Chapter 15 Intuition

Can intuition be explained scientifically? Is it a phenomenon of the mind? Intuition cannot be explained scientifically because the phenomenon is unscientific and irrational. The phenomenon of intuition is irrational. You ask, "Can intuition be explained?" This is linguistically correct; it means: can intuition be reduced to reason? But intuition implies something beyond reason, something that doesn't belong to reason, something that comes from somewhere completely imperceptible to reason. Therefore, reason can sense it, but cannot explain it.

That leap can be felt because there is a gap. Intuition can be felt by reason—it can be recorded: something happened, but it cannot be explained because explanation implies causality. Explanation implies: where did it come from? Why did it come? What is the cause? But intuition comes from somewhere else, not from reason itself, so there is no intellectual cause. In terms of reason, there is no reason, no clue, no continuity.

Intuition arises from a different realm; it is entirely unrelated to reason, though it can penetrate reason. What must be understood is that a higher reality can penetrate a lower reality, but the lower cannot penetrate the higher. Intuition can penetrate reason because it is higher; reason cannot penetrate intuition because it is lower. This is like your mind penetrating your body, but your body cannot penetrate your mind; your existence can penetrate your mind, but the mind cannot penetrate existence. That is why, if you are entering into existence, you must separate yourself from your body and mind, from both. They cannot penetrate a higher phenomenon.

When you enter a higher reality, the lower world that occurred must be discarded. There is no explanation for the higher world in the lower world , because the words of explanation do not exist there; they are meaningless. But reason can sense that gap; it can know that gap; it can feel that "something beyond me has happened." Even reason can only do this much, and it has already done a great deal.

But reason can also refuse, which is what it means to have a mind of faith or a mind of no faith. If you feel that things that reason cannot explain do not exist, then you are a non-believer, then you will remain on this lower level of existence—bound by it, then you will not acknowledge the mystery, then you will not allow intuition to speak to you. This is what a rationalist mind means. Rationalists cannot even see those transcendent things that have already come.

Muhammad was chosen. There were many, many scholars around, but Muhammad was chosen because he had faith. He could allow the higher to enter him. If you are trained in reason, you will not acknowledge the higher; you will deny it, you will say, "It cannot exist; it must be my imagination, it must be my dream. I will not accept it unless I can rationally prove it."

A rational mind can become closed, confined within the boundaries created by reason, thus preventing intuition from penetrating. However, you can use reason without being closed off; in that case, you can use reason as a tool while remaining open, accepting what is higher. If something comes, you accept it. In this way, you can use your reason as an aid, recording "something beyond me has happened," helping you understand this gap.

Moreover, reason can also be used for expression—not for explanation, but for expression. A Buddha is entirely non-interpretive; he is expressive, not interpretive. All the Upanishads are expressive, without any explanation. They say, “This is how it is, this is what has happened. If you want, come in, don’t stand outside. There is no possibility of explanation from inside to outside. So you can only come in and become an insider.” Even if you come in, things cannot be explained to you, but you will know and feel them. Reason can try to understand them, but it is destined to fail. The higher cannot be reduced to the lower.

Intuition is a direct knowing. It doesn't go through the ladder of logic, there's no process of reasoning; it just happens. It's a way of knowing that transcends logic. You suddenly know, but you don't know why you know, or how it came about. This direct, non-deductive knowing is the core characteristic of intuition.

Therefore, when we talk about the non-interpretive nature of intuition, we are acknowledging its essence. It cannot be broken down into smaller , understandable causal units. It is not a jigsaw puzzle that can be pieced together. It is a complete, spontaneous presentation.

So, does intuition come to a person through thought waves, like radio waves? This is also difficult to explain. If intuition comes through some kind of wave, then reason will eventually be able to explain it.