The Sanctity and Infallibility of Prophet Adam (a.s.)

In Tafsir al-Tasnim, Ayatollah Jawadi Amuli provides a nuanced exploration of Prophet Adam’s (a.s.) sanctity and infallibility, addressing questions surrounding the well-known incident involving the “forbidden tree.” The discussion centers on preserving the honor of Adam (a.s.) as a prophet while ensuring his actions align with the principles of divine guidance.

The incident in question occurred in a realm before the formal establishment of legislative prophethood. During this stage, no binding legal rulings or obligatory commands had been revealed. This absence of formal legislation implies that commands, prohibitions, and guidance in that context were advisory rather than obligatory. Analogous to the divine instructions given to the mothers of Moses and Jesus (a.s.), the directives Adam (a.s.) received can be seen as recommendations rather than legislative decrees.

It is essential to recognize that Adam (a.s.) had not yet attained the status of legislative prophethood when the incident occurred. Certain traditions suggest that minor errors are permissible for prophets before their formal appointment. However, this interpretation raises significant questions, such as the nature of the prohibition Adam (a.s.) faced—whether it was obligatory (mawlawī) or advisory (irshādī), and whether it constituted a formal prohibition (taḥrīm) or a discouragement (tanzīh). Proving the permissibility of minor errors before prophethood, particularly for Adam (a.s.) as the first prophet, remains a challenging theological inquiry.

Some interpretations suggest that Adam (a.s.) acted out of forgetfulness rather than deliberate disobedience. The Qur’an states: “And We had already taken a promise from Adam before, but he forgot; and We found not in him determination” (20:115). Forgetfulness absolves one from blame, and this interpretation negates the need to view Adam’s (a.s.) actions as sinful. Instead, the event could reflect human fallibility in a pre-legislative context without undermining prophetic infallibility.

Another perspective is that the incident involved the abandonment of what is preferable (tark al-awlā) rather than the commission of a forbidden act. This view maintains Adam’s (a.s.) prophethood and infallibility while framing his action as a response to guiding instructions rather than obligatory commands. In this interpretation, the prohibition was advisory, intended to guide Adam (a.s.) toward a higher spiritual state without constituting an outright legal obligation.

Theological considerations further emphasize that any interpretation suggesting a prophet’s involvement in sin, even minor, undermines the trustworthiness of their sunnah—their words, actions, and tacit approvals as guides for humanity. Prophets must remain free from sin to ensure the integrity of their divine mission and the reliability of their teachings. Scholars generally agree that while forgetfulness in non-religious matters may be permissible, it cannot extend to violations of divine law.

The verse addressing Adam’s (a.s.) covenant—“And We had already taken a promise from Adam...” (20:115)—has been interpreted in multiple ways, including as a reference to the prohibition against the tree, a warning about Iblīs’s enmity, or even the primordial covenant (mīthāq al-alast). Each interpretation contributes to a broader understanding of Adam’s (a.s.) experience, but all aim to uphold his infallibility and status as a prophet.

Ayatollah Jawadi Amuli emphasizes the importance of prioritizing rational and spiritual considerations over literal interpretations when examining such events. Protecting the sanctity of prophethood requires a careful balance, ensuring that interpretations do not compromise the inherent purity and reliability of prophetic figures. This approach aligns with the views of eminent exegetes who argue that all sins are inherently significant, and the relative severity of one sin over another does not diminish their fundamental gravity.