Appearance
Questions and Answers
The story of Adam in Sūrat al-Baqarah (2:30–39) runs from God’s announcement of a vicegerent on earth to Adam’s descent and repentance, and al-Tasnim’s commentary on it is long. This page gathers the questions readers most often ask, in the order of the story, each with a short answer drawn from what Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says. Each answer links to the passage in al-Tasnim, so you can read more.
0 questions
God announces a vicegerent (2:30)
How does the story of Adam connect to the verses before it?
The verses just before it ask how people can disbelieve in God, who gave them life and created for them all that is on the earth. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī suggests this verse continues that argument: God also made you, as long as you keep the conditions of worthiness, His vicegerent on earth.
It also answers a question those verses raise: who is this human being for whom the heavens and the earth were made? The answer is the station of divine vicegerency of the perfect human being.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
Did God speak to all the angels, or only some of them?
The verse says the angels, but Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says it cannot be conclusively shown that every angel is meant. Shaykh al-Ṭūsī reports from Ibn ʿAbbās that those addressed were the angels who had settled on earth after the jinn; others, such as Kāshānī, take it to mean all the angels.
He notes that one group of angels is so immersed in God that they do not perceive themselves at all, so they could not compare themselves with Adam. Only the later command to prostrate adds the emphasis all of them, altogether.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Selected Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
Was Iblīs among the angels God spoke to?
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī lists four events in these verses: the announcement of the vicegerent, the presenting of the names, Adam informing the angels, and the command to prostrate. Iblīs is certainly included only in the last. He was among the angels and so was included in that one command “by way of predominance” (taghlīb), since the Qur’an holds him to have been commanded, yet no separate command was given to him.
For the other three events there is no evidence that he was included, and a mere possibility does not prove that it happened.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
See also: Key Debate: Is Iblīs a Jinn or an Angel?
Why does God say “I will make” rather than “We will make”?
God often speaks as “We” where intermediaries are involved, as in Indeed, We sent it down during the Night of Decree (97:1), or in Dāwūd’s appointment, Indeed, We have made you a vicegerent (38:26). Here the singular innī (“Indeed, I”) may suggest that no angels mediated this appointment.
The foundation of vicegerency is the inner reality of God’s vicegerent, a stage that is the teacher of the angels and beyond their grasp, so they cannot be its intermediaries. They do have roles in his lower stages: his body and physical form.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Selected Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
Does “upon the earth” mean the vicegerent rules only the earth?
No. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says upon the earth qualifies the appointment, not the one appointed. It tells us that the human being begins from earthly matter and that his elemental body lives on the earth, but the perfect human being is God’s vicegerent in all the worlds, unseen and visible.
Compare Dāwūd: We have made you a vicegerent upon the earth (38:26). There the phrase limits the vicegerency itself, so Dāwūd is a vicegerent on earth, not in the entire world.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
Who is the vicegerent? (2:30)
Is the vicegerent only Adam?
No. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī rejects the view of al-Zamakhsharī and al-Ṭabrisī that the verse means Adam as an individual. What is meant is Adam’s “legal personality” and the station of humanity: Adam is the model of humanity. Even the angels’ prostration was not to his person; he was placed like a qibla, like the Kaʿba, and the humanity of all human beings was made the object of prostration.
The announcement is also a nominal sentence, which indicates continuity, and the knowledge of the names lies, in potential, in all his descendants.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
See also: Key Debate: Who Is the Vicegerent?
Is every human being God’s vicegerent?
In degrees. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī’s preferred view is that the reality of vicegerency was appointed for the reality of the human being. Its root is the knowledge of the Divine Names placed in human nature, and that knowledge has levels. To the extent that a person is guided on the straight path in belief, ethics and action, the Names are realised in him and vicegerency appears.
The perfect human beings have its highest level. Those weak or average in perfection have a weak or average share, and some have only the capacity for it.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
See also: Key Debate: Who Is the Vicegerent?
Do corrupt and cruel people share in this vicegerency?
Not in actual vicegerency. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says those who are human “in terms of statistics and numbers” but not in conduct have no share in it. The vicegerent is the one to whom the angels prostrate, while the Qur’an describes some people as cursed, struck and shackled by the angels. Vicegerency is a divine covenant, and My covenant does not extend to the wrongdoers (2:124).
In answering the angels, he says, God was in effect telling them that those given to corruption and bloodshed have no share in His vicegerency.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:31 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:31 · Subtleties and Allusions
Whose vicegerent is the human being?
God’s. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī lists five views of whom the vicegerent succeeds: the angels who ruled the earth after the jinn, the extinct jinn, all beings, earlier humans (the nasnās), or God. Only the last is correct. Succeeding jinn or nasnās would bring no honour and would need no knowledge of the names.
I will make … a vicegerent means a vicegerent for Himself; the angels prostrated to him; and although many generations succeeded one another, God never called any of them a vicegerent.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
See also: Key Debate: Whom Does the Vicegerent Succeed?
Did angels rule the earth before Adam?
