3,507
edits
Historical Errors in the Quran: Difference between revisions
→'Uzayr as the son of God in Jewish doctrine
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
31 They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.}} | 31 They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.}} | ||
Academic scholars in the past have theorized that the statement derives from the high esteem in which the Biblical Ezra was held in the Talmud (though not as the "son of god"), or from the angel | Academic scholars in the past have theorized that the statement derives from the high esteem in which the Biblical Ezra was held in the Talmud (though not as the "son of god"), or from the angel Azazel in 1 Enoch (a non-canonical Jewish apocalyptic text)<ref>Gabriel Said Reynolds, ''The Quran and Bible: Text and Commentary'', New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2018, pp. 307-8<BR />Reynolds notes that according to one opinion cited in b. Sanhedrin 21b, "''Had Moses not preceded him, Ezra would have been worthy of receiving the Torah for Israel''".</ref> while others have simply inferred that the verse is an example of the thematic assumption in the Quran that humans tend to repeat the same religious mistakes, in this case transferring a Christian concept onto the Jews.<ref>Nicolai Sinai, ''The Qur'an: A Historical-Critical Introduction'', Edinburgh University Press, 2018, p. 201</ref> | ||
====Identification as R. Eliezer==== | ====Identification as R. Eliezer==== | ||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
[[w:Eliezer ben Hurcanus|Eliezer ben Hurcanus]] (ʾEliʿezer, d. 2nd century CE), known as Rabbi Eliezer or Eliezer ha-Gadol ("the Great") is the 6th most commonly mentioned sage in the Mishnah, a 3rd century CE written compilation of Jewish oral traditions which was the first written work of Rabbinic literature. The Mishnah claims its traditions were handed down orally from Moses on Mount Sinai. This concept, later termed "oral Torah" is first seen around the 1st century CE. | [[w:Eliezer ben Hurcanus|Eliezer ben Hurcanus]] (ʾEliʿezer, d. 2nd century CE), known as Rabbi Eliezer or Eliezer ha-Gadol ("the Great") is the 6th most commonly mentioned sage in the Mishnah, a 3rd century CE written compilation of Jewish oral traditions which was the first written work of Rabbinic literature. The Mishnah claims its traditions were handed down orally from Moses on Mount Sinai. This concept, later termed "oral Torah" is first seen around the 1st century CE. | ||
Rabbis revered R. Eliezer with great legal authority. A 5th century Palestinian Rabbinic text has | Rabbis revered R. Eliezer with great legal authority. A 5th century Palestinian Rabbinic text has God himself quoting the future Rabbi's legal interpretations to Moses on Mount Sinai and promising that this "righteous one" will be born in Moses' lineage.<ref>Pesikta des Rav Kahana 4:7-8.<BR /> | ||
See at 21 minutes in [https://youtube.com/watch?v=W3Pj8fVo7Y0 Zellentin's presentation]</ref> A later text of uncertain date adds that on this occasion the voice of god stated "R. Eliezer my son said...". | See at 21 minutes in [https://youtube.com/watch?v=W3Pj8fVo7Y0 Zellentin's presentation]</ref> A later text of uncertain date adds that on this occasion the voice of god stated "R. Eliezer my son said...". | ||
<ref>Tanhuma Ḥukat (Chukat) 8-9 (Warsaw), part 2, folio 79a quoted at 26 minutes in [https://youtube.com/watch?v=W3Pj8fVo7Y0 Zellentin's presentation]</ref> | <ref>Tanhuma Ḥukat (Chukat) 8-9 (Warsaw), part 2, folio 79a quoted at 26 minutes in [https://youtube.com/watch?v=W3Pj8fVo7Y0 Zellentin's presentation]</ref> | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
Zellentin points out both possibilities. Early Muslims gave the rival prophet Maslamah the insulting diminutive Musaylimah, while on the other hand Ali's sons were called Hasan and Husayn.</ref> | Zellentin points out both possibilities. Early Muslims gave the rival prophet Maslamah the insulting diminutive Musaylimah, while on the other hand Ali's sons were called Hasan and Husayn.</ref> | ||
The next verse (Q. 9:31) criticises the authority accorded by Jews to their scholars. Building on an observation by Saqib Hussain, Zellentin argues that this is further evidence that 'Uzayr | The next verse (Q. 9:31) criticises the authority accorded by Jews to their scholars, just as the Christians do with theirs and with Jesus. Building on an observation by Saqib Hussain, Zellentin argues that this parallel structure with the previous verse is further evidence that 'Uzayr refers to a rabbinic figure.<ref>At 28 minutes in [https://youtube.com/watch?v=W3Pj8fVo7Y0 Zellentin's presentation]</ref><ref name="SidkyZellentin">The argument was further developed in a presentation by Hythem Sidky with Zellentin [https://event.fourwaves.com/iqsa2025/abstracts/94a52e0d-1e00-470c-a5fc-484fb862df96 Once again on ʿUzayr, the Son of God] (2025)<BR/> | ||
Their draft paper of the same title is also available online (submitted to the Journal of Quranic Studies)<BR/> | |||
Zellentin and Sidky describe the Quranic accusation of deification as hyperbolic, though certainly not entirely baseless. They also variously describe its polemic as taking some poetic license, and as giving a simple, historically well-founded message.</ref> | |||
====Historical accuracy of the polemic==== | ====Historical accuracy of the polemic==== | ||
Assuming this identification is correct, it has also however been pointed out that "son of god" did not denote any kind of quasi-divine status in Judaism but rather is common language in the Hebrew Bible. In [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Chronicles%2028&version=NIV 1 Chronicles 28:6] Solomon is chosen to be God's son. In the Babylonian Talmud (compiled 6th century CE) and wider tradition, a voice from heaven calls several other Rabbis "my son", including Yishmael ben Elisha,<ref>[https://www.sefaria.org/Berakhot.7a.4?ven=hebrew|William_Davidson_Edition_-_Vocalized_Aramaic&lang=bi Berakhot 7a] - Sefaria.org</ref> and Hanina ben Dosa.<ref>[https://www.sefaria.org/Berakhot.17b.4?lang=bi Barekhot 17b], [https://www.sefaria.org/Taanit.24b.14?lang=bi Taanit 24b], and [https://www.sefaria.org/Chullin.86a.5?lang=bi Chullin 86a] - Sefaria.org</ref> The heavenly voice in each case uses the same phrasing formula as for Rabbi Eliezer in the Jerusalem Talmud.<ref name="SidkyZellentin" /> | |||
It may be that Q. 9:30 means no more than that the Jewish scholars (particularly those who follow the Jerusalem Talmud) are like Christians and disbelievers of old in terms of applying "son of god" language to a revered figure, and in ascribing legislative authority to such a man or men which in monotheism belongs to Allah alone (Q. 9:31). | It may be that Q. 9:30 means no more than that the Jewish scholars (particularly those who follow the Jerusalem Talmud) are like Christians and disbelievers of old in terms of applying "son of god" language to a revered figure, and in ascribing legislative authority to such a man or men which in monotheism belongs to Allah alone (Q. 9:31). | ||
On the other hand, others have noted the vehemence with which Q. 9:30 polemically puts Jews in similar company to Christians in calling a man the son of god. It says they both imitate the saying of those who disbelieved in the past, invokes Allah's destruction on them and is astonished at their delusion. This may indicate that the author thought Jews called R. Eliezer | On the other hand, others have noted the vehemence with which Q. 9:30 polemically puts Jews in similar company to Christians in calling a man the son of god. It says they both imitate the saying of those who disbelieved in the past, invokes Allah's destruction on them and is astonished at their delusion. This may indicate that the author thought Jews called R. Eliezer the son of God in a more literal sense. It would be an easy mistake to make or could be deliberate exaggeration. Significantly, the end of Q. 9:31 accuses both the Jews and Christians of failing to worship only one god and of shirk (associating partners with Allah). This may suggest a theological parallel between Christian worship of Jesus and an imagined quasi-divine Jewish reverence for R. Eliezer. | ||
Ironically, the Quran itself unwittingly credits rabbinic interpretations as divine revelation. The most famous example [[Parallels_Between_the_Qur%27an_and_Late_Antique_Judeo-Christian_Literature#Whoever_kills_a_soul_it_is_as_if_he_has_slain_mankind|occurs in Q. 5:32]]. Some critics also argue there is a double standard in the polemic since {{Quran|33|36}} gives legal authority to Allah and Muhammad, and due to the traditional Sunni reliance on his sunnah as recorded in hadiths. | Ironically, the Quran itself unwittingly credits rabbinic interpretations as divine revelation. The most famous example [[Parallels_Between_the_Qur%27an_and_Late_Antique_Judeo-Christian_Literature#Whoever_kills_a_soul_it_is_as_if_he_has_slain_mankind|occurs in Q. 5:32]]. Some critics also argue there is a double standard in the polemic since {{Quran|33|36}} gives legal authority to Allah and Muhammad, and due to the traditional Sunni reliance on his sunnah as recorded in hadiths. | ||