Allah's Forgotten Creatures A Qur'an and Science Issue While working on the article about a contradiction between S. 15:27 and 21:30 (*), I found another a verse that is a close parallel to S. 21:30. Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were ofone piece, then We parted them, and we made EVERY l iving thing of water? Will they not then believe? 21:30 Pickthall However, this related verse contains an additional problematic statement that will be the topic of this article. Allah has created EVERY moving (living) creature from water. Of them there are some that creep on their bellies, some that walk on two legs, and some that walk on four. Allah creates what He wills. Verily! Allah is Able to do all things. S. 24:45 Al-Hilali & Khan And Allah has create d from water EVERY l iving creat ure: so of them is that which walks upon its belly, and of them is that which walks upon two feet, and of them is that which walks upon four; Allah creates what He pleases; surely Allah has power over all things. S. 24:45 ShakirAren't there a lot of creatures missing in the "divine categorization" of living creatures that is given in S. 24:45? The author starts with making a comprehensive, all-inclusive statement. He speaks about "every living creature". First he refers to their common origin, i.e. that all of them were created from water, and then he categorizes them according to what distinguishes them, their characteristic property. He gives three categories in which those creatures exist: ‘walking’ with no legs [e.g. snakes and snails] walking with two legs [human beings (?), birds (?), jinn (?), see the discussion in the appendix] walking with four legs [e.g. most mammals (sheep, cows, dogs, horses, camels, etc.) and most reptiles (frogs, crocodiles, most lizards, etc.)] However, as intuitive as these three categories may appear at first sight, the author of S. 24:45 forgot a huge number of species when he made this statement. Even the Qur'an mentions several creatures that are not covered by this categorization: the gnat (2:26), the bee (16:68), the fly (22:73), and moths
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
While working on the article about a contradiction between S. 15:27 and 21:30
(*), I found another a verse that is a close parallel to S. 21:30.
Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of
one piece, then We parted them, and we made EVERY living thing of water?
Will they not then believe? 21:30 Pickthall
However, this related verse contains an additional problematic statement that
will be the topic of this article.
Allah has created EVERY moving (living) creature from water. Of them there
are some that creep on their bellies, some that walk on two legs, and somethat walk on four. Allah creates what He wills. Verily! Allah is Able to do all
things. S. 24:45 Al-Hilali & Khan
And Allah has created from water EVERY living creature: so of them is that
which walks upon its belly, and of them is that which walks upon two feet,and of them is that which walks upon four; Allah creates what He pleases;
surely Allah has power over all things. S. 24:45 Shakir
Aren't there a lot of creatures missing in the "divine categorization" of living
creatures that is given in S. 24:45? The author starts with making acomprehensive, all-inclusive statement. He speaks about "every living
creature". First he refers to their common origin, i.e. that all of them were
created from water, and then he categorizes them according to what
distinguishes them, their characteristic property. He gives three categories in
which those creatures exist:
‘walking’ with no legs [e.g. snakes and snails]
walking with two legs [human beings (?), birds (?), jinn (?), see the
discussion in the appendix]
walking with four legs [e.g. most mammals (sheep, cows, dogs, horses,camels, etc.) and most reptiles (frogs, crocodiles, most lizards, etc.)]
However, as intuitive as these three categories may appear at first sight, the
author of S. 24:45 forgot a huge number of species when he made this
statement. Even the Qur'an mentions several creatures that are not covered by
this categorization: the gnat (2:26), the bee (16:68), the fly (22:73), and moths
(101:4) which are all insects and walk on six legs, the spider (29:41) that walks
on eight legs, and all kinds of fish (5:96, 18:61, 37:142) which have no legs and
are not walking (or creeping) at all.[1] Moreover, apart from those various
creatures mentioned in the Qur'an, there are the octopus ("eight foot", actually,
there are about 300 species of octopus,source) and other cephalopods, various
crabs that have ten legs (1, 2), caterpillars, centipedes and millipedes, all of which are not mentioned in the Qur'an.
In fact, for anyone concerned about the "scientific miracle of the Qur'an" the
omission of the six-legged insects must be devastating since science teaches
that there are vastly more insects than there are animals with no legs, two or
four legs taken together. The Wikipedia entry on Insects starts with these
words:
Insects (Class Insecta) are the biggest class of arthropods and the only ones
with wings. They are the most diverse group of animals on the planet. They aremost diverse at the equator and their diversity declines toward the poles. With
over a million described species — more than half of all known living
organisms[2][3] — with estimates of undescribed species as high as 30
million, thus potentially representing over 90% of the differing life forms on
the planet.[4] (Source, accessed on 25 March 2009; underline emphasis mine)
Add to that almost 40,000 living species of spiders (source), about 3,000
described species of centipedes (and an estimated number of 8,000
species, source), and around 10,000 species of millipeds (source), and 6,793
known species of crabs (source), and almost 28,000 known extant species of fish (source), it should be glaringly obvious that Allah forgot to mention the
vast majority of his creatures — and that in a verse talking explicitly about
"every living creature", and then categorizing these creatures. Again, Allah
forgot to include the vast majority of creatures existing on this planet in his
categorization of living creatures!
