The material in this blog is now available at amazon.com under the title: Ideas Inspired by the Qur’an.
Where does science fit within the Qur’anic framework? Is it the hero or the villain in the narrative we have heard so often, the clash between it and religion?
Since the world and the Qur’an are equally authored by GOD, there is no conflict between ‘ilm (knowledge or science) if rightly understood and din (religion)* if rightly understood. Both nature and scripture are books that demonstrate the creative and educative power of the Word.
* Linguistic purists will object to my use of “religion” as a translation of din. I admit the shortfall, since din comprehends not only what we in the West limit religion to but also the ways of life, culture, law, and government that accompany and express in other forms the principles of the faith. Still, there is no other word in English that comes any closer to capturing the whole range of meaning in din, and the difference is not so great as to abandon the rendering altogether for the sake of scholastic rigour.
Say, “Look at what is in the heavens and the earth.” But neither signs nor those who warn will profit people who do not believe. (Q10:101)
قُلْ انْظُرُوا مَاذَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَمَا تُغْنِي الآيَاتُ وَالنُّذُرُ عَنْ قَوْمٍ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ
The same word – ayat – is used throughout the Qur’an to refer to natural phenomena, psychic states, and the verses of the Qur’an itself. All are signs from GOD, and hence there can be no fundamental contradiction among them.
Notice that the verse clearly indicates that knowledge of the heavens and the earth (i.e. all visible phenomena) by itself is of no value if not accompanied by what bestows that value, namely faith. And the tradition below not only emphasizes the same principle but also mentions the traits that are likely to render such knowledge useless.
From ‘Abdil-Lahib-ni ‘Amrin, that the Prophet (may GOD bless him and give him peace) used to seek refuge from four things – from knowledge that is useless, from a heart that is not humble, from a prayer that is not heard [i.e. by GOD], and a soul that is not satisfied. (Sunanun-Nasa’i, Book 50, Hadith 50)
عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم كَانَ يَتَعَوَّذُ مِنْ أَرْبَعٍ مِنْ عِلْمٍ لاَ يَنْفَعُ وَمِنْ قَلْبٍ لاَ يَخْشَعُ وَدُعَاءٍ لاَ يُسْمَعُ وَنَفْسٍ لاَ تَشْبَعُ
On the other hand, the assertion that the types of knowledge associated with modern science, such as astronomy, biology, and medicine, need, because of their secular nature, to be governed by the principles of the faith can be taken too far likewise.
. . . The study of law (fiqh) was more stifling for Arabic science than developments in theology. The eleventh century saw changes in Islamic law that discouraged heterodox thought: lack of orthodoxy could now be regarded as apostasy from Islam (zandaqa) which is punishable by death, whereas before, a Muslim could only apostatize by an explicit declaration. (Al-Ghazali himself only regarded the violation of three core doctrines as zandaqa, statements that challenged monotheism, the prophecy of Muḥammad, and resurrection after death.) Given that heterodox thoughts could be interpreted as apostasy, this created a stifling climate for Arabic science. In the second half of the nineteenth century, as science and technology became firmly entrenched in Western society, Muslim empires were languishing or colonized. Scientific ideas, such as evolutionary theory, were equated with European colonialism, and thus met with distrust.
In spite of this negative association between science and Western modernity, there is an emerging literature on science and religion by Muslim scholars (mostly scientists). The physicist Nidhal Guessoum (2009) holds that science and religion are not only compatible, but in harmony. He rejects the idea of treating the Qur’an as a scientific encyclopedia, something other Muslim authors in the debate on science and religion tend to do, and he adheres to the no-possible-conflict principle, outlined by Ibn Rushd (Averroes): there can be no conflict between God’s word (properly understood) and God’s work (properly understood). . .1
The scholars of the eleventh century were probably inclined to systemic overreach – trying to impose the framing style of one book, Scripture, on another book, Nature – while AL-LAH clearly intended that the two books serve as counterweights and complements to each other. This same overconfidence in the ‘success’ of one’s own system seems to be driving a similar overreach today in the opposite direction: demanding that Scripture conform to the framework of Nature. The Qur’an, however, leaps over the supposed incompatibility between faith and science in one sentence:
Say, “Go out upon the Earth and see how He began creation; then AL-LAH brings forth a final genesis. Indeed AL-LAH has power over everything.”(Q29:20)
قُلْ سِيرُوا فِي الأَرْضِ فَانْظُرُوا كَيْفَ بَدَأَ الْخَلْقَ ثُمَّ اللَّهُ يُنشِئُ النَّشْأَةَ الآخِرَةَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
The ‘seeing how’ is the work of science, expressed as a command to action, while acceptance of the ‘bringing forth’ is faith. The wording of this verse reveals how each confirms and supports the other, for both manifest GOD’s creative power. They are two ‘arms’ of a single grand experiment.
1 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ‘Religion and Science’, section 2.2.
The GOD You Already Know 