M6:365 — چون نمی‌گویی که روز و شب به خود / بی‌خداوندی کی آید کی رود

Translation: Why do you not say that day and night, on their own, How could they come and how could they go, without a Lord?

Meaning: This rhetorical verse questions how the consistent and orderly procession of day and night, and indeed the entire cosmos, could possibly occur without a divine orchestrator, thereby affirming the necessity of a Creator.

This verse, in my estimation, functions as a rhetorical question posed by Mowlana to awaken the listener's conscience. He invites us to contemplate the self-evident order of the universe, particularly the regular coming and going of day and night, and asks: can such an order truly manifest without the governance of a Divine 'Lord' (Khodāvand)? Mowlana here, in remarkably simple and relatable language, employs a form of the 'Argument from Design' (Burhān al-Naẓm), an argument with ancient roots in philosophy and theology that seeks to deduce the existence of an intelligent Creator from the perceived order and design in the cosmos.

I have noted before that Mowlana presents this matter with great simplicity. For instance, in subsequent verses, he asks, "Is a house more rational with a builder, or without one? Speak, O skillful one!" or "Is a script more rational with a scribe, or without one? Consider, O human!" He even likens human organs to letters in a script, asking, "The Jīm of the ear, the Ayn of the eye, and the Mīm of the mouth — how could they be without a scribe, O accused one?" These are all analogies meant to illustrate that, just as every ordered creation requires an intelligent agent, so too must the order of the universe originate from a conscious source. This is an intuitive call that, in its simplicity, carries profound power.

Of course, it must be acknowledged that in contemporary philosophy, the Argument from Design, as simply presented by Mowlana, is not universally accepted. Since David Hume, and later through the works of thinkers like Richard Dawkins, significant critiques have been leveled against it. They argue that likening the universe to a watch or a building is fundamentally flawed, as the universe cannot be equated with a human artifact. However, for Mowlana, this argument is more a matter of intuitive, innate spiritual insight than a complex logical deduction. It stems from inner purity and a lack of alienation from one's true self.

This particular verse appears within the broader narrative context where Mowlana uses the metaphor of a hidden 'thief' within the human being. This 'inner thief' represents the alien elements that prevent sparks of divine insight from igniting and enduring in our hearts. When the heart is not cleansed of these alien presences, individuals suffer a kind of spiritual blindness, failing to perceive even self-evident truths. This verse is, in essence, an address to this very blindness and heedlessness: how can one behold this manifest order and still deny an 'orchestrator'? In this perspective, heedlessness toward God arises not from a lack of evidence, but from an inner malady and the dominance of alien forces within the sanctuary of the soul.

Key takeaways

• The orderly cycle of day and night is Mowlana's intuitive proof for a Divine Governor.
• Mowlana employs the "Argument from Design" through simple, relatable analogies like a house needing a builder.
• Ignoring the self-evident truths of cosmic order signifies an 'inner blindness'.
• This verse is an implicit critique of those who deny basic truths due to internal heedlessness.
• Cleansing the heart of 'inner thieves' is essential for perceiving and accepting this fundamental truth.