by Salman Hameed

Well, here is a good way to spend your four-minutes. Here is a short TED talk by Terry Moore on "Why is 'x' the Unknown":

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Earlier today, the Pew Forum has released a survey of Muslims in 39 countries. The report is titled The World's Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society and provides a fascinating look into the complex ways Muslims are negotiating the modern world (thanks to Neha Sahgal!). In the past couple of years I have written several posts that have utilized the Pew data about Muslims. You should check out
Pew Study: Mapping the Global Muslim Population
Importance of religion for Muslims and their religious practice
Pew global religious landscape: Young Muslims and the unaffiliated
How the Muslim world sees American science and the drones
Pew Survey: Mahdi, Jesus, devotional dancing and sorcery

What does the new report says? Well, a lot of focus will be on opinions on sharia, opinions on women's rights, and extremism etc. I will also have later posts on that. But let me focus here on the question on human evolution. In 22 countries, Muslims were asked if they think that humans and other living things have a) Always existed in present form, or b) Evolved over time.

Here are the results:

Several things to comment here.
1) Interestingly, most Muslims around the world (median 53%) agree with the statement that humans and other living things have evolved over time. There is a large variation amongst countries, with Muslims in Kazakhstan (79%) and Lebanon (78%) having the highest levels of evolution acceptance and Iraq (27%) and Afghanistan (26%) having the lowest rates.

2) In 13 of 22 countries, more than half of respondents accept human evolution. On the other hand, in only four countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Indonesia) do more than half of the respondents reject human evolution (for good measure, we can throw in Turkey in this as well, with 49%). 

3) Pakistan has the most undecided population, with 30% accepting human evolution, 38% rejecting it, and 32% undecided.

4) There are some fascinating variations within the same geographical regions. For example, Morocco has a higher human evolution acceptance rate (63%) than Tunisia (45%); Iraq's acceptance is low (26%) compared to Jordan (52%), Palestinian territories (67%), and Lebanon (78%). And Bangladesh has a higher acceptance rate (54%) compared to Pakistan's at 30%. On the flip side, Malaysia (37%) and Indonesia (39%) are almost identical - something that we have also found in these two countries in  our oral interviews of Muslim physicians and medical students. 

What is causing these differences? Well, we can look at some other indicators to make some sense of it. The Pew survey also included a question about science and religion. In particular, if Muslims see a conflict between science and religion. Here are the results: 

It seems that most Muslims do not see a conflict between science and religion. This is not surprising as there exists a strong narrative of science and Islam harmony since the late 19th century. So does the variation in science and religion attitudes explain the variations in evolution acceptance rates within the same geographical region? Well, it may possibly work for the case of Tunisia and Morocco (42% of Tunisians think there is conflict between science and religion, compared with only 18% of Moroccans) if one believes that the conflict idea leads to a greater rejection of evolution. But then the opposite is true for the case of Bangladesh and Pakistan, where more Bangladeshis see a conflict between science and religion, but also have a higher level of acceptance of human evolution compared to Pakistan.

And if you are looking for even more variety, you can look at southeast asia, where less than a third of respondents in Thailand (26%), Indonesia (26%), and Malaysia (30%) see a conflict between religion and science, but more than half of Muslims in Thailand (55%) accept human evolution, compared to Indonesia (39%) and Malaysia (37%). Similarly, only a handful of respondents in Jordan, Iraq, and the Palestinian territories see a conflict between science and religion, but only 26% of Iraqis accept human evolution, compared to 52% and 67% of Muslims in Jordan and the Palestinian territories, respectively. 

So what is the grand lesson from all this? Well, it seems that not only is there diversity in human evolution responses of Muslims around the world, but there is also diversity in evolution acceptance and its relation with science and religion perceptions.

5) It seems like the global median acceptance for Muslims is higher than that of Muslims in the US:

On first glance, it may seem that Muslims in the US are being impacted by the American flavor of creationism. Well, may be. There a number of Muslim countries with acceptance rates similar to the US - and may simply be due to some other internal factors. But this is an interesting question and we definitely intend to look into it a bit more. By the way, here is the distribution of evolution acceptance in the US based on religion: 

6) This is probably just a coincidence, but the lowest levels of evolution acceptance is found in Afghanistan (26%), Iraq (27%), and Pakistan (30%). Hmm. Interesting. These are the three countries with substantial recent US military intervention. 

7) Religious observance is correlated only with countries in Southern-eastern Europe: 

In countries surveyed in Southern and Eastern Europe, more religiously observant Muslims are less likely to believe in evolution. In Russia, for example, 41% of Muslims who pray several times a day believe in evolution, compared with 66% of those who pray less frequently. Significant gaps also appear between more and less devout Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina (-19 percentage points) and Kosovo (-14). Views on evolution do not differ significantly by religious commitment in the other regions surveyed.

Again, this is something that needs to be further investigated. But it is possible that the issue of evolution may have become inter-twined with the religious identity of Muslims in souther-eastern Europe. But it is important to note that acceptance or rejection of evolution is not correlated with religious observance in much of the Muslim world.

Fascinating!

I will post more from the Pew report in the coming days. In the mean time, you can find the full report here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

There are two events in London next month that might be of interest to the readers here. One is a workshop titled, Islam and Science - a reasoned approach, for students and young researchers to be held from January 18th-20th. This is by invitation only and you have submit an application to get in. You can find out more information about the event here. It looks interesting and the workshop will be lead by a number of well known people in the field, including Nidhal Guessoum (you know him from Irtiqa as well), Jean Staune, Bruno Guiderdoni, Ehsan Masood and Dr. Usama Hasan:

This event will be the latest in a series of educational workshops that have previously been held in Algiers, Paris and other locations. A “reasoned approach” will be taken to Islam and Science: one that is well informed, balanced and constructive. The general themes of the workshop will be: Islam and the History & Philosophy of Science, Islam & Modern Physics/Cosmology, Islam & Modern Biology, Science & Islamic Ethics, Islam & New Paradigms of Science. The workshop will represent a unique opportunity for Muslim students and young researchers to discover the contemporary field of ‘science and religion’ through lectures by, and in-depth discussions with, internationally-recognised thinkers and experts in this field, including Prof. Nidhal Guessoum, Prof. Jean Staune, Prof. Bruno Guiderdoni, Ehsan Masood and Dr. Usama Hasan.

Also, if you are interested more specifically on the issue of Islam and evolution, then you can attend a conference on Have Muslims Misunderstood Evolution? on January 5th. This one includes a scientific and a theological session.  Dr. Usama Hasan will also be part of this, and it is fantastic that evolutionary biologist, Ehab Abouheif will also be there (he is an outstanding researcher and he also participated in the Boston Evolution and Islam event last month). However, it is unclear how much science will be in the scientific session, as one of the speakers is from the Harun Yahya group (wait - are there still people around who take Harun Yahya seriously??). Here are the details of the conference:

The Deen Institute proudly announces its first ‘Dialogue within Islam’ event. The conference titled: Have Muslims Misunderstood Evolution?, will for the first time in the UK, to witness prominent Muslims tackling the controversial topic of evolution in a public forum. 

