The First Creation
-
Noooooooooooo. )
First Adam was created from "clay" then his offspring from "seed".
There really is no good explanation for man appearing on earth. One day he was there, and the earliest religion we know, talk of a lifespirit in all living things (animism).
The wildest theory is that of the ancient austronat theorists, who think the human race was engineered, by them. And later paraphrases of this history has been shrunk to "God created man".
Too wild for me.
And then you have the common theory of evolution, who claims that RANDOM mutation, resulted in not only ONE human, but another RANDOM mutation resulted in ANOTHER human of a DIFFERENT sex, and in THE SAME geographic location, and THEM and the OFFSPRING survived in a WILD CLIMATE.
If you think winning in lotto that many times sounds impossible, I guess you are like me.
So this clay origin is left. Which can be more or less presenting the truth in a poetic way.
-
Thank you Pazuzu for this thread as well!!!
-
Like all new hypothesis, this one will take time and reflection to appreciate or evaluate.
However, whatever the outcome of any such study, I think it deserves congratulations. In the long run it does not matter how many errors there may have been in a new hypothesis, but whether from it sound knowledge can be derived or in fact derives. Ideas may be refined and perfected as queries come up in trying to verify it, but there must be first the idea, so one knows what needs to be verified.
May I ask Pazuzu whether it is your idea or you read it or something?
Another thing, there are many places on earth where people have been buried in earth or in pottery in the fetal position.
That I remember that was the usage in Ecuador in acient times, people were given earch inside big earthenware pots.
Salaam
-
The idea of creation of humans from organic soil was a belief held by some muslim scholars and philosophers of Andalusia. Ibn Tufail (born in 1105 near Granada, died in 1185 in Marrakesh) alluded to this theory in his famous story "Hayy ibn Yagdhan".
Verse 71 17 explicitly expresses this idea.It's good to see it revived again.
-
Spain, and I am getting worse and worse with typing, I meant that nothing like being close to ignore one another. I realise that it is a threat to readers the many typing errors that are slipping into my messages. I m bewitched by hadithists, zionists, or plain bastards. This is awful -\ -\ -\ voodoo voodoo
Salaam
-
Peace Pazuzu peace
An interesting thing you've sited isAn even more amazing concept is that the Quran repeatedly mentions that the First Creation is exactly like the Last Creation (?al-nasha?atul akhira?).
The thing that coicides with this is
I view this verse as it can allude to Evolution, as God Almighty is "increased" us in "creation"... like as in perfecting us
-
Rather, Homo Sapiens (modern humans), which in Arabic are denoted by the term insan, evolved, over thousands of years, from more basic and primitive species (not apes), which the Quran calls bashar. And this difference between bashar and insan is the key to understanding the process of creation, which has been hidden from us, on purpose, behind a veil of lies.
- Their messengers said unto them We are but BAHAR like you, but Allah giveth grace unto whom He will of His slaves. It is not ours to bring you a warrant unless by the permission of Allah. In Allah let believers put their trust!
According to your definition Were the messengers and their people primitive species?
-
Almost forgot about this thread.
Nope. That's not it. The messengers were not primitive. But it's very good that you asked. I was expecting this question a long time ago.
Let me explain to you the contexts of the word "bashar".
From a purely phisiological and anatomical perspective, we are all BASHAR. This means, we have physical bodies made of flesh, bone, organs, hair, nerves, etc... In fact, a chimpanzee has all those as well.
This is why, when we go to the university and study at the faculty of "al- tubb al bashari" (meaning the bashari medicine), we are studying our bodies from a purely anatomical perspective.
But when we study HUMANITIES (Arabic insaniyyat), we are talking here about things that only HUMANS have psychology, sociology, law, philosophy.... get it?
The thing is, I have yet to find, in English, a word that is equivalent to the word "bashar" in Arabic. I mean, when you translate it as "human", you are not being accurate. A human is much more than a bashar.
insan = human
bashar = ?I used the word "humanoid" to describe the primitive beings which existed before Adam (the Homo Sapien). I used it simply for lack of a better term
In fact, the word "bashar" comes from the root 'b-sh-r' which means to announce something that is coming / tidings of things to come in the future. And from it is derived the word "bushra", which every Arab speaker can understand.
So, when Allah told the malai'ka that He was going to create a BASHAR from clay, this bashar was like news of something greater to come in the future. Get it?
Now, concerning your excellent question Why / When did the prophets say "we are simply BASHAR like everyone else"?
If you read the context, it is always in one of the following cases
1- Either the people asked Muhamad for supernatural "miracles", so he answers "I am but a BASHAR like you" (meaning from a purely anatomical perspective, he was not a "supernatural being" or one of the malai'ka. He had a body of flesh and blood)
2- Or, Allah wants to show us that His messengers ate food and had mortal bodies. Again, this is from a purely anatomical perspective. They were bashar, whose bodies required sustanence.
Hope that helps...
@ huruf
It was not my idea. It was from a big load of reading I did long ago. What I did was splice everything into one article.
I have always had doubts in my mind concerning this "Evolution VS. Creation Debate"The readings I did pointed out that the Quran had the answer, and that each side of teh argument had one part of the truth. It's a little bit of both.
But I have always believed, even since before I did this reading, that there WERE more primitive species before Adam, and that they were NOT apes. So the question is how were those humanoids spawned?
Well, therr's your answer.
If you have seen the movie Lord of the Rings, and how those big Orcs are spawned directly from the mud, you'll get the picture. I guess Tolkien was onto to something there...Or maybe he doesn't realize just how close to the truth he got.
Peace...
-
The thing is, I have yet to find, in English, a word that is equivalent to the word "bashar" in Arabic. I mean, when you translate it as "human", you are not being accurate. A human is much more than a bashar.
insan = human
bashar = ?Perhaps the nearest technical terms are the ones used in anthropology
Insan Homo Sapiens
Bashar Homo Neanderthalensishttp//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human
-
I remember many years ago I read a book by an Elaine Morgan who upheld that humans evolved in an acuatic medium, for which reason they have the subcutanean layer of fat, and are not hairy as other mamals. It seems that since she was no acknowledged university biologist she was disdainfully treated. I wish I still had that book, but I lent it then and I can't remember much of it, not even the title, just that curious part, which I found really interesting.
May be, besides the book by Ibn Tufail, Pazuzu, you can tell us some of those readings.
Salaam
-
Noooooooooooo.
First Adam was created from "clay" then his offspring from "seed".
There really is no good explanation for man appearing on earth. One day he was there, and the earliest religion we know, talk of a lifespirit in all living things (animism).
The wildest theory is that of the ancient austronat theorists, who think the human race was engineered, by them. And later paraphrases of this history has been shrunk to "God created man".
Too wild for me.
And then you have the common theory of evolution, who claims that RANDOM mutation, resulted in not only ONE human, but another RANDOM mutation resulted in ANOTHER human of a DIFFERENT sex, and in THE SAME geographic location, and THEM and the OFFSPRING survived in a WILD CLIMATE.
If you think winning in lotto that many times sounds impossible, I guess you are like me.
So this clay origin is left. Which can be more or less presenting the truth in a poetic way.
Salam,
That was a very odd and gross way of explaining evolution. Evolution is not a tornado going through a junk yard giving us a Boeing 737. That would be like winning lotto many times over.
@Pazuzu
Your hypothesis is very interesting indeed. However, do you have any evidence for such interpretation ? Or they are just the way you see it ? According to modern science, we started from the earth as simple things and by the passage of time became Humans. But that is based on evidence. Can you share scientific evidence for your hypothesis ? (If you have actually taken it that far as a work)
PEACE be on you
--------------------------- Student of Allah
-
@ Student of Allah
Sorry, I didn't pay attention to this thread.
Are you 100% certain that single-cell organisms which first showed up in the marches and rivers of the Earth BECAME our ancestors?
To answer your question yes, this is teh way I see it. This is how I understood it from the Quran. And I am not the first one to understand it as such. Maybe science will validate this theory many many years in the future (perhaps not in my lifetime or yours).
Peace...
-
@ Student of Allah
Sorry, I didn't pay attention to this thread.
Are you 100% certain that single-cell organisms which first showed up in the marches and rivers of the Earth BECAME our ancestors?
To answer your question yes, this is teh way I see it. This is how I understood it from the Quran. And I am not the first one to understand it as such. Maybe science will validate this theory many many years in the future (perhaps not in my lifetime or yours).
Peace...
Shalom Pazuzu,
I read your posts and enjoy them. It would be nice if you could actually back them up with scientific evidence. Experiments, Observations, test, natural sciences,etc. But I think that is a HUGE thing to undertake. Anyhow, I like reading them.
Study Evolution, its a very simple yet the most powerful theory I ever came across. It wont answer "origin of life" , but how life adapts and natural selection paves the way for the evolution to take place.
Coming to your question about 100% certainty, the answer is NO. I am not really a 100% certain about ANYTHING. Because everyday I learn and the model of reality in my head undergoes change. Sometime I have to discard old ideas for the sake of better understanding of the universe. My life runs by "balance of probabilities". We being the great^zillion grandchild of a snail is more likely to be true than magically materializing or coming out of the earth (from sacs in the earth) as homo-sapiens. The tree of life from different branches of bio-science leaves no space to doubt our ancestral links. And yes, the trees coincide )
About the last part of your post, wouldn't it be nice if science validates all your hypothesis in future ? Keep working on them, if it is the truth, it will be uncovered one day inshallah.
Peace
------------ Student of Allah -
Salaam,
evolution is only partly right, the evolution is not by chance, it by belief, this is why belief is such a powerful and important foundation of the Qur'an and the purpose of life; being correct belief.
If you change your beliefs you physically change you DNA, this is the true mechanism of evolution, evolution through the mind changing the body as a result of new beliefs; and belief is shaped by both environment and experience, not just education.
-
@ Student of Allah
Study Evolution, its a very simple yet the most powerful theory I ever came across. It wont answer "origin of life" , but how life adapts and natural selection paves the way for the evolution to take place
I believe in evolution within the human species. Take this example A group of humans (men and women), are placed in an underground cave, with no access to the surface world or to sunlight, and where they live off of fish in uderground streams, or mushrooms and edible fungi. What do you think will happen to their descendents after 500 years? Do you think they will look like us? Most probably not. Their skin will be pale, and their eyes larger (because they have to adapt to lack of light).
Another example If you take a group of people and force them to live on a cold mountain over 4,000 meters high, their offspring will eventually develop more red blood cells (their faces will have a reddish tint so they can absorb more oxygen, because of the thin atmosphere).
This is something that Allah has put in his creations The ability to adapt to the surroundings and climate, by undergoing gradual physical changes. Even the most hardline creationists accept this fact.
But this does not mean that humans (Homo Sapiens) evolved from apes. They evolved from lesser beings (Neanderthals). As to how these Neanderthals came into being, the Quran has revealed that they sprung forth directly from the earth.
We being the great^zillion grandchild of a snail is more likely to be true than magically materializing or coming out of the earth (from sacs in the earth) as homo-sapiens.
Why? Is it any less far-fetched than the "magic" of birth from the female womb?
I believe early human consciousness was aware that the female womb is like the fertile earth itself, in which the seed is planted (so you see the paralellism?)
The birth from the female womb is no less "magical" than birth from the earth embryo.Of course, it might seem strange to you. The Quran even admits this. It tells us that we did not witness this first stage of creation. This was hundreds of thousands of years before "adam". And in the Era of the Resurrection, the scene of springing from the earth (muddy graves) will be repeated again. This is how the Quran describes it
{So turn away from them; the Day will come when the caller will announce something truly strange * With their eyes humiliated, they come out of the muddy graves like scattered locusts}...
The word which appears in the Arabic text is (nukr) The FM translation rendered it as "great disaster", which is absolutely FALSE. The word "munkar" is derived from "nukr", which means "something strange / uncommon / unfamiliar".
The sight of humans coming out of the earth on the Day of Resurrection is similar to how they were first created, and it is indeed a very strange (nukr) sight, because no-one has ever witnessed it, or seen anything like it.
But the Quran is telling us that it happened, and will happen again. Despite the Quran being a book of faith (not science), it does contain, here and there, some scientific truths.
About the last part of your post, wouldn't it be nice if science validates all your hypothesis in future ?
