May 12: One Year Passed, No Lessons Learned
Lesson learning starts once Teaching-a-Lesson stops.
These are Cantonment and Colony Caninines. They LOVE to be mistaken for the goraa by their walk, talk & dress. They Love the english language especially as imitation artists of their masters.
They are Kuttaas, Ba Ba Blacksheep. toaa mainaas, performing Bunders, Hyenas and mules ( khachhars)..
These Kanjarisaed Khachars will never ever learn a lesson..they love to be educated...
They are not learned, the are EDUCATED! They never had the benefit of a Madresssa education..they feel proud that they know only EASY URDU. They feel "faarinish" in their miserable OFFENCE-COLONIES..
Thier drooling asses & Lickety-Lick tongues are always yelping for the goraa to never stop their orgasmic-orgies of killing muslims wherever they find them & their Masonic-Satanic agenda gets implemented & they experience that mother-of-all-orgasms as a grand-finale.
===========================================================
U.S. paid bounty for Khadr arrest in Pakistan
COLIN FREEZE
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
May 12, 2008 at 9:32 PM EDT
A U.S. intelligence agency paid a bounty of $500,000 (U.S.) to Pakistani military officials who arrested a Canadian citizen wanted for links to al-Qaeda, according to a new Federal Court ruling.
Mr. Justice Richard Mosley ordered an Oct. 19, 2004, RCMP memo released yesterday after lawyers for The Globe and Mail fought for its disclosure. The newspaper obtained the document more than a year ago, but chose not to publish it after Crown lawyers warned that the release of the information could illegally reveal a state secret.
U.S. officials – likely from the Central Intelligence Agency – had regarded the bounty as sensitive information passed along to Canada in confidence, prompting officials to fight to keep it secret.
Marked “Top Secret,” the internal Mountie memo was addressed to former RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli. Its subject matter was the arrest in Pakistan of Abdullah Khadr, now 28 and jailed in Toronto, the oldest living male member of Canada's infamous Khadr clan.
“He is deemed to be a national security threat and has a $USD 500,000 outstanding bounty for his capture,” the memo reads. “He is deemed to be a great intelligence asset due to his close relationship with Osama bin Laden and other [al-Qaeda] members.”
The suspect is the older brother of Omar Khadr, who was arrested at 15 in Afghanistan and sent to the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay.
Like his siblings, Abdullah Khadr was raised in Afghanistan by a fundamentalist father, a naturalized Canadian, who befriended Mr. bin Laden while fighting the Soviets.
The family fled to Pakistan in late 2001, where the local army killed the Khadr family patriarch in 2003 and arrested Abdullah Khadr a year later. He was questioned by a host of U.S., Canadian, and Pakistani agents while in custody for nearly a year. During that time, he is alleged to have made several admissions about running guns and rocket launchers to al-Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan.
Mr. Khadr was released in 2005, and Canadian officials facilitated his repatriation, but he was arrested within days of landing in Toronto. More than two years later, he continues to fight extradition to Boston on a U.S. indictment alleging material support for terrorism. While the Mounties say they considered Mr. Khadr a “primary target” of their own investigation, they never laid any charges in Canada.
So far, Mr. Khadr's allegations that he was tortured in Pakistan, and his battles for disclosure of documents in Canada, have stymied all attempts to extradite him. Officials allege he admitted running guns across the Pakistan-Afghanistan border – “I only buy and sell weapons for al-Qaeda,” he told authorities, according to a transcript – and also said he used a GPS device to map out co-ordinates for Pakistani jihadists plotting to assassinate Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.
It was amid the Canadian disclosure battle that federal officials inadvertently released to Mr. Khadr's lawyers the top secret Mountie memo as part of the case's voluminous court filings.
Citing secrecy provisions in the Canada Evidence Act, Crown officials tried to pull it back within hours of its release last spring, and, after learning The Globe and Mail had obtained a copy in the interim, warned that publication could lead to prosecution.
That set the stage for a court battle that ended yesterday with Judge Mosley supporting the news media's right to publish the document. “It is a reasonable inference from the public evidence filed in this application that the bounty was offered and paid by the U.S. government,” his 47-page decision reads.
Judge Mosley then went one step further, confirming that the payment was made, even though the memo said only that the bounty was offered.
“The evidence heard in camera supports the conclusion that the bounty was offered and paid by the U.S.,” Judge Mosley said in his ruling.
The Federal Court found that the information was supplied to Canada in confidence, and that the attorney-general had acted in good faith by striving to keep it secret. Even so, Judge Mosley ruled that the memo is crucial to Mr. Khadr's defence and the public has a right to know about it.
“The fact that a foreign state paid a bounty for the apprehension of a Canadian citizen abroad and that Canadian officials were aware of it at an early stage is also a matter in which the public would have a legitimate interest,” the decision reads.
Government lawyers had argued that a “third-party rule” in intelligence circles keeps vital information flowing among states. Global counterterrorism agencies swap secrets on the understanding that sensitive foreign-generated information should not be publicly produced domestically. To jeopardize the third-party rule is often seen as tantamount to risking the entire flow of information.
Peter Jacobsen, the lawyer who acted for The Globe and Mail, called the ruling a victory for transparency. “It was a crack in the system that allowed The Globe to know this information even existed,” he said. “… One wonders how much other information is out there being unjustifiably kept from the public in the name of risk to national security or international relations.”
Mr. Khadr's lawyer, Nathan Whitling, said the memo is crucial. “The secret payment of this bounty is another illustration of the U.S.'s notorious practice of ‘outsourcing torture,' ” he said in an e-mail.
“Rather than getting its own hands dirty, the U.S. simply paid the Musharraf regime $500,000 to arrest Mr. Khadr, knowing full well what Pakistan would do to him.”
When asked which U.S. intelligence agency paid the bounty, another one of Mr. Khadr's lawyers said it was obvious. “The CIA,” said Dennis Edney. Asked if he had any doubt about that, he said, “none at all.”
Mr. Edney added that records show that the CIA questioned Mr. Khadr for 17 days at the beginning of his detention in Pakistan. Defence lawyers intend to argue that the CIA grilling sessions informed, influenced and tainted all subsequent interrogations, nullifying any admissions Mr. Khadr may have made.
Posted by
echoboom
May 12, 2008 08:26 pm
Lessons learnt?Lesson learning starts once Teaching-a-Lesson stops.
These are Cantonment and Colony Caninines. They LOVE to be mistaken for the goraa by their walk, talk & dress. They Love the english language especially as imitation artists of their masters.
They are Kuttaas, Ba Ba Blacksheep. toaa mainaas, performing Bunders, Hyenas and mules ( khachhars)..
These Kanjarisaed Khachars will never ever learn a lesson..they love to be educated...
They are not learned, the are EDUCATED! They never had the benefit of a Madresssa education..they feel proud that they know only EASY URDU. They feel "faarinish" in their miserable OFFENCE-COLONIES..
Thier drooling asses & Lickety-Lick tongues are always yelping for the goraa to never stop their orgasmic-orgies of killing muslims wherever they find them & their Masonic-Satanic agenda gets implemented & they experience that mother-of-all-orgasms as a grand-finale.
===========================================================
U.S. paid bounty for Khadr arrest in Pakistan
COLIN FREEZE
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
May 12, 2008 at 9:32 PM EDT
A U.S. intelligence agency paid a bounty of $500,000 (U.S.) to Pakistani military officials who arrested a Canadian citizen wanted for links to al-Qaeda, according to a new Federal Court ruling.
Mr. Justice Richard Mosley ordered an Oct. 19, 2004, RCMP memo released yesterday after lawyers for The Globe and Mail fought for its disclosure. The newspaper obtained the document more than a year ago, but chose not to publish it after Crown lawyers warned that the release of the information could illegally reveal a state secret.
U.S. officials – likely from the Central Intelligence Agency – had regarded the bounty as sensitive information passed along to Canada in confidence, prompting officials to fight to keep it secret.
Marked “Top Secret,” the internal Mountie memo was addressed to former RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli. Its subject matter was the arrest in Pakistan of Abdullah Khadr, now 28 and jailed in Toronto, the oldest living male member of Canada's infamous Khadr clan.
“He is deemed to be a national security threat and has a $USD 500,000 outstanding bounty for his capture,” the memo reads. “He is deemed to be a great intelligence asset due to his close relationship with Osama bin Laden and other [al-Qaeda] members.”
The suspect is the older brother of Omar Khadr, who was arrested at 15 in Afghanistan and sent to the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay.
Like his siblings, Abdullah Khadr was raised in Afghanistan by a fundamentalist father, a naturalized Canadian, who befriended Mr. bin Laden while fighting the Soviets.
The family fled to Pakistan in late 2001, where the local army killed the Khadr family patriarch in 2003 and arrested Abdullah Khadr a year later. He was questioned by a host of U.S., Canadian, and Pakistani agents while in custody for nearly a year. During that time, he is alleged to have made several admissions about running guns and rocket launchers to al-Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan.
Mr. Khadr was released in 2005, and Canadian officials facilitated his repatriation, but he was arrested within days of landing in Toronto. More than two years later, he continues to fight extradition to Boston on a U.S. indictment alleging material support for terrorism. While the Mounties say they considered Mr. Khadr a “primary target” of their own investigation, they never laid any charges in Canada.
So far, Mr. Khadr's allegations that he was tortured in Pakistan, and his battles for disclosure of documents in Canada, have stymied all attempts to extradite him. Officials allege he admitted running guns across the Pakistan-Afghanistan border – “I only buy and sell weapons for al-Qaeda,” he told authorities, according to a transcript – and also said he used a GPS device to map out co-ordinates for Pakistani jihadists plotting to assassinate Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.
It was amid the Canadian disclosure battle that federal officials inadvertently released to Mr. Khadr's lawyers the top secret Mountie memo as part of the case's voluminous court filings.
Citing secrecy provisions in the Canada Evidence Act, Crown officials tried to pull it back within hours of its release last spring, and, after learning The Globe and Mail had obtained a copy in the interim, warned that publication could lead to prosecution.
That set the stage for a court battle that ended yesterday with Judge Mosley supporting the news media's right to publish the document. “It is a reasonable inference from the public evidence filed in this application that the bounty was offered and paid by the U.S. government,” his 47-page decision reads.
Judge Mosley then went one step further, confirming that the payment was made, even though the memo said only that the bounty was offered.
“The evidence heard in camera supports the conclusion that the bounty was offered and paid by the U.S.,” Judge Mosley said in his ruling.
The Federal Court found that the information was supplied to Canada in confidence, and that the attorney-general had acted in good faith by striving to keep it secret. Even so, Judge Mosley ruled that the memo is crucial to Mr. Khadr's defence and the public has a right to know about it.
“The fact that a foreign state paid a bounty for the apprehension of a Canadian citizen abroad and that Canadian officials were aware of it at an early stage is also a matter in which the public would have a legitimate interest,” the decision reads.
Government lawyers had argued that a “third-party rule” in intelligence circles keeps vital information flowing among states. Global counterterrorism agencies swap secrets on the understanding that sensitive foreign-generated information should not be publicly produced domestically. To jeopardize the third-party rule is often seen as tantamount to risking the entire flow of information.