“Dialogue within Islam” events seek to engage with challenging ideas of concern to Muslims, in a setting that allows for critical dialogue. 

Historically, Muslims have held conflicting opinions on the theory of evolution and whether science and Islamic theology share a point of convergence. In recent years, a polarised debate on the topic has left many Muslims confused as to what Islam does, or doesn’t say, about human evolution. 

The Deen Institute will therefore provide a platform to different viewpoints so that the topic might be debated and examined in an honest, respectful and tolerant environment.
The conference will elucidate the issue of human evolution from an Islamic viewpoint, in order to provide the audience with a clear understanding of the points of convergence between contemporary scientific theories and Islamic theology.

There you go. The next year is starting with a bang.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Last month I presented at a lively panel session on Islam and Evolution in Boston. It was organized by American Islamic Congress and its Project Nur. Now John Farrell has provided a summary of the session and a highlight video from the panel on his Progressive Download blog at Forbes. By the way, John is the author of a fantastic book about Belgian cosmologist and priest, Georges Lemaitre.

Here is John Farrell talking about Ehab Abouheif, his cutting edge research in evolutionary biology, and his faith:

So, it was fascinating to hear from evolutionary biologists like Ehab Abouheif, who runs his own lab at McGill, that doing science and practicing the family’s ancestral faith does not prompt any contradiction. 

Abouheif and his team made a splash earlier this year with the discovery that many species of ants retain dormant genes that can be reactivated to generate an entire caste of ‘super-soldiers.’ [His team's paper was published in the January 6 2012 issue of Science.] 

When he came to Boston University last month at the request of Project Nur and the American Islamic Congress, Abouheif not only shared his personal thoughts on religion as a scientist and a practicing Muslim, but he also shared his concerns about the consequences for Islamic countries that fail to embrace the scientific tradition. 

“There’s a lot at stake here,” he said, “because it’s well beyond evolution. If it’s not about the evidence, if you reject science, if you reject evolution as a science and you’re not willing to listen to evidence, then that means that for all of science, when it comes into contact with sociological, political conflicts, then you won’t believe it either.”

But ultimately he asks the question:

What’s interesting from my perspective is –whatever the immediate difficulties facing Muslim countries as they grapple with democracy and technology– in the broader intellectual scheme, I think science does not pose as many challenges to doctrine in Islam as it seems to pose to traditional Christianity. 

Or is it soon to tell?

I think it is too early to tell. If issues like the rejection of evolution become a matter of Muslim identity for most Muslims, as young earth creationism has become for many Evangelicals in the US, then we are going to see a conflicts with biology. But at present, there seems to be enough flexibility for many Muslims  to accept not just microbial evolution, but also animal evolution, including that of humans.

Here is the highlight video from the panel prepared by John Farrell:


Perspectives on Islam and Evolution from Farrellmedia on Vimeo.

Read More »

Here is the continuation of the article by Khalid Chraibi (it was originally published at Tabsir.net. It is being republished here with the permission of the author). Here he summarizes some individual and institutional positions on the use of astronomical calculations for the Islamic calendar. See Part 1 of the article here.

The Reform of the Islamic Calendar: Part 2

Khalid Chraibi

The legal opinion of Qadi Shakir
Egyptian qadi Ahmad Muhammad Shakir (who was to become President of the Egyptian Supreme Court of the Shariah at the end of his career, and who remains to this day an author of reference in the field of hadith) (9), wrote a lengthy legal opinion in 1939 on the subject of the Islamic calendar, entitled : “The beginning of Arab months… is it legal to determine it using astronomical calculations?”. (2) According to him, the Messenger took into account the fact that the Muslim community of his time was “illiterate, not knowing how to write nor how to count”. So, he recommended to its members to observe the new moon to carry out their religious duties at the time of fasting and hajj. But the community evolved considerably over time, and some of its members even became experts in astronomy.

According to the principle of Muslim law which states that “a rule is no longer applicable, when the factor which justified its existence has disappeared”, the Messenger’s recommendation didn’t apply anymore to the Muslims, after they had learned to read and count and had ceased being illiterate. Therefore, according to Shakir, contemporary ulama’ commit an error of interpretation when they give to the Messenger’s hadith the same interpretation that applied at the time of Revelation, as if the hadith prescribed immutable rules. But, it has stopped being applicable to the Muslim community long ago, based on the principles of the shari’ah themselves.

Furthermore, Shakir refers to the principle of Muslim law according to which “what is relative cannot refute what is absolute, nor can it be preferred to it, according to the consensus of the ulamas.” The observation of the new moon with the naked eye is relative, and can be the subject of error, whereas the knowledge of the beginning of lunar months, based on astronomical calculations, is absolute, and belongs to the domain of certainty.

Shakir reaches the conclusion that there is nothing in the shari’ah which opposes the use of calculations to determine the beginning of all lunar months, in all circumstances, and not only in special situations, as had been recommended by some ulama’. For him, there can exist only one lunar month applicable in all countries of the world, based on astronomical calculations. The use of the same pre-calculated calendar in all Muslim countries will give them an opportunity to celebrate all major Islamic events on the same day, throughout the world, thereby increasing their feeling of solidarity and unity.

In the 73 years since their publication, Shakir’s conclusions have not been refuted by any Muslim jurist. As a man of law, and as an expert on hadith, he continues to be highly considered by his peers, long after his death. (9) Thus, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the well-known theologian and jurist, has lavishly praised Shakir in a 2004 article entitled “Astronomical calculations and determination of the beginning of months” in which he expressed his full support to qadi Shakir’s conclusions. (3)

Paradoxes
In the process of analyzing this topic, one’s attention is unavoidably drawn to the many paradoxes which exist in the situation, and which have to be confronted if one is to make some progress in dealing with the issues. Thus:

a) The Islamic calendar based on the observation of the new moon is only used in contemporary Muslim societies to determine the dates associated with religious celebrations. To meet all their other needs, Muslims around the world have used, for many centuries, the Gregorian calendar, based on astronomical calculations, without the slightest apprehension that they might thereby be violating religious prescriptions.

Why would it be licit for Muslims (including ulama’) to use the Gregorian calendar based on astronomical calculations to meet all their needs, while the use of the Islamic calendar, based on the same calculations, would be illicit?

b) The same situation can be observed at the level of the Muslim States. For example, Saudi Arabia sees no problem in using the Umm al Qura calendar, based on calculations, for the management of all the administrative and budgetary affairs of the country, while insisting that it would be illicit to use it for the determination of the dates of religious celebrations. On which rules of Shari’ah does this paradoxical proposition base itself?

c) The use by Saudi Arabia of the calendar based on calculations to manage its administrative affairs implies, beyond any doubt, that the lunar calendar based on the monthly observation of the new moon is unfit for such use. So, one must ask oneself: When the Messenger Muhammad referred to the observation of the new moon to determine the beginning of a new lunar month, was it his intention to disconnect the Arab calendar from its astronomical moorings, making it unfit for any practical use? Or did he merely give, at the time of Revelation, an appropriate response to the question put to him, based on the current practices of the Arabs at that time ? In the latter case, shouldn’t this response have been reviewed and adapted to the needs of Muslim societies as they progressed in their scientific, cultural and social environment? Isn’t it time to proceed with this review and adaptation now?

d) Why are the prayer times determined in a lawful shari’ah manner on the basis of astronomical calculations, and yet it is stated that the beginnings of Islamic months cannot be dealt with using the same tools and methods?

