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

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature (view source)

Revision as of 23:27, 4 December 2025

509 bytes added ,  Yesterday at 23:27
no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
 
Line 137: Line 137:
==Whoever kills a soul it is as if he has slain mankind==
==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.
The Qur'an parallels a passage in the Talmud, specifically a rabbinical commentary on a verse in Genesis.


===Talmudic Mishnah===
===Talmudic Mishnah===
Line 147: Line 147:
{{Quote|{{Quran|5|32}}|Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely.}}   
{{Quote|{{Quran|5|32}}|Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely.}}   


'''The salient points are:'''
The salient points are:


*<p>a. The Qur'an itself admits to Judeao-Christian origin  of this story with the phrase, 'We <u>decreed</u> (katabnā) for the Children of Israel…’</p><p>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 <ref>katabā [http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume7/00000118.pdf Lane's Lexicon book 1 page 2590]</ref>, 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.</p>
*<p>a. The Qur'an itself admits to Judeao-Christian origin  of this story with the phrase, 'We <u>decreed</u> (katabnā) for the Children of Israel…’</p><p>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 <ref>katabā [http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume7/00000118.pdf Lane's Lexicon book 1 page 2590]</ref>, 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.</p>
Line 159: Line 159:
[http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBCandA.html 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 <u>of Israel</u>’. 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.
[http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBCandA.html 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 <u>of Israel</u>’. 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'''
This has led to the following responses:


#Dr Saifullah's argument that the two stories are not exact copies doesn't hold water, since stories usually change in transmission.
#Dr Saifullah's argument that the two stories are not exact copies doesn't hold water, since stories usually change in transmission.
Line 165: Line 165:
#The commentary also appears in the Jerusalem Talmud, [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Mishnah/Seder_Nezikin/Tractate_Sanhedrin/Chapter_4/5 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.<ref>Joseph Witztum, ''Syriac Millieu'' footnote on p. 123</ref>
#The commentary also appears in the Jerusalem Talmud, [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Mishnah/Seder_Nezikin/Tractate_Sanhedrin/Chapter_4/5 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.<ref>Joseph Witztum, ''Syriac Millieu'' footnote on p. 123</ref>


The Qur'an is taking a story from apocryphal literature as scripture, since Sanhedrin 37a is from the "oral" Torah (a concept developed by the Pharisees) 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.  
Claims that the verse 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.  


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.
Some apologists appeal to the fact that the Talmud was seen as "oral Torah" (a concept first developed by the Pharisees in the first century CE), supposedly comprising traditions handed down ultimately from Moses on Mount Sinai. However, it is not a law, despite being in the Talmud, but a commentary by a Jewish sage, who explains his reasoning.
 
By using the word katabna ("we wrote / decreed"), the Qur'an is taking a commentary by a Jewish Rabbi in the Talmud as divine revelation. The Qur'an sees this tradition as being on the same level as the written Torah, or else is not aware that it does not in fact stem from the Bible.


==The Raven and the Burial of Abel==
==The Raven and the Burial of Abel==
Line 586: Line 588:
A similar story appears in the Arabic Infancy Gospel (also known as the Syriac Infancy Gospel), combining elements from the ''Childhood of the Saviour'', ''Protoevangelium of James'', and the ''Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew''. However, the dating of that version is disputed and academic scholars tend to doubt that it is pre-Islamic.
A similar story appears in the Arabic Infancy Gospel (also known as the Syriac Infancy Gospel), combining elements from the ''Childhood of the Saviour'', ''Protoevangelium of James'', and the ''Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew''. However, the dating of that version is disputed and academic scholars tend to doubt that it is pre-Islamic.


===Muslim Apologetics===
In the Quran, unlike the above mentioned sources, the bird is animated when Jesus breathes into the clay instead of clapping his hands.
However, this element is found in a later pre-Quranic source, the Armenian infancy gospel quoted below,<ref name="Terian">Abraham Terian (transl.) ''The Armenian Gospel of the Infancy'', Oxford University Press, 2008, p. 88</ref> which is a 6th century CE translation of an earlier lost Syriac version.<ref>Ibid. pp. xviii to xxvi</ref>
{{Quote|The Armenian Gospel of the Infancy (translated by Abraham Terian)<ref name="Terian" />|Jesus came and sat among them and said to them: 'Why are you quiet?' What do you intend to do?' They said: 'Nothing: Jesus said: 'Does anyone know a game?' The boys said: 'We know nothing that we could do.' Jesus said: 'Look all of you and see.' And Jesus took clay in his hands and made a sparrow, and blowing on it he let it fly and said: 'Go, reach out and catch the sparrow.' 378 And they all marveled at what they saw; they were amazed by what Jesus did.}}
Like the Quran, this version mentions just a single bird rather than twelve, though some note that in Arabic l-ṭayri "the bird(s)", could mean a single or plural birds, as is clearly the case in Q. 16.79.


This parallelism has never been explained by Muslim apologists except to use it to perversely claim that the Bible is corrupted. They argue that the original Bible contained the apocryphal story of Jesus making and animating clay birds, and that the Qur'an was merely correcting a wrongful exclusion of these apocrypha from the canon.<ref>M S M Saifullah & Hesham Azmy - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html Is The Bible In Our Hands The Same As During The Time Of Muhammad(P)?] Islamic Awareness</ref>
===Sirah account===


Interestingly, the sirah itself narrates how Muhammad, far from receiving these stories from Allah (via the angel Jibreel/Gabriel), heard it from three Christians. Saifullah & Azmy of Islamic-awareness write more on this [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html here]. While the narrative seems to serve a mixture of apologetic and polemical purposes, as well as a kind of "occasion of revelation", it could possibly reflect some historical memory of Muhammad learning from regional Christians about their religious traditions.  
Interestingly, the sirah itself narrates how Muhammad, far from receiving these stories from Allah (via the angel Jibreel/Gabriel), heard it from three Christians. Saifullah & Azmy of Islamic-awareness write more on this [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html here]. While the narrative seems to serve a mixture of apologetic and polemical purposes, as well as a kind of "occasion of revelation", it could possibly reflect some historical memory of Muhammad learning from regional Christians about their religious traditions.  
Lightyears
Editors, em-bypass-2, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
3,454

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislamica.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/140379"

Navigation menu