Moreover, for those Muslims who believe in the miraculous scientific accuracy
of the Qur'an we need to point out that these quranic categories sort the
creatures in wrong ways, grouping together those that do not belong together,
and separating those that should be grouped together. Just a few examples:
scientifically, mammals are one family, but the Qur'an separates two-legged
mammals (human beings and perhaps some kinds of apes) from the four-legged
mammals. It joins (most) mammals with (most) reptiles on the superficial
characteristic that they have four legs, but separates the reptiles, and even the
lizards from each other, since most lizards have four legs but the slowworm
But the list in S. 24:45 was not intended to be comprehensive!
Muslims who want to rescue the Qur'an from such an error, a statement
contrary to established scientific facts, have little choice but to argue that S.
24:45 only gives some examples of different kinds of creatures but that this
statement was not supposed to cover all creatures, appearance to the contrary.The statement should not be taken in a literal way, but it only illustrates the
power of Allah by alluding to several different kinds of animals.
Is there any solid evidence that would support such an interpretation? Anything
beyond mere assertion? In the following, I will present the reasons that appear
to support of a literal reading. [Furthermore, see my observations on the tafsir
of al-Qurtubi ( below) which also does not support the interpretation that this
verse only gives some examples.]
First, a mere statement that there exist animals that walk on four legs, othersthat walk on two legs and yet others that glide over the ground without any legs
is an utter triviality. That is an observation that can be made by a four-year old
child. We do not need divine revelation for that. But either it is an utter
triviality, or it is indeed intended as a categorization of every living being, but
then it is not only incomplete but wrong by all scientific standards.
How does the author of the Qur'an deal with numbers? Let's examine some
statements from the Qur'an involving numbers, specificially verses in which a
statement goes beyond a certain stated number (or amount):
Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the
equivalent of the portion of two females, and if there be women more than
two, then theirs is two-thirds of the inheritance, and if there be one (only) then
the half. And to each of his parents a sixth of the inheritance, if he have a son;
and if he have no son and his parents are his heirs, then to his mother
appertaineth the third; and if he have brethren, then to his mother appertaineth
the sixth, after any legacy he may have bequeathed, or debt (hath been paid).
Your parents and your children: Ye know not which of them is nearer unto you
in usefulness. It is an injunction from Allah. Lo! Allah is Knower, Wise. S.
4:11 Pickthall
And We sent him to a hundred thousand (folk) or more[2] S. 37:147 Pickthall
Hast thou not seen that Allah knoweth all that is in the heavens and all that is in
the earth? There is no secret conference of three but He is their fourth, nor of
five but He is their sixth, nor of less than that or more but He is with them
wheresoever they may be; and afterward, on the Day of Resurrection, He will
inform them of what they did. Lo! Allah is Knower of all things. S. 58:7
Pickthall
Surely Allah is not ashamed to set forth any parable -- (that of) a gnat or any
thing above that; ... S. 2:26 Shakir
It should be obvious that the Qur'an contains several statements using
expressions like "and/or more", or "more than ____", and whoever can say "and
anything above that", can also say "and any number above that". In these
statements, the author made it clear that he refers not only to the number(s) that
is/are stated but a higher number is also in view. If that would have been the
intention for S. 24:45 as well, then the author could easily have added one more
phrase to S. 24:45, saying, for example, "and some that walk on four legs or
more" or "and some whose legs are more than four", or "with legs more than
four", "and some that walk on four or a number above that ", or "walk onfour or even more", or some similar expression.[3] However, he did not, and that
needs to be taken seriously.
After all, who among our Muslim readers would dare to add "or more" in this
list:
And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such
women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you
will not do justice (between them), then (marry)only one or what your right
hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the rightcourse. S. 4:3 Shakir
Are the stated numbers not supposed to be definite? Does the Muslim want to
argue these numbers are mere suggestions or samples, an open-ended list
intended to include the permission to marry six or ten or twenty wives? And the
structure in S. 4:3 is very similar to the one found in S. 24:45. The three options
(or categories) are joined with "wa" (and).
