A wonderfull Book : TIMELESSNESS AND THE REALITY OF FATE

TIMELESSNESS

AND THE REALITY

OF FATE

He is the Originator of

the Heavens and the Earth...

(Surat al-An'am: 101)

HARUN YAHYA

First Published 2001

c Goodword Books, 2001

Distributed by

Al-Risala

The Islamic Centre

1, Nizamuddin West Market,

New Delhi 110 013

Tel. 462 5454, 461 1128

Fax 469 7333, 464 7980

e-mail: skhan@vsnl.com

website:www.alrisala.org

ISBN 81-87570-83-0

Printed in India

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1

THE UNIVERSE IS CREATED

FROM NON-EXISTENCE

CHAPTER 2

THE REAL ESSENCE OF MATTER

CHAPTER 3

RELATIVITY OF TIME AND

THE REALITY OF FATE

CHAPTER 4

THE EVOLUTION DECEIT

NOTES

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Now writing under the pen-name of HARUN YAHYA, Adnan Oktar was born in Ankara in 1956. Having completed his primary and secondary education in Ankara, he studied arts at Istanbul's Mimar Sinan University and philosophy at Istanbul University. Since the 1980s, he has published many books on political, scientific, and faith-related issues. Harun Yahya is well-known as the author of important works disclosing the imposture of evolutionists, their invalid claims, and the dark liaisons between Darwinism and such bloody ideologies as fascism and communism.

Harun Yahya’s works, translated into 60 different languages, constitute a collection for a total of more than 45,000 pages with 30,000 illustrations.

His pen-name is a composite of the names Harun (Aaron) and Yahya (John), in memory of the two esteemed Prophets who fought against their peoples' lack of faith. The Prophet's seal on his books' covers is symbolic and is linked to their contents. It represents the Qur'an (the Final Scripture) and Prophet Muhammad (saas), last of the prophets. Under the guidance of the Qur'an and the Sunnah (teachings of the Prophet [saas]), the author makes it his purpose to disprove each fundamental tenet of irreligious ideologies and to have the "last word," so as to completely silence the objections raised against religion. He uses the seal of the final Prophet (saas), who attained ultimate wisdom and moral perfection, as a sign of his intention to offer the last word.

All of Harun Yahya's works share one single goal: to convey the Qur'an's message, encourage readers to consider basic faith-related issues such as Allah's existence and unity and the Hereafter; and to expose irreligious systems' feeble foundations and perverted ideologies.

Harun Yahya enjoys a wide readership in many countries, from India to America, England to Indonesia, Poland to Bosnia, Spain to Brazil, Malaysia to Italy, France to Bulgaria and Russia. Some of his books are available in English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Urdu, Arabic, Albanian, Chinese, Swahili, Hausa, Dhivehi (spoken in Mauritius), Russian, Serbo-Croat (Bosnian), Polish, Malay, Uygur Turkish, Indonesian, Bengali, Danish and Swedish.

Greatly appreciated all around the world, these works have been instrumental in many people recovering faith in Allah and gaining deeper insights into their faith. His books' wisdom and sincerity, together with a distinct style that's easy to understand, directly affect anyone who reads them. Those who seriously consider these books, can no longer advocate atheism or any other perverted ideology or materialistic philosophy, since these books are characterized by rapid effectiveness, definite results, and irrefutability. Even if they continue to do so, it will be only a sentimental insistence, since these books refute such ideologies from their very foundations. All contemporary movements of denial are now ideologically defeated, thanks to the books written by Harun Yahya.

This is no doubt a result of the Qur'an's wisdom and lucidity. The author modestly intends to serve as a means in humanity's search for Allah's right path. No material gain is sought in the publication of these works.

Those who encourage others to read these books, to open their minds and hearts and guide them to become more devoted servants of Allah, render an invaluable service.

Meanwhile, it would only be a waste of time and energy to propagate other books that create confusion in people's minds, lead them into ideological chaos, and that clearly have no strong and precise effects in removing the doubts in people's hearts, as also verified from previous experience. It is impossible for books devised to emphasize the author's literary power rather than the noble goal of saving people from loss of faith, to have such a great effect. Those who doubt this can readily see that the sole aim of Harun Yahya's books is to overcome disbelief and to disseminate the Qur'an's moral values. The success and impact of this service are manifested in the readers' conviction.

One point should be kept in mind: The main reason for the continuing cruelty, conflict, and other ordeals endured by the vast majority of people is the ideological prevalence of disbelief. This can be ended only with the ideological defeat of disbelief and by conveying the wonders of creation and Qur'anic morality so that people can live by it. Considering the state of the world today, leading into a downward spiral of violence, corruption and conflict, clearly this service must be provided speedily and effectively, or it may be too late.

In this effort, the books of Harun Yahya assume a leading role. By the will of Allah, these books will be a means through which people in the twenty-first century will attain the peace, justice, and happiness promised in the Qur'an.

TO THE READER

A special chapter is assigned to the collapse of the theory of evolution because this theory constitutes the basis of all anti-spiritual philosophies. Since Darwinism rejects the fact of creation—and therefore, Allah's existence—over the last 150 years it has caused many people to abandon their faith or fall into doubt. It is therefore an imperative service, a very important duty to show everyone that this theory is a deception. Since some readers may find the chance to read only one of our books, we think it appropriate to devote a chapter to summarize this subject.

All the author's books explain faith-related issues in light of Qur'anic verses, and invite readers to learn Allah's words and to live by them. All the subjects concerning Allah's verses are explained so as to leave no doubt or room for questions in the reader's mind. The books' sincere, plain, and fluent style ensures that everyone of every age and from every social group can easily understand them. Thanks to their effective, lucid narrative, they can be read at one sitting. Even those who rigorously reject spirituality are influenced by the facts these books document and cannot refute the truthfulness of their contents.

This and all the other books by the author can be read individually, or discussed in a group. Readers eager to profit from the books will find discussion very useful, letting them relate their reflections and experiences to one another.

In addition, it will be a great service to Islam to contribute to the publication and reading of these books, written solely for the pleasure of Allah. The author's books are all extremely convincing. For this reason, to communicate true religion to others, one of the most effective methods is encouraging them to read these books.

We hope the reader will look through the reviews of his other books at the back of this book. His rich source material on faith-related issues is very useful, and a pleasure to read.

In these books, unlike some other books, you will not find the author's personal views, explanations based on dubious sources, styles that are unobservant of the respect and reverence due to sacred subjects, nor hopeless, pessimistic arguments that create doubts in the mind and deviations in the heart.

INTRODUCTION

A general review of historical trends and people against the religious morality reveals that they all base their philosophy on materialist thought. As is known, materialists deny the fact of creation. Instead, they maintain the error that matter has existed since time immemorial and will remain as an absolute entity for all eternity. In other words, they deify matter. (Surely Allah is beyond that.) Materialism is thus defined in materialist sources:

Materialism accepts the eternity and everlastingness of the universe (its having no beginning or end), that it is not created by God, and is infinite in time and place.1

The reason why materialism so deifies matter stems from its categorical refusal to accept the existence of a Creator. That matter is not absolute implies that it had a beginning: that it had a beginning means that it was brought into being from nothing, that is, it was created.

Not surprisingly, the consensus reached by the world of science at the end of the 20th century verifies the fact that matter is not absolute and that it had a beginning: the whole universe originated from nothing approximately 15 billion years ago with the explosion of a point with "zero" volume and took its present shape by expanding over time. The authenticity of this event, which is called the Big Bang, is proved by many substantial observations and experiments as well as by the calculations of theoretic physicists.

The latest point reached by science today verifies the fact that "the universe was created out of nothing," as is maintained in the Qur'an as well as in the Old and the New Testaments. In addition, modern science has disproved materialism and all its sub-ideologies, destroyed the matter-dependent world of materialists, and defeated them in the struggle they waged against creation.

Materialists, however, cannot accept the fact that matter is not absolute but was created, even at the cost of conflicting with science. To accept this fact would require them to accept the existence of Allah, and to believe in Allah would require them to accept religious moral values and lead religious lives. As religious morality primarily requires definite obedience and submission to Allah, this would prove to be troublesome for such people as are blinded by their own arrogance. In the Qur'an, the state of those who escape realities because of their arrogance — though the truth is quite apparent — is explained as follows:

And they rejected those Signs in their iniquity and arrogance, though their souls were convinced of their truth. Consider the fate of those who acted corruptly! (Surat an-Naml, 14)

Materialists believe the falsehood that time, just like matter, is absolute, i.e., it comes from eternity and goes on to eternity. Adhering to this misapprehension, they seek to deny fate, the day of resurrection, paradise and hell. However, today, modern science has proven that just like matter, time, which is a derivative of matter, has also been created from nothingness, and that it also had a beginning. At the same time, that time is a relative notion, that it is not static and unchanging as materialists have long believed, and that it is a changing form of perception were also discovered in the 20th century. The relativity of time and space has been proven by Einstein's Theory of Relativity and this fact has today laid the basis of modern physics.

To sum up, time and space are concepts that are not absolute, that have a beginning, and that were created by Allah from nothing. Allah, Who has created time and space, is certainly beyond these concepts. Allah has defined, determined and created every moment of time in timelessness. This is what underlies the essence of the reality of "Fate," which materialists fail to comprehend.

All of the events that have been experienced in the past and that will be experienced in the future by us, are within the knowledge and control of Allah, Who is not dependent on time, and Who created time from nothing.

Today, modern science verifies facts announced by the Qur'an 1400 years ago, which are unequivocally believed in by the believers. This bears witness that the Qur'an is the word of Allah. On the other hand, materialist thought, which has been denying Allah's existence and the fact of creation for centuries, is refuted in every field by science, a discipline to which it never stops referring and in which it takes refuge on all occasions. In this book, we will produce evidence to show that the claims of materialists have no scientific and logical basis, and that on the contrary, materialism is totally demolished by contemporary science. The subjects covered here include very important pieces of evidence about the essence of matter and the relativity of time and space. Thus, you will encounter some facts which you have never pondered upon so far, and will understand that the essence of matter is in truth very different from what materialism puts forward or what you have previously been taught.

CHAPTER 1

THE UNIVERSE IS CREATED FROM

NON-EXISTENCE

Materialism is a system of thought that holds matter to be an absolute entity and denies the existence of anything but matter. Having its roots in ancient Greece and gaining increased acceptance, particularly in the 19th century, and becoming famous with the dialectical materialism of Karl Marx, this system of thought claims that matter has existed forever and that it will exist for all eternity. Since it maintains that matter is not created, it does not accept the existence of a Creator.

As we have just stated, materialism became popular mainly in the 19th century. One of the principal reasons for this is the "static universe" model that was then produced in response to the question of "how the universe had come about". This model answered the question by stating that the universe had not come about, it had existed forever and would continue to exist forever. The universe was accepted to be a stable, constant and unchanging collection of matter and the notion was promoted that such a universe did not require us to believe in a Creator.

The confirmation of the opposite of this universe model, that is, the discovery that the universe had a beginning and that it was alterable, unquestionably proved the existence of a Creator. In his book "Principes Fondamentaux de Philosophie", renowned materialist philosopher Georges Politzer accepted this fact in his denial of creation on the basis of this "boundless universe" model:

The universe is not a created object. If it were, then it would have to have been created instantaneously by God and brought into existence from nothing. To admit creation, one has to admit, in the first place, the existence of a moment when the universe did not exist, and that something came out of nothingness. This is something to which science cannot concede.2

In saying, “this is something to which science cannot concede,”  Georges Politzer is actually referring to the materialist world view, not to science. As a matter of fact, one of materialists’ most-known false beliefs is the error that science has to be materialist. In writing these lines, Politzer imagined that science was on his side and that subsequent progress would confirm the idea of the boundless universe. At the end of a period that started in the second quarter of the 20th century, modern science, however, proved the fact admitted by materialists when they said: "If it was so, then we would perforce agree that a Creator existed,"—that is, that the universe had a beginning. This fact was revealed after a number of stages.

The Expansion of the Universe

The 1920s were important years in the development of modern astronomy. In 1922, the Russian physicist Alexandra Friedman produced computations showing that the structure of the universe was not static and that even a tiny impulse might be sufficient to cause the whole structure to expand or contract according to Einstein's Theory of Relativity. George Lemaitre was the first to recognize what Friedman's findings meant. Based on these computations, the Belgian astronomer Lemaitre declared that the universe had a beginning and that it was expanding as a result of something that had triggered it. He also claimed that radiation surviving from that initial moment would also be detected. In fact, working on a different research, Vesto Melvin Slipher, had already determined, in 1913, before Lemaitre, that some galaxies near us were rapidly moving away from the Earth. This discovery by Slipher was the first clue to show that the universe was expanding.

The theoretical musings of these scientists did not attract much attention and probably would have been ignored except for new observational evidence that rocked the scientific world in 1929. That year the American astronomer Edwin Hubble, working at the California Mount Wilson observatory, made one of the most important discoveries in the history of astronomy.

What Hubble initially wanted to do was to study far-off galaxies and to try to establish the movements of the stars and their chemical structures based on the information regarding the light they emitted. Hubble and his team analyzed the light rays arriving from distant galaxies one by one and made significant discoveries. One of these was that the commonest elements in the galaxies were hydrogen and helium. This discovery confirmed information put forward by previous scientists, and was accepted without controversy by the scientific world. Hubble’s other discovery stunned the scientific world, however: He noted that light emitted from stars shifted toward red.

According to the physical law known as the Doppler effect, the wavelength of the light is “contracted” as it approaches the observer and is “stretched” when moving away from him. In other words, the light moving toward the observer is seen as shifted towards the blue end of the spectrum, while that of light moving away from the observer shifts towards the red end of the spectrum. (In the same way that the sound of a train whistle moving away from an observer is thinned out.)

That being the case, Hubble and his team’s discovery indicated that all the galaxies were moving away from us and the stars and galaxies were not just moving away from us, but also from each other. The greater the distance, the greater the speed. Hubble designed a mathematical equation to express this, known as “Hubble’s law.” This law was once again conformed by every new piece of information from distant galaxies.  

The only possible conclusion in a universe in which everything is moving away from everything else was that the universe is “expanding.” And that meant the collapse of the idea that “the universe is stable and boundless,” which had reigned in the scientific world for many years and been fiercely defended by materialists. Indeed, at first Hubble’s findings attracted strong reactions. The science writer David Filkin describes the reaction from materialist and atheist scientists to Hubble’s discoveries in his book Stephen Hawking’s Universe: The Cosmos Explained:

An expanding universe was a difficult concept for the majority of atheistic scientists who had become firmly wedded to the idea of an unchanging infinite and eternal universe. Anything that was expanding could hardly be unchanging. So there was a huge temptation to play down or dismiss Hubble’s perception.³

But no matter how much materialists sought to play down Hubble’s discoveries, new findings and data obtained shortly after once again confirmed the irrefutable fact that the universe is expanding.

The Reality Shown by the Expansion of the Universe:

The Big Bang

Hubble's discovery that the universe was expanding led to the emergence of another model that needed no fiddling around with to make the equations work right. If the universe was getting bigger as time advanced, going back in time meant that it was getting smaller; and if one went back far enough, everything would shrink and converge at a single point.

Scientists unable to refute this state of affairs theoretically imagined they could do so with mathematical data. The Oxford University mathematician Roger Penrose worked on various hypotheses using Einstein’s mathematics. Penrose’s research inflicted a terrible disappointment on materialists, because mathematical formulas showed that gravitational attraction would cause a large amount of matter to collapse, becoming an increasingly denser and smaller “single point.”  

Penrose’s findings were expanded by Stephen Hawking. Penrose and Hawking mathematically proved that the universe came into being from a single point they referred to as a “singularity.” Bill Bryson described the concept of the singularity in his book A Short History of Nearly Everything:

… outside the singularity there is no where. When the universe begins to expand, it won’t be spreading out to fill a larger emptiness. The only space that exists is the space it creates as it goes. 

It is natural but wrong to visualize the singularity as a kind of pregnant dot hanging in a dark, boundless void. But there is no space, no darkness. The singularity has no “around” around it. There is no space for it to occupy, no place for it to be. We can’t even ask how long it has been there—whether it has just lately popped into being, like a good idea, or whether it has been there forever, quietly awaiting the right moment. Time doesn’t exist. There is no past for it to emerge from.

And so, from nothing, our universe begins.⁴

The conclusion to be derived from the calculations was that at some time, all the matter in the universe was compacted in a single point-mass that had "zero volume" because of its immense gravitational force.

In an announcement issued in 1970, Penrose and Hawking revealed that the universe had come into being through the explosion of this “point” with zero volume. The formulas they discovered left no room for any alternative proposition. In this way, the theory known as the “Big Bang” had been proved mathematically.

Another fact shown by the Big Bang was this: Since zero volume means “nothing,” the universe had come into “being” from “nothing.” This, in turn, meant that the universe had a beginning and invalidated the materialist assumption that “the universe had existed for ever.” This led to intense debates among materialist scientists. Professor of cosmology Andrei Linde set out the questions needing to be answered in the wake of the Big Bang theory:

In its standard form, the big bang theory assumes that all parts of the universe began expanding simultaneously. But how could all the different parts of the universe synchronize the beginning of their expansion? Who gave the command?⁵

The answer to Linde’s question is in fact quite clear. Something coming into “being” from “nothing” demonstrates one single fact: Creation. Allah created matter and the whole universe from nothing, by commanding it to “Be!” Allah makes this pronouncement about His sublime creative power in this verse from the Qur’an:

[He is] the Originator of the heavens and earth. When He decides on something, He just says to it, “Be!” and it is.” (Surat al-Baqara, 117)

Why Were Materialist Scientists Unable

to Accept the Big Bang?

The Big Bang theory quickly gained wide acceptance in the scientific world due to the clear-cut evidence for it. Nevertheless scientists who favored materialism and adhered to the idea of an infinite universe that materialism seemingly demanded held out against the Big Bang in their struggle to uphold a fundamental tenet of their ideology. The reason was made clear by the English astronomer Arthur Eddington, who said "Philosophically, the notion of an abrupt beginning to the present order of Nature is repugnant to me".⁶ In other words, materialist scientists continued to espouse an error, not out of scientific concerns, but from ideological ones. 

Reactions against the Big Bang theory were expressed in different forms. For example, asked for his view of the Big Bang theory, the German chemist Walter Nernst claimed that to accept these findings “would be to betray the very foundations of science.”⁷ The concern that Nernst expressed in these words was nothing else than a fear of a betrayal of materialism. That is because although the scientific findings indisputably proved the Big Bang, Nernst and others who shared his views were still reluctant to accept it, and thus flew in the face of science. MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) professor of physics Phillip Morrison said in a BBC film, “I find it hard to accept the Big Bang theory; I would like to reject it.”⁸ Allan Sandage, from the Carnegie Observatories, who made significant discoveries showing that the universe was expanding at a constant speed, expressed his amazement at the findings in the words, “it cannot really be true!”⁹

As expressed in an article titled “Big-Bang Theology” by the New Yorker writer Jim Holt, “the big bang is probably the only idea in the history of science that was ever resisted because of its [supporting creation by God].”¹⁰ In “The Religion of Science” chapter of his book God and the Astronomers, the eminent astrophysicist Robert Jastrow examines the reasons why materialist scientists are reluctant to accept the Big Bang theory, despite all the findings that confirm it. Jastrow interprets these responses as follows (the scientists Jastrow refers to here are materialist scientists):

There is a strange ring of feeling and emotion in these reactions. … This religious faith of the scientists is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces or circumstances we cannot discover. When that happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the implications, he would be traumatized. As usual when faced with trauma, the mind reacts by ignoring the implications…

Consider the enormity of the problem [for the scientists]. Science has proven that the Universe exploded into being at a certain moment. … Who or [W]hat put the matter and energy into the Universe? Was the Universe created out of nothing …?

This is an exceedingly strange development, unexpected by all but the theologians.¹¹

Jastrow’s analysis clearly reveals the astonishment and despair of materialist scientists. A fact clearly verified by all scientific findings is rejected solely out of ideological concerns, and the search for an alternative view is insistently maintained. These words from another astrophysicist, Barry Parker, express this very well:

We do, of course, have an alternative. We could say that there was no creation, and that the universe has always been here. But this is even more difficult to accept than creation.¹²

Materialist scientists preferred the difficult alternative and persisted in the denial of Creation. One of the theories proposed against the Big Bang was the “steady state theory,” which was espoused most determinedly for a time, despite all the scientific realities.

The Invalidity of the "Steady State"

Theory Proposed against the Big Bang

Another astronomer who opposed the Big Bang theory was Fred Hoyle. Around the middle of the 20th century he came up with a model, which he called "steady-state", that was an extension of the 19th century's idea of an infinite universe. According to Hoyle’s model, as the universe expanded new matter was continuously coming into existence by itself in just the right amount to keep the universe in a "steady state". In fact, the theory launched by Hoyle and his team contained a number of internal inconsistencies. More importantly, these constituted the basis of new developments that would soon demolish the theory.

Hoyle wanted to account for the emergence of certain chemicals that gave rise to all the matter in the universe. He maintained that stars had moments of birth and death and that they produced all chemical elements throughout their lives. According to this view, the stars came into being when hydrogen atoms in space were pulled together under the force of gravity into increasingly larger spheres. As these spheres grew, so the inward pressure of gravity increased, with the pressure eventually reaching such a point that some of the hydrogen atoms fused together, thus producing helium atoms.¹³ This conversion happens on a constant basis, and stars are exposed to processes of fusion that give rise to the next heaviest chemical element. These progressive reactions continue with the production of numerous light elements as far as iron, and eventually a hot iron core remains.

This stage is one in which the star continues to emit light, known as the white dwarf stage. When the star turns into a cold mass of iron that does not emit light, it moves to become what is known as the brown dwarf. If this final remnant of a star is not pulled into collision by the gravitational force of other bodies in the universe, then it remains in space. 

In large stars, as their lives come to an end, high temperatures and pressure sufficient to give rise to heavier elements arise in direct proportion to the gravitational force. During this process, elements are thrown off reaching far and wide as a very hot shining dust cloud is blown out into space.

When these claims by Hoyle and his team were backed up by observations, scientific circles imagined for a moment that they supported the idea of the infinite universe. The fact is, however, that there was an important question that could not be answered by Hoyle’s concept, which said that all the elements came in a cycle from hydrogen. The question concerned how hydrogen, the basis of all the elements and that gave rise to stars, first appeared. That is because an extraordinarily high-temperature explosion would be needed to produce hydrogen. The scientific answer to that question, which Hoyle ignored, once again came as a disappointment to materialists.

New Evidence for the Big Bang:

Cosmic Background Radiation

In a radio program in 1940s, Hoyle said, “If the universe began with a hot Big Bang, then such an explosion would have left a relic. Find me a fossil of this Big Bang.”¹⁴ The fossil that Hoyle and materialists never imagined would ever be discovered was in fact found soon after.

In 1948, the physicist George Gamow launched a new theory in order to find the traces of the Big Bang. The formation of the hydrogen necessary for the first stars to emerge could be explained by the Big Bang setting up extraordinarily high temperatures. In fact, findings from the traces of the earliest galaxies showed that a cosmic makeup of 80% hydrogen and 20% helium formed at the moment of the great explosion. That being the case, the radiation caused by the high temperatures that gave rise to those elements should still be in existence, despite the passage of billions of years. Since the universe was expanding in all directions, like a balloon being inflated, low-level background radiation should have radiated out in all directions, and that now needed to be detected. Those traces were soon after identified, and the fossil that Hoyle was so certain would never be found was in fact discovered.

In 1965, two researchers by the name of Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered these waves, though they were not actually looking for them. This radiation, called "cosmic background radiation", was different from radiation coming from a particular point in space. It was extraordinarily uniform. In other words, it did not seem to radiate from a particular source but rather pervaded the whole of space. Thus, it was revealed that the heat waves that were uniformly radiated from all around space had been left over from the initial stages of the Big Bang. Penzias and Wilson were awarded a Nobel prize for their discovery.

In 1989, George Smoot and NASA team sent a satellite into space. Called the "Cosmic Background Emission Explorer" (COBE), it took only eight minutes for the sensitive instruments on board the satellite to detect and confirm the levels of radiation reported by Penzias and Wilson. These results conclusively demonstrated the existence of the hot, dense form remaining from the explosion out of which the universe came into being.Cosmic background radiation was invisible to the naked eye, but it was everywhere in the universe and present everywhere we could see. If we could have seen these waves, the whole of the sky, in all directions, would have been equally brightly illuminated by it.

One piece of information discovered in 1992 by George Smoot from data obtained from COBE once again proved the truth of the Big Bang and the false nature of the “steady state theory.” Following discoveries by Penzias and Wilson, the adherents of the steady state theory came up with a new claim. They said that cosmic background radiation temperature was uniform and that there would have to be variations, in other words, small differences in temperature, in order for galaxies to form in the wake of a giant explosion. They suggested that so long as this temperature difference could not be identified, cosmic background radiation could not be used as evidence for the Big Bang. It was this temperature difference that the exponents of the steady state theory said was lacking that George Smoot determined in 1992. There were very small differences between the data sent by COBE in 1992 and the old map of the universe. The details in the picture were closely examined. The computerized maps revealed very small temperature differences in background radiation. For example, some regions had a temperature of 2.7251 Kelvin and others of 2.7249 Kelvin. The Big Bang had once again been confirmed by scientific findings and observations.

The majority of scientists interpreted the COBE data as verifying the Big Bang in an incontrovertible manner. In an article titled “Stephen Hawking, the Big Bang and God,” the Nobel Prize candidate professor of chemistry Henry F. Schaefer described what happened when the results of the COBE research were announced: 

About the 1992 observations, which were from the COBE (the NASA satellite Cosmic Background Explorer), there was a story on the front page of virtually every newspaper in the world. The thing that the London Times, New York Times, etc. seemed to pick up on was a statement by George Smoot, the team leader from the Lawrence-Berkeley Laboratory. He said, “It’s like looking at [the signs of creation by] God.” Obviously, this captured the public’s attention.

A[nother] … assessment of the findings was given by Frederick Burnham, a science-historian. He said, “These findings, now available, make the idea that God created the universe [much more different] … today than at any time in the last 100 years.”¹⁵

More evidence for the Big Bang was forthcoming. One piece had to do with the relative amounts of hydrogen and helium in the universe. Observations indicated that the mix of these two elements in the universe was in accord with theoretical calculations of what should have been remained after the Big Bang. That drove another stake into the heart of the steady state theory because if the universe had existed for eternity and never had a beginning, all of its hydrogen should have been burned into helium.

Confronted by such evidence, the Big Bang gained the near-complete approval of the scientific world. In an article in its October 1994 issue, Scientific American noted that the Big Bang model was the only one that could account for the constant expansion of the universe and for other observational results.

Defending the steady-state theory alongside Fred Hoyle for years, British scientist Dennis Sciama described the final position they had reached after all the evidence for the Big Bang theory was revealed. Sciama stated that he had taken part in the heated debate between the defenders of the steady-state theory and those who tested that theory with the hope of refuting it. He added that he had defended the steady-state theory, not because he deemed it valid, but because he wished that it were valid. Fred Hoyle stood out against all objections as evidence against this theory began to unfold. Sciama goes on to say that he had first taken a stand along with Hoyle but, as evidence began to pile up, he had had to admit that the game was over and that the steady-state theory had to be dismissed.16

Further confirmation of the data obtained by the COBE came from other, subsequent studies. One such was the result obtained in 2000 from an observation balloon known as BOOMERANG (Balloon Observations of Millimetric Extragalactic Radiation and Geophysics), launched at the end of 1998. Loaded with sensitive equipment and traveling 37,000 meters (120,000 feet) above the Antarctic, the balloon made it possible to obtain extremely detailed and clear data regarding cosmic background radiation. The equipment on BOOMERANG was sufficiently sensitive to detect tiny temperature variations—only 100-millionths of a degree Celsius. The results obtained once again verified the truth of the Big Bang and allowed scientists to obtain more detailed information about the earliest days of the universe. One of the scientists who analyzed the data from BOOMERANG that confirmed the Big Bang, Michael Turner of the University of Chicago, says:

The big bang framework and Einstein's general relativity have passed a major new test.¹⁷

The Big Bang's Victory

All of this compelling evidence caused the Big Bang theory to be embraced by the scientific community. The Big Bang model is the latest position reached by science on the formation and beginning of the universe.

Prof. George Abel from the University of California states that currently available evidence shows that the universe originated billions of years ago with the Big Bang. He concedes that he has no choice but to accept the Big Bang theory.18

With the Big Bang's victory, the concept of "eternal matter" that constituted the basis of the materialist philosophy has been thrown on to the trash-heap of history. What, then, came before the Big Bang and what was the power that brought the universe into "being" with this big explosion when it was "non-existent"? This question certainly reveals the existence of a Creator—that is, the existence of Almighty Allah. The renowned atheist philosopher Antony Flew comments on the issue:

Notoriously, confession is good for the soul. I will, therefore, begin by confessing that the Stratonician atheist has to be embarrassed by the contemporary cosmological consensus. For it seems that the cosmologists are providing a scientific proof of what St. Thomas contended could not be proved philosophically; namely, that the universe had a beginning. So long as the universe can be comfortably thought of as being not only without end but also without beginning, it remains easy to urge that its brute existence, and whatever are found to be its most fundamental features, should be accepted as the explanatory ultimates. Although I believe that it remains still correct, it certainly is neither easy nor comfortable to maintain this position in the face of the Big Bang story.19

Many scientists who do not blindly condition themselves to be atheists have admitted the existence of Almighty Allah in the creation of the universe.

Roger Penrose, a physicist who has done extensive research on the origin of the universe, has also stated that the universe rests where it is not by mere coincidence, and this shows that it definitely has a purpose. For some people, "the universe is just there" and it just goes on being there. We just happened to find ourselves right in the middle of this whole thing. This viewpoint would probably not help us in understanding the universe. According to Penrose's view, there are many deep affairs going on within the universe whose existence we cannot today perceive.20

The WMAP Satellite Once Again

Proved the Big Bang

The WMAP (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe) satellite launched into space in 2001 and that enabled the clearest results to be obtained in 2003 also verified the accuracy of the Big Bang theory and enabled discoveries of the greatest significance to be made. Science magazine chose the studies on the basis of the data obtained from the WMAP as the breakthrough of the year 2003.²¹ The great majority of scientists agreed that the data sent back by WMAP represented a turning point in cosmology.

The cosmic background, the map of which was extracted from WMAP, dated back 13 billion years. WMAP determined the state of the universe when it was 390,000 years old. The data from this background enabled a great many questions about the formation of the galaxies to be answered. The importance of the mission was summarized as follows on a NASA web page:

The WMAP mission addresses fundamental questions in cosmology:  What is the geometry of the Universe?  How did structures, such as galaxies and galaxy clusters, that we see in today’s sky come about?  How old is the Universe, and what are its constituents?

Answers to these questions lie in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), the remnant background radiation left over from the Big Bang… ²²

Because of the lower sensitivity of the equipment on COBE, only the main lines of the cosmic background radiation in the universe had been mapped. The WMAP, however, was designed and launched specifically to measure the cosmic background radiation left over from the Big Bang.

The advanced equipment on the WMAP produced a more detailed map of the cosmic background radiation and permitted definitive results to be obtained in many spheres regarding the universe. These data also clarified many subjects of debate such as the universe’s expansion rate, its composition and its density.

Some of the information revealed by WMAP is as follows:

The universe is 13.73 billion years old. The margin for error here is around 1%. Prior to this, space was estimated to be 15-20 billion years old.²³

The first stars began shining about 400 million years after the Big Bang.²⁴ Such an early dating astonished scientists.

The universe is made up of 4.6% ordinary atoms, 23.3% dark matter and 72.1% dark energy. These new measurements will enable significant data to be obtained about the nature of the dark energy, which pulls galaxies apart.²⁵

Scientists say that this information support and reinforce the theories of the Big Bang and the expanding universe. “This is a beginning of a new stage in our study of the early Universe,” said one WMAP team member from Princeton University, N.J. “We can use this portrait … to understand the first moments of the Big Bang.”²⁶

Discoveries That Have Put an End

to the Big Bang Debate

Two separate study groups made up of British, Australian and American scientists produced a three-dimensional map of some 266,000 galaxies in the wake of many years of research. The scientists compared the data they collected about the distribution of the galaxies with those of the cosmic background radiation disseminated throughout the universe, and obtained important findings about the origin of the galaxies. Researchers analyzing the studies concluded that galaxies formed where matter relatively clustered some 350,000 years after the Big Bang and took shape due to the gravitational force. The findings in question provided new evidence for the Big Bang theory. 

One study carried out over 10 years by the Anglo-Australian Observatory in New South Wales, Australia determined the positions in space of around 220,000 galaxies using a three-dimensional mapping technique. The mapping procedure, carried out using the observatory’s 3.9 meter-diameter telescope, was nearly ten times larger than previous similar surveys.²⁷ A team of scientists led by the director of the observatory, Dr. Matthew Colless, determined galaxies’ positions relative to one another and the distances between them. They then modeled the distribution patterns and examined minute fluctuations in these models in great detail.

In a similar study conducted by the Apache Point Observatory in the US state of New Mexico – of another region of space – some 46,000 galaxies were three-dimensionally mapped and their distribution examined. The study, which used the 2.5 meter-diameter Sloan telescope, was led by Daniel Eisenstein from the University of Arizona.²⁸

Both groups’ findings were announced at a meeting held by the American Astronomical Society in San Diego on 11 January, 2005. Colless and Eisenstein’s teams determined a correlation between fluctuations in the distances between galaxies and the fluctuations observed in background cosmic radiation. It was thus established that the galaxies were seeded around 350,000 years after the Big Bang in areas where matter was slightly more intensely clustered together.

The findings obtained from these studies further reinforced the Big Bang theory. Dr. Russell Cannon, a team member of the latter survey, emphasized this support in the words:

We've known for a long time that the best theory for the universe is the Big Bang - that it started in some enormous explosion in a tiny space and it expanded ever since. … What we can now be much more confident about is that it is the right basic idea, it all bolts together very nicely. ²⁹

Facts Announced By The Qur'an 14

Centuries Ago

To sum up, the definite conclusion reached by astrophysics was that the entire universe, with its matter and time dimensions, came into being at a moment of zero with a big explosion (Big Bang). Before the Big Bang, there was no such thing as time. Matter, energy, and time came into existence out of a state of nothingness where neither matter, nor energy, and nor time was existent this event can be defined as entirely metaphysical. However, this great reality discovered by modern physics only at the end of the 20^th century was announced to us in the Qur'an 14 centuries ago.

To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth… (Surat al-Anaam, 101)

The Big Bang theory showed that, in the beginning, all the objects in the universe were of one piece and then were parted. This fact, which was postulated by the Big Bang theory was stated in the Qur'an 14 centuries ago, when people had a very limited knowledge about the universe:

Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe? (Surat al-Anbiya, 30)

As stated at the beginning of this chapter, the expansion of the universe is one of the most important pieces of evidence that the universe was created out of nothing. Although this fact, which has existed since the universe was created, was not discovered by modern science until the 20th century, Allah informed us of this reality in the Qur'an which was revealed 1,400 years ago:

It is We who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We who are steadily expanding it. (Surat adh-Dhariyat, 47)

The Explosion That Brought Order

In reality, the Big Bang caused much greater trouble for the materialists and atheists, than the above confessions of the atheist philosopher, Antony Flew. The Big Bang proved not only that the universe was created out of nothing, but also that it was brought into being in a very planned, systematic and controlled manner.

Perfect order arose after the Big Bang, which was an explosion. Explosions, however, never bring about order. All of the observable explosions tend to harm, cause to disintegrate, and destroy what is present. For example, the atom and hydrogen bomb explosions, fire-damp explosions, volcanic explosions, natural gas explosions, solar explosions all have destructive effects.

If, however, we are introduced to a very detailed order after an explosion, we then conclude that there is an intellect, an intervention behind this explosion and that all the pieces dispersed by the explosion are made to move in a very controlled way.

The following statement made by Sir Fred Hoyle, who accepted his mistake after many years of opposition to the Big Bang Theory, expresses this situation very well:

The big bang theory holds that the universe began with a single explosion. Yet, an explosion merely throws matter apart, while the big bang has mysteriously produced the opposite effect - with matter clumping together in the form of galaxies.30

While stating that the Big Bang's giving way to order is contradictory, he surely interprets the Big Bang with a materialistic bias and assumes that this was an "uncontrolled explosion." In reality, however, he was the one who contradicted himself by making such a statement simply to dismiss the existence of a Creator, Who is Allah. If great order has arisen as the result of an explosion, then the concept of an "uncontrolled explosion" must be set aside and it must be accepted that the explosion was extraordinarily controlled.

This order holds true for all stages after the Big Bang. The matter that has emerged with the Big Bang is in the form of the particles we call "atomic particles". But these have come together in an orderly manner and formed atoms everywhere and in every part of the universe. Being composed in great order, these atoms have formed galaxies by concentrating in certain parts of the universe. In these galaxies stars have formed stars, and around these stars, star systems and planets have come into existence. All these vast heavenly bodies are extraordinarily organized. If we think that there are approximately 300 billion galaxies in the universe, and 300 billion stars in each one of them, we can better understand the degree of the extraordinariness of the order and balance in question.

Delicate Balances

Another aspect of this amazing order formed in the universe following the Big Bang is the creation of a "habitable universe". The conditions for the formation of a habitable planet are so many and so complex that it is almost impossible to think that this formation is coincidental.

Paul Davies, a renowned professor of theoretical physics, calculated how "fine tuned" the pace of expansion after the Big Bang was, and he reached an incredible conclusion. According to Davies, if the rate of expansion after the Big Bang had been different even by the ratio of one over a billion times a billion, no habitable star type would have been formed:

Careful measurement puts the rate of expansion very close to a critical value at which the universe will just escape its own gravity and expand forever. A little slower and the cosmos would collapse, a little faster and the cosmic material would have long ago completely dispersed. It is interesting to ask precisely how delicately the rate of expansion has been "fine-tuned" to fall on this narrow dividing line between two catastrophes. If at time I S (by which time the pattern of expansion was already firmly established) the expansion rate had differed from its actual value by more than 10-18, it would have been sufficient to throw the delicate balance out. The explosive vigour of the universe is thus matched with almost unbelievable accuracy to its gravitating power. The big bang was not, evidently, any old bang, but an explosion of exquisitely arranged magnitude.31

The amazing balance in the universe is thus explained in a scientific magazine:

If the density of the universe matter had been a little more, then the universe, according to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, would never expand due to the attraction forces of atomic particles, and have would have recollapsed to turn into a spot. If the density had initially been a little less, then the universe would have expanded at the highest speed, and the atomic particles would not have been able to attract and capture one another and stars and galaxies would never have been formed. Naturally, we, too, would not have existed! According to the calculations made, the difference between the initial real density of the universe and the critical density beyond which there is no likelihood of its formation is less than a quadrillion of a hundredth. This is like placing a pen on its sharp end so that it can stay so even after one billion years. Moreover, this balance gets more delicate as the universe expands.32

The famous physicist Prof. Stephen Hawking makes this comment on the balance in the speed of expansion in his book A Brief History of Time:

If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have re-collapsed before it ever reached its present size.33

As regards this interesting situation Paul Davies states:

It is hard to resist the impression that the present structure of the universe, apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in the numbers, has been rather carefully thought out… The seemingly miraculous concurrence of numerical values that nature has assigned to her fundamental constants must remain the most compelling evidence for an element of cosmic design.34

In relation to the same set of facts, an American professor of astronomy, George Greenstein, writes in his book The Symbiotic Universe:

As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency–or, rather Agency–must be involved (in the formation of the universe).35

We must conclude, when we examine the glorious system in the universe, that the existence of the universe and its workings rest on extremely delicate balances and an order too complex to be explained away by coincidental causes. As is evident, it is by no means possible for this delicate balance and order to have been formed on its own and by coincidence after a great explosion. The formation of such an order following an explosion such as the Big Bang could only have been possible as a result of conscious interventions at each step. This is the creation of Allah, Who created the universe out of nothing and Who at every moment keeps it under His control and guidance.

Objections to the Fact of Creation and

Why These Are Invalid

As we have seen this far, the Big Bang theory means that the universe came into being from nothing, and obviously therefore proves Creation. For that reason, astronomers and physicists who espoused materialist philosophy have tried to come up with alternative accounts in order to be able, in their own eyes, to reject this reality. The “steady state” theory, one such instance, is a hopeless alternative produced by a number of scientists “philosophically” uneasy at the idea of the creation of the universe.

Two other alternatives proposed by materialists consist of models that accept the Big Bang but seek to interpret it in ways that exclude creation. One is the “oscillating universe model,” and the other is the “quantum model of universe.” Let us now consider these theories in turn, and see why they are invalid.

The oscillating universe model was advanced by the astronomers who disliked the idea the Big Bang was the beginning of the universe. In this model, it is claimed that the present expansion of the universe will eventually be reversed at some point and begin to contract. This contraction will cause everything to collapse into a single point that will then explode again, initiating a new round of expansion. This process, they say, is repeated infinitely in time. This model also holds that the universe has experienced this transformation an infinite number of times already and that it will continue to do so forever. In other words, the universe exists for eternity but it expands and collapses at different intervals with a huge explosion punctuating each cycle. The universe we live in is just one of those infinite universes going through the same cycle.

This is nothing but a feeble attempt to accommodate the fact of the Big Bang to notions about an infinite universe. The proposed scenario is unsupported by the results of scientific research, which show that it is impossible for such an "oscillating" universe idea to come into being. Furthermore the laws of physics offer no reason why a contracting universe should explode again after collapsing into a single point: it ought to stay just as it is.³⁶

Even if we allow that there is some mechanism by which this cycle of contraction-explosion-expansion does take place, the crucial point is that this cycle cannot go on for ever, as is claimed. Calculations for this model show that each universe will transfer an amount of entropy to its successor. In other words, the amount of useful energy available becomes less each time and every "opening" universe will open more slowly and have a larger diameter. This will cause a much smaller universe to form the next time around and so on, eventually petering out into nothing. Even if "open and close" universes can exist, they cannot endure for eternity. At some point it becomes necessary for "something" to be created from "nothing.”³⁷

Put briefly, the "oscillating" universe model is a hopeless fantasy whose physical reality is impossible.

The "quantum model of universe" is another attempt to purge the Big Bang of its creationist implications. Supporters of this model base it on the observations of quantum (subatomic) physics. In quantum physics, it is to be observed that subatomic particles appear and disappear spontaneously in a vacuum. Misinterpreting this observation as "matter can originate at quantum level, this is a property pertaining to matter," some physicists try to explain the origination of matter from non-existence during the creation of the universe as a "property pertaining to matter" and present it as a part of laws of nature.

However this syllogism is definitely out of question and in any case cannot explain how the universe came into being. William Lane Craig, the author of The Big Bang: Theism and Atheism explains why:

A quantum mechanical vacuum spawning material particles is far from the ordinary idea of a "vacuum" (meaning nothing). Rather, a quantum vacuum is a sea of continually forming and dissolving particles, which borrow energy from the vacuum for their brief existence. This is not "nothing," and hence, material particles do not come into being out of nothing.³⁸

So in quantum physics, matter "does not exist when it was not before". What happens is that ambient energy suddenly becomes matter and just as suddenly disappears becoming energy again. In short, there is no condition of "spontaneous existence from nothingness" as is claimed.

In physics, no less than in other branches of the sciences, there are materialist scientists who do not hesitate to disguise the truth by overlooking critical points and details in their attempt to support their own views and achieve their ends. For them, it is much more important to defend materialism and atheism than to reveal scientific facts and realities.

In the face of the reality mentioned above, most scientists dismiss the quantum model of universe. C. J. Isham explains that "this model is not accepted widely because of the inherent difficulties that it poses."³⁹ Even some of the originators of this idea, such as R. Brout and Ph. Spindel, have abandoned it.⁴⁰

A recent and much-publicized version of the quantum model of universe was advanced by Stephen Hawking. In his book A Brief History of Time, Hawking states that the Big Bang doesn't necessarily mean existence from nothingness. Instead of "no time" before the Big Bang, Hawking proposed the concept of "imaginary time." According to Hawking, there was only a 10-43 second "imaginary" time interval before the Big Bang took place and "real" time was formed after that. Hawking's hope was just to ignore the reality of "timelessness" before the Big Bang by means of this "imaginary" time.

As a concept, "imaginary time" is tantamount to zero or non-existence–like the imaginary number of people in a room or the imaginary number of cars on a road. Here Hawking is just playing with words.

One of the claims made by materialist scientists in the face of scientific advances that confirm the flawless creation of the universe from nothing is the idea that “maybe there are an infinite number of universes and one of these, the one we inhabit, by chance became capable of supporting life.” This theory, known as the “multiverse,” is no more than a figment of the imagination launched for the purpose of propping up materialism, and one not supported by any scientific findings. In an article titled “A Brief History of the Multiverse,” published in The New York Times on 12 April, 2003, the well-known astrophysicist Paul Davies attempted to defend the claim. But Davies’s article is full of discrepancies, and he himself recognizes the existence of Allah:

Why is nature so ingeniously, one might even say suspiciously, friendly to life? What do the laws of physics care about life and consciousness that they should conspire to make a hospitable universe? It's almost as if a Grand Designer [Allah] had it all figured out.⁴¹

In addition, Davies also admits that the multiverse theory is purely speculative. According to Davies, “It is but a small extra step to conjecture” the multiverse theory. However, he also admits that “credibility reaches a limit” and “As one slips down that slope, more and more must be accepted on faith.”

What all this shows is that alternative models to the Big Bang such as steady-state, the oscillating universe model, multiverse theory, and quantum universe models in fact spring from the philosophical prejudices of materialists. Scientific discoveries have demonstrated the reality of the Big Bang and can even explain "existence from nothingness." And this is a definitive piece of evidence of creation by Allah.

Ken Miller from Columbia University describes the light the Big Bang sheds on the origin of the universe by saying:

One of the most remarkable findings of cosmological science is that the universe did have a beginning, and a spectacular beginning at that. Discussions of first causes used to be dry philosophical constructs, theoretical arguments against an infinite regression of events backwards in time. The big bang made the first cause real. It placed a wall at the beginning of time, closing to inquiry (but not, of course, to speculation) all events that might have occurred before that cosmic explosion. In the view of many scientists, the big bang casts a distinctly theological light on the origin of the universe.42 

In conclusion, the truth disclosed by science is this: Matter and time have been brought into being by our Creator, Possessor of immense power and unbound by neither time nor matter. It is Omniscient and Almighty Allah Who created the universe in which we live.

Materialists’ Reactions to the Big Bang

Are a Sign of Their Defeat-

An example of the opposition to the Big Bang is to be found in an essay by John Maddox, the editor of Nature (a materialist magazine), that appeared in 1989. In "Down with the Big Bang", Maddox declares the Big Bang to be philosophically unacceptable because it helps theologists by providing them with strong support for their ideas. The author also predicted that the Big Bang would be disproved and that support for it would disappear within a decade.⁴³ Maddox can only have been even more discomforted by the subsequent discoveries during the next twenty years that have provided further evidence of the existence of the Big Bang.

This fact came as a most disturbing and even totally undermining one to materialists who maintained that the universe is infinite and eternal. That is why materialist scientists embarked on a search for models they thought would rule out the Big Bang and keep the idea of the eternal universe alive. But all their efforts along these lines ended in failure. 

Some materialists do act with more common sense on this subject. The British Materialist H. P. Lipson accepts the truth of creation, albeit "unpleasantly", when he says:

If living matter is not, then caused by the interplay of atoms, natural forces, and radiation, how has it come into being?…I think, however, that we must…admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.⁴⁴

The End of Materialism

All these facts indicate that the claims of the materialist philosophy, which is simply a 19th century dogma, are invalidated by 20th century science. By erroneously deeming everything to consist of nothing but matter, materialism made the great mistake of denying the evident existence of a Creator Who brought matter into being and ordered it. By exposing the great intellect and order prevalent in the material sphere, modern science has proved the existence of an almighty Creator Who rules over the material sphere, that is, Allah. The order we encounter in the universe is also revealed in the world of living beings, causing the greatest support of materialism, Darwin’s theory of evolution, to be literally demolished.

Materialism could have held sway over a great number of people for centuries, having even disguised itself with the mask of "science" in the 19th century. Yet it seems that in the 21st century, it will be remembered as a superstitious belief opposing science. Humanity has rid itself of such superstitious beliefs as that the world stands on the horns of an ox, or that it is flat, and so will it rid itself of materialism.

WARNING

The chapter you are now about to read reveals a crucial secret of your life. You should read it very attentively and thoroughly, for it is concerned with a subject that is liable to make a fundamental change in your outlook upon the external world. The subject of this chapter is not just a point of view, a different approach, or a traditional philosophical thought: it is a fact which everyone, believing or unbelieving, must admit and which is also proven by science today.

CHAPTER 2

THE SECRET BEYOND MATTER

AN IMPORTANT STATEMENT

The Secret Beyond Matter

is Not Wahdatul Wujood

The topic called “The Real Essence of Matter” has been criticized by some people. Having misunderstood the essence of the subject, these people claim that what is explained as the secret beyond matter is identical to the teaching of Wahdatul Wujood. Let us state, before all else, that the author of this book is a believer strictly abiding by the doctrine of Ahlus Sunnah and does not defend the view of Wahdatul Wujood.

However, it should also be remembered that Wahdatul Wujood was defended by some leading Islamic scholars including Muhyiddin Ibn al-‘Arabi. It is true that numerous significant Islamic scholars who described the concept of Wahdatul Wujood in the past did so by considering some subjects found in these books. Still, what is explained in these books is not the same as Wahdatul Wujood.

Some of those who defended the view of Wahdatul Wujood were engrossed by some erroneous opinions and made some claims contrary to the Qur’an and the doctrine of Ahlus Sunnah. They, for example, completely rejected the creation of Allah. When the subject of the secret beyond matter is told, however, there is definitely no such claim. This section explains that all beings are created by Allah, and that the originals of these beings are seen by Him whereas people merely see the images of these beings formed in their brains.

Mountains, plains, flowers, people, seas—briefly everything we see and everything that Allah informs us in the Qur’an that exists and that He created out of nothing is created and does indeed exist. However, people cannot see, feel or hear the real nature of these beings through their sense organs. What they see and feel are only the copies that appear in their brains. This is a scientific fact taught at all schools primarily in medicine. The same applies to the article you are reading now; you can not see nor touch the real nature of it. The light coming from the original article is converted by some cells in your eyes into electrical signals, which are then conveyed to the sight center in the back of your brain. This is where the view of this article is created. In other words, you are not reading an article which is before your eyes through your eyes; in fact, this article is created in the sight center in the back of your brain. The article you are reading right now is a “copy of the article” within your brain. The original article is seen by Allah.

In conclusion, the fact that the matter is an illusion formed in our brains does not “reject” the matter, but provides us information about the real nature of the matter: that no person can have connection with its original.

THERE IS MATTER OUTSIDE OF US,

BUT WE CANNOT REACH IT

… [S]aying that matter is an illusion does not mean it does not exist. Quiet the contrary: whether we perceive the physical world or not, it does exist. But we see it as a copy in our brain or, in other words, as an interpretation of our senses. For us, therefore, the physical world of matter is an illusion.

The matter outside is seen not just by us, but by other beings too. The angels Allah delegated to be watchers witness this world as well:

And the two recording angels are recording, sitting on the right and on the left. He does not utter a single word, without a watcher by him, pen in hand! (Surah Qaf: 17-18)

Most importantly, Allah sees everything. He created this world with all its details and sees it in all its states. As He informs us in the Qur'an:

… Heed Allah and know that Allah sees what you do. (Surat al-Baqara: 233)

Say: "Allah is a sufficient witness between me and you. He is certainly aware of and sees His servants." (Surat al-Isra’: 96)

It must not be forgotten that Allah keeps the records of everything in the book called Lawh Mahfuz (Preserved Tablet). Even if we don't see all things, they are in the Lawh Mahfuz. Allah reveals that He keeps everything's record in the "Mother of the Book" called Lawh Mahfuz with the following verses:

It is in the Source Book with Us, high-exalted, full of wisdom. (Surat az-Zukhruf: 4)

… We possess an all-preserving Book. (Surah Qaf: 4)

Certainly there is no hidden thing in either heaven or Earth which is not in a Clear Book. (Surat an-Naml: 75)

KNOWING THE REAL ESSENCE

OF MATTER

People who contemplate their surroundings conscientiously and wisely realise that everything in the universe—both living and non-living—must have been created. So the question now is "Who is the creator of all these things?"

It is evident that "the fact of creation", which reveals itself in every aspect of the universe, cannot be an outcome of the universe itself. For example, a bug could not have created itself. The solar system could not have created or organised itself. Neither plants, humans, bacteria, erythrocytes (red-blood corpuscles), nor butterflies could have created themselves. The possibility that these could all have originated "by chance" is not even imaginable.

We therefore arrive at the following conclusion: Everything that we see has been created. But none of the things that we see can be "creators" themselves. The Creator is different from and superior to all that we see with our eyes, a superior power, invisible but Whose existence and attributes are revealed in everything that exists.

This is the point at which those who deny the existence of Allah demur. They are conditioned not to believe in His existence unless they see Him with their own eyes. They may disregard the fact of "creation", but they cannot ignore the actuality of "creation" manifested all throughout the universe and find themselves forced to prove —falsely—that the universe and the living things in it have not been created. Evolutionary theory is a key example of their vain endeavours to this end.

The basic mistake of those who deny Allah is shared by many people who in fact do not really deny the existence of Allah but have a wrong perception of Him. These people, who make up the majority of the society in some countries, do not openly deny creation, but have superstitious beliefs about "where" Allah is. Most of them think that Allah is "up in the sky." They falsely imagine that Allah is behind a very distant planet and interferes with "worldly affairs" once in a while. Or perhaps that He does not intervene at all: He created the universe and then left it to itself and people are left to determine their fates for themselves. (Surely Allah is beyond that.)

Still others know the fact that Allah is "everywhere" as revealed in the Qur’an, but they cannot perceive exactly what this means. They think that Allah surrounds everything like radio waves or like an invisible, intangible gas. (Surely Allah is beyond that.)

However, this notion and other beliefs that are unable to make clear "where" Allah is (and maybe unwisely deny His evident existence because of that) are all based on a common mistake. They hold a prejudice without any grounds and then are moved to wrong opinions of Allah. What is this prejudice?

This prejudice is about the nature and characteristics of matter. Some people are so conditioned to suppositions about the real essence of matter that they may have never thought about it thoroughly. Modern science demolishes the prejudice about the nature of matter and discloses a very important and imposing reality. In the following pages, we will try to explain this great reality to which the Qur'an points.

The World of Electrical Signals

All the information that we have about the world we live in is conveyed to us by our five senses. The world we know of consists of what our eye sees, our hand feels, our nose smells, our tongue tastes, and our ear hears. We never think that the "external" world can be other  than what our senses present to us, as we have been dependent only on those senses since the day of our birth.

Modern research in many different fields of science, however, points to a very different understanding and creates serious doubt about our senses and the world that we perceive with them.

The starting-point of this approach is that the notion of an "external world" shaped in our brain is only a response created in our brain by electrical signals. The only information you have about the redness of the apple, the hardness of the wood, —even, your mother, your father, your family, and everything that you own, your house, your job, and the lines of this book, are comprised only of electrical signals. In other words, we can never know the true color of the apple in the outside world, nor the true structure of wood there, nor the real appearance of our parents and the ones we love. They all exist in the outside world as Allah’s creations, but we can only have direct experience of the copies in our brains for so long as we live.

In order to clarify the subject, let us consider our sense of sight, which provides us with the most extensive information about the external world.

How Do We See, Hear, And Taste?

The act of seeing is realised in a very progressive way. Light clusters (photons) that travel from the object to the eye pass through the lens in front of the eye where they are broken up and fall in reverse on the retina at the back of the eye. Here, the impinging light is turned into electrical signals that are transmitted by neurons to a tiny spot called the centre of vision in the back part of the brain. This electrical signal is perceived as an image in this centre in the brain after a series of processes. The act of seeing actually takes place in this tiny spot at the posterior part of the brain, which is pitch-dark and completely insulated from light.

Now, let us reconsider this seemingly ordinary and unremarkable process. When we say that "we see", we are in fact seeing the effects  of the impulses reaching our eye and induced in our brain after they are transformed into electrical signals. That is, when we say that "we see", we are actually observing electrical signals in our mind.

All the images we view in our lives are formed in our centre of vision, which makes up only a few cubic centimetres of the volume of the brain. Both the book you are now reading and the boundless landscape you see when you gaze at the horizon fit into this tiny space. Another point that has to be kept in mind is that, as we have noted before, the brain is insulated from light; its inside is absolutely dark. The brain has no contact with light itself, which exists outside.

We can explain this interesting situation with an example. Let us suppose that there is a burning candle in front of us. We can sit across from this candle and watch it at length. However, during this period of time, our brain never has any direct contact with the candle's original light. Even as we see the light of the candle, the inside of our brain is pitch dark. We watch a colourful and bright world inside our dark brain.

R.L. Gregory gives the following explanation of the miraculous aspect of seeing, an action that we take so very much for granted:

We are so familiar with seeing, that it takes a leap of imagination to realise that there are problems to be solved. But consider it. We are given tiny distorted upside-down images in the eyes, and we see separate solid objects in surrounding space. From the patterns of simulation on the retinas we perceive the world of objects, and this is nothing short of a miracle.45

The same situation applies to all our other senses. Sound, touch, taste and smell are all transmitted to the brain as electrical signals and are perceived in the relevant centres in the brain.

The sense of hearing functions in the same manner. The outer ear picks up available sounds by the auricle and directs them to the middle ear; the middle ear transmits the sound vibrations to the inner ear by intensifying them; the inner ear sends these vibrations to the brain by translating them into electrical signals. Just as with the eye, the act of hearing finalises in the centre of hearing in the brain. The brain is insulated from sound just as it is from light. Therefore, no matter how noisy it is outside, the inside of the brain is completely silent.

Nevertheless, even the subtlest sounds are perceived in the brain. The precision of this process is such that the ear of a healthy person hears everything without any atmospheric noise or interference. In your brain, which is insulated from sound, you listen to the symphonies of an orchestra, hear all the noises in a crowded place, and perceive all the sounds within a wide frequency band ranging from the rustling of a leaf to the roar of a jet plane. However, if the sound level in your brain were to be measured by a sensitive device at that moment, it would be seen that complete silence prevails there.

Our perception of odour forms in a similar way. Volatile molecules emitted by things such vanilla or a rose reach the receptors in the delicate hairs in the epithelium region of the nose and become involved in an interaction. This interaction is transmitted to the brain as electrical signals and perceived as smell. Everything that we smell, be it nice or bad, is nothing but the brain's perceiving of the interactions of volatile molecules after they have been transformed into electrical signals. You perceive the scent of a perfume, a flower, a food that you like, the sea, or other odours you like or dislike in your brain. The molecules themselves never reach the brain. Just as with sound and vision, what reaches your brain is simply electrical signals. In other words, all the odours that you have assumed to belong to external objects since you were born are just electrical signals that you feel through your sense organs. You can never have direct experience of the true nature of a scent in the outside world.

Similarly, there are four different types of chemical receptors in the front part of a human being's tongue. These register salty, sweet, sour, and bitter tastes. Our taste receptors transform these perceptions into electrical signals after a chain of chemical processes and transmit them to the brain. These signals are perceived as taste by the brain. The taste you get when you eat a chocolate bar or a fruit that you like is the interpretation of electrical signals by the brain. You can never reach the object on the outside; you can never see, smell or taste the chocolate itself. For instance, if taste nerves that travel to your brain are cut, nothing you eat at that moment will impinge upon your brain; you will completely lose your sense of taste.

And here is another interesting fact: We can never be sure that what we feel when we taste a food and what another person feels when he tastes the same food, or what we perceive when we hear a voice and what another person perceives when he hears the same voice are the same. On this point, Lincoln Barnett says that no one can know that another person perceives the colour red or hears the C note the same way as he himself does.46

Our sense of touch is no different than the others. When we touch an object, all information that will help us recognise the external world and objects are transmitted to the brain by the sense nerves on the skin. The feeling of touch is formed in our brain. Contrary to general belief, the place where we perceive the sense of touch is not at our finger tips or skin but at the relevant centre in our brain. As a result of the brain's assessment of electrical stimulations coming from objects to it, we sense different properties these objects such as hardness or softness, or heat or cold. We derive all details that help us recognise an object from these stimulations. Two famous philosophers, B. Russell and L. Wittgeinstein, have this to say:

For instance, whether a lemon truly exists or not and how it came to exist cannot be questioned and investigated. A lemon consists merely of a taste sensed by the tongue, an odour sensed by the nose, a colour and shape sensed by the eye; and only these features of it can be subject to examination and assessment. Science can never know the physical world.47

It is impossible for us to reach the original physical world. All objects around us are apprehended through one or more means of perception such as seeing, hearing, and touching. By processing the data in the centre of vision and in other sensory centres, our brain, throughout our lives, confronts not the "original" of the matter existing outside us but rather the copy formed inside our brain. We can never know what the original forms of these copies are like.

"The External World" Inside

Our Brain

As a result of our scientific investigation of the physical facts described so far, we may conclude the following: we can never have direct experience of the original of anything we see, touch, hear, and perceive as matter, "the world" or "the universe." We merely know their copies in our brain.

Someone eating a fruit in fact is aware not of the actual fruit itself but of a 'picture' of it in the brain. The object considered to be a "fruit" actually consists of an electrical impression in the brain which includes the shape, taste, smell, and texture of the fruit. If the sight nerve travelling to the brain were to be severed suddenly, the image of the fruit would suddenly disappear. Similarly a disconnection in the nerve travelling from the sensors in the nose to the brain would completely destroy the sense of smell. Simply put, the fruit is nothing but the interpretation of electrical signals by the brain.

Another point to be considered is the sense of distance. Take, for example, the distance between you and this book. It is only a feeling of emptiness formed in your brain. Objects that seem to be distant to the human being likewise exist in the brain. For instance, someone who watches the stars in the sky assumes that they are millions of light-years away from him. Yet what he "sees" are really the stars inside himself, in his centre of vision. While you read these lines, you are, in fact, not inside the room you assume you are in; on the contrary, the room is inside you. Your seeing your body makes you think that you are inside it. However, you must remember that you have never seen your original body, either; you have always seen a copy of it formed inside your brain.

The same applies to all your other perceptions. For instance, when you think that you hear the sound of the television in the next room, you are actually experiencing the sound inside your brain. Both the sound you imagine to be coming from metres away and the conversation of a person right next to you are perceived in a centre of hearing measuring a few cubic centimetres inside your brain. Within this centre of perception, no concept such as right, left, front or behind exists. That is, sound does not come to you from the right, from the left or from the air; there is no direction from which the sound comes.

The same is true of odour. Just as a rose will appear as an image in the centre of vision, so will its fragrance be sensed in the centre of smell. Whether the source of the odour is near or far, and whether the odour is sour, sweet, acrid, pleasant, etc. are likewise matters for the brain to interpret.

The "external world" presented to us by our perceptions is merely a collection of the electrical signals reaching our brain. Throughout our lives, these signals are processed by our brain and we proceed without recognising that we are mistaken in assuming that these are the “original” versions of matter existing in the external world. We are misled because we can never directly reach matter itself by means of our senses.

Moreover, it is again our brain that interprets and attributes meaning to the signals about the "external world" and we assume to be dealing with its original. For example, let us consider the sense of hearing. It is in fact our brain that transforms the sound waves in the "external world" into a symphony. That is to say, we know music as interpreted by our brain, not the original music that exists outside. In the same manner, when we see colours, what reaches our eyes are merely electrical signals of different wavelengths. It is again our brain that transforms these signals into colours. The colours in the "external world" are unknown to us. We can never have direct experience of the true red of an apple, the true blue of the sky or the true green of trees. The external world depends entirely on the perceiver.

Even a slightest defect in the retina of the eye causes colour blindness. Some people perceive blue as green, and some red as blue. In these cases, it does not matter whether the object outside is coloured or not.

The World of Senses Can Occur Without

Outside World's Existence

One factor which reveals that everything we see and experience exists in our brain and that we can never know the original of the matter that exists outside is that we do not need an outside world for senses to occur in the brain. Many technological developments such as simulators and also dreams are the most important evidences of this truth.

Science writer, Rita Carter, states in her book, Mapping The Mind, that "there's no need for eyes to see" and describes at length an experiment carried out by scientists. In the experiment, blind patients were fitted with a device that transformed video pictures into vibrating pulses. A camera mounted next to the subjects' eyes spread the pulses over their backs so they had continuous sensory input from the visual world. The patients started to behave as if they could really see, after a while. For example, there was a zoom lens in one of the devices so as to move closer the image. When the zoom is operated without informing the patient beforehand, the patient had an urge to protect himself with two arms because the image on the subject's back expanded suddenly as though the world was looming in.⁴⁸

As it is seen from this experiment, we can form sensations even when they are not caused by material equivalents in the outside world. All stimuli can be created artificially.

"The world of senses" that

we experience in dreams

A person can experience all senses vividly without the presence of the outside world. The most obvious example of this is dreams. A person lies on his bed with closed eyes while dreaming. However, in spite of this, that person senses many things which he or she experiences in real life, and experiences them so realistically that the dreams are indistinguishable from the real life experience. Everyone who reads this book will often bear witness to this truth in their own dreams. For example, a person lying down alone on a bed in a calm and quiet atmosphere at night might, in his dream, see himself in danger in a very crowded place. He could experience the event as if it were real, fleeing from danger in desperation and hiding behind a wall. Moreover, the images in his dreams are so realistic that he feels fear and panic as if he really was in danger. He has his heart in his mouth with every noise, is shaken with fear, his heart beats fast, he sweats and demonstrates the other physical affects that the human body undergoes in a dangerous situation.

A person who falls from a high place in his dream feels it with all his body, even though he is lying in bed without moving. Alternatively, one might see oneself slipping into a puddle, getting soaked and feeling cold because of a cold wind. However, in such a case, there is neither a puddle, nor is there wind. Furthermore, despite sleeping in a very hot room, one experiences the wetness and the cold, as if one were awake.

Someone who believes he is dealing with the original of the material world in his dream can be very sure of himself. He can put his hand on his friend's shoulder when the friend tells him that "it isn't possible to deal with the original of the world", and then ask "Don't you feel my hand on your shoulder? If so, how can you say that you don’t see the original matter? What makes you think in this way? Let's take a trip up the Bosphorus; we can have a chat about it and you'll explain to me why you believe this." The dream that he sees in his deep sleep is so clear that he turns on the engine with pleasure and accelerates slowly, almost jumping the car by pressing the pedal suddenly. While going on the road, trees and road lines seem solid because of the speed. In addition, he breathes clean Bosphorus air. But suppose he is woken up by his ringing alarm clock just when he's getting ready to tell his friend that what he's seeing is the original matter. Wouldn't he object in the same manner regardless of whether he was asleep or awake?

When people wake up they understand that what they've seen until that moment is a dream. But for some reason they are not suspicious about the real nature of the life that starts with a "waking" image (what they call "real life") can also be a dream. However, the way we perceive images in "real life" is exactly the same as the way we perceive our dreams. We see both of them in the mind. We cannot understand they are images until we are woken up. Only then do we say "what I have just seen was a dream". So, how can we prove that what we see at any given moment is not a dream? We could be assuming that the moment in which we are living is real just because we haven't yet woken up. It is possible that we will discover this fact when we are woken up from this "waking dream" which takes longer than dreams we see everyday. We do not have any evidence that proves otherwise.

Many Islamic scholars have also proclaimed that the life around us is only a dream, and that only when we are awakened from that dream with "a big awakening", will people be able to understand that they live in a dreamlike world. A great Islamic scholar, Muhyiddin Ibn al-'Arabi, referred to as Sheikh Akbar (The greatest Sheikh) due to his superior knowledge, likens the world to our dreams by quoting a saying of the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace):

The Prophet Muhammad [may Allah bless him and grant him peace] said that "people are asleep and wake up when they die." This is to say that the objects seen in the world when alive are similar to those seen when asleep while dreaming...49

In a verse of the Qur’an, people are told to say on doomsday when they are resurrected from the dead:

They will say, "Alas for us! Who has raised us from our sleeping-place? This is what the All-Merciful promised us. The Messengers were telling the truth." (Surah Ya Sin: 52)

As the verse demonstrates, people wake up on doomsday as if waking from a dream. Like someone woken from the middle of a dream in deep sleep, such people will similarly ask who has woken them up. As the verse points out, the world around us is like a dream and everybody will be woken up from this dream, and will begin to see images of the afterlife, which is the real life.

Who Is The Perceiver?

As we have explained so far, we can never have experience of the original of the material world we think we are inhabiting and that we call the "external world." However, here arises the question of primary importance. If we cannot reach the original of any of the material existence that we know of, what about our brain? Since our brain is a part of the physical world just like our arm, leg, or any other object, we cannot reach its original either.

When the brain is analysed, it is seen that there is nothing in it but lipid and protein molecules, which also exist in other living organisms. This means that within the piece of meat we call our "brain", there is nothing to observe the images, to constitute consciousness, or to form the being we call "myself".

R.L. Gregory refers to a mistake people make in relation to the perception of images in the brain:

There is a temptation, which must be avoided, to say that the eyes produce pictures in the brain. A picture in the brain suggests the need of some kind of internal eye to see it - but this would need a further eye to see its picture… and so on in an endless regress of eyes and pictures. This is absurd.50

This is the very point which puts the materialists, who do not hold anything but matter as real, in a quandary. To whom belongs "the eye inside" that sees, that interprets what it sees and reacts to it?

Karl Pribram also focused on this important question in the world of science and philosophy about who the perceiver is:

Since the Greeks, philosophers have been thinking about "the ghost in the machine," "the small man within the small man," etc. Where is "I", the person who uses his brain? Who is it that realises the act of knowing? As Saint Francis of Assisi said: "What we search for is the one that sees."51

Now, think of this: The book in your hand, the room you are in, in brief, all the images in front of you are seen inside your brain. Is it the atoms that see these images? Blind, deaf, unconscious atoms? Why did some atoms acquire this quality whereas some did not? Do our acts of thinking, comprehending, remembering, being delighted, being unhappy, and everything else consist of the electrochemical reactions between these atoms?

When we ponder these questions, we see that there is no sense in looking for will in atoms. It is clear that the being who sees, hears, and feels is a supra-material being. This being is "alive" and it is neither matter, nor an image of matter. This being associates with the perceptions in front of it by using the image of the body.

This being is the "soul".

It is the soul that sees, hears, feels, perceives and interprets the copies in the brain of the matter existing on the outside. The intelligent beings that write and read these lines are not each a heap of atoms and molecules-and the chemical reactions between them-but a "soul".

The Real Absolute Being

All these facts bring us face to face with a very significant question. Since we can never know anything about the original of the material world and since we only have direct experience of replica images in our brains, then what is the source of these images?

So, who makes our soul watch the stars, the earth, the people, our body and all else that we see?

It is very evident that there exists a supreme Creator, Who has created the entire material universe and Who continues His creation ceaselessly. Since this Creator displays such a magnificent creation, He surely has eternal power and might.

This Creator introduces Himself to us. He has sent down a book and through this book has described Himself, and the universe and has explained the reason for our existence.

This Creator is Allah and the name of His Book is the Qur'an.

The fact that the universe, the heavens and the earth, are not stable, that their presence is only made possible by Allah's creation and that they will disappear when He ends this creation, is all explained as follows:

It is Allah Who sustains the heavens and the earth, lest they cease (to function): and if they should fail, there is none – not one – who can sustain them thereafter: Truly, He is Most Forbearing and Oft-Forgiving. (Surah Fatir, 41)

As we mentioned at the beginning, some people have no genuine understanding of Allah and so, as a result of terrible ignorance, they imagine Him as a being present somewhere in the heavens and not really intervening in worldly affairs. (Surely Allah is beyond that.) The basis of this corrupt logic actually lies in the mistaken thought that the universe is merely an assembly of matter and Allah is "outside" this material world, in a faraway place. (Surely Allah is beyond that.)

The only real absolute being is Allah. That means that only Allah exists; matter is not absolute being. The material world on the outside is one of the works of Allah’s sublime creation. Allah is surely "everywhere" and encompasses all. This reality is explained in the Qur'an as follows;

Allah! There is no god but He,-the Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. Neither slumber nor sleep can overtake Him. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who can intercede in His presence except as He permits? He knows what (appears to His creatures as) before or after or behind them. Nor shall man grasp anything of His knowledge except as He wills. His Throne extends over the heavens and the earth, and He feels no fatigue in guarding and preserving them, for He is the Most High, and the Supreme (in glory). (Surat al-Baqara, 255)

The facts that Allah is not bound by space and that He encompasses everything are stated in another verse as follows:

To Allah belong the east and the West: Wherever you turn, there is the presence of Allah. For Allah is all-Pervading, and all-Knowing. (Surat al-Baqara, 115)

The fullness of faith consists of understanding this truth, avoiding the mistake of associating others with Allah and acknowledging Allah as the One Absolute Being. Someone who knows that, apart from Allah, everything is a shadow existence, will say with certain faith (at the level of Haqq-al yakin – truth of certainty) that only Allah exists and there is no other deity (or any being with strength) besides Him. 

The materialists do not believe in the existence of Allah, because they cannot see Him with their eyes. But their claims are completely invalidated when they learn the real nature of matter. Someone who learns this truth understands that his own existence has the quality of an illusion, and grasps that a being which is an illusion will not be able to see a being which is absolute. As it is revealed in the Qur’an, human beings cannot see Allah but Allah sees them.

Eyesight cannot perceive Him but He perceives eyesight... (Surat al-An‘am: 103)

Certainly, we human beings cannot see the Being of Allah with our eyes but we know that He completely encompasses our inside, our outside, our views and our thoughts. For this reason, Allah reveals Himself in the Qur’an as "controlling hearing and sight" (Surah Yunus: 31) We cannot say one word, we cannot even take one breath without Allah's knowing it. Therefore, Allah knows everything we do. This is revealed in the Qur’an:

Allah – Him from Whom nothing is hidden, either on earth or in heaven. (Surah Al ‘Imran: 5)

As we imagine we have direct experience of the original of matter and watch the copy world in our brains, as we live our lives in other words, the closest being to us is Allah Himself. The secret is concealed in this reality: "It was We Who created man, and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein." (Surah Qaf: 16) Allah has encompassed man and He is "infinitely close" to him.

Allah informs men that He is "infinitely close" to them with the verse: "When My servants ask you concerning Me, I am indeed close (to them)" (Surat al-Baqara, 186). Another verse relates the same fact: "We told you that your Lord encompasses mankind." (Surat al-Isra, 60).

Man is misled by thinking that the being that is closest to him is himself. Allah, in truth, is closer to us even more than ourselves. He has revealed this fact in the verse "Why do you not intervene when it (the soul) comes up to the throat, under your very eyes. We are nearer to him than you, but you do not see it." (Surat al-Waqia, 83-85). As we learn from this verse, some people live unaware of this phenomenal fact, because they do not see it with their own eyes.

Some people are unaware of this great fact. They accept that Allah created them, but think that the work they do belongs to them. However, every action performed by a human being is created with the permission of Allah. For example, a person who writes a book writes it with the permission of Allah; every sentence, every idea, and every paragraph is composed because Allah wishes it. Allah reveals this very important principle in several verses; one of these verses is, "... Allah created both you and what you do?". (Surat as-Saffat: 96) In these words "... when you threw; it was Allah Who threw... ", (Surat al-Anfal: 17) Allah reveals that everything we do is an act that belongs to Him.

This is the reality. One may not want to concede this; but this does not change a thing.

Understanding the Reality of Matter

Removes Worldly Ambitions

What we have described so far is one of the most profound truths that you have heard in your whole life. We have shown that the whole material world is really a shadow, and that this is the key to understanding the existence of Allah, His creation, and the fact that He is the one absolute Being. At the same time, we have presented a scientifically undeniable demonstration both of how helpless human beings are and a manifestation of Allah's wonderful artistry. This knowledge compels people to belief making it impossible for them not to believe.  This is the main reason why some people avoid this truth.

The things that are being explained here are as true as a physical law or a chemical formula. When necessary, human beings can solve the most difficult mathematical problems and understand many very complex matters. However, when these same people are informed that matter is an appearance formed in the human mind, and that they have no connection with it, they have no desire at all to understand. This is an exaggerated case of an inability to understand, because the idea discussed here is no more difficult than the answer to the questions, "What is two times two?" or "How old are you?", If you ask any scientist or professor of neurology where they see the world, they will answer you that they see it in their brains. You will find this fact even in high school biology text books. But despite the fact that it is clearly evident, information pertaining to the fact that we perceive the material world in our brains and the results that this information entails for human beings can be overlooked. It is of major significance that one of the most important scientifically proven facts is so carefully hidden from people's eyes.

The fundamental reason why people easily accept all scientific facts, yet are so afraid to accept this one, is that learning the truth about matter will basically change the way everyone looks at life. Those who believe that matter and the self are absolute beings will discover one day that everything they have worked for and protected based on this idea - their spouses, their children, their wealth, even their own personalities - is an illusion.  People are very afraid of this reality and pretend not to understand it even if they do. They try with determination to disprove the facts, which are simple enough for even a primary school child to understand. The reason behind this opposition is that they are afraid to lose what this world offers.

For someone who is attached to his possessions, his children, or the transient offerings of this world, the illusory nature of matter is cause for great fear. At the moment such a person understands this, he will have died before his natural death, and he will have surrendered his possessions and his soul.  In the verse, "If He did ask you for it (all your wealth) and put you under pressure, you would be tight-fisted and it would bring out your malevolence." (Surah Muhammad: 37), Allah reveals how human beings will behave with meanness and rancor when He demands their possessions from them.

But when a person learns the real nature of matter, he will understand that his soul and his possessions already belong to Allah. If he knows that there is nothing to give or to resist giving, he will submit himself and all he possesses to Allah before he dies. For sincere believers, this is a beautiful and honorable thing and a way to draw nearer to Allah. Those who do not believe or whose faith is weak cannot recognize this beauty and stubbornly reject this reality.

The Environment That Will Come To Be When

the Real Nature of Matter Is Not Kept Secret

Those who know that they have no connection with the actual material things, and that they are in the presence only of images that Allah presents to them, will change their whole way of living, their view of life and their values. This will be a change that will be useful both from the personal and social point of view, because someone who sees this truth will live without difficulty according to the high moral qualities that Allah has revealed in the Qur’an.

For those who do not regard the world as important and who understand that matter is an illusion, it is spiritual things that deserve to be given importance. Someone who knows that Allah is listening to him and watching him at every moment, and is aware that he will render an account of his every action in the hereafter, will naturally live a morally virtuous life. He will be very careful about what Allah has commanded and what He has forbidden. Everyone in society will be filled with love and respect for one another, and everyone will compete with one another in the performance of good and noble deeds. People will change the values according to which they judge others. Material things will lose their value and therefore, people will be judged not according to their standing and position in society but according to their moral character and their piety. No one will pursue those things whose source is illusion; everyone will seek after truth. Everyone will act without worrying about what others will think; the only question in their minds will be whether or not Allah will be pleased with what they do. In the place of the feelings of pride, arrogance and self-satisfaction that come from possessions, property, standing and position, there will be a sense of the understanding of humility and dependence. Therefore, people will willingly live according to those examples of good moral qualities spoken of in the Qur’an. Eventually, these changes will put an end to many problems of today's societies.

In place of angry, aggressive people, anxious even about small profit, there will be those who know that everything they see is an image shown by Allah. They will be well aware that reactions of anger and loud shouting make them look foolish. Well-being and trust will prevail in individuals and societies and everyone will be pleased with his life and possessions. These, then, are some of the blessings that this hidden reality will bring to individuals and societies. Knowing, considering and living according to this reality will bring many more goodnesses to human beings. Those who wish to attain these goodnesses should consider this reality well and endeavor to understand it. In one verse, Allah says,

Clear insights have come to you from your Lord. Whoever sees clearly, does so to his own benefit. Whoever is blind, it is to his own detriment... (Surat al-An‘am: 104)

Logical Deficiencies of

the Materialists

From the beginning of this chapter, we have seen through scientific evidence that matter is not an absolute entity as the materialists claim, and that we never have direct experience of the original of the matter that exists outside us. Materialists resist in an extremely dogmatic manner this evident reality which destroys their philosophy and bring forward baseless anti-theses.

For example, one of the biggest advocates of the materialist philosophy in the 20th century, an ardent Marxist, George Politzer, gave the "bus example" as supposedly a great evidence regarding this matter. According to Politzer, philosophers who espouse the fact that we deal with the copy of matter in our brains also run away when they see a bus bearing down on them.52

When another famous materialist, Johnson, was told that we are never in contact with the original matter, he tried to deny this truth by giving stones a kick.53

There are similar examples and ill-considered statements such as "You understand the real nature of matter when you are slapped in the face," in the books of famous materialists such as Marx, Engels, Lenin, and others.

The point where materialists are mistaken is that they think the concept of "perception" only applies to the sense of sight. In fact, all sensations, such as touch, contact, hardness, pain, heat, cold and wetness also form in the human brain, in precisely the same way that visual images are formed. For instance, someone who feels the cold metal of the door as he gets off a bus, actually "feels the cold metal" in his brain. This is a clear and well-known truth. As we have already seen, the sense of touch forms in a particular section of the brain, through nerve signals from the fingertips, for instance. It is not your fingers that do the feeling. People accept this because it has been demonstrated scientifically. However, when it comes to the bus hitting someone, not just to his feeling the metal of the indoor—in other words when the sensation of touch is more violent and painful—they think that this fact somehow no longer applies. However, pain or heavy blows are also perceived in the brain. Someone who is hit by a bus feels all the violence and pain of the event in his brain.

In order to understand this better, it will be useful to consider our dreams. A person may dream of being hit by a bus, of opening his eyes in hospital later, being taken for an operation, the doctors talking, his family's anxious arrival at the hospital, and that he is crippled or suffers terrible pain. In his dream, he perceives all the images, sounds, feelings of hardness, pain, light, the colors in the hospital, all aspects of the incident in fact, very clearly and distinctly. They are all as natural and believable as in real life. At that moment, if the person who is having that dream were told it was only a dream, he would not believe it. Yet all that he is seeing is an illusion, and the bus, hospital and even the body he sees in his dream have no physical counterpart in the real world. Although they have no physical counterparts, he still feels as if a 'real body' has been hit by a 'real bus.'

In the same way, there is no validity to the materialists' objections along the lines of "You realize that the real nature of matter when someone hits you," "You cannot doubt whether you see the original of matter when someone kicks your knee," "You run away when you meet a savage dog," "When a bus has hit you, you understand whether it is in your brain or not," or "In that case, go and stand on the motorway in front of the oncoming traffic". A sharp blow, the pain from a dog's teeth or a violent slap are not evidence that you are dealing with the matter itself. As we have seen, you can experience the same things in dreams, with no corresponding physical counterparts. Furthermore, the violence of a sensation does not alter the fact that the sensation in question occurs in the brain. This is a clearly proven scientific fact.

The reason why some people think that a fast-moving bus on the motorway or an accident caused by that bus are striking proofs of the fact they are dealing with the physical existence of matter is that the image concerned is seen and felt as so real that it deceives one. The images around them, for instance the perfect perspective and depth of the motorway, the perfection of the colors, shapes and shadows they contain, the vividness of sound, smell and hardness, and the completeness of the logic within that image can deceive some people. On account of this vividness, some people forget that these are actually perceptions. Yet no matter how complete and flawless the perceptions in the mind may be, that does not alter the fact that they are still perceptions. If someone is hit by a car while walking along the road, or is trapped under a house that collapses during an earthquake, or is surrounded by flames during a fire, or trips up and falls down the stairs, he still experiences all these things in his mind, and is not actually confronting the reality of what happens.

When someone falls under a bus, the bus in his mind hits the body in his mind. The fact that he dies as a result, or that his body is completely shattered, does not alter this reality. If something a person experiences in his mind ends in death, Allah replaces the images He shows that person with images belonging to the hereafter. Those who are unable to understand the truth of this now on honest reflection will certainly do so when they die.

The Example of Connecting

the Nerves in Parallel

Let us consider the car crash example of Politzer: In this accident, if the crushed person's nerves travelling from the points of impact to his brain, were connected to another person's, for instance Politzer's brain, with a parallel connection, at the moment the bus hit that person, it would also hit Politzer, who was sitting at home at that moment. Better to say, all the feelings experienced by that person having the accident would be experienced by Politzer, just as the same song is listened to from two different loudspeakers connected to the same tape recorder. Politzer would feel, see, and experience the braking sound of the bus, the impact of the bus on his body, the images of a broken arm and the shedding of blood, fracture aches, the images of his entering the operation room, the hardness of the plaster cast, and the feebleness of his arm.

Every other person connected to the man's nerves in parallel would experience the accident from beginning to end just like Politzer. If the man in the accident fell into a coma, they would all fall into a coma. Moreover, if all the perceptions pertaining to the car accident could be recorded by some sophisticated device and if all these perceptions were then transmitted to another person, the bus would knock him down many times.

So, which one of the buses hitting those people is real? The materialist philosophy has no consistent answer to this question. The right answer is that they would all experience the car accident in all its details in their own minds.

The same principle applies to the cake and stone examples. If the nerves of the sense organs of Engels, who felt the satiety and fullness of the cake in his stomach after eating a cake, were connected to a second person's brain in parallel, that person would also feel full when Engels ate the cake and was satiated. If the nerves of Johnson, who felt pain in his foot when he delivered a sound kick to a stone, were connected to a second person in parallel, that person would feel the same pain.

So, which cake or which stone is the real one? The materialist philosophy again falls short of giving a consistent answer to this question. The correct and consistent answer is this: both Engels and the second person have eaten the cake in their minds and are satiated; both Johnson and the second person have fully experienced the moment of striking the stone in their minds.

Let us make a change in the example we gave about Politzer: let us connect the nerves of the man hit by the bus to Politzer's brain, and the nerves of Politzer sitting in his house to that man's brain, who is hit by the bus. In this case, Politzer will think that a bus has hit him, although sitting at home; and the man actually hit by the bus will never feel the impact of the accident and think that he is sitting in Politzer's house. The very same logic may be applied to the cake and the stone examples.

As is evident, it is not possible for man to transcend his senses and break free of them. In this respect, a man's soul can be subjected to all kinds of representations, although it has no physical body and no material existence and lacks material weight. It is not possible for a person to realise this because he assumes these three-dimensional images to be real and is absolutely certain of their existence, because everybody depends on the perceptions stemming from his sensory organs.

The famous British philosopher David Hume expresses his thoughts on this fact:

Frankly speaking, when I include myself in what I call "myself", I always come across with a specific perception pertaining to hot or cold, light or shadow, love or hatred, sour or sweet or some other notion. Without the existence of a perception, I can never capture myself in a particular time and I can observe nothing but perception.54

The Formation of Perceptions in the Brain is not

Philosophy but Scientific Fact

Materialists claim that what we have been presenting here is a philosophical view. However, to hold that we never have direct experience of the original of the "external world" is not a matter of philosophy but a plain scientific fact. How images and feelings form in the brain is taught in detail in all medical schools. These facts, proven by 20th-century science, and particularly by physics, clearly show that matter does not have an absolute reality and that everyone in a sense is watching the "monitor in his brain".

Everyone who believes in science, be he an atheist, Buddhist, or of any other persuasion, has to accept this fact. A materialist might deny the existence of a Creator in his own limited understanding, yet he cannot deny this scientific reality.

The inability of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Georges Politzer and others to comprehend such a simple and evident fact still seems startling, even although the level of scientific understanding and range of possibilities of their times were less than adequate. In our time, science and technology are highly advanced and recent discoveries make it easier to comprehend this fact. Materialists, on the other hand, are stricken with the fear of both comprehending this fact, albeit partially, and realising how definitively it demolishes their philosophy.

The Great Fear of the Materialists

For quite some time now, materialists have been loudly giving vent to their fear and panic in their publications, conferences and panel discussions. Their agitated and hopeless discourses imply that they are suffering from a severe intellectual crisis. The scientific collapse of the theory of evolution, the so-called basis of their philosophy, had already come as a great shock to them. Now, they have come to realise that they are starting to lose matter itself, which is a greater mainstay for them than Darwinism, and the shock they experience as a result is even greater. They declare that this issue is the "biggest threat" for them, and that it totally "demolishes their cultural fabric".

One of those who expressed in the most outspoken way this anxiety and panic felt by materialist circles was Renan Pekunlu, an academician as well as contributor to Bilim ve Utopya (Science and Utopia), a periodical which has assumed the task of defending materialism. Both in his articles in Bilim ve Utopya and in the panel discussions he has attended, Pekunlu presented the book The Evolution Deceit, the first book in which this subject was brought up, as the number one "threat" to materialism. What disturbed Pekunlu even more than the chapters that invalidated Darwinism was the part you are currently reading. To his readers and (only a handful of) audience, Pekunlu delivered the message: "Do not let yourselves be carried away by the indoctrination of idealism and keep your faith in materialism," and gave Vladimir I. Lenin, the leader of the bloody communist revolution in Russia, as his reference. Advising everyone to read Lenin's century-old book titled Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, all Pekunlu did was to repeat the ignorant counsels of Lenin, stating: "Do not think over this issue, or you will lose track of materialism and be carried away by religion." In an article he wrote in the aforementioned periodical, he quoted the following lines from Lenin:

Once you deny objective reality, given us in sensation, you have already lost every weapon against fideism, for you have slipped into agnosticism or subjectivism-and that is all that fideism requires. A single claw ensnared, and the bird is lost. And our Machists have all become ensnared in idealism, that is, in a diluted, subtle fideism; they became ensnared from the moment they took "sensation" not as an image of the external world but as a special "element". It is nobody's sensation, nobody's mind, nobody's spirit, nobody's will.55

These words explicitly demonstrate that the fact which Lenin alarmingly realised and wanted to banish both from his own mind and the minds of his "comrades" also disturbs contemporary materialists in a similar way. However, Pekunlu and other materialists suffer yet a greater distress; because they are aware that this fact is now being put forward in a far more explicit, certain and convincing way than 100 years ago. For the first time in world history, this subject is being explained in a quite irresistible way.

Nevertheless, the general picture is that a great number of materialist scientists still take a very superficial stand against the fact that "we never have direct experience of the original of matter." The subject explained in this chapter is one of the most important and most exciting subjects that one can ever come across in his life. There is no chance of ever having faced such a crucial subject before. Still, the reactions of these scientists and the manner they adopt in their speeches and articles hint at how superficial their comprehension is.

The reactions of some materialists to the subject discussed here show in no uncertain manner that their blind adherence to materialism has caused some kind of a flaw in their logic and for this reason, they are far removed from comprehending the subject. For instance, Alaattin Senel, also an academician and a writer for Bilim ve Utopya, delivered himself of similar messages as Rennan Pekunlu saying: "Forget the collapse of Darwinism, the really threatening subject is this one," and issued such challenges as "so you prove what you say," sensing that his own philosophy is groundless. What is more interesting is that this writer himself has shown in his writings that he can by no means grasp this fact which he considers to be a menace.

For instance, in an article in which he exclusively discussed this subject, Senel accepts that the external world is perceived in the brain as an image. However, he then goes on to write: "I do not know whether the images in my brain have correlates in the external world or not, but the same thing applies when I speak on the phone. When I speak on the telephone, I cannot see the person I am speaking to but I can have this conversation confirmed when I later see him face to face."56

By saying so, this writer actually means the following: "If we doubt our perceptions, we can look at matter itself and check its reality." However, this is an evident misconception, because it is impossible for us to reach matter itself. We can never get out of our minds and know what is "outside". Whether the voice on the phone has a correlate or not can be confirmed by the person on the phone. However, this confirmation is also a confirmation experienced by the mind.

As a matter of fact, the same events may be experienced also in dreams. For instance, Senel may also see in his dream that he speaks on the phone and then have this conversation confirmed by the person to whom he spoke. Or, Pekunlu may in his dream feel as if he is facing "a serious threat" and advise people to read the century-old books of Lenin. However, no matter what they do, these materialists cannot deny the fact that they never experience the original of the events that have happened and the people they have talked to in their dreams.

Materialists Have Fallen Into

The Biggest Trap In History

The atmosphere of panic sweeping through materialist circles in Turkey, of which we have mentioned only a few examples, shows that materialists face utter defeat, one which they have never previously suffered. That we do not have direct experience of the original matter has been proven by modern science and it is put forward in a very clear, straightforward and forceful way. It only remains for materialists to see and acknowledge the collapse of the entire material world in which they blindly believe and on which they rely.

Materialist thought has always existed throughout the history of humanity. Being very assured of themselves and the philosophy they believed in, materialists ignorantly revolted against Allah Who created them. The irrational and unscientific scenario they formulated maintained that matter has no beginning or end, and that none of its forms could possibly have a Creator. (Surely Allah is beyond that.) Because of their arrogance, they denied Allah and took refuge in the lie that matter was the absolute entity. They were so confident in this philosophy that they thought that it would never be possible to put forward an explanation proving the contrary.

That is why the facts as set forth in this book regarding the real nature of matter surprised these people to such a degree. What has been explained here has destroyed the very basis of their philosophy and left no ground for further discussion. Matter, upon which they based all their thoughts, lives, arrogance and denial, vanished all of a sudden.

One of the attributes of Allah is His plotting against the unbelievers. This is stated in the verse: "They plot and plan, but Allah too plans; and Allah is the best of planners." (Surat al- Anfal, 30)

Allah entrapped materialists by making them assume that they deal with the original of matter and, in so doing, humiliated them in hidden ways. Materialists deemed they knew the originals of their possessions, status, rank, the society to which they belonged, the whole world and everything else, of which they actually had an experience of only the copies, and ignorantly grew arrogant toward Allah in their reliance on these things. Displaying the greatest unreason, they revolted against Allah by being boastful, thereby taking their unbelief to extremes. While so doing, they totally relied on matter. Yet, they were so lacking in understanding that they failed to think that Allah totally encompasses them. Allah announces the state to which the unbelievers are led as a result of their thick-headedness:

Or do they intend a plot (against you)? But those who defy Allah shall themselves be ruined! (Surat at-Tur, 42)

This is most probably the biggest defeat in history. As they grew more arrogant, materialists were tricked and suffered a serious defeat in the struggle they attempted to wage against Allah by bringing up something monstrous against Him. The verse: "Thus have We placed leaders in every town, its wicked men, to plot therein: but they only plot against their own souls, and they do not perceive it," indicates how lacking in awareness these people who ignorantly revolt against our Creator are, and what their fate will be. (Surat al- An'am: 123). In another verse the same fact is related:

Fain would they deceive Allah and those who believe, but they only deceive themselves, and do not realise it! (Surat al-Baqarah, 9)

While the unbelievers try to plot, they do not realise a very important fact, which is stressed by the words "they only deceive themselves, and do not realise it!". This is the fact that everything they experience is a piece of copy image they deal with in their minds, and they have experience of the copies of all the plots they devise in their brains just like every other act they perform. Their folly has made them forget that they are all alone with Allah and, are thus entrapped in their own devious plans.

No less than those unbelievers who lived in the past, those living today face a reality that will shake their devious plans to their very foundations. With the statement that "…feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan" (Surat an-Nisa, 76), Allah says that these plots were doomed to end with failure the day they were hatched. He gives good tidings to believers with the assertion that "…not the least harm will their cunning do you." (Surat 'Ali Imran, 120)

In another verse Allah says: "As for the unbelievers, their deeds are like a mirage in sandy deserts, which the man parched with thirst mistakes for water; until when he comes up to it, he finds it to be nothing." (Surat an-Nur, 39). Materialism, too, becomes a "mirage" for the rebellious, just as stated in this verse; when they have recourse to it, they find it to be nothing but an illusion. Allah has deceived them with such a mirage, and shown them this whole collection of images as if they experienced their originals. All those professors, astronomers, biologists, physicists, and all others regardless of their rank and position are simply deceived like children, and are humiliated because they unwisely took matter as their god. (Surely Allah is beyond that.) Assuming the copy images they see in their brains to be absolute, they based their philosophy and ideology on it, became involved in serious discussions, and indulged in so-called "intellectual" discourse. They deemed themselves wise enough to offer an argument about the truth of the universe and, more importantly, to imagine vain thoughts about Allah with their limited intelligence. Allah explains their situation in the following verse:

And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah. (Surat 'Ali Imran, 54)

It may be possible to escape from some plots; however, this plan of Allah against the unbelievers is so foolproof that there is no way of escape from it. No matter what they do or to whom they appeal, they can never find a helper other than Allah. As Allah declares in the Qur'an, "they shall not find for them other than Allah a patron or a helper."  (Surat an-Nisa, 173)

Materialists never expected to fall into such a trap. Having all the means of the 20th century at their disposal, they thought they could remain obdurate in their denial and coerce people into disbelief. In the Qur'an, Allah thus describes this unremittingly stubborn mentality of the unbelievers and their end: 

They plotted and planned, but We too planned, and they did not perceive it. Then see what was the end of their plot! This, that We destroyed them and their people, all (of them). (Surat an-Naml, 50-51)

This, on another level, is what the verses come to mean: materialists are made to realise that they have experience of only the copies in their brains of everything they own, and therefore everything they possess has been destroyed. As they witness their possessions, factories, gold, dollars, children, spouses, friends, rank and status, and even their own bodies, the originals of all of which they deem to know, slipping out of their reach, they are "destroyed" in a sense. At this point, they are no longer material entities but souls.

No doubt, realising this truth is the worst possible situation for materialists. This is tantamount, in their own words, to "death before dying" in this world.

With the verse, "Leave Me alone, (to deal) with the (creature) whom I created (bare and) alone", Allah reveals the fact that each human being is, in truth, all alone in His presence. (Surat al- Muddaththir, 11). This remarkable fact is repeated in many other verses:

And behold! You come to us bare and alone as We created you for the first time: you have left behind you all (the favours) which We bestowed on you… (Surat al-An'am, 94)

And each one of them will come to Him on the Day of Resurrection, alone. (Surah Maryam, 95)

This, on another level, is what the verses indicate: those who ignorantly take matter as their god (surely Allah is beyond that) have nevertheless come from Allah and must return to Him. They must submit their wills to Allah whether they want to or not. Now they must wait for the Day of Judgement when every one of them will be called to account, however unwilling they may be to acknowledge this.

Conclusion

The subject we have explained so far is one of the greatest truths that will ever be told to you in your lifetime. Proving that we never have direct experience of the original of matter, this subject is the key to comprehending the existence of and creation by Allah, and to understanding that He is the only absolute being.

The person who understands this subject realises that the world is not the sort of place it is surmised by most people to be. The world is not an absolute place, of which we know the original, as supposed by those who wander aimlessly about in the streets, who get into fights in pubs, who show off in luxurious cafes, who brag about their property, or who dedicate their lives to hollow aims. All our knowledge of the world consists of copy images we see in our brains. All of the people we have cited above are only shadow beings who watch these copy images in their minds: yet they are not aware of this.

This concept is very important, for it undermines and demolishes the materialist philosophy that denies the existence of Allah. This is the reason why materialists like Marx, Engels, and Lenin felt panic, became enraged, and warned their followers "not to think over" this concept when they were told about it. As a matter of fact, such people are in such a state of mental deficiency that they cannot even comprehend the fact that perceptions are formed inside the brain. They assume that the world they watch in their brains is the "original external world" and they cannot comprehend the obvious evidence to the contrary.

This unawareness is the outcome of the lack of wisdom given to disbelievers by Allah. As Allah reveals in the Qur'an, the unbelievers "have hearts with which they do not understand, eyes with which they do not see, and ears with which they do not hear. They are like cattle—nay more misguided: for they are heedless (of warning)." (Surat al-Araf, 179)

In the age in which we live, this fact has been empirically proven by the body of evidence put forward by science. The fact that we do not experience the original of the universe is described in such a concrete, clear, and explicit way for the first time in history.

For this reason, the 21st century will be a historical-turning point when people will generally comprehend the divine realities and be led in crowds to Allah, the only Absolute Being. In the 21st century, the twisted materialistic creeds of the 19th century will be relegated to the trash-heaps of history, Allah's existence and creation will be grasped, such facts as spacelessness and timelessness will be understood, and humanity will break free of the centuries-old veils, deceits and superstitions enshrouding the truth.

CHAPTER 3

RELATIVITY OF TIME AND

THE REALITY OF FATE

The foregoing arguments demonstrate that we can never have direct experience of the outside world, that we only know matter as it exists inside our brains and that one leads one's whole life in "spacelessness". To assert the contrary would be to hold a superstitious belief removed from reason and scientific truth, for the things set out here are all technical and scientific facts even described in middle school textbooks.

This fact refutes the primary assumption of the materialist philosophy that underlies evolutionary theory. This is the assumption that matter is absolute and eternal. The second assumption upon which the materialistic philosophy rests is the supposition that time is absolute and eternal. This is as superstitious as the first one.

The Perception of Time

The perception we call time is, in fact, a method by which one moment is compared to another. We can explain this with an example. For instance, when a person taps an object, he hears a particular sound. When he taps the same object five minutes later, he hears another sound. He then perceives that there is an interval between the first sound and the second, and he calls this interval "time." Yet at the time he hears the second sound, the first sound he heard is no more than a bit of information in his memory. The person formulates the perception of "time" by comparing the moment in which he lives with what he has stored in his memory. If this comparison is not made, neither can there be perception of time.

Similarly, a person makes a comparison when he sees someone entering a room through its door and sitting in an armchair in the middle of the room. By the time this person sits in the armchair, the images related to the moments he opens the door, walks into the room, and makes his way to the armchair have been compiled as bits of information in the brain. The perception of time occurs when one compares the man sitting in the armchair with those bits of stored information.

In brief, time comes to exist as a result of the comparison made between a number of illusions stored in the brain. If man had not had memory, his brain would not have made such interpretations and therefore the perception of time would never have been formed. The reason why one determines himself to be thirty years old is only because he has accumulated information pertaining to those thirty years in his mind. If his memory did not exist, he would not be thinking of the existence of such a preceding period of time and he would only experience the single "moment" he was living in.

The Scientific Explanation

Of Timelessness

Let us try to clarify the subject by quoting explanations by various scientists and scholars on the subject. Regarding the subject of time flowing backwards, the famous intellectual and Nobel laureate professor of genetics, François Jacob, states the following in his book Le Jeu des Possibles (The Possible and the Actual):

Films played backward, make it possible for us to imagine a world in which time flows backwards. A world in which milk separates itself from the coffee and jumps out of the cup to reach the milk-pan; a world in which light rays are emitted from the walls to be collected in a trap (gravity center) instead of gushing out from a light source; a world in which a stone slopes to the palm of a man by the astonishing cooperation of innumerable drops of water making it possible for the stone to jump out of water. Yet, in such a world in which time has such opposite features, the processes of our brain and the way our memory compiles information, would similarly be functioning backwards. The same is true for the past and future and the world will appear  to us exactly as it currently appears.57

Since our brain is accustomed to a certain sequence of events, the world operates not as it is related above and we assume that time always flows forward. However, this is a decision reached in the brain and therefore is completely relative. In reality, we can never know how time flows or even whether it flows or not. This is an indication of the fact that time is not an absolute fact but just a sort of perception.

The relativity of time is a fact also verified by the most important physicist of the 20th century, Albert Einstein. Lincoln Barnett, writes in his book The Universe and Dr. Einstein:

Along with absolute space, Einstein discarded the concept of absolute time — of a steady, unvarying inexorable universal time flow, streaming from the infinite past to the infinite future. Much of the obscurity that has surrounded the Theory of Relativity stems from man's reluctance to recognize that a sense of time, like sense of colour, is a form of perception. Just as space is simply a possible order of material objects, so time is simply a possible order of events. The subjectivity of time is best explained in Einstein's own words. "The experiences of an individual," he says, "appear to us arranged in a series of events; in this series the single events which we remember appear to be ordered according to the criterion of 'earlier" and 'later'. There exists, therefore, for the individual, an I-time, or subjective time. This in itself is not measurable. I can, indeed, associate numbers with the events, in such a way that a greater number is associated with the later event than with an earlier one."58

Einstein himself pointed out, as quoted from Barnett's book, that "space and time are forms of intuition, which can no more be divorced from consciousness than can our concepts of colour, shape, or size." According to the Theory of General Relativity, "time has no independent existence apart from the order of events by which we measure it."59

Since time consists of perception, it depends entirely on the perceiver and is therefore relative.

The speed at which time flows differs according to the references we use to measure it, because there is no natural clock in the human body to indicate precisely how fast time passes. As Lincoln Barnett wrote: "Just as there is no such thing as colour without an eye to discern it, so an instant or an hour or a day is nothing without an event to mark it."60

The relativity of time is plainly experienced in dreams. Although what we see in our dream seems to last for hours, it in fact, lasts for only a few minutes, or even a few seconds.

Let us take an example to further clarify the subject. Imagine that, for a certain unspecified period of time, we are locked up in a room with a single, specially designed window from which we can see the setting and rising of the sun, and that we have a clock by which to judge the passage of time. A few days later, our estimate of the time spent in the room will be based on our periodic clock – watching and our noting of how often the sun rose and set. At the end of our period of confinement, we come to the conclusion that we have spent three days in the room. But then our "captor" reveals that in reality if was only two days. The reason?  The "sun" we had been observing had been artificially projected by a simulation machine and our clock had been regulated to run faster than normal. So our calculations had no meaning.

This example confirms that the information we have about the rate of the passage of time is based on relative references. The relativity of time is a scientific fact also proven by scientific methodology. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity maintains that the speed of time changes depending on the speed of the object and its distance from the centre of gravity. As speed increases, time is shortened, compressed; and slows down as if coming to the point of "stopping".

Let us explain this with an example given by Einstein himself. Imagine twins, one of whom stays on earth while the other goes travelling in space at a speed close to the speed of light. When he comes back, the traveller will see that his brother has grown much older than he has. The reason is that time flows much more slowly for the person who travels at speeds near the speed of light. Similarly, in the case of a space-travelling father and his earth-bound son, if the father was 27 years old when he set out and his son 3, when the father comes back to the earth 30 years later (earth time), the son will be 33 years old, but his father will be only 30.61

It should be pointed out that this relativity of time is caused not by the slowing down or running fast of clocks or the slow running of a mechanical spring. It is rather the result of the differentiated operation periods of the entire material system, which goes as deep as sub-atomic particles. In other words, for the person experiencing it, the shortening of time is not like acting in a slow-motion picture. In such a setting where time shortens, one's heartbeats, cell replications, and brain functions, and so on, all operate more slowly than those of the slower-moving person on Earth, who goes on with his daily life and does not notice the shortening of time at all. Indeed the shortening does not even become apparent until the comparison is made.

Relativity In The Qur'an

The conclusion to which we are led by the findings of modern science is that time is not an absolute fact as supposed by materialists, but only a relative perception. What is more interesting is that this fact, undiscovered until the 20th century by science, was imparted to mankind in the Qur'an 14 centuries ago. There are various references in the Qur'an to the relativity of time.

The scientifically-proven fact that time is a psychological perception dependent on events, setting, and conditions is underscored in many verses of the Qur'an. For instance, as started in the Qur'an, the entire life of a person spans a very short time:

On that Day He will call you, and you will answer (His Call) with (words of) His Praise and Obedience, and you will think that you have stayed (in this world) but a little while! (Surat al-Isra, 52)

And on the Day when He shall gather them together, (it will seem to them) as if they had not tarried (on earth) longer than an hour of a day: they will recognise each other. (Surah Yunus, 45)

In some verses, it is indicated that people perceive time differently and that sometimes people can perceive a very short period of time as a very lengthy one. The following conversation of people held during their judgement in the Hereafter is a good example of this:

He will say: "What number of years did you stay on earth?" They will say: "We stayed a day or part of a day: but ask those who keep account." He will say: "You, stayed for only a little while – if you had only known!" (Surat al-Mumenoon, 112-114)

In some other verses it is stated that time may flow at different paces in different settings:

Yet they ask you to hasten on the Punishment! But Allah will not fail in His Promise. Truly, a day in the sight of your Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning. (Surat al-Hajj, 47)

The angels and the spirit ascend to him in a day the measure of which is like fifty thousand years. (Surat al-Maarij, 4)

These verses are all manifest expressions of the relativity of time. The fact that this result, only recently understood by science in the 20th century, was communicated to man 1,400 years ago by the Qur'an is an indication of the revelation of the Qur'an by Allah, Who encompasses the whole of time and space.

Many other verses of the Qur'an reveal that time is a perception. This is particularly evident in the stories. For instance, Allah has kept the Companions of the Cave, a believing group mentioned in the Qur'an, in a deep sleep for more than three centuries. When they were awoken, these people thought that they had stayed in that state but a little while, and could not reckon how long they slept:

Then We drew (a veil) over their ears, for a number of years, in the Cave, (so that they could not hear). Then We wakened them up so that We might know which of the two parties would best calculate the time that they had tarried. (Surat al-Kahf, 11-12)

Such (being their state), we roused them (from sleep), so that they might question each other. Said one of them, "How long have you stayed (here)?" They said, "We have stayed (perhaps) a day, or part of a day." (At length) they (all) said, "Allah (alone) knows best how long you have stayed here.... (Surat al-Kahf, 19)

The situation described in the verse below is also evidence that time is in truth a psychological perception.

Or (take) the instance of one who passing by a hamlet, all in ruins and quite desolate, said: "Oh! how shall Allah (ever) bring it to life, now that it is dead?" Therefore, Allah caused him to die for a hundred years, then brought him back to life. Allah asked: "How long did you tarry (thus)?" He said: (Perhaps) a day or part of a day." He said: "No, you have tarried thus a hundred years; but look at your food and your drink; they show no signs of age; and look at your donkey: And so that We may make you a sign to the people, look further at the bones, how We bring them together and clothe them with flesh." When this was shown clearly to him, he said: "I know that Allah has power over all things." (Surat al-Baqara, 259)

The above verse clearly emphasises that Allah, Who created time, is unbound by it. Man, on the other hand, is bound by time: that is ordained by Allah. As in the verse, man is even incapable of knowing how long he remained asleep. This being so, to assert that time is absolute (just as the materialists do because of their distorted mentality), would be very unreasonable.

Destiny

This relativity of time clears up a very important matter. Relativity is so variable that a period of time, which seems to us like billions of years may last for only a second in another dimension. Moreover, an enormous period of time extending from the world's beginning to its end may not last even a second but only a fraction of a second in another dimension.

This is the very essence of the concept of destiny- a concept that is not well understood by most people, especially materialists, who deny it completely. Destiny is Allah's perfect knowledge of all events past or future. The majority of people question how Allah can already know events that have not yet been experienced and this leads them to fail to understand the authenticity of destiny. However, "events not yet experienced" are not yet experienced only for us. Allah is not bound by time or space, for He Himself has created them. For this reason, the past, the future, and the present are all the same to Allah; for Him, everything has already taken place and finished.

Lincoln Barnett explains how the Theory of General Relativity leads to this fact in The Universe and Dr. Einstein: According to Barnett, the universe can be "encompassed in its entire majesty only by a cosmic intellect."62 The will that Barnett calls "the cosmic intellect" is the wisdom and knowledge of Allah, Who prevails over the entire universe. Just as we easily see a ruler's beginning, middle, and end, and all the units in between as a whole, Allah knows our entire life span as if it were a single moment, right from its beginning to the end. People experience incidents only when their time comes and they witness the fate Allah has created for them.

It is also important to draw attention to the shallowness of the distorted understanding of destiny prevalent in society. This distorted conviction of fate has engendered the superstitious belief that Allah has determined a "destiny" for every man, but that these destinies can sometimes be changed by people. For instance, in the case of a patient who returns from death's door, people make superficial statements like "He defeated his destiny". Yet, no one is able to change his destiny. The person who turns from death's door does not die because he is destined not to die just then. It is again the destiny of those people who deceive themselves by saying "I defeated my destiny" to say so and maintain such a mindset.

Destiny is the eternal knowledge of Allah and for Allah, Who knows time like a single moment and Who prevails over the whole of time and space, everything is determined and finished in the matter of destiny. We also understand from what is related in the Qur'an that time is one for Allah: some incidents that will seemingly happen to us in the future are related in the Qur'an in such a way as to indicate that they have already taken place long before. For instance, the verses that describe the account that people are to give to Allah in the hereafter are related as events which have already occurred long ago:

And the trumpet is blown, and all who are in the heavens and all who are in the earth swoon away, save him whom Allah wills. Then it is blown a second time, and behold them standing waiting! And the earth shines with the light of her Lord, and the Book is set up, and the prophets and the witnesses are brought, and all are judged with fairness, and none are wronged... And those who disbelieve are driven to hell in hordes... And those who keep their duty to their Lord are driven unto the Garden in hordes..." (Surat az-Zumar, 68-73)

Some other verses on this subject are:

And every soul came, along with a driver and a witness. (Surat al-Qaf, 21)

And the heaven is cloven asunder, so that on that day it is frail. (Surat al-Haaqqa, 16)

And because they were patient and constant, He rewarded them with a Garden and garments of silk. Reclining in the Garden on raised thrones, they saw there neither the sun's excessive heat nor excessive cold. (Surat al-Insan, 12-13)

And Hell is placed in full view for all to see. (Surat an-Naziat, 36)

But on this Day the Believers laugh at the Unbelievers. (Surat al-Mutaffifin, 34)

And the Sinful saw the fire and apprehended that they had to fall into it: no means did they find to turn away from it. (Surat al-Kahf, 53)

As is evident, occurrences that are going to take place after our death (from our point of view) are related in the Quran as past events which have already been experienced. Allah is not bound by the relative time frame that we are confined in. He has willed these things in timelessness: people have already performed them and all these events have been lived through and ended. It is stated in the verse below that every event, be it big or small, is within the knowledge of Allah and recorded in a book:

In whatever business you may be, and whatever portion you may be reciting from the Qur'an,- and whatever deed you (mankind) may be doing,- We are witnesses to it  when you are deeply engrossed in it. Nor is there hidden from your Lord so much as the weight of an atom on the earth or in heaven. And the least and the greatest of these things are recorded in a clear book. (Surah Jonah, 61)

The Worry of the Materialists

The issues discussed in this chapter, namely the truth underlying matter, timelessness, and spacelessness, are, of course quite clear. As stated before, these issues are in no way any sort of a philosophy or a way of thought, but crystal-clear, indisputable scientific truths. In addition to their being a technical reality, the rational and logical evidence also admits of no other alternatives on this point: we can know only the version of the universe, with all the matter composing it and all the people living in it, in our brain.

Materialists have a hard time in understanding this issue. For instance, let us return to Politzer's bus example: although Politzer knew that technically he could not step out of his perceptions, he could only admit it for certain cases. That is, for Politzer, events take place in the brain until the bus crash, but as soon as the bus crash takes place, things go out of the brain and gain a physical reality. The logical defect at this point is very clear: Politzer has made the same mistake as the materialist philosopher Johnson who said, "I hit the stone, my foot hurts, therefore it exists" and could not understand that the shock felt after bus impact was in fact a mere perception as well.

The subliminal reason why materialists cannot comprehend this subject is their fear of the fact they will face when they comprehend it. Lincoln Barnett writes that this subject has been "discerned" by certain scientists:

Along with philosophers' reduction of all objective reality to a shadow-world of perceptions, scientists have become aware of the alarming limitations of man's senses.63

Any reference made to the facts that we do not have direct experience of the original of matter and that time is a perception arouses great fear in a materialist, because these are the only notions he relies on as absolute entities. In a sense, he takes these as idols to worship; because he thinks that he has been created by matter and time (through evolution). (Surely Allah is beyond that.)

When he feels that he only experiences the perceptions of the universe he thinks he is living in, the world, his own body, other people, other materialist philosophers whose ideas he is influenced by, and in short, everything, he feels overwhelmed by the horror of it all. Everything he depends on, believes in, and takes recourse to vanishes suddenly. He feels a desperateness which he, essentially, will experience on Judgment Day in its real sense as told about the unbelievers in the verse: "That Day they shall openly show their submission to Allah; and all their inventions shall leave them in the lurch." (Surat an-Nahl, 87)

From then on, this materialist tries to convince himself of the lie that he can reach the original of matter, and makes up "evidence" to this end; he hits the wall with his fist, kicks stones, shouts, yells, but can never escape from the reality.

Just as they want to dismiss this reality from their minds, they also want other people to discard it. They are also aware that if the true nature of matter is known by people in general, the primitiveness of their own philosophy and the ignorance of their worldview will be exposed for all to see, and there will be no grounds left on which they can rationalise their views. These fears are the reason why they are so disturbed by the fact related here.

Allah states that the fears of the unbelievers will be intensified in the hereafter. On Judgement Day, they will be addressed thus:

One day We shall gather them all together: We shall say to those who ascribed partners to Us: "Where are the partners whom you invented and talked about?" (Surat al-Anaam, 22)

Thereupon, unbelievers will bear witness to the disappearance of possessions, children and close circle whom they had assumed to be real and ascribed as partners to Allah: "Behold! how they lie against their own souls! But the (lie) which they invented will leave them in the lurch." (Surat al-Anaam, 24).

The Gain of Believers

While the reality that we do not have direct contact with the original matter and that time is a perception alarms materialists, just the opposite holds true for true believers. People of faith become very glad when they have perceived the secret behind matter, because this is the key to all questions. With this key, all secrets are unlocked. One comes to easily understand many issues that were previously difficult to understand.

As previously stated, the concepts of death, paradise, hell, the hereafter and changing dimensions will be explained, and important questions such as "Where is Allah?", "What was before Allah?", "Who created Allah?", "How long will the life in cemetery last?" "Where are heaven and hell?", and "Where do heaven and hell currently exist?" will be easily answered. The kind of system by which Allah created the entire universe from nothingness will be understood. So much so that, with this secret, the questions of "when", and "where" become meaningless, because there will be no time and no place left. When spacelessness is comprehended, it will follow that hell, heaven and earth are all actually at the same place. If timelessness is understood, it will follow that everything takes place at a single moment: nothing is waited for and time does not go by, because everything has already happened and finished.

With this secret uncovered, the world becomes like heaven for a believer. All distressful, material worries, anxieties, and fears vanish. The individual grasps that the entire universe has a single Sovereign, that He changes the entire physical world as He pleases and that all he — the believer — has to do is to turn to Him. He then submits himself entirely to Allah "to be devoted to His service". (Surat 'Ali Imran, 35)

To comprehend this secret is the greatest gain in the world.

Along with this secret, another very important reality mentioned in the Qur'an is unveiled: the fact that  "Allah is nearer to man than his jugular vein." (Surah Qaf, 16). As everybody knows, the jugular vein is inside the body. What could be nearer to a person than his own insides? This is easily explained by the reality of spacelessness. This verse can also be much better understood in terms of this concept.

This is the plain truth. It should be well established that there is no other helper and provider for man other than Allah. There is nothing but Allah; He is the only absolute being in Whom one can seek refuge, appeal to for help, and count on for reward.

Wherever we turn, there is the presence of Allah.

CHAPTER 4

THE DECEPTION OF EVOLUTION

Darwinism, in other words the theory of evolution, was put forward with the aim of denying the fact of creation, but is in truth nothing but failed, unscientific nonsense. This theory, which claims that life emerged by chance from inanimate matter, was invalidated by the scientific evidence of miraculous order in the universe and in living things. In this way, science confirmed the fact that Allah created the universe and the living things in it. The propaganda carried out today in order to keep the theory of evolution alive is based solely on the distortion of the scientific facts, biased interpretation, and lies and falsehoods disguised as science.

Yet this propaganda cannot conceal the truth. The fact that the theory of evolution is the greatest deception in the history of science has been expressed more and more in the scientific world over the last 20-30 years. Research carried out after the 1980s in particular has revealed that the claims of Darwinism are totally unfounded, something that has been stated by a large number of scientists. In the United States in particular, many scientists from such different fields as biology, biochemistry and paleontology recognize the invalidity of Darwinism and employ the fact of creation to account for the origin of life.

We have examined the collapse of the theory of evolution and the proofs of creation in great scientific detail in many of our works, and are still continuing to do so. Given the enormous importance of this subject, it will be of great benefit to summarize it here.

The Scientific Collapse of Darwinism

Although this doctrine goes back as far as ancient Greece, the theory of evolution was advanced extensively in the nineteenth century. The most important development that made it the top topic of the world of science was Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species, published in 1859. In this book, he denied that Allah created different living species on Earth separately, for he claimed that all living beings had a common ancestor and had diversified over time through small changes. Darwin's theory was not based on any concrete scientific finding; as he also accepted, it was just an "assumption." Moreover, as Darwin confessed in the long chapter of his book titled "Difficulties on Theory," the theory failed in the face of many critical questions.

Darwin invested all of his hopes in new scientific discoveries, which he expected to solve these difficulties. However, contrary to his expectations, scientific findings expanded the dimensions of these difficulties. The defeat of Darwinism in the face of science can be reviewed under three basic topics:

1) The theory cannot explain how life originated on Earth.

2) No scientific finding shows that the "evolutionary mechanisms" proposed by the theory have any evolutionary power at all.

3) The fossil record proves the exact opposite of what the theory suggests.

In this section, we will examine these three basic points in general outlines:

The First Insurmountable Step:

The Origin of Life

The theory of evolution posits that all living species evolved from a single living cell that emerged on the primitive Earth 3.8 billion years ago. How a single cell could generate millions of complex living species and, if such an evolution really occurred, why traces of it cannot be observed in the fossil record are some of the questions that the theory cannot answer. However, first and foremost, we need to ask: How did this "first cell" originate?

Since the theory of evolution denies creation and any kind of supernatural intervention, it maintains that the "first cell" originated coincidentally within the laws of nature, without any design, plan or arrangement. According to the theory, inanimate matter must have produced a living cell as a result of coincidences. Such a claim, however, is inconsistent with the most unassailable rules of biology.

"Life Comes From Life"

In his book, Darwin never referred to the origin of life. The primitive understanding of science in his time rested on the assumption that living beings had a very simple structure. Since medieval times, spontaneous generation, which asserts that non-living materials came together to form living organisms, had been widely accepted. It was commonly believed that insects came into being from food leftovers, and mice from wheat. Interesting experiments were conducted to prove this theory. Some wheat was placed on a dirty piece of cloth, and it was believed that mice would originate from it after a while.

Similarly, maggots developing in rotting meat was assumed to be evidence of spontaneous generation. However, it was later understood that worms did not appear on meat spontaneously, but were carried there by flies in the form of larvae, invisible to the naked eye.

Even when Darwin wrote The Origin of Species, the belief that bacteria could come into existence from non-living matter was widely accepted in the world of science.

However, five years after the publication of Darwin's book, Louis Pasteur announced his results after long studies and experiments, that disproved spontaneous generation, a cornerstone of Darwin's theory. In his triumphal lecture at the Sorbonne in 1864, Pasteur said: "Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment."64

For a long time, advocates of the theory of evolution resisted these findings. However, as the development of science unraveled the complex structure of the cell of a living being, the idea that life could come into being coincidentally faced an even greater impasse.

Inconclusive Efforts of the Twentieth Century

The first evolutionist who took up the subject of the origin of life in the twentieth century was the renowned Russian biologist Alexander Oparin. With various theses he advanced in the 1930s, he tried to prove that a living cell could originate by coincidence. These studies, however, were doomed to failure, and Oparin had to make the following confession:

Unfortunately, however, the problem of the origin of the cell is perhaps the most obscure point in the whole study of the evolution of organisms.65

Evolutionist followers of Oparin tried to carry out experiments to solve this problem. The best known experiment was carried out by the American chemist Stanley Miller in 1953. Combining the gases he alleged to have existed in the primordial Earth's atmosphere in an experiment set-up, and adding energy to the mixture, Miller synthesized several organic molecules (amino acids) present in the structure of proteins.

Barely a few years had passed before it was revealed that this experiment, which was then presented as an important step in the name of evolution, was invalid, for the atmosphere used in the experiment was very different from the real Earth conditions.66

After a long silence, Miller confessed that the atmosphere medium he used was unrealistic.67

All the evolutionists' efforts throughout the twentieth century to explain the origin of life ended in failure. The geochemist Jeffrey Bada, from the San Diego Scripps Institute accepts this fact in an article published in Earth magazine in 1998:

Today as we leave the twentieth century, we still face the biggest unsolved problem that we had when we entered the twentieth century: How did life originate on Earth?68

The Complex Structure of Life

The primary reason why the theory of evolution ended up in such a great impasse regarding the origin of life is that even those living organisms deemed to be the simplest have incredibly complex structures. The cell of a living thing is more complex than all of our man-made technological products. Today, even in the most developed laboratories of the world, a living cell cannot be produced by bringing organic chemicals together.

The conditions required for the formation of a cell are too great in quantity to be explained away by coincidences. The probability of proteins, the building blocks of a cell, being synthesized coincidentally, is 1 in 10950 for an average protein made up of 500 amino acids. In mathematics, a probability smaller than 1 over 1050 is considered to be impossible in practical terms.

The DNA molecule, which is located in the nucleus of a cell and which stores genetic information, is an incredible databank. If the information coded in DNA were written down, it would make a giant library consisting of an estimated 900 volumes of encyclopedias consisting of 500 pages each.

A very interesting dilemma emerges at this point: DNA can replicate itself only with the help of some specialized proteins (enzymes). However, the synthesis of these enzymes can be realized only by the information coded in DNA. As they both depend on each other, they have to exist at the same time for replication. This brings the scenario that life originated by itself to a deadlock. Prof. Leslie Orgel, an evolutionist of repute from the University of San Diego, California, confesses this fact in the September 1994 issue of the Scientific American magazine:

It is extremely improbable that proteins and nucleic acids, both of which are structurally complex, arose spontaneously in the same place at the same time. Yet it also seems impossible to have one without the other. And so, at first glance, one might have to conclude that life could never, in fact, have originated by chemical means.69

No doubt, if it is impossible for life to have originated from natural causes, then it has to be accepted that life was "created" in a supernatural way. This fact explicitly invalidates the theory of evolution, whose main purpose is to deny creation.

Imaginary Mechanism of Evolution

The second important point that negates Darwin's theory is that both concepts put forward by the theory as "evolutionary mechanisms" were understood to have, in reality, no evolutionary power.

Darwin based his evolution allegation entirely on the mechanism of "natural selection." The importance he placed on this mechanism was evident in the name of his book: The Origin of Species, By Means of Natural Selection…

Natural selection holds that those living things that are stronger and more suited to the natural conditions of their habitats will survive in the struggle for life. For example, in a deer herd under the threat of attack by wild animals, those that can run faster will survive. Therefore, the deer herd will be comprised of faster and stronger individuals. However, unquestionably, this mechanism will not cause deer to evolve and transform themselves into another living species, for instance, horses.

Therefore, the mechanism of natural selection has no evolutionary power. Darwin was also aware of this fact and had to state this in his book The Origin of Species:

Natural selection can do nothing until favourable individual differences or variations occur.70

Lamarck's Impact

So, how could these "favorable variations" occur? Darwin tried to answer this question from the standpoint of the primitive understanding of science at that time. According to the French biologist Chevalier de Lamarck (1744-1829), who lived before Darwin, living creatures passed on the traits they acquired during their lifetime to the next generation. He asserted that these traits, which accumulated from one generation to another, caused new species to be formed. For instance, he claimed that giraffes evolved from antelopes; as they struggled to eat the leaves of high trees, their necks were extended from generation to generation.

Darwin also gave similar examples. In his book The Origin of Species, for instance, he said that some bears going into water to find food transformed themselves into whales over time.71

However, the laws of inheritance discovered by Gregor Mendel (1822-84) and verified by the science of genetics, which flourished in the twentieth century, utterly demolished the legend that acquired traits were passed on to subsequent generations. Thus, natural selection fell out of favor as an evolutionary mechanism.

Neo-Darwinism and Mutations

In order to find a solution, Darwinists advanced the "Modern Synthetic Theory," or as it is more commonly known, Neo-Darwinism, at the end of the 1930s. Neo-Darwinism added mutations, which are distortions formed in the genes of living beings due to such external factors as radiation or replication errors, as the "cause of favorable variations" in addition to natural mutation.

Today, the model that stands for evolution in the world is Neo-Darwinism. The theory maintains that millions of living beings formed as a result of a process whereby numerous complex organs of these organisms (e.g., ears, eyes, lungs, and wings) underwent "mutations," that is, genetic disorders. Yet, there is an outright scientific fact that totally undermines this theory: Mutations do not cause living beings to develop; on the contrary, they are always harmful.

The reason for this is very simple: DNA has a very complex structure, and random effects can only harm it. The American geneticist B. G. Ranganathan explains this as follows:

First, genuine mutations are very rare in nature. Secondly, most mutations are harmful since they are random, rather than orderly changes in the structure of genes; any random change in a highly ordered system will be for the worse, not for the better. For example, if an earthquake were to shake a highly ordered structure such as a building, there would be a random change in the framework of the building which, in all probability, would not be an improvement.72

Not surprisingly, no mutation example, which is useful, that is, which is observed to develop the genetic code, has been observed so far. All mutations have proved to be harmful. It was understood that mutation, which is presented as an "evolutionary mechanism," is actually a genetic occurrence that harms living things, and leaves them disabled. (The most common effect of mutation on human beings is cancer.) Of course, a destructive mechanism cannot be an "evolutionary mechanism." Natural selection, on the other hand, "can do nothing by itself," as Darwin also accepted. This fact shows us that there is no "evolutionary mechanism" in nature. Since no evolutionary mechanism exists, no such any imaginary process called "evolution" could have taken place.

The Fossil Record:

No Sign of Intermediate Forms

The clearest evidence that the scenario suggested by the theory of evolution did not take place is the fossil record.

According to this theory, every living species has sprung from a predecessor. A previously existing species turned into something else over time and all species have come into being in this way. In other words, this transformation proceeds gradually over millions of years.

Had this been the case, numerous intermediary species should have existed and lived within this long transformation period.

For instance, some half-fish/half-reptiles should have lived in the past which had acquired some reptilian traits in addition to the fish traits they already had. Or there should have existed some reptile-birds, which acquired some bird traits in addition to the reptilian traits they already had. Since these would be in a transitional phase, they should be disabled, defective, crippled living beings. Evolutionists refer to these imaginary creatures, which they believe to have lived in the past, as "transitional forms."

If such animals ever really existed, there should be millions and even billions of them in number and variety. More importantly, the remains of these strange creatures should be present in the fossil record. In The Origin of Species, Darwin explained:

If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed... Consequently, evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.73

Darwin's Hopes Shattered

However, although evolutionists have been making strenuous efforts to find fossils since the middle of the nineteenth century all over the world, no transitional forms have yet been uncovered. All of the fossils, contrary to the evolutionists' expectations, show that life appeared on Earth all of a sudden and fully-formed.

One famous British paleontologist, Derek V. Ager, admits this fact, even though he is an evolutionist:

The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at the level of orders or of species, we find – over and over again – not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another.74

This means that in the fossil record, all living species suddenly emerge as fully formed, without any intermediate forms in between. This is just the opposite of Darwin's assumptions. Also, this is very strong evidence that all living things are created. The only explanation of a living species emerging suddenly and complete in every detail without any evolutionary ancestor is that it was created. This fact is admitted also by the widely known evolutionist biologist Douglas Futuyma:

Creation and evolution, between them, exhaust the possible explanations for the origin of living things. Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from pre-existing species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must indeed have been created by some omnipotent intelligence.75

Fossils show that living beings emerged fully developed and in a perfect state on the Earth. That means that "the origin of species," contrary to Darwin's supposition, is not evolution, but creation.

The Tale of Human Evolution

The subject most often brought up by advocates of the theory of evolution is the subject of the origin of man. The Darwinist claim holds that modern man evolved from ape-like creatures. During this alleged evolutionary process, which is supposed to have started 4-5 million years ago, some "transitional forms" between modern man and his ancestors are supposed to have existed. According to this completely imaginary scenario, four basic "categories" are listed:

1. Australopithecus

2. Homo habilis

3. Homo erectus

4. Homo sapiens

Evolutionists call man's so-called first ape-like ancestors Australopithecus, which means "South African ape." These living beings are actually nothing but an old ape species that has become extinct. Extensive research done on various Australopithecus specimens by two world famous anatomists from England and the USA, namely, Lord Solly Zuckerman and Prof. Charles Oxnard, shows that these apes belonged to an ordinary ape species that became extinct and bore no resemblance to humans.76

Evolutionists classify the next stage of human evolution as "homo," that is "man." According to their claim, the living beings in the Homo series are more developed than Australopithecus. Evolutionists devise a fanciful evolution scheme by arranging different fossils of these creatures in a particular order. This scheme is imaginary because it has never been proved that there is an evolutionary relation between these different classes. Ernst Mayr, one of the twentieth century's most important evolutionists, contends in his book One Long Argument that "particularly historical [puzzles] such as the origin of life or of Homo sapiens, are extremely difficult and may even resist a final, satisfying explanation."77

By outlining the link chain as Australopithecus > Homo habilis > Homo erectus > Homo sapiens, evolutionists imply that each of these species is one another's ancestor. However, recent findings of paleoanthropologists have revealed that Australopithecus, Homo habilis, and Homo erectus lived at different parts of the world at the same time.78

Moreover, a certain segment of humans classified as Homo erectus have lived up until very modern times. Homo sapiens neandarthalensis and Homo sapiens sapiens (modern man) co-existed in the same region.79

This situation apparently indicates the invalidity of the claim that they are ancestors of one another. The late Stephen Jay Gould explained this deadlock of the theory of evolution although he was himself one of the leading advocates of evolution in the twentieth century:

What has become of our ladder if there are three coexisting lineages of hominids (A. africanus, the robust australopithecines, and H. habilis), none clearly derived from another? Moreover, none of the three display any evolutionary trends during their tenure on earth.80

Put briefly, the scenario of human evolution, which is "upheld" with the help of various drawings of some "half ape, half human" creatures appearing in the media and course books, that is, frankly, by means of propaganda, is nothing but a tale with no scientific foundation.

Lord Solly Zuckerman, one of the most famous and respected scientists in the U.K., who carried out research on this subject for years and studied Australopithecus fossils for 15 years, finally concluded, despite being an evolutionist himself, that there is, in fact, no such family tree branching out from ape-like creatures to man.

Zuckerman also made an interesting "spectrum of science" ranging from those he considered scientific to those he considered unscientific. According to Zuckerman's spectrum, the most "scientific"—that is, depending on concrete data—fields of science are chemistry and physics. After them come the biological sciences and then the social sciences. At the far end of the spectrum, which is the part considered to be most "unscientific," are "extra-sensory perception"—concepts such as telepathy and sixth sense—and finally "human evolution." Zuckerman explains his reasoning:

We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man's fossil history, where to the faithful [evolutionist] anything is possible – and where the ardent believer [in evolution] is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time.81

The tale of human evolution boils down to nothing but the prejudiced interpretations of some fossils unearthed by certain people, who blindly adhere to their theory.

Darwinian Formula!

Besides all the technical evidence we have dealt with so far, let us now for once, examine what kind of a superstition the evolutionists have with an example so simple as to be understood even by children:

The theory of evolution asserts that life is formed by chance. According to this claim, lifeless and unconscious atoms came together to form the cell and then they somehow formed other living things, including man. Let us think about that. When we bring together the elements that are the building-blocks of life such as carbon, phosphorus, nitrogen and potassium, only a heap is formed. No matter what treatments it undergoes, this atomic heap cannot form even a single living being. If you like, let us formulate an "experiment" on this subject and let us examine on the behalf of evolutionists what they really claim without pronouncing loudly under the name "Darwinian formula":

Let evolutionists put plenty of materials present in the composition of living things such as phosphorus, nitrogen, carbon, oxygen, iron, and magnesium into big barrels. Moreover, let them add in these barrels any material that does not exist under normal conditions, but they think as necessary. Let them add in this mixture as many amino acids  and as many proteins—a single one of which has a formation probability of 10-950—as they like. Let them expose these mixtures to as much heat and moisture as they like. Let them stir these with whatever technologically developed device they like. Let them put the foremost scientists beside these barrels. Let these experts wait in turn beside these barrels for billions, and even trillions of years. Let them be free to use all kinds of conditions they believe to be necessary for a human's formation. No matter what they do, they cannot produce from these barrels a human, say a professor that examines his cell structure under the electron microscope. They cannot produce giraffes, lions, bees, canaries, horses, dolphins, roses, orchids, lilies, carnations, bananas, oranges, apples, dates, tomatoes, melons, watermelons, figs, olives, grapes, peaches, peafowls, pheasants, multicoloured butterflies, or millions of other living beings such as these. Indeed, they could not obtain even a single cell of any one of them.

Briefly, unconscious atoms cannot form the cell by coming together. They cannot take a new decision and divide this cell into two, then take other decisions and create the professors who first invent the electron microscope and then examine their own cell structure under that microscope. Matter is an unconscious, lifeless heap, and it comes to life with Allah's superior creation.

The theory of evolution, which claims the opposite, is a total fallacy completely contrary to reason. Thinking even a little bit on the claims of evolutionists discloses this reality, just as in the above example.

Technology in the Eye and the Ear

Another subject that remains unanswered by evolutionary theory is the excellent quality of perception in the eye and the ear.

Before passing on to the subject of the eye, let us briefly answer the question of how we see. Light rays coming from an object fall oppositely on the eye's retina. Here, these light rays are transmitted into electric signals by cells and reach a tiny spot at the back of the brain, the "center of vision." These electric signals are perceived in this center as an image after a series of processes. With this technical background, let us do some thinking.

The brain is insulated from light. That means that its inside is completely dark, and that no light reaches the place where it is located. Thus, the "center of vision" is never touched by light and may even be the darkest place you have ever known. However, you observe a luminous, bright world in this pitch darkness.

The image formed in the eye is so sharp and distinct that even the technology of the twentieth century has not been able to attain it. For instance, look at the book you are reading, your hands with which you are holding it, and then lift your head and look around you. Have you ever seen such a sharp and distinct image as this one at any other place? Even the most developed television screen produced by the greatest television producer in the world cannot provide such a sharp image for you. This is a three-dimensional, colored, and extremely sharp image. For more than 100 years, thousands of engineers have been trying to achieve this sharpness. Factories, huge premises were established, much research has been done, plans and designs have been made for this purpose. Again, look at a TV screen and the book you hold in your hands. You will see that there is a big difference in sharpness and distinction. Moreover, the TV screen shows you a two-dimensional image, whereas with your eyes, you watch a three-dimensional perspective with depth.

For many years, tens of thousands of engineers have tried to make a three-dimensional TV and achieve the vision quality of the eye. Yes, they have made a three-dimensional television system, but it is not possible to watch it without putting on special 3-D glasses; moreover, it is only an artificial three-dimension. The background is more blurred, the foreground appears like a paper setting. Never has it been possible to produce a sharp and distinct vision like that of the eye. In both the camera and the television, there is a loss of image quality.

Evolutionists claim that the mechanism producing this sharp and distinct image has been formed by chance. Now, if somebody told you that the television in your room was formed as a result of chance, that all of its atoms just happened to come together and make up this device that produces an image, what would you think? How can atoms do what thousands of people cannot?

If a device producing a more primitive image than the eye could not have been formed by chance, then it is very evident that the eye and the image seen by the eye could not have been formed by chance. The same situation applies to the ear. The outer ear picks up the available sounds by the auricle and directs them to the middle ear, the middle ear transmits the sound vibrations by intensifying them, and the inner ear sends these vibrations to the brain by translating them into electric signals. Just as with the eye, the act of hearing finalizes in the center of hearing in the brain.

The situation in the eye is also true for the ear. That is, the brain is insulated from sound just as it is from light. It does not let any sound in. Therefore, no matter how noisy is the outside, the inside of the brain is completely silent. Nevertheless, the sharpest sounds are perceived in the brain. In your completely silent brain, you listen to symphonies, and hear all of the noises in a crowded place. However, were the sound level in your brain measured by a precise device at that moment, complete silence would be found to be prevailing there.

As is the case with imagery, decades of effort have been spent in trying to generate and reproduce sound that is faithful to the original. The results of these efforts are sound recorders, high-fidelity systems, and systems for sensing sound. Despite all of this technology and the thousands of engineers and experts who have been working on this endeavor, no sound has yet been obtained that has the same sharpness and clarity as the sound perceived by the ear. Think of the highest-quality hi-fi systems produced by the largest company in the music industry. Even in these devices, when sound is recorded some of it is lost; or when you turn on a hi-fi you always hear a hissing sound before the music starts. However, the sounds that are the products of the human body's technology are extremely sharp and clear. A human ear never perceives a sound accompanied by a hissing sound or with atmospherics as does a hi-fi; rather, it perceives sound exactly as it is, sharp and clear. This is the way it has been since the creation of man.

So far, no man-made visual or recording apparatus has been as sensitive and successful in perceiving sensory data as are the eye and the ear. However, as far as seeing and hearing are concerned, a far greater truth lies beyond all this.

To Whom Does the Consciousness that Sees

and Hears within the Brain Belong?

Who watches an alluring world in the brain, listens to symphonies and the twittering of birds, and smells the rose?

The stimulations coming from a person's eyes, ears, and nose travel to the brain as electro-chemical nerve impulses. In biology, physiology, and biochemistry books, you can find many details about how this image forms in the brain. However, you will never come across the most important fact: Who perceives these electro-chemical nerve impulses as images, sounds, odors, and sensory events in the brain? There is a consciousness in the brain that perceives all this without feeling any need for an eye, an ear, and a nose. To whom does this consciousness belong? Of course it does not belong to the nerves, the fat layer, and neurons comprising the brain. This is why Darwinist-materialists, who believe that everything is comprised of matter, cannot answer these questions.

For this consciousness is the spirit created by Allah, which needs neither the eye to watch the images nor the ear to hear the sounds. Furthermore, it does not need the brain to think.

Everyone who reads this explicit and scientific fact should ponder on Almighty Allah, and fear and seek refuge in Him, for He squeezes the entire universe in a pitch-dark place of a few cubic centimeters in a three-dimensional, colored, shadowy, and luminous form.

A Materialist Faith

The information we have presented so far shows us that the theory of evolution is incompatible with scientific findings. The theory's claim regarding the origin of life is inconsistent with science, the evolutionary mechanisms it proposes have no evolutionary power, and fossils demonstrate that the required intermediate forms have never existed. So, it certainly follows that the theory of evolution should be pushed aside as an unscientific idea. This is how many ideas, such as the Earth-centered universe model, have been taken out of the agenda of science throughout history.

However, the theory of evolution is kept on the agenda of science. Some people even try to represent criticisms directed against it as an "attack on science." Why?

The reason is that this theory is an indispensable dogmatic belief for some circles. These circles are blindly devoted to materialist philosophy and adopt Darwinism because it is the only materialist explanation that can be put forward to explain the workings of nature.

Interestingly enough, they also confess this fact from time to time. A well-known geneticist and an outspoken evolutionist, Richard C. Lewontin from Harvard University, confesses that he is "first and foremost a materialist and then a scientist":

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, so we cannot allow a Divine [intervention]...82

These are explicit statements that Darwinism is a dogma kept alive just for the sake of adherence to materialism. This dogma maintains that there is no being save matter. Therefore, it argues that inanimate, unconscious matter created life. It insists that millions of different living species (e.g., birds, fish, giraffes, tigers, insects, trees, flowers, whales, and human beings) originated as a result of the interactions between matter such as pouring rain, lightning flashes, and so on, out of inanimate matter. This is a precept contrary both to reason and science. Yet Darwinists continue to defend it just so as "not to allow a Divine intervention."

Anyone who does not look at the origin of living beings with a materialist prejudice will see this evident truth: All living beings are works of a Creator, Who is All-Powerful, All-Wise, and All-Knowing. This Creator is Allah, Who created the whole universe from non-existence, designed it in the most perfect form, and fashioned all living beings.

The Theory of Evolution:

The Most Potent Spell in the World

Anyone free of prejudice and the influence of any particular ideology, who uses only his or her reason and logic, will clearly understand that belief in the theory of evolution, which brings to mind the superstitions of societies with no knowledge of science or civilization, is quite impossible.

As explained above, those who believe in the theory of evolution think that a few atoms and molecules thrown into a huge vat could produce thinking, reasoning professors and university students; such scientists as Einstein and Galileo; such artists as Humphrey Bogart, Frank Sinatra and Luciano Pavarotti; as well as antelopes, lemon trees, and carnations. Moreover, as the scientists and professors who believe in this nonsense are educated people, it is quite justifiable to speak of this theory as "the most potent spell in history." Never before has any other belief or idea so taken away peoples' powers of reason, refused to allow them to think intelligently and logically, and hidden the truth from them as if they had been blindfolded. This is an even worse and unbelievable blindness than the totem worship in some parts of Africa, the people of Saba worshipping the Sun, the tribe of Prophet Ibrahim (as) worshipping idols they had made with their own hands, or the people of Prophet Musa (as) worshipping the Golden Calf.

In fact, Allah has pointed to this lack of reason in the Qur'an. In many verses, He reveals that some peoples' minds will be closed and that they will be powerless to see the truth. Some of these verses are as follows:

As for those who do not believe, it makes no difference to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe. Allah has sealed up their hearts and hearing and over their eyes is a blindfold. They will have a terrible punishment. (Surat al-Baqara, 6-7)

… They have hearts with which they do not understand. They have eyes with which they do not see. They have ears with which they do not hear. Such people are like cattle. No, they are even further astray! They are the unaware. (Surat al-A‘raf, 179)

Even if We opened up to them a door into heaven, and they spent the day ascending through it, they would only say: "Our eyesight is befuddled! Or rather we have been put under a spell!" (Surat al-Hijr, 14-15)

Words cannot express just how astonishing it is that this spell should hold such a wide community in thrall, keep people from the truth, and not be broken for 150 years. It is understandable that one or a few people might believe in impossible scenarios and claims full of stupidity and illogicality. However, "magic" is the only possible explanation for people from all over the world believing that unconscious and lifeless atoms suddenly decided to come together and form a universe that functions with a flawless system of organization, discipline, reason, and consciousness; a planet named Earth with all of its features so perfectly suited to life; and living things full of countless complex systems.

In fact, the Qur'an relates the incident of Prophet Musa (as) and Pharaoh to show that some people who support atheistic philosophies actually influence others by magic. When Pharaoh was told about the true religion, he told Prophet Musa (as) to meet with his own magicians. When Musa (as) did so, he told them to demonstrate their abilities first. The verses continue:

He said: "You throw." And when they threw, they cast a spell on the people's eyes and caused them to feel great fear of them. They produced an extremely powerful magic. (Surat al-A‘raf, 116)

As we have seen, Pharaoh's magicians were able to deceive everyone, apart from Musa (as) and those who believed in him. However, his evidence broke the spell, or "swallowed up what they had forged," as the verse puts it:

We revealed to Musa: "Throw down your staff." And it immediately swallowed up what they had forged. So the Truth took place and what they did was shown to be false. (Surat al-A‘raf, 117-8)

As we can see, when people realized that a spell had been cast upon them and that what they saw was just an illusion, Pharaoh's magicians lost all credibility. In the present day too, unless those who, under the influence of a similar spell, believe in these ridiculous claims under their scientific disguise and spend their lives defending them, abandon their superstitious beliefs, they also will be humiliated when the full truth emerges and the spell is broken. In fact, world-renowned British writer and philosopher Malcolm Muggeridge, who was an atheist defending evolution for some 60 years, but who subsequently realized the truth, reveals the position in which the theory of evolution would find itself in the near future in these terms:

I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it's been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books in the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.83

That future is not far off: On the contrary, people will soon see that "chance" is not a deity, and will look back on the theory of evolution as the worst deceit and the most terrible spell in the world. That spell is already rapidly beginning to be lifted from the shoulders of people all over the world. Many people who see its true face are wondering with amazement how they could ever have been taken in by it.

1.   Materyalist Felsefe Sozlugu (Dictionary of Materialist Philosophy), Istanbul: Sosyal Yayinlar, 4th Edition, p. 236

2.   George Politzer, Principes Fondamentaux de Philosophie, Editions Sociales, Paris, 1954, pp.62-63

3. David Filkin, Stephen Hawking’s Universe: The Cosmos Explained, Basic Books, USA, 1997, p. 75

4. Billy Bryson, A Short History of Nearly Everything, Broadway Books, USA, 2004, p. 10

5. Andrei Linde, "The Self-Reproducing Inflationary Universe", Scientific American, vol. 271, 1994, p. 48

6. S. Jaki, Cosmos and Creator, Regnery Gateway, Chicago, 1980, p. 54

7. Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, Second Edition, July 2000, USA, p. 104

8. Ibid., p. 104

9. Ibid., p. 105

10. http://slate.msn.com/id/3142/

11. Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, Second Edition, July 2000, USA, pp. 105-106.

12. Barry Parker, Creation: The Story of the Origin and Evolution of the Universe, 2003, pp. 201-202

13. David Filkin, Stephen Hawking’s Universe: The Cosmos Explained, p. 89

14. David Filkin, Stephen Hawking’s Universe: The Cosmos Explained, p. 96

15. Henry F. Schaefer III, “Stephen Hawking, The Big Bang, and God,” online available at http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9404/bigbang.html

16. Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time: A Reader's Companion (edited by Stephen Hawking ; prepared by Gene Stone.), New York, Bantam Books, 1982, p. 62-63

17. Jeff Foust, “Big Bang Evidence Found,” Spaceflight Now, May 2, 2001; online available at: http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0105/02bigbang/

18. George O. Abel, Exploration of the Universe, Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1975, pp. 665-667

19. Henry Margenau and Roy Abraham Varghese, eds., Cosmos, Bios, Theos, La Salle, IL: Open Court Publishing, 1992 p. 241

20. Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time: A Reader's Companion (edited by Stephen Hawking; prepared by Gene Stone.), New York, Bantam Books, 1982, p. 143

21. Charles Seife, “Illuminating the Dark Universe,” Science, 19 December 2003: 2038-2039.

22. http://nasascience.nasa.gov/missions/wmap

23. http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/

24. http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_life.html

25. http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/

26. http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/0206mapresults.html

27. “Galaxy patterns reveal missing link to Big Bang”, 12 January 2005,

http://info.anu.edu.au/mac/Media/Media_Releases/_2005/_January/_120105redshift.asp

28. “The Cosmic Yardstick--Sloan Digital Sky Survey astronomers measure role of dark matter, dark energy and gravity in the distribution of galaxies”, January 11, 2005, online available at:

http://www.sdss.org/news/releases/20050111.yardstick.html

29. “Universe is flat with a ripple,” January 12, 2005; online available at:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Science/Universe-is-flat-with-a-ripple/2005/01/12/1105423539638.html

30. W.R. Bird, The Origin of Species Revisited, Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1991; originally published by Philosophical Library in 1987, p. 462

31. W.R. Bird, The Origin of Species Revisited, Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1991; originally published by Philosophical Library in 1987, p. 405-406

32. Bilim ve Teknik magazine, vol. 201, p. 16

33. Stephen W. Hawking, A Brief History of Time, Bantam Books, April 1988, p. 121

34. Paul Davies, God and the New Physics, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1983, p. 189

35. Hugh Ross, Ph.D., The Creator and the Cosmos, Navpress, 1995, p. 76

36. William Lane Craig, “Cosmos and Creator,” Origins & Design, Spring 1996, vol. 17, p. 19

37. William Lane Craig, Cosmos and Creator, Origins & Design, Spring 1996, vol. 17, p. 19

38. William Lane Craig, Cosmos and Creator, Origins & Design, Spring 1996, vol. 17, p. 20

39. Christopher Isham, “Space, Time and Quantum Cosmology”, paper presented at the conference “God, Time and Modern Physics”, March 1990, Origins & Design, Spring 1996, vol. 17, p. 27

40. R. Brout, Ph. Spindel, “Black Holes Dispute”, Nature, vol 337, 1989, p. 216

41. Paul Davies, “A Brief History of the Multiverse,” The New York Times, April 12, 2003

42. Miller K.R., Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution, [1999], HarperCollins: New York NY, 2000, reprint, p. 225

43. John Maddox, “Down with the Big Bang”, Nature, vol. 340, 1989, p. 378

44. H. P. Lipson, “A Physicist Looks at Evolution”, Physics Bulletin, vol. 138, 1980, p. 138

45. R.L.Gregory, Eye and Brain: The Psychology of Seeing, Oxford University Press Inc., New York, 1990, p.9

46. Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr.Einstein, William Sloane Associate, New York, 1948, p.20

47. Orhan Hancerlioglu, Dusunce Tarihi (The History of Thought), Istanbul: Remzi Bookstore, 6.ed., 1995 September, p. 447

48. Rita Carter, Mapping the Mind, p. 113

49. Muhyiddin Ibn al-'Arabi, Fusus al-Hikam, p. 22050.        R.L.Gregory, Eye and Brain: The Psychology of Seeing, Oxford University Press Inc., New York, 1990, p.9

51. Ken Wilber, Holographic Paradigm, p. 37

52. George Politzer, Principes Fondamentaux de Philosophie, Editions Sociales, Paris, 1954, p. 65.

53. Orhan Hancerlioglu, Dusunce Tarihi (The History of Thought), Istanbul: Remzi Bookstore, 6.ed., 1995 September, p. 261

54. Paul Davies, God and the New Physics, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1983, p. 180-181

55. V.I. Lenin, Materialism and Empiriocriticism, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1970, p.334-335

56. Alaettin Senel, "Evrim Aldatmacasi mi? Devrin Aldatmacasi mi?", (Non-Evolution of Deceit), Bilim ve Utopya, December 1998

57. François Jacob, Le Jeu des Possibles, University of Washington Press, 1982, p. 111.

58. Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, William Sloane Associate, New York, 1948, pp. 39-40.

59. Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, p. 12.

60. Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, p. 40.

61. Paul Strathern, The Big Idea: Einstein and Relativity, Arrow Books, 1997, p. 57.

62. Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, p. 67.

63.       Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, p.12.

64. Sidney Fox, Klaus Dose, Molecular Evolution and The Origin of Life, W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 1972, p. 4.

65. Alexander I. Oparin, Origin of Life, Dover Publications, NewYork, 1936, 1953 (reprint), p. 196.

66. "New Evidence on Evolution of Early Atmosphere and Life," Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol 63, November 1982, 1328-1330.

67. Stanley Miller, Molecular Evolution of Life: Current Status of the Prebiotic Synthesis of Small Molecules, 1986, p. 7.

68. Jeffrey Bada, Earth, February 1998, p. 40.

69. Leslie E. Orgel, "The Origin of Life on Earth," Scientific American, vol. 271, October 1994, p. 78.

70. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, The Modern Library, New York, p. 127.

71. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 184.

72. B. G. Ranganathan, Origins?, Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1988, p. 7.

73. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the First Edition, p. 179.

74. Derek A. Ager, "The Nature of the Fossil Record," Proceedings of the British Geological Association, vol 87, 1976, p. 133.

75. Douglas J. Futuyma, Science on Trial, Pantheon Books, New York, 1983, p. 197.

76. Solly Zuckerman, Beyond The Ivory Tower, Toplinger Publications, New York, 1970, 75-14; Charles E. Oxnard, "The Place of Australopithecines in Human Evolution: Grounds for Doubt", Nature, vol 258, 389.

77. "Could science be brought to an end by scientists' belief that they have final answers or by society's reluctance to pay the bills?" Scientific American, December 1992, p. 20.

78. Alan Walker, Science, vol. 207, 7 March 1980, p. 1103; A. J. Kelso, Physical Antropology, 1st ed., J. B. Lipincott Co., New York, 1970, p. 221; M. D. Leakey, Olduvai Gorge, vol. 3, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1971, p. 272.

79. Jeffrey Kluger, "Not So Extinct After All: The Primitive Homo Erectus May Have Survived Long Enough To Coexist With Modern Humans," Time, 23 December 1996.

80. S. J. Gould, Natural History, vol. 85, 1976, p. 30.

81. Solly Zuckerman, Beyond The Ivory Tower, p. 19.

82. Richard Lewontin, "The Demon-Haunted World," The New York Review of Books, January 9, 1997, p. 28.

83. Malcolm Muggeridge, The End of Christendom, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980, p. 43.