Not many will dare dispute that knowledge occupies a special position in Islam and the intellectual and scientific tradition it gives rise to.
In fact, apart from certain sections or chapters of books in that tradition which have dealt with the various issues pertaining to knowledge, there have also been books which were solely dedicated to discussing such issues, some of which were voluminuous.
As one’s grasp of knowledge cannot be deemed sufficient and complete unless one also firmly understands what destroys or negates it, among the issues discussed in such works are the various antitheses to knowledge as well as the many obstacles to knowing.
One such discussion is what Abu Hamid Muhammad al-Ghazzali exemplified in his famous Ihya’ `Ulumuddin, making the best pedagogic use of what I once referred to as “the Parable of Mirror” [see IKIM Views of May 30, 2006].
The parable, as explained before, is basically used to describe the nature of knowledge as a faithful reflection, in one’s mind or intellect, of the extramental reality, whatever that may be.
In any normal situation, when an object-say, a tree-is facing a mirror, its image will then be reflected in the mirror.
The real tree, despite its image being reflected in the mirror, remains existent outside the mirror and is indeed existentially different from either the mirror or its image as reflected therein.
The image, in turn, though different from the tree and existentially secondary or subsequent to it, is similar to it and in fact points to it.
Similarly, al-`ilm or ‘knowledge’ is not existentially the same as anything actual and existent that becomes ‘the object of knowledge’ (al-ma`lum).
Yet, although the former is different from the latter, it is still referentially related to the latter in an intimate manner.
The object-of-knowledge is like the tree in the parable, and the human mind or soul is like the mirror.
Just as the image of the tree will be reflected in the mirror, so will knowledge of a thing be formed in one’s mind if one properly attends to the thing.
However, the reflection of an external object in the mirror can be hampered by five factors.
First, the bad quality of the material from which the mirror is made as well as the mirror’s improper shape.
Second, impurities on the surface of the mirror.
Third, the mirror being directed to other angles although the person who does so is conscious of the direction where the object lies.
Fourth, something opaque placed between the mirror and the object.
And lastly, a person’s not knowing the direction of the object, which causes him to not be able to direct the mirror to its proper spot.
Similarly, the formation of knowledge may be impeded by five obstacles.
Firstly, an inadequate formation and incomplete natural development of one’s mind may prevent one from truly knowing something; for instance, youth generally cannot grasp some abstruse matters because their intellect are not yet matured.
Secondly, sins may veil one’s intellect from comprehending the true meaning of something, particularly if that something belongs to the spiritual and religious realm.
Thirdly, the mind’s preoccupation with other matters despite its awareness of what it should have attended to, turns it away from properly knowing that object-of-knowledge.
Fourthly, inherited prejudices and imitative acceptance of dogma may tarnish one’s intellect and make it impossible for it to accept the truth.
Finally, one’s ignorance of the right methods of observation and reasoning is epistemically incapacitating.