Qur'an and Semen Production (Qur'an 86:7)

This article analyzes the Qur'anic idea of semen production from between the sulb and the tara’ib.

Introduction

Many individuals have promulgated the Qur'anic idea of semen production from between the sulb and the tara’ib. This has led to several distinct classes of explanations provided by them. There are already articles available that refute these assertions.^[2] However, this article aims to summarize the case against the various claims, so that a comprehensive review can be made of the issue.

Surah 86:7

A note on the English word 'loins'

Islamic websites sometimes will show you the word loins in certain English translations and want you to understand it in the modern euphemistic sense as the sexual areas of a man. But this meaning is secondary to its primary meaning which is the lumbar portion of the back, as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary:

It's secondary, euphemistic meaning in the O.E.D. is defined as follows:

In Lane's Lexicon entry for sulb includes the following:^[4]

He goes on to quote a phrase of the Arabs that features sulb, translating it and explaining as follows:

Apologetic Claims

The most prominent explanations are as follows:

1. Drs. Maurice Bucaille and A.K. Giraud: Sulb and tara’ib refer to the sexual areas of the man and woman.
2. Ahmed A. Abd-Allah: Accepts and extends Bucaille’s assumption, and claims that all the acknowledged translations and tafsirs are in error, as sulb and tara’ib does not refer to a man’s backbone and ribs, but to the man’s “hardening” (i.e. penis) and a woman’s erogenous zones (not including the vagina).
3. Dr. Zakir Naik: Sulb and tara’ib refers to the backbone and ribs of both sexes, however the verses refer only to the gonads in the embryonic stage, and not to adults in the act of sexual reproduction.
4. Dr. Jamal Badawi: The verses refer not to semen production but to the blood of the aorta as the ‘gushing fluid poured forth’.
5. Tafsir Ibn Kathir: Sulb refers to the man’s backbone, and tara’ib refers to the woman’s chest.
   1. Tafsir al-Jalalayn - issuing from between the loins, of the man, and the breast-bones, of the woman.
   2. Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs- (That issued from between the loins) of a man (and ribs) the ribs of a woman.
6. Muhammad Asad: Sulb refers to the man’s loins and tara’ib refers to the woman’s pelvic arch.
7. Moiz Amjad makes three claims; a) Sulb and tara’ib refers to the blood supply of the testes emanating from between the man’s back and ribs, b) The embryonic gonads originate in the area as per Dr Zakir Naik, and c) The sulb and tara’ib region is a euphemism for the male sexual organ.
8. Yusuf Ali: Backbone is a symbol of man's strength. Man's seed is a metaphor which flows between the backbone and the ribs.

Analysis

Maurice Bucaille

While there is evidence that sulb can mean “hardening” and thus, the penis, there is no evidence that tara’ib can mean the vagina. Bucaille and Giraud appear to have assumed that tara’ib means the ’sexual areas of the woman’, without providing supporting evidence. Even if tara'ib means what Bucaille and Giraud want it to mean, the term, 'sexual areas of the woman' is too vague to be meaningful. To assume that it means the vagina is merely an assumption, and may constitute the logical fallacy of equivocation.

Ahmed A. Abd-Allah

Abd-Allah extends Bucaille’s proposition, providing dictionaries and tafsirs to support his case that sulb means ‘hardening’ and tara’ib means the sexual areas of the woman.

Here is Abd-Allah's definition of sulb:

Almost all the commonly available translations of the Qur'an refer to sulb as the backbone, though some refer to loins. Even Ibn Kathir accepts backbone. Is Wehr a more authoritative and knowledgeable authority on the Arabic language than Ibn Kathir? This is difficult to believe.

Regardless, Abd-Allah’s proposition is undercut by his own definitions of tara’ib. He failed to show that his tafsirs and dictionaries explain tara’ib to mean vagina. Instead, tara’ib is defined as breasts, eyes, legs and chest. While erogenous zones are important in foreplay, the sexual act really must be consummated through the vagina.

Abd-Allah’s reference to Ibn Kathir’s tafsir is also disingenuous, as he only mentions the one half of the description which supports his case (i.e. tara’ib refers to the woman), while leaving out the other half that contradicts it (i.e. tara’ib is the woman’s ribs).

Zakir Naik

Naik’s embryology is askew. The original position of the cells destined to develop into spermatogonia (sperm producing cells) is not ventro-medial to the kidneys (where they undoubtedly develop) but in the wall of the yolk sac:

Even if Naik’s assertion that the verse refers to the embryonic testes is accepted, it is unclear whether the gonads are located where he claims, i.e. between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs.

This cross-sectional diagram of the human embryo shows the gonads at or around the level of the placenta:

Thus, it is not strictly true that the embryonic testes is located specifically between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs as the gonadal or genital ridge (precursor of the gonads) is commonly believed to lie medial to the lower part of the mesonephros, while the adult kidney actually develops from the metanephros.

It is incorrect to assume the position of the embryonic gonads from the position of the adult kidneys, as the embryonic positions of gonads and kidneys are not the same as their adult positions. Gonads descend, while kidneys enlarge and ascend. It should also be noted that the developing gonads are ventro-medial to the mesonephros (i.e. the embryonic kidney) and not the metanephros (which would develop into the adult kidney). Hence it would seem that Zakir Naik does not know the embryology of the urogenital system and cannot differentiate between the mesonephros and the metanephros.

Even if Naik’s implied association between embryonic and adult anatomical positions were to be accepted, he is also wrong because in the condition of cryptorchidism where the testes is undescended, the highest position of the undescended testes is below the kidney.^[6]

Note that the inferior pole of the kidney lies around L3 (the third lumbar vertebra), thus the embryonic testes must be below L3. The twelth rib does not extend below L2. Since the testes are below the kidneys, there is no possibility that the testes were ever between the ribs and the backbone either in the embryonic or the adult (as with cryptorchidism) stage.

It also seems disingenuous to interpret a ‘drop emitted, proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs’ to mean the embryonic development of the testes, as the ‘drop emitted’ suggests a fully developed and functional testes, rather than an embryonic structure. Embryonic testes do not emit, ejaculate, gush forth, pour forth, spurt or ejaculate any substance; only the peri- and post-pubertal testes do.

Naik’s explanation of the nerve, blood and lymphatic circular from the abdominal aorta is irrelevant and constitutes the logical fallacy of the red herring. This is because verse 85:6 speak about ‘a drop emitted’, commonly taken to mean semen and semen only, as this drop is directly responsible for human reproduction, something which cannot be claimed for nerve signals, blood or lymph. Further, circulation and nerve supply do not correlate with embryonic origin. For example, the blood supply, lymphatics and nerve supply of the lower limbs originate in the abdomen and pelvis. This does not mean the lower limbs embryonically originated in the abdomen and pelvis.

Jamal Badawi

Badawi’s proposition is proven to be in error with the same explanation given for Naik’s blood circulation proposition.

Ibn Kathir

Modern medical science has shown that semen does not emanate from the male’s backbone, nor do the female’s sexual secretions emanate from the ribs.

Muhammad Asad

Even if Asad’s definition of sulb as the male loins (in the modern sense of the word loins, rather than its old meaning of the lower back) is accepted, it is a stretch to accept that sexual reproduction is the consequence of a union between the male loins and the female pelvic arch. Asad does not claim tara’ib means the pelvis, but the pelvic arch which is a specific part of the pelvis. Moreover it is merely his own speculative definition of tara'ib (he says, "rendered by me").

Hamza Tzortzis

Hamza Tzortzis has an article on his website in which he has misunderstood what Muhammad Asad said, implying that the pelvic arch definition comes from Taj al-Arus, which he cites directly for this claim along with Asad. Hamza has made a mistake, and is even aware of this fact (having withdrawn a lengthy paper with the same claim after it was comprehensively debunked^[9]). As pointed out above, pelvic arch is merely Asad's own definiton of the word.

Moiz Amjad

Moiz Amjad makes three claims:

1. Sulb and tara’ib refer to the blood supply of the testes emanating from between the man’s back and ribs.

This proposition is proven to be in error with the same explanation given to Naik.

2. The embryonic gonads originate in the area (as per Zakir Naik).

This proposition is proven to be in error with the same explanation given to Naik.

3. The sulb and tara’ib region is an euphemism for the male sexual organ.

Amjad attempts to show this by drawing lines on pictures of a human skeleton. However, any line can enclose any human organ if that line is drawn on the surface of the body.

Similarly, arguments claiming that the sulb and tara’ib is a euphemism for both the male and female sexual organs make little sense. There are better euphemisms for sexual organs than two other unrelated human organs, since sperm never flows between seperate organs; wherever it is, it always flows inside a single organ.

Tahir Ul-Qadri

Tahir Ul-Qadri makes the following claim:

There is no evidence that tara'ib can be translated as pubic symphisis. Even if Qadri's claim of a single word having a large number of meanings were true and applicable in this case, tara'ib would have meant many organs other than the pubic symphisis. Those organs would have no relationship with the place where semen flows. It is a typical Texas sharpshooter fallacy to focus only on the similarities between two sets of information and draw a conclusion while ignoring the differences. Qadri also ignores the testicles which produce the essential sperms. They are not situated in the zone he mentioned but below the symphisis.^[10]

Yusuf Ali

• Firstly, Yusuf Ali does not explain what he means by seed: Sperm, semen, ovum or zygote. This should have been clarified because the verse is generally taken to be referring to a male fluid but a human is not created without the female ovum. If "seed" refers to one sex, it is biased and incorrect; but if it refers to both sexes, the interpretation of backbone and ribs must be valid for both.

• If the backbone is so crucial for man to exist, it is hard to comprehend why the similarly crucial seed (or drop) would flow near the backbone instead of both being the same thing metaphorically. A man's backbone can often be symbolic but in no way is it related to his offspring.

• There is no reason for even mentioning medulla oblongata here.

Miscellaneous Claims

This claim is erroneous since it twists the meaning of the verse to say that the force for ejaculation comes from between the backbone and the ribs. The actual verse mentions a "liquid flowing" and not its cause.

The ribs are above the seminal vesicles which are above the tip of the coccyx when a standing person's anatomy is viewed. Since only the top of the seminal vesicles falls between the bottom of the coccyx and the bottom of the rib-cage on the above mentioned line, the vesicle is not really between the loins and ribs.^[12] This argument also ignores the prostate glands (source of 25-30% of semen), testes (2-5%) and bulbourethral glands (up to 1%).

Though the ribcage is roughly cylindrical, the uterus is never inside it. Further, the embryo is already "created" much before pregnancy since the verse refers to fertilisation. The liquid being discussed here never flows anywhere close to a woman's ribs.

This is partly similar to the claim of tara'ib meaning uterus; a baby has nothing to do with its mother's ribs. If one were to describe the emergence of a baby by referring to external organs, one would have better said "between backbone and abdomen", not ribs. In all major translations, verse 86:7 (Coming from between the backbone and the ribs) is an incomplete sentence which continues from 86:6 ("He is created from a gushing fluid"), hence it is only a fluid that is said to emerge.

This is not true. The entire process of spermatogenesis from a spermatogonium to a sperm occurs in various regions of the testicles.^[13]

Conclusion

The various attempts to show that the Qur'an correctly describes semen production are not supported by modern scientific knowledge.

These propositions are frequently conflicting, for instance, Ibn Kathir refers to tara’ib as a female organ, while other tafsirs claim it belongs to the man.^[14] Another conflict is the definition of sulb to mean either the backbone or the ‘hardening’ or the loins.

A point often missed, though alluded to by Dr. Campbell, is the phrase “min bain” which literally means “from between”. If this interpretation is accepted, which seems to be the case from a reading of the commonly accepted translations, then one must also note that semen emanates from the penis, and not from between the penis and the vagina. To be strictly correct, semen emanates from the penis into the vagina. This point seems to rule out tara’ib as being anything to do with the female sexual partner.

See Also

• Reproduction - A hub page that leads to other articles related to Reproduction
• Mistranslated Verses - A hub page that leads to other articles related to Mistranslated Verses

External Links

• The Quran on Semen Production
• No Scientific Problems (Errors?!?) in the Quran
• Science in Quran: Ambiguity of Human Embryology

References