Terrorists aim to get a lot of people to pay attention to their cause; they don’t necessarily want a lot of people dead. Since they have neither large armies nor economic power, the terrorists’ political hopes lie in the success or failure of their propaganda (Livingstone, 1988, p.120). However, to get attention terrorists must terrorize, must escalate violence in order to capture or recapture headlines (Jenkins, 1985).

The state’s response to terrorism can be categorised as ‘legitimate’ ‘suppressive’ or ‘concessionary’. ‘Legitimate’ measures include the whole range of legal procedures and punishments, special but ‘irregular’ counter-terrorist forces assisted by special courts, special rights of surveillance and arrest, very specific media restrictions, visa controls, etc. ‘Suppressive’ measures can include punitive military strikes against the terrorists (if they can be located) or military or economic or diplomatic sanctions against foreign powers alleged to be supporting the terrorists, intensive propaganda campaigns, extensive media restrictions, etc. ‘Concession’, obviously, involves negotiating some sort of deal with the terrorists.

The state’s counter-terrorist strategy has four major aspects: deterrence; intelligence (early warning); defence; retaliation. Deterrence works on the assumption that the terrorists can be persuaded that the costs of their policy exceed the benefits. Typically, however, terrorists do not have identifiable assets against which the state can take or threaten action. Deterrent action is therefore usually directed against foreign powers allegedly involved in assisting or supporting the terrorists. Apart from the diplomatic and legal complications which may result from such deterrence, the state must also calculate how far action against the foreign power really would affect the terrorists themselves.

lntelligence aims primarily at early warning of what are by their very nature surprise military attacks. ‘Humint’ or covert human intelligence depends on infiltrating terrorist cells, a more hazardous and difficult task than against other types of enemy organizations. Also, information collected about terrorist activity is usually limited in quantity and quality.

Active defence, pre-emptive arrests or military strikes, depends on identification and early warning. Passive defence consists mostly of so-called ‘target hardening’, that is, making potential targets harder to reach and harder to damage. The financial costs of protecting embassies, airports, individual official or private buildings, are very high. Also, protective measures can seriously interfere with the operations of such institutions. Finally, target hardening can encourage terrorists to move to ‘softer’ targets, terrorists can attack anything, anywhere, at any time, whereas the state cannot secure everything, everywhere all the time. The terrorists, in short, retain an edge over state security forces and security measures (Kegley and Wittkopf, 1989, pp.417-18).

The political cost of retaliation against foreign powers allegedly supporting terrorists can be very high unless there is strong proof of such support (Ofri, 1984). Also, as above noted, retaliatory action of this kind may not always impinge upon the terrorists themselves and may, conceivably, exaggerate the importance of their cause and enhance support for it. It is worth noting, in this context, that the international law surrounding counter-terrorist action is problematic. First of all, it is vague. Secondly, three principles of international law have often worked in favour of terrorist groups and their supporters: the right of self- determination, the right of asylum, and the rule of non-interference in the affairs of other states.

The role of the mass media is a crucial one. The terrorists need publicity since their goal is to win support for their cause. The media generally see their role as checking or criticizing the state: in theory, not being on the side of the state can mean being on the terrorists’ side. State imposed media blackouts certainly do not work. Experts on terrorism have pointed out that this policy only forces terrorists to escalate violence until they do get the media attention. The state, therefore, aims to get the media on its side–to encourage media to focus on the horrors of terrorist acts, and to deny exposure to the terrorists’ cause. Extensive anti-terrorist media-coverage can be of great benefit to the state in providing the background which allows it to plan and carry out retaliatory or other measures, in particular to obtain special legal powers which the public might otherwise resist (Clawson, 1987).

‘The state sponsorship of terrorism’ is an accusation that has been exchanged between various states. For example, the US has accused the former Soviet Union, Cuba, Libya, Iran, North Korea and Syria among others, of the practice and has itself been accused of sponsoring terrorist activities in Vietnam, Chile, and Nicaragua, and, as an ally of Israel in many other places (Kegley and Witkopf, 1989, pp.418-19). The historical fact is that ‘terrorists’, according to the definition of one ideological or political purpose are, according to another, ‘freedom fighters’. There is no coherent or generally accepted set of criteria by which the terrorists can be defined as such. However, acts of terrorism can be identified, and it is generally accepted that such acts should be prevented and/or punished. The difficulty lies in how to do so.

The terrorists are hoping to provoke an over-reaction from the state so that it will appear repressive. But if the state is to counter terrorism effectively it may have to take strong and unpopular action, given that a weak response will give an impression of weak government. One way out of this dilemma is for the sate always to act through the normal processes of the courts and not be panicked into any hasty suspension of civil liberties.

One approach is vigorous police action against terrorists, short of a full military commitment but not altogether excluding military involvement–for example, commando-style raids to seize hijackers, relieve hostages, etc. Overt and full-scale military action against terrorists is more controversial–for very good reasons. The record of what might be termed cross-border, military, punitive responses to terrorist actions is not particularly encouraging. For one thing, the motives and consequences of such actions are liable to misinterpretation. Incursions into a foreign country by the forces of one power may provoke another power which has interests or ambitions in that country. Also, such incursions, however honourably motivated, may legitimize similar incursions by others which claim, falsely, the same motive of combatting or punishing terrorism. For example, only five weeks after the US raid on Libya of 14-15th April 1986, South African forces attacked a series of targets in Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Botswana, arguing that they were terrorist centres. Then, there is the difficulty of choosing the targets of such military-punitive raids. It is not at all easy to select suitable targets since relatively few potential targets are indisputably associated with terrorism (Freedman, 1986. pp.l9-22).

Although there is considerable evidence that military retaliation does deter terrorism to some degree, military force is certainly not the answer to every terrorist challenge. Both politically and militarily, the army is a crude instrument. It, at least partly, legitimizes terrorist demands to be treated as political or military prisoners rather than as criminals. Army involvement heightens public tension and creates a feeling that the situation is getting out of hand. What can a state then do to combat terrorism?

One is never sure, where, when, how terrorists will attack. The state should use special intelligence and anti-terrorist units rather than the army. Such units must operate, and be seen to operate, within the law and under the control of legitimate authorities of the state. If not, these units may themselves be labelled terrorist and lose public support for the state’s policy. Given that such units must be ‘undereover’, public supervision of their work is bound to be a difficult and delicate task.

A ‘no concession to terrorists’ attitude, although painful in hostage situations, has been proven to be effective. Following the experience of Irish security forces in 1975, a policy of ‘no deals’ and ‘no assaults’ in a hostage situation was found to work. The tactic used is to wear down the resistance and the morale of the terrorists. Negotiating with or giving in to terrorist demands is generally perceived by the public as weak government and leads to anxiety about what the next concession is going to be (Wilkinson, l988, p.l3l).

Domestic or internal acts of terrorism can usually be traced to minority groups who perceive themselves to be excluded from the political or economic rights and privileges enjoyed by the majority. It is self-evident that the legitimacy of the power and authority of the state will be challenged by grieved parties if their grievances cannot be redressed through the normal political channels. Similarly, international terrorism can flourish where the international system fails to satisfy the aspirations of people whose national or ethnic or religious-cultural rights (or hopes) are denied and, often, denied brutally. Terrorism is, insofar as one can generalize, the weapon of the desperately weak: the despair and the weakness need to be addressed if the causes of the problem, as well as its symptoms, are to be eradicated. The sad reality is that, despite the existence of international law, that law is relatively ineffective in controlling the ‘competition for power’ between powerful states. Sometimes overtly, sometimes covertly, terrorism is used as an instrument of foreign policy. To the extent that a foreign policy may be shared by a number of states, these states may agree to poll information and resources in the fight against terrorism (Borg, 1988, pp.11-12). But international co-operation achieved in this way is limited to the states who support or share foreign policy objectives–once the objectives are not shared, the co-operation becomes a pretence, terrorism again finds an ideological space to inhabit and a cause for which to seek attention and support. 

References 

• Borg, P. W. (1988) ‘The evolution of US. anti-Terrorism policy’ in Livingstone and Arnold (1988).
• Clawson, P. (1987) ‘We need more but better coverage of terrorism’, Orbis.
• Freedman, L.(1986) Terrorism and International Order, Routledge, New York.
• Jenkins, M. (1985) ‘Will terrorists go nuclear?’, Orbis.
• Kegley, C. W. And E.R. Wittkopf (1989) World Politics, St Martin’s Press, New York.
• Livingstone. C. Z. (1988) ‘New media strategies for addressing terrorism’ in Livingstone and Arnold (1988).
• Livingstone, C. Z. and E.T. Arnold. (1988) (eds) Beyond the Iran-Contra Crisis, Lexington Books.
• Ofri, A. (1984) ‘Intelligence and counter-terrorism’. Orbis.
• Wilkinson, P.(1986). Terrorism and the Liberal State, Macmillan, London.

The movie might be a fad, or a nine days’ wonder, simply another Spielberg special, like Jaws or E.T. However, this time the messages that the movie addresses have far-reaching consequences for mankind.

Thanks to Jurassic Park, our attention has been drawn to the recent achievements made in molecular biology and we have the opportunity to ponder how genetic engineering, in the hands of scientists who are apparently unrestrained by moral and ethical values, could threaten the ecological equilibrium of the planet and our very survival.

Let us consider the scientific advantages and ethical disadvantages of the advance of genetic engineering, by taking a look at the various applications of this knowledge in the modern world.

In Jurassic Park, John Hammond, played by Richard Attenborough, inspired by motives of forwarding the causes of science and making a profit, undertakes a scheme to clone living copies of dinosaurs from DNA extracted from fossilised, blood-sucking insects, preserved in amber. The origin of this idea was first proposed by George Poinar and his team at California University, Berkeley. In the last twenty years there have been many scientists working on the extraction of DNA from fossilized remains and the notion of obtaining dinosaur DNA in this way became feasible. Ironically, on the eve of the release of Jurassic Park, Poinar announced that his group had, in fact, extracted the first samples of genetic material from the age of the dinosaur. Using liquid nitrogen to crack open a sample of amber, DNA had been obtained from a weevil trapped 120 million years ago. Using gene-amplifying techniques, scientists are now able to make billions of copies of any piece of DNA.

I would like to draw your attention to two aspects of these scientific endeavors; firstly to the religious dimension and secondly to the wider ethical considerations of genetic engineering.

We must first ponder the notion that if it is possible for mortal human beings to produce synthetic RNA, one of the master-molecules in the nuclei of all cells, or to reproduce extinct animals by the retrieval of their DNA, surely it is possible for God, the All-Mighty, to recreate us from our bones on the Day of the Resurrection.

There are, of course, more secular ethical considerations in the application of genetic engineering. Today, scientists are experimenting with gene sequences and seem to have the ability to switch particular genetic codes on and off. By this means, science is on the brink of producing hybrid organisms in vitro. One recent experiment reported in The Economist (18th September 1993: pp.119-20) described how scientists were able to change the function of developing organs in four-hour-old fly embryos. One claim made recently is that the difference between man and chimpanzees is a few critical genes affecting intelligence. Are we to allow scientists, once these genes have been isolated, to create a hybrid intelligence? Are we ready to have these hybrid creatures living in our midst?

Will the Beast (Dabbah) mentioned in the Qur’an (al Naml, 27.82) be the result of such unrestrained scientific enquiry? What are the moral, ethical and religious implications of these advances?

When recent experiments on human cloning were publicized people seemed to worry, and worry deeply, about the horrific implications of duplicating a human embryo. This experiment is not the Jurassic Park-type cloning many might imagine. The worrying thing is that such technology really could pave the road to embryo factories to selling foetuses, freezing cloned foetuses for ‘spare organs’ that might be needed, or to be giving birth to genetically the same child at intervals, even to ‘maturing’ a twin cloned and stored for later use. According to Time’s survey 63% of people asked said human cloning is against God’s will; 90% of women stated that they would not be interested in cloning an embryo: a 58% said it is morally wrong (Time, 8 November 1993, pp.63-8).

In Jurassic Park, chaos theoretician Ian Malcolm, played by Jeff Goldblum, insists that what God has put asunder, no man should join together. Man should not interfere with the order of nature ordained by God and Malcolm says: ‘God created dinosaurs, God destroyed dinosaurs. God created Man, Man created dinosaurs’. Viewed in this perspective, can we foresee the consequences of interfering with this divine order, created by Allah in perfect balance? (al-Rahman, 55.8).

Today, genetic engineering is becoming a commercial enterprise in the hands of avaricious entrepreneurs and ethical considerations are being subverted by the desire for profit. The same technology is also being investigated to make tailor-made human organs, for transplantation into human patients. The specificity of these engineered organs would, in principle, avoid problems of rejection, as well as the practical and moral problems associated with human donors. This sounds good, but are we allowing ourselves, unhampered by moral considerations, to pave the way to a greater calamity?

Great advances have also been made in the field of agricultural genetics, with scientists trying to find answers to the problems of feeding a spiralling world population and of growing crops and raising cattle on poor soil or in adverse weather conditions. The Malthusian nightmare of populations being decimated by starvation has, to some extent, been averted in this century, although most of the benefits of these advances have been felt in the West where intensive farming of hardy crops and animal breeds have produced huge surpluses of food. For example, bovine growth hormone can be injected into dairy herds to give higher milk-yields and hybridization of crops has been used to produce strains which will grow in areas thought to have been useless for large-scale farming.

Genetic engineering in the field of producing vigorous or hardy varieties and breeds has signalled a new departure. Instead of the long, hit and miss processes of traditional hybridization, scientists are now able to isolate and transfer genetic material to improve the vigor of an organism or to increase its resistance to disease, insect damage or weed killers. Plants have been produced which fix their own nitrogen, as do natural legumes, and strains of bamboo have been reproduced which grow faster than the ‘natural’ varieties. All of this progress seems to suggest that yet another watershed has been reached in the realms of technology and productivity, which might offer benefits to all of mankind.

There is, however, another side to this coin. For example, hogs which have been treated with growth hormone are subject to gastric ulcers, arthritis, dermatitis and other diseases, making their already shortened lives a pain-ridden misery, and producing animals possibly unfit for human consumption. In Arable farming too, the production of herbicide-resistant crops encourages the indiscriminate spraying of chemicals on the land, increasing pollution of land and waterways. The agro-chemical companies are simply creating a ‘treadmill’ whereby new formulas are constantly needed to combat the new mutants of resistant pests.

Another environmental concern is that biotech agriculture will encourage the evasion of fundamental ecological reforms. If crop species can he easily bred to thrive in inhospitable conditions, farmers may fail to see the need to prevent environmental damage and simply wait for the scientists to engineer new crops or beasts to suit the new conditions. Would fish, genetically modified to flourish in acidified lakes, undercut the determination to clean up the air and water? Perhaps scientists should be concentrating more on the fundamental problems of the environment, rather than inventing palliatives to deal with the ravages of mankind. Surely it is better, for example, to find ways of conserving the rain forests than to invent ways of recreating their extinct flora and fauna?

Because of the limitless possibilities offered by the application of gene technology, DNA has become a corporate resource which can be patented and owned, designed in the laboratory and used to replace raw materials. This tendency may lead to the monopolization of genetic resources, placing control in the hands of multi-national giants whose main motive is profit, rather than with the people who need to use the technology to live.

Biotechnology will introduce a new era, greatly changing the way we live and the structure of our national economies. Food production in the laboratory will mean that traditional farming jobs will disappear–the EEC have already issued directives setting strict quotas for this type of production (EC Commission Directives 90/219 and 90/220). Consumers will also be directly affected and there is already a growing ‘grass-roots’ opposition to genetically engineered plants and animals. In the United States, for example, there have been moves to boycott such products and some restaurants have refused to serve genetically engineered foodstuffs. On 3rd October, l993, legislation came into force in Chicago obliging all food outlets to label genetically engineered food.

Studies in genetics are not confined to medicine and food production. In 1986, Professor Alec Jeffreys, of Leicester University in England, discovered that DNA is as individual as a finger-print and his research led to the genetic finger-printing techniques now established in forensic science. Samples of DNA taken from body fluids or tissues can provide an unmistakable ‘identity card’ and so assist in the conviction of offenders, particularly in cases of physical violence or sexual assault. DNA recovered from the victims of such crimes is now regarded by the British judicial system as highly reliable evidence and its use in the conviction of suspects is spreading, very rapidly, worldwide.

Even this seemingly overpoweringly beneficial use of genetic science has its dark side. The possibility of creating global genetic databases, with genetic information on all known criminals would appear to be an ideal solution in these times of escalating crime. However, there are issues of civil liberty to be tackled, and there is public resistance to such information being collated, using much the same arguments as have been used to resist the issuing of identity cards. There is also the problem of information held on these databases finding its way into the wrong hands. Again, mankind is faced with moral and ethical questions concerning the use and the abuse of technology.

Further Reading 

• BBC2 SERIES Cracking The Code: The Mouse That Laid The Golden Egg.
• HURREL, M. (1992) ‘Criminals Could Go On To World Blacklist’, The Times, 8 May, p.26.
• KENNEDY, P. (1993) Preparing for the Twenty-First Century, Harper-Collins Publishers, London, pp.65-8l.
• NASH, J. M. (1993) ‘How Did Life Begin?’, Time, 11 October, pp.53-9.
• RICHARD, M. et al. (1993) ‘Archaeology and Genetics: analyzing DNA from skeletal remains’. 25 (1) World Archaeology, pp.18-28
• TEICHMAN, D. L. (1993) Regulation of Recombinant DNA Research: a comparative study, 6 (1) Loyola Los Angeles International & Comparative Law, pp. l-35.
• TRUX, J. (1993) ‘A Case of Unmistakable Identity’, Observer, 13 August.
• WALKER, J. (1990) ‘DNA Profiling and Police Powers’, Criminal Law Review, pp. 479-93.
• TIME, (November 1993) ‘Cloning: Where Do We Draw The Line?’, pp.63-8.

Technology is the tool of civilization, and for Islamic civilization to have been such a leading force in the world for several centuries, it must have been based on important technological achievements.

The blossoming of science and culture in Islamic civilization was the result of the increasing quality of material life in its cities. The material prosperity, the varied local industries, the local and international trade, and the flourishing science and culture, in these cities, were all linked together, and would have been impossible without a developing technology. If Islam was the force behind the rise of cities, as is frequently asserted, then it was also the force behind all aspects of the prosperity of these cities and hence the technological efforts associated with it.

In addition to the positive effects of the ideology of Islam as a religion, Islam achieved a unique effect in the history of mankind. It united the civilizations and populations of the vast expanse of territory which lies between the borders of China and the Atlantic. This area comprised the lands of those ancient civilizations which were also the seat of later civilizations in the Near East, such as the Hellenistic. It remained under one government during the first centuries of Islam. Moreover, even after the rise of various dynasties, the region benefited from the cultural unity Islam provided. Islam abolished the barriers which had isolated these countries from each other, so that the whole area now had one religious tradition and one literary and scientific language. The cultural unity also ensured free passage and free trade from China in the east to Spain in the west. Scientists and men of letters were free to travel, and crossed vast distances to meet other scholars. Moreover, although the Umayyads in Spain did not acknowledge the Abbasid Caliphate in Baghdad, there always exited links between Spain and the Eastern territories under Islamic rule.

TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY

The traditional view of Western historians is that European culture is the direct descendant of the classical civilizations of Greece and Rome. According to this theory, the works of classical authors–mostly in Latin, but some in Greek–were preserved by the Church during the centuries that followed the fall of the Roman Empire, to re-emerge as a potent source of inspiration in the later middle Ages and the Renaissance. Few would deny the strong influence of classical literature on European thought. Until recently, the works of Homer, Thucydides and the Greek dramatists, of Tacitus, Virgil and Horace, to name but a few, were part of the cultural background of every educated European. In science, however, the situation is very different. During the sixth century after the Hijra (twelfth century CE) the writings of such scholars as al-Farabi, al-Ghazali, al-Farghani (Afragamus), Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and Ibn Rushd (Averroes) were translated into Latin, and became known and were esteemed in the West. The works of Aristotle, soon to become the predominant influence on European thought, were translated from the Arabic together with the commentaries of Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd to the medieval Europeans. These commentaries were as important as the works of Aristotle himself in forming European scientific and philosophical thought. Many other scientific works, which had originally been translated from Greek into Arabic centuries earlier, were now translated into Latin. However, most of these were from the Hellenistic period, and though they were written in Greek, their authors came from all the countries of the Near East and eastern Mediterranean. It seems, therefore, that some European writers, being deeply appreciative of the literary masterpieces of Greece and Rome, have been led to believe that Western civilization, in all its aspects, was based upon Greek and Roman foundations. This is not the case with science and technology.

Charles Singer has discussed some of the points already touched upon. The Graeco-Roman heritage was built upon the great civilizations of the Near East and, furthermore, the major achievements in science and technology that are called Hellenistic and Roman were mainly Near Eastern achievements due to the scholars and artisans of Egypt and Syria. The pre-Islamic civilizations from Spain to Central Asia and northern India were inherited by Islam. Under the influence of Islam and the Arabic language, the science and technology of these regions was developed and improved. Referring to the Eurocentrism of Western historians, Singer wrote: ‘Europe, however, is but a small peninsula extending from the great land masses of Afrasia. This is indeed its geographical status and this, until at least the thirteenth century CE, was generally also its technological status.’ In skill and inventiveness during most of the period CE 500 to 1500, Singer continues: ‘the Near East was superior to the West… For nearly all branches of technology the best products available to the West were those of the Near East… Technologically, the West had little to bring to the East. The technological movement was in the other direction.’ We shall now indicate (see, S. Charles, et al., A History of Technology, 8 vols, Oxford, 1954) how this technology transfer occurred, and give some examples of the transfer of ideas and techniques from Islam to the West.

The adoption by Europe of Islamic techniques is reflected by the many words of Arabic derivation that have passed into the vocabularies of European languages. In English these words have often, but not always, entered the language from Italian or Spanish. To cite but a few examples: in textiles–muslin, sarsanet, damask, taffeta, tabby; in naval matters–arsenal, admiral; in chemical technology–alembic, alcohol, alkali; in paper–ream; in foodstuffs–alfalfa, sugar, syrup, sherbet; in dyestuffs–saffron, kermes; in leather-working–Cordovan and Morocco. As one would expect, Spanish is particularly rich in words of Arabic origin, especially in connection with agriculture and irrigation. We have, for example, tahona for a mill, acena for a mill or water-wheel, acequia for an irrigation canal.

Many Arabic works on scientific subjects were translated into Latin in the later middle Ages. The translation bureau in Toledo in the twelfth century CE, where hundreds of such works were rendered into Latin, is a notable example of this activity. There was, unfortunately, nothing comparable in the field of technology, in which direct translations from Arabic were extremely rare. About CE 1277, in the court of Alfonso X of Castile, a work in Spanish entitled Li-bros del Saber de Astronomia was compiled under the direction of the King, with the declared objective of making Arabic knowledge available to Spanish readers. It includes a section on time keeping, which contains a weight-driven clock with a mercury escapement. We know from other sources that such clocks were constructed by Muslims in Spain in the eleventh century , that is about 250 years before the eight-driven clock appeared in northern Europe. About CE 1277 the secrets of Syrian glass-making were communicated to Venice under the terms of a treaty made between Bohemond VII, titular prince of Antioch, and the Doge. Such direct examples of technology transfer are still comparatively rare but more will undoubtedly come to light as research proceeds.

For the moment, we can indicate several points in space and time where the exchange of ideas took place. Relations between Christian Europe and the Islamic world were not always hostile. Muslim rulers were often enlightened men and tolerant towards their Christian subjects, an attitude enjoined upon them by the precepts of the Qur’an. Furthermore, commercial considerations led to the establishment of communities of European merchants settled in Byzantium, where they made contact with Swedish traders traveling down the Dnieper. There were particularly close commercial ties between Fatimid Egypt and the Italian town of Amalfi in the fourth and fifth centuries AH (tenth and eleventh centuries CE). The ogival arch, an essential element of Gothic architecture, entered Europe through Amalfi–the first church to incorporate such arches being built at Monte Casino in CE 1071. Some historians think that the influence of the Crusades on European culture has probably been exaggerated, but transmission certainly occurred, as we have seen in the case of Syrian glass-making. Certainly, however, the mast fruitful exchanges took place in the Iberian Peninsula, where over many centuries the generally tolerant rule of the Umayyad caliphs and their successors permitted friendly relationships between Muslims and Christians. Muslim operations in agriculture, irrigation, hydraulic engineering, and manufacture were an integral part of everyday life in the southern half of the peninsula, and passed from Spain into Italy and northern Europe. These transmissions were not checked by the Reconquista. Indeed, they were probably accelerated, since the Christians took over the Muslim installations and maintained them in running order in the ensuing centuries. The Muslim irrigation systems with their associated hydraulic works and water-raising machines remained as the basis for Spanish agriculture and were in due course transferred to the New World. Other installations passed into Christian hands. Industrial plants, such as the paper mill at Jativa near Valencia, were taken over. Two large water-clocks on the banks of the Tagus at Toledo were found by the Christians where they continued in operation for at least fifty years. These few examples must suffice as indicators of the passage of Muslim ideas into Europe.

CONCLUSION

The contributions of Islamic civilizations to science, notably mathematics and astronomy, have long been recognized. The application of this scientific expertise to technology, however, has been neglected. The story of Islamic technology is far from complete. Research in this area is still at an early stage and, notwithstanding what has been published so far, contributions by Islam to science and technology have yet to be fully revealed. During the nineteenth and the first quarter of the twentieth centuries, Western research into Islamic science yielded outstanding results, but only after a long period of silence has that interest now been revived. There is still a need for additional co-ordinated research if significant results are to be obtained. The field of alchemy/chemistry and chemical technology is a case in point. At present this is an almost totally neglected area in which few seem to have taken even a slight interest since the admirable research several decades ago of Kraus, Ruska, Stapleton and Wiedemann.

(For more information, see, A. Y. al-HASSAN and D. R. HILL, Islamic Technology: An Illustrated History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988.)

Although the disintegration of the Soviet Union has, largely, put an end to the end of Cold War, the world has not become more peaceful. The bloody disintegration of Yugoslavia and other savage conflicts have signaled the emergence of a new nationalism. In this context, to justify the use of force we frequently hear talk of self-determination and the rights of peoples.

Membership of the United Nations has increased sharply only twice in its history. The first time was in the late fifties and early sixties, at the people of the decolonization following the retreat of the Western imperial powers. The second time was after the disintegration of the Soviet empire and then, a little later, of Yugoslavia. In the latter case, the new sovereign nation-states were not colonies achieving a new independence.

It is thought that the latest increase in the number of nation-states will encourage distinct communities within larger states to seek some measure of independence. Although the legal right for self-determination as the basis for the use of force to gain independence is not new, it would be wrong to deny that the use of force is now perceived as a likely means of realizing full independence or some degree of autonomy. That perception is surely one of the strongest reasons behind many of the conflicts currently stretching taking place in Bosnia- Herzegovina, Nagorno-Karabakh, Palestine, Kashmir, Northern Iraq, Somalia, Dniester region of Moldova, the Abkhazian region of Georgia, etc. These are only some of the hot spots which have one, or more than one group of people engaged in armed struggle for independence. Of course the list could easily be enlarged.

Language is certainly a decisive factor in the assertion of ethnic identity. According to the Summer Institute of Linguistics, Dallas, Texas, there are 6,170 languages spoken in the world at this time (Grimes (ed). 1988, p.vii: quoted in Moynihan, 1933, p.72) However, there are only 184 states in the world, the latest additions being Eritrea, Monaco and Andorra.

The steady increase in the number of nation-states indicates that the process of state-building is far from over. International analysts John O’Loughlin and Herman van der Wusten expect the number to reach around 250 by the middle of the next century (O’Loughin and Van der Wusten, in Taylor (ed). 1993, p.l08). The way that number will be attained is likely to be by using force. That likelihood alone is enough reason for taking the issue very seriously. For, as the number of nation-states increases, so too do the chances of war between them as the conflicts of interest between the states become more complicated.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, it was a self-evident truth that wars, strictly speaking, could only be engaged in by established states. Other terms were used to describe other forms of violence such as insurrection, civil unrest, piracy, or rebellion. At most, there was ‘civil war’ where the adjective modified the idea and the law which applied.

Especially after the Second World War, opinions about what constitutes war and which entities in the international arena may wage war have altered. The swift break-up of colonial empires and the increasing consensus that there was a right of peoples to self-determination have led some to the view that wars of national liberation are international wars, albeit they are not inter-state wars (Wilson, 1988, p.134). It can he convincingly argued that the rules governing the Legitimacy of resort to force (jus ad bellum) and the rules governing the conduct of hostilities (jus in bello) have changed markedly since the Second World War and especially since 1960.

As the ethnic conflicts spread around the world, they are becoming another source of human misery in the aftermath of the Cold War. It is a reality of our time that secessionist, irridentist, and national liberation wars are the greatest killers-either directly through bloodshed or indirectly through hunger or disease stemming from such wars (Farley, 1986, p. 139). O’Loughlin and Van der Wusten hold that the causes of wars after the 1990s will most probably be ethno-nationalist disputes (Taylor (ed.), 1993, p.106), that is, related to national liberation or separatist movements. For the last two years, we have been witnessing through the nastiest example of such a conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Unless a remedy is found to these ethnic disputes, the peoples of the earth will not experience in the foreseeable future the peace that seemed to be, to so many, the promise of the end of the Cold War era. 

References

• FARLEY, Lawrence T. (1986) Plebiscites and Sovereignty: the Crisis of Political Illegitimacy, Westview Press, London.
• GRIMES, Barbara F.( ed) ( 1988) Ethnologue:Languages of the World. Summer Institute of Linguistics. Dallas.
• O’LOUGHLIN, J. & VAN DER WUSTEN, H. (1993) ‘Political geography of war and peace’, in Taylor(ed.)
• TAYLOR, Peter J. (1993) Political Geography of The Twentieth Century, Belhaven Press, London.
• MOYNIHAN, DANIEL P. (1993) Pandemonium:Ethnicity in International Politics, Oxford Univercity Press.
• WILSON, Heather A. (1988) International Law and the Use of Force by National Liberation Movements, Clarendon Press.

We have described elsewhere the chain of divine wonders in the structure of the earth. The 23.5 degrees inclination of its axis is a matter for such delicate computation that it is possible for neither physics nor philosophy to pre-calculate it. For example, if the earth was inclined 25 degrees, the polar caps would melt in a few hundred years, and the oceans would be flooded with ice. If the slant was 22 degrees, on the other hand, Arctic ice would invade the whole of Europe, and life would be possible only in the equatorial regions of the earth. The All-Mighty emphasizes this important insight at the beginning of the verse in the description of spreading out and ordering.

Again, this spreading out and ordering of the earth is closely related to its rotation on its axis every 24 hours. If the earth had completed one revolution every 30 hours, such tremendous winds would have ensued that the earth would have become a hurricane-ridden desert for living things. If, on the contrary, the earth had rotated every 20 hours, most plants would have been unable to complete their biological activity and fallen victim to droughts.

The spreading out and ordering mentioned in the first part of the sacred verse, then, is obtained for the rotation of the earth by the harmonious inclination of the earth’s axis. This result, if ever, if left to chance could be achieved, if ever only after millions of trials.

God’s presentation, in various parts of the Qur’an of His marvels of order and measure, aims at closing all doors to unbelief with the mathematical and physical order of the earth and the universe.

The most significant message of the verse is the proper balance of things produced from the earth. What are these things, and what are these harmonious measures?

Scientific research to date links the chain of life to the balanced interactions between plants, animals and bacteria. The bacteria are charged with transferring nitrogen from animals to plants. Plants produce the oxygen needed by animals and other organisms, and animals supply both carbon dioxide and–through bacteria–nitrogen to plants.

While the chain of life proceeds in this manner, it is imperative that the proportion of oxygen in the air remains close to 20%. This is where the most delicate of subtleties begins. All smoke and exhalations are converted by plants into oxygen. One would need a computer to calculate the ratio of plant species needed to maintain the oxygen in the air at 20%.

There has to be a divine computer that can regulate the amount of plants needed for the smoke from chimneys and the oxygen consumption of humans and provide the necessary oxygen to the air. This incredible calculation can only be considered as a divine miracle. The Qur’an declares: ‘The things produced in the earth are subject to proper balance’ and its wisdom reaches us across a gulf of fourteen centuries, from a time when none of the above facts were known.

Millions of years ago, a vast blanket of flora covered the earth. The purpose of this was to increase the oxygen balance of the atmosphere. Dinosaurs, the animals benefitting from these plants, roamed on earth. Finally, the oxygen ratio began to exceed 20%. The consumption of the plants by dinosaurs and their exhalation of carbon dioxide was no longer able to balance the gigantic production of oxygen by the plants.

At this point, a vast geological upheaval occurred, and both the flora and the dinosaurs vanished from the face of the earth. Then, God produced all fish, birds and mammals at the same time. (That is the latest valid hypothesis, the views of the diehard evolutionists having been superseded some time ago.)

As the verse tells us, the volume of plants is in such harmonious balance that a tree has been assigned to purify the fumes of every smoking chimney. Man–including those who think they believe–is in such heedlessness that he can never fathom these delicate calculations of Divine Omniscience, and for this reason cannot intuit the secret of ‘Provider of the worlds.’ The respect, accorded in Islam to trees and the importance assigned to planting new trees stand in recognition of the above facts.

Let me now provide some further incredible calculations.

For nearly every illness, the Great Creator has fashioned a plant or microbe as a cure. How can the ignorant, altogether lacking evidence, call this system a coincidence! To create the earth, to settle human beings there, and then to keep ready all the botanical and bacterial remedies for all their ailments in the laboratories of nature!

There are enough foxglove plants in the world to provide digitalis to cure all heart patients. There are also enough hashish plants to ease the sufferings of all the painfully ill, yet the medicine of that plant has become black market stuff under the pressure of heedless selfishness and is used to provide pleasure for the lunatic fringe.

Another example of the things produced in harmonious balance in the earth: until about a hundred years ago, firewood met the heating and energy requirements of men. If coal and oil had not been discovered, the forests would all have been the last of their kind on earth. But just at the right moment, the divine computer delivered the coal and later, the oil, that it had prepared millions of years ago, and in such measure as to provide enough for all human beings. Unfortunately man, the prisoner of egotism, is now preparing for the greatest war in history with oil as the centre of the controversy. And what of the House of Islam? Because it has not truly embraced the Qur’an, because it has been unable to understand it and to realize new scientific advances, it now stands dazed, looking in bewilderment at even the wealth gushing from its own backyard.

Let us now look at the proper balance of the earth’s constitution in terms of its metals.

We do not know the proportions of metals in the central core of the earth and the liquid mantle surrounding it. But in the crust on which we live, the elements are distributed in such proportion that it is as if a scientific committee had provided a shopping list and the orders had been met by an infinitely powerful factory. Each substance is present in the earth’s crust to the exact proportion that the level of civilization ordained by God demands. Compounds of silicon, iron and potassium are the basic substances for residential construction. If even one of these had been missing, we could not have cities.

Until recently we didn’t know what blessing water is. Today we know that the calcium bicarbonate in water is the best organizer of digestion. Vital substances such as salt are distributed over the earth in such proportion that man has almost arrived in a fully equipped biological laboratory.

Have you ever considered that sea water has been evaporating, and then returning to the seas by rivers, for millions of years? During this process, new substances are transported to the seas from land, and yet the composition of sea water never changes. Observe the magnificence of this miracle of the divine computer: millions of events take place, yet the harmonious balance imposed by God on the earth’s produce does not change. For the Guarded Tablet is also, in a sense, a law of the Qur’an.

Returning to metals, there are some whose names have been heard of only in the last 150 years, such as beryllium, uranium, cadmium, tungsten, tantalum and gallium. When these were first discovered, everyone regarded them merely as laboratory curiosities. Only later was it realized that these are the indispensable building blocks of advanced technology. From the utilization of atomic energy to high temperature technological activities, each one of these metals represents some essential property, and their presence on earth is adjusted according to the part they were predestined to play.

One of the greatest wonders of the planet earth, which the All-Mighty furnished before lowering man upon it, are the radioactive substances of the world. These are present in the earth’s crust in such perfect proportion that its measure could not be ordered by any scientific committee. On the one hand, there is uranium-235 to provide nuclear power, safe in its natural setting yet dangerous when purified; on the other hand, carbon-14 to enable biological activity. And how wonderful are mineral springs whose waters, which bear moderate amounts of radioactive substances, dispense health to millions of people all over the world.

Consider what we have said about the radioactivity of the earth from the reverse point of view. If uranium had been present in the earth in the form of its uranium-235 isotope exclusively, the world would have become a witch’s cauldron a short time after it was formed. On the other hand, if uranium-235 had not been present in uranium-238 in the proportion of 0.7%, we could not have obtained atomic energy. God has invested uranium-235 with such a characteristic that it can be converted to nuclear power only when it is separated, and does not pose a danger in its natural matrix in uranium-238.

Many biological events could not take place, but for the presence of carbon-14 in the atmosphere. If this substance, which has a proportion of one ppm (parts per million), had been slightly more common, it would have constituted a lethal hazard. And if the sodium-24 isotope were present in mineral springs, taking a bath would be like being present at Hiroshima when they dropped the bomb. Although the main substance in mineral springs is sodium, its isotopes other than sodium-24 are predominant.

Indeed, we could never exhaust commentary on this verse if we were to fill volumes. I have therefore been content to offer only a short summary. Let us read and re-read it with due reverence and wonder:

‘We have given the produce of the earth in harmonious balance and proper proportion.’

One argument is that the fundamental source of conflict in this new phase will not be political or economic ideology. The great divisions among humankind and the dominant source of conflict will be civilizational or cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful agents in world politics, but the principal conflicts will occur between groups of nations and peoples of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics.

A civilization is the broadest notion of identity people have of themselves, short of that which distinguishes humans from other species. It is composed both of objective elements, such as religion, language, customs, institutions, and of subjective elements, subjective notions of belonging.

Civilizations are meaningful entities, and while the lines between them are seldom sharp, they are nonetheless real. Civilizations are dynamic: they rise and fall; they divide and merge.

Civilizational identity will be increasingly important in the future, and the world will be shaped in large measure by the interactions among seven or eight major civilizations. These include the Islamic, Western, Japanese, Confucian, Hindu, Slav-Orthodox, Latin American and possibly African, civilizations. The most important conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural fault lines separating these civilizations from one another.

Why will this be the case?

Civilizations are differentiated from each other by history, language, customs and tradition, and, most important, religion. Differences do not necessarily mean conflict, and conflict does not necessarily mean violence. Over centuries, however, differences among civilizations have generated the most prolonged and the most violent conflicts.

The world is becoming a smaller place. The interactions between peoples of different civilizations are increasing; these increasing interactions intensify civilization consciousness and awareness of differences as well as commonalities.

The processes of economic modernization and social change throughout the world are alienating people from long-standing local identities. They are also weakening the nation state as a source of identity. In much of the world, religion has moved in to fill this gap, often in the form of revival movements that are labeled ‘fundamentalist’. Such movements are mostly found in Western Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism, although Islam is intentionally blamed for such movements. In most countries and most religions, the people active in this kind of movements are young, college-educated, middle-class technicians, professional and business persons.

The growth of civilization-consciousness is enhanced by the global reach of the West. The West is at a peak of power. Perhaps precisely because of that, among the peoples of non- Western civilizations, there is a growing movement to return to their ‘roots’ .One hears increasingly of a turning inward away from failed Western ideas of socialism and nationalism, in particular of ‘re-Islamization’ of the Middle East and Africa.

Cultural characteristics are less mutable, therefore less easily compromised, and the differences between them less easily resolved than political and economic differences. An individual can be half-Arab and half-French, but it is more difficult to be half-Muslim and half-Catholic.

Finally, the importance of regional economic blocs is likely to continue to increase in the future and to reinforce civilization-consciousness. Economic regionalism is likely to succeed only when it is rooted in a common civilization. Thus, the European Community rests on the shared foundation of European culture and Western Christianity. Similarly, culture and religion form the basis of the Economic Co-operation Organization (ECO), which has brought together ten non-Arab Muslim countries: Turkey, Pakistan, Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgzstan, Turkmenistan, Tadjikistan, Uzbekistan and Afghanistan.

As people define their identity in ethnic and religious terms, they are likely to see an ‘us’ and ‘them’ relation between themselves and people of different ethnicity or religion. The end of ideologically defined states in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union has allowed traditional ethnic identities and animosities to come to the fore. Differences in culture and religion create differences over policy issues, ranging from human rights to immigration, trade and commerce to the environment. Most important, the efforts of the West to promote its values of democracy and liberalism as universal values, to maintain its military predominance and to advance its economic interests, provoke countering responses from other civilizations. Decreasingly able to mobilize support and form coalitions on the basis of political ideology, governments and groups will increasingly attempt to mobilize support by appealing to shared civilizational and religious identity.

The clash of civilizations thus occurs at two levels. At the micro-level, adjacent groups along the fault lines between civilizations struggle, often violently, over the control of territory and population. At the macro-level, states from different civilizations compete for relative military and economic power, for control of international institutions and third parties, and competitively promote their particular values. 

*See S. P. Huntingdon’s article, ‘The Clash of Civilizations?’, Foreign Affairs, Summer 1993, Volume 72, Number 3, pp.22- 49

‘O people of Quraysh! It is God who has created the sheep. He it is who has sent down rain from the skies of which they drink and He has caused fodder to grow from the earth with which they are fed. Then even so you slaughter them in names other than His. Indeed, I see that you are an ignorant people.’

Zayd’s uncle al-Khattab, the father of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, seethed with anger. He strode up to Zayd, slapped him on the face and shouted:

‘Damn you! We still hear from you such stupidity. We have borne it until our patience is exhausted.’

Al-Khattab then incited a number of violent people to harass and persecute Zayd and make life extremely uncomfortable for him.

These incidents which took place before Muhammad’s call to prophethood gave a foretaste of the bitter conflict that was to take place between the upholders of truth and the stubborn adherents of idolatrous practices. Zayd was one of the few men, known as hunafa’ (sing. hanif,), who saw these idolatrous practices for what they were. Not only did he refuse to take part in them himself but he refused to eat anything that was sacrificed to idols. He proclaimed that he worshipped the God of Ibrahim and, as the above incident showed, was not afraid to challenge his people in public.

On the other hand, his uncle al-Khattab was a staunch follower of the old pagan ways of the Quraysh and he was shocked by Zayd’s public disregard for the gods and goddesses they worshipped. So he had him hounded and persecuted to the point where he was forced to leave the valley of Makka and seek refuge in the surrounding mountains. He even appointed a band of young men whom he instructed not to allow Zayd to approach Makka or enter the Sanctuary.

Zayd only managed to enter Makka in secret. There, unknown to the Quraysh, he met with people like Waraqah ibn Nawfal, Abdullah ibn Jahsh, ‘Uthman ibn al-Harith and Umaymah bint ‘Abd al-Muttalib, the paternal aunt of Muhammad ibn Abdullah. They discussed how deeply immersed the Arabs were in their misguided ways. To his friends, Zayd spoke thus:

‘Certainly, by God, you know that your people have no valid grounds for their beliefs and that they have distorted and transgressed from the religion of Ibrahim (Abraham). Adopt a religion which you can follow and which can bring you salvation.’

Zayd and his companions then went to Jewish rabbis and Christian scholars and people of other communities in an effort to learn more and go back to the pure religion of Ibrahim.

Of the four persons mentioned, Waraqah ibn Nawfal became a Christian. Abdullah ibn Jahsh and Uthman ibn al-Harith did not arrive at any definite conclusion. Zayd ibn ‘Amr, however, had quite a different story. Finding it impossible to stay in Makka, he left the Hijaz and went as far as Mosul in the north of Iraq, and from there south-west into Syria. Throughout his journeys, he always questioned monks and rabbis about the religion of Ibrahim. He found no satisfaction until he came upon a monk in Syria who told him that the religion he was seeking did not exist any longer, but the time was now near when God would send forth, from his own people whom he had left, a Prophet who would revive the religion of Ibrahim. The monk advised him that, should he see this Prophet he should have no hesitation in recognizing and following him.

Zayd retraced his steps and headed for Makka intending to meet the expected Prophet. As he was passing through the territory of Lakhm on the southern border of Syria, he was attacked by a group of nomad Arabs and killed before he could set eyes on the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace. However, before he breathed his last, he raised his eyes to the heavens and said:

‘O Lord, if You have prevented me from attaining this good, do not prevent my son from doing so.’

When Waraqah heard of Zayd’s death, he is said to have written an elegy in praise of him. The Prophet also commended him and said that on the day of Resurrection ‘he will be raised as having, in himself alone, the worth of a whole people.’

God, may He be glorified, heard the prayer of Zayd. When Muhammad the Messenger of God rose up inviting people to Islam, Zayd’s son Sa’id was in the forefront of those who believed in the Oneness of God and who affirmed their faith in the prophethood of Muhammad. This is not strange, for Sa’id grew up in a household which repudiated the idolatrous Quraysh and he was instructed by a father who spent his life searching for Truth and who died in its pursuit.

Sa‘id was not yet twenty when he embraced Islam. His young and steadfast wife Fatima, daughter of al-Khattab and sister of ‘Umar, also accepted Islam early. Evidently both Sa‘id and Fatima managed for some time to conceal their acceptance of Islam from the Quraysh and especially from Fatima’s family. She had cause to fear not only her father but her brother ‘Umar who was brought up to venerate the Ka’ba and to cherish the inseparability of the Quraysh and their religion.

‘Umar was a headstrong young man of great determination. He saw Islam as a threat to the Quraysh and became most violent and unrestrained in his attacks on Muslims. He finally decided that the only way to put an end to the trouble was to eliminate the man who was its cause. Goaded on by blind fury, he took up his sword and headed for the Prophet’s house. On his way he came face to face with a secret believer in the Prophet who, seeing ‘Umar’s grim expression, asked him where he was going.

‘I am going to kill Muhammad,’ ‘Umar answered.

There was no mistaking his bitterness and murderous resolve. The believer sought to dissuade him from his intent but ‘Umar was deaf to any arguments. He then thought of diverting ‘Umar in order to at least to gain time to warn the Prophet of his intentions.

‘O ‘Umar,’ he said, ‘Why not first go back to the people of your own house and set them to rights?’

‘What people of my house?’ asked ‘Umar.

‘Your sister Fatima and your brother-in-law Sa‘id. They have both forsaken your religion and are followers of Muhammad in his religion…’

‘Umar turned and made straight for his sister’s house.

There he called out to her angrily as he approached. Khabbab ibn al-Aratt who often came to recite the Qur’an to Sa‘id and Fatima was with them then. When they heard ‘Umar’s voice, Khabbab hid in a corner of the house and Fatima concealed the manuscript. But ‘Umar had heard the sound of their reading and when he came in, he said to them:

‘What is this haynamah (gibbering) I heard?’

They tried to assure him that it was only normal conversation that he had heard, but he insisted:

‘Hear it I did,’ he said, ‘and it is possible that you have both become renegades.’

‘Have you not considered whether the truth is not to be found in your religion?’ said Sa‘id to ‘Umar trying to reason with him. Instead, ‘Umar set upon his brother-in-law hitting and kicking him as hard as he could and when Fatima went to the defence of her husband, ‘Umar struck her a blow on her face which drew blood.

‘O ‘Umar,’ said Fatima, angrily. ‘What if the truth is not in your religion! I bear witness that there is no god but Allah and I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of God.’

Fatima’s wound was bleeding, and when ‘Umar saw the blood he was sorry for what he had done. A change came over him and he said to his sister:

‘Give me that script which you have that I may read it.’ Like them, ‘Umar could read, but when he asked for the script, Fatima said to him:

‘You are impure and only the pure may touch it. Go and wash yourself or do ablution.’

‘Umar went and washed himself, and she gave him the page on which was written the opening verses of Surah Ta Ha. He began to read it and when he reached the verse,

Verily, I-I alone-am God, there is no deity but Me. So, worship Me alone, and be constant in prayer so as to remember Me.

He said:

‘Show me where Muhammad is.’

‘Umar then made his way to the house of al-Arqam and declared his acceptance of Islam and the Prophet and all his companions rejoiced.

Sa‘id and his wife Fatima were thus the immediate cause which led to the conversion of the strong and determined ‘Umar and this added substantially to the power and prestige of the emerging faith.

Sa‘id ibn Zayd was totally devoted to the Prophet and the service of Islam. He witnessed all the major campaigns and encounters in which the Prophet engaged, except Badr. Before Badr, he and Talha were sent by the Prophet as scouts to Hawra on the Red Sea coast due west of Madina to bring him news of a Quraysh caravan returning from Syria. When Talha and Sa‘id returned to Madina the Prophet had already set out for Badr with the first Muslim army of just over three hundred men.

After the passing away of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, Sa‘id continued to play a major role in the Muslim community. He was one of those whom Abu Bakr consulted on his succession and his name is often linked with such companions as ‘Uthman, Abu ‘Ubaydah and Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas in the campaigns that were waged. He was known for his courage and heroism, a glimpse of which we can get from his account of the Battle of Yarmuk. He said:

‘For the Battle of Yarmuk, we were twenty-four thousand or thereabouts. Against us, the Byzantine mobilized one hundred and twenty thousand men. They advanced towards us with a heavy and thunderous movement as if mountains were being moved. Bishops and priests strode before them bearing crosses and chanting litanies which were repeated by the soldiers behind them.

‘When the Muslims saw them mobilised thus, they became worried by their vast numbers and something of anxiety and fear entered their hearts. Thereupon, Abu ‘Ubaydah stood before the Muslims and urged them to fight.

“Worshippers of God,” he said, “help God and God will help you and make your feet firm.”

“Worshippers of God, be patient and steadfast for indeed patience and steadfastness (sabr) is a salvation from unbelief, a means of attaining the pleasure of God and a defence against ignominy and disgrace.

“Draw out your spears and protect yourselves with your shields. Don’t utter anything among yourselves but the remembrance of God Almighty until I give you the command, if God wills.”

‘Thereupon a man emerged from the ranks of the Muslims and said:

“I have resolved to die this very hour. Have you a message to send to the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace?”

“Yes” replied Abu Ubaydah, “convey salam to him from me and from the Muslims and say to him: ‘O Messenger of God, we have found true what our Lord has promised us.”

As soon as I heard the man speak and saw him unsheathe his sword and go out to meet the enemy, I threw myself on the ground and crept on all fours and with my spear I felled the first enemy horseman racing towards us. Then I fell upon the enemy and God removed from my heart all traces of fear. The Muslims engaged the advancing Byzantine and continued fighting until they were blessed with victory.’

Sa‘id was ranked by the Prophet as one of the outstanding members of his generation. He was among ten of the companions whom the Prophet visited one day and promised them Paradise. These were Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, Abu ‘Ubaydah, Talha al-Zubayr, Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas, and Sa‘id the son of Zayd the Hanif. The books of the Prophet’s sayings have recorded his great praises of the Promised Ten (al- ‘asharatu al-mubashsharun), and indeed of others to whom, on other occasions, he also gave good tidings of Paradise.

First of all, it is useful to recall why the institution of slavery is thought of or remembered with such revulsion. Images of the brutal treatment of slaves, especially in ancient Rome and Egypt, provokes sorrow and deep disgust. That is why even after so many centuries, our conception of slaves is of men and women carrying stones to the pyramids and being used up in the building process like mortar, or fighting wild animals in public arenas for the amusement of their owners. We picture slaves wearing shameful yokes and chains around their necks.

Nearer modern times there is the practice of slavery on an enormous scale by the Western European nations; the barbarity and bestiality of this trade beggars all description. The trade was principally in Africans who were transported across the oceans, packed in specially designed ships, thought of and treated exactly like livestock. These slaves were forced to change their names and abandon their religion and their language, were never entitled to hope for freedom, and were kept, again like livestock, for hard laboring or for breeding purposes-a birth among them was celebrated as if it were a death. It is difficult to understand how human beings could conceive of fellow human beings in such a light, still less treat them thus. But it certainly happened: there is much documentary evidence that shows, for example, how ship-masters would throw their human cargo overboard in order to claim compensation for their loss. Slaves had no rights in law, only obligations: their owners had absolute rights over them to dispose of them as they wished-brothers and sisters, parents and children, would be separated or allowed to stay togather according to the owner’s mood or his economic convenience.

After centuries of this dreadful practice had made the West European nations rich from exploitation of such commodities as sugar, cotton, coffee, they abolished slavery-they abolished it, with much self-congratulation, first as a trade, then altogether. Yet the Muslim regions had also known considerable prosperity through the exploitation of sugar, cotton, coffee (these words in European languages are of Arabic origin), and achieved that prosperity without the use of slave labour. More important, let us also note, when the Europeans abolished slavery, it was the slave-owners who were compensated, not the slaves-in other words, the attitude to fellow human beings which allowed such treatment of them had not changed. It was not many years after the abolition of slavery that Africa was directly colonized by the Europeans with consequences for the Africans no less terrible than slavery itself. Further, because the attitude to non-Europeans has changed little, if at all, in modem times, their social and political condition remains, even where they live amid the Europeans and their descendants as fellow-citizens, that of despised inferiors. It is barely a couple of decades since the anthropological museums in the great capitals of the Western countries ceased to display, for public entertainment, the bones and stuffed bodies of their fellow human beings. And such displays were not organized by the worst among them, but by the best-the scientists, doctors, learned men, humanitarians.

In short, it is not only the institution of slavery that causes revulsion in the human heart, it is the attitudes of inhumanity which sustain it. And the truth is, if the institution no longer formally exists but the attitudes persist, then humanity has not gained much, if at all. That is why colonial exploitation replaced slavery, and why the chains of unbearable, unrepayable international debt have replaced colonial exploitation: only slavery has gone, its structures of inhumanity and barbarism are still securely in place. Before we turn to the Islamic perspective on slavery, let us recall a name famous even among Western Europeans, that of Harun al-Rashid, and let us recall that this man who enjoyed such authority and power over all Muslims was the son of a slave woman. Nor is he the only such example; slaves and their children enjoyed enormous prestige, authority and respect within the Islamic system, in all areas of life, cultural as well as political. How could this have come about?

Islam amended and educated the institution of slavery and the attitudes of masters to slaves. The Qur’an taught in many verses that all human beings are descended from a single ancestor, that none has an intrinsic right of superiority over another, whatever his race or his nation or his social standing. And from the Prophet’s teaching, upon him be peace, the Muslims learnt these principles, which they applied both as laws and as social norms:

• Whosoever kills his slave, he shall be killed. Whosoever imprisons his slave and starves him, he shall be imprisoned and starved himself, and whosoever castrates his slave shall himself be castrated. (Abu Dawud, Diyat, 70; Tirmidhi, Diyat, 17; Al-Nasa’i, Qasama, 10, 16)
• You are sons of Adam and Adam was created from clay. (Tirmidhi, Tafsir, 49; Manaqib, 73; Abu Dawud, Adab, 111)
• You should know that no Arab is superior over a non-Arab and, no non-Arab is superior over any Arab, no white is superior over black and no black is superior over white. Superiority is by righteousness and God-fearing [alone]. (Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, 411)

Because of this compassionate attitude, those who had lived their whole lives as slaves and who are described in ahadith as poor and lowly received respect from those who enjoyed high social status (Muslim, Birr, 138; Jannat, 48; Tirmidhi, Manaqib, 54. 65). ‘Umar was expressing his respect in this sense when he said: ‘Master Bilal whom Master Abu Bakr set free’ (Bukhari. Fada’il al-Sahaba, 23). Islam (unlike other civilizations) requires that slaves are thought of and treated as within the framework of universal human brotherhood, and not as outside it. The Prophet, upon him be peace, said:

• Your servants and your slaves are your brothers. Anyone who has slaves should give them from what he eats and wears. He should not charge them with work beyond their capabilities. If you must set them to hard work, in any ease I advise you to help them. (Bukhari, Iman, 22: Adab, 44; Muslim, Iman, 38:40; Abu Dawud, Adab, 124)
• Not one of you should [when introducing someone] say ‘This is my slave’, ‘This is my concubine’. He should call them ‘my daughter’ or ‘my son’ or ‘my brother’. (Ibn Hanbal, Musnad. 2, 4)

For this reason ‘Umar and his servant took it in turns to ride on the camel from Madina to Jerusalem on their journey to take control of Masjid al-Aqsa. While he was the head of the state, ‘Uthman had his servant pull his own ears in front of the people since he had pulled his. Abu Dharr, applying the hadith literally, made his servant wear one half of his suit while he himself wore the other half. From these instances, it was being demonstrated to succeeding generations of Muslims, and a pattern of conduct established, that a slave is fully a human being, not different from other people in his need for respect and dignity and justice.

This constructive and positive treatment necessarily had a consequence on the attitudes of slaves to their masters. The slave as slave still retained his humanity and moral dignity and a place beside other members of his master’s family. When (we shall explain how below) he obtained his freedom, he did not necessarily want to leave his former master. Starting with Zayd bin Harith, this practice became quite common. Although our Prophet, upon him be peace, had given Zayd his freedom and left him a free choice, Zayd preferred to stay with him. Masters and slaves were able to regard each other as brothers because their faith enabled them to understand that the worldly differences between people are a transient situation-a situation justifying neither haughtiness on the part of some, nor rancour on the part of others. There were, in addition, strict principles enforced as law:

Whosoever kills his slave, he shall be killed, whosoever imprisons his slave and starves him, he shall be imprisoned and starved himself.

Beside such sanctions which made the master behave with care the slave also enjoyed the legal right to earn money and hold property independently of his master, the right to keep his religion and to have a family and family life with the attendant rights and obligations. As well as personal dignity and a degree of material security, the Islamic laws and norms allowed the slave a still more precious opening-the hope and means of freedom.

Human freedom is by Allah, that is, it is the natural and proper condition which must be regarded as the norm. Thus, to restore a human life, wholly or partly, to this condition is one of the highest virtues. To set free half of a slave’s body has been considered equal to saving half of one’s own from wrath in the next world. In the same way to set free a slave’s whole body is considered equal to assurance of one’s whole body. Seeking freedom for enslaved people is one of the causes for which the banner of war may be raised in Islam. Muslims were encouraged by their faith to enter into agreements and contracts which enabled slaves to earn or be granted their freedom at the expiry of a certain term or, most typically, on the death of the owner. Unconditional emancipation was, naturally, regarded as the most meritorious kind, and worthiest of recognition in the life hereafter. There were occasions when whole groups of people, acting together, would buy and set free large numbers of slaves in order to obtain thereby the favour of Allah.

Emancipation of a slave was also the legally required expiation for certain sins or failures in religious duties, for example, the breaking of an oath or the breaking of a fast: a good deed to balance or wipe out a lapse. The Qur’an commands that he who has killed a believer by mistake must set free a believing slave and pay the blood-money to the family of the slain (al-Nisa’, 4.92). A killing has repercussions for both society and the victim’s family. The blood-money is a partial compensation to the family of the victim. Similarly, the emancipation of a slave is a bill paid to the community-from the point of view of gaining a free person for that community. To set free a living person in return for a death was considered like bringing someone back to life. Both personal and public wealth were expended to obtain the freedom of slaves: the examples of the Prophet, upon him be peace, and of Abu Bakr are well known; later, especially during the rule of ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al‘Aziz, public zakat funds were used for this purpose.

A possible question: ‘It is true that Islam has commended humanity in the treatment of slaves, and encouraged most forcefully their emancipation. We can see from the history of many different peoples in the Islamic world that slaves quickly integrated into the main society and achieved positions of great prestige and power, some even before they gained their freedom. And yet, if Islam regards slavery as a social evil, why did the Qur’an or the Prophet not ban it outright? There are, after all, other social evils which pre-existed Islam, and which Islam sought to abolish altogether-for example, the consumption of alcohol, or gambling, or usury, or prostitution. Why does, Islam by not abolishing slavery, appear to condone it?’

Answer: Until the evil of the European trade in black slaves, slavery was largely a by-product of wars between nations, the conquered peoples becoming the slaves of their conquerors. In the formative years of Islam, no reliable system existed of exchanging prisoners of war. The available means of dealing with them were either (i) to put them all to the sword; or (ii) to hold them and attend to their care in prison; or (iii) to allow them to return to their own people; or (iv) to distribute them among the Muslims as part of the spoils of war.

The first option must be ruled out on the grounds of its barbarity. The second is practicable only for small numbers for a limited period of time if resources permit-and it was, of course, practised-prisoners being held in this way against ransom, many so content with their treatment that they became Muslims and changed sides in the fighting. The third option is imprudent in time of war. This leaves, as a rule for general practice, only the fourth option, whence followed the humane laws and norms instituted by Islam for what is, in effect, the rehabilitation of prisoners of war.

The slave in every Muslim house had the opportunity to see at close quarters the truth of Islam in practice. His heart would be won over by kind treatment and the humanity of Islam in general, especially by the access the slave had to many of the legal rights enjoyed by Muslims, and, ultimately, by getting his freedom. In this way, many thousands of the very best people have swelled the numbers of the great and famous in Islam, whose own example has then become a sunna, a norm, for the Muslims who succeeded them-imams such as Nafi’, Imam Malik’s sheikh, and Tawus bin Qaisan, to name only two.

The reality is that in Islam it is overwhelmingly the case that being a slave was a temporary condition. Unlike Western civilization, whose values are so much in fashion, slavery was not passed down, generation after generation in a deepening spiral of degradation and despair, with no hope for the slaves to escape their condition or their status. On the contrary, regarded as fundamentally equal, the slaves in Muslim society could and did live in secure possession of their dignity as creatures of the same Creator and had steady access to the mainstream of Islamic culture and civilization-to which, as we have noted, they contributed greatly. In the Western societies where slavery was widespread, particularly in North and South America, the children of the slaves, generations after their formal emancipation, remain for the most part on the fringes of society, as a sub-culture or anti-culture-which is only sometimes tolerated, and mostly despised, by the still dominant community.

But why, our critics will ask, when the Muslims were secure in their conquests did they not grant emancipation wholesale to former captives or slaves? The answer has, again, to do with realities not theories. Those former captives or slaves would not have either the personal, psychological resources or the economic resources needed to establish a secure, dignified independence. Those who doubt this would do well to examine the consequences upon the slaves in the former European or American colonies of their sudden emancipation- many were abruptly reduced to destitution, rendered homeless and resourceless by owners who (themselves compensated for their loss of property) no longer accepted any kind of responsibility for their former slaves. We have already noted the failure of these ex-slaves to enter upon or make a mark in the wider society from which they had been so long excluded by law.

By contrast, every good Muslim who embraced his slave as a brother, encouraged him to work for his freedom, observed all his rights, helped him to support a family, to find a place in the society before emancipating him, might well be pleased with an institution that opened to him a means of pleasing Allah. The example that comes first to mind: Zayd bin Harith who was brought up in the Prophet’s own household and set free, who married a noblewoman, who was appointed as the commander of a Muslim army which included many of noble birth. But one might swell the list of examples to many thousands if one had the space.

There are two important points to emphasize concerning the attitude of Muslims to slavery, one on the part of Muslims themselves, the other of slaves and non-Muslim countries. Although slavery is accidental to the Islamic fiqh, a matter which is to be solved step by step until it almost completely disappears in the course of time in parallel with spiritual, cultural and social developments, it was sometimes observed that some Muslims, especially some Muslim rulers, continued to hold slaves in their possessions. Islam, however, cannot be blamed for this practice, which came from the spiritual deficiency of such Muslims in practising Islam in their lives. The other point is that habits and the lifestyle of a man cause him to develop a second nature in him. When Lincoln legally abolished slavery in the US in the previous century, most of the slaves had to return to their owners because they had already lost initiative and the ability to make a free choice so as to be able to lead their life as free people. It is because of this psychological fact that the prisoners of war were first distributed among Muslims so that they, after their emancipation, would be able to lead a true Islamic social life as free human beings in a Muslim society and to enjoy their legal rights fully. Islam, thus, sought to solve the problem by steps: in the first step it enabled slaves to realize their true human consciousness and identity; then, it educated them in Islamic, human values, and inculcated in them love of freedom. When, at last, the slaves were emancipated, they found themselves to be fully equipped with all kinds of possibilities to be useful members of the community as farmers, artisans, teachers, scholars, and commanders, governors and ministers or even prime ministers.

Islam attempted to destroy the institution of ‘individual slavery’, and never envisaged nor tried ‘national slavery’. So, as a Muslim, I pray to God that enslaved-coIonized, oppressed-peoples of the world should enjoy real freedom.

The era of illumination which began with the coming of our Prophet, upon him be peace, lasted for centuries. Then, we began to lose the dynamism of our civilization, to collapse. As a result, we came to regard the enemy as more powerful than ourselves. Our power of will and strength of spirit were paralysed. We sought excuses for our defeats, and considered the enemy invincible. The people, in consequence, lost their hope and resolve.

For many centuries we have deluded ourselves into believing our enemies irresistible, singing the praises of their military superiority. On occasions, we have even accused our ancestors of failing to match the technical advances of our opponents and have spoken ill of them. At other times, we have moaned that the enemy is cruel and pitiless. What we have not done is to criticize ourselves and honestly evaluate our own attitudes. In doing so, we have inflicted further heavy blows to the hope and resolve of people. It will remain impossible to establish the real reasons for our collapse, impossible to achieve a true revival as long as we continue to ascribe our defeats only to the military or technical superiority of the enemy and the superior number of their mechanized troops.

So ask yourselves, and then tell me, have you actually fulfilled your obligations? Have you been able to pursue the right road in your activities? Do you have enough will-power and resistance to overcome the obstacles that you face? Are your thoughts and actions in conformity with your beliefs? Have you been able to keep clear of such sinister motivating forces as hatred, malice and vengeance? And your plans and projects–are they carefully, accurately and appropriately thought out?

Only those afflicted with paralysis of will-power and spirit are so blind to their own faults that they busy themselves in finding fault with others. Such poor souls will never be able to perceive the truth, nor make a spiritual recovery, unless they admit that they are themselves fallible.

Every defeat and decline from greatness arises, first of all, from spiritual bankruptcy, and it will continue until there is spiritual recovery. What is most ominous for the well-being of the community is that the spiritually bankrupt individuals do not hold themselves responsible for the decay of the social order, and persist in laying the blame for it on others.

For God’s sake, stop blaming others, and allow yourself to carry a little of the blame. Be self-critical, at least a little. If indeed you are on the right road, if indeed your hearts are set on the service of the truth, and fully alert to your responsibilities, then no one will be able to do you any harm. Remember that only by the Will of God does harm or good come to anyone. Remember that the way has always been paved by Divine Destiny for those pure, loving souls who are determined to serve and support the truth.

How often has a small, resolute band, devoted to jihad, overcome, by God’s leave, a more numerous host. Many devout, godly persons have spent their whole lives in the way of God, and not quailed in front of whatever has befallen them. They have neither been weakened, nor brought low. They are the fortunate ones who are welcomed by the angels, and it is they who will be commemorated by succeeding generations.

I am sure, to most of us who have learned about scientists as unapproachable figures sitting on top of Mount Everest (and somehow almost all of whom are Western), this viewpoint may seem quite new. Yet, there is more to it. The same thinker points to another equally important factor in the development of civilization and advancement of sciences: with a great strength in his weakness and potency in his impotence, man is very much like a pampered child in creation. If he recognizes his weakness and performs his worship with his words, actions and state of mind, if he knows his own impotence and asks for God’s aid, he will then have fulfilled the obligation of gratitude for the subjugation of creation to his needs.

As with a petted child who by means of a little cry or simply a sad look obtains the assistance of adults to serve him: even the tiniest part of what they do for him by far exceeds what lies in the child’s own power to do for himself, and their great help he owes to his great weakness. So too, the apparent dominance of man over the rest of creation and his progress in civilization are not the result of his own deserving but they were subjugated to him because he himself was weak: he received aid because he was helpless; he was enriched thereby because he was poor; he was inspired because he was ignorant; he was bestowed with favours because he was in need of them (Nursi, 23rd Word). 

Penicillin

Most people believe that great discoveries are results of deliberate, directed effort, planning. exhaustive experiment and logical inference. The discovery of penicillin is the most famous counter example. Although the role of planning, experimenting and research has an undeniable role in scientific discoveries, events do not always form a logical sequence, and this is what I am here trying to emphasize.

During World War I, doctors depended on antiseptics to cure battIe wounds. A. Fleming, a bacteriologist, observed that phenol (or carbolic acid, the most common antiseptic at that time) did more harm than good, in that it killed the leukocytes (white blood cells) faster than it killed the bacteria, and he knew this was bad because the leukocytes are the body’s natural defenders against bacteria.

In 1922, while suffering from a cold, Fleming made a culture from some of his own nasal secretions. As he examined the culture dish filled with yellow bacteria, a tear fell into it from his eye. The next day, when he examined the culture, he found a clear space where the tear had fallen. He correctly concluded that the tear contained a substance that caused rapid destruction of the bacteria, but was harmless to human tissue. The antibiotic enzyme in the tear he named lysozyme. It turned out to be of little practical importance because the germs that lysozyme killed were relatively harmless, but this discovery was an essential prelude to that of penicillin.

In the summer of 1928, Fleming was engaged in research on influenza. While doing some routine laboratory work involving microscopic examination of cultures of bacteria grown in petri dishes (flat glass dishes provided with covers), Fleming noticed in one dish an unusual clear area. Examination showed that the clear area surrounded a spot where a bit of mould had fallen into the dish, apparently while the dish was uncovered. Remembering his experience with lysozyme, Fleming concluded that the mould was producing something that was deadly to the staphylococcus in the culture dish. Later he would say: ‘There are thousands of different moulds and there are thousands of different bacteria, and that chance putting the mould in the right spot at the right time was like winning the Irish sweep.’

Fleming’s own words are enough as a response to those who attribute scientific discoveries to chance or idolize scientists. However, I will give other examples to make the point clearer.

Teflon

From non-stick frying pans to space suits to artificial heart valves, Teflon has found several areas of application. Its discovery resulted from an apparently ‘accidental’ observation by a young chemist, R. Plunket, working in Du Pont laboratories. On April 6, 1938, Plunket opened a tank of gaseous tetrafluoerothylene in the hope of preparing a non-toxic refrigerant from it, but no gas came out, to the surprise of Plunkett and his assistant. Plunkett could not understand this because the weight of the tank indicated that it should be full of the gaseous fluorocarbon.

Instead of discarding the tank and getting another in order to get on with his refrigerant research, Plunkett decided to satisfy his curiosity about the ‘empty tank’. Having determined that the valve was not faulty by running a wire through its opening, he sawed the tank open and looked inside. There he found a waxy white powder and, being a chemist, he realized what it must mean.

The molecules of the gaseous tetrafluoroethylene had combined with one another ‘polymerized’ to such an extent that they now formed a solid material. The waxy white powder did indeed have remarkable properties: it was more inert than sand – not affected by strong acids, bases or heat and no solvent could dissolve it – but, in contrast to sand, it was extremely slippery.

X (Roentgen) Rays

Physicist W. Roentgen discovered the rays which were later to be named after him, in an unexpected and unplanned manner. Roentgen was repeating experiments by other physicists in which electricity at high voltage was discharged through air or other gases in a partially evacuated glass tube. We now know that cathode rays are actually streams of electrons being emitted from the cathode, and the impact of these electrons on the walls of the glass tubes produces the phosphorescence.

In 1892, it was demonstrated that cathode rays could penetrate thin metallic foils. Discharge tubes having thin aluminium windows allowed the cathode rays to pass out of the tube where they could be detected by the light they produced on a screen of phosphorescent material (such screens were also used to detect ultraviolet light), but they were found to travel only two or three centimetres in the air at ordinary pressure outside the evacuated tube.

Roentgen repeated some of these experiments to familiarize himself with the techniques. He then decided to see whether he could detect cathode rays issuing from an evacuated all-glass tube, that is, one with no thin aliminium window. Na one had observed cathode rays under these conditions. Roentgen thought the reason for the failure might be that strong phosphorescence of the cathode tube obscured the weak fluorescence of the detecting screen. To test this theory, he devised a black cardboard cover for the cathode tube. To determine the effectiveness of the shield, he then darkened the room and turned on the high voltage coil to energize the tube. Satisfied that his black shield did indeed cover the tube and allowed no phosphorescent light to escape, he was about to shut off the coil and turn on the room lights so that he could position the phosphorescent screen at varying short distances from the vacuum tube:

Just at that moment, he noticed a weak light shimmering from a point in the dark room more than a yard from the vacuum tube. At first, he thought there must be, after all, a light leak from the black mask around the tube, which was being reflected from a mirror in the room. However, there was no mirror. When he passed another series of charges through the cathode tube, he saw the light appear in the same location again, looking like faint green clouds moving in synchronism with the fluctuating discharges of the cathode tube. Hurriedly lighting a match, Roentgen found to his amazement that the source of the mysterious light was the little fluorescent screen that he had planned to use as a detector near the blinded cathode tube, but it was lying on the bench more than a yard from the tube.

Roentgen realized immediately that he had encountered an entirely new phenomenon. These were not cathode rays that lit up the fluorescent screen more than a yard from the tube! With feverish activity, he devoted himself single-mindedly in the next several weeks to exploring this new form of radiation. He reported his findings in a paper published in Wunburg, dated December 28, 1895, and entitled ‘A New Kind of Ray, a Preliminary Communication’. Although he described accurately most of the basic qualitative properties of the new rays in this paper, his acknowledgement that he did not yet fully understand them was indicated by the name he chose for them, X-rays. (They have also often been called Roentgen rays.)

He reported that the new rays were not affected by a magnet, as cathode rays were known to be. Not only would they penetrate more than a yard of air, in contrast to the two or three inch limit of cathode rays, but also (to quote his paper):

‘All bodies are transparent to this agent, though in very different degrees. Paper is very transparent; behind a bound book of about one thousand pages I saw the fluorescent screen light up brightly. In the same way the fluorescence appeared behind a double pack of cards. Thick blocks of wood are also transparent, pine boards two or three centimetres thick absorbing only slightly. A plate of aluminium about fifteen millimetres thick, though it enfeebled the action seriously, did not cause the fluorescence to disappear entirely. If the hand be held between the discharge tube and the screen, the darker shadow of the bones is seen within the slightly dark shadow image of the hand itself.’

He found that he could even record such skeletal images on photographic film. This property of X-rays captured the attention of the medical world immediately. In an incredibly short time X-rays were used routinely for diagnosis in hospitals throughout the world.

Insulin

If a relative or a friend of yours has diabetes, you will probably know how important insulin is for them. As a partial remedy for most diabetics today, insulin was discovered as an answer to the prayers of hundreds of thousands of diabetics by the Most Merciful One. Perhaps, even better relief and remedy are awaiting discovery in some unexpected time or place.

In 1889, while studying the function of the pancreas in digestion, two researchers removed the pancreas from a dog. The very next day a laboratory assistant called their attention to a swarm of flies around the urine from this dog. Curious about why the flies were attracted to the urine, they analysed it and found it was loaded with sugar. Sugar in urine is a common sign of diabetes.

The researchers realized that they were seeing for the first time evidence of the experimental production of diabetes in an animal. The fact that this animal had no pancreas suggested a relationship between that organ and diabetes. The researchers subsequently proved that the pancreas produces a secretion that controls the use of sugar, and that lack of this secretion causes defects in sugar metabolism then exhibited as symptoms of diabetes.

Many attempts were made to isolate the secretion, with little success until 1921. A young Canadian medical student extracted the secretion from the pancreas of dogs. When they injected the extracts into dogs rendered diabetic by removal of their pancreases, the blood sugar levels of these dogs returned to normal or below, and the urine became sugar-free. The general condition of the dogs also improved.

Until recently, all insulin used for the treatment of human diabetes came from the pancreases of some animals. As a result of genetic engineering, based on knowing how DNA controls protein synthesis, a major pharmaceutical firm has begun to produce human insulin by using bacteria. The fact that a microscopic creature, like the bacterium can be made to work for the wellbeing of human beings is a subject worthy of study on its own.

Of course, these are by no means the only examples worth mentioning of ‘happy, chance discoveries’. Here are some more to add to the list: the discovery of molecular structure of organic compounds, saccharin and nutra-sweet (sugar substitutes, again for diabetics), ‘safety glass used in automobiles and planes, oxygen and several other chemical elements, radioactivity, astronomical discoveries like pulsars and background Big Bang radiation, many mathematical theorems, high temperature superconductors, synthetic dyes, etc., etc.

Can one really call all of these marvellous discoveries simply ‘happy, chance accidents’? I believe human conscience and reason must resist such a misconception. Surely, any person of common sense would say: ‘I am thankful to the Merciful One, who has bestowed upon us the favour of these discoveries, enabled us to benefit from them, among His innumerable other bounties’.