Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
tonnyj

Embryology

Recommended Posts

Surah 86:

6- He was created from a fluid, ejected,

7- Emerging from between the backbone and ribs

 

Isn't sperm discharged from the underneath the groin? The lowest point of the ribs are above the groin. So if semen is shout out from above the groin, isnt that impossible? Being in between the backbone and ribs, how can the stomach shoot out semen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Hello,

 

Read the third response on this site: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_forums.understanding-Islam(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/showthread.php?2585-Sperm-formation-error&p=50668&viewfull=1#post50668"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_forums.understanding-Islam(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/show...ull=1#post50668[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From the link : (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_forums.understanding-Islam(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/show...ull=1#post50668"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_forums.understanding-Islam(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/show...ull=1#post50668[/url]

Re: Sperm formation error?

 

1. As Dr. Zakir Naik writes:

 

In embryonic stages, the reproductive organs of the male and female, ie. the testicles and the ovaries, begin their development near the kidney exactly between the spinal column and the eleventh and twelfth ribs. Later they descend; the female gonads (ovaries) stop in the pelvis while the male gonads continue their decent before birth to reach the scrotum outside the body through the inguinal canal. Even after the embryonic stage after the decent of the reproductive organ, these organs receive their nerve supply and blood supply (from the Aorta) and lymphatic drainage which is in the area between the backbone (spinal column) and the ribs

Very cool

2. As Moiz Amjad writes:

 

although the male sperm is formed in the testes, yet the blood supply which, obviously, is integral to the making of the sperm comes from between the ribs and the back...the cells that form the sperm originate from between the ribs and the back. If this is true, then the words of the Qur'an are not scientifically incorrect, as the words "emanating from a place between the (lower) back and the (lower) ribs", do not necessarily imply "emanating in its final shape" only, but can also cover "initial emanation".

Gotchya

 

3. He also gives a third response:

 

As shown in Figure 2, if we were to join the sulb (i.e. the back) and the taraayib (i.e. the ribs), by means of an external line, it would pass through our lower abdomen, to our hips, to the testes, to the sex organ on to our groin, and then join our ribs.

Figure 2

 

The line would roughly look like the red curve ABCD. Obviously, the ultimate point of emanation of the male sperm lies within the points A and D. This, in my opinion, is what the statement "Yakhrujo min bayen al-Sulb Wa al-Taraayib" (i.e. 'which emanates from a place between the back and the ribs') means. The meaning and the implication of the verse, as well as the message entailed in it, was as clear to the unlettered Arabs as it is for the scientists of the modern day. If seen in the light of this explanation, it would be clear that the verse does not refer to any scientific reality, but to an obvious physical reality. Thus, the very objection of a scientific error, in this case, is misplaced.

 

Nevertheless, a few questions may arise in one's mind regarding the above explanation.

 

Firstly, one may ask why has the Qur'an used the phrase 'between the back and the ribs' and, thereby, created confusion regarding the implication of the verse. The Qur'an, on the contrary, could have saved us from all confusion simply by naming the organ from which semen spurts out. Furthermore, one may also ask whether such usage of the phrase 'bayena shayin wa shayin' (i.e. 'between one thing and another') as it has been interpreted in the above explanation, is supported in the Arabic language or not.

 

