Coursera, founded in 2012, emerged as one of the pioneering platforms of the MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) movement. Soon, leading universities – Stanford, Princeton, Michigan, Duke and others – joined in and education began to spill beyond campuses into the hands of anyone with an Internet connection. What printing had achieved for the written word, MOOCs began to achieve for university-level learning: expanding the circle of who gets to learn.

But technology did not stop there. While MOOCs delivered information, AI (Artificial Intelligence) began shaping tools that could interact with learners. Unlike a textbook, these tools could respond, adjust, explain, and guide. AI assistants such as ChatGPT represent a moment when

education becomes personalized, flexible, and available at any hour of the day. They are not simply repositories of information – they are companions in thinking.

The roots of ChatGPT lie in a breakthrough known as the Transformer architecture, introduced in 2017 under the title “Attention Is All You Need.” This innovation made possible a family of models – GPT-1, GPT-2, GPT-3 and further – capable of understanding patterns in human language at remarkable depth. Over time, ChatGPT evolved from a single model into a spectrum of specialized assistants, able to analyze, create, and collaborate. (https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models)

Yet the idea that knowledge will one day reach everyone, without distinction, is not new.

A narration attributed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) conveys a striking divine promise:

“God said, ‘In the end of time, I will spread knowledge so widely that men and women, the free and the enslaved, the young and the old – everyone – will have the opportunity to learn.’” (Ibn Abd al-Barr. Jami’ Bayan al-‘Ilm wa Fadlih)

This narration is not found in the authenticated primary sources due to weak chain of narration. It is found in secondary sources; but the fact that renowned scholars like Ibn Abd al-Barr noted it in their works makes it worth pondering over. This wise saying predicts not simply an expansion of education, but a transformation of society. In a world where access to learning has historically been shaped by gender, wealth, age, or social position, these words imagine a future where knowledge becomes universal and where the privilege of learning dissolves into a shared human inheritance.

“Men and women” – a hint that gender will no longer determine who may seek understanding. “The free and the enslaved” – that knowledge will transcend status and economic barriers. “The young and the old” – that learning becomes lifelong, not limited to childhood and youth.

One cannot help but assume that long before our age of digital platforms and AI, a future where learning flows to all corners of society was already being imagined in the ancient world. It is not difficult to see resonances with the present moment: AI tutors on smartphones, open courses from world-class universities, translated materials, adaptive learning systems, and global communities of learners who can study together without ever meeting in person.

From this perspective, AI technology is not an isolated achievement of the 21st century; it is part of a broader human journey toward expanding the horizons of knowledge. And perhaps, as this narration suggests, it is also part of a spiritual journey, one in which the spread of learning reflects a divine mercy extended to all people.

Athlete’s foot is a frequent infection that millions of people suffer from annually. I once had it during my military service where we had to wear boots almost an entire day. Once during a noon intercession, I performed my ablutions to pray and I placed my feet under the sunlight to dry them. I was also hoping that ultraviolet rays from the sun would be good for the infection. Soon, flies swarmed in between my toes. When I could not bear the excessive itching, I tried to kill the flies until I was stopped by a friend who reminded me of the great sage Bediuzzaman’s comments where he called flies “cleaning workers.” At that time, I also remembered Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) words on flies. So, I patiently endured the nuisance, and repeated the same procedure for the next three or four days. Eventually, my feet were healed and there was no trace of the fungi.

In one of his very interesting hadiths, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, is reported to have said the following about flies: “If a fly falls into your drink, dip it into your drink, then throw it away, for on one of its wings is a disease, and on the other is a cure. It dips the wing with the disease to protect itself” [1]. This hadith has been a reason for much controversy mainly due to germ disease theory.  According to Jonathan C. Brown, “even before modern medicine, the Hadith of the Fly was raising skeptical eyebrows and prompting Sunni defensiveness as early as the writings of Ibn Qutayba (d. 276/889)” [2]. Brown also mentions that this hadith “could be false or it could be true, since scientists used the flesh of a snake to help prepare antidotes to its poison” [3].

Before the microscope was invented it was impossible to define microbes or talk about the anatomy or microbiology of flies as we can today. However, the introduction of experimentation and observation as an important scientific method with the Renaissance served as a turning point in Western scientific revolution. Thus, the “proof-based medicine” conception that relies on experimentation and observation emerged as a precursor to today’s medicinal and scientific research. The importance of perceptions that rely on causes relating to the material world in persuading the human mind cannot be denied. It is harder to make people believe in something unless they are provided with concrete results that appeal to our five senses. We should not rush to deny any claim solely based upon our preconceptions and prior knowledge without doing any research about it; rather, we should pass our judgment on it after experimentation and observation.

Some people may automatically reject the idea that when a fly falls in our food or drink that we should immerse this microbe-carrying insect completely and they may say that this would not eliminate the microbes. Indeed, it may sound reasonable to assume that this disgusting insect that feeds on all sorts of dirt would cause only diseases. If you have an ample supply of food or water and if you do not have the stomach for it, you can of course refrain from eating or drinking such a food or drink. But, you can hardly advise someone who has very little water or food in a desert or at the time of famine to throw away what they have because of a fly.

We should examine different types of flies in laboratory settings using the method of experimentation and observation. First of all, it is very difficult to prove that someone can contract an illness from eating food in which a fly had fallen into although he or she had immersed that fly completely in that food. If it is proven that someone becomes ill due to a fly’s alighting in their food, then strong objections can be raised. If it is said that there many diseases caused by flies, no one will deny it. The point is not whether flies carry germs, but whether this advice for being protected from the germs carried by flies is correct or not. As a matter of fact, the advice by the Prophet seeks to protect us from diseases that may be caused by germs carried by flies. The great scholar Bediuzzaman’s words on flies also give us an alternative perspective to consider about these “tiny birds”:

“…Flies are dutiful about cleaning away noxious substances or germs that cause disease. By sucking up and absorbing harmful germs, they destroy them, and they cause noxious or poisonous substances to change into other harmless forms, thus preventing the spread of many contagious diseases. A sign that they are both laborers for health and cleansing operatives and chemists, serving many instances of wisdom, is the fact that they exist in extremely great numbers. For the things that are valuable and beneficial are multiplied.” [4]

The hadith of the Prophet and Bediuzzaman’s commentary encourage us to explore more about flies and whether they can be a source of healing in any way.

Flies are very ubiquitous on earth. There are approximately 125,000 species of flies, but only ten species live in our homes and are of concern to us. They feed on garbage and organic waste materials that act as a breeding ground for microbes such as bacteria, fungi, and viruses. The female fly lays down more than 100 eggs in the dung of some animals or in garbage. After one day, the larva emerges to feed on the surrounding organic materials. In two weeks, they become full-grown flies. In four generations, one female fly can lay 1.5 million eggs, but fortunately the majority die due to weather circumstances or become food for birds, reptiles, amphibians, and other insects. A fly can live for 60 days at most.

Given the ecological balance in nature, one comes to accept that there should be species that will remove all sorts of organic waste, garbage, dead animals or plants, and similar things by eating them. Houseflies feed on the rotting corpses of animals while female horseflies suck blood. How can flies, which act as health workers that are charged with the duty of cleaning the world, digest so many diverse amounts of garbage and waste?

Flies get their nourishment differently from other animals. What other animals do for digestion is done by flies outside their bodies. They do not have teeth-like structures in their mouths in order to chew solid, dry food and therefore have to turn such food into liquid form or split it into 0.45-mm or smaller pieces. In this liquid form, flies can easily suck up their food using their suitably shaped mouths. To do this, flies vomit a saliva-like liquid, containing enzymes and acids, and that disintegrates the solid food into something that can easily be digested in a couple of seconds. In this process, some of the microbes in that waste food can be disintegrated while the rest will be sent to the stomach.

These foods and microbes taken inside in the form of vomit are sent to a sac called a “crop” if they are not small enough to go through the digestive tract. Flies produce fresh saliva regularly during which the vomit moves between their mouths and crops. Eventually, the sufficiently liquefied food is sent to the stomach which contains enzymes and acidic content as well as partially disintegrated microorganisms.

What does scientific research tell us?

Based on the theory that flies must have remarkable antimicrobial defenses and resistance to survive the bacteria from rotting dung, meat, and fruit, a team at the department of biological sciences at Macquarie University in Australia set out to identify those antibacterial properties.

“Our research is a small part of a global research effort for new antibiotics, but we are looking where we believe no one has looked before,” said Joanne Clarke, who presented the group’s findings at the Australian Society for Microbiology Conference in Melbourne.

Clarke’s research showed that flies produce their own antibiotics, and this was tested on four different fly species. Such research may lead to better treatments for human infections from Escherichia coli and other virulent bacteria even, perhaps, Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

Upon preliminary results, a global pharmaceutical company decided to support the research over the next six months by trying to isolate antibiotic compounds from the material collected from the flies. The research team is trying to identify the specific antibacterial compounds. As antibiotics that will eventually be invented and chemically synthesized come from the body surface of flies, not from other fungi or bacteria, it is believed that any gene that gives resistance to microbes will not be easily transferred to pathogens and the new antibiotic form will have longer and more effective treatment duration [5].

Later, Russian doctors had developed interest in this topic and observed that flies contain many substances that can be more effective than traditional medications and certain fly larvae have very strong therapeutic effects [6].

Noting that flies should be kept away from hospitals, Professor Juan Alvarez Bravo at the University of Tokyo expressed his support for such research, saying, “But soon we will witness a rapid treatment for many diseases, which consists of extracts from flies” [7].

Some researchers at Auburn University of the United States discovered a protein in the fly’s saliva which can accelerate the lengthy process of healing wounds and chronic skin cracking. Entomologists Ed and Mary Cupp managed to isolate the protein which houseflies inject into their prey to increase blood flow in the skin of their prey. Mary Cupp and surgeon Steven Swaim demonstrated that surgical incisions, skin ulceration, and diabetic foot lesions treated with solutions that combine antibiotics and this protein heal faster and stronger than incisions treated with antibiotics alone [8, 9].

In another study, it was found that epithelial cells forming the inner layers of the front and back intestines of the fly protect it from the bacteria it swallows thanks to a special cuticular lining, and in this way, bacteria never directly touch the intestinal epithelium and cannot give any damage to it. In this study, it was noted that people nurtured a radical approach to flies and that fly control has been abused for the sake of human health, suggesting that flies may be the source of novel germicides that make use of their antimicrobial digestive enzymes, lysozyme, and antimicrobial peptides [10].

Viruses cause many diseases in cattle, sheep, and birds. These diseases include encephalitis, aphthous fever (foot and mouth diseases), and duck plague which can be transferred to people through infected animals. Some crops such as potatoes, tomatoes, bananas, and sugarcane can also be destroyed by viral infections.

Flies carry the viruses of many diseases which are consequently transferred to man’s food, drink, and body. Of these viral diseases are common flu, measles, mumps, chickenpox, warts, yellow fever, infectious liver diseases, some cases of paralysis, some types of cancer, and some chronic diseases of the central nervous system.

El-Naggar, Zaghloul, from Egypt, indicates that some of the disease-causing viruses may directly infect living beings and cause damage to their cells, while there is a type of virus which infects bacteria cells known as “bacteriophage.” These viruses, which can kill the bacteria they infect in a short time, are known as “virulent bacteriophage.” Those viruses that do not kill the bacteria they infect are called “temperate bacteriophage” [11].

After a bacteriophage infects a bacterium, more than 100 viruses are released from that bacterium and each of these viruses can infect new bacteria. The spreading of infection may continue until all vulnerable bacteria cells die. After it was discovered that bacteriophages are parasites of bacteria, they started to be used in treating the diseases caused by bacteria. However, their use in this manner declined after the discovery of antibiotics. Yet, the interest in phage treatment was revived after the emergence of bacterial resistance to antibiotics [12].

Researchers from Stanford University announced that they found a substance in flies that can improve the human immune system [13].

The work by Rehab Mohammed Atta from the Microbiology and Immunology Department, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt, is quite remarkable [14]. In this research, the extracts taken separately from the left and right wings of flies were used against the bacteria and fungi calculated on nutrient “agar” media in the laboratory. It was demonstrated there was both bacterial and fungal growth for the left wing extract plates while no bacterial or fungal growth was reported for the right ones.

Given the fact that the garbage and rotting corpses on which flies feed from contain numerous dangerous bacteria, it is quite reasonable that it contains antibacterial materials necessary for its survival. In this case, the fly’s needs might be of service as sources of antibiotics that can prevent epidemics among human beings, and this may be the reason why they were created in the first place: not to be a source of nuisance but a source of healing for us.

Aj-Taili, et al., from the department of medical microbiology, Qassim University in Saudi Arabia, conducted an experiment using water, honey, and various fruit juices in different cups. They found no germ in the solution in which the whole body of fly was immersed while the solution in which only one wing of the fly was dipped indicated the presence of germs [15].

