The tenth and the last verse among the verses under discussion presents a unique idea about natural Tawhid that is not found any where else in the Qura’n. What is the meaning and purpose of this verse? Since this is a complex issue the Ulema, commentators, orators, and the traditionalists have discussed it at length. We present the various view points after explaining the verse briefly.

God says’ “When your Lord brought from the loins of the children of Adam their descendents, and made them bear witness upon their own selves, saying, “Am I not your Lord?” They replied: “Yes, indeed! We do bear witness.” They all answered simultaneously, “Yes, indeed! We do bear witness.” He further says, “(This we did) lest you should say on the Day of Judgment, “Verily we were unaware of this. (Tawhid)”that they should not take the excuse of imitation instead of agreeing to their negligence so they may not be able to say that their forefathers were polytheists (and we being their progeny have no recourse but to follow them. Will we the innocent be punished for their sins. In verse 173 of Surah A’raf it says, “ Or lest you should say that it was your fathers afore time who took others ass partners in worship along with God, and we were merely descendents after them; Will you then destroy us because of the deeds of men who practiced evil, invoking and worshiping others?”

This verse briefly uncovers a series of truth:

1. Once God revealed all the children of Adam till the judgment Day

2. God made them the witness of their souls and made them agree to His Godship.

3. The purpose of this covenant was, 1. That the idolaters should be able to take recourse to ignorance as an excuse and should be able to make the imitation of their forefathers a proof of their innocence.

The question is when did this exhibition of the progeny of Adam take place and in what manner? What is meant by the spiritual world? How has it been discovered?

There are six interpretations about this spiritual word and the verses mentioned above.

1. The Way of the Traditionalists and the Wise.

According to some narratives they believe that the progeny of Adam till Doomsday came out of his back like atoms and spread in the sky; they did have intelligence and awareness and they could speak. God addressed them and said, “Am I not you Lord?” and they unanimously replied, “Yes!” This is the way God took the covenant from mankind making them the witness against their souls. (1)

2. The Pre-existent World. (Pre-natal world)

The spiritual world has been explained as the seeds containing human germs or the semen ejaculated into the wombs of the mothers from the fathers and it went through stages to finally emerge as a human child. God has instilled in them at that stage the realization of His Oneness and His laws. It is as if the natural recognition of the Oneness of God has been instilled into them

This commentary has been recorded by a group of commentators such as those authors of Tafsir Al Minar and Fi Zalal Qura’n but some others too have copied it.(2)

According to this view “Spiritual world” is the “World of birth” and the questions and answers are through that state of being and not through words and tongue. This proof exists in the Arab as well as non-Arab writings and Sayyid Murtaza has quoted from some scholars, “Ask the earth who has created your rivers, who has planted the trees and selected the fruits. If the earth cannot answer you in words it will answer you tacitly. This is in accordance to the statements made by the commentators who have praised the beings generally including even those that seem dead.

3. The realm of “Dhurr” or Pre-existent world means the spiritual world.

God created the souls before the bodies and addressed them and took the covenant of His Oneness from them. This explanation has been taken from some traditions and we will discuss it later.

The point to note that the word “Dhurr” is the origin of the word “Dhurriya” which means the small particles of dust or the components of the semen or its origin may be from”Dhuru” which means to be dispersed or the word “Dhurra” which means creation or birth. We should not suppose that the origin of “Dhurriya” is from “Dhurr’ only which means small particles or elements. (Reflect)

4. The Questions and answers through the Apostles.

This question and answer between man and God was done through the apostles was done verbally because after birth a group of people heard about the perfection of the mind, and the proof of the Oneness of God from them and answered in the affirmative.

It does not seem correct if we say that “Dhurriyat’ is from “Dhurr” which means small particles but the supporters of this view say that “Dhurriyat” mean sons whether they are big or small. The word “Dhurriyat” has often been used to denote adult and intelligent people in the Qura’n so this interpretation is not correct.

Sayyid Murtaza has mentioned this explanation as one of the arguments about this verse and so have Abul Fatuh Razi and Fakhruddin Razi (3)

5. This Question and Answer was done tacitly.

This question and answer was done tacitly after the human soul had attained maturity and intelligence because after reaching this stage of intelligence when the humans observed the glory of God they readily admitted the Oneness of God. It is as if God asked them “Am I not your Lord?’ only after showing His signs and they answered tacitly “Yes”. There are many proof of this admission being verbal. This has been narrated by Allama Tabrisi in Tibiyan from Balkhi and Rummani. (4)

6. The Explanation in Tafsir Al Mizan.

Explaining this verse Allama Tabatabai in his Tafsir Al Mizan has quoted that it seems impossible that human beings before their material birth existed having both intelligence and awareness. And that God made a covenant with them and returned them to their original form so that they go through the natural process of human birth to come to this world. He quotes Surah Yasin verses 82-83 that say, “Verily His command when He intends something is only that he says to it, “Be” and it becomes. (83) Glorified is He exalted above all that they associate with Him, and in whose hands is the dominion of all things, and to Him you shall be returned.” And Surah Qamar verse 50 that says, “And Our command is but one, as the twinkling of the eye”

It is evident from these verses that there are two conditions of beings in this world, one is the way they enter into this world and the rule for this is that every thing comes into this world after crossing the stages of birth. It is weak in the beginning then gains strength and then returns to God after its death.

The first are those creations and they come into existing as per the direct command of God without passing through the stages described above and Qura’n has termed them as His kingdom or the manifest universe. The second is the being that is spread but unites and develops while passing through different stages.

We learn from this arrangement that there exists a world of humans before this world and mankind there is able to witness the glory of God in its soul and then agrees to His Oneness. The Allama then says that if we ponder on these verses we will learn that they refer to this meaning and purpose.

Though the five commentaries explain these verses and their meanings we will it pertinent to debate and discuss them a little.

The First Interpretation

Many philosophers have declared the first premise recorded by Allama Majlisi in Maratol A’qul to be weak and have raised doubts about it. Allama Tabrisi has criticized in Majmaul Bayan and Sayyid Murtaza in one of his treatise. Fakhr Razi has raised twelve objections about it in his commentary. Some of the objections are not worth the attention, some are repetitive and some can be merged but when we scan them, five objections seem relevant.

A. The use of the plural form for the beings refers to the progeny of Hazrat Adam. It is not about Adam himself because the word “Zuhur” is the plural of “Zahar’ which means the back is not compatible with it. In short, the verse tells us that the progeny of the sons of Adam was exhibited but it does not say that the progeny of Adam was exhibited from his back even though the traditions do relate that it was the progeny of Adam that was exhibited.

B. If such a covenant has been taken in a world before this world then how is it that everyone has forgotten about it? This forgetfulness is the proof of it not happening because from the verses of the Qura’n it is evident that mankind will remember his deeds in this world. Is the distance between this world and the pre-natal world greater than the distance of the hereafter?

C. If we accept the premise that a general amnesia is possible then what is the use of such a covenant? This covenant can have desired consequences only if the people remember

 But a covenant that they have forgotten has no value even as a closing argument.

D. It is evident from verse 11 of Surah Mumin which says, “They will say, “Lord you have made us die twice and you have given us life twice” that there are two deaths and two lives for mankind. They were dead at first then became alive, they will die and then be alive on the Day of Judgment but according to this interpretation we will have to accept the view of more than two deaths and lives, one life and death in the pre-natal world, the two lives and two deaths in this world.

E. If we accept this interpretation then we should agree about trans-migration or the soul being transferred from body to another because this is what it is the passage through different bodies. According to this view the soul was first connect to the particles that were manifest from the back of Adam and then it was connected to the present body. This transfer is “Tanasukh” (trans-migration) and this is negated by the religion of Islam. Period. This is the reason Sheikh Mufid in his book Jawab Almasail Alsarwiya while dealing with this interpretation has mentioned it to be the view of those who believe in a sort of reincarnation and they have mixed the falsehood with the truth.(5)

Such a statement is also recorded in the work of leader of the commentators Allama Tabrisi. (6)

The Second Interpretation

It is now said that mankind has been endowed with the habit of recognizing God and His oneness. This interpretation has fewer doubts. The most important objection can be that from the discussion on this verse it is discerned that the question and answer is in words and not tacitly (which can be termed as similarity) the word “Akhaza” proves that this was done in an earlier time though the natural recognition of Tawhid is connected with birth and has been continuous in every age.

These two questions can however be answered:

As per the arrangement this question and answer can be attributed to a silent assent and there is no objection about it because there are various examples of this in the poetry and prose of both the Arabs and the non-Arabs. As far as “Istimrar” is concerned it is often used in the past tense but of course it needs an arrangement and this arrangement is present in this discussion. (7)

The Third Interpretation

This speaks of the question and answer with the souls but this does not seem agreeable with the words of the verse because it speaks of extracting the progeny from the backs of the progeny of Adam to be questioned. There is no connection with the souls.

The Fourth Interpretation: The question and answer was done in lingual words and is connected with that group of people who answered in the affirmative after reaching maturity to the call of the apostles. There are many doubts raised about this interpretation. The verse speaks about the entire mankind and not a group of people who believed in the apostles and then reneged and the question and answer is from God and not the apostles.

Some people say that the verse “Our fathers were already polytheists” proves that this belongs to a group of people whose forefathers were idolaters. This idea is incorrect because the verse mentions to excuses. One is the negligence and the second is blind adherence. It is possible that each excuse belongs to a separate group specially so when they have been joined together with the word “Au”.

The Fifth Interpretation

This interpretation in many ways is similar to the second interpretation with the slight difference that in the first it is about the natural inclination of the heart and here it is about the natural inclination of the intellect. We have already mentioned that many commentators have accepted this view.

The Sixth Interpretation

This view is recorded in Tafsir Al Mizan and has two major doubts about it:

1. There is no valid proof about the entire world and the detailed world.

2. It will be very far fetched to connect this verse to such a world (even if is proven) and the main premise itself seem in jeopardy, there fore the issue of question and answer too becomes invalidated.

1. Allama Majlisi has written in the exposition of Usul Kafi called Sharah Maratol A’qul page 28 of volume 7 : “ this is the way of the traditionalists and the purists they say, “ Our belief is based on the manifest and we do not think more about it nor do we try to explain it “. Fakhr Razi has attributed these words to the Traditionalists and the commentators on page 46 of vol.15 of Tafsir Kabeer.

2. Tafsir Al Minar Vol.9 Page 387 and Tafsir Fi Zalal Al Qura’n Vol.3 Page 671

3. Tafsir Ruhul Jinan Vol.5 Page 326

4. Tafsir Tibiyan Volo.5 Page 27 (Tafsir Al Minar vol.9 page 386 also has the same meaning.)

5. Maratol Aquul vol.7 page 41

6. Tafsir Majmaul Bayan vol.4 page 497

7.This interpretation can be seen in verse 44 of Surah Fatir, Verse 51 of Surah Shura and Verses 11 and 19 of Surah Fath.