Author: Ali Boriqee
Source: Multaqa Ahlul-Hadeeth
Produced by: al-Mustaqeem Publications
الحمد لله رب العالمين، وصلى الله وسلم وبارك على نبينا محمد وعلى آله
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركات
Brothers and Sisters in Islam, I received a link to a site started by Usama Hasan that contains a reply to our Shaykh Saalih as-Sadlaan. I will link to the site here http://unity1.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/a-response-to-sheikh-salih-al-sadlan-and-the-so-called-save-masjid-tawhid-petition/ . I will simply quote the body of text along with either an Islamic reply or a perspective that could be incorporated as an Islamic viewpoint inshaallah.
I decided to initiate the original reply exclusively on the Multaqa Ahlul-Hadeeth forums in English and then host it here and possibly other places.
At any rate, there has been some recent controversy regarding a particular individual by the name Usama Hasan. Usama Hasan a couple of years ago began to diverge from the orthodox disciplines of Islamic knowledge and began to utilize revisionist ideologies as a tool within the framework of his Islamic thought. He has even opened himself up for working with the notorious Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) which we have uncovered merely a fraction of the atrocious scandals of this organization here at al-Mustaqeem Publications.
However, none of this is the subject of this reply, rather the subject of this reply is based on a rather new occurrence with regards to his declaration on the Islamic “validity” of Darwinism. Basically, this is a reply with regards to his acceptance and trying to pass an Islamic validation to the concept of Darwinism, may Allah grant this occultist devil worshiper (Darwin) what he deserves.
Methodology of Articulation
What I will do inshallah is to first address the entire reply of his reply to Shaykh Saalih. After this body of text, then i will reply to other comments he made on the “Guardian” that may not be with the main body of text in his new site.
I assure all readers, both with us and those with Usama or even Usama himself, this will be a reply like no other.
Usama Hasan names the title of his response as “A Response to Sheikh Salih al-Sadlan and the So-Called “Save Masjid Tawhid” Petition
Bismillah. I hope I do not have to waste too much with this, but here is an initial response. There will be more later, God-willing.1. Sh. Salih al-Sadlan of Riyadh gave a fatwa on not praying behind anyone who accepts Darwinism. This fatwa was given at the Green Lane Mosque in Birmingham, HQ of Markazi Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith, during their annual conference 24-28 Dec 2010. Sh. Sadlan is a respected Professor of Law, especially Hanbali Law, and I read and benefited from some of his books when I was much younger. The last time I saw him was c. 1998 at the opening of the new Edinburgh Mosque followed by a conference on the issues facing Muslims in the West, discussed mostly by Saudis plus a few Azharis, all of whom were, not surprisingly, pretty clueless about the reality of trying to live as Muslims here. I still remember the gravity with which Sh. Sadlan said the word haymanah when talking about a Muslim man’s duty towards his children, especially if he was contemplating marrying a Jewish or Christian woman!2. I rang Sh. Sadlan on Tuesday 29 Dec 2010 and spoke to him for about 20 min whilst he was in a car on the way to the airport. There is at least one witness (the car driver) to some of that conversation. Apart from mentioning “hasty young men” who had briefed him against me, he said that Darwinism was a denial of the Qur’an. I asked him whether to believe that the earth is round is also a rejection of the Qur’an, for some commentators such as the authors of Tafsir al-Jalalayn said that the earth is flat, based on Surah al-Ghashiyah 88:20.
For whatever reason, he opens up the doors of reminiscence and then he brought forth the first invalid qiyaas that I easily noticed, the same type of qiyaas that Iblees did with Allah in comparing himself with Adam as noted by some of the muffasireen like Abu Hayyaan and Ibn Katheer.
What is this invalid qiyaas?
Well, he compares the t’awilaat of Bin Baz, the Jalalayn, or other than them regarding the format of the earth as tantamount to the origin of man. The two issues are poles apart. One deals with our perception of the earth while the other deals with the actual origin and makeup of the human being. The ayaah with regards to the Earth being flat is what may be called lafdh ghayrul-waadih i.e. a word in which its meaning is not entirely clear what was meant. Particularly, this ayah may fall under what is known as mujmal which denotes a word or text which is inherently unclear and gives no indication as to its precise meaning. It may have several meanings or it may be an unfamiliar word or the lawgiver may not have explained the word to clarify it. However, with regards to the ayaah of the creation of Adam, these ayaat were waadih absolutely.
