Albatta, bu to'g'ri. Qur'on fan darsligi emas. Lekin ba'zi musulmonlar bu da'voni bildirganlarida, ular aslida boshqacha narsani nazarda tutadilar.
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.
Yuqorida ko‘rib o‘tganimizdek, ba’zi musulmonlar ilm bilan Qur’onning mos kelishini haddan tashqari ta’kidlaydi va ilm bilan Qur’on hech qachon ziddiyatga bormaydi, deb da’vo qiladi. Boshqa tomondan, “Qur’on ilm darsligi emas” deb e’lon qiluvchi musulmonlarning ayrimlari Qur’on (va umuman din) butun olam haqida hech narsa demaydi, degan fikrni anglatmoqchi bo‘ladi. Biolog Stiven Jey Gould ishlatgan atama bilan aytganda, bunday musulmonlar ilm va dinni “o‘zaro kesishmaydigan magisteriyalar”, ya’ni alohida va ajralgan vakolat hamda qo‘llanish sohalari deb hisoblaydi. Boshqacha aytganda, ilmning vakolati atrofimizdagi dunyo haqidagi savollarga javob berishda, dinning vakolati esa axloq, ruhoniyat va “hammasining ma’nosi” haqidagi savollarga javob berishda bo‘ladi, va ikkalasi bir-birining ishiga aralashmasligi kerak.
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.
Bu, biroq, Qur'on borasida noto'g'ri tavsif, chunki Qur'on bizni o'rab turgan dunyo haqida keng gapiradi. Qur'on zamonaviy ilmiy tilni ishlatmasligi rost. Shunga qaram, Qur'on dunyo va tarix haqidagi bayonotlarga to'la ekanligini inkor etib bo'lmaydi. Ayrim namunalar:
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 Dovud, Termiziy.
35. Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi.
1. Koinotning yaratilganligi.
1. The createdness of the universe.
2. Farishtalarning mavjudligi va dunyodagi faoliyati.
2. The existence of Angels and their activity in the world.
3. Jinlarning mavjudligi va dunyodagi faoliyati.
3. The existence of Jinn and their activity in the world.
4. Ong (ruh)ning jismsiz va miyasiz mavjud bo‘la olishi (boshqacha aytganda, moddiy bo‘lmagan ruhning mavjudligi).
4. The ability for consciousness to exist without a body or brain (in other words, the existence of the immaterial soul).
5. Organizmlarning o'limdan va tana chirishidan keyin tirilishi.
5. The resurrection of organisms after death and bodily decomposition.
6. Jannat va Jahannamning mavjudligi.
6. The existence of Heaven and Hell.
7. Isro va Me'roj.
7. The Night Journey and Ascension.
8. Payg'ambarlarning turli mu'jizalari (masalan, oyning ikkiga bo'linishi, dengizning yorilishi, o'liklarni tiriltirish va boshqalar).
