When I first heard about the theory of evolution of human kind, I laughed. Well, it sounded crazy, we humans, the creatures greater in might over all the other creations, were evolved from apes eh? How crazy does that sound! Anyhow, although my scientific knowledge is much limited I could not simply let go the question, is it illogical or impossible? In a shallower meaning of evolution – if evolution is not possible probably we would still live as cavemen. It is the evolution of our minds that enabled us to achieve what we have achieved today. If not for evolution we would still be choosing between a camel or a horse or perhaps a donkey rather then thinking of a motorcycle or a car!
However, this still does not give a glimpse into the possibility of physical evolution. And one reason why people conclude that Islam refutes evolution is the fact that it is stated in the Quran that Adam was created by Allah himself, not as an ape but as a human. It is stated “It is He Who has given the best form to everything that He has created. He originated the creation of man from clay; then automated the creation of his progeny by an extract of a despicable water; then He fashioned him in due proportions and breathed into him of His spirit. He gave you ears, eyes and heart; yet you are seldom thankful.” (32:7-9)
Does this ayah actually describe the looks of Adam? Could humans have had a different look in the history? There are several hadith’s that support the fact that first generations of human kind were huge in size! Narrated Abu Hurairar: The Prophet said “Allah created Adam, making him 60 cubits tall… Any person who will enter paradise will resemble Adam. People have been decreasing in stature since Adam’s creation.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Hadith 4:543) A sixty cubits tall means that Adam was created with a height of about 90 feet! And according to this hadith it wasn’t just Adam, but ‘people have been decreasing in stature’ which means the offspring of Adam is also gigantic in size.
If a person of 60 cubits tall existed today, we, the tiny people, would certainly not even accept that person as one of us. We rather call him a giant, and we would be running around haywire. Thus, is it not a physical evolution that has taken place? And could there have been no generation of humans where they looked similar to apes? And in my point of view and evidently, Islam by no means refute evolution.
-thadu-
What if We didn’t evolve from Ape like creatures, but were created independently. But since we and every creature else in the world are biological the process of evolution made us change over time. and as for the units of measurements..In the Middle East the language used is such that if u want to say something is, large it would be said normally in measurements like 10s, 100s and 1000s which conveys the idea of the size relatively but is not giving an accurate measurement.
The 60 cubit hadith is an especially amusing one. We find dozens of pre-human fossils yet not one of them are anything near the mentioned height. If anything, all we find consistently is that pre-modern humans had a slouch and definitely were no taller than modern humans.
Islam by no means refute evolution indeed
To my understanding- “He originated the creation of man from clay”,implies we are all carbon based(that our ‘earthly’ form is by no means heavenly, that we are very much down to earth lol, that we too are of Gaia- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis)
AND while No time frame has been specified for this creation, every indication is there that our ‘evolution’ to the present form has been through ‘Time’, so to speak..
“then He fashioned him in due proportions and breathed into him of His spirit. He gave you ears, eyes and heart”, implies not so much a physical apparatus, as much as a metaphysical; that which sets us apart from the ‘Apes’ we are said to have superseded (who ironically enough still exist; why is it that apes are no longer extinct?)…
“yet you are seldom thankful”, is self explanatory i guess..
As for Al-Bukhari, I’ve got a bone to pick with the guy.
From: “Ha-Mada Ha-Yisraeli B’Angleet V’Ivreet” – [Hebrew-English Israeli Popular Science Journal. September 2001 issue.
Dr. Shlomi Lesser of Hebrew University, and the Chairman of the Hofesh V'Mada Society (a stalwart for deeply skeptical Israeli scientists), led a heated debate between biologists and ultra-orthodox Rabbis on the origins of life. Many of the spectators, including those of a deeply religious stance, came away with the feeling that the Rabbis had not done very well against their "Epicurean" counterparts.
The hi-light of the evening came when Dr. Lesser engaged in a one-on-one question exchange with Rabbi Dovid Brown of Yeshiva University. At one point Dr. Lesser asked R. Brown how tall the first man was, to which the esteemed Rabbi replied, "He was roughly the size of an average man according to chazal [Jewish sages].”
From there Dr. Lesser revealed that genetic research has revealed that the human race coming from a single pair of parents is impossible in light of the biological bottle-neck [a term for the strain put on successive generations by inbreeding] they would have to travel through.
“Our research, in conjunction with the research of other respected institutions around the world, has demonstrated that the entire human population descending from a single pair of human ancestors is highly unlikely,” stated Dr. Lesser.
“It would seem that the traditional view of groups, not individuals, evolving has been corroborated; the only way man could descend from a single pair (rather than from an entire group of transitional hominids) is if the original pair were literally giants in the pre-nutrition age.”
As Dr. Lesser pointed out, prior to the breakthroughs in nutrition that took place in the 17th and 18th centuries, genetic evidence revealed that man would have been shrinking if he came from a single human ancestor.
His calculations revealed that in order for the human race to reach the state it was in during the 17th century, the “Adam and Eve” story would only be plausible if the first man was 90 feet tall (which is fantastic to say the least).
“There is no other way man could traverse the genetic bottleneck” Dr. Lesser again said.
“If Adam was the size of any other man according to the learned Rabbis of the Jewish religion, this demonstrates an obvious absurdity to this myth.”
“Since resemblance to the apes increases as we trace back man’s ancestry into neolithic times, the later paleolithic, the earlier paleolithic and those still earlier stages represented by the remains from Heidelberg, Piltdown, Java, this resemblance which intensifies with age has been accepted as pointing to a common ancestry for man and apes. There may other abundant evidence for supposing such a common ancestry, but the evidence of prehistoric human remains does not justify that inference, though of course it does not discount it. This is based on the fact, if fact it be, that practically all the changes in man’s structure traceable through prehistoric remains are the result of changes in food and habits…Most notable of these are the changes in the skull”
-Wilson Dallam Wallis
Religion always refutes the Theory of Evolution. That’s why religion is wrong: it’s irrational and makes people dangerous. The theory of evolution is supported by all scientist (real scientists not the creationist idiots) and to date there is not a single piece of evidence that disproves the theory of evolution.
And for those who don’t really understand what the TOE states: humans did NOT originate from apes, but rather it states that both apes and humans share a common ancestor. Just like both tigers and lions share a common ancestor or a donkey and a zebra share a common ancestor. Why do some people find this so difficult to understand?
http://www.discovery.org/a/2828
http://www.discovery.org/a/6141
http://www.exploreevolution.com/about_the_book.php
All scientists huh!
And fyi creationists are not scientists, and not all scientists are radical atheists. Evolution is not a rock solid argument, and is marred in controversy even within the scientific community. Also, A theory which seeks to explain the natural history of the planet does not necessarily negate the existence of an entity which may have put in motion that evolution in the first place.
Read that as well
http://www.exploreevolution.com/pdf/peek-inside_24-25.pdf
http://www.harunyahya.com/en.m_categorie_76.php
Turkish Muslim apologist HARUN YAHYA,authored the Atlas of creation. The thesis of the book, which was published in eleven languages, is that evolution is false. The main ‘evidence’ consists of page after page of beautiful photographs of fossil animals, each one accompanied by a modern counterpart that is said to have changed not at all since the time of the fossil….but the whole thing was a fake….
here is what dawkins thought …..I am at a loss to reconcile the expensive and glossy production values of this book with the “breathtaking inanity” of the content . Is it really inanity, or is it just plain laziness ? or perhaps cynical awareness of the ignorance and stupidity of the target audience ? mostly Muslim creationists.
by the way did you guys know that in May 2008 Harun Yahya, whose real name is Adnan Oktar, was sentenced in a Turkish court to a three-year prison sentence “for creating an illegal organization for personal gain.”
dear mulsimah, the guy was a fake…so sorry..
Turkish Muslim apologist HARUN YAHYA,authored the Atlas of creation. The thesis of the book, which was published in eleven languages, is that evolution is false. The main ‘evidence’ consists of page after page of beautiful photographs of fossil animals, each one accompanied by a modern counterpart that is said to have changed not at all since the time of the fossil….but the whole thing was a fake….
here is what dawkins thought …..I am at a loss to reconcile the expensive and glossy production values of this book with the “breathtaking inanity” of the content . Is it really inanity, or is it just plain laziness or perhaps cynical awareness of the ignorance and stupidity of the target audience mostly Muslim creationists.
by the way did you guys know that in May 2008 Harun Yahya, whose real name is Adnan Oktar, was sentenced in a Turkish court to a three-year prison sentence “for creating an illegal organization for personal gain.”
dear mulsimah, the guy was a fake…so sorry..
Turkish Muslim apologist HARUN YAHYA,authored the Atlas of creation. The thesis of the book, which was published in eleven languages, is that evolution is false. The main ‘evidence’ consists of page after page of beautiful photographs of fossil animals, each one accompanied by a modern counterpart that is said to have changed not at all since the time of the fossil….but the whole thing was a fake….he couldn’t fool others but muslims
here is what dawkins had to say …..I am at a loss to reconcile the expensive and glossy production values of this book with the “breathtaking inanity” of the content . Is it really inanity, or is it just plain laziness or perhaps cynical awareness of the ignorance and stupidity of the target audience mostly Muslim creationists.
by the way did you guys know that in May 2008 Harun Yahya, whose real name is Adnan Oktar, was sentenced in a Turkish court to a three-year prison sentence “for creating an illegal organization for personal gain.”
dear mulsimah, the guy was a fake…so sorry..
i agree with jesmond above….religion always refutes evolution
Not only does islam refute evolution but science itself. Evolution is a clear assumption. Darwin says that variation is caused by evolution however variation comes from genes which already exist so he is at loss. Islam says man originated from a single pair of male and female and that is irrefutable. One should ask himself if man originated from monkeys then why do they still exist today?
Evolution is illogical
And Allah is best!!!
[...] a previous writing of mine with the same title, ‘does Islam refute evolution?’ I have looked into the issue of evolution in a logical and Islamic perspective. Why some of the [...]