One view, drawn from the commentary attributed to Imam al-ʿAskarī and a narration of al-Qummī, says angels fought the corrupt jinn, ruled the earth after them, and were to be replaced by the vicegerent and taken back to heaven.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī finds this hard to accept. Another narration says the earth’s inhabitants then were jinn and nasnās. An earthly life of desire, anger and conflict does not fit beings who are all infallible. And if humans merely replaced angels, the angels would be the original, leaving no room for their argument that they were more deserving.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
Were there other creatures on earth before Adam?
A narration from Imam al-Ṣādiq says God created the world fifty thousand years ago. Beings that were neither jinn, angels nor humans lived there and caused corruption; then came the jinn, who shed blood; then Adam. Another narration speaks of “a thousand thousand worlds and a thousand thousand Adams.”
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says such reports have weak, disconnected chains and are solitary reports, so they are hard to establish. Yet nothing valid contradicts the first, so its authenticity is probable. Nor is it rational to rule out a fourth kind of being besides angels, humans and jinn.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
Why would God need a vicegerent when He is never absent?
A deputy is normally appointed because the one he represents is absent, unable or weak, and that is meaningless for God, who is ever-present and encompasses everything. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says the need lies on the other side. God’s grace is constant, but most beings, especially earthly ones, cannot receive His grace, rulings and knowledge without an intermediary: one who knows their language and whom they can perceive.
This is also why the messenger is human; even an angel would have been sent in the form of a man (6:9).
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Subtleties and Allusions
Who are the vicegerents named in the narrations?
One narration counts Adam as God’s first vicegerent, Dāwūd the second, Hārūn, Mūsā’s deputy, the third, and ʿAlī the fourth; in another, al-Khiḍr greets ʿAlī as “fourth of the caliphs.”
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī explains that this counts only those where the word “vicegerent” is used explicitly. All the prophets, messengers and infallible Imams are divine vicegerents, and the Prophet himself is one of its most perfect instances. Since ʿAlī’s succession to the Prophet was by God’s appointment, as Hārūn’s to Mūsā was, ʿAlī and the other Imams are vicegerents of God.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:30 · Discussion of the Narrations
See also: Themes: Imāmah
The angels’ question (2:30)
Were the angels objecting to God?
No. With Shaykh al-Ṭūsī and most exegetes, Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī holds that Will You place upon it one who causes corruption? was not denial, objection or pride. It was a question of wonder about the wisdom of the decision, mixed with concern about its results, like Mūsā’s questions to al-Khiḍr.
The angels do not precede Him in speech (21:26–27), so even this question was asked by God’s leave. Their glorification and sanctification show they believed God’s acts free of any fault, which leaves no room for criticism.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
See also: Key Debate: Was the Angels’ Question an Objection?
How did the angels know humans would cause corruption?
Some narrations say God showed the angels the jinn and nasnās corrupting the earth; Imam al-Ṣādiq said they would not have known unless they had seen one who causes corruption; Ibn ʿAbbās reports that God told them.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says these are weak or disconnected solitary reports. The angels could know it from God’s own declaration, or by reflecting on a material being with desire and anger, and in fact both were the case. They could not infer it from the jinn by analogy, since humans are a different species.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:30 · Discussion of the Narrations
Why do some narrations say God was angry with the angels?
Several narrations say the angels regretted their words, God turned away from them or veiled them from His light, and they sought refuge at the Throne. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī answers that weak or disconnected reports are not authoritative even in secondary rulings, let alone in matters of belief, and their mass transmission is hard to establish.
The realm of angels is not one of law, reward and punishment, and the proofs of their infallibility allow no exception. If such narrations are authentic, their apparent meaning needs explanation.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Discussion of the Narrations
See also: Key Debate: Was the Angels’ Question an Objection? · Themes: Infallibility (ʿIṣmah)
Why does the verse say “one who causes corruption” and then “sheds blood”?
Saying who (man) rather than what may show that the angels knew of Adam’s will, choice and intellect. Their concern was that a spirit joined to desire and anger, armed with choice and a boundless intellect, could cause corruption and shed blood beyond any predator, whose violence serves only bodily needs.
Bloodshed is the specific named after the general: the gravest corruption is killing an innocent soul, and killing by bloodshed is the worst. God’s answer is that they had seen only one side of the coin.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
Were the angels claiming to be more deserving than Adam?
Al-Ṭabrisī and al-Zamakhsharī read while we glorify Your praise as “Do you do good to so-and-so while I am more deserving?” Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī reads it differently: we glorify You, and You are above any unwise act, so how can You do something whose wisdom is not clear? There is no self-admiration in it.
Rather than saying “we are worthy to be Your vicegerents,” they put it indirectly: Your vicegerent must glorify and sanctify You, and we are those who do. That, he says, shows their politeness.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
How was the angels’ question different from Iblīs’s?
Iblīs looked only at Adam’s material origin: You created me from fire and created him from clay (7:12). The angels looked further, to his desire and anger. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says Iblīs questioned with arrogance, to assert his own superiority, and grew more stubborn when the truth was shown. The angels asked to understand, and once they understood, they showed humility.
