Author [EN] [PL] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Was Iblis the First Disbeliever?

Offline Reader Questions

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Was Iblis the First Disbeliever?
« on: March 15, 2012, 09:10:19 AM »
Assalamu Alaikum Br. Joseph:

Re:  Sura 2:34:  It says that Iblis was included amongst the "nonbelievers" when he refused to bow down before Adam.  It appears that there were other nonbelievers at time.  What is your opinion ?   

Regards.

Offline Joseph Islam

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1858
    • View Profile
    • The Quran and its Message
Re: Was Iblis the First Disbeliever?
« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2012, 09:12:36 AM »
Salamun Alaikum.

Linguistic discussions aside, there is indeed an apt theological question here. At no place in the Quran does the Quran categorically state that:

  • Mankind was the first creation that was given complete 'free choice'. (*)
  • That Satan was the first creation of God to disbelieve.

The Quran is clear when it wants to state when something is the first. For example, Prophet Muhammad was the first (awwalu) to submit amongst his people (6:163, 39:11-12).

The universe is replete with God's creation which includes moving creatures (Da'aba). We have not been advanced any information as to how many of these creatures were granted 'volition' before or after the creation of man. To think of man as the only sentient creation with volition is a very 'earth-centric' view with no categorical warrant from the Quran.

042:029
"And one of His signs is the creation of the Heavens and the Earth and what He has spread forth in both of them (Arabic: fi-hima) of living beings (Arabic: Da'aba); and when He pleases He is all powerful to gather them together"

A related point is to be noted in another verse. The 'Malaika' (angels) enquired as to why God was to create a vicegerent (Khalifa) on the Earth that would create mischief and cause much bloodshed (2:30). The question arises how did they know that a creation such as man when given volition would create such mischief? By virtue of this question asked by the 'malaika', there seems to be a strong suggestion that they had prior knowledge by experience. This seems to indicate that this experience would most likely have been gained from other parts of the Universe where similar volition was granted to other of God's creatures. In this way, the malaika were simply applying prior observational experience to another situation. However, despite this suggestion remaining hypothetical, the nature of the question asked by the 'malaika' remains fact.

(*) Now one contention may be raised with verse 33:72 which may argue that 'Amanata' implies 'volition' or a form of 'trust' and hence despite this being offered to the Heavens and the Earth, only man accepted it [Please see related Note 1 below]. However, if the Heavens and the Earth were to include everything within it, then why were the mountains (jibal) mentioned separately when they would have been part of the Earth anyway? Such an inclusion would seem superfluous based on this interpretation.

However, the mention of 'jibal' along with the heavens and the earth can be seen to support another interpretation. The term 'samawati' does not only refer to the complete Universe, but can also refer to parts of it. (e.g. 'Indeed, We have decked the lower heaven / near heaven / worldly heaven (samaa-duniya) with the planets (kawakib)' 37:6). This interpretation is strengthened with the word 'jibal' (mountain) mentioned in 33:72 which seems to suggest the context referring to a localised celestial space which includes the earth and a local heaven such as our solar system.  With this interpretation, other parts of our galaxy (Milky way) and billions of other galaxies may still be teeming with life which has been granted some form of volition.

Furthermore, when 'samawate wal-ardi' (heavens and the earth) is addressed, this address does not necessarily automatically include a reference to every creation inside it. We note the phrase "samawati wal-ardi wama baynahuma" (Heavens and the Earth and what is between both of them) 5:17, which implies a clear separation of the heavens (samawate) as an address and what is contained within them (baynahuma) as an address. Similarly in 38:27, we note the expression 'samaa wal-arda wama baynahuma' which again addresses the heaven (s) and the earth separately from what is contained within them (baynahuma).

Therefore, 'Samawate' as an address, is possibly better understood as the various layers of celestial space (seven or several) which ultimately constitute the totality of the Universe which by itself has no volition but executes God's ordained laws (41:12).  So by virtue of 33:72 alone and the address 'samawate wal-ardi' (heavens and the earth), it is difficult to conclude that no other creation within it (baynahuma - between them) was offered volition, free-choice or a broader definition of 'amanata'. Rather, it was man in the context of Earth that accepted it.

So it is quite possible that 2:34 would support the idea that Satan was not the first disbeliever in the wider perspective of the complete Universe.

Now of course, based on linguistics, one may argue that Satan became 'of the disbelievers' (i.e. category of disbelievers) or any other number of interpretations. However, the theological points suggested by your question still remain, which I have endeavoured to answer.

I hope this helps, God willing.

Related Article:

DO ALIENTS EXIST?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/do%20aliens%20exist%20FM3.htm

Note [1]
It is difficult to accept a narrow definition of 'amanata' in 33:72 as 'volition' or 'free will' when we know from the Quran that the Jinn were created before mankind (15:27) and they too were granted free-will as a separate creation (55:14-16; 15:26-27). Therefore, a broader definition of 'amanata' is expected which constitutes a form of trust.

Regards,
Joseph.
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act' 
George Orwell