Ibn Khaldun’s Evolution Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter anatolian
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 47
  • Views Views 28K

anatolian

IB Expert
Messages
1,831
Reaction score
78
Gender
Male
Religion
Islam
Salam. Since the subject is heated frequently here and everywhere I thought it is a good idea to discuss its Islamic roots if there is any. I personally believe that evolution is real and it perfectly explains the creation. All the confusion comes from some misinterpretations of Quran and older scriptures. Ibn Khaldun was the first evolutionist in the history of Islam and most probably Darwin was influenced by him. He thought the creation of man does not contradict with the idea of men coming from apes.

https://muslims4uk.com/2013/01/19/ibn-khaldun-on-human-evolution/amp/

“It should be known that we – May God guide you and us – notice that this world with all the created things in it has a certain order and solid construction. It shows nexuses between causes and things caused, combinations of some parts of creation with others, and transformations of some existent things into others, in a pattern that is both remarkable and endless.

(…)

One should then look at the world of creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch. The word “connection” with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group.

The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and to reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of the monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man after (the world of monkeys). This is as far as our (physical) observation extends.

Now, in the various worlds we find manifold influences. In the world of sensual perception there are certain influences of the motions of the spheres and the elements. In the world of creation there are certain influences of the motions of growth and perception. All this is evidence of the fact that there is something that exercises an influence and is different from the bodily substances. This is something spiritual. It is connected with the created things, because the various worlds must be connected in their existence. This spiritual thing is the soul, which has perception and causes motion.

Above the soul there must exist something else that gives the soul the power of perception and motion, and that is also connected with it. Its essence should be pure perception and absolute intellection. This is the world of the angels. The soul, consequently, must be prepared to exchange humanity for angelicality, in order actually to become part of the angelic species at certain times in the flash of a moment. This happens after the spiritual essence of the soul has become perfect in actuality, as we shall mention later on“
 
This is wrong. Our father Adam was created human and didn't evolve from an ape. And Allah Knows Best.
 
if you say that,human also have come through evolution, you are wrong.
but if you say,all creatures have come on earth through evolution, but Allah created human separately, then I guess, you are right.
 
Wa alaikum assalam.
1- Ibn Khaldun believed in Islam and that Adam is the first human as shown in his writings.
2-"Ibn Khaldun was not talking about evolution but the old greek philosophical idea of an order to creation, and this can be shown by his viewpoint placing angels above men and his placing of dark skinned races below light skinned ones in the same way the greeks did.

However even this idea of an order of creation is incorrect according to Islam as it goes directly against the Islamic teaching of peoples race not having any effect upon their deen, that black and white, arab and non arab is equal and the only thing which differentiates us is our piety and good deeds.

Ibn Khaldun was merely placing things in a series of steps to show what he thought were superior or inferior creations and not describing one becoming the other, as by placing the angels above men was he really saying men evolve into angels? A part of his theories that is ignored or left out by evolutionists when referring to him.

Its quite a desperate bit of lying on the part of evolutionists and 'muslims' who support this godless philosophy to try to claim ibn Khaldun as one of their own over this and can be easy disproved but then the evolutionists and those who put their aql before naql share a similar trait of twisting the evidence to support their twisted views and claiming any proof to counter the fact they usually go against the Quran and sunnah."

"the passage from Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddima, from the section ‘the Meaning of Prophecy’, seems to describe a succession of stages in superiority of one creation to another, without at all implying a physical evolution of one form to the next. His usage of the word ufuq (literally: ‘horizon,’ in some contexts ‘side/edge of the celestial sphere,’ translated (incorrectly?) in the passage as “stage”) is more suggestive of ‘the theory of celestial spheres and emanation’ floating around at that time, and seems to be an extension of that. Medieval philosophers would often discuss prophecy in the context of emanation, again another indication that ibn Khaldun is not talking about evolution."
http://turntoislam.com/community/threads/ibn-khaldun-on-evolution.87389/#post-569048

3-Great Chain of Being
416636859-1.gif
"The term denotes three general features of the universe: plenitude, continuity, and gradation. The principle of plenitude states that the universe is “full,” exhibiting the maximal diversity of kinds of existences; everything possible (i.e., not self-contradictory) is actual. The principle of continuity asserts that the universe is composed of an infinite series of forms, each of which shares with its neighbour at least one attribute. According to the principle of linear gradation, this series ranges in hierarchical order from the barest type of existence to the ens perfectissimum, or God.The idea of the chain of being was first systematized by the Neoplatonist Plotinus, though the component concepts were derived from Plato and Aristotle."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Great-Chain-of-Being
 
Last edited:
Asalamu Alaikum

I agree with [MENTION=42550]Mahir Adnan[/MENTION]

No harm in saying all life (other than humans) have evolved from other species, but saying it for humans is a grave sin, and some even count it as an act of kufr/blasphemy.
 