Continuing right along, he says
I further told him that for at least a thousand years, Muslim philosophers and scientists developed evolutionary ideas, e.g. Ibn Miskawayh, al-Jahiz in his Kitab al-Hayawan (“Book of Animals”), Ibn Tufayl in his evolutionary novel Hayy b. Yaqzan (“The Living, Son of the Awake”) and Ibn Khaldun.
There is nothing to be said here except that not everything that has preceded us that became a view among those acclaimed to be Muslims is not to be adopted.
Moreover, in my personal view, and also a growing Islamic view which has a basis, the underlying aspect of philosophy is rooted in Satanic methodology. To delve into this topic would wipe out the basis of this reply due to the length of information. We have elaborated on this elsewhere and inshallah we will be working on this as a project hopefully by the grace of Allah sometime in the near future.
I summarised Ibn Khaldun’s words on the subject (given in full below), and told him that there is some evidence that Darwin was aware of, and influenced by these evolutionary ideas developed by Muslims.
These ideas do not originate from the Islamic ‘itiqaad irrespective if people who are attributed to Islam formed these views.
Moreover, these were thoughts that can be induced through satanic rituals that some philosophers went through in the past. Some of them have went insane. There is nothing exponentially awesome about what philosophers philosophized about except that with each thing that was of benefit, two other bogus, absurd, and even illogical fallacies came out as a result of their internal thinking.
He seemed entirely unaware of any of this, and responded to Ibn Khaldun by saying that “there is no development or evolution in nature” (a statement which is patently false, but unfortunately many of our traditional scholars know nothing about modern science that has progressed exponentially in the centuries since the decline of Muslim science). He further said the most I could do was to quote Ibn Khaldun but clarify that he was wrong and absolve myself absolutely of his statement.
The shaykh may have been wrong in this open declaration with no clarification. I will then clarify the specific area in which the shaykh is absolutely correct in as we move along bi ithnillah.
I believe that the essence of the Islamic opposition to Darwinism is with regard to the creation of man as opposed to the natural evolution that occurs in various aspects of nature or the transmutation of particles on a molecular level. The reason being is that
1. We do have literal evidence of the evolution of inanimate products and the Qur’an remains silent with regards to this field or gives no indication of a rebuttal to this theory
2. We have no literal scientific evidence that animals change from one species to a completely different species or that man’s origin lies in the realm of apes or monkeys or what have you and coupled with the Qur’an’s literal verbal declaration of the origin of man’s creation, then I would say that the transformation of one species to another is at the very least, far-fetched.
(As a scientist with ijazahs from some of the world’s leading universities, by the Grace of Allah, and as a seeker of knowledge, I clearly cannot accept this based on blind following of “authority,” especially when there is no authority here, for the Muslim world has not really discussed Darwin properly.
I may not reach to your level of recognition among these entities and may possibly dwarf in my studentship as compared to yourself, however what I offer will be far from a mere reply with no tangible authoritative evidence, whether through rationale or evidential proofs.
The Muslim world does not need to discuss Darwin properly. What I will offer here shall be sufficient for those who have emaan or at least some level of rationality.
I repeat my reply on BBC Radio 4′s Beyond Belief when asked about why the Muslim world has not come to terms with Darwin: forget Darwin, it has not come to terms with Newton yet, given the popularity of the Ash’ari theology and its absolute rejection of causality and extreme affirmation of atomism.)
The Ash’ari dogma is simply that, the ash’ari dogma, and their polemic is not reflective of the Islamic sentiment worldwide.
The basis for the methodology of the ahlu-sunnah wal-jama’ah in Islam is that the theoretical suppositions are open for review, and thus empirical until it is proven that it defies an Islamic concept or is uprooted by scientific fact. Unlike this Islamic methodology is the methodology of the Ash’aris who have fixed their creedal supposition to unscientific theories that has no support textually in Islam.
What is the basis for my claim. I bring a statement of haafidh ibn Abil-Izz al-Hanafee. Now while his statement is with regards to the topic of Allah’s attributes, this principle can be applied to all that is unknown in the human experience for it best models a safety and precautionary measure.
Imaam Ibn Abil-‘Izz al-Hanafi, in his explanation of at-Tahawi’s statement in his creed on point 38, stated the following
ش أذكر بين يدي الكلام على عبارة الشيخ رحمه الله مقدمة وهي أن الناس في إطلاق مثل هذه الألفاظ ثلاثة أقوال فطائفة تنفيها وطائفة تثبتها وطائفة تفصل وهم المتبعون للسلف فلا يطلقون نفيها ولا إثباتها الا اذا تبين ما أثبت بها فهو ثابت وما نفي بها فهو منفي لأن المتأخرين قد صارت هذه الألفاظ في اصطلاحهم فيها إجمال وابهام كغيرها من الألفاظ الاصطلاحية فليس كلهم يستعملها في نفس معناها اللغوي ولهذا كان النفاة ينفون بها حقا وباطلا ويذكرون عن مثبتها ما لا يقولون به وبعض المثبتين لها يدخل لها معنى باطلا مخالفا لقول السلف ولما دل عليه الكتاب والميزان ولم يرد نص من الكتاب ولا من السنة بنفيها ولا إثباتها وليس لنا أن نصف الله تعالى بما لم يصف به نفسه ولا وصفه به رسوله نفيا ولا إثباتا وانما نحن متبعون لا مبتدعون
Some speech has been mentioned to me regarding the statement of the shaykh (at-Tahaawi), may Allah have mercy on him, in the foreword, and regarding it, the people separated into three stances regarding the issuing of statements like this [like the one Tahaawi made].
their views are
1. the group who completely and absolutely disprove of such statements
2. the group who completely affirm (such statements)
3. those who hold (to the methodology of seeking clarification) tafseel
And it is they (the people of the third category) who follow and are attributed to the salaf and so they are not entirely liberated from either completely denying or completely affirming until it (meaning statements not found in the sources) turns out to be approved and upon good merit.
So this is the approach of the majority of the people of the Sunnah and the Ash’aris are beholden to their aging and useless philosophical theories invented by their hadhrat, Aristotle.
I will come to terms with Dawrin
Moving right along
I also said that I believe that it is possible to reconcile the Book of Allah with established scientific theories such as those of Darwin.
I, and most likely the rest of the Muslims, also believe it is possible to reconcile the Book of Allah with established scientific theories. We just don’t believe that Darwinism is one of them. The most obvious reason for their rejection of Darwinism as something remotely scientific is because as of this day it remains a scientific theory and is not a scientific fact. As I said, it may or has been proven that organisms can evolve due to changes in the environment, however it has not been proven that man evolved from apes and monkeys because technically speaking, the two represent a difference in the format of evolution, the first being micro-evolution, the second being typical of the theory of macro-evolution. No matter how much the atheists desire to somehow intertwine the two by insinuating that micro-evolution is a by-product of macro-evolution, at the end of the day, they are simpy offering their “theories” and it must be treated as such. The person who does not understand the difference between theory and fact should be focused on elementary knowledge than entertaining their atheist notions.
He further states
I think I also mentioned that many ayat of the Qur’an could be understood to support evolutionary theory, such as “Allah made you grow like plants out of the ground.” (Nuh 71:17) He said I mustn’t do that, and absolve myself of Darwin. Of course, I didn’t want to argue too much with a sheikh almost twice my age, and so wished him salams and a safe return to Saudi. He gave me salams at the beginning and end of the conversation, alhamdulillah.
Let us examine this ayaah
﴿وَاللَّهُ أَنبَتَكُمْ مِّنَ الاٌّرْضِ نَبَاتاً ﴾
(And Allah has brought you forth from the (dust of) earth) This (Nabat) is a verbal noun (masdar, for emphasis). The ayaa was directly speaking of our origin from dirt and not that we were first organisms in the dirt, and then we became a plant, and then we as humans were animals, and then we moved on to be apes, and then we moved on to eventually become humans, and then we’ll move on to other stuff, which is outright kufr, yet Usama Hasan finds no qualms in utilizing it as valid evidence in his case against the Muslims for their lack of adoption of philosophical theories that are in reality unestablished and ae merely theories, and not established facts.
The reason why the ayaah is informing us of how our origin is, is because the intent was pretty much clarified in the next ayaah,
﴿ثُمَّ يُعِيدُكُمْ فِيهَا﴾
THEN (afterwards), He will return you back to it (meaning back to the earth i.e. when you die)
It has nothing to do with the opinion that we were once flowers.
3. Around 1st January, my father faxed Sh. Sadlan a five-page letter informing him about some of the work I’ve done in the past and continue to do, and requested him to reconsider his fatwa. I am humbled and upset that my father went to such great lengths on my behalf. Although my father is not persuaded yet about my view on Darwin , he described it briefly to Sh. Sadlan in the letter and defended my right to arrive at independent conclusions. All three of us agreed during these conclusions that these discussions must be handled carefully, especially where the public are concerned. It may be that I publish my father’s letter on this blog later.
May Allah reward your father and bless him for the fadheelah we benefited from him, however the love of truth is more beloved to us than any individual. I don’t believe that someone who has reached the level of developing their own opinion actually extends to them the right of developing an opinion in which its origin and intent is based on kufr, particularly the kufr of atheism. Similar to such an act would be an American court judge to issue edicts based on the communist manifesto or practices of the Third Reich.
I plan to write a detailed paper later insha’Allah on how I believe Darwinism is compatible with the Qur’an. I would be happy to send that to Muslim scholars around the world for their opinions. But in the meantime, here are some quotes from scholars of the past, below.
I will love to see this thesis you can provide for us all.
And yes, I will break down these statements inshallah
My main ideas have already been summarised and available in this section of my blog including a slide presentation that many people have benefited from, but the others appear not to have bothered to make an effort to even try to listen, learn, understand or discuss. People are free to disagree and make up their own minds, and I am open to discuss the matter with anyone. Several honest souls have come to me over the last few years to ask and learn rather than backbite, gossip and slander, which is unfortunately what some others do.
Irrespective of what people do of those things that you like or do not like, you will find that what we will address here are matters of substance which constitute an atmosphere of constructive criticism seeking your guidance and the pleasure of Allah and we will be forthright in our demeanor whether it is viewed as an offense or not. Our primary concern is the establishment of the meaning of terminologies and language and the implications they may have or do have.
Let those who wish to harmonise, discuss and learn sincerely and worship, do so. Those who wish to gossip, slander, backbite and spread rumours, only damage themselves.
QUOTES FROM MUSLIM SCHOLARS OF THE PAST1. Ibn Miskawayh (932-1030 or 4th century AH)The following entry used to be at Wikipedia for several years, but has now been removed. I found it here.
Ibn Miskawayh was one of the first to clearly describe the idea of evolution. Muhammad Hamidullah describes the evolutionary ideas found in Ibn Miskawayh’s al-Fawz al-Asghar as follows:
“[These books] state that God first created matter and invested it with energy for development. Matter, therefore, adopted the form of vapour which assumed the shape of water in due time. The next stage of development was mineral life. Different kinds of stones developed in course of time. Their highest form being mirjan (coral). It is a stone which has in it branches like those of a tree. After mineral life evolves vegetation. The evolution of vegetation culminates with a tree which bears the qualities of an animal. This is the date-palm. It has male and female genders. It does not wither if all its branches are chopped but it dies when the head is cut off. The date-palm is therefore considered the highest among the trees and resembles the lowest among animals. Then is born the lowest of animals. It evolves into an ape. This is not the statement of Darwin. This is what Ibn Maskawayh states and this is precisely what is written in the Epistles of Ikhwan al-Safa. The Muslim thinkers state that ape then evolved into a lower kind of a barbarian man. He then became a superior human being. Man becomes a saint, a prophet. He evolves into a higher stage and becomes an angel. The one higher to angels is indeed none but God. Everything begins from Him and everything returns to Him.”
Arabic manuscripts of the al-Fawz al-Asghar were available in European universities by the 19th century. This work is believed to have been studied by Charles Darwin, who was a student of Arabic, and it is thought to have had an influence on his inception of Darwinism.
^ a b Muhammad Hamidullah and Afzal Iqbal (1993), The Emergence of Islam: Lectures on the Development of Islamic World-view, Intellectual Tradition and Polity, p. 143-144. Islamic Research Institute, Islamabad.
I hope all of the readers noticed the words in bold. Let us break this kufr down and provide some simple kindergarten rebuttals to these absurd satanic notions.
I’ll re-quote the most problematic section of the quote, however, before that, I wish to answer the statement before the bolded speech
The next stage of development was mineral life. Different kinds of stones developed in course of time. Their highest form being mirjan (coral). It is a stone which has in it branches like those of a tree. After mineral life evolves vegetation. The evolution of vegetation culminates with a tree which bears the qualities of an animal. This is the date-palm. It has male and female genders. It does not wither if all its branches are chopped but it dies when the head is cut off.
I personally think that Darwinists cannot simply fathom the difference between the reliance of species on others versus the transformation of a species from its claimed “predecessors”. What is true from the statement above can be true IF it is viewed from the angle that vegetation relies on mineral resources for vegetation cannot grow without different types of soil and minerals.
However, it is false if viewed from the prism that the greatest extent of a type of creation evolves into something else. For instance, what was the animal that the Date palm tree chose to evolve to. Is there any plausible scientific evidence aside from the theory? Moreover, how does the acceptance that the date palm is the last and top of all vegetation and initiate the beginning form of animals simply because it has two genders and the ability to live without branches.
This is as loose as someone trying to connect humans to Venus for all things are made from matter and thus we have variable and very similar compositioning codes, that does not mean that humans are Venus or we originate from the planet called Venus.
The same is said with regards to the Qur’an in which Allah unequivocally declared that our creation is from water. Does that mean that we as humans, were fish before.
The date-palm is therefore considered the highest among the trees and resembles the lowest among animals. Then is born the lowest of animals. It evolves into an ape.
I simply ask who or what made the ape the apex of the evolutionary tract of the animal world. Just because they look like us does not somehow give this species a type of privilege simply because we resemble them. There are more animals that exist that are smarter and even better than the monkey. I’ve always viewed the credibility of Darwinists as a hoax based on this very issue alone even before my entry to Islam.
This is not the statement of Darwin. This is what Ibn Maskawayh states and this is precisely what is written in the Epistles of Ikhwan al-Safa.
its okay, both come from the same source i.e. Iblees. In what way. Well, I will explain this further after completing the reply bi ithnillah
The Muslim thinkers state that ape then evolved into a lower kind of a barbarian man.
That is the absurdity
He then became a superior human being. Man becomes a saint, a prophet.
Prophets are chosen by Allah by His preferred and chosen Will and has nothing to do with the evolutionary nature of humans.
He evolves into a higher stage and becomes an angel.
This is where the kufr comes in play. What is essentially being said is that Angels were once humans, despite the fact that the Angels chronologically (and thus logically) existed for possibly eons before something called a human was even created, oh Im sorry, “evolved” into.
The one higher to angels is indeed none but God. Everything begins from Him and everything returns to Him.
And thus further kufr by utilizing a truth by which utter falsehood is intended. Yes, everything originates from Him and to Him all things must indeed return, that does not mean that a human will morph into an angel and then that human who is now an angel will morph into Allah. We, or anything else for that matter, does not return to Allah by becoming Allah, we return to Allah by simply returning back to Him and reporting to Him for what we have done.
Yet, absurd forms of kufr like this are normal delusions in the life of a philosopher, whether they be Greek, or from the realm of Islam, or other than this.
Moreover, this is the basis for the gnostic mysticism of the ittihaadi sufis, yet from a different angle of approach. I do not wish to go into detail on this but rather just noting that there is an area on this topic from this group.
2. IBN KHALDUN (d. 1408 or 8th century AH)The 14th-century philosopher Ibn Khaldun (http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ik/klf.htm) wrote in his famous Muqaddimah,“One should then look at the world of creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch. The word ‘connection’ with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group.”
Ibn Khaldun continues, “The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and to reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of the monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man. This is as far as our (physical) observation extends.” (This is found in NJ Dawood’s abridgment of Rosenthal’s translation, p. 75)
well, at least Ibnul-Khaldun was acting honest here and behaved like a real scientist when he said “This is as far as our (physical) observation extends“. The reason why this is noteworthy to mention is simply because the practice of enthralling the world into various theories is to behave contrary to scientific inquiry. Many scientists are more like political social advocates directed at advancing new theories rather than only utilizing tangible evidences arrived at through actual study of tangible evidences.
However, in spite of my admiration for Ibn Khaldun, I accept what is established as correct or at the very least plausible from what he elucidated. However none of these statement above has no scientific proof, it is pnly a theory and remains a theory.
3. RUMILow in the earth
I lived in realms of ore and stone;
And then I smiled in many-tinted flowers;
Then roving with the wild and wandering hours,
O’er earth and air and ocean’s zone,
In a new birth,
I dived and flew,
And crept and ran,
And all the secret of my essence drew
Within a form that brought them all to view –
And lo, a Man!
And then my goal,
Beyond the clouds, beyond the sky,
In realms where none may change or die –
In angel form; and then away
Beyond the bounds of night and day,
And Life and Death, unseen or seen,
Where all that is hath ever been,
As One and Whole.
An ittihaadi sufi, need I say more. Of course ar-Rumi is going to advocate such a theory when he believes that there is nothing except Allah and that everything is Allah.
4. Allama Muhammad Iqbal, the great 20th-century philosopher-poet-thinker and intellectual founder of Pakistan, had no problems with Darwinism, as is clear for example in his Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, where he quotes the above lines by Rumi.5. Prof. Nidhal Guessoum, a practising Muslim and leading astronomer, has published a book recently, reconciling Islam & Evolution. It is called Islam’s Quantum Question. I have not seen it yet.—
Iqbal, a revisionist and thus falls in some perpetual love and fantasy with everything the west had to offer.
The rest of his speech deals with the political aspect of masjid at-tawheed, I guess where he is Imaam and which is not the discussion of this reply
Darwinism and Occult Satanism and the Intention for the formation of Darwinism
The Epistemological Cartel
In The Architecture of Modern Political Power, Daniel Pouzzner outlines the tactics employed by elitist to maintain their dominance. Among them is: ‘Ostensible control over the knowable, by marketing institutionally accredited science as the only path to true understanding’ (Pouzzner, 75). Thus, the ruling class endeavors to discourage independent reason while exercising illusory power over human knowledge. This tactic of control through knowledge suppression and selective dissemination is reiterated in the anonymously authored document Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars:
If one has any doubt with this, then let us review a statement by a colleague of Darwin, that being Aldous Huxley who more succinctly defined this epistemological cartel:
“The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles, and mysteries. Under a scientific dictatorship, education will really work’ with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.”
– Huxley, Brave New World Revisited, 116
This consciously induced paradigm shift facilitated the emergence of the elite’s new theocracy. The official state-sanctioned religion of this theocracy was ‘scientism’: the belief that the investigational methods of the natural sciences should be ecumenically imposed upon all fields of inquiry. This form of epistemological imperialism is not to be confused with legitimate science. Researcher Michael Hoffman makes this distinction in his book Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare:
“Science, when practiced as the application of man’s God-given talents for the production of appropriate technology on a human scale, relief of misery and the reverential exploration and appreciation of the glory of Divine Providence as revealed in nature, is a useful tool for mankind. Scientism is science gone mad, which is what we have today.” (Hoffman, 49)
Hoffman further elaborates on the folly of scientism:
“The reason that science is a bad master and dangerous servant and ought not to be worshipped is that science is not objective. Science is fundamentally about the uses of measurement. What does not fit the yardstick of the scientist is discarded. Scientific determinism has repeatedly excluded some data from its measurement and fudged other data, such as Piltdown Man, in order to support the self-fulfilling nature of its own agenda, be it Darwinism or ‘cut, burn and poison’ methods of cancer ‘treatment’.” (Hoffman, 49)
And now the world saw this manipulation with the exposed climategate scandal. I don’t necessarily hold Hoffman to a high degree with regards to valid viewpoints, however I believe he was dead on accurate in these comments above when taking into consideration the events unfolding in front of our eyes in today’s world
The Darwin Project
In the article ‘Toward a New Science of Life,’ EIR journalist Jonathan Tennenbaum makes the following the statement concerning Darwinism:
“Now, it is easy to show that Darwinism, one of the pillars of modern biology, is nothing but a kind of cult, a cult religion. I am not exaggerating. It has no scientific validity whatsoever. Darwin’s so-called theory of evolution is based on absurdly irrational propositions, which did not come from scientific observations, but were artificially introduced from the outside, for political-ideological reasons.” (Tennenbaum)
Given Darwinism’s roots in occult Freemasonry and its expedient promotion of an emergent species of supermen (i.e., the elite), this is a fairly accurate assessment. Charles Darwin acted as the elite’s apostle, preaching the new secular gospel of evolution. Darwinism could be considered a Freemasonic project, the culmination of a publicity campaign conducted by the Lodge
Moreover, Usama Hasan is inaccurate, and most likely incorrect that the basis for Darwin’s view stems from these Muslim philosophers. We have to remember, that while we have nothing to do with what other people do, Darwin was an occult mason mushrik. Whether anyone believes or does not believe in the these groups has nothing to do with the fact that these individuals involves in these groups actually do believe in their kufr and in their magic.
One of the most pivotal influences to Darwin was another occultist mushrik and philosopher was Thomas Malthus and which the Malthusian dialectic merged out of. The Malthusian school is the basis for the pre-modern eugenicist school of thought which has no taken the form of transhumanism and bio-genetic engineering.
Malthus authored Essay on the Principle of Population, a treatise premised upon the thesis: ‘Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio. Subsistence increases only in an arithmetic ratio’ (Malthus, 6). Although Malthus articulated his observations in succinct mathematical equations, the labyrinthine and complex machinations comprising the natural order typically defy such overly simplistic reductionism. Nonetheless, Malthus concluded that society should adopt certain social policies to prevent the human population from growing disproportionately larger than the food supply.
Malthus’ genocidal policies specifically targeted the poor. For instance, one of his proposals suggested the implementation of the following measures:
“Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country, we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlement in all marshy and unwholesome situations. But above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases; and those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular disorders.” (Malthus, 412)
Anyway, another one of the many constituent worldviews comprising Darwinism is Hegelianism which is what has become known as the Hegelian dialectic. According to philosopher Georg Hegel, a pantheistic world spirit was directing ‘an ongoing developmental (evolutionary) process in nature, including humanity,’ which bodied itself forth as a ‘dialectical struggle between positive and negative entities.’ This conflict always resulted in a ‘harmonious synthesis’ (Taylor, 381-2). The same dialectical framework is present in Darwinism.
In Circle of Intrigue, occult researcher Texe Marrs reveals the Hegelian structure intrinsic to Darwinian evolution. The organism (thesis) comes into conflict with nature (antithesis) resulting in a newly enhanced species (synthesis), the culmination of the evolutionary process (Marrs, Circle of Intrigue, 127). Of course, in such a world of ongoing conflict, violence and bloodshed are central to progress. Thus, Darwin’s theory ‘gave credence to the Hegelian notion that human culture had ascended from brutal beginnings’ (Taylor, 386).
Thus this electrifying dogma gives rise to the “order out of chaos” culture that the west has adopted and the Americans have become proficiently good at. This is the practice of forming a thesis (a problem), offering an antithesis (providing a solution), and thus land at the synthesis (the desired intent of the power holders).
Lastly, I will also have to present a former devil worshiper Roger Morneau who gave a long interview about his occult satanism years ago. here is a clip from that interview
With regards to a reference made by Usama Hasan on the Ikhwaan as-Safa noted above, here is some further information that the readers should know
The Ikhwaan as-Safa was the eastern order of the esoteric batiniyya section of satanists of whom the Muslim world knows too well and they are the Isma’eelis, whom the masons acknowledged as an order of theirs. In reality, freemasonry was deeply influenced by these esoteric groups
Another Masonic organization to have developed the idea of evolution was not in the West but it was another Masonic order founded in the East. Grand Master Selami Isindag provides the following information, in an article entitled “Masonry and Us From Its Foundation Until Today“:
In the Islamic world there was a counterpart of Masonry called the Ikhwan as-Safa’ [The Brethren of Purity]. This society was founded in Basra in the time of the Abbasids and published an encyclopedia composed of 52 large volumes. 17 of these dealt with natural science and it contained scientific explanations that closely resembled those of Darwin. These found their way even to Spain and had an influence on Western thought
[Source Dr. Selami Isindag, Kurulusundan Bugune Masonluk ve Bizler (Freemasonry and Us: From Its Establishment Until Today), Masonluktan Esinlenmeler (Inspirations from Freemasonry), Istanbul 1977, pp. 274-275, (emphasis added)]
This society originated in the Ismaili sect and its basic purpose was to make religious dogmas intelligible by allegorical and symbolic explanations. Its philosophy was influenced by Pythagoras and Plato. To enter this secret society, a person was first enticed by mystical instruction and later purged of vain religious beliefs and dogmas. Later he was familiarized with philosophical and symbolic methods. Such an initiate who passed through his apprenticeship was sometimes put through training in neo-platonic ideas, and then he could begin chemistry, astrology and numerology, the science of the significance of numbers. But all this knowledge was kept secret and was given only to those deemed worthy to receive it. So, the origins of Masonry is based on these foundations. Some of the symbolic meanings of these elements were not contrary to science and logic and so survive in various places in our rituals today.
One can refer to this video for further deception of evolutionists
And for further information on the topic, I urge the readers to utilize the following reference