Thus, scientific tafsir, for Kamal, is the act of reading the Ayat al-Takwiniyya (cosmic verses) with the same hermeneutic rigor as the Ayat al-Tashri’iyya (legal verses). Both require ijtihad (independent reasoning). The scientist is the mujtahid of nature. Here is where Kamal departs most radically from mainstream i’jaz writers. He was deeply suspicious of literalism. For example, when the Qur’an describes the heavens as a “roof” (21:32) or the sun setting in a muddy spring (18:86), the i’jaz writer contorts physics to fit the literal. Kamal, drawing on his existentialist training (he was a scholar of Heidegger and Sartre), insisted on symbolic hermeneutics .
In his own words: “The Qur’an does not tell you that water boils at 100 degrees. It tells you that water obeys its Lord. The scientist tells you the temperature. The mufassir tells you the meaning. Scientific tafsir is where the two meet in awe.” scientific tafsir zakaria kamal
On the other hand, secularized Muslims and Western orientalists claimed that the Qur’an had nothing to say about nature beyond medieval folklore. Against both extremes, Kamal proposed a : a return to the rationalist tradition of falsafa (Islamic philosophy) as embodied by al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, and Ibn Rushd. He believed that the decline of tafsir began when theology ( kalam ) defeated philosophy ( falsafa ). His project was to revive the philosophical reading of revelation. 2. The Qur’an as a “Summons to Reason” (Istiqlal al-‘Aql) Central to Kamal’s scientific tafsir is the concept of Tawhid not merely as a theological formula, but as a cosmic hypothesis . For Kamal, the declaration “There is no god but God” is also a statement about the universe’s intelligibility. Because the universe is the creation of a singular, rational Will, it operates according to consistent laws ( sunan ). This consistency is the precondition for science. Thus, scientific tafsir, for Kamal, is the act
In an age where the Qur’an is often forced onto a Procrustean bed of modern physics or biology—either to “prove” its divinity via a miracle or to be dismissed as mythological—the voice of the Egyptian existentialist philosopher Zakaria Kamal stands as a remarkable, yet largely overlooked, alternative. Kamal did not ask, “Does the Qur’an contain scientific facts?” Instead, he asked a more fundamental question: “How does the Qur’an’s worldview structure the very possibility of science?” Here is where Kamal departs most radically from
For Zakaria Kamal, the deepest act of scientific tafsir was not to find a verse predicting the Big Bang. It was to look through a telescope and, in that very act of measurement and calculation, perform a silent dhikr . The scientist, when honest, is a theologian of the concrete. And the Qur’an, when read philosophically, is the manual for that theology.