Sources of Islamic Theories of Reproduction

This article or section is being renovated. Lead = 4 / 4 Structure = 4 / 4 Content = 4 / 4 Language = 4 / 4 References = 4 / 4 Lead 4 / 4 Structure 4 / 4 Content 4 / 4 Language 4 / 4 References 4 / 4

The writers of the Qur’an and hadith were influenced by Galen, the hugely influential 2^nd Century Greek physician.

The hadith contain many statements about fluids from both the man and woman that were believed to form the human embryo. The Qur’an too says that the embryo is formed from emitted fluid, and in one verse perhaps indicates a mingling of male and female fluids. This article will trace the origins of each of these ideas at least as far back as the Jewish Talmud and the ancient Greek physicians.

The Prophet Muhammad, who had been a well-traveled merchant, had extensive interactions with Jews in Arabia, and almost certainly with Nestorian Christians, who had large communities in Najran in the south and Hira to the north of the Arabian Peninsula.^[1][2] Guillaume says of the Nestorians, “Such men were a familiar sight on all the caravan routes of Arabia”.^[3] The Nestorians were based in Syria, where they already possessed and studied the works of Galen, the hugely influential 2^nd century Greek physician.^[4] While this does not necessitate that the creators of the Qur’an and hadith directly copied from these works, it seems likely that they were, at the very least, indirectly influenced by these widespread ideas.

History of Embryology

Before commencing the specific topic of this article, the following timeline summarises existing theories of embryology, which may be compared with the wider content of Islamic embryology. Some argue that the vague statements of Qur'anic embryology have similarities with these theories, most conspicuously the incorrect ideas of Galen.

A few definitions

The following 3 words are used in the Qur’an and hadith in connection with semen:

Nutfah نطفة

The word nutfah is used 12 times in the Qur’an in the following verses, in each case saying much the same thing, that man is created from a nutfah: Quran 16:4, Quran 18:37, Quran 22:5, Quran 23:13, Quran 23:14, Quran 35:11, Quran 36:77, Quran 40:67, Quran 53:46, Quran 75:37, Quran 76:2, Quran 80:19.

A nutfah is a small quantity of liquid. It was also used in reference to semen that was believed to form the embryo. Lane’s Lexicon of classical Arabic defines nutfah as:

(Sperma is a Late Latin word meaning seed, semen).

The Lisan al Arab dictionary of classical Arabic gives these definitions (translated from the Arabic):

A nice example of nutfah usage can be found in a pre-Islamic poem where it is used to mean “the small quantity of wine that remained in a wineskin”.^[23]

Maa ماء

Water. Sometimes used for semen. Used in this way in verses Quran 32:8 and Quran 77:20, and Quran 86:6.

Maniyy مني

Semen. It is frequently used in hadith about ritual purity, especially narrations saying that Aisha used to clean semen off Muhammad’s clothes. It is used once in the Qur’an, verse Quran 75:37.

Evidence of influence

This section documents the influence of ideas from other cultures on the Qur’an and hadith regarding reproduction. It will go without saying that these ideas are inaccurate compared with current scientific knowledge of reproduction and embryology. All Qur’an quotes are from the Sahih International translation.

A mingled drop

Ibn Kathir’s commentary on this verse gives a very useful definition of nutfah from Muhammad’s companions.

In each case, the word translated “fluid” is maa^[25] (see above for definition), so there is no case for retro-fitting the sperm or ovum into it. Similar comments from Muhammad’s companions appear in al-Tabari’s Tafsir on 76:2. His companions apparently believed that the mingled nutfah was a mixture of male and female semen.

This same idea was taught by Galen, the hugely influential 2^nd Century Greek physician. Galen’s main treatise about embryology was called “On Semen”, and his works were studied by Muhammad’s nearby contemporaries in Alexandria, Egypt and in Gundeshapur, southwestern Syria.^[26]

Galen said that the embryo is initially formed out of the male semen mixed (μίγνυται) with what he called the female semen, which also forms an additional membrane entwined (ἐπιπλεκονταί) with that of the male semen. He believed that blood from the woman is subsequently drawn in via the uterus and membrane, and this combined material literally goes on to form the fetus.^[27] This will be explained a little more later. Unlike Galen (and before him, Hippocrates) with the two-semens theory, Aristotle believed that there was only a male semen, which does not itself provide material for the embryo, but triggers its formation from menstral blood.^[28] The quoted comments from Muhammad’s companions are good evidence for Galenic influence in 7^th century Arabia.

The Qur’anic verses that are most explicit in stating that the embryo is initially formed out of semen, as per Galen and Hippocrates, are shown below.

Just as Galen taught about the mixed semens, this nutfah is stored in the womb before undergoing the next stage of development.

The Qur’an itself confirms that it is semen that is developed in the womb in an almost identical verse. Here maa (water), the euphemism for semen, is used instead of nutfah. In this instance it probably just means male semen (see the “Extract of liquid disdained” section later).

In both cases, the “firm lodging” (qararin makeenin) obviously refers to the womb, with 77:22 adding that it is for a “known extent”. It certainly does not mean the female ovum, which is only penetrated by a single sperm cell and not the “liquid disdained”.

The four stages of embryo development

As mentioned in the Corpus Coranicum Project, the stages of embryo development described in the Qur'an reflect the medical knowledge of the late antique world, compatible with seventh-century AD understanding.^[29] The development of humans in the womb outlined in the Qur'an seems to correspond in its four stages to the communis opinion summarized by Galen for (late) ancient medicine;^[30]

Both passages speak of a development of the embryo that begins with the 1) drop of semen (Arabic: nuṭfa), which is then followed by the stage of the 2) blood structure (Arabic: ʿalaqa), which then develops into a 3) flesh structure (Arabic: mudġa), from which the "physically formed and not yet fully formed" (Q 22:5 min muḍġatin muḫallaqatin wa-ġairi muḫallaqatin ) embryo then develops. And in Sura 23, the flesh structure becomes bones that are covered with flesh (Arabic: fa-ḫalaqnā l-muḍġata ʿiẓāman fa-kasaunā l-ʿiẓāma laḥman). This form of life then finally takes on a new quality: 4) The fully formed infant In Q 23:14 it says: "Then We created him as a new (i.e. different) creature. Thus God is full of blessings. He is the best creator." In Q 22:5 the formed and at the same time not yet complete creature becomes a sign of divine power, since God "makes his power clear" to man.^[31]

Basim Musallam notes that the stages were sufficiently similar for medieval Islamic authors to use Qur'anic terminology when describing Galen's (incorrect, see: Embryology in the Quran) four stages of development.

Three layers of Darkness

We see the idea of three layers of darkness.

Ibn Qayyim (d. 1350), a prominent Hanbali jurist, links these to different membranes being mentioned by Hippocrates, quoting previous scholars opinions on the matter.

Seminal fluid and the backbone

The relationship between seminal fluid and the backbone has many ancient pre-modern scientific roots.

As Noble et al (2014) note.

This was an ancient Egyptian belief too, as Schwabe, Calvin W., et al. (1982) notes, 'Egyptians believed that sperm was produced in the thoracic spine , a conviction apparently based on their understanding of the bull.'^[32]

Semen stage lasts 40 days

See also Quran 23:12-14 to see how the nutfah and subsequent stages fit together. Now let us compare with the Talmud:

(Part b comes after each mishnah and is the Rabbinic commentary, called Gemara, on the mishnah in part a). Notice also that like in the Qur’an, the embryo is formed from semen.

Gender determined after 40 days

See also Sahih Muslim 33:6395 quoted above, for example. Once again, we see that this is an idea from the Talmud:

It should, however, be noted that in the next hadith, number 6393, the angel who comes after 40 days creates the child’s flesh and bones and then gender is determined. In number 6397 (also appears in Sahih Bukhari), gender is determined once the fetus has become a “lump of flesh”.

Resemblance of the child to its parents

A similar idea is found in the Talmud:

The same thing is reported in Berakoth 60a.^[34] Notice also a two-semens theory again. In most versions of this hadith the determining factor in resemblance is whose water (maa i.e. semen) preceded (sabaqa) the other person’s water. In other versions it is whose water is on or upon (‘ala) the other’s, which is closer to various Greek theories in which resemblance or gender is caused by semens prevailing upon each other.^[36][37] In one case (Sahih Muslim, Book 3, number 614), it is gender rather than resemblance that is determined in this way and maniyy is used rather than maa.

