Detailed Abstract
Purpose of the Study:
The present study aims to examine and analyze Yousofi Ashkevari’s position regarding the hypothesis of the evolution of species. Similar to some of his predecessors, he adopts this hypothesis as a definitive conclusion—rather than a mere possibility—in an attempt to reconcile science and religion. This is despite the fact that most contemporary Qur’anic exegetes maintain that even if, hypothetically, science were to prove the theory of evolution in the future, such a proof would never conflict with revealed doctrines. What renders Ashkevari’s acceptance of this hypothesis problematic is his personal and inaccurate interpretation of certain Qur’anic verses and parts of the first sermon of Nahj al Balāghah. Accordingly, the central concern of this study is to evaluate and critique his claims on the basis of both transmitted (naqlī) and rational (ʿaqlī) evidence. By engaging with the exegetical opinions of several contemporary scholars—particularly ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī—the author seeks to demonstrate the inadequacy of Ashkevari’s personal interpretations.
Methodology:
The methodology employed in this study is descriptive analytical. The author first presents Ashkevari’s arguments, as articulated in his book Re reading the Story of Creation, without initially engaging in evaluative judgment. This is followed by a critical analysis based on the exegetical perspectives of contemporary commentators. It is worth noting that the critique is not confined to transmitted evidence; rather, the author also utilizes philosophical arguments—such as the principle of imkān al ashraf (the possibility of the nobler)—to evaluate Ashkevari’s assertions. Furthermore, by drawing on the scientific analyses of several scholars who share similar intellectual orientations, the study demonstrates that the evolution of species, as proposed by Ashkevari, lacks the essential characteristics of a scientific theory and is therefore unfounded.
Findings:
The findings indicate that the claim of lacking any rational or textual basis for the independent creation of humankind from clay is untenable, and that considerable scriptural and rational evidence contradicts such a claim. Moreover, the near explicit (ẓuhūr qarīb bi l naṣṣ) import of several textual sources—including the clarity of Qur’an 3:59—affirms the independent creation of humanity, contrary to the position endorsed by Ashkevari. It is evident that the theory of evolution remains probabilistic and non definitive; therefore, the apparent meaning of Qur’anic verses that reject the evolutionary development of species does not constitute a genuine instance of conflict between religion and science. According to Ṭabāṭabāʾī, the claim that Qur’anic descriptions of human creation are merely metaphorical or allegorical in reference to biological evolution is, for three reasons—linguistic foundations, the misapplication of the Qur’an’s metaphorical method to the example rather than what is exemplified, and the near explicit nature of the verses—devoid of substantiation and unsupported by both internal and external textual evidence. Additionally, the philosophical principle of imkān al ashraf stands in conflict with the unproven hypothesis of the transformation and evolution of species.
Conclusion:
Drawing upon both the transmitted and rational arguments of Ṭabāṭabāʾī, and based on the epistemic authority of Qur’anic outward meanings (ẓawāhir), this study upholds the principle that the apparent meaning of any speaker’s words constitutes valid evidence for the listener, unless an unequivocal counter proof establishes otherwise. Once such decisive evidence is demonstrated, the outward meaning loses its evidentiary status; this is in contrast to explicit texts (naṣṣ), which admit no possibility of contrary interpretation. Consequently, the evidentiary force of the Qur’an’s apparent statements affirming the independent creation of humanity—as relied upon by ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī—remains valid in the absence of any definitive contrary proof. Yet Ashkevari asserts the certainty of the evolutionary hypothesis solely on the basis of two or three Qur’anic verses and a passage from the first sermon of Nahj al Balāghah. It is evident, however, that claiming certainty in a matter as significant as the evolution of species—an issue requiring comprehensive interdisciplinary research—is methodologically and scientifically untenable.