of Nokounam, , Session 302
The noble verse 65 of Surah Al-Baqarah, like a clear mirror, reflects a part of the history of Bani Israel, in which a group, due to their transgression beyond divine limits on the Sabbath day, faced an unparalleled punishment. This verse, by addressing the themes of "transgression" and "transformation" into apes, poses profound questions in the domains of jurisprudence, theology, and philosophy before scholars. In this work, with a scientific and multidimensional approach, we have analysed two main axes of this verse: firstly, the nature of transgression as either a factual or legal violation, and secondly, the reality of transformation as either a true ontological or a symbolic occurrence. This treatise, employing a lofty language and systematic structure, elucidates the concepts and extracts the implicit lessons within the verse, linking jurisprudence, philosophy, and social issues to offer a novel perspective on this Quranic event. Its objective is to enable scholarly audiences and researchers of Quranic sciences to access the depths of the verses meanings with academic precision.
وَلَقَدْ عَلِمْتُمُ الَّذِينَ اعْتَدَوْا مِنْكُمْ فِي السَّبْتِ فَقُلْنَا لَهُمْ كُونُوا قِرَدَةً خَاسِئِينَ
And indeed, you knew those among you who transgressed on the Sabbath, so We said to them: Be apes, despised.
The noble verse 65 of Surah Al-Baqarah, by referring to "transgression" on the Sabbath, addresses the violation of divine limits by a group among Bani Israel. From a jurisprudential standpoint, the transgression here is a factual violation that leads to disruption of social and legal order, not merely a legal breach burdened with sin and guilt. A factual violation, like a stone thrown into the calm waters of a lake, creates ripples of disorder in society, whereas a legal breach refers primarily to an ethical and hereafter-related sin.
The term "اعتدوا" (transgressed) in the verse signifies exceeding limits and, from both linguistic and jurisprudential perspectives, emphasises violation of rights or order, not sin in the sense of religious guilt. This distinction, like a clear line separating two jurisprudential domains, shows that the verse concerns the social and legal effect of the factual act rather than the burden of sin (legal effect). For example, usurpation in jurisprudence is a factual violation that infringes upon others rights, while sin denotes violation of divine command and consequent hereafter punishment.
The phrase "from among you" in the verse acts as a precise indicator, signifying that the violation was committed only by a particular group of Bani Israel, namely the coastal inhabitants who lived by the sea. This limitation prevents generalising the punishment to the entire nation and emphasises the lesson for the transgressing group.
Surah Al-Araf, verse 163, referring to "the town which was by the sea," provides further details of this transgression:
وَسْئَلْهُمْ عَنِ الْقَرْيَةِ الَّتِي كَانَتْ حَاضِرَةَ الْبَحْرِ إِذْ يَعْدُونَ فِي السَّبْتِ إِذْ تَأْتِيهِمْ حِيتَانُهُمْ يَوْمَ سَبْتِهِمْ شُرَّعًا وَيَوْمَ لَا يَسْبِتُونَ لَا تَأْتِيهِمْ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ نَبْلُوهُمْ بِمَا كَانُوا يَفْسُقُونَ
And ask them about the town by the sea when they transgressed on the Sabbath, when their fish came to them openly on their Sabbath day, but on the day they did not keep the Sabbath, they did not come to them. Thus We tested them because of their disobedience.
This verse clarifies the geographical context (coastal) and the type of transgression (unauthorised fishing on the Sabbath). The transgressors cunningly trapped fish on the Sabbath day, an act that breached divine order.
The transgression in this verse signifies violation of the rights of the fish and exploitation of nature, not theft or infringement of others rights. This violation, like grasping an entrusted divine trust, disrupted the natural order. The fish, surfacing on the Sabbath due to their natural trust, were caught.
From a biological perspective, fish, due to living in aquatic environments, possess lower intelligence compared to terrestrial animals such as mice. This natural limitation rendered them vulnerable to human cunning and facilitated the transgression.
The phrase "because they were disobedient" in Surah Al-Araf refers to social deviation and violation of the Sabbath order, not merely a moral sin. Fasq here, like a branch detached from the tree of order, indicates departure from divine order.
