"Why is there something rather than nothing?" This is perhaps the most profound question to haunt human consciousness. When we turn to Islam for an answer, we find a web of contradictions and logical evasions. The deeper we look, the more the Islamic narrative of creation clashes with the supposed nature of its deity.
To unravel this, we must distinguish between two fundamentally different questions:
-
The Antecedent Motivation: What was the reason or "trigger" before the decision to create? What moved an eternal being to start the process of creation?
-
The Subsequent Assignment: What tasks were assigned to creation after it already existed?
Islamic theology constantly confuses the two. It attempts to answer the "Why" (Motivation) before the creation by citing the "What" (Assignment) after the creation.
The "Worship" Dodge:
The most common answer given by Muslims is the following verse:
Quran 51:56: "I have not created the jinn and mankind except to worship Me."
Apologists present this as the grand answer to human existence, but it is a logical dodge. This verse does not explain what was the motive before the creation took place that Allah decided for it. It only tells us what the "jinn and mankind" are expected to do once they are already here after the creation. It describes a job description, not a reason for creation itself.
If we press further and ask why worship specifically, Islamic theology offers nothing beyond circular reasoning. Worship is the purpose because Allah said so. Allah said so because it is the purpose. The argument rotates endlessly around its own axis without ever moving forward.
An all-knowing God, dictating the final and complete revelation to humanity, had every opportunity to explain the underlying motivation for creation. He did not. That silence is not a mystery to be accepted with reverence. It is a gap that no amount of scholarly interpretation has ever successfully filled, because the question it leaves open is one that only a genuine creator with a genuine motivation could answer.
The Paradox of al-Samad (Self-Sufficiency):
The problem becomes a full-blown contradiction when we examine one of the core attributes of the Islamic deity: al-Samad.
Quran 112:2: "Allah, the Eternal, the Absolute (al-Samad)."
Al-Samad implies perfection, zero deficiency, and absolute independence. A being that is al-Samad has no needs, no desires, and nothing to gain.
This leads to an inescapable logical failure: How can a being who needs nothing desire/demand worship? The moment a deity desires praise, recognition, or obedience, the illusion of self-sufficiency breaks. A truly perfect, self-sufficient being does not require affirmation from humans, jinn, or even atoms (i.e., insignificant and lowly creatures that He himself created). The act of commanding worship suggests a deficiency, and a "desire" that was unfulfilled before the command was given.
The "Benefit for Humans" Fallacy:
When confronted with this, Muslim scholars attempt a "patchwork" explanation:
"Worship does not benefit Allah; it is for your own good to get you into Paradise."
This only complicates the failure further:
-
If worship is solely for our benefit, then the statement "I created them except to worship Me" becomes misleading. It should have said, "I created them to reward them."
-
If the ultimate goal was our benefit in Paradise, why create this "test" at all? Why subject billions (a huge majority of humans) to suffering, disease, and tragedy just to reach a destination a "Self-Sufficient" creator could have placed them in instantly?
The silence on this issue is deafening. When you put together the verse from the Quran with the scholarly interpretations, you are left with a theological contradiction so blatant that it almost feels like satire.
Allah creates beings only to worship Him, but claims He does not need worship. That is like:
-
Allah saying: "I am eating, even though I do not need food."
-
Or Allah saying "I am sleeping, even though I do not need sleep."
Ultimately, Islamists have to openly accept that:
-
Allah neither told the underlying reason/motivation for CREATION.
-
Nor did Allah tell the reason for not telling it.
The "Grand Purpose" of Islam is not an answer; it is a circular argument that collapses under its own weight.
The failure to explain the true motive for creation suggests that there is no divine wisdom at play, but only Muhammad speaking from behind the mask of Allah. Because Muhammad was merely human, he was inherently unable to provide a logic that transcended human limitations. He could proclaim the "purpose," but he could not explain the "reasoning."
Another problem is one of plain language:
If worship is not for Allah's benefit but entirely for ours, then the Quranic verse "I have not created the jinn and mankind except to worship Me" becomes actively misleading. It says nothing about human benefit. It says nothing about Paradise or moral development or spiritual purification. It presents worship as something directed toward Allah, performed for Allah, centred on Allah. If the scholars are correct that worship is actually for our benefit, then the verse should have said precisely that. It should have read something like "I created them to benefit them" or "I created them so that they might reach Paradise." The fact that it does not say this, and says something quite different, is not a minor textual inconvenience. It is a significant problem for a book claimed to be the precise and perfect word of an all-knowing God.
