This is a clear challenge to the
non-Muslim.Basically, it invites him to find a mistake. As a matter of fact,
the seriousness and difficulty of the challenge aside, the actual presentation
of such a challenge in the first place is not even in human nature and is
inconsistent with man's personality. One doesn't take an exam in school after
finishing the exam, write a note to the instructor at the end saying, "This
exam is perfect. There are no mistakes in it. Find one if you can!". One just
doesn't do that. The teacher would not sleep until he found a mistake! And yet
this is the way the Qur'an approaches people. Another interesting attitude
that exists in the Qur'an repeatedly deals with its advice to the reader. The
Qur'an informs that reader about different facts and then gives the advice:
"If you want to know more about this or that, or if you doubt what is said,
then you should ask those who have knowledge." This too is a surprising
attitude. It is not usual to have a book that comes from someone without
training in geography, botany, biology, etc., who discusses these subjects and
then advises the reader to ask men of knowledge if he doubts
anything.
Yet in every age there have been Muslims
who have followed the advice of the Qur'an and made surprising discoveries. If
one looks to the works of Muslim scientists if many centuries ago, one will
find them full of quotations from the Qur'an. These works state that they did
research in such a place, looking for something. And they affirm that the
reason they looked in such and such a place was that the Qur'an pointed them
in that direction. For example, the Qur'an mentions man's origin and then
tells the reader, "Research it!" It gives the reader a hint where to look and
then states that one should find out more about it. This is the kind of thing
that Muslims today largely seem to overlook - but not always, as illustrated
in the following example. A few years ago, a group of men in Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia collected all if the verses in the Qur'an which discuss embryology -
the growth of the human being in the womb. They said, "Here is what the Qur'an
says. Is it the truth?" In essence, they took the advice of the Qur'an: "Ask
the men who know." They chose, as it happened, a non-Muslim who is a professor
of embryology at the University of Toronto. His name is Keith Moore, and he is
the author of textbooks on embryology - a world expert on the subject. They
invited him to Riyadh and said, "This is what the Qur'an says about your
subject. Is it true? What can you tell us?" While he was in Riyadh, they gave
him all of the help that he needed in translation and all of the cooperation
for which he asked. And he was so surprised at what he found that he changed
his textbooks. In fact, in the second edition of one of his books, called
Before we are born... in the second edition about the history of embryology,
he included some material that was not in the first edition because of what he
found in the Qur'an. Truly this illustrates that the Qur'an was ahead of its
time and that those who believe in the Qur'an know what other people do not
know.
I had the pleasure of interviewing Dr.
Keith Moore for a television presentation, and we talked a great deal about
this - it was illustrated by slides and so on. He mentioned that some of the
things that the Qur'an states about the growth of the human being were not
known until thirty years ago. In fact, he said that one item in particular -
the Qur'an's description of the human being as a "leech-like clot" ('alaqah)
at one stage - was new to him; but when he checked on it, he found that it was
true, and so he added it to his book. He said, "I never thought of that
before," and he went to the zoology department and asked for a picture of a
leech. When he found that it looked just like the human embryo, he decided to
include both pictures in one of his textbooks. Dr. Moore also wrote a book on
clinical embryology, and when he presented this information in Toronto, it
caused quite a stir throughout Canada. It was on the front pages of some of
the newspapers across Canada, and some of the headlines were quite funny. For
instance, one headline read: "SURPRISING THING FOUND IN ANCIENT BOOK!"! It
seems obvious from this example that people do not clearly understand what it
is all about. As a matter of fact, one newspaper reporter asked Professor
Moore, "Don't you think That maybe the Arabs might have known about these
things - the description of the embryo, its appearance and how it changes and
grows? Maybe there were not scientists, but maybe they did something crude
dissections on their own - carved up people and examined these
things."
The professor immediately pointed out to
him that he [i.e., the reporter] had missed a very important point - all of
the slides of the embryo that had been shown and had been projected in the
film had come from pictures taken through a microscope. He said, "It does not
matter if someone had tried to discover embryology fourteen centuries ago,
they could not have seen it!". All of the descriptions in the Qur'an of the
appearance of the embryo are of the item when it is still too small to see
with the eye; therefore, one needs a microscope to see it. Since such a device
had only been around for little more than two hundred years, Dr. Moore
taunted, "Maybe fourteen centuries ago someone secretly had a microscope and
did this research, making no mistakes anywhere. Then he somehow taught
Muhammad and convinced him to put this information in his book. Then he
destroyed his equipment and kept it a secret forever. Do you believe that? You
really should not unless you bring some proof because it is such a ridiculous
theory." In fact, when he was asked "How do you explain this information in
the Qur'an?" Dr. Moore's reply was, "It could only have been divinely
revealed."!
