The Children of Adam and the Children of Israel

The story of the conflict between humanity and Satan did not begin when the human being descended to earth. It began earlier, when Iblis declared his position toward Adam, then requested a reprieve and pledged to lie in wait for human beings on the straight path, approaching them from different directions until he led them astray.

Yet the Qur’an reveals to us that leading astray was not confined to the realm of the jinn: just as there is a devil among the jinn, there is a devil among humankind. Here, reflective reading begins to search for the human figure who participated in the project of leading astray, for the name this figure bore, and for the attributes that disclose his reality when the name alone is insufficient.

The First Crime

﴿وَاتْلُ عَلَيْهِمْ نَبَأَ ابْنَيْ آدَمَ بِالْحَقِّ إِذْ قَرَّبَا قُرْبَانًا فَتُقُبِّلَ مِنْ أَحَدِهِمَا وَلَمْ يُتَقَبَّلْ مِنَ الْآخَرِ﴾ (And recite to them in truth the account of Adam’s two sons, when they made an offering, and it was accepted from one of them but was not accepted from the other.) [المائدة: ٢٧]

The matter then reaches the first murder:

﴿فَطَوَّعَتْ لَهُ نَفْسُهُ قَتْلَ أَخِيهِ فَقَتَلَهُ فَأَصْبَحَ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ﴾ (Then his soul made the killing of his brother seem acceptable to him, so he killed him and became one of the losers.) [المائدة: ٣٠]

Then comes the second stage of the crime: concealing its traces.

﴿فَبَعَثَ اللَّهُ غُرَابًا يَبْحَثُ فِي الْأَرْضِ لِيُرِيَهُ كَيْفَ يُوَارِي سَوْءَةَ أَخِيهِ﴾ (Then God sent a raven scratching in the earth to show him how to conceal his brother’s exposed body.) [المائدة: ٣١]

Then comes the verse that opens the door to reflection:

﴿مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَٰلِكَ كَتَبْنَا عَلَىٰ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ أَنَّهُ مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا﴾ (For that reason, We prescribed for the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul, unless for a soul or for corruption in the land, it is as though he has killed all humankind.) [المائدة: ٣٢]

Here the Qur’an places before us a continuous line: the Children of Adam ← the first killing ← the attempt to conceal the crime ← the Children of Israel.

This is where the questioning began: Who are the Children of Israel? Who is the Israel whose name they bore? Does the Qur’an’s transition from the Children of Adam to the Children of Israel after mentioning the first crime carry a significance beyond merely recounting a historical story?

This is a question of reflection, not of transmitted accounts.

Israel before the Children of Israel

The Qur’an does not always mention Israel as a collective; it also mentions him as an individual:

﴿كُلُّ الطَّعَامِ كَانَ حِلًّا لِّبَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ إِلَّا مَا حَرَّمَ إِسْرَائِيلُ عَلَىٰ نَفْسِهِ مِنْ قَبْلِ أَن تُنَزَّلَ التَّوْرَاةُ﴾ (All food was lawful for the Children of Israel except what Israel had forbidden himself before the Torah was sent down.) [آل عمران: ٩٣]

Here Israel appears as an individual, followed by the Children of Israel as a collective. More importantly, Israel’s act occurred before the revelation of the Torah. The Qur’an then says:

﴿قُلْ فَأْتُوا بِالتَّوْرَاةِ فَاتْلُوهَا إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ﴾ (Say: Then bring the Torah and recite it, if you are truthful.) [آل عمران: ٩٣]

Thus, the Qur’an itself places Israel in a period preceding the Torah. The search for Israel therefore becomes not merely an inquiry into a historical name, but an inquiry into a figure who preceded the scripture borne by the Children of Israel.

The Crime Did Not End

If the first killing occurred between Adam’s two sons, the Children of Israel did not stop at knowing about the first crime. The Qur’an describes a long history of violating the covenant, distorting words, concealing what God revealed, and killing messengers.

