Throughout history Muslims have been renowned traders. Many of the Sahabah (ra) were shrewd businessmen. Indeed, trading is an issue that has been implicitly and explicitly encouraged in the Qur'an and Sunnah.
''O you who believe! Eat not up your property among yourselves in vanities: But let there be amongst you Traffic and trade by mutual good-will.'' [ 4:29]
''And when the (Friday) prayer is finished, then may you disperse through the land, and seek of the Bounty of Allah: and celebrate the Praises of Allah often (and without stint): that you say prosper.'' [ 62:10]
''Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury.'' [ 2:275]
''And O my people! Give just measure and weight, do not withhold from the people the things that are their due: commit not evil in the land with intent to do mischief. That which is left you by Allah is best for you, if you (but) believed! but I am not set over you to keep watch!'' [ 11:85]
Rasul-Allah (saw) was asked what type of earning was the best, to which Rasul-Allah (SAW) answered, ''The work of a man's own hand, and every pious sale''. [Hakim] Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''A trustworthy and an honest and truthful businessman will rise up with martyrs on the Day of Resurrection.'' [Ibn Majah, Hakim] He (saw) also said, ''A truthful, and trustworthy trader will rise up with the Prophets, the righteous and the martyrs.'' [al-Hamim, Tirmidhi]
As Muslims, we should not consider that Allah (swt) left us to trade in whichever manner we choose without giving us a guide. Allah (swt) sent Rasul-Allah (saw) as that guide. A'isha (ra) reported that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''He who does an act which is not in accordance with our matter will have it rejected.'' The basis of all trading is the contract. As we are encouraged to trade we are therefore encouraged to understand the subject of contracts within Islam. Further to this, it is not just merchants and entrepreneurs that are involved in trading. All humans, not just Muslims, need to exchange in some form. Therefore, if we are to perform our transactions in accordance with what has been revealed, it is necessary for us to understand some basic principles of contract.
The Contract ('Aqd) in Islam
It is obligatory for us to honour our contracts and agreements.
''O you who believe! Fulfil all your covenants'' [ 5:1]
''Fulfil (every) engagement, for (every) engagement will be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning)'' [17:34]
Contracts may be generally described as the effective mode of acquisition of ownership and transfer of property or services. It expresses the combination of offer and acceptance. The contract, 'aqd or tie forges legal relations between two parties over a particular matter. It is formed with the declaration of offer al-ijaab (offer) and al-qabool (acceptance). An example of ijaab by a seller would be, ''I sold this to you for the price of...'' Al-qabool would then be ''I accepted''. Regardless of how elaborate a transaction may be, this simple model is the basis of all Islamic contracts.
Contracts and agreements should preferably involve the spoken word. The maximum degree of clarity must be given by the one who makes the offer, and the maximum degree of clarity must be ascertained by the one who accepts. This is the underlining principle of contracts in Islam. The period between the offer and its acceptance should not be longer than what is customary. The offer should not be made conditional (t'aliq) upon an occurrence outside the agreement. For example, the contract is invalid if a person sells his car under the stipulation that the purchaser shall not sell it again. ''I will sell 'x', provided you sell it back to me, should you decided to sell it.'' [Sarkhasi, Mabsoot]
On the authority of 'Urwa, 'A'isha (ra) said Burairah came to me and said, ''My people (masters) have written the contract for my emancipation for nine ounces (of gold) to be paid in yearly instalments, one ounce per year; so help me.'' 'A'isha (ra) said (to her), ''If your masters agree, I will pay them the whole sum provided the allegiance will be for me.'' Burairah went to her masters and told them about it, but they refused the offer and she refused the offer and she returned from them while Allah's Messenger (saw) was sitting. She said, ''I presented the offer to them, but they refused unless the allegiance would be for them.'' When the Prophet (saw) heard that and 'A'isha told him about it, he (saw) said to her, ''Buy Burairah and stipulate that her allegiance will be for them, as the allegiance is for the slave-freer.'' 'A'isha (ra) did so. After that Allah's Messenger (saw) stood up amidst the people, glorified and praised Allah (swt) and said, ''What is wrong with some people who stipulate things which are not in Allah's laws? Any condition which is not in Allah's laws is invalid even if there were a hundred such conditions. Allah's rules are the most valid and Allah's conditions are the most solid. The allegiance is for the slave-freer'' [Sahih al-Bukhari]
General Islamic rules concerning contracts
According to Imam Ghazali,
''a Muslim who makes up his mind to adopt trade as a profession or to set up his own business should first acquire a thorough understanding of the rules of business transactions codified in the Islamic Shari'ah. Without such understanding he will go astray and fall into serious lapses making his earning unlawful.''
There are several general rules about trading agreements that we should all acquaint ourselves with. We are all directly or indirectly involved in these types of agreements. As stated, one of the key issues is clarity. Many ahadeeth concerning buying and selling indicate that clarity in the agreement is paramount:
Ibn 'Umar (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''If palm trees are sold after they have been pollinated, the fruit belongs to the seller unless the buyer makes a stipulation about the inclusion.'' [Muwata, Muslim]
Hakim bin Hizam (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''Both parties in a business transaction have the right to annul it so long as they have not separated; and if they speak the truth and make everything clear they will be blessed in their transaction; but if they tell a lie and conceal anything the blessing on their transaction will be blotted out.'' [Muslim]
Ibn 'Umar (ra) also related that Rasul-Allah (saw) forbade the sale of fruits until they were clearly in good condition, he forbade it both to the seller and the buyer. [Muslim]
Jabir bin 'Abdullah (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) forbade the sale of a heap of dates, the weight of which is unknown, in accordance with the known weight of dates. [Muslim]
There are many unique mannerisms that Islamic traders should adopt. These are very different to those adopted in the West. Moreover, these manners are not just a gentleman's code of ethics, rather they are the direct product of the sayings of Rasul-Allah (saw). It is forbidden to buy and sell with any undue advantage over other traders. For example, trading in ignorance of the current market prices.
Ibn 'Umar (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''Do not go out to meet merchandise on the way, (wait) until it is brought into the market.'' [Muslim]
Abu Hurayrah (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''Do not meet the merchant on the way and enter into business transaction with him, and whoever meets him and buys from him (and in case it is done, see) that when the owner of the (merchandise) comes into the market (and finds that he has been paid a lower price) he has the option (to declare the transaction null and void).'' [Muslim]
Abu Hurayrah (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''The townsman should not sell for a man from the desert (with a view to taking advantage of his ignorance of the market conditions of the city).'' [Muslim]
Ibn 'Umar (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''No-one amongst you should enter into a transaction when another is bargaining.''
Ibn 'Umar (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''A person should not enter into a transaction when his brother is already making a transaction and should not make a proposal of marriage when his brother has already made a proposal except when he gives permission.''
These two last ahadeeth have many implications for sale such as auctioning and gazumping(raise the price of something after agreeing on a lower price), which may involve Muslims.
Today's situation
We now live in a situation in which Islam is not implemented in its correct form anywhere in the world. This fact has left Muslims focusing on ritual aspects of Islam. For example, prayer and fasting etc. Generally, there is a good understanding of the rules of prayer amongst the Ummah. However, there remains a general lack of knowledge of contract law. There are many problems that we face in modern life that we can not take for granted. We can not assume that the ways in which we buy, sell, rent and hire are all allowed in Islam. In an article like this, space does not allow comprehensive answers to questions about trading. However, we should question many of the common trading methods employed today. To follow are a few examples of trading methods that we should consider.
The verbal offer and acceptance is certainly the best contract in Islam. This manner of transaction can easily be performed even in the modern age and even in Europe or America. However, it is common practice today to place orders by purchase order form, by fax machine, merely quoting a catalogue or part number of the items to be purchased. Further to this, items can be bought over the internet from anywhere in the world from one's living room. Also, Rasul-Allah (saw) forbade ''...making one contract of sale into two transactions.'' [Nisa'i, Tirmidhi]. So, it is not permitted to sell a car, stipulating that the buyer buys parts from the seller alone. Nor is it permitted to sell a house, whilst insisting that all the furniture is to be bought from the seller. He (saw) also said, ''...the attachment of an extra condition with a sale transaction'' [Tibran]. Issues such as vending machines, hire-purchase agreements, the involvement of separate financing companies, insurance cover, trading in stocks and share companies, selling things that are not yet in one's possession and sub-contracting of orders, are all issues we cannot assume are allowed or not allowed in Islam. As a final example, the employment contract is a contract that should be honoured in Islam. There are many comprehensive rules mentioned directly in the Qur'an and Sunnah concerning employment of labour.
''The duty of feeding, clothing and nursing mothers in a seemingly manner is upon the father of the child.'' [ 2:233]
Abu Hurayrah (ra) narrated that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''Three persons I am their opponent on the day of judgement; a person who gave in my name and then betrayed, one who sold a free person and used his price, and the person who hired a labourer and did not give his wage.'' Rasul-Allah (saw) also said, ''Whosoever hired a person he has to inform him about his wage.''
In today's situation both the employer and employee must honour the work contract not for the sake of humanity but for the sake of fulfilling Allah's (swt) command. However, this has implications for trade unions and strike action. Withdrawal of labour in industrial action is a violation of the original contract and is therefore forbidden in Islam. Trade unions are established to protect the rights of the worker. Whilst in Islam, only the Islamic State is allowed to protect worker's rights. It is not allowed for Muslims to participate in such 'industrial action'. However, this is the normal way of settling disputes in a Capitalist system.
Pre-Islamic contracts
It is clear from the seerah of Rasul-Allah (saw) that the business ethic of the pre-Islamic Arabs was riddled with corruption. Indeed, the dishonesty in jahiliyyah is condemned in the Qur'an.
''Woe to those that deal in fraud, those who, when they have to receive by measure from men, exact full measure, but when they have to give by measure or weight to men, give less than due. Do they not think that they will be called to account?'' [83:1-3]
The Jews, Christians and Persians at the time were again not noted for the fairness in transactions. The first Muslims were on the one hand encouraged to adopt trade as their profession and on the other hand exhorted to observe truthfulness and honesty in the transactions. This was surely a unique situation at that time. Similarly today the Islamic society should have a very unique character.
Capitalism and contracts
Western style contracts and agreements are usually in the written form only. Buying and selling agreements are always underpinned with the maxim caveat emptor (the buyer alone is responsible for assessing the quality of a purchase before buying) or buyer beware. Not only is it in the written form but they involve reams of very small print. This small print is written in language that is harder to interpret than Shakespeare's sonnets. This combination of jargon, oxymoron and tautologies all contribute to enshrouding agreement with the mystique of ambiguity. Loop hole and get out clauses are always woven into the agreement in contract speak. Any person who has ever tried to end a contract of line rental for a mobile telephone fully should understand this. Western trading is often based on maximising profits through deceiving the purchaser.
Fulfilling obligations for services
Agreements are not necessarily based on items and objects. Contracts to fulfil a service or duty are common both in Islam and in the capitalist system. Marital services are agreed upon in the 'aqd zawaj'.The marriage contract stipulates that the husband should spend for the wife and children.But he is not required to look after members of his wife's family financially.Similarly the wife is not required to look after or serve every member of her husband's family.And moreover the husband cannot claim any share in the wealth of his wife or wife's family.But if the wife is willing to share then it is allowed.Hence Islam did not leave the obligations and duties of marriage to be decided by the mind of humans.It is not allowed for either partner to withdraw marital obligations and duties. One can also make agreements for services from a cleaner, book-keeper or a physician.
Another important contract that is often overlooked today is the contract of ruling. The Khaleefah in Islam is charged with the duty of implementing the Law of Allah over the people. This is laid down and defined contractually. Unfortunately this is little understood by Muslims today. This is not because we are ignorant but because of our situation. The time is such that there is no living memory where this system of bay'ah (contract) actually existed as a working example. Muslims can only read about it in books. Nonetheless it is fard for Muslims to study this subject.
Ironically, we see Western systems of government nurture the citizens in such a way that they understand the concept of the pledge to rule. The US has widely broadcast (even internationally) inauguration ceremonies. This is where the president makes a pledge to honour the obligations laid down in the constitution. US school children all memorise the, ''We the people...'' preamble to the constitution.
''We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.''
This small paragraph reminds the American people of the obligations they have to the state and the states obligation to the citizens. Their system of democracy is such that they believe that 'The People' are the actual rulers and are charged with the duty of upholding the constitution. A direct parallel in the actual detail of the American system cannot be drawn with Islam. Its basis, democracy, is the antithesis of Islam. However, the principle of pledge of obedience to the Khaleefah and the obedience of the Khaleefah to Allah (swt) must be ingrained within all Muslim. It is this principle of nurturing the citizens of the state to understand the position of pledges and duties that oils the machinery of the state.
Conclusions
Buying and selling is an agreement. The procedure of buying and selling should not be seen as a mundane and routine necessity. Rather, it is a normal human action from which we can derive many rewards both in this life and in the hereafter, i.e. it is an act of worship. The converse is also true. If one performs the act of buying or selling in a manner that contradicts the law one is sinful.
Many contracts made today are made without considering Islam. This is entirely unacceptable. For although they do not involve camels, dates and slaves, the principles laid down in the Qur'an and Sunnah are just as applicable today as they where in the time of Rasul-Allah (saw). None of us as Muslims should take any agreement lightly or assume that because that is the way things are done today, then that is the way we should do them.
Lastly, we should remind ourselves of the one obligatory contract that none of us are performing today. That is the contract of bay'ah to the Khaleefah. Ibn 'Umar (ra) related that Rasul-Allah (saw) said, ''Whosoever takes off his hand from allegiance (bay'ah), Allah will meet him on the Day of Resurrection without having any proof for himself, and whosoever dies while there was no allegiance on his neck dies a death of the Days of Ignorance (jahiliyyah).'' [Muslim]
Thursday, April 6, 2006
The True Understand of Victory (Nasr) being from Allah
“Verily those who disbelieve spend their wealth to hinder (men) from the way of Allah and so they will continue to spend it, but in the end will become an anguish for them. They will be overcome and those disbelievers will be gathered in Hell" [TMQ Al-Anfal: 36].
Ibn Kathir in his Tafseer mentions that this verse was revealed during the battle of Badr in particular concerning Abu Sufyan ibn Harb. Moments before the battle it is narrated that Abu Sufyan delivered a speech calling on the Quraish to donate their wealth for the war (harb) and in particular to get rid of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) once and for all.
He also narrates from Ibn Abbas (ra) from Mujahid (ra) that it was revealed concerning Abu Sufyan because he donated his wealth to kill the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam).
Dahhak (ra) said: "This verse was revealed concerning the people of Badr and all those capable of doing (what the ayah mentions). The Sabab an Nuzul (circumstance of revelation) was concerning a specific incident i.e. at Badr. Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has informed us that the Kuffar will spend their wealth so as to hinder people from following the Tareeqa (path) of Haq (truth), and they spend their wealth for this purpose until they become miserable … they wish to extinguish the light of Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) and to make their word prevail over the word of truth but Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) raises his light although the Kuffar may detest this and He helps his Deen and makes it prevail over all other Deens and this is their humiliation in this life and punishment of hellfire in the hereafter." [Tafseer Ibn Kathir]
This verse is applicable to the current reality where the Kuffar have launched a crusade against Islam and are continuing this during the blessed month of Ramadhan. This verse was revealed during the month of Ramadhan when the Quraish were gathering their forces and wealth in order to quell Islam, which culminated in the famous battle of Badr. Today the forces of Kufr are also attempting to curb Islam by attacking the Muslims of Afghanistan, Palestine, Chechnya, Kashmir and other parts of the Islamic land. They spend their wealth not only to fight the Muslims physically but also to colonise the minds of the Muslims by attempting to sever them from their Aqeedah (belief) and distort the Islamic culture.
Unlike the battle of Badr, the Muslims today do not stand side by side under a single leadership, which implements Islam. Rather since the destruction of the Khilafah, the Muslims have been in the absence of the shepherd, shield and protector whom the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) called the shade of Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) upon the earth.
Al-Tabarani and Al-Baihaqi reported that the Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: "The Sultan is the shade of Allah on earth".
Without this Sultan, Imam or Khalifah we are exposed to attack from all sides without having a leadership that protects our lives, property and dignity. In this situation it is of paramount importance that we understand the concept of Nasr (victory) being from Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) in the correct manner. It can be noticed, from looking at their statements and behaviour, that some Muslims misunderstand this concept.
Some find it hard to believe that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) can provide us the victory when we are drowning in a sea of problems and the ship of the Kuffar seems so powerful. They see the heads of Kufr such as America and its modern Ahzab (Alliance or Coalition) as too strong economically, militarily and politically for the Muslims to overcome. They become mesmerised by the spider’s web (Bait al Ankabut) and can’t see through its weak structure. This has led to some being defeated by the current onslaught and has resulted in their inactivity and failure to try to liberate the Ummah from the Fir’awn of the world by standing up and re-establishing the Khilafah. Defeatism should never enter the heart of the true believer who knows that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) will provide the victory.
Another misunderstanding that people fall into is one of mixing the Aqeedah (belief) and the Ahkam Shari’ah (Shari’ah rules). They believe that Allah Azza wa jall will provide us with victory but they rely on this without undertaking the actions that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) ordered us with. This error in understanding leads people to remain inactive to change the situation around them and leaves them content in waiting for the victory to come, often the only action they call for is Du’a to Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) and the asking of help from Him (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala). This diseased view is a corruption in the Islamic mentality and can lead Muslims into fatalism and neglecting their Fara’id (obligations). To demonstrate this we can look at the belief in the Rizq (provision) being from Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala). We belief that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) is Ar-Raaziq (The one who provides) however when it comes to our actions we must follow His commands and prohibitions otherwise we would be violating the Qur’an which he revealed to us as a Furqan (criterion) and we would definitely fall into sin.
It was narrated that Umar bin Al-Khattab (ra) passed by some people, who were known as readers of the Qur’an. He saw them sitting and bending their heads, and asked who they were. He was told: "They are those who depend (al-mutawwakiloon) upon Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala)." Umar replied; "No, they are the eaters who eat the people’s properties. Do you want me to describe who those who really depend upon Allah (al-mutawwakiloon) are?" He was answered in the affirmative, and then he said: "He is the person who throws the seeds in the earth and then depends on his Lord, The Almighty, The Exalted."
Umar bin al Khattab (ra), of whom the Shaytan was afraid, explained to us how depending upon Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) does not mean leaving his obligations and not working to achieve his responsibilities. The Muslim man is commanded by Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) to earn a living for himself and his family although he has the permanent belief that effort is not proportional to Rizq. Hence there is a difference between the matters of Aqeedah and the following of the Ahkam Shari’ah.
Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) once shook the hand of Sa’ad ibn Muadh (ra) and found his hands to be rough. When the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) asked about it, Sa’ad said; “I dig with the shovel to maintain my family.” The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) kissed Sa’ad’s hands and said; “(They are) two hands which The Supreme loves.” The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: “Nobody would ever eat food that is better than to eat of his own hand’s work.”
As Muslims, we know that the Ajal (lifespan) can be only terminated by Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala). As He (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) said,
“And no person can ever die except by Allah's leave and at an appointed term” [TMQ Ale-Imran: 145].
Although our death cannot be avoided the knowledge of this should not lead to us abandoning any cures to illnesses or other means from the reality. Rather we seek cures for illnesses in response to the Hadith, “For every disease there is a cure. So seek the cure.”
Unfortunately we can see contradictions in those who restrict themselves to Du’a when it comes to solving the dire problems the Ummah is faced with like the bombardment of the innocent Muslims of Afghanistan. They would not limit themselves to Du’a when it comes to seeking their Rizq (provision) rather we would find them studying, working and striving in order to achieve it. Nor would we find them leaving their property unattended and their houses insecure even though they believe that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) is Ar-Raaziq (The Provider). When they are ill we would find them going to the doctor and taking medicine. Then how can it be, when Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has commanded us to motivate the people of power like the armies in the Islamic world to undertake their duty of repelling the aggressor and crushing the crusaders that they remain inactive praying for the Mahdi to emerge or for the victory to be granted? How can it be that they remain silent when Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has commanded us to undertake the intellectual and political struggle in order to remove the corrupt rulers in the Islamic land and replace them with the Khilafah? As if we are like a feather in the wind with no accountability.
We must understand that victory is only granted by Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) just as Rizq (provision) is, however we have not been left on this earth without a Shari’ah wandering aimlessly. Rather He (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) revealed the Qur’an in the month of Ramadhan as a guidance for mankind together with the clear proofs of this guidance for us to follow.
The two extremes of defeatism and fatalism are both incorrect and did not exist in the Sahabah (ra). The Muslims in the battle of Badr as in all the other battles understood that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) is the provider of the victory even if they were outnumbered, so they didn’t become defeated by the difficult reality around them, rather they knew that they were entrusted with the obligation of doing their utmost to defeat the enemy. The example of Badr is sufficient to demonstrate this.
In the second year of Hijrah the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) set out on the 8th of Ramadhan with three hundred and five of his companions mounted on seventy camels - ‘Amr ibn Umm Maktum was assigned to lead the prayer whilst Abu Lubabah was left in charge of Madinah. They rode the camels in turn heading towards a caravan led by Abu Sufyan. As they marched on they sought news of the caravan until they had reached the valley of Dafran where they settled, and news reached them there that Quraish had set out from Makkah to protect their caravan. The whole affair then assumed different proportions for it was no longer simply a raid on a caravan, the question was whether to confront Quraish or not. So Allah’s Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) consulted the Muslims. Abu Bakr (ra) followed then by ‘Umar (ra) voiced their opinions respectively, then al-Miqdad ibn ‘Amr (ra) arose and said, "O Messenger of Allah! Go where Allah tells you, for we are with you. We shall not say as the children of Israel said to Moses ‘You and your Lord go and fight and we will stay at home’, but you and your Lord go and fight and we will fight with you.""Give me advice O men!" by which he meant the Ansar who had paid allegiance to him at al-’Aqabah. They had pledged to protect him as they protected their wives and children, with the stipulation that they were not responsible to fight with him outside Madinah. When the Ansar sensed that he (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) meant them, Sa’ad ibn Mu’adh (ra) who was holding their banner said, "It seems as if you mean us, O Messenger of Allah." He (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, "Yes.” Sa’ad said, "We believe in you, we declare your truth, and we witness that what you have brought us is the truth, and we have given you our word and agreement to hear and obey; so go where you wish, we are with you; and by He who sent you, if you were to ask us to cross this sea and you plunged into it, we would plunge into it with you; not a man would stay behind. We do not dislike the idea of meeting our enemy tomorrow. We are experienced in war, trustworthy in combat. It may well be that Allah will let us show you something which will bring you joy, so take us along with Allah’s blessing." The Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) was delighted with Sa’ad’s words and said, "Forward in good heart, for Allah had promised me one of the two parties, and by Allah, it is as though I now saw the enemy lying prostrate."
Then the two sides advanced and drew near each other on Friday morning on the 17th of Ramadhan. The Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) straightened the ranks and incited the Muslims to fight. The Muslims were encouraged by the words of Allah’s Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and went forward. The fighting broke out fiercely and the heads of the Quraishi fighters went flying from their bodies, the Muslims becoming stronger all the time chanting ‘Ahad! Ahad!’ (The One, the One). Allah’s Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) whilst standing in the midst of the confrontation took a handful of pebbles and threw them at Quraish saying, "Foul be those faces!" Then he (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) ordered his companions to charge and they duly obliged until the battle was over, and the foe was routed. The Muslims emerged victorious despite being outnumbered three to one, they slew many warriors and tribal leaders of Quraish and took captive many more. The Quraish fled the battlefield and the Muslims returned to Madinah having achieved a truly great victory.
In these difficult days it is vital for us to have the mentality the Sahabah (ra) had regarding the issue of Nasr (victory). We must believe that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) will provide it whenever He (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) wishes, we shouldn’t become defeated if we don’t see it, nor should we remain idle waiting for it to come about. We have to do our utmost in implementing all the orders of Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) including those regarding changing the status quo and re-establishing the Khilafah. This life is a test and in pursuit of political change we may face all types of tribulations as the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and the Sahabah (ra) faced.
“Or do you think that you shall enter the gardens of Bliss (al-Jannah) without such (trials) as came to those who passed away before you?” [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 214]
Indeed Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has promised us His (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) help and victory.
“So do not become weak (against your enemy), nor be sad, and you will be superior (in victory) if you are indeed (true) believers” [TMQ Ale-Imran: 139].
“O you who believe if you aid the cause of Allah he will aid you and make your foothold firm” [TMQ Muhammad: 7].
Ibn Kathir in his Tafseer mentions that this verse was revealed during the battle of Badr in particular concerning Abu Sufyan ibn Harb. Moments before the battle it is narrated that Abu Sufyan delivered a speech calling on the Quraish to donate their wealth for the war (harb) and in particular to get rid of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) once and for all.
He also narrates from Ibn Abbas (ra) from Mujahid (ra) that it was revealed concerning Abu Sufyan because he donated his wealth to kill the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam).
Dahhak (ra) said: "This verse was revealed concerning the people of Badr and all those capable of doing (what the ayah mentions). The Sabab an Nuzul (circumstance of revelation) was concerning a specific incident i.e. at Badr. Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has informed us that the Kuffar will spend their wealth so as to hinder people from following the Tareeqa (path) of Haq (truth), and they spend their wealth for this purpose until they become miserable … they wish to extinguish the light of Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) and to make their word prevail over the word of truth but Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) raises his light although the Kuffar may detest this and He helps his Deen and makes it prevail over all other Deens and this is their humiliation in this life and punishment of hellfire in the hereafter." [Tafseer Ibn Kathir]
This verse is applicable to the current reality where the Kuffar have launched a crusade against Islam and are continuing this during the blessed month of Ramadhan. This verse was revealed during the month of Ramadhan when the Quraish were gathering their forces and wealth in order to quell Islam, which culminated in the famous battle of Badr. Today the forces of Kufr are also attempting to curb Islam by attacking the Muslims of Afghanistan, Palestine, Chechnya, Kashmir and other parts of the Islamic land. They spend their wealth not only to fight the Muslims physically but also to colonise the minds of the Muslims by attempting to sever them from their Aqeedah (belief) and distort the Islamic culture.
Unlike the battle of Badr, the Muslims today do not stand side by side under a single leadership, which implements Islam. Rather since the destruction of the Khilafah, the Muslims have been in the absence of the shepherd, shield and protector whom the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) called the shade of Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) upon the earth.
Al-Tabarani and Al-Baihaqi reported that the Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: "The Sultan is the shade of Allah on earth".
Without this Sultan, Imam or Khalifah we are exposed to attack from all sides without having a leadership that protects our lives, property and dignity. In this situation it is of paramount importance that we understand the concept of Nasr (victory) being from Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) in the correct manner. It can be noticed, from looking at their statements and behaviour, that some Muslims misunderstand this concept.
Some find it hard to believe that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) can provide us the victory when we are drowning in a sea of problems and the ship of the Kuffar seems so powerful. They see the heads of Kufr such as America and its modern Ahzab (Alliance or Coalition) as too strong economically, militarily and politically for the Muslims to overcome. They become mesmerised by the spider’s web (Bait al Ankabut) and can’t see through its weak structure. This has led to some being defeated by the current onslaught and has resulted in their inactivity and failure to try to liberate the Ummah from the Fir’awn of the world by standing up and re-establishing the Khilafah. Defeatism should never enter the heart of the true believer who knows that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) will provide the victory.
Another misunderstanding that people fall into is one of mixing the Aqeedah (belief) and the Ahkam Shari’ah (Shari’ah rules). They believe that Allah Azza wa jall will provide us with victory but they rely on this without undertaking the actions that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) ordered us with. This error in understanding leads people to remain inactive to change the situation around them and leaves them content in waiting for the victory to come, often the only action they call for is Du’a to Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) and the asking of help from Him (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala). This diseased view is a corruption in the Islamic mentality and can lead Muslims into fatalism and neglecting their Fara’id (obligations). To demonstrate this we can look at the belief in the Rizq (provision) being from Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala). We belief that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) is Ar-Raaziq (The one who provides) however when it comes to our actions we must follow His commands and prohibitions otherwise we would be violating the Qur’an which he revealed to us as a Furqan (criterion) and we would definitely fall into sin.
It was narrated that Umar bin Al-Khattab (ra) passed by some people, who were known as readers of the Qur’an. He saw them sitting and bending their heads, and asked who they were. He was told: "They are those who depend (al-mutawwakiloon) upon Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala)." Umar replied; "No, they are the eaters who eat the people’s properties. Do you want me to describe who those who really depend upon Allah (al-mutawwakiloon) are?" He was answered in the affirmative, and then he said: "He is the person who throws the seeds in the earth and then depends on his Lord, The Almighty, The Exalted."
Umar bin al Khattab (ra), of whom the Shaytan was afraid, explained to us how depending upon Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) does not mean leaving his obligations and not working to achieve his responsibilities. The Muslim man is commanded by Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) to earn a living for himself and his family although he has the permanent belief that effort is not proportional to Rizq. Hence there is a difference between the matters of Aqeedah and the following of the Ahkam Shari’ah.
Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) once shook the hand of Sa’ad ibn Muadh (ra) and found his hands to be rough. When the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) asked about it, Sa’ad said; “I dig with the shovel to maintain my family.” The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) kissed Sa’ad’s hands and said; “(They are) two hands which The Supreme loves.” The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: “Nobody would ever eat food that is better than to eat of his own hand’s work.”
As Muslims, we know that the Ajal (lifespan) can be only terminated by Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala). As He (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) said,
“And no person can ever die except by Allah's leave and at an appointed term” [TMQ Ale-Imran: 145].
Although our death cannot be avoided the knowledge of this should not lead to us abandoning any cures to illnesses or other means from the reality. Rather we seek cures for illnesses in response to the Hadith, “For every disease there is a cure. So seek the cure.”
Unfortunately we can see contradictions in those who restrict themselves to Du’a when it comes to solving the dire problems the Ummah is faced with like the bombardment of the innocent Muslims of Afghanistan. They would not limit themselves to Du’a when it comes to seeking their Rizq (provision) rather we would find them studying, working and striving in order to achieve it. Nor would we find them leaving their property unattended and their houses insecure even though they believe that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) is Ar-Raaziq (The Provider). When they are ill we would find them going to the doctor and taking medicine. Then how can it be, when Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has commanded us to motivate the people of power like the armies in the Islamic world to undertake their duty of repelling the aggressor and crushing the crusaders that they remain inactive praying for the Mahdi to emerge or for the victory to be granted? How can it be that they remain silent when Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has commanded us to undertake the intellectual and political struggle in order to remove the corrupt rulers in the Islamic land and replace them with the Khilafah? As if we are like a feather in the wind with no accountability.
We must understand that victory is only granted by Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) just as Rizq (provision) is, however we have not been left on this earth without a Shari’ah wandering aimlessly. Rather He (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) revealed the Qur’an in the month of Ramadhan as a guidance for mankind together with the clear proofs of this guidance for us to follow.
The two extremes of defeatism and fatalism are both incorrect and did not exist in the Sahabah (ra). The Muslims in the battle of Badr as in all the other battles understood that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) is the provider of the victory even if they were outnumbered, so they didn’t become defeated by the difficult reality around them, rather they knew that they were entrusted with the obligation of doing their utmost to defeat the enemy. The example of Badr is sufficient to demonstrate this.
In the second year of Hijrah the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) set out on the 8th of Ramadhan with three hundred and five of his companions mounted on seventy camels - ‘Amr ibn Umm Maktum was assigned to lead the prayer whilst Abu Lubabah was left in charge of Madinah. They rode the camels in turn heading towards a caravan led by Abu Sufyan. As they marched on they sought news of the caravan until they had reached the valley of Dafran where they settled, and news reached them there that Quraish had set out from Makkah to protect their caravan. The whole affair then assumed different proportions for it was no longer simply a raid on a caravan, the question was whether to confront Quraish or not. So Allah’s Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) consulted the Muslims. Abu Bakr (ra) followed then by ‘Umar (ra) voiced their opinions respectively, then al-Miqdad ibn ‘Amr (ra) arose and said, "O Messenger of Allah! Go where Allah tells you, for we are with you. We shall not say as the children of Israel said to Moses ‘You and your Lord go and fight and we will stay at home’, but you and your Lord go and fight and we will fight with you.""Give me advice O men!" by which he meant the Ansar who had paid allegiance to him at al-’Aqabah. They had pledged to protect him as they protected their wives and children, with the stipulation that they were not responsible to fight with him outside Madinah. When the Ansar sensed that he (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) meant them, Sa’ad ibn Mu’adh (ra) who was holding their banner said, "It seems as if you mean us, O Messenger of Allah." He (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, "Yes.” Sa’ad said, "We believe in you, we declare your truth, and we witness that what you have brought us is the truth, and we have given you our word and agreement to hear and obey; so go where you wish, we are with you; and by He who sent you, if you were to ask us to cross this sea and you plunged into it, we would plunge into it with you; not a man would stay behind. We do not dislike the idea of meeting our enemy tomorrow. We are experienced in war, trustworthy in combat. It may well be that Allah will let us show you something which will bring you joy, so take us along with Allah’s blessing." The Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) was delighted with Sa’ad’s words and said, "Forward in good heart, for Allah had promised me one of the two parties, and by Allah, it is as though I now saw the enemy lying prostrate."
Then the two sides advanced and drew near each other on Friday morning on the 17th of Ramadhan. The Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) straightened the ranks and incited the Muslims to fight. The Muslims were encouraged by the words of Allah’s Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and went forward. The fighting broke out fiercely and the heads of the Quraishi fighters went flying from their bodies, the Muslims becoming stronger all the time chanting ‘Ahad! Ahad!’ (The One, the One). Allah’s Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) whilst standing in the midst of the confrontation took a handful of pebbles and threw them at Quraish saying, "Foul be those faces!" Then he (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) ordered his companions to charge and they duly obliged until the battle was over, and the foe was routed. The Muslims emerged victorious despite being outnumbered three to one, they slew many warriors and tribal leaders of Quraish and took captive many more. The Quraish fled the battlefield and the Muslims returned to Madinah having achieved a truly great victory.
In these difficult days it is vital for us to have the mentality the Sahabah (ra) had regarding the issue of Nasr (victory). We must believe that Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) will provide it whenever He (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) wishes, we shouldn’t become defeated if we don’t see it, nor should we remain idle waiting for it to come about. We have to do our utmost in implementing all the orders of Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) including those regarding changing the status quo and re-establishing the Khilafah. This life is a test and in pursuit of political change we may face all types of tribulations as the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and the Sahabah (ra) faced.
“Or do you think that you shall enter the gardens of Bliss (al-Jannah) without such (trials) as came to those who passed away before you?” [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 214]
Indeed Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has promised us His (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) help and victory.
“So do not become weak (against your enemy), nor be sad, and you will be superior (in victory) if you are indeed (true) believers” [TMQ Ale-Imran: 139].
“O you who believe if you aid the cause of Allah he will aid you and make your foothold firm” [TMQ Muhammad: 7].
Excavating Evolution
The scientific dogma of the 20th century
Observe the sun rising in the morning, the stars hanging in the sky in their beautiful order, the incredible nature of man or of any other creature for that matter. See their intricate system interwoven, as splendid tapestry, systems upon systems, beauty upon beauty, complexity upon complexity.
If we were to come upon a beach where pebbles and stones had been arranged in an intricate pattern, we would feel no hesitation in jumping to the conclusion that they had been arranged in such a manner by someone. Although it is theoretically possible that the sea could have deposited the stones and pebbles in such a manner by chance. It would be considered most unlikely.
The standard argument put forward to counter the argument, that a Creator exists, is that the universe came into being purely by chance through the random forces of nature over millions of years. Thus the diversity and intricacy found in humans and animals is put down to chance. This argument holds that there is no purpose behind the universe and the complexity and intricacy of the world. Living experience shows us that without the Creator's ‘design’ the random evolutionary process could never have got started.
Finally, how does one explain the beauty and diversity in the world without reference to a purposeful Creator. The world exhibits order and regularity that testifies to the wisdom of Creator. This is in stark contradiction to the scientific view that things naturally tend towards disorder, which only proves that something is indeed ordering life to a particular plan.
Such an intricate relationship require an intelligent, purposeful power behind the world, and not the random unconscious and unintelligent process of chance. The occurrence of events requiring intelligence to explain them is positive proof for the designer of the world. Allah the Supreme being.
Like the Church in the Middle Ages that chained the minds of the people into thinking that there was no hope for salvation outside the Church, the Scientific Community has worlked along the similar lines to enslave the people with the notion that the concepts of Evolution and Science are the key to understanding the nature of life and the universe.
Much too often we are forced to sit as passive observors in lecture halls as university professors dazzle the crowd with the idea that apes and baboons gave birth to humans. They have raised the Evolutionist Theory to the level of something holy.
In this age of science and technology, we have become accustomed to thinking that science is everything. Let us suppose for a moment that scientific knowledge became so complete that it encompassed everything in the universe. Would we then be any closer to answer, through science, questions like: “Why is there a universe?” and “What is the purpose of life?”
Science cannot answer such questions because scientific knowledge is derived through experiments. Science is concerned with observing things, i.e., the way things behave. Questions like “Why did the universe come into being?” cannot be answered just by observing things in an experiment.
A scientist can observe the movements of the watch and conclude that the watch keeps time because the quartz and the mechanics or electronics behaves in a particular manner; however, such observation will never answer the question “Why did the watch-maker make the watch?”
Indeed, scientific experiment alone will not tell us that there is a creator for the universe or a watch-maker for the watch. Now, if we substitute the watch for the universe, external observation alone will not answer the question “ Why is there a universe?” Rather, these observations should be used to lead us to answer the big question.
Today there is such an ideology or way of life which answers all of the questions about our existence in a comprehensive manner. This ideology is Islam, and it is a complete way of life.
The education system of western nations is a means by which the thoughts, ideas, and culture of the secular ideology is preserved and protected. So vehement is the protection that any viewpoint in life that challenges the secular view and its systems is suppressed, distorted and eradicated. This distortion is nowhere more apparent than the area of science where any hint of objective scientific phenomena challenging the secular belief is distorted and presented as fact to conform to the belief. One of the best known examples of this manipulation is the subject of the origin of life and evolution.
In Islam, there is no disagreement between the objective scientific phenomena and the Islamic creed. On the contrary, the Islamic belief is built upon the objective reality, upon the foundation of fact rather than theory, assumption, or blindly accepted belief and therefore no manipulation of scientific phenomena needs to occur to conform to its belief.
We will endeavour to show the fallacy of modern scientific thinking regarding the evolution of mankind as a species, commonly referred to as Darwinism.
It is a fact that many of us take information for granted or just at face value, because it has a great deal of scientific backing.
For indeed it is science that has put digital watches on our wrists, television in our living rooms, and sent mankind into space. The credibility that science has attained over the last three hundred years has empowered it to start dictating the way people think. No longer do we question the theories and proposals, more likely we start taking them as fact, and very soon it becomes foolish to argue against them. So when we are faced with the question "are we descendant from apes?" we are more inclined to answer "yes", not because we are convinced of the theory, but more because of scientific thinking.
The Question of Life
The first stage of the theory states :
Life started as a result of an accident in the sea. This is commonly referred to as "spontaneous generation."
The result of this accident was a single celled organism which could 'replicate' itself to form similar organisms.The spontaneous generation took place within what is known as the 'organic soup'.
When it comes to the creation of life on this planet, the principle of 'chance' is invoked. The belief posits that given a large enough number of planets, and the correct planetary conditions in the presence of the correct fundamental building blocks, life could have emerged spontaneously by chance on at least one of these planets (earth).
The earth at that time was very volatile with a great deal of seismic and volcanic activity. There was radiation from the sun owing to the partially formed atmosphere, and harsh weather conditions that existed. The distance from the sun was such that the temperature of the earth was able to sustain water in liquid form.
Within these oceans existed a mixture of elements compounds, and complex chemical chains. This is commonly referred to as 'organic soup'. Organic compounds are the building blocks that all living beings are comprised of (amino acids). It is not totally unlikely that organic compounds existed at this stage, since they can be formed by certain conditions arising. Up to this point the scenario that exists all seems very plausible according to the evidence we have in the fields of astronomy and chemistry. Indeed with only a partially formed atmosphere, and the beginning of a crust forming, the climate would have been very severe.
The Fallacy
The key statement amongst the facts illustrated above is that 'life started by accident through a process known as spontaneous generation'. To say that it started by accident means that it was an incidental byproduct of serious conditions. In fact, the objective was never to create life. .."it just happened".
It is impossible to objectively analyze this because science itself is proclaiming that it does not have the reason or the cause of life itself. So, the question begs "what is life?'
The inanimate or abiotic matter is simply the world we see around us, it comprises the elements that makes up the ground upon which we walk, the air we breathe, the buildings in which we live, or the cars that we drive. These are elements that do not have a mind or characteristics possessed by living or biotic organisms. The organic compounds are those that are necessary for the formation of life but like matter they are just unique configurations of inanimate objects. 'A collection of inanimate objects is itself inanimate'.
To say that life spontaneously arose from a collection of organic compounds i.e. a collection of inanimate objects is totally irrational and therefore totally absurd. The reason being that once life was formed it had needs and requirements, & it needed laws to regulate it, since it did not ability to create laws for itel. To state that an element is the source of laws to regulate itself is completely infounded & highyl ludicrous ! This same element has the ability to replicate itself, repair itself, & possessed survival characteristics.
All of these are implicit attributes of life, i.e. everything we see living around us needs sustenance, has the ability to renew or reproduce, and generates factors unique to its survival. We have to remember that we are dealing with a collection of organic compounds or a collection of inanimate objects. Somehow this collection of organic compounds gained an extra attribute that yields the characteristics of life that cannot be totally understood. As of yet there is absolutely no understanding of the nature of the bridge between organic compounds and life.
In addition to this, scientists are still puzzled as to how the very first cell was able to survive let alone start replicating itself. Given the harsh temperatures and conditions that existed at that time, it seems a more probable event that such an organism would have been instantaneously eliminated.
Even if it did survive, what was existent in the cell to instruct it to create another just like it (the process of cell division and replication i.e. mitosis/meiosis? This can only mean that the first cell had some genetic structure thus begging some essential and fundamental questions.
How did the first D.N.A. (or equivalent) molecule come into being?
We know that genetic material only comes from a parent cell. Where was the parent cell?
What is instructing this molecule to replicate itself, and maintain the coding for hereditary cells?
Again this is an issue which is not satisfactorily tackled by science, since they use spontaneous generation example to hide what they do not know. They cannot answer how elements re-arranged themselves into unique configurations of genetic material, and this complex coded chain then became the key to defining the characteristics of the organism.
With the state of technology that exists at the moment it would be very easy to recreate (within a controlled environment) the harsh conditions that would have existed during the early period of the earth. So you think that scientists would be actively trying to recreate these conditions within experiments to see if life itself could be created spontaneously as they suggest.
However, in numerous experiments by scientists they have never been able to produce the minimum required quantity of amino acids from a random selection of elements under a myriad of conditions, let alone these building blocks to resemble anything that could be classified as life.
Professor Stanley Miller conducted an experiment to see if it was possible to create the basic building blocks for life. By accident he set up chemical solutions inside a flask and passed high voltage arcs through the flask. In many attempts altering the experimental parameters, he was never able to create more than four amino acids. The minimum requirement for each cell in the human body is twenty.
The fact that they have not generated life has been attributed to the failure to replicate the exact conditions that they presume to have existed, since according to them it is the natural consequence of a pre-set environment. On the other hand there were scientists like Louis Pasteur and Francisco Ready who contradicted modern belief by stating that life could only come from previous life. If this was the case, where did the first cell receive its life from?
From leading biologists in this field it becomes apparent that probabilities of life emerging by itself was virtually non-existent. In fact, the number quoted was so immensely small that it could not even be imagined. It was estimated that in order to create a D.N.A. molecule by accident required fourteen stages.
Within each stage there is a sequence of approximately ten steps which lead to the next stage. The probabilities are not known, so an example of a dice was used. If a dice was thrown at each step, the probability of success at each stage is one in six. For a successful of 140 stages (fourteen stages with ten sequences each) the probability would be one in 6x10(140) a number which incidentally is more than the number of atoms in the entire universe! It is like having an explosion at a printing factory that results in a concise English dictionary by letters and words forming randomly. This is far from the reality within which we exist
D.N.A. is simply the collection of inanimate matter. There is something beyond the material form of D.N.A. to account for life giving properties (i.e., what differentiates live matter from dead matter). Indeed, biologists recognize the fact that life could be independent of the elements, coding or structure of the D.N.A. molecule.
Twins could be born absolutely identical in make up and D.N.A.. However, one could be still born. From a chemical make up point of view they are exactly identical, their D.N.A. structure is exactly the same, however one has life the other has not.
Why does the characteristic of life exist in one and not the other?
After having explained the uniqueness and wonder of life that most biologists appreciate, it seems confusing that they leave the whole subject untackled. They say that life commenced through an unknown cause (an accident) & they leave the whole subject unfinished from a scientific viewpoint. The educational establishment, in upholding the secular view has tried to convince the populace that science has answered the question of life.
Evolution
Not content with icing over the question of life, one of the specialties of the educational establishment has been the constant reinforcement of the assumption of evolution.
So how did modern scientists and indeed Darwin himself postulate simple organisms started to give rise to more complex and advanced organisms?
Evolutionary theory continues to state that:
According to the theorists, this first living organism replicated itself in abundance from similar organisms. According to normal cell division, the rate of replication would have been geometric if the external factors remained constant. There is no idea of what structure the cell had at this stage, but it would have needed to be complex enough to undergo cell division as is understood by modern science.
The first cells found themselves living in a hostile environment such that the original cells were struggling to survive there in harsh surroundings.
The random element known as mutation resulted in variations occurring within the basic genetic structure. These primitive structures succumbed to the processes of Natural Selection.
There are a lot of terms here, all that need explanation before an in depth analysis can take place.
Geometric cell division is where each cell replicates at the same rate. So, in effect if we have one cell, and it divides then there are two. Then if the cells divide there are four. . . then eight, sixteen, thirty-two and so on. . .
Mutation is the process of random genetic change. All cells within an organism carry hereditary material in the form of genes, arranged linearly on the chromosomes contained in the nuclei of the cells. As the body grows, new cells are created with identical genetic material. Sometimes, genes make mistakes copying the genetic code. This is known as genetic mutation. Various factors can affect the rate of genetic mutation. These include external agents such as radiation, chemicals, smoke and certain edibles.
Natural Selection : The process of Evolution needs Natural Selection. Genetic Mutations are identified as the root cause of the change of characteristics of a certain number of members of a species. If the change enables that proportion to be better suited for survival, then as the environment changes, only those organisms within the species that are better suited for survival will live. This means that through time, only enhanced features will eventually dominate the species, and nature will gradually eliminate those species which lack this feature. In other words, weak & unsuitable forms that fail to adapt to their environment die out, while the strong & well adapted organisms survive "Survival of the Fittest."
In fact, this is the basis of Evolution. It is a very concise and clear theory to understand and appreciate (which probably relates to one of the reasons it has been so widely accepted.)
The theory itself doesn't sound so ridiculous. However, there is vast evidence that points to the fact that this could not possibly have been the case.
Genetic Mutation
Firstly, Darwinian theory lays the basis of evolutionary change with genetic mutation. The problem here is that an overwhelming majority of mutations are fatal to the organism. Mutations are rarely beneficial, sometimes neutral, but mostly harmful, resulting in deformed, sick or weakened organisms.
In today's world where the effects of radiation/pollution are far less than primitive earth, you would expect less mutation. However, the effects of mutation are no less pronounced. According to some recent studies an incredible 99.99% of genetic mutations kill the cells in which they occur (be they harmful or even beneficial.)
Sometimes mutations may cause a cell to lose control of its machinery. For example, the affected cells undergo uncontrolled cell division, resulting in cancerous growth. Many human diseases can be traced to mutant genes.
Only in a very few cases will the organism be able to survive a mutation, but even then to be of any use to the organism's survival, it must produce a result in a feature which enhances the survival characteristics of the organism within that environment (e.g., a deer that has larger muscles on its hind legs allowing it to run faster from predators.)
The Mechanics of Evolution
So, to be of any use, the mutation must result in an enhancement of physical characteristics as specified above. The mutations must take place within the sex cells in order to be passed on to progeny.
So, taking the example above, the mutation of muscle for the deer not only has to take place in the hind legs, but, it also had to take place within the sex cells of the deer (a mutation in a certain part of the body, without taking place in the sex cells, will never get passed to any of the breeding population).
The most evident problem here is that a large number of mutations would have to have taken place over a very large amount of time in order to produce a minimum quantity of viable organisms that were better suited to the changed environment (thousands of generations over millions of years). And then as the environment changed the ones that were less able to survive were selected out of existence. However, going by the nature of genetic mutation, if the rate of mutation were increased then the mortality rate of the organisms would have also drastically increased.
So in order for a species to develop from a lower one in a very short space of time would mean that the number of mutations would have to have been very high, which also implies that a large proportion of those organisms affected would have died.
A stark example will illustrate this principle:
Consider the evolution of terrestrial organisms to airborne organisms (i.e. since life started in the sea, at some stage in history according to Darwin, sea based organisms progressed onto land, some of these land based animals subsequently took to the air).
In order to create a viable airborne organism, a wing is required. So an arm of a creature had to evolve into a wing. Note, here that a stark mutation from an arm to a wing does not occur overnight. Many mutations will have to take place, over a considerable amount of time, before full transition is effective (typically millions of years). During the phase in which the arm is mutating into a wing it is neither a wing or an arm, and as such it is evidently detrimental to the organisms survival in the environment it was adapting. An organism with fully functional arms is better suited to survival than one which is undergoing mutations within the arm. In its current from, the mutated organism is in a form of disability because it is not able to use the originally intended arm for its main purpose. It is thus vulnerable, and by Darwin's own process of natural selection, it should be selected out of existence (because in its current form of transition it is not the fittest to survive).
Taking this example further, not only must the arms become wings but the entire physical structure must simultaneously evolve together in order for an effective transition to take place (i.e. in order for flight to take place the strength to weight ratio is critical as is the skeletal structure, and muscle development, heart rate, lung capacity...etc.).
So, in other words, what we are trying to say is that an organism suited to living on the ground, undergoes physical mutation for flight, and somehow, according to the theory undergoes similar mutation that will enable it to eventually fly. It is not enough to have one feature, all these features must evolve together simultaneously. The design complexity required for such a change from a land bearing mammal to an airborne organism defies the idea that such selections could have happened by chance.
What the theory proposes is that those within the species undergoing transition from land to airborne flight, succeeded as far as natural selection is concerned. Why would they succeed...?
Of those that survived mutation, only a few mutated to the necessary further physical features that would enable flight. Of those, only a few had the equivalent mutation with their sex cells. At each stage, the mutation gets rarer and rarer, and the number of organisms gets less and less, and the time span stretches over thousands of millions of years. These facts only lend to the implausibility of the theory.
A second example that is widely used is the successful competition example:
According to Darwin, a modern giraffe's long neck is an evidence of successful competition. If indeed there was such a competition and this competition only favored its long-necked forms, how did the female giraffes and the baby giraffes (which are shorter than the males) survive during periods of scarcity of food (when the leaves were on the highest branches).
According to Darwin's standards, female & baby giraffes would have died first, and then the whole race would have died out in the absence of the females.
There are many other examples that lend themselves to the fact that such stark mutation from species to species could not have occurred in this manner.
The Continual Process
According to Darwin, life originated on earth from simple single-celled organisms giving rise to the multicellular organisms through process of gradual change, through random mutations over millions of years.
This is how the diversity of species is explained:
There is overwhelming evidence today that the intermediate forms required for the process of evolution are totally absent. Darwin was frustrated by this, and this frustration extends to evolutionists today.
If evolution was an ongoing process, we should be able to see evolving species, genera, classes. But, the fact is that there are sharply definable features within a species (classified easily). This puts evolutionists in a very embarrassing situation.
Darwin wrote, "Why, if species have descended from other species to fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all of nature in confusion, instead of the species as we see them, well defined?"
To put it bluntly, if indeed mankind was descended from apes and evolution is a continuous ongoing process, then why do we not find today a half-man/half ape?
According to the theory, evolution resulted in the single cell organism forming more advanced better suited and more adaptable multi-celled organisms. If natural selection took over, then why weren't the single cells selected out of existence. Unicellular and multicellular organisms exist to this day together in the same environment. Bacteria and yeast are the oldest surviving organisms and yet they show no signs of evolution. Why have they survived unchanged?
Some may argue that such organisms were too small to evolve, but if we look at starfish (440-500 million years), shark (350-400 million years), horseshoe crab (500-600 million years), these are neither too small or too simple or too recent in time, and yet still they too have escaped evolution.
It seems that certain forms existed and died out, and some other forms have existed in a set state for a considerable time. It does not seem that nature has made any species progress drastically into another species.
When we look at fossil remains there is no evidence of gradual development, (in fact, the opposite is true). Charles Darwin wondered about this, but reconciled that when plenty of fossils were unearthed, in the near future the gradual change could hopefully be seen. Indeed, he was postulating a theory which needed proof, and to him that is all it was-just a theory. Today, unfortunately it has been taken as fact.
Today, large amounts of fossil evidence exist. The evidence basically lead to the conclusion that species existed for a set time, only to be replaced by a markedly different species.
These facts are now generally accepted by biologists, despite the fact that they significantly oppose Darwinism.
J.F. Case & V.E. Steirs write:
"... Though the fossil record makes an enormously important contribution to evolutionary theory, this source of data poses some questions that have proved to be a source of embarrassment to evolutionary theorists."
Variations within a Species vs. Evolution of a Species
There exists a definite difference between: 1) Variation within a species, 2) Evolution of a species. The area of most confusion that exists when evolutionists cling so dearly to the theory, is when they try to reconcile the variation of species and the variation within those species. Although evolution sounds improbable, there is no other scientific explanation of the wide variety of animal species present on this planet.
1.) Variations within a Species
We see today many variations within a particular bird species: feathers, colour, weight, etc. This can occur, and is classified as variation within a species. There is no better proof of this than the human species. We can see the immense variation between individuals, and races living in different continents. The pygmies of Central Africa differ considerably in relation to the fair skinned people of Europe, but they are still the same species. Its just that the genetic make-up controlling the height is different.
Even with people of the same race; hair color, eye color, mental ability are all varying factors affected by the natural selection processes of human breeding.
The combining of the parent hereditary genes upon human conception, is a random factor influenced only by dominant genes governing certain characteristics. However, the fundamental genes governing human characteristics (i.e. two arms, two legs, bone structure, muscle configuration...) remain unchanged.
2.) Evolution of a Species
According to the theory, evolution of a species will only occur if the fundamental characteristics change within the progeny, and that mutated change is beneficial to that organism (i.e. increases its survival factor within a changing environment), and that organism manages to reproduce that change to the rest of the species within that habitat, such that it becomes the dominant survival characteristic over its predecessor.
There is a distinct difference between the two.
Take for example, a selection of cockroaches that have immunity A & immunity B. If an insecticide is released which kills the immunity B cockroaches, then we cannot say that type A is an evolution within the cockroach species. It is still a cockroach and it has been living as a cockroach for the last few million years. It is simply a variation within that species that has succeeded as far as natural selection is concerned.
These two examples have simply illustrated the change in ratio of two different variants within a particular species (not evolution).
Indeed, changes have occurred but they have not been of such magnitude so as to change a lizard into a bird or a mouse into a man. There seems to be inherent rules, that while permitting certain amount of variation in certain directions, do not allow solid boundary of the permanent kind to be crossed over into another. Whatever change occurs, it occurs within secure boundaries of the same kind.
Even Pierre Crosee who held the chair of evolution for 30 years at the Sorbonne university writes "The repertory of mutations of a species has nothing to do with evolution. They merely represent the mutation spectrum”.
The Mind
The probability of life emerging by itself is astoundingly small (if at all we can say that the DNA molecule gives rise to life). But what has left scientists in the fields of anatomy, psychology, and even computer science completely baffled is the mind of human beings.
The mind is the sensing of the reality linked with the precedent information, allowing human beings to produce thoughts and enable them to verify that they exist.
We say that computers work in a similar fashion to the processing abilities of the brain, but they do not have a mind. They are not aware of their own existence, they cannot produce independent thought.
Of course, you know that you exist. But if you were to examine yourself from a material point of view, then all you consist of is a collection of complex chains of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and some trace elements.
What gives this strange collection of atoms the ability to recognize that it exists?
Why does it attempt to protect itself against danger?
Why do we generate emotions, like love, hate and jealousy?
...given that all that is happening at the base level is, electrical impulses firing along neurons.
Indeed, if as Darwin proposes, that all life on earth emerged from just one single cell, and that the evolution of species was a random factor, then how does the theory account for the development of mental processes, and the mind. Nature seems to have played a cruel trick on Darwin. Since it seems that when we consider man in relation to other species, dominance has not occurred via physical survival characteristics. It has in fact come via progressive thought.
Many biologists have tried to attribute this to the brain to body ratio. But if we look at apes, the brain to body ratio is almost the same, and yet they have not advanced as far as man has. There is in fact, a more fundamental difference between humans and animals. Some may argue that you can teach an animal tricks and they have the ability to learn, but this is indeed not true. In animals it is based on reward, i.e. the instincts are pushing the animal to satisfy a certain requirement. This is in stark contrast to the human child who will ask the question, "WHY?," because it has a mind which allows it to learn and progress.
Again, as in the dilemma of life itself, the ability for a human mind to be able to monitor, react, and control a machine more complex and involved than any super computer on this earth (i.e. human body,) leaves evolutionists at a complete loss as to how this could occur through the haphazard random process they describe as Evolution. It actually seems as though evolving organisms knew their goal. Could it be the result of fortuitous simultaneous mutations or are there other factors involved which we are not considering or cannot understand...?
"We can still stand in awe of a universe in which galaxies and life and the human mind came into being. Evidence from cosmology does not provide a proof for the existence of God but it is consistent with belief in a cosmic design that is not pre-determined in all its details.
Humans might seem insignificant in the immensity of time and space, but the greatest complexity in the universe was not in the atomic structure or the galactic scale. It lies in the 100 million synapses in the human brain. The number of ways of connecting these, is greater than the number of atoms in the universe.
There is a higher level or organization and richness in a human being than in a thousand lifeless galaxies. It is human beings, after all, that reach out to understand that cosmic immensity." [Prof. Ian Barbour]
The Dogma
How did evolution work with such serious difficulties...?
It is obvious that throughout the history of this planet, that species have come and gone, each being succeeded by other forms, as though it was following a well defined system.
Today, in schools, evolution is taught almost as fact, indoctrinating many millions with the idea that the current race of mankind in fact, all the species on earth derived their existence from a freak accident many millions of years ago. Something which may never have happened, something with no known case, no reason, and no purpose.
It does not seem to be a reasonable conclusion. The immense complexity around us has lead many to concede that there may well be something beyond which we understand that instigated and controlled at the development of life on this planet.
J.F. Case & V.E. Stiers write
"...It is as though life-forms incubating in a single-celled form for a billion years or more, suddenly evolved overnight into the great variety of complex multicellular animals."
Prof. D'arcy Thompson quotes:
"...Eighty years of Darwinism evolution has not taught us how birds descend from reptiles, nor vertebrates from invertebrate stock..."
"...The breach between vertebrate & invertebrate, worm & coelenterate, and protozoan is so wide that we cannot set across the intervening gap at all...to seek for stepping stones across the gaps between is to seek in vain forever."
The Theory of Evolution has become a symbol of scientific logic & progressive thinking although its nothing of the kind. It has been taken as a dogma, proven or unproven it is always right. The absence of a coherent alternative to Darwinism has made biologists feel that a bad theory is better than no theory at all.
Conclusion
Islam is a system of life which originated from the Creator (Allah in Arabic). Allah is the One who created man, life, and the universe and subjected man to the physical laws that He imposed on the universe. The Qur'an, as revealed to Muhammed (peace be upon him), directs man to study the physical world in order to understand the reality and to appreciate more the greatness of the One who created man, life and the universe.
Many verses in the Qur'an point to the physical world and explain natural phenomena to man, as a confirmation for mankind that this revelation is from the Creator, the Supreme. Some of these explanations could not be understood at the time of the revelation because man did not have the tools that we take for granted in modern times, such as the microscope, X-rays, etc. It is only in the last hundred years that some of these explanations became understood as a result of advances in science.
The examples in the Qur'an are many and range from the creation of the universe down to the fertilization of the egg by the sperm. It will suffice here just to quote few of these verses.
"Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them? We made every living thing from water. Will they not then believe?" [Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an, chapter 21; verse 30]
"Do you not see that Allah has made subservient to you whatsoever is in the earth." [Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an chapter 22; verse 65]
"Then We placed him as (a drop of) sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed. Then we made the sperm into a thing which clings (to the womb), then of that thing We made a (fetus) lump, then We made out of that lump, bones and clothed the bones with flesh, then We developed out of it another creature. So blessed be Allah, the perfect Creator." [Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an, chapter 23; verses 13-14]
"Verily, in cattle there is a lesson for you. We give you to drink of what is inside their bodies, coming from a conjunction between the contents of the intestines and blood, a milk pure and pleasant for those who drink it." [Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an, chapter 16; verse 66]
Although Islam points to the physical world to make man think, it did not come to explain the detailed physical laws, nor did it come to stop man from discovering them. Rather, it came to organize man's relationship with man himself, man's relationship with the society and man's relationship with his Creator. Islamic law therefore deals with the proper use of scientific facts and not their discovery in the state and society. For example, Islam does not prevent man from designing a gun, but it does lay down principles for its use.
Islam is an ideology which offers solution to all the problems faced by humanity.
Islam secures the mind by asking mankind to think about the existence of the creator and arrive to the rational conclusion that He does exist.
Observe the sun rising in the morning, the stars hanging in the sky in their beautiful order, the incredible nature of man or of any other creature for that matter. See their intricate system interwoven, as splendid tapestry, systems upon systems, beauty upon beauty, complexity upon complexity.
If we were to come upon a beach where pebbles and stones had been arranged in an intricate pattern, we would feel no hesitation in jumping to the conclusion that they had been arranged in such a manner by someone. Although it is theoretically possible that the sea could have deposited the stones and pebbles in such a manner by chance. It would be considered most unlikely.
The standard argument put forward to counter the argument, that a Creator exists, is that the universe came into being purely by chance through the random forces of nature over millions of years. Thus the diversity and intricacy found in humans and animals is put down to chance. This argument holds that there is no purpose behind the universe and the complexity and intricacy of the world. Living experience shows us that without the Creator's ‘design’ the random evolutionary process could never have got started.
Finally, how does one explain the beauty and diversity in the world without reference to a purposeful Creator. The world exhibits order and regularity that testifies to the wisdom of Creator. This is in stark contradiction to the scientific view that things naturally tend towards disorder, which only proves that something is indeed ordering life to a particular plan.
Such an intricate relationship require an intelligent, purposeful power behind the world, and not the random unconscious and unintelligent process of chance. The occurrence of events requiring intelligence to explain them is positive proof for the designer of the world. Allah the Supreme being.
Like the Church in the Middle Ages that chained the minds of the people into thinking that there was no hope for salvation outside the Church, the Scientific Community has worlked along the similar lines to enslave the people with the notion that the concepts of Evolution and Science are the key to understanding the nature of life and the universe.
Much too often we are forced to sit as passive observors in lecture halls as university professors dazzle the crowd with the idea that apes and baboons gave birth to humans. They have raised the Evolutionist Theory to the level of something holy.
In this age of science and technology, we have become accustomed to thinking that science is everything. Let us suppose for a moment that scientific knowledge became so complete that it encompassed everything in the universe. Would we then be any closer to answer, through science, questions like: “Why is there a universe?” and “What is the purpose of life?”
Science cannot answer such questions because scientific knowledge is derived through experiments. Science is concerned with observing things, i.e., the way things behave. Questions like “Why did the universe come into being?” cannot be answered just by observing things in an experiment.
A scientist can observe the movements of the watch and conclude that the watch keeps time because the quartz and the mechanics or electronics behaves in a particular manner; however, such observation will never answer the question “Why did the watch-maker make the watch?”
Indeed, scientific experiment alone will not tell us that there is a creator for the universe or a watch-maker for the watch. Now, if we substitute the watch for the universe, external observation alone will not answer the question “ Why is there a universe?” Rather, these observations should be used to lead us to answer the big question.
Today there is such an ideology or way of life which answers all of the questions about our existence in a comprehensive manner. This ideology is Islam, and it is a complete way of life.
The education system of western nations is a means by which the thoughts, ideas, and culture of the secular ideology is preserved and protected. So vehement is the protection that any viewpoint in life that challenges the secular view and its systems is suppressed, distorted and eradicated. This distortion is nowhere more apparent than the area of science where any hint of objective scientific phenomena challenging the secular belief is distorted and presented as fact to conform to the belief. One of the best known examples of this manipulation is the subject of the origin of life and evolution.
In Islam, there is no disagreement between the objective scientific phenomena and the Islamic creed. On the contrary, the Islamic belief is built upon the objective reality, upon the foundation of fact rather than theory, assumption, or blindly accepted belief and therefore no manipulation of scientific phenomena needs to occur to conform to its belief.
We will endeavour to show the fallacy of modern scientific thinking regarding the evolution of mankind as a species, commonly referred to as Darwinism.
It is a fact that many of us take information for granted or just at face value, because it has a great deal of scientific backing.
For indeed it is science that has put digital watches on our wrists, television in our living rooms, and sent mankind into space. The credibility that science has attained over the last three hundred years has empowered it to start dictating the way people think. No longer do we question the theories and proposals, more likely we start taking them as fact, and very soon it becomes foolish to argue against them. So when we are faced with the question "are we descendant from apes?" we are more inclined to answer "yes", not because we are convinced of the theory, but more because of scientific thinking.
The Question of Life
The first stage of the theory states :
Life started as a result of an accident in the sea. This is commonly referred to as "spontaneous generation."
The result of this accident was a single celled organism which could 'replicate' itself to form similar organisms.The spontaneous generation took place within what is known as the 'organic soup'.
When it comes to the creation of life on this planet, the principle of 'chance' is invoked. The belief posits that given a large enough number of planets, and the correct planetary conditions in the presence of the correct fundamental building blocks, life could have emerged spontaneously by chance on at least one of these planets (earth).
The earth at that time was very volatile with a great deal of seismic and volcanic activity. There was radiation from the sun owing to the partially formed atmosphere, and harsh weather conditions that existed. The distance from the sun was such that the temperature of the earth was able to sustain water in liquid form.
Within these oceans existed a mixture of elements compounds, and complex chemical chains. This is commonly referred to as 'organic soup'. Organic compounds are the building blocks that all living beings are comprised of (amino acids). It is not totally unlikely that organic compounds existed at this stage, since they can be formed by certain conditions arising. Up to this point the scenario that exists all seems very plausible according to the evidence we have in the fields of astronomy and chemistry. Indeed with only a partially formed atmosphere, and the beginning of a crust forming, the climate would have been very severe.
The Fallacy
The key statement amongst the facts illustrated above is that 'life started by accident through a process known as spontaneous generation'. To say that it started by accident means that it was an incidental byproduct of serious conditions. In fact, the objective was never to create life. .."it just happened".
It is impossible to objectively analyze this because science itself is proclaiming that it does not have the reason or the cause of life itself. So, the question begs "what is life?'
The inanimate or abiotic matter is simply the world we see around us, it comprises the elements that makes up the ground upon which we walk, the air we breathe, the buildings in which we live, or the cars that we drive. These are elements that do not have a mind or characteristics possessed by living or biotic organisms. The organic compounds are those that are necessary for the formation of life but like matter they are just unique configurations of inanimate objects. 'A collection of inanimate objects is itself inanimate'.
To say that life spontaneously arose from a collection of organic compounds i.e. a collection of inanimate objects is totally irrational and therefore totally absurd. The reason being that once life was formed it had needs and requirements, & it needed laws to regulate it, since it did not ability to create laws for itel. To state that an element is the source of laws to regulate itself is completely infounded & highyl ludicrous ! This same element has the ability to replicate itself, repair itself, & possessed survival characteristics.
All of these are implicit attributes of life, i.e. everything we see living around us needs sustenance, has the ability to renew or reproduce, and generates factors unique to its survival. We have to remember that we are dealing with a collection of organic compounds or a collection of inanimate objects. Somehow this collection of organic compounds gained an extra attribute that yields the characteristics of life that cannot be totally understood. As of yet there is absolutely no understanding of the nature of the bridge between organic compounds and life.
In addition to this, scientists are still puzzled as to how the very first cell was able to survive let alone start replicating itself. Given the harsh temperatures and conditions that existed at that time, it seems a more probable event that such an organism would have been instantaneously eliminated.
Even if it did survive, what was existent in the cell to instruct it to create another just like it (the process of cell division and replication i.e. mitosis/meiosis? This can only mean that the first cell had some genetic structure thus begging some essential and fundamental questions.
How did the first D.N.A. (or equivalent) molecule come into being?
We know that genetic material only comes from a parent cell. Where was the parent cell?
What is instructing this molecule to replicate itself, and maintain the coding for hereditary cells?
Again this is an issue which is not satisfactorily tackled by science, since they use spontaneous generation example to hide what they do not know. They cannot answer how elements re-arranged themselves into unique configurations of genetic material, and this complex coded chain then became the key to defining the characteristics of the organism.
With the state of technology that exists at the moment it would be very easy to recreate (within a controlled environment) the harsh conditions that would have existed during the early period of the earth. So you think that scientists would be actively trying to recreate these conditions within experiments to see if life itself could be created spontaneously as they suggest.
However, in numerous experiments by scientists they have never been able to produce the minimum required quantity of amino acids from a random selection of elements under a myriad of conditions, let alone these building blocks to resemble anything that could be classified as life.
Professor Stanley Miller conducted an experiment to see if it was possible to create the basic building blocks for life. By accident he set up chemical solutions inside a flask and passed high voltage arcs through the flask. In many attempts altering the experimental parameters, he was never able to create more than four amino acids. The minimum requirement for each cell in the human body is twenty.
The fact that they have not generated life has been attributed to the failure to replicate the exact conditions that they presume to have existed, since according to them it is the natural consequence of a pre-set environment. On the other hand there were scientists like Louis Pasteur and Francisco Ready who contradicted modern belief by stating that life could only come from previous life. If this was the case, where did the first cell receive its life from?
From leading biologists in this field it becomes apparent that probabilities of life emerging by itself was virtually non-existent. In fact, the number quoted was so immensely small that it could not even be imagined. It was estimated that in order to create a D.N.A. molecule by accident required fourteen stages.
Within each stage there is a sequence of approximately ten steps which lead to the next stage. The probabilities are not known, so an example of a dice was used. If a dice was thrown at each step, the probability of success at each stage is one in six. For a successful of 140 stages (fourteen stages with ten sequences each) the probability would be one in 6x10(140) a number which incidentally is more than the number of atoms in the entire universe! It is like having an explosion at a printing factory that results in a concise English dictionary by letters and words forming randomly. This is far from the reality within which we exist
D.N.A. is simply the collection of inanimate matter. There is something beyond the material form of D.N.A. to account for life giving properties (i.e., what differentiates live matter from dead matter). Indeed, biologists recognize the fact that life could be independent of the elements, coding or structure of the D.N.A. molecule.
Twins could be born absolutely identical in make up and D.N.A.. However, one could be still born. From a chemical make up point of view they are exactly identical, their D.N.A. structure is exactly the same, however one has life the other has not.
Why does the characteristic of life exist in one and not the other?
After having explained the uniqueness and wonder of life that most biologists appreciate, it seems confusing that they leave the whole subject untackled. They say that life commenced through an unknown cause (an accident) & they leave the whole subject unfinished from a scientific viewpoint. The educational establishment, in upholding the secular view has tried to convince the populace that science has answered the question of life.
Evolution
Not content with icing over the question of life, one of the specialties of the educational establishment has been the constant reinforcement of the assumption of evolution.
So how did modern scientists and indeed Darwin himself postulate simple organisms started to give rise to more complex and advanced organisms?
Evolutionary theory continues to state that:
According to the theorists, this first living organism replicated itself in abundance from similar organisms. According to normal cell division, the rate of replication would have been geometric if the external factors remained constant. There is no idea of what structure the cell had at this stage, but it would have needed to be complex enough to undergo cell division as is understood by modern science.
The first cells found themselves living in a hostile environment such that the original cells were struggling to survive there in harsh surroundings.
The random element known as mutation resulted in variations occurring within the basic genetic structure. These primitive structures succumbed to the processes of Natural Selection.
There are a lot of terms here, all that need explanation before an in depth analysis can take place.
Geometric cell division is where each cell replicates at the same rate. So, in effect if we have one cell, and it divides then there are two. Then if the cells divide there are four. . . then eight, sixteen, thirty-two and so on. . .
Mutation is the process of random genetic change. All cells within an organism carry hereditary material in the form of genes, arranged linearly on the chromosomes contained in the nuclei of the cells. As the body grows, new cells are created with identical genetic material. Sometimes, genes make mistakes copying the genetic code. This is known as genetic mutation. Various factors can affect the rate of genetic mutation. These include external agents such as radiation, chemicals, smoke and certain edibles.
Natural Selection : The process of Evolution needs Natural Selection. Genetic Mutations are identified as the root cause of the change of characteristics of a certain number of members of a species. If the change enables that proportion to be better suited for survival, then as the environment changes, only those organisms within the species that are better suited for survival will live. This means that through time, only enhanced features will eventually dominate the species, and nature will gradually eliminate those species which lack this feature. In other words, weak & unsuitable forms that fail to adapt to their environment die out, while the strong & well adapted organisms survive "Survival of the Fittest."
In fact, this is the basis of Evolution. It is a very concise and clear theory to understand and appreciate (which probably relates to one of the reasons it has been so widely accepted.)