I think, it is fair to say that in those cases when the Qur'an makes statements
that are not restricted to the numbers that are stated explicitly but only givessome examples and implies that there is more, then it adds a phrase like "or
more". But if that is not there, then the Qur'an means what it says. Anything
else is not taking the Qur'an seriously and opens the door to arbitrary
Muslims who insist that we should read the verse as if it contained the words
"or more" are saying that Allah cannot be trusted in regard to clearly expressing
what he wants to say and they need to "help Allah" out in order to make clear
what he should have said. It also means that Allah is inconsistent in his
formulations, and therefore it is up to the believer (or unbeliever) whether he
wants to add "or more" in this, that or the other statement. That is arbitrary, and basically says that Allah meant,but forgot , to add these words. Such an
approach replaces the problem of "Allah forgetting to mention certain
creatures" with "Allah forgetting to add a rather important phrase" in this verse
in order to clarify what he actually means.
Finally, some may say, the third part of S. 24:45 covers the rest of the
creatures. In other words, there are actually four categories:
walking with no legs
walking with two legs walking with four legs
"Allah creates what He wills. Verily! Allah is Able to do all things."
being an implicit references to all other creatures.
That does not seem to be a valid interpretation. The last part of the verse is not
an additional category but a conclusion (giving praise to God) presented as a
reflection on what was stated before. The three categories are joined with "wa"
(and): "those walking with no legs" AND "those walking with two legs" AND
"those walking with four legs". There is no third "wa" joining the text that
follows to the other three categories. This change in structure does not allow for understanding the concluding reflection as a fourth category.
I agree that giving a complete categorization of all creatures is not the main
thrust of this verse. Its main message is the power of Allah who created
everything and who is able to do all things. That is how this verse starts and
ends, "Allah has created every moving (living) creature ... Allah creates what
He wills. Verily! Allah is Able to do all things." Nevertheless, it is difficult to
avoid the conclusion that the author of the Qur'an was somewhat sloppy or
casual in the formulation of the middle part of this verse; he did not carefully
think about the statement that was intended to illustrate the vastness of Allah's
creative power.
Assuming the human origin of the Qur'an, these observations are easy to
understand. It should be obvious that Muhammad, as a man living in the
Arabian desert in the seventh century, could not imagine that God's creation
was actually vastly more diverse than what he was aware of. It is also
understandable that insects may simply have slipped his mind when he
composed that verse. This "slip of mind" explanation makes sense and is
acceptable for a human author, but it is difficult to accept when one wants to
believe that the Qur'an comes directly from the all-knowing and all-wise God.
Even more so, when one believes that Allah intended the "scientific miracle of
the Qur'an" to prove its divine authorship.
Which of the companions of Muhammad corrupted the text of the Qur'an?
Al-Qurtubi provides the following interesting commentary on S. 24:45.
“so of them is that which walks upon its belly, and of them is that which walks
upon two feet, and of them is that which walks upon four; Allah creates what
He pleases ...”
The walking on the belly is for snakes and fish and the likes of worms andothers. Upon two feet is for humans and birds when they walk. Upon four is for
all other animals.
In Ubayy’s (copy of the) Qur'an: “and of them who walks upon more”. Hence
in this addition he included all animals such as crab, however this is a copy of
the Qur'an which did not gain consensus. Al-Naqqash said: the verse used four
feet in lieu of more than that because all animals depend on four feet for
walking, and those animals who have more than four legs do not need these
additional legs ... (Arabic source, translation by Mutee'a al-Fadi)
We can see that this Muslim commentator is struggling to make sense of the
statement in the Qur'an, but his assertions are not really convincing.
To use the expression "walking on the belly" is already somewhat strange,
since "walking" presupposes legs, but to claim that this expression also
includes fish is more than a stretch. At least snakes are gliding over the ground;
they are indeed using their bellies to move forward (i.e. their body movement
with the friction of the belly on the ground etc.). However, fish are not usually
touching the ground with their bellies and do not use their bellies to move. Fish
use fins and tails to move forward. The belly of a fish is not contributing anymore to its movement than its back.
"Upon four is for all other animals" is a desperate claim. The number four is
not a representative for all numbers "four and higher" any more in this verse
than in S. 4:3. Moreover, not all animals depend on four feet for walking. On
one hand, besides human beings there are animals that can walk on only two
legs (birds, apes, kangaroos). On the other hand, millipeds would not be able to
walk on only four of their feet if the others were removed. Even crabs would be
severly handicapped if six of their ten feet were amputated. Does al-Naqqash
know better than their creator when he claims that "those animals who have
more than four legs do not need these additional legs"? Did God create what is
entirely superfluous?
However, the main reason for quoting this commentary is the reference to
Ubayy's codex of the Qur'an in which the text of this verse contains an extra
phrase that would solve at least the greater part of the problem discussed in this
article (but fish are still not covered). This early textual variant is testimony that
already (some of) the companions of Muhammad realized that there is a serious
problem with this verse.
