Abstract
The incognizability of God is a fundamental question in the philosophy of religion. This article, through a comparative analysis of the views of Ludwig Wittgenstein and Qazi Saeed Qomi, examines the epistemological challenges associated with this issue. Wittgenstein, emphasizing the limitations of language in describing metaphysical truths, considers the knowledge of God to be beyond the capabilities of human language. In contrast, Qazi Qomi, emphasizing the importance of a correct understanding of religious sources, believes that knowledge of God can be attained through deep contemplation of these sources, but its admixture with human beliefs can lead to misunderstandings in religion.
This article, through a careful examination of the works of both philosophers, shows that although both acknowledge epistemological limitations in the knowledge of God, there are fundamental differences in their concept of knowledge, approach to religion, and their theological implications. This comparison contributes to a deeper understanding of the challenges involved in the incognizability of God in both Eastern and Western philosophical traditions.
Keywords: Incognizability of God, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Qazi Saeed Qomi, Philosophy of religion, Epistemological challenges, Language, Religious sources
Introduction
The concept of God's incognizability, or unknowability, has been a central theme in religious and philosophical discourse for centuries. This paper delves into this profound question by examining the perspectives of two influential thinkers: Ludwig Wittgenstein and Qazi Saeed Qomi. These two figures, hailing from vastly different cultural and intellectual traditions, offer unique insights into the epistemological limitations and possibilities of divine knowledge.
Wittgenstein: The Limits of Language: Ludwig Wittgenstein, a prominent 20th-century philosopher, is renowned for his exploration of the limits of language. In his later works, particularly Philosophical Investigations, he argues that language is inherently tied to our experiences and the world as we perceive it. Metaphysical concepts, such as the nature of God, transcend the boundaries of ordinary language.
Wittgenstein suggests that religious language is often used symbolically rather than literally. When we speak of God, we are not referring to a being that can be comprehended in the same way as empirical objects. Instead, religious language serves as a means of expressing profound spiritual experiences and aspirations. While it may seem paradoxical, Wittgenstein contends that it is precisely through the recognition of the limits of language that we can approach the ineffable nature of the divine.
Qazi Saeed Qomi: The Role of Revelation: Qazi Saeed Qomi, a renowned Islamic scholar and philosopher, offers a different perspective on the incognizability of God. While acknowledging the limitations of human reason, Qomi emphasizes the importance of divine revelation as a source of knowledge about God. He argues that through the careful study and contemplation of religious texts, particularly the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad, one can gain a deeper understanding of the divine.
However, Qomi also cautions against the tendency to impose human limitations and concepts onto the divine. He stresses the importance of distinguishing between the attributes of God, as revealed in scripture, and the limitations of human understanding. By recognizing the transcendent nature of God, we can avoid the pitfalls of anthropomorphism and idolatry.
 
Materials & Methods
While Wittgenstein and Qomi arrive at similar conclusions regarding the incognizability of God, their approaches differ significantly. Wittgenstein focuses on the limitations of language, while Qomi emphasizes the role of revelation. Both thinkers acknowledge the inadequacy of human reason in fully comprehending the divine, but they diverge in their understanding of how to approach this challenge.
Wittgenstein's linguistic analysis highlights the symbolic nature of religious language, suggesting that our understanding of God is ultimately limited by the constraints of human thought. Qomi, on the other hand, offers a more optimistic view, suggesting that through divine revelation and spiritual contemplation, we can attain a deeper, albeit imperfect, knowledge of the divine.
 
Discussion & Result
Both Wittgenstein and Qazi Saeed Qomi concur on the belief that God cannot be fully comprehended.
Wittgenstein asserts that language is insufficient for understanding God, and we approach the divine through symbols and spiritual experiences. Qazi Qomi also maintains that human reason is limited, and knowledge of God can only be attained through divine revelation. Conclusion: Both philosophers highlight the limitations of human understanding of God, but they propose different paths to this knowledge.
 
Conclusion
The incognizability of God remains a profound and enduring question. By examining the perspectives of Wittgenstein and Qazi Saeed Qomi, we gain valuable insights into the epistemological challenges and the potential avenues for exploring the divine. Both thinkers, despite their divergent approaches, converge on the idea that human understanding of God is inherently limited. However, they also suggest that through careful reflection, spiritual practice, and a humble recognition of our limitations, we can deepen our connection to the divine.