Epigraph:

Eyes cannot reach Him but He reaches the human consciousness. And He is the Incomprehensible, the All-Aware. (Al Quran 6:103)

Written and collected by Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times

Despite the last five centuries of intense investigation, humanity has no idea what our most ubiquitous daily experience of consciousness is and where it came from. We simply cannot understand how inorganic atoms, molecules, and compounds yield the fantastic inner experience of thoughts, emotions, dreams, consciousness, and more.

Philosophers and scientists suggest dozens of outlandish explanations. In their frustration to explain consciousness, some otherwise very well-respected philosophers even suggest that it does not exist and is an illusion.

Two theories explaining consciousness are examined today. The first is panpsychism, which has existed for several centuries in slightly different flavors.

Panpsychism

Panpsychism is a philosophical perspective positing that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of the physical world. This view suggests that all matter, from the smallest particles to the largest structures, possesses some form of consciousness or experience. Throughout history, various philosophers have advocated for versions of panpsychism, each contributing unique insights into the nature of consciousness and its relationship to the material world.

Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677)

The Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza proposed that every physical entity possesses its own mind, and these individual minds are unified with God’s mind. This perspective suggests a form of universal consciousness permeating all aspects of the universe. philarchive.org

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716)

Leibniz introduced the concept of monads, which he described as simple substances that form the basic units of reality. He posited that each monad is a unique, indivisible, and self-sufficient entity imbued with its own form of perception or consciousness. Leibniz stated, “Monads are the true atoms of nature, and, in a word, the elements of things.”

William James (1842–1910)

American philosopher William James was a proponent of panpsychism, suggesting that consciousness is a fundamental feature of the world. He argued that mental properties are ubiquitous and that even the simplest forms of matter possess some degree of consciousness. James wrote, “We must assume that the elementary particles of matter are endowed with something like a faint copy of mentality.”

Alfred North Whitehead (1861–1947)

Whitehead developed a process philosophy that views reality as a series of interconnected events rather than static substances. He proposed that these events, or “actual occasions,” possess both physical and mental aspects, suggesting a form of universal consciousness. Whitehead stated, “Each actual entity is a throb of experience.”

Philip Goff (Contemporary)

In recent times, philosopher Philip Goff has emerged as a prominent advocate for panpsychism. He argues that traditional physicalist approaches fail to account for subjective experience and that positing consciousness as a fundamental aspect of matter offers a more coherent framework. Goff states, “Panpsychists believe that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of the physical world.” quotefancy.com

While this perspective offers a unique approach to the mind-body problem, it has faced several critiques concerning its empirical testability, explanatory power, and conceptual coherence.

Empirical Testability

A significant criticism of panpsychism is its lack of empirical testability. Consciousness, being inherently subjective, poses challenges for objective observation and measurement. This makes it difficult to verify the presence of consciousness in entities like particles or inanimate objects. As noted in a PubMed article, “The main obstacle is the lack of any evidence to confirm the presence of consciousness.” pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Explanatory Power

Critics argue that panpsychism does not sufficiently explain how simple forms of consciousness in basic particles combine to form the complex conscious experiences observed in higher organisms—a challenge known as the “combination problem.” An article in Philosophy Now states, “Far from solving the problem of identifying mental activity with neural activity, panpsychism makes it worse.” philosophynow.org

Conceptual Coherence

Some philosophers question the coherence of attributing consciousness to inanimate matter. The idea that particles or simple systems possess subjective experiences is seen by some as counterintuitive and lacking clear definition. As highlighted in an article on SelfAwarePatterns, “Panpsychism is built on a questionable intuition… lacks evidence, can skew evaluation of scientific theories, and seems to either require epiphenomenalism or has problems with physics.” selfawarepatterns.com

Conclusion

While panpsychism presents an intriguing perspective on the nature of consciousness, it faces substantial critiques regarding its empirical support, explanatory adequacy, and conceptual clarity. These challenges have led many philosophers to seek alternative explanations for the relationship between mind and matter.

