Semen Production in the Quran: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 40: Line 40:
'''Transliteration:''' min banee adama min thuhoorihim thurriyyatahum}}One other verse in the Qur'an uses the word ''sulb''. In this case there is no mention of ''tara'ib''. It is an example of the simple Arabic phrase mentioned in Lane's Lexicon (see above), based on the belief that the seed of men proceed from their backs.{{Quote|{{Quran|4|23}}|'''Corpus:''' Forbidden to you (are) your mothers and your daughters and your sisters [...] And wives (of) your sons, those who (are) from your loins and that you gather together [between] two sisters except what has passed before.}}Slightly more explicitly, a hadith in [[Sahih Bukhari]] (also in {{Muslim|39|6733}}) uses ''sulb'' to say that the source of Adam's future progeny was in his back from before they were conceived.{{Quote|{{Bukhari|8|76|562}}|The Prophet (pbuh) said, "Allah will say to the person who will have the minimum punishment in the Fire on the Day of Resurrection, 'If you had things equal to whatever is on the earth, would you ransom yourself (from the punishment) with it?' He will reply, Yes. Allah will say, 'I asked you a much easier thing than this while you were in the backbone of Adam, that is, not to worship others besides Me, but you refused and insisted to worship others besides Me."'}}
'''Transliteration:''' min banee adama min thuhoorihim thurriyyatahum}}One other verse in the Qur'an uses the word ''sulb''. In this case there is no mention of ''tara'ib''. It is an example of the simple Arabic phrase mentioned in Lane's Lexicon (see above), based on the belief that the seed of men proceed from their backs.{{Quote|{{Quran|4|23}}|'''Corpus:''' Forbidden to you (are) your mothers and your daughters and your sisters [...] And wives (of) your sons, those who (are) from your loins and that you gather together [between] two sisters except what has passed before.}}Slightly more explicitly, a hadith in [[Sahih Bukhari]] (also in {{Muslim|39|6733}}) uses ''sulb'' to say that the source of Adam's future progeny was in his back from before they were conceived.{{Quote|{{Bukhari|8|76|562}}|The Prophet (pbuh) said, "Allah will say to the person who will have the minimum punishment in the Fire on the Day of Resurrection, 'If you had things equal to whatever is on the earth, would you ransom yourself (from the punishment) with it?' He will reply, Yes. Allah will say, 'I asked you a much easier thing than this while you were in the backbone of Adam, that is, not to worship others besides Me, but you refused and insisted to worship others besides Me."'}}


== Classical perspectives ==
==Classical perspectives==


=== Ibn Kathir ===
===Ibn Kathir===
{{Quote|{{cite web|url= http://www.muhajabah.com/islamicblog/archives/a_quranic_journal/002121.php|title= A Quranic Journal: Surah at-Tariq ayah 7|publisher= Al-Muhajabah|author= |date= November 13, 2002|archiveurl= http://archive.is/UJp0t|deadurl=yes}}|''Yakhruju min bayni as-sulbi w'at-tara'ib''
{{Quote|{{cite web|url= http://www.muhajabah.com/islamicblog/archives/a_quranic_journal/002121.php|title= A Quranic Journal: Surah at-Tariq ayah 7|publisher= Al-Muhajabah|author= |date= November 13, 2002|archiveurl= http://archive.is/UJp0t|deadurl=yes}}|''Yakhruju min bayni as-sulbi w'at-tara'ib''


