Yi bincike a Google kan "mu'ujizozin kimiyya a cikin Alkur'ani" zai ba ka miliyoyin sakamako, ciki har da shafukan yanar gizo, bidiyo da hotuna. Ba abin mamaki ba ne cewa, a matsayinmu na Musulmi, muna marmarin ganin an tabbatar da littafinmu mai tsarki ta hanyar tashar ilimi mafi rinjaye a zamanin nan, watau kimiyya. Ga mafi yawan al'ummar duniya, ba tare da la'akari da kabila, asali ko addini ba, kimiyya tana daidai da gaskiya, kuma idan littafin addini yana daga wurin Allah da gaske, to ya kamata ya dace da kimiyya.

Do a Google search on “scientific miracles in the Quran” and you will get millions of results, including web pages, videos, and images. It is not surprising that, as Muslims, we would be keen to have our holy book validated by the dominant epistemic channel of the day, i.e., science. For the vast majority of the world’s population, regardless of race, ethnicity, or creed, science is synonymous with truth, and, if a religious book is truly from God, then it ought to be compatible with science.

Ta wannan hanyar tunani, wane shaida ce mafi bayyana ga asalin Alkur'ani daga wurin Allah fiye da cewa yana ɗauke da ilimin gaba na al'amuran kimiyya waɗanda ba za a iya sani ba shekaru 1400 da suka wuce? Ko da yake wannan yana da kyau kuma yana da ma'ana, ya kamata mu dakata mu share wasu rikice-rikice.

By this reasoning, what clearer evidence could there be of the divine origin of the Quran than the fact that it miraculously contains foreknowledge of scientific matters that could not have been known 1400 years ago? While this sounds appealing and sensible, we should step back and clear up some confusions.

Wasu Musulmi suna ikirarin cewa Alkur'ani yana da cikakkiyar "daidaituwa da kimiyya" a kashi dari bisa dari. Ba abin mamaki ba ne a fahimci dalilin da yasa Musulmi zasu fadi haka. Ana ganin kimiyya a matsayin cikakken wakilci na gaskiyar duniya, kuma Alkur'ani maganar Wanda Ya halicci wannan gaskiyar ne. Saboda haka, bisa dalili, ya kamata a sami cikakkiyar jituwa tsakanin su biyun.

Some Muslims claim that the Quran is 100% “scientifically accurate.” Again, it is easy to understand why Muslims would say this. Science is seen as a perfect representation of reality and the Quran is the speech of the One who created that reality. Therefore, logically, there should be perfect accord between the two.

Matsalar da ke cikin wannan, duk da haka, ita ce kimiyya ba cikakkiyar wakilcin gaskiya ba ce. Ba sai ka zama masanin falsafar postmodernist irin na Kuhn ba don ka yarda da hakan. Ko da al'ummar kimiyya da kanta ta yarda cewa yawancin kimiyya tana da yanayin wucin gadi, ma'ana kimiyya koyaushe tana sabuntawa da ci gaba yayin da ake gano sababbin gaskiya.

The problem with this, however, is that science is not a perfect representation of reality. You do not have to be a Kuhnian postmodernist to accept this. Even the scientific community acknowledges that much of science is provisional in nature, meaning that science is always updating and evolving as new facts are discovered.

Misali, ka'idar kimiyya mafi ƙarfi da muke da ita a yau ita ce Quantum Field Theory (QFT). Duk da haka, masana kimiyyar lissafi sun yi imani cewa QFT ko dai gaba ɗaya ƙarya ce ko, a mafi kyau, kusan-kusan ce kawai ta wata ka'ida mafi cikakkiya kuma mafi daidaito (wadda za ta iya lissafin ƙarfin nauyi).

For example, the most scientifically robust theory we have today is Quantum Field Theory (QFT). Yet, physicists believe that QFT is either completely false or, at best, an imperfect approximation of a more complete, more accurate theory (one that can take into account the force of gravity).

Kadan daga cikin masana kimiyya a yau za su ce suna da cikakkiyar gaskiya a fagen binciken su. (Masana masu bin tafarkin Popper ma na iya cewa kimiyya ba za ta taba sanin gaskiya ba da kashi 100% ba, sai dai kawai ta karyata hasashen da ke gogayya da ita.) A takaice, kimiyya ba ta cika ba, kuma sau da yawa tana kuskure. Abin da masana kimiyya ke dauka a matsayin gaskiya a rana daya, sau da yawa ana kifar da shi washegari.

Few, if any, scientists today would claim that they know the absolute truth in their field of research. (Scientists with a Popperian bent might even say science can never know the truth 100% but only disconfirm competing hypotheses.) In short, science is incomplete, and often it is wrong. What scientists hold as fact one day is often overturned the next.

Wannan gaskiya ne, babu shakka. Al-Qur'ani ba littafin ilimin kimiyya ba ne. Amma idan wasu Musulmi suka yi wannan ikirari, a fakaice suna nufin wani abu daban.

This is true, of course. The Quran is certainly not a science textbook. But, when some Muslims make this claim, they implicitly mean something else.

Kamar yadda muka gani, akwai Musulmai da suke wuce gona da iri wajen nuna cewa kimiyya da Alƙur'ani sun dace da juna, suna cewa kimiyya da Alƙur'ani ba sa taɓa yin karo da juna. A ɗaya ɓangaren kuma, daga cikin Musulmai waɗanda suka bayyana cewa "Alƙur'ani ba littafin koyon kimiyya ba ne," wasu daga cikinsu suna nufin cewa Alƙur'ani (da addini, gabaɗaya) ba shi da abin da zai ce game da duniya baki ɗaya. Domin aro kalmar da masanin halittu Stephen Jay Gould ya yi amfani da ita, waɗannan Musulmai sun yi imani cewa kimiyya da addini suna da "yankuna marasa haɗuwa", watau fagage daban-daban kuma rabe-rabe na iko da aikace-aikace. A wata ma'ana, ikon kimiyya yana cikin amsa tambayoyi game da duniyar da ke kewaye da mu, yayin da ikon addini yana cikin amsa tambayoyi game da ɗabi'a, ruhaniyanci, da "ma'anar komai," kuma babu ɗayansu da ya kamata ya shiga harkar ɗayan.

As we have seen, there are Muslims who overemphasize the compatibility of science and the Quran, claiming that science and the Quran never conflict. On the other hand, of the Muslims who declare that “the Quran is not a science textbook,” some of them mean to say that the Quran (and religion, in general) have nothing to say about the world at large. To borrow the term used by biologist Stephen Jay Gould, these Muslims believe science and religion to occupy “non-overlapping magisteria,” i.e., distinct and separate domains of authority and applicability. In other words, science’s authority lies in answering questions about the world around us while religion’s authority lies in answering questions about morality, spirituality, and the “meaning of it all,” and neither should meddle in the business of the other.

Wannan, duk da haka, kuskure ne game da Alkur'ani saboda dalili guda: Alkur'ani yana magana sosai game da duniyar da ke kewaye da mu. Gaskiya ne cewa Alkur'ani ba ya amfani da harshen kimiyya na zamani. Duk da haka, ba za a iya musantawa ba cewa Alkur'ani cike yake da bayanai game da duniya da tarihi. Ga wasu misalai zababbu:

This, however, is a mischaracterization as far as the Quran is concerned for the simple reason that the Quran speaks about the world around us at length. It is true that the Quran does not use modern scientific language. Nonetheless, it is undeniable that the Quran is replete with statements about the world and history. Some choice examples:

35. Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi.

35. Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi.