How to read the phenomenon of atheism Sheikh Is Islam loses its place in the hearts of his children?

Tap to listen

Since the Arab Spring, the word "atheism" has been on the hearts of Arab youth with an unprecedented intensity, which raises questions about faith and atheism, and explored whether atheism is a social phenomenon or whether social media amplified the matter. Atheistic programs on social media platforms are more than twenty programs, and are watched by more than 200 million young Arabs. What is the relationship between faith and empirical science, and is there a link between science and religion ?! Then what is the limit between the mind and the illusion, and where does the mind stand ?! What is the role of the psychological dimension in the cause of faith and atheism ?!

All these questions were posed in this lengthy and in-depth dialogue. Mohammed Al-Awadhi, director of the Rawasikh Center for Studies and Publishing, which deals with the issue of atheism among young people; is a professor of Islamic faith at Kuwait University. He has headed a number of positions in Islamic institutions around the world and has a prolific production of Arabic television programs.

First, do you think that atheism is a real youth phenomenon, or is it just a transient event that coincides with the decline of the role of the clergy in society ?!

This is a fundamental question, and perhaps the correct and convenient hierarchy of dialogue on this subject should be the beginning of this question in order to build on it beyond. To be systematic in judging the reality of atheism "is it a phenomenon, indicators or individual cases?", We must first define the phenomenon. Among the definitions that I accept that the problem becomes apparent if: "repeated occurrence, and widened the patch, and diversified segments, and converged time, and aggravated the size, and eluded the stereotypes, and proceeded from the thought fueled by not reactions" [a].

In order to determine that we are facing a problem or a phenomenon, we need questionnaire and observational studies, especially in conservative eastern societies where many refrain from disclosing what they harbor, which contradict the prevailing values ​​of their societies such as atheism. In my view, the general public, including many intellectuals, relies on three sources to describe developments:

1- Personal life impressions.

2 - TV drama and means of communication.

3. Competent institutions.

Unfortunately, we do not have any real signs that would enable us to imagine "Is atheism a real phenomenon or merely individual cases?" [B].

Dr. Mohammed Al-Awadi Introduction to Atheism

I also like to emphasize, through my vision of events, that atheism in its “classical” meaning comes to mind in the sense of “denying the existence of a creator and saying the eternity of matter” is not a youth phenomenon, albeit with a loud voice through the communication platforms and media amplifications that overlook us; On the screens of several Arab channels to the point of recruiting prominent figures from cultural elites such as the poet and modern critic Adonis and turn it into a populist broker of atheism. There is no doubt that these media bands make an uproar for an “appearance of atheism” but it is characterized by instantaneous publicity, and therefore distinguish between appearance and “phenomenon” in the idiomatic sense circulated by academics.

With suspicions about the origins of religion and its constituencies spreading in low ages, it is considered a youth phenomenon in young ages, as I have seen through my discussions and discussions with young people.I am keen to open up to them and to simplify with them and the fall of psychological and customary barriers between me and them.I have noticed the proliferation of doubtful questions and their diversity. This is also confirmed by our brothers in the specialized intellectual centers to monitor and track the new intellectual and ideological concessions and study them.

Meedan : Do you see that the "elders of the Sultan" contributed to the aversion to religion and the trend towards atheism?

Take it as a life rule, any symbol that raises a beautiful slogan and cracks the commitment of the great principles and urges the public to adhere to it and wants to create ethics and then retracts his heels and contradict his theories in practice. They have the ability to separate model and application between example and reality.

This is why you find that millions entered Islam and believed in it through the treatment of Muslims with them well, they recognized the religion of religious behavior as happened in the sweep of Islam to East Asia without wars. Likewise, the deviation of religious symbols from Islam in their financial transactions or their social and moral relations repels worshipers from religion and religiosity. Therefore, God Almighty, by the nature of the human soul, has not neglected the negative impact of this behavior, “emotional shock”. For those who disbelieve . "

I am one of the people testify that the elders of religion and its preachers and scholars and muftah provisions who became sedition not only to those who disbelieve, but even to those who believe! Perhaps the ugliest types of alienation of religion when the sheikhs become bridges to tyrants to gain their lusts, or the sheikhs donate to make tyrants from their fatwa poles mill mill people and drown the land with the blood of innocent people and fill the prisons of society.

Notice with me the great prophetic educational alert: "The Mnfrn of you," this is the speech of the Holy Prophet - peace be upon him - to some of his followers, who over-worship in the place of the generation of the companions. This is what Umar ibn al-Khattab fully understood when he said: "Do not hate God to His servants." That is, do not make people - with your wrong behavior and unfair understanding of the truth - hate their Lord. God, if prolonged prayer and exaggeration in worship alienate the companions of the Prophet of religion, what may be the degree of alienation from the religion that will be committed by the sheikhs of sultans in our days for the bewildered generations ?!

I was shocked in my recent Ramadan tour inside and outside Kuwait that the most frequently asked questions were about the fluctuations of the prominent sheikhs in their attitudes from the opposite to the other in response to the transformation of politics and politicians, which reminded me of the description of historian Will Durant in the chapter of “The Morals of the Clergy” in his Great Book ”. The story of civilization "about the morals of the church 's aversion to religion in Italy as being the lowest of the military. Perhaps today we are going through the same historic turning point for Europe in the Middle Ages and beyond in the corruption of the Christian clergy and their alliance with the feudal lords against the poor peasants, and with the kings against the oppressed peoples, causing the infidelity of the people with their clergy, their church and the Lord they call for.

Medan : What is your treatment ?!

Treatment is centered on the enlightenment of people and young people in particular the need to differentiate between the "sanctification" of religious scholars, which is a rejected scourge, and the deep "respect" for them and conditional on their commitment to the principles, not personalities, and that the principles above the people and be the balance in judging them and not vice versa. He also warned that the subject entered the circle of strategy in the war on religion through the distortion of religious people, and burn models, the media sheds light on the scholars of the sultans and displays their fawning and dancing to the impact of their contradictions, magnifying the ugly image of some of the leaders of the call and boys and guidance who chose to fall.

Our role is in highlighting the bright and honorable image of hundreds of preachers, scholars and legitimate academics who are honest and forbidden to speak, and dozens of imprisoned right-wingers, and others who have proven their status, or at least did not respond to falsehood, so their movement was narrowed in life and they lost many interests. Huda beacons infer them confused youth and shocked masses to the safety of the road and set them ideals steadfastness on the right, and thus be integrated and balanced image to ratify and infect people's judgments on the world of people and ideas.

Meydan : There are analyzes concerning the aversion to religion of young people, and that it was a reaction to the Islamic movements in general, and the decline of their place in society, do you agree ?!

Yes, the phenomenon is a transient event that coincides with the decline of the position of preachers and legitimate people, but I think that it is deeper than this framing and specific, and I also believe that human phenomena are multiple factors that shape and vary the degree of impact on individuals, groups and societies to their complex nature. That is why I do not think that atheism or the comparative course of rebellion against religion is a transient event, or just a reaction to the Islamists for a number of reasons, and I will address only a major cause, which also negates the character of spontaneity in the emergence of the phenomenon, which is a strategic reason coinciding with the development of political stages. After the events of September 11 and then the Arab Spring and then accelerated the passage and imposition of the deal of the century and imposed.

This reason is the strategic view adopted by Western institutions that have declared their goals to distort Islam (this is a form of atheism) and broadcast it in communities and youth circles. One of the famous reports and evidence of this goal is the study of the RAND Foundation entitled "Civil Democratic Islam: Allies". Resources and strategies, "they seek a new Islam that is tailored to the stated hegemony plans.

For example, the study adopted the theses of Muhammad Shahrour and supported its marketing and the like. It is celebrated at the highest political leadership, a foundation for Qur'anic studies is established, millions of budgets are allocated, tens of luxury books are printed, Arab satellite channels are opened in Ramadan and non-Ramadan to practice religious distortion on screens, hosted in Arab activities in the West. European channels in Adha Arabic-speaking to promote Islam that Muslims do not know the era of prophecy to this day.

Meedan : Do you think that there are Arab institutions that support this trend of the new Islam and will push it ?!

Why do we go away ?! Just quietly consider what happened in Amman, Jordan, concerning the activities of "Believers Without Borders", and the investigation revealed by the Jordanian police that a play was organized by the Secretary General of the organization after the Jordanian authorities banned their cultural conference charged with "innovative" issues to distort Islam. In short, adversaries lurking from the outside or who are inside us know that faith and faith are based on certainty, and that the right based on certainty is not ceded by its owners, and therefore its source (ie, faith itself) must be demolished by direct atheism, or dissolved by distortion through soft and subtle atheism. So that the masses do not have faith or certainty, and therefore there is no stability on the truth.

Such crowds, when they lose reliance on an authentic center, embark on a policy of dumping into the quagmire of value relativism and substituting a culture of interests in place of all principles; In this context, we must understand all these reasons, and also understand the reason for the besieging, exile and recession of what you have called in your question of faithful preachers who reject Western hegemony and domination of our religion and values ​​and take away our rights and devote our dependence on them.

Medan : Do you see that the psychological dimension has a role in the question of atheism, and how?

Certainly yes, there is a great role for the psychological dimension in the phenomenon of atheism, and let us pave the way to detail the answer by identifying one of the most important differences between the characteristics of the human phenomenon such as atheism - which is the subject of our dialogue - and the physical and natural phenomenon such as boiling water at 100 degrees in normal circumstances. The difference between the two phenomena is that the natural phenomena within them tell about their phenomena and a high degree of conformity to our knowledge of the precise laws governing them, and thus facilitate sensory and mental observation in their perception.

Human phenomena do not require the conformity between their appearance and their informant, because of the "complex" human nature that allows the influence of emotions, prejudices, greed and conscience in the apparent divergence of subconsciousness and the loss of precise normality in proving their congruence. And deny them in the rule of the impossible. A person is a good being, and representation may make a person proclaim the antithesis of what is implied in him, so the term "hypocrisy" has been found. Hence, I do not exaggerate if I say, according to my personal experience and my general impressions, that the majority of those fleeing from faith to atheism and rebels against religion were psychologically motivated and their psychological attitudes may develop into adopting philosophical tendencies to rationalize their emotional atheism.

This is what we read - in the past - in the front pages of the confessions of former atheist doctor Mustafa Mahmoud in his book "My journey from doubt to certainty," and read - if you want - the experience of writer Zaki Mubarak, who was finishing some of the prefaces of his books by signing under his name as "atheist atheist allegedly ". He admitted a rare moral courage for his emotional, psychological and personal position on the day that he criticized himself in an open session on the podium of the Egyptian University in 1937, declaring his submission to the passions in his attitude towards Ghazali and the inherited ethics of the ancients he wrote in his doctoral degree in literature entitled "Ethics at Ghazali" And see the story in his article entitled "I apologize, Ghazali" in the letter of the letter 1941, and also in his book "Islamic Sufism", and the book "literary battles between Zaki Mubarak and his contemporaries," under the title "Zaki Mubarak in a battle with himself."

I conclude with a third example of the American psychic atheism of Paul Vetter, the author of the exciting book "The Psychology of Atheism: Iman is a Daddy," translated by the Center for Evidence. Hume, Russell, Hobbes, Voltaire, Freud, Feuerbach, Hitler, Sartre, Simon de Beauvoir, etc., held a chapter titled "Superficial Atheism: My Personal Story" in which he described his experience with belief in extreme comfort and explicitly said: "The fundamental factors that made me an atheist did not Be intellectual, but social and psychological. "

He wrote in Arabic Amr Sharif a wide book on the subject "atheism is a psychological problem", but objectivity requires the assertion of the multiple causes of atheism and the diversity of motives and components, and atheism multiple stripes, and can not reduce atheism in a certain aspect, although it has an effective and strong impact, such as psychological dimension, and this calls us It is not always mental arguments and logical proofs that are the final say of persuasion, but discovering the inherent dimensions and identifying personal experiences and trying to reach the bottom of the soul brings us closer to understanding intellectual problems and then selecting The most appropriate evidence in their discussions.

Do you think that the psychological dimension refers to an inherent need in human being?

Certainly, yes, this is why some thinkers described the human being as a distinct metaphysical being "aspiring to the sky", which makes him become "metaphysical dizzy," as Ali Izetbegovic expresses in the first chapter of his book "Islam between East and West", because it keeps on the concern of seeking satisfactory answers The questions of the existential beginnings, and then make sure the difference between him and other neighborhoods in what is not only in the degree as decided by Darwinism.

Perhaps what seems to us of the reverence of a group of atheism of their atheistic ideology and their desperation to infer them with metaphysical answers and logic of logic is proof of their urgent psychological need. This need for metaphysics may explain the rituals of oriental spiritual secularism in Western secular materialistic societies and the metaphysical alternatives to the Abrahamic religions, which they enveloped with pseudo-science, such as energy and other sciences.

Even believing in flying dishes and resorting to clairvoyants and palm readers among aristocratic families plunged in pleasures and centered around the body and glutton in satisfying the stomach and vulva; all this is one form of compensation for the lost spiritual spirituality of another spirit but without the burdens of legitimate costs of halal and haram to conform to the practical secularism they live Dr. Abdel-Wahab El-Messiri has a detailed analysis of this phenomenon, which he chose as the title "The Hidden God" as in his book "Towards Humanity Modernity", in which it is rarely useful in other books. I conclude that the most important atheistic objection is the problem of evil, not the eternity of the universe or Darwinism or any other scientific question, which confirms the authority of the psychological aspect of the phenomenon of atheism!

Maidan : There are those who believe that advocates of "resistance to atheism" often discuss atheists with an outward view, claiming the religious republic and the absolute right, which wants to remove these atheists from misguidance, while they - preachers - do not really seek to understand atheists and discuss with them impartially, which Makes the discussion in this regard sterile, based on rigid perceptions will not change any discussion, what do you think?

Advocates of "resistance to atheism" cannot be categorized as a single fabric in the depth of their culture, their emotional maturity, their methodology of thinking, and finally their view of atheism and their literature in their argument. Inequality and diversity exist as they do with other trends, including non-religious.

But on the other hand, I believe that all believers share the doctrine of "absolute right" in the origins of belief, and I do not see this as a lack of conscience or flawed knowledge, especially if the believer believes that he established his certainty (absolute right) on the first class of evidence he called The argument on the "proof" argument, and the human being before the definitive proof is not free to be convinced of the right or not convinced, because the facts impose itself on the recipients, otherwise it would be between two options, one of the worst of the other, arrogance or sophistry!

Apart from the claims of idealism among materialists, if we browse the biography and literature of many modern and non-religious atheists, we find that they revere their ingratitude to the point of having the "absolute truth" they deny to their opponents. For example, the famous philosopher Bertrand Russell said: "What experimental science cannot discover cannot be known by humans." In his footsteps, Richard Dawkins in his book "The Devil's Pastor," decides with absolute certainty: "Experimental scientists are specialists in discovering what is right about this universe." "And I have taken from Dawkins Thirdly, atheistic dogmatic atheistic mentality in the program "Ask and not be afraid" in a episode on YouTube site "Rawasikh" under the title: "Which is more convincing .. metaphysics of religion or rationality of atheism ?!", and what happened to him in his televised documentary film "expelled" "Available on YouTube, how he plunged into the valleys of superstition by answering the origin of life in the universe!

"They are simply religious fanatics," said Noam Chomsky, a professor of linguistics in his YouTube lecture on contemporary atheist poles Sam Harris, Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. Then you are not with me that the question of "possession of the absolute truth" first atheists atheists who confine cognitive certainty to experience and then jump to certainty metaphysically superstitious without proof? Sir, in all intellectual currents there are those who discuss deeply and with great objectivity, and in return there are models that vary in weakness, sometimes in the surface, and there are those who meet with his theses this and that.

"If I don't see God with my own eyes, or shake hands with him, I won't believe in him."

I might not exaggerate if I say that this statement has been overtaken by atheism themselves and can be termed "childish atheism", which we can only respond in brief words to Badei Alnorsi summarizing their cognitive problematic, such as saying: "Those who search for everything in the article Their minds in their eyes, and the eye does not see morale. "

But in detail we can consider this statement more expensive in its sensuality than the statements of atheist scholars who are the most extreme doctrines in narrowing the door of knowledge and their rejection of metaphysics, scientists accept the experience in the broad sense of knowledge, as they see the direct sense of the only way of knowledge. So even though experience is broader than sense, the experimentalists believe in what is not seen as an atom, but what can never be seen as the Big Bang, and other universes other than ours. However, the sensitivists and scholars have also fallen into the fallacy of confiscation, which is the materialistic assumption of everything, including the reason for this existence, and therefore demand that this reason be found within this physical world, even though that is the subject of dispute.

The objection of the followers of the sensory approach here can only be true if this world is obligatory; it is thus capable of explaining itself, but none of them say so, nor Bertrand Russell, who in his famous debate with philosopher Cobblestone said when asked to explain the existence of the world: "The world is an unexplained reality." The truth is that all atheism, as you prefer, is asking for an explanation of this world by searching for eternal universes to explain its existence, multiple universes to explain exact control, and a random evolution of the interpretation of systems in the world of biology.

Medan : The laws of nature explain the universe and therefore do not need a "God." Atheists say a word based on the power of science, do you see that science is becoming a justification for atheism?

We can call this conception "illusion of the greatest scientists" versus "illusion of the greatest philosophers" in their conception of time before the creation of the world. Abu Hamed al-Ghazali in the "philosophers' rush" and the illusion of the existence of time before the world by his statement that time did not exist and can not be conceived before the creation of the world, because time is simply the idea we imagine from the sequence of events in the world. If there is no world and no successive events, how can we imagine time ?! Aren't I with me that the problem of the ancient philosophers with the previous time on the universe and independent of the moving material as the problem of scientists today with the existing laws in isolation from the physical existence ?! Sir, the existence of "time" or "laws" can only be assumed within their preoccupation: the universe.

Perhaps the best witness we offer on the rushing guide Allehadeh this reported by d. Sami Ameri in his book "Proofs of the Existence of God" from the words of one of the extremists of the new atheism "Peter Atkins" where he said in his book "On being: exploring the world of the questions of the great existence": "There are no laws in the universe does not exist yet, because the laws appear to exist as The behavior that emerges with the emergence of existence, and the source of their fallacy that made them invent a term such as "God of bridging the gaps," which the primitive mind assumed for his ignorance of cosmic laws and assuming the conflict between the "scientific" and "religious" interpretations, in fact otherwise, because scientific explanation provides an answer to a question "How?", While religion provides an answer to the question "Who?" And "Why?". Scientific laws are a logical or mathematical formulation to indicate the "relationship" between the variables of the phenomenon of nature, and in the book "Illusions of Scientific Atheism" by Dr. Mohammed Al-Taie detailed the meaning of natural law and its sections and conditions.

Newton's law of general gravitation among the masses, for example, explained how these planets and objects settle in space, as well as other laws that we studied or knew, such as the law of "Hubble" for the spacing and expansion of galaxies by distance and speed, and the law "Ohm" and the law "Kepler". As for the question of religion, he says: "Who" put the law of gravity in which the objects settle in space as well as the rest of the laws? Therefore, science does not detract from the religious interpretation of natural phenomena, because its field is different from the field of scientific interpretation, there is no contradiction between the scientific and religious fields because "the side is disjointed" as it crosses the region.

I have shred d. Hani Rizk in his book "The Human Genome and Ethics" in the illustration he chose to defend what suggests that the religious answer contradicts the scientific answer or requires that one of the answers be removed and the other retained, says: "If one of us asks: Why is the sky blue?

The second answer before scientists discover Relite's scattering, its idea will now and always exist, and our scientific progress will not undermine its validity. We can therefore think that Relate is the way God chose to fulfill His desire to make the sky blue: Intelligent. "

Another intellectual flaw in this argument is that the discovery of natural laws does not substitute for the existence of a deity to combine the many powerful and well-known evidence that the team of believers, theologians, philosophers, and natural scientists infer. Even Stephen Hawking, when CNN presenter Larry King besieged him in a live interview, said, "I will simply formulate the question I think: Do you believe in God?", Hawking replied, "God may exist but science can explain the universe." Perhaps you notice the confusion in his response to the authorization of the existence of God, because even if we assume that science dispensed with the interpretation of phenomena in religious logic, because there are some superstitious interpretations in the religions misrepresented or in the wrong jurisprudence of the clergy, it is not necessary to deny the existence of God.

In addition to the above in this section fallacy in the same context is the belief of scientists that our belief in the existence of God is our belief that the universe works "temperament" of God as they put it, rain is accompanied by the satisfaction of God and hurricanes in anger, thinking that we deny the age of the universe, and this is contrary to reality Believers, despite knowing that the whole thing is in the hands of Allah Almighty and that there is nothing but wisdom, however, we believe in the universal Sunnah, the origin of this suspicion stems from the perception of ancient theologians that the universe is not Sunnah, when they discovered his Sunnah the need for a god, and the truth that this Perception is not present for Muslims and for When the masses of Christians.

Square : Let 's ask permission; Is the existence of God or not the subjects of philosophy or natural science issues?

Investigation is one of the issues of philosophy. God and metaphysics are not subject to experimentation, laboratories, microscopes, and telescopes, but scientific issues are taken as a prelude to a philosophical debate. For example, if science decides that the universe has a beginning, That this system is organized ..., and so on. Hence, we recognize Stephen Hawking's systematic stalemate when he said in the introduction to his Great Design that philosophy is dead.

That is why he and many of his colleagues say that Einstein said: "Naturalist is a miserable philosopher", and the intellectual must know that there is a problem with Western scientists who admire their scientific discoveries that require them to review their negative convictions contrary to God, why insist on their positions in the ingratitude of the Lord? ! The answer is that they have two options: either to remain atheist, or the only alternative before them is the distorted Christianity that contradicts science, logic and rationality, which leads them to respect their scientific status and sacrifice for it by faith, and may have eased their atheism to adopt the doctrine of agnosticism.

Square : This leads us to talk about the scientific miracles of the Koran as the basis for the health of religion, not to see that many of the advocates of Islam confused science and philosophical connotations carried over what is likely to approve the Koran, although it is rather left science for science space? So that the "absolute" Koran does not fall into the cycle of relative science changes?

A question at the core, and perhaps my answer to the question is strange if I told you that before I mentioned the uncle and the damage to religion through the methodology once, gain once, and emotions again, in the victory of the Koran by adopting the argument of scientific miracle, I will start my answer By revitalizing minds to review what the opposing and critical team has stumbled upon in what may be termed “popular scientific releases” such as the circular circulation of the “Relativity of Science” and “Absolute Qur'an” argument when debating religion and science.

As for the concept of science, the question: What is the terminological significance of science talking? Science as opposed to ignorance, or science as opposed to suspicion, suspicion and illusion, or science in the sense of cognitive format such as science history, or science in the sense of research in the laws of nature ?! In which science of nature do we go through? In what historical context are we talking? We must begin with a statement that the term science is broad and semantic; so we need to define precisely the "science" that we mean by our words, rather than the abbreviation, reduction and logos circulation of this bright term, what is meant by science?

Science as an attempt to understand the work of the things of nature under the authority of laws includes scientific truth, scientific theory, hypothesis, law and model, not every claim claimed by a scientist regarding the functioning of the cosmic system is a final truth or a firm statement, and therefore we must recognize the significance of this scientific case in the divisions of scientists prior to interpretation The research may require a return to the first question in epistemology, the possibility of knowledge itself; do we have to understand the reality of the world, or is it the last thing that we have to recognize the phenomena of existence as we have in mind, the Phenomenon? Baabar By Immanuel Kant, science should be a purely pragmatic practice that does not want to come to the truth of existence, but merely uses nature to serve man.

So it is not a joke in all sections of the talk about science, especially issues of scientific certainty, and perhaps in the veto of scientists to stable scientific groups and withdraw recognition of scientific research errors won the Nobel Prize proof that the talk in science and its statements is not a muddle, but it requires a long time before the launch Suit and harvest their supplies. For this reason, scientists call the term “scientifically proven” three categories:

1. What has been scientifically proven by the repeated observation of the steady results of a particular incident makes us judge the existence of a certain relationship "certainty" between the natural phenomenon and celebrated conditions such as the expansion of iron heat.

2 - What disturbed the experiences, between support and veto, and that calls for stopping assertion or weighting, and the search for a steady explanation does not invalidate.

3 - What has been scientifically proven that the theory can explain as much as possible natural phenomenon studied, and this is a door to weighting, not cutting.

Our motto in the scientific miracle should not be to submit the Qur'an to our wishes and wishes to convince people of its credibility without adhering to the correct approach.

communication Web-sites

The scientific saying, therefore, does not deserve to be described as a "scientific fact" just because it is circulated in the scientific arena, or its fame on the tongues of the symbols of the so-called simplified sciences (Popular science), which came out of the avenue of bringing science to non-specialists to kidnap non-specialists to corrupt popular culture, as it is The case of Bill Nye in America and the engineer Ali Kayyali in the Arab world. Just as it is not true to generalize the "relativity of science", our perception of a scientific fact can be considered a general perception that science evolves in revealing its details over time in a way that does not contradict it as a fact in itself. That is what matters to science, and the reality of its concept.

Accordingly, to say "science is all relative" is a claim that no one says when applied, many of our knowledge of embryology, biology and astronomy, such as the sphericality of the Earth, its orbiting itself, the orbiting of the sun, that stars are raging suns, etc. Anatomy, microscopic vision, or repeated experience.

As for the description of the Koran as "absolute", the intellectual must know that the concept of "religion", after the appointment of the true religion - which we believe here Islam - and the infallible book - which is in our doctrine of the Koran - we must look at the semantics of verses language, Is it "definitive" or "suspicion"? Similarly, in the hadeeth which we have to look at its authenticity first, and then in the amount of assertiveness, ie, is it conducive to the predominance of suspicion or benefit science (ie, certainty)? And that section of science is broad, written lengths, and understand the implications of science and its levels on the one hand, and understand the semantics of verses and sections eliminate many ambiguities in the understanding of the relationship between science and religion.

From this rooting we talk about the scientific miracle in the Koran, and we will address the controversy around it in today's reality through these questions:

1- Is there anything in the Qur'an about the phenomena of nature?

2 - Is there a scientific miracle in the Koran or not?

Be aware that the two questions do not stop the fundamental question about the definition of scientific miracles in the Koran, confusion between these axes confuses our perception of the subject.

As for the first question, yes, in the Qur'an there is talk about cosmic phenomena.This is a definite certainty that is shared in its common, intellectual and competent awareness, even though it is employed as a nodal employer in demonstrating the greatness of the Creator and his virtue over human beings (the principle of harness) and the call for reflection and research. As for the question of miracles in the Koran, we say: Is the Koran in all his talk about natural phenomena was committed to the famous scientific culture in Mecca and its surroundings?

Our answer to the question is to say that the traditional reading, supported by conclusive evidence, tells us that the Qur'an appeared in the primitive pagan environment that generally interpreted the world of nature as non-materialistic cosmic Sunnah, where scientific research is never known, but rather the myths of the ancestors transmitted to each generation. Therefore, the Koran has achieved a great breakthrough in Mecca by moving the superstitious mind to the stage of scientific rational consideration of the universe, without pursuing idolatry idols scientific.

If we listen to the claim of the Orientalist audience, founded by the Abraham Jaeger and confirmed by Noldke, concerning the great and wide impact of the written and verbal heritage of the Jews on the Qur'an, then we should ask: What does the Qur'an say about natural phenomena corresponds to the Jews in the Old Testament called the Torah And in the Babylonian Talmudin and Jerusalem and other religious books, or the Koran violated that?

This is where the debate begins, and this should be our motto in the scientific miracle not to subject the Koran to our wishes and wishes to convince people credibility without commitment to the correct approach, if we find the Koran mentioned some of the natural facts we should not say that the Koran is a guide and doctrine in which there is absolutely universal truths, and after Proof of the references of the Koran to this type of facts we move to the second stage, which is the research in the scientific culture of that era and the semantics of the text in the light of the language in which the text was written.If we find that the text that speaks of natural phenomena is misused by the mistakes of his time and his environment Other If the Qur'an speaks of unknown scientific issues in the multicultural environment of the environment in which it descended (ie in its temporal and spatial circumstances) and in which I have already said miracle, and also if there is no scientific precedent, but the text is innocent of all the scientific errors prevailing in that environment we also rule on this Miracle purity.

The audience of researchers in the scientific miracle recognized that "the Qur'an has already mentioned the fact proved by experimental science recently and proved that it can not be realized by human means in the time of the Prophet, peace be upon him, a door of the metaphysical miracle." In his book to be published by Rawasikh, Science and Revelation between the Infallibility of the Qur'an and the Mistakes of the Gospel and the Torah, Dr. Sami Amri argues that the scientific miracle is a violation of the Qur'an to the prevailing scientific culture on the Arabian Peninsula with the consent of the right to every issue, even if the right is known at that time outside the Arabian Peninsula.

Dr. Sami by this definition pushes a central suspicion among the Orientalists that the Qur'an is a simple Jewish source textbook adapted to the needs of the people of Mecca, and the miracle in this section is to show that the Koran is contrary to the culture of ignorance in Mecca and contrary to Jewish culture, it is in every scientific issue The right agrees to reverse the scientific perversions that existed among Jews and Christians at that time.The Qur'an's commitment to truth - even if the Qur'an did not come before - is the face of its miracles in an environment that was full of scientific errors, and even issues where scientific correctness was frequently disputed between teams, religions and scientists.

Today, the public cultural space is experiencing unprecedented chaos in dealing with the subject of scientific miracle for many reasons and motives, from the absence of a clear scientific method to honest emotions claiming objectivity, to gain, to surrender to the predominance of the empirical method. In the article a. Mohamed Fattouh, published on the site " Meydan " entitled "scientific miracle in the Koran .. fact or wrong promotion of Islam" focused research on the beginnings of interest in the subject and its development and symbols, motives and effects.

If we divide the employees in this file, they can be classified into three sections:

1 - expanders excessively without scientific scrutiny and discipline method of interpretation of texts, and stands on top of this geological category Dr. Zaghloul Nagar.

2 - absolutely disputed the idea of ​​scientific miracle in the Koran and that what was found in the days of download, and represents these astronomer Dr. Nidal Qassoum.

3 - the average in the subject and they are authorized to this type of miracle with great caution and the introduction of numerous controls in the scientific and linguistic fields, including the physicist Mohammed Basil al-Tai.

With the Mediterranean, I tend to be very cautious with an adequate statement of the difference between scientific miracle and scientific interpretation, and the call to transcend the opinion of individuals, albeit competent, to collective diligence in each discipline.

Medan : But do not you see a doctor that you infer the support of religion and belief in something and its opposite? For example, you hosted Dr. Sabri Demerdash in 10 episodes to reverse the theory of evolution, and then hosted Dr. Amr Sharif to talk in 6 episodes in support of evolution directed in the same program "between me and you" ?!

I am full of insight in the two dialogues with the two professors, but I proceeded from a joint mosque between them and me, which is faith in God and Muhammad and his prophet Islam, but they differed in the attitude towards development, the first (Demerdash) believes in direct creation, and the second (Sharif) says development oriented They both see God as the Creator, whether through direct creation or creation through the mechanisms of directed evolution. By demonstrating this diversity, I try to create an atmosphere of study and communication between these parties to clarify ideas, which has happened.

The answer to my personal position of the two creeds is brief; there is a first scientific incision intersecting the texts of revelation, and another scientific incision purely. The first part is in the creation of Adam, peace be upon him, and not on the ancestor, and this is the apparent texts of the Koran, and that the creatures created by God from wisdom and is not the product of chance, and that fact is a Koranic repeated in the verses in the most beautiful words, and therefore I reject the Darwinist randomness for its denial of wisdom in Determination, I reject the argument of guided evolutionists that Adam peace be upon him a lower ancestor.

The pure scientific aspect is the claim of the evolution of living beings, with the exception of Adam, peace be upon him, from an ancestor extending to the first cell nearly 4 billion years ago, a claim in the verses of the Koran is not supported or denied, unlike Genesis of Jews and Christians, which decides the special creation of each Biology is not about ancestor. I would argue that fossil evidence and modern genetic research have made the idea of ​​the tree of life a myth to refrain from establishing a tree arrangement of living beings, a dilemma to which evolutionists have not found a solution, and I do not think that they have a way out, and do not develop in all its forms without a tree of life.

Field : see Dr. Moroccan philosophy Fathi Almiskina that the phenomenon of atheism , which spread after the revolutions of the Arab Spring is different from the phenomenon of atheism in ancient times , which was based on -sabaka- philosophical and ideological arguments, while heading atheism today to become " a teenage atheist" as described by Almiskina, ie , it is like Rebellious reaction to authoritarian reality, how do you see the characterization of Miskini?

Not surprisingly, the Tunisian philosopher Fathi Meskini should make this description of the modern Arab atheism, as he stopped with the question of who is the philosopher? And what philosophy? In his book "The Philosophy of the House" in that the difficulty of answering does not lie in the "what" or "limit" of philosophy as far as it refers to the difficulty of all thinking in the form of this "I" or "we", which perches on our minds as a forced horizon, it is as Stop with these two fundamental questions through our identity and cultural location it is self-evident to have his own vision in our very new Arab atheism. But we have to look at what exactly is meant in the question and expressed in the word "old atheism", the word old is relative, is the old atheism near? What old pre-Arab revolutions as the question suggests? Or old in the Renaissance and Enlightenment and then modernity and beyond? Or the ancient Greek? There is no historical narrative here.

Perhaps Mr. Maskini wanted adolescents that did not prepare for this phenomenon, the cognitive introductions, which was, for example, when the emergence of the doctrine of the god in the era of lights and then the positive school in France and then the logical situation ..., these physical schools have paved the causes and conditions of philosophical and economic and social transformations led to these patterns In addition to the use of scientific theories such as Darwinism, the mechanical interpretation of the universe, and so on, atheist adolescence in the Arab world, the region did not prepare for atheistic philosophy, but rather an industry rather than a spontaneous phenomenon within the intellectual system of the history of societies. What confirms that it is fantasy and intellectual bias has come to these results, which seem atheist phenomenon, and perhaps our generation is aware of the great difference between ideological atheism consistent with himself philosophically and reality during the emergence and presence of the currents of Marxism and communist thought in the fifties of the last century and the atheism of today's teen.

That is why I agree with Professor Miskini in his characterization of contemporary atheism as an “intellectual adolescence”, and I agree with it in general terms, although I think, and I think he agrees, that we do not deny the existence of diversity in the atheism of post-Arab revolutions, whether ideological, philosophical, scientific or psychological atheism. , And each era is a general feature of any intellectual phenomenon that tops reality. Yes, I agree with Almskini what he went to, and perhaps the same question came to the most important features of intellectual adolescence is the start of the "reaction" to an authoritarian reality, and this is one of the aspects of the problem; "bullying". I have felt the thought that arises from the "reaction" through my direct arguments and my numerous meetings with those who have turned their faces about religion and adopted its opposite or infiltrated by nihilism.

Starting in adopting thought through experimentation rather than meditation and accountability, scattering ideas, relativism in concepts, reluctance and inability to judge judgments on ideas, the speed of transition from adopting an idea to another before it is saturated with understanding, intellectual chaos and lack of consistency between concepts, and perhaps diligence in Reading and the acquisition of books, but at the expense of the mental approach and logical rules, which disperses his cognitive effort, jumping from one subject to another without a link except the rebellion, which I call the character "spring", and loosening and speed in judging issues that need to grasp and serious research. It is also a feature of the adolescence of this atheism that the intensity and challenge shown by some as if not in the school of knowledge need to be careful and focused, but enter into dialogues atmosphere of the final of football matches and the spirit of longing to score goals amid the crowd shouting and applause for the crushing victory.

I may conclude with the most prominent feature of the phenomenon of the new atheist adolescence that he rose very suddenly after a very large religious revival among Muslims and even among Christians after the Arab revolutions without being prepared for real intellectual reasons (reactions), but is it only to explain the reaction and domination or There are other factors and many reasons for the emergence of such a phenomenon, which have been established institutions and research centers and organizations funded internally and externally to its industry and vigorously seek to prove its existence as well as the large cyberspace and suspicions everywhere everywhere with the decline of the wave of religiosity ?! This is the question that should be asked, even if we describe the new state of atheism as a “teen situation”.

Square : there is seen as a religion of authority, and this word carries connotations of force and subjugation and control of personal freedoms, and thus the freedom of religion is the essence of freedom, what do you think?

Freedom, and what you realize what freedom! In his book "First Year of Prison", Mustafa Amin told us that the prison administration where he was imprisoned prevented the ink from prisoners, not for the purpose of preventing them from writing, but after the administration learned that the prisoners were deliberately pouring ink in their eyes and fled to take them to the prison hospital To breathe in it a little lost freedom even for hours! Mustafa Amin wonders; you saw how a human sacrifice his precious eyes for a little freedom!

I say that the beauty of the singularity of freedom and its magic and the sense of the public's importance in their private lives, their public relations, their common interests and their collective destiny and their application in the details of their daily activities have made it a popular slogan that is more popular than any other term such as liberalism, secularism, rationality, equality, human rights, justice and tolerance. The most ambiguous and ambiguous terminology.

Therefore, it is not easy to summarize the answer to this immortal question in light of the old legacy, the newcomer and the complex reality, so I will elaborate my response by presenting the axes of the subject in a sequential order to be necessary milestones in understanding the concept of freedom and to show young people themselves, regardless of approval or dissent, the importance of lingering in launching General provisions or taking final positions before taking note of the broad horizons of this concept of cross-semantics.

To begin with, I would like to draw attention to a peculiar paradox that deserves to be contemplated: while the demand for the expansion of freedom in societies grows increasingly feverish, inevitability, necessity or algebraism has flourished in the last century and dominated by mothers of theories. Psychological, philosophical and other and dominated in the theses of modern-day thought and in the subjects of the humanities in its broad sense.

There is the "historical determinism" of Karl Marx, the "determinism of psychological reasoning" in the school of analytical psychology of Sigmund Freud, the inevitability of "conditional association" in behavioral psychology as in the Pavlov experiment, and the inevitability of "collective mind" when Durkheim. When Jean-Paul Sartre's existence existed to uphold individual liberty against all forms of alienation, the structural determinism - the unconscious structures that govern thought - came to be challenged by Levi Strauss, the philosophy of individual freedom of his contemporary Sartre, and then there was biological or genetic determinism in Darwinian studies. Dawkins. "

The great thinker who deplored his early departure from the world, Muhammad Abdullah Deraz, in his unique book The Constitution of Ethics in Islam, a doctoral thesis at the Sorbonne in Paris, discussed in depth the subject of freedom in which he discussed the inevitable theories of Western philosophers Kant and Spinoza and Hume within the principles of instinct. Moral responsibility, human will, psychological motivation and the principle of duty led him to reluctantly call it "the inevitability of astray", including mechanical and dynamic, and to lose balance in the human soul. We do not know where the position of Western freedom in all these inevitable philosophies produced by Western thought!

Square : This means that there is confusion in the definition of freedom and look to it ?!

Researchers from almost all intellectual circles agree that the term freedom is one of the most hazy and jargon of contemporary thought. For example, scholars of philosophy and historians Abdul Rahman Badawi in his philosophical encyclopedia, Zakaria Ibrahim in his book The Problem of Freedom, and the legitimate Muhammad al-Bouti in “Civilizational Problems”. Sultan Al-Amiri in "spaces of freedom" ..., to all other directions, each of them has its own definition of freedom.

According to my knowledge, most of the questions concerning the problem of this term are the prominent professor in the philosophy of science d. Yomna El-Khouly in her article "Freedom in Nature .. What does it mean" ended with the outcome of its outcome that we can make the saying of freedom "plus any added to its creation." Suffice it to know how confusing this term is, that Isaiah Berlin, one of the most prominent in the interest in the problem of liberty, as in his books "Four Essays on Freedom" and "The Idea of ​​Liberty," declared, puzzled, that he would not discuss more than two hundred Definition of freedom!

Square : The question of salt here; What is the source of this ambiguity of the individual in the minds of the elite and public intellectuals?

I think that the many fields of human knowledge that dealt with "freedom" lesson is one of the most important reasons for its ambiguity, we find its manifestations in philosophy, ethics, religion, sociology, politics, economics, and in all these disciplines schools and jurisprudence, each of them releases freedom and the head of the concept of the angle of dealing and interaction experienced by thought and conscience Dozens of related branching concepts are formed around this very term, and a group of theorists outlined their talk of the essence of freedom or transcended it, while elaborating on the types of freedoms as German Laland did in his philosophical encyclopedia when he detailed its meaning in three directions. Within the divisions more detailed.

What we export and import passionately from the terms and concepts of the dominant West is often extracted from its historical, political, social and cognitive context

communication Web-sites

The other reason for the ambiguity of the term and the multiplicity of its significance is that the definition of any term is based on a holistic view of the universe, man and life, which we call the cognitive reference or the cognitive map that affects our partial and detailed perceptions of the concepts and then in our formulations of their definitions. Will the meaning of freedom be in the mind of those who embrace moral relativism and drown in it as someone who proceeds from believing in fixed values? Are they equal in diagnosing the meaning of freedom ?! Are those who uphold the value of individual freedom and rights and say that they take precedence over the freedom and rights of society, such as those who take the opposite view?

I cannot paradox this part without warning that what is exported to us and passionately imported from the terms and concepts of the West is often extracted from its historical, political, social and epistemological context, and presented to us as the axioms and divorces matured free minds enlightened West! We repeat the systematic misconception itself, which depends on the psychological dependence of the so-called generation of pioneers who faced the shock of Western modernity, such as Rifa'a Tahtawi, for example, and tried to reconcile the concepts of Western civilization with their religion and cultural heritage, the result was that they arbitrarily in the projection of Western terms forcibly Islamic, and more dangerous that they have made the other (the West) is the basis and origin, then we come with jurisprudence and legal terms appropriate to show that our religion responds to the requirements of the times and fit for this time as it was valid in ancient times! Al-Tahtawi stated this in his book "Curriculum of the kernels", referring to verses, hadiths and others.

There is no such thing as absolute freedom except in the imaginations of those who do not know what to say, it is words without meaning, and perceptions without ratifications

communication Web-sites

Surprisingly, to this day in the third millennium, it is still absent not only from our youth but from many intellectuals that the vocabulary and terms of a civilization do not translate and translate them into another civilization, and between them a great disparity in terms of experience, ethics and social systems, because the terms are only Building a special language among special people.Therefore, we should distinguish between purely scientific terms that are easy to translate and generalize, such as medical and engineering terms, and cultural and civilizational terms.It is the terminology of a particular nation that is difficult to translate, such as caliphate, Imamate, Baya, Shura and others.

The right thing to try to bring it closer to understanding the other is not to translate it literally, so I completely disagree with Dr. Mohammad Al-Ahmari in his book, "Rooted Democracy and the Problematic Application", in which he compared the terms "Shura and Democracy" despite the vast differences between them, both belonging to a cultural and civilizational space. Its own. Therefore, we find Taher Ben Achour of scholars who stopped with the term freedom, indicating that the term "birth" despite the common among us, and elaborated on its meaning in Arabic in his book "The Origins of the Social Order in Islam" and the difference between its significance and releases and what people settled for the singularity of contemporary freedom.

Therefore, I call for the need to be free from the freedom of the West by emancipating first from the recognition of its centrality, which globalizes and generalizes the connotations of terms and concepts, but join my voice with those who disagree with them in matters and agree in another to the need to overcome the Americanization of freedom when we ask the question of freedom as Nassif Nassar in his book Freedom". I would like to mention here my disagreement with Nassif Nassar's thesis on the globalization of the term "human rights", which was called by critics of conservative opponents who are afraid for their privacy as in his book "From Ewan Ibn Rushd to Rehab Secularism," and my very contrary view is found in my YouTube lecture. Entitled: "No Universal Declaration of Human Rights".

Therefore, as a Muslim, I do not object to say clearly that the term “freedom” in the intellectual circles today does not exist in the Koran, and at the same time we see the Koran mentioned the supplies of freedom and the consequent responsibility, because it is the result of a sense of freedom, and I conclude that one of the largest Delusions The claim to achieve the essence of freedom through freedom from the power of religion. Power surrounds man from everywhere, and if he does not pay attention - as we pointed out at the beginning of the answer to the question - there is the authority of external universal and biological biological necessity, the authority of customs, traditions and culture of society, and the authority of law, regulations and constitutions.

But if they postpone their delightful gossip about the need to be free from power and invoke religion as a model and contemplate their reality, they would discover, as the Frankfurt philosopher Herbert Marcus, best known for his book One Dimension Man, discovered that we live in "democratic societies that are not free", in his critical analysis. For industrialized capitalist, consumer-technical societies.

As soon as he leaves his home, he feels the arsenal of codified systems that encircle his freedom throughout his movement in life, restricting and determining the way he walks, the speed set for him, the parking place, the entrance gate, and at how many angles we read a warning and the word "forbidden", starting with a forbidden There is no such thing as absolute freedom except in the imaginations of those who do not know what to say, it is words without meaning, and perceptions without ratifications, and therefore Ibn Khaldun held chapters in which he described some of those who were disconnected from the cities Far from them in deserts and mountains brutally, and does not mean that they are not subject to their own system, the advocates of absolute freedom are looking for a post-brutal society!

-------------------------------------------------- -----------

Footnotes

[A] This definition is the Dacum for Consultancy and Training Academy.

[2] References to religious statistics in the Middle East and North Africa Youth Predicament can be found.