Hehehe.... coba lu liat pengikut nabi lu di dlm dongeng itu, tukang ngerampok, merkosa dan ngebunuh bukan? Kalo bajingan jadi anak buah bajingan, apa anehnya?
Di sini jg, bajingan2 spt tukang fitnah jg pd ngumpul koq, yaitu yg disebut dgn gerombolan Islam plus. ________________________________ From: Abbas <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, May 14, 2011 12:00:26 PM Subject: [proletar] Re: Ziauddin Sardar: Between Two Masters: Qur’an or Science? Wah hebat kamu ! Bisa mengetahui sejarah Islam dengan begitu dalam ! Jadi kenapa 1 orang yang dibenci masyarakat saat itu; bisa punya pengikut 300 orang !? --- In [email protected], item abu <itemabu@...> wrote: > > Quran itu jelas bikinan orang banyak selama berthn2. > > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Abbas <abas_amin08@...> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Fri, May 13, 2011 10:42:08 AM > Subject: [proletar] Re: Ziauddin Sardar: Between Two Masters: >QurÃÆ'ƒÂ¢ÃÆ'¢â€šÂ¬ÃÆ'¢â€žÂ¢an >n or Science? > > > habis , kan gak mungkin dari TAIK Anjiang bukan ? Dari siapa lagi > > > --- In [email protected], item abu <itemabu@> wrote: > > > > Ga ada bukti sama sekali. > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Abbas <abas_amin08@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Thu, May 12, 2011 9:40:52 AM > > Subject: [proletar] Re: Ziauddin Sardar: Between Two Masters: > > >QurÃÆ'Æ'¢ÃÆ'¢â€šÂ¬ÃÆ'¢â€žÂ¢an > or Science? > > > > > > Memang bener dicetak oleh manusia kok. Tapi isinya dari Allah. > > > > --- In [email protected], item abu <itemabu@> wrote: > > > > > > Kalo lu make logika, maka akan kliatan bhw Quran penuh dg kesalahan2 yg > >berarti > > > > > > > > Quran itu cuma bikinan orang doang. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Abbas <abas_amin08@> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Wed, May 11, 2011 10:33:22 AM > > > Subject: [proletar] Re: Ziauddin Sardar: Between Two Masters: > > >>QurÃÆ'Æ'¢ÃÆ'¢â€šÂ¬ÃÆ'¢â€žÂ¢an > or > > > > > > > Science? > > > > > > > > > Dan Allah Maha Logika > > > > > > --- In [email protected], item abu <itemabu@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dgn orang Islam coba ngebuktikan kebenaran Quran make "sains" gaya > >Bucaille, > > > > > > > > orang Islam itu sebetulnya udah bilang bhw auloh itu tunduk pd sains. > > > > > > > > Abbas ini kliatannya masih punya logika, cuma sayangnya begitu Islam yg > > > >dinilai, > > > > > > > > logikanya ngedadak ngilang. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Abbas <abas_amin08@> > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Sent: Tue, May 10, 2011 10:17:26 AM > > > > Subject: [proletar] Re: Ziauddin Sardar: Between Two Masters: > > >>QurÃÆ'Æ'¢ÃÆ'¢â€šÂ¬ÃÆ'¢â€žÂ¢an > or > > > > > > > > > > > Science? > > > > > > > > > > > > Justru Allah diluar semua hukum alam; tapi Allah sendiri yang mencipta > >segala > > > > > > > > > hukum alam ini; untuk kepentingan ciptaanNya. > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], item abu <itemabu@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Kalo Quran itu berisi sains yg menunjukkan Quran itu dr auloh, > > > > > berarti > > >auloh > > > > > > > > > > >itu > > > > > > > > > > tunduk pd hukum sains, hehehe... > > > > > > > > > > Sayangnya, orang Islam yg dungu2 itu umumnya ga bisa ngerti apa yg > > > > > gua > > >bilang > > > > > > > > > > > > ini dan konsekuensinya. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: Jusfiq <kesayangan.allah@> > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Sent: Mon, May 2, 2011 10:29:42 PM > > > > > Subject: [proletar] Ziauddin Sardar: Between Two Masters: > > >>QurÃÆ'Æ'¢ÃÆ'¢â€šÂ¬ÃÆ'¢â€žÂ¢an > or > > > > > > > >Science? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://ziauddinsardar.com/2011/02/quran-science/ > > > > > > > > > > Between Two Masters: Qur'an or Science? > > > > > > > > > > The headline in the Bulletin of the Islamic Medical Association of >South > > > > > >Africa > > > > > > > > > > > > > > announces a staggering discovery. Canadian scholar confirms Quran and > > >Ahadith > > > > > > > > > > > >on > > > > > > > > > > Human Embryology (1). The story tells us that a certain Dr Keith > > > > > Moore, > > > > > >Chairman > > > > > > > > > > of the anatomy department of the University of Torontos School of > >Medicine, > > > > > > > > >has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered the happy marriage between the Islamic revelation and > > >contemporary > > > > > > > > > > > > human developmental anatomy. I am amazed at the scientific accuracy > > > > > of > > >these > > > > > > > > > > > statements which were made in the seventh centuryIt is quite > > > > > reasonable > > >for > > > > > > > > > > Muslims to believe that these verses are revelations from God, Moore > > > > > is > > > > > >reported > > > > > > > > > > to have said. > > > > > > > > > > What has Keith Moore discovered that has excited the Muslim doctors, > > > >scientists > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and scholars so much? His paper, Highlights of human embryology in > > > > > the > > >Koran > > > > > > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > the Hadith, was first presented at the Seventh Saudi Medical Meeting, >and > > > > > >has > > > > > > > > > > > > since then been reprinted in a number of places (2). It simply reads > >modern > > > > > > > > > > biology into certain Quranic verses, describing the development of a > >foetus > > > > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > illustrating them with clinical drawings and text book descriptions. >For > > > > > > > example, the Quranic verse, verily, we fashioned man from a small > >quantity > > > > >of > > > > > > > > > > > > mingled liquids (Nut-fatin Imthjin) (76:2) is explained by Moore as > > >referring > > > > > > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > the mixture of a small quantity of sperms with the oocyte and its > > >associated > > > > > > > > > > > follicular fluid, or the male and female sexual secretion. The >resulting > > > > > >mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > drop, made up of the ovum and penetrating sperm, becomes the zygote, >the > > > > > > > precursor of the embryo. Similarly, explanation, for example, is > > > > > given >of > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > following verses, Verily, we created man from a product of wet earth; > >then > > > > > > > > > placed him as a drop (of seed) (Nutfatun) in a safe lodging; then > >fashioned > > > > > > > > >We > > > > > > > > > > > > > the drop a clot (alaga), then fashioned We the clot a little lump, > >(Mudgha) > > > > > > > > > >then > > > > > > > > > > fashioned We the little lump bones (Izam), then clothed the bones > > > > > with > > >flesh > > > > > > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > then produced it as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the best > > >Creator! > > > > > > > > > > > (23:12-14). Reading these verses, Moore made some clay models and >showed > > > > >them > > > > > > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > be similar to the description of the verses. He starts with an embryo >at > > >28 > > > > > > > > > >days > > > > > > > > > > and shows that by the sixth week bones begin to form and muscles > > > > > appear > > >on > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > > embryo. By the seventh week the bones give a human shape to the > > > > > embryo. > > >The > > > > > > > > > >ears > > > > > > > > > > and eyes begin to form in the fourth week and are visible by the > > > > > sixth, > > >or > > > > >42 > > > > > > > > > > > > days after the zygote has been formed. All these developments are in > > > >conformity > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with the Quranic description, Moore tells us. > > > > > > > > > > So what does all this prove? Does it confirm the Divine origins of > > > > > the > > >Quran? > > > > > > > > > > > >Or > > > > > > > > > > does it merely tell us that the Quran is a treasure chest of > > > > > scientific > > > > >facts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the function of the exercise? This incident throws > > > > > considerable > > > >light > > > > > > > > > > > >on > > > > > > > > > > the state of the Muslim mind: its acute inferiority complex; its > >obsession > > > > > > > >with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > science and by extension with modernity; and its pathological concern > >with > > > > > > > > > seeing the Quran as the end of knowledge rather than as a text that > > >provides > > > > > > >an > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ethical framework for the pursuit of knowledge. On the surface, such > > >attempts > > > > > > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > legitimise modern science by equating it with the Quran, or to prove >the > > > > > >divine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > origins of the Quran by showing that it contains scientifically valid > > >facts, > > > > > > > > > > > appear harmless, indeed, even commendable exercises. However, when > >pursued > > > > >on > > > > > > >a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nave basis, as is often done by Muslim scholars, such methods can be > > > >dangerous; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when undertaken deliberately, be it sincerely, often by > > > > > non-Muslim > > > > >scholars, > > > > > > > > > > it can have mischievous consequences. > > > > > > > > > > The inference drawn by comparing the Quran and science is two-fold: > > > > > if > >the > > > > > > > > >facts > > > > > > > > > > and theories mentioned in the Quran, which was revealed 1400 years > > > > > ago, > > >are > > > > > > > > > > supported by modern science, the Divine nature of the Quran is >confirmed, > > > > > >(if > > > > > > > > > > > > confirmation is indeed what we are looking for); and conversely, if > >modern > > > > > > > > > scientific facts and theories find a reflection in the Quran, then >modern > > > > > > > > science must also have the same universal and eternal validity as the > > >Quran. > > > > > > >My > > > > > > > > > > > > > > counter arguments is simple and though it will be discussed in detail > > >towards > > > > > > > > > > > > the end, suffice it to say now that the Quran, which is a book of > >guidance, > > > > > > > > > >does > > > > > > > > > > not need confirmation from any other source. For Muslims, it is a >priori > > > > > >valid > > > > > > > > > > > > > and eternal. Any attempt at reading science in the Quran makes the > >eternal > > > > > > > > > scripture subservient to science; and it elevates science to the > > > > > level > > >where > > > > > > >it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > becomes the arbitrator of what is and what is not Truth. It further > > >enforces > > > > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > mythical notion that scientific theories are neutral, universal and > > >eternally > > > > > > > > > > > > valid. Moreover, trying to read science in the allegorical, >metaphorical > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > > symbolic verses of the Quran often stretches analogical reasoning >beyond > > > > >its > > > > > > > > > > > limits and leads to absurd and in some cases, to quite contradictory > > > > >conclusions > > > > > > > > > > not intended by the Quran. It is apologia of the worst type. > > > > > > > > > > Apologetic Muslim authors trying to prove that the Quran is very > >scientific > > > > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > modern often start by stating that the Quran places great emphasis, > > > > > and > > > > >indeed > > > > > > > > > > > > > it does, on the pursuit of knowledge and the use of reason. Some 750 > > >verses, > > > > > > > > > > > almost one-eighth of the Quran, in contrast to only 250 legislative > >verse, > > > > > > > > > exhorts the believers to study nature, reflect, make the best use of > > >reason, > > > > > > > > > > > make scientific enterprise an integral part of the community life. It >is > > > > > > >further > > > > > > > > > > pointed out that the Quran mentions several scientific facts and > >theories, > > > > > > > >all > > > > > > > > > > > > > of which are supported by the most recent discoveries and advances. > > > > > > > > > > This type of apologetic literature, trying to give scientific > >legitimation > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > > > the Quran, goes back to the early sixties. In fact, one of the > > > > > earliest > > > > > > pamphlets came out of Cairo: On Cosmic Verses in the Quran by > > > > > Muhammad > > > > > Jamaluddin El-Fandy (3). El-Fandy has a sense of religious > > > > > superiority > >that > > > > > > > > > > manifests itself in his attempts to prove that every astronomical > >discovery > > > > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > scientific theory (that is in the 1950s) has already been mentioned > > > > > in > >the > > > > > > > > > Quran. He considers the Quran as the best example of scientific > >expression > > > > > > > >(an > > > > > > > > > > > > > unsuitable claim as the ideal form of scientific expression is a > > >mathematical > > > > > > > > > > > > equation; and there certainly are no equations in the Quran). Thus, >from > > > > > >almost > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any Quranic verse referring to any astronomical phenomenon, El-Fandy >can > > > > >draw > > > > > > > > > > > > modern astronomical parallels and comparisons. For example, from the > >verse, > > > > > > > > >all > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is He who raised the heavens without any pillars that you can see, > > > > > and > > > >neither > > > > > > > > > > > > > can the night outstrip the day, and each revolve in an orbit, > > > > > al-Fandy > > >draws > > > > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > following inference: > > > > > > > > > > If we consider the sky a name given to anything which is over our >heads, > > > > >then > > > > > > > > > > > >it > > > > > > > > > > will surely mean the entire universe which surrounds us and which >begins > > > > >with > > > > > > > > > > > > the space around the earth followed by the planets, the sun and other > >stars > > > > > > > > > > found in the depth of space, in our galaxy or in other galaxies. All > >these > > > > > > > > > heavenly bodies move in their orbits. This is the sky. It is created > > > > > by > > > >Allah > > > > > > > > > > > > and each body in the space is similar to the brick in its lofty > >structure. > > > > > > > >All > > > > > > > > > > > > > these heavenly bodies split one after the other and are held in their > > > >relative > > > > > > > > > > > > > positions by centrifugal force and universal gravity. The gravity and > >this > > > > > > > > > centrifugal force, produced by rotation in semi-circular orbits or > > >ellipses, > > > > > > > > > > > could be treated as actually built pillars. Although we may not > > > > > detect > >such > > > > > > > > > > forces with our eyes, yet that does not mean that they are not there > > > > > in > > >any > > > > > > > > > > case, since we can measure and give their specifications correctly. > > > > > If > > >anyone > > > > > > > > > > > >of > > > > > > > > > > us is granted a suitable sense in addition to the normal ones we > > > > > have, >he > > > > > > >will > > > > > > > > > > > > > be able to feel these (tubes of forces) exactly as we can feel any > >material > > > > > > > > > >body > > > > > > > > > > with our normal senses. (4). > > > > > El-Fandy does not stop here. He goes on to argue that the atmosphere >can > > > > be > > > > > regarded as a pillar and that light itself is like a pillar, with the > > >colours > > > > > > > > > > > >of > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > spectrum being minor pillars! In the other verses of the Quran, >El-Fandy > > > > > >finds > > > > > > > > > > > > > evidence for the creation of red giants, white dwarfs, existence of >ether > > > > > > >(?), > > > > > > > > > > > > > the evolution of the planets and the big bang theory. And there is >more: > > > > > > >science > > > > > > > > > > supports the Quranic claim, writes al-Fandy, that life exists on > > > > > other > > > >planets. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After quoting numerous verse, including, And they Lord best knows > > > > > those > > >who > > > > > > > > >are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the heavens and the earth and to Him submit whosoever is in the > >heavens > > > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > > > > the earth, he ventures to describe what aliens may look like (here it >is > > > > >not > > > > > > > > > > > clear whether he is drawing inferences from the Quran or science): > > > > > > > > > > If we try to define the shape or form which developed races living > >outside > > > > > > > >our > > > > > > > > > > > > > planet will have, we should, in this case, and without inviting > > >complication > > > > > > >s > > > > > > > > > > > > > act on the assumption that nature has made no dissimilarity > > > > > whatsoever >in > > > > > >its > > > > > > > > > > > > method. Accordingly, such creatures, in their attempt to make good >show, > > > > > >share > > > > > > > > > > > > > with us the following: > > > > > > > > > > 1. The bodys reliance on an inner osteology made of hard material. > > > > > 2. The existence of a main centre for nerves (the brain) which > >communicates > > > > > > > > > >with > > > > > > > > > > various parts of the body directives (thenerves). > > > > > 3. The best shelter for the brain which exists inside a safe movable > >organ > > > > > > > > > either in the fore or the top part of the body > > > > > 4. Creatures dependence upon legs used in motion. > > > > > 5. The existence of a mouth for speaking and feeding (5) > > > > > > > > > > All this is not just bad science. It makes a mockery of the Quran. > >However, > > > > > > > > > > compared to many others, El-Fandy is quite sane. Azizul Hasan Abbasi, > > > > > a > > > > > > Pakistani neuropsychiatrist, manages to find in the Quran modern > > > > > cures > >for > > > > > > > > > diabetes, tuberculosis, stomach ulcers, rheumatism, arthritis, blood > > > >pressure, > > > > > > > > > > > > > asthma, dysentery and paralysis! (6). > > > > > > > > > > In recent years, this rather banal comparative approach to science > > > > > and > > >Islam > > > > > > > > > > >has > > > > > > > > > > been legitimised by the French surgeon, Maurice Bucaille. His book, > > > > > The > > > > >Bible, > > > > > > > > > > > > > the Quran and Science (7) is essential reading for Muslims with > > > > > larger > >than > > > > > > > > > >life > > > > > > > > > > inferiority complexes and has been translated into almost every > > > > > Muslim > > > > >language, > > > > > > > > > > from Arabic, Persian, Turkish, Urdu to Indonesian. Bucaille sets out > > > > > to > > >do > > > > >a > > > > > > > > > > > detailed and thorough analysis of the holy scriptures in the light of > > >modern > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge. He focuses on four topics: astronomy, the earth, animal > > > > > and > > > > >vegetable > > > > > > > > > > kingdom and human reproduction. The methodology followed is the well > > > > >established > > > > > > > > > > one of quoting the Quranic verse and then giving a scientific >commentary > > >on > > > > > > > > > > them. Bucaille tries to be more objective and takes pains to point > > > > > out > >that > > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quran contains scientific information that was not available at the >time > > >of > > > > > > > > > > revelation and, in fact, some of the information contained in it is > > >contrary > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what people believed at the time of the Prophet. After going through >the > > > > > > > standard motions of examining verses about the orbit of the moon and >the > > > > >sun, > > > > > > > > > > > > the water cycle, the reproduction procedure, he concludes: > > > > > > > > > > The Quran most definitely did not contain a single proposition at > >variance > > > > > > > >with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the most firmly established modern knowledge, nor did it contain any > > > > > of > > >the > > > > > > > > > > ideas current at the time on the subjects it describes. Furthermore, > > >however, > > > > > > >a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > large number of facts are mentioned in the Quran which were not > >discovered > > > > > > > > >until > > > > > > > > > > modern times. So many in fact, that on November 9, 1976, the present > >author > > > > > > > > >was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > able to read before the French Academy of Medicine a paper on the > > > >Physiological > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and Embyological data in the Quran. The data like many others on > >differing > > > > > > > > > subjects constituted a veritable challenge to human explanation in > > > > > view > > >of > > > > > > > >what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we know about the history of the various sciences through the ages. > >Modern > > > > > > > >mans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > findings concerning the absence of scientific error are therefore in > > >complete > > > > > > > > > > > > agreement with the Muslims exegetes conception of the Quran as a Book >of > > > > > > > Revelation. It is a consideration which implies that God could not > >express > > > > >an > > > > > > > > > > > > erroneous idea. > > > > > > > > > > The bible, of course, did not meet the stringent criteria of modern > > >knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > and the clear-cut conclusion of Bucaille is that it is impossible not >to > > > > > >admit > > > > > > > > > > > > > the existence of scientific errors in the Bible. However, all this >simply > > > > > > > >states > > > > > > > > > > the obvious with a sense of real discovery: the Muslim belief that > > > > > the > > >Quran, > > > > > > > > > > > >as > > > > > > > > > > the Word of Allah, cannot contain any errors and that the Bible, as > > > > > it > > >exists > > > > > > > > > > > > today, is not true Divine revelation. > > > > > > > > > > But where Bucaille stops, Bucaillism takes over. A number of recent > >studies > > > > > > > > > >have > > > > > > > > > > tried to look further for scientific facts and theories in the Quran. > >Thus > > > > > > > > > Shamsul Haq, for example, manages to find the seeds of the theory of > > > >relativity > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and quantum ma=echanics in the Quran and produces Quranic evidence to > > >support > > > > > > > > > > > > the Big Bang Theory (The Quran and Modern Cosmology Science and > >Technology > > > > >in > > > > > > > > > > > > the Islamic World 1 (1) 47-52 (1983). M Manzoor-I-Khuda manages to > > > > > find > > >the > > > > > > > > > > theory of the development of the biosphere, the water cycles of life > > > > > on > > > >earth > > > > > > > > > > > >in > > > > > > > > > > the Quran (Creation and the Cosmos in Islamic Scientific Thought and > >Muslim > > > > > > > > > > Achievements in Science, proceedings of the International Conference > > > > > on > > > > >Science > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in Islamic Polity, Islamabad, 1983, Vol 1, p96-113). Moore > >notwithstanding, > > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > entire field of embryology has been discovered several times in the > >Quran. > > > > > > > > > > After all this scientific data and support for numerous theories, it > >seems > > > > > > > >that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the Quran has not left anything out. And to enforce the point that > > >scientific > > > > > > > > > > > > equations are not missing from the Book of Guidance, Rashad Khalifas > > > > >statistical > > > > > > > > > > analysis (Miracle of the Quran Islamic Productions International, St. > > >Louis, > > > > > > > > > > > Missouri, 1973) even provides that. Khalifa focuses on Quranic > > > > > initials > > > > >letters > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which appear at the beginning of some surahs (chapters) and feeds the > > > >frequency > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of occurrence of each letter into a computer. The letters are : Alif >(A), > > > > > >Ha > > > > > > > > > > > (H), Ra , Sin (S), Sad (S), Ta (T), Ayn (A), Qaf (Q), Kaf (K), Lam > > > > > (L), > > >Mim > > > > > > > > > >(M), > > > > > > > > > > Nun (N), Ha (H), and Ya (Y). His additional data includes the total > >number > > > > >of > > > > > > > > > > > > letters in each of 114 Surahs of the Quran and the number of verse in > >each > > > > > > > > > Surah. He manipulates the data to calculate the percentage value and > > >average > > > > > > > > > > > frequency of occurrence for each of the 14 letters in each verse of > > > > > the > > > > >Quran. > > > > > > > > > > > > > For the multi-lettered Quranic initials, such as Ta Ha, Ta Sin and Ya > >Sin, > > > > >he > > > > > > > > > > > > calculates the absolute frequency of occurrence, percentage of the > > >frequency > > > > > > > > > > > value for each of the 114 Surahs, and the average occurrence per > > > > > verse > >for > > > > > > > >each > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the multi-lettered Quranic initials in each sura. Finally he >arranges > > > > >all > > > > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > Surahs of the Quran in the ascending order of the absolute frequency > > > > > of > > > > > > occurrence of each Quranic initial and percentage frequency of >occurrence > > > > > >for > > > > > > > > > > > > each of the 14 sets of Quranic initials. What does Khalifa find? That >the > > > > > > > > chapters which begin with the Quranic initials also contain the > > > > > highest > > > > > > frequency of the specific letters used at the beginning of the Surah. >For > > > > > > > > example, Surah Qaf contains the highest frequency of the letter qaf >than > > > > >any > > > > > > > > > > > other Surah of the Quran or there is not one Surah in the Quran where >all > > > > > > >three > > > > > > > > > > > > > > values of nun are higher than their counterparts in the > > > > > non-initialled > > >Surah, > > > > > > > > > > > > al-Qqalam. The analysis for Quranci initials Alif Lam Mim which occur >in > > > > >four > > > > > > > > > > > > Makkan and two Medinan Surahs shows that the four Makkan Surahs are > > >superior > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > all Makkan Surahs in the overall frequency of Alif Lam Mim. > > > > > > > > > > So what can we conclude from this? In Khalifa's own words: > > > > > "The Qur'anic initials as a whole have shown us that every word, > > > > > indeed > > > >every > > > > > > > > > > > > letter, in the Qur'an was carefully calculated. The Qur'an itself >states > > > > >this > > > > > > > > > > > > fact very clearly in the first verse of Surah HudPlacement of the > >Qur'anic > > > > > > > > > initials in their specific locations proves the existence of advance > > > >knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the distribution pattern of the alphabet throughout the Qur'an. No >one > > > > > >can > > > > > > > > > > > > claim that such advance knowledge is attainable by man; any man. > > > > > > > > > > To translate this into physical, tangible evidence, the computer was > >asked > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > > > calculate the number of manipulations one should master in order to >write > > >a > > > > > > > > > > mathematically controlled book such as the Qur'an. The composition of >the > > > > > > > >Qur'an > > > > > > > > > > involves 114 chapters where 14 alphabet letters were distributed > >according > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > > > specific combinations. According to the well known mathematical >formula, > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > number of manipulations involved in this case equals 11414This value, > > > > > 626,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,(626b septillions) is certainly > >beyond > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > > capacity of any creature, including today's most sophisticated >computers. > > > > > > >When > > > > > > > > > > > > > we look at this number we can readily appreciate the divine statement >in > > > > > >Surah > > > > > > > > > > > > > Al-Isra (The Night Journey), verse 88 >ÃÆ'Æ'¢ÃÆ'¢â€šÂ¬" Say, if > > >all the humans > > > > >and all > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > >jinns > > > > > > > > > > banded together in order to produce a verse like this, they will > > > > > surely > > > >fail. > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, this is the number of controlled manipulations of a >specific > > > > > > > > distribution pattern of the alphabet, without placing them in useful > > > >sentences. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To place these mathematically distributed alphabetic letters in > > > > > useful > > > > >sentences > > > > > > > > > > is another complete job" > > > > > > > > > > On the basis of his analysis, Khalifa can also prove that the present > >order > > > > > > > > >of > > > > > > > > > > > > > recording the Qur'anic chapters is divinely inspired, the locations > > > > > of > > > > > revelation of the Qur'anic chapters, whether Makkan or Medinan, can > > > > > be > > >proved > > > > > > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > be correct, the Qur'an's specific way of dividing each Surah into >verses > > >is > > > > > > > > > > divinely prescribed ("the average per verse value is a highly >significant > > > > > > > > property throughout the Qur'an"), that the opening statement > > > > > "Bismillah > > > > > > r-Rahmani-r-Rahim" (In the name of God, the Compassionate, the >Merciful) > > >is > > > > > > > > >an > > > > > > > > > > > > > integral part of each Surah, except Surah Al-Tawba and even the > >particular > > > > > > > >way > > > > > > > > > > > > > of spelling certain words in the Qur'an has a mathematical >significance. > > > > > > > > > > All this adds nothing to the sum of our knowledge. It does, however > >equate > > > > > > > > > Qur'anic truth with the mathematical `truth' and makes the Qur'an >appear > > > > >more > > > > > > > > > > > > and more like a contemporary data-base. From here, it appears, the > > > > > next > > > > >logical > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stop ought to be to present the Qur'an as a scientific text book. And > > >Afzalur > > > > > > > > > > > > Rahman (Qur'anic Sciences, The Muslim schools Trust, London 1981) has > > >obliged > > > > > > > > > > > >us > > > > > > > > > > with exactly that. Rahman, whose knowledge of science as well as his > > > > > understanding of the Qur'an is on a par with a child at nursery > > > > > school: > > > >"The > > > > > > > > > > > Qur'an provides a complete picture of the material universe and what > > > > > is > > > > >beyond > > > > > > > > > > > > > in a scientific and rational manner, appealing to the scientific and > > >rational > > > > > > > > > > > > manner, appealing to the scientific mind as well as to the ordinary > > >layman." > > > > > > >He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > finds almost every secondary school science subject, from heat, > > > > > light, > > >sound > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even electricity, in the Qur'an and presents them as a long list of > >subject > > > > > > > > > > headings with appropriate Qu'ranic quotations. The book is meant to > > > > > be > >used > > > > > > > > >in > > > > > > > > > > > > > schools (and probably is) and prepare the next generation of Muslims > > > > >scientists! > > > > > > > > > > The only thing now left for Bucaillism is to be institutionalised and > > > > >introduced > > > > > > > > > > in the school curricula. Muhammad Abdus Sami and Muslim Sajjad >(Planning > > > > > > > Curricula for Natural Sciences: The Islamic Perspective, Institute of > > >Policy > > > > > > > > > > > Studies, Islamabad, 1983) have produced a plan to accomplish this > > > > > goal. > > > >Every > > > > > > > > > > > > chapter of every textbook on physics, chemistry, biology and Zoology > >should > > > > > > > > > > contain the appropriate verse from the Qur'an. But unlike Rahman, the >two > > > > > > > > Pakistani scientists foresee some problems: for example, how are we >going > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > > treat the theory of evolution? "This theory seeks to provide >essentially > > >a > > > > > > > > > rational belief in God." Maybe there are, after all, a few things in > > >science > > > > > > > > > > > that do not tally with what the Qur'an tells us! > > > > > > > > > > Bucaillism appeals particularly to the older generation of Muslim > > >scientists, > > > > > > > > > > > > scholars and intellectuals because of its psychological message > > > > > value. >It > > > > > > > > reinforces their faith in the Qur'an and Islam on the one hand, and > > >confirms > > > > > > > > > > > their belief in the superiority and universal validity of western > >science, > > > > >on > > > > > > > > > > > > the other. Their naivete is well reflected by Candide: "all is well > > > > > in > >this > > > > > > > > > >best > > > > > > > > > > of all possible worlds." > > > > > > > > > > However, the dangers inherent in Bucaillism are very grave. There is >the > > > > > > >obvious > > > > > > > > > > fact that it generates a strangely dumbfounding theology > >ÃÆ'Æ'¢ÃÆ'¢â€šÂ¬" as > > > > >all > > > > > > >scientific > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge is contained in the Qur'an, simply studying the Qur'an from > > > > > a > > > > > > scientific perspective will reveal everything and lead to new > > > > > theories > >and > > > > > > > > > discoveries. While the Qur'an obviously contains some passing >references > > >to > > > > > > > > > > natural facts, it is by no means a textbook of science. It is a book > > > > > of > > > > > > guidance. It provides motivation and only motivation, for the pursuit >of > > > > > > > knowledge. Knowledge begins with the Qur'an and does not end with it. > > > > > > > > > > But, more importantly, by equating the Qur'an with science, > > > > > Bucaillism > > > >elevates > > > > > > > > > > > > > > science to the realm of the sacred and makes Divine Revelation > > > > > subject >to > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > verification of western science. Apart form the fact that the Qur'an > >needs > > > > >no > > > > > > > > > > > > justification from modern science, Bucaillism opens the Qur'an to the > > >counter > > > > > > > > > > > > argument of Popper's criteria of refutation: would the Qur'an be > > > > > proved > > > >false > > > > > > > > > > > > and written off just as Bucaille writes off the Bible, if a > > > > > particular > > > > > scientific fact does not tally with it or if a particular fact >mentioned > > >in > > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Qur'an is refuted by modern science? And what if a particular theory, > >which > > > > > > > > >is > > > > > > > > > > > > > "confirmed" by the Qur'an and is in vogue today is abandoned tomorrow >for > > > > > > > > another theory that presents an opposite picture? Does that mean that >the > > > > > > > >Qur'an > > > > > > > > > > is valid today but will not be valid tomorrow? > > > > > > > > > > Moreover, by raising science to the level of sacred knowledge, >Bucaillism > > > > > > > > effectively undermines any criticism of science. Because the pursuit > > > > > of > > > > > > knowledge is so strongly emphasised in the Qur'an, most Muslim >scientists > > > > > > > > already possess a sense of reverence towards modern science. > > > > > Bucaillism > > > >takes > > > > > > > > > > > > this reverence to a new level: a whole generation of Muslim > > > > > scientists >do > > > > > >not > > > > > > > > > > > > just accept all science as Good and True, but attack anyone who shows > > > > > a > > > > > >critical > > > > > > > > > > or sceptical attitude towards science. Furthermore, the belief in a > > > >universally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > beneficial science leads to a pestiferous kind of fatalism: since >science > > > > > >is > > > > > > > > > > > universal and for the benefit of all humankind, it will eventually > > > > > make > > >its > > > > > > > > >way > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Muslim