Islam is knowledge itself

[Murad]

Islam is knowledge itself. Many chapters of the Qur'an al-karim enjoin seeking knowledge and praise men of knowledge. For example, the ninth verse of Chapter Zumar declares: "Are those who know, to be considered equal with those who do not know? Truly, men of understanding will take heed more."

Our Prophet's (sall-Allahu alaihi wa sallam) utterances praising and encouraging knowledge are so plentiful and so well known that even non-Muslims know of them.

For example, while describing the virtues of knowledge, the books Ihya al-'Ulum and Mawduat al-'Ulum quote the Hadith ash-Sharif: "Go and get knowledge even if it is in China?" which means: "Go and learn even if knowledge is in the farthest place in the world and even if possessed by disbelievers! Another Hadith ash-Sharif declares: "Work and learn from the cradle to the grave!" That is, even an old man of eighty who has one foot in the grave has to work. His learning is an act of worship. Another Hadith ash-Sharif declares: Work for the next world as if you were to die tomorrow, and work for this world as if you were never going to die." And another Hadith ash-Sharif: "Little worship done with understanding is better than much worship done with ignorance." And yet another Hadith ash-Sharif states:

"Satan fears a savant more than he does a thousand devoted worshippers who are uneducated."

In Islam a woman cannot go and perform supererogatory hajj (pilgrimage) without her husband's permission. Nor can she travel or visit others. But if her husband does not teach her Islam or allow her to study Islam she may go and study it without his permission. As it is seen, while it is sinful for her to go on hajj without his permission though it is a great act of worship loved by Allahu ta'ala, it is not sinful for her to go out seeking knowledge without his permission.

Here is another Hadith ash-Sharif in which our Prophet (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa-sallam) commands us to learn: "Islam is where knowledge is; disbelief is where knowledge is absent." First, every Muslim has to learn his religion and then the secular sciences.

Nor can it be asserted that Islam is hostile to science. Science means, "observing creatures and events, studying on them so as to understand, and doing experiments to make the same." All these three are commanded by the Qur'an al-Karim. In fact, all these three are the things which Islam commands. That is, our religion commands us to learn scientific knowledge. In many places of the Qur'an al- karim, we are commanded to see and observe nature, that is, all creatures, living and lifeless beings. One day his Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur-ridwan' asked our Prophet, "Some of us who have been to Yaman saw that they budded the date trees in a different way and got better dates. Shall we bud our trees in Medina as our fathers have been doing or as we have seen them do in Yaman, thus getting better and more plentiful dates?" Rasulullah could have answered them, "Wait a bit! When Hadrat Jabrail (Gabriel) comes, I will ask him and tell you what I learn," or "I must think for a while; when Allahu ta'ala lets my heart know the truth, I will tell you." He didn't. Instead, he said, "Try it! Bud some of the trees with your father's method, and others with the method you saw being used in Yaman! Then always use the method which gives better dates!" In other words, he commanded us to experiment and to rely on experimentation, which is the basis of science. He could have learned it from the angel or no doubt, it might have materialized in his blessed heart. But he pointed out that all over the world Muslims who will exist until the end of the world should rely on experimentation and science. The event about budding the date trees is written in Kimya-i se'adet and also on the hundred and eighteenth page of Marifatnama.

Islam emphatically commands every kind of work, working in all the branches of science, on knowledge and morals. It is written in books that all these efforts are fard-i kifaya (a fard which is no longer an obligation for other Muslims when one Muslim does it. That is, when one Muslim does it, the others don't have to do it any longer). Moreover, if a tool or a means newly discovered by science is not produced in an Islamic country, and if any Muslim suffers harm for his reason, the administrators, the authorities of that country, are held responsible according to Islam.

It was declared in a hadith, "Teach your sons how to swim and how to shoot arrows! What a beautiful amusement it is for women to spin threads in their homes." This hadith commands us to procure every kind of knowledge and weaponry necessary for war, never to remain idle, and to find useful amusements.

The knowledge which Muslims have to acquire and learn is called "Ulum-i Islamiyya" (Islamic knowledges). It is fard to learn some of this knowledge. It is sunnat to learn some other branches of it, and it is mubah to learn even more of it. Islamic knowledge is mainly divided into two branches. The first one is Ulum-i naqliyya. This is also called "religious knowledge." This originates from four sources called "Adilla-i Shariyya." Religious knowledge is also divided into two: the Zahiri (external) branches of knowledge and the batini (internal) branches of knowledge.

The first ones are called the Knowledge of fiqh or Shariat; the second ones are called the knowledge of tasawwuf (sufism) or Marifat. The Shariat is learned through murshids and through the books of fiqh. Marifat goes into hearts after flowing from murshids' hearts.

The second branch of Islamic knowledge is Ulum-i 'aqliyya (experimental sciences). The branch dealing with living creatures is called Ulum-i tibbiyya (science of medicine), and the branch dealing with non-living creatures is called Ulum-i hikemiyya. The branch dealing with the sky and stars is called Ulum-i falakiyya. The knowledge dealing with the earth is called Ulum-i tabiiyya. The subdivisions of Ulum-i 'aqliyya are mathematics, logic and experimental knowledge. They are acquired by perceiving through the five senses, by observing through the mind, experimentation and calculation. These fields of knowledge help us to understand and better carry out religious knowledge. They are necessary for this reason. They change, increase and improve in the course of time. For this reason, it has been said, "Takmil-i sina'at is fulfilled by talahuk-i afkar," which means that "improvement in arts, science and technology is realized by adding to one another's ideas and experiments."

