons these things are forbidden to Muslims, but the point I am driving should stand clear: there is reason behind every rule in place, which God has set. You don’t even have to be a believer to see the pragmatism of these rules, and they are much easier to understand if you have fallen into the traps and vices of these forbidden things before, as have I.

In fact, it is this very guidance that brought me to Islam. After so many mishaps with these forbidden things, the ‘conservatism’ of Islam really attracted me, and it was easy for me to see the logic in these guidelines. After considering my former philosophy once more, that there was no higher being, that one should live his life according to his own terms and to what makes him ‘happy’ (a very fickle, fragile, and fleeting ‘feeling’ for lack of a better word), and that one should depend on knowledge and more so logic to let truths be proved, it was easy to tell that my logic was failing; I was not able to find a stable source of ‘happiness’ in anything, not relationships, nor love, nor alcohol, nor music, nor art, nor expression, nor in anything else. Following the ‘strict’ guidelines that the Muslims adhere to was the easiest way for me to avoid problems in my life.

Now to turn to logic, it is then apparent that there is much wisdom behind these rules and guidelines, since they help one avoid most, if not all problems. Logically, then, someone who knows how to avoid most if not all problems had determined these rules. Muhammad, peace be upon him, was a man who could not read nor write. Of course illiterate people have common sense and are able to lead perfectly normal and often successful lives, even in today’s western society, where illiteracy is quite rare and makes acquiring even the most basic of jobs difficult. Yet it is still hard to imagine that an uneducated man brought up in a polytheistic society could establish such an immaculate set of guidelines, which have without fail guided every generation since to a life with a relatively less amount of problems, and that he would go against the entire community to claim monotheism merely to protect these guidelines; and all of that by himself. When I, a literate and educated American raised under a Christian roof failed to come anywhere close to that level of excellence with my own, personal set of guidelines, which were ‘logically’ created by the person who knows me best, myself, and was arrogant enough to think I did not need God and his guidance, returned to Him for that very purpose; yet this uneducated, illiterate man figures it all out by himself? Yes, my logic had failed.

I “didn’t need God because I couldn’t prove that He exists,” and “if He gave me the logical brain I have, He would want me to disbelieve;” verily, those whom He chooses to lead astray may not be guided. He allowed me to make mistakes, be hurt, and disbelieve, only so that I may eventually truly use my God given logic to find proof and truth in His guidance, and to let that large amount of disbelief I had accrued build and ferment into the strongest belief I ‘logically’ rejected in the first place.

That’s the problem with logic and knowledge: the frame of reference is so small and narrow that what one actually sees is much less than the entire picture he thinks he is seeing. Our knowledge is very limited. This is proven by the billions of dollars that go to fund research projects to try to find the cures for cancer and AIDS. Those who disbelieve in God often turn to science as their answer and truth. How can you believe in something which is incomplete? We obviously don’t know everything, or we wouldn’t be a quarrelling world with so many different opinions. This is only further evidence that we are imperfect and limited in knowledge. Why not use that knowledge which is complete? To trust in science and in one’s self is to trust an obvious and moreover proven imperfection. If once claims to trust in science because it is what can be ‘proven’ and therefore is the logical thing to believe in, or perhaps the opposite, that science cannot be disproven, their logic is faltered; is a guidance so sure to guarantee you the least amount of trouble not proof of divinity? Isn’t it proof enough that we know so little about our bodies and how we function, for example how our brain works, or how intricate and complex our bodies are, from the formation and function of capillaries down to the very core of every atom? There are those who say, as I once said, “I’m not sure of the answer, but there must be a more ‘logical’ explanation for these things than God, so I chose not to believe in Him.” That one word is exactly where the difference lies: Belief.

Even if you could prove God exists, proof would not unlock the powers of a problem free life, that is divine guidance. Sure, you can believe in the system and try to follow the Islamic rules without belief in God, but it will not work fully. You will not fail because the guidance contains error, you will fail because you have set yourself up to do so by trusting and believing in yourself, an imperfect creature, and not the Creator. We alone are not strong enough to be trusted in. We often have hard times forgiving ourselves for certain things we have done, and if there is no fear of damnation, or no promise of reward in paradise, a human being may turn to suicide as a method of relieving his anguish, but this is also an error; it only spreads one’s own anguish to those who have survived and who care about that person. Humans are indeed flawed and insufficient. As enticing as a relatively problem free life may sound, and even if one found the motivation to follow these guidelines because he maybe saw the pragmatism in them, as did I, one would give up after a short while, because belief is what truly motivates one and what makes it easy on him. Those that seek to please God are the ones who really trust in the system and who really have an easy life. For every step you take towards God, He takes many more towards you.

To discuss logic and belief, it is also illogical to believe solely in science. If you have admitted that science is created or discovered by humans, who are distinctly imperfect, you are admitting to science being prone to error. Also, to accept science as the discoveries of nature by humans is a dead end for logic. Then, the mere idea of science, for which we know relatively little about given the unknown size of the universe, not to mention its vulnerability to include human fault, is imperfect and incomplete. The idea of God, even for those who do not believe, is perfection. The idea that the entire universe sparked out of one little happening and consecutively rapidly exploded into what it is today is at best unlikely. One might argue that it is however more likely than the chance of God creating the universe, but which offers a more promising and conclusive answer? To believe that nature is coincidental and yet so diverse and complex offers much less of an explanation or ‘proof,’ as those who side with science might say, however neither God nor the Big Bang can be disproven.

So in the end, it all comes down to belief. What do you choose to believe in, a perfect idea, or an imperfect idea? Would you choose to take that path which is logically more sound, easier, and healthier for the human, or the one that is more prone to lead one to problems? A complete, conclusive way of life, or one with no guidance but ‘proof?’ Proof is found wherever you choose to find it; you just have to be logical in your analysis thereof. The logical answer is clear to me: God is above logic.