Based on all the above considerations, numerous Muslim thinkers and community organizations consider that it is perfectly licit for Muslims to use a calendar based on calculations, in substitution to the calendar based on the monthly observation of the new moon, to determine the beginning of all months. But there remain major differences between them concerning the specifics of the Muslim calendar which could be used as a “global Islamic calendar”, as is clear form the major proposals which were made in this domain in recent years.

The decision of the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA)
The Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) was regularly confronted with the responsibility of telling its Muslim American audience when to start fasting, when to celebrate eid al-fitr, etc. After several years of study of the legal issues involved, it reached a decision, which it announced in August 2006, to use henceforth a pre-calculated Islamic calendar, taking into consideration the sightability of the new moon anywhere on Earth. (4) The decision of the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) combines the theological requirements of the ulama’ with the state of the art in the field of new moon observation. First, it retains the well-known principle of unicity of horizons (matali’) which states that it is sufficient to observe the new moon anywhere on Earth, in order to declare the beginning of a new lunar month, applicable in all areas in which the information is received. (10) Second, it uses the International date line (IDL) or Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) as its conventional point of reference to conduct its analysis.

Based on the maps of sightability of the new moon in the various regions of Earth, which are now regularly prepared by professional astronomers (11), the FCNA reached the conclusion that when the conjunction took place before 12:00 noon (GMT), there was enough time left for the new moon to be seen in numerous areas on Earth where sunset took place long before sunset in North America. Since the criteria of sightability of the new moon were met in these areas, the new moon would be observed (or could have been observed if weather conditions had been adequate) long before sunset in North America.

Therefore, the requirements of sightability of the new moon as set by the shari’ah would be respected, and the new lunar month could begin in North America on sunset of the same day. On the other hand, if the conjunction took place after 12:00 noon GMT, the month would begin in North America on sunset of the following day.

The FCNA decision aroused much interest in many Muslim countries, because it elegantly met the requirements of the traditional interpretation of the shari’ah, while making use of the state-of-the art know-how in the field of astronomy to respond to the needs of the modern age. It was thought that this solution could be applicable in other Muslim countries, and could give them a chance to adopt the same pre-calculated Islamic calendar (prepared on an annual basis, long in advance), in order to fulfill all the religious duties as well as to manage all other tasks.

An international conference was thus held in Morocco, in November 2006, to study the issues involved, with the participation of astronomers from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Iran, Guinea, Libya, Morocco, and the USA. The overwhelming majority of the participants, including Saudi, Egypt, and Iran astronomers agreed that the calendar adopted by Fiqh Council of North America could be used as a Global Islamic Calendar. (12)

A “global Islamic calendar” based on calculations, set to the coordinates of Makkah
But FCNA changed its position in 2007 to align itself on a new decision by the European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR), which used the same parameters as those of the Umm al Qura calendar (7) to determine the beginning of Islamic months. These parameters are as follows : the “conjunction” must take place “before sunset at the coordinates of Makkah” and “moonset must take place after sunset” at the same coordinates. FCNA and ECFR justified the adoption of the new parameters by their desire to help develop a consensus within the Muslim community throughout the world on issues of common interest, among which that of the calendar.

From a methodological point of view, the substitution of the parameters of Umm al Qura calendar to those initially set by FCNA in its August 2006 decision has the following consequences:

• The requirement that the “conjunction” take place “before sunset at the coordinates of Makkah” instead of 12:00 noon GMT, as previously specified by FCNA, adds 3 hours to the time period during which the conjunction will be taken into account. This improves the chances that the first day of the new month will immediately follow the day on which the conjunction takes place.

• But, the requirement that “moonset take place after sunset” at the Makkah coordinates sets an unduly restrictive condition, which didn’t exist in FCNA parameters of 2006. It implies that the new moon will be potentially sightable at Makkah on the evening of the day of conjunction, whereas the FCNA based its reasoning on the fact that the new moon would be potentially sightable “somewhere on Earth”.
According to FCNA, the data of the calendar thus obtained differs only marginally from the data developed using its methodology of August 2006. Concretely, the decisions of FCNA and ECFR had the following results:

• The principle of use of a calendar based on calculations was officially sponsored by religious leaders who are well-known and respected within the Muslim community (2) (3) (13)

• This principle was officially adopted by Islamic organizations whose legitimacy and credibility are unquestionable;

• The Muslim communities in Europe and America were willing to use this calendar to determine the beginning of all months, including those associated with religious events.

1st Ramadan 1433: a case study
Five years after the adoption by the FCNA and ECFR of their important decisions, it is possible to draw the point of the situation, based on the announcements made by the major Muslim States and organizations concerned, on the occasion of the 1st of Ramadan 1433 (July 2012). It shows that there remains major differences between them concerning the properties and technical specifications that a “global Islamic calendar” should have.

Thus, in application of its stated policy, the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) announced early in July 2012, well in advance of the event, that “the first day of Ramadan 1433 will be Friday, July 20, 2012 and Eid al-Fitr on Sunday, August 19, 2012″. The FCNA explained that:

a) it recognized astronomical calculation as an acceptable shar’ia method for determining the beginning of lunar months including the months of Ramadan and Shawwal;
b) it used Makkah al-Mukarrama as a conventional point for the calculations; and
c) it took the position that the conjunction must take place before sunset in Makkah and moon must set after sunset in Makkah. “On the basis of this method the dates of Ramadan and Eidul Fitr for the year 1433 AH are established as follows: 1st of Ramadan will be on Friday, July 20, 2012 ; and 1st of Shawwal will be on Sunday, August 19, 2012.” (14)

But, the Dublin-based European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR) seemed to have changed position, at least momentarily, compared to its 2007 decision. It also announced, well in advance, that the 1st of Ramadan 1433 would be on Friday, July 20, 2012, but explained that this finding was “based on calculation criteria that there must be the possibility of crescent sighting by naked eye or telescope on any place on Earth. To accept the possibility of crescent sighting in any place on Earth the following conditions must exist :
a) The moon must set after sunset in the place where sighting is possible
b) The elevation of the crescent must be at least 5 degrees
c) The elongation distance between the sun and moon must be at least 8 degrees.” (15)

In contrast, Saudi Arabia continued to claim its officially stated, but hard to verify, policy of relying exclusively on sighting to determine the dates of religious observances. Thus, on the evening of Thursday, July 19, 2012 the Saudi authorities announced that the new moon had been observed and that the fast of Ramadan would start on Friday, July 20. The Saudi statement contradicted astronomers’ announcement in moonsighting websites worldwide that it would be impossible to observe the new moon in the Middle East region on the evening of Thursday, July 19. (15) However, based on the Saudi announcement, some 69 countries and Muslim communities worldwide began the fast of Ramadan on Friday, July 20. This represented a historical record in the number of Muslim countries which began fasting on the same date. (15)

For their part, the major Muslim associations of France also announced that the 1st of Ramadan 1433 would be on Friday, July 20, 2012 using a calendar based on astronomical calculations, taking into account the criteria of the possibility of crescent sighting in any place on Earth. (16)

Turkish Muslims in Asia Minor and several Muslim communities in Eastern Europe and elsewhere also began their fast of Ramadan 1433 on Friday, July 20, 2012, basing themselves on the Islamic calendar of Turkey, which is calculated several years in advance (currently up to 1437 AH/2015 CE) by the Turkish Presidency of Religious Affairs (Diyanet Isleri Baskanligi). (17) Since 1 Muharrem 1400 AH (21 November 1979) the computed Turkish lunar calendar is based on the following rule: “The lunar month is assumed to begin on the evening when, within some region of the terrestrial globe, the computed centre of the lunar crescent at local sunset is more than 5° above the local horizon and (geocentrically) more than 8° from the Sun.” (18)

One can draw the following conclusions from the 1st Ramadan 1433 illustration:
a) the use of a Muslim lunar calendar based on calculations is steadily gaining grounds, particularly within the Muslim communities of North America and Western Europe. But there are still important differences as to which new lunar calendar to use, as witnessed by the different methodologies used by FCNA, ECFR, the Muslim associations of France and Turkish Muslims;
b) the number of States claiming to follow the leadership of Saudi Arabia in the matter of the date of religious observances is growing at a considerable rate;
c) Saudi Arabia’s strategy and objectives in the matter of determination of the lunar months associated with religious observances continue to be puzzling for the observer. The Saudi authorities regularly announce the observation of a new moon on dates when professional astronomers state that such sighting was impossible. They use the Umm al Qura calendar (which is based on astronomical calculations) for civil and administrative purposes, but quite regularly advance or postpone the weekday on which falls the 1st of the month associated with religious observances, for unexplained reasons. (7)

These changes decrease the credibility and value of the Umm al Qura calendar as an astronomical calendar that the Muslim community could use, worldwide, leading Muslim communities in North America and Europe to draw their own Muslim astronomical calendar.

The ritual confrontation between tradition and modernity
On the basis of what has been said, it is clear that the Muslim calendar based on the monthly observation of the new moon with the naked eye cannot perform the functions expected of a calendar. It is of no use to manage long-term activities, to anticipate, plan and organize in advance everything that must be done. These weaknesses stand out even more clearly when each State and Muslim community around the world conducts its own individual monthly observation of the new moon, resulting in a range of calendars which present conflicting data for the same day from one country to another.
But, a lunar calendar based on calculations can meet all the needs of Muslims in the world, just as well as the Gregorian calendar they currently use. The only problem concerns the determination of the parameters that would be acceptable to all potential users of the calendar, to turn it into a “global Islamic calendar”. The FCNA and the ECFR presented, in this respect, two basic versions of such a calendar, both equally valid. They deserve to be studied with the greatest care.

Following in the steps of Qadi Shakir, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, and the leaders of the FCNA and the ECFR, a new generation of Muslim thinkers see no religious barrier to the adoption of such a calendar. At present, they represent only a minority of people, when compared to the entire Muslim population of the world, and are mostly located in North America, Europe and some North African countries. But, their views are gaining ground, with the support of some distinguished thinkers, political and social leaders, jurists and theologians who are influential in the Muslim world.

Will this Muslim minority be able to convert to its thinking the vast majority of those who, today, continue to uphold the practice of the monthly observation of the new moon? Or, will the latter remain faithfully on the side of the fundamentalist movements which, today more than ever, vigorously preach the respect of orthodoxy and tradition in religious matters? In these early years of the 21st century, the calendar based on calculations thus becomes, in its turn, a stake in the ritual, recurrent political confrontation between those who defend tradition and those who wish to promote modernity in Muslim societies.

Footnotes
(9) Ahmad Muhammad Shakir: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Muhammad_Shakir
(10) Abi al-Fayd Ahmad al-Ghomari: Tawjih alandhar litaw-hidi almouslimin fi assawmi wal iftar (In order to unify the Muslims when they start and end the fast of Ramadan), 160p, 1960, Dar al bayareq, Beyrouth, 2nd ed. 1999
(11) http://www.moonsighting.com/
(12) http://www.moonsighting.com/1427zhj.html
(13) Zulfikar Ali Shah: ‘The astronomical calculations: a fiqhi discussion’
(14) Fiqh Council of North America: http://fiqhcouncil.org/ Announcements - Ramadan & Eid Mubarak 1433 (2012):
• Ramadan 1433 AH:
• The Astronomical New Moon is on July 19, 2012 (Thursday) at 4:24 Universal Time (7:24 a.m. Makkah time). Sunset at Makkah on July 19 is at 7:05 p.m., while moonset is at 7:11 p.m. Moon is born before sunset in Makkah and moonset is after sunset. Therefore first day of Ramadan is Friday, July 20.
• Eid ul-Fitr 1433 AH:
• The Astronomical New Moon is on August 17, 2012 (Friday) at 15:54 Universal Time (6:54 p.m. Makkah time). On Friday, August 17, sunset at Makkah is 6:49 p.m. and moonset is 6:30 p.m. Moon is born after sunset in Makkah and moon sets before sunset. On Saturday, August 18 , sunset at Makkah is 6:49 p.m. and moonset is at 7:11 p.m. Moon is born 24 hours before sunset, while moonset is after sunset. Therefore, first day of Shawwal, i.e., Eid ul-Fitr is Sunday, August 19.
(15) European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR) announcement: http://www.moonsighting.com/1433rmd.html
(16) Conseil Français du Culte Musulman (CFCM): Ramadan moubarak http://oumma.com/13434/ramadan-moubarak and Nidhal Guessoum: Quel sera le premier jour du mois de Ramadan 2012 ? (On which date will Ramadan 2012 begin) ? http://oummatv.tv/13306/sera-premier-jour-mois-de-ramadan
(17) http://www.diyanet.gov.tr/turkish/dy/default.aspx
(18) Robert Harry van Gent: The Islamic calendar of Turkey http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/islam/diyanetcalendar.htm

References:

Helmer Aslaksen: The Islamic calendar 
Methods used by countries for determining the beginning of Islamic months : http://moonsighting.com/methods.html
Moonsighting.com: Selected articles on the Islamic calendar
Islamic Crescent’s Observation Project (ICOP): http://www.icoproject.org/ Selected articles on the Islamic calendar in Arabic 
Mohamed Odeh: The actual Saudi dating system 
Karim Meziane et Nidhal Guessoum: La visibilité du croissant lunaire et le ramadan, La Recherche n° 316, janvier 1999, pp. 66-71
Nidhal Guessoum, Mohamed el Atabi and Karim Meziane : Ithbat acchouhour alhilaliya wa mouchkilate attawqiti alislami (Establishing the lunar months and the problem of keeping time in Islam), 152 p., Dar attali’a, Beyrouth, 2nd ed., 1997
Different proposals for the reform of the Islamic calendar: http://moonsighting.com/calendar.html
A video by Dr.Muzammil Siddiqi on “Fiqh Council of North America about using astronomical calculations to affirm the month of Ramadan”: http://www.islamicity.com/islamitv/?ref=5919
An Article on Sighting and Calculations by Dr. Muneer Fareed
A video by Dr. Jamal Badawi on “To see or not to see: the Moon Sighting controversy in Islam”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzLqHyQ8l9U
A video by Javed Ghamidi: http://www.meezan.tv/videos/928/the-issues-regarding-moon-sighting
A video by Dr. Tahirul Qadri: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZ8ieVBlE6g 

