IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General > Science & Technology
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - quran and science  What is Islam What is Islam  Donate Donate
  FAQ FAQ  Quran Search Quran Search  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

quran and science

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2122232425 26>
Author
Message
Ron Webb View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar
Male atheist
Joined: 30 January 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2467
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ron Webb Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 January 2015 at 9:16am
Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:

Now that the objective part of the discussion has been cleared that there is no basis to establish anything wrong with the mentioned Quranic verses as 6 months gestation is a fact, for me the crux of the matter is concluded.

For a baby to survive at six months' gestation is a rare exception, not a fact.  The fact is that normal gestation is about nine months, as you know perfectly well.

Quote 1. Instead of stating the obvious, Quran gives a vital information which was not available at its time of revelation, that helps man make a better judgement--even though the quoted tafsirs are self explanatory for those who look for the right cues, it is amazing to note how the Quranic verses here far exceed the normal human wisdom by mentioning a 6 months gestation.

"Normal human wisdom" would be that premature babies sometimes survive, even as early as six months.  What makes you think that wasn't known at the time?

Quote While a 9 months gestation is what usually observed and what a normal human would tend to mention, especially some 1,400 years ago, the Quran here gives a 6 months gestation which then provided for a legal framework to judge the legitimacy of a child and is now an acknowledged fact in modern times.

Except that if six months is the "legal framework", then a woman who gives birth nine months after her husband dies or leaves her could be accused of adultery and stoned to death.

Quote 2. a very careful selection of words to state the facts--this is another amazing characteristic of the Quran that the underlying facts in the Quranic verses are always stated using the best selection of words that it stands the test of time in all circumstances.

A careful selection of words would not leave the impression that six months is the usual period of gestation.
Addeenul �Aql � Religion is intellect.
Back to Top
Quranexplorer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 09 May 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 152
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Quranexplorer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 January 2015 at 9:40am
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

For a baby to survive at six months' gestation is a rare exception, not a fact.� The fact is that normal gestation is about nine months, as you know perfectly well.
Six months gestation not being usual doesn't make it a non-fact. Just refer to the two cases TG quoted where this fact was the basis for the judgement.

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

"Normal human wisdom" would be that premature babies sometimes survive, even as early as six months.� What makes you think that wasn't known at the time?
What makes you think that this was a known fact prior to the Quran? At least the two incidents quoted by TG does not suggest so. If you have an established proof to suggest such knowledge at that time, let's see that.

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Except that if six months is the "legal framework", then a woman who gives birth nine months after her husband dies or leaves her could be accused of adultery and stoned to death.


Can you quote the Quranic verse that gives you this idea and then we can discuss.

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

A careful selection of words would not leave the impression that six months is the usual period of gestation.


"usual" is your version of interpretation and you are free to interpret your way, but that's only your version and not what the Quran says.
Back to Top
TG12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 December 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 1146
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TG12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 January 2015 at 4:14pm
Salaam Alaikum QuranExplorer, and thank you for your response.

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:

Now that the objective part of the discussion has been cleared that there is no basis to establish anything wrong with the mentioned Quranic verses as 6 months gestation is a fact, for me the crux of the matter is concluded.

It is true that the earliest age of viability is during the 6th month, however almost all Muslim scholars and lawmakers interpreted this verse to mean that the minimum age of viability is after 6 months, not during 6 months. In fact, they stated that a child born less than 6 months after marriage is a product of adultery, whereas a child born 6 months or more after marriage is not. We know this is false, as babies have been born less than 6 months after conception.

Why is this a problem? Another part of the Quran states:

4:59

O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.

Since people in authority need to be obeyed, such an erroneous law needs to then be followed also.

Secondly, even if the verse is saying that the 6th month is the minimum period in which a child can be born, it goes on to say that the period of gestation and weaning is 30 months.

Another verse though says that mothers may breastfeed their children for two complete years.

2:233

Mothers may breastfeed their children two complete years for whoever wishes to complete the nursing [period]. Upon the father is the mothers' provision and their clothing according to what is acceptable. No person is charged with more than his capacity. No mother should be harmed through her child, and no father through his child. And upon the [father's] heir is [a duty] like that [of the father]. And if they both desire weaning through mutual consent from both of them and consultation, there is no blame upon either of them. And if you wish to have your children nursed by a substitute, there is no blame upon you as long as you give payment according to what is acceptable. And fear Allah and know that Allah is Seeing of what you do.


Some basic math would show then that 30 months is not not the time of weaning and gestation for most people if the period of suckling is 2 years.
Verse 46:15 should say that the period of gestation and weaning is not 30 months but 33, unless it is addressed to only pre-emies, which I doubt.

46:15

And We have enjoined upon man, to his parents, good treatment. His mother carried him with hardship and gave birth to him with hardship, and his gestation and weaning [period] is thirty months. [He grows] until, when he reaches maturity and reaches [the age of] forty years, he says, "My Lord, enable me to be grateful for Your favor which You have bestowed upon me and upon my parents and to work righteousness of which You will approve and make righteous for me my offspring. Indeed, I have repented to You, and indeed, I am of the Muslims."

The problem remains.


Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


What is remaining is the subjective part where the arguments are mostly based on personal opinions and usually a definitive conclusion is difficult. I would prefer not to waste much time on such discussions as only Allah knows the best, however, Insha Allah I can present my reasons as and when time permits.

Again thanks TG for sharing those tafsirs and commentary. First of all, on a related note, I would like to put to perspective two specific characteristics of the Quran that sets it apart from any of the human works:

1. Instead of stating the obvious, Quran gives a vital information which was not available at its time of revelation, that helps man make a better judgement--even though the quoted tafsirs are self explanatory for those who look for the right cues, it is amazing to note how the Quranic verses here far exceed the normal human wisdom by mentioning a 6 months gestation. While a 9 months gestation is what usually observed and what a normal human would tend to mention, especially some 1,400 years ago, the Quran here gives a 6 months gestation which then provided for a legal framework to judge the legitimacy of a child and is now an acknowledged fact in modern times.

If you read the actual law, you will see that the legal framework is based on the understanding that the minimum period of viability is after 6 months, not during the 6th month.

I find it interesting that two of the four Caliphs misunderstood this verse, especially given that they knew Muhammad and were his companions and fellow fighters. No less interesting how Islamic Law states what they did, that kids born before 6 months have passed are products of adultery, and those born after that time period are not.

Fatwa No : 137526

The minimum term of pregnancy according to the Quran

  Fatwa Date : Rajab 23, 1431 / 5-7-2010

Question

Bismillah Assalaamuu Alaikum warahamatuhlahi wbarakatuh! I am being tediously harassed with this question from the kufar. Can you please send me an answer as soon as possible. "The Koran provides that the length of a normal gestation (pregnancy) is six months (Luqman 31:14; al-Baqarah 2:233; al-Ahqaf 46:15). Luqman 31:14 and al-Baqarah 2:233 provide a nursing period of 24 months. Al-Ahqaf 46:15 provides a total of 30 months for both gestation and nursing combined. This leaves only six months for the period of gestation. We know that this is not true. Normal gestation lasts nine months. Can you explain this error?" May Allah bless you and reward you.

Answer

All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammad %20sallallaahu%20%20`alayhi%20%20wa%20%20sallam%20%28%20may%20%20Allaah%20exalt%20his%20mention%20%29 is His slave and Messenger.

 

What the Quran states that the period of pregnancy is six month is correct and you should not say that it is wrong, because the pregnancy has its maximum period and its minimum period. The maximum period of pregnancy is nine months as it is well-known, and its minimum period is six months. There are some women who give birth when she is only six or seven or eight months pregnant, and the born child lives. Allaah, The Most Exalted and The Most High, clarified to us the minimum period of pregnancy because there are some religious rulings that apply to it, like establishing the lineage of a child or denying it, inheritance, divorce, the waiting period and the like. Among these issues, is that if a woman gives birth to a child five months after marrying her, then the new-born is not traced back to the husband.

Therefore, it is not permissible to describe what is mentioned in the Quran as being wrong. Rather, what the Quran states that the minimum period of pregnancy is six months is confirmed by modern science, that the fetus may be born at the age of six months and it can live, and this is what is called a premature baby. Moreover, medical evidence proves that the fetus that is born before a full six months period does not live.

Finally, we advise you to avoid debating with the non-Muslims if you do not have enough religious knowledge in to refute their misconceptions.

Allaah Knows best.

http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=137526

The fatwa states clearly that according to religious rulings, children born before a period of 6 full months are not to be traced back to the father, but children born after this time can be. 6 months means after a full 6 month period has passed, not during the 6th month.

We can hopefully agree that, given the scientific knowledge we have today, this is an error. However, this error had been followed for thousands of years.

Did not the Quran's author foresee this could happen when he told the readers to follow him, Muhammad, and those in authority over them?

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


2. a very careful selection of words to state the facts--this is another amazing characteristic of the Quran that the underlying facts in the Quranic verses are always stated using the best selection of words that it stands the test of time in all circumstances.

I mean no offense to you my friend but if the selection of words was so carefully done, how is it that so many Muslims were led into an error because of this verse? How is it possible that "the best selection of words" was not good enough to prevent a major misconception forming, like the one that a child born 6 months after marriage is viable but a child born 6 months before marriage is not?

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


Now coming to my link, I just gave it for a reference to let you know that 6 months gestation is a fact as per modern day knowledge. Now if you have a look at the below two quotes, you can see for yourself that modern knowledge itself gives contradicting information on the minimum gestation--in one place it says "during" 6 months and in another place "after" six months. So which one do you take here for reference?


Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


 
Thank you for sharing. The source states that a baby can be viable at the earliest during the 6th month.That doesn't mean that 6 months is the minimum length of gestation, and two of the Companions of Muhammad who became Caliphs did not understand it that way either. I will cite two tafsirs of this verse, tafsir Ibn Qathir and Maulana Maududi's commentary.[



Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:



Here, it would be useful to know that according to the latest medical research a child needs at least 28 weeks to remain in the mother's womb to be developed and delivered as a living baby. This period amounts to a little more than 6 months. The Islamic law has allowed a concession of about half a month, because a woman's being declared an adulteress and a child's being deprived of lineage is a grave matter, and its gravity demands that maximum period be allowed to save both the mother and the child from its legal consequences. Furthermore, no physician and no judge, not even the pregnant woman herself and the man impregnating her, can know as to when exactly did the conception take place. This thing also demands that a few more days be allowed in determining the minimum Legal period of pregnancy.


The first one, and the reason should be quite obvious.

The second reference came from Maulana Maududi, who lived from 1903 to 1979. He lived before the medical advancements that exist today, and it is very likely that the period of 28 weeks was the minimum.

The first came from a website that is citing a medical dictionary article which I think is safe to assume was written much more currently.

