Is the Qur’an Outdated on the Origins of the Universe?

A Contention

Allah says:

قُلْ أَئِنَّكُمْ لَتَكْفُرُونَ بِالَّذِي خَلَقَ الْأَرْضَ فِي يَوْمَيْنِ وَتَجْعَلُونَ لَهُ أَنْدَادًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ رَبُّ الْعَالَمِينَ ۞ وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا رَوَاسِيَ مِنْ فَوْقِهَا وَبَارَكَ فِيهَا وَقَدَّرَفِيهَا أَقْوَاتَهَا فِي أَرْبَعَةِ أَيَّامٍ سَوَاءً لِلسَّائِلِينَ ۞ ثُمَّ اسْتَوَىٰ إِلَى السَّمَاءِ وَهِيَ دُخَانٌ فَقَالَ لَهَا وَلِلْأَرْضِ ائْتِيَا طَوْعًا أَوْ كَرْهًا قَالَتَا أَتَيْنَا طَائِعِينَ ۞ فَقَضَاهُنَّ سَبْعَ سَمَاوَاتٍ فِي يَوْمَيْنِ وَأَوْحَىٰ فِي كُلِّ سَمَاءٍ أَمْرَهَا ۚ وَزَيَّنَّا السَّمَاءَ الدُّنْيَا بِمَصَابِيحَ وَحِفْظًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ تَقْدِيرُ الْعَزِيزِ الْعَلِيمِ

“Say, ‘Do you disbelieve in the One who created the earth in two days—and you ascribe to Him rivals? That is the Lord of the worlds.’ And He placed therein mountains rising above it, and blessed it, and measured therein its sustenance in four days—alike for those who ask. Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke, and He said to it and to the earth, ‘Come together—willingly or unwillingly.’ They said, ‘We come—willing.’ Then He ordained them seven heavens in two days—in each heaven its mandate. And We adorned the lowest heaven with lamps and protection. That is the decree of the Mighty, the Knower.”¹

In a literal reading, one may take issue with the above passage from the Qurʾān, arguing that it contradicts our current understanding of the origins of the universe. That is to say, they could argue that this passage reverses the order of creation, and that it describes the earth being created before space.

Such a line of questioning is not completely baseless, as the view that the earth was created before space was commonplace among premodern peoples, and it seems to have been the preferred view of many Qurʾanic exegetes. For one, Ibn Kathīr argues for this to be the case, and he uses as supporting evidence the analogy of a building—the earth being its prerequisite foundations and the firmament being its ceiling. Ibn Kathīr goes further to argue that only Qatādah from among the major early exegetes believed that the firmament was created before the earth, and not the other way around.²

A couple of question arise, therefore:

1. What is the cosmological meaning of these āyāt?
2. Do these āyāt contradict modern science?

It is these two questions we will explore and directly address in this article, and while there are myriad ways in which one may do this, we will try to avoid overly deconstructivist arguments and address the question more in keeping with traditional epistemological frameworks. Thus, it shall not be said—by any fair-minded reader—that the question was strawmanned or that its central tenets were not addressed, God willing.

A Multiplicity of Meanings

Whenever one is faced with a dilemma such as the one mentioned above, they have a number of ways they can approach the issue. I propose a three-tiered approach that appreciates the purpose and plausibility of what is being said. The approach is as follows³:

1. Consider the intent of the passage upon the primary recipients of Revelation—the Arabs at the time of Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ.
2. Consider interpretations of the passage that do not contradict modern science, being sure not to force interpretations where they do not fit.

• Reject impossible interpretations of the passage which contradict modern knowledge.

This is not a modern approach. Rather, it has long been the practice of a number of Qurʾanic exegetes, and it is how the Qurʾan has been understood for over a millenia. We will now use the āyātquoted above as a case study to explore this approach.

An Argumentative Context

To understand these āyāt, we need to understand the context in which they were revealed. The sūrah begins with the context being set for us.

