The fruits He made in pairs. (13:3)

[mclinkin94]

Per my last post, the Quran says that: Some fruits, Allah put in them double marriages (Zawj= pair, marriage). Hmm...double marriages inside fruits, double mating inside fruits--fruits have double mating within them...double fertilization within them...

Welcome to the forum, thank you for your insights.

Thank you, I hope it will be helpful.

[jkhan]

I am really sorry, I have been reading this post and I got so sad that people are making a problem about 13:3. I just have to discuss this here. Please forgive me for bringing back an old topic, but I NEED to address it because this thread had no closure!!

Actually, it is not a contradiction, and in fact, it is a major miracle--if you understand the science behind plant development.

Let's start with:

[Quran 36:36] Exalted is He who created (in) pairs all things.

This is an example of the inferiority of the English translation compared to the original Arabic. This verse does not say "in" pairs all things. Rather, if you look at a word for word translation, it says "the pairs", not "in pairs". That is, Allah created "all the pairs" of the Earth. i.e He created all the existing pairs, so what.

kol=all

In arabic you can say "kol alazwaj or "alazwaj kollaha" interchangeably.

[Quran 51:49] And of all things We created two pairs...

In Arabic, (مِنْْ) "min" could mean "some of"

Definitions:  from, some, some of .

Some of, of. Indicating a segment of; a portion of. In other words, "Some of all things we created pairs" in essence: "a part of all things are made into pairs".

[Quran 13:3] and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates

Same thing as above. A part of all the fruits have in them pairs. In other words: of all the fruits, there are pairs within them (fi-ha). This could be referring to some of the fruits with seeds which are diploid (have two sets/pairs of chromosomes, from the male and female components of the plant)

Believe it or not, this verse is a significant MIRACLE. It is something, the prophet Muhammad could not have known! Let me explain. This verse uses the terminology "zawjayni ith'nayni"--which is weird terminology. Zawjayni means "two"/"pair" and Ith'nayin also means "two". That means 4 in total! (2 pairs)! What???! That doesn't make any sense?!! Actually it does:

Double fertilization: "The launch of seed development in flowering plants (angiosperms) is initiated by the process of double fertilization: two male gametes (sperm cells) fuse with two female gametes (egg and central cell) to form the precursor cells of the two major seed components, the embryo and endosperm, respectively." From: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452  

This is a peer reviewed scientific article, so cut the BS from those atheist/anti-Muslim websites that claim this Quranic verse is a contradiction because plants only have 1 sperm and 1 egg and that no plants have 2 pairs of sperm and eggs. WRONG THEY ARE!! Double fertilization happens in some fruits (not single fertilization, DOUBLE fertilization). I cannot believe the stupidity and ignorance of anti-muslim apologists and the BS they spew on their websites and forums!

Now, did 7th century Arabs have a concept of double fertilization? How did Muhammad (pbuh) know??
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to be that Allah is appealing to 7th century Arabs' astonishment with duality/dualism of the world and is saying "you see that thing that you are astonished by?--Allah created it". Allah said this in such a way to appeal to 7th century Arabs' dispositions while not making it a contradiction for future generations. Allah may have wanted to make it sound like to the 7th century Arabs that he was talking about duality in the world (Quran must support 7th century belief by relating to their dispositions) AND the objective nature of reality that will be discovered through science). If Allah said "and everything that exists in the heaven and the Earth are made in pairs", that would be a clear scientific error, but notice how the Quran was careful to avoid this. It is only human interpretation that messes things up; It is only the English translators that mess things up.

Peace..

23:27 "So We inspired to him, "Construct the ship under Our observation, and Our inspiration, and when Our command comes and the oven overflows, put into the ship from each [creature] two mates and your family, except those for whom the decree [of destruction] has proceeded. And do not address Me concerning those who have wronged; indeed, they are to be drowned..

Would you pls explain the verse 23:27 connecting to your above explanation
Thank you..

[mclinkin94]

Peace..

23:27 "So We inspired to him, "Construct the ship under Our observation, and Our inspiration, and when Our command comes and the oven overflows, put into the ship from each [creature] two mates and your family, except those for whom the decree [of destruction] has proceeded. And do not address Me concerning those who have wronged; indeed, they are to be drowned..