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


However, I won't blame science or medicine for their failure to give an accurate figure as these are things beyond absolute human judgement as you mentioned below. So I won't waste my time on such discussions as "during", "after" etc. unless you can establish a unanimous figure which is impossible in this case. I think the Islamic Law providing about half a month concession here provides the best reasonable way given the element of uncertainty with the exact date of conception.

The half a month concession, according to Islamic law, is a half month from 28 weeks.

Here, it would be useful to know that according to the latest medical research a child needs at least 28 weeks to remain in the mother's womb to be developed and delivered as a living baby. This period amounts to a little more than 6 months. The Islamic law has allowed a concession of about half a month, because a woman's being declared an adulteress and a child's being deprived of lineage is a grave matter, and its gravity demands that maximum period be allowed to save both the mother and the child from its legal consequences. Furthermore, no physician and no judge, not even the pregnant woman herself and the man impregnating her, can know as to when exactly did the conception take place. This thing also demands that a few more days be allowed in determining the minimum Legal period of pregnancy. 

http://englishtafsir.com/Quran/46/index.html#sdfootnote19sym

Ironically, since 28 weeks constitutes a bit more than 6.5 months, Maududi unintentionally stated that the minimum age of viability is 6 months and 3 days, if we are using the lunar calendar.

We know that the Quran states 6 months is the period of gestation (as the total of weaning and gestation is 30 and suckling lasts 2 years). We know that this verse has been interpreted by Muslim scholars and leaders, from Ali and Uthman to even the 21st century, to mean that children born after 6 months are viable and that those who are born before 6 months are not.

Even if the verse is stating that the minimum age of viability is during the 6 month after conception, the problem remains that the Quran's author has told people to obey not only him and Muhammad, but also their rulers. The rulers made a mistake and passed a law that not only is incorrect, but could result in someone falsely being accused of adultery. Muslims are obligated to obey those in authority over them, though.

The fact that this verse has led so many people into a mistake also shows that the Quran is not always very clear, and the "careful selection of words" was not careful enough to stop Muhammad's companions and Muslims after them from going into error.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Here is another point to consider- if gestation + weaning and nursing (2:233 states that nursing is 2 years so 46:15 by weaning means weaning+nursing) is 30 months and gestation is 2 years, that would mean that the only children who are advised to be nursed and weaned for two years are babies who are born 6 months after marriage.


Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

If God is the Quran's author, why would He give advice to parents to nurse for a shorter time than is necessary to provide their children with the best health?


Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


The Quranic verses are very clear. The weaning period is expressly mentioned as 2 years. So there is no question of Quran advising a lower duration.

Yet in the same book there is a verse that states that gestation and weaning is to last 30 months.

Unless you can show evidence that the verse was addressed only to people born during the 6th month after conception, and explain why that would be the case, it looks like the Quran is saying that the period of gestation and weaning for human beings is 30 months.

This could only be the case if people who were born 7 or 8 or 9 or 10 month after conception are suckled for 23 or 22 or 21 or 20 months. If they were breastfed for a full two year period, the period of gestation and weaning would be more than 30 months.

This problem is addressed by Ibn Qathir, when he stated in his tafsir that the only children who need 2 full years of weaning are those who are born after 6 months. He not only said this, but he quoted the origin of this statement. Ibn Abbas, another one of Muhammad's companions.

`Ali bin Mushir narrated to them from Dawud bin Abi Hind, who narrated from `Ikrimah that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said, "When a woman delivers after nine months, the baby will only need twenty-one months of suckling. When she delivers after seven months, the baby will need twenty-three months of suckling. When she delivers after six months, the baby will need two full years of suckling, because Allah says,

﴿وَحَمْلُهُ وَفِصَـلُهُ ثَلاَثُونَ شَهْراً حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغَ أَشُدَّهُ﴾

(and his gestation and weaning is thirty months, till when he attains full strength).'' meaning, he becomes strong, youthful, and attains full ability.

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2042&Itemid=102

Notice that the Quran states that whether to complete or not complete the two year period is up to the parent.

2:233

Mothers may breastfeed their children two complete years for whoever wishes to complete the nursing [period]. Upon the father is the mothers' provision and their clothing according to what is acceptable. No person is charged with more than his capacity. No mother should be harmed through her child, and no father through his child. And upon the [father's] heir is [a duty] like that [of the father]. And if they both desire weaning through mutual consent from both of them and consultation, there is no blame upon either of them. And if you wish to have your children nursed by a substitute, there is no blame upon you as long as you give payment according to what is acceptable. And fear Allah and know that Allah is Seeing of what you do.


The nursing period is 2 complete years, but whether or not a mother breastfeeds her kid that long is her choice. Unlike dressing modestly or shunning gambling or alcohol, breastfeeding a child for 2 complete years is not commanded.

In order for the gestation period and weaning period of 30 months to be correct, it is in fact necessary for a child who is born after 9 months (most kids) to be weaned only for 21 months.

Unfortunately, an estimated 800,000 kids die every year in developing countries, because they were not breastfed up to 23 months.

About 800 000 children's lives could be saved every year among children under 5, if all children 0-23 months were optimally breastfed.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs342/en/

Why would God not mention such an important piece of information when He allegedly was giving parenting advice?

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


Now comes the human judgement which is subjective--whether you want to follow something that is expressly mentioned and you know with your reason that is the best thing to do in a situation, or to look for an interpretation which gives you an inferior result.

How can you avoid interpretations if the Quran itself states you are to follow those in authority over you, and they made a law saying that babies who are born 6 months after marriage are products of adultery, and not that the minimum age of viability is during the 6th month?

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


And again the 2 years weaning period mentioned in Quran 1,400 years ago is in perfect agreement with the modern day studies on this subject--more signs for those who wish to think in the right direction!

Yet it contradicts 46:15, which states that weaning + gestation is 30 months. The only way these two verses can be reconciled is if we state that 2 years weaning only applies to children born after 6 months.

Modern day studies by the WHO and the sources I cited in the wikipedia article actually both state it is advisable for weaning to continue for 2 years or more. The wikipedia article shows that in Indonesia and Guinea, children who were breastfed for 3 years were much healthier than those who were not.

Nice debating with you. Looking forward to your response, inshAllah.


Edited by TG12345 - 31 January 2015 at 6:39pm
Back to Top
TG12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 December 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 1146
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TG12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 January 2015 at 4:34pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:

Now that the objective part of the discussion has been cleared that there is no basis to establish anything wrong with the mentioned Quranic verses as 6 months gestation is a fact, for me the crux of the matter is concluded.

For a baby to survive at six months' gestation is a rare exception, not a fact.  The fact is that normal gestation is about nine months, as you know perfectly well.

Quote 1. Instead of stating the obvious, Quran gives a vital information which was not available at its time of revelation, that helps man make a better judgement--even though the quoted tafsirs are self explanatory for those who look for the right cues, it is amazing to note how the Quranic verses here far exceed the normal human wisdom by mentioning a 6 months gestation.

"Normal human wisdom" would be that premature babies sometimes survive, even as early as six months.  What makes you think that wasn't known at the time?

Quote While a 9 months gestation is what usually observed and what a normal human would tend to mention, especially some 1,400 years ago, the Quran here gives a 6 months gestation which then provided for a legal framework to judge the legitimacy of a child and is now an acknowledged fact in modern times.

Except that if six months is the "legal framework", then a woman who gives birth nine months after her husband dies or leaves her could be accused of adultery and stoned to death.

Quote 2. a very careful selection of words to state the facts--this is another amazing characteristic of the Quran that the underlying facts in the Quranic verses are always stated using the best selection of words that it stands the test of time in all circumstances.

A careful selection of words would not leave the impression that six months is the usual period of gestation.


Ron, no offence to you my friend but I think you are misunderstanding the mistake.

The verse doesn't leave the impression that 6 months is the usual period of gestation. The early Muslims didn't think so.

It leaves the impression that the minimum period of viability is 6 months after conception (which would take place no earlier than the wedding night). That is an error, as cases of children born after 5 months shows.

Another error is that 46:15 states that gestation + weaning = 30 months, and 2:233 states that suckling lasts 2 years. This would mean that only children born after the 6th month need 2 years of suckling, most only need 21 months.

Yet reality shows us that in developing countries (most of the world), hundreds of thousands of children die who could have lived had they been breastfed for 2 years or longer.

Take care,
TG12345


Edited by TG12345 - 31 January 2015 at 4:35pm
Back to Top
Quranexplorer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 09 May 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 152
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Quranexplorer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 February 2015 at 3:47am
Salam TG,

To cut the long story short, now that we are clear on the 6 months gestation being a fact as stated in the Quran, your problem is now with the subjective interpretation that the minimum gestation used for a legal framework should be "during 6 months" rather than "after 6 months". Let me give you a reason why "after 6 months" makes more sense for a legal framework:

It is a known fact that the viability of a child born during the 6th month is 50% or less and the % increases with the gestation period. Now if a child is born during the sixth month and survives, there is already a 50% or more chance that the child is a product of adultery. So specifying any gestation period less than 6 full months skews the judgement towards the female. And I'm not sure if it's for the same reason even the US legal systems have used 28 weeks as the usual limit for fetal viability.

Given the above facts, I must say the Islamic interpretation here does a fine balancing within the limitations of human knowledge in a subject where nobody has got a crystal ball to pinpoint an absolute figure.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:



It is true that the earliest age of viability is during the 6th month, however almost all Muslim scholars and lawmakers interpreted this verse to mean that the minimum age of viability is after 6 months, not during 6 months. In fact, they stated that a child born less than 6 months after marriage is a product of adultery, whereas a child born 6 months or more after marriage is not. We know this is false, as babies have been born less than 6 months after conception.Why is this a problem?


So I would say it will be a bad idea to jump to the "right/wrong" conclusions without having the full picture. I can give you an example how I look at these subjective matters:

Consider a time-bound test where you just can't afford to fail. In such a situation, would you try to answer all that you know for sure and pass the test the best way or would you waste time thinking on some instruction that seems confusing to you? The worst part still will be when you come out of the test and see that others have understood things correctly and passed, while you failed miserably.

So I would rather concentrate my energies on things that I know for sure I have to do and I personally see the benefits in my life rather than debating uncertainties.   

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Yet it contradicts 46:15, which states that weaning + gestation is 30 months. The only way these two verses can be reconciled is if we state that 2 years weaning only applies to children born after 6 months.

Modern day studies by the WHO and the sources I cited in the wikipedia article actually both state it is advisable for weaning to continue for 2 years or more. The wikipedia article shows that in Indonesia and Guinea, children who were breastfed for 3 years were much healthier than those who were not.






Again something too subjective to waste time on:

- 2 years weaning period is specifically mentioned in the Quran.
- This is absolutely a personal decision. There is no compulsion.
- And I'll give you the figures from the same wikipedia (Duration of breastfeeding) which will show you the triviality in arguing over 21 or 24 months weaning period when even anything beyond 12 months is considered an extended period in the west!


"As such, their latest figures (2008) show that 76.9% of US women had ever breastfed but only 47.2% were still breastfeeding at six months and 25.5% at twelve months. Figures for exclusive breastfeeding at three months were 36% and at six months only 16.3%.[131]

In many Western countries, however, breastfeeding beyond the age of 1 year old is considered "extended breastfeeding".
"--but you don't see may infant deaths for lack of breastfeeding in western countries!

I fully understand your interest in these subjective discussions, but for me these are just waste of time unless you have something concrete to establish. I know there are many things which are beyond absolute human comprehension and I am fine with it. I try my best to understand these but if they are beyond my capabilities I would say "Allah knows best" rather than wasting time on speculations.

There is a beautiful passage on the "companions of the cave" explaining this concept in Chapter 18. Al-Kahf in the Quran:


And in like manner We disclosed them (to the people of the city) that they might know that the promise of Allah is true, and that, as for the Hour, there is no doubt concerning it. When (the people of the city) disputed of their case among themselves, they said: Build over them a building; their Lord knoweth best concerning them. Those who won their point said: We verily shall build a place of worship over them. (21) (Some) will say: They were three, their dog the fourth, and (some) say: Five, their dog the sixth, guessing at random; and (some) say: Seven, and their dog the eighth. Say (O Muhammad): My Lord is best aware of their number. None knoweth them save a few. So contend not concerning them except with an outward contending, and ask not any of them to pronounce concerning them. (22)

Further there is another beautiful passage on Prophet Musa (pbuh) and Prophet Kidhr (pbuh) in the same chapter which explains the limitation of human knowledge and why it will be wrong to jump to conclusions with your limited knowledge.

Having said that, if you at any point feel that you have a definitive and conclusive proof to establish something wrong in the Quran, give me a shout and In Sha Allah I would be more than happy to clear your misconception.

Edited by Quranexplorer - 06 February 2015 at 7:11am
Back to Top
airmano View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 31 March 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 884
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote airmano Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 February 2015 at 4:56am
QE
Quote I fully understand your interest in these subjective discussions, but for me these are just waste of time unless you have something concrete to establish.
Whenever QE gets cornered (due to a massive lack of arguments) he issues either a hefty "No time to waste on this subject", or he tries to get out by requesting an impossible task in return (like creating an artificial human in order to prove that we don't contain any clay)

Chuckle Point !

Airmano     

Edited by airmano - 07 February 2015 at 5:03am
Back to Top
TG12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 December 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 1146
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TG12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 February 2015 at 9:53am
Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:

Salam TG,

Wa alaikum, QuranExplorer. Thank you for your response.

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


To cut the long story short, now that we are clear on the 6 months gestation being a fact as stated in the Quran, your problem is now with the subjective interpretation that the minimum gestation used for a legal framework should be "during 6 months" rather than "after 6 months". Let me give you a reason why "after 6 months" makes more sense for a legal framework:

It is a known fact that the viability of a child born during the 6th month is 50% or less and the % increases with the gestation period. Now if a child is born during the sixth month and survives, there is already a 50% or more chance that the child is a product of adultery. So specifying any gestation period less than 6 full months skews the judgement towards the female. And I'm not sure if it's for the same reason even the US legal systems have used 28 weeks as the usual limit for fetal viability.

Given the above facts, I must say the Islamic interpretation here does a fine balancing within the limitations of human knowledge in a subject where nobody has got a crystal ball to pinpoint an absolute figure.

There are a few problems I see with your rebuttal.

Firstly, it is not true that the viability of babies born during the 6th month is less than 50%. That applies only to babies born before the 24th week. Babies born after 24 weeks have a 40%-70% chance of survival and babies born after 25 weeks have a 50%-80% chance of survival. Both fall into the category of less than 6 months.

Completed weeks of Gestation at birth 21 and less 22 23 24 25 26 27 30 34
Chance of survival[5] 0% 0-10% 10-35% 40-70% 50-80% 80-90% >90% >95% >98%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_viability

Secondly, you pointed out the US legal system have used 28 weeks as the usual limit for fetal viability. That was perhaps the limit when this law was written, it isn't true anymore.

   Are you putting Islamic law on the same level as secular law? Secular law is from human beings, and needs to be sometimes revised as new knowledge comes up, because it is not perfect. Stating that the age of viability is 28 weeks is a perfect example. What was perhaps correct at a certain point in history is incorrect now. The same actually applies to Islamic law which states that 6 months after marriage is the determining factor as to whether a child that is born belongs to his/her father or mother. Perhaps at a certain point in history, 6 months was the age of viability... though I can guarantee it wasn't when the Quran was written and if you want me to prove why, let me know. However, now we know that a child born less than 6 months after sex (which would certainly happen during the wedding night) is not necessarily a product of adultery. Like American secular law, the Islamic law in regards to this issue proved to be outdated and no longer correct.

Thirdly, what difference does it make even if (which is not the case actually) not kids born during the 6th month have less than 50% chance of survival? The law states that children born within 6 months do not belong to the father. Even one instance of the opposite being true shows that the law is mistaken and not perfect, and needs to be revised in order to avoid a wrong ruling.
 

