Qur'an and Embryology

    

Here is something I wrote up but never had time to finish, 

feel free to send me your comments.  



-- Milind Saraph     [email protected]





I see that the embryology in the Quran has again appeared in SRI.

Some time ago the I was involved in a discussion about whether the Quran 

contains details about Embryology which could not have been known at 

that time. Please note focus of this note: it is about details which "could 

not have been known" and not whether the details were (or not) known.  I have 

not had time to tie up some loose ends and I would appreciate any comments 

and suggestions.



To those who question my motives -- I have always been fascinated by claims

of existence of knowledge acquired by non-traditional means such as through

mysticism or direct communication from a supernatural entity (entities).



I have tried to ensure that I dont insult anyone's beliefs, even

inadvertently.  If I have not succeeded in my attempt, let me know why you 

feel so.  



I was given the following references and sent some IPC pamphlets [6] by 

mail.



>[1] Moore, Keith, L.: The Developing Human.  Clinically oriented

>embryology. 3rd Ed., W.B. Saunders, 1982

 

I also looked at the more recent edition of this book; the material

in the section on historical perspective has not changed.  So I am

using the new edition (pages 8-9).



Here are some highlights from [1]:



1. Ancient Views about Embryology



   Garbha Upanishada in Sanskrit, supposed to have beeen written in 1416 B.C,

   correct in sequence of appearance of structure, incorrect in dates.



   Hippocrates, considered the Father of Medicine made important contributions

   to Embryology in fifth century B.C.



   Aristotle, considered the Father of Embryology wrote a treatise on

   Embryology in fourth century B.C.  His treatise contains the same

   erroneous idea that the embryo developed from a formless mass as

   that in Garbha Upanishad.



   Galen wrote a book entitled "On the Formation of the Foetus" in 

   first century A.D.



2. Embryology in the Middle Ages



   "It is, however cited in the ... the Quran .., that human beings are

    produced from a mixture of secretions from the male and the female.

    Several references are made to the creation of human being from a

    nufta (small drop).  It is also stated that the resulting organism

    settles in the womb like a seed, six days after the beginning. 

    (The human blastocyte begins to implant in the uterus about six

    days after fertilization.)  Reference is also made to leech-like

    appearance of the early embryo.  (The four week embryo shown looks

    like a leech or a bloodsucker.)  The embryo is also said to 

    resemble a "chewed substance."  (The somites of older embryos 

    somewhat resemble teethmarks in a chewed substance.)  For more 

    information ...



The references he cites are: his article in JIMA and "The Human

Embryo in Arabic Scientific and Religious Thought", by B. Musallam.

I could not find this book by Musallam in the library but I did

find his other book:



[7]  Musallam, "Sex and Society in Islam", Cambridge Studies in Islamic

     Civilization, ISBN 0 521 24874 4.



>[2] Moore, Keith L. and Azzindani, Abdul Majeed A.: The Developing

>Human.  Clinically oriented embryology with Islamic Additions, 3rd

>Ed., Dar Al-Qiblah and W.B. Saunders



I could not find this one in our library, neither does it show up in

Library of Congress catalog.  Most probably it is same as [1] with

annotations and commentary as it relates to the Quran.

 

>[3] Moore, Keith L.: "A scientist's interpretation of references to

>embryology in the Qur'an." JIMA 18:15 (1986) (Journal of the Islamic

>Medical Association of US and Canada)



I have no access to this journal.  If someone is willing to mail me

a copy I will pay for the copying and mailing charges.



>[4] Albar, Muhammed Ali: Human Development as revealed in the Holy

>Qur'an and Hadith.  Illustrated with color photographs.  Contact the

>IPCI (USA), P.O. Box 218, Woodside, New York, 11377-0218



I did not expect to find [4] in our library and did not.

 

>[5] This is the Truth.  (Video tape) Scientific Signs in the Qur'an

>and Hadith, from the Creation of the Universe to Human Embryology.

>Contact IPCI at address above. 



Although it may not help much, I am willing to look at the transcript 

of this tape if someone has it.



I have a copy of the following which was sent to me by mail:



[6] The Developing Human according to the Quran, the Hadith and Modern

    Embryology, 5 part pamphlet distributed by IPCI.



I will skip [2], [4] and [5].  I will focus on [1] and [6].  Together

these may cover all the details. 





My thoughts on passages from Moore's book [1]

---------------------------------------------



A. "human beings are produced from a mixture of secretions from the male

    and the female.."



   Aristotle believed that a male contributes the principle of organization

   whereas a female contributes only matter.  He solved the problem of

   resemblance to the mother by positing that this is determined by the

   degree to which the material contribution from mother resists

   formation.



   Galen (first century A.D.) disagrees with Aristotle and argues that the 

   female semen, just like the male semen, contributes both to the matter 

   and the form of the foetus.  This idea had been around at least for 600 

   years.



   (See Chapter 3 from Musallam's book [7]).



B. "Several references are made to the creation of human being from a

    nufta (small drop)."



    From [7], page 54:

  

    "The stages of development which the Quran and hadith established for

    the believers agreed perfectly with Galen's scientific account.  Galen

    spoke of four periods in the formation of the embryo: (1) seminal 

    matter; (2) as a bloody form (...) (3) the foetus acquires flesh and

    solidity (...) and .. (4) all the organs attain their full perfection..

    ... Arabic science employed the same Quranic terms to describe the

    Galenic stages ....."



C   "leech-like appearance of the early embryo. ...  resemble a 

    "chewed substance."

    

    Factual observation.



D.  "It is also stated that the resulting organism settles in the womb 

    like a seed, six days after the beginning."



    This is the only specific fact which Moore implies could be found in

    the Quran.



    Musallam provides a translation of the relevant verses on pages 53-54.

    I looked at "History of Embryology" by Joseph Needham where he provides 

    translated verses (translated by his colleague).  I searched the online

    translation by Shakir.  I could not find any verse which could be

    considered to imply this.



    I need to look at [3] to understand how Moore comes to this conclusion.



    Needham characterizes the Quranic description as "seventh century echo

    of Aristotle and Ayurveda."  (Ayurveda is the Indian Medical system).

    Needham credits Galen for consolidating biogical knowledge of antiquity

    and transmitting it to Middle ages.



My thoughts on IPCI pamphlets [6]:

---------------------------------



I will focus only on the Quranic verses, which all the Muslims believe to 

have been divinely guaranteed to remain free of error. 



Pamphlet 1:



1.A "The Hadiths have also been recorded and preserved by the will of God

    by men who used the strictest of methods for recording the traditions

    of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upong him)."



    This is not really relevant to the discussion.  But does this mean

    that the Hadith are protected against error by the divine will? 



2.B "Before Islam and a long time afterwards, it was predominantly believed

    that the embryo originated from the mestrual blood."



    This is simply untrue, as far as "before Islam" is concerned.  See 

    Galen's ideas which were predominant then. 



Pamphlet 2:



2.A "He created you in the wombs of your mothers from one stage to another

    and all along three veils of darkness surround you." (39.6)



    The pamphlet says: "This probably refers to (i) the maternal anterior

    abdominal wall, (ii) the uterine wall, (iii) the amniochoric membrane."



    I will withold my comment until I read more on development of human 

    embryo and also find out if the number three has any significance

    in a metaphorical sense.  Also I need to find out whether there are indeed

    only 3 layers and if there are, whether they are observable as 3 layers.  



2.B "It is an established fact that the fertilized ovum is implanted in 

    the uterine mucosa about six days after fertilization, and anatomically

    speaking, the egg is indeed something which clings."



    Here again is a reference to six days but I could not find any verse

    which implies this.



2.C "Then out of the chewed-like substance partly formed and partly

    unformed.." (22.5)



    The pamphlets interpretes this to mean all the organs are formed but

    their functions are yet to appear.  To me, this seems more like an 

    observation of the nature of chewed-like substance.



2.D "Then out of the leech-like structure We made a chewed-like substance,

    then we made out of that chewed-like substance a skeleton (bones)."



    This stage occurs at 40 days and again is just an observation.



2.E "... Then We clothed the bones with flesh (LAHM) then We developed

    out of him another creation (NASHAH). .... " (23:14)



    This stage occurs at the seventh week.  This again is an observation.



Pamphlet 3:



    There are no references to the Quranic verses.



Pamphlet 4:



4.A "They ask about (intercourse during) mestruation.  Say: 'It is a 

    harm, so keep away from women during mestruation and do not approach

    them until they are clean.'"



    I dont know what the prevailing view was in various cultures during

    that time.



    There is no reference to other verses.



Pamphlet 5:



    This refers to some verses from the Quran regarding punishment for

    those who reject God's signs.  I am skipping these because these are

    not relevant.



    This pamphlet provides testimony from 5 individuals. 



    Prof Moore has no hesitation in accepting the statement "The Quran

    is the Word of God."  



    Tejasen embraced Islam.



    E. Marshal Johnson believes that Divine Intervention was involved.



    Simpson believes that "the knowledge in the Quran is derived from 

    God."



    Persaud agrees with Moore.



    Implicitly this an "argument from

    authority."  It is true that we have to rely on experts in several

    day to day endeavours, it is humanly impossible to acquire knowledge

    and expertise, and verify everything for yourself.  However, the

    authority of these individuals stops at an accurate description of

    the development process of a human embryo.  



Conclusion:

----------



The Quranic view of development of a human embryo agrees very well with

the Galenic view.  Galen wrote his book in the first century A.D. and

600 years is more than adequate for this dominant view to diffuse to the

middle east.  Whether it did or not is not the issue and I doubt whether

it is possible to assert one way or other.  The point is simply this:

are there any details in the Quran regarding human development which

could not have been known at that time?  My tentative answer is no. There

are two things which need further investigation: one factoid "about 6 days" 

which Moore and the pamphlets refer to and a comment about "three veils

of darkness." 



-- Milind Saraph

Qur'an and Science.
Answering Islam Home Page