The world around us is a very interesting place, and hence has been the subject of observation and analysis since times immemorial. Man has sought to study the world and his relation with it because it is one of the primary thoughts that occupy one’s mind as soon as the basic needs are taken care of. We all indulge in this activity on a day-to-day basis, often without realizing it. This, according to me, is because somewhere down the line, it has become a part of our basic needs, like food, air and water. We don’t realize we are breathing, unless we wish to do it specifically. An example of specific realization is my cognizance of my breathing as I wrote the last lines and yours of your own on reading them. The point that I wish to make here is that the activity of trying to understand the world around us has perforated the layers of our conscious into our subconscious. This can only happen if the need to engage in the activity is primal. Something that is not instinctive or does not become innate can never be carried out subconsciously. I cannot quote any scientific research as a testimony apart from my own experience, but I am quite sure that many people would agree with this. An activity that we carry out without realizing is definitely a part of our own self. Trying to understand others, like I said, is one such activity.

Let’s try and ascertain the reasons why something which sounds like an activity that only trained psychologists can indulge in is of such paramount importance to our lives. For one, it’s because all that we do apart from breathing involves interactions. With the encroachment of smokers on public spaces, even breathing today involves interactions on a few occasions. Something as personal as thinking too involves, more often than not, recollecting our previous dealings with others. From the market to the workplace to the quiet of our homes, every action that we undertake involves a fair bit of interacting with others. Perhaps, in a bid to further our interests, we all try to behave well with people who would have any significant effect on our lives. This is what, according to me, makes us want to understand the world around us. It does not necessarily begin as an interest that later on develops into a need. Rather, it’s the other way round. It is a need that is inherent to life. Some develop an interest in this and try to understand the world and its residents systematically. This desire to understand the world in systematic manner, using holistic methods that not only solve the problem at hand but also help codify and formulate methods for further analysis and research, is what has given rise to all the branches of study in our world today and encompasses science, arts and commerce among the mundane and interesting new fields among the exciting.

The systematic understanding, as I mentioned, is what constitutes all sciences, but the purpose of writing this article is not to deal with this systematic understanding. I also don’t intend to talk a lot of science, though some of it is inevitable as science, and its applications, is my field of education. What I intend to do here is talk about one aspect of this world that all of us notice. I also will try to delve deeper into my experience and try to look at it from a spiritual point of view. Of course, it goes without saying that there would be many who will disagree or shall fail to agree with me in its entirety. What I will try to talk about here is also nothing new, as I mentioned earlier. However, this thought is not plagiarized from somewhere, for it is something no one fails to notice and infer. It’s like looking at someone’s muddy clothes and realizing that he or she fell in mud. Neither the observance nor the inference is singular, yet no one copies the train of thought from someone else. It’s the most apparent observation and deduction, and hence people make it. The idea that I am trying to convey is similar and hence readers, if any, might find something in this article that essentially mirrors their own thought.

W. H. Davies, in his famous poem, “Leisure” writes,

What is this life, full of care?

We have no time to stand and stare.

 

This observation about how observing things no longer remains an activity we indulge in might be true, but in parts. People I know are not those who have given up the subtle beauties of nature for the rat race that is often said to replace them. We are all common people who have a tough time living our lives, but we all do enjoy our own bit of looking around, our own bit of standing and staring. Moreover, observing nature is not my topic. I am speaking here of observing things around us, not necessarily beautiful and delightful. I am speaking about the observation that Davies made. The world around us today seems to be in a hurry. Urban people will be familiar with the spectacle of a sea of people walking down the busy streets of the city trying to avoid colliding with each other as they jostle to get to their destinations, literally and figuratively. Everything seems to move on without ever caring for anything else. Cars drive past and trains whistle by, humans walk past and the clock seems ticking. The picture that I present can be summarized in one word – chaos. There seems to be an eternal state of chaos all around us that runs through our entire world. There is an element of chaos in every walk of life, in every sphere of existence. It pervades every aspect of our being, as if it is something inherent to existence. I can give a hundred examples of chaos in our daily lives but that, I presume, is unnecessary.

