Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. Iblys and his Seed

Iblys and his Seed

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
113 Posts 14 Posters 3.6k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Z Offline
    Z Offline
    Zulf
    wrote on last edited by
    #41

    True or not true, it works.

    It would make much more sense than humanity being cast out just for eating an apple (or approaching a tree...). If it was only about breaking a promise, then I cannot see the whole point of the tree. But on the other hand, I cannot see why the tree is not explained in the Quran (as far as I'm currently aware).

    Peace

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • H Offline
      H Offline
      hicham9
      wrote on last edited by
      #42

      Thank you for sharing your view @Zulf!

      ~ Be sound

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • H Offline
        H Offline
        huruf
        wrote on last edited by
        #43

        True or not true, it works.

        It would make much more sense than humanity being cast out just for eating an apple (or approaching a tree...). If it was only about breaking a promise, then I cannot see the whole point of the tree. But on the other hand, I cannot see why the tree is not explained in the Quran (as far as I'm currently aware).

        Peace

        May be the "tree" is not a tree. One has to go to the root of the words.

        Salaam

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • M Offline
          M Offline
          Man_of_Faith
          wrote on last edited by
          #44

          The "tree" could be several other words such as dispute, controversy, avert, turn aside. I doubt attaching to it would make such a dramatic difference.

          Salaam

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • H Offline
            H Offline
            hawk99
            wrote on last edited by
            #45

            Peace,

            Allah's creation of this universe is truly stupendous and beyond comprehension
            so metaphors will have to suffice.

            As we can see free will precedes consciousness.

            We said, "O Adam, live with your wife in Paradise, and eat therefrom generously,
            as you please, but do not approach this tree, lest you sin."

            The tree represents consciousness.

            He thus duped them with lies. As soon as they tasted the tree, their bodies became
            visible to them, and they tried to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise. Their Lord
            called upon them "Did I not enjoin you from that tree, and warn you that the devil is your
            most ardent enemy?"

            After approaching the tree they became aware of their bodies and began to cover themselves.

            God bless

            peace

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • H Offline
              H Offline
              hicham9
              wrote on last edited by
              #46

              Grettings @huruf, @MOF and @hawk99,

              Thank you for contributing to the discussion, ye have made some good observations.

              N.b. In the Qurnic Sura 1850, the descendants of Adem (us included) are accused of/blamed for taking Iblys and its seed as "allies" (&#1575 beside G-D! In all seriousness, I don't see a better explanation than the tree of vices! Still, if anyone here has some additional knowledge regarding this, or a different theory alltogether, I am interested to hear it. Its good to compare and calibrate our understandings/theories while keeping an open mind ~ The quest (for truth) continues.

              Ps @hawk, isn't free will an aspect of our form of consciousness?
              Perhaps you meant to say that Adem's incorporeal consciousness preceded the corporeal Adem (in time/existence)?

              SLM

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • U Offline
                U Offline
                unknownuser
                wrote on last edited by
                #47

                How can iblis who was made from smokeless fire suffers in fire when he is made of fire? The same way we human beings are made of clay being buried in clay.

                This is of course off-topic but slightly related.

                The hell and its fire and heaven too for that matter maybe figurative. So the most painful thing for you may not be the same thing for someone else. Like wise the idea of heaven maybe different for everyone, because every soul has its own desires. So it does not matter what you are made of, hell fire is another way to say the very worst, painful element to a soul. In contrast, heaven is not necessarily gardens underneath which rivers flow, but maybe different for every soul.

                Allah knows best.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • H Offline
                  H Offline
                  hicham9
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #48

                  He thus duped them with lies. As soon as they tasted the tree, their bodies became
                  visible to them, and they tried to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise. Their Lord
                  called upon them "Did I not enjoin you from that tree, and warn you that the devil is your
                  most ardent enemy?"

                  After approaching the tree they became aware of their bodies and began to cover themselves.

                  I'm aware that swh can mean body, or corpse (as in 531), ...
                  but, in context (of 722), I think it denotes the private parts..

                  In 720, we learn that only a portion of their bodies was concealed from them!

                  Notice how, hereupon, Our Master directs the focus/attention towards the 'offspring/descendants' of Adem (in 726)!

                  ... Is it Sexuality!?
                  = the means of reproduction!

                  Cf. 7189-190!

                  SLM

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • H Offline
                    H Offline
                    hawk99
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #49

                    Peace hicham9,

                    Thank you for reading my post.

                    I'm aware that swh can mean body, or corpse (as in 531), ...
                    but, in context (of 722), I think it denotes the 'private parts'.