Pantheism

Pantheism is a philosophical and theological perspective that identifies God with the universe, asserting that everything collectively composes an all-encompassing, immanent deity. This view implies that the divine is synonymous with the cosmos, and that the universe and God are identical. en.wikipedia.org

Several philosophers have advocated for pantheism and the concept of a universal consciousness:

Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677):

Spinoza is often regarded as a central figure in pantheistic philosophy. In his work “Ethics,” he presents the idea that God and Nature are two names for the same reality, a single substance with infinite attributes. He writes, “Whatever is, is in God, and nothing can exist or be conceived without God.” Spinoza’s philosophy suggests that everything that exists is a part of God, emphasizing a unity between the divine and the material world. en.wikipedia.org

Giordano Bruno (1548–1600):

An Italian philosopher and cosmologist, Bruno proposed that the universe is infinite and that it, in its entirety, is an expression of the divine. He asserted that God is present in all aspects of the universe, and that the universe itself is a manifestation of divine power. Bruno’s pantheistic views challenged the orthodox religious doctrines of his time, leading to his eventual execution. en.wikipedia.org

Victor Cousin (1792–1867):

A French philosopher, Cousin developed a form of spiritualistic pantheism. He posited that the human mind is a manifestation of the absolute, and that by studying the operations of the human mind, one can gain insight into the nature of the divine. Cousin’s philosophy emphasized the unity of the finite and the infinite, suggesting that individual consciousness is a reflection of a universal consciousness. en.wikipedia.org

These philosophers, among others, have contributed to the development of pantheistic thought, exploring the idea that the universe and the divine are fundamentally interconnected, and that a universal consciousness pervades all existence.

Pantheism is a philosophical and theological perspective that identifies God with the universe, asserting that everything collectively composes an all-encompassing, immanent deity. This view implies that the divine is synonymous with the cosmos, and that the universe and God are identical. en.wikipedia.org

The concept of cosmic consciousness is often associated with pantheism, suggesting that the universe itself possesses a form of consciousness or that individual consciousnesses are part of a greater universal mind. This idea posits that the cosmos is not merely a collection of inert matter but is imbued with awareness, leading to a profound interconnectedness between all entities.

The relationship between pantheism and cosmic consciousness has been explored by various thinkers. For instance, the 19th-century philosopher Richard Maurice Bucke introduced the term “cosmic consciousness” to describe a higher state of awareness in which an individual perceives the universe as a living presence and recognizes their unity with it. Bucke’s work suggests that such experiences are a natural progression in human evolution, leading to a more profound understanding of the universe and one’s place within it.

In contemporary discussions, the idea of a conscious universe has been revisited in light of advancements in physics and cosmology. Some modern physicists and philosophers propose that consciousness could be a fundamental aspect of the universe, intertwined with its very fabric. This perspective aligns with certain interpretations of quantum mechanics, where the observer plays a crucial role in the manifestation of physical phenomena.

I do not rule out the possibility of extra dimensions, which may suggest some truth in pantheism, but the nature of total reality will move towards a transcendent God, to whose dimension humanity does not have any direct access except when He chooses to reveal Himself to humanity through prophets and saints. The Quran states:

Eyes cannot reach Him but He reaches the human consciousness. And He is the Incomprehensible, the All-Aware. (Al Quran 6:103)

The same critiques apply to pantheism as they do to panpsychism. Neither the atoms have consciousness individually nor their collection in a universe does, except for humans and some animals.

Let us meet the twelfth-century mystic Ibn Arabi and what has been described as wahdat al-wujud.

Ibn Arabi’s concept of wahdat al-wujud

Ibn Arabi’s concept of wahdat al-wujud, often translated as the “Unity of Being” or “Oneness of Existence,” has been a subject of extensive scholarly discussion and debate. While some have equated it with pantheism—the belief that God and the universe are identical—such an interpretation may oversimplify Ibn Arabi’s nuanced metaphysical views.

Understanding Wahdat al-Wujud

Ibn Arabi did not explicitly use the term wahdat al-wujud in his writings; it was later attributed to his teachings. His philosophy posits that all existence is a manifestation of a single, divine reality. In this framework, the multiplicity of the world is perceived as diverse expressions of the One Being. However, this does not imply that the created world and the Creator are identical; rather, the creation reflects the divine essence without being equivalent to it. ibnarabisociety.org

Distinguishing from Pantheism

Pantheism asserts that God and the universe are synonymous, effectively denying any distinction between the Creator and creation. In contrast, Ibn Arabi’s wahdat al-wujud maintains a clear differentiation: while all beings manifest the divine reality, they do not encompass the totality of God. God transcends His creation, and the created entities are seen as signs or reflections of the divine, not as the divine itself. ibnarabisociety.org

William C. Chittick, a distinguished scholar of Islamic philosophy and Sufism, has extensively explored the works of the 12th-century Andalusian mystic, Ibn al-ʿArabī. Through his scholarly endeavors, Chittick has illuminated Ibn al-ʿArabī’s intricate metaphysical concepts, making them accessible to contemporary audiences.

Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Metaphysics of Imagination

In “The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Metaphysics of Imagination,” Chittick delves into the pivotal role of imagination in Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought. He elucidates how Ibn al-ʿArabī perceives imagination as a bridge between the spiritual and material realms, facilitating the manifestation of divine realities in the physical world. Chittick’s analysis underscores the significance of imagination in comprehending the unity of existence and the multiplicity of forms. goodreads.com

Critiques and Misinterpretations

Throughout history, some Islamic scholars have criticized wahdat al-wujud, alleging that it borders on pantheism or blurs the lines of strict monotheism (tawhid). Figures like Ahmad Sirhindi advocated for wahdat al-shuhud (“unity of witnessing”) as an alternative perspective, emphasizing the experiential aspect of perceiving God’s unity without implying an ontological oneness. en.wikipedia.org

Conclusion

While there are superficial similarities between Ibn Arabi’s wahdat al-wujud and pantheism, equating the two overlooks the profound distinctions in their theological foundations. Ibn Arabi’s doctrine emphasizes that while the divine reality permeates all existence, God remains transcendent and distinct from His creation. If we read Ibn Arabi correctly, we find him to be a devout monotheist.

The only reality that can explain our consciousness is the transcendent God of the Abrahamic faiths, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, best presented by the Quran and in the Muslim scripture best covered by the Crown verse:

Allah — there is no God but He, the Living, the Self-Subsisting and All-Sustaining. Slumber seizes Him not, nor sleep. To Him belongs whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that will intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them; and they encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He pleases. His knowledge extends over the heavens and the earth; and the care of them burdens Him not; and He is the High, the Great. (Al Quran 2:255)

God the Self-Subsisting and the All-Sustaining

In Islamic theology, the divine attributes Al-Ḥayy (ٱلْحَيُّ) and Al-Qayyūm (ٱلْقَيُّومُ) are among the 99 names of Allah, each encapsulating profound aspects of His nature and relationship with creation.

Al-Ḥayy (The Ever-Living):

Derived from the Arabic root “ḥ-y-y,” meaning “to live” or “to be alive,” Al-Ḥayy signifies that Allah possesses perfect and eternal life, unbounded by beginning or end. This attribute emphasizes that Allah is ever-living, undying, and self-sustaining, with all life arising from Him. myislam.org

The Quran highlights this attribute in several verses, including Ayat al-Kursi (The Throne or the Crown Verse):

“Allah! There is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of [all] existence.”

Al-Qayyūm (The Sustainer):

Al-Qayyūm, stemming from the root “q-w-m,” Arabic: qāf-wāw-mīm, conveys the meaning of self-subsistence and self-sustenance. This attribute denotes that Allah is the One upon whom all creation depends, while He depends on none. He sustains, protects, and governs the affairs of the universe in accordance with His knowledge, wisdom, and justice. religion-of-islam.com

Al-Qayyūm encompasses several meanings, including:

• To stand or rise up.
• To be or begin.
• To be ongoing or exist.
• To manage or make right.

These connotations collectively portray Allah as the One who stands by Himself, requiring no support, while all of creation depends entirely upon Him for existence and sustenance. Understand Al Quran Academy

Al-Qayyūm is mentioned in the Qur’an in conjunction with Al-Ḥayy (“The Ever-Living”) in three significant verses:

1. Ayat al-Kursi (Surah Al-Baqarah 2:255):“Allah! There is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of [all] existence…”
2. Surah Al ‘Imran 3:1-2:“Alif, Lam, Meem. Allah, there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of existence.”
3. Surah Ta-Ha 20:111:“And [all] faces will be humbled before the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of existence…”

In these verses, the pairing of Al-Ḥayy and Al-Qayyūm underscores Allah’s eternal life and His unceasing maintenance of the universe.

The pairing of Al-Ḥayy and Al-Qayyūm underscores Allah’s eternal existence and His role as the sustainer of all that exists. Recognizing these attributes encourages believers to place their trust and reliance solely upon Allah, acknowledging that He is the source of all life and the maintainer of the universe.

Conclusion

Al-Qayyūm embodies the concept of Allah’s unparalleled self-existence and His role as the sustainer of all that is. By reflecting on this attribute, believers can deepen their understanding of Allah’s nature and reinforce their reliance upon Him in every aspect of life.

Avicenna’s formulation of the “Proof of the Truthful” represents a significant milestone in philosophical theology. By articulating a pathway from the existence of contingent beings to a Necessary Existent, he provided a framework that has been the subject of extensive analysis and debate, bridging the realms of ontological and cosmological reasoning.