Semen Production in the Quran: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Semen Production in the Quran (view source)

Revision as of 23:55, 15 June 2021

42 bytes added ,  15 June 2021
no edit summary
(View all pending changes)
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:Islam and Science]]
[[Category:Islam and Science]]
[[Category:Qur'an]]
[[Category:Qur'an]]
{{QualityScore|Lead=2|Structure=4|Content=4|Language=4|References=3}}[[File:Hippocrates.jpg|thumb|280px|right|Qur'an 86:7 says that sperm originates from the backbones and the ribs, a theory similar to another (now known to be erroneous) theory proposed by Hippocrates in 5th century BC (1000 years before Islam). Hippocrates taught that semen comes from 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.<ref>Hippocratic Writings (Penguin Classics, 1983) pp. 317-318</ref>]]Towards the end of the 20th century and into the early 21st century, drawing on the work of a broad and largely Saudi-financed movement to demonstrate the concordance of [[Islam and Science|Islamic scriptures and modern science]], attempts have been made to not only defend the '''[[Quran|Qur'anic]] idea of semen production''' (found in {{Quran-range|86|6|7}}) from between the ''sulb'' and the ''tara’ib'', but also to demonstrate it as an instance of divinely inspired scientific foreknowledge, or, as more commonly referred to, a [[Scientific Miracles in the Quran|scientific miracle of the Quran]]. Several specific [[Tafsir|interpretations]] advocating the miracle have been proposed, critiqued, and withdrawn - none, however, have been welcomed by the professional scientific or historian community.<ref>Sam Shamoun has, for example, considered some of these ideas in the articles found [http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/semenproduction.htm here] and [http://www.answeringislam.info/Shamoun/wonders.htm here].</ref>
{{QualityScore|Lead=3|Structure=4|Content=4|Language=4|References=3}}[[File:Hippocrates.jpg|thumb|280px|right|Qur'an 86:7 says that sperm originates from the backbones and the ribs, a theory similar to another (now known to be erroneous) theory proposed by Hippocrates in 5th century BC (1000 years before Islam). Hippocrates taught that semen comes from 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.<ref>Hippocratic Writings (Penguin Classics, 1983) pp. 317-318</ref>]]Towards the end of the 20th century and into the early 21st century, drawing on the work of a broad and largely Saudi-financed movement to demonstrate the concordance of [[Islam and Science|Islamic scriptures and modern science]], attempts have been made to not only defend the '''[[Quran|Qur'anic]] idea of semen production''' (found in {{Quran-range|86|6|7}}) from between the ''sulb'' (literally "backbone") and the ''tara’ib'' (literally "ribs"), but also to demonstrate it as an instance of divinely inspired scientific foreknowledge, or, as more commonly referred to, a [[Scientific Miracles in the Quran|scientific miracle of the Quran]]. Several specific [[Tafsir|interpretations]] advocating the miracle have been proposed, critiqued, and withdrawn - none, however, have been welcomed by the professional scientific or historian community.<ref>Sam Shamoun has, for example, considered some of these ideas in the articles found [http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/semenproduction.htm here] and [http://www.answeringislam.info/Shamoun/wonders.htm here].</ref>


Human semen comprises the product of 4 glands: the testes produce sperm cells, while the fluid in which they are carried comes from seminal vesicles (behind the bladder), the prostate gland (below the bladder), and from the bulbourethral glands (below the bladder).
Human semen comprises the product of 4 glands: the testes produce sperm cells, while the fluid in which they are carried comes from seminal vesicles (behind the bladder), the prostate gland (below the bladder), and from the bulbourethral glands (below the bladder).


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 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.
==Semen production in Islamic scriptures==
==Semen production in Islamic scriptures==


Line 51: Line 56:
:'Referring to the creation of man from a drop of fluid gushing forth from between the backbone and the ribs, Allah emphasizes the inherent weakness of man... Allah says that man has been created from a mix of seminal fluid of man which gushes forth from the backbone and the yellowish fluid of woman that flows from her ribs.'}}
:'Referring to the creation of man from a drop of fluid gushing forth from between the backbone and the ribs, Allah emphasizes the inherent weakness of man... Allah says that man has been created from a mix of seminal fluid of man which gushes forth from the backbone and the yellowish fluid of woman that flows from her ribs.'}}
==Modern revisionary perspectives==
==Modern revisionary perspectives==
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 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.
===Maurice Bucaille===
===Maurice Bucaille===
{{Main|Bucailleism}}{{Quote|Dr. Maurice Bucaille, ''The Bible, the Qu'ran and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge'', Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, ISBN 978-1879402980, 2003|Two verses in the Qur'an deal with sexual relations themselves [...] When translations and explanatory commentaries are consulted however, one is struck by the divergences between them. I have pondered for a long time on the translation of such verses (In plain English that means there is "an improbability or a contradiction, prudishly called a `difficulty'" ), and am indebted to Doctor A. K. Giraud, Former Professor at the Faculty of Medicine, Beirut, for the following:
{{Main|Bucailleism}}{{Quote|Dr. Maurice Bucaille, ''The Bible, the Qu'ran and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge'', Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, ISBN 978-1879402980, 2003|Two verses in the Qur'an deal with sexual relations themselves [...] When translations and explanatory commentaries are consulted however, one is struck by the divergences between them. I have pondered for a long time on the translation of such verses (In plain English that means there is "an improbability or a contradiction, prudishly called a `difficulty'" ), and am indebted to Doctor A. K. Giraud, Former Professor at the Faculty of Medicine, Beirut, for the following:
IbnPinker
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,632

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislamica.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/132633"

Navigation menu