“Not from all the sperm a fetus is created…”

Searching for some kind of reference to sperm (rather than merely semen), which was not discovered until the 17^th century, some Islamic apologists point to the following hadith:

The first thing to point out is that the word translated “sperm” in the apologists’ translation is actually maa in the Arabic, which as mentioned above, means water/fluid and is a euphemism for semen. This is also apparent in another translation of the exact same hadith:

A somewhat similar idea is found in the Talmud:

The possible Talmudic influence is much less clear in this example as the hadith concerns the practice of al-‘azl, or coitus interruptus. In any case, it would have been well known that not all of a semen emission was needed to initiate pregnancy, so that this method of birth control was unreliable.

Al ‘azl and al ghila

While on the subject of ‘azl, and another practice, ghila, which is a man having intercourse with his wife while she is suckling, we see that Muhammad openly admits to his knowledge of and interest in the reproductive practices of the Byzantines (“Romans”) and Sassanids (“Persians”):

Of the two centers of Galenic study mentioned above, Syria was under the Sassinid empire and Egypt was under both the Sassinids and Byzantines at different times during Muhammad’s career. Muhammad did not live in a bubble. These hadith suggest that Muhammad would have had access to and had interest in the practices and ideas regarding sexual matters and reproduction transmitted by these other cultures.

“From the man’s nutfah and from the woman’s nutfah”

Asked by a Jewish man how man is created, Muhammad reportedly answered:

Some Islamic apologists suggest that this hadith in the Musnad Ahmad hadith collection is a reference to the sperm and ovum. However, as shown by the ibn Kathir quote above, not only were these understood to be male and female fluids, but this is once again the Galenic two-semens theory. Indeed, the remainder of the very same hadith (which is almost never included upon reference) explicitly affirms the two-semens theory, and proceeds to describe the different purposes of each of the two semens in a manner that is, needless to say, plainly unscientific and inaccurate.

See the references section for a link to the Arabic^[39]. Not only is it apparent that the male nutfah is none other than semen (“thick”), but the process described is completely wrong from a scientific perspective. The origins of these ideas can be traced as far back as the Talmud:

Also notable is that this hadith and the Talmud have striking similarities with what Galen taught in his work, “On Semen”, Galen says:

Based on pp.91-93 and p.101, he seems to mean here the thicker male semen, which he says provides some of the material for the fetus as well as “power” or “motion” to the material. He says that the female’s semen provides nutriment to the male semen, and also has a weaker “power”, supplemented by that of her blood, to cause any resemblance of the child to the mother.^[41] On p.87 Galen says about the female semen "for it is thinner than the male semen",^[42] matching the hadith.

Galen says a few pages later:

Here, blood refers to the mother’s blood, some fine and some thick, which Galen believed is drawn via the uterus and membrane into the combined male and female semens after they have mixed in her womb.^[44] That Galen and the Talmud say the fleshy parts are formed from the woman’s blood rather than her semen barely detracts from the other striking similarities with the hadith.

In any case, this hadith is graded as having weak authenticity. Sahih Muslim 3:614 is a similar hadith, which instead of mentioning nutfah and saying what is formed from each semen, gives the resemblance theory mentioned above after saying that the man’s water (maa) is white and the woman’s water (maa) is yellow. Sahih Muslim 3:608 is a version of the hadith we look at next, but adds that the man’s water is thick and white and the woman’s water is thin and yellow.

"Then why does a child resemble (its mother)?"

This, again, is Galen’s idea about “female semen”. Even Muhammad’s reasoning in the hadith is clearly the same as Galen’s, whose main thesis in the 2^nd part of 'On Semen' is that a generative female semen exists and causes resemblance to the mother. Like Muhammad in this hadith, Galen explicitly uses fluid emitted during nocturnal orgasm as evidence for the existence of a female semen that causes resemblance:

On the same page, Galen goes on to criticize other physicians who say that the female spermatic ducts just “discharge the semen on the outside down below the uterus” (a possible reference to “female ejaculation” from the paraurethral glands), and argues that the female semen is also discharged into the uterus. It is clear also from other pages that he believes this occurs at a particular moment, namely orgasm, and when it occurs during sleep the semen is subsequently voided externally.^[46]

As the hadith is talking about a fluid that a woman can see, it has nothing to do with oviductal secretions or the jelly-like coating of the ovum produced by the ovarian folicle during her monthly ovulation (in any case it is the ovum that is the source of the female genetic contribution, not this coating). Furthermore, the hadith is saying that resemblance is caused by a semen released during the female orgasm. Orgasm has nothing to do with the genetic contribution of the woman to the embryo. There are many narrations of this hadith in which the imagined female semen is released during orgasm, as Hippocrates and Galen believed.^[47]

Other apologetic claims

Some Islamic apologists have hence turned to other arguments to find a reference to sperm (not just semen) or the female ovum in the Qur’an. They are considered below. Qur’an translations are Sahih International’s.

Single entity that is part of a bigger group of its kind

An Islamic apologist has made the following claim about the word nutfah in an attempt to make it sound like a single sperm:

The first line is the apologist's generalization based on the second line, which is his attempted translation of a definition in the Lisan al-Arab dictionary of classical Arabic.^[49]

However the quotation has been truncated, mistranslated, and is of the definition for the wrong word (nataf – pearls or earrings), which has the same n-t-f root as nutfah.

His claim has been copied on other Islamic websites, one even attempting to evolve the claim further by suggesting that this 'mistaken' generalization actually appears in the Lisan al-Arab definition. Lisan al-Arab’s actual definition of nutfah is a little amount (qalil, قليل) of water (see beginning of this article). Note that even if we supposed that nutfah had meant a single drop, a sperm is a discrete object from among many of the same discrete objects, unlike a drop of water, which is an amount of something from a larger amount.

Sperm from semen emitted

Some apologetics websites claim that this verse shows that nutfah does not refer to the same substance as maniyy, translating the phrase as “sperm-drop from semen”, whereas pretty much all others translate it as “drop [nutfatan] of [min] semen [maniyyin]”, or words to that effect (Sahih International's translation shown above is very much an exception).

However, as demonstrated above, nutfah meant a small quantity of liquid, in this context in reference to semen that was believed to form the embryo, whereas maniyy is simply semen. Whenever the Qur’an mentions nutfah, which indicates the small quantity of liquid, it is emphasizing the humble beginnings of man. In the hadiths that use maniyy, it is a different context where the quantity is irrelevant. We also saw in the Lisan al-Arab dictionary above that maniyy is called nutfah because it is a small amount of liquid.

In addition, verse 53:46 has virtually the same phrase with the same verb as 75:37, but this time just mentions nutfah, without maniyy.

Tumna in 53:46 and yumna in 75:37 is the same verb meaning "to emit", and from the same root as maniyy. The same verb is understandably used if it is talking about the emission of the same thing, semen, but without explicitly stating the type of liquid in 53:46. In any case, the evidence is unanimous that nutfah is always used for a liquid.

Extract of liquid disdained

The word translated “posterity” in Sahih International’s translation is nasl, which means progeny (i.e. descendants).^[50] It is a reasonable assumption that ma-in maheenin (liquid disdained) means male semen here (see 86:6-7, which too uses maa). Some apologists like to read sulalatin^[51] (“extract”) as a reference to sperm. There are a couple of problems with this. First, it ignores the role of the female ovum (this is a problem with pretty much any interpretation of the verse). Secondly, we can compare 32:8 with 77:20, which has the exact same last 3 words, and without the word extract.

This suggests that the extract is or is of the same substance as the disdained liquid. As we saw above, the next two verses, 77:21-22, indicate that this liquid is gestated in the womb. There are various possible meanings for this verse, but even if it is interpreted as saying that only a special part of semen forms the embryo, that belief would have been common among the Jews with whom Muhammad was acquainted, as we saw from the Talmud quoted earlier:

Theory that verses about Adam were repurposed as embryology

In 2023, Thomas Eich and Doru Constantin Doroftei's academic book Adam und Embryo was published (open access) in which they argue that the Quranic verses about reproduction and embryology have been misinterpreted and instead relate to the creation of Adam.^[52] In this theory, the Quranic nutfah is not semen, but rather water that was mixed with dust to create the first man; alaqah is not clotted blood, but rather a lump of clay; and mudghah is not a bite sized lump of meat but rather the creation when it has become flesh. The theory requires that some of the relevant verses were edited or interpolated to reframe them in a pre-natal context, most notably Quran 23:14^[53]. They also argue that hadiths relating to such verses merely reflect this reinterpretation and contemporary ideas.

The authors identify occurances of the Syriac word nuṭptā (cognate to Arabic nutfah) in the works of early church fathers of the Syriac Church of the East, also known as the Assyrian Church. Ephraim the Syrian (d. 373) wrote:

And similarly Babai the Great (c.551–628CE):^[54]

Eich and Doroftei's theory has a number of strengths, perhaps most interestingly the two above quotes from Ephraim and Babai which use the Syriac cognate for nutfah in the context of the creation of the first (they also quote a similar passage in the Syriac Cave of Treasures, which likewise mentions the palm of God's hand in this context but with four elements - a grain of dust, drop of water, breath of wind and a little fire, explicitly to create Adam^[55]).

Their view that Quran 23:14 was edited or interpolated is a common one among scholars for stylistic and rythmic reasons.^[56] Their interpretation provides a simple reason for the dust stage being mentioned in some verses before other stages. It works particularly well for Quran 18:37 and Quran 35:11,^[57] in the latter of which pairs/mates would refer to Adam and Eve rather than the birth of males and females (though others may note that the verse immediately then mentions normal conception, and comparisons with Quran 75:37-39 and Quran 53:45-46 may suggest that the conventional interpretation is stronger). Eich and Dorotei also observe that a number of verses which only mention nutfah can be interpreted as the creation of the first man rather than conception: Quran 16:4, Quran 36:77, and Quran 76:1-2, the first of which they note is surrounded by verses about the creation of the world.^[58] They cleverly offer a reinterpretation of Quran 80:17-23 as the conception, life, death and resurrection of Adam.

At the same time, various difficulties and problems may be observed in their theory. Quran 37:7-9 provides context to verses that mention dust before other stages. It clarifies that the first man was created from dust, and his progeny from "liquid disdained" (a synonym for nutfah, as discussed in this article). The authors try to explain "disdained" here by appealing to an obscure and certainly metaphorical mid 7th century Syriac passage on baptismal theology which compares the race of Adam to water polluted by the devil. ^[59] As argued elsewhere in this article, another passage, Quran 77:20-22 mentions liquid disdained placed in a firm lodging (similar to Quran 23:13 which instead uses the word nutfah), and is easily understood as semen placed in the womb in line with Greek and Talmudic concepts. Eich and Dorotei interpret the "firm lodging" as a prominent fixed place and attempt a connection with the creation story, though their evidence may seem very thin here.^[60] Some may also find it hard to see how the disdained liquid being placed there for a known extent/determination in Quran 77:22 sounds like the creation of Adam more than gestation in the womb.

Eich and Doroftei's theory relies crucially on editorial processes and interpolations to explain verses that do not fit a first man interpretation. Like many scholars, they regard Quran 23:14 as an interpolation. But in addition, Quran 75:37 uses a noun and verb relating to seminal emission to remind man that he was a nutfah of semen emitted. They accept that this verse refers to semen, but suggest that an editorial insertion has occurred.^[61] Perhaps the greatest difficulty arises in Quran 22:5 and Quran 40:67. The authors attempt to divide the part mentioning various stages from the part about pregnancy and childbirth in Q. 22:5, which they consider to be a revision and expansion of Q. 40:67 to add an element about the creation of the first man. They attempt to explain Q. 40:67 itself as a deliberate parallelism of prenatal development with the creation of primordial man.^[62]

Another possible weakness is that the verses that mention dust and nutfah separate them chronologically with the word thumma ("then") but never say "dust and nutfah" (in their theory these two elements are combined to create Adam). Similarly, the theory is also perhaps somewhat challenged by the fact that many verses just mention creation of man from dust, and others just mention a nutfah (or liquid disdained as a synonym for nutfah), though Quran 25:53-54 which says man was made from water after describing the world's creation could perhaps be offered in response to that point.^[63]

Eich and Doroftei present virtually no positive evidence that the nutfah and later stages were ever interpreted by early Muslims as descriptions of Adam's creation (nor would this be expected if they are correct that the Quran had already been edited to reframe the meaning to a pre-natal context). Nevertheless, even if they are correct that Q. 23:14 and some other verses were edited or interpolated to reframe the original context of nutfah, alaqah, and mudghah, the Quran as we have it today certainly uses these terms with a pre-natal meaning in at least some passages, reflecting the influence of pre-scientific contemporary beliefs which are also apparent to an even greater extent in hadiths, as demonstrated in this article.

See Also

• Embryology in the Quran
• Semen Production in the Quran

External Links

• Early Arabs and Greek Knowledge - islamwhattheydonttellyou164 - Youtube.com (video)
• Greek and Jewish ideas about reproduction in the Qur’an and hadith by Martin Taverille - Quranspotlight blog (the original source for most of this article)

References