Sunday 11 April 2021

Are “Scientific miracles” open to various interpretations? Part of the "Scientific miracles in Islam" series

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام على رسول الله

This brief article continues the discussion around "scientific miracles in the Qur'an" from an intellectual perspective. This article critically analyses the frequent claim that "scientific miracles are not possible because there can be various interpretations ". This claim has been considered as a "major argument" against "scientific miracles".

As is well known to any Muslim scholar who looks at prophecies in the Qur'an and Hadiths, they are often (not always) open to various interpretations, such as the famous prophecy in Surah Rum. Despite this fact, scholars normally claimed that these are miracles and proofs of Islam being from Allah Most High. This is especially the case where the correct interpretation has become clear once the prophecy has come true or a sound exegetical methodology is applied. Furthermore, not every interpretation is correct or plausible. Thus, the possibility of multiple valid and sound interpretations of a text doesn't negate it being a miracle.

It is a famous principle in tafsir (a principle expounded by the Sahaba and various other mufassirs like al-Mawardi and al-Shawkani), that multiple meanings and interpretations can be intended by a Qur’anic verse.(1) There can also be one primary meaning and multiple secondary meanings intended by a verse. Part of the miracle of the Qur'an is that it contains the most eloquent wordings that suit various contexts. This includes choosing words that have various suitable meanings that cater for different audiences, times, and places. Thus, a verse about nature can give a meaning understood to a bedouin in the 7th century, and a different meaning to a scientist in the 21st century with new scientific discoveries. If the wrong wording was chosen, and a scientific discovery disproved the previous understanding of nature, then the Qur'an would be falsified. However, the Qur'an chose the best words to accommodate different meanings according to the needs of people that Allah Most High deemed relevant. The fact that there are so many instances of these eloquent wordings that encompass modern scientific facts shows that such wordings were deliberately chosen by Allah Most High to include such facts within its meanings. Let me provide an example outside of scientific meanings: if multiple prophecies come true, it increases the epistemic assurance that the person is receiving knowledge from a supernatural source, until we achieve certainty of it.

An example of a scientific meaning is seen in the Qur'anic discussions on the embryo, including the word "Alaq" (علق) and its various linguistic possibilities that accommodate new scientific discoveries. The Qur'an could have just used the various terms in vogue according to Greek and Arab medical knowledge (including the various terms by Aristotle) and which turned out to be wrong about embryology, yet the Qur'an did not make that error but used precise and eloquent wordings as part of its balagha. Considering that “Alaq” is mentioned in the first set of verses revealed to the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), and a chapter is named after it, the importance of scientific tafsir in understanding the Qur’an is clearly shown. The fact that modern Muslims understand “Alaq” to refer to something that “clings”, looks like a “leech” and like a “chewed substance” and is not a meaning invented in modern times nor is from Greek medicine is the fact that Niketas of Byzantium (using a 9th century Greek translation) understood it to mean a leech and condemned it (he didn’t know that it looked like a leech).(2)

Furthermore, sometimes various interpretations may be offered by scholars of a verse about natural phenomena based on their ijtihad and the sciences of their time, but because the science was limited, they may have not encompassed all suitable meanings. Despite the literal meaning being the default meaning according the standard tafsir methodology (unless other evidence, like Allah's dissimilarity requires a metaphorical meaning), scholars sometimes adopted a metaphorical meaning because they couldn't conceive how it could be literal. Due to new scientific discoveries, a meaning that fits the verse better can appear. It would be a grave injustice to the Qur'an to refuse to consider new scientific knowledge on matters discussed in the Qur'an. An example is the meaning of the term "al-Tariq" (الطارق) in the Qur'an where the mufassirs had different opinions over which celestial object it referred to, whether it was for the genus or individual star etc. Now that we know a lot more about different planets and stars etc, we can understand another meaning that is more suitable. An investigation should be carried out to see how the linguistic descriptions fit with black holes or neutron stars. (3)

As for the cases where someone can clearly show that the primary meaning of particular words in the Qur'an refers to phenomena identified by modern science (i.e. no other meaning can be taken as the primary meaning, especially when the literal is preferred over the metaphorical), these obviously don’t fall under the objectors claim of negating "scientific miracles". Of course, we can make similar points when the definition of science is non-Eurocentric and includes sciences like theology and Hadiths.  Therefore, claims about "all scientific miracles having multiple interpretations " are gross generalisations because has the claimant analysed each claim and claimed to encompass the knowledge of Allah Most High? Indeed, Allah Most High commands us in the Qur'an to reflect on the signs, be they of the Qur'an itself or of the world and the scholars of the past used the theories at their disposal for interpreting the Qur'an. Imam al-Ghazali has a chapter on scientific knowledge in the Qur’an and examples of verses which can’t be understood unless one has certain scientific knowledge. In summary, he mentioned “in the Qur’an lies the confluence [merging] of the sciences of the ancients and the moderns."(4)


Footnotes:

1)     For further details, see “The Lights of Revelation and the Secrets of Interpretation: Hizb One of the Commentary on the Qurʾan by al-Baydawi” by Dr Gibril Fouad Haddad

2)     See http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/did-the-prophet-muhammad-plagiarise-hellenic-embryology/

3)     The claims in the following video should be investigated https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx94yXhpEak

4)     See Imam al-Ghazali’s “Kitab Jawahir al-Qur'an”

No comments:

Post a Comment