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

حم ۞ تَنْزِيلٌ مِنَ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ ۞ كِتَابٌ فُصِّلَتْ آيَاتُهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ ۞ بَشِيرًا وَنَذِيرًا فَأَعْرَضَ أَكْثَرُهُمْ فَهُمْ لَا يَسْمَعُونَ ۞ وَقَالُوا قُلُوبُنَا فِي أَكِنَّةٍ مِمَّا تَدْعُونَا إِلَيْهِ وَفِي آذَانِنَا وَقْرٌ وَمِنْ بَيْنِنَا وَبَيْنِكَ حِجَابٌ فَاعْمَلْ إِنَّنَا عَامِلُونَ

“In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Mercifier

Ḥā-Mīm. A revelation from the Merciful, the Mercifier. A book whose āyāt are detailed—a recital in Arabic for a people who understand. Good tidings and a warning, yet most of them turn away so they do not hear. And they say, ‘Our hearts are covered from what you call us to, and in our ears is deafness, and between us and you is a barrier. Act, then, for, surely, we shall act.’”⁴

This was Makkan Qurʾān addressing a dismissive and unyielding audience who were mocking and taunting the Prophet ﷺ. As he approached them with Revelation, they turned away and sarcastically responded with self-deprecating claims of being deaf and barred from guidance.

To this hostility, the Prophet ﷺ is given a three-layered Qurʾanic response. The first part of this is as below:

قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ يُوحَىٰ إِلَيَّ أَنَّمَا إِلَٰهُكُمْ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ فَاسْتَقِيمُوا إِلَيْهِ وَاسْتَغْفِرُوهُ ۗ وَوَيْلٌ لِلْمُشْرِكِينَ ۞ الَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ بِالْآخِرَةِهُمْ كَافِرُونَ ۞ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَهُمْ أَجْرٌ غَيْرُ مَمْنُونٍ

“Say, ’Surely, I am only a human being like you. It is inspired in me that your Lord is one Lord. Therefore, take the straight path to Him and seek His forgiveness. And woe unto the polytheists—who do not give the alms-tax, and they, of the hereafter, are in denial. Certainly, those who believe and do righteous works, for them is an unending reward.’”⁵

The first of these layers entails relaying the message of Islam in a clear and unequivocal manner. The Prophet ﷺ is ordered to tell his people that he is but a man who has been inspired with guidance from above. Unbelief and belief are then mentioned, with the former being linked to worldliness—miserliness in this case—and the latter being linked to otherworldliness and eternal bliss.

Following this are the āyāt we quoted earlier, those being considered in this article:

قُلْ أَئِنَّكُمْ لَتَكْفُرُونَ بِالَّذِي خَلَقَ الْأَرْضَ فِي يَوْمَيْنِ وَتَجْعَلُونَ لَهُ أَنْدَادًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ رَبُّ الْعَالَمِينَ ۞ وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا رَوَاسِيَ مِنْ فَوْقِهَا وَبَارَكَ فِيهَا وَقَدَّرَفِيهَا أَقْوَاتَهَا فِي أَرْبَعَةِ أَيَّامٍ سَوَاءً لِلسَّائِلِينَ ۞ ثُمَّ اسْتَوَىٰ إِلَى السَّمَاءِ وَهِيَ دُخَانٌ فَقَالَ لَهَا وَلِلْأَرْضِ ائْتِيَا طَوْعًا أَوْ كَرْهًا قَالَتَا أَتَيْنَا طَائِعِينَ ۞ فَقَضَاهُنَّ سَبْعَ سَمَاوَاتٍ فِي يَوْمَيْنِ وَأَوْحَىٰ فِي كُلِّ سَمَاءٍ أَمْرَهَا ۚ وَزَيَّنَّا السَّمَاءَ الدُّنْيَا بِمَصَابِيحَ وَحِفْظًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ تَقْدِيرُ الْعَزِيزِ الْعَلِيمِ

“Say, ‘Do you disbelieve in the One who created the earth in two days—and you ascribe to Him rivals? That is the Lord of the worlds.’ And He placed therein mountains rising above it, and blessed it, and measured therein its sustenance in four days—alike for those who ask. Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke, and He said to it and to the earth, ‘Come together—willingly or unwillingly.’ They said, ‘We come—willing.’ Then He ordained them seven heavens in two days—in each heaven its mandate. And We adorned the lowest heaven with lamps and protection. That is the decree of the Mighty, the Knower.”⁶

These provide a logical and rational basis for which to believe in the Prophet’s ﷺ message. They justify the preceding rhetoric. The pagans of Arabia are being asked how they could worship inanimate objects over the One who created the worlds. They are called to look at the land below them and the firmament above them, awestruck at its beauty and realising that the One who created such beauty must, Himself, be awesome.

And, lastly, an emotional call is made, as the unbelievers are warned about the fate of earlier nations who dismissed their own prophets:

فَإِنْ أَعْرَضُوا فَقُلْ أَنْذَرْتُكُمْ صَاعِقَةً مِثْلَ صَاعِقَةِ عَادٍ وَثَمُودَ ۞ إِذْ جَاءَتْهُمُ الرُّسُلُ مِنْ بَيْنِ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمِنْ خَلْفِهِمْ أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا اللَّهَ ۖ قَالُوا لَوْشَاءَ رَبُّنَا لَأَنْزَلَ مَلَائِكَةً فَإِنَّا بِمَا أُرْسِلْتُمْ بِهِ كَافِرُونَ ۞ فَأَمَّا عَادٌ فَاسْتَكْبَرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ وَقَالُوا مَنْ أَشَدُّ مِنَّا قُوَّةً ۖ أَوَلَمْ يَرَوْا أَنَّ اللَّهَالَّذِي خَلَقَهُمْ هُوَ أَشَدُّ مِنْهُمْ قُوَّةً ۖ وَكَانُوا بِآيَاتِنَا يَجْحَدُونَ ۞ فَأَرْسَلْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ رِيحًا صَرْصَرًا فِي أَيَّامٍ نَحِسَاتٍ لِنُذِيقَهُمْ عَذَابَ الْخِزْيِ فِي الْحَيَاةِالدُّنْيَا ۖ وَلَعَذَابُ الْآخِرَةِ أَخْزَىٰ ۖ وَهُمْ لَا يُنْصَرُونَ ۞ وَأَمَّا ثَمُودُ فَهَدَيْنَاهُمْ فَاسْتَحَبُّوا الْعَمَىٰ عَلَى الْهُدَىٰ فَأَخَذَتْهُمْ صَاعِقَةُ الْعَذَابِ الْهُونِ بِمَاكَانُوا يَكْسِبُونَ ۞ وَنَجَّيْنَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَكَانُوا يَتَّقُونَ

“But if they turn away, then say, ‘I warn you of a thunderbolt like the thunderbolt of ʿĀd and Thamūd. When their messengers came to them from before them and behind them, saying, ‘Worship none but Allah’, they said, ‘If our Lord had willed, He surely would have sent down angels. So we disbelieve in what you have been sent with.’ As for ʿĀd, then they were arrogant in the land without right, and they said, ‘Who is mightier than us in power?’ Could they not see that Allah, who created them, was superior to them in might? And they denied our āyāt. Therefore, We let loose on them a raging wind in evil days, that We might make them taste the torment of disgrace in the life of this world. And, certainly, the punishment of the hereafter is more shameful, and they will not be helped. And as for Thamūd, We gave them guidance, but they preferred blindness to the guidance, so the bolt of the doom of humiliation overtook them because of what they used to earn. And We delivered those who believed and used to keep their duty to Allah.”⁷

Notably, the unbelievers were earlier recorded as having complained that their hearts were sealed and their ears were deaf so they could not believe. Here, God provides an example of a people whose hearts were sealed out of arrogance, and another example of a people who preferred blindness to guidance. These served as a warning to the pagans of Arabia of the doom that awaited them if they followed suit.

It is in this context that the āyāt we are discussing were revealed. They are not primarily geological or astronomical; they are primarily spiritual. The reference to the earth and firmament is a call to spirituality through reflection upon nature. The primary audience did not dispute any of the cosmology mentioned therein, their resistance was towards monotheism. God is asking them why, after accepting that God created the world and all that was within it—in the most beautiful of ways—they still rejected His sovereignty. It is in this vein that the āyāt must be understood and considered—they are not scientific hypotheses, nor are they merely cosmological predicates; they are a call to believe in God through reflection upon the physical world.

Non-contradiction with Science

Seeing as though the Qurʾanic passage in question is not a scientific discussion, it would not—and should not—be expected to affirm scientific discoveries. What it must be shown to do is not contradict known facts. In other words, it does not need to describe cosmological phenomena accurately—that would, in fact, be quite unusual, given the context. What it must do is not be incorrect. This is the principle of non-contradiction.

This marks a deviation from an al-iʿjāz al-ʿilmī [scientific miracles] approach in which the threshold is raised and the āyāt are to be evaluated not only for non-contradiction, but also for the affirmation of scientific doctrines. That is because it argues that modern scientific discourse is prefigured in the Qurʾān.

In our approach, all that needs to be shown is that the Qurʾān does not contradict known facts. Two contentions have been raised in this regard:

1. Does the Qurʾān claim that mountains are older than the sun and stars?
2. Does the Qurʾān claim that the earth was created before space?

Let us address the first of these first. The confusion comes from an interpretation of Q 41:9. Let us re-present the two relevant āyāt and their translation here:

قُلْ أَئِنَّكُمْ لَتَكْفُرُونَ بِالَّذِي خَلَقَ الْأَرْضَ فِي يَوْمَيْنِ وَتَجْعَلُونَ لَهُ أَنْدَادًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ رَبُّ الْعَالَمِينَ ۞ وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا رَوَاسِيَ مِنْ فَوْقِهَا وَبَارَكَ فِيهَا وَقَدَّرَفِيهَا أَقْوَاتَهَا فِي أَرْبَعَةِ أَيَّامٍ سَوَاءً لِلسَّائِلِينَ

“Say, ‘Do you disbelieve in the One who created the earth in two days—and you ascribe to Him rivals? That is the Lord of the worlds.’ And He placed therein mountains rising above it, and blessed it, and measured therein its sustenance in four days—alike for those who ask.”⁸

The confusion arises due to the ambiguity in the progression from one āyah to the next. Such ambiguity serves effective rhetorical and aesthetic purposes, and it guides readers to what is more important (i.e. the spiritual message) over what is less so (i.e. precise sequencing and chronology). The first āyah speaks about the creation of the earth, and the second āyah speaks about the creation of the mountains. The conjunction ‘و’ is used between these two statements, and, whilst its meanings are many, it is most commonly understood to mean ‘and’. Such a conjunction does not necessitate chronological sequencing, nor does it necessarily imply this.

This rebuttal against the first contention hardly needs any external referencing as it is self-evident, though we shall highlight some exegetical precedent to support our claims. al-Bayḍāwī, a pre-eminent classical Qurʾanic exegete, mentioned the following:

{ وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا رَوَاسِيَ } اسْتِئْنَافٌ غَيْرُ مَعْطُوفٍ عَلَى { خَلَقَ } لِلْفَصْلِ بِمَا هُوَ خَارِجٌ عَنِ الصِّلَةِ. { مِّن فَوْقِهَا } مُرْتَفِعَةٌ عَلَيْهَا لِيَظْهَرَ لِلنُّظَّارِمَا فِيهَا مِنْ وُجُوهِ الِاسْتِبْصَارِ وَتَكُونَ مَنَافِعُهَا مُعَرَّضَةً لِلطُّلَّابِ.

“{And He placed therein firm mountains} This is a resumptive statement, not connected to {created} due to the separation by what is outside the relative clause.”⁹

Abū Ḥayyān, the foremost linguist of Andalusia in his time, wrote:

{ وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا رَوَاسِيَ }: إِخْبَارٌ مُسْتَأْنَفٌ، وَلَيْسَ مِنَ الصِّلَةِ فِي شَيْءٍ، بَلْ هُوَ مَعْطُوفٌ عَلَى قَوْلِهِ: { لَتَكْفُرُونَ }.

“{And He placed therein mountains rising above it}: This is an independent statement and is not part of the relative clause at all, but, rather, it is conjoined to His saying: {you disbelieve}.”

Ibn ʿĀshūr, among the most respected exegetes of his time and all times thereafter, wrote:

عَطْفٌ عَلَى فِعْلِ الصِّلَةِ لا عَلَى مَعْمُولِ الْفِعْلِ، فَجُمْلَةُ { وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا رَوٰسِيَ } الْخ صِلَةٌ ثَانِيَةٌ فِي الْمَعْنَى، وَلِذٰلِكَ جِيءَ بِفِعْلٍ آخَرَ غَيْرِ فِعْلِخَلَقَ لِأَنَّ هٰذَا الْجَعْلَ تَكْوِينٌ آخَرُ حَصَلَ بَعْدَ خَلْقِ الْأَرْضِ وَهُوَ خَلْقُ أَجْزَاءٍ تَتَّصِلُ بِهَا إِمَّا مِنْ جِنْسِهَا كَالْجِبَالِ وَإِمَّا مِنْ غَيْرِ جِنْسِهَا كَالْأَقْوَاتِوَلِذٰلِكَ أُعْقِبَ بِقَوْلِهِ { فِي أَرْبَعَةِ أَيَّامٍ } بَعْدَ قَوْلِهِ { فِي يَوْمَيْنِ } فُصِّلَتْ ٩.

“It is conjoined to the verb of the relative clause, not to the object of the verb. So the sentence { And He placed therein mountains rising above it } etc. is a second relative clause in meaning, and that is why another verb different from the verb { created } was used, because this ’placing’ is another formation that occurred after the creation of the earth—it is the creation of parts connected to it, either of the same kind, like mountains, or of a different kind, like sustenance. That is why it was followed by His saying { in four days } after His saying { in two days } (Fussilat 9).”¹⁰

Thus, the placement of the mountains may comfortably be understood as not being simultaenous to the creation of the earth. Given this, there is no contradiction between this passage and our modern understanding that the sky preceded the mountains.

Moving onto the second contention (i.e. the contention over the chronology of the creation of the earth and firmament), we need to identify whether or not a definite chronology is imposed by the text.

Abū Ḥayyān, whom we quoted above, wrote:

وَنَقَلَ الْوَاحِدِيُّ فِي الْبَسِيطِ عَنْ مُقَاتِلٍ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: خَلَقَ اللهُ السَّمَاءَ قَبْلَ الْأَرْضِ، وَتَأَوَّلَ قَوْلَهُ: { ثُمَّ اسْتَوَى إِلَى السَّمَاءِ وَهِيَ دُخَانٌ } قَبْلَ أَنْ يَخْلُقَ الْأَرْضَ، فَأَضْمَرَ فِيهِ كَانَ، كَمَا قَالَ تَعَالَى:{ إِنْ يَسْرِقْ فَقَدْ سَرَقَ أَخٌ لَهُ مِنْ قَبْلُ }

“al-Wāḥidī transmitted in al-Basīṭ from Muqātil, that he said, ‘God created the heaven before the earth.’ And he interpreted His saying, { Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke } as occurring before He created the earth, so He implied ‘was’ in it, as He—most high—said [quoting the brothers of Prophet Joseph (upon him be peace)] { If he stole, then, certainly, his brother stole before }.”¹¹

al-Wāḥidī was a leading linguist and philologist of the classical period, whilst Muqātil was one of the earliest exegetes of the Qurʾān in history. In fact, Muqātil’s exegetical work remains the earliest complete extant exegesis of the Qurʾān. There was no new science that reached Muqātil which had not reached people at the time of the Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ. Thus, the understanding of Muqātil, al-Wāḥidī, Abū Ḥayyān, and others demonstrates that a reading which understands the firmament to have been made before the earth is entirely viable linguistically, and that it was a position held by a number of scholars, even if they were fewer in number than their opponents. Bear in mind that there have been many cases in which a minority Islamic position proved to be the correct one in later times. This is a natural consequence of Qurʾanic studies, as no exegesis is completely without eisegesis, and the latter reflects the understandings—scientific or otherwise—of the day in which the authors were writing.

Collectively, these positions highlight that the condition of non-contradiction can easily be met, and that, even if the terminology (e.g. earth, firmament) is defined in the way done so by polemicists arguing against Islam, there are viable understandings of these āyāt that do not contradict modern science. And since the primary objective of the āyāt is not to explain cosmological concepts with precision but to call people to wonder and marvel at the creation of God, it makes complete sense that positive affirmations of precise cosmological chronologies are not made. Instead, the focus remains on what is rhetorically most useful.

Inexact Terminology

We already have a solution to the contentions raised in this article, as we can, quite simply, say that earlier exegetes were not well-informed regarding cosmology and geology, and so they misinterpreted these āyāt. We could also stress that these āyāt are especially powerful, as they did not challenge the scientific understanding of any time and remain as plausible today as they did back then—the ambiguity means no generation of Muslims faced hardship in understanding the āyāt.

However, such an argument is not even needed in the case of these āyāt when we understand Qurʾanic language better. We have an innate tendency to anchronise and anatopise our readings of any text. And although this is a byproduct of our human nature, it is still something we should watch out for when trying to be objective and fair. Whilst the Qurʾān is timeless and directed at all people, it had a clear primary audience who were being addressed, and we cannot wrestle that away from it. Nor would we want to, as that context adds so much value to our understanding of the Qurʾan.

One mistake polemicists against Islam often make is not appreciating the Qurʾān’s use of polysemy. In modernity, language is often valued more when it becomes increasingly precise. We value sharp definitions and jargon far more than pre-modern readers would have done so. Throughout most of history, literary cultures exalted and extolled polysemy as a mark of eloquence and linguistic prowess. Within the grey areas of language lay much beauty and rhetorical force. The Qurʾān outshone all other texts, and it abounds in polysemy.

A clear example in the passage in question is with the word ‘yawm’, used in both the dual (i.e. yawmayn) and plural (i.e. ayyām) forms. To a modern reader, when a cosmological discussion is taking place, and the word ‘day’ is used, it has a precise and measurable meaning. In the Qurʾān, the word ’day’ has a far more fluid definition. We are told:

يَعْرُجُ إِلَيْهِ فِي يَوْمٍ كَانَ مِقْدَارُهُ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ مِمَّا تَعُدُّونَ

“It ascends to Him in a day, the measure of which is a thousand years in your recknoning.”¹²

We are told elsewhere:

تَعْرُجُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ إِلَيْهِ فِي يَوْمٍ كَانَ مِقْدَارُهُ خَمْسِينَ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ

“[Whereby] the angels and spirit ascend to him in a day whose measure is fifty thousand years.”¹³

The definition is, thus, fluid and may refer to an indefinitely long time. This was completely understood by the Arabs of the day, and it was something they responded well to aesthetically. Our personal and more modern desire for technical jargon is irrelevant, and the Qurʾān does not yield to it.

In this vein, when al-samāʾ [heaven] and al-arḍ [earth] are mentioned, we may be eisegetically tempted to ascribe them to sharply defined physical entities. Perhaps one thinks al-samāʾ means the sky—the atmosphere—in which case, there is no issue at all, as the sky was clearly made after the earth, the latter being a product of the former. Further, the sky is adorned with stars from the perspective of man, and it provides protection to the earth below. Or, perhaps, one understands al-samāʾ to mean space, which is, essentially, a vacuum filled with cosmological objects. In this case, we would understand the adornment of stars to be within the ‘substance’ of space itself, and the creation of this samāʾ from smoke would refer to it progressing from one stage to another—a gasseous condition to the way we see it now. Similarly, and to complement this, al-arḍ can refer to more solid matter. Thus, perhaps, one understands these āyāt in terms of origins and forms.