Although the aforementioned example of man
researching information contained in the Qur'an deals with a non-Muslim, it is
still valid because he is one of those who is knowledgeable in the subject
being researched. Had some layman claimed that what the Qur'an says about
embryology is true, then one would not necessarily have to accept his word.
However, because of the high position, respect, and esteem man gives scholars,
one naturally assumes that if they research a subject and arrive at a
conclusion based on that research, then the conclusion is valid. One of
Professor Moore's colleagues, Marshall Johnson, deals extensively with geology
at the University of Toronto.
He became very interested in the fact that
the Qur'an's statements about embryology are accurate, and so he asked Muslims
to collect everything contained in the Qur'an which deals with his specialty.
Again people were very surprised at the findings. Since there are a vast
number subjects discussed in the Qur'an, it would certainly require a large
amount of time to exhaust each subject. It suffices for the purpose of this
discussion to state that the Qur'an makes very clear and concise statements
about various subjects while simultaneously advising the reader to verify the
authenticity of these statements with research by scholars in those subjects.
And as illustrated by the Qur'an has clearly emerged authentic. Undoubtedly,
there is an attitude in the Qur'an which is not found anywhere else. It is
interesting how when the Qur'an provides information, it often tells the
reader, "You did not know this before." Indeed, there is no scripture that
exists which makes that claim. All of the other ancient writings and
scriptures that people have, do give a lot of information, but they always
state where the information came from.
For example, when the Bible discusses
ancient history, it states that this king lived here, this one fought in a
certain battle, another one had so may sons, etc. Yet it always stipulates
that if you want more information, then you should read the book of so and so
because that is where the information came from. In contrast to this concept,
the Qur'an provides the reader with information and states that this
information is something new. Of course, there always exists the advice to
research the information provided and verify its authenticity. It is
interesting that such a concept was never challenged by non-Muslims fourteen
centuries ago. Indeed, the Makkans who hated the Muslims, and time and time
again they heard such revelations claiming to bring new information; yet, they
never spoke up and said, "This is not new. We know where Muhammad got this
information. We learned this at school.
They could never challenge its
authenticity because it really was new! In concurrence with the advice given
in the Qur'an to research information (even if it is new), when 'Umar was
caliph, he chose a group of men and sent them to find the wall of
Dhul-Qarnayn. Before the Qur'anic revelation, the Arabs had never heard of
such a wall, but because the Qur'an described it, they were able to discover
it. As a matter of fact, it is now located in what is called Durbend in the
Soviet Union. It must be stressed here that the Qur'an is accurate about many,
many things, but accuracy does not necessarily mean that a book is a divine
revelation. In fact, accuracy is only one of the criteria for divine
revelations.
For instance, the telephone book is
accurate, but that does not mean that it is divinely revealed. The real
problem lies in that one must establish some proof of the source the Qur'an's
information. The emphasis is on the reader. One cannot simply deny the
Qur'an's authenticity without sufficient proof. If, indeed, one finds a
mistake, then he has the right to disqualify it. This is exactly what the
Qur'an encourages. Once a man came up to me after a lecture I delivered in
South Africa. He was very angry about what I had said, and so he claimed, "I
am going to go home tonight and find a mistake in the Qur'an." Of course, I
said, "Congratulations. That is the most intelligent thing that you have
said." Certainly, this is the approach Muslims need to take with those who
doubt the Qur'an's authenticity, because the Qur'an itself offers the same
challenge. An inevitably, after accepting it's challenge and discovering that
it is true, these people will come to believe it because they could not
disqualify it. In essence, the Qur'an earns their respect because they
themselves have had to verify its authenticity. An essential fact that cannot
be reiterated enough concerning the authenticity of the Qur'an is that one's
inability to explain a phenomenon himself does not require his acceptance of
the phenomenon's existence or another person's explanation of
it.
