OF EVOLUTION AND THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

(By way of a critique of Prof Richard Dawkin’s “The God Delusion”)

(Dedicated to Malaysia’s 50^th Anniversary of Independence.)

Kassim Ahmad

27 August, 2007

In this matter of God’s existence, scientists and the Muslim scripture, the Quran, happily agree on one thing – the need for proof. “If you claim that God does not exist, bring your proofs,” demands the Quran.[1] British biologist Richard Dawkin’s book, The God Delusion, [2] may be considered the latest scientific proofs on behalf of atheists or non-believers. In this essay, we shall examine whose proofs are valid.

It is generally accepted that belief in the existence of God entails belief, and belief is considered to be not based on reason. It is beyond reason. It is unreasonable. The generality of people, comfortable with unthinking existence, accept this mode of life as a matter of course. But there have been individuals throughout history, in all societies, who are not satisfied with this unreasonableness. They probed the question of the meaning of life and of man’s destiny on Earth and introduced religion and belief in the existence God into human life. It is tacitly assumed that belief and reason are not contraries, but rather complementary.[3]

This is man’s daily practical experience. One can say that a man does not go about his daily life with only his eyes and ears open and his reason functioning; he also goes about with faith in his heart, with faith that on his way to the office, he will not die in a car crash! He may yet die in that way, but when he sets out, he believes that nothing bad will happen to him.

Is there any logical basis to this belief? There is, and also there is none. He may reason that he is healthy and he may not die that day on his way to his office. Although we may discern some reason for his feeling, it is essentially faith. Thus, as we say, man does not live by bread alone, we may also say that man goes through the day with faith in his heart. Faith is natural to man.

Thus, there are three ways of knowing. Firstly, through our senses (sensory evidence); secondly, through our logical inference (logical or rational evidence); and, lastly, through our intuition or inspiration (supra-rational evidence). Western scientific epistemology rejects the third method, considering it unscientific, although inspiration is a daily occurrence in a man’s life.[4]

Let us get a little deeper. What is life? Where does it come from? Where is it going? Science has some, but not complete and satisfying answers. We originate from lifeless matter many millions of years ago, and we are on a long evolutionary journey, becoming living matter, evolving from a simple cell into more complex entities and ending presently in “the crown of creation” – the human being, homo sapiens – headed to where? No known answer yet. Religion, however, tells us that we were created by God, for a short sojourn on Earth to do good works, will be resurrected for Final Judgment on Judgment Day and then to be rewarded or punished accordingly, to live in an eternal Paradise, or to suffer in an eternal Hell, depending on what we do with our short Earthly lives.

Holding on to science, we live in abeyance, not knowing the whence and where of humanity. Is it any better, holding on to religion? Millions of people from all religions have lived and died, contentedly. But we know the vast differences between the various major religions’ theologies. The various scriptures are couched in metaphorical language and we are at a loss to understand their true meanings. Concepts such as “Afterlife”, “Heaven”, “Hell” and Divine rewards and punishment – what exactly do they mean? The Quran, for instance, states that none knows the meanings of the allegorical verses, except God and those deeply-versed in knowledge. [5] God’s rewards and punishments turn out to be none other than logical consequences of our own actions.[6]

It is obvious that a supreme power, God, created the world. Although we have not seen Him doing it, logical inference tells us so. Dawkins and other atheists argue that the world is eternal, even though none of them witness this eternity. They argue thus because they reject the concept of infinite regression. “If a god created the world, who created this god?” – an unending regression that is not permissible. Actually, there is no regression. God the Creator is not created. If God is created, how can we call Him God? As the Quran says, “He is the Ever-Living, the Self-Subsisting, by Whom all subsist.” [7]

Most of his arguments dismissing God’s existence boil down to his opposition to this infinite regression. He dismisses the argument from design by claiming that if it were improbable to have life on Earth begin in physico-chemical reactions, then how more improbable it would be to have a designer, i.e. God, to do it? He says, “The temptation is a false one, because the designer hypothesis immediately raises the larger problem of who designed the designer. The whole problem we started out with was the problem of explaining statistical improbability. It is obviously no solution to postulate something even more improbable. We need a ‘crane’, not a ‘skyhook’, for only a crane can do the business of working up gradually and plausibly from simplicity to otherwise improbable complexity.” (p. 158)

The obvious flaw this argument is that he assumed the Universe to be material, when there is absolutely no proof for that. Moreover, his analogy of the crane is quite misplaced. The crane needs a crane operator to operate it. Further, it needs a crane maker to produce the crane before it can be put to work. It is surprising that Prof. Dawkins deals with only part of the problem.

The Universe is a manifestation of God. It is Nature and therefore natural. God is immanent in Nature. [8] But Nature is not God, as God in more than Nature. Thus God is both natural and supernatural. It is natural because His ways, or laws, are natural and can be studied and verified scientifically. Natural selection is a methodology embedded in nature to achieve a certain purpose.[9] There is nothing strange or illogical about that. But it is obvious that it is taking the Universe from somewhere to somewhere. Why is it wrong to see a design to this process, natural though it is?

Being spiritual, God is hidden from the physical Universe. We cannot prove His existence through an epistemology that is clearly inadequate. Just as the human being is not merely physical, but also spiritual, we cannot comprehend him unless we take into consideration his spirit or his soul. So is God hidden in the Universe, just as man’s soul in hidden in his physical body. We know that it is there, because, without it, man cannot possess the qualities of intelligence, creativity and freedom. The individual man becomes a corpse once his soul leaves him. In the same way, the Universe will collapse once God is no longer immanent in it. When will this happen? It will happen, just as once it happened when there was nothing, except God. [10]

Dawkins rejects the examples of great religious personages, such as Jesus Christ, as proof of Divine presence, by arguing that such people are “either right or else insane or a liar.” (p. 92) He concludes that “ Jesus was honestly mistaken. Plenty of people are… there is no historical evidence that he ever thought he was divine.” (p. 92). The question of Jesus is not whether he was divine, for he was definitely not. The question of the historical existence such religious personages is their teachings of the existence of God and the obligation of human beings to obey God. Jesus is one example. There are many others, like Noah, Abraham, Moses and Muhammad, and several other major spiritual teachers coming for all the cultural areas of the world. Most of them essentially teach us about the One God, of the necessity to pattern our lives on His teachings and to warn us about His punishments should we deviate. Their teachings were recorded, although, due to the primitive communications technology of those days, not completely perfectly. Still those scriptures, one and all, clearly show the importance of belief in God and in living righteously.

In this connection, we wish to draw Prof. Dawkins attention to the Muslim scripture, the Quran, brought to us by Prophet Muhammad. Muhammad, being the last in a series of divine messengers to mankind, came 600 years after Jesus Christ and 2,000 years after Moses. He was born, grew up, and came to adulthood in late 6^th Century and early 7^th Century Arabia. At the spiritually adult age of forty, he began, bit by bit, for twenty two years, first in Mecca and then in Medina and lastly back to Mecca, to deliver the last divine message to the world that is the Quran. Different from the Old and the New Testaments (the Bible), the Quran was written down and collected into the present form at the time of Prophet Muhammad himself and under his own supervision. The Quran makes the claim, as no other scripture does, that it is divinely protected.[11] We especially want to draw attention to the contents of the Quran, especially to verses relating to the creation and the fashioning of the heavens and earth and of the human being. Amazingly, these verses reveal facts referring to scientific discoveries made only recently.[12] It is impossible for these matters to be known to anyone at that time. This is the strongest evidence that the Quran is a revelation from the All-Knowing God. It is also the strongest evidence for God’s existence.

