A Response to Sheikh Salih al-Sadlan and the So-Called “Save Masjid Tawhid” Petition

Bismillah.  I hope I do not have to waste too much with this, but here is an initial response.  There will be more later, God-willing.

1. Sh. Salih al-Sadlan of Riyadh gave a fatwa on not praying behind anyone who accepts Darwinism.  This fatwa was given at the Green Lane Mosque in Birmingham, HQ of Markazi Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith, during their annual conference 24-28 Dec 2010.  Sh. Sadlan is a respected Professor of Law, especially Hanbali Law, and I read and benefited from some of his books when I was much younger.  The last time I saw him was c. 1998 at the opening of the new Edinburgh Mosque followed by a conference on the issues facing Muslims in the West, discussed mostly by Saudis plus a few Azharis, all of whom were, not surprisingly, pretty clueless about the reality of trying to live as Muslims here.  I still remember the gravity with which Sh. Sadlan said the word haymanah when talking about a Muslim man’s duty towards his children, especially if he was contemplating marrying a Jewish or Christian woman!🙂

2. I rang Sh. Sadlan on Tuesday 29 Dec 2010 and spoke to him for about 20 min whilst he was in a car on the way to the airport.  There is at least one witness (the car driver) to some of that conversation. Apart from mentioning “hasty young men” who had briefed him against me, he said that Darwinism was a denial of the Qur’an.  I asked him whether to believe that the earth is round is also a rejection of the Qur’an, for some commentators such as the authors of Tafsir al-Jalalayn said that the earth is flat, based on Surah al-Ghashiyah 88:20.

I further told him that for at least a thousand years, Muslim philosophers and scientists developed evolutionary ideas, e.g. Ibn Miskawayh, al-Jahiz in his Kitab al-Hayawan (“Book of Animals”), Ibn Tufayl in his evolutionary novel Hayy b. Yaqzan (“The Living, Son of the Awake”) and Ibn Khaldun.  I summarised Ibn Khaldun’s words on the subject (given in full below), and told him that there is some evidence that Darwin was aware of, and influenced by these evolutionary ideas developed by Muslims.  He seemed entirely unaware of any of this, and responded to Ibn Khaldun by saying that “there is no development or evolution in nature” (a statement which is patently false, but unfortunately many of our traditional scholars know nothing about modern science that has progressed exponentially in the centuries since the decline of Muslim science).  He further said the most I could do was to quote Ibn Khaldun but clarify that he was wrong and absolve myself absolutely of his statement.

(As a scientist with ijazahs from some of the world’s leading universities, by the Grace of Allah, and as a seeker of knowledge, I clearly cannot accept this based on blind following of “authority,” especially when there is no authority here, for the Muslim world has not really discussed Darwin properly.  I repeat my reply on BBC Radio 4’s Beyond Belief when asked about why the Muslim world has not come to terms with Darwin: forget Darwin, it has not come to terms with Newton yet, given the popularity of the Ash’ari theology and its absolute rejection of causality and extreme affirmation of atomism.)

I also said that I believe that it is possible to reconcile the Book of Allah with established scientific theories such as those of Darwin.  I think I also mentioned that many ayat of the Qur’an could be understood to support evolutionary theory, such as “Allah made you grow like plants out of the ground.” (Nuh 71:17) He said I mustn’t do that, and absolve myself of Darwin.  Of course, I didn’t want to argue too much with a sheikh almost twice my age, and so wished him salams and a safe return to Saudi.  He gave me salams at the beginning and end of the conversation, alhamdulillah.

3. Around 1st January, my father faxed Sh. Sadlan a five-page letter informing him about some of the work I’ve done in the past and continue to do, and requested him to reconsider his fatwa.  I am humbled and upset that my father went to such great lengths on my behalf.  Although my father is not persuaded yet about my view on Darwin😉, he described it briefly to Sh. Sadlan in the letter and defended my right to arrive at independent conclusions.  All three of us agreed during these conclusions that these discussions must be handled carefully, especially where the public are concerned.  It may be that I publish my father’s letter on this blog later.

I plan to write a detailed paper later insha’Allah on how I believe Darwinism is compatible with the Qur’an.  I would be happy to send that to Muslim scholars around the world for their opinions.  But in the meantime, here are some quotes from scholars of the past, below.  My main ideas have already been summarised and available in this section of my blog including a slide presentation that many people have benefited from, but the others appear not to have bothered to make an effort to even try to listen, learn, understand or discuss.  People are free to disagree and make up their own minds, and I am open to discuss the matter with anyone.  Several honest souls have come to me over the last few years to ask and learn rather than backbite, gossip and slander, which is unfortunately what some others do.

Let those who wish to harmonise, discuss and learn sincerely and worship, do so.  Those who wish to gossip, slander, backbite and spread rumours, only damage themselves.

QUOTES FROM MUSLIM SCHOLARS OF THE PAST

1. Ibn Miskawayh (932-1030 or 4th century AH)

The following entry used to be at Wikipedia for several years, but has now been removed.  I found it here.

Ibn Miskawayh was one of the first to clearly describe the idea of evolution. Muhammad Hamidullah describes the evolutionary ideas found in Ibn Miskawayh’s al-Fawz al-Asghar as follows:

“[These books] state that God first created matter and invested it with energy for development. Matter, therefore, adopted the form of vapour which assumed the shape of water in due time. The next stage of development was mineral life. Different kinds of stones developed in course of time. Their highest form being mirjan (coral). It is a stone which has in it branches like those of a tree. After mineral life evolves vegetation. The evolution of vegetation culminates with a tree which bears the qualities of an animal. This is the date-palm. It has male and female genders. It does not wither if all its branches are chopped but it dies when the head is cut off. The date-palm is therefore considered the highest among the trees and resembles the lowest among animals. Then is born the lowest of animals. It evolves into an ape. This is not the statement of Darwin. This is what Ibn Maskawayh states and this is precisely what is written in the Epistles of Ikhwan al-Safa. The Muslim thinkers state that ape then evolved into a lower kind of a barbarian man. He then became a superior human being. Man becomes a saint, a prophet. He evolves into a higher stage and becomes an angel. The one higher to angels is indeed none but God. Everything begins from Him and everything returns to Him.”[1]

Arabic manuscripts of the al-Fawz al-Asghar were available in European universities by the 19th century. This work is believed to have been studied by Charles Darwin, who was a student of Arabic, and it is thought to have had an influence on his inception of Darwinism.[1]

  1. ^ a b Muhammad Hamidullah and Afzal Iqbal (1993), The Emergence of Islam: Lectures on the Development of Islamic World-view, Intellectual Tradition and Polity, p. 143-144. Islamic Research Institute, Islamabad.