Would you pls explain the verse 23:27 connecting to your above explanation
Thank you..

Yes, I will address this in two parts. First, this reflects the complexity and multiple meanings of the Arabic language and the Quran.

'Zawj' can mean "pairs" or "kinds" or "sorts". It is not clear which one is the case--it can mean either thing depending on the context of the Quran, and sometimes the context of the Quran doesn't give us the answer and remains ambiguous.

'Min kol' can mean "a part of every/each" or "a part from/of the set of all" (ie. a part from [all things]). In other words, it can mean a 'portion of each thing', or it can mean a 'portion of/from the set of all things' (ie. a portion of/from [all things]) For example, imagine the number set [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]--we will call this set "Set A". If I say "pick numbers from the whole Set A"--it is ambiguous. Does it mean pick some numbers from Set A, or pick all the numbers of Set A? The way I worded it allows for both translations and is thus ambiguous. This too is ambiguous and can mean either depending on the context of the Quran and sometimes the context does not reveal which is the case. The Quran tells us that it is sometimes deliberately ambiguous in 3:7.

Ambiguity is a strength of the Quran, not a weakness--it allows support of 7th century dispositions while not contradicting ours. Maybe this is one of the reasons why Allah chose it to be revealed in Arabic, which is a rich language containing words with multiple meanings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, the second part:

With the above said, I want to mention a nuance in those two verses (13:3 and 23:27)--specifically, Allah's word choice.

If you notice in both verses it says: zawjayni ith'nayni

In Arabic, there are three types of nouns:

- Singular
- Dual
- Plural

(In English, there is only singular and plural)

Zawjani is a dual noun. Ith'nayni is also a dual noun.

https://imgur.com/a/GWLDCyN

So even if "Zawjani" is translated as "kinds" rather than "pairs", it is in dual form--so it means "2 kinds" which means the same thing as a "pair". Thus the verses that say "zawjayni ith'nayni" would be saying "two kinds two". It is using the number 2 twice. 2 x 2.

Some English translators have picked up on this, for example: In translating 13:3, Yusof Ali writes "and fruit of every kind He made in pairs, two and two". Other English translators have also written "two pairs"--see: Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar, T.B.Irving, Abdul Hye, Abdul Majid Daryabadi, Muhammad Mahmoud Ghali, Syed Vickar Ahamed, Farook Malik, Dr. Kamal Omar, Maududi, Ali Bakhtiari Nejad, A.L. Bilal Muhammad, Sayyed Abbas Sadr-Ameli, Mir Aneesuddin etc.

Allah could've just simply said "and fruits he made Zawjani" which would say "fruits made in pairs"--but Allah didn't say that. He added the redundant word "ith'nayni". It is clear from the science what Allah is referring to--double marriages, double mating, double fertilization IN fruit. Notice how the verse says "Fiha" which means In/inside. It is saying INSIDE the fruit there are double pairings of mates. Male and female gametes/cells are inside the fruit. It is not a contradiction at all--in fact, given the deliberate seemingly unnecessary redundancy of using "Ith'nayni" in 13:3, Allah is pointing to that redundancy INSIDE fruits. Literally double spouses; double fertilization.

Part of the miracle is that Allah used the word "inside" when referencing the double pairings in fruit. "inside" ("fiha" in Arabic) also seems to be an unnecessary thing to say if Allah was just saying 'fruits, he made them pairs'--rather, Allah instead put the word "inside", which directs our attention to something happening inside fruits, rather than fruits having genders. The specificity of Allah's use of language in this verse is very telling.

As a side note, notice how the Quran does not rule out the existence of a multiplicity of double fertilization in fruits (eg. Fruits can have multiple seeds--each seed is doubly fertilized)--it just said inside fruits, there are double matings. It didn't say how many double matings are occurring, as thus, it does not explicitly rule them out. It's kind of like saying: "In plants, there is X"<---When I say this, I am not ruling out that plants also have Y--I just said they have X in them: that is a true statement.

Now, regarding 23:27, I think we should consider Allah's word choice--he is saying "2 pairs"--as in two sets of a mating pair (as in 4 animals). Likewise, If I tell you to give me 2 pairs of socks, I am asking for 4 socks.

