The study of religion is what is termed, in general, beliefs pertaining to the unseen world. These are the beliefs that are beyond our known sensory world. That is the existence of God and the angels, revelation, Hell and Heaven, etc. In this other aspect of religion, direct observations do not exist. The study of religion must, therefore, be done in the light of that logical principle called inference on the basis of observation, that is, the same logical principle that the evolutionists employ in the second aspect of their theory.

Looked at in light of this principle, both religion and science are at par. Both have two equally different parts. One part is based on such scientific certainty as permits direct argument. The other part is based on scientific inference, to prove which only the principle of indirect argument may be used. Keeping this logical division before us, we can find no actual difference between the two.

It is true that the new facts regarding the universe discovered in the twentieth century have revolutionized the world of logic. The difference between religious argument and scientific argument which had been erroneously conceived has been eliminated. In respect of argument, the case of science too has reached exactly the same point as religion.

Both the Direct and Inferential Arguments are valid. Newton (1642-1727) made a special study of the solar system, discovering laws governing the revolution of planets around the sun. His study was, however, confined to astronomical bodies, which can be called the macroworld. It is possible in the macroworld to weigh and measure things. As a result of the immediate impact of these discoveries, many began to think along the lines that reality was observable and that the proper and valid argument was one based on observation. It was under the influence of this concept that philosophy generally known as logical positivism came into being.

However, the discoveries made in the first quarter of the twentieth century shook the very foundation of the preliminary theories. These later discoveries revealed that beyond this world of appearance, a whole world was hidden, a world that does not come under observation. It is only indirectly possible to understand this hidden world and present arguments in its favour. That is, by observing the effects of something, we arrive at an understanding of its existence.

This discovery altered the whole picture. When access to human knowledge was limited to the macrocosmic world, man was prey to misapprehension—that reality is only that which is observable. But when human knowledge penetrated the microworld, the academic situation underwent a paradigm shift.

Now it was revealed that the field of direct argument was extremely limited. New facts which came to the knowledge of man were so abstruse that indirect or inferential argument alone was applicable. For instance, in 1895, the German scientist Wilhelm Konrad Roentgen found during an experiment that on a glass before him some effects were observable despite the fact that there was no known link between his experiment and the glass. He concluded that there was invisible radiation, which was traveling at the speed of 186,000 miles per second.

Due to the unknown nature of this radiation, Roentgen named it X-ray. The twentieth century brought forth the discoveries of a number of things like X-rays which do not come under direct human observation. However, due to their effects having come to the knowledge of man, it was not possible to deny their existence. As a result of modern research, not only were different departments of science revolutionized but the science of logic too witnessed fundamental changes.

Now inferential reasoning was also accepted as a valid method of reasoning, for, without discoveries like X-rays, the scientific structure of the atom, the existence of dark matter, etc., could not be explained. After the extension of this method of reasoning in modern times, the argument on religious faith has become as valid as reasoning on scientific concepts. Differences in the criterion of logic have now vanished.

The same inferential logic that is employed to prove newly discovered concepts of science can be applied to prove the veracity of religious truths like the existence of God, and the Hereafter.

Source: God Arises

In the modern age, faith and belief can be placed on the same level of certainty as scientific theory. In its issue no. 134 (1992), the journal, Faith and Reason, from Manchester College, Oxford (England), published an article titled, ‘The Relationship between Faith and Reason’, by Dr. Paul Badham.

Paul Badham is professor emeritus of Theology and Religious Studies at St. David’s College, Lampeter, in the University of Wales. His paper in this issue had been presented at a Conference of the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Science in Moscow in November 1991.

Professor Badham’s paper can indeed be called thought-provoking and, as such, is worth reading, but he has made certain points with which I do not agree. He states that philosophical certainty should not be confused with religious certitude. He writes: ‘As a philosopher of religion I feel compelled to acknowledge that faith could never be placed on the same level of certainty as scientific knowledge’.

In contrast, I feel that faith and belief can indeed be placed on the same level of certainty as scientific theory. In the twenty-first century, there is no real difference between the two.

