Shoaib Malik Article "Houston, al-Rāzī Has a Problem: Are Humans (Really) the Best of Creation"

Mawlana @abu Hasan when you get some time can you please explain the issue(s) in the original article?

 

Would like to point out that Shoeb is the editor of this book: Islamic Theology and Extraterrestrial Life*.

His intro from the book:

Shoaib Ahmed Malik is a Visiting Researcher at St. Mary’s University, Twickenham, UK, holding dual PhDs in Chemical Engineering and Theology. He serves on the editorial board of Theology and Science and is a trustee of the International Society for Science and Religion (ISSR). His monograph, Islam Evolution: Al-Ghazālī and the Modern Evolutionary Paradigm, published by Routledge, was selected as the best academic book of science and religion in 2022 by ISSR. He is currently engaged in crafting educational textbooks and micrographs on Islam and evolution under Routledge’s imprint and curating several edited volumes and special issues. Notably, he is serving as the Chief Editor for Palgrave Macmillan’s newly established Islam and Science book series (monographs) and encyclopaedia, both world-firsts, all of which contribute significantly to the scholarly discourse at the intersection of Islam and Science.​

This gives an idea as to why he might have been tempted to run away with an idea which seems to nod, even if from a mile, to something he is passionate about. Afterall, who doesn't want Imam Razi on their side?

---
* It consists of just 9 (mostly speculative) essays spanning no more than 200 pages. One of the essays is by Shoeb himself and one is by doctor Jalajel (whose Yaqeen paper on Islam and Evolution gained considerable notoriety a few years back).

Looking at the price tag, one would think it's ground breaking research. It is selling for INR 11K on Amazon. Compare that to, for example, "A Secular Age", a 800 page tome by noted philosopher Charles Taylor, which is selling for half that price.

 

rather, the short refutation should be:




chun guzaarad khisht e avval bar zameeN mi'ymar kaj
gar rasaanad bar falak bashad haman deevar kaj

since the first brick was laid crooked on the ground by the mason
even if the wall reaches the sky, it will remain crooked.

---
another version is:

khisht e avval gar nahad miymar kaj
taa surayya mee-ravad deevaar kaj

if the mason lays the first brick crooked
the wall can go up to pleides but it will be a crooked one

---
the key here is to find the crooked brick..

: )

 

this is shoaib's own interpretation and not imam razi's words.

please note that where i have said that the citations match, those are the ones in quotes such as this:

 

parking it here for a short cut refutation.



we can take this guy at his word that he's an Ash3ari, at least aspiring to be - but he's afflicted by the cesspool of western academia.

 

in sha'Allah.

 

Mawlānā @abu Hasan,

I had a read of some of your points on the thread about crow's meat. Your research on wild and urban crows eating carrion demonstrated how an interlocutor's own premise can lead to a refutation of their own position when they insufficiently research. A theme in your writings is how we ought to research and read widely. As such, I, as a beginner have a request.

Request: can you please show us how Shoaib Malik got this wrong so we beginners can see:

1. how misquotation happens even if a person understood a sufficient amount of Arabic to translate accurately,
2. how academia constructs theory from misunderstandings,
3. how a synoptic reading of kalām texts from within a manhaj allows us to understand an author as nuanced as Imām Rāzī

Shoaib Malik writes more and is more active than others who have since gone quiet like Atabek, so this would demonstrate how having many citations does not a researcher make.

کرم فرمائیے حضرت اور اس مسئلہ پر روشنی ڈالیے۔

 

modern academia is a self-delusional expensive fraud.

the guy has a phd, and doesn't even know the meaning of research. extremely stupid article and phenomenally ignorant conclusions. the opening statements and assertions on evolution and AI also indicate that he is just another mindless follower of the cult of science, though he styles himself as a 'thinker'.

jahl shadeed.

initially, i just looked at the cited excerpt and dismissed it as humbug. but the link to the full article tempted me to read it in full - and my review is that it is standard academic nonsense. of course, numerous citations, but nonsense nevertheless. in spite of heavy sounding qualifications, they don't have basic research abilities.

knowledge is not mere citation, but the ability to question, research whether this is indeed the position of the author - whether he has said something else elsewhere etc. an astute researcher will not hesitate to look up opinions of authorities in the specific field of research. besides, insight about the opinions of cited authorities in the field is gained only by voracious readings on the subject. one cannot hope to pick up a book - probably land on the quote by a keyword search - read a few lines and build a theory.

the citations are more or less correct - and the translation (i did a quick check) is also matches the arabic text (as i said, a quick read - not a rigorous examination)

suffice it to say that shoaib malik (mentioned below) is not only ignorant of razi's position, but ignorant of the issue overall. and his representation of imam razi's position is not borne out of research, but merely a patchy reading of texts and a heavy dose of imagination. and of course, the lack of any consideration to nuance and the extremely debilitating disease of generalisation.

=====
suffice it to say, that the poor fellow built a theory on a misunderstood citation!

 

If you have access to him, can you ask jim to bring the Arabic texts that he is citing, along with his own translations?

 

Shoaib's Claims:
From the abstract:

"By revisiting a long-standing debate in the Islamic tradition concerning the superiority (afḍaliyyah) of angels versus humans, this article positions al-Rāzī as a pivotal case who diverges from the majority Ashʿarī stance by advocating for angelic superiority"

From later sections in the article:

"The Superiority of Gabriel over Muḥammad The sixth and final cluster addresses the specific case of archangel Gabriel’s superiority over the Prophet Muḥammad, based on the former’s attributes and his role as an intermediary of divine revelation (al-Rāzī 2024, 641–47).

The tenth argument draws on Q. 81:19–22, where God says: “Indeed, it is a noble messenger’s word, [delivered by] one of mighty power, [and] held in honor by the Owner of the Throne, obeyed and trustworthy. And your companion is not [at all] mad.” In this context, the “noble messenger” refers to Gabriel, who is described as possessing immense strength, honor, and reliability, and as being held in high esteem by God Himself. In contrast, the Prophet Muḥammad is referred to as “your companion,” with the verse affirming only that he is free from madness. The elevated language used to describe Gabriel emphasizes his exceptional qualities of power and trustworthiness, which surpass the attributes explicitly ascribed to the Prophet in this passage. This disparity in description suggests a hierarchy in which Gabriel occupies a higher rank than Muḥammad.

The eleventh argument expands on Gabriel’s superior knowledge and proximity to divine matters, asserting that his extensive understanding of both foundational and secondary realms of knowledge solidifies his elevated status. Gabriel’s unique position as the first recipient of divine revelation grants him unparalleled access to the mysteries of the heavens and the divine order. As stated in Qurʾān 53:5: “He was taught by one mighty in power,” Gabriel served as the teacher to Muḥammad, highlighting the hierarchical relationship between teacher and student (al-Rāzī 2024, 645).

Al-Rāzī elaborates on this epistemic hierarchy by dividing religious knowledge into two broad categories: foundational (ʿilm al-usūl   ̣ ) and secondary (ʿilm  al-furūʿ ). Foundational knowledge itself consists of two aspects. The first is the knowledge of God’s oneness and attributes, which al-Rāzī argues is necessarily perfect for both Gabriel and Muḥammad, as any deficiency in this domain would imply ignorance of God—a theological impossibility. The second aspect, however, pertains to the details of creation, where Gabriel’s superiority becomes evident. As a celestial being, Gabriel has directly witnessed the Throne (al-ʿArsh), the Footstool (al-Kursī ), the Preserved Tablet (al-Lawḥ al-maḥfūẓ), the Pen (al-Qalam), Paradise (al-Jannah), Hell (al-Nār), and the layers of the heavens.12 Additionally, his knowledge extends to the intricacies of earthly creation, including the elements, minerals, plants, and animals. Gabriel’s role as a leader among celestial beings and his command over the angels entrusted with these domains further highlight his unparalleled comprehension of these realms (al-Rāzī 2024, 645–46).
In the domain of secondary knowledge (ʿilm al-furūʿ ), which concerns the specifics of the jurisprudential laws and prophetic missions, Gabriel’s superiority remains evident. Al-Rāzī explains that Prophet Muḥammad’s understanding of his jurisprudential framework (sharīʿa) was confined to the laws of his own mission, and he did not have knowledge of the divine laws governing (sharāʾiʿ ) the previous prophets. Furthermore, Prophet Muḥammad was unaware of the divine laws governing celestial realms, whereas Gabriel possessed comprehensive knowledge of these domains. Since this secondary knowledge was acquired exclusively through Gabriel, the teacher–student relationship further underscores Gabriel’s epistemic primacy. Gabriel’s unique position as the mediator of revelation makes him indispensable for the transmission of this knowledge (al-Rāzī 2024, 646).

This hierarchy of knowledge is encapsulated in the Qurʾānic verse: “Are those who know equal to those who do not know?” (Qurʾān 39:9). Gabriel’s direct witnessing of creation’s mysteries and his comprehensive knowledge of both foundational and secondary matters firmly establish his superiority within the epistemic order.

To preempt counterarguments based on Qurʾān 2:31—where Adam is taught the names of all things while the angels appear unaware—al-Rāzī interprets the verse in line with the argument discussed in the first section (under “The Argument from Adam’s Prostration and Vicegerency”). He suggests that the ignorance attributed to the angels in this instance pertains specifically to the terrestrial angels and not to Gabriel or the higher celestial beings. This approach reconciles the verse with the broader theological framework that positions Gabriel above all human prophets, including Prophet Muḥammad (al-Rāzī 2024, 646–47).

This cluster emphasizes Gabriel’s pivotal role in the transmission of revelation, his unparalleled access to divine knowledge, and the extraordinary qualities attributed to him in scripture. Together, these arguments establish Gabriel as a figure of supreme status within the hierarchy of creation, surpassing even the greatest of human prophets, i.e., Prophet Muḥammad.13" (pages 14-16)


He cites to:
"———. 2024. Al-Matālib al- ̣ ʿĀliya  min  al-ʿ Ilm  al-Ilāhī (The  Sublime  Objectives  in  Metaphysics). Edited by ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ismāʿīl and Muḥammad Ḍargām. Vol. 7: Al-Arwāḥ  al-ʿĀliya  wa-l-Sāfila (The  Higher  and  Lower  Souls). Kuwait: Dār al-Ḍiyāʾ"

 

Shoaib Malik is someone in academia who has been involved in the discussion about evolution for some years. He teaches with Mawlānā Shams Tameez at OpenMadrasa for his Hidāyat al-Ḥikmah course.

Recently, I came across a post of his on X where he writes:


Which directs the reader to his paper on this subject.

Questions:

1. What is the Sunni view on this discussion?
2. Did Imām Rāzī hold this view?