Abstract
A thorough analysis of Muslim reactions to the notion of evolution may be found in Islam and Evolution. It is long overdue and provides a thorough, well-rounded perspective that thoroughly documents the range of contemporary answers to evolution. Even though it approaches the subject of evolution from a Ghazzalian perspective, much of what is written about it has connections to other Islamic theological schools. The book’s open access distribution was made possible by a kind benefactor, which helped make this work on a crucial cross-cultural issue more accessible.
The book itself does not presuppose or call for an understanding of the principles of evolutionary theory. Consequently, the first chapter, “What evolution is and isn’t,” briefly summarizes the key ideas of evolutionary theory starting with Darwin and ends with the discovery of genetics, which made Neo-Darwinism a plausible hypothesis. The author notes that different people interpret evolution differently, but he identifies three main tenets of Neo-Darwinism: (I) the earth was created very long ago (before a literal reading of the Bible would suggest), (II) terrestrial lifeforms share a common ancestor, and (III) natural selection and mutation are the forces driving evolution. This chapter also discusses other issues like whether Charles Darwin was an atheist or common fallacies regarding evolution, such as the notion that humans directly evolved from monkeys.
Christian reactions to evolution are discussed in Chapter 2. This is relevant because, despite some doctrinal differences, Muslim and Christian reactions have occasionally been adopted wholesale and have occasionally impacted one another. Unlike the Christian Bible, for example, a literal reading of the Quran does not require that the cosmos was formed between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago in six literal twenty-four-hour days. The topic of evolution in the Quran and Sunni hadith is covered in Chapter 3, with an emphasis on Adam’s creation and non-human existence. While it is not feasible to be detailed, for the sake of brevity, pertinent features of Quranic verses are explored. This chapter makes it clear that the Quran and hadith seem to portray Adam’s creation as miraculous and him as the ancestor of all humans. As such, a Muslim who desires to make an opposing argument must approach the Quran and hadith in a different way.
Then, Chapter 4 discusses Muslim beliefs on evolution; tellingly, this chapter is longer than the preceding one. Four categories are used by the author to classify Muslim attitudes towards evolution: creationism, human exceptionalism, Adamic exceptionalism, and no exceptions. Each one has a great deal of variability. For example, creationists include both Zakir Naik and Seyyed Hossein Nasr, who oppose evolution by claiming that species are eternal metaphysical archetypes. The claim that evolutionary theory was initially conceived by classical Muslims is refuted in Chapter 5, “Old Texts, New Masks.” The most strident claim made in this chapter is that those who contend that early Muslims accepted evolution are either misguided, apologetic, or utilitarian. Rumi, Ibn Khaldun, al-Jaḥiz, and the Ikhwan al-Ṣafaʾ are the four writers that are examined.
Following this extensive introduction, the book’s last three chapters address the primary metaphysical challenges to evolution in Islamic philosophy. The problems of chance, naturalism, and inefficiency are discussed in Chapter 6. In other words, it does not speak well for God as a designer if humans are the result of an apparently wasteful process of survival of the fittest and are really a happy coincidence. The concepts behind the Christian intelligent design movement—as opposed to the idea of intelligent design in general—are the focus of Chapter 7. The moral issues raised by evolution are discussed in Chapter 8; for example, the principle of survival of the fittest appears to be at odds with the religious precept that people should take care of the weak and disadvantaged. On the other hand, it examines the concept of biological altruism (i.e., morality developed as a result of its advantages for a species’ existence).
Al-Ghazālī's hermeneutics are the focus of the book’s last three chapters, which apply them to the issue of which of the four possibilities (Adamic exceptionalism, creationism, human exceptionalism, or no exceptions), he would have accepted. Naturally, the writer warns that this is only a theoretical exercise, as al-Ghazālī is not a spokesperson for himself. However, it does confine his investigation to predetermined guidelines rather than attempting to investigate every conceivable interpretation of Islam, both historical and contemporary. He concludes that the first three stances (anything aside from a strict, no-exceptions policy) are all consistent with al-Ghazālī's thought after giving careful thought to a number of issues, including reason versus revelation, the creation of Jesus, whether Adam and Eve were said to be in an earthly or heavenly garden, and the decision to remain neutral on an issue lacking evidence (Tawaqquf). But Adamic exceptionalism is what he finds to be the most compatible.
This conclusion has some appeal to me, despite the fact that some Muslims find it offensive since Adamic exceptionalism permits the cohabitation of Adam with other human species and interbreeding between homo sapiens and other human species. First, this is due to the finding that many modern humans still have some genetic material from Neanderthals or Denisovans. It also removes the need to come up with cozy and imaginative explanations for how Adam and Eve’s progeny interbred. Third, while the author only discusses Sunni hadith, Shiʿa hadith do refer to the creation of “Adams” prior to the current human generation. Thus, while opinions may differ, I personally think this result is sufficient. Regardless, the author acknowledges that his finding is provisional. He acknowledges the diversity of the Islamic tradition and the possibility that his reading of al-Ghazālī was incorrect. In addition, his intellectual activity raises unanswered issues like what it is to be a person. However, it appears that humility is the right strategy for addressing an issue about which we are now unable to establish factual assurance. Maybe accurate responses to the evolution hypothesis will come not only with scientific advancements but also with the extinction of modernity’s ideological baggage.