The theory itself doesn't sound so ridiculous. However, there is vast evidence that points to the fact that this could not possibly have been the case.
Genetic Mutation
Firstly, Darwinian theory lays the basis of evolutionary change with genetic mutation. The problem here is that an overwhelming majority of mutations are fatal to the organism. Mutations are rarely beneficial, sometimes neutral, but mostly harmful, resulting in deformed, sick or weakened organisms.
In today's world where the effects of radiation/pollution are far less than primitive earth, you would expect less mutation. However, the effects of mutation are no less pronounced. According to some recent studies an incredible 99.99% of genetic mutations kill the cells in which they occur (be they harmful or even beneficial.)
Sometimes mutations may cause a cell to lose control of its machinery. For example, the affected cells undergo uncontrolled cell division, resulting in cancerous growth. Many human diseases can be traced to mutant genes.
Only in a very few cases will the organism be able to survive a mutation, but even then to be of any use to the organism's survival, it must produce a result in a feature which enhances the survival characteristics of the organism within that environment (e.g., a deer that has larger muscles on its hind legs allowing it to run faster from predators.)
The Mechanics of Evolution
So, to be of any use, the mutation must result in an enhancement of physical characteristics as specified above. The mutations must take place within the sex cells in order to be passed on to progeny.
So, taking the example above, the mutation of muscle for the deer not only has to take place in the hind legs, but, it also had to take place within the sex cells of the deer (a mutation in a certain part of the body, without taking place in the sex cells, will never get passed to any of the breeding population).
The most evident problem here is that a large number of mutations would have to have taken place over a very large amount of time in order to produce a minimum quantity of viable organisms that were better suited to the changed environment (thousands of generations over millions of years). And then as the environment changed the ones that were less able to survive were selected out of existence. However, going by the nature of genetic mutation, if the rate of mutation were increased then the mortality rate of the organisms would have also drastically increased.
So in order for a species to develop from a lower one in a very short space of time would mean that the number of mutations would have to have been very high, which also implies that a large proportion of those organisms affected would have died.
A stark example will illustrate this principle:
Consider the evolution of terrestrial organisms to airborne organisms (i.e. since life started in the sea, at some stage in history according to Darwin, sea based organisms progressed onto land, some of these land based animals subsequently took to the air).
In order to create a viable airborne organism, a wing is required. So an arm of a creature had to evolve into a wing. Note, here that a stark mutation from an arm to a wing does not occur overnight. Many mutations will have to take place, over a considerable amount of time, before full transition is effective (typically millions of years). During the phase in which the arm is mutating into a wing it is neither a wing or an arm, and as such it is evidently detrimental to the organisms survival in the environment it was adapting. An organism with fully functional arms is better suited to survival than one which is undergoing mutations within the arm. In its current from, the mutated organism is in a form of disability because it is not able to use the originally intended arm for its main purpose. It is thus vulnerable, and by Darwin's own process of natural selection, it should be selected out of existence (because in its current form of transition it is not the fittest to survive).
Taking this example further, not only must the arms become wings but the entire physical structure must simultaneously evolve together in order for an effective transition to take place (i.e. in order for flight to take place the strength to weight ratio is critical as is the skeletal structure, and muscle development, heart rate, lung capacity...etc.).
So, in other words, what we are trying to say is that an organism suited to living on the ground, undergoes physical mutation for flight, and somehow, according to the theory undergoes similar mutation that will enable it to eventually fly. It is not enough to have one feature, all these features must evolve together simultaneously. The design complexity required for such a change from a land bearing mammal to an airborne organism defies the idea that such selections could have happened by chance.
What the theory proposes is that those within the species undergoing transition from land to airborne flight, succeeded as far as natural selection is concerned. Why would they succeed...?
Of those that survived mutation, only a few mutated to the necessary further physical features that would enable flight. Of those, only a few had the equivalent mutation with their sex cells. At each stage, the mutation gets rarer and rarer, and the number of organisms gets less and less, and the time span stretches over thousands of millions of years. These facts only lend to the implausibility of the theory.
A second example that is widely used is the successful competition example:
According to Darwin, a modern giraffe's long neck is an evidence of successful competition. If indeed there was such a competition and this competition only favored its long-necked forms, how did the female giraffes and the baby giraffes (which are shorter than the males) survive during periods of scarcity of food (when the leaves were on the highest branches).
According to Darwin's standards, female & baby giraffes would have died first, and then the whole race would have died out in the absence of the females.
There are many other examples that lend themselves to the fact that such stark mutation from species to species could not have occurred in this manner.
The Continual Process
According to Darwin, life originated on earth from simple single-celled organisms giving rise to the multicellular organisms through process of gradual change, through random mutations over millions of years.
This is how the diversity of species is explained:
There is overwhelming evidence today that the intermediate forms required for the process of evolution are totally absent. Darwin was frustrated by this, and this frustration extends to evolutionists today.
If evolution was an ongoing process, we should be able to see evolving species, genera, classes. But, the fact is that there are sharply definable features within a species (classified easily). This puts evolutionists in a very embarrassing situation.
Darwin wrote, "Why, if species have descended from other species to fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all of nature in confusion, instead of the species as we see them, well defined?"
To put it bluntly, if indeed mankind was descended from apes and evolution is a continuous ongoing process, then why do we not find today a half-man/half ape?
According to the theory, evolution resulted in the single cell organism forming more advanced better suited and more adaptable multi-celled organisms. If natural selection took over, then why weren't the single cells selected out of existence. Unicellular and multicellular organisms exist to this day together in the same environment. Bacteria and yeast are the oldest surviving organisms and yet they show no signs of evolution. Why have they survived unchanged?
Some may argue that such organisms were too small to evolve, but if we look at starfish (440-500 million years), shark (350-400 million years), horseshoe crab (500-600 million years), these are neither too small or too simple or too recent in time, and yet still they too have escaped evolution.
It seems that certain forms existed and died out, and some other forms have existed in a set state for a considerable time. It does not seem that nature has made any species progress drastically into another species.
When we look at fossil remains there is no evidence of gradual development, (in fact, the opposite is true). Charles Darwin wondered about this, but reconciled that when plenty of fossils were unearthed, in the near future the gradual change could hopefully be seen. Indeed, he was postulating a theory which needed proof, and to him that is all it was-just a theory. Today, unfortunately it has been taken as fact.
Today, large amounts of fossil evidence exist. The evidence basically lead to the conclusion that species existed for a set time, only to be replaced by a markedly different species.
These facts are now generally accepted by biologists, despite the fact that they significantly oppose Darwinism.
J.F. Case & V.E. Steirs write:
"... Though the fossil record makes an enormously important contribution to evolutionary theory, this source of data poses some questions that have proved to be a source of embarrassment to evolutionary theorists."
Variations within a Species vs. Evolution of a Species
There exists a definite difference between: 1) Variation within a species, 2) Evolution of a species. The area of most confusion that exists when evolutionists cling so dearly to the theory, is when they try to reconcile the variation of species and the variation within those species. Although evolution sounds improbable, there is no other scientific explanation of the wide variety of animal species present on this planet.
1.) Variations within a Species
We see today many variations within a particular bird species: feathers, colour, weight, etc. This can occur, and is classified as variation within a species. There is no better proof of this than the human species. We can see the immense variation between individuals, and races living in different continents. The pygmies of Central Africa differ considerably in relation to the fair skinned people of Europe, but they are still the same species. Its just that the genetic make-up controlling the height is different.
Even with people of the same race; hair color, eye color, mental ability are all varying factors affected by the natural selection processes of human breeding.
The combining of the parent hereditary genes upon human conception, is a random factor influenced only by dominant genes governing certain characteristics. However, the fundamental genes governing human characteristics (i.e. two arms, two legs, bone structure, muscle configuration...) remain unchanged.
2.) Evolution of a Species
According to the theory, evolution of a species will only occur if the fundamental characteristics change within the progeny, and that mutated change is beneficial to that organism (i.e. increases its survival factor within a changing environment), and that organism manages to reproduce that change to the rest of the species within that habitat, such that it becomes the dominant survival characteristic over its predecessor.
There is a distinct difference between the two.
Take for example, a selection of cockroaches that have immunity A & immunity B. If an insecticide is released which kills the immunity B cockroaches, then we cannot say that type A is an evolution within the cockroach species. It is still a cockroach and it has been living as a cockroach for the last few million years. It is simply a variation within that species that has succeeded as far as natural selection is concerned.
These two examples have simply illustrated the change in ratio of two different variants within a particular species (not evolution).
Indeed, changes have occurred but they have not been of such magnitude so as to change a lizard into a bird or a mouse into a man. There seems to be inherent rules, that while permitting certain amount of variation in certain directions, do not allow solid boundary of the permanent kind to be crossed over into another. Whatever change occurs, it occurs within secure boundaries of the same kind.
Even Pierre Crosee who held the chair of evolution for 30 years at the Sorbonne university writes "The repertory of mutations of a species has nothing to do with evolution. They merely represent the mutation spectrum”.
The Mind
The probability of life emerging by itself is astoundingly small (if at all we can say that the DNA molecule gives rise to life). But what has left scientists in the fields of anatomy, psychology, and even computer science completely baffled is the mind of human beings.
The mind is the sensing of the reality linked with the precedent information, allowing human beings to produce thoughts and enable them to verify that they exist.
We say that computers work in a similar fashion to the processing abilities of the brain, but they do not have a mind. They are not aware of their own existence, they cannot produce independent thought.
Of course, you know that you exist. But if you were to examine yourself from a material point of view, then all you consist of is a collection of complex chains of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and some trace elements.
What gives this strange collection of atoms the ability to recognize that it exists?
Why does it attempt to protect itself against danger?
Why do we generate emotions, like love, hate and jealousy?
...given that all that is happening at the base level is, electrical impulses firing along neurons.
Indeed, if as Darwin proposes, that all life on earth emerged from just one single cell, and that the evolution of species was a random factor, then how does the theory account for the development of mental processes, and the mind. Nature seems to have played a cruel trick on Darwin. Since it seems that when we consider man in relation to other species, dominance has not occurred via physical survival characteristics. It has in fact come via progressive thought.
Many biologists have tried to attribute this to the brain to body ratio. But if we look at apes, the brain to body ratio is almost the same, and yet they have not advanced as far as man has. There is in fact, a more fundamental difference between humans and animals. Some may argue that you can teach an animal tricks and they have the ability to learn, but this is indeed not true. In animals it is based on reward, i.e. the instincts are pushing the animal to satisfy a certain requirement. This is in stark contrast to the human child who will ask the question, "WHY?," because it has a mind which allows it to learn and progress.
Again, as in the dilemma of life itself, the ability for a human mind to be able to monitor, react, and control a machine more complex and involved than any super computer on this earth (i.e. human body,) leaves evolutionists at a complete loss as to how this could occur through the haphazard random process they describe as Evolution. It actually seems as though evolving organisms knew their goal. Could it be the result of fortuitous simultaneous mutations or are there other factors involved which we are not considering or cannot understand...?
"We can still stand in awe of a universe in which galaxies and life and the human mind came into being. Evidence from cosmology does not provide a proof for the existence of God but it is consistent with belief in a cosmic design that is not pre-determined in all its details.
Humans might seem insignificant in the immensity of time and space, but the greatest complexity in the universe was not in the atomic structure or the galactic scale. It lies in the 100 million synapses in the human brain. The number of ways of connecting these, is greater than the number of atoms in the universe.
There is a higher level or organization and richness in a human being than in a thousand lifeless galaxies. It is human beings, after all, that reach out to understand that cosmic immensity." [Prof. Ian Barbour]
The Dogma
How did evolution work with such serious difficulties...?
It is obvious that throughout the history of this planet, that species have come and gone, each being succeeded by other forms, as though it was following a well defined system.
Today, in schools, evolution is taught almost as fact, indoctrinating many millions with the idea that the current race of mankind in fact, all the species on earth derived their existence from a freak accident many millions of years ago. Something which may never have happened, something with no known case, no reason, and no purpose.
It does not seem to be a reasonable conclusion. The immense complexity around us has lead many to concede that there may well be something beyond which we understand that instigated and controlled at the development of life on this planet.
J.F. Case & V.E. Stiers write
"...It is as though life-forms incubating in a single-celled form for a billion years or more, suddenly evolved overnight into the great variety of complex multicellular animals."
Prof. D'arcy Thompson quotes:
"...Eighty years of Darwinism evolution has not taught us how birds descend from reptiles, nor vertebrates from invertebrate stock..."
"...The breach between vertebrate & invertebrate, worm & coelenterate, and protozoan is so wide that we cannot set across the intervening gap at all...to seek for stepping stones across the gaps between is to seek in vain forever."
The Theory of Evolution has become a symbol of scientific logic & progressive thinking although its nothing of the kind. It has been taken as a dogma, proven or unproven it is always right. The absence of a coherent alternative to Darwinism has made biologists feel that a bad theory is better than no theory at all.
Conclusion
Islam is a system of life which originated from the Creator (Allah in Arabic). Allah is the One who created man, life, and the universe and subjected man to the physical laws that He imposed on the universe. The Qur'an, as revealed to Muhammed (peace be upon him), directs man to study the physical world in order to understand the reality and to appreciate more the greatness of the One who created man, life and the universe.
Many verses in the Qur'an point to the physical world and explain natural phenomena to man, as a confirmation for mankind that this revelation is from the Creator, the Supreme. Some of these explanations could not be understood at the time of the revelation because man did not have the tools that we take for granted in modern times, such as the microscope, X-rays, etc. It is only in the last hundred years that some of these explanations became understood as a result of advances in science.
The examples in the Qur'an are many and range from the creation of the universe down to the fertilization of the egg by the sperm. It will suffice here just to quote few of these verses.
"Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them? We made every living thing from water. Will they not then believe?" [Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an, chapter 21; verse 30]
"Do you not see that Allah has made subservient to you whatsoever is in the earth." [Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an chapter 22; verse 65]
"Then We placed him as (a drop of) sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed. Then we made the sperm into a thing which clings (to the womb), then of that thing We made a (fetus) lump, then We made out of that lump, bones and clothed the bones with flesh, then We developed out of it another creature. So blessed be Allah, the perfect Creator." [Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an, chapter 23; verses 13-14]
"Verily, in cattle there is a lesson for you. We give you to drink of what is inside their bodies, coming from a conjunction between the contents of the intestines and blood, a milk pure and pleasant for those who drink it." [Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an, chapter 16; verse 66]
Although Islam points to the physical world to make man think, it did not come to explain the detailed physical laws, nor did it come to stop man from discovering them. Rather, it came to organize man's relationship with man himself, man's relationship with the society and man's relationship with his Creator. Islamic law therefore deals with the proper use of scientific facts and not their discovery in the state and society. For example, Islam does not prevent man from designing a gun, but it does lay down principles for its use.
Islam is an ideology which offers solution to all the problems faced by humanity.
Islam secures the mind by asking mankind to think about the existence of the creator and arrive to the rational conclusion that He does exist.
History
The following are various articles written by various authors on issues related to Islamic history. Please note that these are selected articles and not a full list of articles available on this site, to see a full list on this topic please click on the category label: History
Lessons from the tragedy of Karbala
America should remember its warm relations with the Caliphate in the past
The Khilafah and the Indian Subcontinent
Comparisons from the Battle of Ain Jaloot
Ramadhan Timeline
Significance of Muharram & Ashoora
Photos of Uthmani Khilafah during rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid II
Lessons from the tragedy of Karbala
America should remember its warm relations with the Caliphate in the past
The Khilafah and the Indian Subcontinent
Comparisons from the Battle of Ain Jaloot
Ramadhan Timeline
Significance of Muharram & Ashoora
Photos of Uthmani Khilafah during rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid II
Economics
The following articles are written by various writers on issues related to Economics & Islam. Please note that these are selected articles and not a full list of articles available on this site, to see a full list on this topic please click on the category label: Economics
Adam Smith's praise of the Caliphate
Q&A: The dollar crisis, rising oil & commodity prices
Big oil speculators ensure that a barrel of oil crosses the $135 mark
The Crude facts
Your Money Is Not Good Anymore!
Food Crisis - The Failure of Capitalist Economics and Global Institutions
World Bank reveals food prices becoming unbearable for the world's poor
IMF: The world economy is to worsen
Economic Colonisation: The Forgotten Killer
All Bribery is Haram (Forbidden)
Dollar’s decline: A crisis or an opportunity?
The Indian stock market crash, an Islamic perspective
The prohibition of Insurance in Islam
The Laws of Partnerships (Companies) in Islam
Rethinking Intellectual Property
The difference between the Capitalist, Communist & the Islamic economic System
Scarcity is not so Scarce
The Significance of Zakah
“Creditors have better memories than Debtors”
The Shock in the Kuwaiti Money Market its causes & how to deal with it
Shouldn't there be a war on poverty?
The Role of Contracts in Islam
Islam and the economic question
Adam Smith's praise of the Caliphate
Q&A: The dollar crisis, rising oil & commodity prices
Big oil speculators ensure that a barrel of oil crosses the $135 mark
The Crude facts
Your Money Is Not Good Anymore!
Food Crisis - The Failure of Capitalist Economics and Global Institutions
World Bank reveals food prices becoming unbearable for the world's poor
IMF: The world economy is to worsen
Economic Colonisation: The Forgotten Killer
All Bribery is Haram (Forbidden)
Dollar’s decline: A crisis or an opportunity?
The Indian stock market crash, an Islamic perspective
The prohibition of Insurance in Islam
The Laws of Partnerships (Companies) in Islam
Rethinking Intellectual Property
The difference between the Capitalist, Communist & the Islamic economic System
Scarcity is not so Scarce
The Significance of Zakah
“Creditors have better memories than Debtors”
The Shock in the Kuwaiti Money Market its causes & how to deal with it
Shouldn't there be a war on poverty?
The Role of Contracts in Islam
Islam and the economic question
Political Analysis
The following are various different articles related to current affairs and political analysis by various authors. Please note that these are selected articles and not a full list of articles available on this site, to see a full list on this topic please click on the category label: Political Analysis
US Normalizing relations with the "Axis of Evil"
Hizb ut-Tahrir Bangladesh condemns the arrest its student activists
This Spring America’s target is not Iran but Pakistan
No Palestinian Prison state until 2009
Musharraf's American Plan
Statement on Hizb ut-Tahrir's delegations to quell bloodshed in Lebanon
Bush’s Plan For Iraq and The Middle East
The disastarous declaration of Hamas & Fatah amounts to recognising the Jewish state
Pakistan's Kashmir policy is a double-edged sword
A call to the people of Palestine and to Hamas and Fatah in particular
Somalia…Somalia Make It Victorious, Oh Muslims!
Political Concepts Part 6 - World Main issues
Iran and North Korea standoff exposes US NPT policy
Is America encouraging the Talibanisation of Afghanistan?
The tragedy in the foreign policy of Turkey
The danger of Baker-Hamilton document on Iraq
Musharraf Attempts To Resuscitate The Kashmir Plan By Abandoning Its Claim To The Territory
The American century is about to end
The fictitious expansion of Tajikistan's ruling party
Democrats win: What does it mean for Bush and Iraq
America plans to give Southern Iraq to Iran
America in a difficult predicament over North Korea
US hand in Pakistan '99 coup: Ex-ISI chief
Attempted Coup in Pakistan Foiled
Pakistan’s regime commits to sacrifice soldiers for America’s divide and rule policy
America could neither dare to wage an open war against Pakistan five years ago nor has the courage to do so today
From Syria: If Not Ashamed, Do Whatever You Wish
Murder in Samarkand - book by ex-ambassador of UK to Uzbekistan
The Lebanese Blood Is Wasted By A Fatal Resolution
The UK Terror plot: what's really going on?
What is going on in Lebanon?
What’s behind the official completion of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline?
Analysis about tensions with Iran
The Great Game in Somalia
Political Concepts Part 5 - Motives of struggle between states
Political Concepts Part 4 - International Convention/Norms
Political Concepts Part 3
Political Concepts Part 2 - Political plans and styles
Political Concepts - Part 1
American Influence Over Indian Politics And Its Consequences
Analysis of the Coup in Mauritania
Analysis of EU Summit
Recent Developments in Darfur
What is the tug-of-war taking place in Lebanon?
Analysis of Russian & Chinese joint military manoeuvres
America, India, Pakistan & F16's
Analysis of Rice's visit to Central Asia
Recent developments in Syria
US Normalizing relations with the "Axis of Evil"
Hizb ut-Tahrir Bangladesh condemns the arrest its student activists
This Spring America’s target is not Iran but Pakistan
No Palestinian Prison state until 2009
Musharraf's American Plan
Statement on Hizb ut-Tahrir's delegations to quell bloodshed in Lebanon
Bush’s Plan For Iraq and The Middle East
The disastarous declaration of Hamas & Fatah amounts to recognising the Jewish state
Pakistan's Kashmir policy is a double-edged sword
A call to the people of Palestine and to Hamas and Fatah in particular
Somalia…Somalia Make It Victorious, Oh Muslims!
Political Concepts Part 6 - World Main issues
Iran and North Korea standoff exposes US NPT policy
Is America encouraging the Talibanisation of Afghanistan?
The tragedy in the foreign policy of Turkey
The danger of Baker-Hamilton document on Iraq
Musharraf Attempts To Resuscitate The Kashmir Plan By Abandoning Its Claim To The Territory
The American century is about to end
The fictitious expansion of Tajikistan's ruling party
Democrats win: What does it mean for Bush and Iraq
America plans to give Southern Iraq to Iran
America in a difficult predicament over North Korea
US hand in Pakistan '99 coup: Ex-ISI chief
Attempted Coup in Pakistan Foiled
Pakistan’s regime commits to sacrifice soldiers for America’s divide and rule policy
America could neither dare to wage an open war against Pakistan five years ago nor has the courage to do so today
From Syria: If Not Ashamed, Do Whatever You Wish
Murder in Samarkand - book by ex-ambassador of UK to Uzbekistan
The Lebanese Blood Is Wasted By A Fatal Resolution
The UK Terror plot: what's really going on?
What is going on in Lebanon?
What’s behind the official completion of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline?
Analysis about tensions with Iran
The Great Game in Somalia
Political Concepts Part 5 - Motives of struggle between states
Political Concepts Part 4 - International Convention/Norms
Political Concepts Part 3
Political Concepts Part 2 - Political plans and styles
Political Concepts - Part 1
American Influence Over Indian Politics And Its Consequences
Analysis of the Coup in Mauritania
Analysis of EU Summit
Recent Developments in Darfur
What is the tug-of-war taking place in Lebanon?
Analysis of Russian & Chinese joint military manoeuvres
America, India, Pakistan & F16's
Analysis of Rice's visit to Central Asia
Recent developments in Syria
Wednesday, April 5, 2006
Political Concepts - Part 1
The following is an extract of the draft english translation of an excellent recent book entitled 'Political Concepts' which was published in the Arab world in 2005. I will be posting more sections of the book in future.
Introduction
Politics is taking care of the affairs of a nation (ummah), internally and externally. This is conducted by the state and the ummah. The state conducts that practically; whilst the ummah takes the state to task over that.
Taking care of the affairs of the ummah, internally and externally, by the state is discharged through the implementation of the ideology internally; and this represents the domestic policy.
As regards taking care of the affairs of the ummah externally, by the state, it consists of her relations with other states, peoples and nations, and propagating the ideology to the world; and this represents the foreign policy.
Understanding of the foreign policy is fundamental for safeguarding the entity of the state and the ummah; it is essential for the enablement of conveying the da’wa to the world; and it is indispensable for the sound regulation of the relations of the ummah with others.
Since the Islamic ummah is entrusted with carrying the Islamic da’wa to the whole mankind, it is thus indispensable for Muslims to stay in contact with the world, where they comprehend its circumstances, understand its problems, be aware of the motives of its states and nations, pursue the political actions that take place in the world. In this context, they have to pay attention to the political plans of the states in terms of the styles they use for the execution of such plans, the relations between these states, and the political manoeuvres they use. Therefore, it is indispensable for Muslims to understand the reality of the situation in the Islamic world in the light of understanding the global international stance. This is vital for them so that they can find out the style of work they use to establish their state, and to convey their da’wa to the world.
However, it must be understood that the situation of any state would not remain the same internationally. It rather goes into many changes, in terms of strength and weakness, power of influence or its absence, and in terms of difference and change of its current relations with other states. Therefore, it is not possible to draw constant and general guidelines for the international position, and nor giving a constant thought about the position of any of the existent states in the world. It is rather possible to give a general guideline about the political situation at a certain period, taking into notice the possible change of this position. It is also possible to give a specific thought about the situation of any state at a certain circumstance, bearing in mind the possible change of such position. Therefore, it is necessary that the politician has to pursue with the ongoing political actions in the world and to link them with his previous political information. This is necessary for him so that he can properly understand politics, understand whether the political situation remains the same or has changed, and understand the political situation of every state and whether such situation remained the same or has changed as well.
Change of the international situation is subject to the change of political situation of some states from one circumstance to another. Such change of a political situation of a state is either because it became stronger or weaker, or because its relation with other states became stronger or weaker. In such a case, a change in international balance would result due to change in the balance of powers existent in the world. Therefore, understanding of the situation of each state that has influence on the international situation is the basis for understanding the international situation. Accordingly, attention must be focused on obtaining information about each state; because this is the first pillar for political understanding. Understanding of the situation of each state is not related to its position in the international situation; it is rather related to any thing related to its domestic and foreign policy. Thereupon, it is necessary to be acquainted with the thought upon which the policy of each existing state in the world is built; particularly those states that might have influence on the stance, which the Islamic ummah must take towards them. It is also necessary to know the plans and styles used by such states. This knowledge of the plans and styles must be linked with pursuing them constantly and with the extent of their change. Understanding of the motives behind such change or the reasons that forced such states to change these plans and styles is necessary as well; besides the sound knowledge of the matters that affect these states or drive them to change their plans and styles.
Politics is a thought and a method
As regards the thought upon which the policy of a state is established, it is the thought on whose basis the state builds its relation with other nations and peoples. The thoughts of the states that do not adopt an ideology, are different and dissimilar; besides such thoughts are open to change. The policies of such states would be studied through the study of their political plans and styles; where the study of the political thought is irrelevant.
As regards the states that adopt and ideology, their thought is constant without a change. This thought would be the propagation of the ideology, which it adopts, to the world via a constant method that does not change, regardless of the change of styles; so the study of the political thought applies to such states.
Accordingly, the present states in the world have to be viewed based on the assumption that each one of them has a basic thought for drawing its relation with other nations and peoples; whether this thought was constant or not. It also has a specific method for executing this thought, whether such method was constant or not. In the light of its thought and method, it draws the plans, and follows the styles that help it to realize its objective. However, the present states in the world today give free rein to themselves in terms of the styles. So, they would follow a style that realizes the objective, even if it violates the method; and thus they follow the rule that says: “The end justifies the means”.
Whatever the case may be, all the states draw political plans that change according to the need; and they follow styles that differ and diversify in accordance with the situations.
The states undertake political actions so as to take care of the interests of the ummah. They build relations with other states in accordance with the interests. Despite that, there is a big difference between the states. The state that doe not adopt a certain ideology would make the interest alone as the effective factor in its international relations. As regards the state that adopts a certain ideology that conveys to the world, it makes the ideology an effective factor in its international relations, and makes the interest assigned by the ideology a supportive factor in this course. Therefore, it is necessary to understand a state in terms of the thoughts it adopts, whether it adopts an ideology or not. Then the factors that affect its international relations would be understood. Since an ideology affects the state that adopts it, and consequently it affects the international relations and the international situation, therefore it is necessary to be acquainted with the ideologies that prevail in the world today. It is also necessary to know the extent of effect each ideology has today on international politics, and its possible effect on international arena today and in future. In the light of these ideologies and the extent of their effect at present and in future, the international relations can be understood.
When we examine the world today, we find it dominated by three ideologies only, which are: Islam, communism and capitalism, where hundreds of millions of people embrace each one of them. However, Islam has no state today to adopt; therefore we do not see any effect to it in the international relations and international situation that prevails the world today. As regards the actions that are undertaken by the states of the world to prevent the return of the Islamic state to life, after the unrest amongst Muslims became quite noticed, this has nothing to do with the international situation, and nor it affects the international relations. This is because effect on the international situation and international relations requires the presence of a state that adopts Islam as an ideology, upon which it conducts its domestic and foreign policy.
As regards that which is noticed, in terms of the prospects of international, particularly American, politics for attempting to reshape the Islamic region via plans of hegemony, such as ‘Greater Middle East Initiative’ in 2003. All of this is due to the growing fear of these states that emergence of a state to Muslims is potentially near. It is not because Islam affects on international politics the way it would do when there is a real Islamic state.
As regards the other two ideologies, each one of them has a state, rather more. Therefore, they have effect on international relations, international situation, and international politics, particularly when the Soviet Union (SU) was present, and before its downfall. One sign of their effect is that world was divided into two camps: the eastern one and the western one. However, after the collapse of the eastern camp, and fragmentation of Warsaw Pact, the bi-polar policy in the world came to an end. So, Communist ideology is no more implemented, even formally, except in China and North Korea. Accordingly, struggle in the world ceased to be international; it rather became regional. This is because after the downfall of SU, its (communist) thought ceased to have effect on the global politics. This was due to the fact that the propagation of communism, upon which its foreign policy was established, ceased to be implemented. As regards the states that still adopt communism, their foreign policy is not based on this thought. Chinese policy, as an example, is not built on propagating communism in the world. This is due to the reality of Chinese people, which was content with influence in the Asian neighbourhood; and it did not historically aspire for a global role. Due to this reality of the Chinese people, China did not strive any time to prepare itself and its resources for acquiring an effective position in the global politics. All the Chinese activities are still focused on winning regional influence in the neighbourhood.
As regards the capitalist camp, the thought upon which its policy is built is the propagation of capitalism, which is separation of religion from life affairs, worldwide. Though there are numerous and different states that adopt capitalism, all of them work to propagate their capitalist intellectual leadership in the world, and to make their viewpoint about live dominate over the world.
As regarding the method, which the capitalist camp follows for executing its thought, it is colonialism; ie imposing the political, military, cultural and economic authority over the conquered peoples for the sake of their exploitation. This method of colonialism is constant, and does not change regardless of the change of governments and their laws. Colonialism is not as Lenin described, where he said: ‘It is the last stage of capitalism’. Rather, colonialism is part of the viewpoint of capitalism; and it is the method by which capitalism is propagated to the nations and peoples. Therefore, the foreign policy of the capitalist camp is constant, in terms of its thought and its method; and it does not change following the change and competition of states. Thus, Britain is like America, France, Italy and any other capitalist state; where its policy is based on propagating its ideology and its viewpoint about life, through colonizing the nations and peoples.
For understanding the method of the western camp, it is worth noticing that though this method, which is colonialism, is constant, however the styles of realizing colonialism and view towards it have developed a little in the western camp. This was in term of its link, as a method, with capitalism, as a thought, through time. And also in term of change of styles and difference in the view towards colonialism, which occurred as a result of this development. As regards the change in the styles of the method (colonialism), it used to depend on military domination in what was known as old colonialism, but then it became to depend on other matters in what was called new colonialism. So, America started to depend on the economic side, such as loans, development projects, experts and the like; this is beside political pressure and harassment. However, America returned to use, beside these styles, the style of military domination over the nations and peoples, so as to subjugate them to her influence and will. She also began to endeavour to building military bases in her colonies so as to safeguard her influence in them. England became to depend on finding agents for her, English intelligence, making rulers as agents for her and on notorious trading deals. Her dependence on loans retreated because of her weak financial situation. Likewise, her dependence on military bases diminished due to her weak international influence, though she still holds fast to her military garrisons and bases in her colonies, as in Cyprus, or close to those colonies. Thus, change of styles became an inseparable attribute of colonialism.
As regards the change in the view towards colonialism, concerning its link (as a method) with capitalism (as a thought), this view started to fluctuate between two matters. On one side is the strength of this link, i.e. colonialism is just a method for propagating capitalism, which means the prime attention is for propagating capitalism. On the other side is the weakness of this link, ie the prime attention is colonialism, itself, while the second attention is propagating capitalism. In this case, colonialism was close to become an objective. The strength and weakness of this link depend on the country, which the capitalist states want to dominate. Has such country a civilization, where these states want to invade it and enforce the corrupt capitalist civilization on it, so as to enable its control and pillage of its wealth? Or, is it empty, having no civilization to be attacked; they rather colonize it for robbing its resources and controlling it only? This is manifested in the fact that the severity of competition between the western states over the colonization of Africa was for its exploitation, and the propagation of the capitalist thought hardly existed. Civil war in Uganda and Rwanda continued for many years, causing hundreds of thousands of human victims. In the events of Zaire (Democratic Congo), there was only material greed and competition over influence between Europe and America. Britain and her European allies, together with America, did not look for anything in Africa except for material benefit. Thus, colonialism in Africa was close to become an objective rather than a method. However, in the Islamic world: the Middle East and North Africa or in Central and South Asia, the colonial powers, including America, besides they struggle to exploit its material resources, they strive to propagate capitalism as well, as represented in their attention to the conferences of ‘freedom of women’ and ‘consolidation of women’, the contents of the American plan for the Middle East, imposing the cultural hegemony as manifested in ‘rebuilding of cultures’, dialogue between religions, meeting of civilizations, and focus on changing or modifying the education curriculum; all of that is for breaking the attachment of Muslims to their civilization and culture. Thus, the method of capitalism started to develop with time. However, colonialism is a fundamental pillar in capitalism, whether it was a method for propagating capitalism or a method that is more to become an objective.
The full book is available from Revival Publications
Introduction
Politics is taking care of the affairs of a nation (ummah), internally and externally. This is conducted by the state and the ummah. The state conducts that practically; whilst the ummah takes the state to task over that.
Taking care of the affairs of the ummah, internally and externally, by the state is discharged through the implementation of the ideology internally; and this represents the domestic policy.
As regards taking care of the affairs of the ummah externally, by the state, it consists of her relations with other states, peoples and nations, and propagating the ideology to the world; and this represents the foreign policy.
Understanding of the foreign policy is fundamental for safeguarding the entity of the state and the ummah; it is essential for the enablement of conveying the da’wa to the world; and it is indispensable for the sound regulation of the relations of the ummah with others.
Since the Islamic ummah is entrusted with carrying the Islamic da’wa to the whole mankind, it is thus indispensable for Muslims to stay in contact with the world, where they comprehend its circumstances, understand its problems, be aware of the motives of its states and nations, pursue the political actions that take place in the world. In this context, they have to pay attention to the political plans of the states in terms of the styles they use for the execution of such plans, the relations between these states, and the political manoeuvres they use. Therefore, it is indispensable for Muslims to understand the reality of the situation in the Islamic world in the light of understanding the global international stance. This is vital for them so that they can find out the style of work they use to establish their state, and to convey their da’wa to the world.
However, it must be understood that the situation of any state would not remain the same internationally. It rather goes into many changes, in terms of strength and weakness, power of influence or its absence, and in terms of difference and change of its current relations with other states. Therefore, it is not possible to draw constant and general guidelines for the international position, and nor giving a constant thought about the position of any of the existent states in the world. It is rather possible to give a general guideline about the political situation at a certain period, taking into notice the possible change of this position. It is also possible to give a specific thought about the situation of any state at a certain circumstance, bearing in mind the possible change of such position. Therefore, it is necessary that the politician has to pursue with the ongoing political actions in the world and to link them with his previous political information. This is necessary for him so that he can properly understand politics, understand whether the political situation remains the same or has changed, and understand the political situation of every state and whether such situation remained the same or has changed as well.
Change of the international situation is subject to the change of political situation of some states from one circumstance to another. Such change of a political situation of a state is either because it became stronger or weaker, or because its relation with other states became stronger or weaker. In such a case, a change in international balance would result due to change in the balance of powers existent in the world. Therefore, understanding of the situation of each state that has influence on the international situation is the basis for understanding the international situation. Accordingly, attention must be focused on obtaining information about each state; because this is the first pillar for political understanding. Understanding of the situation of each state is not related to its position in the international situation; it is rather related to any thing related to its domestic and foreign policy. Thereupon, it is necessary to be acquainted with the thought upon which the policy of each existing state in the world is built; particularly those states that might have influence on the stance, which the Islamic ummah must take towards them. It is also necessary to know the plans and styles used by such states. This knowledge of the plans and styles must be linked with pursuing them constantly and with the extent of their change. Understanding of the motives behind such change or the reasons that forced such states to change these plans and styles is necessary as well; besides the sound knowledge of the matters that affect these states or drive them to change their plans and styles.
Politics is a thought and a method
As regards the thought upon which the policy of a state is established, it is the thought on whose basis the state builds its relation with other nations and peoples. The thoughts of the states that do not adopt an ideology, are different and dissimilar; besides such thoughts are open to change. The policies of such states would be studied through the study of their political plans and styles; where the study of the political thought is irrelevant.
As regards the states that adopt and ideology, their thought is constant without a change. This thought would be the propagation of the ideology, which it adopts, to the world via a constant method that does not change, regardless of the change of styles; so the study of the political thought applies to such states.
Accordingly, the present states in the world have to be viewed based on the assumption that each one of them has a basic thought for drawing its relation with other nations and peoples; whether this thought was constant or not. It also has a specific method for executing this thought, whether such method was constant or not. In the light of its thought and method, it draws the plans, and follows the styles that help it to realize its objective. However, the present states in the world today give free rein to themselves in terms of the styles. So, they would follow a style that realizes the objective, even if it violates the method; and thus they follow the rule that says: “The end justifies the means”.
Whatever the case may be, all the states draw political plans that change according to the need; and they follow styles that differ and diversify in accordance with the situations.
The states undertake political actions so as to take care of the interests of the ummah. They build relations with other states in accordance with the interests. Despite that, there is a big difference between the states. The state that doe not adopt a certain ideology would make the interest alone as the effective factor in its international relations. As regards the state that adopts a certain ideology that conveys to the world, it makes the ideology an effective factor in its international relations, and makes the interest assigned by the ideology a supportive factor in this course. Therefore, it is necessary to understand a state in terms of the thoughts it adopts, whether it adopts an ideology or not. Then the factors that affect its international relations would be understood. Since an ideology affects the state that adopts it, and consequently it affects the international relations and the international situation, therefore it is necessary to be acquainted with the ideologies that prevail in the world today. It is also necessary to know the extent of effect each ideology has today on international politics, and its possible effect on international arena today and in future. In the light of these ideologies and the extent of their effect at present and in future, the international relations can be understood.
When we examine the world today, we find it dominated by three ideologies only, which are: Islam, communism and capitalism, where hundreds of millions of people embrace each one of them. However, Islam has no state today to adopt; therefore we do not see any effect to it in the international relations and international situation that prevails the world today. As regards the actions that are undertaken by the states of the world to prevent the return of the Islamic state to life, after the unrest amongst Muslims became quite noticed, this has nothing to do with the international situation, and nor it affects the international relations. This is because effect on the international situation and international relations requires the presence of a state that adopts Islam as an ideology, upon which it conducts its domestic and foreign policy.
As regards that which is noticed, in terms of the prospects of international, particularly American, politics for attempting to reshape the Islamic region via plans of hegemony, such as ‘Greater Middle East Initiative’ in 2003. All of this is due to the growing fear of these states that emergence of a state to Muslims is potentially near. It is not because Islam affects on international politics the way it would do when there is a real Islamic state.
As regards the other two ideologies, each one of them has a state, rather more. Therefore, they have effect on international relations, international situation, and international politics, particularly when the Soviet Union (SU) was present, and before its downfall. One sign of their effect is that world was divided into two camps: the eastern one and the western one. However, after the collapse of the eastern camp, and fragmentation of Warsaw Pact, the bi-polar policy in the world came to an end. So, Communist ideology is no more implemented, even formally, except in China and North Korea. Accordingly, struggle in the world ceased to be international; it rather became regional. This is because after the downfall of SU, its (communist) thought ceased to have effect on the global politics. This was due to the fact that the propagation of communism, upon which its foreign policy was established, ceased to be implemented. As regards the states that still adopt communism, their foreign policy is not based on this thought. Chinese policy, as an example, is not built on propagating communism in the world. This is due to the reality of Chinese people, which was content with influence in the Asian neighbourhood; and it did not historically aspire for a global role. Due to this reality of the Chinese people, China did not strive any time to prepare itself and its resources for acquiring an effective position in the global politics. All the Chinese activities are still focused on winning regional influence in the neighbourhood.
As regards the capitalist camp, the thought upon which its policy is built is the propagation of capitalism, which is separation of religion from life affairs, worldwide. Though there are numerous and different states that adopt capitalism, all of them work to propagate their capitalist intellectual leadership in the world, and to make their viewpoint about live dominate over the world.
As regarding the method, which the capitalist camp follows for executing its thought, it is colonialism; ie imposing the political, military, cultural and economic authority over the conquered peoples for the sake of their exploitation. This method of colonialism is constant, and does not change regardless of the change of governments and their laws. Colonialism is not as Lenin described, where he said: ‘It is the last stage of capitalism’. Rather, colonialism is part of the viewpoint of capitalism; and it is the method by which capitalism is propagated to the nations and peoples. Therefore, the foreign policy of the capitalist camp is constant, in terms of its thought and its method; and it does not change following the change and competition of states. Thus, Britain is like America, France, Italy and any other capitalist state; where its policy is based on propagating its ideology and its viewpoint about life, through colonizing the nations and peoples.
For understanding the method of the western camp, it is worth noticing that though this method, which is colonialism, is constant, however the styles of realizing colonialism and view towards it have developed a little in the western camp. This was in term of its link, as a method, with capitalism, as a thought, through time. And also in term of change of styles and difference in the view towards colonialism, which occurred as a result of this development. As regards the change in the styles of the method (colonialism), it used to depend on military domination in what was known as old colonialism, but then it became to depend on other matters in what was called new colonialism. So, America started to depend on the economic side, such as loans, development projects, experts and the like; this is beside political pressure and harassment. However, America returned to use, beside these styles, the style of military domination over the nations and peoples, so as to subjugate them to her influence and will. She also began to endeavour to building military bases in her colonies so as to safeguard her influence in them. England became to depend on finding agents for her, English intelligence, making rulers as agents for her and on notorious trading deals. Her dependence on loans retreated because of her weak financial situation. Likewise, her dependence on military bases diminished due to her weak international influence, though she still holds fast to her military garrisons and bases in her colonies, as in Cyprus, or close to those colonies. Thus, change of styles became an inseparable attribute of colonialism.
As regards the change in the view towards colonialism, concerning its link (as a method) with capitalism (as a thought), this view started to fluctuate between two matters. On one side is the strength of this link, i.e. colonialism is just a method for propagating capitalism, which means the prime attention is for propagating capitalism. On the other side is the weakness of this link, ie the prime attention is colonialism, itself, while the second attention is propagating capitalism. In this case, colonialism was close to become an objective. The strength and weakness of this link depend on the country, which the capitalist states want to dominate. Has such country a civilization, where these states want to invade it and enforce the corrupt capitalist civilization on it, so as to enable its control and pillage of its wealth? Or, is it empty, having no civilization to be attacked; they rather colonize it for robbing its resources and controlling it only? This is manifested in the fact that the severity of competition between the western states over the colonization of Africa was for its exploitation, and the propagation of the capitalist thought hardly existed. Civil war in Uganda and Rwanda continued for many years, causing hundreds of thousands of human victims. In the events of Zaire (Democratic Congo), there was only material greed and competition over influence between Europe and America. Britain and her European allies, together with America, did not look for anything in Africa except for material benefit. Thus, colonialism in Africa was close to become an objective rather than a method. However, in the Islamic world: the Middle East and North Africa or in Central and South Asia, the colonial powers, including America, besides they struggle to exploit its material resources, they strive to propagate capitalism as well, as represented in their attention to the conferences of ‘freedom of women’ and ‘consolidation of women’, the contents of the American plan for the Middle East, imposing the cultural hegemony as manifested in ‘rebuilding of cultures’, dialogue between religions, meeting of civilizations, and focus on changing or modifying the education curriculum; all of that is for breaking the attachment of Muslims to their civilization and culture. Thus, the method of capitalism started to develop with time. However, colonialism is a fundamental pillar in capitalism, whether it was a method for propagating capitalism or a method that is more to become an objective.
The full book is available from Revival Publications
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)