An Evaluation of Scientific Exegesis of the Qur’an from the Classical to Modern Period

                                     An Evaluation of Scientific Exegesis of the Qur’an

                                            from the Classical to Modern Period

 Faiyaz M. Khan

Introduction

The paramount importance of the science of tafsir, or exegesis of the Qur’an, is that it seeks to explain the words of God to Muslims.[1] In order for Muslims to practice Islam to the best of their ability, they must know what the Qur’an requires of them, and the meanings of its words on a variety of different subjects.[2] Traditionally, the two broad categories of tafsir are by tradition, al-tafsir bil ma’thur, or by transmission, al-tafsir bil riwayah,  and by reasoning, al-tafsir bil ra’y.[3] Some researchers have questioned if there is a real distinction between the two, since both require choices, judgements[4] and thinking by the exegete.[5] Over a millennia and a half has seen different types of tafsir develop within the genre, from legal to mystical, each expounding their different perspectives of the Qur’an, in their own historical, social and intellectual contexts.[6] Scientific exegesis of the Qur’an, or tafsir ilmi,[7] is one such type which developed in the classical period out of the need to understand verses about the creation; while in modern times, to counter ‘challenges of scientism’[8] and to demonstrate harmony between Islam and science.[9]

This paper will evaluate the development of scientific exegeses of the Qur’an from the classical to the modern period: by examining its benefits and challenges. Scientific tafsir utilises the natural sciences, engineering, medical science, mathematics, applied sciences, botany and zoology, to accomplish the aims of the exegete.[10] This paper will explore the introduction of science into the tafsir genre, the ever-changing nature of science and its impact on tafsir literature, and the plausibility of explaining certain Qur’anic verses through science. 

The Classical Period

The introduction and development of science among Muslims on a systemic scale, occurred during the Graeco-Arabic translation movement from the mid-eighth to the end of the tenth century.[11] The movement contributed significantly to the “emergence of an Islamic scientific culture;”[12] however, Muslim exegetes did not synthesise new-found scientific knowledge with the relevant verses of the Qur’an until centuries later.[13] The idea that the Qur’an is the bedrock of all sciences is attributed to Muhammad al-Ghazali (d. 1111),[14] while Ibn Rushd (d. 1198) argued that there was no conflict between the Qur’an and science since there is only one Truth, but arrived at in “different languages.”[15] These ideas greatly assisted in the development of scientific tafsir.[16] The key objective of the classical period was to illustrate God’s existence, his control over nature, his omnipotence and omniscience.[17]

The classical period saw the use of science to better understand and implement Qur’anic injunctions and practices. As such, science was used for calculating Islamic lunar months, prayer times, shares of inheritance, and the direction of the qibla for prayer.[18] These were written as specialised texts, not as part of a tafsir; but nevertheless they are part of the tafsir genre, since they interpret and comment on relevant Qur’anic verses to illustrate the accuracy and usefulness of their calculations.[19] These early works that utilised science laid the foundations for scientific exegesis; however, these authors did not regard their efforts as such.[20] Therefore, science was viewed as beneficial knowledge that assisted Muslims to follow their religion.

As all knowledge is from God, which includes science;[21] scientific knowledge needs to be acquired: to learn more about the creation and insight into the relevant verses of the Qur’an.[22] In al-Ghazali’s Kitab jawahir al-Qur’an, he emphasises that the verses that refer to the sun and the moon, and those that mention human anatomy can only be understood by those who are knowledgeable in these fields.[23] Therefore, he contends that since the Qur’an has scientific information which must be understood, it lies the “foundations of scientific research.”[24] This paved the way for Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 1209), Badr al-Din al-Zarkashi (d. 1349), Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 1506) to expand and validate the field of scientific tafsir.[25]

However, the nature of the field of science is one of constant change, as new discoveries and theories emerge; old knowledge and theories are challenged and discarded.[26] The first tafsir to comment on verses about nature in a comprehensive approach was Mafatih al-ghayb, commonly known as Tafsir al-kabir, by al-Razi;[27] which has encyclopaedic information on the natural sciences and astronomy.[28] Commenting on the phrase, “Lord of the worlds, rabbil alamin”[29] in Surah al-Fatihah, al-Razi postulates that the term “alam”[30] includes lofty and lowly bodies; and that the simple lowly bodies are made from earth, water, air and fire.[31] This ancient Greek theory of the four elements assumed that everything was made up of these elements.[32] Furthermore, commenting on a verse in Surah al-Mulk which says, “And We have adorned the nearest heaven with lamps …,”[33] al-Razi believed that “lamps, masabih”[34] were fixed stars that “maintained a fixed distance between each other as they moved about the earth with uniform motion,”[35] never passing in front of any of the planets.[36] This was because Muslim astronomers hypothesised that fixed stars had their own sphere, which was beyond that of the furthest planet.[37] Nevertheless, these ancient scientific theories are no longer accepted science,[38] similarly, much of al-Razi’s commentary using science of a bygone era would be irrelevant, or even erroneous today. This highlights a major challenge of using science to comment on the Qur’an, which would subject the Qur’an to the fancies of the latest scientific discoveries and theories that would be modified and changed in the future.[39]

The Modern Period

Scientific exegesis in the modern era was a reaction and response to colonisation and the scientific and technological advancement of the West,[40] in comparison to Muslim countries that were economically and militarily underdeveloped.[41] Thus, the genesis of tafsir ilmi can be traced to the beginning of the 19th century,[42] from Muhammad al-Iskandarani (d. 1889) being a noteworthy pioneer, to Tantawi Jawhari (d. 1940)  a significantly influential exegete in the field.[43] Most researchers agree that the methods and aims of tafsir ilmi is a modern phenomenon, that cannot be compared to pre-modern scientific exegesis in its scope and dimensions.[44] This is due to the development of the scientific method and the secularisation of science.[45] Hence, this tafsir trend has endeavoured to interpret the Qur’an with a “modern scientific worldview in mind”[46] to offer Muslims an Islamic response to modernity.

The Qur’an and science can be viewed as being embodiments of God’s divine attributes,[47] thus, Muslims need one to interpret the other.[48] Said Nursi (d. 1960) in his voluminous work Risale-i Nur maintains that far from being in conflict with one another, the Qur’an and science complemented each other and were “two faces of the one truth.”[49] Moreover, he believed that there was an intrinsic connection between the Qur’an and the universe;[50] the Qur’an discerns the universe for the reader, while the universe assists the reader to better comprehend the Qur’an.[51] Therefore, he is critical of modern science for its focus away from God, and its sole emphasis towards the creation; whereas, he asserts that science’s true vocation is to search the Truth – that God can be known through His creation.[52] Hence, Nursi’s method epistemologically places God at its centre; thus, being critical of modern science from straying from “the path of truth”[53] by insisting on viewing the universe only through materialism.[54] His approach does not sacrifice the Qur’an as the word of God,[55] nor does it use science to explain miraculous events.[56] Instead, he postulates that science in the light of the divine text leads to the discovery of deeper truths about the creation.[57]

However, an exegete’s attempt to impose a scientific explanation onto the Qur’an, at times ignores its language, grammar and context;[58] thus, arriving at an improbable interpretation that burdens the text with forced meanings.[59] Tafsir al-manar, a modern seminal exegesis by Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905), and his student, Rashid Rida (d. 1935), assert that in Islam there is no conflict “between reason and revelation,”[60] and that reason was crucial to understanding the Qur’an and the universe.[61] In order to prove their contention, Surah Fil was reinterpreted: “birds in successive flights, tayran ababil”[62] became “swarms of flies”;[63] and “shooting them with stones of baked clay, tarmihim bi hijarah min sijjil”[64] became flies spreading disease.[65] The meanings of these words are as follows, tayr means bird, ababil means successive groups, tarmi means shoots or throws, hijarah means stones, and sijjil means baked clay or brimstone.[66] While it is true that Qur’anic words have multiple and layered meanings, they cannot imply other meanings which alters the narrative and decontextualises it from the essence of the chapter.[67] Moreover, this surah is specifically mentioning an historical event that was familiar to the Arabs of the 7th century,[68] and had the army died from an “outbreak of contagious diseases such as smallpox and measles,”[69] they would have known about it. Reinterpreting this surah in order to prove Islam is rational, by imposing a scientific gloss on to it, illustrates fanciful interpretation and colourful reasoning to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.[70]

