The Fake Scholar

And from his character in seeking knowledge is that he seeks it whilst being in the state of neglect and forgetfulness. He only seeks the knowledge which his desire calls him towards.
And if it’s said, ‘How is that possible?’

The reply is, his aim in seeking knowledge is not due to him thinking it is fardh upon him or in order for him to worship Allah by fulfilling His obligations and staying away from the things He has declared unlawful, No! Rather his aim is to become known to the people as a taalib-ul-’ilm (student of knowledge) and so that the students flock around him.

He studies only for Riyaa (showing off) and debates with others in order to be known for his knowledge and eloquence in discussion. If the person he is debating with has the truth with him, it causes him grief. Even if he knows he is wrong he carries on debating and never declares he is mistaken due to fear of people criticizing his mistakes.

He is lenient with giving fatwa to those he loves and is severe and stern against those who can not benefit him at all. Whoever he teaches knowledge to he expects benefits back from. And if his students can not benefit him in this world but only benefit him in the aakhirah, teaching them becomes a burden upon him (and he sees it as a waste of time).

He anticipates the reward for knowledge he never practiced, and is not afraid of the consequences for knowledge he never acted upon. He speaks words of wisdom so it might seem he is from its people, whilst not fearing the evidence being established against him, because he doesn’t practice what he preaches. The more he learns and seeks knowledge the more he shows off and boasts.

If the scholars of his time are many in number and they are mentioned as people of knowledge he wishes to be mentioned with them. If they, the scholars, are asked about a question and he is not asked he wishes he be asked as well, when it was upon him to praise Allah who just saved him from being asked when others had fulfilled the need.

If it reaches him that any of the scholars made a mistake whilst he got the right verdict, he becomes happy for the mistakes of others, when in reality he should be sad for the mistakes of his brothers. If any of the scholars pass away it makes him happy since now people will be in need of him and his knowledge more.

And if he is asked about a matter that he has no knowledge of, it becomes difficult for him to say ‘I do not know’. If he hears about someone else that is benefiting the people more than he is, he hates him and does not tell the people about him. His pride stops him from admitting his own mistakes, even when corrected by others he will keep on defending his mistake, despite knowing it is a blatant mistake, just so that he might not be looked down upon by the people.

His fitnah (trial) is love for this dunya and being praised by mankind along with status and nobility. He beautifies himself with knowledge as people in this dunya beautify themselves with jewelry but he forgets to beautify his knowledge with actions.

(Taken from Akhlaaq al-Ulamaa by al-Aajoriyy)

The Difference between a Student of Knowledge and a Student of the Internet

By Shaykh Abdul Malik Abdul Hameed (may Allah preserve him)

The Student of Knowledge

He is the one who before doing anything fixes his soul. Then he maintains his soul to upright character. Therefore he becomes an example for others, in his character and manners.

The student of knowledge strives for knowledge and benefit. The seeker of ilm does his utmost to sit with scholarly men, people of piety and in circles of knowledge. The person striving to learn his deen constantly equips himself with beneficial knowledge and information.

He safeguards his time. Hence you don’t see him involved in things which are useless. The student of knowledge turns away from things that don’t concern him, and busies himself with things that affect him.

Whenever he speaks, he brings benefit to the people, and when he writes it’s beneficial. Furthermore whoever sits with him, learns something.

He gives precedence to knowledge, its people, consequently benefiting from them.

As result of this he honors the people of knowledge; he supplicates for them, and asks Allah to have mercy and forgiveness for the deceased scholars.

The student of knowledge hates backbiting, abhors the backbiters and detests anyone’s name mentioned in a bad light.

You notice about the student of knowledge, that he is humble, he doesn’t raise himself above his level. He doesn’t act like he’s loaded with something he really can’t offer.

This student isn’t misled by people praises of him, people blowing him up to be a big shot, or their extolment of him.

The student of knowledge doesn’t want to be famous, so he doesn’t seek fame from the people.

Reason being, he knows that it’s Allah who raises the people and gives them rank, not such and such.

This seeker of knowledge is one who calls to Allah and advises the Muslims. He enjoins what’s right and forbids what’s wrong based on the Islamic principles and guidelines.

You will notice that the student of knowledge is always trying to unite the Muslims and their hearts. He can’t stand division between the people of the Sunnah. He is well aware that division is connected to innovation, and unity is connected to the Sunnah.

For that reason it is said, “ Ahulus Sunnah wal Jama’a (the People of Sunnah and the gathering) and Ahul Bid’ah wal Farqa (the People of innovation and sects)”.

Moreover, you will notice that the student of ilm is shy to speak. He doesn’t speak about everything or every affair that happens among the people. He remains silent, because he knows that he will be called to account for his words, the same way for his actions. Hence, he safeguards his own well being in his speech and actions. He won’t open a door to evil for the general masses.

The student of knowledge doesn’t embark on issues of falsehood and deal with things he’s unaware of. That’s why; he enters into issues with clarity. He is aware of them inside and out. He is prepared for the meeting with Allah.

These are some of the traits of the student of Knowledge. May Allah give them to us-Ameen

The Student of the Internet

First of all, he doesn’t have any of the traits we mentioned, as this is witnessed.

The student of the net is shameless in his character. He displays arrogant behavior towards people.

The student of the World Wide Web wastes his time in things that are fruitless. He attacks anyone, regardless if they are a minor or senior. He hurls his assault without maintaining the reverence of knowledge, age, or its people.

The student of the internet learns hatred, he follows the mistakes and slip ups of others. These are the fruits of learning from the internet. For the student on this path, days and years remain empty. He is unable to relax and the people can’t feel at ease from his harm and evil.

In conclusion, if you want to be a student of knowledge, here you are! Take the path. The milestones have been laid out for you.

On the other hand if you want to be a student of the internet, there you are! There is the way. That path is full with filth and rubbish. So disgrace yourself, if you want to be a student of the net, but beware of lying to the people claiming you’re a STUDENT OF KNOWLEDGE!

(Reference: qsep.com)

The Praiseworthy Differences and the Blameworthy Differences?

Source: How do I Achieve FIQH (understanding) of the Deen? - From the lectures of Shaikh Saleh ibn Fawzan al-Fawzaan

Translated by Shawana A. Aziz

Published by Quran Sunnah Educational Programs -www.qsep.com

Main Heading: From Whom should I take Fiqh of the Deen?

Sub-Title 14: The praiseworthy differences and the blameworthy differences?

Question: O Shaikh, please explain the praiseworthy differences and the blameworthy differences?

Reply by Shaikh Saleh ibn Fawzan al-Fawzaan (p. 877):

Differences are not praiseworthy but there are

• differences which are excused and
• differences which are inexcusable.

Differences in Furu'ee (i.e., issues not related to Aqeedah) issues of Ijtihaad like deducing rulings from the proofs… One says, 'The proofs point towards this', and the other says, 'The proof proves that.'

So, each of them talks according to what appears (correct) to him, and what his Ijtihad concludes.

The Messenger of Allah (once) told the Sahabah, "None of you should pray except in Bani Quraydah."

The Sahabah left but the time of Asr Salaat arrived while they were on their way. And a group said,

"The Prophet meant that we should not pray except after reaching Bani Quraydah —even if the Salaat is to be delayed."

So, they delayed their Salaat until they reached their destination.

Another group said,

"The Prophet meant to exhort us to hasten in departure. He did not mean delaying the prayers." (So, they prayed Asr Salaat on the way).

And when they (informed the Prophet about their disagreement and how each group acted differently and) asked the Prophet, he (salallahu alaihi wasallam) did not criticize either of them because each of them made Ijtihad, and had a point of view in understanding (the daleel or the statement of the Prophet).

There is no blame on this form of Ijtihad because it is based upon deduction from the Daleel.

Similarly, the story of the two men who ran out of water and prayed with Tayammum, then they found water before the time of the prayer expired. So, one of them performed wudhu, and repeated his Salaat while the other did not repeat the Salaat.

So, the Prophet (salallahu alaihi wasallam) said to the one who performed wudhu and repeated the Salaat, "You have two rewards." And he said to the other, "You Salaat is accepted from you." [See, Abu Dawood] So, he (salallahu alaihi wasallam) did not criticize either of them for the Ijtihad. [see, Abu Dawood. The narration of Abu Saeed]

As for the blameworthy difference, it is the difference in Aqeedah.

Aqeedah has no scope for differences, and Manhaj has no scope for difference - because Allah has ordered us to return back to the Book and Sunnah of the Prophet, and what the Salaf were upon. Allah Messenger (salallahu alaihi wasallam) said,

"The Jews split into 71 sects, the Christians split into 72 sects, and you will split into 73 sects —all of them in the fire except one." They asked, "Which sect is that, O Allah's Messenger?"

He (salallahu alaihi wasallam) replied, "(Those who follow) that which I and my companions follow." [(hasan) Saheeh at-Tirmidhee]

So, the 72 sects are not excused except the one which adhered to the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of the Prophet (salallahu alaihi wasallam) because difference in Aqeedah and Manhaj are not excused.

Verily, the exception is for issues of Furoo (i.e., issues not in Aqeedah) which are deduced from the texts if there is a need for Ijtihad from the text. As for, if Ijtihad is not required, then it is not permissible.

The Use of Weak Ahadith to Encourage Virtuous Deeds

by Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi | Translated and Abridged, with slight modifications, by Suha Abu Shakra

(Source: http://www.suhaibwebb.com/islam-studies/the-use-of-weak-ahadith-to-encourage-virtuous-deeds/ )

Question:

Many preachers, reformers, and scholars frequently use ahadith (pl. of hadith) known even to novice students of knowledge as being weak. When critiqued, such people claim that weak hadith can be referred to when encouraging virtuous deeds, deterring people from doing wrong and encouraging them to do what is right. What is the legal opinion on this?

Answer:

The practice of citing weak ahadith to encourage virtuous deeds (fadā`il al-a`māl) has become so widespread that some people assume that this practice is agreed upon by hadith scholars. This notion is undoubtedly flawed, however, because a large number of hadith researchers affirmed that weak hadith should not be used to promote virtuous deeds nor any other category of good deeds.

It must also be noted that those who do allow for the use of weak hadith in fadā`il al-a`māl place important conditions on their use so they are not held at the same status as authentic narrations. Also, scholars who have a deep-rooted understanding of Islamic law (Sharī`ah) should never need to resort to using weak ahadith because the wealth of authentic ahadith is more than sufficient.

Regarding the opinion that permits the use of weak hadith, Dr. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi makes the following points:

First: This opinion is not agreed upon amongst hadith scholars, as there are a number of well-respected scholars who reject the application of weak hadith in fadā`il al-a`māl or any other field of Islamic practice. These include Yahya Ibn Mu`īn, and a number of other scholars; it appears to also be the opinion of Imam Al-Bukhari, who employed very strict criteria for accepting hadith. Imam Muslim, who held the same opinion, actually condemned narrators of weak and rejected ahadith in the introduction to his Sahih, and censured them for abandoning authentic narrations. This is also the opinion that al-Qādi Abu Bakr Ibn Al-`Arabi, and Abu-Shama (the former heads of the Maliki and Shafi’i juristic schools of thought), leaned towards; it was also the opinion of Ibn Hazm, and others.

Second: If the meaning sought to be conveyed can be extracted from authentic or acceptable ahadith, then it is pointless to cite weak ahadith. Allah has sufficed us with what is superior so we don’t need that which is deficient; and rarely do we find a religious, moral, or instructional meaning that is not addressed by authentic or acceptable narrations. Yet, some people find it easier to use weak hadith unreservedly because they lack the drive to search for and review authentic narrations, and because of their limited scope of knowledge.

Third: Weak hadith should not be attributed to the Prophet ﷺ using definitive terms. The author of Al-Taqrīb said in his explanation: “If you narrate a weak hadith without the chain of transmitters, don’t say, ‘The Prophet ﷺ said such and such,’ or use similar definitive language, but rather, [say] that such and such was narrated about him, or that such and such reached us about him… or similar passive forms of narration…” Thus, the practice of many preachers and orators who begin a weak hadith by saying, “The Prophet said,” is unacceptable and rejected.

Fourth: Muslim scholars who permitted the use of weak hadith to promote good and warn against evil did not leave the door wide open to allow citing every weak hadith. Rather, they placed three conditions that regulate the use of weak hadith:

1. That the hadith not be very weak.
2. That the hadith be within the scope of an authentic legal principle that is applied and accepted in either the Qur’an or Sunnah.
3. That its weakness, not authenticity, be realized when applying it.

Thus, none of the Muslim scholars permitted the narration of weak ahadith indiscriminately, but rather, stipulated those three conditions. We also cannot overlook the most important condition of all; the hadith should address fadā`il al-a`māl and not lead to a legal ruling.

In my opinion, there should be two more conditions added to the list above:

1. That it not include exaggeration or embellishment such that it defies logic, Islamic law or rules of the Arabic language. Hadith scholars have stated clearly that a weak hadith can be recognized through clues in the narrators or the narration.
2. That it not contradict another piece of legal evidence that is stronger than it.

Allah knows best.

Advice to Youth facing Confusion in Manhaj

Source: How do I Achieve FIQH (understanding) of the Deen? - From the lectures of Shaikh Saleh ibn Fawzan al-Fawzaan

Translated by Shawana A. Aziz

Published by Quran Sunnah Educational Programs -www.qsep.com

Main Heading: From Whom should I take Fiqh of the Deen?

Sub-Title 16: Advice to Youth facing Confusion in Manhaj

Question: What is your advice O Shaikh, to the students of knowledge and the youth - in the present times - concerning what is widespread of ideological confusion and confusion in Manhaj. What is the role of a student of knowledge towards these situations?

Reply by Shaikh Saleh ibn Fawzan al-Fawzaan (pg. 879):

I pointed in my talk that the youth, especially in these times, when there is an increase in ideas, Manaahij (pl. of Manhaj), groups and divisions;

• I advise them, first and before all, with the Taqwa (piety) of Allah and Khashyah (fear) of Him.
• I advise them to mind their tongues from talk which could bring bad consequences for them.
• I also advise them to seek IslaaH (rectification) and unity amongst the people, Allah says, "There is no good in most of their secret talks except (in) him who orders Sadaqah, Ma'roof, or conciliation between mankind. And he who does this, seeking the good Pleasure of Allah, We shall give him a great reward." [Soorah an-Nisa (4): 114]

I also advise them to seek knowledge from its sources upon the hands of the people of Ilm (i.e., the scholars) and the people of Baseerah.

This is the only way to seek Ilm from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger —i.e., upon the hands of the scholars —this is the only way to know the truth.

It is not knowledge what some claim —i.e., learning al-Fiqh al-Waqee which is engaging oneself in the politics of the country, the issues of the world and their solutions —this is keeping busy away from the beneficial Ilm, and it does not reap any benefits.

When the Prophet (salallahu alaihi wasallam) informed about division amongst ummah, he said,

"My Ummah will split into 73 sects —all of them in the fire except one." They asked, "Which sect is that, O Allah's Messenger?" He (salallahu alaihi wasallam) replied, "(Those who follow) that which I and my companions follow." [(hasan) Saheeh at-Tirmidhee]

So, there is no salvation except through following what the Prophet was upon - and how do we know that?

We will not know that except if we were to seek Ilm upon the hands of the scholars.

Everyone claims to be upon the Manhaj of the Prophet (salallahu alaihi wasallam) and his Sahabah - everyone makes this claim, and only the reality (of their actions) can decide (who is upon the correct Manhaj).

It is impossible to know what the Prophet was upon unless we seek Ilm upon the hands of the scholars, who are sincere to their Deen and to the ummah. Allah says,

"None can inform you (O Muhammad (salallahu alaihi wasallam)) like Him Who is the All-­Knower (of each and everything)." [Soorah Fatir (35): 14]

So, Ilm is neither taken from the ignorant nor from those who claim Ilm —verily, it is taken from the expert; those who possess knowledge about the Deen of Allah - They alone are the scholars.

Allah's Messenger (salallahu alaihi wasallam) said,

"Whoever among you lives, will see many differences, so I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the rightly-guided caliphs who will come after me, and cling firmly to it.

Beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is a going astray." [Sunan ibn Majah]

So, he (salallahu alaihi wasallam) informed that the way out of Fitna is verily following the Sunnah of the Prophet (salallahu alaihi wasallam), and the Sunnah of his Rightly Guided Caliphs, and that cannot happen except by studying Ilm at the hands of the scholars —those who know the Sunnah of Prophet and his Caliphs, and they explain it to the people —So, there is no way out of the Fitna, groups and divisions and various Manaahijs etc., except though this.

The correct Manhaj is one and it does not have divisions and differences. Differences are in the Manaahij (pl. of Manhaj) that contradict the Manhaj of the Prophet.

The Manhaj of the Prophet unites, and there is no division or difference in it, and therefore, Allah says,

"Verily, this is my Straight Path, so follow it, and follow not (other) paths, for they will separate you away from His Path. This He has ordained for you that you may become a-Muttaqoon (pious)." [Soorah al-An'aam (6): 153]

Allah mentioned that His (salallahu alaihi wasallam) path is one single path:

"this is my straight path."

And when he mentioned the paths he mentioned them in plural,

"follow not (other) paths."

—'paths'—because each of them has a Manhaj and a Tareeqah and a Madhhab. So, he who follows these people of the misguided Madhhaaib, Manaahij and groups, then he is lost amongst them.

So, there is no alternative for following the Manhaj of the Prophet, and it is one Manhaj which does not incorporate any division or difference and, "Whoever holds firmly to Allah, (i.e. follows Islam), then he is indeed guided to a Right Path." [Soorah aali-Imran (3): 101]

The Secret Weapon

Since centuries of old, empires and nations have sought power and strength to overcome one another. They have searched for secret weapons that can change the outcome of their conquests and battles. But despite their efforts to find such mythical weapons, none have succeeded; except, those who were not even looking.

Do you know what that weapon is? Has anyone ever shared this secret with you? Pay close attention now because there is a weapon out there, that even when in the hands of the most poor and oppressed of people, it is enough to defend against the greatest armies of the world.

It is known as the “dua” – to call on Allaah for help.

The Messenger of Allaah (ﷺ) said: “Nothing can change destiny (qadr), except dua.” [at-Tirmidhi]

So imagine if you could gather all the weapons of the world together on one side and try to change the qadr of Allaah, you would never be able to. Yet a simple dua on the other hand would be enough with Allaah to change the course of any battle, any difficulty, any scenario, no matter how great.

You don’t have to be eighteen or twenty one years of age to be able to use this weapon. Even a five year old can use it with perfection. The key however, is to be able to ask Allaah sincerely and with devotion.

Allaah, the Almighty says in the Qur’an:

“And when My slaves ask you (O Muhammad ﷺ) concerning Me, then, I am indeed near. I respond to the invocations of the supplicant when he calls on Me. So let them obey Me and believe in Me, so that they may be led aright.”

[al-Baqarah 2:186]

If we carefully examine the above ayah, we will observe the following points:

Point No.1

Allaah says “I respond to the invocations…” meaning that you can feel free to ask Allaah without hesitation and He will respond to you. When Allaah Himself is telling us that He responds, can there be anyone to doubt it? This is a special mercy from Allaah that He listens to His people and answers their prayers.

Point No.2

Then Allaah says “…when he calls on Me”. This means that Allaah answers you whenever you decide to call Him. Never will you get a busy signal or an automated message saying “Allaah is not available at the moment” or “Sorry the office is closed right now, please call back tomorrow”! No, you can call Allaah anytime of the day or night and He will always be there to listen. This is the beauty of dua.

Image if you are worried about a test at school or a student who has been giving you a hard time or a teacher who scolds you; and you find yourself tossing and turning in bed, not being able to sleep, you don’t have to wait until morning, you don’t even have to get on the prayer mat or make wudoo, you can simply ask Allaah while lying in bed and you will find Allaah listening to you. Even if you are in the car or on a plane or a train, make dua to Allaah to help you with your worries.

Point No.3

People often forget that in order to increase the acceptance of their prayers there is something that they also need to do. Just like whenever there is an agreement or a contract, there must be at least two parties (or persons) involved. If Allaah is accepting your prayers and giving you what you have asked for, isn’t there something that we need to do as well? Or is it that Allaah should just keep giving us and we can do whatever we want?

Allaah says “so let them obey Me”, meaning if you want Allaah to listen to your duas, you have to become one who is obedient to Allaah also. How many times have you said this to your brother, sister or friend “if you do this for me, I will do that for you.” Isn’t there always a give and take?

For example, Allah wants us to pray as soon as we hear the azaan but we say “no let’s finish the game first” or “no, I don’t have time right now”.

Think about it, will this type of attitude get our prayers accepted?

Point No.4

According to authentic narrations from Sahih Muslim, there are certain types of duas which will never be accepted. These include:

• Asking Allaah for something that is sinful (or haraam)
• Asking Allaah to break the ties of the family
• Being hopeless after making dua, thinking that the dua will never be answered

Every dua of a Muslim, no matter what it is, is never devoid of good. According to a Hadith from Ahmad, Abu Said al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allaah (ﷺ) mentioned three possible outcomes of every dua:

• That the person gets whatever he asked for very soon.
• The person’s dua will be saved for him in the Hereafter (meaning, he will get much better than what he asked for).
• The person did not get what he wanted but instead an adversity (difficulty, illness, hardship, trial) coming his way was avoided.

So no matter what the result, there is always good in making dua.

Should we not develop the habit of making dua abundantly; asking Allaah alone, anytime of the day or night and doing our best to be obedient to Him?

Remember that apart from all the other duas we make, we should pray especially for ourselves and our families to be guided to the straight path. At the end of the day, that is what will really matter.

I conclude with a special dua that the Messenger of Allaah (ﷺ) used to make often:

“Oh turner of the hearts (Allaah), keep our hearts firm on your religion” [at-Tirmidhi]

Do We Have Good Reasons to Believe?

Why is the universe the way it is?

One of the most important questions that almost all thinkers, philosophers and people like you and I, have asked is “Why does the universe exist at all? And why is it the way it is?” In response to this question there are those who say that the universe is uncaused, in other words it is eternal, meaning it has no beginning and no end. If this is true, there should be an infinite history of past events. However, the infinite in the real world is not possible as it implies a quantity that is limitless. Let’s take the following examples into consideration: if there were an infinite number of books in a room and two were taken away, how many would be left? The response may be “infinity” or for those who are logically inclined “infinity minus two”. In any case, the responses don’t make sense because although two have been taken away from infinity there still remains infinity! Consequently, we’re not able to count the remaining books left in the room. Therefore the infinite leads to contradictions and simply doesn’t exist in the real world (although it exists in mathematical discourse; however it is based upon certain axioms and conventions). Therefore, it logically follows that the universe must have a finite history of past events, which indicates that it must have begun to exist at some point in time.

The above may sound too philosophical, but it is also supported by scientific evidence, for instance, Stephen Hawking, in his lecture The Beginning of Time states, “The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago.”[i]

According to contemporary cosmologists, the universe began at time zero with the event commonly called the “Big Bang”. The theory postulates that the universe began as a “singularity”, an extremely hot and dense entity that expanded and subsequently cooled, going from something incredibly small and hot to the current size and temperature of our universe. In light of these facts, it is interesting to note that there is no scientific explanation as to what happened before time zero. In addition to this, the Big Bang theory can only postulate what happened 1 x 10-34 seconds after the Big Bang but not anytime before it. What happened before this particular point in time is unknown.

In the context of the above discussion, it can be concluded that generally physicists agree that as a result of the Big Bang, physical time and space were created as were energy and matter. So two premises can be drawn from all the above: 1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause 2. The universe began to exist - Therefore the universe has a cause. How do we get to this conclusion? Well, if everything we know and see that begins to exist has a cause, for example a noise in the room or the pyramids at Giza, then the universe - which also began to exist - must also have a cause.

The Cause for the Universe = God?

Our discussion so far has provided good reasons to believe that there must have been a cause for the universe. However, this doesn’t tell us much about what the cause is, but if we think deeply about the nature of the cause - also known as conceptual analysis - we can conclude that it must be very powerful as it brought into existence the entire universe, and it must be:

One...

The cause for the universe must be a single cause for several reasons. An attractive argument to substantiate this claim includes the use of the rational principle called Occam’s razor. This principle is commonly summarised as “the simplest explanation is the best explanation”. In philosophical terms the principle enjoins that we should not multiply entities beyond necessity. What this basically means is that we should stick to explanations that do not create more questions than it answers. In the case of the cause for the universe we have no evidence to claim multiplicity, in other words more than one, and if we did it would create more questions than it answers.

Uncaused & Eternal...

This cause must also be uncaused due to the absurdity of an infinite regress, in other words an indefinite chain of causes. To illustrate this better, if the cause of the universe had a cause and that cause had a cause ad infinitum, then there wouldn’t be a universe to talk about in the first place. For example, imagine if a Stock Trader on a trading floor at the Stock Exchange was not able to buy or sell his stocks or bonds before asking permission from the investor, and then this investor had to check with his, and this went on forever, would the Stock Trader ever buy or sell his stocks or bonds? The answer is no. In similar light, if we apply this to the universe we would have to posit an uncaused cause due to this rational necessity.

However, some philosophers and scientists claim that “why doesn’t the cause be the universe itself?” and “why can’t the cause stop at the universe?” Well, the problem with these claims is that they would imply the universe created itself, which is absurd because how can anything exist and not exist at the same time? Finally, it would be irrational to claim that whatever begins to exist causes itself!

Immaterial...

The cause has to be immaterial since it created everything. If you were to take any state of physical existence, you would come to the conclusion that, that state of physical existence owes itself to another state of physical existence. And that state of physical existence, owes itself to another state of physical existence. But you can’t go back states of physical existences ad infinitum. There has to be a beginning to the entire state of physical existences. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the origin of all creation has to be a non- physical state.

After thinking about the nature of the cause for the universe we come to the remarkable realisation that it has all the basic attributes of the traditional monotheistic God, namely that He is one, eternal and immaterial. But what reasons do we have to start claiming that a particular religion is true? This leads us to discuss the Qur’an, the book of the Muslims.

The Qur’an

The Qur’an is no ordinary book. It has been described by many, who engage with the book, as an imposing text, but the way it imposes itself on the reader is not negative, rather it is positive. This is because it seeks to positively engage with your mind and your emotions, and it achieves this by asking profound questions, such as “So where are you people going? This is a message for all people; for those who wish to take the straight path.”[ii] and “Have they not thought about their own selves?”[iii]

However, the Qur’an doesn’t stop there, it actually challenges the whole of mankind with regards to its divine authorship, it boldly states “If you have doubts about the revelation we have sent down to Our servant, then produce a single chapter like it – enlist whatever supporters you have other than God – if you truly think you can. If you cannot do this – and you never will – then beware of the fire prepared for the disbelievers, whose fuel is men and stones.”[iv]

This challenge refers to the various wonders in the Qur’an, even within its smallest chapter, that give us good reasons to believe it is from God. Some of these reasons are historical and scientific.

Historical...

There are many historical statements in the Qur’an that show us good reasons that it is from God. One of them is that the Qur’an is the only religious text to use different titles for the rulers of Egypt at different times. For instance while addressing the Egyptian ruler, at the time of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph), the word “Al-Malik” is used which refers to a king (note: that during the middle old kingdom Hyksos Asiatic families were governing Egypt and they did not use the title Pharaoh, as the Qur’an mentions “The King said, 'Bring him to me straight away!’”).[v]

In contrast, the ruler of Egypt at the time of the Prophet Musa (Moses) is referred to as Pharaoh, in Arabic “Firaown”. This particular title began to be employed in the 14th century B.C., during the reign of Amenhotep IV. This is confirmed by the Encyclopedia Britannica which states that the word Pharaoh was a title of respect used from the New Kingdom (beginning with the 18th dynasty; B.C. 1539-1292) until the 22nd dynasty (B.C. 945-730). So the Qur’an is historically accurate as the Prophet Yusuf lived at least 200 years before that time, and the word “King” was used for the Hyksos kings, not Pharaoh.

