The Qur?an is Islam’s foundational scripture, encompassing its message as the religion’s primary source of guidance and legislation. The Qur’an directs and legitimizes Muslims’ lives and actions. Muslims across sectarian divides unanimously agree on the divine source of the Qur?an, its authenticity, its authority, and the binding nature of its commands. Differences occur, however, over how to interpret these commands. The relationship between the Qur?an and its exegesis or tafsir, whether in Arabic or in other languages, is a longstanding and difficult issue. There were many complex reasons that necessitated interpretation of the Qur’an: to name a few, the literal and figurative language of the Qur’an, which at times needed elucidation; the specific occasions on which individual verses were revealed, the knowledge of which may help explain the text; and the special nature of the message of the Qur’an, where God speaks in the language that humans can understand, but at the same there is presence of allegorical verses or mutashabihat. The exegetical corpus of the Qur’an or tafasir (plural of tafsir) is indeed enormous. They all attempt to explicate the Qur?an for easier comprehension. Moreover, the varying individual perspectives that the Qur’an exegetist or mufassir brought to bear on understanding the Qur’an resulted in differences in interpretation and emphasis. Among the traditional exegeses, some have been primarily grammatical and linguistic, some historical, and others philosophical, legal, theological, scientific, mystical, and metaphysical. This paper will evaluate the scientific exegetical trends from the classical to the modern period, and it will include in its analysis new developments that took place in the modern period. 

 

The discourse on the relationship between the Qur`an and science started more than a millennium ago, but it is important not to confuse this discourse with the problem of Islam and Hellenistic philosophy that emerged in the classical period. Philosophy at that time incorporated scientific knowledge such as medicine, mathematics, chemistry, and astronomy. These sciences were not the subject of the historical problem between Islam and Hellenistic philosophy; rather, it was the metaphysical aspects of philosophy that contradicted Islamic beliefs. When some Muslim thinkers attempted to synthesize Islam with the Greek metaphysical views, it was objectionable to influential figures such as al-Ghazali (d. 1111), who wrote a famous refutation, Tahafut al-Falasifa, or “The Incoherence of the Philosophers.” 

 

One of the positive outcomes of this was the discussion of the relationship between revelation (naql) and reason (‘aql) that forms the basis of our topic. Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328 CE), a leading figure in Sunni schools, wrote extensively on the “refutation of any contradiction between revelation and reason” in which he articulated a rule that proved “authentic revealed knowledge is consistent with established rational evidence.” Any appearance of tension between ‘aql and naql cannot be considered as a fundamental. In the case of any doubt, a careful reconsideration of the authenticity and understanding of the revelation, as well as a careful consideration of the claimed rational evidence, would ultimately resolve the inconsistency. Since historically there was no tension as such between natural sciences and Islam, an intense discourse occurred about how natural science relates to the interpretation of the Qur`an. One of the main approaches to the understanding of the Qur`an is ‘exegesis through reason,’ or tafsir bi`l-ra`y. It was therefore necessary to broaden the scope of the Qur’an’s understanding beyond the immediate meaning of its text, on the conditions of an adequate application of the usage of the Arabic language that was prevalent at the time of revelation and a full consideration of the Prophet’s traditions and those of the first generations of Muslims, who were best suited to explaining the Qur`an. Within this context, the issue of using scientific knowledge for the interpretation of the Qur`an had arisen. 

