Pak Tea House » Science » Happy 200th Mr. Darwin: Darwin's World
Happy 200th Mr. Darwin: Darwin's World
Charles Robert Darwin turns 200 today. He stands as one of those pivotal figures in the course of human consciousness who changed the course of the world. This article, first published in Dawn, is an overview of the life and times of one of the greatest scientific observers in history. We at PakTeaHouse celebrate all human endeavor especially that which seeks to propel humanity forward and for me personally evolution means enlightenment and liberation from dogma, orthodoxy and witchdoctorism that often masquerades as something holy in the good name of faith. I, for one, concur with the more rational and reasonable of the believers who maintain that religion – especially Islam- is completely at peace with the idea of evolution. – Yasser Latif Hamdani
Evolution: Darwin’s World
By Dr Viqar Zaman
Charles Robert Darwin was born on 12 February, 1809, in Shrewsbury, England. His father, Robert, was a doctor and Charles was the youngest in a family of two boys and two girls.
He completed schooling in the local grammar school where he learnt classics and poetry. But his greatest pleasure was bird watching and he wondered, “Why every gentleman did not become an ornithologist”.
After schooling he was sent to Edinburgh University to study medicine but he disliked surgery and gave up medical studies. His father felt that theology may suit him better and sent him to Cambridge from where he graduated in 1831. However, his heart still lay in the study of nature rather than religion and he joined the famous naturalist of his time, John Henslow, to study insects.
John Henslow was very impressed by Darwin and secured a place for him on a British Navy ship, HMS Beagle, which was going round the world on a mapping expedition. HMS Beagle sailed out of Plymouth in December 1831 and remained voyaging for five years. Whenever the ship berthed, Darwin would collect specimens of all possible animals to take them back to England for further study.
Probably the most important observation he made during the voyage was on the Galapagos Islands, which form a cluster, about 600 miles from the South American coast. Darwin was struck by the fact that finches living on the islands differed from each other in their beak size and shape. He also noted that the beak variations were connected with the food they consumed, i.e., the beaks were larger and more robust in the seed eaters and smaller and finer amongst the insect eaters; otherwise the birds were almost identical. He concluded that animal species start from an original form and then digress or branch into different species depending on their survival needs.
Briefly the theory he proposed consists of the following:
1. The reproductive capacity of animals, including humans, far exceeds the food supply available to nourish an expanding population. Darwin got this idea from Malthus’s An Essay on the Principle of Population.
2. As a result of expanding population and limited food supply “struggle for existence” ensues. The term “survival of the fittest” depicts the same idea but was first used by Herbert Spencer (1820-1903)
3. There are certain individual variations in the population. If the variations are favourable, the population carrying it, would survive and pass it on to the progeny. Darwin called this ‘natural selection’. This concept also implies that if the variations are unfavourable then that group would eventually become extinct.
4. Animals evolve from a common stock and proceed to develop into new species under the pressure of ‘natural selection’.
5. The development of new species may take many years as evolution is basically an accumulation of countless small changes. Darwin pointed out that the selection process is not unique to nature and man uses selective breeding to produce desired changes from a parent animal, which he called ‘artificial selection’. The common example of this being the breeding of show dogs which range from the great dane to poodle. Under human protection the poodle survives but left to nature it would have become extinct. Artificial selection is also used to produce race horses, ornamental birds and a variety of plants.
Darwin also put forward the idea of ‘sexual selection’ in which certain features of an animal are favoured by the opposite sex, and are thus inherited, although they may not have any utilitarian value or may even be disadvantageous. An example of this is the peacock’s tail which hampers the male to fly but is attractive to the peahen and thus survives the pressure of ‘natural selection’.
Natural selection is difficult to observe in higher animals because it takes place over many years and can’t be experimentally proved. In contrast, microbes reproduce several times a day and their growth can be observed using simple procedures.
A well-known example of natural selection in microbes is their development of antibiotic resistance. A given species of microbes may have a mixture of resistant and susceptible organisms. When exposed to an antibiotic all the susceptible ones would die while the resistant ones survive and multiply. This has happened in the case of a common skin bacterium Staphylococcus aureus which was susceptible to penicillin when if was first discovered. Gradually resistant strains developed to penicillin due to its wide usage, and now S. aureus is almost universally resistant to penicillin.
At present evolutionary experiments on microbes are being conducted in many laboratories. Due to the availability of genome-sequencing technology, scientists can now zero in on the precise genetic changes that occur during an evolutionary change.
In the last chapter of his most famous book, “On the Origin of Species”, Darwin reflects on the appearance and disappearance of numerous species over the great spans of time. He writes, “From the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved”.
Darwin died on 19 April, 1882, and was given a state funeral and buried in West minister Abbey near the grave of Sir Isaac Newton.
The understanding of evolution has greatly advanced since Darwin’s time but he was responsible for a paradigm shift in the field of biology and will always be remembered as a great thinker who put forward the idea that all life forms are interrelated and are continuously changing with the passage of time, to adapt to the prevailing conditions, and this is the logical explanation of the diversity of life that exists on earth.
Filed under: Science
25 Responses to "Happy 200th Mr. Darwin: Darwin's World"
Leave a Reply
PTH biweekly Cartoon
Picture of the Week
-
Sunrise at the Arabian Sea, Charna Island
24 Dec 2011
(4 Comments)
Recent Comments
- Sachbol
said Kalchakra .
Good one , Did you notice how he inse... - kaalchakra
said rex, no problem, my friend. You are a nice fellow.... - kaalchakra said Bin Ismail
Thanks for the response. Fortunately...
- YesSar
said Most of Germanic, Celtic and Slavic are returning... - Raj TOO
said Arab Ki Bund wrote:
- AKB
said @ rajmoot and his like
.
Ugly Dravidians in... - Sachbol said YesSar
The solution is complete separation betwee...
- rex minor said And what a simple but provocative word the anglosa...
- Sachbol said AKB
Has been always right on Qadianis. They are t...
- Raj TOO said Arab Ki Bund:
Muhajirs are t...
PTH on facebook
[...] Charles Robert Darwin turns 200 today. He stands as one of those pivotal figures in the course of human consciousness who changed the course of the world. This article, first published in Dawn, is an overview of the life and times of one of the greatest scientific observers in history. We at PakTeaHouse celebrate all human [...] Go to Source [...]
Man, it’s shocking the way Darwin got everything right without even knowing about things like genes and stuff.
Mendelev is the only other one that comes to mind to match this remarkable feat.
I, for one, concur with the more rational and reasonable of the believers who maintain that religion – especially Islam- is completely at peace with the idea of evolution
Y’ know, I’ve come across this view earlier too, that Islam, unlike Christianity, is compatible with evolution.
Could Yasser or someone else explain what exactly are the differences between the two religions on this?
Doesn’t the common belief in Genesis disqualify both religions on this count?
The people I refer to interpret “adam” and “eve” as a metaphor.
Religion is a construct…god is probably some sort of cosmic consciousness …hence every religious belief is open to reinterpretation.
“The Vatican has admitted that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution should not have been dismissed and claimed it is compatible with the Christian view of Creation.”
See here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html
Evolution has survived through all scientific skepticism in the 150 years since the publication of Origin of Species, and its accuracy has now forced the religious scholars to bring out re-interpretations of religion to bring them into conformity with evolution. If there is any lesson to be learnt, it is that scientific theories should not be judged by religious parameters.
Quite spaced-out, Yasser.
I am also celebrating Chacha Evolution’s 200th but in my own style
I admire YLH’s radical interpretation of his faith. If the main elements of any faith are metaphor what is real. I say this with reference to, say, Hinduism, whose fantastic imaginations about the origin of the universe and the place of Earth in it would benefit greatly were the whole thing merely metaphor.
If faith is to be reinterpretated to make it compatible with the findings of religion then it is best down immediately and not centuries later as with Galileo and Darwin.
And then we need not fight each other over which metaphor is the more appropriate.
Try selling that to the fundos of all faiths.
2 questions for clearing my doubts on Islam’s acceptance of evolution.
1.) Adam and eve are metaphor for what?
If my understanding is correct even the evolution of mammals is predated by asexual reproduction meaning evolution might have to go back to unicellular organisms like amoeba etc. In that context even adam and eve (duality speaking metaphorically) would be a burden.
2.)An idea of an all benevolent god (as in judea christian-Islamic context) will be quite against the ‘survival of fittest’ theory.
2 questions for clearing my doubts on Islam’s acceptance of evolution.
1.) Adam and eve are metaphor for what?
If my understanding is correct even the evolution of mammals is predated by asexual reproduction meaning evolution might have to go back to unicellular organisms like amoeba etc. In that context even adam and eve (duality speaking metaphorically) would be a burden.
2.)An idea of an all benevolent god (as in judea christian-Islamic context) will be quite against the ‘survival of fittest’ theory.
The first Muslim intellectual to refute Darwinism was Jamal al-Din Afghani who wrote an essay entitled Al-Radd ala al-Dahriyyin (“The Refutation of Materialists”) while he was in British India in 1881. In 1885, Muhammad Abduh, one of Afghani’s disciples, translated this text into Arabic in reaction to Shumayyil’s ideas on evolution. Nikki R. Keddie published an English translation of the al-Radd in 1968.[3] Afghani’s response should be seen in the wider context of his efforts to awaken the Muslim Ummah against the Western expansionism and intellectual threat. He was, by no means, against Western education. In fact, he was an advocate of learning the useful arts of Europe and his response was not to the scientific challenge of Darwin’s theory, but to its materialism. It is a polemic that asks Darwin to explain the causes of variations of trees and plants of Indian forests. “Darwin would crumble,” he wrote, “flabbergasted. He could not have raised his head from the sea of perplexity, had he been asked to explain the variation among the animals of different forms that live in one zone and whose existence in other zones would be difficult.”[4] He cites Darwin’s illustration of how the continuous cutting of dogs’ tails for centuries would produce a new variety of dogs without tails and asks rhetorically: “Is this wretch deaf to the fact that the Arabs and Jews for several thousand years have practiced circumcision, and despite this until now not a single one of them has been born circumcised?”[5] In his later life, Afghani softened his stand but he remained a firm believer in the special creation of Man.[6]
In response to the scientific challenge, there was a general defence of the Islamic doctrines on the basis of superiority of revelation compared to reason. For example, Risalat at-Tawhid by Muhammad cAbduh (1849-1905), first published in 1897, expounded the doctrine of unity and emphasized that reason has a restrictive domain beyond which it cannot lead the intellect; it accepted revelation as central to human existence and thus all those scientific theories which could not be accommodated within the framework defined by revelation had to be discarded.
A more accommodating line was adopted by the Lebanese Shica scholar, Hussein al-Jisr, who authored more than twenty-five books, including Al-Risla al-Hamidiyya fi Haqiqat al-Diana al-Islamiyya wa-Haqiqat al-Sharia al-Muhammadiyya.[7] Al-Jisr was born in Tripoli, Lebanon and he was the teacher of many prominent Arabs, including Rashid Rida, the editor of influential journal Al-Minar. Al-Jisr’s views on Darwin are also formulated in the context of western materialism but he makes efforts to reconcile the theory of evolution with the Qur’anic teachings. He quotes 21:30 (“We made every living thing from water. Will they not then believe?”) and then agrees with the theory of evolution.[8] “There is no evidence in the Qur’an,” he wrote, “to suggest whether all species, each of which exists by the grace of God, were created all at once or gradually.”[9]
A full treatment of this theme of accommodation was to find its way in the works of Abu al-Majid Muhammad Rida al-Isfahani, a Shicite theologian from Karbala, Iraq who wrote a book in two parts, Naqd Falsafat Darwin, Critque of Darwin’s Philosophy, in 1941.[10] Isfahani defended a God-based version of evolution and counted Lamarck, Wallace, Huxley, Spencer and Darwin among those who believed in God. He referred to the works of Imam Jacfar bin Muhammad bin al-Sadiq (especially to his Kitab al-Tawhid) and to those of Ikhwan al-Safa’ to point out anatomical similarities found in Man and apes, claiming that Darwin could never provide full treatment of these similarities as compared to the Ikhwan. But he disputed the embryological similarities between man and other animals. He affirmed that the structural unity of living organisms was a result of heavenly wisdom and not a consequence of blind chance in nature; he also demanded identification of first causes.[11]
In 1924, Haeckel’s book on evolution was translated into Arabic by Hassan Hussein, an Egyptian Muslim scholar as Fasil al-Maqal fi Falsafat al-Nushu wa-al-Irtiqa (On the Philosophy of Evolution and Progress).[12]
In his seventy-two-page introduction Hussein agreed with some scientific ideas propagated by Haeckel but he refuted all ideas against religion, though he tried to reconcile Islam and science. He insisted on a non-literal reading of six days verses in the Qur’an and he claimed that what Darwin was saying was heavenly wisdom (Hikmah Ilahyya).[13]
Four years after the publication of Hussein’s book, Ismacil Mazhar translated the first five chapters of Darwin’s Origin of Species into Arabic, adding four more chapters in 1928. The complete translation was published in 1964. He also wrote a book on evolution in 1924.[14] Mazhar is one of the many secularist Arabs who saw nothing of value in his own civilization. He advocated adoption of the scientific method not only in education but also in life.[15] He also published a journal, al-Usur, which had, as its motto, the phrase Harir Fikrak, “Liberate your thought”. He thought man must be free in his thoughts, in his speech and even in his religion in order to progress. He also saw religion as being a private thing, between an individual and his God. He claimed that Islamic Law may have been suitable for the Arabs of the seventh century; it was totally incompatible with modern Arab society. He was, to no one’s surprise, an ardent follower of Mustafa Kemal of Turkey.
In Turkey, up to about 1850, higher education in the Ottoman Empire was controlled by the Ulama (religious scholars) through religious institutions headed by Shaykh al-Islam. But as a result of contact with the west, these educational institutions lost popularity and these fossilized structures, which used to be the hallmark of Islamic learning, had run out of creative energy and were totally abolished along with the Ottoman Caliphate in 1923 when Mustapha Kemal solidified his power and became the president of the new Turkish Republic. In that defining year, Turkey became a country rooted in contradiction of terms: a secular Muslim state, a state whose constitution forbade religious laws from having any role in the state and society (Article 2 of the Turkish Constitution, revised in 1982). During the initial fervour of Kemalism, the ruling junta tried to purged all expression of religion from public life: Arabic alphabet was replaced with Roman alphabet, Islam and its study was taken out of the educational curriculum, prayers which had always been recited in Arabic were translated into Turkish, religious education in traditional Tariqas and Zaviyes was banned, a new legal system based on the European model was adopted and most important for our study, the theory of evolution was introduced as an important part of biology curriculum. By the time Mustapha Kemal died in 1938, Turkey had been transformed into a secular state run by men and women who were fiercely against Islam as a way of life.
While Islam remained the religion of the majority of Turks, the elimination of Arabic from public life, the forced removal of Islamic studies along with the traditional dress, practices and norms of a society based on revealed doctrine made it increasingly difficult for the adherents of Islam to articulate anything based on their faith. The dominant voices were secular voices that considered anything that came from the West a divine writ. This is not to say that there was no resistance to this secularism. In spite of state violence against religiosity and religious worldviews, there remained, at all levels of society, Islamic organizations that tried to preserve values, ethics and worldview based on Islam.[16]
This struggle spilled over into the field of biology. During the rise of the Welfare party (from 7.2% votes in 1987 to 21.4% in 1995) and especially during its coalition government (with secular True Path Party) in 1996, its leader and Prime Minster of Turkey Necmettin Erbakan was able to introduce reforms in curricula. But more importantly, evolution has become a case of political and ideological stance with pro and anti-evolutionists organizing conferences. With Science Research Foundation (known in Turkey with its Turkish initials as BAV) and pro-evolutionists locked in a deadly campaign of kill or die, tens of local meetings and rallies for and against evolution have far greater consequences than merely the verdict on a scientific theory. Pro-evolutionists depict BAV as a fundamentalist organization which was established in 1991, BAV has published several books on evolution. The person who has been singled out as the author of a large number of books on evolution is Harun Yahya, a person whose identity is questioned by pro-evolutionists. His opponents claim that Harun Yahya is not a single person but a group of writers formed by BAV. They even claim that Harun Yahya is actually Necmettin Erbakan himself, or collaboration between Erbakan and Adnan Oktar.[17] His website has an impressive range of books and it states that Harun Yahya is the pen-name of Adnan Oktar, who devoted his life in explaining the existence and unity of Allah. The biographical note states that he is the author of over 100 books.
The opponents of BAV also accuse it of having an active alliance with the Institute of Creation Research (ICR) in the United States. They trace the history of these links and of the establishment of BAV to the report on Darwinism that was commissioned by the Minister of Education, Vehbi Dinçerler, in 1985. Adem Tatli wrote the report and it was distributed to various educational institutions as a “working paper”. In a recent article, Arthur M Shapiro, Professor of Evolution and Ecology at the University of California, Davis and a member of National Center for Science Education (NCSE) accused Vehbi of making a phone call to ICR in San Diego and asking for material on creationism that would be suitable “for translation and distribution in Turkey”.[18]
He also says that the report by Tatli “reproduced the ICR’s arguments, but omitted all Christian fundamentalist hobbyhorses as the age of the earth. Predictably, it concluded that evolution had been falsified by scientists and was still being taught only because of its ideological value to Marxists. Soon afterwards, Tatli’s effort was amplified into a booklet called Evolution, a Bankrupt Theory, widely distributed by the political Islamists.”[19]
Shapiro also points out that American creationists were invited to BAV conferences. He says the BAV held three international conferences in 1998 with “star speakers recruited from ICR and other American sources… between August 1998 and May 1999, BAV staged local meetings and rallies in some 60 Turkish cities.”[20] The Americans who attended BAV conferences are: John Morris, Duane Gish, Carl Fliermans, David Menton, Edouard Boudreaux, Michael Girouard and Kenneth Cummings.
In response to activities of BAV, Turkish Academy of Sciences (TUBA) issued a declaration on September 17, 1998.[21] It opens with a quote from Mustafa Kemal, which states: “I do not leave any scripture, any dogma, any frozen and ossified rule as my legacy in ideas. My legacy is science and reason.”
Because of the importance of this declaration in understanding the nature of conflict in Turkey, we are reproducing the text from the TUBA website:
Science is the most successful enterprise developed by mankind in order to understand and explain the universe and nature, we live in, by the way of observation, experiment, and testing. For centuries scientists have not submitted oppression and obstruction, defending the supremacy of man’s reasoning and intellect, and its ability to attain the truth against prejudiced ideas and traditions. Today science is the greatest and most reliable pathfinder for human civilization’s goals of investigating nature and magnifying and advancing the happiness of societies.
Science, due to its nature, works through free thought and its product of testable hypotheses. Scientific facts can only be endorsed and approved by the international scientific community after long years of unfettered debate and repeated testing by independent methods. Those opinions which pass this merciless test of science, which can explain many phenomena at once and which make it possible for new hypotheses to be tested, receive the right to be called scientific theories. Science, being a system of thought which assumes the existence of an external reality and its comprehensibility, is differentiated from dogmatic systems of faith primarily through its continual openness to debate, and the fact that even the theories considered most successful can be revised when a more advanced explanation appears.
In the past few years an organized campaign against modern science and science education has been started in our country. These efforts, which especially manifest themselves through attacks on scientific theories concerning the origin and development of the universe and of life, are furthered by the collaboration of certain religious groups from within the country and from abroad. In reality, the concepts these groups proposed are nothing but opinions that various Christian organizations have tried to spread for many years but which have been wholly rejected in scientifically advanced countries. These groups, which see the belief that the universe and life was created within a very short period of time by extraordinary and paranormal forces as an undebatable fact, have especially declared war upon the theory of evolution, which determines that all life is derived from common ancestors over long periods of time and that they undergo constant change. Today the theory of evolution is a fundamental concept that brings clarity to many problems concerning life; it finds very widespread acceptance in the world of science and it is strongly supported by reputable scientists and scientific organizations. Furthermore, though evolution was first proposed in the biological sciences, it has today found extremely interesting applications in fields such as epistemology, sociology, and economics, being used to investigate and explain all processes of development where acquired information is passed from one generation to another. The dogma-based propaganda which claims that the theory of evolution is no longer accepted and that it has been demonstrated to be scientifically false is totally incorrect.
The true purpose of these attacks on accumulated scientific tradition, which is centuries old, is to bring up unthinking, unquestioning and uncritical individuals who do not test ideas and who accept dogmatic and incorrect information exactly as they are given to them. It is obvious that those circles who conduct an open or covert war against secular government, freedom in education, and advancement in science and technology in our country do not desire independent-thinking civilized people. These segments of society initially work towards including non-scientific beliefs along with scientific ideas in educational curricula, and in the long term they have the goal of totally eliminating the theory of evolution from textbooks. Such primitive enterprises have been rejected years ago in countries with a high and established tradition of science and removed from the agenda.
The Turkish Academy of Sciences (TUBA) believes that science is the correct path and approach to understanding the universe in which people and societies live, defining nature and determining its laws, and progressing in social, economic and cultural platforms. The citizens of our country have the right and responsibility not only to consume the products of science reflected in technology, but to learn the methods and ways of thought of science and contribute to its progress. Therefore we consider it our duty to warn and inform the public on the matters of eliminating the non-scientific elements of our educational system, installing modern methods of scientific thought and its products in our educational curricula, and taking necessary precautions to ensure that as we hail the twenty-first century a democratic and secular generation with “free thought, free knowledge, and free conscience” is brought up.
;
Let us also note that the general decline of intellectual activity in the Muslim world also had an exception: Iran. As mentioned earlier, by the time Darwin arrived on the scene, the tradition of philosophy had almost died in the Sunnite Islamic circles, though, the transmitted sciences, cUlum al-Naqliah, remained the bedrock of Sunni traditional madrassahs.
But unlike the Sunni world, Islamic Intellectual tradition remained alive in Iran throughout the course of the rise of Darwinism in Europe, but there was virtually no activity in the experimental and physical sciences to match the intellectual vigour of the philosophical tradition[22] that had been revived in Iran during the Safa’vid period.[23] The emergence of the “School of Isfahan” with towering intellectual figures, such as Zayn al-Din ibn cAli ibn Ahmad Jab’i (911/1505-966/1558), cAli ibn cAbd al-cAli cAmili, known as Muhaqqiq-i Karaki (d. 945/1538), Muhammad Taqi Majlisis (1003/1594-1070/1659) and his son Muhammad Baqir Majlisis 91037/1628-1110/1699), the greatest theologian of the Safa’vid period, revived Islamic Philosophy but not natural sciences. Among the hukama of this period are Sadr al-Din Shirazi (979/1571-1050/1640), better known as Mulla Sadra, Sayyid Ahmad cAlawi, Mir Damad’s son-in-law and the commentator of Ibn Sina’s Shifa’, Mullah Muhammad Baqir Sabziwari (d. 1090/1669), Rajab cAli Tabrizi (d. 1080?/1670), a student of Mulla Sadra, cAbd al-Razzaq Lahiji (d. 1071/1661), the author of some of the most important works of hikmat in Persian, like the Gawhar Murad, Sarmay-i iman and the Mashariq al-ilham, and Qadi Sacid Qummit (1049/1640-1103?/1692), the author of The Arbacinat, Kilid-i bihisht and a commentary on the Athulujiyya which was attributed to Aristotle but is now known to be a paraphrases of the Enneads of Plotinus.
Mir Damad, one of the most influential figures of the Safa’vid period, was unique in the Islamic Wisdom tradition because the organization of his work did not follow the traditional pattern of Muslim philosophy that usually started with logic and then proceeded to natural philosophy (tabicyyat), mathematics (riyadiyyat) and theology (ilahiyyat). The ten chapters of his Qabasat deal with various meanings of creation and the division of being, kinds of anteriority, multiplicity, appeal to the Qur’an and the Hadith, nature, time and motion, criticism of logic, divine omnipotence, intellectual substances, chain of Being and finally predestination.[24] Mir Damad sought a solution to the old dispute between the notions of the world being created (hadith) or eternal (qadim) by dividing reality into three ontological categories: zaman or time, dahr and sarmad; the latter two referring to two different kinds of eternities. But this scheme is within the neo-Platonic tradition of Great Chain of Beings rather the western secular scientific tradition.
After the death of Mir Damad’s most famous student, Mulla Sadra, Persia continued to enjoy a high degree of intellectual activity, mostly in its philosophical tradition. For example, Haji Mulla Hadi Sabziwari (1212/1797-98-1289/1878), the most famous hakim of the Qajar period, produced, among other works, a complete and systematic summary of hikmat, Sharh-i manzumah (composed in 1239/1823) which forms the basic text of this Wisdom school along with Shifa’ of Ibn Sina, al-isharat of Nasir al-Din Tusi and Asfar of Mulla Sadra.[25] Qum, Mashhad, Isfahan and Tabriz remain major centers of Islamic philosophy even today and the tradition of celebrating centenaries of Muslim philosophers has further helped in dissemination of the works of these masters.[26] There exists in this tradition, a detailed exposition of the Muslim position on the generation and corruption of beings, which links these recent thinkers to the Islamic philosophical tradition. But none of the Iranians mentioned above, not even those who were Darwin’s contemporaries, dealt with his theory directly.
This may be because the direction taken by the western science after the Renaissance was totally alien to the intellectual climate of the Muslim world. Increasing interaction with the West did produce a major change in the Muslim world which resulted in the creation of two kinds of intellectuals: those who were well-versed in the traditional subjects but without much knowledge of contemporary western thought and especially sciences and those who felt totally disarmed against the advances of western thought and science.
In the Indian subcontinent, there were only a few responses to Darwin. Muhammad Iqbal (1876-1938) has two oblique references to Darwin in his Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam.[27] Originally delivered in 1930, these six lectures form an early Muslim response to materialism. Iqbal wrote:
The discoveries of Newton in the sphere of matter and those of Darwin in the sphere of Natural history reveal a mechanism. All problems, it was believed, were really the problems of physics. Energy and atoms, with the properties self-existing in them, could explain everything including life itself, thought, will, and feeling. The concept of mechanism—a purely physical concept—claimed to be the all-embracing explanation of Nature. And the battle for and against mechanism is still being fiercely fought in the domain of Biology. The question, then, is whether the passage to Reality through the revelations of sense perception necessarily leads to a view of Reality essentially opposed to the view that religion takes of its ultimate character. Is Natural Science finally committed to materialism?[28]
Iqbal further states that though natural science can produce verifiable data about matter, life and mind, it is merely generates “a sectional view of Reality”. He then delineates the limitations of natural sciences: “… the moment you ask the question how matter, life, and mind are mutually related, you begin to see the sectional character of the various sciences that deal with them and the inability of these sciences, taken singly, to furnish a complete answer to your question.”[29]
Muhammad Hamidullah, perhaps the best Muslim scholar of the twentieth century to write in French, delivered a series of twelve lectures at the Islamia University Bahawalpur, Pakistan in March 1980.[30] The lectures, delivered without even the help of notes, covered a vast range of areas, ranging from the history of the Qur’an to the educational system in Islam and they truly reflect the depth and breadth of a unique scholar who has devoted his life to solitary pursuit of scholarship. Each lecture was followed by a question-answer session. During the question-answered session that followed the lecture on “Religion”, someone asked Dr. Hamidullah: “If Darwin’s theory of evolution is correct from the scientific point of view, there is conflict between science and Islam. Kindly explain.”
Dr. Hamiduallah’s answer is totally astonishing. He said:
It has been presumed that Darwin’s theory has been rejected by Islam. It appears to create complications for us because we presume that Darwin was an atheist, although he believed in God. When he completed his medical education and entered his family profession, Darwin went through a metamorphosis. Being sick of the world he became interested in God. He studied Christianity in the Faculty of Religion at the University of Cambridge. Comparative Religion was one of the subjects taught in the University. Darwin also learned Arabic in order to understand Islam. In the collection of his letters that have been published, a number of them are addressed to his Arabic teacher. They are couched in extremely reverent and respectful language.[31]
This is indeed an amazing statement that belies all known facts about Darwin and what is more disturbing is the authoritarian tone of the statement. Dr. Hamidullah then goes on to state another astonishing theory:
Among the text books prescribed for Arabic studies at that time were selections either from The Epistles of Ikhwan al-Safa’’ [Brethren of Purity] or al-Fawz al-Asghar of Ibn Maskawayh. Both the books mention the theory of evolution. Nobody ever criticized their Muslim authors on this account nor were they dubbed as unbelievers. The books in question belong to the third or fourth century of the Hijrah.[32]
One can only say that it must have been the blind desire to accommodate Darwin within the Islamic worldview that produced this statement for it is inconceivable that Dr. Hamidullah would not know about the true nature of this theory or hundreds of criticisms that exist on The Epistles of the Brethren of Purity, including the well-known and reasoned attack of al-Ghazali who states in his al-Munqidh min al-Dalal: “Among them [the Taclimites] was one who claimed to know some of their lore. But the substance of what he mentioned was a bit of the feeble philosophy of Pythagoras. The latter was one of the early ancients, and his doctrine is the feeblest of all philosophical doctrines. Aristotle had already refuted him and had even regarded his teaching as weak and contemptible. Yet this is what is followed in the book of the Brethren of Purity, and it is really the refuse of philosophy. One can only marvel at a man who spends a weary lifetime in the quest for knowledge and then is content with such flaccid and thin stuff! Yet he thinks he has attained the utmost reaches of knowledge!”[33]
Dr. Hamidullah then elucidates the theory contained in “these books” which, according to him,
state that God first created matter and invested it with energy for development. Matter, therefore, adopted the form of vapour which assumed the shape of water in due time. The next stage of development was mineral life. Different kinds of stones developed in course of time. Their highest form being mirjan (coral). It is a stone which has in it branches like those of a tree. After mineral life evolves vegetation. The evolution of vegetation culminates with a tree which bears the qualities of an animal. This is the date-palm. It has male and female genders. It does not wither if all its branches are chopped but it dies when the head is cut off. The date-palm is therefore considered the highest among the trees and resembles the lowest among animals. Then is born the lowest of animals. It evolves into an ape. This is not the statement of Darwin. This is what Ibn Maskawayh states and this is precisely what is written in the Epistles of Ikhwan al-Safa’’. The Muslim thinkers state that ape then evolved into a lower kind of a barbarian man. He then became a superior human being. Man becomes a saint, a prophet. He evolves into a higher stage and becomes an angel. The one higher to angels is indeed none but God. Everything begins from Him and everything returns to Him.[34]
This statement, which even does not state the thesis propounded by Ikhwan, as we will see shortly, is revealing for it shows how certain Muslim thinkers can “Islamize Darwinism”. But what follows is even more revealing of this attitude.
Dr. Hamidullah states that
when all this has been stated by Muslim thinkers and no Muslim scholar ever took them to task for making such statements, one should pause and ponder over these facts. In the Qur’an it is stated that God made man out of clay. Our concept of the creation of man is that God, like a potter, molded clay into shape and breathed His spirit into it and Adam was thus created. Possible this was the process but what does one do with verses 18:37, 22:5, 35:11, 40:67 which state time and again that God created man from clay and sperm? It is obvious that clay does not create sperm; it comes from an animal and a human being. It means that the mention of all intermediary stages of evolution has been omitted and attention is drawn to the original source which is clay. The last cause is the sperm of man which stays in the womb of a woman.[35]
But perhaps the worst example of this attitude is the definition of evolution that he produced from the Qur’an: “Take yet another verse of the Qur’an (71:14): “He created you in stages”. The word tawr is the basis of tatawwur which means evolution.”[36]
This is then further defended: “This can also mean that God created man as a mineral in the first instance. Minerals developed into vegetation which developed into animal life. There is no contradiction.”[37]
We wish to look at work of Brethren cited by Dr. Hamidullah in detail and examine his claim in the light of Islamic scientific tradition which has, as one of its most consistent themes, the study of Nature within the general cosmological principles which dealt with the generation and corruption of beings but let us first state the main thesis of this paper.
by the way: alok name is blocked so i am using aloks to post my messages
Why is Islam compatible with Evolution? Lets talk a bit about evolution first.
Evolution is more a Universal theory than a biological one. It is applicable to natural systems, ecosystems, and includes the principles of adaptability, self organisation and self sustenance. Of course it is a big political issue as well, having been used as white man’s supremacy theory ( natural selection) for decades and having given birth to Eugenics. It has its weaknesses and gaps as well and within the evolutionary world there are well known ‘Darwin wars’ such as between Dawkinians and Gouldians. Similarly the theory suffers form confirmation bias and tautological arguments. Perhaps the best-known philosophical criticism of evolution was put forth by Karl Popper, who once claimed that “Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research program”. The simple version of the so-called ‘tautology argument’ is this: Natural selection is the survival of the fittest. The fittest are those that survive. Therefore, evolution by natural selection is a tautology (a circular definition). Evolution has also managed to produce militant atheists; such as soft ones like Dawkins who wants to ban all religion, and hard core such as Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens who are particularly vitriolic against Islam to the extent of suggesting to annihilate Muslims.
It has also been argued the Darwin has got more credit and prominence simply because of who he was, an Englishman, in the then biggest Empire in the world, British of course. Certainly Evolutionary ideas predate him. Geologists and paleontologists had made a compelling case that life had been on Earth for a long time, that it had changed over that time, and that many species had become extinct. Lamarck and others had promoted evolutionary theories but without evidence. Many German biologists conceived of life evolving according to predetermined rules, in the same way an embryo develops in the womb.
Darwin simply provided the first coherent evidence for the evolution by his method of ‘natural selection’ ( as opposed to artificial selection of pigeon breeders he had worked with during his studies) – a genius master stroke. Darwin published his book only after Alfred Wallace had written articles and came forward and he also exhorted Darwin to finish and publish his book. He sent Darwin his theory in 1858, which, to Darwin’s shock, nearly replicated Darwin’s own. These theories were presented in Linnaean Society in 1858. Darwin published in 1859. Wallace, on the other hand, continued his travels and focused biogeography. The phrase ‘survival of the fittest’ was not Darwin’s. It was urged on him by Wallace, the co-discoverer of natural selection, who hated ‘natural selection’ because he thought it implied that something was doing the selecting. The phrase ‘survival of the fittest’ was originally due to Herbert Spencer some years before.
But the first known man to write about biological evolution is AlJahiz, the Muslim biologist from Baghdad in the 9th century.
Interestingly some of the ideas with in the evolution such as selfish genes, nature vs. nurture, memes etc (like some Quantum mechanics ideas) are so speculative and bizarre that they make the idea of ‘GOD’ or a benevolent creator look a much simpler and rational one. (Although ‘Rationality’ has its own weaknesses simply because its so dangerously intoxicating. As iqbal had said ‘ warna qawali se kuch kamtar nahin ilm ul kalam’.)
Why is Islam compatible with Evolution? Because to begin with Quran does not give the Biblical account of creation. It also as YLH says talks a lot in metaphor. (And yes Hades you may be surprised that it is a Muslim claim that all religions including Hinduism are from Allah, but they have been distorted). Allah talked about Creation of Humans before he talked about anything else, including creation of Adam. Creation of Adam is mentioned in Quran on four different occasions and if read it carefully it does not create the Biblical picture of Allah sitting somewhere carving Adam out. Then Quran also talks about replacing humans with others in a different verse . It also specifically appoints humans as Khalifah ul Araz (second in command on Earth).
The closest explanation to evolution of Adam has been provided by an Australian convert to Islam, Akbar (sorry I don’t remember the surname right now). Read Quran verse 2: 30. Akbar has argued that Adam was no more than a homo specie (homo sapiens) on this earth who was selected by Allah to be the Sentient Being. As you see Angels ask ‘you want to make some the khalifa who creates fitna and fasaad one earth?’ Akbar argues rightly that how did the angles know that Adam was going to making fitna and fasaad (in future tense ‘ make mischief and shed blood’); if he/she did not pre-exist and was already not doing fitna and fasaad( sometimes I think angles were so right). Also note the tense used in the verse. As you know several homo species coexisted with homo sapiens such as Neanderthals, erectus, sapiens idaltu and floresiensis.
Thus this homo specie was selected (in preference see verse 17: 70) over others. How? By bestowing ‘Consciousness’; one mystery which alludes definition and scientific explanation yet, (and as Paul Davies and others believe will continue to allude defined explanation, at least in 21st century). There is a lot more that can be said but perhaps this is not the space for it (as a comment).
In general if you read Islamic history and thought you will find that there is no rigidity and predefined and defined concepts (at least in the first five hundred years) that inhibit the growth of several explanations, about creation of universe and human beings at odds with each other. Fortunately the philosophical concepts stayed away form the clutches of Shariah Taqlidis and had their defendants when a usurper came along.
I finish this with a quote for Introduction to the History of Science by George Sarton.
“The Muslim ideal was, it goes without saying, not visual beauty but God in His plentitude; that is God with all his manifestations, the stars and the heavens, the earth and all nature. The Muslim ideal is thus infinite. But in dealing with the infinite as conceived by the Muslims, we cannot limit ourselves to the space alone, but must equally consider time.’’
That is why many Muslims believe (more than a metaphor) that Islam has no problem with evolution. But this is no claim to superiority of Muslims.
DISCLAIMER:
I posted my comment without knowing that alok has posted a comment; I have not read his comment and neither have I responded to him/her.
Azhar,
Thanks for that write-up, man. Quite cogent. In fact you should submit it to actually be posted on the forum…I surely wouldn’t mind seeing it there.
It also as YLH says talks a lot in metaphor
I wonder how many muslas actually believe this. The Salafis, to the best of my knowledge, reject it outright.
Regards,
Hades
And yes Hades you may be surprised that it is a Muslim claim that all religions including Hinduism are from Allah, but they have been distorted
I shall sleep well tonight, knowing this fact.
The concept of a benevolent god with a long flowing beard sitting atop a throne is hellenistic not semitic.
My own view of Islam is open to scientific reinterpretation. There is a hadith I am told that equates god with time.
With our new understanding of time space continuum, I think we can probably reinterpret the whole concept of god and spirituality.
Azhar,
Of course it is a big political issue as well, having been used as white man’s supremacy theory ( natural selection) for decades and having given birth to Eugenics.
Incidently, Eugenics is a mis-interpreation of Natural Selection.
The theory deals almost solely with one thing–numbers of the next generation. Excellence, or human definitions of it, have nothing to do with it.
Darwin’s theory, for example, says that Desis are a lot more “successful” that the firangs because there are more desis. That the most desis ‘drive’ to work in a bail gaadi has nothing to do with it.
Similarly, I’m sorry to say that Semetic views of Humans being the Lord of the Beasts and such again don’t fit in with Natural Selection.
Cockroaches and bacteria whoop our asses on that count cos they’ll, in all probability be here long after we’ve nuked ourselves over who gets to keep more ice on the Siachin Glacier.
Regards,
Hades
Hades
Too right you are about bacteria and cockroaches. as far the salafis are concerned they don’t even live up to their name. as you probably know Salaf means ancestor ( plural Islaaf… ancestors). if they were really salfis they would behave very differently.
YLH
that Hadith is ” Dont say Time is bad or worse; For Allah is Time”. As you know about surah As’r.
aloks
can you please tell us the source/s of your comment. very interesting. also will you complete it please?
hmmm…..
by going through some comments i feel and see the necessity of people to marry religion with reason.
The necessity of not being seen as unreasonable and non scientific (by not accepting theories-like in this case ‘Darwin’) yet at the same time not being able to give up religion(because it is a case of identity). hence the need to stretch(not necessarily a wrong thing) the religion to meet science at some point. It is a compromise at best since many are not equipped to have the courage to stand on either shore(where their conviction lies). perhaps its a game we play with ourselves to feel better and secure?
After all “is Religion a matter of convenience”?
alok
actually the most courageous shore to stand on is the one where Religion/Science are complimentary; not the other way round as you suggest.
you have made the typical mistake of confusing/mixing up the science with technology; equating advancement with progress; and accepting a western definition of religion (with its greeko-roman-judeo-christian perspective)applying this into the discourse. If you are Hindu, you should know better.
look at what you said
‘by going through some comments i feel and see the necessity of people to marry religion with reason’.
you have used word ‘religion ‘ in place of ‘nonreason or unreason’ and word ‘ reason’ for science.
oh boy….
can you please give me the references I requested.
http://saif_w.tripod.com/curious/evolution/muz/muz-part3.html
the references at the end seem helpful. Suit yourself.
Indeed religion is unreasonable because religion revolves around faith and belief which cannot be equated with reason.
Most religions/Theology/Holy books are said to be ordained from god, divine knowledge etc.
Its given and accepted. No dissent is allowed because it cannot be accepted that it is incomplete and further improvements could be done over it. There is no evolution to it.
This is the part which denies reason and solely and utterly depends on the faith of its followers to carry on.
Just look at the psychology part of it:
something is written in a holy book which is not in accordance to the percepts of science/technology/logic/reason whatever you call.
Then rather than outrightly rejecting it people try to find metaphorical meanings, hidden meanings rather than at face value. I mean whats the need to do all this. Just say that so and so is written in the holy book. I don’t accept it. I may accept other things but its not necessary that all that is written is correct. It could be wrong too.
This is what i call complementary. You can take a lot of wisdom out of holy books and augment your living but to accept that its the final word is an insult to your spirit of enquiry and the scientific quest to find the truth.
i have tried giving references but my ids are blocked more than often….the last thing i had posted a day ago including references doesnt not show up…
This is with reference to YLH’s opener to this post.
You “concur with the more rational and reasonable of the believers who maintain that religion – especially Islam- is completely at peace with the idea of evolution.”
However, there is a basic problem here, not just with Islam, but with any religion that promotes the idea of a higher being that created the universe. Whether this creation took place in a millisecond or over billions of years is irrelevant, because both assume the existence of a ‘creator’ or ‘creating force’, which logically would have to be far more complex than the species it creates. This presents a problem of regression, i.e. Who created the creator, and who created the creator’s creator and on and on. At least I haven’t found a satisfying response to this problem, which is why I consider evolutionary theory to be a deathblow to religion.