In light of this, how could have the Prophet Muhammad known such a minute historical detail? Especially when all the other religious texts, such as the Bible, just mention Pharaoh as a title for all times? Also, since people at the time of the revelation did not know this information and hieroglyphs were a dead language, what does this say about the authorship of the Qur’an? There is no naturalistic explanation.

Scientific...

The Qur’an always mentions nature as a sign for God’s existence, power and majesty. Every time these are mentioned, they are expressed with a great accuracy, and they also give us information that could have never been known at the time of the Prophet Muhammad. One of these signs includes the function and structure of mountains. The Qur’an mentions that mountains have “peg” like structures and that they have been embedded into earth to stabilise it, a concept known in Geology as isostasy. The Qur’an mentions: “We placed firmly embedded mountains on the earth, so it would not move under them…”[vi] and “Have We not made the earth as a bed and the mountains its pegs?”[vii]

The Qur’an’s eloquent renderings of the facts mentioned above are confirmed by modern science which only came to be understood by the end of the 20th Century. In the book Earth, by Dr. Frank Press, former president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, states that mountains are like stakes, and are buried deep under the surface of Earth.[viii]

With regards to the vital role of mountains, it was formerly understood that mountains were merely protrusions rising above the surface of Earth. However, scientists realised that this was not actually the case, and that the parts known as the mountain roots extended down as far as 10 to 15 times their own height. With these features, mountains play a similar role to a nail or peg firmly holding down a tent, which has been discovered by modern geological and seismic research, a concept known as isostasy.[ix]

In conclusion, how can we explain this in the light of the fact that this is relatively recent science (with no one at the time of the revelation knowing this information)? What does this tell you about the author? Again, there is no naturalistic explanation.

Is Life Absurd without God?

The writer Loren Eiseley said that man is a cosmic orphan. This is quite profound, as man is the only creature in the universe who asks: why? Other animals have instincts to guide them, but man has learned to ask questions. If many of these questions raised by man exclude God then the conclusion is simple: we are the accidental byproducts of nature, a result of matter plus time plus chance. There is no reason for your existence and all we face is death. Modern man thought that when he had got rid of God, he had freed himself from all that repressed and stifled him. Instead, he discovered that in killing God, he had also killed himself.

If there is no God, then man and the universe are doomed. Like prisoners condemned to death we await our unavoidable execution. What is the consequence of this? It means that life itself is absurd. It means that the life we have is without ultimate significance, value, or purpose. For example, according to the atheist worldview this life is purposeless, or at best, just assembled to propagate our DNA. The way some atheists get out of this is by saying we can create purpose for ourselves, however this is a self-delusion as we try and find some purpose by attributing purpose to the things we do in life, but remove purpose from our very own lives. Also, without God our lives do not have any ultimate meaning. If our ends are the same, in that we just pass out of existence, what meaning does that give our lives? Does it even matter if we existed at all? If the universe was never in existence what difference would it make?

Existentialists such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus understood the meaningless reality of life in absence of acknowledging the purpose of our existence. This is why Sartre wrote of the “nausea” of existence and Camus saw life as absurd, indicating that the universe has no meaning at all. The German Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche argued in clear concise pronouncements that the world and human history do not have any meaning, any rational order or aim. Nietzsche argued that there is only a mindless chaos, a directionless world tending towards no end. It is not wonder the philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said he would have wished the world never existed. All of these views on the world are absurd conclusions carved by the atheist world view.


References:
i http://www.hawking.org.uk/index.php/lectures/publiclectures/62
ii Qur’an Chapter 81 Verses 26 – 28
iii Qur’an Chapter 30 Verse 8
iv Qur’an Chapter 2 Verse 23
v Qur’an Chapter 12 Verse 50
vi Qur’an Chapter 21 Verse 31
vii Qur’an Chapter78 Verses 6-7
viii Frank Press, and Raymond Siever, Earth, 3rd ed. (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Company: 1982)
ix M. J. Selby, Earth's Changing Surface (Oxford: Clarendon Press: 1985), 32.

Courtesy, One Reason
URL: www.onereason.info
Email: info@onereason.info