Infinite Parallel Universes – Dilemma of a Muslim Intellectual

 

 

ويتعلمون ما يضرهم ولا ينفعهم

They learn what harms them and does not benefit them. [al-Baqarah: 102]

 

A colleague mentioned to me today that one of his students attending his Arabic class is a Professor studying mathematical aspects of String Theory. This reminded me of a conversation I had meant to write about for some time.

 

A Muslim living near me has Masters, and by now what not, in Physics. A few years back he mentioned how according to String Theory there exists an infinite amount of parallel universes, each with our mirror personalities therein. In addition, these universes are created by every possible permutation of actions, however minor. For example, if I lift my right hand, that happens in one universe, and simultaneously another universe is created where I lift my left hand instead.

 

Creation

 

Although my first objection was rather weak, it still reveals the worrying influence of a materialist based education. I do not object to secular sciences, but the attitude of those who make it into an unassailable idol. Science is a means of recognising the Creator. As such it is a form of worship. Yet worship can be adulterated and innovated into service of the Devil.

 

I objected that his theory of creating an entire universe from such a petty act, implies the power of creation in our most mundane, profane and indeed disgraceful acts. That is indeed most insulting to the Creator.

 

His ready reply, to which I admit I had no immediate rebuttal, was that the creation of those universes are pre-programmed into those mundane acts which are merely the triggers for their creation.

 

Fair enough. Whatever the theological implications might be of such an argument, I would like the dear reader to ponder over the mind-set of such a person. Consider that when examining a scientific issue in regards religion, one may cling to a doctrine and reject all evidence to the contrary, as did the Catholics when debating Copernicus. It is also possible to examine the evidence independently and research a path of conciliation. Here however we have a case where a supposedly scientific theory is declared absolute truth and religion is bent to fit the case. Does the religion even provide the basis for a pre-programmed creation theory? Even if it did, the arrogance still lies in unilaterally theorising a religious doctrine, rather than researching if such doctrine is compatible with the faith. The difference may be subtle, but I hope the reader grasps the distinction as well the harm this might have to one’s faith.

 

Infinity

 

My next bone of contention, which I did not raise at the time, was the idea of infinity. Infinite is defined as something boundless, an amount without end. As such I would contend that all material objects are in fact finite in the knowledge of the All-Knowing. A man might regard the number of leaves on all the trees in the world or the grains of sand on all the shores of the world to be infinite, yet in the knowledge of Allāh, a number, however mind-boggling it may be to me, does exist and is NOT infinite. Infinity in its true sense is only applicable to Allāh and His Attributes. Anything less is quantifiable. Allāh is the First without beginning, the Last without end. His is the perfect and complete knowledge of everything. His Power, Beauty and Perfection are infinite. The angels are less than Him. Their number is finite, they do not share in His infinity.

 

Now how possibly can acts like lifting my hands create infinite universes – when firstly creation is Allāh’s prerogative – and secondly the number (infinity) which is only truly associated with Allāh, now becomes my profane tool?

 

As some could care to overlook such subtleties, let me be as blunt as I can. Skip this paragraph if you overly sensitive. Can you accept that a universe was created because I answered the call of nature and a different one was created because I was constipated and a third because I suffered from diarrhoea? Then add the number based on the different nano-seconds I spent differently engaged in these acts. (Since supposedly I spent different nano-seconds in different universes). Consider that in each universe a New Adam is also created – because of me passing urine! What exactly each new Adam did before and where was he before I wonder. Now consider that in each of these toilet-created universes there are perfectly created people. Some are reciting the Qurān. Some are assisting humanity. Some are behaving less than beasts and engage in every vice. Wow!

 

Rome defeated Persia

 

I asked the Physicist, if he as a Muslim would accept the Qurān as the absolute truth in all his varied universes. Thankfully he agreed to this. However, all his responses were basically repackaging the same reply, “So you do not accept scientific String Theory!” I also do not remember each new variation of the same response after these years, so I do not mention them further.

