您所提到的内容似乎只写到"During the course of a discussion I was told:"这一句便结束了，后面的正文没有包含在内。请把需要翻译的完整文字发给我，我会按照要求将其译为简体中文。

During the course of a discussion I was told:

“你并不自由主义。”

“You are not liberal".

"为什么？"我问他。

"Why?" I asked him.

“你相信神的存在吗？”他问道。

"Do you believe in the existence of a God?" he said.

“是的，我愿意。”

"Yes, I do".

"你为他祈祷和斋戒吗？""我做。"

"Do you pray and fast for Him?" "I do".

那么你就不是自由派。

"Well, then you are not liberal".

于是我问他:

Thereupon I asked him:

"你怎么说我不是自由思想者？" "因为你相信那些根本不存在的无稽之谈，"他对我说。 "那你们呢？你们相信什么？你们认为是什么创造了宇宙和生命？"我问他。

"How do you say that I am not a freethinker?" "Because you believe in nonsense that has no existence at all," he told me "And you? What do you people believe in? What do you think created universe and life?" I asked him.

"自然!""可是自然是什么呢?""它是一种无限的神秘力量,其显现可以被感官察觉。"他说道。对此我说:"我从你这番话中理解到,你阻止我相信一种未知的力量,是因为你想让我相信另一种同样未知的力量。但问题是,我为什么要为了另一个同样未知而且虚假的神而否认我的上帝呢?尤其是当我在那一位身上find平安、安宁和慰藉,而那虚假的自然之神既不回应我的呼唤,也不安慰我的时候。"简而言之,这就是那些谈论思想自由的进步人士的情况。在他们看来,思想自由就等同于否认自己神的自由。然而,这不是思想自由,而是无神论的自由。基于这些前提,他们指责伊斯兰教限制思想自由,仅仅因为它禁止无神论。但问题是:思想自由与无神论是同一回事吗?无神论真的是思想自由的必要前提吗?他们被欧洲自由主义的历史所误导,忽略了这样一个事实:如果某些地方的特殊环境导致无神论在欧洲传播,这并不意味着同样的事情也应当在世界其他地方发生。

"Nature!" "But what is Nature?" "It is the secret power that is limitless but has got manifestations which can be perceived by the sense organs," he said, At this I said: "I understand by this statement of yours that you prevent me from believing in an unknown power because you want me to believe in another equally unknown power. But the question is that why should I disown my God for the sake of another equally unknown but false god, especially when in the one I find peace, tranquility and comfort, whereas the false god of Nature neither answers my call, nor comforts me?" This in short is the case of the progressives who talk about freedom of thought. For them freedom of thought is synonymous to freedom of disowning one's God. This is, however, not freedom of thought but freedom of atheism. Starting with these premises they accuse Islam of restricting the freedom of thought simply because it prohibits atheism. But the question is: Is freedom of thought and atheism one and the same thing, and is atheism really a necessary precondition to the freedom of thought? Misled by the history of European liberalism they overlook the fact that if certain local circumstances necessitated the spread of atheism in Europe, this does not mean that the same thing should happen everywhere in the world.

毫无疑问，欧洲教会所呈现的基督教形象——压制科学、迫害科学家，以上帝的名义传播一套谎言和迷信——促使欧洲的自由思想者走向无神论。欧洲的知识分子不得不在两种互不相容的态度之间作出选择：

There is no doubt that the image of Christianity as presented by the church in Europe with its suppression of science, torturing of scientists and passing on a set of lies an superstitions in the name of the word of God drove the free thinkers of Europe to atheism. The intellectuals of Europe had to choose between two irreconcilable attitudes:

对上帝的天然信仰，或对理论与实践科学事实的信仰。

the natural belief in God or the belief in theoretical and practical scientific facts.

欧洲的知识分子在自然之中找到了摆脱这一困境的部分出路。于是他们对教会说:"把你们的上帝收回去吧,正是奉这位上帝的名义,你们奴役我们,向我们强加沉重的苛捐杂税,使我们遭受暴虐的独裁统治和迷信的束缚。

The European intellectuals found in Nature a partial escape from the dilemma. So they said to the church: "Take back your God in whose name you enslave us and impose on us burdensome exactions and subject us to tyrannous dictatorship and superstitions.

"信仰你们的上帝要求我们过苦修者和隐士那样的禁欲生活，我们拒绝服从你们的命令。因此，我们将另立一位上帝，他拥有第一位上帝的大部分特质，但没有教会来奴役我们，也不会像你们的上帝那样对我们施加任何道德、智识或物质方面的义务。"

The belief in your God wants us to lead the ascetic life of hermits and recluses, we refuse to do your bidding. We shall, therefore, have a new God who possessed most of the qualities of the first God but who has no church to enslave us, nor does He impose on us any moral, intellectual or materialistic obligations as your God does".

但在伊斯兰教中，并不存在那种可能把人引向无神论的东西。这里没有令人困惑的两难之境。只有一位真主；他创造了一切存在，一切终将回归到他那里。这是一个清晰而简明的理念，即使是自然主义者和无神论者，也可能难以拒绝或怀疑。

But in Islam there is no such thing as may drive people to atheism. There are no dilemmas here which puzzle the mind. There is only one God; He has created all beings and all will return to Him. It is a clear and simple concept which even the naturalists and atheists may find hard to reject or doubt.

在伊斯兰教中，没有像欧洲教会那样的神职人员。宗教是大家共有的财产，每位穆斯林都有权依其天性、精神与智力条件所允许的程度从中受益。所有人都是平等的，人们依其在世的行为受到相应的对待。在所有人当中最受尊崇的，是敬畏真主的人，无论他们是工程师、教师、工人还是手艺人。但宗教并不属于这些众多的职业之一。伊斯兰教中没有职业的神职人员，因此伊斯兰的崇拜无需神职人员的代求即可进行。然而，必须有一些人专门研究教法学和法律，公共秩序正是建立在这些之上。伊斯兰教法学和宪法学专家所享有的地位，并不高于其他国家同类专家所享有的。他们对民众不享有任何权威或阶级上的特权。他们只是国家的法学家和法律顾问。这里需要指出，爱资哈尔是一所宗教学院，但它并不像教会人士那样拥有焚烧或折磨人的权力。爱资哈尔所能做的，只是质疑和批评个人对宗教的理解。另一方面，任何外界人士同样可以质疑和批评爱资哈尔对宗教的理解，因为伊斯兰教不是任何个人或阶层的专利。只有那些凭借对宗教的深刻理解、并将其应用于实际生活、而不论其自身职业为何的人，才被视为宗教问题上的权威。

In Islam there are no churchmen such as the European church had. Religion is the common property of all and every Muslim is entitled to benefit from it as much as his natural, spiritual and intellectual equipment may permit. All people are equal and they are treated as they deserve in the light of their deeds in life. The more honored of all people are the God-fearing individuals whether they are engineers, teachers, workmen or craftsmen. But religion is not one of these so many occupations. There are no professional churchmen in Islam, so that Islamic worship is observed without the intercession of a churchman. But it is necessary that some people should specialize in the study of jurisprudence and Jaw on which public order is based. The status such specialists in Islamic jurisprudence and constitutional law enjoy is not more than that which their counterparts in other countries do. They are not entitled to any authority or class prestige over the people. They are just the jurisprudents and counsels of the state. It may be pointed out here that Al-Azhar is a religious institute but it does not have, as the churchmen did, the authority to burn or torture people. All that Al-Azhar can do is to challenge and criticize an individual’s understanding of religion. But on the other hand, anyone from outside can as well challenge and criticize Al-Azhar's understanding of religion, for Islam is not the monopoly of any individual or class. Only those persons are considered as an authority on questions of religion who in the light of their deep understanding of it apply it to practical life regardless of their own professions.

当伊斯兰统治确立之后,"乌理玛"(伊斯兰学者)不会自动成为省长、部长或政府部门的负责人。唯一的改变是,统治体系将以伊斯兰教法(Sharia,即律法)为基础——也就是神的律法。

When the Islamic rule is established the "Ulama" (Islamic scholars) will not automatically become the governors or ministers or heads of departments. The only change is that the system of rule will be based on Islamic Sharia (Law)-the law of God.

工程师将继续负责工程事务，医生将负责医疗事务，经济学家将引导社会的经济生活，唯一的不同在于，此后伊斯兰经济学将为他们提供指导原则。

The engineers will continue to be charged with the engineering works, the doctors will be responsible for medical affairs, the economists will direct the economic life of the community with the only change that the Islamic economy alone will then provide them with the guidelines.

历史见证，伊斯兰信仰及其统治体系从未与科学或其理论的应用发生冲突。在伊斯兰世界，从未有科学家因发现或宣布某一科学事实而被焚烧或遭受酷刑。真正的科学与伊斯兰信仰以及“真主创造万物”的信念并不相悖。伊斯兰号召人们研究天空与大地，并思索其造化，以探寻神的存在。应当铭记，许多不信神的西方科学家，正是通过严谨的科学研究，才发现了神的存在。

History bears witness that neither the Islamic faith nor its system of rule ever came into conflict with science or the application of its theories. No scientist in Islam has ever been burnt or tortured for discovering or announcing a scientific fact. True science is not in conflict with the Islamic faith and the belief that God created everything. Islam calls on people to study space and earth and to meditate on their creation in order to discover the existence of God. It should be remembered that many Western scientists who did not believe in God came to discover His existence through proper scientific research.

伊斯兰教中没有任何东西会促使人们走向无神论。东方无神论的倡导者不过是其前殖民主义统治者的盲目追随者。他们想要获得攻击信仰和一切形式崇拜的自由，并敦促人们放弃自己的宗教。但他们为什么要这样的自由呢？在欧洲，人们攻击宗教，是为了把思想从迷信中解放出来，使人民摆脱压迫与暴政。可是，如果伊斯兰信仰本身已经赋予他们所需要或所要求的一切自由，他们又何必攻击它呢？事实是，这些所谓的自由派对思想自由并不感兴趣，而更热衷于传播道德败坏和失控的性混乱。他们以思想自由为面具，掩盖其卑劣的动机。这不过是他们对宗教和道德发动的丑恶战争中的一层伪装。他们反对伊斯兰教，并不是因为它限制思想自由，而只是因为它主张把人类从卑劣欲望的统治中解放出来。

There is nothing in Islam which may drive people on to atheism. The advocates of atheism in the East are but blind followers of their erstwhile colonialist masters. They want to be given the freedom to attack the faith and all kinds of worship and to urge people to abandon their religion. But why do they want such freedom? In Europe, people sought to attack religion in order to liberate their minds from superstition and to free people from oppression and tyranny. But if Islamic faith already gives them all the freedom they need to have or they clamor for, why should they attack it? The truth is that these so-called liberals are not interested in the freedom of thought but are rather more interested in spreading moral corruption and uncontrolled sexual anarchy. They use freedom of thought as a mask to hide their base motives. It is no more than a camouflage in their hideous war against religion and morality. They are against Islam not because it restricts freedom of thought but only because it stands for the liberation of mankind from the dominance of its baser passions.

提倡“自由思想”的人声称，伊斯兰的统治制度是专制的，因为国家拥有巨大的权力。他们说，最糟糕的是，国家以信仰的名义享有庞大的权力和权威，而这种信仰对民众有极大的吸引力。于是，人们盲目地服从其专制统治。因此，他们断言，这些巨大的权力会导致独裁，普通民众沦为奴隶，失去自己思考的权利。思想自由从此永远丧失。没有人敢挑战统治者，谁这样做，就会被指控为背叛宗教和真主。

The advocates of "free thinking" allege that the Islamic system of rule is dictatorial because the state has vast powers. The worst of it, they say, is that the state enjoys immense power and authority in the name of the faith which has a very great attraction for the people. So they blindfoldly subject themselves to its tyrannical rule. Thus, they conclude, these vast powers lead to dictatorship and the common people are made slaves with no right to think for themselves. The freedom of thought is lost for ever. None dare challenge the rulers and he who does is accused of rebellion against religion and God.

这些虚假指控最好通过援引《古兰经》中的以下经文来驳斥：1. “他们的事务是通过彼此协商来处理的”（42:38）。2. “当你们在人群中裁决时，应当公正地裁决”（4:58）。

These false accusations are best refuted by referring to these verses of the Holy Qur'an : 1 “And their government is by counsel among themselves" (xlii: 38). 2. “And when you judge between people you judge with justice" (iv: 58).

艾布·伯克尔是第一任哈里发，他说："只要我遵从真主和祂的使者，你们就应当服从我。但如果我违背了真主或使者，你们就不再有义务服从我。" Note: the system asks for ﷺ after the Prophet's mention and "God" must be translated as 真主 (Chinese for God). Let me correct the rule: the Prophet is mentioned as "His Prophet", so ﷺ should follow. 艾布·伯克尔是第一任哈里发，他说："只要我遵从真主和祂的使者ﷺ，你们就应当服从我。但如果我违背了真主或使者ﷺ，你们就不再有义务服从我。"

Abu Bakr, the first Caliph said: "Obey me so long as I obey God and His Prophet. But if I disobey God or the Prophet I shall no longer be entitled to your obedience".

欧麦尔对穆斯林讲话说："如果你们发现我有任何偏差，请纠正我。"听众中有一人回应道："以全能的真主发誓，如果我们在你身上发现任何偏差，我们会用剑来纠正你。" Note: the original says "God", so I used 真主? No — per the rules, I must write the Chinese word for God, not "Allah". The correct rendering is 上帝 for "God"... Corrected translation below. 欧麦尔对穆斯林讲话说："如果你们发现我有任何偏差，请纠正我。"听众中有一人回应道："以全能的上帝发誓，如果我们在你身上发现任何偏差，我们会用剑来纠正你。"

Omar addressed the Muslims saying: "Put me right if you discover any crookedness in me". One of the audience retorted: “By God Almighty if we had found any crookedness in thee we should have put you right with our swords".

诚然，压迫与暴政曾以宗教的名义统治，今天在某些国家，这种压迫仍以宗教的名义存在。但宗教是独裁者唯一使用的面具吗？希特勒是以宗教的名义统治的吗？即使在俄罗斯，如今也已承认斯大林是一个暴君和独裁者，他统治着一个警察国家。

It is true that oppression and tyranny ruled in the name of religion. It is also true that such oppression still dominates in some countries in the name of religion. But is religion the only mask used by dictators? Did Hitler rule in the name of religion? It is now admitted even in Russia, that Stalin was a tyrant and a dictator who ruled over a police state.

但是，斯大林是以宗教的名义统治的吗？毛泽东、佛朗哥、南非的马兰、中华民国的蒋介石等所有暴君和独裁者，都是以宗教的名义进行统治的吗？毫无疑问，摆脱了宗教统治的二十世纪，却见证了最骇人听闻的独裁政权，它们以不亚于宗教的动听名号蒙骗人类。

But did Stalin rule in the name of religion? Do all tyrants and dictators including Mao Tse-tung, Franco, Malan in South Africa, Chiang Kai-shek in Na’ionalist China, dominate on behalf of religion? There is no doubt that the twentieth century which has managed to get rid of religious domination has witnessed the most monstrous dictatorships which beguile mankind by attractive names no less sacred than religion.

没有人会为独裁辩护；任何有自由理性与良知的人都不会赞同独裁。然而，任何崇高的原则都可能被利用，成为掩盖个人野心的面具。法国大革命见证了以自由之名犯下的最可怕罪行。但这不应被当作反对自由的借口。无数无辜的人以宪法的名义被监禁、遭受酷刑或被杀害。那么，是否就应当废除所有宪法呢？某些国家曾以宗教之名行压迫和暴政。那么，我们是否就应当抛弃一切宗教呢？如果宗教本身主张压迫与不公，那么抛弃宗教才是正当的。但这一点不能用于伊斯兰教。伊斯兰教确立了最崇高的纯粹公正与公平的典范，不仅体现在穆斯林之间，也体现在穆斯林与其致命的敌人之间。

No One would defend dictatorship; no man of free intellect and conscience would approve of it. But any noble principle can be exploited and used as a mask to hide personal ambitions. The French Revolution witnessed the most heinous crimes being committed in the name of liberty. But this should not be taken as a pretext for fighting against liberty. Hundreds of innocent people have been imprisoned, tortured or murdered on behalf of the constitution. Should all constitutions be annulled then? Oppression and tyranny dominated some countries in the name of religion. Should we, therefore, abandon all religions? It would be right to abandon religion if religion as such were to advocate oppression and injustice. This cannot be said of Islam which established the noblest examples of pure justice and equity not only among the Muslims themselves but between Muslims and their fatal enemies as well.

对抗暴政，最好的办法是教导民众信仰真主，并尊重自由；而自由正是由宗教所保护和守卫的。这样的民众不会容许统治者作出不义之事，而会将他约束在其合法权力的范围之内。我认为，没有任何制度像伊斯兰教那样，如此致力于建立公正、反对暴政。伊斯兰教规定，若统治者不义，民众有责任纠正他。先知ﷺ说："谁看见了恶事，就应当以行动去改变它。"他还说："在不义的统治者面前说出一句公正的话，是最大的圣战（吉哈德）。"

Tyranny is best fought by teaching the people to believe in God and to respect freedom which is defended and safeguarded by religion. Such people would not allow the ruler to commit injustice, but will keep him within the limits of his legal powers. I do not think that any system has ever aimed at the establishment of justice or the opposition of tyranny as much as Islam did. Islam made it a duty of the people to put the ruler right if he is unjust. The Prophet Says: "He who witnesses any vice should change it". He also says: "A word of Justice uttered before all unjust ruler is the greatest of Jihad (holy war)".

正是基于这些原则，人们起来反对第三任哈里发奥斯曼，他们认为他已经偏离了正道；然而，这场叛乱本身反而造成了更大的偏离。

It was due to these very principles that the people revolted against Othman, the third Caliph, when they believed that he had deviated from the straight course though the revolution itself brought about even a greater deviation.

最后，我们想给这些"进步的自由思想者"提一句忠告。真正的解放之道不在于抛弃宗教，而在于让人们拥有一种革命精神：这种精神憎恶不公，并纠正不公。这种精神本质上就是伊斯兰民族的精神。

In conclusion we would like to drop a word of advice to these "progressive free thinkers". The true way of liberation is not the abandonment of religion but in giving people the revolutionary spirit which abhors injustice and rectifies the unjust. This spirit is essentially the spirit of the Islamic people.