Another problem is one of design:
If the ultimate goal of creation was to benefit human beings by bringing them to Paradise, then the entire architecture of Islamic theology raises an immediate and devastating question: why the test? Why subject billions of human beings to lifetimes of suffering, disease, poverty, grief, and tragedy as the path to a destination that an all-powerful, all-knowing, self-sufficient creator could have placed them in directly and instantly?
If fact, according to the Quran, many of humans and jinns will be the fuel of eternal hellfire:
Quran 7:179: And surely, We have created majority of the Jinn and mankind for Hell.
Quran 12:103: "And most of the people, although you should desire it, are not believers"
A surgeon who deliberately breaks a patient's leg before setting it and presenting himself as a healer is not being generous. He is being cruel and then taking credit for the remedy. If Allah's genuine intention was always to benefit humanity with Paradise, the suffering that precedes it is not a necessary journey. It is an unnecessary imposition by a being who had the power to simply skip it entirely.
The standard Islamic response to this is that the test builds character, earns reward, and makes Paradise meaningful. But this response assumes that an all-powerful God had no way to grant meaningfully earned Paradise without first engineering a world of suffering and failure. That is not a description of omnipotence. It is a description of limitation.
The "Divine Attributes" Fallacy:
Muslim scholars also present the following argument for creation (al-Islam.org):
Allah’s perfection includes creativity (al-Khaliq), mercy, and generosity. Creation is an expression of these attributes, not a response to need or deficiency. "
Our Response:
This argument still does not answer the fundamental questions:
-
Firstly, why does a self-sufficient al-Samad God need attributes at all? It makes no sense. He should be complete even without any attributes.
-
And secondly, why does He need to express them? Again, He should be complete and perfect even without expressing those attributes.
-
And to whom does He want to express these attributes? To insignificant and lowly creatures (i.e. humans) which He brought into existence himself? This makes no sense.
Please ask these questions to yourself:
-
Would Allah cease to exist without these attributes?
-
Would He cease to exist without the desire to express them?
-
Would He cease to exist without creating something (i.e. humans, jinns, angels etc.) outside Himself to receive them so that they could these attributes could be expressed?
Beyond all of this, perhaps the most telling point is that this entire philosophical framework does not appear anywhere in the Quran or authenticated Sunnah. It was constructed by later scholars who recognized the logical gap in the creation narrative and worked backward to fill it. If this were the true reason for creation, an all-knowing God would have stated it clearly in His own revelation. Instead, He left it unexplained, and human beings spent centuries building philosophical scaffolding around a silence that should not exist in the book of an all-knowing God.
Why a Test of PRAISING Allah?
If life is truly a test, then shouldn't that test be about kindness, justice, compassion, and helping those in need? Shouldn't it be about resisting oppression, standing up for the weak, and making the world a better place?
But Islam tells us something else. It tells us that the ultimate test is to worship and praise Allah five times a day, every single day, without fail. Not because it improves the world. Not because it helps humanity. But simply because Allah demands it.
And this obsession with praise does not stop with humans.
According to Islam, angels have been endlessly worshipping and glorifying Allah since the beginning of time. They do not sin. They do not question. Yet they spend their entire existence in submission and praise. And for what? They are not going to paradise. They receive no reward. We are told Allah does not need their praise, yet He demands it endlessly. How is that different from someone insisting on being constantly applauded while claiming they do not care for attention?
Imagine someone saying, “I do not need food,” while continuing to eat non-stop. That is the same contradiction we are presented with. Allah supposedly needs nothing, yet He created a universe where everything exists just to praise Him.
It does not stop with angels either. The Quran claims that every creature, animals, birds, insects, even the stars and mountains, they all are engaged in praising Allah. From the vast galaxies to the tiniest atom, everything is glorifying Him. And yet none of these things will enter paradise. None will be rewarded. Their worship is never acknowledged.
Why?
What kind of being would create an entire universe just so it can be endlessly praised by every particle within it? What does Allah gain from this chorus of eternal worship? If He gains nothing, then why demand it? Why insist on it so obsessively?