Line 53: Line 53:
Professional historians hold that the discussion of embryology found in the Quran, as with most discussion of natural phenomena in the scripture, was intended only to inspire awe in its audience by drawing their attention towards amazing natural phenomenon they already knew of (or thought they knew of). Historians hold this perspective because it would not have made sense for the Quran to discuss scientific facts with an audience who, unaware of what was being discussed, would have been unable to appreciate the discussion's significance. Classical Islamic scholars, living in ages prior to the advent of modern science, tended to agree with this view. By contrast, modern Islamic scholars have generally come to hold that these discussions of natural phenomena found in the Quran were intended as miracles predictive of modern science. In addition to entailing the reconciliation of the Quran with modern science, this modern perspective confounds traditional interpretations regarding the significance of these verse and can thus be considered revisionary.
Professional historians hold that the discussion of embryology found in the Quran, as with most discussion of natural phenomena in the scripture, was intended only to inspire awe in its audience by drawing their attention towards amazing natural phenomenon they already knew of (or thought they knew of). Historians hold this perspective because it would not have made sense for the Quran to discuss scientific facts with an audience who, unaware of what was being discussed, would have been unable to appreciate the discussion's significance. Classical Islamic scholars, living in ages prior to the advent of modern science, tended to agree with this view. By contrast, modern Islamic scholars have generally come to hold that these discussions of natural phenomena found in the Quran were intended as miracles predictive of modern science. In addition to entailing the reconciliation of the Quran with modern science, this modern perspective confounds traditional interpretations regarding the significance of these verse and can thus be considered revisionary.


The most common of these revisionary perspectives which advocate a miraculous interpretation of the Quran via its reconciliation with modern science include that of Drs. Maurice Bucaille and A. K. Giraud (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the sexual areas of the male and female), Ahmed A. Abd-Allah (according to which all acknowledged translations and tafsirs are in error, as ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer instead to to the male's “hardening” penis the female's erogenous zones other than the vagina), Dr. Zakir Naik (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the backbone and ribs of both sexes and where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction), Dr. Jamal Badawi (according to which the verses refer not to semen production but to the blood of the aorta as the ‘gushing fluid poured forth’), Muhammad Asad (according to which ''sulb'' refers to the male's loins and ''tara'ib'' to the female's pelvic arch), Moiz Amjad (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' refer to the blood supply for the testes emanating from the backbone and ribs, where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction, and where the ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' 'region' alluded to is a euphemism for the male sexual organ), and Yusuf Ali (according to which the backbone is only symbolically alluded to as a symbol of male strength where semen flows between the backbone and ribs).
The most common of these revisionary perspectives which advocate a miraculous interpretation of the Quran via its reconciliation with modern science include that of Drs. Maurice Bucaille and A. K. Giraud (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the sexual areas of the male and female), Ahmed A. Abd-Allah (according to which all acknowledged translations and tafsirs are in error, as ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer instead to to the male's “hardening” penis the female's erogenous zones other than the vagina), Dr. Zakir Naik (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the backbone and ribs of both sexes and where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction), Dr. Jamal Badawi (according to which the verses refer not to semen production but to the blood of the aorta as the ‘gushing fluid poured forth’), Muhammad Asad (according to which ''sulb'' refers to the male's loins and ''tara'ib'' to the female's pelvic arch), Moiz Amjad (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' refer to the blood supply for the testes emanating from the backbone and ribs, where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction, and where the ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' 'region' alluded to are special euphemisms for the sexual organs), and Yusuf Ali (according to which the backbone is only symbolically alluded to as a symbol of male strength where semen flows between the backbone and ribs).