See, that's the problem with Muslims. They sit on their a$$es doing NOTHING, wait for the "Kafir West" to discover all scientific truths, then they boast "Oh, that's not new! The Quran mentioned it centuries ago!"
Instead of taking the initiative themselves, and letting the Quran LEAD them to the truth, they adopt the passive approach.
Keep working on them, if it is the truth, it will be uncovered one day inshallah.
In order for them to uncover it, they have to start by looking in the right place.
When Allah told Muhamad and his people
{Say "Roam the land and observe how the creation was initiated. Thus Allah will establish the final creation. Allah is capable of all things}...
I don't think Allah meant they had to roam the entire planet. The truths of creation are found in the south western part of Arabia. It is the center of everything.
I would like you to take a look at the following links. I believe now that archeologists are on the verge of making a new discovery that will shake the very foundation of the "Ethiopian Craddle" story.
Please read and ponder on the implications We have always thought humans originated in Ethiopia, then migrated to Arabia some 70,000 years ago.....until they found human artifacts in Oman and the Emirates dating back over 100,000 years, with ZERO evidence of any African origin.
Why Oman and Emirates? Simply because the governments of these two countries are more open to archeological digs than the Saudis and Yemenis.
http//www.livescience.com/17248-arabian-artifacts-humans-africa.html
http//blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/12/out-of-africa-to-out-of-arabia/
http//www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jan/27/stone-tools-human-migration-africa
http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45501635/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/arabian-artifacts-may-rewrite-out-africa-theory/
I believe this is the begining of the end of the "African Origin" story. Inshallah, in our lifetime, the Zionist Saudi and Yemeni regimes will be toppled, and the regions of Western Arabia will be opened to scientists. Only then will the truth of our creation come out.
Peace...
-
Shalom Aleikhom,
I believe in evolution within the human species. Take this example A group of humans (men and women), are placed in an underground cave, with no access to the surface world or to sunlight, and where they live off of fish in uderground streams, or mushrooms and edible fungi. What do you think will happen to their descendents after 500 years? Do you think they will look like us? Most probably not. Their skin will be pale, and their eyes larger (because they have to adapt to lack of light).
Another example If you take a group of people and force them to live on a cold mountain over 4,000 meters high, their offspring will eventually develop more red blood cells (their faces will have a reddish tint so they can absorb more oxygen, because of the thin atmosphere).
This is something that Allah has put in his creations The ability to adapt to the surroundings and climate, by undergoing gradual physical changes. Even the most hardline creationists accept this fact.
But this does not mean that humans (Homo Sapiens) evolved from apes. They evolved from lesser beings (Neanderthals). As to how these Neanderthals came into being, the Quran has revealed that they sprung forth directly from the earth.
My friend, I was not talking about our beliefs. The examples you gave are really nice, they demonstrate that you do understand and recognize that we adapt to changing environments. Not only you, even the "Young Earth Creationists" have to agree and DO agree on "micro evolution". Having said that, one must realize that micro-evolution and macro-evolution are the EXACT same thing only separated by TIME. Let me give you an example
I am sure that you will agree that receiving a penny a day gives you a buck after 100 days. Carry on the process for 2million years, I should be expected to have 7,300,000 bucks !!!
Thus, We don't get to question earning 7,300,000 bucks in 2 million years if we accept that a penny a day gives you a buck every 100 days.
But this does not mean that humans (Homo Sapiens) evolved from apes. They evolved from lesser beings (Neanderthals). As to how these Neanderthals came into being, the Quran has revealed that they sprung forth directly from the earth.
No evolutionist will tell you that. We share common ancestry. Like a "modern CASIO CALCULATOR" shares its roots with "MODERN COMPUTERS". Thus the "tree of life". It is entirely impossible for any ape to give birth to a modern human. But when we give birth, there are ALWAYS mutations, which results in you and your siblings not coming out as identical twins..lol. Generations after generations, adaptability shapes and forms your lineage . Look at a chinese, indian, african, scottish, mexican,etc. You will notice the product of adaptation to environment. Now think about it in terms of MILLIONS of YEARS. Bruce Lee did not come out of Black Parents for sure, but they have common ancestral roots. In the same way, no modern ape is directly evolved from each other, we all share our roots.
About the Highlighted red part, I have not come across any such ideas in the Qur'an.