8. The various prophetic miracles (e.g., splitting of the moon, parting of the sea, raising the dead, etc.).
9. Ayrim kishilarning g‘ayrioddiy uzoq umr ko‘rishi (masalan, Nuh va g‘ordagi yigitlar) [29:14, 18:11].
9. The extraordinarily long lives of certain persons (e.g., Nuh, the youth of the cave) [29:14, 18:11].
10. Yuce Allohning Arshi va Kursisi.
10. The Throne and Footstool of the Almighty.
1. Yetti osmon (masalan, [65.12] va boshqa ko'plab oyatlar).
11. The seven heavens (e.g., [65.12] and many others).
12. Osmonlar, yer va tog'lar amanatni, ya'ni axloqiy ishonchni rad etishi [33:72].
12. The rejection of the amana, or moral trust, by the heavens, earth, and mountains [33:72].
13. Rabbiylariga hamd bilan tasbeh aytayotgan mavjudotlar va payg'ambarlar bilan muloqot qilayotgan mavjudotlar.
13. The creatures singing praises of their Lord and communicating with prophets.
14. Adam alayhissalomning jannatda yaratilishi.
14. The creation of Adam in Paradise.
15. Sulaymonning qobiliyatlari.
15. The capabilities of Sulayman.
16. Sehr (sehrgarlik) va “ko‘z tegishi”ning mavjudligi. 17. Qabrda hayotning mavjudligi.
16. The existence of Magic and the “Evil Eye.” 17. The existence of life in the grave.
18. Xudo tomonidan tavba qilmagan jinoyatkorligi uchun ayrim xalqlarning halok etilishi.
18. The annihilation of certain peoples by God due to their unrepentant criminality.
19. Barakaning haqiqati, ya'ni baraka yoki muqaddaslik.
19. The reality of barakah, or blessing/sanctity.
Ushbu misollar zamonaviy fan va tarix bilan farq qilishi uchun ataylab tanlangan. Shuni ta'kidlash kerakki, Qur'onning ko'plab oyatlarida yomg'ir yog'ishi, inson embrionining rivojlanishi, osmon jismlarining harakati kabi kundalik hodisalar ham zikr qilinadi.
These examples were deliberately chosen to contrast with modern science and history. It should be noted that many verses in the Quran also mention everyday phenomena like rainfall, the development of the human embryo, the movement of celestial bodies, etc.
Bu oyatlarni va ularga o'xshash boshqa ko'plab oyatlarni o'qib, ilmiy asrda yashayotgan musulmonlar qanday xulosaga kelishlari kerak? Oddiy o'qilganda ilmiy bilimlarga zid keladigan bu oyatlarning hammasi faqat axloqiy yoki ruhiy ma'no uchun mo'ljallangan rang-barang metafora va ertaklarmi? (Ko'pchilik musulmonlar bunday deb o'ylamasligiga umid qilaman.) Yoki bu oyatlarning hammasi mo'jizalarga va al-G'ayb ya'ni "Ko'rinmas"ga taalluqlimi va shuning uchun fan hamda empirik bilim doirasidan tashqarida qolasizmi? Yoki bularning qandaydir aralashmasimi?
Reading these verses and many others like them, what should Muslims living in this scientific age conclude? Are all these verses — all of which, on a plain reading, conflict with modern science — just colorful metaphors and fables intended to be understood purely for their moral/spiritual import? (Hopefully most Muslims do not believe this.) Or, perhaps, all these verses refer to miracles and/or the Ghayb (i.e., “Unseen”) and, therefore, remain outside the domain of science and empirical knowledge? Or some combination thereof?
Aniq aytish kerakki, sanab o‘tilgan narsalarning hammasi ham "mo‘jizaviy" toifasiga kirmaydi. Shuningdek, hammasi ham ghayb (yashirin, ko‘zga ko‘rinmas narsalar) degan keng ma’noga kiradimi, degan savol tug‘iladi. Zamonaviy musulmonlar orasida keng tarqalgan qarash shundan iboratki, ghaybning chegaralari aynan empirik fanning chegaralariga to‘liq mos keladi. Bu esa, barcha ilmlar o‘z sohalarida mustaqil ekanligi haqidagi keng qabul qilingan e’tiqod nuqtai nazaridan, juda qulay ko‘rinadi.
Clearly, not all listed things fall under the heading of “miraculous.” And, it is questionable whether everything falls under the broad heading of the Ghayb. It is a common assumption among modern Muslims that the boundaries demarcating the Ghayb perfectly coincide with the limits of empirical science, which is all too convenient given the overarching belief in non-overlapping magisteria.
Boshqacha qilib aytganda, klassik islomiy "g'ayb" ("ko'zga ko'rinmas") va "hiss" (taxminan, "sezilib turadigan") tushunchalari, masalan, zamonaviy G'arb tushunchalari bo'lgan "empirik" va "ilmiy kuzatuv" bilan mukammal mos kelishi juda ajoyib tasodif bo'lardi. Masalan, Xiggs bozonidagi kabi subatomik zarralar jinlar ko'zdan yashiringani kabi g'aybga kiradimi? Albatta, Xiggs bozoni barcha sezgi a'zolarimiz uchun ko'rinmasdir va zarralar kollayderlaridan olingan ma'lumotlar uning mavjudligiga faqat yaqinda ishora qila boshladi. Lekin Xiggs bozonini hech kim ko'rgan emas va, aslida, hech kim ko'rmaydi ham.
