In one of his lectures he refers to the spread of doubt and...

In one of his lectures he refers to the spread of doubt and misgivings in the hearts of the people about Islam.[^2] Discussing the spread of belief in naturalism, he said, “Today we are in need of a modern Ilm al-Kalam by which we should refute the doctrines of modern science and undermine their foundations, or show that they are in conformity with the articles of Islamic faith.

While I am endeavouring to introduce these sciences among the Muslims, it is my duty to defend the religion of Islam and to reveal its original bright face.” But the important question was how to prove the validity of a particular religion in the face of so many claimants. He came to the conclusion that “the only touchstone of a true religion can be this: if it is in conformity with human nature or with nature in general, then it is true.

This would be a clear proof that the religion in question has come from God, the Author of nature both in man and outside. I am fully confident that the guidance that He has given us is absolutely in con­formity with our constitution and our nature and this is the only touchstone of its truth. It would be clearly absurd to assert that God’s action is different from His Word.

All creation including man is the work of God and religion is His Word, so there cannot be any contradiction between the two.”[^3] What is nature? Sayyid Ahmad Khan interprets it in the sense in which the thirteenth/nineteenth century scientists interpreted it as a closed system of the universe which obeys certain laws of mechanics and physics and which is characterized by a uniformity of behaviour to which there cannot be any exception.

All inorganic, organic, and human behaviour is subject to these mechanical laws. In one of his articles, he says, “In the beginning this knowledge of nature was limited.

But with the increase in knowledge, the sphere of nature has correspondingly increased and, thus, seems to have become co-extensive with what we find in the universe, what we see or feel, so much so that the actions and thoughts of man and even his beliefs are all different chains in the inexorable laws of nature.”[^4] But this mechanical conception of nature, as James Ward put it, is totally antagonistic to the spiritual inter­pretation of life, and, therefore, cannot be upheld by a person who is advocating the truth of any theistic religion.