Tafsir of At-Tariq 86:7

"Emerging from between the sulb (backbone)": That is, from between the segments of the sulb of every man—meaning his back.

"And the tara'ib": That is, from between the tara'ib of every woman—meaning the bones of her chest. Tara'ib is the plural of taribah. It has also been interpreted as the location of the necklace on the chest. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas that for every woman it is a single place, though it is pluralized, as in the statement of Imru' al-Qays:

It is used in the singular, tarib, as in the saying of al-Muthaqqib al-'Abdi: "And gold appearing upon the collarbone."

The interpretation of the verse according to what has been mentioned is narrated from Sufyan and Qatadah; however, they stated that it means: "It emerges from between the sulb of the man and the tara'ib of the woman." The manifest meaning of the verse is that one of the two parties to the "betweenness" is the sulb and the other is the tara'ib, which is different from what we have stated. In this regard, it is said to be like your saying: "Much good comes from between Zayd and 'Amr," in the sense that they are both causes of it. It is also said that this is because the man and woman become as one thing, so the sulb and the tara'ib belong to a single person—so do not be heedless.

Furthermore, the preceding is based either on the idea that the tara'ib are specific to the woman, as is the manifest speech of more than one [scholar], or on interpreting the definite article as referring to a known entity. Al-Hasan, and it is also narrated from Qatadah, said that the meaning is: "It emerges from between the sulb of each—the man and the woman—and the tara'ib of each of them." They did not define tara'ib, but it has been said: the bones of the chest, or the area between the breasts, or the area between the shoulders and the chest, or the collarbones, or four ribs from the right of the chest and four from the left. From Ibn Jubayr: the ribs which are below the sulb. Makki related from Ibn Abbas that they are the extremities of the person: their hands and their eyes. The most famous view is that they are the bones of the chest and the location of the necklace upon it.

Some heretics—may Allah the Exalted abandon them—attacked this by saying: "The semen is generated from the remainder of the fourth digestion and separates from all parts of the body, taking from every organ a nature and characteristic, preparing to generate those specific organs." If it is meant that the majority of the parts of the semen are generated in those two locations, this is weak, because the majority of it is generated in the brain—do you not see that in its appearance it resembles the brain, and one who engages in it excessively first shows weakness in his brain and eyes? If it is meant that its resting place is there, it is also weak, because its resting place is vessels that wind around one another near the testicles, called the "vessels of semen." If it is meant that its exit point is there, that is also [debatable], because sensory experience indicates otherwise.

The Imam—may Allah have mercy on him—replied: "There is no doubt that most of the organs assist in the generation of the semen: the brain, and its successor, the spinal cord in the sulb, and the branches descending to the front of the body, which are the tara'ib. Therefore, they are singled out for mention." Furthermore, their discourse on the matter of semen and its generation is pure conjecture and weak assumption, while the Glorious Word of Allah is not approached by falsehood from before it or from behind it; thus, it is the accepted and the relied upon.

In al-Kashf, I say: The spinal cord is between the sulb and the tara'ib. There is no need to restrict the tara'ib to women; those descending branches may be blocked. Furthermore, if those branches exist, they are nerves, not vessels. The correct view—and Allah the Exalted knows best—is that the spinal cord, along with the cerebral, cardiac, and hepatic powers, all cooperate to produce that residue in the state it is in, capable of becoming the origin of the person, as has been explained in its place. His saying, "from between the sulb and the tara'ib," is a concise expression encompassing the influence of the three organs. The tara'ib includes the heart and the liver, and their inclusion of the heart is more manifest. The sulb is the spinal cord, and through it, the brain. Perhaps there is no need to alert [the reader] to the location of the liver because of its obviousness, as it is refined blood. There was a need for what was hidden—the matter of the brain and heart in the formation of that water—so He alerted us to their locations. It is said that the beginning of the exit is from there, just as its end is through the urethra.

It is also said: if "what is between the sulb and the tara'ib" were made a metonym for the whole body, it would not be far-fetched, and its singling out for mention would be because they are like a vessel for the heart, which is the great lump of flesh within it. The case for this metonym, according to what Makki related from Ibn Abbas regarding the tara'ib, is more manifest.

Some have claimed the possibility that the sulb and tara'ib belong to the man—meaning it emerges from between the sulb and tara'ib of every man. Thus, "the gushing water" refers to the man's water only, and the speech is either by way of predominance or based on the view that the woman has no water at all, let alone "gushing water," as has been said. The state of this is obvious. The claim that the woman has no water is refuted by the Shari'ah and other [sciences].

Ibn Abi 'Ablah and Ibn Miqsam recited yakhruju (it emerges) in the passive voice. They, along with the people of Mecca and 'Isa, [read] as-sulb with the sad and lam both dammah. Al-Yamani read them with fatha. Two languages are narrated from al-'Ajaj:

There is a fourth linguistic form, salib, as in the saying of al-'Abbas:

Moved from a backbone to a womb.

It is rarely used. Some eminent scholars cited His saying, "He was created from a gushing water," as evidence that the human being is the specific physical structure, as held by the majority of theologians who deny the existence of an immaterial human rational soul that is neither inside the body nor outside it. They said: "It is strong evidence for this." To interpret it as having an elided noun—meaning: "The body of the human was created"—is not acceptable as long as no proof is established for the impossibility of its literal meaning. You know that those who hold the view of an immaterial rational soul have established what they consider proofs for its confirmation. Yes, there are debates on this for those who deny it, and the verification of this, with nothing left to add, is in the book ar-Ruh by the scholar Ibn al-Qayyim, may mercy be upon him.