While the implications pursued by the interpretations of modern and classical Islamic scholars differ (with only the former aspiring to a scientific miracle), some classical scholars also tried to explain the apparent disagreement of a reading entailing the backbone and ribs with what they conjecturally held to be the process behind semen production involving the testes. While the role of the testes in semen production would only be established incontrovertibly with modern science, the pre-modern intuition regarding the role of the testes was strong enough, at least in some cases, to bring classical scholars to attempt a reading similar to those almost universally favored by modern Islamic scholars today (listed in the preceding paragraph). One of the most famous pre-modern source to attempt such a reading is found in the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, which, while reading ''tara'ib'' as the female's 'breast-bones', takes ''sulb'' to mean the male's 'loins'. The classical Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs advances a similar reading, involving the male's 'loins' and female's 'ribs'. Other classical sources, such as Tafsir Ibn Kathir, straightforwardly read ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' to refer to the male's 'backbone' and female's 'chest' respectively.
While the implications pursued by the interpretations of modern and classical Islamic scholars differ (with only the former aspiring to a scientific miracle), some classical scholars also tried to explain the apparent disagreement of a reading entailing the backbone and ribs with what they conjecturally held to be the process behind semen production involving the testes. While the role of the testes in semen production would only be established incontrovertibly with modern science, the pre-modern intuition regarding the role of the testes was strong enough, at least in some cases, to bring classical scholars to attempt a reading similar to those almost universally favored by modern Islamic scholars today (listed in the preceding paragraph). One of the most famous pre-modern source to attempt such a reading is found in the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, which, while reading ''tara'ib'' as the female's 'breast-bones', takes ''sulb'' to mean the male's 'loins'. The classical Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs advances a similar reading, involving the male's 'loins' and female's 'ribs'. Other classical sources, such as Tafsir Ibn Kathir, straightforwardly read ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' to refer to the male's 'backbone' and female's 'chest' respectively.
Line 72: Line 72:
The primordial germ cells form in the wall of the yolk sac during week 4. They later migrate into the developing gonads at week 6 and differentiate into the definitive germ cells (oogonia / spermatogonia).}}The full argument of the critics runs as follows. If Naik’s assertion that the verse refers to the embryonic testes is accepted, it is not evident whether the gonads are located where he claims, i.e. between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs. A cross-sectional diagram of the human embryo shows the gonads at or around the level of the placenta.<center>[[File:Gondev154.gif|alt=|thumb]]</center>Consequently, it cannot be said that the embryonic testes is located between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs as the gonadal or genital ridge (precursor of the gonads) is generally held to lie medial to the lower part of the mesonephros, while the adult kidney actually develops from the metanephros.
The primordial germ cells form in the wall of the yolk sac during week 4. They later migrate into the developing gonads at week 6 and differentiate into the definitive germ cells (oogonia / spermatogonia).}}The full argument of the critics runs as follows. If Naik’s assertion that the verse refers to the embryonic testes is accepted, it is not evident whether the gonads are located where he claims, i.e. between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs. A cross-sectional diagram of the human embryo shows the gonads at or around the level of the placenta.<center>[[File:Gondev154.gif|alt=|thumb]]</center>Consequently, it cannot be said that the embryonic testes is located between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs as the gonadal or genital ridge (precursor of the gonads) is generally held to lie medial to the lower part of the mesonephros, while the adult kidney actually develops from the metanephros.


It is likewise 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). Zakir Naik does not differentiate between the mesonephros and the metanephros.
It is likewise 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. Also, 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). Zakir Naik does not differentiate between the mesonephros and the metanephros.


If Naik’s implied association between embryonic and adult anatomical positions were nonetheless accepted, the explanation given is inaccurate because in the condition of cryptorchidism where the testes is undescended, the highest position of the undescended testes is ''below'' the kidney.<ref>[http://www.nakshatras.net/genetics_basics.htm genetics basics]</ref>
If Naik’s implied association between embryonic and adult anatomical positions were accepted, the explanation given is inaccurate because in the condition of cryptorchidism where the testes is undescended, the highest position of the undescended testes is ''below'' the kidney.<ref>[http://www.nakshatras.net/genetics_basics.htm genetics basics]</ref>


Additionally, the inferior pole of the kidney lies around ''L3'' (the third lumbar vertebra), such that the embryonic testes must be below ''L3''. The twelfth rib does not extend below ''L2''. And because 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.
Additionally, the inferior pole of the kidney lies around ''L3'' (the third lumbar vertebra), such that the embryonic testes must be below ''L3''. The twelfth rib does not extend below ''L2''. And because 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.


Moreover, he interpretation of a ‘drop emitted, proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs’ to mean the embryonic development of the testes is misleading, as the ‘drop emitted’ implies 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 peri- and post-pubertal testes do.
Moreover, the interpretation of a ‘drop emitted, proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs’ to mean the embryonic development of the testes is misleading, as the ‘drop emitted’ implies 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 peri- and post-pubertal testes do.


Naik’s explanation of the nerve, blood and lymphatic circular from the abdominal aorta is not relevant to the phenomenon being discussed. {{Quran|85|6}} speaks about ‘a drop emitted’, commonly taken to mean semen, as this drop is directly responsible for human reproduction, something which cannot be claimed for nerve signals, blood or lymph. Circulation and nerve supply also 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.
Naik’s explanation of the nerve, blood and lymphatic circular from the abdominal aorta is not relevant to the phenomenon being discussed. {{Quran|85|6}} speaks about ‘a drop emitted’, commonly taken to mean semen, as this drop is directly responsible for human reproduction, something which cannot be claimed for nerve signals, blood or lymph. Circulation and nerve supply also 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.
Line 85: Line 85:
===Muhammad Asad===
===Muhammad Asad===
{{Quote||(5) LET MAN, then, observe out of what he has been created:<br/>
{{Quote||(5) LET MAN, then, observe out of what he has been created:<br/>
(6) he has been created out of a seminal fluid<br/>
(6) he has been created out of a seminal fluid<br/>
(7) issuing from between the loins [of man] and the pelvic arch [of woman].
(7) issuing from between the loins [of man] and the pelvic arch [of woman].
<nowiki>*</nowiki>The plural noun tara'ib, ''''rendered by me''' as "pelvic arch", has also the meaning of "ribs" or "arch of bones"; according to most of the authorities who have specialized in the etymology of rare Quranic expressions this term relates specifically to female anatomy (Taj al-'Arus).}}Asad's definition of ''tara’ib'' takes it to refer to the pelvic arch which is a specific part of the pelvis, however, as critics point out, this definition is nowhere evidenced (Asad says the word is "rendered by me"). Dictionaries define ''tara'ib'' as the upper ribs.<ref name="Lane Lexicon taraib2" />


Critics argue that if Asad's definition of ''sulb'' as the male loins (in the modern sense of the word loins, rather than its old and primary meaning of the lower back) as well as his definition of ''tara'ib'' are accepted, his proposition that sexual reproduction is the consequence of a union between the male loins and the female pelvic arch is still inaccurate.
 
<nowiki>*</nowiki> The plural noun tara'ib, ''''rendered by me''' as "pelvic arch", has also the meaning of "ribs" or "arch of bones"; according to most of the authorities who have specialized in the etymology of rare Quranic expressions this term relates specifically to female anatomy (Taj al-'Arus).}}Asad's definition of ''tara’ib'' takes it to refer to the pelvic arch which is a specific part of the pelvis, however this definition is nowhere evidenced (Asad says the word is "rendered by me"). Dictionaries define ''tara'ib'' as the upper ribs.<ref name="Lane Lexicon taraib2" />
 
If Asad's definition of ''sulb'' as the male loins (in the modern sense of the word loins, rather than its old and primary meaning of the lower back) as well as his definition of ''tara'ib'' are accepted, his proposition that sexual reproduction is the consequence of a union between the male loins and the female pelvic arch is again inaccurate.
====Hamza Tzortzis====
====Hamza Tzortzis====
{{Quote||The word tara’ib means breastbone, the ribs or the pelvic arch, and this word according to most authors refers specifically to women.}}Hamza Tzortzis, on his website, repeats Muhammad Asad's perspective while implying that the pelvic arch ''definition'' comes from Taj al-Arus, which he cites directly for this claim. Asad sought only to evidence the relationship of the word ''tara'ib'' to "female anatomy" by citing Taj al-Arus, while providing the definition of "pelvic arch" himself. Tzortzis, repeatedly made aware of this error, ultimately withdrew his lengthy paper.<ref>[http://embryologyinthequran.blogspot.com Embryology in the Qur'an Much Ado about Nothing]</ref>
{{Quote||The word tara’ib means breastbone, the ribs or the pelvic arch, and this word according to most authors refers specifically to women.}}Hamza Tzortzis, on his website, repeats Muhammad Asad's perspective while implying that the pelvic arch ''definition'' comes from Taj al-Arus, which he cites directly for this claim. Asad sought only to evidence the relationship of the word ''tara'ib'' to "female anatomy" by citing Taj al-Arus, while providing the definition of "pelvic arch" himself. Tzortzis, after repeatedly being made aware of this error, ultimately withdrew his lengthy paper.<ref>[http://embryologyinthequran.blogspot.com Embryology in the Qur'an Much Ado about Nothing]</ref>
===Moiz Amjad===
===Moiz Amjad===
Moiz Amjad makes three claims:
Moiz Amjad makes three claims. Firstly, Amjad repeats an idea found in Zakir Naik's work and states that ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the blood supply of the testes emanating from between the man’s back and ribs. According to critics, this idea makes the same error regarding blood circulation that is found in Naik's work. Secondly, also replicating Zakir Naik, Amjad states that the embryonic gonads originate in the area described in the Quran rather than ending up in this position in the fully developed human body. Here again, critics argue that Amjad makes the same general error made by Naik. Thirdly, Amjad states that the ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' region alluded to in the verse is in fact special euphemisms for the sexual organs.
 
