Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature: Difference between revisions

From WikiIslam, the online resource on Islam
Jump to navigation Jump to search
[checked revision][checked revision]
Line 356: Line 356:
{{main|Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance}}
{{main|Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance}}
The Quranic story of Dhu'l Qarnayn is narrated in {{Quran-range|18|83|101}}, and is perhaps the most famous example of an intertextual relationship between the Quran and a non-biblical legend. Academic scholars consider the Quranic pericope to be closely connected to the ''Syriac Alexander Legend'', which has Alexander the Great voyaging to the ends of the earth to see where the sun sets and also describes its rising place, before he secures the Huns (including Gog and Magog) behind an iron wall. The academic consensus today is that the story was composed in the sixth century CE, with a small interpolation around 629-30 CE to make it relevant to a later context (previously, a prominent view had been that the whole legend was composed at that later date, but this is now rejected). The legend of Alexander enclosing Gog and Magog behind a iron barrier is first found several centuries earlier in the works of the Jewish historian Josephus. For a detailed discussion, see the main article.
The Quranic story of Dhu'l Qarnayn is narrated in {{Quran-range|18|83|101}}, and is perhaps the most famous example of an intertextual relationship between the Quran and a non-biblical legend. Academic scholars consider the Quranic pericope to be closely connected to the ''Syriac Alexander Legend'', which has Alexander the Great voyaging to the ends of the earth to see where the sun sets and also describes its rising place, before he secures the Huns (including Gog and Magog) behind an iron wall. The academic consensus today is that the story was composed in the sixth century CE, with a small interpolation around 629-30 CE to make it relevant to a later context (previously, a prominent view had been that the whole legend was composed at that later date, but this is now rejected). The legend of Alexander enclosing Gog and Magog behind a iron barrier is first found several centuries earlier in the works of the Jewish historian Josephus. For a detailed discussion, see the main article.
== The End of Jesus's Earthly Mission ==
The [[Isa al-Masih (Jesus Christ)|Jesus in the Quran]] is quite different to that of the bible. One aspect that differs notably from the gospels surrounds the crucifixion, and taking away (''tawaffī'') and raising (''rafʿ'') of him. 
{{Quote|{{Quran-range|3|54|55}}|Then they plotted [against Jesus], and Allah also devised, and Allah is the best of devisers. <br>When Allah said, ‘O Jesus, I shall take you[r soul], and I shall raise you up toward Myself, and I shall clear you of [the calumnies of] the faithless, and I shall set those who follow you above the faithless until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me will be your return, whereat I will judge between you concerning that about which you used to differ.}}
{{Quote|{{Quran-range|4|156|159}}|And for their faithlessness, and their uttering a monstrous calumny against Mary,<br>and for their saying, ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the apostle of Allah’—though they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but so it was made to appear to them. Indeed those who differ concerning him are surely in doubt about him: they do not have any knowledge of that beyond following conjectures, and certainly, they did not kill him.<br> Indeed, Allah raised him up toward Himself, and Allah is all-mighty, all-wise. <br> There is none among the People of the Book but will surely believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them.}}
Professor Sean Anthony (2025) reports in his paper ''The Early Aramaic Toledot Yeshu and the End of Jesus’s Earthly Mission in the Qur’an,''<ref>Sean W. Anthony; ''The Early Aramaic Toledot Yeshu and the End of Jesus’s Earthly Mission in the Qur’an.'' Studies in Late Antiquity 1 May 2025; 9 (2): 151–185. doi: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1525/sla.2025.9.2.151</nowiki></ref> the somewhat vague Qur'anic accounts of the end of the ministry of Jesus and execution match with a key points from a Jewish anti-gospel work known in modern scholarship as Toledot Yeshu (The Life Story of Jesus)<ref name=":2">Ibid. pp. 153</ref> (which is not a single text but a tradition of polemical counternarratives drawing from oral stories and anecdotes originating in a Jewish environment)<ref>Ibid. pp. 171</ref> rather than the Gospels (or other heretical Christian sect work). The oldest recension of it (comprising the 'Pilate' or 'Early Oriental' recensions) was believed to be committed to writing as early as 500-600CE in the Sasanian Empire, but references to many of the motifs found in the Toledot and its component narratives can be traced in various writings from the second century onward.<ref>Ibid. pp. 173</ref> It is summarised in the paper,<ref>Ibid. pp. 173-176</ref> where he notes the key parallel overlaps for these motifs:<ref>Ibid pp.177.</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|+
|'''Motif'''
|'''Toledot Yeshu'''
|'''Qur’an (3:54–55, 4:156–159)'''
|-
|Mary is depicted as adulterous / Jesus as illegitimate
|✓ (implied)
|4:156–159 ✓ (implied by saying the Jews slander Mary, a point agreed by Islamic exegetes pp165-166<ref>Ibid. pp. 165-166
''Early exegetes are in accord that v. 156 intends by “a grievous slander” (buhtān ʿaz.īm) the accusation that Mary conceived Jesus via illicit sexual intercourse (al-zinā), stating by implication that Jesus was himself a bastard and Mary an adulteress.<sup>46</sup> This interpretation is well suited to the context of the qur’anic corpus and its other stories about Mary (e.g., Q. Maryam 19:20, 27–28) <sup>47</sup> and reflects a tendency in the qur’anic usage of buhtān (e.g., Q. al-Nūr 24:16, usually read as a reference to accusations of adultery leveled against Muh.ammad’s wife ʿĀʾishah).<sup>48</sup> It also reflects late antique polemics between Jews and Christians attested in the broader region.''</ref>)*
|-
|Israelites plot against Jesus
|✓
|3:54–55 ✓
|-
|Israelites claim to have killed Jesus
|✓
|4:156–159 ✓
|-
|Jesus only appears to be killed/crucified
|✓*
|4:156–159 ✓
|-
|Jesus ascends to heaven/God.
|✓*
|Both 3:54-55 and 4:156-159 ✓
|-
|Internal dispute among Israelites over Jesus’ fate
|✓
|4:156–159
|}
<nowiki>*</nowiki>occurs only as a counterfactual claim rather than affirming its factual accuracy.
The focus on these motifs highlights the Qur’an’s allusive narratives can be read as a counternarrative to the Toledot's final days: they adopt its narrative framework / events order but overturn their conclusions to side with Jesus’s followers testimonies in the story.<ref>Ibid. pp. 170-183. ''Part 3: The Qur'an and the Toledot Yeshu''</ref> Both accounts are found in suras from the Medinan period in suras that focus on polemics against the People of Scripture rather than the unscriptured, pagan 'associators' (mushrikūn) mentioned in earlier suras,<ref name=":2" /> which Anthony (2025) notes is important to consider for the context of these verses, as they reflect an environment of interfaith competition, particularly between Muhammad and his followers and the Jewish inhabitants of Medina who rejected his claim to prophethood<ref name=":2" /> - with the often Quran addressing their concerns directly.<ref>Ibid. pp. 152</ref> The verses on the end of Jesus’s earthly mission in Surah 4 (Sūrat al-Nisāʾ) even appear within an extended anti-Jewish polemic surrounding them,<ref>Ibid. pp. 163</ref> using stories familiar to the local environment (rather than the canonical scripture) but disputing theological points on them.


==The Qur'anic Trinity==
==The Qur'anic Trinity==

Revision as of 01:21, 24 September 2025

Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination

This article or section is being renovated.

Lead = 4 / 4
Structure = 4 / 4
Content = 4 / 4
Language = 4 / 4
References = 4 / 4
Lead
4 / 4
Structure
4 / 4
Content
4 / 4
Language
4 / 4
References
4 / 4


The similarities between the Qur'an and previous scriptures have been noted since the advent of Islam. The Judeo-Christian tales and their Qur'anic retellings, however, rarely match perfectly. A claim found in the Qur'an and other Islamic literature is that the Jews and Christians deliberately changed their scriptures to obscure the truth which is restored in the Qur'an. There is no documentary evidence in the textual traditions of those religions to support this claim, and since it would require a conspiracy of people across centuries and empires, speaking different languages and holding radically different beliefs, the claim itself is generally not taken seriously by modern scholars.

The prevailing academic consensus is that the Qur'an makes use of stories from the ancient milieu in which it arose - Christianity and Judaism of the late antique period in the near east. These are often reshaped for its own purposes. In modern academic parlance, this is known as 'intertextuality' (allusion to, dialogue with, interaction with). Contrary to the Islamic tradition, most scholars today agree that the Qur'an must have been composed in an environment in which Christian and Jewish stories were very familiar, both to the person (people) writing the Qur'an and to the audience. As such allusions are to be expected, and in a semi-literate culture before the advent of the printing press, different versions of the same story as well as mistakes in transmission from one medium to the other are also to be expected.

In such an environment it is also unsurprising that many of the stories one finds in the Qur'an do not come from the canonical books of the Christian or Jewish bibles, but often from secondary apocryphal and exegetical literature which played a huge role in the spiritual life of believers in that time. It is the Quranic relationship with these secondary works which is the focus of this article, since their late appearance and evident evolution during the centuries leading up to Islam make particularly obvious their origin in human creativity and that they do not in any sense portray actual historical events. Indeed, given the overwhelming evidence, one (unpopular) Islamic modernist position is to accept this fact, and claim that the Quran makes no pretense to be recounting events or persons who actually existed.

In particular, late antique Syriac Christian influence has become increasingly apparent in Quranic scholarship of the 21st century, in significant part through the work of Dr Joseph Witztum, whose PhD thesis The Syriac milieu of the Quran: The recasting of Biblical narratives will be oft-cited in this article.[1] Time and again, small details that were thought to be distinctive of the Quranic versions of Judeo-Christian stories have been found to closely match what is found in the works of the Syriac church fathers such as Ephrem and Narsai. Known Quranic connections with these sources, as well as with the Jewish Talmud and Midrash have been extensively noted by Professor Gabriel Said Reynolds in his 2018 book The Quran and Bible: Text and Commentary which will be referred to throughout this article.[2] The Jewish story additions were for exegetical purposes (sometimes derived from a single word in the Hebrew Bible) and were not treated by the Rabbis as actual historical events, in contrast to the way Biblical stories themselves were regarded.[3]

Allegations Recorded in the Quran

The Qur'an famously records that doubters dismissed its verses as "tales of the ancients", and used to approach Muhammad with the allegation. These verses occur in the Meccan surahs, where his message was largely rejected by the inhabitants. One instance appears in surah 8, after the migration and battle of Badr in 2AH, though the previous verse is recalling the persecution in Mecca.

A notable example, Quran 25:5, has unbelievers accusing the Qur'an of “making ancient tales written” (iktatabaha) that were recited (i.e. dictated) to him or that people assisted him with inventing falsehood. Modern academic scholars "virtually unanimously" agree that the Quran does not describe the Prophet as illiterate, contrary to the Islamic tradition.[4] The idea that Muhammad was illiterate was a later reinterpretation of a word in certain verses in order to negate charges of borrowing (see Muhammad and illiteracy).

And those who disbelieve say, "This [Qur'an] is not except a falsehood he invented, and another people assisted him in it." But they have committed an injustice and a lie. And they say, "Legends of the former peoples which he has written down, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon." Say, [O Muhammad], "It has been revealed by He who knows [every] secret within the heavens and the earth. Indeed, He is ever Forgiving and Merciful."
Some of them listen to you. But We have cast veils over their hearts lest they understand it and in their ears heaviness; and if they see every sign they do not believe in it. When they come to you they argue, the unbelievers say: 'This is nothing but the tales of the ancient ones.'
Whenever Our verses are recited to them, they say: 'We have heard them, if we wished, we could speak its like. They are but tales of the ancients'.

Similar verses are Quran 16:24, Quran 26:137, Quran 68:15 and Quran 83:13. Sometimes such remarks are attributed to those who doubted resurrection (Similarly Quran 27:67-68 and Quran 46:17):

'When we are dead and become dust and bones shall we be resurrected? We and our fathers have been promised this before. It is but of the ancients' fictitious tales.'

The Qur'an itself records allegations of influence by a non-Arab:

When We exchange a verse for another and Allah knows best what He is sending down they say: 'You are but a forger. 'No, most of them do not know. Say: 'The Holy Spirit (Gabriel) brought it down from your Lord in truth to confirm those who believe, and to give guidance and glad tidings to those who surrender. 'We know very well that they say: 'A mortal teaches him. 'The tongue of him at whom they hint is a nonArab; and this is a clear Arabic tongue. Those who disbelieve in the verses of Allah, Allah does not guide them for them is a painful punishment.

The evidence is that Quranic tales were already familiar to its critics. That at least some of these tales of the ancients were Judeo-Christian tales and not the fanciful Quranic “Arabic/Arabized” fairy-tales of Jinns, Houris and the like is apparent from the context of these verses, particularly those doubters who at the same time dismissed the idea of resurrection. This is also evident from the charge that another nation had supplied these tales (meaning the Jews and possibly also Sabeans and Christians - nations such as the Byzantine Empire at the time were associated with certain religions such as Chalcedonian Christianity).

Possible Channels and Circulation of Stories

The Quran itself (especially Surah Imran) is concerned that some people of the book were trying to lead the believers astray. Many academic scholars have further noticed that the elliptical and homiletic way many of the stories are told in the Quran indicates that their basic outlines must have been in circulation already, common knowledge to its listeners. Some even suspect that the direct stories were already circulating in Arabic and in pre-Islamic Arabic poetry. There is also a hadith narrated from Abu Huraira that the Jews used to explain the Torah in Arabic to the Muslims (Sahih Bukhari 6:60:12)

Syriac Christian missionary activity

Julien Decharneux, an academic scholar who specialises in Syriac traditions and the Quran, proposes that the Quranic author(s) came into contact with East Syriac Christian preachers or missionaries rather than direct accessing Christian texts. In his book Creation and Contemplation: The Cosmology of the Qur'ān and Its Late Antique Background, he notes that the Christian lore in the Quran is "always periphrastic, never detailed, and often approximative". Decharneux further explains that the repetoire of texts that would have contributed to the thought of a "standard Christian preacher" at the turn of the 7th century would vary depending on church affiliation, "but it involves among other things the Bible, apocryphal texts, exegetical commentaries, and ascetic literature. These types of texts were not occasionally read. The sources attest that they were omnipresent in the Christian scholastic and monastic life from where a 'standard preacher' would have come". Indeed, he adds, "both Syriac and Greek exegetes were extremely popular".[5]

Decharneux further writes regarding missionary activity in the vicinity of Arabia:

The Church of the East was particularly active from this point of view with far-reaching missionary activites in the south-eastern part of the Asian world. At the time of the emergence of the Qurʾān, both the Syro-Orthodox Church and the Church of the East were already exerting their influence on the south of the Arabian Peninsula, as the records show. Most importantly, the Church of the East was established on both sides of the Persian Gulf. From the end of the 4th century at least, Christian communities had settled in the region called Beth Qatraye, covering a large zone of the eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula. Recent archaeology shows that several monasteries existed along the coast and in the islands of the Persian Gulf. We know that these communities were connected with the regions of Sinai and the Byzantine world particularly. Some of the writings emanating from these circles were also translated in Sogdian, Ethiopic, and Arabic from the 7th century onwards.
Julien Decharneux (2023) "Creation and Contemplation", p. 252

Zaid bin 'Amr

Attributing vectors of transmission to individuals is a somewhat speculative endeavour, though there is significant evidence from the sahih hadiths that Muhammad initially converted to Abrahamic monotheism under the influence of a Hanif known as Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail. Meir Jacob Kister wrote a short academic article about this tradition. He quotes Alfred Guillaume who called it "a tradition of outstanding importance" as "it is the only extant evidence of the influence of a monotheist on Muhammad by way of admonition". Kister then details several versions of the tradition through different chains of narration (including in Sahih al-Bukhari, shown below), each of which convey the same essential message that Muhammad was converted to Abrahamic monotheism by Zayd, with minor differences. Commentators were very uncomfortable with the idea that Muhammad may have at one time eaten meat sacrificed to idols of even made such an offering himself. Kister considers the version which is most explicit on that point to be the earliest layer.[6]

Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle said that he met Zaid bin 'Amr Nufail at a place near Baldah and this had happened before Allah's Apostle received the Divine Inspiration. Allah's Apostle presented a dish of meat (that had been offered to him by the pagans) to Zaid bin 'Amr, but Zaid refused to eat of it and then said (to the pagans), "I do not eat of what you slaughter on your stonealtars (Ansabs) nor do I eat except that on which Allah's Name has been mentioned on slaughtering."
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: The Prophet met Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail in the bottom of (the valley of) Baldah before any Divine Inspiration came to the Prophet. A meal was presented to the Prophet but he refused to eat from it. (Then it was presented to Zaid) who said, "I do not eat anything which you slaughter in the name of your stone idols. I eat none but those things on which Allah's Name has been mentioned at the time of slaughtering." Zaid bin 'Amr used to criticize the way Quraish used to slaughter their animals, and used to say, "Allah has created the sheep and He has sent the water for it from the sky, and He has grown the grass for it from the earth; yet you slaughter it in other than the Name of Allah. He used to say so, for he rejected that practice and considered it as something abominable.