Read More »

The issue of Islamic calendar comes up every year around the time of Ramadan and/or the two Eids. On Irtiqa Nidhal Guessoum had this post a little over a year ago: Islam and Astronomy: The tug-of-war continues and another one earlier this year: Important progress on the Islamic calendar problem. And then just a couple of months ago, I had a post about the confusion about Eid in Pakistan: Strife amongst  maulvis give astronomers a rare opening in Pakistan.

We have a guest post here on Irtiqa on this particular topic. It was originally published at Tabsir.net, but it is being republished here with the permission of the author. I think it is an important issue and it is great to see progress being made in this direction (though it is only a matter of time when the dispute will only be about what astronomical marker to use rather than whether we should use calculations. And these discussions will pave the way for that).

Here is the first part of the article. Read part 2 of the article here.

The Reform of the Islamic Calendar: Part 1

by Khalid Chraibi

Shortcomings of the Islamic calendar
A calendar associates a specific date with each day of any given week, month or year, to enable people to manage all their activities over an extended period of time. They must be able to anticipate, plan and organize in advance, using the information provided by the calendar, everything that they need to do. But, in Muslim societies, people wait to see, each country for itself, the appearance of the new moon at the end of each lunar month, before they declare the beginning of a new lunar month. As a result:
- the information in the Islamic calendar does not extend beyond the current month;
- and the data it shows each month differs from one Muslim country to another.
For instance, the first day of Ramadan 1427 corresponded to Saturday, September 23, 2006 in 20 countries ; Sunday, September 24 in 46 countries ; and Monday, September 25 in 5 countries. (1) This situation is in no way unusual, but can be observed every month.

Because of these shortcomings, after the major Muslim countries were occupied by foreign powers in the 19th and 20th centuries, Muslim people started using the Gregorian calendar to meet all their needs, and only care about determining Islamic dates on momentous Islamic religious occasions.
But, to this day, they regularly get puzzled at the inability of the Islamic calendar to predict precisely, well in advance, the day on which major Islamic events such as the first day of Ramadan, or eid al-fitr, or eid al-adha, or the first day of the new Islamic year are to take place. They may even get annoyed because they cannot arrange in advance such ordinary things as taking a few days off from work on such occasions, making hotel bookings or flight reservations, or avoiding to take business or trip commitments on such dates.

The Islamic calendar only lost its usefulness when it got disconnected from its astronomical, conceptual and methodological moorings, early in the 7th century, based on Muslim theologians’ interpretation of a celebrated hadith of the Messenger on how to determine the first day of Ramadan. It could fulfill all the basic functions of a calendar, and meet all the needs of modern man, within the Muslim community, on a worldwide basis, if it were prepared using the applicable scientific concepts, methods and parameters developed in astronomy.

Qadi Ahmad Shakir, President of the Egyptian Supreme Court of the Shari’ah, explained in an important 1939 study of the issues that there was absolutely no obstacle, on the theological level, to the establishment of such an Islamic calendar, using astronomical calculations. (2) In 2004, jurist Yusuf al-Qaradawi announced his full support to Shakir’s analysis and conclusions. (3) For its part, the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA), acting independently, presented in 2006 an ingenious, well thought-out methodology which permits the adoption of a pre-calculated calendar, while meeting all the traditional requirements of the Shari’ah (4).

Since then, a number of representative organizations of the Muslim communities in North America and Europe announced that they would henceforth use a calendar based on astronomical calculations to determine all the dates associated with the Islamic calendar, in substitution to the traditional method of observing the appearance of the new moon at the end of each lunar month to determine the first day of the following month.

Astronomical considerations
The lunar calendar is based on a year of 12 months adding up to 354.37 days. Each lunar month begins at the time of the monthly “conjunction”, when the Moon is located on a straight line between the Earth and the Sun. The month is defined as the average duration of a rotation of the Moon around the Earth (29.53 days). From an astronomical point of view, lunar months do not have a duration of 30 days and 29 days in sequence. There are at times short series of 29 days and short series of 30 days, as illustrated by the following sequence of the duration of 24 lunar months in the period 2007-2008 : « 30, 29, 30, 29, 29, 30, 29, 29, 30, 30, 29, 30, 30, 30, 29, 30, 29, 29, 30, 29, 29, 30, 29, 30. »

The astronomers set the convention, over two thousands years ago, that months of 30 days and 29 days would succeed each other, adding up over two successive months to 59 full days. This left only a small monthly variation of 44 minutes to account for, which added up to a total of 24 hours (i.e. the equivalent of one full day) in 2.73 years. To settle accounts, it was sufficient to add one day every three years to the lunar calendar, in the same way that one adds one day to the Gregorian calendar, every four years. The lunar calendar based on calculations can thus be established very precisely, on an annual basis, long in advance, with identical monthly data for the whole Earth.

A calendar disconnected from its astronomical moorings
In pre-Islamic Arabia, the Bedouin were used to observing the position of the stars at night, to guide them in their travels through the desert, and to observe the appearance of the new moon to determine the beginning of months. When the Companions of the Messenger asked him about how they should determine the beginning and end of the month of fasting (Ramadan), he told them, in line with the well-established habits of the Arabs, to begin fasting with the appearance of the new moon ( the evening of 29th day of the month of Sha’baan) and to stop fasting with the appearance of the new moon (of the month Shawal). “If the crescent is not visible (due to clouds) count up to 30 days.”

However, the new moon typically becomes visible only some 17 hours after the “conjunction”, and only subject to the existence of favorable conditions including such factors as the site where the observation is carried out, the number of hours since the conjunction, the relative positions of the sun, the moon and the observer, the angle with the sun at sunset, the altitude of the moon at sunset, atmospheric conditions at the site of observation (pollution, humidity, air temperature, altitude), the detection limit of the human eye, etc …

If the “conjunction” occurs early in the day, the new moon may be visible on the same evening, after sunset, in specific regions of Earth where the appropriate favorable observation conditions are met. From one month to the next, these favorable conditions exist in different areas of the globe. Otherwise, beginning with the second night after the “conjunction,” the new moon will be observed easily enough in many regions of Earth. Thus, various States and communities in the Muslim world often begin the new lunar month on different days, with a delay of 24 hours from each other during the 48 hours following the “conjunction”.

Clearly, a calendar which depends on the observation of the new moon, at the end of each lunar month, to determine the beginning of the new month, cannot be of any use to plan activities beyond the current month.

