Presented by Zia H Shah MD

Abstract

This comprehensive report investigates the transformative potential of scientific exegesis (tafsīr ʿilmī) as a hermeneutical mechanism to transcend the historical and theological fractures that define contemporary sectarian Islam. Anchored in the Quranic articulation of Divine Infinity—specifically the “Ocean of Ink” metaphors found in Surah Al-Kahf (18:109) and Surah Luqman (31:27)—the analysis posits that the “Words” (kalimāt) of God are ontologically inexhaustible, rendering any human claim to a monopoly on interpretation both theologically unsound and intellectually stifling.

The report argues that traditional sectarian tafsīr, formed largely during the medieval consolidation of the Sunni, Shia, and Ismaili schools, has created “parochial boxes” of meaning. These interpretive silos prioritize juristic and dogmatic particularities while marginalizing the Quran’s extensive cosmological discourse. In contrast, the “Book of Nature”—readable through the universal language of modern science—offers a neutral, empirical common ground. By validating Quranic truths through the observable realities of biology, geology, and cosmology, scientific commentary democratizes access to the text, shifting authority from the exclusive lineage of the clergy to the inclusive observations of the “people of understanding” (ulul albab).

Drawing on a synthesis of classical exegesis, modern reformist thought (notably Tafsīr al-Manār), and contemporary philosophy of science (Nidhal Guessoum, Ziauddin Sardar), this document demonstrates how acknowledging the infinite essence of Divine Knowledge necessitates an “Open Text” approach. This paradigm not only reconciles revelation with reason but also serves as a vehicle for spiritual liberation, taking the Quran out of the clutches of sectarian monopoly and restoring it as a living, unfolding guide for a global humanity.

---

1. Introduction: The Crisis of Fragmentation and the Call for Universality

The contemporary Muslim world is characterized by a profound paradox: the adherence to a single, unalterable text—the Quran—coexists with a fractured landscape of interpretation that often renders the scripture a source of division rather than unity. For fourteen centuries, the exegesis (tafsīr) of the Quran has been the primary intellectual battleground upon which sectarian identities have been forged, defended, and ossified. Whether through the hadith-centric methodologies of Sunni orthodoxy, the Imam-centric esotericism of Twelver Shi’ism, or the ta’wil-heavy gnosis of the Ismaili tradition, the Quran has frequently been read through lenses that prioritize the validation of specific theological lineages over the universal applicability of the Divine message.¹

This phenomenon has resulted in what can be termed “interpretive silos” or “parochial boxes”.² Within these confines, the “Truth” is treated as a scarce resource, hoarded by a clerical elite who claim exclusive access to the intent of the Lawgiver. The average believer is thus reduced to a passive consumer of meanings derived centuries ago, often disconnected from the lived reality of the modern world. The crisis is compounded by the historical marginalization of the “Cosmic Quran”—the hundreds of verses inviting reflection on the natural world—in favor of legalistic and polemical verses.¹

However, the Quran itself contains the antidote to this fragmentation. By invoking the concept of God’s infinite knowledge and the inexhaustibility of His “Words,” the scripture challenges the very notion of finality in human interpretation. This report explores how recovering this theological commitment to infinity, coupled with the universal language of modern science, offers a pathway out of sectarian parochialism. It posits that tafsīr ʿilmī (scientific exegesis) is not merely an apologetic tool, but a necessary evolution in Islamic hermeneutics—one that restores the “Common Ground” of empirical reality as a valid site for encountering the Divine.¹

---

2. The Theology of the Infinite: Deconstructing 18:109 and 31:27

The theoretical core of this analysis rests on two pivotal verses that fundamentally alter the relationship between the finite human reader and the infinite Divine author. These verses, 18:109 and 31:27, serve as the “new heading” under which the entire enterprise of tafsir must be re-evaluated. They provide the license for a continuous, unending engagement with the text.

2.1 The Metaphor of the Exhausted Ocean

Surah Al-Kahf, verse 109, presents a quantitative argument for the boundlessness of Divine Knowledge:

Say, “If the sea were ink for [writing] the words of my Lord, the sea would be exhausted before the words of my Lord were exhausted, even if We brought the like of it as a supplement.” (18:109).⁴

In the 7th-century Arabian context, the “sea” (al-bahr) represented the ultimate symbol of vastness and abundance. It was the largest physical entity conceivable to the human mind. By reducing this vastness to a finite, consumable resource (ink), the Quran dramatically recalibrates the scale of human understanding against Divine reality. Classical commentators like Ibn Kathir and Al-Tabari acknowledged this, noting that while the sea is vast, it is created and finite, whereas the Words of Allah are uncreated and infinite.⁴

