Theology and Science, 2013

Vol. 11, No. 4, 339355, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2013.836888

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple: Bediuzzaman

Said Nursi on the Quran and Modern Science

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

ISRA YAZICIOGLU
Abstract This article discusses the noteworthy approach of a twentieth-century Muslim scholar,
Bedizzaman Said Nursi (18771960), to the issue of Quran and science. Nursi points out the
problem of authoritarianism in both religious and secularist discourses, arguing that many of
the clashes between faith and reason result from a misunderstanding of spheres of expertise. Nursi
also argues that even at the height of scientic and technological development, the Quran remains
indispensable in humankind interpreting the world around them. Nursis case illustrates that the
task of relating the modern science and the Quran requires attention to their interpretive dimensions.
Key words: Quran; Scientic miracles; Scientism; Naturalism; Islamic theology; Said
Nursi

The aim of this article is to discuss the noteworthy approach of a twentieth-century

Muslim scholar and exegete, Bedizzaman Said Nursi (18771960), to the relationship between the Quran and science. Nursis case illustrates that the task of relating the modern science and the Quran requires attention to the interpretive
dimensions of both. Before I turn to discussing Nursis approach, in the rst part
of the article I shall discuss a popular contemporary Muslim discourse on
science, the genre of scientic miracles of the Quran, in order to provide a heuristic comparative context.

1.

The genre of scientic miracles of the Quran

The idea that there is harmony between Islam and science is a widely shared notion
among contemporary Muslims. As Stefano Bigliardi has summarized well, contemporary Muslims express such a claim in a variety of ways. One way is to highlight
the exhortations in the sacred sources of Islam, namely the Quran and the hadith or
prophetic sayings, for the pursuit of knowledge and study of nature. Another
common trend is to point out the major scientic developments that took place
during Muslim history as an evidence of the harmony between Islam and
science. Finally, a frequently used argument is that there is no disagreement
between the Quran and science, and that the Quran actually anticipates many
modern scientic discoveries.1
2013 Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

340

Theology and Science

The latter approach, also known as the genre of scientic miracles of the
Quran, has become quite popular with the use of the Internet enhancing its dissemination.2 This genre is devoted to presenting examples of modern scientic
discoveries that are compatible with the plain sense of the Quran. For instance,
the Quranic verse that refers to resurrection, Does man think that We [God]
shall not put his bones back together? In fact, We can reshape his very ngertips (Q. 75:34) is interpreted as being remarkably in agreement with the nineteenth-century discovery of uniqueness of ngerprints.3 Similarly, various
Quranic verses mentioning the formation of an embryo in a mothers womb
(e.g. Q. 39:6; Q. 23:1214) are read as conforming to the ndings of modern
embryology.4 Likewise, Maurice Bucaille, a French physician who was a major
proponent of the genre, locates in the Quran descriptions that match the
current scientic opinions in cosmology, astronomy, geology, zoology, and
history.5
Such connections between the Quranic passages and scientic discoveries are
offered as supporting two main conclusions. First is a negation: it is argued that
such verses show that there is no dissonance between the Quran and science,
and therefore the Quran is not disqualied from being a genuine revelation
from God. This negation of any disagreement between the Quran and modern
science was anticipated earlier, perhaps most clearly by the Indian Muslim
scholar S. Ahmad Khan (18171897). Writing under British colonialism in India
and taking the Enlightenment claims as well as missionary challenges to Islam
seriously, Khan had put forth fteen principles for Quranic interpretation.
Khans fourteenth hermeneutical principle anticipates the central thesis of the
genre of scientic miracles, which was to emerge decades later:
Whatever God has said in the glorious Quran about the things that exist in the world
and the created beings is either absolutely, or in some respect or other, in accordance
with reality. It is not possible that what He declares be opposed to what He has
created, or vice-versa. In some places we have called the speech of God: Vu rd af
Gad (i.e. word of God) and have called what He has created: Vu rk of Gad (i.e.
work of God) and have said that agreement between the word and work of
God is essential. If the word is not according to the work, then such word cannot
be the word of God.6

In addition to negating any dissonance between the Quran and scientic facts,
this popular genre of scientic miracles argues that the Quran is indeed a genuinely inspired text, revealed by the Creator of the universe. The idea is that it is
inconceivable that such scientically accurate descriptions be offered by an
ordinary man who lived in the seventh-century Arabian desert, unless that
person was genuinely inspired by God as His messenger to people.7 Hence the
term miracle: the proponents of this genre say that scientically accurate
descriptions of nature in such an ancient text cannot be explained by referring
to Muhammads genius, mere coincidence, or the scientic information available
in his milieu. Rather, they argue, it can only be described as a miracle, a special
circumstance that acts as a sign that the Quran is indeed revealed by God, the
All-Knowing One.

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple

341

This genre of scientic miracles also ts in with the traditional Muslim belief
that God gave each messenger or prophet a miracle appropriate to his audience.
While Prophet Moses was given miracles that would surpass feats of magic in
his time, Prophet Jesus was gifted with healing miracles that were tting for his
audiences high regard for medicine. And the miracle given to Muhammad, they
argue, was the Quranic text itself, appropriate to its rst audience of seventhcentury Arabia, who had a very ne taste for verbal eloquence. According to this
traditional Muslim belief, the miracle of the Quran was given to Muhammad, as
the nal messenger of God, as a miracle that would endure until the end of
time.8 Thus, for many contemporary Muslims, the scientic miracles of the
Quran are just another specic manifestation of the miracle of the Quran for the
needs of a contemporary age.9
This contemporary Muslim understanding of the harmony of the Quran and
science also at times refers to the biblical text as its control group, so to speak.
For instance, Bucaille, in his book The Bible, the Quran, and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge, argues that while the Bible contains
truth revealed by God to the messengers of God before Muhammad, including
Abraham, Moses and Jesus, some of its content contradicts modern science,
unlike the Quran. As Bigliardi has aptly summarized:
Bucaille buttresses his interpretation with numerous references to Christian exegetes, and his purpose is not to radically discredit the Bible. He maintains that
it was genuinely inspired and that it therefore still fullls a basic religious aim:
it helps humans to understand Gods power The mistakes in the Bible, Bucaille
argues, cannot be ascribed to God, but to the historical process undergone by the
text, written down by different authors and transmitted with interpolations and
errors. Keeping this process in mind, Bucaille holds, the absence of such mistakes
would be surprising.10

Given its explicit belief claims as well as implicit existential assumptions, such as
belief in the existence of God and His communication with humanity through
scriptures, it is not surprising that this widespread genre has been controversial.
There have been Christians who have been offended, either at the unfavorable
comparison of the Quran with the Bible, or at the too-literal interpretation of
the biblical text. This discourse also comes across as strange for those who
believe that harmony between modern science and religion is a lost cause.
Finally, the genre also has been criticized among Muslims for containing examples
of stretched readings and hasty conclusions, and for blurring the real purposes of
the Quran. The aim of this article is not to pass a judgment against this genre,
which at times offers very interesting evidence for its thesis, and carries existential
implications for a number of people. Rather, my purpose is to highlight other
issues worthy of attention in conceiving a harmonious relation between Islam
and science that are commonly left out in this contemporary popular Muslim discourse. By exploring the approach of an important and yet understudied contemporary Quranic exegete by using primary texts and interpretive analysis, this
article will thus contribute new material to the study of the relation between the
Quran and science.

342

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

2.

Theology and Science

Said Nursi on the harmony of the Quran and modern science

As a Muslim theologian and Quranic exegete from Anatolia, who lived during late
Ottoman and then Turkish Republican periods, Nursi was very much interested in
reconciling faith and reason, and Islam and science. Such a concern was not unique
to Nursi in his era. In fact, during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century,
there was strong optimism about science and progress among many Muslim intellectuals. For instance, Jamal al-din al-Afghani (18381897), the famous Islamic
scholar and activist who traveled across the Muslim world for Muslim solidarity
and reform, condently claimed that there was, is, and will be no ruler in the
world but science.11 Indeed, Afghanis Egyptian students, Muhammad
Abduh (18491905) and Rashid Rid a (18651935), Indian scholars such as
S. Ahmad Khan (18171898) and Shibli Numani (18571914), as well as many

Ottoman activists and scholars, such as Izmirli

Ismail
Hakk (18681946), were
all excited about scientic developments in Europe. They were condent that
Islam was fully compatible with science and progress, even more so than Christianity had been.12
Nor was such concern to harmonize science and religion an exclusively Muslim
phenomenon.13 While the nineteenth and early twentieth century was a time of
great enthusiasm about science and technology in both the Western and the
Muslim worlds, it was also a time when the ideas of atheism and materialism
were becoming much more pronounced than ever before. In fact, many of the
Western-educated elite in Nursis milieu of late Ottoman and early Turkish period
saw the successes of science and technology as lending support to a materialist
and an atheistic worldview. It is in this very climate that Nursi argued that there
is no real tension between the Quran and modern science; and that any apparent
clash between them derives merely from a misunderstanding of either one.
As Nursis life journey took him through the various social, political and personal upheavals of the late nineteenth and rst half of the twentieth century, his
discussion of the relationship between science and religion also seems to have
gone through some changes.14 Perhaps at the risk of oversimplifying, we may
observe that in the earlier part of his scholarly career Said Nursi seems to be
more excited about new scientic discoveries and technological development. In
this period, which he later labels as the Old Said period, he seems to have
embraced modern science and technology with excitement, albeit not without
exhortations on maintaining faith and serving humanity in Gods name. His
approach to harmony of faith and science in this period is reminiscent of many
other Muslim reformists and revivalists. Like his contemporaries, the Old Said
highlights the importance of free inquiry from a Quranic perspective and considers
the study of universe as a religiously meaningful act: believers should be openminded, appreciate the relevance of the Quran in a new era, and embrace
reason and science as divine gifts leading to appreciate the Creator better. In contrast, after the horrors of the World War I, Nursi seems to become more cautious
vis--vis modern science and technology. He still very much believes that scientic
inquiry and technology are fully compatible with faith in God. The difference is
that his approach to modern science in this second period, which he himself

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple

343

labels as the New Said period, is more critical. The New Said puts more
emphasis on the fact that what is meant by modern science is not always a
neutral endeavor, and he spends more time on noting the philosophical and
ethical strings frequently attached to modern science.
Having given this brief background on Nursi and his context, I shall now highlight some key aspects of Nursis approach, based on his writings, which were
mostly penned in Ottoman Turkish. First, I shall note aspects of his approach
that are most reminiscent of the popular Muslim understanding of the relation
between Islam and science: he, too, claims that there is no dissonance between
the Quran and modern scientic ndings. Next, I shall offer examples of what I
see as a deeper engagement with modern science, in which Nursi identies
various philosophical underpinnings and interpretations of both modern science
and the Quran. It is this deeper level of engagement that showcases the important
considerations missing from the popular Muslim views of the harmony between
the Quran and modern science.

