Semen Production in the Quran: Difference between revisions

From WikiIslam, the online resource on Islam
Jump to navigation Jump to search
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 40: Line 40:
'''Transliteration:''' min banee adama min thuhoorihim thurriyyatahum}}One other verse in the Qur'an uses the word ''sulb''. In this case there is no mention of ''tara'ib''. It is an example of the simple Arabic phrase mentioned in Lane's Lexicon (see above), based on the belief that the seed of men proceed from their backs.{{Quote|{{Quran|4|23}}|'''Corpus:''' Forbidden to you (are) your mothers and your daughters and your sisters [...] And wives (of) your sons, those who (are) from your loins and that you gather together [between] two sisters except what has passed before.}}Slightly more explicitly, a hadith in [[Sahih Bukhari]] (also in {{Muslim|39|6733}}) uses ''sulb'' to say that the source of Adam's future progeny was in his back from before they were conceived.{{Quote|{{Bukhari|8|76|562}}|The Prophet (pbuh) said, "Allah will say to the person who will have the minimum punishment in the Fire on the Day of Resurrection, 'If you had things equal to whatever is on the earth, would you ransom yourself (from the punishment) with it?' He will reply, Yes. Allah will say, 'I asked you a much easier thing than this while you were in the backbone of Adam, that is, not to worship others besides Me, but you refused and insisted to worship others besides Me."'}}
'''Transliteration:''' min banee adama min thuhoorihim thurriyyatahum}}One other verse in the Qur'an uses the word ''sulb''. In this case there is no mention of ''tara'ib''. It is an example of the simple Arabic phrase mentioned in Lane's Lexicon (see above), based on the belief that the seed of men proceed from their backs.{{Quote|{{Quran|4|23}}|'''Corpus:''' Forbidden to you (are) your mothers and your daughters and your sisters [...] And wives (of) your sons, those who (are) from your loins and that you gather together [between] two sisters except what has passed before.}}Slightly more explicitly, a hadith in [[Sahih Bukhari]] (also in {{Muslim|39|6733}}) uses ''sulb'' to say that the source of Adam's future progeny was in his back from before they were conceived.{{Quote|{{Bukhari|8|76|562}}|The Prophet (pbuh) said, "Allah will say to the person who will have the minimum punishment in the Fire on the Day of Resurrection, 'If you had things equal to whatever is on the earth, would you ransom yourself (from the punishment) with it?' He will reply, Yes. Allah will say, 'I asked you a much easier thing than this while you were in the backbone of Adam, that is, not to worship others besides Me, but you refused and insisted to worship others besides Me."'}}


== Classical perspectives ==
==Classical perspectives==


=== Ibn Kathir ===
===Ibn Kathir===
{{Quote|{{cite web|url= http://www.muhajabah.com/islamicblog/archives/a_quranic_journal/002121.php|title= A Quranic Journal: Surah at-Tariq ayah 7|publisher= Al-Muhajabah|author= |date= November 13, 2002|archiveurl= http://archive.is/UJp0t|deadurl=yes}}|''Yakhruju min bayni as-sulbi w'at-tara'ib''
{{Quote|{{cite web|url= http://www.muhajabah.com/islamicblog/archives/a_quranic_journal/002121.php|title= A Quranic Journal: Surah at-Tariq ayah 7|publisher= Al-Muhajabah|author= |date= November 13, 2002|archiveurl= http://archive.is/UJp0t|deadurl=yes}}|''Yakhruju min bayni as-sulbi w'at-tara'ib''


Line 53: Line 53:
Professional historians hold that the discussion of embryology found in the Quran, as with most discussion of natural phenomena in the scripture, was intended only to inspire awe in its audience by drawing their attention towards amazing natural phenomenon they already knew of (or thought they knew of). Historians hold this perspective because it would not have made sense for the Quran to discuss scientific facts with an audience who, unaware of what was being discussed, would have been unable to appreciate the discussion's significance. Classical Islamic scholars, living in ages prior to the advent of modern science, tended to agree with this view. By contrast, modern Islamic scholars have generally come to hold that these discussions of natural phenomena found in the Quran were intended as miracles predictive of modern science. In addition to entailing the reconciliation of the Quran with modern science, this modern perspective confounds traditional interpretations regarding the significance of these verse and can thus be considered revisionary.
Professional historians hold that the discussion of embryology found in the Quran, as with most discussion of natural phenomena in the scripture, was intended only to inspire awe in its audience by drawing their attention towards amazing natural phenomenon they already knew of (or thought they knew of). Historians hold this perspective because it would not have made sense for the Quran to discuss scientific facts with an audience who, unaware of what was being discussed, would have been unable to appreciate the discussion's significance. Classical Islamic scholars, living in ages prior to the advent of modern science, tended to agree with this view. By contrast, modern Islamic scholars have generally come to hold that these discussions of natural phenomena found in the Quran were intended as miracles predictive of modern science. In addition to entailing the reconciliation of the Quran with modern science, this modern perspective confounds traditional interpretations regarding the significance of these verse and can thus be considered revisionary.


The most common of these revisionary perspectives which advocate a miraculous interpretation of the Quran via its reconciliation with modern science include that of Drs. Maurice Bucaille and A. K. Giraud (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the sexual areas of the male and female), Ahmed A. Abd-Allah (according to which all acknowledged translations and tafsirs are in error, as ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer instead to to the male's “hardening” penis the female's erogenous zones other than the vagina), Dr. Zakir Naik (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the backbone and ribs of both sexes and where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction), Dr. Jamal Badawi (according to which the verses refer not to semen production but to the blood of the aorta as the ‘gushing fluid poured forth’), Muhammad Asad (according to which ''sulb'' refers to the male's loins and ''tara'ib'' to the female's pelvic arch), Moiz Amjad (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' refer to the blood supply for the testes emanating from the backbone and ribs, where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction, and where the ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' 'region' alluded to is a euphemism for the male sexual organ), and Yusuf Ali (according to which the backbone is only symbolically alluded to as a symbol of male strength where semen flows between the backbone and ribs).
The most common of these revisionary perspectives which advocate a miraculous interpretation of the Quran via its reconciliation with modern science include that of Drs. Maurice Bucaille and A. K. Giraud (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the sexual areas of the male and female), Ahmed A. Abd-Allah (according to which all acknowledged translations and tafsirs are in error, as ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer instead to to the male's “hardening” penis the female's erogenous zones other than the vagina), Dr. Zakir Naik (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the backbone and ribs of both sexes and where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction), Dr. Jamal Badawi (according to which the verses refer not to semen production but to the blood of the aorta as the ‘gushing fluid poured forth’), Muhammad Asad (according to which ''sulb'' refers to the male's loins and ''tara'ib'' to the female's pelvic arch), Moiz Amjad (according to which ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' refer to the blood supply for the testes emanating from the backbone and ribs, where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction, and where the ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' 'region' alluded to are special euphemisms for the sexual organs), and Yusuf Ali (according to which the backbone is only symbolically alluded to as a symbol of male strength where semen flows between the backbone and ribs).


While the implications pursued by the interpretations of modern and classical Islamic scholars differ (with only the former aspiring to a scientific miracle), some classical scholars also tried to explain the apparent disagreement of a reading entailing the backbone and ribs with what they conjecturally held to be the process behind semen production involving the testes. While the role of the testes in semen production would only be established incontrovertibly with modern science, the pre-modern intuition regarding the role of the testes was strong enough, at least in some cases, to bring classical scholars to attempt a reading similar to those almost universally favored by modern Islamic scholars today (listed in the preceding paragraph). One of the most famous pre-modern source to attempt such a reading is found in the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, which, while reading ''tara'ib'' as the female's 'breast-bones', takes ''sulb'' to mean the male's 'loins'. The classical Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs advances a similar reading, involving the male's 'loins' and female's 'ribs'. Other classical sources, such as Tafsir Ibn Kathir, straightforwardly read ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' to refer to the male's 'backbone' and female's 'chest' respectively.
While the implications pursued by the interpretations of modern and classical Islamic scholars differ (with only the former aspiring to a scientific miracle), some classical scholars also tried to explain the apparent disagreement of a reading entailing the backbone and ribs with what they conjecturally held to be the process behind semen production involving the testes. While the role of the testes in semen production would only be established incontrovertibly with modern science, the pre-modern intuition regarding the role of the testes was strong enough, at least in some cases, to bring classical scholars to attempt a reading similar to those almost universally favored by modern Islamic scholars today (listed in the preceding paragraph). One of the most famous pre-modern source to attempt such a reading is found in the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, which, while reading ''tara'ib'' as the female's 'breast-bones', takes ''sulb'' to mean the male's 'loins'. The classical Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs advances a similar reading, involving the male's 'loins' and female's 'ribs'. Other classical sources, such as Tafsir Ibn Kathir, straightforwardly read ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' to refer to the male's 'backbone' and female's 'chest' respectively.
Line 72: Line 72:
The primordial germ cells form in the wall of the yolk sac during week 4. They later migrate into the developing gonads at week 6 and differentiate into the definitive germ cells (oogonia / spermatogonia).}}The full argument of the critics runs as follows. If Naik’s assertion that the verse refers to the embryonic testes is accepted, it is not evident whether the gonads are located where he claims, i.e. between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs. A cross-sectional diagram of the human embryo shows the gonads at or around the level of the placenta.<center>[[File:Gondev154.gif|alt=|thumb]]</center>Consequently, it cannot be said that the embryonic testes is located between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs as the gonadal or genital ridge (precursor of the gonads) is generally held to lie medial to the lower part of the mesonephros, while the adult kidney actually develops from the metanephros.
The primordial germ cells form in the wall of the yolk sac during week 4. They later migrate into the developing gonads at week 6 and differentiate into the definitive germ cells (oogonia / spermatogonia).}}The full argument of the critics runs as follows. If Naik’s assertion that the verse refers to the embryonic testes is accepted, it is not evident whether the gonads are located where he claims, i.e. between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs. A cross-sectional diagram of the human embryo shows the gonads at or around the level of the placenta.<center>[[File:Gondev154.gif|alt=|thumb]]</center>Consequently, it cannot be said that the embryonic testes is located between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs as the gonadal or genital ridge (precursor of the gonads) is generally held to lie medial to the lower part of the mesonephros, while the adult kidney actually develops from the metanephros.


It is likewise incorrect to assume the position of the embryonic gonads from the position of the adult kidneys, as the embryonic positions of gonads and kidneys are not the same as their adult positions. Gonads descend, while kidneys enlarge and ascend. It should also be noted that the developing gonads are ventro-medial to the mesonephros (i.e. the embryonic kidney) and not the metanephros (which would develop into the adult kidney). Zakir Naik does not differentiate between the mesonephros and the metanephros.
It is likewise incorrect to assume the position of the embryonic gonads from the position of the adult kidneys, as the embryonic positions of gonads and kidneys are not the same as their adult positions. Gonads descend, while kidneys enlarge and ascend. Also, the developing gonads are ventro-medial to the mesonephros (i.e. the embryonic kidney) and not the metanephros (which would develop into the adult kidney). Zakir Naik does not differentiate between the mesonephros and the metanephros.


If Naik’s implied association between embryonic and adult anatomical positions were nonetheless accepted, the explanation given is inaccurate because in the condition of cryptorchidism where the testes is undescended, the highest position of the undescended testes is ''below'' the kidney.<ref>[http://www.nakshatras.net/genetics_basics.htm genetics basics]</ref>
If Naik’s implied association between embryonic and adult anatomical positions were accepted, the explanation given is inaccurate because in the condition of cryptorchidism where the testes is undescended, the highest position of the undescended testes is ''below'' the kidney.<ref>[http://www.nakshatras.net/genetics_basics.htm genetics basics]</ref>


Additionally, the inferior pole of the kidney lies around ''L3'' (the third lumbar vertebra), such that the embryonic testes must be below ''L3''. The twelfth rib does not extend below ''L2''. And because the testes are ''below'' the kidneys, there is no possibility that the testes were ever between the ribs and the backbone either in the embryonic or the adult (as with cryptorchidism) stage.
Additionally, the inferior pole of the kidney lies around ''L3'' (the third lumbar vertebra), such that the embryonic testes must be below ''L3''. The twelfth rib does not extend below ''L2''. And because the testes are ''below'' the kidneys, there is no possibility that the testes were ever between the ribs and the backbone either in the embryonic or the adult (as with cryptorchidism) stage.


