Seeing is one of the luminous Attributes of God Almighty, and one’s insight, as declared in: We have shared among them (43:32), is proportionate to one’s ability to receive the manifestations of this Attribute. The greatest portion belongs to the one who, having benefited from that Divine Source to the fullest, poured his inspirations into the hearts of his followers, namely Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace and blessings. He is the most polished mirror of the manifestations of the Ultimate Truth, and is unequaled in receiving them. The Divine declaration: Say: This is my path. I call to God on clear evidence and by insight, I and whoever follows me (12:108) points to the greatness of the share of that Divine gift belonging to the prince of the Prophets and his followers.

This matchless perceptiveness allowed that holy traveler on the path of Ascension to reach in one breath the realms beyond corporeal existence, which those devoid of any amount of perception regard as dark or unknown or the existence of which they categorically deny. He studied those realms like a book, and traveled on the “slopes” of the Unseen where the archetypal tablets are exhibited, and the melodies of the pens of Destiny, which make one’s heart jump, thrilled him. He visited Paradise accompanied by heavenly servants, and received a Divine welcome on the border between the created realm and the infinite realm of Divinity. That is, he rose as high as any created being can rise and acquired such nearness to God that it is described in the Qur’an metaphorically as the distance between the strings of two bows (put adjacent to each other), or even nearer (53:9). It was a point where space and location are undefined or undifferentiated.

The pleasure of observance given by insight sometimes acquires a new, deeper dimension when the believer begins to discern and discover the spiritual dimension and meanings of objects and events. His or her spirit experiences other dimensions in this three-dimensional realm, and his or her conscience becomes the eye of existence with which it sees, as well as its pulse and intellect.

In addition to perception and understanding, discernment (firasa) denotes the deepening of insight when perception becomes a source of certain knowledge. Those who discern the manifestations of the light of God, the Ultimate Truth, possess such a radiance that they see everything, every issue, in its full clarity. They are never confused, even when encountering the most intricate elements, elements that are extremely similar, and do not become lost in particularities. Simultaneously seeing the sugar contained within the sugarcane and the hydrogen and oxygen contained within the water molecule, they refrain from all deviations (e.g., pantheism and monism) and recognize the Creator as He is, and the created as it is.

From the face of each individual believer to the face of the universe, every point, word, and line in existence is a meaningful sentence, even a book for those to whom the verse: Surely in this are signs for those having insight and discernment (15:75) refers. Those who can look at existence from the point stated in the Prophetic Tradition of: Fear the discernment of a believer, for he sees with the light of God,¹ make contact with reality, become familiar with the invisible side of existence, and shed light on events, revealing the true face of everything. While others spend their lives in “black holes,” these people are enraptured with increasing pleasures on Paradise-like “slopes.”

For one endowed with such discernment, existence is a book of countless pages, with each animate or inanimate part of creation being a word shining with thousands of meanings, and the face of existence and that of each person expressing many hidden realities. Those of true spirituality see such things in the “verses” of that book and in the luminous “phrases” of those verses, and receive from them messages that even the greatest of the minds devoid of spirituality are unable to discern. The unimaginable surprises awaiting believers in the other world are according to the rank of each, and are revealed to them along with all the spiritual pleasure that they give.

O God! We ask You for hearts tender, devoted, and everturning to You in penitence for Your sake; and bestow blessings and peace on our master Muhammad, the leader of Your way, and on his Family and Companions, all of them.

Note

1. at-Tirmidhi, “Tafsiru Sura 15,” 6.

According to truth-seeking scholars, yaqin means certainty or conviction of the truth expressed in the essentials of faith, including primarily one’s doubt-free belief in God’s Existence and Unity. It is also defined as reaching that conviction through observing or experiencing the essence or truth of those essentials in which regular people believe, and discerning or penetrating the realms beyond this material one.

Certainty may also be regarded as a point, final in one respect and initial in another, reached by using all sources of knowledge and ways of observation and discernment. A traveler who has reached this point frequently sails for what is eternal, realizing ascension in his or her heart and reaching the horizon of: His sight swerved not, nor did it go wrong (53:17). He or she travels amidst Divine manifestations in the material and immaterial realms, and is favored with a tongue to speak, eyes to see, and ears to hear the truths contained in the Supreme Sign.¹ That is, repeated observation and study of the book of the universe, of the things and events contained in it, allows the traveler to eternity to perceive the meanings of the inimitable signs special to God.

By repeatedly observing and reflecting on the scenes presented for study in the outer world, as well as those in his or her inner world, truths beyond the visible realm are unveiled to the traveler. Also, by living in the brilliant, mysterious climate of Divine Revelation, namely the Qur’an and the Sunna, and the inspirations coming from the worlds beyond, one feels the manifestation of the Hidden Treasure in his or her heart. The believer becomes aware of and experiences the tokens and signs issuing from the prism of his or her conscience, which reflects the rays of Divine gifts coming from the outer world, his or her inner world, and the Divine Revelation, and sends them to his or her senses and faculties. Certainty, in this meaning and degree, is a gift with which God favors those near to Him.

Even in its least degree, certainty is so strong that it fills the heart with light, removes the mist of doubt from the mind, and causes breezes of joy, satisfaction, and exhilaration to blow in one’s inner world. As pointed out by Dhu’n-Nun al-Misri, certainty causes the heart to overflow with the desire to reach eternity. This engenders the desire to live an austere life, for asceticism allows one to think and speak with wisdom. One who takes the wing of asceticism and flies to the realm of wisdom never forgets what the end will be, always thinks of the afterlife, and always feels God’s company, even when with other people.

In the early steps of certainty, the veil between the material and immaterial sides of existence begins to be removed and, a few steps further, the traveler discerns the realm beyond this material world. With his or her heart filled with Divine manifestations, which result in the attainment of peace and satisfaction, the believer is freed absolutely from all doubt about the truths of faith. Like ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, may God be pleased with him, some who have attained this degree of certainty have declared: “Even if the veil between the seen and the Unseen were to lift, my certainty would not increase.”² A few steps further on is the station where one journeys in the pure realm of Divine gifts, which eyes have never seen, ears have never heard, nor have minds ever conceived.

To gain certainty, an initiate beginning the journey must try to do what is necessary to reach certainty. However, one can only reach this station when God bestows it as a blessing and gift. Without acquiring due knowledge of God, one cannot reach certainty. Knowledge of God is acquired through a correct view of and perspective on objects and events; the ability to think in a correct and balanced manner; purity of intention; the study of the signs of God’s Existence and Unity; and finally knowledge of God is required through reflection on His Acts and the manifestations of His Names and Attributes. Knowledge of God is a light illuminating the initiate’s inner and outer worlds, a light shining from all corners of existence. Under the rays of this light, the initiate sees everything as it really is and, being freed from the confines of multiplicity (of objects and events), discerns Divine Unity and is enraptured with indescribable spiritual pleasure.

Although an initiate may feel uneasy during the early stages on the way to certainty, he or she will be lost in inconceivable pleasure and peace in the end. Those who cannot distinguish between what is felt in the beginning and what is experienced in the end wrongly conclude that certainty is risky; however, those who constantly feel God’s company and the resulting spiritual delight enjoy peace and security from all spiritual trouble and possible deviation. Uneasiness and trouble are felt only in the beginning. As for certainty being risky, all stations confront the traveler with some degree of risk. Even the Prophet himself, upon him be peace and blessings, declared: Even I could not be saved (from Hellfire or God’s punishment through my own actions), if God did not embrace me in His mercy.³ As for being secure from trouble and deviation and gaining peace, these are the fruits that God causes certainty to yield.

As referred to in some verses of the Qur’an, Sufis classify certainty in three categories:

– Certainty coming from knowledge: Having a strong, firm belief in or conviction of all the essentials of faith, primarily in God’s Existence and Unity, acquired through correct observation and study of the relevant signs and evidence.

– Certainty coming from direct observation or seeing: Having an indescribable degree of certainty and knowledge of God acquired through unveiling and observing the immaterial truths invisible to ordinary believers and on which the essentials of belief are based.

– Certainty coming from direct experience: Being favored with God’s constant company, without any veils and in a way that only the one receiving this favor can perceive. Some have interpreted this as self-annihilation in God and gaining subsistence by Him. These three degrees of certainty can be summed up in the following examples: A person’s knowledge of death (before he or she dies), acquired by observing or studying the body in a biological context, can be an example of certainty coming from knowledge. Witnessing some metaphysical phenomena, such as seeing the angel who has come to take one’s soul and catching glimpses of the intermediate world of the grave, may be regarded as a kind of certainty coming from direct observation. The certainty gained by actually experiencing death is a certainty coming from direct experience.

Certainty about abstract truths such as God’s Names and Attributes, which arise from vision or experience, pertains to one’s personal experience. It is therefore beyond my ability to explain this.

O God! Show us the truth as being true and enable us to follow it, and show us falsehood as being false, and enable us to refrain from it. And bestow blessings and peace on him who has the perfect certainty—our master Muhammad, the noblest one, and on his Family and Companions, all of them.

1. “The Supreme Sign” is a Qur’anic expression that is generally held to be the greatest or most comprehensive sign by which God is known most clearly. It can be reached after physical or mental or spiritual or both physical and mental and spiritual travel throughout or an overall study of the whole universe and spiritual vision of God with His Acts, Names and Attributes. What God’s Messenger saw during his Ascension was the Supreme Sign (53:18). Everyone can reach it according to their own capacity. (Tr.)
2. Abu Nu’aym, Hilyatu’l-Awliya’, 10: 203; ‘Alliyu’l-Qari, al-Asraru’l- Marfu’a, 193.
3. al-Bukhari, “Riqaq,” 18; Muslim, “Munafiqun,” 71–78.

Even though Kant has very original insights that opened new gateways in the history of philosophy, his so-called “critical philosophy” is not devoid of defects. This article aims to present Kant’s account of causation and critically evaluate it.

Kant’s famous remark about his awe for “the starry heavens above me, and the moral law within me,” which is written in his gravestone, shows his orientation in philosophy. While he was interested in explaining the features of the universe and the nature of our theoretical knowledge, he did not ignore the practical aspect of our life that concerns with how to act in the right way. That is to say, ethics and natural science were main disciplines Kant tried to understand. However, this paper examines his analysis of theoretical knowledge and the natural science by focusing on his account of causality.

An introduction to Kant’s “critical philosophy”

Before Kant, there were two important traditions in modern philosophy: rationalism and empiricism. On the one hand, the rationalists assumed that we could obtain knowledge of the world by trusting in the power of our minds. Kant considered them to be dogmatic in the sense that they dogmatically assumed this idea without examining the nature and limits of our minds so as to see whether we can really achieve this goal or not. On the other hand, the empiricists usually distrusted the power of the mind in its attempt to know the world, and in its most extreme case, in Hume, it led to skepticism. In response to these two approaches, Kant suggested to examine critically the nature and limits of the mind and see to what degree we can have knowledge at all. This is called “critical philosophy.”

For Kant, our minds are not passive receivers of representations like mirrors. A normal flat mirror reflects the image from an object as if it is the same except in a two-dimensional way. It was a common attitude among philosophers before Kant to treat the mind like a mirror. The mirror does not change the form of the object. Likewise, the mind does not affect or change the form of the objects, it just receives them. However, Kant changed the whole picture. He treated minds as active filters. Whatever is reflected on it is shaped in a certain way. On this view, the mind is like a concave or convex mirror, or colormatic glasses but it is not like a flat mirror.

According to Kant, the mind has three faculties with different functions. These faculties are sensibility, understanding and reason. Through sensibility we get the raw material of experience. This material is structured and shaped by space and time which are not outside the mind but are the pure forms of the faculty of sensibility. What we get through this faculty is called “intuition.”

The faculty of understanding provides us with concepts, especially with “the pure concepts,” or categories, of which there are twelve in total, and are used in organizing the intuition. In brief, what is reflected on the mind as coming from the world is structured by the a priori forms of intuiton (space and time) to which the twelve categories of mind are applied.

Kant’s postulation of the mind as an active factor in obtaining knowledge is considered to be “the copernican revolution” in philosophy. Kant has a formula which depicts his system very well: “Thoughts without content are empty, intuitons without concepts are blind.” In order to have understanding, we should both have intuition and concepts. These two conditions should be fulfilled for a genuine and reliable understanding. First, concepts without intuiton do not give us understanding; we can just think about them and never be sure whether they are something about real or not. According to Kant, concepts such as soul, God, and free will are ideas to which no intuition corresponds. Second, if there were no ordering role of the mind, all the information we got from the world would be chaotic. For instance, we would not be able to identify a certain individual as a human being, an animal of a different sort or even as an object, because we lacked an ability to order and classify the information. Therefore, according to Kant, the world appears to us differently from as it is in itself due to the ordering character of the mind.

Kant calls the world as it appears to us “phenomena” and the world in itself “noumena.” The latter is beyond the limits of the legitimate realm of theoretical knowledge. We cannot understand it, and we cannot theoretically know anything about it: we can only think about it. Ideas such as those of God and free will are directed toward the nounemal realm. They belong to the faculty of reason and have a regulative role in ordering and unifying our experience. However, they are empty according to Kant. That is to say, there is no corresponding intuition to them in our experience. Thus, we cannot decide whether they really exist or not by theoretical knowledge. This conclusion of Kant’s critical philosophy may suggest an agnostic position towards God, (actually it led many people to become agnostics) according to which human beings can neither affirm nor deny the existence of God. However, Kant thought that he found a reason for believing in God in another domain, namely in practical reason and knowledge. Nevertheless, Kant’s attempt to show the illegitemacy of theoretical knowledge regarding neumena undermines itself. This can be seen especially in his analysis of causality.

Synthetic a priori truths

Kant takes mathematical science and natural science for granted. He accepts them as successful sciences and tries to understand the conditions under which they are possible. His conclusion is that these sciences can be grounded only on “synthetic a priori judgments.” There are two important conceptual distinctions here: the analytic-synthetic and the a priori-a posteriori. The former is a semantic distinction, the latter is epistemological. A statement is analytic if its predicate-concept is included in the subject-concept, otherwise it is synthetic. The proposition that all black cats are black or that bachelors are unmarried is analytic. A black cat is black, the predicate is embedded in the subject here. And bachelors are by definition unmarried because a bachelor is a single male. However, the color of my cat is not included in its definition. A priori judgments are known independently of experience whereas a posteriori ones are known by appealing to experience as a justification. We know that everything is identical to itself without any experience. But we need some experiential evidence to affirm the statement that the Morning Star is identical with the Evening Star. It was a scientific discovery that those stars were actually the same, namely Venus.

For Kant, all analytic judgments are a priori. He also claims that there are synthetic a priori statements. This is a bit unusual because we normally know synthetic statements by experience. How can we know a statement a priori if its predicate is not included in the subject? Kant explains the possibility of such judgements by appealing to the mind’s role in shaping experience. According to him, by applying the categories to intuition, we put what is in our minds into our experiences. So, “we can cognize of things a priori only what we ourselves have put into them.” In other words, the categories shape the experience and we know that aspect of experience a priori since it belongs to us. The conceptual distinctions presented so far enable us to understand Kant’s account of causality better.

Causality

From a historical point of view, Kant’s account of causality was a response to Hume’s scepticism about causation. Let us first see what Hume said about this issue. Hume points out that we only observe correlated events in nature, and that there are some regular correlations and some irregular ones. For instance, we always observe that lightning precedes thunder. On the basis such regular correlations, we infer that the events in question are also causally related. That is to say, lightning causes thunder. However, according to Hume, we never observe causation between events. What is observed is just that two events are correlated in a regular manner. Causation is what our mind is inclined to infer when faced with such regularities. Causal links are produced by the human mind as subjective mental operations. So, there is no objective causality between events: it is our subjective interpretation of the regularity between them.

If we consider the fact that electrical charges are regarded as the common causal factor behind lightning and thunder by contemporary scientists, we can appreciate what Hume said. We do not observe causal links. Perhaps, sometime in the future, scientists will propose another physical factor as the cause for thunder, lightning and maybe for electical charges. Since we do not observe causal links, we can never be sure about what causes what. Hume extends this skepticism so far that nothing really causes anything else. There is no objective causation; there are just correlations in our experience. In other words, he also denies the objectivity of the universal causal principle, namely that every effect or event must have a cause.

As a response, Kant distinguishes two different levels in analysing causation. On the one hand, he tries to prove the objectivity of the universal principle of causality. Kant is aware of the difficulty of proving it on the basis of experience. Such a universal principle cannot be based on experience. Kant considers this univeral principle as a synthetic a priori truth. It is valid for anything we experience because all our experience is shaped by the category of causality. He formulates this principle in the following way: everything that happens presupposes that which it follows in accordance with a rule.

According to Kant, the phenomena consisting in irreversible sequences indicate the causal order. As an example of irreversible sequence, he mentions the sequence when we look at a ship moving down the river. In this case, what we apprehend is an objective process. And its order cannot be arranged otherwise than in this very succession. So, when we watch the ship’s departure, the order in which our visual states occur is not up to us. As a conclusion, Kant argues that in irrevesible cases, the apprehension of one perception which occurs necessarily succeeds that of the other which preceded according to a rule called “the law of the connection of cause and effect.”

On the other hand, Kant’s analysis of irreversible sequences does not suggest anything about particular causal relations. A particular sequence of irreversible representations does not enable us to identify the cause of the event in question: it only indicates that the event in question must have a cause (in the sense that some other event precedes it), even if we do not know what this cause is. Kant expresses this point by saying that “Everything in nature, as well in the inanimate as in the animated world, happens or is done according to rules, though we do not always know them….”

While there are some ambigious passages indicating as if Kant has identified some necessary causal links between particular events (such as that the sunshine caused the warmth of a stone), those passages should be interpreted under the light of this general statement here. The reason simply is that Kant aims to exemplify his view of causation in such contexts rather than identifying some particular causal links.

A fundamental problem with Kant’s analysis of causality

As we have seen, Kant treats the universal principle of causality as a synthetic a priori truth. In doing so, he limits causal ascriptions to the phenomenal realm because it is the phenomenal realm not the noumenal realm, which is shaped by our minds. So, according to Kant causal talk about noumena, things in themselves, is not legitimate and does not give us theoretical knowledge.

However, the question that should be answered in this regard is if the human mind interacts with noumena. If so, how does it interact? In some passages, Kant seems to consider noumena to be an empty and limiting concept. We cannot know anything about this realm (even whether or not noumenal objects such as free will, soul and God exist), therefore it is just a heuristic device indicating what is beyond our theoretical knowledge. Thus, we cannot say anything about the relationship between the mind and noumena, because noumena are beyond our understanding. Otherwise, anything we say can only be an illegitimate speculation.

Nevertheless, such passages do not represent Kant’s whole philosophical outlook. As a fundamental aspect of his critical philosophy, Kant assumes that our experience is shaped by us but not totally created by us. There is an external element to experience that is independent of us. He must accept that there are noumenal objects even though we do not know what they are. They are not just conceptual tools formulated to define the phenomenal realm. In fact, there are several passages in which Kant explicitly ascribes causal efficiency to the noumenal realm.

For instance, when Kant distances himself from the idealist philosophers who claim that everything we perceive is mind-dependent and there is no objective reality outside the mind, he claims that “there are bodies without us, that is, things which, though quite unknown to us as to what they are in themselves” and that we know them “by their representations which their influence on our sensibility procures us.”

As another example, this time regarding the free will of human beings, Kant thinks that human beings are free with respect to the noumenal realm but under causal determination with respect to phenomenal realm. When he tries to account for moral responsibility, he presents the free will as having its own causal power to be able to appropriate particular human actions. The following is an explicit remark: “The will is a kind of causality of living beings so far as they are rational.”

As it is clearly seen, Kant is forced to accept that the realm of things in themselves (noumena) causes the realm of appearances (phenomena) and this is exactly what undermines the very foundation of his critical project as limiting theoretical knowledge to phenomena.

Conclusion

Kant certainly has an insight in making a distinction between phenomena and noumena; however, his way of distinguishing these two realms undermines his own critical philosophy. There is a similar distinction made by Muslim theologians between dhahir (phenomena) and batin (noumena). In their case, categories of causality and existence for instance are legitimately applicable to noumenal realm, but they argue that we do not know how they are applicable. According to them, for instance, we know that God exists but we do not know how He exists. His existence is quite different from our existence. As Descartes says: “A finite mind cannot grasp [adequately] God, who is infinite. But that does not prevent [the finite thinker] having a perception of God, just as one can touch a mountain without being able to put one’s arms around it.” As a conclusion, Kant’s distinction between phenomena and noumena should be improved so that it enables us to ascribe existence and causality to the noumenal realm even in a minimal sense.

So enraptured that

We’re oblivious to spring and summer.

The magical song of faith on our tongues,

There’s a love like Majnun’s in our hearts.

Those who visit our circle turn to diamonds,

Divine lights keep showering all around.

We do not actually mean “us,”

all these bestowals are from the Providence,

All souls and beloved ones

are from the Eternal’s garden

The ones who face Him are like flowers turning,

In that blessed climate, autumn turns to spring

No wonder their rosy skins look silvered

The infinite color of the Eternal gleaming bright.

We certainly fail if we try to consider time as only a matter of determining the hour. It is, in fact, a dimension like depth, height and length. One reason of our difficulty in perceiving time may be caused by the fact that our optical perception is sensitive only to three dimensions, but no others. Many animals cannot comprehend the dimension of depth. Some animals see their environs in two dimensions as in pictures. We have difficulty perceiving other dimensions just as animals which see the world in two colors live without any awareness of other colors.

Humankind, with the most sophisticated aspects, has a very different and privileged position above all creation. In spite of this, we have limited sight, hearing, and other senses. Many a world that is beyond our senses remains imperceptible to us.

Another aspect of time that supports its dimensional feature is that it is in full conformity with and proportional to other dimensions. In terms of its extent, duration of events increases or decreases in parallel with spatial dimensions. Man lives for around sixty to seventy years, while microscopic animals live around one or two days. The life of the sun and the universe which constitute the macrocosmos is expressed in billions of years. On the other hand, the life of subatomic particles is expressed in billionths of a second. Thus, we assume them as being resonances. There is time reduction together with and compatible with space constriction on the sub-atomic scale, and this fact is yet another proof that time is also a dimension.

How shall we understand the other dimensions of space? What does the fourth dimension of space mean? Let alone describing, it is not easy to even imagine this.

If a is the length, a2 is the area and a3 is the volume of a thing, then what is a4? If we see space as a giant plain sheet of paper, that sheet of paper has no depth but only a surface. If we fold crumple it into the shape of a sphere, we obtain “Riemann space.” Just like we perceive the three-dimensional earth as a two-dimensional surface while we are on it, this 3-dimensional sphere made of 2-dimensional paper will be perceived as 2 dimensional by us. We can only talk about the third dimension after we generate a depth, that is, after we step outside the paper and move above and below it.