To put it another way, it would be an amazing coincidence if the classical Islamic categories of ghayb (“the unseen”) and hiss (roughly, “the perceptible”) for example, perfectly aligned with modern Western notions of the “empirical” and “scientific observation.” For example, would subatomic particles like the Higgs boson be considered part of the Ghayb in the same way that jinn are Unseen? Certainly, the Higgs boson is invisible to all our senses, and only recently has data from particle colliders provided hints of its existence. But, no eye has ever seen the Higgs boson, and, as a matter of fact, no eye ever will.
Bu turdagi mavjudotlarni toifalashdagi qiyinchilik asosiy muammoni ochib beradi. Biz barcha mavjudotlarga bir xilda qo‘llash mumkin bo‘lgan, klassik qarashlarga mos keladigan, shu bilan birga zamonaviy fanni ham o‘z ichiga oladigan izchil toifalash tizimiga ega emasmiz. “Principled” (prinsipial) deb ta’kidlayman, chunki “zamonaviy fan ko‘rmaydigan narsa de facto G‘aybdir” deb shunchaki belgilab qo‘yish hech narsaga arzimaydi. Buning sababi shuki, fan yana bir bor doimiy o‘zgarishda. Bugun fan uchun ko‘rinmas bo‘lgan narsa kelajakda ko‘rinmas bo‘lmasligi mumkin. Shuningdek, biz mavjudotni G‘oyib deb toifalash uning ichki tabiatiga bog‘liq deb o‘ylaymiz, olimlarning ayni paytda o‘z sohasida nima qilayotganiga tasodifan bog‘liq emas-ku! Albatta, men o‘zim bunday toifalash tizimini tuzishga urinmayman va bunga qiziqishim ham yo‘q. Bu ishni malakali ulamolarga qoldirish mumkin.
The difficulty in categorizing such entities is revealing of the underlying problem. We lack a consistent categorization to apply across all entities, a principled categorization that is consistent with classical understandings but also accommodates modern science. I emphasize “principled” because simply stipulating that “whatever is invisible to modern science is de facto Ghayb” is toothless. This is because science, again, is continuously changing. What once was invisible to science may not be in the future. And, we would think that categorizing an entity as Unseen has to do with the inherent nature of the entity itself rather than merely being contingent on what random scientists are doing in their field at any given time! Of course, I would not attempt to formulate such a categorization scheme myself, nor do I have an interest in doing so. We can leave that to qualified theologians.
Shunga qaramay, bizning nazarimizda muhim narsa shuki, Qur'onni o'qiganimizda koinotning asl tabiati haqida ko'p narsa o'rganayotganimizni anglaymiz. Aslida, biz fan bera oladigan narsalardan ancha muhimroq va chuqurroq haqiqatlarni o'rganamiz.
That being said, what I see as important here is that, when we read the Quran, we realize that we are learning a great deal about the fundamental nature of the universe. In fact, we learn much more significant and penetrating facts than science could ever produce.
Mening kuzatishimcha, zamonaviy davrda yashayotgan ko'plab musulmonlar ushbu ro'yxatdagi narsalarning haqiqatini ilm tomonidan tan olingan mavjudotlarning haqiqatini his qilganidek chuqur his qilmaydilar, garchi ikkinchilari ularning kundalik tajribasidan jannat, do'zax, mo'jizalar va boshqalar kabi uzoq bo'lsa ham.
My observation is that, living in modern times, many Muslims do not viscerally feel the reality of the things on this list in the same way they feel the reality of entities acknowledged by science, even when the latter are as far removed from their daily experience as heaven, hell, miracles, etc.
