2

There is a verse in the Qur'an that goes:

The heavens, We have built them with might. And verily, We are expanding it (51:47)

Some Islamic scholars say that this is an indication of the universe constantly expanding, which wasn't known by the science until it was discovered by Edwin Hubble and others in the 1920s:

The expansion of the universe is one of the most important pieces of evidence that the universe was created out of nothing. Although this fact was not discovered by science until the 20th century, God has informed us of this reality in the Qur'an revealed 1,400 years ago:

It is We who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We who are steadily expanding it. (The Qur'an, 51:47)

Yet, astonishingly well before telescopes were even invented and well before Hubble published his Law, Prophet Muhammad used to recite a verse of the Quran to his companions that ultimately stated that the universe is expanding.

Were there any scientific research about 1450 years ago and prior that talk about this?

Oddthinking
  • 140,378
  • 46
  • 548
  • 638
  • 3
    "*Were there any scientific research about 1450 years ago and prior that talk about this?*" This is begging the question. It presupposes that the Quran is talking about the modern idea of an expanding universe. – Schwern Nov 25 '22 at 05:44
  • @Schwern The universe is constantly expanding, that's what the verse is saying. Not sure what you mean by "modern era", I think I am not able to understand you well. –  Nov 25 '22 at 05:57
  • 2
    @Stranger It really doesnt clearly state that the universe is expanding in anything like the scientific sense we mean now. For example, the translation: "It is We who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We who are steadily expanding it." Could be referring to many different things. You could use that paragraph to describe the _Star Wars Universe_. If that's all they really have talking about expansion of the universe, it's too vague to say they mean the same thing as scientists who talk about the expanding universe. – JMac Nov 25 '22 at 14:09
  • 1
    @JMac Scientists talk in detail, Holy books, and religious texts are there to be short and generalized, to cover as much as possible in concise texts, so I am not really "comparing" both. –  Nov 25 '22 at 14:15
  • Your question is essentially invalid. Its because you ask about a prediction about a fact that was as well a fact when the "prediction" was made as its a fact today. You should have asked something like "Did quran told that universe is expanding?". In short, prediction is about a future event. Not about a current event or a past event. – Atif Dec 15 '22 at 07:49
  • @Atif It's a prediction if the event is there but just not known. Telling something not known, if put under context, does very well come under the definition of "prediction". Think for example machine learning models, the term "predict" is used for getting the outputs regardless of it being a fact or not. –  Dec 15 '22 at 08:23
  • Okay. You are right. Whats the protocol? Should I delete my comment? – Atif Dec 15 '22 at 08:27
  • @Atif It's fine, we learn together on stackexchange sites and it's better to keep it for context :). Btw, from your name, I am guessing that you are a Muslim too, so Assalamoalikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. –  Dec 15 '22 at 08:28

2 Answers2

11

Before we reach for the miraculous, we must first consider the mundane.

What are the odds the Quran is coincidentally right?

Pretty good.

Consider there's only three options here:

  1. Expanding.
  2. Contracting.
  3. Static.

If picked at random the odds are 1-in-3; not bad.

But it isn't random. Consider "The heavens, We have built them with might. And verily, We are making them smaller." It's unlikely a holy text will glorify creation by saying it's contracting.

That leaves us with expanding or static. Expanding is an expression of power and might and awe. Static is an expression of constancy, reliability, and unending power. Either seems likely.

So about 50/50.

This is before considering that we're combing through the text to find verses which match modern scientific understanding while discarding those which do not.

Interpreting holy texts literally.

As always with reading of holy texts literally, there are other interpretations with different implications.

For example, I have a copy of a translation by M. H. Shakir which interprets it as an expression of the Lord's power to create.

And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

But I'm no expert. Let's take this interpretation at face value.

What else does the Quran say about the heavens?

If we're going to interpret this one verse of the Quran as God informing us of the reality of the universe, we have to examine the other parts of the Quran that speak of the "the heavens" and see how they match reality. Otherwise we'd be cherry picking.

There are seven heavens and they were made in two days.

So He formed the heaven into seven heavens in two Days, assigning to each its mandate. And We adorned the lowest heaven with ˹stars like˺ lamps ˹for beauty˺ and for protection.

41:12

Then He turned towards the heaven, forming it into seven heavens.

2:29

The heavens have soldiers.