Greetings,

No harm in saying all life (other than humans) have evolved from other species, but saying it for humans is a grave sin, and some even count it as an act of kufr/blasphemy.

If all the available evidence indicated that humans did indeed evolve from apes, would you still regard it as a grave sin to believe it?

Peace
 
I don't know why brother [MENTION=16149]anatolian[/MENTION] believe in an imperfect theory.seems that,Muslims in west are facing too much fitna. in my country majority laughs at Darwin. however,that's not the case. truth is Halden law disprove ape to human evolution regarding ibn khaldun- https://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=311803

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 100%, align: center"]
[TR][TD]Ibn Khaldoon did not support the theory of evolution - Islam web - English
Ibn Khaldoon did not support the theory of evolution I have a question you say that the theory of evolution is haram but did Ibn khaldun not write a b.....[/TD][/TR][/TABLE]
 
If all the available evidence indicated that humans did indeed evolve from apes, would you still regard it as a grave sin to believe it?

Yes, because "all the available evidence" can still be incomplete and misleading. Please see this thread to understand how: How science fails to explain complete truth

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 100%, align: center"]
[TR][TD] How science fails to explain complete truth
The truth is what Allah has revealed on the Prophet . And theories and assumptions are what science might tell us. Science can never explain the truth...[/TD][/TR][/TABLE]
 
Greetings,



If all the available evidence indicated that humans did indeed evolve from apes, would you still regard it as a grave sin to believe it?

Peace

There is no conclusive evidence, and there never will be. So this is a pointless thought experiment.
 
There is some confusion here. the word "believing" is being used with different meanings.
Muslims do not believe in evolution in the same way they believe in Allah.
If a Muslim says "I believe in Allah"...then he is saying "I know Allah exists". there is no doubt here.

If a Muslim says "I believe in evolution" then he is saying "there is a great possibility that evolution has been taking place" (with a certain amount of doubt)

no one believes in a theory with centainty. you develop a theory in an attempt to explain the unknown. then you test and investigate. if it turns out false, then you adjust your theory.
this is how science works.

for a long time scientists thought you could add up or distracts speeds in the same direction from each other like Vr = V1 + V2.
this was assumed to be one of the general laws of physics.
Then Einstein came along and proved this was only accurate for speeds much lower than lightspeed.
he then changed this formula into Vr = (V1 + V2) / (1 + (V1V2 / C^2)).

So again, no one believes in an imperfect theory. but science points more and more towards that direction, so it is highly plausible.
There still is Allah in the background controlling the process all the time.

And why would it be kufr to say that humans also evolved from other species? it does not neccessarily imply that Adam as's parents were some other species.
no one is saying miracles are not allowed to happen during evolution.

example: Humans reproduce themselves by giving birth and this requires a male and a female human...but this didn't stop Isa to be born without a father.
does this mean our understanding how human reproduction takes place is wrong?
 
And why would it be kufr to say that humans also evolved from other species? it does not neccessarily imply that Adam as's parents were some other species.
no one is saying miracles are not allowed to happen during evolution.

It is kufr to say humans evolved from other species, because Allah :swt: Himself says,

[ Allah ] said, "O Iblees, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with My hands? Were you arrogant [then], or were you [already] among the haughty?"
[Surah Saad: 75]

Adam :as: was created by Allah Himself and every human being is from his progeny.

It comes in a Hadith,
And people are all the children of Adam, and Adam was [created] from dust. [Tirmidhi]


We don't know about all other species, but certainly, man was created as a man.
 
It is kufr to say humans evolved from other species, because Allah :swt: Himself says,

[ Allah ] said, "O Iblees, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with My hands? Were you arrogant [then], or were you [already] among the haughty?"
[Surah Saad: 75]

Adam :as: was created by Allah Himself and every human being is from his progeny.

It comes in a Hadith,
And people are all the children of Adam, and Adam was [created] from dust. [Tirmidhi]


We don't know about all other species, but certainly, man was created as a man.
So this surah and hadeeth you are quoting would not match anymore if humans evolved from other species? Why? Did Allah not create the other species with his hands?
Do other species not go back to dust when they die?
 
So this surah and hadeeth you are quoting would not match anymore if humans evolved from other species? Why? Did Allah not create the other species with his hands?
Do other species not go back to dust when they die?

Other creatures were created simply by Allah's command, kun fa yakoon, be and they became. It doesn't matter whether they evolved after that into more species or not. All what matters is humans did not evolve from any other specie. The first human, Adam :as:, was created as a man.
 
Evolutionists say that people, plants, and animals evolve into completely different things over time. If that's true, we should find an abundance of evidence, transitional species all over the place, and someone in the history of science must have observed this happening. After all, with all the trillions of creatures that exist on this planet, at least one of them should be evolving right now!Interestingly enough, that is a dead end as well. All the fish we find are fish, all the birds we find are birds, all the bats we find are bats, all the people we find are people, and single-celled organisms never reproduce into anything except single-celled organisms. There's no transitional species to be found, and evolution (in the sense of organisms increasing in complexity) is not happening anywhere. In reality, if evolution were true, everything that is or was alive should just be another transitional species, including humans. There would be no point in classifying species, because they all would just be changing into something else continuously. But we find none of that. http://www.muftisays.com/forums/13-articles--stories--more/6836-the-myth-of-evolution.html
 
Greetings,

Evolutionists say that people, plants, and animals evolve into completely different things over time. If that's true, we should find an abundance of evidence, transitional species all over the place, and someone in the history of science must have observed this happening.

No individual could directly observe macroevolution happening, because the magnitude of the time involved in the process is too great. However, there is a huge amount of evidence of transitional forms in the fossil record.

Partial list of transitional fossils

Peace
 
Evolutionary biology is scientific model that gives the best explanation of the apparent and phenomenal world. However no scientific theory can verify miracles because its outside of its domain eg Adam and Jesus pbut.

If a paradigm shift happens then the the whole theory would be replaced just like Newtons laws to Chaos Theory/Einsteins theory of relativity or Geo eccentric to helio centric, Qualitative to the Quantitative etc etc.
 
Last edited:
This concept of apeman is flawed.

Can you put these animals in order of evolution..?

Orang utan, gorilla, ape, chimpanzee, monkey, gibbon, atheists

- - - Updated - - -
[MENTION=2092]czgibson[/MENTION]:
 
[MENTION=2092]czgibson[/MENTION], are you sure?? fossil record supports evolution!! Harun Yahya wrote 4 volumes of Atlas of Creation only on fossil record. Dawkins just have pointed out 4 mistakes from 800+ pages. isn't that pathetic? http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/2017...e-missing-link-between-us-and-apes?ocid=fbert

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 100%, align: center"]
[TR][TD]BBC - Earth - We have still not found the missing link between us and apes
There was once an animal that was an ancestor to both humans and apes. But what was it like?...[/TD][/TR][/TABLE]
 
Greetings,



No individual could directly observe macroevolution happening, because the magnitude of the time involved in the process is too great. However, there is a huge amount of evidence of transitional forms in the fossil record.

Partial list of transitional fossils

Peace

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170517-we-have-still-not-found-the-missing-link-between-us-and-apes

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 100%, align: center"]
[TR][TD]BBC - Earth - We have still not found the missing link between us and apes
There was once an animal that was an ancestor to both humans and apes. But what was it like?...[/TD][/TR][/TABLE]
 
Greetings,

czgibson, are you sure?? fossil record supports evolution!!

Yes. I agree that the fossil record supports evolution.

Harun Yahya wrote 4 volumes of Atlas of Creation only on fossil record. Dawkins just have pointed out 4 mistakes from 800+ pages. isn't that pathetic?

Harun Yahya's work is pathetic, yes. He's a deeply suspicious man who knows very little about biology. One glance at his TV programme (which features numerous women wearing hardly any clothes) ought to convince you that he sets a very bad example for any Muslim.

When I first joined this forum, it was very common for people to present Harun Yahya's arguments in opposition to evolution. After his arguments had been repeatedly destroyed by various members here (both religious people and not), it then became much less common to see his work mentioned for a while. Muslim members seemed to become embarrassed or otherwise reluctant to use his arguments, as the flaws in them had by then become obvious to pretty much everybody.

Peace
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top