By Cyril Anderson

 One of the more controversial issues at the foundation of Christianity and its understanding of the role and mission of Jesus is the notion of Original Sin.  Original Sin refers to the idea that the original or first sin of Adam and Eve in the garden resulted in a breaking of an original close bond between mankind and God, and a tainting of sorts of human nature that produces the tendency of humans to sin.  The Catholic Catechism describes it thus:

“By his sin Adam, as the first man, lost the original holiness and justice he had received from God, not only for himself but for all human beings. 

Adam and Eve transmitted to their descendants human nature wounded by their own first sin and hence deprived of original holiness and justice; this deprivation is called "original sin".

As a result of original sin, human nature is weakened in its powers, subject to ignorance, suffering and the domination of death, and inclined to sin.”

This doctrine then connects to the idea in Christian doctrine of the need for a Divine Savior in the figure of Jesus to reconnect humanity from God so that humanity can be spiritually cleansed from the taint of this Original Sin. The other Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam however, do not hold to this doctrine.  It is useful, given the centrality of this concept to disagreements between Muslims and Christians over their perceptions of the role and purpose of Jesus, to take a closer look at this concept and why Muslims disagree with it.

 It is Islamic belief that Adam was created and intended for life in the earth, taken to be a different place from his first place of residence, Jannah, or paradise. (literally, “The Garden”)  This belief is based on the Qu’ran, which states that God created Adam and appointed him to be an Imam, or leader in the earth.  The book of Genesis includes similar statements, indicating that Adam was to be the first leader of human society in the earth.  In this light, Muslim commentators, at least from the Shia’ school of Islam, conclude that the exit of Adam and Eve from the Garden cannot be seen as a punishment, since leaving the garden was necessary for them to fulfill their prophesied destiny in the Earth beyond. 

 Shia’ Muslims would say that the disobedience of the command to not touch the tree was  not a sin, but rather at worst a forgivable and understandable  mistake made out of innocence while they were newly created and not yet knowledgeable to comprehend and resist deception.  Those who want to lay tremendous blame on Adam and Eve must put the situation in proper perspective; they were newly created, in a sort of childlike state of lack of experience and lack of full awareness of the way of the world, having had no prior experience of evil or deceit or the temptations of the Deceiver.  In such a state, they would have been naturally trusting, since distrust is a human trait that has to be taught and learned.   When a child, for example, is faced with two contradictory sets of instructions, he will inevitably become confused, and therefore likely stumble in trying to act.   This is not something to blame the child for; it is simply a life test through which the child grows wiser and more aware.  Humans are judged according to their level of understanding.  Understandably, it would not be right to judge Adam and Eve for their action as if they acted with full knowledge. 

 Human society and the level of human awareness within it has developed over the centuries and millennia.  Over time, humans have been able to understand more and more sophisticated messages.  It is a sort of growing up of humanity.  In this light, Adam and Eve represented the infancy of the human race; a period of innocence.  Therefore, just as a child is not judged harshly for any mistakes or missteps, similarly for Adam and Eve. 

 This period in paradise was a temporary period of training and preparation before being turned loose into the world.  It was a sheltered, safe environment, a cradle for the infancy of human civilization.  The temptation of the tree in paradise, and the allowing of Iblees to try Adam and Eve was a last part of the training before they were sent into the world.  It was a preparation for the deceit which Iblees and his servants would deliver to his descendants after him.  This story of the temptation was meant to serve as an object lesson, to be careful.  It was not the “original sin” but was a last warning before the training period in paradise closed and the trial of life began in earnest.

 According to the Qu’ran account, this mistake was forgiven.  This is understandable; God is like a parent over us, and a loving parent forgives the innocent mistakes of those children who err without knowing better.  In this light, the exit of Adam and Eve from paradise was not some curse; rather it was a blessing and a destined step for mankind in its spiritual evolution.  Just as we do not reach the full extent of learning unless we are challenged, so we cannot reach our full spiritual potential without being tried in this life with the temptations of Iblees and his minions.  Through overcoming such challenges, we become stronger than we otherwise would. 

 The other problem that Muslims and Jews have with the doctrine of original sin is that it seems to run counter to the idea of Divine Justice by implying that one soul is made bear the burden of another’s action.  Muslims and Jews insist that we are then judged only on our own merits, and not on something that happened thousands of years back by an ancestor.  Christian thinkers meanwhile respond using the analogy of cause and effect, saying that often children will be affected, through no action of their own, through the actions of another. (e.g. birth defects from an alcoholic or drug-addicted mother, childhood accidents resulting from the negligence of a parent, etc.)  However, Muslim and Jewish thinkers tend to see a problem extending this thinking to spiritual matters of the soul, arguing that rather, one of the roles of the judgment in the next life is to settle the scales of justice to remedy and remove the effects of ills suffered not as a result of one’s own will and actions, but rather the consequences of others’ actions.   Another problem is the relative scarcity of hard direct textual support within the Old Testament, the Gospels, or the Letters of Paul for the doctrine.  Within the ranks of Christian thinkers, some similarity to the Muslim thinking on the idea of Original Sin can be seen in the thought of Pelagius, a 5^th c. CE Irish monk whose thinking was the subject of a great religious controversy in the early Christian church.  It was in response to these teachings that St. Augustine wrote works in support of the doctrine of Original Sin that were highly influential in the early church.