Many verses in the Qur’an are cryptic. While being aware of theological tools helps understand the meaning, in many instances, scientific findings, too, prove to be of use to unpack the mysteries therein. One of those verses I find fascinating is al-Isra 17:44:

“The seven heavens, the earth, and all that is in them glorify Him. There is nothing that does not glorify Him with praise, but you do not understand their glorification. Truly, He is Most Forbearing, Most Forgiving.”

In classical commentary, the phrase “the seven heavens, the earth, and all that is in them” is generally understood as a reference to all beings, conscious or unconscious. It is explained that everything glorifies God in its own way, though the nature of this glorification cannot be directly grasped by human understanding.

To go deeper into the meaning of this verse, we will first review approaches found in classical exegetical sources as well as modern interpretations. In particular, we will briefly highlight the commentary of Bediüzzaman Said Nursi in his work Ayetü’l-Kübrâ, a fifty-page treatise devoted in part to this verse. After that, we will present a framework of interpretation shaped by modern scientific findings, suggesting an alternative reading of the verse that accounts for both its metaphysical and physical dimensions. The broader goal is to contribute to a new interpretive ground at the intersection of revelation-based knowledge and scientific observation, through the universal laws that govern existence.

Glorifying God

In classical sources, the concept of tasbih (glorification) in this verse is often explained as all beings’ turning toward divine order and the Creator, each in its own way. For example, al-Tabari sees tasbih as each being worshiping God in its own language. Fakhr al-Din al-Razi states that sometimes this happens through words and sometimes through the state of existence itself, and that it can only be grasped by those with intellect. Ibn Kathir considers the tasbih of all beings to be real, though imperceptible to human senses. Elmalılı Hamdi Yazır emphasizes that the order in the universe itself demonstrates a kind of tasbih.

A common point among these classical commentators is that tasbih occurs on two levels: through spoken expression (lisan al-qal) and through existential state (lisan al-hal). This dual approach applies both to conscious beings (such as humans) and unconscious beings (such as stones, air, or atoms). The verse highlights that this universal glorification operates on a level beyond human comprehension. Thus, tasbih is not limited to conscious acts of worship but can also be understood as the ongoing and all-encompassing order within the natural world.

From this perspective, the workings, regularities, and interrelations of all things—from subatomic particles to galaxies—can be seen as manifestations of divine laws, a kind of ontological tasbih. The cosmological view offered by the verse thus points to a profound overlap between the natural laws discovered by modern science and the metaphysical insights of classical thought.

Modern interpretations tend to explain tasbih as beings’ fulfilling their functions in line with their purpose of creation and their inherent nature (fitrah). In this sense, even if not a conscious act of worship, every being is seen as glorifying God through its orientation embedded in creation. Each being’s continuation of existence according to its own nature is also considered tasbih.

In this framework, tasbih is not limited to conscious expressions but includes the structural order, physical laws, and natural processes observed throughout the universe. Modern interpretations therefore understand tasbih as an ontological orientation: every being continues its existence in accordance with its own internal laws and physical limits. This shows that tasbih is not only a religious or metaphysical concept but also resonates with the idea of natural order observed by science.

In his treatise Ayetü’l-Kübrâ, Bediüzzaman Said Nursi discusses tasbih on both metaphysical and ontological levels. He likens the universe to a book and every being to a letter or sentence in that book, each directly remembering the Creator. For him, tasbih is not merely metaphorical but a true glorification that each being performs through its existential function. Nursi structures his metaphysical reflections through contemplation, grounding what is perceivable in rational thought.

He emphasizes that the continuity and order seen throughout the cosmos directly point to the Creator: “The entirety of the universe glorifies its Maker with true remembrance.” “The manifestations of divine power appear in everything, and each being declares: There is no god but He.” “With the motion of particles, a glorification, remembrance, and worship take place.” “Every creature has a task; its task is worship.” These statements highlight how all beings, from subatomic particles to the cosmic whole, operate within law, order, and functionality.

When compared with modern interpretations, Nursi’s approach shows some key differences. While modern exegetes often see tasbih as symbolic or systematic order—beings acting in line with their purpose of creation—Nursi considers it direct and real. For him, every being actively and consciously glorifies God. His approach integrates physical reality with a metaphysical perspective, presenting creation as not only “existent” but also “meaningful.” This resonates with both classical and modern interpretations while adding a contemplative dimension that speaks to modern seekers of meaning.

