By Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times

Verse-by-Verse Commentary on Surah Al-Qiyāmah (75:36–40)

75:36 – “Does man think that he will be left without purpose?” – The passage opens by asking rhetorically if the human being (al-insān) imagines he will be left sudā – ungoverned and unaccountable​. Classical exegetes explain sudā as “neglected” or “aimlessly wandering,” like a stray camel with no one to guide it​. In other words, God did not create humankind with no obligations or end-goal. Mujāhid and others said it means man is not left without divine commands and prohibitions (i.e. moral responsibility), while al-Suddī took it to mean without resurrection (no future reckoning)​. Both meanings are implied: human life is not without duty in this world, nor will humans be left without judgment in the next​. The verse thus negates the nihilistic idea that life has no higher purpose or accountability. Philosophically, this is a teleological assertion: our existence is intentional and goal-oriented, not a mere accident. Theologically, it affirms that a Just Creator would not abandon His creation without guidance or ultimate justice. As other verses say, “Did you think We created you in vain (without meaning), and that to Us you would not be returned?” (Qur’an 23:115). Humanity’s endowed intellect and free will are part of this purpose – unlike animals bound by instinct, humans are tested by moral choice and will answer to God for their use of these faculties.

75:37 – “Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (ejaculated)?” – To support the necessity and reality of resurrection, the Qur’an next directs us to our humble biological origins as evidence. It reminds the skeptic: every person began as a nutfah, a despised droplet of fluid​. Classical commentators identify the nutfah as the semen (or mixed reproductive fluid) poured forth in the womb​. This emphasizes the meager beginnings of a human being – a single cell or fertilized ovum in modern terms. The verse invites reflection on the astonishing journey from a microscopic drop to a complex human. Scientifically, we now know that this drop carries the genetic blueprint (DNA) for a new human life, and upon fertilization a zygote is formed. Yet in the ancient world, the full details of development were unknown; the Qur’an drawing attention to the nutfah was itself remarkable. The indignity of our origin – “from a semen-drop”​ – is meant to humble human pride. As Ibn Kathīr notes, a being created from “something insignificant, weak and despised” should acknowledge the power of the Creator rather than arrogantly denying Him​. This rhetorical strategy has philosophical weight: if one admits that an intelligent, self-aware person can originate from a primitive drop of fluid by God’s power, then accepting other wonders (like life after death) should be reasonable. In essence, initial creation is presented as proof of re-creation.

75:38 – “Then he became a clinging clot; and [God] created and fashioned [him].” – The verse continues outlining embryonic stages: from nutfah to ‘alaqah. The Arabic ‘alaqah literally means something that “clings” and can refer to a clotted mass of blood or a leech. Classical exegesis often translated it as a blood clot, given the observable clot-like appearance of early miscarried tissue​. Modern scholars note that around 2-3 weeks of gestation the embryo indeed resembles a leech-like clot attached to the uterine wall, hanging in the nutrient-rich blood – a striking concurrence between Quranic language and modern embryology​. After the ‘alaqah, God “created and proportioned” the embryo (the phrase fa-khalaqa fa-sawwā). This implies the formation of the mudghah (“chewed-like lump of flesh”) and the gradual development of organs in due measure. Ibn Kathīr, drawing on hadith, mentions the embryo passes through these phases – drop, clot, lump – and then is sawwa (shaped) into human form as the soul is breathed into it​. The term taswiyah (proportioning) indicates the ordering of embryonic structure: the differentiation of tissues, the emergence of bones and flesh in the correct arrangement (as elaborated in Qur’an 23:14). From a philosophical perspective, this verse underscores design and intentionality in human development, as opposed to a random or chaotic process. Theologically, medieval commentators marveled at the wisdom of God in these stages; modern observers likewise are astonished at how this ancient text aptly captures a sequence of development: implantation (clinging), morphogenesis (shaping) and growth. It invites an epistemological reflection: these hidden stages were unknown to the desert Arabs, suggesting that the Qur’an is guiding them (and us) to recognize divine knowledge behind human creation​.