Somewhat strangely, but acceptable to this writer, Prof. Dawkins does not want to characterize natural selection as chance. He argues: “The argument from improbability states that complex things could not have come about by chance. But many people define ‘come about by chance’ as a synonym for ‘come about in the absence of deliberate design’. Not surprisingly, therefore, they think improbability is evidence of design….A deep understanding of Darwinism teaches us to be wary of the easy assumption that design is the only alternative to chance, and teaches us to seek out the graded ramps of slowly increasing complexity… The illusion of design is a trap that has caught us before …” (p. 114)

But Dawkins does not express himself clearly on the alternative to chance that he alludes to above. What he probably wants to convey is that Darwinian natural selection is natural. There should be nothing supernatural, i.e. given from above, about it. If this is what he means, we can accept it. We can now notice his error, i.e. he opposes “Nature” to “God” and “nature” to “spirituality”, when they are not opposites!

We can now leave the question of proofs of God’s existence and non-existence, having refuted Dawkin’s major arguments. We shall now go into his arguments against belief in the existence of God and for atheism.

In my earlier essay written in Malay on this topic, I spoke about the possibility of our misunderstanding, due to gaps in language. However, having gone through his book again and again, there does not seem to be this possibility, although it is not completely a closed question.

In the first place, Prof. Dawkins’s rejection of religion and the existence of God, is premised on his claim that both are not based on reasoning. As we stated earlier, this does not apply to true religion. True religion, although based on faith, cannot be contrary to reason. In this case, faith and reason are complementary to a unified whole. We shall come back to this later.

Prof. Dawkins sees (religious) fundamentalism as the main culprit. He cites many cases, both from Christianity and Islam, where religion is dangerous and destructive, due to the blind following and fanaticism of its followers. The rise of the Christian Right in American politics during the recent decades, and the rise of religious theocracies in some Muslim countries afford reason for great concern among the more reasonable followers of both religions and warn the world of looming religious conflicts. However, we should be careful to distinguish the great majority of all religious followers who do not follow their religions or their religious leaders blindly and fanatically and exercise a modicum of reason and restraint in the practice of their religions.

However, Prof. Dawkins is right in drawing our attention to the teachings of Christian and Muslim scriptures. He cites the cases of death punishments for blasphemy and apostasy. In the case of the Quran, it must be pointed out that such punishments are not stipulated there. These punishments originate from the so-called Prophetic Traditions, which later came to be wrongly regarded as on par with, or even above, the Quran.[13]

One great difficulty about the scriptures is posed by a literal understanding in place of the truer metaphorical understanding of the texts. This has given rise to wrong interpretations, not consistent with general run of the religions’ teachings. How to overcome this danger of religions being manipulated by vested interest groups? The West’s answer is secularism – the separation of religion from politics. But, recent American politics have seen the increasing influence Christian Right and this has been answered by the Talibans and the bin Ladens of the Muslim world.

Our problem is to seek the true religion, God’s religion. To cut the matter short, the true religion is represented by Abrahimic monotheism, which originally included the teachings of Moses and Jesus Christ. Both these teachings, over the years, have reverted to polytheism. Muhammad came to correct the deviations with the Quran, which, as I have stated, is divinely protected. Thus, not only the Muslims, but the entire mankind have to search the Quran to embrace the true religion. The core of this Abrahamic monotheism is to absolutely refute any form of subservience to any and all gods (external authorities), except the authority of Truth (the One True God). By and through this, mankind, individually and collectively, will be automatically liberated – a total liberation. He will be in full charge of his own destiny. That is the full meaning of his being made God’s vicegerent on Earth.[14]

This total liberation wrought by the monotheistic world-view was displayed to the world by the feats of that Arab Renaissance. In barely sixty years, an unknown people, deep in superstition and slumber, rose to liberate the then world from the oppression of the two superpowers, the Persion and the Roman Empires, and then went on to create the first scientific culture in the world.

I stated above that there may be a problem of understanding. Several quotations from famous scientists on religion are produced, namely:-

“How is that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, ‘This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant’? Instead they say, ‘No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.’ A religion, old and new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths.” ( p. 12. Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot.)

“I am a deeply a religious non-believer. This is somewhat a new kind of religion. I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely a religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism. The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naïve.” (p. 15. Albert Einstein)

Dawkins himself says, “ … if there is something that appears to lie beyond the natural world as it is now imperfectly understood, we hope eventually to understand it and embrace it within the natural. As ever when we unweave as a rainbow, it will not become less wonderful.” (p. 14)

These and similar quotations reveal minds that are not adamantly rejecting faith in a power that we call God. Such minds keep themselves open to embrace new truths and realities. They are not against God or religion as such. They are only against the destructive effects of irrational beliefs, whatever religion they originate from. This is precisely the position of true Islam. Therefore, by Quranic definition, they cannot be called disbelievers.[15]

In conclusion, we should like to deal with the difficult question of the link between faith in God and morality. Is it true that moral actions can only originate from a belief in God, and without a belief in God, there can be no morality? Here one calls to mind the famous speech by a character in Dostoyevsky’s novel Brothers Karamazov in the “Legend of the Grand Inquisitor” where he states that “if there is no God, then everything is permissible.” That means even murder is permissible. This is a frightening prospect. But how have we come to this? Western thought, since Greek times, has had its materialist strain, and in modern times, it has developed through various stages until we come to the German philosopher’s Friedrich Nietzche’s “death of God” and nihilism, ending in the nakedly atheistic philosophical cul-de-suc of Logical Positivism. It is not accidental that the slaughter of humanity in World War I and World War II happened after Nietzche’s “death of God” pronouncement. It seems obvious that the belief in the existence of God and morality is logically and practically linked. Man acts on external as well as internal impulses. God’s authority acts as an external authority to impose good behavior on man. Lacking this, he loses his moorings and becomes lawless and commits hideous crimes. But external authority is only one form of authority, and a primitive form at that. God can also be an internal impulse, having been internalized in psychologically higher human psyches. Such human beings voluntarily acts righteousness because they voluntarily belief in goodness, a quality of God.

The Quran defines disbelievers as those who reject truth and act contrary to truth and justice. Believers are those who affirm and uphold truth and act to spread truth and justice. The militant disbelievers are warmongers in every society and age and inflict war on society to control and exploit its members. Worldwide hegemony that is being practiced by certain powers during the last several decades on humankind are repugnant to Nature, Nature being spiritual with God immanent in it. That is precisely the reason why it will not last and will fall and be replaced, just as Darwinian Dawkins’ natural selection will select more fit species of human beings to carry forward the banner of modern civilization.

Kassim Ahmad is a Malaysian author. He can be contacted at kasmad172@yahoo.com.my. His website is www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com

