Page 1

Page 2

Page 3

Page 4

Page 5

Page 6

Page 7

Page 8

Page 9

Page 10

Page 11

 Page 12

Page 13

Page 14

Page 15

 Page 16

Page 17

Page 18

Page 7

2892


SOME BASIC POINTS ABOUT RELIGION ISLAM (part seven)

As for the quranic universe, there is only one sun and only one moon in this whole wide universe. Also see what sense it gives for the location of the sun, the moon and the stars in relation to the heavens and the earth. When you will put everything together you will see a pattern emerging ie the quranic map of the universe. Remember, do not try and look at quran according to what scientists say, look at it as it is in the quran. To look at it as it is, you can get help from commentaries on the quran that are ancient like Ibn Abbas etc. Or get explanation from Hadith books. The accepted first rule for quranic tafseer=explanation is, tafseer alqur aan bil quraan ie explanation of the quran by the quran itself. Thereafter the quran could be expounded by way of hadith ie tafseeral quraan bil Ahaadith. After that study what is the scientific map of the universe but again independently ie do not try to bend scientific explanation either to fit the quran etc and then compare the two. You will begin to realise that the quranic concept of the universe has no relation whatsoever to the scientifically observed universe. The quranic concept of the heavens and the earth and everything in between them is like a huge flat plate with things inside it like food, which is covered up by the dome like seven tops one over the other with door like holes from which thing are raised to heavens from the earth or dropped to the earth from the heavens. The quranic concept is that the heavens are up and the earth is down but, are they really like that? No.

They only seem like that when a tribal man looks at them from the Arabian desert fourteen centuries back when people had no idea what the earth or the sky looked like from the space. The idea seems to be exactly the same in the bible except that the tribal man who wrote the quran was clever enough to scatter the related verses through out the quran, for he wrote lectures rather than complete stories like other religious scriptures. That is why things became repeated so many times in the quran because most of the times he tries to explain the very same things in each and every lecture he thought were necessary for the people he was lecturing at a time in a place just like a religious preacher or a politician. Remember, he was always addressing different audiences with same speeches or same audience with the different speeches or lectures and or same audience with same lectures. When the quran was collected, perhaps lots of similar lectures were left out. I mean abrogation theory is still disputed vigorously amongst muslims scholars and whether the quran is complete or incomplete has been a matter of debate between shias and sunnies. Do not forget Muhammad was married to a jewish lady. The story of first revelation in Bukhaari should be looked at carefully. It seems jews are upto something through Muhammad. May be we will discuss this when we come to talk about origin of the quran and Muhammad‚€™s linkage with jews and its affect on Arabs. Arab chiefs did accuse him for getting ideas from jews to create problem for them.

Anyway he first began delivering shorter lectures one kind first then the longer of the same kind. Probably, because more people wanted to know more things as to what this whole of his mission was all about. The quranic lectures are actually muddled up religious and political speeches that were delivered by Muhammad even if they were not originally by him. He begins his speeches with importance of faith in god then about importance of himself as a leader of the faithful and slowly develops them into political issues of social, cultural and economic nature. I do not wish to go into detail of the actual quranic text and personality of the author at this stage, for I want to discuss the information that is in the quran about the universe just now. As explained above one should likewise see the verses about the end of the universe as well. The quran again does not state the death of individual galaxies or individual solar systems ie stars and their planets etc etc. Just like everything was created once so everything will finish off all at the same time as far as the quran is concerned. All this has no comparison to what we know through scientific observations, for we see destruction of stars and formation of new stars of which the quran is completely devoid. See 14/48, 18/47, 21/104, 55/26, 33, 37, 56/4, 69/13, 70/8, 73/14,18, 74/8, 75/8, 77/8, 78/19, 81/1, 82/1, 84/1, 89/21, 99/1 and a whole lot more verses like them all over the place. Please read Hadith book as well to get the idea. The difference between the quranic and the hadith textual styles is due to the nature of them ie one is set of lectures and the other a set of reports. It is like a newspaper reporter following a politician and recording his speeches separate from his normal activities etc etc.


12) The problem with science is that it changes with time. Not only it grows but branches out in different directions. It increases the depth of knowledge as well as its width. It expands contexts of knowledge as well as its perspectives. For example, place yourself in a room with a window to outside world. Now suppose you are away from the window at the other end of the room, would you be able to view things from the window as far and wide as you would be if you were standing at the window? The answer is, no. Well science also works something like that. It helps us to discover more physical things and then by using those discovered thing we can discover even more physical things and so on. For example, as we naturally are, with help of our brains we can work with things that are within our physical power. I may be able to break a branch of a tree and make a stick then use that to break a walnut. I may be able to use a stone for the same purpose. One day it might come to my mind that I can join the stick and the stone and make a better tool ie a hammer and use that to do something else with it. Now where there are a few people together if they talk to each other and exchange ideas, they will get many more ideas, so one can see where all this will eventually lead us. Likewise as we learned to manipulate things within our reach then they helped us to manipulate things which we could not before. You can now imagine how all inventions came about and how they changed our ideas and perceptions of things, for they changed our perspectives of looking at things in new or different contexts.

If we look at the sky from the earth with naked eye, it still looks the same as it used to because the perspective remains the same, however if we use powerful radio telescopes or go into space and look at the sky then it looks nothing like the way it looks from here on the earth. So what has changed? Our perspective has changed ie our place from where we used to look at the sky has virtually or actually changed eg we have moved to a new position to view the sky. So, what was visible context then and what is visible context now are completely different. The earth seemed vast flat surface covered by dome of sky when we look at it from the earth but now from the space the earth looks like any other planet flying around the sun and there is no blue sky. All this because our angle of viewing the earth has changed. Germs etc were always about but we never knew till we invented optic and electron microscopes as well as the means to do so. How we end up inventing things is simple ie we go about our daily business and as we do that we find problems in doing some of the things and that is where we become aware of the problems. We study the nature of the problem and that raises ideas in our minds how they may be solved. All inventions involve many many small steps, there is not a single invention that may be called a one step solution. Look at invention of wheel and how we use it today. Look at invention of gears, pulleys, belts, shafts, linkages and think about automobiles they were not invented as a single step. We invented basic electronic components and now we use them in everything. If we have a television, we want to be able to carry it with us, so we invented portable TVs. Mobile phones and so on and so forth. What happened was that when we invented a component of a system we later also came up with the idea where else they might be used etc etc. Thus one thing leads to another or ideas bread ideas. We invent things to help us expand our power over more and more things regardless how small or how large so that we could use them for our betterment or in some cases for our destruction.

Now the problem with scripture and science. As already explained religion and science do not mix. It is possible to prove religion false by way of science but it is impossible to prove it true. Science assumes about physical facts on the basis of physical facts for the purpose of their verification ie to prove whether the hypothesis is true or false. Not that we are able to do so straight away but in time when we are able to do so. This is not and cannot be true in case of religion, for in case of religion it is impossible to make scientific guesses to begin with. For example, by looking at the universe and things in it which are physical facts, you can assume there may be a creator, but is this assumption even possible to verify? The answer has to be no, it is absolutely not. Now if we know for a fact that we cannot verify a certain assumption then, is it right to call it scientific? I do not think so. On the other hand when we make scientific guesses, we also assume that they are not impossible to verify for their truth or falsehood at least because we assume them to be physical not nonphysical. The argument here is not whether we can verify them today or in a million year but that they are possible at least due to being physical in their nature of existence. We cannot verify existence of god even in a million years, not ever, for god is also assumed to be nonphysical being.

So people who use science for proving existence of god are going about the thing in a wrong way. As for the statement that it is possible to prove religion false by using science that is correct. The idea is that if religion talks about the physical world then laws of physical universe apply. Now if scriptural statements are found to be false about the physical universe then what makes us sure that the rest of the scripture is true? Now some religious brothers and sisters have reversed the argument saying that if the scriptural statements about the physical universe proves to be true then that also proves that the rest of the religious scripture is also true. Not necessarily, for it is still an assumption based on facts whose ultimate truth is still beyond the reach of science ie you cannot verify hell, heaven, god, angels etc etc. One really has to understand the difference between these two aspects of the argument. Moreover religion further complicates problems by bringing in the notion of predictions, particularly the ones that are said to be scientific. This takes us into philosophy of nature of god. That is whether god is able to predict future. I do not believe that such a being can exist, for there come about many conflicts as regard his nature. God would be an incomplete being if he lacked any of qualities that make a being perfect in sense of completion but also if he did, ie he would not be perfect in sense of goodness, which scriptures claim.

Likewise if god is infinite then he cannot be defined and if he cannot be defined then he cannot be known, for human mind only works the way it does ie we can only make sense of things we can sense and understand by way of their physical confirmation but not of things we cannot sense or understand. Now if god wanted us to understand him then he ought to create us and our rationality such that we could sense and understand him. The problem with scriptural god is that he has freewill and can do whatever he likes and knows all there is to know. The logical conclusion which is only and only assumptuous and absurd then tells us there cannot be any such god. Why not? Because if god has freewill then it shows that god has choice of doing one thing rather than the other. Let say, it was upto god to create this world or not to create it. Now if his knowledge is infinite and perfect then if it was in the knowledge of god that he will create this world then how could he not have created it? Because if he did not then that would have proved what he knew about the world was wrong. So to accept that god has any choice in any matter disproves his all knowing personality and that also assumptuously disproves personality of god as all powerful. This is a vast subject on its own I am only touching on it to show the philosophical side of the problem. The qualities with which the quran qualifies Allah do not make sense, for they cannot be verified for their truth. Moreover it will also show that it is impossible for god to predict future and therefore all predictions found in any scripture have been invented. You see when you know something is impossible and yet somebody tells you that it is possible and has even happened, what will your answer be? Let us accept for argument sake that there are predictions in the scriptures, the question is, what is the point that god wants to make by having predictions in the scriptures?

Does he want us to believe him through miracles and prophecies? If the answer is yes then where are miracles for us to believe in god today? It is not enough to tell us that they were shown to others long before us but we do not need them today. This is no answer rather it is an acceptance of the fact that there was never any miracle from any god whatever. Some one has been at it. I know who it was. It were guys who invented these religions. They ie masters made some people to act as messengers and the others to confirm them to make fool of people who had minds like babies ie the slaves. The very same is true about predictions ie they too were invented. One may ask how was that possible? It was possible because back in those days there was no education allowed for ordinary people. Only top people in the human society would have education and scribes etc etc. Rich and powerful people can sell anything they want to little children ie slaves, can‚€™t they? They are doing it very successfully even today. Anyway going back to predictions, how many predictions of what kind would prove that there is a god? Before one could attribute any predictions to god, one has to realise that that kind of predictions should not be possible for anyone else ever. If the purpose of god is to prove divine truth by predictions, only and only then predictions are important otherwise not. These predictions then ought to be in such great numbers that people had no doubt that they were from god and especially for them.

Now the quran contains only 6238 verses and it has been there for last 1400 years. Since it claims to be a universal book, so how many different universal predictions have been stated in the quran for people though out times and places? Moreover what kind of predictions are they ie vague statements or vividly stated? You see, a prediction has to be clear since it is suppose to act as a proof for divinity. If it was so vague that anyone could make anything of it or apply it anywhere then it would fail in its purpose. So as I said in the beginning any kind of divine proof needs perfect definition that none can challenge. If the definition of divine proof could be challenged then that is no proof at all. On the other hand if you leave out all necessary definitions then what are you trying to prove? Because you don‚€™t even have an unchangeable definition of the proof in place. It is as if a person is trying to bring in his case for judgement without any proof. Beside this there are other problems with predictions. If Muhammad had told Arab tribal people that there are such things as germs, what would have been there response? Would they laugh at him, what kind of people would have laughed at him and why? Would they believe him, what kind of people would have believed him and why? You see people of that time needed information that was for their own time just as people of today need information that is fit for present time. There are hardly any predictions in the quran for the people in the past so claiming that there are many predictions in the quran of scientific nature is even more absurd. Moreover if the quran contained loads of scientific statements that would have caused a serious problem for people of that time as well, for they would have said the same thing ie why are there no sufficient number of predictions for us yet so many are their for people to come? Likewise if it was not found accurate centuries later again it would have caused a huge problem. I mean, we are talking about two completely different civilisations of people and many in between the two extremes. Just as ideas of olden people make little sense to us at times so the ideas of our time would have been laughable for them as well.

You can see such differences even between people of the cities and people of the villages within the very same country. City people find village people outlandish because they are not upto date with city life and the same is true the other way round ie city people do not know how to live like villagers. Likewise people of one belief or practice find people of another belief or practice strange. Just as people of Muhammad‚€™s own time found some of Muhammad‚€™s claims strange and even laughable the same is true even today. If we look into each of the speeches or lectures ie quranic suras of Muhammad individually and see what he claims, what challengers demand and what Muhammad replies, why or how, things may make better sense.

We must remember that Muhammad had different groups of people to put his claim to eg belief wise there were jews, christians, polytheists, and atheists etc etc. Each and everyone of them had tribal chiefs and master and slaves as well as different shades of ordinary people of tribes. I mean we are talking about people with different interests. As I said before slaves were already fed up with the existing systems and practices and so were the poor. They were not educated people so they would not know whether to ask any questions of Muhammad at all or if so what? They were simply looking for a Messiah so to speak to get them out of this mess ie anything was better than the situation in which they were. They obviously could not be the tough debaters of their time. However, the people who would be ready to oppose Muhammad will be the ones who will be in loss if Muhammad succeeds. Muhammad strangely enough does not turn to jews for help who were more likely to help him and that he was sent to all so why not? May be it were jews who put him upto it and did not want to be spotted out. They were at it right from the beginning behind the scenes. They did not dismiss his claim till when Muhammad decided to go his way alone rather than their way. Why would otherwise they help him in Madina and then he kills them and enslaves them?

Anyway let us go back to the questions. It depends which group of people are target of Muhammad‚€™s speech at any given time and place. Muhammad claims to be a prophet to a particular group of people ie pagan chiefs of Makkah perhaps. They reply, what is the proof? He says, this quran is the proof ie any suras he has so far? They examine them and tell him, this is no proof, for they contain no such information as would prove you divine messenger, for they are only tales of the ancient which anyone could write etc etc. Remember the beginning suras were shorter and were only about faith in Allah. These suras mostly demanded faith in Allah by way of reward and punishment in hereafter and Muhammad‚€™s authority did not matter. When Muhammad fails to understand what the proof is, what is the way to prove himself a prophet and so fails completely in proving himself a prophet. He stops preaching. During this time he tries to commit suicide as well. After some time somehow he find some courage to make another start. The new structure of lectures he prepared are different. They now include reward and punishment for believers and disbelievers in this world as well. The idea is to create fear of imaginary god in people‚€™s mind but these people are no fool. They ask him, if he is a human. He says, yes, he is a human being just like them. Now they raise very serious philosophical questions like god does not speak to a human, he never did. If god could speak to a human he would have chosen somebody more suitable than Muhammad. I have already pointed out this so I am putting it here again for reminder that clever people of Muhammad‚€™s time were not made fool of when it came to proof and proving the religious truth. They remain adamant that their way of life was fine unless Muhammad had proof that it was not and that his way was the only way. Muhammad could not prove them wrong nor himself right. This becomes obvious when one studies the quran as regard the arguments of the nonmuslims and Muhammad. As for my opinion in this matter, both sides seems to be equally wrong which is so obvious from the quran.

Now going back to quranic scientific predictions, there are none. Each and every Sura is only expansion of the others. That is the context of the whole of the quran. Like a collection of speeches of a politician who is out campaigning for his leadership for a cause. He begins from faith and ends up on politics. That is the context of each and every sura of the quran. In each and every sura, how does he invite people to believe him is obvious from the suras. There is no talk of definition of proof, the way of proving and actual proving. He may begin from god and get into talk of frightening punishments for people or great rewards to entice them. This technique is used through out the quran and the real issue of proof, the way of proving and actual proving is not tackled at all. Not only that the quranic lectures are compiled haphazardly, for there are no reliable records about it and so muslim scholars have given them range of time but that each and every lecture is compiled haphazardly, for none can really sequence them as to which one may be before or after which. In other words just by looking at contents of each of the suras you cannot connect them together and can even dispute the imaginary chronological order given to them. All you need to do is look into the quranic suras‚€™ contents in chronological order ie the first revelation is said to be sura 96, 2nd 68, 3rd 73, 4th 74, 5th 1 and so on.

Now imagine if you were a prophet how would you go about your business ie first things first or haphazardly? Also see what is the significance of each of the suras eg sura 1 called Al Faatiha is said to teach man how to pray to Allah. Yet , if you read sura 73, Muhammad used to perform prayer already and Allah was happy with his prayer, for he did not tell him to change. Now a person must be clean and so should be his clothes etc when he prays yet that commandment comes in sura 74. So one can see that chronology of revelation makes no sense. The other example is that for Muhammad to begin his mission commandment comes in sura 74 yet the unbelievers are condemned already in the suras before that eg 96, 68, 73 etc etc. So one can see clearly that there is no sense in bit by bit revelation of the quran nor in its compilation, for all verses are muddled up anywhere and everywhere. Revelational or compilational sequence could only matter or be significant if there was some sensible order of things in the quran. Since suras do not fit together in any significant way, the quran is therefore a haphazard collection of suras. Now if we study individual suras they too suddenly switch subject matter without any sense ie many quranic lectures have been compiled haphazardly. This is the reason that the quranic text looks like a dog‚€™s breakfast. Despite all this our muslim brethren think that the quran is such a book that none can produce like it ever, even if all human beings joined together.

Let us now turn to story of Jesus in the quran. Please read 6/101. Here we are told that for god to have a child need of a goddess is absolute. The verse say, how can Allah have a child when he does not have even a wife? On one hand one has to see if god can talk like this ie make absurd statements. Such statements serve no purpose whatsoever but the author of the quran did not realise that such a state is absurd. To prove such a statement is absurd, one has to ask what purpose does it serve? Could a better statement be used to state the same objective without raising confusion? If the purpose was to tell people that god cannot have children then that could be stated as such. By bringing in the concept that both parents are necessary for having a child the quran has got itself in trouble. One, on the account of Adam, for he had no parents at all according to the quran. Two, on the account of Eve ie she did not have parents either. We have yet another problem and that is Jesus. The quran also tells us that Jesus had no father. Now talking about Jesus we also have another problem just like Abraham‚€™s problem. Abraham‚€™s god first forbids taking of a human life then orders him to kill his only son in the name of god. So what was Abraham supposed to make of all this? In case of Jesus god first sends the law that anyone who commits adultery shall be stoned to death then gets Mary to bear a child without any father and calls it a miracle. If Abraham was caught doing what he did people would have laughed at him, for telling them one thing one day and doing the opposite the very next day ie both by commandments of his god.

Moreover he could have been killed for attempted murder of his son if caught by authorities of his time. Since according to quran Abraham is a good example to follow perhaps some people will sacrifice their own children today and end up in jail. The idea that a father can sacrifice his son who is just a very young boy is very wrong. Not only because it is a waste of life but also it shows that father owns the son and can do whatever he like with him. The consent of son at such a young age is invalid. In fact more invalid because of the brought up in a fully controlled tribal environment. Again we see the tribal mentality at work. The same is true in case of Mary ie one day she is told that adultery is wrong, the next day she has to run for her life for being pregnant without any husband. Mary too is brought up in a tribal and fully controlled environment, for she too is not able to live her life on her own. Now another question, how could this be a miracle? Imagine Muhammad claiming that god created Jesus without father. He is making a statement against the observed facts of the time. Would people believe him or laugh at him for such an obvious wrong claim? I mean who would be silly enough to claim something so weird as this in the face of laws of nature? If you want to prove something, you got to go by laws of nature not against them particularly if you do bring nature as evidence. This is like saying, look at this or that evidence in nature and then turning round and saying don‚€™t bother, it is not important, for things can happen other ways as well.

Also this in fact would have opened the door to many more such miracles ie any women who becomes pregnant can then escape the legal punishment by saying that god made it happen, how would anyone know it may be true particularly before Mary because it was predicted in the previous scriptures ie a virgin will bear a child? Moreover we have the quran but no Abraham, we have the quran but no Mary to justify such quranic absurdities today. Instead of the quran proving those miracles it has disproved itself by containing such absurd statements. You see, if something is logically incorrect, for it cannot be confirmed and the scriptures contains it as correct then that scripture has to go, for it is absurd. This is not the only problem, the quran also states Noah‚€™s age 950 years, see 29/14. One wonders, how come we have such short life span whereas we are the one‚€™s who have made the discoveries that have increased the average life expectancy, we always believed that people of old did not live very long because of the way the world was ie full of predators, wars and diseases etc etc. Now how can the quran be scientific proof if it contradicts law of nature on which the science is based? It is like a person destroys a house and then says I am going to live in it and make it my home. It is important therefore not to mix religion with science or science will prove religion false. Moreover it can never prove religion true. People always had many different concepts of god, nature, religion or revelation etc etc due to being superstitious . Since no religion can be proven absolute truth therefore people believe what they like. What may seem to me a nonsense somehow makes perfect sense to somebody else.

Faith in religion is mere superstition. Superstition is based on absurd observations and absurd assumptions. For example, one day, as one gets out of the house one sees a dog cross one‚€™s path. After a while one ends up in an accident. Instead of taking accident as a normal part of daily life, one starts assuming it may have happened because of this or that, so one blames the dog crossing one‚€˜s path. After sometime another day one goes out and once more one‚€™s path is crossed by a dog. After a while something wrong happens to one, so this makes things worse ie one becomes even more convinced that bad things happen to one when a dog crosses one‚€™s path. So one begins to avoid going out and about whenever a dog crosses one‚€™s path. It does not take long after that that one begins to give credit to things for anything good that happens to one. My be one goes out and a black cat crosses one‚€™s path and later one‚€™s wins the lottery. Thus superstition develops more and more with time due to people‚€™s ignorance and completely over takes their lives. Already frightened people only need a little push to fall into the ditch of superstition. This is the only reason people become or are religious, for they assume that if they believed in god they will not only be spared the hardships of life but also be better off etc etc.