Peter Jacobsen, the lawyer who acted for The Globe and Mail, called the ruling a victory for transparency. “It was a crack in the system that allowed The Globe to know this information even existed,” he said. “… One wonders how much other information is out there being unjustifiably kept from the public in the name of risk to national security or international relations.”
Mr. Khadr's lawyer, Nathan Whitling, said the memo is crucial. “The secret payment of this bounty is another illustration of the U.S.'s notorious practice of ‘outsourcing torture,' ” he said in an e-mail.
“Rather than getting its own hands dirty, the U.S. simply paid the Musharraf regime $500,000 to arrest Mr. Khadr, knowing full well what Pakistan would do to him.”
When asked which U.S. intelligence agency paid the bounty, another one of Mr. Khadr's lawyers said it was obvious. “The CIA,” said Dennis Edney. Asked if he had any doubt about that, he said, “none at all.”
Mr. Edney added that records show that the CIA questioned Mr. Khadr for 17 days at the beginning of his detention in Pakistan. Defence lawyers intend to argue that the CIA grilling sessions informed, influenced and tainted all subsequent interrogations, nullifying any admissions Mr. Khadr may have made.
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful
Was Ayesha really 6 years old when she married Muhammad?
A few comments about Muhammad’s marriages are in order. Muhammad married his first wife, Khadijah, several years before his announcement as a prophet of Islam. Khadijah was a reasonably well-to-do woman of Makkah and was 15 years his senior. Muhammad was 25 and Khadijah was 40 at the time of their marriage. This loving and caring monogamous relationship continued for 25 years until her death.
Muhammad, now over 50 years of age, married a relatively aged woman by the name of Saudah. It is thus important to note here that Muhammad’s twenty five prime youth years were spent in purely monogamous relationship with a lady 15 years his senior. This speaks volumes about this man’s piety and loyalty in spousal matters as well as about the fact that his later marriages could not have been motivated by any human wild sexual desires.
In 620-621 A.D, he and his devout companions migrated from Makkah to Medina. Then a couple of years later, he married Ayesha, a daughter of his closest companion, Abu Bakr, in the 3rd Hijrah (Islamic calendar--623-24 A.D). This information coming from diverse historical and Hadith sources is widely agreed upon and therefore can be, a priori, considered authentic. Based on this information, and a host of other related bits and pieces detailed below, it can be shown that Ayesha could have been at least 16-19 of age at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (pbuh). The following is the detail of the analysis of these historical and Hadith accounts.
1. Several books of Hadith (Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim, Abu Dawood, among others) and Islamic history (Tabari, among others) report that Ayesha was married to the Prophet at 6 but her marriage was not consummated until she was 9. Although, this information is widely quoted and found in many Hadith and history books, it must be noted that most of this information has come from a single person, Hisham bin Urwah, who is the last narrator of this Hadith Isnaad (chain of narration) on the authority of his father. Thus, this Hadith is primarily a single Hadith. Some other narratives mention the same Hadith but their narration has been found weak and unacceptable. In general, a Hadith has more credibility if it is narrated by more people independently from diverse chains of narrators. In this case, there is basically only one source.
2. Despite the abundance of information available during the 71 years that Hisham bin Urwah lived and taught in Medina, it is rather odd that that no one else—not even his famous pupil Malik ibn Anas---reported Ayesha’s age from Hisham in Medina. Furthermore, all the narrators of this Hadith were Iraqis. Hisham is reported to have moved to Iraq in his later years. An extensive list of biographical sketches of all narrators including these Iraqis is available in some books.
3. Yaqub ibn Shaibah is reported to have said, “narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq". Malik ibn Anas (d. 795), a student of Hisham in fact discredited all narratives of Hisham that were reported through people of Iraq.
(Tehzibu'l-tehzib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh), vol 11, pg 48 - 51).
4. It is reported that Hisham bin Urwah’s memory suffered in his later years to the extent that some of the traditions reported from Hisham bin Urwah could not be trusted for authenticity.
(Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, by Al-Zahbi , Arabic, a book on the life sketches of the narrators of the Hadith, Al-Maktabatu'l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol 4, pg 301).
5. Even though Ayesha is reported to have been born about eight years before Hijrah (around 614 A.D.), one can find another narrative in Bukhari (kitabu'l-tafseer) whereby Ayesha is reported to have said that she was a ‘young girl’ at the time of revelation of the 54th chapter of the Qur'an which came 9 years before Hijrah (around 612 A.D). Thus, according to this tradition, Ayesha was a young girl (Jariyah—as she calls herself and not an infant in which case she would be sibyah). Additionally, this narrative stands in direct contrast to the one reported on Ayesha’s age by Hisham bin Urwah. This puts Ayesha’s age significantly higher than 9 as reported by Hisham bin Urwah—possibly 15 or even higher. Obviously, if this narrative is held to be true, it is in clear
contradiction with the narratives reported by Hisham
ibn Urwah. There is no compelling reason as to why this tradition should be considered less accurate vis-à-vis Hisham’s narrative).
(Sahih Bukhari, kitabu'l-tafsir, Arabic, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-sa`atu Maw`iduhum wa'l-sa`atu adha' wa amarr).
6. According to many narratives, Ayesha participated in the battles of Badr and Uhud. No one older than 15 was allowed to accompany the Prophet’s army in the battle of Uhud. This applied across the board to all participants, men and women alike. The battle of Uhud took place around the 2nd Hijrah, a time line close to her marriage with the Prophet. Obviously, she was at least older than 15 at that time.
7. A narrative regarding Ayesha's participation in the battle of `Uhud is given in Bukhari, (Kitabu'l-jihad wa'l-siyar, Arabic, Bab Ghazwi'l-nisa' wa qitalihinna ma`a'lrijal; that all boys under 15 were sent back is given in Bukhari, Kitabu'l-maghazi, Bab ghazwati'l-khandaq wa hiya'l-ahza'b, Arabic).
8. Most historians have consensus on the age of one of the oldest female companions of the Prophet, namely, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha that was ten years older than Ayesha. It is also reported in Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah that Asma died in 73 Hijrah when she was 100 years old. Clearly, if Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of Hijrah, Ayesha was 17 at the time of Hijrah and 19 at the time of consummation of her marriage with Muhammad.
(For Asma being 10 years older than Ayesha, see A`la'ma'l-nubala', Al-Zahabi, Vol 2, Pg 289, Arabic, Mu'assasatu'l-risalah, Beirut, 1992. Ibn Kathir confirms this fact, [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by ten years" (Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol 8, Pg 371, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933). For Asma being 100 years old, see Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol 8, Pg 372, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933). Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also has the same information: "She [Asma (ra)] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH." Taqribu'l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, Pg 654, Arabic, Bab fi'l-nisa', al-harfu'l-alif, Lucknow).
9. Tabari informs in his treatise on Islamic history that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the pre Islamic period. The pre-Islamic period ended in 610 A.D, a fact that makes Ayesha to be at least 14 years of age at the time of her marriage around 613-624 A.D.
Tarikhu'l-umam wa'l-mamlu'k, Al-Tabari, Vol 4, Pg 50, Arabic, Dara'l-fikr, Beirut, 1979).
10. Ibn Hisham, the historian, reports that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before `Umar ibn al-Khattab which only means that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam close to the time of first revelation (around 610 A.D). This means she must have been at least a young girl at that time. Assuming she was barely 6 or 7 at that time this information puts the age of Ayesha at 20 or more at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (623-624 A.D.), (Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Hisham, vol 1, Pg 227 – 234 and 295, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-hadithah, Al-Riyadh).
11. Tabari reports that before migrating to Habashah, Abu Bakr planned to hand over his daughter, Ayesha to Mut’am’s son to whom she was engaged. But fearing persecution by the Quraish, Mut’am refused and his son divorced Ayesha. The migration to Habashah happened 8 years before Hijra. Obviously, at the time she was ready to take on responsibilities as a wife (possibly 9 or 10 years of age). If she married Muhammad in the 2nd Hijrah (623-624 A.D), she could not be less than 19 years of age (a secondary reference for this argument is: Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat, Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi, Urdu, Pg 38, Anjuman Uswa e hasanah, Karachi, Pakistan).
12. A famous Sunni imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, reports in His Musnad, that after the death of Khadijah, Khaulah came to the Prophet (pbuh) and advised him to marry again. She had two propositions for the Prophet: Either Muhammad could marry a virgin (bikr), or he could go for woman who had already been married (thayyib)". Khaulah named Ayesha for a virgin (bikr). It is common knowledge that the term bikr in the Arabic language refers to a well formed lady and not to a 9 year old, playful, immature lass. If she were nine, the word used by Khaulah would have been jariyah and not bikr.
(Musnad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol 6, Pg 210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut).
13. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani has reported that Fatimah, Muhammad’s daughter, was five years older than Ayesha and that Fatimah was born when the Prophet was 35 years old. Thus, Ayesha, according to Ibn Hajar, was born when Muhammad was 40 and consummated her marriage when he was 54 or 55. That makes Aysha at least 15-16 years of age.
(Al-isabah fi tamyizi'l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol 4, Pg 377, Arabic, Maktabatu'l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh,1978)
Finally, it must be pointed out that Ayesha’s age at the time of her marriage has never been an issue. If it were, his enemies must have picked up on this issue as they did to him on some other issues. Also, the reader must note that none of these Hadith reports concerning Ayesha’s controversial age of marriage with the Prophet goes back to the Prophet himself. In other words, it is not the Prophet himself who said Ayesha was 6 or 9. These reports came from a single individual and the Iraqis reported from him when he grew old and his memory started failing.
http://www.quranicteachings.co.uk
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 29, 2008 12:51 pm
An informative write-up to clear up the matter..once for all.Was Ayesha really 6 years old when she married Muhammad?
A few comments about Muhammad’s marriages are in order. Muhammad married his first wife, Khadijah, several years before his announcement as a prophet of Islam. Khadijah was a reasonably well-to-do woman of Makkah and was 15 years his senior. Muhammad was 25 and Khadijah was 40 at the time of their marriage. This loving and caring monogamous relationship continued for 25 years until her death.
Muhammad, now over 50 years of age, married a relatively aged woman by the name of Saudah. It is thus important to note here that Muhammad’s twenty five prime youth years were spent in purely monogamous relationship with a lady 15 years his senior. This speaks volumes about this man’s piety and loyalty in spousal matters as well as about the fact that his later marriages could not have been motivated by any human wild sexual desires.
In 620-621 A.D, he and his devout companions migrated from Makkah to Medina. Then a couple of years later, he married Ayesha, a daughter of his closest companion, Abu Bakr, in the 3rd Hijrah (Islamic calendar--623-24 A.D). This information coming from diverse historical and Hadith sources is widely agreed upon and therefore can be, a priori, considered authentic. Based on this information, and a host of other related bits and pieces detailed below, it can be shown that Ayesha could have been at least 16-19 of age at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (pbuh). The following is the detail of the analysis of these historical and Hadith accounts.
