Talk:Muslim flat-earth theories

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Physics Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.
Help with this template Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

In Arabic the Qur'anic verse says "wajada" which means "it appeared to" Dhul Qarnayn. It was his perspective and it appeared to him that it was setting in murky waters... There have been many articles that talk about this. Check out the debate between Zakir Naik and William Champbell here: http://www.aswatalislam.net/DisplayFilesP.aspx?TitleID=50027&TitleName=Zakir_Naik called "Qur'an And Bible In The Light Of Science Vs Campbell" .

Since Yuber put the replacement Dhul-Qarnayn article up, I figured it was incumbent upon me to put up the Islam and flat earth article I promised. This is a quick draft and I haven't transferred all the references from the old Dhul-Qarnayn article and talk page. I will work on it as I can, but would appreciate help. Zora 04:25, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Zora. I did some copyediting. I believe this article would be a good one. -- Svest 17:56, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Regarding 36:40.. there is more than one interpritation of that Ayat. Kabbani uses it as an example of a miracle of the Quran, citing how it speaks of the Sun haing it's own orbit, something scientists didn't fully comprehend till the 1970's. --Irishpunktom\^talk 18:18, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Produce your proof for the Earth being flat in ISLAM. Meaning, cite your sources from the Quran and sayings of Muhammad. Don't say some people think, who are also Muslim. I may have to vote this article for deletion as it provides no proof and seems to be just a hate article.--HaRpRiT

Harprit, doing what you say to do would be original research (see Wikipedia:No original research). A synthesis of our arguments for whether Islam views the earth as flat or not would be our original research. This aritlce is not saying that Islam believes the earth is flat. No wikipedia article should be saying that Islam as an entity believes anything since Muslims have the free right to interpret their religion as they see fit. This is about the view of some Muslims who have argued that the world is flat -- and some of them have been very prominent. There is no problem in providing a counterbalance to show that not all Muslims believed this because this really is not an attempt to say that Islam is not compatible with science or that Muslims are backwards. However, as with some Christians, some Muslims believe things that go against scientific theories. It's just a fact and we're portraying this fact, not arguing from Qur'an and hadith as to what we think Islam says, because that would go against wikipedia policy. I do invite you to vote this for deletion so that you will see how the community feels about this article. So, by all means put this up on WP:AFD which will give us a definitive view instead of just having this be a war of threats. Also using ~~~~ to sign posts would post the time you placed your message. gren グレン 19:54, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Harprit, the article is not a final version. Sources must be needed or otherwise statements would be considered to be removed from there. For now, we have to work to make the article a good and neutral. -- Svest 19:58, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

What is this garbage: "It has been said that at least one influential modern Saudi jurist, Ibn Baz, the former Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, claimed that the earth is flat and that anyone who denies this is considered as an unbeliever. The Wahabbi or Salafi tradition that he espoused was already known for its fierce insistence on the letter of the Qur'an, to the point that they interpreted references to God's hand or face as references to a divine body."

This looks like an anti-Saudi/Wahabi article full of lies. Bin Baz never said the earth was flat, and he never went to the extent of calling one a disbeliever for disbeliving something so trivial. I will not remove what is said about the other people on this list before I look in to their beliefs, but for Bin Baz, I know for a fact he didn't make these accusitions placed on him --Bera7m 20:00, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

The article is actually rather careful to say that it isn't clear whether or not he made all the remarks attributed to him. It's a widely reported episode and you can't just wish it out of existence. Zora 20:23, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Let's start from sources 2 Ibn Baz 3 Rewrite 4 Was Ibn Baz the only one? 5 POV 6 Deleting 7 Scholar? 8 Change the title, please. It's misleading. 9 Major change 10 How could they have not known the earth was spherical? 11 merge

[edit] Let's start from sources

I didn't want to comment on the contents as I tried to be patient or maybe someone would be an expert on the topic. What I notice in the article is that nothing suggests that Islam believed in the flat-earth theory!! At the opposite the only reference we have there is about arguing for the round-flat theory.

I wonder with a lot of amazement about the purpose of such an article w/o sources and even categorized in Category:Obsolete scientific theories while Christianity is much more notable in supporting the theory. No article about that topic exists!!! I do doubt about the creation of this article now. I believe Muslim readers would be amazed as they always believed in the round theory and finding unsourced stuff here.