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:



It is true that the earliest age of viability is during the 6th month, however almost all Muslim scholars and lawmakers interpreted this verse to mean that the minimum age of viability is after 6 months, not during 6 months. In fact, they stated that a child born less than 6 months after marriage is a product of adultery, whereas a child born 6 months or more after marriage is not. We know this is false, as babies have been born less than 6 months after conception.Why is this a problem?

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


So I would say it will be a bad idea to jump to the "right/wrong" conclusions without having the full picture. I can give you an example how I look at these subjective matters:

Consider a time-bound test where you just can't afford to fail. In such a situation, would you try to answer all that you know for sure and pass the test the best way or would you waste time thinking on some instruction that seems confusing to you? The worst part still will be when you come out of the test and see that others have understood things correctly and passed, while you failed miserably.

So I would rather concentrate my energies on things that I know for sure I have to do and I personally see the benefits in my life rather than debating uncertainties.   

If I had a time-bound test that I could not afford to fail, yes, I would do my best with the limited knowledge I have.

However, I am a human being and am very capable of being wrong about something. My ideas, unlike Islamic law, are not derived from the Quran, which you believe to be God's word.

The Quran states that the period of breastfeeding is two years (2:233) and that gestation and weaning last 30 months (46:15). This obviously means that gestation is 6 months.

Of course we know that is false, since gestation is usually not 6 months but 9.

We turn to two of Muhammad's Companions (Ali and Uthman) who legislated from these verses that the minimum period of pregnancy after marriage is 6 months- children born after this time belong to the father and children born within this time do not.

Unfortunately, that turns out to be false also, since children have indeed been born within 6 months and legitimate.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Yet it contradicts 46:15, which states that weaning + gestation is 30 months. The only way these two verses can be reconciled is if we state that 2 years weaning only applies to children born after 6 months.

Modern day studies by the WHO and the sources I cited in the wikipedia article actually both state it is advisable for weaning to continue for 2 years or more. The wikipedia article shows that in Indonesia and Guinea, children who were breastfed for 3 years were much healthier than those who were not.


Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


Again something too subjective to waste time on:

I don't think it's subjective at all. It can determine whether or not a kid dies early in a developing country. Is this something not worth "wasting time" on?

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


- 2 years weaning period is specifically mentioned in the Quran.

Yet it is also stated that the time of weaning and gestation is 30 months.

As Abbas pointed out, this means that only those children who are born at 6 months need 2 years of breastfeeding, others need less.

The only other way that both 46:15 and 2:233 can be true is if 46:15 is only addressed to adults who were born prematurely.

If there is still any confusion, notice that 31:14 states that weaning is in two years.

31:14


And We have enjoined upon man [care] for his parents. His mother carried him, [increasing her] in weakness upon weakness, and his weaning is in two years. Be grateful to Me and to your parents; to Me is the [final] destination.


If weaning is in 2 years, that means that the child is weaned in 2 years or less. In other words, 2 years is set as the maximum time for weaning.

This is confirmed Tafsir Ibn Qathir and also Yusuf Ali's commentary on the Quran.

(and his weaning is in two years) means, after he is born, he is breastfed and weaned within two years

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1791

14.  And We have enjoined on man (to be good) to his parents:

...حَمَلَتْهُ أُمُّهُ وَهْنًا عَلَى وَهْنٍ...

in travail upon travail did his mother bear him,

...وَفِصَالُهُ فِي عَامَيْنِ...

and in years twain was his weaning:

C3596. The set of milk teeth in a human child is completed at the age of two years, which is therefore the natural extreme limit for breast-feeding.

In our artificial life the duration is much less.

http://quran4u.com/Tafsiraya/031luqman.htm

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


- This is absolutely a personal decision. There is no compulsion.

Irrelevant. It is still bad advice to breastfeed your child for less than 2 years, especially in developing countries... countries that make up most of the world's population.

There is no compulsion in North America for a parent to make sure their kids get enough sleep, but a good parent would make sure their child does that, to ensure their well-being.

Imagine what would happen if a pediatrician told a parent that children should get 10 hours of sleep, up to 4 years of age. Imagine also if he pointed out that whether a child gets this much sleep before turning 4 years of age or not, is optional for the parents.
http://www.webmd.com/parenting/guide/sleep-children?page=2

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


- And I'll give you the figures from the same wikipedia (Duration of breastfeeding) which will show you the triviality in arguing over 21 or 24 months weaning period when even anything beyond 12 months is considered an extended period in the west!


"As such, their latest figures (2008) show that 76.9% of US women had ever breastfed but only 47.2% were still breastfeeding at six months and 25.5% at twelve months. Figures for exclusive breastfeeding at three months were 36% and at six months only 16.3%.[131]

In many Western countries, however, breastfeeding beyond the age of 1 year old is considered "extended breastfeeding".
"--but you don't see may infant deaths for lack of breastfeeding in western countries!


You are comparing WHO medical findings of infant mortality rates in developing countries, to opinion polls of women in the West on what is culturally considered to be excessive breastfeeding. Do opinion polls trump medical studies?

You don't see infant deaths for lack of 2 years of breastfeeding in Western countries, but you certainly do in the developing world. WHO recommends that breastfeeding lasts for 2 years or more, and the results of breastfeeding of less of a time that 23 months are very amply demonstrated. Furthermore, it has been also demonstrated that in Indonesia and Guinea, children who were breastfed for 3 years did better than those who were breastfed for less.


Furthermore, even in the West, doctors encourage mothers to keep breastfeeding their children until 2 years of age or more.

AAFP agree with the findings of the WHO, and encourage the support and encouragement of mothers who continue breastfeeding beyond infancy.

