Religion

Islamic Religious Perspectives on Darwinian Evolution

Islamic scholarly perspectives on Darwinian evolution since 1859 range from outright rejection to full acceptance, with human exceptionalism as a recurring theme. The theological questions of human creation, the status of Adam, and the compatibility of Islam with biological evidence are examined.

January 18, 201865 min read41K viewsفارسی العربيةPDF

Islamic Religious Perspectives on Darwinian Evolution

This article examines the different approaches that Muslim scholars have adopted toward Darwin's theory since its inception in 1859, considering the theological arguments, whether explicit or implicit, employed within them. A wide spectrum of views and arguments is surveyed, ranging from complete rejection to full acceptance, including "human exceptionalism" (the idea that evolution applies to all living beings except humans).

Thus, two theological arguments extracted from the discussions of Muslim scholars are these: 1) Is God outside the paradigm of evolution, or does the term "Creator" require a new definition? 2) Does Adam still exist in this scenario of human evolution, and how can the Quranic story of Adam be incorporated into this scientific scenario?

Topics beyond these, but of lesser importance, are sometimes examined in Islamic discussions on evolution: a) Does the extinction of countless species in the history of life on Earth conflict with the traditional view of God's creation? b) Is divine theodicy[1] (the "problem of evil") exacerbated or explained by evolution? c) Are "animal species" defined entities and important biological categories in the Islamic worldview? d) Can the randomness that appears inherent in the evolutionary process be reconciled with a divine plan of creation?

These questions are examined here through the writings and arguments of Muslim scholars, and a general conclusion is ultimately drawn as to why it is impossible for deniers of evolution to address these issues in a manner compatible with their religious principles and methods, and why scholars who are more progressive and less text-literalist can accommodate these issues with a more flexible conception of God and the world.

The compatibility between Islamic teachings and the theories of biology and human evolution is one of the most challenging issues facing Islam today. Indeed, this matter relates to several of the most important dimensions of contemporary Islamic culture: a) the role and status of scientific evidence in Islamic thought and theology, b) the place and standing of scientific knowledge and references to religious texts in public culture, c) the principles (and consequently the content) of the education that Muslims receive (or should receive) today. These multiple aspects not only determine how Muslim scholars approach the examination of the acceptability of evolution, but also govern the debates on this matter, which have intensified and become more frequent in recent years.

Recent surveys on Muslim views toward evolution indicate significant differences among respondents, but generally, the surveys show that approximately three-quarters of Muslims either completely reject evolution or have serious disagreements with the idea that species evolved from one another—especially concerning humans.[2]

Research writings on Islam and evolution are still very scarce, and most of those written in the native languages of Muslims (Arabic, Bahasa Indonesia, Persian, Urdu, and Turkish) display a lack of understanding of the scientific aspects of the issue—particularly among traditionalists—or a superficial view of the principles of Islamic doctrine and theology. Very few well-researched, profound, and coherent articles on this subject can be found in these languages; good books are even rarer than good articles. Moreover, there is a demagogic and populist resonance in most of these writings; it is as if the authors consider the topic so controversial and sensitive that they express no view other than the one the public has always heard: namely, the view that evolution is an atheistic "theory" that is not very scientifically robust and clearly denies the familiar foundations of Islamic beliefs, and must therefore be rejected and ignored. However, a few Muslim scholars have seriously examined its theological foundations.

البته که دلالت‌های الهیاتی روشنی در رابطه با نظریه فرگشت داروین و شواهد علمی در مورد فرگشت انسانی که در چند دهه گذشته جمع آوری شده‌اند وجود دارند. دلالت‌های الهیاتی کلی فوراً پس از آن که داروین کتاب تاریخی اش را (در 1859) به چاپ رساند مورد بررسی قرار گرفتند، و زمانی که دانشمندان سازوکارهای فرگشت را (با این فرض که آنها کم و بیش ثابت هستند و دگرگونی های تصادفی نقشی اساسی دارند) و شواهد راجع به فرگشت انسانی و زیست شناختی را (این که هزاران، شاید میلیون ها گونه در طول تاریخ حیات منقرض شده‌اند؛ شباهت ژنتیکی نزدیک میان انسان ها، میمون ها و دیگر حیوانات و...) درک کردند، این دلالتها تقویت شدند.

در این مقاله من به مرور رویکردهایی که علمای مسلمان به فرگشت داروین داشته اند می پردازم؛ ابتدا رویکردهای مخالف و بعد رویکردهای موافق مورد بررسی قرار می گیرند. سپس مسائل الهیاتی که در بح‌ها بوجود می‌آیند را برجسته خواهم کرد، بخصوص مسائلی که با شواهد فرگشت انسانی و زیستی آنقدر زیاد شده‌اند که نمی‌توان نادیده شان گرفت یا ردشان کرد. و در پایان با چند ایده در مورد اینکه بهترین راه برای بررسی این موضوع توسط علمای مسلمان و جامعه به طور کلی –از جمله در ابعاد آموزشی- چیست، بحث را به پایان خواهم رساند.

مروری کوتاه بر نظرات مخالف

در مقاله ای با عنوان «پاسخ های مسلمانان به فرگشت»، عبدالمجید[3] علما را در رابطه با مسئله فرگشت در به سه گروه تقسیم می‌کند: 1) منکران که فرگشت را به طور کامل متعارض و ناسازگار با خوانش نص‌گرایانه از آموزه های اسلامی می دانند؛ 2) موافقان فرگشت که اصرار دارند آن را باید به طور کامل پذیرفت؛ و 3) «میانه روها» که فکر می کنند برخی از جنبه های نظریه ولی نه همه آنها را می توان در اسلام جای داد.

در اولین گروه او افرادی مانند شهاب الدین ندوی[4]، وحیدالدین خان[5] و هارون یحیی را قرار می دهد که تمرکزش روی علمای غیرعرب است. به این فهرست می توان فیلسوفان چون سید حسین نصر، مارتین لینز و فریتیوف شوئون (که در غرب مشهورتر هستند) اضافه کرد، علاوه بر این فهرستی طولانی از علمای عرب معاصر بسیار تاثیرگذار که با حدت مخالف فرگشت هستند مانند عبد العزیز بن باز، صفر الهوالی، عبدالمجید الزندانی، محمد متوالی الشعراوی، محمد س. ر. البوطی و دیگران هم در این دسته جای دارند. به طور خلاصه به مرور نظرات و سخنان برخی از این علمای مهم با تاکید بر اعتراضات الهیاتی آنان می پردازم.

عبدالعزیز بن باز (1999-1910) یکی از مشهورترین و مورد احترام ترین علمای سلفی است؛ او از 1993 به عنوان مفتی اعظم عربستان سعودی مشغول به کار بود و به فتوا دادن در مورد موضوعات مختلف از جمله موضوعات مدرن تر مشهور است. او در مورد فرگشت گفته است: «داروین اشتباه کرده: انسان ها از دیگر موجودات تکامل نیافته‌اند، آنها به همین شکلی که امروزه دارند آفریده شده‌اند. آدم به طور کامل انسان بود، اما قدش 60 ارش [27.4 متر] بود و انسان ها بعدها کوچک تر شدند... میمون ها و دیگر حیوانات گونه های متمایزی هستند (قرآن آنها را امم یعنی ملت ‌ها می خواند)؛ آنها روز رستاخیز به بارگاه خدا آورده خواهند شد... مسلمانانی که این ادعا را [فرگشت انسان از گونه های شبیه به میمون] می کنند در حالی که می دانند متون دینی چه می گویند، کافر هستند!»[6]

صفر الهوالی (متولد 1955 در عربستان سعودی)، عالم مسلمان وهابی چنین گفته است: «می دانیم که انسان ها همه نوادگان آدم و حوا هستند- در این بحثی نیست! اما برای دیگر موجودات زنده اگر مردم بگویند «آنها از نسل یکدیگرند» ما شاید با این مشکلی نداشته باشیم، اما اگر آنها بگویند که «آنها از هیچ به وجود آمده‌اند» یا افسانه‌های دیگری مطرح کنند، در این صورت ما با استفاده از متون دینی مان به آنها پاسخ خواهیم داد (و هر کس در موردشان شکی داشته باشد به مثابه کافر است) و از شواهد علمی که ضدفرگشت ها در غرب ارائه کرده‌اند هم استفاده خواهیم کرد.»[7]

Abd al-Majid al-Zindani (b. 1942, Yemen) is the founder and president of Al-Iman University and a founding member of the International Commission on Scientific Signs in the Qur’an and the Sunnah; he previously studied biology and chemistry in Egypt (during the 1950s and 1960s). In 2009, as a result of the confusion surrounding the meaning and implications of the discovery of the Ardi fossil skeleton[8], he claimed: “Darwin’s theory has become a myth… Ardi is the latest evidence of the failure of Darwin’s theory and the special creation of humans… There is no evidence that humans evolved from apes… Evolution was not even a theory, it was merely a hypothesis that materialists defended against the Church, and colonial powers spread it in the Islamic world to undermine the sway of religion there.”[9]

Muhammad Metwalli al-Sha‘rawi (1911–1998) was a popular Egyptian jurist, exegete, and preacher. Regarding evolution, he said: “It is a theory, not a fact. Evolution has been refuted; we must not adhere to it… Why did the ape evolve into a human? Why do apes still exist? Why do we not see another ape evolving today?”[10]

Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti (1923–2013) was, for decades until his death, one of the most renowned and respected Muslim scholars in the Arab world. He was a conservative traditionalist but strove to employ a systematic approach of reasoning and logical justification as much as he could. In particular, he sought to revive the tradition of Islamic theological reasoning concerning Islamic principles and doctrines; the most important example of this can be seen in his major work, Kubra al-Yaqiniyyat al-Kawniyya (The Greatest Cosmic Certainties). In this book, he devotes an entire chapter to the issue of evolution and, in some sections, offers a “scientific” critique of “Darwinism.” Unsurprisingly, his focus is on “man.” The opening lines of this chapter are as follows:

A Muslim must be acquainted with these truths about man and his reality: He must then attain certainty about them and build his faith in God upon their meaning:

Man is the best and noblest of all creatures;
Man – in terms of his [physical] nature – was created from clay and is the product of procreation from Adam, may God’s mercy be upon him;
Man was created from the very beginning in the finest appearance and most perfect form; he did not evolve throughout his history in such a way that he gradually transformed from one species into another.[11]

A few pages later, he warns the Muslim reader: “And be careful not to pay heed to what some Sufis say, that before Adam, may God’s mercy be upon him, whose creation is recounted in the Qur’an, there were many Adams.”[12]

Seyyed Hossein Nasr (b. 1933)[13] is undoubtedly one of the most famous and celebrated Muslim philosophers today. However, he has consistently opposed the theory of evolution on philosophical and theological grounds, although he occasionally attempts to examine it from a scientific perspective. But more often he focuses on philosophical arguments:[14] “[First] is the question of the nature[15] of things and its finality. A triangle is a triangle, and nothing evolves into a triangle; as long as a triangle has not become a triangle, it is not a triangle. Thus, if we have three separate lines that gradually come together, as long as there is a gap of one-thousandth of a millimeter between them, a triangle does not exist. Only a triangle is a triangle. And biological essences also have their finality.” Similarly, “Man has been man since the entry of human beings into the world. Humans did not evolve from other beings whose bones bear some resemblance to theirs, [which] does not mean that the human body evolved from the chimpanzee based on purely material factors. It is clear that there is a discontinuity indicating the appearance of a being of a higher degree.”[16]

He also refers to an argument he calls the “logical critique”: “How is it possible for something superior to arise from something inferior?” In fact, Nasr insists that only God, the Giver of Life (al-Muḥyī, one of the 99 names of God), can transform inanimate matter into something living. He adds to his argument the “mathematical critique of evolution” put forward by “those who speak of intelligent design,” considering it “one of the most important scientific criticisms of the biological theory of evolution.”[17]

In response to the question of whether Adam (the first human) was created on earth, he says: “This is pure blasphemy, of the worst kind, because it deprives Muslims of their hope for the resurrection. The [Paradise] described by God in the Qur’an bears no resemblance to the earth we know, even if the earth was originally Paradise (that is another matter) and even if, when God created the earth, it was called Paradise on earth in Christian theology.” He concludes: “Anyone who equates Paradise with a place in Africa where Adam gradually evolved has committed the worst kind of theological blasphemy. Such people are no longer serious Muslims.”[18]

In summary, he accepts microevolution[19] but is vehemently opposed to macroevolution.[20] In his view, “theistic evolution[21] is worse than the Darwinian idea” because “it is no longer scientific evolution and will not satisfy agnostic[22] or atheist[23] biologists,” and it “limits God’s power through a process we think we know but do not really know.” He warns Muslims “not to surrender like many Christian theologians who have unfortunately surrendered to the paradigm of evolution” and calls upon “Muslim theologians” “to critique not only biological evolution but also Christian evolution—that is, the modern Christian understanding of biological evolution.”[24]

Muzaffar Iqbal (born 1945), a Pakistani-Canadian Islamic scholar trained in chemistry, has recently followed the path of Seyyed Hossein Nasr. In an article on evolution, he writes: “This idea has now spread throughout the world, although its root is a vague concept of species—a concept on which there is no agreement even within the community of [evolutionary] scientists... The logical implication [of evolution] is nothing less than the destruction of the sanctity of species—something granted by the Noble Book... The ant and the bee have always been ant and bee and will forever remain so.” He adds: “One of the core components of the meaning of the word ummah (nation, plural umam) is the concept of the sanctity of species. As the Qur’an tells us, not only does each species preserve its characteristics, but it also receives divine revelation and acts upon it. The ant and the bee have always been ant and bee and will forever remain so.”[25]

Harun Yahya[26] has published relatively fatuous books and articles on evolution, including: The Evolution Deceit: The Scientific Collapse of Darwinism and its Ideological Background[27] (1999); The Disasters Darwinism Brought to Humanity[28] (2001); “New Fossil Discovery Discredits Evolutionary Theories[29]” (2005); “Thermodynamics Refutes Evolution” (Chapter 11 of The Evolution Deceit). Harun Yahya’s anti-evolutionary writings attack evolution on scientific, rather than theological, grounds—unlike the previous examples. Among his “scientific” arguments are the following: 1) “The information that specifies species already exists in the genes, and it is impossible for natural selection to produce new species by altering genes.”[30] 2) “When the earth’s strata and the fossil record are examined, it is observed that living organisms appeared simultaneously ... [in] a miraculous event [that] is referred to in the scientific literature as the ‘Cambrian Explosion.’”[31] 3) “Not a single transitional form has ever been found to prove what is called the sequence[32] of vertebrates—from fish to amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Every living species appears instantaneously and in its present form, complete and perfect, in the fossil record. In other words, living beings did not come into existence through evolution; they were created.”[33] 4) “The mechanisms that evolution proposes completely violate the second law [of thermodynamics]”[34]; 5) “The probability that a protein molecule consisting of 500 amino acids will be arranged in the correct quantity and sequence, and that all the amino acids it contains will be left-handed and combined only with peptide bonds, is 1 in over 10.”[35]; and other arguments of this kind.

The turn toward scriptural literalism has not diminished on the theological front in recent years. In an article titled “The Prophet Adam and Human Evolution,” Sheikh Dr. Haitham al-Haddad[36] insists that the divine command “Be! and it is”[37] must be understood as signifying instantaneous creation; he writes: “The Arabs did not think that the phrase kun fa-yakun implied an indeterminate time, for in reality this phrase depicts the divine power and might, whose will manifests immediately, definitively, and without delay. Even the phrase ‘Be! and it is/was’ in English implies that (whatever it is) happens instantaneously.”[38]

Al-Haddad goes even further with his literalism: “The Qur’an clearly states that Adam was created by God and by His own hand, ‘He said, O Iblis, what prevents you from prostrating to one whom I have created with My two hands?’ Furthermore, the famous Companion Abdullah ibn Umar said that ‘God created four things with His hand: the Throne, the Pen, the Garden of Eden, and Adam. As for the rest of His creation, He said to them: “Be!” and they were.’ This narration clearly shows that the Companions believed that these four things, including Adam, were created in a manner different from other animals and creatures.”[39]

An interesting case is a book titled Abi Adam (My Father Adam), published in 1998 by the Egyptian religious scholar Abd al-Sabur Shahin (1929–2010). His thesis had two aspects: 1) Human development continued over millions of years, but they did not evolve from another animal species; and 2) Macroevolution did not occur, and species do not evolve or arise from one another. He insists that he does not accept Darwin in any way. But what is interesting is that he says his intention was to rid Islamic culture of two “viruses”: “All the ‘Israelite’ stories that have been forcibly crammed into Muslims’ understanding of various historical subjects; and 2) the literalist approach to Islamic texts.

Shahin’s book is full of errors; in fact, he gets almost every scientific point wrong. For example, he names geological eras on a scale of tens of billions of years (e.g., the length of the Precambrian era is given as 71.125 billion years). He has serious misconceptions about the theory of evolution and quotes from unreliable sources, the chief of which is a 1956 book that claimed to have refuted Darwin’s theory. He then calls the theory of evolution “a very weak claim” that “has nothing to do with human origins, though it may have contributed much to biology and anthropology.”

Nevertheless, the book contains important theological and cultural advances regarding human origins and evolution: 1) Instead of the usual claim of traditional creationists that humans are thousands or tens of thousands of years old, Shahin insisted that humans are several million years old; 2) He accepted that many humans existed before the Adam of the famous creation story; 3) He accepted that the garden from which Adam was expelled was on Earth, perhaps somewhere in East Africa; 4) He claimed an important distinction in the Qur’anic vocabulary describing humans, with “bashar” referring to pre-humans and “insān” referring to ensouled humans; and 5) He insisted that many parts of the creation story must be read metaphorically and with a hermeneutical approach. One can therefore understand why the book caused a storm and led to its author appearing in several courts.

Thus, this is an interesting case of a somewhat successful attempt by a Muslim theologian to engage with modern science; indeed, it seems clear that his studies of human evolution sparked his interest in re-examining the traditional stories about Adam and Eve and human history. But the more striking point is that, despite the author’s willingness to engage with and revise the simplistic, traditionalist story of human origins, his inflexible approach to Darwin (a taboo name in Islamic culture) prevented him from taking the final step: accepting that humans evolved from other species and share common ancestors with apes, other primates, and animals.

Another interesting work belongs to Daoud Suleiman Jalajel[40], who, in his book titled “Islam and Biological Evolution: Exploring Classical Sources and Methodologies,” states his aim as “investigating, within the framework of classical Islamic scholarship, what the Islamic position on evolution could be… The scope of this study includes scholarly traditions that are considered, at least by their adherents, to be part of the Islamic tradition… including the works of scholars from the Ash‘ari, Maturidi, and Salafi schools of thought.” The author argues for this limitation in his research by stating that “these traditions represent ‘mainstream’ Islamic thought for most Muslims and are therefore more relevant in determining what the general Islamic perspective on evolution could be.” He dismisses the views of rationalist scholars, both ancient (such as the Mu‘tazila) and contemporary (whom the author calls “Islamic modernism”), claiming they are heretical.”[41]

By restricting himself to the traditional schools of Islamic theology, especially with regard to humans, Jalajil is forced to arrive at anti-evolutionary conclusions. His first, general conclusion is somewhat positive: biological evolution need not be rejected (“Islam can accommodate the claim that God created many animal and plant species in gradual stages”), and whether evolution is scientifically correct or not—and whatever theory about evolution turns out to be true or false—will have no impact on the beliefs of Muslims.” [42] Nevertheless, he insists that Adam be regarded as a miraculous creation. His belief in this matter aligns with Ashʿari theology, which denies a strong cause-and-effect relationship; indeed, following this dominant school of thought, he insists that we only witness patterns in divine action, not rigid laws of nature in the world; therefore, God can break or suspend them however He wishes, whenever He pleases, and “science can never hope to ascertain how Adam in particular was created... What the sacred texts say about the creation of Adam led early scholars to conclude that his creation was unique and even miraculous.”[43] He adds: “There is no reason to assume that the creation of Adam must have followed the same pattern as the creation of other living species.” Needless to say, this statement is not only completely at odds with the general scientific outlook on the subject but also contradicts a great deal of empirical evidence.

But the most interesting point about this work is the fact that its author, almost unprecedentedly, discusses issues that evolution claims to raise for theology. These issues include the questions: why there appears to have been such “profligacy” in animals and species throughout the evolutionary history of the world (extinction), and why there is evil in the natural world. We will later return to examine these topics, which are rarely, if ever, addressed in Islamic literature in relation to the evolutionary paradigm.

Before reviewing the writings of Muslim authors who have accepted evolution and found it compatible with Islam, I must mention a group that can be termed “human exceptionalists”: individuals who accept biological evolution for all beings except humans. Their most important argument is that humans possess a special soul/mind that cannot be explained by evolutionary processes. Among them are the following individuals: Abdul Majid quotes Muhammad Rafiuddin, who adopted this view in his book “The Quran and Modern Science”; Israr Ahmad agreed with Rafiuddin in “Creation and Innovation in Science”; and Ahmad Hafiz, a student of Israr Ahmad, who followed his teacher’s views with a coherent and sharp article titled “The Quran and Human Evolution.” To these figures can be added Hussein al-Jisr, an important figure in this field, and Abu al-Majid Isfahani, both of whom I will discuss in detail later.

A Brief Overview of Favorable Views

It may be surprising that the initial Arab/Muslim reactions to the publication of Darwin’s book and his theory were not very hostile. In fact, Adel A. Ziadat, in his study of Arab reactions to Darwin’s ideas from 1860 to 1930, points out that “medieval Muslim thinkers, who had taken the idea of evolution from the ancient Greeks, had many reflections on the ideas of biological evolution and transformism[44] in the animal and plant kingdoms. [...] The writings of the Arabs were somewhat close to the views of Charles Darwin.”[45] This point is, of course, greatly exaggerated, but for Ziadat it explained the generally positive (or at least non-negative) reception of Darwin’s theory. Indeed, he writes: “A number of influential modern Arab thinkers [...] denied the fact that the theory of evolution was a discovery of Darwin and Wallace. Others pointed out that Darwin’s explanations were part of the Arabs’ elaboration on the broader concept of the transmutation of species[46].”[47]

Thus, it should not be surprising that the debate among Arab thinkers about the theory of evolution began and continued from 1870 with open minds. The discussions focused more on the philosophical, religious, and social implications than on the specific aspects of the theory. Nevertheless, we must emphasize that the thinkers’ approaches encompassed a wide spectrum, from naive rejection to unconditional acceptance. Indeed, some secular Arabs saw Darwinism as the embodiment of the modern scientific spirit of the age and considered it a way to pull the Arab world out of its ossified and irrational mentality (as they imagined it to be).

