Ahadith

asalaam alaikum


Hadith/Sunnah



Allaah (Exalted is He) says:

He [Muhammad, peace be upon him] does not speak from his desires, Verily it is inspiration (unrecited revelation) which has been revealed.

(Qur'an Soorah an-Najm:3-4)



The definition is eloquently explained by Imaam Shaaf’ee (may Allaah have mercy on him) who comments on the ayaat regarding the Kitaab (Qur’aan) and the Hikmaah (Sunnah):

Allaah (Exalted is He) mentioned the Kitaab, and that is the Qur'aan; He also mentioned Hikmaah. I have heard those whose opinion I trust among the people of knowledge of the Qur'aan say that Hikmaah means the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). This supports what Allaah (Exalted is He) said - and Allaah knows best - because the Qur'aan is a reminder (dhikr) and hikmaah follows it, and Allaah mentioned that He lavished favour on His creatures by teaching them the Kitaab and Hikmaah. It is therefore impermissible - and Allaah knows best - to say that Hikmaah here is anything other than the Sunnah of Allaah's Messenger (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). That is because it is coupled (maqruna) with the Kitaab, and that Allaah has made obedience to His Prophet a strict obligation, imposing upon people the absolute duty to follow his commands. Thus it is not permissible to say about anything that it is a strict obligation (fard) except about Allaah's Book and the Sunnah of His Messenger (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) due to what we just said, namely, that Allaah has coupled belief in His Messenger with belief in Him. (al-Risala (p. 78))

Allaah (Exalted is He) mentions the Hikmaah in several ayaat:

Here Hikmaah is followed straight after the mentioning of Kitaab (Book). According to the Quraniyyah, it should read as:

He (Allaah) is the One who raised up, among the unlettered, a Messenger from among themselves who recites the verses of Allaah, and makes them pure, and teaches them the Book (Qur'aan) and the Wisdom (Qur'aan) (Soorah al-Joomooa:2)

According to the methodology of the Hadith rejectors, This is grammatically incorrect since according to the Qur'aanic principle of mooghayaraa (differentiation), coupled words do not mean the same thing and indeed the Glorious Qur’aan is far above such mistakes.


Allaah (Exalted is He) says: Do they not then consider the Qur'aan carefully? Had it been from other than Allaah, they would surely have found therein much contradiction. (Soorah An Nisaa: 82)

Ahadith used to disprove Hadith

Some of the Hadith rejectors quote this hadith to prove that the ahadith are not reliable;

It was narrated from Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: Do not write anything from me; whoever has written anything from me other than the Qur’aan, let him erase it and narrate from me, for there is nothing wrong with that. (Narrated by Muslim, al-Zuhd wa’l-Raqaa’iq, 5326)

But Later ahadith WERE written down by the companions


But we see from other ahadith that Allah's Messenger later allowed the companions to write his sayings. He temporary prohibition was meant as a precautionary step to ensure the correctness of the word of Allaah as distinguished from the words of the Prophet himself, as both came from the lips of the Prophet. This is one view and several other views are mentioned in the commentary on Saheeh Muslim by Imaam Al-Nawawi (May Allaah have mercy on him);



Al-Nawawi said in his commentary on Saheeh Muslim:

Al-Qaadi said: there were many disputes among the Sahaabah and Taabi’een concerning the writing down of knowledge. Many of them regarded this as being makrooh, but most of them regarded it as permissible. This dispute is no longer an issue.

They differed as to the meaning of this hadeeth which says that it is forbidden. It was said that this pertained to one who was sure of his memory, and there was the fear that he may rely upon what he had written if he wrote it down; the ahaadeeth which say that it is permissible to write things down is to be interpreted as referring to the one whose memory is not reliable, such as the hadeeth, “Write it down for Abu Shaah”; or the hadeeth of the saheefah of ‘Alee (may Allaah be pleased with him); the hadeeth of the book of ‘Amr ibn Hazm, which contains laws on inheritance, sunnahs and diyaat (blood money); the hadeeth about writing down charity, and the minimum amounts at which zakaah becomes obligatory (nisaab), with which Abu Bakr sent Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) to Bahrain; the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah which says that Ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas used to ; write things down but he (Abu Hurayrah) did not write things down, and other ahaadeeth. And it was said that the hadeeth forbidding writing down ahaadeeth was abrogated by these ahaadeeth.

The prohibition was in effect when there was the fear that (the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) might be mixed with the Qur’aan. When that danger was no longer present, permission was given to write down (ahaadeeth). And it was said that the prohibition mentioned in the hadeeth referred to writing ahaadeeth on the same page as Qur’aan, lest they become mixed and thus the reader would be confused when looking at this page. And Allaah knows best.

The hadeeth of Abu Shaah was narrated by al-Bukhaari from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him), who said:

‘When Allaah granted His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) victory over Makkah, he stood before the people and praised and glorified Allaah, then he said: “Allaah protected Makkah from the elephant and has given authority to His Messenger and the believers over it, so fighting was forbidden for anyone before me, and was made permissible for me for part of a day, and it will not be permissible for anyone after me. Its game should not be chased, its thorny bushes should not be uprooted, and picking up its fallen things is not allowed except for one who makes public announcement for it, and he whose relative is murdered has the option either to accept a compensation for it or to retaliate.” Al-‘Abbas said, “Except Al-Idhkhir (a kind of plant), for we use it in our graves and houses.” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “Except Al-Idhkhir.” Abu Shaah, a Yemeni, stood up and said, “O Messenger of Allaah! Get it written for me.” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “Write it for Abu Shaah.” (al-Luqatah, 2254)

Ibn Hajar said: What may be understood from the story of Abu Shaah (“Write it for Abu Shaah”) is that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) gave permission for hadeeth to be written down from him.

This contradicts the hadeeth of Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri, which says that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, ‘Do not write down anything from me except the Qur’aan.’ (Narrated by Muslim).

The two may be reconciled by noting that the prohibition applied only to the time when the Qur’aan was being revealed, lest it be confused with something else, and that permission was given at other times; or that the prohibition applied only to writing down things other than Qur’aan with the Qur’aan on one thing, and that permission was given to write them separately; of that the prohibition came first and the permission abrogated that, when there was no longer any fear of confusion. This is most likely to be the case.

It was said that the prohibition applied only to those whom it was feared would depend on the writing and not memorize things, and that permission was given for those from whom such a thing was not feared.

The scholars said: a group of the Sahaabah and Taabi’een regarded it as makrooh to write down the hadeeth and they regarded it as mustahabb to learn it from them by heart, as they had learned it. But when people were no longer able to strive so hard (in memorizing) and the scholars feared that knowledge might be lost, they compiled it in books.”
There are countless instructions from the Prophet instructing his companions to write down some ahadeeth.

Proof of Ahadith which the companions of Prophet Muhammad did right;

One of the Ansaar (The Helpers) asked the Prophet if there was another way to preserve ahadeeth as he sometimes forgets them. The Prophet replied:

Seek help from your right hand, and pointed out to a writing. (Tirmidhi)

Raafi ibn Khadij (May Allaah be pleased with him) said:

I said to the Prophet that we hear from you many things, should we write them down?” He replied: You may write. There is no harm. (Tadreeb ar Raawi)

Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) narrates that the Prophet said:

Preserve knowledge by writing. (At-Tabari Jaami ul Bayaan)

Abu Raafi (may Allaah be pleased with him) sought permission from the Prophet to write ahadeeth and the Prophet granted him that permission (Tirmidhi)

Salma (student of Ibn Abbaas) says:

I saw some small wooden boards with Abdullaah Ibn Abbaas. He was writing on them some reports of the acts of the Prophet which he acquired from Abu Raafi’. (Tabaqaat Ibn Sa’d)

Abdullaah ibn Amr ibn al-Aas (May Allaah be pleased with him) reports that the Prophet said to him:

Preserve Knowledge

Abdullaah then asked,

how should it be preserved?

The Prophet replied,

by writing it.
(Mustadrik Haakim; Jaami ul Bayaan)

In another report, he says,

I came to the Prophet and told him, I want to narrate your ahadeeth. So, I want to take assistance of my handwriting besides my heart. Do you deem it fit for me?’

The Prophet replied,

If it is my hadeeth you may seek help from your hand besides your heart. (Daarimi)

He also says:

I used to write whatever I heard from the Prophet and wanted to learn it by heart. Some people of the Quraysh dissuaded me and said,
Do you write everything you hear from the Prophet, while he is a human being and sometimes he may be in anger as any other human beings may be? (Abu Dawood)

After Abdullaah ibn Amr conveyed their opinion to the Prophet, the Prophet replied by pointing to his lips and said:

I swear by the One in whose hands is the soul of Muhammad: nothing comes out from these two (lips) except truth(haqq). So, do write. (Abu Dawood; Tabaqaat ibn Sa’d; Mustadrik ul Haakim)

These narrations attest that ahadeeth were written during the era of the Prophet.

I will list here the prominent compilations written in the first and second century, some written by the sahabas (the Prophet’s companions), their students (taabi’een), and the students of the taabi’een (tabaa'at-taabi'een).

Some of the compilations during the era of the Prophet:

The Scripts of Abu Hurairah

Hasan ibn Amr reports that once:

Abu Hurairah took him to his home and showed him “many books” containing the ahadeeth of the Prophet. (Jaami’ Bayaan-ul-‘Ilm; Fath-ul-Baari)

The Script of Abdullaahi ibn Amr

Mujahid, his student, said

I went to Abdullaah ibn Amr and took in hand a script placed beneath his cushion. He stopped me. I said, You never save anything from me. He replied:

This is the Saadiqah (the Script of Truth). It is what I heard from the Prophet. No other narrator intervenes between him and myself. If this script, the Book of Allaah, and wahaz (his agricultural land) are secured for me, I would never care about the rest of the world. (Jaami’ Bayaan-ul-‘Ilm)

The Script of Anas

Sa’eed ibn Hilal, one of his students, says:

When we insisted upon Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) he would bring to us some notebooks and say, These are what I have heard and written from the Prophet, after which I have presented them to the Prophet for confirmation. (Mustadrik Haakim)

The Script of Alee

Alee said:

I have not written anything from the Prophet except the Qur’aan and what is contained in this script. (Saheeh Bukhaaree- Book of Jihaad)

Ibn Sa'd reports that Alee stood in the mosque and delivered a lecture then he asked the people:

Who will purchase ‘knowledge’ for one dirham only?

meaning, who wants to learn ahadeeth should buy writing paper for one dirham and come to him for dictation.

It is reported that Haarith al-A’war bought some paper and came to him:

So, Alee wrote for him a lot of knowledge. (Tabaqaat Ibn Sa’d)

Scripts of Jaabir

Qataadah, one of Jaabir’s students, says,

I remember the script of Jaabir more than I remember Surah al-Baqarah (Qur’aan). (Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb)

Scripts of Ibn Abbaas

Musa ibn Uqbah says:

Kuraib left with us a camel load of Ibn Abbaas’s books. When Alee ibn Abdullaah ibn Abbaas would need any book from them, he wrote to Kuraib, ‘Send to me such and such books.’ He would then transcribe the book and send to him one of the two copies. (Tabaqaat Ibn Sa’d)

The pupils of Ibn Abbaas would copy these scripts and read them over to him to confirm the correctness of the copies. (Tirmidhi)

Sometimes Ibn Abbaas would narrate the ahadeeth to his pupils while they would record them. (Daarimi)

The compilations of Ahadith in the First Century Hijrah:

1. Book of Khalid ibn Ma’dan (d. 104)
2. Books of Abu Qilabah (d. 104). He bequeathed his books to his pupil, Ayyub Saktiyan (68-131 A.H.), who paid more than ten dirhams as a fare for them being loaded on a camel.
3. The script of Hammam ibn Munabbih,
4. Books of Hasan al-Basri (21-110 A.H.)
5. Books of Muhammad al-Baqir (56-114 A.H.)
6. Books of Makhul from Syria
7. Book of Hakam ibn ‘Utaibah
8. Book of Bukair ibn Abdullaah ibn al-Ashajj (d. 117)
9. Book of Qais ibn Sa’d (d. 117). This book later belonged to Hammad ibn Salamah.
10. Book of Sulaiman al-Yashkuri
11. Al-Abwaab of Sha’bi,
12. Books of Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri
13. Book of Abul-Aliyah
14. Book of Sa’id ibn Jubair (d. 95)
15. Books of Umar ibn ‘Abdul Aziz (61-101 A.H.)
16. Books of Mujahid ibn Jabr (d. 103)
17. Book of Raja ibn Hywah (d. 112)
18. Book of Abu Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Amr ibn Haq
19. Book of Bashir ibn Nahik.

The compilations of the second century (note that only the prominent ones are listed due length) :

1. Book of Abdul Malik ibn Juraij (d. 150)
2. Muwatta of Maalik ibn Anas (93-179)
3. Muwatta of Ibn Abi Zi’b (80-158)
4. Maghaazi of Muhammad ibn Ishaq (d. 151)
5. Musnad of Rabi’ ibn Sabih (d. 160)
6. Book of Sa’id ibn Abi ‘Arubah (d. 156)
7. Book of Hammad ibn Salmah (d. 167)
8. Jami’ Sufyan ath-Thauri (97-161)
9. Jami’ Ma’mar ibn Rashid (95-153)
10. Book of ‘Abdur-Rahman al-Awzaa’I (88-157)
11. Kitaab az-Zuhd by Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak (118-181)
12. Book of Hushaim ibn Bashir (104-183)
13. Book of Jarir ibn ‘Abdul-Hamid (110-188)
14. Book of Abdullaah ibn Wahb (125-197)
15. Book of Yahya ibn Abi Kathîr (d. 129)
16. Book of Muhammad ibn Suqah (d. 135)
17. Tafsîr of Zaid ibn Aslam (d. 136)
18. Book of Musa ibn ‘Uqbah (d. 141)
19. Book of Ash’ath ibn ‘Abdul-Malik (d. 142)
20. Book of Aqil ibn Khalid (d. 142)
21. Book of Yahya ibn Sa’id Ansari (d. 143)
22. Book of Awf ibn Abi Jamilah (d. 146)
23. Books of Jafar ibn Muhammad al-Sadiq (d. 148)
24. Books of Yunus ibn Yazid (d. 152)
25. Book of ‘Abdur-Rahman al-Mas’udi (d. 160)
26. Books of Zaidah ibn Qudamah (d. 161)
27. Books of Ibrahim al-Tahman (d. 163)
28. Books of Abu Hamzah al-Sukri (d. 167)
29. Al-Gharaaib by Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaj (d. 160)
30. Books of Abdul-Aziz ibn ‘Abdullaah al-Majishun (d. 164)
31. Books of Abdullaah ibn ‘Abdullaah ibn Abi Uwais (d. 169)
32. Books of Sulaiman ibn Bilal (d. 172)
33. Books of Abdullaah ibn Lahi’ah (d. 147)
34. Jami’ Sufyan ibn ‘Uyainah (d. 198)
35. Kitaab-ul-AAthaar by Imaam Abu Haneefah (d. 150)
36. Maghaazi of Mu’tamir ibn Sulaiman (d. 187)
37. Musannaf of Waki’ ibn Jarrah (d. 196)
38. Musannaf of Abdur-Razzaaq ibn Hammam (136-221)
39. Musnad of Zaid ibn Alee (76-122)
40. Books of Imaam Shaafi’i (150-204)

The following are available today in printed form:

1. Al-Muwatta by Imaam Maalik.
2. Kitaab-ul-AAthaar by Imaam Abu Haneefah.
3. Musannaf by ‘Abdur-Razzaaq. This book has been published in eleven big volumes.
4. As-Seerah by Muhammad ibn Ishaq.
5. Kitaab az-Zuhd by ‘Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak.
6. Kitaab az-Zuhd by Waki’ ibn Jarraah (3 volumes).
7. Al-Musnad by Zaid ibn Alee (76-122).
8. Sunan of Imaam Shaafi’i.
9. Musnad of Shaafi’i.
10. Siyar of Awzaa’i (88-157).
11. Musnad of ‘Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak.
12. Musnad of Abu Daawood Tayalisi (d. 204).
13. Ar-Radd ‘ala Siyaril-Awzaa’i by Imaam Abu Yoosuf.
14. Al-Hujjah ‘ala Ahlil-Madeenah by Imaam Muhammad ibn Hasan Shaibaani.
15. Kitaabul-Umm by Imaam Shaafi’i.
16. Al-Maghaazi by Waqidi (130-206) (4 volumes).

Full Article;
Ahadeeth myths :: load-islam


Useful Links;
http://islamtoday.com/discover_islam.cfm?cat_id=6&sub_cat_id=46
http://www.islamreligion.com/category/81/
Questions that the Quranites Have No Good Logical Responses To

Slaves?

asalaam alaikum

Slaves

Slavery was the norms throughout the world - just like its not the norms today - when the Qur'an was being revealed. People would be taken as prisoners during wars or even outside of wars, and were treated as property which you could use and do whatever you wanted with, since they were your yours to use as you will.

Islam came and changed that, and through this - it would give slaves rights similar to free people. Yes, it didn't abolish slavery totally, this was due to the worldly conditions that were present in the world during its time, and also due to future events which would cause slavery to return in the world in the future. This is one of the reasons why Islam didn't abolish slavery totally.


Their Rights

So what rights did Islam give to slaves?

They are our brothers;

Allah's Messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him) said about slaves: [translation of meaning];
" Those slaves are your brothers, only God gave you an upper hand over them. So let that who has his brother (i.e. slave) under him give him the same food he himself eats, and the same clothing as he himself wears. The master may not give his brother a task that is beyond his ability. If he does give him such task, let him lend him a hand."

Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29

So we see that slaves are similar in rights to the owner.



Can Slaves be beaten?


Abdul-Lah bin 'Umar freed a slave of his then picked a twig from the ground and said:

" I shall not receive for freeing him the worth of this in the Hereafter. I heard the Messenger of Allah say : ' If a man hits or beats his slave, his atonement is the freeing of that slave. [Reported by Muslim and Abu Dawud]





'Why didnt they reject the concept of slavery altogether when islam came?' Its not that simple because most of the time, these people were slaves only because they fought Muslims and they would have done the exact same to them if the Muslims were caught! This concept was so common in the world at that time - the same way its so uncommon in the world at todays time (- its Islam that actually removed the concept so much that we find it strange today.)

So something practical had to be done about it to slowly set people free. If Muslims said, you can go back home now after fighting us - then wouldn't the Muslims always be at the disadvantage? So by making them slaves - but respecting them, giving them similar rights - Islam changed the concept of slavery altogether in the world (but again this changed when queen Victoria came to Africa.)





Sexual relations with a female slave?

So what is the proof for having intercourse with ones own female slaves?


And those who guard their chastity,

Except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (then) they are not to be blamed,


[Quran Al Ma'arij 70: 29-30]



Why the number of concubines weren't restricted to a certain number?

Islam encouraged cohabitation with slaves as another avenue to liberation for them and their children. this may be particularly significant if it is realized that the slave's offspring were often the children of wealthy owners who kept slaves for domestic purposes. It is further suggested that, to enhance the cause of liberation, Islam did not limit the number of slaves with whom a master may cohabit because the greater the number - the closer to freedom they become.

So the more slaves kept, the greater the freedom of slaves (because he has alot) at his death, so alot of these slaves are then free at his death.


Some people might say that anyone could buy slaves so sexuality was rampant, but this isn't true - since slaves were expensive.




Methods of Freedom


Slaves can be freed in 4 ways;

4 types of freedom;


The first type is that the owner can free his slave for the sake of Allah. This makes the slave a free man/woman.

Al Mudabir; master promised freedom when master died.

Al Mukaatab; slave made contract to free himself when payed an agreed amount

also see tafsir of Surah Nur 24:33;
Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir

Um al Walad; female slave had child [boy or girl] is then freed after death of owner.


the sources from hadith which mention these types of freedom;
http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/anti-islamic-refutations/female-slaves-433/page3/#post7944



Marriage is encouraged more in islam though:


Sahih Al Bukhari Volume 1, Book 3 [book of knowledge], Number 97:

Narrated Abu Burda's father:

Allah's Apostle said "Three persons will have a double reward:

1. A Person from the people of the scriptures who believed in his prophet (Jesus or Moses) and then believed in the Prophet Muhammad (i .e. has embraced Islam).
2. A slave who discharges his duties to Allah and his master.
3. A master of a woman-slave who teaches her good manners and educates her in the best possible way (the religion) and manumits her and then marries her."





also read;

islamic slavery; a refutation of doubts:
The Islamic position on Slavery: A refutation of doubts :: load-islam

http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/quran-hadith-prophet-muhammad/islam-permit-muslim-men-rape-slave-girls-1832/

Make any editions or comments on what we can change or add insha Allah.

Terrorism?

asalaam alaikum

Terrorism


From Qur'an, Allaah says (translation of the meaning):

Whosoever kills a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind...

[Qur'an Ma'idah 5: 32]



Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.

Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.

[Qur'an Mumtahinah 60: 8-9]

The Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said [translation of meaning]:

“Do not kill any old person, any child, or any woman.” [Abu Dawud]

“Do not kill the monks in monasteries,” or “Do not kill the people who are sitting in places of worship.” [Musnad Ahmad]

Narrated Anas ibn Malik: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Go in Allah's name, trusting in Allah, and adhering to the religion of Allah's Apostle. Do not kill a decrepit old man, or a young infant, or a child, or a woman; do not be dishonest about booty, but collect your spoils, do right and act well, for Allah loves those who do well. (Sunan Abu Dawud , Book 14, Number 2608)


It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children.

[Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4320]



All the above is in the context of fighting. Outside of the war-zone none of that is permissible - unless there is a certain law which calls for capital punishment by a just judge. [Refer to Capital Punishment.]


There are some verses in Surah Tawbah [surah 9] which some people may misunderstand or take out of context;

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

[Qur'an Al-Tawbah Repentance 9:5]

But in context it is referring to those who are in a state of warfare with the Muslims.


For example, those who have a peace treaty with the Muslims are not fought;

Except those of the polytheists with whom you have a treaty, and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfill their treaty to them to the end of their term. Surely Allâh loves Al- Mattaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2).

[Qur'an 9:4]

Those who do not have a peace treaty, then it depends on the scenario - if they are peaceful with you and not a threat - then its not necessary to fight them. However, if they are likely to harm, then precautions are taken.


Okay, but still.. killing all polytheists?

Let's look at the verse that comes after the original verse [9:5]:

And if anyone of the Mushrikûn (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allâh (the Qur'ân), and then escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men who know not. [Qur'an 9: 6]

So thats the basics and shows that the killing of innocents isn't allowed. Yet at the same time - Islam isn't a religion which means peace in of itself, it's a religion which leads to peace - yes. But Islaam means submission. And it's a religion of justice - so if some nation comes and invades ones country - they have the right to defend themselves without exceeding the limits.

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

[Qur'an 2: 190]

These are basic human rights which all humane people recognise and accept.



If someone argues that Islam spreads itself to other nations by force politically, this is a satisfactory response by a Christian author;

In this formulation the claim was that jihad was better than secular conquest. Unlike Alexander the Great, Mohammed incorporated people in a polity in which they had the option of being saved, in which they had the ability to see for themselves, in which they could choose to become true believers. But it left inner conviction as something over which the individual had full control.

This argument ought to be easy for modern people to understand, or at least Americans, for they also tend to think that war can be legitimated by a high moral purpose - as long as that purpose hasn’t got anything to do with individual faith. The moral purposes they have in mind are wholly secular, not the lower level of religion, and the salvation they talk about is in this world. But they too tend to be eager to rescue other people by enabling them to become more like themselves: richer, freer, more democratic.


What do you do when your fingers are itching to intervene, when you have the power to do it, when you are sure you are right and you are convinced that the victims will be grateful - quite apart from all the advantages that may redound to yourself from intervening? Aren’t you allowed to use force? Indeed, aren’t you obliged to use it? Is it right to save people against their will? Should you force them to be free? If you say yes to these questions, you are in effect a believer in jihad.

“Jihad”: idea and history - Patricia Crone




Useful Links;
http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=414&subsection=Misconceptions

Marriage Relations with 'Children'?

asalaam alaikum


Marriage Relations with 'Children'?


In Islam, a marriage contract can be agreed by parents for their children. So two parents may make a marriage contract that their children will be each others partners when they are mature for the rights of marriage. Why is this type of marriage contract usually done? In most cases it is done to cement relations between two families, or to agree to marriage early so they have an opportunity for marriage with a certain family before someone else proposes. This was done by Kings in the past to secure relations between two kingdoms.

Even though this is recognised in Islam, when the children become mature - they have the choice of annulling/cancelling the marriage if they wish to do so. This then refutes the concept of forcing them into marriage if they don't wish to do so.



Intimate Relations

The concept of maturity (balaghah) is different to how people percieve it today.


People mature at different levels, depending on where they live, and also their biological makeup.

In countries near the equator, girls mature into women a few years quicker than girls in colder nations. I.e. a girl may have physically developed into a woman by the age of 10 in the middle east, whereas this may occur at 13 for a young woman in Europe.

HerWord.com says:

There was a study conducted showing that girls who live in countries close to the equator started their menstruation earlier.

(HerWord.com,
http://www.herword.com/healthdesk/ot...s10.28.03.html)



The book Women and Health Psychology says:

Many factors have been reported to affect age at menarche and/or the regularity of menstruation—[such as] climate, altitude, race, height, weight, hereditary, stress/psychological factors, light, and nutrition.

(Women and Health Psychology,
Women and Health Psychology ... - Google Book Search)

This phenomenon is not limited to menarche [menstruation periods], but also applies to the whole of puberty. In the book Women: An Historical, Gynecological, and Anthropological Compendium, we read:

The average temperature of the country or province is considered the chief factor here, not only with regard to menstruation but as regards the whole of sexual development at puberty.


(Herman H. Ploss, Max Bartels and Paul Bartels; Woman: An Historical,
Gynecological, and Anthropological Compendium, Volume I, Lord & Bransby,
1988, p.563;

Woman. An historical, gynaecological and anthropological compendium. Volume 3 only by PLOSS, Herman Heinrich, BARTELS, Max & BARTELS, Paul Find or Buy Book Now!)

In Islam, for a girl to have menstruation is not enough, but she should be mature physically, mentally and emotionally for marriage.

Mufti Maulana Husain Kadodia explained:

In reality, puberty has two usages. The first usage is with regards to physical development, whereas the second usage is with regards to menses.

For (sexual) intercourse, developmental puberty (balagha) is a precondition.* Whereas for other rulings—such as being ordered to pray—the menses usage applies.

(Maulana Mufti Husain Kadodia, Ask Imam.com with Mufti Ebrahim Desai)

*The puberty being referred to is the puberty of physical growth - so that a person is capable for sexual relations - without any harm coming to them.

This statement of the scholar - which is based on Islamic teachings - Husain Kadodia proves two points;

1) A girl who has had her menses but has not matured in her body physically should not have sexual relations, if she was to have a marriage contract. This is because she could be harmed in the process, since her body has not physically matured. [Some girls do have periods early, but their body has not matured for any form of sexual activity - so she is not permitted to have such relations due to the harm caused to her in the process*.]

*This is based on the hadith of the Prophet;

It was related on the authority of Abu Sa'id Sa'd bin Malik bin Sinan al-Khudri, radiyallahu 'anhu, that the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam, said:

"There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm."

[A excellent hadith which Ibn Majah, Al-Daraqutni and others related as of sound isnad, but which Malik related in his Muwatta' as of broken isnad, from 'Amr bin Yahya, from his father, from the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam, but dropping (the name of) Abu Sa'id. This hadith has lines of transmission which strengthen one another (so that it may be regarded as of sound isnad).]


more explanation;
http://fortyhadith.iiu.edu.my/hadith32.htm

2) A young woman who has matured in every single way, but has not had her menses - then she is permitted to have sexual relations with her husband when she has had a valid marriage contract completed. This is because she will not be harmed through such relations since her body and mind has matured for it. [This may occur in countries like Antarctica where women at the age of 20 may have matured in every way except they have not had their periods due to the climate conditions.]

Mental & Emotional Maturity

Girls and boys also reach mental maturity quicker in close climate nations because they are brought up this way by their culture and upbringing. This usually makes them mature more emotionally too. Think about it; if the norms in a culture are to marry early, then the upbringing by the parents will ensure that the child is brought up to mature and prepare for marriage at an earlier age.



If someone can handle the it well, then what's the problem?

In Islam, if someone is capable of being married and is mature in a way to handle its responsibilities, it is permitted in Islam for that person to get married, male or female. But if there will be any harm that could come to them through such a marriage, then the marriage should not go ahead, and may be annulled by the Islamic judge if there is harm in it.

Marriage may be done earlier in Muslim nations because having any intimate relations outside of marriage is not permitted. Instead, it is to be done through a secure and safe relationship of marriage. This is why marriage is encouraged, because if a person is capable of having a relationship with someone else, then why not through a trustworthy relationship which both parties agree to?







The marriage of Aisha



There is a very strong proof we can use to show that Aisha (peace be upon her) had reached physical maturity before she moved into the Prophet’s house, and this is Aisha’s own statement in which she said:


When the girl reaches nine years of age, she is a woman.

(Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Kitab al-Nikah)


This statement of Aisha shows that it was the norms in Arabia for a girl to mature on to become a young woman, i.e. become physically mature for marriage and its rights at the age of 9.




Further, Aisha describes herself at the age of nine;
Imam Ibn kathir (May Allah have mercy on him) narrates a hadith in his Al-Bidayah wa-Nihayah:

"Imam Bukhari (May Allah have mercy on him) narrates another hadith which he heard from Farwa bin abi al-Mughria who heard from 'Ali bin Masher who heard from Hisham bin 'Urawh who heard from his father who reports from 'Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her), who said: 'When the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) was betrowth to me, I was six years old. Later, when we migrated from Makkah to Medina and stayed at bin harith bin khdhrj's place, I had grown up. My hair had got longer and I had physically matured; however, I still used to play with other girls...I was nine years old at that time."

Source Page 210-211

There are cases of this being the norms throughout the world, without any harm coming to the young woman. Its only lately that the ages have started to rise to above 15, abit more or less. This is likely due to the longer life expectancy of people today in comparison to the past.



Useful Links;

Marriage in other nations throughout the world at early ages, and more in depth explanation on the issues addressed;
http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/quran-hadith-prophet-muhammad/book-refuting-islamaphobes-claim-prophet-muhammad-pedophile-1441/

Intelligent Design - the Logic & Proof behind our Faith

Asalaam alaikum Warahmatulah Wabarakatuh



Intelligent Design - The Logic & Truth Behind our Faith



There's a book by William Dembski which is called - the Design Interface. He studies human logic to try to find conclusions as to why people believe in intelligent design, ranging from belief of designs of humans, to designs of God. Why do we believe something is designed by someone and not by chance or nature?


He explains this sequence of Logic thought, and then compares this to natural objects to see whether living beings can really be a work of nature or Intelligent Design.







The logical sequences goes like this;

1] Improbable Object + Recognizable Pattern = Intelligent Design.


So an improbable object, with the addition of a recognized pattern = the design of someone with an intelligence.

He gives the example of the hieroglyphics in Egyptian writing. We did not see the egyptians write them on the walls, however - due to the writing on the walls - with recognized patterns, such as the repetition of certain letters in different words - we can conclude that someone did actually write this - based on intelligence - because it makes sense and its improbable that all these letters came together to make up meaningful words.

So his other logical sequence is;

2] Small Probability + Specification = Design.


Since the possibility of these letters and words being written in the correct sequences, and their specificness in the way they are written [to be meaningful] - we come to the conclusion that is based on someone with intelligence, who designed it this specific way for a purpose.


Then he gives examples of the Carved faces of the American presidents on a Mountain (Mountain Rushmore) in the USA, these faces are specific, recognizable by everyone who sees them [not just specific people who may imagine them as faces], and its highly improbable that it can happen by chance [since there are no other mountains similar to this design in its detail and specific carvings etc.] Therefore we come to the conclusion that it is carved by someone with an Intelligence.


Then he gives more examples such as writing written by people on a beach which means something meaningful to a passer by reader, who would recognise that it was written by another person before etc.

The 3rd logical sequencing he gives is;

3] See Objective Pattern = Recognise some Intelligence.


This is a summary of the logical sequences we discussed above.

We recognise that there is intelligence which caused this final product to be made due to our objectivity [i.e. we can compare this mountain (Mountain Rushmore) of the USA presidents in comparison to other mountains which have no faces on and just eroded through natural means].

Another example given is how forensic experts can study different scenarios and come to conclusions as to whether an incident was caused by a criminal with intelligence, or if it was an accident - even though they didn't see the crime take place when it occurred, they recognised whether it was due to Intelligent criminal activity, or natural means.

Let's put DNA through the Intelligence test



Now by using the 3 Logical sequences above, let's look at DNA and see how it fulfills the above conditions to fit into the category of Intelligent Design.

Logic #1] Improbable Object + Recognizable Pattern = Intelligent Design.

So an improbable object (DNA), with the addition of a recognized pattern [the makeup of DNA*] = the design of someone with an intelligence.



There is a recognizable pattern in the formation of DNA, and its structure: *

*Nucleotides (i.e. billions of A,T,C,G, match with their suited nucleoclide to become: Base Pairs [A-T, G-C] (millions of these matching pairs*)] ---> Genes (thousands of these*) --> DNA.

--> = come together to make up... [i.e. Base Pairs --> (combine to make Genes etc.)]

• 2 Nucleotides form a Base Pair
• A specific number of Base pairs form a Gene
• A whole strand of base pairs with different genes on it form DNA
• DNA is folded, wrapped up with histones to form Chromosomes
• Chromosomes are stored inside the Nucleus.

*(The haploidhuman genome (23 chromosomes) is estimated to be about 3 billion base pairs long and to contain 20,000-25,000 distinct genes.[1])

[1]International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium (2004). "Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome". Nature 431 (7011): 931–45. doi:10.1038/nature03001. PMID 15496913.[1]

The above flow diagram shows what DNA is made up of.




The most basic foundation of DNA are base Pairs;

But let's look at the basic foundations of DNA, and that is base pairs. In regard to genetic material (i.e. base pairs) being formed out of natural processes; some might claim that genetic material was formed in chains naturally. However there is a whole bunch of objections to this idea. First of all the basic building blocks, neucleotides/base pairs don't form spontaneously from the earth. Secondly they don't pair up to form base pairs correctly just like that either. And finally even if you could explain the previous two steps, it still wouldn't be a linear (straight line) strand, but more probably a chaotic and branched strand, or lots of base pairs clogged up together [whereas a linear strand is required for it to be useful RNA/DNA for life so that two RNA strands can bind together to form into useful DNA]. Finally, another problem is that they wouldn't form much long strands, and a short chain can only hold a very limited amount of information (even the most basic of bacteria require thousands of base pairs/nucleotides in a linear strand for their RNA/DNA makeup to be useful for living beings).

Since the above is a repetition of a pattern which is recognizable (like programming i.e. like binary coding for a software) Our logic tells us that it was organized by someone with an Intelligence who controlled it to fulfill its role.

So we continue to his other logical sequence;

Logic #2] Small Probability + Specification = Design.

Small Probability; We know that science has been unable to produce DNA through experiments, and scientists are aware of how improbable it would be for it to come into existence through natural means (no experiments to prove DNA can come into existence by natural means no evidence to prove its reality). For example; the probability of billions of base pairs connecting with each other in the correct sequencing, and them forming on to become DNA, The probability of this is actually 4^1million (four to the power of one million). Whereas in mathematics, probabilities smaller than 1 over 10 to the power of 50 [50 zeros after it] are thought of as "zero probability" Even if they were to argue that the chains were much smaller in the earlier days, the probability of this happening are still high (reaching to the mathematical probability of impossibility of such a thing happening.)



Specification; We know that if these base pairs do not match up together correctly, then there will not be any useful genes for life. So millions of base pairs have to connect properly in the right sequencing to become useful genes. These genes will have to be many in number (hundreds or thousands) [so the nucleotide sequences will have to be in the billions connecting with each other properly], and these genes will have to form onto become strands of RNA.

Two strands of RNA will have to be equal lengths (with equal amounts of base pairs) so they can connect with each other (in a helix/coiled up way) to become DNA. The probability of this (like mentioned) above is 4^1million, because all the base pairs will have to connect with each other in the correct sequencing [i.e. A (from one RNA strand) will have to connect with T (from the other strand of RNA), G will have to with C etc.] This will have to be done billions of times - so that all the base pairs can connect with each other, and the probability of this happening without someone purposelly controlling it is impossible.


Its like tossing a coin one billion times and it always landing on heads, people won't say its chance - but they will say that it was controlled by someone with Intelligence.


Since that - happening by natural causes - is impossible (according to the rules of statistics probability) - there is a plausible explanation, and that is Intelligent Design.

The 3rd logical sequencing he gives is;

Logic #3] See Objective Pattern = Recognise some Intelligence.

Definition ofObjective: undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena; "an objective appraisal"; "objective evidence"

wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn



Today, scientists are aware of how complex DNA really is.


Here's a few statements from objective scientists, some who were atheists before but left atheism and started to believe in Intelligent Design - [because that was the only plausible explanation to understand how amazing DNA really is];

“Biologists’ investigation of DNA has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce [life], that intelligence must have been involved.”[1]

Richard N. Ostling, “Lifelong atheist changes mind about divine creator,” The Washington Times 10 December 2004; (http://washingtontimes.com/national/20041209-113212-2782r.htm.




Francis Crick, for instance, one of the scientists who revealed the helix shape of DNA admitted in the face of the findings regarding DNA that the origin of life indicated a miracle:

An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.[4]

Based on his calculations, Led Adleman of the University of Southern California in Los Angeles has stated that one gram of DNA can store as much information as a trillion compact discs [of genetic information].[5]




Gene Myers, a scientist employed on the Human Genome Project, has said the following in the face of the miraculous arrangements he witnessed:

“What really astounds me is the architecture of life… The system is extremely complex. It’s like it was designed… There’s a huge intelligence there.”[6]




The most striking fact about DNA is that the existence of the coded genetic information can definitely not be explained in terms of matter and energy or natural laws. Dr. Werner Gitt, a professor at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology, has said this on the subject

A code system is always the result of a mental process… It should be emphasized that matter as such is unable to generate any code. All experiences indicate that a thinking being voluntarily exercising his own free will, cognition, and creativity, is required… There is no known natural law through which matter can give rise to information, neither is any physical process or material phenomenon known that can do this.[7]

more:
http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/265/#_ftnref12874

So this final statement by Dr. Werner Gitt is saying that there's no process in science which indicates or explains that something without a mind can form itself in a way to actually produce information in such detail [like the DNA].


[4] Francis Crick, Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981, p. 88
[5] John Whitfield, “Physicists plunder life’s tool chest”, 24 April 2003; (http://www.nature.com/nsu/030421/030421-6.html)
[6] San Francisco Chronicle, 19 February, 2001
[7] Werner Gitt, In the Beginning Was Information, CLV, Bielenfeld, Germany, pp. 64-7, 79

And the owner of Microsoft said; DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software we've ever created. - Bill Gates


So we see that many intelligent scientists who are objective, who were infact atheists before realise how complex DNA really is and explain that Intelligent design can be the only plausible explanation as to how it came into existence. They even compare DNA to software and hardware which humans [who have intelligence] themselves make. So what then, about DNA which is even more detailed, and contains more genetic information (i.e. it contains all your bodies attributes like hair colour, eye colour, your testosterone/oestrogen levels, thousands of pages of information of who you are and how your body works etc.) than them softwares and hardwares which they program?





A Final Word

Finally, Even if scientists were able to produce the likes of the DNA (although this seems extremely far off), this would again be Intelligent Design and would not prove that it can come into existence by natural means. Since the production of DNA by scientists would be through controlled experiments by them, whereas nature in of itself is not controlled by Intelligence [according to atheists.]


If someone said that you are relying on 'the god of the gaps', i would say that this isn't 'god of the gaps' - since nothing is preventing us from studying this further. However, due to the detailed specifications and co-ordination of such works and processes, I believe there is no other alternative except Intelligent Design.



It all started because Darwin (died in 1882CE) thought a cell was just a blob which could come into existence by nature, he never knew how complicated cells really were until we were able to use the Electronic Microscope (for the first time in the 1950s) to see the details within the cell. This breakthrough is what amazed many atheist scientists, and made them realise that there was no other logical explanation except Intelligent Design.



We simply know that the the attributes atheists give to nature are usually some form of attribute of Allah. I.e. Allah is al Faatir [the Originator], Al Khaaliq [the Creator], He is Al Mussawir [the Shaper], Al Razzaaq [the Provider] etc.

The only exception is that they have to depend on not knowing why nature does its job well in a controlled manner and why the universe actually formed into this control and order from the start of time (through gradual processes through Allah's wisdom), whereas we rest our faith based on logic and understanding - which is more logical and plausible in understanding the amazing universe around us. We might not have been present when the creation took place, but we understand that all this is based on Intelligent work, and the attributes of control, design (like forensic experts understand), this Intelligence is the Knowledge, Wisdom and Power of Allah.

DNA - it HAD to be Intelligent Design (final?)

Asalaam alaikum Warahmatulah Wabarakatuh

DNA - it HAD to be Intelligent Design



Intro

For a 'living' cell to pass its evolution on to future generations - it needs genetic material either in the form of DNA or RNA. Without genetic material, no progress can be passed on to the future generations. Your DNA contains all information necesairy for your body, it contains the blueprints of how things should be build such as your physical attributes (i.e. hair colour, eye colour etc. to how tall you would be, and some say - even how old your body can possibly age). Without these blueprints it's impossible for a body to be formed, a child to grow up. If any life form would suddenly and randomly appear without such a blueprint, it would not be able to copy itself, or to have offspring without any such guidelines. Therefore in order to preserve life, and pass down biological information, lifeforms must contain this genetic material.

DNA and RNA are both strands made of nucleotides. The difference is, that RNA is a single strand whereas DNA are two strands of nucleotides coiled together. Now for these strands to "fit" into one another, the right nucleotides need to be paired up. We call these paired up nucleotides from the two strands of DNA "base-pairs". Some other small differences, RNA does not use Thymine as one of the 4 nucleotides but uses Uracil instead. DNA uses deoxyribose instead of ribose.

DNA is the most common genetic material found inside the cells of plants & animals. RNA can be found in different places, it can be the genetic material of a virus. RNA is also used in our body to carry information (a transcript of a part of our DNA) to other places in the cell.


Being Made

DNA is made up of thousands of different genes, and genes are made up of base pairs. These "base pairs" are made of two paired up nucleotides. In other to form a base pair, we need to pair up specific nucleotides. Each type of nucleotide has a specific shape, so only certain combinations fit. There are 4 nucleotides. Adenine, Thymine, Guanine and Cytosine represented respectivly by the letters A,T,G and C. Due to their shapes only A and T or G and C fit into one another.

In regard to genetic material being formed out of natural processes; some might claim that genetic material was formed in chains naturally. However there is a whole bunch of objections to that idea. Fist of all the basic building blocks, neucleotides don't form spontaniously. Secondly they don't pair up to form base pairs correctly just like that either. And finally even if you could explain the previous two steps, it still wouldn't be a linear strand, but more probably a chaotic and branched strand. Finally, another problem is that they wouldn't for msuch long strands, and a short chain can only hold a very limited amount of information.

*Nucleotides (i.e. billions of A,T,C,G, match with their suited nucleoclide to become: Base Pairs [A-T, G-C] (millions of these matching pairs*)] ---> Genes (thousands of these*) --> DNA.

--> = come together to make up... [i.e. Base Pairs --> (combine to make Genes etc.)]



*(The haploidhuman genome (23 chromosomes) is estimated to be about 3 billion base pairs long and to contain 20,000-25,000 distinct genes.[1])

[1]International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium (2004). "Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome". Nature 431 (7011): 931–45. doi:10.1038/nature03001. PMID 15496913.[1]

• 2 Nucleotides form a Base Pair
• A specific number of Base pairs form a Gene
• A whole strand of base pairs with different genes on it form DNA
• DNA is folded, wrapped up with histones to form Chromosomes
• Chromosomes are stored inside the Nucleus.

Connecting

Now since these nucleotides need to connect with each other to form base pairs, they have to do this thousands and millions of times - in the correct sequencing - in order for them to become useful genes. So millions of different A nucleotides will have to connect with millions of T nucleotides, and millions of G nucleotides have to connect with millions of C nucleotides. These combined will make our genes. One gene might contain any number from a small dozen up to thousands of nucleotides connected together into base-pairs, so there will be millions of nucleotides connected together in the matching sequences in the DNA.



Connecting two strands to make DNA

Since DNA is made up of two strands, proponents of the RNA world suggest that somewhere along evolution DNA was formed by merging two RNA strands toghether.

Now for two strands to connect - not only would they have to have approximately the same size, the nucleotides should also have to match up correctly. I.e. the A from one strand would have to connect with a T nucleotide from the other strand, and a G nucleotide to connect with a C nucleotide from the other strand. If we take two RNA strands with a million nucleotides, the probability of all nucleotides pairing up correctly would be 4^1million (four to the power of one million). Whereas in mathematics probability, In practice, probabilities smaller than 1 over 10 to the power of 50 [50 zeros after it] are thought of as "zero probability" Even if they were to argue that the chains were much smaller in the earlier days, the probability of this happening are still high (reaching to the mathematical probability of impossibility of such a thing happening.)

Right handed and left handed isomers - right handed only being useful for nucleotides:

Theres something else which is interesting aswell;

There are two types of nucleotides, left handed and right handed (isomers) [Imagine your left hand and right hand - they're the same - but the total mirror opposite of each other]. Someone can argue that yes, left handed ones were only present and this is why there was no harm in nucleotides coming together to form into the correct genes. The problem is though that even if they could show how nucleotides could form natuarally (which they can't) then both left handed as well as right handed nucleotide isomers would have produced equally. (Search Racemic mixture) [Pasteur concluded that organic molecules can exist in one of two forms, called isomers (that is, having the same structure and differing only in mirror images of each other), which he referred to as "left-handed" and "right-handed" forms. When chemists synthesize an organic compound, both of these forms are produced in equal proportions, canceling each other's optical effects.] - Term Paper on Biology. Essays, Research Papers on Bacteria -research material v. II,I

The nucleotides which make up our DNA are exclusively made up of right handed isomers [of nucleotides], and no left handed isomers. The same problem exists for our proteins. The proteins are made up of amino acids which are all made out of left handed isomers.

Its like tossing a coin 1000 times and it always landing on heads only. Would you say this is because of chance, or purposely controlled by someone with an Intelligence?


DNA needs to pass its genes on to future generations, but how?

Finally, even if for arguments sake DNA was to form, it would need to reproduce itself or it'd eventually end up being destroyed by the chaotic atmosphere. Replication is a vital part of evolution, without replication no advancement can be saved. For this it would need protein organelles, preferably kept together with our DNA by a cell membrane. The problem is though, DNA by itself can't do anything - it's just a Blueprint, or a set of instructions. So even if amino acids were present (based on Millers study some were produced), how did the amino acids know what to do? (Millers experiment does not explain how amino acids come together to form proteins and there is no successful study to show that this has actually ever occurred.)

To make a comparison, Imagine a factory with car parts (amino acids) laying around scattered, and some blueprints (dna/rna) laying inbetween them, and whole whole bunch of other random and even harmfull stuff. Would such an enviroment naturally produce a car? Everyone would agree you need factory workers [protein organelles and enzymes] who can sit within a factory (a cell membrane) and get their instructions from the DNA. The problem is though, that a simple cell membrane is made up of lipids (fat) only, so it can't open and close (like floodgates) at its own will unless it has a system within it [telling the different components what to do, and when to open up or close]. Fat/lipids by themselves aren't able to do this. So how did the DNA enter into this cell membrane in the first place, and how did any organelles enter into this cell membrane - so that they could work together to be productive in reproducing themselves on to future generations?