Surah Luqman, verse 27, expands this imagery into a hyperbole of multiplication:

And if whatever trees upon the earth were pens and the sea [was ink], replenished thereafter by seven [more] seas, the words of Allah would not be exhausted. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise. (31:27).⁸

Here, the logistical apparatus of recording is exhausted. Every tree becoming a pen implies the utilization of all terrestrial biomass for the purpose of documentation. The addition of “seven more seas” (sab’atu abhur) is understood by linguists and exegetes not as a literal integer, but as an idiom for multiplicity and unlimited abundance—essentially, “ocean upon ocean, ad infinitum”.¹¹

2.2 Kalimāt (Words) vs. Ilm (Knowledge): An Ontological Distinction

A critical nuance in these verses is the use of the term Kalimāt (Words) rather than simply Ilm (Knowledge). While Ilm refers to God’s omniscience, Kalimāt implies His creative acts and commands. As noted by scholars referencing Al-Ghazali and Ibn Arabi, the “Words” of God are the realities of existence itself.¹³ When God wills a thing, He says “Be” (Kun), and it is. Therefore, every galaxy, star, planet, organism, and atom is a “Word” of God.

This ontological definition transforms the universe into a “Book” (Kitāb al-Takwīnī) that runs parallel to the “Book of Revelation” (Kitāb al-Tadwīnī). If the physical universe consists of God’s Words, and these Words are inexhaustible, then the study of the universe—science—is a direct engagement with the Divine Speech.¹

2.3 The Theological Mandate for Open Interpretation

The implications of this theology for tafsīr are radical. If God’s Words are inexhaustible, then no single interpretation, no matter how authoritative, can ever encompass the totality of the text’s meaning. A commentary written in the 10th century, however brilliant, utilized the “ink” of its time—the limited knowledge of the era. To claim that such a commentary is final is to claim that the ocean has run dry, which contradicts the explicit text of the Quran.²

This realization strikes at the heart of sectarianism. Sectarian dogmas often rely on the closure of meaning—the idea that the “Truth” was fully captured by the founding Imams or Jurists. Verses 18:109 and 31:27 dismantle this closure. They compel the believer to adopt a stance of intellectual humility and continuous inquiry. The “Invitation” of the Quran is thus an invitation to a journey that has no end, liberating the text from the temporal and cognitive limitations of any specific group of scholars.¹

---

3. The Anatomy of Sectarian Monopoly

To understand the liberating power of scientific tafsīr, one must first diagnose the pathology it seeks to cure: the sectarian monopoly on the Quran. This monopoly is not merely a matter of differing opinions; it is a structural concentration of interpretive power that excludes the “other” and stifles the “new.”

3.1 The Historical Consolidation of Interpretive Authority

Following the death of the Prophet, the early Muslim community fractured over political leadership. These political fissures rapidly evolved into theological chasms. To legitimize their positions, each group developed distinct hermeneutical principles:

• The Sunni Tradition: Came to rely heavily on Tafsīr bi-al-Ma’thur (received exegesis), prioritizing the reports of the Companions and the early generations (Salaf). While this preserved the historical context, it often led to Taqlid (imitation), where later scholars felt unauthorized to contradict the “understanding of the ancestors.” This created a backward-looking orientation where the “best” understanding was always in the past.¹⁷
• The Shia Tradition: Centralized authority in the figure of the Imam, who possessed the Ilm (divine knowledge) to unlock the bāṭin (inner meaning) of the Quran. While allowing for deeper spiritual readings, this created a dependency on the hierarchy of the Imams and their deputies (Marja’iyya), potentially limiting the layperson’s direct engagement with the text.²
• The Ismaili Tradition: Took the bāṭin/zāhir distinction to its zenith. Historical critiques suggest that high-ranking Ismaili hierarchies effectively monopolized the “true” meaning of the Quran, rendering the literal text a mere shell or “veil” for the uninitiated. This structure creates a “parochial box” par excellence, where meaning is not found in the text or the world, but in the secret knowledge of the leader.²

3.2 The “Parochial Box” and the Exclusion of Reality

The “parochial box” refers to the closed epistemic systems generated by these sects. Within the box, truth is self-referential. A verse is interpreted not by looking at the world it describes, but by looking at what previous scholars within the box said it meant.

