placing in the earth, not about anyone else.(1) For the dialogue between the angels and their Lord was concerning him. They said: Since that is so—and God had declared Ādam innocent of corruption in the earth and shedding blood, and purified him from that—it is known that what was meant thereby was someone other than him among his offspring. Thus, it is established that the successor who works corruption in the earth and sheds blood is someone other than Ādam, and that they are his children who did that, and that the meaning of the succession mentioned by God is merely the succession of one generation of them after another generation, as we have described.
And those who advanced this statement and interpreted the verse according to this Interpretation neglected the proper path of Interpretation. That is because when their Lord said to the angels, "I am placing a successor in the earth," they did not attribute working corruption and shedding blood in their reply to their Lord to His successor in His earth; rather, they said, "Will You place therein one who works corruption therein?" And it is not to be rejected that their Lord informed them that this successor of His would have offspring from whom corruption and bloodshed would issue, so they said: O our Lord, "Will You place therein one who works corruption therein and sheds blood?" Just as Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn ʿAbbās said, along with those among the people of Interpretation whom we have cited.(2)
"Note": It has become clear to me from what I have reviewed of al-Ṭabarī's words that al-Ṭabarī's inference using these reports which he narrates with their chains of transmission is not intended except to verify the meaning of a word or to clarify the context of a phrase. He has cited here the reports which he narrated with their chain of transmission to indicate the meaning of "al-khalīfa", and "al-khilāfa", and how the early exegetes differed regarding the meaning of "al-khalīfa". He made his inference using these reports like the inference of one who uses poetry as evidence for the meaning of a word in the Book of God. This is evident in the paragraph following report number: 605, as he mentioned what was narrated from Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn ʿAbbās, and what was narrated from al-Ḥasan in clarifying the meaning of "al-khalīfa", and he deduced what the words of each of them indicated. Because of this inference, he did not care about the weakness in the chain of transmission that he would not normally accept. The proof of this is that al-Ṭabarī himself said regarding the chain of transmission of report: 465 from Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn ʿAbbās, as has preceded on p. 353: "If that is authentic, and I do not know it to be authentic, since I am doubtful about its chain of transmission..." Thus, despite his doubt regarding this chain of transmission, he cited the report solely to indicate the meaning of the word, according to what Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn ʿAbbās understood—if it is authentic from them—or what the early narrators understood of its meaning. This is an acceptable methodology in inference. Similar to it also is what he cites of reports and traditions whose weakness he does not doubt, or their being from the Isrāʾīliyyāt; he did not cite them to be dominant over the Tafsir of the verses of the noble Revelation, but rather he cites very lengthy reports to clarify the meaning of a word or the context of an event, even if the report itself is not something by which proof is established in religion, nor in the complete Tafsir of the verses of the Book of God.
Thus, al-Ṭabarī's inference using what the deniers reject was nothing but a deduction of the meanings indicated by the words of this noble Book, just as meanings are deduced using poetry. It is, therefore, an inference that is almost linguistic. And since it is not considered objectionable to use poetry as evidence even if its speaker lied, as long as its language is correct; it is not objectionable to cite reports that the scholars of hadith do not accept, and by which proof is not established in religion, to indicate the meaning understood from the explicit wording of the Qurʾān, and how the early generations understood it—whether they were from the Companions or those after them.
This translation was produced with AI assistance and is part of an ongoing human-review process. Found a mistake? Use the feedback option in the reader menu.
I hope that this will be a note that benefits the reader of al-Ṭabarī's book, whenever he comes across something that the scholars of the science of hadith consider to be singular and rejected. My brother, al-Sayyid Aḥmad Shākir, did not fall short in clarifying the grade of al-Ṭabarī's narrators according to the scholars of narrator evaluation, and in this is sufficiency for whoever wants to know the knowledge of the early scholars properly, and all praise is due to God, first and last.
