The Qurʾānic Cosmology (Prof. Tabataba’i)

Article

1. Introduction
2. The dire need of conducting studies on the qurʾānic cosmology is strongly felt when one takes into consideration the fact that, as Damien Janos also well mentions: “In spite of its central place in traditional Islamic culture, the qurʾānic cosmology has received relatively little attention when compared to the Jewish and Christian traditions; the last substantial publications on the subject date back several decades” (Damien Janos, “Qurʾānic Cosmography in its Historical Perspective: Some Notes on the Formation of a Religious Worldview,” Religion, 42/2 (2012), p. 215). In the most recent work on the qurʾānic cosmology, Tommaso Tesei concludes: “It is not clear whether the Prophet or his contemporaries had a coherent imagery about the shape of the world and to what extent it mediated between the two models—as far as I know, a thorough study of Qurʾānic cosmology is as yet lacking” (Tommaso Tesei, “Some Cosmological Notions from Late Antiquity in Q 18:60-65: The Quran in Light of Its Cultural Context,” Journal of the American Oriental Society, 135/1 (2015), p. 31). We are now certain that the Qurʾān has appeared at a time and place in which two major cosmological models were dominant: a religious one known as the biblical model, as described in the Torah and subsequent sacred texts with ancient Semitic roots, and a non-religious one, the Greco-Roman model, also known as the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic cosmology. According to these findings, just a few decades before the appearance of the Qurʾān there were many disputes amongst the Christian scholars in the eastern Mediterranean over the two rival models, that is the Hebrew or the Hellenic. Not surprisingly at all, the first one found more advocates among the Christian scholars and as is expected, the Qurʾān, appearing in the Western Arabia and holding this dialectic relation with its milieu, should be more tended to the same model.

The most convincing reason why the traces of the Greek cosmology are not found in the Qurʾān is given by Janos: “[. . .] the Qurʾānic cosmology stems from a different religious background, and it does not contain any conspicuous signs of synthesis or assimilation with the cosmological trends indebted to Ptolemaic astronomy. It appears free of the influence of the philosophical disciplines” (Janos, “Qurʾānic Cosmography,” p. 224; see also van Bladel, “Heavenly Cords,” p. 225, 240). Although some traces of the Greek one may be tracked in some qurʾānic terms or descriptions, namely the falak.

We can conclude, by reading the immediate text of the Qurʾān what one comes up with is a unique Weltbild that, in spite of borrowing many cosmological motifs common amongst the people in that time and space, has enough of ideological and innovative coloring and tinting of its own as to help it shape a new identity for itself and to present a novel and distinct cosmology. What we claim here is not at all revolutionary. It is already mentioned, though not so strongly, by others like Janos as well: “The notion of exclusion and the process of selec ting sources to the detriment of others are salient features of the formative phase of all religious traditions, and they could very well have played a role in the crystallization of the Qurʾānic cosmology. If Islam developed out of a dialectical relation with the Jewish and Christian communities on the one hand and the pagan ones on the other, then it is not surprising that it would have been outwardly hostile to certain cosmological ideas endorsed by these competing religious groups, while at the same time endorsing and assimilating other features in an attempt to fashion its own distinct identity” (Janos, “Qurʾānic Cosmography,” p. 224). Both of them, i.e. Islam and the qurʾānic cosmology, have a selective manner in gathering certain motifs (and not the rest), based on certain doctrinal ideologies, and this manner gives them identities in their own rights. So just as much as we recognize Islam as a new religious system, so should we admit the qurʾānic cosmology as a new cosmo logical system.

1. Cosmos According to the Qurʾān
2. We are not the first ones who try to describe the universe from the qurʾānic perspective. After Edith Jachimowicz, Anton M. Heinen, and Neuwirth, Janos is the last who has tried his hand at it. Janos goes so far as to offer two possible pictures of the qurʾānic universe in its most general shape, with almost no details. The most substantial elements of the qurʾānic universe/cosmos are the (seven) heavens and the earth. The juxtaposition of the heavens (al-samāʾ; pl. al-samāwāt) and the earth (al-arḍ; not in the plural form in the Qurʾān) is seen in 222 qurʾānic verses. The heavens and the earth are the most vital elements on the scene—in terms of occurrence and emphasis—compared to which all other elements lose importance, and around which all others revolve. The same motif is used in the Bible as well. The phrase ‘heaven and earth’ is so often used in the Hebrew Bible (ca 65 times). Cornelis Houtman sees here a kind of merism employed: using this pair of words to refer to the whole universe/ cosmos, and therefore concludes one cannot study any one of the two without the other. So the refrain ‘heavens and earth’, when used in the Bible, means the cosmos in its entirety (Houtman, Der Himmel, p. 26-28). The very same notion is repeated in the Mesopotamian literature. Horowitz states that “The Sumerian and Akkadian lexica contain no single word that conveys our notion of cosmos or universe. Instead, gene ral words or phrases for totality are used [. . .] More often both Sumerian and Akkadian materials speak of the entire universe in terms of its two constituent halves, ‘Heaven and Earth’ ” (Wayne Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, Winona Lake Ind, Eisenbrauns (“Mesopotamian civilizations”, 8), 1998, p. xiv).

Also in the Qurʾān, when it wants to allude to all God’s creatures in short, it uses the expression “the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them” (e.g. Kor 5, 18; 15, 85; 19, 65; 21, 16; 25, 59). Taking the heavens and the earth as the major components, in order to sketch, then, an overall picture of the cos mos according to the Qurʾān, one would come up with a three-tiered universe (the heavens, the earth, and what is between them). This is not an unpre- cedented view of the world. One can find traces of it in the older ancient texts, namely the Mesopotamians and biblical ones. The ancient Mesopotamians, namely Sumerians, Akkadians and Babylonians, understood the universe as consisting of superimposed levels separated by open space. “From above to below, the levels were: a region of heaven above the sky where the gods of heaven dwelled, the starry sky, the earth’s surface, the subterranean waters of the Apsû, and finally the under world of the dead” (Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, p. xxi). However, in the Bible, the universe/cosmos has three thirds, namely: the heavens, the earth and the underworld. “In heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth” is the refrain repeated in the Bible (Ex 20, 4; Phil 2, 10; Rev 5, 3 and 13). Thus, the universe in the eyes of the Bible “is divided into three realms—heaven, earth, underworld” (J. Edward Wright, The Early History of Heaven, New York, Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 54). The importance of the heavens and the earth is distinguishably evident from their fixed high status in all the world cosmologies. Therefore, we will outline our work based on the qurʾānic three-tiered model: the heavens, the earth, and the space between the lowest heaven and the earth.

1. The Upper Part of the World (Heavens)
2. The word al-samāʾ (heavens/sky), with its different forms, has been repeated 310 times in the Qurʾān. From a theological viewpoint, this part of the world is the most important one, because God resides there (Kor 67, 16-17) upon his throne (ʿarš: Kor 7, 54; 10, 3; 13, 2; 20, 5; 25, 59; 32, 4; 57, 4) and has his footstool (kursī) that encompasses the heavens and the earth (Kor 2, 255). The divine throne is held and carried by throne-carriers/angels (Kor 39, 75; 40, 7). There are, of course, other heavenly residents there (Kor 3, 83; 13, 15; 16, 49; 19, 93; 27, 87; 30, 26 and 68). The upper part of the world contains the seven heavens (Kor 2, 29; 17, 44; 23, 86; 41, 12; 65, 12; 67, 3; 71, 15) superimposed one upon another (ṭibāqan: Kor 60, 3; 71, 15) with the heavenly waters flowing around. However, the Qurʾān seems to be very laconic about the heavenly water(s), so much so that it “is mentioned only once in the Qurʾān in the context of creation, namely in Q 11:7.”23 The most familiar of the seven heavens for man is al-samāʾ al-dunyā (the nearest/lowest heaven), above the humans (Kor 50, 6). The idea of seven heavens is Mesopotamian—finding its way later to the biblical and the rabbinic literature (Janos, “Qurʾānic Cosmography,” p. 221). In their cosmology, the heavens and the earth where multiple in number and were conceived as seven superim posed heavens and earths. As Horowitz states: “A tradition of seven heavens and seven earths was popular in the Near East during the later part of the first millennium BCE and the first millennium CE” (Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, p. 216-217) Interesting enough, only the former (the seven heavens) finds its way into the Hebrew and much later Arabic literature.

