bs_bs_banner

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille: Notes for a Re-examination

muwo_1401 248..263

Stefano Bigliardi
CMES, Lund University EXC-16, Constance University

Abstract
The present essay focuses on the gure of Maurice Bucaille and on his contribution to the discourse on Islam and science. Its purpose is twofold. First of all, it aims to provide the reader with a concise map of the ideas of the French author, reconstructing their core and their interrelations. Furthermore, it aims to question what I dene as the apparent naivety of Bucailles work, a reason why he can sometimes be too easily dismissed, by pinpointing a number of original features of his intellectual activity. My argument is that Bucaille deserves more attention for two good reasons: rstly, because of the inuence that he de facto exerts on Muslim societies, secondly, because of some highly specic characteristics of his discourse. Such features not only distinguish his contribution from analogous ones, but also give rise to interpretative questions, which have as yet been either overlooked or unsatisfactorily addressed. Closely connected to this thesis is the idea that Bucailles work constitutes a good starting point for a discussion amongst scholars of different disciplines and from different cultural backgrounds. The rst section reconstructs Bucailles life and works. The second section focuses on his method and ideas regarding science. The third section is devoted to Bucailles conclusions following his study of the Bible and the Quran, and therefore deals more closely with the core of his ideas. The fourth section covers Bucailles complementary criticism of the theory of evolution. In the fth section I examine the possible reasons behind the scant scholarly attention concerning Bucaille. In the nal section I propose an interpretative model of Bucailles gure conceived as a system of concentric spheres and I raise, for each one of them, several questions, which have so far been, in my view, insufciently investigated, thus setting an agenda for further scholarly work.

1. Maurice Bucaille. Life and Works

ne of the most widespread and wholeheartedly defended claims of contemporary Islamic faith is the existence of a special accordance between Islam and natural sciences. Islam, through the Quran, is believed to enjoy an exclusive, original harmony with the pursuit of knowledge in general and with the

2012 Hartford Seminary. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148 USA. DOI: 10.1111/j.1478-1913.2012.01401.x

248

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille

natural sciences in particular, which had a historical manifestation during the so-called Islamic Golden Age (8th14th century AD). One of the most vital contributions to the debate on the harmony of Islam and science is the work of the French author Maurice Bucaille.1 Maurice Bucaille was born in Pont-lvque (Normandy), on July 19, 1920. He attended Catholic schools and eventually studied medicine in Paris. At the apex of his career as a gastroenterologist he achieved the position of Head of the Surgical Clinic at the University of Paris. He had the opportunity of talking about Islam with Muslim patients, who recommended that he read the Quran in the original Arabic language. In 1969 he enrolled at the cole nationale des langues orientales vivantes and studied Arabic for three years. Later, the wife of the Egyptian President Anwar Sadat became his patient. This acquaintance granted him the possibility of informal and direct contact with the President. Bucaille convinced him of the importance of carrying out, together with other scientists, a research on the mummies of the 13th Century BC Pharaohs kept in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. The research took place between 1974 and 1975. It was aimed at collecting more data about the mummies, at assessing their preservation state and, if necessary, at stepping up measures. In 19761977 Bucaille also took part in the examinations of the mummy of Ramesses II in Cairo and Paris.2 The Sadats introduced Bucaille to the Saudi King Faisal, who became his patient and with whom he had the opportunity to discuss the Quran as well. The proposal of a medical examination of the mummies involved Bucailles professional competence, but it stemmed also from his interest in Egyptology.3 As a result of the reading of the Quran and of the medical tests conducted on the mummies, Bucaille developed specic convictions regarding the divinity of the Quran, which would become the core of his theories. He subsequently articulated and defended his positions in several books and in the numerous talks he held all over the world. He went on relentlessly promoting his ideas till his death, which occurred in Paris on February 17, 1998. The rst outcome of Bucailles studies and reections was the book La Bible, le Coran et la Science, published by Seghers, Paris, in 1976. The rst English edition, The Bible, the

Starting point of my analysis of Bucaille is Leif Stenberg, The Islamization of Science. Four Muslim Positions Developing an Islamic Modernity (Lund: Religionshistoriska avdelningen, Lunds universitet, 1996). From now on IS. 2 The so-called Operation Ramesses II was a complex event involving diplomatic exchanges between France and Egypt and was covered by numerous press interventions in the two countries. The mummy was received in Paris on Sep. 26, 1976 with the honours of a head of State. Apparently the organization was not immune from jealousies and intrigue, and Bucaille was not always actively involved to the extent he wished. I will not deal here with the complicated vicissitudes of this operation, nor with the connected polemic, nor will I try to reconstruct in greater detail Bucailles involvement. 3 Bucailles competence as a non-specialist is beyond dispute. The website of Manara Communications (http://bucaillelegacy.com/Maurice%20Bucaille.html- cf. infra, sec. 5) reports that Bucaille was a member of the SFE (French Society of Egyptology) since his early youth. This piece of information is not supported by any statement to be read in Bucailles books.
2012 Hartford Seminary.

249

The Muslim World

Volume

102

April

2012

Quran and Science, appeared two years later.4 Bucaille further claried his views regarding biological and cosmological theories vis--vis the Holy Scriptures in 1982 with Lhomme do vient-il? Les rponses de la Science et des critures saintes, published in English two years later.5 A detailed report on the research on mummies was published in 1987 with the title Les Momies des Pharaons et la Mdecine. Ramss II Paris. Le Pharaon et Mose. It was published in English three years later6 and was awarded a History Prize in 1988 by the Acadmie Franaise.7 In 1989 Bucaille also co-authored a book about the Quran8 with the leading modernist Muslim thinker Mohamed Talbi. Bucailles last book was once again focused on the relationship between archaeological-historical data and the Holy Scriptures: Moses and Pharaoh. The Hebrews in Egypt (subtitle: Teachings of the Holy Scriptures and History).9 Besides his books, one should number among Bucailles contributions also the numerous talks held the world over,10 as well as the documentary lm The Book of Signs (1986), showing Bucaille himself in the British Library, and co-authored with the lm director, Shahrom Mohammed Dom.11

From now on BQS. Edition of reference: The Bible, the Quran and Science. The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge. Revised and expanded edition, translated from the French by A. D. Pannell and the Author (Tripoli, Libya: The World Islamic Call Society, 1987). 5 From now on WOM. Edition of reference: What is the Origin of Man? The Answers of Science and the Holy Scriptures. Translated from the French by A. D. Pannell and the Author (Paris: Seghers 1984(3)). 6 From now on MMM. Edition of reference: Mummies of the Pharaohs. Modern Medical Investigations. Translated from the French by A. D. Pannell and the Author (New York: St. Martins Press, 1990). 7 It was the Prix Diane-Potier-Bos, yearly awarded to a literary work concerning the history of Egypt, or the relationships between Egypt and France, or the history and civilization of the Mediterranean. It consisted of a silver medal (information available on the ofcial website of the Academy: http:// www.academie-francaise.fr/role/index.html). For a review of the book cf. Bettyann Kevles A Shred of Proof about Pharaohs, Los Angeles Times, Dec. 18, 1990 (http://articles.latimes.com/1990-12-18/news/ vw-6558_1_maurice-bucaille) and Malcom W. Browne, All Wrapped Up in his Work, The New York Times, Feb. 3, 1991 (http://www.nytimes.com/1991/02/03/books/all-wrapped-up-in-his-work.html). 8 Rexions sur le Coran (Paris: Seghers). From now on RC. So far not translated into English, the book consists of two independent sections. Bucaille wrote the foreword (pp. 710) and Part II, Le Coran et la Science Moderne (pp. 157- 245); Talbi authored Part I, Quelle cl pour lire le Coran (pp. 13154). I will refer to the two sections as independent books: RC and Talbi 1989. 9 From now on: MP. (Tokyo: NTT Mediascope, 1994). Seghers had paused its activities. 10 Worth mentioning are two conferences: the rst, given on November 9, 1976, at the French Academy of Medicine, regarding Physiological and Embryological data in the Quran and the second, on The Quran and Modern Science, given in June 1978 at the Commonwealth Institute, in London. I shall refer to the second as QMS in its published version: The Quran and Modern Science, The Journal Rabitat al-Alam al-Islami, Mecca: Muslim World League, Vol. 6, N. 10, Aug. 1979, pp. 1926. Another conference with the same title, given at the Islamic Foundation, Villa Park, Illinois, (date unknown) circulates on YouTube in 7 parts (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaSfE1DW2-w). In this study I have not taken into account Bucailles specic essays on medical-archaeological matter often referred to in MMM (cf. pp. 64, 173, 206). 11 The movie circulates on YouTube in 6 parts (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98ZPHh07S74), presented by the IIPC (International Islamic Propagation Center). Its production involved nancial support from Malaysia, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, as it is to be inferred by the nal credits, which include an acknowledgement to King Fahd.

250

2012 Hartford Seminary.

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille

2. Bucailles Methodological Standpoints

Bucaille developed and defended his specic positions within the frame of a broader view of the method with which knowledge should be pursued, and of the status of the elements of knowledge. This view emerges from his explicit denitions and/or from the usage of several key-terms, and it is constantly conrmed and supported throughout his works. Independently of the specic eld he investigated (medical, archaeological, historical etc.), what he constantly referred to was basically the model of inquiry of a natural scientist, characterized, in his opinion, by several intellectual habits. (i) The absence of prejudice: Bucaille stressed, for example, the fact that he himself had begun his examination of the quranic text (. . .) with a completely open mind and a total objectivity (BQS p. 128. Cf. also QMS pp. 1920). He even started his research with [. . .] no faith whatsoever in Islam (BQS p. 128. Cf. also QMS p. 20). (ii) The love for knowledge and its advancement (cf. MP p. 163 and BQS p. 125). (iii) The possession of an all-embracing,12 scientically updated competence, which lead him to reject pure speculation: It is very rare to nd philosophers who support their theories with reections on subjects other than those belonging to their own eld. (WOM p. 215. Cf. also BQS pp. 129130 and QMS p. 20). (iv) The critical use of reasoning, the capacity to detect errors, inaccuracies, inconsistencies, implausible statements and so on, which Bucaille dened logical deduction (cf. WOM pp. 163 and 219). As to the status of knowledge, Bucaille puts particular emphasis on the opposition of two terms: facts and theory. The opposition between the two has to be read in terms of established and/or provable certainty vs. uid and/or hypothetical knowledge. In order to grasp this distinction, we can extensively quote from Bucailles words: In modern times, scientic progress has enabled us to acquire denitively established, experimentally veriable ideas on natural phenomena he argues thereby excluding theories which by their very nature are liable to change (BQS p. 6). We also read in BQS (p. 131) that: [. . .] an observed fact checked by experimentation is not liable to modication: it becomes easier to dene its characteristics, but it remains the same. On the same page Bucaille gave as an example of a fact the rotation of Earth around the Sun. Facts are thus the starting point, the aim and the yardstick of all good scientic ideas. Theories, on the other hand, can be modied and even abandoned; they must in fact be discarded when they no longer t the facts: By denition, a theory is no more than a hypothesis that for a while serves to link facts of various kinds by way of an explanation. While it may prove useful at a certain stage in human knowledge,

12 Bucaille saw in the multidisciplinary approach one of the virtues of the intellectual activity during the Golden Age of Islam (cf. RC pp. 223225).

