(Video Transcript)
Muslim believers claim that the Quran is absolutely free-from scientific errors. There is not one scientific mistake in the book… And whenever they are presented with any clear scientific mistake in the Quran, they find creative ways to construct apologetic arguments to refute that claim. So the underlying question is, are Muslim believers really in absolute denial of what is crystal clear? Or do they really have a sound and logical counter argument that the Quran is truly free from scientific errors?
In today’s video, I want to introduce you to one of those exhausted and long-debated scientific errors in the Quran. But more importantly, I want to explore the counter arguments presented by Muslim apologists, and explain why these defensive arguments do not refute or debunk the original claim; that is that there are scientific errors in the Quran – Do you want to bury your head in the sand and continue with your faith? Well, that is your choice. But if you really want to pursue the truth no matter where it takes you, then please keep watching.
A very quick disclaimer before I start: I absolutely support your right to believe in whatever you want to believe in – no matter how absurd or ridiculous it may seem in someone else’s opinion. I stand for religious freedom! But as a non-believer myself, and while I fully support your freedom of belief, I also have the duty of promoting critical thinking and to protect freedom of speech. I stand for diversity and inclusion. And it is only through these values that we can co-exist. With that in mind, let’s delve in.
So what is that clear scientific error in the Quran?
Well, you probably heard it before – as I said – it’s a been long-debated topic and there are plenty of apologetic explanations from Muslim scholars and apologists against it. The Quran details the story of a person or a character mentioned as Dul-Qarnayn in Sura 18. In verse 86 of that Sura, the Quran tell us that dul-Qarnayn Or the 2 horned one reached the place of sunset, and right there, he found the sun to set in muddy waters or a murky pool. A non-believer like myself, would normally look at this passage and see that the Quran clearly fell into a massive scientific error, since we all know that: 1. You can never reach the place of sunset for it is forever setting somewhere due to the earth’s constant rotation around the sun AND, 2. Of course the sun doesn’t set or go into muddy waters at the edge of the earth.
At this point, if you are Muslim watching me, you could do a face palm and say… Oh My GOD! Still some silly non-believers is making this argument??! The Quran didn’t say that the sunsets in muddy waters. It says, Wajadaha – meaning it appeared to Dul-Qarnayn that sets in muddy water. The word Wajad could mean “appeared to” or “looked like” it was setting in a muddy pool.
Okay – Alright – I hear what you’re saying. You claim that The Quran doesn’t say it sets in muddy waters. The Quran says Dul-Qarnayn found it to be setting in Muddy Waters. Thus you conclude that the Quran is true and didn’t fall into any scientific error. I hear you. Can you hear me now? Will you let me explain why this apologetic response doesn’t seem to do it for me. Doesn’t sound convincing at all! Let me tell you why, if you really care about the truth not just protecting your beliefs for the sake of it. Will you?
There are 3 reasons – not just one – Three reasons why this explanation falls short to defend your faith-based position.
The first reason is, Muslim scholars have an important rule in “Tafseer” or interpreting the Quran. The rule of thumb in understanding the meaning on any word in the Quran, is by referring to the Quran itself – القرآن يُفَسَر بالقرآن – Literally means The Quran is interpreted by the Quran. So if we want to really understand the meaning of the word “wajadaha” in this verse, we need to look at how the word was used and how it was meant in the rest of the story. Lucky for us, we don’t need to look too far to find the same word repeated multiple times, for the word Wajad was used twice in this same verse. And four times in the story of Dul-Qarnayn. When you read verse 86 fully, from start to finish, you will see how the translators of the Quran deliberately forged the translation of the word wajad. The first time in the verse the word wajad was translated as appeared to him – while the second time in the same verse it was translated as “found”. He literally found something!
حَتَّىٰٓ إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ ٱلشَّمْسِ وَجَدَهَا…. وَوَجَدَ عِندَهَا قَوْمًۭا ۗ
until he reached the setting ˹point˺ of the sun, which appeared to him “wajadaha” to be setting in a spring of murky water, where he found wajada found some people.
THIS IS the very same word, in the very same verse, yet translated differently. Simply because the second wajad in the same verse cannot mean “it appeared to him that there were some people”. No. He actually found some people. More interestingly, just four verses later, Dul-Qarnayn encounters the sun rise this time in verse 90. Almost identical wording to verse 86 - حَتَّىٰٓ إِذَا بَلَغَ مَطْلِعَ ٱلشَّمْسِ وَجَدَهَا –
This time, the word wajadaha was translated as “He found it rising on a people for”… Not it appeared to him to be rising on people.. No.. He literally found it rising on people. And again, two verses later, verse 93, Dul-Qarnayn reached a third place and wajada min doneham qawma - He found in front of them some people… Every single wajada in the Quran means found or found out.
In fact, in the entire Quran, the word wajada with all its variations appeared 40 times. Every one of these – except that one – was translated as found or found out.. Never meant or translated as “appeared to be”. That’s because, the coherent use of the word wajada in the Quran, means found not appeared to be.
To prove my point, when the Quran wanted to say something appeared to be “while not really happening”, it used a different word. When the Quran was telling the story of Moses and Pharaoh’s magicians, in Sura no 20 verse 66, it said “And suddenly their ropes and staffs appeared to him—as if by magic—to be slithering.” This word translated “appeared to him” is يُخَيَّلُ إِلَيْهِ - not wajada… That’s because خُيل إليه or يُخَيَّلُ إِلَيْهِ means appears or appeared to be when it is not real. While wajada means found something to be in real life. That’s how coherent the Quran is in its usage of words and its meanings.