I then said that when the Persians practically annihilated the Byzantine Empire, the Qurān declared to the incredulous Arabs that the Byzantines would gain the upper hand within 3 to 9 years. This transpired as the Qurān predicted, against all the odds! However, in the “infinite” universes where every permutation of events occurs, the following would also have to happen, which would make the Qurān false:

• Rome defeated Persia in less than three years.
• Rome defeated Persia after 9 years.
• Rome never defeated Persia, there was a stalemate.
• Rome never defeated Persia, a third nation such as the Mongols wiped out Persia.
• Rome never defeated Persia, a third nation such as the Goths wiped out Rome.
• Rome never defeated Persia, Persia wiped Rome out of existence.

 

Each of the above permutations exist according to String Theory and each would be a refutation of the Qurān which is the True Word of Allāh.

 

The Most God Fearing vs the Most Wretched

 

Who can begin to describe the status of the most noble Companion of the Prophet Muḥammad – salutations and peace be upon him. Let us suffice with the Qurān calling Abū Bakr - al-Aṭqā – he who fears Allāh the most, in contradistinction to castigating Abū Jahl as al-Ashqā – the most wretched. I asked the physicist if he does not realise that his belief supports the following worlds, in contradiction to the Qurān:

• Abū Bakr – may Allāh be pleased with him – is less pious. Thus ‘Umar – may Allāh be pleased with him – is al-Aṭqā.
• Abū Jahl is not so bad. He is number 2.
• All the variuations in between, until a stage is reached…
• ….that Abū Bakr and Abū Jahl exchange the positions the Qurān declares for them!

 

Loyalty to Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu had no effect. So I resorted to, what I thought at the time, can only be a final appeal.

 

The Final Messenger صلى الله عليه و سلم

 

I thought of Prophethood being the final argument at that point. That my mind did not reach the point of presenting monotheism is perhaps for the best. I asked if he could accept that he believes in the possibility of Muḥammad صلى الله عليه و سلمnot being the Final Messenger and every possible lowering of his pure status which I would not verbalise? Even then he would not recant and firmly defended String Theory as absolute undeniable truth.

 

Dealing with one who showed no emotion in dishonouring Abū Bakr رضى الله عنه, the Qurān and the Final Messenger Muḥammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, I said, “I hate saying this, but it seems that you will only understand the implications of your belief if it affects you directly. Do you understand that you believe that somewhere your mother is a prostitute?”

 

He finally kept quiet ….. but still remained convinced of his correctness!

 

The issues the above raises of a sector of Muslims worshipping the intellect are quite worrisome. Indeed the intellect is a great bounty to be correctly used. It is however my experience that there are many who submit their intellect to their desires and then submit their religion to their supposed intellect. Thus intellectualism is but a front for the worship of personal desires and destruction of religion.

خسر الدنيا والآخرة ذلك هو الخسران المبين

….They lose this world and the hereafter. That is indeed the manifest loss. [al-Ḥajj: 11]

 

سليمان الكندي

Infinite Parallel Universes – Dilemma of a Muslim Intellectual

ويتعلمون ما يضرهم ولا ينفعهم

They learn what harms them and does not benefit them. [al-Baqarah: 102]

A colleague mentioned to me today that one of his students attending his Arabic class is a Professor studying mathematical aspects of String Theory. This reminded me of a conversation I had meant to write about for some time.

A Muslim living near me has Masters, and by now what not, in Physics. A few years back he mentioned how according to String Theory there exists an infinite amount of parallel universes, each with our mirror personalities therein. In addition, these universes are created by every possible permutation of actions, however minor. For example, if I lift my right hand, that happens in one universe, and simultaneously another universe is created where I lift my left hand instead.

Creation

Although my first objection was rather weak, it still reveals the worrying influence of a materialist based education. I do not object to secular sciences, but the attitude of those who make it into an unassailable idol. Science is a means of recognising the Creator. As such it is a form of worship. Yet worship can be adulterated and innovated into service of the Devil.

I objected that his theory of creating an entire universe from such a petty act, implies the power of creation in our most mundane, profane and indeed disgraceful acts. That is indeed most insulting to the Creator.

His ready reply, to which I admit I had no immediate rebuttal, was that the creation of those universes are pre-programmed into those mundane acts which are merely the triggers for their creation.

Fair enough. Whatever the theological implications might be of such an argument, I would like the dear reader to ponder over the mind-set of such a person. Consider that when examining a scientific issue in regards religion, one may cling to a doctrine and reject all evidence to the contrary, as did the Catholics when debating Copernicus. It is also possible to examine the evidence independently and research a path of conciliation. Here however we have a case where a supposedly scientific theory is declared absolute truth and religion is bent to fit the case. Does the religion even provide the basis for a pre-programmed creation theory? Even if it did, the arrogance still lies in unilaterally theorising a religious doctrine, rather than researching if such doctrine is compatible with the faith. The difference may be subtle, but I hope the reader grasps the distinction as well the harm this might have to one’s faith.    

Infinity

My next bone of contention, which I did not raise at the time, was the idea of infinity. Infinite is defined as something boundless, an amount without end. As such I would contend that all material objects are in fact finite in the knowledge of the All-Knowing. A man might regard the number of leaves on all the trees in the world or the grains of sand on all the shores of the world to be infinite, yet in the knowledge of Allāh, a number, however mind-boggling it may be to me, does exist and is NOT infinite. Infinity in its true sense is only applicable to Allāh and His Attributes. Anything less is quantifiable. Allāh is the First without beginning, the Last without end. His is the perfect and complete knowledge of everything. His Power, Beauty and Perfection are infinite. The angels are less than Him. Their number is finite, they do not share in His infinity.

Now how possibly can acts like lifting my hands create infinite universes – when firstly creation is Allāh’s prerogative – and secondly the number (infinity) which is only truly associated with Allāh, now becomes my profane tool?

As some could care to overlook such subtleties, let me be as blunt as I can. Skip this paragraph if you overly sensitive. Can you accept that a universe was created because I answered the call of nature and a different one was created because I was constipated and a third because I suffered from diarrhoea? Then add the number based on the different nano-seconds I spent differently engaged in these acts. (Since supposedly I spent different nano-seconds in different universes).  Consider that in each universe a New Adam is also created – because of me passing urine! What exactly each new Adam did before and where was he before I wonder. Now consider that in each of these toilet-created universes there are perfectly created people. Some are reciting the Qurān. Some are assisting humanity. Some are behaving less than beasts and engage in every vice. Wow!

 

Rome defeated Persia

I asked the Physicist, if he as a Muslim would accept the Qurān as the absolute truth in all his varied universes. Thankfully he agreed to this. However, all his responses were basically repackaging the same reply, “So you do not accept scientific String Theory!” I also do not remember each new variation of the same response after these years, so I do not mention them further.

I then said that when the Persians practically annihilated the Byzantine Empire, the Qurān declared to the incredulous Arabs that the Byzantines would gain the upper hand within 3 to 9 years. This transpired as the Qurān predicted, against all the odds! However, in the “infinite” universes where every permutation of events occurs, the following would also have to happen, which would make the Qurān false:

·         Rome defeated Persia in less than three years.

·         Rome defeated Persia after 9 years.

·         Rome never defeated Persia, there was a stalemate.

·         Rome never defeated Persia, a third nation such as the Mongols wiped out Persia.

·         Rome never defeated Persia, a third nation such as the Goths wiped out Rome.

·         Rome never defeated Persia, Persia wiped Rome out of existence.

Each of the above permutations exist according to String Theory and each would be a refutation of the Qurān which is the True Word of Allāh.

The Most God Fearing vs the Most Wretched

Who can begin to describe the status of the most noble Companion of the Prophet Muḥammad – salutations and peace be upon him. Let us suffice with the Qurān calling Abū Bakr -  al-Aṭqā – he who fears Allāh the most, in contradistinction to castigating Abū Jahl as al-Ashqā – the most wretched. I asked the physicist if he does not realise that his belief supports the following worlds, in contradiction to the Qurān:

·         Abū Bakr – may Allāh be pleased with him – is less pious. Thus ‘Umar – may Allāh be pleased with him – is al-Aṭqā.