2. IBN KHALDUN (d. 1408 or 8th century AH)

The 14th-century philosopher Ibn Khaldun (http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ik/klf.htm) wrote in his famous Muqaddimah,

“One should then look at the world of creation.  It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals.  The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants.  The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch.  The word ‘connection’ with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group.”

Ibn Khaldun continues, “The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and to reflect.  The higher stage of man is reached from the world of the monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking.  At this point we come to the first stage of man.  This is as far as our (physical) observation extends.” (This is found in NJ Dawood’s abridgment of Rosenthal’s translation, p. 75)

3. RUMI

Low in the earth
I lived in realms of ore and stone;
And then I smiled in many-tinted flowers;
Then roving with the wild and wandering hours,
O’er earth and air and ocean’s zone,
In a new birth,
I dived and flew,
And crept and ran,
And all the secret of my essence drew
Within a form that brought them all to view –
And lo, a Man!

And then my goal,
Beyond the clouds, beyond the sky,
In realms where none may change or die –
In angel form; and then away
Beyond the bounds of night and day,
And Life and Death, unseen or seen,
Where all that is hath ever been,
As One and Whole.

4. Allama Muhammad Iqbal, the great 20th-century philosopher-poet-thinker and intellectual founder of Pakistan, had no problems with Darwinism, as is clear for example in his Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, where he quotes the above lines by Rumi.

5. Prof. Nidhal Guessoum, a practising Muslim and leading astronomer, has published a book recently, reconciling Islam & Evolution.  It is called Islam’s Quantum Question.  I have not seen it yet.

About the so-called “Save Masjid Tawhid” petition

1. The petitioners call themselves, “the Community of Masjid Tawhid” although they appear to be hiding behind internet anonymity so that we don’t know the real names and addresses of the petition-signers.  This is a lie because alhamdulillah, my father and I and our supporters are regulars at MT and do not support this despicable petition.

2. They say, “Now Usama Hasan calls on Muslims to believe that Prophet Adam (alayhi as-salam) evolved from apes, rather than being the Creation of Allah with His Own Two Hands, as the Qur’an informs us.”  This is a lie and a slander.  I have repeatedly said that both creation and evolution are true, since evolution is clearly involved in creation.  What do they say about Allah creating cattle with His Own Hands (Ya Sin 36:71) or building the heavens with Hands, meaning power and skill (Dhariyat 51:47) ?  Will they reject all of science due to their ignorance and misunderstanding of both the Qur’an and science?  Yet they will happily use the fruits of science, i.e. technology such as the internet and mobile phones, to continue their ridiculous campaign!

3. They refer at least twice to “our own Sheikh Suhaib Hasan.”  How is he their Sheikh, and not mine? My father is my main teacher and I do not know anyone who has studied with him more than me.  If there is such a person, I would like to meet him.  I’m fed up of people trying to drive a wedge between father and son, a heinous moral crime.  Have they not realised that my father has endorsed my imamate at the mosque throughout these years and regularly prays behind me at the mosque and at our homes?  Have they not witnessed this hundreds of times during Ramadans and Fridays?  (By the grace of Allah, I led most of the nightly Tarawih prayers at MT over a period of about 20 years.)

3. According to the petition website, it is created by Abu Abdullah (savemasjidtawhid@gmail.com).  He might as well call himself Joe Bloggs (Abu Abdullah means “Father of a Servant of God”).  Why does he not reveal his full name?

4. The petition signatures are private, not public. Enough said.

I advise the petition authors to remove the petition and engage in a civilised discussion.  But regrettably, we’ve seen this situation many times before, e.g. the fitnah-mongers who obtained fatwas against my father in the past from Ali al-Halabi, Salim al-Hilali and Muqbil bin Hadi.  All their efforts came to no avail.  Goats butting mountains.

All Praise be to Allah, in every eventuality.

35 Responses to “A Response to Sheikh Salih al-Sadlan and the So-Called “Save Masjid Tawhid” Petition”

  1. May Allah guide you Says:

    May Allah save us from the fitna you are facing. Ameen.

  2. 'Uthmān Says:

    As-salaamu ‘alaykum

    I don’t have enough of a background in science to be able to decide for myself whether, on a scientific basis, I can believe in evolution. Up until now, I have rejected evolution based on my understanding that it is inconsistent with the Qur’anic narrative of how human beings came to be. After reading what you have to say, I am less certain about that now, although I’m still undecided. Have you read Adam Deen’s response to your 2008 CiF article on this subject? If not, you can find it here: http://adamdeen.blogspot.com/2008/09/responding-to-usama-hasans-muslim-apes.html. Amongst other things, he attempts to show why he still believes the Qur’anic narrative cannot be compatible with evolution so it might be interesting for you to consider his arguments.

    I think, at best, I can say that the Qur’anic narrative is definitely compatible with the creationist account and, after reading your posts, I might say that the Qur’an is POSSIBLY also compatible with the evolutionary account as well. I’ll probably still tend towards creationism for now while keeping an open mind. Also, I’m aware that there are some holes in the evolutionary theory that need to be addressed before I can fully accept it on a scientific basis. On that note, have you heard of a book called “The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism” by Michael Behe? I haven’t read it myself, but it’s supposed to be a good critique of Darwinism.

    I would be interested in looking at the paper that you intend to write on how you believe Darwinism to be compatible with the Qur’an. Is that going to take a while to do or will it be available fairly soon?

  3. Ma'alim Alrawi Says:

    Assalamualaykum Br I read with interest you veiws on Islam and darwinism i also read the extract taken from the bbc radio 4 programme. In you writing above you qoute Ibn Khaldun please could you give me the the exact page references from the arabic al muqaddimah, I was suprised to read that Ibn khaldun made such comments and would like to check the original version, as the muqaddima is so big i would appreciate if you could give me exact references from arabic please. Also i did not understand the connection you made between the creation of Adam (AS) and the evolutionary process. Allah (SWT) details the creation of Adam AS in Ch2:35 onwards, brings the angels before him, you know the rest, so he was clearly created then and there, this is my understanding. While i accept that there are some evolutionary processes that have occured and perhaps continue to do so (science has clearly shown this) with regard to the creation of man i was not able to understand how you came to reconcile the two ( mans creation, darwins evolutionary theory) please could you clarify JazakAllahkhir wassalam Ma’alim

  4. Yassin Says:

    I am not one to be involved in useless arguments, and do not enjoy watching everyone spending excessive time refuting everyone not part of their groups. I don’t agree with your recent views (hijab/evolution/music etc.) and your quilliam-like stances, but I believe I can spend my time better than speaking about you. I respect your father. I am typing because this is my chance to give you naseeha in the form of my opinion.

    You have studied more than me and know more Qur’an than me, and I am sure have knowledge advanced to my knowledge in Sharia and secular matters. Yet in that level of knowledge in which we match, I feel that there is something you have missed or possibly do not believe in. Your strange opinions disagree with the vast majority of scholars from the past. So either, you have missed the issue of ijma3 in your studies or that you apply it differently, or that you do not believe in it…. or maybe something else. Look who you qoute in your defence against ‘evolution’ (which is a misleading concept in the first place). People who have no weight when assessing past opinions to look at current ijtihaad.

    The vast majority of people who have a basic understanding of the methodology of sharioa will never agree with you in my humble (probably wothless) opinion. I can’t help but think that the kind of people who would follow you would be people infuenced by their desires for the dunya or people who have no basic principles to build knowledge upon.

    I would advise you, if you haven’t done so already, to make clear the principles you base your judgements on, your understanding of how they work, and your understanding of their weight when coming up with opinions (no one has come up with before). Do you believe in Ijmaa3? what do you know about it? What do you know about how those who see it differently explain it? Qiyaas? Difference between 3illah and hikmah? etc.

    Until then, argueing will really be like goats butting heads against mountains, because unless the base to argue from is defined then people will never agree with each other. If you really believe you are on haqq and want to to ‘guide’ people then styart from the beginning otherwise you will be wasting your time.

    People would rather follow the majority than you.

  5. Abdullah Says:

    AsalamuAlykum brother Usama, I hope all is well.

    In the petition it is stated that you believe that “Adam (alayhi as-salam) was the son of two apes”, is this true. I don’t understand where Darwin’s theory fits into Islams belief in creation. I understand what you are saying about scientific knowledge that was not available before, but non of these discoveries contradict Quran and authentic Sunnah.

    In relation to the following ayat I just want to know where you understanding of darwin’s theory fits into our deen:

    “Verily, the likeness of ‘Eesa (Jesus) before Allaah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then (He) said to him: ‘Be!’ — and he was”

    [Aal ‘Imraan 3:59]

    Then it became dried (sounding) clay of altered mud. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “And indeed, We created man from dried (sounding) clay of altered mud”
    [al-Hijr 15:26]

    Then when it dried it became sounding clay like the clay of pottery. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “He created man (Adam) from sounding clay like the clay of pottery”

    [al-Rahmaan 55:14]

    Then Allaah moulded it into the form that He wanted and breathed into him (his) soul created by Him. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “(Remember) when your Lord said to the angels: ‘Truly, I am going to create man from clay’.

    So when I have fashioned him and breathed into him (his) soul created by Me, then you fall down prostrate to him”

    [Saad 38:71-72]

    So if Allah created Adam, and we his descendants, where does this theory fit in?

    Barakallah Feek

  6. Mohammad Uz-Zaman Says:

    Assalamu Alaykum Sheikh Usama,

    I clicked on the link regarding a slide presentation on evolution but could see a download link.

    I thought it was a powerpoint presentation. If so, could you email to please?

    Though I am hugely sceptical of the theory of evolution, I do not think it contradicts the Quran or the Sunna, just anthromorphist theology, and established scientific paradigms to ascertain facts. Another discussion…for another day….

    I put up a link on FB, hopefully your piece will generate a tolerant intelligent discussion inshAllah

  7. Mohammad Uz-Zaman Says:

    sorry…typo….”….I couldn’t see the link….”

  8. Aston 'Musa' Walker Says:

    Salaam alaikum,
    I dont know if you remember me but I was the black dude who used to hang out with softar(?) and zubayr. I’m the guy who brought those handsworth geezers paul davies (bilal) to green lane. I think your the same guy who used to give talks with abu muntasir. I hope all is well. I make cartoons and films now but zubayr is one guy I would like to see. When all is said and done you guys gave me a little hope when I converted. Yes I am aware of all the fitnah, but because I met you guys and your dad before all the wierdos you guys still bring some good memories. And God only knows we could do with some of those. Peace.

  9. fug Says:

    *hug*

  10. Suyuti Says:

    Can you give me your ijazahs details that you said you have from those universities? I want to contact them also to confirm.
    If one believes in human evolution, then they would have a large trouble in interpreting the narrations about Allah creating Hawa(AS) after Sayyidina Adam(AS) was created, thus contradicting basic evolutionary theory. Nor can the Sahih narrations about Adam’s(AS) height be understood with evolution(we don’t need to go into the opinion-see Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali’s commentary- that this height was in heaven and it decreased when he came to Earth).
    Just because there are some odd, interpretable quotes/opinions from the past, it doesn’t mean they’re valid.
    In fact one can find the opinion that men can see a woman naked before marriage, held by some of the Dhahiris.
    Furthermore the deception in the article, for example Ibn Miskawayh’s quote says “He evolves into a higher stage and becomes an angel.”
    So that shows that the quote isn’t literally referring to apes evolving into humans because otherwise the latter sentence wouldn’t make sense (Angels came before humans)
    Ibn Khaldun’s quote is also a misinterpretation as he says “The word ‘connection’ with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group”. This means that they don’t actually evolve but that Allah creates a new group, almost similar to the previous.
    Furthermore Rumi’s quote is of course misunderstood, he’s talking about spiritual aspects. And this same Usama Hasan complains of fundamentalist literalism… It is not helped that he hasn’t given a reference to Rumi, nor has he directly quoted from Ibn Miskawayh (instead he has a second hand source), so much for his scholarship…

  11. Suyuti Says:

    Also what are your qualifications in biology since I want to know if you have expert knowledge of evolutionary theory and are able to give an informed opinion as to the legitimacy of the scientific theory?

  12. Abu Ibraheem Says:

    Dear Usama

    Does this mean you will accept Sh. As Sadlaan challenge and have a dialogue with him in Saudi Arabia?

  13. Shafi Chowdhury Says:

    Jazakallahu khairan for taking the time to pen this response. Can you also please address the question raised about your position on hijab, or direct us to anything you have written on the subject?

    أسأل الله أن يؤلف بين قلوبكم ويتوب على المسيئين منكم والمخطئين ويجمعكم على ما يحب ويرضى

  14. Robin Yassin-Kassab Says:

    strength to you, Usama.

  15. Shaheen Amin Says:

    Dr Usama – interesting writing from ibn Khaldun and I am surprised by his comments. If one is to take the view of ibn Khaldun literally, how would one explain the fact that all of human beings are children of Adam (as) and that he (Adam) was created from dust as stated in Al-Quran?

  16. Kennedy fiddles while Birmingham is burning | Peace, Bruv Says:

    […] Usama Hasan published some comments online to support earlier claims that Islam’s creationist narrative can coexist with the […]

  17. zaki Says:

    In the Name of Allaah.

    After reading your ‘response’ above, the following beautiful statements come to mind… Imam al-Awza’i said: “Whoever holds on to the odd positions of the Scholars has left Islam.” Sufyan at-Thawri said: “Whoever pursues the odd and unusual has gathered up all the evil.” Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi said: “He is not an Imam in ‘ilm who follows shadh positions.”

    To briefly summarise my observations, I note the following:

    1. Since when have books of anecdotal proverbs, allegory and translations of Greek kalam become a basis for the establishment of Islamic creed? And since when have philosophers and physicians taken over the role of Prophets and scholars?

    2. In appealing to the views of Aristotelian and neo-platonist philosophers, you should not think that a batil ijtihad or an invalid ikhtilaf will somehow ‘legitimise’ your views.

    3. If Darwin was influence by, and took some of his understanding from “Muslim literature”, where did characters like Ibn Miskawayh, Ibn Tufayl and Rumi take their understanding from? Their ideas certainly do not originate from Islamic ‘itiqad, irrespective of which people (attributed to Islam) formed these views.

    4. Are you aware of the misconceptions surrounding al-Jahiz’s so-called ‘support for evolution’: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Jahiz)

    5. You raise a lot more questions than answers in your short response (inc. making ta’weel of Allaah’s Sifat and seemingly condoning the idea of ‘wahdat al-wujood’) – and in the midst of your waffling, you have not even given a straight forward answer: “Did Adam alayhis-salaam evolve from an ape?” Yes or no according to your belief in Darwinism?

    You may also want to take a moment and read an initial reply from another observant brother here: http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=11760

    And only Allaah’s Refuge is sought from tumultuous and kufr ideologies.

  18. refi shafi Says:

    Salam,

    Saw this post. A number of observations, if I may

    1) Darwinism, particularly as related to man, contradicts explicit Qur’anic verses, a multitude of hadiths, and the unanimous understanding of early Muslims.

    2) Darwinism is a theory, it is not fact. Why does this seem to be ignored?

    3) No point in getting sidetracked too much by what one or two scholars may have said since for every aberrant view, you will almost always find the odd one or two classic authorities who support it. They are the odd one or two, and that is the point.

    4) However, the passage from Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddima, from the section ‘the Meaning of Prophecy’, seems to describe a succession of stages in superiority of one creation to another, without at all implying a physical evolution of one form to the next. His usage of the word ufuq (literally: ‘horizon,’ in some contexts ‘side/edge of the celestial sphere,’ translated (incorrectly?) in the passage as “stage”) is more suggestive of ‘the theory of celestial spheres and emanation’ floating around at that time, and seems to be an extension of that. Medieval philosophers would often discuss prophecy in the context of emanation, again another indication that ibn Khaldun is not talking about evolution.

    5) Similary in the quote from ibn Miskawayh, Hamidullah ends by saying, “…He then became a superior human being. Man becomes a saint, a prophet. He evolves into a higher stage and becomes an angel.” I do not think that anyone would claim that an ‘ordinary’ man physically evolves to a ‘superior’ Saint or Prophet. Or further into an angel! He is talking in the same sense as ibn Khaldun above.

    6) Rumi passage is clearly allegorical and is talking more about the immortality of the soul, not evolution. I read that when I was 17 years old and understood then that this was a metaphor.

    7) Moreover, read about “the great chain of being” here,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_chain_of_being
    and you will see that this is almost exactly what these authors were talking about. Again, not Darwinian evolution.

    8) Correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I am aware, the Epistles of Ikhwan al-Safa were written by unknown authors. Ironic considering the great emphasis placed on the anonymity of the savemasjidtawhid site.

    Allah knows best

    Refi Shafi Abu Rumaysah

  19. Abu Ibraaheem Says:

    Praise is for Allah, the Creator and Shaper, who sent His Messenger with guidance and the deen of truth making it manifest over all other deens, even if the disbelievers come to hate it.

    Dr Usama Hasan,

    I write this to you grudgingly, for I’d rather regard you in high stead for knowledge acquired or righteous action undertaken, yet, your impious attitude and arrogant retorts to those who advise you somewhat compel me to make obvious the realities of your inane ideas. The belligerence you have demonstrated to those around you as well as in the media not only call into question your intentions, but make them evidently clear. And most sorrowful is it that I wonder the many innocent ignorant who have, to whatever extent, succumbed to your feebly reasoned and scantily researched drivel.

    Even you must know that the Ahlus-sunnah are quite tired of your self-perceived prophetic ramblings, even the sufis have quite intelligently washed their hands of you with H. Yusuf and T. Ramadan rebuking the negation of the shari’a – somewhat of a reply to you and your Quillam cohorts.

    As for Masjid Tawhid, it is extremely unfortunate that a man who has benefitted his community so much then turn to misguide people to ideas that have all the hallmarks of heresy and disbelief. Clearly, it is out of sheer frustration that the creators of the petition have resorted to such tactics (I personally have nothing to do with it), and if you were to get over your own arrogance, maybe instead you’d question as to why offended individuals felt that they couldn’t address you in private and had to resort to a petition – but more of that later.

