questioning vicegerency
by zoss in s-l-m( … when your Lord said to the angels “I am appointing, on Earth, a vicegerent”, they said “wilt You appoint on it one who will corrupt it and shed blood .. ?”*) What did they base their assesment on? — albeit limited knowledge, as it were, for the verse later says that ( [God] said: “I know what you know not”).
These questions never cease to puzzle me — what is it that the angels knew that brought them to their conclusion, and what is it that they didn’t know that is supposedly the elevator of the human from a primarily mischief-causing creature to fulfilling the intended status — God’s vicegerent?
*Quran verse 2:30 — please consult your favorite translation, or even better, the original text.
Comment by Mohamed — 27/8/2005 @ 16:19
One explanation is that the bashar existed before Adam, so these creatures were known to the angels already. Adam however made a shift into humanity, from bashar to ensan –and that is what the angels didn’t know about. Interpretation from Shahien’s Abee Adam.
Comment by zoss — 29/8/2005 @ 17:37
Yes Mohamed, very interesting — But the argument you present assumes that the above mentioned dialouge has taken place after creation of bashar but before ensan. However, there’s a suggestion that said dialouge has occurred before the creation of bashar — that is, if we assume the verses below give another snapshot of the same conversation:
{Quran[38:71-72] :
إِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي خَالِقٌ بَشَرًا مِن طِينٍ
فَإِذَا سَوَّيْتُهُ وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِي فَقَعُوا لَهُ سَاجِدِينَ
}
Comment by Mohamed — 29/8/2005 @ 18:44
Shahien says that إِنِّي خَالِقٌ بَشَرًا indicates something that is in progress (not “about to” as the translations indicate). While the second aya is in the future, tasweyya and nafkh transforming that bashar into a human, and this is when the angels are ordered فَقَعُوا لَهُ سَاجِدِين
Comment by zoss — 30/8/2005 @ 5:11
I stand corrected — I did think that خَالِق indicated future tense, but it’s not so obvious anymore. So, even though I still am not totally convinced that Shahien’s argument is correct, I have to say that it rings more valid now. I have to look more into it.
I would love to get my hands on that book — Who is the publisher?
Comment by Mohamed — 30/8/2005 @ 7:47
I don’t know that its correct, he doesn’t know either.
It is an interesting theory of his where he tries to align with science.
The publisher is Akhbar AlYom, and its available.
Comment by zoss — 30/8/2005 @ 14:08
Right — we’ve “talked” about this book before, haven’t we?
Comment by Mohamed — 30/8/2005 @ 15:30
Yes.