Of note in another hadith is how Zaid is said to have learned of the Hanif religion (Abrahamic monotheism) in Syria from a Jew and a Christian without identifying himself as being of either confession:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail went to Sham, inquiring about a true religion to follow. He met a Jewish religious scholar and asked him about their religion. He said, "I intend to embrace your religion, so tell me some thing about it." The Jew said, "You will not embrace our religion unless you receive your share of Allah's Anger." Zaid said, "'I do not run except from Allah's Anger, and I will never bear a bit of it if I have the power to avoid it. Can you tell me of some other religion?" He said, "I do not know any other religion except the Hanif." Zaid enquired, "What is Hanif?" He said, "Hanif is the religion of (the prophet) Abraham who was neither a Jew nor a Christian, and he used to worship None but Allah (Alone)" Then Zaid went out and met a Christian religious scholar and told him the same as before. The Christian said, "You will not embrace our religion unless you get a share of Allah's Curse." Zaid replied, "I do not run except from Allah's Curse, and I will never bear any of Allah's Curse and His Anger if I have the power to avoid them. Will you tell me of some other religion?" He replied, "I do not know any other religion except Hanif." Zaid enquired, "What is Hanif?" He replied, Hanif is the religion of (the prophet) Abraham who was neither a Jew nor a Christian and he used to worship None but Allah (Alone)" When Zaid heard their Statement about (the religion of) Abraham, he left that place, and when he came out, he raised both his hands and said, "O Allah! I make You my Witness that I am on the religion of Abraham."

Even the prohibition of female infanticide was inspired by Zaid according to the tradition below.

Narrated Asma bint Abi Bakr: I saw Zaid bin Amr bin Nufail standing with his back against the Ka'ba and saying, "O people of Quraish! By Allah, none amongst you is on the religion of Abraham except me." He used to preserve the lives of little girls: If somebody wanted to kill his daughter he would say to him, "Do not kill her for I will feed her on your behalf." So he would take her, and when she grew up nicely, he would say to her father, "Now if you want her, I will give her to you, and if you wish, I will feed her on your behalf."

Zaid’s religious principles adopted by Muhammad

In Ibn Ishaq's Sirah, Zaid is said to have composed a poem after leaving Mecca. The poem mentions among other things: .

  1. the acknowledgment of the Unity of God.
  2. the rejection of idolatry and the worship of Al-Lat, AI-'Uzza' and the other deities of the people.
  3. the promise of future happiness in Paradise or the "Garden".
  4. the warning of the punishment reserved in hell for the wicked.
  5. the denunciation of God's wrath upon the "Unbelievers".
  6. And also, the application of the titles Ar Rahman (the Merciful), Ar Rabb (the Lord), and Al Ghafur (the Forgiving) to God.

Moreover, Zaid and all the other Hanifs claimed to be searching for the "Religion of Abraham."[7] Besides all this, the Qur'an repeatedly, though indirectly, speaks of Abraham as a "Hanif", the chosen title of Zaid and his friends (for example, Quran 16:123).

Even the Muslim method of prayer may have originated from Zaid, as Ibn Ishaq wrote that he prayed by prostration on the palm of his hands.[8]

The alleged informant mentioned in Quran 16:101-4

The non-Arab who was accused of teaching Muhammad the Qur'an (Quran 16:101-104, quoted above) is not mentioned by name, but there are many candidates in the sira.

According to Professor Sean Anthony, from the ninth century Christian polemics attributed Muhammad's religious knowledge to his trading travels outside Arabia. In the eight century, Christian writers said Muhammad reputedly learned from an Arian monk (an archetypal heresy at that time), or a Syriac Christian monk known as Sergius Bḥyrʾ. The second word Bḥyrʾ was a monastic title meaning tested / elected / renowned, but in later writings was treated as a personal name, Bahira, and legends about him were subsequently picked up by Muslim writers.[9]

The case for Sergius does not seem very convincing. Perhaps the strongest evidence of the non-Arab's identity is another name mentioned in the Sira:

"According to my information the apostle used often to sit at al-Marwa at the booth of a young Christian called Jabr, a slave of B. al-Hadrami and they used to say "The one who teaches Muhammad most of what he brings is Jabr the Christian, slave of the B. al-Hadrami." Then God revealed in reference to their words "We well know that they say, "Only a mortal teaches him"." The tongue of him at whom they hint is foreign, and this is a clear Arabic tongue.[10]
Ibn Ishaq (d. 768); Ibn Hisham (d. 833), A. Guillaume, ed, The Life of Muhammad [Sirat Rasul Allah], Oxford UP, p. 180, ISBN 0-19-636033-1, 1955, https://archive.org/details/GuillaumeATheLifeOfMuhammad/page/n113/mode/2up 

This source specifically names the foreigner to be Jabr, slave of Ibn al-Hadrami. This report and a number of similar versions are also recorded by al-Tabari in his tafsir (Quranic commentary). Professor Sean Anthony considers them just another set of exegetical stories from the tafsir literature, and that none of the versions are particularly credible, noting that they seem to build upon and contradict each other.[11] There is some commonality between them in that some of the stories state that Muhammad's alleged informant was a slave or slaves of Ibn al-Hadrami. The slave is said to have been learned in the scriptures. The slave or slaves in the different versions are named as Ya'ish' or Yasar, and / or Jabr. They were sword sharpeners according to one version, while another story mentions a metal-smith called Balaam as Muhammad's informant.

Then there is this sahih hadith recording an allegation that Muhammad learned from a Christian:

Narrated Anas: There was a Christian who embraced Islam and read Surat-al-Baqara and Al-Imran, and he used to write (the revelations) for the Prophet. Later on he returned to Christianity again and he used to say: "Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him." …

This Christian who taught Muhammad is not named in the sahih hadiths. However, Ibn Warraq, citing Waqidi, names him as ibn Qumta: "Waqidi [d. 207 AH D/823 CE] who says that a Christian slave named Ibn Qumta was the amanuensis of the prophet, along with a certain ‘Abdallah b. Sa‘ad b. Abi Sarh, who reported that 'It was only a Christian slave who was teaching him [Mohammed]; I used to write to him and change whatever I wanted.'"[12]

Another hadith mentions a Christian called Waraqa b. Naufal b. Asad b. 'Abd al-'Uzza, who used to write the Christian scriptures in Arabic:

Khadija then took him to Waraqa b. Naufal b. Asad b. 'Abd al-'Uzza, and he was the son of Khadija's uncle, i. e., the brother of her father. And he was the man who had embraced Christianity in the Days of Ignorance (i. e. before Islam) and he used to write books in Arabic and, therefore, wrote Injil in Arabic as God willed that he should write. He was very old and had become blind Khadija said to him: O uncle! listen to the son of your brother.

Regardless who this foreigner who taught Muhammad was, it is clear that this highly specific charge was leveled against the Qur'an, and the aforementioned verse is intended to answer this very specific objection. That this foreigner existed is real: the Qur'an itself alluded to him by saying, ‘the tongue of him at whom they hint is a non-Arab’. Again, this strongly indicates that there was in fact such a foreigner who may have influenced the "clear Arabic tongue" of the Qur'an.

That this foreigner is alleged to have taught Muhammad Judeo-Christian tales is alluded to when one follows the apologetic against this complaint in Surah 16. What follows Quran 16:103 is a discussion of how Allah revealed the religion of Abraham, the Resurrection, the Everlasting Life, Judgment Day, prohibition of meat of swine and non-halal slaughter, and other practices given to the Jews.

In short, verse Quran 16:103-104 is nothing more than the Qur'an's attempt to answer the charge that he learned the Jewish/Christian religion from a foreigner (very possibly Jabr). He was the Muslim who first came up with the excuse that the similarities between the Judeo-Christian religion and the Qur'an are due to the three scriptures sharing the same source, which he named as Allah.

Thus, beyond what seems to have been a general circulation of Judeo-Christian stories (and the Quran attesting the presence of and complaining about the people of the book), there are various individuals from whom Muhammad may have heard these tales, beginning with Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail and from Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, to Jabr and the un-named Christian of Sahih Bukhari 4:56:814.

Muslim Views

In apologetic and theological literature, Muslim scholars generally follow the Qur'an in denying that Muhammad was influenced by the "legends of the ancients", citing some of the following points:

1. There were no Arabic copies of the Judeo-Christian literature available to Muhammad.

This argument ignores the Qur'an itself. which claims the charges were that Muhammad heard what was recited to him Quran 25:4-6 or that he learned them from a foreigner Quran 16:103-104. Thus, the existence or otherwise of Arabic translations in Muhammad’s time is an irrelevancy. Moreover, epigraphic and historical evidence from the the time points to an Arabia which was awash in Greek and Syriac literature, and in which knowledge of both the Syriac and Greek alphabets were widespread, and both of these were used to write Arabic along with the Hismaetic and Safaitic scripts.[13]

2. There was no center of Judaism and/or Christianity in Mecca or the Hijaz in Muhammad’s time.

As the Islamic literature itself shows Muhammad was accused of repeating ‘tales of the ancients’ from individual Jews and Christians, some of whom we may know by name, there is no need for Muhammad to learn from centers of Judaism or Christianity. Surah Imran is in large part concerned with people of the book leading the believers astray. However, whether or not there were any Christians proselytizing in Mecca or other localities is irrelevant: all it takes is one Christian individual (as in Sahih Bukhari 4:56:814) for Muhammad to learn from. Moreover, modern scholarship has shown through inscriptions inter alia that the Arabian peninsula at the time of the prophet was thoroughly Christianized.

3. There is no evidence that Muhammad borrowed these tales even though there were Jews and Christians in the region.

The evidence is laid out on this page and forms a vibrant area of academic study known as source criticism. The charges of borrowing are in the Qur'an and they are easily proven. The evidence is to be found in the hadiths and sirah in addition to the Qur'an. Even according to the Islamic tradition itself, individuals who taught Muhammad the Judeo-Christian tales were named.

4. The Jews were in Medinah and the Christians were in Najran and Yemen.

There is debate among academic scholars as to the extent of Christian presence around Mecca and Medina specifically. Given the limited evidence so far available, and the internal evidence in the Quran that its audience were familiar with the stories therein and the numerous complaints about the people of the book, some academic scholars such as Stephen Shoemaker have posited that these materials first circulated in a location further to the North with a greater Christian presence. On the other hand, specific Jews and Christians do seem to have been present in Mecca, for instance Jabr the Christian slave. Waraqa, Khadijah’s cousin also lived in Mecca, and so did the Hanif Zaid bin ‘Amr.[14]

It is even possible that the Ka’ba contained a biblical quote:

"Layth Abu Sulaym alleged that they found a stone in the Kaba forty years before the prophet's mission, if what they say is true, containing the inscription "He that soweth good shall reap joy; he that soweth evil shall reap sorrow; can you do evil and be rewarded with good? Nay, as grapes cannot be gathered from thorns"
Ibn Ishaq (d. 768); Ibn Hisham (d. 833), A. Guillaume, ed, The Life of Muhammad [Sirat Rasul Allah], Oxford UP, p. 86, ISBN 0-19-636033-1, 1955, https://archive.org/details/GuillaumeATheLifeOfMuhammad/page/n1/mode/2up 

There were also eye-witness reports that figures of Mary and Jesus were in the Kaaba narrated from Muslims who died in the early 2nd century.[15] Even according to a hadith, the Ka’aba may have contained pictures of Abraham and Mary (similarly, see Sahih Bukhari 4:55:571):

Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet entered the Ka'ba and found in it the pictures of (Prophet) Abraham and Mary. On that he said' "What is the matter with them ( i.e. Quraish)? They have already heard that angels do not enter a house in which there are pictures; yet this is the picture of Abraham. And why is he depicted as practicing divination by arrows?"

It seem to be the case that, in actuality, there were Jews elsewhere outside of Yathrib and surrounding areas of Northern Hijaz. So far, there is limited evidence of a small number of Christians present in Mecca.[16]

5. The Qur'an contains stories absent in the Judeo-Christian scriptures, thus the charge of borrowing is erroneous.

As documented in detail in this article, a great number of non-Biblical stories in the Quran are now known to have antecedents in late antique Jewish and Christian apocrypha and exegesis. This is rather suggestive that all or almost all Quranic examples have such an origin. This conclusion would naturally extend to imply that Biblical stories were similarly circulating in the environment in which the Quranic materials were first composed.

Whoever kills a soul it is as if he has slain mankind

The Qur'an parallels a passage in the Talmud, specifically a rabbinical commentary in the Book of Sanhedrin.

Talmudic Mishnah

For thus we find in the case of Cain, who killed his brother, that it is written: the bloods of thy brother cry unto me: not the blood of thy brother, but the bloods of thy brother, is said — i.e., his blood and the blood of his [potential] descendants. (alternatively, the bloods of thy brother, teaches that his blood was splashed over trees and stones.) For this reason was man created alone, to teach thee that whosoever destroys a single soul of israel, scripture imputes [guilt] to him as though he had destroyed a complete world; and whosoever preserves a single soul of israel, scripture ascribes [merit] to him as though he had preserved a complete world. Furthermore, [he was created alone] for the sake of peace among men, that one might not say to his fellow, 'my father was greater than thine, and that the minim might not say, there are many ruling powers in heaven;

Qur'anic Verse

“Because of this, we decreed for the Children of Israel that anyone who murders any person who had not committed murder or horrendous crimes, it shall be as if he murdered all the people. And anyone who spares a life, it shall be as if he spared the lives of all the people.