Masalan, ilmiy ma'lumotga ega bo'lmagan, hayotida hech qachon ilmiy maqola o'qimagan, hech qachon ilmiy laboratoriyaga kirmagan, lekin evolyutsiya nazariyasi yoki atomlarning haqiqatiga mutlaq yaqin bilan ishonadigan musulmonlar bor, holbuki farishtalar, jinlar, barzax va boshqalarga nisbatan yaqinlari zaif bo'ladi. Bu yerda maqsad ilm qadrini kamsitish yoki uning qonuniyligini shubha ostiga qo'yish emas. Shunga qaramay, bunday munosabatlarning ummat orasida tobora ko'proq uchrashi zamonaviy musulmon ontologiyasi va epistemologiyasining parchalangan tabiatidan darak beradi.
For example, you have Muslims who have no science education, have never read a scientific paper in their lives, have never been to a science lab, yet have utmost conviction (yaqin) in, say, the theory of evolution or the reality of atoms, while having less than yaqin when it comes to angels, jinn, the barzakh, etc. The aim here is not to impeach the value of science or question its legitimacy. Nonetheless, such attitudes we increasingly find in the Ummah are symptomatic of the fractured nature of modern Muslim ontology and epistemology.
Xulosa nima? Oxir-oqibat, "bir-birini takrorlamaydigan magisteriyalar" degan tushunchadan voz kechishimiz kerak. Ko'rib turganimizdek, Qur'onda koinot va uning qanday ishlashi haqida ulkan miqdordagi bilim mavjud. Biz faqat fan dunyoni tavsiflashga epistemologik vakolatga ega, deb aytgan zahoti, Qur'onda bayon etilgan haqiqatlar ongimizda, bilaturib yoki bilmasdan, ikkinchi o'ringa tushib qoladi va ilm tomonidan tasdiqlangan mavjudotlardan past darajadagi haqiqiylikka ega deb hisoblanadi. Bundan kelib chiqishi mumkin bo'lgan chuqur salbiy ruhiy oqibatlarni tasavvur qilish qiyin emas.
So, what is the takeaway message? Ultimately, we must do away with the notion of non-overlapping magisteria. As we have seen, the Quran contains vasts amount of knowledge regarding the universe and how it works. As soon as we say that only science has the epistemological authority to describe the world in which we live, realities detailed in the Quran wittingly or unwittingly take a back seat in our minds, relegated to a lower level of veridicality than entities sanctioned by science. It is not difficult to imagine the deeply negative spiritual consequences that can result from this.
Amalda, biz Qur'on va Sunnatning vahiy ruhini ichki qabul qilishga intilishimiz kerak. O'qiganimizda, masalan, bizga qarshi faol ravishda fitna va makr uyushtirayotgan shaxs (Iblis) borligini, tog'lar, osmonlar, yer va ulardagi hamma narsa (ya'ni kundalik hayotimizni o'rab turgan, hatto jonsiz va ongsiz ko'rinadigan barcha narsalar) Allohni tasbeh aytib ulug'lashini ({34:10}, {17:44}) yoki boshimizga tushadigan har bir narsa, qanchalik kichik yoki oddiy bo'lmasin, Allohning irodasi bilan sodir bo'lishini ko'rsatadigan oyatlarni o'qiganimizda, bu haqiqatlarni ko'z oldimizda turgandek his qilishga, ya'ni yaqin va ichki ishonchning jonli tuyg'usini shakllantirishga harakat qilishimiz lozim.
Practically speaking, we should personally strive to internalize the revelatory thrust of the Quran (and Sunnah), to cultivate that visceral sense of “realness” and yaqin when we read, for example, that there is a personage actively trying to sabotage and conspire against us (Iblis) or that the mountains, the heavens, the earth, and everything in them (i.e., everything around us in day to day life, even if inanimate and seemingly unconscious) sing the praises of Allah (34:10, 17:44) or that everything that happens to us, no matter how miniscule or quotidian, happens because of Allah’s willing it so.