This relentless demand for worship looks less like divinity and more like human ego projected onto the heavens. A god created in man's image, reflecting human flaws like the need for validation, praise, and submission.
It makes you wonder: Did Allah create man, or did man create Allah?
Because the Allah described in Islamic texts carries the same fragile pride and hunger for attention that we find in the most insecure of human rulers.
And if that is the god we are supposed to worship, then maybe the real test is not about obedience, but about the courage to question.
Islamist Excuse: “Worship Is About Moral Development”
A common response to the critique of divine praise is to redefine "worship." Proponents argue that worship is not for the benefit of Allah, but for the moral development of the human being. They claim that rituals like Salat are tools designed to instill justice, gratitude, discipline, and charity, ultimately transforming the individual into a better member of society.
Our Response:
Firstly, the development of moral character is not a uniquely religious achievement. Every human society, religious or not, has independently produced ethical frameworks centered on justice, compassion, honesty, and social responsibility.
Confucianism built an entire civilization of moral discipline without a personal God. Buddhism and Taoism guided hundreds of millions toward ethical living without demanding ritual praise of a creator. And today, the largely secular societies of Northern Europe, Japan, and South Korea consistently rank among the most honest, peaceful, and well-functioning in the world, without any theology behind their moral frameworks.
This tells us something important. Moral teaching and worship are two separate things. Morality is a universal human necessity. Worship, specifically the ritualized glorification of a divine being, is something else entirely. The two should not be conflated.
Secondly, if the genuine purpose of Islamic worship were human moral transformation, we would expect the most emphasized rituals to reflect that. We would expect acts of service, justice, empathy, and integrity to sit at the very center of the faith.
But that is not what we find.
The most central and non-negotiable act of Islamic worship is Salat, five daily prayers, each one mandatory, each one a structured ritual of pure glorification. Reciting Allahu Akbar (Allah is the Greatest), affirming His exclusive Lordship in Surah Al-Fatiha, bowing and prostrating in physical submission. These are acts of recognition and exaltation, not acts of social justice or charity.
Now consider this. A person could be the most honest, generous, and compassionate human being on earth, and in Islamic theology, they are still considered a sinner if they do not perform these specific daily affirmations of Allah's greatness.
If moral transformation were truly the goal, why would the absence of praise, rather than the absence of good character, be the defining line between salvation and damnation?
Thirdly, Islam also teaches that angels, animals, insects, trees, mountains, and every particle of the universe is in a constant state of worship, glorifying Allah at all times. None of these beings require moral development. None of them will be judged, rewarded, or sent to paradise.
Yet they worship.
If the purpose of worship is moral transformation, why does it extend to beings who have no morality to build? The only consistent explanation is that the worship of all creation serves a single function: the continuous acknowledgment of Allah's greatness, regardless of who or what is doing the acknowledging.
Fourthly, perhaps the most revealing test of any system is what it punishes.
In Islam, neglecting Salat carries severe consequences, including in classical jurisprudence the possibility of execution, and in theology the threat of eternal hellfire. This punishment applies even to a person of outstanding moral character who simply does not perform the verbal and physical acts of glorification.
Ask yourself honestly. If a truly self-sufficient being gains nothing from praise, why does the failure to offer that praise result in horrific eternal punishment? Why would a lifetime of perfect moral behaviour fail to compensate for the absence of ritualized glorification?
If a human authority figure demanded constant verbal affirmation of their greatness from those beneath them, and threatened severe punishment for those who refused even if those people were otherwise kind and ethical, we would not hesitate to recognize that as a need for ego-validation and control.
Calling the same pattern of behaviour "divine wisdom" does not change its nature. It simply places it beyond question by attaching a sacred label to it.
If Allah Is Eternal, Why Did He DECIDE to Create the Universe ONLY 13.8 Billion Years Ago?
If Allah is truly eternal, existing without beginning or end, then why did He choose to create the universe only 13.8 billion years ago? What was He doing before that? Was He silently watching nothingness for an eternity, only to suddenly decide it was time to create a universe, a planet, a species, and a divine drama?
Islamic theology has no satisfying answer to this. Any answer either introduces change into an unchanging being, which destroys the concept of a perfect God, or admits that creation was somehow always necessary, which destroys the concept of a self-sufficient God. There is no clean exit from this dilemma.