In sum, we can say that antibacterial materials produced in the bodies of flies protect them against the microbes in their environments and that these microbes can prevent epidemics among human beings. At the very least, this topic deserves in-depth research. Atta’s study confirms the virtue of the hadith that says, “The best way to release this vital antidote is to dip the fly in a liquid because these substances are concentrated on the outer surface of the fly body and wing.” Abduldaem al-Kaheel refers to this study in his website: “This is logical because the fly has a lot of harmful bacteria on the outside of her body and therefore in order to continue in her life, it should also carry anti-bacterial materials; these materials were furnished by God to protect it from viruses and diseases.” In the light of these studies, the need for conducting more research for obtaining antibiotics from the right wing of the fly is clear [16].

References

1. Abu Dawud, At’imah, 49. Also see Bukhari, Tib, 57, Bed’u al-Khalk 17; Ibn Majah, Tib, 31, Nasa’i, Far’, 11.
2. Brown, Jonathan A. C. 2009. Hadith: Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World, p. 264.
3. Ibid. p. 255.
4. Nursi, Bediuzzaman Said. 2008. The Gleams. The Light, Inc. p. 376.
5. Danny Kingsley, ABC Science Online, 1 October 2002, The new buzz on antibiotics. Clarke, J., Gillings, M. and Beattie, A. (2002). Hypothesis-driven drug discovery. Microbiology Australia, pp. 8–10.
6. Petersburg State University, (2006). The fly effect: Russian Scientists Invent new medicine with the help of flies.
7. Bravo, J. A. (1994). The ointment in the fly: antibiotics. New antibiotic derived from a common fly. The Economist (US).
8. Ed and Mary Cupp (2005). Protein in Fly Saliva Speeds Healing of Incisions Wounds. Auburn University. R Am Ex Ars Medica, Inc., 7:23.
9. Protein in Fly Saliva Speeds Healing of Incisions, Wounds 20-Jan-2005. www.newswise.com/articles/protein-in-fly-saliva-speeds-healing-of-incisions-wounds
10. Nayduch, D. and Burrus, R.G. (2017). Flourishing in Filth: House Fly–Microbe Interactions Across Life History. Special Collection: Filth Fly–Microbe Interactions. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 2017, Vol. 110, No. 1.
11. El-Naggar, Zaghloul, (2010). Housefly Falls into One’s Drink! 09 September 2010. www.quranandscience.com/quran-science/sunnah-science/204-housefly-falls-into-ones-drink-274
12. Aydogan, D.Y., Hadimli, H.H. (2016). Bakteriyofaj Tedavisi (Bacteriophage Treatment), Etlik Vet. Mikrobiyol. Derg.; 27 (1): 38–47.
13. Stanford University Medical Center, 2007. Fruit Fly Insight Could Lead to New Vaccines. Science Daily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070308220904.htm
14. Atta, R. M. (2014): Microbiological Studies on Fly Wings (Musca domestica) Where Disease and Treat. World Journal of Medical Sciences 11 (4): 486–489.
15. Aj-Taili, S.I., A.A.R. Al-Misnid and K.D. Al-Uteybi, (2002). Wing One and the Other Disease Carrying the Cure. Qassim University. Danny Kingsley.
16. Abduldaem al-Kaheel, 1995. New facts: fly have a cure, www.kaheel7.com/eng.

Especially after the 1950s, divergent thinking has been studied a lot by psychologists. Innovations, discoveries and novelties have been associated with divergent thinking which intrigued the scholars in the fields of management, military and advertisement, as well as psychology and education. However, we lack studies that link the concept of divergent thinking to religious texts. One basic contribution of employing divergent thinking to religious texts would be to broaden the understanding of the texts and to seek alternative perspectives. Such endeavor seems consistent with the consideration that religion (hence, religious texts) is an everlasting source of wisdom and inspiration, and if so, why is it confined to the early interpretations? Why not become seekers of original interpreters of religious texts and discover the unveiled aspects of it? This article will discuss the perspective from psychology and religious texts to find an answer for these questions in the case of Islam.

Among the several views on divergent thinking, a brief psychological framework that can be applied to religious texts would be helpful. This framework was conceptualized by Donald Campbell (1960). According to this, in order for original ideas to appear, the initial task would be thinking in various ways. This phase is called “blind variation.” Think of the question “List possible uses of a brick.” Possible answers to such prompts would be “build a wall,” “break into pieces,” “step on it to reach something” or “use as a pillow.” Among those responses, the first one (“build a wall”) would be a conventional response while the second, third and fourth responses are non-conventional or original ideas. However, the fourth one “use as a pillow” does not seem to be an appropriate or useful response even though it is original. Therefore, appropriateness and originality may not go hand in hand and such original but non-useful and inappropriate ideas should be filtered out. This phase is called “selective retention” which makes the process of divergent thinking more valid and a functional way of idea generation. When we apply this two-stage method of idea generation to the field of theology, verse(s) of the spiritual texts could be regarded as prompts to ponder systematically.

Two basic approaches to religions should be recalled here. One school of thought, known as orthodoxy, refers to adherence to traditional and established views on the texts. Because of the persistence on the traditional views, orthodoxy was regarded in relation to dogmatism and accused of lacking originality (Shedd, 1893). Heterodoxy implies a departure from the established and traditional views of orthodoxy. Apparently, this article does not favor a strict orthodoxy as it does not add new perspectives to our understanding of the religions. On the other hand, the extent of departure which is not at odds with the general framework of a given religion is of interest. Given the two aspects of divergent thinking (blind variation and selective retention) discussed above, generation of original ideas and novel inspirations from the religious texts can be theoretically achieved without deviating from the given frameworks of the religions.

Divergent thinking for religious texts

If one thinks of religious texts of the monotheistic religions, Biblical Judaism goes back to 4th century BCE; Christianity has a history of more than two millennium. Islam, being the recent religion, has a history of 15 centuries. The texts are obviously old and for an academic field of study, there is an enormous amount of knowledge accumulated throughout the centuries by many scholars. On the other hand, those deeply rooted traditions have created their own ways of understanding which contributed to the convergence and contraction of the interpretations. Even though converging perspectives might yield more accurate interpretations, it is still possible that many subtle or alternative aspects of religious texts have probably been ignored or not yet discovered.

As time goes by, the discrepancy between the interpretation of human beings and the original texts have increased with excessive amounts of the interpretations masking the divine message of the original texts. Interpretations converged and shrank even more since new generations were simply taught what the early generations have understood instead of being encouraged to generate new meanings. The natural transmission of religious knowledge survived for centuries. Yet, it is possible to put forward that convergent thinking has been overwhelmingly weighted in the field of theology as in other fields for the purpose of finding the single best interpretation of religious texts. We owe current level of knowledge to those scholars with a divergent mind who intervened in the process of religious thinking and teaching, and enlarged the horizons of religious thought.