Source: Spirit of Islam May 2020

The Quran states, “This is a blessed Book which We sent down to you [ Muhammad], for people to ponder over its messages, and for those with understanding to take heed.” (38:29) Islam as presented in the Quran and demonstrated by the Prophet possesses the quality of being in accordance with human reason and human nature. Rational thinking and academic progress do not clash with the message of Islam. That is to say, at no stage does Islam and reason contradict one another. No believer is faced with the problem of accepting religious dogmas at the expense of science and reason. Acknowledging this characteristic of Islam, George Bernard Shaw writes:

When the Mohammedan reformation took place, it left its followers with the enormous advantage of having the only established religion in the world, in whose articles of faith, any intelligent and educated person could believe. It is due to this characteristic of Islam that people have been attracted towards Islam before as well as after the age of science. The modern educated mind when presented with the different aspects of Islam as it is, acknowledges that it is according to nature and appeals to one’s reasoning.

What George Bernard Shaw has termed an enormous advantage for the Muslims of the first phase, exists equally for the believers of today. But it is not being availed of. Instead of presenting the message of Islam peacefully, Muslims are putting up a violent and unfriendly image of Islam. If people create obstacles by resorting to general ill will, there will be a misunderstanding of religion. When this obstacle is removed, the Islamic goal of living in harmony society will be fulfilled.

The modern educated mind, when presented with the different aspects of Islam as it is, acknowledges that it is according to nature and appeals to one’s reasoning.

Source: Spirit of Islam June 2019

One of the objectives of Islam is to strive for a society in which spiritual, ethical, and human values are cherished. Islam advocates an atmosphere where peace, tolerance, love, and well-wishing are the order of the day, where controversies are resolved without the use of violence. This is the desired world of Islam and such a world can be established only through peaceful dialogue. This is the essence of Islamic teaching. No other way is possible in Islam. 

One significant aspect of the culture of Islam is dialogue. It is mentioned thus in the Quran: “They conduct their affairs by mutual consultation.” (42:38). This verse indicates that Muslims should base their dealings on dialogue and mutual discussion.

Debate on the other hand is quite different from dialogue. Debate is conducted between two parties, each trying to prove its superiority over the other, while the essence of dialogue is mutual learning without any bias. In dialogue, there are also two or more parties, but no party tries to establish its superiority over the other. Everyone tries to learn from the other. Everyone tries, in the sharing of experiences, to increase their knowledge. Dialogue is a healthy practice, whereas debate is a kind of intellectual wrangling.

The practice of consultation (shura) was common among the Companions of the Prophet of Islam. For example, it is reported of Umar bin al-Khattab, the second Caliph, that he used to learn from everyone. This means that it was a general habit of his to engage in serious dialogue with everyone he met. He would thereby learn something new to enhance his wisdom and knowledge.

There is great benefit in mutual discussion as everyone gains some new knowledge or experience through this. When one conducts a serious dialogue with another person, both derive some benefit from this. Both enrich their minds and progress on the path of intellectual development.

The Quranic word shura is generally taken to be a political term but, in fact, it is not. “Political shura” may be a way of proceeding in Muslim society, but it is only an occasional occurrence. In this sense, it is only a small part of Muslim life. On the other hand, in general, non-political terms, shura is a daily part of Muslim life. In family life, in social life, and in national life, it is good to develop the habit of mutual consultation. It leads to intellectual development for everyone.

Source: Spirit of Islam September 2014

The method of Islam is that of peaceful dialogue. The Quran tells us that the way of peace is the best way. (4:128)

There is another verse, which tells us that the way of negotiation and arbitration should be adopted in controversial matters. (4:35) The Prophet said, “Do not desire or seek confrontation with the enemy, but rather ask for peace from God."

The objective of Islam is to bring about a divine revolution, to invite people to the worship of God, and to strive for a society in which spiritual, ethical, and human values are cherished. Islam advocates an atmosphere where peace, tolerance, love, and well-wishing are the order of the day, where controversies are resolved without the use of violence. This is the desired world of Islam and such a world can be established only through peaceful dialogue. The truth is that Islam is based on monotheism, with regard to God, and on peaceful dialogue, with regard to methodology. This is the essence of Islamic teaching. No other way is possible in Islam.

Source: Spirit of Islam April 2019

Another principle of dialogue can be drawn from the Hudaybiyyah Peace Treaty. This treaty was signed only after long negotiations between the Prophet of Islam and the Quraysh. It is a matter of historical record that the conclusion of this treaty was possible because the Prophet unilaterally accepted the conditions laid down by the Quraysh.