Moreover, he interpretation of a ‘drop emitted, proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs’ to mean the embryonic development of the testes is misleading, as the ‘drop emitted’ implies a fully developed and functional testes, rather than an embryonic structure. Embryonic testes do not emit, ejaculate, gush forth, pour forth, spurt or ejaculate any substance; only peri- and post-pubertal testes do.
Moreover, the interpretation of a ‘drop emitted, proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs’ to mean the embryonic development of the testes is misleading, as the ‘drop emitted’ implies a fully developed and functional testes, rather than an embryonic structure. Embryonic testes do not emit, ejaculate, gush forth, pour forth, spurt or ejaculate any substance; only peri- and post-pubertal testes do.


Naik’s explanation of the nerve, blood and lymphatic circular from the abdominal aorta is not relevant to the phenomenon being discussed. {{Quran|85|6}} speaks about ‘a drop emitted’, commonly taken to mean semen, as this drop is directly responsible for human reproduction, something which cannot be claimed for nerve signals, blood or lymph. Circulation and nerve supply also do not correlate with embryonic origin. For example, the blood supply, lymphatics and nerve supply of the lower limbs originate in the abdomen and pelvis. This does not mean the lower limbs embryonically originated in the abdomen and pelvis.
Naik’s explanation of the nerve, blood and lymphatic circular from the abdominal aorta is not relevant to the phenomenon being discussed. {{Quran|85|6}} speaks about ‘a drop emitted’, commonly taken to mean semen, as this drop is directly responsible for human reproduction, something which cannot be claimed for nerve signals, blood or lymph. Circulation and nerve supply also do not correlate with embryonic origin. For example, the blood supply, lymphatics and nerve supply of the lower limbs originate in the abdomen and pelvis. This does not mean the lower limbs embryonically originated in the abdomen and pelvis.
Line 85: Line 85:
===Muhammad Asad===
===Muhammad Asad===
{{Quote||(5) LET MAN, then, observe out of what he has been created:<br/>
{{Quote||(5) LET MAN, then, observe out of what he has been created:<br/>
(6) he has been created out of a seminal fluid<br/>
(6) he has been created out of a seminal fluid<br/>
(7) issuing from between the loins [of man] and the pelvic arch [of woman].
(7) issuing from between the loins [of man] and the pelvic arch [of woman].
<nowiki>*</nowiki>The plural noun tara'ib, ''''rendered by me''' as "pelvic arch", has also the meaning of "ribs" or "arch of bones"; according to most of the authorities who have specialized in the etymology of rare Quranic expressions this term relates specifically to female anatomy (Taj al-'Arus).}}Asad's definition of ''tara’ib'' takes it to refer to the pelvic arch which is a specific part of the pelvis, however, as critics point out, this definition is nowhere evidenced (Asad says the word is "rendered by me"). Dictionaries define ''tara'ib'' as the upper ribs.<ref name="Lane Lexicon taraib2" />


Critics argue that if Asad's definition of ''sulb'' as the male loins (in the modern sense of the word loins, rather than its old and primary meaning of the lower back) as well as his definition of ''tara'ib'' are accepted, his proposition that sexual reproduction is the consequence of a union between the male loins and the female pelvic arch is still inaccurate.
 
<nowiki>*</nowiki> The plural noun tara'ib, ''''rendered by me''' as "pelvic arch", has also the meaning of "ribs" or "arch of bones"; according to most of the authorities who have specialized in the etymology of rare Quranic expressions this term relates specifically to female anatomy (Taj al-'Arus).}}Asad's definition of ''tara’ib'' takes it to refer to the pelvic arch which is a specific part of the pelvis, however this definition is nowhere evidenced (Asad says the word is "rendered by me"). Dictionaries define ''tara'ib'' as the upper ribs.<ref name="Lane Lexicon taraib2" />
 
If Asad's definition of ''sulb'' as the male loins (in the modern sense of the word loins, rather than its old and primary meaning of the lower back) as well as his definition of ''tara'ib'' are accepted, his proposition that sexual reproduction is the consequence of a union between the male loins and the female pelvic arch is again inaccurate.
====Hamza Tzortzis====
====Hamza Tzortzis====
{{Quote||The word tara’ib means breastbone, the ribs or the pelvic arch, and this word according to most authors refers specifically to women.}}Hamza Tzortzis, on his website, repeats Muhammad Asad's perspective while implying that the pelvic arch ''definition'' comes from Taj al-Arus, which he cites directly for this claim. Asad sought only to evidence the relationship of the word ''tara'ib'' to "female anatomy" by citing Taj al-Arus, while providing the definition of "pelvic arch" himself. Tzortzis, repeatedly made aware of this error, ultimately withdrew his lengthy paper.<ref>[http://embryologyinthequran.blogspot.com Embryology in the Qur'an Much Ado about Nothing]</ref>
{{Quote||The word tara’ib means breastbone, the ribs or the pelvic arch, and this word according to most authors refers specifically to women.}}Hamza Tzortzis, on his website, repeats Muhammad Asad's perspective while implying that the pelvic arch ''definition'' comes from Taj al-Arus, which he cites directly for this claim. Asad sought only to evidence the relationship of the word ''tara'ib'' to "female anatomy" by citing Taj al-Arus, while providing the definition of "pelvic arch" himself. Tzortzis, after repeatedly being made aware of this error, ultimately withdrew his lengthy paper.<ref>[http://embryologyinthequran.blogspot.com Embryology in the Qur'an Much Ado about Nothing]</ref>
===Moiz Amjad===
===Moiz Amjad===
Moiz Amjad makes three claims:
Moiz Amjad makes three claims. Firstly, Amjad repeats an idea found in Zakir Naik's work and states that ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' refer to the blood supply of the testes emanating from between the man’s back and ribs. According to critics, this idea makes the same error regarding blood circulation that is found in Naik's work. Secondly, also replicating Zakir Naik, Amjad states that the embryonic gonads originate in the area described in the Quran rather than ending up in this position in the fully developed human body. Here again, critics argue that Amjad makes the same general error made by Naik. Thirdly, Amjad states that the ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' region alluded to in the verse is in fact special euphemisms for the sexual organs.
 
1. Sulb and tara’ib refer to the blood supply of the testes emanating from between the man’s back and ribs.
 
This proposition repeats the error found in Naik’s proposition regarding blood circulation.
 
2. The embryonic gonads originate in the area (as per Zakir Naik).
 
This proposition repeats the error found in Naik’s general proposition.


3. The ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' region is a euphemism for the male sexual organ.
Amjad argues this third point by drawing lines on pictures of a human skeleton, so that all parts of the body lying between the relevant bones and the opposing surface of the body are included.


Amjad argues this point by drawing lines on pictures of a human skeleton, so that all parts of the body lying between the relevant bones and the opposing surface of the body are included.
Amjad also argues, to this end, that the ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' are special euphemisms for the male and female sexual organs respectively. There exist in Arabic, however, numerous other, more direct euphemisms for these two organs, and ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' are no where else used euphemistically in this sense in classical Arabic literature, as critics have pointed out. Amjad provides not explanation for why a novel, esoteric, and unclear pair of euphemisms should be employed by the Quran where so many other diverse and well-established euphemisms are available, especially in a textual and historical context where the proposed euphemisms could be acutely misleading.


Amjad also argues that the ''sulb'' and ''tara’ib'' are euphemisms for the male and female sexual organs. There exist in Arabic, however, numerous other, more direct euphemisms for these two organs, and ''sulb'' and ''tara'ib'' are no where else used euphemistically in this sense. Additionally, since sperm never flows between separate organs, and always flows inside a single organ, it is very strange that the Qur'an should make an unclear euphemistic reference to two organs in order to refer to just one of those organs, which could easily and clearly been described directly or through various, clear euphemisms.
Critics also note that since sperm never flows between separate organs, and always flows inside a single organ, it is very strange that the Qur'an should make an unclear euphemistic reference to two organs in order to refer to just one of those organs (after all, the semen discussed in the verse emanates from only the male organ, and not the female), which could easily and clearly been described directly or through various, clear euphemisms.  To critics, if these words may be read as both euphemistic and metaphorical, then essentially any word in the Quran could be read in this manner, permitting infinitely malleable readings - and while modern literary theorists may make a case for this method in the abstract, it cannot be said to be useful in determining the original, intended meaning of a historical text.
===Tahir Ul-Qadri===
===Tahir Ul-Qadri===
Tahir Ul-Qadri makes the following claim:{{Quote|{{cite web|url=http://minhajbook.kortechx.netdna-cdn.com/images-books/creation-man/creation-man_1.pdf |title=Creation of Man: A Review of the Qur'an & Modern Embryology  |publisher=Minhaj-ul-Qur'an |author= |date= |archiveurl= |deadurl=no}}|{{Quote||"So let man think from what he is created. He
Tahir Ul-Qadri makes the following claim:{{Quote|{{cite web|url=http://minhajbook.kortechx.netdna-cdn.com/images-books/creation-man/creation-man_1.pdf |title=Creation of Man: A Review of the Qur'an & Modern Embryology  |publisher=Minhaj-ul-Qur'an |author= |date= |archiveurl= |deadurl=no}}|{{Quote||"So let man think from what he is created. He

Revision as of 22:36, 15 June 2021

Under construction icon-yellow.svg

This article or section is being renovated.

Lead = 2 / 4
Structure = 3 / 4
Content = 4 / 4
Language = 2 / 4
References = 3 / 4
Lead
2 / 4
Structure
3 / 4
Content
4 / 4
Language
2 / 4
References
3 / 4
Qur'an 86:7 says that sperm originates from the backbones and the ribs, a theory similar to another (now known to be erroneous) theory proposed by Hippocrates in 5th century BC (1000 years before Islam). Hippocrates taught that semen comes from all the fluid in the body, diffusing from the brain into the spinal marrow, before passing through the kidneys and via the testicles into the penis.[1]

Towards the end of the 20th century and into the early 21st century, drawing on the work of a broad and largely Saudi-financed movement to demonstrate the concordance of Islamic scriptures and modern science, attempts have been made to not only defend the Qur'anic idea of semen production (found in Quran 86:6-7) from between the sulb and the tara’ib, but also to demonstrate it as an instance of divinely inspired scientific foreknowledge, or, as more commonly referred to, a scientific miracle of the Quran. Several specific interpretations advocating the miracle have been proposed, critiqued, and withdrawn - none, however, have been welcomed by the professional scientific or historian community.[2]

Human semen comprises the product of 4 glands: the testes produce sperm cells, while the fluid in which they are carried comes from seminal vesicles (behind the bladder), the prostate gland (below the bladder), and from the bulbourethral glands (below the bladder).

Semen production in Islamic scriptures

Verses 86:6-7

There is relatively little disagreement over the proper translation of Quran 86:6. The only recurrent disagreement between translations is over whether the word maa should be translated literally as 'water' or generalized to 'fluid'. Most translations opt for the former translation, which is accurate to the Arabic text, as opposed to the latter, which amounts to a metaphorical interpretation. No scholar has expressed disagreement with the fact that the word for water (maa) was the standard Arabic euphemism for 'semen' - many translations have included this point in their footnotes on the verse.

Arabic: خُلِقَ مِن مَّآءٍ دَافِقٍ
Corpus translation (literal): He is created from a water [maa, the word 'water' was the standard Arabic euphemism for semen], ejected,
Transliteration: Khuliqa min main dafiqin

As can be seen in the competing translations listed below, there is significant disagreement among Islamic translations and controversy surrounding the translation of the subsequent verse, Quran 86:7.