1. Sulb and tara’ib refer to the blood supply of the testes emanating from between the man’s back and ribs.
 
This proposition repeats the error found in Naik’s proposition regarding blood circulation.
 
2. The embryonic gonads originate in the area (as per Zakir Naik).
 
This proposition repeats the error found in Naik’s general proposition.


3. The ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' region is a euphemism for the male sexual organ.
Amjad argues this third point by drawing lines on pictures of a human skeleton, so that all parts of the body lying between the relevant bones and the opposing surface of the body are included.


Amjad argues this point by drawing lines on pictures of a human skeleton, so that all parts of the body lying between the relevant bones and the opposing surface of the body are included.
Amjad also argues, to this end, that the ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' are special euphemisms for the male and female sexual organs respectively. There exist in Arabic, however, numerous other, more direct euphemisms for these two organs, and ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' are no where else used euphemistically in this sense in classical Arabic literature, as critics have pointed out. Amjad provides not explanation for why a novel, esoteric, and unclear pair of euphemisms should be employed by the Quran where so many other diverse and well-established euphemisms are available, especially in a textual and historical context where the proposed euphemisms could be acutely misleading.


Amjad also argues that the ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' are euphemisms for the male and female sexual organs. There exist in Arabic, however, numerous other, more direct euphemisms for these two organs, and ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' are no where else used euphemistically in this sense. Additionally, since sperm never flows between separate organs, and always flows inside a single organ, it is very strange that the Qur'an should make an unclear euphemistic reference to two organs in order to refer to just one of those organs, which could easily and clearly been described directly or through various, clear euphemisms.
Critics also note that since sperm never flows between separate organs, and always flows inside a single organ, it is very strange that the Qur'an should make an unclear euphemistic reference to two organs in order to refer to just one of those organs (after all, the semen discussed in the verse emanates from only the male organ, and not the female), which could easily and clearly been described directly or through various, clear euphemisms.  To critics, if these words may be read as both euphemistic and metaphorical, then essentially any word in the Quran could be read in this manner, permitting infinitely malleable readings - and while modern literary theorists may make a case for this method in the abstract, it cannot be said to be useful in determining the original, intended meaning of a historical text.
===Tahir Ul-Qadri===
===Tahir Ul-Qadri===
Tahir Ul-Qadri makes the following claim:{{Quote|{{cite web|url=http://minhajbook.kortechx.netdna-cdn.com/images-books/creation-man/creation-man_1.pdf |title=Creation of Man: A Review of the Qur'an & Modern Embryology  |publisher=Minhaj-ul-Qur'an |author= |date= |archiveurl= |deadurl=no}}|{{Quote||"So let man think from what he is created. He
Tahir Ul-Qadri makes the following claim:{{Quote|{{cite web|url=http://minhajbook.kortechx.netdna-cdn.com/images-books/creation-man/creation-man_1.pdf |title=Creation of Man: A Review of the Qur'an & Modern Embryology  |publisher=Minhaj-ul-Qur'an |author= |date= |archiveurl= |deadurl=no}}|{{Quote||"So let man think from what he is created. He
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,632

edits

Navigation menu