|
Does the Qur'an Have any scientific Miracles?
10 Top-most
Scientific Myths about the Qur'an
[Part-1]
[Part-2]
By
Avijit Roy
e-mail:
charbak_bd@yahoo.com)
Founding Moderator,
Mukto-mona
PART-1:
Richard Carrier’s recent essay “Predicting
Modern Science: Epicurus vs. Mohammed” in Secular Web inspired me to reform
this treatise. Being the founding moderator of
Mukto-mona (an internet congregation of secularists, atheists, agnostics,
freethinkers, rationalists, skeptics and humanists of Bengali origin) for more
than three years, I had to engage in argument by discussing with indefinite
numbers of Bangladeshi apologists; multitudinous are from highly educated of
Islamic origin (mentioned as “Islamic scholars” hereafter). I have examined
all the arguments (scientific-hermeneutic approach) the Islamic scholars
commonly put forward in favor of the divine origin for the text of their holy
scripture. I have also gone through many web-pages, books and videos that have
been produced by both Bengali and non-Bengali Islamic sources proclaiming that
some verses in their scriptures contain super-scientific facts. This essay is
an attempt to examine critically and carefully some, if not all, of those
“miraculous scientific facts”, and to point out some fallacies, myths and
“clever reinterpretation” of the vague verses that appear in the debates with
an intent to convince others about the pseudo-scientific claims. I have
written previously a lot in some online newspapers, progressive web-sites and
forums, both in Bengali and English, touching the issues (Richard Carrier also
referred to one of my essays in his above-mentioned piece). Also I have found
Jochen Katz'
Answering-Islam site serves as a great
resource for possible answers to such popular claims, nevertheless, they have
not touched all the considerable topics, for e.g, Big Bang, the expansion of
Universe to mention few. Again, Answering-Islam team always responds the
issues from a Christian perspective. Approaches to this polemic from a secular
non-theist (atheist/agnostic/skeptic) perspective are somewhat slim on the net
[12].
This is also one of my motivations to formulate this article especially for
secular web (by mentioning my personal inclination towards secular philosophy,
I am not disregarding the comprehensive wealth of material criticizing Islam
and Qur’an in Answering-Islam though).
The fundamentalist Islamic scholars always claim
that Qur’an miraculously predicted many invention of modern science and all of
those Qur’anic predictions and myths are flawless. Their plan of action
lifted to a newer dimension serving euphoria to a great extent when they have
found Dr. Maurice Bucaille, a French physician started talking in favor of
their faith in his famous book "The Bible, The Qur’an and Science.” [4].
They suddenly started finding Big Bang theory, expansion of universe, atom,
molecules, shooting stars, embryologic facts, cosmology, genetics and many
other theories of modern science in Qur’an! Although, I found Bucaille's
intentions of relating modern science with Islam are somewhat wishful, shady,
ambiguous and doubtful; the dearth of "well-written" books by occidental
non-Muslim scholars available in English necessitates the use this particular
book to propagate various form of pro-Islamic apologia. The objective of this
article is not to focus on the arguments of Dr. Bucaille in general, as two of
my Mukto-Mona collogues have already done a splendid job in their respective
articles [4,
13]
by exposing some of the dishonest tricks taken by Dr. Bucaille. Also, there
are some other books from Christian perspective available which categorically
refuted Dr. Bucaille’s numerous pseudo-scientific claims [14].
The purpose of my article is mainly to show the flawed nature of Islamic
apologists who use to link science with ambiguous religious verses and
subsequently claim transcendental nature of holy verses on the discovery of
many scientific truths. Before dwelling on it further, I wish to put here
three of my important objections to such claims, in my later part of
discussion I will refute the specific claims of those famous scientific myths.
Objection
1: If it was indeed the case those
scriptures contain scientific facts and principles then we wouldn't need
popular science books to explain scientific facts to common people. Instead
the verses of the scriptures which are claimed to represent scientific facts
and principles could be compiled and published as an "Introduction to
Science". There is no doubt that if those vague verses are indeed compiled and
edited (omitting God or prophets and other holy references) and then published
as a science book, these books will not even be published, even if it is, no
one will buy it. It is a sure failure, that's why it has never been attempted
by the apologists. These verses cannot stand on their own merit as anything
close to even a popular exposition of scientific facts and principles, let
alone as accurate scientific statements.
Objection
2:
If Qur’an is a book of science, then what branch
of science is this? Physics ? Chemistry ? Biology ? Social science? Library
science? Political science? No answer. [1]
Islamic scholars can only give the answer in the line of
technological/medical science relating blurry wordings of the book with
practical examples of embryology, astronomy, Big-Bang etc. Moreover, if one
considers Qur’an as a scientific book then, they should be able to show us
at least one scientific principle that is disclosed in the Qur'an without
using any mumbo jumbo words and hocus pocus boring tricks of difficulty with
confusing translation of the Qur'an. They should be able to tell us where in the
Qur'an one can find the laws of gravitation, laws of planetary rotation,
principle of atomic structure of matters, the periodic table of elements,
theory of relativity, geological science and which chapter of Qur’an deals
with the modern science of aerodynamics, genetics engineering and
inter-planetary travel, and elucidation of genetic code etc [2].
We fail to ascertain any meaningful direction. Moreover, If a perfect book
written by a perfect God having intention to reveal a scientific idea, it
should not have been so vague and metaphoric, but accurate and scientific
enough that it can be put in a physics /chemistry/biology textbook without the
need of any change. Not a single verse in the Holy Books contain even one
scientific term, like atom, electron, cloning, Theory of relativity,
Uncertainty principle etc. A "perfect" book cannot be lacking in precision so
much [3]. In fact, the term “Islamic Science” popularly
quoted in Islamic web-sites and articles by the Islamic scholars is also
flawed in nature, if we consider the basic definition of science, not
scienticism per se. Pakistani Nobel laureate Physicist Dr. Abdus Salam, wrote in
forwarding letter of Dr. Parvez Hoodboy’s book [16]:
“There is only one Universal Science; its problems and modalities are
international and there is no such thing as Islamic Science just as there is
no Hindu Science, nor Jewish Science, no Confucian Science, nor Christian
Science".
This is the inherent beauty of science - the
scientists can speak the same language irrespective to their races, religion
or nations, and the language is science itself. Nobel laureate Physicist
Steven Weinberg also remarked in the same manner [17]:
"The experience of listening to a discussion of Quantum field theory or weak
interactions in a seminar room in Tsukuba or Bombay gives me a powerful
impression that the laws of physics have an existence of their own.”
The concept of Islamic science is
therefore faulty in light of science.
Objection
3:
If one insists that the verses of scriptures are literally word of Allah
(God) who is omnipotent and omniscient then one is forced to
conclude that Allah as a perfect being is even a worse science writer than
humans and if Allah really wanted to communicate scientific facts and
principles to his mortal creations, humans He failed miserably. Nobody
discovered or understood those scientific facts and principles until humans
discovered them on their own with no help from the verses. And as the words of
a perfect being, the scientific accuracy of the verses should have been of
such magnitude and objectivity that their could not be any scope of any
dispute about them among humans and all would accept them like they do all the
scientific principles discussed in science text books.
Now we will discuss and scrutinize critically the
10 top most (pseudo) scientific myths
of Qur’an. I have decided to publish it in two parts.
1. Qur'an foretells about Big bang.
[al-Anbiya' 21:30]
Have not those who disbelieve known that the
heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, ....
Some
Muslim interpreters tries to relate the above mentioned sura with Big-Bang.
But does it really depicts any fact about Big-bang at all? Lets look the next
verses to understand the Qur’anic image ...
21:30 Have not those who disbelieve known
that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we
made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe?
21:31 And We have placed in the earth firm
hills lest it quake with them, and We have placed therein ravines as roads
that haply they may find their way.
21:32 And we have made the sky a roof
withheld (from them). Yet they turn away from its portents.
For further clarification let us also quote verse from
Sura Al-Rad (13:2)
Allah it is
Who raised up the heavens without visible supports, then mounted the Throne,
and compelled the sun and the moon to be of service, each runneth unto an
appointed term; He ordereth the course; He detaileth the revelations, that
haply ye may be certain of the meeting with your Lord.
It
looks like a very primitive image on the relationship between the heavens and
earth. After Allah raise up the heavens on unseen pillars, and put down the
earth, he put the mountains on the earth to not quake, like putting a heavy
thing on a piece of paper to not fly?! Allah make the sky a roof withheld to
not fall on people head?! How he do so? By putting the heavens on unseen
pillars!! How could one pass these as twentieth century science? Still more
strange is this part of verse 21:30:…the heavens and the earth were of one
piece, then we parted them, …..’ If these few words are really the proof of
‘Big-Bang’, then one may legitimately ask; where is the mention of the huge
explosion? The word ‘Big-Bang’, itself, is very significant here. Where do we
find the sign of that famous ‘Bang?’ [5]
Moreover, Big Bang in Physics refers to the explosion of
SPACE-TIME SINGULARITY
(not matter). Matter was not even created when
Big Bang happened. Earth was formed billions of years after the Big Bang. The
above verses are clearly referring to earth and sky being "joined" (which
doesn't even have a common sense or scientific meaning) together and then
being split apart (again no scientific or common sense meaning), forget about
comparing it to Big Bang!