1. Several books of Hadith (Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim, Abu Dawood, among others) and Islamic history (Tabari, among others) report that Ayesha was married to the Prophet at 6 but her marriage was not consummated until she was 9. Although, this information is widely quoted and found in many Hadith and history books, it must be noted that most of this information has come from a single person, Hisham bin Urwah, who is the last narrator of this Hadith Isnaad (chain of narration) on the authority of his father. Thus, this Hadith is primarily a single Hadith. Some other narratives mention the same Hadith but their narration has been found weak and unacceptable. In general, a Hadith has more credibility if it is narrated by more people independently from diverse chains of narrators. In this case, there is basically only one source.
2. Despite the abundance of information available during the 71 years that Hisham bin Urwah lived and taught in Medina, it is rather odd that that no one else—not even his famous pupil Malik ibn Anas---reported Ayesha’s age from Hisham in Medina. Furthermore, all the narrators of this Hadith were Iraqis. Hisham is reported to have moved to Iraq in his later years. An extensive list of biographical sketches of all narrators including these Iraqis is available in some books.
3. Yaqub ibn Shaibah is reported to have said, “narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq". Malik ibn Anas (d. 795), a student of Hisham in fact discredited all narratives of Hisham that were reported through people of Iraq.
(Tehzibu'l-tehzib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh), vol 11, pg 48 - 51).
4. It is reported that Hisham bin Urwah’s memory suffered in his later years to the extent that some of the traditions reported from Hisham bin Urwah could not be trusted for authenticity.
(Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, by Al-Zahbi , Arabic, a book on the life sketches of the narrators of the Hadith, Al-Maktabatu'l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol 4, pg 301).
5. Even though Ayesha is reported to have been born about eight years before Hijrah (around 614 A.D.), one can find another narrative in Bukhari (kitabu'l-tafseer) whereby Ayesha is reported to have said that she was a ‘young girl’ at the time of revelation of the 54th chapter of the Qur'an which came 9 years before Hijrah (around 612 A.D). Thus, according to this tradition, Ayesha was a young girl (Jariyah—as she calls herself and not an infant in which case she would be sibyah). Additionally, this narrative stands in direct contrast to the one reported on Ayesha’s age by Hisham bin Urwah. This puts Ayesha’s age significantly higher than 9 as reported by Hisham bin Urwah—possibly 15 or even higher. Obviously, if this narrative is held to be true, it is in clear
contradiction with the narratives reported by Hisham
ibn Urwah. There is no compelling reason as to why this tradition should be considered less accurate vis-à-vis Hisham’s narrative).
(Sahih Bukhari, kitabu'l-tafsir, Arabic, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-sa`atu Maw`iduhum wa'l-sa`atu adha' wa amarr).
6. According to many narratives, Ayesha participated in the battles of Badr and Uhud. No one older than 15 was allowed to accompany the Prophet’s army in the battle of Uhud. This applied across the board to all participants, men and women alike. The battle of Uhud took place around the 2nd Hijrah, a time line close to her marriage with the Prophet. Obviously, she was at least older than 15 at that time.
7. A narrative regarding Ayesha's participation in the battle of `Uhud is given in Bukhari, (Kitabu'l-jihad wa'l-siyar, Arabic, Bab Ghazwi'l-nisa' wa qitalihinna ma`a'lrijal; that all boys under 15 were sent back is given in Bukhari, Kitabu'l-maghazi, Bab ghazwati'l-khandaq wa hiya'l-ahza'b, Arabic).
8. Most historians have consensus on the age of one of the oldest female companions of the Prophet, namely, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha that was ten years older than Ayesha. It is also reported in Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah that Asma died in 73 Hijrah when she was 100 years old. Clearly, if Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of Hijrah, Ayesha was 17 at the time of Hijrah and 19 at the time of consummation of her marriage with Muhammad.
(For Asma being 10 years older than Ayesha, see A`la'ma'l-nubala', Al-Zahabi, Vol 2, Pg 289, Arabic, Mu'assasatu'l-risalah, Beirut, 1992. Ibn Kathir confirms this fact, [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by ten years" (Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol 8, Pg 371, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933). For Asma being 100 years old, see Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol 8, Pg 372, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933). Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also has the same information: "She [Asma (ra)] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH." Taqribu'l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, Pg 654, Arabic, Bab fi'l-nisa', al-harfu'l-alif, Lucknow).
9. Tabari informs in his treatise on Islamic history that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the pre Islamic period. The pre-Islamic period ended in 610 A.D, a fact that makes Ayesha to be at least 14 years of age at the time of her marriage around 613-624 A.D.
Tarikhu'l-umam wa'l-mamlu'k, Al-Tabari, Vol 4, Pg 50, Arabic, Dara'l-fikr, Beirut, 1979).
10. Ibn Hisham, the historian, reports that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before `Umar ibn al-Khattab which only means that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam close to the time of first revelation (around 610 A.D). This means she must have been at least a young girl at that time. Assuming she was barely 6 or 7 at that time this information puts the age of Ayesha at 20 or more at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (623-624 A.D.), (Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Hisham, vol 1, Pg 227 – 234 and 295, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-hadithah, Al-Riyadh).
11. Tabari reports that before migrating to Habashah, Abu Bakr planned to hand over his daughter, Ayesha to Mut’am’s son to whom she was engaged. But fearing persecution by the Quraish, Mut’am refused and his son divorced Ayesha. The migration to Habashah happened 8 years before Hijra. Obviously, at the time she was ready to take on responsibilities as a wife (possibly 9 or 10 years of age). If she married Muhammad in the 2nd Hijrah (623-624 A.D), she could not be less than 19 years of age (a secondary reference for this argument is: Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat, Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi, Urdu, Pg 38, Anjuman Uswa e hasanah, Karachi, Pakistan).
12. A famous Sunni imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, reports in His Musnad, that after the death of Khadijah, Khaulah came to the Prophet (pbuh) and advised him to marry again. She had two propositions for the Prophet: Either Muhammad could marry a virgin (bikr), or he could go for woman who had already been married (thayyib)". Khaulah named Ayesha for a virgin (bikr). It is common knowledge that the term bikr in the Arabic language refers to a well formed lady and not to a 9 year old, playful, immature lass. If she were nine, the word used by Khaulah would have been jariyah and not bikr.
(Musnad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol 6, Pg 210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut).
13. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani has reported that Fatimah, Muhammad’s daughter, was five years older than Ayesha and that Fatimah was born when the Prophet was 35 years old. Thus, Ayesha, according to Ibn Hajar, was born when Muhammad was 40 and consummated her marriage when he was 54 or 55. That makes Aysha at least 15-16 years of age.
(Al-isabah fi tamyizi'l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol 4, Pg 377, Arabic, Maktabatu'l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh,1978)
Finally, it must be pointed out that Ayesha’s age at the time of her marriage has never been an issue. If it were, his enemies must have picked up on this issue as they did to him on some other issues. Also, the reader must note that none of these Hadith reports concerning Ayesha’s controversial age of marriage with the Prophet goes back to the Prophet himself. In other words, it is not the Prophet himself who said Ayesha was 6 or 9. These reports came from a single individual and the Iraqis reported from him when he grew old and his memory started failing.
http://www.quranicteachings.co.uk
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful
THis is reproduced from a past post of mine, with some editing now.Maybe some missed it.
============================================================
Muslims, are strictly prohibited to interfere in the religious practices, rituals, cultures of those who are NOT muslims.
Once they convert they are supposed to adhere very strictly to the Islamic practice & culture & give up the pagan/non-muslim practices.
Fundamentalism (GOOD word) is not applied one sidedly.
Babur , the great Mughal, specifically intructed MUSLIMS to be very discreet about cow slaughter. It is also in his will to Hamayoun, his son.
SATI:
This indeed is very disturbing but even then there was no interference EXCEPT on one occasion & one occasion ONLY.
and that was by Sher Shah Suri.
Once during his exile days he was given sanctuary by a hindu woman who he had called mother because of his association with her when he was a mere child. He was the only "mughal" king who was a Quazi, & an exemplary one because he was trained in a Madressa to be a Quazi & mufti. HIs battles were against Babur & then by Humayoun but with latter only by default.
It so happened that when he was appointed the adminitrator of a certain district, some 20 years later, he was aghast to find out that it was that same woman who was to be sutteed , by her "will" of course..because that was what was expected of her..no choice then.
Sher Shah intefered & stopped it..but then the Pundits all went to the governor & complained. The Governor immedeiately reprimanded Sher Shah and reminded him that the Sharia forbade him to interfere into the religious practices , no matter how heinous they be or how personall one is affected by them, & hence is a violation of the social-contract that no religion wiill interfere in matters of another religion {sounds like pristine "secooolarism].
Sher Shah backed off but was also determined to curb it whenever he would get a chance.
Whe he took control of Bihar, the first thing he did was to summon a large assembly of Pundits & brahmins & arranged a debate , without any coersion yet in control, to somehow work towards alternatives.
Sati was stopped then by the Pundits & Brahmins themselves agreeing that it was not necessary. You might call it his power & influence..but still it was not decreed & no one was punished if they did so. There IS a difference.
After him they all went back to their old ways. You might also be aware that sati gets more "honourable" either in famine or in plenty.
P.S: A person of your caliber really gains something by interacting with plebians or pavlovians?
============================================================
Matti Pao & enjoy this. Even if you knew him, you'd still enjoy this..I hope Rahul, GT, Swarrier & others too are around. I'll post it on unplugged as well. Here he is when he was almost 80, & I know not anyvoice as powerful ANYWHERE
ANYTIME since recording began.
The recording is better in this audio only which is also continous. Listen to this FIRST before the Video.
http://www.apnaorg.com/music/pkhan/pkhan6.rm
This is a VIDEO --unfortunately in TWO parts ..& you have to go click number 2 on the same page to get the 2nd part. It is 17 mts long & you`ve to be patient & worry-free & undisturbed to appreciated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVeBsN3Zsc4
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 27, 2008 09:58 am
DostMittar:THis is reproduced from a past post of mine, with some editing now.Maybe some missed it.
============================================================
Muslims, are strictly prohibited to interfere in the religious practices, rituals, cultures of those who are NOT muslims.
Once they convert they are supposed to adhere very strictly to the Islamic practice & culture & give up the pagan/non-muslim practices.
Fundamentalism (GOOD word) is not applied one sidedly.
Babur , the great Mughal, specifically intructed MUSLIMS to be very discreet about cow slaughter. It is also in his will to Hamayoun, his son.
SATI:
This indeed is very disturbing but even then there was no interference EXCEPT on one occasion & one occasion ONLY.
and that was by Sher Shah Suri.
Once during his exile days he was given sanctuary by a hindu woman who he had called mother because of his association with her when he was a mere child. He was the only "mughal" king who was a Quazi, & an exemplary one because he was trained in a Madressa to be a Quazi & mufti. HIs battles were against Babur & then by Humayoun but with latter only by default.
It so happened that when he was appointed the adminitrator of a certain district, some 20 years later, he was aghast to find out that it was that same woman who was to be sutteed , by her "will" of course..because that was what was expected of her..no choice then.
Sher Shah intefered & stopped it..but then the Pundits all went to the governor & complained. The Governor immedeiately reprimanded Sher Shah and reminded him that the Sharia forbade him to interfere into the religious practices , no matter how heinous they be or how personall one is affected by them, & hence is a violation of the social-contract that no religion wiill interfere in matters of another religion {sounds like pristine "secooolarism].