The knowledge which is acquired through tradition, that is, religious knowledge, is very exalted. It is beyond and above the mind, the power of human brains. It can never be changed by any person at any time, and this is the meaning of the statement, "There can be no reform in the religion." Islam has not prohibited or limited the knowledge which is acquired through the mind; yet it has commanded us to learn it together with religious knowledge and to utilize its results compatibly with the Shariat. It has also commanded us to make it useful for people and not to use it as a medium for cruelty, torture and disasters. Muslims made and used many scientific productions. The compass was invented in 687 [1288 A.D.]. The rifle with a trigger was invented in 1282 [1866 A.D.]. The cannon was invented in 762 and used by Sultan Muhammad, the conqueror.

Islam prohibits the teaching and learning of immorality, false history and lies against Islam, which enemies of Islam, enemies of morality, put forward as education and give the name "lessons" or "duties". Islam wants useful and good things to be learned and abstinence from bad and harmful propaganda.

Islam is a religion which encourages every branch of knowledge, every branch of science and every sort of experimentation. Muslims like science and believe in the experiments of the men of science. But, they cannot be deceived by the slanders and lies of false scientists, who introduce themselves as scientists.] Disbelievers destroy and annihilate Muslims when they are able. Or, they mislead Muslims onto a path which they have made up. ).

Once again it is fard-i kifaya for Muslims to study science, art, and to try to make the most up-to-date weapons. Our religion commands us to toil more than our enemies. Hence, Islam is a dynamic religion that commands science, experiments, and positive developments. The Europeans took many of the fundamentals of their scientific understanding from the Muslim world. For example, the Europeans thought that the earth was flat like a tray and was surrounded by a wall, while the Muslims had realized the fact that it was a revolving globe. This is written in detail in the books Sharh-ul mawaqif and Marifatnama. They measured the length of the meridian on the Sinjar Desert, which is near Musul, and determined it as it is calculated today. Nur-ud-din Batruji, who died in 581 (1185), was a professor of astronomy at an Islamic University in Andalusia. His book Al-Hayat reflects today's astronomical information. When Galileo, Copernicus and Newton studied from Muslims' books and stated that the earth was rotating, their statements were deemed heresy. Galileo, as we have said above, was subjected to a trial and was sentenced to imprisonment by Christian priests. The natural sciences were also studied and taught in old Islamic madrasas. The Andalusian madrasas guided the whole world in this respect. The one who first found out that germs caused diseases was Ibni Sina, who was educated in a Muslim environment. It was 900 years ago when he said, "It is a very little worm that makes every disease. It is a pity we do not have an apparatus to see them."

One of the great Islamic doctors, Abu Bakr Razi (rahima-hullahu ta'ala) (854-952), was the first to distinguish between scarlatina, measles, and smallpox, which were thought to be the same disease during that time. The books of such Islamic scholars had been taught in all the universities of the world throughout the Middle Ages. While the mentally- handicapped were being burned alive because they were "possessed by Satan" in the Western world, hospitals had been constructed in the Eastern world for the medical treatment of such patients.

Today, everyone with an objective mind admits the facts written above, that is, the fact that positive knowledge and science was first founded by the Muslims. This, too, is also confirmed by many Western scholars. However, some enemies of Islam, who infiltrated Muslim countries, masquerading as Muslims, seized the opportunity to get the Muslims to listen to them. They told uneducated people about their new scientific findings and facilities, and about the new weapons they produced. Then they deceived the ignorant, saying, "These are non-Muslim findings, those who use them will become non-Muslim." They caused the Muslims to forget Allahu ta'ala's command: "Learn everything."

[Qingu]

Hi Murad,

Interesting article. Just to comment on some things, since I have some background in this:

The Europeans took many of the fundamentals of their scientific understanding from the Muslim world. For example, the Europeans thought that the earth was flat like a tray and was surrounded by a wall, while the Muslims had realized the fact that it was a revolving globe.

This is not true. The ancient Greeks knew the earth was round well before the Muslims did.

There is a myth in popular culture that the Europeans only "discovered" the world was round after Columbus voyaged to the New World, but it's a myth.

When Galileo, Copernicus and Newton studied from Muslims' books and stated that the earth was rotating, their statements were deemed heresy.

While these men did use Muslim translations and books of measurements, they certainly did not base their ideas about heliocentrism on any Muslim ideas—because there were no Muslims before Copernicus who believed the earth revolved around the sun.

There was an ancient Greek philosopher named Aristarchus who believed the earth revolved around the sun, as well as a few ancient Hindu philosophers. But after that, every single scientist and philosopher—including the Muslims—believed the sun revolved around the earth. It wasn't until after Copernicus and Newton that the Muslims changed their mind about the position of the earth and the sun.

-------------

Murad, why do you think that Muslims have contributed so little to scientific advances since the 1500s? Nobody will deny that the Islamic world was a major center of science in the middle ages, more advanced than Christendom. But Christendom no longer exists—it was replaced in the 1600s with the "enlightenment," which made a huge number of scientific advances, unparalleled in the Muslim world.

In my opinion, the main reason that the West has so thoroughly surpassed the Muslim world in scientific advances is because of religion. The enlightenment secularized Europe, and so scientists were free to question and challenge widely-held assumptions about reality based on religion.

For example, today biology is based almost entirely on the work of Charles Darwin and evolution. Every biological scientific journal does work based on the theory of evolution. However, Muslims refuse to believe in evolution because it contradicts their religious scriptures. And so Muslims have completely lagged behind Westerners in almost all areas of biology, from taxonomy to genetics to medical science to ecological issues.

Similarly, Einstein's theory of relativity—which says that time and space are connected and therefore the universe could exist on its own without being created by a god—also contradicts the basic theology of the Quran. Everything, from space travel to the GPS satellites to atomic clocks to the atomic bomb, owes something to the theory of relativity. And yet Muslims refuse to accept the tenets of Einstein's theory because it contradicts their religion.

I believe that Islam is clearly an obstacle to scientific knowledge, because it sets absolute limits on what you can study to whatever doesn't contradict the scriptures. True scientific advancement is only possible if you are willing to question and challenge everything—even your scriptures.

Until Muslims are willing to do this, they will never be able to join the scientific process and will have to rely—as they have for the past 300 years—on buying and copying Western scientific advancements and inventions without understanding anything about how they work or the underlying theories that led to their creation.

[Marwan Ibrahim]

Salaam Alaikum,

Indeed, Islam is the religion of knowledge. Muslims have historically promoted higher learning as a degree of spirituality. Only with the increasing secularization and cohersion of Western, Christian society, has it been able to surpass us. Allahu Alim.

[Murad]

Hi Murad,

Hi Qingu

Interesting article. Just to comment on some things, since I have some background in this:

What background would that be my friend?

This is not true. The ancient Greeks knew the earth was round well before the Muslims did.

I believe you misconstrued europeans living in the middle ages for greeks living amongst the millenia before Christ, I also believe you have failed to realise that to the Muslim mindset, Muslims have been around since the time of Adam, with Hasret Adam being considered the first Prophet.

There is a myth in popular culture that the Europeans only "discovered" the world was round after Columbus voyaged to the New World, but it's a myth.

The fact is that it was one of Piri Reis's stolen maps that was used to reach America and you won't find that in popular culture.

While these men did use Muslim translations and books of measurements, they certainly did not base their ideas about heliocentrism on any Muslim ideas—because there were no Muslims before Copernicus who believed the earth revolved around the sun.

Incorrect my friend. They hadn't understood the Muslim works correctly, or were gagged from explaining the extent of it. You see, Muslims have always considered that the Sun swims in its own orbit, this does not mean it orbiting around the Earth, it means it is not stationary and is like the earth which also swims in its own orbit, heliocentrism however proposes the Sun being stationary with the Earth revolving around it.

Mevlana recognised and spiritualised the Muslims understanding of swimming in orbits by whirling supra-lateraly (new word) with the planets and stars there-by supererogatorily praising the All Mighty in unison with the continual praise and obedience to the All Mighty by the planets and stars .

You wont find the evidence in popular culture for this but only amongst the academics and scholars of ancient muslim theological & astronomical texts or the texts themselves, the same source copernicus had used.

It was only recently discovered the sun has its own elliptical orbit.

There was an ancient Greek philosopher named Aristarchus who believed the earth revolved around the sun, as well as a few ancient Hindu philosophers. But after that, every single scientist and philosopher—including the Muslims—believed the sun revolved around the earth. It wasn't until after Copernicus and Newton that the Muslims changed their mind about the position of the earth and the sun.

This mindset is one you can only find in popular culture or amongst the populist mindset.

Murad, why do you think that Muslims have contributed so little to scientific advances since the 1500s?

Since the 1500's, really? There are more scientists professing to the Muslim faith than there are of scientists professing to "Non-Muslim" faiths.

Nobody will deny that the Islamic world was a major center of science in the middle ages, more advanced than Christendom. But Christendom no longer exists—it was replaced in the 1600s with the "enlightenment," which made a huge number of scientific advances, unparalleled in the Muslim world.

Muslims science is an ethical science in the pursuit of humanitarian and ecological welfare and not for the pursuit of Mammon. The Science of today is only now discovering the virtuousness and magnanamity of the legacy from Muslim science whether from the complex mathametics yet simple geometry used in their intricate Art, Architecture or Robotics or from the many and diverse surgical instruments that were designed for a myriad of operational techniques.

In my opinion, the main reason that the West has so thoroughly surpassed the Muslim world in scientific advances is because of religion. The enlightenment secularized Europe, and so scientists were free to question and challenge widely-held assumptions about reality based on religion.

My friend it was what transpired from populist criticism on the translated arguments from two titans of Islamic knowledge: Imam Ghazzali & Qadi Rushd (Elgazelis & Averroes), that chisseled the Wests destiny.

For example, today biology is based almost entirely on the work of Charles Darwin and evolution. Every biological scientific journal does work based on the theory of evolution. However, Muslims refuse to believe in evolution because it contradicts their religious scriptures. And so Muslims have completely lagged behind Westerners in almost all areas of biology, from taxonomy to genetics to medical science to ecological issues.

Darwinism as an absolute philosophical concept is a fallacy all repectable proponents of evolution should steer way clear of.

If the distinction between the original creation of Man as being a divinely created complete, whole and perfected abiogene and evolution as being a divinely inspired or created adaption of a biogene to their surroundings is adhered to, the Muslim Mindset should then have no qaulms.

Similarly, Einstein's theory of relativity—which says that time and space are connected and therefore the universe could exist on its own without being created by a god—also contradicts the basic theology of the Quran. Everything, from space travel to the GPS satellites to atomic clocks to the atomic bomb, owes something to the theory of relativity. And yet Muslims refuse to accept the tenets of Einstein's theory because it contradicts their religion.

My friend Atomic-Physists are grappling with the results from experiments that show in their astonishment the existence of a divine creator however they ignore it for it being way too simplistic..Steven Weinberg even admits to this in his books, this is already recognised amongst the eschelons of academia and not from those within the popular culture.

I believe that Islam is clearly an obstacle to scientific knowledge, because it sets absolute limits on what you can study to whatever doesn't contradict the scriptures. True scientific advancement is only possible if you are willing to question and challenge everything—even your scriptures.

Anarchy is a political philosophy that only exists in an artifical utopia

Until Muslims are willing to do this, they will never be able to join the scientific process and will have to rely—as they have for the past 300 years—on buying and copying Western scientific advancements and inventions without understanding anything about how they work or the underlying theories that led to their creation.

It seems, to me, this delusion exists amongst the populist mindset living in a particular neck of woods

[Qingu]

What background would that be my friend?

I'm the science editor for an encyclopedia.

I believe you misconstrued europeans living in the middle ages for greeks living amongst the millenia before Christ, I also believe you have failed to realise that to the Muslim mindset, Muslims have been around since the time of Adam, with Hasret Adam being considered the first Prophet.

Huh? My point was that the Greeks knew the world was round long before the Muslims, and the Europeans also had this knowledge (at least their scholars did).

And yes, I'm familiar with the Muslim position that Alexander the Great was actually a Muslim and all that—one of the reasons why Islam is not really consistent with history or reality.

The fact is that it was one of Piri Reis's stolen maps that was used to reach America and you won't find that in popular culture.

I have no doubt that the medieval Europeans took many of their maps from Islamic culture, which was more advancaed at the time.

Incorrect my friend. They hadn't understood the Muslim works correctly, or were gagged from explaining the extent of it. You see, Muslims have always considered that the Sun swims in its own orbit, this does not mean it orbiting around the Earth, it means it is not stationary and is like the earth which also swims in its own orbit, heliocentrism however proposes the Sun being stationary with the Earth revolving around it.

Really? Please cite a single Islamic work—pre-Copernicus—that says the earth revolves around the sun.

If the Muslims really believed this before Copernicus this should be easy for you to find.

Mevlana recognised and spiritualised the Muslims understanding of swimming in orbits by whirling supra-lateraly (new word) with the planets and stars there-by supererogatorily praising the All Mighty in unison with the continual praise and obedience to the All Mighty by the planets and stars .

You wont find the evidence in popular culture for this but only amongst the academics and scholars of ancient muslim theological & astronomical texts or the texts themselves, the same source copernicus had used.

It was only recently discovered the sun has its own elliptical orbit.

I have no doubt that Muslim scholars claimed the sun has an orbit.

They believed the sun revolves around the earth. Of course they'd say it has an orbit.

Like I said, find me a medieval Muslim work that says the earth revolves around the sun.

Since the 1500's, really? There are more scientists professing to the Muslim faith than there are of scientists professing to "Non-Muslim" faiths.

What scientists would those be and why aren't they publishing anything?

Muslims science is an ethical science in the pursuit of humanitarian and ecological welfare and not for the pursuit of Mammon.

What Muslim science? Where are all these Muslim scientists today?

I am aware that Islam was once a center of great learning, but that was 500 years ago. Where are all these Muslim scientists today? Can you name a single Islamic scientific innovation or discovery made in the past 500 years?

My friend it was what transpired from populist criticism on the translated arguments from two titans of Islamic knowledge: Imam Ghazzali & Qadi Rushd (Elgazelis & Averroes), that chisseled the Wests destiny.

Again, these Muslim thinkers were alive almost 1000 years ago.

Like I said before, I have no doubt that the Christian Europeans stole many ideas from the Muslims. At the time, Muslims were much more scientifically advanced than the Christians.

But as soon as the Europeans stopped being Christian and became "The Secular West," suddenly they became much more advanced then the Muslims. This is why the only influential Muslims you are citing lived more than 500 years ago. Why can't you cite anyone more recent?

Darwinism as an absolute philosophical concept is a fallacy all repectable proponents of evolution should steer way clear of.

I'm not sure how to interpret this. Can you explain what you mean, please?

If the distinction between the original creation of Man as being a divinely created complete, whole and perfected abiogene and evolution as being a divinely inspired or created adaption of a biogene to their surroundings is adhered to, the Muslim Mindset should then have no qaulms.

95% of scientists and 99% of biologists believe man descended directly from ape-like ancestors. Are all these scientists wrong? They certainly don't hold the Muslim view.

My friend Atomic-Physists are grappling with the results from experiments that show in their astonishment the existence of a divine creator

What on earth are you talking about? What experiments?

however they ignore it for it being way too simplistic..Steven Weinberg even admits to this in his books, this is already recognised amongst the eschelons of academia and not from those within the popular culture.

Really? Can you please cite where Steven Weinberg admits that science has performed experiments that show a divine creator exists? I looked him up on Wikipedia and saw nothing like that in his profile or his books. I did find the following quote by him, though:

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

Are you sure this guy thinks that science has discovered a God? (Let alone your God?)

Anarchy is a political philosophy that only exists in an artifical utopia

Who mentioned anything about anarchy?

I said that scientific progress is only possible if you are willing to question and challenge authority. I find it incredibly interesting that you are apparently equating this with "anarchy."

It seems, to me, this delusion exists amongst the populist mindset living in a particular neck of woods

If what I said—that Islam is largely inconsistent with science and that the West has surpassed Islam beyond all measure scientifically—is a delusion, you should have no trouble at all pointing to some scientific advances made by Muslims in the past 500 years.

[Murad]

I'm the science editor for an encyclopedia.

Interesting, that wouldn't be editing of wickepedia by any chance now would it?

Huh? My point was that the Greeks knew the world was round long before the Muslims, and the Europeans also had this knowledge (at least their scholars did).

The excerpt of the article correctly claimed:

The Europeans took many of the fundamentals of their scientific understanding from the Muslim world. For example, the Europeans thought that the earth was flat like a tray and was surrounded by a wall, while the Muslims had realized the fact that it was a revolving globe.

However you insisted it being untrue by referring to the ancient Greeks knowledge of the world being round well before Muslim Scholars, while the excerpt had only referenced Europeans knowledge of the Earth being flat at time and how the earth had been realised by Muslims as a revolving globe, now you curiously claim European scholars had realised the earth was a round well before Muslims.

And yes, I'm familiar with the Muslim position that Alexander the Great was actually a Muslim and all that—one of the reasons why Islam is not really consistent with history or reality.

My friend, the position is of it being one of several theories of the "Two Horned one", the Illustrious and praiseworthy king and servant of Allah. There is a theory for the "two horned one" for example of being a Persian king, another of being some sort of time traveller, the horns representing epochs, another being the commander and companion of Hasret Khidr, "the green one", another servant of Allah, who brings lush green life to land that was considered to be dead and who is said to have been given the elixir of life and was also said to be another time traveller. These are all theories and God knows Best.

Nevertheless the Western historical sources we have of Alexander the great could be at most phantasm and at least folklore. The claim that Alexander the Great was a polytheist based on these obscure historical sources could be likened to claiming that the Prophet Abraham was not a monotheist because archaeological records show everyone had worshipped idols at the time or that the Prophet Moses never existed because there is no record of it in Egyptology.

I have no doubt that the medieval Europeans took many of their maps from Islamic culture, which was more advancaed at the time.

Really? Please cite a single Islamic work—pre-Copernicus—that says the earth revolves around the sun.

It is in the Holy Quran for those who reflect, exegetes attest this knowledge:

In the interpretation of the thirty-third ayat of Anbiya Sura, Fakhraddin-i Radi writes that Dahhak and Kalbi said that the moon, the sun and the stars rotated about their axes and revolved in their orbits. While explaining the twenty-ninth ayat of Baqara Sura, Fakhraddin-i Radi says, "Asiruddin-i Abhari, the author of the physics book Hidaya and of the logic book Isaguji, used to teach with the astronomy book entitled Majasti by Ptolemy. Somebody who considered the use of such a book as intolerable asked him with a harsh voice why he was teaching it to Muslim children. He answered that he was interpreting the sixth ayat in Sura Kaf which purports, "Don't they see how beautifully I have created the earth, the skies, the stars, and the planets?' thus giving him a beautiful reply." Imam-i Radi writes in his interpretation that this reply of Abhari's was correct and stated that those scientists who observe Allah's creatures understand the infinitude of His power very well.

You can reference the rest of the article here

If the Muslims really believed this before Copernicus this should be easy for you to find.

It was common knowledge, as shown, promulgated by exegetes and jurists like al-Dahhak who lived in the 8th century, al- Kalbi in the 9th, al-Razi, in the 12th, Baidawi in the 13th & Asiruddin-i Abhari in the 14th century.

Hasret Ibn Abbas who lived in the 7th century and who was a companion of our Beloved Prophet had said in his exegete of the Holy Quran that the celestial bodies "revolve like a spinning wheel, in a circle."

I have no doubt that Muslim scholars claimed the sun has an orbit.

Affirmation of this is the Holy Quran

They believed the sun revolves around the earth. Of course they'd say it has an orbit.

No exegete of the Holy Quran held by consensus has stated that the sun revolves around the earth.

Like I said, find me a medieval Muslim work that says the earth revolves around the sun.

Refer to the exegete from Dahhak & Kalbi who do not say the Sun revolves around the Earth. In fact you cannot find this claim from even

"the famous Ibni Hazm Ali bin Ahmad proved in his book Al-Fasl that the earth was round through ayats and hadiths nine centuries ago. The earth's diameter and inclination angles toward the sun was measured in the deserts of Sinjar and Kufa by Musa bin Shakir's sons, Ahmad and Muhammad, in the time of Khalifa Mamun. The tools for astronomy made by these two brothers are clear documents for the importance which the Muslims of that time laid on knowledge and science. Ahmad died in 265, and Muhammad died in 259 [873 A.D.]."

or

"The Indian Mulla Qudsi, in his book Asrar-i malakut, collected the meanings which Islamic savants had given to those ayats about the earth, the moon, the sun, the sky and the stars; thus he proved that they fully agreed with today's modern discoveries."

These documents and their sources were found to be correct with modern knowledge and none of them mention the Sun revolving around the Earth and none of them mention heliocentricism in the sense of it meaning that the Sun is stationary and the Earth revolves around it as Copernicus and Galileo had claimed. This would have been incorrect according to the Holy Quran and incorrect to recently confirmed modern knowledge.

The Holy Quran states unequivocally the celestial bodies rotate and swim in their own orbit.

What scientists would those be and why aren't they publishing anything?