Chaos doesn’t engulf only human nature and society. If we observe carefully, it also serves the dominions of the nature and the cosmos. Let’s take the case of the weather and natural conditions. If there was ever anything unpredictable, this was it. The swiftness with which a bright day morphs into a grim cloudy one and the speed with which the winter chill descends are experienced more often than not in the part of the world where I come from. A regular feature of cricket matches that viewers across the world would be familiar with is the cancellation or abandoning of games due to rains that weren’t expected. The same unpredictability is seen in outer spaces. Due to excessive technical jargon, much of what is said and written about the outer space goes over the heads of laymen like me, but we all understand that something new and unanticipated keeps happening out there. The discovery of a new planet or the departure of a heavenly body from its predicted course because of an inexplicable course of events suggests a certain degree of randomness in the sanctum sanctorum of the skies. All the examples I have quoted so far have served just one purpose – paint an image of chaos.

These are physical, tangible realities. Let’s try to analyze abstract feelings. Human nature, for one, is extremely fickle. One person, in two similar situations, might react differently to each of them. This is the fickleness of human nature. It can never conform to a described and well-defined protocol of reaction. This can be said to be, in the context of our article, chaos in the thought process of human beings. Inanimate objects too display this sort of chaotic behaviour as they don’t necessarily always perform in a prescribed manner or order. The same window that breaks on the impact of one stone doesn’t when hit with another. There is unpredictability all around us, in most of the things that we encounter on a day to day basis. There’s a famous quotation that change is the only constant. Borrowing the same style, I would say unpredictability is the only thing that we can predict with certainty. The chaos and disorder that is present in the world around us is perhaps the only order that we live by. This chaos and our familiarity with it is what explains why many aspects are of our lives are mired in or at least influenced by some sort of disorder. We rely on chance for many things, in spite of careful and meticulous planning. A student hopes for the examination paper to be easy or at least not be tough. The questions are not something he decides or selects for himself, but there is still an element of luck that he hopes for. An immaculate planner too hopes for certain things to fall in place so that his plans meet success. There is, as I said, an element of chaos in all aspects of our life. Chaos and chance are not, by definition, one and the same. Certainly, it is neither my intention to portray them as such. The reason for speaking of them in the same breath is that both have one thing in common, apart from beginning with the same three letters. Both of them betray an attitude of letting things take care of themselves, of rejection at the hands of destiny. Chaos and chance both prove that things that happen in this world aren’t always in our hands. We are not the masters of our own destiny.

The chaos and disorder of nature has been studied and understood by men of science for ages. The susceptibility of any system to initial conditions is one of paramount importance, as a slight change in the initial states of the conditions prevailing in a given system might have vastly different results. This is called chaos theory. It was, in the modern scientific paradigm, first understood by Edward Lorenz in the 1970s in a series of experiments that eventually led to the establishment of the theory of chaotic systems. In the words of Ian Stewart,

“The flapping of a single butterfly’s wing today produces a tiny change in the state of the atmosphere. Over a period of time, what the atmosphere actually does diverges from what it would have done. So, in a month’s time, a tornado that would have devastated the Indonesian coast doesn’t happen. Or maybe one that wasn’t going to happen, does.” (Ian Stewart, Does God Play Dice? The Mathematics of Chaos, pg. 141)

[I haven’t read the book myself. I was reading about Chaos theory when I came across this. However, this is a famous quote and even if the reference is wrong, the words are true as I have read at other places and numerously.]