The American Academy of Family Physicians recommends that breastfeeding continue throughout the first year of life and that As recommended by the WHO, breastfeeding should ideally continue beyond infancy, but this is not the cultural norm in the United States and requires ongoing support and encouragement. It has been estimated that a natural weaning age for humans is between two and seven years. Family physicians should be knowledgeable regarding the ongoing benefits to the child of extended breastfeeding, including continued immune protection, better social adjustment, and having a sustainable food source in times of emergency. The longer women breastfeed, the greater the decrease in their risk of breast cancer.�

http://kellymom.com/ages/older-infant/ebf-benefits/

Why encourage mothers in the United States to defy the cultural norm and keep breastfeeding for longer than a few months?

The reason is the even in North America, kids who breastfeed less than 2 years are at a disadvantage.

The American Academy of Family Physicians notes that children weaned before two years of age are at increased risk of illness (AAFP 2008).
http://kellymom.com/ages/older-infant/ebf-benefits/


Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


I fully understand your interest in these subjective discussions, but for me these are just waste of time unless you have something concrete to establish. I know there are many things which are beyond absolute human comprehension and I am fine with it. I try my best to understand these but if they are beyond my capabilities I would say "Allah knows best" rather than wasting time on speculations.

There is a beautiful passage on the "companions of the cave" explaining this concept in Chapter 18. Al-Kahf in the Quran:


And in like manner We disclosed them (to the people of the city) that they might know that the promise of Allah is true, and that, as for the Hour, there is no doubt concerning it. When (the people of the city) disputed of their case among themselves, they said: Build over them a building; their Lord knoweth best concerning them. Those who won their point said: We verily shall build a place of worship over them. (21) (Some) will say: They were three, their dog the fourth, and (some) say: Five, their dog the sixth, guessing at random; and (some) say: Seven, and their dog the eighth. Say (O Muhammad): My Lord is best aware of their number. None knoweth them save a few. So contend not concerning them except with an outward contending, and ask not any of them to pronounce concerning them. (22)

Further there is another beautiful passage on Prophet Musa (pbuh) and Prophet Kidhr (pbuh) in the same chapter which explains the limitation of human knowledge and why it will be wrong to jump to conclusions with your limited knowledge.

I agree there are some things beyond human knowledge. I don't see how it applies to this discussion.

Originally posted by Quranexplorer Quranexplorer wrote:


Having said that, if you at any point feel that you have a definitive and conclusive proof to establish something wrong in the Quran, give me a shout and In Sha Allah I would be more than happy to clear your misconception.


I did in this thread, Alhamdullilah.

To restate my points:

46:15 and 2:233 state that the time of gestation for people is 6 months, when we know that the average is 9.

When we look at the exegesis of 46:15 by Ibn Qathir and other scholars and at the laws derived from them by Uthman and Ali, the conclusion is that a child born less than 6 months after marriage does not belong to the father. We know this is false, since children have been born within 6 months of sexual intercourse.

In both cases, there is an error with what the Quran teaches about gestation being 6 months... it is neither the norm or the minimum within which a child is not viable.



2:233 also states that the period of breastfeeding is 2 years, and 23:14 clarifies that children are weaned in 2 years. When we look again at these verses and 46:15, we see that if 30 months is the time of gestation and weaning, then the only children who are to or need to be weaned for 2 full years are premature kids who were born after 6 months. Most need less than 2 years. The average child would only need 21 months of breastfeeding, since 9 + 21 = 30.

However, not only the World Health Organization but also the American Academy of Family Physicians point out that children who breastfeed less than 2 years are at a disadvantage compared to those who breastfeed for that time or longer.

In the United States, kids who are weaned before reaching 2 years of age are at a higher risk of diseases.

In the developing world, an estimated 800,000 children die at an early age because they were not breastfed up to 23 months.


If we are to accept the premise that God is the Quran's author, it raises the question why would He be giving parenting advice that can result in children dying early or having an increased risk of health problems later on in life. It also begs the question why would He set a 6 month minimum on the viability of a child, if children have been born before 6 months and have lived.

Either God doesn't know everything there is to know about taking care of children and pregnancy, or He did not dictate the Quran word for word.

I believe the second scenario is most likely.



Edited by TG12345 - 08 February 2015 at 7:32am
Back to Top
Quranexplorer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 09 May 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 152
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Quranexplorer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 February 2015 at 6:37am
Thanks TG,


I can see a lot of problems with your arguments. First of all you are jumping to definitive conclusions based on some shallow data which fail to represent the full picture.

Specifying a minimum 6 months gestation for a legal framework makes perfect sense based on the following:

1.     Specifying a gestation period less than 6 months will definitely skew the judgement towards the female as explained below:

The legal point you quoted says:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

The following legal injunctions are derived from the three verses when they are read together: The woman who gives birth to a sound and complete child in less than six months after marriage (i.e. in a proper delivery and not abortion) will be declared an adulteress and her child's lineage from her husband will not be established.


The conditions to declare a case of adultery would be a child birth less than 6 months and the child survives and the child is in a sound and complete condition. The below quote from your Wikipedia reference says the incidence of major disabilities remains high for child births less than 6 months which clearly means a less than 50% chance for a �sound and complete� child.


