Thoughts on Evolution - 6

If, one day, a machine is invented that can show the past, and if it is seen by using this machine that humanity actually evolved from monkeys, what would be the Islamic scholars' reaction?

We can actually answer this hypothetical question by looking at the scholars' reaction to other issues so far. For sure, there would be a group that will deny this evidence by saying that the machine is hacked, and is producing forged data. Furthermore, this first group of scholars would announce that whoever believes in this innovation in religion has become an infidel/disbeliever.

Contrary to the first group, another group of scholars would start publishing articles and giving interviews on "how Quran told of this fact 1400 years ago". They would comment on how culture and social psychology act as a barrier before our eyes and interfere with properly understanding and interpreting the word of God. They would list the verses from the holy book that support or point at the idea of evolution, and they would mention the Islamic scholars in history who had talked in favor of evolution.

A third group of scholars, who were long outcast by the majority of the believers due to their support of the idea of evolution, would make a prostration of gratitude and glorification to their Lord for this unparalleled discovery in human history. They would ardently explain to the young believers that one can see Allah through His works in the universe and on ourselves, as indicated in the Quran.

We will soon show them Our signs in the Universe and in their own souls, until it will become quite clear to them that it is the truth. Is it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things? (41/53)

Now, let's step back and think. Can such a thing really happen? I mean, can we prove the evolution of the species from a single ancestor, and especially the evolution of humans, without a doubt so that it becomes a compelling truth for everyone with reason? But more importantly, is Islamic stance on creation of the living organisms and humans essentially against the idea of evolution, as claimed by many? If yes, how so? If not, why is it so difficult to accept this idea?

Before we embark on exploring answers to these questions, I strongly recommend that you read the five previous episodes of this series (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

I would like to explore the answers to these and few more questions without putting them into an order. As you will see, they all stem from and also find answers in the same root causes, i.e. 1-not knowing God really, 2- not having a proper understanding of science in context of God's will, and 3- not understanding the word of God properly.

Creation vs. Evolution

Not only among Muslims but also among members of the other faiths, there is a perception that if something is explained by science, it is out of the will and power of God. Namely, if the emergence of living organisms and humans is explained through successive and overlapping mechanisms that we can study scientifically and reproduce at our will, then God must be out of this game! Or is He?

In this context, some people simply go with the explanation that science explaines how and religion explains why; and so, these people solve this problem by annihilating it, not by resolving it. However, this approach brings a concept of God that is not justifiable with that introduced in the Quran. God tells us in His book that He is the answer to all how's and why's, whether we like it or not. So, one must go beyond this how-why dichotomy.

Another group of people accept the idea of evolution by claiming a God-directed process. Compared to the previous one, this approach is closer to the Islamic stance, in that it gives the control of "how" to God. Nevertheless, this designated-driver idea comes with an innate flaw. When you read, it tells you about a God-controlled evolution, as if there were other processes going on without His control! That is, "God-controlled evolution" idea promotes an island of God's will in an ocean of independent processes. Again, this is against the concept of God explained in the Quran.

In order to reach a solution in this regard, one must understand the philosophy of science objectively, and study God through His word objectively. Here, I re-iterated the word objectively for a purpose, as will become clear below, and also I am not going to go into details of these issues, since they are discussed elsewhere and also in several articles shared in Mureferrik Tefekkur.

One must admit that it is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God through science. Rather, using science from an Islamic perspective, one can at best learn how God is doing/creating something, not whether it is Him who is doing. You believe in God as a leap of faith, and your observations and contemplation thereof foster your faith. Furthermore, technology is the accumulation of lessons that we learn from God about how we can manipulate or employ the laws governing the game we are in. This game and its rules (i.e. physical laws) are set by God, and we are allowed by Him to use them. This permission is not a singular event that happened sometime in the past. Rather, it is a continuous interaction with God. When, for example, we are flying an aircraft, as we accelerate, it is God who is actively creating the lift force at every instant. Therefore, if we are doing something using technology, we are not doing it out of the will of God; rather, He is actively putting our will to action. But in the end, this way of understanding relies on a core assumption, that is your belief in God.

