The Rational Evidences in the Qur'an on Allah's Existence

Source: The Learning of the Glorious Qur’an, by Ayatullah Misbah Yazdi page 25.

The first question that is asked in respect of the Qur'anic knowledge of Allah is whether the Qur'an could prove the existence of Allah. A good number of the exegesists of the Qur'an, especially those versed in theology, could locate numerous ayahs in the Qur'an that prove the existence of Allah, regarding their import to be evidences that depend on the order of the universe.
On the other hand, another group of commentators believe that the glorious Qur'an made it needless to prove the existence of Allah, and, thus, it did not care to prove it.
This group believes that the evidences brought about by the first group are either to prove monotheism and deny polytheism, or they are not to be regarded as proofs in the Qur'an, and that it was the commentators who used parts of the Qur'an together with some other introductions to show them as evidences.


Indirect Proving of Allah's Existence

Correct and documented judgment concerning this subject naturally depends on strict and all-embracing study, which cannot be accommodated in this concise discussion. What can be said to bring together these two opinions is that the Qur'an might not have directly tried to prove the existence of Allah, because it regarded the idea of His existence as to be so self-evident that it needed no argumentation, or because it encountered no serious dangers, and so it did not find it wise to discuss a topic which could arise some doubts and controversies. Yet, it is possible to find out in the declarations of the Qur'an some evidences on the subject. It is even not impossible that the Qur'an itself indirectly takes care of them. For example, it is not contradictory that an ayah may directly aim at proving the oneness of Allah, and indirectly prove the very existence of Allah, too. Or an ayah, by way of defying those who did not believe in the prophethood of the Prophet (S.A.) and denied it, may refer to a subject which indirectly proves the existence of Allah, too. For instance, the Qur'an, arguing with the disbelievers who refrain from believing in the noble Prophet (S.A.), puts forth a number of ensuring questions: "Or were they created without there being anything, or are they the creators?" [Suratut-Tur/35]
There is no doubt that the ayah is not openly intended to prove the existence of Allah, yet it can be a tacit proof on that. That is, a human being must have either been created by himself, without having a creator, he himself had created himself, or he must have a creator. The invalidity of the first and second suppositions is obvious and no sane person can accept them. So, the third supposition must inevitably be regarded as correct, i.e. man has a creator.
This inference is based on the fact that the meaning of "thing" in the noble ayah is "creator", that is: were those disbelievers created without there being any creator, or were they the creators of themselves? Naturally, neither of these two notions is correct, and the answer to both questions is negative. So, they must believe that there was a creating god.
But there are two other possibilities in respect of the sense of "thing": one is that it means a "previous matter", i.e. were they created without there being a previous matter? The other is that it means "a goal", i.e. were they created without any objective? It seems that neither of these two senses befits the next question: were they the creator of themselves?
It is not that whether they had been created without a previous matter or with no goal.
Actually, it coincides with such a question as: were they created without a creator, or did they create themselves? It may be that the reason for not putting the question like this: "Do they have no creator or are they themselves creators?" is that a stress is wanted on "were created" so as to make more the invalidity of both suppositions more clear.
Therefore, as we realize that the Qur'an did not present the question of the existence of Allah as a problem, and did not try to directly prove it, we also realize that it requires that it should not, even indirectly and tacitly, refer to its proof, too, inasmuch as we may not be able to obtain even preparatory inferential steps.
It is to be noted that the rational evidences, whether in the Qur'an or in the discourses of the philosophers, prove the existence of Allah by way of mental concepts, which result in a total and acquired knowledge. For example, the evidence showing the movement in the world proves the existence of a mover for the world, and the evidence showing the order of the universe proves the existence of Allah as the organizer of that order, and then other evidences prove His existence as Creator, Maker, the Necessary Being, the Perfect, the Absolute, and afterwards, the evidences of monotheism prove that all these total titles prove but only a single thing - that Allah is One.
As to the evidences of Allah's Attributes, they also affirm His Attributes of perfection and negate all defects from Him, and final conclusion comes to:
"There exists the Being Who possesses Knowledge, Power, Life, and has, no limitations, such as time, place and the like, and it is He Who is the Creator of the universe and man." This is a knowledge that concerns a totality confined to a single One, and it is an in-absentia knowledge of "Being" and of "Him".[Look carefully into the formerly mentioned narrative: "...and recognizing the attribute of the absent comes before the very thing," quoted from Tahaful- Uqul.]