Al-Risala (English), February 1984

these traditional arguments appealed is of an antiquated Aristotelian sort which is now rejected by practically all logicians except such as are Catholics. There is one argument that is not purely logical. I mean the argument from design. This argument, however, was destroyed by Darwin; and in any case, could only be made logically acceptable at the cost of abandoning God’s omnipotence.” Arguing the existence of a designer from design is, as Russell admits, a scientific argument in itself. It is the very argument that science uses to prove anything. Russell then rejects this argument by citing Darwin’s theory of evolution. This rejection would only be acceptable if Darwin’s theory was itself scientifically established. But scientific research has proved Darwinism to be a mere hypothesis, rather than an established scientific fact. It is Russell’s first statement, therefore, concerning the validity of the argument from design that must prevail. His rejection of that argument on the basis of Darwinism is groundless. □ Because of One Vowel This is how Professor A. J. Arberry has translated Verse 39 of the chapter of the Quran entitled “Pilgrimage”: Leave is given to those who fight because they were wronged—surely God is able to help them. (22:39) It can be seen that he has rendered the verb “to fight” into the active voice, whereas in the original Arabic it is in the passive voice. There is a difference of one vowel between the active and passive forms of this verb. N. J. Dawood has correctly translated the verse as follows: Permission to take up arms is hereby given to those who are attacked, because they have been wronged: Allah has power to grant them victory. This translation shows that the Prophet and his companions only fought when they were attacked, whereas Professor Arberry’s translation gives one the impression that Muslims took up arms themselves, without provocation from the other side. □