Verses 26–36

Chapter 7: Al-Aʿrāf (Elevations) · Printed edition: Volume 15, pp. 93–156

يا بَنِي آدَمَ قَدْ أَنْزَلْنا عَلَيْكُمْ لِباساً يُوارِي سَوْآتِكُمْ وَ رِيشاً وَ لِباسُ التَّقْوى‏ ذلِكَ خَيْرٌ ذلِكَ مِنْ آياتِ اللَّهِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَذَّكَّرُونَ ٢٦ يا بَنِي آدَمَ لا يَفْتِنَنَّكُمُ الشَّيْطانُ كَما أَخْرَجَ أَبَوَيْكُمْ مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ يَنْزِعُ عَنْهُما لِباسَهُما لِيُرِيَهُما سَوْآتِهِما إِنَّهُ يَراكُمْ هُوَ وَ قَبِيلُهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لا تَرَوْنَهُمْ إِنَّا جَعَلْنَا الشَّياطِينَ أَوْلِياءَ لِلَّذِينَ لا يُؤْمِنُونَ ٢٧ وَ إِذا فَعَلُوا فاحِشَةً قالُوا وَجَدْنا عَلَيْها آباءَنا وَ اللَّهُ أَمَرَنا بِها قُلْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لا يَأْمُرُ بِالْفَحْشاءِ أَ تَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ ما لا تَعْلَمُونَ ٢٨ قُلْ أَمَرَ رَبِّي بِالْقِسْطِ وَ أَقِيمُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ عِنْدَ كُلِّ مَسْجِدٍ وَ ادْعُوهُ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ كَما بَدَأَكُمْ تَعُودُونَ ٢٩ فَرِيقاً هَدى‏ وَ فَرِيقاً حَقَّ عَلَيْهِمُ الضَّلالَةُ إِنَّهُمُ اتَّخَذُوا الشَّياطِينَ أَوْلِياءَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ وَ يَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُمْ مُهْتَدُونَ ٣٠ يا بَنِي آدَمَ خُذُوا زِينَتَكُمْ عِنْدَ كُلِّ مَسْجِدٍ وَ كُلُوا وَ اشْرَبُوا وَ لا تُسْرِفُوا إِنَّهُ لا يُحِبُّ الْمُسْرِفِينَ٣١

26. O Children of Adam! We have certainly sent down to you garments to cover your shameful parts, and adornments. Yet the garment of Godwariness—that is better. That is [one] of Allah’s signs, so that they may take admonition.
27. O Children of Adam! Do not let Satan tempt you, like he expelled your parents from paradise, stripping them of their garments to expose to them their shameful parts. Indeed he sees you—he and his hosts—whence you do not see them. We have indeed made the devils guardians of those who have no faith.
28. When they commit an indecency, they say, “We found our fathers practicing it, and Allah has enjoined it upon us.” Say, “Indeed Allah does not enjoin indecencies. Do you attribute to Allah what you do not know?”
29. Say, “My Lord has enjoined justice,” and [He has enjoined,] “Set your faces [toward Him] at every place of worship, and invoke Him, putting your exclusive faith in Him. Even as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return.”
30. A part [of humankind] He has guided, while error is fixed upon a part, for they took devils for guardians instead of Allah, and supposed they were guided.
31. O Children of Adam! Put on your adornment on every place of worship, and eat and drink, but do not waste; indeed He does not like the wasteful.
32. Say, “Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants, and the good things of [His] provision?” Say, “These are, on the Day of Resurrection, exclusively for the faithful in the life of this world.” Thus do We elaborate the communications for a people who have knowledge.
33. Say, “My Lord has only forbidden indecencies, the outward among them and the inward ones, and sin and undue aggression, and that you should ascribe to Allah partners for which He has not sent down any authority, and that you should attribute to Allah what you do not know.”
34. There is a [preordained] time for every nation: when their time comes, they shall not defer it by a single hour nor shall they advance it.
35. O Children of Adam! If there come to you messengers from among yourselves, recounting to you My communications, then those who are Godwary and righteous will have no fear, nor will they grieve.
36. But those who deny Our communications and are disdainful of them, they shall be the inmates of the Fire and they shall remain in it [forever].

Introduction

The previous section was a detailed account of the story of prostration and Adam’s garden, which is also elaborately discussed in Sūrah al-Baqarah []. The same story is mentioned concisely in Sūrah Ṭā-Hā []. Matching these verses together, we can deduce, after some contemplation, that whereas the verses in Sūrah Ṭā-Hā are addressed to Adam specifically, the current set of verses generalize them to all his descendants, where the verses begin with: O Children of Adam. This complies with what we saw in the previous section, where the story was presented in a more general way [than in Sūrah Ṭā-Hā].

There are four verses here which begin with: O Children of Adam. Three of them [verses 26, 27 and 31] generalize God’s initial addresses to Adam in Sūrah Ṭā-Hā. There He warns Adam against Satan’s temptations and tell him about being provided with food, drink and clothes in the garden: We said, “O Adam! This is indeed an enemy of yours and your mate’s. So do not let him expel you from paradise, or you will be miserable. Indeed you will neither be hungry in it nor naked. Indeed you will neither be thirsty in it, nor suffer from the sun” (). The fourth verse [] generalizes a subsequent verse in Sūrah Ṭā-Hā: Then, should any guidance come to you from Me… ().

Therefore, God’s initial directives to Adam [in Sūrah Ṭā-Hā] are generalized to all his descendants [here], and from them the verses conclude a set of laws and instructions. This shows that what is legislated here in concise and general terms are universal commands that are part of all religions without any exception [because they are equally extended to all descendants of Adam]. We can also deduce that the general laws that govern the life and afterlife of any person, including the determinents of their felicity or wretchedness, stem from that initial story [of Adam]. Hence, the story of Adam [mentioned in the previous set of verses] is the root, and the laws and system [mentioned in the current set of verses] are its branches. The story of Adam is like a table of contents which presents the elaborate discussions that are to follow.

Commentary

يا بَنِي آدَمَ قَدْ أَنْزَلْنا عَلَيْكُمْ لِباساً يُوارِي سَوْآتِكُمْ وَ رِيشاً وَ لِباسُ التَّقْوى‏ ذلِكَ خَيْرٌ ذلِكَ مِنْ آياتِ اللَّهِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَذَّكَّرُونَ ٢٦

(7:26) O Children of Adam! We have certainly sent down to you garments (libāsan) to cover your shameful parts, and adornments (rīshan). Yet the garment of Godwariness—that is better. That is [one] of Allah’s signs, so that they may take admonition.

Libās is “something that can be worn to cover the body.” It is originally constructed as a verbal noun: labisa, yalbasu, labsan, libsan and libāsan [where the last three terms are verbal nouns, meaning “wearing, clothing”]. Rīsh means “something that is beautiful.” It is derived from the “feathers” (rīsh) of birds in the sense that their beauty and adornment. Rīsh is also used for appliances and furniture.

Apparently what is meant by “sending down” garments and adornments is “creating” them. The same usage is seen elsewhere in the Qur’an: and We sent down iron, in which there is great might and uses (); and He has sent down for you eight mates of the cattle (). This is based on the verse: There is not a thing but that its sources are with Us, and We do not send it down except in a known measure (). It means that God has “sent down” garments and adornments from some hidden source that is “with Him” to the visible world. This process is called khalq (creation) [in its etymological sense, which means taqdīr (measurement)].

Garments are a product of human manufacturing and fabrication, but not their primary material such as cotton, wool and silk. We extract, spin, weave, sew and cut these things until we make garments out of them which are suitable for wearing. Hence, garments and adornments are produced by humans, yet the verse attributes them to God. This attribution is similar to the verse: but Allah has created you and whatever you make ().

The existence of anything traces to God and can be attributed to Him, whether that thing occurs through human activity, or occurs through other means and instruments, including the essential properties of different species like the growing of plants from the earth, the yellow color of gold, and the sweetness of honey. All means and instruments, including all their properties and impacts, trace back to God, Who encompasses all of their existential properties.

Meanwhile, not all events can be called “created” in the same sense. Everything goes back to God except the aspects of deficiency, evil and sin in His creation, because these things are in fact a lack of creation of good, or a violation of God’s command. Hence, they are not created [as things that are brought to existence primarily]. Rather, they are aspects of some deficiency in human deeds, whether inward or outward. We have repeatedly discussed this idea in different places in this book.

The verse describes the purpose of garments as: to cover your shameful parts. This refers to the need which makes humans go after clothes: to cover their body parts which would be shameful to them to reveal. As with adornment, humans go after them to embellish themselves, which is something beyond the primary need for clothing. This verse implies God’s favor upon humans for guiding them to manufacture garments and adornments. As some exegetes have said, we can also infer from this verse that it is permissible to wear clothes for beauty.

Yet the garment of Godwariness—that is better. That is [one] of Allah’s signs, so that they may take admonition: Here the verse makes a transition from physical garments to a spiritual garment. The former cover the body parts that would make one ashamed if they are revealed. Similarly, the latter covers inner defects that would make one ashamed if they are revealed. These defects include polytheism and all other sins. This spiritual garment is Godwariness, which is God’s advice and command to us.

The psychological pain and humiliation that one suffers due to a disclosure of any defect—whether that is physical or spiritual—is of the same nature. However, the appearance of inner defects is more intense, bitter and lasting, because then one has to face God and be accountable to Him, and because they result in a fire which will overspread the hearts (). This is why the garment of Godwariness is better than the physical garments.

… That is [one] of Allah’s signs, so that they may take admonition: This sentence complements the previous part of the verse. It means that the physical garment is a sign of God. We must reflect on the fact that we have some private parts which we should cover with clothes, because their disclosure would grieve us. Then we should infer that we also have some spiritual defects that we must cover, because their disclosure would grieve us in like manner. We will then realize that we must, a fortiori, cover these hidden defects. These defects are our moral vices and evil habits, and the garment that we need to cover them is the garment of Godwariness. This is what God has commanded us, and has explained it to us through the tongue of His prophets. This garment is necessary for us to remove our [spiritual] need.

Here is a list of how other exegetes have interpreted the garment of Godwariness:

1. It means belief and good deeds.
2. It means having a decent appearance as a righteous person.
3. It means ḥayāʾ (shame, modesty).
4. It means the garment of worship and asceticism, which is typically coarse woolen clothes.
5. It means Islam.
6. It means what is worn in battles.
7. It means anything that covers the private parts.
8. It means fear of God.
9. It means what the Godwary will wear on the Day of Resurrection. That is better than all garments in this world.

The readers would certainly agree that none of these views is quite concordant with the context and flow of the verse.

يا بَنِي آدَمَ لا يَفْتِنَنَّكُمُ الشَّيْطانُ كَما أَخْرَجَ أَبَوَيْكُمْ مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ يَنْزِعُ عَنْهُما لِباسَهُما لِيُرِيَهُما سَوْآتِهِما إِنَّهُ يَراكُمْ هُوَ وَ قَبِيلُهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لا تَرَوْنَهُمْ إِنَّا جَعَلْنَا الشَّياطِينَ أَوْلِياءَ لِلَّذِينَ لا يُؤْمِنُونَ ٢٧

(7:27) O Children of Adam! Do not let Satan tempt you, like he expelled your parents from paradise, stripping them of their garments to expose to them their shameful parts. Indeed he sees you—he and his hosts—whence you do not see them. We have indeed made the devils guardians of those who have no faith.

The repetition of O Children of Adam at the beginning of this verse makes it independent of the last verse, but semantically it follows the same thread—as we can see, there is again reference made to shameful parts. The meaning is: “You humans have some shameful parts that can only be covered by the garment of Godwariness, and We have dressed you in this garment by the innate makeup and creation (fiṭrah) that We have given you. So beware lest Satan deceives you and takes away this garment from you, as he took it away from your parents in the garden, in order to expose to them their shameful parts. Indeed We have made the devils guardians over those who follow them and do not believe in Our signs.”

This means that what Satan did to Adam and Eve in the garden—that is, stripping them of their garments to expose to them their shameful parts—symbolizes what he does to all humans: he strips them of their innate garment of Godwariness through temptation. Hence, all individuals are in the “garden of felicity” as long as they do not fall for this temptation. Once they fall for Satan’s deception, God expels them from that garden.

… Indeed he sees you—he and his hosts—whence you do not see them…: This sentence emphasizes the previous warning. It says that Satan’s work is so subtle that one does not realize it, and so hidden that one does not sense it. One only sees oneself in the process, without realizing that there is another being or force beyond him who commands him to do evil and leads him toward wretchedness.

… We have indeed made the devils guardians of those who have no faith: This is another emphasis on the previous prohibition. The control and authority that the devils have over humans is inasmuch as tempting and deceiving them. Once one falls for their temptation and deception, they take control of the person as they wish. This is seen in God’s addresses to Iblīs: “Entice whomever of them you can with your voice; and rally against them your cavalry and your infantry, and share with them in wealth and children, and make promises to them!” But Satan promises them nothing but delusion. “As for My servants, you shall have no authority over them.” And your Lord suffices as trustee (); Indeed he does not have any authority over those who have faith and put their trust in their Lord (); Indeed as for My servants you do not have any authority over them, except the perverse who follow you (). Matching these verses with the current verse, we can deduce that the devils have no authority over the believers, although they may sometimes be tempted by the devils. Satan has no authority over those believers who trust in God [], who are described as My servants in the other verse []. This means that Satan’s authority only encompasses those who do not believe.

What is meant by “lack of faith” here is not simply atheism or polytheism [which includes passive unbelief], but it is rejecting the signs and communications of God [actively and deliberately]. This is a more specific and restricted meaning than the general sense of unbelief. Our evidence for this specific interpretation is found in God’s addresses to humankind in this story: We said, “Get down from it, all together! Then, should any guidance come to you from Me… But those who are faithless and deny Our signs, they shall be the inmates of the Fire and they shall remain in it [forever]” (); But those who deny Our communications and are disdainful of them, they shall be the inmates of the Fire and they shall remain in it [forever] ().

وَ إِذا فَعَلُوا فاحِشَةً قالُوا وَجَدْنا عَلَيْها آباءَنا وَ اللَّهُ أَمَرَنا بِها قُلْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لا يَأْمُرُ بِالْفَحْشاءِ أَ تَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ ما لا تَعْلَمُونَ ٢٨

(7:28) When they commit an indecency, they say, “We found our fathers practicing it, and Allah has enjoined it upon us.” Say, “Indeed Allah does not enjoin indecencies. Do you attribute to Allah what you do not know?”

Whereas in the previous verses God addressed all children of Adam, in this verse He addresses the Prophet in particular, since He wants to then deduce certain points that specifically apply to the Prophet’s nation. We had a similar transition to this in verse , where the verse began with O Children of Adam, but ended with: That is (dhālika) [one] of Allah’s signs, so that they may take admonition (). That transition served the same purpose.

What happened in the story of Adam’s garden was that their shameful parts were disclosed, which led to their expulsion from the garden. This shows that God is not pleased with indecent acts by the people. Following the same theme, this verse talks about the polytheists committing indecencies, justifying it by the practice of their fathers, and claiming that God has ordered them to do so. God commands His Messenger to respond to them by clarifying that He never orders indecency, and reminding them that their claim is not based on knowledge, but is a false imputation to God. The story of the garden is a proof for this.

The verse quotes two arguments from the polytheists to support and justify their practice: (1) that their fathers did the same; (2) that God has enjoined them to do so. Only the second argument is relevant to the above generalization from the story of Adam’s garden. That is why the verse only responds to that. Their first statement is also flawed and not admitted by God, but it is not addressed here since it goes beyond the theme of these verses. God has refuted it in many other verses in the Qur’an, such as: What, even if their fathers neither applied any reason nor were guided?! ().

Several exegetes have said that this verse—When they commit an indecency… ()—refers to a common custom in the pre-Islamic era among the Arabs, where they used to circumambulate the Holy House naked. Their reason for this was: “We do not want to circumambulate in clothes in which we have sinned, but we want to circumambulate just as our mothers gave birth to us.” It is narrated from al-Farrāʾ that they used to take some pieces of leather called ḥawf, or pieces of wool called rahṭ, and wrap it around their waist. Women used to cover their fronts with a strap or something else. Then they would chant:

الْيَوْمَ يَبْدُو بَعْضُهُ أَوْ كُلُّهُ وَ مَا بَدَا مِنْهُ فَلَا أُحِلُّهُ‏

Today shall appear part of it or all,

But to look at what appears is by no means halal.

This custom was common among them until the Prophet prohibited them from doing so after the conquest of Mecca, when he sent ʿAlī to recite the opening verses of Sūrah al-Barāʾah [] in Mecca. The Prophet—and/or some Muslims—sometimes blamed the polytheists for this practice, but they justified it by saying: We found our fathers practicing it, and Allah has enjoined it upon us. Thus God refuted their claim and rebuked them by revealing: Indeed Allah does not enjoin indecencies. Do you attribute to Allah what you do not know?

The above interpretation of the verse is in fact quite possible, and there are some indications in the verse to support it. One indication is that their act is called al-faḥshāʾ (indecency), which means “a very abhorrent act.” Another indication is that they used to justify it by saying that God has ordered them to do so. This means that the act must have been an indecency that was committed in the context of some worship, which matches naked circumambulation. Nevertheless, the verse uses the word al-faḥshāʾ in an unrestricted form [indicated by the article al-]. Therefore, it can have multiple instances and applications, including what they used to do, as well as other similar practices that are found among the people, especially in our time and age.

قُلْ أَمَرَ رَبِّي بِالْقِسْطِ وَ أَقِيمُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ عِنْدَ كُلِّ مَسْجِدٍ وَ ادْعُوهُ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ كَما بَدَأَكُمْ تَعُودُونَ ٢٩

(7:29) Say, “My Lord has enjoined justice (bil-qisṭ),” and [He has enjoined,] “Set your faces [toward Him] at every place of worship, and invoke Him, putting your exclusive faith in Him. Even as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return.”

The last verse denied the claim that God has enjoined indecencies, and stated that such a claim is not rooted in anything that God has revealed. Hence it is a calumny against Him and a statement made without knowledge. This verse complements that negation by affirming what God has in fact enjoined: Say, “My Lord has enjoined justice”…. The last verse was about faḥshāʾ (indecency), which means a severely vile act, which would necessarily be on either extremum of excess or defect. That is why this verse contrasts it by qisṭ (justice, balance). Al-Rāghib says:

Qisṭ means “a fair share,” which makes it synonymous with niṣf and niṣfah (half, equal share). God says: that He may reward those who have faith and do righteous deeds with justice (bil-qisṭ) (); Maintain the weights with justice (bil-qisṭ) (). Qasṭ means usurping the fair share (qisṭ) of someone else, which is the same as jawr (oppression, injustice, wrong). Iqsāṭ means giving the fair share (qisṭ) of someone else, which is the same as inṣāf (fairness, equity). When one takes something wrongly, it is said: qasaṭa al-rajul (he wronged); and when one observes justice, it is said: aqsaṭa (he was fair). Thus the Qur’an says: As for the unjust (al-qāsiṭūn), they will be firewood for hell (); and do justice (aqsiṭū); indeed Allah loves the just (al-muqsiṭīn) ().

The meaning is, “Say: My Lord has commanded that you must observe fairness, follow the middle path in all affairs, and abstain from the two extremes of excess and lack. So be just and return [to your Lord]. Establish yourselves in every place of worship of God, and call Him with a sincere religion. Do not associate anyone with Him in your worship, whether that is an idols or your fathers—through blindly following them. This is justice (qisṭ) in worship.”

… and [He has enjoined,] “Set your faces (wujūhakum, plural of wajh) [toward Him] at every place of worship…”: The conjunction “and” apparently shows that the first part of the verse implies an imperative: “Be just and set you heart…” The wajh (face) of something is the part of it that faces other things. The human face often represents the person as a whole. Setting up the “face” at every place of worship means doing justice to this act [of worship] completely, without any shortcoming. Therefore, the meaning of setting up one’s face in worship boils down to engaging in worship only and cutting oneself from every other occupation.

… Set your faces [toward Him] at every place of worship, and invoke Him, putting your exclusive faith in Him…: Based on our explanation, these two sentences together mean that one should free oneself from every occupation other than God’s service, and from any object of worship other than God. Among these “others”—from which one should sever oneself—is worship itself. Worship is the act of paying attention [to God] not an object of attention itself. If one’s attention is directed at one’s worship, then that act is no longer “worship,” because worship means turning one’s attention to God. Hence, when anyone worships, one must forget everything else, and must be mindful of no one but God.

Here is a list of how other exegetes have interpreted Set your faces [toward Him] at every place of worship (masjid):

1. It means: “When you pray in any mosque, directly face the qiblah (direction of prayer).”
2. Masjid means “time of prostration” which is the time of prayer. The meaning is: “At times of prayers face the direction that God has ordered you, which is the Kaʿbah.”
3. “At every masjid” means that if it is the time of prayer and you are in [the vicinity of] a mosque, then pray in that mosque. Do not postpone it until you go back to your own mosque [in your neighborhood].
4. It means: “Go to the mosque whenever there is the time to pray.” In other words, the verse commands praying in congregation.
5. It means: “Direct your faces at God by obeying Him alone. Do not associate with Him the idols or any other partner.”

Despite their difference, none of these views is a plausible interpretation of the verse. The first three do not match the condition of Muslims in Mecca, which is where this chapter was revealed. At the time the Kaʿbah was not the qiblah, nor did the Muslims have multiple mosques to pray in. The last view is close to our interpretation of the verse, but its problem is that it is rather an exposition of the next part of the verse about ikhlāṣ (exclusivity, sincerity, purity)—putting your exclusive faith in Him—not the part which says: Set your faces [toward Him] at every place of worship.

فَرِيقاً هَدى‏ وَ فَرِيقاً حَقَّ عَلَيْهِمُ الضَّلالَةُ إِنَّهُمُ اتَّخَذُوا الشَّياطِينَ أَوْلِياءَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ وَ يَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُمْ مُهْتَدُونَ ٣٠

(7:30) A part (farīqan) [of humankind] He has guided, while error is fixed upon a part (farīqan), for they took devils for guardians instead of Allah, and supposed they were guided.

The linguistic construct of the word farīqan suggests that it functions as a ḥāl (circumstantial qualifier, participial phrase), describing the condition of the subject “you” at the end of the last verse: Even as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return. In other words, the end of the last verse compares people’s end to their origin, and this verse clarifies in what sense the two stages are similar. It means: “You shall return while you are two parties, just as you initiated while being two parties.” A similar analogy [between the beginning and the end] is found in the verse: Certainly you have come to Us alone, just as We created you the first time (), which means: “Certainly you have come to Us alone, just as We created you the first time alone.” This is the clearest meaning that we can infer from the verse.

Some exegetes have claimed that farīqan cannot be a ḥāl for what is mentioned in the previous verse. Therefore, there must be another point of similarity between the two stages of their origination and end, such as being alone in both stages, issuing from dust in both stages, both stages being by God’s power, and so on. However, all these are far-fetched possibilities from the meaning of the verse. After all, why should God not state the point of similarity, and instead mention something that is not needed, especially in a context where the intended meaning could be misunderstood? We shall explain this below, by God’s will.

What is meant by “beginning”—in Even as He brought you forth in the beginning—is only the very onset of human life in this world, not the entire span of human life in this world in contrast to their life in the hereafter. The meaning is: “He created you in this world, where He guided a party of you, while another party were destined for deviation. Thus you shall return [while being composed of these two groups].” This is effectively the same as an interpretation offered by some exegetes: “You will be resurrected in the same state that you died: those who died with īmān (belief, faith) shall be resurrected with īmān, and those who died with kufr (disbelief, infidelity) shall be resurrected with kufr.”

When we speak of the “beginning” of something that stretches over time, what is meant is the first part of it where it starts, not all of it. Here, the audience are all people. Hence, their “beginning” would be when humankind was first created and appeared. Moreover, this verse builds on the previous verses about the origination of humankind, where God says: Certainly We created you, then We formed you, then We said to the angels, “Prostrate before Adam” (). Therefore, as He brought you forth in the beginning refers to how the previously mentioned creation of humankind unfolded. The idea of having two groups from the beginning was already alluded to in God’s address to Satan: Begone hence, blameful, banished! Whoever of them follows you, I will surely fill hell with you all (). This verse shows a divine decree that humankind shall divide into two groups: one group are those who are guided on the straight path, and one group are those upon whom error is fixed. This is how He originated humans, and that is how they shall return.

A more explicit mention of this is found in another verse, where God says [to Satan]: This is a straight path incumbent upon Me. Indeed as for My servants you do not have any authority over them, except the perverse who follow you (). The “straight path” mentioned here refers to a definite decree from God that people shall divide into two groups. One group are outside Satan’s authority, and those are the ones whom God guides. Another group are the perverse who follow Satan, for whom it is prescribed to deviate from the truth due to submitting to Satan and following him. The Qur’an says: About him [Satan] it has been decreed that should anyone take him for a friend, he will lead him astray, and conduct him toward the punishment of the Blaze (). This verse suggests that their misguidance is a consequence of their following the devil and taking him as a friend, not vice versa.

Another example is: Said He, “The truth is that—and I speak the truth—I will surely fill hell with you and all those who follow you” (). Here again we see that God has decreed that humans shall divide into two groups. It is for the same reason that after the story of the fall, God says: Get down both of you from it… Then, should (fa-immā) any guidance come to you from Me, those who follow My guidance will not go astray, nor will they be miserable. But whoever disregards My remembrance, his shall be a wretched life, and on the Day of Resurrection We shall raise him blind (). Here, the letter fāʾ (then, so, therefore) shows that the division of humankind into two groups was a direct consequence of their appearance on earth. It should also be noted that “blindness” here means “error” [that is, being blind of guidance].

Given the above Qur’anic evidence, we can interpret the current verses of discussion—as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return… ()—as a justification for the previous commands [at the beginning of verse ]. The meaning would be: “Observe justice in your actions and dedicate yourselves to God exclusively, because when God created you humankind, He decreed that you shall split into two groups: a group that is guided by Him, and a group that deviates from the path. You will return as He originated you, one group having been guided by, Him and another group being overcome by error because of accepting the authority of devils. Therefore, you should be just and sincere so that you may be among those who are guided through God’s instruction, not those who go astray through adopting the authority of devils.”

Our suggested interpretation here makes the verse comparable to the verse: Everyone has a direction to which he turns; so take the lead in the good works. Wherever you may be, Allah will bring you all together (). This verse, on the one hand, states that everyone has a specific goal that they seek, until they reach its definite goal of either felicity or wretchedness. On the other hand, it orders the people to take the lead in the good works. If the felicity or wretchedness of every person is already certain, then this order would not make sense. Therefore, what is meant is: “Every one of you should necessarily turn toward a specific direction—which will either lead you to paradise or to hell. Hence, hasten to do good deeds so that you may be among those who are directed toward felicity, not among the other group.”

We can interpret the current verses of discussion [] in like manner: “You shall return in two groups just as God brought you into being in two groups according to His definite decree. Therefore, you must be just in your actions and sincerely dedicated to God, so that you may be among those who are guided on the return journey, not among those for whom error is established.”

Finally, it is possible to say that the last part of verse and the entire verse —Even as He brought you forth in the beginning…—compose an independent statement that is not primarily a continuation of the first part of verse . But even in that case, this statement would still bear a subtle hint to the previous command to justice and sincerity, as it springs to mind based on the context.

… for they took devils for guardians…: This statement explains why error was ordained and established for them: while error is fixed upon a part. It is as if the decree of being destined for error and loss is conditional on the person accepting the guardianship of Satan. This is confirmed by the verse: About him [Satan] it has been decreed that should anyone take him for a friend, he will lead him astray (). Because of accepting the guardianship of devils in this world, error befell and overcame them in a way that does not depart from them anymore. This idea can also be deduced from the verse: We have assigned them companions who make to seem decorous to them whatever is before them and whatever is behind them, and the word became due against them, as it did against the nations that passed away before them of jinn and humans. They were indeed losers ().

… and supposed they were guided: This is an interpretive addition to the previous sentence. It clarifies why error became fixed and binding to them. For those who deviate from the straight path and fall for falsehood, one can be optimistic of their return to the truth as long as they acknowledge their error, know that they are lost, and have not forgotten the right way. It can be hoped that they will soon abandon their wrong ways and return to the path of guidance. However, if they believe that their falsehood is the truth and consider themselves as pursuing guidance while they are in error, then that solidifies them in their error and deviation, and there is no hope for their salvation anymore.

In other words, this final statement—and supposed they were guided—means that error became their due as a necessary consequence of this supposition. Elsewhere we read: Say, “Shall we inform you about the biggest losers in regard to works? Those whose endeavor goes awry in the life of the world, while they suppose they are doing good” (); As for the faithless, it is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not have faith. Allah has set a seal on their hearts and their hearing, and there is a blindfold on their sight, and there is a great punishment for them ().

Humans have such a makeup—called the fiṭrah (primal nature, innate disposition)—that does not allow them to submit to anything other than the truth, or seek anything other than their good and happiness. The problem is in the application of this disposition. If one is supported by divine grace, they will pursue the right path, seek the actual truth, and achieve it at the end. They end up serving God alone, in which lies the eternal happiness and good life that they wish. Sometimes, however, one deviates from the straight path and chooses falsehood instead of truth, evil instead of good, and wretchedness instead of felicity. They adopt their desires as their god, serve the Devil, submit to the idols, indulge in the material adornments and glamour of this world, and take the world as their final goal [instead of a means and passage]. Nevertheless, they do so only because of supposing that this is what they should do; that this is the right way and the correct thing to do. In other words, they choose falsehood supposing that it is the truth; they do evil assuming that it is good; and they pursue wretchedness thinking that it leads to happiness. This means that the innate human cognition [which is always oriented toward true beliefs and good deeds] is preserved without any change, but the person has mismatched it in its practical applications. God says: O you who were given the Book! Believe in what We have sent down confirming what is with you, before We blot out the faces and turn them backwards ().

It is impossible that one would choose and follow falsehood, wretchedness and loss through falsehood, wretchedness and loss. The Qur’an says: the origination of Allah according to which He originated humankind. There is no altering Allah’s creation (). Any being that works in the universe—including humankind—only inclines toward a goal or act which is in harmony with its essence and beneficial for it. If we see any counter examples for this, it is only a prima facie observation, not the fact of the matter.

The above is what we can say about these verses after a complete analysis and deep reflection: as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return. A part [of humankind] He has guided, while error is fixed upon a part… (). Our interpretation is based on the word farīqan [in verse ] functioning as a ḥāl (circumstantial qualifier, participial phrase) for the verb so will you return. That is, the beginning and the return are compared with one another in the sense that in both cases the people will be classified into two groups. This meaning is applicable whether the last part of verse [as He brought you forth…] is connected to the previous part of the verse—as a justification for it—or not.

However, most exegetes have agreed that the two parties mentioned in verse only describe the state of return of the people, not their state of beginning. They have assumed there to be another basis for comparing the beginning with the return [in verse ]—which is not mentioned here [in verse ]. One exegete has interpreted “beginning” as “the entire round of worldly life.” As we said above, this cannot be true, and we shall discuss it further below. Since these verses are surrounded by commands and prohibitions, they imply the free will of humankind. That is why the exegetes have opted for the above interpretations—because they did not want to fall for jabr (compulsion, determinism, predestination). However, our readers would concur that our interpretation does not necessitate jabr given our thorough analysis.

There is a difference of opinion among the exegetes concerning how the last part of verse connects to the previous part. Here is a list of their suggested views:

(1) The last sentence warns the people about the Resurrection in order to solidify and emphasize the commands in the previous part of the verse, and draws on the beginning of creation as evidence. The meaning is: “Call God exclusively, for indeed you shall be resurrected and recompensed for your deeds. If this seems unlikely to your minds, then remember your initial creation. As God originated you the first time, He will certainly resurrect you a second time.”

Comment: This interpretation revolves around God’s power as a basis of comparison between the beginning and the end, which is mentioned to warn the people of retribution in the hereafter. If this were the intended meaning, then instead of mentioning the “people” as those who will return, the verse should have mentioned God as the One Who returns the people. Furthermore, if that were the central meaning of the verse, it should have explicitly mentioned retribution—as the above exegete has offered in his interpretation of the verse.

(2) The last sentence is an argument against those who deny the Resurrection. It connects to what we read a few verses above: In it [the earth] you will live, and in it you will die; and from it you will be raised [from the dead] (). The meaning is: “Your return is no more difficult than your beginning.”

Comment: This interpretation suffers from the same problem as the last. In addition, it restricts the meaning without any supporting evidence.

(3) The last sentence is an independent statement that is unconnected to the previous part of the verse.

Comment: We already discussed this possibility above.

(4) It is connected to the first part of the verse. The meaning altogether is: “Dedicate yourselves to God exclusively in this life, because you shall be resurrected as you die—the believers in a state of īmān (belief, faith) and the disbelievers in a state of kufr (disbelief, infidelity).”

Comment: This interpretation assumes the “beginning” to include the entire lifespan of this world, in contrast to our eternal existence in the hereafter. It also assumes the comparison between “return” and “beginning” to be between one’s eternal life and one’s ending of life in this world. However, as we said above, there is no supporting evidence in the verse for this interpretation.

يا بَنِي آدَمَ خُذُوا زِينَتَكُمْ عِنْدَ كُلِّ مَسْجِدٍ وَ كُلُوا وَ اشْرَبُوا وَ لا تُسْرِفُوا إِنَّهُ لا يُحِبُّ الْمُسْرِفِينَ ٣١

(7:31) O Children of Adam! Put on your adornment on every place of worship (masjid), and eat and drink, but do not waste (lā tusrifū, from saraf); indeed He does not like the wasteful.

Al-Rāghib says:

“Saraf means overstepping the limits in anything that one does, although it is used more often in financial spending.”

“Putting on adornment on every place of worship” means dressing up beautifully when one wants to attend the masjid (place or time of worship), which can be identified with prayer, circumambulation, and other forms of God’s remembrance. Therefore, adorning oneself on “every place of worship” boils down to adorning oneself for the prayer (ṣalāh) and other similar acts. Given the unconditional sense of masjid, it would include the Eid prayers, daily congregational prayers, and other forms of worship and remembrance.

… and eat and drink, but do not waste…: The two commands here imply permissibility (ibāḥah), while the prohibition implies impermissibility (ḥurmah). These instructions are then justified by adding: indeed He does not like the wasteful. This verse relates to the story of Adam’s garden, as we mentioned before. We also said that the universal address of this verse includes all humankind. Therefore, the message of this verse is not limited to any specific religion or any subgroup of people. One exegete has said:

This verse—O Children of Adam! Put on your adornment on every place of worship—shows that the Prophet’s mission includes all humankind. The verse’s address does not include women from a linguistic point of view, but they are also included alongside men based on evidence from the shariah.

We should clarify that even though the rules mentioned here apply to all humans, it does not specify whether these rules were transmitted through a single mission or multiple missions. Moreover, the inclusion of women in the verse is actually linguistic, because there is rational evidence to generalize the male address to females (called taghlīb).

قُلْ مَنْ حَرَّمَ زِينَةَ اللَّهِ الَّتِي أَخْرَجَ لِعِبادِهِ وَ الطَّيِّباتِ مِنَ الرِّزْقِ قُلْ هِيَ لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا فِي الْحَياةِ الدُّنْيا خالِصَةً يَوْمَ الْقِيامَةِ كَذلِكَ نُفَصِّلُ الْآياتِ لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ ٣٢

(7:32) Say, “Who has forbidden the adornment (zīnah) of Allah which He has brought (akhraja, from ikhrāj) forth for His servants, and the good things (al-ṭayyibāt) of [His] provision?” Say, “These are, on the Day of Resurrection, exclusively for the faithful in the life of this world.” Thus do We elaborate the communications for a people who have knowledge.

This is a rhetorical question that implies a negation. The verse involves a transition from the general address of the last verse to a specific point about the Muslim nation. We had similar transitions to this above, where we had a general address to all humankind in verse (That is [one] of Allah’s signs, so that they may take admonition) followed by a specific address to the polytheists in verse (When they commit an indecency…).

Zayn is the opposite of shayn, which means “anything that brings blame and disgrace to the person.” Therefore, zīnah means “anything that removes blame and disgrace from the person, and makes others not adverse to the person.” In this verse, ikhrāj (bringing forth) implies iẓhār (revealing, showing, making appear). God has inspired and guided humankind—through their fiṭrah (primal nature, innate disposition, initial makeup)—to invent various forms of adornments that are generally appealing to them, are attractive to their souls, and take aversion and disgust away from them. By so doing, it is as if God has “brought forth” adornments for them. These adornments were hidden and concealed [deep in their fiṭrah], then God made them visible to their senses. This is an imaginary metaphor.

If one were to live alone in this world, without any social interaction, then the person would have no need for any adornment whatsoever. Even the idea of having adornments would not cross the person’s mind, because it is always a feeling of need which prompts someone to do something. However, humans need to pass this life in societies, where they confront other people’s attraction, aversion, like, dislike, pleasure and displeasure. They have no choice but to learn the acceptable and unacceptable ways of dressing and appearing in public. That is why the “Hidden Teacher” has taught them through their initial makeup and creation (fiṭrah) their various forms of zīnah (adornment, ornament), which means anything that removes blame and disgrace from them, and puts them in a good shape. Perhaps this is why the verse refers to humankind as “servants” (ʿibād).

What we described as zīnah here is among the most important foundations of human societies. It is a deeply rooted custom that is directly related to how advanced a civilization and culture is. If it were to be lifted from a society, the society would collapse and disintegrate, because being devoid of zīnah in this sense means being devoid of good and bad, like and dislike, pleasure and displeasure. It is impossible to have a society without such values and classifications. The reader should reflect on this.

Ṭayyib means “that which is agreeable with one’s nature.” The good things of [His] provision are various kinds of food that people ingest. It could also be interpreted more broadly to include anything that serves the continuation of human life, such as food, drink, sex, shelter and so on. God has equipped humans with the ability to feel what they need, and various appetites that pull them toward fulfilling those needs through appealing pleasures that are harmonious with their being. This quality is called ṭīb, which means agreement and harmony with one’s nature.

There is no need to elaborate the fundamental position of the good things of [His] provision in human life. Humans can continue living happily only by provisions that are agreeable with their faculties and systems—in the right proportion according to each faculty. Any faculty or organ that is placed in humankind is because of their need to it. If they transgress from what is compatible with their makeup to what is incompatible, they will be forced to amend their resulting deficiency in the faculty that has been neglected by drawing from the other faculties. For example, a gluttonous person who is given to excess eating will suffer digestive problems. Then he would have to resort to drugs which treat his stomach and digestive system. However, overuse of such drugs will make him addicted and resistant to them, such that they will no longer be effective for him. Thus he will become chronically ill, and that will hamper him from attending to the most necessary needs of his life, the most important of which is having sound reasoning and a free intellect. Other forms of excess have similar effects.

Stepping beyond the limits of “good provisions” would turn the human to another being that is not created for this world, nor is this world created for it. What good is there in trying to live in a way that is against our creation, pursuing a path that is different from the path of our primal nature, and seeking a goal that is not our perfection? That is the case when we exert our maximum effort to acquire as much as we can to sate any appetite or lust, only because it seems appealing to our imagination.

In this verse God says that He has “brought forth” an adornment for His servants, meaning that He has made it known to them through inspiring it to their fiṭrah (primal nature, innate disposition, initial makeup). Meanwhile, we know that the fiṭrah is only disposed to real needs in one’s life. This is the strongest evidence for the permissibility of anything: to have a genuine need for it according to one’s nature and essence. In other words, God’s creation and makeup of humankind (takwīn) can be indicative of legislative permissibility (tashrīʿ). A genuine need in one’s existence shows that God has made a connection between that being and the means of fulfilling it. God has embedding certain faculties in humans which prompt them to seek what they need. This prompt is itself a message and evidence of permissibility.

The conjunction “and” in and the good things of [His] provision means that these good things are also among what God has brought forth for His servants. That is, there are various good provisions—meaning things that are agreeable with human nature and creation—which people discover through the faculties that God has embedded in their being. They learn about these through their feeling of a need to them in order to support and sustain their life. As we said above, the clearest evidence to the permissibility of an act is having a natural need and existential lack for it.

The question in this verse is a rhetorical one which implies a negation. This shows that the permissibility of God’s adornment and good provisions is something that should not be doubted, because it is the rule of reason, we find it intuitively in ourselves (in our fiṭrah), and is also approved by religious law.

Nevertheless, this permissibility is only at the level of moderation between the two extremes of excess and defect. This is what our fiṭrah necessitates, and it also matches what we read above: but do not waste; indeed He does not like the wasteful (); Say, “My Lord has enjoined justice” (). Transgressing the limits to either excess or deficiency threatens the survival of human society and hampers their achievement of a happy life. It is like destroying the foundations of a building. We can rarely find any war or natural disaster anywhere in the world—which has threatened the continuation of the human race and destroyed their cities—that is not a result of some extravagance and excess in seeking either adornment or provision. This is the nature of the beast: humans do not stop at any limit. If it comes to going out of balance and stepping outside the middle path, they continue deviating without recognizing any cap or ever returning to moderation. That is why it is most appropriate to keep them always in check with a whip of discipline, and constantly remind them of the most basic principles which can be verified by their reason [even in the lack of formal learning and education]. This is why God gives us orders with respect to the necessities of life such as food, drink, clothes, shelter and putting on adornments.

The author of al-Manār has an excellent point which is relevant to our discussion here:

Commanding the people to put on their adornment may seem rather obvious and redundant. However, to appreciate its value, one should only study the history of various tribes and nations. There have been numerous primitive societies and idolatrous people leading a savage life in the woods, mountains, deserts, caves and islands, especially in Africa. Men and women in these societies were completely bare of all clothing. When Islam reached them, it taught them to put on garments by making it religiously incumbent.

When some Christian preachers in Europe attacked and criticized Islam in order to prevent the conversion of European Christians, some more fair-minded thinkers among them responded by referring to the spread of Islam in Africa, from where it entered Europe. Islam promoted the spread of civilization among its followers by opposing nudity and imposing a dress code. This in turn led to the flourishing of the textile industry in Europe.

I should add that some idolatrous societies which were more advanced in civilization, science and technology, were still leading bare lives until they faced Islam. Then they started wearing clothes and adorning themselves with garments. They turned to manufacturing clothes, and set an example which was adopted to some extent by their neighboring societies.

A good example for this is India. Despite having a long-lasting polytheistic civilization, they have always had millions of men and women who were either completely naked, or with a quarter or half of their bodies clad. And this continues up to this day [among the Hindus]. One can see some of their men in their workplaces and markets with barely any clothes. Some wear a piece that only covers their two private parts, which they call “the two ducts” (sabīlayn). This is an Arabic word used by Islamic jurists when discussing things that makes one’s ablution void. Some of them only cover the lower half of their body. There are some women with their bellies and legs revealed, or their upper half completely or partially bare. Some of their fair-minded scholars have admitted that it was the Muslims who taught them to put on clothes and eat on dishes. The poor among them [who cannot afford to have a dish] place their food on leaves and eat from that, yet they are better than many other idolaters in terms of covering and adornment, because they were ruled by Muslim rulers. Indian Muslims have been, and continue to be, among the most advanced Muslims on earth in terms of knowledge and practice, and in terms of their contribution to the idolaters in their country.

In contrast to Indian Muslims, Muslims in the Far East have been farther from religious knowledge and closer to idolatry in terms of clothing and many other religious practices. For instance, Siamese women only consider their two private parts as shameful parts that must be covered, as we pointed out before. In short, the more deeply Islam is established anywhere, th closer its people come to a level of clothing that matches human worth and development.

Here is where one would realize and appreciate the value of this reforming injunction in Islam. If this most civilized religion did not include the prescription that God’s servants must put on their adornment, all these nations and tribes would not transform from leading a savage life to having an advanced civilization. Only those who are ignorant of history would fail to recognize this advantage of Islam, even though they may be historians otherwise. It is not unlikely to find among the pretentious westernized intellectuals certain people who lounge in pubs, taverns and nightclubs, tilting their fez on their head and pontificating: “Why should wearing clothes for beauty be discussed in religion? This is among the necessary requirements of human life, and people do not need divine law or revelation to teach them about it.” They voice the same opinion concerning verses like: and eat and drink ().

It is narrated that [Hārūn] al-Rashīd had a professional Christian physician. One day he told ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn b. Wāqid, “There is no teaching of medicine in your scripture, while knowledge has two branches: religious knowledge and physical knowledge.” ʿAlī responded to his criticism:

God has summarized all medicine in half a verse, where He says: eat and drink, but do not waste (). Likewise, our Prophet encapsulated all medicine when he said: “The stomach is the house of malady, and abstinence is the root of all remedy. Give to each body what you have made it accustomed to.”

The physician commented, “Your scripture and your prophet have not left any aspect of medicine for Galen!”

… Say, “These are, on the Day of Resurrection, exclusively for the faithful in the life of this world”: The first part of this verse—Say, “Who has forbidden…”—is certainly addressed to the unbelievers [because of its critical tone]. Or perhaps it is addressed to both the believers and the unbelievers, in conformity with the last verse, which was addressed to all humankind: O Children of Adam! Put on your adornment on every place of worship, and eat and drink, but do not waste (). This means that God has brought forth adornment and good provision for all people, whether believer or unbeliever.

Then, the subsequent part of the verse— Say, “These are for the faithful…”—is meant to describe an advantage for the believers [in contrast to the general enjoyments available to everyone]. While the believers share God’s blessings with others in this life, they will be the exclusive beneficiaries of these enjoyments in the hereafter. This means that in the life of this world is a ẓarf (container, receptacle, place of occurrence) for the faith of the faithful, and on the Day of Resurrection is a ẓarf for These are. “Exclusively” (khāliṣah) functions as a ḥāl (circumstantial qualifier, participial phrase) for the feminine pronoun hiya (These are). This implies that there is an omitted word like kāʾinah in the verse. In the Arabic text of the verse, the word khāliṣah is mentioned before the Day of Resurrection in order to add some distance between the life of this world and the Day of Resurrection. The meaning is: “These [adornments and provisions] are for the faithful on the Day of Resurrection; it will exclusively belong to them, and no one else will enjoy them there, unlike the life of this world. Whoever is faithful in this world will possess these blessings on the Day of Resurrection.”

Here are two alternative interpretations of khāliṣah (exclusively, purely) suggested by some exegetes:

(1) What is meant is freedom from pain and anxiety. The meaning is: “These blessings are for the believers in this world, but they are mixed with pain and sorrow. However, on the Day of Resurrection the believers will have a pure enjoyment of these blessings.”

Comment: The problem with this interpretation is that there is no indication in this verse or the previous verses referring to the pleasures of this world being surrounded by pain and limitation. Therefore, there is no evidence to support the above interpretation of khāliṣah.

(2) In the life of this world is a ẓarf (container, receptacle, place of occurrence) for the blessings which belong to the faithful. The meaning is: “It is the believers who primarily and essentially deserve these blessings in this world, but others also share in these blessings in their shadow, without deserving the blessings as the believers do. On the Day of Resurrection, however, these blessings will be exclusively for the believers.” It should be noted that among the [seven] main recitations of the Qur’an, Nāfiʿ’s recitation reads khāliṣatun as a predicate, meaning that “these blessings shall be exclusive for the believer.” Other recitations say khāliṣatan as a ḥāl (circumstantial qualifier, participial phrase), meaning that “these blessings shall be for the believers while they [the blessings] are exclusive for them.”

According to this view, the believers are the primary beneficiaries of worldly pleasures in the sense that they are the ones who benefit from divine teachings and commands that are conducive to a good life in this world, such as the command to put on their adornment, consume the good provision of their Lord, fulfill their obligatory tasks in life, and reflect on God’s signs in the horizons and in themselves. All these instructions lead to the development of industries and technologies which advance human civilization and culture. The believers are taught these ways through revelation and prophethood. They must learn about these blessings and be grateful for them.

Comment: This interpretation cannot be the direct meaning of the verse because there is no indication in the verse about primary and secondary beneficiaries of these blessings. Perhaps what is meant is that the verse starts by assigning worldly blessings to the believers, then it clarifies that the unbelievers share in these blessings with the believers, but they are only secondary beneficiaries who sponge off the believers. However, even this meaning is not supported by the verse, because the verse only talks about the equal partaking of both groups in worldly blessings. It does not establish any exclusivity for the believers in this world, so there are no grounds to talk about primary and secondary enjoyment. Not only that, but perhaps the matter is the other way around, as evidenced by other verses like: Were it not [for the danger] that mankind would be one community, We would have surely made for those who defy the All-Merciful, silver roofs for their houses and [silver] stairways by which they ascend… yet all that would be nothing but the wares of the life of this world, and the hereafter near your Lord is for the Godwary (). These verses suggest that if there were to be any exclusivity for worldly enjoyments, the disbelievers would be the main beneficiaries.

… Thus do We elaborate the communications for a people who have knowledge: This sentence implies that God has a special favor upon the people of knowledge through elaborating His communications for them.

قُلْ إِنَّما حَرَّمَ رَبِّيَ الْفَواحِشَ ما ظَهَرَ مِنْها وَ ما بَطَنَ وَ الْإِثْمَ وَ الْبَغْيَ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ وَ أَنْ تُشْرِكُوا بِاللَّهِ ما لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطاناً وَ أَنْ تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ ما لا تَعْلَمُونَ ٣٣

(7:33) Say, “My Lord has only forbidden indecencies (al-fawāḥish), the outward among them and the inward ones, and sin (al-ithm) and undue aggression (al-baghy), and that you should ascribe to Allah partners for which He has not sent down any authority, and that you should attribute to Allah what you do not know.”

We already discussed the vocabulary used in this verse in detail. As we explained before, fawāḥish are “sins at the utmost degree of vileness and reprehensibility,” such as adultery and sodomy. Ithm is “an act that results in loss, failure, abasement and humiliation for the person in this life,” such as drinking wine, which destroys one’s reputation, wealth, health and good name. Baghy means “seeking something that one is not entitled to.” It includes all sorts of unlawful consumption, oppression and extortion against fellow human beings. The adjective “undue” does not qualify and restrict its meaning, but only describes and expresses an inseparable quality of baghy. The same can be said about the addition of for which He has not sent down any authority [to “partners” for God].

The last verse was about the lawfulness of adornment and good provisions. This would naturally raise an interest in the audience to also know about things that God has forbidden. That is why God continues to complete the picture in this verse by listing unlawful things. This verse encompasses all things that are religiously unlawful, which can primarily be divided into two categories: (1) wrong action; and (2) wrong speech or belief. The first three items mentioned in the verse are actions, which can be divided into two subcategories: (1) wrong acts against other people, which is called undue aggression; and (2) wrong acts at the personal level, irrespective of others, which are either flagrant or not. The flagrant is called indecencies; otherwise it is called sin. The last two items in the verse—ascribing partners to God and making false ascriptions to Him—pertain to one’s speech or belief.

وَ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَجَلٌ فَإِذا جاءَ أَجَلُهُمْ لا يَسْتَأْخِرُونَ ساعَةً وَ لا يَسْتَقْدِمُونَ ٣٤

(7:34) There is a [preordained] time for every nation: when their time comes, they shall not defer it by a single hour nor shall they advance it.

This verse, much like the many other verses before it, is subsequent to what God said at the end of Adam’s story: He said, “In it you will live, and in it you will die; and from it you will be raised [from the dead]” (). The verse means that societies and communities have fixed terms and life spans, much like individuals.

Based on the connection between this verse and the verses at the end of Adam’s story, we can arguably deduce that verse —He said, “In it you will live…”—is about the life of individual persons and individual societies, each of which is only one constituent of the human species; while verse —On the earth shall be your abode and sustenance for some time—refers to the entire human race. Humanity as a whole has a lifespan for some time (), which refers either to the time of their extinction or the Resurrection.

يا بَنِي آدَمَ إِمَّا يَأْتِيَنَّكُمْ رُسُلٌ مِنْكُمْ يَقُصُّونَ عَلَيْكُمْ آياتِي فَمَنِ اتَّقى‏ وَ أَصْلَحَ فَلا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَ لا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ ٣٥ وَ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآياتِنا وَ اسْتَكْبَرُوا عَنْها أُولئِكَ أَصْحابُ النَّارِ هُمْ فِيها خالِدُونَ ٣٦

(7:35-36) O Children of Adam! If (immā) there come to you messengers from among yourselves, recounting (yaquṣṣūna) to you My communications, then those who are Godwary and righteous will have no fear, nor will they grieve. But those who deny Our communications and are disdainful of them, they shall be the inmates of the Fire and they shall remain in it [forever].

The word immā is in fact the conditional particle inn (stressed) added to the particle mā. Their composition implies that the condition shall certainly occur. The root meaning of the verb yaquṣṣūna is “to cut, to clip.” Here it means “explaining and elaborating the āyāt (communications, signs, verses) of God,” in the sense that explanation involves dissecting the content and cutting it off from hiddenness.

These two verses are the fourth and last universal address in this chapter to all humankind, following the story of Adam’s garden. They refer to God’s legislation of religion for the people through messengership and revelation. The core of what is being said here can also be seen in Sūrah Ṭā-Hā: He said, “Get down both of you from it, all together, being enemies of one another! Then, should any guidance come to you from Me…” (). The current verses clarify that this “coming of guidance” to the people is through God’s appointment of messengers.

Examining Narrations

1. Concerning We have certainly sent down to you garments to cover your shameful parts () ʿIkrimah said: This verse was revealed about the Quraysh tribe—also called al-Ḥums—and other Arab tribes that followed the same practice, including al-Aws, al-Khazraj, Khuzāʿah, Thaqīf, Banū ʿĀmir b. Ṣaʿṣaʿah, and some branches of Kinānat b. Bakr. [While performing the pilgrimage,] they used to abstain from eating meat; they would enter the homes from the back; they would not wear wool or fur, but only leather; and they used to dress their children in rihāṭ (a scanty piece of animal skin that covered from the navel to the knees). They also circumambulated [the Kaʿbah] naked, except for the Quraysh. When they arrived [in Mecca] they would take off the clothes with which they had come and throw them aside, saying: “We cleanse ourselves from sins and errors in return to our Lord by taking off these garments!” Then they would tell the Quraysh [who resided in Mecca], “Who will lend us a loincloth (miʾzar)?” If they did not find anything, they would go on circumambulating naked; afterwards they would pick up the clothes that they had taken off.
2. Saʿīd b. Jubayr said: People used to circumambulate the House naked and would justify it by saying, “We shall not circumambulate with garments in which we have sinned.” Once a woman came, took off her clothes and started circumambulating. She covered her front with her hand and chanted:

الْيَوْمَ يَبْدُو بَعْضُهُ أَوْ كُلُّهُ وَ مَا بَدَا مِنْهُ فَلَا أُحِلُّهُ‏

Today shall appear part of it or all,

But to look at what appears is by no means halal.

Then these verses were revealed: O Children of Adam! Put on your adornment on every place of worship… and the good things of [His] provision ().

Author’s comment: Similar accounts are narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās, Mujāhid and ʿĀṭāʾ. However, as we explained above, these verses start with O Children of Adam (), which indicates that what is said here is a set of universal laws for all humankind, not something specifically addressed to a certain community. These solitary reports (called āḥād) are not authoritative proofs, but are rather personal opinions that is narrated from these individuals (it is their ijtihad). The soundest narrations in this regard are the next two:

3. Ibn ʿAbbās said: Since some people used to circumambulate the House naked, God commanded them to put on zīnah (adornment), which means libās (clothes, garment). It is good clothes and fabric which covers one’s shameful parts and other parts.
4. Ibn ʿAbbās said: In the pre-Islamic era (jāhiliyyah) people used to consider certain things unlawful while God had made them lawful, such as clothes. This is reflected in the verse: Say, “Have you regarded what Allah has sent down for you of [His] provision, whereupon you made some of it unlawful and [some] lawful?” (). Then God revealed: Say, “Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants, and the good things of [His] provision?” Say, “These are These are for the faithful in the life of this world” (). That is: Muslims and non-Muslims equally share in the good of this life; they both eat of its food, wear its good clothes, and marry its desirable women. Then God will exclusively assign the good things in the hereafter to the faithful. The polytheists will not have any share of that.

Author’s comment: As one can see, the last two narrations match the verse with the event [while maintaining its general meaning], as opposed to interpreting the verse to the event [and thus restricting its meaning]. This is how most narrations [about Qur’anic verses] should be viewed.

5. The Messenger of God said: Any servant who does any act, whether good or evil, will [some day] wear the robe of his act in a way that he will be known for it. The Book of God confirms this: Yet the garment of Godwariness—that is better… ().
6. ʿUthmān said: I heard the Messenger of God reciting riyāshan, not rīshan [in verse ].
7. Concerning verse (O Children of Adam! We have certainly sent down to you…) it is narrated from Imams al-Bāqir and al-Ṣādiq: The garment of Godwariness is white clothes.
8. Concerning O Children of Adam! We have certainly sent down to you garments to cover your shameful parts, and adornments. Yet the garment of Godwariness—that is better () Imam al-Bāqir said: Garments are the clothes which you wear. Adornments are commodities and wealth. The garment of Godwariness means ʿafāf (piety, modesty, self-restraint). The ʿawrah (shame, defect, dishonor) of a pious person is never disclosed even if he lacks clothes, while the ʿawrah of a degenerate person is disclosed even if he is covered with clothes.

Author’s comment: The last two narrations provide some examples and applications for the garment of Godwariness, which are also found in other narrations.

9. Concerning verse (When they commit an indecency, they say…) Tafsīr al-Qummī says: This is about idol-worshipers. God refutes their claim by saying: Say, “Indeed Allah does not enjoin indecencies… ().
10. Muḥammad b. Manṣūr says: Once I asked the Imam about the verse: When they commit an indecency, they say, “We found our fathers practicing it, and Allah has enjoined it upon us”… (). He said, “Does anyone suppose that God would command fornication, drinking wine, or anything that is forbidden?”

“Of course not,” I replied.

He said, “So what are these indecencies that they claimed God has enjoined them?”

I replied, “God and His Messenger know best.”

The Imam explained, “This refers to wrongful leaders. They claimed that God has ordered them to follow certain individuals, while God had not made such an order. Thus He rejected their claim, informed us that they had ascribed a lie to Him, and called their act an indecency.”

Author’s comment: Based on the narration in Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, the Imam in this hadith is Imam Mūsá b. Jaʿfar [who was sometimes referred to as “a righteous servant” (ʿabd ṣāliḥ) due to dissimulation (taqiyyah)]. Based on the chain of transmission of the narration in al-Kāfī, we can deduce that Abū Wahab was the link between al-Ḥusayn b. Saʿīd and Muḥammad b. Manṣūr.

The content of this narration does not match the circumstances at the time of revelation of the verse. The argument presented in it is not accurate either, because people of the pre-Islamic era had many indecent and egregious practices that they used to ascribe to God, such as circumambulating the House naked. Nevertheless, if we move to the post-revelation period, the best match for the verse would be the wrongful leaders and oppressive rulers, as mentioned in the hadith. Indeed for several centuries the affairs of Muslims were governed by the likes of the illegitimate Ziyād b. Abīh, his son ʿUbayd-Allāh, al-Ḥajjāj b. Yūsuf, and other tyrants. The courts of these rulers were always supported by a retinue of scholars who issued legal rulings about the obligation to obey them on the account of verses like: O you who have faith! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those vested with authority among you (). Therefore, the above narration refers to an application of the verse to after its time of revelation.

11. Imam al-Ṣādiq said: Whoever thinks that God orders indecency has surely attributed a lie to God. And whoever thinks that both good and evil trace to Him has surely attributed a lie to God.
12. Imam al-Ṣādiq said: Whoever thinks that God has ordered evil and indecency has surely attributed a lie to God. Whoever thinks that good and evil occur without His decree has surely stripped God of His dominion. Whoever thinks that sins are committed without God’s power has surely attributed a lie to God. And whoever attributes a lie to God, God will place him in the fire.

Author’s comment: In the last hadith we read about “whoever thinks that good and evil occur without His decree…” This refers to the proponents of tafwīḍ (delegation, entrustment, unbound free will), who hold that humans are independent of God in doing either good or evil. In the narration before that, we read about “whoever thinks that both good and evil trace to Him.” This refers to the advocates of jabr (compulsion, determinism, predestination), who state that good and evil, obedience and disobedience, all stem from God’s will, without the involvement of the person’s choice and decision in any possible way whatsoever. It is also possible that the pronoun “him” [in “trace to him”] refers to “whoever” [that is, the human being]. If so, then that statement would again be a refutation of tafwīḍ.

13. Ibn Muskān says: Once I asked Imam al-Ṣādiq about the verse: Set your faces [toward Him] at every masjid (). He said: This refers to the qiblah (direction of prayer).

Author’s comment: Given our exposition above, this narration is also an example of matching and applying the verse to a different context (jary wa inṭibāq).

14. Concerning Set your faces [toward Him] at every masjid () it is narrated from Imams al-Bāqir and al-Ṣādiq: This refers to the new mosques [that are built]. People were ordered to set their faces toward the Holy Mosque [in any mosque that they may be].

Author’s comment: According to this hadith, the verse is saying: “In any mosque that you may be, you should turn your attention to God by turning your faces toward the qiblah (direction of prayer).” This is apparently what is meant by set your faces [toward Him]. The verse only commands the people to face the qiblah, without specifying what the qiblah is. That is defined as the Kaʿbah by other verses such as: so turn your face toward the Holy Mosque, and wherever you may be, turn your faces toward it (). As we said in our discussion of verses about the qiblah [], the Kaʿbah was designated as qiblah only in Medina, after the Prophet’s migration. However, the current verse of discussion [] is in Sūrah al-Aʿrāf, which was revealed in Mecca. Perhaps what we can say is that this verse introduced the general law of qiblah, which was then to be elaborated and interpreted in Medina, with the revelation of Sūrah al-Baqarah. This is assuming that the theme and context of the verses about the qiblah allow for such connection. This is generally true about all laws: they were introduced in a concise and overall manner in Meccan chapters, and were later differentiated, interpreted and clarified in Medinan chapters.

The narration mentions “new mosques,” which include any mosque that the Muslims build anywhere in the earth. According to this narration, “setting or establishing” the face (iqāmah) [as mentioned in verse ] is the same as “turning” the face (tawliyah) toward the Holy Mosque [as mentioned in verse ].

15. Concerning Set your faces [toward Him] at every place of worship () Imam al-Ṣādiq said: It means the Imams.

Author’s comment: Apparently what is meant here is “the leaders (imams) of congregation.” The next narration offers another interpretation for this.

16. Concerning Put on your adornment on every place of worship () Imam al-Ṣādiq said: It means the Imams.

Author’s comment: This is similar to the last narration. Having the leader of congregation advance and stand in the front is an adornment for the prayer. It is recommended (mustaḥabb) to choose righteous people in a community who are known for piety to lead the prayer. It could also be that “imam” here refers to the Infallible Imams in particular, as we shall see in a narration by al-ʿAlāʾ b. Sayābah at the end of this section [number 32].

17. Concerning Put on your adornment on every place of worship () the Prophet said: Pray in your shoes.
18. Ibn ʿAbbās said: Once I was wearing a soft shirt and an elegant cloak, when ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib sent me to Ibn al-Kawwāʾ and his companions [that is, the Khārijites, to debate with them]. They rebuked me, “Even you Ibn ʿAbbās—wearing such clothes?!”

I told them, “This shall be my first argument against you. God says: Say, “Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants?” () and: Put on your adornment on every place of worship (). Also, on the occasion of the two Eids, the Messenger of God used to wear two fine Yemeni garments.”

19. Imam al-Ṣādiq said: Imam ʿAlī sent ʿAbd-Allāh b. ʿAbbās to Ibn al-Kawwāʾ and his companions while he was wearing a soft shirt and an elegant cloak. When they saw him they said, “We see you as the better of us, O Ibn ʿAbbās. How come you wear such clothes?” “This shall be,” he said, “my first argument against you. Say: Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants, and the good things of [His] provision? (). God also says: Put on your adornment on every place of worship ().”
20. Concerning Put on your adornment on every place of worship () Imam al-Ṣādiq said: On the two Eids and Friday.
21. Once Imam al-Riḍā was asked about the verse: Put on your adornment on every place of worship (). He said: This includes combing [one’s hair] before every prayer.

Author’s comment: There are more narrations to this effect.

22. Al-Ḥasan b. ʿAlī used to wear his best clothes when he wanted to pray. “O son of God’s Messenger,” he was asked, “why do you wear your best clothes?”

He explained: “Indeed God is beautiful and loves beauty. So I beautify myself for my Lord. He says: Put on your adornment on every place of worship (). That is why I wear my best clothes.”

Author’s comment: This hadith is also narrated in Sunni sources.

23. Yūnus b. Ibrāhīm says: One day I went to see Imam al-Ṣādiq, while I was wearing a long shirt and a cloak made of fur. He looked at me and I said, “May I be your ransom! I’m wearing a long shirt and a furry cloak; what do you say about it?”

He said, “There is no problem with fur.”

I added, “Its weft is silk.”

He said, “And what’s wrong with that, Ibrāhīm? Al-Ḥusayn was killed while he was wearing a fur shirt.” Then he narrated the story of ʿAbd-Allāh b. ʿAbbās meeting the Khārijites and arguing against them with the two verses [].

24. One day Sufyān al-Thawrī saw Imam al-Ṣādiq in the Holy Mosque, clad in elegant and valuable clothes. He said [or thought], “By God I shall go to him and reprimand him [for this].” So he went close to the Imam and said, “O son of God’s Messenger! Neither the Messenger of God, nor ʿAlī, nor any of your fathers, wore such clothes.”

The Imam told him, “The Messenger of God used to live at a time of pressing poverty, so he used to manage his life according to his few means and his tight livelihood. But then the world opened up its abundance [upon the Muslims], and the fittest people to benefit from it are the righteous.” Then he recited: Say, “Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants, and the good things of [His] provision?” () and added: “So we are most deserving of taking of this world what God has bestowed.” The Imam then continued, “Thawrī, this garment that you see, I’m wearing it only on the top for the people.”

He took Sufyān’s hand and pulled it toward himself, then he lifted his outer garment and showed him what he was wearing underneath: a coarse dress which was touching his skin. “This,” the Imam explained, “is what I’m wearing for myself, and what you see [on top of it] is for the people.” Then he grabbed and lifted Sufyān’s outer garment—which was a coarse, ragged piece of clothing—and behold: inside he was wearing a soft dress. The Imam said to him, “Here you are wearing this outer garment for the people, while you’re wearing this other one for yourself, which you’re hiding [from the people].”

25. Ibn al-Qaddāḥ says: Once Imam al-Ṣādiq was wearing an elegant garment from Marw [or a beautiful garment]. Then ʿAbbād b. Kathīr came in, while the Imam was reclining on me—or on my father. ʿAbbād rebuked him, “O Abā ʿAbd-Allāh! You are from the household of prophethood, and your father was so-and-so. So what’s with this Marwī [or beautiful] garment that you’re wearing? Why don’t you wear a dress that is more modest?”

Imam al-Ṣādiq told him, “That’s a pity, ʿAbbād! Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants, and the good things of [His] provision? (). Indeed when God bestows a blessing upon His servant, He likes to see him with it, and there is nothing wrong with that.”

26. The Messenger of God said: Indeed God likes to see the trace of His blessings on His servant.
27. Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Abī Naṣr says: Once Imam al-Riḍā told me, “What do you think about coarse clothes?”

“I’ve been told,” I replied, “that [Imam] al-Ḥasan used to wear them, and that [Imam] Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad would order his new clothes to be washed in water [to look old].”

The Imam told me: “Wear [new clothes] and adorn yourself [with it]. ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn used to wear a long shirt of fur worth 500 dirhams, and a cloak of fur worth 500 dinars. Once he had passed the winter with it, he would sell it and donate its price.” Then the Imam recited the verse: Say, “Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants, and the good things of [His] provision?” ().

Author’s comment: There are very many narrations in this regard. The next one is a fairly comprehensive one.

28. Imam al-Ṣādiq said: “Do you think that when God gives a blessing to someone, it is because of his worth? And when He deprives someone, it is because of his lack of worth? Nay! All wealth belongs to God, Who gives it to people as a trust. He has permitted them to eat moderately, drink moderately, dress moderately, marry moderately, and ride moderately; then give the remainder to the needy believers and help them out with it. Whoever does so, whatever he eats, drinks, rides and marries would be lawful, but it will be unlawful for whoever transgresses beyond that.”

He then recited: but do not waste; indeed He does not like the wasteful () and added: “Do you think that when a 20-dirham horse would suffice a person, God would entrust him with money to go and buy a 10,000-dirhams for himself? Or when a 20-dinar slave girl meets the needs of someone, would God give him money to go and buy one for a thousand dinars? [No, because] He says: but do not waste; indeed He does not like the wasteful ().”

29. One of the companions of Imam al-Ṣādiq narrates: Once I told the Imam, “We were on our way to Mecca and were about to enter the state of iḥrām, so we wanted to depilate. Since we did not have any bran with us to use with the depilator, we used flour instead. But then I felt so upset for this that only God knows.”

The Imam asked, “Why? Because of the thought of being wasteful?” “Yes,” I admitted.

The Imam said, “There is no isrāf (waste, extravagance, excess, prodigality) in what is good for the body. Sometimes I order flour to be mixed with [olive] oil and apply it to my body. Isrāf is to waste away one’s property and to harm the body.”

I asked, “And what is iqtār (parsimony, tight-fistedness)?”

He explained, “It is to eat bread and salt when you can eat better.”

I inquired, “And what is qaṣd (the middle course, balance)?”

He said, “Eating bread with either meat, yogurt, vinegar or butter—alternating between these.”

30. Imam al-Kāẓim said: Concerning the verse: Say, “My Lord has only forbidden indecencies, the outward among them and the inward ones, and sin and undue aggression” (), “outward indecency” means overt fornication [that is, prostitution], which was marked by flags that prostitutes used to raise [at their homes] to designate themselves. “Inward indecency” means marrying the wife of one’s father. Before the Prophet’s mission, when a man died, his son would marry his wife as long as she was not the mother of the son [that is, the son would marry his stepmother]. God prohibited that. And “sin” clearly means [drinking] wine.

Author’s comment: This is a summary of the Imam’s debate with al-Mahdī [the Abbasid caliph]. We quoted it in our discussion of narrations under the verse about wine in Sūrah al-Māʾidah [].

31. Muḥammad b. Manṣūr says: I asked “a righteous servant” (ʿabd ṣāliḥ) [Imam al-Kāẓim] about the verse: Say, “My Lord has only forbidden indecencies, the outward among them and the inward ones” (). He said: “Truly the Qur’an has an outward aspect and an inward layer. Whatever has been forbidden in the Book is on the outward, and its inward dimension is aʾimmat al-jawr (wrongful leaders, illegitimate imams). Whatever has been permitted in the Book is on the outward, and its inward dimension is aʾimmat al-ḥaqq (rightful leaders, true imams).”

Author’s comment: The Imam matches sins and forbidden acts with wrongful leaders, while he matches lawful acts with rightful leaders. There are two possible explanations for this correspondence: (1) Wrongful leaders distance the people from God [just like sins and wrongful acts], while rightful leaders are a cause of nearness to God [just like obedience]. (2) Following either group will lead people to commit acts that are congruous with that leader.

The two narrations that we quoted above, on the authority of al-Ḥusayn b. Mihrān [numbers 15 and 16], can also be interpreted in this light. The next tradition is also of the same type.

32. Concerning Put on your adornment on every place of worship () Imam al-Ṣādiq said: [It means] taking a ritual bath (ghusl) before visiting an Imam.
33. Saʿd b. ʿUbādah said, “If I ever see a man with my wife, I will surely treat him with my sword.” When the Messenger of God heard about this statement he said, “Aren’t you fascinated by Saʿd’s ghīrah (protective jealousy)? Yet, by God I am more ghayūr than he is, and God is more ghayūr than I am. It is out of His ghīrah that He has forbidden indecencies, the outward among them and the inward ones (), and no one is more ghayūr than God.”
34. The Prophet said: No one is as ghayūr as the Almighty God. After all, who can be more ghayūr than One Who has forbidden indecencies, the outward among them and the inward ones ()?
35. Concerning when their time comes, they shall not defer it by a single hour nor shall they advance it () Imam al-Ṣādiq said: This [appointed time] is what is designated to the Angel of Death.

Author’s comment: We presented other narrations in this regard under the verse: then He ordained the term [of your life], and the specified term is with Him ().

Felicity and Wretchedness: A Discussion of Narrations and More

Concerning the verse: Even as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return. A part [of humankind] He has guided, while error is fixed upon a part () Imam al-Bāqir said: When He created them, He created them as believers, disbelievers, wretched and felicitous. Thus they shall return on the Day of Resurrection, as guided and misguided.

Tafsīr al-Qummī narrates this on the authority of Abū al-Jārūd, and then quotes the Prophetic narration: “The loser is one who loses in his mother’s womb, and the winner is one who wins in his mother’s womb.”

Abū Jārūd is not known as a reliable transmitter of hadith, but the scholars have accepted his narrations from Imam al-Bāqir before his deviation. Moreover, there are other narrations which interpret the verses in the same way, such as a narration from Imam al-Bāqir on the authority of Ibrāhīm al-Laythī. The same idea is found in narrations which interpret other verses on the topic of predestination (qadar). Overall, there are numerous narrations that, despite their variety and difference, convey one common message: that the end of the creation will be similar to its beginning; that the return of every person will be like his origin; that one who is guided at last was guided at first, and one who is misguided at last was misguided at first; that the wretched is wretched from the onset of their creation, and the successful is successful from the onset of their creation.

What these narrations and verses mean is not to assert that felicity and wretchedness are among the essential properties of people—in the sense that evenness is an essential property of number four. This possibility is totally out of the question. Such essential property can be interpreted in two ways, both of which are problematic. (1) Felicity or wretchedness is a necessary concomitant of one’s essence at the level of mental image. What is meant here is that the mind derives the concepts of felicity and wretchedness from what happens in the external world, and applies them to its concepts of people’s māhiyyah (essence, quiddity). All this is subsequent to the occurrence of beings, acts and results in the world of existence (wujūd). Such essential property is devoid of any real impact or practical significance. (2) Felicity or wretchedness is a necessary, inseparable and independent requirement of one’s substance. This means that God’s job is only to bring out what is hidden in the person’s essence, which entails a limitation on God’s absolute dominion and a restriction of His authority. That would be contrary to the Qur’an, the sunnah, and reason.

This idea contradicts reason because rational people conduct their affairs based on the assumption that education and training have an impact on the souls. They are unanimous about this principle, and agree on classifying actions as good or evil, and assigning praise and blame to them. It is also against the idea that God has completed His argument against the people through sending religions, scriptures and messengers. If one’s actions and destiny are already embedded in one’s substance as essential properties—meaning properties that are impossible to be separated from the person—then it does not make sense to offer any proof, argument or guidance to the person. There is no consistent way of conceiving this.

The picture the Holy Qur’an draws for us also confirms a rational system of human life based on the free will of the people. The Qur’an says that God created humans from dust, then He made their progeny from an extract of a base fluid (). He makes them grow in a splendid fashion, until He blesses them with maturity and reason, whereby they act voluntarily and can distinguish between good and bad, virtue and vice, benefit and loss, obedience and disobedience, reward and punishment. He then blesses them by directing His religious obligations to them. Those who follow their reason and obey their Lord with respect to His commands and prohibitions will be happy and rewarded with the best of rewards. Those who oppose their reason, follow their desires, and disobey their Lord will be wretched and will taste the consequence of their deeds. This life is an abode of test and trial: today is the time for action, and tomorrow is the time for retribution.

As one can see, this Qur’anic picture is based on two principles: (1) There is a difference between voluntary and involuntary acts. This is a rational, necessary statement. (2) Voluntary acts can be described as good or evil, and can win either praise and reward, or blame and punishment. This is also a rule of reason and a governing principle which gives order to human societies. Hence no rational person can deny it.

These are two indubitable and unquestionable premises which prove that felicity and wretchedness are connected to the voluntary acts of the people. Hence, there is no place whatsoever to hold that felicity and wretchedness are essential properties—in the sense that we discussed above. The Qur’anic verses and narrations in this regard do not tie people’s ends to their essences per se, but they tie people’s ends to God’s creation and existentiation. Nevertheless, we need to explore the meaning of these verses and narrations further.

Narrations which match the return to the beginning are abundant in number, and vary from one another in terms of their text and context, much like the verses in this regard. We can classify these narrations under five categories:

I. Succinct Narrations in Broad Terms

Some of these narrations discuss the matter in a concise way without further elaboration. They state that when God created the people, He created them as two classes: wretched and happy, or disbelievers and believers. Abū Jārūd’s narration, which we quoted above, is an example of such hadiths. Another example is a narration that we quoted from al-Kāfī about the embryonic development under the verse: It is He who forms you in the wombs however He wills ().

These narrations correspond to verses like: It is He who created you. Then some of you are faithless and some of you are faithful (); He knows you best since [the time] He produced you from the earth, and since you were fetuses in the bellies of your mothers. So do not flaunt your piety: He knows best those who are Godwary (); as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return. A part [of humankind] He has guided, while error is fixed upon a part… ().

There is not much of a problem with these verses, because as their context shows, and as we can see more expressly stated in the last example [], they talk about an overall decree from God that humankind shall be divided into two groups. However, whether a person belongs to this group or that will be determined through one’s voluntary acts during one’s life, and that is the source of one’s felicity or wretchedness. Each person will qualify for either being blessed with guidance from God, or being doomed to error through Satan’s guardianship. In other words, what is decreed at the beginning of creation is only a conditional decree. It becomes absolute and finalized later on through one’s voluntary deeds.

II. Narrations about ṭīnah (Clay, Substance)

There are some narrations which are more explicit than the previous group, saying that God created the people from different substances. He created some out of clay from paradise, and created others out of clay from hell; each group will return to where it came from. Here are three examples, while there are many other similar narrations:

1. ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn said: God made a covenant between our followers (shīʿah) and us over our wilāyah (divine guardianship, spiritual authority); thus they neither increase nor decrease [in number]. Indeed God created us from the clay of ʿIlliyyūn (the Highest Heaven, the Elevated Record), and He created our followers from a clay that is inferior to that. He created our enemies from the clay of Sijjīn (the Lowest Hell, the Infernal Record), and He created their followers from a clay that is inferior to that.
2. ʿAbd-Allāh b. Kaysān says: I introduced myself to Imam al-Ṣādiq: “May I be your ransom! I am one of your friends, ʿAbd-Allāh b. Kaysān.”

He said, “Now I know your name, but I do not recognize you.”

I said, “I was born in al-Jabal and was raised in Fārs. When I interact with people in my business and other dealings, sometimes I see a man who is righteous, morally sound, and trustworthy; but when I get to know him more, I realize that he is among your enemies. And sometimes I interact with a man that I find to be morally corrupt, untrustworthy, and vile in conduct; but when I learn more about him, I find out that he is among your friends. How is that possible?” “O Ibn Kaysān, you should know that God took some clay from paradise and some clay from hell. He mixed them together, then He separated them again. The trustworthiness, good conduct and righteousness that you see in the first group are because they came in touch with the clay of paradise. Yet, they will go back to what they were created from. The untrustworthiness, evil conduct and vileness that you saw in the second group are because they came in touch with the clay of hell. Yet, they will go back to what they were created from.”

3. Imam ʿAlī said: Indeed God created Adam from the outer layer of the earth, which includes poor, rich and salty lands. Thus his descendants include both righteous and unrighteous.

The first narration about the clay of ʿIlliyyūn and Sijjīn refers to these verses in the Qur’an: No indeed! The record of the vicious is indeed in Sijjīn. And what will show you what is Sijjīn? It is a written record. Woe to the deniers on that day (); No indeed! The record of the pious is indeed in ʿIlliyyūn. And what will show you what is ʿIlliyyūn? It is a written record, witnessed by those brought near [to Allah] (). We shall discuss these verses in their own place, if God wills.

The last narration provides some explanation for the one before it, because it implies that there is some relationship between the qualities and conditions of people—in terms of being righteous or unrighteous—and the earthly matter from which they are created. This complies with our first-hand experience: different matters are inevitably different in terms of what form they can adopt and what effects they can cause—although this difference is at the level of preponderance (iqtiḍāʾ), not complete causation (ʿilliyyat tāmmah).

Therefore, if we put together what is said in these narrations—that we are made of some clay from the earth, and that our origin is either paradise or hell—we can deduce that parts of earth belong to paradise and parts of it belong to hell. Each part will certainly end up where it belongs, but the process of each part reaching where it belongs is through our doing. The earth first becomes a human, and then we either purify ourselves and thus enter paradise; or we plunge into darkness, whereby we enter hell and become fuel for the fire. This is what determines if one’s original earthen substance is congruent with heaven or hell.

The following verse bears some allusion to this idea, where the inhabitants of paradise will say [after they enter paradise on the Day of Resurrection]: All praise belongs to Allah, who has fulfilled His promise to us and made us heirs to the earth, that we may settle in paradise wherever we may wish (). Apparently what is meant by “earth” here is the very earth where humans live, where they die, and whence they are raised. This “earth” is used interchangeably with “paradise” in this verse. Another verse that refers to the same point is: The day the earth is transformed into another earth and the heavens [as well] (). In short, apparently what is meant by “the clay of paradise” and “the clay of hell” in the narrations is “the clay which will become part of paradise or hell in future.” This interpretation is especially strengthened by certain expressions such as “the clay of ʿIlliyyūn” and “the clay of Sijjīn” [in the first narration], as well as “the clay of paradise” and “the clay of hell” [in the second narration].

What is meant is that humans are physically made of an earthly matter which may be either good or bad. This matter has a direct impact on the comprehension, feelings and faculties of the person. When these feelings and faculties—which are based on one’s material substance—start working, they consolidate one’s material substance. In other words, there is a mutual relationship between our substance and our actions and tendencies. Hence we continue to act and grow, until we develop fully into either a felicitous or a wretched individual, according to the means and causes that God has arranged and willed. At the same time God maintains the right to badāʾ (alteration, apparent change of the course of events) by bringing in other means and causes that are stronger [than one’s original substance], which can change the course of one’s development, and can override the influence of its opposing factors.

All we can say is that one’s earthly substance has some impact on leading a felicitous or a wretched life. Yet, there are countless other factors which figure in here. We only know a few general and obvious ones which are negligible compared to what we do not know. Some of the factors that we know are the wellness of parents, proper nutrition, and the climate where one lives. For instance, one whose seed is conceived properly and develops fully in a healthy womb, and then feeds on proper nutrients, breathes clean air and grows in a sound environment, will have a greater potential to grow to perfection, will have a sharper mind and a more discerning comprehension, and will be stronger in action. Having the right genes and being conceived properly, as well as living in a moderate climate, will prepare the person to better absorb human perfections. On the contrary, people who grow in places with harsh climates and unsuitable air and water—such as equatorial and arctic lands—are more prone to developing undesirable qualities such as harshness, hard-heartedness and weak intelligence.

A physical makeup that is free from impediments of intellectual precision will give rise to a fair spirit with a discerning intellect and subtle emotions, which will guide the person toward human perfections through the person’s beliefs, will and actions. The person’s intellectual and emotional capacity will also guide them to maintain their physical wellness, which will in turn further consolidate the person’s spirit and actions. This mutual strengthening continues until one’s potentialities fully materialize. The same reciprocation is true on the side of wretchedness, mutatis mutandis. There are several verse which confirm this idea, such as: As for those who strive in Us, We shall surely guide them in Our ways, and Allah is indeed with the virtuous (); Then the fate of those who committed misdeeds was that they denied the signs of Allah and they used to deride them (). Despite all this, there are a myriad of other causes and factors which can influence how one turns out, but we are ignorant of them. We only know that they exist because of rare instances where people develop in a way that we would have never expected given their background. Indeed it is God Who brings forth the living from the dead, and brings forth the dead from the living (, ).

Overall, what we can say is that one’s success in life—both in terms of knowledge and practice—has a direct relationship with having a suitable material substance. It is one’s material substance which determines what kind of spirit may develop with the body, and that spirit is the basis of the person finding their way to either paradise or hell. The same can be said about wretchedness, where wretchedness in knowledge means abandoning one’s reason, and relying on illusions and superstitions which embellish the forces of appetite and anger to the person. Likewise, wretchedness in practice means indulging in material pleasures, yielding to carnal desires, and defiantly rejecting any truth that does not match one’s interests.

The above means that one’s birth is a material cause which pushes the person to either truth or falsehood, either felicity or wretchedness, either paradise or hell. However, this cause is called a preponderant cause, not a complete cause. In other words, God’s decree may bring in another cause which overrules its opposing forces. This is mentioned in the narration which we quoted at the beginning of Sūrah Āl-i ʿImrān, about the creation of the fetus. There are also other narrations which state that God’s will and decree can always make changes to affairs through effacement and confirmation (maḥw wa ithbāt).

A Deeper Layer of Meaning

There is yet another possible explanation for these narrations, which is more advanced, requires a high level of intellectual precision, and is based on a profound understanding of metaphysical principles. The integral element in one’s felicity or wretchedness is one’s degree of consciousness, which is one’s intellectual realization. This is something immaterial and unbound by the laws and restrictions of material phenomena, including time. Time is a measure of change, and as such it is an exclusive aspect of material events. We see a material substance transforming from potentiality to actualization, and thus conclude that “felicity occurs after one’s actions.” However, this is only when we look at it from the perspective of the material substance. Otherwise, felicity in itself is not temporal. It is not something that exists in one time or another because it is not a material reality. Therefore, “prior felicity” and “future felicity” are identical; the distinction comes in only when we map out the movement of a time-bound entity.

This is exactly what happens when we talk about the acts of God occurring “in time.” For instance we say, “God created Zayd on such a day”; “That is when God drowned Noah’s tribe”; “He rescued Jonah’s people in the xth century”; or “He appointed Muḥammad as prophet in year y.” In these examples, God’s action is temporal because we are not looking at it in its entirety. What happens in time is only one aspect of God’s doing, divested of the other aspects. Otherwise, in the broad scheme of things, God is the creator of an event with all its features, including its time and the preparatory changes which give rise to it. This means that God’s act is not bound by time, but sits higher than the plane of temporal events. We qualify God’s acts by time because it is in a sense united with a temporal incident that we observe from our perspective in the temporal world. Another example is when we talk about our comprehension as a temporal event, like when we say, “Today I learnt this and that” or “Now I see.” Knowledge qua knowledge is not temporal. What is temporal is the mental processes and neural activities that prepare the person to have a certain realization and serve as an occasion for understanding. But because of the connection between the two, we speak as if comprehension is a temporal process in its essence.

Given the most apparent meaning of Qur’an and hadith, there is a physical paradise and a physical hell in the hereafter. However, this does not mean that the hereafter is temporal and material like this world. Rather, physical reward or punishment coincides with one’s felicity or wretchedness, which are immaterial by nature. Whether one is felicitous or wretched is determined by one’s final state of consciousness and awakening. Since this, by essence, is an immaterial reality—meaning that it lies above the plane of time—then at that level it does not make any difference whether we talk about past or future. Once one transcends time, the distinction between “before” and “after” disappears, and what is otherwise called “the beginning” coincides with what is otherwise called “the return” [as matched in verse ]. The reader must reflect on this.

III. Narrations about Potable and Briny Waters

Some narrations say that God created the people from either sweet and agreeable water, or from salty and bitter water. For instance:

1. Imam al-Ṣādiq said: God made some potable water and then He created the people of obedience from it. He also made some bitter water and then He created the people of disobedience from it. Then He ordered the two waters to mix. Had He not done that, a believer would only give birth to a believer, and a disbeliever would only give birth to a disbeliever.
2. Ibn Sinān says: I asked Imam al-Ṣādiq about the first thing that God created. He replied, “The first thing that the Almighty God created was that from which He created everything.” I inquired, “And what is that?”

“Water,” he said.

The Imam then explained: “God created two seas of water, one sweet and one briny. Once He created them, He looked at the sweet one and said, ‘O sea!’

It replied, ‘Here I am, at Thy service!’

He said, ‘My blessing and mercy shall be in you. From you I shall create the people of My obedience and My paradise.’

Then He looked at the briny one and said, ‘O sea!’ But it did not reply. He called it up to three times and it did not respond. He said, ‘My curse shall be upon you. From you I shall create the people of My disobedience and those whom I shall settle in My fire.’ Then He commanded them to mix, so they mixed.”

The Imam added at the end: “That is why a believer is born to a disbeliever, and a disbeliever is born to a believer.”

3. Imam al-Ṣādiq said: God ordered some water: “Be sweet and agreeable so that I may create from you My paradise and the people of My obedience.” He ordered some other water: “Be salty and bitter so that I may create from you My fire and the people of My disobedience.” Then He applied the two waters on clay.

There are numerous other narrations—from Imams ʿAlī, al-Bāqir, al-Ṣādiq and others—which convey the same idea as each of the above. We quoted these three as a sample. These narrations can be matched with verses like: Allah created you from dust, then from a drop of [seminal] fluid, then He made you mates. No female conceives or delivers except with His knowledge, and no elderly person advances in years, nor is anything diminished of his life, but it is [recorded] in a Book. That is indeed easy for Allah. Not alike are the two seas: this one sweet and agreeable, pleasant to drink, and that one briny and bitter, and from each you eat fresh meat and obtain ornaments which you wear. And you see the ships plowing through them, that you may seek of His grace, and so that you may give thanks (). The first verse [] is about how individuals differ from one another despite being of the same species and having common enjoyments and benefits. Then the second verse [] provides an example to clarify and illustrate this.

Elsewhere God says: and We made every living thing out of water (). Another verse in this regard is: It is He who created the human being from water, then invested him with ties of blood and marriage, and your Lord is all-Powerful (). We shall discuss these verses in their own place.

This set of narrations can be classified into two categories:

(1) Some of them say that the two types of water—one being sweet and agreeable, and one being salty and bitter—were applied to the clay which was the substance of humankind’s creation. That is the source of difference in the substance of people. This boils down to the previous set of narrations about the differences of people being traceable to to their clay. Hence, the same explanations that we provided there would be applicable to these narrations.

(2) Some of them say that creation as a whole—including the creation of humankind and other things, even paradise and hell—is from water, and the felicity and wretchedness of the people is because they are made of different waters. In other words, the differences in creation are rooted in being created of either potable or briny water. This again boils down to the previous set of narrations about ṭīnah (clay, substance), and the same discussion would apply here. Hence, the first category serves to interpret the second, and all of them serve to interpret the previous set of narrations about ṭīnah.

There is also the idea that at the end, the creation will return to its origin, which was water. This is another topic which we shall discuss later in its appropriate place, by God’s will.

IV. Narrations about Creation from Light and Darkness

Some narrations state that the difference of people is because they were created from either light or darkness. One example is:

Imam al-Ṣādiq said, “Indeed God created us [Ahl al-Bayt] from a light that was drawn from another light that is ingrained in the ṭīnah (clay, substance) from the top of ʿIlliyyūn (the Highest Heaven, the Elevated Record). He created the hearts of our followers (lit. shīʿah) from what He created our bodies from, and created their bodies from a lower substance. So their hearts incline toward us because they are created from what we are created from.” The Imam then recited: No indeed! The record of the pious is indeed in ʿIlliyyūn. And what will show you what is ʿIlliyyūn? It is a written record, witnessed by those brought near [to Allah] ().

He continued: “Indeed God created the heart of our enemies from a ṭīnah from Sijjīn (the Lowest Hell, the Infernal Record), and created their bodies from a lower substance. He created the hearts of their followers from what He created their bodies from; that is why their hearts incline toward them.” Then He recited: No indeed! The record of the vicious is indeed in Sijjīn. And what will show you what is Sijjīn? It is a written record. Woe to the deniers on that day ().

This, and other similar narrations, reduce to the second set of narrations that we discussed above, concerning the origin of creation tracing to either the clay of ʿIlliyyūn or the clay of Sijjīn. However, they specify that after the stage of clay, the substance of people becomes either light or darkness. Apparently light and darkness here symbolize knowledge and ignorance, respectively. A felicitous substance reflects the truths and leads to knowledge, while a wretched substance is intertwined with ignorance and blindness. This means that the ṭīnah of felicity is light. This language has its roots in the Qur’an, which frequently refers to knowledge and guidance as light, just as it refers to īmān (belief, faith) as life. God says: Is he who was lifeless, then We gave him life and provided him with a light by which he walks among the people, like one who dwells in a manifold darkness which he cannot leave? (); Allah is the Guardian of the faithful: He brings them out of darkness into light. As for the faithless, their patrons are the Rebels, who drive them out of light into darkness (). There are abundant other narrations which say that light was the original substance for the creation of a set of beings such as the prophets, the angels, the Tablet, the Pen, the Throne, the Pedestal, and paradise. We shall present some of these under other relevant verses, if God wills.

V. Narrations about Merging the Deeds of Good-doers and Evil-doers

Some narrations talk about the good deeds of the wretched being added to [the record] of the felicitous, and the evil deeds of the felicitous being added to the record of the wretched. One example for this is found in part of a long narration from Imam al-Bāqir, on the authority of Ibrāhīm al-Laythī:

… Then the Imam asked me: “Tell me, Ibrāhīm, when the sun rises and shines its rays on different lands, do the ray separate from the disk?”

I said, “When it rises, the rays are separate [from the disk].”

“Isn’t it true,” the Imam ask, “that when it sets, the rays return and connect back to the disk?”

“Yes,” I confirmed.

He explained, “In the same way everything will return to its original substance and root. On the Day of Resurrection, God will remove anything that is congruous with our enemies (sing. nāṣīb)—including their [dark] substance and it resulting sins and burdens—from the believers, and will add them all to our enemies [because of their essential congruence]. He will also remove anything that is congruous with the believers—including their substance and their various good deeds and efforts—from our enemies, and will add them all to the believers. Now, do you think there is any injustice and aggression in this?”

“No, O son of God’s Messenger.”

He said, “By God this is a decisive decree, a definitive rule, and clear justice. He is not questioned concerning what He does, but they are questioned (). This, O Ibrāhīm, is the truth from your Lord; so do not be among the skeptics (). This is a law of malakūt (God’s kingdom, angelic world).”

“O son of God’s Messenger,” I asked, “what is the law of malakūt?”

“That is the law of God, the law of His prophets, and the story of al-Khiḍr and Moses—when Moses accompanied al-Khiḍr, but al-Khiḍr told him: Indeed you cannot have patience with me! And how can you have patience about something you are not in the know of? (). Contemplate this, Ibrāhīm, and fathom it. Moses criticized al-Khiḍr and condemned his acts, until al-Khiḍr told him, ‘Moses, I did not do that out of my own accord (), but I only did that based on God’s command.’…”

This narration corresponds to the verse: so that Allah may separate the bad ones from the good, and place the bad on one another, and pile them up together, and cast them into hell () and other verses which are mentioned in the above hadith. As one can see, this verse says that God will separate good from evil on the Day of Resurrection and will completely distinguish between them, such that there remains good without any mix of evil, and evil without any mix of good. Then He will pile up all evil together, meaning that He gathers everything of evil nature: He will join people’s actions and results with the subjects who have done them; He will connect the branches back to their roots. The implication of this is that all virtues will be gathered at one end and connected back to pure felicity of essence, which is completely free from any tinge of wretchedness. Likewise, all vices will be gathered at another end and connected back to their unmixed source of origination. This is what the above narration tries to explain.

When the Imam asks Ibrāhīm about the sun and its rays, he is providing a physical image for the idea that every effect is a reflection of its cause, is of the same nature, depends on it, and is inseparable from it. The statement that “By God this is a decisive decree…” is based on the necessary congruence that exists between a subject and his actions, or between a cause and its effect. This entails that the real owner of every act is a subject whose essence is congruous with that act, not one who has no connection with the act [at the level of one’s essence]. This is despite our prima facie impression that such a judgment is unfair, because that impression is only at the surface level, based on outward senses [not based on one’s essential realization and substantial tendency].

Every act has two aspects: (1) It is a set of certain movements which is attributable to the subject who makes those movements. This aspect of the act belongs to the apparent actor. (2) It is described as either good or evil, either felicitous or wretched. This aspect of the act belongs to the essence which has the same moral value and quality. At this level, suppose there are two different causes, each having its distinct effect. Then suppose we find the effect of one manifesting from the other. This is impossible unless there is some mix between the two causes, where the real cause of the observed effect stands behind the apparent cause that is thought to be the source of the event. For instance, we may observe heat in water, but that is only because the water is heated by fire or sun [as the real source of heat]. The heat appears in water, but in reality it is a property of fire. One who investigates the truth would never fail to attribute an effect to its real source, as opposed to where it apparently manifests.

Based on the above clarification, we can say that good deeds belong to those who are good-doers by virtue of their essence, and have a felicitous substance. Similarly, evil deeds belong to those who are evil-doers by virtue of their essence, and have a wretched root and substance. This is genuine justice, which shall appear in the realm of truth [that is, the hereafter] based on the reality of everything.

What is said here does not contradict verses which say: So whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it, and whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it (); that no bearer shall bear another’s burden (); Whatever [good] it earns is to its benefit, and whatever [evil] it incurs is to its harm (). These verses assert that the consequence of every act should accrue to its doer: if the act is good, then they will be rewarded good, and if the act is evil, then they will receive evil. What is mentioned in these verses is correct in its own place. From a worldly point of view and conventionally speaking, “action” refers to a set of physical movements. Given this notion of action, the “actor” would obviously be the person who makes those movements. So worldly reward and praise, or punishment and blame, would accrue to the person who does the act in this sense. This is where the above verses are applicable. However, from the point of view of reality, the true actor of an act is one whose essence is in line and harmony with the act, which is not necessarily the person who makes the outward movements called “action.” Therefore, saying that the act and its good or evil consequences belong to the essence from which it originated is not a violation of these verses, because we are not ascribing the act to a source where it does not belong. In other words, we have two laws at two levels, with a vertical relationship between them: (1) an apparent law which governs our social interactions in this world; and (2) a hidden law which the Imam referred to as “the law of malakūt.”

As we have repeatedly said, the Day of Resurrection is a day when the secrets are examined [], when the truth manifests and nothing conceals it anymore. That realm is where the law of malakūt comes into play and connects every event to its real subject. That is when everything returns to its origin. God says: and there will appear to them from Allah what they had never reckoned (); You were certainly oblivious of this. We have removed your veil from you, and so your sight is acute today (); We will make their descendants join them, and We will not stint anything from [the reward of] their deeds (); But surely they will carry their own burdens and other burdens along with their own burdens ().

Here we can see why the law of malakūt is specifically designated to the Day of Resurrection, and not to the barzakh (the intermediate realm between this life and the Resurrection). The barzakh—which lies between one’s death and the Resurrection—is also a time of retribution and among “the days of God” []. However, the Qur’an counts it as an extension of people’s stay on the earth and this world, as one can infer from these verses: He will say, “How many years did you remain on earth?” They will say, “We remained for a day, or part of a day; yet ask those who keep the count.” He will say, “You only remained a little; if only you had known” (); And on the day when the Hour sets in the guilty will swear that they had remained only for an hour. That is how they were used to lying [in the world]. But those who were given knowledge and faith will say, “Certainly you remained in Allah’s Book until the Day of Resurrection. This is the Day of Resurrection, but you did not know” (). Our life in the barzakh is like a remainder of our worldly life, and thus it is subject to some of the same laws. In the barzakh people are still in the process of being filtered and purified, in their way to their ultimate felicity or wretchedness. The decisive decree [of attaching actions to their real actors] requires total congruence and a pure essence, which is realized only after the barzakh.

Given the above explanations, we can now understand another important idea which is mentioned in the Qur’an and hadith: that God rewards the good deeds of disbelievers in this world, but in the hereafter their actions will be void, no scale will be set up for them on the Day of Resurrection [], and they shall have nothing but fire at that point. The reader should reflect on this.

God’s Actions are not Open to Question

In the above narration, the Imam quoted the verse, He is not questioned concerning what He does, but they are questioned () as a justification for what he said about the law of malakūt (God’s kingdom, angelic world). When someone does an act, makes a judgment, or utters a speech, we may ask the person to justify it for us by explaining the correspondence between the reality and his action or speech. Such questions are applicable when we are dealing with two things that are distinct and separable from one another: an action or speech on the one hand, and the truth on the other hand. There is room for question in such cases until it is clarified that what the person did or said matches reality. However, if the person’s action, judgment or statement is the reality itself, then there is no room for question, because there is no intermediating link to connect the person’s action or speech with the fact of the matter.

When you are questioned about something that you have done, judged, or said, then you are bound to that question unless you clarify the truth behind your action, judgment, or statement. For instance, if one inquires, “Why did you hit the orphan?” or “Why did you judge that this property belongs to Zayd?” or “Why did you say that Zayd is standing?” then you are bound to that question unless you provide an explanation like “I hit the orphan to discipline him”; “Zayd inherits this property from his father”; or “I saw with my own eyes that Zayd was standing.” Meanwhile, there are other statements that are not open to question, such as: “Four is even”; “Ten is greater than five”; “One ceases to be alive if his head is chopped off.” The reason is that these statements are the very reality of the matter, not something to be matched and verified with the truth. Hence, it does not make sense to ask, “Why is four even?” or “What makes ten greater than five?” When the complete cause of an event is realized, then the event will inevitably occur. In such cases, it is vain to ask “Why did this effect come to be?” because its efficient cause and final cause are there.

In the case of God, His actions are the very realm of existence, and His speech is the very external reality. There is no other reality to corroborate His acts and speech. That is why there is no place for asking “why” and “how” with respect to Him. God’s act is the reality with which we assess the truth of all our beliefs and actions. We infer truths from the external world, which is the making of God. Hence, our inferences about the truth have no rule over His acts, but are rather deduced from His acts. The two are concomitant in the sense that our sense of truth [in beliefs] and right [in actions] follows His act [of creation]. The reader should reflect on this.

We can explain this in a different way: God always acts through the intermediation of causes which govern the world. These causes are the means and instruments which manifest God’s acts. When one asks about God’s act, the person is really asking about the means through which God has acted. It reveals the person’s ignorance about the causes at work. For example, suppose Zayd dies because of a wall collapsing on him unexpectedly. Then one would ask, “Why did God kill Zayd? Why didn’t He have mercy on his young age and his poor parents?” So they explain to him that Zayd died because the wall collapsed on him. Then he would ask, “Why did the wall collapse on him?” They tell him that the wall’s foundation had become weak and unsupportive due to rain; that is why it could not carry the weight of the wall anymore, and it so happened that Zayd was right there when it collapsed. But then he would move on to the next question about why it rains, and the inquiry continues. A question is always about an event whose cause is unknown. Otherwise, if one knows the cause, then one would not question the occurrence of its effect. The problem is that the person assumes the chain of causes which support one’s life is secure from sudden death. That is why when Zayd dies unexpectedly, the person cannot imagine a cause that justifies it, so he concludes that it was a groundless act by God. Thus the person asks about the basis behind the event. If one knows about the causes which give rise to events, then one would not have any question. We also had a previous discussion on the verse, He is not questioned concerning what He does, but they are questioned () when we discussed Satan’s objections in his dialogue with the angels.

In the above narration, the Imam mentioned “the law of God and the law of His prophets…” This refers to God’s judgment and decree, and the judgment of His prophets with His permission. God’s decree and judgment is based on the truth and the fact of the matter in the real world, unlike our judgments which are based on signs and indications.

The above should clarify how good deeds and their consequences are added to good essences which have a substance of light, and how evil deeds and their consequences belong to evil essences which have a substance of darkness. Also, our explanation about the verse, He is not questioned concerning what He does, but they are questioned () should clarify another series of questions that may potentially arise here. One may ask: “Why is it that good essences which have a substance of light are tied to good deeds and good consequences? Why is it that evil essences which have a substance of darkness are tied to sins and evil consequences? Why do good deeds result in eternal bliss and everlasting paradise? Why do evil deeds result in God’s punishment and hell?”

The answer is: There is a necessary existential connection between these essences and what issues from them in the real world. It is not an arbitrary assignment based on a social contract, even though in religious language it is sometimes expressed in a way that is similar to our conventional laws which we have set up to govern our societies as a complement to religious laws. We explained this above in our discussion on the result of deeds.

It is an essential property of a good or evil source to have a consequence which is congruent with it, and essential properties are not open to question. However, the idea that the essential property of a being is inseparable from it does not mean that the being is an independent cause of that effect. It does not mean that the beings can necessitate their essential consequences and bind them to themselves independently of God. The Qur’an rejects this notion. Rather, what necessitates these consequences is that they are part of God’s doing, and His acts are not open to question as we just explained. God refers to this necessary consequence using an example in the verse: The good land—its vegetation comes out by the permission of its Lord, and as for that which is bad, it does not come out except sparsely (). The verse adds by the permission of its Lord as a qualification to clarify that no being is independent of God in effecting its essential properties. The following Prophetic narration also refers to the same notion of essential consequence: “The pen [of decree] has dried (jaff al-qalam) with the inscription of felicity for one who believes and is self-restrained.”

---

1. See volume 3, pp. 243-244 (under verses ), and volume 9, pp. 13ff (under verses ) of the English translation. (Trans.) ↩︎

2. The demonstrative pronoun dhālika (as used at the end of verse ) is used in second person singular addresses. The author’s point is that these verses begin with general addresses to all humans, but then narrow down to make specific statements about the audience of the Qur’an at the time of revelation. (Trans.) ↩︎

3. Ḥāl always implies the meaning of “while.” It describes a subject who does an act while being in a certain state (ḥāl), or an object which is acted upon while it is in a certain state. (Trans.) ↩︎

4. In other words, verse clearly states how the two stages are similar: in that you are alone and on your own. (Trans.) ↩︎

5. This is the second time the author is stating this point. This sensitivity and emphasis is to avoid the impression of jabr (compulsion, determinism, predestination). (Trans.) ↩︎

6. The author has bundled the last sentence in verse —Even as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return—with verse as one unit. His reason for doing so is that the sentence in verse compares the “beginning” to the “return” without specifying in what sense they are similar, which necessitates the discussion to continue in the next verse. However, the sentence in verse seems to have a complete meaning on its own. It is not about the how of the beginning and the return, but about their actual occurrence. An almost identical sentence is mentioned elsewhere, using the same verbs, about the creation as a whole, not the creation of humankind in particular: as We began the first creation, so We shall return it (). This verse shows that the comparison between the beginning and the return is complete in itself, because it is about the very existence and creation of things, not about some aspect of their existence and creation. The following two verses also convey the same message: Say, “He will revive them who produced them the first time” (); Your creation and your resurrection are not but as of a single soul (). What is stated in verse —Even as He brought you forth in the beginning, so will you return—can be compared with narrations which say, “As you wake up [from sleep], you will be raised [from death].” There are many verses in the Qur’an which prove the truth and occurrence of the Resurrection based on the truth and occurrence of the initial creation. Hence, assuming that the letter kāf (“as” in as He brought you forth in the beginning) denotes a comparison in the quality and manner of beginning and return is an unwarranted assumption, which makes much of the author’s above discussions contrived and only secondarily related to the verses. Similarly, verse —A part [of humankind] He has guided, while error is fixed upon a part—is a complete sentence on its own, as the same idea is mentioned elsewhere in the Qur’an without reference to the beginning and the return: Then among them were some whom Allah guided, and among them were some who deserved to be in error (). This means that the word farīqan is not a ḥāl, but is the object of the verb hadá (He has guided). (Trans.) ↩︎

7. In other words, instead of saying so will you return, it should have said, “so will God return you” because the focus is God’s power to bring the dead back to life. (Trans.) ↩︎

8. In other words, “eat” and “drink” are neither obligatory (wājib) nor recommended (mustaḥabb), by they are mentioned to show the wide range of permissible acts before adding the restriction on being wasteful. Similarly, the first part of the verse does not primarily mean that adornment in prayer is recommended, but it simply means that it is permissible. This is clearly confirmed by the next verse. These verses by no means promote luxury, extravagance and consumerism. They should be viewed in the light of the pre-Islamic custom of circumambulating the Kaʿbah naked, as discussed by the author under verse . This also relates to the falling of Adam and Eve’s coverings (, ), and God’s sending of garments to cover your shameful parts, and adornments (). Therefore, the primary meaning is: “Put on some clothes,” where clothes are referred to as “adornments” as one of their aspects, mentioned specifically here in order to appeal to the audience. (Trans.) ↩︎

9. The verse says banī Ādam, which literally means “sons of Adam.” The subsequent pronouns in the verse are also masculine. Thus the discussion about the inclusion or exclusion of women. (Trans.) ↩︎

10. Taghlīb is defined both above and below. See my first note under the section entitled “The People on the Aʿrāf” below. (Trans.) ↩︎

11. An “imaginary metaphor” (istiʿārah takhyīliyyah) is when a comparison is made between one thing and an implication of another thing, such as “the claws of death.” In this verse, what is meant is that God has created humankind in a way that one of its implications is that they produce and “bring forth” adornments for themselves. (Trans.) ↩︎

12. This statement of the author can be interpreted in two ways: (1) “Servants” is plural, referring to the social aspect involved in adornments. (2) “His servants” implies a sense of divine mercy, referring to the efficacy of adornments in social human life. (Trans.) ↩︎

13. Here, adornment (zīnah) and provision (rizq) can be matched, respectively, with “luxury goods” and “normal goods” as defined in economics. (Trans.) ↩︎

14. One loses one’s state of ritual purity by things that exit the “two ducts.” (Trans.) ↩︎

15. In other words, consistency of flow necessitates that the first part of the current verse establishes the permissibility of adornment and good provision for all people, not just believers. (Trans.) ↩︎

16. This part entirely pertains to the Arabic construct of the verse. The word kāʾinah is already included in the English translation, where it says: These are… (Trans.) ↩︎

17. To elaborate this further, the meaning is: “Those who are faithful in the life of this world, shall exclusively enjoy God’s blessings on the Day of Resurrection.” This means that “the life of this world” is the time or place of their faith, and “the Day of Resurrection” is the time or place of their enjoyment. They are separated by the insertion of the word khāliṣah (exclusively) between them because it would be awkward and confusing to say, “in the life of this world on the Day of Resurrection.” (Trans.) ↩︎

18. The English translation of the verse () was adjusted to reflect the author’s interpretation. An alternative translation (by Qarāʾī) is: “These are for the faithful in the life of this world, and exclusively for them on the Day of Resurrection.” This is a more apparent meaning given the context of the verse and other Qur’anic usages. It is also supported by the fourth narration quoted below. The author has favored the other meaning in order to be consistent with the general address of O Children of Adam (). However, the same verse talks about every masjid (place or time of prayer), which can be a clear indication of what is meant by exclusivity in the following verse. Moreover, whenever the Qur’an talks about “the faithful in this world,” this world is never a ẓarf (container, receptacle, place of occurrence) of faith—implying “those who lead faithful lives in this world”—but it is always a ẓarf of some advantage for the faithful—implying “those who lead faithful lives shall have such-and-such in this world.” It is already understood that faith and good deeds take place in this world; therefore the qualification in this world indicates a worldly advantage for the faithful in addition to their reward in the hereafter. This can be clearly seen in these verses: Indeed We shall help Our messengers and those who have faith in the life of the world and on the day when the witnesses rise up (); For those who do good, in this world there will be a good [life], and the abode of the Hereafter is certainly better (). A similar pattern can be observed in verse , especially when we compare it with verse , which conveys the same message with a different wording. (Trans.) ↩︎

19. In other words, all aggression (bagh) is undue, and all assumed partners of God are without any justification from God. (Trans.) ↩︎

20. The particle mā is called zāʾidah (extra, redundant, semantically empty). Overall, immā in this verse can be translated as “when,” implying a condition that will surely happen. (Trans.) ↩︎

21. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn al-Mundhir. ↩︎

22. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of ʿAbd b. Ḥumayd. ↩︎

23. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn Jarīr, Ibn Abī Ḥātim and Ibn Mardawayh. ↩︎

24. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn Jarīr, Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abī Ḥātim. ↩︎

25. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Abū al-Shaykh, on the authority of al-Ḥasan. ↩︎

26. Riyāsh is the plural of rīsh (lit. feathers of birds). Both words are used as singular terms for good clothes. Either way the meaning of the verse would be the same. (Trans.) ↩︎

27. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn Mardawayh. ↩︎

28. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Zurārah, Ḥumrān and Muḥammad b. Muslim. ↩︎

29. Tafsīr al-Qummī, on the authority of Abū al-Jārūd. ↩︎

30. Baṣāʾir al-darajāt, on the authority of Aḥmad b. Muḥammad, on the authority of al-Ḥusayn b. Saʿīd. The same account is narrated in al-Kāfī, on the authority of some of our [Shia] companions, on the authority of Aḥmad b. Muḥammad, on the authority of al-Ḥusayn b. Saʿīd, on the authority of Abū Wahab, on the authority of Muḥammad b. Manṣūr. A similar narration to the same effect is reported in Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Muḥammad b. Manṣūr, from “a righteous servant” (ʿabd ṣāliḥ). ↩︎

31. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Abū Baṣīr. ↩︎

32. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Masʿadat b. Ṣadaqah. ↩︎

33. Tahdhīb al-aḥkām, via its chain of narration. A similar account is narrated in Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Abū Baṣīr, from either Imam al-Bāqir or Imam al-Ṣādiq. ↩︎

34. Tahdhīb al-aḥkām, via its chain of narration, on the authority of al-Ḥalabī, from Imam al-Ṣādiq. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Zurārah, Ḥumrān and Muḥammad b. Muslim, from Imams al-Bāqir and al-Ṣādiq. ↩︎

35. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of al-Ḥusayn b. Mihrān. ↩︎

36. The narration does not specify whether it is an interpretation of your faces or an interpretation of place of worship. The former is more likely because the meaning of masjid (place or time of worship) is quite evident. Thus the author’s explanation. The meaning would be: “Set up the most pious among you (or the Infallible Imams) as the leaders of your congregation whenever you pray.” Based on the less likely possibility—that the narrations interpret masjid as the Imams—the meaning would be: “Set up your faces toward the leader of the congregation (or toward the Infallible Imams) whenever you pray.” The same dichotomy, ambiguity and interpretations are applicable to the next narration about verse . (Trans.) ↩︎

37. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of al-Ḥusayn b. Mihrān. ↩︎

38. That narration says: “[It means] taking a ritual bath (ghusl) before visiting an Imam.” This shows that “the Imams” are offered here as an interpretation for masjid (place or time of worship), and ghusl is an interpretation for zīnah (adornment). According to the author’s first explanation, “the congregational leader” is an interpretation for zīnah. (Trans.) ↩︎

39. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of al-ʿUqaylī, Abū al-Shaykh, Ibn Mardawayh and Ibn ʿAsākir, on the authority of Anas. The same idea has been narrated from the Prophet through other chains of narration, on the authority of ʿAlī, Abū Hurayrah, Ibn Masʿūd, Shaddād b. al-Aws and others. ↩︎

40. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn Mardawayh. ↩︎

41. Al-Kāfī, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Yaḥyá b. Abī al-ʿAlāʾ. ↩︎

42. Al-Kāfī, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Faḍalat b. Ayyūb, on the authority of ʿAbd-Allāh b. Sinān. It is also narrated in Tahdhīb al-aḥkām, on the authority of Faḍalat b. Ayyūb, from the Imam. The same idea is narrated Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī from Imam al-Ṣādiq, and in Majmaʿ al-bayān from Imam al-Bāqir. ↩︎

43. Man lā yaḥḍuruhu al-faqīh. ↩︎

44. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Khaythamat b. Abī Khaythamah. ↩︎

45. Al-Kāfī, via its chain of narration. ↩︎

46. Al-Kāfī, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Aḥmad b. Abī ʿAbd-Allāh, on the authority of Muḥammad b. ʿAlī, via an unconnected chain of transmission (marfūʿ). ↩︎

47. This apparently refers to Imam ʿAlī’s asceticism. Fayḍ al-Kāshānī, al-Wāfī (Iṣfahān: Maktabat al-Imām Amīr al-Muʾminīn, 1406), 20:705. (Trans.) ↩︎

48. Al-Kāfī, via its chain of narration. ↩︎

49. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of al-Tirmidhī (who has authenticated it), on the authority of ʿAmr b. Shuʿayb, on the authority of his grandfather through his father. ↩︎

50. Ḥimyarī, Qurb al-isnād, part of a longer hadith. ↩︎

51. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Abān b. Taghlib. ↩︎

52. Al-Kāfī, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Isḥāq b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz. ↩︎

53. Al-Kāfī, via its chain of narration, on the authority of ʿAlī b. Yaqṭīn, through a connected chain of transmission. It is also narrated in Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, via an incomplete chain of transmission (mursal). ↩︎

54. The author has quoted this under verse , which the Imam recites in support of wine being called “a great sin” in the Qur’an. See volume 3, pp. 258-259 of the English translation. (Trans.) ↩︎

55. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī. This is also narrated in al-Kāfī, via a connected chain of transmission, on the authority of Muḥammad b. Manṣūr. There the narration reads: “Whatever God has forbidden in the Qur’an…” and “whatever God has permitted in the Qur’an…” ↩︎

56. According to this explanation, “inward” means cause or root, because the outward is a manifestation of the inward. Following a just leader will cause one to obey God, and following an unjust leader will cause one to disobey God. (Trans.) ↩︎

57. Tahdhīb al-aḥkām, via its chain of narration, on the authority of al-ʿAlāʾ b. Sayābah. ↩︎

58. Ghīrah (ghayrah) means “intolerance toward outsiders and intruders.” It involves two aspects of protectiveness and possessiveness. Ghīrah can be translated as “jealousy”; and ghayūr as “jealous”—in the accurate technical sense of jealousy in psychology and sociology, which is different from envy (ḥasad). (Trans.) ↩︎

59. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn Abī Shaybah, al-Bukhārī, Muslim and Ibn Mardawayh, on the authority of al-Mughīrah b. Shuʿbah. ↩︎

60. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of ʿAlī b. Abī Ḥamzah, from Imam al-Ṣādiq. ↩︎

61. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī. ↩︎

62. See volume 13, pp. 16-17 of the English translation. (Trans.) ↩︎

63. A more literal translation of the hadith is: “The wretched one is one who attains wretchedness in his mother’s womb, and the happy one is one who attains happiness in his mother’s womb.” (Trans.) ↩︎

64. This refers to verse . (Trans.) ↩︎

65. The difference here is about ascription. One’s end is not a result of a rigid māhiyyah (quiddity, substance, essence) which determines the person’s felicity or wretchedness by virtue of itself. Rather, any complete or incomplete causation is traceable to God’s doing, Who gives different capacities and inclinations to the people. Since things are not tied to a fixed essence, but to God’s will, His hands are always open to make any modifications. For a more complete and decisive explanation, see the section entitled “A Deeper Layer of Meaning.” (Trans.) ↩︎

66. See volume 5, pp. 20ff of the English translation. (Trans.) ↩︎

67. Baṣāʾir al-darajāt. ↩︎

68. This is a general designation for the lands lying between Azerbaijan, Iraq and Fārs, including Hamadān and Kurdistān. (Trans.) ↩︎

69. Al-Maḥāsin. ↩︎

70. ʿIlal al-sharāʾiʿ, on the authority of Ḥabbat al-ʿUranī. ↩︎

71. Here matter (māddah) is meant in its metaphysical sense, meaning a substance in a potential state. It becomes actualized by adopting a form (ṣūrah), which is an actualizing substance. (Trans.) ↩︎

72. See volume 5 (2nd ed.), pp. 20ff of the English translation. (Trans.) ↩︎

73. A complete cause (ʿillat tāmmah) consists of three things: (1) existence of the necessary preponderant cause (muqtaḍī); (2) existence of every condition (sharṭ); (3) non-existence of every impediment (māniʿ). A common example is the process of burning: fire is the preponderant cause; it must be in proximity of the fuel as a condition; and there must be no barriers that prevent combustion. This is according to Islamic philosophy, which recognizes events as conditional causes (which is another translation for muqtaḍī), and where God’s will operates at the same plane (called horizontally, ʿarḍī) by either removing a condition or introducing an impediment. In Islamic mysticism (ʿirfān), this is taken a step forward, where there is no cause—whether absolute or conditional—except the Absolute Cause. What is commonly called a cause (sabab, ʿillah) is only seemingly and apparently so, but not in reality. All forces and factors in creation are like sleeves which cover the hand which extends through them and effects changes. They are all expressions, extensions and reflections of the only real cause. There is no contradiction, nor any real duality, in the working of different members of the same body. It is a single subject which employs different organs to what he wills, according to their capacity and based on his wisdom. This is called “vertical agency” (fāʿiliyyah ṭūliyyah). (Trans.) ↩︎

74. Here both “time” and “matter” are meant in their metaphysical sense. Time is “the yardstick of change,” and change, by definition, means “transition from a state of potentiality to actualization.” Having a state of potentiality is identical to being material. Philosophical matter means “potentiality,” and prime matter (materia prima) means “pure potentiality.” (Trans.) ↩︎

75. Occasion here is meant in its philosophical sense, which is distinct from “cause.” (Trans.) ↩︎

76. This discussion is based on a metaphysical principle that knowledge is immaterial, which means that it is indivisible, and is not bound by time and space. When we are fully aware of something—an object, an incident, a feeling—our consciousness transcends past and future, even though we, as a subject, live in time. The realm of afterlife is eternal, not perpetual. While perpetuity means infinite time, eternity means being timeless or above time, and therefore changeless. The same can be said about God and other immaterial beings. From this, the author has intelligently deduced that our existence in the hereafter is not based on a material substance as in this world, but it is based on a conscious substance—notwithstanding all its ambiguity for us being caged by time. (Trans.) ↩︎

77. ʿIlal al-sharāʾiʿ. ↩︎

78. ʿIlal al-sharāʾiʿ. ↩︎

79. Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, part of a longer hadith, on the authority of ʿUthmān b. ʿĪsá, on the authority of some of his companions. ↩︎

80. ʿIlal al-sharāʾiʿ. ↩︎

81. ʿIlal al-sharāʾiʿ. ↩︎

82. I explained the technical meaning of “vertical relationship” above, in the section entitled “Back to Iblīs.” Here, what is meant is that the apparent and hidden laws do not contradict because they pertain to two different planes. Each has its own scope and application. (Trans.) ↩︎

83. Questioning an act means inquiring about either the efficient cause or the final cause of the act. The efficient cause (al-ʿillat al-fāʿiliyyah) of an act is the subject which does the act and thus brings it to existence. The final cause (al-ʿillat al-ghāʿiyyah) of an act is its raison d’être, or a goal that the subject aims to achieve through the act. In the case of divine acts, God is both the efficient cause and the final cause: there is no other source of existence but Him that may give existence to the event, and there is no perfection beyond Him that may justify His action. His acts issue from His essence because of His perfection. He Himself suffices to justify His acts. That is why in the case of divine acts there is no room to inquire about some other efficient or final cause. In short: He is the First and the Last (). (Trans.) ↩︎

84. According to Islamic philosophy, God is the only real cause of any phenomenon. All other “causes” are rather “preparatory causes” or “occasions” (called muʿiddāt) which enable the recipient to receive God’s grace (that is, existence). According to Islamic mysticism (ʿirfān), the other causes are reflections and manifestations of God’s causality at work. (Trans.) ↩︎

85. See the section entitled “God cannot be Questioned about His Actions.” (Trans.) ↩︎

86. In other words: Why not vice versa? Why do these essences not result in the opposite actions and consequences? (Trans.) ↩︎

87. See the section entitled “Two Forms of Human Knowledge.” (Trans.) ↩︎

88. See my first footnote under the section entitled “Detailed Response to Satan’s Objections.” (Trans.) ↩︎