Apparent Evil by Two Humans and its implications.
In the name of Allah, Most Beneficent, Most Merciful.
The picture in the home page is one of the proofs of the divinity of the Holy Quran. Read about this miracle in item 5 in this blog published on February 16, 2006. You might visit the URL http://www.bilal-prayer.com/Quran_en.html
You are invited to read – 13. Allah exists – A proof; and 14. Evidence that the Holy Quran supersedes the Holy Torah and the Holy Bible – in this blog. As of now, only one religion is approved by God Almighty – Islam.
There are many religions that associate good alone with God Almighty. Some have many deities each deity for one type of behavior. Some claim that the single God Almighty is made of many parts all of them doing good only. However Islam asserts that nothing happens without the sanction of the one and only God Almighty called ‘Allah’ in Arabic. From http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display_all.php?chapter=64&from_verse=11&to_verse=11&mac=&translation_setting=1&show_transliteration=1&show_yusufali=1&show_shakir=1&show_pickthal=1&show_mkhan=1 we quote the translation given by Abdullah Yusuf Ali in support of the above conclusion.
===
Yusuf Ali 64:11
No kind of calamity can occur, except by the leave of Allah. and if any one believes in Allah, ((Allah)) guides his heart (aright): for Allah knows all things.
===
Muslims believe that each and every action of God Almighty is either good or apparent evil that looks evil in this life but bestows immense good in the Hereafter. Can there be an act that looks evil on the surface but is good only? God Almighty caused this writer to experience such an apparent evil in this life itself. In the rest of this article the circumstances and the actions are described.
Recently quite a bit of controversy developed on account of a speech by the revered Pope Benedict XVI. Quoting from http://www.zaman.com/?bl=commentary&alt=&trh=20061024&hn=37645 we have:
===
As a Christian philosopher, I have followed with great interest the controversy ignited by the Pope’s lecture in Regensburg.
… If some Muslims responded to that contention with the kind of rage and anger that seemed only to confirm it, the editors and writers of Zaman have done a commendable job of demonstrating that other response that the Pope insists was his real intent: the call for dialogue, possible only in the court of reason.
… With regard to the specific passage that ignited the controversy, I think little needs to be added to what was reported here in Zaman. Adel-Theodore Khoury, the author of the book the Pope was quoting, claimed that the Pope had misread him, creating an “obstacle against dialogue.” Instead of contrasting a rational and enlightened Byzantine emperor with an inherently irrational (but “educated”) Persian, the point of the entire text (according to its author) was to show how both the emperor and his interlocutor were locked inside of their own constrictive theological views, each of which was internally rational. What made the conversation unproductive was not the failure of one or the other to understand reason, but instead the failure of both to look at each other and recognize their common humanity. If the Pope had read Khoury as generously as he asked people to read him, that is, in full context, he would have been saved from the embarrassment not only of sloppy scholarship, but of replicating the very mistake the text was meant to expose. In extending to Islam his invitation to dialogue, the Pope unfortunately made the same mistake the emperor made. One cannot speak productively with a person one regards as irrational.
===
Should a Muslim obey reason? From http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display_all.php?chapter=7&from_verse=33&to_verse=33&mac=&translation_setting=1&show_transliteration=1&show_yusufali=1&show_shakir=1&show_pickthal=1&show_mkhan=1 we find:
===
Yusuf Ali 7:33
Say: the things that my Lord hath indeed forbidden are: shameful deeds, whether open or secret; sins and trespasses against truth or reason; assigning of partners to Allah, for which He hath given no authority; and saying things about Allah of which ye have no knowledge.
===
For a Muslim trespass against reason is forbidden; so also trespass against truth. The implication is the Muslim must demand reason wherever possible, but should accept as truth those statements of God Almighty that are beyond reason at the current level of development of mankind. A Muslim should seek reason as far as possible.
So anyone who encourages people to live according to reason whether Muslim or not serves God Almighty. One such person is Mr. Ivan Alexander, author of HumanCafe (http://www.humancafe.com/ ). Quoting from http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/89.html?1161995494#POST1314 we find:
===
Welcome to this discussion, Mohideen. The task here will be to explore, I hope with some lucidity of reason, what is it that human reason can accomplish, or fails to accomplish.
===
The policy of HumanCafe is spelled out in http://www.humancafe.com/ . Quoting relevant extracts, we get:
===
You are cordially invited to participate in the celebration of the evolution of human consciousness with your ideas.
… Write as you like. All your ideas and feelings are valid, on any topic or aspiration, even graffiti. Once you are happy with your results, save your words into the People's Book Forums, where they will remain as a permanent testimony to who you are.
===
Surprisingly one of my post was censored recently. http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/144.html?1161911754#POST2163 has:
===
[DELETED]
===
When I noticed that my feelings which are part of the testimony to who I am were curtailed, I felt hurt and desired to give a fitting response. Then I read the following:
1. http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/144.html?1161911754#POST2164
===
Mohideen, I must ask you to cease and disist posting such rubbish on the Humancafe boards, we do not support such trash of not only weak intellect but seditious treason. Stop it.
===
by Ivan and
2. http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/144.html?1161911754#POST2166
===
Having been in the Middle East I have seen that the Muslem people are not stupid.
This take on events is far different and closer to the truth than the rubbish that Mohideen is spouting regarding 9/11.
… Compared to us Osama is a deprived child. Youngsters I was teaching advanced weapons theory to in 1997 were building one shot Lasers capable of blasting holes in concrete blocks.
From the streets of any city I have access to the world wide web and a technical cadre that has capabilities that Al Qaeda only dreams of.
… Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called the children of God.
One hopes that you lock this thread to keep more dribble off of it
===
by Ed.
Before I proceed, I must record that I value Ed and his opinions. I value Ivan too. Still to know that my post was not only censored but also the thread was closed denying me the opportunity to respond to the insinuations against me was appalling. See http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/88.html?1162057360 and notice the lock in the following:
I read the above developments regarding the censorship by a site that promotes ‘Freedom of Expression’ just before going to bed on October 28, 2006. I was boiling; I had difficulty getting sleep. However sleep I did possibly out of mental exhaustion.
I read the details about the censorship again on the morning of October 29, 2006. I reconstructed the deleted part of my post. This article is posted in my blog and web that I control. I could easily repost the deleted part here. I am not going to do that. I realize that both Ivan and Ed were indeed acting to protect me rather than to criticize me. How come? Read on.
What does ‘Freedom of Speech’ bestow? Hyde Park is well known for ‘Freedom of Speech.’ From http://community.iexplore.com/planning/journalEntryActivity.asp?JournalID=21788&EntryID=28742&n=Sunday Hyde Park Speakers%92 Corner %26 Sushi in Soho we get a recent certificate about Hyde Park given below:
===
Soho has become associated for some time with alternative lifestyles and night life, just as Hyde Park’s Speakers’ Corner has become synonymous with individual freedom of speech; both areas offer visitors glimpses of the immense variety of peoples that are the Londoners of today.
===
When one gives a speech in Hyde Park who bears the responsibility? The responsibility is that of the speaker alone; whatever consequences arise out of the speech is borne by the speaker alone.
What is the situation with respect to a web site that promotes ‘Freedom of Expression?’ To really serve ‘Freedom of Expression’ the web site must be on. If the web site is to suffer a Denial of Service (DOS) attack and thus is not accessible for any there is no benefit at all. So any web site that promotes ‘Freedom of Expression’ must ensure its own continued operation.
Whether the conclusion by Ivan that the deleted part of my post would be treated as treason is correct or not is immaterial for the current discussion. He being responsible for the upkeep of the web site has the responsibility to see to it that it does not suffer any DOS attack. If a poster claims that certain individuals acted against the law of the land such a claim – until and unless verified and supported by a court of law – is just that a mere claim. However such a claim could enrage some who would not tolerate that kind of claim becoming popular. To such people taking a site that makes such unverified claims out of circulation is a justified action. Is Ivan obliged to fight such people to honor my ‘Freedom of Expression?’ No! ‘Freedom of Expression’ is free only as long as the consequences are borne by the poster alone. It is constrained by reality if such a post is liable to cause hardship to others.
Ed acted in my benefit by suggesting that Ivan lock the thread so that I do not come back with stronger posts on the deleted theme. Ivan responded and locked the thread. Could he lock the thread leaving the objectionable matter in place? Of course not! By necessity he had to delete that part.
We all know that censorship is evil. However here we have a demonstration so orchestrated by God Almighty through three individuals – Ed, Ivan and Mohideen – that not only shows censorship to be beneficial but also to be essential.
This demonstration of censorship being an ‘apparent evil’ ties in handsomely with the Muslim understanding of the nature of God Almighty that all His actions are good or apparent evil. In what follows we expound on this aspect a little more.
1. Apparent Evil in this life as in the Holy Quran and Sunnah.
http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display_all.php?chapter=18&from_verse=71&to_verse=71&mac=&translation_setting=1&show_transliteration=1&show_yusufali=1&show_shakir=1&show_pickthal=1&show_mkhan=1 has the following translation of Verse 71 of Chapter 18 of the Holy Quran:
===
Yusuf Ali 18:71:
So they both proceeded: until, when they were in the boat, he scuttled it. Said Moses: "Hast thou scuttled it in order to drown those in it? Truly a strange thing hast thou done!"
===
and from
http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display_all.php?chapter=18&from_verse=79&to_verse=79&mac=&translation_setting=1&show_transliteration=1&show_yusufali=1&show_shakir=1&show_pickthal=1&show_mkhan=1
===
Yusuf Ali 18:79:
"As for the boat, it belonged to certain men in dire want: they plied on the water: I but wished to render it unserviceable, for there was after them a certain king who seized on every boat by force.
===
It is indeed evil to destroy the means of earning the livelihood of the owners of the boat. However it is a noble deed to save the owners of the boat from slavery. The detail is given in the Traditions found in http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=boat Khadir&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all .
2. We find the following in Tradition quoted from http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=epilepsy&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all
===
Narrated 'Ata bin Abi Rabah: Ibn 'Abbas said to me, "Shall I show you a woman of the people of Paradise?" I said, "Yes." He said, "This black lady came to the Prophet and said, 'I get attacks of epilepsy and my body becomes uncovered; please invoke Allah for me.' The Prophet said (to her), 'If you wish, be patient and you will have (enter) Paradise; and if you wish, I will invoke Allah to cure you.' She said, 'I will remain patient,' and added, 'but I become uncovered, so please invoke Allah for me that I may not become uncovered.' So he invoked Allah for her." (Book #70, Hadith #555)
===
The above Tradition illustrates the following facts:
a) Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, had the power to cure an incurable disease.
b) Suffering that incurable disease for the sake of God Almighty results in the reward of Paradise itself in the Hereafter.
c) Use of divine power to protect the modesty of a female does not diminish her rewards. What a pity that some females and their admirers boast that to expose the female body is a mark of freedom!
The above Tradition does not imply that we should not cure epilepsy using medicines developed by mankind. The following treatments do not deny the seat in Paradise:
1. http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk/articles/article.aspx?articleId=155§ionId=19051
===
Medicines to treat epilepsy are called anti-epileptics or anti-epileptic medicines. There are a large number of different anti-epileptics available. They are available as tablets, capsules, liquids and suppositories (medication placed in the vagina or anus).
Anti-epileptic medicines may stop seizures happening altogether, stop them occurring so often, or make them less severe. They do not cure epilepsy. They work by controlling the electrical activity of the brain that causes seizures.
===
2. http://www.mayoclinic.org/epilepsy/epilepsy-surgery.html
===
Traditionally, physicians have compared two SPECT (single photon emission computed tomography) scans of the brain: one taken during a seizure and one while seizure-free. The goal is to compare the two scans and find out where seizures are originating.
Differences between the two SPECT scans are very difficult to detect with the human eye. In response, a team of Mayo Clinic physicians and scientists developed a computer software program that electronically subtracts one image from the other, leaving a clear picture of the seizure hot spot. Next, the subtracted image is superimposed onto an MRI scan of the patient's brain so that neurosurgeons can verify the hot spot's anatomic location and remove it safely.
===
3. http://www.hpathy.com/casesnew/barvalia-cuprum-met.asp
===
This patient had been admitted in our ward in the year 1993, when I saw her. … A girl, a child of 5 years, was brought to us in a STATUS EPILEPTICUS. She was not responding to her anti-epileptic drugs even in the maximum therapeutic oral dosage. … She was frequently evaluated by the attending MD physician. … The seizures had been progressively worsening since the time they started, at the age of 6 months. … The exacerbation promptly responded and convulsions reduced completely. Over time she improved so much that she was able to even speak a few words. Her case was reviewed for a constitutional after about 7-8 months on Cuprum Met, and Silica was the chronic remedy given to her.
===
We have included the surgical treatment also just to show that it is a possible remedy. In our opinion surgery simply removes the result of the disease; it does not eliminate the basic cause. For example, the bypass surgery performed on heart-attack patients does not avoid the blocks from occurring in future. It would be preferable to avoid surgery for religious reasons also. Inshah Allah the religious reasons would be considered in a future article.