2012 Hartford Seminary.

251

The Muslim World

Volume

102

April

2012

however, it is the future which determines whether a certain hypothesis is valid or not (WOM p. 42).13 One can further understand what Bucaille meant by facts and theories through what he concretely associated with the terms. Facts are not only big-scale, specic phenomena, like the above-mentioned behaviour of celestial bodies, but also universal phenomena, like the chemical composition, structure and mutual relationships of the cells and organs involved in the process of fecundation (cf. BQS pp. 211212). Finally, Bucaille also dened as facts very specic, circumscribed occurrences or arrangements of phenomena, like the state of the mummies of the Pharaohs. What he, mostly and derogatorily dened as a theory is Darwinism (cf. WOM p. 42), which we shall inspect more closely in the fourth section.

3. Bucailles Analysis of the Holy Scriptures

Bucaille emphasized that the Bible was a collection of different narratives dating back to different periods (cf. MP p. 21; BQS pp. 2940; QMS p. 26), which therefore contained several literary genres (BQS p. 5). Then he closely examined the contents guided by logical and scientic reasoning: I cannot refrain from discussing certain passages of the Bible which are not tenable when one possesses a critical mind (MP p. 7). Eventually, he pointed out that the Bible was rife with mistakes. The mistakes listed by Bucaille can fall, according to his own lexicon, into three major categories: (i) historical inaccuracies or anachronisms; (ii) implausible statements; (iii) blatant contradictions (cf. BQS p. 136).14 Their acknowledgment stems from a comparison of the statements contained in the Scriptures, respectively, with: (i) historical knowledge based on facts or other reports; (ii) scientic knowledge or scientic knowledge-based common sense; (iii) other scriptural statements. In order not to clutter the exposition and not to offer a mere rewording of Bucailles work, let us now see short examples for each of the three cases. (i) One of the anachronisms of the Bible is the reference, in Genesis 24, to camels as a means of transportation in the time of Abraham, while written and pictorial documents concerning ancient Egypt do not testify it (cf. MP p. 45). (ii) The description of creation in the Genesis is untenable if not interpreted allegorically, as it mentions creation of different elements of the Earth in different stages while they cannot exist separately; it
13 In WOM, the work in which he dealt most with natural sciences, Bucaille also said (p. 181): The intention here is not to put forward theories, but to advance ideas based on facts. Theories are by nature open to change; when approached from a theoretical angle, science is always in a state of ux: what is valid today may be disproved tomorrow. A suitable basis for comparison is therefore one which rests on scientic data that are not open to change, having been rmly established and checked through experimentation, and having even possibly been effectively put into practice. For further discussion of the term cf. also RC pp. 174 and 220221. 14 In another passage Bucaille held that the New Testament contained passages that are obscure, incomprehensible, contradictory, improbable, absurd (cf. BQS p. 65) and even ridiculous (cf. BQS p. 90). Cf. Ch. V of the 2nd part of BQS: Contradictions and improbabilities in the descriptions.

252

2012 Hartford Seminary.

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille

makes no sense, for instance, to speak of day and night before the creation of light (cf. BQS p. 43) or of vegetables before the creation of the Sun (cf. BQS p. 44). (iii) The Old Testament contradicts itself when, despite the fact that God has limited the human lifespan to 120 years (Gen 6, 3), the descendants of Noah are said to have lived even 600 years (Gen 11, 1032); the Gospels contradict themselves when they offer different genealogies of Jesus (cf. BQS pp. 95 ff.). Bucaille criticized those interpreters of the Bible who tried to cover such mistakes through apologetical verbiage (BQS p. 111. Cf. also BQS pp. 16 and 50). The outcome of the rational reading is liable to disturb some believers (cf. BQS p. 63), but Bucaille made clear that his purpose was not to undermine the overall credibility of the Old and New Testament. He was not attempting to radically discredit the Bible, nor the Church, to whose scholars and ofcial judgments he indeed made reference ever so often. He recalled, for example, that even the Second Vatican Council, in the Document N 4 on the Revelation, admitted in it the existence of (. . .) material which is imperfect and obsolete (. . .) (BQS p. 57). The sacred texts full indeed a basic purpose; namely, they help understanding Gods omnipotence (cf. WOM p. 204); the idea that they were genuinely inspired is not questioned. The acknowledgment of mistakes rather underlines human interferences: errors of transmission, inuence of myths and allegories, narrative exaggerations. Bucaille emphasized that errors could not be ascribed to God (BQS p. 52). While the Bible is divinely inspired, then, the inaccuracies are just the result of the language of the day and reference to the traditions still honoured in the period (WOM p. 15. Cf. also p. 148). In some accounts, history quickly turned into fable (cf. BQS p. 19). What would be surprising states Bucaille from a logical point of view, would be the absence of errors at all (WOM p. 15. Cf. also pp. 152153).15 Bucaille analyzed the Quran according to an analogous pattern: he recalled rst of all its external history, and then he scrutinized its content.16 The Quran was revealed through the Archangel Gabriel (cf. BQS p. 134), recited and written down while the Prophet was still alive, all this being a guarantee of authenticity (cf. BQS p. 134). Furthermore, the successors of the Prophet had it copied and systematized and thus achieved a perfect stabilization and preservation of the original text. The agreement between ancient texts to be found throughout the whole Muslim world conrms all this (cf. BQS pp. 137138 and RC pp. 229230). As to the content, Bucaille recognized that [. . .] some verses of the Quran correct others in the case of prescriptions (BQS p. 137), but this is the result of the length of Muhammads apostolic period; so are minor variations between the most ancient
15 In one passage, the Old Testament is compared with the Song of Roland, a literary work with a historical basis, stemming from an oral tradition, where reality is mixed with legend (BQS pp. 2627). 16 Bucaille stressed the importance of reading the Quran in the original version [. . .] to make a sentence-by-sentence analysis [. . .] (BQS p. 128). As to the New and Old Testament, he did not read them in the original languages but rather used the French Ecumenical Translation of 1975 (cf. MP p. 19).

2012 Hartford Seminary.

253

The Muslim World

Volume

102

April

2012

copies of the Quran, and the fact that the nal arrangement of the suras does not respect the chronological order of the Revelation (cf. BQS p. 138). Nevertheless, the Quran does not contain any errors of the three kinds we listed in the Bible, even when the two narratives touch upon the same subject.17 The most important point is not the absence of errors, though. The Quran displays a surprising accordance with the facts of science. Here lies the core of Bucailles discourse and the source of inspiration for his numerous followers. I will mention here only two examples of the cases in which he acknowledges such accordance, one regarding a very specic fact and one about a more general phenomenon. Bucaille identied in one of the Pharaohs whose mummies he investigated, Merneptah, the Pharaoh of Exodus.18 Now, the Quran, through a specic verb, states that the Pharaoh and his soldiers were thrown (nabadha: cf. Q 28: 40 and 51: 40) into the waters of the Red Sea when they were pursuing the Hebrews. The medical examination of state of the brillae (. . .) does not allow to say that the corpse has remained for a long time underwater (MP p. 127) and ascertains, on the other hand, the presence of multiple traumas (cf. MP p. 201). Then, according to Bucaille, the Quran accurately told the truth about facts that occurred before its descent. This is also contrasted with the Old Testament, which rather suggests (Exodus 14, 2829) that the Pharaoh died by drowning. Furthermore, Bucaille maintained that the Quran had foretold the present (or, in other words, was in accordance with the present), as it mentions (Q 10: 92) the preservation of the Pharaohs body as a sign to man (BQS p. 256. Cf. also QMS p. 26). The Quran refers to the creation of man from something called alaq and to one of the stages of its development as mudgha (Q 23: 14). The rst term can be properly translated, according to Bucaille, as something which clings (cf. BQS pp. 216218 and QMS p. 24). Clinging to the uterus is precisely what the egg does, after being fertilized, through villosities or elongations. The second term can be properly interpreted Bucaille maintained as chewed esh, which is precisely the aspect of the very rst stage of an embryo (cf. BQS pp. 218222).19 According to Bucaille, the absence of errors in the Quran and its accordance with scientic facts unknown at the time of the revelation have only one explanation: namely, the divine origin of the revelation itself: The history of science leads us to conclude that

17 No mention is made, for instance, of the camels as means of transportation even if the Quran relates events that took place in the same epoch (cf. MP p. 45). 18 The mummy was discovered in 1898 (MMM p. 157). The identication with the Pharaoh of the Exodus is no uncontroversial matter and dates back to the French Egyptologist Gaston Maspero (cf. MMM pp. 140141); Bucaille defended it along arguments that I will not reconstruct here. 19 The description of the embryonic development in the Quran is nowadays one of the most popular among Bucailles followers and supporters. It was especially emphasized by another scientist, the Canadian convert Keith L. Moore (cf. his Highlights of Human Embryology in the Koran and the Hadith, in Proceeding of the 7 th Saudi Medical Meeting at King Faisal University, Dammam, May 36 1982; pp. 5158).

254

2012 Hartford Seminary.

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille

there can be no human explanation for the existence of these verses in the Quran (WOM p. 188). As far as the Quran is concerned, Scripture and modern knowledge are in harmony not disagreement and this agreement may not be explained in human terms (BQS p. 7. Cf. also QMS p. 19).20 Bucaille did not claim that the Quran was a scientic book; yet, the capacity of reading specic Quranic passages in the light of scientic knowledge is seen as a valuable exegetical tool in order to avoid misleading interpretations (cf. BQS p. 130). Moreover, the acknowledgment of the accordance between the text and the facts of science is decisive, especially for Bucaille as a scientist who began his analysis not being inuenced by faith, for the acknowledgment of its divine character. This leads also to a parallel conclusion concerning the Bible. Bucaille underlined that the Bible and the Quran have many points in common which [. . .] are ignored or sometimes overshadowed (MP p. 156); yet the latter, because of the guarantees of its authenticity, enjoys a superiority over the former.

4. Bucailles Critique of (Neo)Darwinism

Parallel to his investigation of the scriptures is Bucailles refutation of Darwinian theories. He emphasized the fact that his polemic was against developments of Darwinism, considered as an instrument of atheism (cf. WOM p. 36), within which Darwins original ideas played an important but not essential role, having been, in Bucailles opinion, amply anticipated and eventually exaggerated.21 The version of Darwinism against which Bucaille wanted to take issue with was rather the one advocated by the French biologist Jacques Monod, (Nobel Laureate in Medicine, 1965) who, in Le hazard et la ncessit (1970), stressed the role of chance and necessity in the process which brought to the appearance of present-day human beings (cf. QMS p. 19 and RC p. 159). In carrying on the criticism Bucaille did not claim he was developing ideas of his own but overtly followed the criticism of P.-P. Grass, professor of Evolutionary Studies at the Sorbonne, whom he extensively quoted and praised (cf. WOM pp. 1112 and RC p. 178). Bucaille criticized the social impact of the theory of evolution. In his opinion, when the Malthusian idea of the survival of the more apt, which had inspired the very theory of Darwin, was assumed to be followed while shaping socio-political relationships (sociobiology), it brought about devastating consequences like the Holocaust (cf. WOM p. 46). The core of Bucailles criticism, nevertheless, consists of pointing out several shortcomings which in his opinion undermine the scientic tenability of Darwinian evolutionism. Chance is said to be insufcient to describe the high order and
Because of the absence of such a concordance, and because of mistakes that are similar to the Biblical ones, Bucaille rejected the divinity of the Hadith (cf. BQS pp. 259264). 21 Darwins On the Origin of Species (1859) as to the origin of human beings [. . .] did little more than offer suggestions (WOM p. 9). According to Bucaille, it contains a lot of data about the species but not about evolution itself (cf. WOM p. 37). Bucaille underlined that its ideas were anticipated by Lamarck (cf. WOM pp. 31 ff.), inuenced by Malthus (cf. WOM p. 37) and developed by von Haeckel (cf. WOM p. 35).
2012 Hartford Seminary.
20

255

The Muslim World

Volume

102

April

2012

organization which can be seen in the world (cf. WOM p. 19).22 The time elapsed between the origin of Earth and its actual state is deemed insufcient in order to explain present complexity and variety (cf. WOM p. 45). Death and mating processes do not necessarily favour the strongest individuals (cf. WOM p. 39). Human beings23 and animals are said to be too distant; the former have lost their innate behaviour (cf. WOM p. 113) and they have gained their characteristic freedom (cf. WOM p. 118).24 Finally, and most decisively, Darwinism is said to be insufciently supported by fossils proving evolution; it is rather an intellectual construction. In the eld of reconstruction of human types Exaggerated claims resulting from imaginative interpretations [. . .] are legion (WOM p. 87). Apart from the critique of its social consequences and of its historical emergence, Bucaille basically questioned the epistemological status of evolutionism, which he dened as a theory according to the meaning mentioned in the second section. Bucaille recognized that palaeontology, even though it does not possess sufcient data enabling it to support the theory of evolution, testies to the existence of living forms in the past which have no correspondence to present-day ones. The existence of variations is not denied; Bucaille held that they had supposedly been simultaneous and coordinated (WOM p. 50). In order to account for them, once more along Grasss ideas, Bucaille advocated a position called creative evolutionism, positing divine interventions in the development of nature. Such interventions basically consist in the successive enrichment of the existing living beings by prototype forms, obtained by newly created genetic material (cf. WOM pp. 7987); they are, in other words, genetic modications arising from Gods creative genius (WOM p. 200). Bucaille combined this doctrine with his idea of the harmony between the Quran and science. He indeed envisaged, though cautiously, such modications in the quranic reference to a creation of human beings in stages (cf. Q 71: 14) and pointed at several quranic passages which supposedly suggest analogous ideas (cf. WOM pp. 175179).

5. Bucailles Success and Scholarly Silence

Bucaille enjoyed considerable success in his lifetime. His works were translated into numerous languages and gained a wide readership (cf. RC p. 161); he traveled extensively in order to give lectures to Muslim and Christian audiences alike. His public consisted not only of laypersons but also of specialists of the different elds and doctrines he was occasionally in contact with. Neither the scientic interpretation of the Quran nor associating specic passages of the Quran with historical facts, natural
22 Bucaille traced a parallel between the matter and the cell, and the metals and the Eiffel tower, in order to suggest the necessity of an intelligent intervention opposed to chance (cf. WOM p. 19). 23 Bucaille in fact constantly referred to man (Fr. homme). 24 Bucaille also mentioned language as one of the distinctive features of human beings (cf. WOM p. 121).

256

2012 Hartford Seminary.

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille

phenomena or recent scientic achievements, and attributing a wondrous trait to all that, were Bucailles inventions (cf. IS p. 331 and Talbi 1989 pp. 5566). Bucaille, nevertheless, blended these elements into a new compound, to which he added unique ingredients, so that also pre-existing ideas gained unprecedented momentum. He was entitled to present himself as a natural scientist (also with the traditional authority of a physician); he put forth his views in the frame of a confrontation with the quranic text showing a competence in the Arabic language and Islam that was unusual for a non-specialist; furthermore, he linked creative evolutionism and Quran clearly together. The Bucaille formula turned out to be extremely appealing in Muslim societies. In the long run, it generated a popular apologetic genre which boasts a ood of books and booklets, usually authored by natural scientists of Islamic faith and devoted to the scientic miracles of the Quran, i.e., the points of accordance between revelation and science. The investigation of the harmony between the Quran and science has been increasingly pursued and supported by Islamic foundations or directly by Islamic governments (cf. IS pp. 230237).25 All this has generated a circulus virtuosus that has preserved Bucailles specic work as well. He is currently referred to in religious sermons and in Internet forums alike. The production, in 2010, of a documentary lm centred on his ideas about the Exodus (Maurice and the Pharaoh. The Bucaille Report, by Farouq Abdul-Aziz) testies to the vitality of the Bucaille formula more than thirty years after his rst book.26 In view of all this, Bucailles gure, his ideas and the phenomenon he generated have not received the scholarly attention they deserve. The only work of a certain extension is that of Leif Stenberg (The Islamization of Science, cit.), who has reconstructed the debate on Islam and science by focusing on its major gures. Stenberg not only produced the rst systematization of Bucailles ideas but he has also underlined the analogies with similar ones and sketched a critical discussion of them by raising some objections of his own or recalling others ones (cf. IS pp. 243263). Nevertheless, since the time of Stenbergs study, and despite it, Bucaille has been virtually absent from any debate. This can be seen as a result of several factors. Some reasons behind the academic silence surrounding Bucaille can be traced back to the form in which he expressed his ideas. He namely wrote books for a wide audience with a system of references not always fullling academic standards (cf. IS pp. 224, 255 and 331). Some of his attitudes or stylistic traits might be perceived as parochial and old-fashioned, such as his insistence on identifying himself as a medical doctor, or the personal polemics and

The ourishing of such organizations is well known. For a criticism of this trend see Pervez Hoodbhoy, Islam and Science. Religious Orthodoxy and the Battle for Rationality (London: Zed Books Ltd., 1991). For a journalistic survey see Daniel Golden: Western Scholars Play Key Role in Touting Science of the Quran. The Wall Street Journal, January 23, 2002. 26 The documentary is produced by Manara Communications, based in Kuwait, Cairo and the USA. It is currently advertised on the website http://bucaillelegacy.com. The trailer is available on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bMk8dGs_DU.
2012 Hartford Seminary.

25

257

The Muslim World

Volume

102

April

2012

praises directed towards other scholars,27 or his expressions of deference towards authorities, which are interspersed throughout his works. His multidisciplinary approach is very distant from contemporary hyper-specialization and liable to sound suspect, and so is his defence of creationism. Finally, one should reckon with the rapid obsolescence of scientic data: even books of pure popularization published at the time of Bucaille are not likely to be taken into account by readers originally interested in scientic matter. All this constitutes what I call the apparent naivety of Bucaille. The silence surrounding Bucaille, though, cannot be completely justied with the latter factors. The debate on the harmony of Islam and science is advancing and Bucaille is likely to be more widely taken into account, as soon as the scholars of Islamic Studies grow more aware of his inuential role. Yet these ideas are not only an object of study as a cultural phenomenon; they are relevant for the philosophical debates on religion and science as well. Nevertheless, such debate in general, and Bucaille in particular, have been almost completely ignored by thinkers and authors who usually address these topics. Even among the most militant and vocal ones, one does not nd a direct discussion of the harmony of Islam and science in Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, Hitchens, Odifreddi or Onfray, whenever they take up on Islam. What is decisive in this case has nothing to do with the supposed shortcomings of Bucaille and his followers, which actually can be perceived only if one takes pains to read their books. It is rather the absence of a genuinely intercultural philosophy of science. This is the result either of cultural blindness or of a precise strategy: denying the adversary the capacity of producing an articulated theoretical discourse. The authors who currently devote themselves to the criticism of religion(s), when they underline the clash of religious beliefs with scientic reasoning, seem not to be aware of the discourse on the harmony of Islam and science.28 It is indeed much easier to select single eschatological beliefs and to deride their unlikelihood. However, a look at Islamic forums conrms that young educated Muslims are much more concerned with the harmony between Quran and science than with the physical pleasures which await the believers in the afterlife.

6. The Bucaille Universe. A System of Concentric Spheres

I shall not engage here in any critical discussion of Bucailles specic ideas. My aim in the following paragraphs is to give my reader an idea of the questions which should be investigated in order to achieve a better understanding of Bucaille. In order to grasp the complexity of it and to plan future work about it, we should think of it as a system of concentric spheres, each one deserving a deeper exploration. The agenda I am setting up is primarily thought for the scholars of Islamic Studies or the historians of ideas, but
27

For instance Brown 1991 (cit.) states that MMM is too much [. . .] devoted to petulant criticism of Egyptologists [. . .]. 28 An exception is Taner Edis, An Illusion of Harmony. Science and Religion in Islam (Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2007).

258

2012 Hartford Seminary.

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille

the questions should be also taken into account also by those who are interested in a criticism of Bucaille on a theoretical level. The innermost sphere is the man Bucaille.29 Two immediate questions concerning this sphere concern his networking and his religious views. The success of Bucaille can be indeed explained with the appeal of the above-mentioned characteristics of the Bucaille formula. But it might be also explained on a practical level, by referring to precise publishing strategies, necessarily involving relationships with Islamic centres of power.30 The story of these relationships has not been reconstructed yet.31 The same holds for the story of Bucailles relationships within the French academic milieu of his time in the elds of Egyptology, Natural Sciences and Arabic studies in general. Another unwritten chapter, nally, concerns his contacts and reception in the Catholic Church. A second delicate issue regarding the man Bucaille is that of his conversion and of the practical consequences it brought about in Bucailles life. Bucaille related that had grown up and studied in a cultural and intellectual environment which was highly ignorant of Islam, and he regretted having believed in false notions regarding it (cf. BQS p. 128 and RC p. 166). He also explicitly admitted that he had begun his investigations having (. . .) no faith whatsoever in Islam (BQS p. 128. Cf. also QMS p. 20). Bucaille is surely perceived as a Muslim, and he is often referred to as a convert. He expressed, indeed, ideas that seemed to inescapably lead him to embrace Islam or, conversely, which were hardly conceivable if not in the context of a conversion (cf. IS pp. 226227). This is also one of the factors of his success: a convert (and a French one) is always more likely to catch the attention of believers. Yet, Bucaille never stated it overtly. Even the answer he gave to the direct question Have you embraced Islam? in a 1992 interview for the Islamic Bulletin was not unequivocal.32
Biographical information about Bucaille circulating on the Internet is not always supported by reliable sources. My reconstruction was strictly based on what can be directly read or easily inferred from his books. Cf. MP p. 8 and RC pp. 157 and 165166 (Catholic education); RC pp. 167168 (study of Arabic); MMM pp. xii-xiii, MP pp. 9, 77, 78 (acquaintance with the Egyptian presidential couple); BQS p. 128, RC p. 162 (acquaintance with King Faisal); MMM pp. xv, 200201; RC pp. 92, 173, 212213, 226 (lectures in Canada, Egypt, France, Tunisia, USA). The Islamo-Christian conference on Oct. 14 1986 in Cordoba (Spain), whose bishop in person invited Bucaille, is referred to in RC pp. 212 ff. 30 Bucaille, though, stated that he had not begun his work in the hope of being well received in the Muslim world (cf. RC p. 170) and I see no reason why we should disbelieve this. At least his rst book stemmed from a genuine intercultural interest and was not commissioned nor solicited. 31 It is, though, the matter of malevolent allusions circulating on the web. Bucaille did not facilitate the task of uncovering the truth. Be it the result of modesty, or of a precise intention of impressing the reader with vague but prestigious references, or of a politically motivated reticence, a detailed account of the circumstances and consequences of Bucailles contact with powerful political gures is not to be directly found in his works. His references to the Sadats or to King Faisal remained constantly allusive. 32 Why I Embraced Islam? The Islamic Bulletin (http://www.islamicbulletin.com/newsletters/ issue_6/embraced.asp.) Perhaps a better knowledge of the circumstances of his burial might shed light on this issue. Obituaries in the major French newspapers online are also lacking, and the date of his death, sometimes reported to be Feb. 18 1998, is to be found on the Internet on numerous pages offering neither further sources nor information.
2012 Hartford Seminary.
29

259

The Muslim World

Volume

102

April

2012

I have touched upon the two questions which most intuitively appeal to readers curiosity. While they are immediate and intuitive, that does not mean that they are decisive. In other words, I do not want to suggest that they represent the exclusive key to the understanding of the genesis of Bucailles work. If there was indeed a precise political interest in supporting it, then it came after his rst book. Furthermore, Bucailles success exceeded the duration of the power of King Faisal and Sadat, who were assassinated in 1975 and 1981, respectively. Finally, neither the intellectual interests nourishing BQS, nor Bucailles hypothetical conversion, can be seen as the mathematical outcome of the human experience of someone who, coming from the French provinces, had studied during the Second World War, had already risen to a brilliant (and busy) medical career in Paris, and was no scholar of Oriental studies.33 The second sphere is the author Bucaille. The precise genesis of his ideas has not been reconstructed yet. The most urgent point is the precise account of the inuence exerted on him by those authors who had previously advocated and practiced the scientic exegesis of the Quran and conversely, of the actual degree of originality of Bucailles contribution.34 Apparently, the intuition on which his discourse is founded came to him while he was reading several quranic passages with the eyes of a scientist, but this does not rule out that he might have been inspired by preceding work. The question of intra-Islamic inuence on Bucaille is still unclear. A further aspect to be explored is Bucailles placement in the French and more generally, European culture. He was, apparently, an extremely well-read man. Can we reduce Bucailles theoretical stances and attitudes only to his profession and to a result of his autonomous reections? A rst analysis seems rather to suggest that, to a certain extent, his approach echoes ideas which were deep-rooted within the French culture. The recurring emphasis on clarity and reasoning present in his work can be ascribed to Bucailles activity as a physician (cf. IS p. 226), but there can be a latent inux of Cartesian tradition at work, which might perhaps be attributed to his educational background. The same can be said about the inuence of Comtian Positivism in his work, if we consider Bucailles insistence on facts and on the privileged status he accords to modern science.35 Theism, the idea of a God who can be grasped by reason alone, one of the ideas of French Enlightenment, can be detected in his conviction that an

One wonders also what might have been Bucailles perception of the Middle East as a non-specialist and Frenchman who witnessed the war for Algerian independence (19541962). 34 Bucaille indeed mentioned having read such authors (RC p. 168). In one case he stated that one of them, whom he did not mention out of deference, had acted as a warning because his theses were not convincing or far-fetched due to lack of scientic rigor (RC p. 172). In another case he overtly distinguished his work from those of Ahmed Hanay and Kamal Hussein, to whom he had been associated by an unknown commentator in a negative criticism published on the bulletin of the PISAI, Ponticio Istituto di Studi Arabi e dIslamistica (Le Commentaire Scientique du Coran, tudes Arabes-Dossiers, 1985, N 69, pp. 8593). Bucaille basically underlined that, for chronological reasons, he could not have inuenced them (cf. RC pp. 172 and 238245). 35 It is to be noted that also Comtes philosophy had, in the end, a religious outcome.

33

260

2012 Hartford Seminary.

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille

observation of the world based on a scientic background [. . .] far from causing people to reject the idea of God, may in fact bring them nearer to it [. . .]; it [. . .] leads us to acknowledge, not only as possible, but as highly likely that there exists a Creator (WOM p. 194, Bucailles emphasis).36 Finally, his critical discussion of the Bible in the light of history, science and philology can remind us of analogous attitudes to the Holy Scriptures shown by the French Enlightenment in its anti-religious expressions.37 Natural sciences, scientic method, philology, rational approach to divinity, encyclopaedism, Quran: So far, Bucaille can be presented as the contemporary version of a philosophe who was fascinated by La description de l gypte, developed a romantic vein and ended up embracing religion. But we shall not overlook other pervasive elements. First of all, the Christian points of reference. Bucaille scrutinizes the Bible also within the frame of positions expressed in ofcial documents (Second Vatican Council), by Christian scholars,38 and even by an outsider such as Teilhard de Chardin.39 Furthermore, the Second Vatican Council is the source of another element of Bucailles topicality, which should not be disregarded: his appeal to a dialogue between religions (cf. BQS pp. 1415 and RC pp. 161163) and between religion and science.40 Bucaille saw the former as accomplished within Islam, where religion and science could be considered twin sisters (RC p. 228).41 On closer inspection, a further element which appears paradoxical in the light of Bucailles success in the Arab world is the historical importance that he confers to Moses gure and feats, constantly present in his books. We can say with a jeu de mots that in his work he creates a strategic balance by referring to the Hebrews while passing over in silence the Jews. The ideological implications of giving credence and conferring scientic solidity to the narrative of the Exodus were inescapable, for someone who had witnessed the birth of the state of Israel (1948) and the Six-Day War (1967), just to name two events which cannot have escaped the attention even of the most common

36 Cf. also QMS p. 19. The further one advances along the road to knowledge, especially of the innitely small, the more eloquent are the arguments in favour of the existence of a Creator (BQS p. 126). 37 One gure who reconciled both theism and critical approach to the sacred scriptures (in order to question ecclesiastical power) was Voltaire. Bucaille referred twice to him: once polemically as to his deformation of the gure of the Prophet (BQS p. 122 n. 1) and once positively because of his theism (RC p. 159). 38 In WOM Bucaille referred primarily to the interpretation of the Bible put forth by the Christian authors Jean Guitton and Carra de Vaux (passim cf. also MP pp. 1830). 39 Cf. WOM p. 211, MP p. 24 and RC p. 178, 243. The Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin (18811955) developed a theory aimed at reconciling evolutionism and faith, because of which he was ostracized by ecclesiastical authorities. 40 At the same time, Bucaille was against genetic manipulations (cf. WOM p. 46). This constitutes a further point of contact with Catholic positions. 41 We shall record here that Bucaille also provoked a polemical response from the Christian side: W. Campbell, The Quran & the Bible in the Light of History and Science (Upper Darby: Middle East Resources, 1992).

2012 Hartford Seminary.

261

The Muslim World

Volume

102

April

2012

newspapers-readers.42 Once again, we encounter an element which contributes to the impression that Bucaille is much more difcult to pigeonhole than we can judge at rst glance. A third, last, and dense sphere is constituted by the production of Bucailles followers. It ranges, as I have beforehand mentioned, from books singling out further points of concordance between the Quran and science to anonymous booklets focusing on the compatibility between Islam and science which can be easily purchased at mosque bookshops. If the content of such production is not worth any closer conceptual analysis, sociological investigations might provide us with more precise information regarding their appeal amongst believers with different backgrounds, and help us to delineate a more precise social map of the debate on Islam and science. Part of the questions related to the third sphere is the inuence which Bucaille himself has exerted on Muslim creationism, today a widespread view especially thanks to the intense activities of the Turkish author Harun Yahya (Adnan Otkar).43 In his massive production of books and booklets Yahya not only mirrors Bucailles ideas regarding creative evolutionism and its accordance with the Quran, but also refers to the points of concordance between archaeological data and the Quran as they were highlighted by Bucaille.44 As a conclusive remark, I shall emphasize that Maurice Bucaille should be approached with the greatest open-mindedness possible. His work stems from a combination of cultural interests which is rather rare and that deserves respect. Before putting down his long-lasting appeal to simply sociological, political or psychological factors, we need a more precise answer to the open questions I have listed. The soundness of the specic theses advocated by Bucaille is then for experts in their respective elds to judge. Only from this shall a fair and general evaluation of his work stem. At the current state of knowledge Bucaille can be dened only as a strange case, i.e., a successful outsider and a multifaceted gure acting within an unjustly neglected debate. Finally, if the pursuit of interdisciplinary, inter-religious and intercultural dialogue is to be regarded as positive per se, then Bucailles legacy, has, somehow or

Perhaps this helps to explain why MP was published in Japan. Seghers was not active and we can also assume that Bucaille in the 90s wasnt able anymore to arouse the interest of a European publisher. In the Middle East, though, it should have been known that any new book by Bucaille was potentially a bestseller. 43 For a 2003 survey of this trend see Taner Edis, Harun Yahya and Islamic Creationism http:// www2.truman.edu/~edis/writings/articles/hyahya.html. (Also in Amanda Chesworth et al., eds., Darwin Day Collection One; Albuquerque: Tangled Bank, 2003). 44 Yahyas works can be purchased on http://www.harunyahya.com/. See for instance Miracles of the Quran, 2003 (http://us3.harunyahya.com/Detail/T/EDCRFV/productId/870/MIRACLES_OF_THE_ QURAN). Darwinism is undoubtedly Yahyas bte noire and each of his books contains a polemic against it, usually in a nal section.

42

262

2012 Hartford Seminary.

The Strange Case of Dr. Bucaille

other, provided an ideal basis for setting it up. The dialogue, in fact, has already begun, and it now is up to any open-minded, good-willed scholar to join it.

Acknowledgements
My research has received generous support by the Excellence Cluster EXC-16 of Constance University. It has strongly beneted from scholarly exchanges at CMES, Lund University, while I was hosted as a visiting scholar within the research project Middle East in the Contemporary World. I warmly thank Leif Stenberg for his stimulating discussions, as well as Mike Degerald, Mario Luporini and Christa Salamandra for their accurate corrections. These pages are dedicated to Matteo Capasso and to the whole rst generation of CMES students.

2012 Hartford Seminary.

263