 

al-Ghazali was among the first classic scholars to promote the use of science in exegesis to expand the meaning of the Qur’an. He believed that the Qur`an was the foundation of all knowledge. He stressed that all notions that are unclear to the thinkers or that people disagree on are already embedded in the Qur`anic verses but need specialists in the fields of natural science to discover. al-Ghazali cited a number of verses from the Qur’an to support his viewpoint. When he commented about the verses that speak about the sun and the moon, he argued that a deeper sense of the movement of the sun and the moon would only be fully comprehended by a person with a sound knowledge of astronomy. His approach was supported by a number of classical scholars of the Qur`an, such as al-Zarkashi (d. 1349 CE), al-Suyuti (d. 1506 CE) and al-Razi (d. 1209). The foremost work of exegesis that extensively applied science to the interpretation of the Qur`an was that of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, yet his critics described his work as containing everything except exegesis. The approach of using science as the Qur`an exegesis never gained full approval in the classical period; rather, it was met by fierce opposition. A notable opponent to scientific exegesis in the classical period was the famous jurist al-Shatibi (d. 1388 CE). His opposition is based on the argument that the Qur`an is a religious book for guidance, not a book of science. The Qur’an’s main objective is to guide mankind to align their will to that of the divine so that they achieve felicity in this life and in the hereafter. It is out of its scope to include science or any other kind of knowledge. al-Shatibi thought it was forbidden to ascribe to the Qur`an what it does not call for, as much as it is forbidden to deny what the Qur’an calls for. 

 

Traditional exegetes intended to discover cosmological and natural wonders to illustrate God’s authority over the universe. For example, in the tafsir of the verse, “O man, what deluded you concerning your Munificent Lord, who created you, fashioned you and made you well-wrought,” al-Ghazali said everything can only be known by Him who is able to control everything in the universe, including having full knowledge of the internal organs of a human being or an animal. Another example, according to both al-Razi (d. 1210 CE) and al-Nisaburi (d. 1330 CE), is the verse “Yea, verify We are Able to restore his very fingers!” which is about the authority (al-qudrah) of God to recreate human bones and His control over the universe and human beings in every state. Ibn Kathir (d. 1373 CE) translated “the lamps” in the verse “And verify We have beautified the world`s heaven with lamps” as the stars which have been placed in the heavens, some moving and some stationary. The significant point is that these scholars did not merely pay attention to science or ‘ilm to elaborate the issue of inimitability of the Qur’an; they mostly focused on expressing God`s authority over the universe. 

 

In the modern era, especially in the last three hundred years, the political landscape of the Muslim world changed radically, much to the detriment of Muslims. The 18th century saw the newly industrialized West gaining domination over Muslim lands. This is the period when scientists in the non-Muslim world discovered many new ideas and innovations that gave them wealth and power. The 19th century saw colonization of Muslim lands, and many Muslim states began to collapse or fall under European colonial rule. Muslims not only lost control of their lands, culture and history, but also of their social, economic, and political institutions. The whole Muslim world was in a state of internal strife and their great tradition of scientific learning and research had virtually disappeared. At this point, Muslim countries experienced the pressure of backwardness, poverty and dogmatism. The exposure to new ideas of Western modernity and secular liberalism fascinated some Muslims but shocked many others. 

 

The triumph of modern science in the West led to a renewed debate over the relationship between the Qur`an and science. However, the nature of Muslim debate about relationship between the Qur’an and science is different from that in the West. Unlike the Muslim scientific heritage that was linked to the sacred view of the cosmos, modern science was born into a cultural context of secular humanism and has been purged of sacredness such that scientific empiricism dismisses divinely sourced knowledge. What is counted as genuine knowledge is only that which was derived from observation of the natural world, and that which has been verified through experimentation. That is why when modern science began to attain dominance it posed a great threat to the foundations of religion in the West. Science triumphed over religion and seems to have the upper hand. The scientific community is acting as a powerful science lobby, which is determining the rules of the game. 

