Four methods of acquiring knowledge

Intuition (or inner perception) is a power or a light by which man comprehends and perceives the realities of things without the mediumship of the outward senses. To illustrate: There are four kinds of lights: 1 - The outward (or phenomenal) light, which makes things manifest or visible, but which does not discover them. 2 - The light of the eye, or the Eye-sight. This makes things manifest and also discovers them, but it does not comprehend them. 3 - The light of the Intellect (or reason). this light makes things manifest, discovers them, comprehends them, but things pre-exist it, (i.e., its existence is posterior to the creation of things). 4 - The Light of God. It is the revealer of things (i.e., by it things are made manifest), the discoverer of things, the comprehender of things, and it precedes the creation of all things and follows the existence of all things, as it is said, 'God is the Light of the Heaven and Earth' (Quran).

To be brief: The light which is the manifestor of things makes things manifest; the light which is the discoverer of things discovers them; the light which is the comprehender of things, comprehends things. Likewise, the outward faculties and senses of man discover and perceive the appearance of things. But the light of Intuition (or Inner Perception) is a light which comprehends the realities and the core of things. Intuition (or Inner Perception) means the Divine Universal Reason, and it comprehends and grasps supernatural things and conditions which cannot be grasped by the outward senses.

The Prophets and Divine Manifestations have taught that this sense of Intuition, Inner Perception, or Innate Reason exists in man. Philosophers are also in accord with the Prophets in this matter, that is, to the degree of believing it possible that such a power may exist in man. For Philosophers do not deny the existence of powers which are supernatural. But Prophets demonstrate the existence of this Inner Perception and Intuition in man in a practical way. They show forth this power first in themselves by inspiring men with the faculty of comprehending the realities of things and grasping things supernatural.

(That is, the Prophets prove the existence of Intuition or Inner Reason, by showing forth themselves such a comprehension which is beyond the power of any man. They also inspire their disciples with, and develop in them, the same power. This is illustrated in the life, prophetic vision and deeds of the Prophets and their true followers.)

There are only four accepted criteria of comprehension, that is, four criteria whereby the realities of things are understood.

The first criterion is that of the senses, that is, all that the eye, the ear, the taste, the smell, and the touch perceive is called "sensible". At present all the European philosophers hold this to be the most perfect criterion. They claim that the greatest of all criteria is that of the senses and they regard it as sacrosanct. And yet the criterion of the senses is defective, as it can err. For example, the greatest of the senses is the power of vision. The vision, however, sees a mirage as water and reckons images reflected in mirrors as real and existing; it sees large bodies as small, perceives a whirling point as a circle, imagines the earth to be stationary and the sun to be in motion, and is subject to many other errors of a similar nature. One cannot therefore rely implicitly upon it.

The second criterion is that of the intellect, which was the principal criterion of comprehension for those pillars of wisdom, the ancient philosophers. They deduced things through the power of the mind and relied on rational arguments: all their arguments are based upon reason. But despite this, they diverged greatly in their opinions. They would even change their own views: for twenty years they would deduce the existence of something through rational arguments, and then afterwards they would disprove the same, again through rational arguments. Even Plato at first proved through rational arguments the immobility of the earth and the movement of the sun, and then subsequently established, again through rational arguments, the centrality of the sun and the movement of the earth. Then the Ptolemaic theory became widespread and Plato's theory was entirely forgotten until a modern astronomer revived it. Thus have the mathematicians disagreed among themselves, even though they all relied on rational arguments.

Likewise, at one time they would establish a thing by rational arguments and disprove it at another, again by rational arguments. So a philosopher would firmly uphold a view for a time and adduce a range of proofs and arguments to support it, and afterward he would change his mind and contradict his former position by rational arguments.

It is therefore evident that the criterion of reason is imperfect, as proven by the disagreements existing between the ancient philosophers as well as by their want of consistency and their propensity to change their own views. For if the criterion of intellect were perfect, all should have been united in their thoughts and agreed in their opinions.

The third criterion is that of tradition, that is, the text of the sacred scriptures, when it is said, "God said thus in the Torah," or "God said thus in the Gospel." This criterion is not perfect either, because the traditions must be understood by the mind. As the mind itself is liable to error, how can it be said that it will attain to perfect truth and not err in comprehending and inferring the meaning of the traditions? For it is subject to error and cannot lead to certitude. This is the criterion of the leaders of religion. What they comprehend from the text of the Book, however, is that which their minds can understand and not necessarily the truth of the matter; for the mind is like a balance, and the meanings contained in the texts are like the objects to be weighed. If the balance is untrue, how can the weight be ascertained?

Know, therefore, that what the people possess and believe to be true is liable to error. For if in proving or disproving a thing a proof drawn from the evidence of the senses is advanced, this criterion is clearly imperfect; if a rational proof is adduced the same holds true; and likewise if a traditional proof is given. Thus it is clear that man does not possess any criterion of knowledge that can be relied upon.

But the grace of the Holy Spirit is the true criterion regarding which there is no doubt or uncertainty. That grace consists in the confirmations of the Holy Spirit which are vouchsafed to man and through which certitude is attained.

There are four means of knowledge. Among scientists and philosophers a method of attaining knowledge is through the senses, principally through observation. Light shows us that light exists. Reality is limited to the perceptible thing; all that is not perceptible is subject to doubt.

Among the ancient philosophers the infallible way to knowledge was through logic. The different schools of logic weighed everything in the scales of cold scholasticism. As to religious people their criterion has ever been the sacred text which must be accepted as final. One is not allowed the slightest reflection. "The word of God," they say, "is truth." Inspiration is the fourth criterion. Occultists say, "I have had a revelation. This truth has been revealed to me." For them everything outside direct revelation is viewed with doubt. So we have indicated the four criterions: the senses, reason, the sacred text, inspirations. There is no fifth.

Knowledge is measured by four things, viz., first, sensation (that is, the things understood by the five senses); second, reason; third, revelation; fourth, inspiration.

O distinguished and learned one! You know that the measures of understanding among people are of four kinds: the measure of the senses, the measure of reason, the measure of tradition, and the measure of inspiration. As for the sensory measure, its greatest medium is sight, and its error is clearly evident to people of insight, for sight sees the mirage as water, shadow as stationary, a moving point as a circle, and great bodies as small. As for the measure of reason, upon which the people of observation and deduction rely, its error is clearly proven, for its adherents differ on most questions and opinions. Were it a straight measure, they would not have differed on any question.

There are three ways of apprehending Truth. First, the earthly way, by means of the five senses. Second, the way by argument and reasoning and all philosophers have taught that it was possible to reach the knowledge of Truth by this method. Third, the spiritual way, by which man receives knowledge from the inner light or inspiration.

The criterion of perception among the philosophers of the West is sense. Their opinion is that whatsoever is sensible is real; that is, in that which is perceived by the senses there is neither doubt nor uncertainty. … But among the philosophers of the East---especially the philosophers of Greece and Persia---the criterion of perception hath been reason; and their proof is this: sense is liable to error, and, since it erreth, it cannot be called a perfect criterion.

Consequently, it has become evident that the four criteria or standards of judgment by which the human mind reaches its conclusions are faulty and inaccurate. All of them are liable to mistake and error in conclusions. But a statement presented to the mind accompanied by proofs which the senses can perceive to be correct, which the faculty of reason can accept, which is in accord with traditional authority and sanctioned by the promptings of the heart, can be adjudged and relied upon as perfectly correct, for it has been proved and tested by all the standards of judgment and found to be complete.

Our conclusion must, therefore, be that none of these standards for the determination of truth is worthy of implicit confidence; and man has no other means for reaching a true understanding.

Yet if the conclusion declared by all four of these standards be the same, it is worthy of confidence. Then we may be assured that the common report is correct. Otherwise we cannot be sure.

… Yet there is another standard which is the peculiar possession of the Chosen of God. This standard is the breathings of the Holy Spirit. By that power assurance is produced, man becomes certain, and the consciousness is satisfied.

Briefly then, these four criteria according to the declarations of men are: first, sense perception; second, reason; third, traditions; fourth, inspiration.

… Briefly, the point is that in the human material world of phenomena these four are the only existing criteria or avenues of knowledge, and all of them are faulty and unreliable. What then remains? How shall we attain the reality of knowledge? By the breaths and promptings of the Holy Spirit, which is light and knowledge itself. Through it the human mind is quickened and fortified into true conclusions and perfect knowledge.

Verily, inspiration indicateth certain inclinations of the heart. And the whisperings of Satan are also inclinations which arrive successively upon the heart by the agency of the soul. If there occureth to the heart a certain idea or question, how is it to be known whether it is an inspiration of the All-Merciful or a whispering of Satan? Therefore, it is evident that all of balances current among the people are defective and their conclusions are unreliable. Nay, they are confused dreams, doubts, and idle fancies that neither allay the sore athirst nor appease the seeker of knowledge ['irfan].

As for the true, divine balance which never strayeth, and which ever comprehendeth the universal realities and the sublime inner meanings, it is the balance of the inmost heart [mizanu'l-fu'ad], of which God hath made mention in the blessed verse. It is an effulgence of the brilliant lights of the Divine Outpouring, the secret of the All-Merciful, the manifestation of sincere faith, and the lordly sign.