Nidhal Guessoum’s Reconciliation of Islam

and Science
with John Hedley Brooke, “Reconciling Religious Tradition and Modern Science”; Salman
Hameed, “Walking the Tightrope of the Science and Religion Boundary”; Rana Dajani,
“Evolution and Islam’s Quantum Question”; Zainal Abidin Bagir, “Practice and the
Agenda of ‘Islam and Science’ ”; and Nidhal Guessoum, “Issues and Agendas of Islam
and Science”

EVOLUTION AND ISLAM’S QUANTUM QUESTION

by Rana Dajani

Abstract. The apparent contradictory relationship between Islam

and evolution is important because it has been cited as an example
of contradiction between religion and science by both thinkers in the
West and Muslims. Muslim scholars and scientists mainly disagree
with evolution’s legitimacy. Islam’s Quantum Question by Nidhal
Guessoum is a unique narrative providing in one of its first chapters an
overview of evolution from neo-Darwinists to creationists, including
the views of scholars throughout Islamic history. Guessoum then
proceeds to advocate for evolution. Drawing from Nidhal Guessoum’s
work, I highlight the reasons why there is an apparent contradiction
between Islam and science—and, in particular, Islam and evolution—
which include lack of freedom of thought and misinterpretation of the
Qur’an. In doing so, I suggest setting the stage for a new Einsteinian
theory of evolution, which involves the dimension of time and human
cognition.

Keywords: evolution; freedom of thought; Nidhal Guessoum;

history; human cognition; Islam; misinterpretation; science; time

A number of questions arise while reading Islam’s Quantum Question. How

is it different from other books of a similar genre that try to explore
the intersection of science and religion? What does it offer contemporary
religious scholars and scientists, who may not always be in dialogue? To
begin, Islam’s Quantum Question is unique in that it addresses the issue of
science from an Islamic perspective, one that isn’t prevalent in Western, let
alone English, scientific discourse. There are numerous books in English
that address controversial issues in modern science, but all do so from a
Western point of view; very few address controversial issues in modern

Rana Dajani is Assistant Professor in the Department of Biology and Biotechnology,

Hashemite University, P.O. Box 150459, Zarqa 13115 Jordan; e-mail: [email protected].

[Zygon, vol. 47, no. 2 (June 2012)]


C 2012 by the Joint Publication Board of Zygon ISSN 0591-2385 www.zygonjournal.org

343
344 Zygon

science in the context of Islam. In addressing these issues, the author calls
upon not the background of a religious scholar or historian, but as a
Muslim scientist. As such, the book is rare in that it focuses not on the
history, philosophy, and practice of science in Islam, but on contemporary
intersections of Islam and science. When the author does review the other
religious positions on science, he does so in a fair, unbiased manner.
Muslim scientists are reluctant to tackle controversial issues in science
and leave it to the religious scholars to deal with public opinion. This
results in a misguided understanding of science. Guessoum is one of the
rare Muslim scientists who has taken the bull by the horns and addressed
these issues without fear.
His succinct book calls upon experience in ways that are otherwise only
presented in online forums. As a result, its writing is accessible, and I would
recommend the book to Muslims interested in science and philosophy
and to non-Muslims interested in Islam and philosophy. Moreover, in
order for it to reach a wider audience in the Arab world, I recommend
its translation into Arabic, as well as using it as a reference in courses
interested in the intersection of science and Islam. In his presentation,
Guessoum addresses the reader’s intellect and leaves it to him or her to
draw conclusions concerning science and religion.

OVERVIEW
The book is divided into three parts. The first part addresses the
fundamentals of Islam as a religion and philosophy. It goes into detail
about Allah/God, the Qur’an, and their relationship with science. The
book gives a brief introduction to the philosophy of science, comparing,
and contrasting scholars’ views from different eras and religions. The author
proceeds to focus specifically on the Qur’an’s role in science. He argues
for the idea that there is no opposition between Qur’an and science. He
writes:
While the Qur’an cannot be turned into an encyclopedia of any sort, least of all
of science, one must keep it in mind the fact that if the Qur’an is to be taken
seriously and respectfully, one must uphold the Rushdian (Averroes’s) principle
of no-possible-conflict (between the word of God and the work of God) and
his hermeneutical prescription. In practice this principle can be turned into a
no-objection or no-opposition approach, whereby one can convince the Muslim
public of a given idea (say the theory of biological evolution), not by proving that
it can be found in the Qur’an but rather by showing that at least one intelligent
reading and interpretation of various passages of the Holy book is fully consistent
with that theory. (174–75).
The author then talks about aspects of the science enterprise, arguing
that adopting a theistic approach toward science does not demolish
science—a very important point for Muslims, who assume science to be
purely materialistic, and for non-Muslims, who believe that a theistic
 Rana Dajani 345

approach demolishes science. The author then presents the various

opinions of Muslim scholars toward science and religion both historically
and contemporaneously. Such a presentation encourages freedom of
thinking, which is much needed in our part of the world. Arabic speaking
scholars/philosophers are rare, especially in modern times. The second part
addresses various controversial issues in science from an Islamic perspective.
These issues include cosmology, design, the anthropic principle, and
evolution. The third part is a perspective on the future of Islam and
science. The author also briefly discusses miracles, prayers, and divine
action in terms of how to explain them and what they are from a scientific
point of view, presenting various interpretations from various religions.
I propose that miracles are observations based on natural phenomenon
that don’t have an explanation within the context of the science we know
today but that may be explained later with the advancement of science.
I like to cite the example of certain diseases that were considered to be
caused by bad spirits in history, and later on, were proven to be bacteria
or viruses. Another example is psychiatric diseases such as schizophrenia,
which is still considered to be evidence of genuine mystical experience in
some parts of the world, although science has shown that it is an imbalance
of neurotransmitters in the brain. Humans tend to explain phenomenon
they do not understand in metaphysical terms.
The author ends with the most important take-home message, which
is the importance of educating Muslims in the subjects of philosophy of
science and history. No such courses are taught at schools or universities
in the Arab world. He writes:
It is very sad and quite astounding that practically no philosophy of science is
taught in schools and universities in the Arab-Muslim world, except perhaps in
departments (e.g., philosophy) which cannot ignore such a topic. But the fact
remains that none of the names and schools of thought that I have presented and
engaged . . . are known to any Arab-Muslim students. (341).

Guessoum states that this is why there is so much ignorance. He writes:

This is an extremely serious situation, for this in my view is the essential reason
for the existence of a very skewed understanding of the relation between science
and religion generally and Islam in particular, among most Muslims. This is also
the reason why thousands of Muslims scientists are in fact technicians who are
competent in some narrow area but have no knowledge or understanding of the
bigger picture; this is also why they very often adopt traditional, or even irrational
views on most issues, from Qur’anic healing to Ijaz. . . . I strongly believe that the
main remedy to many of the ills that plague the Arab-Muslim world in the realm
of science is the introduction of serious courses on the philosophy of science.
(341–42).

He also explicitly describes how Muslim views on the history of science

in Islam are extremist on either side as follows:
346 Zygon

I wanted to highlight . . . a serious problem we Muslims tend to have in dealing with

our history, from its scientific components to its theological and political elements.
On this issue writers . . . tend to be extremists who either describe the classical era
as an extraordinary golden age of major discoveries, important innovations, and
methodological explorations or dismiss the whole historical narrative we find in
our books as a large myth constructed to make Muslims feel good about their
heritage and thus believe that their culture and religion have indeed been—and
thus can still be—capable of producing a great civilization, complete with science
and technology. (343).
Adopting a factual reality of what the Islamic civilization was in its bad
and good releases the Muslims from dreams and disillusions of perfection
to a reality that we can create our world, our future. We may err, but that
is expected. We should not stop working and thinking for fear of making
mistakes. Muslim scholars, unfortunately, have in recent history adopted
an approach that is the opposite. They believe sincerely that preventing
freedom of thinking is better for the layman—a philosophy that is very far
from the teachings of Islam, which calls for observation and thinking to
reach the truth. Prophet Mohammad said, “When a judge gives judgment
and strives to know a ruling (ijtahada) and is correct, he has two rewards.
If he gives judgment and strives to know a ruling, but is wrong, he has one
reward” (Bukhari (b00), 9.133: 7352 (a2)).
One must mention in this context the third source of jurisprudence
after the Quran and hadith; ijtehad, where every adequately qualified jurist
had the right to exercise original thinking, mainly ra’y (personal judgment)
and qiyas (analogical reasoning). Ijtehad has not been used for a long time
and must now be encouraged specifically in the light of the changes in the
political arena in various Arab countries.
Also in this context I would like to call for the formation of committees
to deal with controversial issues in science and Islam. These committees
should include scientists, theologians, Arabic language experts, and all
stakeholders in the matter to remove the monopoly of religion on these
scientific matters. Guessoum says in his book:
The next important issue is the need to engage the Islamic scholars in a serious
dialogue and convince them that scientists have much to say on topics that
have for too long remained the monopoly of the religious scholars and their
discourse. While there is no doubt in people’s minds that human knowledge
evolves and grows, it is often understood that religions, especially Islam, are
absolute, immutable, and transcendent principles, which are set in rigid frames of
reference. But we know today that religions—and Islam is no exception—cannot
afford to adopt a stationary attitude, lest they find themselves clashing with and
overrun by modern knowledge, and religious principles appear more and more
quaint and obsolete. (343–44).
We have indeed started something of that sort in Jordan and presented
our findings at the “Belief in Dialogue” conference in June 2011 in
Sharjah UAE. Recent advances in biomedical science and technology have
resulted in a revolution in medicine—namely, stem cell–based therapy.
 Rana Dajani 347

The sources of human stem cells, together with advances in potential

therapeutic and clinical applications, result in major ethical issues and
challenges for regulatory bodies. The first international guidelines on
human embryonic stem cell research were released in 2008, as reported by
Hyun and colleagues. People in Muslim countries consider legislation and
the principles of bioethics to be based on sacred sources and jurisprudence.
The objective of science is to explore the secrets and laws of nature, which
were set by God. Islam has always encouraged people to contemplate, and
explore, new horizons. Stem cell research is one of those new horizons, and
Islam does not object to this exploration. We have established a committee
that includes scientists, physicians, Islamic scholars, and other stakeholders.
This committee has investigated and debated views about stem cell research
that include sourcing (procurement and derivation), manipulation and
transplantation, and related social and ethical issues. All discussions so far
have indicated that stem cell research is permissible in Islam as long as it is
carried out with the purpose of improving human health. This matter still,
however, needs to be reexamined over and over again as science advances.

ISLAM AND EVOLUTION

As a molecular biologist, I will focus on the issue of Islam and evolution
(human and nonhuman). Evolution is a fact that cannot be denied. We see
manifestations of it in the design of drugs that target the influenza virus
and in antibiotic resistance of bacteria and in forced evolution exhibited in
artificial breeding of various plants and animals.
In the Muslim world, when evolution is discussed, it is partnered
with Darwinism and, in most cases, automatically considered heresy. The
scientific theory is therefore denied, and all evidence to prove its falsehood
is undertaken with a zealous approach. And anyone who says otherwise is
looked upon with suspicion and suspected to be on the slippery slope to
hell, as one Muslim scientist put it.
Guessoum presents this reaction to evolution with various examples in
his chapter. The fact that a sound scientific theory is so vehemently denied
by Muslim scientists, let alone the layperson, on the basis of belief not logic
is scary because it makes one wonder what else is being denied in the name
of religion and played upon by people who want to control others through
ignorance and emotion. This position alienates the world of Islam from
thinkers and deprives the individual Muslim of the full use of his mind. In
addition, it gives a terrible representation of Islam to non-Muslims, leading
them to believe that Islam is a religion that denies freedom of thinking
when that is the exact opposite of the truth. Islam calls for thinking,
contemplating, and using logic to reach the truth: “Behold! In the creation
of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day, there are
indeed Signs for men of understanding” (Qur’an 3:190). In Islam, there
348 Zygon

is no limit to your questioning unless you question the existence of a God

and that has nothing to do with evolution.
Even though evolution as a theory has different facets, and there are
Darwinians and non-Darwinians, as Guessoum presents in his book, the
fundamental issue is that the layperson denies and rejects the whole theory
on the premise that it challenges the concept of a creator without really
understanding what evolution is. This issue is very important and becomes
more so when one tries to analyze why Muslims have taken this position
toward evolution. Guessoum does go into analyzing why, although he does
not list the reasons. He presents examples of reactions of various Muslim
scientists and scholars toward evolution from the time Darwin published
his theory up until today.
From my perspective, there are many reasons for the position that
Muslims have taken against evolution:
(1) Ignorance: In the past three centuries education has waned in
the Muslim world primarily as a result of Western colonialism,
cultural imperialism, the corruption of the Ottoman Empire in
the late nineteenth century, and a lack of focus on education in
the Arab-Muslim world.
(2) Lack of scholars: Another effect of colonialism and the resultant
lack of political freedom was the loss of autonomy for the general
public. The lack of freedom of thought and opinion resulted in
less freedom in terms of thinking about and pursuing, scientific
projects. From another perspective, the turning away from Islam
as it was originally practiced reduced the practice of education as
a form of enlightenment, which is primary in Islam. Inevitably,
science suffered because of this.
Indeed, in Islam evolutionary, theory is not a problem. As Guessoum
has stated, a number of scholars in early Islamic civilization had proposed
variations of the theory of evolution and were not considered a threat to
religion. The problem was created when Islamic scholars out of ignorance
adopted the stance of certain Christian churches against evolution, which
was necessarily a response to the particular atheistic understanding of
evolution common in Europe and the United States. For some people in
the West, if you believe in evolution, you are an atheist, and if you don’t,
you are a believer. That is not the case in Islam. I believe the contradiction
arose with the church and its claims of the age of the Earth and the creation
theory.
(3) Language: Darwin was not translated into Arabic until 1964.
Usage of different definitions confused people. Creationism in
Islam is seen in a different context than it is in the West. For
 Rana Dajani 349

Muslims, “Creationism” means that there is a creator who is

responsible for making the universe and all that is in it. That
does not deny evolution and the presence of natural selection.
The only clash would be with atheists who believe that there
is no divine being that started it all. But this issue is not the
point of discussion in the argument. The whole argument is
about whether all creatures were created instantaneously from
a human perspective or through a long process controlled by laws.
Guessoum alluded to this.
(4) Misinterpretation of the religious texts: We are in need of Arabic-
language experts to revisit interpretation of religious texts in the
light of advances in science because of the multilayered meaning
that Guessoum alluded to in his book. An interesting example is
the interpretation of the word “Ahsan .”
The verses that from my perspective support evolution use the word
“Ahsan ”:

(i) Al-Sajdeh verse 7: “He Who has made everything which He has
created (Ahsan) most good: He began the creation of man with
(nothing more than) clay” (Quran 32:7)
(ii) Al-Teen verse 4: “We have indeed created man in the (Ahsan) best of
moulds” (Quran 95:4)

In these two verses, Allah states that he created all creatures and man in
the (Ahsan ) way. He uses the word Ahsan, meaning “most fit,” not the
word (Afdal ), which means “the best.” Although, as can be seen from
the translation, the word (Ahsan ) has been translated as “most good”
in the first verse and as “the best” in the second verse. Both translations
hold a totally different meaning in this context. In the Sajdeh verse, Allah
states that he created all organisms to be the best fit and even man was
created from mud, which is the origin of all creatures. In the verse in Al
teen, Allah states that man was created to be fit for his environment. To
me, this supports evolution and is an example of misinterpretation of the
meaning of words in religious texts for lack of the scientific knowledge on
the issue by the interpreters.
(5) Philosophy is not taught in the Arab Muslim world as a subject
in schools or universities, as Guessoum observed in his book: One
must not be confused with the new trend in the West, which
proposes that the reason the Muslim world is not developed is
because Islam hinders scientific progress. This faulty proposition
is the result of a misunderstanding of Islam on the part of the
West. The advancements that occurred during the Golden Age of
350 Zygon

Islamic civilization are clear indictors of how such a proposition

is false. As such, Islam in itself does not hinder scientific progress,
whereas the misuse of Islam, as a result of ignorance, made way
for Muslims to hinder scientific progress. Ultimately, such misuse
is a product of ignorance of religion.

HOW IS THIS BOOK’S PRESENTATION OF EVOLUTION

SPECIFICALLY DIFFERENT?
Guessoum presents the theory of evolution and then proceeds to list the evi-
dence that supports it from the point of view of fossil evidence, comparative
anatomy, and the universality of biochemical organization as well as genetic
evidence. His presentation of such evidence is simple and gives sufficient
context in case the reader is unfamiliar with the concept, ultimately making
way for a lucid argument for how evolution is logically valid, following
which he discusses microevolution and Darwinian evolution.
The book is unprecedented in that it dedicates a chapter to explaining
the scientific logic of evolution, from a Muslim perspective—a perspective
that has usually dedicated many more chapters to disproving or castigating
evolution. The author also presents the different schools of evolutionary
theory from neo-Darwinism to non-Darwinism, as well as the arguments
of various Muslim scholars against evolution. In addition, he presents
historical evidence that suggests a theory similar to evolution was proposed
as an explanation for the variety of species in the history of Islamic
civilization. This suggestion is new, as its historical narration has not been
mentioned before in modern scientific or religious discourse, whether in the
West or in Islamic countries. In this context, I would like to mention Iyad
A. Hijazi and Sylvia J. Nemmers, who have developed new interpretations
of Qur’anic verses in support of human evolution, going as far as to
suggest that the Qur’an itself supports the proposition the humans are still
evolving.
I might also add that we may find an evolutionary process in terms of
the brain’s comprehension of the concept of evolution. You cannot, for
example, spring upon a child the concept of calculus without first taking
the child step by step through the fundamentals of arithmetic. Similarly,
Guessoum and Jean Staune talk about how Newton’s theories could explain
some but not all natural phenomena until Einstein came along, who
suggested a more comprehensive approach. Similarly, in the case of Darwin,
the theory of evolution provides an explanation for most phenomena, but
there are some phenomena that don’t exactly fit the theory of evolution.
These anomalies require a novel, progressive scientific development, not
unlike Einstein’s intervention in physics. The various theories of evolution
seek to explain various facets of the process of evolution, but there is not
yet one that fully grasps or explains the whole truth. This is not the fault
 Rana Dajani 351

of human cognition. Human cognition needs to evolve so to speak to be

able to grasp the concepts of evolution as they develop.
The author thus encourages the offering of new approaches, new
interpretations, an Einstein intervention in the theory of evolution.
In doing so, he points to Staune’s (2007) chapter, “Seeking Biology’s
Einstein—Urgent!” in his book Does Our Existence Have a Meaning? A
Scientific and Philosophical Investigation.
In this context, I would like to respond to Guessoum’s book with
a new way of looking at evolution. The issue of time, I argue, is the
most prominent obstacle for the acceptance of evolution from religious
perspectives. This is so because of an ostensible inability to reconcile two
things: the belief that God is the creator as stated in the religious text—
such as: “Verily, when He intends a thing, His Command is, ‘be,’ and it
is!” Qur’an (36:82)—and that Darwinian evolution postulates that there
is one origin for all living creatures and that their evolution took millions
of years. One must note here that Darwin never discussed or questioned
the origin of life. He only discussed how different species evolved from
one origin. Darwin stated in the last paragraph of the Origin of the
Species:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally
breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has
gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning
endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.

This also speaks to a misunderstanding in the Muslim context. Muslims

are led to believe that Darwin denied the presence of a God because
he attributed the development of species to natural selection. Guessoum
alludes to this, relating how Asa Gray, a Harvard professor teaching in
1857, saw in Darwin’s theory “a beautiful description of how God brought
about creatures in the world” (295). In this context, one must also mention
that the nonscientist Muslims in the Arab world, for the most part, are
not avid readers. They hear the proclamations of a religious scholar and
take it without verification. Nearly all those who deny evolution and claim
that Darwin is a heretic have never read his book, as reported in Science by
Hamid (2008).
Science states that the creation of the universe took billions of years.
Muslim scholars do not claim that such a fact contradicts the Qur’an.
However, when science shows that human life and all creatures took
millions of year to evolve, Muslim scholars object. They misinterpret the
term khalaq—meaning “creation”—in the Qur’an to mean instantaneous
creation. My interpretation is that time does not exist for God: the term
khalaq has no temporal context. Therefore, if we believe that the universe
took time to evolve, why don’t we believe that life took time to evolve? God
exists outside of dimensions. He is not limited by them. In this context,
352 Zygon

let us focus specifically on the dimension of time. We exist in a world

that is limited by time. We cannot reverse time, because we are limited by
our comprehension as a direct result of our biology. We can only think in
terms of time. We cannot comprehend that there is no yesterday, today,
and tomorrow for God, while for God it is all one.
We are limited in our biology and thinking. We cannot, for example,
comprehend the presence of a fifth dimension because of the limitation in
our biology. Carl Sagan (1985), in his book Cosmos, gave a telling example
for the comprehension of a fifth dimension. Sagan asks us to imagine being
an ant: ants can only comprehend two dimensions. They crawl around, and
if they encounter a vertical wall, they just keep crawling and fall off because
of gravity. However, they keep trying because they do not realize they are
going into another dimension. Sagan goes on asking us to imagine that ants
live in a town of circles. The ant goes into its home, which is a flat circle; no
one else is in the ant’s house. Now imagine a sphere (a three-dimensional
object) bouncing into the ant’s circle. What does the ant see? It suddenly
sees a circle appearing in its home and growing at an alarming rate and then
decreasing in size and finally disappearing. To the ant, such an occurrence
seems impossible! For the ant, the natural rules it follows cannot explain it.
As humans, we are also limited by our biology and thus cannot reconcile
the religious beliefs with reality. As science advances, our comprehension
increases, and so our interpretation of the texts must change. However,
we must always remind ourselves that we are limited by our biology, just
like ants. This leads to the conclusion that any phenomenon we observe
has a scientific explanation, including miracles. We simply may not have
uncovered the science or our biology limits our ability to comprehend.

CONCLUSION
Finally, as Mehdi Golshani (2003) said, “The belief in an evolutionary
mechanism for the emergence of species does not negate the idea of Divine
creation” (5). As Guessoum concludes:
Finally, evolution is highly important in the science-religion/Islam debates, for it
is there that one sees the clear difference between those who adopt a simplistic,
literalistic reading of the scriptures (in all areas of life and thought) and those who
accept the application of hermeneutics and the principle of multiple, multilayered
reading of the Texts. (324)
I instruct my students when I teach evolution that they don’t have to
agree with what I say but to at least use their brain and intelligence to
examine the data, to analyze, and whatever they come up with is fine for
themselves. I encourage them to trust their intuition and not to accept
anything that does not make sense, even though it may seem to contradict
their beliefs. I tell them not to be scared, for, if they are sincere in seeking
 Rana Dajani 353

the truth, they will find it. It will either reemphasize what they already
know, or open new doors for exploration.
Islam is a spiritual guide to life. It teaches us how to live in harmony
with ourselves, fellow humans, and the world. Islam asks us to use our
intelligence to explore the world around us. Islam calls for using scientific
methodology and logic in our approach to understanding the world. The
Qur’an contains verses that describe worldly phenomenon. These verses
are presented as evidence of the elegance and simplicity of creation. The
Qur’an is not a book of scientific facts. If there happens to be an apparent
contradiction between a verse in the Qur’an and a scientific fact, one is
advised to either revise one’s scientific conclusion (which is never absolute)
or to revise the interpretation of the Qur’anic verse. It is humans who
interpret verses, and we are limited by the scientific knowledge of our era.
I believe, therefore, that our encounter with an ostensible conflict between
Islam and science is an opportunity for harmony.

REFERENCES
Golshani, Medhi. 2003. “Does Science Offer Evidence of a Transcendent Reality and Purpose?”
Science and Islam 1:45–58.
Hameed, Salman. 2008. “Bracing for Islamic Creationism” Science 322:395–419.
Hijazi, Iyad A., and Sylvia J. Nemmers. http://www.truevolution.net/
Hyun, Insoo, et al. 2008. Stem Cell Research 3, 607.
Sagan, Carl. 1985. Cosmos. New York: Ballantine Books, Random House Publishing Group.
Staune, Jean. 2007. Does Our Existence Have a Meaning? A Scientific and Philosophical
Investigation. Paris: Presses de la Renaissance.