The salient points are:

  • a. The Qur'an itself admits to Judeao-Christian origin of this story with the phrase, 'We decreed (katabnā) for the Children of Israel…’

    This word katabnā كَتَبْنَا is from the same Arabic root as kitāb, meaning book, as in 'People of the Book', and the verb kataba literally means he wrote. It is used a few verses later (wakatabnā) in Quran 5:45 regarding some things that are certainly in the written Torah, and in another example Quran 7:145 it is used for Allah writing on the stone tablets. Lane's Lexicon includes 'prescribed', 'ordained' among its definitions for this verb [17], though it is likely that this usage arose from royal decrees and legal rulings being written down. In some other verses exactly the same word is translated 'We have written'. It is quite obvious that the author believed that this 'decree' was in the law book of the Jews, the written Torah.

  • b. The Sanhedrin parallel is not in the Torah as it is merely a rabbinical commentary on Cain’s murder of Abel, derived from the use of the plural, "bloods", in Genesis 4:10. It is a Mishnayot – a teaching of a Jewish sage, and not from the biblical tradition as such but rather an extension of it.
  • c. The Qur'anic verse relates to the story of Cain's murder of Abel Quran 5:27-31, as does the Sanhedrin parallel.

Muslim Objections

Dr Saifullah of the Islamic-awareness website has claimed that the parallelism is inexact, as the Sanhedrin 37a should be limited to ‘whoever destroys a single soul of Israel’. He claims that since the Qur'an lacks this reference to the 'single soul of Israel' but instead, generalizes the injunction to any soul, then the charge of parallelism has failed.

Problems with this argument

  1. Dr Saifullah's argument that the two stories are not exact copies doesn't hold water, since stories usually change in transmission.
  2. "of Israel" is absent in some manuscripts of this passage in the Babylonian Talmud, and we don't know which version Muhammad might have heard.
  3. The commentary also appears in the Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin 4/5, which omits the phrase, ‘of Israel’. There is no evidence that Muhammad had to rely on the Babylonian Talmud and not the Jerusalem Talmud, even though the former is considered more authoritative. Joseph Witztum is even more emphatic that "of Israel" is merely a secondary reading.[18]

The Qur'an is taking a story from apocryphal literature as scripture, since Sanhedrin 37a is from the "oral" Torah and therefore not part of the original biblical canon. There is no other explanation for the phrase, ‘We decreed / have written’ (katabna) in the verse. It appears the Qur'an considers this apocryphal tradition to be on the same level as the biblical canon. The claim that it is lost because the Torah is corrupted stretches credulity because the parallelism exists in the Talmud, and it is unlikely that something lost from the Torah should find its way almost unchanged into the Talmud as a commentary of a narrative (i.e. a mishnayot). If the Rabbi had in mind a verse in the Torah that has since been lost, he would not have quoted verbatim from Genesis 4:10 ('it is written...'), but then when making his main point not quoted directly this hypothetical lost verse. It is not a law, despite being in the Talmud (Oral Law) but a commentary by a Jewish sage, who explains his reasoning.

Thus the use of the word "katabna" / decreed / ordain / prescribe / write something was used for a commentary written by a Jewish Rabbi. The conclusion seems to be that the Qur'an sees this tradition as being on the same level as the Bible, or else is not aware that it does not in fact stem from the Bible.

The Raven and the Burial of Abel

Qur'anic Account

The Qur'an tells the story of how Allah sent a raven to show Cain how to bury Abel.

Then Allah sent a crow scratching the ground to show him how to cover the dead body of his brother. He said: Woe is me! Am I not able to be as this crow and cover the dead body of my brother? So he became of those who regret.

Jewish Folklore

This story of the raven and the burial of Abel has led many scholars to the conclusion that the Qur'an integrated Jewish folklore because this account is not in the Old Testament or the Torah, though there is uncertainty. It used to be supposed that a Jewish source known as Pirke de-Rabbi Elizer was a precursor to the story (there, it is Adam who learns from the raven how to bury his son). As Witztum notes however, Pirke de-Rabbi Elizer has been demonstrated to be a post-Islamic midrash, sometimes reflecting Islamic tradition so that it is not clear which tradition influenced the other.[19] A more likely antecedent for the Quranic story which is supported by many scholars is the Midrash Tanhuma, particularly the Tanhuma Yelammedenu, which existed in some form by the sixth century CE.[20] There, it is Cain who learns how to bury his brother, like in the Quranic version, although from two birds instead of one raven (Tanhuma Bereshit 10).

After Cain slew Abel, the body lay outstretched upon the earth, since Cain did not know how to dispose of it. Thereupon, the Holy One, blessed be He, selected two clean birds and caused one of them to kill the other. The surviving bird dug the earth with its talons and buried its victim. Cain learned from this what to do. He dug a grave and buried his brother. It is because of this that birds are privileged to cover their blood.
Tanhuma Bereshit 10 in S. A. Berman, Midrash Tanhuma-Yelammedenu: An English Translation of Genesis and Exodus from the Printed Version of Tanhuma-Yelammedenu with an Introduction, Notes, and Indexes (Hoboken, 1996), pp. 31-32

Wiztum comments that "Since the bird tradition is found in several rabbinic sources and versions it is hard to deny the possibility that ultimately its origin is indeed Jewish." Nevertheless, he argues that the Quranic version is earlier than those we find in Jewish sources, including the Tanhuma which most probably continued evolving long after the Quran appeared. While the story is present in the Tanhuma-Yelammedenu version of the Midrash Tanhuma, it is absent in its parallel version, the Buber Tanhuma. The details in the Quranic version are also simpler, and the extra details in the Tanhuma may reflect similar considerations as occured to Quranic commentators. Witztum concludes, "Is it possible that the midrashic sources reflect tafsir traditons in this instance? Perhaps."[21]

Abel's words to Cain

On a more concrete connection regarding the Cain and Abel verses, Reynolds remarks, "In Genesis the two brothers do not speak to each other at all [...] The conversation between Cain and Abel is close to that found in the Palestinian Targums, such as Targum Neofiti.[22]

And recite to them the story of Adam's two sons, in truth, when they both offered a sacrifice [to Allah], and it was accepted from one of them but was not accepted from the other. Said [the latter], "I will surely kill you." Said [the former], "Indeed, Allah only accepts from the righteous [who fear Him].

If you should raise your hand against me to kill me - I shall not raise my hand against you to kill you. Indeed, I fear Allah, Lord of the worlds. Indeed I want you to obtain [thereby] my sin and your sin so you will be among the companions of the Fire. And that is the recompense of wrongdoers."

And his soul permitted to him the murder of his brother, so he killed him and became among the losers.

Reynolds points the reader to Witztum, who notes how early Jewish sources supposed that Cain invited his brother to an open plain, some even speculating on possible arguments they may have had there. Witztum quotes such a developed dialogue found in Targum Neofiti, noting that similar dialogues are preserved in other targums of which we have surviving fragments. Scholars have noticed how Q. 5:27 may reflect Targum Neofiti where Abel replies to Cain that his sacrifice was accepted because his deeds were better. Similarites between certain Arabic words in the Quranic version and the Targum have also been noted.[23] Targum Neofiti has received datings ranging from the 2nd century BCE to the 2nd century CE.[24]

However, there are also differences: In the Targum, Cain does not announce his intention to kill his brother (he just kills him after they argue), and it lacks Abel's passivity to the threat.

Witztum fills this gap using certain Syriac sources. As Reynolds summarises, Witztum shows that "the Qurʾānic dialogue is related to a series of Syriac texts which describe the dialogue between Cain and Abel". These include a "'Syriac Dialogue Poem on Abel and Cain' (dated by S. Brock to 'no later than the fifth century'", "an unpublished Homily on Cain and Abel by Isaac of Antioch (d. late fifth century)", and the "Life of Abel of Symmachus (fl. late fifth to early sixth century)". Interestingly, Abel's passivity in the Quran to the threat from his brother reflects the latter two Syriac sources, in which Abel's arms are outstretched and explicitly described as a depiction of the crucifixion of Jesus on the cross.[25]

In the Syriac Dialogue Poem, we see Cain's direct murder threat to his brother, as in the Quran:

(Cain) Says Cain: Since the Lord has taken delight

in your sacrifice, but rejected mine,
I will kill you (qāṭelnā lāk): because He has preferred you.
I will take vengeance on His friend.


Syriac Dialogue Poem on Abel and Cain, stanza 13[26]

Witztum quotes further stanzas from the poem about the acceptability of offerings, which are reflected in the end of verse 27 of the Quranic passage ("Indeed, Allah only accepts from the righteous [who fear Him].":

(Abel) Abel replies: What wrong have I done

if the lord has been pleased with me?
He searches out hearts and so has the right.
to choose or reject as He likes.
[...]
(Abel) in all offerings that are made
it is love that He wants to see,
and if good intention is not mingled in,

then the sacrifice is ugly and rejected.
Syriac Dialogue Poem on Abel and Cain, stanzas 14 and 16[27]

Witztum cites other stanzas from the same poem which are somewhat reflective of Abel's passivity in verses 28-29 of the Quranic passage. He finds closer parallels on this point in the other Syriac sources mentioned above.[28] Also very important is that there are various lexical correspondances between the Arabic and Syriac vocabulary used in the Quranic passage and its Syriac precursors.[29]

Iblis and his refusal to prostrate

Qur'anic Account

The Qur'anic story that Satan was expelled from Heaven for defying Allah’s command that the angels prostrate to Adam has an antecedent in a pre-Islamic Jewish tale which itself was an elaboration of a Rabbinic exegesis. The Quran is closest to the Syriac Christian versions from which it takes numerous details. The Bible does not contain this tale.

And We have certainly created you, [O Mankind], and given you [human] form. Then We said to the angels, "Prostrate to Adam"; so they prostrated, except for Iblees. He was not of those who prostrated.

‏[Allah] said, "What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?" [Satan] said, "I am better than him. You created me from fire and created him from clay." [Allah] said, "Descend from Paradise, for it is not for you to be arrogant therein. So get out; indeed, you are of the debased. [Satan] said, "Reprieve me until the Day they are resurrected." [Allah] said, "Indeed, you are of those reprieved." [Satan] said, "Because You have put me in error, I will surely sit in wait for them on Your straight path. Then I will come to them from before them and from behind them and on their right and on their left, and You will not find most of them grateful [to You]."

[Allah] said, "Get out of Paradise, reproached and expelled. Whoever follows you among them - I will surely fill Hell with you, all together."

This story recurs several times in the Qur'an, for instance:

And [mention] when We said to the angels, "Prostrate before Adam"; so they prostrated, except for Iblees. He refused and was arrogant and became of the disbelievers. And We said, "O Adam, dwell, you and your wife, in Paradise and eat therefrom in [ease and] abundance from wherever you will. But do not approach this tree, lest you be among the wrongdoers." But Satan caused them to slip out of it and removed them from that [condition] in which they had been. And We said, "Go down, [all of you], as enemies to one another, and you will have upon the earth a place of settlement and provision for a time.
Remember when your Lord said to the angels, "I am going to create a man (Adam) from sounding clay of altered black smooth mud. So when I have fashioned him completely and breathed into him (Adam) the soul which I created for him then fall you down prostrating yourselves unto him." SO the angels prostrated themselves all of them together, except Iblis, he refused to be among the prostrators. Allah said: "O Iblis! What is your reason for not being among the prostrators?" Iblis said: "I am not the one to prostrate myself to a human being, whom You created from sounding clay of altered black smooth mud." Allah said: "Then get out from here for verily you are Rajim (an outcast or cursed one). Verily the curse shall be upon you till Day of Recompense (Day of Resurrection).
"Shall I prostrate to one whom You created from clay?" Iblis said: "See? those whom You have honored above me, if You give me respite (keep me alive) to the Day of Resurrection, I will surely seize and mislead his offspring (by sending them astray) all but a few!"
Remember when your Lord said to the angels: "Truly I am going to create man from clay. So when I have fashioned him and breathed into him (his) soul created by me, then you fall down prostrate to him." So the angels prostrated themselves all of them; except Iblis, he was proud and was one of the disbelievers. Allah said: "The truth is, and the truth I say, that I will fill Hell with you and those of them (mankind) that follow you together."

Apocryphal Account

Regarding Quran 7:11-12, Reynolds comments that the story of angels prostrating before Adam, which is not in the Bible, emerged from Rabbinic speculation on Psalms 8:4-6 ("what is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and honor. You made them rulers over the works of your hands; you put everything under their feet"). He cites as an example the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 38b:[30]

Rab Judah said in Rab's name: When the Holy One, blessed be He, wished to create man, He [first] created a company of ministering angels and said to them: Is it your desire that we make a man in our image? They answered: Sovereign of the Universe, what will be his deeds? Such and such will be his deeds, He replied. Thereupon they exclaimed: Sovereign of the Universe, What is man that thou art mindful of him, and the son of man that thou thinkest of him?

The story of Satan refusing to prostate/worship (sajada) Adam is found in the apocryphal ‘Life of Adam and Eve’, a first to fourth century Jewish Hellenistic work. Some authorities date it to the first century CE based on the absence of the Christian concept of original sin and the influence of the story on the Ebionites.[31]

“And with a heavy sigh, the devil spake: ‘O Adam! all my hostility, envy, and sorrow is for thee, since it is for thee that I have been expelled from my glory, which I possessed in the heavens in the midst of the angels and for thee was I cast out in the earth.’ Adam answered, ‘What dost thou tell me? What have I done to thee or what is my fault against thee? Seeing that thou hast received no harm or injury from us, why dost thou pursue us?’

“The devil replied, ‘Adam, what dost thou tell me? It is for thy sake that I have been hurled from that place. When thou wast formed, I was hurled out of the presence of God and banished from the company of angels. When God blew into thee the breath of life and thy face and likeness was made in the image of God, Michael also brought thee and made (us) worship thee in the sight of God; and God the Lord spake: “Here is Adam. I have made him in our image and likeness.”

“‘And Michael went out and called all the angels saying: “Worship the image of God as the Lord hath commanded.”

“‘And Michael himself worshipped first; then he called me and said: “Worship the image of God the Lord.” And I answered, “I have no (need) to worship Adam.” And since Michael kept urging me to worship, I said to him, “Why dost thou urge me? I will not worship an inferior and younger being (than I). I am his senior in the Creation, before he was made was I already made. It is his duty to worship me.”

“‘When the angels, who were under me, heard this, they refused to worship him. And Michael saith, “Worship the image of God, but if thou wilt not worship him, the Lord God will be wroth with thee.” And I said, “If He be wroth with me, I will set my seat above the stars of heaven and will be like the Highest.”

“‘And God the Lord was wroth with me and banished me and my angels from our glory; and on thy account were we expelled from our abodes into this world and hurled n the earth. And straightway we were overcome with grief, since we had been spoiled of so great glory. And we were grieved when we saw thee in such joy and luxury. And with guile I cheated thy wife and caused thee to be expelled through her (doing) from thy joy and luxury, as I have been driven out of my glory.’