Why? Is it any less far-fetched than the "magic" of birth from the female womb?
I believe early human consciousness was aware that the female womb is like the fertile earth itself, in which the seed is planted (so you see the paralellism?)
The birth from the female womb is no less "magical" than birth from the earth embryo.Yes it is far fetched. So far fetched that one has Evidence and the other is just a belief. And as I stated before, It is impossible for me to argue with anyone's belief. I can only come to common terms with evidences. The earth embryo hypothesis has no scientific base what so ever. For tonnes of reasons, the earth is incapable of demonstrating such high level of biological activity. If you say that its your belief, the argument ends right there.
Of course, it might seem strange to you. The Quran even admits this. It tells us that we did not witness this first stage of creation. This was hundreds of thousands of years before "adam". And in the Era of the Resurrection, the scene of springing from the earth (muddy graves) will be repeated again. This is how the Quran describes it
{So turn away from them; the Day will come when the caller will announce something truly strange * With their eyes humiliated, they come out of the muddy graves like scattered locusts}...
The word which appears in the Arabic text is (nukr) The FM translation rendered it as "great disaster", which is absolutely FALSE. The word "munkar" is derived from "nukr", which means "something strange / uncommon / unfamiliar".
The sight of humans coming out of the earth on the Day of Resurrection is similar to how they were first created, and it is indeed a very strange (nukr) sight, because no-one has ever witnessed it, or seen anything like it.
But the Quran is telling us that it happened, and will happen again. Despite the Quran being a book of faith (not science), it does contain, here and there, some scientific truths.
I do not see where the Qur'an mentions what you say it does. Whatever happens at the final hour is beyond natural science, so one can not use that to study current world sciences. And I still don't see how this necessitates pre-adam man coming out of "earth wombs" in the past. That is still a hypothesis, I hope you realize that.
See, that's the problem with Muslims. They sit on their a$$es doing NOTHING, wait for the "Kafir West" to discover all scientific truths, then they boast "Oh, that's not new! The Quran mentioned it centuries ago!"
Instead of taking the initiative themselves, and letting the Quran LEAD them to the truth, they adopt the passive approach.
In order for them to uncover it, they have to start by looking in the right place.
Hmm.. finally someone spoke my mind. I agree. The muslim world is still stuck in the 12th century, not only that, they are perfecting their art of living in the 12th century. Their focus is to dress like the thief of baghdad , eat like the arabs, and scream Allahu akhabar when the "Kafirs" confirm any statement of the Qur'an. How dutiful servants of the Lord !!!!
When Allah told Muhamad and his people
{Say "Roam the land and observe how the creation was initiated. Thus Allah will establish the final creation. Allah is capable of all things}...
I don't think Allah meant they had to roam the entire planet. The truths of creation are found in the south western part of Arabia. It is the center of everything.
Well, we did roam the earth. We did find tonnes of fossil evidence of our past. We found life deep in the oceans , so deep that it is entirely impossible to even think of developing a hypothesis. We roamed the earth and confirmed that species undergo change depending on environment. We understood that adaptation to environment is the reason behind the diversity of life. We roam the world and gather samples on which we can carry out scientific tests to determine our past. All of the things we see reveal awful amounts of data on our past. Indeed our beginnings were simple, linked to water, then we were shaped and formed.
http//www.livescience.com/17248-arabian-artifacts-humans-africa.html
http//blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/12/out-of-africa-to-out-of-arabia/
http//www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jan/27/stone-tools-human-migration-africa
http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45501635/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/arabian-artifacts-may-rewrite-out-africa-theory/
I am still not done seeing all the things "Abdun Nur" gave me. And they are pretty brain twisting for me personally. Inshallah, if I get time, I will go through the subjects of exploration that you suggested.
From experience, I know that many people get emotional over the subject of "creation", specially when "humans" are involved. So, if I hurt you in anyway, I apologize and it was never meant to hurt you. It is one of the most difficult topics to discuss (in terms of science). People for some reason tend to inject their faith/belief/preconceived ideas into it and contaminate the non-bias nature of "The Scientific Method".
Thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge. Your avatar had this effect on me, I picture you like it !! lol....
Peace be on you
------------------------------ Student of Allah