34. This is, there is no means of knowledge by which they might have known with certainty that after this life there is no other life for man, and that man's soul is not seized by the command of God, but he dies and perishes merely in the course of time. The deniers of the Hereafter say these things not on the basis of any knowledge but on mere conjecture. The maximum that they could say scientifically is: We do not know whether there is any life after death or not; but they cannot say: We know that there is no other life after this life. Likewise, they cannot make the claim of knowing scientifically that man’s soul is not seized by God’s command but he perishes after death just like a watch which suddenly stops functioning. The most they can say is just this: We do not know what exactly happens in either case. Now the question is: When to the extent of the means of human knowledge there is an equal possibility of there being life after death or there being no life after death, and the soul’s being seized by Allah’s command, or man’s dying of himself in the course of time, what is the reason that these people abandon the probability of the possibility of the Hereafter and give their judgment in favor of its denial? Do they have any other reason than this that they, in fact, decide this question on the basis of their desire and not by any argument? As they do not like that there should be any life after death and death should mean total annihilation and not seizure of the soul by Allah’s command, they make their heart’s desire their creed and deny the other probability.