We did not send any soldiers from the heavens against his people after his death, nor did We need to.

36:28

Stars are for decoration and protection from eavesdroppers.

We have adorned the lowest heaven with the stars for decoration and ˹for˺ protection from every rebellious devil. They cannot listen to the highest assembly ˹of angels˺ for they are pelted from every side, ˹fiercely˺ driven away. And they will suffer an everlasting torment.

37:6,9

And indeed, We adorned the lowest heaven with ˹stars like˺ lamps, and made them ˹as missiles˺ for stoning ˹eavesdropping˺ devils

67:5

The seventh heaven has a tree.

at the Lote Tree of the most extreme limit ˹in the seventh heaven˺—

53:14


The Quran refers to the heavens as a physical place which was made in two days and needs protection from eavesdroppers. It has soldiers, seven levels, and a tree. In this context, the verse is referring to expanding that creation.

Whether you believe that place exists is up to you, but it bears little resemblance to our modern astrophysics.

Schwern
  • 17,034
  • 7
  • 63
  • 66
  • If we consider the literal Arabic words, the M.H. Shakir translations seems invalid. the verse directly says "we are its expanders" in Arabic, so I am not sure how they got the "maker of things". –  Nov 25 '22 at 05:59
  • I think that the Qur'an refers to many metaphysical things in regard to the heavens, those other verses seem to have little to no connection with the verse in question. If you'd want to state that the Qur'an is scientifically invalid, you *can* bring much seemingly effective verses such as the flat earth ones, but neither that nor the verses mentioned in your answer seem to have a link with the question. –  Nov 25 '22 at 06:10
  • 8
    @Stranger If you're asking if people were studying the expansion of the universe 1450 years ago, that's not a skeptics question; try History.SE. The question relevant to Skeptics.SE is whether the Quran predicts the expanding universe. Those verses show their understanding of the "heavens" was quite different than ours, their idea of what expanding the heavens means is about a completely different heavens than our own. – Schwern Nov 25 '22 at 06:18
  • @Schwen Okay, now I get what you mean. That's a good answer overall. –  Nov 25 '22 at 06:23
  • @Schwen I'll wait for other answers, so that I don't have to change the accepted answer many times :) –  Nov 25 '22 at 06:25
  • I did do some research regarding this, and a lot of explanations say regarding the Qur'an that it uses the word Heaven with multiple meanings depending on where it is used. So I'll take a look into this more when possible. Would asking a new question regarding this be better or just updating the existing one? @Schwen –  Nov 25 '22 at 09:51
  • @Stranger I'd think [Islam.SE](https://islam.stackexchange.com/) might be a better forum to discuss the subtle meanings of the words in the Quran. Then perhaps come back here. Also consider what I just added; the odds of the Quran coincidentally getting this right are about 50/50. – Schwern Nov 25 '22 at 18:09
  • Yes I just saw. Great answer overall in terms of research. –  Nov 26 '22 at 01:59
  • @Stranger, "we are its expanders" is not quite accurate, see my detailed answer. – Akli Nov 27 '22 at 00:16
  • Why are you answering "What are the odds the Quran is coincidentally right?" when its not the question that is asked. The question that is asked is prediction. A prediction may or may not be by coincidence. That is, its a detail that is not asked and not relevant. If you go on that path where will you stop? How much deep will you go when you think its enough? – Atif Dec 15 '22 at 07:44
  • @Atif I'd say the answer I wrote was deep enough. :) – Schwern Dec 15 '22 at 07:48
  • You took a "yes" answer to the question for granted, instead of answering the question. The entirety of your answer took a "yes" answer as basis for stating your opinion about something else. Your answer fit, as per rules of this website, as a comment to someone else's answer if that answer is a "yes". – Atif Dec 15 '22 at 08:24
  • @Atif The question is "Did the Qur'an predict an expanding universe 1300 years before Edwin Hubble?". Before we reach for the miraculous, "God has informed us of this reality", we must first consider the mundane. It's a 50/50 chance the text gets it right; the meaning of the passage is subject to interpretation; and the rest of the text's references to heaven show no similar astronomical knowledge. There's no evidence it is anything more than a coincidence cherry-picked from the text. – Schwern Dec 15 '22 at 18:18
  • @Schwen The question is as you have stated, its not "Is it by coincidence that quran predicted an expanding universe 1300 years before Edwin Bubble?". Its also not "Is quran a miracle". You got to answer the question thats asked. Do not invent your own questions. Second thing is, interpretation of text is limited to whats in text, you cannot go outside the meaning of words to interpret it. In my comments to an answer below I go in length about the meaning of the main word thats central to the thing asked in question. (contd.) – Atif Dec 16 '22 at 03:51
  • ...Third thing is, the text do show another astronomical fact that science is just reaching, your ignorance do not limit what the text says. Look at the word "heavens" in translation. In urdu we just say "aasman" for the translation (look any urdu translation for reference) which just mean "skies". Pay attention to the plural. Quran is telling us that there are multiple of skies, not just one. At other places many times we are told that there are 7 skies. Also, in Surah Yaseen in quran its told that all heavenly bodies (planets, stars etc) float on definite paths. – Atif Dec 16 '22 at 03:58
  • @Atif You have a lot to say. Please consider writing your own answer so others can vote and comment. – Schwern Dec 16 '22 at 04:18
3