We now know that the observable universe contains over two trillion galaxies. Each galaxy holds hundreds of billions of stars. Many of those stars have planets. Entire worlds are being born and destroyed every second. Stars larger than our entire solar system are exploding at this very moment.
And yet, according to Islamic theology, the focus of the creator of all this is a single species, on a single planet, in an unremarkable corner of one average galaxy. Not their civilizations, not their scientific discoveries, not their journey toward the stars. But whether they pray five times a day, and what they do in their bedrooms.
This is not the behaviour we would expect from the architect of a universe spanning 93 billion light-years. It is the behaviour we would expect from a deity imagined by people who believed their patch of desert was the center of everything, because they had no way of knowing otherwise.
When we step back and look honestly at the priorities, obsessions, and worldview reflected in Islamic scripture, what we find is not the mark of a being who created 13.8 billion years of cosmic history. We find the fears, values, and limited understanding of seventh century human beings projected onto a divine figure.
The signs of the last hour described in Hadiths contain no mention of space exploration, other galaxies, or the vast universe we now know exists. There is no awareness of a cosmos that dwarfs everything these scriptures describe. The entire framework is geocentric, tribal, and strikingly human in its concerns.
This leads to a question that is uncomfortable but worth asking seriously. What if Allah is not the creator of man, but rather a creation of man? A god not born among the stars, but imagined in the deserts of the seventh century. Shaped not by divine essence, but by the hopes, fears, and ignorance of early human beings who were doing their best to make sense of a world they could not yet understand.
What Was the Purpose Behind Creating Dinosaurs and Pre-Human Species?
If Allah created everything with purpose and wisdom, then what exactly was the purpose behind the millions of species that lived and died long before humans ever arrived?
Consider the dinosaurs. These creatures ruled the Earth for over 150 million years. They lived, evolved, dominated every continent, and went extinct around 65 million years ago. What role did they play in Allah's supposed grand plan? Were they simply a meaningless prelude? A trial version of creation that was quietly discarded?
Islam says nothing about them. The Quran does not contain even a hint of their existence. And the reason is straightforward. Muhammad and his followers had no idea they existed. That is not a divine mystery. That is a knowledge gap.
The same problem appears when we look at Neanderthals, Denisovans, and other pre-human hominids. These were not primitive animals. They used tools, buried their dead, cared for their injured, and showed clear signs of intelligence and social life. They lived and died long before the Adam and Eve narrative begins. Were they part of the divine test? If yes, why are they completely absent from Islamic teaching? If no, then why create them at all?
These are not minor details at the edges of Islamic theology. They represent hundreds of millions of years of life on Earth that an all-knowing God apparently forgot to mention. The actual history of life on this planet tells a far deeper and more complex story than Islamic scripture ever acknowledges.
This silence is not divine mystery. It is the silence of a man from the seventh century who knew camels and deserts, but nothing of dinosaurs, hominids, or the deep history of life on Earth. And when a scripture cannot account for the majority of life that has ever existed on the planet it claims to explain, that is not a minor oversight. It is a fundamental failure.
What Is the Purpose of Eternal Life in Paradise?
Religious teaching consistently warns against materialism. We are told not to become too attached to this world, not to chase pleasure, not to prioritize luxury and comfort over spiritual preparation. This life, we are reminded, is temporary. The real life comes after.
But pause for a moment and ask what that real, eternal life actually consists of.
Paradise in Islamic theology is described as a place of eternal eating, drinking, golden palaces, rivers of wine, and for men, the permanent sexual companionship of beautiful women. These are the very pleasures we are warned not to chase in this life. Yet in the next life, the exact same pleasures become the ultimate divine reward.
Why are these things considered shallow distractions when enjoyed on Earth, but sacred and meaningful when enjoyed forever in heaven? If the purpose of this life is to rise above materialism, why is the reward for doing so an eternity of precisely that?
And more fundamentally, if no scripture clearly explains why an eternal life of luxury is the destination, then what exactly are believers preparing for? If the honest answer is "we do not know the deeper purpose, we only know we want to go there," then the entire framework collapses into circular reasoning. This life exists to earn the next life, and the next life exists as a reward for enduring this one. Neither half of that equation explains what the point actually is.
What is the purpose of Allah's infinite life?