Chaos theory has several fields of application. My personal interest in them arises because it crosses my path in Control System Engineering, where it is used to explain the behaviour of highly turbulent or chaotic systems. Systems, when narrowed down to ideal conditions, generally exhibit properties and characteristics that follow predicted paths. However, in case of some systems, the dependence on their initial conditions is highly pronounced. These systems are called chaotic systems. Another interesting and more popular field which is, to an extent, based on chaos theory is fractal geometry. Regular users of online networking sites will be familiar with stationary pictures that seem to create an illusion of movement. These pictures are called fractals, derived from the word fractional. One of my friends actually has a fractal as his profile picture on a social networking site and I had him explain to me what fractals are. His explanation was that they are pictures that are infinite within themselves and he used the example of a triangular picture. This picture of an equilateral triangle and its continued repetitions within the same outer circle is called Koch curve, after the scientist von Koch. This aspect involves imaginary dimensions called fractal dimensions and I admit I am not really good at imaginative science. So I don’t think I will say anything more about the chaos theory, one reason being that I don’t know much about it in the first place. There are experts who have written a lot about it. My own research is limited and based on matter easily available and hence no one will have any problem in looking them up, provided there is interest. I wish to understand this theory from another angle, which I will be coming to shortly. Chaos theory, in short, tells us how much things depend on chance, or as some will call it, luck. Of course, it goes without saying, that this is just a theory which might fall flat. However, it also goes without saying that most people would agree that randomness and uncertainty do have a very important part to play in our lives. Waking up five minutes late can actually lead to being late for office by one hour, as one can miss the designated bus or train, get caught in rush hour traffic and similar such situations. It can be argued that all this happened by ipso facto waking up late, and that this mistake shouldn’t be attributed to luck or fate. The fact to be understood here is that no one is attributing one’s mistake to luck, even though I don’t deny that there are people who do so. The point that I am making here is that five minutes can set off a chain of events that ultimately lead to an hour being lost. This is the degree to which randomness affects our lives, even if it is due to our own mistakes. Taking the blame on ourselves is the right attitude to display, and more important is taking corrective action. This should be the way to go about it. The uncertainty, however, cannot be just wished away as the alibi given by irresponsible people. I hope I have made my point in clear and certain terms that definitely don’t entertain thoughts of ambiguity. I am a little unsure about the butterfly, though. I am neither affirming it, nor am I denying it, for proving or disproving chaos theory is neither my agenda nor within my capability.

Moving on, the thought that occurred to me after observing the chaos all around us is the way everything seems to be working in tandem with everything else to provide an order to this disorder. There may be chance and luck behind everything, but the world seems to run smoothly and all things seem to settle down with other things to harmoniously operate and participate in the functioning of all worldly activities. There is a definite algorithm of chaos. This algorithm is what determines the co-ordination of the various events taking place all around the world in a synchronized manner such that all random occurrences fit together with one another to give the world a semblance of orderliness. Try and observe the world carefully around. There is a certain method to all the madness that exists. The world, in spite of seeming to be going around in a haphazard manner, actually is not. Even the tiniest incident like the falling of a leaf that seems to have no importance or significance whatsoever might actually be working according to an algorithm, a predefined or decided routine that makes sure the maintenance of this universe. I would again reiterate that there is an algorithm of chaos.

It is to be understood here that neither is the chaos nor is the algorithm behind it something tangible that can be touched, seen or felt. They are neither definitive axioms nor hypotheses that can be proven logically through other laws. They also cannot be proven through proofs and evidences, either conclusively or prima facie, to a degree that eradicates all doubts and does away with all grounds of doubt or skepticism. It is only through observation and pondering that one can come to any conclusion. But I guess most would see the rationality of my arguments and agree that even though there is undefined chaos all around us, there is a certain procedure that seems to be running subliminal to it. In programming terms, there is an algorithm behind this. This is the algorithm that I have termed the algorithm of chaos. The idea that I share here is not something unique to me and I am not trying to propose a new idea here. It’s like I mentioned at the start of this article that this thought that I try to pen down is something so central to human thought that most, if any, readers would feel at home with it. Let us for the sake of brevity here surmise that there exists inevitable chaos around us, which however is governed by its own set of rules and methods that we call its algorithm. Period.