The limit of viability is the gestational age at which a prematurely born fetus/infant has a 50% chance of long-term survival outside its mother's womb. With the support of neonatal intensive care units, the limit of viability in the developed world has declined since 50 years ago, but has remained unchanged in the last 12 years.[8][9] Currently the limit of viability is considered to be around 24 weeks although the incidence of major disabilities remains high at this point.[10][11] Neo-natologists generally would not provide intensive care at 23 weeks, but would from 26 weeks.[12][13]

So even if you argue the viability of a child before 6 months is more than 50% (which is not the case as explained below), when you factor in the �sound and complete child� condition as well, the % goes below 50 which means more than 50% chance of adultery if a child is born before six months and survives and is in sound and complete condition.

2.     I don�t agree that the viability of babies born before 6 months is more than 50% globally:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

There are a few problems I see with your rebuttal.

Firstly, it is not true that the viability of babies born during the 6th month is less than 50%. That applies only to babies born before the 24th week. Babies born after 24 weeks have a 40%-70% chance of survival and babies born after 25 weeks have a 50%-80% chance of survival. Both fall into the category of less than 6 months.


Completed weeks of Gestation at birth     21 and less     22     23     24     25     26     27     30     34
Chance of survival[5]
0%     0-10%     10-35%     40-70%     50-80%     80-90%     >90%     >95%     >98%



Your Wikipedia reference says:

Viability exists as a function of biomedical and technological capacities, which are different in different parts of the world. As a consequence, there is, at the present time, no worldwide, uniform gestational age that defines viability.[3]

With the support of neonatal intensive care units, the limit of viability in the developed world has declined since 50 years ago, but has remained unchanged in the last 12 years.[8][9] Currently the limit of viability is considered to be around 24 weeks although the incidence of major disabilities remains high at this point.[10][11] Neo-natologists generally would not provide intensive care at 23 weeks, but would from 26 weeks.[12][13]


So the data of developed world cannot be applied as a global data without applying the correction factors. Just to give you a feel how these correction factors could vary, just have a look at the infant mortality rates (The infant mortality rate (IMR) is the number of deaths of infants under one year old per 1,000 live births) which gives a representation of the biomedical and technological capabilities. While the global average is 49.4, in US it is 5.2. Even if we take the developed world average to be 10, there is a correction factor of 5 while we apply this to the global stage.

Now, going by this the viability of a baby below 26 weeks at global level could be something around 15%-20%.

Based on the foregoing, I must say the Islamic interpretation here does a fantastic job within the limitations of human knowledge in judging these matters.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Secondly, you pointed out the US legal system have used 28 weeks as the usual limit for fetal viability. That was perhaps the limit when this law was written, it isn't true anymore.

   Are you putting Islamic law on the same level as secular law? Secular law is from human beings, and needs to be sometimes revised as new knowledge comes up, because it is not perfect. Stating that the age of viability is 28 weeks is a perfect example. What was perhaps correct at a certain point in history is incorrect now. The same actually applies to Islamic law which states that 6 months after marriage is the determining factor as to whether a child that is born belongs to his/her father or mother. Perhaps at a certain point in history, 6 months was the age of viability... though I can guarantee it wasn't when the Quran was written and if you want me to prove why, let me know. However, now we know that a child born less than 6 months after sex (which would certainly happen during the wedding night) is not necessarily a product of adultery. Like American secular law, the Islamic law in regards to this issue proved to be outdated and no longer correct.

Thirdly, what difference does it make even if (which is not the case actually) not kids born during the 6th month have less than 50% chance of survival? The law states that children born within 6 months do not belong to the father. Even one instance of the opposite being true shows that the law is mistaken and not perfect, and needs to be revised in order to avoid a wrong ruling.

Here you need a better understanding of the concepts my friend. Allah has given man the guidelines to judge things within the confines of man�s abilities and the human imperfections are already built in to all these systems that men use based on their limited knowledge. So a man following Allah�s guidelines is not immune to human imperfections. Imperfection is a fact of this world and there can be no perfect system in the human domain. The only place where all these apparent imperfections and inequalities will be corrected is on the judgement day. The beauty of Allah�s system is that there is an absolute level of personal responsibility�i.e. you are responsible for all your thoughts, intentions and actions and you are the only one responsible for that�there is no confusion of somebody else taking responsibility for all your mistakes and stuff like that. Coming to the specific case of judging a birth before 6 months, there could be a judgement in this imperfect world, but the true judgement with an absolute establishment of personal responsibility will be done on the judgement day. So a Muslim does not have to really worry about the judgement at all�because his true destination is the hereafter and all imperfections are going to be settled there for eternity.

So there is no point in arguing about the perfection of human judgement under Islamic law.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I don't think it's subjective at all. It can determine whether or not a kid dies early in a developing country. Is this something not worth "wasting time" on?

Coming to breastfeeding I can see lot of contradictory facts from your arguments. I would prefer to get some facts cleared upfront and would appreciate if you can answer the following questions I have in the shortest possible words. Frankly I really have a problem with these long stories:

1.     Infant deaths in the west are comparatively very less�is prevalence of 24 months or longer periods of breastfeeding the sole reason for this?
2.     You argue that lot of infant deaths happen in the developing world�is cutting a max 3 months from the 24 months breast feeding duration the sole reason for this?

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:



Either God doesn't know everything there is to know about taking care of children and pregnancy, or He did not dictate the Quran word for word.

I believe the second scenario is most likely.


Absolutely a personal decision. Whether you want be puffed up with pride and jump to wrong conclusions on things that you can�t really judge based on some shallow data or you would like to humble yourself and appreciate the truth based on the numerous signs that are around.


Edited by Quranexplorer - 14 February 2015 at 8:14am
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2122232425 26>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.