And you do not will except that Allah wills - Lord of the worlds. (81/29)

The second station in this matter is about knowing God. Some people claim that the reason for the sending of Islam and Quran is the loss of the original form of the previous heavenly religions and the books. This idea may have a merit, but it is ultimately incomplete and incorrect. If you read Quran, throughout its pages, you learn about different names/attributes of God. Each name has different manifestations. Some of them look at the creation of things, their artistic design, the compassionate care towards the newborns, etc., whereas some others look at the destruction of things, the rigid assurance of balance regardless of loss of lives, etc. So, believing in God in the Islamic sense requires you to embrace all of these attributes, hence the meaning of Islam (submission). Therefore, some of these attributes of God explain or relate to the how's of things, and are the source of science, and other attributes relate to why's of things, and are the source of wisdom.

And to Allah belong the best names, so invoke Him by them. And leave [the company of] those who practice deviation concerning His names. They will be recompensed for what they have been doing. (7/180)

If we bring these ideas to our present discussion, if the evolution took place, God made it, and is still doing it. Furthermore, God is the one who executes not only the evolution but also all other physical laws. He is the artist who is at work at the micro scale and macro scale. So, evolution is one way of creation, and there is no such dichotomy as creation vs. evolution.

What does the Quran Say about Evolution?

One reason why some scholars so adamantly fight against the idea of evolution is that they think that the Quran speaks of a creation not through evolution. I am not going to go through their thoughts, but rather, I am going to show here how Quran actually presents verses that allow interpretations in support of evolution. Before that, it important to indicate that Quran was revealed for all people from the 7th century on to the end of time. So, it is not fair to expect statements that are going to be outright nonsense to the human mind during any part of this time frame. Evolution is an idea that only became plausible recently, although it had been voiced in the previous millennia. So, it only makes sense that we cannot find explicit evidence for evolution in the Quran. Then, at least, if evolution took place, Quran must not have explicit contradictions to it either. Now let's see what's available in this regard.

And [mention, O Muhammad], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority." They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we declare Your praise and sanctify You?" Allah said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know." (2/30)

In this verse, the verb make (ja'ala) refers to the transformation of something already existent, not a creation out of nothing (khalaqa). Therefore, if humans were made the khalifa (successor, vicegerent) on the earth, then they must have existed before this event, and in that time, they were not khalifa yet! What makes the humans the khalifa? Their individual and collaborative intelligence and free will. Without these, humans are no different than animals. In fact today, life conditions of the people who do not use their intelligence and will power are not much different than those of the animals. In that case, without the quality of khalifa, humans are not worthy of mentioning at all.

Has there [not] come upon man a period of time when he was not a thing [even] mentioned? (76/1)

When no different than animals, humans would be as wild as the animals in shedding blood, and this is how the angels have a justification for their objection to the Creator about the making of a khalifa from a creation that is skilled at causing corruption.

Through the above discussion, we can clearly see that we can find justification for a "biological creation of the human species" and then "making of the human being". This kind of two layered approach is also consistent with the approach indicated in the Quran about the creation of Adam and Jesus (read From Jesus to Adam). That is, there is first a creation, then there is something miraculous.

Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created Him from dust; then He said to him, "Be," and he was. (3/59)

In fact, this way of understanding can resolve other issues as well. For example, death is nothing more than the spirit coming out of the animal body. Another example, second coming of Jesus is as simple as the entering of Jesus's spirit into a new individual that is going to be born towards the end of time.

It is understandable that not every Muslim would agree with this interpretation, and it is ok. About a subject on which God Himself has not made explicit comments, we can only make justifiable and reasonable interpretations, and do not go beyond our limits. That is, we can not claim that "this is how it was and how God tells in the Quran". We only make our case and welcome other perspectives as long as they, too, make their case based on Quran and reason.

And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding. (3/7)

And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie or denies His verses? Indeed, the wrongdoers will not succeed. (6/21)