Interestingly, in the bible, it says "seven pairs" rather than "two pairs" in Genesis 7:3. If you look at a mechanical word for word translation https://www.mechanical-translation.org/mtt/G7.html it says:

"From all of the clean beasts you will take for you seven seven males and females"--so 7 pairs of males and females.

https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8170/jewish/Chapter-7.htm The Jews translate it as: "Of all the clean animals you shall take for yourself seven pairs, a male and its mate".

So this could be a corruption in the bible. But note that the common understanding that they only took ONE male and female only of each animal is not correct in either the Bible nor the Quran.

As a side note, the Quran does not conclusively lay out whether the flood was a local or global event, nor does it say if they took animals from all the Earth or just from all the animals that they use for subsistence (like the grazing animals--Quran just said take 2 pairs each and thus could be referring to what was around or proximal to Noah's settlement--it didn't say take 2 pairs of each living being on the planet) and thus this ambiguity allows for either understanding.

[tutti_frutti]

salam mclinkin94

i understand from the Quran that the flood was global

surah 71 verse 26

"and noah said: my Lord, do not leave on the earth from among the rejecters an inhabitant."

so from my understanding the flood was global (i may be wrong so please verify for yourself)

peace

[ade_cool]

I am really sorry, I have been reading this post and I got so sad that people are making a problem about 13:3. I just have to discuss this here. Please forgive me for bringing back an old topic, but I NEED to address it because this thread had no closure!!

Salam mclinkin94,

There is nothing wrong about replying an old thread especially in this case you bring insights to others.

Like you said in "introduce yourself" section, "Don't leave any thoughts that support Islam unsaid!"   

Actually, it is not a contradiction, and in fact, it is a major miracle--if you understand the science behind plant development.

Let's start with:

[Quran 36:36] Exalted is He who created (in) pairs all things.

This is an example of the inferiority of the English translation compared to the original Arabic. This verse does not say "in" pairs all things. Rather, if you look at a word for word translation, it says "the pairs", not "in pairs". That is, Allah created "all the pairs" of the Earth. i.e He created all the existing pairs, so what.

kol=all

In arabic you can say "kol alazwaj or "alazwaj kollaha" interchangeably.

[Quran 51:49] And of all things We created two pairs...

In Arabic, (مِنْْ) "min" could mean "some of"

Definitions:  from, some, some of .

Some of, of. Indicating a segment of; a portion of. In other words, "Some of all things we created pairs" in essence: "a part of all things are made into pairs".

[Quran 13:3] and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates

Same thing as above. A part of all the fruits have in them pairs. In other words: of all the fruits, there are pairs within them (fi-ha). This could be referring to some of the fruits with seeds which are diploid (have two sets/pairs of chromosomes, from the male and female components of the plant)

Believe it or not, this verse is a significant MIRACLE. It is something, the prophet Muhammad could not have known! Let me explain. This verse uses the terminology "zawjayni ith'nayni"--which is weird terminology. Zawjayni means "two"/"pair" and Ith'nayin also means "two". That means 4 in total! (2 pairs)! What???! That doesn't make any sense?!! Actually it does:

Double fertilization: "The launch of seed development in flowering plants (angiosperms) is initiated by the process of double fertilization: two male gametes (sperm cells) fuse with two female gametes (egg and central cell) to form the precursor cells of the two major seed components, the embryo and endosperm, respectively." From: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452  

This is a peer reviewed scientific article, so cut the BS from those atheist/anti-Muslim websites that claim this Quranic verse is a contradiction because plants only have 1 sperm and 1 egg and that no plants have 2 pairs of sperm and eggs. WRONG THEY ARE!! Double fertilization happens in some fruits (not single fertilization, DOUBLE fertilization). I cannot believe the stupidity and ignorance of anti-muslim apologists and the BS they spew on their websites and forums!

Now, did 7th century Arabs have a concept of double fertilization? How did Muhammad (pbuh) know??
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to be that Allah is appealing to 7th century Arabs' astonishment with duality/dualism of the world and is saying "you see that thing that you are astonished by?--Allah created it". Allah said this in such a way to appeal to 7th century Arabs' dispositions while not making it a contradiction for future generations. Allah may have wanted to make it sound like to the 7th century Arabs that he was talking about duality in the world (Quran must support 7th century belief by relating to their dispositions) AND the objective nature of reality that will be discovered through science). If Allah said "and everything that exists in the heaven and the Earth are made in pairs", that would be a clear scientific error, but notice how the Quran was careful to avoid this. It is only human interpretation that messes things up; It is only the English translators that mess things up.

