Menu

iv) Darwin’s Theory :- AQEEDAH SEREIS sheikh umar al ashqar

iv) Darwin’s Theory  :- AQEEDAH SEREIS sheikh umar al ashqar

The supporters of this theory tried to use it to explain the existence of living beings. This theory is widespread; many people try to spread it with good intentions, because they think that it is a scientific fact, whilst others try to spread it with bad intentions, because it suits their desire, which is to prove religion wrong in its description of how man was created. Those who seek to undermine religion find evidence in science to support their stance and deceive people.

What does this theory say?

This theory claims that the origin of all creatures was small organisms which developed from water, then their environment changed them until new characteristics emerged in this life-form, and these characteristics, over millions of years, led to the development of more advanced characteristics which changed that primitive creature into a superior life form. This development of characteristics caused by the environment and evolution continued until it arrived at the appearance of man.

The bases of this theory

a) This theory is based on what was noted during excavations carried out during Darwin’s time. They discovered that the more ancient levels contained primitive life-forms, and the levels above them contained progressively more developed life-forms. Darwin said: “These more highly-developed animals came about as a result of evolution from earlier, primitive life-forms.”

b) It was also based on what was known at Darwin’s time about the resemblance of the embryos of different animals at the early stages of development, which could give the impression that the origin of all animals is the same as their embryos appear to be the same, and that evolution happened on earth along the same lines as the development of embryos in the wombs of living beings.

c) It was also based on the existence of the vermiform appendix in human beings, which helps in digesting plant matter, but it no longer has any function in man. This gave the impression that it was something left over from monkeys that did not evolve, because it does have a function in monkeys.

Darwin’s explanation of the process of evolution

a) Natural selection. Destructive factors kill off the weaker specimens and leave the stronger specimens. This is what they call the principle of “the survival of the fittest.” ^So the strong specimens remain and pass on their strong characteristics to their offspring. These strong characteristics are combined as time goes by to form a new feature in the species. This is “evolution” which makes the specimen develop into a superior specimen. This ongoing development is evolution.

b) Sexual selection. This has to do with the preference of both males and females to mate with strong specimens, so that the characteristics of stronger specimens will be passed on and the characteristics of weaker specimens will be eliminated because of the reluctance of others to mate with them.

c) Every time a new characteristic emerges, it is passed on to the offspring.

 

Refutation of the bases on which this theory is founded

Archaeology is not a precise science, and no one can claim that he has carried out a complete survey of all the layers of the earth, including those beneath mountains and oceans, and that he did not find anything new that would challenge previously-held concepts.

Even if we suppose that the statements of this branch of science (i.e., archaeology) are proven to be true, the fact that were were at first primitive life-forms which were then superceded by more advanced creatures does not prove that the advanced life-forms developed from their primitive counterparts. All that this proves is the order of their existence, which may simply be a rejection of changes in the environment which supported different life-forms at different times. The archaeological view at the time of Darwin was that man has existed for 600,000 years; recent discoveries in the field of archaeology put the age of man at 10 million years.

Does this not prove that archaeology is a changeable science on which no definitive proof can be based? Tomorrow the archaeologists may discover something that is the opposite of what we expect!

Dr. Mustafa Shaakir Saleem has commented on the book Al-Insaan fi’l-Mar’aah (Man in the Mirror) by Clyde Colquhoun, which talks about Neanderthal man, which the supporters of Darwin’s theory say, was the first man to evolve from monkeys and gorillas... Dr. Mustafa said: “Neanderthal man is described as having the following main natural features: a larger brain than that of modem man, and a large, broad skull... In addition to that, the chain of evolution which the archaeologists are trying to piece together is not complete; there is something known as ‘the missing link’.”

Dr. Sooriyaal said in his book Tasaddu‘ Madhhab Darwin (The Collapse of Darwin’s Theory):

a) The missing links in the chain of evolution are not only missing between man and the life-forms beneath him, but there are also missing links between the primitive single-celled life-forms and multi-celled life-forms, between unjointed and jointed, between invertebrates and fish and amphibians, between the latter and reptiles, between reptiles and human beings. I have mentioned them according to the order in which they appear in the geological periods.

b) Similarities between the embryos of different species: this is a serious mistake which some scientists made because microscopes had not yet been developed which would show the minute differences in the formation of the embryos of different species. In addition, there was a hoax perpetrated by the German scientist Ernst Haeckel who juxtaposed pictures of similar embryos. When some embryologists criticized him, he admired that he had had to touch up approximately 8 per cent of the pictures and make them look similar because they were incomplete.

c) With regard to the human appendix being an evolutionary left-over from the monkey stage, this does not prove definitively that man evolved from monkeys. The reason for its presence may be that it is inherited from early man, who was dependent on plants, so it was created to help him digest that plant matter. Moreover, science may yet discover that it has a function which we currently do not know.

Science is advancing every day. If hermaphroditism is a characteristic of lower life forms, and having two genders is a characteristic of higher life-forms, and if having nipples is a sign of femininity, then why do we find that male elephants have nipples like man does, whilst the males of hoofed animals such as horses and donkeys do not? If Darwin claimed that man evolved from lower life forms, why is this trace of hermaphroditism left in man when it is not left in lower life-forms?

Refuting Darwin’s explanation of how evolution works

a)Darwin says that there is a law that works in extermination and extinction of living beings so that only the fittest survive to pass on their characteristics to their offspring, until the strong characteristics combine to form a new species. There is indeed a law which works in the annihilation of all living beings, strong and weak alike, because Allah has decreed death for all living beings. But there is also a parallel law whereby there is co-operation between living beings and their environment, because when Allah created life, He also created the means to sustain life. So we see the sun, the oceans, the wind, rain, plants, gravity… all of these and other things co-operate to sustain human and animal life.

Focusing on the destructive factors and overlooking the factors of sustenance creates an imbalance in one’s way of thinking. If there is a law of death or destruction, then there is also a law of life, and each of them has a role to play in life. If these natural forces such as wind, thunder, heat, water, storms, etc. are able to cause damage to people or to destroy their works, such as blinding them or destroying what they have built, it is impossible to believe that these blind, unintelligent natural forces are able to create an eye for one who does not have an eye, or to repair a structure that is in a state of disrepair.

It is reasonable to say that natural forces could be destructive or fatal, but it is unreasonable to say that these forces explain this perfect, wonderful creation in which everything has been shaped perfectly and formed in a systematic way such that its parts fit together with such amazing precision and work together in perfect harmony. It is impossible to attribute this perfection to blind natural forces.

Jamaluddeen al-Afghaani said in his book Al-Radd ‘ala ad- Dahriyeen — Refutation of the atheists — where he discusses this theory. After that, I ask them, how does each separate part of a living being know what the other parts are trying to achieve when each of them serves a different function? By what means does one part inform the others of what it intends to do? What parliament or senate or assembly of elders was held to create this perfectly-assembled being? How do these parts know — when they are still inside the bird’s egg — that they should come out in the form of a bird which eats grains, so it has to have the necessary beak and craw?

Darwin’s principle of the survival of the fittest has destroyed human life, because it has given justification for every oppressor, whether an individual or a government. When the oppressor

engages in oppression, confiscation, war and plots, he does not think that he is doing anything wrong — rather, he is following a natural law, according to Darwin’s claims, the law of the survival of the fittest. This claim led to the ugliest excesses of colonialism.

b) Natural selection, the tendency to mate with stronger individuals so as to eliminate weaker individuals, does not prove that evolution takes place within that species. What we understand from it is that stronger individuals of a given species survive whilst weaker specimens are eliminated.

It may be said that if evolution occurs in some individuals, this may lead to a lack of sexual attraction because sexual attraction will be reduced according to the difference of form between males and females. This is what was suggested by the famous scientist Duwayr Zansky in 1958, a century after Darwin. Among the things that he suggested was: “Differences in physical form reduce sexual attraction, so the tendency to reproduce is reduced between animals of different shapes; the more different they are, the less attraction there is between them. Therefore it is wrong to say that new characteristics will be passed on from an individual in its genes. For example, a blacksmith with strong muscles will not pass on his muscular strength to his offspring, just as a scientist with deep knowledge will not pass his knowledge on to his sons in his genes.”

c) The suggestion that some characteristics emerge accidentally and are then passed on has been rejected by the modern science of genetics. Every characteristic that is not carried in the genes is an earned or acquired characteristic which cannot be passed on to the offspring.

Proffessor Nabeel George, one of the reliable scientists in this field, says: “For that reason, natural selection does not explain the theory of evolution. It only explains that the least fit will die, and that some characteristics will spread among the species. Those who speak of evolutionary leaps mean that an animal which did not have an eye suddenly had an eye because of the action of some rays.

Some specialists have proved that x-rays can cause changes in the number of genes, but this change occurs in something that is already present—it does not create something that does not exist. The number of a monkey’s genes differs from the number of a human’s genes. X- rays only affect the genes that are present; how could these rays, which do not possess any form of intelligence, create the intelligence in man which distinguishes him from monkeys and other animals?

These rays can affect the genes, but it is more akin to distortion than reforming, as happens in the case of atomic rays (radiation). This is in addition to the fact that science of genetics disproves Darwin’s theory, as experience shows. The Jews, and the Muslims after them, have been circumcising their sons for centuries, but this has not led to any of their children being born circumcised. The more science advances, the more Darwin’s theory is proven wrong.

This theory is not supported by reality

a)If this theory were true, we would see many animals and people coming into existence through evolution, not only through reproduction. Even if evolution needs a long time, this does not mean that we would not see monkeys changing into men, one group after another.

b) Even if we accept that natural circumstances and natural selection turned a monkey into a man, for example, we cannot accept that these circumstances would also dictate that there would be a woman to accompany his man, so that they could reproduce and there would be a balance between men and women.

c)            The ability to adapt which we see in creatures such as the chameleon, which changes its colour according to where it is, is an ability which is inherent in the formation of that creature. It is born with that ability which exists in some and is barely present in others. All creatures have limits beyond which they cannot pass. The ability to adapt is the matter of inborn potential, not a developed characteristic that has been formed by the environment as the proponents of this theory say. Otherwise, the environment would have forced rocks, soil, and other inanimate objects to adapt.

d) Frogs are distinguished from man in their ability to live on the land and in water. Birds are distinguished from man by their ability to fly and move rapidly without the aid of a machine. A dog’s nose is far more sensitive than that of a human — so is a dog’s nose more advanced than a human’s nose? Are frogs and birds more advanced than humans in some ways? Camels’, horses’ and donkeys’ eyes see equally well by day and by night, whereas human eyes are unable to see in the dark. An eagle’s vision is far more acute than that of a human. So are eagles and donkeys more advanced than man? If we take self-sufficiency as the basis of superiority, then plants are superior to man and all animals, because they manufacture their own food and food for others, with no need for nourishment from elsewhere.

If we take size as the basis of superiority, then camels and elephants and prehistoric animals (dinosaurs for example) would be superior to man.

The attitude of natural scientists towards this theory

a) Those who support this theory want to support the freedom of thought which the Church opposed and resisted. The natural scientists launched a war against the priests of the Church and their thought after the conflict between the two sides took a vicious turn.

b) Those who oppose it demand tangible evidence that natural selection has changed any species, especially mankind. Those who oppose it because they want natural proof are no less in number or in the fierceness of their resistance than the theologians in Europe who oppose it.

These are some of the views of the scientists who oppose this theory as quoted by Prof Ibraaheem Houraani: “The scientists have not proven the theory of Darwin; in fact they have disproved it and criticized it, even though they know that he researched it for twenty years.” Among them are the scientists Nechel and Dallas, whose comments may be summed up as follows: “Evolution by natural selection cannot apply in the case of man; he can only have been created directly.”

Another scientist, Farkho, said: “It is clear to us from real life that there is a big difference between humans and monkeys. We cannot say for sure that man is descended from monkeys or from any other animal, so we should not say any such thing.”

Another scientist, Mivart, said, after examining the realities of life in detail: “The theory of Darwin is insupportable and is a childish opinion.”

Von Biskoun said, after he and Farkho had conducted a comparative study of humans and monkeys: “The difference between the two is basic and a very great difference...”

Agassiz said in a paper which he delivered during a seminar on Victorian science that Darwin’s theory was in fact wrong and false, his methods had nothing to do with science, and his theory was of no use at all.

Huxley, who was a skeptic and a friend of Darwin said that according to the evidence we have, it can never be proven that any kind of plants or animals evolved through either natural selection or artificial selection.

Tyndall, who was like Haeckel, said: “Undoubtedly those who believe in evolution are unaware of the fact that it is based on principles which are not proven (i.e., hypothetical principles). It is obvious to me that Darwin’s theory needs to be altered.”

Theory not fact

For all of these reasons, what Darwin said about evolution is called the theory of evolution. In the eyes of scientists, there is gulf of difference between a theory and a fact or law. According to their terminology, a theory is something which may be either true or false, whereas a fact or law is something which cannot be false in any way.

So why did it become so widespread?

The reason why this theory became so widespread is that it appeared at a time when Allah (s.w.t), willed that the faIsehood of that distorted and altered religion (Christianity) should become apparent through the actions of some of its followers. The advance of science played a major role in exposing the falsehood of this religion, which led to the outbreak of a fierce battle in which thousands of scientists were killed. In this heated battle each side started to use all kinds of weapons against the other, and this theory spread as a weapon wielded by the scientists against their own religion, then against the religion of every land they colonized. They did this because they believed the theory to be true, and as an act of vengeance against the false religion which had stood in the way of scientific research. Then they used it as a means of destroying the religions of the colonized nations so that it would become easy for the colonialists to dominate those peoples.

Thus the colonialist education system, after destroying the people’s religion, imposed the study of this theory in the curriculum, introducing it in scientific garb so that students would believe it to be true, thus instilling in students’ minds the difference between this falsified science and religion, so that people would reject religion.

It is sufficient for the reader to know that because of this theory, many Muslims deviated from their religion. For this reason the colonialists were keen to teach this theory to Muslim children in their schools at the time when American law forbade teaching this theory in schools from 1935 CE.

But in Europe, after they had dealt the final blow to their deviated religion, they announced that Darwin’s theory, which they had used in the battle to support science against religion, was not a scientific fact; it was no more than a theory, and the more science advanced, the more the falsehood of this theory became apparent.

The Qur’an and Darwin’s theory

When the Qur’an speaks about the realities of past eternity, people must listen and pay heed to.

“So, when the Qur’an is recited, listen to it, and be silent...”(Qur’an 7:204)

— because it comes from the All-Knowing, All-Aware, Who encompasses all things with His knowledge. What does man know? In comparison to the knowledge of Allah, he knows nothing.

“...Allah knows but you do not know.” (Qur’an 2: 216)

How could He not know about His creatures’ affairs when He is the one Who has created them?

“Should not He Who has created know? And He is the Most Kind and Courteous [to His slaves], All-Aware [of everything].”    (Qur ’an 67: 14)

How can people let themselves talk about their origins when they did not witness that act of creation?

“I [Allah] made them [Iblees and his offspring] not to witness [nor took their help in] the creation of the heavens and the earth and not [even] their own creation...”(Qur ’an 18: 51)

Because they did not witness it, what they get right concerning this matter is very little, and the mistakes they make are many.

The opposite of this theory is the truth

What the All-Knowing All-Aware, the Creator of man, says is diametrically opposed to what these ignorant people said. Allah (s.w.t), tells us that He created man as a complete and independent creature. He told His angels that He was going to create him before He brought him into being.

“And [remember] when your Lord said to the angels: ‘Verily, I am going to place [mankind] generations after generations on earth.’...”      (Qur’an 2: 30)

Allah (s.w.t) has told us of the substance from which He created man. He created him from dust:

“…We have created you [i.e. Adam] from dust...”(Qur’an 22: 5)

Abu Moosa al-Ash‘ari said that he heard the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) say:

“Allah created Adam from a handful which He gathered from throughout the earth, so the sons of Adam vary as the earth varies; some are red, some are white, some are black, and some are of colours in between, some are easy-going, some are difficult, some are evil and some are good”

Water is an element in the creation of man:

“Allah has created every moving [living] creature from water...”(Qur’an 24:45)

Man is created from water and dust:

“He it is Who has created you from clay...” (Qur ’an 6:2)

This clay turned into sounding clay like the clay of pottery,

“He created man [Adam] from sounding clay like the clay of pottery.”(Qur’an55:14)

Allah (s.w.t), created him with His hands:

“[Allah] said: “O’ Iblees [Satan]! What prevents you from prostrating yourself to one whom I have created with Both My Hands...”(Qur’an 38:75)

Allah (s.w.t), has created him hollow from the beginning. According to the hadith narrated from Anas (ra), the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) said:

“When Allah formed Adam in Paradise. He left him for as long as He willed to leave him, and Iblees started walking around him, looking at him. When he saw that he was hollow, he knew that this was a creature which was not solid (strong).”

Allah (s.w.t), blew into this clay of His Spirit, and life entered into it, so he started to hear, see, speak, think and be aware. Allah commanded the angels to prostrate to Adam when He breathed into him of His Spirit and life entered into him.

“So when I have fashioned him and breathed into him [his] soul created by Me, then you fall down prostate to him.” (Qur’an 38:72)

Allah (s.w.t), tells us of the place where He caused him to dwell after He had created him:

“And We said: ’O’ Adam! Dwell you and your wife in the Paradise...” (Qur’an 2:35)

As soon as his creation was completed, he began to speak and he understood what was said to him:

”And He taught Adam all the names [of everything], then He showed them to the angels and said, ‘Tell Me the names of these if you are truthful.’ They [angels] said:

Last modified onWednesday, 09 September 2015 17:54
back to top