The lesson is to ask in order to learn, not out of pride or to belittle others, as Imam ʿAlī said: “Ask in order to gain understanding, not to be obstinate.”
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Subtleties and Allusions
“I know what you do not know” (2:30)
Why did God answer the angels so briefly?
Two answers are given. For a servant who submits to the Lord and knows that He is wise in all His acts, a detailed explanation of the wisdom is not needed.
And the answer was not entirely brief: some of the wisdom is shown in the verses that follow, where God teaches Adam the names and presents them to the angels.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
What did God know that the angels did not?
Ibn ʿAbbās and Ibn Masʿūd said it was Iblīs’s arrogance; Qatāda said it was the prophets and righteous among Adam’s descendants. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī explains that the angels saw only one side of the human being: if intellect prevails over desire and anger, virtues emerge, and from him come prophets and Imams who are pure and infallible.
In the end, what God knew were the prophets, the righteous and the infallible Imams, the same as the names taught to Adam and the unseen of the heavens and the earth. The two early views, he says, do not contradict each other.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:30 · Detailed Exegesis
Teaching Adam the names (2:31)
Why was Adam called Adam?
Narrations from the Prophet, Imam ʿAlī, Imam al-Bāqir and Imam al-Ṣādiq say he was named Adam because he was created from the adīm, the crust or surface of the earth. In one, Gabriel was sent to bring four kinds of clay, white, red, dusty and black, and four kinds of water.
Scholars differ on whether the word is Arabic and derived from adīm, which al-Qurṭubī considers correct, or non-Arabic, as al-Zamakhsharī holds.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:31 · A Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:31 · A Discussion of the Narrations
Did the angels teach Adam the names?
No. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says the teaching was direct, a revelation without any intermediary. Mediation in grace is not like a postman carrying a letter he does not read; it needs awareness of what is passed on, and only Adam became aware of the names. Whatever the angels learned, they learned through him.
It was also taʿlīm, teaching that is inseparable from learning, not tadrīs, instruction that can leave the student ignorant. It left no room for forgetting.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:31 · Selected Exegesis
What were “the names” Adam was taught?
They are the unseen realities of the world, called names because they are signs of God: conscious, intelligent beings hidden behind the veil of the unseen, treasured with God, and the treasuries from which everything in the heavens and the earth descends. They are probably the “keys of the unseen” (6:59) and the “treasuries” (15:21).
Adam was taught them by witnessing them, not through concepts and words. The concepts of them are names of these names, and the words are “the names of the names of the names of God.”
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis
See also: Key Debate: What Were the Names Taught to Adam?
Why couldn’t the names simply be the words of a language?
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī gives several reasons. Words are conventions that change and fall out of use, so learning them is no real perfection on which to base vicegerency. Immaterial angels have no dealings with coined words. Peoples’ languages differ, so which one would Adam have been taught?
And, as ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī says, if it were vocabulary, the angels would have become equal to Adam once he told them, and could have said: had You taught us the words, we too would be worthy.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis
See also: Key Debate: What Were the Names Taught to Adam?
Why do the narrations about the names differ so much?
Some narrations say the names were the earth, mountains and valleys; Imam al-Ṣādiq even pointed to the rug beneath him. Another says they were the names of all God’s proofs, presented as spirits; another, the names of the prophets and Imams.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says the Imams spoke according to their listeners’ capacities, so some exegetes looked at the plainer statements and others grasped the deeper ones. Naming the Ahl al-Bayt applies the verse to its most perfect instance and is not a definition, and natural things are mentioned to suit the audience’s understanding.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:31 · A Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis
Presenting the names to the angels (2:31)
How were the names presented to the angels?
Not physically, but the way a problem is put to someone who claims knowledge: a presentation to the mind, giving a summary awareness by inspiration or similar means. What stopped the angels from understanding was not a dark veil but a luminous one: the very depth and intensity of the Divine Names, like the light of the sun. Each angel has a known station (37:164) it cannot pass.
It is also possible that what was presented was the reality of the perfect human being, in whom all the Beautiful Names gather.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:31 · Selected Exegesis · Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis
What did “if you are truthful” refer to?
To a claim the angels had made. ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī explains that it shows they had made a claim requiring knowledge of the names: that they were more deserving of vicegerency than Adam. A narration from Imam al-Ṣādiq says the same. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī adds that it may also concern their claim to glorify God with full praise, which would require knowing all realities.
Since angels never lie deliberately, the issue is the truth of the claim, not the honesty of the angels.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis · Verse 2:31 · Detailed Exegesis
The angels’ reply (2:32)
Were the angels repenting when they said “Exalted are You”?
Those who deny that angels are infallible see it as regret and repentance; scholars who accept their infallibility see it as an admission of incapacity and good manners before God. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says it was not an act of making amends, since glorification joined with praise is the angels’ constant conduct and inner state.
Their reply shows many courtesies: they begin with glorification, admit their ignorance, attribute all knowledge to God, consider wisdom His alone, and call Him their Teacher. Prophets shared these manners; Yūnus said: There is no god except You! Glory be to You! (21:87).
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:32 · The Etiquette of Angels in Speaking with God · Verse 2:32 · The Conduct of Angels in Glorification
What does “we have no knowledge except what You have taught us” teach us?
Imam ʿAlī said that admitting one’s inability to reach what is hidden is itself knowledge, and God calls it being firmly grounded in knowledge. The angels knew their level and admitted that much was hidden from them, a sign of their perfection.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī adds al-Qurṭubī’s report that a scholar should leave “I do not know” as a legacy to his companions: Mālik was seen answering “I do not know” to 32 of 48 questions. Avoiding these words comes from a love of leadership.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:32 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:32 · Subtleties and Allusions
Adam informs the angels (2:33)
Why does the Qur’an say Adam “informed” the angels, not “taught” them?
God taught Adam, but Adam informed the angels. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says the change of word shows a difference in what each received: Adam was given knowledge of the true nature of things, the angels only news and a report about them. At the least, Adam’s knowledge was unmediated and theirs mediated, a weaker form of it.
This is further evidence that the names are not mere word meanings, since those would be passed on in full just by being told.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:33 · Teaching and Reporting · Verse 2:33 · Teaching and Reporting
How could the angels be sure Adam reported the names correctly?
Sayyid al-Murtaḍā raised this question and answered it with Adam’s prophethood. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī’s “definitive answer” is that in the realm of the names and the angels there is no room for error, which arises only where deception, illusion and Satan’s tricks exist. Where only truth prevails, doubt finds no place. God also confirmed Adam’s report: when he had informed them of their names.
Adam’s prophethood began only after his descent to earth, so commanding him to inform the angels was not a legislative command, and he was not a messenger to them.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:33 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:33 · Teaching and Reporting
See also: Key Debate: Could Adam Have Erred in Telling the Angels the Names?
The unseen of the heavens and the earth (2:33)
What is “the unseen of the heavens and the earth”?
The names themselves. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī reads the phrase as “the unseen belonging to” the heavens and the earth, not “unseen from” them: this unseen lies outside them, not part of them. It is the absolute unseen, which cannot be reached by exploring the earth or crossing the heavens, only through God.
Did I not tell you points back to I know what you do not know, so the unseen, what the angels did not know, and the names are one reality. The angels belong to the unseen too, but what Adam was taught came from its higher levels.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:33 · The Unseen of the Heavens and the Earth · Verse 2:33 · The Unseen of the Heavens and the Earth
What did the angels reveal, and what had they concealed?
What they revealed was their question, Will You place upon it one who causes corruption? What they concealed may be an unspoken sense that they were more deserving; or Iblīs’s hidden arrogance, which came out at the command to prostrate; or the thought of how an earthly being could gain authority over everything, even over them.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī thinks Iblīs’s arrogance more likely, since the angels had voiced all that was in their hearts and harbour no secret reservations. He also allows that all three may be meant together.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:33 · God’s Knowledge Encompasses Both the Apparent and Hidden Aspects of the Angels · Verse 2:33 · Selected Exegesis
What lesson does “I know what you reveal and what you conceal” hold for us?
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says that while God values knowledge highly, He warns against neglecting the purification of the soul while seeking it. The verse is a reminder to every scholar to watch his thoughts. God not only knows what is hidden but will bring out that which you were concealing (2:72), sometimes even in this world.
Whoever gathers knowledge without purifying it, letting self-conceit grow with it, will be exposed. The perfect human being knows the names and is free of any inner malice.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:33 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:33 · Subtleties and Allusions
The angels prostrate to Adam (2:34)
Why were the angels told to prostrate to Adam?
To show Adam’s greatness and his fitness to be God’s vicegerent. The three verses before this one show the vicegerent’s knowledge; this verse shows his honoured, sanctified status, which grows out of that knowledge. Because Adam is God’s vicegerent with comprehensive knowledge by God’s permission, the angels are commanded to honour him.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī counts the prostration as the fourth honour given to Adam, after being chosen as vicegerent, being taught the names and becoming the teacher of the angels.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · Selected Exegesis · Verse 2:34 · Honoring Adam or Rebuking the Angels?
Wasn’t prostrating to Adam a form of worshipping someone other than God?
No. The prostration was a greeting and a mark of respect towards Adam, and at the same time an act of submission and worship towards God, since the angels did it at His command. It resembles the prostration of Joseph’s parents and brothers before him (12:100).
Prostration is not worship in itself; it becomes worship when it is done with the intention of worship and of treating the other as a lord. Narrations from Imam al-Ṣādiq and Imam al-Kāẓim also state that it was a greeting, not worship of Adam.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · Prostration for Other Than God · Verse 2:34 · Prostration for Other Than God
Did the angels prostrate to Adam the individual, or to humanity?
There is strong evidence that they prostrated to the station of humanity, that is, to the perfect human being of every era, with Adam as its example. The prostration comes right after the story of vicegerency, and 7:11 says We created you… then We said to the angels, “Prostrate to Adam.”
A narration tells that on the Night Journey Gabriel would not lead the Prophet in prayer, saying, “We do not go ahead of the children of Adam since we were commanded to prostrate before Adam.” For Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī, this shows the story was not a one-time personal event.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:34 · A Discussion of the Narrations
Was the command to prostrate a real command or a symbolic one?
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī argues that it cannot be taken as a literal command. A creative command cannot be disobeyed, yet Iblīs disobeyed; and a legislative command does not fit angels, who are not under religious obligation. So the command is best read as a parable.
That does not make the story fiction. A real, unseen truth, the elevated station of humanity, is shown in a tangible form. He adds a condition: this reading holds only if the angels’ infallibility makes disobedience impossible. Otherwise the story should be read at face value.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:34 · Subtleties and Allusions
Was the prostration a rebuke for the angels’ earlier question?
No. The angels’ question, Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein?, was only an inquiry, and an inquiry does not call for punishment. The prostration was an honour for Adam and an act of worship for God, not a rebuke for the angels.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī also reports a view of some great mystics: the question slightly clouded the angels’ purity, and the prostration repaired it, much as a worshipper performs the prostration of forgetfulness. Even on this view it was a mending, not a punishment.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · Honoring Adam or Rebuking the Angels?
Iblīs refuses (2:34)
Was Iblīs an angel or a jinn?
A jinn. The Qur’an says plainly that he was of the jinn (18:50), so “except Iblīs” is an exception from outside the group, even though he lived among the angels. This is the widely held Imāmī view, and Shaykh al-Mufīd gave proofs for it. The jinn have offspring and are divided into believers and disbelievers, which is not true of angels. Angels do not disobey, and Iblīs disobeyed.
Narrations agree: the angels thought Iblīs was one of them, but he was not.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · Connected or Disconnected Exception? · Verse 2:34 · Subtleties and Allusions
See also: Key Debate: Is Iblīs a Jinn or an Angel?
If Iblīs was not an angel, why did the command to the angels apply to him?
Because he lived with them and was counted among them. Imam al-Ṣādiq said Iblīs worshipped God with the angels in heaven, and “was among them by allegiance, but he was not of the genus of angels.” The command reached everyone who had accepted the call, just as “O you who believe” also addresses the hypocrites.
How could a jinn live among infallible angels? Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī explains that angels have different ranks. Iblīs may have been among angels connected to the material world, not those near the Throne.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · A Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:34 · Connected or Disconnected Exception?
Why did Iblīs refuse to prostrate?
Out of arrogance. In the verse, he was arrogant follows he refused. This shows his refusal did not come from fear of being unable to carry the duty, as when the heavens and earth declined the Trust. It came from arrogance, and that kind of refusal brings about a fall.
His arrogance grew out of a materialistic outlook and a false analogy: I am better than him. You created me from fire and created him from clay (38:76). Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī calls his answer to God personal reasoning (ijtihād) set against the divine text.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · The Arrogant Refusal of Iblīs · Verse 2:34 · Subtleties and Allusions
Did Iblīs become a disbeliever at that moment, or was he one already?
He already was one. The verse says he was (kāna) of the disbelievers, not that he “became” one. A hidden disbelief was in him and came out under the test. The angels had been told I know… what you were concealing.
Imam ʿAlī said Iblīs worshipped God for six thousand years but became arrogant for a single moment. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī reconciles the two: his disbelief was hidden, neither hypocrisy nor sudden apostasy. It lay buried so that even he was unaware of it until the trial exposed it.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · The Hidden Disbelief of Iblīs · Verse 2:34 · Subtleties and Allusions
Was Iblīs created evil?
No. Although his disbelief was hidden before the test, it was not part of his nature. Every free and accountable being is created upon the innate nature (fiṭra) of monotheism, or at least as a blank slate. Otherwise it could plead on the Day of Resurrection that it never knew.
No one tempted Iblīs. His fall came from within, from a love of greatness. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī stresses that such an inner inclination is not compulsion: Iblīs chose freely.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · The Hidden Disbelief of Iblīs · Verse 2:34 · The Hidden Disbelief of Iblīs
What was the first sin?
The disbelief of Iblīs. Asked whether disbelief or polytheism is older, the Imams answered that disbelief is older, because Iblīs was the first to disbelieve when he rejected God’s command, and at first he called no one to worship another god. Imam al-Ṣādiq said Iblīs was the first to use analogy, and arrogance was the first disobedience.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī draws from this that the angels’ earlier question was not a sin. He adds that “first” is meant in relation to the human race descended from Adam and Eve.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · A Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:34 · A Discussion of the Narrations
Why didn’t God accept Iblīs’s offer to worship Him in some other way?
Iblīs asked to be excused from prostrating to Adam, promising to worship God as no one ever had. God answered: “I want to be worshipped as I want, not as you want.”
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī draws the lesson: God values servitude and doing one’s duty, being as God wants rather than as we want. Choosing the method of worship belongs to the One worshipped. Whoever sets his own way of worship has made his desire a god beside God, as Iblīs did.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:34 · A Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:34 · A Discussion of the Narrations
Adam and his wife in the Garden (2:35)
Which garden did Adam live in?
Not the eternal Paradise, and not a garden of this world. Those who enter the eternal Paradise never leave, and Satan, temptation and sin cannot reach it. An earthly garden is no lofty station to fall from, and its people go hungry, thirsty, cold and hot, whereas Adam was told he would suffer none of these (20:118–119).
So Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī concludes it was the intermediate (barzakh) Paradise, between this world and the Hereafter. It shared some features of each, and Satan could still reach it.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · The Command to Dwell and Benefit in Paradise · Verse 2:35 · Selected Exegesis
But doesn’t a narration say Adam’s garden was in this world?
Imam al-Ṣādiq said Adam’s Paradise was “from the paradises of the world where the sun and moon rise. If it had been from the eternal paradises, he would never have left it.”
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī explains that “world” (dunyā) here is the opposite of the Hereafter, not the same as the earth. Day and night, sun and moon, can also exist in the intermediate realm. So the narration shows that Adam’s garden was not the eternal Paradise, but not that it was part of the material world.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:35 · Discussion of the Narrations
What was the forbidden tree?
Exegetes named wheat, dates, grapes, camphor, envy and the knowledge of the family of Muḥammad. Asked which was right, Imam al-Riḍā said, “All of that is true.” The tree of Paradise is not like the trees of this world, which bear one fruit; it bears whatever fruit is desired.
A narration from Imam al-ʿAskarī calls it the tree of the knowledge of Muḥammad and his family, reserved for them. Whoever eats of it with God’s permission gains knowledge of the first and the last; whoever eats without permission fails and disobeys.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · What was the Forbidden Tree? · Verse 2:35 · Selected Exegesis
Why do the narrations about the tree disagree?
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī suggests that some narrations explain the outward meaning and others the inner interpretation (taʾwīl), with the Imams speaking to each person according to his understanding. Fayḍ Kāshānī adds that the body has foods from grains and fruits, and the soul has foods from knowledge, each with its own trees.
So the tree could be named as fruit, as knowledge, as camphor (the coolness of certainty) or as envy, without contradiction. Such a non-material tree can bear many fruits; a worldly tree could not.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:35 · Discussion of the Narrations
Is it true that Adam envied the Prophet’s family?
A narration from Imam al-Riḍā says that Adam, honoured in Paradise, wondered whether anyone was better than him. He was shown the names of Muḥammad, ʿAlī, Fāṭima, al-Ḥasan and al-Ḥusayn and warned not to look at them with envy, but he did and wished for their station.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī notes that such reports are mursal and may be metaphorical. If accepted, they show that in the realm of wilāya even an unauthorised wish for another’s rank is improper for such great figures.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:36 · A Discussion of the Narrations
Did “do not approach this tree” forbid going near it, or eating from it?
Eating from it. Some great mystics held that merely approaching the tree was forbidden. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says this lacks evidence: the Qur’an says the blame came when they tasted the tree and ate from it (7:22; 20:121), not when they came near.
“Do not approach” stresses how serious the matter was, like saying “Do not go near the snake.” The Qur’an speaks the same way about the orphan’s wealth, indecencies and adultery.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · The Divine Guidance Forbids · Verse 2:35 · The Divine Guidance Forbids
Was the ban on the tree a religious law?
No, says Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī; it was guiding advice (irshādī). It came in Paradise, before the descent, and guidance, prophethood and religious duties began only after it (2:38). The Qur’an speaks of worldly results: leaving Paradise, hunger, thirst and heat (20:117–119), not Hell.
It was like a doctor saying, “Do not eat this food, or you will become ill.” He gives a further argument, that Adam’s state did not return after his repentance, but notes it is open to question.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · The Divine Guidance Forbids · Verse 2:35 · The Divine Guidance Forbids
What does “lest you be among the wrongdoers” mean here?
It means wronging oneself, not wronging God or others. Since the ban was advice, disregarding it harmed only Adam and Eve, like a patient ignoring his doctor. Their own words confirm it: Our Lord, we have wronged ourselves.
Here “wrong” (ẓulm) means falling short and being deprived, as when a garden did not fall short in its fruit (18:33). In Sūrah Ṭāhā the same warning is lest you suffer (fatashqā), meaning hardship and toil.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · The Wrong that Adam Did to Himself · Verse 2:35 · The Wrong that Adam Did to Himself
Did Adam sin? How does this fit with prophets being infallible?
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī weighs several answers: the ban was advisory; Adam acted out of forgetfulness; it was a minor sin before prophethood; it was a disliked act; or it was leaving what is better (tark al-awlā). Each has strengths and weaknesses. In the end rational and heart-based considerations must come first, so that prophethood is not stained by any sin.
He points out what most exegetes missed: Adam lived before any sacred law existed at all. Infallibility cannot be judged there as it is under an established law.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:35 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:36 · A Discussion of the Narrations
See also: Key Debate: Did Adam Sin? · Themes: Infallibility
Doesn’t a narration say Adam committed a minor sin before he became a prophet?
Yes. Imam al-Riḍā is reported to say that Satan deceived Adam and Eve with a false oath. It was before prophethood, a minor, forgivable sin of a kind allowed to prophets before revelation, and Adam became infallible once chosen.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says that settling a theological question like this from mursal reports is very difficult. Even this answer depends on unproven points, especially that a sacred law already existed and that minor sins before prophethood are allowed.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:36 · A Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:35 · Subtleties and Allusions
See also: Key Debate: Did Adam Sin?
Satan makes them slip (2:36)
How did Satan get into the Garden after he had been expelled?
Some Israelite tales say he slipped in through the mouth of a snake. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī’s answer is that Adam’s garden was the intermediate Paradise, not the eternal one. It was not a purely intellectual realm reserved for the sincere. It included lower, imaginal levels that Satan can reach, though he cannot reach higher.
Satan had in fact descended twice: first from the rank of the angels, when he refused to prostrate, and then from the Garden, where he had entered again to tempt Adam and Eve.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:36 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:36 · Selected Exegesis
How did Satan deceive Adam and Eve?
Not by making Adam forget the ban. Satan reminded them of it himself, saying Your Lord did not forbid you this tree except that you become angels or become of the immortal (7:20). He used “beautification”, making the cause of their fall look like a way to rise, and swore he was a sincere adviser (7:21).
Because they valued angels and eternal life rather than the world, he deceived them with those very things. A narration has Adam say he never thought a creature would swear falsely by God.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:36 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:36 · A Discussion of the Narrations
What was it that Adam “forgot” (20:115)?
ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī considered three possibilities: the ban on the tree, the warning about Satan’s enmity, or the covenant of God’s lordship taken from Adam’s descendants. The ban cannot be meant, since Satan reminded Adam of it. The warning was given to both Adam and Eve, while only Adam is said to have forgotten. So it was the covenant of lordship, in its special form for prophets.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī supports this. The address is to Adam alone, and nothing in the context widens it.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:36 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:36 · Subtleties and Allusions
What was Satan really after?
To expose what was hidden. Sūrahs al-Aʿrāf and Ṭāhā both stress that when Adam and Eve ate, their nakedness appeared to them. Satan’s aim was that he might reveal to them that which was hidden from them of their shame (7:20).
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī draws the lesson for Adam’s children: Satan seeks to expose people’s faults and disgrace them. God has given an outer garment for the body and the garment of piety (7:26) for inner faults. Satan works to make people forget that garment.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:36 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:36 · Subtleties and Allusions
Who is told to “go down”, and who are the enemies?
The plural “go down” (ihbiṭū) includes Adam, Eve and Iblīs. Satan was present in the Garden, as his conversations with Adam and God’s words this is an enemy to you show.
So some of you are enemies to others covers Satan’s enmity towards humans and also the enmity among humans. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī calls Satan the main axis of enmity: every hostility among people, even between father and son, first comes from his whisperings.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:36 · Two Types of Satan’s Descent · Verse 2:36 · Satan, the Main Axis of Enmity
Was Adam’s coming down to earth a punishment like Iblīs’s?
No. Both went down, but Adam’s descent came with acceptance of his repentance, being chosen and guided. Iblīs’s came with stoning, blame, expulsion and humiliation. Iblīs lost his rank, while Adam settled on earth keeping his dignity.
For Adam the descent carried the message of vicegerency and wilāya. Imam ʿAlī said God sent him down after repentance to populate the earth with his offspring and to establish His proof among His servants.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:36 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:36 · A Discussion of the Narrations
Where on earth did Adam and Eve land?
The narrations differ. Some say Adam came down on al-Ṣafā and Eve on al-Marwa, and that the hills were named after them. Others name India, a valley called Sarandīb, or a place between Mecca and Ṭāʾif, and one says Eve landed in Jidda.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī says these reports seem closer to legend than to verified ḥadīth and may reflect Israelite influence. Their differences are hard to reconcile unless they are read as symbols of the blessings of the descent, not literal accounts.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:36 · A Discussion of the Narrations · Verse 2:36 · A Discussion of the Narrations
The words Adam received and his repentance (2:37)
What were the “words” Adam received from his Lord?
The Qur’an does not spell them out. Narrations give supplications, such as “There is no god but You… I have done evil and wronged myself, so forgive me.” Several say Adam asked God by the right of Muḥammad, ʿAlī, Fāṭima, al-Ḥasan and al-Ḥusayn.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī holds that the words were not merely sentences. They were existential realities, the very signs of the Ahl al-Bayt, which Adam encountered, even if he spoke their names in prayer. So all the narrations can be accepted together.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:37 · Explaining the Uncommon Recitation and the Effect of Receiving Words · Verse 2:37 · A Discussion of the Narrations
Why does the verse say Adam “received” the words?
“Receiving” (talaqqī) suggests Adam sought the words eagerly and consciously, as an act of obedience. In a less common reading, the words are the subject and Adam the object: the words came to meet Adam.
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī finds a point in this reading: spiritual blessings, unlike material ones, depend on God’s bestowal and care. The receiving can also happen on several levels, through hearing, through contact with a reality, or through witnessing a divine decree.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:37 · Selected Exegesis · Verse 2:37 · Explaining the Uncommon Recitation and the Effect of Receiving Words
Eve repented too, so why does the verse say God turned to “him”?
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī gives several reasons. Eve’s repentance had already been told in the earlier Meccan Sūrah al-Aʿrāf: Our Lord, we have wronged ourselves (7:23). Eve followed Adam, God’s vicegerent, as Joshua followed Moses in the story of Khiḍr. And Adam’s lapse, like his repentance, was greater in degree.
Eve shared in all of it, but at lesser degrees. He stresses that this does not mean the female gender is secondary to the male.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:37 · The Secret Behind the Singular Pronoun · Verse 2:37 · The Secret Behind the Singular Pronoun
Is God obliged to accept repentance?
The Ashʿarites call acceptance pure grace, while the Muʿtazilites say it is obligatory upon God. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī rejects the Muʿtazilite view, since no law has power over God.
His answer, which he traces to Ibn Sīnā through Ṣadr al-Mutaʾallihīn, separates “obligatory upon God” from “obligatory from God”. Sincere, complete repentance will certainly be accepted, as justice certainly comes from Him. Yet God is not bound to it.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:37 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:37 · Subtleties and Allusions
See also: Key Debate: Must God Accept Repentance?
Guidance, “no fear”, and the companions of the Fire (2:38–39)
Why is the command “go down” given twice?
Some said there were two descents, from Paradise to the sky and then to earth. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī finds this against the verses’ plain meaning: both commands are the same descent, so the second repeats the first.
He gives four reasons. It stresses the importance of the descent. It shows that repentance did not cancel the descent. It resumes the story after the account of repentance. And the first command brings out the creative result (living on earth), the second the legislative one (guidance).
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:38–39 · The Reason Behind the Repetition of the Command “Go Down” · Verse 2:38–39 · The Reason Behind the Repetition of the Command “Go Down”
See also: Key Debate: Why “Go Down” Twice?
What is the “guidance” promised in “when guidance comes to you from Me”?
It is not limited to prophets and scriptures. It includes every complete rational proof and authentic transmitted evidence, and only what comes from God counts; anything else is mere desire. It must also actually reach people: a proof that never reached them does not bring punishment.
A narration from Imam al-Bāqir interprets this guidance as ʿAlī. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī calls this an example, not a limit: all the infallibles, and the Qur’an, are instances of divine guidance.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:38–39 · The Extensive Guidance of God · Verse 2:38–39 · A Discussion of the Narrations
Why does God say “if guidance comes”, as if it were uncertain?
A conditional sentence does not imply doubt. It only links the condition to its result, and the condition may be certain. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī calls revelation and prophethood indispensable: human life on earth is never without divine guidance.
Then why the conditional form? He suggests that sending messengers was new to the first generation after Adam and Eve. After the advice broken in Paradise, guidance now came with a warning: if God’s command is broken again through Iblīs’s whispering, disobedience will bring severe punishment.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:38–39 · The Lack of Doubt and Hesitation in the Conditional Statement · Verse 2:38–39 · The Lack of Doubt and Hesitation in the Conditional Statement
“No fear nor grief”: shouldn’t believers fear God?
They should. In this world a believer lives between fear and hope, fearing God’s punishment and hoping for His mercy. The promise of no fear concerning them, nor will they grieve is fulfilled in the Hereafter, as in O My servants, no fear shall be on you that Day (43:68).
The friends of God (awliyāʾ) are an exception: their freedom from fear and grief covers both worlds. Their hearts are attached only to God, so they fear no future harm and grieve no past loss.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:38–39 · Subtleties and Allusions · Verse 2:38–39 · Subtleties and Allusions
Why does the warning mention the Fire, while the promise does not mention Paradise?
Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī suggests it may come from the different motives of the guided. A high group follows guidance out of fear of Hell or longing for Paradise. A highest group follows it out of fear of separation from God and longing to meet Him.
The highest group does not long for Paradise; rather, Paradise longs for them. Since “no fear nor grief” covers both groups, some verses join it with entering Paradise, and others with being friends of God.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:38–39 · The Extensive Guidance of God
Who are “the companions of the Fire”? Does this include every sinner?
No. Being companions of the Fire and staying in it forever is for the complete disbelievers and deniers of God’s signs, not for ordinary sinful believers or those who waver between good and evil. Such mixed believers are not immune from fear and grief either. Their case is taken up in other verses, such as others who have acknowledged their sins… Perhaps God will turn to them (9:102).
The verses here speak of only two groups: those who fully accept guidance and those who fully rebel against it.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:38–39 · Subtleties and Allusions
Can someone know the truth and still deny it?
Yes. Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī separates knowledge from belief. Knowledge follows necessarily once a person grasps definite premises. Belief is an act of the will by which the soul accepts what it knows. So a person can know the truth and still refuse to believe it, as with those who rejected the signs while their inner selves were convinced of them (27:14).
Belief, however, cannot coexist with denial. He says Tafsīr al-Manār was imprecise in suggesting it can.
Read more in al-Tasnim: Verse 2:38–39 · The Difference Between Knowledge and Belief · Verse 2:38–39 · The Difference Between Knowledge and Belief