This insularity had a devastating effect on the “Cosmic Verses”—those dealing with natural phenomena. Classical scholars, lacking scientific instruments, interpreted verses about the heavens, embryology, and geology through the prevailing myths or Aristotelian physics of their time. For example, the “seven heavens” were often mapped onto the Ptolemaic spheres. Because the interpretive authority was vested in the “popular scholars” of law and theology, these scientifically outdated interpretations became canonized.¹

The “clutches of sectarian monopoly” thus act as a filter, allowing only meanings that reinforce the sect’s identity to pass through, while blocking insights that might challenge established dogmas or require knowledge outside the sect’s traditional curriculum.

3.3 The Marginalization of the “People of Understanding”

The Quran frequently addresses Ulul Albab (people of intellect/understanding) and Qawm Yatafakkarun (people who reflect). In the sectarian framework, these terms were often redefined to mean “people who agree with our theology.” The scientist, the philosopher, and the independent thinker were frequently marginalized or viewed with suspicion.

By reclaiming the “Infinite Ink” of the Quran, we assert that the Ulul Albab are not just the jurists, but anyone who engages deeply with God’s signs. This includes the astronomer peering into the early universe and the biologist decoding the genome. Their exclusion from the table of tafsīr is a symptom of the monopoly that must be dismantled.²

---

4. Scientific Commentary (Tafsir Ilmi) as the Neutral Arbiter

In the face of deep sectarian divisions, scientific exegesis offers a unique methodological advantage: the neutrality of its source material. The natural world does not belong to any sect.

4.1 The Epistemology of Nature: Science as Universal Truth

Gravity exerts the same force on a Sunni as it does on a Shia. The stages of embryonic development are identical for Ismaili and Wahhabi infants. The expansion of the universe is an objective reality independent of theological disputation.

This universality makes Tafsīr ʿilmī a powerful tool for reconciliation. When the Quran speaks of natural phenomena, interpreting these verses through the lens of established science removes the interpretation from the realm of sectarian polemics. It anchors the meaning in an external, verifiable reality—the “Work of God”—which serves as a check and balance on the interpretation of the “Word of God”.¹

4.2 Historical Precedents: From the Golden Age to Al-Manar

The integration of science and scripture is not a modern innovation but a revival of the classical Islamic spirit.

• The Golden Age: Polymaths like Al-Biruni (d. 1048) and Ibn al-Haytham (d. 1040) viewed their scientific work as Tafakkur (worshipful reflection). They did not see a dichotomy between their faith and their empirical studies.
• The Modern Turn – Tafsīr al-Manār: In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Muhammad Abduh and Rashid Rida initiated a reformist movement centered on Tafsīr al-Manār. They argued that the decline of the Muslim world was due to the stagnation of the Ulama and their refusal to engage with reason and science. Abduh posited that the Quran must be compatible with modern knowledge, effectively opening the door for tafsīr ʿilmī as a tool of revival.²⁰

4.3 Modern Methodologies: The “Reconciliation” Model

While early attempts at scientific tafsir were sometimes criticized for “concordism” (forcing the text to fit the science), contemporary scholars like Nidhal Guessoum advocate for a more nuanced “Reconciliation” model.

• Rejection of Scientism: Guessoum argues against treating the Quran as a science textbook. Instead, he views it as a book of guidance that includes “signals” (ishārāt) to the natural world.
• Multi-Level Meaning: This approach accepts that a verse may have a simple literal meaning for the 7th-century Arab and a complex scientific meaning for the modern reader. This aligns perfectly with the “Infinite Ink” theology—the meaning expands as the reader’s capacity expands.²²
• Theistic Science: This model promotes a science that is methodologically naturalistic but metaphysically theistic, seeing the laws of nature as the habits of God. This allows for a “Common Ground” where religious and secular truths converge.²²

---

5. Unfolding the Signs: Case Studies in Scientific Hermeneutics

The abstract arguments for “Infinite Insights” become tangible when applied to specific Quranic verses. The following case studies illustrate how modern science “replenishes the ink,” revealing layers of meaning that were inaccessible to the classical sectarian mind.

5.1 The Aquatic Origins of Life (Surah Al-Anbya 21:30)

Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?.²⁴

Classical “Limited Ink” View:

Classical commentators like Al-Tabari interpreted “made from water” based on the observable physiology of the time. They noted that animals eject fluid (semen) for reproduction or that depriving an animal of water causes death. This interpretation was observational but superficial, constrained by the lack of biological knowledge.24

Scientific “Replenished Ink” View:

Modern biology offers a profound deepening of this verse. We now know that:

1. Cytoplasm: The cell, the basic unit of life, is approximately 80% water. Without water as a solvent, the biochemical reactions of life (metabolism) cannot occur.
2. Abiogenesis: Evolutionary biology and geochemistry posit that life on Earth originated in the “primordial soup” of ancient oceans or hydrothermal vents.
3. Astrobiology: The search for extraterrestrial life is predicated on the mantra “follow the water.”The verse’s structure—linking the cosmological “separation of heavens and earth” (Big Bang/accretion) immediately with the biological “creation from water”—mirrors the scientific narrative of cosmic evolution leading to chemical evolution. This insight was technically impossible for a classical scholar to possess. The “Word” of God here contained a biological truth that waited 1400 years to be fully read.25

5.2 Geological Stabilizers: The Roots of Mountains (78:6-7, 31:10)

Have We not made the earth a resting place? And the mountains as stakes (awtād)? (78:6-7).³

Classical “Limited Ink” View:

Early exegetes understood “stakes” metaphorically or visually. Mountains looked like pegs driven into the ground. They believed mountains weighed down the earth to stop it from shaking, akin to placing a heavy stone on a fluttering carpet.3

Scientific “Replenished Ink” View:

Geophysics and the theory of Isostasy have revealed that mountains are not merely heavy loads on the surface. Like icebergs, they have deep crustal “roots” extending into the mantle, often 10-15 times deeper than their surface height. These roots mechanically stabilize the continental plates “floating” on the asthenosphere.

Furthermore, the Quranic mention of “lest it shake with you” (31:10) aligns with the role of mountain belts in cratonic stabilization. The term awtād (pegs) is scientifically precise: a peg holds a tent by being driven deep into the ground, just as a mountain is rooted in the crust. This scientific reading bypasses sectarian disputes about the nature of the earth and grounds the verse in physical reality.28

5.3 Embryological Stages and Human Development (23:12-14)

Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot (alaqah), and We made the clot into a lump [of flesh] (mudghah)….¹³

Classical “Limited Ink” View:

Classical tafsīr relied on Galenic medicine or simple observation of miscarriages. Alaqah was often interpreted as “congealed blood,” and mudghah simply as a piece of meat.

Scientific “Replenished Ink” View:

Microscopic embryology has revolutionized the understanding of these terms:

• Alaqah: In Arabic, this means a leech, a suspended thing, or a blood clot. The embryo at days 15-24 literally resembles a leech in shape, is suspended in the womb, and feeds on the mother’s blood (like a leech).
• Mudghah: This means “chewed substance.” At week 4, the embryo develops somites (precursors to vertebrae) which give it the distinct appearance of a piece of gum with teeth marks.The precision of these descriptions, confirmed by modern technology, suggests an authorship aware of microscopic details. This “common ground” invites all Muslims to appreciate the text’s accuracy without needing a sectarian mediator.30

5.4 Cosmological Expansion (51:47)

And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander (mūsiʿūn)..²⁸

Classical “Limited Ink” View:

The word mūsiʿūn was traditionally interpreted as “We are vast in power” or “We are rich/bountiful.” The idea of a physical expansion of the universe was conceptually alien to the static universe models of the time.

Scientific “Replenished Ink” View:

Since Edwin Hubble’s 1929 discovery, we know the universe is expanding. The Arabic participle mūsiʿūn (plural of mūsi’) literally means “expanders.” The scientific interpretation—that God is continuously expanding the fabric of space-time—fits the literal Arabic perfectly. This interpretation transforms a verse about God’s general power into a specific cosmological statement, demonstrating the “inexhaustible” nature of the Quranic text as it accommodates new realities.28

---

6. Democratizing the Divine: The Sociology of Open Interpretation

The shift towards scientific tafsīr is not just an intellectual exercise; it is a sociological shift in the structure of religious authority.

6.1 Breaking the Clerical Gatekeeping

Historically, the “gatekeepers” of the Quran were those who mastered the 15 sciences of the madrasa (grammar, rhetoric, hadith, etc.). While essential for legal rulings, these tools are insufficient for verifying the “Cosmic Quran.”

A geologist who reads the verses on mountains brings a level of Tafakkur (reflection) that a grammarian cannot. By validating the scientist’s insight as a legitimate form of exegesis, we break the clerical monopoly. Authority becomes distributed: the faqih (jurist) retains authority on law, but the scientist gains authority on nature. This creates a “Republic of Knowledge” rather than a “Monarchy of the Mullah,” fulfilling the Quranic ideal of a community of thinkers.16

6.2 The Quran as an “Open Text”

Ziauddin Sardar, a prominent Muslim intellectual, argues for reading the Quran as an “Open Text.” He posits that if the Quran is eternal, it cannot be “closed” by the interpretations of the past. It must be open to the future, ready to engage with new ethical, social, and scientific challenges.16

This “Open Text” theory is the practical application of 18:109 and 31:27. It demands that the reader constantly “refresh” the interpretation. It rejects the “Parochial Box” where the only valid questions are those asked by the founders of the sects. Instead, it encourages questions driven by contemporary reality: “What does the Quran say about bioethics? About climate change? About AI?”

The “Open Text” approach is inherently anti-sectarian because it prioritizes the current interaction between the text and reality over the historical interaction between the text and the sect’s founders.1

6.3 Spiritual Liberation and the End of Compulsion

The Quranic declaration “Let there be no compulsion in religion” (2:256) is often cited in political contexts. However, in the context of tafsīr, it signifies spiritual liberation.35

Sectarian monopoly is a form of cognitive compulsion: “You must think like us to be saved.” Scientific tafsīr offers a liberation from this. It allows the believer to witness the signs of God directly in the world, validating their faith through personal reason and observation rather than blind submission to authority. This restores the dignity of the individual believer, making them an active participant in the discovery of Truth.37

---

7. Thematic Epilogue: The Unending Voyage

The central thesis of this report—that the “Words” of God are infinite and that scientific commentary offers a common ground for their exploration—culminates in a vision of the Quran as an inexhaustible ocean.

The verses 18:109 and 31:27 are not merely hyperbolic praises of God; they are methodological instructions. They warn against the arrogance of finality. They remind the scholar, the scientist, and the mystic that their cups of knowledge, no matter how full, are but drops in a sea that never depletes.

The “clutches of sectarian monopoly” rely on the illusion of scarcity—the idea that the truth is small, fragile, and possessed entirely by “us.” The Quranic worldview is one of abundance. The Truth is as vast as the universe, as deep as the ocean, and as enduring as the Face of God.

By embracing scientific commentary, the Muslim Ummah does not turn away from its heritage; it expands it. It moves from a defensive posture of guarding the “ink” of the past to a courageous posture of sailing the “oceans” of the future. In this voyage, there are no Sunni currents or Shia tides; there is only the water of life, the stars of guidance, and the infinite Words of the Lord, waiting to be read by any soul brave enough to look.

---

Table 1: The “Parochial Box” vs. The “Open Ocean”

Feature	The “Parochial Box” (Sectarian Monopoly)	The “Open Ocean” (Scientific/Universal Tafsir)
Theological Basis	Finite Interpretation (Truth was captured by the Salaf/Imams).	Infinite Interpretation (18:109/31:27: Words are inexhaustible).
Primary Authority	The Person (The Scholar, The Imam, The Sheikh).	The Evidence (The Text, The Natural Phenomenon, Reason).
View of Nature	Irrelevant or Metaphorical; Secondary to Law.	A “Second Revelation” (Kitab al-Takwini); Essential for Truth.
Social Structure	Hierarchical; Clergy leads, masses follow (Taqlid).	Democratic; “Republic of Knowledge,” distributed authority.
Goal of Tafsir	Validation of Sectarian Identity/Dogma.	Discovery of Universal Truth/Reality (Haqq).
Response to New Knowledge	Suspicion, Rejection, or defensive apologetics.	Integration, “Replenishment,” and unfolding of meaning.

---

Table 2: The Unfolding of “Cosmic Verses” Through Time

Verse	Quranic Text (Snippet)	Classical Interpretation (Limited Ink)	Scientific Interpretation (Replenished Ink)
21:30	“…made from water every living thing…”	Observational: animals need drink; semen is fluid.	Biological: Cytoplasm is ~80% water; Life originated in oceans (Abiogenesis).
51:47	“…We are [its] expander.”	Metaphorical: God is vast in bounty/sustenance.	Cosmological: Physical expansion of the Universe (Hubble’s Law/Big Bang).
78:7	“…mountains as stakes?”	Visual: Mountains look like tent pegs; hold earth down by weight.	Geological: Isostasy; Mountains have deep crustal roots stabilizing tectonic plates.
23:14	“…clot (alaqah)… chewed lump (mudghah)…”	Visual: Congealed blood; piece of meat.	Embryological: Alaqah = Leech-like suspension & blood feeding. Mudghah = Somites resembling teeth marks.
21:33	“…each [sun/moon] floating in an orbit.”	Geocentric: Sun/moon move around stationary earth.	Astrophysical: Celestial mechanics; precise orbits of all bodies in vacuum of space.

If you would rather read in Microsoft Word file: