This paper explores how the great chain of being in classical Islamic philosophy has been selectively chosen and reinterpreted in debates surrounding the evolution-creationism controversy within the Islamic world. For the classical Muslim philosophers, the great chain of being was a hierarchy of nature in which they identified and combined a host of plants and animals, including coral, date palms, vines, snails, shellfish, horses, falcons, elephants, and monkeys. Why were these specific plants and animals chosen and what does the great chain of being reveal about how modern Muslim intellectuals have responded to Darwinism? Although this hierarchy of nature was utilized by many of the classical Muslim philosophers, they disagreed about which plants or animals should be chosen as intermediate links. For example, Nasir al-Din al-Tusi believed that the horse and falcon should be used as the link between animals and humans, while the Ikhwan al-Safa’ believed it should be the elephant. Other classical Muslim philosophers, including Ibn Sina, al-Biruni, Miskawayh, Ibn Khaldun, and al-Qazwini, thought the monkey connected animals to humans. In modern times, the great chain of being has been reinterpreted by Muslim intellectuals as a form of evolution, even though it is not. This interpretation is justified by pulling from those classical Muslim philosophers who chose the monkey as the link between animals and humans. Given there were other animals chosen for this link in addition to the monkey, this selective choosing and reinterpretation of the great chain of being reveals modern Muslim intellectuals to have specific agendas when responding to Darwinism. These agendas appear in two distinctive ways. First, there are those who utilize the version of the great chain of being that includes the monkey by arguing that the idea of evolution can be found in the history of Islamic thought before Darwin, and thus provides a justification for denying Darwinism. For example, the Muslim intellectuals who first responded to Darwinism, e.g. Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and Muhammad ‘Abduh, fell into this group. Second, there are others who appropriate the same version of the great chain of being, but instead of denying Darwinism, argue that it should alleviate fears of the ummah and motivate Muslims to learn evolution and accept its incorporation into science education curriculum. Since the 19th century, this position has become more popular and is best represented by such contemporary Muslim intellectuals as Nidhal Guessoum and Salman Hameed.