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

Introduction

Does the Qur’an envision the Resurrection as a physical, bodily return to life or a purely spiritual revival? This question has long been a subject of theological and philosophical discussion in Islam. Mainstream Islamic doctrine – based on a plain reading of the Qur’an and prophetic teachings – affirms a bodily resurrection on the Day of Judgment, when human beings will be raised in flesh and form for divine reckoning​. Yet, the Qur’an’s rich imagery and occasional metaphorical language have also inspired minority interpretations that emphasize a spiritual resurrection or inner awakening. This article examines the Qur’anic evidence (focusing especially on Surat al-Qiyamah 75:1-5 and Surat as-Sajdah 32:17), classical Islamic exegesis (Ibn Kathir, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, and others), and diverse viewpoints to clarify whether the Qur’an teaches a bodily resurrection, a spiritual resurrection, or aspects of both. The discussion will show that while the Qur’an emphatically teaches the literal raising of bodies, it also alludes to realities beyond physical life – allowing for philosophical reflection on the spiritual dimensions of Resurrection without negating its literal truth.

Qur’anic Verses Affirming Bodily Resurrection

The Qur’an repeatedly asserts God’s power to resurrect the dead in bodily form, often addressing skeptics who doubted that decayed corpses could be restored. For example, Surat al-Qiyamah (75:1-5) opens with emphatic oaths by the Day of Resurrection itself, directly refuting those who denied the revival of human bodies​. In this passage, God poses a rhetorical question: “Does man think that We will not assemble his bones?” and immediately answers that indeed “We are able to perfectly restore even his fingertips.”​ The mention of assembling bones and finely reconstructing fingertips vividly underscores a physical resurrection down to the smallest details. As Ibn Kathir notes in his classical commentary, these verses affirm “surely, We will gather [the bones], and We are quite able to put together [even] his fingertips,” stressing God’s power to re-create the human body completely​. Such Qur’anic language leaves little doubt that actual bodily re-creation is intended.

This theme appears throughout the Qur’an. When unbelievers in Mecca scoffed at the idea of revival, pointing to crumbled skeletal remains, the Qur’an replied by reminding them of God’s initial act of creation and His ability to repeat it. In Surat Yā Sīn 36:78-79, a skeptic asks, “Who will give life to bones when they are disintegrated?” The Qur’an answers: “Say: He will give life to them who created them the first time, for He is Knower of every creation.”​ Here the Qur’an explicitly links resurrection to the same power by which God created life initially, reinforcing that reviving a decayed body is no more difficult for the Almighty than the original creation was​. Other verses employ similar reasoning – for instance, challenging humans to consider their own creation from a mere drop of fluid (sperm) as proof that resurrection is possible (Qur’an 22:5-7, 16:38-40). In short, the literal reanimation of the human body is a core Qur’anic doctrine, presented as a demonstration of divine omnipotence.

Some key Qur’anic verses that underscore bodily resurrection include:

• Qur’an 75:3-4: “Does man think We will not assemble his bones? Yes indeed – We are able to even reconstruct his fingertips.”​ This refutes those who deny the reassembly of the physical body, down to its minutest parts.
• Qur’an 36:78-79: “He says, ‘Who will give life to these bones when they have decayed?’ Say: ‘He who brought them forth the first time will revive them, and He has knowledge of every creation.’”​ This verse directly asserts that the same Creator who made human beings from nothing can revive their remains, however dispersed.
• Qur’an 17:49-51: “They say: ‘When we are bones and fragments, shall we really be raised up as a new creation?’ Say: ‘(Yes) even if you become rocks or iron or any substance you think hardest to bring to life.’” (paraphrase). Here, God proclaims no substance or state of decay can prevent Him from resurrecting embodied life anew.
• Qur’an 22:5-7: “O humanity! If you doubt the Resurrection – (consider that) We created you from dust, then from a drop of fluid… Look at the dry earth: We send down rain and it stirs to life… So will God bring forth the dead.” (summary). By analogy to rainfall reviving dead land and the stages of embryonic development, the Qur’an argues that bodily resurrection is both plausible and promised.

In all these examples, the context is a literal, future event in which dead persons return to life in a tangible form. The Qur’an’s emphasis on bones, flesh, and the physical process of re-creation would be superfluous if only a disembodied spiritual survival were meant. Moreover, the Qur’an describes scenarios of the Judgment where people emerge from graves, recognize one another, speak, and even try to flee – all implying embodied existence (see 36:51-52, 70:43, 75:10). In Surat al-Qiyamah, after asserting God’s ability to reassemble the body, the disbeliever is quoted asking, “When will this Day of Resurrection be?”​ – indicating that Resurrection is understood as a real future day when humans in bodily form face God’s judgment. Classical exegetes like Ibn Kathir explicitly state that this passage was revealed as a “refutation against the claim of the ignorant that the resurrection of bodies will not occur.”​ In Islamic creed, denying the bodily Resurrection was thus viewed as a grave error that the Qur’an decisively repudiates.

