Thus, while walking toward the future as a whole community, tolerance is our safest refuge and our fortress against the handicaps that arise from schism, factions, and the difficulties inherent in reaching mutual agreement; troubles that lie waiting at every corner.

We should have such tolerance that we are able to close our eyes to the faults of others, to have respect for different ideas, and to forgive everything that is forgivable. In fact, even when faced with violations of our inalienable rights, we should remain respectful to human values and try to establish justice. Even before the coarsest thoughts and the crudest ideas, ideas that we find impossible to share, with the caution of a Prophet and without losing our temper, we should respond with mildness. This mildness is presented in the Qur’an as “gentle words”; it will touch the hearts of others. This mildness is the result of a tender heart, a gentle approach, and mild behavior. We should have so much tolerance that we can benefit from opposing ideas in that they force us to keep our heart, spirit, and conscience active and aware, even if these ideas do not directly or indirectly teach us anything.

Tolerance, a term which we sometimes use in place of the words respect, mercy, generosity, or forbearance, is the most essential element of moral systems; it is a very important source of spiritual discipline and a celestial virtue of perfected people.

Under the lens of tolerance the merits of believers attain new depths and extend to infinity; mistakes and faults become insignificant and whither away until they are so small that they can be placed into a thimble. In fact, the treatment of He Who is beyond time and space always passes through the prism of tolerance, and we wait for it to embrace us and all of creation. Because of the broadness of this embrace, when a corrupt woman who had given water to a thirsty dog touched the knocker of the “Door of Mercy,” she found herself in a corridor extending to chastity and Heaven. Similarly, due to the deep love he felt for God and His Messenger, a drunk suddenly shook himself free and attained companionship of the Prophet. In another example, with the smallest of Divine favors, a bloody murderer was saved from his monstrous psychosis and headed toward the highest rank; a rank that far surpassed his natural ability and, one that in the end he actually reached.

We all want everyone to see us through this lens and we expect the breezes of forgiveness and pardon to constantly blow in our surroundings. All of us want to refer our past and present to the climate of tolerance and forbearance that melts, transforms, cleans, and purifies and then to walk toward the future securely, without feeling any anxiety. We do not want our past to be criticized or our future to be darkened because of our present. All of us expect love and respect for a whole lifetime, hope for tolerance and forgiveness, and want to be embraced with feelings of liberality and affection. We expect tolerance and forgiveness from our parents in response to mischievousness at home, from our teachers in response to our misbehavior at school, from those innocent victims toward whom we have acted unjustly and oppressed, from the judge and prosecutor in court, from our army commanders, from police officers and from the Judge of Judges in the Highest Tribunal.

However, deserving what we expect is very important. Anyone who does not forgive has no right to expect forgiveness. Everyone will receive disrespect to the degree that he has been disrespectful. Anyone who does not love is not worthy of being loved. Those who do not embrace all of humankind with tolerance and forgiveness have lost their worthiness to receive forgiveness and pardon. An unfortunate one who curses others does not have the right to expect respect from others. Those who curse will be cursed and those who beat will be beaten. If true Muslims observed such Qur’anic principles as the following and were to go on their way and tolerate curses deep in their breasts, then others would appear in order to implement the justice of Destiny on those who cursed us.

When they meet hollow words or unseemly behavior, they pass them by with dignity.(Furqan 25:72)

If you behave tolerantly, overlook, and forgive (their faults) . . . (Taghabun 64:14)

In countries rife with corruption, intolerance, and mercilessness, such things as freedom of thought, polite criticism, and the exchange of ideas according to norms of equity and fairminded debate are absent; it would be meaningless to talk of the results of logic and inspiration. In my opinion, this must be the real reason that for years no progress has been made, in spite of plenty of empty boasting.

For years, there have been numerous examples of immorality-my values do not allow me to speak about them openly-although their perpetrators have received their share of tolerance. Despite this, attempts continue to be made to label innocent people as “backward fanatics who support theocratic regimes.” “Fundamentalism” is another fashionable term with which to smear them. Moreover, Islam has been accused of not keeping up with the times. We frequently observe with sorrow today that those who did nothing more than express their religious feelings have been branded as reactionaries, fanatics, and fundamentalists. Unfortunately some people do not distinguish between being truly religious and blind fanaticism.

It is not possible to talk about common ideas or a collective consciousness in communities where individuals do not look upon one another with tolerance or in countries where the spirit of forbearance has not become fully entrenched. In such countries, ideas will devour one another in the web of conflict. The work of thinkers will be futile, and in such countries it will not be possible to establish sound thought or freedom of belief or thought. These things will not be allowed to flourish. In fact, it cannot be said that in such a country the state has been based on a true system of justice; even if this appears to be the case, it is nothing more than a sham. Actually, in a place where there is no tolerance, it is not possible to talk about a healthy media, scholarly thought, or pertinent cultural activities either. What we see when we look at the things that carry such names are only some fruitless, one-sided efforts made according to certain thoughts and a certain philosophy; expecting something fresh, beneficial and promising for the future from these is futile.

In addition to all these questions, there is one aspect of time that will attract a believer in God and that is time’s fascinating connection with the act of creation and the continuity of physical processes. In this article, we choose to probe down to subatomic distances in an attempt to understand the act of creation and clarify the meaning of time, leaving cosmological time aside. Along the way, we will visit what some Muslim scholars have said regarding the issue. It is, however, useful to look first at the view of modern physics on time.

The classic and modern view on time in physics

The best known physicist who wrote on time is Newton. For Newton space and time were separate and were backgrounds on which physical processes evolved. Therefore, time can exist with or without events. As, according to Newton, time is a linear continuum of instants and each instant exists by itself, we can only talk about the existence of the present. In this approach time is absolute, meaning that it is the same everywhere in the universe. So your “now” is the same with my “now” no matter how fast each of us is moving. One consequence of this classic and commonsense view is that time-travel is not possible. At the beginning of the twentieth century, after the work of Hermann Minkowski and Einstein’s relativity theory the question “What is time” received the answer, “time is the fourth dimension,” which has become almost a cliché. It is not only difficult for us to visualize the fourth dimension itself, but also its relation with space. In Minkowski’s space-time, a time dimension can turn into a space dimension by a rotation, just as the length of an object can turn into its height by simply rotating the object. Actually, it is wrong, after all, to think of space and time as two independent things. As soon as there is space, there is time by default. An event happens in space-time at a particular space-time location and space-time spans all through these locations on which many other events happen. In 1919, in an interview he gave for The New York Times, Einstein explained the shift in the view of space-time: “Till now it was believed that time and space existed by themselves, even there was nothing, no Sun, no Earth, no stars, while now we know that time and space are not the vessel for the Universe but could not exist at all if there was nothing, no contents, namely, no Sun, no Earth, and other celestial bodies.”1

The new notion of space-time has also changed the deep-seated belief that only the present is real, because in the space-time present, the past and the future all exist together. “Physicists prefer to think of time as laid out in its entirety-a time space analogous to a landscape-with all past and future events located there together. It is a notion sometimes referred to as block time. Completely absent from this description of nature is anything that singles out a privileged special moment as the present or any process that would systematically turn future events into the present, then past, events. In short, the time of the physicist does not pass or flow.”2 The above view of the universe, described by Paul Davies, has been called “The Block Universe”; this view has also been supported by many philosophers like Leibniz and Spinoza. It is not wrong to say that it is not time that flows but it is us who are flowing by changing our space-time location in the space-time landscape at each instant. Simply put by Aristotle, “Time is motion.” There is a very nice example given by Rumi, also used by Imam al-Rabbani, given to explain the non-real nature of matter, which also explains how space-time comes into being with motion. Imagine a stick that is spinning at high speed with a fixed light on one side. Even though the light is fixed at just one point, once the stick is spun at high speed, we see a circle of light.

The theory of special relativity has also revealed that time is not absolute: Time actually slows with motion and stops when the speed reaches that of light. This effect becomes apparent only at speeds close to the speed of light at the quantum world and is not noticeable to us since the human scale motion is far too slow. The relative nature of time enters the general relativity theory as well with a theory that explains gravity as the curvature of space-time. One of the striking features of the equations of general relativity, which was noticed first by Godel in 1949 and then by many others, is that they allow for closed time-like curves in space-time. This means the possibility of time travel, at least theoretically.

A time scale we know nothing about

Modern view of time as explained above is valid up to atomic scale and has taken its place in the basic structure of quantum theory. However, science has no experimental ground to reveal anything about the nature of time at Planck’s scale or at smaller levels. The Plank scale corresponds to a time of 10-44 seconds and a distance of 10-35 m. This is a distance which is a hundred times a million times a million times a million smaller then the atomic nucleus. At such distances the quantum theory does not work. We have neither the necessary theory nor the necessary experimental facility to say anything about time.3

Relation of time with the act of creation

Long before revolutionary changes in the view of physical time at the beginning of the twentieth century there were always metaphysical explanations for what time really is; one of these was that of René Descartes. In his meditation on God’s existence, he argues that God must and does continually recreate the world at each instant. Therefore, time is a divine process of recreation. There are two points in Descartes’ statement. One is that creation is a continuous act and the other is its relation with time. We are all aware that the continuity of creation is found in the teachings of the Torah, the Bible, and the Qur’an. It is not that God created the universe at the beginning and left it to evolve according to laws. When it comes to the relation of creation to the essence of time, Descartes view, at first, may be considered to be a metaphysical speculation. But it may also be an inspiration which Descartes received from a divine scripture.

Many Muslim scholars as well have taken Qur’anic verses on creation as references for their meditations on the nature of time. Ibn al-Arabi, in his Kitab Ayyam al-Sha’n writes about the structure of time and takes the Qur’anic verse Every day (yawm) He is in a new manifestation (sha’n) (Rahman 55:29) as a reference. The Arabic word “yawm” which means day is interpreted not as a time period that we call “day” but as a day in God’s Divine Presence. In Qur’an, the special word “sha’n” is used while talking about God’s acts to distinguish these from human acts. Besides sha’n (God’s act of creation) is always associated with the smallest and finest of times that leads to the fact that His acts happen with an incredible speed. There are few Qur’anic verses about the incredible speed of creation. One is:

God creates whatever He wills; when He decrees a thing, He does but say to it “Be!” and it is (Al Imran 3:47).

And the other is:

Our commands are done within the blink of an eye (Qamar 54:50).

Both verses imply not only that God creates whatever He wills without any difficulty but also the speed which His acts and His commands are carried out. Therefore, most scholars interpreted verse 55:29 as “God is in a new manifestation or at an affair at each instant.”

Now going down to sub-atomic levels where we come closer to the recreation at each instant and reading the following lines from The Words by the Turkish Islamic scholar Said Nursi we are better able to understand the essence of time:

“Indeed, the transformations of particles are the motion and meaningful vibrations that proceed according to the dictation and principles of “The Clear Record” (Imam-i Mubin) which is a title of Divine Knowledge and Command and is the arrangement of the past origin and future progeny of everything in the World of the Unseen. They proceed by means of transcription from “The Clear Book” (Kitab-i Mubin), which is a title for Divine Power and Will and is formed of the present and the Manifest World and consists of the free disposal of that power and will in the creation of things. Thus, this motion and meaningful vibration proceed from the writing and drawing of the words of Power in ‘The Tablet of Effacement and Reaffirmation,’ which is a metaphorical page, and the reality of the stream of time.”4

The terms Imam-i Mubin and Kitab-i Mubin are used in the Qur’an in the following verses respectively.

And we have vested (the knowledge and authority) of everything in the manifest record. (Ya Sin 36:12)

The unbelievers claim, “The Last Hour will not come upon us.” Say: “Nay, but, by my Lord, Who is the Knower of the unseen, it will most certainly come upon you.” Not an atom’s weight of whatever there is in the heavens or in the earth escapes Him, nor is there anything smaller than that, or greater, but it is recorded in a Manifest Book. (Saba 34:3)

The term Imam-i Mubin, which is interchangeably used with Lawh al-Mahfuz by many Islamic scholars, is associated with Divine Knowledge and Command. Since Divine Knowledge encompasses everything, the Imam-i Mubin includes the past, present and future as well as the world of unseen. Time from azal (eternity in past) to abad (eternity in future) are found in Imam-i Mubin. Kitab-i Mubin, however, embraces only the present. We understand from the above Qur’anic verse that, Kitab-i Mubin accommodates the inward (batin) meaning of creation as well as the outward (zahir). The passage of time lies in a close relationship between Imam-i Mubin and Kitab-i Mubin. Time passes when God’s command proceeds from the Sphere of Divine Knowledge to the Sphere of Divine Power. Since we are restricted in time and are only witnesses to the Book of the Universe, that is, Kitab-i Mubin, we see only the present, instant after instant. In a way, we witness recreation instant after instant, a creation that continues completely unnoticed due to the incredible speed of God’s commands from Imam-i Mubin to Kitab-i Mubin. The interpretation given by Ibn al-Arabi to the Qur’anic verse Nay, (although they admit that We were not so,) they are in a confused state of mind about a new creation (after destruction) (Qaf 50:15) is that: There is continuous renewal of creation in every instant. What people see in the first instant is not identical to what they saw in the previous instant. So people are in confusion about this. Actually, through the manifestation of His Names, God continuously creates, annihilates and re-creates the universe.

Creation, time and the continuity of physical events

Keeping in mind the connection between Imam-i Mubin and Kitab-i Mubin and the renewal of creation at each instant, we can now contemplate on another puzzling issue: The continuity of physical events. Even before quantum mechanics revealed the discontinuous nature of sub-atomic particles, some philosophers argued that it is the mind’s apprehension of discrete events as being continuous that leads us to conclude that things around us are continuous. The best known macro scale examples are watching a motion picture in cinema which is actually seeing 60 images one after another in one second, and looking at a burning light bulb which is, in fact, light that is flickering many times. Even though these processes are discrete in nature, our mental snapshots one after another gives the impression that these processes are continuous. How about the discontinuity in the micro world? Professor Whitehead nicely explains the discreteness of the (motion of) electron in the following lines:

“It is not wrong to assume that an electron does not continuously traverse its path in space. The alternative notion as to its mode of existence is that it appears at a series of discrete positions in space which it occupies for successive durations of time. It is as though an automobile, moving at the average rate of thirty miles an hour along a road, did not traverse the road continuously, but appeared successively at the successive milestones remaining for two minutes at each milestone.”5

At this point it is agreeable to look further down to the distances that are smaller than Plank length, the smallest physical arena we can think of, where physics meets metaphysics and the act of creation takes place. This locus may well be the realm of discontinuity as well, as it is at this locus that materialization takes place. At this locus we may be able to witness God’s repeated acts of creation and annihilation and re-creation again, if we were able to probe down so far. So at the sub-atomic level, the transformation of particles can all be viewed as the vibrations that occur while God’s command is carried out from Imam-i Mubin to Kitab-i Mubin and back to Imam-i Mubin. Hence, there is the continuous cycle of coming into existence and dying in the Book of the Universe, if we call not appearing in the universe for a fraction of a fraction of a second dying, of course.

Taking the Qur’anic verse 28:886 as a reference, Nursi says “Existence continuously comes from God and returns to and perishes in God’s Knowledge”7 and he claims that there is no absolute nothingness (‘adam) since nothing can escape from God’s Sphere of Knowledge. In other words, even if something ceases to exist in the physical universe, or something that has not been even created or seen yet has some mode of existence, as it exists in God’s Knowledge. Because in God the ideas of all things are fixed, Imam-i Mubin, the title of His Knowledge, is also associated with a’yan thabita, which means fixed prototypes, where the latent realities of things exist.

Time versus dahr

Other than the term “zaman”, meaning time, the term “dahr” is also used in some Qur’anic verses (45/24).8 Scholars give different views on the use of the latter word; the widely accepted one is that “dahr” means a long period of time, an eon. Sadruddin Konevi calls God “Dahr-i Daim” meaning “everlasting dahr” and identifies this as the eternal time which does not have relative aspect but includes relative and temporal time (zaman). According to him, dahr is the essence of time. This helps us to understand the Prophetic saying: “Curse not dahr, for God is dahr.”

Conclusion

We have seen what physics has to say about time, but we will never know if science can grasp the whole truth. Moreover, science cannot tell anything about the nature of time for and smaller than “Plank era.” We either stop at that point and do not question further or break the tenets of positivism. Islamic scholars and intellectuals have always linked time to God’s act of creation. Said Nursi further linked the passage of time to the relation between Imam-i Mubin and Kitab-i Mubin. Being a creation in space-time we are bound to relative time and have only the perception of events in time. But it may well be that innermost essence of time lies not in the material world but in the Unseen.

Notes

1. The New York Times, December 1919.
2. Paul Davies, “The Mysterious Flow,” Scientific American (September 2002).
3. To probe down such small distances we need a particle accelerator much more powerful than the one proposed by SSC (Superconducting Super Collider) project that had been canceled by US Congress after spending $2 billion.
4. Said Nursi, The Words, The Thirtieth Word.
5. Alfred N. Whitehead, Science and Modern World.
6. Everything is perishable (and so perishing) except His “Face” (His Eternal Self and what is done in seeking His good pleasure (Qasas 28:88).
7. Said Nursi, The Letters, “The 15th Letter.”
8. And they say: “What is there but our life in this world? We shall die and we live, and nothing but time can destroy us.” But of that they have no knowledge: they merely conjecture (Jathiya 45:24).

In his studies, (1993, 1996) Huntington suggests alternative explanations to understanding conflicts and disputes in the post-Cold War period. To him, “culture and cultural identities, which at the broadest level are civilizational identities, are shaping patterns of cohesion, disintegration, and conflict in the post-Cold War” (Huntington 1996, 20).

The purpose of this paper is to test Huntington’s argument (1996) by addressing the following question: “Does a civilizational difference cause militarized interstate dispute?” The significance of the answer to this question is obvious: if Huntington’s claim is empirically supported, then dominant theories of international politics, which do not base conflicts on civilizational differences, have to be revised. And, therefore, Huntington’s theory will be useful in understanding the emerging world-order and explaining militarized disputes and conflicts that have occurred in the post-Cold War era.

Literature review

There were many responses and objections to Huntington’s argument that resulted in an extensive debate. Many of them claimed that the civilization theory is unable to explain the causes of conflicts and international order. In spite of the great number of responses and studies, few of these have been supported by quantitative research.

One of the important studies that evaluated Huntington’s argument and which deserves close attention was conducted by Russett, Oneal, and Cox in 2000 (in Triangulating Peace 2001, 239-305). The main question to be answered was “Does a difference in civilization increase the likelihood that a pair of states will become involved in a militarized interstate dispute?” (Russett et al 2001, 248). To perform their study, they used the University of Michigan’s Correlates of War (COW) database that provided Militarized Interstate Disputes (MID). In their view, limiting their analysis to MID that occurred during the 1950-92 period was appropriate, because “Huntington addressed events in these years when he first presented his argument in 1993” (249). Variables of liberal and realist theories were also added to their analysis in order to observe which theory had had higher explanatory and predictive power. Results of logistic regression indicated that variables of liberal and realist theories had much more influence on the probability of conflict than on civilization theory. Belonging to different civilizations increases the risk of dispute between two states only by 12 percent with .30 level of statistical significance. (255).

Huntington (2000, 609) replied to Russett et al, suggesting that they retest their argument as it was dealing with the post-Cold War period. Russett et al (2000, 611), in turn, argued that Huntington (1993) had used many disputes and conflicts that had not occurred in the post-Cold War era to justify and support his argument. That was the reason why they used MID of the 1950-92 period.

Another study to test Huntington’s argument was conducted by Jonathan Fox in 2001. He tried to examine whether conflicts between civilizations, particularly Western and Islamic conflicts, had increased with the end of the Cold War (Fox 2001, 459). He used the Minorities at Risk (MAR) dataset for his quantitative research and came up with interesting results. From a global perspective, the ratio of non-civilizational conflicts to civilizational conflicts had not changed significantly after the end of the Cold War. From an Islamic civilization perspective, there had been little change in the amount of conflicts among Islamic and other civilizations. However, from the perspective of Western civilizations, the proportion of conflicts between Western and Islamic civilizations had significantly increased since the end of the Cold War. Fox concludes that the findings illustrate that it is important which perspective one looks at conflicts from. If one looks from the Western perspective, they will find an increased amount of conflicts between Western and Islamic civilizations, which supports Huntington’s argument. But from the global and Islamic civilization perspective, little evidence can be found for a “clash of civilizations” in the post-Cold War period (459).

Although Fox’s study deserves attention, it does not examine conflicts among the other seven civilizations, but only focuses on the Western versus Islamic civilizations. Furthermore, his units of analysis are conflicts within states, not interstate. Interstate disputes are important in analyzing Huntington’s argument, because a nation as a whole has specific civilizational characteristics. According to Huntington’s map (1996, 26-27) of civilizations, each nation belongs to one of the nine civilizations and conflicts mostly arise among these. Conflicts that occur within states are only one minor part of Huntington’s argument.

Many other scholars have qualitatively criticized Huntington’s clash of civilizations theory. Ali Mazrui (1997) finds three major problems in Huntington’s argument. First, there is a “factual fallacy.” “It may not be factually true that the main lines of conflict of the future, following the Cold War, will be lines of clash of civilizations. It could be states or economic blocs” (Mazrui in Rashid 97, 27). Second, there could also be a “conceptual fallacy” in Huntington’s argument. Mazrui suggests a “clash of races” as an alternative to the clash of civilizations (27). Thirdly, there is a “temporal fallacy,” which means that inter-civilizational conflicts are not phenomena of the emerging world, but rather that they have been the most important issue of the world for at least the past four to five hundred years; within these conflicts we can include the Crusades, the “trans-Atlantic slave-trade, and European colonization of much of the world” (29).

In response to his critics (Foreign Affairs 1996, 67), Huntington stated that none of these scholars had come up with a better alternative to explain the conflicts of the new era. To him, the clash of civilizations remains the most powerful theory to understand disputes in the post-Cold War period.

In this context, this paper is of a crucial importance because 1) it will focus on militarized disputes of the post-Cold War period; 2) the disputes are among the states and civilizations they belong to; 3) and the study will conduct a quantitative method to analyze the clash of civilizations. Thus, this paper takes into account the weaknesses of previous studies and establishes a strong critique to Huntington’s argument.

Research design

This analysis uses the Correlates of War (COW) project’s Militarized Interstate Disputes (MID). The COW provides MID starting from 1816 to 2001. As Huntington (2000, 609) claims, the clash of civilizations theory is helpful in understanding conflicts that occurred after the end of the Cold War, specifically after 1989 (Huntington 1996, 21; Huntington 2000, 609). The COW project had MID reaching up to 2001, so I chose those MID which occurred from 1989 to 2001. Although the number of disputes in this period seems to be small to test any theory, it should be quite enough to evaluate Huntington’s argument, as post-Cold War disputes were the basis of his theory. I had 620 militarized interstate disputes in total. Each dispute occurred between at least two states; one state in side A, and another on side B. The sides are coded as 0 and 1. I had information on which pair of states had disputes. Some disputes had more than two sides. I rearranged these coalitions as if they had disputes separately as dyads. For instance, if there were two states on side A and two states on side B in a dispute, than there would be four dyads involved in the same dispute.

States in these disputes belong to one of the nine civilizations, which are Western, coded as 1, Latin American (2), African (3), Islamic (4), Sinic (5), Hindu (6), Orthodox (7), Buddhist (8), and Japanese (9). Huntington (1993, 1996) does not explicitly specify the number of civilizations. In his article (1993) he mentions about “seven or eight major civilizations.” To him, Buddhism “has not been the basis of a major civilization.” (Huntington 1996, 48). Also Japan has not founded any civilization as there are no nations that share the same religion, language, or cultural values with Japanese culture. However, map 1.3 (The World of Civilizations: Post-1990) in his book (1996, 26-27) shows that there are nine civilizations in the world, including Buddhist and Japanese. I used nine civilizations as shown in the map. Russett et al (2001, 251) used eight, excluding Japanese. I wonder how they dealt with disputes that had Japan on one of the sides.

Having nine coded civilizations and many more states in the dataset, I coded all states as any of the nine civilizations they belonged to, according to map 1.3. (Huntington 1996, 26-27). I had difficulties, as did Russett et al (2001, 251), in classifying some states, because the map was not clear and Huntington did not explicitly mention them in the text. For example Nigeria, according to the map is separated into two civilizations, Islamic and African. Since religion is the most important factor that distinguishes each civilization, I have used the CIA’s World Factbook to find out the proportion of religion in Nigeria, and classified it as Islamic. India is shown as a state of both Islamic and Hindu civilizations, but I have classified it as Hindu. Sri Lanka was classified as Buddhist in relevance with Russett et al (2001). The Philippines, in my classification, go into Sinic civilization, but Russett et al (2001) classify it as Western. The most interesting problem that occurred in classification was to which civilization Israel belongs. The question is significant, as Israel has had many disputes with its neighboring states. Huntington thinks Israel is an Islamic civilization according to the map. It is ironic that Israel is considered as an Islamic civilization, first because it has nothing to do with the religion of Islam, and second because such an approach decreases empirical support for Huntington’s argument. Although it does not make sense, I classified Israel as Islamic, strictly adhering to the map.

To answer my research question I had to use civilization dyads and observe if these dyads are prone to clash or not and how frequently they have disputes. Thus, I arranged these nine civilizations in dyadic form and came up with 45 civilization dyads, extracting each one of the same dyads as 1,2 v. 2,1. A dyad is labeled 0 if the civilizations in it are the same and 1 if the civilizations are different. After arranging civilization dyads, I plugged each dispute into one of the dyads and totaled it in regard to the 45 civilization dyads. Then I arranged the number of disputes in each dyad according to the proportion to the total number of disputes.

Huntington’s main hypothesis is that civilizations have mattered and have had positive impact on disputes in the post-Cold War period. I have my doubts about his argument and hypothesize that civilizations do not matter in interstate.

Data analysis

After running my Probit model, I have found that difference in civilizations had negative impact on interstate disputes with relatively small statistical significance (10). The findings of this paper contradict what Huntington (1993, 1996) suggests as his explanation for the causes of interstate disputes in the post-Cold War era. In other words, civilization differences do not cause interstate conflicts.

There have been a total of 620 militarized interstate disputes during the 1989-2001 period, according to the COW dataset (see Table 1). Some of civilization dyads did not have any disputes, whereas other dyads conflicted several times. Huntington’s argument that different civilizations clash does not find support with the results of this study. We can see from Table 1 that 19 dyads that consist of different civilizations have not had any militarized dispute since the end the Cold War. How can Huntington explain this phenomenon on the basis of his clash of civilizations argument? Can interstate disputes be explained by civilizational differences? The answers to these questions are obviously negative. Different variables of realist and liberal theories may explain the findings, but that is not within the scope of this study.

Limitations

One of the important limitations is the absence of a clear list of civilizations and states in these civilizations. If Huntington had provided these data then there would be no dissimilarities among the scholars who tried to test his argument. Some studies used eight civilizations while others used nine. Some states, like Israel and the Philippines were placed in different civilizations in different studies. This may influence the results of these studies, as these states have had many militarized disputes.

Conclusion

This study shows that Huntington’s argument is insufficient to explain conflicts in the new world order. As he argues, “culture and cultural identities, which at the broadest level are civilizational identities, are shaping patterns of cohesion, disintegration, and conflict in the post-Cold War” (Huntington 1996, 20). However, he did not carry out a quantitative analysis of the argument. He provided only case studies and offered qualitative analysis as support. Many studies, including this one, have been conducted in response to his clash of civilizations argument, with the conflicts of the post-Cold War period being analyzed quantitatively. None of these studies has found evidence to support Huntington’s argument. The finding of this study illustrates that a difference in civilization is not sufficient on its own to understand what causes conflicts these days nor does it have a positive impact on militarized disputes.

References

• Foreign Affairs. 1996. Samuel P. Huntington’s the Clash of Civilizations? The Debate. New York: W.W. Norton & Company,
• Fox, Jonathan. 2001. Two Civilizations and Ethnic Conflict: Islam and the West. Journal of Peace Research 38(4): 459-472.
• Huntington, Samuel P. 1993. The Clash of Civilizations? Foreign Affairs 72(3): 22-49
• If Not Civilizations, What? Foreign Affairs 72(4): 186-94, 1993.
• The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon and Schuster. 1996.
• Try Again: A Reply to Russett, Oneal & Cox. Journal of Peace Research 37(5): 609-610, 2000.
• Rashid, Salim. 1997. The Clash of Civilizations? Asian Responses. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Russett, Bruce M. and John R. Oneal. 2000. A Response to Huntington. Journal of Peace Research 37(5): 611-612.
• Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Inter dependence, and International Organizations. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001.

Hi, I am still alive. Yeah, I was talking about how we serve an aircraft. By adjusting our distribution, we provide the necessary forces for the aircraft to fly and maneuver. Some of us help the engines burn their fuel; and the heat released from this combustion is again used to provide thrust to the aircraft. Although the duties we perform may sound harsh, it is our pleasure to do them; because this is what our Lord wants from us: to serve humans. The only contention we have is the way we are treated by humans. As all other creatures in this universe, for the continuation of all the services we provide, we need some food for survival. Your fellow engineers call this food “air resistance,” which disappoints us. They are talking as if we are stealing their property from them without any return. They do not give credit to the continuous service we provide. Moreover, they delineate the lift force as something that they came up with, disregarding our major role in it. I, and my other fellow air particles, hope that one day you will learn to consider us as living organisms just like you; then you will change your vision of your and our lives.

Sincerely,

Air Particle

Reading these sentences of the air particle changed my vision of science about which I have been learning for the past 18 years. The new vision I have now has sent me on a journey in which I have started to criticize and, if necessary, amend the scientific understanding of nature. So it is my intention now to convey some of the milestones of my journey. Aside from a personal discourse, you can also consider the following discussion as a conversation between your heart and the air in your lungs. The air is very close to us; it functions in our bodies at every moment. But on the other hand, we are very distant from it as we fail to use our hearts to communicate with it. We consider it to be an unconscious slave, and therefore do not respect it. Even if the air particle cries out to us, we do not hear it, because we consider it to be inanimate.

This situation is the result of what we have been taught over the past few centuries. The materialist philosophy, with the scientific advancements of the 19th and 20th centuries, concluded that we humans are alone in this universe to make our way, and that our survival is dependent on the strength we display in the conflicts that make up life. Is it only the understanding of life that exhibits the characteristics of the materialist philosophy? One’s perception of reality depends on the paradigms that are built in one’s mind. Therefore, a person raised in the atmosphere of materialist philosophy develops a perception accordingly, which tells us that it is possible to find the materialist paradigms not only in the positive sciences but also in all of the fruits of the same mentality: individual and social life, scientific models, religious philosophy, etc.

Individual and social life

A contemporary thinker from the materialist age, although himself not a materialist, Nursi summarizes the materialist philosophy’s view of the individual life as follows.¹ According to the materialist philosophy, every thing that exists in this universe stands as a separate entity on its own, and its life has a meaning only for itself. The formations in the universe are results of a deterministic succession of events in the macroscale and non-conscious coincidences in the microscale. Hence, life is another accident which we experience. In terms of the continuity of life, the past is a completely lost domain of time, and the future is constantly under the threat of a sudden death that will bring life to a halt. As a result, the present is the only slice of time that humans can enjoy; hence the phrase “carpe diem – seize the day.” Being the sole zone of influence, the value of the day is only as great as its benefits to the individual.

In terms of social life, the value of individuals for each other is measured by their mutual interest. The continuity of friendship is therefore based on the continuity of interest.² Each individual and every part of nature in general,³ by considering its own existence as the ultimate criterion, tries to optimize things according to its own self. This motive ultimately leads to the destruction of the bonds that keep a society intact. In order to re-establish the connection, a relation based on action-reaction is considered between the individuals. This consideration suggests “do unto others the way they do unto you,” instead of “do unto others as you would have them to do unto you.” The emphasis on the individual ego along with the action-reaction principle leads to the result that “might is right”; i.e. “get the power to have the right,” instead of “be righteous to have the power.”

The ideal gas theory and the Ideal Individuals’ society

The ideal gas theory was primarily developed based on two famous laws of Newton: the 1st law, defining the inertia of an object, and the 2nd law, which relates the force acting on a body to the consequent acceleration. The purpose of the ideal gas theory is to explain the relationship between various gas properties (e.g. pressure, temperature) under stable conditions. Although the development of the formulation continued with the emergence of quantum mechanics, the core of the theory, which was based on the deterministic view, was completed between the 17th and 19th centuries with contributions from several scientists, such as Robert Boyle, and Gay-Lussac. The ideal gas theory is still in use for many engineering applications.⁴

The following is a sample explanation of the ideal gas theory. The gas molecules fill the space provided for them in a container. This means that they form a continuum between the boundaries of the container. If the boundaries undergo some changes due to heat transfer or wave propagation, the gas molecules communicate these changes to their fellow gas molecules. The ideal gas theory explains the communication among the gas molecules in terms of mutual collisions. Therefore, according to the ideal gas theory, a gas is made of individual molecules that are either traveling with constant speed (inertia) or changing properties due to collisions. The existence of other interactions, such as gravitational, electric, or magnetic, are potential causes of divergence from the ideal gas behavior. Therefore, a real gas will manifest ideal gas behavior only if the inter-molecular forces do not exist or have a negligible effect as compared to the effect of the collisions. From this, it can be concluded that strong collisions form the basis of an ideal gas.

Although the ideal gas theory has significant success in explaining gas properties in equilibrium conditions, it has difficulty in explaining the behavior of gases during a flow process. The reason is one of the manifestations of the intermolecular forces: viscosity. In terms of the macroscale properties of gases, viscosity is explained as the resistance of the gas particles against deformation, or in other words, their resistance against flow. This means that during a flow process, the gas particles rip off useful energy from each other and convert it to their own personal energy. That is why we have to burn fuel continuously while driving or flying. So, we consider viscosity as an adverse effect because of its cost, but it is also a problem for scientists because of the complications it causes in formulations.

Having identified the fundamental characteristics of the ideal gas theory, which are inertia, neglect of intermolecular forces, and strong collisions, let’s look at the corresponding image of the same fundamentals in social life.

1) Selfishness: This is the corresponding image of inertia on personal life. Individuals do not share their wealth with others unless they are physically forced to do so. The wealthier they are, the higher their inertia, and the less they are affected by their interactions with others, as they have the power to do as they wish.

Another way to see this is the pursuit of individual interest rather than communal interest. This is a result of neglecting moral values that tie individuals to each other (a neglect of intermolecular forces). Individuals pursue their own benefit regardless of the morality of the means they use to achieve it. In other words, they try to maximize their personal interest despite the poor condition of other people. Ideally, they indulge in this so much so that they do not care about the misery going on in the lives of others, which reflects the level of corruption in their hearts. This state of interaction is depicted by the famous Adam Smith (1723-1790) model5 in economic theory that idolizes individual interest as the source of ultimate good in society;

2) Conflict and clash: This mode of communication among people is the same as the collisions in the ideal gas theory. Every individual is supposed to retain its personal power and wealth as long as possible (inertia). As a result of neglected moral values, there is only one way for these to be transferred to others: to clash. The members of society have to clash with each other to achieve equilibrium. This is how wealth and power are distributed among the members of society. This conclusion is in parallel with the famous theory of the clash of civilizations,⁶ which foresees such a future for humanity.

The materialist understanding of science and consequent religious understanding

One of the very first scientific facts most of us learn is from the Newtonian mechanics, originating from the 18th century. This formulation was able to explain the motion of both particles and heavenly bodies. Newtonian mechanics is based on a deterministic view of nature, which sets everything on a predictable path of change. Witnessing the capability of this theory to explain nearly all of the existing natural phenomena in the heavens and on the earth, many scientists denied the role of God in the universe. This meant that, at best, God created the universe at the beginning and everything has progressed since then on its own. It also meant that God is not capable of changing the fate of the universe, since we can predict the future of natural events successfully.

Later in the early 20th century, with the development of quantum mechanics, the indeterministic, i.e. unpredictable, character of nature on a small scale was revealed. Although this theory broke the strength of the deterministic view, it further inculcated the materialist philosophy. This was to say that God does not and/or cannot interfere with micro-scale events. Urged by his religious sensitivities, Einstein replied: “God doesn’t play dice.” With the support of several experimental results that confirmed the quantum theory, some scientists later argued: “Indeed He does.”

The theory of evolution was the reflection of the same phenomena on biological sciences. This suggested that accidental events at the micro level, which are out of God’s control (!), gave birth to life. So, living beings have nothing to do with God, since they came into being out of His control. The theory of evolution also propounds the “survival of the fittest”; hence, living creatures are reflected as enemies to one another, as the survival of one means the death of the other. Therefore, they are in a continuous clash. What is more, God has nothing to do with this struggle for survival, which He started, but which is now out of His control.

As a result, the deterministic views expulse the concept of God from the macro-scale universe, and the indeterministic views do the same at the micro-scale. Both views, as explained above, are used to free humans from their responsibility to God; or at least, they are used to impair the understanding of God in our minds.⁷

The Reflection of Materialist Philosophy on Science-Fiction

Science-fiction is an art form that was inspired by scientific developments. Therefore, science-fiction is another domain where the impact of materialist philosophy can be observed. The topics of such movies and novels are dangers coming from unknown creatures, or people who are trying to conquer the entire universe at the expense of the lives of millions. Both themes reflect the same characteristics that we have been observing so far: absence of moral bonds between individuals and communication through clashes. The underlying reason for these violent and selfish motives is that every individual living being in the universe is thought to have an instinct to modify things according to its own interests, which again brings us to emphasize the individual ego. In other words, it is assumed that every individual creature idolizes its own ego so much that it can sacrifice everything else for the sake of this ego. This is what is depicted for us by current science-fiction. Therefore, materialist philosophy is not only influencing us today, it is also outlining a horrible future image for humanity through science-fiction.

Model people for new understandings

The above discussion may trigger many questions concerning all human endeavors, such as science, economy, education, etc. Although a materialist perspective of nature and life is presented in this article, there exists a moral understanding of the same phenomena as well; these have been explained and discussed in detail in many articles and books. However, what is missing from the moral view is a modern representation in real life; i.e. actual achievements by those people who both sincerely practice moral values and participate in the advancement of science and technology. Without these achievements, all of the good words about a new and better understanding of nature and life are going to be no more than romanticism or another “once upon a time” story. We hope that the days for the appearance of such scientists are close.

Notes

1. Nursi, S., The Words, “23rd Word”, The Light, Inc., New Jersey: 2005.
2. ibid, “12th Word-3rd fundamental.”
3. ibid, “30th Word-1st aim.”
4. Cengel, Y.A., Boles, M.A., Thermodynamics – An engineering approach, 5th edition, McGraw-Hill, p. 137.
5. Smith, A., Cannan, E., Krueger, A., The Wealth of Nations, Bantam Books, 2003.
6. Huntington, S.P., Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Simon & Schuster Adult Publishing Group, 1998.
7. Nursi, S., The Words, “30th Word-1st aim,” The Light, Inc., New Jersey: 2005.

One action in particular which has drawn much attention to the Muslim faith is jihad. The original meaning of jihad and the way it is still practiced today by the vast majority of Muslims is admirable, emphasizing perseverance towards a just, ever-lasting and rewarding goal-spiritual enlightenment (Gulen 208-227). However, jihad has recently been misinterpreted, misunderstood, and misused by many non-Muslims and by a few Muslim extremists. This has resulted in many great mistakes, made both by the extremists and non-Muslims alike. The extremists have taken jihad and manipulated its meaning to suit their own beliefs and dogmas. The end result of all this has been and will continue to be heavy criticism and scrutiny of Muslims for performing an action that in actuality is very peaceful and responsible in its meaning. The true meaning of jihad is to struggle, to persevere and the meaning of the word does not include implicit or explicit approval of the radical acts of terrorism that have been committed by extremists; such people have simply misinterpreted its meaning.

To strive or struggle is the most suitable translation of the word jihad (Gulen 208-227). Jihad is carried out (or at least is prescribed to be carried out) by Muslims both collectively and individually. There are two parts of jihad: the lesser and the greater. The greater jihad is the inner struggle that an individual Muslim goes through in order to fight against superstition, wrong belief, carnal desire, and evil inclinations while striving to obtain intellectual and spiritual enlightenment. The lesser jihad is encouraging others to strive for and reach the same goal of enlightenment. Both aspects are carried out in the name of God and both aspects are interdependent on each other, since one cannot work without the other.

If Muslims want to be successful in the greater jihad they must make their focus in life striving for the sake of God. This includes all aspects of their lives, from sleeping to coming home from work at the end of the day. Every thought and every action Muslims take up must be directed towards God so that they can overcome their primitive carnal impulses. The goal of this, as mentioned before, is to obtain spiritual and intellectual enlightenment (Gulen 208-227). The caliph Umar exemplified his jihad through some of his actions. An example is a story related about this caliph in which he was giving a sermon and interrupted his own sermon, saying: “O Umar, you were a shepherd taking care of your father’s sheep!” Later, he was asked why he had said this, and he replied: “I remembered that I was the caliph, and was afraid of feeling proud.” Another story which exemplifies his jihad is when Umar was asked why he was carrying a sack on his back, to which he replied “I felt some pride, and wanted to get rid of it” (Gulen 18-31). Through these two examples we can see how Muslims in the past strove to achieve spiritual enlightenment.

The lesser jihad a Muslim will strive for includes all outward actions towards others that are done for the cause of God. In other words, this means conveying God’s message to others through all aspects of a Muslim’s daily life. Given this idea, the lesser jihad will be practiced while going to war with others, but let us not forget that it will also be practiced in other more prosaic actions, such as shaking hands with someone. If the outwardly action will help one person or many people and it is carried out in the name of God then it is considered to be jihad. Forceful jihad is resorted to and permitted only when a person or many people seek to maintain a society or group that has been built on corruption, self-interest, oppression, and the degradation of the rights of others. This means that forceful jihad is only permitted when a society or group seeks to contain or even deflate the basic principles of Islam and in essence, Islam itself (Gulen 208-227). This point is clearly illustrated in the history of the persecution that the first converts to Islam faced while living in Mecca. Moustapha Akkad outlines this point successfully in his film, The Message: Muslims who were living in Mecca were facing extreme persecution from the pagans. It was upon God’s command that Muhammad, who was with his some of his followers in Medina, led his followers into battle against the persecuting Meccans. The Muslims in Medina took arms against the Meccans only because numerous Muslims in Mecca were facing severe persecution for their beliefs and practices. Thus jihad was necessary in order to save those who were victims of persecution. In his commentary on the revelation associated with this event, Abdullah Ali states how jihad was used justifiably,

Even from the human point of view, the cause of God is the cause of justice, the cause of the oppressed. In the great persecution, before Mecca was won again, what sorrows, threats, tortures, and oppressions were suffered by those whose faith was unshaken? Muhammad’s life and that of his adherents was threatened: they were mocked, assaulted, insulted, and beaten; those within the power of the enemy were put into chains and cast into prison … they could not even buy the food they wanted or perform their religious duties. (208)

Thus, there was need and justification for Muhammad and his followers to fight the persecuting Meccans. It is easy to see from this example that forceful jihad is used only as a method of last resort and it is only a small aspect of the lesser jihad. Hence, lesser jihad incorporates all aspects of Muslims’ outwardly actions, which unless otherwise directed by God, will be peaceful, since they will strive to share the message of God with others.

Lesser and greater jihad are interdependent of each other; Muslims must first be struggling and striving within their self before they can strive outwardly in the name of God. Fethullah Gulen explains this idea exceptionally well by saying, “the deeper [the believers’] belief in and submission to God, the deeper their concern for all creatures” (208-227). Gulen’s quote reflects the idea of individual inwardly action (deep belief in God), being interdependent of outwardly action (deep concern for all creatures). Thus he emphasizes the point that the lesser and greater jihad are dependent on each other.

It is important for Muslims to constantly be striving for God; if Muslims abandon this goal, they will become without an aim and this will be the cause of their own failure in the quest for intellectual and spiritual enlightenment (Gulen 208-227).

To further emphasize devotion to jihad I will examine some passages from the Qur’an. The first is found in chapter 9, verses 38 to 39. This passage focuses solely on the individual Muslim, his/her jihad and the implications of the jihad. The verse stresses the actions of the individual both inwardly and outwardly,

O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that, when you are asked to go forth in the Cause of God, you cling heavily to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless you go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; But Him you would not harm in the least. For God has power over all things. (449-450)

In this passage, God challenges the individual to go forth in God’s cause and to abandon clinging to worldly ideals. Focusing on the hereafter is an action that leads to perseverance and devotion for Muslims. In challenging the individual to go forth, God is commanding them to strive within themselves to win the inner struggle. That struggle is acting justly in the name of God in day to day life (the greater jihad). In giving the command to go forth, God also challenges the individual to go out into the world and spread the message of God to everyone; this is the second part of jihad. Nowhere in this passage is harming, fighting, or killing others in the name of God spoken of. The message here is that through peaceful, inner struggle the individual will not be punished, but will rather be unharmed and able to live in the hereafter.

The next section of the Qur’an to be looked at comes from chapter 8, verses 72 to 74. These lines focus on the lesser jihad of a group of Muslims rather than just one individual Muslim. It emphasizes the promotion of Islam by a group of Muslims to others through jihad (fighting for God and also through hospitality to others),

Those who believed, And adopted exile, And fought for the Faith, With their prosperity and their persons, in the cause of God, as well as those who gave (them) asylum and aid-these are (all) friends and protectors, one of another. As to those who believed but come into exile; You owe no duty of protection to them until they come into exile, but if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them, except against a people with whom you have a treaty of mutual alliance. And (remember) God sees all that you do. The unbelievers are protectors, one of another: Unless you do this, (protect each other), there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief. Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith, in the cause of God, as well as those who give (them) asylum and aid-these are (all) in very truth Believers: For them is the forgiveness of sins and provision most generous. (433-434)

The line which reads “if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them” is God’s command to Muslims to promote Islam to others only if they ask for aid. This can be seen as the lesser jihad and though it is a very daunting task for any one Muslim, it is still a very tranquil, peaceful, and patient act as God says that religious aid should be provided only if they (friends and protectors) seek it. The gentleness of this passage is further extended when God says if the unbelievers and the Muslims do no protect each other then there will be tumult and oppression in the world. The exact opposite of violence and radical acts of terrorism is emphasized here (the people who it is implied to be protected here are Jews and Christians). So it is obvious that this passage shows that the lesser jihad Muslims should practice has peaceful aspects and has very little to do with violence.

The Qur’an does however contain passages that speak of fighting, going into battle, and taking prisoners. But as we will see, these actions are not associated in any way with the mass murders that Islamic extremists commit, claiming (obviously incorrectly) that such actions are performed in the name of God. Verses 74 to 75 of Chapter 4 read as follows:

Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of God-whether he is slain or gets victory-soon shall we give him a reward of great (value). And why should you not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?-Men, women, and children, whose cry is: “Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You one who will protect; and raise for us from You one who will help!” (207-208)

Emphasis in this passage falls upon fighting in the cause of God; fighting for the oppressed and the maltreated. However the reader must be aware of the context of the passage before drawing conclusions about what is being commanded. First of all, this revelation came to the Prophet when he and some of his followers were in Medina. It was around this time that the Muslims still living in Mecca were facing severe persecution from the pagans. Muslims in Medina had wanted to retaliate and fight back, but Muhammad only allowed for fighting back after God had commanded him to do so. Therefore, this passage is likely to be one of the revelations the Prophet received from God directing him and the other Muslims to fight the persecutors of their religion. It is important to note that only after the Muslims in Mecca came under direct attack did God command the Muslims in Medina to fight the persecutors. In this passage God does not give permission for random mass murders, but rather only to fight the oppressors. As Abdullah Ali says in his commentary of this passage, “… the cause of God is the cause of justice, the cause of the oppressed” (434). The idea of defending Islam by means of fighting is a part of jihad, but it is vital to understand that such fighting is only necessary after Islam and the followers of Islam have come under direct attack from oppressors. And even in that fighting, as Ali mentions, there should be justice, and justification for fighting. The justification is that Islam is coming under attack. Given these ideas about jihad, it becomes clear that Islam does not promote radical acts of terrorism committed by extremists today. The extremists are wrong in claiming that their killing of innocent people is for the cause of God.

After taking into account all these misinterpretations, acts of terrorism, and acts of striving for justice in the name of God (as individuals and as groups), where do we go from here? Robert Jewet and John Lawrence claim that today it is inappropriate to focus on a crusade against Islamic terrorists attacking the West. Rather, they say it is far more appropriate for the West, while seeking forms of international law enforcement, to examine their own religious traditions and through research find resources that transform zeal and jihad into dimensions that match the political values of the West (165). While I agree with the first part of this solution, I strongly disagree with the second part. It is true that when dealing with jihad and the way it is used by extremists, we should not persecute and scrutinize Islam. However, when dealing with this issue, we must not retreat back to Christianity, afraid to take a leap ahead. Christian doctrine is not the key to the solution, contrary to what Jewet and Lawrence suggest. The solution does not lie within books of scripture; why look away from a problem and into a book when instead we can literally face the problem head on? The solution rests on the shoulders of each and every person who has a brain and a heart and who knows how to effectively use both. We must use our brains to realize that this issue will never completely go away but that we can minimize it. We must also use our brains in a way that allows us to learn and understand Islam and its key doctrines, beliefs, and practices, because if we willingly adhere to ignorance then we do not deserve to be described in a way that is different from how Bin Laden has described the West. Bernard Lewis cites a letter from Bin Laden in his book, The Crisis of Islam, published in November 2002. Bin Laden says in this letter “[we want you] to stop your oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery” (157). He claims America is “without principles or manners” (158). We must use our hearts to allow us the patience and tranquility to understand the doctrines, beliefs, and practices of Islam, because if we cannot learn to accept Islam then we might as well deport all of the immigrants currently living in the West. The same must be done by Muslims who seek to deal with this issue, so that everyone will be working together to minimize the situation we find ourselves in. If we in the West do not seek to understand Islam and live peacefully with Muslims, then we will slowly lose our reputation as a multi-cultural society and we will slowly gain a reputation that is similar to that of the United States.

References

• Akkad, Moustapha. The Message. Released 1976.
• ‘Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an. 10th ed. Beltsville, Maryland: Amana, 1999.
• Gulen, M. Fethullah. The Messenger of God: Muhammad, The Light, Inc., New Jersey.
• Gulen, M. Fethullah. Questions and Answes about Faith I, The Light, Inc., New Jersey.
• Jewett, Robert and John Shelton Lawrence. Captain America and the Crusade Against Evil. The Dilemma of Zealous Nationalism. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans, 2003.
• Lawrence, Bruce B., Shattering the Myth. Islam Beyond Violence. New Jersey: Princeton, 1998.
• Lewis, Bernard. The Crisis of Islam. Holy War and Unholy Terror. New York: Modern Library, 2003.
• Lincoln, Bruce. Holy Terrors. Thinking About Religion after September 11, University of Chicago, 2003.

Particles that are the size of a nano (a billionth of a meter) are of great interest to science today. The most common saying in the engineering world is “the smaller the better,” and thus nanotechnology (technology of nano sizes) has become very popular in almost no time at all. Everybody is now trying to nanosize their ultrahigh technological instruments to catch up with ongoing nano-fashion. Taking this new technology into account, the use of the word “particles” instead of “atoms” that we encounter while reading about how the Law of Wisdom bestows important duties to inanimate and unconscious particles helps to unravel the mystery of how nanosized particles act under the Highest Command.3

As organisms made up of zillions of cells, we human beings are amazing biological systems. No moment passes without millions of reactions happening in our body. Most of them, indeed, all of them are being carried out by molecules, in particular supramolecular structures (also called enzymes) supplied with hands, arms or some other robotic units of several atoms. These are the actual “particles” on which the world is running.

The verse Not an atom’s weight of whatever there is in the Heavens or in the Earth escapes Him, nor is there anything smaller than that, or greater, but it is recorded in a Manifest Book2 has only clearly been understood since nanoscience has emerged. Some still interpret the meaning of zarrat (the original word used in Qur’an) as meaning atoms instead of particles, but it will not be long before they recognize that the actual work is being done by particles which are made up of molecules that consist of more than one atom, a state that is in agreement with Qur’an.

Zarrat are, first of all, the bricks used to build beings, worlds, and universes. They act in the name of the Glorious Creator, doing the work necessary for the continuity of systems. They work together as a team, in most cases without any trouble, demonstrating that the One Supreme Being is in command.

Secondly, the zarrat act as a multi-purpose cultivation field for all different crops, addressing the infinite treasury of His mercy and giving samples of His endless power.

The renewal of the zarrat each spring like an endless flood flowing through the world from the infinite treasury of His power, while preserving the property of being recyclable is a clear indication of the Absolute Commander.

Obviously, the so-called nanoscale sciences use these zarrat in action. Those particles work, doing whatever they have been told to do as they are obedient slaves of the Greatest King; however, some scientists fool themselves, assuming that each one of these particles is equipped with all-encompassing knowledge and power.

Above all else, the verse, “There is nothing that does not glorify Him with His praise, proclaiming that He is free from having any partners and all praise belongs to Him exclusively,”4 perfectly sums up the situation: the zarrat, the particles, have all been created to praise Him, the Creator, the Only Owner.

Notes

1. Nursi, Bediuzzaman Said, The Words, (translated by Sukran Vahide), Sozler Publications, 1998, page 570.
2. Qur’an, 34:3.
3. Nursi, ibid, 1998, page 580.
4. Qur’an, 17:44.

1. Is “Allah” the same god as the God of the Bible?

2. Trinity and Tawhid (oneness).

3. The divinity of Jesus (pbuh) and the concept of Prophethood.

4. The authenticity of Holy Scriptures.

We will now briefly touch upon these four points in the same order given above.

Is “Allah” the same god as the God of the Bible?

A frequently-asked question by Christians in such meetings is if the word “Allah” refers to the same Deity mentioned in the Bible. The answer to this question is different for each side. According to Islamic teachings, the Creator of the heavens and the earth, Who sent prophets throughout history to mankind, speaks in the Bible as well as in the Qur’an. Thus, the answer is undoubtedly a “yes” for the Muslims. On the other hand, we cannot expect the Christians to accept this answer with similar enthusiasm, as this would also mean that they accept the Qur’an as the Word of God.

The Names and Attributes of Allah as they are mentioned in the Bible are very few compared to the many found in the Qur’an and the sayings of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him. Despite the fact that these Attributes and Names are similar, the Christian understanding of God shifts from the God of the Old Testament that commands an “eye for an eye” to a very compassionate God presented in the New Testament. Naturally, when a Christian hears the word “God,” he or she immediately begins to think, what kind of a God figure is being referred to? Is He like that of the Old or the New Testament?

To make things more complicated, the word “Lord” is sometimes used to refer to “Jesus” in Christianity. Thus, in a Muslim-Christian Dialogue the two sides may have significant differences in the very concept of God, the first article of faith. The key to successful communication on this topic is probably to discuss the Attributes and the Names of Allah as they are presented in the Bible and the Qur’an. This should be done without confusing the issue by discussing the personality or the claimed divinity of Jesus. The similarities in the way the Creator describes Himself in both Books will surprise the parties and clearly show that it is the same Divine Being Who is speaking in both Books.

Trinity and Tawheed

Trinity is often misunderstood by Muslim populations, including some learned men of religion. Most of the time, it is portrayed as believing in three gods or in three deities. However, as is well known, Christianity is a monotheistic religion, not a polytheistic one. The confusion comes from the fact that the godhead of Trinity has three distinct characters. But, to a Christian believer, these three characters are like three different manifestations of the same Divine Being on different platforms. In one of the most-quoted verses of the Bible, Jesus says “Father and I are one.” So, to a Christian, Jesus is the manifestation of the Heavenly Deity on Earth. This may be the grounds for many other disagreements between the Muslims and Christians about the personality of Jesus, but it certainly does not make Christianity a polytheistic religion.

This is, in a way, good news for the dialogue efforts. The most important article of faith is shared by both sides, which is the fact that God is One. He is the Creator of the Heavens and Earth, Almighty, All-Knowing, Pre-Eternal, Everlasting God that we all worship.

The oneness of God is not the only tenet shared by these two major world religions. The list indeed is very long. According to most Christian denominations, God will judge us on our deeds on the Day of Judgment and He has an eternal life prepared for us. The good will be rewarded and the evil will be punished. But, we all count on His Mercy rather than on our own deeds or acts of worship for our salvation. The concept of the Hereafter and the Day of Judgment are the most central articles to both faiths after the Oneness of God.

The divinity of Jesus and the concept of prophethood

Many Muslims simply fail to understand how central the divinity of Jesus is to the Christian faith in most denominations. It is not very uncommon for Muslim speakers to start their speeches by claiming that Islam respects Jesus so much so that it considers him as one of the five major prophets of God. It is in fact a great blasphemy for a Christian to consider Jesus as less than divine. As much as Muslims disagree with it, the idea that Jesus was sent to earth by God as His beloved son and that he died on the cross as a ransom for the sins of believers are main tenets of the Christian faith and they are as central as the Trinity itself. For a Christian to accept that Jesus was indeed a man just like us, and/or he was actually not crucified is the same as abandoning the Christian faith in its most orthodox form as practiced by majority of churches.

On the other hand, the high respect paid to the institution of prophethood in Islam, both for the major and minor prophets, is not shared by the Christian scripts. The Old Testament contains many accounts of major acts of sin committed by the prophets. The life style of the prophets depicted in these stories very often does not resemble that of God’s chosen people, contrary to their counterparts in the Qur’an. Consequently, it is very difficult for a Christian individual to feel the same high respect that a Muslim feels for the prophets. Therefore, calling Jesus a prophet in an attempt to find a common ground with Christians backfires for two reasons; first anything less than divinity for Jesus is not acceptable to a Christian mind; second the institution of prophethood is not as lofty for a Christian as it is for a Muslim.

Where is the common grounds regarding this matter? As mentioned above, the divinity of Jesus should not be addressed by the Muslim side at all. Neither should they insist on calling Jesus a prophet. A more productive approach for the Muslim side would perhaps be to emphasize the fact Islam recognizes Jesus as the promised Messiah and as the Word of God (Kalematullah, Qur’an: 4:171), and that he has been strengthened with the Holy Sprit (Ruh-ul Qudus, Qur’an: 2:87 and 2:253). He indeed has a very special place among the other prophets in the Qur’an.

The authenticity of Holy Scriptures

Christians have a diverse opinion as to how much and what parts of the Bible were inspired by God. The opinions on this matter extend from those who believe that each and every word in the Bible is inspired and hence binding to those who value the words of Jesus above the rest, as those are indicated in red ink in the “red lettered” Bible. Most Christians are probably of the opinion that even though the actual quotations from Jesus in the red lettered New Testament are few, the Bible is inspired by God in its entirety. Even the ones who do not agree with this statement would at least believe that the Bible is a book of good guidance as a whole. One way or another, the definitions of what is the Word of God, what is inspired, and what is from holy men who proclaimed the divine message throughout history are not profoundly important concepts to the faith of a Christian on the personal level. What matters is the fact that the Bible was written by so many authors over a period of thousands of years and that they all confirm each other. This is what it makes the Bible good guidance.

For the Muslims, however, it is simply not acceptable to found a religion on information that is doubtful in its authenticity. Religious principles can only be derived from the Holy Qur’an, every word of which is believed to have been revealed, and the examples from the life of Prophet Muhammad. Thus, Muslims again approach the Christian Scriptures on the matter of authenticity with severe criticism. In general, Christians do not see the need for a word by word authenticity in a religious Scripture for the foundations of the religion to be strong. In fact, they think that this is hardly possible as the Bible was written by 66 different authors. It is very much expected and acceptable that some parts of the book should be the words of holy men who committed themselves to spreading it to others, in the form of letters and such, mixed with the inspired words by God. Word by word revelation, as happened with Muhammad, on the other hand, is a new concept that Christians only become familiar when they talk to their Muslim friends. Therefore, the Muslim challenge to the Christian mind on this matter does not mean much more than the fact that it is another point which Muslims use to attack the foundations of Christian faith.

A more productive approach in a Muslim-Christian dialogue would be to point out the fact that the very fundamental tenets of the Christian faith are shared in the teachings of the Qur’an. The Ten Commandments revealed to Moses are laid out and detailed in the first several chapters of the Qur’an. The message of Jesus , the love and compassion that he had for others, regardless of who they were, his embracing of even the lowest in rank in the society and the giving of the glad tidings to the pious; all of these principles were also preached by Prophet Muhammad. Emphasizing the parallelism between the Bible and the Qur’an in the spirit of their teachings and not in their wording would be a much more productive approach than scrutinizing these books for authenticity in expectation that our Christian friends will have a higher respect for the Qur’an.

The selection of terminology

Furthermore, simple mistakes made in the selection of terminology can be misleading. The same word in the English language can bring quite different concepts and connotations to the minds of Muslims and Christians. Obviously the selection of the language determines the terminology. Each Biblical word in English has a long history in the minds of the people who speak this language. It is impossible not to get caught up in these connotations when Biblical terms are used to translate Qur’anic concepts into the English language. For instance, each of the words “grace,” “Lord,” and “saint” have deeply rooted meanings in the Christian tradition, which may be used as translation of Arabic words “ihsan,” “Rab,” and “wali.” However, these English and Arabic words do not overlap exactly in meaning. Islamic concepts like “rububiyah” are impossible to translate with one word. If one uses a made-up word to translate these Islamic terms, then the translation loses its religious flavor and its influencing power on the reader. On the other hand, if Biblical words are used, then it becomes impossible for the Christian mind not to get caught up in the Biblical connotations of these words. Therefore, one should not think that conveying Islamic concepts to Christians is a matter of having perfect translations. It will take many years before Islam establishes its own vocabulary in the English language amongst the native speakers of this language with well-understood meanings, as it did in many other cultures throughout the history. Considering the short history of indigenous Muslims in the West, particularly in English-speaking countries, the growth of Islamic media and their circulation is very encouraging.

Concluding remarks

Sincere efforts of dialogue should always start by learning the other party’s fundamentals of faith and what is most dear to them. Christian-Muslim dialogues, in our opinion, can be much more productive if the four points discussed above are carefully addressed during these meetings. First, Muslims should be very sensitive when discussing the personality of Jesus, who is not just a prophet to Christians, but everything that Christianity is built on. It should be clearly spelled out that calling Jesus a prophet is literally attacking the very foundations of Christianity and it should be avoided. Furthermore, the Trinity is a concept that is misunderstood by Muslims. It is in fact true, as often pointed out by Muslims, that Christian clergymen have difficulty explaining the concept of Trinity to themselves. But, this does not mean that the subject of Trinity, particularly the divinity of Jesus is a trivial matter to the followers of the faith. On the contrary, it is something very important and something taken to heart without question by the Christians. It is an issue of faith rather than reasoning. Therefore, Muslims should not try to explain this point with logic. There is nothing to be gained on this point in terms of finding a common ground with Christians and it will be a deal breaker if insisted upon.

The Christian side can also do their homework by paying attention particularly to the concepts of prophethood, and the Attributes and Names of God in Islam. As they study Islam, it will become clear that a prophet has a much loftier place in the mind of a Muslim than it ever has to a Christian. Also, the Attributes of Allah mentioned in the Qur’an are not different than those in the Bible, but only there is more information about who God is in the Qur’an than there is in the Bible. The faith that Muslims have in the prophets of the Old Testament and the second coming of J esus are two more crucial points that Christians can quickly discover to their surprise. Dwelling on these points first before the problematic ones listed above may be a good starting point for successful dialogue.

No one else, you, the candidly expected

A voice unreserved, sentimental

Nourishing sermons forever in memories

The sublime pundit,

Within an exalted sound

You left us an earnest legacy

More than a touching discourse

Guiding the devout minds

Into soulful sincerity.

The role of mathematics in understanding nature

Mathematics is a discipline of thought. It helps to develop our way of thinking and is an exercise in improving our intelligence. Mathematics can be considered as another kind of language, a language very different from that of a spoken language. When it is hard to convey our thoughts in terms of words, or our words become insufficient to express our thoughts, mathematics may be used as an alternative. On some occasions, expressing ideas via mathematics might be more concise, much clearer and more understandable. Although mathematics is considered to be a separate branch of science, in fact it is related to all branches of science. Nowadays, even in biological and social sciences, extensive studies are being conducted using mathematics.

Engineering was one of the earliest application fields of mathematics. It has strong links with mathematics as well as physics. Many engineering problems can be considered as an application of mathematics and hence applied mathematicians and engineers share common research areas. Engineers try to improve the quality of life by designing new products and in the design process, geometry and mathematics play a vital role.

Since the first day of existence on the world, mankind has tried to understand and formulate the surroundings and events that take place around them. They have investigated the world and the cosmos and accumulated knowledge. Each question that was answered yielded more questions to be answered and the more the knowledge that was acquired the better the extent of our ignorance about the universe was understood.

The universe has been established in a very complex orderly manner. The magnificent order observed cannot be expressed well in words, but may also be expressed using mathematics. A person who develops their knowledge of mathematics can understand more about this supreme order. For example, the universal gravitational law, which describes the movement of planets, can best be understood through mathematical equations, while the solutions of the equations yield the well-known elliptic paths. The concept of infinity that is attributed to the Creator can be realized through the concept of infinity that is frequently used in mathematics. So mathematics is an essential tool in developing our understanding of the nature and universe. It is essential also in applying the principles of physical laws in nature to improve our quality of life. The design of an airplane requires extensive mathematical calculations and applications of physical laws.

Finally, it should be noted that mathematics also has its limits, as it is something that has been developed by human beings and may not be sufficient to express the total order and all physical laws. Chaotic motion, a very complex order, was developed recently to understand some phenomena that do not obey the rules of deterministic motion. A daily example of such motion would be atmospheric motion. With even super computers and satellite technology, the path of the hurricane Katrina could not be predicted precisely due to its largely chaotic behavior and these errors cost thousands of lives.

Basic engineering principles and their applications in nature

First, let’s briefly describe some of the fundamental engineering courses and their aims. Dynamics is the science of motion. It models motion, describing the relation among displacement, velocity and acceleration. The specific type of motion and its causes, such as forces, movements, impulses etc. are examined. Dynamics deal with solid bodies while fluid mechanics basically deals with liquids and gases.. In the context of fluid mechanics the rest states of fluids as well as their motions are investigated. The strength of materials deals basically with the design of structures and mechanical parts to loading conditions. Under a given loading condition, what would be the best design for withstanding the loads while using the minimum amount of material? Materials science deals basically with the mechanical properties of various materials and the causes (microstructure etc.) of those properties. Proper selection of the materials to perform the required task is another important issue.

Living organisms can also be considered as some sort of design, but of course they are different from man-made designs. Living organisms, whether they are plants, animals or human beings, are designed to perform a specific predetermined task. The organism has to move, find food, safely operate and resist the forces that act on it throughout its life, and it must reproduce. Therefore, organisms have to be designed (or more precisely created) according to the principles of engineering. The development of technology drew attention to creatures and the underlying engineering principles in their structures. Extensive research on living creatures revealed a clear conclusion: Designs applied in nature are much more sophisticated then the ones humans come up with.

Bernoulli’s principle is a fundamental principle in fluid mechanics. Basically, the principle states that when the velocity of fluid increases the pressure drops and visa versa. The lift force generated in the wing of a plane is explained with this principle. Air separates in front of the wing and reattaches at the back. When the upper surface of the wing is slightly curved and the bottom flatter, the air particles in the upper part travel a further distance at a higher velocity and meet the particles traveling under the wing at the back. The relatively higher velocity on top causes a pressure difference in the lift direction and this lift force balances the weight of the plane. Many applications of Bernoulli’s principle can be found in living organisms. A fish moving in water is a good example. In particular, fish that swim at great speeds, like the tuna, have distinctive body shapes: The mouth of the fish is at the front where the fluid comes to rest and the pressure is very high, making the fluid intake of oxygen easier. The heart is located at the minimum pressure point to make it easier for it to beat. The eyes are located on a precise saddle point, a place which is not affected by velocity changes. Since the pressure is constant for all ranges of velocities, vision is not distorted by movement. Another example is the human body. When one breathes in the fluid velocity in the nose increases and pressure drops. The outer pressure is higher than the inner pressure and the walls tend to collapse. If bones were found at the tip of the nose, they might easily break when excessive force was present. We need some other material to sustain the shape yet be elastic enough not to break down. Cartilage is the best choice in this case, as it has both strength and elasticity. Our ears are also made from the same material. If bones were used instead of cartilage in our ears, resting our head on one side would be painful or even cause damage to the ears.

Insect flight is another important issue and has attracted considerable research recently. Fluid scientists now realize that insect flight is much more developed than our flight techniques. Turbulence is the main issue. In turbulent flow, the fluids move in erratic paths colliding with each other, forming eddies and irregularities. This is a dangerous state, especially for planes, and increases the friction forces between fluid and structure. Therefore the maintenance of a regular flow (laminar flow) over the wings is advantageous. However, all insects benefit from turbulence and some portion of their lift is gained from eddies that are formed over their wings. Mechanical insect robots are built to understand insect flight. Insects have movable elastic wings, but aircraft only have immovable rigid wings. Movable elastic wings would certainly improve the flight of planes and their maneuverability, but extensive research has to be done before these designs can be safely implemented.

The bumps on the fins and heads of some whales are not accidents of nature. They were given to them by the Creator for some very special purposes. They decrease the friction (drag) force by 10% and increase the lift by 5%.1 When some have the effect of decreasing drag, they can also decrease lift and visa versa. This effect of both decreasing drag and increasing lift, which can be observed in whales, is very uncommon in fluid mechanics.

Streamlining is a very important issue for an object that moves in a fluid. Fluid particles move around an object that follows a path. Roughly speaking these paths are streamlines (in a steady motion) and it is a general rule that abrupt distortion of these streamlines should be avoided. Smooth changes in the streamline help to reduce the friction force between the object and fluid. All organisms, particularly those that move at greater speeds, have been created in accordance to streamlining principles. In these you can find many species of birds and fish, such as dolphins, sharks, whales etc. The friction reduction caused by the shape of a dolphin is still a controversial issue in science and the underlying mechanism has not yet been well understood.

An example of the strength of natural materials can now be given. Our bones are optimum structures, combining strength with lightness. In modern buildings, 60-70% of the buildings consist of the skeletons, which carry the loads and moments. In our body, our skeleton is only 1/7th of our body weight. Bones have inspired a new generation of lightweight structures. For instance, a bridge inspired by the backbone was recently designed.2 When a longitudinal cross-section is taken from a femur, some curved lines are observed. Recent numerical simulations revealed that these lines are to be found in one exact place and their configuration increases the strength of the bone. Our backbone and the muscles around it withstand very high loads, equivalent to 7,000 Newtons or approximately 700 kilograms of weight.3 The bones of mammals are hollow inside to increase strength. The inner to outer ratio of the radii is at the optimum range, between 0.4 and 0.7.4

Hardness is another important issue in some applications. Seashells are the leaders in this issue. Their microstructures are being investigated under electron microscopes to invent new materials with extreme hardness properties. Micro-cracks inside a material grow over time, finally leading to failure. This is a major problem in turbine blades and this phenomenon is responsible for some plane crashes. In seashells, micro-crack inhibiting mechanisms are inserted to prevent crack growth. Inspired by spider silk and the microstructure of bird feathers, a new generation of bullet-proof waistcoats has been developed.

Owls are very silent flyers; they need to be so in order to approach rodents as rodent ears are highly sensitive to sound. Recent investigations have shown that the special geometry of their wings results in this silent flight. Their feathers are placed to form fringes on their wings. The technology might be mimicked to reduce the noise generated in planes.5

A recent engineering discipline is robotics. There are industrial robots, which are designed to perform some very special tasks. But there are also robots inspired by living organisms. A new robot is designed to mimic caterpillar motion so that it can be stable enough in a hazardous region, pass through small gaps and detect humans who are alive under debris.6 By mimicking the motion and body of a scorpion, a military robot was designed with a camera and sensors to safely operate in a battle region.7 Of course there are human-like robots that are designed to mimic our motion and activities. The developments in robotics teach us a very important lesson: All animals are much more sophisticated in their locomotion, actions, and behavior and it is extremely hard to mimic those. A robot that can move freely like a cat and climb a tree yet maintain its balance has not yet been produced. Our robots are very slow in motion, and their stability in movement is an important technological issue that requires extensive sensors and control designs.

Newly developing engineering branches

As mentioned above, one of the newly developing branches of engineering is robotics. Day by day, better robots are being designed and those designs try to better mimic animals and humans. Some 50 years ago, a human walking might be considered a simple issue, but now we know that comfort in walking and excellent balance in such movement are very complex issues.3 Each new design in robotics adds to our knowledge of understanding animal locomotion and behavior and how miraculous their designs are. Some people think that robots may take control of the world in the future. Yet this is simply not possible: If humans are to design them, there is no way that such machines can be superior to the designers.

Other promising new fields are the MEMS (Micro-electrical machinery systems) and nano-technology. These are design attempts on extremely small scales which actually mimic some micro biological systems and micro-physics. A vertebrate consists of an enormous number of cells, while the chemical and physical events that take place inside the cells and their establishment as a system are crucial parts of staying alive. It is extremely hard to design at the micro and nano scale and it is likely that research in this field will reveal more about understanding the art of God.

Notes

1. M. Le Page, “Speed Bumps Give Humpbacks a Surprise Boost,” New Scientist, 13 January 2001, p. 22.
2. I. Sample, “A Bridge with Backbone,” New Scientist, 16 September 2000, p. 7.
3. R. Mc Neill Alexander, The Human Machine, Colombia University Press, 1992.
4. R. Mc Neill Alexander, Optima for Animals, Princeton University Press, 1996.
5. C. Seife, “Deadly Hush,” New Scientist, 6 march 1999, p. 10.
6. C. Zandonella, “Wriggle into Rubble,” New Scientist, 10 November 2001, p. 22.
7. D. Graham-Rowe, “Walk Like a Scorpion,” New Scientist, 21 April 2001, p. 18.

* How do we leave traces of ourselves everywhere we touch with hardly visible fingerprints?

* Methods used for fingerprint identification…

* The signature we always carry with us: Our fingerprints…

A little girl in the US was kidnapped in 1993. Finding an opportune moment to escape, the child fled to a nearby neighborhood. Based on the girl’s statement, the police arrested a suspect, who told them about the other perpetrators and the car used for the abduction.

Realizing that there was missing evidence, the defendants asked for evidence of the child’s fingerprints from the car, as she had testified that she was in the automobile for hours. Strangely enough, despite scanning the entire vehicle, the detectives only found the fingerprints of the defendants. The joy of the latter made the child and her parents afraid that they would be unable to prove her presence in the car.

Leaving the rest of the story to the end, we will now focus on the fingerprint screening process, which sheds light on the frustration of the criminal detectives who were unable to find the child’s fingerprints in the car.

Innately found in the DNA structure of each and every individual, fingerprints are actually formed in the early embryonic stage with the infinite knowledge and might of the Creator. No two fingerprints have ever been found to be identical in every detail, despite billions of comparisons. This miracle alludes to the omnipotence and omniscience of God. Fingerprints are never exactly alike, but unique for each individual, except identical twins. To achieve this requires the infinite knowledge of the One Who distinguishes the fingerprints of all the living and dead, as well as those who are to be born. The fingerprints of identical twins are identical because the same egg has been inseminated by the same sperm and has then split into two, and thus the two babies have exactly the same DNA structure.

As is well-known, fingerprint identification stands head and shoulders above all other human identification procedures as the most reliable means of identifying individuals worldwide. The Qur’an speaks of the revival of every human being in all their particularities down to their fingertips, thus drawing our attention to the uniqueness and distinctive features of the fingertips of each and every individual. Only if one perceives the Qur’an as being the Word of God can they avoid the great difficulty inherent in attempting to explain how the Qur’an is able to refer to this issue; at the time of the revelation, 14 centuries ago, this matter was not known, rather, it only became known in modern times:

Does the human think that We will never assemble his bones (to resurrect him)? Yes indeed, We are able to make complete his very fingertips. (Qiyamah 75:3-4)

Fingerprints are friction whirl formations on the skin of the fingertips that are perpendicular, circular, oval, or made up of patterns parallel to each other. To make impressions of the fingerprints, the fingertips are pressed first on an ink pad, and then on a card; the ink impressions on the card retain the shape of the whirls. The fingerprints collected from items of evidence from a crime are matched (or not) with the suspect’s fingerprints. The fingerprint database archived in this way is the most reliable way to conduct criminal record checks when needed.

But how are the impressions of the fingerprints retained on the objects that have been touched? Fingerprints are deposited by the natural secretions of the eccrine glands which are present in the skin of the fingertips. When we touch an object, natural sweat secretions are discharged from the glands at the fingertips and these secretions remain on the surface in the shape of the whirls.

Fingerprints of children

How is it, then, that the fingerprint impressions of the child in the story could not be found at the crime scene? 99% of the secretion produced from the glands is water. The remaining 1% is of fatty acids, ethers, amino acids, and salts. It has been found, in contrast to the fingerprints of adults, which include long carbon chains linked by ethers, that the fingerprints of children have mostly non-etherized, short chains of fatty acids. These short chains of fatty acids on the fingertips of children are volatile. Thus, the fingerprints of children evaporate in 24 hours, while those of adults remain for longer periods. For this reason, fingerprint detection should be done as soon as possible in crime scenes in which children are involved.

We normally cannot see the impression left by the whirls. Criminal detectives, however, use electronic, chemical, and physical processing techniques that permit the visualization of invisible or hidden latent print residue from natural secretions of the eccrine glands on the fingertips. They then take the photographs of the impression to compare with fingerprint impressions of suspects and those on the database.

Amazingly enough, something as simple as sweat-which we mistakenly think is composed of pure water-can be used to solve serious issues as needed, because our fingerprints, which are hardly visible, leave clear signs of our presence everywhere we touch. It is not difficult to understand, then, that nothing has been created to vanish for ever; just as we leave our fingerprints everywhere, at every moment we also leave our own images in different forms of action in the minds of others and they are recorded on the heavenly plates. By the way, if you think that the suspects in the child abduction case were able to get away with it, you are wrong! Though her fingerprints could not be found in the car, the relief of the suspects did not last long. A small fiber from her clothing was found in the car, thus proving them to be guilty.