From: mirza@vxcrna.cern.ch (MIRZA,I./EP)
Subject: Re: Islam and Religion (an Explanation)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 07:19:00 GMT

In article <70187@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gt7242a@prism.gatech.EDU (KHAN,RAHEEL) writes...
> 
>              In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Benificent
> 
> 
>                       RELIGION VS SCIENCE: A SURVEY
>                       -----------------------------
> 
> 
>I have been following the on going debate on SCP about the imcompatability of 
>relgion and science. The debate in many ways is not a new one, but rather, it
>is a debate which is dates back to the time when Islam was first revealed to
>man.  It is not the first time that man has openly denied religion, and it is 
>certainly not the first time Islam has been falsely accused of being regressive
>or antiquated.
> 
>At the heart of the debate is a deeper issue.  The issue infact is of man's
>rebellion against his Creator, of his concieted proclamation of sufficiency and
>independence from God.  
> 
>Surat-ul-'Alaq (The Clot), (which includes the first Revelation to the prophet
>Muhammad(SAW)) says:
> 
>     "Read: In the name of thy Lord who creatheth,
>      Createth man from a clot.
>      Read: And thy Lord is the Most Bounteous,
>      Who teacheth by the pen,
>      Teacheth man that which he knew not.
>      Nay, but verily man is rebellious
>      That he thinketh himself independent!
>      Lo! unto thy Lord is the return."
> 
>                                (Surah 'Alaq: 1 - 7)
> 
>This in essence outlines Islam's position towards science.  Science is a tool
>for acquiring knowledge, given to man by his Master, Allah (SWT). Another of
>his innumerable bounties.  Sceince was given to man so that he could see the
>signs of his Creator and submit his will to the Allah, and thus fulfill the 
>aim of his creation.  Islam does not discourage knowledge, but rather encourages
>it , as is apparent from the following verses:  
> 
>   "Say: Behold what is in the heavens and the earth! But revelations and 
>    warnings avail not folk who will not believe"
>                                                  (Yunus: 101)
> 
>   "And in the Earth are portents (signs) for those whose faith is sure,  
>    And also in yourselves.  Can you then not see?"
>                                                  (Zariyat: 101)
> 
>   "Soon will We show then Our signs in the (furthest) regions(of the earth),
>    and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is 
>    the truth."
>                                                   (Fussilat: 53)
> 
>Islam, unlike Medieval Christianity, encourages man to seek, to learn, so 
>that he may be better able to appreaciate the signs of his Lord.  The true
>believer will only be benifitted from the signs of Providence manifest in 
>nature, and within himself.  
> 
>The question that arises is that what is Islam's position towards scienfic 
>knowledge?  Does it acknowledge scientific "facts" even if they are in 
>conflict with its very basic beliefs?  Does it at least allow such diagreement
>to exist?  Is the way of acquiring knowledge within the prescribed limits of
>Islam (if such limits exist!) scientific, or is it at least compatable with 
>the scientific method?
> 
>In order to answer this super-question one must examine the very basics of
>human understanding and try to define parameters within which such knowledge
>is reliable.  That man's knowledge (individual and collective) is finite 
>is an undisputed fact.  Our physical senses are tools with which we acquire
>information about our surroundings, our reasoning is a tool with which 
>we piece together this information into a gossimer of reality (or, more
>accurately, what we percieve to be reality.  Our knowledge(of reality) is
>always subject to change, it is undergoing constant review in light of the new
>information we amass and is being constantly transformed by experience.
>The elements of experience which we can factor out, or in other
>words,  elements of our reality that we can isolate as the residue
>of experience, achieve fact-hood in our eyes.  Every one knows
>that an apple falls towards the ground, or touching a fire can burn our hand
>and any claim to the contrary is met with skepticism, especially in the  
>absence of convincing evidence.
> 
>The sum total of the experiences of men becomes something almost sacrosanct, 
>rebellion agianst which maybe tolerated but will be deemed foolish.  Such facts
>form postulates upon which a more comprehensive view of reality can be based.
>For example, one of the fundamental postulates of Euclidean Geometry is that
>two parallel lines meet at infinity. 
> 
>Reality, however, has infinite dimensions, and our senses and our reasoning
>are admittedly finite.  This is why two seemignly contradictory observations
>may infact be correct.  What we know at a given time constitutes our view of 
>reality, but does not encompass reality in its entirety. An analogy that 
>may help clarify the relation ship between our view of reality and Reality is
>that of the projection of a three dimensional object onto a planar surface.  
