Archive for October, 2007

Evolution

Thursday, October 25th, 2007

As humans, we have surely had an evolution in the cultural sense. After our ancestors lived by hunting and gathering for a long period of time, they started to cultivate the land, and eventually we moved to a new mode of production with the industrial revolution. During this process, the technology that we use, as well as our culture, literature and our level of knowledge made much progress. This was the cultural evolution.

Based on this, can we think that a biological evolution in which there has been no place for God’s intervention makes sense too? No, the cultural evolution does not provide any foundation for a godless biological evolution at all. Cultural evolution is a process that has developed under the control of human consciousness and reason. However, the assertion of the contemporary evolutionist thought is that evolution has happened without a consciousness and reason in charge and therefore without God.

Is it then possible that a biological evolution under the control of Allah did materialize? Yes, but it is more reasonable to think that it happened through very different mechanisms from the mechanisms that modern irreligious biologists suggest.

However much humans may be similar to the apes and other mammals apparently, we cannot agree from an Islamic viewpoint that they have evolved from them. Allah must have created man based on a biological model similar to that of the animals under consideration, but I think the Qur’an and the literature of hadith is clear that man did not descend from another species but was created literally out of clay. I appreciate that this argument might convince only a Muslim, then what can we say to a non-Muslim whose view on the matter is based on the current scientific literature on evolution? The holes in that literature that some scientists point out are part of the evidence for my point.

So, Allah might have created many species out of the stock of other species that are similar to them. But this creation, or “evolution”, could not have happened through random mutations, as such mutations cannot do this no matter how hard the spiritually blind would have us believe so. If we proceed under this assumption that there was a process of evolution governed by God, God consciously designed a new species and then created it in its perfect form out of the other one species. No imperfect intermediary forms were needed. Even the intermediary forms that the evolutionists claim to exist can only be intermediary forms in the ongoing design process by God and not intermediary forms in a random, unconscious process.

Sublime is the glory of Allah, the only God, the possessor of the primordial and ultimate consciousness, who brought us into existence out of nothingness and who will bring us to life again after our deaths for an eternal life.

Posted in Islam, The Truth | 1 Comment »

War and Peace in Islam – Part 2

Thursday, October 18th, 2007

I have something else to add to my commentary in the preceding post.

I admit that I know nothing about Buddhism and other “religions of peace”, but I would like to make another comment based on my general impression. To my impression, it is true that, albeit with certain exceptions, for instance Buddhist monks and scholars do abstain from violence more than our Muslim scholars have abstained in history. But this does not show that Islam or Muslim religious scholars encourage violence.

My inference is that Islam tries to channel the universal instinct of violence in all societies into its right channel, into more humane and ultimately more peace-creating ways, whereas religions like Buddhism refuse to guide people regarding war and instead tells them to stay away from war. But from the very situation in Buddhist societies throughout history, it can easily be inferred that this Buddhist attitude is not realistic. Look at the present day Burma and look at the history of Japan. What happened when Buddhism told good Buddhists to stay away from war and violence? Did that eradicate war and violence? No, histories of such Buddhist societies are as violent and full of injustice as any other society’s.

If religion refuses to instruct people on war, people will not choose to abstain from war but will actually take their war instructions from sources that do not have the moral concerns of religion and religious scholars. This will cause only more trouble for humankind instead of real peace.

Islam and true Muslim scholars do not justify morally wrong violence. But regarding morally justified forms of violent resistance and retaliation, the true Islamic attitude is different. That’s why the Qur’an includes verses that command believers to slay the unjust aggressors who are ready to kill them in a situation of war.

However, please do not misunderstand me. The likes of Mr. Bin Ladin who are said to kill innocent or non-combatant people are not true scholars who justify only morally right actions at all. Their case is a clear one of misunderstanding Islam wittingly or unwittingly.

So, could we say that, in order to prevent the creation of such misunderstandings as those of Bin Ladin, Islam should have forbidden all forms of violent retaliation and military resistance? No, as I said above, that would not be realistic, for, as in the case of Buddhist societies, it would not actually obliterate the violence in society. Guiding people, from the most moral perspective of God Himself, on when to and when not to take part in a war and how to and how not to behave in a war would be the best attitude, hence the instructions of the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be unto him) concerning the needed moral conduct in war.

Inshallah the right path is to follow what Allah and His Messenger (peace be unto him) said about peace and war and not what Bin Ladin or the American government says. Let us pray for peace for all humankind.

Posted in Islam, Muslims, War and Peace | No Comments »

Why do Muslims and not others base their violence in their religious principles?

Tuesday, October 16th, 2007

I think of two reasons why it appears as if only Muslims seem to fight in the name of Islam but members of other religions seem to fight in the names of other things than their religion.

I don’t think that the reason is the violent nature of Islam or Muslims at all. The first reason may be that the mainstream western media exaggerates the religious motives among militant Muslims but do not show the same care to emphasize such motives when they are among militant members of other religions. In a world where the USA, the contemporary vanguard of western imperialistic ambitions, targets the Muslim world, perhaps it is deemed more essential by some western circles of power to make Islam’s appeal to the masses less strong than any other religion’s. That may be why they are doing this to Islam and not other religions.

Another reason may be that neither in the conscience of the Christians and the Jews, who have been largely secularized, nor maybe in the conscience of members of other religions does religion occupy such a high position as Islam does in the conscience of Muslims. Therefore when a Muslim looks for justification of his acts, he looks at Islam because Islam represents the highest level of moral values for him or the Muslim society around him. But a Christian does not care to look at Christianity for justification and inspiration any more. He and the society around him have other and, to their mind, more rational and higher causes for war and violence than the Muslim, such as the spread of [the western understanding of] democracy, civilization and liberty to other parts of the world.

Just an opinion.

Posted in Muslims | No Comments »