Sher Shah backed off but was also determined to curb it whenever he would get a chance.
Whe he took control of Bihar, the first thing he did was to summon a large assembly of Pundits & brahmins & arranged a debate , without any coersion yet in control, to somehow work towards alternatives.
Sati was stopped then by the Pundits & Brahmins themselves agreeing that it was not necessary. You might call it his power & influence..but still it was not decreed & no one was punished if they did so. There IS a difference.
After him they all went back to their old ways. You might also be aware that sati gets more "honourable" either in famine or in plenty.
P.S: A person of your caliber really gains something by interacting with plebians or pavlovians?
============================================================
Matti Pao & enjoy this. Even if you knew him, you'd still enjoy this..I hope Rahul, GT, Swarrier & others too are around. I'll post it on unplugged as well. Here he is when he was almost 80, & I know not anyvoice as powerful ANYWHERE
ANYTIME since recording began.
The recording is better in this audio only which is also continous. Listen to this FIRST before the Video.
http://www.apnaorg.com/music/pkhan/pkhan6.rm
This is a VIDEO --unfortunately in TWO parts ..& you have to go click number 2 on the same page to get the 2nd part. It is 17 mts long & you`ve to be patient & worry-free & undisturbed to appreciated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVeBsN3Zsc4
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful
#528 Posted by NangaPir on April 24, 2008 6:46:19 am
Dhol, Dunger, Ghunwar, Nari
Sub Haain Tarren keh Kari
(Musical drum, animal, ignorant and woman
All need beatings to make them work)
===========================================================
Nangapir: 612
Wow what an adventurous spirituality you have.
I am first in line to be your mureed...I am desperately in need of such inter-faith miss-understandings.
Your query in #528 was, perhaps, missed by many.
It is thus
'Dhor gavar Sudar pasua nari,
yeh subb tarran key adhikari".
tr:
Animal, Plebian, Shudra, dog & woman
All of them need exemplary thrashing
Tulsidas, in his Ram Charit Manas, quoting from Manu smituri, the hindoo holey book.
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 24, 2008 08:02 pm
#528 Posted by NangaPir on April 24, 2008 6:46:19 am
Dhol, Dunger, Ghunwar, Nari
Sub Haain Tarren keh Kari
(Musical drum, animal, ignorant and woman
All need beatings to make them work)
===========================================================
Nangapir: 612
Wow what an adventurous spirituality you have.
I am first in line to be your mureed...I am desperately in need of such inter-faith miss-understandings.
Your query in #528 was, perhaps, missed by many.
It is thus
'Dhor gavar Sudar pasua nari,
yeh subb tarran key adhikari".
tr:
Animal, Plebian, Shudra, dog & woman
All of them need exemplary thrashing
Tulsidas, in his Ram Charit Manas, quoting from Manu smituri, the hindoo holey book.
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful
#528 Posted by NangaPir on April 24, 2008 6:46:19 am
Dhol, Dunger, Ghunwar, Nari
Sub Haain Tarren keh Kari
(Musical drum, animal, ignorant and woman
All need beatings to make them work)
===========================================================
Nangapir: 612
Wow what an adventurous spirituality you have.
I am first in line to be your mureed...I am desperately in need of such inter-faith miss-understandings.
Your query in #528 was, perhaps, missed by many.
It is thus
'Dhor gavar Sudar pasua nari,
yeh subb tarran key adhikari".
tr:
Animal, Plebian, Shudra, dog & woman
All of them need exemplary thrashing
Tulsidas, in his Ram Charit Manas, quoting from Manu smituri, the hindoo holey book.
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 24, 2008 08:02 pm
#528 Posted by NangaPir on April 24, 2008 6:46:19 am
Dhol, Dunger, Ghunwar, Nari
Sub Haain Tarren keh Kari
(Musical drum, animal, ignorant and woman
All need beatings to make them work)
===========================================================
Nangapir: 612
Wow what an adventurous spirituality you have.
I am first in line to be your mureed...I am desperately in need of such inter-faith miss-understandings.
Your query in #528 was, perhaps, missed by many.
It is thus
'Dhor gavar Sudar pasua nari,
yeh subb tarran key adhikari".
tr:
Animal, Plebian, Shudra, dog & woman
All of them need exemplary thrashing
Tulsidas, in his Ram Charit Manas, quoting from Manu smituri, the hindoo holey book.
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful
Gentle folks,
You dragged me in.
The metaphors did not elude me. It is just that we see what we choose to see.
Once we view it as the dragon & the rodent..everything fits in neatly.
Other than our mutual tickling, which sometimes ascendingly progresses to ribbing, elbowing, nudging, kneeing, fingering, fisting, and eventually to effing the ems & esses of each other through the glory-holes of WebStalls, we seem to be fine folks who always become friends under the looming shadow of the fear of getting re-colonised.
It is this primordial fear which is our ticket to survival.
Battles between brothers be they kauros or Paandoas right through Humayun , Aurangzeb to each & every RajwarRaa or Riyasat..this is woven into the web & waft of our fabric. I cannot recall any other society with such an anathemic perversion.
Hence the unflinching idolism.
Anil deserves a good song as a praischath by me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QMjFcX0-Hs
P.S: I'll still be an on/off recluse..I've been weaned & now I'm a grown up :)
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 23, 2008 04:50 pm
Eklavya, AnilGentle folks,
You dragged me in.
The metaphors did not elude me. It is just that we see what we choose to see.
Once we view it as the dragon & the rodent..everything fits in neatly.
Other than our mutual tickling, which sometimes ascendingly progresses to ribbing, elbowing, nudging, kneeing, fingering, fisting, and eventually to effing the ems & esses of each other through the glory-holes of WebStalls, we seem to be fine folks who always become friends under the looming shadow of the fear of getting re-colonised.
It is this primordial fear which is our ticket to survival.
Battles between brothers be they kauros or Paandoas right through Humayun , Aurangzeb to each & every RajwarRaa or Riyasat..this is woven into the web & waft of our fabric. I cannot recall any other society with such an anathemic perversion.
Hence the unflinching idolism.
Anil deserves a good song as a praischath by me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QMjFcX0-Hs
P.S: I'll still be an on/off recluse..I've been weaned & now I'm a grown up :)
The Psychology of Mothering
A friendly advice
To the Murtid Mice
Thank you Izza
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 23, 2008 02:29 pm
http://www.chowk.com/viewg/2433A friendly advice
To the Murtid Mice
Thank you Izza
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful
A friendly advice
To the Murtid Mice
Thank you Izza
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 23, 2008 02:28 pm
http://www.chowk.com/viewg/2433A friendly advice
To the Murtid Mice
Thank you Izza
The Psychology of Mothering
To the Murtid Mice
![]()
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 23, 2008 02:24 pm
A friendly adviceTo the Murtid Mice
The Psychology of Mothering
Your "Honey, I have shrunk the shrink" is superbly hilarious.
Here is the self-analysis of the Shrrivelled shrink...the last entry into his diary.
........................................................
Last Entry:
In the diary of the Psycho from chukk:420, mauza Harrapa
===========================================================
My own private Fridaho
epilogue
.....and now I can sense that they are mumbling & whispering about removing the life-support system from me. It is not that I am in coma all the time, it is just that they cannot tell that, and I do not tell them. I observe, I listen, but I cannot respond...but only for sporadic minutes when no one is around. The prescriptions & proscriptions of the west & east did me in!
It`ll be anyday, anytime,
sooner than later.
.........ahh!and memories! , in a rewind loop, now in focus, now in a blurr & blob from the deep deep recesses of my mind, never ever abandon me, never let go. It sure helps to be a shrink to interpret and bring into focus these repressed memories....
...the joyful days and nights when I was called Fridaho by everyone. Snot, rat-tail-like, peeking in and out of my dust laden & dirt ridden nostrils and occasionally wiped-ff by my left sleeve while looking askance at every passing elder who would shove-kick-slap-hit me--just for the heck of it . At least they recognised me that I existed. I belonged! Here in US nobody gives a damn no matter how hard you try to prove that now you are one of them.So Frida-ho it was, sometimes Freeda-ho, sometimes Freeday-ho but none seemed different. The landowners around Harrapa were too preoccupied & disinterested to worry about my heritage or what I truly aspired to be. I was simply a body, a serf, a kummee`s son, destined to be a kummee himself when old enough to plow their fields.
But I had ambitions. Secret designs of my own. Intrepid & Intrigue was important to overcome the caste, and the color barrier. I wanted to be like the Jat jagirdars son.., with the plastic clip-on tie & back-pack,..whose forefathers helped the british to rule over us. ``Salvation is in slavery``! this became my banner & beacon....to enable me to cross over to the other side & someday have my own private slaves.
`` I must redesign my heritage`` I heard myself say to myself aloud oneday. It must be sculpted by me to suit the occasion or event. I decided to interrupt others and correcte them that my name was Fareed. Everyone should take notice, I told them. I am Fareed--not Freeda-ho. They all did, and shoved-kicked-slapped and ran me out of the chukk # 440 near to the mound-ruins where heritage is preserved. Preserved so well that it generates ample reveues for its progeny even after laying dormant for about 5000 years. The goraas discovered the mounds of the dead and educated the slaves; drilled into them how civilised they once were and how the slaves were once 5000-year civilised & now in the darkages due to their stupid reli.. (well-never mind)
...good that they hounded me out of the Chukk 420 near mauza Harrapa. In the city I became the real me, Fareed! and now diligently pursued the practised the Jaw-resetting language to such perfection that that I was soon inducted into that inner-sanctum of those who prided themselves to announce themselves as The-Tongued-Ones: (ahle-zubaan)
Years passed and then I discovered that even this heritage is now under suspicion and is no longer respectable. The-Tongued-ones are being harrassed by those who are now refusing the get their jaws reset. So I decided to look for opportunities to create another new heritage for my nation`s posterior and my own posterity
I decided to emigrate to the fantasy-land of sex,drugs & faith-freedom
----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------
and opportunity!
Here I learned that my name a big problem for me & the way I pronounce it is even a bigger problem for the immigration folk. They re-named me Freud, ( apt! I chucked then) entered that in the register, and officially I became Archie Freud . Archie is for Arshad , a name I had always liked and was given that as my `christain` name when the immigration guy, fat beet-red face one, insisted that Arshad was too foreign & a jawlocker for him.
Sixty long years seem now like the blink of an eye! Such a Psychiatric I was that, in serving science & humanism, I became a psycho myself and was committed to the proper places many a times during my shining career & gloomy disposition. Some alluded this to the genius in me and such a price is small for those like me to pay to serve humanity and reassert my Insaanyat in ways other than the mundane kind. I sometimes feel that it is my obssessive cynicism to keep a score on my insaanyat index that blew my brainfuse.
