Verses 27–32

A Talk on Perception and Thought

The verse: Then Allah sent a crow digging up the earth so that he might show him how he should cover the dead body of his brother. He said: “Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I should be like this crow and cover the dead body of my brother?” So he became o f those who regret is a unique one; there is no other like it in the Qur’an. It portrays man’s ability of benefiting from perception; that he acquires knowledge of characteristic properties of various things through perception, and then thinking on it arrives at its aims and objects in life. It is what has been discovered by academic research that human knowledge and cognition emanates from perception (or call it sensitivity), in contrast to those who believe in remembrance and natural knowledge. We may explain it as follows:

10:139Look at a man with all his cognitive pictures—be it ideas or propositions, particular or general, whatever the characteristic of his knowledge and consciousness—you will find that he has got numerous pictures and a great deal of cognition, even if he be the most ignorant, and extremely weak in understanding and thinking; and no one can enumerate the pictures in his mind; in fact only God knows their limit.

Although it is beyond the limit of human computation, it is seen that it goes on growing and increasing so long as the man remains alive in this world. If we retreat and go back in human life, we shall find it decreasing and decreasing until it will become cipher, and man will become like a blank slate without any knowledge. God says: [God] taught man what he knew not (96:5).

The above verse does not mean that God taught him what he did not know; but as for the things he knew, he had no need of divine teaching. Obviously, human knowledge, of whatever type it may be, is needed to guide him to what will make his existence perfect and will benefit him in his life; the goal to which inorganic things proceed by natural laws, the organic ones—including man—proceed and are guided to it in the light of knowledge. Thus knowledge is guidance.

God has ascribed guidance to Himself, as He quotes Moses as saying: “Our Lord is He Who gave to everything its creation, then guided.” (20:50). Again He says: And Who made (things) according to a measure, then guided (87:3). Also He says, and in a sense it points to guidance through perception and thought: Or, Who guides you in utter darkness of the land and sea, ... (27:63). In previous volumes, we have discussed to a certain extent the meaning of guidance. In short, every knowledge is guidance; and every guidance is from God; therefore, whatever knowledge man has got, has come to him through divine teaching.

10:140Also, the verse, And Allah has brought you forth from the wombs of your mothers—you did not know anything—and He gave you the hearing and the sight and the hearts ...(16:78), gives the connotation near to that of the verse: [God] taught man what he knew not.

Contemplation of man’s condition and meditation on Qur’anic verses show that man’s theoretical knowledge, that is knowledge of things’ characteristics and the resulting intellectual cognition, all emanate from the senses, and God through it teaches him the things’ characteristics, as is seen in the divine words: Then Allah sent a crow digging up the earth so that he might show him how he should cover the dead body ...

Attribution of sending the crow for showing how the dead body should be covered is exactly the attribution of teaching the way of covering to Him. The crow did not know that it was God Who had sent it; likewise, the son of Adam did not perceive that there was a planner who had arranged the matter for his thinking and learning; and the fact that apparently the crow and its digging had caused him to learn the way of burial, was merely a chance factor like all chance factors which teach man ways of his life in both worlds. However, it is God Who has created mankind and led him to perfection of knowledge for the goal of his life. The laid down system of creation is such as makes man seek perfection through knowledge, with continuous contacts and knocks between him and various parts of creation; and by this process man learns the means of acquiring his aims and objects. It is God Who sends the crow and other mediums to engage in some activity that helps man in his learnings; so He is the real teacher of man.

There are many similar expressions in the Qur’an. For example: ... and what you have taught the beasts of prey, training them to hunt—you teach them of what Allah has taught you ... (5:4); the verse counts what they have learnt and what they teach as part of what God has taught them, although they have learnt it from other people or found it out by themselves. Again: ... and fear Allah; and Allah teaches you, ... (2:282); but it was the Messenger of God who was teaching them. Also: ... and the scribe should not refuse to write as Allah has taught him (2:282); while the scribe had learnt the art of writing from another scribe. However, all these matters are an integral part of creation and management; and the resulting knowledge helps man in arriving at his perfection. Therefore, it is God who has taught him these means of perfection, as a teacher teaches through speech and training, and a scribe teaches others through speech and pen.

10:141This is the way of all activities, which are attributed in this world of cause-and-effect to God. God is their creator, and there is a chain of causes between Him and His creatures, which are apparent causes like instruments and tools, which bring a thing into existence.

You may say that these causes are conditions on which a thing’s existence depends—everything is covered from all sides by these causes. Zayd comes into this world; he is son of ʿAmr and Hind. Now, ʿAmr and Hind should have been born long before Zayd, and they should have united in marriage; only then the said Zayd could be born. Likewise, for seeing through a seeing eye, there should be a seeing eye before the sight.

Some people think that belief in oneness of God (monotheism) demands that one should totally negate chain of causes; only then one can establish God’s absolute power and dismiss the idea of any weakness in him. They say that the idea of necessity of intermediary causes is tantamount to saying that God is compelled to use a particular way for creating things and has no free will or power. However, those people have inadvertently contradicted themselves.

In short, it is God Who has taught human beings characteristics of the things which are perceived by their senses; He has taught them through the senses; then made all that is in the earth and the sky subservient to them; He says: And He has made subservient to you whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth, all, from Himself; (45:13)

This subjugation has a purpose behind it: Man by managing these things reaches his goals and attains to his wishes in life. God has made them connected to his existence so that he may benefit from them. The Creator has bestowed on man the faculty of contemplation in order that he may understand how to manage and use them, how to proceed ahead through them. The following verses points to this reality: Do you not see that Allah has made subservient to you whatsoever is in the earth and the ships running in the sea by His command? ... (22:65). ... and made for you of the ships and the cattle what you ride on (43:12). ... and upon them [the cattle] and upon the ships you are borne (40:80). There are many verses of similar connotation. Look at their language, how they ascribe making of ships to God, while they are manufactured by man; how they attribute carrying of man to God, while it is done by the ships and the cattle; how they assign the ships’ movement to His order, while it takes place because of the flow of the river, winds or steam, etc. All these phenomena have been described as God’s subjugating them to man, because his will has some control on ships, cattle and in the earth and sky which pulls them to the desired goal.

10:142In short, God has given man thinking power over the senses, so that he may use it as a means to reach the perfection appointed for him; he is helped by his intellectual cognition covering the creation, in other words, the theoretical knowledge.

God says: ... and He gave you the hearing and the sight and the hearts that you may give thanks. (16:78)

As for the knowledge related to action, which guides man to what is to be done and what not to be done, it comes to man through divine inspiration [or call it, instinct] without the agency of the senses or theoretical intellect. God says: And [I swear by] the soul and Him Who made it perfect, then He inspired it to understand what is wrong for it and right for it; he will indeed be successful who purifies it, and he will indeed fail who corrupts it (91:7-10). Then set your face upright for religion in natural devotion (to the truth), the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah’s creation; that is the right religion, ... (30:30). In these verses God ascribes the knowledge of what should be done (that is, good deed) and what should not be done (that is, evil deed) to divine inspiration; and it is what is thrown into the heart.

So, whatever knowledge is gained by man is a divine guidance and through divine guidance. However, there is difference among various types of knowledge:

(1) As for the characteristics of things found outside human mind,

God gives him their knowledge through the five senses;

(2) The general comprehensive intellectual knowledge is given by God and through His subjugation; the senses do not interfere in it, nor can man be able to dispense with it;

(3) The knowledge related to action, which is related to good or evil deed, and decides what is good for it and what is bad; this comes from divine inspiration, thrown into the heart, knocking on the nature’s door.

This third type of knowledge, which in fact emanates from divine inspiration, can only succeed in doing its work and complete its effect if the second type is in order and has grown up with health and uprightness; as even intellect can only do its work properly if man is upright and firm in piety and on the natural religion. God says: ... and none do mind except those having understanding (3:7). ... and none minds but he who turns (to Allah) again and again (40:13). And We will turn their hearts and their sights, even as they did not believe in it the first time, ... (6:110). And who turns away from the religion of Abraham but he who makes himself a fool, ... (2:130). That is, none discards the demands of nature except he whose understanding is defective, and therefore he treads on a wrong path.

10:143Reason supports this concomitance between understanding and piety. If man’s theoretical power becomes defective, and he does not perceive truth as truth or falsehood as falsehood, then how can he be inspired to adhere to that or avoid this? Look at someone who believes that there is no life after this world’s life; obviously he would not be inspired to observe religious piety which is the best provision for the life hereafter.

Likewise, if a man’s natural religion is perverted, and he does not acquire the provision of religious piety, then his inner powers which give rise to desire or anger, love or hate, etc. cannot remain moderate; and when these powers’ balance is disturbed, the power of theoretical perception cannot discharge its functions properly.

As the Qur’anic statements aim at spreading the religious cognition and teaching the people useful knowledge, they tread the same path and stick to the above methods which it has prescribed for acquiring knowledge: (i) If the matter concerns particular items which have perceivable characteristics, it clearly appeals to the senses; for example, verses which contain phrases like, “have you not seen,” “do they not see,” “have you seen,””do you not then see?” (ii) If the topic covers rational generality—whether it is related to general physical matters, or is beyond this phenomenal world—then it pays full regard to understanding and reason, although it is beyond the jurisdiction of the senses and outside the circle of matter and materials. For example, most of the verses related to genesis and resurrection, which contain phrases like, “for a people who understand,” “for a people who reflect,” “for a people who remember, “for a people who understand,” etc. (iii) As for practical propositions which touch upon good and evil, profit and loss in deed, or piety and impiety, they rely on divine inspiration and describe the things which make the person remember his inner inspiration; like the verses which contain such phrases as, “it is better for you,” “his heart is surely sinful,” “in both of them there is a great sin,” “and sin and rebellion without justice,” “surely God does not guide,” etc. You should meditate on them.

Now, it is clear that the Qur’an demonstrates the error of materialists— those who rely on sense and experiment alone and reject pure rational propositions in practical matters. We know that the first concern of the Qur’an is the topic of monotheism, and it is on foundation of monotheism that it builds all true cognition, which it explains and invites people to. There is no need to remind that monotheism is a topic which is the furthest removed from the senses, has the least connection with matter and is deeply related to the pure rational affair.

10:144The Qur’an explains that this true cognition is a part of nature and creation. God says: Then set your face upright for religion in natural devotion (to the truth), the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah’s creation (30:30).

It means that human creation is such an origination as it results in these perceptions and cognition. What does alteration of a creation imply? That alteration itself would be another creation and origination. But if altering of general creation is taken to mean negation of actual function then it is beyond comprehension. Far be it from him to negate his natural knowledge and to tread in life on a totally different path. Those who deviate from natural orders do not negate the dictate of nature; they rather use it in a wrong way. Sometimes an archer misses the target; now the bow and arrow as well as other conditions of shooting are originally made and laid down for hitting the target, but mistake in using throws it into error. If knives, saws, augers, needles, and other such things are fitted wrongly in their machines, they will perform the same functions for which they have been made but in an undesired way. However, it will be impossible for them to deviate from their natural function and do some other work, e.g. a saw cannot do the work of needle by sewing clothes, and so on.

The above matters are clear for him who thinks over general arguments offered by those who oppose rational proofs. For example, they say: ‘Pure rational proofs and syllogisms composed of such premises which are not based on perceptions of five senses, often throw one into error. Look, for instance, at irreconcilable disputes in pure rational matters. Therefore, one should not rely on them because they do not reassure mind.’

Also they argue for correctness of the way of senses and experiments in the following manner: Obviously, the senses are the tools through which we acquire the knowledge of the characteristics of various things. When we perceive a thing’s effect in the framework of some particular conditions, and observe the same effects repeatedly appearing with the same conditions—without fail and without any discrepancy—then we become sure that the said effect was the characteristic of the said thing and that it was not merely a matter of chance, because chance is not a permanent phenomenon.

10:145Both these arguments have been offered to prove that one should compulsorily depend on perception and experiment, and should discard pure rational methods. But it is amusing to note that all the premises used therein are rational and outside the purview of perception and experiment. These people have used these rational premises for rebutting the use of these very premises. That is what we have earlier said that nature cannot be negated, although man errs in its use.

And more abominable than that is the use of experiment and test in evaluation of legislated rules and enacted laws; a law is made and enforced in public with the aim of testing its effect through statistics, etc.; if good results get the upper hand, the law is confirmed as a permanent one, otherwise it is set aside and replaced by another, and so on. The same is the case of making a law through analogy or discretional liking.¹

The Qur’an negates all the above methods and proves that the laid down laws are natural and clear; general piety and impiety are academic and based on inspiration; and their details should be learnt fro m the side of revelation. God says: And pursue not that of which you have not the knowledge; ... (17:36); and do not follow the footsteps of the Satan ... (2:168). It names the laid down shariah as truth: ... and He sent down with them the book with truth, so that it might judge between people in that in which they had differed; ... (2:213). ... and surely conjecture does not avail against the truth at all (53:28). How can conjecture avail when by following it one puts oneself in danger of falling into untruth which is error? God says: ... and what is there after the truth but error; ... (10:32) ... yet surely Allah does not guide him who leads astray, (16:37). In other words, error cannot be a way to lead man to good and felicity. Whoever wants to reach truth through falsehood, achieve justice through injustice, do a good by means of evil, or acquire piety through impiety, he has certainly lost the way; he craves to get from the creation (which is the foundation of law and shariah) what it can never deliver. Had it ever been possible, this interchange would have happened in characteristics of opposite things, and one side of opposite would have served what the other side was supposed to do.

10:146Likewise, the Qur’an negates the path of remembrance (which invalidates the procedure of thinking academics and dismisses the natural logic); and we have earlier discussed this topic in detail.

In the same way, the Qur’an forbids people to indulge in contemplation without accompaniment of fear of God. (We have talked briefly on this subject too.) That is why when Qur’an teaches the laws of religion, it follows that legislation with description of moral virtues and good characteristics, which in their turn awaken the instinct of piety in man, with which he is able to understand the law. Look for example the following verses: And when you have divorced the women and they have ended their term (of waiting), then do not prevent them from marrying their husbands when they agree among themselves in a lawful manner; with this is admonished whosoever among you believes in Allah and the last day; this is more profitable and purer for you; and Allah knows while you do not know (2:232). And fight with them until there is no more mischief (disbelief), and religion be only for Allah; but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors (2:193). ... and keep up prayer; surely prayer keeps (one) away from indecency and evil, and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest, and Allah knows what you do (29:45).

Commentary continues:

مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَٰلِكَ كَتَبْنَا عَلَىٰ بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ أَنَّهُۥ مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًۢا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ ٱلنَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَمَنْ أَحْيَاهَا فَكَأَنَّمَآ أَحْيَا ٱلنَّاسَ جَمِيعًا ۚ وَلَقَدْ جَآءَتْهُمْ رُسُلُنَا بِٱلْبَيِّنَـٰتِ ثُمَّ إِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنْهُم بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ لَمُسْرِفُونَ ۝٣٢

5:32 For this reason did We prescribe to the Children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear proofs, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

Majmaʾ al-bayan says:

“al-Ajl literally means felony.”

al-Rāghib says:

“al-Ajl is that felony (retribution of) which is feared immediately;

10:147thus every ajl is a felony, but not every felony is ajl; it is said: ‘I did it because of him.’”

Then it was used for describing the cause; it is said: ‘I did it for this cause,’ that is, this is the cause of my action. Probably its use for description of cause began in the context of felony and crime, as we say: ‘Zayd did evil and for this crime [ajl] I punished him with hitting,’

That is, my hitting Zayd sprang from his crime which was his evildoing, or from crime of his evil-doing; then it was used for general cause and reason, as for example, I visited you for the reason of my love to you, or because of my love to you.

The context apparently shows that the phrase, “For this reason,” refers to the story of the two sons of Adam given in the preceding verses. That is, the occurrence of that distressing event was the reason of our prescribing to the Children of Israel this and this. Some people have said that this phrase is a part of the preceding sentence: So he became of those who regret; that is, this was the cause of his regretting. This in itself is not farfetched, as we see in the verses 2:219–20: ... Thus does Allah make clear to you the signs, that you may ponder (219) about this world and the hereafter. And they ask you concerning the orphans ... But in that case the words: “We prescribed,” would begin a new sentence, and the usual style of the Qur’an would demand a (wa) for recommencement of another sentence, as we have seen in the above-mentioned verse 2:220.

Why does this phrase refer to the story of the two sons of Adam? It is because the story shows that this human species by nature is entangled in desire and jealousy; thus he hates people for things that are beyond their power [that is, are gifted by God]. This jealousy for even ordinary things instigates him against divine decrees for negating the purpose of creation; it blinds him so that he kills another human being, even his own brother.

Individual men belong to a single species and have the same essence and reality. Each of them possesses [in miniature] the same humanity that is possessed by all others, and vice versa. God created so many individuals and multiplied the human race in order that this reality should survive, in view of the fact that individuals remain alive only for short periods; by this increase in population, new generations will replace the old, and the worship of God will continue. In this background, destroying an individual by murder is tantamount to doing mischief in creation and negating the divine aim of keeping the humanity alive through increased population and succeeding generations. To this fact the killed son of Adam had pointed while talking to his brother: “I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards you to slay you; surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds.” Thus he indicated that slaying someone without genuine reason was tantamount to waging war against God’s Lordship.

10:148As the human nature is such that a trivial cause incites him to commit injustice and oppression, which in the long run, negates the laws given by the Lord and contradicts the purpose of creation of humanity in general; and as the Children of Israel were sunk in jealousy and envy, pride and haughtiness, pursuit of desire and rejection of truth—as the preceding verses have described and their narrated stories show—God explained to them the reality of this heinous oppression and its position in depth, and informed them that in His eyes slaying one man was equal to slaying all people, and conversely keeping one person alive was tantamount to keeping alive all of them.

The phrase: “We prescribed to the Children of Israel,” does not indicate any laid down law, yet it is not without emphasis looking at its importance and approach; and it has effect in provoking the divine wrath in this world or the next.

In short, the verse means: As man, by nature, is pushed even by a trivial motive to commit this great oppression [that is, murder], and peculiar characteristics of the Children of Israel were well-known, We described to them the gravity of manslaughter, in order that they should desist from extravagance, and there came to them Our messengers with clear proofs, but even after that they certainly act extravagantly in the land.

The sentence: “whoever slays a soul, unless it be for man-slaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men.” Here God has made exception of two categories of killing: (i) In punishment, that is, for retribution, as He says: ... retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain; ... (2:178). (ii) In punishment of mischief in the land, as He says in the next verse: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides ... (5:33).

The seriousness of killing is elaborated by the phrase: it is as though he slew all men. We have already explained that each individual man possesses the same reality and quiddity, which is found in all members of the species, this reality lives and dies with him. All human beings, be he an individual or the whole species, one man or a multitude, all are one in this reality. Naturally, murdering one soul should be tantamount to killing the whole species. Conversely, keeping alive one man should be equal to keeping all men alive, as the verse says.

10:149First Objection: This equalization leads to nullification of the main purpose of the verse. The verse aims at showing the seriousness and gravity of slaying a soul and its great sin and dire consequences. Obviously, the more men one kills the more serious and grave its consequences should be. If one slaying is made equal to slaying all men, then what would be said for a man who kills ten men? One victim’s murder becomes equal to murdering all men; and the remaining nine victims are left without anything to compare with.

This objection cannot be removed by saying that: ‘Killing ten persons is equal to ten times murdering all men; and killing all of them is equal to murdering all multiplied by the total number of all’; because it means multiplication of punishment number, and the text of the verse does not support it.

Moreover, the total is made of units each of which is equal to the total, which is again made of such units; and this computation is not going to end at any point, and such a total is meaningless, because it has no unit, and there is no total without unit.

Apart from that, God says: ... and whoever brings an evil deed, he shall not be recompensed but only with the like of it, ... (6:160).

Second Objection: What is the meaning of saying that killing one person is equal to killing all? If this “all” includes this one person who is killed, it means that the said person is equal to a collection of himself and others taken together. But it is obviously impossible. If “killing all” connotes killing all persons accept this one, it means that whoever killed a man, it is as though he killed all men except this one. Obviously, it is a rotten claim that contradicts the purpose of speech, that is, elaboration of the extreme seriousness of this oppression. Moreover, the phrase: “it is as though he slew all men,” is unconditional and without any exception; so it does not allow this hypothesis.

This objection cannot be cleared by saying that: ‘The aim is to show equality as far as punishment is concerned, or in other words, multiplication of punishment or other such matters.’ And it is clear.

The reply to both the above objections is this: The divine words: “whoever slays a soul, it is as though he slew all men,” are an allusion to the fact that all men have one single reality, that is humanity in which all are united, and one and all are equal in it; whoever attacks the humanity found in one of them, he attacks the humanity found in all of them. For example, there is water divided in numerous glasses; whoever drinks from one glass he drinks the water—and he desires the water because it is water—and what is found in all other glasses is no more than water; thus it is as though he has drunk from all glasses. Therefore, the above-mentioned sentence is an allusion in the form of a simile.

10:150In this way both objections are removed, because those objections have treated it as a simple simile in which the factor of similarity intensifies when the number of a side of simile increases; obviously if in this case one is equalized with all the meaning will be disturbed and objection will arise, as if someone says: One of this group of people is like a lion, and one among them is like all in bravery and valor.

As for the sentence: “and whoever keeps it alive it is as though he kept alive all men,” it will be explained in the same way as the preceding sentence was. Keeping alive alludes to what the sane persons would call giving life, like delivering a drowning person and freeing a captive. God in His Book has counted guiding to the truth as giving life, as He says: Is he who was dead then We raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people, ... (6:122). Therefore, one who guides a soul to the true faith has raised him to life.

The clause: “and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear proofs,” is related to the beginning of the verse, that is, ‘Certainly, Our messengers came to them warning them against murder and other related ways of making mischief in the land.’ The next sentence: “but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land,” completes the speech, and its addition gives the intended result of this talk—a clear idea that the Children of Israel were extravagant, persisting in their arrogance and impertinence. We certainly described to them the gravity of murder, and Our messengers came to them with proofs, explaining this and other related topics. They clearly described it to them and warned them of its consequences; even then they did not desist from their haughtiness and insolence. They certainly acted extravagantly in the past, and continue to do so even now.

Extravagance means going beyond the boundary and exceeding this limit in all activities, although it is mostly used in monetary context. God says: And they who when they spend, are neither extravagant nor parsimonious, and (keep) between these the just mean (25:67), as al-Rāghib has said.

Examining Narrations

10:151(1) Hishām b. Sālim narrates through Habīb al-Sijistānī from Abū Jaʾfar that he said, “When the two sons of Adam offered (their) offerings, and it was accepted from one of them and was not accepted from the other; [the Imam] said, ‘It was accepted from Hābīl and not accepted from Qābīl. Because of it he (Qābīl) was overcome by intense jealousy and he committed outrage against Hābīl. He was lying in wait for him, watching when he would be alone, until he got the better of him, away from Adam; so he attacked and killed him. A part of their story is what God has described in his Book concerning their talk before his killing ...’” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)

Author’s comments: This is one of the best traditions narrated about this story. It is a lengthy tradition in which the Imam describes: the birth of Hibatullāh Shīth after this event, Adam’s will for him; and continuation of will among the prophets. We shall write it in some appropriate place.

The tradition clearly shows that Qābīl assassinated Hābīl when Hābīl was unaware of it, and he did not submit himself to the killer’s design, as it agrees with reason; and we have elaborated it in the preceding Commentary.

It should be noted that our traditions give the names of the two sons as Hābīl and Qābīl, while the prevalent Bible says: Abel (Hābīl) and Cain (Qābīl). But there is no authenticity in it, because the narration of the Torah ends on one person whose details are unknown, apart from the alterations in the Torah, which are widely known.

(2) al-Qummī narrates from his father, from al-Hasan b. Mahbūb, from Hishām b. Sālim, from Abū Hamzah al-Thumālī, from Thuwayr b. Abī Fākhitah that he said, “I heard ʿAlī b. al-Husayn, talking to some Qurayshites. He said, ‘When the two sons of Adam offered (their) offering, one of them offered the fattest ram which he kept, and the other offered a bunch of ear of grain; so it was accepted from the owner of the ram—and he was Hābīl—and not accepted from the other one. Thus Qābīl was angry, and said to Hābīl, “By Allah! I will most certainly slay you.” Hābīl said, “Allah only accepts from those who are pious. If you will stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards you to slay you; surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds. Surely I wish that you should bear my sin as well as your own sin, and so you would be of the inmates of the Fire, and this is the recompense of the unjust.” Then his mind facilitated to him the slaying of his brother; but he did not know how to kill him until Iblīs came and taught him, saying, “Put his head between two rocks, then crush it.” So when he killed him, he did not know what should he do with him. Then came two crows, and they came forward fighting and combating with one another; so one of them killed his companion; then the survivor dug into the land with his claws and buried his companion in it. Qābīl said, “Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I should be like this crow and cover the dead body of my brother? So he became of those who regret.” Then he dug for him a ditch and buried him into it; thus it became a custom to bury the dead bodies.

10:152“‘Thereafter Qābīl returned to his father, and he did not see Hābīl with him. Adam said to him, “Where have you left my son?” Qābīl told him, “Had you sent me as his guardian?” Adam said, “Come with me to the place of offering.” And [Adam] had a fore boding of what Qābīl had done. When he arrived at the place of offering, Hābīl’s murder became clear to him. Then Adam cursed the land that accepted Hābīl’s blood [that is, drank the blood, leaving nothing above]; and Adam ordered that Qābīl be cursed, and Qābīl was called from the sky: “You are cursed as you killed your brother.” It is for the above reason that the earth does not drink blood.

“‘Then Adam returned, weeping for Hābīl forty days and nights. When he felt grief for him, he complained to God about it. So God revealed to him: “I am going to give you a male child who will be a replacement of Hābīl.” Thus Hawwāʾ gave birth to a son, pure and blessed; when it was the seventh day, God revealed to him: “O Adam! This son is my gift to you; therefore you name him Hibatullāh [that is, God’s gift]; so Adam gave him the name Hibatullāh.’” (al-Tafsīr, al-Qummī)

Author’s comments: This is the most moderate of the traditions narrated about this story and the matters connected with it. Even so, it is not free of some confusion in the text; as it shows that Qābīl threatened Hābīl to kill him, and then he did not know how to kill him; it is an unimaginable idea, except if it is taken to mean that he was perplexed which method he should use to kill his brother, so Iblīs (may God curse him!) advised him to crush his head with rock. There are other traditions, narrated through the Shīʾah and Sunnī chains, whose theme is nearer to this tradition.

10:153It should be noted that many diverse traditions have been narrated about this event with astonishing themes, like:

The one that says that God took the ram of Hābīl, and kept it in the Garden for forty autumns, then offered it as Ishmael’s ransom, so Abraham slaughtered it:

Or that which says that Hābīl surrendered himself to Qābīl’s control and desisted from stretching forth his hand towards his brother;

Or that which says that when Qābīl killed his brother, God bound one of his legs to its thigh from the day of murder to the Day of Resurrection, and turned his face to right side, wherever he turns it turns; on him is a hedge of ice in winter, and a hedge of fire in summer; there are with him seven angels, when one of them goes, another one comes;

Or that which says that he is undergoing punishment in an island in sea; God has hanged him upside down, and he will remain in the same condition up to the Day of Resurrection;

Or that which says that Qābīl son of Adam hangs by his hair in core of the sun; it takes him with it in its circulation—in winter and summer— up to the Day of Resurrection; when that day comes. God will send him into the Fire;

Or that which says that the son of Adam, who killed his brother, was Qābīl who was born in the Garden;

Or that which says that when Adam came to know of the murder of Hābīl, he elegized him in a few lines of Arabic poem;

Or that which says that according to their shariah if someone intended to attack another person, the victim left him free to do whatever he wanted, without resistance.

In addition to other such traditions, most or all of these and other similar traditions are weak; they go against the dictates of reason, and the Book does not support them. Some of them are clearly forged; others are distorted, while many are the result of the narrators’ mistake who tried to narrate them in their own words.

(3) Ibn Abī Shaybah narrates from ʿUmar that the Messenger of God said, “Does one of you lack the strength, if a man comes to him to slay him, to say like it?”—He said it pointing with one of his hands to the other—“Then he would be like the good one of the two sons of Adam; he would be in the Garden and his killer in the Fire. (al-Durr al-manthūr)

10:154Author’s comments: It is among the traditions describing civil strifes and trials. There are many others like it, and al-Suyūtī has narrated most of them in al-Durr al-manthūr. For example, the following one which he has quoted through al-Bayhaqī, from Abū Moses from the Prophet that he said: “Break your swords”—that is, during civil strife—“and cut your strings, and stay inside the houses, and be in it like the good one of the two sons of Adam.”

Another tradition he has quoted through Ibn Jarīr and ʿAbdu al-Razzāq from al-Hasan that he said, “The Messenger of God said, ‘Verily the two sons of Adam have been offered as an example for this ummah; so adhere to the good one of them.’” There are other narrations like them.

These traditions apparently are not consistent with correct consideration, which is supported by correct traditions, which command people to defend themselves and fight in support of truth. God has said: And if two parties of the believers quarrel, make peace between them; but if one of them acts wrongfully towards the other, fight that which acts wrongly until it returns to Allah’s command (49:9).

Moreover, all of these traditions purport to explain the words of Hābīl in this story: “If you will stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards you to slay you, ” and try to show that Hābīl gave his brother power over himself enabling him to kill him without any attempt to defend himself. And you have seen that this idea is not in conformity with the Qur’anic text.

Apart from that, what makes one suspicious of these traditions is the fact that they have been narrated by people who sat during turmoils that led to ʿUthmān’s murder, and during ʿAlī’s reign they joined Muʾāwiyah, the Khārijites and Talhah and al-Zubayr. Therefore, it is necessary to interpret them in a sensible way if possible, failing which they should be discarded. (4) Ibn ʿAsākir has narrated from ʿAlī that the Prophet said, “There is a mountain in Damascus, called Qāsiyūn; son of Adam killed his brother in it.” (ibid.)

Author’s comments: There is no objection to this tradition. However, Ibn ʿAsākir has narrated through one chain from Kaʾb al-Ahbār that he said, “The blood, which is on the mountain of Qāsiyūn, is that of the son of Adam.” Also he narrates through another chain from ʿAmr b. Khabīr al-Shaʾbānī that he said, “I was with Kaʾb al-Ahbār on the mountain, Dayr al-Murrān; and he saw a flowing chasm in it; so he said, ‘Here the son of Adam had killed his brother, and this is the trace of his blood; God has made it a sign for the worlds.’”

10:155These two traditions show that there was there some firm sign, which was claimed to be the blood of Hābīl. In all probability, it looks like so many myths which crafty people have invented, so that people should come there to visit it, bringing with them large votive offerings and precious gifts, not unlike so many palm-prints and footprints on stones, ¹ and the grave of the grandmother² and other such things.

(5) Ahmad, al-Bukhārī, Muslim, al-Tirmidhī, al-Nasāʾī, Ibn Mājah, Ibn Jarīr and Ibn al-Mundhir have narrated from Ibn Masʾūd that he said, “The Messenger of God, said, ‘No soul will be slain unjustly but a portion of its blood shall be apportioned to the first son of Adam, because he was the first to establish the custom of killing.’” (ibid.)

Author’s comments: This theme has been narrated through other Sunnī and Shīʾah chain.

(6) Humrān said, “I said to Abū Jaʾfar, ‘What is the meaning of the words of God, the Mighty, the Great: For this reason did We prescribe to the Children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men?’” He [Humrān] said, “How can it be as though he slew all men, while he had slain a single soul? He said, ‘He will be put in a place in Jahannam (Gehenna) where the punishment of the p eople of the Fire reaches its utmost limit; if he had killed all men, he would have entered the same place.’ I said, ‘Then if he killed another (man)?’ He said, ‘It will be increased for him.’” (al-Kāfī) Author’s comments: al-Sadūq too has narrated a similar tradition in Maʾāni al-akhbār from Humrān.

Humran’s question, “Then if he killed another (man)?” points to the above-mentioned objection that it makes one murder equal to that murder plus all others. The Imam has replied that his punishment will be increased for him.

At this juncture someone may think that this reply of the Imam goes against the equality mentioned in the verse: whoever slays a soul it is as though he slew all men, because increase means that murder of one or many or all is not equal. But this objection is not sustainable, because equality refers to the nature of punishment, that is, all murderers— whether of one or many or all—will be put in one valley of Jahannam, and to this fact refer the Imam’s words: “if he had killed all men, he would have entered the same place.”

10:156The evidence for this explanation is found in a tradition narrated by al-ʿAyyāshī in his al-Tafsīr, from the same Humrān from Abū ʿAbdillāh about this verse, that the Imam said, “There is a place in the Fire where the punishment of all the people of the Fire reaches its utmost limit, so he will be put in it.” “I [that is, Humrān] said, ‘And if he had killed two?’ (The Imam, a.s.), said, ‘Don’t you see that there is no place in the Fire more severe in punishment than this?’ Then he said, ‘[His punishment] will be increased according to his deed ‘”

The Imam has joined negative and positive in his reply; it points to what we have already explained that equality is in the nature of punishment and difference will be in intensity of punishment and the effect it will have on the killer.

Some more evidence may be found in what Hannān b. Sudayr has narrated from Abū ʿAbdillāh that he said about the verse: whoever slays a soul, it is as though he slew all men. “There is a valley in Jahannam, if he slew all men, he will be (put) in it, and if he slew one soul he will be (put) in it.” This too is narrated in al-Tafsīr of al-ʿAyyāshī.

Author’s comments: It is as though the verse is quoted not verbatim in this hadīth.

(7) [al-Kulaynī] narrates through his chain from Fudayl b. Yasār that he said, “I asked Abū Jaʾfar, about the word of God, the Mighty, the Great, in His Book: and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men. He said, ‘(It is saving) from burning or drowning.’ I said, ‘He who takes him out from error to guidance?’ He said, ‘That is its greatest taʾwīl.’” (al-Kāfī)

Author’s comments: al-Shaykh has narrated it in his al-Amālī, and al-Barqī in his al-Mahāsin, through Fudayl from Abū Jaʾfar; and it has been narrated by Sumāʾah and Humrān from Abū ʿAbdillāh.

The statement that saving from error is the greatest taʾwīl of this verse means that it is its finest and most subtle explanation. In early period of Islam the word, taʾwīl, was often used as a synonym of tafsīr.

This explanation of ours is supported by what has been narrated in al-Tafsīr of al-ʿAyyāshī from Muḥammad b. Muslim from Abū Jaʾfar that he said, “I asked the Imam, about the word of God: whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men. (The Imam) said, ‘For him there is a place in the Fire, if he killed all men, his punishment will not increase on it.’ He said, ‘and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men. He did not kill him, or saved him from drowning or burning; and the greatest of this all is that he takes him out from error to guidance.’”

10:157Author’s comments: The Imam’s saying, “He did not kill him,” means: ‘He did not take revenge against him (the victim) though he could do so after the killing has been proved.’

(8) al-ʿAyyāshī also says in his al-Tafsīr that Abū Basīr narrated from Abū Jaʾfar that he said, “I asked him (the Imam, about the verse): whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; he, said, ‘Whoever saves one from the unbelief (kufr) to belief( īmān).’” Author’s comments: This theme has been mentioned in many traditions narrated through Sunnī chains.

(9) Abū Jaʾfar said, “Extravagants are those who regard unlawful things as lawful and shed blood.” (Majmaʾ al-bayān)

An Academic Discourse and Application

The Torah says:

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.

And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? and he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?

10:158And he said, What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground.

And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand;

When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.

And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.

Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.

And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven fold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. (Genesis, 4:1-16)

The Qur’an says about the story of the two sons of Adam:

And relate to them the story of the two sons of Adam with truth when they both offered an offering, but it was accepted from one of them and was not accepted from the other. He said: “I will most certainly slay you.” (The other) said: “Allah only accepts from those who are pious.

If you will stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards you to slay you; surely I fear Allah the Lord of the worlds.

Surely I wish that you should bear my sin as well as your own sin, and so you would be of the inmates of the Fire, and this is the recompense of the unjust.

Then his mind facilitated to him the slaying of his brother, so he slew him; then he became one of the losers.

Then Allah sent a crow digging up the earth so that he might show him how he should cover the dead body of his brother. He said: “Woe me! Do I lack the strength that I should be like this crow and cover the dead body of my brother?” So he became of those who regret. (Qur’an, 5:27–31)

You should contemplate on this story as described by the Torah and then compare it with the narrative of the Qur’an; then decide for yourself.

10:159The first thing which hits your eyes in the story of the Torah is that it has turned God the Lord into an earthly creature in the image of man, who lives with the men, issues decrees for and against them as another man may do; he comes near him and talks to him as one man to another; then he hides himself by going away and becoming absent; so he does not see an absent and far away thing or person as he sees a nearby and present person. In short, he is just like a terrestrial man in every aspect; the only difference is that his intentions come into force and his orders are carried out. On this basis are built all the teachings of the Torah and the Gospel; far exalted be God from such insinuations!

This Biblical story makes us to understand that man at that time lived face to face with God and his physical presence; then God hid himself from Cain or from Cain and people like him, while the others continued to see him plainly. But irrefutable proofs show that mankind is one species, its individuals have similar faculties and powers, and they live in this world the material lives, while God is totally free of material attributes and conditions; accidents of possibility and attributes of defect cannot touch his subtle position—and this is what the Qur’an describes.

As for the Qur’an, its story is based on the fact that all men share similar traits and is joined in humanity. Then it goes on to tell the story of the appearance of the crow on the scene, and discloses the fact that man gradually advances to his perfection, and that his step-by-step perfection is based on his sensory perception and contemplation. Then it describes the talk of the two brothers; and quotes Hābīl’s discourse which contains brilliant cognition of human nature, and fundamental religious factors like tawhīd, prophethood and resurrection; then he explains piety and impiety, justice and injustice—the two basics which govern all divine laws and shariah’s rules; finally he elaborates the principle of justice of God concerning acceptance and non-acceptance and the recompense in the next world.

Then the Qur’an describes the remorse and regret of the killer and his loss in this world and the next. Lastly, it shows the gravity of the crime of murder that to slay one soul is tantamount to slaying all men; and whoever keeps one soul alive is as though he kept alive all men.