    Of course, you will respond full of vengeance, and with rant and rave you shall paint me to be some lonely and ignorant miscreant devoid of reason and intelligence, possibly a salafite or jihadist with takfiri kharijite tendencies, or maybe you’ll go for a discourse reflective of contemporary politics – a radical extremist of the fundamentalist type. But whatever you say, those of sincerity will see the weakness of every argument you posit, and the way in which you do.

    However, a conceited retort from you is not what I seek, but I desire, in all sincerity, that Allah guide you to rectification and grants you Paradise. So take this piece of writing not entirely as a refutation of the contemptible things you claim, but also as judicious counsel from one Muslim to another. “I only desire (your) betterment to the best of my power; and my success (in my task) can only come from Allah. In Him I trust, and unto Him I look.”

    In discussing your comments, I wish to first address the issue of shaikh al-Sadlan and his fatwa. It is regrettable that in order to deal with an issue here in the British Isles, British Muslims felt the need to take their grievances to the door of Saudi Arabian scholarship. Saying this, I doubt neither shaikh al-Sadlan’s scholarship nor his scholarly authority, but I concur to some extent that, as you claim, many Saudi Arabian scholars prove to be oblivious to the nature of discussions taking place in the West. Subsequent to having made statements that refer to the ‘cluelessness’ of foreign scholars, I don’t quite understand your need to then seek the retraction of his fatwa, especially when you could have simply disregarded what he had stated. Yet you chased him down endeavouring to explain your stance and win him over to acceptance – for someone who doesn’t respect al-Sadlan’s authority this seems quite bizarre and unnecessary. But then, you’d probably intend to carry around his retraction like a badge and use it against your most ardent salafite opposition. But with finding al-Sadlan rather uncompromising, your sudden urge of ‘humility’ kicked in and you retreated most gracefully. It is not only clear from this event and others you will clutch at absolutely anything in order to buttress your exceptionally frail views, but that your reasoning is extremely appalling, and frankly, from someone of your academic grounding one would expect much better.

    That brings us to your pitiable attempts to establish Darwinism as an idea deeply embedded in classical Islamic scholarship. Not only are the vast majority of scholars you quote (here and elsewhere) of no major importance, but the way in which you read into their statements is abysmal and a clear indication of an individual quite oblivious to the rules of reasoning and interpretation. Although I am an aspiring scientist, science need not be discussed – the sources which you use not only fail to draw a correlation to the subject at hand, but you’ve also gone out of your way to make the sources seem as if they do. Let’s take the examples you’ve presented:

    1. Ibn Miskawayh (932-1030 or 4th century AH)
    Firstly, you fall short of quoting directly from Ibn Miskawayh, and your Wikipedia-based research (literally) had you present Muhammad Hamidullah’s description of the evolutionary ideas found in Ibn Miskawayh’s al-Fawz al-Asghar. Secondly, your supreme ignorance is indicated in the fact that you posit that Ibn Miskawayh believes one entity came from the other, yet, Ibn Miskawayh merely describes the scala naturae – the (Christian) theological hierarchical structure of all life. This is clearly seen from Hamidullah’s statement, ‘The date-palm is therefore considered the highest among the trees and resembles the lowest among animals. Then is born the lowest of animals.’ There are two key words in these sentences –‘resembles’ and ‘then’. He posits how the date-palm metaphorically resembles animals in that cutting off the head results in death, but this, however, is only one point of resemblance – there are also many points of differences between them. He then says, ‘Then is born…’ the word ‘then’ clearly indicates that one does not come from the other, but that Ibn Miskawayh will now start with describing the next category: the lowest form of animal. Your awful system of reasoning would allow us to conclude that because humans and chairs both share legs, that man somehow came from chairs!
    Hamidullah then clearly states that (unnamed) Muslim thinkers (and not Ibn Miskawayh) state that ape then evolved into a lower kind of a barbarian man and so on. However, we know from Islamic orthodox theology that the description of man’s evolution to prophethood, and then an angel, and then God Himself constitutes nothing short of disbelief. Man does not evolve into a prophet, and such a consideration is foolish – even Judeo- Christian theology seems to be sounder than your new supposed doctrine! To posit that an angel evolves into God which is the meaning of ‘everything begins from Him and everything returns to Him’ is clear pantheism (hulool) and rebuked by every orthodox scholar of Islam as I’m sure you are well aware of.

    2. Ibn Khaldun (d. 1408 or 8th century AH) posits the same ideas as Ibn Miskawayh in describing the scala naturae. Likewise, Ibn Khaldun’s discussion actually refers to the importance of prophecy and the position of Prophets in relation to all other creation. Your supposition that man may evolve into a prophet is somewhat of a secular analysis of prophethood where the notion of divine appointment is completed disregarded in favour of natural selection!

    But let’s be frank, Ibn Khaldun seems to be a favourite of yours when it comes to misconstruing his words to demote the shari’a and promote secularism, for it wasn’t too long ago that you were attempting, by means of Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddimah, to demote the notion of khilafah and shari’a, and advocate secularism. Back then you put forward oxymoronic concepts such as ‘Islamic secularism’ misusing the hadith of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): ‘You are more knowledgeable in you worldly affairs’. Yet those who aim to mislead nearly always do so by failing to mention the context in which an author makes a statement. We find that Ibn Khaldun a) quoted the hadith while discussing Prophetic medicine, and b) also went on in the book to say that ‘the appointment of the Imam (leader) is obligatory, its obligation known in the shar’ by the consensus of the Companions and their followers (tabi’een)…’ – so much for you Ibn Khaldunic revolution.

    3. To even quote Rumi (let alone in this discussion) is comical, and from the poetry you provide two things are clear. Firstly, that Rumi is speaking metaphorically, and secondly, he is basically saying that which Ibn Khaldun and Ibn Miskawayh did.

    4. You say Allamah Muhammad Iqbal had no problems with Darwinism because he quotes the above lines by Rumi. I am astounded that you even quote Iqbal, as if he is an authority on science and theology – who cares what Iqbal thinks? It is evidently clear that you have no idea what constitutes a relevant opinion, and again, it was not too long ago that you quoted Sir Syed Ahmed Khan to argue that the hijab is in reality a shawl over the necks of women, essentially a dupatta. Your heretical ideas seem to be increasingly Pak-centric – I’d like to take this opportunity to remind you that you are indeed in Britain, and not Pakistan. (It is also quite ironic given that you criticise others for relying on Saudi Arabian scholars.)

    5. Prof. Nidhal Guessoum being a practising Muslim means nothing in an academic debate that revolves around science and theology, and his being a leading astronomer also means nothing; the man isn’t even examining his own field, and in this case, a biologist would perhaps have been more apt. Do you assume that merely because a man is a Muslim he unexpectedly arrives at Islamic scholarship of the highest calibre?!
    But then, you manage to blur the lines quite a bit, for in your attempt to Islamicise your study (of science) in western academic institutions you refer to them as ijazahs, yet a university certificate is not quite the same and is, in essence, simply a certificate stating that that you have passed the examinations set by the university’s examining board. Furthermore, I believe your so called ijazahs are in the realm of physics, and not biology, and so, they are meaningless to the discussion taking place. No sensible scholar with ijazahs in Qur’anic recitation would bring them to a discussion on fiqh, although the qira’at may have some legal implications that add to juristic discussions.

    Please note that it is not my intention to discuss the scientific aspects of the theory of evolution but merely to show your pitiable reasoning that demonstrates not an iota of Islamic scholarship. I believe that this is due to your Ahl-e-hadith background and the literalism it promotes, things are bound to be misunderstood in the absence of usul al-fiqh – and it is clear that have never touched a book on the subject.

    Let us now discuss the “Save Masjid Tawhid” petition where I shall endeavour to broach the topic in the order that you have.

    Your first point discusses two points, the first being the anonymity of the petitioners which I plan to address at the end of this message, and a poorly reasoned argument that because you’ve managed to find TWO people (you and your father) who disagree with the petition, the community of Masjid Tawhid cannot in reality be considered a ‘community’. Such reasoning seriously makes me speechless! Does the notion of a community vanish because of two opponents?! Again, going back to the point of usul al-fiqh, ijma (consensus) is not negated by a few shadh (irregular) opinions, and likewise, a community is not negated because two people refuse to be on board. What makes you point even more absurd is that in this case, you and your father are not to be considered part of the community which opposes you, for if you were, you’d essentially be opposing yourself!

    Probably the biggest contradiction is thae fact that you ardently promote democracy only then to prove that both you and your father have despotic and authoritarian tendencies – very Pakistani indeed!

    Your second point is absurd as the first and you actually affirm what you are negating! The petitioners claim that you call on Muslims to believe that Adam evolved from apes rather than being created with God’s own Two Hands as the Qur’an describes. You refuse this charge but then affirm that you believe Adam was the consequence of evolution (and human evolution is based on coming from primates)! It is also clear from your retort that you very mindlessly misread the petitioners’ statement – they didn’t state your opinion to be one of negating Allah as overall Creator, they said you refuse to accept the literal reference of God creating Adam with His Two Hands.

    You ask, ‘What do they say about Allah creating cattle with His Own Hands (Ya Sin 36:71)’, well, if they espouse orthodoxy they’ll accept it without attempting to explain the reality of God’s hands. Was that not the way of the earliest generations?

    As for your statement, ‘…building the heavens with Hands, meaning power and skill (51:47)?’ well, you have finally manifested your Mu’tazilite tendencies. It is unmistakable that you have departed from orthodoxy and taken to interpreting the essence of God where His Hands, in your dismal estimation, means power and skill. Yet, unbeknownst to your self- perceived scholastic brilliance, the word ‘ayd’ as it is in Arabic does not, in actuality, even mean hand, but just power. A preliminary search of the word ayd in the exegesis of al-Alusi, Ibn Kathir, al-Tabari, Muhammad Amin al-Shinqiti et al would promptly clarify this unawareness, yet, you disregard Islamic scholarship to make such a naive error when discussing issues pertaining to the Most High!
    In order to simply it for you and others, it is held by many that ayd is plural of yadd (hand) but in actuality the plural of yadd (hand) is really aydii. The word al-ayd (that you have used) is singular, and its plural is al-aad (الأيد والآد) which, in the language of the Arabs, only means power and has nothing to do with a hand.

    As for your statement concerning Muslims rejecting science, it is clear that you have made the observations of men (which science is) authoritative over the divine scripture, for when you deem there to be incongruity between the two, you alter the meanings of the message of God to fall in line with scientific theory. Your statements about the use of internet and mobile phones are unintelligent to say the least as no one negates everything man innovates, only matters pertaining to religion.
    In your third point you remonstrate at the taunts of you adversaries who have sought to ‘drive a wedge between father and son’, ‘a most heinous moral crime’ you say. And how the thespians would, in all embellishment, despair at this most odious undertaking by your foes – alas! The vile wretchedness of your antagonists who have tasked themselves with none other but to divide father and son…Osama, get a grip.

    In calling for your father to remove you as imam at the mosque is merely to request your father to make an administrative reshuffle in light of your heretical consideration. Your father has been asked neither to disown you nor mistreat you, and in fact, the only way that there may be antagonism (if you were removed) would be if you yourself dissented making a spectacle of the affair whilst disassociating yourself from your father in the process. The only reason the petitioners have called for your removal from the office of imam is because an imam’s role is much more than to lead the prayers, indeed, he is a beacon of Islam and the standard bearer for the Muslims. He is appointed as a guide for the faithful, representing them before God five times a day and exhorting them to righteousness from the pulpit. You are not worthy of such a position (and neither am I for that matter) given your clear opposition to key doctrinal points. Furthermore, it seems that your intention is to make Islam comfortable for its ‘host nation’ and so, you will misread and misinterpret whatever source you can to that end.

    I’m not sure if you realise, but respect for you has extremely declined, to the extent that many, if not most, have come to the conclusion that you are engaged in heresy and disbelief. You will, of course, claim that I speak namelessly, yet the abjadiyyah mailing list which you are a member of counts as a starting point. Nearly all members rebuke you and your anomalous ideas, with Yasir Qadhi, Abu ‘Abdissalam et al having refuted and challenged you to a public debate many a time. Various other mailing lists have featured your views; with calls for you removal and excommunication from the sunni community seeming to now grow louder into a symphony of harmonies. Murtaza Khan debated you on the issue of music (although the debate itself was pointless), and his supporters booed you out of mere disgust. The Ahl-e-Hadith community, at least those who know of your heresy, writhe in repugnance and antipathy to your stances. Scholars from oversees have began to issue edicts against you, and as stated before, even the sufi community reject you and any claim to Sufism you make. Yet with all this, you flaunt yourself in the media with nothing but contempt for the orthodox community, parading your ideas as the only vehicle for progressive change. You say different things to different people all the while promoting your own scholarship which is steeped in nothingness to advance your mission: create an Islam that is ever so more palatable for disbelievers. I agree that Islam is yet to be realised in the UK in its fullest form, and Muslims are yet to take on a progressive persona, but appeasement, and a commitment to anything that leads to it, can never be the way forward since Allah informs us,
    ‘So you see those in whose hearts is disease hastening into association with them, saying, “We are afraid a misfortune may strike us.” But perhaps Allah will bring conquest or a decision from Him, and they will become, over what they have been concealing within themselves, regretful. And those who believe will say, “Are these the ones who swore by Allah their strongest oaths that indeed they were with you?” Their deeds have become worthless, and they have become losers. O you who have believed, whoever of you should revert from his religion – Allah will bring forth [in place of them] a people He will love and who will love Him [who are] humble toward the believers, powerful against the disbelievers; they strive in the cause of Allah and do not fear the blame of a critic. That is the favour of Allah; He bestows it upon whom He wills. And Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing.’[5:54]

    You often attempt to enforce your interpretations of the divine scripture by stating that you are from the ahl al-Qur’an, an assertion you attempt to prove by stating your ability to recite in Warsh! For your information, reciting in Warsh does not make one an exegete. Furthermore, you inability to understand the text of the Qur’an in its most basic meaning is manifest, and just as many heretics over a millennia have done, you constantly refer to metaphorical meanings although the text presents you with no impetus to do so. Thus Allah says about such deviants,
    ‘It is He who has sent down to you the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise – they are the foundation of the Book – and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. And those firm in knowledge say, “We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord.” And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.’ [3:7]

    Osama, how many friends, colleagues, and even students of yours have attempted to discuss your views in a civilised way? How many people have constantly given you the benefit of the doubt? Yet when you are cornered in your arguments and your seemingly intellectual premises stand to be annihilated you resort to name calling, defaming sincere advisors and hurling insults at those who address you.

    And why is evolution or any of the other inane ideas you come up with of any importance to one’s religion? Will a man be questioned in judgement as to his views on evolution? Does it have any creedal significance? Will it be the means of progression for the Muslim community? The answer to all of these questions is clearly a negative one, yet you constantly take up your much-loved spot in the media disparaging Muslims for their rejection of evolution and so-called scientific interest. But how many Muslims are doctors, surgeons, graduates from various scientific backgrounds – why do you make such lazy assumptions?

    It is a fact that all of the issues you discuss and fervently promulgate will do nothing for Islam and its adherents. Your lines of argument clearly source from your inferiority complex in the face of the disbelievers, but you must remember that although Muslims seem to be broken (due to their iniquity), Islam has not, and it is only through Islam that superiority is maintained. Allah says,
    ‘Allah has promised those who believe among you and undertake righteous deeds that He will surely grant them succession [to authority] upon the earth just as He granted it to those before them and that He will surely establish for them [therein] their religion which He has preferred for them and that He will surely substitute for them, after their fear, security, [for] they worship Me, not associating anything with Me. But whoever disbelieves after that – then those are the defiantly disobedient.’

    Although open criticism is generally disliked – ‘whisper to their innerselves’, when an individual promulgates unorthodox and irregular views, espousing them openly, he must also be confronted openly so that the whole community be aware of what has afflicted them. By this I do not mean that that we as British Muslims should not attempt to radically address problems amongst us and seek to bring about radical change (to those problems) even if it be at the hest of criticisms voiced, but if you seek to be understood and accepted by the Muslim community, then you must display a level of scholarship and reasoning that has gone a miss in all of your arguments along with addressing topics that are actual pertinence.

    As for your father, then we note that Allah has informed us of the fitnah that our wealth and children are, and as is true to revelation, you have proved to be such for your father. Your father is undoubtedly well known and has accomplished much, yet this does not place him beyond reproach. His stance towards you has cost him much of the respect of his community (and yes I know that he has various Pakistani families that back him, but allegiance here is purely cultural and nationalistic). Your father’s harsh treatment of your detractors has only made clear to the community the family- run business that Masjid Tawhid and sharia council have become. And this is why many critics reply to you anonymously – why should they be denied the ability to do good works by your father over some retort to you?

    If you require a civilised discussion, why have you refused to engage Yasir Qadhi and many others who have openly called you to publically engage scholars and thinkers with your views? But you’d rather play the victim and paint all others as ignorant ‘clerics’ out to subvert your most ‘rational’ statements!

    As for goats butting mountains, you seriously need to grow up. Research your ideas properly as it is clear you have over looked TOO many things, and learn how to reason logically. When, and if, you try to answer this, make it not about my persona, but about the retort made, but that may be too much sincerity to ask of you.

    All Praise be to Allah, and may he cleanse us of your heterodoxy.

  20. mx22 Says:

    Dear Br Usama, Assalamu alaikum,

    I am sorry I have to be pseudonymous following your criticisms of the practice but unfortunately for personal reasons I am compelled to keep it as such. I hope you will respect my choice in this and then again being as smart as you are I am sure you will eventually be able to point me out in the annals of your own memory. The first point I want to raise is in respect of your father because this is obviously the most painful aspect for you in that you believe people are striving to drive a wedge between you and your father. Therefore I think first and foremost you need to deal with the question as to “why are you unable to convince your father on the positions you have taken in regard to Darwinism”? Is it a question of communication? I think not because I know you are able to communicate with him fluently in at least three languages. This then leaves us with two rather awkward explanations. First, your father is intellectually incapable of comprehending your arguments but continues to give you the benefit of the doubt or second he has comprehended your arguments but refuses stubbornly to accept the truth.

    I would have accepted either of these explanations if your father was what you use to describe as a “blind-follower” of tradition (madhabi) rather than evidence when it comes to fiqh. However, your father’s approach is well known to be entirely antithetical to such a charge. When a person’s lifelong track record is in applying intellectual rigger, as opposed to blindly following tradition, to determine the intent of the Creator in acts of worship, I find it hard to believe he would reject your evidence in favour of Darwinism were it to be placed before in sufficient quantity. You spend, as you say, more time with him, than any other and yet you fail to convince him. This suggests failure not in the intellect of your father nor any attitude of stubbornness on his part but of your own and herein lies the crux of your conundrum.

    Fathers, as you know, owing to the intense love Allah has placed in their hearts for their sons and especially their first son, would do anything to bring happiness to their child and so your father is doing the same but the fact that he continues to disagree with you tells of rift drawing the two of you apart without the help of anyone else. This has come about solely through actions of our own and perhaps there is no greater wedge than that which comes from the son himself. I know you did not intend it to be so but here we are.

    Perhaps you need to give your mind a rest from scripting all your thoughts in the pursuit of pleasing the pack mental auditorium of audiences you have acquired in recent times and make some space and time for your father and the many many Muslims who think you are trying a bit too hard to be soft and palatable.

    Insha Allah I will deal with the finer issues on Darwinism in particular that you have raised in due course but for now I think the issue of your father is paramount. Please share your thought with me on this.

    Wassalam

  21. mx22 Says:

    Dear Usama

    Assalamu alaikum

    Having read your most recent post (Question to…) I thought I should clarify for your benefit that I am not Abu Abdillah and I have absolute nothing to do with the fatwa nor the petition.

    I am just a “old friend” who was hoping to have this discussion with you for quite some time and I only decided to engage now because the issue has become a hot topic of discussion among Muslims in the UK. I have chosen to remain pseudonymous because I thought you would publish my comments on your blog and I did not want people to know who I was.

    Insha Allah you will understand my rationale later. In the mean time I think the requests on your facebook page for a clear answer in regard to your position on Adam’s (a.s.) predecessor would be quite helpful to everyone. People are keen to know if you think He evolved from other life forms or not.

    BTW I have prayed behind you twice at MT within the last year so I am certainly not one of the petitioners.

    Wassalam

  22. Abdul Lateef Says:

    May I remind you that this fitnah is of your own making:

    http://www.aqidah.com/creed/articles/kgmbv-usamah-hasan-suhaib-hasan-darwinism-and-the-creation-of-man—part-2.cfm

  23. Aboul Hassan Says:

    I should like to ask you one simple question please: do you believe that Adam (alayhisalam) had parents?

  24. أبو من؟ Says:

    Assalaamu ‘alaikum

    Just a quick comment, cause I don’t have time to comment on everything that needs to be commented on here. BUT…I’d just like to point out that the way that you’ve translated the aayah from al-Dhaariyaat and yaaseen is not correct.
    In both of them translation of the word أيدي or أيدٍ as “hands” is incorrect, so much so, that you’ll find that the word أيد is written differently to point towards the meaning, this you should know.
    What I’m pointing out though is that those two aayahs are not to be equated to the aayah is surah saad where Allah says: خلقت بيديّ where it is clear that Allah did so with His own two hands. Ibn Taymiyyah touched on this in al-‘aqeedah at-tadmuriyyah. Refer to any good explanation and I’m sure that you’ll find that point expanded on. So why confuse the reader into equating those two to this one.

    Secondly, how do you explain the hadeeth:
    عَنْ أَنَسٍ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ -صلى الله عليه وسلم- قَالَ « لَمَّا صَوَّرَ اللَّهُ آدَمَ فِى الْجَنَّةِ تَرَكَهُ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ يَتْرُكَهُ فَجَعَلَ إِبْلِيسُ يُطِيفُ بِهِ يَنْظُرُ مَا هُوَ فَلَمَّا رَآهُ أَجْوَفَ عَرَفَ أَنَّهُ خُلِقَ خَلْقًا لاَ يَتَمَالَكُ »
    that’s in saheeh Muslim, and other similar ahaadeeth?

    Thirdly,
    If you agree that Evolution is a theory that still isn’t complete and that can possibly be disrpoven, why do you feel the need to go through all of this trouble to re-interpret the texts of The Qur’an and Sunnah to conform to the theory?

  25. Mushafq Sultan Says:

    Interesting read. Jazakallahu khair
    🙂

  26. Anonymous Says:

    Britain 2011…

    Most people are gonna be aware of Usama Hasan’s theories on evolution by now, but possibly less aware of the outrage still continuing surrounding his views and Masjid & Madrasah al-Tawhid. First of all Usama Hasan is from Britain, a supporter of women…

  27. Aboul Hassan Says:

    Aqidah.com has utterly dismantled Usamah’s hybrid theory which, by the way, is inconsistent both with Islam and the Theory of Evolution as proposed by the so-called scientists.

  28. umm bashira Says:

    I think you are confused about Darwinism, I will not praying behind you. May Allah guide you

  29. Muslim Inquisition Today: the plight of Usama Hasan » Savoir ou se faire avoir Says:

    […] even the hatred. But in Dr. Hasan’s case, things went much worse. First he was hit by a fatwa. As documented by Usama Hasan, “Sheikh Salih al-Sadlan of Riyadh gave a fatwa on not praying behind anyone who accepts […]

  30. Simon Gibson Says:

    Do you have a transcript of your speech on Islam and Evolution? If so I would very much like to post it on my website so that people can read what was actually said rather than the soundbites.

  31. shakir Says:

    How can we differ on theories that have not been scientifically proven, just someone’s imagination becoming popular. Alhamdulillah there is no contradiction between Islam and scientific fact, Allah the Most High being the legislator of Islam and the Creator, scientific theories should not be confused with scientific realities.

  32. abu bananas Says:

    i inform the proud muslim world that those whosoever does not believe the earth to be created in 6 days and the moon was split in half is sentenced to death!

  33. youtube video download Says:

    youtube video download…

    […]A Response to Sheikh Salih al-Sadlan and the So-Called “Save Masjid Tawhid” Petition « UNITY[…]…

  34. onlineradio Says:

    onlineradio…

    […]A Response to Sheikh Salih al-Sadlan and the So-Called “Save Masjid Tawhid” Petition « UNITY[…]…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: