Verse 2:34

[Wakas]

Dear Joseph,
w/salaam,

Thanks for clarifying.

Your view is similar to mine except:
the degree of iblees' separateness with mankind
the state from which adam/mankind was removed (I haven't studied that aspect)
whether malaika have free-will or not (I haven't studied that aspect)
and perhaps some other minor points.

If you take it literal, as in two of a new species were created (i.e. adam and his spouse), how did they procreate? i.e. was it from these first two, then from within their children, and so on?

[Joseph Islam]

Dear brother Wakas,

As-salam alaykum

Thanks for your response.

With regards your question “If you take it literal, as in two of a new species were created (i.e. adam and his spouse), how did they procreate? i.e. was it from these first two, then from within their children, and so on?”:
 
Adam and his spouse arguably had many offspring (4:1).

The first generation offspring were not like subsequent generations of children / siblings.

First generation offspring were procreated from individuals (Adam & his spouse) that were a new species from a parent species that was not 'ins'. Adam and his spouse only became ‘ins’ when God blew His spirit in them. Therefore, not only were Adam and his spouse’s parent DNA not ‘ins’, there is no evidence to suggest that Adam and his spouse were born as humans’. After all, God could have blown his spirit when they were at a stage of their physical maturity as ‘bashar’.

Hence understanding first generation offspring as 'siblings' in the conventional sense is not completely appropriate and a point often missed.

The first generation offspring procreated to produce second generation offspring.

Second generation offspring were first cousins and born of parents that were themselves born 'ins' and had parent DNA that was 'ins'. They therefore procreated as first cousins in the conventional sense.

As I am sure you will appreciate, that there are many that also unnecessary apply 'Biblical' or 'Quranic' Shariah compliant 'laws' on the first humans who arguably knew nothing of these advanced laws which were revealed for succeeding civilisations, nations and a people.  For all intent and purposes, the laws of the first generation humans may have been extremely rudimentary.

I hope that clarifies, God willing.
Joseph

[Sword]

Salam Alaykum, brother Joesph.


I have read your article about Adam. May I kindly ask you, if the traditional understanding is wrong regarding the place where Adam was created, and since Quran's one of the targets was to eliminate false beliefs with truths (from the Bible and the Torah), then why did God still leave it ambiguous in the Quran whether Adam was at first in a different realm called Jannah or whether he was already on earth? Or do you think it is explicit from the Quranic verses that Adam was already on earth, but most people are finding it ambiguous / failing to understand the corrected belief for whatever reason?


Regards.

[Joseph Islam]

Wa alaikum assalam Sword,

Yes, I would certainly incline with your latter comment. It is always difficult to be exactly sure how the earliest generations of Muslims may have understood a concept when the main Islamic secondary source literary record is at times, many centuries after the death of the prophet. The earliest historical literary record of Islam in Arabia is the Quran.

For example, clearly there were early Islamic thinkers that understood a concept of God guided evolution although it is not accepted today in mainstream 'traditional thought'.

The Quran remains the first point of analysis, and the word 'jannah' is well understood to have a literal core meaning which  is not always a reference to a spiritual 'heaven'. See verses 2:265 and 6:141. These are 'earthly' jannahs. 'Jannah' literally means a 'garden' irrespective of whether it is an abode in the afterlife or elsewhere. It takes its meaning from the dense trees which conceal the ground.

The Quran as you know remains a guard over the previous scriptures and at times does address mainstay beliefs. In the story of Adam, there are many insights to the Quran's narratives which provide clear evidence that he was created on and for Earth, otherwise many other verses would simply make no sense.

For example, why did God create a creature elsewhere when he was meant to be a vicegerent on Earth? If so, then Adam would have to sin to be sent to Earth so that God's plan could be accomplished. This removes accountability from Adam and Satan.  Furthermore '"Indeed, I am going to make / create / appoint in the earth a khalifa" (2:30) is a very explicit statement. The intention being to create Adam to be a resident on earth.

I hope that helps, God willing.
Joseph

[Student]

Salamun Alaykum,
Brother Joseph,

Mashallah your explanation lend support to the evolution theory without compromising the honor of Adam and his spouse (peace be upon them both), indeed a very persuasive presentation of the creation story, Subhan Allah! However, it didn't touch on the question I've had in mind for as many times as I read this Surah, the ayah 2:31 begs a question and I'm yet to find an answer let alone to my satisfaction and i.e., Why or How Allah swt expect an answer by posing the same question to both Adam AS and the Angels while teaching the former and leaving the latter uninformed?

   And He imparted unto Adam the names of all things; then He brought them within the ken of the angels and said: "Declare unto Me the names of these [things], if what you say is true." 2:31 (Asad)

 At least I do not see they too were given the list of names (Asmaa) and could not retain - did I miss it? It's our fundamental belief that Allah's swt justice demands equal opportunity be given to both parties in the contest of comparison of knowledge/whatever else was being tested with that Asma question, isn't it?

Is Allama=Arada, then?

It pique my curiosity every single time I read the story in Baqarah....Hope you'll be able to quench my thirst, inshallah!

Thanks & Jazak Allah Khair!
Student

[Student]

Alhumdulillah, I'm into my another iteration of Quran reading and still vexing with 2:31, anyone has any explanation?

[wanderer]

Hi Student--
This is actually a GENIUS lesson that Allah (swt) imparted onto the angels. Let me do my best to explain.
It is clear from the beginning of the story that the angels saw themselves superior to man and could not understand why God created us. (2:30) So to show them the reason why, He teaches the names of all the creatures to Adam. He then asks the angels what the names are and they (obviously) do not know, since angels do not have free will to think and gain knowledge. However, Man does, and seeing this, the Angels understand why God created us a worthy creation, despite our numerous flaws.
Let me know if you need me to clarify
wanderer

[good logic]

.Peace wanderer.
 Please state the verse/s that confirm /imply what you said here:
It is clear from the beginning of the story that the angels saw themselves superior to man
And here:
since angels do not have free will to think and gain knowledge

Thanks in advance.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

[ilker]

assalamu alaikum brothers and sisters

well i should say i personally don't agree with the part that brother wakas wrote about iblees. i don't think we should necessarily conclude that iblees was a consequence of free will just because there is no mention of iblees prior to the creation of man. 

I don't know if you have done your research on the freewill of angels brother wakas, but it seems to me that if you come to the conclusion that they indeed have freewill then that automatically means iblees might be there (just like angels) before man was endowed with freewill.

In addition you say (quote from freeminds.org) iblees was doing what he was expected to do, so he didn't break the rule, he was designed this way. How do you explain for example Surah Sad 71-78 and other similar ayat:

14:22:

"And Satan will say when the matter has been concluded, "Indeed, Allah had promised you the promise of truth. And I promised you, but I betrayed you. But I had no authority over you except that I invited you, and you responded to me. So do not blame me; but blame yourselves. I cannot be called to your aid, nor can you be called to my aid. Indeed, I deny your association of me [with Allah ] before. Indeed, for the wrongdoers is a painful punishment."

7:18:

"(Allah) said: "Get out from this disgraced and expelled. If any of them follow thee hell will I fill with you all."

38:85:

[That] I will surely fill Hell with you and those of them that follow you all together."


Salam...

[wanderer]

 "Please state the verse/s that confirm /imply what you said here:
It is clear from the beginning of the story that the angels saw themselves superior to man "
I did. It was 2:30.
And here:
since angels do not have free will to think and gain knowledge
verse 2:32
Regards
wanderer

[Student]

Wanderer, thanks for your attempt but your opinion is way off, unfortunately. Also, you didn't answer my simple question is Allama=Arada?

Sir Joseph, Salaamun Alayka, if you have some time and find this thread could be please comment/elaborate on the lexical nuances of the words and pronouns as I came across this extremely interesting discussion here:

http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=(2:31:6)

[wanderer]

"Wanderer, thanks for your attempt but your opinion is way off, unfortunately. Also, you didn't answer my simple question is Allama=Arada?"

What did you think was off about my answer? As far as I could tell, your question was, why didn't Allah (swt) give the same opportunity to both the angels and Man to answer his question, which as I explained was to prove a point to the angels. Did I miss something here?
wanderer

[Student]

everything plus you don't have to insert yourself in every thread (my humble request, very respectfully).

If you are interested read this entire thread, my question, and the link I provided to get the whole picture before you speak.

Br Wakas Sir Joseph waiting for your kind input if you will 

[wanderer]

everything plus you don't have to insert yourself in every thread (my humble request, very respectfully).
Thank you for your rude comment. This has been the first thread i've commented on in WEEKS, so stop making ridiculous accusations. And (ironically enough), i see you've failed to answer my ONLY question. Yes, I have read the entire thread, for your information.
wanderer

[Student]

When I say every thread I mean every thread I'm involved in, somehow even when I'm specifically addressing questions to seniors by name you seems to ignore. I don't think you read the link I gave and my questions. Also, as my name suggest I'm here as a STUDENT to learn and correct myself and NOT to answer question to a question or tread in threads already thoroughly discussed in articles and other threads by Sir Joseph.

I humbly request you not to comment on my questions unless specifically addressed to you or to general group. Hope you understand and take it in positive stride. Peace