The first response to Darwinism belongs to the non-Arab Muslim, Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838/1839–1897), the famous leader of the reformist Pan-Islamic movement. In 1881, while al-Afghani was in India, he published “The Refutation of the Materialists” in Persian; it was soon translated into Arabic, and from Arabic into other languages. This book was largely a reaction to the pro-modernity Islamic movement of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, whose school of thought emphasized the importance of naturalism (and consequently rejected all miracles, small and large). Some authors have stated that it is evident from this book that al-Afghani had not actually studied Darwin’s works, because the description of the theory of evolution in it is often erroneous and confused. In later years, he moderated his views and wrote that Darwin’s ideas had previously been proposed by the “Arab scholars” of the Golden Age of Islam.

The most important and most complete Islamic response to Darwin’s theory is a book by Hussein al-Jisr (1845–1909), a respected and influential Lebanese Sunni scholar. His book, entitled “al-Risala al-Hamidiyya fi Haqiqat al-Diyana al-Islamiyya wa Haqiqat al-Shari’a al-Muhammadiyya,” was published in 1887 and contained a precise and clear discussion of evolution with a decisive and positive Islamic approach. Al-Jisr deeply believed that Islam has always championed truths in all matters and encouraged progressive thinking, including naturalism, as long as it did not question the central principle of a Creator; this consequently led him to accept all evolutionary processes and even what we today call “methodological materialism.” Although al-Jisr emphasized that Darwin’s theory had not yet been proven in his time, he reassured his Muslim readers, giving them confidence that even if the theory were to be strongly confirmed in the future, no harm would come to Islam from it; on the contrary, as long as the monotheistic worldview is preserved within the paradigm of evolution, it would easily accommodate it.

In fact, al-Jisr quoted some verses of the Quran to show their compatibility (in principles and rules) with evolution, and even pointed out that the Quran refers to the creation of life from inanimate matter. He further stressed that since God is Almighty and outside of time, it makes no difference to Him whether the universe and all that is in it was created all at once or was created in stages.[48]

اما او تردیدهای جدی در این مورد داشت که انسان ها هم در این پارادیم فرگشتی قرار می گیرند یا نه. از نظر او، قرآن به طور واضح در مورد آفرینشی خاص برای آدم سخن می گوید و علاوه بر این، بعید است علم بتواند روزی ماهیت معنوی انسان را، به ویژه در طرحواره فرگشتی گونه های ابتدایی و پیش تر توصیف کند. (باید این آیه قرآن را به خاطر داشت: «و آنها از تو در مورد روح می پرسند. بگو: روح امری از پروردگار من است و شما از آن جز اندک دانشی ندارید» (17:85)) با این وجود، او قبول کرد که اگر علم شواهد غیر قابل انکار در مورد فرگشت انسان ارائه دهد، مسلمانان چاره‌ای جز پذیرش و پیروی از پارادیم فرگشت نخواهند داشت. در هر صورت، ایمان فرد به خدا به خظر نخواهد افتاد.

از میان شیعیان، ابوالمجید م. ر. اصفهانی (1943-1870) به سال 1914، «نقد فلسفه داروین» را نوشته که عنوانش اشاره به رد داروینیسم دارد. با این حال، عالم عراقی، در واقع نظریه فرگشت را نقض نکرد و بیشتر نگران وضعیت انسان بود. او این را درک کرده و بر این تاکید داشت که متون دینی تنها داستان های استعاری از آفرینش ارائه می کنند، اما با این وجود اصرار داشت که نمی توان و نباید حیوان را به عنوان خاستگاه آدمی پذیرفت. اصل اساسی او این بود که ماتریالیست ها تنها می توانند در مورد مسئله آفرینش و خاستگاه انسان گمانه زنی کنند، در حالی که مردم مذهبی می توانند به حقایق قطعی که در کتاب هایشان وجود دارد اعتماد نمایند.

در ترکیه، جایی که نظریه داروین توسط متفکران طرفدار غرب به عنوان ایدئولوژی ماتریالیستی که آنها در دهه های اول قرن بیستم پیشنهاد می کردند، مورد شناسایی قرار گرفته و معرفی می شد، علمای اسلام باید واکنش نشان می دادند. از این رو، احمد حمدی اکسکی (1951-1887) و سلیمان آتش (متولد 1933) مقاله های منتشر کردند که داستان آدم به عنوان خاستگاها انسان را تمثیلی می دانست که برای تعلیم مردم در باره جنبه های اساسی انسان، یعنی روح او، نقل شده است و ربطی به واقعیات تاریخی ندارد.[49] در واقع، اکسکی به این نکته اشاره کرد که در هیچ جای قرآن نمی توان اطلاعاتی در مورد این که آدم چه زمانی «آفریده» شده یافت و متون اسلامی در این مورد وارداتی از سنت های بنی اسرائیلی است که در جوامع اولیه اسلامی ترویج شده بودند. علاوه بر این، او به برخی اندیشمندان مسلمان اولیه اشاره می کند که ابراز کرده اند احتمالاً موجوداتی شبیه به انسان ها پیش از آدم روی زمین وجود داشته اند. در نهایت، اکسکی توانست برای دیدگاه هایش شواهدی در قرآن پیدا کند؛ وی به ویژه اشاره دارد به: آیه 71:17 که در آن خداوند از «رویاندن شما (انسان ها) از زمین»[50] (نباتاً در لغت یعنی مانند گیاهان) سخن می گوید و 3:33، که در آن آدم برتر از دیگر مخلوقات «انتخاب شده» (اصطفی) است.[51]

آتش، یکی از علمای مسلمان مورد احترام معاصر مقاله ای در مورد فرگشت در دانش نامه اسلام به زبان ترکی در سال 1973 منتشر نمود. او بر این تاکید داشت که قرآن می گوید که خداوند آفرینش انسان را از خاک «شروع کرد» (32:7)، که معنای ضمنی اش این است که آفرینش مدت زمانی به طول انجامیده است. در واقع، او فرگشت انسان ها را فرآیندی ادامه دار و بدون انتها می داند؛ زیرا قرآن هدف نهایی آفرینش انسان را تلاش آنها برای رسیدن به خدا (عبادت) می داند (51:56) ، بنابراین، روح/روان به تدریج به سوی پروردگارش بالا می یابد.[52]

در آخر، اسمائیل مظهر (1962-1891)، نویسنده مسلمان مصری، اولین فردی بود که اصل انواع داروین را ترجمه کرد. او این کار را طی مراحلی انجام داد: پنج فصل اول در سال 1918 چاپ شدند، چهار فصل دیگر در 1928 به انتشار رسیدند ولی اثر کامل تنها در 1964 به عربی به چاپ رسید. اسمائیل مظهر عقل گرا که بر جستجوی دانش در اسلام تاکید داشت، سازگاری کاملی میان فرگشت و دین مشاهده کرد و در ادامه زندگی خود صفحات زیادی در این رابطه نگارش کرد.

In fact, in the decades following the publication of the theory of evolution, there was a wide spectrum of views toward Darwin among Muslim thinkers; but Ziadat considers most of these reactions, by and large, as an acceptance of the theory, interpreted as “the wisdom and will of God.” In his view, “Muslim writers provided a religious license for Darwinian science.”[53] He concludes: “If one writes such statements as: ‘evolution occurred under God’s control,’ ‘the universe was created for a purpose,’ and ‘materialism [i.e., naturalism] is intellectually impartial,’ one will enjoy the full support of Arab thinkers, Christian or Muslim.”[54] He goes on to say: “Was there a difference between Arab Muslim and Christian thinkers regarding Darwin’s theory of evolution? The answer is not difficult to find. Although both were receptive to Darwinism, this research shows that Arab Muslims were more prepared to accept Darwinian evolution compared to Arab Christians.”[55]

Recently, in an article, Muzaffar Iqbal (who is an anti-evolution figure) points to a number of famous and/or respected Muslim scholars from the 1880s to the 1970s who were theistic evolutionists: Muhammad Abduh, Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Fazlur Rahman, Ayatollah Morteza Motahhari, Ayatollah Beheshti, Javad Bahonar, Maurice Bucaille, Muhammad Hamidullah, Muhammad Iqbal, and others.[56]

In contrast, a characteristic of the late 20th and early 21st centuries in the Islamic world is the taking root of highly fundamentalist and scripturalist forms of religion. And it is for this reason that the majority of Muslims today, including the elites, whether educated in modern universities or in seminaries, more or less deny evolution, at least in relation to humans. Very rarely do Arab/Muslim thinkers, including Arab/Muslim scientists, express pro-evolution views.

But one rare exception is the Syrian thinker Muhammad Shahrur, who has adopted a very interesting Quranic approach to the issue of human evolution. He begins by differentiating between the terms “bashar” and “insan,” which are often both used to mean “human being.” Shahin later—probably unaware of Shahrur’s ideas—(as we saw) made this distinction.[57] These two terms refer to different stages in human evolution. In fact, by examining the story of Adam in the Quran, he shows that whenever the word insan is used, its connotation is “understanding” (mental ability), “abstract perception” (especially regarding metaphysical categories), and “intelligence.” In contrast, the word bashar is used only in the context of the creation of the species, before it became insan and acquired the ability to think. Simply put, Shahrur wants to equate bashar with primates[58] (or even Homo (the human genus)[59]) and consider insan synonymous with modern humans. His evidence for this idea is the fact that the Quran speaks of the “divine spirit being breathed” into the primates/hominins (see the following verses). Furthermore, Shahrur points to an important nuance in the use of the words ja‘ala (to make) and khalaqa (to create) in one of the key verses. He then constructs a story about human evolution based on the Quranic verses that is fully compatible with modern theory.

Another important exception is Rana Dajani[60], a Jordanian molecular biologist who has recently risen vigorously to defend the compatibility of Islam with modern science, and especially with evolution.

Recently, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who is perhaps considered the most influential Sunni Muslim scholar of the last decade, has reiterated views that al-Jisr put forward more than a century ago. Al-Qaradawi has said: “Even research into the beginning of creation, so long as the individual remembers that he is investigating creation, meaning that a Creator is at work, [is permissible in Islam]... Even if we assume that species evolved from [other] species, this happened only by the will of God and according to the Creator’s laws... If Darwin’s theory is proven, we can find Qur’anic verses that accord with it.”[61]

In fact, some scholars have found in the Qur’an the possibility of accommodating the theory of evolution, both in its biological and human aspects; for example, “and We made every living thing from water” (21:30), “God has created every animal from water. Among them is [a kind] that crawls on its belly, [a kind] that walks on two legs, and [a kind] that walks on four. God creates whatever He wills. Be aware! God is capable of doing whatever He wills.” (24:45), “and He created you in stages...” (71:14), and “and He it is who created you from clay and then decreed a term...” (6:2).

Theological Issues

From the review of Muslim views on Darwin’s theory of evolution, one can see that certain theological issues have been examined, either explicitly or implicitly. The following two are, by a wide margin, the most important topics for Muslim thinkers:

Is there a place for God, the Creator, in the evolutionary paradigm? Does “evolution” not entail a materialist worldview? In this vein, what does it mean that God “created” things?
Is there a place for Adam in the scenario of human evolution? Does the Qur’an not state clearly and unequivocally that Adam was a fully-formed human created without parents or ancestors in a metaphysical “paradise”?

In addition to these, other topics are occasionally raised in Islamic discussions about evolution, though they are not of the same level of importance:

If the history of life on Earth shows the extinction of thousands and even millions of species, can this be considered as excess and wastefulness (on the part of the Creator), or can it be understood (coherently) within an Islamic worldview?
Is theodicy (“the problem of evil”) exacerbated or explained by evolution?
Are “species” precisely defined biological units? Are they fixed and therefore significant in an Islamic worldview? Would evolution, in this case, undermine this perception?
If randomness plays a major role in the theory of evolution, can it be reconciled with the divine plan of creation by an omniscient God?

The first major theme in Islamic discourse concerning evolution is the place of the Creator in this new paradigm. Indeed, Seyyed Hossein Nasr insists that “the power of creativity, as the Qur’an clearly demonstrates, belongs to God alone and not to matter.”[62] As we saw earlier, he considers any “tawhidic” understanding of evolution to be “even worse than the purely biological theory of evolution” “because [such an understanding], while claiming to believe in God, in a theological sense prevents God from intervening in creation.”

اما مفهوم «آفرینش» به خودی خود، مفهومی مبهم و مناقشه برانگیز است. در واقع، این که خداوند چیزها را «آفریده» است به چه معناست؟ آیا ضرورتا به این معناست که اشیا یا موجودات زنده از هیچ و به یک باره آفریده شدند؟ برخی از صاحب نظران به آیه 29:20 که در آن «آفرینش» به عنوان فرآیندی توصیف شده که «آغازی» دارد اشاره می کنند: «بگو: در زمین سیر کنید و بنگرید که چگونه خدا موجودات را آفریده سپس، آفرینش بازپسین را پدید می آورد زیرا خداوند بر هر چیزی تواناست.» علاوه بر این، در 39:6، خداوند رشد جنین آدمی را با این عبارات توصیف کرده است: «او شما را در رحم های مادرانتان در مراحلی می آفریند» یا اگر لغت به لغت از عربی ترجمه شود (چنان که مارمادوک پیکتال[63] انجام داده) چنین است: «او شما را در رحم های مادرانتان آفریده است، آفرینش پس از آفرینش.» علاوه بر این، اندیشمندان دیگر اشاره کرده اند که با وجود این که مسلمانان باور دارند که خداوند هرگز آفرینش را متوقف نمی کند، در هیچ جای طبیعت هرگز مشاهده نمی کنیم که خداوند چیزی را به طور یک باره بیافریند.

دومین موضوع مهم برای مسلمانان، جایگاه آدم است. همان طور که پیش تر اشاره کردیم، اغلب علمای مذهبی معاصر، داستان آفرینش آدم را نشان دهنده آفرینش جدا و ویژه انسان کامل اولی می دانند و بسیاری اصرار دارند که این اتفاق در مکانی متافیزیکی یعنی «بهشت» روی داد. از این رو، برای بسیاری از علما درک این غیرممکن است که گونه هایی پیش از آدم وجود داشته اند و یا حتی ممکن است آدم ها و دودمان های مختلفی بوده اند که در نهایت ناپدید شده اند (مانند نئوآندرتال ها، انسان جاوه ای). در نتیجه، اغلب علمای مسلمان نظریه فرگشت را، حداقل در مورد انسان ها، رد می کنند.

این تعارض به دلیل تفسیر لفظی متون دینی است. جلاجل می نویسد: «اصلی که اینجا برقرار است این است که تا زمانی که ممکن است یک متن باید بر اساس معنای ظاهری آن درک شود.»[64] او با قطعیت نتیجه می گیرد: «این نتیجه از شواهد متنی به وضوح حاصل می شود: آدم توسط خدا به طور مستقیم از خاک آفریده شد. آدم و همسرش هر دو توسط خدا بدون عاملیت والدین آفریده شدند.» او اضافه می کند که: «تمام صاحب نظران سنتی به این نتیجه رسیده اند.»[65] شیخ بن باز (مفتی اعظم پیشین عربستان سعودی) به طور مشابه بر این هم اصرار دارد که حدیث معروفی که آدم را 60 ارش (71 متر) می داند هم باید به طور لفظی حقیقی در نظر گرفته شود.

در مقابل این دیدگاه، محمد عبد الحلیم، مترجم و مفسر معاصر قرآن که بسیار مورد احترام است، «زبان استعاری معلوم قرآن» را کم اهمیت در نظر گرفته و می گوید: «در روایت قرآن، حتی جزئیاتی مانند این که خدا آدم را به دست خودش آفرید و تعداد روزهایی که برای آفرینش زمین و آسمان ها صرف نمود باید بر اساس تعلیمات خود قرآن، نمادی و سمبلیک در نظر گرفته شوند زیرا در جای دیگری در قرآن گفته شده است که «هیچ چیزی مانند خدا نیست» (42:11؛ 5:103؛ و 112:3) و «و فرشتگان و روح در روزی که پنجاه هزار سال طول می کشد به [سوی خدا] بالا می روند. (70:4)»[66]

در استدلالی دیگر، شیخ الحداد، فرگشت انسان را به این دلیل که آدم پیامبری شریف بود رد می کند. او می نویسد: «تایید این فرضیه که انسان ها فرگشت یافته اند، باعث الزام به باورهای نکوهیده ای در مورد پیامبر شریف آدم (سلام الله علیه) می‌شود که پدر و مادر او میمون یا میمون نما بوده‌اند! این توهین به مقام پیامبری است که ادعا شود بوزینه های انسان نما از آدم نگهداری می کردند. آیا پدر و مادر آدم می توانستند حرف بزنند یا فقط خرناس می کشیدند؟»[67]

For many scholars, reconciling the spiritual nature of Adam and human beings with evolution from apes is difficult. A similar argument is the “Islamic example of God[68]”; the Prophet Muhammad stated that “God created Adam in His own image and likeness,” which has always been interpreted as referring to the spiritual capacities of human beings. This, of course, leads to the issue of the nature of the soul, which Muslims (following the Qur’an) have avoided trying to define but regard as a characteristic unique to humans (non-animal). Therefore, many Muslims conclude that at least some aspects of human beings were created in a non-evolutionary manner.

It is true that accepting the paradigm of human evolution alongside other species would entail a new understanding of Adam and the story of humanity’s creation. During the Golden Age of Islamic civilization and the modern era, a minority of Muslim scholars have insisted that the creation stories in the Qur’an, including the story of Adam, can be taken metaphorically; or that the “paradise” referred to in the Qur’an in the creation story is a “garden” on earth (indeed, the Qur’anic-Arabic word “janna” in other Qur’anic stories simply means “garden”); or that there were human beings before Adam[69], who were the first God-conscious (spiritual) beings to walk the earth. In fact, Shahrour has reconstructed various parts of the story of Adam and his descendants in the Qur’an in a way that corresponds to different stages of human evolution:[70]

Hominids (human species) standing upright (bipedalism): Surah Al-Infitar, 6-8
Emergence of language: Surah Ar-Rahman, 3-4
Learning to bury the dead: Surah Al-Ma’idah, 31
Sacrifice/offering: Surah Al-Ma’idah, 27
Spiritual growth: Surah Al-Ma’idah, 27
Clothing/covering the body: Surah Al-A’raf, 27
Finally, revelation, human beings becoming God’s vicegerents on earth, and the “descent” of Adam and Eve from “paradise”

The third major issue that Islamic theology faces in its encounter with evolution is theodicy (suffering, killing, evil, and extinction).

W. Montgomery Watt (1909–2006), the renowned Islamicist, begins his article entitled “Suffering in Sunni Islam” as follows: “Various writers have noted that Islam, unlike Christianity and Judaism, has paid little attention to the problem of theodicy.” A few pages later, he adds: “It is safe to say that mainstream Sunni Islam has avoided the subject of theodicy.” To clarify the importance of the issue, he emphasizes the perplexing suffering of children and animals and points to some of the answers that have been given, including those that are unsatisfactory: especially if the suffering of children is “compensated” by their free admission to paradise, what could compensate for the constant killing and extinction of animals?[71] Watt reminds us that the Qur’an recounts stories that are clearly meant to teach Muslims the doctrine that apparent explanations for things that happen in the world can often be very wrong; for example, the story of Moses and the wise man, often considered to be the prophet Khidr (Al-Kahf: 65-82). In other words, people should not let apparent pain and suffering disturb them unnecessarily.

In contrast, we know that Darwin lost his faith not because he could not see a Creator God within the paradigm of evolution or because he could not reconcile human evolution from primates with Adam, but because he could not accept the existence of an omnipotent, merciful, and compassionate God who created a world so filled with the suffering and killing of humans and animals. Indeed, the late Ian Barbour, a leading philosopher of science and religion, observed significant theological implications in this general theodicy in nature: “There seem to be so many dead ends, extinct species, and so much pain, suffering, waste, and extravagance [in the world] that it is impossible to attribute every event in detail to God.”[72]

Jalajel, on the Muslim front, has examined the issues of pain and suffering, extinction, and wastefulness and profligacy from the perspective of “traditional” Islamic theology. His examination can be summarized in these two points: 1) Muslims, or human beings in general, cannot conceive of God’s creation and His plan, and consequently cannot question it; and 2) the species of living beings, like human beings, are nations, and God replaces whichever nation He wills with another nation.

On the issue of theodicy, Jalajel cites the Ashʿarī theory of the acquisition of acts: “Although God creates acts that, in relation to the individuals who perform them, can be described as evil, evil cannot be attributed to God. Evil is attributed to the individual who acquires it.”[73] He applies this [theory] to the problem of evil by quoting figures such as Abū al-ʿIzz: “It is God’s will that sin exists, but He does not love it, is not pleased with it, and does not command it.”[74]

Ashʿarī theology always considers evil to be merely a limitation of human perspective; to put it simply, “evil” is what the individual sees, and in reality, many of the actions around us that may shock us might prove to be purposeful and beneficial when viewed from a broader angle and a longer time frame. One must always remember that God’s ways and purposes are often mysterious. Furthermore, Ashʿarī theology emphasizes that God is bound by no rules (whether moral or otherwise) and is completely free to act as He wills, even to do things that seem unjust or evil to us in this world. The problem lies in our attempt to understand everything with human reason and standards. In contrast, Muʿtazilī theology held that everything in the world (creature, object, act) has an “existential reason… that is ultimately beneficial for human beings.”[75]

Finally, some Muslim theologians have examined the issue of randomness.

The (official) Egyptian Fatwa Institute, in its fatwa against Darwinian evolution, citing verse 54:49, “Indeed, We have created all things in measure,” expresses its opposition to the “randomness” that it sees as inherent to the theory of evolution.

The contemporary American Muslim scholar, Nuh Keller, rejects evolution on grounds that include the issue of “randomness.” He writes: “From the point of view of Islamic tawhid, nothing occurs by chance. There is no ‘independent nature,’ and anyone who believes in either of these is necessarily outside the fold of Islam.”[76] Moreover, he rules that “it makes no difference whether we attribute the process to God or to ‘nature’; it will be disbelief in any case, because it negates the truth of the special creation of Adam that God has revealed in the Qur’an.”

Shaykh al-Haddad considers the argument of “randomness” (or “chance and luck”) to be an issue that precludes any possible acceptance of evolution: “By endorsing the unwarranted theories of human evolution, we consider chance to be the creator, because everything that is created exists only because chance has so decided. But God says, ‘Do they attribute to God partners who have created something like His creation, so that the creations seem similar to them? Say, God is the Creator of all things; He is the One, the Irresistible.’”[77]

Jalajel’s discussion of randomness, or what he calls “chance and determinism,” is one of the rare instances of serious discussion on this topic in the context of evolution. He first points out that chance-based events, such as the toss of a coin, exhibit a rule-like pattern that is prescribed and defined. He then insists that it is the pattern that is significant, not the individual, particular events. He writes: “Since chance patterns exist in the world, this means that God can manifest such patterns wherever and whenever He wills in natural processes. Therefore, from a theological perspective, there should be no objection to the idea of viewing chance as playing a vital role in biological evolution.”[78]

Nevertheless, Jalajel’s failure to employ quantum physics and its inherently probabilistic processes does not provide an answer to the problem of the physical world being deterministic. In fact, what matters to him is that a physical perspective does not impugn the possibility of miracles and that God is free to act however He wishes; without there even being a need for our understanding of those actions. He writes: “Apart from miracles, this does not mean that the world is deterministic at the empirical level… It is equally possible that God wills, in some instances, to act in a way that resists human attempts at prediction. In short, God does whatever He pleases.”[79]

As I stated earlier, once conservative Ash‘ari theology is accepted, it becomes extraordinarily difficult to conceive of a world in which science is accepted and reasonable theological inferences from science can be made.

The Most Important Themes and Methodologies

Muslim scholars and thinkers have addressed various issues related to Darwin’s theory of evolution. In some cases, they have examined the issues from a well-planned, detailed theological perspective and arrived at a spectrum of views, but in other cases they have rejected the theory, or at least its human component, with a reactionary and contemptuous attitude.

The main patterns encountered in the views of Muslims who deny evolution can be summarized as follows:

Evolution is, at best, a theory and, at worst, a dogma; in fact, evolution is a materialist philosophy, not science (as it is considered); it should not be regarded as a proven fact in nature.
Darwin’s theory does not refer to God as the source of the evolutionary process, and every phenomenon in nature (for example, developments) must be viewed as actions of which God is the cause and upon which He exerts influence; not as random or naturalistic events.
This theory is incompatible with the story of Adam’s creation in the Qur’an. Human beings are special; they are God’s vicegerents on earth, and Muslims must in no way accept the idea that humans evolved from non-human ancestors.
The subjects of creation and origin are matters that cannot be grasped by reason (this verse from the Qur’an is usually cited in this context: “I did not make them witness the creation of the heavens and the earth, nor their own creation; nor would I ever take those who lead [others] astray as My helpers.” (Al-Kahf, 51).

But behind these explicit arguments lies the important question of whether science or rational knowledge can overcome theological arguments and beliefs. Does science possess a power and authority higher than that of sacred texts? For traditionalists, and especially for scripturalists, the answer is decidedly negative; in fact, [the relationship] must be the reverse: sacred texts can and should be used to set aside “theories”—regardless of the evidence that exists in their support.

For Muslim scholars who take rational knowledge and learning seriously and accept that definitive scientific evidence can sometimes exist for matters of fact, and that when such definitive evidence exists there is no choice but to fully accept it and change the interpretation of texts accordingly. Al-Jisr is among this group of Muslim scholars, and the methodology he prescribed can be summarized as follows:

Scientific theories and developments generally fall under the category of the “permissible” (mujāz) in Islam unless they explicitly contradict a religious text.
As established Islamic principles state, clear and explicit religious texts concerning the doctrinal tenets (dogmas) of Islam do not—and cannot—conflict with rational arguments.
Muslims should begin with a literal understanding of the sacred texts, and only if the literal understanding conflicts with a specific and accepted rational argument may one then resort to hermeneutical interpretation (taʾwīl) of the text (using accepted hermeneutical methods); for compelling rational arguments cannot be ignored without calling into question the very method by which faith is attained.
In the absence of a scriptural text (naṣṣ) on a specific issue, one must examine its ultimate purpose and outcome, a task that requires a dual competence and effort, both scientific and religious.
Such a rational, flexible, and dialectical process, coupled with reliance on immutable principles and an adaptable understanding of many issues, is what creates strength, permanence, and relevance in Islam for every era and subject.
Regarding the issue of human evolution, it must be remembered that some Muslim scholars have suggested that Adam’s Paradise was not necessarily an otherworldly paradise, and as long as people accept that God created everything, including human beings, the process itself is not important. Indeed, evolution in the view of Muslims must differ from evolution in the view of materialists.

Furthermore, Al-Jisr adheres to Ibn Rushd’s twin principles: 1) harmony between philosophy/science and revelation; and 2) the necessity of interpreting religious texts (the Qurʾān) when their literal meaning leads to a contradiction with accepted truths about the world. He also emphasizes that certain aspects of nature cannot (in his view) be explained by materialism; for example, the intrinsic properties of certain material laws and phenomena are among these.

The intensity of the debate over evolution has not diminished among Muslim scholars, thinkers, and educated individuals. The rapid growth and advancement of education in the Islamic world over the past half-century, along with the global cultural diffusion brought by the internet and especially satellite television networks, has caused the topic of evolution (and, secondarily, other topics related to the interaction of science and religion) to become central. Indeed, Harun Yahya (and his group) have placed evolution at the core of their campaign against materialism, which, using a combination of Islamic and Western creationist literature, aims to reject theories considered materialistic/atheistic. Now, Muslims increasingly express the view that evolution is a real fact about nature and that the current theory is broadly correct, with many considering it compatible with their religious beliefs. However, the overwhelming majority of Muslims, both the general public and the elites, including the community of religious scholars, still either reject part of the theory (for humans) or deny it altogether. Indeed, in many cases (as we have observed), strict fatwas have been issued against the acceptance of evolution.

To bridge this gap, more education is needed. First, it is important to set aside the myths and misconceptions surrounding evolution; especially the common idea that “humans are descended from monkeys.” Second, it is important to explain to all audiences (school students, university students, educated readers, Muslim scholars) that evolution is not necessarily a materialist view; it is not an ideological project and is, in fact, a thoroughly scientific theory/hypothesis on whose various aspects, including empirical/experimental evidence, much work is underway. More importantly, while the facts of evolution should not be denied, one must likewise continue to refine the theory that explains them; and the philosophical and theological interpretation of evolution can be theological (for theists). Third, it is useful to mention the names and quotations of great Muslim scholars and thinkers who have discussed the idea of evolution in the natural world and/or humans, both in ancient and modern times. Finally, to alleviate the serious concerns of many Muslims regarding the issues described above, theological arguments must be discussed and examined.

PDF file of this article

Islamic Religious Perspectives on Darwinian Evolution

Author: Nidhal Guessoum

Translator: Somayeh Rezaei

Source: 42 Internet Magazine

Discussion7 comments

The.ManDecember 21, 2018

چگونه میتوان با یک الگوی جدید دروغی بزرگ و قدیمی را مقبول نسل امروز کرد؟

راحلهJanuary 25, 2018

اولین مطلب جامع و بی طرفانه ای بود که در مورد اسلام و فرگشت میخواندم. تمام طیفها را با حوصله و متانت معرفی و بررسی کرده و به تکفیر روی نیاورده است. ولی در مورد پیشنهادهاشبرای حل این بحران یک مقدار کم پرداخته بود. تنها سوالی که دارم این است که ایا در حوزه های علمیه ما همچنان کسی هست مانند مرتضی مطهری و مشکینی که باور به فرگشت دادشته باشه اگر چنین روححانیان در قید حیات را به من معرفی کنید تا آثارشان را مطالعه کنم خیلی ممنون دار میشوم. خیلی ممنون بابت این مطلب خوب و سایت خوبتون.

محموJanuary 22, 2018

این بخش مقاله رونوشت شود به داوکینزی‌های محترم: در مقابل، ما می دانیم که داروین ایمانش را به این دلیل از دست نداد که نمی توانست خداوند آفریننده را در پارادایم فرگشت ببینید یا چون نمی توانست میان فرگشت انسانی از نخستیان و آدم آشتی برقرار کند، بلکه ایمانش را از دست داد چون نمی توانست وجود خدایی قادر متعال و رحمان رحیم را بپذیرد که چنان جهانی انباشته از رنج و کشتار انسان ها و حیوانات آفریده است.