societies and serve their needs! > > > > > > > > > > Science is not the pursuit of Truth and its "discoveries", and > > > > > "facts" >do > > > > > > >not, > > > > > > > > > > > > > and cannot have the same validity as the verse of the Qur'an. Science >is > > >a > > > > > > > > > problem solving enterprise: it is a method, a technique, for solving > > >problems > > > > > > > > > > > > within a given paradigm and worldview. Just as Abdus Sami and Sajjad >find > > > > > > >that > > > > > > > > > > > > > the theory of evolution is a rational attempt to undermine belief in >God, > > >a > > > > > > > > > > great deal in the modern system of science is an exercise in control >and > > > > > > > domination of nature and men. When Bacon said that nature yields her > > >secrets > > > > > > > > > > > under torture, he made torture and suppression an integral and >legitimate > > > > > > >part > > > > > > > > > > > > > of modern science. Science, as it exists and is practised today, is > > >designed > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > keep a particular culture and its worldview dominant. Reading the >verses > > >of > > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Qur'an into modern science is not going to change its essential >character > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > > > style. > > > > > > > > > > That there is something magically objective and neutral about the > > >Scientific > > > > > > > > > > > Method is a cruel hoax; and bias-free observation is a myth. Nothing >"out > > > > > > > >there" > > > > > > > > > > can be perceived without filtering it through our worldview and >culture. > > > > > > > Scientists too often modify their observation with their own ideas > > > > > and > > > > > prejudices, values and norms of their society. Not just observation > > > > > but > > > > > > experimentation too cannot be made in a cultural vacuum, but have >meaning > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > > > > > significance solely in the framework of a theory itself set in the > > >conceptual > > > > > > > > > > > > picture of a worldview. Putting a theory into a mathematical code > > > > > does > >not > > > > > > > > >strip > > > > > > > > > > the value content of a proposition of modern science. On the > > > > > contrary, > >the > > > > > > > > > nature of mathematics is such that its application to the world > > > > > through > > > > >science > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is purely fortuitous. Mathematical propositions, including the >geometric > > > > > > > propositions of Euclid, are a priori analytic >ÃÆ'Æ'¢ÃÆ'¢â€šÂ¬" > > >that is to say, > > > > >that > > > > > > >their > > > > > > > > > status is determined merely by analysing the term of the proposition. > >That > > > > > > > >one > > > > > > > > > > > > > plus one equals two can be determined as conforming to the principle >that > > > > > >one > > > > > > > > > > > > plus one means two. That some theories can be codified in > > > > > mathematical > > > > > expression is a matter of scientific convenience. The laws of nature >are > > > > >not > > > > > > > > > > > expressed in mathematical formulae, in indelible ink across the >heavens; > > > > >they > > > > > > > > > > > > are manufactured in ballpoints in laboratories and institutes. > > > > > > > > > > The fact that some of these manufactured laws and theories agree with > >what > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > > > > > > Qur'an says is not in itself of any significance. It is a >non-statement. > > > > >The > > > > > > > > > > > Qur'an promotes the pursuit of knowledge within a framework of > > > > > values: >it > > > > > >is > > > > > > > > > > > these values which should be the focus of our attention and which >should > > > > > >shape > > > > > > > > > > > > > our scientific activity. Only by turning these values into a living > >reality > > > > > > > > >can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we truly be honest to the Qur'an and fulfil our obligations towards it. > > > > > > > > > > References > > > > > > > > > > 1. April 1985. > > > > > 2. Including, Africa Events May 1985. > > > > > 3. The Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, 1961. > > > > > 6. The Quran and Mental Hygiene, Karachi, undated. > > > > > 7. Seghers, Paris, 1976; and North American Trust Publication, > > >Indianapolis, > > > > > > > > > > > 1978. > > > > > > > > > > From > > > > > This essay appeared in Inquiry Vol 2 No 8 37-41 August 1985 > > > > > Share > > > > > 468 ad > > > > > Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterFollow Us on RSS > > > > > > > > > > Contact ZiauddinSardar > > > > > > > > > > Recent Posts > > > > > > > > > > Welcome to postnormal times > > > > > The Idea of Justice > > > > > Displaced Homes > > > > > Reading The Qur'an > > > > > 367 > > > > > > > > > > Sign up to our newsletter. > > > > > Email: > > > > > > > > > > Copyright ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚© 2009 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Post message: [email protected] Subscribe : [email protected] Unsubscribe : [email protected] List owner : [email protected] Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
