SX43%LIVERPOOL.AC.UK@EVANS.UCAR.EDU (11/29/90)
Salaam all,
I am posting this as a reply/followup to some
correspondence I got which I felt would be appreciated by a wider
audience.
Let me make one thing clear at the outset : many people seem to
feel that looking at the Quran for scientific info is not a good idea.
I feel however that there is nothing wrong with looking in the Quran to
see what it seems to say about creation. If we find things that agree
with what science already has discovered, this is confirmation, although
that should not stop us from questioning and searching for other
meanings and new facts. We must bear in mind that the theories of
science are just that, not facts, and not expect them to hold forever.
We must not allow the sight of apparent confirmation of current ideas in
the Qur'an to stagnate our quest to understand better the Sunans
that Allah has endowed His creation with ('Physical Laws of the
Universe'). That trap, I sometimes feel, is what stopped the Muslims from
taking their aeon-long lead in the fields of science to its logical
conclusion, leaving the way clear for the Kafirs of Europe to proceed to
technological victory.. but I am no expert on this subject.
The other side of the coin is that as Muslims we believe that this Book
contains the verbatim Arabic speech of Allah. Hence should we not look
in it for pointers to help us in ANY field of endeavor ? Where there are
references to physical phenomena, we should use them to help us identify
possibly fruitful ways of viewing phenomena; I wish I could give some
concrete examples here.
For me it is part and parcel of appreciating the gift that Allah has
given us in the form of this Book.
Correspondence from Donald quoted with permission :
DB> Subject: Re: 'Verily We Are Expanding It!' Big Bang & Al-Quran..
DB>
DB> In article <1990Nov19.021124.16731@nntp-server.caltech.edu> you write:
DB> > Dr Maurice Bucaille, in his book 'The Bible, the Qur'an and Science'
DB> > 'The heaven, We have built it with power, Verily We are expanding it.'
DB> > (Verse 47 of Surah 51).
DB>
DB> The root of the word in question is WS'. The idea here seems to be
DB> "high and wide". As you point out the word means spacious and
DB> extensive. In Qur'an 2:236 the word refers to extensive or expansive
DB> wealth (not expanding wealth).
I refer you to the good Doctor again :-)
Bucaille says on page 174 :
" 'We are expanding it' is the translation of the plural present
participle musi'una of the verb ausa'a meaning 'to make wider, more
spacious, to extend, to expand'.
^^^^^^
I am not sure whence came the connotation 'high and wide' which you
mention; Bucaille seems to be convinced of the explicit meaning of
expansion involved in the root WS' that you mention ( = ausa'a).
He also clarifies that the form of the word used is the Present
Participle :ie it's happening now, it is an action, a verb.
I know that Allah uses the meanings 'constrained' to mean poor and
'widened' or 'made freer' to mean rich many times in the Qur'an, but
surely that is not to be taken to mean that we must ignore the face value
meaning of 'widened' each time it occurs ?
Perhaps someone with access to a concordance of the Qur'an plus a
detailed dictionary (Bucaille mentions Kazimirsky..) could enlighten us
as to the meanings and connotations of >ausa'a< in more detail..?
(Hint, Craig..! :-)
Secondly,
DB> > "Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were
DB> > joined together, then We clove them asunder and We got every living
DB> > thing out of the water. Will they not then believe ?" (Surah 21, verse
DB> > 30 Quoted from page 145 of Bucaille.)
DB>
DB> The first chapter of the Torah describes the creation of the heavens
DB> and the earth as taking place in six days. In the first three days,
DB> God cleaves the light from the darkness, cleaves the upper waters from
DB> the lower waters, and similarly separates the lower waters from earth.
DB> In the following three days the domains of light, water, and earth are
DB> populated with the appropriate creatures. This story was well known
DB> to the Jews and Christians of Arabia in Muhammad's day. For someone
DB> who is not a Muslim, finding a similar description in the Qur'an seems
DB> to require no special explanation.
I will quote Bucaille as a reply to this comment. Many people believe
that the Qur'an was copied to some extent from Biblical writings at the
time of the Prophet (Peace be on him), so I hope we can lay this myth
to rest :
[From the introduction to the section on the Quran and Science..]
" At the end of this , the third section of the present work, the
detailed results of the comparison between the Biblical and Quranic
description of a single event are given along with an account of how the
passage fared when subjected to the scientific criticism of each
description. An examination has, for example been made in the case of the
Creation and of the Flood. In each instance, the incompatibilities with
science in the Biblical description have been made clear. Also to be seen
is the complete agreement between science and the description in the
Quran referring to them.
We shall note precisely those differences that make one description
scientifically acceptable in the present day, and the other
unacceptable.
* This observation is of prime importance, since in the west Jews,
* Christians and Atheists are unanimous in stating (without a scrap of
* evidence however) that Muhammad wrote the Qur'an or had it written as an
* imitation of the Bible. It is claimed that stories of religious history
* in the Qur'an resume Biblical stories. This attitude is as thoughtless
* as saying that Jesus himself duped his contemporaries by drawing
* inspiration from the Old Testament during his preachings; the whole of
* Matthew's Gospel is based on this continuation of the Old Testament, as
* we have already seen.
...
How could a man, from being completely illiterate, become the most
important author in terms of literary merit, in the whole of Arabic
Literature ? How could he then pronounce truths of a scientific nature
that no other human being could possibly have developed at the time,
and all this without once making the slightest error in his
pronouncements on the subject ?...
..They will lead to the conclusion that it is inconceivable for a human
being living in the seventh century AD to have expressed assertions in
the Qur'an on highly varied subjects that do not belong to his period
and for them to be in keeping with what was to be revealed only
centuries later..."
On P. 129 :
"Whereas monumental errors are to be found in the Bible, I could not find
a single error in the Quran. I had to stop and ask myself : If a man was
the author of the Quran, how could he have written facts in the seventh
century AD that are today shown to be in keeping with modern scientific
knowledge ? There was absolutely no doubt about it : the text of the
Quran we have today is most definitely a text of the period... there is
no special reason why an inhabitant of the Arabian Peninsula should, at
the time when King Dagobert was reigning in France (629-639 AD), have
had scientific knowledge on certain subjects that was ten centuries
ahead of our own... ".
Further :
"..Anyone who knows anything about Islamic history is aware that
the period of the Middle Ages which saw the cultural and scientific
upsurge in the Arab world came AFTER Muhammad....the majority of
scientific facts which are either suggested or very clearly recorded in
the Quran have only been confirmed in modern times."
Just in case _that_ point was about to rear itself :-)
Sorry 'bout the size of this. 'Tis a pity that the translation from
the French renders Bucaille's book slightly wordy and boring to
read, but it does contain a lot of useful discussion.
Regards,
Fazal.