Between A Backbone & Ribs - Asadullah Ali Al-Andalusi
Between aBackbone & RibsHow Science Obscures the Beauty of the Qur’anmJANUARY 29/2020Asadullah Ali al-Andalusi1
Abstract: This paper examines contemporary arguments attempting to justify ordiscredit the scientific credibility of the Qur’an. Special consideration is given to Surah86:5-7, which discusses the genesis of mankind through reproductive fluids emittedfrom “between the backbone and the ribs”. Many contemporary Muslim apologistsreference these verses as evidence of the Qur’an’s miraculous scientific nature, whilemany anti-Islam polemicists believe it proof of its scientific inaccuracy. This paperargues both these approaches erroneous as neither conform to the scope of theQur’an’s intended message nor to the classical scholarly tradition of Quranic exegesis.Based on intertextual and extratextual evidence it is argued that the phrase “betweenthe backbone and the ribs” should be interpreted as a euphemism for sexual relationsbetween parents and as an allusion to humanity’s first parents, Adam and Eve.IntroductionThe first time I read the Qur’an was sometime back in 2008 when I was still completingmy undergraduate degree in philosophy. At the time I was attending a private CatholicUniversity run by a local Benedictine monastery. It was a highly academic institution,yet tranquil and devout – minus the occasional tipsy monk who would wander on tothe school grounds. I recall him greeting the students with red cheeks and hearty laughswhile he discussed the finer details of Christian theology in our local student cafeteria.I never partook in these disoriented conversations but noticed them from afar. Ifanything, the contradiction of virtue and drunkenness put a smile on my face. I wouldcompare his state of being to my thoughts on religion at the time – when I started tolose my faith in Christianity. And although my degree wasn’t necessarily the reason formy apostasy, it was beneficial in my journey to Islam. My degree was all about criticalthinking and rationally assessing the thoughts of man. It certainly assisted me inreconciling many doubts I had about the conception of a triune god, the divinity ofJesus, and the authority of the Church. But it was the Qur’an which eventually broughtmy doubts to rest through the clarity and beauty of its message.“Was it the Qur’an mentioning the Big Bang? Was it when the Qur’an mentionedembryology? Was it when it mentioned the boundary between fresh and saltwater?”2
are inquiries I often receive from Muslims regarding my reversion to Islam. For the overa decade now, my answer has remained the same. I give them a puzzled look and afrank response: “No, nothing of the sort.” The subsequent reaction to my comment isusually a mix between stunned confusion and an incredulous smile; a foreshadowingof an inevitable lecture on the Qur’an’s “scientific miracles” to relieve me of myignorance.Now, to be fair, I never saw these impromptu orations as ill-intentioned – quite thecontrary – but they always brought to mind an unfortunate reality that many Muslimsbelieve that science is the measure of the Qur’an’s divine nature, and that nothing elseabout the Qur’an really matters. And in those moments, I feel like my religion has beencheapened; completely undermined by superficial appeals to modern sensibilities.You see, it never occurred to me that the Qur’an was miraculous because it revealedscientific truths. In fact, it never occurred to me that there was science therein to beginwith. I have literally never read the Qur’an in this fashion. From the very first momentI opened a translation of the Qur’an and began reading Surah Al-Fatihah till the veryend of Sura An-Nas, not one ayah, not one word, not one iota of the Revelationsscreamed out “science!” Rather, every utterance appeared to be referencing commonsense observations, the life of the Prophet ( )ﷺ and his companions, or stories fromprevious scriptures. And to this day – as I now read it in Arabic – it still appears to mein this manner, albeit far more eloquently than before.What strikes me as miraculous is the Qur’an’s coherency, its prose, and its power toinfluence, a power so remarkably other-worldly that it molded a seemingly insignificantgroup of desert dwelling merchants and farmers to fashion the most cosmopolitancivilization overnight, to overcome two of the most powerful empires of antiquity inonly a few decades, and to expand a following beyond the boundaries of an arid landto the farthest points on earth; from the lushest jungles, to the greenest pastures, atopthe highest mountains, through the tongues of every major known language,indiscriminate of every shade of skin, young and old, rich or poor.3
