Can the Qur’an be Interpreted with Scientific Discoveries?

This article will compare and contrast the different views.

Interpretation of the Qur’an with scientific discoveries is a controversial topic amongst Muslim scholars and has stirred much debate over the years. The varied scholarly views which circulate this topic have given way to the emergence of four splintered groups that range from scholars who completely advocate the use of scientific exegesis, to those who take a cautious approach, to those who wish to completely replace old interpretations with the new and those who completely reject it. The Qur’an clearly claims itself to be a book of guidance for all of humanity until the end of time and further claims that nothing has failed to be mentioned within it. Due to this it is plausible to believe that the creator of everything in existence may then refer to His creation in order to prove the truth and authenticity of His message for later generations to come. However, complete reliance on scientific interpretation could lead to problems as scientific theories or even facts are always evolving and subject to change. Therefore, such interpretations could have the potential to weaken the foundations of one’s faith instead of actually reinforcing and strengthening it, as many who advocate such interpretations claim it will do. This article will compare and contrast the different scholarly views on whether or not the Qur’an can be interpreted with scientific discoveries and what will be concluded is that the approach of the moderates appears to be most sound. The moderates do not completely rule out scientific interpretations but accept them with a great degree of mindfulness, wariness and caution.

Scientific exegesis which is also known as tafsir ilmi in Arabic is a topic that has caused much debate among scholarly circles over the centuries. Scholars examine the validity of modern scientific theories in an attempt to further understand certain Qur’anic verses. (Abdullah, Hussin, and Mohd 2014, 236) Within the Qur’an lies a sizable amount of verses that appear to explain some of the human scientific discoveries and according to some, these verses do warrant further examination. (Khir 2000, 1) The Scholars who endorse this type of Qur’anic tafsir believe such verses provide further evidence and reinforcement as to the accuracy and genuineness of the Qur’an (Khir 2000, 15) They argue that if people have a greater awareness of these verses and their scientifically compatible meaning they will be guided toward recognizing God as their creator. (Noor 2015, 14) Endeavoring to interpret parts of the Qur’an through scientific discoveries has inevitably produced varied scholarly views. These different views have eventually led to “… four distinct approaches: The modernists, advocates, rejectionists and moderates.” (Khir 2000, 15)

The first of the four groups are those who take a moderate view toward interpreting the Qur’an with scientific discoveries. This group is not against this type of Qur’anic interpretation but they do believe that such interpretations should be used cautiously, Sayyid Qutb is one scholar amongst this group. Qutb, as mentioned, does not rule out the use of scientific tafsir of Qur’an, however he does not also promote it. He takes a very cautious approach and at times even appears to be condemning the use of it. Sayyid Qutb does however, from the outset clearly state that, “… the Qur’an is not meant to be a book of science … .” (Khir 2000, 11) He believes that the Qur’an was not revealed in order to educate humanity on the varied scientific disciplines. (Khir 2000, 11) And that the Qur’an’s main interest is centered around the condition of the human soul. (Khir 2000, 11) However, despite this, Qutb does also say that Allah (God) does unveil some of His natural laws to humanity in order to strengthen their belief. (Qutb, n.d, 155) And points out that “the Qur’an … states that knowledge man has been given is scanty, but sufficient for man and appropriate for his potential.” (Qutb, n.d, 155) Qutb refers to the verse in the Qur’an which says, “We shall show them [people] our signs across all corners of the world and within themselves, until they clearly see that it [the Qur’an] is the truth!” (Qur’an, 41:53) and due to this verse, he believes that the use of science in order to make sense of certain verses is acceptable. (Khir 2000, 13)

Another two scholars known to be amongst those who take a moderate approach are Said Nursi and Hassan al-Banna. Nursi states that the Qur’an in not intended to be a book of science, however he does say that in order to promote human reflection and contemplation that lead to God, Allah does mention natural and cosmic facts. (Coruh 2020, 158) Furthermore, Nursi asserts that some Qur’anic verses are broad in nature and their meanings are not clear, and due to this he believes that such verses could be suggestive of modern scientific discoveries. (Coruh 2020, 158) Nursi also advises that the creation and the Qur’an should not to be interpreted independent of each another as both stem from the same origin, one being the deed of God and the other His word. (Coruh 2020, 156) Al-Banna further echo’s Nursi’s views by claiming that “Science must merge with the Qur’an” (Larsson, 2017, 33) However, despite such comments which appear to be in full advocation of such interpretations, Khir highlights that although al-Banna does advocate its use, he does so but only within defined limits. (Khir 2000, 10) The approach of the moderates appears sensible and well considered. They do not outright reject such interpretations as they are aware that some benefit may be derived from them, however they do so with a great deal of precaution and care.

The second of the four groups are the scholars who outright reject Qur’anic interpretations based on scientific discoveries. Among this group is scholar Muhmud Shaltut. Shaltut, from the outset warns of the inappropriateness of interpreting the honorable Qur’an via such methods. (Shaltut 1988, 84) He points out that any reference to God’s natural laws found in the Qur’an are intended to strengthening a believer in faith and to arouse contemplation. (Shaltut 1988, 85) Shaltut outlines four distinct reasons as to why the Qur’an should never be interpreted with scientific discovery. The first among them being that God did not reveal the Qur’an in order to educate man on scientific hypothesis. Secondly, Shaltut claims that if interpreting the Qur’an through such methods was meritorious then the first Muslim generations would have done so as they did have some knowledge of science. Thirdly, Shaltut believes that in order to interpret the Qur’an through scientific discoveries the interpreter must manipulate a verse to levels that are unacceptable. Finally, Shaltut points out that scientific findings are fickle and subject to change so interpreting the Qur’an with such flimsy theories is a perilous path to take. (Khir 2000, 10)

Scholars Aishah abd al-Rahman bint al-Shati and Imam al-Shatabi are also among those who view the interpretation of the Qur’an with scientific discoveries objectionable. Al-Shati states that there is no verse in the Qur’an that can be found that has the aim of educating man on the science behind his creation. (Amin 1992, 89) She believes that scientific knowledge is not necessary for the purpose of comprehending the meaning of a verse. Furthermore, she claims that the Qur’an’s objective is to warn humans on the repercussions of a life lived without faith and to guide them. (Amin 1992, 89) Al-Shatibi’s claims are reminiscent of al-Shati’s, he too rejects such tafsirs saying that the Qur’an is not revealed in order to clarify and analyze scientific theories, it is a book sent as a guide to humanity. (Abdullah, Hussin, and Mohd 2014, 238) He believes that “it is totally impermissible to ascribe to the Qur’an what it does not call for … .” (Khir 2000, 5) The rejectionist view appears rigid and unopen to different possibilities. Although the Qur’an is intended to be a book of guidance for humanity, there could be found within such scientific interpretations’ guidance for some as such interpretations could lead to thought provoking contemplation which could ultimately lead one to God.

The third group are the advocates who are a group of scholars who encourage Qur’anic interpretation with scientific discoveries. This group comprises of scholars like Rashid Rida and Al-Ghazali. Another notable advocate is the famous French doctor Maurice Bucaille who has written many books on this topic. Although he is not considered an Islamic scholar, Bucaille becomes intrigued by this topic upon being informed about Qur’anic verse (10:92) which refers to Pharaoh’s body being preserved as a sign for generations to come and is deeply perplexed by its accuracy. (Al-Ghazali 2001, 2) Bucaille believes that the Qur’an and science are identical and cannot be separated (Philips 1995, 6) He also argues that the scientific references made in the Qur’an are all compatible and are proven to be correct with the scientific facts of modern times. (Bucaille n.d, 88) He also asserts that “… the Qur’an is not only immune from scientific errors but that it has stated facts that were unthinkable at the time of its advent.” (Khir 2000, 5-6)

Adding strength to this argument is scholar Rashid Rida. Rida points to the Qur’anic verse that says “we have neglected nothing in the book” (Qur’an, 6:38) and believes that this verse specifies that God will speak about all matters of knowledge in His book. (Khir 2000, 10) Furthermore, Rida reinforces Bucaille’s view by pointing out that the Qur’an contains many verses which accurately describe modern scientific findings relating to natural phenomena as well as humanities historical events. (Khir 2000, 7) According to Rida it is the “scholars right to resort to personal interpretation of the sacred texts in order to adapt Islam to new circumstances …” (Soage 2008, 2-3) Following on from this line of thought is al-Ghazali. Al- Ghazali was one of the first leading figures to use scientific discoveries in order to broaden Qur’anic interpretation. (Khir 2000, 4) Ghazali believes that the Qur’an has not failed to mention anything and that God refers to all scientific fields within it. (Elshimi 2017, 53) He says that “Nothing in nature … can act spontaneously and apart from God.” (Ofek 2011, para 8) The Qur’an does clearly say that it is a book that has not failed to mention anything. Therefore, the argument of the advocates appears somewhat justified. However, despite this, over reliance on such interpretations could prove to be problematic as science and scientific discoveries are everchanging. Careful measure toward such interpretations would be a more prudent approach.

Finally, there is the modernist view which promotes the overhaul of old interpretations for that of new ones aligning with modern scientific knowledge. Sayyd Ahmed Khan is one of the most prominent figures in this group. (Khir 2000, 6) Khan believes that,  

the story of the creation is a metaphorical rendering of the evolution of humans and is not to be taken literally. Therefore, it is explained in the light of Darwinism where Adam, a symbol of humanity and not a real man, has originated from a chemical fusion of water and minerals. … It is claimed that the classical exegeses …, are no longer valid due to the vast expansion of human knowledge in the modern world.” (Khir 2000, 7) 

Despite this outlandish interpretation, Khan does insist that Qur’an is an unalterable text that is ever beyond the need of any alteration or change. He says however, that the scholars have no such immunity and can be wrong in their understanding and findings whereby requiring their resolutions to be amended. (Siddiqi 1967, 3) Khan’s views appear extreme and poorly calculated for the theory of Darwin is still until this day not an entirely accepted theory. 

In conclusion, the debate on whether or not the Qur’an can be interpreted with scientific discoveries is one that does not appear will abate any time soon and the answer is very much dependent upon whom you are speaking to. The four different scholarly approaches toward this topic and the evidence that each group cites to promote their views do have some merit. However, the views of the advocates, rejectionists and modernists are rigid and there are potential pitfalls to all three approaches. If the Qur’an identifies itself as a book for all people to the end of time and claims it does not fail to mention anything, then it is plausible to believe that God would have referred to some scientific discoveries within His book in order to guide and draw humans closer to Him via such contemplation. It would therefore appear, that the carefully considered approach of the moderates, which neither outwrite accept nor reject such interpretations, is the more prudent approach that strikes the correct balance between embracing the new whilst maintaining a firm foundation rooted in the past.

Bibliography

Abdullah, Wan Nasyrudin Wan, Haziyah Hussin, and Nor S. Mohd. 2014. “Scientific Exegesis in Malay Qur’anic Commentary.” Journal of Asian Social Science 10, no. 10. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n10p236.

Al-Ghazali, Muhammad. 2001. “Untitled.” Review of The Bible, The Qur'ān and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge, by Maurice Bucaille. Islamic Studies 40 (2): 329-35. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20837104.

Amin, Muhammad. 1992. “A Study of Bint Al-Shati’s Exegesis.” Thesis for The Degree of Master of Arts in Islamic Studies., McGill University Montreal.

Bucaille, Maurice. n.d. The Bible, The Qur’an and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge. Translated by Alastair D. Pannell and Maurice Bucaille. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d016c1ba9f2e7000120c08c/t/5ecf393301658b7cb86c7363/1590638900524/The+Bible%2C+The+Qur%27an+and+Science.pdf

Coruh, Hakan. 2020. “Relationship Between Religion and Science in the Muslim Modernism.” Theology and Science 18 (1): 152-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2019.1710355

Elshimi, Amani. 2017. “Al-Ghazali’s Integral Epistemology: A Critical Analysis of the Jewels of the Qur’an.” Thesis for Masters of Arts., The American University in Cairo.

Khir, Bustami Mohamed. 2000. “The Qur'an and Science: The Debate on the Validity of Scientific Interpretations.” Journal of Qur'anic Studies (2): 19-35. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25727996.

Larsson, Tommy. 2017. “The Islamist Ideology of Hassan Al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb: A Comparative Analysis.” Master’s Thesis in History., University of Oslo.

Noor, Ahmad Yunus Mohd. 2015. “Islamic Scientific Exegesis: An Introduction.” Accessed May 2,2021. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285584025_ISLAMIC_SCIENTIFIC_EXEGESIS_AN_INTRODUCTION

Ofek, Hillel. 2011. “Why the Arabic World Turned Away from Science: On the Lost Golden Age and the Rejection of Reason.” The New Atlantis. https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/why-the-arabic-world-turned-away-from-science

Philips, Abu Ameenah Bilal, ed. 1995. The Qur’an and Modern Science. https://www.islamland.com/uploads/books/The_Quran_and_Modern_Science_maurice_bucaile-eng.pdf

Qutb, Sayyid. n.d. In the shade of the Qur’an Vol V, Surah 6. http://www.kalamullah.com

Siddiqi, Mazheruddin. 1967. “Religious Thought of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan.” Journal of Islamic Studies 6 (3): 289-308. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20832887.

Soage, Ana B. 2008. “Rashid Rida’s Legacy.” The Muslim World 98 (1): 1-23. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229771951_Rashid_Rida%27s_Legacy

Zebiri, Katharine Patricia. 1988. “Mahmud Shaltut (D. 1963): Modern Muslim Scholar and Reformer.” The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy., School of Oriental and African Studies University of London.