As for the nature of the heaven/sky in the Qurʾān, it is a concrete object (Kor 79, 27; 91, 5) built by God (Kor 50, 6) by hands (= power?) (Kor 51, 47) and it is lifted up (Kor 88, 18). Built by hands seems to be a reaction to 2Cor 5.1 “For we know we have a building from god, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” Cosmas Indicopleustes (2, 3-4) takes this to refer not to the body but to the actual cosmos (van Bladel, “Heavenly Cords,” p. 234, n. 47). So it is not surprising to expect its fall, or at least the fall of some of its fragments (Kor 34, 9; 17, 92), upon the earth; yet, God himself holds the firmament lest it may fall upon the earth (Kor 22, 65). In some other verses they are assumed to be held up by invisible pillars (Kor 13, 2; 31, 10). The Qurʾān describes the heavens as a protected/preserved and uplifted roof (saqfan maḥfūẓan: Kor 21, 32; al-saqf al-marfūʿ: Kor 52, 5) and a structure/ edifice (bināʾ: Kor 2, 22; 40, 64), in which there is no fissures (Kor 50, 6; 67, 3). As for the measure of the firmament, it seems that it (alongside with the earth) is the most extended thing which the Qurʾān knows of. So massive, seems to the Qurʾān, the scale of the sky, that describing the grandeur of paradise, it likens it, in its broadness, to the sky (Kor 3, 133; 57, 21). As large as it already is, its width is still constantly broadening (Kor 51, 47). The image of the upper heaven is very much Judeo-Christian, with the exception of the footstool (Isa 66.1).

In the Bible, stretched above the earth is the sky, ‘heaven’ (šāmayim) or ‘firmament’ (rāqiʿa) a solid substance (Gen 1, 6-8) resting on pillars (Job 26, 11; 2 Sam 22, 8). The area above the sky is known as ‘the heaven of heavens’ (Deut 10, 4; I King 8, 27). This is the abode of God where he has established his temple and throne (Isa 66, 1; Ezek 1, 1; Deut 26, 15; Psa 11, 4; 103, 19; Matt 5, 34) on the waters above the firmament (Gen 1, 6-7) (Rabbi Louis Jacobs, “Jewish Cosmology” in Ancient Cosmologies, p. 68-70). The biblical concept of the ‘waters above the firmament’ is also found occa sionally in other traditions (in the Rig Veda and in Egyptian writings, to name some) but the one in the Bible reflects the ancient Near Eastern one of Enūma Eliš and implies “a veritable sea located above a solid firmament which is in turn located above the sun, moon, and stars” (Paul H. Seely, “The Firmament and the Water Above Part II: The Meaning of ‘The Water above the Firmament’in Gen 1: 6-8,” Westminster Theological Journal, 94 (1992), p. 47).

1. The Lowest Part of the World (the Earth)
2. The word arḍ (earth) is repeated 461 times in 440 qurʾānic verses; so it is the most repeated cosmological term. This is only the simplest reason to show that the Qurʾān talks from the perspective of a person who looks at the world standing on the earth. Arḍ in more than half of its occurrences in the Qurʾān is accompanied by the heavens, implying its importance (as much as the heavens are, or even more). Regarding the constant juxtaposition of the heavens and the earth in the Qurʾān, describing the boundaries of the world, it seems that the earth should be as broad as the firmament is. Nonetheless, as broad as it may be, it is not impossible to reach the ends of the earth, as Ḏu l-Qarnayn did (Kor 18, 83-90) (Van Bladel, “The Alexander Legend in the Qur’an 18:83-102,” in The Qurʾān in its Historical Context, ed. Gabriel Said Reynolds, London-New York, Routledge (“Routledge studies in the Qurʾān”), 2008, p. 175-203). This is an almost universal understanding of the world by the scientifically naïve people. As Paul H. Seely mentions, they believed the earth was limited in scope and there were points where the firmament/sky would literally touch the earth at the horizon (Paul H. Seely, “The Geographical Meaning of ‘Earth’ and ‘Seas’ in Genesis 1:10,” Westminster Theological Journal, 59 (1997), p. 231-232). Also in the Bible, as he states, the peoples in the Old Testament believed, the firmament was a hemispherical dome or a disc “which literally touched the earth (or the sea around the earth) at the horizon”. This should be taken into consideration, however, that the sky in the Qurʾān never touches the earth.

As for the number of the earths, recalling what Horowitz has stated regarding the disappearance of the notion of the seven earths in the first millennium CE—despite the survival of that of the seven heavens—also in the Qurʾān one can witness the fact that the earth is single—and not multi ple—in number, pace Janos (Janos, “Qurʾānic Cosmography,” p. 217), distinguishing it from the heaven whose plu ral form is so commonly used in the Qurʾān and its number is explicitly and repeatedly mentioned. There is, however, one verse in the Qurʾān which led the Muslim commentators to believe in seven earths—just like seven heavens. The verse reads: “It is God who created seven heavens, and of earth their like” (Kor 65, 12). While the single form of the word ‘earth’ (al-arḍ) in this verse does not normally bring to mind the concept of a multi-earth universe, most of the Muslim commentators went as far away as to infer from it the existence of the other (parallel) worlds (Muqātil b. Sulaymān, Tafsīr Muqātil b. Sulaymān, ed. ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Šaḥāta, Beirut, Dar iḥyāʾ al-turaṯ al-ʿarabī, 2002, IV, p. 368) or seven earths each underlying each single layer of the seven heavens (Alī b. Ibrāhīm al-Qummī, Tafsīr al-Qummī, ed. Musawī Ǧazāʾirī, Qum, Dār al-kitāb, 1363/1943, II, p. 375), or six other earths beneath our earth (Muḥammad b. Ǧarīr al-Ṭabarī, Ǧāmiʿ al-bayān fī ta ʾwīl āy al-Qurʾān, Beirut, Dār al-maʿrifa, 1992, XXVIII, p. 99), and thus, even tually, using the plural form of the word as ‘seven earths’ (al-araḍīn al-sabʿ) became conventional in the post-Qurʾānic literature (Muḥammad b. Yaʿqūb al-Kulaynī, al-Kāfī, ed. ʿAlī Akbar al-Ġaffārī, Tehran, Dār al-kutub al-islāmiyya, 1365/1945, II, p. 514; III, p. 122, 426; IV, p. 72). As for the shape of the earth, one can certainly claim that it is flat and solid (terra firma).

Since the solidity and flatness of the earth are the common motifs among the scientifically naïve people (Paul H. Seely, “The Firmament and the Water Above,” The Westminster Theological Journal, 53 (1991), p. 228; id., “The Firmament and the Water Above Part II,” p. 231-236), the Qurʾān also takes the same pattern for granted (Kor 17, 37). While there is not even one hint to a spherical earth, all of the verbal roots—some ten different roots—used by the Qurʾān to describe the earth are concerned with the notion of extensiveness and flatness (see Kor 4, 97; 29, 56; 39, 19; 9, 25, 118; 13, 3, 19; 50, 7; 79, 30; 91, 6; 71, 19; 88, 20; 2, 22; 51, 48). One important feature of the earth, in the eyes of the Qurʾān, is its tran quility against sudden motions, for God has put it stable (Kor 27, 61; 35, 41). This stability is due to the massive corpuses, namely mountains, which are put upon the earth (Kor 41, 10; 88, 19), like pegs (Kor 78, 7), in order to fix the earth into its place. It is why the Qurʾān in ten places (Kor 13, 3; 15, 19; 16, 15; 21, 31; 27, 61; 31, 10; 41, 10; 50, 7; 77, 27; 79, 32) describes them as rawāsī or rāsiyāt, both plural forms for rāsiya, which stands for something which is fastened to the earth due to its heaviness (Ibn Manẓūr, Lisān al-ʿarab, Beirut, Dār al-fikr, 1994, XIV, p. 32). So, according to the Qurʾān, mountains are the heavy masses upon the earth which like pegs are hammered to it, lest it would shake.

Concerning the underground, there is only one Qurʾānic reference (Kor 20, 6) to it as mā taḥt al-ṯarā (what is beneath the ground). This verse which depicts the world with four tiers is an exception among abundant qurʾānic references to a three-tiered universe (see above), as al-ṯarā is a qurʾānic hapax legomenon. Anyhow, according to other Qurʾānic references, this level should be where the waters of the rain are stored (Kor 23, 18; 13, 17; 39, 21). Maybe the reason for leaving this level out from the list of cosmic levels is that the waters there are supplied by the heavenly waters. Therefore, in the qurʾānic image of the cosmos, there is no Hades or Šeol or any world under the surface of the earth—as most of the ancient mythologies would suggest—dedicated to the dead, where the human souls would reside for eternity. According to the Mesopotamian myths, under the surface of the earth there is an area called Apsû which is “a huge subterranean body of sweet water” (Wilfred George Lambert, “The Cosmology of Sumer and Babylon” in Ancient Cosmologies, p. 47) (the source of the waters above; such as oceans, rivers, springs or fountains) and underneath it is the underworld (where the human spirits go at death)— a Sumerian myth, recurring in other mythologies as well, namely Egyptian, Babylonian and Greek. One can see the very same notion being repeated in the Bible as well. Beneath the earth is a world that is regarded as the abode of the dead; called either by its Hebrew name as Šeol (Num 16, 28-34; Sam 28, 13-15; Isa, 14, 9-11; Eccles 9, 10) or by its Greek equivalent as Hades (Luke 10, 15; 16, 23; Rev 20, 14).

1. And there are waters beneath the surface of the earth (tehom; Gen 49, 25; Psa 136, 6). And the earth rests on foundation(s) (Ps 75, 3; 104, 5; Job 9, 6; 38, 4-6; 1Sam 2, 8; Zech 12, 1; Prov 8, 29). So the idea of the underworld—as common as it was to the ancient non- scientific understanding of the world—is absent in the Qurʾān. Thus the qurʾānic point to the underground seems to be nothing more than just a mere geographical description, rather than a mythological idea about a world beneath the earth. The waters stored there are to supply the wells and foun tains and the water needed for the vegetation (Kor 39, 21). As for the large bodies of water, namely sees and oceans, the word baḥr (sea) is repeated in the Qurʾān 41 times, in singular, dual (baḥrān/baḥrayn) and plu ral (biḥār/abḥur) forms. So the number of the seas in the Qurʾān is a matter of controversy. The reference to the two bodies of water, i.e. the salt water and the fresh water oceans, does not resemble the ancient idea and the biblical description of the waters above and behind the firmament as suggested by some scholars simply because both of these seas are placed on the earth, hence enabling people to catch fish (Kor 12, 35) and pearls (Kor 55, 22) from both of them. So in spite of all attempts done so far to discover more details about these two sees, we are unable to figure out its geographical situation on the earth, and what Tesei suggests as “the place where the heavenly and terrestrial oceans meet” seems to be a non-qurʾānic idea, irreconcilable with what we know of the shape of the sky, the earth, and its waters in the Qurʾān. What we can obtain from the plain text of the Qurʾān is that these ‘two seas’, both located on the earth, are separated by a barrier (barzaḫ or ḥāǧiz: Kor 25, 53; 27, 61; 55, 20, and see also Kor 35, 12); one being fresh the other salty.
2. “A.J. Wensinck (The ocean, 37-8) suggests that the isthmus and the dual form of ocean is part of a cosmographic story that is now lost. The important point to mention here is the fact that, pace van Bladel47 and Tesei,48 there is no evidence in the Qurʾān implying the concept of the earth being surrounded by waters (the Mesopotamian and the biblical motif). The above mentioned Ḏu l-Qarnayn in his trip to the furthest eastern and western lands never reached anything more than a muddy fountain in the West, where the sun sank (Kor 18, 86).49 So there is no point to the notion of “ocean” (al-baḥr al-muḥīṭ) in the Qurʾān, but only “sea” (baḥr/yamm) and “river” (nahr)—the former has frequently been intended to mean river (see e.g. Kor 2, 50; 7, 138; 10, 90; 26, 63). This is very different from the biblical and Mesopotamian cosmological images, where the flat disc of the earth is thoroughly surrounded by waters. Based on the surviving Babylonian Mappa Mundi (British Museum/B.M. 92687), i.e. the Babylonian map of the world, the earth, as conceived by Mesopotamians, was a flat circular disc and restricted in size and scale, as Lambert holds, “the movement of the heavenly bodies, and especially the sun, showed that it [i.e. earth] was limited in extent” (Lambert, “The Cosmology of Sumer and Babylon,” p. 47-48).
3. The creation of the lands describes the lands as a raft both floating on top of waters and surrounded by waters. The waters surrounding the lands must be the waters of the cosmic salt water ocean. On a Babylonian drawing of the earth’s surface from the middle of the first millennium, commonly known as the Babylonian map of the world, the cosmic salt water sea encircles a central continent where Babylon is situated (Wayne Horowitz, “Mesopotamian Accounts of Creation,” in Encyclopedia of Cosmology, ed. Norriss S. Hetherington, New York-London, Garland Publishing, 1993 (reprint New York, Routledge, 2014), p. 394). The Bible also follows this geographical model (i.e. the flat disc earth sur rounded by circumferential seas): “The earth has the shape of a flat disc so that if one were able to travel far enough one would eventually arrive at the ‘ends of the earth’ ” (Deut 28, 64; Isa 5, 26; 41, 9; Ps 135, 7; 72, 8; Zech 9, 10; Dan 4, 10-11; Job 37, 3; Matt 12, 42) (Jacobs, “Jewish Cosmology,” p. 67-68). This flat disc is surrounded by water(s) (Ps 136, 6). In Isaiah (40, 22) and Proverbs (8, 27), the word (ḥūg) implies the notion of the circularity of the ‘earth’ (Eugenie C. Scott, “The Creation/Evolution Continuum,” reports of “The National Center for Science Education,” 19/4), echoing the Mesopotamian motif of the “circle of the earth”.

So as seen above, although the Qurʾān follows the same concept of the earth’s geometrical shape (i.e. flatness, as opposed to the spherical notion) as other ancient and scientifically naïve people did, yet it does not follow the same biblical and Mesopotamian shape (i.e. circularity) for the earth, nor does it accept the idea of the earth being encircled by the waters. Here the Qurʾān depicts an image, unexpected from a pre-scientific text. As Seely believes, “In every pre-scientific cosmology which I have seen that mentions the sea, the earth is described as circular, floating in a circular sea. The concept of a circular earth set in a circular sea is, of course, the natural result of a scientifically naive person observing the circular horizon of both earth and sea” (Seely, “The Geographical,” p. 241).

The Middle Part of the World

Adopting the biblical term, the lowest heaven could be called ‘firmament’; since the lowest heaven in the Qurʾān is depicted also as a solid roof (Kor 21, 32; 78, 12; 79, 21). The qurʾānic heavens are not hemispherical and the firmament is not a vault. The heavens in the Qurʾān are flat, extending across the expanse of the earth (see below). The lowest heaven is adorned with lights (maṣābīḥ: Kor 41, 12; 67, 5), the sun and the moon (Kor 71, 16; 78, 13), the stars (Kor 37, 6; 41, 12; 67, 5), and the con stellations (burūǧ:57 Kor 15, 16; 25, 61; 85, 1). In the space between the earth and the firmament, there are some other familiar entities, which the Qurʾān does not leave out, namely: birds (Kor 16, 79; 67, 19), clouds which are drifted by winds (Kor 7, 57; 30, 48; 35, 9, etc.), and maybe some angels (see Kor 79, 3-5). This image calls to mind the almost same Mesopotamian and biblical image of the earth’s sky. In ancient Mesopotamia the heavens include both visible areas, where the stars, sun, moon, and planets are seen, and higher regions above the sky, where gods of heaven dwell. And in the Bible the sun, moon and stars are positioned in, or just beneath, the firmament (Gen 1, 14-17) and they move across it (Ps 19, 1-7). Additionally, in the Qurʾān there are some enigmatic cosmological ele ments; namely the ‘heavenly cords’ (asbāb: Kor 38, 10; 40, 36-37), the ‘invisi ble pillars’ (Kor 13, 2; 31, 10), and demons (ǧinn, šayāṭīn), who try to infiltrate the lowest heaven and are chased away by shooting flames (šihābun mubīnun/ ṯāqibun) when they would seek to eavesdrop the heavenly councils (Kor 15, 17-18; 37, 7-10; 72, 9) (Tilman Seidensticker, “The authenticity of the poems ascribed to Umayya Ibn Abi al-Salt,” in Tradition and Modernity in Arabic Language and Literature, ed. Jack R. Smart, Richmond, Curzon Press, 1996, p. 95-96).

1. Belief and speculation about heavenly cords of various kinds, including cords by which a living human could ascend to heavens, were evidently widespread, and the traditions of several religions in many languages document this” (Van Bladel, “Heavenly Cords,” p. 240), and that “The asbāb therefore appear to be the ropes of the heavenly tent or dome, leading to the upper level of the dwelling of the cosmos: God’s place above the firmament of heaven.” As mentioned earlier, the idea of the pillars to uphold the firmaments is also found in the Bible. However, they are not invisible as the qurʾānic ones are. The concept of evil gods and demons was common place in Mesopotamia. And there was also this possibility for them to travel around—from the under world to the gates of heaven. The gods, demons, and ghosts, thus, could alter nate routes to the underworld and travel along the ‘Stairway of Heaven’, which would lead directly from the gates of heaven to the gates of the underworld, or they could spring up from the underworld through cracks in the earth’s surface like plants that pierce the earth’s crust (Horowitz, Mesopotamian, p. 353).
2. The Qurʾānic Cosmos:

The Babylonian Cosmos:

The Biblical Cosmos:

Flat-Roofed Structure of the Qurʾānic Heavens, A Case Study

Given the similarities between the qurʾānic cosmology and other ancient ones, most of the Western scholars have also taken for granted that the qurʾānic fir mament must be hemispherical (Neuwirth, “Cosmology,” p. 446). In his article on heavenly cords, van Bladel has dedicated a part to the subject of the shape of the sky as whether it is as a dome, a roof, or a tent (Van Bladel, “Heavenly Cords,” p. 233-235), as Janos too has done in his article (Janos, “Qurʾānic Cosmography,” p. 216-217). While the latter, though favoring the flat-roofed sky prefers not to take a clear stance at the point—as he thinks there are evidences in favor of the both ideas, i.e. flat and dome-shaped heavens, in the Qurʾān and the post-qurʾānic literature—van Bladel suggests the dome as the shape of the qurʾānic firmament. The striking point is that the evidences offered by both of them pro the dome-like heavens are non-qurʾānic: van Bladel relies most on the pre-qurʾānic documents, while Janos finds his evidences on tafsir materials. Of course, van Bladel puts forth some qurʾānic supports, saying that the sky was made as a roof, with invisible pillars and some gates. We argue, however, that none of these qurʾānic refe rences are sufficient to prove that the qurʾānic firmament could be dome-like. All the other proofs of this are related to biblical material, and besides what he cites from Lane on the definition of sabab (rope) sounds more befitting the idea of a flat-roofed, rather than a domical, sky.

So it seems to us that the similarities between the qurʾānic cosmological references to its earlier rivals has led van Bladel, like Neuwirth and others, to the simplistic conclusion that the Qurʾān must be just another reproduction of earlier cosmological depic tions. It seems, however, inaccurate. While there is not even one single proof in the qurʾānic text supporting this idea, a scrutinized look at the qurʾānic descriptions of the firmament shows that it cannot be anything but flat. In addition to these textual evidences, there are many other meta-textual proofs— including historical, linguistic, and theological—which show how the Qurʾān had an active interaction with its milieu, by adopting and/or disregarding certain cosmological items according to its specific features.

1. Textual Evidence
2. The firmament in the Qurʾān is likened to a structure (bināʾ) or a roof (saqf). Bināʾ is something which is built or constructed.68 Abu ʿUbayda (d. 224/838) defines it as al-mušayyad al-muṭawwal (tall, elevated).69 Although this word root can be used for any kind of settlement, including a tent and a house, the Qurʾān itself tends to use it just for stable constructions, such as chambers (Kor 39, 20), the mosque (Kor 9, 110), and the monument (Kor 18, 21). These structures might have flat or domical roofs, as from this word root we have al-baniyya which means the Kaʿba, with its flat roof, and al-mibnāt which stands for a great house with a dome-like roof.70 So, we suppose that this description has nothing to say about the shape of the firmament save that it is something built or constructed, a point mentioned very explicitly in many verses (Kor 50, 6; 51, 47; 78, 12; 79, 27; 91, 5). The second description for the firmament in the Qurʾān is saqf (roof). Here again we have a word which can be used in both senses. Up until this point, the evidences seem neutral about the two rival ideas on the shape of the firmament. Both bināʾ and saqf can allude to either flatness of the sky or its curvature. The other point which supports the flatness-theory of the qurʾānic firma ment is found in Kor 13, 2: “God is He who raised up the heavens without pillars you can see” (similar content in Kor 31, 10). The stability of the firmament is something significant in the qurʾānic view, in that despite the firm and heavy structure of the heavens (Kor 78, 12), it does not fall upon the earth. In addition, there is another evidence offered already also by Janos:75 in the Qurʾān we have seven heavens superimposed one on top of the other like layers (sabʿa samāwātin ṭibāqan: Kor 67, 2; 71, 15). This depicts the heavens as a skyscraper with seven floors.
3. It is, so, difficult to imagine such a structure with domical roofs, unless we suppose that there is a dome above all of these floors, which, of course, needs a compelling evidence. The similarity between the qurʾānic ṭibāqan and the Babylonian tubuqāti76 allows us to propose that the idea of seven superimposed flat heavens is a common feature between the qurʾānic and Babylonian cosmologies. There is yet another textual proof, based on the shape of the earth, which as mentioned earlier is flat. The Qurʾān, like other ancient cosmologies in which an identity of shape and width between the earth and the heavens is assumed, believes in such a similarity. The ubiquitous juxtaposition of the earth and the heaven(s) in the Qurʾān, in addition to an explicit qurʾānic verse which says that the earth is created just like the heavens (Kor 65, 12), and some other verses which speak about the equality of the width of the paradise to the heavens and the earth (together) (Kor 3, 133; 57, 21), are proofs, then, which imply the fact that the shape of the firmament cannot be but flat (since the earth is flat).

1. Meta-Textual Evidence
2. The sky in the Hebrew Bible (Isa 40, 22) and some other ancient texts is likened to a tent (van Bladel, “Heavenly Cords,” p. 234, n. 47). Al-ḫayma and al-qubba are two familiar Arabic terms for tent, which one would expect to find in the Qurʾān, either referring to the heavens or to something else. There is another common term which equally can refer to a house or a tent: al-bayt. However, some limited usages of the terms al-ḫayma and al-bayt (in the sense of tent) are found in the Qurʾān, but none has any association with the cosmo logical issues. It is interesting that the Qurʾān while using terms like bināʾ and saqf to describe the heavens, dispenses with not only al-ḫayma and al-qubba, but even with the term al-bayt, although it is used mostly for houses rather than tents. The Qurʾān, thus, appears reluctant to use any term implying the concept of the ‘tent’ for the heavens. The most important missing word here is al-qubba which, according to modern scholars, stands for Arabic dome-like tents made of red leather (Earl Baldwin Smith, The Dome: A Study in the History of Ideas, Princeton, Princeton University Press (“Princeton monographs in art and archaeology”, 25), 1978, p. 60 and p. 61, n. 3).

1. The Historical Background
2. To begin with, a cursory glance at works written on the subject of the nature in the pre-Islamic poetry, surprisingly, leads one to the conclusion that, while the earth and its elements in addition to heavenly bodies were subject of inte rest to the pre-Islamic poets, the sky itself was out of their attention. Nawāl ʿAlī ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ḫuḍar in his MA thesis entitled The Shape of the Heaven and the Earth in the Holy Qurʾān (Ṣūrat al-samāʾ wa-l-arḍ fī l-Qurʾān al-karīm) dedicates a chapter to the subject of the shape of the heaven and the earth in the pre-Islamic poetry, and, hopelessly, dispenses with the shape of the heaven itself and instead offers a bulk of information about celestial bodies. However, in the last paragraph of this chapter, he speaks about the similarity between the earth and the sky in the pre-Islamic Arabs’ mind (p. 59), from which one can conclude that the firmament was flat-shape in their eyes. Al-Zaʿīm has found only one verse in which the sky is likened to the qubba, but the verse belongs to an Andalusian poet of the fifth/eleventh century (Muḥammad Zakariyāʾ al-Zaʿīm, al-Ṭabīʿa fī mirʾāt al-šiʿr, Damascus, Dār Ibn Qayyim, 2006, p. 30). In two other Arabic works about the animate and inanimate nature in the pre Islamic poetry, one finds everything but the heavens (Nūrī Ḥammūd al-Qaysī, al-Ṭabīʿa fī l-šiʿr al-ǧāhilī, Beirut, Dār al-iršād, 1970).

The same is true about the ancient Arabic myths, in which one can find just stories about the stars, the sun, the moon, etc., but not about the sky itself (Aḥmad Ismāʿīl al-Naʿīmī, al-Usṭura fī l-šiʿr al-ʿarabī qabl al-islām, Cairo, Sīnā li-l-našr, 1995, p. 140-156). As such, this would not be so strange to presume that the Arab poet, unlike his other non-Arab rivals, sought immortality on the earth, rather than in the heavens (Ṣāliḥ Mafqūda, al-Abʿād al-fikriyya wa-l-fanniyya fī l-qaṣāʾid al-sabʿ al-muʿallaqāt, Cairo, Dār al-faǧr, 2003), and therefore did not pay so much attention to the sky itself. As Adonis well states this reality, saying: “He [i.e. pre-Islamic Arab poet] has nothing save the earth . . .” (Adonis, Muqaddima li-l-šiʿr al-ʿarabī, Beirut, Dār al-ʿawda, 1979, p. 14). What some Arab scholars have said about the wide gap between the pre-Islamic Arabic thought and that of the other ancient cosmic myths (Yaḥyā Šāmī, Tārīḫ al-tanǧīm ʿind al-ʿarab, Beirut, Muʾassasat ʿIzz al-Dīn, 1993, p. 109), seems relatively true, at least regarding to the heavens.