Muḥammad al-Ṭanṭāwī, former Grand Mufti of al-Azhar University, explains that this is not unusual in Qurʾanic discourse. He notes that the Qurʾān states:

وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَاكُمْ ثُمَّ صَوَّرْنَاكُمْ ثُمَّ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ لَمْ يَكُنْ مِنَ السَّاجِدِينَ

“And, certainly, We created you, then fashioned you, then told the angels, ‘Prostrate before Ādam’, and they did, except Iblīs, who was not of those who prostrate.”¹⁴

Again, the word ‘khalaqa’ [to create] is used—this time as ‘khalaqnākum’ [We created you]. Allah mentions that mankind was created before mankind was fashioned. This primordial and unfashioned creation is still considered to be the creation of mankind, even if in an unrecognisable (to us) form. For this reason, most scholars have believed that the universe existed in a gasseous state prior to the creation of the earth. A substance then formed from which the earth would later be fashioned, and the gasseous state would go on form the cosmological bodies we see in space, such as the sun and stars. Thereafter, the earth was formed from its earlier substance, and, later, it took a more identifiable shape with mountains, rivers, and pastures. Such an understanding is far different from what the polemicists argue, and it was a commonly held understanding in Islamic scholarship.

This goes to highlight the importance of not imposing our own understandings of language upon the Qurʾān—it will not yield to anyone, and you will find yourself going astray if you try to force it to. Instead, the Qurʾān is to be approached on its own terms with honesty and humility.

Conclusion

We have shown that the primary intent of the early āyāt from Sūrah Fuṣṣilat is not to provide a scientific explanation for natural phenomena. This is important to remember, as forgetting this fact may lead one to await positive and direct scientific affirmations which do not exist. Instead, these āyātargued powerfully for the majesty and power of God and the beauty of His creation. They presented Islamic creed to a polytheistic people, and explained through rational and emotional rhetoric the need for people to worship God.

Further, these āyāt have been shown to not contradict modern science, especially when we appreciate the multiple possible interpretations of chronology therein, as well as the inexact use of language (i.e. polysemy). Such language is entirely consistent both internally (i.e. in other parts of the Qurʾān) and externally (i.e. with normative use of language in pre-modernity). Impossible interpretations of these āyāt are dismissable when we appreciate that possible interpretations not only exist but are entirely normative.

And, therefore, the contentions posed at the start of this article are resolved. Further, this article serves to show how important a deeper engagement with the Qurʾān and exegetical tradition are. Such an engagement requires humility, composure, and academic honesty. Confused and belligerent antagonism are seldom productive.

Allah says:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَسْتَحْيِي أَنْ يَضْرِبَ مَثَلًا مَا بَعُوضَةً فَمَا فَوْقَهَا ۚ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا فَيَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّهُ الْحَقُّ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ ۖ وَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَيَقُولُونَ مَاذَاأَرَادَ اللَّهُ بِهَٰذَا مَثَلًا ۘ يُضِلُّ بِهِ كَثِيرًا وَيَهْدِي بِهِ كَثِيرًا ۚ وَمَا يُضِلُّ بِهِ إِلَّا الْفَاسِقِينَ

“Indeed, Allah is not ashamed of coining similitudes, even of a gnat or what is larger. Those who believe know that it is the truth from their Lord, but those who disbelieve say, ‘What does Allah intend by this example?’ He causes many to stray by it and He guides many by it and He does not cause to stray [any] except the rebellious.”¹⁵

References

1. Qurʾān 41:9-12.
2. Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr.

3. Andreas Tzortzis, “Iʿjāz ʿIlmī and the Multiplicity of Readings” (presentation, Islamic Colloquia of Edinburgh, July 2025), based on his forthcoming PhD diss., A Theo-Philosophical Assessment of al-Iʿjāz al-ʿIlmī and the Multiplicity of Readings Approach, Cardiff University.

4. Qurʾān 41:1-5.

5. Qurʾān 18:110-112.
6. Qurʾān 41:6-8.
7. Qurʾān 41:13-18.
8. Qurʾān 41:9-10.
9. al-Bayḍāwī, Anwār al-Tanzīl wa Asrār al-Taʾwīl.
10. Ibn ʿĀshūr, al-Taḥrīr wa al-Tanwīr.
11. Abū Ḥayyān, al-Baḥr al-Muḥīt.
12. Qurʾān 32:5.
13. Qurʾān 70:4.
14. Qurʾān 7:11.
15. Qurʾān 2:26.