“When Adam heard the devil say this, he cried out and wept and spake: ‘O Lord my God, my life is in thy hands. Banish this Adversary far from me, who seeketh to destroy my soul, and give me his glory which he himself hath lost.’ And at that moment, the devil vanished before him. But Adam endured in his penance, standing for forty days (on end) in the water of Jordan.”

Reynolds notes that Satan's desire to plot against Adam in the above passage is because he was cast out for refusing to worship him. Reynolds cites a parallel in Quran 2:34-36, though a stronger parallel is Quran 7:13-18 (especially v. 16 where Satan expresses his motivation).[32]

Regarding Quran 7:23-25 where Adam pleads for forgiveness and mercy, Reynolds comments on another parallel with this apocryphal work: "The idea that God forgave Adam is found in the Life of Adam and Eve". He cites Life of Adam and Eve Armenian version, trans. Anderson and Stone, 28:2-4. Note that in Quran 2:37 and Quran 20:122 it is clearer that Allah forgives Adam after his plea.

28.2 Adam said again to God, 'My Lord, I beseech you, give me of the tree of life, so that I may eat before I shall have gone forth from the Garden'.

28.3 God said to Adam, 'You cannot take of it in your lifetime, because I have given an order to the Seraphs to guard it round about with weapons because of you, lest you should eat more of it and become immortal and say, 'Behold, I shall not die"; and you will be boastful of it and be victorious in the war which the enemy has made with you.

28.4 Rather, when you go out of the Garden, guard yourself from slander, from harlotry, from adultery, from sorcery, from the love of money, from avarice and from all sins. Then, you shall arise from death, in the resurrection which is going to take place. At that time, I will give you of the tree of life and you will be eternally undying'.

Another important set of parallels is found in the Cave of treasures, dating to the sixth century CE.[33][34] It was written in Syriac by Christians from earlier Jewish sources and contains another version of the prostration story which is even closer to the Quranic version. The sequence of events in the Quran and many details are as found in this work.

Reynolds observes: "In the Syriac Christian work Cave of Treasures - as in the Qurʾān (v. 12) - the angels prostrate before Adam, but the devil refuses to do so, with the explanation that he is made from fire while Adam is made from dirt". Reynolds here cites "Cave of Treasures [Oc.], 2:12-13, 22-25, and 3:1-2". Reynolds notes in one of his other books that this "marks a distinct development in the narrative of the devil's rebellion. According to the Life of Adam and Eve, the devil's excuse for not worshipping Adam is that he was created first. In the Cave of Treasures, however, the devil's excuse is that he was created from fire, while Adam was created from dirt. It is this tradition that is reflected in the Qurʾān: 'I am better than he is. You created me from fire. You created him from clay.' (Q 7.12; cf. 15.33; 17.61; 38.76)."[35] An earlier source for this element, known as the Questions of Bartholomew, was originally written in Greek by a Christian and has been variously dated from the 2nd to 6th century CE (Sergey Minov's opinion is 2nd-3rd century). It closely follows the Life of Adam narrative, but after Michael tells Satan to worship Adam, Satan replies, "I am fire of fire, I was the first angel to be formed, and shall I worship clay and matter?".[36]

God formed Adam in his holy hands, in His image and in His likeness. When the angels saw the image and the glorious appearance of Adam, they trembled at the beauty of his figure...Moreover, the angels and celestial powers heard the voice of God saying to Adam, "See, I have made you a king, priest and prophet, Lord, leader and director of all those made and created. To you alone have I given these and I give to you authority over everything I have created." When the angels and archangels, the thrones and dominions, the cherubims and seraphins, that is when all of the celestial powers heard this voice, all of the orders bent their knees and prostrated before him.

[...]

When the leader of the lesser order saw the greatness given to Adam, he became jealous of him and did not want to prostrate before him with the angels. He said to his hosts, 'Do not worship him and do not praise him with the angels. It is proper that you should worship me, for I am fire and spirit, not that I worship something made from dirt.
Cave of Treasures (Western recension) 2:12-13, 22-25, and 3:1-2[37]

Witztum (crediting Beck) notes that Quran 7:13-18 has the same sequence of events as Cave of Treasures 3:3-9, with Adam and his mate placed in the garden and told not to approach the tree immediately after Iblis is banished.[38]).

Regarding Quran 7:19-22 where Adam and Eve eat from the tree, Reynolds notes that "Syriac texts including Cave of treasures and Ephrem's Hymns on Paradise (following Rev 12:9), and unlike most Jewish texts, puts Satan there" (in Jewish tradition, Satan is not identified with the serpent in Genesis[39]). Furthermore, "Like the Qurʾān , the 'Oriental' version of the Cave of Treasures makes no mention of the 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil' but rather connects the sin of Adam and Eve with the 'tree of life'. It does so to make a parallel between the one tree of life and the one cross of salvation (Cave of Treasures [Or], 4:2-5; on this see Witztum, Syriac Milieu, 81-83[...]"[40]

According to Reynolds, Allah's command to "Go down" in the Quranic verses "reflects the cosmological vistas of Syriac Christian sources in which paradise is on top of a cosmic mountain, above the earth, and thus has God cry out 'Go down'."[41] See also Tommaso Tesei's article Some Cosmological Notions from Late Antiquity in Q 18:60–65 for a probably more accurate interpretation of the cosmography, such that Syriac authors like Ephrem, who refers to paradise as being at a great height, had in mind that paradise was beyond the world-encircling ocean, and was the source of the great rivers on earth, as reflected also in for example Quran 88:10 and the common Quranic phrase "gardens from beneath which the rivers flow".[42]

The Qur'anic story of Satan refusing to worship or prostate before Adam has distinct antecedents in pre-Islamic Jewish and Christian sources including elements that were added in stages over the centuries. It would appear that this post-biblical legend has been extensively incorporated into the Islamic scriptures, without an apparent understanding of its origin.

Jinn created from fire

And the jinn We created before from scorching fire.

According to Reynolds, "The idea that God first created the Jinn from fire (v. 27) reflects Christian texts such as the Cave of Treasures that speak of the creation of the devil from fire (and have him already present at the creation of Adam)."[43] See the discussion in the previous section above on the prostration of Iblis, which quotes the Cave of Treasures where he states that he was created from fire and spirit.

The angels could not name animals when Adam was created

In the Quran, the angels are at first wary of the creation of Adam. Allah then teaches Adam "the names" (in the Biblical book of Genesis God brings the animals to Adam so he can name them) and challenges the angels to match this knowledge. They are reminded of their place when they are unable to answer, whereas Adam is able to do so.

They said, "Exalted are You; we have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Indeed, it is You who is the Knowing, the Wise." And [mention, O Muhammad], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority." They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we declare Your praise and sanctify You?" Allah said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know." He said, "O Adam, inform them of their names." And when he had informed them of their names, He said, "Did I not tell you that I know the unseen [aspects] of the heavens and the earth? And I know what you reveal and what you have concealed."

In the Bible, Genesis 2:19-20, God allows Adam to name all the animals and there is nothing more to that part of the story. The angelic element of the Quranic narrative derives from a similar account originating in the exegesis of a Rabbi:

Said R’ Acha: In the hour that the Holy One came to create the human, He ruled [together] with the ministering angels. He said to them: “Let us make a human [in our image]”. They said to him: This one, what good is he? He said: His wisdom is greater than yours. He (God) brought before them beast and animal and bird. He said to them: This one, what is his name? and they didn’t know. He made them pass before Adam. He said to him: This one, what is his name? [Adam] said: This is ox/shor, and this is donkey/chamor and this is horse/sus and this is camel/gamal.

The four stories in Surah al-Kahf

The Quran contains four short stories from the Christian lore of late antiquity, some of which seem to have been popular in the Syriac speaking region. The traditional account about the revelation of Surah al-Kahf in the sira literature is somewhat at odds with this context. According to Ibn Ishaq's biography of Muhammad, he was challenged by Jews from Medina to answer three questions about the young men who disappeared in ancient days, the mighty traveller who reached the eastern and western ends of the world, and the spirit (a question about the spirit is actually answered in Quran 17:85-87, not Surah al-Kahf).[44]

The seven sleepers of Ephesus

Academic scholars consider the story of the sleepers of the cave in Quran 18:9-26 to be derived from a famous Christian legend, known as The Seven Sleepers of Ephesus. In 2023, Thomas Eich published his finding that the specific version of the tale found in the Quran overlaps significantly with the version taught by Theodore of Tarsus which can be situated in a 7th century Palestinian context. For a detailed discussion, see the main article.

Moses, his servant and the fish

The story of Moses and his journey to the end of the world, with his servant and a miraculously escaped fish in Quran 18:60-64 is almost unanimously considered by academic scholars to be derived from a legend about Alexander the Great in the Alexander Romance tradition (Pseudo-Callisthenes), an episode known as the search for the water of life. This tale is also found in the Jewish Talmud and the Syriac metrical homily (memre) about Alexander (also known as the Song of Alexander, or Alexander Poem, which used to be dated to 629-636 CE, but is now considered likely to be 6th century).

The Syriac metrical homily also features the episode of Alexander enclosing Gog and Magog behind a wall, derived from the slightly earlier Syriac Alexander Legend, and which occurs in the Dhu'l Qarnayn pericope, discussed below. It cannot be a coincidence that, like surah al-Kahf, the Syriac homily has both stories, perhaps providing a clue to the content of their ultimate common or intermediate source. See the Water of Life section in the main article for a more detailed discussion, including relevant quotes from the Syriac homily.

Moses and al Khidr

The story of Moses and al-Khidr occurs in Quran 18:65-82. A J Weinsink (d. 1939) proposed that it was derived from the story of Elijah and Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, though more recent scholarship has shown that the latter is late and heavily influenced by the Islamic tradition. More successfully, Roger Paret identified a significant Christian parallel that may predate the Quran.[45] It is an example of a genre of literature known as "theodicy" (dealing with the theological problem of evil).

Paret identified this parallel in a popular (though not authoritative) version of a late sixth or early seventh century CE collection of middle eastern monastic tales, the Leimon (in its original Greek, or Pratum Spirituale in Latin, which translates to Spiritual Meadow) of John Moschos (d. 619 CE). This version includes a set of supplementary stories, published by Elpidio Mioni, which are now generally considered not to have been penned by Moschus and include the Quranic parallel. They do nevertheless appear to originate from Palestinian monastics of the 7th century according to Sean Anthony, likely added by one of Moschus' Palestinian disciples.[46] The basic structure of the story is identical to the Quranic passage, and has many similarities of detail though also differences.

A wandering ascetic is upset by notions of divine justice demonstrated to him by an angel before the events are explained to him. Like the Quran, the story involves three perplexing acts by the divine servant followed by an explanation to his exasperated companion, the second and third of which have obvious similarities to the Quranic pericope: In order to spare his father's salvation, a boy is killed who would have grown up commiting evil; and in a town where no-one would offer them hospitality, a wall containing hidden treasure on the verge of collapsing is repaired without asking for payment.

Quran 18:65-82 (Moses and al Khidr):

And they found a servant from among Our servants to whom we had given mercy from us and had taught him from Us a [certain] knowledge.

Moses said to him, "May I follow you on [the condition] that you teach me from what you have been taught of sound judgement?" He said, "Indeed, with me you will never be able to have patience. And how can you have patience for what you do not encompass in knowledge?" [Moses] said, "You will find me, if Allah wills, patient, and I will not disobey you in [any] order." He said, "Then if you follow me, do not ask me about anything until I make to you about it mention." So they set out, until when they had embarked on the ship, al-Khidh r tore it open. [Moses] said, "Have you torn it open to drown its people? You have certainly done a grave thing." [Al-Khidh r] said, "Did I not say that with me you would never be able to have patience?" [Moses] said, "Do not blame me for what I forgot and do not cover me in my matter with difficulty." So they set out, until when they met a boy, al-Khidh r killed him. [Moses] said, "Have you killed a pure soul for other than [having killed] a soul? You have certainly done a deplorable thing." [Al-Khidh r] said, "Did I not tell you that with me you would never be able to have patience?" [Moses] said, "If I should ask you about anything after this, then do not keep me as a companion. You have obtained from me an excuse." So they set out, until when they came to the people of a town, they asked its people for food, but they refused to offer them hospitality. And they found therein a wall about to collapse, so al-Khidh r restored it. [Moses] said, "If you wished, you could have taken for it a payment." [Al-Khidh r] said, "This is parting between me and you. I will inform you of the interpretation of that about which you could not have patience. As for the ship, it belonged to poor people working at sea. So I intended to cause defect in it as there was after them a king who seized every [good] ship by force. And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared that he would overburden them by transgression and disbelief. So we intended that their Lord should substitute for them one better than him in purity and nearer to mercy.

And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure for them, and their father had been righteous. So your Lord intended that they reach maturity and extract their treasure, as a mercy from your Lord. And I did it not of my own accord. That is the interpretation of that about which you could not have patience."

The Spiritual Meadow of John Moscus (d. 619 CE), Mioni 6 (for images of the translation see footnote[47]):

There was a virtuous anchorite who called upon God saying: 'Lord, make known to me what your judgements are'. He demonstrated frequent <acts of> asceticism in support of this prayer, but God made it known to him that, for men, this was not possible. He still continued beseeching God by an ascetic mode of life; and as God wished to inform the elder, he allowed the idea to come to him to go visit an anchorite who was settled not a few miles away. He got his sheepskin coat ready and set off. God sent an angel disguised as a monk who met the elder and said to him: 'Where are you going, good elder?' The elder said 'To so-and-so the anchorite'. The angel who was pretending to be a monk said: 'I am going to <see> him too; we will travel together'. When they had travelled the first day, they came to a place in which there dwelt a man who loved Christ. He received them <as guests> and put them up. Whilst they were eating, the man produced a silver dish <patella> and when they had eaten, the angel took the dish and made it disappear into thin air. The elder was disturbed when he saw this. Then going out together, they travelled the next day and in due course encountered another man who loved Christ and monks, in the place where he dwelt. He received them as his guests, washed their feet and embraced them. Early next morning, he brought his son, the only child he had, to be blessed by them. The angel seized it by the throat and strangled it. The elder was flabbergasted, but he said not a word. The third day, although they travelled a great distance, they found nobody who would offer them hospitality. Then they found a long-deserted dwelling where, sitting down in the shade of a wall, they partook of the dried-out crusts the elder had. And, as they were eating, the angel saw a wall about to collapse. Leaping up to safety, he began to take down the masonry and to rebuild <it>. The elder could bear it no longer; he swore at him, saying: 'Are you an angel? Are you a demon? Tell me what you are; the things you do are not the sort of things a man does'. The angel said: 'What did I do?' The elder said: 'Yesterday and the day before, those friends of Christ put us up. You not only made the first one's dish disappear; you also strangled the son of the other. And yet here, where we have found no rest, you stand doing the work of a labourer'. Then the angel said to him: 'Listen, and I will tell you. The first man who received us is one who loves God and manages his possessions in a godly way. That dish was left to him as the inheritance of an unjust man. I made that dish disappear, you see, so that he would not lose the reward of his other good <deeds> on account of it, and <now> his record is clean. And the other man who made us his guests, he is virtuous. Had that small child lived, it would have <grown up> to be an instrument of Satan, so that the good works of his father would pass into oblivion. So I strangled him whilst he was tender to ensure the salvation of the father, and that his record remain unassailable before God'. The elder said: 'And what about here?' The angel said: 'The owner of this dwelling is a plague who seeks to harm many people; it grieves him that he cannot succeed in doing so. When his grandfather built this house, he put money into the masonry he was building. I restored the masonry, you see, so that he would not be able to harm those he intended to harm by means of the cash he would have found when the building collapsed; I deprived him of the means. Now go to <your> cell, for as the Holy Spirit says: Your judgements are like the great deep <Ps 35:6>.' Having said this to him, the angel of God disappeared. Then the elder returned to his senses; he went back to his cell, glorifying God.
The spiritual meadow by John Moschos (also known as John Eviratus): introduction, translation, and notes by John Wortley (Kalamazoo, Michigan: Cisternian Publications, 1992) pp. 220-222

Dhu'l Qarnayn

The Quranic story of Dhu'l Qarnayn is narrated in Quran 18:83-101, and is perhaps the most famous example of an intertextual relationship between the Quran and a non-biblical legend. Academic scholars consider the Quranic pericope to be closely connected to the Syriac Alexander Legend, which has Alexander the Great voyaging to the ends of the earth to see where the sun sets and also describes its rising place, before he secures the Huns (including Gog and Magog) behind an iron wall. The academic consensus today is that the story was composed in the sixth century CE, with a small interpolation around 629-30 CE to make it relevant to a later context (previously, a prominent view had been that the whole legend was composed at that later date, but this is now rejected). The legend of Alexander enclosing Gog and Magog behind a iron barrier is first found several centuries earlier in the works of the Jewish historian Josephus. For a detailed discussion, see the main article.

The Qur'anic Trinity

God, Jesus and Mary: The Trinity?

In Surah 5 al-Ma'idah, the Qur'an apparently responds to a strange version of the Christian Trinity:

They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. Say: Who then can do aught against Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone on earth? Allah's is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. He createth what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things.
And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah'?" He will say: "Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden

This alternative formulation of the trinity is present even more clearly in Quran 5:72-75, which makes no mention of the holy spirit and takes measure to disprove the divinity of Jesus and his mother by pointing out that they, like normal human beings, also ate food.

They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers. They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the third of three." And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment. So will they not repent to Allah and seek His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded. Say, "Do you worship besides Allah that which holds for you no [power of] harm or benefit while it is Allah who is the Hearing, the Knowing?" Say, "O People of the Scripture, do not exceed limits in your religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclinations of a people who had gone astray before and misled many and have strayed from the soundness of the way."

This seeming mistake about the Christian trinity, a well established doctrine for centuries by this point, has long been one of the great riddles of the Qur'an (though in 2022 an interesting solution was proposed by Klaus von Stosch, discussed further below).

Muslim Apologetics about the Collyridians

Orthodox Muslim scholars tend to explain these verses by appearling to the heretical Arab Christian sect of the Collyridians, which were described in the 4th century CE and possibly may have survived into Muhammad’s time, so the Quran was specifically addressing their understanding of the Trinity.

Reynolds notes that Epiphanius (d. 403 CE) in his Panerion refers briefly to a group of women in the Arabian desert who worship Mary as a godess and offer her cakes (in Greek, collyrida; hence they were known as Collyridians).[48] Epiphanius of Salamis (a saint in both the Nicaean Orthodox churches and the Catholic Church) was a 4th-century Christian arch-heresy hunter and defender of Christian orthodoxy. This is what he has to say about them:

1,1 < Another > sect has come to public notice after this, and I have already mentioned a few things about it in the Sect preceding, in the letter about Mary which I wrote to Arabia. (2) This one, again, was also brought to Arabia from Thrace and upper Scythia, and word of it has reached me; it too is ridiculous and, in the opinion of the wise, wholly absurd...For as, long ago, those who, from an insolent attitude towards Mary, have seen fit to suspect these things were sowing damaging suspicions in people’s minds, so these persons who lean in the other direction are guilty of doing the worst sort of harm. In them too the maxim of certain pagan philosophers, “Extremes are equal,” will be exemplified. (5) For the harm done by both of these sects is equal, since one belittles the holy Virgin while the other, in its turn, glorifies her to excess. For certain women decorate a barber’s chair or a square seat, spread a cloth on it, set out bread and offer it in Mary’s name on a certain day of the year, and all partake of the bread–as I partially discussed in my same letter to Arabia. Now, however, I shall speak plainly of it and, with prayer to God, give the best refutations of it that I can, so as to grub out the roots of this idolatrous sect and with God’s help, be able to cure certain people of this madness...As Maker and Master of the thing [to be made] he formed himself from a virgin as though from earth—God come from heaven, the Word who had assumed flesh from a holy Virgin. But certainly not from a virgin who is worshiped, or to make her God, or to have us make offerings in her name, or, again, to make women priestesses after so many generations. (3) It was not God’s pleasure that this be done with Salome, or with Mary herself. He did not permit her to administer baptism or bless disciples, or tell her to rule on earth, but only to be a sacred shrine and be deemed worthy of his kingdom. (4) He did not order the woman called the mother of Rufus to advance < to* > this rank22 or the women who followed Christ from Galilee, or Martha the sister of Lazarus and [her sister] Mary, or any of the holy women who were privileged to be saved by his advent < and > who assisted him with their own possessions—or the woman of Canaan, or the woman who was healed of the issue of blood, or any woman on earth.

According to Epiphanius, the Collyridians seem to merge pagan goddess-worship with Christian Mariolatry. They had female priests and, interestingly for purposes of this study, seem to have been found in Arabia. It's important to remember that this is one of dozens of heresies mentioned by Epiphanius, and this is the only mention extant of them. Epiphanius doesn't give any indication of how many people actually followed this heresy, and it's not possible to know how long after his time they lasted exactly. It's also not possible for us to know how accurately this section actually describes their beliefs, since we have no extant writings from them; it is possible that Epiphanius is exaggerating here and they did not actually worship Mary as a god.

Edward Gibbon in 'the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' [Chapter 50] states that they were still in existence in the seventh century (without providing any corroborating evidence). One explanation is that Gibbon's simply took the clear parallelism of verse 5:116 with Collyridianism to mean they were present during Muhammad’s day.

As to the purpose of verse 5:116, the most plausible explanation is clearly that it was a polemic against real or imagined Christian belief in the trinity. Whether or not the Collyridians still existed at Muhammad's time or before is not knowable from the extant evidence, but if it is a reference to this sect, either by mistake or over-generalization the Qur'an does seem to apply this polemic to all Christians as a whole, whereas at most this belief was extremely marginal within Chrisitanity.

See also the sirah quoted in the section about Jesus and the Clay birds below.

Byzantine theological debates and war propaganda

Klaus von Stosch proposed at the 2022 conference "Unlocking the Byzantine Qur'an" an explanation for the hitherto unexplained and unusual Quranic phrases regarding Mary and the Christian trinity in Surah 5 al-Ma'idah, which are not found in earlier surahs but make a late appearance here in the Quran. Regarding the perculiar formulation "They have certainly disbelieved who say, 'Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary'" (verses 17 and 72), Stosch points out that a hot theological debate in 6th century CE Byzantine Christianity was whether it was correct to not only say Christ is God, but also that God is Christ.

Regarding "They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three" (verse 73), Stosch points out that a liturgy propogated across the empire by the emperor Justinian had introduced the phrase "One of the Holy Trinity" (albeit applied to Jesus, not God) in order to smooth over the differences in the above mentioned debate, and was in use as a creedal formula in Alexandria even during Muhammad's prophetic career.

Regarding the argument that he and his mother "both used to eat (earthly) food" (verse 75), some Byzantine theologians had proposed that because Christ was without sin, his body was incorruptible and he had no need for food. Moreover, relics relating to Jesus and Mary had recently been credited as saving Constantinople from a seige by Khosrow in 626 CE and were therefore considered indestructable (surah al Ma'idah dates to 630 CE or after the conquest of Mecca). Another phrase in verse 17 also appears to be a response to this imperial propaganda: "Say, 'Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?'". A letter had been sent throughout the empire by the Byzantine emperor Heraclius blaming Khosrow's defeat on his opposition to Christ and Mary. Stosch argues that "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah'?" (verse 116) is a Quranic critique of what it sees as the Byzantines turning Mary into a Godess of war.[49]

However, this last proposal seems somewhat insufficient since the verses (especially 5:72-75) very much read as though the author believed Mary was being worshipped as part of the Christian trinity, not a godess alongside it. It could be that the imperial news and propaganda had become corrupted by the time it penetrated Arabia, giving the impression that Mary was now being worshipped as part of the trinity by the Byzantine Christians.

The Wealth of Korah

Qur'anic Verse

The Torah tells the story of Korah (or Korach) and his rebellion against Moses (Numbers 16:1-35). This story was later embellished by Rabbinic exegetes and replicated in the Qur'an where Korah is transliterated to Qaaroon.

Indeed, Qarun was from the people of Moses, but he tyrannized them. And We gave him of treasures whose keys would burden a band of strong men; thereupon his people said to him, "Do not exult. Indeed, Allah does not like the exultant.

Talmudic Account

Reynolds comments regarding this passage, "The reference to Korah's possessions (Num 16:32-33) was taken by Jewish exegetes as a sign that he had grown rich: 'the keys of Korah's treasure house were a load for three hundred white mules' (b. Sanhedrin 110a). One tradition in the Babylonian Talmud (b. Peshahim 119a) attributes Korah's riches to a treasure left by Joseph."[50]

“Riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt: Resh Lakish said: This refers to Korah's wealth. And all the substance that was at their feet: R. Eleazar said: This refers to a man's wealth, which puts him on his feet. R. Levi said: The keys of Korah's treasure house were a load for three hundred white mules, though all the keys and locks were of leather. R. Hama son of R. Hanina said: Three treasures did Joseph hide in Egypt: one was revealed to Korah; one to Antoninus the son of Severus, and the third is stored up for the righteous for the future time.”

Jewish scholars have noted that the story of Korah’s wealth is not told in the Torah or Mishnah but by sages. Professor Avigdor Shenan says that the Sages present Korach, among others things, as an extremely wealthy man and the phrase “as wealthy as Korach” is used even today.

Professor Shenan also noted that the Jewish sages had two theories about how Korah acquired his wealth.

“According to the first: “Joseph hid three treasures in Egypt. One was revealed to Korach, one was revealed to Antoninus son of Asviros, and one is hidden away for the righteous in the end of days” (Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 119a).

Joseph’s great wealth, from when he gathered “all the money which was in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan” (Bereishit 47:14)”

“According to the other opinion, Pharaoh’s wealth reached Korach since he was Pharaoh’s finance minister, “and he had in his hands the keys to his treasures” (Bamidbar Rabba 18:15).”

Here is Professor Shenan’s conclusion about the wealthy Korah story:

“Why do the Sages wish to present Korach as extremely wealthy? It is difficult to find a basis for this in the biblical story. There it is written that the mouth of the earth opened in order to swallow Korach and his followers, their homes “and every man that was for Korach and all the property” (Bamidbar 16:32) and there is not enough in these words to find a basis for the assertion that he was extremely wealthy.”[51]

Thus, it can be seen that there is little or no basis in the Bible for Korah to be assumed a wealthy man, especially since he fled with Moses during the Exodus. It is unlikely, although Jewish tradition has it, that the Hebrews would have fled in haste from a vengeful Pharaoh and his army carrying a load of treasure. Rather this idea, included in the Quran, about Korah being so wealthy that the keys to his treasure house themselves were so heavy that they required a large number of bearers is credited in the Talmud to Rabbi Levi; a third century Haggadist who lived in Palestine.

Mountain raised above the Children of Israel

Qur'anic Account

In four passages, the Quran says that the mountain was raised over the Children of Israel when they were given the covenant.

And [recall] when We took your covenant, [O Children of Israel, to abide by the Torah] and We raised over you the mount, [saying], "Take what We have given you with determination and remember what is in it that perhaps you may become righteous."
And [mention] when We raised the mountain above them as if it was a dark cloud and they were certain that it would fall upon them, [and Allah said], "Take what We have given you with determination and remember what is in it that you might fear Allah."

See similarly Quran 2:93 and Quran 4:154.

Midrash Account

Michael Graves has argued in a detailed article on the theology of these passages that the Quran deploys the motif that the mountain was literally raised over the Israelites for its own theological purposes, to destabilize Judeo-Christian concepts of divine election and to emphasise the need for all people to show reverant awareness of Allah. Moreover, he explains why academic scholars understand the idea to have come about from Rabbinic exegesis of a verse in the biblical book of Genesis.[52]

Graves explains that in Exodus 19:17 Moses brings the people out of the camp to meet God, and the people take their place beṯaḥtîṯ hāhār, which is usually taken to mean, “at the foot of the mountain.”

17 And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet with God; and they stood at the nether part of the mount.
18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the LORD descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly.
Exodus 19:17-18 (KJV)

He notes that beṯaḥtîṯ is an unusual way to say "at the foot of", the root word typically meaning "under", and this particular form of the word is unique in the Hebrew Bible. Graves observes that:

If one were to press the language of the text in a literalistic fashion, one could construe this verse as saying that the people took their place “below” or “underneath” the mountain. It is precisely this kind of unusual expression in the biblical text that regularly served as a jumping off point for midrashic exegesis (see Zetterholm 2012, 70–71; Wylen 2005, 97–98; Stern 1987, 613–620; Sarason 1998, 133–154). In fact, the picture of Israel situated literally underneath the uplifted mountain supports a theological reflection on Israel’s meeting with God at Sinai in the earliest rabbinic midrash on Exodus, Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael. That God raised up Mt. Sinai over Israel became a standard interpretation of Exodus 19:17 in rabbinic sources. It is notable, although not unusual, that an exegetical motif such as this should find its way into the Qurʾan.

Graves notes that the Talmud ascribes the interpretation to R. Abdimi b. Hama, a fourth century Rabbi. He quotes the tradition as reported in the Babylonian Talmud, Tracates Shabbat 88a and Abodah Zarah 2b:

And they stood under the mountain”: R. Abdimi b. Ḥama said: This teaches that the Holy Blessed One overturned the mountain upon them like a cask, and said to them, “If you accept the Torah, well and good; but if not, there shall be your burial.
Tracates Shabbat 88a and Abodah Zarah 2b

Reynolds notes an additional point regarding Quran 7:171-174: "On the term translated here as 'canopy' (Ar: zulla), Yahuda (284) argues that it means something closer to a jar (inverted)."[53] If correct, that would suggest an even closer fit to the talmud quote above.

Moses, Aaron and the Samiri

Neuwirth (2024) notes on the following verses that when Moses grabs Aaron’s beard, it may symbolize a challenge to Aaron’s priestly dignity, an idea rooted in Jewish and Christian traditions.[54] And Aaron’s defense — that the people should not be divided — is not found in the Bible’s account in Exodus 32:22–24, but appears only in later rabbinical debates.[54]

But (Moses) said: "O Aaron, when you saw that they had gone astray, what hindered you from following me? Did you disobey my command?’ He said, ‘O son of my mother! Do not grab my beard or my head! I feared lest you should say, ‘‘You have caused a rift among the Children of Israel and did not heed my word [of advice].’’’

She also notes a possible parallel in this story Quran 20:95-96 in the brief description of how the calf was made may relate to scriptural magic described in Exodus Rabba 41:10, though this view contrasts with Paret, who follows Yahuda and relies on a later Midrash that is hard to date.[54] And in Quran 20:97-98 the Samiri / 'al-Sāmirī' is condemned in the Qur’an to live as a leper, symbolizing lifelong impurity — echoing the Bible's Leviticus 13:45; though his expulsion and the warning of future punishment parallel the story of Iblīs, showing that al-Sāmirī plays a Satan-like role in the Qur’anic narrative, which, similarly, rabbinic tradition also links Satan to the golden calf incident.[54]

The body on Solomon's throne

And We certainly tried Solomon and placed on his throne a body; then he returned. He said, "My Lord, forgive me and grant me a kingdom such as will not belong to anyone after me. Indeed, You are the Bestower."

Citing and quoting the Babylonian Talmud, Gitten 68, Reynolds notes, "Behind this passage is a midrashic tale found in the Babylonian Talmud according to which the demon Ashmedai, who had been subdued by Solomon, tricks Solomon into removing his chains and handing over his ring. Ashmedai swallows Solomon, casts him far away, takes Solomon's likeness, and takes his place on the throne (eventually Ashmedai is recognized because of his stockings which he wore to cover his roosterlike feet). Solomon returns to Jerusalem in the guise of a beggar, which may explain the humility ascribed to him in these two Qur'ānic verses."[55]

Jinn help Solomon build temples

And to Solomon [We subjected] the wind - its morning [journey was that of] a month - and its afternoon [journey was that of] a month, and We made flow for him a spring of [liquid] copper. And among the jinn were those who worked for him by the permission of his Lord. And whoever deviated among them from Our command - We will make him taste of the punishment of the Blaze. They made for him what he willed of elevated chambers, statues, bowls like reservoirs, and stationary kettles. [We said], "Work, O family of David, in gratitude." And few of My servants are grateful.

Reynolds notes that behind these verses is a legend found in the Talmud (Babylonian Talmud Gittin 68a-b) about demons who help Solomon build the Jerusalem temple (the Arabic word for elevated chamber in v. 13 is the same as is used for the Jerusalem temple sanctury in Quran 3:37-39). [56] It appears to stem from an idosyncratic exegesis on Solomon's words in Ecclesiastes 2:8.

I gat me sharim and sharoth, and the delights of the sons of men, Shidah and shidoth. 'Sharim and Sharoth', means diverse kinds of music; 'the delights of the sons of men' are ornamental pools and baths. 'Shidah and shidoth': Here [in Babylon] they translate as male and female demons. In the West [Palestine] they say [it means] carriages. R. Johanan said: There were three hundred kinds of demons in Shihin, but what a shidah is I do not know.

The Master said: Here they translate 'male and female demons'. For what did Solomon want them? — As indicated in the verse, And the house when it was in building was made of stone made ready at the quarry, [there was neither hammer nor axe nor any tool of iron heard in the house while it was in building]; He said to the Rabbis, How shall I manage [without iron tools]? — They replied, There is the shamir which Moses brought for the stones of the ephod.
[...]
What I want is to build the Temple and I require the shamir.
[...]

Solomon kept him with him until he had built the Temple.

The Queen of Sheba

Qur'anic Account

The story of the Queen of Sheba is an ancient one, dating back to the Old Testament (1 Kgs. 10:1-10 and 2 Chr. 9:1-12). Josephus also makes mention of the Queen of Sheba, as does the Qur'an, which interestingly embellishes the Old Testament account with the episodes of the hoopoe and the Queen of Sheba exposing her legs.

Below is the Quranic account of the story:

And he took attendance of the birds and said, "Why do I not see the hoopoe - or is he among the absent? I will surely punish him with a severe punishment or slaughter him unless he brings me clear authorization." But the hoopoe stayed not long and said, "I have encompassed [in knowledge] that which you have not encompassed, and I have come to you from Sheba with certain news. Indeed, I found [there] a woman ruling them, and she has been given of all things, and she has a great throne. I found her and her people prostrating to the sun instead of Allah, and Satan has made their deeds pleasing to them and averted them from [His] way, so they are not guided, [And] so they do not prostrate to Allah, who brings forth what is hidden within the heavens and the earth and knows what you conceal and what you declare - Allah - there is no deity except Him, Lord of the Great Throne." [Solomon] said, "We will see whether you were truthful or were of the liars. Take this letter of mine and deliver it to them. Then leave them and see what [answer] they will return." She said, "O eminent ones, indeed, to me has been delivered a noble letter. Indeed, it is from Solomon, and indeed, it reads: 'In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful, Be not haughty with me but come to me in submission [as Muslims].' " She said, "O eminent ones, advise me in my affair. I would not decide a matter until you witness [for] me." They said, "We are men of strength and of great military might, but the command is yours, so see what you will command." She said, "Indeed kings - when they enter a city, they ruin it and render the honored of its people humbled. And thus do they do. But indeed, I will send to them a gift and see with what [reply] the messengers will return." So when they came to Solomon, he said, "Do you provide me with wealth? But what Allah has given me is better than what He has given you. Rather, it is you who rejoice in your gift. Return to them, for we will surely come to them with soldiers that they will be powerless to encounter, and we will surely expel them therefrom in humiliation, and they will be debased." [Solomon] said, "O assembly [of jinn], which of you will bring me her throne before they come to me in submission?" A powerful one from among the jinn said, "I will bring it to you before you rise from your place, and indeed, I am for this [task] strong and trustworthy." Said one who had knowledge from the Scripture, "I will bring it to you before your glance returns to you." And when [Solomon] saw it placed before him, he said, "This is from the favor of my Lord to test me whether I will be grateful or ungrateful. And whoever is grateful - his gratitude is only for [the benefit of] himself. And whoever is ungrateful - then indeed, my Lord is Free of need and Generous." He said, "Disguise for her her throne; we will see whether she will be guided [to truth] or will be of those who is not guided." So when she arrived, it was said [to her], "Is your throne like this?" She said, "[It is] as though it was it." [Solomon said], "And we were given knowledge before her, and we have been Muslims [in submission to Allah]. And that which she was worshipping other than Allah had averted her [from submission to Him]. Indeed, she was from a disbelieving people." She was told, "Enter the palace." But when she saw it, she thought it was a body of water and uncovered her shins [to wade through]. He said, "Indeed, it is a palace [whose floor is] made smooth with glass." She said, "My Lord, indeed I have wronged myself, and I submit with Solomon to Allah, Lord of the worlds."

Targum Sheni

Regarding the above passage, Reynolds cites the Targum Sheni 1:1-3 (also known as The Second Targum of Esther).[57] The Targums were translations (in this case, Aramaic) of the Hebrew scriptures, often with significant exegesis, paraphrase, or additional tales interwoven with the text.

A few verses earlier, Quran 27:16-17 also has a parallel at the start of the same Targum Sheni passage. Reynolds remarks that "The Qurʾān's declaration that Solomon was taught the 'speech of the birds' (v. 16) and that his army included 'jinn, humans and birds' (v. 17) reflects the Second Targum of Esther (the date of which is disputed, but may date originally from the fourth century AD; On its relationship with the Qurʾān see BEQ, 390-91; 393-98)."[58] However, it must be cautioned that the date of the Targum Sheni (Second Targum of Esther) is extremely uncertain. It has received various datings from the 4th to 11th centuries AD (as Reynolds also mentions), though certainly in its final redaction includes material which post-dates the lower end of that range.[59]

Dozens of details correspond between this passage and the Quranic verses when they are compared:

At another time, when the heart of Solomon was gladdened with wine, he gave orders for the beasts of the land, the birds of the air, the creeping things of the earth, the demons from above and the Genii, to be brought, that they might dance around him, in order that all the kings waiting upon him might behold his grandeur. And all the royal scribes summoned by their names before him; in fact, all were there except the captives and prisoners and those in charge of them. Just then the Red-cock, enjoying itself, could not be found; and King Solomon said that they should seize and bring it by force, and indeed he sought to kill it. But just then the cock appeared in presence of the King, and said: O Lord, King of the earth! having applied thine ear, listen to my words. It is hardly three months since I made a firm resolution within me that I would not eat a crumb of bread, nor drink a drop of water until I had seen the whole world, and over it make my flight, saying to myself, I must know the city and the kingdom which is not subject to thee, my Lord King. Then I found the fortified city Qîtôr in the Eastern lands, and around it are stones of gold and silver in the streets plentiful as rubbish, and trees planted from the beginning of the world, and rivers to water it, flowing out of the garden of Eden. Many men are there wearing garlands from the garden close by. They shoot arrows, but cannot use the bow. They are ruled by a woman, called Queen of Sheba. Now if it please my Lord King, thy servant, having bound up my girdle, will set out for the fort Qîtôr in Sheba; and having "bound their Kings with chains and their Nobles with links of iron," will bring them into thy presence. The proposal pleased the King, and the scribes prepared a despatch, which was placed under the bird's wing, and away it flew high up in the sky. It grew strong surrounded by a crowd of birds, and reached the Fort of Sheba. By chance the Queen of Sheba was out in the morning worshipping the sea; and the air being darkened by the multitude of birds, she became so alarmed as to rend her clothes in trouble and distress. Just then the Cock alighted by her, and she seeing the letter under its wing opened and read it as follows: "King Solomon sendeth to thee his salaam, and saith, The high and holy One hath set me over the beasts of the field, etc.; and the kings of the four Quarters send to ask after my welfare. Now if it please thee to come and ask after my welfare, I will set thee high above them all. But if it please thee not, I will send kings and armies against thee; — the beasts of the field are my people, the birds of the air my riders, the demons and genii thine enemies, — to imprison you, to slay and to feed upon you." When the Queen of Sheba heard it, she again rent her garments, and sending for her Nobles asked their advice. They knew not Solomon, but advised her to send vessels by the sea, full of beautiful ornaments and gems, together with 6000 boys and girls in purple garments, who had all been born at the same moment; also to send a letter promising to visit him by the end of the year. It was a journey of seven years but she promised to come in three. When at last she came, Solomon sent a messenger shining in brilliant attire, like the morning dawn, to meet her. As they came together, she stepped from her carriage. "Why dost thou thus?" he asked. "Art thou not Solomon?" she said. "Nay, I am but a servant that standeth in his presence." The queen at once addressed a parable to her followers in compliment to him, and then was led by him to the Court. Solomon hearing she had come, arose and sat down in the Palace of glass. When the Queen of Sheba saw it, she thought that the glass floor was water, and so in crossing over lifted up her garments. When Solomon seeing the hair about her legs, cried out to her: Thy beauty is the beauty of women, but thy hair is as the hair of men; hair is good in man, but in woman it is not becoming. On this she said: My Lord, I have three enigmas to put to thee. If thou canst answer them, I shall know that thou art a wise man: but if not thou art like all around thee. When he had answered all three, she replied, astonished: Blessed be the Lord thy God, who hath placed thee on the throne that thou mightest rule with right and justice. And she gave to Solomon much gold and silver; and he to her whatsoever she desired.
Targum Sheni 1:1-3[60]

One cannot be too dogmatic about this parallelism, as the dating of Targum Sheni is not beyond doubt. Nevertheless, it is likely that the story of the Queen of Sheba pre-dates the Qur'an as the Targum is mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud. It is also clear that the post-Quranic dates often ascribed to Targum Sheni are that of the final redaction and not necessarily that of the Queen of Sheba myths.

Jacob tells his sons to not enter through one gate

And he said, "O my sons, do not enter from one gate but enter from different gates; and I cannot avail you against [the decree of] Allah at all. The decision is only for Allah; upon Him I have relied, and upon Him let those who would rely [indeed] rely."

According to Reynolds, Jacob's instruction to his sons to enter through different gates rather than one is a Midrashic tale found in Genesis Rabbah 91:6 "Do not enter through one gate."[61]

Every living thing from water

In two verses the Quran states that Allah created every living thing from water:

Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?
Allah has created every [living] creature from water. And of them are those that move on their bellies, and of them are those that walk on two legs, and of them are those that walk on four. Allah creates what He wills. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent.

It is significant that the first of the two verses, 21:30, is explicitly about the creation of the world. Reynolds notes an earlier parallel taught by the Syriac church father Ephrem (d. 373 CE). He writes, "[...] Ephrem, who explains that God created everything through water: 'Thus, through light and water the earth brought forth everything.' Ephrem, Commentary on Genesis, 1:1-10)."[62] Ephrem's comment is in the context of the Genesis creation story, much like the first Quranic verse, 21:30. Ephrem says that when heaven and earth were created there were no trees or vegetation as it had not yet rained, so a fountain irrigated the earth. Tafsirs say that when the heaven and earth were separated rain fell so that plants could grow. There is also a similarity with Ephrem in the other verse (24:45), which mentions creatures that move on two, four or no legs. Ephrem explains that as well as the "trees, vegetation and plants", the "Scripture wishes to indicate that all animals, reptiles, cattle and birds came into being as a result of the combining of earth and water".[63]

The preaching of Noah

Surah 71 consists entirely of the preaching of Noah and his supplications to Allah.

Indeed, We sent Noah to his people, [saying], "Warn your people before there comes to them a painful punishment." He said, "O my people, indeed I am to you a clear warner, [Saying], 'Worship Allah, fear Him and obey me. Allah will forgive you of your sins and delay you for a specified term. Indeed, the time [set by] Allah, when it comes, will not be delayed, if you only knew.' "

[...]

And Noah said, "My Lord, do not leave upon the earth from among the disbelievers an inhabitant. Indeed, if You leave them, they will mislead Your servants and not beget except [every] wicked one and [confirmed] disbeliever. My Lord, forgive me and my parents and whoever enters my house a believer and the believing men and believing women. And do not increase the wrongdoers except in destruction."

Reynolds remarks that "The Qur'ānic character of Noah is quite unlike that of the Noah in Genesis, who does not speak a word until after the flood." Citing the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 108a, he observes that "[his preaching] is also suggested by a passage in the Talmud:

"The righteous Noah rebuked them, urging, 'Repent; for if not, the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring a deluge upon you and cause your bodies to float upon the water like gourds, as it is written, He is light [i.e., floats] upon the waters. Moreover, ye shall be taken as a curse for all future generations.' (b. Sanhedrin 108a)"

Reynolds further notes, "It is also prominent in the Syriac fathers, several of whom report that Noah preached to his people for a hundred years before God finally sent the flood." citing for example the Syriac authors Narsai, "On the Flood", 33, II. 227-30 and Jacob of Serugh, Homilies contre les juifs, 70, homily 2, II. 37-40.[64]

Noah's disbelieving wife

Allah presents an example of those who disbelieved: the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot. They were under two of Our righteous servants but betrayed them, so those prophets did not avail them from Allah at all, and it was said, "Enter the Fire with those who enter."

The Bible briefly mentions Noah's wife in one verse without further comment (Genesis 7:7), "And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives entered the ark to escape the waters of the flood." Regarding the Quranic verse which speaks of her negatively, Reynolds briefly considers the possibility that the Quran has extended to their wives the parallelism between Noah (though not his wife) and Lot found in the New Testament (2 Peter 2), but then comments, "However, it is important to note that already in the pre-Islamic period certain groups had developed hostile legends about Noah's wife." He cites Epiphanius (d. 403 CE), Panarion 2:26, which relates the Gnostic belief that she was not allowed onto the ark, having burned it down three times before the flood.[65]

Noah's flood waters overflowed from an oven

The Qur'anic version of the Noah's flood story describes the flood waters as overflowing from an oven. This element is not found even in more ancient versions of the story (Epic of Gilgamesh, Atra hasis, and Ziusudra).

Note that in his translation, Yusuf Ali mistranslates the Aramaic loan word for the oven (alttannooru ٱلتَّنُّورُ)[66] as "fountains". The Arabic verb translated "gushed forth" (fara فَارَ) means overflowed or boiled in the context of water in a cooking pot[67], as well as in the other verse where it is used, Quran 67:7. Here is Pickthall's more accurate translation:

(Thus it was) till, when Our commandment came to pass and the oven gushed forth water, We said: Load therein two of every kind, a pair (the male and female), and thy household, save him against whom the word hath gone forth already, and those who believe. And but a few were they who believed with him.
Then We inspired in him, saying: Make the ship under Our eyes and Our inspiration. Then, when Our command cometh and the oven gusheth water, introduce therein of every (kind) two spouses, and thy household save him thereof against whom the Word hath already gone forth. And plead not with Me on behalf of those who have done wrong. Lo! they will be drowned.

At one time academic scholars thought this verse alluded to a Midrashic exegesis in which the flood waters were boiling hot (b. Sanhedrin 108b, Rosh Hashanah 12a:4). More recent scholarship, particularly by Olivier Mongellaz in 2024,[68] has identified that these verses most likely reflect a late antique legend in which water gushing up through a bread oven (a large hole dug into the ground) was a sign warning Noah's family of the imminent flood. The interpretation as Noah's own oven is attributed to a number of early commentators (such as Ibn Abbas, Mujahid), while others understood it to be the area of land where the flood waters first rose. Qurtubi said: "The sayings of commentators appear to be different as to the meaning of tannur, but this, in reality, is not a difference. When water began to bulge out, it overflowed from the bread baking oven, and from out of the surface of the land".

Significantly, Mongellaz has argued on literary grounds that a fragmentary Arabic text falsely attributed to Hippolytus of Rome, and which mentions the overflowing bread oven story, is independent of the Islamic tradition and was originally written in a very specific environment which has parallels with the context in which certain parts of the Quran were written.

Meanwhile, Ham's wife stood up to take out the bread that remained in the oven and immediately water sprang out of the oven [fāḍa l-māʾmin al-tannūr] and immediately water came out of the oven, as the Lord had said: "The fountains of the great deeps were opened." Ham's wife called to Noah, saying, "My lord, the word of God has come true (Syr. what God promised has come true!)" - for it had come true just as the Lord had promised her. When Noah heard Ham's wife's words, he said to her, "Oh, the flood has come."
Pseudo. Hippolytus of Rome (translated to English from Mongellaz's French translation)[68]

Noah's ark left behind as a sign

And We carried him on a [construction of] planks and nails, Sailing under Our observation as reward for he who had been denied. And We left it as a sign, so is there any who will remember?

Unlike the bible, which does not mention the ark as a sign for future generations, Neuwirth (2024) notes the salvation of Noah is made physically plausible to the listeners through the reference to the material verifiability of the ark, which could be taken from various late antique traditions, for example Flavius Josephus (b. 37AD) reports in the Jewish Antiquities (I 3.5 § 92) of the existence of the remains of Noah’s ark in Armenia (Clementz 1959: 22).[69] She also notes that the appeal to the willingness of the listeners to be admonished by the sign (āya) of Noah’s ark is also reminiscent of the Talmudic story (bSanhedrin 96a) of the death of Sennacherib, who was led to a fateful decision by seeing the remains of Noah’s ark.[69]

Moses and Pharaoh

Alongside the biblical account of Moses and the Pharoah, there are some key aspects that match Jewish Rabbinic and Christian non-biblical traditions. Even the place where Moses communicates with God in the story of the burning bush, the word used ṭuwan in e.g. Quran 20:12 (for the folded land, implying double the holiness)[70] does not have a parallel in the bible,[71] but does in other Judeo-Christian (later) works.[72] And the idea of eschatology in Moses's story such as Quran 20:15, with reward in the afterlife being mentioned, is not contained in the biblical story of Moses, Neuwirth (2024) notes moves the story into a late antiquity interpretation.[73] Key details in the stories include:

The prophecy of baby Moses

Alongside the scene of Exodus 1:8-2:10 where the Hebrews in Egyptian bondage are told to kill all male babies to control the growing Israelite population, where Moses's mother places his basket in the Nile to escape; Neuwirth (2024) citing Speyer, notes that the prophecy to Moses’s mother that an enemy—of Moses as well as of God himself—would take him in reflects a Midrashic interpretation of Exodus Rabba (1:31: “So the daughter of Pharaoh raised the daughter, who was once to take revenge on her father”). The event is explicitly based on a divine intention, namely, to make Moses his chosen one.[74]

We have bestowed Our favour on you before this, When We told your mother what We relate: 'Put him in a wooden box and cast it in the river. The river will cast it on the bank. An enemy of Ours, and his, will retrieve it.' We bestowed Our love on you that you may be reared under Our eyes.

And similarly the next verse unlike the bible focuses on the emotional impact of the event on Moses’s mother, Neuwirth notes is comparable to Midrash Exodus Rabba 1:25.[75] Moses's salvation from persecution after manslaughter is commemorated with similar consideration of Moses’s mental condition.[76]

When your sister walked up [to Pharaoh’s palace] saying, “Shall I show you someone who will take care of him?” Then We restored you to your mother, that she might not grieve and be comforted. Then you slew a soul, whereupon We delivered you from anguish, and We tried you with various ordeals. Then you stayed for several years among the people of Midian. Then you turned up as ordained, O Moses!

Moses not suckled by Egyptians

And We had prevented from him [all] wet nurses before, so she said, "Shall I direct you to a household that will be responsible for him for you while they are to him [for his upbringing] sincere?" So We restored him to his mother that she might be content and not grieve and that she would know that the promise of Allah is true. But most of the people do not know.

Reynolds comments, "On this passage cf. Exodus 2:7-9. The Qurʾān's declaration (v. 12) 'We had forbidden him to be suckled by any nurse' (v. 12) reflects a tradition in the Babylonian Talmud that Moses (from whose mouth would come forth the word of God) refused the impure breasts of the Egyptian women:

Then said his sister to Pharaoh's daughter, Shall I go and call thee a nurse of the Hebrew women? Why just 'of the Hebrew women'? - It teaches that they handed about to all the Egyptian women but he would not suck. He said: Shall a mouth which will speak with [God] suck what is unclean! (b. Sotah 12b)"[77]

Moses's speech impediment

Moses has some kind of speech impediment when going to speak to Pharaoh in the Qurʾān.

"Go to Pharaoh. Indeed, he has transgressed."( Moses) said: "O, my Lord! Expand me my breast,” ease my task for me, And untie the knot from my tongue, so they may understand what I say.”

Biblical Scholar James Kugel (1997)[78] notes that later Jewish and Christian commentators found it necessary to explain Moses's statement in the Old Testament “Oh my Lord, I am not a man of words … but I am heavy of speech and heavy of tongue” (Exodus 4:10), as he was believed to be a highly educated man who had been supposedly been schooled in every branch of wisdom, including eloquence.

He notes "it occurred to interpreters that Moses might have been referring here not to any lacuna in his education, but to an actual speech defect, some physical deformity of his mouth or tongue that prevented him from speaking in the usual fashion." We see this in:[79]

"I am not by nature eloquent; my tongue with difficulty speaks, I stammer, so that I cannot speak before the king." —Ezekiel the Tragedian, Exaggē 113– 115 (3rd-2nd century BCE)

He [Moses] pleased his parents by his beauty, but grieved them by his speech impediment. —Ephraem, Commentary on Exodus 2: 4 (d. 373 AD)

Others even added stories on how he might have acquired that deformity, such as Josephus in Jewish Antiquities 2: 232– 236 (published ~93/94 AD), connecting their explanation of Moses’ speech problems to the tradition of Pharaoh’s wise men and their warnings about a boy that might grow up and save Israel.[80]

Pharaohs questions

Neuwirth (2024) comments that the list of further detailed questions to Moses in Surah 26 'The Poets' / al-shuʿarāʾ (i.e. in Quran 26:22-29), citing Speyer, reflect a more detailed episode from Midrash Exodus Rabba 5:18, which also starts from Pharaoh’s self-praise as God.[81]

The Drowning of Pharaoh

And We took the Children of Israel across the sea, and Pharaoh and his soldiers pursued them in tyranny and enmity until, when drowning overtook him, he said, "I believe that there is no deity except that in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am of the Muslims." Now? And you had disobeyed [Him] before and were of the corrupters? So today We will save you in body that you may be to those who succeed you a sign. And indeed, many among the people, of Our signs, are heedless

Reynolds comments, "The question of Pharaoh's survival appears in an opinion found in the (late fourth century AD) Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael (cr. Gavin McDowell):

"And the waters returned and covered the chariot etc. [Exo 14:27]. Even Pharaoh, according to the words of R. Judah, as it is said, 'The chariots of Pharaoh and his force, etc.' [Exo 15:4]. R. Nehimiah says: Except for Pharaoh. About him it says, 'However, for this purpose I have let you live' [Exo 9:16]. Others say that in the end Pharaoh went down and drowned, as it is said, 'Then went the horse of Pharaoh, etc.' [Exo 15:19]. (Beshallah 7)"[82]

Allah keeps the heavens and the birds from falling

Do they not see the birds above them with wings outspread and [sometimes] folded in? None holds them [aloft] except the Most Merciful. Indeed He is, of all things, Seeing.
Do they not look at the birds, held poised in the midst of (the air and) the sky? Nothing holds them up but (the power of) Allah. Verily in this are signs for those who believe

The same verb for holding (amsaka) appears in Quran 22:65 and Quran 35:41 with regard to Allah holding the sky from falling to earth.

Do you not see that Allah has subjected to you whatever is on the earth and the ships which run through the sea by His command? And He restrains the sky from falling upon the earth, unless by His permission. Indeed Allah, to the people, is Kind and Merciful.
Indeed, Allah holds the heavens and the earth, lest they cease. And if they should cease, no one could hold them [in place] after Him. Indeed, He is Forbearing and Forgiving.

In his 2023 academic book on Quranic cosmology, Julien Decharneux observes that the 6th century CE Syriac Christian writer Jacob of Serugh repeatedly used birdflight as an illustration of the concept of remzā ("[The remzā] is, both in Narsai and Jacob, the medium through which God’s power operates."[83])

A very close similarity with Q. 16:79 can be seen in this homily:

See! They are suspended and stand like a bird who is suspended in the air with nothing on which it rests except the remzā.
Jacob of Sarugh, Homily on the Chariot that Ezekiel saw, Homilies 4:551, translated by Julien Decharneux[84]

A more elaborat passage makes the parallel with the Quranic concept clearer:

Look at the bird when it is standing erect and relaxed and its feathers are spread out and it is standing on nothing, and it is not heavy for that nothing on which it is set, but its wing is stable and rests as if on something, and its feet and wings are spread to and it stands there and that empty space where it is please is like the earth for it, and when it is not leaning nor resting, hanging in the air and imagining the earth hanging on nothing. The hidden force [ḥaylā kasyā] of the Divinity, that is that something on which all the creation hangs and with which it is held.
Jacob of Sarugh, Homily on the fifth day of Creation, Homilies 3:96, translated by Julien Dechaneux[85]

Just as the Quran uses the same verb to say that Allah holds up the birds and the heavens (as noted above), Jacob uses the concept of remzā (God's action in the world) also for the firmament.

[The firmament] became like an arch hanging and standing without foundation [d-lā šatīsē], borne not by columns [law ʿamūdē], but by the remzā.
Jacob of Sarugh, Homilies 3:35 quoted by Julien Decharneux[86]

The seven skies/heavens

He created seven heavens in layers. You do not see any discordance in the creation of the All-beneficent. Look again! Do you see any flaw?

The idea of multiple layered heavens above each other, including seven among other numbers, dates back to at least ancient Mesopotamian times.[87] The seven skies/heavens however, are not mentioned in the bible, though a 'third' heaven is specifically mentioned in the new Testament with Corinthians 12:2. Reynolds (2018) notes that the cosmology of seven heavens specifically however is found in both Jewish Talmudic and apocrypha texts (e.g., BT, Ḥagīgā, 12b) and Christian traditions (e.g. church fathers, Irenaeus (Proof of the Apostolic Preaching 9); in the Ascension of Isaiah, a composite text extant in Ethiopic with Jewish origins but redacted by Christians, Isaiah travels to the seventh heaven.[88] Other non-biblical Judeo-Christian works range in the number of heavens, including three (family α of Testament of Levi),  five (3 Baruch), and seven (long and shorter recensions of 2 Enoch).[89]

Late antique Christian Martyrdom

Durie (2018) notes the violence of the Qur'an shares more commonality with contemporary late antique religious (primarily Christian) violence and warfare rather than being directly biblically based.[90]

Covering the continuity and similarities between late antique religious violence & warfare and the Qur'an (and other Islamic traditions) is too big a topic to cover here; perhaps the most in-depth academic work looking at the continuity between this and Islam is Thomas Sizgorich's Violence and Belief in Late Antiquity: Militant Devotion in Christianity and Islam,[91] however Sinai (2017) notes alongside similar ideas and theology, there are some direct textual references.

That the Qur’anic community’s access to Biblical notions of militancy was mediated by late antique Christian discourse is indicated by an intriguing intertextual overlap. According to Q 3: 169–170, those who have been ‘killed in the path of God’ are not dead but ‘alive with their Lord’, rather than having to spend the remaining time until the Resurrection in a state of slumber (similarly Q 2: 154).39 Tor Andrae has pointed out that the phrase ‘alive with their Lord’ (ayāun inda rabbihim) corresponds exactly to the Syriac phrase h. ayyē lwāth alāhā, which a sixth-century Syriac Christian writer (Mar Ishay) applies to the martyrs.40 Furthermore, Mar Ishay contrasts the true fate of the martyrs with unfounded prior opinion: ‘they are believed to be already dead’.41 The same contrast is found in the two Qur’anic passages just cited.42 It could be objected that the parallel demonstrates merely that the Qur’an is familiar with the widespread Christian idea that martyrs are granted prompt access to paradise but that this does not establish a Christian precedent for the Qur’anic application of this idea specifically to those who actively enact – rather than just suffer – violence. However, as Sizgorich reminds us, a Christian martyr was by no means seen merely as a passive victim of persecution but rather as someone who actively ‘defeats the power of the Roman state’.43
Sinai, Nicolai. Qur'an: A Historical-Critical Introduction (The New Edinburgh Islamic Surveys) (pp. 301-302). Edinburgh University Press. Kindle Edition.
And never think of those who have been killed in the cause of Allah as dead. Rather, they are alive with their Lord, receiving provision
Do not say that those who are killed in the way of God, are dead, for indeed they are alive, even though you are not aware.

See also Quran 2:154.

Sinai (2017) similarly notes strong ideological parallels a 6th century hagiographical text (the Panegyric on Macarius, Bishop of Tkow by Pseudo-Dioscorus of Alexandria) of a 5th-century martyr, Egyptian Bishop Macarius of Tkow who was martyred for opposing the council of Chalcedon. Citing Michael Gaddis's summary of the document, ‘He was both willing to die for his faith, and willing to kill for it.’ he notes the same idea in Quran 9:111 … they fight in the way of Allah, kill, and are killed.. [92] As well as citing English historian of the Byzantine Empire James Howard-Johnston "..James Howard-Johnston draws attention to a passage in the Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor (d. 818), which reports that at about the same time when the Qur’an promised those ‘killed in the path of God’ immediate entry to paradise, the Byzantine emperor Heraclius similarly announced that those fighting the Sasanians would be recompensed with eternal life. In Heraclius’s address as reported by Theophanes Confessor, we find some of the same general ingredients that are noticeable in Qur’anic calls to militancy…"[93] He notes these similarities are likely caused by being on the fringes of the Roman empire.[94]

Neuwirth (2024) also notes the influence of Christian martyrdom stories on the sudden conversion and prayers/asking for forgiveness to God of Pharaoh's magician's, who are originally opponents of Moses until he shows them proof of his prophecy via a miracle in the face of a sudden and violent death as threatened by the arrogant ruler (e.g. in Quran 26:50-51 and Quran 20:71-73).[95] Both Jewish and Christian traditions present individual “anti-Moses” sorcerers named Jannes and Jambres, who continue to appear in later interpretations; citing Nora Schmid, she notes that, although there is no explicit textual reference and the magicians are typically depicted in a negative light, they came to be associated with penance and martyrdom in Christian tradition - in the Qurʾan, this idea is developed further: the forgiveness that Jannes and Jambres either did not receive or only partially received in earlier sources is ultimately granted.[96]

V. 72–73 qālū lan nuʾthiraka ʿalā mā jāʾanā mina l-bayyināti wa-lladhī faṭaranā fa-qḍi mā anta qāḍin innamā taqḍī hādhihi l-ḥayāta l-dunyā / innā āmannā birabbinā li-yaghfira lanā khaṭāyānā wa-mā akrahtanā ʿalayhi mina l-siḥri wallāhu khayrun wa-abqā] Conversion scene as later in Q 26:50–51. The sorcerers renounce their allegiance to Pharaoh on the basis of the obvious evidence (bayyināt) and give preference to the Creator God, they submit to their worldly fate and hope for the forgiveness of their sins and what they have been forced to do by the ruler—they are a role model for the community, which is also subject to pressure from outside. The request for forgiveness of sins before a violent death is a topos of Christian martyr stories. The entire scene, leaving the context of ‘ancient’ Egypt, reflects the notion of Christian martyrdom stories. Khaṭāyā (singular khaṭīʾa) also lets a Syriac terminus technicus ring through, but the word can be derived from the Arabic root KhṬʿ (“to miss a goal”) (see FVQ, 123ff.). The idea of the forgiveness of sins is prominent in the Christian liturgy—not only through the Lord’s Prayer. In addition to khaṭīʾa, there is the genuine Arabic dhanb, dhunūb.
Neuwirth, Angelika. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 2.1: Early Middle Meccan Suras: The New Elect (p. 204). Yale University Press. Kindle Edition.

See Also

References

  1. Witztum, Joseph (2011) The Syriac milieu of the Quran: The recasting of Biblical narratives, PhD Thesis, Princeton University
  2. Reynolds, Gabriel Said, "The Quran and Bible: Text and Commentary", New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2018
  3. Chaim Milikowsky, Midrash as Fiction and Midrash as History: What Did the Rabbis Mean? in Jo-Ann Brant, et al., eds., Ancient Fiction: The Matrix of Early Christian and Jewish Narrative (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005) 117-127
  4. Mehdy Shaddel, Qurʾānic ummī: Genealogy, Ethnicity, and the Foundation of a New Community (Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 43, 2016, pp. 1-60)
  5. Julien Decharneux (2023) "Creation and Contemplation: The Cosmology of the Qur'ān and Its Late Antique Background", Berlin/Boston: DeGruyter, pp. 10-11
  6. Kister, M. J. ‘A Bag of Meat’: A Study of an Early ‘Ḥadīth.’ Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, vol. 33, no. 2, 1970, pp. 267–75
  7. Guillaume, A., The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah. Oxford University Press, London: Oxford University Press, 1955, pp. 98-100
  8. Guillaume, A., The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah. Oxford University Press, London: Oxford University Press, 1955, p. 100
  9. Sean Anthony, Muhammad and the Empires of Faith: The making of the Prophet of Islam, Oakland CA: University of California, 2020, pp. 76-78
  10. Muhammad the borrower – Debate 2 with Saifullah
  11. See this Twitter.com thread by Professor Sean Anthony - 21 August 2023
  12. Summary by Sharon Morad, Leeds - The Origins of The Koran: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book, edited by Ibn Warraq (Prometheus Books: Amherst, New York. 1998)
  13. Ahmad al-Jallad (2020) Chapter 7: The Linguistic Landscape of pre-Islamic Arabia - Context for the Qur’an in Mustafa Shah (ed.), Muhammad Abdel Haleem (ed.), "The Oxford Handbook of Qur'anic Studies", Oxford: Oxford University Press
  14. There is also a woman mentioned by Ibn Sa'd:
    "..... (Muhammad's father) passed by a woman of the Kath'am (tribe) whose name was Fatimah Bint Murr and who was the prettiest of all women, in the full bloom of her youth and the most pious and had studied the scriptures;..."
    Ibn Sa'd's "Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir", page 104
  15. See this Twitter thread by Professor Sean Anthony - 11 July 2022 (archive)
  16. See this Twitter.com thread involving Professor Sean Anthony - 11 July 2022
  17. katabā Lane's Lexicon book 1 page 2590
  18. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu footnote on p. 123
  19. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu, p. 116
  20. Myron B. Lerner, "The works of Aggadic Midrash and Esther Midrashim" in Eds. Sefrai et. al. (2006) The literature of the Sages: Second Part Netherlands: Royal van Gorcum and Fortress Press, p.150
  21. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu pp. 117-122
  22. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible pp. 197-198.
  23. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu pp. 125-28
  24. Shepherd, Michael B. (2008) Targums, the New Testament, and Biblical Theology of the Messiah Biblical and Theological Studies Faculty Publications. 294. https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/biblical_and_ministry_studies_publications/294
  25. Reynolds citing Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu, pp. 125-152
  26. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu p. 129
  27. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu p. 31
  28. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu pp. 132-33
  29. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu pp. 143-44
  30. Gabriel Said Reynolds (2018) The Qurʾān and Bible: Text and Commentary pp. 251-2
  31. Encyclopædia Britannica - biblical literature britannica.com
  32. Gabriel Said Reynolds (2018) The Qurʾān and Bible: Text and Commentary pp. 38-39
  33. Witztum says it has been dated to the fifth or sixth century: Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu pp. 80-81
  34. In a detailed analysis, Sergey Minov concludes that "the most likely date for this work's composition is the span of time between the middle of the sixth century and the first decades of the seventh century." Minov, S. (2017) Date and Provenance of the Syriac Cave of Treasures: A Reappraisal Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 20:1 (2017), 129-229.
  35. Gabriel Said Reynolds, "The Qurʾān and its Biblical subtext", London and New York: Routledge, 2010, p.51, ISBN 9780415524247
  36. Sergey Minov, “Satan’s Refusal to Worship Adam: A Jewish Motif and Its Reception in Syriac Christian Tradition,” in: M. Kister et alii (eds.), Tradition, Transmission, and Transformation from Second Temple Literature through Judaism and Christianity in Late Antiquity (STDJ 113; Leiden: Brill, 2015), 230-271. (see pp. 247-9)
  37. Gabriel Said Reynolds, "The Qurʾān and its Biblical subtext", p.50
  38. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu p. 81
  39. Joseph Witztum, Syriac Millieu pp. 88-93
  40. Gabriel Said Reynolds (2018) The Qurʾān and Bible: Text and Commentary pp. 254-5
  41. Gabriel Said Reynolds (2018) The Qurʾān and Bible: Text and Commentary p. 256
  42. Tommaso Tesei (2015) Some Cosmological Notions from Late Antiquity in Q 18:60–65: The Quran in Light of Its Cultural Context Journal of the American Oriental Society 135.1
  43. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 407
  44. Guillaume, Alfred (1955) The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah. Oxford University Press. pp. 136–139. ISBN 978-0-19-636033-1
    "The rabbis said, ‘Ask him about three things of which we will instruct you; if he gives you the right answer then he is an authentic prophet, but if he does not, then the man is a rogue, so form your own opinion about him. Ask him what happened to the young men who disappeared in ancient days, for they have a marvellous story. Ask him about the mighty traveller who reached the confines of both East and West. Ask him what the spirit is."
  45. Gabriel Said Reynolds,"The Quran and Bible:Text and Commentary", New Haven: Yale University Press, 2018 p. 465
  46. See this tweet by Professor Sean Anthony and the preceding discussion - Twitter.com 2 April 2022 (archive)
  47. For screenshots of Wortley's english translation of the relevant passage in the Spiritual Meadow see this tweet by Professor Sean Anthony Twitter.com - 31 Dec 2021 archive
  48. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 218
  49. Klaus von Stosch, Jesus and Mary in Q5 - An anti-imperial discourse in the Qur'an as a critique of Byzantine misuse of Christology at the 2022 conference "Unlocking the Byzantine Qur'an"
  50. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 610
  51. The Jewish Agency for Israel - Nehar Deah: The Sages’ Korach jafi.org
  52. Graves, M. W. (2018). The Upraised Mountain and Israel’s Election in the Qur’an and Talmud Comparative Islamic Studies, 11(2), 141–177. https://doi.org/10.1558/cis.34780
  53. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 286
    "Yahuda" refers to Abraham Yahuda, "A contribution to Quran and Hadith interpretation" in S. Lowinger and J. Somogyi (eds.) Ignace Goldziher Memorial Volume. Budapest: Globus, 1948
  54. 54.0 54.1 54.2 54.3 Neuwirth, Angelika. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 2.1: Early Middle Meccan Suras: The New Elect. Kindle Edition: pp. 209.
  55. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible pp. 692-3
  56. Gabriel Said Reynolds (2018) The Qurʾān and Bible: Text and Commentary p. 654
  57. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible pp. 585-6
  58. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 524
    The BEQ reference in the quote is to H. Speyer Die biblischen Erzahtungen im Qoran 1931, reprint 1961
  59. Targum Sheni - Encyclopedia.com (originally from the Encyclopaedia Judaica)
  60. William St. Clair Tisdall, The Sources of Islam translated and abridged by William Muir, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1901, pp. 26-27
  61. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 377
  62. Gabriel Said Reynolds, "The Quran and Bible:Text and Commentary", New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2018 p. 553. This is regarding Quran 24:45, though on p. 508 Reynolds cross references the same parallel regarding the other verse, Quran 21:30, which is more clearly a statement in the context of the Genesis creation story, like Ephrem's comment.
  63. Ephrem's commentary on Genesis - Faber Institute.com
  64. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 858
  65. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 841
  66. Lane's Lexicon p. 318 تَّنُّورُ
  67. Lane's Lexicon p. 2457 فور
  68. 68.0 68.1 Olivier Mongellaz (2024) Le four de Noé : un cas d’intertextualité coranique, Arabica 71(4-5), 513-637. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700585-20246900
  69. 69.0 69.1 Neuwirth, Angelika. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 2.1: Early Middle Meccan Suras: The New Elect (p. 62). Yale University Press. Kindle Edition.
  70. See; Neuwirth, Angelika. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 2.1: Early Middle Meccan Suras: The New Elect (p. 199). Yale University Press. Kindle Edition. Ṭuwā stands for the holy Mount Sinai or Horeb (cf. KU, 124ff.; FVQ, 206ff.; BEQ, 255ff.). The word was long thought to be a rhyming transformation of Aramaic ṭūrā (“the mountain”), but now, based on rabbinic tradition and in agreement with traditional exegetes, Uri Rubin has convincingly interpreted bi-l-wādī l-muqaddasi Ṭuwā to mean “in the doubly hallowed valley” (see Rubin 2014). (The Sinai is in a sense the “folded Holy Land” [ṬWY = “to fold”].) Citing: Rubin, Uri, 2014, Moses and the Holy Valley Ṭuwan. On the Biblical and Midrashic Background of a Qurʾanic Scene, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 73, 73–81.
  71. Moses and the Holy Valley Ṭuwan: On the biblical and midrashic background of a qurʾānic scene. Rubin 2014. Ibid. pp. 75.
  72. Ibid. pp. 76-78
  73. Neuwirth, Angelika. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 2.1: Early Middle Meccan Suras: The New Elect (p. 199). Yale University Press. Kindle Edition.
  74. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 2.1: Early Middle Meccan Suras: The New Elect Ibid. pp. 201.
  75. Ibid. pp. 201-202.
  76. Ibid. pp. 202.
  77. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 598
  78. Kugel, James L.. The Bible As It Was (Kindle Edition. pp. 432-433). Harvard University Press.
  79. Ibid. pp. 432 - 433 (Kindle Edition)
  80. Ibid. pp. 433 - 434 (Kindle Edition)
  81. Neuwirth, Angelika. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 2.1: Early Middle Meccan Suras: The New Elect (p. 250). Yale University Press. Kindle Edition.
  82. Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qurʾān and Bible p. 339
  83. Julien Decharneux (2023), Creation and Contemplation: The Cosmology of the Qur’ān and Its Late Antique Background, Berlin: De Gruyter, p. 149
  84. Ibid. p. 160
  85. Ibid. p. 160
  86. Ibd. p. 146
  87. Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography. Wayne Horowitz. Eisenbrauns. 1998. ISBN 9780931464997. Chapter "Seven Heavens and Seven Earths". pp. 208-222. Read PDF online for free on internetarchive.org: horowitzmesopotamian cosmic geography mesopotamian civilizations -.pdf
  88. Reynolds, Gabriel Said. The Qur'an and the Bible: Text and Commentary. pp. 843. Yale University Press, 2018.
  89. Stephen Wunrow. 2022. Biblical Research. Paul among the Travelers into Heaven: 2 Corinthians 12:1–4 and Other Early Jewish and Christian Ascent Texts. pp.39-41.
  90. Durie, Mark. The Qur’an and Its Biblical Reflexes: Investigations into the Genesis of a Religion. Lexington Books. 2018. Pp. 229 -237.  (Kindle Edition: pp. 423-439).  6.9 Stories of Fighting Prophets
  91. Thomas Sizgorich. Violence and Belief in Late Antiquity: Militant Devotion in Christianity and Islam (Divinations: Rereading Late Ancient Religion). 2008. University of Pennsylvania Press.
  92. Ibid. (Kindle Edition. pp. 299).
  93. Ibid. (Kindle Edition. pp. 301).
  94. Ibid. (Kindle Edition. pp. 301).
  95. Neuwirth, Angelika. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 2.1: Early Middle Meccan Suras: The New Elect (p. 204). Yale University Press. Kindle Edition.
  96. Ibid. pp. 251-252