WikiIslam

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

Page Discussion

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

Revision as of 20:22, 5 March 2021

30 bytes added ,  5 March 2021
no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:




The similarities between the Qur'an and previous scriptures have been salient since the advent of Islam. However, the Judeo-Christian tales and their Qur'anic counterparts do not always match. 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 of the Qur'an. There is no documentary evidence in the textual traditions of those religions to support this claim, and as it would require a conspiracy of people across centuries and empires, speaking different languages and holding radically different beliefs, as such the claim is generally not taken seriously by modern scholars.  
The similarities between the Qur'an and previous scriptures have been noted since the advent of Islam. However, the Judeo-Christian tales and their Qur'anic counterparts do not always match. 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 of the Qur'an. There is no documentary evidence in the textual traditions of those religions to support this claim, and as it would require a conspiracy of people across centuries and empires, speaking different languages and holding radically different beliefs, as such the claim is generally not taken seriously by modern scholars.  


The more accepted theory is that the Qur'an burrows stories from the ancient milieu in which it arose--Christianity and Judaism of the late antique period in the near or middle east. 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 borrowings 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.  
The more accepted theory is that the Qur'an burrows stories from the ancient milieu in which it arose--Christianity and Judaism of the late antique period in the near or middle east. 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 borrowings 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.  
Line 60: Line 60:




Even the prohibition of female infanticide was inspired by Zaid. How often did Muhammad hear these stories from Zaid? The hadiths do not tell. However, one notes that the sira recounts Zaid’s withdrawal from Meccan society (where he was allegedly persecuted) to a cave in Mount Hira. Muhammad apparently visited the same cave at Ramadan on a yearly basis, an act his wife Khadijah said was the custom of his tribe as an act of penance.<ref>Siratu' Rasul, vol. i, p. 79.</ref>
Even the prohibition of female infanticide was inspired by Zaid according to the tradition. How often did Muhammad hear these stories from Zaid? The hadiths do not tell. However, one notes that the sira recounts Zaid’s withdrawal from Meccan society (where he was allegedly persecuted) to a cave in Mount Hira. Muhammad apparently visited the same cave at Ramadan on a yearly basis, an act his wife Khadijah said was the custom of his tribe as an act of penance.<ref>Siratu' Rasul, vol. i, p. 79.</ref>


Thus, it can be seen that there was ample opportunity for Muhammad to learn from Zaid long before the first revelation in 610 AD. Some say Muhammad first went to Mt Hira when he was around 35, i.e. around 605 AD. It is possible that Muhammad first visited Mt Hira when he was 33, when the “first unseen secrets” revealed themselves to him. Zaid died around 607 AD. The cave in Mt Hira is very small, measuring 4 yards long and 1.75 yard wide – there seems no way Zaid and Muhammad could have avoided each other. Clearly they knew each other; the sahih hadiths make that apparent, and we also know that Muhammad spent weeks and months in that cave which Zaid was reputed to have lived.  
Thus, it can be seen that there was ample opportunity for Muhammad to learn from Zaid long before the first revelation in 610 AD. Some say Muhammad first went to Mt Hira when he was around 35, i.e. around 605 AD. It is possible that Muhammad first visited Mt Hira when he was 33, when the “first unseen secrets” revealed themselves to him. Zaid died around 607 AD. The cave in Mt Hira is very small, measuring 4 yards long and 1.75 yard wide – there seems no way Zaid and Muhammad could have avoided each other. Clearly they knew each other; the sahih hadiths make that apparent, and we also know that Muhammad spent weeks and months in that cave which Zaid was reputed to have lived.  