Arabic: يخرج من بين الصلب والترائب
Corpus translation (literal): Coming forth from between the backbone and the ribs.
Transliteration: Yakhruju min bayni alssulbi waalttara-ibi
Yusuf Ali: proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.

Pickthal: that issued from between the loins and ribs.

Arberry: issuing between the loins and the breast-bones.

Shakir: coming from between the back and the ribs.

Sarwar: which comes out of the loins and ribs.

Khalifa: from between the spine and the viscera.

Hilali/Khan: proceeding from between the back-bone and the ribs.

Malik: that is produced from between the loins and the ribs.

QXP: that issued from between tough rocks and mingled dust.

Maulana Ali: coming from between the back and the ribs.

Free Minds: it comes out from between the spine and the testicles.

The word sulb, translated as 'loins'

Many Islamic translations opt to translate the word sulb in Quran 86:7 as 'loins', evoking the euphemistic sense of the word 'loins' which alludes to the reproductive organs of a male. This sense of the word 'loins' is secondary to its primary sense, which refers to the lumber portion of the back (hence the word sirloin, which refers to '(a piece of) meat from the back of an animal near the tail or from the top part of the back legs').[3] Both senses of the word are accounted for in the Oxford English Dictionary.

Loin, n.
1. a. In the living body. Chiefly pl. The part or parts of a human being or quadruped, situated on both sides of the vertebral column, between the false ribs and the hip-bone.
2. Chiefly Biblical and poet. This part of the body, regarded: a. as the part of the body that should be covered with clothing and about which the clothes are bound; so, to gird (up) the loins (lit. and fig.), to prepare for strenuous exertion.
"Loin", Oxford English Dictionary

The Lane's Lexicon of Classical Arabic definition for sulb includes the following:

and any portion of the back containing vertebrae: (S, MSB, TA:) [and particularly the lumbar portion; the loins:] and the back [absolutely]

Lane also quotes an Arab saying that features sulb, translating and explaining it as follows (sperma is a Late Latin word meaning seed, or semen):

These are the sons of their loins: Because the sperma of the man is held to proceed from the sulb of the man

Supporting evidence in other verses and hadiths

Independent corroboration that sulb in the Qur'an refers to the back or backbone is found in another verse on the same subject using a different word for back. Quran 7:172 says that the offspring of the children of Adam are 'from their backs (loins)'. Instead of sulb, the word here is thahr, which means the back[4], as is also the case in other verses such as Quran 6:31.

Sahih International: And [mention] when your Lord took from the children of Adam - from their loins - their descendants and made them testify of themselves, [saying to them], "Am I not your Lord?" They said, "Yes, we have testified." [This] - lest you should say on the day of Resurrection, "Indeed, we were of this unaware."

Corpus: And (remember) when thy Lord brought forth from the Children of Adam, from their reins, their seed, and made them testify of themselves, (saying): Am I not your Lord? They said: Yea, verily. We testify. (That was) lest ye should say at the Day of Resurrection: Lo! of this we were unaware;

Arabic: مِنۢ بَنِىٓ ءَادَمَ مِن ظُهُورِهِمْ ذُرِّيَّتَهُمْ

Transliteration: min banee adama min thuhoorihim thurriyyatahum

One other verse in the Qur'an uses the word sulb. In this case there is no mention of tara'ib. It is an example of the simple Arabic phrase mentioned in Lane's Lexicon (see above), based on the belief that the seed of men proceed from their backs.

Corpus: Forbidden to you (are) your mothers and your daughters and your sisters [...] And wives (of) your sons, those who (are) from your loins and that you gather together [between] two sisters except what has passed before.

Slightly more explicitly, a hadith in Sahih Bukhari (also in Sahih Muslim 39:6733) uses sulb to say that the source of Adam's future progeny was in his back from before they were conceived.

The Prophet (pbuh) said, "Allah will say to the person who will have the minimum punishment in the Fire on the Day of Resurrection, 'If you had things equal to whatever is on the earth, would you ransom yourself (from the punishment) with it?' He will reply, Yes. Allah will say, 'I asked you a much easier thing than this while you were in the backbone of Adam, that is, not to worship others besides Me, but you refused and insisted to worship others besides Me."'

Classical perspectives

Ibn Kathir

Yakhruju min bayni as-sulbi w'at-tara'ib

Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs

This concludes the description started in ayah 5. The following is an excerpt of commentary on this passage, from Tafsir Ibn Kathir:

'Referring to the creation of man from a drop of fluid gushing forth from between the backbone and the ribs, Allah emphasizes the inherent weakness of man... Allah says that man has been created from a mix of seminal fluid of man which gushes forth from the backbone and the yellowish fluid of woman that flows from her ribs.'
"A Quranic Journal: Surah at-Tariq ayah 7", Al-Muhajabah, November 13, 2002 (archived from the original), http://archive.is/UJp0t. 

Modern revisionary perspectives

Professional historians hold that the discussion of embryology found in the Quran, as with most discussion of natural phenomena in the scripture, was intended only to inspire awe in its audience by drawing their attention towards amazing natural phenomenon they already knew of (or thought they knew of). Historians hold this perspective because it would not have made sense for the Quran to discuss scientific facts with an audience who, unaware of what was being discussed, would have been unable to appreciate the discussion's significance. Classical Islamic scholars, living in ages prior to the advent of modern science, tended to agree with this view. By contrast, modern Islamic scholars have generally come to hold that these discussions of natural phenomena found in the Quran were intended as miracles predictive of modern science. In addition to entailing the reconciliation of the Quran with modern science, this modern perspective confounds traditional interpretations regarding the significance of these verse and can thus be considered revisionary.

The most common of these revisionary perspectives which advocate a miraculous interpretation of the Quran via its reconciliation with modern science include that of Drs. Maurice Bucaille and A. K. Giraud (according to which sulb and tara’ib refer to the sexual areas of the male and female), Ahmed A. Abd-Allah (according to which all acknowledged translations and tafsirs are in error, as sulb and tara’ib refer instead to to the male's “hardening” penis the female's erogenous zones other than the vagina), Dr. Zakir Naik (according to which sulb and tara’ib refer to the backbone and ribs of both sexes and where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction), Dr. Jamal Badawi (according to which the verses refer not to semen production but to the blood of the aorta as the ‘gushing fluid poured forth’), Muhammad Asad (according to which sulb refers to the male's loins and tara'ib to the female's pelvic arch), Moiz Amjad (according to which sulb and tara'ib refer to the blood supply for the testes emanating from the backbone and ribs, where only the gonads in the embryonic stage are being described rather than a male and female in the act of sexual reproduction, and where the sulb and tara'ib 'region' alluded to are special euphemisms for the sexual organs), and Yusuf Ali (according to which the backbone is only symbolically alluded to as a symbol of male strength where semen flows between the backbone and ribs).

While the implications pursued by the interpretations of modern and classical Islamic scholars differ (with only the former aspiring to a scientific miracle), some classical scholars also tried to explain the apparent disagreement of a reading entailing the backbone and ribs with what they conjecturally held to be the process behind semen production involving the testes. While the role of the testes in semen production would only be established incontrovertibly with modern science, the pre-modern intuition regarding the role of the testes was strong enough, at least in some cases, to bring classical scholars to attempt a reading similar to those almost universally favored by modern Islamic scholars today (listed in the preceding paragraph). One of the most famous pre-modern source to attempt such a reading is found in the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, which, while reading tara'ib as the female's 'breast-bones', takes sulb to mean the male's 'loins'. The classical Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs advances a similar reading, involving the male's 'loins' and female's 'ribs'. Other classical sources, such as Tafsir Ibn Kathir, straightforwardly read sulb and tara'ib to refer to the male's 'backbone' and female's 'chest' respectively.

Maurice Bucaille

Two verses in the Qur'an deal with sexual relations themselves [...] When translations and explanatory commentaries are consulted however, one is struck by the divergences between them. I have pondered for a long time on the translation of such verses (In plain English that means there is "an improbability or a contradiction, prudishly called a `difficulty'" ), and am indebted to Doctor A. K. Giraud, Former Professor at the Faculty of Medicine, Beirut, for the following:
"(Man was fashioned from a liquid poured out. It issued (as a result) of the conjunction of the sexual area of the man and the sexual area of the woman. [...] The sexual area of the man is indicated in the text of the Qur'an by the word sulb (singular). The sexual areas of the woman are designated in the Qur'an by the word tara'ib (plural). [...] This is the translation which appears to be most satisfactory."
Dr. Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, the Qu'ran and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge, Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, ISBN 978-1879402980, 2003

Critics have pointed out that while a case can be made that sulb means “hardening” and thus, metaphorically, "penis", there is no comparable case that tara’ib can mean "vagina". Bucaille and Giraud hold that tara’ib means the ’sexual areas of the woman’ but do not provide evidence to this end save the quote produced by Bucaille above (which itself gives no justification for this reading). Critics also argue that if tara'ib does mean what Bucaille and Giraud take it to mean, 'sexual areas of the woman' is too vague and speculative an interpretation to be meaningfully accurate or constitutive of a scientific miracle.

Ahmed A. Abd-Allah

Abd-Allah extends Bucaille’s interpretation, providing dictionaries and tafsirs to support his case that sulb means ‘hardening’ and tara’ib means the sexual areas of the woman. Abd-Allah defines sulb as follows:

Note that 'sulb' is *singular*. In the dictionary by Wehr you cite below, you will see that its meaning of backbone is *only* when we take the *plural* word of sulb (aslaab). In its singular form, it means hardening.
Ahmed A. Abd-Allah, "Blemish", Answering Christianity, https://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/blemish.htm 

Critics note that almost all the commonly available translations of the Qur'an refer to sulb as the backbone, though some refer to loins. Even classical authorities such as Ibn Kathir accept the meaning of the word as "backbone". Additionally, Hans Wehr, a dictionary of modern standard rather than classical Arabic, is an unreliable source for determining the meanings of words in the Qur'an.

Critics also argue that Abd-Allah’s proposition is undercut by the definitions of tara’ib he provides. He does not show that the tafsirs and dictionaries explain tara’ib to mean vagina. Tara’ib is defined as the upper chest or ribs, or according to some sources can also mean the two legs, two arms or two eyes[5]. While erogenous zones are important in foreplay, the sexual act must be consummated through the vagina.

Finally, critics argue that Abd-Allah’s reference to Ibn Kathir’s tafsir is misleading, as it includes only the half of the description which supports his case (i.e. that tara’ib refers to the woman) and excludes the other half that contradicts it (i.e. that tara’ib is the woman’s ribs).

Zakir Naik

“Now let man but think From what he is created! He is created from A drop emitted – Proceeding from between The back bone and the ribs.” [Al-Qur’an Surah al-Burooj 86:5-7] In embryonic stages, the reproductive organs of the male and female, i.e. the testicles and the ovaries, begin their development near the kidney between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs. Later they descend; the female gonads (ovaries) stop in the pelvis while the male gonads (testicles) continue their descent before birth to reach the scrotum through the inguinal canal. Even in the adult after the descent of the reproductive organ, these organs receive their nerve supply and blood supply from the Abdominal Aorta, which is in the area between the backbone (spinal column) and the ribs. Even the lymphatic drainage and the venous return goes to the same area.

Critics argue that Zakir Naik incorrectly present the biology of the phenomenon he describes above. The original position of the cells, they note, are destined to develop into spermatogonia (sperm producing cells) and is not ventro-medial to the kidneys (where these cells develop) but the wall of the yolk sac:

Testes and ovaries are derived from the mesodermal epithelium (mesothelium) lining the posterior abdominal wall, the underlying mesenchyme and the primordial germ cells. The primordial germ cells form in the wall of the yolk sac during week 4. They later migrate into the developing gonads at week 6 and differentiate into the definitive germ cells (oogonia / spermatogonia).
Taihung Duong, Ph.D., "Urogenital system embryology", Indiana University School of Medicine, accessed February 9, 2014 (archived), http://web.indstate.edu/thcme/duong/EMBRYOL.html. 

The full argument of the critics runs as follows. If Naik’s assertion that the verse refers to the embryonic testes is accepted, it is not evident whether the gonads are located where he claims, i.e. between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs. A cross-sectional diagram of the human embryo shows the gonads at or around the level of the placenta.

Consequently, it cannot be said that the embryonic testes is located between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs as the gonadal or genital ridge (precursor of the gonads) is generally held to lie medial to the lower part of the mesonephros, while the adult kidney actually develops from the metanephros.

It is likewise incorrect to assume the position of the embryonic gonads from the position of the adult kidneys, as the embryonic positions of gonads and kidneys are not the same as their adult positions. Gonads descend, while kidneys enlarge and ascend. Also, the developing gonads are ventro-medial to the mesonephros (i.e. the embryonic kidney) and not the metanephros (which would develop into the adult kidney). Zakir Naik does not differentiate between the mesonephros and the metanephros.

If Naik’s implied association between embryonic and adult anatomical positions were accepted, the explanation given is inaccurate because in the condition of cryptorchidism where the testes is undescended, the highest position of the undescended testes is below the kidney.[6]

Additionally, the inferior pole of the kidney lies around L3 (the third lumbar vertebra), such that the embryonic testes must be below L3. The twelfth rib does not extend below L2. And because the testes are below the kidneys, there is no possibility that the testes were ever between the ribs and the backbone either in the embryonic or the adult (as with cryptorchidism) stage.

Moreover, the interpretation of a ‘drop emitted, proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs’ to mean the embryonic development of the testes is misleading, as the ‘drop emitted’ implies a fully developed and functional testes, rather than an embryonic structure. Embryonic testes do not emit, ejaculate, gush forth, pour forth, spurt or ejaculate any substance; only peri- and post-pubertal testes do.

Naik’s explanation of the nerve, blood and lymphatic circular from the abdominal aorta is not relevant to the phenomenon being discussed. Quran 85:6 speaks about ‘a drop emitted’, commonly taken to mean semen, as this drop is directly responsible for human reproduction, something which cannot be claimed for nerve signals, blood or lymph. Circulation and nerve supply also do not correlate with embryonic origin. For example, the blood supply, lymphatics and nerve supply of the lower limbs originate in the abdomen and pelvis. This does not mean the lower limbs embryonically originated in the abdomen and pelvis.

Jamal Badawi

Badawi must assume that "gushing fluid poured forth" refers to the aorta which according to a book cited by him, Clinical Anatomy, supplies the testes and ovaries with the necessary nutrients and this is what the Quran refers to.Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; refs with no name must have content

According to critics, Badawi’s proposition repeats the error found in Naik’s proposition regarding blood circulation.

Muhammad Asad

(5) LET MAN, then, observe out of what he has been created:

(6) he has been created out of a seminal fluid
(7) issuing from between the loins [of man] and the pelvic arch [of woman].

*The plural noun tara'ib, 'rendered by me as "pelvic arch", has also the meaning of "ribs" or "arch of bones"; according to most of the authorities who have specialized in the etymology of rare Quranic expressions this term relates specifically to female anatomy (Taj al-'Arus).

Asad's definition of tara’ib takes it to refer to the pelvic arch which is a specific part of the pelvis, however, as critics point out, this definition is nowhere evidenced (Asad says the word is "rendered by me"). Dictionaries define tara'ib as the upper ribs.[5]

Critics argue that if Asad's definition of sulb as the male loins (in the modern sense of the word loins, rather than its old and primary meaning of the lower back) as well as his definition of tara'ib are accepted, his proposition that sexual reproduction is the consequence of a union between the male loins and the female pelvic arch is still inaccurate.

Hamza Tzortzis

The word tara’ib means breastbone, the ribs or the pelvic arch, and this word according to most authors refers specifically to women.

Hamza Tzortzis, on his website, repeats Muhammad Asad's perspective while implying that the pelvic arch definition comes from Taj al-Arus, which he cites directly for this claim. Asad sought only to evidence the relationship of the word tara'ib to "female anatomy" by citing Taj al-Arus, while providing the definition of "pelvic arch" himself. Tzortzis, after repeatedly being made aware of this error, ultimately withdrew his lengthy paper.[7]

Moiz Amjad

Moiz Amjad makes three claims. Firstly, Amjad repeats an idea found in Zakir Naik's work and states that sulb and tara’ib refer to the blood supply of the testes emanating from between the man’s back and ribs. According to critics, this idea makes the same error regarding blood circulation that is found in Naik's work. Secondly, also replicating Zakir Naik, Amjad states that the embryonic gonads originate in the area described in the Quran rather than ending up in this position in the fully developed human body. Here again, critics argue that Amjad makes the same general error made by Naik. Thirdly, Amjad states that the sulb and tara’ib region alluded to in the verse is in fact special euphemisms for the sexual organs.

Amjad argues this third point by drawing lines on pictures of a human skeleton, so that all parts of the body lying between the relevant bones and the opposing surface of the body are included.

Amjad also argues, to this end, that the sulb and tara’ib are special euphemisms for the male and female sexual organs respectively. There exist in Arabic, however, numerous other, more direct euphemisms for these two organs, and sulb and tara'ib are no where else used euphemistically in this sense in classical Arabic literature, as critics have pointed out. Amjad provides not explanation for why a novel, esoteric, and unclear pair of euphemisms should be employed by the Quran where so many other diverse and well-established euphemisms are available, especially in a textual and historical context where the proposed euphemisms could be acutely misleading.

Critics also note that since sperm never flows between separate organs, and always flows inside a single organ, it is very strange that the Qur'an should make an unclear euphemistic reference to two organs in order to refer to just one of those organs (after all, the semen discussed in the verse emanates from only the male organ, and not the female), which could easily and clearly been described directly or through various, clear euphemisms. To critics, if these words may be read as both euphemistic and metaphorical, then essentially any word in the Quran could be read in this manner, permitting infinitely malleable readings - and while modern literary theorists may make a case for this method in the abstract, it cannot be said to be useful in determining the original, intended meaning of a historical text.