Recent Developments

The development and acceptance of tafsir ilmi has contributed to the emergence of i’jaz ilmi, or the scientific miraculousness of the Qur’an:[71] which is dedicated to establishing the divine origin of the Qur’an through science.[72] The basic premise of i’jaz ilmi is to demonstrate that the Qur’an contains information about scientific theories, facts, phenomena, discoveries and inventions – long before they became known to science;[73] thus, proving the truth of Islam. However, pseudoscience and conspiracy theories have also exploited i’jaz ilmi to legitimise their claims,[74] especially on television and on the internet.[75] Proponents, who are by and large non-experts,[76] either misuse scientific information or interpret the Qur’an in a fallacious way:[77] both have the same outcome of burdening the text with meanings and speculations which it cannot bear linguistically, grammatically or contextually.[78] The result is that pseudoscience and conspiracy theories gain acceptance and legitimacy among Muslims, which is detrimental to their understanding of the Qur’an – which is the opposite of what the science of tafsir is meant to accomplish.

Conclusion

The development and growth of this trend within the tafsir genre has its benefits, challenges and even dangers. The classical period was responsible for its genesis and acceptance within the science of tafsir.[79] Nevertheless, science being an ever-fluctuating area of study, naturally leads to scientific information being outdated and also rejected as new discoveries are made.[80] The modern period witnessed a resurgent interest in tafsir ilmi as a consequence of colonisation and modernity, which exposed Muslim countries as backward and regressive.[81] This led to modernist thinkers to promote the idea that Islam and science were compatible, and that there were no contradictions between the Qur’an and modern science.[82] Current research has illustrated the growth of i’jaz ilmi from tafsir ilmi, which has had limited success due to the rise of pseudoscience and conspiracy theories within this expanding field.[83] While it is true that tafsir is each exegete’s attempt at meaning-making of the sacred text in their world,[84] this process cannot ignore the text’s language, history and context.[85] 

Bibliography

 

Abdel Haleem, M. A. S. The Qur’an: A New Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

 

Abul Quasem, Muhammad. The Jewels of the Qur’an: Al-Ghazali’s Theory. Kuala Lumpur: Islamic Book Trust, 2013.

 

Ali, Muhammad Mohar. A Word for Word Meaning of the Qur’an. Ipswich, UK: Jam’iyat Ihyaa Minhaaj al-Sunnah, 2003.

 

Al-Razi, Fakhr al-Din. The Great Exegesis: Al Tafsir al-Kabir. UK: The Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought and The Islamic Texts Society, 2018.

 

Ansari, Zafar Ishaq. “Scientific Exegesis of the Qur’an.” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 3, no. 1 (2001): 91-104.

 

Bakar, Osman. “The Importance of al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd in the History of Islamic Discourse on Religion and Science.” In Science and Religion: Christian and Muslim Perspectives, edited by David Marshall, 102-110. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2012.

 

Bauer, Karen. “Introduction.” In Aims, Methods and Context of Qur’anic Exegesis (2nd/8th-9th/15th Centuries), edited by Karen Bauer, 1-35. Oxford: Oxford University Press in association with The Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2013.

 

Bigliardi, Stefano. “The ‘Scientific Miracle of the Qur’an,’ Pseudoscience, and Conspiracism.” Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 52, no. 1 (2017): 146-171.

 

Boyd, T. J. M., and J. J. Sanderson, The Physics of Plasmas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

 

Campanini, Massimo. “Qur’an and Science: A Hermeneutical Approach.” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 7, no. 1 (2005): 48-63.

 

Coruh, Hakan. “The Qur’an and Interpretation in the Classical Modernism: Tafsircentric Approach of Muhammad Abduh.” Australian Journal of Islamic Studies 4, no. 2 (2019): 1-21.

 

—. Modern Interpretation of the Qur’an: The Contribution of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2019.