---

[1] “Who is it that initiates the creation, then repeats it? Who is it that provides you from heaven and the earth? Is it another god besides God? Say: ‘Show your proof, if you are truthful.’ ” (Quran, 27: 64)
[2] Bantam Press, Great Britain, 2006.
[3] The statement as to the logical link between reason and faith is explicitly made in the Quran. See Quran, 10: 100.
[4] The Quran mentions three methods whereby God communicates with man, namely (a) by inspiration or revelation, (b) through a veil, as in the case of His speaking to Moses, and (c) through His sending a messenger with a revelation. See Quran, 42: 51.
[5] “He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses – which constitute the essence of the scripture, as well as the allegorical verses. Those who harbour doubts in their hearts will pursue the allegorical verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows their true meanings except God and those well-founded in knowledge. The say, ‘We believe in this – all of it comes from our Lord.’ Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.” (Quran, 3: 7)
[6] “We have recorded the fate of every human being; it is tied to his neck. On the Day of Resurrection, We will hand him a record that is accessible. Read your own record. Today you suffice as your own reckoner.” (Quran, 17: 13-14)
[7] See Quran, 2: 255.
[8] “He is the First and the Last, the Manifest and the Hidden, and He is Knower of all things.” (Quran, 56: 3)
[9] The Quran informs us of various methods that God ordains for the world, including man, to change or evolve. Changing from stage to stage is one (see Quran, 56: 61; 71: 14; 14: 48), sifting the useful from the useless or truth from falsehood is another (see Quran, 13: 17), and replacement of an unfit group by a fitter group to do God’s bidding is yet another divine methodology (natural, by Dawkins) to achieve His purpose. (see Quran, 47: 38; 9: 39; 6: 134; 35: 15-17)
[10] “Everything perishes except His Presence.” (Quran, 28: 88) A Prophetic Tradition has it that, “God was, and there was not anything with Him. God is now as He was then.” This would render matter as dependent on God and having no independent existence. Only God is real and exists independently.
[11] See Quran, 56: 77-80. For the methodology of this protection, see Kassim Ahmad, “Religion, Logic and Reason”, www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com , note 9.
[12] For an account of this, see Maurice Bucaill, The Bible, the Quran and Science, Tripoli, Libya; n.d.
[13] See Kassim Ahmad, Hadith – A Re-evaluation, Monotheist Productions International, Tucson, Arizona, 1997.
[14] See Quran, 2: 30-34.
[15] “This is because those who disbelieve are following falsehood, while those who believe are following the truth from their Lord.” (Quran, 47: 3) We can find many such verses in the Quran.

PERSOALAN ADAKAH TUHAN ATAU TIADA?

Oleh: Kassim Ahmad

19 Julai, 2007

Apakah perkara yang paling penting dalam kehidupan manusia? Kerjayanya? Mencari seberapa banyak wang dan menjadi jutawan? Mencari nama dan kuasa? Mencari agama yang benar, atau mencari Kebenaran? Jawapan kepada soalan ini bergantung kepada individu. Bagi kebanyakan orang, saya kira, kerjayanya – mahu ada suatu pekerjaan yang tetap yang dia suka buat dan yang boleh menyara kehidupan dia dan keluarganya. Bagi sesetengah orang lain pula, mencari nama dan kuasa. Bagi suatu golongan kecil, mencari agama yang benar, atau mencari Kebenaran (dengan K huruf besar).

Seorang ahli sains Inggeris berfahaman eteis, Richard Dawkins, baru-baru ini menerbitkan sebuah buku berjudul The God Delusion[1]. Dari nama buku ini nyata beliau menganggap kepercayaan kepada Tuhan itu suatu anggapan palsu. Bagi kita, dari segi apa pun ditimbang, anggapan ini tidak lain dari satu anggapan yang tidak berasas. Kita ingin mengajukan soalan kepada beliau: Mengapakah anda menulis dan menerbitkan buku ini? Jawabnya, dengan harapan bahawa sesetengah daripada pembacanya akan menerima saranan beliau dan menjadi ateis. Harapan beliau itu berdasarkan kepercayaan semata-mata. Sepertimana tiap-tiap pagi beliau bangun dan pergi bekerja di pejabat beliau dengan keyakinan bahawa tidak apa-apa yang buruk akan berlaku kepada beliau dan hari itu akan menjadi suatu hari yang bermanfaat kepada beliau. Ini membuktikan bahawa manusia hidup, bukan saja berpandukan pancaideran dan akalnya, tetapi juga kepercayaannya. Kita boleh mengatakan dengan tegas bahawa tiada manusia jika tidak ada keyakinan dalam dadanya. Ini suatu perkara yang sangat asas dan kita hairan bagaimana Dawkins dan ahli-ahli fikir yang tajam seperti dia boleh melupakan perkara ini!

Ini membawa kita kepada soalan epistemologi, atau kaedah mengetahui. Sains Barat mengiktirah hanya dua kaedah mengetahui, iatu melalui pencaindera dan melalui akal atau ilmu. Mari kita bawa suatu misalan. Ambil sebiji buah durian. Kita melihat buah durian itu di depan mata kita, lalu kita mengatakan, “Itu buah durian.” Kenyataan ini benar. Kemudian kita beredar setapak lagi lalu kita mengatakan, “Buah durian ini datang dari sepohon dunrian.” Kenyataan ini juga benar, walaupun kita tidak pernah melihat pohon durian, atau kita tidak melihat buah durian itu jatuh dari satu pohon durian. Kenyataan ini benar dari segi logika, atau dari segi ilmu, yakni kita tahu dari segi ilmu bahawa buah durian itu mesti berasal dari sepohon durian. Setakat ini, kita sudah melalui dua kaedah mengetahui. Tetapi, apabila kita bertanya seterusnya, “Dari mana pohon durian itu datang?”, jawapan epistemologi Barat ialah, “Ia datang dari bumi, dan bumi jadi sendiri; maka Tuhan tiada.” Demikian jawapan mereka, kerana mereka tidak melihat Tuhan menjadikan bumi dan epistemologi mereka tidak mengiktiraf alam rohaniah yang ghaib. Sebenarnya, ketidak-iktirafan mereka kepada alam rohaniah tidak berasaskan fakta, kerana fakta membuktikan kewujudan satu lagi kaedah manusia mengetahui, iaitu melalui ilham atau wahyu.[2] Ilham memang wujud dan ahli-ahli sains dan para pujangga mengalami ilham dalam karya-karya mereka dan merupakan suatu lagi cara mereka mengetahui.[3] Quran menyebut tiga kaedah mengetahui, melalui konsep-konsep ain ‘ul-yakin [4] (ketahui melalui pancaindera), ilmu’l-yakin [5] (ketahui melalui logika), dan haqq ‘al-yakin [6] (ketahui melalui ilham, wahyu). Apabila kita menggabungkan ketiga-tiga kaedah mengetahi ini, kita mendapat pengetahuan sepadu yang lengkap atau sempurna.

Berbalik kepada contoh buah durian tadi, kita sudah sampai kepada kaedah yang ketiga, yang ditolak oleh epistemologi saintifik Barat, tanpa alasan yang kukuh, seperti yang sudah kita lihat. Dalam epistemologi yang lebih sempurna, durian itu datang dari bumi, dan bumi tidak jadi sendiri, tetapi dijadikan oleh Tuhan. Epistemologi saintifik Barat menolak konsep bumi dijadikan, kerana, mengikut mereka, logika ini akan menghadapkan kita dengan rentetan yang tidak berkesudahan. Jika bumi dijadikan oleh Tuhan, siapa pula yang menjadikan Tuhan? Soalan ini nyata bodoh dan mustahil, kerana jika Tuhan dijadikan, maka dia bukan Tuhan lagi! Tuhan mustahil dijadikan, kerana Dia Berdiri Sendiri. [7]

Tidakkah menghairankan bahawa epistemologi Barat yang boleh menerima konsep “Bumi jadi sendiri”, tidak boleh menerima konsep “Tuhan jadi sendiri”? Mereka juga tidak melihat dunia ini jadi sendiri. Anggapan bahawa dunia jadi sendiri tidak lebih dari anggapan yang tidak berasaskan penglihatan. Dakwaan bahwa epistemologi Barat lebih saintifik tidak berasas sama sekali.

Kita boleh faham bahawa Eropah, setelah melalui Reformasi Agama dalam abad ke-16 dan memisahkan Agama dari Negara dan menganut cara hidup sekular, mahu membebaskan minda orang Eropah dari khurafat-khurafat yang datang dari agama, atau leih tepat, dari salah tafsir agama. Kesuburan sains dan teknologi di Barat dan kepimpinan Barat dalam sains dan teknologi membuktikan kemujaraban cara hidup ini, dibanding dengan cara hidup bangsa-bangsa Asia yang masih dikongkong oleh fahaman-fahaman agama yang kolot. Inilah hujah yang paling kuat untuk menolak fahaman-fahaman agama yang menyeleweng dari agama tauhid (Islam yang sebenar, yang akan kita huraikan nanti).

Namun demikian, penolakan Barat terhadap khurafat dan tahayul yang datang dengan fahaman-fahaman agama yang menyeleweng (fahaman Tritunggal dalam agama Kristen tidak diajar oleh Nabi Isa, tetapi diperukunkan menjadi asas teologi Kristen dalam Majlis Nicaea pada 325 Masehi melalui undi!). Maka penolakan sebagian agama membawa kepada penolakan total agama, dan ini bercampuir dengan faham materialisme yang sedia ada dalam falsafah Yunani berkembang menjadi benih yang subur dalam tamadin Barat. Ia berakhir dengan fahaman nihilisme Friedrich Nietzche (“Tuhan sudah mati”). Falsafah inilah yang merintis jalan bagi penggunaan bom atom dan bom nuklier pada pertengahan dan akhir abad ke-20 dan awal abad ke-21. Dakwaan Dawkins bahawa fahaman ateisme tidak membawa kepada kejahatan yang lebih banyak daripada yang telah diakibatkan oleh agama tidak boleh dipertahankan, berhadapan dengan dua peperangan dunia yang dahsyat, yang menyebabkan kematian puluhan juta orang, termasuk orang awam dari kanak-kanak dan orang tua, dan kerosakan harta-benda yang banyak.

Mustahillah Alam Raya yang begitu besar yang telah terjadi berbilion-bilion tahun lamanya, yang beredar mengililingi satu sama lain, yang diatur dengan begitu teratur, teliti dan harmonis, terjadi dari peringkat terendah ke peringkat tertinggi, dari yang paling mudah dan yang paling kecil kepada yang paling kompleks, terjadi tanpa dijadikan oleh suatu kuasa yang maha kuat, maha bijak, dan maha mengetahui! Kita ingin bersikap murah hati kepada Dawkins dan ahli-ahli sains yang masyhur, seperti Einstein, Carl Sagan, Steven Weinberg dan Stephen Hawking, bahawa mungkin kita bercakap mengenai perkara yang sama, tetapi bahasa kita berbeza. Bahasa menjadi masalah di antara kita.

Mereka sendiri mengiktiraf kewujudan suatu struktur dan harmoni yang hebat pada Alam Raya [8], tetapi mereka enggan mengiktiraf kuasa lampau deria (supra-sensory)dan lampau rasional (supra-rational) yang wujud di belakang atau di dalamnya, yang bertanggunjawab kepada wujudnya Alam Raya ini dan evolusinya.

Apabila kita bercakap tentang agama, maksud kita bukan sembarangan agama, tetapi agama yang benar (din’ul-haqq) [9], agama Allah (din’ul-Lah),[10] yang juga dinamakan Islam dalam Quran.[11] Inilah yang dikatakan agama tauhid, monoteisme, yang bermula dari Nabi Adam, membawa kepada Nabi Ibrahim, melalui nabi-nabi Musa dan Isa, hingga kepada nabi yang terakhir, Nabi Muhammad. Agama tauhid yang dibawa oleh mereka sama, iaitu beriman kepada Tuhan Yang Esa dan menyembah Dia saja, dan tidak menyembah lain daripada Dia. Tetapi, apa yang telah berlaku ialah, lebih kurang tiga ratus tahun setelah nabi-nabi ini wafat, ajaran yang mereka bawa itu bertukar dari agama tauhid murni yang asal kepada agama banyak tuhan. Hal ini berlaku kepada kebanyakan pengikut-pengikut Nabi Nuh, Nabi Ibrahim, Nabi Musa, Nabi Isa, dan termasuk Nabi Muhammad. Kita menekankan perkara pengikut-pengikut Nabi Muhammad, kerana, pada hari ini, kebanyakan mereka menganggap mereka mengikut agama yang betul, sedangkan mereka juga telah masuk perangkap yang sama! Oleh sebab itu, dalam Quran disebut mereka yang beriman dari kalangan orang-orang Yahudi, Kristen dan dari kalangan pengikut-pengikut agama-agama lain, termasuk agama Islam. [12] Tetapi, dalam kes pengikut-pengikut Nabi Muhammad, dan ini juga terpakai kepada pengikut-pengikut semua agama, kitab suci Quran, yang dibawa oleh Nabi Muhammad, satu-satunya kitab suci yang dijamin kemurniannya oleh Tuhan Sendiri,[13] berdiri sebagai hakim (furqan) kepada semua ajaran, agama, falsafah, sains, dulu dan kemudian. [14] Oleh yang demikian, keperluan manusia dalam Abad Ke-21 ini ialah mencari pedoman yang mujarab sekali untuk menyelamatkan mereka dari kehancuran total yang menunggu dan dekat, iaitu memeluk ajaran Quran, yang bukan saja rasional dan saintifik, tetapi merangkumi alam supra-rasional, yang juga rasional dan saintifik, dalam ertikata yang sebenarnya.

Kita tidak akan menutup esei ini, kecuali setelah kita jawab bantahan yang paling kuat, tetapi yang tidak ditimbulkan oleh Dawkins dalam buku ini, iaitu soal kejahatan. Kata mereka yang tidak beriman, “Jika Tuhan Maha Berkuasa, mengapa Ia tidak menghapuskan kejahatan? Oleh kerana Tuhan membiarkan kejahatan berleluasa dalam dunia, maka Ia tidak berkuasa menghapuskannya. Oleh itu, Dia bukan Tuhan. Jadi, Tuhan tidak ada.”

Jawapan kepada soalan ini mudah saja. Tuhan memberikan manusia kebebasan untuk menentukan hidupnya. Baik dibalas baik; jahat dibalas jahat. Yang baik itu daripada Tuhan; yang jahat itu akibat perbuatannya sendiri.[15] (Perhatikan ajaran Quran yang sangat menasabah ini bersalahan dengan fahaman kaum Asya’ariah yang memperukunkan bahawa “baik dan jahat itu dari Tuhan”.) Oleh kerana manusia sendiri gagal menghalang kejahatan-kejahatan yang dilakukan oleh pemimpin-pemimpin mereka (umpamamnya, pengeboman Hirishoma dan Nagasaki dalam Perang Dunia Kedua, serangan dan penaklukan Iraq yang haram oleh Amerika Syarikat dan sekutunya dalam 2003, dan banyak lagi jenayah), maka jenayah-jenayah ini berlaku, dan manusia harus terima akibat-akibatnya. Jenayah-jenayah ini tidak diperintahkan oleh Tuhan (seperti yang didakwa oleh George Bush dalam kes jenayahnya di Iraq), malah Tuhan melarangnya keras.

Kita juga ingin menarik perhatian Dawkins bahawa motivasi untuk berbuat baik dalam ajaran Quran bukan saja kerana balasan. Motivasi yang lebih tinggi dari balasan material (syurga) ialah kepuasan dari perbuatan baik itu sendiri. [16]

Satu lagi kekeliruan ialah perbezaan antara pengetahuan Tuhan dan perbuatan-Nya. Tuhan Maha Mengetahui; oleh itu, Dia tahu dari azali apa yang akan dilakukan oleh seseorang. Tetapi pengetahuan ini tidak bermakna kemestian bagi pelaku itu. Pelaku itu (manusia) tetap bebas melakukan apa yang dia hendak lakukan dan dengan demikian bertanggungjawan atas perlakuan itu. Walaupun Tuhan tahu, Tuhan tidak bertanggungjawab atas perlakuan itu.

Kassim Ahmad seorang penulis bebas Malaysia. Beliau boleh dihubungi di kassim03@streamyx.com dan kasmad172@yahoo.com.my Laman web beliau http://www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com/

---

[1] Bantam Press, Great Britain, 2006. Disenaraikan sebagai 10 buah buku bukan fiksi terlaris dalam pasaran.

[2] Ada tiga cara Tuhan berkomunikasi dengan manusia, iaitu (a) melalui wahyu atau ilham, (b) dari sebalik tabir (hijab), seperti dalam kes percakapan Tuhan dengan Nabi Musa, dan (c) melalui seorang rasul. Lihat Quran, 42: 51.

[3] Archimedes, ahli sains Yunani, kononnya, telah melafazkan perkataan “eureka!”, kerana terlalu gembira mendapat suatu cara untuk mengukur keasliaan emas.

[4] Lihat Quran, 102: 7

[5] Lihat Quran, 102: 9.

[6] Lihat Quran, 69: 51.

[7] Lihat Quran, 2: 255.

[8] Sila rujuk kata-kata mereka pada hal. 12-19 dalam buku ini.

[9] Lihat Quran, 9: 33; 48: 28 dan 61: 8-9.

[10] Lihat Quran, 3: 82 dan 110: 2.

[11] “Agama yang diredai Allah ialah Islam.” (Quran, 3: 19)

[12] “Mereka yang beriman, sama ada orang Yahudi atau orang Kristen, atau orang Sab’in; sesiapa saja yang beriman kepada Tuhan, kepada Hari Kemudian dan berbuat baik akan mendapat ganjaran dari Tuannya. Mereka tidak perlu bimbang atau berdukacita.” (Quran, 2: 62). Orang Sab’in merujuk kepada pengikut-pengikut agama di luar Tradisi Ibrahim.

[13] Lihat Quran, 15: 9 dan 41: 41-42.

[14] “Kemudian Kami mengwahyukan kepada kamu kitab suci ini, dengan benarnya, mensahkan semua kitab suci dulu dan mengatasi mereka.” (Quran, 5: 48)

[15] Lihat Quran, 4: 79.

[16] “Sembahyangku, pengorbananku, hidupku dan matiku semata-mata kerana Allah Tuan seru sekalian alam.” (Quran, 6: 162-63)

SATU LAGI PELAJARAN UNTUK UMAT ISLAM

SEKARANG DARI ISLAMABAD

Oleh: Kassim Ahmad

9 Julai, 2007

Apabila pentadbiran neo-kon Bush di Washington mengisytiharkan Perang Anti-Keganasan di seluruh dunia selepas peristiwa 9/11 tahun 2001, ramai orang melihat perang ini sebagai suatu muslihat puak neo-kon untuk menjatuhkan Presiden Saddam Hussein, menawan Iraq dan mendominasi kawasan Asia Barat yang strategik itu. Setelah lima tahun lebih, walaupun kes Iraq jelas suatu muslihat untuk menjatuhkan Saddam ternyata benar, suatu kalangan kecil dari orang Islam telah bangkit untuk memberontak, malah mangamuk, terhadap kuasa-kuasa Barat dan sekutu mereka . Pemberontakan dan amukan ini telah bermula lebih satu dekad yang lalu. Peristiwa 850 pelajar Pakistan, termasuk 600 pelajar wanita, yang berlindung dalam Masjid Merah di Islamabad, di bawah hasutan seorang mullah dengan tujuan hendak memaksa Kerjaan Pakistan melaksanakan pertadbiran a-la Taliban di bandar itu merupakan suatu lagi bukti bahawa golongan ini sanggup menggunakan kekerasan untuk mencapai matlamat mereka. Mereka ini bersenjatakan raifal Kalashnikov dan lebih dari 16 orang pelajar dan seorang asykar sudah terbunuh.

Bolehkah umat Islam sendiri membenarkan perkara ini berlaku? Tentu tidak. Bukan saja kerana cara kekerasan tidak dibenarkan dalam Islam, tetapi sebagai agama dan satu cara hidup yang mengutamakan kedamaian, Islam sendiri tidak mensahkan matlamat ini.

Jadi, apakah matlamat Islam sebenarnya? Mengapakah wujud kumpulan militan yang sanggup memaksakan undang-undang syari’ah (konsep undang-undang syari’ah juga berbeza di kalangan orang Islam sendiri) dalam sesebuah negara Islam, seperti Pakistan?

Walaupun kita fikir umat Islam sudah terlewat untuk menanyakan soalan-soalan ini serta mengambil langkah-langkah untuk membetulkannya (Lihat bagaimana kuasa-kuasa Barat yang menentukan nasib orang-orang Islam), kita masih percaya kepada kata-kata hikmah, “Tiada yang terlewat.”

Masalah kita memang tidak boleh diselesaikan, kecuali kita ketahui puncanya. Semua orang Islam tahu, diperturunkan dari ajaran Empat Imam Besar, bahawa sumber undang-undang Islam ialah dua yang utama, iaitu Quran dan Hadis/Sunnah, dengan tiga lagi sumber sampingan, iaitu Ijmak, Qias dan Ijtihad. Mengkaji sejarah Islam awal dan mengkaji kitab suci Quran, kita akan mendapat tahu bahawa sumber utama dalam Islam ialah Quran (yang, walaupun wahyu daripada Tuhan, dibawa oleh Nabi Muhammad; oleh itu, frasa “taatilah Allah dan taatilah rasul” dalam Quran bermakna “ikutlah Quran”, bukan “ikut Quran dan Hadis/Sunnah”). Sumber undang-undang yang kedua ialah “pihak yang berkuasa” (ulil-amr). “Pihak berkuasa ini” boleh meliputi konsep-konsep klasik Hadis/Sunnah, Ijmak, Qias dan Ijtihad. Nabi Muhammad sendiri, sebagai pemimpin kepada masyarakat Arab pada waktu itu, melakukan ijtihatnya dalam banyak hal, yang tidak disebut secara langsung dalam Quran. Umpamanya, Piagam Madinah yang masyhur itu ialah ijtihad Nabi Muhammad.

Sesetengah kalangan dalam Islam akan menuduh kita menyeleweng, kerana telah tidak mengikut ajaran ulama yang muktabar. Saya ingin bertanya: “Adakah salah kita membuat tafsiran yang baru, yang sesuai dengan tuntutan zaman kita, dan yang tidak bercanggah dengan ajaran Quran? Sebaliknya, tidakkah mereka yang taksub kepada Empat Imam Besar sudah membuat kesilapan besar mendewakan mereka?

Pada awal abad Islam, lebih kurang pendirian inilah dibawa oleh puak Muktazillah, puak rasionalis dalam masyarakat Islam awal. Malangnya, mereka telah kalah kepada puak Ahli Sunnah Wal-Jama’ah dan teologi puak kedua ini diterima oleh generasi-generasi Islam kemudian hingga ke hari ini. Tetapi, kita harus ingat, dalam hal kebenaran, bilangan ramai tidak semestinya betul, dan bilangan kecil tidak semestinya salah.

Penulis ini telah menganjurkan penilaian semula prinsip-prinsip undang-undang syari’ah ini sejak tahun 1986, apabila bukunya Hadis – Satu Penilaian Semula terbit. Dua puluh satu tahun sudah berlalu, dan kita disuakan dengan “Islam hadhari” oleh pepmimpin kita yang baru, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Bolehkah kita menyelesaikan masalah ini dengan preskripsi Islam hadhari? Orang akan bertanya: Mengapa Islam hadhari? Mengapa tidak Islam saja? Kepada soal ini tidak ada jawapan yang memuaskan. Oleh yang demikian, Islam hadhari tidak boleh menyelesaikan masalah kita. Pemimpin-pemimpin kita mestilah berani berhadapan dengan realiti dan mengambil tindakan-tindakan yang sesuai untuk mengatasi masalah ini dengan segera.

Reformasi pelajaran agama, mereformasi dan memodenkan golongan ulama dan membuat golongan umara menghayati pandangan hidup Islam – ini semua kita telah buat dan patut diteruskan, tetapi ini semua bukan soalan pokok. Soalan pokok ialah: sumber utama bimbingan kita. Sumber utama bimbingan kita ialah Quran, dengan sumber-sumer lain mengambil tempat kedua. Apa jua ajaran yang selaras dengan ajaran Quran boleh dan wajib dipakai; apa jua ajaran yang bercanggah dengan ajaran Quran (secara terang-terang), tidak boleh dipakai.

Perkara ini sepatutnya kita selesaikan antara kita sendiri lama dulu, sebelum campur-tangan kuasa-kuasa Barat di Afghanistan dan di Iraq. Tetapi kita semua tahu pertubuhan OIC dalam kocek Amerika Syarikat. Tidak ada negara Islam yang bebas sepenuhnya. Ini semua kesilapan kita sendiri. Kita tidak sedar bahawa Islam itu bermakna pembebasan dari segala bentuk perhambaan. Kebanyakan orang Islam mengaggap agama sebagai ibadah semata-mata, ibadah dalam ertikata yang sempit. Kita perlu tukar sikap kita dan kembali menghayati Islam sebagai suatu cara hidup yang direstu oleh Allah s.w.t. Pada waktu itu umat Islam akan keluar dari kemelut besar ini dan bangkit semula membina sebuah dunia yang aman, adil dan bahagia, bukan saja untuk umat Islam, tetapi untuk semua manusia.

Kassim Ahmad seorang penulis bebas Malaysia. Beliau boleh dihubungi di kassim03@stremyx.com and kasmad172@yahoo.com.my. Laman web beliau www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com

RELIGION, LOGIC AND REASON *

By: Kassim Ahmad

31 May, 2007

Is it possible for religion to dwell in the same world as logic and reason? For many people, believers as well as atheists, it is not possible, because religion demands faith, while logic and reason dwell in a lawful rational world.[1] This matter has divided mankind into two camps: the religious that either follows the religion of their ancestors uncritically, or the fanatics who would kill to defend and promote their religion blindly; and those who reject religion and the existence of God, i.e. the atheists. However, there exists another group which accepts religion and the existence of God, while at the same time, equally accepting logic and reason. They are the monotheists, or followers of the religion of unity. In the Quran, they are called mukmin or believers (we would prefer the term ‘affirmers’), i.e. they affirm the existence of God, and muslim, i.e. submitters to the monotheistic system of the religion of unity.

The religious life has existed from very early times in human society, because the social character of that society demands it. Birth, marriage, death, sickness and, in fact, the daily activities of the community needed to be regulated by customs, which included religious beliefs and rituals, which defined their relations with the Divine. All religions embrace matters regarding belief in one god, or many gods, with defined powers, and the rituals of how humans appease him or them, how to supplicate his or their help so that their supplication is met with approval, as well as the beliefs in rewards and punishments and in afterlife.

Due to the limitations as well as the evolutionary character of his knowledge, human beings lack knowledge about many things, especially about the future. For example, the afterlife to him is the “unseen” world, or the invisible world until that world comes into being, or manifests itself. So is God invisible, until such time as He chooses to manifest Himself. So, these worlds though invisible now are going to be visible at some future time, and are therefore not inconsistent with a logical and rational order. Indeed, this Universe becomes irrational, if there was no Power that creates and guides it, that Power, whom we call God, being Power, is, ipso facto, Self-Existent. So is afterlife a logical necessity as a continuation of the present life. For that reason, belief, or, better termed, affirmation of the existence of afterlife and the existence of God, far from being illogical and irrational, is fully logical and rational.

Be it as it may, we must admit that many things in all religions take on the character of myths: the Greek gods of Olympus, the myriad Hindu gods, the myth of the world being supported on horns of a bull; the myth of the Javanese Ratu Adil (the awaited Queen of Justice) and kindred Judeo-Christian and Muslim beliefs in the coming of a Leader or Messiah and the Second Coming of Christ at the “End Times” to bring about a world of justice. However, all these myths have either cleared up or will clear up with the advance of knowledge. There is no mysticism about the coming of a just world. We do not need a Messiah to bring it about. Man is the messiah. It will be the result of his long, persistent, recurring, developing, widening and deepening high endeavour. It will come into being as certainly as the day follows the night.

At this early juncture in our essay, it should be noted that religions group themselves into two major categories. Firstly, the heavenly religions of divine revelation, such as revealed to Moses (later became Judaism), Jesus (later became Christianity, and Muhammad (Islam of Muhammad’s time later to become Sunnism and Shi’ism) – the Abrahimic Tradition. Hinduism and some other major religions might also be included in this category, but coming outside the Abrahimic Tradition. Secondly, the non-heavenly nature-religions, such as animism, shamanism and the like. The first category is the religion based on the belief in One God, or monotheism, or the religion of unity. The second category includes beliefs based on many gods, or many spiritual powers.

Although Judaism and Christianity originated from the monotheistic faith of Abraham, after about three hundred years, beliefs alien to monotheism crept in and became part of the religions.[2] The same thing happened to the Islam of Prophet Muhammad. (It should be noted that the religions brought by Abraham, Moses and Jesus was essentially the same monotheistic religion of Islam but historically suited to their times.) This perfected Islam of Muhammad has also changed, just as the religions of Judaism, Christianity and others. That is why it is acceptable to say believers from among the Jews, Christians, Hindus and others, including Muslims, implying that the majority of them have become disbelievers.[3]

However, the Christians had their religious Reformation in the 16^th Century aimed at cleansing the religion from the corrupt practices of the Catholic Church, especially the Papacy. The results of this reformative movement were the separation of Church and State, freeing the European mind from the oppressive clutches of the Church, limiting the Pope’s and the Church’s powers to religious and moral issues only, and the introduction of secularism into Europeans life. For the Muslim world, modernist reforms began with the modernization movement of Jamaluddin al-Afghani (1839-1897) and Sheikh Muhammad Abduh (1849- 1905), which, after more than a hundred years, achieved limited success in legal and educational fields. Rather, it may be said that the orthodox groups have increased their influence in Muslim societies almost everywhere since the revolutionary victory of the Iranian religious class in 1979. In Malaysia, the liberal, in fact, progressive methodologies applied by the Government to circumvent religious orthodoxy (“good values” or “Islamic values”, under Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohammad, and “Civilizational Islam” under Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi), have succeeded to bring in limited modernization into the life of Muslims, but whether this methodology will achieve total success, and how long it can contain the increasing onslaught of the religious orthodoxy, we cannot say.[4] We would rather vote for a fail-safe methodology, i.e. calling the Muslims and the people back to the teachings of Quran, wisely and liberally interpreted, as Prophet Muhammad himself did. [5]

However, we must distinguish between Islam and other religions. Islam is different from other religions in the following ways. The scripture brought by Muhammad, the Holy Quran, describes Islam as a natural religion [6] sanctioned by God,[7] whereas other revealed religions, including Judaism and Christianity have changed to incorporate polytheistic elements into their theologies and practices.[8] Islam, as taught in the Quran, remains a pure and strict monotheism.[9] Although Islam affirms the existence of invisible worlds, such as the existence of God and the Day of Judgement and requires its adherents to believe in them, such beliefs are truthful and not contrary to logic and reason. On the other hand, beliefs other false powers, like the devil and its like, are not necessary, and are, in fact, prohibited.[10]

So, Islam, as represented by the Quran, is not an anti-logical and anti-rational religion. It is completely coherent with reason. We shall investigate these characteristics of Islam further.

Firstly, its monotheism is simple, clear, definite and pure. It is based solely on the belief in One God, unadulterated with beliefs in other gods than This One God. Affirmation in this One God is extremely important. Hence the affirmative sentence begins with a clear and total denial and refutation of other gods (la ‘ilah=there is no god), and only after this denial that affirmation is made in this One and Only God. This means that man is free from all false powers, i.e. that he is free from all forms of idolatry that have been set up by society to subjugate man, individually and collectively. At that moment, man is sovereign, able to decide his own destiny.

This chief characteristic of Islamic monotheism is further strengthened by the concept of man as khalifah, God’s vicegerent, mentioned in the Quran.[11] One of the meanings of the Arabic word ‘khalifah’ is ruler. Man, individually and collectively, is a ruler. He rules over himself and his society, by the authority of God. Although this freedom is precarious and fraught with danger, [12] it is given, indicating God’s faith in the goodness and capability of man, the crown of His creation.

Man is also capable of knowledge, having been taught by God Himself, [13] thus indicating that the world is knowable. He is superior even to the angels, having the faculty of reason and intelligence. His superiority to the angels is symbolized in the Divine order to the angels to prostrate to Adam. That is because at the time of his creation, God breathed into him a breath of His soul and subjected the whole of creation to man’s use.[14] What tremendous potential power man has!

This vast concept of human sovereignty appears to contradict the vaster concept of Divine Sovereignty, the true source of all power in the Universe.[15] How do we reconcile the two opposed concepts of power? We shall not deal with this problem here. We shall only take note of the effects of this power when Muhammad in 7^th Century Arabia and his immediate followers in the next sixty years completely liberated Arabia from idolatry and the evil effects of this idolatry and to make almost unknown Arabia into a world power above the two world powers of that time, The Roman Empire and the Persian Empire, and to forge a literary and scientific civilization that lighted the way to the European Renaissance out of its long Dark Ages. [16]

But when the Muslims themselves deviated, against the clear warnings of the Quran [17] after some 250-300 years, and went back their old ways of idolatry and tribalism: the rise of a so-called ulama class, arbitrating their religion, like the Jews and the Christians before; the introduction of a new flawed source, apart from the Quran, the so-called Hadith/ Sunnah; [18] the breakup into sects and fixed schools of legal thought; and the emergence of a new form of escapism from active life, a mysticism called tasawwuf (because of the crass materialism that had developed in official society soon after Muhammad’s death and the fear to confront it), neither taught in the Quran, nor illustrated in the Prophet’s life, [19] their fate was sealed. They fell. Europe, after going through a Religious Reformation, and the new Republic of the United States, an extension and outgrowth of Europe, replaced them to become the new torch-bearers of human progress. [20]

As stated in the Quran, idolatry is yet the greatest mistake a human being or a human society can commit. We are strictly forbidden by God to idolize any human beings, particularly prophets and leaders.[21] Do we realize that we have, perhaps unconsciously and inadvertently, idolized Prophet Muhammad? Setting up Hadith/Sunnah as a source on par with the Quran, and, some time, even above the Quran, thorough the methodology of “Hadith interpreting the Quran” is a subtle form of this idolatry. The setting up of the ulama class to arbitrate our religion for us is another form of idolatry, prohibited to us by God. We have merely imitated the Christians and the Jews!

A Malay proverb requires us to retrace our steps should we lose our way. This is age-old wisdom that is proper for us to follow now, given the mistakes we have made. The beginning of our journey is God and the Quran. We should go back to the Quran to find our bearings. We should be grateful to God that we still have this incomparable book with us, the only scripture whose authenticity is guaranteed by God Himself. [22]

We are living in a world defined and developed by science and technology. We should realize that the Quran itself opened the way for the Age of Science and Technology in human history.[23] As the Pakistani philosopher, Muhammad Iqbal, pointed out, it was Muhammad who began the scientific age.[24] Malaysia is lucky to have leaders who encourage scientific developments in our country. We should proceed more firmly and completely along this line, while deepening our understanding of this Book to guide us into the near and far future.

Religion, science and philosophy are three fundamental areas of knowledge. Religion deals with the spiritual world; science the physical; and philosophy the mental. As the Universe is one integrated whole, so are these three branches of knowledge of the Universe one integrated whole and there is no contradictions among them. The contradictions that we seen in the past are due to our lack of knowledge as well as our mistaken interpretation of that knowledge. But the future, as Philosophy Professor Errol E. Harris has stated, points to rapproachement between religion and science. [25]

Science cannot reject the existence of God, because, to borrow Prof. Harris’s most apt phraseology, “the existence of God is the absolute and most indispensable presupposition of science”, which cannot operate in a physical world that does not run on a lawful and rational basis. Religion cannot reject science, which studies the operation of this physical world that is the manifestation of God. Likewise, philosophy cannot reject the existence of God, because logic and reason which is the methodology of philosophy is also the methodology of the being and becoming of this world. The unification of these three fundamental categories of knowledge will, no doubt, usher in a new era in man’s history to greatly accelerate man’s scientific and technological advancement and take him nearer to his age-old dream of complete universal happiness, that, in the religious terminology, is Paradise.

_____________

* An English rendering of the original essay in Malay entitled “Agama, Logik dan Akal”, (not an exact translation) published in the blog on 27 May, 2007 – K.A.

Kassim Ahmad is a Malaysian freelance writer. He can be contacted at kasmad172@yahoo.com.my His website is www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com

---

[1] Mazlan Nordin, in his weekly column in Mingguan Malaysia (20 May, 2007, p. 9), reported a current debate in the West over a best-selling book by Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, in which the author states that faith without proofs is extremely dangerous. Some philosophers argue that questions regarding the origin, nature and purpose of existence are pseudo-problems and meaningless. The Universe just exists.( See Errol E. Harris, Nature, Mind and Modern Science, George Allen & Unwin, London, 1954; p. 3.)

[2] The religion brought by Jesus Christ changed at the Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.) where the so-called Nicene Creed, based on the Trinity, was first promulgated. The rebellion of the Jews is well-known. They refused to believe in Prophet Muhammad, although his advent was foretold in the Torah, simply because he was not a Jew, and plotted to kill him. They also attempted to kill Jesus Christ.

[3] Several Quranic verses state so. One of them goes like this: “Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians and the Sab’in -- anyone who believes in God and the Last Day, and leads a righteous life – they will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.” (2: 62) Sab’in means those religious followers outside the Abrahimic Tradition.

[4] The question of apostasy characterizes true Islam from deviated Islam. The Quran is the first book to enunciated clearly the principle of the freedom of conscience thirteen centuries ahead of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 in a famous verse that goes, “There shall be no compulsion in religion: the right way is now distinct from the wrong way. Anyone who denounces the devil and believes in God has grasped the strongest bond, one that never breaks. God is Hearer, Omniscient.” (2: 256). Death penalty for apostasy, taken from the Bible (see Deuteronomy, 22: 20-30), since adopted for this deviated Islam, comes through a Prophetic tradition, obviously a fabricated tradition.

[5] In this age, we need a scientific methodology of tafsir. The classical methodology of “Hadith interpreting the Quran” is clearly time-bound and inadequate. It needs to be updated to keep up with the advance of knowledge. See Kassim Ahmad, Hadis – Jawapan Kepada Pengkritik, media Indah, Kuala Lumpur, 1992; Chapter 7.