·         Abū Jahl is not so bad. He is number 2.

·         All the variuations in between, until a stage is reached…

·         ….that Abū Bakr and Abū Jahl exchange the positions the Qurān declares for them!

Loyalty to Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu had no effect. So I resorted to, what I thought at the time, can only be a final appeal.

The Final Messenger صلى الله عليه و سلم 

I thought of Prophethood being the final argument at that point. That my mind did not reach the point of presenting monotheism is perhaps for the best. I asked if he could accept that he believes in the possibility of Muḥammad صلى الله عليه و سلم  not being the Final Messenger and every possible lowering of his pure status which I would not verbalise? Even then he would not recant and firmly defended String Theory as absolute undeniable truth.

Dealing with one who showed no emotion in dishonouring Abū Bakr رضى الله عنه, the Qurān and the Final Messenger Muḥammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, I said, “I hate saying this, but it seems that you will only understand the implications of your belief if it affects you directly. Do you understand that you believe that somewhere your mother is a prostitute?”

He finally kept quiet ….. but still remained convinced of his correctness!

The issues the above raises of a sector of Muslims worshipping the intellect are quite worrisome. Indeed the intellect is a great bounty to be correctly used. It is however my experience that there are many who submit their intellect to their desires and then submit their religion to their supposed intellect. Thus intellectualism is but a front for the worship of personal desires and destruction of religion.

خسر الدنيا والآخرة ذلك هو الخسران المبين

….They lose this world and the hereafter. That is indeed the manifest loss. [al-Ḥajj: 11]

سليمان الكندي

Companions of the Cave – language, chauvinism & Quraan commentary

 

سَيَقُولُونَ ثَلَاثَةٌ رَابِعُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ وَيَقُولُونَ خَمْسَةٌ سَادِسُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ رَجْمًا بِالْغَيْبِ وَيَقُولُونَ سَبْعَةٌ وَثَامِنُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ قُلْ رَبِّي أَعْلَمُ بِعِدَّتِهِمْ مَا يَعْلَمُهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلٌ فَلَا تُمَارِ فِيهِمْ إِلَّا مِرَاءً  …ظَاهِرًا وَلَا تَسْتَفْتِ فِيهِمْ مِنْهُمْ أَحَدًا

وَلَبِثُوا فِي كَهْفِهِمْ ثَلَاثَ مِائَةٍ سِنِينَ وَازْدَادُوا تِسْعًا

قُلِ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثُوا لَهُ غَيْبُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ أَبْصِرْ بِهِ وَأَسْمِعْ مَا لَهُمْ مِنْ دُونِهِ مِنْ وَلِيٍّ وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا

They will say [that there were] three [companions] the fourth being their dog. Others will five and their dog being their sixth. They but guess at the unknown. Others say seven and their eighth being their dog. Say, “My Cherishing Lord knows their number best.” None but a few knows them. So do dispute about them except for what is plain and apparent and do not enquire about them from any of them [unbelievers]….. [al-Kahf : 22]

They stayed in their cave for 300 years and increased 9. Say, “Allāh knows best how long they stayed…” [al-Kahf : 25-6]

 

Listening to the Jumu‘ah [Friday] talk, some thoughts which I had pondered on before, came to the fore. I wish to share some words on language issues and their broader context, and discuss some aspects which our attitude to knowledge reveal.

 

Respecting languages should work both ways

 

Having heard the desecration of Muḥammad into MO-HA-MID for the umpteenth time on a famous talk-radio station, I wrote to express my disappointment. When it comes to Italian or French names, the presenters take care to correctly pronounce the foreign name. Yet when it comes to Arabic names, which are far more numerous than those named in any single European language, any haphazard pronunciation will do. I did not mention that the presenter in question whom I was addressing is African, at least in terms of DNA, not Caucasian.  The station replied that they would note this for the future. Ha! Don’t hold your breath.

Conversely I find it symptomatic of the tribal chauvinism of some Muslims, as well as their academic laziness, that the entire history and geography of mankind magically conforms to their traditional language, whichever it may be. This may unfortunately include Arabic in itself for an Arab chauvinist, or Arabic vocabulary where an Arabic word is used by a non-Arab.

 

Someone told me that he had listened to a speech of a world famous scholar. He spoke on how Muslim explorers had apparently named a host of countries in the world. The examples cited seemed sensible enough, but I objected to Madagascar being al-Madīnah al-Aṣghar in origin. The grammar is incorrect. Had it been the case, it would have been al-Madīnah aṣ-Ṣughrā. The look of horror on the brother’s face, that I could DARE to have a different opinion, as well as his pious exclamation, “But that is what so-and-so said!” speaks volumes on the mentality of a good proportion of Muslims. By the way, you are welcome to do your own research on the etymology of Madagascar.   

 

Getting back to Friday, the classical commentators of the Qurān were generally monolingual. Based on their time and place, and when Arabic was the world language in terms of academia, trade, politics, literature etc, it was only practical and obvious that they would record the Greek names of the Companions of the Cave [“Seven Sleepers,” as the Christians call them] in an Arabicised form, amenable to their audience.

 

I would ask, why is it that a millennium later, Muslim scholars who are born in western lands would still not have the aptitude to pronounce the tyrant Emperor’s name as Decius instead of Diqyānūs? Is it really practical to give the name of one of the Sleepers as Miksalmīnā to a western Muslim, or would Maximillian make more sense? Are we lazy and chauvinistic, or is it just that we have as yet not worked on the balance of holding firmly onto our religion, whilst according our host countries and their cultures their respect?

 

Majority commentary, Qataadah and Greek records

 

The Qurān is a book of guidance, not a story book. It does not discuss historical details. I would not dare comment on Allāh’s Word based on my unsubstantiated opinion, but fail to see the validity of the extremism amongst Muslims. On the one hand, there are those who expect the Qurān to comply with their theories. These people lose sight of the Qurān being the absolute truth, and worship sciences whose absolutes today is discredited the next generation. If Allāh wills, I shall write one day on my discussion with a Muslim physicist in regards infinite parallel universes.

 

 On the other hand, some confine their minds to a single tradition. Findings from science, history, geography etc are of less than zero relevance to them, even when these fields are used as mere supporting evidence to an existing orthodox view in Islām, NOT primary proof. Any deviation from a school’s thought is disrespect to the instructors and pious predecessors. That is the problem of holding the middle ground amongst extremists. To the former, I am Neanderthal idiot, to the latter a disrespectful rebel verging on heresy.

 

 The commentary of Qatādah – Allāh’s mercy be upon him – appealed far more to me than the majority opinion when we studied the story of the Companions of the Cave as students.  

 

They majority view is that, “They stayed in their cave for 300 years and increased 9” means that they stayed for 300 solar equivalent to 309 lunar years in the cave. Qatādah however opined that the Verse is actually quoting the speculation of the unbelievers, just as they were quoted in regards their number speculation. Both the numbers and years are guesses in the unknown, hence the next Verse, Say, “Allāh knows best how long they stayed…”

 

Why I prefer Qataadah

 

• Decius ruled 249 -251. So there is no harm with the Greek dating of 250.
• If 300 is absolute, they awoke in 550.
• This is a mere 2 decades before the birth of the Prophet Muhammad ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
• The Commentators explain that the story had been revealed in response to the unbelievers testing the Prophet Muhammad ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam with an incident so ancient, that the time and place had been lost to history. How is 20 years ancient lost history?
• The way Qatādah explains the speculation and that Allāh knows best, has a better logical flow that appeals to me.

All that being said, I can be wrong and 309 is clear and correct!

What then, is my point?

