|
|
| 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== |