The West and Elimination of Alleged Contradiction between Science and Religion

In a bid to eliminate the alleged contradiction between science and religion, Western religious figures, doubtful of their religion, said that the real jurisdiction of religion is distinct from that of science and philosophy. A philosophical, moral, or human value is compatible or incompatible depending on whether they both meet at a certain point, because when we assume one line to be inclined toward another line, the two lines will meet at a certain point. However, if the two lines are parallel, they will never meet nor oppose each other because each of them ends up at a point which is distinct from that of the other.
In explaining and justifying the relationship between science and religion, they say that there should be reconciliation between religion and science, religion and philosophy, religion and reason, religion and moral values, and two distinct realms created for them. That is, separating the realm of religion from other subjects. The realm of religion is man’s connection with God such as, praising God, prayer, supplication, and a set of issues which are totally personal and have nothing to do with others.
In this realm, there is no room for science, philosophy or any other subject; it is only related to the heart. If there is anything associated with religion in this realm, it is mysticism [‘irfan], because religion and mysticism are of the same class and share the same goal. Thus, science, philosophy and rationality have no place in the realm of religion. In fact, the realm of each of them is distinct, each having its specific function.
Ethics, values, praying, and do’s and don’ts related to God, is related to religion, and in this realm it does not conflict with science. However, if these dos and don’ts are related to man’s social life, like the proper treatment of a thief, traitor or any other criminal—to punish him or not—they say that whoever commits a crime or offence is sick, and thus, he must be cured. He should be nursed and treated with kindness and understanding in a suitable place so that he desists from committing crime!
We do not know any country or place in the world where a criminal or offender is treated like a patient and not punished. But in presenting a theory, they say: “The criminal should not be punished because punishment is neither appropriate for man nor consistent with human dignity.” As a general principle, they advance the proposition that man, even if he commits the most horrendous of crimes, should not be punished at all because this kind of approach is repugnant to the dignity and station of man. Contrary to this idea, we Muslims believe that religion has jurisdiction over all aspects and dimensions of life and has promulgated relevant laws. Regarding the thief, for example, it says:
وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُواْ أَيْدِيَهُمَا...
“As for the thief, man and woman, cut off their hands...”[18][115]
Those who have separated social matters from the realm of religion say that religion has no right to interfere in such domains. Religion can only urge you to pray or teach you how to praise God. But treating a criminal has nothing to do with religion. Certainly, empirical science has also nothing to do with such cases because empirical science describes the laws that govern phenomena.
In other words, science expresses “being” and it cannot determine the “dos and don’ts”. Moral laws cannot be derived from science. So, in the context of moral and social values, including legal, civil and penal laws and purely ethical issues in which moral dos and don’ts are involved, religion and “empirical science” cannot interfere.

Imam reza network

Islamization, Science, and Technology

At an earlier stage In the life of the Ummah, under pressure from the cultural and scientific pressure that was exerted upon It by the West, educated Muslims confused two things: firstly, the objective nature of truth and universal laws: secondly, the personalization Inherent In the way that Individuals and societies make use of these truths and universal laws. Thus, educated Muslims accepted everything Western civilization and science produced, supposing this to be objective and neutral.
The truth of the matter, however, is that Western civilization, like all other nations and civilizations, sprang from its own particular set of beliefs, psychological elements, and historical factors. Its development was also Influenced by its loss of confidence in revelation sources when It discovered that these had been tampered with and altered.
Thus, the material needs of humankind became so important that the individual and his/her desires attained a sort of sanctity. In this way, all ties to spiritual life were severed. It is for this reason that while Western society provides its people with an abundance of material goods and comforts, it is plagued by psychological problems and social strife that constantly destabilize society and threaten it with destruction.
It Is therefore extremely important for Muslims to realize that not all of Western knowledge and science is objective in nature. If it is not difficult to see how the social sciences are clearly subjective, it should not be difficult to see how the hard sciences are really any different in this respect. If there is a difference, it is one of degree only. Indeed, scientific studies are not undertaken in a haphazard manner.
On the contrary, these spring from decidedly human objectives and from subjective considerations undertaken by minds shaped in the Western mold and determined to achieve their objectives. All the sciences of foreign civilizations need to be seen in this perspective.
There is no way to speak truthfully about objectivity in science other than from an Islamic perspective. This is because Islamic thought, in its study of the particulars of nature, the laws of nature, and natural phenomena, does not proceed from limited rationalist vision only, but combines this with the comprehensive and universalist knowledge of revelation so that all science and knowledge emerge with their objectives properly designated, thus satisfying for humankind both temporal and spiritual needs.
The Islamization of knowledge in general and of the hard sciences in particular does not necessarily mean that the material or professional particulars of a science will be any different. Rather, its significance is in its providing guidance to scientific research and endeavors so that these are directed toward the achievement of what is truly in the best interests of humankind. Thus, Islamization means correct direction, correct objectives, and correct philosophy. In this way, Islamic knowledge is reformational in nature, constructive, ethical, rightly guided, and tawhidi.
The challenge confronting Islamization is that it present to humankind a vision In which science is put to the service of humankind in order to fulfill the responsibilities of reformation and constructive custody of the earth.
It is strange indeed that in the shadow of Western civilization there should be nothing greater for humankind than to compete in the arms race or to produce swifter and more deadly means of destruction. In this arrangement, truth always resides with those who possess the most arms, power, and wealth.
Certainly, the present situation is one that goes against the grain of humankind\'s fitrah. In fact, humankind has now reached a juncture where divine guidance has become all the more Important to its future, where the comprehensive vision of Islam is urgently needed, and where the establishment of constructive and reformational civilization Is essential.
Without a living example, however, it will be difficult for humankind to comprehend the vision of Islam or apply its solutions to their problems. Thus, only if Muslims discharge their responsibility to themselves by applying this vision and those solutions will humankind ever understand the efficacy of the Islamic solution.
Abdul Hamid Abu Sulayman
Imam reza network