Zora, the article should be named the opposite. Why? Because of God's sake, Muslims believe in the opposite!!! It is for opponents to bring sources and not the opposite. -- Svest 20:30, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the article lacks references. I didn't bring over all the references from the Dhul-Qarnayn article because I was writing in a hurry. I said so at the top of this page! I have no doubt that the controversy existed, and I'll spend some time later today pulling up the references.

However, it seems to me that you miss the point when you say that Islam teaches this or that. Various Muslims have had various opinions about flat-earth/round-earth. Until Ibn Baz' fatwa (which may or may not have happened) none of them were claiming that those who thought differently were heretics. It's just a difference of opinion within the Muslim community, one that reflects conflicting views in the world at large. See the Flat earth article for more info -- it's actually quite a good article. Indeed, there's something to be said for merging this article into that one. Zora 20:41, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning Flat earth. I wasn't aware of its existance. Merging this with that sounds a perfect idea as the theory doesn't deal only with the Islamic view.

The problem with Ibn Baz is that it looks as if the article is dedicated to his view (this is in case it was true that he issued a Fatwa). I now that you are still working on it but what I said above is that for the time being the article(especially w/ its title) suggests clearly (except a simple mention about the round theory view) that Islam believes in FET. Good luck to all. -- Cheers Svest 20:52, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I picked the title in a hurry (forced to act quickly because of Yuber's action at Dhul-Qarnayn) and I'm not going to defend it with my life. Perhaps we can have a general discussion as to whether or not this should all be moved to Flat earth (it might unbalance the article as it exists now) or whether this article should have a new title.

It would also be nice if someone worked on the Ibn Baz article, which right now is a Salafi panegyric of the gentleman. I don't think that the world at large was quite that fawning. Oh, and while I'm thinking of it -- Salafi hands have been at work on Sunni Islam and the kalam section is now full of praise for the Hanbali position. Needs fixing. Zora 21:07, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I remember Yuber doing that yesterday, lol. However, I didn't want to be involoved waiting for the reaction.

For this article, I support of course that it got to be merged w/ Flat earth for the reasons mentioned above.

The problem again with Mr Baz, is that there are no resources available to work on! I'll try again and see.

I'll also check what's going on at the rest of the articles you mentioned. -- Svest 21:21, 15 October 2005 (UTC)  Wiki me up™

This article may need renaming... but, I don't think I like how it's being seen as an attack on Islam... I really don't think it's meant to be that. I thought it was title this because it was talking about flat earth... I suppose we could have Islam and earth circumference or area or uhhh. I don't think this is to make an argument if most Muslims believe that the world is round or flat? It's just a part of Muslim history. O_O gren グレン 03:31, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Well Gren. Yes I agree but do you remember the raison d'être of Dhul-Qarnayn and why this article had to be an oubreak? Wasn't Zeno who was pushing the speed to the limit to apply his stance? Now Dhul-Qarnayn is fine though it needs a simple revision especially with copyvios introduced by Bera7m and fixed by Zora. So I expect this article to be a baby simulating the same ideas behind Dhul Qarnayn. That's why I asked about a renaming. It would be NPOV if there was a parallel Islam and round-earth theories. Indeed, if most Muslims are believing in the round stuff than why the rush to create an article about the flat stuff before having the round one? -- Svest 03:49, 16 October 2005 (UTC)  Wiki me up™

The reason for the rush was playing fair with Zeno. I said that the Dhul-Qarnayn article didn't need all the flat earth stuff AND promised to find another home for it when I took it out. That's why it seems a bit slanted, because it originally comes from Zeno. I started the darn thing, but I don't have all that much attachment to it. I'd really like to find out whether or not Ibn Baz issued a fatwa, however. Zora 04:33, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ibn Baz

I am into his official website now. The Arabic version is more complete. The guy got 13 volumes of Fatwas and opinions. I'll update you with what I found. -- Cheers -- Svest 04:49, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

What I found is plenty of advices and fatwas (from women driving cars to his opinions about dying your beard). Nothing found about the flat stuff. In contrast, this is what I found very interesting, revoking all allegations and claims about the flat stuff.

• Ibn Baz official rebuttal and reply to the allegation (in Arabic). [1]
• An english version from a blog. [2] -- Svest 05:32, 16 October 2005 (UTC)  Our problem is solved

The problem is ... we can't trust the official collected volumes, or the website. The editors would want to make Ibn Baz look good, so it's possible that they'd suppress anything embarrassing. It seems to come down to some article that appeared in Egypt. If we could get a verifiable copy of THAT, we might be able to judge whether or not the article was based on anything solid. If we can't confirm anything in the article, then we have to assume that the authors were fabricating. Zora 05:48, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Never heard you asking about a copy of a reference before!!!

