sons of Adam

The narrative of the two sons of Adam (a) : reason versus dominance

Abstract:

This article aims to analyse the narrative of the two sons of Adam (a) as reported in the Noble Quran. It argues that Adam’s son Abel represents the reason and Adam’s son Cain represents the dominant nature of mankind. It also analyses the Quranic conclusion of the outcome of the contest between the two sons and its consequence for society and mankind.

Introduction

The narrative of the two sons of Adam (a) is mentioned in the Noble Quran, Surat Al-Mā’idah (5:27-32):

“And recite to them with truth the narrative of the two sons of Adam, when they each offered a sacrifice, and it was accepted from one of them and it was not accepted from the other. He said [the latter]: I will surely kill you. He Said [the former]: Surely Allah only accepts of the pious. 27

If you should raise your hand against me to kill me, I shall not raise my hand against you to kill you. Indeed, I fear Allah, Lord of the worlds. 28

I intend to let you draw my sin on yourself as well as yours and become one of the dwellers of the Fire. That is the recompense of unjust-doers. 29

But his [the latter] self [essence] facilitated to him the killing of his brother, so he killed him and became one of the losers. 30

Then Allah sent a raven scratching up the ground, to show him how to hide the shame of his brother. He said, “O woe to me! Have I failed to be like this raven and hide the shame of my brother?” And he became of the regretful. 31

Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whosoever kills a person unless it be for murder or for spreading corruption in the earth, it is as if he had killed mankind entirely, And whoever saves one person, it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs, but afterwards lo! Many of them became prodigals in the earth.” 32

The narrative concerns the sons of Adam (a), Abel and Cain. They contested each other by offering a sacrifice to Allah, and only the sacrifice of Abel was accepted, so Cain killed Abel. The reason behind the contest is thought to be that Adam AS chose Abel to be his successor despite him being the younger brother (Al-Tabtabaie, 1972).The explanation of the vocabulary and sentences of those verses is accessible in many books of tafsir (Arabic, meaning: interpretation [of Quran]); of exceptional importance is the tafsir of Al-Mizānby Sayed Muhammad Hussein Al-Tabtabaie (1904-1982).

This article aims to analyse the sequence of the narrative, the documented conversation of the two sons in the Quran (Quran 5:27-31), and the Quranic conclusion as a result of this narrative (Quran 5:32). It highlights the recurring conflict of mankind between reason and dominant nature, and focuses on the guidance of Allah to mankind through the judgements regarding killing and life giving.

Dominance of Cain

The logical levels theory (Dilts, 2014) can be used to analyse human behaviour. It suggests that human behaviour is affected by environment and is a reflection of human capabilities, values and beliefs. Analysing Cain’s behaviour from this perspective suggests that Cain’s paramount value is of a materialistic dominant nature and his belief in his father’s judgement and consequently in his father’s prophecy is doubtful. There are several arguments to support this notion.

The first argument is seen in Cain’s opposition to his father’s judgement and in claiming that he is the older brother and therefore has to be the successor. This argument indicates that Cain does not trust his father’s decision, and he employed a biologic criterion, which is of materialistic nature, to achieve his aim of dominance.

The second argument suggesting Cain’s materialistic dominant thinking is his turning to material violence to win the contest, saying with confidence, “I will surely kill you” (Quran 5:27), which suggests that he was the stronger physically, and indicates that Cain succumbed to the tendency of physically stronger human beings to dominate physically weaker people. The Quran is full of examples of this dominant behaviour; for instance "Said the eminent ones [dominant] who were arrogant among his people to those who were oppressed, to those who believed among them,” (Quran 7:75), “So as for he who transgressed” (Quran 79:37), and “Go, both of you, to Pharaoh. Indeed, he has transgressed” (Quran 20:43). This tendency of dominance has accompanied the history of mankind until today. The stronger overtake the weaker, regardless of reason and righteous deed towards the society of mankind. Nevertheless, the core message of all prophets is to change that; “And We desired to show favour unto those who were oppressed in the earth, and to make them leaders and to make them the inheritors” (Quran 28:5).

The third argument, or counter-argument, is against what has been mentioned in some books of tafsir, that the sacrifice of Cain was of less material quality than the sacrifice of Abel and it suggests that this might be the reason for non-acceptance (Ibn Kathir, 2002). However, looking closely at the verses of the narrative, we see that Allah has mentioned both sacrifices in one ambiguous term as “a sacrifice” (Arabic qurbān), which could indicate the similarity of the sacrifice in terms of material quality, or the unimportance of the nature of these sacrifices, in comparison to other sacrifices mentioned in other verses; “And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice” (Quran 37:107), where an adjective “great” is used to describe the significance of the sacrifice. In addition, Cain has offered his sacrifice aiming that his materialistic opinion than it is illogical that Cain would offer a sacrifice of less material quality, since he was aiming to win what he thought to be a materialistic contest. In supporting argument is the saying of Abel; “Surely Allah only accepts of the pious” (Quran 5:27), which means that the criterion that Allah quoted and approved (by not contradicting it), was that it was the actual piety towards Allah which mattered and not the material quality of the sacrifice.

The final argument concerning Cain’s materialistic thinking is concluded from the verse “Then Allah sent a raven” (Quran 5:31), which tells us that Allah sent a raven to teach Cain to hide his brother’s body. This proves that Cain was learning from the observation of his environment and from the materialistic experience and not using his reason. He failed to understand the abstract teaching of his father and brother about the pious and reason, and didn’t realise his incapability until seeing the raven’s behaviour, than he did regret what happen; “And he became of the regretful” (Quran 5:31).

Reason of Abel

Abel, on the contrary, was full of faith in his father’s prophecy and obedience to the will of Allah, and this is why his sacrifice was accepted. “Surely Allah only accepts of the pious” (Quran 5:27). Abel has placed reason in the first place from the beginning. There are several arguments which support this notion.

Firstly, when Cain threatened Abel saying, “I will surely kill you” (Quran 5:27), Abel responded byshowing his brother the path to win alongside himself by explaining the reason why his sacrifice was accepted; “Surely Allah only accepts of the pious” (Quran 5:27). Abel did not keep this knowledge to himself and wanted his brother to win alongside him, because he was true successor of his father in wanting reason to help all mankind.

Secondly, in the next verse, Abel expanded his explanation to his brother regarding the disadvantages of following the dominant nature. He explained that he would not have initiated such material, threatening, “I shall not raise my hand against you to kill you” (Quran 5:28), because this is against the prophecy of their father and against the reason that humans were blessed with from Allah. Any decline of this principle would cause remoteness from the path to Allah; “Indeed, I fear Allah, Lord of the worlds” (Quran 5:28).

Thirdly, Abel has warned Cain about bearing the sin of violence. Divergence exists in the books of tafsir concerning determining the sin of Abel; “I intend to let you draw my sin” (Quran 5:29). Al-Tabtabaie inclined to the explanation that the killer bears the sin of the person he killed, from the perspective of the “practical reason” which has to do with society’s relationships and rules; for instance the killer has to pay all the debts of the killed, but not from the point of view of the “theoretical reason” with regard to the sins of Judgement Day, because “and no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another” (Quran 39:7) (Al-Tabtabaie, 1972). However, if we analyse this verse from the perspective of use of material dominance to sort out differences, Cain initiated the conflict and this is against Allah’s willing and Abel’s belief. But for Abel to defend himself, he has to use the same material dominant means after the failure of the use of reason to persuade and deter his brother. This use of material dominance was regarded by Abel as a sin, which means a diversion from Allah’s guidance to mankind to use reason. Abel believed that using such sin to defend himself, would not bear the Judgement Day consequence of such as it was a result of Cain’s action; “Fighting may be imposed on you, even though you dislike it” (Quran 2:216).

In summary, Abel advised his brother of the righteous way to win, discouraged him from using material dominance, explained that he would not have used such method against him, and that should he initiate that, he would bear the sin of using such a method. Still, Cain attacked Abel and killed him by succumbing to his dominant nature “But his [the latter] self [essence] facilitated to him the killing of his brother, so he killed him and became one of the losers” (Quran 5:30). Cain, as a result was not a real winner; he was instead a loser in this world because he lost a loving, supporting and advising brother and he is loser on Judgement Day because of the consequence of such a huge sin, which distances mankind from Allah, because Allah is beneficent and“Allah loves the doers of good” (Quran 2:195).

Conclusion of the narrative

The last verse; “Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whosoever kill a person unless it be for murder or for spreading corruption in the earth, it is as if he had killed all mankind” (Quran 5:32) forms the concluding wisdom of the narrative of the two sons of Adam.

Firstly, it is important to clarify the use of term “the Children of Israel,” since it has a moral lesson that would also benefit Muslims. It is very prestigious and glorious if Allah calls you a name that relates you to one of his prophets, since Israel AS is the other name of the prophet Jacob AS, but still Allah blamed the “Children of Israel” for misbehaving and misconduct. This use of terminology constitutes a great lesson for all Muslims, whose name indicates their belonging to Islam (in Arabic the word ‘Muslim’ means a person who has accepted Islam). This clarifies that being named as belonging to Allah’s messenger (Israel) or to Allah’s message (Islam) does not protect you from misbehaving and misconduct in the eyes of Allah. Everyone is judged by his deeds, rather than by his name or genealogy. The example of those who were entrusted with the Noble Quran and then did not take it on are like “The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah and then did not take it on” (Quran 62:5) and they are like “that of a donkey who carries volumes [of books]” (Quran 62:5). It seems that all verses where “Children of Israel” are mentioned are directed toward Muslims, so they learn from these lessons, and don’t become like them “but afterwards lo! Many of them became prodigals in the earth” (Quran 5:32).

Secondly, the declaration that “whosoever kills a person unless it be for murder or for spreading corruption in the earth, it is as if he had killed all mankind” (Quran 5:32) forms a fundamental constitution to all mankind, by forbidding the assault of any human being on another for the benefit of dominance, at the cost that this assault is considered to be an assault towards all mankind. It is a huge rebuff against such behaviour .If the all killers on the Earth, Muslims or not, thought for a second about this divine appeal, the situation of mankind would not be as it is today.

Thirdly, the next sentence of this verse; “And whoever saves one person, it is as if he had saved mankind entirely” (Quran 5:32) completes the magnificence and glorious beauty and perfection of the words of the Quran and mercifulness of Allah. Saving just one person is like saving all mankind; this is the end message of the merciful Allah to mankind. All prophets came with this message; “And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs” (Quran 5:32). It is in the hands of human beings to follow this proof and this reason for the benefit of humanity, or to follow the nature of dominance and “become prodigals in the earth” (Quran 5:32).

References

• THE NOBEL QURAN.(Online available from:www.holyquran.net and www.quran.com)

• AL-TABTABAIE, MUHAMMAD HUSSEIN (1972) ‘Al-Mizān’(Online available from: http://www.narjes-library.com/2012/05/blog-post_4954.html)

• DILTS, ROBERT (2014) ‘A Brief History of Logical Levels’ (Online available from: http://www.nlpu.com/Articles/LevelsSummary.htm).

• IBN KATHIR, ISMAIL (2002) ‘Tafsir Ibn Kathir’(Online available from: http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/bookslist.php)