Nursi on the harmony between the Quran and scientic data

Like other Muslims, Nursi believed that the creator of the universe is the same one
who speaks in the Quran. Thus, reminiscent of Khans hermeneutical formula, he
argues that there cannot be any genuine contradiction between what happens in
the world and what the Quran says; the Creators work and word will be
always in harmony. As a result, he believes that to the extent that modern
science studies and accurately describes the world, it cannot be in tension with
the Quran. Instead, what appears to be a clash between the Quran and modern
science is in reality either a clash of science and misinterpretation of the Quran,
or a clash between the Quran and a mistaken interpretation of science.
According to Nursi, in both types of situations the underlying problem is dictatorship in scholarship.15 That is, too often an expert of one eld breaches the eld
of another specialty, as if ones authority in one subject gives him authority in all
elds of study. Yet, with respect to a problem subject to discussion in science or
art, those who stand outside that science or art cannot speak authoritatively,
however great, learned and accomplished they may be [in another discipline],
nor can their judgments be accepted as decisive. They cannot form part of the
learned consensus [of that discipline.16 One may be a great engineer, but his or
her judgment on the diagnosis and cure of a disease does not have the same
value as that of the lowliest physician.17 When such distinction between
spheres of expertise is overlooked, either by theologians or by scientists, a clash
between religion and science may appear.
Nursi suggests that on the religious side such dictatorship in scholarship
happens through confusing what is divine and what is human. Just because
Quranic exegetes are discoursing about Gods word does not mean that their
works are impeccable, as Gods word is. In fact, not everything mentioned in
Quranic commentary is genuinely a Quranic commentary [Tk. tefsirde mezkur
olan herbir emir, tefsirden olmak lazm gelmez].18 Hence, a Quranic exegete may

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

344

Theology and Science

well have interpreted a verse in a way that contradicts a scientic fact that was not
available in his time. To claim that a great theologian has more authority on a scientic issue than an up-to-date scientist is mere ignorance.19
What Nursi argues for may sound too obvious. Yet, given the realities of transmission of religious discourse, it is, unfortunately, not at all redundant. In fact, as a
contemporary Muslim intellectual, Abdolkarim Soroush, notes, in some parts of
the Muslim world some seminarians still uncritically transmit scientic errors
found in past religious texts.20
It is noteworthy that as he acknowledges the scientic errors of past theologians,
Nursi does not dismiss all medieval religious discourse as outdated. Instead, he
suggests that insofar as their aim to understand the Quranic guidance is considered,
a medieval commentators scientic mistake is not a genuine problem in itself. After
all, when the Quran speaks of the world, it speaks not so as to communicate scientic information about it, but rather to attract attention that there is an order, and to
point out to the Maker of that order.21 From Nursis perspective, therefore, it does
not matter ultimately for the purposes of spiritual edication, if some of the readers
of the Quran over the ages have made mistakes in the details of the cosmic
order. For the point of the Quran is to reveal the purpose and meaning of the
world around us, not to supply technical information about it.
Nursi gives three more reasons as to why religious literature may contain scientic mistakes. First, in the medieval era, some religious scholars gave too much
importance to israiliyyat and Greek philosophy. Second, it is a human tendency
to exaggerate religious narratives. Finally, many fail to appreciate the metaphoric
character of certain religious references.
To begin with israiliyyat, the narrations and stories taken from Jewish and Christian sources, Nursi notes that this genre, which mainly came into circulation among
Muslims through Jewish scholars who converted to Islam, were initially deemed
helpful or at least not harmful in supplementing the Quranic interpretation.
Over time, these narrations came to be used frequently in traditional exegesis of
the Quran. Yet, Nursi argues, like many other contemporary Muslim theologians,
that one must be careful about the superstitious parts in these haggadic stories. The
stories may indeed contain some truth, but cannot be uncritically relied upon in all
its details. And, they certainly do not deserve clinging upon in the face of counter
scientic evidence.22
Nursi suggests that same caution be applied to the material that entered the traditional Islamic discourse from Greek thought.23 For instance, the ideas that
heavens consist of nine layers, or that re, air, water and soil are four basic elements
in the universe, are not Quranic in origin, but derive from the superstitions of
Greek science that were used by some previous exegetes.24 While the medieval
authors may be excused since they did not have access to more accurate scientic
information, Nursi has no patience for someone clinging to that mistake of the past
in the contemporary age in the name of faith.25
According to Nursi, a third source of scientic mistakes in some traditional religious works is the tendency on the part of some people to exaggerate sacred narratives. It is a common human tendency to go into excess about things that one
likes [Ar. mayl al-tazayyud], to speculate as one narrates events [Ar. mayl

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple

345

al-mujazafa], and exaggerate stories as one transmits them [Ar. mayl al-mubalagha].26
Yet, Nursi argues, such elaborations on otherwise authentic accounts misses the
crucial distinction between possibility and reality. For, while God can create anything, God does not create anything haphazardly; rather, the Creator creates with
wisdom. Thus, Nursi argues, even when God creates a miracle, He creates it as a
sign for those who are open to believe. Miracles are never created in such overwhelming proportions that would compel everyone to believe regardless of their
voluntary choice. Nursi strongly criticizes these religious enthusiastsor externalists [zahiriyyun], as he calls themfor their fallacy to assume that they could
make an authentic story more attractive by exaggerating them.27
A similar mistake is made when the Prophets life is portrayed as if it was full of
miracles. Again, the problem in this assumption is not to think that God can
support His Prophet with so many miracles, but to fail to appreciate His wisdom
and to expect that God would choose for this exemplary human being a life that
is utterly removed from the conditions of an ordinary person.28 Nursi contrasts
such unfortunate zeal for exaggeration with the respectful appreciation of the
reality of the world created by God. People who love exaggeration are in effect disparaging and disrespecting the beauty and perfection in the way things are
created.29 Indeed, exaggeration is implied disparagement.30
According to Nursi, yet another source of confusion in religious discourse is
related to the metaphorical nature of certain Quranic verses and hadith (sayings of
Prophet Muhammad). When one takes such metaphors in the sacred texts literally,
then it can give the appearance of a clash between faith and science: when metaphors pass from the learned to the hands of ignorant, it becomes regarded as
[literal] truth and opens door for superstition.31 Nursi gives a telling illustration
of how this distortion can take place. He recalls from his childhood that his
mother used to explain the lunar eclipse by saying that a transparent snake had swallowed the moon! In reality, however, the snake was simply a metaphor among the
medieval astronomers for a particular constellation of sun, moon and heavenly
bodies during an eclipse. But in time, as the expression passed into circulation
among common people, it became regarded as literally true.32
An example of such misunderstanding of sacred sources concerns a controversy
that Nursi was asked about. Some local preachers were saying that the earth rests
on a bull and a sh, and yet geography sees it hanging in space and traveling like
a star. There is neither bull nor a sh? Nursi answers by noting that some hadith scholars have interpreted a prophetic saying by relying on stories taken from israiliyyat,
and missing the metaphor in the saying, they have turned it into something
strange.33 Then he goes on to explain how the bull and sh may be taken as symbolic names of the angels that are appointed for the land and the sea, or it might be that
the Prophet wanted to express the two sources livelihood of the worldagriculture
and shing. Besides, relying on a slightly different narration of the same hadith,
Nursi also notes that Prophet was alluding to constellations.34 In any case, Nursi
reminds us that the extraordinary and unreasonable stories in certain Islamic
books are either israiliyyat, or they are allegories or they are interpretations of scholars
of hadith, which certain careless people have supposed to be hadiths and attributed
them to the Noble Prophet [Muhammad], upon him be peace.35