Despite all the laurels and dollars , I was still uneasy with this post-modernistic, humanistic heritage of mine. Hell, the kids, no longer kids by the way, were determined to manufacture their own heritage, as muslim, and were going out of the way to refuse to inherit anything at all from the mounds of Moenjo Dero or the hollows of Harrapaa . This really did me in. I mean with all the heritage that I accumulated and now here my own flesh and blood wanted to disinherit all that!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------
...So When I returned to the area I had left as Chukk 420 I tried to prove & convince the people running the heritage industry, primarily the Jaw-lockers--the Tongued-ones (ahli-Zubaan), but no one was interested anymore.They ahd outslaved me by a single U-turn. They were all trying to become a mirror image of the people from the land of bilk & money.
I learnt that behind my back they sneered at my attempt to speak in the Jawlock-way or the neo-Tongue-Ones way.
They were calling me Dr. Fraud.
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 22, 2008 07:40 pm
Nature-LoverYour "Honey, I have shrunk the shrink" is superbly hilarious.
Here is the self-analysis of the Shrrivelled shrink...the last entry into his diary.
........................................................
Last Entry:
In the diary of the Psycho from chukk:420, mauza Harrapa
===========================================================
My own private Fridaho
epilogue
.....and now I can sense that they are mumbling & whispering about removing the life-support system from me. It is not that I am in coma all the time, it is just that they cannot tell that, and I do not tell them. I observe, I listen, but I cannot respond...but only for sporadic minutes when no one is around. The prescriptions & proscriptions of the west & east did me in!
It`ll be anyday, anytime,
sooner than later.
.........ahh!and memories! , in a rewind loop, now in focus, now in a blurr & blob from the deep deep recesses of my mind, never ever abandon me, never let go. It sure helps to be a shrink to interpret and bring into focus these repressed memories....
...the joyful days and nights when I was called Fridaho by everyone. Snot, rat-tail-like, peeking in and out of my dust laden & dirt ridden nostrils and occasionally wiped-ff by my left sleeve while looking askance at every passing elder who would shove-kick-slap-hit me--just for the heck of it . At least they recognised me that I existed. I belonged! Here in US nobody gives a damn no matter how hard you try to prove that now you are one of them.So Frida-ho it was, sometimes Freeda-ho, sometimes Freeday-ho but none seemed different. The landowners around Harrapa were too preoccupied & disinterested to worry about my heritage or what I truly aspired to be. I was simply a body, a serf, a kummee`s son, destined to be a kummee himself when old enough to plow their fields.
But I had ambitions. Secret designs of my own. Intrepid & Intrigue was important to overcome the caste, and the color barrier. I wanted to be like the Jat jagirdars son.., with the plastic clip-on tie & back-pack,..whose forefathers helped the british to rule over us. ``Salvation is in slavery``! this became my banner & beacon....to enable me to cross over to the other side & someday have my own private slaves.
`` I must redesign my heritage`` I heard myself say to myself aloud oneday. It must be sculpted by me to suit the occasion or event. I decided to interrupt others and correcte them that my name was Fareed. Everyone should take notice, I told them. I am Fareed--not Freeda-ho. They all did, and shoved-kicked-slapped and ran me out of the chukk # 440 near to the mound-ruins where heritage is preserved. Preserved so well that it generates ample reveues for its progeny even after laying dormant for about 5000 years. The goraas discovered the mounds of the dead and educated the slaves; drilled into them how civilised they once were and how the slaves were once 5000-year civilised & now in the darkages due to their stupid reli.. (well-never mind)
...good that they hounded me out of the Chukk 420 near mauza Harrapa. In the city I became the real me, Fareed! and now diligently pursued the practised the Jaw-resetting language to such perfection that that I was soon inducted into that inner-sanctum of those who prided themselves to announce themselves as The-Tongued-Ones: (ahle-zubaan)
Years passed and then I discovered that even this heritage is now under suspicion and is no longer respectable. The-Tongued-ones are being harrassed by those who are now refusing the get their jaws reset. So I decided to look for opportunities to create another new heritage for my nation`s posterior and my own posterity
I decided to emigrate to the fantasy-land of sex,drugs & faith-freedom
----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------
and opportunity!
Here I learned that my name a big problem for me & the way I pronounce it is even a bigger problem for the immigration folk. They re-named me Freud, ( apt! I chucked then) entered that in the register, and officially I became Archie Freud . Archie is for Arshad , a name I had always liked and was given that as my `christain` name when the immigration guy, fat beet-red face one, insisted that Arshad was too foreign & a jawlocker for him.
Sixty long years seem now like the blink of an eye! Such a Psychiatric I was that, in serving science & humanism, I became a psycho myself and was committed to the proper places many a times during my shining career & gloomy disposition. Some alluded this to the genius in me and such a price is small for those like me to pay to serve humanity and reassert my Insaanyat in ways other than the mundane kind. I sometimes feel that it is my obssessive cynicism to keep a score on my insaanyat index that blew my brainfuse.
Despite all the laurels and dollars , I was still uneasy with this post-modernistic, humanistic heritage of mine. Hell, the kids, no longer kids by the way, were determined to manufacture their own heritage, as muslim, and were going out of the way to refuse to inherit anything at all from the mounds of Moenjo Dero or the hollows of Harrapaa . This really did me in. I mean with all the heritage that I accumulated and now here my own flesh and blood wanted to disinherit all that!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------
...So When I returned to the area I had left as Chukk 420 I tried to prove & convince the people running the heritage industry, primarily the Jaw-lockers--the Tongued-ones (ahli-Zubaan), but no one was interested anymore.They ahd outslaved me by a single U-turn. They were all trying to become a mirror image of the people from the land of bilk & money.
I learnt that behind my back they sneered at my attempt to speak in the Jawlock-way or the neo-Tongue-Ones way.
They were calling me Dr. Fraud.
The Importance of Natural Selection
There is no need to "discuss" or "debate" here
Let these slime-sons wallow in their own soup of Disbelief. Their itch to "debate" and "discuss" is their own whistling in the dark. Enjoy their whistling march into their own abyss into the oblivion.
Theirs is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The West is already alarmed at its own dwindling & InshaAllah, soon-to-be-extinct population...thus getting what it wished.
May Allah hasten its demise
============================================================
DARWIN_DEB UNKED...many times over & at many places & all the time.
Millions of people are taught that the fossil record furnishes proof of evolution. But, where are there fossils of half-evolved dinosaurs or other creatures?
The fossil record contains fossils of only complete and fully-formed species. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species to indicate that a gradual process of evolution ever occurred. Even among evolutionists there are diametrically different interpretations and reconstructions of the fossils used to support human evolution from a supposed ape-like ancestry.
Even if evolution takes millions and millions of years, we should still be able to see some stages of its process. But, we simply don't observe any partially-evolved fish, frogs, lizards, birds, dogs, cats among us. Every species of plant and animal is complete and fully-formed.
Another problem is how could partially-evolved plant and animal species survive over millions of years when their basic organs and tissues were still in the process of evolving? How, for example, were animals breathing, eating, and reproducing if there respiratory, digestive, and reproductive organs were still evolving?
In fact, precisely because of this problem more and more modern evolutionists are adopting a new theory known as Punctuated Equilibrium which says that plant and animal species evolved suddenly from one kind to another and that is why we don't see evidence of partially-evolved species in the fossil record. Of course, we have to accept their word on blind faith because there is no way to prove or disprove what they are saying. These evolutionists claim that something like massive bombardment of radiation resulted in mega mutations in species which produced "instantaneous" changes from one life form to another. The nature and issue of mutations will be discussed later and the reader will see why such an argument is not viable.
The fact that animal and plant species are found fully formed and complete in the fossil record is powerful evidence (although not proof) for creation because it is evidence that they came into existence as fully formed and complete which is possible only by creation.
Evolutionists claim that the genetic and biological similarities between species is evidence of common ancestry. However, that is only one interpretation of the evidence. Another possibility is that the comparative similarities are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes in all the various forms of life. Neither position can be scientifically proved.
Although Darwin was partially correct by showing that natural selection occurs in nature, the problem is that natural selection itself is not a creative force. Natural selection can only work with those biological variations that are possible. The evidence from genetics supports only the possibility for horizontal evolution (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.) but not vertical evolution (i.e. from fish to human). Unless Nature has the ability to perform genetic engineering vertical evolution will not be possible.
The early grooves in the human embryo that appear to look like gills are really the early stages in the formation of the face, throat, and neck regions. The so-called "tailbone" is the early formation of the coccyx and spinal column which, because of the rate of growth being faster than the rest of the body during this stage, appears to look like a tail. The coccyx has already been proven to be useful in providing support for the pelvic muscles.
Modern science has shown that there are genetic limits to evolution or biological change in nature. Again, all biological variations, whether they are beneficial to survival or not, are possible only within the genetic potential and limits of a biological kind such as the varieties among dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.
Variations across biological kinds such as humans evolving from ape-like creatures and apes, in turn, evolving from dog-like creatures and so on, as Darwinian evolutionary theory teaches, are not possible unless Nature has the capability of performing genetic engineering.
Biological variations are determined by the DNA or genetic code of species. The DNA molecule is actually a molecular string of various nucleic acids which are arranged in a sequence just like the letters in a sentence. It is this sequence in DNA that tells cells in the body how to construct various tissues and organs.
The common belief among evolutionists is that random mutations in the genetic code over time will produce entirely new sequences for new traits and characteristics which natural selection can then act upon resulting in entirely new species. Evolutionists consider mutations to be a form of natural genetic engineering.
However, the very nature of mutations precludes such a possibility. Mutations are accidental changes in the sequential structure of the genetic code caused by various random environmental forces such as radiation and toxic chemicals.
Almost all true mutations are harmful, which is what one would normally expect from accidents. Even if a good mutation occurred for every good one there will be thousands of harmful ones with the net result over time being disastrous for the species.
Most biological variations, however, are the result of new combinations of previously existing genes - not because of mutations.
Furthermore, mutations simply produce new varieties of already existing traits. For example, mutations in the gene for human hair may change the gene so that another type of human hair develops, but the mutations won't change the gene so that feathers or wings develop.
Sometimes mutations may trigger the duplication of already existing traits (i.e. an extra finger, toe, or even an entire head, even in another area of the body!). But mutations have no ability to produce entirely new traits or characteristics.
Young people, and even adults, often wonder how all the varieties and races of people could have descended from Adam and Eve as the Bible teaches. Well, in principle, that's no different than asking how children with different color hair (i.e., blond, brunette, brown, red ) can come from the same parents who both have black hair.
Just as some individuals today carry genes to produce descendants with different color hair and eyes, our first parents, Adam and Eve, possessed genes to produce all the varieties and races of men. You and I today may not carry the genes to produce every variety or race of humans, but Adam and Eve did possess such genes.
All varieties of humans carry the genes for the same basic traits, but not all humans carry every possible variation of those genes. For example, one person may be carrying several variations of the gene for eye color (i.e., brown, green, blue) , but someone else may be carrying only one variation of the gene for eye color (i.e., brown). Thus, both will have different abilities to affect the eye color of their offspring.
Science cannot prove we're here by creation, but neither can science prove we're here by chance or macro-evolution. No one has observed either. They are both accepted on faith. The issue is which faith, Darwinian macro-evolutionary theory or creation, has better scientific support.
What we believe about life's origins does influence our philosophy and value of life as well as our view of ourselves and others. This is no small issue!
