I refer to the letter Limiting realm of Islamic thinking by AB Sulaiman. The problem with his argument is that he keeps on using definitions of dogma, definite and indefinite knowledge that are purely his own. They are heavily biased and tailored to suit the need of certain quarters who put faith or God below science, or even totally reject the existence of God. Period.

Islam, and with due respect to other theological beliefs, has its own definition of knowledge. As practicing Muslims, we believe the definitions of knowledge in Islam are more comprehensive compared to what Sulaiman has offered, as they cover many areas that science cannot. Briefly, the knowledge is learned as al- 'ilm al-'aqli (knowledge acquired through human reason and intellect) and al-'ilm al-naqli (transmitted knowledge through Quran and Sunnah).

The aqli , is overridden by naqli if ever they contradict one another. And to my knowledge, there is only one example to this, the Darwinian Theory, which I believe is not a vital necessity of any human to subscribe to. As far as medicine is concerned, none of the proven medical laws or interventions ever gets in the way of a syariah-compliant scientist or patient. There are two reasons for this.

First, the syariah has provided us with the method of reviewing the purposiveness of all human needs from the lowest daruriyat (basic needs) to the higher hajiyat (comforts) and on to the highest tahsiniyat (luxury).

Secondly, unlike Sulaiman's assumption that the Muslim "syariah compliant" minds are not free to roam around, scientific findings and advancements are greatly emphasised in Islam. Muslims do have professional body to deal with these aspects. One example is the Federation of Islamic Medical Association (Fima) whose members comprise half those with the expertise on science and medicine and the other half on syariah.

The body has had various meetings to deal with the latest medical issues of abortion, cloning and assisted reproductive techniques, just to name a few. If Sulaiman would care to delve further, these medical problems are dealt within the many provisions in syariah.

Many would agree that it is the practicality of knowledge itself that benefits humans and not the complex, metaphorical definitions given by Sulaiman. Science as a reflection of God's existence seems to serve the function of the knowledge better than when used as a tool to prove the non-existence of the Creator, which is a complete waste of time.

With regards to his opinions that:

"The belief in the One God and that Mohammed is His prophet being the first, followed by other 'must believe' (but non-quantifiable and non-measurable) items like belief in the seen and the

unseen, and the supremacy of the Quran";

and

"...'Must believe' and 'given' elements are the spoilers in Islamic thinking";

These elements in Muslim aqeedah have nothing to do with the scientific thinking which is endorsed and very much encouraged by the the Quran. How would my belief in Oneness of Allah SWT, and the Prophet Muhammad SAW, and the supremacy of the Quran, hinder me from doing my lab work? From pursuing my research? From attending to my patients?

I am a scientist too, but I humbly believe that science is not the only thing man needs and science does not have answers to every problem we face. How can human explains the injustice that seems to be the norm of the world we are living in now? How can we justify that while some of us are filthy rich, the others suffer famines? How come bad tyrants get way with their crimes and good leaders imprisoned? What about those who escape the supposedly perfect man-made laws? Are we supposed to believe that we have to live by the law of the jungle where the strong, the powerful and the deceitful rule? And the weak will forever be oppressed?

There must be a court of justice which is free of human flaws where every deed is accounted for, every wrong punished. So the "non-quantifiable and non-measurable" things as put by Sulaiman eg, the world hereafter, the heaven and the hell do make sense to me and are a psychological relief to a lot of us, however non-measurable they are.

I agree that there are many rooms for improvement for Muslim scientists. The1988 Science Citation Index, however, may not be accurate in reflecting the number of Muslim scientists as it is only based on countries. There are many Muslim professionals in non-Muslim countries who should be taken into account. However, I strongly object the causative factor put forward by

Sulaiman. The circle of civilisation had the Islamic World once as the centre of knowledge. The Golden Age of the 'Abbasids and the Andalusian era are testimonials of this.

The majority of Muslim, be they leaders or followers, in those two eras embraced Islam wholeheartedly and made it a way of life. If it is Islamic policy towards science and research combined with syariah which is to be blamed, then history would have dictated otherwise.

It is actually the deviation from true Islamic tenets and the acceptance of un-Islamic behaviour that has plagued Moslems and stunted their intellectual growth. In our own backyard we are witnessing our Muslim youth succumbing to the fantasy of endless entertainment, abandoning their books.

Having said that, I thank Sulaiman for the statistics he has provided though they will not be the reason for me to be trapped in the psychological sense of an inferiority complex. Neither will I resort to the easy way out of blaming the religion. The Quran has reminded me that it is of no point to rely on the glory of my forefathers (who undeniably are our benchmarks for truly successful scientists) but rather to move forward.

Muslims are now taking this as a challenge and we are doing what we feel is the remedy - by getting back to the Quran and the Sunnah and yes ... the syariah.