The fourth co-ordinate of space is a tunnel. Let us suppose that the universe is two-dimensional, that is, it is like a thin sheet of paper, and let us human beings be like pictures with no thickness over its surface just like the pictures on a newspaper. We are free to move in all directions on this sheet of paper. We can sense four directions. But we will never perceive the terms “up” and “down” (or “upper” and “lower”) since we will never leave the surface of this sheet of paper. Such terms will seem unacceptable to us even we are told of them. Accordingly, we will never hear of a third dimension and our vocabularies will never contain such terms as “up” and “down.”

If a three-dimensional object existed above our fictional paper realm and if this object even slit our paper realm and went away, we still would not see it in three dimensions but only the part of it intersecting our paper realm. If such a thing were a sphere, for instance, we would see its projection in a circular form. Its latitudinal sections would gradually expand starting from the poles, reach their largest on the equator line and its ring-like (circular) shape would gradually decrease and finally disappear at the other pole. That is, we would see it only as its cross section or shade. Such a three-dimensional object would seem two-dimensional to us since we would suddenly see its cross section. The sudden appearance, expansion, decrease and final vanishing of that spherical object in our two-dimensional realm would seem quite amazing to us since our shapes are fixed and immovable.

The three-dimensional shade of an extraterrestrial four-dimensional object overshadows our three-dimensional space. We see the linear tunnels in cross-section, not longitudinally, just as we see the sphere as circular. Though the sphere is a simple object, it amazes us.

Let us now imagine a more complex form. Let us, for instance, reflect the shadow of a vase onto a wall and obtain various shades by turning it repeatedly. A fixed and immovable portrait on the wall would regard the shadow and its variations reflected over the same plane with surprise and fear, since that portrait, or that person without depth, sees only what is reflected on the wall, but not us and the vase. The wall is the only realm for him and there is nothing for him beyond and behind the wall even if we say so.

We humans tend to assess events within the narrow limits of space and within certain dimensions, since we are bound within a single space–time cone. The conceptualization of space with its dimensions of height, length and depth is possible for us. However, the fourth dimension, time, is an abstract and metaphysical measure even though it is studied within physics. The tunnel thus seems to us like an incredible dimension.

Our perceptions with the five senses in the visible universe can be considered as the projections of non-physical and multi-dimensional realities (the eighteen thousand realms) to our domain. Clearly, in order to gain a better understanding of those realms, which we do not see but which we feel exist, with the help of the physics, we need to emancipate ourselves from the narrow patterns of time and space in this world of trial. We need to travel toward the horizon of spirit and develop an all-new scientific language which approaches physics and metaphysics together. Finally, we can say, in Bediüzzaman’s words, that the physical and observable universe which is the domain of research for modern physics is an ornamented curtain veiling the world of the unseen.

Osman Cakmak is a professor of chemistry at Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey.

In my view, with its wonderful people, welcoming nature, and geographical features, this realm is no different than a hallway to the heavens. Once upon a time in its golden age this realm used to be perceived as a trajectory to the highest gardens of Paradise, and its value was worth the entire world. In those days, travelers from faraway lands would visit this realm, and once they sipped its dazzling flavor and felt inside the heavenliness in its aura their spirits were raised, and on departure they comforted their hearts with a promise of a revisit.

The inhabitants of this realm were more intimately connected with physical phenomena than we are today; they were in close embrace with all existence, and were like brothers and sisters to nature. Their homes, villages, and towns were in harmony with nature from all aspects; they were spacious and heart-expanding, and their surroundings were like a botanic garden. With their celestial horizons, crystal-clear sentiments, and otherworldly spirits these homes, villages, and towns made people living there feel as if Paradise was only one step away. This was why people considered their graves an important station on this journey of a single step. They decorated their cemeteries with the colors and patterns of their angelic horizons, for they believed the cemetery was the first point of arrival in the Afterlife. They transformed this splendid area, which appears horrific to the materialistic mind’s eye, into a pleasant resort.

When we were ourselves, our homes, streets, and walkways exchanged warm glances with their inhabitants; their demeanor was so meaningful that those who could observe them from the angle of their spirit could feel as if these places were intoning things that were unique to our realm. Almost everyone in this realm was intoxicated with a kind of music originating in their heart and refined in their beliefs, dreams, and subconscious. Every moment thrilled them with a different breeze of meanings and they were overjoyed.

There were occasional occurrences of frustration and sorrow, but they did not last for long. Such moments were immediately followed by the victory of this realm’s unique character, texture, and ever-enchanting nature that would overcome all the tumult in people’s conscience and convert the darkest autumns into the brightest springs. Our days and nights were always cordial, our months and years were all resplendent.

Every day started with a new beauty as the cries of spring were heard everywhere; the morning breeze brought the scent of Prophet Joseph’s shirt and rivers overflowed from the life-giving spring of Prophet Job . . . a kind of joy from the afterlife was being tasted in this realm. As the days were illumined with the rays from the sun, so were our hearts lit with the light from beyond the heavens. Like sunflowers, the eyes of the heart were vigilant for this light, our souls lived on a schedule adjusted according to the prayer times-the propitious times of the day-and hearts would beat with its excitement. Each portion of the day would then become like a new festival; each week, month, and year would come and pass in unique colors, caressing the heads of these fortunate people and reminding them every season that they were strolling on the walkways of Paradise. Every morning in the lands of this privileged community was like a kind of Resurrection; every noon rose with a new touch of heat; a cool breeze was felt everywhere in the afternoon; the music of silence was heard in the depths of the heart every evening . . . the entire day offered a feast of scenery through its windows opened to the beyond. Enchanted by this profundity and color, even the ones with hearts harder than rocks would soften like silk.

The generations of those days were blessed with glowing hearts and an affectionate setting. Unyielding security and peace ruled everywhere. Mobs, anarchy, tyranny, deep state, unsolved murders . . . these crimes that we experience so much today were unknown to those generations. They were foreign words, for order, harmony, justice, and mercy prevailed in their realm.

Ambition, jealousy, ill-gotten gains, illegal hoards, bribery, nepotism, swindling, cheating, embezzlement . . . these crimes were out of the question. Indeed, some of them only existed in the dictionary, for the auspicious people of those days were exceptionally contented with what they possessed, stayed away from what was forbidden, and fixed on what was lawful, and they pursued a life in justice.

Occurrences of enmity, feelings of murder and revenge, mischief and corrupt plots, passion for authority were the rarest things, for the people’s mindset was directed towards a serious dialogue effort, a philosophy of tolerance, an ethics based on love and compassion.

Autocratic rule was regarded as tyranny from ancient times; for them, despots were no different than pharaohs and were mentioned with imprecations; defaming and classifying others were works of despicable ones. People maintained a life in humility, munificence, and generosity-they acted on forgiveness and courage, breathed with sacrifice and sincerity.

In that bright era, alcoholism, drug abuse, smuggling were never as frequently committed as today. You would not see modern problems like “homeless children” or “addictions to various substances” even as entries in dictionaries. For people then behaved with their hearts, spirits, and minds in control; there were people who made intellectual efforts, sincere hearts that beat for their country and humankind.

They were the prototype people of virtue, and in their abode neither filthy affairs such as those listed above nor corruptions like sinfulness, prostitution, impertinence, and bohemian lifestyles that bring disgrace on being human, could exist. Above all, avoiding sin, and maintaining chastity, virtue, divine ethics, and accountability were their most distinct attributes and natural state of being. They were on a straight track with a clear road map in their hands; they were blessed with a humane profundity that prepared them to walk on such a broad road. They lived straight, walked straight, and became a blissful memory for the generations to come. I wonder where we are on this road.