مرتضیJanuary 21, 2018

بهرنگ جان ترجمه روان و خوبی بود البته متن ساده‌ای نیست که با قدری آشنایی با موضوع فرگشت و تمرین خواندن و فکر کردن مشکل شما حل میشود. اگر هم زمانی متنی ایرادی داشت با استناد و ارجاع به متن اشاره کن و پیشهادهایی برای بهسازی بده تا هم مترجمان و هم خوانندگان بهره ببرند. از مسئولین صدانت هم میخواهم اگر امکانش اطلاع دهند کل مجله یا دیگر مطالب آن را از کجا میتوان پیاده گذاری کرد. با سپاس

محموJanuary 22, 2018

اینجا میشه دانلودش کرد https://t.me/philosopherin

بهرنگ پیرJanuary 22, 2018

همان طور که شما فرمودید من اطلاع چندانی از این موضوع ندارم. تمرین خواندن هم که فرمودید ندارم. لابد شما درست تر می دانید. اطلاع از چیزهایی که آدم بهشان علاقه دارد و تمرین خواندن، و البته به قول شما تمرین فکر، وظیفه ی هر طالب دانشی است. شک ندارم. ارجاعات به متن را به زودی به شما و سایر دوستان نشان می دهم. حق با شماست. بدون ارجاع دادن به اثر از آن عیب گرفتن، درست نیست. شاید هم این قدر این موارد زیاد بوده که اشاره به چند مورد از آن بی فایده به نظر رسیده. فرمودید ترجمه ی روان و خوبی است. نمی دانم لابد وقتی آدمی مدتی اسب سفید تیزپا سوار شد دیگر به خرسواری رضایت ندهد. آقا به سوی این صفحه نمایش قسم، این ها فحش های کادوپیچ شده نیست. منظورم همین چیزی است که می گویم. ولی خوب متاثر از تذکر شما، چشم! و ممنونم از نصیحتتان، از قلب. *پی نوشت: یک سوال! این "پیاده گذاری" یعنی چه؟ هیچ جای دیگری ندیدم، نشنیدم. اگر لطفا توضیح دهید... البته باز هم بر می گردیم به نصیحت شما، این که بیشتر بخوانم تا با ادبیات جدید آشنا شوم.

بهرنگ پیرJanuary 21, 2018

سلام علیکم! محض رضای خدا، اگر به ساحت مبارکتان بر نمی خورد، لطف کنید قبل از انتشار مطالب، به خصوص ترجمه ها، دستی به سر و روی آنها بکشید. به جان ناقابل خودم، متن همه اش ایراد است. شخصا به این گونه مترجم ها که می رسم دوستانه ازشان خواهش می کنم که آقا دست از سر کچل شده ی این زبان بردارید! این جسارت من را ببخشید ولی واقعا خواندن این متون زجرآور است. کیفیت را فدا نکنید.

مروری کوتاه بر نظرات مخالف

A Muslim must be acquainted with these truths about man and his reality: He must then attain certainty about them and build his faith in God upon their meaning:

Man is the best and noblest of all creatures;
Man – in terms of his [physical] nature – was created from clay and is the product of procreation from Adam, may God’s mercy be upon him;
Man was created from the very beginning in the finest appearance and most perfect form; he did not evolve throughout his history in such a way that he gradually transformed from one species into another.[11]

A Brief Overview of Favorable Views

Theological Issues

Is there a place for God, the Creator, in the evolutionary paradigm? Does “evolution” not entail a materialist worldview? In this vein, what does it mean that God “created” things?
Is there a place for Adam in the scenario of human evolution? Does the Qur’an not state clearly and unequivocally that Adam was a fully-formed human created without parents or ancestors in a metaphysical “paradise”?

In addition to these, other topics are occasionally raised in Islamic discussions about evolution, though they are not of the same level of importance:

If the history of life on Earth shows the extinction of thousands and even millions of species, can this be considered as excess and wastefulness (on the part of the Creator), or can it be understood (coherently) within an Islamic worldview?
Is theodicy (“the problem of evil”) exacerbated or explained by evolution?
Are “species” precisely defined biological units? Are they fixed and therefore significant in an Islamic worldview? Would evolution, in this case, undermine this perception?
If randomness plays a major role in the theory of evolution, can it be reconciled with the divine plan of creation by an omniscient God?

Hominids (human species) standing upright (bipedalism): Surah Al-Infitar, 6-8
Emergence of language: Surah Ar-Rahman, 3-4
Learning to bury the dead: Surah Al-Ma’idah, 31
Sacrifice/offering: Surah Al-Ma’idah, 27
Spiritual growth: Surah Al-Ma’idah, 27
Clothing/covering the body: Surah Al-A’raf, 27
Finally, revelation, human beings becoming God’s vicegerents on earth, and the “descent” of Adam and Eve from “paradise”

The third major issue that Islamic theology faces in its encounter with evolution is theodicy (suffering, killing, evil, and extinction).

Finally, some Muslim theologians have examined the issue of randomness.

The Most Important Themes and Methodologies

The main patterns encountered in the views of Muslims who deny evolution can be summarized as follows:

Evolution is, at best, a theory and, at worst, a dogma; in fact, evolution is a materialist philosophy, not science (as it is considered); it should not be regarded as a proven fact in nature.
Darwin’s theory does not refer to God as the source of the evolutionary process, and every phenomenon in nature (for example, developments) must be viewed as actions of which God is the cause and upon which He exerts influence; not as random or naturalistic events.
This theory is incompatible with the story of Adam’s creation in the Qur’an. Human beings are special; they are God’s vicegerents on earth, and Muslims must in no way accept the idea that humans evolved from non-human ancestors.
The subjects of creation and origin are matters that cannot be grasped by reason (this verse from the Qur’an is usually cited in this context: “I did not make them witness the creation of the heavens and the earth, nor their own creation; nor would I ever take those who lead [others] astray as My helpers.” (Al-Kahf, 51).

Scientific theories and developments generally fall under the category of the “permissible” (mujāz) in Islam unless they explicitly contradict a religious text.
As established Islamic principles state, clear and explicit religious texts concerning the doctrinal tenets (dogmas) of Islam do not—and cannot—conflict with rational arguments.
Muslims should begin with a literal understanding of the sacred texts, and only if the literal understanding conflicts with a specific and accepted rational argument may one then resort to hermeneutical interpretation (taʾwīl) of the text (using accepted hermeneutical methods); for compelling rational arguments cannot be ignored without calling into question the very method by which faith is attained.
In the absence of a scriptural text (naṣṣ) on a specific issue, one must examine its ultimate purpose and outcome, a task that requires a dual competence and effort, both scientific and religious.
Such a rational, flexible, and dialectical process, coupled with reliance on immutable principles and an adaptable understanding of many issues, is what creates strength, permanence, and relevance in Islam for every era and subject.
Regarding the issue of human evolution, it must be remembered that some Muslim scholars have suggested that Adam’s Paradise was not necessarily an otherworldly paradise, and as long as people accept that God created everything, including human beings, the process itself is not important. Indeed, evolution in the view of Muslims must differ from evolution in the view of materialists.

Islamic Religious Perspectives on Darwinian Evolution

Further Reading

PDF file of this article

Islamic Religious Perspectives on Darwinian Evolution

Author: Nidhal Guessoum

Translator: Somayeh Rezaei

Source: 42 Internet Magazine

Discussion7 comments

Islamic Religious Perspectives on Darwinian Evolution

Further Reading

PDF file of this article

Islamic Religious Perspectives on Darwinian Evolution

Author: Nidhal Guessoum

Translator: Somayeh Rezaei

Source: 42 Internet Magazine

Discussion7 comments

Omid Ghaempanah

Related articles

Reflections on Islam and Modern Thought by Seyyed Hossein Nasr

The Nexus of Art and Islamic Spirituality by Seyyed Hossein Nasr

Seyyed Hassan Eslami Ardakani: Motahhari’s Philosophical Encounter with Darwinian Evolution

Religions and the Concept of Ultimate Reality: An Article by Seyyed Hossein Nasr and John Hick

Lecture Series: “Special Topics in Philosophy of Religion, Theism, and Darwinian Evolution” by Seyed Hassan Hosseini