by Dr. Maurice Bucaille (Edited by Dr. A. A. Bilal Philips)
- Table of Contents
- Editor’s Foreword
- Religion & Science
- The Qur’an And Science
- Authenticity Of Qur’an
- Creation Of The Universe
- The Sun and Moon.
- Stars and Planets
- The Day and Night
- The Solar Apex
- Expansion of the Universe
- Conquest of Space
- Bible, Qur’an And Science
- Age of the Earth
- The Flood
- The Pharaoh
This booklet by Dr. Maurice Bucaille has been in circulation for the past nineteen years and has been a very effective tool in presenting Islam to non-Muslims as well as introducing Muslims to aspects of the scientific miracle of the Qur’an. It is based on a transcription of a lecture given by Dr. Bucaille in French.
In this reprint, I decided to improve its presentation by simplifying the language and editing the text from an oral format to a pamphlet format. There were also passing references made by the author to material in his book, The Bible, the Qur’an and Science, which needed explanation. I took the liberty of including explanatory portions from his book where more detail was necessary. A few footnotes were also added for clarity and a hadeeth which the author mentioned was replaced due to its inauthenticity. There were also some corrections made to the historical material on the compilation of the Qur’an.
It is my hope that these slight improvements will make this excellent work even more effective in presenting the final revelation of God to mankind.
Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips
Director/Islamic Information Center Dubai
On the 9th of November, 1976, an unusual lecture was given at the French Academy of Medicine. Its title was “Physiological and Embryological data in the Qur’an”. I presented the study based on the existence of certain statements concerning physiology and reproduction in the Qur’an. My reason for presenting this lecture was because it is impossible to explain how a text produced in the seventh century could have contained ideas that have only been discovered in modern times.
For the first time, I spoke to members of a learned medical society on subjects whose basic concepts they all knew well, but I could, just as easily, have pointed out statements of a scientific nature contained in the Qur’an and other subjects to specialists from other disciplines. Astronomers, zoologists, geologists and specialists in the history of the earth would all have been struck, just as forcibly as medical doctors, by the presence in the Qur’an of highly accurate reflections on natural phenomena. These reflections are particularly astonishing when we consider the history of science, and can only lead us to the conclusion that they are a challenge to human explanation.
There is no human work in existence that contains statements as far beyond the level of knowledge of its time as the Qur’an. Scientific opinions comparable to those in the Qur’an are the result of modern knowledge. In the commentaries to translations of the Qur’an that have appeared in European languages, I have only been able to find scattered and vague references to them. Nor do commentators writing in Arabic provide a complete study of the aspects of the Qur’an that deal with scientific matters. This is why the idea of a comprehensive study of the problem appealed to me.
In addition to this, a comparative study of similar data contained in the Bible (Old Testament and Gospels) seemed desirable. Thus, a research project was developed from the comparison of certain passages in the Holy Scriptures of each monotheistic religion with modern scientific knowledge. The project resulted in the publication of a book entitled, The Bible, the Qur’an and Science. The first French edition appeared in May 1976. English and Arabic editions have since been published.
RELIGION AND SCIENCE
There is, perhaps, no better illustration of the close links between Islam and science than the Prophet Muhammad’s often-quoted statements:
“Seeking knowledge is compulsory on every Muslim.”
“wisdom is the lost property of the believer.”
“whoever follows a path seeking knowledge, Allah will make his path to paradise easy.”
These statements and many others are veritable invitations to humanity to enrich their knowledge from all sources. It comes as no surprise, therefore, to learn that in Islam religion and science have always been considered as twin sisters and that today, at a time when science has taken such great strides, they still continue to be associated. Nor is it a surprise to learn that certain scientific data are used for the better understanding of the Qur’anic text. What is more, in a century where, for many people, scientific truth has dealt a deathblow to religious belief, it is precisely the discoveries of science that, in an objective examination of the Islamic scripture, have highlighted the supernatural nature of revelation and the authenticity of the religion which it taught.
When all is said and done, scientific knowledge seems, in spite of what many people may say or think, to be highly conducive to reflection on the existence of God. Once we begin to ask ourselves, in an unbiased or unprejudiced way, about the metaphysical lessons to be derived from some of today’s knowledge, (for example our evolving knowledge of the smallest components of matter or the questions surrounding the origin of life within inanimate matter), we indeed discover many reasons for thinking about God. When we think about the remarkable organization presiding over the birth and maintenance of life, it becomes clear that the likelihood of it being the result of chance lessens quite considerably.
As our knowledge of science in the various fields expands, certain concepts must seem increasingly unacceptable. For example, the idea enthusiastically expressed by the recent French winner of the Nobel prize for medicine, that living matter was self-created from simple chemical elements due to chance circumstances. Then from this point it is claimed that living organisms evolved, leading to the remarkably complex being called man. To me, it would seem that the scientific advancements made in understandithe fantastic complexity of higher beings provides stronger arguments in favor of the opposite theory: that the existence of an extraordinarily methodical organization presiding over the remarkable arrangement of the phenomena of life necessitates the existence of a Creator.
In many parts of the Book, the Qur’an, encourages this kind of general reflection but also contains infinitely more precise data which are directly related to facts discovered by modern science. It is precisely this data which exercise a magnetic attraction for today’s scientists.
The Qur’an And Science
For many centuries, humankind was unable to study certain data contained in the verses of the Qur’an because they did not possess sufficient scientific means. It is only today that numerous verses of the Qur’an dealing with natural phenomena have become comprehensible. A reading of old commentaries on the Qur’an, however knowledgeable their authors may have been in their day, bears solemn witness to a total inability to grasp the depth of meaning in such verses. I could even go so far as to say that, in the 20th century, with its compartmentalization of ever-increasing knowledge, it is still not easy for the average scientist to understand everything he reads in the Qur’an on such subjects, without having recourse to specialized research. This means that to understand all such verses of the Qur’an, one is nowadays required to have an absolutely encyclopedic knowledge embracing many scientific disciplines.
I should like to stress, that I use the word science to mean knowledge which has been soundly established. It does not include the theories which, for a time, help to explain a phenomenon or a series of phenomena, only to be abandoned later on in favor of other explanations. These newer explanations have become more plausible thanks to scientific progress. I only intend to deal with comparisons between statements in the Qur’an and scientific knowledge which are not likely to be subject to further discussion. Wherever I introduce scientific facts which are not yet 100% established, I will make it quite clear.
There are also some very rare examples of statements in the Qur’an which have not, as yet, been confirmed by modern science. I shall refer to these by pointing out that all the evidence available today leads scientists to regard them as being highly probable. An example of this is the statement in the Qur’an that life has an aquatic origin ( “And I created every living thing out of water” Qur’an, 21:30 ).
These scientific considerations should not, however, make us forget that the Qur’an remains a religious book par excellence and that it cannot be expected to have a scientific purpose per se. In the Qur’an, whenever humans are invited to reflect upon the wonders of creation and the numerous natural phenomena, they can easily see that the obvious intention is to stress Divine Omnipotence. The fact that, in these reflections, we can find allusions to data connected with scientific knowledge is surely another of God’s gifts whose value must shine out in an age where scientifically based atheism seeks to gain control of society at the expense of the belief in God. But the Qur’an does not need unusual characteristics like this to make its supernatural nature felt. Scientific statements such as these are only one specific aspect of the Islamic revelation which the Bible does not share.
Throughout my research I have constantly tried to remain totally objective. I believe I have succeeded in approaching the study of the Qur’an with the same objectivity that a doctor has when opening a file on a patient. In other words, only by carefully analyzing all the symptoms can one arrive at an accurate diagnosis. I must admit that it was certainly not faith in Islam that first guided my steps, but simply a desire to search for the truth. This is how I see it today. It was mainly the facts which, by the time I had finished my study, led me to see the Qur’an as the divinely-revealed text it really is.
AUTHENTICITY OF QUR’AN
Before getting to the essence of the subject, there is a very important point which must be considered: the authenticity of the Qur’anic text.
It is known that the text of the Qur’an was both recited from memory, during the time it was revealed, by the Prophet and the believers who surrounded him, and written down by designated scribes among his followers. This process lasted for roughly twenty-three years during which many unofficial copies were made. An official copy was made within one year after the Prophet’s death at the instruction of Caliph Abu Bakr.
Here we must note a highly important point. The present text of the Qur’an benefited in its original preparation from the advantage of having its authenticity cross-checked by the text recited from memory as well as the unofficial written texts. The memorized text was of paramount importance at a time when not everyone could read and write, but everybody could memorize. Moreover, the need for a written record was included in the text of the Qur’an itself. The first five verses of chapter al-‘Alaq, which happen to constitute the first revelation made to the Prophet (S), express this quite clearly:
“Read: In the name of your Lord who created. Who created man from a clinging entity. Read! Your Lord is the most Noble, Who taught by the pen. Who taught man what he did not know.” Qur’an, 96:1-5
These are surely words in “praise of the pen as a means of human knowledge”, to use Professor Hamidullah’s expression.
Then came the Caliphate of ‘Uthman (which lasted from the twelfth to the twenty-fourth year following Muhammad’s death). Within the first two years of Caliph ‘Uthman’s rule, seven official copies were reproduced from the official text and distributed throughout a large area of the world which had already come under Islamic rule. All unofficial copies existing at that time were destroyed and all future copies were made from the official seven copies.
In my book, The Bible, the Qur’an and Science, I have quoted passages from the Qur’an which came from the period prior to the Hijrah (the Prophet’s emigration from Makkah to Madeenah in the year 622) and which allude to the writing of the Qur’an before the Prophet’s departure from Makkah.
There were, moreover, many witnesses to the immediate transcription of the Qur’anic revelation.
Professor Jacques Berque has told me of the great importance he attaches to it in comparison with the long gap separating the writing down of the Judeo-Christian revelation from the facts and events which it relates. Let us not forget that today we also have a number of manuscripts of the first written versions of the Qur’an which were from a time period very close to the time of revelation.
I shall also mention another fact of great importance. We shall examine statements in the Qur’an which today appear to merely record scientific truth, but of which men in former times were only able to grasp the apparent meaning. In some cases, these statements were totally incomprehensible. It is impossible to imagine that, if there were any alterations to the texts, these obscure passages scattered throughout the text of the Qur’an, were all able to escape human manipulation. The slightest alteration to the text would have automatically destroyed the remarkable coherence which is characteristic to them. Change in any text would have prevented us from establishing their total conformity with modern knowledge. The presence of these statements spread throughout the Qur’an looks (to the impartial observer ) like an obvious hallmark of its authenticity.
The Qur’an is a revelation made known to humans in the course of twenty-three years. It spanned two periods of almost equal length on either side of the Hijrah. In view of this, it was natural for reflections having a scientific aspect to be scattered throughout the Book. In a study, such as the one we have made, we had to regroup the verses according to subject matter, collecting them chapter by chapter.
How should they be classified? I could not find any indications in the Qur’an suggesting any particular classification, so I decided present them according to my own personal one.
It would seem to me, that the first subject to deal with is Creation. Here it is possible to compare the verses referring to this topic with the general ideas prevalent today on the formation of the Universe. Next, I divided up verses under the following general headings: Astronomy, the Earth, the Animal and Vegetable Kingdoms, Humans, and Human Reproduction in particular. Furthermore, I thought it useful to make a comparison between Qur’anic and Biblical narrations on the same topics from the point of view of modern knowledge. This has been done in the cases of Creation, the Flood and the Exodus. The reason that these topics were chosen is that knowledge acquired today can be used in the interpretation of the texts.
CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE
From an examination of creation as described in the Qur’an, an extremely important general concept emerges: The Qur’anic narration is quite different from the Biblical narration. This idea contradicts the parallels which are often wrongly drawn by Western authors to emphasize the resemblance between the two texts. To stress only the similarities, while silently ignoring the obvious dissimilarities, is to distort reality. There is, perhaps, a reason for this.
When talking about creation, there is a strong tendency in the West to claim that Muhammad copied the general outlines mentioned in the Qur’an from the Bible. Certainly it is possible to compare the six days of creation as described in the Bible, plus an extra day for rest on God’s Sabbath, with this verse from chapter al-A‘raaf.
“Your Lord is God who created the heavens and the earth in six days.” Qur’an, 7:54
However, it must be pointed out that modern commentators stress the interpretation of the Arabic word ayyaam, (one translation of which is ‘days’), as meaning ‘long periods’ or ‘ages’ rather than periods of twenty-four hours.
What appears to be of fundamental importance to me is that, in contrast to the narration contained in the Bible, the Qur’an does not lay down a sequence for creation of the earth and heavens. It refers both to the heavens before the earth and the earth before the heavens, when it talks of creation in general, as in this verse of chapter Taa Haa:
“(God) who created the earth and heavens above.” Qur’an, 20:4
In fact, the notion derived from the Qur’an is one of a parallelism in the celestial and terrestrial evolutions. There are also basic pieces of information concerning the existence of an initial gaseous mass ( dukhaan ) which are unique to the Qur’an. As well as descriptions of the elements which, although at first were fused together ( ratq ), they subsequently became separated (fatq). These ideas are expressed in chapters Fussilat and al-Anbiyaa:
“God then rose turning towards the heaven when it was smoke” Qur’an, 41:11
“Do the disbelievers not see that the heavens and the earth were joined together, then I split them apart?” Qur’an, 21:30
According to modern science, the separation process resulted in the formation of multiple worlds, a concept which appears dozens of times in the Qur’an. For example, look at the first chapter of the Qur’an, al-Faatihah:( “Praise be to God, the Lord of the Worlds.” Qur’an, 1:1 ). These Qur’anic references are a11 in perfect agreement with modern ideas on the existence of primary nebula (galactic dust), followed by the separation of the elements which resulted in the formation of galaxies and then stars from which the planets were born. Reference is also made in the Qur’an to an intermediary creation between the heavens and the earth, as seen in chapter al-Furqaan:
“God is the one who created the heavens, the earth and what is between them…” Qur’an, 25:59
It would seem that this intermediary creation corresponds to the modern discovery of bridges of matter which are present outside organized astronomical systems.
This brief survey of Qur’anic references to creation clearly shows us how modern scientific data and statements in the Qur’an consistently agree on a large number of points. In contrast, the successive phases of creation mentioned in the Biblical text are totally unacceptable. For example, in Genesis 1:9-19 the creation of the earth (on the 3rd day) is placed before that of the heavens (on the 4th day). It is a well known fact that our planet came from its own star, the sun. In such circumstances, how could anyone claim that Muhammad, the supposed author of the Qur’an, drew his inspiration from the Bible. Such a claim would mean that, of his own accord, he corrected the Biblical text to arrive at the correct concept concerning the formation of the Universe. Yet the correct concept was reached by scientists many centuries after his death.
Whenever I describe to Westerners the details the Qur’an contains on certain points of astronomy, it is common for someone to reply that there is nothing unusual in this since the Arabs made important discoveries in the field of astronomy long before the Europeans. But, this is a mistaken idea resulting from an ignorance of history. In the first place, science developed in the Arab World at a considerable time after the Qur’anic revelation had occurred. Secondly, the scientific knowledge prevalent at the highpoint of Islamic civilization would have made it impossible for any human being to have written statements on the heavens comparable to those in the Qur’an. The material on this subject is so vast that I can only provide a brief outline of it here.
The Sun and Moon.
Whereas the Bible talks of the sun and the moon as two lights differing only in size, the Qur’an distinguishes between them by the use of different terms: light (noor) for the moon, and lamp (siraaj) for the sun.
“Did you see how Allah created seven heavens, one above the other, and made in them the moon a light and the sun a lamp?” Qur’an, 78:12-13
The moon is an inert body which reflects light, whereas the sun is a celestial body in a state of permanent combustion producing both light and heat.
Stars and Planets
The word ‘star’ (najm) in the Qur’an ( 86:3 ) is accompanied by the adjective thaaqib which indicates that it burns and consumes itself as it pierces through the shadows of the night. It was much later discovered that stars are heavenly bodies producing their own light like the sun.
In the Qur’an, a different word, kawkab, is used to refer to the planets which are celestial bodies that reflect light and do not produce their own light like the sun.
“We have adorned the lowest heaven with ornaments, the planets.” Qur’an, 37:6
Today, the laws governing the celestial systems are well known. Galaxies are balanced by the position of stars and planets in well-defined orbits, as well as the interplay of gravitational forces produced by their masses and the speed of their movements. But is this not what the Qur’an describes in terms which have only become comprehensible in modern times. In chapter al-Ambiyaa we find:
“(God is) the one who created the night, the day, the sun and the moon. Each one is traveling in an orbit with its own motion.” Qur’an,21:33
The Arabic word which expresses this movement is the verb yasbahoon which implies the idea of motion produced by a moving body, whether it is the movement of one’s legs running on the ground, or the action of swimming in water. In the case of a celestial body, one is forced to translate it, according to its original meaning, as ‘to travel with its own motion.’
In my book, The Bible, The Qur’an and Science, I have given the precise scientific data corresponding to the motion of celestial bodies. They are well known for the moon, but less widely known for the sun.
The Day and Night
The Qur’anic description of the sequence of day and night would, in itself, be rather commonplace were it not for the fact that it is expressed in terms that are today highly appropriate. The Qur’an uses the verb kawwara in chapter az-Zumar to describe the way the night ‘winds’ or ‘coils’ itself around the day and the day around the night.
“He coils the night upon the day and the day upon the night.” Qur’an, 39:5
The original meaning of the verb kis to coil a turban around the head. This is a totally valid comparison; yet at the time the Qur’an was revealed, the astronomical data necessary to make this comparison were unknown. It is not until man landed on the moon and observed the earth spinning on its axis, that the dark half of the globe appeared to wind itself around the light and the light half appeared to wind itself around the dark.
The Solar Apex
The notion of a settled place for the sun is vividly described in chapter Yaa Seen of the Qur’an:
“The sun runs its coarse to a settled place That is the decree of the Almighty, the All Knowing.” Qur’an, 36:38
“Settled place” is the translation of the word mustaqarr which indicates an exact appointed place and time. Modern astronomy confirms that the solar system is indeed moving in space at a rate of 12 miles per second towards a point situated in the constellation of Hercules ( alpha lyrae ) whose exact location has been precisely calculated. Astronomers have even give it a name, the solar apex.
Expansion of the Universe
Chapter ath-Thaariyaat of the Qur’an also seems to allude to one of the most imposing discoveries of modern science, the expansion of the Universe.
“I built the heaven with power and it is I, who am expanding it.” Qur’an,51:47
The expansion of the universe was first suggested by the general theory of relativity and is supported by the calculations of astrophysics. The regular movement of the galactic light towards the red section of the spectrum is explained by the distancing of one galaxy from another. Thus, the size of the universe appears to be progressively increasing.
Conquest of Space
Among the achievements of modern science is the “conquest” of space which has resulted in mans journey to the moon. The prediction of this event surely springs to mind when we read the chapter ar-Rahmaan in the Qur’an:
“O assembly of Jinns and men, if you can penetrate the regions of the heavens and the earth, then penetrate them! You will not penetrate them except with authority.”
Authority to travel in space can only come from the Creator of the laws which govern movement and space. The whole of this Qur’anic chapter invites humankind to recognize God’s beneficence.
Let us now return to earth to discover some of the many amazing statements contained in Qur’anic reflections about our own planet. They deal, not only with the physical phenomena observed here on earth, but also with details concerning the living organisms that inhabit it.
As in the case of everything we have discussed so far, we shall see that the Qur’an also expresses concepts in the field of geology that were way ahead of those current at the time of its revelation.
At this point, we must ask ourselves the following question: How could an uneducated man in the middle of the desert accurately tackle so many and such varied subjects at a time when mythology and superstition reigned supreme? How could he so skillfully avoid every belief that was proven to be totally inaccurate many centuries later?
The verses dealing with the earthly systems are a case in point. I have quoted a large number of them in my book, The Bible, The Qur’an and Science, and have paid special attention to those that deal with the water cycle in nature. This is a topic which is well known today. Consequently, the verses in the Qur’an that refer to the water cycle seem to express ideas that are now totally self-evident. But if we consider the ideas prevalent at that time, they appear to be based more on myth and philosophical speculation than on observed fact, even though useful practical knowledge on soil irrigation was current at that period.
Let us examine, for example, the following verse in chapter az-Zumar:
“Have you not seen that Allah sent rain down from the sky and caused it to penetrate the ground and come forth as springs, then He caused crops of different colors to grow…” Qur’an,39:21
Such notions seem quite natural to us today, but we should not forget that, not so long ago, they were not prevalent. It was not until the sixteenth century, with Bernard Palissy, that we gained the first coherent description of the water cycle. Prior to this, people believed that the waters of the oceans, under the effect of winds, were thrust towards the interior of the continents. They then returned to the oceans via the great abyss, which, since Plato’s time was called the Tartarus .In the seventeenth century, great thinkers such as Descartes still believed in this myth. Even in the nineteenth century there were still those who believed in Aristotle’s theory that water was condensed in cool mountain caverns and formed underground lakes that fed springs. Today, we know that it is the infiltration of rain water into the ground that is responsible for this. If one compares the facts of modern hydrology with the data found in numerous verses of the Qur’an on this subject, one cannot fail to notice the remarkable degree of agreement between the two.
In geology, modern science has recently discovered the phenomenon of folding which formed the mountain ranges. The earth’s crust is like a solid shell, while the deeper layers are hot and fluid, and thus inhospitable to any form of life. It has also been discovered that the stability of mountains is linked to the phenomenon of folding. The process of mountain formation by folding drove the earth’s crust down into the lower layers and provided foundations for the mountains.
Let us now compare modern ideas with one verse among many in the Qur’an that deals with this subject. It is taken from chapter an-Naba’:
“Have We not made the earth an expanse and the mountains stakes?”
Stakes ( awtaad ), which are driven into the ground like those used to anchor a tent, are the deep foundations of geological folds.
Here, as in the case of all the other topics presented, the objective observer cannot fail to notice the absence of any contradiction to modern knowledge.
More than anything else, I was struck by statements in the Qur’an dealing with living things, both in the animal and vegetable kingdoms, especially with regard to reproduction. We should really devote much more time to this subject, but, due to the limited scope of this presentation, I can only give a few examples.
I must once again stress the fact that it is only in modern times that scientific progress has made the hidden meaning of some Qur’anic verses comprehensible to us. Numerous translations and commentaries on the Qur’an have been made by learned men who had no access to modern scientific knowledge. It is for this reason that scientists find some of their interpretations unacceptable.
There are also other verses whose obvious meanings are easily understood, but which conceal
scientific meanings which are startling, to say the least. This is the case of a verse in chapter al-Ambiyaa, a part of which has already been quoted:
“Do the unbelievers not realize that the heavens and the earth were joined together,
then I clove them asunder and I made every living thing out of water. Will they still not believe?” Qur’an, 21:30
This is a dramatic affirmation of the modern idea that the origin of life is aquatic.
Progress in botany at the time of Muhammad (S) was not advanced enough in any country for scientists to know that plants have both male and female parts. Nevertheless, we may read the following in the chapter Taa Haa:
“(God is the One who) sent down rain from the sky and with it brought forth a variety of plants in pairs.” Qur’an, 20:53
Today we know that fruit comes from plants that have sexual characteristics even when they come from unfertilized flowers, like bananas. In the chapter ar-Ra‘d we read the following:
“… and of all fruits (God) placed (on the earth) two pairs.” Qur’an, 13:3
In the field of physiology, there is one verse which appears extremely significant to me. One thousand years before the discovery of the blood circulatory system, and roughly thirteen centuries before it was determined that the internal organs were nourished by the process of digestive , a verse in the Qur’an described the source of the constituents of milk, in conformity with scientific facts.
To understand this verse, it must first be known that chemical reactions occur between food and enzymes in the mouth, the stomach and the intestines releasing nutrients in molecular form which are then absorbed into the circulatory system through countless microscopic projections of the intestinal wall called villi. Blood in the circulatory system then transports the nutrients to all the organs of the body, among which are the milk-producing mammary glands.
This biological process must be basically understood, if we are to understand a verse in the Qur’an which has for many centuries given rise to commentaries that were totally incomprehensible.
Today it is not difficult to see why! This verse is taken from the chapter an-Nahl:
“Verily, in cattle there is a lesson for yon. I give you drink from their insides, coming from a conjunction between the digested contents ( of the intestines ) and the blood, milk pure and pleasant for those who drink it.” Qur’an, 16:66
The constituents of milk are secreted by the mammary glands which are nourished by the product of food digestion brought to them by the bloodstream. The initial event which sets the whole process in motion is the conjunction of the contents of the intestine and blood at the level of the intestinal wall itself.
This very precise concept is the result of the discoveries made in the chemistry and physiology of the digestive system over one thousand years after the time of Prophet Muhammad (S).
There are a multitude of statements in the Qur’an on the subject of human reproduction which constitute a challenge to the embryologist seeking a human explanation for them. It was only after the birth of the basic sciences which contributed to our knowledge of biology and the invention of the microscope, that humans were able to understand the depth of those Qur’anic statements. It was impossible for a human being living in the early seventh century to have accurately expressed such ideas. There is nothing to indicate that people in the Middle-East and Arabia knew anything more about this subject than people living in Europe or anywhere else. Today, there are many Muslims, possessing a thorough knowledge of the Qur’an and natural sciences, who have recognized the amazing similarity between the verses of the Qur’an dealing with reproduction and modern scientific knowledge.
I shall always remember the comment of an eighteen-year-old Muslim, brought up in Saudi Arabia, commenting on a reference to human reproduction as described in the Qur’an. He pointed to the Qur’an and said, “This book provides us with all the essential information on the subject. When I was at school, my teachers used the Qur’an to explain how children were born. Your books on sex-education are a bit late on the scene!”
If I were to spend as long on all the details of reproduction contained in the Qur’an, as the subject merits, this pamphlet would become a book. The detailed linguistic and scientific explanations I have given in The Bible, The Qur’an and Science are sufficient for the person who does not speak Arabic nor know much about embryology to be able to understand the meaning of such verses in the light of modern science in more depth.
It is especially in the field of embryology that a comparison between the beliefs present at the time of the Qur’an’s revelation and modern scientific data, leaves us amazed at the degree of agreement between the Qur’an’s statements and modern scientific knowledge. Not to mention the total absence of any reference in the Qur’an to the mistaken ideas that were prevalent around the world at the time.
Let us now isolate, from all these verses, precise ideas concerning the complexity of the semen and the fact that an infinitely small quantity is required to ensure fertilization. In chapter al-Insaan the Qur’an states:
“Verily, I created humankind from a small quantity of mingled fluids.” Qur’an, 76:2
The Arabic word nutfah has been translated as “small quantity”. It comes from the verb meaning ‘to dribble, to trickle’ and is used to describe what remains in the bottom of a bucket which has been emptied. The verse correctly implies that fertilization is performed by only a very small volume of liquid.
On the other hand, mingled fluids ( amshaaj ) has been understood by early commentators to refer to the mixture of male and female discharges. Modern authors have corrected this view and note that the sperm is made up of various components.
When the Qur’an talks of a fertilizing fluid composed of different components, it also informs us that human progeny will be formed from something extracted from this liquid. This is the meaning of the following verse in chapter as-Sajdah:
“Then He made [ man’s ] offspring from the essence of a despised fluid.”
The Arabic word translated by the term ‘essence’ is sulaalah which means ‘something extracted, the best part of a thing’. In whatever way it is translated, it refers to part of a whole. Under normal conditions, only one single cell, spermatozoon, out of over 50 million ejaculated by a man during sexual intercourse will actually penetrate the ovule.
Once the egg has been fertilized in the fallopian tube, it descends to lodge itself inside the uterus. This process is called the ‘implantation of the egg’. Implantation is a result of the development of villosities, which, like roots in the soil, draw nourishment from the wall of the uterus and make the egg literally cling to the womb. The process of implantation is appropriately described in several verses by the word ‘alaq, which is also the title of the chapter in which one of the verses appears:
“God fashioned humans from a clinging entity.” Qur’an, 96:2
I do not think there is any reasonable translation of the word ‘alaq other than to use it in its original sense. It is a mistake to speak of a ‘blood clot’ here, which is the term Professor Hamidullah uses in his translation. It is a derivative meaning which is not as appropriate in this context.
The evolution of the embryo inside the maternal uterus is only briefly described, but the description is accurate, because the simple words referring to it correspond exactly to fundamental stages in its growth. This is what we read in a verse from the chapter al-Mu’minoon:
“I fashioned the clinging entity into a chewed lump of flesh and I fashioned the chewed flesh into bones and I clothed the bones with intact flesh.” Qur’an, 23:14
The term ‘chewed flesh’ (mudghah) corresponds exactly to the appearance of the embryo at a certain stage in its development.
It is known that the bones develop inside this mass and that they are then covered with muscle. This is the meaning of the term ‘intact flesh’ (lahm).
The embryo passes through a stage where some parts are in proportion and others out of proportion with what is later to become the individual. This is the obvious meaning of a verse in the chapter al-Hajj, which reads as follows:
“I fashioned (humans) a clinging entity, then into a lump of flesh in proportion and out of proportion.” Qur’an, 22:5.
Next, we have a reference to the appearance of the senses and internal organs in the chapter as-Sajdah:
“… and (God) gave you ears, eyes and hearts.” Qur’an, 32:9
Nothing here contradicts today’s data and, furthermore, none of the mistaken ideas of the time have crept into the Qur’an. Throughout the Middle Ages there were a variety of beliefs about human development based on myths and speculations which continued for several centuries after the period. The most fundamental stage in the history of embryology came in 1651 with Harvey’s statement that “all life initially comes from an egg”. At that time, when science had benefited greatly from the invention of the microscope, people were still arguing about the respective roles of the egg and spermatozoon. Buffon, the great naturalist, was one of those in favor of the egg theory.Bonnet, on the other hand, supported the theory of ‘the ovaries of Eve’, which stated that Eve, the mother of the human race, was-supposed to have had inside her the seeds of all human beings packed together one inside the other.
BIBLE, QUR’AN AND SCIENCE
We have now come to the last subject I would like to present in this short pamphlet: it is the comparison between modern knowledge and passages in the Qur’an that are also referred to in the Bible.
We have already come across some of the contradictions between scripture and science regarding the creation of the universe. When dealing with that topic, I stressed the perfect agreement between modern knowledge and verses in the Qur’an, and pointed out that the Biblical narration contained statements that were scientifically unacceptable. This is hardly surprising if we are aware that the narration of the creation contained in the Bible was the work of priests living in the sixth century BC, hence the term ‘sacerdotal’ ( priestly ) narration is officially used to refer to it. The narration seems to have been conceived as the theme of a sermon designed to exhort people to observe the Sabbath. The narration was constructed with a definite end in view, and as Father de Vaux (a former head of the Biblical School of Jerusalem) has noted, this end was essentially legalist in character.
The Bible also contains a much shorter and older narration of Creation, the so-called ‘Yahvist’ version, which approaches the subject from a completely different angle. They are both taken from Genesis, the first book of the Pentateuch or Torah. Moses is supposed to have been its author, but the text we have today has undergone many changes.
The sacerdotal narration of Genesis is famous for its whimsical genealogies, that go back to Adam, and which nobody takes very seriously. Nevertheless, such Gospel authors as Matthew and Luke have reproduced them, more or less word-for-word, in their genealogies of Jesus. Matthew goes back as far as Abraham, and Luke to Adam. These writings are scientifically unacceptable, because they set a date for the age of the world and the time humans appeared on Earth, which most definitely contradicts what modern science has firmly established. The Qur’an, on the other hand, is completely free of dates of this kind.
Earlier on, we noted how perfectly the Qur’an agrees with modern ideas on the formation of the Universe. On the other hand, the Biblical narration of primordial waters is hardly, nor is the creation of light on the first day before the creation of the stars which produce this light; the existence of an evening and a morning before the creation of the earth; the creation of the earth on the third day before that of the sun on the fourth; the appearance of beasts of the earth on the sixth day after the appearance of the birds of the air on the fifth day, although the former came first. All these statements are the result of beliefs prevalent at the time this text was written and do not have any other meaning.
Age of the Earth
As for the Biblical genealogies which form the basis of the Jewish calendar and assert that today the world is 5738 years old, these are hardly admissible either. Our solar system may well be four and a quarter billion years old, and the appearance of human beings on earth, as we know him today, may be estimated in tens of thousands of years, if not more. It is absolutely essential, therefore, to note that the Qur’an does not contain any such indications as to the age of the world, and that these are specific to the Biblical text.
There is a second highly significant subject of comparison between the Bible and the Qur’an; descriptions of the deluge. In actual fact, the Biblical narration is a fusion of two descriptions in which events are related differently. The Bible speaks of a universal flood and places it roughly 300 years before Abraham.
According to what we know of Abraham, this would imply a universal cataclysm around the twenty-first or twenty-second century BC This story would be untenable, in view of presently available historical data. How can we accept the idea that, in the twenty-first or twenty-second century BC, all civilization was wiped off the face of the earth by a universal cataclysm, when we know that this period corresponds, for example, to the one preceding the Middle Kingdom in Egypt, at roughly the date of the first Intermediary period before the eleventh dynasty? It is historically unacceptable to maintain that, at this time, humanity was totally wiped out. None of the preceding statements is acceptable according to modern knowledge. From this point of view, we can measure the enormous gap separating the Bible from the Qur’an.
In contrast to the Bible, the narration contained in the Qur’an deals with a cataclysm that is limited to Noah’s people. They were punished for their sins, as were other ungodly peoples. The Qur’an does not fix the cataclysm in time. There are absolutely no historical or archaeological objections to the narration in the Qur’an.
A third point of comparison, which is extremely significant, is the story of Moses, and especially the Exodus from Egypt of the Hebrews. Here I can only give a highly compressed account of a study on this subject that appears in my book. I have noted the points where the Biblical and Qur’anic narrations agree and disagree, and I have found points where the two texts complement each other in a very useful way.
Among the many hypotheses, concerning the historical time-frame occupied by the Exodus in the history of the pharaohs, I have concluded that the most likely is the theory which makes Merneptah, Ramesses II’s successor, the pharaoh of the Exodus. The comparison of the data contained in the Scriptures with archeological evidence strongly supports this hypothesis. I am pleased to be able to say that the Biblical narration contributes weighty evidence leading us to situate Moses in the history of the pharaohs. Moses was probably born during the reign of Ramesses II. Biblical data. are therefore of considerable historical value in the story of Moses. A medical study of the mummy of Merneptah has yielded further useful information on the possible causes of this pharaoh’s death. The fact that we possess the mummy of this pharaoh is one of paramount importance. The Bible records that pharaoh was engulfed in the sea, but does not give any details as to what subsequently became of his corpse. The Qur’an, in chapter Yoonus, notes that the body of the pharaoh would be saved from the waters:
“Today I will save your dead body so that you may be a sign for those who come after you.” Qur’an, 10:92
A medical examination of this mummy, has, shown that the body could not have stayed in the water for long, because it does not show signs of deterioration due to prolonged submersion. Here again, the comparison between the narration in the Qur’an and the data provided by modern knowledge does not give rise to the slightest objection from a scientific point of view.
Such points of agreement are characteristic of the Qur’anic revelation. But, are we throwing the Judeo-Christian revelation into discredit and depriving it of all its intrinsic value by stressing the faults as seen from a scientific point of view? I think not because the criticism is not aimed at the text as a whole, but only at certain passages. There are parts of the Bible which have an undoubted historical value. I have shown that in my book, The Bible, The Qur’an and Science, where I discuss passages which enable us to locate Moses in time.
The main causes which brought about such differences as arise from the comparison between the Holy Scriptures and modern knowledge is known to modern scholars. The Old Testament constitutes a collection of literary works produced in the course of roughly nine centuries and which has undergone many alterations. The part played by men in the actual composition of the texts of the Bible is quite considerable.
The Qur’anic revelation, on the other hand, has a history which is radically different. As we have already seen, from the moment it was first commto humans, it was learnt by heart and written down during Muhammad’s own lifetime. It is thanks to this fact that the Qur’an does not pose any problem of authenticity.
A totally objective examination of the Qur’an, in the light of modern knowledge, leads us to recognize the agreement between the two, as has already been noted on repeated occasions throughout this presentation.
It makes us deem it quite unthinkable for a man of Muhammad’s time to have been the author of such statements, on account of the state of knowledge in his day. Such considerations are part of what gives the Qur’anic revelation its unique place among religious and non-religious texts, and forces the impartial scientist to admit his inability to provide an explanation based solely upon materialistic reasoning.
Such facts as I have had the pleasure of exposing to you here, appear to represent a genuine challenge to human explanation leaving only one alternative: the Qur’an is undoubtedly a revelation from God.
Written by leading scholars, the Focus On essays are designed to stimulate thought and enhance understanding of vital aspects of the Islamic world. New essays on specific themes, with links to related content within the site for further reading, are published throughout the course of the year. All visitors to Oxford Islamic Studies Online can access these essays, but related content links in Previous Features are available to subscribers only.
Join the discussion: If you have a question related to the topic explored in a Focus On article, please email your inquiry to the editor of Oxford Islamic Studies Online. Selected questions and the author's replies will be posted in our Focus On Forum in tandem with site updates.
Islam and Science
Professor Ibrahim Kalin
The debate over Islam and science covers a wide range of issues and extends from political leaders and experts to the public at large. Revealing the ever-present tensions between theory and practice, this debate takes place at two levels: practical and intellectual. At the practical level, the challenge is keeping up with the technological civilization of our age and bridging the gap between the advanced societies of the West and Muslim countries. From Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the modern Turkish Republic, to the Islamic Republic of Iran and poor and rich Arab countries, empowering nations through science and technology is a top priority for all governments in the Muslim world, even though not all succeed in this goal. But it is not only governments and bureaucrats who think this way; the public at large is also fascinated by the power and magic of science and technology, which has penetrated all aspects of our lives. By will or by necessity, the vast majority of Muslims use science and technology in ways indistinguishable from the rest of the world.
While the practical application of science shadows everything else, the intellectual claims surrounding it raise serious questions. As a systematic way of studying nature, science operates within a framework of philosophical assumptions that overlap with theology and philosophy. Religious, cosmological, and metaphysical ideas provide a context of justification for the scientific study of the order of nature. These ideas and presuppositions may not always be explicitly articulated, but they underlie the conceptual foundations of all scientific traditions from the classical to the modern period. Contrary to the claims of positivists and scientific purists, scientific inquiry is shaped by socio-historical circumstances and preferences. Long before the publication of Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions in 1962 and the postmodernist critiques of science that followed it, a number of studies—including Edmund Burtt's The Foundations of Modern Physical Sciences—had begun to probe into the tacit and explicit presuppositions of modern natural sciences. No matter how "objective" and precise it may claim to be, no science functions in a social or conceptual void.
The Qur'an, Islam's sacred text, contains an elaborate cosmology, makes regular references to natural phenomena, and implores its readers to ponder the world of nature as God's signs (ayat Allah, vestigia Dei). It is quite telling that a verse of the Qur'an is also called an ayah, i.e., sign. It deals with issues that are also studied by the natural sciences: creation, life, heavens and earth, animals, causality, order in nature, the argument from design, and the relation between the natural and human orders. The Qur'an presents natural phenomena as both the foundations of the physical order in which we live and the marvelous work of God as the great Artisan. By giving nature a religious meaning and a metaphysical function within the great chain of being, it offers a religious view of the universe which, in turn, lays the foundation for an Islamic philosophy of science. But this is not simply a religious philosophy superimposed upon a material entity. Rather, it is an integrated and holistic notion of the universe in which man and nature are placed as complements to each other.
Islamic Worldview and Modern Science
The notion of worldview is where Islam's holistic view of the universe runs into conflict with the secular, materialistic, and reductionist notions of the natural world. The latter is not science in any proper sense of the term but what some have called "scientism," an ideological construction of science as an alternative worldview. Scientism seeks to supplant the religious view of the universe and reduce religion to ethics without a claim over the nature of reality. This explains in part why modern atheism makes frequent use of scientism to substantiate its claims against religious faith. The debate as to whether Islam and science can be reconciled is not so much about science as it is about the unsubstantiated claims of scientism and its dubious philosophical arguments.
The secularization of the world-picture has been one of the most important outcomes of the scientific revolution. The scientistic worldview that has emerged out of this process has reduced nature to dead matter and divested the natural world of any intrinsic qualities. It has rejected the creationist account of traditional religions and purged all teleology from scientific nomenclature. The Darwinian theory of evolution, for instance, has come to symbolize the epic battle between religion and science in the West and has caused considerable consternation in the Muslim world, since the majority of Muslims maintain the creation story as the explanation of life on earth.
It is therefore not easy to reconcile the philosophical assumptions of modern scientism with the religious view of the universe espoused by the Qur'an and the Islamic intellectual tradition. These two perspectives represent not just two separate domains, i.e., religion and scientism, but rather different ways of looking at reality and the universe, with radically different and often opposing premises. The world-picture that emerges out of these approaches has far-reaching consequences for the theory and practice of science in any civilization. While the advocates of modern science and technology in the Muslim world emphasize the practical applications of science and consider them essential for the advancement of Muslim societies in the twenty-first century, their critics point to the philosophical and ideological underpinnings of scientism and offer an alternative philosophy of science.
Scientism on the Attack
Scientism's frontal attack on Islam came from Ernest Renan at a lecture at the Sorbonne in 1883. A famous historian of religion and devoted positivist of his time, Renan argued that Islam was inherently irrational, militantly intolerant, and essentially incapable of producing science and philosophy. Lacking the "scientific outlook" that made the scientific revolution possible, Islam prevented the development of science and the kind of "free thinking" that is independent of all metaphysical and religious notions. When there was progress, it was despite Islam's religious dogmas, not because of them. Renan's quasi-racist attack was not an invitation for a conversation on religion and science or on Islam and Europe, but a verdict that was to generate a flurry of responses from several generations of Muslim scholars, scientists, and activists. Published in book form as L'Islam et la science, Renan's lecture was a triumphalist announcement of the final victory of Eurocentrism and its new scientistic worldview over the Muslim world and, in fact, the rest of the globe.
Spearheaded by Jamal al-Din Afghani in Persia and Namik Kemal in the Ottoman Empire, Muslim men of letters took it upon themselves to respond to what they considered to be the distortion of modern science at the hands of some anti-religious philosophers, producing a sizable discourse on modern science and how it can be reconciled with Islamic faith. Afghani epitomized the zeitgeist of his generation when he based his historical apology against Renan on the premise that there could be no clash between religion and science, be it traditional or modern, and that modern Western science was nothing other than the original true Islamic science shipped back, via the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, to the Islamic world. By the same token, there is nothing essentially wrong with modern science, and it is the reductionist and exclusivist representation of science that pits scientific facts against religious faith. Afghani also believed that the Muslim lands that were once the trailblazer of scientific advancements in the world would one day recover from their current eclipse and catch up with Europe (see also Lecture on Teaching and Learning and Answer to Renan).
The prominent Ottoman intellectual Namik Kemal joined Afghani with a rebuttal of his own in his Renan Mudafanamesi (A rebuttal of Renan), focusing this time on the scientific achievements of the Arabs (part of Renan's racism was directed at Muslim Arabs). Kemal was more nuanced in his assessment of the relations between religion and science and hinted that the Islamic intellectual tradition had produced a healthy synthesis of religious faith, philosophical investigation, and scientific discovery. Acutely aware of the daunting challenges of modern scientism but not intimidated by it, he produced an interpretation of Islam and science that has sought to strike a balance between tradition and modernity—a balance that has been attempted by numerous scholars and intellectuals since then.
Religion, Philosophy, and Science
The search for a balanced synthesis of religion, philosophy, and science remains at the center of the Islam-science debate. Philosophy is a bridge, a mediator between religious truths and scientific facts, because it provides a conceptual framework in which the religious view of the universe is related to the scientific description of physical reality. Science cannot produce a "worldview" because, as Huston Smith argues in his Beyond the Postmodern Mind, "'world' implies whole and science deals with part, an identifiable part of the whole that can be shown to be part only." Scientific knowledge is a special kind of knowledge, precise in its details but extremely restricted in its scope. The boundaries of science are drawn by itself: it is an enterprise limited to the quantitative study of the physical world, for which specific methods are needed. In this undertaking, natural sciences excel and show great prowess. Science becomes scientism and turns into poor philosophy when these boundaries are obliterated.
The premodern Muslim scientists applied this principle to their hermeneutics of science and interpreted scientific data within the worldview and cosmological outlook of Islam. A case in point is the notion of God as the "clock-maker" and why it has not caused a religious outrage among Muslims. The mechanization of the cosmos is a hallmark of the modern scientific worldview and underlies much of the new atheism today, because it dispenses with the idea of a creator and a divine agent in the universe. The explanation of the order and balance of the universe through the metaphor of a well-functioning system, however, is not an exclusively modern phenomenon. The Qur'anic concept of mizan, balance, and the philosophical notion of nizam, order, has been utilized to prove God's absolute perfection and artisanship. In fact, one of the classical proofs for the existence of God is the perfection of God's creation: the order, balance, proportionality, beauty, and harmony that we see in the universe. One can study the universe in its physical aspects and marvel at its mathematical precision without turning it into self-sustaining matter and a self-regulating entity separated from God. This is where classical Muslim theology, or kalam, joined the work of Muslim cosmologists and physicists and produced a scientifically sound and philosophically integrated view of the natural world.
The controversies surrounding faith and reason in Islam were hardly between religion and science or religious faith and rational argumentation. Many scholars of religion were also scientists, philosophers, historians, and philologists, and vice versa. When the question of the compatibility of faith and reason was raised, it was raised not by secular philosophers, as in post-medieval Europe, but by religious authorities who did not feel comfortable with particular theories and interpretations of Muslim philosophers. Most of their objections pertained to the philosophical and cosmological system developed by the Muslim Peripatetics on the basis of Aristotle's core ideas. Science per se was hardly a matter of controversy. Al-Ghazali's attack on the Muslim Aristotelians in his Tahafut al-falasifah is a case in point.
Overcoming the Boundaries
Ghazali's criticism of Peripatetic metaphysics and cosmology has been interpreted as the death knell of philosophy and science in Islam—a point still raised in the Islam-science debate today. This is a simplistic reading of the intellectual tradition of Islam and fails to do justice to the long and complex history of science in the Muslim world. Philosophical and scientific studies continued after al-Ghazali and reached a climax in terms of accumulated scientific knowledge and advanced techniques in Andalusia, the Ottoman world, and the subcontinent of India.
More importantly, al-Ghazali makes it clear in his autobiography al-Munqidh min al-dalal that his primary objections were directed not at philosophy (falsafah) as such but at the philosophers (falasifah) and their metaphysics in particular. In a Kantian move, al-Ghazali's concern was to draw the limits of speculative (and Aristotelian) philosophy vis-á-vis Islamic metaphysics. Al-Ghazali held that the Aristotelian system, which the Muslim Peripatetics endorsed, was not adequate for an Islamic metaphysics of God and the creation of the universe because it reduced God to an Unmoved Mover, which hardly did justice to God's absolute power, infinity, mercy, and love.
Diverse Views of Science in the Muslim World
With this background in mind, three main positions can be identified in the present religion-science discourse in the Muslim world. The first is that science is a cross-cultural enterprise and that it does not take an "Islamic" or "Western" form. In simple terms, science studies the world of nature and is a tool to make people's lives better. It is not a philosophical project and does not need religious justification. What the classical Islamic civilization had in the past was a scientific tradition carried out in Muslim lands, which was then transmitted to the West, preparing the ground for the rise of modern science. Thus the Muslim world should import science and technology to solve its economic and social problems without fearing their religious or ethical implications.
This view has been generally defended by such figures as Jamal al-Din Afghani and Sayyid Ahmad Khan in the nineteenth century and is held by scores of Muslim scientists and engineers today. One of its most ardent defenders was Ataturk, who said in his usual crisp tone: "We shall take science and knowledge from wherever they may be, and put them in the mind of every member of the nation. For science and for knowledge, there are no restrictions and no conditions. For a nation that insists on preserving a host of traditions and beliefs that rest on no logical proof, progress is very difficult, perhaps even impossible." Today, governments in the Muslim world follow the same approach and seek to make the most of modern scientific and technological advancements. While many Muslim countries lag behind in scientific research and publication, they share the goal of transferring and owning science and technology to empower their military, economic, and societal development.
Science as Deciphering the Signs of God
In a pious religious context, a different version of this view has been produced to show the compatibility of the Qur'an and science. The proponents of this view, such as Farid Wajdi, Said Nursi, and the latter's follower Fethullah Gulen, both of whom have popularized the study of science among their followers, assign to the natural sciences the task of deciphering the signs of God in the universe. According to them, science reveals the divinely ordained codes built into the natural order and thus helps us marvel at God's creative act. The Qur'an describes the world of nature as a book to read under its guidance, and every sign in the cosmos points to God's power and generosity. This view of science as the decoder of the sacred language of the cosmos has appealed to generations of pious believers in the Christian and Muslim worlds. It has been deployed to show the unity of the three orders of reality: the divine who has created the universe, the natural world that bears to witness to God's creation, and the human order that is attached to both and thus occupies a unique position.
This view of science has also been used as a bulwark against the anti-religious claims of aggressive scientism and atheism. Those who hold a religious view of the universe reject scientism not only on philosophical but also on scientific grounds, and assert that scientism is not verified by the objective findings of natural sciences. The world of nature, when properly studied, reveals a remarkable structure of order, balance, and proportion, all of which point to a higher principle in the universe. God's "invisible hand" is seen most clearly in the cosmos, which humans must not only use for their practical, worldly needs but also understand in order to appreciate God's grace. Thus the sciences, which study nature, God's great work of art, can only enhance one's belief in God. The scientistic critics of religion misuse scientific theories and facts and create a pseudo-religion called scientism. Far from contradicting each other, Islam and science complement each other. Thus Farid Wajdi, one of the most prolific writers of modern Islam, states in his hefty work Islam in an Age of Science, published in Arabic in the middle of the last century, that "science in all ages supports and confirms Islam and Islam helps and backs its learning."
A more recent version of this view has been popularized by the work of Harun Yahya, the pen name of Adnan Oktar, a Turkish scholar and popularizer of Islam. Through numerous publications, videos, and Internet resources, Yahya has launched a major attack against Darwinism and evolutionary theory and defended monotheistic creationism as a scientifically proven doctrine. His work is also a typical example of what some have called "the scientific exegesis of the Qur'an."
The construction of science as a way of deciphering God's signs in the cosmos has led some Muslim scholars to interpret Qur'anic verses according to the findings of modern natural sciences. In turn, scientific discoveries have been interpreted to show their compatibility with religious belief. Some have gone even further and tried to prove not only that the Qur'an is compatible with scientific facts, but that it predicted new scientific discoveries fourteen centuries ago, and that this should be seen as a miracle of the Qur'an and demonstrate that it is the word of God. From the creation of the universe and the formation of clouds to the genesis of the fetus, Qur'anic verses as well as the sayings of the Prophet of Islam have been analyzed with a view toward explaining their scientific precision and truth.
Best exemplified by the French medical doctor Maurice Bucaille's The Bible, the Qur'an and Science, published in 1976, this approach has led to what is called "scientific exegesis" (al-tafsir al-ilmi, al-tafsir al-fanni) of the Qur'an. Its primary focus is to prove the miraculous nature of the Qur'an by using recent scientific discoveries. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, this view has been largely accepted by various Muslim scholars including Muhammad Abduh, Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Iskandarani, Sayyid Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi, Muhammad Abdullah Draz, and Said Nursi. Today, there are numerous publications in various languages advocating a pious interpretation of modern natural sciences.
The pietistic interpretation of modern science in the name of Islamic compatibility fails to address the deep philosophical differences between the Islamic scientific tradition and the secular outlook of modern science. As William Chittick argues in his Science of the Cosmos, Science of the Soul: The Pertinence of Islamic Cosmology in the Modern World, it is misleading to think that the goals of the traditional natural sciences are the same as those of modern science. It is also wrong to assume that premodern science is different from modern science only in the advancement of techniques, methods, and the accumulation of scientific data. The qualitative differences in the overall outlook of classical and modern science are too obvious to ignore. As George Saliba discusses in his Islamic Science and the Making of the European Renaissance, the rise of the Islamic scientific tradition cannot be relegated to the Muslim encounter with the Greco-Hellenistic tradition and its appropriation by successive generations of Muslim scholars and scientists. A more complex set of circumstances were at work in the formation of the Islamic scientific heritage, and they were underlined by both philosophical considerations and practical necessities, which will be examined below.
Science as a Cultural Enterprise
The second view of science in the Muslim world, which we may call the "epistemic view," takes its cue from contemporary philosophy of science and focuses on the social and historical bases of scientific theories. Its proponents criticize modern Western science on epistemological grounds and make use of the postmodern critiques of natural sciences and their philosophical claims. The epistemic view of science considers the sciences of nature like any other human enterprise: historically grounded, socially bounded, culturally situated, and economically motivated.
Led by the work of T. Kuhn, P. Feyerabend, I. Lakatos, and others, the philosophy of science has gradually become a sociology of knowledge, unearthing the social circumstances, historical prejudices, and tacit assumptions that shape the outlook and practice of science at any given time in history. There is no such thing as '"pure science"' untouched by contexts of historical formation; sciences, no matter how objective or precise they may claim to be, cannot claim immunity. The natural sciences are both cultural products and intellectual constructs that seek to understand the natural world in certain specific ways. As a result, the exclusivist claims of modern science and scientism over other forms of knowledge, including religious, philosophical, and artistic knowledge, should be discarded and the validity of different types of knowledge should be recognized.
The epistemic and methodological critique of modern science and its exclusivist claims of epistemic dominance have been fully developed by a number of Muslim scholars and intellectuals, including Ismail Faruqi, Ziauddin Sardar, Zaki Kirmani, and M. Ahmad Anees. They have also attempted to give an Islamic content to the epistemic-philosophical architecture of natural sciences. The "Islamization of knowledge" project, developed by Ismail Faruqi and his followers at the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), aimed at creating a new epistemic foundation for social and natural sciences from an Islamic point of view, and adopted an interdisciplinary approach. But Faruqi, since he believed in the essential neutrality of natural sciences and thought they needed no special attention, turned to social sciences and initiated a program to '"Islamize"' the existing forms of knowledge and social disciplines as they have developed in the West in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Ziauddin Sardar and a number of closely associated scholars known as the "Ijmalis" and the "Aligarh School" have also addressed the issues of science and scientific knowledge from an Islamic point of view. They have adopted a largely historical-cultural approach to science and interpret it as "a basic problem-solving tool of any civilization." As Sardar argues in his Explorations in Islamic Science, the natural sciences, just like any other human enterprise, operate within a certain historical-cultural context. Their tacit philosophical assumptions and scientific programs are shaped by the socio-historical settings in which they emerge and function. As the defenders of "postmodern science" hold, all scientific data are subject to such historical readings and cannot be considered absolute truths outside their socio-cultural contexts. This does not lessen the significance and reliability of scientific discoveries. But it does limit the degree to which the natural sciences can claim universal objectivity and applicability.
The epistemic view of science has led a number of Muslim scholars, scientists, and intellectuals to produce a sizable literature on the development of methods of natural sciences according to Islamic principles in such diverse fields as physics, astronomy, and biology. Several Islamic universities in Pakistan and Malaysia have implemented these principles in their curricula and have taught natural and social sciences from an Islamic and multidisciplinary point of view. Although they have achieved some success, they have so far failed to produce an integrated and coherent body of knowledge in either social or natural sciences.
The culturalist-historical approach to science has been further developed in relation to the practice of science in the Muslim world. In his Islam, Science, and the Challenge of History, Ahmad Dallal, for instance, traces the history of scientific activity in classical Islamic civilization by analyzing the cultural forces that propelled Muslims to take up natural sciences as a primary field of study. Toby Huff's The Rise of Early Modern Science: Islam, China, and the West provides a comparative study of the history of science in Chinese, Islamic and Western traditions and focuses on legal and institutional foundations. Huff explores why the scientific revolution did not happen in China or the Islamic world when in fact they had more advanced science than Europe until the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
A Metaphysics of Science
In addition to the neutral and epistemic-cultural views of science, a third view of science has emerged with a more substantial critique of the secular-materialist outlook of modern natural sciences and the philosophical claims of scientism. Led chiefly by Seyyed Hossein Nasr and defended by Naquib al-Attas, Osman Bakar, Alparslan Açikgenç, Mahdi Golshani, and Muzaffar Iqbal, the proponents of this view aim to analyze and deconstruct the metaphysical and philosophical foundations of modern science and propose a view of science grounded in the sacred teachings of religion on nature and the cosmos. They agree with the epistemic view that every scientific activity is carried out within a certain framework of principles, ideas, and assumptions about the universe. But these are not simply methodological principles; they pertain to the very nature of scientific activity. Our basic premises about existence precede the scientific descriptions of the physical reality. Thus a proper of study of the relation between religion and science has to start with the delineation of these presiding ideas and assumptions.
The task of a proper philosophy of science is to clarify these ideas and principles as they apply to the scientific investigation of the physical world. "Islamic science" refers to the kind of science produced within a framework of reality as envisaged by the fundamental teachings of Islam about the universe. It is both a metaphysical and an ethical framework, a way of looking at physical reality as part of the great chain of being that encompasses all beings and regulates their relations. According to its defenders, the concept of Islamic science operates on the principle of a conceptual unity and a holistic view of reality whereby everything in the universe is related to everything else. The Qur'anic view of the cosmos undergirds the scientific study of the natural world not only at the level of methodology but also at the level of "fundamental metaphysics," providing a context of meaning for all philosophical investigations and scientific discoveries. As Nasr states in his Science and Civilization in Islam, "the aim of all the Islamic sciences . . . is to show the unity and interrelatedness of all that exists, so that, in contemplating the unity of the cosmos, man may be led to the unity of the Divine Principle, of which the unity of Nature is the image." Thus the doctrine of tawhid, divine unity, applies to theology as well as to science; by means of this concept, the hierarchical interconnectedness and the inherent order and intelligibility of things are unveiled.
As Muzaffar Iqbal discusses in his Islam and Science, the great achievements of Muslim scientists in classical Islamic civilization were made possible within such a framework of understanding and thus extended the Islamic Weltanschauung into the field of practical sciences and technology. While operating within the religious universe of Islam, natural sciences also responded to the practical needs of Muslim societies. These included a wide range of issues: finding the direction of the qibla; determining prayer times; devising complex tax systems; developing new surgical methods; examining and discovering different aspects of the human body; producing new drugs; applying mathematical models and geometrical patterns to architecture and plastic arts; producing complex colors and coloring techniques; researching light and its movements; advancing optical sciences for various uses; building sophisticated and efficient windmills and watermills; developing the science of cybernetics; inventing new devices for measurement; advancing map making; and so on.
History of Islamic Science
While scientists and technicians met these practical needs and advanced the material well-being of their societies, states and political leaders supported and generously funded scientific activities. In some cases, rival states competed with each other to attract the best scientists in the world, from the Byzantine lands to China. Most scientific projects in physics, astronomy, chemistry, optics, and medicine were funded through public funds but also through endowments, schools, libraries, and research centers. The famous Bayt al-Hikmah, for instance, became such a center in the ninth century and functioned as a model for other institutions in the centuries to come. It was not only a center for the translation of Greek philosophical and scientific works into Arabic. It was also a center for advanced learning, research, and study where Muslims and non-Muslims, Arabs and non-Arabs came together to pursue knowledge in the vast inventory of human learning that was available to them. It is still remembered today as a beacon of knowledge and as a memorable witness to the great achievements of Muslim scholars and scientists.
The contributions of Muslim scientists have been studied in various academic works, including those by Roshdi Rashed, N. Haq, E. Kennedy, and others. The Cambridge Journal of Arabic Sciences and Philosophy publishes scholarly articles on the history of science in the Muslim world. The journal Islam and Science, edited by Muzaffar Iqbal, engages the Islam-and-science debate through discussions on the theory and practice of science in an Islamic context.
Seyyed Hossein Nasr's Islamic Science: An Illustrated Study was the first major study of Islamic science with a view toward making it available to a general audience. Most recently, the major achievements of classical Islamic science have been presented in a major exhibition and study called 1001 Inventions: Muslim Heritage in Our World. The exhibition brings together some of the important discoveries made by Muslim scientists and discusses their contributions to general knowledge.
A museum of Islamic science and technology with a similar idea has opened in Istanbul, Turkey under the direction of Fuat Sezgin. Considered one of the most prolific historians of Islamic thought and science, Sezgin's works, published in several languages, cover the major areas of Islamic science and technology. His science museum provides an engaging access to the workings of various technical devices and machines developed by Muslim scientists.
The Islam-science debate has its critics as well. The critics reject the Islamic science literature as conceptually weak, historically ungrounded, and scientifically unproductive. For instance, Pervez Hoodbhoy and Taner Edis, while taking different approaches, insist on a clear-cut distinction between the fields of religion and science, and see attempts at reconciliation or synthesis as unsound. They generally take a bifurcationist position and propose that religion and science be treated as two independent domains of study.
Issues in Physical and Biological Sciences
Today, Muslim scholars and scientists face a series of conceptual and practical challenges in the field of science and technology. The findings and application of modern science to various fields of life pose challenges to world religions including Islam. Issues in bioethics, human cloning, genetic engineering, organ transplantation, and stem-cell research have generated varying responses by Muslim scholars and scientists. This is a new area of intense debate in which Muslim jurists, biologists, and physicians have all been consulted for answers. The Darwinian theory of evolution remains a highly contentious issue, with both defenders and opponents arguing from the Islamic sources. Osman Bakar's Critique of Evolutionary Theory: A Collection of Essays brings together a number of essays that consider Darwinian evolution both unscientific and un-Islamic.
A similar set of issues has emerged in the field of physical sciences and cosmological theories. Quantum mechanics has substantially changed our concept of matter, and its philosophical implications have been applied to issues of determinism, measurement, chance, and necessity. Modern cosmological theories, the big-bang theory of creation, the anthropic principle, the argument from design, and models of the expanding and oscillating universe have also produced a sizable literature and have once again blurred the lines between religion, philosophy, and science. A number of Muslim scientists have written about modern physics and cosmology from an Islamic point of view.
Muslim thinkers and scientists have produced different perspectives on Islam and science. Their diverse responses attest to the possibility of different conceptualizations and formulations within an Islamic framework. The practical and conceptual challenges of science and technology remain pressing for Muslim societies. The debate over how to develop a coherent Islamic framework for science and technology continues with important implications for biological and environmental issues in the Muslim world. As developing Muslim nations continue to struggle with issues of science and technology, the Islam-science debate is certain to gain further momentum.
- Açikgenç, Alparslan. Islamic Science: Towards a Definition. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: ISTAC, 1996.
- al-Attas, S. M. Naquib. "Islam and the Philosophy of Science." In Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam: An Exposition of the Fundamental Elements of the Worldview of Islam. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: ISTAC, 1995.
- Bagir, Zaynal Abidin, ed. Science and Religion in a Post-colonial World. Adelaide, Australia: ATF Science and Theology, 2006.
- Baharuddin, Azizan, ed. Science and Religion: An Islamic Perspective. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Center for Civilizational Dialogue, 2006.
- Baharuddin, A., F. M. Denny, and R. C. Foltz, eds. Islam and Ecology. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003.
- Bakar, Osman. Classification of Knowledge in Islam. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Institute for Policy Studies, 1992.
- Bakar, Osman. Critique of Evolutionary Theory: A Collection of Essays. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Islamic Academy of Science and Nurin Enterprise, 1987.
- Bakar, Osman. Tawhid and Science: Essays on the History and Philosophy of Islamic Science. 2nd ed. Shah Alam, Malaysia: Arah Publications, 2008.
- Bucaille, Maurice. The Bible, the Qur'an and Science. New York: Islamic Book Service, 2001.
- Chittick, William. Science of the Cosmos, Science of the Soul: The Pertinence of Islamic Cosmology in the Modern World. Oxford: Oneworld, 2007.
- Dallal, Ahmad. Islam, Science, and the Challenge of History. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2010.
- Dien, Mawil Izzi. The Environmental Dimensions of Islam. Cambridge, U.K.: Lutterworth Press, 2000.
- Ebrahim, Abul Fadl Mohsin. Organ Transplantation, Euthanasia, Cloning and Animal Experimentation. Markfield, UK: The Islamic Foundation, 2001.
- Edis, Taner. An Illusion of Harmony: Science and Religion in Islam. Amherst, Mass.: Prometheus Books, 2007.
- Faruqi, Ismail, and Omar Naseef, eds. Social and Natural Sciences: The Islamic Perspective. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: 1981.
- Faruqi, Ismail R. Islamization of Knowledge: General Principles and Work Plan. Washington, D.C.: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1982.
- al-Ghazali. The Incoherence of the Philosophers (Tahafut al-Falasifah). Provo: Brigham University Press, 2002.
- Golshani, Mahdi. "Creation in the Islamic Outlook and Modern Cosmology." www.cis-ca.org
- Golshani, Mahdi. Issues in Islam and Science. Tehran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, 2004.
- Guessoum, Nidhal. Islam's Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science. London: I. B. Taurus, 2011.
- Guiderdoni, Bruno. "The Exploration of the Cosmos: An Endless Quest?" www.cis-ca.org.
- Hassan, Ahmad, and Donald Hill, eds. Islamic Technology: An Illustrated Study. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
- al-Hassani, Salim. 1001 Inventions: Muslim Heritage in Our World. London: Foundation for Science, Technology and Civilization, 2011.
- Hoodbhoy, Pervez. Islam and Science: Religious Orthodoxy and the Battle for Rationality. London: Zed Books, 1991.
- Huff, Toby. The Rise of Early Modern Science: Islam, China, and the West. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
- Ibn Rushd. The Decisive Treatise (Fasl al-Maqal). London: Luzac & Co., 1976.
- Ihsanoglu, Ekmeleddin, ed. Transfer of Modern Science and Technology to the Muslim World. Istanbul: IRCICA, 1992.
- Iqbal, Muzaffar. Islam and Science. Aldershot, U.K.: Ashgate, 2002.
- Kalin, Ibrahim. "Three Views of Science in the Islamic World." In God, Life and the Cosmos: Christian and Islamic Perspectives, edited by Ted Peters, Muzaffar Iqbal, and Syed Nomanul Haq, 43–75. Aldershot, U.K.: Ashgate, 2002.
- Kennedy, E. S., et al. Studies in the Islamic Exact Sciences. Beirut: American University, 1983.
- King, David. Astronomy in the Service of Islam. Aldershot, U.K.: Variorum, 1993.
- King, David. Islamic Mathematical Astronomy. London: Variorum, 1986.
- Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964.
- Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Islamic Science: An Illustrated Study. Kent, U.K.: World of Islam Festival Publishing Company, 1976.
- Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Religion and the Order of Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
- Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Science and Civilization in Islam. Cambridge, U.K.: Islamic Texts Society, 1987.
- Nasr, S. H., and William Chittick, eds. An Annotated Bibliography of Islamic Science. Tehran: Imperial Iranian Academy of Philosophy, 1975–78.
- Rahman, Fazlur. Health and Medicine in the Islamic Tradition. New York: Crossroad, 1987.
- Rashed, Roshdi, ed. Encyclopedia of the History of Arabic Science. London: Routledge, 1996.
- Saliba, George. Islamic Science and the Making of the European Renaissance. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007.
- Sardar, Ziauddin. Explorations in Islamic Science. London: Mansell Publishing, 1989.
- Smith, Huston. Beyond the Postmodern Mind. Wheaton, IL: Quest, 1989.
- Stenberg, Leif. The Islamization of Science: Four Muslim Positions Developing an Islamic Modernity. Lund, Sweden: Lund Studies in History of Religions, 1996.
- Turner, Howard. Science in Medieval Islam: An Illustrated Introduction. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1997.
- Wajdi, Farid. Islam in an Age of Science .
- Ziadat, Adel. Western Science in the Arab World: The Impact of Darwinism 1860–1930. London: Macmillan Press, 1986.
- Natural Sciences
- Technology and Applied Sciences
- Science, attitudes toward
- Science, Medicine, and Technology