 

—. “Relationship Between Religion and Science in the Muslim Modernism.” Theology and Science 18, no. 1 (2020): 152-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2019.1710355

 

Dallal, Ahmad. “Science and Religion in the History of Islam.” In Science and Religion: Christian and Muslim Perspectives, ed. David Marshall, 22-34. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2012.

 

Daneshgar, Majid. “An Approach to Science in the Qur’an: Re-examination of Tantawi Gawhari’s Exegesis.” Oriente Moderno 95, no. 1 (2015): 32-66.

 

Denffer, Ahmad Von. Ulum Al-Qur’an: An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’an. UK: The Islamic Foundation, 1983.

 

Dogan, Recep. A History of the Methodology of Qur’anic Exegesis. New Jersey: Tughra Books, 2015.

 

Gutas, Dimitri. The Graeco-Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early Abbasid Society (2nd-4th/8th-10th Centuries). London: Routledge, 1998.

 

Hidayatullah, Aysha A. Feminist Edges of the Qur’an. Oxford Scholarship Online, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199359561.001.0001

 

Khalil, Imad al-Din. “The Qur’an and Modern Science: Observations on Methodology.” In The Qur’an and the Sunnah: The Time-Space Factor, by Taha Jabir al-Alwani and Imad al-Din Khalil, 42-57. Washington: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1995. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvkc671c.7

 

Khir, Bustami Mohamed. “The Qur’an and Science: The Debate on the Validity of Scientific Interpretations.” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 2, no. 2 (2000): 19-35.

 

Morrison, Robert G. “The Portrayal of Nature in a Medieval Qur’an Commentary.” Studia Islamica 94, (2002): 115-137.

 

—. “Reasons for a Scientific Portrayal of Nature in Medieval Commentaries on the Qur’an.” Arabica 52, no. 2 (2005): 182-203.

 

—. “Tafsir and Science.” In The Oxford Handbook of Qur’anic Studies, ed. Mustafa Shah and Muhammad Abdel Haleem, 807-817. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199698646.013.58

 

Naguib, Shuruq. “The Hermeneutics of Miracle: Evolution, Eloquence, and the Critique of Scientific Exegesis in the Literary School of tafsir. Part I: From Muhammad Abduh to Amin al-Khuli.” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 21, no. 3 (2019): 57-88.

 

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein., ed. The Study Qur’an: A New Translation and Commentary. New York: HarperCollins, 2015.

 

Saeed, Abdullah. Interpreting the Qur’an: Towards a Contemporary Approach. London: Routledge, 2006.

 

Shabana, Ayman. “In Pursuit of Consonance: Science and Religion in Modern Works of Tafsir.” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 21, no. 3 (2019): 7-31.

 

Telliel, Yunus Dogan. “Miraclous Evidence: Scientific Wonders and Religious Reasons.” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 39, no. 3 (2019): 528-542.

 

Ushama, Thameem. Methodologies of the Qur’anic Exegesis. Kuala Lumpur: A. S. Noordeen, 1995.

 

Watson, Peter. Ideas: A History from Fire to Freud. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2005.

 

Zebiri, Kate. Mahmud Shaltut and Islamic Modernism, Oxford Scholarship Online, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198263302.001.0001

 

---

[1]. Ahmad Von Denffer, Ulum Al-Qur’an: An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’an (UK: The Islamic Foundation, 1983), 123.

 

[2]. Thameem Ushama, Methodologies of the Qur’anic Exegesis (Kuala Lumpur: A. S. Noordeen, 1995), 1-4.

 

[3]. Aysha A. Hidayatullah, Feminist Edges of the Qur’an, (Oxford Scholarship Online, 2014), 25.

 

[4]. Ibid., 28.

 

[5]. Bustami Mohamed Khir, “The Qur’an and Science: The Debate on the Validity of Scientific Interpretations,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 2, no. 2 (2000): 22.

 

[6]. Karen Bauer, “Introduction,” in Aims, Methods and Context of Qur’anic Exegesis (2nd/8th-9th/15th Centuries), ed. Karen Bauer (Oxford: Oxford University Press in association with The Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2013), 7; Abdullah Saeed, Interpreting the Qur’an: Towards a Contemporary Approach (London: Routledge, 2006), 116.

 

[7]. Ayman Shabana, “In Pursuit of Consonance: Science and Religion in Modern Works of Tafsir,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 21, no. 3 (2019): 10.

 

[8]. Robert Morrison, “Tafsir and Science,” in The Oxford Handbook of Qur’anic Studies, ed. Mustafa Shah and Muhammad Abdel Haleem (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020), 807.

 

[9]. Stefano Bigliardi, “The ‘Scientific Miracle of the Qur’an,’ Pseudoscience, and Conspiracism,” Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 52, no. 1 (2017): 147.

 

[10]. Osman Bakar, “The Importance of al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd in the History of Islamic Discourse on Religion and Science,” in Science and Religion: Christian and Muslim Perspectives, ed. David Marshall (Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2012), 103.

 

[11]. Dimitri Gutas, The Graeco-Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early Abbasid Society (2nd-4th/8th-10th Centuries), (London: Routledge, 1998), 1.

 

[12]. Ahmad Dallal, “Science and Religion in the History of Islam,” in Science and Religion: Christian and Muslim Perspectives, ed. David Marshall (Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2012), 22.

 

[13]. Ibid., 23.

 

[14]. Massimo Campanini, “Qur’an and Science: A Hermeneutical Approach,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 7, no. 1 (2005): 49-50.

 

[15]. Ibid., 57-58.

  

[16]. Osman Bakar, Science and Religion, 108-109.

  

[17]. Robert G. Morrison, “The Portrayal of Nature in a Medieval Qur’an Commentary,” Studia Islamica 94, (2002): 116.

 

[18]. Dallal, Science and Religion, 23-24.

 

[19]. Ibid., 22-23.

 

[20]. Ibid., 31.

 

[21]. Muhammad Abul Quasem, The Jewels of the Qur’an: Al-Ghazali’s Theory, (Kuala Lumpur: Islamic Book Trust, 2013), 30-31.

 

[22]. Khir, “The Qur’an and Science,” 22.

 

[23]. Abul Quasem, The Jewels of the Qur’an, 30-32.

 

[24]. Campanini, “Qur’an and Science,” 50.

 

[25]. Khir, “The Qur’an and Science,” 22.

 

[26]. Ibid., 28.

 

[27]. Morrison, “The Portrayal of Nature in a Medieval Qur’an Commentary,” 115; Robert Morrison, “Reasons for a Scientific Portrayal of Nature in Medieval Commentaries on the Qur’an,” Arabica 52, no. 2 (2005): 182.

 

[28]. Ushama, Methodologies of the Qur’anic Exegesis, 93-94.

 

[29]. Qur’an, 1:1. Muhammad Mohar Ali’s translation of the Qur’an has been used for this paper.

 

[30]. Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, The Great Exegesis: Al Tafsir al-Kabir, (UK: The Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought and The Islamic Texts Society, 2018), 1:360.

 

[31]. Ibid., 1:360-361.

 

[32]. T. J. M Boyd and J. J. Sanderson, The Physics of Plasmas, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 1.

 

[33]. Qur’an 67:5.

 

[34]. Muhammad Mohar Ali, A Word for Word Meaning of the Qur’an, (Ipswich, UK: Jam’iyat Ihyaa Minhaaj al-Sunnah, 2003), 3:1851.

 

[35]. Morrison, “Reasons for a Scientific Portrayal of Nature in Medieval Commentaries on the Qur’an,” 189.

 

[36]. Ibid.

 

[37]. Ibid.

 

[38]. Peter Watson, Ideas: A History from Fire to Freud, (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2005), 134 & 179.

 

[39]. Khir, “The Qur’an and Science,” 28.

  

[40]. Hakan Coruh, “Relationship Between Religion and Science in the Muslim Modernism,” Theology and Science 18, no. 1 (2020): 153.

 

[41]. Zafar Ishaq Ansari, “Scientific Exegesis of the Qur’an,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 3, no. 1 (2001): 91-92.

  

[42]. Shabana, “In Pursuit of Consonance,” 8.

 

[43]. Majid Daneshgar, “An Approach to Science in the Qur’an: Re-examination of Tantawi Gawhari’s Exegesis,” Oriente Moderno 95, no. 1 (2015): 33.