 

Modern science has not shaken Muslims’ faith or confidence in the authenticity of the Qur`an; instead, Muslims set out to use modern science to augment and strengthen the evidence that the Qur`an is of divine origin. An influential contribution was made by a French scientist and convert to Islam, Maurice Bucaille (d. 1998), in his famous book, The Bible, the Qur`an and Science, in which he claimed that the Qur`an is not only immune from scientific errors, but it states facts that were unthinkable at the time of its advent. For many Muslims, modern science has become a new tool to corroborate religious claims. However, there is a need to exercise prudence in the use of science for that purpose. It is admitted that knowledge obtained through the methods of science, namely, observation, hypothesis and experimentation based on sensory, measurable data, is trustworthy. However, scientific methods have limitations and are not suitable to verify or falsify matters beyond sensory perceptions. Maurice Bucaille highlighted statements from the Qur’an about a number of natural phenomena only recently discovered that could not possibly have been known at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh): statements such as the origins of the universe, the development of human fetus inside the womb, the expansion of the universe, mountains as pegs, and the origin of life. This line of thought has been developed considerably in contemporary studies and writings on the Qur`an and has been referred to as the scientific miracle of the Qur`an or i’jaz al-Qur`an al-‘ilmi. 

 

The classical trend of using scientific knowledge in Qur’anic exegesis has been renewed and intensively applied due to the vast riches of modern science. The extent of this type of exegesis is reflected in the fact that a new term, “the scientific exegesis,” has been coined to distinguish it from other genres of exegeses. One such distinguished work is al-Jawahir fi Tafsir al-Qur`an or The Jewels of Exegesis of the Qur`an by Tantawi Jawhari (d. 1939 CE), an Egyptian Azhari scholar. Jawhari was one of the students of Muhammad ‘Abduh and a follower of his political movement aimed to regain authority, speed development, and prevent Muslims from deserting their faith. The perception of the scientific superiority of the West and its impressive progress in science and industries led Tantawi to devote most of his life to encouraging Muslims to study modern science and to build advanced communities imitating the West. Tantawi’s al-Jawahir fi Tafsir al-Qur’an covers the whole Qur’an in twenty-six volumes and utilizes the latest modern scientific discoveries to better inform readers of the Qur’an. Because Tantawi’s tafsir is the first and the most complete scientific interpretation of the Qur’an according to many Qur’an scholars who studied his exegetical methods, its all-inclusiveness warrants him the title of the founder of a modern scientific exegetical method. There are other scholars who oppose scientific exegesis of the Qur’an; among them is Rashid Rida, another ‘Abduh student. Rida thought Tantawi overemphasized science as the real source of industry, wealth and authority. He did not agree with the view that in order for Muslims to be wealthy, powerful, and gain their independence or in order for them to be able to protect their religious beliefs, customs, rituals, and law, they must learn and pursue science. While it is understandable that science is not an end in itself, it does provide the means toward progress, along with other factors.

 

Another important event of the 19th century that alluded to the relationship between science and the Qur’an is the arrival of Darwin’s theory of evolution that challenged the traditional understanding of creation narratives. Jamal Din al-Afghani (d. 1897 CE) was among the first Muslim intellectuals to respond to Darwin’s theory. His polemic, Refutation of Materialists, was not successful, but its ideas attracted Muhammed ‘Abduh. As the leading modernist, ‘Abduh influenced a younger generation of Qur’an commentators such as Rashid Rida, Husayn al-Jisr (d. 1909 CE), and Tantawi. ‘Abduh and Rida wrote the prominent Tafsir al-Manar that sought to harmonize modern science and the Qur’an. The tafsir was initially a collection of fragments of thought articulated by ‘Abduh, who was the pioneer of Islamic modernism and favored scientific exegesis of the Qur’an.  Rida was his disciple and took the task of editing it into more popular language for the general public. The al-Manar commentary on creation suggests that should Darwin’s theory of evolution prove to be correct, it would not constitute a challenge to the Qur’an because of the fact that the Qur’anic text can never contradict scientific empirical findings. The concept of evolution could be supported by the verses that describe God’s gradual creation of the heavens, earth and living creatures, as well as the verses that speak of the gradual creation of man, and creation of man from clay. While several verses say that God created the Heavens and the earth in six days, a day in Arabic may take a meaning of a time span that could be interpreted as referring to the periods in which different stages of evolution occurred. al-Manar offered a more systematic analysis of the compatibility of Darwin’s theory and the Qur’an exegesis on creation at the time in the West when Darwin’s theory of evolution was the common point of contention between what was perceived as loyalty to scientific truth (evolutionists) and religious dogmatism (creationists). In the Muslim world, the chief exponents of evolution were modernists, but it did not garner solid support among traditional religious scholars. While the Darwinian theory of evolution contradicts the Bible, Rida insisted that it should not necessarily contradict the Qur’an, if and only if proven to be true because not a single scientific discovery contradicts the Qur’an. 