Now, you coming today or any Muslim apologist trying to convince me that, this one time the word wajada was used - out of 40 other times – but in this instance the Quran meant “the sun appeared to Dul-Qarnayn to be setting in Muddy pool” but the Quran doesn’t mean in reality the sun sets in a muddy pool – That explanation is utter non-sense and doesn’t even match the rest of the Quran itself or its linguistic coherence.
That was my first reason. Now the second reason this apologetic response falls short is that it completely ignores the history of civilisations and mythology. In the Greek mythology – which a lot of people will argue that Dul-Qarnayn came from and it’s an alias for Alexander the Great – but beside that, in the Greek mythology we find the Sun God Helios – Pulling the with his chariot every day in the sky all the way from the east to the west, where he goes into Oceanus or Oceanus – a massive body of water that wraps around the flat disk of the earth where he goes back to the east to pull the sun again from the east to the west on the next day. In some stories, there is a muddy and dark beach at the far ends of the earth where the sun goes down into the underworld.
Similarly, the ancient Egyptians believed that the sun goes to the underworld at night. You wonder how?
Ra – the Sun God of ancient Egypt used two boats or sailing ships. At night, Ra takes the Mesektet, or the evening boat on his journey to the Duat – the twelve hours of night which is also the literal underworld of ancient Egypt.
So between the Egyptian Ra who sails on a solar boat and the Greek Helios who pulls the sun towards the massive body of water known as Oceanus – It doesn’t come as a surprise at all to find the author of the Quran following the mythical trend of his time, telling us in the Quran that the sun also sets in a muddy pool. Perhaps a muddy pool like that muddy beach at the end of Oceanus leading to the underworld – but in the Islamic version it goes and bows down or kneels before Allah.
So, again, you coming today trying to twist the meaning of one word in the Quran to make it sound like “it only just appeared to DulQarnayn” but the Quran didn’t really mean the sun sets in a muddy pool – well, that sounds really like a weak argument to me and honestly, not convincing at all! It seems that the Quran re-iterated what a lot of people already believed at the time!
The third and final reason as to why this apologetic response doesn’t have any merit, is that the Sunnah also confirms that the sun indeed sets in a muddy pool. And we are not talking about a disputed hadith. We are talking about authentic hadith – Hadith Sahih.
Now, you probably heard this hadith before - Narrated by Abu Dharr:
I was sitting behind the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: Do you know where this sets ? I replied: Allah and his Apostle know best. He said: It sets in a spring of warm water.
Some Muslim apologists will claim that this particular narration is disputed and cannot be taken as an evidence against the Quran. And while I disagree with the apologetic response that this hadith cannot be used as an evidence, it requires an entire video to explain why it is still valid.
Instead, let me show you how the Sunnah still agrees and confirms that the sun indeed sets in a muddy pool and that the sahaba and the early muslims understood it that way. Early on, when Muslims were reading this verse no86 in Surat Al Kahf, there was a massive debate around the reading of the actual word, When Dul Qarnayn saw the sunset did the Quran use the word – حمأة or حامية – muddy pool or hot pool of water.
Now, Tafseer ibn Katheer and also Tafsir Al Dur Al Manthour by Imam Al Sauyti tell us the stories surrounding that debate. In one particular story they both mention, the debate was between three Muslim people known as معاوية بن أبي سفيان - ابن عباس and عبدالله بن عمرو … as they were arguing about that word, is it hame2ah or haeyah, they called for a fourth guy named Ka3b el A7bar to ask him his opinion. Now, the most interesting part is that, Ka3b el A7bar was Muslim from a Jewish background. When they asked him about whether the sunsets in عين حمأة or عين حامية - muddy pool or hot pool of water, they asked him a very interesting question. They said, Hey Ka3b, since you are originally a Jew before you embraced Islam – where does the sun set in the Torah? Which Ka3b then answered: “In the Torah, the sun sets in a pool of mud and water”
Now the reason this answer is very interesting and intriguing, is that it doesn’t talk about Dul-Qarnayn at all. It talks about the actual place of sun set – Hey Ka3b, What does the Torah say about the place of sun set? And Ka3b then confirms that the Sun sets in a muddy pool – regardless of Dul Qarnayn and his story. He’s referring to a different book all together.
And it doesn’t really matter if it says so in the Torah or not – that is irrelevant to the argument. It doesn’t even matter if Ka3b is saying the truth from the bible or not…
Why doesn’t it matter, you wonder? - simply because the sahaba معاوية بن أبي سفيان - ابن عباس and عبدالله بن عمرو – they were not trying to verify what Dul-Qarnayn saw or how he saw the sun set. Instead, they asked, what does the Torah say about the place of sun set. Any answer after that doesn’t matter. What really matters here from this story is that, it shows us that early Muslims and the sahaba knew what the Quran meant. It wasn’t that the sun appeared to DulQarnayn as if it sets in a muddy pool… NO! The Quran meant that the sun actually does set in a muddy pool, like “it was mentioned” in the Torah – the place of the actual sunset.
So, to wrap up and end this video – The apologetic response that the Quran is free from scientific errors and that it didn’t fall in the same mistakes of the ancient mythology, is a very weak argument and clearly an absurd claim. You can choose to ignore all the above, bury your head in the sand and insist that the Quran is free from scientific mistakes. But for someone who values the sound of logic and reason, it is undeniable that the Quran fell into the same scientific errors of the ancients and clearly the author was just a mere human from that ancient past.
Comentarios