====Zaid’s religious principles were also adopted by Muhammad====  
====Zaid’s religious principles adopted by Muhammad====  


#the prohibition of killing infant daughters by burying them alive, according to the cruel custom of the Arabs of the time.
#the prohibition of killing infant daughters by burying them alive, according to the cruel custom of the Arabs of the time.
Line 78: Line 78:




Argumenta ad hominem-loving Muslims who malign [http://answering-islam.org answering-islam] for the above, should note that it references Ibn Ishaq’s Siratu’Rasul. The main thrust of Zaid’s story in the sira conforms to the reported meeting with Muhammad, and Zaid’s anti-female infanticide stance, in the sahih Bukhari hadiths.  
[http://answering-islam.org Answering-islam] above references Ibn Ishaq’s Siratu’Rasul. The main thrust of Zaid’s story in the sira conforms to the reported meeting with Muhammad, and Zaid’s anti-female infanticide stance, in the sahih hadiths of Bukhari .


Even the Muslim method of prayer may have originated from Zaid, as Ibn Ishaq (pg. 99-100) wrote that he prayed by prostration on the palm of his hands.<ref>Abul Kasem - [http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/kasem/quran_origin.htm Who Authored the Qur’an?—an Enquiry] mukto-mona</ref>
Even the Muslim method of prayer may have originated from Zaid, as Ibn Ishaq (pg. 99-100) wrote that he prayed by prostration on the palm of his hands.<ref>Abul Kasem - [http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/kasem/quran_origin.htm Who Authored the Qur’an?—an Enquiry] mukto-mona</ref>


Another possible source of Judeo-Christian stories is Umm Habiba bint Abu Sufyan, Muhammad’s eighth wife. Her former husband Ubaydullah b. Jahsh was a Christian who converted to Islam and migrated with other Muslims to Abyssinia, there to reconvert to Christianity. However, this is admittedly mere conjecture. Other critics name Mariah the Copt but the evidence is against her being the source of Muhammad’s Judeo-Christian borrowings as she was presented to Muhammad when he was residing in Medinah, long after he included the Judeo-Christian tales in his ‘revelations’.  
Another possible source of Judeo-Christian stories is Umm Habiba bint Abu Sufyan, Muhammad’s eighth wife. Her former husband Ubaydullah b. Jahsh was a Christian who converted to Islam and migrated with other Muslims to Abyssinia, there to reconvert to Christianity. However, this is admittedly mere conjecture. Yet another vector for the influence of Christian narratives on Muhammad may have been Mariah the Copt, but the evidence is against her being the source of Muhammad’s Judeo-Christian borrowings as she was presented to Muhammad when he was residing in Medinah, long after he included the Judeo-Christian tales in his revelations, according to the [[Sira]] and the [[Hadith]].


There is yet another hint in the Qur'an that Muhammad was influenced by a ‘foreigner’.  
The Qur'an itself refers to influenc by a foreign "tongue."


{{Quote| {{Quran|16|101-104}}| 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.}}  
{{Quote| {{Quran|16|101-104}}| 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.}}  


Who is this non-Arab who taught Muhammad? Could it have been Salman the Persian (who was a Christian) or Bahira the disgraced Nestorian?
This non-Arab who influenced the Qur'an is not mentioned by name, but there are many candidates in the sira including Salman the Persian (who was a Christian) or Bahira the disgraced Nestorian.


The evidence for Salman is not strong and some say it was Bahira.
There is other evidence for the influence on Muhammad of a Christian from within the tradition itself: 


{{Quote|Hughes' Dictionary of Islam, p. 30, quoting Tafsir-i-Husaini|"Husain the commentator says on this passage that the Prophet was in the habit of going every evening to a Christian to hear the Taurat and Injil."<ref>[http://answering-islam.org.uk/Index/B/bahira.html Hughes' Dictionary of Islam, p. 30, quoting Tafsir-i-Husaini, Sale p. 223 and Muir's Life of Mahomet, p. 72]</ref>}}
{{Quote|Hughes' Dictionary of Islam, p. 30, quoting Tafsir-i-Husaini|"Husain the commentator says on this passage that the Prophet was in the habit of going every evening to a Christian to hear the Taurat and Injil."<ref>[http://answering-islam.org.uk/Index/B/bahira.html Hughes' Dictionary of Islam, p. 30, quoting Tafsir-i-Husaini, Sale p. 223 and Muir's Life of Mahomet, p. 72]</ref>}}