A
scientifically and common sensually meaningless statement like - "sky and
earth being joined and subsequently separated" cannot be suggested as
hinting to the scientific facts of Big Bang! In fact, why the idea is put in
such form in Qur’an can be easily guessed. Such kind of idea that the heavens
and earth were once joined and then separated by the activity of Gods and
Goddesses was actually quite common among pagans of the Middle East. Among the
Egyptians for example, it was the involuntary separation of Geb (the earth
god) from his wife and sister Nut (the sky goddess) that was responsible for
the division of the earth from the sky. The Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh
likewise describes the moment “when the heavens had been separated from the
earth, when the earth had been delimited from the heavens” as a result of the
separation of a sky God (An) from a earth Goddess (Ki). If you remove the
pagan references, you have the same story as found in the Qur’an [10].
Again,
from Quantum theory we know that moments after the explosion occurred, the
four forces of nature; strong nuclear, weak nuclear, electromagnetic and
gravity were combined as a single "super force" (Wald). Where are those
indications in those verses of Qur’an? How can someone derive Hubble's
Constant from those verses ? How can some one calculate red shift ? How can we
measure Doppler shifts? No answer.
If there
is no answer of those scientific enquiries, how can one make himself convince
that those verses actually describing big bang, not the partition of an egg
before making an omelet?
On a side note, I
want to add, Nobel laureate Physicist Dr. Abdus Salam once warned us against
people trying to explain Big Bang using verses from
Qur'an
[15],
saying that the current version of Big Bang is the best known scientific
explanation for the creation of the universe. What if a better scientific
explanation than Big Bang is found tomorrow? Should the verses be changed to
accommodate the new scientific view? Certainly it is not possible; thus it
shows the inherent contradiction such attempt leads to. Religious revelations
can never vindicate or falsify science. The truth or falsity of a scientific
principle lies within science itself.
2. Qur'an foretells about Expanding Universe.
[ADH-DHARIYAT 51:48]
And the earth, We have made it a wide extent; how
well have We then spread (it) out.
Islamic scholars try to relate the above mentioned ayat with expanding
universe. But there is no mention of "universe" at all in this verse. This
verse here is only talking about earth. "Spreading the earth out "does
not correlate with any expansion of universe by any means, rather it
establishes century old incorrect Qur’anic flat earth theory
[6].
Some
Islamic scholars also use to quote the previous verse (51:47) of the same
Soorat az-Zaariyaat to justify the identical claim. For example, one of these
popular claims put forth by Harun Yaha, a renowned Islamic scholar of Muslim
community wrote in his article “THE
SIGNS OF THE QUR'AN”:
Another truth revealed in the Qur'an is the expansion of the universe that was
discovered in the late 1920s. Hubble's discovery of the red shift in the
spectrum of starlight is revealed in the Qur'an as:
It is We Who have built the
universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We Who are steadily
expanding it. (Surat adh-Dhariyat: 47)
The
first important point to ponder whether is the actual statements of the Qur’an
have been honestly presented here. Mr. Yaha quotes the Qur’an as saying in
51:47 “It is We Who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and,
verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it”
The
purpose of the above translation could have served well for Mr. Yaha and his
gullible followers, but not the sceptics for obvious reasons. Let me quote the
three most highly regarded English translations that generally available in
the Net [18].
Their versions are:
051.047
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it
is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make
the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely
We are the makers of things ample.
None
among the above mentioned translators gives the slightest idea of an ongoing
expansion of the universe. In fact, none of them refers to the “universe” at
all, but to the heavens or firmament, in contrast to the Yaha immediately
following which discusses the earth in the following verse (051.048)
that I explained previously. Denish Giron also explained in one of his
wonderfully written pieces that the verb from which the Arabic word (moosi'oon)
is derived cannot mean ‘expand’ [19].
Also, according
to Dr. Ali Sina the word used here is moosiAAoona which drives from
word vaseun. [24] It means vast. It has nothing to do
with expanding. When one says al rezwano vaseun it refers, 'the
garden is vast'. It does not mean that the garden is expanding. Any Arab
standing in the clear nights of the desert could lookup at the sky and see
that it was vast. Muhammad is stating the obvious. There is no scientific
miracle or prophecy in this.
The
cause of the expansion of the universe is scientifically known from Modern
High Energy Astrophysics, known as the theory of inflation. The theory is
guided by Einstein's mathematical theory of general relativity about the
physical universe. These are all characterized, at any instant in
cosmological history, by mathematically- infinite space-like surfaces (3-d
space in other words). In this (open) model of the universe, everything is
expanding in the same sense that the points on a balloon's surface move away
from all other points as the balloon is inflated. General Relativity says that
for infinite universes, the same kind of expansion occurs. Inflationary
cosmology adds to this by saying that we live in a small pocket of some vaster
space-time. This pocked emerged from a tiny patch in the primordial space-time
and inflated to a vast size (I have
written a series of articles in Bengali mentioning the facts of origin and
expanding nature of Universe which is under publication in a book format).
From
the above analysis it should be clear that nothing in those Qur'anic verses
come any close to what an expansion of universe really means. Those who want
to relate the verse with expansion of universe, do this just by their wishful
interpretation or favourable twist.
3. Qur'an mentions that the universe originated from a 'gaseous material'.
[FUSSILAT 41:11]
Then turned He to the heaven when it was smoke, and said unto it and unto the
earth: Come both of you, willingly or loth. They said: We come, obedient.
Muslim
fundamentalists, by pointing out the above verse, claim that the Qur'an
miraculously foretells that origin of universe began with the gaseous mater.
They try to confuse the common people that it is the great and surest sign
that the Qur'an is a book of God. Richard Carrier has already refuted this
claim in detail in his article,
Cosmology and the Koran: A Response to Muslim Fundamentalists
Lets
study some of his findings once again in this regard:
First
of
all, the universe did not begin as a gas or any gaseous material. From current
Big Bang theory we know, the universe began before any matter of any kind
existed--it began as pure energy. It took several moments for any matter to
form, and then it was a plasma, not a gas. Gases only came
later, after the plasma cooled, and yet gasses were still not the only
constituent--much of the mass-energy at even that point, as before, was
comprised of electromagnetic radiation--light. The fact that the Qur’an fails
to mention any of this or any other crucial scientific information is
precisely why its claim to "scientific accuracy" is to be dismissed. It is
making vague metaphysical statements, and that is not science [7]
Secondly,
Even, for the shake of arguments, if we take "gaseous material" as plasma,
then also the problem remains unsolved. The main problem is that the
above-mentioned verse actually does not say about any "gaseous
material," which Islamic scholars are continuously claiming. The Arabic word
used in this verse is dukhan, - "smoke" [7]. Trying
to relate smoke with gaseous material is nothing but a hide and seek wordy
games played by Islamic scholars. Moreover, Smoke is made of ash,
predominantly carbon, and is produced from burning (oxidation), not plasma
condensation. Smoke looks nothing like heated hydrogen or helium, does not
share its elemental mass or other properties, and does not even possess many
of the general properties of a gas. Thus, Allah chose the wrong word. He could
have used "hot gases" or "hot gases expanding in a vacuum" or anything which
is much closer to the truth. If we critically examine this verse, it becomes
very clear to us that this verse is far from being scientific to define
initial condition of the universe, that verse is really hoax.
Thirdly, Let's check the chronological order of the above verse
from Qur’an.
From
verse
41:9 we find that that the earth is made "in two days," and this is the
first two days in the list. After the creation of earth, Allah describes the
next two days of creation, completing the first "four days equal," in which
mountains and plants are made in verse
41:10. Thus, we find a gradual order of the Qur'anic creation ie. Allah first
created the earth and then filled the earth with mountains and plants (It is
quite understandable that mountains and plants could not be made before the
earth was made, thus 41:10 follows 41:9 in a quite reasonable order). But
then we see that verse
41:11 establishes an undeniable context in which the universe exists as
smoke at the same time that the earth already exists, since God
"rose over towards the heaven when it was smoke" and spoke to it and to the
earth, therefore no Muslim can rationally deny that this verse clearly says
the earth existed at the same time as the smoke which is totally irrational
and absurd.
Thus
the verse mentioned above which is claimed to be a "perfect analogy"
describing the initial condition of the universe is nothing but a clever
deception.
4. Qur'an reveals Embryological facts !
[AL-MUMENOON 23: 12-14]
Verily We created man from a product of wet earth;
Then placed him as a drop (of seed) in a safe lodging; Then fashioned We the
drop a clot, then fashioned We the clot a little lump, then fashioned We the
little lump bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, and then produced it as
another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators!
Some
Islamic scholars find the embryological facts in above verse. But if we check
the verse from a rational point of view, it appears to us with a different
meaning. Let's check the above verse critically. First line is totally wrong.
Man is not a product of any wet earth. Moreover, Qur’an ambiguously asserts
many common sensually meaningless statements about such an elementary matter
in other verses. For examples sometimes it tells that we are created
from earth (11:61), sometimes it claims from dry clay
(15:26,28,33, 17:61, 32:7), sometimes "from nothing" (19:67),
sometimes "NOT from nothing" (52:35), sometimes from wet
earth (23:12), or from mire (38:71), sometimes
from water (25:54, 21:30, 24:45), sometimes from dust (
3:59, 30:20, 35:11) or even sometimes from dead (30:19, 39:6).
So which one is true? Those contradictory ambiguous statements actually do
not reveal any scientific facts regarding either how we created or what
exactly we are made of.
Before
analyzing rest of the portion of the above verse, I would like to cite an
useful information to the readers. In 1982 Keith Moore, an anatomy professor
at the University of Toronto, produced a textbook titled "The Developing
Human, 3rd edition". Relating embryological facts with Qur’anic verse
wishfully in Muslim community mainly started thereafter. In his book Moore
states astonishment at the way embryonic development is depicted in the
Qur'an. Moore took Yusuf Ali's translation of the verse under discussion which
directly uses the word “sperm” [8]:
023.013
YUSUFALI: Then We placed him as (a drop of) sperm in a place of
rest, firmly fixed;
PICKTHAL: Then placed him as a drop (of seed) in a safe lodging;
SHAKIR: Then We made him a small seed in a firm resting-place,
023.014
YUSUFALI:
Then We made the sperm into a clot of
congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then we made out
of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of
it another creature. So blessed be Allah, the best to create!
PICKTHAL:
Then fashioned We the drop a clot, then fashioned We the clot a little lump,
then fashioned We the little lump bones, then clothed the bones with flesh,
and then produced it as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of
creators!
SHAKIR: Then We made the seed a
clot, then We made the clot a lump of flesh, then We made (in) the lump of
flesh bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh, then We caused it to grow
into another creation, so blessed be Allah, the best of the creators.
Many
people may amaze by the mention of sperm in this verse. But close
observation reveals that there is nothing supernatural in it. Since the
beginning of time man has been quite aware of the "seed" that is released from
the penis during sexual intercourse. The old Hindu scriptures or Bible, which
are much older than the Qur'an, also have such indication. Aristotle clearly
described about formation of a child inside the womb early 1,000 years before
the Qur'an was written. No body claimed any miracles for it. In fact Aristotle
correctly described the function of the umbilical cord, something not
mentioned in the Qur'an, showing that earlier philosophers were aware of such
things mentioned by Muhammad and more [8].
Actually the Qur'an contains erroneous ancient theories developed by Roman and
Greek philosophers about human development . Let us consider the following
verse referring to sperm:
He is created from a drop emitted- Proceeding from between the backbone and
the ribs: (sura At-Tariq 86:6-7)
Clearly this
verse is incorrect, and clearly it has origins in earlier theories. First of
all, for sperm to originate between the back and the ribs would mean that it
comes from the kidneys! Greek physician Hippocrates theorized this
wrong idea long before Muhammad that sperm passed through the kidneys into the
penis. For centuries this was an accepted (and incorrect) belief of the
origins of sperm. Aristotle though correctly described the function of the
umbilical cord, also amusingly believed that sperm testicles functioned as
weights to keep the seminal passages open during sexual intercourse [20].
One can easily find similar erroneous concepts in the Qur'an too.
Let us
focus on another scenario by considering the following sura from Qur’an:
O mankind! if ye
are in doubt concerning the Resurrection, then lo! We have created you from
dust, then from a drop of seed, then from a clot, then from a little lump of
flesh shapely and shapeless, that We may make (it) clear for you. And We cause
what We will to remain in the wombs for an appointed time, and afterward We
bring you forth as infants, then (give you growth) that ye attain your full
strength. And among you there is he who dieth (young), and among you there is
he who is brought back to the most abject time of life, so that, after
knowledge, he knoweth naught. And thou (Muhammad) seest the earth barren, but
when We send down water thereon, it doth thrill and swell and put forth every
lovely kind (of growth) (Sura Al-Hajj
022.005).
The verse mentions
three primary stages of embryonic development: (1) a “seed,” “drop” or “semen”
phase (in Arabic, “nutfah”), (2) followed by a “clot” or “leach-like clot”
phase (in Arabic, “Alaqah”), (3) followed finally by a “morsel of flesh” or
“chewed lump” phase (in Arabic, “Mudghah”). Some other additional suras can
also be cited that deal with this subject, and none seems to disagree with
this basic scenario. Again the hadiths, particularly that of Bukhari and
Muslim give some relevant information. For e.g,
following hadith tells
us about developmental timing of an embryo.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 430:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Mus'ud:
“Allah's Apostle, the true and
truly inspired said, "(The matter of the Creation of) a human being
is put together in the womb of the mother in forty days, and then he
becomes a clot of thick blood for a similar period, and then a piece of flesh
for a similar period.”
Also,
Sahih Muslim, Book 033, Number 6395:
Abu Tufail reported:
I visited Abu Sariha Hudhaifa b. Usaid al-Ghifari
who said: I listened with these two ears of mine Allahs Messenger (may peace
be upon him) as saying: The semen stays in the womb for forty nights,
then the angel, gives it a shape. Zubair said: I think that he said: One who
fashions that and decides whether he would be male or female. Then he (the
angel) says: Would his limbs be full or imperfect? And then the Lord makes
them full and perfect or otherwise as He desires. Then he says: My Lord, what
about his livelihood, and his death and what about his disposition? And then
the Lord decides about his misfortune and fortune.
These same
details are also given in Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 549. Sahih
Bukhari Volume 8, Book 77, Number 593, Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 93, Number
546 etc. The key information gained from all these above mentioned hadiths are
that the three phases (nutfah, alaqah and madghah) takes 40 days each, for a
total period of 40 + 40 + 40 = 120 days from conception to the point at which
the embryo becomes a fetus. After that the blood clot was turned to bone and
then God "clothed the bones with flesh" (Qur’an 23:13-14). And finally the
gender of the child is assigned by an angel.
The whole idea is
completely erroneous in many ways. First of all, the human embryo becomes a
fetus around week 9, i.e, roughly half the time “Islamic embryology”
suggests. Again, there are no developmental milestones which can be mapped to
the thrice forty day period, even though they are suggested in several
authoritative hadiths with full support from Qur’an. Also, from medical
science we know in human development process living tissue forms first, and
then bones grow at a later time, and it continues to gain strength for many
years after birth. But by expressing "blood clot was turned to bone" Qur’an in
fact reveals its one of many scientific inaccuracies.
Finally, if we check the above cited verses of Qur’an carefully, we will find
nowhere in Qur’an it mentions about human egg; instead Qur’an refers to the
“drop of seed” solely. This is because most primitive peoples including Arabs
thought that the whole child was in the "seed" of the man. The woman was
considered simply as the oven or incubator that fully contained in the
father’s seed. They could not figure out its existence as no one could find
the eggs of the woman at that time. It is a historical fact that prior to the
medical community comprehending that women actually have eggs and men have
sperm that must be combined to produce a child, it was widely believed that
the whole child was contained in the man's seed. This was also Catholic Church
doctrine for hundreds of years. Not "spilling one's seed on the ground" is an
admonition against masturbation because it was believed that one's children
would be eliminated. The majority of Islamic scholars consider it haram
(prohibited) too for having direct support from hadith [21].
It can be pointed out from Islamic culture that the Shah of Iran divorced her
wife Soraya (Soraya Esfandiari Bakhtiari) because of no children. In rural
areas of Bangladesh, in similar fashion, many women gets divorced each year
because they are wrongly blamed for not being capable of producing male child.
5. Qur'an reveals Earth is round !
This
is far from truth. There is no sura in Qur’an that can claim for accuracy
to reveal that earth is round. Let's find some of those wonderful
cosmological facts from Qur’an. In many places of "miaculous" Qur’an it
alludes to the fact that earth is flat and mountains are like poles, which
create a balance so that earth does not tilt. In chapter 88:17,20 it is
recorded....
"Will
they not regard the camels how they are created...... and earth how it
spread?"
Even
many Muslim scholars confess that In this phrase 'how it spread', he denotes
that earth is flat. All the scholars of Islam agree upon this. It is not
round as the physicists claim.
There
are some other suras excerpted from Qur’an for the discerning readers to prove
that Qur’an clearly supports the erroneous "flat earth" theory [5,
9]:
And the
earth have We spread out, and placed therein firm hills, and caused
each seemly thing to grow therein…(Sura Al-Hijr
15:19)
Who hath
appointed the earth as a bed and hath threaded roads for you therein
and hath sent down water from the sky and thereby We have brought forth divers
kinds of vegetation,…(Sura Ta Ha
20:53)
Who made the
earth a resting-place for you, and placed roads for you therein, that
haply ye may find your way;…(Sura Az-Zukhruf
43:10)
And the
earth have We spread out, and have flung firm hills therein, and have
caused of every lovely kind to grow thereon, …(Sura Qaf
50:7)
And Allah
hath made the earth a wide expanse for you…(Sura Nooh
71:19)
Now
let's check two prominent suras from Qur’an. In one sura Qur'an says that one
of the righteous men of God's servants saw the Sun setting in a certain place
of the Earth-in particular a well full of water and mud. There, this man found
some people. Let us read what is recorded in the Qur'an (chapter "the Cave",
verse 86):
Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in
a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn!
Either punish or show them kindness (Sura Al-Kahf
018.086).
Again
in another verse of the same sura it is said -
Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a
people for whom We had appointed no shelter therefrom (Sura Al-Kahf
018.090).
Any
reader, who has some common sense and preliminary knowledge of science, knows
that sun does not need to have any "rising" or "setting" place, because, sun
neither rise, nor does it set. It is the diurnal motion of the earth which
makes appear in every place of earth for sun's rising and setting. But it
seems that omniscient Allah does not know the simple scientific truth. Allah
thought that sun needs a definite rising and setting place and one does need
to go to the end of the world to find it rising/setting. This gives an idea
the people of Muhammad’s time believed that the Earth is flat and the sun
moves in the sky rising from one place and setting in another.
The proof of flat
earth is implicit in the instruction for Muslim prayer times.
Aroj Ali Matubbar, the peasant-philosopher of Bengal has further
elaborated on this idea of flat earth in his book ‘The
Quest for Truth’ [22].
Let us take this opportunity to examine his elaboration.
Allah clearly assumes
that universality of time and has no concept of "Local Time". It is found that
in almost all religions there are certain fixed hours for certain prayers. But
it is not understood why the Lord of the universe should withhold His
acceptance if a person says his/her prayers before or after the fixed hours?
Islam enjoins saying one’s prayers five times a day at particular hours and
there are certain hours when prayers are forbidden.
The diurnal motion of
the earth causes difference in the local time of the countries situated in
different longitudes as a result of which there is a prayer time at every
moment of the day and night in some places or other. Yet it is forbidden to
say one’s prayers at sunrise, at 12 noon and at sunset. What is its
significance? The sun rises at different hours at different places – earlier
in eastern countries and later in the western countries. So when prayers are
forbidden here it is not forbidden elsewhere at that particular moment. For
instance, when the sun rises in New York, it is yet to rise in Los Angels and
it had already risen in London a few hours ago. Thus, when prayers are
forbidden at New York, it is not forbidden in L.A. or London. In that case, is
there any sense in forbidding prayers at particular hours?
The same question
applies to prescribed hours for prayers. Since every moment is a prayer time
in some place or other what is the point in fixing certain hours for certain
prayers?
There was a time when
the Earth was supposed to be flat and stationary which would make the hour of
clock at any given moment identical in all the countries or places of the
world with no variation in local time. Probably this notion led to the
prescribed prayer–schedule. But now it has been proved that the earth is a
moving sphere. Let us now discuss the problems arising out of the erroneous
notion.
Suppose after saying
his afternoon prayer “Zohar” at half past one, a man started for Holly Mecca
in Saudi Arabia by plane from Bangladesh flying at a speed of 3000 miles per
hour. On reaching there he found that it was yet to be noon. Will he have to
say the “Zohar” prayer once again when the appointed time for it comes?
If a plane flies west
at a speed 1041.67 miles per hour, the sun will appear to be at rest as if it
stood motionless at one place and the passengers will have no idea of the time
of day – morning, noon or evening – by looking at the sun. In this
circumstance, how will the passengers take care of their prayers and fasting?
It is only in the
equatorial region of the earth that at certain times of the year the days and
nights are of equal or nearly equal duration. But the further north and south
we travel from this region, the longer are the days or nights depending on the
season of the year. In some countries near the arctic region days become so
long in summer that soon after dusk the sun rises again with no night between
evening and dawn. How will one say one’s Esha prayer there?
In the arctic region
about six months of continuous daytime is followed by a night lasting for six
months. Since we get only one day and one night there it may be possible to
say one’s prayers five times a year but how can one fast there for thirty days
from dawn to dusk? This is proof enough that Allah was not knowledgeable
about the reality of the Earth, and probably considered the Earth as flat.
After
Maurice Bucaille's "Bible Qur’an and Science" appeared in the market in 1976,
it had created literally a sensation especially among educated community in
Bangladesh. A new trend has been observed to relate modern science with vague
verses of the holy books. It would however not be irrelevant to point out at
this moment from the news media and rationalist/humanist web-sites how some
western $cientists (yes, some are exposed as $cientists, not scientists) are
bribed, duped into endorsing so called "Qur’anic" Science :
In
Bangladesh, I have seen exactly similar efforts from some Muslim intellectuals
who have already started writing so called "super scientific" books following
the leading trend showed by Dr. Bucaille and Dr. Moore. The most
prominent fundamentalist organization named Islamic Foundation of Bangladesh
have undertaken some "wonderful" projects and philanthropic tasks of unfolding
the scientific treasures hidden in Qur’an!
Such efforts are warm-heartedly being patronized by Bangladesh government
[11].
Hundreds of popular pseudo-scientific books have already been written to
influence the common people of Bangladesh, even some fundamentalist
organization, inspired by the mission, are threatening the secular professors
demanding to change the University syllabus to make the education system
compatible with Islamic Science [23].
I would like to touch on some other prominent scientific myths in the second
part.
Read Part-2 of the article
======================================================
References :
[1] Fatemolla,
Qura’anic Debate - 1, Mukto-Mona
[2] Abul Kasem,
Reinventing and Redefining Islam, Mukto-Mona
[3] Aparthib,
Myths & Fallacies of Religious Apologetics, Mukto-Mona
[4] Abul Kasem,
How Western Scientists Discovered $cience in Qur’an, Mukto-mona
[5] Avijit Roy,
Super-Scientific Religious Scriptures!,
Mukto-mona
[6] Dr. Ali Sina,
Genesis According to Muhammad, FFI
[7] Richard Carrier,
Cosmology and the Koran: A Response to Muslim Fundamentalists, Secular
Web
[8] Denis Giron,
Islamic Science: Does Islamic literature contain scientific miracles?,
Secular Web
[9] Abul Kasem,
Allah's Flat earth and His Cosmos, Mukto-Mona
[10]
THHuxley,
Islam and the “Big Bang”: A Refutation, Mukto-Mona
[11] Jahed
Ahmed,
A
Pseudo-scientist gets 25 million Taka from PM Khaleda!, Mukto-Mona
[12] Dr.
Abdul-Kalaam Pangloss,
The Qur'an and the Big Bang, freethoughtmecca
[13] Syed
Kamran Mirza,
Religion, Science, and Maurice Bucaille, Mukto-Mona
[14]
William F. Campbell: The Qur’an and the Bible in the light of history &
Science, Second Edition, Middle East Resources, 2002 ISBN, 1-881085-03-01
[15]
Aparthib Zaman,
Mixing Science with Religion, Mukto-Mona
[16] Dr.
Pervez Hoodbhoy, Islam and Science, Zed Books Ltd., 1991 ISBN
1-85649-025-4.
[17] Steven
Weinberg, Dreams of a Final Theory: The Scientist's Search for the Ultimate
Laws of Nature, p-47-48.
[18]
Qur’an translations are cited from the website:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
[19] Denis Giron,
Expansion of the Universe in the Bible and the Qur'an Comparing Isaiah to
Soorat az-Zaariyaat
[20] Syed Kamran Mirza,
Ambiguity of Human Embryology: Science in Quran # (1), Mukto-Mona
[21]Hadith translations are cited from
the website: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/
[22] "MohaGuru" Aroj
Ali Matubbar - a truly home-grown philosopher of Bangladesh:
http://mohaguru.humanists.net
[23] Professor Ajoy Roy,
Three DU Teachers threatened, Mukto-mona
[24] Dr. Ali Sina, http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/rezwan.htm,
FFI
|