>Each projection of the object reveals some information about it, but it takes
>an infinite number of such projections to fully describe the object.
>Similarly, another analogy which can be drawn is that of two  
>blindmen trying to describe an elephant by touching it:  One touches its
>tail, and claims that an elephant is long and round with a hairy head, while
>the other who is touching the elephant's ear insists that it is flat, wrinkled
>and very soft.  They are both right but neigther is completely right.
> 
>Similarly, the our perception of reality is made up of shadows of Reality.
>We can never encompass it completely.  The short comings of science must be 
>accepted and its value in the determination of the absolute truth must not 
>be over-estimated.  Relativity, Quantum Physics, the Theory of Evolution are
>all tranistory in nature.  Tommorrow, some other, "more comprehensive" theory
>will replace them.  
> 
>Instead of proceeding to ramble on about the merits of science let me quote
>a few passages from Muhammad Qutab's book, "Islam: the misunderstood religion":
> 
>   "Islam uses a very simple terminology.  Its teachings are very easy to
>    understand, perceive and believe in.  It invites man to make use of 
>    the faculties given to him and try to acquire the fullest possible 
>    understanding of life surrounding him.  It does not as such admit of
>    any inborn hositility between reason and religon or, for that  matter,
>    between science and relgion.  It does not force man to believe in  silly
>    stuff as a prior condition to his belief in God.  Nor does it compel 
>    him to renounce his God so as to be able to admit of scientific facts.
>    Not content with this, Islam impresses upon man in clear and unequivocal
>    terms that it is God and God alone Who has in His immense mercy
>    subjected all the things on this earth to man, and that all the facts 
>    that are discovered by scientific exploration or the material benefits 
>    that flow therefrom to man, are in fact a blessing of God, for which
>    man should offer his thanks to God, and strive hard so as to become
>    a worthy slave of so Merciful and Beneficent a Master. Thus Islam
>    holds knowledge and science as a part of faith rather than regard    
>    these as an evil intrinisically opposed to genuine belief in God."
> 
>   "Science is a powerful instrument to help us increase our knowledge of 
>    things around us.  As such it has an impressive record of achievements
>    to its credit.  All these brilliant achievements were, however, vitiated
>    by on fatal mistake of the westerners:  they installed science as 
>    supreme God, declaring that it alone had the right to claim the 
>    adoration and submission of man unto it.  Thus they denied themselves
>    all means of acquiring knowledge save that recognized by empirical 
>    sciences which let humanity wander farther away than bring it nearer
>    to its real objective or destination.  Consequently, the otherwise
>    vastly immense range of human endeavor and progress shrunk small with
>    limitations such as all empirical sciences entail....."
> 
>   "The protagonists of science also claim that science alone can introduce
>    man to the secrets of this universe and life:  hence, only that which
>    is upheld by science is true; the rest is trash!  But while making such
>    a statement they overlook the fact that science with all its brilliant
>    and impressive record is still in its infancy and ever hesitant to 
>    commit itself as regards the veracity or supposititiousness of many 
>    things for the simple reason that it cannot penentrate deep into the 
>    heart of reality beyond effecting a mere superfluous survey of it.  But
>    still its votaries clamour and tell us with a very authouritative air
>    that there is no such thing as  a human soul in existence...."
> 
>   "Such then is the 'enlightened ignorance' man suffers from today, which
>    shows how desperately he stands in need of Islam to blow away these 
>    'scientific cobwebs' of today as well as the imbecilities inheritied 
>    from a remote past.  Idol-worship was the older form wherein 
>    human folly found expression:  the cult of science-worship is its 
>    latest version. To liberate human reason and spirit, both of these
>    needs must be shaken off.  It is in this persepective that Islam 
>    emerges as the only hope for humanity, for it alone can restore 
>    peace between religion and science, bring back once more the tranquillity
>    and concord to this distressed world of today that has lost them through 
>    the perverted attitude towards life of the dominant West, forestalling
>    an irreconcilable antgonism between man's reason and intuition, between
>    his desire for knowledge and his craving for God."
> 
>So it is not science or knowledge that Islam opposes.  It is the diefication
>of science that it rejects.  The world view of the Modern West, which has
>its foundation in the "scientific" way of thinking, lacks, in the words of 
>Ali Alija Izetbegovic, "humanity".  Man has become a sophisticated, soul-less
>beast which evolved from the basest elements through continued random 
>chemical interaction.  He has neither any capacity of good, nor any desire
>thereof.  
> 
>In spite of its advances, science fails in presenting a unified picture of 
>the reality.  It takes more belief to believe in science than it does to 
>believe in God.  Lets assume, that form a scientific point of view,
>the existence of God cannot be proven.  That only means two things:  either
>there is God, or there is no God. Lets assume that there is no God.  Then
>we are left with a whole spectrum of unexplicable and disjoint observations
>which can never be explained by science.  What was there before the universe
>came int being by itself?  How and why did it come into being?  The very
>existence of the universe, the existence of natural laws, the existence of
>air and water, the existence of life and the our own existence can not be
>explained by science alone.  The answers to such questions are beyond the 
>scope of scientific knowledge.  In Islam, given the fundamental beliefs, 
>of which the most fundamental is the existence of God, every thing else
>makes perfect sense!  There is nothing that is contrary to logic or that 
>you have to brush aside on  blind faith.   
> 
>As regards to the futile attempts of science in explaining (all) Reality the 
>Quran says:
> 
>   "(O man), follow not that whereof you have no knowledge.  Lo! the 
>    hearing and the sight and the heart--of each of these it will be
>    asked (on the day of Judgement)"
>                                              (Al-Asra: 36)
> 
>   "Say: Is there of your partners(whom you ascribe unto Allah) one that
>    leadeth you to the truth?  Say: Allah leadeth to the Truth.  Is He
>    Who leadeth to the truth more deserving that He should be followed,
>    of he who findeth not the way unless he (himself) be guieded?  What
>    aileth ye?  How judge ye?
>  
>    Most of them follow naught but conjecture.  Assuredly conjecture can
>    by no means take the place of truth.  Lo!  Allah is Aware of what they
>    do.
> 
>    And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be invented in despite of
>    Allah;  but it is a confirmation of that which was before it and an
>    exposition of that which is decreed for mankind--Therein is no doubt
>    ----from the Lord of the Worlds."
>                                              (Yunus: 35-37)
> 
>The source for the ultimate truth can only be the One who created the
>earth and the heavens and all that lies between them. The ability to 
>gather knowledge is only one of his countless bounties, nothing more!
>Do we think that if we have recognized the existence of the very laws
>that he has set in motion that we are independent of him, that we can
>rival his authority?                     
> 
>    "O company of jinn and men, if ye have power to penentrate (all)
>     regions of the heavens and the earth, then penentrate (them)!
>     Ye will never penentrate them save with (Our) sanction."
>                                               (Ar-Rahman: 33)
> 
>  
>I have tried to explain the Islamic position towards knowledge and science
>to the best of my knowledge.  If anyone sees any mistakes please correct me.
>If I have failed in being clear, I hope that someone else will be better 
>able to explain this matter.  As for the final knowledge of the truth, it
>rests with Allah, the most High!
> 
>I was disturbed to see the endless discussion about the alleged inconsistancy
>in verses 3 and 112 of Surah Nisa, more because of the manner in which
>many good Muslims were trying to "disprove" the allegations rather than 
>anything else.  I will just say that I wish someone had checked one of the 
>manifold explanations of the Qur'an by well known scholars.  Why do we think
>that Muslims have been wasting their time, with their heads burried in the sand
>for the past fourteen hundred year?   In spite of this I appreciate the 
>sincere efforts of my brothers and sisters and I pray that Allah give us all
>enough knowledge and guidance to judge between the truth and the falsehood. 
>I will, Insha'Allah (if God wills) try to post an explanation of the verses 
>according to Maulana Maududi and Imam Ibn-e-Kathir.
> 
>Wassalam
> 
>Raheel Khan
> 
> 
> 
>[  "Praise the name of thy Lord, the Most High,
>    Who createth, then disposeth;
>    Who measureth, then guideth;
>    Who bringeth forth the pasturagee,
>    then turneth it to russet stubble."
>                                      (Al-A'la: 1 - 5)
>]
>-- 
>KHAN,RAHEEL
>Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
>uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt7242a
>Internet: gt7242a@prism.gatech.edu


	Does this garbage answer my question?

Mirza Ilyas