Form 1037: Fill & Download for Free

Iraq has one of the richest histories in the world - obviously, will not be able to cover them all, but it kind of goes like this…Sumer → Akkadian Empire → Babylonia → Neo-Assyrian Empire → Neo-Babylonian Empire → Achaemenid (Persian) Empire → Macedonian Empire (Alexander) → Parthian Empire → Sassanid Empire (Asuristan) → Rashidun Caliphate → Umayyad Caliphate → Abbasid Caliphate → Buyyid dynasty → Mongol Empire (sack of Baghdad in 1285) → Ilkhanate → Jalairid Sultanate → Timurid Empire → Ottoman Empire → Mamluk dynasty of Iraq → Mandatory Iraq (British) → Republic of Iraq → Baathist party (Saddam Hussain) → 2003 Iraq war.Sumer (4500–1900 B.C):Akkadian Empire (2334 B.C–2154 B.C):Neo-Assyrian Empire (911 B.C–609 B.C):Neo-Babylonian Empire (609 B.C–539 B.C):Achaemenid Empire (550–330 BC):Macedonian Empire (808–168 BC, 150–148 BC):Parthian Empire (247 BC – 224 AD):Sassanid Empire (226 AD - 651 AD):Rashidun Caliphate (632–661):Umayyad Caliphate (661–750):Abbasid Caliphate (750–1258, 1261–1517):Buyyid dynasty (934–1062):Seljuk Empire (1037–1194):Mongol Empire (1206–1368):Ilkhanate (1256–1335/1353):Jalairid Sultanate (1335–1432):Timurid Empire (1370–1507):Ottoman Empire (1299–1922/1923)Mamluk dynasty of Iraq (1704–1831)Mandatory Iraq (1920–1932)Republic of Iraq (1958–1968) & Baathist party (Saddam Hussain, 1968–2003):

The most stable elements are Nobel gases.Among them also Xe forms compounds with O and F at extreme conditions. And Radon is radioactive. Among He,Ne,Ar and Kr; He is most stable as it's ionisation enthalpy is higher than the other which is about 2372 KJ/ molThe ionisation enthalpy of the element areHe - 2372Ne- 2080Ar-1520Kr-1351Xe-1170Rn* - 1037The enthapies are in KJ / mol.Rn is a radioactive element and doest not occur in nature. It is obtained as the result of decay of RaRa -------> Rn + He.A few compounds of Xe areXeF2, XeF4,XeF6, XeO3 ,XeOF4 ,XeO2F2.Hope the information is useful for u .Thanks for reading.

Al-Ghazali was a great man. And to understand his position in this dialogue/conflict between reason and anti-resaon in early Islam, one must know a little about this debate between two groups.Naturally there was no argument about “what was Islam” among Muslims during the times of The Prophet (571–632). And there weren’t big questions about essentials of the religion during the reigns of four caliphs either. They had Quran (The Words of God) and teachings of The Prophet; Sunnah (things he did) and Hadiths (things he said).Muslims had a message to share with the rest of the world. Territories of Islamic state was expanding strikingly fast and people with different backgrounds, cultures and languages were joining them. So, new questions of ‘what’, ‘why’ and ‘how’ emerged. Then the classifications of issues started. For example; things such as theory, theology, faith and philosophy became subjects of “Kelam” and practical things such as jurisprudence became subject of “Fikq”.And here comes The Great Imam Abu Hanifa (699–765). He formed an approach regarding the issues of applied aspects of the religion. He took both Quran and hadiths and searched for the rationale behind each verdict. Then he collected these rationales and used them when he needed to solve new issues. His approach has become to known as one of the four schools of thought in Sunni Islam; “Hanafism”.Then debate started. Because while forming his approach, to get conclusions, Abu Hanifa excluded some hadiths. For the reasons of these hadiths were contradicting with Quran and some other hadiths and eventually with general rational.You see, Quran clearly emphasizes the authority of The Prophet. That’s why, for Muslims the formula of Islam is simple “Quran+Hadiths=Islam”. But the problem with hadiths was, unlike Quran, they were very disorganized. In eighth century, many years (and generations) had already passed since the demise of The Prophet. And people were learning them (the hadiths) mostly verbally. And there were many unreliable of them as well as reliable ones. Still, at first some people found Abu Hanifa very daring, for discarding some hadiths.Then comes Imam Shafi, after studying the approach of Abu Hanifa, he formulated an anti-thesis. Imam Shafi started to develop some methods for the hadiths which contradict each other and claimed that each hadith was important in its context and looking for the rationale of God was very insolent behavior. Then he gracefully criticized Abu Hanifa for using his own reason in expense of some hadiths. Approach of Imam Shafi became another school of thought in Sunni Islam, “Shafism”.So, this dialogue/conflict took momentum. But it wasn’t between reason and scripture as question suggest, because scripture or Quran were accepted without questioning. Debate was mostly about; to which degree reason can be used for the interpretation of the religion. And this was a necessary argument because both sides essentially wanted the same thing, which was preserving and living the religion as close to the way it was revealed to The Prophet.So two intellectual groups were formed; rationalists and hadithists. Rationalists (Followers of Abu Hanifa) had a very solid thesis and they kept building on it. On the other hand, hadithists (Followers of Imam Shafi) had to renew their anti-thesis occasionaly. These debates kept Islamic thinking very dynamic and on the right path. Because when hadithists came with a very reliable hadith before them, rationalists were correcting themselves. And because of rationalists, hadithists organized phrases of the Prophet in a rational way. Not the mention, hadithists also needed rely some other way (like reason) to solve issues eventually, when they came upon problems which hadn’t been mentioned in Quran or by The Prophet before. Other two thoughts of Islam; Maliki and Hanbeli positioned themselves between these two approaches.So here the famous anti-rationalists: Imam Bukhari (810–870) and Imam Muslim (822–875) finally collected all hadiths and sorted them out accordance to their reliability. They used very academic methods for these procedures. Then it was Ibn Sina (Avicenna) (980–1037) who renewed the hadithist approach, then it was Al Ghazali (1058–1111), then after him, it was Fahreddin ar-Razi (1149–1210). So, this is the role of Al Ghazali in the dialogue between reason and anti-reason. He advocated the importance of hadiths before using your own reason. A Hanafi Scholar Ibn Abidin wrote that:Al-Ghazali was the greatest scholar of his time. He wrote many books about fikq. Some verdicts of Shafi School of Thought, were built on his writings.Conclusion: I don’t think people who accuse Al Ghazali for ceasing rational thinking in Islamic World, comprehend the context of his arguments. Debates of rationale and anti-rationale was about methods of applied aspects of the religion (fikq). And he wasn’t the last advocater of his ideal anyway (therefore he couldn’t have been the one who cease the rational thinking), because Fahraddin ar-Razi renewed the approach (the anti-thesis) only 50 years later not the mention Hanafi School of Thought (the real rationalists) never disappeared.The reason for Muslims not having heated debates in favor or against the rationale of Islamic thinking anymore is not because they have stopped thinking (and certainly not because of Al Ghazali). It is because they have reached to a synthesis through their thesis and anti-thesis.