Ghamidi Sahib View On Science In The Quran
Ahsan, I I read the article half way. It is a great article still open for further discussion. Unfortunately texting is not an optimum medium to discuss complicated topics. I will try a bit here with one point that may destroy this article. The author states that many of the scientific facts in Quran were known far before 1400 years ago. 1. What is the authenticity of source of his reference when history was not being systematically being captured and preserved at that time. What is the proof that the information is still authentic. 2. Allah has been sending prophets since the creation of human being. Thus some of the scientific facts may be coming from the knowledge Allah revealed previously. 3. If prophet copied this information from existing knowledge that means he scoured the Earth, read every tablet written, and interviewed all knowledgeable people from around the World and surrounded himself from the World’s most knowledgeable apeople around him and then wrote Quran will just random references to science in random places in Quran. 4. Lastly and the most powerful argument that destroys this article… At the time of prophet Muhammad if many of these scientific facts existed, at the same time there were mostly numerous erroneous beliefs were present too. How come none of those erroneous science crept into Quran. Did prophet Muhammad experimented and verified science before choosing only correct science in Quran. It does not make sense. If Quran’s science was copied, there would be mostly and obvious incorrect science in Quran.
You are subjectively saying Quran is better. Prove that to a person from another religion and you will fail. I do not know what convinced Sahaba. It can’t be any different from believers of other faith. Also Quran has a great message it confirms previous books and it helps oppressed. That is a great draw for poor, oppressed and people who lost all hope.
@codename.AJK Now that I read the article. It is one of the best pieces of writings I have ever read. Great work. I totally agree with the following conclusion ————————— A New Approach So what now? How do we change the direction of the science in the Qur’ān tidal wave that has engulfed Muslim apologetics (more commonly known as daᶜwah in the Muslim community)? How do we transform the narrative? The simple answer is we need a new approach. This new approach is what Professor of Physics and Astronomy Nidhal Guessoum calls a “multiple, multi-level” approach.[52] The new approach is based on the following axioms and principles: The Qur’ān allows multiple and multi-level meanings. Our understanding of natural phenomena and science changes and improves with time. The Qur’ān is not inaccurate or wrong. In the case of any irreconcilable difference between a Qur’ānic assertion and a scientific one, the following must be done: Find meanings within the verse to correlate with the scientific conclusion. If no words can match the scientific conclusion then science is to be improved. Find a non-scientific meaning. The verse itself may be pertaining to non-physical things, such as the unseen, spiritual or existential realities. Mustansir Mir, Professor of Islamic Studies at Youngstown State University, argues for a similar approach. He writes, “From a linguistic standpoint, it is quite possible for a word, phrase or statement to have more than one layer of meaning, such that one layer would make sense to one audience in one age and another layer of meaning would, without negating the first, be meaningful to another audience in a subsequent age.”
Definitely, it is one of the good article on this topic. But Ghamidi sb dont agree ot the point of multiple meaning based on Nazm in Quran. For your other point that, references and how other theories didnt come in Quran. Atheist generally say may be Prophet Mohammad saw or his companion were clever enough to most logical one. Even if authencity is not there, but whole narrative of scientific miracle is destroyed with even single piece from ancient scrolls. Btw in the article he gave references to those historical theories from ancient egypt etc.
You didn’t hurt anyone’s feelings, so no worries. The approach that I proposed is not only for scholars, but as I stated above, it is for anyone who wants to pursue a deeper understanding of the Quran in order to make sense of the philosophy of the Quran, the foundation of it’s principles, the very problems that it’s laws address, as well as the overall world view it presents . I did not say that the evolution in science will prove the Quran wrong, and I don’t recall Ghamidi sahab ever saying that either. The point that I was trying to make is that with evolution in science our understanding of the physical world is bound change. If we use science as a basis to understand the Quran, we can never have the correct understanding. It is a shortcoming of human mind that it can’t understand things that are constantly changing, let alone use them as a basis to understand anything else. Besides, there’s no reason to understand the Quran using any other principles than what the Quran uses itself. It is incorrect that Ghamidi sahab has tried to forcefully take science out of the Quran . His methodology of interpreting the Quran is published and he has consistently applied the same principles throughout his translation and tafseer. Please take a moment to read it: Discussion 1088 The issue about same spouses in heaven is not about translation or interpretation. That is his inclination about the issue and he has made it very clear as such.