Embryology

The description of the development of the human baby in the womb of the mother has been described in several places in the Holy Qur'án. Modern scientists marvel at the accuracy of the process described in its verses.
The Holy Qur'án says:
He creates you in the womb of your mothers, in stages, one after another,
in three (veils of) darkness.
He is Alláh, your Lord. His is the kingdom (authority). There is no god but He, where then do you turn away? (az Zumar 39:6)
The stages in the development of human embryos was not described until the 20th century. According to modern scientific knowledge, the three veils of darkness may refer to: (1) the anterior abdominal wall; (2) the uterine wall; and (3) the amniochorionic membrane - see Figure 1.
Figure 1
Drawing of a sagittal section of a female's abdomen and pelvis showing a foetus in utero. Veils of darkness are:

the anterior abdominal wall;
the uterine wall, and
the amniochorionic membrane

Verily, We created man from an extract of clay,
Then We made him of a drop (Nutfah), in a firm resting place;
Then We made the drop into a leech-like (clinging) structure (`Alaqah), then we made the leech-like structure into a lump of chewed flesh (Mudghah)
and we made the lump of chewed flesh into bones (`Idhama), then We clothed the bones with flesh (Lahma);
thereafter We caused it to grow into another creation.
So blessed be Alláh, the best of creators. (al Mu’minún, 23:13,14)
The drop or Nutfah is usually translated as the sperm, but a more meaningful interpretation would be the zygote which divides to form a blastocyst which is implanted in the uterus (the firm resting place).
The word `Alaqah refers to a leech or bloodsucker. This is an excellent description of the human embryo from days 7-24 when it clings to the wall of the uterus, in the same way that a leech clings to the skin. It is remarkable how much the embryo of 23-24 days resembles a leech - see Figure 2.
Figure 2
A drawing of a leech or bloodsucker and below a drawing of a 24 day-old human embryo. Note the leech-like appearance of the human embryo at this stage.
The word Mu_ghah means chewed substance or chewed lump. Toward the end of the fourth week, the human embryo looks somewhat like a chewed lump of flesh - see Figure 3. The chewed appearance results from the somites which resemble teeth marks. The somites represent the beginnings of the vertebrae.
Figure 3
A plasticine model of the human embryo which has the appearance of chewed flesh. Right, a drawing of a 28 day-old human embryo showing bead-like somites which resemble the teeth marks in the model shown to the left.
"And we made the lump of chewed flesh into bones (`Idhama), then We clothed the bones with flesh (La<ma)" The verse indicates that out of the chewed lump stage, bones and muscles form. This is in accordance with embryological development. First the bones form as cartilage models and then the muscles (flesh) develop around them.
"Thereafter We caused it to grow into another creation." This next part of the verse implies that the bones and muscles result in the formation of another creature. This may refer to the human-like embryo that forms by the end of the eighth week. At this stage it has distinctive human characteristics After the eighth week, the human embryo is called a foetus. This may be the new creature to which the verse refers.
The interpretation of the verses in the Holy Qur'án referring to human development would not have been possible in the 7th century A.D., or even a hundred years ago. We can interpret them now because the science of modern embryology affords us new understanding. Undoubtedly there are other verses in the Holy Qur'án that will be better understood in the future as our knowledge increases.
References
The Holy Qurán, S V Mír Ahmad `Alí
"Before we are Born", Keith L. Moore, Ph.D., F.I.A.C, Professor of Anatomy and Associate Dean, Basic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Canada.

The QURA'N, Knowledge, and Science

In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful

"The Qur'an, Knowledge,& Science"
The Description of Knowledge in the Qur'an and by the Prophet (P)

There are plenty of references to knowledge and the pursuit of knowledge in the Qur'an. The general feeling they leave the reader with is that the possessor of knowledge or wisdom has been given a very powerful gift, and that the pursuit of knowledge is something which should be done actively by everyone. Here are a few verses on the subject:
[96:1-5] Read! In the name of your Lord who created - Created the human from something which clings. Read! And your Lord is Most Bountiful - He who taught (the use of) the Pen, Taught the human that which he knew not.
These five verses make up the first passage revealed from the Qur'an to mankind through the Prophet Muhammad (saas). It is interesting that of all the things which Allah chose to begin His revelation with is related to the actions of reading and writing, especially the latter. The ability to write and store information is described by Professor Carl Sagan in his book COSMOS: "Writing is perhaps the greatest of human inventions, binding together people, citizens of distant epochs, who never knew one another. Books break the shackles of time, proof that humans can work magic." [21]
[2:269] He [Allah] grants wisdom to whom He pleases; and he to whom wisdom is granted indeed receives a benefit overflowing. But none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.
[20:114] High above all is Allah, the King, the Truth. Do not be in haste with the Qur'an before its revelation to you is completed, but say, "O my Sustainer! Increase my knowledge."
[3:190-191] Verily in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day - there are indeed signs for men of understanding; Men who remember Allah, standing, sitting, and lying down on their sides, and contemplate the creation of the heavens and the earth (with the thought) "Our Lord! Not for nothing have You created (all) this. Glory to You! Give us salvation from the suffering of the Fire."
These verses are a clear demonstration that 'science' and 'religion' were NOT meant to be fundamentally incompatible with each other by Allah. In fact, verses [3:190-191] strongly imply that "contemplating" the world around us is an integral part of faith.
[29:20] Say: Travel through the earth and see how Allah originated creation; so will Allah produce the second creation (of the Afterlife): for Allah has power over all things.
There are also references in the Qur'an describing the value (in the sight of Allah) of a knowledgeable person as opposed to an ignorant person. They are not equal:
[39:9] ...Say: Are those equal, those who know and those who do not know? It is those who are endued with understanding that remember (Allah's Message).
[58:11] ...Allah will raise up to (suitable) ranks (and degrees) those of you who believe and who have been granted knowledge.
The first source of Islam is the Qur'an - and we have seen some verses above on the subject of knowledge. The second source is the life of Prophet Muhammad (saas). Here are a few of the Prophet's sayings on the subject of knowledge:
"Upon a person whom Allah desires good, He bestows the knowledge of faith." - from the hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim
"A person who follows a path for acquiring knowledge, Allah will make easy the passage to Paradise for him." - from the collection of Muslim
"A Muslim is never satiated in his quest for good (knowledge) till it ends in Paradise." - from the collection of Tirmidhi
The Relationship Between the Qur'an and Modern Science
Modern scientific theory today finds itself quite close to the Qur'an. There are at least two reasons behind this observation. The first is the lack of inconsistencies between the Qur'an and observable natural phenomena. Science has not been able to produce theories or experiments that fundamentally contradict the Qur'an. Had our science done so, either our understanding of the Qur'an or of the world would have been to blame: the Qur'an itself is true for all times. The second reason for the remarkable harmony between the Qur'an and science is the presence in the Qur'an itself of very clear and positive encouragement to contemplate and investigate the world around us. As the verses quoted above indicate, Allah has not forbidden man to question, and in fact, it seems He wants us to do so.

However, the Qur'an goes beyond simply encouraging all human beings to be aware of the natural world. It also contains widely dispersed references on a variety of subjects which are not only scientifically accurate, but in some cases, quite advanced relative to the time of the Prophet Muhammad (saas). For the Muslim who reads and understands these references, they serve to strengthen his or her faith of course. For the non-Muslim who questions the authenticity or authorship of the Qur'an, these references provide some interesting answers. One possible reason for these Qur'anic verses which describe the natural world can be found in the following verse:
[41:53] Soon will We show them Our Signs in the (farthest) horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes manifest to them that it is the Truth...
The historical event which this verse alludes to is the conquest of Makkah. However, almost every verse in the Qur'an carries a historical and a universal meaning, and therefore one possible interpretation of this verse is that it refers to the gradual discovery of greater and greater natural "evidence" of the Creator's involvement in our world. Two of the most important and most fascinating goals of modern science are to peer farther and farther out to the edge of the universe, and to look deeper and deeper into the structure of the human body. It is in these two areas that we find the "signature" of Allah's creative power at its strongest.
A Selection of Qur'anic Verses which Comment on the Natural World
A. - On the ongoing process of creation
[16:8] ...and He creates other things beyond your knowledge...
[24:45] ...Allah creates what He wills...
These two verses, among others, indicate that Allah has not 'finished' creation; rather, it is an ongoing process. This is very significant from a scientific point of view because we are gradually beginning to observe and understand certain natural phenomena which are still in a process of formation. One prime example is our observation of still- emerging galaxies from huge clouds of nebulae. Another is the evolution of species, with its associated evidence of strange and exotic "intermediate" life forms turned into fossils. These two examples are just the tip of the iceberg; the following excerpt from the physicist Paul Davies' book The Cosmic Blueprint underscores the growing awareness of continuous creation:
"An increasing number of scientists and writers have come to realize that the ability of the physical world to organize itself constitutes a fundamental, and deeply mysterious, property of the universe. The fact that nature has creative power, and is able to produce a progressively richer variety of complex forms and structures, challenges the very foundation of contemporary science. 'The greatest riddle of cosmology,' writes Karl Popper, the well-known philosopher, 'may well be...that the universe is, in a sense, creative.'" [21]
B. - On pollution and the wasting of natural resources
[30:41] Rottenness (decay/corruption) has appeared on land and sea because of what the hands of men have earned, that (Allah) may give them a taste of some of their deeds, in order that they may turn back (from evil).
[7:31] O Children of Adam! Wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer; eat and drink, but waste not by excess, for Allah does not love those who waste.
The importance of understanding the ecological consequences of our actions as individuals or as a society was not fully appreciated until this century. We now understand that we cannot alter the face of the earth indiscriminately without paying some penalty, which may be disastrous. We also understand that caution ought to be applied globally, not just locally but truly "on land and sea". Ecological awareness does not imply asceticism however. According to the Qur'an, we are not forbidden to take pleasure in this life, however we are forbidden from wasting resources needlessly.
C. - On the dual nature of iron
[57:25] ...And We sent down iron in which is mighty harm, as well as many benefits for mankind...
Iron is one of two metals found abundantly on the earth (aluminum being the other). It was known to many ancient civilizations, and is the most important metal we use today. The general description of it in the Qur'an was accurate in the time of the ancients, and it is even more so today: iron is the basis for most weapons of war and most of the everyday tools which we work with.
D. - On the origin of life in water
[21:30] ...And We made every living thing from water...
[24:45] And Allah has created every animal from water...
Modern scientific theory on the origin of life was not firmly established up until the last two or three centuries. Prior to that, the predominant theory on the origin of life was based on a concept called "spontaneous generation" where living creatures literally popped out of inanimate matter spontaneously and continuously. This view was discredited with the work of many Renaissance scientists including Harvey and Redi, and in the 1850's, Louis Pasteur's research on bacteriology sealed the coffin on this theory. Starting with the work of Huxley up to the present day, an alternative theory has been proposed where life is understood to have emerged from a long, increasingly complex chain of chemical reactions. These reactions are believed to have begun in the depths of the oceans because the atmosphere was not sufficiently developed to protect living organisms from ultraviolet radiation:
"...it is believed that early forms of life developed in oceans or pools...It has been suggested that the colonization of land, about 425,000,000 years ago, was possible only because enough ozone was then produced to shield the surface from ultraviolet light for the first time." [20]
This idea of life originating in the oceans is strongly supported by the two Qur'anic verses quoted above.
It is important to note however that the Qur'an does NOT contain an exclusive endorsement for evolution. While the verses quoted above indicate beyond any doubt that Allah created all living things from water, there are many other verses that emphasize His Absolute power over everything.
[41:39] "...For He (Allah) has power over all things."
[3:47] "...when He has decreed a matter, He only says to it, 'Be', and it is."
E. - On the diversity of mankind
[30:22] And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variations in your languages and your colors; verily in that are Signs for those who know.
[49:13] O mankind! We created you from a male and female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other. Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him...
The racial and linguistic differences between humans are not meant as reasons to discriminate. Allah simply describes this diversity as a part of His creative power, and He does not single out any race as being inherently superior to the others. The emphasis in [49:13], in fact, is to learn to communicate with one another.
F. - On the Water Cycle
Most of us are familiar with the water cycle from our classes in middle school, where we learned how a drop of seawater evaporates, then becomes a drop of rainwater, and then finally returns to the sea via rivers or underground channels. The first person in modern times to understand this process was Bernard Palissy who described it correctly in 1580 [10]. Prior to him, most of the ancient Greek and Roman scholars had various incomplete or incorrect theories on the water cycle (Plato, for example, believed that precipitation eventually descended into the abyss called Tartarus and from there it fed into the oceans [10]).

The Qur'an does not give a complete description of the water cycle from start to end, however there are a few precise references to specific stages. Perhaps the most fascinating of these references are the following two verses on rain clouds:
[30:48] It is Allah Who sends the winds, and then they raise clouds: then He spreads them in the sky as He wills and makes them dark, then you see the drops issue from the midst of them...
[24:43] Don't you see how Allah drives clouds with force, then joins them together, then makes them into a heap? - then you see the drops issue from the midst of them. And He sends down from the sky mountains (of clouds) wherein is hail: He strikes therewith whom He pleases and He turns it away from whom He pleases. The flash of His lightning well-nigh snatches away the sight.
The two verses are describing the stages in the formation of rain clouds, which is in turn a stage in the water cycle. A close examination of these two verses suggests that they make reference to two different phenomena, one of "spreading" the clouds and the other of "joining" them together, two different processes by which rain clouds might be formed.

Modern meteorology has come to this very conclusion within the last two centuries. [17,18,19]

There are two types of clouds which can yield precipitation, and they are classified by their shape: stratus (layer-type) and cumulus (heap- type). The precipitative layer clouds are further subdivided into stratus and nimbostratus (nimbo meaning rain). The first verse above on rain clouds ([30:48]) precisely sums up the formation of layer rain clouds. It is known today that these types of clouds are started under conditions of gradual, rising winds:
"...and then they [winds] raise clouds..." [30:48]
Next, the cloud takes on its distinctive shape, that of a layer:
"...then He spreads them..." [30:48]
If the conditions are right (i.e. low enough temperature, high enough humidity, etc.), the cloud droplets further condense into (larger) rain droplets, and we observe this effect from the ground as a darkening of the cloud layer:
"...and makes them dark..." [30:48]
Finally, drops of rain fall from the cloud.
"...then you see the drops issue from the midst of them..." [30:48]
The second type of precipitative cloud is the heap type, and it is subdivided into cumulus, cumulonimbus, and stratocumulus. These clouds are characterized by being puffy-shaped and piled upon each other. Cumulus and cumulonimbus are the true heap clouds - stratocumulus is a form of degenerated, spread-out cumulus [18]. The second verse above on rain clouds [24:43] describes the formation of heap rain clouds. These clouds are formed under conditions of strong updrafts (thermals) and downdrafts of air:
"...drives clouds with force..." [24:43]
As the puffs of clouds form, they may unite into a single giant cloud, all piled up on top of one another:
"...then joins them together, then makes them into a heap..." [24:43]
At this point, either a cumulus or a cumulonimbus cloud has formed - either of which can yield rain. The rest of the verse is applicable to the case of a cumulonimbus (which is familiar to all of us as the towering thunderstorm cloud). If the heap cloud assumes large vertical proportions, then it can appear to the observer on the ground as a huge mountain or hill, but more importantly, by extending high into the atmosphere, the upper cloud droplets can freeze and thereby yield hail [17, 18]:
"...And He sends down from the sky mountains (of clouds) wherein is hail..." [24:43]
Finally, cumulonimbus clouds (i.e. thunderstorms) can have one last vivid property: lightning [17, 18]:
"...The flash of His lightning well-nigh snatches away the sight..." [24:43]

Other Qur'anic verses deal with more stages in the water cycle.
[23:18] And We send down water from the sky according to (due) measure, then We cause it soak into the soil. And We are most certainly able to withdraw it.
This is a single verse stating that rainfall is absorbed into the ground and that it can eventually be removed (drained).
[13:17] He sends down water from the sky, and the rivers flow, each according to its measure...
[39:21] Don't you see that Allah sends down rain from the sky, and leads it through the springs in the earth?...
Two methods by which absorbed rainfall is moved are described here: surface and underground rivers.

There are other references in the Qur'an to the water cycle (e.g. [40:13], [23:18], [25:48], [29:63], and others) , and all of them have the same property as the verses quoted above: modern scientific findings are fully compatible with them [10].

A few other verses also deal with water but in a slightly different context. They are not nearly as numerous as the verses on the water cycle.
[56:68-69] Do you see the water which you drink? Do you bring it down from the cloud or do We?
This rhetorical question emphasizes our inability to fulfill one of our oldest dreams: to control the rain. The fact is we cannot make it rain unless a pre-existing cloud is in the vicinity - and then only under the proper conditions, and even then we are not assured of success. The cloud should have different sized cloud particles, a high rate of condensation from the rising air, and good vertical development. If all of these characteristics are present, then we MAY coax some more rain out through cloud seeding and various other techniques. However, modern meteorologists are unsure of its effectiveness. Regardless, it is the presence of the necessary preconditions which we have no control over, and this ultimately stops us from arbitrarily bringing down the water of any cloud in the form of rain [10].

The following verse describes a property of large rivers.
[25:53] It is He who has caused to mix freely the two great bodies of water, this one pleasant-tasting and sweet and this one salty and bitter, and He made between them a barrier and a forbidding ban.
A description of the estuaries of large rivers is supplied by the verse above. These estuaries are relatively unusual because the outgoing fresh water of the river does not immediately mix with the salt water of the sea into which the river empties. Instead, the fresh water penetrates deep into the salt water body before any mixing occurs, far from the mouth of the river. Small rivers do not have this property. [10]

Finally, one more reference to clouds.
[52:44] And were they to see a piece of the sky falling down, they would (only) say "Heaps of clouds!"
Another reference to clouds but this time in the context of responding to a challenge by an earlier peoples who ridiculed a prophet by asking him to cause a piece of the sky to fall on them, apparently thinking it to be a solid cap around the earth. Allah refutes their challenge here, declaring that they would only find a pile of clouds, something all of us would understand today. [10]
G. - On Human Embryological and Fetal Development
The Qur'an has an extensive amount of information on the growth of the human embryo and fetus, especially the former. Before presenting this information, it may be helpful to provide a brief outline of human development in the womb as modern science understands it. [10]
1. An unfertilized egg is produced by the female, and is subsequently placed in her Fallopian tubes.
2. The male cohabits with the female, and a single sperm cell fertilizes the egg.
3. The fertilized egg retreats into the uterus, and attaches itself to the uterine wall.
4. Embryological growth (roughly 3 months).
5. Fetal growth (6 months).
6. Birth
We will examine some of these stages in greater detail as the verses in the Qur'an require. First, however, two verses which give a general overview of human development:
[71:14] ...seeing that it is He (Allah) Who has created you in stages...
[35:11] And Allah created you from dust, then from a drop...
The first verse is a very general, yet accurate description of our creation as coming in stages (see the six-step outline above). The second verse puts some perspective on the whole affair: how man originally came from dust (Adam), and then from a drop.

There are at least four specific details regarding human development in the Qur'an which modern science has revealed only within the last few centuries, and in some cases only in this present century. The first concerns the emission of semen:
[75:37] Was he (man) not a drop of semen emitted?
In spite of the large amount of liquid which can be produced by a man during human intercourse, this verse emphasizes that only a small drop of it is important.

The second important detail in the Qur'an on human development is the description of the fertilizing liquid (i.e. semen):
[86:6] He (man) is created from a gushing liquid.
[76:2] We created the human from a drop which is a mixture...
[32:8] Then He (Allah) made his (Adam's) progeny from a quintessence of a despised liquid.
The second and third verses relate to the contents of semen. Modern science has established that semen is in fact a composition of different secretions which come from four different glands during ejaculation: the testicles, the seminal vesicles, the prostate gland, and the urinary tract glands. The actual sperm cells come from the testicles; the other three glands produce no fertilizing agents. The Qur'an goes farther than just informing us that semen is a mixture of liquids. It tells us in [32:8] that only the "quintessence" of the liquid is used (the "despised" comes from the fact that semen is emitted from the same place as urine, and thus may be despicable in some people's sight). The Arabic word for "quintessence" in this verse signifies extracting the absolute best out of something. The numbers tell the story: a normal ejaculation involves about 3 ml of fluid containing between 120,000,000 and 150,000,000 sperm cells. Of these cells, only one fertilizes the egg in the female, and this is the point which [32:8] alludes to [15].

A third detail of human development mentioned in the Qur'an concerns the newly fertilized egg:
[75:37-38] Was he (man) not a drop of semen emitted? Then he did become something leech-like which clings...
Recent observations of the fertilized egg in the womb have revealed that the egg literally implants itself into the uterine wall. It "clings" in the strongest sense, and it remains like so in the early stage of development. On top of that, the developing organism acts as a leech on the female host in the sense that it draws its sustenance directly from its mother's body [10].

Finally, the Qur'an gives a fascinating account of embryological development (the first three months) in the following verses (certain words have been transliterated directly from the Arabic):
[23:14] ...We made the drop into an ALAQAH (leech-like structure), and then We changed the ALAQAH into a MUDGHAH (chewed-like substance), then We changed the MUDGHAH into IDHAAM (bones, skeleton), then We clothed the IDHAAM with LAHM (flesh, muscles), then We caused him to grow and come into being as another creation.
[22:5] ...We created you out of dust, then out of a drop, then out of a MUDGHAH, partly formed and partly unformed...
Verse [23:14] divides embryological development into four stages. The first stage picks up right after fertilization ("drop"), and is characterized by an ALAQAH or "leech-like structure" which describes how the egg implants itself into the uterus (see above). The second stage describes the embryo as evolving into a MUDGHAH which means something which has been chewed (especially a piece of meat), or which has the appearance of having been chewed. This seemingly crude description is in fact quite accurate: after the fertilized egg lodges itself in the uterus, it begins to receive its first nutrients and energy from its mother. Consequently, it begins to grow especially rapidly, and after a week or two it looks like a ragged piece of meat to the naked eye. This effect is enhanced by the development of small buds and protrusions which will eventually grow into complete organs and limbs.

The next two stages described in verse [23:14] tell of bones being made from the MUDGHAH, followed by the "clothing" of the bones with flesh or muscles. If we follow the progress of the embryo with our own eyes, we find that after approximately four weeks, a process called 'differentiation' begins, where groups of cells within the embryo transform themselves to form certain large organs. One of the earliest structures to develop in this stage is the cartilaginous basis of the human skeleton (in subsequent months, the cartilage hardens or ossifies). It is followed soon after by the appearance of a host of other organs including muscles, ears, eyes, kidneys, heart, and more. This maintains the order described in the Qur'an. Verse [23:14] concludes with the growth of the organism in the womb (and simple growth is the primary characteristic of the fetal stage) followed by its birth.

Verse [22:5] adds one more interesting note on the embryo. In this verse, the MUDGHAH is qualified with the phrase
"partly formed and partly unformed."
As alluded to above, our modern observations of embryological development have revealed how different structures and organs develop one after another through differentiation. This gives rise to unusual situations where the embryo is unevenly formed (i.e. lungs but no ears for example). [11,16]
H. - On Cosmology
Of all the references in the Qur'an to scientific matters, the most numerous are on the creation and structure of the universe and the earth. This area is singled out in several verses like the one below as an example of Allah's creative power:
[45:3] Verily, in the heavens and the earth are signs for those who believe.
For a much more detailed exposition of the Qur'an and cosmology (and science in general), interested readers should consider reading M. Bucaille's book 'The Bible, The Qur'an, and Science' [10]. Below, a brief summary of some of the more powerful verses.

First, a verse which makes a small note regarding the age of mankind with respect to the universe:
[76:1] Has there not been over Man a long period of Time when he was not yet a thing thought of?
The Arabic word for "Time" in this verse is "Dahr" and it can mean either all of eternity or simply a tremendously long time. Modern science can help us understand this verse better. The first appearance of humans on this earth is estimated to have occurred on the order of one million years ago. The age of the universe, on the other hand, is estimated at roughly fifteen billion years. If we normalize the age of the universe to one day, then man would be less than six seconds old.

The following verse deals with the creation of the heavens and the earth.
[50:38] And We created the heavens and the earth and all between them in six days, and nothing touched us of weariness.
Notice the sharp counterpoint to the Bible at the end of this verse regarding whether Allah "rested" after the sixth day from tiredness. However, a more subtle yet perhaps vastly more important difference is brought out when we look at the first verse in the Bible, Genesis [1:1]:
Bible [1:1] In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
There is no mention of "and all between them", as opposed to the Qur'an (which refers to this in several verses, no less). Modern science has just within this last century discovered that much of the mass of the universe is contained in the vast spaces between galaxies and stars (ignoring for the moment the possibility of 'dark matter' which would only make a stronger point). In spite of having only a single hydrogen atom every few cubic meters on average (interstellar material), the universe is so huge that the "empty" space may account for more of the total universe's mass than all the stars combined - at the very least, it is a significant amount. Thus, it is an important omission to leave out "all between" the earth and the other stars and galaxies ("heavens").

As to the debate which has wracked Christianity and Judaism for centuries regarding the meaning of "six days", the word "days" in classical Arabic has a secondary meaning of a "very long time" or an "era" [12]. The Qur'an, however, presents a conclusive answer to this question via the following three verses scattered throughout the text:
[22:47] And yet they ask you to hasten on the Punishment! But Allah will not fail in His promise. Verily a Day in the sight of your Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning.
[32:5] He (Allah) directs (all) affairs from the heavens to the earth: in the end will (all affairs) go up to Him on a Day the space whereof will be (as) a thousand years of your reckoning.
[70:4] The angels and the Spirit ascend to Him in a Day the space whereof is (as) fifty thousand years.
It is clear from these verses that a "day" in the Qur'an can easily have different meanings in different contexts, and is thus not constrained to mean a strict 24-hour period.

The next two verses address certain details of creation.
[21:30] Don't those who reject faith see that the heavens and the earth were a single entity then We ripped them apart?...
[41:11] Moreover, He applied His design to the heavens, while it was (yet) vapor,and He said to it and to the earth, "Come (into being), willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We do come in obedience."
Verse [21:30] foreshadows the modern cosmological theory known as the Big Bang theory wherein all matter is presumed to have originated from a violent explosion. Verse [41:11] refers to a later stage in creation, one in which a cosmologist would describe the universe as filled with a nebulous gas undergoing a slow coalescence into gross structures such as clusters, galaxies, stars, and so on. The words of these two verses may seem coarse and simplistic to the modern eye, but this does not detract from their general accuracy.

Then there are verses that speak of the sun and the moon.
[25:61] Blessed is He Who put in the heavens constellations, and put in it a lamp and a light-giving moon.
This verse emphasizes the sun as a direct source of light ("lamp"), whereas the moon is not given this title. Man has long since established that the moon's light is simply reflected sunlight.
[55:5] The sun and the moon follow precise courses.
The meaning of this verse is obvious, and we have known the mathematical description of these "courses" since Kepler and Newton formulated them several centuries ago.
[21:33] It is He Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon: all swim along, each in its rounded course.
This verse supplements the previous one: here, we learn that the sun and moon follow "rounded courses." It is significant that the Arabic word used here - "falak" - does not mean circular course, just rounded. Kepler was the first European astronomer to realize that the paths of the planets and the moon are elliptical. It was not until later, though, that astronomers also realized that the sun has an orbit as well - around the center of the Milky Way.

The Qur'an contains a number of verses on the structure and contents of the universe. There are too many to list here, but the following three form an interesting sample:
[51:47] And the heavens We did create with Our Hands, and We do cause it to expand.
Flatly stating what Einstein refused to believe at first, this verse anticipates Hubble's discovery of the expanding universe by approximately thirteen centuries. This verse makes a very clear point that the expansion is continuous (until the Day of Judgement, which is guaranteed by Allah to come upon us unexpectedly).
[42:29] And among His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the living creatures that He has scattered through both of them...
[45:13] And He has subjected to you (man), from Him, all that is in the heavens and on earth: behold, in that are signs indeed for those who reflect.
These two verses are extremely interesting. Not only does the first one very strongly imply the existence of living creatures on other planets throughout the universe, but the second tells us that the heavens are "subject" to us. With a little imagination, we (or perhaps our children) can begin dreaming of the possibility of interstellar travel - and not just confined to our own solar system!
Bibliography
[1]. The Qur'an
[2]. At-Tabari. Abridged Tafseer (commentary) of the Qur'an. Arabic
[3]. Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an. Amana Corporation, Maryland, 1991
[4]. Asad, Muhammad. The Message of the Qur'an. Dar-Al-Andalus Limited, Gibraltar, 1984
[5]. Irving, Thomas. The Noble Qur'an. Amana Books, Vermont, 1992.
[6]. Pickthall, Mohammed. The Meaning of the Glorious Koran. Penguin Books, New York
[7]. Dawood, N. J. The Koran. Penguin Books, London, 1990
[8]. Nadvi, Syed M. Muslim Thought and its Source. Ashraf Press, Lahore, 1947
[9]. Kazi, Mazhar. Guidance from the Messanger. Islamic Circle of North America, New York, 1990
[10]. Bucaille, Maurice. The Bible, the Qur'an, and Science. American Trust Publications, Indiana, 1979
[11]. Moore, K., A. Zindani, M. Ahmed. New Terms For Classifying Human Development
[12]. Wehr, Hans. Arabic-English Dictionary. Spoken Language Services, New York, 1976
[13]. Steingass, F. Arabic-English Dictionary. Librairie du Liban, Lebanon, 1978
[14]. The Holy Bible - Revised Standard Version
[15]. Sussman, Maurice. Developmental Biology. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1973
[16]. Bodemer, Charles. Embryology, Encyclopedia Americana. Grolier Incorporated, Connecticut, 1988
[17]. Chandler, T. J. The air around us. Natural History Press, New York, 1969
[18]. Kotsch, William. Weather for the Mariner. Naval Institute Press, Maryland, 1983
[19]. Battan, Louis. Fundamentals of Meteorology. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1983
[20]. Sagan, Carl et. al. Life, Encyclopedia Brittanica. Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago, 1992
[21]. Davies, Paul. The Cosmic Blueprint. Simon & Schuster, New York, 1988
[22]. Sagan, Carl. Cosmos. Ballantine Books, New York, 1980
By: A. Abd-Allah
Note: All translations of the Qur'an in this article are based on several translators including Yusuf Ali, Marmaduke Pickthal, T. B. Irving, and N. J. Dawood. However, there are some differences which the author felt made the English closer to the Arabic. The author is indebted to Dr. M. Zerroug for reviewing this article.
Reference: al-shia.org

Can Science Dispense with Religion?