The principle of dialogue derived from this Sunnah (method) of the Prophet is that both parties should present their viewpoints supported by arguments, while remaining ever ready for give and take—a pre-requisite of a successful dialogue—rather than insisting on all demands being unconditionally met. In practical matters, Islam advocates flexibility to the ultimate possible extent.

We learn from a number of examples throughout Islamic history that Islam not only lays down principles of dialogue but also gives practical illustrations. In the Makkan period of his mission, the Prophet of Islam repeatedly practiced the principle of dialogue. For instance, once the Quraysh sent their leader, Utba ibn Rabiyya, as their representative to the Prophet of Islam so that an atmosphere of peace might be arrived at through negotiation on the subject of mutual differences. The traditions tell us that Utba heard the Prophet out patiently and with full attention, and then conveyed what he had said to the Quraysh. Similarly, at the invitation of his uncle, Abu Talib, representatives of the Quraysh gathered at the Prophet’s home and held negotiations there peacefully on controversial matters.

This principle of peaceful negotiations can also be witnessed in the negotiations held at Hudaybiyyah between the Quraysh and the Prophet of Islam that continued for about two weeks, culminating in the treaty of Hudaybiyyah. This event, without a doubt, is a successful example of peaceful negotiation. Again, in the presence of the Prophet of Islam, tripartite talks were held between representatives of three religions—Islam, Judaism, and Christianity, in the Prophet’s mosque in Madinah. This historic event, which took place in the sacred place of worship, shows the importance given to peaceful dialogue in Islam. These examples, which are many in number, relate to the golden age of the Prophet and his Companions. That is why; the practice of dialogue in terms of bilateral negotiation enjoys the position of an established principle in Islam.

Source: Spirit of Islam April 2019

The Quran gives many principles to undertake interfaith dialogue. One important principle is given in the following verse:

“Say: “O People of the Book! Come to common terms as between us and you that we worship none but God.” (3:64)

We learn from this verse the subject of discussion when a conversation is being held between two parties. That is, the beginning of a dialogue should not be started with a controversy. Instead, a common ground should be sought on which the discussion should begin. The sequence of the discussion, therefore, should be from agreement to difference of opinion and then back to agreement.

In Islam, the formula for social peace, social harmony and inter-faith dialogue is based on peaceful co-existence as has been given in the following verse of the Quran:

         “You have your religion and I have mine.” (109:6)

In other words, the principle of dialogue given by Islam is, 'Follow one and respect all', or the method of ‘mutual respect’. As per the teachings of Islam, while respecting others, we have to welcome differences wholeheartedly without any reservation. It is hatred, which has to be eliminated, and not the difference of opinion. People may have their differences in belief, religion, culture, etc., but while following their religion, they have to have mutual respect for others and discover a common bond between them, which shows them all to be human beings.

When dialogue takes place between two parties on a controversial subject, it is essential that an amicable atmosphere be maintained. If media belonging to both parties set about arousing animosity, and people on both sides are engaged in spreading antagonistic feelings, an unfavourable atmosphere will be created that will make no fruitful dialogue possible.

It is a fact that the result of dialogue is not solely dependent upon the atmosphere of the immediate surroundings, but depends rather upon the external environment.

Source: Spirit of Islam April 2019

The Prophet of Islam started his mission in AD 610. This mission was to communicate his ideology to people by talking to them, listening to their objections, and trying to convince them of his viewpoint by means of arguments. One of the initial Quranic verses revealed to him was that the ideology given by God to the Prophet should be spread by him among the people. The Prophet’s ideology was based on monotheism, whereas his Arab contemporaries believed in polytheism. It was but natural, therefore, that his mission should be subjected to bilateral negotiation.

He would communicate his point to people, listen to their responses and then give them further explanations. In this way, his mission became a practical demonstration of what we now term dialogue. To make this dialogue fruitful, the Quran lays down certain meaningful guidelines:

"Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation and reason with them in a way that is best." (16:125).

This verse shows that your conversation with others should be carried on in the best and most gracious way, which is any bickering with other parties has to be avoided. After listening to their objections, the point should be made in such a way as appeals to their minds. That is, it should not end in mere debate but should be result-oriented. The conversation should not appear to be between rivals, but should take a scientific course. The Quran makes this quite explicit:

“Good and evil are not alike. Repel evil with that which is best, then he between whom and you was enmity will become as if he were a warm friend.” (41:34)

This verse of the Quran tells us that no one is an enemy. Everyone is potentially a friend. This is so because everyone is born with the same nature. From this Quranic principle, we learn that the beginning of any dialogue should not be marked by any sign of frustration about the possible outcome. The right approach is to display a hopeful attitude and at the very outset to suppress any tone which would suggest low expectations of success.

Source: Spirit of Islam April 2019

We are living in an age of information—the age of the knowledge explosion. Today, everyone wants to know more and more about everything, including religion. The result is that today, on the subject of religion, people are far better informed than ever before.

At the same time, we are living in a world of differences—of multi-religious, multi-cultural, multi-ethnic societies. To remove the differences people fight amongst themselves not realizing that differences cannot be removed. A reformer has rightly said that nature abhors uniformity. This means ‘difference’ is a part of nature and it exists in every aspect of life including religion. What we need to do is simply learn the ‘art of difference management’ rather than the art of difference elimination. For, who has the power to remove differences? How do we manage differences? In ancient times, people used to take a confrontational course whenever differences arose. They knew only one way to settle disputes, and that was war. But democracy put an end to this way of settling matters and introduced the culture of peace. We should also understand that difference is not a curse, but rather a blessing. History shows that difference of opinion leads to dialogue, and dialogue results in intellectual development, which is a boon for everyone concerned. Difference of opinion also leads to high thinking, which is the sole key to all kinds of human progress.

In the realm of religion, today, differences are managed only through meaningful and positive ‘inter-faith dialogue’ between people of world religions. The aim of dialogue is to seek peaceful solutions to controversial matters, in spite of differences. There may be differences in religion and culture, but there is absolutely no difference or discrimination made between people in terms of respect and honour.

The principle of dialogue is that the parties should present their viewpoints supported by arguments, while remaining ever ready for give and take—a pre-requisite of a successful dialogue—rather than insist on all demands being unconditionally met.

Dialogue, or peaceful negotiation, is the path prescribed by Islam. Islam is based on the principle of dawah, which is another name for peaceful negotiation. Violence is totally forbidden in Islam. There is only one exception to this ban and that is when it is engaged in self-defence. This can take place only at the time of external invasion, and such action is the prerogative of an established government. Non-governmental organizations have no right to wage a war in the name of justice, or even in self-defence.

Source: Spirit of Islam April 2019

Religious differences have always existed between people. That is why inter-religious dialogue has been found in one form or the other since ancient times. Fourteen hundred years ago, the Prophet of Islam held a three-religion conference in Madinah to exchange views on religious issues. If the Quran is consulted on the subject of interfaith dialogue, we find two main principles on which to hold dialogues. One is derived from this verse of the Quran:

“Say: O People of the Book, let us come to a word common to us and you that we will worship none but God.” (3:64)

The first and foremost principle for any dialogue held to discuss two or more religions is to strive to find a mutual basis for peaceful co-existence. Finding common ground in secular matters is comparatively easy, for nothing is held sacred in secularism. On the contrary, everything is sacred in religion. That is why it becomes the most difficult task to find a basis for agreement in religious matters. However, despite all difficulties, we must continue our peaceful efforts, irrespective of the results. The second principle given to us by the Quran is purely a matter of pragmatism. We learn that matters should be settled on practical grounds, avoiding their theoretical aspects. This principle is derived from this verse of the Quran:

“For you, your religion and for me, mine.” (109:6)

This is the principle of religious co-existence. This means that whenever common grounds for agreement between two or more parties cannot be arrived at on an ideological basis, then the way of practical co-existence must be adopted.

Source: Spirit of Islam January 2013

A creative solution is a general principle of nature. It is as much relevant to the secular domain as it is to the religious sphere. It is something fully desirable as far as Islam is concerned. What is called ijtihad in Islam is precisely this principle. Whether it be in the religious or the secular sphere, people repeatedly face the need to rethink certain issues with an open mind, so they can rise above prejudices, and seek new and effective solutions for them.

A person with a creative mind is someone who is free of prejudices, someone who can think objectively about issues and with a completely open mind.

