Was Allah a “Flat-Earther”? A Scholarly Reflection on Qur’an 15:19 and Ancient Cosmology
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute
Abstract
This article critically examines Qur’an 15:19, which states, “And the earth We have spread out, and placed therein firm mountains, and caused to grow therein all things in due proportion.” Classical Islamic exegesis frequently interpreted this verse literally, envisioning the earth as a flat expanse stabilized by mountains. Such interpretations reflect the cosmological assumptions of late antiquity, paralleling Mesopotamian and biblical imagery. However, this worldview is irreconcilable with modern scientific knowledge of a spherical earth governed by gravitational forces. This paper situates Qur’an 15:19 within its exegetical and historical contexts, compares it with neighboring cosmologies, and explores its implications for theology and interpretation.
Introduction
Qur’an 15:19 reads:
“And the earth We have spread out, and placed therein firm mountains, and caused to grow therein all things in due proportion.”
The expression madadnāhā (“We have spread it out”) has been widely understood by classical exegetes as describing the earth in flat, expansive terms. Such language provokes critical questions regarding the Qur’an’s claim to divine omniscience: is this a phenomenological metaphor, or does it betray the human cultural horizon of its composition?
Classical Exegesis and the Flat Earth Conception
The major tafsīr authorities consistently interpreted the verse in line with a flat-earth cosmology:
Al-Ṭabarī (d. 923):
وَالْأَرْضَ مَدَدْنَاهَا أي بسطناها على وجه الماء لتكون فراشاً للخلق.
(“And the earth We have spread out” means: We stretched it out over the surface of the water so that it might be a resting place for creation.”)1Al-Qurṭubī (d. 1273):
مددناها: أي بسطناها، مثل مد الأديم.
(“‘We have spread it out’: that is, We stretched it, like the stretching of a hide.”)2Ibn Kathīr (d. 1373):
أي بسطناها وقررناها وثبتناها بالجبال الرواسي.
(“That is, We spread it out, established it, and fixed it with firm mountains.”)3Al-Rāzī (d. 1210), in his Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, acknowledges the plain sense of spreading as expansion but attempts to reconcile the imagery with philosophical reasoning, suggesting that even a spherical earth can be perceived as spread from the human vantage point.4
Al-Bayḍāwī (d. 1286) in his Anwār al-Tanzīl reinforces the traditional reading:
مددناها: بسطناها طولاً وعرضاً.
(“We spread it out: We extended it in length and breadth.”)5Al-Suyūṭī (d. 1505), in al-Durr al-Manthūr, collects earlier reports affirming that the earth was stretched flat and anchored with mountains, citing early authorities such as Ibn ʿAbbās and Mujāhid.6
These authorities show a broad exegetical consensus: the earth was envisioned as a vast, flat expanse, stabilized by mountains.
Ancient Cosmology and Human Perception
The Qur’anic description mirrors the cosmological framework of the ancient Near East. Mesopotamian cosmology depicted the earth as a flat disc under a solid firmament; biblical texts likewise refer to the “pillars of the earth” (Job 9:6) and its immovable foundations (Psalm 104:5). For seventh-century Arabs, the earth appeared phenomenologically flat, and the Qur’an’s imagery corresponds with this perception.
The Conflict with Modern Science
Modern science establishes beyond dispute that the earth is spherical, rotating, and governed by gravity. The Qur’anic notion of a flat, spread-out earth anchored by mountains directly contradicts these findings.
Apologists often argue for metaphorical interpretation (earth spread for habitation) or attempt to reconcile the text with geology (mountains as stabilizers of tectonic plates). Yet, these interpretations impose anachronistic readings on the text, obscuring its historical meaning.
Theological and Hermeneutical Implications
The exegetical consensus that Qur’an 15:19 describes a flat earth raises theological questions. If the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated, why does it reflect seventh-century cosmology?
Two responses are possible:
Allegorical Hermeneutics – Reinterpreting cosmological language as metaphorical or symbolic.
Historical-Critical Realism – Recognizing the Qur’an as a document embedded in its historical context, reflecting human cultural limitations.
The former preserves theological inerrancy; the latter challenges claims of divine omniscience.
Comparative Biblical Cosmology
The Bible also reflects pre-scientific cosmology (e.g., Genesis 1:6-8’s firmament). However, Christian theology traditionally interprets such texts metaphorically. By contrast, modern Muslim apologists often insist the Qur’an is scientifically miraculous, leaving less interpretive flexibility.
Conclusion
Qur’an 15:19 reflects the cosmological assumptions of late antiquity, presenting the earth as a flat plain stabilized by mountains. While coherent in its historical context, this imagery is incompatible with modern scientific knowledge. The verse illustrates the challenge of reconciling ancient sacred cosmologies with contemporary understandings of the natural world.
References
Secondary Works
Wansbrough, J. Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977.
Watt, W. Montgomery. Bell’s Introduction to the Qur’an. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1970.
Stökl Ben Ezra, D. Scriptural Cosmology in the Ancient Near East. Leiden: Brill, 2014.
Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Science and Civilization in Islam. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968.
Would you like me to add an appendix with a comparative table showing Qur’anic, Biblical, and Mesopotamian cosmology side by side (flat earth, mountains as pegs, firmament, etc.) to strengthen the comparative argument?
Footnotes
Al-Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Taʾwīl Āy al-Qurʾān, Vol. 14, p. 12. ↩
Al-Qurṭubī, Al-Jāmiʿ li-Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, Vol. 10, p. 99. ↩
Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm, Vol. 3, p. 532. ↩
Al-Rāzī, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, Vol. 19, p. 145. ↩
Al-Bayḍāwī, Anwār al-Tanzīl wa-Asrār al-Taʾwīl, Vol. 3, p. 85. ↩
Al-Suyūṭī, al-Durr al-Manthūr fī al-Tafsīr bi’l-Maʾthūr, Vol. 4, p. 219. ↩
No comments:
Post a Comment