Nursi even describes the entire universe as a grand assembly of remembrance (common ground for everything but Allah): “The heavens, the earth, and all within them are like a great gathering of remembrance. Every atom praises God in its own language. Humans may not perceive this praise, but it is real.” This view emphasizes that the order of the universe is not only physical but also meaningful and holistic.

What do scientific findings say?

In continuing this discussion, our focus will shift to how this “common ground” can be conceptualized in light of modern scientific discoveries. That is, how the building blocks, laws, and principles uniting all beings in the universe can be understood through contemporary science.

The idea of glorification through words (tasbih by speech) is easily understood as conscious beings verbally exalting God. But how should glorification through state (tasbih by being) be understood? Both classical and modern interpretations agree that all beings and events are bound by divine laws governing their existence and functioning. This compulsory harmony and order can be seen as the creation glorifying its Creator. Still, this idea may seem abstract at first, so it requires explanation. In particular, we will explore what modern science offers for understanding tasbih by being.

Science gives us several fundamental elements that reveal a common ground uniting all of existence. Among these are shared building blocks (subatomic particles), universal physical laws, common origins, and systematic methods of observation and interpretation. Every being demonstrates, in its own context, that it is part of the larger whole through structural similarities and compliance with shared laws.

At the microscopic level, this unity is especially clear. All observable entities are made of atoms—small and discrete units. The atomic structure is universal: a nucleus of protons and neutrons, surrounded by a cloud of electrons. These fundamental particles themselves are composed of even more basic particles such as quarks and leptons. Thus, all material systems are built from the same components in varying combinations.

In addition to this shared structure, quantum numbers define the order within atoms, governing matter’s behavior at a universal level. The position and energy of electrons are described by four quantum numbers:

• n: the principal quantum number, indicating energy level,

• l: angular momentum, describing orbital shape,

• ml: orientation of the orbital in space,

• ms: electron spin.

By the Pauli exclusion principle, no two electrons in an atom can share the same four quantum numbers. This rule shows that universal order operates even at the subatomic level. Each particle has a unique position in this order.

Other principles, such as Hund’s rule (that electrons are first singly filled with the same spin before they are filled doubly) and the Aufbau principle (that electrons first fill subshells of the lowest available energy, then those of higher energy), further highlight this extraordinary order, leaving no room for randomness at the atomic level. Together, they point to a coherent, universal structure encompassing all matter. In Nursi’s words, this could be seen as a shared “mosque” for all creation.

Each particle’s individuality—defined by its unique quantum state—coexists with the universality of the shared laws. In religious terminology, this can be linked to Ahadiyyah (the unique individuality of each being) and Wahidiyya (the unity of all beings within one system). While a deeper discussion of these theological concepts is beyond the scope of this article, we note that even in physical reality, these dual dimensions of uniqueness and unity are observable.

One of the most striking scientific principles supporting this universal order is Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. This principle points to a limit built into the very structure of nature: it is impossible to know both the exact position and momentum of a particle at the same time. This is not due to shortcomings in measurement tools but due to the nature of reality itself. It reveals an inherent “limit of knowledge” in the physical world.

As such, the principle is not only a physical rule but also an epistemological sign: it defines the boundaries of human knowledge about nature. In a metaphysical reading, it indirectly suggests an unbridgeable difference between Creator and creation. While natural laws provide knowledge, the limits of this knowledge reveal the boundaries of human existence and understanding.

Conclusion

In this study, we have attempted to interpret the concept of tasbih in Qur’an 17:44 through both classical and modern exegesis, alongside insights from contemporary science. The order observed in creation, from the quantum level to cosmic structures, manifests laws and harmony that align with the Qur’anic concept of glorification. This perspective allows us to reconsider the idea of tasbih by being in a scientific framework.

In short, the laws, order, and functionality observed in the universe can be seen as signs of beings’ connection to their Creator, a form of existential orientation. The author hopes that this article may serve as a modest attempt to show how scientific discoveries can contribute to a deeper understanding of a Qur’anic expression.