The question that this presumption led me to was much simpler or much tougher to answer, depending on an ideological divide that’s widely gaining ground in today’s age. If an algorithm exists behind the operation of this world, then who has given it this algorithm? Who has written this procedure on which the universe functions? Things don’t happen by themselves. Students of or even dilettantes interested in philosophy would have heard of cause and effect. Behind every effect exists a cause. The theory, again, cannot be proven by its own self or through other theoretical considerations, but is accepted till proven otherwise and hence, those willing to negate it will have to bring evidence that is real and observable. Acceptance of this theory is, as is obvious, based on countless proofs that real life throws at us. Think of any action and there is a reason behind it. Myriad incidents that take place the world over have to have a reason for their existence. This is something that is easily understood and hence, I don’t think I will give any examples to state my case. Now that I have stated the cause and effect theory, let’s closely analyze it in relation to the idea of the algorithm behind chaos. Since all effects have to have a cause, every incident that we perceive as random too has a cause that can be identified by putting in a little thought for the worst cases. This can be understood to explain the fact that all events, since having a cause each, happen in accordance to a plan. All events and incidents thus aren’t random, and hence they have an algorithm. So, restating the question that I posed earlier, I ask again as to who is the writer of this algorithm.

My conviction is that it is Allaah, or God in English. This is where ideological divide creeps up. Atheists and aficionados of scientific temper will definitely rubbish this claim as being, for want of a better word, unscientific. Religious bigots will claim this to be, again for want of a better word, bigoted. Of course, my conviction does not count as proof and is definitely not decisive. The idea has to be proven but, as has been the case of all matters that I have tried to deal with, cannot be proven using tangible means and would therefore require reason, logic and a little common sense. All three are in themselves subject to perceptions and hence might attract criticism and ridicule. Nevertheless, I am going to stress that a person should stand up for what he believes in if he is convinced of it provided there is a logically sound train of thought, or evidence, at least empirical, if possible, behind it. It also implies that the said person should be ready for a critical analysis of his ideas and use them constructively. Every idea and notion floated about should be weighed carefully in the crucible of sound intellect and then understood with an open mind. I would request any readers to have the same and hope to see things rationally myself. I would also like to make clear to anyone out there that what I say next isn’t a work of scholarly magnitude but rather a layman perspective, and hence interested readers are advised to consult authorities on the subject for a clearer and more correct view of things. Also, this article might end up looking Islamic but that would be because I am a Muslim. There is no theological education behind this and research is minimal. Still, I would like to share it with others, just in the hope of getting people interested if nothing else. Also, let me state that there would be a few things that might not sound simple enough to be written by me, the reason being that they aren’t. I have read a few pages in trying to understand and hence solve the question that I earlier asked, and hence this article is nothing but a representation of the answer I arrived at.

So, to summarize, the writer of the algorithm of chaos is God. Let us look at the cause and effect theory. Every effect has a cause. Stretching this argument backwards, every cause too must have in turn another cause. Everything that is created has a creator. So, we arrive at two possible conclusions, one being that this chain stretches endlessly backwards, infinitely. First, let us look at this possible conclusion. It has one valid argument against it. If the events stretch back infinitely, they will a priori never end, as infinity is attained by going one step further than where one is, ergo never. This is because on reaching what is perceived as the last event, there automatically crops up the need of its cause. Hence an infinite sequence of events is set up that implies that the past has never ended. Obviously, past has to have occurred for it to be past. This in turn, brings us to the second possibility, a being that can cause the beginning of the universe, i.e. space and time, without anything. I would like to also address the issue of randomness, which means the idea that events can begin at random. If this were true, then such an event should be true even today. Well, how many events can one think of that just happen themselves. Take a basketful seeds, a tumbler of water and leave them by the side of a field. Do the seeds get sowed and watered on their own? This therefore, at least to me indicates, that randomly isn’t the way things happen. Hence the concept of a superpower seems to be more at harmony with reason, logic and common sense. Detractors would of course point out that it is just the lame old excuse that religionists use and that it stands no ground in today’s world of science. They would definitely condemn my statement of the concept of a superpower being in harmony with reason, logic and common sense as being idiotic if not downright balderdash. It goes without saying that they would demand proof of god’s existence. Let me admit, if the gist of what I have been trying to convey, i.e. the harmony and inherent order in the apparent disorder, doesn’t convince one of god, nothing can. So, “To each his own” is what I would say.