Specifically, just because one cannot
explain something does not mean that one has to accept someone else's
explanation. However, the person's refusal of other explanations reverts the
burden of proof back on himself to find a feasible answer. This general theory
applies to numerous concepts in life, but fits most wonderfully with the
Qur'anic challenge, for it creates a difficulty for one who says, "I do not
believe it." At the onset of refusal one immediately has an obligation to find
an explanation himself if he feels others' answers are inadequate. In fact, in
one particular Qur'anic verse which I have always seen mistranslated into
English, Allah mentions a man who heard the truth explained to him. It states
that he was derelict in his duty because after he heard the information, he
left without checking the verity of what he had heard. In other words, one is
guilty if he hears something and does not research it and check to see whether
it is true. One is supposed to process all information and decide what is
garbage to be thrown out and what is worthwhile information to be kept and
benefited from at a later date. One cannot just let it rattle around in his
head. It must be put in the proper categories and approached from that point
of view. For example, if the information is still speculatory, then one must
discern whether it's closer to being true or false. But if all of the facts
have been presented, then one must decide absolutely between these two
options. And even if one is not positive about the authenticity of the
information, he is still required to process all of the information and make
the admission that he just does not know for sure. Although this last point
appears to be futile, in actuality, it is beneficial to the arrival at a
positive conclusion at a later time in that it forces the person to at least
recognize, research and review the facts. This familiarity with the
information will give the person "the edge" when future discoveries are made
and additional information is presented. The important thing is that one deals
with the facts and does not simply discard them out of empathy and
disinterest.
The real certainty about the truthfulness
of the Qur'an is evident in the confidence which is prevalent throughout it;
and this confidence comes from a different approach - "Exhausting the
Alternatives." In essence, the Qur'an states, "This book is a divine
revelation; if you do not believe that, then what is it?" In other words, the
reader is challenged to come up with some other explanation. Here is a book
made of paper and ink. Where did it come from? It says it is a divine
revelation; if it is not, then what is its source? The interesting fact is
that no one has with an explanation that works. In fact, all alternatives have
bee exhausted. As has been well established by non-Muslims, these alternatives
basically are reduces to two mutually exclusive schools of thought, insisting
on one or the other. On one hand, there exists a large group of people who
have researched the Qur'an for hundreds of years and who claim, "One thing we
know for sure - that man, Muhammad, thought he was a prophet. He was crazy!"
They are convinced that Muhammad (SAW) was fooled somehow. Then on the other
hand, there is another group which alleges, "Because of this evidence, one
thing we know for sure is that that man, Muhammad, was a liar!" Ironically,
these two groups never seem to get together without contradicting. In fact,
many references on Islam usually claim both theories. They start out by saying
that Muhammad (SAW) was crazy and then end by saying that he was a liar. They
never seem to realize that he could not have been both!
For example, if one is deluded and really
thinks that he is a prophet, then he does not sit up late at night planning,
"How will I fool the people tomorrow so that they think I am a prophet?" He
truly believes that he is a prophet, and he trusts that the answer will be
given to him by revelation. As a matter of fact, a great deal of the Qur'an
came in answer to questions. Someone would ask Muhammad (SAW) a question, and
the revelation would come with the answer to it. Certainly, if one is crazy
and believes that an angel put words in his ear, then when someone asks him a
question, he thinks that the angel will give him the answer. Because he is
crazy, he really thinks that. He does not tell someone to wait a short while
and then run to his friends and ask them, "Does anyone know the answer?" This
type of behavior is characteristic of one who does not believe that he is a
prophet. What the non-Muslims refuse to accept is that you cannot have it both
ways. One can be deluded, or he can be a liar. He can be either one or
neither, but he certainly cannot be both! The emphasis is on the fact that
they are unquestionably mutually exclusive personal traits.
The following scenario is a good example
of the kind of circle that non-Muslims go around in constantly. If you ask one
of them, "What is the origin of the Qur'an?" He tells you that it originated
from the mind of a man who was crazy. Then you ask him, "If it came from his
head, then where did he get the information contained in it? Certainly the
Qur'an mentions many things with which the Arabs were not familiar." So in
order to explain the fact which you bring him, he changes his position and
says, "Well, maybe he was not crazy. Maybe some foreigner brought him the
information. So he lied and told people that he was a prophet." At this point
then you have to ask him, "If Muhammad was a liar, then where did he get his
confidence? Why did he behave as though he really thought he was a prophet?"
Finally backed into a corner, like a cat he quickly lashes out with the first
response that comes to his mind. Forgetting that he has already exhausted that
possibility, he claims, "Well, maybe he wasn't a liar. He was probably crazy
and really thought that he was a prophet." And thus he begins the futile
circle again.