yousuf gabriel

DISCOVERIES OF SCIENCE ABOUT OUR EARTH (HOME) AND THE IMPACTS OF PHILOSOPHY BY ALLAMA MUHAMMAD YOUSUF GABRIEL Modern science has during its three centuries of constant struggle made a number of discoveries, as established facts and as hypotheses and our philosophers have placed their interpretations on them. Yet out of various probable lines of interpretations, the philosophers have assumed a line that evidently appears as the echo of the doctrinal implications of early Greek Atomism, implications that are basically atheistic and exact antithesis of the doctrines of revealed religion. Science has discovered that (a) our home, this earth is incredibly small in comparison to the unimaginably vast-universe- around it. (b) life could exist only in zones that are utterly insignificant against the immensely vast regions of the universe incapable of producing life. (c) life can only exist on the planets like earth and such planets are a rarity. From these facts our philosophers have argued that this universe could not have been designed primarily to produce life like our own. Had it been so, a better proportion between the magnitude of the mechanism and the amount of the product could have been expected. At first glance, at least, they say, life appeared as unimportant by product. We living things were somehow off the main line, they thought. Although the early Greek Atomists did not hint at this point, yet the line of the argument of our philosophers follow the same trace. The point of the insignificance of earth and life upon it will deprive man of his position of special honour on earth and in the creation, and will throw away life from its position of honour in the sight of the Creator, and will thus strike at the doctrine of trial, purpose, resurrection and all the religious doctrines. It has to be observed that religion itself has assigned a very low place to the life in this world. But it has done so against the eternal life of the next world for which the sacrifice of this transient life is desirable. But what a difference exists between the two similar approaches to the same question. Our philosophers and the religion both regard this life insignificant. Yet our philosophers strike at the very root of religion by calling the life insignificant, while religion strikes at the root of atheism by calling this life insignificant. Science has discovered that Physics played an incomparably great part in the Universe than Biology. From this our philosophers have inferred that unless the Creator were not a magnified man---like being activated by feelings and interests like our own, it were hard to believe that life could from a special interest of the great architect of the universe judging from the utter insignificance of life. If then life were so insignificant in the sight of the Creator, all the doctrinal structure of revealed religion, man's vicergency, trial, purpose, resurrection would stumble down and disappear. A sailor who is capable of forming al ink between the process of tying the knots and the design of the Creator of the universe is in the sight of our philosophers a fellow totally devoid of the faculty of imagination, while monkeys strumming on a type-writer unintelligently were likely to work wonders. Plato or Aristotle would have wondered at such a philosophy appearing in an age in which man's knowledge were regarded to have reached its utmost pinnacles Our philosophers have discovered this universe as indifferent to life, so that emotion, ambition, and achievement, art and religion all were foreign to its plan. For the most part empty space was very cold, and most of the matter was extremely hot. Space was traversed, and astronomical bodies constantly bombarded by radiation of a variety of kinds much of which is probably inimical to, or even destructive of life. And so our philosophers have regarded the universes as actively hostile to life like our own. They have neglected the religious doctrine of man's trial, this world according to religion being a house of trial full of afflictions. Our philosophers, however, have regretted the mistake of man's stumbling into such a universe. How dearly it has to be wished, that the philosophers and the scientists were half as enthusiastic in describing the horrors of atomic war and atomic radiations. Our philosophers have regarded the appearance of life on earth as accidental. If monkeys strumming unintelligently on typewriters infinitely could accidentally produce a book, why then the millions of millions of stars wandering blindly in space for millions of millions of years could not meet with every kind accident including a kind which calls planetary systems into being, and is fit for producing life. How our philosophers have come to such a conclusion is known only to themselves, for, science has hitherto made no discovery in the light of which the accidental nature of the appearance of life could be confirmed. No, but perhaps it is by the

bailarina

i can't believe this was written so long ago!