Quran:

وَٱلسَّمَآءَ بَنَيْنَـٰهَا بِأَيْي۟دٍۢ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ

Quran.com translation:

The heavens, We have built them with might. And verily, We are expanding it

The translation is not quite accurate, especially for the last word "expanding it/expanders" for "مُوسِعُونَ".

Let's see what the top most revered muslim exegetes of all time say:

  • Baghaway (10th century): one who has power/capacity (ذو سعة). rich (أغنياء) ...etc.
  • Qurtubi (12th century): rich and powerful (أغنياء قادرون)
  • Tabari (9th century): one who has power/capacity (ذو سعة) or extended/contained it (أوسعها).
  • Ibn kathir (14th century): we extended/contained its edges without pillars until it stabilized as it is (قد وسعنا أرجاءها ورفعناها بغير عمد ، حتى استقلت كما هي)

Source: https://quran.ksu.edu.sa/tafseer/baghawy/sura51-aya47.html#baghawy

Interestingly and as noted by Baghaway and Tabari (cf source), The Quran itself uses the singular form of "مُوسِعُونَ" in another verse ("مُوسِع"):

عَلَى ٱلْمُوسِعِ قَدَرُهُۥ وَعَلَى ٱلْمُقْتِرِ قَدَرُهُۥ

If we go to the source of your translation (quran.com) and check now the translation of its singular form (2-236):

the rich according to his means and the poor according to his

https://quran.com/al-baqarah/236

In order to have a more faithful translation, let's start with a word-to-word translation (mine):

And_the_sky (وَٱلسَّمَآءَ) we_built_it (بَنَيْنَـٰهَا) with_hands (بِأَيْي۟دٍۢ) and_we_are (وَإِنَّا) powerful (لَمُوسِعُونَ).

I translated the last word مُوسِعُونَ as "powerful", I could have chosen a more elegant word such as "omnipotents", but I'll stick to a literal translation and avoid the shakespearian style translations that target westerners.

If the author meant "expanders" instead of "powerful", he would have chosen another word: "مُوَسِّعُونَ" instead of "مُوسِعُونَ". These two words might look identical to you, but they are not: notice the small " ّ" above "سـ" and the " َ" above "و".

The final translation would give:

And the sky, we built it firmly. Indeed we are powerful.

General advice: if you want to have a good interpretation of the quran without a concordist bias, stick to the old exegesis.

