Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Natural World Order & The Islamic Thought


Published on

Published in: Spiritual, Technology
  • Crush food cravings with "ODD" water hack. watch video... ➽➽
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Sex in your area is here: ❤❤❤ ❤❤❤
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Dating direct: ♥♥♥ ♥♥♥
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • 8 Ways to Communicate with Your Guardian Angels... ●●●
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Humans are not only physical bodies but besides physical bodies humans have soul, substance responsible for life phenomenon, substance wherein the actions done by them are stored. Soul within the humans could be perceived by existence of the Ego, innate knowledge of the Creator and most importantly a very well defined book of innate moral law and the latter is with only humans as the species.The only task of all prophets was to convey the eternity of the soul and to warn humans that their afterlife will depend upon whether they adopted the book of innate moral law, which has been inscribed by the Creator in their souls, or not. Once the book of innate moral law is opened (this could be done by only genuine & philanthropist philosophers) the basic & fundamental principle of this book is that humans should live peacefully & justice should prevail in all human societies. Humans are living like everything other than humans because religions have been corrupted and this basis message was not conveyed.
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Natural World Order & The Islamic Thought

  1. 1. P R E F A C ENever in the human history world required truephilanthropists and philosophers as the world requirespresently. From Socrates up to about eighteenth centuryphilosophy, science, arts and all social sciences were studiedtogether and a very well defined correlation existed betweenall these fields so as to understand the universe and everyliving and non-living thing which exists therein. Considerableprogress was made in all fields of study and some pioneeringwork was done in political science especially by Plato andAristotle. During last two centuries philosophy and differentfields of study got divorced and studies became highlyspecialized and compartmentalized for the researcher or thegroup of researchers. Whatever be the purpose of study andresearch of the individuals, the fact remains that everybodyhas contributed to the human knowledge andunderstanding. Resultantly a sea of knowledge andinformation is available to us for finally to understand theuniverse and the human beings. Philosophers are requirednow, though late, who could put together and analyze all therelevant knowledge and information to understand thepurpose of all creation. Human beings have to be primaryconcern of all the studies and the task of all studies is almostaccomplished if we understand what the human being is andwhat could be the purpose of human being on this planetand how to fulfill that purpose.1
  2. 2. Human beings, whether created or evolved, whichwould be thoroughly discussed in this endeavor, is born andlives for some period of time and finally dies. Every study,scientific or otherwise, agrees that the death of the physicalbody of the human being is inevitable and in no case deathcould be overcome. Apparently the purpose of every humanindividual is to live on this planet for some time. It should besole purpose of the life of the true philanthropists and thephilosopher to work out the ways and means to fulfill thisapparent purpose of human beings in the most comfortable,fulfilling and just manner so that there is no injustice,confusion, confrontation, exploitation, corruption andbloodshed on this planet.Philosophy has to be revived to use the sea ofinformation and knowledge available to us so as toaccomplish the task of fulfilling this apparent purpose ofhuman life because it is only through philosophy all theinformation and knowledge could be analyzed and processedso as to understand human beings and the universe. Theinformation and knowledge has been utilized in thisendeavor to revive the philosophy in order to understandthe human being and the universe and efforts have beenmade to know the ways and means by which humans couldlive on this planet peacefully without injustice, confusion,confrontation, exploitation, corruption and bloodshed.After Kant (1724-1804) almost no philosopher haspaid due attention to this field of study in a positive sense byutilizing the present day knowledge and information. Theendeavor is written in such a manner that the knowledge of2
  3. 3. philosophy is not a pre-requisite to understand the messageof this endeavor. However the knowledge of philosophy,physics and political philosophy will be of great help inunderstanding this work in true perspective. Besides thereader need not be highly qualified person to understandthis endeavor but anybody of the level of under graduateeducation could easily do so.The individual human being and the collective socialstructure is the primary concern of this endeavor. Since thestudies and research was compartmentalized in narrowfields of study and the researchers confined to these narrowfields of study, none of philosophers attempted to utilize therelevant scientific and other knowledge and information toderive the exact nature and purpose of human life and asocial structure required for peaceful existence on thisplanet. There had been great philosophers in the past fromSocrates to Kant, but due to lack of scientific evidence andverification of their knowledge, their philosophies remainedas ideas and no one has tried to apply scientific informationto test and verify the knowledge they gave to the worldespecially during the last two centuries. This is high time,though late, to reveal and to make all human beings torealize that this is what you are, this is what your purpose is,this is what you are supposed to do and this is how it couldbe done at the individual level as well as at the collectivelevel.All human beings at one time or the other have beenmisled, exploited, confused, corrupted, massacred andterrorized by a few for one reason or the other. A state of3
  4. 4. total confusion is prevailing and human beings are simplyreduced to animals who strive for their survival andmaterialism. Religious corruptions prevail in almost allreligions as the result of which religions are reduced to thedoctrines of illogical beliefs which cumulatively adds to thestate of confusion. Basic and fundamental concepts requireto be clarified so that there is no confusion and exploitation.The individual life and collective social structure are closelyinterdependent and change in one cannot lead to the changein the other. At both levels a simultaneous change isrequired and this endeavor is precisely meant to effect thechange. One might feel that this endeavor reveals somemiraculous findings or some highly complicated andtechnical matters, beyond the comprehension andunderstanding of the common human being, through whichthe change is contemplated but this endeavor discusses &uses simple, basic, fundamental and understandable axiomsso as to realize the importance of the change in theindividual life and the collective social structure and by usingsimple, basic, fundamental axioms this endeavor works outthe alternative world order.At the individual level people especially educated andeven the uneducated but intelligent people find the religiousbeliefs as illogical doctrines which they do not dare tochallenge. What they understand about religion they find itneither applicable nor practicable in the world. There isconfusion as the result of which they simply hold their faithand belief without any conviction. They do not feel anydesire to ponder on their faith & belief and nor take up in4
  5. 5. depth study of their faith & belief. Those who take the faithand belief seriously and take up in depth study of their faith& belief find certain fundamental facts of the faith & beliefillogical and irrational and their confusion cumulativelyincreases. When they turn to the religions scholars andpreachers for the answer the reply is not at all convincingand in some cases the reply is that for faith and belief therationality and logic does not apply.There are serious fundamental problems with thepresent world order but it has to its credit the progress ineducation of all sections of society. No educated individualwill accept, with total conviction, the faith and belief systemswhich are not based on rationality and logic. It cannot bedenied that a small percentage of people in orthodoxsocieties keep faith & belief with total conviction withoutgoing deep into the philosophical defects in their faith andbelief. But in those societies also educated and intelligentpeople keep their doubts and confusion with them and noone dares to come out with the problems with their faith &belief. These confusions about the faith & belief systems areone of the basic factors for the evolution of the presentagnostic world order. Charles Darwin was a genius of histime and keen study of his life history would reveal that heinitially intended to associate with the church and because ofthe fundamental defects in his faith and belief system heturned into an atheist and proposed Darwin’s Theory whichbeing a great instrument for evolution of the presentagnostic world order. This endeavor attempts to put a finalnail in the coffin of the Darwin’s Theory.5
  6. 6. Every individual in the world, irrespective of theirfaith, is convinced that the social structure which is evolvingbecause of the present world order is bad and with time it isgetting from bad to worst. Every individual is also convincedthat the world order and the social structure would require achange. But every individual, though convinced, isapprehensive above the alternative world order andsecondly realizing the dimensions of the efforts required tochange the world order; every individual acts as a mutespectator of whatever is happening in the world. Theadvocates of the present world order have made it clear tothe world that it would be absolutely futile to even to thinkof any alternative world order especially the world orderbased on faith. Any efforts of changing the world order, evenon a small scale or localized level is being suppressed withruthless force. People at large, irrespective of their faith andeven the atheists, have to realize that there has to be aworld order and a social structure which could bepracticable, acceptable and applicable to the whole world.Every philanthropist, philosopher, thinker, intellectual andtrue leader should not leave any stone unturned to identifyand devise a new world order which could be practicable,acceptable, compatible and applicable to the whole world sothat there is no injustice, confusion, confrontation,exploitation, corruption and bloodshed in the world. This ishigh time to accomplish this task and it will be greatestservice to the humankind and the generations to follow.The present world order is basically agnostic and thesocial structure which has evolved encourages the agnostic6
  7. 7. values. Though at the personal level one is free to practiceany faith but has no power to interfere in the evolution ofthe agnostic social structure. Nobody can deny that thepresent scientific and technological advancement, abolitionof slavery and progress in education of all sections ofsocieties has taken place during the present world order. Butthat does not mean that with some other world order theseachievements could not have been possible. The civilizationswould not have survived if world order had not allowedthese achievements. Unfortunately the present world orderhas failed in every other sphere of activity of the humankind;the most important aspect of human life which has badlysuffered because of the present world order is faith. Thepresent agnostic world order is responsible for moraldegradation of the human beings to an extent that it will bea herculean task to repair the damage. The family structurehas almost collapsed all over; the collapse is almostcomplete in the developed countries whereas in the under-developed countries the degree of collapse is lower. Themoral and human values are at the verge of annihilation. Thepresent agnostic world order encourages the adoption ofmaterialism as the true religion, where anything other thanmaterialism is not of any importance. Every sort ofcorruption, exploitation, confrontation, injustice, bloodshedis the order of the day in the present world order.This endeavor undertakes the task of understandingthe human being scientifically, philosophically andpsychologically so as to work out the most suitable andpracticable ways and means of living a satisfying and7
  8. 8. peaceful life at the individual as well as at the collectivelevel. A new method has been conceived for this purpose.Available scientific, philosophical and psychologicalknowledge and information shall be analyzed and discussedin great details to derive the basic tenets of the religion andthe world order. This study could be applied to the differentreligions so as to identify the corruption in the religions andthe present world order, so as to rectify the corruptions inthe religions, which exists in almost all the religions and onthe basis of this study the possible and practicable worldorder would be derived so that human beings could livepeacefully individually and collectively.8
  9. 9. 1. Impracticability of DemocracyI. Human Being – Life & soulII. Human Being – Nature & PurposeIII. Political Systems & Impracticability ofDemocracy9
  10. 10. I. Human Being – Life & soulHuman being is the most intelligent and perfectcreature on this planet and our basic and primary concernshould be to strive to understand the origin, constituentsand purpose of human being. Unless and until correct, logicaland rational answers are found, nothing could be right aboutthe life of the human beings on this planet. Human beingshave reached almost to the point of climax of scientific andintellectual development and with the available knowledge& information, it is high time and it should not be verydifficult to find out answers of these basic and fundamentalquestions.Presently the human life is in a state of confusedexistence and will continue to be so, if the task of finding theanswers of these basic questions is not undertaken.Let us first consider the origin of human life. Therecould be only two possibilities as to how life on this planet,including the human life, came into existence. Either the lifecame into being by itself or life has been created by somecreator. One has to bear in mind that either of the twopossibilities could be right.Human knowledge is basically information regardingthe effects and in some cases the mechanism of effects andin almost all the cases have no knowledge of the cause.Scientists present hypothesis, theories and even concludethat they possess the knowledge, but they basically haveeither the information of the effect or information regardingthe mechanism of the effect. This applies to most of thephysical sciences, especially the biological sciences. To10
  11. 11. substantiate this a few examples are quoted here. Newtonwas basically a philosopher who concluded that matterattracts matter and called it gravitation by philosophicallyobserving and analyzing the falling of an apple from the tree.This is a universal fact and scientists have put forward atheory that gravitation is due to the exchange of gravitons,which being the infinitely small particles. The gravitationbeing the effect and the theory of exchange of gravitonsbeing the mechanism of effect but the actual cause of thiseffect shall continue to be the mystery till the causativefactor of gravitation is discovered. Physicists know that theopposite charged particles attract and the same chargedparticles repel. These are the effects which physicists knowbut the actual cause of attraction or repulsion is not known.To explain the mechanism of attraction or repulsion,physicists say that the attraction or repulsion is due to theelectric field which in turn, according to some theoreticalphysicists, is due to exchange of infinitely small particles, butwhat is the actual causes of emission of such particles is notknown. Thus the actual cause shall continue to remain themystery. The cosmological theories are simple theories ofthe effect, but the actual cause is unknown. The Big BangTheory concerns the effect as the cause remains a mystery.Fertilization is an effect and the cause of the fertilizationshall remain a mystery, unless and until serious attempts aremade to know the cause.With this background let us explore the first possibilitythat life came into existence by itself. There is one theorywhich has been put forward which claims that life evolvednaturally in time by mere chance under the influence of the11
  12. 12. environmental factors without any intervention from anyexternal factor; which is called Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.Before we examine the Darwin’s Theory let us look into thelife history of Darwin. It has to be accepted that Darwin wasan intelligent person of his time. Initially he got associatedwith the Church for some time and after remainingassociated with the Church he could not reconcile with someirrational and illogical concepts of Christianity as the result ofwhich he disassociated with the Church. To justify hisdisassociation with the Church he looked for ways & meansto defy the existence of God. I would like to reproduce histhree quotes and make comments on his quotes. The firstquote is ‘Believing as I do that man in the distant future willbe far more perfect creature than he now is, it is anintolerable thought that he and all other sentient beings aredoomed to complete annihilation after such long continuedslow progress’. The present day science has made it crystalclear that the life on this planet has to end sooner or later.The universe as well as the world is living on the edge andthe whole equilibrium can get disturbed at any time. Sun isemitting the radiation in space around it continuously as theresult of the nuclear reaction called nuclear fusion. Thereaction could stop at any point of time and emission ofradiation could stop and this radiation being the source oflife on this planet and resultantly the life on this planetwould annihilate. Secondly without doing any calculations,the nuclear fuel in the sun has to exhaust at one time,however long it may take, as the result of which the life onthis planet is destined to annihilate. Thirdly the sun isemitting radiation continuously and a small portion of this12
  13. 13. radiation reaches this planet. Part of this radiation isreflected and part of it is being absorbed by this planet bymeans of photosynthesis and other mechanisms. Thus theenergy level of the atmosphere of this planet is continuouslyincreasing resulting the average temperature of theatmosphere is also increasing with time. Let us not take intoaccount the increase in temperature due to artificial carbonand other gas emissions. Thus the average temperature ofthis planet will continue to increase as long as sun emits theradiation and water level will continue to increase in the seasdue to the melting of the glaciers; all or most of the landmass will be drowned, if the glaciers contain that much ofwater which could drown the whole land mass otherwiseland mass will be partly drowned. The drowning of the landmass will annihilate most of the life forms of this planet. Thisshould prove that Darwin had wrong beliefs which cannotstand the test of science.The second quote of Darwin (Introduction to thedescent of Man, 1871) is a very beautiful quote and I wonderhad he pondered on this quote with an open vision, hewould not have presented his Theory of Evolution. The quoteis ‘Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than doesknowledge; it is those who know little, not those who knowmuch, who so positively assert that this or that problem willnever be solved’. Keeping in view the scientific knowledgeavailable today, Darwin’s knowledge could be comparedwith ignorance of today. He did not imagine that the basicunit of life which is a cell could be studied with the help ofmodern technologies to the extent it is being studied today.Had he foreseen the complexities of the cell and that of the13
  14. 14. DNA, he would have considered himself as an ignorant beingand would not have tried to solve the problem ofunderstanding the origin of life with his virtual ignorance. Histheory draws inferences, without considering the cause, oneffects and assumes that the cause is a natural phenomenon.The cause as such is taken for granted and thereby denied.Unless and until the possible causes or mechanism of anyphenomenon are discussed and proper provision kept in thetheory for the mechanism or causative factors, the theorycannot be justified. Darwin closed the doors of anypossibility of finding the mechanism or the cause anddeclared nature, time and environment to be the cause. Thisreveals that Darwin had the wrong conception of the basicprinciples of science.The third quote of Darwin (Descent of Man) is ‘falsefacts are highly injurious to the progress of science, for theyoften endure long, but false views, if supported by someevidence do little harm, for everyone takes a salutarypleasure in proving their falseness; and when this is done,one path towards errors is closed and road to truth is oftenat the same time opened’. It we analyze this quote, it is notthe false facts which are injurious to the progress of sciencebecause sooner or later science will prove false facts to befalse. But false views, if supported by some evidence aboutsome obscure matter are more injurious to the progress ofscience. The views whether false or true views continue tillthe obscurity of the matter is resolved. Since the obscurity ofthe origin of life has not been solved till date, Darwin’s viewscontinue to be held despite the lapse of about one and halfcentury. If we assume, at this stage, that Darwin’s views14
  15. 15. were wrong then humanity after assessing the damageDarwin’s views have done to the humanity scientifically,socially, politically and morally, will never forgive Darwin forhis false views. Darwin never considered this possibilitywhatsoever, which reveals that he had wrong understandingas well.From the quotes of Darwin it should be clear thatDarwin had wrong beliefs, wrong conceptions and wrongunderstanding. This endeavor will prove this scientifically aswell as philosophically.In this endeavor I do not intend to repeat what isalready written so as to keep its size within limits. Scientificdifficulties of Darwin’s Theory on the same principles onwhich it was derived are well known and well written about.Instead of repeating what is already written I will refer to thecollection of books wherein all the information regarding thedifficulties of Darwin’s Theory are discussed in great detail.These books have been written by Adnan Oktar under thepen-name Harun Yahya which are available on the, which are: -01. The Evolution Impasse02. If Darwin Had Known About DNA03. The Skulls That Demolish Darwin04. What Darwinists Fail to Consider05. Confessions of the Evolutionists06. Darwin’s Dilemma; The ‘soul’07. The Cambrian Evidence That Darwin Failed toComprehend08. Atlas of Creation09. The Intellectual Struggle Against Darwinism15
  16. 16. 10. The Error of the Evolution of Species11. The Transitional Form Dilemma12. The Collapse of the Theory of Evolution13. Once Upon A Time There Was Darwinism14. The Social Weapon, Darwinism15. Charles Darwin & His Magic Barrel16. How Fossils Overturned Evolution17. The Religion of Darwinism18. The Dark Spell of Darwinism19. New Research Demolishes Evolution20. The Evolution Deceit21. The Disasters Darwinism Brought to Humanity22. Fascism: The Bloody Ideology of Darwinism23. Darwinism Refuted24. A Definitive Reply to Evolutionist PropagandaI would request the readers to go through at leastsome of these books and read from purely scientificperspective as some of the material in these books has beenwritten with religious perspective. Reading these books isnot a pre-requisite for understanding the contents of thisendeavor, but those readers who are interested in scientificanalysis of the Darwin’s Theory should go through thesebooks. These books give sufficient proofs that there are veryserious problems with Darwin’s Theory scientifically and assuch the theory is not tenable logically and scientifically.The basic unit of life is a ‘cell’ which is common to alllife forms. Biologists now know almost everything physicalabout the cell as to what are the constituents of the differenttypes of cells, plant and animal, and what functions differentcells perform; of which Darwin at his time was not aware of.16