 

[44]. Shabana, “In Pursuit of Consonance,” 10.

 

[45]. Khir, “The Qur’an and Science,” 20.

 

[46]. Hakan Coruh, “The Qur’an and Interpretation in the Classical Modernism: Tafsircentric Approach of Muhammad Abduh,” Australian Journal of Islamic Studies 4, no. 2 (2019): 4.

 

[47]. Coruh, “Relationship Between Religion and Science in the Muslim Modernism,” 156.

 

[48]. Recep Dogan, A History of the Methodology of Qur’anic Exegesis, (New Jersey: Tughra Books, 2015), 275.

 

[49]. Ibid.

 

[50]. Yunus Dogan Telliel, “Miraclous Evidence: Scientific Wonders and Religious Reasons,” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 39, no. 3 (2019): 536.

 

[51]. Dogan, A History of the Methodology of Qur’anic Exegesis, 275.

 

[52]. Coruh, “Relationship Between Religion and Science in the Muslim Modernism,” 156-157.

 

[53]. Ibid., 156.

 

[54]. Morrison, The Oxford Handbook of Qur’anic Studies, 815.

 

[55]. Hakan Coruh, Modern Interpretation of the Qur’an: The Contribution of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi. (Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2019), 104-105.

  

[56]. Ibid., 215.

 

[57]. Ibid., 210.

 

[58]. Shuruq Naguib, “The Hermeneutics of Miracle: Evolution, Eloquence, and the Critique of Scientific Exegesis in the Literary School of tafsir. Part I: From Muhammad Abduh to Amin al-Khuli,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 21, no. 3 (2019): 75.

 

[59]. Bauer, Aims, Methods and Context of Qur’anic Exegesis, 8.

 

[60]. Kate Zebiri, Mahmud Shaltut and Islamic Modernism, (Oxford Scholarship Online, 2011), 193-194.

 

[61]. Shabana, “In Pursuit of Consonance,” 12.

 

[62]. Qur’an 105:3.  

 

[63]. Coruh, “Relationship Between Religion and Science in the Muslim Modernism,” 155.

 

[64]. Qur’an 105:4.

 

[65]. Coruh, “Relationship Between Religion and Science in the Muslim Modernism,” 155.

 

[66]. Ali, A Word for Word Meaning of the Qur’an, 3:2022.

 

[67]. Naguib, “The Hermeneutics of Miracle,” 76.

 

[68]. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, ed., The Study Qur’an: A New Translation and Commentary, (New York: HarperCollins, 2015), 1561.

 

[69]. Shabana, “In Pursuit of Consonance,” 15.

 

[70]. Imad al-Din Khalil, “The Qur’an and Modern Science: Observations on Methodology,” in The Qur’an and the Sunnah: The Time-Space Factor, by Taha Jabir al-Alwani and Imad al-Din Khalil (Washington: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1995), 43; Khir, “The Qur’an and Science,” 28.

 

[71]. Naguib, “The Hermeneutics of Miracle,” 61.

 

[72]. Bigliardi, “The ‘Scientific Miracle of the Qur’an,’ Pseudoscience, and Conspiracism,” 148.

 

[73]. Ibid., 149.

  

[74]. Ibid., 150.  

 

[75]. Ibid., 152.

 

[76]. Ibid., 158.

 

[77]. Ibid., 153-154.

 

[78]. Naguib, “The Hermeneutics of Miracle,” 75-76.

 

[79]. Osman Bakar, Science and Religion, 108-109.

 

[80]. Khir, “The Qur’an and Science,” 28.

 

[81]. Coruh, “Relationship Between Religion and Science in the Muslim Modernism,” 153.

 

[82]. Coruh, “The Qur’an and Interpretation in the Classical Modernism,” 4.

 

[83]. Bigliardi, “The ‘Scientific Miracle of the Qur’an,’ Pseudoscience, and Conspiracism,” 150.

 

[84]. Bauer, Aims, Methods and Context of Qur’anic Exegesis, 8.

 

[85]. Ansari, “Scientific Exegesis of the Qur’an,” 102.