If believers are expected to find purpose in their brief lives, it is fair to ask whether Allah has ever defined a purpose for His own infinite existence.
This God has existed from eternity and will exist forever. In all that infinite time, the purpose of His existence appears to be this: creating a world where the powerful oppress the weak, sending earthquakes, famines, floods, and disease upon His own creation, and ultimately watching which humans on one small planet pass or fail a brief test before assigning them to paradise or hellfire.
Is that truly the purpose worthy of an infinite, all-powerful, and supposedly all-loving being? An eternity of existence, and the grand outcome is a human morality test on a tiny planet in an unremarkable corner of the universe?
If this God expects humans to find clear meaning and purpose in their short lives, it seems reasonable to ask Him to first define the purpose of His own infinite one.
Islamist's Argument: Our Parents also gave birth to us without asking us first
The Islamist Argument:
"Just as our parents gave birth to us without asking our permission, Allah created us without our consent. If you don't blame your parents, why blame Allah?"
Our Response:
There is a fundamental difference between human parents and Allah.
Human parents are subject to natural instincts, biological drives, and social pressures. They may desire children out of love, loneliness, cultural expectation, or the fear of growing old without companionship. These are understandable, deeply human motivations rooted in need and emotion.
Muslims, however, describe Allah as al-Samad, completely self-sufficient and free from all need. If Allah desires something, that desire implies incompleteness. If He acts to fulfill something, that fulfillment implies a prior deficiency. Both contradict the very definition of al-Samad.
This is what makes the comparison hollow. We can explain why human parents bring children into existence without asking them first, because human parents have needs, fears, and desires that make such a decision understandable, even if imperfect. But Allah, by Muslim definition, has none of these. He needs nothing, lacks nothing, and is affected by nothing.
So the question remains unanswered. If Allah is truly al-Samad, what motivated the creation of the universe and humanity? Neither Allah in the Quran nor Muslim scholars have ever provided a satisfying answer. And borrowing an analogy from human parenthood, a condition defined entirely by need and dependency, only makes the problem more visible, not less.
Islamist's Argument: Allah does not need to tell us why He created us
At this stage, Islamic apologists come up with the following two excuses:
- Allah does not need to tell us why He created us.
- And even if Allah told it, we could not comprehend it.
Our Response:
First, it is worth acknowledging what this admission actually concedes. Islamic apologists are openly stating that Allah neither explained why He created us, nor explained why He chose not to explain it. That is a significant silence from a being described as all-knowing and all-communicating.
Second, this position creates a direct contradiction at the heart of Islamic theology. Islam consistently invites humanity to use reason and intellect to recognize Allah. The Quran repeatedly calls on people to reflect, to observe, and to think. But the moment a sincere and honest question arises from that very intellect, we are told that our minds are too limited to receive the answer.
You cannot invite someone to use a tool and then punish them for using it. Encouraging intellect and then dismissing its conclusions as incomprehension is not a theological position. It is a way of avoiding accountability.
Third, and perhaps most tellingly, this silence has a simpler explanation. If Muhammad had no answer to why Allah created the universe and humanity, it may not be because the answer is beyond human comprehension. It may simply be because Muhammad himself did not know. A human being speaking from his own limited understanding would naturally be unable to answer a question that has no answer within that framework.
Finally, if any claim about God cannot be questioned, tested, or explained, then it becomes indistinguishable from every other unverifiable claim ever made about every other god. Without clear answers to fundamental questions, there is no logical basis for preferring one claim over another. They all rest equally on assertion, and assertion alone is not evidence.
The Next Logical Step: Why the Test?
A discussion on the "Why of Creation" is incomplete without addressing the inevitable follow-up question: Why the Test?
Islamic scholars attempt to shift the debate toward the necessity of the "Test" once the initial arguments for creation begin to fail under logical scrutiny. They argue that existence is merely a trial designed to separate the righteous from the wicked. However, this second layer of reasoning introduces even deeper ethical and logical contradictions than the first.
If the act of creation itself is a paradox for a self-sufficient being, then the imposition of a high-stakes test, with the threat of eternal punishment, transforms that paradox into a profound moral crisis.
To understand why this divine examination is not an act of justice, but rather a fundamental violation of human rights and logic, continue to our next article:
Hassan Radwan