1. What is your definition of science and of religion?
The question implies that science and religion cannot be defined with proximate genus and specific difference. How could we, who are dependent on religion and surrounded by the world of science, define the perimeters of science and religion? Naturally, we provide a description of science and religion. Some of the contemporary researchers are of the opinion that our understanding and comprehension is a function of the world in which we live, and that this world has paradigms and measures which guide science. I do not mean we do not know science and religion. Understanding is one thing and describing is something else. Of course, if we are able to describe something, undoubtedly we know it. But, first, we do not know everything through descriptions. Second, the highest form of knowledge is about things that cannot be described such as God, truth and justice.
But there are people who are aware of God and those are supporters of truth and justice. Any man of religion is familiar with religion. Any man of science is dealing with science. But neither the man of religion nor the man of science know all of religion or science, and, hence, they are unable to define science or religion (and of course, if they are not philosophers, they would not even decide to define science and religion). This difficulty arises more often in the case of religion, because science is related to reason. But reason is not able to understand the depth and mystery of religion, even though religion itself is not alien to reason. It is clear that here we are not referring to science in its wider sense. What is meant here is a science through which the modern world has been distinguished from other worlds, and its precise example is found in mathematical physics. The positivists viewed this science as expressing constant and necessary relations among the phenomena.
In the neo-positivism, it was insisted that science is not a collection of propositions or theories whose correctness is confirmed or proven by experience. The first statement has the added advantage that indirectly it points out to the fact that science had an order. But the second statement is mostly the description of the work that the scientist does. Perhaps Feyerabend had this in mind when he said-and in his opinion one cannot put it any better than this-that science is that which the scientist does. One can find fissures in these so-called definitions. For example, one can ask whether the constant relations among the phenomena are external relations, and that science recognizes the things and relations as they are, or as Kant used to say, these relations derive their constancy and necessity from the human understanding. If through science one can understand the phenomena of nature, the understanding of each phenomenon depends on our faculty of perception. A phenomenon does not have an independent being. But when some say that science is composed of propositions which are either proved or refuted by experiment, they still have not defined science, but have tried to describe the features of a scientific proposition.
However, is it not true that if we know the description and nature of the statements and propositions of a science, then we know that science? But here the question does not revolve around the nature of the problem, but around the way in which the problems are proven or refuted. In effect, it would be as if it were said that science is a collection of propositions which can render themselves to scientific investigation. Let us assume that we know the description of scientific propositions. For example, we accept that there are statements and propositions that are proven by experience, and scientific judgments are among these types. In this case, have we found the essence of science? This is not a description of science; it is a brief account of a viewpoint and philosophical perception of science. What should be stressed here is that there is no common feature in the two aforementioned statements. But, how would it be possible then to define, with one or two statements, two things that do not mean the same thing and are not convertible to each other?
In the first statement, science or scientific judgment has been described on the basis of its subject matter, whereas in the second description, the subject matter and object of science have been completely ignored and the focus has been on the method and form. But a more difficult question in the second description is: Where does theory come from, and how is it constructed, and if the theory is not derived from experience, how can experience be the measure for the truth or falsity of scientific judgments? Can science have a measure outside of itself, a measure which would not be in the same category as science? Of course, method is very important in science. It is so important that one could say that science is investigation, and investigation is applying a design on beings based on method. As we see in this definition, the status of technique in the nature of science has been duly recognized. However, we should not consider it as a definition of science. We cannot define science. There are plenty of ambiguities and differences of opinion regarding the source, conditions, possibilities, exigencies and effects of science, as well as on the relationship between science, history, culture and metaphysics. How can one define science if it does not have a beginning, and its beginning dates back to man's prehistory, and its end cannot be predicted? Essentially the question about the nature of science is one which belongs to the domain of philosophy and in each philosophy a manifestation of science appears. Hence, it is possible that someone would say that science is the same as quantification, and still someone else might call science [a way of] forecasting.
It is possible that some experts would regard science as true because it fulfils our demands and needs. In the language of religion and metaphysics, science is defined in a different manner. For example, it is possible to say that science is among the manifestations of the majesty of the Lord, and, amazes man. Because the path to the Sacred passes through [the realm of] amazement, perhaps through science man can reach the Sacred dimension. The great philosopher of the Islamic world, Mulla Sadra, considered science as a manner of existence. He viewed science as possessing analogical gradation. When anyone of us speaks of science, we intend a certain stage of it, and one cannot understand the truth and the stage without referring to the totality. If we are supposed to define particular science, this definition must be with a view to general science. Since in the contemporary philosophy of science, universal science is not discussed, it would be difficult and baseless to define science.
Now we must define religion. If science does not have a definition, how can one define religion? Religion is love. It is submission. It is servitude [to God]. It is submission [to the will of God]. It is a covenant. These are all true. But this is still not a definition. If we review, and describe, the religious statements and actions of the man of religion, we still cannot consider it a description of religion. Anthropologists, sociologists, psychologists and philosophers usually look at religion from outside. Each is trying in a special way to come up with general definitions of religion. It can be summarized, from what has been said in different disciplines that religion is belief in the Sacred, acting on the basis of religious decrees and required rites. But the difficulty is in understanding the meaning of the belief, especially the belief in the Sacred.
What is the Sacred? How do we understand the Sacred and the Transcendent and how do we believe in them? For instance, the understanding of the one who sees religion rooted in man's fear is quite different from that of the person who views man as a being who is by nature religious. Before defining religion, we must know what relations there are between man and religion. If man is connected as much with religion as he is with irreligion, and this relation has come about by accident, in effect these are two independent entities, and while man examines religion from the outside, he can understand religion to a degree. But if man's nature is mixed with religion, in that case, in the understanding of religion, the believer himself is involved as well; one cannot look at religion divorced from the outside world and in a vacuum. For the moment, I decide against getting involved in these debates. What I want to say is that man became man with the Covenant he made in time immemorial. The beginning of religion starts with the Covenant of the past. Whatever religion encompasses-laws, decrees, its decrees on what is prohibited or permissible, its rites and rituals-are the result of that Covenant.
But we have to be careful not to view this Covenant as a covenant between two independent entities. This is a special Covenant. We were asked, while we were only a potentiality, "Am I Not Your Lord?" and we responded positively to the question in the language of our potentiality. With this response, we became a human being, and carried the burden of that which has been entrusted to us. The emergence of man, the advent of religion and belief in religion was indeed an event. Man became man after he made a Covenant, and his Covenant was of a religious nature. Some say that if religion had been innate in man, then all of the people would have been religious, and no one could have been able to reject religion. These people do not understand that religion is a covenant and it is possible that one would forget or break a covenant, in which case they are covenant-breakers. With this statement, we have indeed admitted that religion does not belong to us; we have admitted that it is we who belong to religion, and how can a component of an entity define the entity to which it belongs?