﴿كُلَّمَا جَاءَهُمْ رَسُولٌ بِمَا لَا تَهْوَىٰ أَنفُسُهُمْ فَرِيقًا كَذَّبُوا وَفَرِيقًا يَقْتُلُونَ﴾ (Whenever a messenger came to them with what their souls did not desire, some they denied and others they would kill.) [المائدة: ٧٠]

The question thus becomes more profound: If the first crime disclosed to human beings the gravity of taking a life, why did killing recur afterward? Why did deviation continue after the revelation of scripture and the covenant? Why did the disclosure of the first crime not become an admonition that brought crime to an end?

The matter is no longer merely an individual’s crime; it has become a method recurring through time.

The Two Misleaders

The Qur’an reveals the existence of devils among humankind and the jinn:

﴿وَكَذَٰلِكَ جَعَلْنَا لِكُلِّ نَبِيٍّ عَدُوًّا شَيَاطِينَ الْإِنسِ وَالْجِنِّ يُوحِي بَعْضُهُمْ إِلَىٰ بَعْضٍ زُخْرُفَ الْقَوْلِ غُرُورًا﴾ (Thus We have appointed for every prophet an enemy: devils among humankind and the jinn, inspiring one another with embellished speech as a deception.) [الأنعام: ١١٢]

There are therefore two parties to the project of leading astray: a devil among the jinn and a devil among humankind. Here, two figures emerge in this reflective reading: Iblis among the jinn and Israel among humankind.

Iblis: The Name and the Attribute

Iblis is the name the Qur’an gives to the figure who disobeyed God’s command in the story of Adam, whereas Satan describes the role he performs. It is Iblis who said:

﴿أَنظِرْنِي إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ يُبْعَثُونَ﴾ (Grant me a reprieve until the day they are resurrected.) [الأعراف: ١٤]

He was answered: ﴿إِنَّكَ مِنَ الْمُنظَرِينَ﴾ (You are indeed among those granted a reprieve.) | الأعراف: ١٥

He then declared his mission:

﴿لَأَقْعُدَنَّ لَهُمْ صِرَاطَكَ الْمُسْتَقِيمَ﴾ (I will surely lie in wait for them on Your straight path.) [الأعراف: ١٦]

It is an ongoing project: enticement into error ← going astray ← leading astray ← distancing human beings from the path. Satan thus becomes a description of this figure and his role in the project.

Al-taghut, meanwhile, belongs to the same system of leading astray, in which the Qur’an mentions belief in al-jibt and al-taghut, seeking judgment from al-taghut, and fighting in the cause of al-taghut. Accordingly, this reflective reading considers these names as parts of a single system, while retaining the requirement that each name be identified from within the Qur’an.

The Human Misleader

If Iblis represents the unseen party to the project of enticement into error, who is the human party? Here the figure of al-Samiri appears, and the Qur’an does not merely mention him but specifies his function:

﴿فَإِنَّا قَدْ فَتَنَّا قَوْمَكَ مِن بَعْدِكَ وَأَضَلَّهُمُ السَّامِرِيُّ﴾ (We have indeed put your people to the test after your departure, and al-Samiri has led them astray.) [طه: ٨٥]

Al-Samiri did not merely go astray himself; he led a people astray, then fashioned the calf, then said:

﴿هَٰذَا إِلَٰهُكُمْ وَإِلَٰهُ مُوسَىٰ﴾ (This is your god and the god of Moses.) [طه: ٨٨]

Here the signature appears: knowledge ← deviation ← the fabrication of a symbol ← misleading the community ← transforming individual error into collective error. These are the attributes that make the name al-Samiri an object of reflection in the search for Israel.

Israel, al-Samiri, and al-Jibt

Here the hypothesis reaches its core: Israel is the name, al-Samiri is an attribute disclosing the function, and al-jibt is a description belonging to the system of deviation and leading astray.

The issue, then, is not that the Qur’an literally says, “Israel is al-Samiri,” but that the inquiry attempts to discover a single figure who bears the name and appears in the Qur’an with different descriptions and roles.

Just as Iblis is the name, while Satan is the description and the role, the inquiry’s hypothesis states: Israel is the name, while al-Samiri and al-jibt disclose aspects of his attributes and role.

At this point, the comparison must continue until the signature is complete.

The One Who Was Given the Signs, Then Cast Them Off

The Qur’an mentions another figure without naming him:

﴿وَاتْلُ عَلَيْهِمْ نَبَأَ الَّذِي آتَيْنَاهُ آيَاتِنَا فَانْسَلَخَ مِنْهَا فَأَتْبَعَهُ الشَّيْطَانُ فَكَانَ مِنَ الْغَاوِينَ﴾ (And recite to them the account of the one to whom We gave Our signs, but who cast them off; Satan then pursued him, and he became one of those who went astray.) [الأعراف: ١٧٥]

﴿وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَرَفَعْنَاهُ بِهَا وَلَٰكِنَّهُ أَخْلَدَ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاهُ﴾ (Had We willed, We would have elevated him through them, but he clung to the earth and followed his desire.) [الأعراف: ١٧٦]

This figure bears attributes of great importance: he was given the signs ← he knew them ← he cast them off ← he followed Satan ← he became one of those who went astray ← he clung to the earth ← he followed his desire.

Here the two parties to the project meet: Satan entices into error, and the human being casts off the signs and follows him. From here comes the hypothesis that Israel is the human figure who participated with Iblis in the project of going astray and leading astray.

Two Figures on Earth

According to this reflective reading, two parties appear in human history. The first is among the jinn: Iblis, whose description is Satan and whose role is enticement into error and leading astray. The second is among humankind: Israel, whose signature appears through al-Samiri, al-jibt, and the figure who was given the signs, then cast them off and was followed by Satan.

The project thus becomes: Iblis entices into error, and Israel leads astray; the first is among the jinn, the second among humankind, and both work in a single direction: distancing human beings from the way of God.

And Where Do the Children of Israel Stand?

If Israel is the bearer of this signature, then the Children of Israel are the community that bore his name. The Qur’an does not say that all the Children of Israel were alike, but it reveals that many of them violated the covenant, distorted, concealed, denied, and killed.

The relationship can thus be understood within a different framework: Israel is the bearer of the signature, and the Children of Israel are the community that bore the name; some followed the method, while others departed from it. Yet the history presented by the Qur’an reveals that deviation did not cease.

Did the Children of Israel Help Conceal the Truth?

If there is a person bearing this signature, and if the name passed from an individual figure to a community, then preserving the community requires that the original identity remain hidden from public view. Here the concepts of withholding, concealment, and distortion appear in the Qur’an:

﴿يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ قَدْ جَاءَكُمْ رَسُولُنَا يُبَيِّنُ لَكُمْ كَثِيرًا مِّمَّا كُنتُمْ تُخْفُونَ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ﴾ (O People of the Book, Our messenger has come to you, making clear to you much of what you used to conceal of the Book.) [المائدة: ١٥]

﴿فَبِمَا نَقْضِهِم مِّيثَاقَهُمْ … يُحَرِّفُونَ الْكَلِمَ عَن مَّوَاضِعِهِ﴾ (Then, because of their breaking their covenant … they distort words from their proper places.) [المائدة: ١٣]

Here the concept of concealment enters the heart of the inquiry: concealment ← distortion ← shifting the locations of meaning ← the continuation of the narrative. From here, the hypothesis is posed: Did the community of the Children of Israel contribute to keeping Israel’s true identity hidden by distorting the narrative, changing the positions of words, and concealing some of what was in the Book?

If this is established, distortion would not be merely a religious transgression; it would become part of protecting a figure’s identity and perpetuating his project.

Why Was Concealing the Identity Important?

Because knowing the identity changes the meaning of history as a whole. If human beings knew that a single human figure stood behind the chain of leading astray, then saw how his attributes passed among names, narratives, and communities, their reading of history would change.

But if the name becomes detached from the signature, and the signature becomes distributed among different figures, the original figure disappears.

The name remains, and the signature is lost; history remains, and the first crime disappears. This is the essence of the hypothesis.

Why Is the Qur’an the Arbiter?

Because the Qur’an does not ask us to accept a narrative merely because it has been inherited across generations. Rather, it says:

﴿أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ﴾ (Do they not reflect upon the Qur’an?) [النساء: ٨٢]

﴿وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ … وَمُهَيْمِنًا عَلَيْهِ﴾ (And We sent down to you the Book in truth … and as a guardian over it.) [المائدة: ٤٨]

The Qur’an is the criterion. For this reason, the inquiry does not begin with the Torah in order to arrive at the Qur’an; it begins with the Qur’an and then returns to what preceded it to put it to the test. If the narrative agrees with the Qur’an, it is accepted where it agrees. If it differs, judgment belongs to the Qur’an. If we find no definitive judgment in the Qur’an, the matter remains within the domain of reflection and inquiry.

The Greater Disclosure

When we gather the threads—the Children of Adam, then the first crime, then the concealment of the crime, then the Children of Israel, then Israel as an individual, then the breaking of the covenant, distortion, and concealment, then the killing of messengers, then al-Samiri who led his people astray, then the one who was given the signs but cast them off and followed Satan, then al-jibt and al-taghut, then the devils among humankind and the jinn—a single hypothesis emerges before us:

Behind the history of human error stand two parties: one among the jinn, represented by Iblis, and one among humankind, represented by the figure of Israel. The human signature of this project appears in the attributes of al-Samiri, al-jibt, and the figure who was given the signs and then cast them off, while the community that bore Israel’s name became part of the continuation of this signature through history.

According to this conception, the problem lay not in the crime alone, but in concealing its perpetrator and his identity.

The First Crime Was Not Only Killing

The first crime disclosed by the Qur’an may be broader than merely killing a brother. Killing is a crime, but attempting to conceal the crime is another crime; continuing the method after coming to know it is a third crime; and transforming the crime into history, narrative, and collective identity is the most dangerous stage.

The question thus becomes: Was the intention that human beings should forget who began the crime, not merely forget the crime itself?

A human being may remember that killing is forbidden, yet not know where the pattern of killing began. He may know that there is a Satan who leads people astray, yet not search for his human partner. He may know the name Israel, yet not search for the signature the name carries. He may read al-Samiri as a figure from the past without asking: Is al-Samiri the name of a person whose existence ended, or a description of a signature that endured?

Israel across the Age

According to this conception, the figure of Israel is not bound to a single time; rather, the signature extends across time: enticement into error ← misleading ← distortion ← the fabrication of a narrative ← concealing the truth ← the community’s following ← the continuation of the signature. Iblis remains on the other side of the project, and for this reason he says:

﴿لَأَقْعُدَنَّ لَهُمْ صِرَاطَكَ الْمُسْتَقِيمَ﴾ (I will surely lie in wait for them on Your straight path.) [الأعراف: ١٦]

He does not act alone, because the Qur’an itself speaks of devils among humankind and the jinn. Here the human being who casts off the signs and follows Satan becomes part of the same project.

And the Real Fear

If this hypothesis is correct, the most dangerous thing that can happen to human beings is not that they know the crime, but that they know the crime without knowing the bearer of the signature. Knowing the crime prevents its recurrence, whereas concealing its perpetrator makes it capable of being reproduced.

Here we can understand why disclosing identity becomes part of the struggle: not to expose a person in order to take revenge on him, but to expose the model so that it does not continue.

What We Conclude

The story of the Children of Adam opens the door, the Children of Israel broaden the question, and Israel as an individual brings the question back to one person. Al-Samiri reveals the model of the human being who leads a community astray; the one who was given the signs and then cast them off reveals the human being who abandoned the signs and followed Satan; al-jibt and al-taghut appear within the system of deviation; and Iblis remains the other party to the project of going astray.

Among these threads, a conception emerges: two work to lead human beings astray. One is among the jinn: Iblis, whom the Qur’an describes as Satan. The other is among humankind: Israel, whose attributes are disclosed in this reflective reading through al-Samiri, al-jibt, and the figure who was given the signs but cast them off and was followed by Satan.

Between them stand the Children of Israel: a community bearing Israel’s name, in whose history appear forms of distortion, covenant-breaking, concealment of the truth, opposition to the messengers, and the killing of some of them.

From here, disclosing the first crime becomes not the end of the inquiry but its beginning. The Qur’an did not recount the story of Adam’s two sons merely to tell us that a human being killed his brother; it left us a question: Where did the signature begin? It then moved us to the Children of Israel, from the Children of Israel to Israel, from Israel to al-Samiri, al-jibt, and the figure who cast off the signs, and from that figure to Iblis, Satan, and the devils among humankind and the jinn.

The arbiter remains the Qur’an. If the Qur’an establishes the identification, it is established; if it reveals a difference, the identification falls; and if it leaves the matter unresolved, it remains an open reflective inquiry.

But after this course of inquiry, the question is no longer: Who is Israel according to the transmitted accounts? Rather, it is: Who is Israel as the Qur’an reveals him? Here the real inquiry begins.

When the Name Returned, the Signature Appeared

If the Qur’an disclosed the thread of the crime from the outset, and the perpetrator’s identity was then concealed throughout history, deception is complete only when the agent’s true name is hidden and the story is then rewritten so that the name is attributed to someone other than its bearer.

From here, the choice of the name “Israel” for a state established in Palestine thousands of years later becomes a question that cannot be passed over: Why Israel? Why was the name Jacob not revived?

Along this course of inquiry, the matter does not appear to be merely the revival of a historical name, but the return of the name that history concealed from the first crime. If Jacob, in the Qur’anic portrayal, is the patient and discerning figure who is not taken in by a false narrative, then “Israel,” in the signature disclosed by this reflective reading, is connected to another trajectory: killing, leading astray, displacement, and concealing the truth.

Here Palestine becomes the final moment of testing. After thousands of years, the name Israel returned to political existence, and with it returned—according to this reading—the conduct disclosed by the Qur’anic signature: killing human beings and displacing them from their land, under different designations, until killing and displacement became defining features inseparable from the name in contemporary reality.

Thus the question is not: Why did they choose the name Israel? It becomes the more dangerous question: Did the name return because the true identity had not disappeared, but had merely been concealed?

If the Qur’an disclosed the signature and history then failed to disclose its bearer, the reappearance of the name at the end of time becomes an inevitable consequence of the ancient deception: the crime was concealed and the signature remained; the identity was concealed and the name remained; and when the name reappeared, the signature appeared once again.

Here the great paradox emerges: the Qur’an had been before Muslims for centuries, yet it was abandoned as a book to be reflected upon, tested, and read in relation to its own parts. Had the Qur’an been understood, had the verses been read in their context, and had questions been asked about the reason for the transition from the Children of Adam to the Children of Israel, about the meaning of Israel as an individual, and about the relationship of al-Samiri, al-jibt, al-taghut, and Satan to the system of leading astray, the question might have emerged before the name returned to history.

But when the Qur’an is abandoned, it is not only the answer that is lost; the question itself is lost.

The Qur’an disclosed the deception, but those who abandoned the Qur’an did not see what had been disclosed before them. When the name Israel returned to history, they did not recognize the signature that had preceded the name by thousands of years. The deception lay not in the Qur’an’s failure to disclose, but in the human failure to reflect upon what had been disclosed.

Conclusion: Abandoning the Qur’an and Its Effect on the Conflict with Israel

The problem is that Muslims, in dealing with the question of Israel, did not return to the Qur’an as the arbiter. Instead, many of them approached it through inherited Islamic tradition and traditional exegesis.

Here lies the paradox: Islamic tradition, in its prevalent conception, does not deconstruct the narrative on which modern Israel’s identity rests. Rather, it often approaches that narrative within the same framework: Israel is Jacob, the Children of Israel are his descendants, and Palestine is linked to an ancient divine promise.

Islamic discourse thus does not confront the Israeli narrative at its roots; instead, it enters into a political struggle with it over the land, while the religious foundation on which the Israeli narrative rests remains insufficiently subjected to Qur’anic deconstruction. This—according to this reading—helps sustain international sympathy for Israel, particularly among sectors of the Christian world, because the Israeli narrative appears to accord with a religious story that the Christian world knows and believes.

Returning to the Qur’an, however, opens an entirely different path: before we investigate the promise, we must investigate Israel; before we investigate the land, we must investigate identity; and before we accept the historical narrative, we must submit it to the Qur’an.

The central question then becomes: Did Muslims err when they abandoned the Qur’an for tradition, leaving the narrative on which modern Israel’s legitimacy was founded without deconstruction, while the Qur’an itself was opening a different door to understanding Israel and the Children of Israel?

Returning to the Qur’an is therefore not merely a religious return; it can become a reconstruction of the Arab and Islamic understanding of the Palestinian question from its Qur’anic foundation.