Session Twenty-Three, The First Station: Examining the Existence or Non-Existence of Intrinsic Dignity in the Human Being

Session Twenty-Three

The First Station: Examining the Existence or Non-Existence of Intrinsic Dignity in the Human Being – The Foundations of the Intrinsic Dignity of the Human Being – The Second Category: 4. The Divine Trust – The Demonstration of the Intrinsic Nature of This Dignity and Its Evidence – Examining the Intrinsic Nature of This Dignity – The Possibilities Regarding the Meaning of the Trust

January 18, 2025

Summary of the Previous Session

Among the matters cited, or that may be cited, as a foundation for the intrinsic dignity of the human being, we have thus far mentioned several instances in the first category, and we have also addressed several matters from the second category.

4. The Divine Trust

Another of the instances cited as a foundation for the intrinsic dignity of the human being is the divine trust. According to the Qur’an, God, the Exalted, offered a trust to the human being, and the human being accepted it and bore it; this is explicit in the Qur’an and there is no doubt in it. Verse 72 of Sūrat al-Aḥzāb is as follows: “Indeed, We offered the Trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they declined to bear it and feared it; yet the human being bore it. Indeed, he was unjust and ignorant.” (إِنَّا عَرَضْنَا الْأَمَانَةَ عَلَى السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَالْجِبَالِ فَأَبَيْنَ أَنْ يَحْمِلْنَهَا وَأَشْفَقْنَ مِنْهَا وَحَمَلَهَا الْإِنْسَانُ إِنَّهُ كَانَ ظَلُومًا جَهُولًا). The meaning of the verse is clear; God, the Blessed and Exalted, states: We offered the trust to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains, but they declined to accept and bear it and turned away from it; yet the human being bore it and accepted it, even though the human being is unjust and ignorant. Now, there is a discussion as to why, after referring to the human being’s acceptance of this divine trust, it states that the human being is unjust and ignorant.

The Demonstration of the Intrinsic Nature of This Dignity

The purport of the verse, in light of the meaning of “trust,” is that God has placed something as a deposit with the human being for safekeeping; a deposit and a trust, as their name indicates, mean the safekeeping of something entrusted to one, and the effort to preserve it and then return it to its owner. The term “trust” is used precisely for this reason; otherwise, it would have said “We bestowed.” But the term “trust” means safekeeping as a trustee and then returning it to the owner of the deposit. Whatever meaning we adopt for “trust” (given that there is disagreement concerning the meaning of “trust,” and we shall later present the various views regarding this trust), the very entrusting of this trust to the human being, its acceptance by the human being, and the refusal of the heavens, the earth, and the mountains to accept it, indicate a particular capacity and aptitude in the human being relative to other beings; that is, as it were, no being in this world (not even animals) possesses such a capacity. What is mentioned in the verse is the offering of the trust to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains, and no mention is made of other beings; although “the heavens” and “the earth” may also be a reference to their inhabitants. Here, the heavens, the earth, and the mountains themselves—as being the greatest and most magnificent of God’s creatures—may be intended; their inhabitants may be intended; both may be intended. Therefore, as it were, no being other than the human being accepted this trust.

When God, the Blessed and Exalted, gives this trust to the human being and not to others—especially in light of the fact that it must be returned—it indicates a distinguished position for the human being. That is, the human being accepted this onerous responsibility, and no being accepted it; from this it becomes clear that God has accorded a special distinction to the human being, such that He entrusted this trust to him; this is an honoring and esteeming.

The important point is that this trust does not have a legislative aspect but rather a creational aspect; and the evidence for this is that this trust was offered to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains, whereas legislation—the offering of a reality in the form of a law to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains—is altogether meaningless; they have no capacity whatsoever for this matter. This shows that the reality offered was a creational matter. When it is creational, it means that the human being has intrinsically come to possess such a position, and that no being other than the human being has been the recipient of this honoring; from this it becomes clear that the human being possessed a characteristic, distinction, and feature on account of which this honoring occurred; this characteristic existed in no other being. This indicates a worthiness, distinction, greatness, nobility, and distinction for the human being.

Evidence

Thus, according to this verse:

First: God bestowed something upon the human being as a trust which, by various pieces of evidence and proofs, is considered an honoring and is an intrinsic dignity. This is a creational matter and has been bestowed upon the human being; the human being qua human being, in contrast to the mountains, the earth, and the heavens; thus, this is not a legislative matter. When it is creational, it cannot be construed as an acquired dignity, and acquisition is not at all involved; this is a creational matter.

Second: He gave this as a trust and seemingly wishes to take it back. A trust is entrusted to one who possesses the requisite qualification; it becomes clear that the human being qua human being possessed this qualification. The important matter is that this capacity for bearing it existed in the human being qua human being, in God’s view, such that such a blessing was bestowed upon him.

Thus, in total, this is an honoring; it is an honoring of the human being qua human being, irrespective of faith and belief; the human being has come to possess this capacity, and the dignity is likewise an intrinsic dignity, since faith, belief, color, race, and religion are not involved. This is the summary of the demonstration of the intrinsic nature of this dignity.

Question:

Professor: That is, had this been a legislative reality, it would have been meaningless to offer it to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains.

Question:

Professor: Even if it does not refer to the inhabitants, the earth, in any case, includes the mountains as well. When we say “the inhabitants of the earth,” the earth—in contrast to the heaven—includes the mountains as well. The mention of the mountains alone, alongside these, is meaningless. Whatever meaning we adopt—whether it indicates dignity or not—there is room for this question: what is the significance of conjoining “the mountains” to “the earth” here? We do not wish to enter into the exegetical points of this verse. Our discussion at present concerns whether the verse indicates intrinsic dignity or not; whether the divine trust is considered an intrinsic dignity for the human being or not. This verse contains dozens of discussions, and we are not presently concerned with these discussions; at present, we wish to consider this aspect: whether this is truly considered an intrinsic dignity for the human being or not.

Examining the Intrinsic Nature of This Dignity

Now we must examine and determine whether such an inference can truly be drawn from the verse or not. The views regarding the trust differ; in order to determine whether such an indication exists or not, and whether this trust is considered an intrinsic dignity or not, we must define the trust. Several views have been cited regarding the trust, and the views differ. I shall make a brief and itemized reference to the views concerning the word “trust,” so that we may then consider whether it can be regarded as an intrinsic dignity or not.

The Possibilities Regarding the Meaning of the Trust

The late al-Ṭabrisī, in Majmaʿ al-Bayān, cited several meanings; the late ʿAllāma Ṭabāṭabā’ī expressed one view; the late Imām [Khomeini] expressed one view. Several meanings have been cited here.

1. Al-Zamakhsharī says that “trust” means obedience; obedience is the opposite of disobedience—that is, the performance of the commands and the abandonment of the prohibitions.

2. One of the meanings cited by the late al-Ṭabrisī is that “trust” means the divine commands and prohibitions—the very acts and abstentions that God has obligated us to perform or to abandon.

3. Another meaning that al-Ṭabrisī related is the rulings and obligatory duties. The rulings and obligatory duties are, in one sense, the same as the commands and prohibitions.

4. Another meaning that al-Ṭabrisī related is fidelity to one’s covenant.

5. ʿAllāma Ṭabāṭabā’ī states that this is the divine guardianship (wilāya). The divine guardianship is either the acceptance of the divine guardianship or the same as the divine vicegerency; when he says “the universal divine guardianship (al-wilāya al-kulliyya al-ilāhiyya),” it means that the human being occupies a station in which he possesses guardianship upon the earth on behalf of God. The source of this guardianship is naturally the acceptance of the divine guardianship.

6. The late Imām [Khomeini] says that the trust here has an outward aspect and an inward aspect; its inward aspect is the very reality of the universal divine guardianship, the absolute divine guardianship (al-wilāya al-muṭlaqa al-ilāhiyya); its outward aspect is the divine obligations—that is, the very religious law (sharīʿa). His statement that We offered the trust to the human being means that We both placed the obligations upon him and offered the divine guardianship to him. The acceptance of the divine guardianship in a creational manner can occur on the part of the heavens and the earth as well, as indeed it has occurred; in this sense, they have accepted this divine guardianship. This universal divine guardianship means that the human being himself comes to possess such guardianship; just as the sacred being of the great Prophet of Islam is the Muḥammadan Reality (al-ḥaqīqa al-muḥammadiyya)—the Muḥammadan Reality being that expansive existence (al-wujūd al-munbasiṭ) after the Exalted Truth, the closest of beings to God, who oversees the entire order and world of existence and is the intermediary of the divine effusion. This constitutes that universal divine guardianship. This matter has also been alluded to in Ādāb al-Ṣalāt; the late Imām [Khomeini] has alluded to this matter in various places.

7. Another meaning that can be derived from the words of the late Imām [Khomeini] is the primordial nature (fiṭra); in certain places, the late Imām [Khomeini] has identified this trust—which God offered to the human being and which the human being accepted while the heavens, the earth, and the mountains did not accept it—as the divine and monotheistic primordial nature.

Question:

Professor: If all had accepted monotheism, then all would have to be monotheists.

8. It is the guardianship of the People of the House (peace be upon them) and the guardianship of the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him).

9. Another meaning is the intellect.

Some of these meanings are reducible to one another; therefore, if we wish to examine carefully the meanings cited for the trust, perhaps there are, in total, no more than two or three meanings.

10. Another meaning is the bodily organs of the human being.

If we wish to place all of these among meanings distinct from one another, there are no more than three or four meanings: one is the very religious law and rulings—that which is counted as the divine obligations; the very meaning that appeared in the words of al-Zamakhsharī and the late al-Ṭabrisī as well. That is, We offered to the human being the obligations, directives, or religious law; We offered the religious law and obligations to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains, but the human being accepted it. One meaning is the very intellect. One meaning, in light of the explanations we have given previously, is the primordial nature. One meaning is the very universal divine guardianship—which, of course, contains within it the guardianship of the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him) and the guardianship of the Imāms (peace be upon them); for the universal divine guardianship is, in fact, the very guardianship that God has bestowed upon them. It is said that the guardianship of the noble Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him and his family) is original guardianship, whereas the guardianship of the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him) is derivative guardianship; the former is the guardian of God by original right (bi-l-aṣāla), and the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him) is the guardian of God by secondary right (bi-l-ʿaraḍ); otherwise, the principle of divine guardianship belongs to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), and the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him) possesses this guardianship in dependence upon the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Now, other human beings, to the measure of their own capacity and existential rank, may possess a certain degree of this divine guardianship.

These are, in total, the several meanings that have been cited for the trust. We must now consider, with regard to these meanings we wish to examine, whether this is truly an intrinsic dignity or not; we must conduct a brief examination of these four or five meanings, and then consider whether the evidence cited for the intrinsic nature of the dignity is truly correct or not. Here there was a claim, and then evidence was cited for it; therefore, we must put this claim to the test and examine that evidence as well.