As a matter of fact, older interpretations of religious texts may not always be compatible with the problems and needs of contemporary life. Since the life conditions and the intellectual climate (or zeitgeist) have dramatically changed and today’s intellectuals are educated in a different mindset which separate religious thought and scientific/philosophical issues into two distinct categories, arguments of theologians have become less convincing than they used to be. Critically, this insufficiency has been attributed to the religion itself such as “opiate of the masses” rather than the religious scholars who are unable to reproduce the religious thinking in contemporary ages without removing it from its fundamentals or simply attempting to reform it. For a theologian who believes in the idea that the role and mission of religion never ends and the religion is able to guide human beings eternally, being satisfied with the traditional views and taken-for-granted interpretations should not suffice. Indeed, the attempt to inquire new ways of interpretations of the scriptures does not necessarily negate the previous interpretations because they had validity under certain conditions in the past, and can explain today to a considerable degree. In other words, employment of divergent thinking in understanding the texts should aim to enrich and widen perspectives of the individuals rather than replacing the current views and reforming the religions.

The contribution of divergent thinking to religions can be seen in the works of scholars who came up with divergent interpretations to the texts. Richness in their interpretations without imposing necessarily one unique truth provides the readers with room for elaborating on the texts and interpretations. This attitude helps people to diverge their thinking and even go beyond what they literally see in the texts.

Some examples

There are many examples of divergent interpretation in the works of Said Nursi who is a prominent twentieth century Muslim scholar. One of the foremost features of Nursi is his approach to questions, verses of Qur’an and hadiths (collection of writings that document the sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him) in multiple ways. For example, Nursi has shown several ways to interpret one hadith about cosmology:

People asked the Prophet what the earth rests upon. He replied that the earth rests upon a fish and another time upon an ox. This hadith has been discredited given the cosmology knowledge of human beings when it is taken literally. However, alternative explanations of the hadith show how some allegoric statements in the religious texts can be understood. His first interpretation was about the angels created by God who are responsible for every creation in the universe called as “commissioned angels.”

Two angels were created for the earth. Their names were “thawr” (meaning ox) and ‘hut’ (meaning fish). With that in mind, this verse means that the earth would not survive if these angels did not take care of it.

Another interpretation was related to the way people make their living. Especially in the past, people were making their living through farming and hunting. Ox represents the farming and fish represents hunting. The third interpretation is based on the different answers given at different times. According to this interpretation, the earth was on particular cosmological position or horoscope. Nursi also argued that this kind of response is legitimate because people at that time would not understand the complexity of the cosmology and the Prophet told them the truth in a way they would understand.

Another such example that Nursi interprets by going beyond its literal meaning is the verse about Moses (peace be upon him):

Again (remember) when Moses (on an occasion when his people were without water in the desert) beseeched water for his people, so We told him: “Strike the rock with your staff!” (As soon as he struck) there gushed forth from it twelve springs. Each tribe knew their drinking place. Eat and drink of that which God has provided, and do not go about acting wickedly on earth, causing disorder and corruption. (Qur’an 2:60)

According to Nursi, this verse prophesized the discovery of sounding underground to get water. This explanation is legitimate given the context that the solution is suggested “miraculously” after the people asked help from Moses for their need for water.

Nursi, as a divergent thinker, viewed the miracles in the Qur’an in a different way than others. In classical view, the extraordinary events that take place in Qur’an were indicative of the strength that God has granted some special people in history. Nursi did not restrict those verses within this view. According to him, those verses conveyed a more critical message for us as well as their message in their own contexts. The extraordinary events that happened in the past also indicate the ultimate level human beings can arrive at by working hard on sciences. This message of the miracles is the possibility that other people who work hard on understanding the rules of the nature designed by God could also achieve what have been wondrously achieved before. Therefore, those miracles that the Qur’an mentioned are not some stories that should solely bewilder, but call human beings to go beyond their limited knowledge and discover the further facts. If every technology that we take for granted was some sort of a miracle in the past, why not chase the new “miracles” by thinking outside of the box? As a result, the miracles in the Qur’an are more than the stories of unexplainable events. Such subtle messages however, are read only by divergent minds that transcend the cursory meanings.

There are many examples which scientific advances uncovered alternative interpretations of texts. The Fountain readers are very lucky to brainstorm novel interpretations. One example of divergent explanations about the verses of Holy Qur’an is the description of creation of iron. In one issue several years back Nuh Gedik (2006) brought an interesting comment on the 25th verse of Sura Hadid: “…And We sent down Iron, in which is great might, as well as many benefits for mankind….” Scholars used to interpret “sending down” the iron as one of the God-sent blessings coming from above, His supreme treasure consisting of everything. “Sending down” is taken as metaphorical, reflecting the relationship (status) between human beings and God, rather than its literal meaning. Even though this interpretation might be correct, Gedik argued that being “physically sent down from the sky miraculously points out to a very important scientific fact that was discovered only very recently” (Gedik, 2006).

According to Gedik, supernova explosions that create very high energy and heat can allow a heavy element like iron to form. According to this scenario, formation of iron can be attributed to supernova explosions that occur in Space and “sent down” on earth rather than the scenario that presumes iron resides under the soil as a consequence of some chemical reactions. While these two scenarios do not necessarily conflict, the former and more recent one gives birth to another interpretation.

The same verse inspired other divergent minds too. Salih S. Duran (2009) explained another mechanism that results in the “sending down” of iron. According to this argument, desert sands in varied magnitude travels on the air and are hanged on the atmosphere where the miraculous chemical reactions that reduce Fe+3 to Fe+2 are fulfilled with the help of water vapor and sun. Eventually, resultant iron materials are descended to earth with the rains. Those two novel explanations are neither the best nor the ultimate perspectives, but are worth considering while reading the Qur’an.

Limitations

More examples can be found, but a critical question still remains to be answered: Can we come up with any interpretation for the verses? Are there limitations to interpret the verses? The answer for these questions lies in the perspective that is provided in the beginning of this article where I discussed the processes of blind variation and selective retention. Religions (specifically Islam in the scope of this article) have basic belief systems and the understanding of the verses and hadiths have to be understood in accordance with this basic structure. For this reason, some original interpretations may not be the valid interpretations. In fact, Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, warned “Whoever explains the Qur’an according to his [wrong] personal opinion shall take his place in Hell.” Some experts who focused on the outward meanings of the Qur’an have argued that this hadith prohibits personal interpretations at all, and understanding and interpreting Qur’an should merely rely on early interpretations like those of Ibn Abbas and other exegetes. Quasam (1982) outlined Al-Gazali’s theory regarding the recitation and interpretation of the Qur’an where he objected to the interpretation of this hadith as evidence negating the attempts to make new interpretations. He argued that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, also said that “Surely the Qur’an has an outward aspect, inward aspect, a limit and a prelude.” If there is an inward aspect, how can we achieve to learn it? Assuming that early interpretations have covered all possible meanings contradicts with the presence of inward aspect. If the outward meaning is clear and enough, and there is no need to seek anything new in it, why did Ali, the fourth caliph, say “If I so will I can certainly load seventy camels with the exegesis of the Opening Sura (chapter) of the Book” while this chapter is very short? Then the question is, how can we reconcile those hadiths which seem to conflict with each other?

Al-Gazali argued that this hadith actually prohibits the interpretations which aim to adduce arguments that favor interpreters’ own purposes or passions whether it is a valid purpose or not. With such incentive, the interpretation is simply corrupt rather than a personal effort to understand the Qur’an. A second reason is to prohibit those who try to interpret the Qur’an without any fundamental knowledge of the Qur’an and Arabic language which are necessary for the outward aspects. Therefore, this hadith should be seen as a warning for the appropriateness of the interpretations. Now, the nature of divergent thinking as suggested by Campbell (1960) should be recalled. Even though developing several meanings of the religious texts corresponding to blind variation is critical, it should be tested within the overall framework of the religions which is the criterion for the stage of selective retention.

To conclude, divergent thinking is one of the promising abilities of human intellect that many fields like education, psychology, management and military have utilized. However, the need for divergent thinkers is increased in the era which people cannot appreciate the intellectual depth in religious texts. Different and legitimate interpretations of religious texts will reform people’s minds regarding the potential in the old texts for our civilization and intellectual life. Contributions of Islamic scholars like Said Nursi should encourage other divergent minds for new inspirations and state-of-art perspectives.

Zekeriya Ozsoy is doctoral student studying educational psychology. For correspondence with the author: ozsoyzekeriya@gmail.com.

References

• Quasem, A. M. 1982. The recitation and interpretation of the Qurān. Al-Ghazālī’s theory. London: Kegan Paul International
• Duran, S. S. 2009. Iron: A boon that comes with desert sands. [Turkish-Col kumuyla gelen nimet: Demir]. Sizinti, 369, 454-457.
• Guilford, J. P. 1950. Creativity. American Psychologist. 5, 444-454.
• Gedik, N. 2006. Supernova Explosions and a Miracle of the Qur’an. Fountain, 54,
• Shedd, W.G.T. 1893. Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy. New York: Scribner’s Sons.
• At-Tirmidhi, Sunan, Tafsir, 1.

Mary was given her name by her mother. Her name has been said to mean “the one who does not want, one who departs” or “the servant,” but the opinion that the name Mary means “one who worships” in the Aramaic language1 seems more suitable.

The guardianship of Zachariah

Mary’s honorable family upbringing, the fact that she was a chosen person, and her many outstanding virtues are emphasized frequently in both the Qur’an and hadith. However, the verses of the Qur’an alone are more than sufficient to explain her superiority as a woman. Firstly, she came from an honorable family, a father as noble as Imran and a mother so memorable and devoted that her prayers were accepted by God. Mary was the fruit of a devoted mother’s prayer and because of her oath she was entrusted to a holy sanctuary at a very young age.

When her father Imran died,2 Mary was still only a young girl and many asked for the honorable duty of her guardianship, but this duty was bestowed upon Prophet Zachariah3 in an event that was revealed in the Holy Qur’an: “(O Messenger:) that is of the tidings of the things of the unseen (the things that took place in the past and have remained hidden from people with all their truth), which We reveal to you, for you were not present with them when they drew lots with their pens about who should have charge of Mary; nor were you present with them when they were disputing (about the matter)” (Al Imran 3:44). The Qur’anic verse which describes how Mary’s sustenance comes to her is immediately followed by a supplication from Zachariah that clearly indicates that he was growing old and was slowly becoming incapable of looking after Mary adequately. This is the most likely reason for the weak reports claiming that the person who was blessed with her guardianship was a priest called Juraich4 or a member of her family called Joseph,5 but these reports have no authority, for God revealed in the Qur’an that Mary was living under the education and care of Zachariah.6

Mary was blessed with sustenance from God

Zachariah made Mary a sanctuary7 in the temple so she could be more occupied with daily worship.8 During the period that Mary lived at the temple under the guidance of Zachariah, she was exceptionally blessed with sustenance from God. The Qur’an informs us that every time Zachariah went to see Mary, there would be lovely fruits in her room: “Whenever Zachariah went in to her in the Sanctuary, he found her provided with food. ‘Mary,’ he asked, ‘how does this come to you?’ ‘From God,’ she answered. Truly God provides to whomever He wills without reckoning”(Al Imran 3:37).9 It is also known that after giving birth to baby Jesus, she was miraculously provided with the blessing of fresh dates and water. A similar event is reported for Fatima, the Prophet Muhammad’s daughter.10

There is no information about Mary’s life before the angel came giving Mary the glad tidings of Jesus’s birth. But the books of Apocrypha (accounts rejected by the Church) convey the blessing of sustenance bestowed upon Mary. However, the Apocrypha give some information about the earlier period of Mary’s life, including predictions as to where she was born and even estimations regarding the date of her birth. The Protoevangelium, one of the books of Apocrypha, contains some additional information which is not found in the canonical scriptures (those accepted by the Church).

The Sanctuary and sense of servitude

While she increased her worship with every day that passed, the period that Mary was under the care of Zachariah continued with God’s special protection and sustenance. This particular characteristic is mentioned in the Qur’an: “And (in due time came the moment) when the angels said: “Mary, God has chosen you and made you pure, and exalted you above all the women in the world. “Mary, be devoutly obedient to your Lord, prostrate and bow (in the Prayer and devotion to Him) with those who bow!”(Al Imran 3:42–43).11

The words of the Creator’s purification of Mary-“God’s purification”-have been interpreted in various ways as referring to spiritual, moral, or physical purification. Some said that this means “purification from disbelief and sin,” while others claim this means “purification from menses following birth, all kinds of physical defect and contact with males,” and most scholars say the words “chosen above women of all nations” refers to all the women of her era,12 and though the physical actions of worship are stressed in this verse, more important is the fact that Mary abided by both the command of worship, “be devoutly obedient to your Lord, prostrate and bow (in the Prayer and devotion to Him) with those who bow!” and the spirit of worship deep in her soul: “And also Mary, the daughter of ‘Imran, who kept herself chaste (body and soul), so We breathed into it out of Our Spirit, and who affirmed the truth of the words of her Lord, and His Books; and she was of those devoutly obedient to God” (At-Tahrim 66:12).

The Qur’an also bears witness to Mary being a woman of “truth”13 in many verses.

Mary’s superiority to all women

The verse in the Qur’an about Mary being superior to all other women (Al Imran 3:42–43) has been referred to in most commentaries as well as various reports of hadith found in the Tisa Qutubi. About the many virtues of Mary, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said:

1. “The best of the women in the world is Mary (in her lifetime),14 and the best of the women in the world is Khadijah (in her lifetime).” (Bukhari, Muslim)

2. “Many among men attained perfection, but among women none attained perfection except Mary the daughter of Imran, and Asiya the wife of Pharaoh; and the superiority of Aisha to other women is like the superiority of Tharid (an Arabic dish) to other meals.” (Bukhari, Muslim)

3. “There is no new-born except that (at the moment of birth) Satan disturbs him, so he begins to cry from Satan’s disturbance with the exception of the son of Mary and his mother.” (Bukhari, Muslim)

4. “Of all the women in the universe, four would suffice (as an example for others): Mary, Asiya, Khadija, and Fatima.” (Tirmidhi, Ahmad b. Hanbal)

5. “The best of the women of Paradise are Khadijah, Fatima, Asiya and Mary.” (Ahmad b. Hanbal)

6. “Fatima is the leader of the women of Paradise after Mary.” (Tirmidhi, Ahmad b. Hanbal)

7. “The best women among the camel riders, are the women of Quraish.” (Another narrator said) The Prophet said, “The righteous among the women of Quraish are those who are kind to their young ones and who look after their husband’s property,” (Bukhari, Muslim) and this hadith is followed up in many cases by a report from Abu Hurairah who said, “Mary the daughter of Imran never rode a camel,” stressing the virtues of Mary. According to Imam Nawawi and Ibn Hajar, Abu Hurairah’s aim was not actually to stress the fact that Mary never rode a camel but was just an expression of his praise of Mary’s virtues,15 or another explanation of these words could be, “It does not mean that a woman who rides a camel is righteous because Mary was a righteous woman even though she never rode a camel.”

As we see from these hadith the interpreters and scholars have varying opinions on the order of arrangement of the superiority of these women, but the most interesting aspect of these hadith is that although the other names may change, Mary is the only person who is mentioned in all the given examples of these hadith, and this should be sufficient to show her unmatched excellence.

Mary’s being among the Prophets

The narrations stated above have led some scholars to believe that there is a possibility of the existence of female prophets. There has been various opinions supporting the idea that female prophets may have been sent and asking whether Mary the mother of Jesus was a Prophet or not. The opinion of scholars who believe Mary may have been a Prophet is based on the fact that Mary’s name is mentioned in the Qur’an among the Prophets: “Those were some of the Prophets on whom God did bestow his grace of the posterity of Adam and of those whom we carried (in the Ark) with Noah and of the posterity of Abraham and Israel-of those we guided and chose”(Mary 19:58), and also on the angel bringing the revelation of tidings and the benevolence provided to Mary from the creator, and the fact that she was a chosen person above all women purified through the grace of God as a “woman of perfection,” and “leader in Paradise”16 all led these scholars to believe that Mary could possibly be a messenger. However, the general opinion accepted by most scholars is that women were not sent to the world as prophets.17

There are some Christian theologians who claim that Mary was a prophet. The Christian opinion in general is that she was superior to other women and saints but not superior to Jesus. Mary has been widely praised in Christian literature for her obedience, patience, modesty, piety, faith, hope, compassion, dignity and many other virtues.

Mary: the monument of chastity

The Qur’an clearly explains in this verse how Mary conceived Jesus:

And (remember) when the angels said: “Mary, God gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him, to be called the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary” highly honored in the world and the Hereafter, and one of those near-stationed to God. He will speak to people in the cradle and in manhood, and he is of the righteous. “Lord,” said Mary, “how shall I have a son seeing no mortal has ever touched me?” “That is how it is,” he (the Spirit who appeared before her) said, (quoting God): “God creates whatever He wills; when He decrees a thing, He does but say to it ‘Be!’ and it is.”(Al Imran 3:45–47)

The chapter Mary (19:16–33) of the Qur’an gives an extensive version of the conception, the birth and the events that followed the birth of baby Jesus. Furthermore, God the Almighty reveals how He located Mary and her son Jesus, whom He sent as an example to humans, in a prosperous place on high land with flowing streams and bestowed upon Jesus the divine benevolence He had bestowed upon his mother: “O Jesus son of Mary! O Jesus, son of Mary! Remember My favor upon you and upon your mother” (Al-Maeda 5:110).

There are various reports and comments specifically referring to Mary’s conception of Jesus and the miraculous birth in the interpretations and explanations of hadith which exceed the limits of this article. The embryologic phase of Mary’s pregnancy was just like any other pregnant woman: she conceived, the baby grew in her womb, and when the contractions began she made her way to the vicinity of the date tree behind a flowing stream and then gave birth. But how did the pregnancy and this embryological process actually begin? This question resembles a parcel holding the mysteries of this miraculous event.

So in brief, Mary was a true monument of chastity and, even though she was a virgin, conceived in a miraculous way. The fact that Mary guarded both her dignity and chastity is emphasized in the following verses of the Qur’an:

“And (mention) that blessed woman who set the best example in guarding her chastity. We breathed into her out of Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a miraculous sign (of Our Power and matchless way of doing things) for all the worlds.” (Al-Anbiya 21–91), “And also Mary, the daughter of Imran, who kept herself chaste (body and soul), so We breathed into it out of Our Spirit, and who affirmed the truth of the words of her Lord, and His Books; and she was of those devoutly obedient to God.” (At-Tahrim 66:12).

As a matter of fact, the Qur’an tells us that great disaster and punishment await those who speak unfavorably about Mary, for whatever they say against her chastity and dignity is slander, and their hearts are sealed to faith.

Mary’s death and burial

There is no account in the Qur’an or hadith of Mary’s death or burial, so details and information related to the topic are generally based on Christian sources or historical literature. Not included in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke), Mary’s attending the miracle of Cana (John 2:11) and the event of the crucifix (John 19:25–27) were only reported in the book of John; she prayed with Jesus and his disciples in the Acts (1:14) following his resurrection, but there is no mention of the remaining period of her life, her death, age, or appearance in any of the gospels.