Just because the laws of science can explain how life and the universe operate and work doesn't mean there is no Maker. Would it be rational to believe that there's no designer behind airplanes because the laws of science can explain how airplanes operate and work?
Natural laws are adequate to explain how the order in life, the universe, and even a microwave oven operates, but mere undirected natural laws can never fully explain the origin of such order.
The law of entropy in science shows that the universe does not have the ability to have sustained itself from all eternity. In other words, the universe cannot be eternal and requires a beginning.
It is only fair that school students be exposed to the scientific arguments and evidence on both sides of the creation/evolution issue.
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 10, 2008 08:46 pm
Zeemax:There is no need to "discuss" or "debate" here
Let these slime-sons wallow in their own soup of Disbelief. Their itch to "debate" and "discuss" is their own whistling in the dark. Enjoy their whistling march into their own abyss into the oblivion.
Theirs is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The West is already alarmed at its own dwindling & InshaAllah, soon-to-be-extinct population...thus getting what it wished.
May Allah hasten its demise
============================================================
DARWIN_DEB UNKED...many times over & at many places & all the time.
Millions of people are taught that the fossil record furnishes proof of evolution. But, where are there fossils of half-evolved dinosaurs or other creatures?
The fossil record contains fossils of only complete and fully-formed species. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species to indicate that a gradual process of evolution ever occurred. Even among evolutionists there are diametrically different interpretations and reconstructions of the fossils used to support human evolution from a supposed ape-like ancestry.
Even if evolution takes millions and millions of years, we should still be able to see some stages of its process. But, we simply don't observe any partially-evolved fish, frogs, lizards, birds, dogs, cats among us. Every species of plant and animal is complete and fully-formed.
Another problem is how could partially-evolved plant and animal species survive over millions of years when their basic organs and tissues were still in the process of evolving? How, for example, were animals breathing, eating, and reproducing if there respiratory, digestive, and reproductive organs were still evolving?
In fact, precisely because of this problem more and more modern evolutionists are adopting a new theory known as Punctuated Equilibrium which says that plant and animal species evolved suddenly from one kind to another and that is why we don't see evidence of partially-evolved species in the fossil record. Of course, we have to accept their word on blind faith because there is no way to prove or disprove what they are saying. These evolutionists claim that something like massive bombardment of radiation resulted in mega mutations in species which produced "instantaneous" changes from one life form to another. The nature and issue of mutations will be discussed later and the reader will see why such an argument is not viable.
The fact that animal and plant species are found fully formed and complete in the fossil record is powerful evidence (although not proof) for creation because it is evidence that they came into existence as fully formed and complete which is possible only by creation.
Evolutionists claim that the genetic and biological similarities between species is evidence of common ancestry. However, that is only one interpretation of the evidence. Another possibility is that the comparative similarities are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes in all the various forms of life. Neither position can be scientifically proved.
Although Darwin was partially correct by showing that natural selection occurs in nature, the problem is that natural selection itself is not a creative force. Natural selection can only work with those biological variations that are possible. The evidence from genetics supports only the possibility for horizontal evolution (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.) but not vertical evolution (i.e. from fish to human). Unless Nature has the ability to perform genetic engineering vertical evolution will not be possible.
The early grooves in the human embryo that appear to look like gills are really the early stages in the formation of the face, throat, and neck regions. The so-called "tailbone" is the early formation of the coccyx and spinal column which, because of the rate of growth being faster than the rest of the body during this stage, appears to look like a tail. The coccyx has already been proven to be useful in providing support for the pelvic muscles.
Modern science has shown that there are genetic limits to evolution or biological change in nature. Again, all biological variations, whether they are beneficial to survival or not, are possible only within the genetic potential and limits of a biological kind such as the varieties among dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.
Variations across biological kinds such as humans evolving from ape-like creatures and apes, in turn, evolving from dog-like creatures and so on, as Darwinian evolutionary theory teaches, are not possible unless Nature has the capability of performing genetic engineering.
Biological variations are determined by the DNA or genetic code of species. The DNA molecule is actually a molecular string of various nucleic acids which are arranged in a sequence just like the letters in a sentence. It is this sequence in DNA that tells cells in the body how to construct various tissues and organs.
The common belief among evolutionists is that random mutations in the genetic code over time will produce entirely new sequences for new traits and characteristics which natural selection can then act upon resulting in entirely new species. Evolutionists consider mutations to be a form of natural genetic engineering.
However, the very nature of mutations precludes such a possibility. Mutations are accidental changes in the sequential structure of the genetic code caused by various random environmental forces such as radiation and toxic chemicals.
Almost all true mutations are harmful, which is what one would normally expect from accidents. Even if a good mutation occurred for every good one there will be thousands of harmful ones with the net result over time being disastrous for the species.
Most biological variations, however, are the result of new combinations of previously existing genes - not because of mutations.
Furthermore, mutations simply produce new varieties of already existing traits. For example, mutations in the gene for human hair may change the gene so that another type of human hair develops, but the mutations won't change the gene so that feathers or wings develop.
Sometimes mutations may trigger the duplication of already existing traits (i.e. an extra finger, toe, or even an entire head, even in another area of the body!). But mutations have no ability to produce entirely new traits or characteristics.
Young people, and even adults, often wonder how all the varieties and races of people could have descended from Adam and Eve as the Bible teaches. Well, in principle, that's no different than asking how children with different color hair (i.e., blond, brunette, brown, red ) can come from the same parents who both have black hair.
Just as some individuals today carry genes to produce descendants with different color hair and eyes, our first parents, Adam and Eve, possessed genes to produce all the varieties and races of men. You and I today may not carry the genes to produce every variety or race of humans, but Adam and Eve did possess such genes.
All varieties of humans carry the genes for the same basic traits, but not all humans carry every possible variation of those genes. For example, one person may be carrying several variations of the gene for eye color (i.e., brown, green, blue) , but someone else may be carrying only one variation of the gene for eye color (i.e., brown). Thus, both will have different abilities to affect the eye color of their offspring.
Science cannot prove we're here by creation, but neither can science prove we're here by chance or macro-evolution. No one has observed either. They are both accepted on faith. The issue is which faith, Darwinian macro-evolutionary theory or creation, has better scientific support.
What we believe about life's origins does influence our philosophy and value of life as well as our view of ourselves and others. This is no small issue!
Just because the laws of science can explain how life and the universe operate and work doesn't mean there is no Maker. Would it be rational to believe that there's no designer behind airplanes because the laws of science can explain how airplanes operate and work?
Natural laws are adequate to explain how the order in life, the universe, and even a microwave oven operates, but mere undirected natural laws can never fully explain the origin of such order.
The law of entropy in science shows that the universe does not have the ability to have sustained itself from all eternity. In other words, the universe cannot be eternal and requires a beginning.
It is only fair that school students be exposed to the scientific arguments and evidence on both sides of the creation/evolution issue.
The Importance of Natural Selection
Dost Mittar:
kis sher kee amad hay keh rUn kanp raha hay
rustam ka jigar zair-e kafan kanp raha hay
har qasr-e salateen e zaman kanp raha hay
sab eik taraf naqshe kuhan kanp raha hay
........Shamshir bakaf dekh key Haider key pisar ko
.........Jibreel laraztey hein samaitey huey par ko
*******MIRZA DABEER
==========================================================
Urstruly: You might find this fascinating.
The Information Beyond Matter & Lawh-i Mahfuz
HARUN YAHYA
Information… This concept today means a lot more than it did even a half century ago. Scientists are developing theories to define information. Social scientists speak of "the information age." Information is becoming a very important concept for humanity.
The discovery of information in the origin of both the universe and life itself is what makes this concept so important in the modern world. Scientists today are realizing that the universe is formed by "matter, energy and information," and this is replacing the materialistic philosophy of the nineteenth century that defined the universe as being made up entirely of "matter and energy."
So, what does this all mean?
Let's explain through an example, that of DNA. All living cells function according to the genetic information in the double helix structure of DNA. Our bodies are also formed by trillions of cells each with its own DNA, and all the functions of our bodies are registered in this giant molecule. Our cells use protein codes inscribed in the DNA to produce new proteins. The information that our DNA possesses is so large that if you wanted to write it down, it would fill up 900 volumes of encyclopedias, cover-to-cover!
So what is DNA made up of? Fifty years ago, scientists would have replied that DNA is formed by nucleic acids called nucleotides and the chemical bonds holding these nucleotides together. In other words, they used to list only the material elements of the DNA. But today, scientists have a different answer: DNA is composed of atoms, molecules, chemical bonds and, most importantly, information.
It's just like a book. We would be quite mistaken to say that a book is only made up of paper, ink and binding for, alongside these materials, it is the information that truly makes it a book. It is information which separates a volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica from a "book" formed by randomly arranged letters like ABICLDIXXGGSDLL. Both have paper, ink and binding, but one has information while the other does not. The source of information is the author of that book, a mind with consciousness. Therefore we can't deny that the information in DNA was placed there by an intelligent being.
The Information Dead End of Evolutionary Theory and Materialism
The discovery of this fact has sent materialist philosophy and Darwinism, its application to the natural sciences, into a dead end, because materialist philosophy claims that all living things are formed by matter alone and that genetic information appeared somehow by "chance." This is like saying that a book could be formed from a random assemblage of paper and ink.
Materialism subscribes to the theory of "reductionism," which claims that information can ultimately be reduced to matter. For this reason, materialists say that there's no need to look for any source of information besides matter. But this assertion has been proven to be in error, and even materialists have started to owe up to this truth.
One of the leading defenders of the theory of evolution, George C. Williams, pointed in a 1995 essay to the mistake of materialism (reductionism), that is, assuming everything to consist of materials:
Evolutionary biologists have failed to realize that they work with two more or less incommensurable domains: that of information and that of matter… These two domains will never be brought together in any kind of the sense usually implied by the term "reductionism." …The gene is a package of information, not an object... In biology, when you're talking about things like genes and genotypes and gene pools, you're talking about information, not physical objective reality... This dearth of shared descriptors makes matter and information two separate domains of existence, which have to be discussed separately, in their own terms. 1
Stephen C. Meyer, a philosopher of science from the Cambridge University and who is critical of the theory of evolution as well as materialism, says in an interview:
One thing I do in classes to get this idea across the students is that I hold up two computer disks. One is loaded with software, the other one is blank. And I ask, "What is the difference in mass between these two computer disks as a result of the difference in the information content that they possess"? And of course the answer is zero, none, there is no difference as a result of the information. That is because information is a massless quantity. Information is not a material entity.
Then how can any materialistic explanation explain its origin? How can any material cause explain its origin?... This creates a fundamental challenge to the materialistic evolutionary scenarios.
