Prof. Dr. Necdet Cagil, born in 1956 in Erzurum, is a theologian, academic, and professor of tafsir. He graduated in 1992 from the Faculty of Theology at Ataturk University and began his academic career at the same faculty as a research assistant in the field of Qira’at. He completed his master’s degree with a study entitled “The Qira’at of the Imams of Basra and Their Evidences” and earned his doctorate with his dissertation titled “The Qira’at in Terms of the Eloquence and Phonetics of the Qur’an.” Continuing his academic career at Ataturk University, Cagil attained the titles of associate professor and subsequently professor at the same institution.
How should we understand the frequent attention drawn in the Noble Qur’an to the heavens, the earth, and the order within the universe? How do these emphases shape the believer’s perspective on the cosmos?
In the Qur’an, frequent emphasis is placed upon the entirety of the cosmic order and its operation within an unerring and precise system. In this context, numerous subjects grounded in reflection, knowledge, and observation are addressed—ranging from the distinctive animals of the geographical region that constituted the text’s first audience, to the heavens and celestial bodies, light and darkness, night and day, mountains and seas, and even to the geological and topographical structure of the earth. There are two principal reasons for this: first, to attain insight into the mysteries of the divine power and wisdom that prevail throughout the entire universe; and second, through this awareness, to learn the art of living in harmony with the cosmos, to advance on the path of becoming a balanced and exemplary human being, and to acquire the consciousness of servitude to Allah the Almighty. Human beings come to know Allah more profoundly in proportion to what they learn and understand, and they develop a deep reverence toward Him: “Of all of Allah’s servants, only the knowledgeable (of His might) are ‘truly’ in awe of Him.” (Fatir, 35:28) The frequent emphasis on the subtleties of creation and the vivid depiction of scenes serve to enable believing individuals to observe the universe with a contemplative and analytical gaze. The verse, “And you (O Prophet) may see them facing towards you, but they cannot see” (A‘raf, 7:198), draws attention to the profound distinction between merely “looking” and truly “seeing”. Not everyone who looks is able to see; yet everyone who truly sees is indeed looking. Just as the white light of the sun, when refracted through a prism, transforms into multicolored secondary rays, so too, when believers observe the universe through the prism of reflection in light of the verses that speak of the majesty of the cosmic order, their gaze is transformed into countless rays of wisdom, enabling them to discover more fully the mysteries of existence. Indeed, the Qur’an states that in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are signs for people of sound intellect; and that this distinguished group remembers Allah while standing, sitting, and lying down (in every state), reflecting upon the creation of the heavens and the earth, and ultimately supplicating, “Our Lord! You have not created (all of) this without purpose. Glory be to You! Protect us from the torment of the Fire” (Al-i ‘Imran 3:190–191). Thus, attaining insight into the magnificent order of the universe leads to the discovery of its Creator, and that discovery, in turn, directs one toward exalting and glorifying Him.
Allah the Almighty has established certain laws governing everything from atoms to the states and motions of stars, planets, and the heavens: “So He formed the heaven into seven heavens in two Days, assigning to each its mandate.” (Fussilat, 41:12) When the verses that indicate the universe was created according to order and measure are considered together with contemporary scientific data, what do they convey to us?
Although the Qur’an is not a book of “science” in the technical sense, it contains striking statements that shed light on scientific reflection. One of these is its depiction of the transition of the universe from chaos to cosmos: “Do the disbelievers not realize that the heavens and earth were (once) one mass then We split them apart? And We created from water every living thing.” (Anbiya 21:30) In a manner consistent with the conclusions of contemporary astrophysicists, the verse offers an expression that evokes the Big Bang theory, suggesting that the universe was initially an indistinct unified whole, a “mass of gas” or nebula, which was subsequently separated and gave rise to the celestial bodies, including our own world. The verb “fataqna” (“We split them apart forcefully”) appearing in the verse contains as its third letter the consonant qaf, which produces an explosive sound when pronounced. The medical term “fitq” (hernia), known in medical literature and referring in essence to the protrusion or rupture of tissue, is derived as a verbal noun from the same root. The word “ratqan,” which appears immediately before the verb and describes the universe’s initial state as a joined, single mass, likewise contains the same qaf sound, in addition to the emphatic consonant ta’. Through this phonetic structure, it evokes the image of a firm and compact union—one that would require a forceful and intense separation. Similarly, the verse, “We built the universe with (great) might, and We are certainly expanding (it).” (Dhariyat 51:47), particularly in light of interpretations that ascribe the act of expansion specifically to the heaven, evokes the theory of cosmic expansion. In this respect, it reflects a perspective consistent with the views of contemporary astronomers such as Edwin Hubble (d. 1953) and Georges Lemaître (d. 1966), both of whom articulated what is known as the theory of expansion. The matter referenced in your question, namely, the statement in the Surah Fussilat (41:12) that the heavens were arranged and completed as seven layers within “two days,” requires clarification. As described in the preceding verse (Fussilat, 41:11), the heaven was still in a state of smoke/vapor/nebular matter. At the stage presented in the 12th verse of the Surah Fussilat, when it was fashioned into seven heavens, the celestial bodies, foremost among them the sun and the moon, had not yet entered into their established cosmic order; therefore, the familiar twenty-fourhour “day” as we know it did not yet exist. In this case, it is highly probable that the expression “two days” refers to two distinct phases, epochs, or periods of cosmic development, the precise duration of which is not definitively known. According to the explanations of earlier generations of exegetes, the expression “Seven Heavens” refers to the heavenly spheres represented by the seven planets identified in the astronomy attributed to Pythagoras (d. 495 BCE): the Moon, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. If this interpretation is sound, it is likely that at the time the Qur’an was revealed, the Pythagorean cosmological model was still regarded as valid, and this was the prevailing understanding among the people of that era. Since the primary aim of the Qur’an is guidance, it may be inferred that it did not employ a different numerical expression that would have conflicted with the commonly accepted cosmological framework of its first audience. Moreover, the Qur’an does not deny the possibility of realities beyond the number seven. On this basis, it cannot be claimed that the Qur’an is unaware of the actual number of planets, new ones of which continue to be discovered. As for the statement that Allah inspired each heaven with its function, this signifies that the planets, stars, and galaxies fulfill their cosmogenic roles in preserving the cosmic order without deviation, in accordance with the divine ordinance established by Allah the Almighty.
Within all of this balance, order, and measure, what, in your view, is the place of the human being in the universe? Is the human being merely an observer of this order, or a responsible agent charged with its preservation?
Some atheist philosophers, such as Bertrand Russell (d. 1970), argue that if God truly values the human race, one should question why, according to Genesis 1:26, He did not create human beings at the very outset but rather at a later stage (Russell, Religion and Science, p. 19). On the contrary, however, it may be said that precisely because human beings are the most valuable element of the universe, their creation was left to the final stage. What ought truly to be questioned is how a philosopher could fail to consider how human beings might survive in a completely barren world devoid of plants and living creatures. As you have also indicated in your question, human beings are not merely passive observers of the cosmic order. While contemplating this magnificent system with both wonder and analytical insight, they are at the same time called to seek ways to preserve it. For human beings are responsible agents, entrusted with safeguarding this unique order that has been placed in their service. Two Qur’anic passages are particularly noteworthy in this regard: “As for the sky, He raised it (high), and set the balance (of justice) so that you do not defraud the scales.” (Rahman 55:7–8); and “Do not spread corruption in the land after it has been set in order.” (A‘raf 7:56) In the first verse, it is conveyed that Allah the Almighty has instituted the law of “balance” within the universe—that among all beings and processes there prevails a comprehensive cosmic equilibrium which ensures that the universe functions within a determined system. In the second verse, similarly, it is emphasized that the earth, having been originally ordered according to a cosmic measure and having been arranged such that the interests of all created beings were most suitably provided for, must be preserved and not corrupted. The law of gravity on our planet is itself a consequence of this general cosmic balance, and the regular functioning of weighing instruments is likewise a result of that very law.
At which points does the Qur’anic conception of the Creator converge with the universe paradigm set forth by modern science, and at which points does it diverge?
In the Qur’anic conception of the “Creator,” three fundamental principles are set forth: A) Allah is the Creator of all things. B) There is no place for chance in the universe. C) Everything has been created within a framework of order, measure, and wisdom. “Say, ‘Allah is the Creator of all things’” (Ra‘d 13:16); “He has created everything, ordaining it precisely.” (Furqan, 25:2); “Or were they created by nothing, or are they (their own) creators?” (Tur, 52:35) Among the philosophers of Antiquity, figures such as Anaxagoras (d. 428 BCE), Plato (d. 348 BCE), and Aristotle (d. 322 BCE) regarded God as the “First Mover” (al-Muharrik al-Awwal) and architect of the universe. According to these philosophers, the “mover” and the “moved” must necessarily be distinct from one another, for two entities of the same kind cannot cause motion in one another. Plato likewise affirms that there is no place for chance in the universe (Timaeus, p. 37). Philosophers of the medieval and early modern periods who adopted the views of these thinkers generally embraced an optimistic perspective, accepting God as the Creator of the universe. According to the law of motion formulated by the renowned physicist, philosopher, and theologian Isaac Newton (d. 1727), nobody can pass from rest to motion, nor from motion to rest, without the influence of an external force; and if in motion, neither its speed nor its direction changes unless acted upon by such a force. He maintained that God created everything in due measure and asserted that, aside from all other proofs, even the thumb alone is sufficient evidence to believe in God. The universe paradigm advanced by modern science has given rise to two distinct philosophical trajectories. According to one, the origin of the universe necessitates the design argument; according to the other, it does not. The rejection of design carries two different meanings. The first entails the acceptance of atheism; the second affirms theism, yet denies the existence of a divine plan. For a “plan,” that is, prior design, would imply that a work attains perfection only through such pre-arrangement, which in turn suggests deficiency and incapacity. Allah the Almighty is exalted above all deficiency. This represents the approach of the Ash‘arite theologians. The atheistic view that rejects the design argument maintains that the universe came into existence spontaneously, attributing this to the eternal nature of matter and energy.
It is frequently asserted that there is an inevitable conflict between science and religion. In your view, which underlying misconceptions form the basis of this perception?
The alleged conflict between science and religion is nothing but a naturalist and positivist slander, arising from the sacralization and idolization of science, coupled with hostility toward religion. For religion is by no means opposed to science or scientific inquiry; on the contrary, the Qur’an in numerous passages encourages its addressee toward knowledge, reflection, and the discovery of the mysteries of the universe: “Say, (O Prophet) ‘Are those who know equal to those who do not know?’” (Zumar, 39:9) The omission of the object (maf‘ul) in the verse indicates that everything which can be the subject of knowledge and learning is intended. “Have they ever reflected on the wonders of the heavens and the earth, and everything Allah has created, and that perhaps their end is near?” (A‘raf, 7:185); “Say, (O Prophet,) ‘Consider all that is in the heavens and the earth!’” (Yunus, 10:101) Both verses recommend that the entirety of the cosmic system be made the subject of examination and investigation. When the paths of a preacher and a chemist cross, whether in a mosque or in a laboratory, one would not expect a conflict to arise between them. For their fields are distinct, and both are real and indispensable. If any tension is to occur, it would stem not from mutual acceptance or rejection, but from the differing natures of the two domains. The reason lies in the fact that science is open to experimentation and empirical observation, whereas religious values pertain primarily to faith and affirmation. Although religion does address inward experiences such as unveiling and inspiration, it is evident that such experiences are binding only upon the one who undergoes them. For this reason, inspiration, for example, has not been included among the three principal sources of knowledge—namely, reason, the five senses, and authentic report.