2. Do you see any conflict between your definitions of these two concepts?
When providing a description, hardly any conflict arises between religion and science, and if there is a conflict, it is in the sub-principles and conclusions. In fact, there is no conflict between science and religion. No scientist can deny the existence of the sacred source by resorting to science, and view worshipping as a futile act. But sometimes there is a conflict between scientific research and religious absolutes. Earlier thinkers used to say that if a conflict arises between the dictates of reason and the religious decrees, one must interpret the religious decree. This perception, especially in the past two centuries, has led to the interpretation of the religious statements in harmony with the universally accepted scientific facts.
For example, some of the researchers and even some of the jurisprudents have adjusted the account of the creation of man to the evolution theory. Perhaps these attempts are not that significant but they are not without justification either. If they view the language of religion and science as one, and if they divide the religious decrees to descriptive and prescriptive decrees, and view its descriptive decrees of the same type as the descriptive scientific propositions and subject to investigation based on the scientific method, they would have no choice but to take the side of science in case there emerges a conflict between science and religion. This is due to the fact that from the beginning they have understood the language of religion as similar to the language of science and have scientifically approached religion, If our yardstick is the language of science and scientific theories, and religious statement has to be interpreted such that it would go along with science, still the language of religion would be different from the language of science: The religious statement, once interpreted, does not mean the same thing as what it seems to say. If it were so, would there be any need for analogy and interpretation?
If we look closer, we realize that there is no conflict between science and religion. Actually, the conflict is between the theologians and scholars or between theology and some parts of the scientific theories or a specific interpretation of these theories. However, in educational textbooks or the like, and in the opinion of those who limit scientific judgments to investigation, research, refutation and proof or testability, and contend that scientific judgments could be either confirmed or approved, or investigated and refuted, either deliberately or unconsciously, they have created a confrontation between religion and science. Especially when having meaning would mean that it is testable (the view held by most members of the Vienna Circle), one cannot test and investigate a religious decree in the same manner that one would with routine scientific hypotheses and theories (of course, grand scientific theories, too, are not provable or refutable in their totality).
The point that needs to be considered here is the meaning of experiment and investigation. If we intend the general meaning of experiment, undoubtedly it would include religious, moral and mystical experiments. Hence, it could no longer be considered a characteristic exclusive to science and scientific research. But the statement that decrees are meaningful only when they can be investigated through scientific methods cannot be supported and the men of science reject such statements. Hence, if someone says that the definition of science is in conflict with the definition of religion, he can hardly justify his own words.
3. Where do you think there may be a conflict between these two?
The way is paved for the emergence of conflict whenever and wherever they want to evaluate religious decrees with scientific measures, and especially view its language of allusion as identical with the quantitative language of sciences. But if the boundaries are clearly recognized, the belief in the religious principles and exigencies would never hinder scientific investigation anywhere. But sometimes some of these dependencies create or destroy the context for doing scientific research. However, whatever is not considered as preconditions for scientific research and does not pave the way for it, is not opposed to science.
4. What have been the grounds for the development of conflict between these two?
In the past periods, there was no contradiction between science and religion. The conflict between reason and religion has been discussed since the time of Plato. From the beginning of the Hellenistic era and Alexandrian period, this conflict was intensified somewhat. Muslim philosophers and theologians from the Christian era tried to somehow resolve this conflict. The result of the efforts by Muslim philosophers and researchers such as Khwaja Nassir-al-Din Tusi and Fayyaz Lahiji is that reason and religion are not at all opposed to each other. If some of the mystics denigrated science, they were referring to a science which serves as a veil.
5. What has been the role of religion in the development of science in the West?
The people of Iran and those in the regions considered the Islamic lands were able to learn the sciences of the Greeks, Chinese and Indians before accepting Islam. But as we know, they did not show any interest or desire [to learn these sciences]. But with the expansion of Islam, the interest in science grew. Seekers of knowledge traveled from remote regions in order to learn sciences. In less than 80 years, sciences such as medicine, astronomy, mathematics, alchemy and philosophy arrived in the world of Islam from India and Greece. Despite the perception common among some historians of science, the sciences of the Islamic era did not have a stillbirth. Rather, they were like dynamic newborns who grew to their maturity. But, it would not be appropriate or right to compare the growth and vitality of the sciences of the Islamic era with those of the Renaissance period in Europe.
6. Can we have a religious science?
One understands two things from the term "religious science". One is a science which is about religious questions and discussions. The other is a science which has acquired religious characteristics, even though it is not necessarily connected with religion and is separate from religion. Undoubtedly, the second type of science is intended when it is asked whether it is possible to have religious science. If we approach the issue from an abstract perspective, we realize that logic, mathematics, physics and sociology would not become religious sciences, and there is no need to make them religious, and it is possible to say that speaking of Islamic physics and geometry would be meaningless.
These statements, as has been stated before, are generally understood to imply that a person has only engaged in an exercise of futility if he decides to make mechanics and astronomy Christian or Islamic. In whatever world the sciences are, they acquire the characteristics of that world. They also rotate around the axis, as well as serve the interests, of that world. As far as we know, the only non-religious world in the history of man is the modern Western world. The non-religious thought and science began in Greece. The Greek world was non-religious and their science, too was non-religious. But if the modern non-religious world would be transformed to a relig- ious world, i.e. this world would vanish and a new world would emerge for which religious thought would serve as the backbone, then science, too, would be under the shade of religion, and would become religious in a sense.
7. Can science dispense with religion?
Apparently, science can be independent from religion because the fundamentals of science are not the same as the principles and fundamentals of religion, and scientific judgments are rarely mistaken for religious decrees. Not only the modern science is independent from religion, but also the science of perspectives, astronomy, mathematics and mechanics of the earlier people were not religious and would not have any relations to religiosity. But one could discuss the issue in a different way. One could imagine that if man had not had any religion, would science have evolved to become what it is today? Would science have been possible at all? We do not know what man would have been if there had been no religion. Man became man with the Covenant, and if this Covenant had not been there, man would not have become possessor of science, technique, ethics and politics. It might be said that this statement contradicts what have been considered established facts, because millennia of growth and development of science in the religious contexts are not comparable with the 200-year or 300-year growth of science in the modern non-religious world. It is true that the modern world is non-religious but this world follows a religious world.
In the modern world, pseudo-religious interests have taken the place of religious interests. The existence of this world depends in many ways on religion and religious beliefs. Modern science too, has roots in metaphysics and religious thought. I do not want to dwell on what has been said about the Christian foundation of modern civilization and science. Suffice it to say that if religion had not been there, we would not have known about truth. The dependence of science on truth is of the same type as the religious quest. Actually, science has borrowed the concept of truth from religion and has given it another meaning. Even though science, in its abstract form, is independent from religion, when all the conditions for emergence of science are considered, then we realize that it is connected with religion.
8. Can one separate the domains of activity of science and religion completely?
Based on what has been said in the seventh question, the domains of science and religion are in one sense independent from each other. But if we consider it with a view to unity, both are rooted in the same source.
Reference: al-shia.org