In the 19th century, we thought that there were two fundamental entities of science: Matter and energy. At the beginning of the 21st century, we now recognize that there is a third fundamental entity, and it is information. It is not reducible to matter; it is not reducible to energy. 2
All theories put forward in the twentieth century to reduce information to matter-like the random origin of life, self-organization of matter, the biological theory of evolution that has tried to explain species' genetic information through the mechanism of mutation and natural selection-have failed. Professor Phillip Johnson, a leading critic of Darwinism, wrote:
The real duality at every level of biology is the duality of matter and information. The philosophers of mind-science fail to understand the true nature of information because they assume that it is produced by a material (i.e. Darwinian) process and hence is not something fundamentally different from matter. But this is merely a prejudice that would be swept away by unbiased thinking. 3
As Johnson states, "information is not matter, although it is imprinted on matter. It comes from elsewhere, from an intelligence...." Dr. Werner Gitt, a director and professor at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology, expressed much the same thought:
A coding system always entails a nonmaterial intellectual process. A physical matter cannot produce an information code. All experiences show that every piece of creative information represents some mental effort and can be traced to a personal idea-giver who exercised his own free will, and who is endowed with an intelligent mind.... There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter... 4
As we discussed above, a book is formed by paper, ink and the information it includes. The source of this information is the mind of the author.
And there is one more important point: This mind comes prior to the material elements and it decides how to use them. A book first appears in the mind of the person who will write that book. The author makes logical connections and comes up with sentences. Later, in the second stage, he gives these ideas a material form. By using a typewriter or computer, he turns the information contained within his mind into letters. Later these letters go to a printing house and they make up a book.
So here, we can reach the following conclusion: "If matter includes information, then that material has been pre-organized by a mind possessing that information. First there was a mind, and then the owner of that mind turned that information into matter and thus created a design."
The Mind That Existed Before Matter
Therefore, the source of the information in nature cannot be the matter itself, as the materialists claim. The source of information is not matter, but rather a supra-material Mind. This Mind existed before matter. The Mind created, shaped and organized the whole material universe.
Biology isn't the only branch of science leading us to this conclusion. Twentieth century astronomy and physics also demonstrated the existence of an astonishing harmony and design, pointing to the existence of a Mind that existed before the universe and created it.
Israeli scientist Gerald Schroeder who studied physics and biology in universities like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and the author of the book The Science of God, makes some important remarks on this subject. In his new book entitled The Hidden Face of God: Science Reveals the Ultimate Truth, he explains the conclusion reached by molecular biology and quantum physics as follows:
A single consciousness, a universal wisdom, pervades the universe. The discoveries of science, those that search the quantum nature of subatomic matter, have moved us to the brink of a startling realization: all existence is the expression of this wisdom. In the laboratories we experience it as information that first physically articulated as energy and then condensed into the form of matter. Every particle, every being, from atom to human, appears to represent a level of information, of wisdom. 5
According to Schroeder, the scientific results of our age lead science and theology to meet at a common truth. This is the truth of Creation. Science is now re-discovering this truth that divine religions have actually taught to humanity for millennia.
The Lawh-i Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)
So far, we have looked at science's conclusions about the universe and the origin of living things. The conclusion is that the entire universe and life itself were created using a blueprint of magnificent information that existed before.
This conclusion reached by modern science is strikingly in agreement with a secret that was laid out in the Qur'an some 14 centuries ago. In the Qur'an, a book sent to people as a guide, God announced that the Lawh-i Mahfuz (the Preserved Tablet) existed before the creation of the universe and that it furthermore explained all creation and events in the universe.
The Lawh-i Mahfuz was "guarded" (mahfuz) so the things written there were not changed or spoiled. In the Qur'an, this is called "Ommu al-Kitabi" (The Mother of the Book), "Kitabun Hafeethun" (All-Preserving Book), "Kitabin Maknoonin" (Well-Protected Book) or just the book. It is also called Kitabin min Qabli (The Book of Decrees) since it also tells of the events that humanity will face.
In many verses, God tells about the characteristics of the Lawh-i Mahfuz. First of all, there is nothing missing from this book:
The keys of the Unseen are in His possession. No one knows them but Him. He knows everything in the land and sea. No leaf falls without His knowing it. There is no seed in the darkness of the earth, and nothing moist or dry which is not in a Clear Book. (Qur'an, 6: 59)
One verse says that all life in the world is recorded in the Lawh-i Mahfuz:
There is no creature crawling on the earth or flying creature, flying on its wings, who are not communities just like yourselves —We have not omitted anything from the Book— then they will be gathered to their Lord. (Qur'an, 6: 38)
In another verse, it is stated that "on earth and in the heavens," in the entire universe, all creatures and things, including the smallest speck, are known by God and recorded in the Lawh-i Mahfuz:
You do not engage in any matter or recite any of the Qur'an or do any action without Our witnessing you while you are occupied with it. Not even the smallest speck eludes your Lord, either on earth or in heaven. Nor is there anything smaller than that, or larger, which is not in a Clear Book. (Qur'an, 10: 61)
All information concerning humanity is in the Lawh-i Mahfuz, and this includes the genetic code of all people and their destinies:
Nonetheless they are amazed that a warner should have come to them from among themselves and those who disbelieve say, "What an extraordinary thing! When we are dead and turned to dust? That would be a most unlikely return!" We know exactly how the earth eats them away. We possess an all-preserving Book. (Qur'an, 50: 2-4)
The following verse states that God's words in the Lawh-i Mahfuz are endless, and this is explained through an example:
If all the trees on earth were pens and all the sea, with seven more seas besides, was ink God's words still would not run dry. God is Almighty, All-Wise. (Qur'an, 31: 27)
Conclusion
The facts that we explored in this article prove yet again that the findings of modern science confirm what religion teaches to people. The materialist dogmatism that has been imposed on science is in fact rejected by science itself.
The conclusions of modern science about information serve to objectively demonstrate who is right in a dispute that has been raging for thousands of years. This dispute has been waged between materialist thought and religion. Materialist thought claims that matter is without beginning and that nothing existed before matter. Religion, on the other hand, states that God existed before matter, and that matter is created and ruled by God's endless knowledge.
The fact that this truth, which has been taught by divine religions - like Judaism, Christianity and Islam - since the dawn of history, has been proved by the findings of science, is an indication of the impending post-atheist age. Humanity is getting closer to realizing that God truly exists and He is the "All-Knowing." Just as reminded to people in the following verse of the Holy Qur'an:
Do you not know that God knows everything in heaven and earth? That is in a Book. That is easy for God. (Qur'an, 22: 70)
___________________________________________
(1) George C. Williams. The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution. (ed. John Brockman). New York, Simon & Schuster, 1995, pp. 42-43
(2) Stephen Meyer, "Why Can't Biological Information Originate Through a Materialistic Process", Unlocking the Mystery of Life, DVD, Produced by Illustra Media, 2002
(3) Phillip Johnson, The Wedge of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism , Intervarsity Press, Illinois, 2000, p. 123
(4) Werner Gitt. In the Beginning Was Information. CLV, Bielefeld, Germany, pp. 107, 141
(5) Gerald Schroeder, The Hidden Face of God, Touchstone, New York, 2001, p. xi
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 7, 2008 10:40 am
Urstruly & Dost-Mittar: Thanks friends...It is self-exile but once in a while I might pop-in.Dost Mittar:
kis sher kee amad hay keh rUn kanp raha hay
rustam ka jigar zair-e kafan kanp raha hay
har qasr-e salateen e zaman kanp raha hay
sab eik taraf naqshe kuhan kanp raha hay
........Shamshir bakaf dekh key Haider key pisar ko
.........Jibreel laraztey hein samaitey huey par ko
*******MIRZA DABEER
==========================================================
Urstruly: You might find this fascinating.
The Information Beyond Matter & Lawh-i Mahfuz
HARUN YAHYA
Information… This concept today means a lot more than it did even a half century ago. Scientists are developing theories to define information. Social scientists speak of "the information age." Information is becoming a very important concept for humanity.
The discovery of information in the origin of both the universe and life itself is what makes this concept so important in the modern world. Scientists today are realizing that the universe is formed by "matter, energy and information," and this is replacing the materialistic philosophy of the nineteenth century that defined the universe as being made up entirely of "matter and energy."
So, what does this all mean?
Let's explain through an example, that of DNA. All living cells function according to the genetic information in the double helix structure of DNA. Our bodies are also formed by trillions of cells each with its own DNA, and all the functions of our bodies are registered in this giant molecule. Our cells use protein codes inscribed in the DNA to produce new proteins. The information that our DNA possesses is so large that if you wanted to write it down, it would fill up 900 volumes of encyclopedias, cover-to-cover!
So what is DNA made up of? Fifty years ago, scientists would have replied that DNA is formed by nucleic acids called nucleotides and the chemical bonds holding these nucleotides together. In other words, they used to list only the material elements of the DNA. But today, scientists have a different answer: DNA is composed of atoms, molecules, chemical bonds and, most importantly, information.
It's just like a book. We would be quite mistaken to say that a book is only made up of paper, ink and binding for, alongside these materials, it is the information that truly makes it a book. It is information which separates a volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica from a "book" formed by randomly arranged letters like ABICLDIXXGGSDLL. Both have paper, ink and binding, but one has information while the other does not. The source of information is the author of that book, a mind with consciousness. Therefore we can't deny that the information in DNA was placed there by an intelligent being.
The Information Dead End of Evolutionary Theory and Materialism
The discovery of this fact has sent materialist philosophy and Darwinism, its application to the natural sciences, into a dead end, because materialist philosophy claims that all living things are formed by matter alone and that genetic information appeared somehow by "chance." This is like saying that a book could be formed from a random assemblage of paper and ink.
Materialism subscribes to the theory of "reductionism," which claims that information can ultimately be reduced to matter. For this reason, materialists say that there's no need to look for any source of information besides matter. But this assertion has been proven to be in error, and even materialists have started to owe up to this truth.
One of the leading defenders of the theory of evolution, George C. Williams, pointed in a 1995 essay to the mistake of materialism (reductionism), that is, assuming everything to consist of materials:
Evolutionary biologists have failed to realize that they work with two more or less incommensurable domains: that of information and that of matter… These two domains will never be brought together in any kind of the sense usually implied by the term "reductionism." …The gene is a package of information, not an object... In biology, when you're talking about things like genes and genotypes and gene pools, you're talking about information, not physical objective reality... This dearth of shared descriptors makes matter and information two separate domains of existence, which have to be discussed separately, in their own terms. 1
Stephen C. Meyer, a philosopher of science from the Cambridge University and who is critical of the theory of evolution as well as materialism, says in an interview:
One thing I do in classes to get this idea across the students is that I hold up two computer disks. One is loaded with software, the other one is blank. And I ask, "What is the difference in mass between these two computer disks as a result of the difference in the information content that they possess"? And of course the answer is zero, none, there is no difference as a result of the information. That is because information is a massless quantity. Information is not a material entity.
Then how can any materialistic explanation explain its origin? How can any material cause explain its origin?... This creates a fundamental challenge to the materialistic evolutionary scenarios.