  17. 17. The cells, plant or animal, could be in three states; dead,living but dormant and living. Again dead cells could be ofthree types; firstly dead cells with food supply stopped andconstituents of the cell intact, secondly dead cells with foodsupply intact but constituents of the cellsdamaged/disturbed and thirdly dead cells with food supplyintact and constituents of cells intact. The existence of thirdtype of dead cells is a phenomenon which cannot beexplained by any scientific demonstration, not to speak ofDarwin’s Theory. According to Darwin’s Theory the cells havelife as a natural phenomenon and there should be life inevery cell with food supply intact and constituents of thecells intact. The very existence of dead cells with food supplyintact and constituents of cells intact defies the Darwin’sTheory on simple & fundamental facts. It is believed thatDNA molecule in the nucleus of the cell contains all theinformation pertaining to the cell, organ or organism and toknow about the cell and the DNA I will again refer to twobooks again written by Adnan Oktar under the pen- nameHarun Yahya which are available on namely01. The Miracle in the Cell02. The secrets in the DNAThis has been done to avoid writing what is alreadywritten and to limit the size of this endeavor. Again I wouldrequest the readers to read with purely scientific perspectiveas in these books some material has been written withreligious perspective.With this in the background, recently the DNA of thechimpanzee has been matched with human DNA (R.J. Baitten17
  18. 18. 2002) and it has been demonstrated that the two DNA’salmost (95%) match. This defies the Theory of Evolution andalmost puts the final nail in the coffin of the Theory ofEvolution, because two species with almost matching DNAdiffer so much in physical and instinctive characteristicsproves loudly and clearly that DNA is not containing all theinformation regarding the cell, organ or organism and theinheritance & modification over time and environment is notbased on facts. Darwin had conceded that ‘if it could bedemonstrated that any complex organ/organism existed,which could not possibly have been formed by numeroussuccessive slight modifications my theory would absolutelybreak-down’. This is exactly what the matching ofchimpanzee & human DNA’s demonstrates. Two species doexist which have almost same DNA and even the cellstructures, proves that one species has not proceeded fromanother and live differently and separately. There is noquestion of any modification. Thus this should be taken asscientific collapse of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution whicheven Darwin himself had conceded.Let us analyze the Darwin’s Theory of Evolutionphilosophically. There are some basic, fundamental andsimple facts which need to be considered to understand thephenomenon of life. Molecules and chemicals are known tohave physical and chemical properties. Outside the cell, thebasic unit of life, molecules and chemicals in anycomposition or in any set of arrangement do not and cannothave the property of reproduction, growth, sense ofidentification of harmful and beneficial molecules andchemicals and many other senses. How it is that all the18
  19. 19. constituents of the cell when in the cell possess senses?Whatever the extent of information contained in the DNA, itcannot give the senses of reproduction, growth and manyother senses to the cell, organ or organism; DNA can, at themost, be responsible for definite physical and chemicalcharacteristics of the cell, organ or organism. The life in thecells or organic being cannot be due to the merearrangement of chemicals & molecules and by any meansthe instincts cannot be stored and transmitted. Darwin andevolutionists assume that because of special arrangement ofchemicals and molecules in the cells and elsewhere, lifeexists as a natural phenomenon and the instincts in theorganic being could be stored, transmitted and modified bythe numerous, successive and slight modifications. This isdue to the lack of philosophical mind on the part of biologistswhich includes the evolutionists. We need to understand thephenomenon of life before we could decide upon the originof life. It will be proved that evolutionist’s basic presumptionthat life exists due to mere arrangement of chemicals &molecules in the cells, organs or organisms is wrong.Philosophically it has been concluded, decades before, thatthe process of evolution as the origin of life is not tenableand there is something wrong with the theory of evolutionand explanation of phenomenon of life as understood by thebiologists. This would be clear to the readers by the passagefrom Wildon Carr which is quoted as follows;‘If intellect is a product of evolution the whole mechanisticconcept of the nature and origin of life is absurd, and theprinciple which science has adopted must clearly be revised.We have only to state it to see the self-contradiction. How19
  20. 20. can the intellect, a mode of apprehending reality, be itself anevolution of something which only exists as an abstraction ofthat mode of apprehending, which is the intellect? If intellectis an evolution of life, then the concept of the life which canevolve intellect as a particular mode of apprehending realitymust be the concept of a more concrete activity than that ofany abstract mechanical movement which the intellect canpresent to itself by analyzing its apprehended content. Andyet further, if the intellect be a product of the evolution oflife, it is not absolute but relative to the activity of the lifewhich has evolved it; how then, in such case, can scienceexclude the subjective aspect of the knowing and build onthe objective presentation as an absolute? Clearly thebiological sciences necessitate a reconsideration of thescientific principle.’The readers should bear in mind that every livingorganism has the intellect of survival, growth & reproductionas the natural instincts. It is due to the compartmentalizationof different fields of study that the biologists andevolutionists have not taken notice of such basic &fundamental philosophical problems of evolution &phenomenon of life.Newton’s observation of gravitational force betweenmatter was accepted as a natural phenomenon withoutgoing into the reason of attraction. This was accepted as auniversal fact and physicists did not bother to look for thereasons or mechanism of attraction between the matter forseveral centuries. Now the physicists have come forwardwith the theory that matter attracts matter because ofexchange of infinitesimally small particles called gravitons.20
  21. 21. Similarly the processes which take place within the cell,biologists assume that these processes are a naturalphenomenon and no biologists has gone further as to howsuch processes take place within the cells and have given thenames like protein-synthesis, cell-metabolism to cover upthe mysterious functioning of the cells. The biologist have togive an explanation of causative factors for all the processeswhich take place within the cells and none of the micro-biologists, including molecular biologists, bio-chemists andgenetic scientists have even thought of any explanation. Thefood material being converted into amino acids which in turnare converted into 2,00,000 types of proteins in the cells asthe human body uses this number of proteins. It is presumedby the biologists that the information of protein formation isencoded in the DNA and also the information of the proteinsto be utilized within the cells & those which are to beexported outside the cells. This is the illogical argument heldby the biologists to avoid defining the actual cause of thefunctioning of the cell. Unless there are means ofcommunication between the DNA and the actual constituentof the cell where the protein synthesis and other functionstake place and these means of communication have to beidentified which could pass on such information. No suchmeans of efficient communication have been conceived notto speak of the identification. The functioning of the cell isaccepted as a mystery which needs to be resolved.There has to be a theory to explain the mysteriousfunctioning of the cells and that of organs and organisms. Ifthe theory can explain all the phenomena which have notbeen explained so far by scientists and the philosophers then21
  22. 22. one has to consider the theory seriously. The theory hasbeen conceived and is presented herein. If that is done, theDarwin’s Theory summarily fails to explain the origin &phenomenon of life.There has to be a driving force within the cells, organsor organisms which could be responsible for livingness of thecells, organs or organism. Human beings have to look for thisdriving force which gives life to the cell to know the origin &phenomenon of life. It has to be done scientifically as well asphilosophically.The existence of the dead cells with the food supplyintact and the constituents of the cells also intact is aphenomenon which in no case could be explained by anyscientific demonstration with the presumption of biologiststhat life exists as a natural phenomenon in the cells. Thisphenomenon could be explained by existence of somedriving force of livingness within the cells. There is absolutelyno other alternative but to accept this driving force orlivingness or essence within the cells to explain existence ofdead cells with food supply intact and constituents of cellsintact.Secondly matching of the DNA in two species to theextent of 95% or more and their differences in physical andinstinctive characteristics, as wide as that betweenchimpanzee and the humans, loudly and clearly proves theexistence of some other substance, the driving force orlivingness or essence as the cause of differences in thephysical and instinctive characteristics.Thirdly despite tremendous advances in the molecularbiology, bio-chemistry and genetics the functioning of a22
  23. 23. living cell remains a mystery. Unless and until we accept theexistence of a driving force or livingness in the cell, thismystery cannot be resolved. This substance within cell as thesource of life has to be highly complex; more complex thanthe cell or DNA.Fourthly we might know the processes fromproduction of sperm or pollen and its fertilization then birth,growth, survival, reproduction and finally death of theorganisms but science has so far failed to assign or explainthe causative factors to all these processes.Fifthly there are many other phenomena such assleep, mysticism or spirituality, mystical curing of diseasedhuman beings, evil spirits etc. All these phenomena couldonly be explained by the existence of this complex substancewithin the human beings.The physical characteristics of this complex substanceare described as under: -01. This substance has to be invisible to the naked eye,microscope, electron microscope etc. because till dateno such substance has been seen or imagined to beexisting in the cell or organic being except some vagueimaginations by some philosophers like Plato,Aristotle, Leibniz, Avicenna and Averroes etc.02. This substance has to be highly complex andinteractive within the cells; otherwise this substancehas to be inert and inactive with respect to othermatter outside of the cells. This is due to the fact thatphysicists have not made any observations regardingsuch a substance. It has to be more inert thanneutrinos outside the cells.23
  24. 24. 03. This substance when interacting with the constituentsof the cells or organic being gives senses ofreproduction, growth, understanding or simply life tothe cells or organic being.04. This substance has to be highly interactive andcommunicating between different units of itsexistence within the organism & capable of havingindependent existence also.Evidently the substance could be highly complex‘energy’ which could have its independent existence as well.This ‘energy’ is the source of life of every living thing, plant &animal.At this stage, readers might feel that I am trying toresolve the mysteries of cell function and life or human beingby introducing some mysterious ‘energy’. But I will prove theexistence of this ‘energy’ indirectly by explaining everythingwhich hitherto could not be explained by science orphilosophy; besides a direct proof will be given to the humanbeings when they could simply feel the presence of this‘energy’ within them.The humankind being a special and perfect creatureand our primary concern, let our attention be on the humanbeings only. This ‘energy’ is the source of life for all livingthings and in so far as the human being is concerned in this‘energy’ is embedded the ‘ego’ of the human being. This‘ego’ is the ‘soul’ of the human being. Thus living humanbeing is not simply a set of different groups of cells butbesides these cells, human being has this ‘energy’ as thesource of life and a ‘soul’. The physical body of the humanbeing, ‘energy’ and the ‘soul’ can have their independent24
  25. 25. existence also. The physical body in the form of a dead bodyhas neither ‘energy’ nor ‘soul’. In the condition of sleephuman being has physical body and ‘energy’ only. Acceptableexplanation of all the phenomena by this design is a proof ofexistence of ‘energy’ and ‘soul’.The body and the ‘soul’ independently are inactiveand with the help of interaction between the body, the ‘soul’and the ‘energy’; human being is a living being capable of allthe activities which human being perform.Due to the interaction between the ‘energy’ and thehuman body thoughts are created either due to the externalstimuli or in situ. These thoughts after giving some feelingsreach the ‘soul’, where final decision of action is taken andopinion is formed. The ‘soul’ of the human being has theinnate knowledge of right & wrong of every action, thoughtor opinion. Now if we prove that innate knowledge of right &wrong exists within the human being that will indirectlyprove the existence of ‘energy’ and ‘soul’.I have done intense research by interacting withpeople of different education levels and intelligencequotients, of different classes of societies and of differentfinancial status and even observed the children of differentages of above mentioned classes of people. Every adulthuman being has agreed of having the innate knowledge ofright and wrong irrespective of religion and social taboo. Anyintelligent reader will agree to it and he is free to consult anynumber of people; then he will simply confirm that everyindividual including the children have the innate knowledgeof right and wrong of all his actions and thoughts. This is themost convincing indirect proof of existence of the ‘energy’25
  26. 26. and ‘soul’ to all the people of the world and resultantlyindirect proof of the ultimate failure of Darwin’s Theory ofEvolution.The destiny of the human being lies in as to how heapplies his innate knowledge of right and wrong to all of hisactions and thoughts.Due to the external stimuli or in situ thoughts arecreated in the human being as the result of the interactionbetween body and the ‘energy’. This gives rise to theformation of feelings, which may require action or may notrequire action, and in ‘soul’, with the innate knowledge ofthe right and wrong, decisions are taken about the actionand opinion. Thus an attitude of a human being is formed bythe way he acts and with time he develops a habit and finallya type of personality is formed which determine the destinyof the human being. This all is represented in the figure 1 foreasy and quick understanding.26
  27. 27. 27Fig 1External StimuliBody EnergyIn situBody EnergyThoughtsFeelingsRequiring Action Requiring No Action‘soul’OpinionActionAttitudeHabitPersonalityDestinyHaving innate knowledge ofright & wrong and decidesabout action and opinion
  28. 28. Evolutionists assume that habits or instincts are inheritedand transmitted to the off-springs by their parents. Butthrough genes only the physical characteristics aretransmitted to the off-springs. This fact is confirmed by thefact that the DNA’s of the chimpanzee and the human beingmatch to the extent of 95% because it could be acceptablethat difference of 5% in the DNA’s of chimpanzee and humanbeing could account for the physical differences between thetwo. But the difference of 5% of DNA’s cannot explain thehuge difference of physical and instinctive characteristicsbetween humans & chimpanzees.Since physical characteristic could be stored andtransmitted through genes as such for all the plant speciesthe type of ‘energy’ required as source of life could beuniform ‘energy’. But for the animal life the ‘energy’ has tobe different for different species, because instinctivecharacteristics of different species are different. Evidentlythere is no need of any ‘soul’ in respect of plant life on thewhole and all of the animal species except human being.Keeping in view what has stated herein and trying tounderstand the human being to be in a state in which wefind him, we could easily draw the inference that the Theoryof Evolution fails scientifically as well as philosophically. Butthe fact remains that the origin of life has to be explainedwhich I will do hereunder.It stands cleared that the cell and ‘energy’ in respectof plant life and all of the animal species except the humanbeings and cell, ‘energy’ and ‘soul’ in respect of humanbeings contain all the information of physical characteristicsand instinctive characteristics including the senses of growth,28
  29. 29. reproduction, etc. The cell being the basic unit of lifewherein the ‘energy’ is the source of life or driving force orlivingness and in respect of humans cells contain besides‘energy’, the ‘soul’; the most convenient and acceptableorigin of life has to be the cell but unlike Theory of Evolution,cells have to originate for different species separately andindependently and secondly the place of origin of the cellshave to be water and thirdly the cells have to originate atdifferent places on the planet as different species, plants andanimals, survive in different climatic zones. Human being isone of the species which can survive naturally in everyclimatic zone. In respect of human being we could acceptthat the whole humanity originated from the couple of cells;one cell of the male and another cell of the female. In thatcase one has to understand that the combination of cell and‘energy’ especially the ‘energy’ in respect of initial two cells,one male & one female to be slightly different, to allow forthe fending in the initial stages of the first human male andfemale like some of the animal species who survive inabsence of the parents.Having solved mystery of the functioning of the celland proposed a theory of origin & phenomenon of life; thequestion as to whether the initial cells for every species haveoriginated by itself or have been created, needs to beanswered. After analysis of all the studies conductedregarding the cell and the DNA and also keeping in view whatis contained herein one can easily conclude that there isnegligible probability that the cells could come into being byitself. How could such a complex and perfect entity comeinto existence without the intervention of the perfect29
  30. 30. designer or creator? Any statistician, biologist or aphilosopher after due consideration of all aspects of scienceand philosophy would simply arrive at one and only solution,that the initial cells of every species have been created by aperfect designer or creator. Even if scientists may be inposition to assemble the cell but to give life to the cell wouldbe beyond human reach because the ‘energy’ required forthe cells to be live and functional is not under the control ofhuman being. This also substantiates the existence of perfectdesigner or creator for as the only cause of creation of all lifeforms on this planet.The theory & design of the human being which hasbeen conceived herein had not been thought of by scientistsso far but several philosophers in the past have vaguelyconceived the existence of such a design of human being.These ancient philosophers namely Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz,Averroes, Plotinus, Avicenna etc. were the first whosuggested the somewhat similar design of human being, butsince no scientific evidence & verification was possible atthose times, the designs remained only as ideas and virtuallyfaded away with time. Since during last two centuriesphilosophy was an almost forgotten field of study noscientist or researcher, also due to compartmentalization &specialization of scientific study, paid any attention to thegreat works of these ancient philosophers. Out of all thephilosophers whom the world has produced till date Platostands out as the visionary philosopher, which shall beproved by the contents of this book also because hisphilosophy had a divine touch. The contents of this work willmake it clear that Aristotle, though a genius of his time,30
  31. 31. except his borrowed concept of ‘Ousia’ which he borrowedfrom Plato, all his philosophy especially his politicalphilosophy had been on wrong foundations. Plato’s conceptof ‘forms’ and his belief that the material world as it seemsto us is not the real world, but only a shadow of the realworld, has been conceived & evidence gathered is this work.Leibniz had also put forward the concept of ‘monads’ inplace of ‘energy’ of this work as the source of life. In the‘soul’ of the human being there is the concept of perfectuniversal creator which human being feel as intuition whichDescartes realized and suggested that since humans havethe feeling that God exists; God must exist. This designconfirms the basic concept of Descartes. Descartes’ conceptwas rejected by Kant later-on on the basis of his confusingphilosophy which was not based on the right principles.However, one must admit that a few of the inferences whichKant drew from his confusing philosophy do hold goodbecause he in his philosophy accepted the existence of ‘apriori’ but his definitions and classifications of ‘a priori’ arenot tenable. Avicenna tried to apply the Greek philosophyespecially the Aristotle’s philosophy, to the religious thoughtbut encountered certain genuine difficulties which he spelledout in his works because the existence of perfect universalcreator has some serious difficulties in the Greek philosophywhich have been resolved in this work. Algazel didpainstaking work to point out certain basic difficulties in theGreek philosophy and tried to solve the basic difficulties ofreligious thought in his work namely “The Incoherence of thePhilosophers” but failed. His failure of giving proper &justified explanations of the difficulties in the religious31
  32. 32. thought has been described by Averroes in his work “TheIncoherence of the Incoherence”. Averroes rightly concludedthat the difficulty cannot be explained by another difficulty.However Averroes had also proposed a somewhat similardesign of human being as contained in this work but lackedin details & description and scientific demonstration. Finallyafter Kant philosophy as a field of study was neglected by theworld. This was all due to the fact that the Greek philosophy,especially the Aristotle’s philosophy, and subsequentphilosophies were based on wrong axioms of matter as thebase material of everything in the universe and imaginationof anything other than matter as the base material did notoccur to any philosopher except a few philosophers likeRussell but the application was vaguely done, as the resultthey could not derive other philosophical conclusionscorrectly. With the scientific knowledge presently availablethis foundation of philosophy has been challenged in thiswork with scientific evidence.To summarize the theory & design of the humanbeing; human being consists of the body, ‘energy’ and ‘soul’.All the three constituents of the human being are capable ofindependent existence. The body occupies the defined spacewhereas ‘energy’ and ‘soul’ have no defined space as theyhave no limitations of space. The body acts as material baseand ‘energy’ is the source of life, the driving force orlivingness or essence within the body and has abundantproperties; ‘energy’ could be initially uniform with all thehuman being and once in a human being it stores theinformation and subsequently gets labeled as ‘energy’ of aparticular individual. While interacting with the body it gives32
  33. 33. the senses of growth, reproduction, feelings, emotions andmost importantly produces the thoughts of right and wrongdesires as the result of external stimuli or in situ. This‘energy’ under special conditions can have the senses ofhearing, seeing and movement independent of the body somuch so this ‘energy’ can perceive the existence of other‘energy’ and know its content and quality and interact withthe other ‘energy’. Besides it stands already described as towhat the ‘energy’ in itself has to be.‘soul’ as already discussed is embedded in the‘energy’ and capable of independent existence also whereinthe concept of existence of the creator is already existentbesides it has the innate knowledge of right and wrong andthe decision of action or opinion lies with the ‘soul’ andfinally the ‘souls’ of every individual are already created withdefined identification as every ‘soul’ has an ‘ego’ associatedwith it.This final design of human being would require somemore clarification. As already clarified that due to externalstimuli or in situ interactions between body and the ‘energy’thoughts are created. These thoughts give rise to desires andthese desires could be right or wrong. Since these desireshave to have the approval of the ‘soul’, this has the innateknowledge of a desire being right or wrong, before thehuman being could take any action or form an opinion. Itneeds no clarification that the ‘soul’ of an individual has tobe specific and no two ‘souls’ could be similar or equivalent.The most important point which needs clarification is thatthe ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of existence of theperfect universal creator. The manifestation of this innate33
  34. 34. knowledge is that most of the human beings hold on to theperception that there exists a perfect universal creatorirrespective of the religions they believe in. The intelligenthuman beings who study the religions deeply find that mostof the religions are illogical and irrational but yet hold on tothe perception that there exists a perfect universal creator.They also understand that the religions are corrupted, onemore than the other, and even though having rejected thereligious beliefs (as most people of the Europe and Americaand of advanced countries have) yet in the heart of heartsthey know that there exists a perfect universal creator. Thiscould be sufficient proof to every intelligent human beingthat the ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of the existence of aperfect universal creator.The ‘energy’ under special conditions can have certainproperties/senses; could now be discussed to explain certainphenomena which hitherto have not been explained byscience or philosophy.It has been already clarified that thoughts give rise todesires in the human beings. The pre-requisite for spiritualityor mysticism is to have the monotheistic belief, irrespectiveof religion, and one has to sacrifice all the human desiresright as well as wrong except the desire of feeding oneself tosurvive for the sake of one perfect universal creator. Besidesthere is another mode of mysticism; that is to adopt any ofthe monotheistic religion and carry out all the dutiesprescribed under that religion as a normal human being,then under the guidance of a spiritual guide and definedpractices one can attain the spiritual power. By spiritualpower is meant to have the control over his ‘energy’ through34
  35. 35. which he is exposed to different experiences which cannotbe expressed by him. The mystic or Sufi has the control overhis ‘energy’ and the degree of control varies from mystic tomystic depending upon the purity of his mind and intention.With time the mystic attains the perfection through increasein control over his ‘energy’; if he sustains the hardships andmaintains his purity of mind and intention. Through ‘energy’within him, the mystic can have the senses of hearing, seeingand movement independent of the organs of hearing, seeingand those of movement of the body. The perfection of themystic could reach the climax when the mystic attains thepower to influence the ‘energy’ of the other human being.Since life in the human being is due to the interactionof body and the ‘energy’ and through the influence on the‘energy’ the diseases of the diseased could be cured bymystic, whereas doctors through chemicals, which influencedifferent organs of the patient, cure the patients; besidesdoctors repair the damages of different organs/tissuesthrough operations to cure the patients. Most of thediseases are due to some malfunction of the cells/tissueseither due to the attack of bacteria or viruses or otherwise orelse because of the malfunction of the ‘energy’ within thecells/tissues. The mystic through the influence on the‘energy’ within the cells/tissues can cure both types ofdiseases whereas the doctors could cure the cells/tissues bychemicals or operation. This should explain the mystic curingof the patients which hitherto has been an unexplainedphenomenon by science, theology or philosophy.In many religions also there are also such practices bywhich they attain the control over the ‘energy’ of the self or35
  36. 36. other human being. The readers should know that mysticismor spirituality is also a way of life and some people sacrificetheir lives for this purpose. The existence of mysticism orspiritually or even poetic mysticism should be indirect proofof this design of human being.This design of human being will also help in scientificstudy of sleep, dreams and psychology.Lastly this design of human being rejects all thematerialistic philosophies. I could discuss all materialisticphilosophies one by one and prove them to be wrong.Keeping in view that readers are not supposed to haveknowledge of philosophy and also keeping in view that thiswork has to be concise and precise, instead of that all effortswill be made to prove the correctness of this design ofhuman being by providing sufficient evidence in chaptersahead.36
  37. 37. II. Human Being – Nature & PurposeThe human nature has been studied and writtenabout in great detail by most of the philosophers fromSocrates to Iqbal. The human nature is so complicated thathundreds of books written so far about it have not describedit completely. There is no need to repeat what is alreadywritten. However I have tried to describe the human naturein the simplest possible manner.Before describing the human nature it would bedesirable to analyze & redefine certain concepts which are inuse to describe the human nature, in view of the design ofthe human being introduced herein. As per the design themind is the collective activity of the ‘energy’ and ‘soul’.‘Energy’ has the capacity of storing the information and the‘soul’ has the capacity of reasoning. Understanding is also acollective activity of the ‘energy’ & ‘soul’. Virtue is thecapacity and content within the ‘energy’ of the human beingwhich by interacting with the human body is capable ofperforming acts which are good for the human being himselfas well as other human beings. Vice is the capacity andcontent within the ‘energy’ of the human being which byinteracting with the human body is capable of performingacts which are harmful/damaging for the human beinghimself as well as other human beings.The state of nature of the human being is that hepossesses varying quantum of vice and virtue and the samehuman being is capable of actions which are worst than theruthless wild animal and virtuous actions of the noblesthuman being. Since by the judgment and approval of the37
  38. 38. ‘soul’ the human being is capable of performing an action,thus it is because of the ‘soul’ a human being may bevirtuous or evil. Besides it has been already stated that ‘soul’has the capacity of reasoning to analyze the genuineness ofthe innate knowledge of right and wrong of a particularaction and finally the ‘soul’ has also the innate knowledge ofexistence of a perfect universal creator.Plato believed that man is immortal ‘soul’ corruptedby vice and purified by virtue, of whom the body is only aninstrument & he has also stated that the ‘soul’ must be freedfrom vice; which should be the ultimate goal of the humanbeing. In principle Plato was very right but actually vice andvirtue are created by the creator and shall continue to bewithin the human beings as long as human beings live on thisplanet. There is more of the vice than virtue in the humanbeing and for controlling the vice human being has beenspirited with the ‘soul’.The vices in the human beings could be divided intothree classes namely: -01. Major Vices02. Medium Vices03. Minor VicesMajor Vices are of seven types01. Desire of Power (financial power & authority)02. Sex03. Selfishness & Greed04. Unjust & Hypocrisy05. Anger & Cruelty38
  39. 39. 06. Envy & Misanthropy07. Superiority, Pride & ArroganceMedium Vices are also of seven types01. Ungratefulness & Negligence towards duties02. Apathy towards poor, orphans & disabled and peoplein trouble03. Backbiting, Scandalousness & Mischievousness.04. Corruption & Nepotism05. Untrustworthiness06. Suspicion07. Deceit & CheatingMinor Vices are also of seven types01. Impatience02. Animosity03. Cowardice04. Imprudence05. Intolerance06. Lethargy07. Extravagance, Love of comforts, luxuries &merrymaking with least effortsHowever there could be many more vices whichwould fall in these classes of vices or types of vices. Thevirtues are opposite of vices. But one has to bear in mindthat desire of power to the reasonable extent with justifiedand honest means cannot be a vice. If a human being has thecapacity of doing good in a place of authority and his desireto have authority is not a vice. The intent and means ofdesire of power makes it a vice or a virtue. Similarly sex, ofcourse created by the perfect universal creator, to the extentpermissible by the ‘soul’ is a virtue rather than a vice.39
  40. 40. Demand of remuneration for work is not selfishness or greedbut a right but desire of remuneration much more for a smallquantum of work is selfishness and greed. To desire goodthings for the self by honest means is a justified desirewhereas feeling jealous about the possessions of others isenvy and is not justified. Thus it has to be born in mind thatvirtue and vice are the two sides of the same coin, only theintent and the means makes an act a vice or virtue. The ‘soul’has the innate knowledge of whether an act thoughapparently a vice is actually an evil or a virtuous act becausethe intent and means of the act is known to the ‘soul’. Ifdesire of power is based on doing good then it is justifiedand ‘soul’ is in complete knowledge of its intent and declaresit to be right.A same act may be virtuous act in view of somepeople and an evil act in view of other people. The mostimportant question to decide about such an act is how todecide virtuousness or evilness of an act. The simplest way ofpresenting the example of such a situation is the sexual actbetween a male and a female who are not married, whenmale and female mutually agree to the act. This debate hasnot been settled till date and would remain an unsettleddebate for centuries to follow unless and untilphilanthropists & philosophers intervene. The simplest of thesolutions to such matters is let the ‘souls’ of the humanbeings decide the matter. Let there be wise men who couldanalyze the decisions of the ‘souls’, irrespective of thereligious beliefs and social taboos. It is not much difficultwith the present day knowledge of psychology to know thefeelings and decisions of the ‘soul’ about rightness or40
  41. 41. wrongness of an act and let those conclusions be debated.The human beings themselves also know the decisions of the‘soul’ about an act; intelligent human being easilyunderstand these decisions whereas less intelligent also dounderstand these decisions but after some explanations bythe psychologists. The right and wrong stands alreadydecided by the creator of the ‘soul’ and human being issimply to decide whether to do right or wrong.The perfect universal creator having created the‘energy’, wherein he has put virtue and vice, and the ‘soul’wherein he has kept the innate knowledge of right andwrong of the act; the only thing left with the human being onthe whole is the ‘freedom of action’. The philosophy ofhuman being having the ‘free will’ cannot be right, becausethe will or desire depends upon the content of virtue andvice in the ‘energy’ which being the creation of the perfectuniversal creator.The human beings have the ‘freedom of action’ andthrough their actions they could decide to be virtuoushuman beings or evil human beings. It has been alreadystated that ‘soul’ has the faculty of reasoning though it alsohas innate knowledge of existence of the perfect universalcreator. This is the ‘Natural State of Nature’ of human beingand has been studied by several past philosophers.Having understood the nature of human being wecould now discuss the purpose of human life. Human beingsare created and they live for some period of time on thisplanet and finally die. The apparent purpose of the life of thehuman being is to live peacefully on the planet? Thequestion now arises what the human being is supposed to do41
  42. 42. on this planet. We will not discuss here the purpose of thecreator for creating the human being, which we will discusslater in this work. The first & foremost purpose of the humanbeing is to live peacefully on this planet and we will have tosearch for the ways and means by which we could livepeacefully.The philosophers as genuine philanthropists have veryrightly concluded that mankind can have peaceful existenceon this planet only through the prevalence of virtue in theindividual life and in the society and that should be theultimate goal of the mankind. It will be stupidity to questionor challenge this conclusion. This task could be accomplishedif and only if the majority of the people, especially thepeople in authority are real philanthropists. But mankind bynature is a selfish creature and he could wish good to othersonly after doing good to himself and there is no limit to hisdesire of doing good to himself. Thus the state of nature ofthe human being is that he cannot be a philanthropist at alleven if his ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of right andwrong and also the innate knowledge of existence of aperfect universal creator. Hence the peaceful life of mankindon this planet and state of nature of mankind areincompatible and there is one and only one condition underwhich the state of nature of mankind and peaceful existenceof mankind on this planet could be compatible. I havethought over this serious problem for years and have not leftany relevant literature unread, which includes science,philosophy, political systems and theology and interactedwith wide range of people and reached one and only oneconclusion that human being has to be answerable &42
  43. 43. accountable for his evil acts after death before the perfectuniversal creator. The human being cannot be answerable &accountable for the content of his vices because the vicesare innate in the ‘energy’ over which human being hasabsolutely no control of creation. The human being canexercise control over the acts of vice through ‘soul’ as thehuman being has the ‘freedom of action’.Plato has held that ‘human body is just aninstrument’, the ‘energy’ and the ‘soul’ being immortal andthese two constituents of the human being contain all theinformation of the human being itself as well as the actionsdone by the human being during his life time.This is my challenge to the whole humanity to unravelany other alternative by which virtue will prevail in theindividual lives and the society so that there could bepeaceful existence of mankind on this planet. There isabsolutely no alternative.It has been already made out by the philosophers thatlaws have to be based on the human nature and purpose.The innate knowledge of right and wrong about all actionswith the ‘soul’ is the virtual definition of laws wherein thepermissible and prohibited actions are defined thus we haveto accept that laws are already defined by the perfectuniversal creator and are contained in the ‘soul’ of thehuman beings. As the ancient philosopher namely Aquinashas called these laws as Natural Laws I too will call theselaws as ‘Natural Laws’. Thus we need genuine philosophersto know the Natural Laws as contained in the ‘souls’ of thehuman beings, with the help of reason it would not be adifficult task to unravel these Natural Laws.43
  44. 44. No law, right or wrong could be enforced unless anduntil it is derived from ‘Natural Laws’ of which human beingshave innate knowledge of its correctness and secondly thepeople are convinced about answerability and accountabilityof evil deeds after death. No judge would judge an actcorrectly to be right or wrong unless and until he too isinstinctively convinced about the rightness and wrongness ofthe act and secondly he too is absolutely convinced of basicaxiom of answerability & accountability of evil actions afterdeath. Thus laws are useless unless and until this basic axiomis accepted. Thus if we do not accept the answerability andaccountability after death, there can be no laws and novirtue in the individual lives and the society and no peacefulexistence of human being is possible on this planet.Just as in the cells the information of everythingphysical about the human being is contained, similarly theactions of the human beings arise because of the thoughts.We derived the origin of the human being from the cells sowe have to derive actions which the human being issupposed to do from thoughts. The perfect universal creatormust have kept the whole information in the human beingwhich we will have to unravel. Neither thoughts are withinthe control of the human being nor the decision about theaction to be right or wrong is within the control of humanbeing, the only thing on which the human being has thecontrol is ‘freedom of action’. As already explained thoughtsarise out of the interaction between body and the ‘energy’whereas the ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of right &wrong about all the actions and power of the decision ofaction. The ‘freedom of action’ is with the ‘soul’ of the44
  45. 45. human being. The human being has to do the virtuousactions, which the perfect universal creator wants from thehuman beings which the design of the human being ascreated by the perfect universal creator would suggest. Asalready clarified that by virtuous actions of the human beingsindividually as well as collectively the peaceful existence ofthe human beings is possible on this planet; thus it has to bepurpose of perfect universal creator and that of the humanbeing that people should live peacefully on this planet andthe perfect universal creator has already kept the reason andmeans of living peacefully within the human being. Asalready mentioned that only means by which human beingscould do virtuous actions is that human being has to beanswerable and accountable for his actions and the perfectuniversal creator in his perfect wisdom has chosen the timeafter death to be the time of answerability andaccountability. This reveals that human being has to live anddo what is right as defined in the ‘soul’ and acceptanswerability & accountability after death.The second most important and general purpose oflife of the individual human being is to be grateful to theperfect universal creator for creating the individual and praythe perfect universal creator for help and guidance forspending the life so as to fulfill the purpose of life.The third purpose of life, of those human beings whohave the means, should be to know and understand theperfect universal creator and all his creations and educateothers. The last important purpose of life of the human beinghas to be to use whatever the perfect universal creator hascreated on this planet justly so that the human being could45
  46. 46. live peacefully on this planet and fulfill his purpose of lifefrom his point of view and from the perfect universalcreator’s point of view.46
  47. 47. Political Systems&Impracticability of DemocracyA. Political SystemsB. Impracticability of Democracy47
  48. 48. A. Political SystemsIt has been already stated simple, basic andfundamental facts & axioms will be considered to drawinferences and conclusions. I have no intention of convincingthe readers with lengthy discourses or jugglery of words. Thepolitical philosophies have been written in detail byphilosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, Aquinas,Russell, Rousseau, Eliot, Hegel, Marx etc. and I will notrepeat what is already written excepting quoting theirconclusive statements.Hobbes has rightly stated that without thegovernment world would be place of war where all will beagainst all. Every government has to be based on a politicalsystem. Hobbes had also stated that the governmentwithout sound political system would be a governmentwherein everyone will try to deprive every other person ofeverything he has. I need not go into unnecessary discourseto prove the correctness of both these statement becausereaders would find no reason to deny these facts.The original work on political systems has been doneby Plato and Aristotle and all subsequent works on politicalsystems are simply extensions of the works of Plato &Aristotle. They have identified six political systems whichwould cover all types of political systems which existed in thepast and which exist even today.1. Monarchy2. Aristocracy3. Polity48
  49. 49. 4. Democracy5. Oligarchy6. Tyranny, Patriarchy & MatriarchyThese political systems in simplest possible termscould be defined asMonarchy: - Monarchy is the rule by one man for thecommon good of all the inhabitants of a piece of land; theone man is called the monarch.Aristocracy: -Aristocracy is the rule by few for the commongood of all the inhabitants of a piece of land.Polity: - Polity is the rule by many for common good ofall the inhabitants of a piece of land.Democracy: -Democracy is the rule by the ruled or rule ofmany in their own interest.Oligarchy: - Oligarchy is the rule by a few in their owninterest and not in the interest of all the inhabitants of apiece of land.Tyranny, Patriarchy & Matriarchy: - Tyranny is the ruleby one in his own interest. I have also included patriarchyand matriarchy in the same category of political systembecause philosophically all the three political systems arealmost the same. Dictatorship, military rules, anarchy haveno political system and are extremely dangerous forexistence of mankind and so need not be discussed.As already stated every government has to be basedon a political system. The political system defines guidingprinciples of the government. The rule of a government isimplemented through laws. Thus the laws depend upon theguiding principle of the government, which is the politicalsystem. Hence laws and the political system are49
  50. 50. complementary and the laws of one political system cannotbe valid or applicable for other political system and viceversa.On the other hand the laws have to be based on thehuman nature and purpose. If the laws are not based on thehuman nature & purpose then the government sooner orlater has to fail.The purpose of laws is to enforce virtue in theindividuals and the society. Thus through laws it is aimedthat the society and the individual are virtuous as almost allphilosophers have held that ultimate goal of mankind shouldbe that virtue should prevail in the social structure and theindividual lives for peaceful existence of mankind on thisplant; otherwise there has to be injustice, exploitation,corruption, confusion, confrontation, plunder andbloodshed.Mankind has sincerely worked hard to gathersufficient knowledge of the creations of the perfect universalcreator but unfortunately besides the source of life the mostimportant aspect of mankind, the ways and means of livingpeacefully on this planet has not received the sincereattention. Several philosophers have made efforts but due toone reason or the other have made mistakes resultantlynone of the philosophers has put forward the practical andacceptable method of living peacefully on this planet.Plato has preferred the rule of philosophers but hasfailed to identify the philosophers fit to rule and insteadimposed some unreasonable restrictions on the rulers. Platohas opposed polity and democracy because human being isgenerally corruptible, irrational, driven by human50
  51. 51. weaknesses with false or even irrational beliefs, unjust andcriminal tendencies besides because of equality, powerseekers driven by personal gains than the public good, andunlimited power would lead to anarchy and corruption(Republic). Aristotle has preferred polity and democracywithout going into the natural state of nature of the humanbeings. According to Aristotle three things are essential forthose who hold the offices, of course, besides selecting themvery carefully: -i. Belief, trust, conviction and affection for establishedregimeii. Virtue & justiceiii. Capability to work as involved in the rule.But keeping in view the natural state of nature of thehuman being; no human being can have these qualitiesexcepting under one condition which has been alreadystated that is mankind has to accept that he will have to beanswerable and accountable for his actions before theperfect universal creator after death. There is just noalternative by which human beings could adopt the virtue ashis way of life which can result in the virtuous socialstructure. Mankind needs the existence of the perfectuniversal creator for the peaceful living on this planet.Excepting tyranny and oligarchy the aim of all politicalsystems is common good as such no philanthropistphilosopher will advocate political systems of tyranny andoligarchy. A careful analysis would prove that aristocracysooner or later turns into oligarchy, which history hasalready proved in Rome and France.51
  52. 52. Plato states ‘the human race will have no respite fromevils until those who are real philosophers acquire politicalpower or until through some divine dispensation those whorule and have political authority in the nations become realphilosophers’. Plato seems do have concluded that realphilosophers are the people who are devoid of vices whichincludes the self interest. But it is impossible to find a personwho is without the vices and the philosophers could not bethe exception. There has to be divine dispensation throughwhich philosophers could be the philanthropist also. This isexactly what philosophers should have looked for. Plato hascriticized polity & democracy because human beings beinggenerally corruptible, as these political systems have alreadyfailed in Rome and Greece before Christian era. Presently inthe world there is only one political system, the democracy,which is the political system of governance in one form orthe other in all countries excepting nominal exceptions likeSaudi Arabia etc. Democracy has strong advocates all overthe world and there are many pseudo-scholars of differentreligions who advocate democracy as the political system oftheir religion; forgetting the fact that the underlying principleof democracy is agnosticism. The most important aspect ofdemocracy which needs to be discussed is Lockean right ofconscience and religion; which means the religion andconscience as to be the personal matters of individuals.Locke while advocating democracy has said ‘God in his greatmercy & beneficence has relinquished even religious rightsto the discretion of the magistrate’. He had probablyforgotten that the conscience being the personal matter ofthe individuals and there being no modus operandi for52
  53. 53. testing the conscience and in fact no need of testing theconscience of the magistrates then the simple questionwould be to consider; could we trust the magistrates withthe fate of the nation & the people?We have already concluded that through virtuousindividuals and the social structure we can have the peacefullife on this planet and that is possible only when mankindaccepts the answerability and accountability before theperfect universal creator after death. This could be done onlythrough religion. As I have already explained that ‘soul’ hasthe faculty of reasoning besides has the innate knowledge ofexistence of a perfect universal creator but the ‘soul’ has noknowledge of accountability and answerability before theperfect universal creator. The ‘soul’ of the human being willnot accept any religion which does not satisfy the reasoningto the minutest details and this should be basic axiom to testthe genuinely of any religion. Thus any religion which is notrational cannot and should not be acceptable to the humanbeing. As already quoted according to Plato ‘the human racewill have no respite from evils until those who are realphilosophers acquire political power or until through somedivine dispensation those who rule and have politicalauthority in the nations become philosophers’. I haverespect for the vision of Plato. He had presumed that realphilosophers would naturally be the philanthropists; here Idisagree with Plato. But future philosophers should havesearched for this divine dispensation by which rulers couldbe philosophers and philosophers could be philanthropists. Ifdivinity exists then there had to be some faith & belief53
  54. 54. system which could be responsible for this divinedispensation.Unfortunately most of the religions have beencorrupted and misinterpreted, one more the other and noreligion satisfies the reasoning of the ‘soul’. The irrationalityof the religions is evident by the fact that almost all religionshave sects and sectarianism in itself is corruption ormisinterpretation. Instead of rectifying the religions of thecorruption & misinterpretations, most of the philosophersproposed the separation of church & state, and this conceptgot impetus by Darwinism and thus democracy became theonly possible political system. Aquinas is the first philosopherwho made the mistake by proposing that Christianity doesnot prescribe any political system of governance as had beenthe concept with Augustine. Aquinas rejected theapplicability of the ‘law’ of the old testament and from thegospel ‘render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s’(Mathew 22-21) he inferred that Christianity does notprovide for conduct of civil society and Christianity couldflourish under any political system. Augustine had alsosimilar ideas and held similar perspective of Christianity.They did not visualize that from the ‘Law’ as in the OldTestament a political system could be derived after removingthe corruption, misinterpretations of the scriptures. Somephilosophers like Eliot did criticize the democracy as suchsocieties rejected the advantage of wisdom of belief systemresultantly would degenerate into tyranny, social & culturalfragmentation, exploitation of natural resources by a few,corruption and moral decay. But due to Darwinism noattention was paid to such philosophies. Under the influence54
  55. 55. of Darwinism philosophers like Nietzsche rejected the idea ofdivinity by stating ‘God as the protector of the weak, thoughonce alive, is now dead, and that we have rightly killed him’.Similarly Marx, an atheist, rejected faith and said religion tobe ‘opium of people and religion is the heart of the heartlessworld’. Russell also concluded as a pseudo-philosopher‘Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear’ hefurther adds “A good world needs knowledge, kindliness andcourage, it does not need a regretful hankering after the pastor a fettering after the intelligent words uttered long ago byignorant men”.Before concluding the discussion about politicalsystems I would like to clarify that the laws of one politicalsystem cannot be applied in the government of any otherpolitical system. To illustrate this, the tyranny and themonarchy are the one man rule but the objective of the twobeing different, so the laws of the two political systems haveto be different depending upon the guiding principles of thepolitical system. There are some pseudo-scholars of Islamwho think that Islam can be practiced in democracy andthere are also other set of pseudo-scholars of Islam whothink that democracy is the Islamic way of life and theShariat Law could be applied in democracy. They fail tounderstand that the underlying principle of democracy isagnosticism & liberty of religion and conscience and ShariatLaw and agnosticism being contradictory; these twocontradictory principles cannot exist together. The sixpolitical systems mentioned herein have to have differentset of laws and the set of laws of one political system cannotbe applied in other political system. The laws have to be55
  56. 56. based on the guiding principles of the political system andobjective of the political system.Finally since there is only one political system, in oneform or the other, being practiced almost all over the worldas such the practicability or impracticability of this politicalsystem will be discussed in detail.56
  57. 57. B. Impracticability of DemocracyAs a rationalist and realist one has to realize thatpresently there is absolutely no alternative political systemto the democracy. Also realizing that most of the religionsare corrupted, misinterpreted and unexplained, therebymaking these irrational doctrines, besides there are sects inmost of the religions thereby proving the corruption of thereligions. Under these circumstances neither one could bejustified to advocate accepting the irrational religions normixing up the state and religion in the political systems.Readers need not bear in mind what has been writtenin previous chapters or even the title of this chapter to avoidany bias against the democracy. One has to sincerely try toanalyze democracy, if by any chance it could be practicablefor common good and peaceful existence of mankind. Underthese circumstances the underlying principle of agnosticismwith freedom of religion & conscience in democracy isjustified. All forms of governments with democracy as thepolitical system have underlying basic principles ofagnosticism with freedom of religion & conscience andequality, liberty & fraternity. As already clarified that therehas to be government and for any government there has tobe a political system. The government is effected throughlaws and as Aristotle has put it ‘for where the laws do notrule, there is no regime or government’. Firstly we will haveto discuss the process of enacting of the laws. In almost allforms of governments under the political system ofdemocracy there is a body of representatives of peoplecalled legislature where the laws are enacted. Some laws57
  58. 58. could be enacted by referendum where under peopledirectly decide about the enactment of a law. Theoreticallyunder the method of referendum the opinion of 0 – 49%people of the nation will carry no weight and as such thelaws of a government cannot have the consent of all thepeople. Theoretically in case of legislature enacting the lawsthrough public representatives, even if the publicrepresentation are true representatives of the people, thelaws would have the consent of 26 – 100% (51% votes foreach representative with 51% seats in the legislature) of thepeople and as such the opinion of 0 – 74% people can carryno weight. Theoretically speaking under democracy the lawscannot have the approval & consent of all people of thenation and since there would naturally be people who areagainst the laws, that would lead to lawlessness andinstability in the nation.This is the inherent problem of democracy whichunder any democratic form of government cannot be solvedas the result of which there have to be sections of thesociety who cannot have affection, belief, conviction andtrust in the government; which as per Aristotle are essentialfor a regime. Now let us assume that the government is inthe hands of real philanthropists and the representatives ofthe people are genuine and wise and the laws will beenacted very wisely keeping in view the aspirations of allpeople and all the people have faith, trust and affection forthe government on this score.We will now discuss the nature of laws. Before doingthat I would like to clarify some aspects of the need of‘Laws’. Laws are enacted to restrict certain harmful actions58
  59. 59. of individuals against other individuals or even actionsagainst themselves for smooth conduct of society. Therecould be civil laws, social laws and criminal laws. Besidesthere are constitutional laws and international laws. There isthe Natural Law Theory of Aquinas which comes under thecategory of present-day Overlap Thesis where under lawsare divinely dictated. Since democracy has an underlyingprinciple of agnosticism, as such, such divine Natural Lawscannot be adopted in democracy. Other alternative fornature of laws in democracy fall under purview of LegalPositivism and there could be three types of laws underLegal Positivism.i. The Social Fact Thesisii. The Conventionality Thesisiii. The Separability ThesisUnder i & ii laws validity is tested with respect tosocial behavior and social conventionality respectively. Thesetheses cannot be adopted or acceptable under democracybecause social behavior and conventionality depending uponage old traditions & practices which have their origin in thereligious beliefs of the people. But since democracy has toassess the validity of laws from agnostic view point and alsothe guiding principle of liberty, thus all the laws which couldbe legitimate under democracy would come under thepurview of the Separability Thesis. However some lawswhich could be tested by the Social Fact Thesis & theConventionality Thesis as valid could also be enactedprovided the laws fulfill the guiding principles of democracy.The Separability Thesis envisages that law and morality areconceptually distinct which is consistent with the basic59
  60. 60. guiding principles of democracy. This is a serious limitation oflaw formation in democracy. The second most importantlimitation in democracy is in so far as the laws connectedwith the individual behavior, wherein no other individual isharmed or benefitted, cannot be enacted. This has been putforward by John Stuart Mill “the only purpose for whichpower (of enactment of law) can rightfully be exercised overany member of a civilized community against his will is toprevent harm to others. His own good either physical ormoral, is not a sufficient warrant. Over himself, over his ownbody and mind, the individual is sovereign”. This is inaccordance with the spirit of democracy. Thus we can nowdraw following conclusions;I) In democracy the laws which impose restrictions onthe individual behavior (self regarding actions) whereunder no harm to others is involved, cannot beenacted.II) The democracy having agnosticism & liberty asguiding principles, no restrictions on the basis ofreligious morality can be imposed. Hence no law canbe enacted which is on the basis of religious moralityand challenges the liberty of the individuals.This is inherent problem of democracy and as suchcannot be solved. Whether committing suicide is permissibleor not cannot be decided in democracy. Similarly is sexpermissible between two individuals of same sex or oppositesex, out of wedlock, with their consent will remain a debateso long as democracy is there. However some nations haveenacted laws coming under above mentioned two categoriesunder Legal Moralism but those laws have been enacted60
  61. 61. against the spirit of democracy. Sooner or later, asagnosticism would find its deep roots in the society, theselaws shall have to be repealed. Since we have no alternativeto democracy, so we will have to manage with theselimitations; meanwhile in religious terms let there by moraldecay so much so the basic unit of society, the familystructure may be demolished and the only purpose otherthan materialism, that is living for the sake of the childrenmay also vanish. However assuming that people will behavethe way they deem proper as they have freedom of religion,and the state would in no case interfere with their faith &belief.Another serious problem with democracy is if laws areenacted, that which are necessary but which are somehowagainst the religious morality, then democracy has to face arevolt. The point which I intend to make clear is that theconcept of liberty and freedom of religion in the democracyare contradictory and this serious problem has evidently nosolution. Similarly liberty and fraternity are also logicallyincompatible. However since there is no alternative todemocracy, we have to find ways & means how to live withthe limitations which are inherent in democracy.Now laws have to prescribe punishments for offensiveacts against the individuals, society, property of individualsor society. The punishment is to inflict discomfort on thecriminals for retributive, deterrence, preventive,rehabilitative and restitutive purposes. All over the worldthere are laws prescribing punishment but ‘the point is notthat the offender deserves to suffer; it is rather that theoffended party deserves and desires compensation’ (Barnett61
  62. 62. 1977). Accordingly laws have to be changed so that theoffenders convicted of wrongdoing are sentenced tocompensate the victim in proportion to the victim’s loss. Thepunishment of imprisonments is also logically wrong becauseif the criminal is married, the wife and the dependentchildren of the criminal have also to suffer for none of theirfaults. Excepting those advanced & resourceful countrieswhere unemployed and disabled persons are paid by thestate; in other countries there is no social security and suchpeople are not being paid and if these people commit theftto feed themselves and those dependent on them;apparently he has committed a crime but keeping in view theguiding principle of equality the criminal act has taken placebecause of failure of state of providing the individuals withthe basic requirement of life. The laws all over the world donot take these matters into consideration. However sincethere is no alternative to democracy, we will change the lawsand punishments and keep the duties of the state in mindwhile framing the laws.There are Critical Theories of Law & Legal Realismwhich envisage that the laws are generally indeterminate &inconsistent; then judges nearly always decide cases therebymake a new law which is against the guiding principle ofdemocracy. Further where there are indeterminate &inconsistent laws or the cases are indeterminate judicialdecisions are influenced by judge’s political & moral outlook.The Critical Legal Studies Theorists argue that cases areradically and globally indeterminate in the sense that theclass of legal material available rarely, if ever,logically/casually entails a unique outcome. Critical Legal62
  63. 63. Studies Theorists also view the content of the law in liberaldemocracies reflects ‘ideological struggles among socialfactions in which competing conceptions of justice, goodnessand social & political life gets compromised, truncated,vitiated and adjusted’ (Altman 1986) resultantly there isprofound inconsistency permeating the deepest layers oflaw. Since the law is inconsistent, a judge can justify anynumber of conflicting outcomes.There is another problem with the laws in democracywhich have been identified by philosopher of law namelyFuller (1964). According to him law’s essential purpose ofachieving the social order cannot be fulfilled, if followingeight conditions are not fulfilled.1. Laws must be expressed in general terms.2. Laws must be publicly promulgated.3. Laws must be prospective in effect.4. Laws must be expressed in understandable terms.5. Laws must be consistent with one another.6. Laws must not require conduct beyond the powers ofthe effected parties.7. Laws must not be changed frequently, that thesubjects cannot relay on them.8. Laws must be administered in a manner consistentwith the wording.According to Fuller ‘such a system cannot be called alegal system at all’ if all these conditions are not fulfilled. Onthe one hand judges change laws by justifying all sorts ofconflicting judgments and on the other hand in most of thedemocracies laws do not fulfill all these conditions. Howeversince we have no alternative to democracy we will change63
  64. 64. everything about laws and make them determinate andconsistent and judge would not be allowed to play with lawsand the law making will be left to legislators only.Legislators are generally with different educationalbackground and in some under-developed countries anddeveloping countries legislators are illiterate and havingnominal education. A limited percentage of legislators havethe background of law. But legislator’s knowledge of law, asit is, cannot be of any help because legislators being lawmakers, they should be aware of the implications of law andpossibility of misuse of law at all the stages. Thus thelegislators should be the philosophers of law, so that properlaws are enacted and old indeterminate and inconsistentlaws are replaced by determinate and consistent laws.However since there is no alternative to the democracy so inorder to frame proper laws we will keep a condition thatonly philosophers of law will be eligible to be the legislators.Justice depends upon laws and if laws are not proper theninjustice prevails. Plato has very rightly clarified that injusticecauses civil war, hatred and fighting in the society besidesthe loss of faith and trust in the governments. But because ofcontradictory guiding principles of democracy we cannotframe laws properly as such there cannot be justice so wehave to be always ready to face the consequences aspredicted by Plato. This is the inherent problem ofdemocracy with which we have to manage.The governments under a democratic political systemrules with the help of functionaries; whose functions wouldfall under following four classes of functions.1. Legislature64
  65. 65. 2. Judiciary3. Executive4. MediaIt is globally and historically an accepted fact that themain pillar of democracy is judiciary and if there is anythingwrong with judiciary the society has to collapse sooner orlater. If there are shortcomings with other three pillars ofdemocracy but the judiciary is perfect the society is likely topull on. It is a global phenomenon that judiciary isindependent and the decisions of judiciary are to be obeyedby all. It is through judiciary laws are interpreted andimplemented and a civilized society cannot afford to takeany chances of allowing any flaw in the judicial system. Butwe have seen the plight of laws in democracy and so is thecase with judiciary. But since judiciary is independent and soit is not accountable to any forum in democracy resultantlythe judiciary is law onto itself and globally there is nothingright about judiciary and nobody can dream of justice fromthe judicial system in democracy. To begin with nodemocratic country provides lawyers to the both sides as theresult of which justice is to be purchased. Thus though thereis right to justice but justice is to be purchased. The globalsituation is that if any nation has something right aboutjudiciary, sooner or later that rightness is destined to vanish.There are defined laws, criminal procedures and judicialprocedures and during last two centuries lawyers haveturned into experts in detecting drawbacks and loopholes ofthe judicial system which includes detecting the proceduralmistakes in the judicial cases. Everything about judicialsystem is exposed as the result of which criminals are65