2nd Matter The Criterion Of Scientific Consensus

The Second Matter:

With respect to a problem subject to discussion in science or art, those who stand outside that science or art cannot speak authoritatively, however great, learned and accomplished they may be, nor can their judgements be accepted as decisive. They cannot form part of the learned consensus of the science.

For example, the judgement of a great engineer on the diagnosis and cure of a disease does not have the same value as that of the lowliest physician. In particular, the words of denial of a philosopher who is absorbed in the material sphere, who becomes continually more remote from the non-material or spiritual and cruder and more insensitive to light, whose intelligence is restricted to what his eye beholds - the words of such a one are unworthy of consideration and valueless with respect to non-material and spiritual matters.

On matters sacred and spiritual and concerning the Divine unity, there is total accord among the hundreds of thousands of the People of Truth, such as Shaykh Gilani (May his mystery be sanctified), who beheld Allah's Sublime Throne while still on the earth, who spent ninety years ad-vancing in spiritual work, and who unveiled the truths of belief in all three stations of certainty. This being the case what value have the words of philosophers, who through their absorption in the most diffuse details of the material realm and the most minute aspects of multiplicity are choking and dazed? Are not their denials and objections drowned out like the buzzing of a mosquito by the roaring of thunder?