Islamic sources report that Muhammad, already at the age of nine to twelve, made his first journey with a trade caravan to Syria where he came in contact with Christians. We also know that on a second visit to Syria he showed great interest in the Judaism and Christianity he encountered there. He spent some time during that period with a Nestorian Christian monk named Bahirah. <ref>The Holy Qur`ân, Ali, p.7, note</ref>   
Islamic sources report that Muhammad, already at the age of nine to twelve, made his first journey with a trade caravan to Syria where he came in contact with Christians. According to these same sources, on a second visit to Syria he showed great interest in the Judaism and Christianity he encountered there. He spent some time during that period with a Nestorian Christian monk named Bahirah. <ref>The Holy Qur`ân, Ali, p.7, note</ref>   


However the evidence is not convincing that it is Bahira that told Muhammad the Judeo-Christian stories.  
However the evidence is not convincing that it is Bahira that told Muhammad the Judeo-Christian stories.  
Line 112: Line 112:
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."<ref>Summary by Sharon Morad, Leeds - [http://debate.org.uk/topics/books/origins-koran.html The Origins of The Koran: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book, edited by Ibn Warraq (Prometheus Books: Amherst, New York. 1998)]</ref>
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."<ref>Summary by Sharon Morad, Leeds - [http://debate.org.uk/topics/books/origins-koran.html The Origins of The Koran: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book, edited by Ibn Warraq (Prometheus Books: Amherst, New York. 1998)]</ref>


Regardless who this foreigner who taught Muhammad was, it is clear that this highly specific charge was leveled against Muhammad, and he revealed the aforementioned verse to ‘deflect’ it. 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’. Why would Muhammad say this? He admits there was someone (who taught him) whose tongue was not Arabic.  
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 influenced the "clear Arabic tongue" of the Qur'an.  


That this foreigner taught Muhammad the Judeo-Christian tales is alluded to when one follows Muhammad’s apologetic against this complaint in Surah 16. What follows {{Quran|16|103}} is Muhammad talking 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.  
That this foreigner taught Muhammad the 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 Muhammad's attempt to answer the charge that he learned the Jewish/Christian religion from a foreigner (probably 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.  
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 (probably 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 it is evident that Muhammad heard Judeo-Christian tales from various sources, 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 {{Bukhari|4|56|814}}
Thus it is evident that Muhammad heard Judeo-Christian tales from various sources, 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 {{Bukhari|4|56|814}}


====Muslim Responses====
====Muslim Views====
   
   
In the literature, Muslims commit ''red-herrings'' and ''straw-man'' arguments to deflect attention from the fact that their own sources, i.e. the Qur'an, hadiths and sira, confirm that Muhammad had borrowed ‘tales of the ancients’. The Muslim responses are as follows:
In apologetic and theological literature, Muslim scholars generally follow the Qur'an in denying that Muhammad was influenced by the "legends of the ancients." 


'''''1. There were no Arabic copies of the Judeo-Christian scriptures available to Muhammad.'''''
'''''1. There were no Arabic copies of the Judeo-Christian scriptures available to Muhammad.'''''
Line 160: Line 160:
As had been stated in the introduction, similarities between the Qur'an and previous Abrahamic scriptures have been noticed since the inception of Islam. However, the Judeo-Christian tales and their Qur'anic counterparts do not always match. There are three possible explanations for this:
As had been stated in the introduction, similarities between the Qur'an and previous Abrahamic scriptures have been noticed since the inception of Islam. However, the Judeo-Christian tales and their Qur'anic counterparts do not always match. There are three possible explanations for this:


# The original Judeo-Christian scriptures have been corrupted (as Muslims like to claim).  
#The original Judeo-Christian scriptures have been corrupted (as Muslims like to claim).
# Muhammad imperfectly borrowed from the Judeo-Christian scriptures.  
#Muhammad imperfectly borrowed from the Judeo-Christian scriptures.
# The Qur'an was corrupted.  
#The Qur'an was corrupted.


Muslims typically focus on translational variations. In most of the examples of Muslim charges, they curiously deride variation in modern English translations of the Bible. This is merely them seeing Christianity through Islamic eyeglasses. Muslims like to claim their Qur'an is immutable and thus deride any variations as proof of the corruption of the Judeo-Christian scriptures. Some of the more intelligent Muslims have homed in on transcriptional variations as well. To them, the Judeo-Christian scriptures are self-evidently corrupt. Hence, there is no need to actually provide any tangible evidence to support their assertions.  
Muslims typically focus on translational variations. In most of the examples of Muslim charges, they curiously deride variation in modern English translations of the Bible. This is merely them seeing Christianity through Islamic eyeglasses. Muslims like to claim their Qur'an is immutable and thus deride any variations as proof of the corruption of the Judeo-Christian scriptures. Some of the more intelligent Muslims have homed in on transcriptional variations as well. To them, the Judeo-Christian scriptures are self-evidently corrupt. Hence, there is no need to actually provide any tangible evidence to support their assertions.  
Line 200: Line 200:
The parallelism between the Arabic Infancy Gospel and verse 19:29-31 and 3:46 is plainly evident. There are three possible logical reasons behind this:  
The parallelism between the Arabic Infancy Gospel and verse 19:29-31 and 3:46 is plainly evident. There are three possible logical reasons behind this:  


#The Qur'an has ‘corrected the omission’ of the talking baby Jesus tale from the New Testament.  
#The Qur'an has ‘corrected the omission’ of the talking baby Jesus tale from the New Testament.
#The Qur'an has ‘corrected the consigning of the tale to the apocrypha,’ and that the Arabic Infancy Gospel should be included in the canonical New Testament.  
#The Qur'an has ‘corrected the consigning of the tale to the apocrypha,’ and that the Arabic Infancy Gospel should be included in the canonical New Testament.
#Muhammad heard the story and mistakenly included it in the Qur'an, thinking it to be canonical and not apocryphal.  
#Muhammad heard the story and mistakenly included it in the Qur'an, thinking it to be canonical and not apocryphal.


The Arabic Infancy Gospel is widely regarded as apocryphal. It is believed to be a seventh century invention and was quite popular among the Syrian Nestorians. The talking baby Jesus miracle was recorded in the sira as one of the topics discussed by three Christians with Muhammad just before he revealed the relevant verses. Thus, it seems strange that the Qur'an should contain what is clearly an apocryphal story.
The Arabic Infancy Gospel is widely regarded as apocryphal. It is believed to be a seventh century invention and was quite popular among the Syrian Nestorians. The talking baby Jesus miracle was recorded in the sira as one of the topics discussed by three Christians with Muhammad just before he revealed the relevant verses. Thus, it seems strange that the Qur'an should contain what is clearly an apocryphal story.
Line 222: Line 222:
*<p>a. The Qur'an itself admits to the borrowing, 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 katabā 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 the borrowing, 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 katabā 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>


*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. Thus, it cannot be of divine origin.  
*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. Thus, it cannot be of divine origin.


*c. The Qur'anic verse relates to the story of Cain's murder of Abel {{Quran|5|27-31}}, as does the Sanhedrin parallel.
*c. The Qur'anic verse relates to the story of Cain's murder of Abel {{Quran|5|27-31}}, as does the Sanhedrin parallel.
Line 234: Line 234:
'''Dr Saifullah has made a number of errors here:'''  
'''Dr Saifullah has made a number of errors here:'''  


# No one claims the parallelism is an ‘exact copy’. That’s why the term ‘parallelism’ is used. By implying thus, Dr Saifullah has created a straw man argument.
#No one claims the parallelism is an ‘exact copy’. That’s why the term ‘parallelism’ is used. By implying thus, Dr Saifullah has created a straw man argument.
# "of Israel" [http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_37.html#37a_39 is absent in some manuscripts] of this passage in the Babylonian Talmud, and we don't know which version Muhammad might have heard.
#"of Israel" [http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_37.html#37a_39 is absent in some manuscripts] of this passage in the Babylonian Talmud, and we don't know which version Muhammad might have heard.
# 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. Thus, Dr Saifullah has committed another straw man argument.  
#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. Thus, Dr Saifullah has committed another straw man argument.


'''Prima facie''' - this is a clear-cut case of Muhammad erroneously thinking the Sanhedrin 37a is from the Torah and therefore, he included it in the Qur'an. There is no other explanation for the phrase, ‘We decreed / have written’ (katabna) in the verse. If Allah had indeed decreed/ordained/prescribed/made binding/written for the Children of Israel where is the corresponding verse in the Torah? 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, why does he quote verbatim from Genesis 4:10 ('it is written...'), but then when making his main point not quote 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.  
'''Prima facie''' - this is a clear-cut case of Muhammad erroneously thinking the Sanhedrin 37a is from the Torah and therefore, he included it in the Qur'an. There is no other explanation for the phrase, ‘We decreed / have written’ (katabna) in the verse. If Allah had indeed decreed/ordained/prescribed/made binding/written for the Children of Israel where is the corresponding verse in the Torah? 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, why does he quote verbatim from Genesis 4:10 ('it is written...'), but then when making his main point not quote 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.  
Line 256: Line 256:
'''Critics point out four sources of this Jewish folklore:'''
'''Critics point out four sources of this Jewish folklore:'''


* the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel
*the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel


*the Targum Yerushalmi I (aka Targum Jonathan or the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan)
*the Targum Yerushalmi I (aka Targum Jonathan or the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan)
Line 262: Line 262:
*the Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer
*the Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer


*the Midrash Tanhuma.  
*the Midrash Tanhuma.


Only two are true. The Targums do not carry this story and the claim that they do is a misreading of Tisdall.  
Only two are true. The Targums do not carry this story and the claim that they do is a misreading of Tisdall.  
Line 276: Line 276:
===Muslim Objection===
===Muslim Objection===


*'''Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer'''  
*'''Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer'''


Saifullah, Ahmed and Karim of Islamic-Awareness claim that Jewish scholars have known for quite some time that Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer is post-Islamic and that it cannot possibly be attributed to Rabbi Eliezer, quoting as evidence:  
Saifullah, Ahmed and Karim of Islamic-Awareness claim that Jewish scholars have known for quite some time that Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer is post-Islamic and that it cannot possibly be attributed to Rabbi Eliezer, quoting as evidence:  
Line 284: Line 284:
They claim that since the final redaction occurred after the advent of Islam, it cannot be the source of the raven burial story. There are two difficulties with this claim:  
They claim that since the final redaction occurred after the advent of Islam, it cannot be the source of the raven burial story. There are two difficulties with this claim:  


* final redaction does not mean the stories contained in the Pirke were composed after the advent of Islam. Redaction means ‘making something suitable for publication – including editing, compilation etc.’ or the act of putting something in writing (i.e. that had already existed prior to the writing);  
*final redaction does not mean the stories contained in the Pirke were composed after the advent of Islam. Redaction means ‘making something suitable for publication – including editing, compilation etc.’ or the act of putting something in writing (i.e. that had already existed prior to the writing);


* new evidence suggests the original dating of the Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer is erroneous.  
*new evidence suggests the original dating of the Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer is erroneous.


According to Andrew Vargo of answering-islam:  
According to Andrew Vargo of answering-islam:  
Line 340: Line 340:
A plausible explanation of Muhammad’s need to reconcile the Christian Trinity with Islam’s monotheism is given below.  
A plausible explanation of Muhammad’s need to reconcile the Christian Trinity with Islam’s monotheism is given below.  


===Analysis of Muslim Apologetics ===
===Analysis of Muslim Apologetics===


Muslims claim verse 5:116 is not a difficulty for them, and they give three reasons for this:  
Muslims claim verse 5:116 is not a difficulty for them, and they give three reasons for this:  
Line 447: Line 447:
'''The salient points are:'''
'''The salient points are:'''


*The child Mary was given into Zachariah’s care by her mother, and kept in a sanctuary (possibly in dedication to God).  
*The child Mary was given into Zachariah’s care by her mother, and kept in a sanctuary (possibly in dedication to God).


*Zachariah was astonished that she did not need human help in feeding herself. Some supernatural occurrence explained her daily sustenance.  
*Zachariah was astonished that she did not need human help in feeding herself. Some supernatural occurrence explained her daily sustenance.


*Zachariah speaks to God who told him of John. Zachariah is incredulous due to the physical condition of him and his wife.  
*Zachariah speaks to God who told him of John. Zachariah is incredulous due to the physical condition of him and his wife.
*Mary’s husband was decided by the drawing of lots.  
*Mary’s husband was decided by the drawing of lots.


==Apocryphal Account==
==Apocryphal Account==
Line 570: Line 570:
===Apocryphal Account===
===Apocryphal Account===


Apparently, 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.<ref>Encyclopædia Britannica - [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-73363 biblical literature] britannica.com</ref>
Apparently, 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.<ref>Encyclopædia Britannica - [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-73363 biblical literature] britannica.com</ref>


Another version of this in Syriac, The Cave of Treasure, appeared in the sixth century. There were also other earlier versions in Arabic, Ethiopic, and Armenian, which indicate the early spread of the story regarding the worship of Adam by the angels.<ref>Samuel M. Zwemer - [http://answering-islam.org./Books/Zwemer/Studies/chap10.htm Studies in Popular Islam: The Worship of Adam by Angels] answering-islam.org</ref>
Another version of this in Syriac, The Cave of Treasure, appeared in the sixth century. There were also other earlier versions in Arabic, Ethiopic, and Armenian, which indicate the early spread of the story regarding the worship of Adam by the angels.<ref>Samuel M. Zwemer - [http://answering-islam.org./Books/Zwemer/Studies/chap10.htm Studies in Popular Islam: The Worship of Adam by Angels] answering-islam.org</ref>
Line 686: Line 686:
The Midrashic account is given here and the Qur'anic equivalent can be found in the ayats in the brackets:  
The Midrashic account is given here and the Qur'anic equivalent can be found in the ayats in the brackets:  


*Abraham's father accused of being an idolater: "Terah (Abraham's father) was a manufacturer of idols" ie. He was an idolater. (52)  
*Abraham's father accused of being an idolater: "Terah (Abraham's father) was a manufacturer of idols" ie. He was an idolater. (52)


*"He once went away somewhere and left Abraham..." (57)  
*"He once went away somewhere and left Abraham..." (57)


*Abraham breaks all the idols except the biggest: "So he took a stick, broke them, (the idols) and put the the stick in the hand of the largest." (58)  
*Abraham breaks all the idols except the biggest: "So he took a stick, broke them, (the idols) and put the the stick in the hand of the largest." (58)


*"When his father returned he demanded, 'What have you done to them?'" (59) (In the Quranic account this demand is made by his father and the people.)  
*"When his father returned he demanded, 'What have you done to them?'" (59) (In the Quranic account this demand is made by his father and the people.)


*Abraham claims: "Thereupon the largest arose, took the stick, and broke them." (63)  
*Abraham claims: "Thereupon the largest arose, took the stick, and broke them." (63)


*Abraham is seized and delivered up for judgement: "Thereupon he seized him and delivered him to Nimrod." (64) (The Quran does not mention by name who was to punish Abraham.)  
*Abraham is seized and delivered up for judgement: "Thereupon he seized him and delivered him to Nimrod." (64) (The Quran does not mention by name who was to punish Abraham.)


*Abraham is saved from the fire: "When Abram descended into the fiery furnace and was saved..." (69)  
*Abraham is saved from the fire: "When Abram descended into the fiery furnace and was saved..." (69)


All the above points are unique both to the Qur'anic and mythical midrashic accounts. They do not appear in the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians.”<ref>[http://answering-islam.org./Quran/Sources/abraham.html Abraham and the Idols] answering-islam.org.</ref>
All the above points are unique both to the Qur'anic and mythical midrashic accounts. They do not appear in the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians.”<ref>[http://answering-islam.org./Quran/Sources/abraham.html Abraham and the Idols] answering-islam.org.</ref>
Line 708: Line 708:
'''Objection 1: Additions (i.e. in the parashiyyot) and alterations may have been made to the text of the Bereshit Rabbah (i.e. Genesis Rabbah) after its redaction in the sixth century CE. '''
'''Objection 1: Additions (i.e. in the parashiyyot) and alterations may have been made to the text of the Bereshit Rabbah (i.e. Genesis Rabbah) after its redaction in the sixth century CE. '''


:Redaction does not mean the date of origin of the text. The Abraham and the idols story is not in the parashiyyot but the Noach. This story is not in the list of texts added or edited.  
:Redaction does not mean the date of origin of the text. The Abraham and the idols story is not in the parashiyyot but the Noach. This story is not in the list of texts added or edited.


'''Objection 2: The existing manuscripts of the Bereshit Rabbah post-date the origin of the Quran.'''  
'''Objection 2: The existing manuscripts of the Bereshit Rabbah post-date the origin of the Quran.'''  


:Historical evidence from various sources evidence a pre-Islamic date for the Bereshit Rabbah. For example, St Jerome mentions the Jewish interpretation of Genesis 11:28 in respect to Abraham refusal to worship fire and his consumption by fire. Also, the Book of Jubilees mention Abraham’s dislike of idol worship, and the Babylonian Talmud mentions Nimrod casting Abraham into the fire.  
:Historical evidence from various sources evidence a pre-Islamic date for the Bereshit Rabbah. For example, St Jerome mentions the Jewish interpretation of Genesis 11:28 in respect to Abraham refusal to worship fire and his consumption by fire. Also, the Book of Jubilees mention Abraham’s dislike of idol worship, and the Babylonian Talmud mentions Nimrod casting Abraham into the fire.


'''Objection 3: The text is unstable due to flexibility of copying and therefore it cannot be ascertained that the compared texts are similar.'''  
'''Objection 3: The text is unstable due to flexibility of copying and therefore it cannot be ascertained that the compared texts are similar.'''  


:It is not asserted that Muhammad copied from the Bereshit Rabbah, rather he heard this Judeo-Christian story from others, possibly Jews and Christians. The Bereshit Rabbah is merely evidence to date this particular Judeo-Christian story. There are other Judeo-Christian sources as listed above.  
:It is not asserted that Muhammad copied from the Bereshit Rabbah, rather he heard this Judeo-Christian story from others, possibly Jews and Christians. The Bereshit Rabbah is merely evidence to date this particular Judeo-Christian story. There are other Judeo-Christian sources as listed above.


'''Objection 4: Judeo-Christian sources of the same story are different, thus the original paralleled story cannot be ascertained.'''  
'''Objection 4: Judeo-Christian sources of the same story are different, thus the original paralleled story cannot be ascertained.'''  


:Again, the charge is not that Muhammad referred to any particular text, although the Bereshit Rabbah’s version comes closest to the Quranic version.  
:Again, the charge is not that Muhammad referred to any particular text, although the Bereshit Rabbah’s version comes closest to the Quranic version.


===Conclusion===
===Conclusion===
Line 800: Line 800:
[[Category:Jewish tradition]]
[[Category:Jewish tradition]]
[[Category:Christian tradition]]
[[Category:Christian tradition]]
<references />
Asmith
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
4,682

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislamica.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/129943"