Akli
  • 1,453
  • 2
  • 10
  • 17
  • Tackling the claim by suggesting the translation is poor is a reasonable approach, but *your personal* translation is off-topic here. I would suggest a reference [like this](https://myislam.org/surah-dhariyat/ayat-47/) that offers competing translations from recognised experts. – Oddthinking Nov 27 '22 at 01:18
  • @Oddthinking My 'personal' translation is based on simple arabic grammar and backed by the top muslim exegetes of all time (tabari, qurtubi, ibn kathir) + the source itself when it translates the singular form, it is superior to all these "recognised experts" translations who did not even bother to read the exegesis of the quran. These are not experts but mere proselytizers, their scientific reliability as source is void. An orientalist translation is much more reliable. – Akli Nov 27 '22 at 01:35
  • @Oddthinking you have a point though, my translation should not be an answer, I'll edit accordingly and put it at the end of the answer making clear that it is a "personal translation". – Akli Nov 27 '22 at 01:43
  • Even in casual Arabic, Mosi'un (مُوسِعُونَ) DOES mean expanders. It's a literal translation of the English word "Expanders" and Mowassi'um (مُوَسِّعُونَ) is as well. I am not able to get how those scholars got those translations. I think those are references from Tafsir, not translations. I haven't taken a look yet, let me see. –  Nov 27 '22 at 02:17
  • Some scholars also seem to claim that the word has both meanings depending on the context, like Abul Ala Maududi: https://myislam.org/surah-dhariyat/ayat-47/ Ibn Kathir talks about the extension of the sky, but draws a different *interpretation* "(Verily, We are able to extend the vastness of space thereof.) means, `We made it vast and We brought its roof higher without pillars to support it, and thus it is hanging independently.’" as you said in your answer. –  Nov 27 '22 at 02:22
  • By the way, quran.com doesn't translate on its own, there is a translation option you can see and choose from the translations of other scholars. By default, It's Sahih international I think. –  Nov 27 '22 at 02:24
  • 2
    @ Stranger, 1. let's restrict ourselves to orthodox islamic sources, those followed by muslims, not those followed by terrorists (Ala Maududi is a modern era terrorist and should not be cited as a source). 2. Ibn kathir citation is already in my answer. 3. I gave the source of all tafsir (exegesis) I used, click on it and you can switch between exegetes (mufassirun). – Akli Nov 27 '22 at 02:44
  • Considering Abul A'la Maududi a terrorist or not is an opinion. You can debate the same about many scholars, even including some orthodox authoritative scholars. But the point is, they are scholars, and their moral character is irrelevant to research. Yes, I saw the Ibn Kathir citation, but we discussed literal word-to-word translations, not TAFASIR. Tafsir Ibn Kathir is a Tafsir (Explanation) from Ibn Kathir based on his understanding of the verse. There are many Orthodox ones (cited above) that are quite a lot different from Ibn Kathir. Again, I am talking translation not an explanation. –  Dec 02 '22 at 15:12
  • 1
    As a native urdu speaker, a language that is derived in part from arabic, its very clear to me and to other 1.5 billion to 2 billion native urdu speakers in world that the word "la mosioon"at end of the quranic verse refer to "wusat" which means expanse. A "wasee" thing is a thing that is big and huge. We say sky is "wasee", ocean is "wasee" means they are expanded, very big. "la mosioon" means "We are expanding it". The tense is continuous, its something that is happening. Thats the point. Its an ongoing thing. Its like someone say "I am driving". (contd.) – Atif Dec 15 '22 at 09:04
  • 1
    ... When "wasee" means rich it means it by extension. A rich man has a type of "wusat", he is expanded, he can live big, he can spend big. Its like in english the word "rich" not exactly means "wealthy", think "rich text font" or "rich experience", just have variety and you are rich, you not have to have a lot of each of the things. In urdu we say "wasee o areez" (its relevant here because "wasee" is an arabic word used in same meaning in urdu) which means huge and wide or expanded and wide. "wasee" is a very common word in urdu and for that matter in arabic also. – Atif Dec 15 '22 at 09:16
  • 1
    ذو سعة means "those that has the capacity / vastness / hugeness". This refer to rich people because they have vastness. أوسعها same root word. How did you translate "لَمُوسِعُونَ" as powerful? Its like translating "I am programming" to "I can think". Ofcourse you can think if you can program but the message is not "I can think". When translating something one should convey the message as accurately as one can. Another problem is لَمُوسِعُونَ dont say anything about who one is, it not show a property, it show an action. The message is about what one is doing. – Atif Dec 15 '22 at 09:31
  • It should be understood by all that translation of quran is not difficult. Its because quran is in a living language. Its miracle of quran that not only it itself is preserved its language is also preserved. Just look at how arabs today speak and what they mean by a particular word. There, thats what the meaning of the word is, and its usage. You can say that for all arab text, not just quran. So, find a poetry say from a thousand years or more ago and ask any arab now what it mean or use a modern arab dictionaty and you will understand it. This cannot be said for any non-arab text. – Atif Dec 15 '22 at 09:54
  • @Atif All your points are valid except for the evolution of the Arabic language. The language evolved heavily over time and just because its native people can understand older texts better than others, doesn't mean that it didn't evolve. Also, you are right about the translation, it is evidently "expanding". –  Jan 06 '23 at 12:01