[6] “Therefore, you shall devote yourself to the religion of strict monotheism. Such is the natural instinct placed into the people by God. Such creation of God will never change. This is the perfect religion, but most people do not know.” (Quran, 30: 30) “Would they seek other than God’s religion when everything in the heavens and on earth has submitted to Him, willingly or unwillingly? To Him they will all return.” (Quran, 3: 83)

[7] “The only religion approved by God is Islam.” (Quran, 3: 19)

[8] See note 2 above.

[9] The Islam of Muhammad’s time remained as it was originally revealed, for its scripture, the Quran, is divinely protected from human corruption. “No falsehood could enter it, in the past or in the future, a revelation from the Most Wise, Praiseworthy.” This divine protection lies in its closely-and- mathematically-structured composition, known as Code 19. See Rashad Khalifa, The Computer Speaks: God’s Message to the World, Islamic Productions, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A., 1981 and Quran: Visual Presentation of the Miracle, Islamic Productions, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A., 1982. See also his English translataion of the Quran, Quran – The Final Testament, Islamic Productions, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A, 1989.

[10] “When you read the Quran, seek refuge in God from the rejected devil. He has no power over those who believe and trust in their Lord. His power is limited to those who ally themselves with him and fall into idol worship.” (Quran, 16: 98-100)

[11] See Quran, 2: 30-34.

[12] See verse 72 of Chapter 33 where God symbolically offered freedom and responsibility to all His creation to take on the administration of the Universe. All refused out of fear; only man dares to accept the offer, and God mildly chides him for it. At another place, God prohibits him from approaching the Tree of Knowledge and Freedom, for the danger implicit in this freedom. (Quran, 2: 35) But, again, God has already showed his faith and trust in man when he overruled the angels’s opposition to man’s creation as ruler, saying that He knew better. (Quran, 2: 30)

[13] See Quran, 2: 31-33.

[14] “He committed in your service everything in the heavens and on earth (Quran, 45: 13)

[15] “No one possesses power except God.” (Quran, 18: 39)

[16] See Phillip K. Hitti, History of the Arabs, Macmillan Press, London, 1970; p. 142. See also A Concise History of Islam, Djambatan, Amsterdam, 1957; pp.6-11.

[17] As an example, see verse 25: 31 which states that God causes enemies from among the criminals to foil the message of every prophet to test the extent of believers’ commitment.

[18] See Kassim Ahmad, Hadis – Satu Penilaian Semula, Media Intelek, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia, 1986 and Delima Umat Islam – Antara Hadis dan Quran, Forum Iqra’, Penang, Malaysia, 2002.

[19] “… We sent Jesus the son of Mary and gave him the Gospel and We placed in the hearts of his followers kindness and mercy. But they invented hermitism which We never decreed for them. All We asked them to do was to uphold the commandments approved by God. But they did not uphold the message, as they should have. Consequently, We gave those who believed among them their recompense, while many of them were wicked.” (Quran, 57: 27) A Prophetic tradition, reported by Bukhari and Muslim, states the same thing: “Once after the Prophet delivered a lecture on the truth of Judgement Day and the judgement before God, a number of Companions met at the house of ‘Uthman bin Maz’um and stated their resolve to fast every day, to pray every night, to refrain from sleeping on beds, to refrain from eating meat and fat, refrain from having contact with women and avoid the use of perfumes; to wear only coarse clothes, and in general to reject the world. When the Prophet heard this, he said to them: ‘I have not been ordered by God to adopt this life-style. Your body has rights over you: so, fast, but also cease from fasting; pray at night, but also sleep. I fast, but I also do not fast. I take meat and fat, and I also marry. Whoever turns away from my way, is not of me.” Sufism has great names as their proponents, including “the greatest Master” Ibni Al-Arabi (1165-1240 A.D.) in classical times, and the famous Iranian scholar, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, in modern times. We shall reserve discussion of this important topic for later. Here we are content to leave the matter with the two quotations from the Quran and the Prophetic tradition.

[20] Replacement of unfit species by fitter ones is a natural law. The Quran states it in many places, one of them thus, “If you turn away, I have delivered to you what I was sent with. My Lord will substitute other people in your place; you cannot harm Him in the least. My Lord is in control of all things.” (11: 57)

[21] “God does not forgive the idolization of any idols besides Him, and He forgives all lesser offences for whomsoever He wills. Anyone who idolizes any idol besides God has gone far astray.” (Quran, 4: 116) Regarding those who idolize prophets and religious leaders, the Quran states, “They will say, ‘Our Lord, we obeyed our masters and elders and they misguided us.’” (33: 67). There exists one and only verse in the Quran referring to those who set up two gods: “God says, ‘Do not set us two gods; there is only one God. You shall reverence Him.’” (16: 51) Since we know those who believe in three gods (Trinity) and in many gods, which religious community does this verse allude to?

[22] See note 8 above.

[23] The very first revelation to Muhammad was the command to read in God’s name. See Quran, 96: 1-5.

[24] In his book, The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, Lahore, 1958, Iqbal states: “… the Prophet of Islam seems to stand between the ancient and the modern world. In so far as the source of his revelation is concerned, he belongs to the ancient; in so far as the spirit of his revelation is concerned, he belongs to the modern world. In him life discovers other sources of knowledge suitable to its new direction. The birth of Islam … is the birth of the inductive intellect. In Islam prophecy reaches its perfection in discovering the needs of its own abolition. This involves the keen perception that life cannot forever be kept in leading strings; that in order to achieve full self-consciousness man must finally be thrown back on its own resources…” (p. 126). The English historian of culture, Robert Briffault, in his extremely perceptive book, The making of Humanity, Islamic Book Foundation, Lahore, 1819, states: “ … The debt of our science to that of the Arabs does not consist in startling discoveries or revolutionary theories; science owes a great deal more to Arab culture, it owes its existence. The ancient world was, as we saw, pre-scientific. The astronomy and mathematics of the Greeks were a foreign importation never thoroughly acclimatized in Greek culture. The Greeks systematized, generalized and theorized, but patient ways of investigation, the accumulation of positive knowledge, the minute methods of science, detailed and prolonged observation, experimental inquiry, were altogether alien to the Greek temperament. Only in Hellenistic Alexandria was any approach to scientific work conducted in the ancient classical world. What we call science arose in Europe as a result of a new spirit of inquiry, of new methods of investigation, of the method of experiment, observation, measurement, of the development od mathematics in a form unknown to the Greeks. That spirit and those methods were introduced into the European world by the Arabs.” (p. 191)

[25] Professor Errol E. Harris, in his excellent book, Nature, Mind and Modern Science, George Allen & Unwin, London, 1954. states: “… The same tendency, owing to the divine character of the higher activities of the mind, leads to a denial by some of the objectivity (i.e.the reality) of values and even of the existence of thinking itself. But though God transcends the process of deveiopemnt – as must be the case if He is its fulfillment – He is also necessarily immanent in and throughout the process – or else it could not be a process of development at all. Consequently, the existence of God is the absolute and most indispensable presupposition of science, and so far from there being an alienation of science from religion in the modern era, there is and can only be the closest rapprochement between them if both scientific and religious concepts are rightly interpreted Such alienation as there has been was due to the influence of empiricism, which created for itself a nature vacuously actual and banished from its purview the mind as a ghost in which only the superstitious could believe. God had then to be imagined as the Supreme Ghost and all things religious as ghostly – and therefore non-existent. But empiricism, though it persists, is a relic of the past without scientific basis, and has itself proved to be, in this age of evolution, relativity and quanta, an outworn and outmoded superstition.” (p. 452)