One of the most fundamental laws of nature is known as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Put simply, this law states that entropy, a measure of disorder or randomness, tends to increase over time. In everyday life, we observe this principle in the tendency of things to break down or decay: metal rusts, organisms age, and heat flows from warm objects to cooler ones until a balance is reached. In the language of physics, unless energy is supplied from outside, an isolated system will inevitably move toward greater disorder. This one-way drive toward disorganization reflects a fundamental directionality in the universe. Sir Arthur Eddington even remarked that the Second Law holds “the supreme position among the laws of nature,” so universally valid that if your theory contradicts it, you have no hope but “to collapse in deepest humiliation.” In other words, no process ever observed has violated this march toward higher entropy.

But how might this apparent law of cosmic disorder relate to the idea of a single, unified Creator behind the universe? At first glance, the inevitable decay of all things culminating in the so-called “heat death” of the universe, a cold and lifeless equilibrium state, could evoke a sense of cosmic pessimism. Indeed, it has led some thinkers to bleak conclusions about meaning. Yet from the perspective of faith in an eternal and transcendent God, this very impermanence can serve as a powerful reminder of the Divine’s uniqueness and everlasting nature. Rather than undermining spiritual belief, entropy underscores the finite, contingent nature of the material world, which in turn points toward an absolute, necessary existence beyond it. This article explores the scientific and philosophical dimensions of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and highlights its intersections with the concept of divine unity across religious thought.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that energy transformations in nature proceed in a particular direction. This “arrow of time,” encapsulated by the concept of entropy, indicates that the amount of disorder in an isolated system (and in the universe as a whole) is always increasing. In practical terms, usable energy naturally flows from more concentrated forms to more dispersed ones like heat diffusing from a hot cup of coffee into the cooler surrounding air. This results in a steady loss of available energy to do work and a gradual slide toward disorder. Because of this law, many physical processes are irreversible: a hot cup of coffee will inevitably cool down over time, but it will never spontaneously heat itself back up.

As physicist and theologian Sir John Polkinghorne explains, the reason entropy must increase is essentially statistical: “There are just so many more ways to be disordered than ordered.” Over time, chaos overtakes structure simply because disordered arrangements are far more probable than highly ordered ones. Thus, given enough time, all processes in the universe tend toward outcomes such as biological death and material breakdown. This matches our everyday experience: our bodies age, machines wear out, and living things eventually die. From a scientific standpoint, it is only natural that order gradually yields to disorder as time progresses.

Scientists often refer to entropy’s inexorable rise as the “arrow of time,” because it gives time a definite direction. The past can be distinguished from the future by the fact that the overall entropy was lower in the past and will be higher in the future. The renowned astrophysicist Stephen Hawking identified this relentless increase in entropy as the key element that gives time its forward direction. This idea carries a profound existential weight, confronting us with the reality of mortality and decay. The philosopher Bertrand Russell, writing in the early 20th century, captured this sentiment of inevitable cosmic ruin in a famous passage:

“All the labors of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system… Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul’s habitation henceforth be safely built.”

Russell, emphasizing the certainty of the universe’s eventual heat death, paints a worldview devoid of any cosmic consolation. In purely physical terms, the Second Law’s long-range prediction is indeed stark: given enough time, stars will exhaust their fuel, matter will decay, and the cosmos will drift into a dark, cold, and lifeless expanse. This “heat death” scenario remains a serious scientific hypothesis for the ultimate fate of the universe.

The universe with a beginning

At this juncture, a profound question naturally arises: if the universe had existed eternally into the past, wouldn’t it already have reached this state of thermodynamic exhaustion by now? In other words, if entropy has been increasing forever, all usable energy should long ago have been depleted. The fact that we still see stars shining and life thriving today suggests that the universe has not existed indefinitely into the past; otherwise, it would have already run down. This line of reasoning leads us to consider the question of the universe’s beginning.