Rigorous rules to reduce uncertainties and drifts
Early astronomers who converted to Islam (and in their wake Muslim jurists) knew that the length of the lunar month was between 29 days and 30 days, whether measured between two “conjunctions” or between two observations of the new moon, as the Messenger had emphasized in various hadiths. (5) As far as they were concerned, the beginning and duration of lunar months were independent of the presence or absence of observers and of the visibility conditions of the new moon in various Earth regions. The first sighting of the new moon anywhere on Earth set the beginning date of each lunar month for the whole Earth (and the duration of each month between two new moons was the same for all regions of Earth).

But, though these principles were conceptually easy to understand, they were difficult to put into practice. Indeed, once the new moon had been reliably observed somewhere, how was this information to be brought to the attention of populations living over extended geographic areas, or even in very remote areas (as illustrated by the distance between Spain and Arabia, for example)? To which communities did such an information apply, as a rule of law, and they had to draw from it all its implications (such as to start fasting, or to celebrate the end of Ramadan, etc.)?

Muslim theologians/jurists in the early days of Islam gave a wide range of practical answers to these difficult questions. One can draw from them a core of fundamental principles, which continue to be of great interest today:

(1) The observation of the new moon can be taken into account only by the communities which receive the information.

(2) The observation of the new moon in Eastern countries marks, from a theoretical standpoint, the beginning of the new month for all countries located to the west of the site of observation. This is so because, as the age of the new moon increases between the time of its birth (at the “conjunction”) and its first setting, the possibility of observing it improves. Thus, going from East to West, from Mecca to Casablanca, for example, the age of the new moon increases by 3 hours between the times of sunset in Saudi Arabia and Morocco.

(3) An observation of the new moon must be considered void, when reported before the conjunction has occurred.

(4) In general, given the difficulties of communication between Muslim communities over extended geographic settings, the population of each country must implement the decision of the national authorities concerning the beginning of lunar months.

Today, only the latter principle is scrupulously respected in the Muslim world. As a result, because of the multiplication of States and Muslim communities around the world, the same beginning of month is sometimes shelled out like a rosary in successive days in different countries. Thus, “Eid al Fitr,” corresponding to 1 Shawal 1429, was celebrated in 5 different days around the world: in 1 country on 29 September 2008, in 19 countries on September 30, in 25 countries on 1 October, in 5 countries on October 2, and 1 community on October 3.

Such a drift in the Muslim calendar is contrary to Reason. Nor, would it be possible if the first three principles outlined above were respected. This is the thesis developed in 1965 by Allal El Fassi, an ‘alim (jurist) of the University Qarawiyine of Fez (Morocco) and Moroccan Minister of Islamic Affairs, in a report on “the beginning of lunar months” he prepared at the request of King Hassan II. (6) According to him, if a consensus could be reached on the application in Muslim countries of the first three principles above, such a “return to the sources of Islamic law” could provide a strong basis and impetus for the unification of the dates of religious celebrations across the Muslim world. Thus, the first sighting of the new moon anywhere on Earth should be confirmed by the appropriate Muslim authorities at the site of observation and, using modern communication technologies, should be quickly brought to the attention of the competent authorities of all States and Muslim communities around the world. The latter would have the responsibility to spread the information in their respective territories.

Diversified sets of rules to determine the beginning of lunar months
But, contrary to el Fassi’s recommendations, things became even more complicated as more independent States began specifying new rules and procedures to determine, each one for itself, the beginning of lunar months. Thus, Saudi Arabia bases itself on the monthly observation, by the naked eye, of the new moon to declare the beginning of months associated with religious celebrations (Ramadan, Eid al Fitr, Dhul Hijja, etc.). Specialized commissions have the responsibility, on such occasions, to search for the new moon in the sky. The High Judicial Council of Saudi Arabia bases itself on the result of their observations to determine the beginning of the new month. In India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Oman, Morocco, Nigeria, Trinidad, etc.., the observation of the new moon must be certified by a qadi (judge) or an official specialized commission. In Egypt, the new month begins after conjunction, when the new moon sets at least 5 minutes after sunset.

In Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei, the new month begins after the conjunction, when the age of the new moon is more than 8 h, the altitude <2 and="and" elongation="elongation"> 3 °. It begins in Turkey, after the conjunction, when the new moon forms an angle of at least 8 ° with the sun, at an altitude of at least 5 °. In Libya, under the former Gaddafi regime, the new month began when the conjunction occured before dawn (”fajr”), local time.

The study of specific cases shows, however, that there is a significant gap between the rules that the various States say they apply and what they do in practice.

Is it licit for Muslims to use a calendar based on calculations?
The Qur’an prohibits nowhere the use of astronomical calculations for the establishment of a pre-calculated calendar. The procedure is therefore perfectly and undisputably licit. Numerous theologians in the early years of Islam saw no contradiction between the Messenger’s teachings and the use of astronomical calculations to determine the beginnings of lunar months. (5) The dynasty of Fatimids in Egypt used a pre-calculated calendar over a period of two centuries, between the 10th and 12th centuries, before a change of political regime reactivated the procedure of observation of the new moon.
But the majority of Muslim theologians insist nowadays that, no matter what, one can’t go against the Messenger’s teachings. They interpret his recommendation concerning the observation of Ramadan’s new moon as if it were part of the fundamental Islamic dogma. It would be utterly wrong, in their view, to use a calendar based on the conjunction, because one would start fasting, end fasting, and celebrate all other important Islamic events about two days earlier than would be the case if the procedure of observation of the new moon were applied.

The argument, however, is hardly convincing when confronted with the facts of the situation. Thus, “a study of 42 reports of sightings of the Ramaḍān new moon, as announced by the Supreme Judicial Council of Saudi Arabia (Majlis al-Qadā’ al-A‘lā) between 1962 to 2001 (1381 AH to 1422 AH), confirms that more than half of these were too early and based on false sightings (Kordi, 2003). Most of these false sightings were probably caused by a bright star or planet (such as Venus) or an airplane contrail viewed near to the western horizon.” (7)

The report of erroneous sightings is not peculiar to Saudi Arabia but is observed in most other Muslim countries studied. The authorities in these countries base themselves on such false sightings to announce the beginning or the end of the fast of Ramadan and other major religious celebrations, even when the reported sightings are in contradiction with the well-publicized astronomical facts of the situation.
In any case, in the view of many Islamic thinkers, the Messenger’s recommendation to the faithful should not be confused with the acts of worship. It was merely adapted to the culture of the times. (6) One should also note that, during long periods of Islamic history, the hadith under discussion was not interpreted to mean the visual observation of a new moon, but only the acquisition of information, according to credible sources, that the month had begun. Thus, one doesn’t have to see the new moon for himself in order to start the fast of Ramadan. He merely needs to learn of the event from credible sources, such as the local authorities. This opens entirely different vistas in the discussion of this question. (6)

As for the hadith of the Messenger according to which the Bedouins can neither write nor count, and must thus avoid using (astronomical) calculations, Ibn Taymiya observes that the argument may have been justified at the beginning of the 7th century, but he questions whether it could still apply to Muslims centuries later, after they had been at the vanguard of development of scientific knowledge, including in the field of astronomy.