75:39 – “And He made from it [i.e. the drop] the two sexes, male and female.” – Here the Qur’an highlights the outcome of that creative process: from the same basic fluid, two complementary genders are fashioned. Classical tafsīr emphasizes that it is by God’s decree that a child develops as male or female​. The verse subtly alludes to the determination of sex in the embryonic stage. Modern biology reveals that the sex of an embryo is determined at fertilization by the genetic contribution of the sperm (X or Y chromosome). Thus, from one drop the divergence into male or female is encoded – a fact only fully understood in the last century. The Qur’an attributes this differentiation to divine will (“by His permission and decree”​), which aligns with the idea that natural laws (like genetics) are instruments of God’s plan. Classical scholars like Ibn Kathīr simply took it as further evidence of God’s power: the One who forms a human with perfectly balanced limbs and features, and who decides its sex, surely demonstrates wisdom and omnipotence in creation ​surahquran.com. They often cite the pairing of male and female in creation as a sign (cf. Qur’an 53:45-46). Philosophically, this verse reinforces the notion of order and purpose: the emergence of two sexes allows for reproduction and the continuation of human life, which is itself part of the divine purpose for mankind. It also humbles the reader again – one’s gender, a core aspect of identity, is not by one’s own doing but by the Creator’s design.

75:40 – “Is not He [who does this] able to give life to the dead?” – The section culminates in this pointed question, driving home the logical conclusion. If God can create a human being from a droplet and bring it through astonishing transformative stages into a living, conscious person, why should resurrection be deemed impossible?​ The verse expects the listener to answer in the affirmative: indeed, the One who did all that can certainly revive the dead. Classical commentators often remark that the mode of argument here is one of “a fortiori” reasoning: restoring life to a once-living body is, in comparison, easier than originating life from scratch​. The Qur’an elsewhere makes this explicit: “He began creation, then He will repeat it, and that is even easier for Him” (30:27)​. Of course, nothing is “difficult” for an omnipotent God – the point is to address human doubt on its own terms. Thus, the possibility of resurrection is affirmed both rationally and theologically. Rationally, a person’s existence after not existing (before conception) is parallel to returning to existence after death​. Theologically, God’s attribute al-Qādir (All-Powerful) guarantees He has power over life, death, and revival. In a hadith cited by Ibn Kathīr, the Prophet ﷺ, upon reciting this verse, would respond, “Subḥānaka Allāhumma balā” (“Glory be to You, O Allah, indeed (You are able)”)​, affirming God’s limitless power to resurrect. In summary, verse 40 caps the argument: a Creator capable of guiding a lifeless gamete into a human being can surely raise a dead human back to life​. This addresses the metaphysical question of life-after-death by pointing to the continuity of divine power: creation and resurrection are part of the same spectrum of God’s creative act.

Verse-by-Verse Commentary on Surah Yā-Sīn (36:77–83)

36:77 – “Does man not consider that We created him from a mere drop of sperm, and behold – he is an open adversary?” – Similar to 75:37, this verse begins the argument for resurrection by invoking human origin from a nutfah. Here, however, the emphasis is on the attitude of the human that results: from a humble beginning, man becomes a self-assured disputant (khaṣīm mubīn). The classical context of these verses is a confrontation between the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and a skeptic of Mecca. According to Ibn ‘Abbās, this verse (and the following) was revealed when one of the polytheists – identified as Ubayy ibn Khalaf or Al-‘Āṣ ibn Wā’il – picked up a decayed bone and ridiculed the notion of resurrection​. The word “Does man (al-insān) not see…” is generic, Ibn Kathīr notes, applying to all who deny resurrection​. It calls on the individual to look at his own existence as proof. The irony is sharp: a creature that began as a microscopic speck now dares to argue against God’s power​. Classical tafsīrs stress the audacity of man’s disbelief: “The one denying resurrection should remember that the One who initiated his creation from that vile fluid can certainly recreate him.”​ In fact, the human being’s capacity to argue (khaṣīm) is itself a gift from God – an outgrowth of the rational faculties bestowed during his development​. Modern commentators like Islāhī point out the psychological insight here: only someone who “forgets his own creation” would ask such a foolish question about resurrection​. Epistemologically, the verse suggests that a lack of self-reflection leads to poor reasoning – the skeptic overlooks the miracle of his origin, so he finds resurrection unbelievable. Philosophically, it highlights human ingratitude and hubris: man uses the intellect God gave him to dispute God’s signs, instead of recognizing them as evidence of divine truth. In sum, 36:77 confronts the reader with a dual reality: your lowly biological origin and your lofty (but often misused) capacity for argument – a combination that should inspire humility and faith, not arrogant denial.

36:78 – “And he strikes for Us a parable and forgets his own creation. He says, ‘Who will give life to these bones when they are disintegrated?’” – This continues the narrative of the skeptic’s challenge. “He strikes a parable” means the disbeliever is making an example or argument – in this case pointing to crumbled bones as an analogy for the impossibility of revival. As recorded in hadith, Ubayy ibn Khalaf crumbled a dry bone in front of the Prophet and scoffed: “Will Allah bring this back to life after it has decayed?”​ The Qur’an exposes the fallacy in the man’s reasoning by saying “he forgets his own creation”. That is, the skeptic fails to recall that he himself was created after not existing (or from something equally inanimate)​. If one remembers the origin of one’s own bones – fashioned by God from a sperm and clot – it is no more absurd for God to refashion rotten bones. The verse captures a common human cognitive error: focusing on the currently visible (dry bones) while neglecting the prior evidence (one’s own genesis) that is equally miraculous. Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī here emphasizes that the incredulous question “Who will revive the bones?” stems from willful ignorance of the Creator’s power manifest in the first creation. The tone of the verse is reproachful; it cites the skeptic’s words only to set up the refutation that follows. From a philosophical standpoint, the skeptic is making an inductive inference (dead bones have never been seen reviving, so he deems it impossible), whereas the Qur’an urges a retrodictive inference (the same power that created life initially can recreate it). This shift from empirical skepticism to rational trust in the Creator’s consistency is at the heart of the Quranic argument. Notably, the Quran does not dismiss the question but rather calls out the questioner’s bias (“forgets his own creation”) and prepares to answer him on rational grounds. Thus, 36:78 sets the stage by articulating the challenge in vivid terms, only to dismantle it with the replies in the subsequent verses.

36:79 – “Say: He will give life to them who produced them the first time; for He is, of all creation, All-Knowing.” – Here the Qur’an provides the direct answer to the skeptic’s question, instructing the Prophet to respond. The reply has two key parts: (1) The one who created the bones (and their owner) in the first instance will revive them, and (2) God has complete knowledge of every creation. This is a concise logical argument for resurrection. First, it appeals to God’s precedent of origination (ibdā‘): creation ex nihilo is a far greater feat than reassembling decayed parts​. The implication is that re-creation is logically possible and even expected from an omnipotent Creator​. Classical authorities like Ibn Kathīr highlight that the phrasing “produced them the first time” refutes the unbelievers by reminding them that prior non-existence was no barrier to God: “the One Who initiated creation of man from semen… is not unable to recreate him after death.”​ The second part, “He is Knowing of every creation” (bi-kulli khalqin ‘Alīm), addresses an underlying doubt: how can scattered dust and bones be recomposed? The Qur’an asserts that God’s knowledge is absolute – He knows where every particle resides, in every corner of the earth​. Thus no resurrected body will be “missing pieces.” Classical exegetes often elaborate that not a single atom of a person’s body is lost to God​. This directly tackles the metaphysical concern of personal identity and bodily continuity: the verse assures that every element of one’s being remains within God’s knowledge (and under His power) no matter how dispersed. From a modern scientific angle, one might note that matter and energy are conserved in the universe; the elements of a corpse merely change form. The Quranic argument goes further by attributing to God perfect knowledge of those elements’ locations and forms – a prerequisite for any notion of bodily resurrection. In sum, 36:79 is a comprehensive rebuttal: God’s prior creation demonstrates His power, and God’s omniscience guarantees none of the details are beyond Him. For a believer, this verse provides intellectual satisfaction that resurrection is neither illogical nor difficult for God​.

36:80 – “(It is) He who made for you fire out of the green tree, such that behold – you kindle fire from it.” – This verse offers a tangible analogy from nature to reinforce belief in resurrection. It points to the phenomenon of fire emerging from green wood as a sign of God’s wondrous power. In Arabia, it was well known that certain green trees – such as Markh and ‘Afār – could be used to spark fire by rubbing their fresh branches together​. Ibn ‘Abbās and Qatādah explain that although these desert trees are full of sap (green and moist), God has placed in them the potential to ignite; people in the Hijāz would strike two green sticks to produce fire as if they were dry tinder​. The Qur’an directs our attention to this surprising opposite: a life-giving, water-filled plant generating consuming fire​. The classical commentaries see it as an a fortiori analogy: if fire (symbol of heat, energy, transformation) can come from a green tree (symbol of water, life, and freshness), then bringing life from decayed bones is certainly within God’s power​. In other words, the One who brings forth such contraries in the natural world can bring the dead to life​. Philosophically, this appeals to the uniformity of nature’s Author: the same God who embeds these transformative properties in creation can achieve any transformation He wills. Some modern commentators also see in this a subtle allusion to stored energy and the cycle of life: the “green tree” through photosynthesis stores solar energy, which is released as fire when wood is burned – a process not understood in the Prophet’s time but consistent with the Quranic imagery. Theologically, verse 80 emphasizes God’s agency in everyday phenomena: humans might think making fire is a simple act of their own, but it is God who “made for you” this capacity in the materials of the earth​. It reminds mankind of the signs of resurrection already around them. Just as life (green wood) can turn to death (ashes via fire), so can the process be reversed by the One who controls all elements. There is also a symbolic layer: green wood and fire represent, to some mystics, the heart of the believer (alive with faith) and the light of divine guidance kindled within. But in the straightforward reading applicable here, the verse’s primary purpose is to provide a concrete example to make the abstract concept of revival more imaginable. God’s creative power is seen in the subtle forces of nature, hinting that miracles like resurrection are just as feasible as the ignition of fire – both are acts of Al-Qādir (the All-Powerful).

36:81 – “Is not He who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them? Yes indeed – for He is the Supreme Creator, the All-Knowing.” – Now the argument shifts to an even grander scale. This verse invokes the creation of the entire cosmos – the heavens and the earth – as evidence of God’s ability to resurrect human beings. It asks: if God could bring into existence the vast universe, how could re-creating human beings (or creating anything similar) be beyond Him?​ The Qur’an often makes this comparison: “The creation of the heavens and earth is surely greater than the creation of mankind, but most people do not know” (40:57)​. Classical commentators read “create the likes of them” in 36:81 as “produce the like of these people again” – essentially, restore them to life​. Either way, the rhetorical question expects agreement: the greater act (cosmic creation) proves the possibility of the lesser (human resurrection). The verse then answers with “Balā” (Yes!), affirming God’s plenary power, and tags two divine names: al-Khallāq and al-‘Alīm. Al-Khallāq (an intensive form of “Creator”) implies God’s continuous, repeated act of creation or His mastery in creating with limitless capacity​. In Islamic theology, this name highlights that not only did God create initially, He could create again and again as He wills – His creative power never diminishes or exhausts. Al-‘Alīm (All-Knowing) reinforces that His knowledge encompasses the design and details of all things, linking back to the idea that He knows every aspect of what He creates (again assuring that re-creation poses no problem of knowledge). Abū Ḥayyān and Fakhr al-Rāzī note that pairing Power and Knowledge here counters two doubts: lacking power or lacking knowledge. God is perfect in both, so neither inability nor ignorance can prevent resurrection. Modern reflections on “the heavens and the earth” add further awe: today we know the universe’s magnitude and complexity far better – billions of galaxies, physical laws finely tuned for life, etc. If one believes an Intelligence created the Big Bang and the cosmic order, reviving creatures on one planet is entirely plausible by comparison. In fact, as one scholar muses, the more we learn about the cosmos, the more unimaginable power we realize was required to bring it into being, making the Quranic argument even more forceful today. The verse also subtly addresses any notion that God’s power might “run out” or that He could be fatigued by the first creation – a notion the pagans of Arabia or others might have implied. By calling God al-Khallāq, the Qur’an insists God’s creative power is inexhaustible and ever-fresh​. Metaphysically, this verse invites contemplation of God’s absolute ontological dominance: all existence owes itself to Him, so restoring existence to something that died is well within His capability. It dissolves any notion of “difficulty” in divine acts – big or small, first or second – all are effortless before His unlimited power.

36:82 – “His Command only, when He intends a thing, is to say to it, ‘Be,’ and it is.” – This verse describes how easily God’s will translates into reality. The formula “kun fayakūn” (“Be, and it is”) signifies the efficacy of the divine command. In Islamic thought, this does not necessarily imply a literal vocalization, but a metaphor for the instantaneous and unfailing execution of God’s intent. When God wills something to exist, it suffices that He wills it – no process, material, or delay can hinder it​. Classical commentators note that this phrase appears in several Quranic contexts (creating Jesus without a father, for example in 3:47, or creating the universe in 2:117) to emphasize creation ex nihilo by divine fiat. In the context of resurrection (following from 36:81), verse 82 closes the logical argument with a decisive theological axiom: Allah’s command over existence is absolute. This means that even the step of gathering the dust and bones (mentioned earlier) is, ultimately, unnecessary for Him – He could re-create by pure command​. As Islāhī writes, the verse implies one should not imagine God needs any “factories, raw materials or tools” to bring about creation​. He is not an artisan who toils; His act of creation is as simple as issuing a decree. Philosophically, this addresses the modal confusion humans have: we conceive making things by labor and intermediate causes, but God’s mode of creating is categorically different – immediate and unconditioned. This line also links to the concept of logos: in some theological interpretations, God’s “Word” (Amr) is creative – an idea that has parallels in other traditions (e.g. “God said ‘Let there be light’” in Genesis). Within Islam, however, “kun fayakūn” is a slogan of omnipotence, used to underscore that nothing can resist God’s will. In terms of epistemology, after providing rational arguments, the Qur’an here appeals to faith in God’s nature: even if one cannot imagine the mechanics of resurrection, one knows that for God, it requires only His will. Thus, verse 82 serves as the coup de grâce in the argument: it eliminates any remaining doubt by asserting that the mechanism of resurrection is simply the command of the Almighty. For a believer, this is the ultimate assurance – the how is placed in God’s hands, and His “Be” spans any gap between death and life. It’s also worth noting that kun fayakūn connects to Islamic metaphysics about the nature of causation – that God is the first and direct cause of all existence (occasionally interpreted by theologians in light of occasionalism: creatures have no autonomous efficacy, only God truly causes things to be). In everyday terms, one can take from this verse a profound sense of trust: just as He created the world by His word, He can resurrect by His word; divine will is the fundamental reality.

36:83 – “So glory be to Him in Whose hand is the dominion of all things, and to Him you will be returned.” – The passage (and Surah Yā-Sīn) concludes with this powerful declaration. “Fa-subḥāna-(lladhī)…,” meaning Exalted or glorified is the One who has absolute control over the universe. After the preceding arguments, this verse serves as a tašbīḥ – a glorification – affirming that Allah is far above any weakness, inability, or partner. “In Whose hand is the dominion (malakūt) of all things” proclaims that all sovereignty, ownership, and governing power over existence rests in God’s hand alone. The term malakūt (an intensive form of mulk, dominion) implies the entire realm of existence, seen and unseen, is under God’s authority. This counters any notion that something could escape God’s grasp – be it human remains scattered in dust or stars in the furthest galaxy, all are within His “hand” (a metaphor for power and control). Finally, “to Him you will be returned” drives home the moral and existential conclusion: every human will ultimately return to God for judgment. It ties back to the very start of this discussion (the question of being left aimless and unaccountable). In context, after demonstrating that resurrection is possible and indeed easy for God, the Quran reminds the listener that resurrection will happen, and it will be the moment of return to the Lord. Classical exegesis often remarks on the choice of “to Him you will be returned (turja‘ūn)” rather than “He will return you”: the reflexive/passive form emphasizes the certainty and natural course of returning to our originator, as a matter of destiny and justice. This final verse thus combines theological summary and ethical warning: God is omnipotent and glorious (so He can resurrect), and God will indeed bring you back (so prepare for accountability). In a philosophical sense, it provides a satisfying telos: the saga of life, death, and resurrection leads back to the Source, completing the circle of existence. It reasserts the worldview that the universe is not a closed system of matter and energy with no ultimate justice, but a moral cosmos governed by a supreme King. For the Prophet’s contemporaries, this finale would dispel any ridicule left in their minds – the tone moves from argument to proclamation, inviting submission and tasbīḥ (glorification of God). In the narrative of Surah Yā-Sīn, this line also serves to conclude the surah’s broader themes (which include prophethood and unbelief) by focusing the reader on the inevitability of meeting God. In our context of commentary, verse 83 aligns exactly with 75:36’s implication: humans are not left without purpose or end – “to Him you will be returned” encapsulates that we are responsible to our Creator. Thus, the passage ends on a note of Divine Majesty and human accountability.

Synthesis: Common Themes and Reflections on Both Passages

Both Surah Al-Qiyāmah 75:36–40 and Surah Yā-Sīn 36:77–83 address the power of God to resurrect the dead, using the theme of creation as evidence for re-creation. Despite slight differences in emphasis, these passages share several profound themes:

• Creation as Proof of Resurrection: In both sections, the Qur’an employs analogical reasoning from the initial creation of man to argue for the plausibility of resurrection. The fact that human beings originate from a fluid drop and develop into complex organisms is presented as a clear proof that God can assemble life again after death​. This reflects a core Quranic principle: “He who began creation can repeat it”. The argument is multifaceted – ontological (life from non-life has happened by God’s will, so life from death can happen again) and logical (surely it is not harder the second time​). Both passages use rhetorical questions (“Does man think…?”, “Is not He able…?”) to prod the listener into acknowledging this truth. Classical scholars like al-Ṭabarī, Ibn Kathīr, and others consistently highlight this theme: the “beginning of creation” is a proof for “the returning of creation.”​ Modern commentators likewise note that the Qur’an is effectively asking the skeptic to reflect on his own existence as empirical evidence for God’s creative power​. Both surahs were revealed in the Makkan period where the denial of bodily resurrection was a major point of contention; thus, the Qur’an’s approach is to remove doubts by reference to the most self-evident sign – our very creation.
• Divine Omnipotence and Knowledge: The God depicted in these verses is omnipotent (all-powerful) and omniscient (all-knowing), which are non-negotiable attributes enabling resurrection. In 75:40 and 36:81–82, we see explicit affirmations of God’s power: He is qādir (able) to give life to the dead​, and His creative command “Be” is irresistibly effective​. We also see stress on God’s knowledge of every detail of creation (36:79, 36:81) – nothing is lost or forgotten by Him​. The combination of power and knowledge answers all aspects of the skeptical challenge. Philosophically, this underscores a key Islamic tenet: no limitation applies to God in either will or wisdom. Metaphysically, the resurrection is a matter of divine decree, not a feat of engineering – a crucial distinction. The “Kun fayakūn” formula encapsulates the Quranic solution to any imagined technical hurdles in resurrection: God’s will directly translates into reality. Both passages conclude with or include glorification of God’s power – 36:83 declares His total dominion, and 75:40 (implied) invites one to say, “Yes, indeed He can!”​ Theologically, these verses reinforce faith in al-Muḥyī (The Giver of Life) and al-Bā‘ith (The Resurrector) as divine names. They resonate with other Quranic cosmological statements, like “the creation of the heavens and earth is greater than man’s creation,”​ reinforcing that nothing is difficult for God. In summary, both passages paint a portrait of a God whose power is not diminished by creating once or by the scale of what is created – He can recreate humans as easily as He created the universe.
• Human Arrogance vs. Humility and Purpose: A striking shared theme is the folly of human arrogance in denying resurrection, given humanity’s humble beginnings. Surah 75 begins by reminding man in verse 36 that he is not left sudā (without purpose or accountability)​, while Surah 36 begins by calling man in verse 77 to remember he was a mere drop before he became a disputant​. Both invoke the lowly origin (nutfah) to humble the skeptic’s attitude. In Yā-Sīn, the tone is almost sarcastic: “Look, you argue with God, but aren’t you the same little drop He made into a man?” In Qiyāmah, the rhetorical question “Does man think he’ll be left unchecked?” scolds the person who lives without concern for final judgment​. This is fundamentally an ethical and existential theme: life has meaning and moral direction, and forgetting that leads to conceit and denial. Both passages link the recognition of resurrection to gratitude and humility. If one acknowledges one’s creation and return to God, one is more likely to live righteously. Conversely, denying resurrection often stems from an unwillingness to be accountable. The Quranic commentary by classical scholars notes that the insān who asks “Who will revive bones?” has made himself an opponent to God in argument​ – an act of pride born of heedlessness. Modern reflections echo this: even today, objections to afterlife can carry an undertone of human pride in empirical knowledge, whereas the Quranic response is to remind humans of the limits of their knowledge and existence​. Thus, a common thread is epistemic humility: man must not forget facts about himself that are known (his birth from a drop) when speculating about what he hasn’t seen (resurrection). Both passages serve as a moral lesson that forgetfulness of one’s origin and purpose leads to disbelief, whereas mindful recognition of one’s dependence on the Creator leads to faith. In essence, the Qur’an diagnoses the denial of resurrection as a symptom of a deeper spiritual ailment – negligence of the soul’s origin and destiny – and it seeks to cure that by stark reminders.
• Integration of Scientific and Natural Signs: While the primary aim is religious, both passages draw on what we might call scientific or natural signs in support of their message. They urge contemplation of embryology (conception to fetal development), biology (male/female sexes), and cosmology (creation of heavens and earth). In doing so, the Qur’an establishes an integrated view of knowledge: empirical phenomena are not divorced from spiritual truth but rather testify to it. Classical exegetes had a limited scientific framework, yet they accurately conveyed the gist – e.g. describing stages of the embryo (drop, clot, lump)​, or how certain green plants produce fire​. Modern science adds depth: we now understand the sperm and egg roles in the nutfah, the embryonic development aligning with ‘alaqah and muḍghah, the genetic determination of sex, and even the biochemical basis of drawing fire from wood. These discoveries tend to support rather than contradict the import of the verses. For instance, modern embryology famously noted that a 23-day embryo does have a leech-like appearance and clings to the womb – imagery very much akin to ‘alaqah. Likewise, the notion that all humans originate from a “mingled drop” (76:2) of male and female contributions, which classical commentators like Ibn Kathīr touched on​, is fully evidenced by genetic science. In cosmology, the enormity of the universe discovered by astronomy powerfully amplifies the Quran’s argument that creating people anew is trivial for the One who fashioned galaxies​. Yet, another verses embellishes this argument: “ARE, THEN, they [who deny the life to come] not aware that God, who has created the heavens and the earth and never been wearied by their creation, has [also] the power to bring the dead back to life? Yea, verily, He has the power to will anything!” (46:33) In sum, the convergence of Quranic statements with observed natural facts has been highlighted by many scholars as a sign of the Qur’an’s divine insight. That said, the Quran is not a science textbook; its references serve a faith-based argument. Both classical and contemporary commentators caution that these verses are sign-posts (āyāt) – meant to encourage faith and reflection, not detailed scientific expositions. When understood properly, believers find that science and Quranic revelation here form a harmonious tapestry: the more we learn about life and the universe, the more we appreciate the “Marvelous Creator” behind them, as implied in these verses.
• Philosophical and Theological Implications: The interplay of themes in these verses raises deeper philosophical questions that Muslims have engaged with over centuries. One is the nature of the human self and continuity: If our bodies disintegrate and God reconstructs them, in what sense is the resurrected person the same person? The Quranic answer lies in God’s perfect knowledge and power – He can recreate not just the matter, but the form and identity (including the soul) such that the person is truly “returned” (36:83). This intersects with the philosophical concept of personal identity, to which Islamic theology responds with a dual aspect: the soul (rūḥ) persists and will be reunited with a renewed body, maintaining identity. Another implication is moral ontology: 75:36’s assertion that man is not left without purpose undercuts existential nihilism. It posits an objective purpose set by the Creator, and an eschatological fulfillment (resurrection for judgment) that grounds moral values. Epistemologically, as mentioned, these verses encourage an empirical-rational approach: observe reality (your creation, natural phenomena) and use logical inference to arrive at unseen truths (resurrection, God’s attributes). The Quran does not endorse blind faith here; it provides hujaj (proofs) and āyāt (signs) to persuade. This methodological stance has been noted by scholars as an early form of natural theology or rational theology in the Quran​. Furthermore, the concept of “Kun fayakūn” (Be and it is) touches on debates about causality – Islamic theologians like al-Ghazālī cited such verses to argue that causation is ultimately governed by God’s command (occasionalism), whereas philosophers like Ibn Sīnā saw kun as metaphorical for the fact that all causal chains trace back to the divine will at their root. In either case, both agreed that God’s creative act is fundamental. These verses thus have informed Islamic understandings of how divine agency relates to the natural order: God normally creates through processes (nutfa to birth, seed to tree to fire), but these processes themselves are instituted by His command, and He can bypass or reverse them at will (resurrection being a prime example). Lastly, there is a theological consistency between the two passages: both tie belief in resurrection to belief in God’s justice and wisdom. If God is ḥakīm (wise) and ‘adl (just), the argument goes, there must be a resurrection to reward and punish, otherwise creation would be sudā (purposeless)​. The Qur’an elsewhere (e.g. 45:21-22) makes this explicit, but in our verses it’s implicit: God did not create man just to end him at death with no reckoning. Thus, the themes of Divine justice, human accountability, and cosmic purpose underlie both passages, knitting them into a coherent worldview.

In conclusion, Qur’an 75:36–40 and 36:77–83 beautifully complement each other. Together, they form a holistic commentary on creation, death, and resurrection. They engage the reader at multiple levels: visually (imagine the drop of fluid, the crumbled bone, the green twig igniting), intellectually (ponder the logical arguments and analogies), and spiritually (submit to the glorification of the One in whose hand is all dominion). The verses affirm life’s purpose and the eventual return to the Creator, urging us to recognize that the Author of life is the Restorer of life. In a modern context, these passages invite us to marvel at scientific truths as reflections of the divine plan and to maintain humility before the vast knowledge and power of God. They answer an ancient skepticism that remains relevant today: “After we have turned to dust, shall we really be raised up?” The Qur’an’s answer is a resounding yes – grounded not in wishful thinking, but in the very fabric of reality, from our earliest biological origins to the farthest stars. In both reasoning and revelation, the Qur’an asserts that the resurrection is neither impossible nor irrational – it is the inevitable fulfillment of the Creator’s purpose, as evidenced by His signs within us and around us.

Sources:

• Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī, Jāmi‘ al-Bayān (Commentary on Qur’an 75:36)​ ​quran.com and (Commentary on 36:77–79)​ surahquran.com​surahquran.com.
• Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘Aẓīm (14th c.) – commentary on 75:36–40​surahquran.com​ surahquran.com and 36:77–83 ​surahquran.com​surahquran.com.
• Abū’l A‘lā Mawdūdī, Towards Understanding the Qur’an (20th c.), commentary on 75:36 ​surahquran.com and 36:77–83​surahquran.com​surahquran.com.
• Amīn Aḥsan Islāḥī, Tadabbur-i-Qur’ān (20th c.) – insights on 36:77–83 (as cited in Quran Academy blog)​ quranacademy.io​quranacademy.io​.
• Yusuf Ali translation of Qur’an (for verse renderings).
• Keith L. Moore & T. V. N. Persaud, The Developing Human – on Quran and embryology (referenced conceptually for ‘alaqah stage).
• Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr (12th c.), and other classical tafsīrs for cross-references and isrā’īliyyāt (e.g., hadith of the man who had himself burned, in Ibn Kathīr on 36:79 ​surahquran.com).
• Qur’an 23:115, 30:27, 40:57, 45:21-22 for related Quranic context on purpose and resurrection.
• Islamic Studies Info (islamicstudies.info) and Quran X for compiled tafsirs​ versebyversequranstudycircle.wordpress.com​ surahquran.com.
• Quran Academy Blog, “Arguments in Surah Yasin Proving Bodily Resurrection” (2017)​ quranacademy.io.
• Academic journal article, M. I. Ansari (2010), “Human Embryology and the Holy Quran: An Overview” – for scientific corroboration of stages​ call-to-monotheism.com​call-to-monotheism.com.