You are here:
Darwinism and Atheism
Mail to a Friend
This is what was posted on the masjid noticeboard recently:
This should really read:
I believe in my version of the account of the creation of Aadam which treats Darwinism as the ultimate, authoritative truth and the Qur'an as a subservient, "children's madrasah level", "needing extra qualification and sophistication" truth and which left as it is, is for backward, narrow-minded Muslims. However, since my kufr has been plainly exposed by both scholar and non-scholar alike, and rejected by all Muslims of sound fitrah and aql, I am left with no choice but to rage in my cage by asserting an ambiguous generalized belief, with generalized ambiguous words as a last-ditch attempt to deceive and hoodwink the congregation and wider audience about the reality of my kufr.
Biologists say, after extensive observational studies, that monkeys are proven to have a basic moral sense, and they even mourn over their dead apparently. We can only hope to appeal to this basic moral sense, and advise Usamah (and his father) that a detailed tawbah is what is required.
Usamah is forgetting the fact that although we are on opposite sides of the bars, he's on the inside and the rest of us are on the outside, watching, in amazement and bewilderment at how a monkey can start raging in the cage given what has transpired. Its the last ditch attempt of a fatally wounded animal. Whatever the case, Usamah's case is over and done with ...
More important and more grave is the issue of the father who has long been touted as a "scholar", allegedly on a par with the well-known genuine, firmly-rooted Scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah. We had deluded ignoramuses stating that Suhaib Hasan is the highest authority in da'wah in the UK because he is an independent scholar of the land. Looks like these people weren't around in the mid and late 90s when the dodgy fatwas of the "House of Hasan" were routinely destroying families and marriages up and down the country and were surprisingly common-knowledge back then even to lay people. And that's peanuts compared to his misguidance in ta'aawun and mu'aamalah with the worst of Ahl al-Bid'ah, and his actions in this regard have buffered many a truth-seeker from arriving at the true and real way of the Salaf, and instead stuck in a "no-man's land" where Ikhwani, Bannaawi principles run circles around them and their perceptions of the da'wah. But what a lengthy fraud this has been, it took 13 years for it to be realized, even after Shaykh Muqbil ordered the boycotting of this man way back in 1997 or thereabouts for these same reasons. It finished very ugly on Saturday 22/01/2011 when Suhaib Hasan's public relations stunt for his son backfired badly. This fraud lasted that long because groups of mostly well-intentioned but uninformed people up and down the country were deceived by treacherous (and not so well-intentioned) graduates having their own wider goals and designs. They raised Suhaib Hasan, supported him and joined his side of the line despite knowing the rulings of the Scholars upon him and his da'wah. Nay, even after they saw him side by side with callers to Shirk and deniers of al-Uluww, Jahmite Sufi grave worshippers in the recent past. The unhealthy and excessive rank hatred being harboured by these graduates (and their followers) towards others prevented them from siding with the truth, even though it was plain and obvious, on the tips of their noses, in front of their very eyes. It's an ugly finish, but a befitting one given the circumstances. We wonder what types of diplomacy and efforts will be made in the background to defend this man now and to save his face and make light his affair...
A Recommended Tawbah
This is what Usamah should be writing and posting on masjid noticeboards and this is what Suhaib Hasan should be encouraging his son with, if he truly is a concerned father:
Dear Muslims in UK and elsewhere:
I hereby announce my open, unequivocal tawbah from an instance of kufr that emanated from me and not least, the great turmoil I have created for the local community and and Muslims in general after having been taken for a ride by Western Materialist philosophies that are fundamentally opposed to fitrah and aql.
- I've realized that Darwinian Evolution is an academic and intellectual con which cannot be conferred "scientific status" by the very demarcation criteria used by materialists and naturalists to distinguish between "science" and "non-science."
- I've realized that natural selection acting on random mutations is a children's madrasah level account of the great diversity and complexity of life. It is the only other explanation atheists managed to pull out of their posteriors to combat the one that is necessitated by fitrah and aql. In other words there are really only two answers. Either matter creates (and it does so randomly of course) or an all-knowing, all-powerful entity creates, one to whom all affairs return to. However, rather than saying "matter creates itself and self-organizes randomly" which all people with sound fitrah and aql reject as absurd through uniform experience in all history, it's clothed as "natural selection acting on random mutations." Fundamentally, the core of neo-Darwinism is an insult to fitrah and aql.
- I've realized that the fossil record on the whole clashes with Darwinian Evolution, and Darwin admitted it himself, in the Origin of Species, writing,
The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth, [must] be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graded organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.
Things have not changed much since then. Proposing a "common ancestor" is not an explanation through "natural law", it is simply a hypothetical assertion used to do the explaining of the observed fossil record. This is not "science" according to the demarcation criteria which requires that a theory is explained by natural law. The theory of "common ancestor" is an explanation through a hypothetical, not through natural law.
- I also acknowledge that in the days of Darwin, the idea of a cell was that it was a minute piece of jelly, pretty much. Of course, primitive understandings lead to primitive theories. Fast forward more than a 100 years after Darwin and the idea of cells and the knowledge of DNA opens up a vast world of unfathomable complexity. It has still not been fully deciphered. Only now are they discovering molecular machines with amazing complexity involved at every level of the cells operation. In retrospect, this shows that a primitive idea like Darwin's should never have seen the light of day. But unfortunately it did. And suckers are born every minute. More and more people (even if they are an outcast minority) are mustering to challenge Darwin's primitive theory because the knowledge of cell and molecular biology was unknown then, and they had a very simplistic idea of how cells formed from minerals and water. We now know that those who research into "origins of life" science, as in abiogenesis, have absolutely no answer to account for the amazing complexity of the simplest single-cell organism. Since, the strength of Darwin's theory relies upon the strength of the evidence and explanation for the actual origin of life, then Darwin's theory becomes even more suspect.