Thanks for the insights!


Wassalam,
Ade

[mclinkin94]

salam mclinkin94

i understand from the Quran that the flood was global

surah 71 verse 26

"and noah said: my Lord, do not leave on the earth from among the rejecters an inhabitant."

so from my understanding the flood was global (i may be wrong so please verify for yourself)

peace

Salam, tutti_frutti

The issue is the translation.

"ard" which they translated as "Earth" can also mean "Land". We know that Noah existed long before Abraham and long before the Jews. He may have existed shortly after Adam before humans really dispersed around the Earth.

I'm not saying the Quran definitively said the flood was local--I'm saying the Quran did not specify whether it was local or global and thus either could be the case.

[jkhan]

Yes, I will address this in two parts. First, this reflects the complexity and multiple meanings of the Arabic language and the Quran.

'Zawj' can mean "pairs" or "kinds" or "sorts". It is not clear which one is the case--it can mean either thing depending on the context of the Quran, and sometimes the context of the Quran doesn't give us the answer and remains ambiguous.

'Min kol' can mean "a part of every/each" or "a part from/of the set of all" (ie. a part from [all things]). In other words, it can mean a 'portion of each thing', or it can mean a 'portion of/from the set of all things' (ie. a portion of/from [all things]) For example, imagine the number set [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]--we will call this set "Set A". If I say "pick numbers from the whole Set A"--it is ambiguous. Does it mean pick some numbers from Set A, or pick all the numbers of Set A? The way I worded it allows for both translations and is thus ambiguous. This too is ambiguous and can mean either depending on the context of the Quran and sometimes the context does not reveal which is the case. The Quran tells us that it is sometimes deliberately ambiguous in 3:7.

Ambiguity is a strength of the Quran, not a weakness--it allows support of 7th century dispositions while not contradicting ours. Maybe this is one of the reasons why Allah chose it to be revealed in Arabic, which is a rich language containing words with multiple meanings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, the second part:

With the above said, I want to mention a nuance in those two verses (13:3 and 23:27)--specifically, Allah's word choice.

If you notice in both verses it says: zawjayni ith'nayni

In Arabic, there are three types of nouns:

- Singular
- Dual
- Plural

(In English, there is only singular and plural)

Zawjani is a dual noun. Ith'nayni is also a dual noun.

https://imgur.com/a/GWLDCyN

So even if "Zawjani" is translated as "kinds" rather than "pairs", it is in dual form--so it means "2 kinds" which means the same thing as a "pair". Thus the verses that say "zawjayni ith'nayni" would be saying "two kinds two". It is using the number 2 twice. 2 x 2.

Some English translators have picked up on this, for example: In translating 13:3, Yusof Ali writes "and fruit of every kind He made in pairs, two and two". Other English translators have also written "two pairs"--see: Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar, T.B.Irving, Abdul Hye, Abdul Majid Daryabadi, Muhammad Mahmoud Ghali, Syed Vickar Ahamed, Farook Malik, Dr. Kamal Omar, Maududi, Ali Bakhtiari Nejad, A.L. Bilal Muhammad, Sayyed Abbas Sadr-Ameli, Mir Aneesuddin etc.


Allah could've just simply said "and fruits he made Zawjani" which would say "fruits made in pairs"--but Allah didn't say that. He added the redundant word "ith'nayni". It is clear from the science what Allah is referring to--double marriages, double mating, double fertilization IN fruit. Notice how the verse says "Fiha" which means In/inside. It is saying INSIDE the fruit there are double pairings of mates. Male and female gametes/cells are inside the fruit. It is not a contradiction at all--in fact, given the deliberate seemingly unnecessary redundancy of using "Ith'nayni" in 13:3, Allah is pointing to that redundancy INSIDE fruits. Literally double spouses; double fertilization.