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

346

Theology and Science

Reminiscent of his predecessor Khan, Nursi also argues that the Quran itself
does not contain any scientic errors. For instance, he claims that the Quran has
never afrmed that the sun revolved around the earth. What the Quran simply
did was to refrain from explicitly stating that the sun revolved around the earth,
so as not to alienate communities in past centuries who might have thought so.36
Nursi notes that just as the sacred sources, such as the Quran and the hadith, need
to be distinguished from their mistaken interpretations, so scientic data needs to be
separated from its materialistic interpretation. A scientists authority within his eld
of expertise must be respected, and should be distinguished from his personal
interpretation of the world in existential and metaphysical terms. Nursi regrets
that many a weak believer wavers when they hear a scientist deny faith, for they
confuse scientic expertise with a materialistic interpretation of the world.37
In addition to distinguishing between science and its materialistic interpretations,
Nursi makes an interesting distinction between two types of disciplines: (1) those
that improve with accumulation of knowledge in time; and (2) those on which the
passage of time has little effect. The former is mostly in the realm of sciences; a
simple fact that was a mystery for a genius in the Middle Ages can eventually
become, in later centuries, a fact well known even by kids. Just as moving a big
stone becomes easier as the number of people pushing it increases, so these sciences
improve with the passage of the time.38 On the other hand, the second type of knowledge, which pertains to spirituality and knowledge of the Divine, is like jumping
over a trench; the fact that one person was able to jump over the trench does not
facilitate the task of the next person. In other words, expertise in this second type
of knowledge is not affected by the passage of time or with accumulation of technical
information over time.39 That is why, Nursi says, in matters of faith one should not
simply prefer the opinion of a modern scientist or a modern thinker to the theological
comment of a great theologian of past. The former is in no way privileged in spiritual
matters simply because of living later in history and having access to more accumulated technical data about the world.40
In sum, Nursi argues that there cannot be any genuine conict between the
Quran, which he regards as the word of the Creator of the universe, and
modern science, insofar as it neutrally studies the world. In popular Muslim discourse on science and the Quran, such a distinction between the Quran and its
interpretations that may contain scientic error is acknowledged quite clearly.
What is less discussed is the distinction between science and its interpretations,
and how a materialist interpretation of science can be mistaken for science itself.
Nursis contribution to the contemporary Muslim discourse is noteworthy in that
respect; and in what follows, I shall offer some examples of such a distinction
between modern science and its philosophical interpretation.

Nursi on the purposes of the Quran and the materialist interpretations of

science
Confusion between science and its philosophical interpretations is not uncommon,
especially in popular discourses. For instance, scientism is often considered to be

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple

347

scientic.41 Yet, scientism, which claims that science is the most reliable source of
knowledge for all areas of human life, is in fact a nonscientic dogma. For,
modern science itself does not claim to answer all questions of life. Rather, its
aim is to study the universe for the purpose of nding consistent patterns, and
to use these to predict and control certain events. Within its dened area, science
raises and deals with many questions; but there are also many questions that fall
outside of its scope. Questions regarding morality are among the latter. For
instance, whether it is okay to steal when in need is not a question within sciences
purview. Moreover, science does not ask questions about its basic assumptions,
such as the uniformity of nature or the stability of natural laws over time.
Indeed, there is no way of scientically proving that the natural laws are absolute
or even stable. Such questions are instead raised and discussed in other disciplines,
such as philosophy of science. Furthermore, science also does not concern itself
with existential and metaphysical implications that can be drawn from the
natural order it studies. The questions whether the regularity and wisdom displayed in nature point to a wise Creator behind the scenes, or to a meaning in
human life that transcends death, are not a scientic questions; yet they are still
worth asking. Hence, to claim that science is the only reliable source of knowledge
is simply a fallacy. And, scientism, which rejects the need for religion, is not scientic in itself; hence what appears to be a clash between science and religion is in fact
a clash between scientism, a philosophical view, and religion.
Similarly, methodological naturalism of scientic approach is often confused
with naturalism, which is in fact a philosophical view. The former is a scientic
assumption for the sake of successful inquiry within the parameters of natural
science. It is the act of a scientist going into the lab with the expectation to nd
something within direct human perception and which is repeatable by anyone in
similar conditions. Given this methodological naturalism, miracles should not
concern the scientist, not because they are proven by science to be invalidthey
are not; but because they simply fall outside of scientic purpose of identifying
general patterns that can be repeated. Such methodological assumption for the
sake of research does not at all contradict religion. In contrast, naturalism is a
philosophical approach that rejects the existence of anything that transcends
nature. Hence, naturalism as a philosophical claim contradicts with monotheistic
traditions, including Islam, which emphasize the existence of a Creator that transcends and sustains nature. These examples of scientism and naturalism highlight
the need to distinguish between science and various philosophical views that interpret scientic data, when discussing the relation between science and religion.
Nursis work is noteworthy in that it offers an explicit engagement with the philosophical interpretations of modern science, consciously distinguishing them from
science. In fact, Nursi often contrasts the Quranic worldview with materialist and
naturalist worldview: both are talking about the same universe, yet interpreting it
completely differently. For Nursi, the Quran is the interpreter of the mighty book
of the universe; it shows how the world through the wisdom, power and beauty in
it points to the Divine Artist behind the scenes.42 In contrast, Nursi argues that
materialist philosophy completely misses these indications in nature. Cutting off
the art from the Artist, the materialist approach claims that there is no intrinsic

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

348

Theology and Science

meaning to the way the things are.43 According to Nursi, the approach of such
misguided philosophy is analogous to the attitude of someone looking at a profound text and instead of reading it, merely analyzing the shapes of the letters and
the geometrical relations between letters, the quality of the paper and the ink; then
claiming to have uncovered the reality of the book. Such a person thinks that the
beautiful calligraphy in the book has no meaning to it, and is just there like that,
as meaningless gures. Whereas, Nursi argues, the person who looks at the
world in the light of the Quran is like a person who is literate, and pays attention
to the ink and calligraphy on the pages of the book so as to read the meaningful
messages communicated through them.
Thus, Nursi argues, unlike naturalist or materialist worldview, the Quran
reveals the reality of the world as full of meaningful signs, each being is a
message from the Divine. He argues that the Quran teaches how all the phenomena in the universe point beyond themselves, to the source of all power, wisdom
and beauty. Nursi gives the example of how the Quranic guidance teaches how
to read a beautiful ower. The Quranic perspective translates the owers
speech into our language. Unlike the pretension of the materialist approach, a beautiful ower is not a thing that exists on its own and for its sake. The ower is not
there to proclaim itself and vanish. Rather, just like writing on a page, it indicates
a meaning other than itself. The ower, coming into life from lifeless matter, and
also withering away after some time, points to an enduring source of beauty,
life, and power beyond itself. In other words, with the Quranic guidance,
human beings can decipher the ontological speech of the ower: I am made
beautiful. Look at me and see how Beautiful is the Artist who made me, I am a
gift from Him The Quran thus deciphers the profound meanings inscribed
on the pages of time and space, reading the manifestation different beautiful qualities of God, or asma al-husna, such as wisdom, knowledge, and power, in their
various shades and colors.44
Nursis contrast between the Quran and materialist philosophy is directly relevant to the relationship between religion and science in that it recognizes the materialist and atheistic claims that are often attached to modern science.45 In fact, Nursi
goes into detailed discussions of why the philosophical claimssuch as the claim
that the nature works on its own, that the world runs as a result of blind chance,
and that material causes and natural laws obviate the need for Godare mistaken
interpretations of the world that contradict both the Quran and rationality.
Deferring a detailed discussion of Nursis justication of monotheism to
another study, in what follows I shall present two representative examples displaying an awareness of the distinction between science and its materialistic
interpretations.

First example: The sun as a lamp?

Nursi was asked a question about a reference to the sun in the Quran. To provide
the context, I shall quote the Quranic passage:

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple

349

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

What is the matter with you? Why will you not [look forward to] Gods majesty, When
he has created you stage by stage? Have you ever wondered how God created the
seven heavens, one above the other, placed the moon as a light in them and the sun
as a lamp, how God made you spring forth from the earth like a plant, how He will
return you into it and then bring you out again (Q. 71:1318) (emphasis added)46

The question addressed to Nursi was: why does the Quran refer to the sun as a
lamp for the earth, as if the sun is subservient to the earth? After all, the questioner continues, modern science has demonstrated that the sun is not revolving
around the earth: actually, it is the center around which the earth and other
planets revolve.
In response, Nursi contrasts the purposes of the Quran with the purposes of
science. Unlike science, the Quran is not talking about sun for the sake of giving
technical information. Rather, the aim of the Quran is to reveal how sun is a
sign pointing to Gods mercy and wisdom: the Quran does not mention the
sun for its own sake. Rather, it refers to it for the sake of the One who illuminates
it.47 Thus, when the Quran refers to the sun as a lamp, it is actually revealing its
intrinsic reality. For, Nursi argues, the term lamp calls into mind the idea of furniture in a home, which is intentionally placed there for the benet of the inhabitants. Hence, by describing the sun as a lamp, the Quran proclaims that the
world is a purposefully constructed home, that human beings and living beings
are guests of a Merciful and Powerful Host, and that the sun is an obedient creature
of this Host.48
This question asked to Nursi shows to what extent a particular interpretation of
science may pass off as a scientic fact. It is a fact that the earth revolves around the
sun. In contrast, the claim that that the benet of the sun for living beings is a mere
accident and not an intentional gift by a Creator is a philosophical interpretation, and
not a scientic position per se. Nursi seems to be quite aware of such interpretive
dimensions frequently attached to modern science. And he is clear that, while
there is no discrepancy between the Quran and science on a factual level, there
is nevertheless a tension between the Quran and such interpretations of science
that reject the witness of the world to the Transcendent.
Indeed, using this example, Nursi contrasts the Quranic view with what he calls
as atheistic philosophy [Tk. dinsiz felsefe]. Like an illiterate person missing the
meaning of the words on a page, the latter approach pretends to have uncovered
the truth about the sun simply by noting its quantiable properties: See how [atheistic philosophy] says the sun is just a vast burning liquid mass. It causes the
planets, which have ung off from it, to revolve around it. Its mass is such-andsuch [etc.].49 Nursi claims that this description, when presented as the reality
of the sun, is in fact ignorance. For it denies the purpose, wisdom and mercy communicated through the existence of sun. He argues that such an interpretation of
the world only yields a terrible dread and fearful wonder in existential sense
and it does not afford the spirit the satisfaction and fullment of true knowledge.50 Such materialistic interpretation is not science per se, and the reader
must be careful about such views that try to pass off as neutral science.51 Nursis
awareness of the distinction between science and its materialist interpretations is
also reected in his word choice. When he is contrasting the Quran with such

350

Theology and Science

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

interpretations of modern science, Nursi often uses the term philosophy [ falsafa]
instead of mere science, which is reserved for what he considers as neutral scientic
study [Tk. fen and hikmet-i cedide, Ar. fann and hikma al-jadda].
In sum, Nursi nuances the picture of the simple harmony between the Quran
and science by showing awareness of the distinction between philosophically
neutral aspects of modern science, and philosophical interpretations of nature commonly attached to modern science. This approach goes beyond addressing the
question of how the Quran is compatible with scientic data: it argues for the relevance of the Quran by showing how the Quran offers a crucial perspective that is
not supplied by science, and that is in fact in tension with its popular atheistic or
materialistic interpretations. As another example of Nursis approach to the
relation between science and religion, let us turn to his exegesis of Q. 31:34.

Second example: Nursis interpretation of the ve unknowns

As another example of how Nursis Quranic hermeneutics not only makes room
for science, but also presents the Quranic discourse as offering an indispensable
perspective for interpreting science, let us attend to his exegesis of Q. 31:34.52
The verse reads as:
Verily, with God alone rests the knowledge of when the Last Hour will come: and it
is He [who] sends down rain; and He [alone] knows what is in the wombs: whereas
no one knows what he will reap tomorrow, and no one knows in what land he will
die. Verily, God [alone] is all-knowing, all-aware.

This verse is traditionally known as the verse of ve unknowns, mughayyabat alkhamsa, for it was commonly interpreted to mean that only God knows the ve
things mentioned in the verse: when the doomsday is, when it will rain, what is
in a mothers womb, what will happen to one tomorrow, and where one will
die. Obviously, such a statement seems to be in at contradiction with modern
developments in technology that enable reliable weather forecasts as well as the
visualizing of an embryo in the womb.53
In order to resolve the apparent tension between the verse and modern science,
Nursi rst makes a distinction between two types of occurrences in nature: (1) those
that come into existence according to a set pattern, and (2) those that come into
existence without a set pattern. He claims that both types of events serve as signs
[Ar. ayat] pointing to God, but in different ways. Sunrise and sunset, for instance,
belong to the rst category. There is a clear pattern and schedule according to
which human beings can predict the times of sunrise and sunset; whereas the
occurrence of rain belongs to the second category, in that it has no such set
pattern. Hence, the rain forecast is not based on a set pattern we have discovered;
rather, it is dependent on our perception of the symptoms or the forerunners of
the coming rain, such as a change in humidity level. In the absence of such forerunners, we would not know when it would rainunlike our prediction of when the
sun will rise the next day. Nursi says that even he himself can sometimes foretell
rain a day before it comes, because he has rheumatoid arthritis and is sensitive

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple

351

to the subtle humidity changes in the weather. The modern methods of detecting
the forerunners of rain have become more precise and nuanced, but that does
not change the fact that the occurrence of rain does not have a regular pattern
unlike, for instance, sunrise. The verse still is valid in highlighting in that
certain things, including rain, do not come into existence with a strict schedule,
and they remain unknown for us until their preliminaries become detectable.54
Nursi argues that the same is true regarding our knowledge about a baby in the
womb. There is a part of the process of embryonic growth that falls under the rst
category, and there is another aspect that is under the second.55 In other words,
there is a uniform aspect or pattern to the growth of any embryo, such as its
main physical features, on the basis of which we can easily anticipate what
organs a baby will have. We condently expect that a human fetus will resemble
other human beings in basic features. A second aspect involved in the babys formation in the womb, however, is under the nonuniform category of natural
events.56 That aspect is the particularity of each baby, such as her character and
the unfolding of her unique life journey. These are special to each embryo, and
cannot be strictly anticipated as one would anticipate her physical features.
Nursi thinks that even what her face will exactly develop into will be difcult to
discern, for each persons facial features will have some unique aspect.57 Thus,
when the verse says only God knows what is in the womb, it is again calling
to attention that there are such diverse manifestations in nature that do not
follow a clear, exact pattern. And our ability to know babys gender beforehand,
or the modern technologys ability to peek into the womb in general, does not eliminate that unknown aspect.
To my mind, what is most interesting in Nursis comment on this verse is that he
is not simply content with releasing the apparent tension between the plain sense of
the Quran and modern scientic discoveries by offering such a distinction between
two types of natural occurrences, regular versus irregular events, and our knowledge regarding them. He goes further and reads this verse on ve unknowns
with the purposes of the Quran in mind. According to Nursi, since the Qurans
main purpose is to reveal how the world points to God, the verses reference to
the existence of events without a set pattern must be articulating a meaning
serving that purpose.
Indeed, according to Nursi, there is a profound meaning behind the fact that
certain things in nature (like sunrise) happen according to a set pattern, while
others (like rain) do not. He argues that uniformity of nature points to the existence
of one source of power and wisdom behind all, i.e. to one God. Hence the baby in
the womb, whose basic organs and capacities resemble all other human beings,
offers spiritual testimony [shahada] that whoever is making me, is the maker of
all other human beings who look like me, as well as the maker of all living
beings [with whom I am interconnected].58 This witness of the embryo in the
womb, just like the witness of regular sunrises, is not concealed in unseen
[ghayb], in the sense that it has a particular pattern to it that is well known to
human beings.59
On the other hand, the events in nature that unfold without a set pattern, like
the particular life journey of a baby, the timings of rainfall, or an individuals

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

352

Theology and Science

lifespan, each point to God in a different way. Nursi argues that they reveal the
will and choice of the Maker, and declare that His mercy or power is not constrained by a particular strict formula.60 Now, this type of declaration comes
from the unseen, in that one cannot foresee how a particular being will
bear witness to freedom and unboundedness of Gods will before it actually
comes into existence. Hence, in Nursis interpretation, while uniformity in
nature allows the human being to appreciate the wisdom of the Creator, the
presence of what appears to us as irregularity or spontaneity in the world
points to the will and creativity of the Creator.61 Our inability to decipher a
precise pattern for certain events makes us notice the Divine choice manifested
in the universe. More importantly, it enables the believer to feel gratitude more
fully, instead of taking for granted the most precious things in existence, such as
life and water.62
This nal example shows how Nursi understands the relevance of the Quran in
an age of science and technology. According to him, even when human beings can
predict weather, peek into the womb, they still need the guidance of the Quran in
how to existentially interpret the nature around them, which manifests both regularity and spontaneity.

Conclusion
The harmony between the Quran and modern science is a very popular subject in
Muslim circles. And rightly so: despite all its shortcomings and complications
(such as environmental problems and the horrors of war technology), science
has beneted and transformed our lives tremendously. Being in contradiction
with such a respected discourse, or more broadly with empirical reality, is not
something a genuine religion can afford. After all, religion is here to
interpret the world, not to replace or to contradict it. The genre of scientic miracles of the Quran has been immensely popular among contemporary Muslims
precisely because it aims to disclose such crucial harmony between the Quran
and science.
Without intending to disparage such a popular approach, the purpose of this
article was to show how the harmony between the Quran and science should
imply more than nding convergences between the scriptural text and scientic
data. Rather, there are a number of important hermeneutical issues that needs to
be raised and discussed. For instance, what is the purpose of the Quranic discourse? How is it different from the purposes of science? Is the Quran really relevant in an age when we know what goes on in a cell, can split an atom,
exchange information instantly across the world, and explore space? Moreover,
what do we make of the rejection of essential faith concepts under the guise of
sciencesuch as claims that human benet from the world is accidental and not
intended, that there is no special meaning to human life, and that nature works
on its own, without need for a transcendent Creator? By using the case of Said
Nursi, this article has illustrated some of the ways in which such questions
might be treated from a contemporary Muslim perspective.

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple

353

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

Endnotes
1 See: Stefano Bigliardi, The Contemporary Debate on the Harmony between Islam and
Science: Emergence and Challenges of a New Generation, Social Epistemology 27:4
(2013) (forthcoming).
2 For a helpful overview of the genre, see ibid.
3 Throughout this article, the standard Egyptian numbering of the Quran is used. Unless
otherwise noted, the translations are from M.A.S. Abdel Haleems English translation of
the Quran, The QuranA New Translation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004),
except where the Quran is cited within another quote, in which case the quoted
authors translation is retained.
4 Thus, for instance, a famous professor of anatomy, Keith L. Moore, considered the Quran
as anticipating the latest scientic descriptions of the early stages of the embryo in the
womb. See Moore, A Scientists Interpretation of References to Embryology in the
Quran, Journal of the Islamic Medical Association of North America, February 18, 1986;
available online at http://jima.imana.org/article/view/8693/18.
5 See Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, the Quran, and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the
Light of Modern Knowledge (Paris: Seghers, 1981), 119 ff.
6 Muhammad Daud Rahbar, Sir Sayyid Ah mad Khans Principles of Exegesis translated
from his Tahrir Usul al Tafsir, II, Muslim World 46:4 (1956): 324335. (In formulating
this principle of interpretation, Khan uses English terminology within his original Urdu
writing.)
7 Gasser Hathout, a medical scientist, notes this in his presentation posted on YouTube
with the title, Quran and Science-Embryology, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v
= fk1OHeHeqvk (accessed October 2011). Similarly, Bucaille, one of the key sources of
the genre, notes: In view of the state of knowledge in Muhammads day, it is inconceivable that many of the statements in the Quran which are connected with science could
have been the work of a man. It is moreover, perfectly legitimate, not only to regard the
Quran as the expression of a Revelation, but also to award it a very special place on
account of the guarantee of authenticity it provides and the presence in it of scientic
statements which, when studied today, appear as a challenge to human explanation.
(Bucaille, Holy Scriptures, 269).
8 For contemporary examples of this traditional view, see Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Heart
of Islam (New York: HarperCollins, 2002), 24; M. Sami M. Ali, Scientic Miracles of the Glorious Quran, tr. Abdussamad Kyle (Syria: n.p., 1997), 1012.
9 Ali, Scientic Miracles, 13.
10 Bigliardi, Snakes from Staves? Science, Scriptures and the Supernatural in Maurice
Bucaille, Zygon: Journal for Religion and Science 46:4 (2011): 793805, 796.
11 Keddie, An Islamic Response to Imperialism, 102, cited in Muzaffar Iqbal, Contemporary Issues in Islam and Science (Farnham: Ashgate, 2011), 149.
12 For a helpful summary of Muslim views of science and religion at the time, see Iqbal,
Islam and Science, 131158.
13 For instance, writing around the same time period as Nursi, the renowned Protestant
theologian Paul Tillich (18861965) also sought to reconcile religion and science in a
Christian context. For an interesting comparison of the two theologians, see Kelton
Cobb, Revelation, the Disciplines of Reason, and Truth in the Works of Bedizzaman
Said Nursi and Paul Tillich, in Islam at the Crossroads: On the Life and Thought of Bedizzaman Said Nursi, ed. Ibrahim M. Abu-Rabi (New York: SUNY Press, 2003), 129150.
14 For a short biography of Nursi, see Colin Turner and Hasan Horkuc, Said Nursi: Makers of
Islamic Civilization (Oxford: I.B. Tauris, 2009), 519.
15 Bedizzaman Said Nursi, Risale-i Nur Kulliyati [henceforth RNK], vol. 2 (Istanbul: Yeni
Asya Yayinlari, 1996), 1991.

