zyx zy zyxw zyxwvuts THEMUSLIMWORLD VOl. LXXIX July/October 1989 NOS.3-4 THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION AND COMMENTARY “She appeared on several nights, in different forms-sometimes in full body, at other times only half, surrounded by a halo of bright light. Sometimes [she would appear] in the domes of the church or above. She moved and walked and bowed before the cross. She blessed people. At times she appeared as a bright cloud of light, preceded by spiritual forms like doves . . . .”’ This description of the appearance of the Virgin Mary, published in Cairo’s widely-read al-Ahriim newspaper on May 5, 1968, was newsworthy precisely because Mary (Arabic, Maryam) is a figure with great and lasting appeal to Muslims as well as to Christians in the Middle East. Copts and Muslims flocked to witness these visions of the Virgin of Zeituna, many of them reporting miraculous healings and other spiritual experiences. Such occurrences are part of an ongoing tradition of Middle East folk religion in which the figure of Mary has continued to play a prominent role. Muslims over the centuries have looked to Mary, the pure one, as an exemplar of obedience and fidelity, a model of piety and, according to many, the first to attain paradise.* Some persons within the Christian community, primarily Roman Catholics, have been turning recently to the figure of Mary the virgin as a common ground for conversation, appreciation, and understanding between Muslims and Christ i a n ~ Such . ~ attempts cannot hope to achieve even limited success, however, unless they are grounded not only in good will but in an honest attempt to zyxw I Al-AnbB Grigorios, Al-hdhrSr’fi a/-ZaytPn (Cairo, 1969), pp. 7-8. The light is said to have lasted one time for over two hours. Cf. Rene Laurentin, Multiplication des Apparitions de la Merge aujourd ’hui (Paris: Fayard, 1988). pp. 70-71, who reports that the Virgin appeared at Zeituna from 2 April 1968 to September of 1970, and that she has made frequent appearances also in the area of Shubra in Cairo, witnessed to by both Muslims and Christians. The Virgin of Zeituna was particularly significant in her role as a figure of comfort, her appearance coming after the devastating Arab loss to the Israelis in the 1967 Six Day War. Some perceived it as a sign that God had not abandoned the Egyptians. Mary’s appearance at that time marks the beginning of the rise in Christian ferver among Copts, along with its counterpart in revivalist Islam. ’ “If the Muslims, so prayerful in their worship of the one true God, can come to see the Mary of the Koran fulfilled by the Mary of the Gospels, perhaps they will come to recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ. The message of Fatima points to the universality of the Church of Christ. Our Lady of Fatima may become our apostle to the Muslims.” Robert D. Rodriguez, “Mary, The Muslims and Fatima,” Ihe Marian Helpers Bullerin, April-June 1984, p. 16. Bishop Fulton Sheen once wrote, ‘‘I believe the Blessed Virgin chose to be known as ‘OurLady of Fatima’ as a pledge and a sign of hope to the Muslim people.” Quoted by James Kroeger, “Mary, Bridge to Islam,” Maryknoll, May 1988, p. 25. Kroeger notes, p. 23, that “While there are vast differences separating Muslims and Catholics, Mary is one point of agreement. Both religions esteem her holiness, humility, purity and miraculous conception of the Word of God.” zyxwvut 161 162 zyxwvu THE MUSLIM WORLD understand how Mary has been viewed by Muslims from her treatment in the Qur’in, traditions, and commentaries to the more esoteric presentations of popular piety and mysticism. The following materials are offered in the attempt to provide some of this context, with particular emphasis on the interpretations of contemporary Muslim exegetes of the Qur’in. There is no question that Mary is the female figure to whom the greatest attention is given in the Q u r h . There are 70 verses that refer to her, and she is named specifically in 34 of these (24 in relation to Jesus, son of Mary). Only three other persons-Moses, Abraham, and Noah, noted respectively 169, 69, and 43 times-are mentioned by name more frequently than is Mary. She is, in fact, the only woman who is identified by name in the Qur)&n“and she enjoys the special honor of having one of its 114 chapters titled after her (Maryam, Sura 19). This chapter includes the narrative about Mary and her family, leading to the annunciation and birth of Jesus. It is widely held that this chapter was given to the Muslims to take with them on their first emigration to Ethiopia, where they recited it to the Negus who recognized them as fellow believers in God and therefore refused to deliver them to their enemies, the Meccans. Some recent commentators, however, believe that this sura was revealed after the Prophet received a Christian delegation from Najran in 632, despite the fact that the delegates refused an invitation from the Prophet to convert to I ~ l a m . Most ~ of the Qur’anic narratives specific to Mary are found in Suras 3:35-47 and 19:16-34; occasional references are found throughout the Qur)&n,usually specifying her as the mother of Jesus. Revelations to the Prophet Muhammad are generally ordered into three distinct periods following the chronology of his leadership of the new Muslim community: first Meccan, second Meccan, and Medinan. In the second Meccan period references to Mary tend to emphasize the fact that she was the virgin mother of Jesus-(“Remember also the woman who kept her virginity and into whom we breathed of our Spirit” [S. 21:91]). In the Medinan period, the references to Jesus as the,son of Mary tend to focus on the negation of his divinity. Following is a synopsis of the major elements in the Qur’anic narratives about the life of Mary. In tracing this story as suggested by fairly sketchy references in the Qur)&nit is helpful to identify a series of chronological events. Before considering the ways in which Muslim commentators have interpreted these events, let us look briefly zy zyxwvut zyx zyxwvutsrqpon ‘ There are references to the wives (unnamed) of Adam, Abraham, Lot, Noah, Pharaoh, (ImrBn, and Zakariah and to the Queen of Sheba. See for a relatively recent example of the first interpretation Mawlana Abul Kalam Azad, 7iie Torjum2n ul-Qur&n. I1 (New York: Asian Publishing House, 1967), 313 who notes that when in the difficult early days of Islam a party of Muslims sought shelter in Christian Abyssinia, their ruler asked the Muslims to say some of the words of the Prophet. When they responded by reciting Sura 19 the ruler wept and exclaimed, “Aye! the same spirit is at work in the utterance of Christ himself!” For an example of the second interpretation-a much later dating-see (Abd al-Ghani (Abbtid, AI-Masih wu ’I Masihiyyu wa ’1-Islam(Cairo, 1984), p. 55, who suggests that the purpose of this sura is the afirmation of the oneness of God and resurrection on the one hand, and the denial of God’s having a son and partners on the other. zyx zyxwv zy THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 163 at the unfolding of the narrative of Mary as found in the Q u r h and in the Hadith, the traditions of the community. A. Mary’s nativity. Sura 3:35-37a relates that the wife of (Imran, an elderly and hitherto barren woman, suddenly found herself pregnant. (The parallel with the birth of John by Zakariah [Zechariah] and his aging wife as detailed in S. 19:2-11 is clear.) She consecrated the child in her womb as an offering to God. When she delivered she made special note of the fact that the baby was female, named her Maryam, and sought protection from Satan for her and her offspring. God accepted Mary fully, caused her to grow in purity and goodness, and appointed Zakariah as her guardian. The mother of Mary is not mentioned by name in the Qur’iin but is referred to only as the wife of (ImrBn. Islamic tradition, however, has accorded her the name of Hanna (Anna). She is considered to be a sister to Elizabeth (Zakariah’s wife and the mother of John the Baptist).6 Some commentators refer to an old Christian tradition which tells of Hanna, sadly barren, sitting at the foot of a tree. Seeing a bird feeding its young she became desolate and prayed intensely for a child (some versions say she asked her husband to pray, whereupon he told her to do it), a prayer that miraculously was answered.’ The Muslim narratives add a few other particulars to the tale of Mary’s birth, such as the fact that Mary’s father died while her mother was pregnant,8 and that her mother had hoped for a male. Germane to the last point, of course, is the reality that in Jewish tradition women were not considered appropriate for servanthood in a house of worship, which related to Hanna’s consecration of her child. This theme receives a good deal of attention in the Islamic traditions. Abii Ja‘far Muhammad al-Pbari, most famous of the classical commentators, renders Mary’s vow this way: “I have made a votive offering of what is in my womb free for the worship of you . . . a hostage for your service and the service of your holiness in the house of worship . . . dedicated to you excl~sively.”~ Al-Pbari himself notes that a woman cannot become a servant of the place of worship because of her menstruation,” an observation repeated in a number of commentaries.” Muhammad Jamal al-Din alQgsimi, a modern commentator, agrees that women are unfit for continued zyx zyxwv zyxw zyxwvuts J . M. Abd-el-Jalil, “La vie de Marie Selon le Coran et I’IsIam” in Maria, ed.H. Du Manoir (Paris: Beauchesne, 1949). p. 190. Marina Warner in Alone ofA// her Sex (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1976). p.12, notes that in the Christian tradition Samuel’s mother Hannah, the forbear of Mary, provides a prototype so close that by the second century it was believed that Mary’s mother was called Anna, a form of Hannah. Muhammad b. (Abdullah al-Kisa’i, Q i j q a/-AnbiyG’, ed. Isaac Eisenberg (London: E. J. Brill, 1922) I, 302; Abd-el-Jalil, “La vie,” Maria, p. 191. Ismacil Haqqi, Tafiiral-Qur)Gn (n.p., n.d.), p. 440.Haqqi refers to Mary’s father as “Abii Maryam al-Batul” (the father of the virgin or chaste Mary). It should be noted that bariil is itself a Christian term, never used in the Qur)an. Abu Jacfar b. Muhammad al-Tabari, Jirrnic al-bayun b n ra’wil al-Qur)Gn (Cairo, 1954), VI, 329. lo Ibid., 335. ‘I See Haqqi, Tafsir. pp. 440-4 1, who says that the female is unfit for service in the masjid because of menstruation, that the male is not like the female. ’ zyxwvu zyxwvutsr 164 THE MUSLIM WORLD service in the place of worship because of menstruation and other female conditions, including the fact that males are better fit for such service because of their strength (the female is weak and unable to serve) and because females would be shamed by mixing with men in the course of service.” Another modern writer, Muhammad Mutawalli al-Sha(riiwi, offers the opinion that Mary’s mother lived in an environment in which people are proud of their children and live for them. Hanna renounced all this and sought a “liberated” child, one that is not bound to her. She was able to achieve this, says al-Sha(r%wi,because of her extreme self control. He also says that her having expressed surprise at the birth of a girl actually meant that God was telling her that this particular female was to have a greater role than that of males, proving the miraculousness of God’s absolute power. In the same verse in which Hanna makes special note of the fact that her child is a girl she states that she has named the child Maryam and that she wants protection for her and her offspring from Satan. The name Maryam, the same as that used in Syriac and in Greek in the Bible, is understood by the commentators to mean pious or devoted, as well as servant (a confirmation of her mother’s dedication of her). The result of Hanna’s wish for protection is confirmed in a very often-cited hadith, with a variety of versions: “Every descendant of Adam experiences the touch of Satan except Mary, the daughter of (Imrsn, and her son”; “Not a descendant of Adam is born but he is touched by Satan and he comes out crying, except Mary and her SO^.'''^ Some variation of this tradition is usually quoted in discussions of Mary’s inherent purity as one preserved from all taint of imperfection. This matter will be raised again later. B. Mary’s retreat into the temple. In S. 19:16-17a and S . 3:37b and 42-44 we read of Mary in the temple or sanctuary under the guidance of Zechariah, receiving food miraculously from God. She was clearly chosen and purified by God and enjoined to obedience. These references are fairly sparse and give only clues to a fuller story. It is in the elaboration of the traditions that one finds actual stories relating to Mary’s childhood. Because her father died when she was very young (as did her mother, according to some reports) it was necessary to select someone to take care of her. After a casting of lots her uncle Zakariah was chosen. (Others, as we will see, interpret the casting of lots mentioned in S. 3:44 to have resulted in the selection of Joseph. Sometimes both Zakariah and Joseph are included in the narrative.) Zakariah built a cell for Mary in the temple (often referred to by the zyxw zyxw zy zyxwvut zyxwvuts zyxwvu zyxwvutsr Muhammad JamHl al-Din al-QHsimi, Tufsir ul-Qasimi (Cairo, 1914), IV, 834. Muhammad Mutawalli al-Sha‘rfiwi, Mnryum wa’l-Masih (Cairo, 1983), pp. 11-14. It is important to note in this context that while Roman Catholics tend to understand purified as a possible reference to an immaculate conception (i.e., sinlessness) Muslims understand rakira as the opposite of defilement (i.e., menstruation). Al-Bbari, Jamic, VI, 337. He gives another version (339) in which Satan squeezes the newborn several times and another (341) in which he says that a curtain is placed between them and him and Satan cannot penetrate the curtain. Cf. Haqqi, Tufiir,p. 441; Muslim b. al-HajjHj al-Qushayri, Suhih Muslim (Lahore: Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, 1976). IV, 1261. I2 zyx zyxwvuts THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 165 commentators as a rnihrub)‘Jto which there was access only by stairs. The special room seems to be conceived as a way of separating her physically from the place of worship. Reference to mihrfib is probably to emphasize her life as spent in devotions, rather than to suggest a place of confinement as such. Her location to this room also verifies that she had no access to men. Zakariah was the only one to see her in this special place, and presumably was the only one to bring her food. In an incident that has evoked considerable commentary (recorded in S . 3:37) he was greatly surprised to discover (on at least one occasion) that she had been provided ample abundance of food that he himself had not given her. This provision became elaborated in the traditions as the fruits of winter in the summer and the fruits of summer in the winter, further indication of their special character.I6 (Some reports note that in fact Mary actually had no need of nourishment at all.)” When he questioned her as to their source she assured him that they were directly from God,I8 another proof of her exceptional status. This reference to abundance of food is proof of God’s bounty and provision, and of His special approval of Mary. Islamic tradition does not specify much of what occupied Mary in these childhood days except to say that she was generally busy with the kinds of service possible for a pious young woman. It is clear from S . 3:43 that God instructed Mary to pray with others in a group (“prostrate yourself and bow down with those who bow down . . .”). Question has been raised about the nature of that common prayer experience and whether it could have taken place within the confines of the temple. Some have asked whether it would have been legitimate for her to pray in the place where congregations of men were gathered praying, others believe that the prescriptions of Jewish law at the time were not exactly the same as those of the Islamic community and thus that she probably would have been able to pray in the temple.” In any case it is clear that Mary was considered to have been rnuhurrura, free from the taint of worldly associations.2o zyxwv zyxwvu zyxwv zyxwv zyxwv Is (Abd al-Rahmln Ibrlhim al- Humaydi notes that mihrirb in this case does not mean the indicator of prayer direction but a protected room where Mary was able to worship. Khawirriq a/-kfirrfi”I-Qur’un a/-Karim (Jiddah, 1982). p. 203. Haqqi, Tahir, p. 443, adds that it is an upper room to which one ascends by ladder, the noblest section of the house of worship. I b AI-nbari, Jcmic, pp. 353, 355. 17Abd-el-Jalil,“La vie,” Maria, p. 195. Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Thaclabi, Qisas a/-anbiytj’ a/-musarnmiJ (arc ’is al-mujdis (Cairo, n.d.), pp. 371-72. Modern commentators sometimes add a bit of perspective to this narrative. Ghulam Ahmad Parwiz in M&rifa/-Qur)irn, 111, 489, says that this verse does not necessarily mean that the food, appeared miraculously without human intervention, and n n t l w i al-Jawhari in a/-Juwirhirfirafsir a/-Qur)anal-Kurim, 11, 107, acknowledges that thinking people will interpret this merely as a way of praising God for sustenance (cited in I. M. S. Baljon, Modem Muslim Koran Interpretation ILeiden: E. J. Brill, 19681, pp. 22, 65-66). I’ Cf. (Abd al-Ghani (Abbud in a/-Masih wa’l-Masihiyya wa’I-Zslirm (Cairo, 1984), p. 60, for reference to Jesus as engaged to her cousin Joseph at age 15. 2o See Mahmijd al-Sharqlwi, al-Anbiya ’fi’I-Qur’irna/-Karim (Cairo, 1970), I, 336, who defines muharrara as freed to serve the place of worship, liberated from having to be mixed up with any worldly matters. See also Paul Nwiya, ELeg2se Coranique et Langage mystique (Beyrouth: Imp. Catholique, 1970). pp. 49-50, who cites Muqltil Ibn Sulaymln (al-Tafsir a/-kabir, ms. Hamidiyya 58) as having 166 zyxwvutsr zyxw THE MUSLIM WORLD The spare details of the story of Mary’s childhood become amplified a bit more as we move to the period of her adolescence. In a few reports it is said that after Zakariah got too old to take care of Mary lots were cast and Joseph the carpenter got the job. Every day Joseph brought her some of what he had earned to help with her maintenance. But each time God multiplied it. When Joseph came and saw provisions greater than what he had brought he asked her, ‘0 Mary, where did you get that?” She answered, “That comes from God, because He gives to whomever He wants without measure,”*’ a variation of the S. 3:37 story about Zakariah. It is important to note the role Joseph plays in the traditions in the overall care and nurture of Mary, a matter about which the Q u r h is silent. Joseph is generally understood to have been Mary’s companion in devotion. Occupied with the affairs of the temple, Joseph and Mary zealously attended to prayer. The commentators are extremely careful not to suggest that this association was in any way compromising. In fact a number of them make much of the story of Joseph’s amazement and horror at finally having to acknowledge, with extreme reluctance, the fact that Mary was pregnant. C. The annunciation. The set of narratives describing this important event in the life of Mary is treated in S. 19:16-21 and S. 3:45-51. According to the Qur1.n (condensing the two narratives into one) when Mary reached a certain age she withdrew from her people to “a chamber looking east” or “an eastern place” (mashruqu)22in seclusion from them. It was in this eastern place, what- or wherever it was, that Mary was told by an angel that she would have a son, and that he would speak to humankind while still in the cradle as well as in manhood, and would be righteous and without fault. Mary demurred that she had never been unchaste and was told that such a feat was easy for God who has only to decree what He wills. God then sent His spirit in the likeness of a man. At the sight of him Mary sought refuge from God and questioned how she, as virgin, could conceive. She was assured by the angel@)that all is possible with God. This is the Qur’anic story. It comes as little surprise to find that traditionists and commentators have been quite fascinated with postulating details as to how this conception actually might have taken place. One interesting commentary from the pen of a contemporary writer focuses on the purpose of Mary’s seclusion: “When confronted with physical developments, those that impact females when they reach puberty, she went into seclusion in the eastern part of the temple and put on the veil-the veil of the face, for she was the most beautiful of women. . . . She protected her chastity by distancing herself from things that arouse and by busying herself in obedience of God.”23 zyxw zyxwvutsr zyxwvu zyxwvutsrq said that mu!zarruru (purified) refers to one who does not work for this world but is connected to the works of the above and beyond, attending to the sanctuary in order to worship God. And in that time, attested MuqBtil, only young men were purified. 2 ’ Al-Thaclabi, Q i J q , p. 373. 22 Helmut Gatje, The Q u r h and its Exegesis, ed. A . Welch (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976), p. 121, cites Mahmnd b. (Umar al-Zamakhshari in commenting on S. 19:16 as having said that some say that her withdrawal was so that she could purify herself from menstruation, after which she returned to the house of her aunt. Cf. al-Bbari, Jam&, XV, 60. 21 (Abd al-Mdizz KhattBb, (IshrOn imrahfi’/-Qur)anal-Karirn (Cairo, n.d.), p. 47. zyx zyxw zyx THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 167 It is the matter of the conception itself, however, that has generated the greatest interest. Al-pbari offers several possibilities. In reference to S . 19:21 (“Then we sent to her our spirit and it assumed for her the likeness of a perfect man”) he cites traditions confirming that God’s spirit (as the angel Jibril or Gabriel) appeared to Mary as an average human being. After reassuring her that he would do her no harm, he (1) blew in the fold (pocket) of her covering until the breath reached her womb and she conceived; or (2) blew in her sleeve and in the fold of her covering; since it was ripped in the front the breath reached her chest and she conceived; or (3) caused the spirit to enter through her mouth, after which God made it into the spirit of J ~ s u s . ’Contemporary ~ commentators generally agree that Gabriel came in the form of a handsome man so that Mary would not be repulsed by him,’5 and that he blew in the opening of her shirt from the top. (This insistence on the direction could only be related to ideas of propriety.) When the breath reached her belly she became pregnant by the permission of God.*6 An intresting interpretation of the mode of conception by the thirteenth-century exegete Abii Bakr al-Ququbi bears noting in full for its portrayal of Mary as a kind of hermaphrodite: “Some say that it is not possible for creation to come out of the blowing of Gabriel because the infant would be part angel and part human. The truth is that when God created Adam and took the covenant with his progeny, He made some of the liquid in the backs of the fathers and some in the uterus of the mothers. When the waters join, a child is formed. God made both waters in Mary, part in her uterus and part in her back. Gabriel blew in order to arouse her desire. The woman cannot conceive unless her desire is aroused. When her desire was aroused with the blowing of Gabriel, the water in her back descended to the uterus, and became mixed and then became fertilized.” zyxwvu zyx zyxwvut zyxwv zyxw Al-Rbari, &mi(, VI, 36; X V , 60-62. He notes in the latter that the spirit of Jesus is one of those with whom God made a covenant prior to creation. Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Tosi, Tufiir a/-ribycin, ed. Ahmad Habib QBsir al-(f\mili (Najaf, 1966) 7: 114. Cf. Mahmird al-Sharqawi, u/-Anbiya’$ a/Q u r h (Cairo, 1970). p. 259. Is Al-(f\mili, Tufsir al-buyan (Cairo, n.d.), p. 114; Mahmtid Muhammad Hamza, Tufsir a/-Qur)cina/Kurim (Cairo, 1960). p. 35. (Abd al-Karim al-Khatib, A/-Tufsir al-Qur)cini /i’/-Qur%n (Cairo, n.d.) 2:730, argues that it was a host of angels that really appeared to Mary, represented by one who does the talking. Many centuries earlier al-Zamakhshari noted that had he appeared in his true form as an angel Mary would have been so frightened that she would have fled (Gatje. The Q u r h and irs Exegesis, p. 121). Muhammad (Abd al-Rahim (Anbar, Buyn (bn wu-Muhammad (n.p., n.d.), p. 37, remarks that the angel appeared as a shadow flooded by light and addressed her in a deep. gentle and comforting voice. He adds that Mary had blue eyes and fine black hair. Muhammad (Arif Mustafa Fahmi, YusC(u/-musi~ wu’l-Im~m(Ati (Cairo, 1971). I, 14, cites a lengthy passage by (Abd al-Muncim (Abd al-Salsm in A/-Dina/-muq6ran, 1, in which there is defense of the appropriateness of an angel having intercourse with a mortal woman, and describes the angel as being neither too tall nor too short, too fat nor too thin, with a beautiful face and beguiling eyes. Fahmi remarks that he does not know where (Abd al-SalBm gets these strange ideas! I6 Muhammad MahmUd Hijlzi, al-Tqfsiral-wadih (Cairo, 1966), p. 18; cf. al-Qasimi, Tufiir, p. 4133 (al-Qasimi also indicates the spirit has blown directly into her pudendum). ?’ Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Ansiri al-Qurtubi, A/-hmi( li-uhkizm a/-Qur)Cn (Cairo, 1937). p. 93. See al-Qasirni, Tufsir, pp. 4139-40, who discusses the confusing physiological technicalities of sperm that separated from Mary’s right kidney being hotter than those from her left kidney and that they joined in her uterus to create the child. The reader will have sympathy for his conclusion that “God knows best. ” 168 zyxwvutsr THE MUSLIM WORLD Considerable interest has been shown in the matter of precisely how an angel can take the form of a human. Since it is clear from the Q u r h that angels are created of fire while humans are made of clay, the question arises as to the possibility of a transition from one form to another. Al-Qasimi, for one, says that an angel could become human without the angel disintegrating or dying after it enters the body. Just as God moves the spirits of martyrs into green birds in paradise, so the angel can take a human form.**Citing the famous eleventh-century theologian al-Juwayni (Imam al-Haramayn) that Gabriel could return to his original form, al-Qiisimi says it is similar to the circumstance of wool which appears larger when carded though its essence does not change. That the angel appeared as a man does not mean that he turned into a man, but that he appeared in that image for familiarity.*’ KhatGb says that the “good news” descended on her repeatedly while she was at devotions, and the angelic messengers no doubt used to visit her in the form of women, which is why she was frightened when Gabriel came as a man.)O The discussion of angelic possibilities in this context has to do not only with what an angel can and cannot do, but with a further defense of Mary’s purity in not having lain with a real man. Much discussion has been held over the matter of Mary’s having responded to the words of the angel that she will conceive by saying, “How can I have a son when no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?” (S. 19:20). Here we have one of the most important theological issues to be raised in reference to Mary. Is it possible that Mary, the obedient one, in this instance was compromising that obedience to God? Or was she doubting God’s power? Her willingness to submit absolutely to God’s will, seen as the equivalent of Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son as the ultimate act of compliance, would certainly seem to preclude such an act of disobedience, even apostasy. One story that appears in the traditions seems to support the notion of Mary’s complete acceptance of God’s will. Joseph, horrified to discover Mary pregnant, as we saw above, tried to confront her with what was too obvious to deny by raising a series of questions. Can wheat grow without seed? Can the trees blossom without rain? Can one have a son without a father? To his surprise, Mary answered each of these questions by saying yes. In each case, of course, she pointed to the fact that it is God who makes growth and development possible. Citing various of the miracles by which God causes a kind of spontaneous generation to take place, including that of the original couple Adam and Eve, Mary assuTes him that it is sufficient for God to say “Be!” and a thing comes into being (see S. 3:47). After that Joseph understood that Mary’s state was indeed the result of divine inter~ention.~’ zyxw zyxwvutsr zyxwvu zyxwv zyxwvutsrq 2n Al-QBsimi, Tafiir,p. 840; cf. Mahmnd al-SharqBwi, Al-Anbiyri ’ fi al-Qur’i?n af-Karim (Cairo, 1970), pp. 258-60. 2y Al-QBsimi, %$sir, p. 4141. 30 KhattBb, (Ishriin. p. 48. ” Al-pbari, Jamic, XVI, 43; Ibn al-Athir, al-Khilfi’l-tririkh, ed. C. I. Tornberg (n.d., n.p.) 1:21819; Thaclabi, Qisw,p. 382. Abd-el-Jalil (“La v.ie,” Marta, p. 201) notes that certain classical authors (whom he does not identify) indicated that the angel took the form of Joseph. zyx zyx zyxw THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 169 The commentators are quick to come to Mary’s defense. “Mary questioned how she could conceive when she had not been touched by a human,” says alBbarsi. “She did not say this in denial or thinking it far fetched, but rather in seeking information and in wonder at the power of God.”32And according to the contemporary exegete Hijiizi, Mary did not deny God’s power to give her a baby but merely expressed her wonder at how this was to come about. Was it to be through marriage in the future, or would God create the baby ex nihilo, so to speak, at that very rn~ment?~’ The Qur’an does not give any detail about Mary’s age at the time of conception, nor about the length of her pregnancy. This has led to speculation by the early commentators, who report her variously to have been 13, 15, 17 or 20, and say that her pregnancy lasted anywhere from eight, seven or six months or possibly just three hours or one hour.’? There are even references to her having conceived and given birth instantly.’s One set of traditions acknowledges that Mary and Jesus actually conversed with each other while Jesus was in the womb. Mary is reported to have said: “Each time that someone came and I talked with him, Jesus in my womb was making divine praises. But when I was alone, and no one was with me, I spoke to Jesus and he spoke to me, as long as he was in my womb.”’6 The contemporary writer Haqqi goes so far as to cite the tradition that Jesus memorized the Torah while in his mother’s belly and that Mary used to hear him study there.” These narratives are undoubtedly a variant on the Qur’anic insistence that Jesus spoke at birth (S. 19:29-33, discussed below). D. The birth of Jesus. This sequence of events is described in S. 19:22-26. After withdrawing to what is called “a far place” Mary experienced such birth pains that she clung to the trunk of a palm tree and cried, (Would that I had died and been forgotten before this!) Then a voice cried from beneath her, reassuring her and telling her to shake the tree and receive the juicy fruit of which she should eat, and that she should make a vow of fasting and of silence. The matter of the far away place has been treated with somewhat desultory interest by the commentators-opinions range from saying it means the other side of her country, to behind Mount Zion, to the trip from Nazareth to Bethlehem, to zy zyxwvutsr zy Al-Fadl b. al-Hasan al-Tabarsi, Mujmd al-bayanfi fufsir al-Qur’icn(Beirut, 1956), 111, 83. Hijazi, nl-Tufsir, p. 18. The defense of Mary in this context has a kind of parallel in the defense of her mother Hanna when she registered surprise at having conceived a female (S. 3:36). Al-QHsimi, for example, proposes several reasons for her saying “My Lord! 1 have given birth to a female . . .”: ( I ) to inform God of her sex (which al-Qisimi acknowledges of course would not be necessary), (2) to glorify God for the grandson who will come (though she is unaware of it), (3) to express regret to God since she cannot fulfill her vow, (4) to comfort herself that perhaps God knows that a female child is better than a male. Al-QBsirni, Tafsir, p. 834. ‘4 Al-Tabari, himi(, 16:44. Cf. Abd-el-Jalil, “La vie,” Maria, p. 203. ’((ImBd al-Din Abi al-FidB’ IsmH’il Ibn Kathir, Tufiiral-Qur%n al-(&im (Beirut, 1966). 4:447. Ibn Kathir does acknowledge that such an event would have been strange. Al-Tiisi, Tafsir, p. 120, in giving the range of pregnancy from one hour to six months to eight months, comments as have many of the classical authors that no other child besides Jesus born after eight months has lived. 76 Abii Nu(aym al-Isbahani, Hilyat (Cairo, 1932-38) 3:294; Ibn al-Athir, al-KZmil, I, 220. Haqqi, Tufiir, p. 449. ’? ” 170 THE MUSLIM WORLD the edge of Egypt where she and Joseph were fleeing.38Much more engaging has been the discussion of her cry that she wished she were dead. Given the general acceptance of Mary as the model of absolute obedience to the divine will, how could she have committed what at first might seem to be an act of disobedience, of not being willing to accept with gratitude the state into which God had put her? Even death, one might argue, is determined absolutely by God39and should not be either challenged or desired. Various exegetes of the QurIBn have provided a range of responses as a kind of line of defense of Mary: 1. She was actually expressing pity for her kin because she knew they would accuse her of adultery and would be punished for not having faith in her purity.4a 2. Had she been given a choice between death and public disgrace through conception, she would have chosen death.“ 3. She feared that someone might call Jesus the son of God and the son of Mary, with the blasphemous implication that Mary was somehow the wife of God.42 (The recurrent theme of menstruation appears again in this context in the passing and unexegeted reference in al-Pbari’s commentary that Mary’s having’said “I wish I were dead and forgotten” is somehow a metaphor for the used cloth of menstruation. y3 Also of great interest to modem commentators has been the matter of the shaking of the tree and the vindication of Mary against those who would accuse her of perfidy. In each case the concern again is to defend the very special qualities that have come to be acknowledged in Mary. Among the reasons given for her instruction to shake the tree are the following: 1. It was not because she needed food or drink, but rather a miracle to prove the truth of her purity. She could not have been in need of sustenance because we know that such was provided for her through divine intervention when she was in earlier seclusion. It was rather a matter of relationship. When she was devoted completely to God she did not need to labor in order to get food. But once she had a baby such effort became necessary, with the clear implication that relationships involve a form of suffering.” 2. She needed to have the sustenance for strength in pushing the child from the womb. This is interpreted as proof that Jesus was born in a natural manner as all humans are born, just as Mary had carried him in a natural manner until the time came for his birth. In other words, Mary was not given any special favors after her pregnancy .45 zy zy zyxwvutsrq zyxwv zy zyxwvutsr I* Abd-el-Jalil, “La vie,” Maria, p. 203; Geoffrey Parrinder, Jesus in the Qurlun (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1965). pp. 76-77. 39 It is Muslim doctrine that the length of each person’s life (ajuf)is set by divine decree and nothing can change it. 40 Al-Tiisi, Tufiir, p. 119. 41 Ibid. 42 Al-ImBm al Qushayri, Lafa’ifal-Isharat(Cairo, n.d.), IV, 96. 43 Al-%bari, Tafsjr, 15:66. Cf. Al-Tihi, Tafsir, p. 117. Al-Qushayri, Larii’if, p. 97. Is (Abd al-Karim al-Khatib, ul-Tufsir al-Qur)&nili-al-QurLin (Beirut, n.d.), p. 73 1. zyx zyxwv THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 171 3. Mary was given the assurance that she could eat what is fresh and appetizing and therefore be happy (with the implication that she need not fear the retribution of her ~ e l a t i v e s ) . ~ ~ 4. God will indeed provide for His devoted servants when they are in need.” Lest it appear contradictory that Mary be told both to shake the tree for fruit and to vow a fast, the exegetes agree that fasting actually meant not engaging in any human conversation for a period of time.48Of considerable interest to the contemporary commentators is the question of exactly who it was that spoke from beneath her with these instructions. Some are convinced it was Jesus, others that it was Gabriel, and still others are unsure. To say that it is Gabriel who spoke, of course, is to question a miracle of Jesus that has a long tradition. It may in fact represent an effort to contain Jesus in an unquestionably human form, rather than to invest him with supernatural qualities. The arguments in any case are not substantive and the evidence is too slim for a conclusion. E. Mary’s defense against her accusers. While in one sense about Mary, this sequence, found in S. 19:27-33, is really a transition to testimony about the special nature of Jesus. When Mary returned to her people carrying the baby they did indeed, as she feared, accuse her of a terrible wrongdoing. Having vowed silence, she pointed to Jesus, who despite the exclamation of the onlookers that a baby cannot talk, proceeded to affirm his own status as a prophet appointed and blessed by God. The last we hear of Mary in this context is Jesus’ affirmation that he will be dutiful toward his mother. “([He] has made me dutiful toward her who bore me and has not made me arrogant, unblest. Peace on me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!” [S. 19:32-331). There was in fact a kind of triple purpose in the words of the young Jesus: he confirmed that Mary was innocent of any misdemeanor, he proclaimed his own mission, and he provided a counter argument, corroborated in the next several verses of the Qu+an, to Christian claims of his divinity. This is all we know from the Qur’an about the life of Mary. There has been some speculation as to a possible flight to Egypt, based on S . 2352 (And we made the son of Mary and his mother a portent, and we gave them refuge on a height, a place of flocks, and water-springs.) Historians and exegetes have ventured a variety of opinions, with little consensus, as to the cause, time, and length of this flight, although it is often said that after twelve years they returned. The specifics that are offered have to do with Jesus in his youth rather than with Mary, with the exception of the notation that she lived a life of poverty while in Egypt in keeping with her nature and with her understanding that her son had been created for something other than Some have posited that Mary died at age 5 1 , six or eight years after the death of Jesus. A. J. Wensinck notes an interesting narrative of Mary going to Rome to speak with John (the disciple) and Shim%n [Si- zyxw zy zyxwvuts zyxwvutsr zyxwvutsrqpon HijM, uI-Tqfsir.p. 19. Qushayri, LA@ ’$ p. 97. 4 8 Parrinder, Jesus, p. 78, notes that this is the only mention of fasting in the suras considered as Meccan. ” Abd-el-Jalil, “La vie,” Maria, p. 109. ‘O 47 172 THE MUSLIM WORLD mon] (the coppersmith) in front of Nero. ShimUn (along with someone named adawus [Thaddaeus?]) was crucified upside down, after which Mary and John fled. When they were caught and persecuted the earth opened to offer them protection, resulting in the conversion of Nero.” With this synopsis of the outlines of Mary’s life as gleaned from the Qur’iin and commentaries, it is now important to return to some of the issues and themes emerging as particularly significant in the history of Muslim piety. We can suggest a number of categories, often overlapping, under which questions about Mary, her nature and condition, have been addressed. These are the matter of Mary’s purity:’ Mary’s virginity, Mary as the true believer, whether or not Mary can be considered to have been a prophet, the identification of Mary with the Prophet’s daughter Fatima in the context of the controversy over the hierarchy of holy women in Islam, and Mary in relation to the first woman Eve. In general these grew out of what is communicated in two key verses of the Q u r h , revealed to Mary in that period of her life when she was in retreat in the temple: “And the angels said, 0 Mary! God has chosen you and made you pure, and has preferred you above the women of the world. 0 Mary! Be obedient to your Lord, prostrate yourself and bow with those who bow in worship” (S. 3:42-3). 1. Mary’s purity. We noted above that the hadith indicating that Mary and Jesus are the only persons not touched by Satan at birth is one that is cited with great frequency in the commentaries. It is used, of course, as a testimony to Mary’s purity. Tuhiiru, purity, is a concept basic to Islam as a human quality and as a prerequisite for acts of worship. As such it has both theological and juridical implications. As we will see, blood, especially menstrual, is understood to be defiling and in itself destructive of a state of purity. Therefore a very important question, sometimes ignored and sometimes dealt with directly by the commentators, is whether Mary’s purity is to be understood as spiritual or physical or both. Specifically the question has been raised as to whether or not Mary shared with (virtually) all women the condition of a menstrual cycle: -God has chosen and purified her for obedience. . . . He has purified your devotion (din) from the defilement which is part of the din of the daughters of Adam.s2 zy zyx zyxwvuts zyxw zyxwvu zyxwvutsr zyxwvuts *“A.J. Wensinck, “Maryam” in Shorter Encyclopedia of Islum, eds. H.A.R. Gibb and J . H. Kramers (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1965), p. 330. No reference is given in the article and we were unable to locate the source of this tradition. s t See George Anawati, “Islam and the Immaculate Conception” in The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception: History and Signi$cunce, ed. E. D. O’Connor (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame, 1958), pp. 447-61 in which he discusses in detail the reasons why this specific Christian dogma can not be equated to the much vaguer Islamic doctrine of Mary’s purity. A key difference, he notes, is that Islam does not have a doctrine of original sin. Cf. R. J. McCarthy, “Mary in Islam,” in Alberic Stacpoole, ed., Mary’s Place in Christian Dialogue (Wilton, C T Morehouse-Barlow Co., 1982). pp. 205-208. 52 Al-Bbari, Jam&, 6:393. Jane McAuliffe, “Chosen of All Women: Mary and Fatima in Qurlanic Exegesis” (Islarnochristiuna,VII [1981]), 20, insists that al-Pbari sees Mary’s purification as strictly non-physical, referring not to her body but to her behavior. That point is not entirely clear in this reference. zyx zyx zyxwvu zyxwvut zyxw zy THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 173 -Purified you has two meanings: (1) Purified you of kufr (rejection of God) and (2) purified you of all defilement (e.g., menstruation, the period of bleeding after childbirth) .53 --Purified for the service of the house of worship, from all defilement which would keep you from dwelling in it.54 --Purified you from kufr, from childbirth, and men~truation.~~ -He purified you from kufr and from disobedience and from reprehensible acts and repulsive habits and the touch of men and from menstruation and from bleeding after childbirth.s6 -You are numbered among men because of the perfection with which you have been endowed (cited from Baqa‘i); this verse (S. 3:43) points to the fact that a woman can lead the prayer.” The last reference, by al-QSsimi, to the opinion of the highly respected classical theologian al-Suyuti that because of Mary women are qualified to lead the prayer suggests the possibility for an interesting discussion on female leadership. The image of Mary as an imiim could become an engaging model for opening up the ranks of religious leadership to women. Those who might wish to pursue this possibility, however, should note that most contemporary opinion agrees with alQgsimi, who in reference to S. 3:43 (“prostrate yourself [O Mary] and pray with those who are praying”) says it means that it is not as a woman that she is given such a directive from God. “Because of the perfection that God has apportioned to you, you are counted as among the men!”58 In any case, it is apparent that the question of Mary’s menstruation is key in most understandings of purity. That purity is understood by many to be both spiritual, in terms of her own religious acts and responses (dln), and physical, as mentioned specifically in relation to bleeding and secondarily to other female conditions considered to be defiling as well as to physical contact with men. Throughout the history of human religiousness female menses generally have been seen as defiling; this is certainly no less true of Islam. “The blood of menstruation and of childbirth is nujis (defiled) according to the agreement of the (ulumi?,” says one contemporary writer. “There is no difference between a small amount and a b ~ n d a n c e . ”We ~ ~ have already noted the problem raised in connection with Hanna’s dedication of her child to the service of the house of worship when the child turned out to be female. “The female is unfit for service of the musjid because of menstruation.”60 Is it to be assumed, then, that Mary actually was free throughout her life from this defilement? The evidence is inconclusive. Some exegetes, especially those zyxwvuts Al-Tusi, Tufiir, 11, 456. Hijazi, al-Tafsir, p. 58. ss Muhammad b. Ahmad al-AnsBri al-Qurtubi, al-JCrnF li-uhhm ul-Qur) Cn (Cairo, 1937), IV, 82. s6 Haqqi, Tufsir, p. 446. ST Al-QBsimi, Tqfir, pp. 841-42; (Abd al-RahmBn Ibrtihim al-Humaydi, ul-(;fdfir fi ul-Qurkn ulKurim (Jeddah, 1982), p. 200. 58 Al-QBsimi, Tufiir, p. 841. 5u Ahmad al-Ghandur, Al-(IbidCr min al-Qur) fin wu’l-Sunna (Cairo, 1969), p. 103. 6o Haqqi, Tufsir, p. 440. 5z s4 174 zyxwvu zyxw zyxwvu zyxwvuts zyxwv THE MUSLIM WORLD writing before the modern period, have been unwilling to grant this kind of immunity. Ibn Kathir quotes the biographer of Muhammad, Ibn IshBq, as having said that when Mary conceived she stopped menstruating and began to have morning sickness.6’Al-KisB(i in Qisus ul-Anbiyii ’ (Stories of the Prophets) says that when Mary reached the maturity of women, Zachariah came to see her and she told him that she had seen an ugly thing, i.e., her menstruation. So he ordered her to stay with her aunt until she was purified.62 Al-AlOsi, however, writing in the nineteenth century, is typical of more recent writing when he concludes that there are several ways in which to look at the matter. Either God purified Mary from all the uncleanness common to women, including periods and bleeding after birth, or her purity was related specifically to the virtue of obedience, or it was in terms of lack of fault in the soul and the character. The best interpretation, he concludes, is to take the word purification in its broadest sense and say that God gave Mary the privilege of being pure from all uncleanness in the literal and the figurative senses, both of the heart and of the body .63 Mary’s freedom from defilement is, of course, what is generally termed her immaculate conception (see note 51). It is interesting to note in this connection that Muslim popular piety affirms the notion of the immaculate conception in relation to both the Prophet and his parents as being very much like that attributed to Mary. Kenneth Cragg cites the Damascene Yiisuf al-NabahBni [d. 19321 as saying in a popular devotional manual that both the Prophet’s parents and his grandparents were immaculately pure .w Thpper and Thpper in an article on rituals in modern Turkey surrounding the birth of the Prophet Muhammad relate an interesting account in which his mother Emine (Amina in Arabic) is said to have had the miraculous experience of being visited by three houris (maidens of Paradise affirmed by the Q u r h as companions of the faithful). These supernatural creatures describe to Emine the qualities that her son, who is about to be born, will Tradition in fact identifies these three houris as Eve, Asiya and Mary (sometimes Eve is omitted and it is said that only Asiya, wife of Pharaoh, and Mary are in attendance at the birth of the Prophet). Annemarie Schimmel cites Suleyman Chelebi’s popular mevlut in which the birth of the Prophet is recounted and upon which the above account undoubtedly is based. In Amina’s (Emine’s) words: “Suddenly the walls were split apart and three houri entered my room. Some have said that of these charm- zyxwvut zyxwvutsrqp zyxwvut Ibn Kathir, Tajiir,IV, 448. AI-Kisaq, Qisaj, p. 303. b3 AI-AIM, RPh al-maGni (Cairo, 1927), 111, 137, as cited in Abd-el-lalil, “La vie,” Maria, p. 192. Rashid Rids, author of the famed modern Manor commentary, agrees in saying that freedom from the defilement of menstruation was a necessary prerequisite for not defiling the temple. (McAuliffe, “Chosen,” p. 122); cf. Ahmad al-Ghandiir, al-(lbdd& min al-Qur)dn wa-al-sunna (Cairo, 1969), p. 103, where he says, “The blood of menstruation and of childbirth is najis (defilement) according to the agreement of the ulema. There is no difference between a little or a large amount.” Nancy and Richard Tapper, “The Birth of the Prophet: Ritual and Gender in Turkish Islam,” Man, XXII (1987). 85. ‘’ Tapper and lipper (“The Birth,” Man. 74) describe the belief in the birth of Muhammad as parthenogenesis. 61 b2 zyx zyxwv zyxwv THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 175 ing three one was Asiya of moonlike face, one was Lady Mary without doubt, and the third a houri beautiful. Then these moonfaced three drew gently near and they greeted me with kindness here; then they sat around me, and they gave the good tidings of Muhammad’s birth. . . .’’%Popular literature records a number of these miraculous appearances by Mary long after her death. 2. Mary’s virginity. In the contemporary period question has been raised in some quarters-generally not by Arab writers-about Mary’s virginity. We recall Mary’s protestation (S. 3:47) that she cannot conceive a child when she has not been touched by a man.67Clearly the vast majority of commentators feel that this means that Jesus was born without a human father, and the consensus is that Mary retained her virginity thoughout her life. “He who denies the birth of Jesus from Mary while a virgin is on the same level as an apostate; his faith is of no use to him, nor will his religion or Islam vouchsafe for him. . . . whoever [questions Mary’s honor] deserves the suffering of hell.”68 A few modern writers, however, have chosen to see it differently. The Indian exegete Sayyid Ahmad Khan, for example, flatly denies Mary’s virginity, saying that the Qur%n does not mean that she never had relations with any man but that she only had intercourse with her It is important to note that this material comes out of the context of intensive and aggressive Christian missionary activity in India which depicted Jesus as superior to Muhammad, even citing the Qur’rin as proof. Thus the denial of the virginity, although not in the tradition of Islam, may well be seen as part of the apologetic to defend the faith against its Christian detractors. Ghulam Ahmad Parwez, the influential Pakistani commentator, is less definitive, but does argue that the Qur’an does not say explicitly that Jesus was born without a human father, citing the fact that the Qur%n does not normally mention the name of the fathers of the prophets. It was perfectly normal for Mary to have protested the news of her pregnancy, he says, because she was leading a reclusive life in the temple. The Q u r k , by affirming God’s power to create simply by saying “Be!”, was attesting to the fact of creation through God’s initiation, a normal occurrence. It was not necessary, he argues, for the Qur%n to detail how Mary got pregnant, as everyone is familiar with that proce~s.’~ zyxwvutsrq zyxwvutsr zyxwvu zy zyxwvutsr Annemarie Schimmel, And Muhammad is His Messenger (Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1985). p. 154. Cf. Louis Massignon, “La notion de voeu et I’dCvotion Musulmane 1 Fatima,” Studi orientulisticu in onore de Georgio Levi de Della Rdu, I1 (Rome: Istituto per I’Orient, 1956). 112: “Dans le Muwlid de Sulayman Celebi (fin XIVe sitcle), les trois femmes qui aident Amina h la nativitC du prophtte Ctaient Eve, Asiya et diriri Muyam sadafden SGjyu. ” b7 Marina Warner (Alone, pp. 32-33) notes the problem that many Christian commentators have had with the vow of Mary to remain a virgin, originating in the apocrypha. It would have been unlikely, they argue, for a young Jewish girl to have vowed chastity given the great stigma placed on barrenness in that culture. Muhammad Majdi Mirjan, Al-Masih: Insan am Ilah (Cairo, 1970). pp. 28-29. hv Tufiir, 11, 38, cited in J . M. S. Baljon, The Reforms and Religious Ideas of Sir Suyyid Ahmud Khan (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1949). p. 82. O ’ MuGriful-QurVtn, 111, 547-53 as cited in Baljon, Modern Muslim Koran Interpretation, pp. 69-70. Baljon notes the contention of Abo’l-Kalim Azad (Tarjurnun al-Qurun, 11, 444 sq.) that those who have tried to argue for the virgin birth have simply taken verses of the Qur’Bn out of context. Parrinder in 176 zyxwvuts THE MUSLIM WORLD zyxwvut zyxwvut More important than arguments that might be marshalled to call into question the virginity of Mary, which in any case have never held sway, is the crucial nature of that virginity to the understanding of Mary as a model of purity. This role has been of particular importance in Muslim mystical piety, as will be seen below .7’ 3. The true believer. Several of the Qurlanic narratives have served as the occasion to raise the issue of whether or not Mary may have questioned (or worse, possibly denied) the will of God. She wondered how as a virgin she could be pregnant, as we have seen, and when she experienced the pangs of childbirth she expressed the wish that she might have died before it happened. Since it is incumbent on the true Muslim believer to accept with gratitude and praise whatever God determines, the question has been raised whether these utterances on Mary’s part could have constituted unbelief. The answer, of course, has been a clear no. In regard to the pangs of childbirth incident, for example, a brief look at the remarks of several commentators is sufficient to illustrate the “protection” they offer to Mary in defending her honor. Qushayri, for example, says that she may have wished for death out of pity for her kin who would no doubt accuse her of adultery and themselves risk punishment for denying God’s power; or that she feared someone might utter the ultimate blasphemy of calling Jesus God’s son and Mary His wife; or that, somewhat more humanly, she was shamed at having gotten into such a difficult ~ituation.~’ And al-Tiisi provides the same kind of explanation in saying that her wish for death came from a concern that people would disobey God by condemning her, or that being human she was afraid of being scandalized, or that had she been given the choice between death and public disgrace she would have chosen death.73The interesting issue is the tension these authors express, characteristic of the history of commentary about Mary (especially that coming out of the Arab world), between affirming Mary’s unquestioning obedience to the divine will (thereby giving her deathwish a very altruistic interpretation) and her horror of being accused of the ultimate act of moral shamefulness, i.e., illicit sex (thereby putting her lamentation into a very human framework).74 zyxwvutsr Jesus in the Q u r h (pp. 72ff.) observes that two points are relevant to the question. The first is the strong similarity of the words spoken to Mary about her impending pregnancy to those spoken at the annunciation of the birth of John (S. 3:40,19:8). The argument can be made, and has been that because the QurXin does not sugget that John was barn without a human father there is no reason to assume that the process was different in terms of Jesus. The second point is that the QurVin is so insistent in its denial of the possibility of God’s taking offspring that it raises serious question about the process of divine intervention in terms of Jesus’ birth. 7’ Annemarie Schimmel, Mysticul Dimensions of Islam (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1975). p. 218. 72 Al-Qusharyri, La@’$, IV, 96. 73 Al-Tiisi, Tafssr, p. 119. 74 This issue, though approached differently, has of course not been absent in Christian reflection. In an interesting article on Eastern Christian views on the eucharist, Sebastian Brock observes that while people are given the potential for sanctification in the eucharist this can only take effect if they allow the Holy Spirit to work freely, unquestioned and accepted. This he likens to the unquestioning acceptance of Mary of the fact of her pregnancy with Jesus. (“Mary and the Eucharist: An Oriental Perspective” in Sobornost, I 119791, 54). THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 177 Mary the true believer has served as a model for the faithful through the ages and has been a much revered figure in popular piety. Annemarie Schimmel, who has introduced Western readers to so many of the realities of Muslim devotional life, has pointed to frequent images of Mary in Sufi poetry and writing. She notes that in parts of the subcontinent the longing soul, so rarely envisaged as female, is seen in feminine terms and likened to the Qur’anic instance of the longing soul of Mary.75And she cites her beloved Jalal al-Din Riimi in the Muthnuwi ( 5 : 1188) concerning the power of true prayer: “He ((who?)) turns the dried-up seed of prayer into a marvelous date-palm, just as in Mary’s birth pangs her pain was rewarded by a shower of dates . . .”, noting that images of Mary and Jesus are more frequent in Riimi’s works than any other comparable Muslim p ~ e t r y . ’In~ the Mufhnawi (4:2142) Riimi plays out his common theme of identifying the internal and the external by saying, “If you see an ugly face, that is you; and if you see Jesus and Mary, that is you.”77 It has been observed that for RUmi in the Mufhnuwi men are often symbols of saints and women of the unbelievers, part of this theme of the intellect as male and the ego as female. It is particularly interesting, then, to see what he does with the imagery of the great Persian warrior Rustam, likened to the one who is heroic in spiritual combat: “Since women never go out to fight the holy war, how should they engage in the Greater Holy War [the jihiid against the base inclinations of the human soul]? Except rarely, when a Rustam is hidden within a woman’s body, as in the case of Mary”(6:1882-84).78 4. Mary as a prophet. Sura 3:42 cited above in which God indicates that He has (1) chosen, (2) purified, and (3) preferred Mary above the women of creation has engendered considerable discussion through the history of Islam. We have already considered the matter of purification and how that has been interpreted. Related to the issues of choice and preference is the question of whether or not Mary could be considered to be a prophet in the line of the prophets of Islam. R. J. McCarthy in a brief article entitled “Mary in Islam” says that the “chosen by God” phrase means that Mary was chosen as the prophets were chosen, and that although she was not an apostle (rusiilu) because she was not sent to a people, “The commentators [uncited] in general regard her as a prophetess (nabiyyu), since God spoke to her.”79This generalization, however, is not supported in the literature consulted for this study. Most commentators in fact neither make the distinction between nubiyyu and rasiilu nor credit the possibility that Mary could have been a prophet. The reason for the latter, of course, is basically that she is female. zyxw zyx zyxwvu zyxwvutsr zyxwvu zyxwvuts zy Schimmel, Mystical, p. 168 761bid.,pp. 35, 160, 318. ”Cited in W. C. Chittick, The SufiPath o f h v e (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1983). p. 145. Cf. Reynold Nicholson, The Mystics of Islam (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966), p. 133, who cites Book Two of the Mathnawi (no vs.): “If you hit the mirror, you hit yourself. If you see an ugly face in it, ’tis your own, and if you see a Jesus there, you are its mother Mary.” 7nChittick,Sufi. pp. 164-65. 7y McCarthy, “Mary,” Mary’s Place, p. 206. He goes on to note that Mary was twice elected by God - once when she was received in the service of the temple and once when chosen to be the mother of Jesus. 75 178 zyxwvu zy zyxwvut THE MUSLIM WORLD A look at the reflections of some of the classical commentators illustrates that. Mary is not a prophet, says Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Tusi, citing S. 12:109 (“We have not sent anyone to you [as prophet] but men to whom we have given revelation . . .”). If any proof of prophethood is involved, he says, it is that of Jesus and not Mary.so Fakhr al-Din Razi, citing the same verse, insists that Mary’s having received this communication from God through the angel does not suggest that she is a prophet, a status clearly reserved for men.*’And the contemporary exegetes generally agree. Gabriel’s conversation with Mary was not a revelation, says Haqqi, because the Qur%n only talks about prophethood as a profession for males and it cannot be for women. This communication, then, while miraculous, is only a foretelling of Jesus’ prophethood. “God has purified her from apostasy and sin and evil deeds and repugnant customs and the touching of men and the bleeding of menstruation and childbirth:’ but He has not, according to Haqqi, made her a prophet.S2The contemporary Shicite commentator (All%mah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn al-%ba@bii’i notes that the fact that Mary was mentioned before Jesus (in S. 21:91) is a temporal reference and not one of ranking, and confirms that since Mary is not a prophet she is honored simply by being mentioned in relation to There have been, however, a few dissenting voices. Ibn Hazm of Cordova seems to have been the most prominent of the classical writers to affirm Mary’s prophethood. (Ibn Hazm, it should be noted, has not been without detractors who seriously question his “orthodoxy” .) He states without equivocation that God’s having sent Gabriel to Mary means that “this is a true Prophethood with a true revelation and message from God.” His argument, quite different from that cited by others, is that the Q u r h does attest to the fact that angels have come to women and have given them messages from God. The mother of Jesus was informed about his coming, as was the mother of Moses who was told to throw her son into the sea. (Ibn Hazm notes that this act of faith is equivalent to the obedience of Abraham in offering his son as a sacrifice.) Therefore, he concludes, there is nothing unusual about Mary’s having received a revelation and thus being designated as a prophet.” Another exception is al-QuQubi, mentioned above for his remarkable interpretation of the hemaphroditic conception of Jesus. On the jssue of prophethood he agrees with Ibn Hazm that Mary is indeed a prophet because God revealed to her by the same means that He revealed to the rest of the prophets. He concludes with his opinion on the much debated issue coming from the last phrase of S. 3:42 about God’s preference of Mary above the women of creation. “It is evident from the Qur)%nand the Hadith,” he says, “that Mary is the best among the women of the world from Eve to the last woman up to the coming of the hour [of zyxwvutsrqp zy Al-Tusi, Tufssir, 11, 457. Fakhr al-Din al-Riizi, Al-Tufssirul-kabir, VIII, 45 cited in McAuliffe, “Chosen,” p. 21. 82 Haqqi, Tqfsir, p. 446. Muhammad al-pbataba’i, Af-MzSn, XIV, 317, cited in McAuliffe, “Chosen,” Ishmo, VII (1981). 26. *& Ibn Hazm, Al-FusIJi’l-mild (Cairo, 1317/1320), V, 88. zyxwvut zyxwvut zyxwvu zy THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 179 resurrection] .” 85 Others are less clear that this unequivocal preeminence should in fact be given to the mother of Jesus, as we shall see in the upcoming section. 5. The hierarchy of holy women (Maryam and Fiitima). It is interesting to see how much discussion has been engendered concerning this matter of the hierarchy of holy women in Islam. While for al-Qunubi the issue is clear and Mary is at the pinnacle, for others the problem is more complex, especially in connection with the role of the Prophet’s daughter Fiitima in Islamic tradition. A tradition often cited is that in which the best women of the world are identified as Mary, daughter of (Imran; Khadija, wife of the Prophet (daughter of Khuwaylid); Fatima, daughter of Muhammad; and Asiya, wife of Pharaoh.86 This identification of the four as equal in status, or at least not differentiated, sometimes is modified so that it is Mary and Khadija alone who are the best8’or Mary and Asiya who are so identified. “Many men have attained perfection. Among the women, only Mary and Asiya, wife of the Pharaoh, have attained a perfection that no other has had.”88 Haqqi comments that Mary is superior to all the women of the world, but concentrates on the four indicated above as being more virtuous and knowledgeable than any others. He says that there is no question of prophethood for women because that is predicated on being visible and making public proclamation, while the condition of women is naturally one of concealment. He concludes with this observation: “Among women are some who are perfect and knowledgeable and who attain the standard of men [in this case Mary, Khadija, Fatima and Asiyalthey are in a real sense men.”89 There is also, however, a significant body of persons who argue that Mary and Fiitima, daughter of the Prophet, are the only two who should be considered superior to all women. Mary’s prerogative is her miraculous conception of Jesus, Fiitima’s her status as daughter of the Prophet (whom she is sometimes said to resemble) .90 For those (both Sunni and Shicite) who have difficulty acknowledging that Fatima is not alone in the category of superior, the argument is put forward that while Mary was chosen above all the women of her generation, Fiitima is in fact the chosen woman of all time.” Or, the reasoning is sometimes turned around to say that while Fiitima is the chief of the women of this time or community (urnma), the chief of the women of the world is Maryam because of the description in S. 3:42.92And in some cases Mary and Fatima seem almost to be abstracted into one person. zyxwvutsr zyxwv zyxwvut zyxwvu ss Al-Qurtubi, al-JSrmi(, IV, 83; cf. Hajiizi, Tafsir,111, 58. See Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad (Cairo, 1955), 2:233 and 3:135; SharqBwi, a!-Anbiyu’, 1:340; al-Qurtubi, al-himF, 4:83. *’See Ibn Hanbal, Musnad (Cairo, 1313 H.),111, 641, 928, 1109, 121 1 ; Muslim, Sahih Muslim, IV, 1296. 88 Ibn Hazm, al-Fasl, IV, 132. See also Muslim, Sahib Muslim, IV, 1296-97. 89 Haqqi, Tafsir. p. 447. Al-’kbari, Jiimic, VI, 393-4; al-Tusi, Tafsir,11, 456; al-Shawkani, Fath al-qodir(Cairo, 1250 H.), I, 340. v1 McCarthy, “Mary,” Mary‘s Place, pp. 206-207. y’ Muslim, Sahih Muslim, IV, 1307. 86 180 zyxw zy zyxwvut zyxwv zyxwvut THE MUSLIM WORLD This matter of the comparisons drawn between Mary and Fatima, leading in some cases to a virtual identity of experience between the two, is an exceptionally interesting phenomenon in Muslim hagiography .93 Louis Massignon sums up what he sees as a kind of absorption into Fatima of the qualities attributed to Mary: On sait assez combien, pour la Chr6tient6, Maryam a 6t6 prCservCe: Hrgo prius uc posterius, sans aucune des impuret6s lCgales dont souffrent les femmes et les mkres. I1 est extrEmement remarquable de constater le travail de la pensee des Musulmanes qui les a amenCes B envisager pour FQtima, graduellement, les privilkges de Maryam. L‘ensemble de 1’Islam fkminin pense que F6tima a Ct6 exemptie de rkgles (huycl) et de perte de sang B l’accouchement (nvds) afin que sa pribre puisse &treperpptfuelle.” A number of traditions can be cited showing that the “miracles” that we have seen acknowledged in relation to the figure of Mary are also understood to have been part of Fatima’s experience. Thus as Mary’s sustenance in the temple was miraculously multiplied by God each day, so Fatima found God providing food for her and her family.9sAs Mary was considered (at least by some interpreters) to have been free from menstruation, so Fgtima is said not to have menstruated and in fact to have stopped bleeding an hour after childbirth, according to one account, so that she would not miss any of her prayers.” Fatima is also called bafiil (chaste, virgin), an epithet used repeatedly of Mary, and in fact is referred to in many places as Maryam al-Kubra, Mary the Greater.” Like Mary, Fatima is said to have been visited by angels, although she did not become impregnated through that experience. And like Mary it is said that Fatima set herself apart from contact with other people while pregnant and like her was given sustenance from zyxwv zyxwv zyxw 93 Several works have been devoted to just this subject, including the above mentioned article by Jane McAuliffe and the unpublished essay by Kelly del Tredici, “Fatimah and Mary: Sorrowful Mothers and Mediators” (Harvard Divinity School, 1984); cf. note 3 above. y4 Louis Massignon, “La notion du voeu,” Srudi orienfalisrica, 11, 111. 95 “The Prophet of God spent days without food. So he toured the houses of his wives and did not find food in any of them. He went to FBtima and asked her if she had anything to eat. She said no. Later, a neighbor sent Fatima two loaves and a little bit of meat. She covered it and sent Hasan and Husayn to call their grandfather [Muhammad] and when he came she uncovered it and it was full of bread and meat. She realized that it was a blessing from God. When he asked her where it was from, she said it was from God who gives to whomever he wills. The Prophet praised God and said, ‘He has made you the best of the women of Banii IsrSil’.” (Al-Thaclabi, (Ara ’ is a f - m j d i s ,p. 373.) y6 Yiisuf b. IsmBcil al-Nabahsni, Al-Sharaf al-Muhbbad fi-d-Muhammad (Cairo, 1961), p. 109. Cf. Abfi al-Futiih RBzi (11th c.) and Rashid Rida (20th c.) as cited in McAuliffe, “Chosen,” Isfurno, VII (1981). 22-23. 97 There are even instances in which similarities between the births of Jesus and (AIT, FHtima’s husband and the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet, are elaborated. One reads, for example, that the mother of (Ali gave birth to him in the Kacba on a night in which there was a bright star that will not occur again. As Jesus was from a pure geneology and from a virgin, so (Ali was from a pure geneology and born in a pure place. As Jesus was born under the blessed tree, so (Ali was born in the blessed Kacba (Muhammad (Arif Mustafa Fahmi, Yasirc al-Masih wa’f-lm6rn(lsa [Cairo, 19711, p. 16.) yx Mahmoud Ayoub, Redemptive Suffering in Islam (The Hague: Mouton, 1978), p. 72. THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION zyx 181 This conjunction between Mary and Fatima has long been part of popular Muslim piety. Hossein Nasr notes that in Syria many Arab women pray through both Mary and Fatima at such occasions as the illness of a child to the point that “the sanctity of Mary and Fatima are related and even identified.”” And one cannot neglect mentioning the designation of the Virgin Mary in the Christian tradition as “Our Lady of Fatima,” after her appearance in 1917 in a little Portuguese village by that name.’O0 Part of the discussion in terms of “priority” between Mary and Fatima has to do with preeminence in the Garden of Paradise. Often it is said that Fatima is the mistress of the women of the Garden except for Mary,’“’ which does little to clarify things, and at other times Eve, Asiya, Mary and Fiitima (Eve here substituted for Khadija) are all put on equal rank in Paradise.’02Farid al-Din (Atgir, perhaps best known of the biographers of the saints of Islam, quotes (Abbas of T u s as saying that when the summons comes for the Day of Resurrection “the first person to set foot in that class of men [persons entering Paradise] will be Mary . . ..”“I3 Shicite persuasions of the preeminence of Fatima as the mistress of the Day of Resurrection notwithstanding, both women clearly play a very important role in popular piety in relation to the reality of the last day.‘w Mary’s miraculous appearances occur also in connection with Fatima. The “mistress of sorrows,” by which name the daughter of the Prophet is known in Shicite tradition,’“’ suffered greatly in the process of a miscarriage. First God is said to have consoled her by saying what he said first to Mary, that he had purified her and chosen her above all women. After Fatima’s intense pains began, God sent Mary to her to console her and to take care of her in this period of extreme illness.’” And in another account both Fatima and Maryam are said to have come to bless the marriage of the twelfth imiim, direct descendant of Fatima and leader of the Ithna (Ashari Shi(ites.I0’ zy zyxwvuts zyxwv zyxwvutsrqp zy zyxwvu zyxwvuts Hossein Nasr, Traditional Islam in the Modern World (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1987). p. 262. Irn Rodriguez, “Mary, the Muslims, and Fatima,” 7he Marian Helpers Bulletin, April-June 1984, pp. 14-15. I”’ Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, 11, 233; 111, 64,80. See the interesting volume by L. Massigon, La Mubahala de Medine et I’Hyperdulie de Fatima (Paris: J. Vrin, 1955), p. 20, in which he notes that in some Shi’ite works FStima is presented as the co-spouse of Maryam in Paradise. Io2 Al-pbari, Jiimic, VI, 393-94. lo’ Cited in Margaret Smith, Riibib the Mystic, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), p. 2. I M That relationship has not been drawn theologically anywhere near as clearly with regard to Mary as it has in the ShiGte tradition with regard to FBtima. Cf., however, the importance of Mary in Eastern Christian eschatological discussions: “Mary’s role is both a historical one and an eschatological one: Historical, in that she gave birth to God in the flesh in time; eschatological, in that proleptically she represents humanity as a whole raised up to its proper relationship to God at the end of time.” Brock, “Mary,” p. 59. ‘as “Weeping for Hussain opens the gates to Paradise, and Fatima, like Mary the mother of Jesus, will intercede for those who shed tears for her son” (Schimmel, Muhammad. p. 20). ’06 Ayoub, Redemptive. p. 239. ’“’Ibid., p219. 182 THE MUSLIM WORLD 6. Mary in relation to Eve. Somewhat more complex than the comparisons between Mary and Fgtirna, though far less numerous, are references that somehow link Mary and the first woman Eve, evidenced above in the story of the three houris appearing to the Prophet’s mother Amina. In some cases a similitude is struck in relation to creation, cited as a defense of the possibility of Mary having given birth to Jesus while a virgin. In such cases Eve and Adam are said to have been created apart from the normal procedures, i.e., at the pure will and discretion of God just as Jesus was created.Io8In other instances the reference is directly to the association of Eve with the origin of evil in the world because of her supposed disobedience. In this sense she is a kind of mirror opposite or antitype of Mary, who is of course the pure and the obedient one.’@Despite the fact that the Qur’anic narratives of Adam and his unnamed mate assign culpability for disobeying God equally to both partners, the ahgdith [sing. hadith] obviously based on Jewish and Christian tradition place blame especially on Eve with the result that certain narratives attribute the cause of menstruation which all women experience directly to her.”O This gives even more significance to the reports of Mary as never having menstruated or suffered the bleeding after childbirth. On a more esoteric level, the link between Mary and Eve is drawn in some mystical interpretations in which Mary is equated, as the prototype of the true believer, with Sophia or wisdom. In a marvelous tribute to the writing of the famous Andalusian mystic entitled Creative Imagination in the Sufism of Ibn (Arabi,”’ Henri Corbin has captured the Sufi’s expression of what he calls the devotis sympathetica. It is Mary who thus holds the sirr al-rubiibiyya, the secret of the divine godhead. As Sophia she is identified as the creative imagination or ‘‘imaginative dignity” (hadrut khayiiliyya), that which forms a link between human and divine. She both veils and reveals God, providing the medium by which he comes into concrete existence in terms of human perception.”’ Corbin then explains the mystical concept of the quaternity of Adam-Eve and Maryam-Jesus. zyxwvuts zy zyxwvut zyxwvu See, e.g., al-QSsimi, TafssSr,p. 4133. Cf. the reference in the apocryphal Gospel of Bartholomew (3:6) in which Peter is said to have told Mary “You made good the transgression of Eve, changing her shame into joy.” Edgar Hennecke, New Tesrament Apocryphah, ed. Wilhelm Schneemelcher (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963). I, 495. See also Robert Murray, “Mary, the Second Eve in the Early Syriac Fathers”, Eastern Churches Review, I11 (1971), 3732-84, in which he quotes such sayings as that of Ephrem in his Diatessaron commentary, “Death entered by the ear of Eve: therefore life entered by the ear of Mary” (p. 374) and of Cyrillona, “The legless serpent crippled Eve; Mary became as feet for her mother” (p. 377). Cf. Brock, “Mary,” p. 57, citing Ephrem (“Hymns on Unleavened Bread” 6:7) as having said that “Mary has given us the bread of rest in place of that bread of toil which Eve provided.” [ l o See Carol Delaney, “The Meaning of Paternity and the Virgin Birth Debate,” Man, XXI, 499, who talks about Turkish villagers believing that women suffer menstruation specifically because of Eve’s disobedience. The background of such belief is clear from traditions that became part of popular Islam in which the Qurhnic figure of Eve underwent very significant interpretation. See Y.Y.Haddad and J. I. Smith, “Eve: Islamic Image of Woman,” Azizah al-Hibri, ed., Women and Islam (Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press, 1982), pp. 135-44. Henri Corbin, Creative Imagination in rhe Sufism oflbn ’Arabi (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969), pp. 136 sqq. Ibid., pp. 145-53. lo* Io9 zy zyxwvut zyx THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 183 In the figure of Mary (Sophia) the feminine principle is invested with the function of creativity. Maryam thus becomes a kind of Adam, and Jesus, created from her, is equated with Corbin reflects that this substitution of the figure of Mary for Eve “announces the ultimate fruition of the dialect of love..”’14And, as the Virgin Mary is identified with Sophia, the soul in which Jesus as the son of the intellect finds birth, so FBtima comes to symbolize the light of the divine through her function as mother of the line of Imams.”s These matters, however, are not the stuff of everyday piety but the philosophical-theosophical imaginings of some of the world’s most spiritually advanced souls. And they find their reflection in much mystical writing in which Mary is taken far beyond the Qur’anic description of a young girl entrusted to the service of the temple and with the motherhood of Jesus. Typical of this genre is the tribute given her by the eleventh-century mystical commentator al-Baqli in his exegesis of S . 1:7: zyxwvuts the substance of Mary is the very substance of original sanctity. Brought up by the Real in the light of intimacy, she is in each of her respirations ‘‘magnetically drawn” by the signs of nearness and intimacy towards the source of the divine lights. She was on the lookout at every instant for the rise of the sun of Power in the east of the Kingdom. She withdrew far from all created beings by her lofty aspiration penetrated with light of the hidden mystery. She turned herself towards the horizon whence flash the gleams of [God’s] Essence and Attributes, “breathing in” the breezes of union blowing from the world of eternity. To her came one of the breezes of the eternal encounter, and upon her rose the sun of the contemplation of holiness. When she had contemplated the manifestation of the orient bursting forth from the eternal, its lights invaded her and its secrets reached the inmost depths of her soul. Her soul conceived by the breath of the hidden mystery. She became the bearer of the Word most high and of the light of the Spirit most lofty. When her state became grandiose by the reflection in it of the zyxwvut zyxwvutsrqp zyxw zyxwv 1 1 3 Ibid., p. 163. “Just as a Feminine had been existentiated by a Masculine without the mediation of a mother, namely, Eve created by Adam and standing in a passive relation to Adam, so it was necessary that a Masculine should be borne by a Feminine without the mediation of a father; and so Jesus was borne by Maryam.” (See Ibn al-(Arabi’s Furtihat, I, 136 [ch. 101, 2:31 and 4:24.) Cf. Hossein Nasr, Knowledge and the Sacred (New York: Crossroads, 1981), p. 142: “Since there is a world which is relative, the root of this world must exist in the principal order itself and this root is none other than the Divine muya which veils and maifests the One upon all planes of reality. She is the Feminine, at once Mary and Eve. Evil issues from the interiorizing activity of maya but Existence which remains pure and good finally prevails over evil as Eve was forgiven for her sins by the spiritual inviolability and victory of Mary.” I l 4 Corbin cites ROmi’s Mathnawi (HI, 3706 sq. and 3771-80) in describing the visit of the angel to Mary, in which he has Gabriel say, “Before my visible Form you flee into the invisible. . . . But truly my hearth and swelling are in the Invisible. . . . 0 Maryam! Look well, for I am a Form difficult to discern. . . . I am like the true dawn, I am the light of your Lord. . . . You take refuge from me, and I am the Refuge” (Crearive, p. 171). ‘ I 5 Nasr, Knowledge, pp. 207-208. 184 zyxwvutsrq zyxw zy THE MUSLIM WORLD beauty manifesting the eternal, she hid herself far from creatures, putting her joy in the nuptials of the Reality.’I6 Here, then, we have at least an initial sketch of some of the ways in which Mary has been viewed by Muslims over the centuries. As one seen to have been pure, obedient, and chosen, she has served as the symbolic justification for everything from unquestioning faith in God’s power and action, to either an affirmation or a denial of the possibility of women as prayer leaders, servants in God’s house or prophets, to a reaffirmation of the impurity of (female) bodily processes. We began with a brief notation of recent common experiences of Muslims and Christians in Egypt witnessing visions of the Virgin. As was evident on the occasion of that vision at Zeituna, dividing lines between the two faith traditions often are blurred in the veneration of Mary. Many Muslim women pray to the Virgin in Christian churches and sanctuaries.”’ Devotion to Mary is evident at shrines visited by members of the two communities in various parts of the Middle East.’I8 Muslims and Christians have even referred in recent times to their reverence for Mary as a means of affirming common ground in the effort to oppose godless Communism. (A high government official in Egypt, whose lineage goes back to the earliest caliphs, reportedly showed with great pride to some visitors in his home an image of Mary on his wall. Not only had he not removed the image, placed there by an earlier inhabitant, but he had specially illuminated it as a symbol of the holy alliance between Christians and Muslims that serves as a vanguard of resistance against atheism.)”’ zyxwv zyxw zyx zyxwvu zyxwvu ‘I6 AI-Baqli, Tufssir, 11, 7, as cited by McCarthy, “Mary,” Mary’s Pluce, p. 205. It is noteworthy that the notion of Mary as the possessor of knowledge of great mysteries is also very much a part of Christian apocryphal literature. See, e.g., the Gospel of Bartholomew (2:4-5): “You, who are highly favored, tabernacle of the Most High, unblemished, we, all the apostles ask you. . . . Tell us how you conceived the incomprehensible, or how you carried him who cannot be carried or how you bore so much greatness. But Mary answered: Do not ask me concerning this mystery. If I begin to tell you, fire will come out of my mouth and consume the whole earth. . . .” Edgar Hennecke, New Tesrment Apocrypha, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963-1966). I, 492. “Et parce que cette devotion se trouve, chez leurs voisins chrttiens, encouragee, dirigee, organisee par une maternelle Eglise, musulmanes et musulmans vont d’instinct aux sanctuaires consacres B Marie s’agenouiller devant ses images, lui amener des malades, se lier par des voeux, ptlerins isolCs ou m&ICsparfous aux foules chrktiennes attitrkes, ignorants des scrupules de commtcnicutio in divinis, avec la candide assurance de la syrophtnicienne se prosternant sous la table du divin Thaumaturge pour manger des miettes des enfants.” Paul M. A. Mulla, “Comment certain milieux islamiques on reage au stimulant de quelques manifestations recentes de la doctrine et de la piit6 concernant la personne privilegiee de Marie mere du Jesus.” Virgo Immacululufu, XVII (Rome: Accademia Mariana Internaz., 1957), 269. See R. Barkai, “Une invocation musulmane au nom de Jesus et du Marie,” Revue de I’Histoire des Religions, CC, 3 (1983), 257-68 in which he translates and discusses a 15th-16th century syncretistic Islamic text said to have been “tcrit par la main de notre maitresse Marie. . . .” (p. 259). Barkai notes that it is a Muslim text which presents the message of Jesus and of Mary as being the principle element of the faith (pp. 259-60). Michael O’Carroll, “Islam”, in Theorokos: A Theological Encyclopedia of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Wilmington, Delware: Michael Glazier, 1982), p. 192. ‘ I 9 Mulla, “Comment certains milieux islamiques,” Virgo Immucululuru, XVII, 270. The author (p. 275) cites various efforts in Turkey to compare the Qur)anic and Biblical versions of Mary as a source of common veneration. THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION zyx zyx 185 Despite the instances of common appreciation of the Virgin at the level of popular piety, however, Christians and Muslims for many centuries have also used her as a vehicle for the expression of their mutual deep mistrust and misunderstanding. ‘’O Mary often has been at the center of polemical controversies between Christians and Muslims. Missionaries and Orientalists have attempted to use the story of Mary to cast doubt on the authenticity of the Prophet Muhammad.’2’ Insofar as Christian veneration of Mary might be seen to carry overtones of recognition of the divinity of her son, it moves into a realm in which common interfaith appreciation is no longer possible. The message of the Qur’iin is an abject denial of the divinity of Jesus.’22 For centuries Christians have tried to read into the Qur’anic passages a reference to Theotokos, mother of God. Catholics continue to believe that her role in the Qur’iin can allow her to serve as a bridge between Christianity and Islam. Some see it as the means of unlocking Muslim resistance to conversion to Christianity. Nil0 Geagea, for example, in a comprehensive study of the figure of Mary in the Qur)iin,lZ3provides a theological commentary on Qur’anic exegesis in the attempt to prove that references to Mary can be interpreted basically as they have been interpreted in the history of Catholic Christianity. In some cases the hope is expressed rather baldly that Mary might serve to lead Muslims to a more Christian perspective, as in Bishop Fulton Sheen’s comment in The World’sFirst Love, “I believe that the Blessed Virgin chose to be known as ‘Our Lady of Fatima’ as a pledge and a sign of hope to the Moslem people, and as an assurance that they, who show her so much respect, will one day accept her Divine Son, Generally, however, the approach suggests rather the attempt to find in Mary a kind of link between the two faith traditions, “a bridge builder between peop l e ~ . ” The ’ ~ ~very name of Nilo Geagea’s aforementioned book, Mary ofthe Ko- zyxw zyx See Norman Daniel, Islam and the West (Edinburgh: University Press, 1960), pp. 175-84, for a detailed study of medieval Christian assessments of the role of Mary in the Q u r h . 1 2 ’ The Q u r h (S. 3:33), for example, identifies Mary with Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron. Christians have cited this as proof that the Q u r h was fabricated by Muhammad in that he clearly confused Aaron’s sister with the mother of Jesus. T. J. O’Shaughnessy in Eschatological Themes in the Qurkin (Manila: Atena de Manila University, 1986), pp. 111-12, notes the possible influence of Muhammad’s Jewish contacts as leading to this confusion, and observes that Mary Magdelene in early Jewish polemical writings was actually called the mother of Jesus. Muslims, of course, have strongly denied this kind of accusation, offering such explanations as the fact that the Q u r h is drawing a similitude between the two or that Mary had a brother called Aaron. (See Abd-el-Jalil, “La vie,” Maria, p. 189): “Quoiqu’il puisse en itre du Coran, il faut s’abstenir d’accuser I’Islam de faire une telle confusion; il faut renoncer B une argumentation facile et vaine et B des insinuations ineffcaces et dCplaisantes.”) Cf. Muhammad ( h a t Darwaza, al-TajsZr al-hadith (Cairo, 1962), 111, 48. Parrinder, Jesus, pp. 134-35, cites in reference to S. 5:116 (“Did you say unto humankind: l i k e me and my mother for two gods besides God?”) the argument that such exaltation of Mary may well refer to a heretical practice in early Arabia. “The Collyridians, an Arabian female sect of the fourth century, offered to Mary cakes of bread (collyrida), as they had done to the great earth mother in pagan times. . . . The Qur)an may well be directed against this heresy.” Nilo Geagea, Mary of the Koran: A meeting Point Between Christianity and Islam (New York: Philosophical Library, 1984). ‘14 Rodriguez, “Mary,” The Marian Helpers Bulletin, April-June, 1984, p. 15. Kroeger, “Mary,” p. 23. He notes that “While there are vast differences separating Muslims and Catholics, Mary is one point of agreement.” zyxwvuts zyxwvutsrqp zyxwvut zyxwvutsr zyxw zyxw 186 THE MUSLIM WORLD ran: A Meeting Point Between Christianity and Islam,gives a strong clue as to his motivations in preparing this material. R. J. McCarthy, in his article “Mary in Islam,” while appropriately cautious about noting the limitations of such efforts as commonality, says that “Mary, though she may not be a touchstone, may well be a stepping-stone.”iz6And on the occasion of Ramadan, 1988, Francis Cardinal Arinze of the Vatican’s Secretariat for Non-Christians addressed a greeting to his Muslim friends whom he called brothers and sisters in God. Over two-thirds of his message dealt with Mary, “the Mother of Jesus, whom both Christians and Muslims-without according her the same role and title-honour as a model for believers. . . .”I2’ Clearly the material presented in this essay is insufficient to draw firm conclusions about the legitimacy or efficacy of such attempts to see Mary as a link, a bridge or a model. It would seem, however, that the extent to which she can profitably serve as this kind of common ground is fairly limited. The role that Mary plays in the Islamic tradition is, in fact, so particular to that tradition that attempts to draw out commonality actually could put in jeopardy the very understanding for which they claim to be seeking. To elaborate direct comparisons is the task of another study. At a very minimum, however, it seems fair to say that unlike what is true of Roman Catholic Christianity, Mary as a person really has nor played an extremely significant part in the history of Islamic thought or, with the exception of Sufi devotion, even in Islamic piety. If it can be granted that Christians have valued Mary specifically for herself, there seems to be a difference to the extent that Islamic tradition has often used her as a kind of foil for making points about human behavior and individual response to God. Marina Warner, for example, identifies Mary’s questioning of the angel Gabriel concerning her pregnancy as the “most precious speech in Mariology, for it implies her innocence and virginity.”’28While Muslims clearly affirm that Mary was innocent and virginal, they have used this protest of Mary’s as the occasion to defend her against charges not only of immoral behavior but of a lack of trust and faith in God. The very defense serves as the occasion to clarify what is, in fact, proper religious response. It is clear that whatever role she may or may not have played in the lives of Muslims, Mary has proved quite useful for contemporary commentators as they prescribe the proper task and role for women. We have seen that in the Islamic tradition Mary has been classed with such figures as Eve, Pharaoh’s wife Asiya, and Fatima. Except for Fiitima, however, these figures are not real in the sense that they have not been a known part of the history of the Islamic community from the time of the Prophet. Persons such as the Prophet’s wives Khadija and (Alisha, as well as his daughter Fatima, are exemplars for ideal womanhood and one finds them invoked with frequency in contemporary writings. The only person with whom Mary is seriously compared zyxwvut zy zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfe McCarthy, “Mary,” Mary’s Place. p. 21 1 . Francis Cardinal Arinze, “Message for the End of Ramadan,” 1988. 128 Warner, Alone, p. 8. 12b zyx zyxwvutsr zyxwvu THE VIRGIN MARY IN ISLAMIC TRADITION 187 (and in fact even put in a kind of competition, no doubt for political-sectarian reasons) is Fatima, and here the comparison is with the supra-natural rather than the human qualities of the Prophet’s daughter. The Fatima who is a role model for women is the pious, suffering, and ultimately human person. And so what of Mary? With the exception of some mystical writings and practice, Mary is not and by definition cannot be a model for human aspiration in Islam because she is clearly recognized, and treated, as unlike anyone else. Whether or not one acknowledges that she had miraculous abilities or even was in a state of perpetual purity (i.e., lack of menstrual or post-partum bleeding), Mary was virginal and thus in fact categorically opposed to the ideal of a Muslim woman whose virginity is prized but ultimately sacrificed to allow her to play the role for which she was created, i.e., wife and mother. The qualities that Mary and Fatima share are those which female Muslims can never achieve-first among women, mistress of the day of judgment, afterdeath visitor, perpetual (in some understandings of FStima) virgin. A Muslim woman now cannot hope to be superior to the women of the world (or even among the very select group of chosen), ultimately pure (i.e., never menstruating), the mother of a prophet (a role others have played but which is no longer a possibility), a prophetess (status that only a few, as we have noted have acknowledged even for Mary), or a worker of miracles. As women are destined to bleed, so they will suffer a periodic state of impurity which will, in the view of most commentators, define them out of the possibility of leadership in a house of worship (a point conveniently made in the discussions about Mary in the temple). Women can, however, be admonished through reference to Mary’s virtue in two limited but very significant ways. While ultimately not pure as she was, they are expected to aspire to this ideal to the extent to which they reserve themselves for their husbands and come to them untouched and undefiled. And as Mary was the embodiment of perfect obedience, Muslim women are enjoined to be obedient not only directly to God, but indirectly through the obedience that they show to the men to whom they are unquestionably responsible. To understand Mary in the Islamic tradition one must look not only at her Qur’anic role but at the ways in which she has been viewed, valued, used, and even overlooked by Muslims. When considerably more ethnographic as well as literary study is undertaken and when more information is available than is presently the case, the scholarly community will be in a better position to formulate its conclusions, and the Christian community to see if Mary indeed might serve as a basis for interfaith understanding. zyxwvu zyxw Iliff School of Theology Denver, Colorado University of Massachusetts Amherst, Massachusetts Jane I. Smith Yvonne Y. Haddad