In the 19th century, we thought that there were two fundamental entities of science: Matter and energy. At the beginning of the 21st century, we now recognize that there is a third fundamental entity, and it is information. It is not reducible to matter; it is not reducible to energy. 2
All theories put forward in the twentieth century to reduce information to matter-like the random origin of life, self-organization of matter, the biological theory of evolution that has tried to explain species' genetic information through the mechanism of mutation and natural selection-have failed. Professor Phillip Johnson, a leading critic of Darwinism, wrote:
The real duality at every level of biology is the duality of matter and information. The philosophers of mind-science fail to understand the true nature of information because they assume that it is produced by a material (i.e. Darwinian) process and hence is not something fundamentally different from matter. But this is merely a prejudice that would be swept away by unbiased thinking. 3
As Johnson states, "information is not matter, although it is imprinted on matter. It comes from elsewhere, from an intelligence...." Dr. Werner Gitt, a director and professor at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology, expressed much the same thought:
A coding system always entails a nonmaterial intellectual process. A physical matter cannot produce an information code. All experiences show that every piece of creative information represents some mental effort and can be traced to a personal idea-giver who exercised his own free will, and who is endowed with an intelligent mind.... There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter... 4
As we discussed above, a book is formed by paper, ink and the information it includes. The source of this information is the mind of the author.
And there is one more important point: This mind comes prior to the material elements and it decides how to use them. A book first appears in the mind of the person who will write that book. The author makes logical connections and comes up with sentences. Later, in the second stage, he gives these ideas a material form. By using a typewriter or computer, he turns the information contained within his mind into letters. Later these letters go to a printing house and they make up a book.
So here, we can reach the following conclusion: "If matter includes information, then that material has been pre-organized by a mind possessing that information. First there was a mind, and then the owner of that mind turned that information into matter and thus created a design."
The Mind That Existed Before Matter
Therefore, the source of the information in nature cannot be the matter itself, as the materialists claim. The source of information is not matter, but rather a supra-material Mind. This Mind existed before matter. The Mind created, shaped and organized the whole material universe.
Biology isn't the only branch of science leading us to this conclusion. Twentieth century astronomy and physics also demonstrated the existence of an astonishing harmony and design, pointing to the existence of a Mind that existed before the universe and created it.
Israeli scientist Gerald Schroeder who studied physics and biology in universities like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and the author of the book The Science of God, makes some important remarks on this subject. In his new book entitled The Hidden Face of God: Science Reveals the Ultimate Truth, he explains the conclusion reached by molecular biology and quantum physics as follows:
A single consciousness, a universal wisdom, pervades the universe. The discoveries of science, those that search the quantum nature of subatomic matter, have moved us to the brink of a startling realization: all existence is the expression of this wisdom. In the laboratories we experience it as information that first physically articulated as energy and then condensed into the form of matter. Every particle, every being, from atom to human, appears to represent a level of information, of wisdom. 5
According to Schroeder, the scientific results of our age lead science and theology to meet at a common truth. This is the truth of Creation. Science is now re-discovering this truth that divine religions have actually taught to humanity for millennia.
The Lawh-i Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)
So far, we have looked at science's conclusions about the universe and the origin of living things. The conclusion is that the entire universe and life itself were created using a blueprint of magnificent information that existed before.
This conclusion reached by modern science is strikingly in agreement with a secret that was laid out in the Qur'an some 14 centuries ago. In the Qur'an, a book sent to people as a guide, God announced that the Lawh-i Mahfuz (the Preserved Tablet) existed before the creation of the universe and that it furthermore explained all creation and events in the universe.
The Lawh-i Mahfuz was "guarded" (mahfuz) so the things written there were not changed or spoiled. In the Qur'an, this is called "Ommu al-Kitabi" (The Mother of the Book), "Kitabun Hafeethun" (All-Preserving Book), "Kitabin Maknoonin" (Well-Protected Book) or just the book. It is also called Kitabin min Qabli (The Book of Decrees) since it also tells of the events that humanity will face.
In many verses, God tells about the characteristics of the Lawh-i Mahfuz. First of all, there is nothing missing from this book:
The keys of the Unseen are in His possession. No one knows them but Him. He knows everything in the land and sea. No leaf falls without His knowing it. There is no seed in the darkness of the earth, and nothing moist or dry which is not in a Clear Book. (Qur'an, 6: 59)
One verse says that all life in the world is recorded in the Lawh-i Mahfuz:
There is no creature crawling on the earth or flying creature, flying on its wings, who are not communities just like yourselves —We have not omitted anything from the Book— then they will be gathered to their Lord. (Qur'an, 6: 38)
In another verse, it is stated that "on earth and in the heavens," in the entire universe, all creatures and things, including the smallest speck, are known by God and recorded in the Lawh-i Mahfuz:
You do not engage in any matter or recite any of the Qur'an or do any action without Our witnessing you while you are occupied with it. Not even the smallest speck eludes your Lord, either on earth or in heaven. Nor is there anything smaller than that, or larger, which is not in a Clear Book. (Qur'an, 10: 61)
All information concerning humanity is in the Lawh-i Mahfuz, and this includes the genetic code of all people and their destinies:
Nonetheless they are amazed that a warner should have come to them from among themselves and those who disbelieve say, "What an extraordinary thing! When we are dead and turned to dust? That would be a most unlikely return!" We know exactly how the earth eats them away. We possess an all-preserving Book. (Qur'an, 50: 2-4)
The following verse states that God's words in the Lawh-i Mahfuz are endless, and this is explained through an example:
If all the trees on earth were pens and all the sea, with seven more seas besides, was ink God's words still would not run dry. God is Almighty, All-Wise. (Qur'an, 31: 27)
Conclusion
The facts that we explored in this article prove yet again that the findings of modern science confirm what religion teaches to people. The materialist dogmatism that has been imposed on science is in fact rejected by science itself.
The conclusions of modern science about information serve to objectively demonstrate who is right in a dispute that has been raging for thousands of years. This dispute has been waged between materialist thought and religion. Materialist thought claims that matter is without beginning and that nothing existed before matter. Religion, on the other hand, states that God existed before matter, and that matter is created and ruled by God's endless knowledge.
The fact that this truth, which has been taught by divine religions - like Judaism, Christianity and Islam - since the dawn of history, has been proved by the findings of science, is an indication of the impending post-atheist age. Humanity is getting closer to realizing that God truly exists and He is the "All-Knowing." Just as reminded to people in the following verse of the Holy Qur'an:
Do you not know that God knows everything in heaven and earth? That is in a Book. That is easy for God. (Qur'an, 22: 70)
___________________________________________
(1) George C. Williams. The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution. (ed. John Brockman). New York, Simon & Schuster, 1995, pp. 42-43
(2) Stephen Meyer, "Why Can't Biological Information Originate Through a Materialistic Process", Unlocking the Mystery of Life, DVD, Produced by Illustra Media, 2002
(3) Phillip Johnson, The Wedge of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism , Intervarsity Press, Illinois, 2000, p. 123
(4) Werner Gitt. In the Beginning Was Information. CLV, Bielefeld, Germany, pp. 107, 141
(5) Gerald Schroeder, The Hidden Face of God, Touchstone, New York, 2001, p. xi
The Importance of Natural Selection
=============================================================
REFUTATI ON of atheism..by GENOME_CODE SCIENTIST: Dr. Frances Collins
from his best-selling book: THE LANGUAGE OF GOD
Francis Collins was the head of the Human Genome Project, which successfully decoded the three billion genes of human DNA. As a young man, he was an atheist, but the demonstrated faith of some of his most desperately ill patients (he started as a medical doctor) prompted him to investigate spiritual issues. This is what he had to say in his 2006 best-seller The Language of God:
“My desire to draw close to God was blocked by my own pride and sinfulness, which in turn was an inevitable consequence of my own selfish desire to be in control. Now the crucifixion and resurrection emerged as the compelling solution to the gap that yawned between God and myself, a gap that could now be bridged by the person of Jesus Christ
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 7, 2008 08:16 am
Since ak cheema included `The Genome Project`in his reading list ( interact 42) It is only appropriate to talk about Dr. Frances Collins..incharge of the Genome Project itself.=============================================================
REFUTATI ON of atheism..by GENOME_CODE SCIENTIST: Dr. Frances Collins
from his best-selling book: THE LANGUAGE OF GOD
Francis Collins was the head of the Human Genome Project, which successfully decoded the three billion genes of human DNA. As a young man, he was an atheist, but the demonstrated faith of some of his most desperately ill patients (he started as a medical doctor) prompted him to investigate spiritual issues. This is what he had to say in his 2006 best-seller The Language of God:
“My desire to draw close to God was blocked by my own pride and sinfulness, which in turn was an inevitable consequence of my own selfish desire to be in control. Now the crucifixion and resurrection emerged as the compelling solution to the gap that yawned between God and myself, a gap that could now be bridged by the person of Jesus Christ
The Importance of Natural Selection
Re: # 82 its upto you urstruly.....you believe what you want, since your mind requires satisfaction from that point of view. Nothing wrong with that. You are happy with your condition and knowledge. I am happy with mine.
===========================================================
SubhaanAllah..Das h-Dot
Qura'an Al-Hakeem is very clear about it...and has already said this long long time ago.
Maybe you just received an evolutionary-spurt telegram, dit dit dat dit, in your genome system.
and here is the complete Verse:
"Say: O You Unbelievers (who obstinately reject Faith), I do not worship which you worship, nor are you worsipping what I worship; Nor will I ever worship which you worship,and nor will you ever worship what I worship; You have your religion( and whatever it will bring on you) and I have my religion ( and whatever it will bring me)
Al-Kafiroun:109.
======================================================= =====
P.S: Quraan has also repeatedly advised & warned us about humans been condemned & cursed to turn into monkeys & swine.
If Darwin knew even a little Science he would not have made the mistake he did, and misled Humanity into the clutches of barbarities pervertedly called GREAT WARS. Nationalism, Communism, and Capitalism are the three facets of the same Colonial-Imperial-Racist Trinity.
Darwin only, perhaps unwittingly, provided "scientific" legitimacy to a Satanic mindset about which Goethe had already warned us in Faust.
Posted by
echoboom
Apr 7, 2008 07:26 am
84 Posted by tahir on April 7, 2008 6:33:09 am Re: # 82 its upto you urstruly.....you believe what you want, since your mind requires satisfaction from that point of view. Nothing wrong with that. You are happy with your condition and knowledge. I am happy with mine.
===========================================================
SubhaanAllah..Das h-Dot
Qura'an Al-Hakeem is very clear about it...and has already said this long long time ago.
Maybe you just received an evolutionary-spurt telegram, dit dit dat dit, in your genome system.
and here is the complete Verse:
"Say: O You Unbelievers (who obstinately reject Faith), I do not worship which you worship, nor are you worsipping what I worship; Nor will I ever worship which you worship,and nor will you ever worship what I worship; You have your religion( and whatever it will bring on you) and I have my religion ( and whatever it will bring me)
Al-Kafiroun:109.
======================================================= =====
P.S: Quraan has also repeatedly advised & warned us about humans been condemned & cursed to turn into monkeys & swine.
If Darwin knew even a little Science he would not have made the mistake he did, and misled Humanity into the clutches of barbarities pervertedly called GREAT WARS. Nationalism, Communism, and Capitalism are the three facets of the same Colonial-Imperial-Racist Trinity.
Darwin only, perhaps unwittingly, provided "scientific" legitimacy to a Satanic mindset about which Goethe had already warned us in Faust.
- echoboom
- Interacts: 2461
- iLogs: 643
- Gallery: 0
- Page views: 149082
- Last visitor: guest
- Member since: Jul 31 2003
- Last signin: Oct 12 2008
- Send a message
- Add as friend
- Add to ignore list
- Add to block list