This is why I grimace when I read tabloid apologetics attempting to justify the Qur’anthrough contemporary science. For me, these sort of arguments obscure the beauty ofthe Revelation and rob it of its timeless message, reducing it to a set of ‘facts’understandable only by those of us privileged to live in the 21st century. But forsomething to be timeless, it needs to be understood by everyone, including thegenerations preceding us. However, proponents of these arguments will claim that theQur’an’s meanings are so vast that it can reveal itself differently to different people atdifferent times in various ways. Although I agree with this notion to a degree, I believemany Muslims today have extended this principle beyond its intended scope,suggesting not only that the Prophet ( )ﷺ and his companions were oblivious to theseinterpretations – thereby indirectly implying them to be more ignorant than ourselves– but that the Qur’an’s message is ultimately relative and unfixed. To me, such claimsmake the Qur’an appear capricious and a slave to the subjective lens of its readers,rather than allowing the Revelation to speak for itself.Unsurprisingly, contemporary scholars on Qur’anic exegesis (both secular and religious)affirm my sentiments and cite historical precedent as evidence. For example, the lateAndrew Rippin (d. 2016) contrast current exegetical trends with the classical scholarlytradition:As an aside, it may be noted that especially some modern Qur’an interpretershave taken advantage of this flexibility of Arabic in their desire to derivemodern science from the text of the Qur’an. This emphasizes a fundamentalpoint that an exercise that considers the issue of historical context must beclear about its goals. Those who argue for science in the Qur’an generally takethe position that while the historical context of the Qur’an is relevant, it doesnot dictate that the text was fully understandable in the time of Muhammad.Such interpreters more commonly take the approach of asserting that thereare multiple meanings to the text and that a more ‘true’ meaning – a divinelyintended message – has become apparent only in today’s context. For mostclassical Muslim commentators, however, historical context is linked tocontemporary intelligibility: that is, the life and milieu of Muhammad sets thecontext, and the text as intelligible to Muhammad himself (even if not all ofhis compatriots, let alone those who came later, fully understood the finer4
points of the text). So, it is a fundamental axiom of classical interpretationthat Muhammad understood the text (to the extent that God allowed himaccess to its meaning) and that it ‘made sense’ within his historical context;that is, of course, a legal point in essence, embedded in the concept of Sunna,Muhammad’s practice, which was in full accord with the Qur’an and God’swishes – Muhammad as the living Qur’an – but it also applies at thegrammatical and textual level.1As such, I find it surprising that others are surprised by my lack of enthusiasm for“scientific miracles” in the Qur’an. Not only is it an approach that has only been recentlypopularized since the 19th century (a topic that will not be discussed in detail), it lacksany real justification – such a reading is wholly unnatural to the intentions and scope ofthe Quranic message per intertextual and extratextual evidence. In step with thisunderstanding, any notion of “scientific errors” should automatically be disregarded aswell given that if the intention behind a text were to exclude any expression of scientificinformation it would be impossible to regard said text as “scientifically inaccurate”. Butone would need to establish that intention first. To meet this challenge, I’ve have chosento emphasize a particularly controversial set of verses which have been the focal pointof both pro-Islam and anti-Islam polemics in the 21st century, Surah at-Tariq, verses 5-7.“From Between the Backbone and the Ribs”Surah at-Tariq – roughly translated as ‘The Chapter of the Piercing Star’ or ‘Night Comer’(lit. ‘Knocker’) – is the 86th chapter of the Qur’an revealed during the first half of the startof the Islamic movement. The chapter is quite short, only consisting of 17 short verses.However, this chapter has become an exegetical battle ground in the 21st centurybetween Muslims seeking to validate the divine nature of the Qur’an and those whowish to invalidate it. The focal point of this conflict can be found in verses 5-7:1Andrew Rippin (2013) “The Construction of the Arabian Historical Context,” in Aims, Methods and Contexts of Qur’anicExegesis (2nd/8th – 9th/15th C.), Ed. Karen Bauer, p. 180.5
Let man see what he was created from. He was created from gushing liquidissuing from between the backbone and the ribs. (Q. 86:5-7)ُ ْ َْThese passages request man to observe [ ]فل َينظر how he was created– to see that he wasَْ ْ ] َي ْخ ُر ُج ِم ْن َب the backbonecreated from an ejected liquid [ ] َماء د ِافق coming from between [ ي ُّ ]. Contemporary Muslim interpretations are generallyَ َّ الص ْلب َو and the ribs [ الت ِائ ِب ِunanimous that these verses be taken literally as an anatomical description of the regionwhere reproductive fluids are produced and emitted. For example, conservative scholarslike salafi shaykh Muhammad al-Munajid, who runs the website Islam Q&A, adopts thefollowing view:So how come the Qur’an describes the emission of gushing water as comingfrom between the back and the ribs? The answer is that this is one of thescientific miracles of this great Book. Modern medicine has discovered thatthis place -- between the backbone and the ribs -- is the place where the cellsthat will form the testes first grow, and at a later stage of embryonicdevelopment they descend to the scrotum below the abdomen.2This view seems to be derived from Dr. Zakir Naik, perhaps the most famous Islamicproselytizer of the 21st century. Over the course of his ministry Dr. Naik has expressedthe exact same view in several of his lectures and published works.3 Even more liberalminded scholars seem to have adopted his perspective (albeit with minor variances). Forexample, shaykh Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri, founder of Minhaj ul-Qur’an International.In his Creation of Man: A Review of the Qur’an and Modern Embryology, ul-Qadri one-and-the-ribs-at-taariq-866-73See http://islamguiden.com/arkiv/quran science.pdf6
Anatomical and physiological studies reveal to us that semen is a prerequisitefor conception. A male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a femalegamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. Moreover, theseminal passages do indeed lie between the sacrum referred to as sulb in theQurā’nic verse and the symphysis pubis referred to as tarā’ib.4Even modern translators and exegetes of the Qur’an have taken this approach. Forexample, the British born Abdullah Yusuf Ali (d. 1953), who fashioned the most popularEnglish translation in the 20th century, stated the following in his footnotes on theseverses:A man's seed is the quintessence of his body. It proceeds from his loins, i.e.,from his back between the hip-bones and his ribs. His back-bone is the sourceand symbol of his strength and personality. In the spinal cord and in the brainis the directive energy of the central nervous system, and this directs allaction, organic and psychic. The spinal cord is continuous with the MedullaOblongata in the brain.5Muhammad Asad, an Austro-Hungarian convert to Islam who developed a morecontemporary English translation of the Qur’an, likewise interpreted 86:5-7 in ananatomical fashion, although he renders the phrase “between the backbone and theُّ ] contrary to the majority of his peers. His translation – “betweenَ َّ الص ْلب َو ribs” [ الت ِائ ِب ِthe loins [of the man] and the pelvic arc [of the woman]” – is largely an invention of es-books/creation-man/creation-man ish/86/YAT#ayanote-60717
َ َّ isown preferences. In his footnotes he openly admits that his translation of الت ِائ ِب anomalous in Quranic lexicography:The plural noun tara'ib, rendered by me as "pelvic arch", has also the meaningof "ribs" or "arch of bones"; according to most of the authorities who havespecialized in the etymology of rare Quranic expressions this term relatesspecifically to female anatomy (Taj al-'Arus).6But these anatomical interpretations aren’t solely held by those who believe in Islam,but also by those who oppose the religion. The disagreement is found in the scientificaccuracy of these passages. Contrary to the aforementioned scholars and translators,anti-Islam polemicists believe these verses were contrived by someone still under theinfluence of antiquated Greek medicine. Sam Shamoun, a dedicated anti-Islam blogger,is one of the most prolific in spreading this opposing view to the masses. His article “TheQur’an on Semen Production” appears to be one of the main source texts for many antiIslam polemicists on the Internet. Therein he states the following:In light of the preceding considerations, we find that the interpretation of S.86:5-7 proposed by [Muslim apologists] is more of a private interpretationthat seeks to make science the standard by which the Quran is understoodand judged. In so doing, these individuals must ignore the authenticinterpretation of their Prophet and his companions in order to avoid the grossscientific errors contained within both the Quran and Hadith.76Muhammad Asad (2003) “Surah 86: That Which Comes in the Night,” The Message of the Qur’an, p. 1079, fn. emenproduction.htm8
The anti-Islam blog WikiIslam, owned by the organization Ex-Muslims of North America,utilizes many of Shamoun’s arguments, but adds that the Qur’an’s error rests inborrowing from the views of the ancient Greek philosopher, Hippocrates (d. 375 BCE):Qur'an 86:7 says that sperm originates from the backbones and the ribs, atheory similar to another erroneous theory proposed by Hippocrates in 5thcentury BC (1000 years before Islam). Hippocrates taught that semen comesfrom all the fluid in the body, diffusing from the brain into the spinal marrow,before passing through the kidneys and via the testicles into the penis.8The above examples represent the mainstream opinions shared between popular Islamapologists and anti-Islam polemics in the 21st century. In summary, an anatomicalinterpretation is widely considered an authentic interpretation of Q. 86:5-7. But is thisexegesis a valid one? Do these modern interpretations align with the classical readingsof the text and the “Quranic tone” of communication, or are they based purely onspeculation? To answer these questions, let us begin with the extratextual evidence athand: the opinions by classical scholars of Quranic exegesis or tafsir.Formative and Classical OpinionsThe Qur’an was revealed gradually over a period of 23 years through the ProphetMuhammad ( )ﷺ in spoken format (‘Qur’an’ lit. trans. ‘Recitation’). During this time, theProphet ( )ﷺ and his followers understood and implemented the message through theirwords and actions, both of which were largely recorded in future biographies (sirah) andmemorized narrations (hadith). Not surprisingly, some of these records discuss the8https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Quran and Semen Production9
meaning of certain verses in the Qur’an. However, for those first few decades during theProphet’s ( )ﷺ ministry and after his death, there was no formalized attempt tocatalogue these records or produce a methodology of authentication. Only roughly aftera century did the formative period of a Quranic exegetical science begin.9 Thisdevelopment was primarily in response to a need that suddenly manifested itself duringthe early Islamic conquests – to teach the newly converted non-Arab population how tounderstand the Qur’an’s lexicon.10 Those initially tasked with this endeavor were fromamong the companions of the Prophet ( )ﷺ himself and considered the mostknowledgeable among their peers. They became the first professional exegetes(mufassirun).The First ExpertsNaturally, these professionals attracted students who eventually would go on to becomeexperts themselves, fashioning their own axioms and procedures for determiningauthentic readings of the text (often as a means to validate or expound on their teachers’views). Among these students included Muqatil ibn Sulayman (d. 767), credited as thefirst known exegete to write a comprehensive tafsir of every verse in the Qur’an. Assuch, it is a very simple commentary with little to no supporting extratextual norintertextual evidence. As Nicolai Sinai notes, Muqatil’s exegesis “belongs to a relativelyprimitive stage of Qur’anic exegesis: grammatical analyses, quotations from Arabicpoetry and reading variants are absent or used only very sparingly, and chains oftransmitters (asānīd, sg. Isnād) are rarely given in the text.”11 For Muqatil, reading withproper recitation and understanding rudimentary semantics were his primary aims, aimslargely restrained by the limitations of his practice (there weren’t many prior experts toreference nor had much of the sirah and hadith been compiled and authenticated during9Nicolai Sinai (2014) “The Qur’anic Commentary of Muqatil b. Sulayman,” in Tafsīr and Islamic Intellectual History: Exploringthe Boundaries of a Genre, Ed. Andreas Görke, pp. 122-123.10Kees Verteegh (2015) “Lexical Explanation in Early Qur’anic Commentary,” The Meaning of the Word: Lexicology andQur'anic Exegesis, Ed. S.R. Burge, p. 44.11“The Qur’anic Commentary of Muqatil b. Sulayman,” p. 114.10
his time).12 Typical of tafasir during the formative period, these newly sanctionedprofessionals were just starting to understand how to explicate their opinions in astructured and coherent manner, having little work with other than what they hearddirectly from their teachers and peers. Not until the 9h century do we begin to observea systemization characteristic of an actual ‘science’ of exegesis. For that, we may creditthe Persian scholar Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d. 923) and his commentaryCompendium of the Explanation in the Interpretation of the Qur’an (Jāmiʿ al-bayān fītafsīr al-Qurʾān). Claude Gilliot summarized at least four maxims which guided Tabari’sexegesis:Among the most important concerns of Tabari in writing his commentary wecan count: 1. al-qirā’a al-mutawātira (or al-qirā’a al-mustafiḍa), that is, theso-called uninterrupted (authentic) reading, also called the ‘reading of thepeople of the cities’ (qirā’at ahl al-amṣār), that is, the cities of Medina,Mecca, Kufa, Basra and Damascus. 2. That the interpretation should notcontradict the interpretation of the ‘majority’ consensus (ijmā’, or mā ajma’a‘alayhi ) of the (early) exegetes (ahl al-tafsīr or ahl al-ta’wīl). 3. Added to thissecond principle is a third axiom: that it is not permitted to interpret theQur’an according to one’s own opinion (bi-ra’yihi). 4. A corollary of thesecond and third axioms is that the Qur’an cannot be interpreted accordingto one’s own opini
modern science from the text of the Quran. This emphasizes a fundamental point that an exercise that considers the issue of historical context must be clear about its goals. Those who argue for science in the Quran generally take the position that while the historical context of the Quran is relevant, it does
New York University, New York Contents 1. Competition among Internet backbone service providers 1.1. Internet backbone services 1.2. Interconnection 1.3. The transit and peering payment methods for connectivity 1.4. Conduct of Internet backbone service providers 1.4.1. Pricing of transport services in the backbone networks 1.4.2.
Backbone.js: In the Beginning, There Was JavaScript By Samuel M. Breed, author of Backbone.js in Action Backbone is a library for structuring web applications. Since the dawn of the Internet, forward thinking developers have known that it is more than just a means of serving static HTML documents, but rather a platform made for applications.
This will come in handy to keep nuts and bolts into place while screwing. 01. Start with the BACKBONE A part. 02. Slide 2 BACKBONE B and 2 BACKBONE C parts into the BACKBONE A part. Note how the ALLBOT logo's are visible on all parts. Also note the indexing notches. 03. Everything should fit flush. 04.
The C-CAM diaphragm of the GX100’s 6.5" midrange-woofer employs Monitor’s Rigid Surface Technology (RST), which includes a series of ribs across the cone’s surface. Apparently the ribs measurably improve the cone’s stiffness, helping it resist breakup and thereby reducing distortion. The additional strength conferred by the ribs also
Body Score Body Condition Scoring 1 No flesh covering ribs, sharpness to vertebrae and pin bones 2 Very little flesh covering ribs and heart girth/part of shoulder area, vertebrae easy to delineate along back 3 Adequate amount of flesh over ribs and heart girth/part of
The Axial Skeleton Ribs Form protective cage that houses heart, lungs, other vital components of body Rib cage consists of 12 pairs of ribs divided into three categories: true, false, floating ribs
ribs are made from the Clark-Y airfoil laser cut from ⅛” balsa wood sheets. After the ribs are cut and separated approximately 2” apart, wooden spars are placed in the designated cuts in the ribs. A leading edge is also cut from balsa wood to match the same profile as the
DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY Telangana University Dichpally, Nizamabad -503322 (A State University Established under the Act No. 28 of 2006, A.P. Recognized by UGC under 2(f) and 12 (B) of UGC Act 1956)