Part of the miracle is that Allah used the word "inside" when referencing the double pairings in fruit. "inside" ("fiha" in Arabic) also seems to be an unnecessary thing to say if Allah was just saying 'fruits, he made them pairs'--rather, Allah instead put the word "inside", which directs our attention to something happening inside it, rather than fruits having genders. The specificity of Allah's use of language in this verse is very telling.

As a side note, notice how the Quran does not rule out the existence of a multiplicity of double fertilization in fruits (eg. Fruits can have multiple seeds--each seed is doubly fertilized)--it just said inside fruits, there are double matings. It didn't say how many double matings are occurring, as thus, it does not explicitly rule them out. It's kind of like saying: "In plants, there is X"<---When I say this, I am not ruling out that plants also have Y--I just said they have X in them: that is a true statement.

Now, regarding 23:27, I think we should consider Allah's word choice--he is saying "2 pairs"--as in two sets of a mating pair (as in 4 animals). Likewise, If I tell you to give me 2 pairs of socks, I am asking for 4 socks.

Interestingly, in the bible, it says "seven pairs" rather than "two pairs" in Genesis 7:3. If you look at a mechanical word for word translation https://www.mechanical-translation.org/mtt/G7.html it says:

"From all of the clean beasts you will take for you seven seven males and females"--so 7 pairs of males and females.

https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8170/jewish/Chapter-7.htm The Jews translate it as: "Of all the clean animals you shall take for yourself seven pairs, a male and its mate".

So this could be a corruption in the bible. But note that the common understanding that they only took ONE male and female only of each animal is not correct in either the Bible nor the Quran.

As a side note, the Quran does not conclusively lay out whether the flood was a local or global event, nor does it say if they took animals from all the Earth or just from all the animals that they use for subsistence (like the grazing animals--Quran just said take 2 pairs each and thus could be referring to what was around or proximal to Noah's settlement--it didn't say take 2 pairs of each living being on the planet) and thus this ambiguity allows for either understanding.

Peace brother..

I wish you stay in this forum actively In sha Allah.. I sense your knowledge and guidance within book and most of all, the way of clarification to a question by not deviating from the point of question..

God bless you..

By the way my undying Zawjain is gender (both male and female only)
53:45 "And that He creates the genders (Zawjain) - the male and female"

Zawj is just kind or pair or any gender regardless

Izthnain is just two numbers and nothing else regardless of gender..

In my case.. Ja'ala(made) and khalaqa (creates) should be noted carefully to understand certain relevant verses..

In the case of 'min kullu' to be called 'part of' as well,  you need to give a big support from Quran whether it has meant anywhere and if so reason it why taken as 'part of' leaving 'all of'

I agree 23:27 quantity is 04 ..

[tutti_frutti]

salam mclinkin94

i agree with you that there could be a possibility that the people of noah pbuh were the only people that existed at that time, when mankind was one community

i think the people of noah pbuh were what we call neanderthals (as per below verse)

surah 7 verse 69 (i understand it is hud pbuh talking to the people he was sent to in the verse)

"are you surprised that a reminder has come to you from your Lord through a man from among you to warn you? ans remember that He made you successors after the people of noah, and He increased you in CREATION vastly. so remember the grace of God, that you may succeed."

scientist also say that some neanderthal genes are in all humans (here is an article:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/africa/africa-neanderthal-dna-scn/index.html ) and i think they say it is because humans mated with neanderthals (as they have no other explanation :s )

i think if we all have some of such genes it is rather because all humans are descendants of the people of noah pbuh a.k.a. neanderthals

i also think that the first ship ever built was the ship of noah pbuh that The Lord created for noah pbuh and subsequently taught humans how to build ships

so my opinion, big possibility that people of noah pbuh were the only community of humans and that the flood was global

i might be wrong so please again verify for yourself

peace

[mclinkin94]

Like you said in "introduce yourself" section, "Don't leave any thoughts that support Islam unsaid!"

I wish you stay in this forum actively In sha Allah.. I sense your knowledge and guidance within book and most of all, the way of clarification to a question by not deviating from the point of question..

Thank you!

By the way my undying Zawjain is gender (both male and female only)
53:45 "And that He creates the genders (Zawjain) - the male and female"

Zawj is just kind or pair or any gender regardless

Izthnain is just two numbers and nothing else regardless of gender..

In my case.. Ja'ala(made) and khalaqa (creates) should be noted carefully to understand certain relevant verses..

I don't think it is necessary. Zawjain can be the dual form of Zawj and it can be any pair. But, if what you say is true, then it strengthens the case of the miracle I mentioned.

Zawjain is still dual form, so it would be dual form of the sexes (as in, both sexes). So now the Quranic verse 13:3 is saying: "two sexes, two"--which is referring to the 2 sexual pairings that happen in double fertilization. If what you say is necessarily true, then that's even better!

In the case of 'min kullu' to be called 'part of' as well,  you need to give a big support from Quran whether it has meant anywhere and if so reason it why taken as 'part of' leaving 'all of'

'min kullu' is technically translated as 'from/of/part-of all'. As such, when understanding that technical morphology, we recognize that it could mean 'part of the whole of' or 'a piece from every'. It can mean one or the other--and what it means can vary between different verses as they can use that same phrase to mean different things.

But then, why use "from ALL" and not just "from them". Because it carries a greater rhetorical effect and signifies massive multitudes. "from ALL" has a greater rhetorical effect and better signifies the magnitude than "from them", yet at the same time, it does not necessarily mean "a part from every single thing", but it can also mean "a part of/from [the set of ALL things]" (just I described with the number set example in my previous post).

I agree that it would be great to have direct support from the Quran, but I don't think it is necessary. If a phrase could mean something else, then it could mean something else--even if nothing else in the Quran helps us identify which is the case.

The Quran's ambiguity is a strength of the Quran, not a weakness. It allows for flexibility in translation and by using this Allah can support 7th century dispositions while still being vague enough not to contradict ours.

That being said, I still want to give examples of verses where "min kullu" does not always mean 'a part from every single thing' and rather it can mean 'a part from [the set of ALL things]' (just as I described in the number set example in my previous post). These verses are not required to understand that "min kullu" can mean different things, but since you asked:

[Quran 18:84] Indeed, we established him on the Earth and gave him "min kulli" thing a means.

This verse doesn't mean that Dhul Qarnayn was omnipotent or that Allah allowed him to do absolutely anything. Could Dhul Qarnayn become prophet Muhammad? Could Dhul Qarnayn ask Allah to forgive mushrikeen of Shirk (something Allah will never do)? Did Allah give Dhul Qarnayn the power to disobey him without any punishment at all? Rather it means Allah gave him capabilities from a big part of [the set of everything].

[Quran 39:27] And We have certainly presented for the people in this Qur'an from every ("min kulli") example - that they might remember.

Does this verse mean that the Qur'an has all the examples Allah can provide? Or does it mean that Allah gave us many examples (pieces) of/from [the whole set of examples]? There are many examples within Allah's infinite knowledge and wisdom that he could've given us, yet the examples in the Quran are many, but finite. Allah demands that we ponder/reflect over the Quran--so we must arrive at this conclusion.

Either way, even if the Quran provided us with no help regarding this, it doesn't change the fact that "min kulli" could mean either "a part from every thing" or "a part from [all things]".

[mclinkin94]

salam mclinkin94

i agree with you that there could be a possibility that the people of noah pbuh were the only people that existed at that time, when mankind was one community

i think the people of noah pbuh were what we call neanderthals (as per below verse)

surah 7 verse 69 (i understand it is hud pbuh talking to the people he was sent to in the verse)

"are you surprised that a reminder has come to you from your Lord through a man from among you to warn you? ans remember that He made you successors after the people of noah, and He increased you in CREATION vastly. so remember the grace of God, that you may succeed."

scientist also say that some neanderthal genes are in all humans (here is an article:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/africa/africa-neanderthal-dna-scn/index.html ) and i think they say it is because humans mated with neanderthals (as they have no other explanation :s )

i think if we all have some of such genes it is rather because all humans are descendants of the people of noah pbuh a.k.a. neanderthals

i also think that the first ship ever built was the ship of noah pbuh that The Lord created for noah pbuh and subsequently taught humans how to build ships

so my opinion, big possibility that people of noah pbuh were the only community of humans and that the flood was global

i might be wrong so please again verify for yourself

peace

Yes, I agree with the possibilities you mention. I also want to add it is also possible the people of Noah were the only community of humans and that the flood was local. I'm not saying happened as a local flood, but that it is possible.