It is estimated that Mary must have been around fifty years old at the time of Jesus’ passing and there are varying reports regarding her own death; some say she was fifty-six, while there are other reports of her being seventy or even seventy-two. The questions of where and how she died have been topics of discussion and dispute for centuries, but the fact that she carried on throughout her life in sincere devotion and worship of God is much more suitable for her general profile.

Although there is no information on Mary’s place of burial in Christian sources, there are different views. Some say she was buried in Jerusalem, whereas others say it could have been in Ephesus or Antioch. Although there is no specific grave associated with Mary in Ephesus, there are graves said to be that of Mary which are in churches, one in the Jehosaphat valley between the Mount of Olives and Mount Temple and another in Gethsemani. There are some claims that her grave is on the mountain of Sion, and a Syrian history writer claims that her grave is situated in Al-Faradis in Damascus.18

Notes

1. Zamahshari, I, 142; Bagawi, I, 295; Baydawi, II, 31.

2. Hakim, Mustadrak II, 646; Tabari, III, 235; Zamahshari, I, 142.

3. See Al Imran 3:37, 44. Also Ibn Hisham, III, 121; Tabari, III, 242-244.

4. Ibn Hisham, III, 121.

5. Ibn Kathir, Bidayah II, 68; Alusi, III, 165, XVI, 80.

6. See Al Imran 3:37. Also see: Tabari, III, 242-244; Qurtubi, IV, 71-86.

7. Mihrab is the original Qur’anic word. A bit different than its meaning today, mihrab in this context refers to a place “where one lives and prays, a most honorable place, where one strives against the carnal self.”

8. Tabari, III, 245; Wahidi, I, 208; Baydawi, II, 34.

9. See also Tabari, III, 244-246; Baqawi, I, 297; Fahruddin ar-Razi, VI, 283.

10. Zamahshari, I, 143; Ibn Kathir, I, 361.

11. See also New Testament, Luke 1:26–28; 41–42.

12. Tabari, III, 262-264; Vahidi, I, 210.

13. Al- Maidah 5:75. The word “Truth” means trustworthy, of truthful speech pious in faith and religion. Ibn Manzur, “s-d-k” (X, 193)

14. Scholars like Qadi Iyaz and Qurtubi understood the meaning of these words as “superior to all women on the earth.”

15. Navawi, XVI, 80; Ibn Hajar, VI, 473-474, IX, 125.

16. Navawi, XV, 198; Ayni, XV, 308.

17. Navawi, XV, 198; Baydawi, II, 38; Ibn Kathir, II, 82; Ayni, XV, 308. Those who support this view usually refer to this verse: “We did not send before you as Messengers any but men to whom We revealed, from amongst the people of the townships (where We raised them)” (Yusuf 12:109).

18. Ibn Asakir, Tarih al-Dimashk II, 337, 411.

A being that covers half the remaining distance with every step can reach its destination only if it can walk for infinity. When the ability to walk is limited, irrespective of the length of the steps taken, one will only be able to cover half the remaining distance, not the entire distance. In other words, there will always be a distance that remains to be covered. To cover more than half would be nothing less than attempting the impossible, because no being lives long enough to do this. With every step that the being moves forward it can only cover half the distance between the location and the destination.

In the light of this mathematical perspective, we can analyze the deeds we carry out and the steps that we have already taken, and those that we will take in our journey through life that is to be carried out towards God. I wonder if the steps we have already taken are enough to acquire His love and consent at the end of the journey. Answering this question in a conclusive way is difficult, because in the end this situation depends on God’s will. Moreover, God informed us of what needs to be done when he sent the Prophets and Books. Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, encouraged us to increase our steps in one of his hadith: “He whose two days are equal is at a loss.” As life passes by, we may be satisfied with our performance so far and we may be sure that we will reach our goal, but if our steps which we make for the sake of God are abating, then we are deceiving ourselves. After some time, our steps become so small as to disappear and it becomes impossible to attain our goals. There is no doubt that such a break in our actions creates a lack of progress, and this in turn induces us to take no further steps. In this saying the Prophet, peace be upon him, highlights this danger and advises us to take more steps than the day before.

In another hadith qudsi (a saying uttered by the Prophet but the meaning of which belongs to God) related to the subject, the Prophet describes how to acquire God’s love in the following manner:

“My servant draws not near to Me with anything more loved by Me than the religious duties I have enjoined upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his hearing with which he hears, his seeing with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes and his foot with which he walks. (I protect her/him from hearing, looking at, touching forbidden things and walking on the wrong path.” (Bukhari, Tawhid, 15)

Certainly, there are occasions when we become so enthusiastic that we lose ourselves in the desire to gain the consent of God and to be reunited with God. On special days and nights and at holy times, we push ourselves; at such times we might perform supererogatory prayers. We hope that God the Almighty accepts these prayers; but if this worship is short-lived, it will not be enough to help us reach our goal. As we can understand from the above hadith, what is important is that prayers are constant. In another hadith, the narrator Abdullah bin Amr bin As reports that our Prophet, peace be upon him, told him “O Abdullah! Do not be like such and such a person who used to pray during the nights but gave up later” (Bukhari-Muslim). Again, according to a narration by Aisha, the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, carried out twelve cycles of prayer to compensate a night in which he had been unable to pray because of pain or some other reason (Muslim).

All of this shows us how important it is to be steadfast in prayer. Taking control of one’s carnal self, the believer should walk toward God with constant steps. To attain the prosperity of the servant described in the above hadith qudsi, a person should make obligatory and supererogatory prayers a habit. Although sometimes the carnal self, nafs, and the Devil try to imprison one in hopelessness, the believer should do whatever they can in order not to lose their zeal and enthusiasm. Even if, from time to time, they stumble or fall, they should never fall into a whirlpool of despair and should not be overcome by pessimism. Thoughts about the brevity of their steps or the inadequacy of their worship should never slow the servant down nor should they be a reason for the servant turning back on the road to which they have devoted their lives. We should not forget that “our Lords’ most beloved worship is the one that is consistent, even if it is small.”

For many, math is the most difficult class. Is it because of our own laziness, or is much math too abstract to comprehend? Ali Unver says, “educators who see the beauty at the center of mathematics and can make their students see it that way, are more likely to be able to get their students’ attention and teach them more effectively.” He explains in “Mathematics and the Universe” that mathematics is not only for keeping track of our checkbooks.

