In theological discussions, the existence of Allah is an issue that’s central, and highly consequential. It is the foundation upon which all theological discourses are based. In fact, it is the fundamental delineator. It is in its light that the entire theological outlook of a believer is set up – for himself, his life, and the world around him.

I would hope to believe the statement above is obvious, and that it is part and parcel of the self-evident theological assertions of theism that require no specific proof. Having faith in Allah  is the pivot, around which all the conceptualisations of a believer revolve. There is no religious concept that is void of this element. This is why there is no difference of opinion among the affiliates of Islam – from the ancients to the contemporaries – that recognising Allah and affirming His existence is the most important fundamental of faith. It precedes all other theological discussions. Without it, any other Islamic belief – such as the monotheism of Allah in worship and lordship, belief in the prophethood of the Prophet , and belief that the Qur’an is Allah’s Book – cannot be attained. Though the above consensus exists among Muslims, there is a difference in the nature of this affirmation, its source, and where it is positioned in the soul. Is the affirmation of Allah imprinted on the soul, or is it acquired knowledge that requires analysis of the evidence?

Let us look at how revelation dealt with this issue, what ancient Muslim scholars said about this, how man and his nature are constructed, and what we innately find in our own selves. We would find that the correct position is that knowledge of the Divine is innate. The recognition of the Creator  represents instinctive and imprinted information that is firmly entrenched in the soul. It is like other instinctive knowledge that does not require any proof. Yet, this innate predisposition can become corrupted and cause an imbalance in man’s inner compass. In such a situation, analysis and proof would be required to remind man of that innate predisposition, not to establish it in him. ‘Affirming the Maker is innately predisposed, instinctive, and self-evident. It is not predicated on analysis or evidence.’11 However, ‘even though it is instinctively known to those with uncorrupted predispositions, many people need analysis. Sometimes, man is not in need of it; in other occasions, he is’.12

So, even though admitting that ‘the innate aspects of knowledge are gained when the predisposition is sound and uncorrupted, that predisposition can become corrupted and ill, leading it to see the truth as falsehood. An example of this is the body when it becomes ill – it might find that something sweet is sour, or it might suffer from double vision. Such instances would have to be treated to remove the illness’.13 Based on this, ‘whosoever gains gnosis or faith…without analysis, it would not be incumbent on him to do so; for those who cannot do so, it would be incumbent on them’.14

Analysis and the ability to produce evidence for Allah’s existence are not from the universal obligations, as knowledge of this can be achieved by the soul’s intuition. However, it does become incumbent on man when the recognition of the Divine is absent from his innate predisposition. This process would be to remind the soul what its predisposition would have dictated. The obligation of analysis and evidence here would act as a mechanism to achieve the primary obligation of affirming the existence of Allah.It is, however, unsubstantiated to claim that analysis and evidence for Allah’s existence is a universal obligation. Another false claim is that the first obligation on a religiously liable person is:

• to know of Allah’s existence.

• to conduct analysis that leads to cognition.

• to have the intention to conduct analysis, or.

• to be in two minds about Allah’s existence before intending to conduct analysis.

Man can recognise the existence of Allah  via his innate predisposition. Whoever is afflicted by doubt in this regard must work to expel such uncertainties. The verified position in this regard is that which Ibn Taymiyyah  mentioned: ‘The first religious obligation can differ based on the variety of people’s situations. What might be the first obligation on one person might not be so on another.’15 Likewise, restricting the ways of analysis to acquire knowledge to one or a few methods is incorrect. Any proper evidence that leads to this knowledge is legislated for anyone who requires it. The most such evidence can offer is to remind a person of his original predisposition. Ibn Taymiyyah  says, ‘As the ways of recognising and acknowledging Allah are varied, various groups of theologians adopted a method to ascertain knowledge of Him, believing that their method was the only way. This is a gross error. It is a position not grounded in knowledge.’16

He adds: ‘There is no Messenger who, when he first called his people, said, “You are commanded to seek the recognition of the Creator, so conduct analysis and derive evidence for it so that you may recognise Him.” They were not made liable to first gain that recognition, nor were they made liable to access the evidence that led to that recognition. Their hearts already knew Him and affirmed Him. Every newborn is born upon the fiṭrah (innate and imprinted predisposition of the soul). However, this predisposition can be altered. When man is reminded, he is reminded of his predisposition. This is why Allah said to Mūṣā, “Speak to him gently, so perhaps he may be mindful” of the knowledge that is in his fiṭrah, which will enable him to know his Lord, how He favoured him, how He was good to him, and how he is dependent on Him. That will invite him to faith.’17

Analysis and deriving evidence have an additional benefit as well. If executed in the proper religious manner, this can lead to greater faith and entrench the fiṭrah in the heart. Abū al-Muẓaffar al-Samʿānī said, ‘We do not deny the type of analysis that is endorsed by the Qur’an and prophetic tradition, for this allows a believer to increase in faith, calm his soul, and gain contentment in his heart.’18

The increase in belief brought about by any proper analysis is not limited to merely affirming the existence of Allah . Rather it allows a servant to gain an enhanced insight into the perfect characteristics of his Lord  and acknowledge that He is complete in His power, will, knowledge, wisdom, mercy, and the like. This analysis and contentment offer similar to what Ibrāhīm al-Khalīl  gained: ‘“My Lord! Show me how you give life to the dead.” Allah responded, “Do you not believe?” Ibrāhīm replied, “Yes I do, but just so my heart can be reassured.”’19

With sound rational analysis, a believer can acquire greater contentment for the heart. This is legislated and is further emphasised in situations when there are doubts and potential objections swirling around a person.

The argument from fiṭrah allows man to obtain synoptic knowledge of His Lord . However, the fiṭrah is unable to offer him a more rounded and complete knowledge of Him; it is here that the role of revelation kicks into play, revealing to the servant the details of His perfect and magnificent attributes that allow him to have a deeper connection with His Lord .

In the evidence of the Shariah, there are pointers to the element of the fiṭrah existing in the soul, albeit with ambiguity surrounding what this element requires and what meanings it comprises of. What is clear is that these texts of the Shariah depict it as a religious imprint. Consider what Allah  said: ‘So be steadfast in faith in all uprightness O Prophet – the natural Way of Allah which He has instilled in all people. Let there be no change in this creation of Allah. That is the Straight Way, but most people do not know.’20

Ibn Kathīr explained this: ‘So turn your face straight. Continue upon that which Allah legislated for you – the monotheistic religion of Ibrāhīm, which Allah has guided you to and perfected for you. With this, hold fast to your sound fiṭrah, upon which Allah created the creation, for He  created His creation so they could recognise Him, consider Him to be one, and believe there is no god besides Him.’21 Similar to the above verse is the following verse: ‘This is the natural Way of Allah. And who is better than Allah in ordaining a way? And we worship none but Him.’22 As for Allah’s statement ‘Let there be no change in this creation of Allah’, Ibn Kathīr  said in his Tafsīr, ‘Some said it means “Do not change the creation of Allah” – people had changed from the fiṭrah upon which Allah had created them. Therefore, this verse would be read as a command shrouded by a proposition, like “Whoever enters it is safe”23, i.e., protect those who enter it. This is a sound and proper interpretation. Others said that this is an actual statement of fact, which means that Allah  equalised all His creation by creating them on the unadulterated condition of the fiṭrah, nobody is born without this being programmed into him, and there is no disparity between people in this regard.’24

On the same theme of fiṭrah and the true religion is the famous narration from Abū Hurayrah : ‘The Prophet  said, “Every newborn is born on fiṭrah. It is his parents who make him into a Jew, Christian, or Magian. It is just like a beast that is born as a whole – do you find some among them maimed?”’ Abū Hurayrah  then read: ‘The natural Way of Allah which He has instilled in all people. Let there be no change in this creation of Allah. That is the Straight Way.’25 It is reported on the authority of ʿIyāḍ al-Mujāshiʿī that, one day, the Messenger of Allah  said in his sermon, ‘Behold, my Lord commanded me that I should teach you that which you do not know. From what He has taught me today is this: “Every property I have conferred upon the servant is lawful. I created all My servants with a natural inclination to the worship of Allah. It is satans who turn them away from the right religion. He makes unlawful what has been declared lawful for them, and he commands them to ascribe partners unto Me, although he has no justification for that…”’26

Like the previous verses, this narration reveals the element of an innate predisposition that begets religiosity. This religiosity is rightly guided and not perverted. It comprises of the cognition of Allah. No type of religiosity can be envisaged without this foundation. In fact, it is apparent that this religiosity begets the monotheism of Allah  in both His lordship and worship.In addition, the scriptural text contains pointers to the specific meaning of the cognition of Allah  as one of the central elements of fiṭrah: ‘And remember when your Lord brought forth from the loins of the children of Adam their descendants and had them testify regarding themselves. Allah asked, “Am I not your Lord?” They replied, “Yes, You are! We testify.” He cautioned, “Now you have no right to say on Judgement Day, ‘We were not aware of this.’”’27 Scholars differ over the interpretation of this verse:

When we say the innateness of cognition of the Divine, what is not intended is that it is present in the soul ever since man is born. Allah  states in the Qur’an, ‘And Allah brought you out of the wombs of your mothers while you knew nothing, and gave you hearing, sight, and intellect so perhaps you would be thankful.’31 Rather, what is intended from the innateness of cognition is that it is an imprint on the soul, which would ultimately kick into action once the prerequisites of acknowledging Allah are met and the obstacles to that are removed. Without this sequence of events, it is possible that the fiṭrah does not kick into action. This can happen because of an external element corrupting the soul. The Prophet  alerted people to this fact: ‘Every newborn is born on fiṭrah. It is his parents who make him into a Jew, Christian, or Magian.’ Explaining this, Ibn Taymiyyah said, ‘When it is said that a person is born on the fiṭrah of Islam, or that he was born a monotheist (ḥanīf), etc., it does not mean that he knows about – or wants – this religion from the moment he left his mother’s womb. Allah says, “And Allah brought you out of the wombs of your mothers while you knew nothing.”32 However, what his fiṭrah does is that it begets the faith of Islam in order for him to recognise it and love it. A soul upon the fiṭrah triggers an acknowledgement and love of its Creator, and the sincere devotion of faith for Him. The requirements of fiṭrah are gained gradually according to how perfectly intact the fiṭrah is, depending on to what extent it was safeguarded from anything that contradicts it.’33

Reality testifies that man’s inclination to faith in Allah , and the inclination to theism, are core elements inside him. One indicator of this phenomenon is the requirement and alertness of the fiṭrah when facing hardships and tough times. Whenever any affliction or major calamity befalls man, an incontrollable feeling is sparked in his soul that he cannot repel. This suggests that there is a higher power who is able to repel it and save him. In such situations, he would find within himself the need to beseech his Lord to deliver him from this calamity. The Qur’an points to this meaning in verses such as: ‘When one is touched with hardship, they cry out to their Lord, turning to Him alone.’34

‘And it so happens that you are on ships, sailing with a favourable wind, to the passengers’ delight. Suddenly, the ships are overcome by a gale wind and those on board are overwhelmed by waves from every side, and they assume they are doomed. They cry out to Allah alone in sincere devotion, “If You save us from this, we will certainly be grateful.”’35

After mentioning the evidence for the existence of Allah , Rāzī said, ‘When man faces a great test or a huge calamity, he loses all hope in that he feels nobody in the creation can come to his aid. It is as if he – invoking his original state of creation and the requirement of his basic nature – is begging the one who can grant him deliverance and take him out of his predicament. This is nothing other than the testimony of fiṭrah by him acknowledging his need for the Creator, the Planner.’36 The English aphorism says, ‘There are no atheists in foxholes.’ Generally, most scholars – even atheist ones – affirm this innate understanding inside the soul, even though atheists obviously do not refer to it as the fiṭrah. Theism transcends the environmental context of one’s upbringing or external influences that may have influenced this predisposition. It is indeed a core feature in man. Testimonies in favour of this are numerous and manifest in various cognitive aspects of life. Human history tells us that religion is a central feature in all civilisations and nations. Anthropological studies underscore this by revealing that the phenomenon of religion was widespread across all human societies. Psychology, sociology, and other branches of social science state the same. In fact, there are now dedicated fields of specialised study that focus specifically on this phenomenon. One such branch of study, which was only just recently spun off from neuroscience, is neurotheology. It discusses the nature of the connection between man’s neuro-structure and religiosity. ‘Religion is hardwired in humans’ is a maxim that is widely known in this field of study, denoting that religion is natural to man and a core human component. One interesting expression, which is a play on the term homo sapiens (wise human), is the one used by Karen Armstrong in her book A History of God, where she suggested that we are in fact homo religious (religious humans). In fact, studies have reached the point where they are searching for the actual gene responsible for the religious disposition inside man. The American geneticist Dean Hamer published a book in 2005 called The God Gene: How Faith Is Hardwired into our Genes. Others have conducted a search for the area of the brain responsible for this disposition. They proposed a number of assumptions which state that there are centres inside the brain responsible for the spiritual side of humans. Such studies include those conducted by Professor Andrew Newberg, who has a number of interviews, discussions, and lectures in this regard. He also co-authored a book with Mark Robert Waldman, called How God Changes Your Brain.