By the late 19th century, physicists recognized that the Second Law of Thermodynamics pointed toward a bleak future for the cosmos: eventual heat death. They also realized that if the universe were infinitely old, it should already be in that lifeless equilibrium state. Yet the universe clearly has not reached such a state, implying that it cannot have existed forever. In modern times, this insight has become part of a cosmological argument for a beginning of the universe. The philosopher William Lane Craig, for example, has invoked the Second Law as evidence in support of the kalam cosmological argument, which asserts that the universe must have a starting point. Craig writes that “the universe began in a state of low entropy (extraordinarily high order) and has followed the trajectory outlined by the Second Law ever since,” underlining that the cosmos has a temporally finite past.

This view accords with contemporary cosmology. Discoveries in astronomy during the 20th century, such as the expansion of the universe and the validation of the Big Bang theory, confirm that the cosmos had a definite beginning in time. Significantly, the Second Law’s arrow of time implies that the universe’s beginning was a moment of exceptionally low entropy. In fact, physicist Roger Penrose has calculated that the level of order at the Big Bang had to be unimaginably high; the universe started in an extraordinarily special state of arrangement. Such a low-entropy outset is so statistically unlikely that it cries out for an explanation beyond mere chance. It is as if the dice were loaded in favor of an orderly cosmos. The question naturally arises: Who or what “loaded the dice” at the inception of the universe?

Some scientists writing on thermodynamics have even openly reflected on this question. In their textbook Introduction to Thermodynamics: Classical and Statistical, Gordon J. Van Wylen and Richard Sonntag note that while science cannot definitively address the absolute origin of the universe, the Second Law “indicates in the direction of before (and continuing work of) a Creator.” In their view, the very fact that nature follows orderly laws (like entropy) is suggestive of an initial and ongoing act of creation. In other words, the cosmos has not been left to itself: an extraordinary order was present at the beginning, and the continued reliability of natural law can be seen as a sign of a sustaining power behind it.

The remarkable order at the universe’s birth is closely connected to what scientists today call the fine-tuning of the cosmos. Notable physicists such as Paul Davies have pointed out that the laws of nature appear to be finely adjusted to permit the existence of complex structures, life, and consciousness, an alignment that is difficult to attribute to pure chance. In his 1984 book Superforce, Davies remarks: “The laws that enable the universe to exist seem to be the product of exceedingly clever design. If physics is the product of design, the universe must have a purpose; and modern physics strongly suggests to me that this purpose includes us.” Many scientists and philosophers have echoed this amazement at how precisely the fundamental constants of physics and the initial conditions of the universe are set. This phenomenon of fine-tuning is often taken as evidence that the universe is not a random accident, but the result of purposeful intent.

A meaningful creation

From a spiritual perspective, the notion of a finely ordered cosmos aligns closely with the timeless belief that creation is intentional and meaningful, rather than a random occurrence. Many faith traditions echo a shared intuition that the harmony and balance we observe in the universe indicate the presence of a singular intelligent source. This divine wisdom within creation suggests that what science identifies as “order” and “laws” reflect an underlying purposeful design.

The belief in one God, an ultimate, singular power governing all existence is a central tenet across many monotheistic faiths. This belief suggests that the unity and coherence observed in nature’s laws reflect the will of a single, unifying Creator. The logic here is straightforward: if multiple independent divine forces governed the universe, disorder and conflict would likely prevail rather than the consistent harmony observed in physical laws. This consistency in the laws of physics from Earth to distant galaxies implies a single, unified source behind them. In philosophical terms, the universe behaves more like a kingdom governed by one sovereign than an empire divided among competing rulers.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics, universal and unfailing, can itself be viewed as part of this overarching cosmic order. It reminds us that all things in creation are subject to change, decay, and eventual dissolution. Everything in the material world is perishable; nothing shares the permanence of the ultimate divine reality. This aligns closely with the spiritual understanding in many religious traditions that all compound or material things eventually break down and fade away. Rather than being merely a grim observation, this scientific fact holds profound moral and spiritual lessons. It encourages humility in acknowledging life’s fragility and inspires us to seek what endures beyond physical existence.

Many spiritual traditions emphasize that observing the natural world can lead to profound wisdom and insight. Contemplating phenomena such as the stars, the cycle of life and death, or even everyday experiences like the cooling of a cup of coffee can provide perspective about our place in the universe and inspire reflection on realities beyond the physical. Through thoughtful observation, the universe reveals itself not just as a realm of matter and energy, but as a profound source of spiritual guidance and enlightenment.