As far as the first question is concerned, it is obvious that the Qur'an, as any decent and sober literature would do, has only avoided direct reference (in words) to the male sexual organ. Through the words that it has used, the Qur'an has made a complete euphemistic reference to the point of emanation of the sperm, while successfully avoiding naming it. Naming it would definitely have negatively affected the literary value of the Qur'an. If Allah is not timid to address himself as royal and proudly by saying "We" to the readers of the quran, why is he timid to mention the gushing out of fluids from a man's testicles? As far as the objection that the euphemistic style of the Qur'an, in this case, has negatively affected the clarity of the message and has resulted in confusion regarding the implication of the verse is concerned, in my opinion, it seems quite out of place. What is out of place? The objection or the idea that sperm emanates from between the backbone and ribs? The mere fact that the previous verse had referred to 'the fluid gushing forth' (semen), which is followed by the words 'which emanates from...', brings to mind the source of the 'gushing forth' of the fluid, without much difficulty. Furthermore, one should not forget that even if the male sperm was actually formed within the two stipulated points, the mention of this source of formation of the male sperm had absolutely no pertinence with the message of the Qur'an and the information would have been of absolutely no relevance to the Arabs of old - the direct addressees of the Qur'an. The mere realization of the point that the Qur'an does not refer to any such information, even if it is true, that has no relevance to its basic message, guides one to the simple physical (non-scientific and uncomplicated) interpretation of the verse under consideration. What is this saying? That without even looking at the quran, one would automatically assume that the idea of sperm emanating from between the backbone and ribs is obvious?

4. Muhammad Asad provides the fourth response in his translation of the verse:

 

issuing from between the loins [of man] and the pelvic arch [of woman].*

* The plural noun tara'ib, rendered by me as "pelvic arch", has also the meaning of "ribs" or "arch of bones"; according to most of the authorities who have specialized in the etymology of rare Quranic expressions this term relates specifically to female anatomy (Taj al-'Arus).

 

Ok I can see this fitting well with a woman

 

Similarly, Shaykh Abdul Wahhab At-Turayri's Fatwa Committe writes:

 

...the words translated as “backbone†(sulb) and “ribs†(tarâ’ib) are not understood in Arabic to belong to the same person. Arabs understand the “sulb†to refer to a part of the male body and the “tarâ’ib†to a part of the female. Ibn Kathîr states: “It refers to the ‘sulb’ of the man and the ‘tarâ’ib’ of the woman, which is the area of her chest.†I dont really understand this. So both of the man and woman's private part are understood by looking at the woman's area of her chest? He then quotes this interpretation on the authority of the Prophet’s companion Ibn `Abbâs. This same understanding is given in all the major classical works of Qur’anic commentary.

 

Moreover, the word “sulb†should not necessarily be translated as “backboneâ€. This word has many possible meanings and backbone is only one of them. It is also quite commonly used to mean the loins of a man. This is how it is used elsewhere in the Qur’ân. Allah says: “Prohibited to you (for marriage) are…wives of your sons proceeding from your loins (aslâb, the plural of sulb).†[sûrah al-Nisâ’: 23] There can be no problem with sperm coming out from the area of a man's loins. Is this talking about specifically now his testicles? So can I consider now Allah is not being timid about the man's purpose of his testicles?

Likewise, when we look at the word being translated as “ribs†(tarâ’ib, the plural of tarîbah) we find that it is used linguistically for the general are of the chest and the abdomen. In al-Qâmûs, the famous classical dictionary of al-Fayrûzabâdî it is defined as a number of things: “the bones of the chest or what comes after the two collarbones or what comes between the collarbones and the chest or the four ribs to the right of the chest or the four ribs to the left of the chest or the hands, eyes and feet or the collarbones.†Some Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and some Successors had also provided many possible meanings, like the lower ribs and al-Dahhâk’s statement that it is the area between the breasts and feet and the eyes (a mere indication of centrality). I did not get this. This seems like alot of ribs, hands, chests, and backs are rearranged to somehow make sense.

 

This word clearly has a very broad and diverse definition. It is so ambiguous a word that the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) could not give it a precise definition. Scholars of Qur’ânic commentary have consistently admitted to there being at least three different possible meanings for this word as it is used in the verse. This is an admission that they do not know for certain what the tarâ’ib are, except that they generally agree it refers to an area of the woman’s body. It can apply to any region nearing the ribcage. Therefore, the area of the ovaries, the fallopian tubes, or the uterus can easily fit into the general area that is being indicated by these verses.

 

That should be sufficient.

 

And the hadiths reflect such errors too, Which error is it mentioning? That the quran is wrong(highly unlikely) or that the error against the quran is worng? like the the three stages of 40 days in which the embryo is semen, alaqa and mudgah.

There is nothing unscientific about this hadith as Dr. Omar Abdel Rahman comments:

 

This Hadith indicates that the Nutfah, 'Alaqah and Mudghah stages are completed before 42 days. Further, the bones stage which follows the Mudghah (Ayah 14, Al-Mu'minun) is now stated to occur after 42 days according to this Hadith. If the interpretation of the first Hadith is correct this will mean that the bones appear after 120 days. The Hadith used the phrase "like that" which can be interpreted as a repetition of the time period or as a repetition of the completion of form in each of the stages of 'Alaqah and Mudghah. Thus the phrase is "Mujmal" general; but in the second Hadith it is explicitly (Mubayyan) stated that the bones start to differentiate after 42 days. The rule followed by Muslim scholars Interprets the "Mujmal" in the light of "Mubayyan" which clarifies the generalisation and gives the specific meaning and intention of the speaker.

 

As early as 651 A.H. Ibn Azzamlakani had reached the conclusion that the stages of 'Alaqah and Mudghah were completed during the first forty days:

 

Ibn Azzamlakani states: "Then he becomes 'Alaqah like that" meaning that in the 40 days mentioned the conceptus will be 'Alaqah which is completely and perfectly formed within the perfection which is possible for it. Thus they are equal in completion in its generality and not in particularities. "Then he becomes Mudghah like that" i.e. in its own share of the 40days also completely formed as the complete human being is perfectly formed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If Allah is not timid to address himself as royal and proudly by saying "We" to the readers of the quran, why is he timid to mention the gushing out of fluids from a man's testicles?"

 

Because talking explicitly about the private parts is not the Qur'anic style. That's why the Qur'an uses an euphemism. Look up the meaning and how it is used.

 

"What is out of place? The objection or the idea that sperm emanates from between the backbone and ribs?"

 

The non-Muslim's objection regarding the expression.

 

"What is this saying? That without even looking at the quran, one would automatically assume that the idea of sperm emanating from between the backbone and ribs is obvious?"

 

I think he is saying that the Arabs of old would have understood this euphemism quite clearly and that it isn't hard to understand even for people of modern age. Look at the picture that is shown in that thread and you'll understand why.

 

" I dont really understand this. So both of the man and woman's private part are understood by looking at the woman's area of her chest?

 

No, that is not what it is saying.

 

"Is this talking about specifically now his testicles? So can I consider now Allah is not being timid about the man's purpose of his testicles?"

 

Yes, it is talking about the man's private parts. The expression "from your own loins" means from your private parts, i.e. your biological children.

 

"I did not get this. This seems like alot of ribs, hands, chests, and backs are rearranged to somehow make sense."

 

It just means that the Arabic word "Taraaib" has quite a large definition. For example, in Patois, a Jamaican) language, "foot" (which is taken from English) can mean any area between the hip and the actual foot. The same is the case here. It has got quite a large definition.

 

"Which error is it mentioning? That the quran is wrong(highly unlikely) or that the error against the quran is worng?

 

The following is the statement of a non-Muslim: "And the hadiths reflect such errors too, like the the three stages of 40 days in which the embryo is semen, alaqa and mudgah." He is saying that the Prophetic narrations/sayings which are called hadiths reflect errors. This wasn't said by a Muslim, that's why it was quoted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If Allah is not timid to address himself as royal and proudly by saying "We" to the readers of the quran, why is he timid to mention the gushing out of fluids from a man's testicles?"

 

Because talking explicitly about the private parts is not the Qur'anic style. That's why the Qur'an uses an euphemism. Look up the meaning and how it is used.

I see a drawing with a red line outlining ABCD. Is that offensive to describe how our private organs work? Euphemism means to express something without being offensive right?

"What is this saying? That without even looking at the quran, one would automatically assume that the idea of sperm emanating from between the backbone and ribs is obvious?"

I think he is saying that the Arabs of old would have understood this euphemism quite clearly and that it isn't hard to understand even for people of modern age. Look at the picture that is shown in that thread and you'll understand why.

 

The mere fact that the previous verse had referred to 'the fluid gushing forth' (semen), which is followed by the words 'which emanates from...', brings to mind the source of the 'gushing forth' of the fluid, without much difficulty. Furthermore, one should not forget that even if the male sperm was actually formed within the two stipulated points, the mention of this source of formation of the male sperm had absolutely no pertinence with the message of the Qur'an and the information would have been of absolutely no relevance to the Arabs of old - the direct addressees of the Qur'an. So the meaning of this process never had any relevance to the quran? I thought the verses from the quran in question - do have relevance. Isn't that why they are proving the quran is compatible with science? The mere realization of the point that the Qur'an does not refer to any such information, even if it is true, that has no relevance to its basic message, guides one to the simple physical (non-scientific and uncomplicated) interpretation of the verse under consideration.

 

"Is this talking about specifically now his testicles? So can I consider now Allah is not being timid about the man's purpose of his testicles?"

 

Yes, it is talking about the man's private parts. The expression "from your own loins" means from your private parts, i.e. your biological children.

Since it says this private part was expressed through euphemism - through the backbone and ribs - now it is expressing the actual private part without being euphemistic? Wasn't the style of the quran trying to avoid the phrases of such things in the first place?

"I did not get this. This seems like alot of ribs, hands, chests, and backs are rearranged to somehow make sense."

 

It just means that the Arabic word "Taraaib" has quite a large definition. For example, in Patois, a Jamaican) language, "foot" (which is taken from English) can mean any area between the hip and the actual foot. The same is the case here. It has got quite a large definition.

I think out of this I only understood that someone can refer to the feet, stomach, and head as one word to mean centrality. So this word whichever it is would mean that even though there are 3 parts of the body (head to toe), it means to describe the center. Am I right?

 

"Which error is it mentioning? That the quran is wrong(highly unlikely) or that the error against the quran is worng?

 

The following is the statement of a non-Muslim: "And the hadiths reflect such errors too, like the the three stages of 40 days in which the embryo is semen, alaqa and mudgah." He is saying that the Prophetic narrations/sayings which are called hadiths reflect errors. This wasn't said by a Muslim, that's why it was quoted.

 

I meant is that the hadith reflecting such errors - is correcting the objection made against the quran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I see a drawing with a red line outlining ABCD. Is that offensive to describe how our private organs work? Euphemism means to express something without being offensive right?"

 

Yes, euphemism means to express something without being offensive or explicit. It is usually used when talking about things of a sexual nature or answering the call of nature ("the call of nature" being an euphemism too). The drawing is an illustration of what "between the back and the ribs" mean. As you can see, the penis and the testicles fall in to that. I hope that is clear.

 

"So the meaning of this process never had any relevance to the quran? I thought the verses from the quran in question - do have relevance. Isn't that why they are proving the quran is compatible with science?

 

Every verse in the Qur'an has relevance.

 

"Since it says this private part was expressed through euphemism - through the backbone and ribs - now it is expressing the actual private part without being euphemistic? Wasn't the style of the quran trying to avoid the phrases of such things in the first place?"

 

The expressions "from between the backbone and the ribs", "loins" and "private parts" are euphemisms. The Qur'an doesn't use explicit words like "penis", "vagina", "testicles" or downright vulgar words etc. The Qur'an uses euphemisms when talking of people's private parts. I hope this is clear.

 

"I think out of this I only understood that someone can refer to the feet, stomach, and head as one word to mean centrality. So this word whichever it is would mean that even though there are 3 parts of the body (head to toe), it means to describe the center. Am I right?"

 

Yes, you got the part about centrality, i.e. an area that is between two things, right.

 

"I meant is that the hadith reflecting such errors - is correcting the objection made against the quran?"

 

I didn't really understand you here, but I will briefly and simply describe the situation by paraphrasing. The non-Muslim said that the Hadiths reflect scientific errors just as the Qur'an does. The Muslim author quoted him and then proceeded to explain that the Hadiths don't contain errors just as the Qur'an doesn't. I hope this is clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"What is this saying? That without even looking at the quran, one would automatically assume that the idea of sperm emanating from between the backbone and ribs is obvious?"-TJ

 

I think he is saying that the Arabs of old would have understood this euphemism quite clearly and that it isn't hard to understand even for people of modern age. Look at the picture that is shown in that thread and you'll understand why.-YNZ

 

So the meaning of this process never had any relevance to the quran? I thought the verses from the quran in question - do have relevance. Isn't that why they are proving the quran is compatible with science? -TJ

 

Every verse in the Qur'an has relevance. -YNZ

 

The mere fact that the previous verse had referred to 'the fluid gushing forth' (semen), which is followed by the words 'which emanates from...', brings to mind the source of the 'gushing forth' of the fluid, without much difficulty. Furthermore, one should not forget that even if the male sperm was actually formed within the two stipulated points, the mention of this source of formation of the male sperm had absolutely no pertinence with the message of the Qur'an (Right here I get confused. In this article it sounds like it's trying to prove (the theme) that sperm being created initially comes from between the backbone and ribs. But this paragraph seems to say it is not trying to prove this. (Seeing how it has no pertinence to the quran) So is it trying to prove this science compatible or not with the quran?) and the information would have been of absolutely no relevance to the Arabs of old - the direct addressees of the Qur'an. The mere realization of the point that the Qur'an does not refer to any such information, even if it is true, that has no relevance to its basic message, guides one to the simple physical (non-scientific and uncomplicated) interpretation of the verse under consideration. -YNZ REF.

 

 

The expressions "from between the backbone and the ribs", "loins" and "private parts" are euphemisms. The Qur'an doesn't use explicit words like "penis", "vagina", "testicles" or downright vulgar words etc. The Qur'an uses euphemisms when talking of people's private parts. I hope this is clear.-YNZ

Ok I'll give the word "loins" the credit for euphemism

 

 

I didn't really understand you here, but I will briefly and simply describe the situation by paraphrasing. The non-Muslim said that the Hadiths reflect scientific errors just as the Qur'an does. The Muslim author quoted him and then proceeded to explain that the Hadiths don't contain errors just as the Qur'an doesn't. I hope this is clear. -YNZI think I need more time to study more about the quran and hadiths before I can understand what words like, "like that" mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The mere fact that the previous verse had referred to 'the fluid gushing forth' (semen), which is followed by the words 'which emanates from...', brings to mind the source of the 'gushing forth' of the fluid, without much difficulty. Furthermore, one should not forget that even if the male sperm was actually formed within the two stipulated points, the mention of this source of formation of the male sperm had absolutely no pertinence with the message of the Qur'an (Right here I get confused. In this article it sounds like it's trying to prove (the theme) that sperm being created initially comes from between the backbone and ribs. But this paragraph seems to say it is not trying to prove this. (Seeing how it has no pertinence to the quran) So is it trying to prove this science compatible or not with the quran?) and the information would have been of absolutely no relevance to the Arabs of old - the direct addressees of the Qur'an. The mere realization of the point that the Qur'an does not refer to any such information, even if it is true, that has no relevance to its basic message, guides one to the simple physical (non-scientific and uncomplicated) interpretation of the verse under consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vow cus t j your fascination with male ejaculation is is very interesting

i wouldnt be surprised if you turned out to be girl

the fluid thatmgushes out between the ribs and the back bone

are the neurotransmitters of the autonomous nervous system

and they induce contractions of the male prostate gland that squeezes sperm out of the organ you seem to wish mentioned by name in the holy scripture

i hope the science i just explained is enoughmto stiate your curiosity

as you can sense all words have a lot of play in them

so one chooses the direction of a words meanings according to

one's personal wishes

if you are set out to prove that the quran is unscientific

then the quran already tells that it leads many astray

if your intent is to find purity through quran

you will acheive that too

however your belief or disbelief

your dissertations about quran's truth or supposed flaws

will effect only you

if you have the time and room to wrestle with the intelligence

of the omniscient

go ahead

just remeber you have volumes and volumes in multiple languages by multiple authorrs to go past

best of luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm glad someone can explain it further for me. See I am new to Islam and the Quran, Hadiths, etc. I see there is alot of volumes and languages to learn as you say - to fully understand Islam. But seeing how I am new and these doctors are using references to hadiths and such things I am very new too confuses me. Because people with general understanding of Islam can link the hadiths to the article right away. As for me, I am slow to see the relevance to one another. I dont know if this is making much sense but you see I'm just trying to learn what they mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, its been a while since I have come back to this forum. How have you guys been? Salem Wa Alikum. Lately I've been attending some sessions held in our local Masjids. I have even taken the Shahadah. I must say it is a good feeling to be with people who know the truth. Yet like the Imam told me, Islam is an never ending process of developing one self to truth. So with that in mind, I asked him about the same question from this topic: Embryology. I just wanted to see what he would say.

 

Surah 86:

6- He was created from a fluid, ejected,

7- Emerging from between the backbone and ribs

There is nothing wrong with verse #6, but as for #7, then the term "backbone" and "ribs" is not correct. The term translated as "backbone" here comes from the Arabic word Sulb - which is more correctly translated as loins - not backbone. And the evidence for that is that Allāh uses this term elsewhere in the Qurʽān where He says: "Prohibited to you (in marriage) are wives of your sons proceeding from your loins (Aslâb, the plural of Sulb)" (An-Nisā' 4:23). So this unfortunately is an erroneous translation.

 

 

 

As for the Arabic term Tarā'ib which is translated as "ribs" - then unfortunately, this too is a mistranslation, as the term literally means curved bones. And this is more correctly referring to the pelvis, which is made up of two semi-circular bones that meet. And in fact, this is not referring to the male, but the Tarā'ib of the women - this is what has been stated by the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and early scholars of the Qurʽān. So Allāh is actually speaking about the area of the loins for the male (where the testicles are), and the area of the pelvis for the woman (where the ovaries are).

This is the email I received from the Imam regarding this topic.

 

Now from the the report Younes sent me, I was not 100% able to comprehend what was being said by the people who have knowledge of these 2 verses. Since I am still a layman, it was a little difficult to make sense of it all from what was being said. The only thing I could extract from the article is that, "the backbone and ribs" being written would bring a euphemistic approach to the process of how man/woman is formed. But what I get as an answer from the Imam is what sounds completely different. He states that these verses written in english is an erroneous translation. So I asked him why is it there in the first place.

 

Good question. I don't normally read the English but even so, like I mentioned in the beginning, this is a limitation of going from one language to another. For example, Tarā'ib - literally meaning curved bones would not be incorrect to say ribs - as the rib cage is curved. In the context of the verse, however, it obviously cannot be the rib cage - for the two reasons I mentioned earlier - but another section of the body that has curved bones - that being the pelvis.

 

 

 

In the Arabic language, many words are far more encompassing than the specifics found in the English language. For example, the word Sadr in Arabic - is commonly translated into English as chest. But that is not completely correct, because in the Arabic language - the entire upper torso is called Sadr, whereas in English, they would break it up into chest, abdomen, etc.

 

So I want to ask you guys. What is the problem all about? Is it about euphemism or a translated error?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surah 86:

6- He was created from a fluid, ejected,

7- Emerging from between the backbone and ribs

 

Isn't sperm discharged from the underneath the groin? The lowest point of the ribs are above the groin. So if semen is shout out from above the groin, isnt that impossible? Being in between the backbone and ribs, how can the stomach shoot out semen?

 

Science at the time of Mohammed thought that semen originated from the kidneys ('from between the backbone and ribs'). We now know today that it comes from the testis. plain and simple. Every refutation you hear from muslim apologetics emerges from their fear of admitting that they're wrong. Let me let you in on a little secret: there's NOTHING wrong with admitting that you're wrong. I've done it plenty of times. It's called 'honesty'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Science at the time of Mohammed thought that semen originated from the kidneys ('from between the backbone and ribs'). We now know today that it comes from the testis. plain and simple. Every refutation you hear from muslim apologetics emerges from their fear of admitting that they're wrong. Let me let you in on a little secret: there's NOTHING wrong with admitting that you're wrong. I've done it plenty of times. It's called 'honesty'.

 

:sl:

 

That is pretty funny.

 

I mean, if Muhammed was so great, why couldn't he realise that those dangly things under the penis were ouside of the body to keep the reproductive cells cool, y'know... so they don't overheat and die?

 

If he was on a 1 to 1 with Allah, surely Allah would've corrected it and said something along the lines of "Noooo, that's your kidney, very importent, helps with a lot of things like filtering out bad things in your blood. The white stuff actually comes from those dangly bits there... yeah, that's them... ok, you can put it away now.".

 

Though, it does make you wonder; what did Muhammed think the testies were actually for? Decoration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surah 86:

6- He was created from a fluid, ejected,

7- Emerging from between the backbone and ribs

 

Isn't sperm discharged from the underneath the groin? The lowest point of the ribs are above the groin. So if semen is shout out from above the groin, isnt that impossible? Being in between the backbone and ribs, how can the stomach shoot out semen?

 

 

If semen is coming out of your stomach, then it's probably because of a night you'd rather forget.

 

So I won't remind you of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@###### : if anyone thinks sperm originates above the kidneys ,is not entirely wrong. A newborn's testicles migrate from above the upper poles of the kidneys down to the scrotal sac.also the nerve signals for ejaculation originate in the lumbosacral ganglia of the autonomic nervous system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Though, it does make you wonder; what did Muhammed think the testies were actually for? Decoration?

 

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) knew about the reproductive function that the testes had.

 

The companions of the Prophet had asked him before, if they should get castrated so as not to ejaculate whilst they are unmarried.

We read from the authentic hadeeth:

 

Abdullah reported: “We were on an expedition with God’s Messenger and we had no women with us. We said: ‘Should we not have ourselves castrated?’ He (the Holy Prophet) forbade us to do so.’” (Sahih Muslim, 3243)

 

There are many authentic hadiths which proved that the Prophet knew about how reproduction in Man worked. Maybe you should check yourself first beofre commenting on things which you do not know.

 

As for this topic, I think brother Yousef has explained it clearly and thoroughly in an earlier post in this thread.

 

The Arabic word in the verse is 'sulb', which when looked in context, means loins. In this verse it is understood to be that of a man.

'Taraib' in the verse, is understood to be ribs or arch of bones, generally understood to be on the body of a female. It is an obscure word, not used commonly by Arabs today, as I understand it. At the time of the Prophet, its definition of this word was a broad one, and they did not understand it to be ribs alone. Neither did they make any definitive claim that it means only ribs. Today, it is understood to be the pelvic arch of a woman.

I think the best translation of the verse comes from Muhammad Asad (may Allah be pleased with him).

 

Al-Quran: 86:6-7 Khuliqa Min Mā'in Dāfiqin Yakhruju Min Bayni Aş-Şulbi Wa At-Tarā'ibi

 

he has been created out of a seminal fluid, issuing from between the loins [of man] and the pelvic arch [of woman]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×