Search the peer reviewed scientific journals my friend there are more Professors & Associate Professors from what is considered a "Muslim world" or background than there are from what is considered the "Non - Muslim world" or background.

What Muslim science? Where are all these Muslim scientists today?

You obviously haven't had a need to cite a peer reviewed paper.

I am aware that Islam was once a center of great learning, but that was 500 years ago. Where are all these Muslim scientists today? Can you name a single Islamic scientific innovation or discovery made in the past 500 years?

Micro-financing in the developing world.

Again, these Muslim thinkers were alive almost 1000 years ago.

Like I said before, I have no doubt that the Christian Europeans stole many ideas from the Muslims. At the time, Muslims were much more scientifically advanced than the Christians.

But as soon as the Europeans stopped being Christian and became "The Secular West," suddenly they became much more advanced then the Muslims. This is why the only influential Muslims you are citing lived more than 500 years ago. Why can't you cite anyone more recent?

They instigated the secularisation thought processes in the West, while themselves, like with all Muslim scientists throughout the ages were able to be nurtured within an Islamic environment and remained faithful to it.

While Al Andalus was being ethnically cleansed of Muslims, euphemistically named in fairy tale history as the reconquest, expunging Muslim Iberians from the north to the south of Spain so as Catholicism holds the dominion. The rest of Europe had begun entering the renaissance with the knowledge gained from Muslims, reducing the Catholic churches hold over Europe, it must seem ironic to atheists ; Europeans had embarked on towards scientific enlightenment, the beginnings of the first scientific revolution for the West. Islam had no need for a scientific revolution as it is knowledge itself. Europeans not only utilised science as a form of discovery & understanding of their surroundings but theological debate centred on questioning the church’s authority, the common people were actually starting to read their bible, instead of being spoon fed cannons and decrees, thereby planting the first seeds of Protestantism. The West could not have been secularised without Muslims, instead of being thankful they patronise as ingrates do while hiding their shame behind a counterfeited history.

I'm not sure how to interpret this. Can you explain what you mean, please?

Do you see Darwinism as a doctrine to adhere to?

95% of scientists and 99% of biologists believe man descended directly from ape-like ancestors. Are all these scientists wrong?

It depends where this percentage sample was derived from and how it was derived.

They certainly don't hold the Muslim view.

You may find that they do, depending on the survey conducted.

What on earth are you talking about? What experiments?

Really? Can you please cite where Steven Weinberg admits that science has performed experiments that show a divine creator exists? I looked him up on Wikipedia and saw nothing like that in his profile or his books. I did find the following quote by him, though:

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

Are you sure this guy thinks that science has discovered a God? (Let alone your God?)

Have you read any of Steven Weinberg’s books? Then I suggest you do, especially the one he is famous for, the one used for public awareness for the superconducting super collider, because you won’t find the citations in wickepedia.

Who mentioned anything about anarchy?

I said that scientific progress is only possible if you are willing to question and challenge authority. I find it incredibly interesting that you are apparently equating this with "anarchy."

You promote an irrational fear for religious authority by considering it of being some sort of devils advocate. Anarchy also promotes an irrational fear of authority by considering it of being some sort of devils advocate. This, to me, stems from being a scarred or marred secularised Western Mindset.

If what I said—that Islam is largely inconsistent with science and that the West has surpassed Islam beyond all measure scientifically—is a delusion, you should have no trouble at all pointing to some scientific advances made by Muslims in the past 500 years.

We must stress that science is not to be considered a monopoly and can only be a communal effort of great minds from all religions for the benefit of human kind, you seem to have forgotten this. The issue is your claim that Islam is detrimental to science. I have cited evidence to the contrary, furthermore, I have shown that to the Muslim mindset being a Muslim means to aspire to being a religious polymath.

[Qingu]

Interesting, that wouldn't be editing of wickepedia by any chance now would it?

I wish! Unfortunately, they don't pay anything.

The excerpt of the article correctly claimed:

However you insisted it being untrue by referring to the ancient Greeks knowledge of the world being round well before Muslim Scholars, while the excerpt had only referenced Europeans knowledge of the Earth being flat at time and how the earth had been realised by Muslims as a revolving globe, now you curiously claim European scholars had realised the earth was a round well before Muslims.

I don't see what your problem is.

You claimed that the Muslims knew the earth was round when the Europeans thought it was flat.

I then responded that the Greeks knew the world was round before either the Europeans or the Muslims, and that most European scholars, like Muslim scholars, learned this from the Greeks (though the Muslims preserved the Greek texts much better than the Europeans).

I'm not sure where we're disagreeing here.

]My friend, the position is of it being one of several theories of the "Two Horned one", the Illustrious and praiseworthy king and servant of Allah. There is a theory for the "two horned one" for example of being a Persian king, another of being some sort of time traveller, the horns representing epochs, another being the commander and companion of Hasret Khidr, "the green one", another servant of Allah, who brings lush green life to land that was considered to be dead and who is said to have been given the elixir of life and was also said to be another time traveller. These are all theories and God knows Best.

Nevertheless the Western historical sources we have of Alexander the great could be at most phantasm and at least folklore. The claim that Alexander the Great was a polytheist based on these obscure historical sources could be likened to claiming that the Prophet Abraham was not a monotheist because archaeological records show everyone had worshipped idols at the time or that the Prophet Moses never existed because there is no record of it in Egyptology.

Let me ask you a question: do you believe that a man named Krishna existed? How about Prince Arjuna? Do you believe these people worshipped Vishnu and lived in magical palaces, even though they lived at a time when there is no record of Vishnu and no archaeological evidence of such magnificent architecture?

I'm guessing you're skeptical of such claims about history—even though they are presented in a popular and influential religious text believed by millions, the Mahabharata. In fact, you probably think that most of the Mahabharata's claims about history were just made up, or at the very least vastly exaggerated from oral tradition.

I feel the exact same way about the Quran's and the Bible's claims about history.

It is in the Holy Quran for those who reflect, exegetes attest this knowledge

Where in this passage do you see anything about the earth revolving around the sun? Recall that that's what I asked you to provide.

It was common knowledge, as shown, promulgated by exegetes and jurists like al-Dahhak who lived in the 8th century, al- Kalbi in the 9th, al-Razi, in the 12th, Baidawi in the 13th & Asiruddin-i Abhari in the 14th century.

Hasret Ibn Abbas who lived in the 7th century and who was a companion of our Beloved Prophet had said in his exegete of the Holy Quran that the celestial bodies "revolve like a spinning wheel, in a circle."

Again, I'm not seeing anything by Muslim scholars that talks about the earth revolving around the sun. Like I said, of course these scholars would believe the celestial bodies revolves like a wheel—they thought they revolved around the earth, which didn't move at all!

No exegete of the Holy Quran held by consensus has stated that the sun revolves around the earth.

Really?

Then why is there not a single Muslim scholar before Copernicus who interpreted the Quran like you do? How come you can't find [b]anyone[/i], at least before the 1500s, who believed that the earth revolves around the sun?

Do you believe that the thousands of Muslim scholars before the 1500s were interpreting the Quran incorrectly?

Refer to the exegete from Dahhak & Kalbi who do not say the Sun revolves around the Earth. In fact you cannot find this claim from even

or

These documents and their sources were found to be correct with modern knowledge and none of them mention the Sun revolving around the Earth and none of them mention heliocentricism in the sense of it meaning that the Sun is stationary and the Earth revolves around it as Copernicus and Galileo had claimed. This would have been incorrect according to the Holy Quran and incorrect to recently confirmed modern knowledge.

Why did you cite these passages? What do they have to do with what we're talking about?

I asked you for Muslim scholars who believed and wrote about how the earth revolves around the sun.

Are you admitting that there aren't any?

Don't you find that curious?

The Holy Quran states unequivocally the celestial bodies rotate and swim in their own orbit.

Why is this significant? The Babylonian creation myth, written 2,000 years before the Quran, says the exact same thing—that the stars and planets and sun "swim" around in their orbits above the earth.

Do you know why "swimming" is the metaphor here used, Murad? I have a pretty good idea: like most ancient cultures, the Arabs believed that there was an ocean above the sky. Just like the Babylonian myths (Enuma Elish), the Hebrew myths (the book of Genesis), the Egyptians (the sky-goddess Nut), the Greeks (Gaia and Ouranos), the Canaanites (Baal and Lotan), and the Hindus (the water dragon-god Vrtra), all of these cultures believes that there was an ocean above the sky. That's why the sky is blue. That's where rain comes from. And unsurprisingly, they all have myths that say the sun, moon, planets and stars orbit the earth, sometimes "swimming" through this above-sky ocean.

So is it really a surprise that the Muslims, like all of these other ancient cultures, believed the exact same thing?

Moreover, how on earth is this primitive and ignorant belief about the heavenly bodies evidence of Islam's scientific superiority?

Search the peer reviewed scientific journals my friend there are more Professors & Associate Professors from what is considered a "Muslim world" or background than there are from what is considered the "Non - Muslim world" or background.

You know.....

I read peer-reviewed scientific journals like Nature and Science for a living.

To be blunt: your claim is asinine. I can't remember reading an article written by someone from a Muslim country. All of the articles on biology deal extensively with evolution, which Muslims reject. None of the articles in either magazine have anything to do with theism of any kind.

Can you support your claim at all, Murad? Or are you just making stuff up?

Here are some surveys of the religious beliefs of scientists:
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm
http://www.livescience.com/strangene...tists_god.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/featu...034872,00.html

The numbers vary by discipline and by survey, but it is clear that a huge number of scientists (a third to a half) are non-believers in any sort of deity. And fewer still believe in a persona deity, such as Yahweh or Allah.

Of note: Disbelief in God and immortality among NAS biological scientists was 65.2% and 69.0%, respectively, and among NAS physical scientists it was 79.0% and 76.3%.

I'm not seeing any Muslim scientists.

So please support your claim that most scientists are Muslims.

Micro-financing in the developing world.

Murad, I asked you to provide a single example of a Muslim scientific advancement, innovation, or discovery made since the 1500s.

Micro-finance? First of all, it's not even science. Secondly, as far as I can tell, Muslims didn't invent the concept anyway.

This is all you can come up with?

They instigated the secularisation thought processes in the West, while themselves, like with all Muslim scientists throughout the ages were able to be nurtured within an Islamic environment and remained faithful to it.

I agree, the Muslims were instrumental in educating the ignorant and barbaric Christians.

But what does this have to do with the current state of Muslim science, Murad (or complete lack thereof)?

While Al Andalus was being ethnically cleansed of Muslims, euphemistically named in fairy tale history as the reconquest,

Murad, I'm not a Christian. I am the first to admit that Christian history is rife with atrocities and genocide.

I fail to see what your point is. Why are you unable to show me a single example of a Muslim scientific since the 1500s?

