 |
 |
 |
||
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Abul Kasem So at long last, Brigadier General (Retd) Syed Ashrafuzzaman admitted that there is no science in the holy Qur�an. (http://www.vinnomot.com/Dhaka/AsrafQuranSC.htm). ( http://www.shodalap.com/Quran_Science.htm ) Bravo Mr. Brigadier General. You gave the �Harami� secularists and repugnant �Muktomonas� a signal victory, no doubt. It had taken us a long time to have such a laurel. Naturally, we should be happy about your sudden change of mind, but wait; before we claim victory I must clear certain cobwebs from the mind of a Military General who views world only wearing a colored glass of Islam. Why is it that whenever the secularists and the rationalists criticize the religious scriptures, especially the Qur�an for advocating science in them, Military Generals, with Islamic garb suddenly become furious to acknowledge that it is futile to discover science in the Qur�an. In his own language the retired Brigadier General quipped, �Therefore, people like Mr. Avijit can be well advised not to look for scientific theories in the Qur�an.� What a great admission of defeat in logic! Why should not a person like Avijit search science in the Qur�an, may I ask such a question to you, Mr. Ashrafuzzaman? Have you heard of Dr. Maurice Bucaille, Mr. Brigadier. General? Have you read his book on science in the Qur�an. If this �quack� scientist could discover plenty of science in the Qur�an, even to the extent of saying that he could not find anything in the Qur�an that is unscientific, then why not a trained engineer with vast knowledge and experience in scientific matters dig Qur�an and prove him otherwise? Why is it that when the charlatan occidental/oriental scientists discover so called science in the Qur�an the Islamists do not object by saying that �it is futile to discover science in the Qur�an?� Is it fair for a retired Military General to practice such a double standard? Is this what Islam teaches to practice�impugn your opponent with epithets whenever you cannot confront him with logic and rationality? Brigadier General Ashrafuzzaman then went on with his diatribe and harangued the likes of Avijit and �Muktomonas� to refrain from delving in to Qur�anic matters else he will �expose the motive.� What motive are you talking about, Mr. Ashrafuzzaman? You mean all of those who criticize Islam and Qur�an, Hadis, Sharia�.etc are paid agents of India, RAW, Jews, CIA�etc.? If that is the case, then please count me as an agent of India and the Jews Axis. Is there anything wrong in becoming a stooge and a paid sleuth of these infidels when there are thousands of Madrassa/Taliban factories in Bangladesh, Pakistan, etc.? How about that Mr. Ashrafuzzaman? Are not the Murids of these Islamic Industries fed, clothed and trained by Saudi Arabia, the keeper of Islam to slaughter the infidels and the secularists? If someone can be the paid agent of Pakistan, and ISI, then why is it so wrong to be the paid agent of India and RAW. Further more, if someone can be a paid agent of Pakistan and ISI, then why is it wrongful to be the paid agent of India and RAW? Oh, come on Mr. Ashrafuzzaman; show some fairness, won�t you? Brigadier General Ashrafuzzaman then had a prolix discourse on the translation, interpretation, infallibility, and the complete immutability of the Qur�an. He found all the translations (especially Bengali translations) are incorrect, if not down right wrong, except perhaps for the translation by Yusuf Ali, whom he found suitable for some selected verses that he (the Brigadier General) himself decided to pick. How funny! Brigadier General, you know how much mastery in Islam and the languages are required to be a translator of a religious scripture? How could you simply dismiss eminent translators including Maulana Muhiuddin as unreliable? You yourself claim that you do not know Arabic at all. Then, how do you know that Maulana Muhiuddin is wrong and Yusuf Ali is correct? In my opinion, Yusuf Ali�s translation is the most corrupt. Why? Simply, because he had translated the Qur�an for the Western readers of the Qur�an and the Western audience do not like any anti-woman and/or anti-humanist view. That is why Yusuf Ali had many insertions in brackets to placate the western readers of the Qur�an. Muslim�s Holy Scriptures, in its raw form are much more anti-woman, violent, barbaric and intolerant. If you think I am exaggerating, then get a transliteration of the Qur�an, get an Arabic dictionary, and judge for yourself. You will surely notice that what Maulana Muhiuddin had translated as to the provision of supply of women in paradise is completely correct. Yusuf Ali simply made it more palatable to the western readers by selectively choosing the �spouse� instead of �women purified.� In the same vein, I would now request you to prove to me that in the original Qur�an, in verse 4:34 there is a bracket that says (lightly) to beat one�s wife. Please do it to prove that you have the slightest fairness in you. Brigadier General Ashrafuzzaman, then brought up many irrelevant matters that had very little to do with the title of his essay, viz., �COMMENTS ON �THE QUR�AN & SCIENCE.� He brought up the topic of quoting the Qur�an �out of context,� as if we are such a bunch of doltish people that we do not understand this idea. This is a very old broken record that Mr. Ashrafuzzaman is playing now. We have heard this ad infinitum and I have personally penned many rebuttals on this matter. Just to let you know, Brigadier General Ashrafuzzaman, that whenever we write any essay that delves in to Islam and Qur�an, we take extreme caution to inscribe a single word that we are not absolutely certain is correct. If you like to test my contention, then I would like you to search the archives of Vinnomot or NFB or FFI, take one of my articles that criticized Qur�an, read it thoroughly and prove to me that what I wrote was wrong, incorrect, illogical, and most of all, out of context. Brigadier General Ashrafuzzaman�s essay does not really deserve a rebuttal. The reason why I wrote this short rejoinder is that I was deeply appalled at the vehement diatribe, personal attack and impugn that he has hurled on Avijit Roy. Besides using completely inappropriate language to describe Avijit�s scholarship, he shamelessly wrote:
Brigadier General. Ashrafuzzaman, why are you claiming that Avijit writes essays that are critical of Islam only? In his article, �Bigganmoy Kitab� he has vehemently criticized Hinduism and Christianity as well. Why don�t you assess his work in all fairness? How about SKM? How about fatemolla? How about Muhammad Asghar? How about Dr Ali Sina? How about Mughal? ��..Why don�t you dare to hurl your epithets to them? Is it not because you think that Avijit belongs to a minority community and you, being an ex-Military General can easily silence him with your �martial� command? To show your petulant military temper, I shall quote from your essay once again. This is what you wrote regarding Avijit Roy:
Is this the language you have learned in the Military Academy of Bangladesh or Pakistan? No wonder you are a total waste of taxpayer�s money. If this is the kind of Military General Bangladesh produces then I wish good luck to Bangladesh. Perhaps we are better off without having an army at all. You only know how to kill and torment the weaker sections of Bangladesh community as you have learned this skill from your Pakistan masters (like Yahya Khan). Pardon me for my acerbic language: it was tit for tat. Are you hurt now, Mr. Brigadier General? Of course you are. This is exactly how a minority in Bangladesh feels when he/she reads (your) above statement. Calm down General! Don�t act like the proverbial Chicken Little thinking that the world is coming to an abrupt end because a solitary Bangalee writer has shown in the Net quite a few inanities in the Qur�an. It�s easy to find vacuity all over Qur�an. You just have to look for it. Oh, one more point, you have to remove your blindfold. Are you now ready to take the plunge?
-----------------
Abul Kasem writes from Sydney. His e-mail address is [email protected] |
|
|
 |
|
 |
||
|
||||