The first Qur’anic scholar to address Darwinism in a systematic and unequivocal approach was Husayn al-Jisr from Ottoman Syria in his 1887 CE treatise, Risalah Hamidiyah. Although Al-Jisr’s views on Darwinism are formulated in the context of Western materialism, he made efforts to reconcile it with Qur’anic exegesis. He alluded to several verses in the Qur’an that deal with creation. He quotes the verse from the Qur’an that speaks of God making everything living thing from the water as being in harmony with Darwin’s idea of how life began. “There is no evidence in the Qur’an,” he wrote, “to suggest whether all species, each of which exists by the grace of God, was created all at once or gradually.” Allah’s dispersal of animals in the heavens and the earth matches with the theory of evolution, while other verses, such as those on the creation of male and female and those stating that creatures were created in pairs, contradict the theory of evolution because these verses suggest that the creatures on the face of the earth were created by God directly and independently. al-Jisr’s treatment of Darwinian natural selection exemplified the method of scientific exegetical hermeneutics. “He began by setting out the guidelines for the relation between science and the Qur’an: (a) Revealed texts should be understood literally, unless they contradict a definite rationalist proof, in which case a process of interpretation (ta’wil) that reconciles the discrepancy may ensue. (b) It is not the purpose of the revelations to teach how the world was created and detail the physical laws that govern it; the Qur’an is primarily a book of guidance. These issues are to be settled through empirical study and rational thinking. 

 

The use of modern science in the interpretation of the Qur`an, whether in the field of exegesis (tafsir), or in proving the miraculous nature of the Qur`an (i’jaz), has produced profound debate among contemporary scholars. Modernism in Islam is a movement that emerged in the 19th century when the Muslim condition was at a very low ebb that called for the revision and reinterpretation of religious ideas in order to conform with modern knowledge and science. The first figure to make such a call was the famous thinker from the Indian subcontinent, Sayyid Ahmed Khan (d. 1898 CE). In his exegesis, he did not adhere to the traditional methodology of “exegesis through reason” to make his explanation sound and consistent with mainstream Islam. He took full liberty in inventing new meanings, even if the language and the context of the text would not accommodate. For instance, the story of the creation should not be taken literally; it is considered a metaphorical rendering of the “evolution” of humans, in which Adam is not a real man. Under the influence of the Western material outlook, all miracles recorded in the Qur`an are rejected and given new meanings. Most of these miracles are regarded as tales, depicted in the Qur`an not as facts, but as lessons on truism since they are well known to the audience. In the same manner, references to jinn and spirits are sometimes meant to recall certain legends deeply embedded in the consciousness of the people to whom the Qur`an was addressed - the purpose being, in every instance, not the legend as such but the illustration of a moral or spiritual truth. These radical interpretations of the Qur’an are justified based on the claim that the traditional exegeses, which are drawn from the stock of knowledge available in their time, are no longer valid due to the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in the modern world. This kind of interpretation is criticized by opponents of scientific exegesis as mere conjecture, not based on any established systematic method of exegesis. It is not possible to disconnect the words of the Qur`anic text from their context and original linguistic meaning and to connect any incredible explanation to them. 

 

A number of scholars expressed their apprehension regarding scientific exegesis as applied in modern times. Some consider it an innovation that does not do justice to the interpretation of the Qur`an nor to science. The list of the rejectionists is long, but they are best represented by Mahmud Shaltut, who sums up the arguments against the use of science in interpreting the Qur`an in three points. First, the Qur`an has not been revealed as a book where God speaks to the people about scientific theories or other disciplines. Second, the first generations of Muslims (companions and successors) were also familiar with scientific knowledge of their time, yet they never applied that scientific knowledge to the interpretations of the Qur`an. If using science in interpretations was desirable, that generation would have set the precedent. Many times, scientific exegesis leads to overstepping the boundaries and stretching the senses of the verses. Third, scientific models don’t represent absolute truth; they are based on probabilistic frameworks with assumptions and disputes. Discussions and research continue within the scientific community, and it is possible to change positions in the future with new observations and data. Therefore, use of modern science in the Qur`an exegesis will be subjecting the text to ever-changing scientific knowledge. Any scientific interpretations of the Qur`an might eventually lead to assigning errors to it and that, indeed, is a dangerous route. 

Other Qur’anic scholars have preferred to take a middle course in the discussion of science and the Qur’an. They are not totally against the use of science in expanding the understanding of the Qur`an, but they argue that it is to be used within certain limits. Any use of science in interpretation has also to agree with the general principles of exegesis that take into consideration the context of the passage, its linguistic meanings and the immediate senses rendered in the traditions. In addition, scientific theories must be differentiated from scientific facts. The use of the scientific theories has been rejected but the use of the scientific facts is possible to a certain degree. Sayyid Qutb (d. 1966 CE), who has written a voluminous exegesis on the Qur`an, gives a good overview of this middle position. In his commentary on the Qur`anic verse, “They ask you about the new moon; say, ‘They are means people use for measuring time, and for Pilgrimage,’” the Qur`an did not give a “scientific” answer to the question about the changes in the phases of the moon, because a scientific answer to the question raised would not have been useful. Instead, the Qur`an delivered a practical explanation of the phases of the moon that matches its religious nature as a book of guidance. The primary objective of the Qur`an to provide guidance is more significant than giving details of natural phenomena. Scientific advancements are left to human endeavor, after it has been provided with the right worldview for such development. In Qutub’s opinion, attempts to show that the Qur`an either conforms or conflicts with science are mistaken for the simple reason that science is not the subject matter of the book. Qutb mentions three negative aspects that result from the attempt to use science to verify Qur`anic statements. First, it reflects internal defeatism that implies that science is superior to the Qur`an, which needs to be verified by it. Second, it overlooks the aim and subject matter of the Qur`an, which is not primarily concerned with providing detailed scientific facts. Third, any scientific interpretations of the Qur`an will constantly need change and adaptation to suit the fluctuating development of human knowledge. 

 

Whatever side one takes in the argument on scientific exegesis, the discussion is likely to continue, but it is possible to draw certain useful conclusions. It is significant that the conflict of religion and science in the West has not been largely reproduced in the Muslim world. Instead of being apologetic concerning Islam against the malfeasance of science, Muslims attempted to use science as new evidence to corroborate the truths of the Qur`an. An influential movement has risen recently claiming that a number of newly discovered scientific facts are found in the Qur`an. Use of science in exegesis is not new, but in the modern era there are two opposing views: modernists who advocate it and traditionalists who reject it. A careful consideration of the arguments presented in the debate by the various trends seems to suggest a third way where a distinction is drawn between exegeses of the Qur`an and commentaries on it. The exegeses are those immediate meanings of the text that are understood from linguistic usage and the explanations given to them in the transmitted traditions. All other additions to the basic meanings necessarily reflect the commentator’s human knowledge. If scientific interpretations are viewed in the light of human constructions there will, in principle, be no objection against them. However, the extent to which they are accepted as an approximate reflection of the original meaning of the Qur`anic text depends on their validity and soundness and the available evidence that supports them. Although in all cases they will be open-ended, and inconclusive, it is possible to use them in our understanding of the Qur`an.