Upon all of the above considerations - meaning, in retrospect, such a theory should never have seen the light of day and gained currency in the first place, such that a deluded Muslim like me should come along, develop an inferiority complex in the face of the rigorous and militant promotion of this theory (in the academic environments that I have passed through) and become deceived into thinking there is a need to merge the Qur'an with it - I say the following:
- Trying to reconcile an unproven, imaginary theory with the Qur'anic texts is imbecilic on my behalf. It appears I was deceived by the false authority I thought my secular ijaazah's gave me. They amounted to nothing in the end, as I got taken for a ride nevertheless. Muslim scholars and the average Muslim are not as backward and ill-informed as I deceived myself into thinking they were no thanks to my inferiority complex in the face of militant Darwinists that appear to dominate the corridors of educational establishments.
- I understand definitions and ideas about "science" are deliberately defined and steered in a direction to favour a materialistic outlook and naturalistic world view, and that certain truths which can be known by objective scientific enquiry are sidelined and marginalized by these rigged definitions because they clash with that world view. As a result, a contrived consensus can be claimed within academic establishments, and this is rigorously defended because the stakes are high. Along come coconuts like me, we get exposed to this environment and get deluded by that fake display of objective scientific enquiry (in those areas that we are discussing) and that contrived consensus. A stretch of a few years like this and next thing you know we are now "in the house" whilst everyone remains "in the field" and we start looking down on those uneducated peasants with an air of arrogance.
- Now that I have come to my senses, I believe that Allaah created Aadam exactly as described in the Qur'an, that Aadam was the first human, there being no human prior to him. That he was granted reason, choice, language and so on after being created. I believe all of mankind are descended from Aadam (alayhis salaam). I specifically reject and deny that he was born of parents that resembled humans or anything like this. I believe that the uniformity and homology in living things is simply an indication of a sole, masterful creator, that the originator is one, and that "common descent" is simply a materialistic interpretation adopted so as to combat fitrah and aql.
- I affirm certain observed realities that can be incorporated into the vague and general term "Evolution" (such as adaptability, phenotypical change etc.), and I realize that Evolution can mean many things. But I reject and deny that particular meaning of it which claims man came to be through Darwinian processes (from a single cell to intermediate stages to apes to man) and deny any claims that this is how Allaah created man, as this directly clashes with revealed texts, and is not a matter open to interpretation to unfounded, unproven theories. Specifically I speak with the verses (22:5, 20:55, 15:26, 55:14, 38:75) upon the explanations found in the well-known books of exegesis, those of al-Tabari, Ibn Katheer, al-Baghawi, al-Qurtubi and others, and upon the consensus of the Muslim scholars and I repudiate all attempts to justify Darwinian theory through vague and obscure statements of the Mu'tazilah, Ismaa'eelee Baatiniyyah, Sufi Ittihaadees and others.
Finally, I repent (and apologise) for all the inconvenience and turmoil I have created for the congregation over the years and I endeavour to start learning true and real knowledge of the deen from its orthodox sources.
Signed: _______________________ Date: ___________
In the presence of:
Witness 1: ________________________________
Witness 2: ________________________________
Print, Sign and Distribute...
Its not comprehensive but at least it's a start. Usamah ought to print this off, sign and distribute openly and widely. Daddy should also give him a helping hand, because the one who helped propagate baatil should be foremost in trying to erase it. This is what should be going up on noticeboards, not expressions of unsophisticated wild rage...
Link to this article: Show:
Add a Comment (comments are currently moderated)
- Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 8: Recommended Letter of Tawbah
- Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 7: Fitrah, Aql, Naql, Science and the Origin of the Universe and Man
- Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 6: Usamah's Lecture 'Islam and the Theory of Evolution'
- Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 5: Takdheeb of Allah and His Messenger Can be Excused Through the Angle of Ta'weel and Ijtihaad?
- Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 4: Scholars Verdicts on Belief in Darwinism
- Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 3: Looking at Usamah's Citations of Evidence
- Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 2: Analyzing the Merger Between Darwinism and the Qur'an
- Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 1: General Observations
You must be registered and logged in to comment.
|Clarification of the Statement of Assim al-Hakeem That Divine Qadar Was Created
|Translation of the Laamiyyah Poem Ascribed to Ibn Taymiyyah
|Imaam al-Sa'dee: What is the Definition of Tawheed and What Are Its Types?
|Want to Understand Aqidah Properly? Then You Must Learn and Understand History!
|Imam al-Barbahaaree's Praise of Allāh and His Favour: Shaikh al-Fawzaan's Explanation
|Introduction to the Book of Imaam al-Barbaharee by the Explainer: The Noble Shaikh, the Scholar, Sālih al-Fawzān
|Brief Notes on the Explanation of al-Aqidah al-Tahaawiyyah: Part 1 - Introduction
|Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 8: Recommended Letter of Tawbah
|Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 7: Fitrah, Aql, Naql, Science and the Origin of the Universe and Man
|Usamah Hasan, Darwinism, Evolutionary Forces and the Creation of Man - Part 6: Usamah's Lecture 'Islam and the Theory of Evolution'