Most religious worldviews also foresee an end to the cosmos as we know it; not as a meaningless collapse, but as a transition to a new order. In Islamic eschatology, for instance, it is said that at the end of time the heavens and earth will be rolled up, symbolically demonstrating absolute kingship over creation, before ushering in a new world. Similarly, Christian theology speaks of “a new heaven and a new earth” established by God beyond the end of our current universe. John Polkinghorne, reflecting on entropy from his dual perspective as a physicist and a priest, noted that while decay and death are intrinsic to this present world (and even serve a role in life’s development), the promise of a divinely renewed creation is that it will be free from decay. In a world to come, in Polkinghorne’s words, “a different material order not subject to decay may emerge.” In religious terms, this is the idea of resurrection or paradise: an existence in which the effects of entropy are abolished by divine decree. In the Islamic description of paradise, for example, it is a realm where people “will not taste death” anymore and will abide in an everlasting life. The notion of an existence not subject to entropy may lie outside the scope of physical science, but it is entirely within the scope of an omnipotent God.

A temporary universe

Seen through this broader lens, the Second Law of Thermodynamics the principle that our universe is winding down takes on a deeper meaning. Rather than implying that everything is pointless, it reminds us that this universe is temporary. It serves as a signpost directing the attentive mind beyond the physical realm toward the eternal. The interplay of order and disorder in nature, then, is not a sign of an absurd cosmos but part of a grander story. On the one hand, the Second Law teaches us to be humble and to recognize the impermanence of worldly things. On the other hand, the astonishing fine-tuning and lawful structure of the universe encourage us to consider the reality of a single, sustaining Creator.

Bridging scientific insight with spiritual understanding is a venerable endeavor. Centuries ago, scholars in various religious traditions asserted that studying nature is a way of learning about God, since the laws of the universe can be seen as manifestations of a divine order. The medieval Muslim thinker Al-Ghazali, for example, described the patterns in nature as part of God’s customary way of acting, and he encouraged believers to contemplate the natural world as a means to deepen their faith. In the modern age, many scientists and philosophers whether Muslim, Christian, or otherwise have similarly found that the discoveries of science resonate with the idea of a Creator. Figures like William Lane Craig, John Polkinghorne, Paul Davies, and Gordon Van Wylen come from different backgrounds, yet all have argued that the empirical evidence of a cosmic beginning, finely tuned laws, and life-friendly conditions makes sense in light of an intentional, intelligent origin. From a monotheistic viewpoint, all of these pointers ultimately direct us to the same conclusion: there is one underlying source behind reality. The conviction that all order (and even what we experience as “disorder”) is governed by a single cosmic will is a unifying idea found across many faiths. Through this lens, one can embrace scientific truth while also recognizing a transcendent meaning beyond it.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics and the spiritual principle of divine unity are not opposing explanations of reality, but complementary ones. Entropy’s increase teaches us about the physical fate of our universe, yet it can also be understood as a signpost to deeper truths. It exposes the mortality and finiteness inherent in the world, even as it invites us to reflect on what might be eternal. In the seemingly cold fact of cosmic decay, one can discern a gentle reminder: “Everything besides the One is perishing.” Seeing traces of a higher order amidst cosmic disorder is part of a holistic quest for truth, merging the scientific and the spiritual. By synthesizing insights from physics with insights from faith, we gain a richer understanding of our place in the cosmos. Ultimately, beyond the visible flux of the material universe lies a transcendent order that gives the cosmos meaning a reality which, according to the world’s great spiritual traditions, has been there all along and will endure when the stars themselves have faded.

References

• Polkinghorne, J. (2011). Believing in God in an Age of Science [Interview: “Holes in the Net”]. Vision Magazine.
• Craig, W. L. (2016). “Excursus on Natural Theology (Part 13): 2nd Scientific Confirmation of the Beginning of the Universe.” ReasonableFaith.org.
• Van Wylen, G. J., & Sonntag, R. E. (1971). Introduction to Thermodynamics: Classical and Statistical. John Wiley & Sons.
• Davies, P. (1984). Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature. Simon & Schuster.
• Russell, B. (1903). “A Free Man’s Worship.” (Reprinted in Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays).