The Muslim Mary

[Abira]

hi everyone,

I was watching a programme last night about the Muslim view of Jesus and a section touched on Mary.

They believe that she was alone when she gave birth and was never supported by Joseph.

They believe that she was treated harshly by her society until Jesus spoke as a baby

They have a history of Mary in the Koran from her birth…

why do Christians not hold these views… and why do Muslims?
I’m asking about Mary as I don’t even wanna get into the differences on the life of Jesus…

Can anyone explain what their sources are for these accounts and why Christians have dismissed them?

S

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

I guess Christians don’t hold these views because there is no evidence nor tradition that they ever occured. And they don’t fulfill any prophecy for us to consider as divine stories. :twocents:

I guess Muslims will hold these views because evidence and tradition are not important to them; Only the Qur’an and Hadiths are important. Muslims are not fussed if the Qur’an and Hadiths are against evidence, tradition, or even reason. They have their faith in their beloved so-called messenger, Muhammed. :twocents:

 

[famdigy]

On the contrary Charlie Zeaiter, evidence and reason are very important to us. Our entire faith is based on reason. The Qur’an encourages its followers to think, to reflect and to contemplate. It is the process by which a human being elevates his/her status.

A good example is the Trinity. Christians accept it because it is based on the bible and since God revealed it to them there is no reason to question it or explain it. God revealed it therefore we accept it. You don’t find this sort of reasoning in anything in Islam. If you think the nature of our belief in Mary is unreasonable then explain what leads you to believe that.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

On the contrary Charlie Zeaiter…

Hi famdigy,

Thank you for diverting the thread; How very predictable of you.

Now, do you have any original thoughts to the questions that Abira posed in the original post? Or do you agree with me?

 

[Verisimilitude]

On the contrary Charlie Zeaiter, evidence and reason are very important to us. Our entire faith is based on reason. The Qur’an encourages its followers to think, to reflect and to contemplate. It is the process by which a human being elevates his/her status.

What evidence do Moslems have for the words of Christ and events of both Jesus and Mary recorded in the Quran that differ from earlier writtings?

A good example is the Trinity. Christians accept it because it is based on the bible and since God revealed it to them there is no reason to question it or explain it. God revealed it therefore we accept it. You don’t find this sort of reasoning in anything in Islam. If you think the nature of our belief in Mary is unreasonable then explain what leads you to believe that.

You find that reasoning with everything in Islam: Mohamed said so.

And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad SAW) gives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it) , and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.
( سورة الحشر , Al-Hashr, Chapter #59, Verse #7)

What have you questioned about your faith?

101:O you who believe! Ask not about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if you ask about them while the Quran is being revealed, they will be made plain to you. Allah has forgiven that, and Allah is OftForgiving, Most Forbearing.
102: Before you, a community asked such questions, then on that account they became disbelievers.
( سورة المائدة , Al-Maeda, Chapter #5, Verse #101-102)

How do you reason this out:

Sura #32
1 AlifLamMeem. (These letters are one of the miracles of the Quran, and none but Allah (Alone) knows their meanings.)
2 The revelation of the Book (this Quran) is from the Lord of the Alameen (mankind, jinns and all that exists) in which there is not doubt!
3 Or say they: “He (Muhammad SAW) has fabricated it?” Nay, it is the truth from your Lord, that you may warn a people to whom no warner has come before you (O Muhammad SAW), in order that they may be guided.

What use are the letters that only allah knows their meaning?
There is doubt about the revelations and who revealed them.
There were many ‘warners’ as it was that came to Arabia. Judaism, and Christianity are among the many faiths that were known in the time of mohamed, and the Quran names at least two other ‘prophets’ that had come before mohamed but were rejected.

Do you accept these verses without question contradicting yourself above where you say Christians do it with regard to the Trinity, or if you question them, are you in violation of asking questions about what has been forbidden to ask?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

hi everyone,

I was watching a programme last night about the Muslim view of Jesus and a section touched on Mary.

They believe that she was alone when she gave birth and was never supported by Joseph.

Not never supported by Joseph. Muslims believe she gave birth to Jesus under a palm tree on their flight to Egypt. She removed herself from Joseph to give birth. It’s in the Quran.

19:22
فحملته فانتبذت به مكانا قصيا
Fahamalat-hu faintabathat bihi makanan qasiyyan
Literal So she was pregnant (with) him so she distantly isolated herself with him (to) a far/remote place/position.
Maulana Ali Then she conceived him; and withdrew with him to a remote place.

‏19:23
فاجاءها المخاض الى جذع النخلة قالت ياليتني مت قبل هذا وكنت نسيا منسيا
Faajaaha almakhadu ila jithAAi alnnakhlati qalat ya laytanee mittu qabla hatha wakuntu nasyan mansiyyan
Literal So the labour/childbirth came to her to (at) the palm tree’s trunk/stem, she said: “Oh I wish I would have died before this and I was forgotten (and long) forgotten.”
Maulana Ali And the throes of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree. She said: Oh, would that I had died before this, and had been a thing quite forgotten!

‏19:24
فناداها من تحتها الا تحزني قد جعل ربك تحتك سريا
Fanadaha min tahtiha alla tahzanee qad jaAAala rabbuki tahtaki sariyyan
Literal So he (Jesus) called her from below/beneath her: “That do not be sad/grieving, your Lord had put below/beneath you a stream/clearance of a burden/generosity .”
Maulana Ali So a voice came to her from beneath her: Grieve not, surely thy Lord has provided a stream beneath three.

‏19:25
وهزي اليك بجذع النخلة تساقط عليك رطبا جنيا
Wahuzzee ilayki bijithAAi alnnakhlati tusaqit AAalayki rutaban janiyyan
Literal And shake/move to(wards) you with the palm tree’s trunk/stem, it causes freshly harvested/gathered ripe/moist (dates) to fall/drop repeatedly on you.
Maulana Ali And shake towards thee the trunk of the palm-tree, it will drop on thee fresh ripe dates.

‏19:26
فكلي واشربي وقري عينا فاما ترين من البشر احدا فقولي ان نذرت للرحمن صوما فلن اكلم اليوم انسيا
Fakulee waishrabee waqarree AAaynan fa-imma tarayinna mina albashari ahadan faqoolee innee nathartu lilrrahmani sawman falan okallima alyawma insiyyan
Literal So eat and drink and be delighted/satisfied eye(s) (delight your eyes), so when you see anyone from the human, so say: ‘That I made a duty/vow (on myself) to the merciful, a fast , so I will not converse/speak the day/today (to) a human .’
Maulana Ali So eat and drink and cool the eye. Then if thou seest any mortal, say: Surely I have vowed a fast to the Beneficent, so I will not speak to any man to-day.

This is a clear parallel of the account in the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew.

They believe that she was treated harshly by her society until Jesus spoke as a baby

This is also in the Quran but don’t know about the treated harshly bit.

[19.23] And the throes (of childbirth) compelled her to betake herself to the trunk of a palm tree. She said: Oh, would that I had died before this, and had been a thing quite forgotten!
[19.24] Then (the child) called out to her from beneath her: Grieve not, surely your Lord has made a stream to flow beneath you;
[19.25] And shake towards you the trunk of the palmtree, it will drop on you fresh ripe dates:
[19.26] So eat and drink and refresh the eye. Then if you see any mortal, say: Surely I have vowed a fast to the Beneficent God, so I shall not speak to any man today.

This closely echoes Pseudo-Matthew.

cont

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

why do Christians not hold these views… and why do Muslims?

Because you don’t believe in fiction created centuries after Jesus, while the Muslims do.

Apparently, Muhammad heard these stories from 3 visiting Christians and surprise, surprise - out comes the situational revelations from the Islamic Allah containing these echoes of the fictional Christian apocrypha.

islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Najran.gif

[Those who talked to Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, were Abu Haritha Ibn Alqama, Al-Aqib Abdul-Masih and Al-Ayham al-Said.] They were Christians according to the faith of the king with differences between them; they say: He is Allah, and say: He is Son of Allah, and say: He is the third of three * and these are the claims of Christianity. [They use as evidence for their claim that He is Allah the argument that] he used to raise the dead, cure the sick, create from clay bird-like structure then breathe into it to make it a [living] bird. All this was by the leave of Allah, the Praiseworthy the Exalted {to appoint him as a sign for men} (Maryam:21).

They also argue for saying that he is Son of Allah by saying he had no known father and spoke in infancy which is something never done by any human being. They use as evidence for their claim that He is the third of three * the argument that Allah says: We did, We commanded, We created and We judged , and whereas if He was one, He would say: I did, I judged, I commanded and I created; but it is He, Jesus and Maryam. The Qur’an was revealed addressing all these arguments.[27] Ref: Abu Muhammad Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham al-Maafiri, Al-Sirah Al-Nabawiyyah, 1998, Volume II, Dar al-Hadith: Cairo (Egypt), pp. 181-182; also A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, 1998 (13th impression), Oxford University Press: Karachi (Pakistan), pp. 271-272.
islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html**

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

They have a history of Mary in the Koran from her birth…

Plagiarised from the Christian apocryphal fiction too.

3:35freed/liberated, so accept from me, that You, You (are) the hearing/listening, the knowledgeable."
Maulana Ali When a woman of Amran said: My Lord, I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service), so accept (it) from me; surely Thou, only Thou, art the Hearing, the Knowing

3:36 Maulana Ali So when she brought it forth, she said: My Lord, I have brought it forth a female – and Allah knew best what she brought forth – and the male is not like the female, and I have named it Mary, and I commend her and her offspring into Thy protection from the accursed devil.

3:37
Maulana Ali So her Lord accepted her with a goodly acceptance and made her grow up a goodly growing, and gave her into the charge of Zacharias. Whenever Zacharias entered the sanctuary to (see) her, he found food with her. He said: O Mary, whence comes this to thee? She said: It is from Allah. Surely Allah gives to whom He pleases without measure.

3:38
Maulana Ali There did Zacharias pray to his Lord. He said: My Lord, grant me from Thee goodly offspring; surely Thou art the Hearer of prayer.

3:39
Maulana Ali So the angels called to him as he stood praying in the sanctuary: Allah gives thee the good news of John, verifying a word from Allah, and honourable and chaste and a prophet from among the good ones.

3:40
Maulana Ali He said: My Lord, how can I have a son when old age has already come upon me, and my wife is barren? He said: Even thus does Allah do what He pleases.

3:41
Maulana Ali He said: My Lord, appoint a sign for me. Said He: Thy sign is that thou speak not to men for three days except by signs. And remember thy Lord much and glorify (Him) in the evenings and early morning.

3:44
Maulana Ali This is of the tidings of things unseen which We reveal to thee. And thou wast not with them when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Mary in his charge, and thou wast not with them when they contended one with another.

The salient points are:

1. The child Mary was given by her mother to Zachariah’s care, and kept in a sanctuary (possibly in dedication to God).
2. Zachariah was astonished that she didn’t need human help in feeding herself. Some supernatural occurrence explained her daily sustenance.
3. Zachariah speaks to God who told him of John. Zachariah is incredulous due to the physical condition of him and his wife.
4. Mary’s husband was decided by the drawing of lots.

The Quranic verses parallel the apocryphal Protevangelium of James and the Gospel of the Birth of Mary. Both apocrypha were probably written in the middle of the second century. blueletterbible.org/faq/canon.htm

Other apocrypha carrying the same story are:
A. The Coptic History of the Virgin, which may be the Gospel of the Birth of Mary. truthnet.org/islam/Qurangil4.html

B. The Arabic apocryphal work, History of our holy Father the Aged, the Carpenter (Joseph), also gives an account of Mary’s upbringing in the Temple and the choice of Joseph by lot.
truthnet.org/islam/src-chp4.htm
comparative-religion.com/christianity/apocrypha/new-testament-apocrypha/6/4.php

The dating of this apocrypha, also known as the History of Joseph the Carpenter, is the fourth or fifth century. catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=4464

C. The Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus and Mary
atmajyoti.org/ul_unknown_lives_02.asp

This apocrypha is also known as the Pseudo-Matthew or ‘The Book About the Origin of the Blessed Mary and the Childhood of the Savior’.

Funny how this Allah, the God of Jesus Christ, got it so wrong about his mother.

 

[famdigy]

Dear Rodrigo,

You mentioned that the apocryphal Protevangelium of James and the Gospel of the Birth of Mary were written in the middle of the second century. Wasn’t the Bible canonized 300 years after Jesus (as)?

Since these stories were present at the time the bible was canonized I’m curious, on what grounds were they considered fabrications and omitted from the bible?

Forgive me if I’m mistaken here but I don’t know much about bible history.

It’s my understanding that there were many works contradictory to the bible at the time it was canonized in the council and that the Council had many of these works burnt or banned. It’s possible that in the process of collecting the bible into a book, some true events were omitted and other fabrications added either by mistake or on purpose. It appears that we just have to take the council’s word on the authenticity of everything written in the bible since it is compiled 3 centuries after Jesus (as).

You mentioned that 4. Mary’s husband was decided by the drawing of lots.
this part is not true, at least not from the Islamic point of view
The drawing of lots is to determine who will be in charge of Mary at the temple and not to decide who will be her husband.

the story goes as such

Before Mary’s (as) birth, her mother made a vow to give the child in her womb in service of God. i.e. to be raised in the temple.

Traditionally only males were allowed serve God in the temple, and since Mary was a female, her mother thought it would be an obstacle in fulfilling her oath to God.

When Mary reached the age at which she would reside in the temple. Zacharias approached the temple elders with the proposition she serve God in the temple, this caused a kafuffle among the temple elders until eventually they agreed to build a small cabin for Mary in the premise of the temple. However, an elder was required to supervise her development at the temple, the decission was made by drawing lots.

FYI. there is an islamic movie out titled “the blessed St. Mary” based on the Quran and the islamic traditions.
aimislam.com/aim-tv/videos/film-maryam-al-muqadasa

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

famdigy:

Dear Rodrigo,

You mentioned that the apocryphal Protevangelium of James and the Gospel of the Birth of Mary were written in the middle of the second century. Wasn’t the Bible canonized 300 years after Jesus (as)?

Canonization is not first appearance. There are other factors besides age as clues to whether a piece of writing is scripture or apocrypha. Obviously a late appearance is a big clue but not the only one. Protevangelium of James was described by Origen in the 3rd century as being of recent appearance.

There is an entire scholarship to the apocrypha and I don’t pretend to be an expert. Suffice to say - this work is generally believed for various reason to be apocryphal. There are other grounds like stylistic and theological grounds.

Since these stories were present at the time the bible was canonized I’m curious, on what grounds were they considered fabrications and omitted from the bible?

Forgive me if I’m mistaken here but I don’t know much about bible history.

It’s my understanding that there were many works contradictory to the bible at the time it was canonized in the council and that the Council had many of these works burnt or banned. It’s possible that in the process of collecting the bible into a book, some true events were omitted and other fabrications added either by mistake or on purpose. It appears that we just have to take the council’s word on the authenticity of everything written in the bible since it is compiled 3 centuries after Jesus (as).

It is possible as you say but then you have to disregard an entire body of scholarly work at one fell swoop with supposition.

famdigy:

You mentioned that 4. Mary’s husband was decided by the drawing of lots.
this part is not true, at least not from the Islamic point of view
The drawing of lots is to determine who will be in charge of Mary at the temple and not to decide who will be her husband.

the story goes as such

Before Mary’s (as) birth, her mother made a vow to give the child in her womb in service of God. i.e. to be raised in the temple.

Traditionally only males were allowed serve God in the temple, and since Mary was a female, her mother thought it would be an obstacle in fulfilling her oath to God.

When Mary reached the age at which she would reside in the temple. Zacharias approached the temple elders with the proposition she serve God in the temple, this caused a kafuffle among the temple elders until eventually they agreed to build a small cabin for Mary in the premise of the temple. However, an elder was required to supervise her development at the temple, the decission was made by drawing lots.

FYI. there is an islamic movie out titled “the blessed St. Mary” based on the Quran and the islamic traditions.
aimislam.com/aim-tv/video…am-al-muqadasa.

Yes, I copy pasted and edited from one of my OWN articles. The parallels there were from the apocrypha. They were not necessarily exact. It only goes to suggest that Muhammad didn’t plagiarize exactly.

But the implication is clear - Muhammad plagiarized from the apocrypha.

 

[famdigy]

Dear Rodrigo,

if the apocryphal stories are true events then wouldn’t it stand to reason Muhammad (sa) related the truth of what has been forgotten and lost to his people.

If an event is true and was reported first in Associated press, does that mean every subsequent newspaper that prints the story is plagiarizing from the AP?

I’m not an expert either but there is no indication the Christian delegation from Najran brought these beliefs with them. The premise of verses 3:36-66 were Allah’s reply to the Christian delegation’s arguments. That is to say, the birth of Mary and the status of Jesus (as) in Islam is not something the Christian Arabs believed in.

It is also possible Muhammad (sa) received revelation from God although I know this is something you do not believe.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Dear Rodrigo,

if the apocryphal stories are true events then wouldn’t it stand to reason Muhammad (sa) related the truth of what has been forgotten and lost to his people.

If an event is true and was reported first in Associated press, does that mean every subsequent newspaper that prints the story is plagiarizing from the AP?

I’m not an expert either but there is no indication the Christian delegation from Najran brought these beliefs with them. The premise of verses 3:36-66 were Allah’s reply to the Christian delegation’s arguments. That is to say, the birth of Mary and the status of Jesus (as) in Islam is not something the Christian Arabs believed in.

It is also possible Muhammad (sa) received revelation from God although I know this is something you do not believe.

That is a big IF. You are making a supposition that the apocrypha has detailed actual events which were forgotten and the re-revealed by your Allah to the Muslims.

There are many reasons why the Protevangelium of James is apocryphal - including a pausity of knowledge of Jewish practices and stylistic grounds. The Christian scholars have examined this work over the centuries and they now (almost generally I believe) regard it as apocryphal.

You are also giving your Allah the benefit of the doubt when it comes to a contested idea. If something is possible then it must be true because Allah said so.

I’m afraid it doesn’t work like that. If a work is suspect it is suspect. Origen already stated, shortly after it appeared, that it was DUBIOUS.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

This might provide some illumination on some of the scholarly reasons why the Protevangelium of James (aka Jacobi) is apocryphal. sd-editions.com/protevangel/Intro.pdf

 

[famdigy]

Dear Rodrigo,

you have not addressed my concern.

there is no indication the Christian delegation from Najran brought these beliefs with them. The premise of verses 3:36-66 were Allah’s reply to the Christian delegation’s arguments. That is to say, the birth of Mary and the status of Jesus (as) in Islam is not something the Christian Arabs believed in.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Dear Rodrigo,

you have not addressed my concern.

there is no indication the Christian delegation from Najran brought these beliefs with them. The premise of verses 3:36-66 were Allah’s reply to the Christian delegation’s arguments. That is to say, the birth of Mary and the status of Jesus (as) in Islam is not something the Christian Arabs believed in.

1. can you see how situational those verses are?
2. the beliefs listed in the hadith I gave are all either wrong (according to Christian doctrine) or apocryphal.
3. Muhammad is known to have associated and learnt from many other Christians. Those Christians of Najran were not the only Christians he associated with.

There were:
a. Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza
b. Jabr the Christian slave
c. the unnamed Christian apostate in Bukhari 8:56:814 whom Waqidi said was Ibn Qumta

There was also Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail, the Hanif who could have told him these stories.

What we do see is multiple parallelism between the Quran and the apocrypha - some of very late age and obvious fiction - like the talking Jesus, the palm tree, the clay birds animation etc.

 

[Abira]

thanks for your references etc regarding this stuff… i’ve nothing i can contribute to this discussion myself with lol…jst reading the thread

S

 

[Montalban]

On the contrary Charlie Zeaiter, evidence and reason are very important to us. Our entire faith is based on reason. The Qur’an encourages its followers to think, to reflect and to contemplate. It is the process by which a human being elevates his/her status.

That’s simply not true

You’ve got a long history of making mistakes about other people’s faiths; such as the one enshrined in the Koran that says we Christians worship Mary as part of the Trinity

 

[famdigy]

Dear Rodrigo,
You say the Qur’an’s story about Mary was a plagiarism of early apocryphal works based on two things.

1. The texts existed among Christians before the Quran.
2. The prophet Muhammad (sa) had contact with Christians.

Based on these two factors I could say the same about the bible.

1. The Vedas which is the Hindu sacred texts existed at least 3 centuries before Christ.
2. The Romans had contact with Indians through the trade routes established between the roman empire and southern India.

Therefore it is quiet possible that Vedas Scriptures made their way into Rome along with other goods (ivory, onyx, cotton, silks, and spices) If you compare the biblical texts in John 1:1 with the Vedas and you’ll find some striking similarities.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Vedas
In the beginning was Brahman [God] (Prajapatir vai idam asit)
With whom was the Vak [Word] (Tasya vag dvitya asit)
And the word is Brahman [God] (Vag vai paramam Brahma)

Would you agree that John 1:1 has also been plagiarized from early Hindu texts? please explain.

 

[eliasaph99]

Dear Rodrigo,
You say the Qur’an’s story about Mary was a plagiarism of early apocryphal works based on two things.

1. The texts existed among Christians before the Quran.
2. The prophet Muhammad (sa) had contact with Christians.

Based on these two factors I could say the same about the bible.

1. The Vedas which is the Hindu sacred texts existed at least 3 centuries before Christ.
2. The Romans had contact with Indians through the trade routes established between the roman empire and southern India.

Therefore it is quiet possible that Vedas Scriptures made their way into Rome along with other goods (ivory, onyx, cotton, silks, and spices) If you compare the biblical texts in John 1:1 with the Vedas and you’ll find some striking similarities.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Vedas
In the beginning was Brahman [God] (Prajapatir vai idam asit)
With whom was the Vak [Word] (Tasya vag dvitya asit)
And the word is Brahman [God] (Vag vai paramam Brahma)

Would you agree that John 1:1 has also been plagiarized from early Hindu texts? please explain.

Citation please.

Which of the four Vedas is this quote from and which hymn?

I tried to find it and cannot. Where is it?

 

[famdigy]

Citation please.
Which of the four Vedas is this quote from and which hymn?
I tried to find it and cannot. Where is it?

I’m not sure which Vedas this quote is taken from, I am basing this on the following article by Stephen Knapp.

        At the beginning of the book of John in the New Testament, it states, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This is actually a verbatim translation of the Vedic Sanskrit mantra: “Prajapatirvai idamagraasit, tasya vag dvitiyaa asit, vag vai paramam Brahma.”

Source: Christianity and the Vedic teachings within it

The similarities between these two quotes are too close to possibly disregard and far from the Gospel having influenced the writing of the Vedas, we know that the Vedas are among the most ancient of all world Scriptures. Clearly, these words found their way from the Vedas of India into the Gospel ‘according to’ John. Many will ask, or rather they should ask, how can this be if the New Testament is the Word of God, written by Divine Inspiration?