The Saudi authorities hold a dual position on this subject. They say they rely exclusively on the sighting of the new moon to determine the dates of all religious celebrations. But they use the Umm al Qura calendar (which is prepared based on calculations) to manage all year-long the administrative and budgetary affairs of the country. (7) Sheikh Abdul Muhsen Al-Obaikan, a Councilor in the Ministry of Justice of Saudi Arabia, is clearly favourable to the use of modern technology to determine the beginning of months. He says “Using the naked eye to determine the beginning and end of Ramadan is primitive in an age of modern science and technology. There is no other way to put it. It’s pure backwardness.” (8)

Parts of the essay appeared on SaudiDebate.com (5 September 2007) and Tabsir.net (23 July 2008). I wish to express my deep appreciation to Ms. Rachida Benchemsi and Messrs Said Branine, Mark Huband, Daniel Martin Varisco and Khalid Shaukat. Any errors of fact or interpretation are solely mine.

Read part 2 of the article here.

(1) http://www.moonsighting.com/1427rmd.html
(2) Ahmad Shakir: « The beginning of arab months … is it legal to determine it using astronomical calculations? ». (published in arabic in 1939) reproduced in the arab daily « al-madina », 13 october 2006 (n° 15878):
http://ahmadmuhammadshakir.blogspot.com/
(3) Yusuf al-Qaradawi: « Astronomical calculations and determination of the beginning of months » (in arabic) : http://www.scribd.com/doc/102861247/Qaradawi-Astronomical-Calculations-and-the-Islamic-Calendar-in-Arabic
(4) Fiqh Council of North America: http://www.moonsighting.com/calendar.html
(5) Abderrahman al-Haj: “The faqih, the politician and the determination of lunar months ” (in Arabic):
http://www.scribd.com/doc/102861233/al-Haj-Le-theologien-le-politicien-et-le-debut-des-mois-lunaires-10-10-2004
(6) Allal el Fassi: “Al-jawab assahih wannass-hi al-khaliss ‘an nazilati fas wama yata’allaqo bimabda-i acchouhouri al-islamiyati al-arabiyah” (The true answer […] concerning the beginning of Islamic Arabic months), report prepared at the request of King Hassan II of Morocco, Rabat, 1965 (36 p.), with no indication of editor
(7) Robert Harry Van Gent: “The Umm-al-Qura calendar of Saudi Arabia” http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/islam/ummalqura.htm
(8) Anver Saad: “The Untold Story of Ramadhan Moon Sighting” Daily Muslims, October 07, 2005 : http://www.scribd.com/doc/102861269/Saad-Untold-Story-of-Ramadhan-Moon-Sighting-Oct-07-2005

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I will be participating in a discussion over Islam and Evolution on Boston University campus this coming Wednesday (Oct 24th). The event is organized by American Islamic Congress and its Project Nur (they had another event in Iowa this past April on Cosmology and Islam. Also see this post). I'm excited about the event. The panel is fantastic - so I hope this will be a lively session.

If you live in or near the Boston area, come to the program.

Here is the full announcement:

Reconciling Muslim Tradition and the Theory of Evolution 

Time: Wednesday October 24, 2012 6:00 pm
Venue: Boston University Photonics Center Colloquium Room
Address:  8 Saint Mary’s Street, 9^th Floor, Boston, MA 02215
Halal food will be served. 

To reserve your free ticket, click here. 

The fascinating dialogue between science and Christianity has gone on for centuries. But we seldom hear a public debate on intersection of Islam and science. That is why American Islamic Congress and Project Nur have launched a groundbreaking series of public dialogues to illuminate the relationships Muslims have with the sciences.
This fall’s dialogue at Boston University will focus on one of the most contentious issues in the field – evolution. Top scholars from across the sciences will meet to explore how men and women of Muslim backgrounds reconcile evolutionary theory with scripture, theology, and personal belief – or whether they do so at all. 

Keynote: Salman Hameed, Associate Professor of Integrated Sciences and Humanites at Hampshire College and Director of the Center for the Study of Science in Muslim Societies 

Panelists: Ehab Abouheif, Research Chair in Evolutionary Developmental Biology and Principal Investigator, Abouheif Lab, McGill University; Rana Dajani, Assistant Professor of Molecular Biology and Director, Centre for Studies, Hashemite University; Omar Sultan Haque, Postdoctoral Fellow, Psychology, Harvard University and Psychiatry and Law, Harvard Medical School, and Co-Director, UNESCO Chair in Bioethics, American Unit.

In addition, Elise Burton from Harvard University will be moderating the session.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

It is pretty cool that Noah Gordon's historical novel, The Physician, is being turned into a film. And Ben Kingsley will be playing Ibn-Sina. Too bad Anthony Quinn isn't alive. For a long time, he used to be the go-to ethnic guy in Hollywood. In particular, he played a fascinating historical trilogy of Muslim characters in Lawrence of Arabia (a hot-headed tribal leader Auda Abu Tayi), The Message (Hamza - uncle of the Prophet) and Lion of the Desert (Omar Mukhtar - the Libyan rebel who fought against the Italians in the early 20th century).

Ben Kingsley has played a number of "ethnic characters" in his long acting career. Of course, his most famous role is of playing Gandhi, but he also played an Iranian in a pretty decent film, House of Sand and Fog. But more recently, he played Al Jazari in a short film (about 13 minutes) for the exhibit 1001 Inventions.



So I guess, the transition to Ibn Sina may not be that difficult. Here is the news item:

Ben Kingsley, Stellan Skarsgard and Tom Payne have signed up for "The Physician," UFA Cinema's adaptation of Noah Gordon's bestseller about a medieval healer who travels from England to Persia to study medicine. 

Directed by Philipp Stoelzl ("Young Goethe in Love") from a script by Jan Berger, the film begins production in June in Morocco and Germany. 

"The Physician" tells the story of Rob Cole, a penniless orphan in an 11th-century English mining town who journeys to Persia to study medicine under Ibn Sina, the philosopher-scientist known as the "doctor of all doctors." 

Payne, the young English actor who most recently appeared in HBO's "Luck," plays the titular protagonist, while Kingsley stars as Ibn Sina. Skarsgard, who currently appears in "The Avengers," plays Barber, Rob's first mentor. The pic also features French thesp Olivier Martinez as the Persian shah. 

"The novel is not only a great adventure revealing the fascinating world of medieval medicine," said Stoelzl, "it also explores some of life's big questions -- about the meaning of death, whether religion is a liberating force or a prison of the mind, and the culture clash between East and West -- all topics that concern us more than ever today."
Published in 1986, "The Physician" has sold more than 21 million copies worldwide.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Here is the video of a talk I gave this past January at the Tech Museum in San Jose, California. The title is a bit misleading as it is hard to fully express the diversity of Muslim views on science and evolution. However, my goal here was to use the title to hit home the point on cultural and social plurality of the Muslim world. I actually enjoyed the format here - lecture for the first half an hour and then a conversation with host Angie Coiro. I think Angie was absolutely terrific and covered a lot of territory in her questions - ranging from evolution acceptance to Muslim freethinkers (on the last topic, also see the recent post on Radical Enlightenment and its connection to Islam).

Here is the video of the talk:

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Here is a fascinating talk by Jonathan Israel about how Radical Enlightenment scholars viewed Islam. First of all, he cautions against considering the Enlightenment as a unified movement. He includes Voltaire, Locke, Hume, and Motesquieu in Moderate Enlightenment while Spinoza, Bayle, and Diderot as part of Radical Enlightenment. The latter was mostly underground in the 18th century but its ideas included not only a fundamental primacy of reason, but it also called for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of conscious, and considered democracy as the best form of government.

What is interesting is that these Radical Enlightenment scholars looked up to medieval Muslim freethinkers, and considered Islam to be a tolerant and progressive religion. These connections were sometimes accurate and deep, and sometimes not - but it gives a broader sense of how these set of scholars viewed Islam. About 40 minutes into the lecture, Jonathan Israel talks about the references to al-Warraq, al-Rawandi, and al-Razi and also about the positive perception of Ibn-Rushd. In addition, he suggests that al-Arabi's sufi ideas of unity may have inspired pan-theistic philosophies in the 17th century (for Spinoza?). Here is an illustration from 1727 by Bernart Picart for an encyclopedia of comparative religions - the first of its kind, and note that the person at the front-right is a Muslim scholar, depicted in a positive light (the first few minutes of the lecture are dedicated to this image):

Also, check out the last couple of minutes of the lecture video. In answering one of the questions, Israel once again draws a line between moderate and radical Enlightenments. While Voltaire, Hume etc. were okay with racism and an the basic imperial ideas, much of the values of the modern world have been shaped by this underground movement of the 18th century.

Here is the video of the talk (Sorry - I can't embed it): The Islamic World and the Radical Enlightenment: Toleration, Freethinking and Personal Liberty by Jonathan Israel.

Also, the Warburg Institute is hosting a series of talks this month on the theme of Islam and the Enlightenment. Here is the schedule:

Thursday 3 May, 6.15 - 7.45 p.m.Jan Loop (The Warburg Institute), Islam and the Enlightenment. An introduction.
Wednesday 9 May, 4.15 - 5.45 p.m.Rolando Minuti (Florence), Islam in Montesquieu’s writings and thought.
Monday 14 May, 4.15 - 5.45 p.m.Jonathan Israel (Princeton), An Islamic Radical Enlightenment? The Philosophes and their perceptions of the Arabic world.
Thursday 17 May, 6.15 - 7.45 p.m.Maurits van den Boogert (Leiden), Sir James Porter (1710–1776) and his 'Observations on the Religion, Law, Government, and Manners of the Turks' (1768)
Tuesday 29 May, 6.15 - 7.45 p.m.Simon Mills (Cambridge), Joseph White (1745-1814) and Arabic Studies in eighteenth-century England.

This is very cool! Hope there are videos of these talks.

Read More »

This is a weekly post by Nidhal Guessoum (see his earlier posts here). Nidhal is an astrophysicist and Professor of Physics at American University of Sharjah and is the author of Islam's Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science.

A panel event titled “Creation of the Universe: Qur’anic Concepts and Scientific Theories” was organized this past Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at the University of Iowa. This was put together by the American Islamic Congress and the Nur Project, which is conducting a ‘Science & Islam’ series of panels over the next couple of years.

This first event gathered Salman Hameed and John Farrell as panelists, Ali Hasan as moderator, and me as “keynote speaker”. Dr. Hasan is a professor of philosophy at the University of Iowa; he specializes in epistemology but clearly has solid interest and knowledge in science topics in relation to philosophy and theology/Islam. John Farrell is a writer and producer working in Boston; he is the author of ‘The Day Without Yesterday: Lemaître, Einstein and the Birth of Modern Cosmology’ (which I’ve reviewed here at Irtiqa); his blog, Progressive Download, I highly recommend.

The main objective of the panel, at least from what could be gathered from the event’s brochure, was: “to understand interpretations in the Islamic tradition as it regards the creation of the universe and where this interpretation conflicts or is compatible with concurred theories on the birth of the universe from the scientific perspective.” A related idea was: “Exploring where the strongest harmony and serious tensions between scientific cosmology and Islam lie.” There was also the question of “Qur’anic cosmological descriptions and their relative accuracy from the scientific perspective”, and of course the role of God in cosmology, from both the scientific perspective and the theological/Islamic viewpoint.

In my talk, I attempted to emphasize the following main points:

• Cosmology used to consist of myths describing the world around us, its origin, and our place in it; it invariably put the earth and humanity at the center of everything; cosmology used to be part of philosophy and theology, or “culture” more generally.

• Modern Cosmology, which has only existed for a century or so, has turned the subject into a scientific discipline; it is now able to describe with great precision not only the history of the universe but its content (although some aspects, e.g. dark matter and dark energy, are still a matter of ongoing research); the main point is: cosmology is now part of science.

• What place then for theology/Islam or even philosophy? Here I argued that although cosmology is produced by science, humans still need to construct a “worldview”, which cannot violate or disagree with the scientific findings, but which interpretation can be open to fit one’s philosophy or theology; in particular, it can be theistic or materialistic. I gave examples of how contemporary thinkers have taken one route or another in this way.

• What “cosmology” can one draw from the Qur’an? Actually, one must talk of a Qur’anic “worldview”, not “cosmology”, as argued in the previous point. And here, looking at various Qur’anic verses, I drew the following conclusions: a) the Qur’an always relates the cosmos to God; b) it uses the ‘Argument from Design’ quite repeatedly, either in its old formulation or in its more modern (fine-tuning) formulation; c) several Muslim thinkers have insisted that the Qur’an uses an ‘Argument of Providence’ (that humans have been particularly well taken care of through the creation of the cosmos and the various objects and phenomena therein, what I call an “ultra-anthropic principle); d) the Qur’an seems to be formulated for humans, as it keeps referring to Earth (“the heavens and the earth”) in a particular way.

•  What constraints and challenges does modern cosmology pose to theology/Islam? Here I argued that cosmology forces us to construct a theology which must take the following ideas into account: a) the staggering size and age of the universe; b) the fine-tuning of the cosmos (design? centrality of life, intelligence, and consciousness? multiverse? are we one among zillions?); c) the discovery/confirmation that other earths/worlds are more than common in the universe and perhaps other species too (are we just one “unimportant” planet/world?)

Salman followed up with his own views on the subject, which I’ll let him summarize. John Farrell recalled that Lemaitre, the father of the Big Bang, was both a first-rate scientist and a catholic priest, and it was interesting to see that he was very clear that one should not be tempted to find confirmation in science for one’s theology: in particular, he resisted the pope’s explicit identification of the Big Bang with the Genesis story.

A good discussion followed, particularly since a number of philosophers (Dr. Hasan’s colleagues and students) were in the audience. The questions revolved around the fine-tuning issue, as well as around the extent to which one could take scientific results from cosmology as definite, and the role and place of theology in constructing a worldview around cosmology.

Read More »