This is what he replied:

...As for what the magazine, as-Siyasah (a former Kuweiti daily) has published about me quoting from the statement that was written by the writers of at-Tajamu’ at-Taqadumi in Egypt in regards to me denying the landing of man on the moon and me making takfir [to declare a person a disbeliever] of the one who says it or says that the earth is round or rotates - then it is a pure lie; it has no basis of authenticity. And perhaps the one who quoted it did not intend the lie but failed to verify the quote.

My statement is published and distributed and I explained the response to the one who denies the landing of man on the moon and the kufr [disbelief] of one who says it. Furthermore, I clarified that it is an obligation on the one who does not have knowledge to withhold and not to affirm or deny until some knowledge is attained which necessitate affirmation or denial.

Also, I affirm in the statement what I have quoted from the Allamah Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, that which proves the affirmation of the roundness of the earth.

As far as its rotation, then I have denied it and explained the evidences denying it. However, I did not declare kufr upon the one who upholds it. I only declared kufr upon the one who says that the sun is stationary and does not run on a course because this statement collides with the clarity of the Noble Qur’an and the pure authentic Sunnah which both prove that the sun and the moon both run on a course...

The letter is signed and dated. خطاب صدر من مكتب سماحته برقم 2925/1 في 7/11/1397. The ref number 1/1925. -- Svest 06:15, 16 October 2005 (UTC)  Me again

[edit] Rewrite

It's not clear whether or not this article will be merged. In the meantime, it might as well be as correct as we can make it.

I'm somewhat distressed the Ibn Baz' supporters seem to have declared the case closed, as obvious slander. The critics gave some convincing-looking references. Are those completely made-up?

So I did the usual Wikipedia thing of stating both sides of the issue. On the one hand, references (which cannot be confirmed). On the other hand, a denial and a claim to have been misquoted. I myself do not know which is true. Zora 13:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Zora, sometimes you surprise me with your oppeness! ;-) I agree about giving the story 2 voices. I, myself, am not sure of who is right and who is wrong. However, I had to make some superficial changes regarding some journalistic style editing, not to make anyone happy but to keep Wikipedia clean.

• Such arguments would seem to belong completely in the past. In this age of photos from space, who could doubt that the earth is round?
• It was a funny story, to anyone save the Saudis. -- Svest 18:42, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Was Ibn Baz the only one?

Fayssal amended the latest version to read that all Muslims accept that the earth is round and revolves around the sun. This claim is too broad. First of all, there may be Third World Muslim peasants, living in impoverished countries, who may believe that the earth is flat or that the sun revolves around the earth. Unlikely, in these days when movies and TV reach everywhere, but possible. Second, Ibn Baz was the Grand Mufti and must have had some influence over his subordinates. Perhaps they were just going along with him out of respect, or fear, or calculation, but it's also possible that some of them shared his beliefs. I don't think it's any shame to Muslims to say that MOST of them accept modern scientific theories. If some Muslims are anti-scientific, well, so are some Christians and some Hindus and some Jews ... Zora 20:49, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

The claim is not "too broad"! It has been well sourced through the Muslim history, while you did not bring any sigle scholar that says otherwise! --Islamic 05:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, just to explain my self: I am talking about Muslim religious scholars during medieval period, not all Muslims at all ages. Also I don't deny that there are still few Muslims that think the earth is flat. --Islamic 07:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Comments:

• This claim is too broad: Yes, it is. You are right. It is indeed just as saying that the world population believe that the earth is round. If there are still some peasants than same everywhere in the rest of the world. No difference. Same also as there are still educated people maybe believing in the flat-earth stuff. The Flat Earth Society. Saying that most muslims easily believe that the earth is round is derogative. So I removed that stuff. The point here is that was implying that some other muslims (including scholars) may still believe the earth is flat. We have to be very careful here or otherwise some newspaper would refer to WP telling its readers that there are still some peasants or scholars thinking that.
• Ibn Baz was the Grand Mufti: His influence was restricted to the Wahhabis and nothing outside KSA, not even including the Shi'as there. The Grand in Grand Mufti doesn't mean he was the Pope. Indeed, we are still not sure if he did say that anyway. -- Cheers Svest 21:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I changed it to "the vast majority of Muslims believe ...". Is that both accurate and non-derogatory? Zora 23:21, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Agreed Zora. Thanks and also agree with the additions regarding Dhul Qarnayn. -- Cheers Svest 23:29, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] POV

Millions of English speakers say the "the sun rises", does this imply that the Earth is flat and the world geocentric?
As far as I can see, the "Qur'anic texts taken by some" sections are misleading. The MuslimHope reference only shows how one Christian scholar interprets the Qur'an. I suppose this author is the "some" refered to in the above mentioned sections. I don't see how it qualifies. Are there any sources from Muslims explaining their position?

