Mayhem in Gaza

God’s Statement in His Revealed Verses in the Qur’an

1. Surah Al-Qalam (68:35-36):
   “(What do the disbelievers in the next life think?) Shall We treat those who are obedient as We treat the guilty? What is the matter with you? What kind of judgment do you make?”

2. Surah Al-An’am (6:12):
   “He has made mercy binding on Himself. He will certainly gather you all together on the Day of Resurrection; there is no doubt about it. Yet those who have lost their souls will not believe.”

3. Surah Al-Ma’idah (5:48):
   “Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return altogether, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ.”

The context of these revealed verses affirms that, based on the conscience bestowed upon human beings, the advent of the Hereafter remains an undeniable certainty.

Nowhere in any scripture does God command the killing or harming of people. The aggressor must be held accountable, and the aggrieved must be fully compensated.

Anon!

 

From Geocentric to Heliocentric Models: The Qur’an’s Insight on the Sun’s Motion

Epigraph: Science can never be at odds with faith; simply because the source of science and faith are one! Science serves as a means of understanding the divine order. The challenge today is not atheism. On the very contrary the real challenge to the world is that of Islam.

"And He it is Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. They float, each in an orbit." — Qur’an 21:33

Ancient Cosmology: The Geocentric and Heliocentric Models

Historically, civilizations believed in a geocentric universe, where Earth was the center and celestial bodies, including the sun, revolved around it. This belief was upheld by Aristotle and formalized by Ptolemy in the 2nd century CE. It remained the dominant point for over a thousand years and was endorsed by religious authorities in medieval Europe.

In the 16th century, Nicolaus Copernicus proposed the heliocentric model, where the Earth and planets revolve around the sun. This revolutionary idea faced resistance but was later supported by Galileo’s telescopic discoveries and Kepler’s laws of planetary motion. However, even within the heliocentric framework, the sun itself was considered stationary, serving as the fixed center of the planetary system.

Modern Scientific Discovery: The Sun is Not Stationary

Contrary to early assumptions, modern astronomy confirms that the sun is not stationary but moves through space. It travels at an astonishing speed of 828,000 km/h (514,000 mph), orbiting the center of the Milky Way galaxy. It completes one full orbit approximately every 225–250 million years. This knowledge was unavailable to early astronomers but it is a fact today.

The Quranic Statement on the Sun’s Motion

The Qur’an, revealed in the 7th century CE, stated the following about the movement of celestial bodies:

“And He it is Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. They float, each in an orbit.” (Qur’an 21:33)

“And the sun runs on course toward its stopping point. That is the determination of the Almighty, the All-Knowing.” (Qur’an 36:38)

These verses explicitly affirm that the sun is in motion, a reality unknown to any human at the time. The term “float” (yasbahun in Arabic) conveys continuous movement, akin to swimming in an ocean—an apt description of celestial bodies in space.

These verses were recited by a man in 7th-century Arabia, without telescopes or access to sophisticated astronomical models. I

If the Qur’an were a product of human knowledge at the time, it would have reflected the geocentric view dominant in that era. Instead, it aligns with 21st-century astrophysical discoveries, proving that its source could not have been human.

Scientists Only Discover What God Has Arranged

The progress of science is, in essence, the unveiling of what God has already arranged. The laws governing celestial mechanics, gravity, and orbital motion existed long before they were discovered. Scientists do not create these realities; they merely uncover them. This realization echoes the Qur’anic assertion:

“We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth.” (Qur’an 41:53)

Science can never be at odds with faith; simply because the source of science and faith are one! Science serves as a means of understanding the divine order. Every discovery, from the vastness of the cosmos to the intricacies of quantum mechanics, is a testament to the perfection of God’s creation.

A Thoughtful Exploration for Scientists and Atheists: A Reality Worth Considering

Today, as we celebrate advancements in space exploration, physics, and cosmology, it is imperative for the scientific community to recognize that these discoveries are not merely random occurrences but insights into the divine blueprint of existence. The Qur'an, in its description of natural phenomena, stands as a profound testament to its divine origin.

The motion of the sun, a fact revealed in the Qur’an and confirmed by modern science, serves as one of many indications that this book is not a product of human intellect but of divine revelation. The challenge today is not atheism. On the very contrary the real challenge to the world is that of Islam. If the Qur’an were merely a 7th-century text, its articulation of scientific truths—confirmed centuries later—remains unparalleled.

The Qur’an invites reflection, urging humanity to observe the universe and recognize the hand of the Creator in every celestial motion. As science progresses, it only further illuminates the wisdom embedded in divine revelation—an undeniable truth that continues to unfold before our eyes.

“[Certainly not! It is precisely this towards which the Qur’ān reminds;] it is a blessed book which We have revealed to you [O Prophet] so that people ponder on its verses and so that those endowed with intellect are reminded by it.” Qur’an (38:29)

 

Aamir Yazdani

Labelling Without Evidence: A Theological and Moral Reckoning

Labelling Without Evidence: A Theological and Moral Reckoning

In the modern age of information overload and polarized discourse, the temptation to quickly label others—especially those with whom we disagree—has become all too common. These labels, often handed out without sufficient reflection or verification, are not benign. They carry implications that can impact reputations, distort truths, and most importantly, erode our own moral compass. In theological terms, such misjudgments may carry significant weight before God.

One of the most egregious of these moral missteps is the act of attributing serious ideological positions to individuals without clear, substantiated evidence. This is not merely an ethical lapse—it is a direct violation of the principles of justice, fairness, and accountability that lie at the heart of the Islamic tradition.

The Danger of Speaking Without Knowledge

The Qur’ān warns believers time and again about the gravity of speaking without knowledge. In Surah al-Isrāʾ, God states:

“And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight, and the heart—about all those [one] will be questioned.” (Qur’ān 17:36)

This verse reminds us that not only our actions, but our thoughts, assumptions, and words will be held to account. Labelling someone with a charge as serious as theological deviance—or in some cases, heresy—without due process and personal verification is not a light matter. In fact, it is tantamount to bearing false witness, a sin of immense magnitude.

A Case in Point: Mr. Javed Ahmad Ghamidi

A striking example of this can be observed in the case of Mr. Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, a prominent contemporary Islamic scholar. For decades, particularly in South Asian religious discourse, Mr. Ghamidi has been routinely labelled as a Munkir-e-Hadith—a "rejector of Hadith." This label suggests that he denies the authenticity or authority of the Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) sayings and traditions.

However, this claim collapses under even minimal scrutiny. As someone who has personally attended Mr. Ghamidi’s weekly study sessions in Dallas, I can testify to the depth of his engagement with Hadith literature. His sessions are thoughtfully divided into three parts: a detailed exegesis of the Qur’ān, a rigorous study of Hadith texts, and an open Q&A. His treatment of Hadith is not cursory or dismissive—it is methodical, nuanced, and firmly rooted in the broader Islamic intellectual tradition.

To differ with a scholar’s interpretations is legitimate. To accuse them of rejecting a foundational source of Islam, however, demands compelling evidence—not hearsay or inherited opinion.

Disagreement in the Islamic Tradition

Islam not only permits but encourages intellectual engagement and difference of opinion. The Qur’ān is replete with exhortations to reflect and reason:

“[This is] a Book We have revealed to you, full of blessings, so that they may ponder its verses and so that those of understanding may take heed.” (Qur’ān 38:29)

The very act of pondering (tadabbur) is praised, and genuine differences that emerge from such reflection are part of the richness of our intellectual heritage. Scholars throughout Islamic history have held divergent views on theology, law, and Hadith methodology—yet the tradition preserved mutual respect and scholarly integrity.

The danger lies not in disagreement, but in reducing intellectual dissent to personal vilification.

The Moral Weight of Our Words

This issue ultimately returns us to a basic principle: the moral weight of our words. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reported to have said:

“Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day, let him speak good or remain silent.”
(Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī & Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim)

Before hastily labelling someone, especially in public discourse, we must ask ourselves: Do I possess direct evidence? Have I verified the claim? Am I being fair? God commands us in Surah al-Nisāʾ:

“O you who believe! Be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves…” (Qur’ān 4:135)

A Personal Resolution

As someone who has erred in this regard, I feel compelled to make a personal resolution: I must stop participating—actively or passively—in the labelling of others without conclusive evidence. This is not just a matter of social ethics; it is a matter of my accountability before God. If I am summoned on the Day of Judgment and asked for proof behind my words, what will I say?

Conclusion

To label someone without evidence is a moral and theological digression. In the age of viral opinions and snap judgments, we must return to the Islamic ethos of fairness, restraint, and personal accountability. Disagreement, when based on sound reasoning, is a mark of a healthy intellectual tradition. But when disagreement morphs into slander, it not only damages the individual but corrodes the very fabric of ethical discourse.

As Muslims and as thinkers, let us rise above hearsay, avoid the pitfalls of tribal polemics, and instead embody the Qur’ānic call to justice—even if it be against ourselves.

Aamir Yazdani