 

Deterioration in Muslim thinking

 

The point of this article is not to espouse my acceptance of Qataadah’s commentary, but to ask the reader to ponder over some points:

 

• The early commentators disagreed with Qatādah but mentioned his view with equal respect.
• Today it is not mentioned at all. 309 is mentioned as an absolute, with no difference.
• To me this but an example of the narrowing of Muslim thinking and inability to be open to differing opinions. A single monolithic narrative is the imperative and the diversity of the earliest Muslims is null and void.
• The above Verses clarify that the unbelievers should not be our point of reference. “…do not enquire about them from any of them.” Thus the Greek period of 180 years for them having slept is not a fact which can be used to interpret the Qurān. However, when the Greeks have a complete historical record of when the pagan Decius and believer Theodosius II ruled, can the historical Greek record not be utilised as supporting evidence for an existing view within Islām?
• My aim is to point out the forgotten middle path. Do we keep being in two groups, one worshipping science, the other living in an intellectual vacuum? Think about it. 

Companions of the Cave – language, chauvinism & Quraan commentary

سَيَقُولُونَ ثَلَاثَةٌ رَابِعُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ وَيَقُولُونَ خَمْسَةٌ سَادِسُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ رَجْمًا بِالْغَيْبِ وَيَقُولُونَ سَبْعَةٌ وَثَامِنُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ قُلْ رَبِّي أَعْلَمُ بِعِدَّتِهِمْ مَا يَعْلَمُهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلٌ فَلَا تُمَارِ فِيهِمْ إِلَّا مِرَاءً  …ظَاهِرًا وَلَا تَسْتَفْتِ فِيهِمْ مِنْهُمْ أَحَدًا

وَلَبِثُوا فِي كَهْفِهِمْ ثَلَاثَ مِائَةٍ سِنِينَ وَازْدَادُوا تِسْعًا

قُلِ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثُوا لَهُ غَيْبُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ أَبْصِرْ بِهِ وَأَسْمِعْ مَا لَهُمْ مِنْ دُونِهِ مِنْ وَلِيٍّ وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا

They will say [that there were] three [companions] the fourth being their dog. Others will five and their dog being their sixth. They but guess at the unknown. Others say seven and their eighth being their dog. Say, “My Cherishing Lord knows their number best.” None but a few knows them. So do dispute about them except for what is plain and apparent and do not enquire about them from any of them [unbelievers]….. [al-Kahf : 22]

They stayed in their cave for 300 years and increased 9. Say, “Allāh knows best how long they stayed…” [al-Kahf : 25-6]

Listening to the Jumu‘ah [Friday] talk, some thoughts which I had pondered on before, came to the fore. I wish to share some words on language issues and their broader context, and discuss some aspects which our attitude to knowledge reveal.

Respecting languages should work both ways

Having heard the desecration of Muḥammad into MO-HA-MID for the umpteenth time on a famous talk-radio station, I wrote to express my disappointment. When it comes to Italian or French names, the presenters take care to correctly pronounce the foreign name. Yet when it comes to Arabic names, which are far more numerous than those named in any single European language, any haphazard pronunciation will do. I did not mention that the presenter in question whom I was addressing is African, at least in terms of DNA, not Caucasian.  The station replied that they would note this for the future. Ha! Don’t hold your breath.

Conversely I find it symptomatic of the tribal chauvinism of some Muslims, as well as their academic laziness, that the entire history and geography of mankind magically conforms to their traditional language, whichever it may be. This may unfortunately include Arabic in itself for an Arab chauvinist, or Arabic vocabulary where an Arabic word is used by a non-Arab.

Someone told me that he had listened to a speech of a world famous scholar. He spoke on how Muslim explorers had apparently named a host of countries in the world. The examples cited seemed sensible enough, but I objected to Madagascar being al-Madīnah al-Aṣghar in origin. The grammar is incorrect. Had it been the case, it would have been al-Madīnah aṣ-Ṣughrā. The look of horror on the brother’s face, that I could DARE to have a different opinion, as well as his pious exclamation, “But that is what so-and-so said!” speaks volumes on the mentality of a good proportion of Muslims. By the way, you are welcome to do your own research on the etymology of Madagascar.   

Getting back to Friday, the classical commentators of the Qurān were generally monolingual. Based on their time and place, and when Arabic was the world language in terms of academia, trade, politics, literature etc, it was only practical and obvious that they would record the Greek names of the Companions of the Cave [“Seven Sleepers,” as the Christians call them] in an Arabicised form, amenable to their audience.

I would ask, why is it that a millennium later, Muslim scholars who are born in western lands would still not have the aptitude to pronounce the tyrant Emperor’s name as Decius instead of Diqyānūs? Is it really practical to give the name of one of the Sleepers as Miksalmīnā to a western Muslim, or would Maximillian make more sense? Are we lazy and chauvinistic, or is it just that we have as yet not worked on the balance of holding firmly onto our religion, whilst according our host countries and their cultures their respect?

Majority commentary, Qataadah and Greek records

The Qurān is a book of guidance, not a story book. It does not discuss historical details. I would not dare comment on Allāh’s Word based on my unsubstantiated opinion, but fail to see the validity of the extremism amongst Muslims. On the one hand, there are those who expect the Qurān to comply with their theories. These people lose sight of the Qurān being the absolute truth, and worship sciences whose absolutes today is discredited the next generation. If Allāh wills, I shall write one day on my discussion with a Muslim physicist in regards infinite parallel universes.

 On the other hand, some confine their minds to a single tradition. Findings from science, history, geography etc are of less than zero relevance to them, even when these fields are used as mere supporting evidence to an existing orthodox view in Islām, NOT primary proof. Any deviation from a school’s thought is disrespect to the instructors and pious predecessors. That is the problem of holding the middle ground amongst extremists. To the former, I am Neanderthal idiot, to the latter a disrespectful rebel verging on heresy.

 The commentary of Qatādah – Allāh’s mercy be upon him – appealed far more to me than the majority opinion when we studied the story of the Companions of the Cave as students.  

The majority view is that, “They stayed in their cave for 300 years and increased 9” means that they stayed for 300 solar equivalent to 309 lunar years in the cave. Qatādah however opined that the Verse is actually quoting the speculation of the unbelievers, just as they were quoted in regards their number speculation. Both the numbers and years are guesses in the unknown, hence the next Verse, Say, “Allāh knows best how long they stayed…”

Why I prefer Qataadah

·         Decius ruled 249 -251. So there is no harm with the Greek dating of 250.

·         If 300 is absolute, they awoke in 550.

·         This is a mere 2 decades before the birth of the Prophet Muhammad ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

·         The Commentators explain that the story had been revealed in response to the unbelievers testing the Prophet Muhammad ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam with an incident so ancient, that the time and place had been lost to history. How is 20 years ancient lost history?

·         The way Qatādah explains the speculation and that Allāh knows best, has a better logical flow that appeals to me.

All that being said, I can be wrong and 309 is clear and correct!

What then, is my point?

Deterioration in Muslim thinking

The point of this article is not to espouse my acceptance of Qataadah’s commentary, but to ask the reader to ponder over some points:

·         The early commentators disagreed with Qatādah but mentioned his view with equal respect.

·         Today it is not mentioned at all. 309 is mentioned as an absolute, with no difference.

·         To me this but an example of the narrowing of Muslim thinking and inability to be open to differing opinions. A single monolithic narrative is the imperative and the diversity of the earliest Muslims is null and void.

·         The above Verses clarify that the unbelievers should not be our point of reference. “…do not enquire about them from any of them.” Thus the Greek period of 180 years for them having slept is not a fact which can be used to interpret the Qurān. However, when the Greeks have a complete historical record of when the pagan Decius and believer Theodosius II ruled, can the historical Greek record not be utilised as supporting evidence for an existing view within Islām?

·         My aim is to point out the forgotten middle path. Do we keep being in two groups, one worshipping science, the other living in an intellectual vacuum? Think about it. 

سليمان الكندي