I think this article should be deleted and the Ibn Baz cotroversy merged into an Ibn Baz section in the Flat Earth article, except for the entire "Why would Ibn Baz deny" section, which isn't neutral and looks more like original research. --Yodakii 14:09, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting

Isnt this a bit to much?--Striver 21:37, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

If you're referring to the removal of the section "Why would Ibn Baz deny that the earth revolves around the sun?" that strikes me as an appropriate deletion, since it is original research. Find citations, keep it in, if not: remove it or at least remove it to the talk page. The article as a whole has a lot of weasel words and lacks citations for all of its claims. It's interesting, though. Esquizombi 01:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that most of the relevant material is in Arabic and unavailable, so we're having to go with second-hand versions that we can cite, but that we aren't quite sure are accurate. That's why it sounds weaselly.

As for the whole bit re Quranic literalism -- I feel strongly that we need some explanation of why Ibn Baz would be moved to say that the earth is flat. Finding published commentary is hard. Citations for anthropomorphism is easy, Quranic literalism is harder, and flat earth theories is hard to link. I'll see what I can do. But Zora 01:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scholar?

It should be noted that Abdul Wahhab was NOT a scholar. He didnt even complete the madrasa. I understand that he was the leader of a movement within the deen that is very close to the hearts of his followers, but a scholar he was not. And he CERTAINLY does not deserve comparison with Ibn Taymiyya.

[edit] Change the title, please. It's misleading.

I think that the title of this article "Muslim flat earth theories" is inappropriate because one, it gives the wrong impression that Muslims believe the earth is flat, and two, the article actually mentions round earth theories as well. Therefore, I propose that the title be changed to something like "Muslim views of geodesy". More NPOV, don't you think?

Most people don't know what geodesy is. In fact, I had to pause a moment to parse the word. How about Muslims and flat-earth theories? Just putting an "and" into indicates that Muslims and flat-earth theories are two different things, which may be related in numerous ways. Zora 06:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the title "Muslim views on the shape of earth", would be nice and simple (if anuybody was looking from simplicity). However, "Muslim views of geodesy" is good too. (I know that geodesy is a difficult word, but wikipedia shouldn't exactly cater to those want easy and simple answers to difficult questions).128.100.36.236 20:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Major change

I have done a major change on the article. I have removed most but not all unsourced claims - if you have any reliable source then bring it on. I think the article is in a better shape now. Please provide your comments. --Islamic 08:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Islami, you emasculated the article. You removed ANYTHING that could be construed as critical of Islam, Ibn Baz, or Salafism. In fact, you removed all reference to the accusations that swept the world, re Ibn Baz and the flat earth fatwa. The accusations are well-documented. You may think that they are wrong, but you should not remove all evidence of controversy. That is not right.

I won't just revert, because you added new material, but now I'm going to have to mix the old material with the new. Plase do not do this sort of thing! That's censorship. Zora 09:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Zora, I don't think I have removed any reference to Ibn Baz fatwa. I have merged two paragraphs that says the same thing. I don't mind if you undo that. The two paragraphs are: Between 1993 and 1995, various newspapers and magazines published accounts of a modern Islamic cleric, Ibn Baz, the former Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, who is said to have claimed that "the earth is flat and that anyone who denies this is considered an unbeliever" ^{[citation needed]}. Later, Ibn Baz issued a rebuttal, claiming that his statements had been misinterpreted [3] [4]. He is also said to have issued a religious ruling in the early 1990s stating "the earth is flat and that anyone who denies this is considered as an unbeliever". They say that in 1993, Ibn Baz issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, declaring that "The Earth is flat. Whoever claims it is round is an atheist deserving of punishment."^{[citation needed]}

--Islamic 14:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How could they have not known the earth was spherical?

greeks knew it for centuries and the single largest contribution from Islam to Science was in the area of Astronomy. Astronomy and Medicine (Avicenna) were pretty much the two big areas contributed by Muslims. I dunno how a seafaring people with a great knowledge of celestial bodies could miss that slight detail. Get real. --Street Scholar 08:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you please go and research the name "Galileo", then find religious references to it. He was accused of heresy by the catholic church, and put on trial in 1633 for putting forward the round earth theory, and was not pardonned until Pope John Paul II did it in 1992! (Now, consider that Magellan's expedition circumnavigated (Sailed all the way around the "Flat" earth) between 1519 - 1522, Galileo was denounced by the church some 111 years AFTER the church's theory was proven WRONG, and not pardonned for a further 359 years AFTER the church's theory was proved wrong) _I_ dont know how by the twentieth century "all knowing" and "wise" religious leaders could still completely deny what people had known as absolute fact by science and travel for hundreds of years. Its not the article writer that needs to get real sir. Also, nothing in this article or talk pages appears to be biased, or intentionally insulting to muslims. FACT- there ARE muslims that hold to the theory that the world is flat. FACT - There ARE ALSO CHRISTIANS that still believe this, as im sure there are people from many backwards religions that believe this. FACT - Highly orthodox religious types and/or not so well educated people tend to believe what they are being told by their religious or community leaders, and a lot of religious scripture completely flies in the face of proven science, and a lot of the time when it doesnt, it doesnt through sheer dumb luck. FACT - that no matter how much you hate a proven truth, no matter what truth might be, it doesnt change it.I wasnt going to enter into this debate but im sick to death of reading reverse racism. Just because people CRY racism/bias against a religion/nation/sect/cult/whatever, doesnt mean its actually there. --Squad'nLeedah 03:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] merge

this article may be safely merged with Flat Earth (notice how it's not called "Christian flat-earth theories"? Medieval Muslim astronomy was, if anything, more aware of the earth's sphericity (and even Christian astronomy was perfectly aware of it). If people like Suyuti or Ibn Baz really supported a flat earth (not in the literal sense, of course:) that should first and foremost be mentioned on their own articles, which at present isn't the case for Suyuti, nor for Al-Ahbash. After that is done, these may be mentioned with some context over at Flat Earth. dab (ᛏ) 09:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I concur wholeheartedly. Those few religious figures who have demonstrably supported the idea of a flat Earth may be mentioned in a section in the Flat Earth article - together with their counterparts from other religions. There is no reason to have a separate article for "Muslim" flat-earth theories.--Thomas Arelatensis 18:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Add me to this wagoon! We've had hard times here arguing about this but it seemed a pain in the a**!!! -- Szvest 18:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up™}

Ditto. --Irishpunktom\^talk 20:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Islamic mathematicians contributed greatly to spherical trigonometry... in order to calculate the positions of stars... this "flat-earth" nonsense needs to stop. --Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 11:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Um, some Muslims were well aware that the earth is round, and others believed that it was flat. The original version of the article, before it was pruned and emended by various people, said that both strands of thought co-existed. You folks are talking as if all Muslims believed the same thing, so that any mention of flat-earth Muslims is therefore a slur on all Muslims. This is a gross over-simplification. It's exactly the same for Christians; both strands of thought co-existed.

I just haven't had the time or energy to restore all the comments re the Bin Baz controversy that were expunged by zealous editors. At one point there was a verifiable published quote from Bin Baz saying that while he believed that the earth was round, the Qur'an said that the celestial bodies revolved around the earth, so therefore they did. It's not clear to me whether or not he ever believed that the earth is flat. I'd have to be able to read Arabic and have access to all of Bin Baz' published writings to determine that. Various people have quoted him as saying so, but the quotes are generally third-hand.

The Bin Baz controversy was the start of this whole article. I'd be OK with moving the Bin Baz part to his article, and merging the rest into the flat-earth article. As long as it doesn't involve sweeping anything under the rug. Or having anything critical of Bin Baz deleted. Zora 09:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Support merge. The information here would be a good addition to the flat earth article, which at the moment is very Euro-centric (except that a spherical Earth has no centre:-) ). Itsmejudith 07:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Support merge. There seems to be information here that is relevant to the history of science, but not so much that a split from Flat Earth is mandated. LeaHazel : talk : contribs 19:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Support merge. Its not just some muslims that believe it. There are plenty of people from many religions, and many NON religious people that believe this. For my arguments read the "I cant believe its not but.... " i mean the "How could they have not known the earth was spherical?" section. --Squad'nLeedah 03:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I think we should note how the article isn't about flat earth, despite the misleading title. Most paragraphs discuss that how Muslims thought the earth was round.128.100.36.236 20:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see the discussion at Talk:Flat Earth#Medieval Muslim World

--SteveMcCluskey 18:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)