Light, Ontology, and Analogy: A Non-Concordist Reading of Qur’an 24:35 in Dialogue with Philosophy and Physics


GÜLER A.

Philosophies, cilt.11, sa.1, 2026 (ESCI, Scopus) identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 11 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2026
  • Doi Numarası: 10.3390/philosophies11010015
  • Dergi Adı: Philosophies
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: al-Ghazālī, amr, cosmology and theology, emergence, Light Verse, Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG), ontic structural realism, quantum vacuum, Qur’ān 24:35, relational ontology, shay’ ontology, structural analogy, symmetry breaking, tajdīd al-khalq, ‘adam, ‘ādātullāh
  • Marmara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

This article develops a structural–analogical framework to investigate conceptual resonances between Qur’an 24:35—the Verse of Light—and contemporary relational models in physics, while maintaining firm epistemic boundaries between theology, philosophy, and empirical science. The Qur’anic metaphors of niche, glass, tree, oil, and layered light depict a graded ontology of manifestation in which being unfolds through ordered relations grounded in a transcendent divine command (amr). By contrast, modern physics—as represented by quantum field theory, loop quantum gravity, and cosmological models—operates entirely within immanent causality, conceiving spacetime and matter as relational, dynamic, and structurally emergent. Despite their distinct registers, both discourses converge structurally around a shared grammar of potentiality, relation, and manifestation. Drawing on classical Islamic metaphysics—especially al-Ghazālī’s Mishkāt al-Anwār—alongside contemporary relational ontologies in physics (Smolin, Rovelli, Markopoulou), the article argues that “real time” functions as an ontological choice that conditions intelligibility, agency, and novelty. The Qur’anic notion of nūr is interpreted not as physical luminosity but as the metaphysical ground of determinability, while the quantum vacuum is treated as a field of latent potential—without suggesting empirical equivalence. Rather than concordism, the comparison highlights a structural resonance (used here as a heuristic notion indicating pattern-level affinity rather than equivalence, correspondence, or empirical verification): both traditions affirm that reality is neither static nor substance-based, but arises through dynamic relational processes grounded—whether transcendently or immanently—in principled order.