Surah Al-Qiyāmah (75:1-5): Reassembling Bones and Restoring Form

Because Surah al-Qiyāmah 75:1-5 is so central to this topic, it merits closer analysis. The surah begins, “I swear by the Day of Resurrection, and I swear by the self-reproaching soul” – an unusual double oath meant to draw attention to the reality of Resurrection. God then asks in verse 3, “Does man think that We shall not gather his bones?”, immediately answering in verse 4, “Yes indeed! We are Able to proportion (even) his fingertips.”​ The imagery is striking: God will gather all the scattered bones of the deceased and is fully capable of reassembling even the unique patterns of fingertips (an allusion to restoring a person’s exact identity)​ According to Ibn Kathir’s tafsir, “Surely, We will gather them and We are quite able to put together his fingertips” emphasizes that God’s power can not only rebuild the human skeleton but even restore its fine details, and if He willed, “He could resurrect [a person] with more than what he originally had.”​ In other words, nothing of the human body lies beyond God’s creative power – He could make all fingertips equal or any other change, but at minimum He promises to restore what once was.

Classical commentators relay that these verses were revealed in response to specific deniers of Resurrection. A narration from Ibn Abbas describes a pagan skeptic (identified in some accounts as Ubayy bin Khalaf) who picked up a dry bone, crumbled it, and blew the dust saying to the Prophet Muhammad, “Will God revive this after it has decayed?”​ The Qur’anic answer in Surah al-Qiyāmah – as well as the similar passage in Surah Yā Sīn – is a resounding yes: the same God who created life out of nothing can certainly recreate it from dust​. Al-Razi, the great theologian, points out that “God could re-create what had been made nonexistent” as a matter of divine omnipotence, forming the basis of literal belief in bodily resurrection​. In his Tafsīr al-Kabīr, Fakhr al-Dīn al-Razi thus upholds the Ash‘arite theological position that no particle lost is beyond God’s ability to restore, countering philosophical doubts. He even notes and refutes an alternative theory (attributed to the Mu‘tazilite Ibn al-Malāḥimī) that the elements of the body might persist in some form – either way, Razi insists, Allah will reassemble the essential parts on the Resurrection Day, whether by gathering dispersed matter or by creating afresh an identical form​.

The oath “Nay, I swear by the Day of Resurrection” at the start of Surah 75 signals the utmost seriousness of this doctrine. The Qur’an seldom makes oaths except to underscore a fundamental truth. Here the truth is that the Final Resurrection is real and corporeal, and the subsequent verses dismantle the “plots of the thinkers” who schemed to deny it​. The passage also subtly exposes the psychological motive of the deniers: “Rather, man desires to continue in sin ahead of him” (75:5) – implying that people denied Resurrection not due to lack of evidence, but out of wishful thinking to avoid accountability​. In context, the insistence on bodily resurrection serves a moral purpose: it guarantees that humans, in their embodied selves, will face consequences for their deeds. As Islamic theologians have often observed, justice in the hereafter necessitates bodily resurrection, since rewards and punishments (pleasures of Paradise or pains of Hell) correspond to the actions of the whole person (body and soul) in this life. Thus, Surah al-Qiyāmah leaves no ambiguity: the Qur’an teaches that on the Day of Resurrection, human beings will be raised in body – refuting those who thought it impossible or implausible.

Surah Al-Sajdah (32:17): Unimaginable Rewards – Physical or Spiritual?

While verses like 75:3-4 emphasize the physicality of resurrection, other verses highlight the transcendent quality of the life hereafter, which might be seen as “spiritual” in the sense of beyond ordinary human experience. A prominent example is Surah as-Sajdah 32:17: “No soul knows what delights of the eyes are kept hidden for them as a reward for what they used to do.”​ This verse indicates that the bliss awaiting the righteous is literally unimaginable – so sublime that no one in this world has seen, heard, or even conceived of it. Classical exegesis connects this verse with a famous hadith qudsī (divine saying) in which Allah declares: “I have prepared for My righteous servants what no eye has seen, no ear has heard, and what has never crossed the mind of any human.”​ Abu Hurayrah, who narrates this hadith, would recite 32:17 “If you wish, read: ‘No soul knows what is hidden for them of joy…’” as proof of that reality​. Thus, Surah 32:17 conveys that the afterlife’s pleasures are of a different order of magnitude and quality than any pleasures known on earth.

The key question is whether this unknowable reward is meant to be physical, spiritual, or both. Mainstream scholars interpret 32:17 as encompassing all forms of reward – physical delights in Paradise as well as spiritual joys (foremost among them the beatific vision of God, according to later Islamic theology). The verse does not negate the physical resurrection; rather, it emphasizes that even those physical experiences will far exceed worldly analogies. For instance, the Qur’an elsewhere describes some joys of Paradise in sensory terms – delicious foods and drinks, gardens with rivers of milk and honey, beautiful spouses, sumptuous couches, etc. (Qur’an 37:40-48, 47:15, 55:52-56). These might sound “physical,” yet 32:17 reminds us that the reality of those pleasures is beyond our current comprehension. Many theologians resolve this by asserting that while the afterlife includes bodily enjoyments, the nature of those bodies and senses will be refined and heightened in ways we cannot imagine. Fakhr al-Dīn al-Razi, in commenting on such verses, often stresses that Paradise’s greatest bliss is ultimately spiritual – nearness to God – even as bodily resurrection is affirmed. In the classical Sunni creed, there is no contradiction here: humans will be resurrected bodily, but with faculties expanded to experience new dimensions of delight or torment.

Interestingly, some mystical commentators lean on verses like 32:17 to argue that the ultimate reward is spiritual vision rather than material pleasure. They point out that an ordinary bodily eye or ear cannot perceive what is being promised – implying the resurrected human may attain higher senses or spiritual perception. For example, Sufi scholars often emphasize that “delight of the eyes” in 32:17 alludes to the joy of ru’yatullāh (seeing God) in the Hereafter, something “no eye has ever seen” in this world. This does not deny the bodily eye – rather, it suggests the experience will transcend any normal sensory input. In sum, Surah 32:17 underscores the transcendence of the afterlife state. It fits harmoniously with the broader Qur’anic teaching: after resurrection, humans live in an embodied form but under radically different conditions. As Ibn Kathir says, “no person knows” the full reality of what God has hidden as a reward​ – a statement leaving room for profound spiritual mysteries within the framework of bodily resurrection.

Classical Islamic Interpretations: Ibn Kathir, Al-Razi, and Others

Classical Muslim exegetes and theologians almost uniformly taught that the Qur’an intends a real, bodily resurrection. The literal wording of the Qur’an was usually taken at face value in this regard, and denials of bodily resurrection were viewed as outside the pale of orthodox belief. Ibn Kathir (d. 1373), a renowned Sunni commentator, explicitly frames Qur’anic passages as affirmations of physical resurrection. We have already seen his commentary on Qiyamah 75:3-4, where he explains that God will “return his bones and gather them from their various places” on Judgment Day​. Ibn Kathir also highlights the Qur’an’s subtle evidence for bodily identity: God’s mention of fingertips in 75:4 “means Our power is such that We can gather and recreate them [the bones and body parts], and if We wished We could surely resurrect him with more than what he originally had.”​ In other words, reassembling the precise original body is well within divine power, and indeed that is what will happen. In his tafsir on Surah 32:17, Ibn Kathir simply cites the hadith about the unseen reward​, treating it as confirmation that Paradise’s joys are real but beyond imagination, without suggesting any negation of physicality. For Ibn Kathir and the mainstream tradition he represents, the Qur’an’s teaching was clear: people will rise from their graves bodily, then experience rewards or punishments that, while described in familiar imagery, ultimately exceed worldly experience.

Fakhr al-Dīn al-Razi (d. 1210), a towering scholar who wrote the expansive Mafātiḥ al-Ghayb (also known as Al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr), approaches resurrection with both textual fidelity and philosophical rigor. Al-Razi vehemently upheld bodily resurrection, aligning with the orthodox Ash‘ari theology. He notes that God’s limitless power means nothing that once existed is beyond re-creation, saying: “Al-Razi held the Ash‘arite position that God could re-create what had been made nonexistent, and this formed the basis of his literal understanding of bodily resurrection.”​ However, Razi also engaged with the intellectual challenges of resurrection – for instance, the question of continuity: is the resurrected body made of the exact same particles or just an identical form? He records the Mu‘tazilite view (Ibn al-Malāḥimī’s theory) that the matter of the world is not annihilated but “dissociated” and can be reassembled​. Razi does not reject the idea that resurrection could involve reassembling original particles, but he ultimately emphasizes God’s freedom to either gather the old parts or create new ones – either way, a person’s identity and form are restored by divine fiat. This reflects a broader consensus in kalām (Islamic theology) that the identity of the resurrected person is guaranteed by God’s preservation of the soul or essence, not necessarily by each atom being the same. Razi’s commitment to literal resurrection is so strong that he sometimes refutes or “goes out of his way to present unorthodox views… before refuting them,” precisely to show the supremacy of the orthodox position​. In short, Razi’s tafsir affirms that at resurrection, body and soul are reunited: unlike philosophers who posited survival of the soul alone, “Imam Razi asserts that at resurrection the jism (body) will be rejoined with the soul,” in line with Qur’anic teaching​.

Other classical authorities echo the same understanding. Al-Tabari (d. 923), in his foundational commentary, marshals early reports from the Prophet’s companions that interpret verses like 75:3-4 in the straightforward sense of reviving bodies from dust. Al-Qurtubi (d. 1273), in Al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, dedicates extensive commentary to resurrection, even addressing questions about whether resurrected people are naked or clothed, young or old, etc., all under the premise of an actual bodily rising. Ibn Al-Jawzi and Al-Baydawi similarly affirm the plain meaning of the texts. In fact, all Sunni and Twelver Shi‘i commentators of note upheld bodily resurrection as a pillar of faith (it was considered one of the essential tenets of Islam’s creed, often listed alongside belief in God, prophets, angels, and scriptures). Dissent on this matter was exceedingly rare within the exegetical tradition. It is telling that denying bodily resurrection was deemed outright disbelief (kufr) by Sunni theologians: Imam al-Ghazali in his Tahāfut al-Falāsifah declared the idea that “there is only a spiritual resurrection and no bodily resurrection” to be a heretical doctrine that removes one from Islam​. He famously pronounced takfīr on the philosophers (like Ibn Sina/Avicenna and Al-Farabi) for, among other things, asserting the impossibility of bodily resurrection​. This reflects just how strongly the classical scholars understood the Qur’an to be teaching a future resurrection in the flesh. Any interpretation that negated that was seen as contradicting the Qur’an’s clear import and the Prophet’s teachings.

To illustrate the classical stance, consider Al-Ghazali’s reasoning: he argues that the Qur’an and hadith unequivocally affirm physical pleasures and pains in the afterlife, such as eating, drinking, sexual bliss for the saved, or physical burning and renewal of skin for the damned​. Indeed, the Qur’an graphically describes how the damned will have their skins repeatedly replaced so they can continue to feel the pain of fire (Qur’an 4:56)​ – a description that only makes sense with a functioning nervous system and body. “Every time their skins are roasted through We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the punishment,” says Qur’an 4:56, underscoring that corporeal sensation is the vehicle of punishment​. On the flip side, Qur’an 36:55-56 says the inhabitants of Paradise will be “busy enjoying themselves, they and their spouses, reclining on couches”, indicating social and physical enjoyments. Given these scriptural affirmations, Ghazali wrote that the philosophers’ denial of bodily resurrection undermined the core of Islamic eschatology and was therefore utterly unacceptable​. Subsequent Sunni creeds (like al-Tahawi’s Creed and Nasafi’s statements) all include belief in resurrection of the body among the fundamental articles of faith.

In sum, classical interpretations of the Qur’an overwhelmingly support bodily resurrection. Ibn Kathir encapsulates the Qur’anic message by stating that Allah “will gather the disintegrated bones and the scattered particles of man from different parts of the world and give them life again, as He did the first time.”​ There was virtually no debate on whether the Qur’an teaches bodily resurrection – it does. The debates, as we will see, were more about how to philosophically explain it, and whether any verses had additional esoteric meanings beyond the literal.

Philosophical and Theological Reflections

Although the Qur’an’s position is clear, the notion of bodily resurrection did raise challenging questions that Muslim philosophers and theologians grappled with. The crux of the issue is the relationship between the human soul (ruh/nafs) and the body (jism), and what constitutes personal identity in the afterlife. The Qur’an itself does not spell out the metaphysics of resurrection (beyond the fact that God will accomplish it). This left room for philosophical speculation – and at times, controversy – in Islam’s intellectual history.

Early Islamic philosophers, influenced by Greek philosophical ideas, tended to emphasize the immortality of the soul and were less comfortable with the idea of the same material body coming back. For example, Al-Kindi (d. 873), the first Muslim philosopher, argued that the human soul is an incorporeal substance only temporarily united with the body​. He described the soul’s connection to the body as “accidental and temporary”, implying that the body is not essential to the soul’s life​. In his view, “the soul continues to live while the body is demolished,” and the soul eventually returns to the eternal realm​. Al-Farabi (d. 950) and Ibn Sina (Avicenna, d. 1037) had similar perspectives: they believed in an afterlife as an intellectual or spiritual experience for the soul, rather than a physical resurrection of flesh. Ibn Sina, for instance, in his esoteric writings apparently regarded the Qur’anic depictions of bodily reward and punishment as symbolic language for the masses, while he personally viewed the afterlife in terms of the soul’s union with the realm of intellect. These philosophers did not outright deny resurrection – they knew the Qur’an affirms it – but they reinterpreted it to fit a Neoplatonic model where only the soul’s immortality truly matters. This amounted to asserting only a “spiritual resurrection” in the sense that the person lives on only as a disembodied soul, not via a revivified body​. Such views were diametrically opposed to the theologians’ understanding.

The Islamic theologians (mutakallimun), particularly of the Ash‘ari and Maturidi schools, pushed back strongly. They insisted that bodily resurrection is literal and must be affirmed even if it transcends full rational explanation. As mentioned, Al-Ghazali (d. 1111) condemned the philosophers for rejecting bodily resurrection, calling it a violation of explicit scriptural statements​. The theologians made a few philosophical arguments of their own to justify bodily resurrection:

• First, they argued from divine omnipotence – God is all-powerful and not constrained by the “laws” of nature. So even if reassembling a burned body seems impossible by natural means, it is easy for the One who created the universe ex nihilo. Fakhr al-Razi’s point about God recreating what was annihilated fits here: since God can annihilate and recreate at every moment (as Ash‘ari occasionalist metaphysics holds), resurrecting a long-dead body poses no philosophical contradiction​. The only limit would be if resurrection were logically impossible – which it is not, since the body is just a collection of atoms or elements that can be re-collected or remade by the Creator.
• Second, theologians tackled the identity problem: how is the “same” person resurrected if their original matter has disintegrated or been dispersed (or even eaten by another creature)? Different theological schools offered different solutions. Some, like certain Mu‘tazilites, held that God will gather the exact original particles of the body (except those that would unjustly harm another’s body) – effectively restoring the very matter that was once the person​. Others (like most Ash‘aris) held that identity does not require the same exact atoms; God could create a body identical to the first, and by reuniting it with the same soul or conscious self, it counts as the same person. They often gave analogies: a person who loses limbs or hair and later these parts regenerate is still the “same person,” not because the matter is identical (it isn’t) but because their form/soul is the same. Likewise, on Resurrection Day the person is the same by virtue of the soul and God’s definition of personal identity, even if the material substrate is renewed. In fact, many theologians believed the soul never perishes – it remains in the barzakh (intermediate realm) after death – and thus at resurrection the soul simply reenters a body that God provides.
• Third, theologians underscored moral coherence: if only souls were rewarded or punished, what about the body that actually committed sins or good deeds? It would seem unjust for the body to have no share in punishment or reward, since in life the body was the instrument of action. Thus, they argued divine justice demands that bodies be resurrected so that individuals (as composites of body and soul) face the consequences together. The Qur’an’s portrayal of bodily punishment (burning skin, etc.)​ supports this moral reasoning.

Over time, Muslim philosophers themselves revisited the question of resurrection with more nuance, especially after Ghazali’s critique. Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198), though a philosopher, defended the idea that resurrection must include the body (at least in his Ash‘arite phase and to satisfy theological requirements, even if his personal philosophical views were complex). But the most remarkable synthesis came from Mulla Sadra (Sadr al-Din al-Shirazi, d. 1640), who developed a detailed metaphysical explanation for bodily resurrection. Mulla Sadra’s theory of “substantial motion” (al-harakat al-jawhariyya) posited that all beings are in a constant process of inner change and development, and that the soul “acquires” a spiritual body through its actions and qualities. In his view, the soul never exists without some body: in this world it has a physical body, in the intermediate state a subtle body, and in the afterlife a perfected, resurrection body​. Sadra asserted “a body is indispensable to the soul at all stages of its existence… By the time God created the human soul, He also created it to manage a natural sensory form, whether in this world, in the barzakh, or in the hereafter.”​ Thus after death “God needs to create bodies to distinguish one soul from another,” meaning each soul will indeed be embodied again in the Hereafter​. He went on to argue philosophically that the identity of a person is preserved by the continuous existence of the soul, which can generate a corresponding body appropriate to its level. Using a series of philosophical premises, Sadra concluded that the resurrected body is numerically the same body as the earthly one in the only sense that matters – it is the same person’s body, arising from the soul’s reality, even if the material composition is renewed​. He wrote that we already have an analogy in life: an old man is the “same” person who was once a child, even though over the years every particle of his body has changed; “nothing remains of [his childhood body]… except due to the persistence of his soul. Hence this present body is precisely the same as that earlier one in [one] respect, while in another respect the two are not the same… both aspects are true without contradiction.”​ By this logic, “the man who is living now is precisely the same as the man who will return after death.”​ The difference is that the resurrected body will be of a higher order – “luminous, eternal, free from disease and decay” for the blessed, or appropriately transformed for the wicked​. Mulla Sadra thus provided a sophisticated philosophical account that fully endorses Qur’anic bodily resurrection, interpreting it as the natural fulfillment of the soul’s evolution. It’s notable that modern scholars see “Sadra’s ideas on bodily resurrection [as] in line with the statements of the Qur’an that say the body in the hereafter will be the same earthly body and not merely a symbolic one.”​ In other words, he reconciled philosophy with the apparent literal meaning of scripture, rather than against it.

From a broader perspective, Islamic thought has generally integrated both bodily and spiritual aspects in its understanding of resurrection. While rejecting the idea that resurrection is “only spiritual,” scholars acknowledge that the resurrected body is not just a crude material body – it is a vehicle for experiencing spiritual truths. The physical resurrection enables individuals to have tangible experiences (reward or punishment), yet those experiences often have profound spiritual significance (e.g. the joy of being near to God or the misery of being veiled from Him). Many theologians say that the highest bliss of Paradise is “the Beatific Vision” – encountering God – which is sometimes described in metaphorical terms because it is beyond physical sight. Thus, body and spirit work together in the afterlife: the body is resurrected and made suitable for an eternal life, and the spirit finds complete fulfillment or despair through what the resurrected body experiences. This holistic view aligns with the Qur’an, which does not separate the human being into dichotomous parts in the afterlife – the whole person is addressed. For instance, on the Day of Resurrection the Qur’an often says “souls” (anfus) will be recompensed (e.g. 81:7, “when souls are paired [with their deeds]”), but also speaks of bodies coming forth from graves (e.g. 70:43, “the Day they emerge from the graves hastening…”). The implicit understanding is that the soul will not be left floating in abstraction – it will be embodied when it is brought to account.

In summary, the mainstream philosophical-theological consensus in Islam arrived at the conclusion that the Qur’an teaches a bodily resurrection supplemented by spiritual realities. Any view reducing resurrection to a purely spiritual event (souls only, or a metaphor for something else) was deemed inconsistent with the Qur’anic proclamation. At the same time, Muslim thinkers enriched the concept by exploring how the bodily resurrection leads to experiences that transcend the purely material – in Paradise, “what no eye has seen,”​ and in Hell, forms of anguish that go beyond worldly pain. The end result is a doctrine of resurrection that is both bodily and spiritual: the dead will rise bodily, and through their renewed bodies they will partake in either bliss or torment that engages their entire being.

Minority and Esoteric Interpretations

Although the orthodox Islamic view of Resurrection is firmly bodily, there have been minority interpretations that diverge from the literal understanding. These often come from mystical (Sufi) or esoteric (particular Shi‘i sects) tendencies, or from rationalist modern re-readings. It is important to note that these interpretations are not the mainstream, but they provide insight into how flexible the symbolism of resurrection can be in the Qur’an’s language.

One form of non-literal interpretation is to see Qur’anic references to “death” and “resurrection” as metaphors for spiritual states. Indeed, the Qur’an itself sometimes uses such metaphors. For example, it describes the unguided person as “dead” and then given life by faith: “Is one who was dead and We gave him life and set for him a light by which to walk among people like one in darkness?” (Qur’an 6:122). Here “dead” clearly means spiritually dead (unaware of truth) and being given “life” means coming to faith – a kind of spiritual resurrection in this life. The Qur’an also likens the reviving of barren land with rain to the raising of people from the dead (30:50, 35:9), implying a symbolic parallel between revival in nature and resurrection. Capitalizing on such usages, some have argued that the Qur’an at times “defines death and resurrection spiritually or metaphorically.”​ A recent scholarly work by Abdulla Galadari, Metaphors of Death and Resurrection in the Qur’an, demonstrates that several passages can be read on multiple levels – for instance, Ezekiel’s “valley of dry bones” story is echoed in the Qur’an (2:243, 2:259) with a possible metaphorical meaning of reviving a community or restoring faith​. However, crucially, these metaphorical or spiritual readings do not negate the literal doctrine – they exist “alongside” the conventional interpretation, not in outright contradiction​. Sufi commentators, for example, often accepted the literal truth of bodily resurrection but also found inner meanings in the Qur’anic descriptions. They might say every individual must undergo a personal “resurrection” – a transformation of the soul – before the physical Resurrection, by awakening from the slumber of heedlessness (ghafla) and rising to the life of the heart. The Prophet Muhammad’s famous saying, “Die before you die,” is taken by Sufis as encouragement to experience a spiritual death and rebirth (i.e., ego death followed by illumination) in this life, prefiguring the actual Resurrection to come.

More radically, certain Isma‘ili Shi‘i teachings interpreted Resurrection in a completely symbolic and inward manner. The Isma‘ilis developed an esoteric theology in which religious terms had multiple levels of meaning (ẓāhir, the outward, and bāṭin, the inward). In their view, the Qiyāmah (Resurrection) could refer to a spiritual event or era rather than a one-time physical upheaval of graves. Notably, the Nizārī Isma‘ilis under the medieval leader Ḥasan II of Alamut (Iran) declared in 1164 CE that the “Great Resurrection” (al-Qiyāma al-Qubrā) had occurred in a spiritual sense. This esoteric Qiyāmah meant that the community had entered a new spiritual phase where the inner truth of religion was unveiled, and certain rituals were replaced with a perpetual inner worship​. In this interpretation, Resurrection symbolizes spiritual transformation and the unveiling of divine light in the hearts of believers​. The Isma‘ili doctrine, especially as outlined in their treatise Haft Bab (Seven Chapters), thus dramatically diverges from Qur’anic eschatology in form: “The Ismaili interpretation of the Qiyāmat is radically different from Qur’anic eschatology in its esoteric formation, spiritual aspiration and imaginative scope.”​ For Isma‘ilis, Resurrection can be an internal, cyclical event tied to the appearance of the Imam of the Time (the Qā’im) who “resurrects” scriptures by revealing their hidden meanings ​ismailignosis.com. This approach effectively sidesteps the literal raising of bodies – some Isma‘ili texts almost seem to allegorize away the physical resurrection (which led other Muslims to accuse them of denying a core tenet). It should be mentioned that even within Isma‘ilism there were nuanced views: earlier Fatimid Isma‘ilis did expect a future outward Qiyāma as well, but the Alamūt-period Nizārīs emphasized the spiritualized interpretation.

Beyond Sufi and Isma‘ili circles, one finds individual thinkers who toyed with non-literal understandings. For instance, some modernist Muslim authors influenced by science or metaphorical hermeneutics have suggested that the Qur’anic descriptions of Paradise and Hell might be symbolic of spiritual conditions rather than physical locales. They argue that what matters is the soul’s experience of joy or regret, and that physical imagery is a way to communicate those realities to human minds. However, even most modernists stop short of denying bodily resurrection outright, since the Qur’an’s statements are so explicit. A few extreme “Qur’anist” or heterodox writers have claimed that “resurrection” simply means the revival of communities or nations (drawing on verses where dead towns are brought back to life). These remain fringe views without support in classical scholarship.

A noteworthy case outside Islam proper is the Bahá’í Faith (which emerged from a Shī‘a Islamic milieu in the 19th century). Bahá’ís interpret Islamic prophecies, including resurrection, entirely symbolically. They assert that Qur’anic resurrection and the Day of Judgment refer to the appearance of a new Divine Revelation (in their belief, the mission of Bahá’u’lláh) and the spiritual judgment of people’s acceptance or rejection of it. Thus, graves opening and bodies rising are seen as metaphors for souls attaining new spiritual life by embracing God’s message. While this view is decidedly non-Islamic from a Muslim perspective, it represents how far a purely “spiritual resurrection” reading can go – effectively reading the doctrine as an allegory for religious renewal, with no literal end-time event at all. Mainstream Islam strongly rejects such an approach, maintaining that the Qur’anic verses cannot be emptied of their plain meaning. The Bahá’í-type interpretation is mentioned here only to illustrate the spectrum of interpretation: it is even more radical than the Isma‘ili esoteric approach, as it transfers resurrection from the individual afterlife to a collective historical metaphor.

In Islamic mysticism (Sufism), one also finds poetic expressions that blur the line between the literal and metaphorical. Jalal ad-Din Rumi, for instance, often speaks of spiritual resurrection: “On the Day when you die to the self, you shall rise in the spirit,” he implies, showing how the concept of qiyāma can inspire personal spiritual growth. But crucially, Sufi poets and saints, while interiorizing these meanings, generally still believed in the literal Resurrection to come. For them the spiritual resurrection now is a preparation or foretaste of the greater Resurrection. None of the acclaimed Sufi shaykhs denied bodily resurrection – even Ibn ‘Arabi (d. 1240), who is often considered extremely esoteric, upheld the necessity of bodily resurrection. Ibn ‘Arabi wrote that the soul requires a body in every realm to act as its vehicle and locus of manifestation ​salehdaulay.com. He stated, “a body is indispensable to the soul at all stages … whether in this world, in the Barzakh, or in the Hereafter,” and that God will “create the bodies [again] to distinguish one soul from another” in the Resurrection ​salehdaulay.com. This is a remarkably clear endorsement of bodily resurrection from the greatest Sufi theoretician, demonstrating that mystical insight in Islam did not mean rejecting the outward doctrine. Ibn ‘Arabi’s perspective can be seen as a minority emphasis – he focuses on the existential and spiritual reasons for why the soul must have a body (to fulfill its divine purpose), complementing the legalistic or theological assertions of others. Thus, even the mystics, when writing doctrinally, confirm the Qur’an’s teaching of a bodily rising, albeit they richly describe the spiritual processes underlying it.

To sum up, while allegorical and mystical interpretations of resurrection exist, they usually function as additional layers of meaning rather than replacements for the literal meaning. The mainstream view (across Sunni, Shi‘i, and Ibadi Islam) remains that the Qur’an intends a real Resurrection of the dead at the end of time, involving the restoration of bodies and the judgment of individuals in both body and soul. Minoritarian views – such as those in certain Isma‘ili texts or some modernist tracts – that reduce resurrection to a symbol or purely spiritual concept are outside orthodox consensus. The very fact that the Qur’an’s language had to be “radically reinterpreted” by groups like the Nizari Isma‘ilis ​iis.ac.uk shows how deeply the literal doctrine was ingrained; they found it necessary to invoke an entirely different esoteric framework to get around the plain sense. In contrast, the dominant scholarly tradition, including the likes of Ibn Kathir and Al-Razi, found no conflict between the Qur’anic literal teachings and profound spiritual truths – both are affirmed, with the understanding that the bodily resurrection is the stage on which the soul’s ultimate destiny is played out.

Conclusion

Both the philosophical reasoning and the theological consensus in Islam converge on the conclusion that the Qur’an teaches a bodily resurrection – a revival of human beings in their corporeal form – albeit a body transformed for an eternal afterlife. The Qur’anic evidence is abundant and explicit: God will raise up those in the graves, assemble their bones, even to their fingertips ​abdurrahman.org, and restore them to life as He did when He created them the first time ​surahquran.com. Classical exegetes from the earliest times unanimously understood these passages in a literal sense, and heresiographers list denial of bodily resurrection as a deviation rejected by all orthodox schools. At the same time, the Qur’an balances this emphasis on physical resurrection with reminders that the afterlife will surpass the physical as we know it – “no soul knows what delights are kept hidden”​ Thus, the bodily resurrection in the Qur’an is not a mere return to mundane life, but an entry into a new order of existence where physical and spiritual joys (or sufferings) intermingle in ways presently inconceivable.

In the Islamic scholarly tradition, this did not become an “either/or” question – both the bodily and spiritual dimensions of resurrection are affirmed. The body will be raised, and the soul will experience realities far beyond earthly life. Philosophers who leaned toward a purely spiritual view were corrected by theologians citing the Qur’an’s clear words and by the inherent justice in reuniting body with soul for reward or punishment. Mystics who spoke of inner resurrection nevertheless acknowledged that the outward resurrection awaits all humanity by God’s decree. Even innovative thinkers like Mulla Sadra found ways to show that a resurrected body is philosophically necessary for the soul’s journey, reinforcing that Qur’anic teaching and rational thought ultimately coincide on this point​ salehdaulay.com.

Minority interpretations serve to remind us of the Qur’an’s richness – its verses can inspire allegory and introspection – but these do not nullify the literal doctrine. The main thrust of the Qur’anic message is that human beings should live with an awareness of Resurrection: a coming Day when we rise from death, bodily and consciously, to account for our lives. This belief in Resurrection (al-ba‘th) is tied intimately to the Qur’an’s moral and spiritual worldview. It grounds the ethical urgency of the text, offering both hope for ultimate justice and warning of consequences. Whether one emphasizes the corporeal details or the spiritual implications, the Qur’an leaves no doubt that Resurrection is a reality decreed by God, not a mere metaphor. As the Qur’an rhetorically asks, “Is not He who created the heavens and earth able to create the like of them (again)? Yes indeed, He is the Supreme Creator, All-Knowing” (36:81).

In conclusion, the Qur’an teaches a bodily resurrection – our earthly bodies (in whatever state of decay) will be reconstituted by the divine command – and through that resurrection, we will step into a life that is also profoundly spiritual. The physical resurrection is the bridge to eternal life, where the rewards and losses are experienced by the complete human being. Classical interpretations (Ibn Kathir, Razi, et al.) affirm this unequivocally, and even when considering philosophical or mystical perspectives, they ultimately circle back to the integrative view: the Resurrection is bodily in execution and spiritual in its highest fulfillment. Any purely “spiritual resurrection” notion, stripped of literal embodiment, fails to do justice to the emphatic language of the Qur’an and the consensus of its interpreters. Thus, for scholars and students of Quranic theology, the answer is clear – the Qur’an envisions resurrection as the raising of the body animated by the soul, inaugurating a new mode of existence where both bodily and spiritual realities attain their perfection.

Sources:

• The Qur’an with classical Tafsīr (exegesis) – e.g. Ibn Kathīr on Surah 75:3-4 (resurrection of bodies)​ abdurrahman.org and Surah 75:1-2 (context of refuting deniers) ​abdurrahman.org; Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī’s theological insights on God’s power to resurrect physically​ fakhrulrazi.blogspot.com.
• Ḥadīth literature – e.g. the divine saying cited in explanation of Qur’an 32:17 (unseen rewards) ​surahquran.com.
• Classical theological works – Ghazālī’s Tahāfut (denouncing those who reject bodily resurrection)​ salehdaulay.com; creedal statements affirming resurrection of the body.
• Philosophical writings – views of early falāsifa like al-Kindī (soul’s immortality without body)​ salehdaulay.com versus later philosophers like Mullā Ṣadrā (harmonizing body-soul resurrection)​ salehdaulay.com.
• Sufi and Esoteric texts – Ibn ‘Arabī on the necessity of embodiment in every realm ​salehdaulay.com; Ismā‘īlī treatises (e.g. Haft Bāb) outlining a spiritualized interpretation of Qiyāmah ​iis.ac.uk.
• Modern scholarship – e.g. Galadari’s study on metaphorical language of resurrection ​library.oapen.org, which confirms that while metaphors exist, the prevailing Qur’anic theme still supports a literal afterlife rising.

All these sources reinforce that the Qur’an’s doctrine of Resurrection is first and foremost bodily, with a rich spiritual significance – a belief that has been central to Islamic theology from the Prophet’s time until today. abdurrahman.org​ ​surahquran.com ​fakhrulrazi.blogspot.com​salehdaulay.com​ salehdaulay.com​iis.ac.uk