The jurisprudential analysis of verse 65 of Surah Al-Baqarah shows that transgression is a factual violation leading to disruption of social order and natural rights. The distinction between transgression and sin, the limitation of the violation to a particular group, and the details provided in Surah Al-Araf form a clear framework for understanding this verse. This analysis underscores the importance of preserving divine order and avoiding exploitation of nature.
The rulings of previous divine legislations, such as the prohibition of fishing on the Sabbath, differ from the rulings of the Islamic Ummah. An act that constituted sin in the legislation of Bani Israel is not necessarily sinful in Islam. This difference, like a breeze blowing differently across lands, points to the relativity of some rulings across various legislations.
Nawamis rulings, such as marriage or the prohibition of wine, are the firm pillars of religions and are valid in all divine legislations. However, non-nawamis rulings, like the prohibition of fishing on the Sabbath, are specific to each legislation and may change across different legislations.
Marriage is among the nawamis and is accepted in all religions, even if its form differs. Islam recognises the marriage of non-Muslims because this ruling flows like a river across all religions.
From a jurisprudential perspective, marriage does not require a specific formula (Arabic or Persian), and practical agreement (mut) suffices. This view, like a key unlocking a complex lock, emphasises simplification of rulings and avoidance of unnecessary formalities.
The permissibility of wine in Christianity results from distortions incompatible with the original rulings of the Abrahamic religions. This corruption, like dust on the mirror of truth, has led to doctrinal and practical deviations.
Some incorrect traditions, such as the permissibility of wine, have been attributed to religion but originate from the misguidance of the communities. These misguidances, like withered branches, are detached from the essence of religion.
Marriage between close relatives is among the nawamis and is not even observed among animals except in low species. This prohibition, like a sacred sanctuary, contributes to the preservation of moral and biological health of societies.
From psychological and ethical viewpoints, homosexuality is a deviation from natural and religious nawamis that, like a mental illness, disrupts human order.
Stories such as marriage between siblings at the time of Adam lack any foundation and contradict the nawamis. These narrations, like baseless tales, are devoid of reliable evidence.
This section, by differentiating between nawms (sacred laws) and non-nawms injunctions, provided a framework for understanding the distinctions among the rulings of divine laws. Nik (marriage), as a nawms, is recognised across all religions, whereas injunctions such as the prohibition of fishing on the Sabbath are specific to prior divine laws. The critique of distortions and erroneous traditions underscores the necessity of returning to authentic rulings.
The phrase كُونُوا قِرَدَةً خَاسِئِينَ
in the verse refers to the metamorphosis of the transgressors into monkeys. The fundamental question is whether this metamorphosis is a genuine ontological transformation or merely a formal, superficial change. This inquiry, akin to a key unlocking the enigma of divine miracles, requires profound philosophical and theological reflection.
Within traditional philosophy, which rests upon the distinction between essence (quiddity) and existence, a revolution of essence (transforming one entity into another) is deemed impossible. Consequently, the transformation of a human into a monkey poses a significant conceptual problem under this viewpoint.
In traditional philosophy, essence was regarded as primary, and existence was considered a secondary concept. However, in Mulla Sadras philosophy, existence is primary and essence is subordinate. This shift, constituting a revolution in philosophical thought, allowed for reconsideration of previously held concepts.
Modern philosophy entirely negates essence, accepting existence as the sole fundamental reality. Existence is defined at two levels: Haqq (Divine essence) and Khalaq (Divine act). Essence, perceived as a shadow lacking truth, is a false concept.
With the negation of essence, the five universalsspecies, genus, difference, common accident, and specific accidentand the distinction between substance and accident are also nullified. This perspective, akin to breaking chains of thought, liberates the world from intrinsic conceptual confines.
By negating essence, the transformation of any being into anotherincluding a human into a monkeybecomes possible. This potential opens a gateway to the dynamism of the universe, enabling ontological transformations under divine will.
In traditional philosophy, to reconcile with the denial of essence revolution, metamorphosis is justified as a mere formal change (such as alteration in appearance). This justification acts as a veil over the truth, preventing acceptance of a genuine transformation.
The imperative كُونُوا
in the verse is ontological, leading to a real and natural transformation, contrary to legislative commands (such as صلوا
). This imperative reflects the creative power of God within the natural order.
كُونُوا is ontological and refers to actual transformation within creation.The intrinsic nature of the transgressors, characterised by deceit and sophistry, corresponds to the attributes of monkeys (notably cunning behaviour). This correspondence represents a just proportion linking punishment to the transgressors conduct.
God can realise in a moment a transformation that would otherwise take years. This power, like thunder and lightning in the cosmos, shatters temporal limitations.
With the negation of essence-based frameworks, formalistic justifications of metamorphosis are unnecessary, and the verse is interpreted as describing a real transformation. This perspective, like a clear mirror, reflects the truth of the verse without obscurity.
The philosophical and theological analysis of metamorphosis in verse 65 of Surah Al-Baqarah confirms, through the negation of essence-based limitations, the possibility of real transformation of humans into monkeys. Existence-centric modern philosophy, by breaking the chains of traditional philosophy, elucidates divine miracles within a dynamic framework. The correspondence of punishment to the transgressors behaviour underscores divine justice and the instructive purpose of the verse.
Traditional sciences, such as zoology, once taught within religious seminaries, have been removed due to social and economic difficulties. This decline, like extinguishing a lamp in the night, has weakened the comprehensive expertise of religious scholars.
The revival of sciences in seminaries requires collective cooperation and strategic planning, not individual efforts. This necessity resembles constructing a grand edifice, demanding coordination and synergy.
Strict measures, such as prohibiting the use of water in seminaries, stem from psychological and social issues, resulting in illogical restrictions. These strictures, like unnecessary walls, block access to facilities.
Improper treatment of orphans, such as forbidding access to their facilities, undermines their personality and social standing. This behaviour casts a heavy shadow over their spirit.
Formalities such as mandating a turban to enter educational centres stem from self-imposed traditions and limit access to education. These formalities, like needless obstacles, hinder learning.
Islamic religion is broader than such self-imposed strictures and must not be tarnished by needless limitations. This expansiveness, like an endless ocean, manifests flexibility and justice in applying rulings.
The view of the ancients supporting the principle of presumed prohibition (requiring permission for every act) conflicts with the fundamental principle of presumed permissibility (Asalat al-Ibahah). The latter, like a master key, affirms freedom of action in the absence of prohibitive evidence.
Numerous hadiths, such as كل شيء مباح
(everything is permissible), endorse presumed permissibility and assert that prohibition requires evidence. These hadiths, like guiding lights, facilitate understanding of rulings.
Excessive prohibition causes public fatigue and alienation from religion. This excessiveness, like a heavy burden, weighs down society and diminishes the religions acceptance.
Essence-based limitations originated in monarchical systems that promoted intrinsic categories to control society. These regimes acted like invisible chains limiting social dynamism.
Monarchical regimes propagated beliefs such as Rab al-Naw and the swaddling of infants, which stifled creativity and social vitality. These beliefs functioned as barriers against progress.
The belief in Rab al-Naw, such as a supernatural entity lighting a wick, has non-scientific roots and conflicts with natural causes. This belief resembles an outdated myth far removed from reality.
The modern abandonment of swaddling has enhanced childrens dynamism and creativity. This freedom, like wings for flight, supports the growth of childrens personalities.
The vitality and dynamism of children, even at the cost of breaking restrictions, are more valuable than blind obedience. This value, like a shining gem, emphasises freedom and individual growth as priorities.
Aristotelian philosophy, by promoting essence and inherent limitations, contributed to the reinforcement of class systems. This philosophy acted as a conceptual cage limiting scientific and social dynamism.
Hadiths such as السعيد سعيد في بطن أمه
(the happy one is happy in his mothers womb) have monarchical origins and contradict Shiite jurisprudence. These hadiths function as fabricated chains restricting human freedom.
Shiite jurisprudence, by affirming the possibility of transformation even for illegitimate offspring (e.g., achieving the status of Ijtihd), demonstrates human dynamism and potential. This flexibility, like a flowing river, opens paths for progress.
Social frameworks, such as class restrictions