Tahir Ul-Qadri

Tahir Ul-Qadri makes the following claim:

"So let man think from what he is created. He

is created from a gushing fluid that is issued

from between sacrum and symphisis pubis (86:5-7)"


Arabic words like many other languages often carry more than one meaning of a single word. For instance the Arabic word ‘salat’ has 60 meanings. ... Moreover the seminal passages do indeed lie between the sacrum referred to as sulb in the Qurā’nic verse and the symphisis pubis referred to as tarā’ib.

There is no evidence that tara'ib can be translated as pubic symphysis (see the Muhammad Asad section above). If Qadri's claim of a single word having a large number of meanings were true and applicable in this case, tara'ib could be taken to refer to many organs other than the pubic symphisis, which have no relationship with the place where semen flows. This appears to be a Texas sharpshooter fallacy, where the focus is only on the similarities between two sets of information so that a conclusion can be drawn while ignoring the differences. Qadri, in his analysis, also ignores the testicles which produce the essential sperms. These are not situated in the zone mentioned, and are rather below the symphisis.[8]

Yusuf Ali

A man's seed is the quintessence of his body. It is therefore said metaphorically to proceed from his loins, i.e., from his back between the hipbones and his ribs. His backbone is the source and symbol of his strength and personality. In his spinal cord and in the brain is the directive energy of the central nervous system, and this directs all action, organic and psychic. The spinal cord is continuous with the Medulla Oblongata in the brain.[9]
  • Yusuf Ali does not state what he means by seed: Sperm, semen, ovum or zygote. This deserves to be clarified as the human embryo does not emerge from either male fluid or the female ovum alone, but from a combination of the two. It follows that if "seed" is taken to refer to one sex, this must be incorrect; but if it refers to both sexes, the interpretation of emergence from between backbone and ribs must be valid for both the male and female products.
  • Ali takes the role of the backbone to be symbolic, suggesting that just as the backbone is crucial to the life of a man, so also it must be crucial to the production of a man's sperm, and hence child. This metaphorical interpretation, appears strained and lacks any sort of precedent or evidence; the backbone has never been understood to relate in any way to one's offspring.
  • Mentioning the medulla oblongata here appears to serve no purpose relevant to Ali's interpretation.

Miscellaneous Claims

The functioning of two spinal cord centers located between vertebrae and ribs connecting spinal cord and sex organs, and of the nerves controlling valves around urethra, causes ejaculation.

This claim takes the meaning of the verse to say that the force for ejaculation comes from between the backbone and the ribs. The verse itself, however, only mentions a "liquid flowing" and not its cause.

A line drawn from the tip of the coccyx to the upper portion of either seminal vesicle and extended forward touches the ribcage. The seminal vesicles from which the semen spurts out, lie between the ribs and the coccyx (lower back, loin, backbone).

The ribs are above the seminal vesicles which are above the tip of the coccyx when a standing person's anatomy is viewed. The top of the seminal vesicles falls between the bottom of the coccyx and the bottom of the rib-cage on the above mentioned line, the vesicle is not between the loins and ribs.[10] Additionally, the role of the prostate glands (source of 25-30% of semen), testes (2-5%) and bulbourethral glands (up to 1%) is not considered in this analysis.

The word tara’ib refers to the woman’s uterus, since the rib cage surrounds it during pregnancy.

Though the ribcage is roughly cylindrical, the uterus is never inside it. Further, the embryo is already "created" much before pregnancy since the verse refers to fertilisation. The liquid being discussed here never flows anywhere close to a woman's ribs.

The verse refers to humans emerging from between the backbone and ribs, so it is about a baby and not sperm.

This is partly similar to the claim of tara'ib meaning uterus; a baby has nothing to do with its mother's ribs. If one were to describe the emergence of a baby by referring to external organs, one would have better said "between backbone and abdomen", not ribs. In all major translations, verse 86:7 (Coming from between the backbone and the ribs) is an incomplete sentence which continues from 86:6 ("He is created from a gushing fluid"), hence it is only a fluid that is said to emerge.

The germ cells which later become sperms are formed near the backbone.

This is not true. The entire process of spermatogenesis from a spermatogonium to a sperm occurs in various regions of the testicles.[11]

Overarching concerns

These propositions are frequently conflicting, such that if any one is correct, the remainder must be incorrect. For instance, Ibn Kathir refers to tara’ib as a female organ, while other tafsirs claim it belongs to the man.[12] Another conflict is the definition of sulb to mean either the backbone or the ‘hardening’ or the loins. These varying interpretations confirm the essential ambiguity of the scriptural texts.

Another point alluded to by Dr. Campbell, is that the phrase “min bain” which literally means “from between”. If this interpretation is accepted, which seems to be the case from a reading of the commonly accepted translations, then one must also note that semen emanates from the penis, and not from between the penis and the vagina. To be strictly correct, semen emanates from the penis into the vagina. This point seems to rule out tara’ib from anything to do with the female sexual partner.

See Also

External Links

References

  1. Hippocratic Writings (Penguin Classics, 1983) pp. 317-318
  2. Sam Shamoun has, for example, considered some of these ideas in the articles found here and here.
  3. "Loin", Cambridge Dictionary
  4. thahr - Lane's Lexicon Book I page 197
  5. 5.0 5.1 tara'ib - Lane's Lexicon Book 1 page 301
  6. genetics basics
  7. Embryology in the Qur'an Much Ado about Nothing
  8. See images here [1] [2] []
  9. Yusuf Ali, Abdullah. The Meaning of the Glorious Quran. p. 446. 
  10. For a visual reference, see this medical diagram. Taken from: "Reproductive Health Module (SECTION I: Reproductive Anatomy and Physiology)", Columbia University: Mailman School of Public Health, accessed March 22, 2014 (archived), http://www.columbia.edu/itc/hs/pubhealth/modules/reproductiveHealth/anatomy.html. 
  11. Spermatogenesis
  12. "Sura Tariq (The Night) no.86 (verses 1-10)", Montazar.net, September 18, 2003 (archived), https://web.archive.org/web/20030918233810/http://www.montazar.net/eng/menu/1/quran/tafseer/tafseer-of-holy-quran/light/html/086/86_1-10.htm.