A number of uncomfortable questions arise: Which of the companions did
corrupt the Qur'an? Did Ubayy ibn Ka'b improve on the text "revealed" toMuhammad? Or did Zaid ibn Thabit accidentally or deliberately omit this
phrase when he worked on his "revised standard version" (RSV[4]) of the
Qur'an? Or was Muhammad so confused that he recited it at times in one form
and at other times in the other form? How can any Muslim know for sure which
version is the authentic text? How does he deal with the fact that the version
that became the standard is scientifically wrong? How many more places are
there in the Qur'an where the "wrong variant" became standardized?
Moreover, as indicated above, al-Qurtubi confirms my argument in the last
section. He realizes that there are animals that do not naturally belong in any of the three given categories. Nevertheless, he does not therefore argue that this
verse only mentions these three categories as examples and that Allah's
statement is not trying to cover all living creatures. On the contrary, he tries to
fit all creatures into the given categories which is evidence that he understands
these given categories as being comprehensive. He even points out that there is
a different reading of the text that would solve the problem of animals with
more feet than four in a more elegant way. But since he does not dare to go
against the standard reading and the "consensus", he tries to gather support for
including all animals with more than four feet in the category of those with four
feet. Clearly, in the understanding of al-Qurtubi, the three given
categories should actually cover all creatures, and so he "(re)defines" what
creatures should be assigned to which category.
He does not even consider it an option that Allah's statement could be
incomplete regarding the categories given and that it was not intending to cover
A similar observation can be made in Ibn Kathir's commentary:
Allah mentions His complete and almighty power to create all the different
kinds of animalswith their various forms, colors and ways of moving and stopping, from
one kind of water.(Of them there are some that creep on their bellies,) like snakes and so on;
(and some that walk on two legs,) like humans and birds;
(and some that walk on four,) like cattle and all kinds of animals. Allah says:
(Allah creates what He wills.) meaning by His power, because what He wills
happens
and what He does not will does not happen. So he says:
(Verily, Allah is able to do all things.) (Source; bold emphasis mine)
Just like al-Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir also does not say that these are not all
categories, not that there are other animals that are not covered by thesecategories, and the given categories are only examples, but he also claims that
the category of those walking on four covers "all kinds of animals". In fact, in
his first statement he even speaks specifically of "all the different kinds of
animals" (as opposed to "all animals"), and the word kind is pointing to an
understanding that a categorization of all animals is in view in this verse.
Appendix: The second category and its questionable members
The second category given in S. 24:45 is actually problematic. What did the
author of the Qur'an really think of in regard to two-legged creatures? There are
not many animals that walk on two legs, particularly when we take the
following two verses from the Qur'an into consideration:
There is not a moving (living) creature (dabbatin) on earth, nor a bird that
flies with its two wings, but are communities like you. We have neglected
nothing in the Book, then unto their Lord they (all) shall be gathered. S. 6:38
Al-Hilali & Khan
And of men and AdDawab (moving living creatures, beasts, etc.), and cattle, in
like manner of various colours. It is only those who have knowledge among His
slaves that fear Allah. Verily, Allah is AllMighty, OftForgiving. S. 35:28 Al-
Surely He knows well all the thoughts within the breasts.
-- Sura 11:5
Die in your rage; God knows the thoughts in the breasts.
-- Sura 3:119
The above is Arberry's translation. Yusuf Ali translates "heart" instead of
"breasts," but whether heart or breast, the question would be the same.
This wouldn't even be worth mentioning as a "problem" if Muslims were notstressing so much the scientific accuracy of the Qur'an. The Semitic people
thought the location of "thinking" to be in the chest/heart area [many Bible
verses show the same view]. I can easily accept it for both Bible and Qur'an
that these verses do not make any scientific claims nor do they give medical
descriptions of the seat of thinking, but that they just employ the commonly
used expressions to communicate the truth the author wants to express here,
namely that God knows our deepest secrets and thoughts. To this day we say
(in English) that God knows our "heart" and we don't mean the muscle in our
physical body but our motives and desires. And we speak that way due to
tradition even though we know those are to be located in the brain if one cangive it a location at all.
I don't want to parade this example as a difficulty or contradiction in the
Qur'an. It only shows that this was the common way of speaking about it in the
Middle East and even until today in our "scientific age."
But it is one passage which shows that the Qur'an uses the normal language to
communicate, and is indeed very unscientific by doing so. I believe that the
Qur'an is equally unscientific in many other verses where Muslims try to
extract scientific miracles and which are just lending themselves in their vageness better to be twisted into harmony with some modern science theories
even though nothing like that was intended in the text.
But if Muslims insist in a general scientific accuracy of the Qur'an and want to
make scientific accuracy of the Qur'an a proof for its divine inspiration, then