A person with a creative mind is someone who is free of prejudices, someone who can think objectively about issues and with a completely open mind. Such a person can arrive at creative solutions to problems.

A prejudiced mind is a veil that prevents one from developing creativity. Freeing oneself from prejudices leads to the opening of the mind. The person who thinks with an open mind and keeps the real nature alive in every circumstance will find that his mind discovers practicable solutions to even the most difficult problems and situations.

Source: Spirit of Islam April 2016

Ijtihad is a principle of Shariah (Islamic law). There is general acceptance among the religious scholars, the ulema, that the source of this principle of ijtihad in the Shariah is a Hadith narrated by Muaz ibn Jabal, a senior companion of the Prophet and recorded by a number of traditionists, like Abu Dawood, At-Tirmizi, An-Nasai, Ibn Majah and Imam Ahmad. The Hadith is as follows:

Muaz ibn Jabal said that when the Prophet sent him to Yemen as governor, he asked him how he would decide matters. Muaz replied that he would decide in accordance with the Book of God. Then the Prophet asked him what he would do in case he did not find the required guidance in the Quran. Muaz replied that he would seek guidance in the Hadith. The Prophet asked him what he would do if he failed to find guidance regarding the matter in the Hadith as well. Muaz replied that in that situation he would exercise his judgment to the best of his ability. The Prophet then placed his hand on his chest and said, “May God be praised, for granting this ability to Muaz".

This Hadith is regarded as the fundamental source of the principle of Ijtihad. When we examine this Hadith, we learn exactly when a Muslim is allowed to do ijtihad in Islam—he or she is permitted to do so only when no guidance is available for that particular situation in the Quran and Hadith.

Source: Spirit of Islam February 2014

The religion handed down by the Prophet remains one and the same. However, since the situations in human society are subject to change, it becomes essential that the original religion (al-din) could be reapplied to changing sets of circumstances through ijtihad. Ijtihad means reapplying divine injunctions to new situations. For instance, the Shariah permitted the touching of leather socks with wet hands for purification instead of the normal washing of feet during ablution. Now when socks made of artificial fibres came to be used, the question arose as to whether doing masah (rubbing with water) was lawful or not. Then it became necessary to re-apply the old injunction to the new situation; after the exercise of ijtihad, permission was given to do masah on these socks.

In every age, the necessity arises of re-applying divine injunctions. And this has happened in modern times on a large scale. In ancient times war was a means of settling conflicts, but with the invention of the latest deadly weapons, war today serves no positive purpose. Now power lies in peace alone. Such is the state of affairs that the commands of war in Islam require a reapplication. In days gone by, kingship, whereby the ruler unilaterally possessed absolute power, was the order of the day. Now it is the age of democracy, which is another name for the politics of power-sharing.

Changed situations in every age demand that efforts be made towards adaptation of the injunctions of Islam to meet new exigencies. This is the way that the Islamic Shariah continues to be updated. This task of updating is performed through ijtihad, a process which, in any community, requires creative thinking. And the essential condition for creative thinking lies in people having full freedom of expression, including that of criticism. This is why Islam has accorded such freedom to everyone, it is in an atmosphere in which everything and everyone is open to criticism that creativity is developed. Creative minds alone can perform the task of ijtihad at the highest level. Where there is no such open intellectual atmosphere, the process of mental development will come to a halt, and that of updating as well.

Source: Islam Rediscovered

A verse of the Quran states: “Corruption has set in on land and sea because of the evil which men’s hands have done; and so He will make them taste the fruit of some of their doings, so that they may turn back from evil.” (30: 41)

This is a declaration by the Creator that, according to His plan, this period of the world has come to its end. According to this plan, the first phase has expired. Now the time is not far away when the present world will be replaced by its second phase. The first phase meant purely as a test for humankind, was temporary. The second phase will be for the result of that test, and it will be eternal.

In the present world, man has been given freedom of action. This is not because he deserves freedom on account of his general prowess: it was allotted to him temporarily for the purpose of testing him. It was meant to see who makes the proper use of freedom and who misuses it. According to the system of nature, the record of every person is being prepared. This record will be presented before the Creator in the next stage of life. Those whose records show that they made proper use of their freedom “will find a place in Paradise where they will live eternally.” (Quran) They will be accorded by their Creator a place where they will lead an eternal life of comfort and happiness. On the contrary, those whose record shows that they misused their freedom will be consigned by their Creator to punishment where in the words of Jesus Christ: “There will be wailing and weeping for all eternity.” (Matthew 13: 42).