In fact this approach that I have used has been used by many philosophers across religious divides to explain the concept of God and His existence. I won’t name any here. Interested people can browse the net to find out. I would just tell this much that ancient Greeks and medieval Muslims and Christians have stood by the same reason. It is why I said earlier that this idea isn’t anything new. People have seen rhyme and reason and therefore believed in it, and I don’t see any reason why one should stop believing in god. I would like to address the problem of there being no physical, observable proof of His existence from an Islamic point of view, cause I find suitable and more importantly, within my grasp. Allaah, or god if you will, is not an entity with a physical form, shape and size. He is not limited to directions or places. His existence is free of space and time. The truth is that in Islam, Allaah is the creator of everything and so, physicality involving form, shape and size, directions and place, space and time and all other aspects of existence that we understand are not applicable to Him. His existence is something that cannot be perceived in its entirety and resembles none of His creation. This is the reason why physical and observable evidence that can be understood by human thought and perceived by intellect cannot be brought definitively for Allaah. Also, if it’s impossible to prove His existence, it also becomes impossible to prove inexistence for Him.

The concept of god is essential as it not only solves the question of existence of this world but also provides a basis for a morally strong and ethical society. It is to be noted here that belief in god is not because of these reasons. God is the only existence that is by itself, and all other existences are because of His divine will. He is not there because we deem it fit and it fits into our scheme of things. We are here because He has decided it to be so and He is the one who defines the scheme of things as we see them. It’s because as human beings, our perceptions aren’t strong enough and sometimes need arguments and what may be called proofs to satisfy us. Men more capable than I have laboured through their lives and given us their works so that we could understand divinity as per our capabilities. Atheists and their ilk would argue that the concept of God exists because of our desire and that it’s unscientific. They might also argue that ethics and morals should be present in the society not due to the fear of punishment or because of the desire of rewards, but rather because we should be good human beings and look to serve the higher ideals of life. This idea, though praiseworthy, is also impractical and utopian in its essence. Human beings are by nature selfish and greedy and serve their own selves rather than a common good. It is only by punishment and reward that one cares to strive for ethics. This is the reason why countries around the world have penal codes and constitutions and a concept of imprisonment. How many people do you honestly think will look to live their lives on what can be called an ethical constitution by themselves with no retribution and punitive action to check them? I, for one, will in all its likelihood not. The concept of a godless morality is not something that can be realized in the real world.

There are various other vistas which writing more would open. However, my intention was never to go into them and I seek to stand by it. I already felt while rereading this piece that I might have written what is beyond my understanding and definitely not in my grasp. Hence I would like to end this already tedious and in parts boring piece. Criticism from any quarter is welcome, but please steer clear of ribald ramblings and pointless polemics. This of course is based on the hope that someone will be reading it and considers it worthwhile to actually reply. The debate between atheists and believers has been played out again and again and has made the careers of many. So if this much has been of any interest to you, do give some time to try and understand. I would end with this story.

I was listening to a discourse once and this story from that discourse comes to mind. An old woman who spun a jenny was busy at her work, and she kept saying “There is no God but Allaah” as she went about her task. A man who happened to hear her got curious and approached her. He then questioned as her as to how could she be sure of the existence of a God. The old woman replied that she spun a jenny. If a jenny couldn’t spin on its own without her spinning it, how could the entire world just run by itself? Definitely, it needed someone to run it, and that was Allaah. The man, impressed, prodded further. This time, he questioned her about the unity, or rather oneness of God. The old woman again referred to her jenny, saying if two people tried to run it from opposite ends, the jenny would break. How could then, she asked, two gods be running this world if the world operated in harmony?