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

354

Theology and Science

16 Nursi, The Rays: From the Risale-i Nur Collection, trans. Sukran Vahide (Istanbul: Szler
Nesriyat, 2002), 127. Here, and in the following citations from Vahides translation, I
have occasionally modied her translation in consultation with the original.
17 Ibid.
18 Nursi, RNK, vol. 2, Muhakemat, 1991. Tk. refers to Turkish original. Ar. refers to
Arabic terms, which are often shared as loan words in Ottoman Turkish.
19 Ibid.
20 See: Abdulkarim Soroush, Reason, Freedom, and Democracy in Islam: Essential Writings of
Abdolkarim Soroush, trans., ed. and intr. Mahmoud Sadri and Ahmad Sadri (New York:
Oxford University Press, 2000), 180182. Not unlike Nursi, Soroush emphasizes distinguishing between what is sacred and what is human in religious discourse.
21 Nursi, RNK, vol. 2, 1986. Cf. Khans similar view: the Arabs called that upon which they
lived ard (earth) and the bluish dome-like thing which was above them they called sama
(sky), and they were completely ignorant of the problems relating to these two things in
sciences. And yet that result of guidance, spiritual teaching and (belief in) the unity and
power of the Creating Essence, which was intended by the Quran, was gained by them.
Rahbar, 330.
22 Ibid., 19901991.
23 Ibid., 19881989.
24 Ibid., 1262, 2010.
25 Ibid., 1986, 1987.
26 Ibid., 1992.
27 Ibid., 2007.
28 All the states and acts of the Noble Messenger (upon whom be blessings and peace) testied to his veracity and prophethood, but not all of them had to be miraculous. For God
Almighty sent him in the form of a human being so that he might be a guide and leader to
human beings in their social affairs, and in the acts and deeds by means of which they
attain happiness in both worlds. [God sent him] so that he might disclose to human
beings the wonders of Divine art and His power that underlie all occurrences
Nursi, Letters, 122 (italics added). Also see RNK, 1999.
29 Here, Nursi notes that it is this profound appreciation of reality that made Al-Ghazal
declare his famous statement that there is not in possibility anything more wonderful
than what is [laysa l imkan abda mimma kan]. For a lucid contextualization of
Al-Ghazals statement, see Eric Ormsby, Theodicy in Islamic Thought (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984), 3341.
30 Nursi, The Words: From the Risale-i Nur Collection (Istanbul: Sozler Publications, 1998,
trans. Sukran Vahide), 749.
31 RNK, vol. 2, 1991.
32 Ibid. Nursis reference to metaphors brings to mind the famous Quranic passage on
mutashabihat (Q. 3:7).
33 Nursi, Flashes: From the Collection of Risale-i Nur, trans. Sukran Vahide (Istanbul: Sozler
Publications, 1995), 127.
34 In an earlier text, Nursi also mentions the authenticity of this hadith, suggesting that since
it is not a very strong narration, it is not a must for ones faith to accept this particular
narration as hadith (RNK, 2002).
35 Nursi, Flashes, 131.
36 Cf. Khan, quoted in Rahbar, pp. 328, 3301.
37 Nursi, RNK, 896; Rays, 127.
38 Nursi, RNK, 19871988.
39 Though Nursi admits that the proofs of faith can become clearer in time (RNK, 1987).
40 Ibid.; see also Nursi, Words, 143145.
41 For a helpful discussion of this point, as well as the point about methodological naturalism in the next paragraph, see Garret J. DeWeese and J.P. Moreland, How Should

Perhaps Their Harmony is not that Simple

42
43
44
45
46

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 08:32 04 March 2016

47
48
49
50

51
52
53
54

55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62

355

Christians Think About Science, in Philosophy Made Slightly Less Difcult; a Beginners
Guide to Lifes Big Questions (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2005), 131154.
Nursi, Words, 376.
Nursi, RNK, 49.
See ibid., 49, 211212, etc.
See for instance, Nursi, Words, 709; Flashes, 232 ff.
I amended Abdelhaleems translation on the basis of Muhammad Asads translation in
The Message of the Quran (Gibraltar: Dar al-Andalus, 1984), 897.
Ibid., 167.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid. In fact, Nursi contrasts the Quranic worldview with unguided philosophy from
other angles as well. For instance, he argues: as for unguided philosophy, it regards the
extraordinary creation around us as ordinary and treats the world in an ignorant and
indifferent fashion. It labels things and pretends that by labeling it explained away
their amazing nature. It focuses the attention to freaks, or abnormalities, which have
fallen from being extraordinary, have come out of the order in creation, and deviated
from the perfections of their true natures. It offers them to conscious beings as objects
of wise instruction. For example, it says that the creation of a human being,which is
an amazing event showing the Creators power, is commonplace and looks at it
with indifference. Instead of being at awe at wonderfulness of the order, it regards
abnormalities, such as a person who has come out of the perfection of creation, and
has three legs or two heads, worthy of amazement (Words, 150 ff.).
Hence, Nursi cautions the readers so do not be deceived by its glittering exterior and be
disrespectful towards the most miraculous expositions of the Quran! (Words, 252).
Nursi, RNK, 639 ff.
RNK, 640641.
RNK, 640. It seems to me that these categories could also be used in interpreting the
verses reference to the time of death. To be sure, many people in their death bed are
known to have recognized that their time of death is very near. Yet, Nursi could say,
such knowledge is again on the basis of the preliminaries of death that they are now
sensing, rather than on the basis of any clear formula of death that humans have discovered. Hence, our time of death remains an unknown category for us.
Ibid.
Ibid.
In fact, Nursi is fascinated with human face, and regards it as a signature of the Divine
in that while the essential features of all faces are the same and each has a unique distinguishing mark (ibid.).
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid., 641.
Ibid., 641.
Ibid., 640.

Biographical Notes
Isra Yazicioglu is Assistant Professor of Theology and Religious Studies at
St. Josephs University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.