Now the time has finally come for all humankind to arise from their slumber. By engaging themselves in introspection they must reform themselves. They must make the attainment of a successful life in the next phase of life their sole concern. Everyone must know that the chance they have been given in the present world is the first and last chance. No other chance awaits them. Global warming tells us that the point of no return has already been reached. Let us avail of this opportunity before the time is up. After this, no one will be given any further opportunity to come back to the present world. Nor will there be any opportunity in the next world to atone for one’s misconduct or be rewarded for the belated performance of worthy deeds.

Source: Spirit of Islam December 2018

After studying the laws of nature, the founder of modern science, Sir Isaac Newton (d. 1727) predicted in 1704 that the present world would end in 2060. (The Times of India, June 18, 2007) Based upon pure observations, scientists all over the world are now stating that as a result of global warming, the end of the world has become certain. Further evolution of civilization is not possible here at all.

Alvin Toffler’s book, Future Shock, was first published in 1970. Alvin Toffler predicted that the world is moving from an industrial to a super-industrial age. The next era of civilization will be the era of complete automation. The push-button culture will progress to the point that everything will start happening automatically. But the problem of global warming arrived with the message of the end of history, instead of the culmination of history.

This predicament of human history is undoubtedly the biggest question of today. A satisfactory explanation can be found only in the theory of universe with God. From the point of view of ‘universe without God’, a satisfactory explanation for this question is entirely impossible.

The certain annihilation of the world human inhabits today is undoubtedly the biggest question of today. A satisfactory explanation can be found only in the theory of the universe with God. Such examples clearly prove that there is a great void in the theory of universe without God. If this theory is followed, a very meaningful universe seems to end in an extremely meaningless end.

The theory of universe with God is completely devoid of this flaw. Believing in this theory means a meaningful culmination of the meaningful universe. This fact is strong proof for the theory of universe with God; it completely satisfies the demands of both reason as well as logic.

Source: Spirit of Islam December 2020

We must understand the seriousness of the issue of global warming in order to be more sensitive toward practicing sustainable living. A recent news report from the Independent says: “Enormous Antarctic glacier on brink of collapse could raise sea levels by half a metre alone, scientists warn.” (The Independent, 9th July 2019)

Global warming is regarded as the greatest problem besetting humankind in the present times. Scientific investigations have revealed that the earth’s life support system dependent upon the balance of nature is fast falling apart. It is greatly feared that soon a time will come when nothing will be left on earth to ensure the survival of life.

The present age has been one of an explosion of divine blessings in the form of scientific discoveries leading to advanced technology, covering every aspect of our life. But the abundance of these blessings has only increased humankind’s arrogance. While making full use of these blessings, humankind is distancing itself to a great extent from the Giver of these blessings. Perversion in the name of freedom has become the general culture today.

In the 7th century, the Prophet of Islam made it clear that human beings were not being settled on earth for eternity; a time would come when the present inhabited world would come to an end and be replaced by another world where we will have to give an account of every deed, which will either make us deserving of the perfect world of Paradise or make us deserving of punishment. Evil will be separated from the good in that world of the Hereafter.

The phenomenon of Global warming is showing that perhaps the time for this to happen is nearing. Man has to change himself; he has to abandon the way of disobedience to God and opt for the path of obedience to Him. Nature is silently calling upon man to mend his ways before he finds that he has no further opportunity to do so. Nevertheless, the news of the end times being near is not to be considered as a loss of hope, for the Prophet of Islam said: “If the Hour (the end of this world) is about to be established and one of you was holding a palm shoot, let him take advantage of even one second before the Hour is established to plant it.”

Source: Spirit of Islam September 2019

The Times of India of October 26, 2018, has the following report under the heading “Air scrubbed off CO2 could be a reality soon—A radical idea takes shape in race to stop global warming. With time running out to avoid dangerous global warming, America’s leading scientific body urged the federal government to begin a research programme focused on developing technologies that can remove vast quantities of carbon‒dioxide from the atmosphere to help slow climate change".

Scientists from all over the world are repeatedly emphasizing that global warming is the greatest danger of present times. Both print and electronic media inform people daily of this perilous situation. Reports based on the findings of international scientists, such as “Doomsday Not Far” (Hindustan Times, December 8, 2007) and ‘Five Years to Doomsday’ telecast on December 20, 2007, on an Indian TV programme warned that climate change is now turning into climate disaster. As a result, the day is fast approaching when human beings, regardless of where they are living, will no longer be able to inhabit this planet earth.

As we all know, there are huge ice caps at both the north and south poles. These are vast reservoirs of fresh water, but they are now melting at an alarming rate. Also, there are huge, mountain-top glaciers,—gigantic storehouses of drinking water—which, as a consequence of global warming, are likewise rapidly melting and their stored water is draining off into the oceans through the rivers.

This is going to result in two unbearable situations. On the one hand, very soon the level of water in the seas will rise, inundating coastal cities such as New York, Los Angeles, Kolkata, Mumbai, Chennai, etc. On the other hand, the non-coastal areas will suffer from an intolerable water shortage. It is predicted by some scholars that the shortage of water will become so acute that even a Third World War might take place over this issue.

The rivers are always full of water because the ice in the mountains keeps gradually melting the whole year round and this water continuously comes to the rivers through tributaries. But when all this ice has melted, naturally the rivers will run dry. And all their fresh water will be mixed with the salty water of the ocean. The ocean will be full of water but, being too salty, it will be fit neither for irrigation nor for drinking. The situation prevailing will be somewhat like that portrayed by Samuel Coleridge in his poem ‘The Ancient Mariner’: “Water, water, everywhere; nor any drop to drink”.

God’s prophets have constantly told us that the present world will not be eternal, that it is perpetually on its countdown, and that a time will come when its term will expire and it will come to its end. All the scientific evidence tells us that this countdown is approaching its final number. The scientists of the 20th century discovered the law of entropy and concluded that the world’s energy is continuously on the decrease and that this process cannot be reversed. Therefore, it is certain that after a fixed period of time, the present world will come to an end. Now the scientists of the 21st century have told us, according to their researches, that the time for the end of the present world has come very close. It could even be a mere 10 to 20 years. All these revelations which are being covered in the media under the heading of ‘global warming’ are in fact ‘divine warning’.

Source: Spirit of Islam December 2018

The Quran states: “There shall be no compulsion in religion” (2:256) This principle of non-coercion mentioned in the Quran has not been confined to religious freedom alone. Rather, it has been extensively elaborated upon and widely applied to all social, cultural, and political spheres of society. This has led to the development of a new culture in which individuals enjoy freedom of expression, dissent, and criticism without any fear or restriction. Two examples may suffice to explain to what extent this essential human right was observed in earlier Muslim societies.

Once Caliph Umar came to a well of the Banu Harithah where he met an outspoken person named Muhammad ibn Maslama. “How do you find me?” he asked Muhammad “By God, I find you just as I would like you to be and just as it would please any well-wisher to see you.

You are good at accumulating money, I see, but you keep your hands clean of it yourself, distributing it equitably to others.” “But” went on Muhammad ibn Maslama, “If you adopt a crooked course, we will straighten you, just as we straighten swords by placing them in a vice.” At these aggressively critical words, Umar, the second Muslim Caliph, exclaimed:

“Praise be to God, who has put me among a people who will straighten me when I become crooked.” (Kanz al-Ummal, Hadith No. 35763)

In another example when Muslims at Madinah, with their increasing affluence, began to settle huge dowers (mahr) on their daughters, Umar, in his capacity as Caliph, ordered that no one should demand or pay a dower that exceeded four hundred dirhams, and that anything in excess of this amount would be confiscated and deposited in the public treasury. (Baitul-Mal)

After the proclamation of this ordinance, when he came down from the pulpit, a tall, old woman stood up and confidently said: "The Quran has set no restrictions on this matter: Umar has no right to set an upper limit to the dowers.” To back up her contention, she loudly recited this verse of the Quran:

“If you decide to replace one wife with another, do not take any part of her dower back: even if you have given her a treasure.” (4: 20)

Umar’s immediate reaction on hearing this was to say: “A woman has quarreled with Umar and has bested him.”

According to another account, Umar said: “May God forgive me, everyone knows better than Umar, even this old lady.” (Musnad al-Farooq by Ibn Kathir, Vol. 2, p. 573)

With the advent of Islam in the seventh century, it was declared for the benefit of mankind that all greatness was the exclusive prerogative of God and that in the eyes of God, all human beings were equal. The Prophet Muhammad declared not once, but on many occasions that all were alike, all were brothers.

The Prophet not only stated the truth but also made it a reality by bringing about a total revolution based on the idea of human equality.

On achieving political domination in Arabia, he was able to put this theory into practice in his capacity as ruler of a state. In this way, Islam put an end to discrimination between human beings on the basis of race, colour, status, etc. People were assigned a high or low status according only to their moral worth.

Source: Spirit of Islam December 2017

According to God’s creation plan, man has been granted total freedom. Freedom means that, from a moral standpoint, he can take either the right path or the wrong path as he chooses.

This fact has been expressed in the Quran in these words: “This is the truth from your Lord. Let him who will, believe in it, and him who will deny it.” (18:29)

That is to say, let one who wants to accept the truth, accept it. And let one who wants to reject the truth, reject it. In such a situation it is quite natural that there should be total freedom of speech in Islam. Placing any curb on freedom of speech will go against the creation plan of the Creator Himself. Anyone who misuses his freedom should be countered with logic and argument, not with violence. In other words, the pen will be countered with the pen and not with the sword.

Source: The True Face of Islam

Man has been granted total intellectual freedom in Islam. Rather the truth is that it was Islam itself which brought into existence that revolution in human history granted freedom of expression to all human beings. Prior to Islam in all periods of human history system of absolutism prevailed in the world. That is why man was denied intellectual freedom. Intellectual freedom is no simple matter. The truth is that the secret of all human progress lies hidden in intellectual freedom.

The first benefit of this intellectual freedom is that man receives that highest good which is called fear of God in the Quran (5: 94). It consists of man’s recognition and realisation of God in full freedom and, of one’s own free will, without any external pressure from God. So long as there is no atmosphere of total freedom, none can experience the indescribable pleasure of spiritual experience which is called fear of God in the Unseen. Hence it is impossible (without freedom) to grant anyone credit for the highest of human actions.

Freedom of expression is the thing that saves one from hypocrisy. Man is a thinking creature. His mind necessarily thinks and forms opinions. In such a situation if curbs are placed on freedom of expression, people’s thinking cannot be ceased, the only thing that will take place is that their thinking will not come to their lips and pens. Any institution, nation, or state which places curbs on freedom of expression will be ultimately brimming with hypocrites. In such an atmosphere sincere people can never be produced.

In this way, intellectual freedom is directly related to creativity. A society having intellectual freedom breeds creative people whereas a society that curbs intellectual freedom will necessarily stagnate and as a result, the production of creative minds and their growth and development will forever be stopped.

The proper stand in the matter of disagreement and criticism is that people shed off their unnecessary sensitivity in this matter, instead of attempting to put a stop to the act of criticism and disagreement itself. This is the demand of Islam as well as the demand of nature.

The attribute of a true believer described in the hadith is: ‘whenever a truth is presented to them, they accept it.’ (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith No. 11678) Here by truth is meant a matter of truth. In other words, a believer is one who has full capacity of accepting the truth. Whenever truth is brought before him, whenever any error of his is pointed out to him, no complex comes in the way of his accepting the truth.

The truth is that the acceptance of the truth is the greatest act of worship. It is an act for which man has to make the greatest of sacrifice. This great sacrifice makes this act the greatest form of worship. This is the sacrifice of one’s prestige; of losing one’s greatness. To lose one’s sense of greatness for the sake of truth is an occasion when man earns his entry into heaven by paying its price.

When one receives the blessing of having performed this great form of worship? This opportunity comes to man only when there is full freedom of speech. When one can criticise another without any obstacles. When such atmosphere prevails in society as people can speak freely and frankly and the listeners listen to them without raising any objection.

Just as the mosque is a place to offer prayer in congregation, similarly the freedom of speech provides that conducive atmosphere in which great virtues flourish. It is in such an atmosphere that those situations are created when a person is given the credit for the pronouncement of truth and another is rewarded for the acceptance of the truth.

Source: The True Face of Islam