Islam had no need for a scientific revolution as it is knowledge itself.

Then why are Muslims forced to import almost 100% of their technological, agricultural, chemical and physical knowledge from Western countries nowadays? Why have Muslims produced no scientific discoveries or advances since the 1500s?

The West could not have been secularised without Muslims, instead of being thankful they patronise as ingrates do while hiding their shame behind a counterfeited history.

If I were a Christian living in the 1200's I'd be incredibly grateful to Muslim scholars for preserving Greek philosophical texts and advancing natural science.

However, I'm not a Christian living in the 1200's, I'm an atheist living in 2007. And I fail to see why I should be personally grateful to people who have been dead for 800 years. Again, I'm glad, in a broad sense, that Muslims were more civilized than Christians 800 years ago. But ancient history is not the subject of this thread.

Do you see Darwinism as a doctrine to adhere to?

No, it's a theory that works extraordinarily well at explaining a wide range of phenomena, just like gravity.

Like gravity, evolution is falsifiable, and we don't understand everything about it yet, but it is so overwhelmingly supported by the evidence that more than 99% of biologists feel comfortable using it as their framework for biological knowledge—just like 99% of physicists use gravity as their framework for physical knowledge.

It depends where this percentage sample was derived from and how it was derived.

I cited my sources—feel free to dispute them if you perceive any problems in how the surveys were conducted.

And I'm still waiting for you to support your claim that most scientists publishing in peer-reviewed journals are Muslims!

Have you read any of Steven Weinberg’s books? Then I suggest you do, especially the one he is famous for, the one used for public awareness for the superconducting super collider, because you won’t find the citations in wickepedia.

I haven't read his books though they sound similar to Thomas Kuhn, which I have read.

I also have no idea what point you're trying to make, as he is demonstrably not a Muslim, nor does he even believe in God.

You promote an irrational fear for religious authority by considering it of being some sort of devils advocate. Anarchy also promotes an irrational fear of authority by considering it of being some sort of devils advocate. This, to me, stems from being a scarred or marred secularised Western Mindset.

This is confusing ... I don't fear religious authority, I think religious authority is groundless because it is based on lies and mythology. I would rather my authority be based on empirical evidence, truth, and the will of the people who the authority governs.

I fail to see what my position has to do with anarchy, as secular governments have existed for thousands of years.

Also, I think you are misusing the term "devil's advocate."

We must stress that science is not to be considered a monopoly and can only be a communal effort of great minds from all religions for the benefit of human kind, you seem to have forgotten this.

The problem is that religion is fundamentally incompatible with science.

Yes, many scientists in history were religious. But science, as practiced, has nothing to do with faith in an invisible deity and unbending adherence to an ancient book. In fact science is anathema to both those things, which is exactly why the religiosity of the West has declined as it has learned more about science.

Case in point: Isaac Newton was a deeply religious man and many scholars believe he is the smartest person in all of history. But his most famous work, Principia Mathematica, had nothing to do with his beliefs about God.

Now, Newton did spend most of his career scientifically exploring religious subjects like alchemy and the dimensions of Solomon's Temple in the Bible. And guess what—these texts are incomprehensible and a complete waste of time. Newton would have been far more productive as a scientist if he gave up his religious convictions and concentrated on observable reality.

The issue is your claim that Islam is detrimental to science. I have cited evidence to the contrary, furthermore, I have shown that to the Muslim mindset being a Muslim means to aspire to being a religious polymath.

If Islam is not detrimental to science then why have there been no scientific advancements in the Islamic world in the past 500 years?

Why could you not find a single Muslim, pre-Copernicus, who believed the earth revolved around the sun?

[celt islam]

Why could you not find a single Muslim, pre-Copernicus, who believed the earth revolved around the sun?

Peace ,

This kind of conversation is getting nowhere i suggest you see this film and witness for yourself non muslims admit that if it was not for islamic spain and their advance in knowledge europe would of been longer in the dark ages.

Where europe abandoned Greek knowledge Islamic spain took it and created some thing unique to the extent that without their unique knowledge sceince wouldent be where it is today, without the numbers you now use and the sceince of maths and algebra not to mention the decimal point.

When the Moors Ruled in Europe

This short documentary describes the glorious rule of Muslim Moors in what is now Spain. A forgotten history is remembered.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...eligious+spain

peace.

[Qingu]

[FONT="Arial Narrow"][SIZE="4"]Peace ,

This kind of conversation is getting nowhere i suggest you see this film and witness for yourself non muslims admit that if it was not for islamic spain and their advance in knowledge europe would of been longer in the dark ages.

Celt, I've admitted this. Several times now.

That was more than 500 years ago. I fail to see what it has to do with the current state of Muslim science.

Can you show me a scientific advancement by Muslims in the past 500 years? If not, why do you think Westerners have so far surpassed Muslims in scientific knowledge?

[celt islam]

Celt, I've admitted this. Several times now.

That was more than 500 years ago. I fail to see what it has to do with the current state of Muslim science.

Can you show me a scientific advancement by Muslims in the past 500 years? If not, why do you think Westerners have so far surpassed Muslims in scientific knowledge?

What are you talking about Islam is also western didnt you know? or do you think Islam is some kind of middle eastern culturalism?

Islam is not a culture nor is it a nation state or anyform of nationalism so thats clear now.

I dont get your point about scientific adavance what are you trying to say here?

I see the west has advanced in polution of the sea , air and land and now seriously peoples health, ya know obesity and cancers.

look materialism isnt the answer.