                    I agree that privates parts is correct, but the point is they were finally aware
                    of their private parts being uncovered. This is the gist of the matter,
                    and why I consider consciousness after free will. Much like a child has
                    free will but as he/she grows they become conscious of their actions.
                    Our parents had the free will to obey/disobey shaytayn but chose to obey,
                    and later became conscious (exposed private parts) of what they had done.
                    This is why I consider the tree to be the "Tree of consciousness"

                    God bless

                    peace

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • H Offline
                      H Offline
                      hicham9
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #50

                      ... Is it Sexuality!?

                      ie. the fruit they ate!


                      Viz. Adem and his mate donning the leaves together was to cover their private parts from each other!

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • H Offline
                        H Offline
                        hicham9
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #51

                        ... Is it Sexuality!?

                        The pernicious seed/fruit that our primeval Ancestors ate from the proscribed tree seems to have been none other than Lust/Luxuria, a cardinal vice! If true, it should follow that our Sexuality (=the medium of reproduction) is actually the after-effect of our Ancestors disobeying G-D! Thus, no wonder there is no mention of Adem's descendants in the Garden ... !

                        ~ Nostalgic, huh?

                        Adem and his mate donning the leaves together was to cover their (shameful) private parts from each other!

                        This seems to have been the first time our kind experienced the (negative) emotion of 'shame'.

                        The strong association of shame with one's genitals and/or sexuality is no "coincidence"! ... Even in our (quotidian) language/s, shame is associated with the genitalia referring to them as the privates like anything negative to be ashamed of or kept private.


                        Ps. According to (clinical psychologist) Gershen Kaufman Sexual disorders and many eating disorders are largely disorders of shame.

                        SLM

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • H Offline
                          H Offline
                          huruf
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #52

                          A Moroccan friend quite knowledgeable with the Qur'an and the Arabic in it the tree would not be a vegetal tree but a linneage tree.

                          So when speaking about trees in the garden in this particular it would be speaking about linneage trees. Interbreed with all, but not with this.

                          Only that one. Why should be that tree about sex, and not the others? No. All are about the same thing. What if there were in the garden different linneages and adam and partner were warned about a particular linneage, and not interbreed with that one.

                          It is explicitly about the beginning of our species. There have been many different species of "homos" before the homo sapiens became the only surviving one. Might that forbidden tree not be about a linneage of "homo" with no future or which might be too difficult to procreate with and therefore would have beeen a dead end for the human species we have now and therefore were advised to not interbreed with it?

                          But after Ibliis came to them with his sweet speech and convinced that it sould not be that bad, even more, that it might be even better and they would live long ages and so on and so forth. They bit the hook and and afterwards they did experience that indeed interbreeding with those was a catastrophe.

                          We look at the events now as if it had been something an incident that hapenned one day, but it may not have been like that but rather something that plaid itself over a stretch of time. After some interbreeding they saw that it was a complete failure and they were ashamed because Ibliis had had them allright. And went back on their idea of interbreeding and tried to cover up for their flop. Tried to cover up for shame of having made such a gross mistake after having been warned in advance.

                          It is known that we are descended of the cro magnon and that till recently it was thought that there was nothing of neanderthal man in our genetical make up, but then as it has turned out we do have a small genetical heretiga of the neanderthals, and I do not know, may be of many other linneages of homos.

                          But there might have been one "tree" which if we had mixed with them would have extinguished our species and we would not have existed. It might even have been the neanderthals with which there was already a mixture , but that if it went further would have aborted the human species. So at some point we could not inerbreed with them any more because there would not be a possiblity of having or keeping alive offspring to procreate new generations.

                          Salaam

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • H Offline
                            H Offline
                            hawk99
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #53

                            The pernicious seed/fruit that our primeval Ancestors ate from the proscribed tree seems to have been none other than Lust/Luxuria, a cardinal vice! If true, it should follow that our ?Sexuality? (=the medium of reproduction) is actually the after-effect of our Ancestors disobeying G-D! Thus, no wonder there is no mention of Adem's descendants in the Garden ... !

                            ~ Nostalgic, huh?

                            This seems to have been the first time our kind experienced the (negative) emotion of 'shame'.

                            The strong association of shame with one's genitals and/or sexuality is no "coincidence"! ... Even in our (quotidian) language/s, shame is associated with the genitalia referring to them as the ?privates? ? like anything negative to be ashamed of or kept private.


                            Ps. According to (clinical psychologist) Gershen Kaufman ?Sexual disorders and many eating disorders are largely disorders of shame.?

                            SLM

                            Peace hicham9, now that you have concluded "vice" to be the forbidden tree,
                            please give context in Quran Kareem. Shame is a good conclusion also. If possible
                            give your explanation of "vice and/or shame" in context regarding 7/20 to 7/28 or other
                            ayats to explain your conclusions.

                            So when speaking about trees in the garden in this particular it would be speaking about linneage trees. Interbreed with all, but not with this.

                            Peace huruf, lineage huh, not bad, how does your analysis fit into the context of the Quran?

                            God bless

                            peace

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • H Offline
                              H Offline
                              huruf
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #54

                              Peace huruf, lineage huh, not bad, how does your analysis fit into the context of the Quran?

                              God bless

                              peace

                              I think it fits all right. May be you can point out where it does not fit in your view and study it further.

                              Salaam

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • U Offline
                                U Offline
                                unknownuser
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #55

                                Salaam,

                                I think we are all missing the point of the story related to us by God. It matters not what the tree was, but the message, which is quite clear When God says "don't do that", then it is better for us to not go near that.

                                "What comes to you of good is from Allah , but what comes to you of evil, is from yourself..." (Quran 479)

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • H Offline
                                  H Offline
                                  hicham9
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #56

                                  SLM @Free minds,

                                  IF Iblys () does not = Hybris () and its seed/s )] are not vices
                                  then, what is Iblys? & what are its seed/s according to you?

                                  ... Lust, Greed, Sloth, Envy, Ire, &c., are actually the 'Seed of Iblys'

                                  The reason why I'm raising this thread again is because I think we're overlooking a Qurnic tree-diagram ~ Iblys being the root/radix; while the descendants (=vices) being the seeds on the branches In my book, this Arbor vitiorum is none other than the (malicious) grh () that G-D cursed in the Qurn (1760) ...

                                  In Srh 72719, qbylh? () means its opposite/antithesis not tribe, or whatnot!

                                  ? from the Arabian, emitic root qbl () ~ to oppose, receive, or appeal to]

                                  According to the Qurn (1527, 5515), it was l-Gn () that G-D apportioned out of a 'mrig' () from 'nr l summ' ( ) ...

                                  ... and since 'hybris' was apportioned from 'nr' () , it therefore belongs to l-Gn () ...

                                  SLM

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • F Offline
                                    F Offline
                                    FreedomStands
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #57

                                    I'm telling you that 'Iblys' is 'Pride' itself!

                                    Is this the mainstream "Quranist" idea? That Iblis was at some point an angel/herald of God? The Qur'an says pretty clearly he was a jinn in species, and never said he was definitely an angel at any point. I was just wondering if this is a common idea here that he was somehow an angel. The Bible also never really says he was an angel.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • R Offline
                                      R Offline
                                      runninglikezebras
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #58

                                      Personally I don't care at all what is mainstream in Quranism. In my opinion Iblis is an angel. I admit Quran does not state this directly but indirectly Iblis with the angels is commanded to sujud to Adam. I find the theory of association by exception very weak.

                                      At first glance it looks self-contradicting to have an angel disobeying Gods command. UNLESS Pride is what Iblis is instructed to.

                                      The phrase "who was of the jinn" refers to Iblis nature (being created from smokeless fire). If Iblis is a jinn how would he have access to heaven?

                                      Peace

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • F Offline
                                        F Offline
                                        FreedomStands
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #59

                                        Personally I don't care at all what is mainstream in Quranism. In my opinion Iblis is an angel. I admit Quran does not state this directly but indirectly Iblis with the angels is commanded to sujud to Adam. I find the theory of association by exception very weak.

                                        On first glance it looks self-contradicting to have an angel disobeying Gods command. UNLESS Pride is what Iblis is instructed to.

                                        The phrase "who was of the jinn" refers to Iblis nature (being created from smokeless fire). If Iblis is a jinn how would he have access to heaven?

                                        Peace

                                        What is heaven? I'm not disagreeing, I'm just curious! I thought the events were taking place where Adam was, an area raised perhaps on the Earth, the jinn are said to be a creation created before mankind out of smokeless fire (plasma), whereas angels are multi limbed beings (perhaps like hindu art potentially, since the word used for "wings" is also used of Musa's hand) which are transformed variously.

                                        Adam didn't appear to be in any supernatural realm but present in the material world. This is similar then to the Bible's account of Adam in the garden of Eden which was on Earth and then cast out of it.

                                        Adam was made viceroy, a King on Earth, whereas the jinn race was older and may have felt that the right belongs to the elder creation and refused to show Adam respect, making the reason essentially racism "I am better than him, I am made of ___ and he is made of ___".

                                        I've heard lots of people say Iblis is an angel though, but the Qur'an specifies at least the jinn is a particular species of material beings made out of what seems to be plasma gas rather than carbon matter like us, who were created before the human race was created.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • M Offline
                                          M Offline
                                          Man_of_Faith
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #60

                                          I do not even consider Ebless a name but part of the language in the passage and the word's root means 'broken'.

                                          Be well

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users