Page 4 of 36 There is no Kaifiah [How-ness] of Divine Attributes. That is way we know God without asking How God/Deity is, How is an Attribute Of God/Deity. The same is true for Divine Acts. One cannot ask How God/Deity did this , or How He can do this in regard to the existence of the very Divine Act. Forth Preliminary Many Muslim Philosophers and Theologians are of the view that Knowledge of God/Deity/ Divine Essence/Divine Existence is Absolute(ly) Possible for Human Beings without the aid of Revelation [‘ILHA:M] and Aspiration [VAH:Y] from God. So it is very clear that many Theologians and Philosophers do believe that God/Deity can be known by REASON without Revelation and Aspiration from Very God/Deity Himself. Certain Knowledge about God /Deity is Absolute(ly) Possible with reason.How ever as God Comprehendeth His Essence by His Own Knowledge He can inform and reveal things better about Himself. A number of Theologians believe that the Knowledge of God/Deity is inherited in the Minds and Rationalities of Human Beings. An other number of scholars believe that the concept and knowledge of God is not evident , and by/ through Reason God Can be Known, yet not comprehensively. Fifth Preliminary A number of Philosophers opine that God Cannot be Known Through reason. A number of Atheists also opine that it is absolutely Unknowable whether God/Deity Existeth or Not. It appeareth that the learned scholar is inspired by each one of the two. Other wise He must not have said such a thing. However he made just one Exception that God Can Only be Known through Incarnation or incorporeal Manifestation. But on what basis he does base his exception? How the exception is known, by Reason or by Revealed Scripture. Unless and otherwise such an exception is presented and strictly analyzed such a claim is proofless. So until then this is an unproved claim. If it is claimed that there are proofs then claim of existing proofs is just a claim and even this claim requires proof. So all the article Page 4 of 36
Page 5 of 36 presented by the Anti Islamic Objection Maker is incomplete. What is wanted that one must accept his assertions with its incompletenesses. Sixth Preliminary If it is Absolute(ly) Possible for a Created Essence to Know God then God can be Known , then God Can be known with or without Incarnation. If it is Absolute(ly) Impossible for Created Essences to Know God/ Deity then It is Absolute(ly) Impossible to Know God With or Without Incartnation. To say it is Absolute(ly) Possible for Created Essence but only through Incarnation is a Conditional Possibility. It cannot be accepted unless and otherwise it is taken as an Independent Axiom of a theological system. But if it is attempted to be prove it is impossible and Un proveable if not Disproveable. But for sake of an argument consider that There is no method for any Created Thing to Know God/Deity then the question is how the Human Nature Knows God. Certainly the consideration implieth that even the Human Nature requires an other Incarnation and this implieth an Infinite series. So this is Absolute(ly) Impossible. Otherwise this consideration is false. Let it be suppose that Knowledge in Created Supposita of God/Deity is Absolute(ly) Impossible. Now if a Human Nature claims that There is a God with Some Hypostases in the Godhead then the Knowledge cannot be shifted from Created to Uncreated even if the Human Nature is supposed to be Assumed by the Hypostasis in the God. Since the Human Nature is Creation even if supposed to be assumed so shift of Knowledge from Created to Uncreated is Absolute(ly) Impossible. If the very Assumption is studied , the very self of the act of assumption is Created and once again the problem of shifting from Created to Uncreated is Absolute(ly) Impossible under the above supposition. Rather the argument from the Creations Not in Godhead,Not in God, Not in any Supposed Hypostasis in God is more Powerful since in the case any Creation is in God or in Hypostasis of God or in the Godhead of God then there is a Barrier of Godhead between the human beings and the the human nature. This barrier weakeneth the this source of Knowledge (if it is).So to deny the Knowablity of God independent of Incarnation , assumption of Human Page 5 of 36
David W. Montgomery presents a rich ethnographic study on the practice and meaning of Islamic life in Kyrgyzstan. As he shows, becoming and being a Muslim are based on knowledge acquired from the surrounding environment, enabled through the practice of doing. Through these acts, Islam is imbued in both the individual and the community. To Montgomery, religious practice and lived experience combine to create an ideological space that is shaped by events, opportunities, and potentialities that form the context from which knowing emerges. This acquired knowledge further frames social navigation and political negotiation. Through his years of on-the-ground research, Montgomery assembles both an anthropology of knowledge and an anthropology of Islam, demonstrating how individuals make sense of and draw meanings from their environments. He reveals subtle individual interpretations of the religion and how people seek to define themselves and their lives as “good�? within their communities and under Islam. Based on numerous in-depth interviews, bolstered by extensive survey and data collection, Montgomery offers the most thorough English-language study to date of Islam in post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan. His work provides a broad view into the cognitive processes of Central Asian populations that will serve students, researchers, and policymakers alike.