Mary and Jesus, peace be upon them, are the subject of a considerable amount of Islamic literature. Ahmet Cetinkaya contributes with a thesis on the question of whether Jesus had any brothers and sisters. Drawing on sources of Islamic tradition and the Bible, Cetinkaya lays out interesting information on the topic, which is also a matter of debate between some Christian denominations.

“Romania – Dar-ul Sulk” discusses how historical truths are sometimes forsaken for the sake of political interests. Victor Nitelea presents an exemplary account of the mutually beneficial centuries-long relationship between the Ottomans and Romania and how the positive image of Turks as a tolerant society was replaced by an image of barbarians. This account also explains how the school curriculum can be manipulated according to political trends at the expense of causing intolerance and conflict between East and West.

“Can I Be Your Baggage?” Barney Zwartz, a journalist from Melbourne asks Abdullah Aymaz, who spoke about the emergence of the Gulen Movement in an international conference organized by the Australian Catholic University back in July. Whose baggage did he want to be? Zwartz was referring to the educational movement started in the 1960s among a small circle of young people like Mr. Aymaz who were inspired by Fethullah Gulen. In this issue, Aymaz shares with us his observations of the conference with some flashbacks to his first encounters with Mr. Gulen and how the movement started to take shape.

And (mention) that blessed woman who set the best example in guarding her chastity. We breathed into her out of Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a miraculous sign (of Our Power and matchless way of doing things) for all the worlds (Anbiya 21:91).

And also Mary, the daughter of Imran who kept herself chaste (body and soul), so We breathed into it out of Our Spirit, and who affirmed the truth of the words of her Lord (His Revelations – commandments, promises and warnings – to His Messengers), and His Books; and she was of those devoutly obedient to God (Tahrim 66:12).

Her expression of astonishment when she was given the tidings that she was to give birth to a son is clear evidence of her chastity: How shall I have a son seeing no mortal has ever touched me, and I have never been unchaste? (Mary 19:20). It is also revealed in the Qur’an that whoever spoke against or slandered Mary would be subjected to grievous punishment and destruction, for their hearts are sealed from belief (Nisa 4:156). While the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches believe in accordance with the Qur’an that Mary remained chaste throughout her life, some other Christian churches believe that Mary was only a virgin until the birth of Jesus. The main justification for their view is in the New Testament, which uses in various chapters the phrases “brothers of Jesus” and “sister of Jesus,” sometimes even referring to them by their names. So for this reason we must look deeper into the meaning of the word “brother” in both the Old and New Testaments and understand the sense in which the word was used. Here I would like to point out that there have been various studies of the Qur’an and the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, aimed at understanding this matter, so I think it is appropriate firstly to explore the possibility Jesus having brothers within the boundaries what is said in the Qur’an and hadith, and then continue by examining the sources in the Old and New Testaments.

A. In the Qur’an and hadith

When Hannah, Imran’s wife and Jesus’ grandmother gave birth to Mary she prayed, “I commend her and her offspring to You for protection from Satan eternally rejected (from God’s Mercy)” (Al Imran 3:36). There have been some who claim that there is a possibility of Jesus having brothers or sisters because the word “offspring” (dhurriyya) refers to a plurality, but a majority of the interpreters of the Qur’an have understood the words “her and her offspring” as referring in particular to “Mary and Jesus.” Most scholars refer to the following hadith as a reason for their interpretations:

“It was reported by Abu Huraira that the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said, ‘There is no newborn except that (at the moment of birth) Satan disturbs him, so he begins to cry from Satan’s disturbance, with the exception of the son of Mary and his mother,” and the scholars say that this was the result of Hannah’s prayer (Bukhari, Muslim).

The word used for “offspring” (dhurriyya) in the Qur’an has a wide range of meaning in the Arabic language; it is used to refer to the children and lineage of a person, a generation of humans and jinns, a household made up of a father, mother and child, and also sometimes used solely for women or fathers and grandfathers. Though most scholars say that the Arabic word for “offspring” has a singular referent, there are some who argue the word to be plural. Raghib al-Isfahani argues that this is a word used in both the plural and the singular sense, but in this case it refers to plurality and Said ibn Mansur states that the word for “offspring” can refer to both the male and female sexes. Other interpreters of the Qur’an like Al-Baghawi and Qurtubi also state that this word can be used for males and females and at the same time singular and plural. The Arabic word for “offspring” is mentioned in various verses of the Qur’an mostly in the singular (e.g. Baqara, 2:124, 128, 266; Al-Imran, 3:34, 36, 38; Nisa, 4:9; An’am, 6:84, 133) sense but with a plural meaning in a few of the verses (An’am, 6:87; Ra’d, 13:23; Furqan, 25:74) and in one verse it is used to describe a group of people (Yunus, 10:83). If we accept the word in the plural sense and agree that this word means at least “three persons from a person’s lineage” it is still impossible to say that the Qur’an’s revelations in any way prove that Mary gave birth to a child other than Jesus. When Mary’s mother made the supplication to her Lord there was no indication of plurality or of the number of Mary’s children, or for that matter if she was to have children at all, for it goes without saying that Mary herself was just a newborn baby at the time. If we take a brief look at the supplication itself, we see that it refers to the likelihood of her having children; so the use of the word “offspring” does not provide foundation for a possibility that Jesus may have had brothers or sisters. We also see in the Qur’an that the whole incident was a miraculous event, that the pregnancy and birth were on the Divine command, a miracle of the Almighty. A hadith of the noble Prophet refers to Mary as “Al-Batul” and “‘Al-Adhra,” both meaning “virgin” or untouched and in the hadith it gives clearer explanations of these words saying, “She was untouched by man,” and goes on, “She bore no child other than Jesus.” The term al-adhra means a virgin woman while al-batul has a more extensive meaning-“the virgin, the woman who withdraws from worldly pleasures, one who devotes herself to worship.”

The conclusion of the examination of both the Qur’an and hadith shows that there is no evidence supporting the claim that Jesus had brothers or sisters, and Ibn Hajar specifically stresses that Mary only gave birth to Jesus and she had no other children.

B. “Brother” and “sister” in the Bible

The word “brother” in the Old Testament has a very broad meaning; it refers to the immediate descendants of the father, the son and the male relatives as a whole, cousins, in-laws and those with blood ties and even includes friends and those with whom a person has political dealings. The words “brother” and “sister” were sometimes used to portray the main family members as we see in the example of the forty two “brethren” of King Uzziah. Another interesting example is in the Song of Solomon, where two lovers are serenading one another, and the young man says in some verses of the song, “How sweet is your love, my sister, my bride.”

Maurice Bucaille, commenting on the word “brother” in the New Testament states that the words “adelphoi” and “adelphai” in Greek refer to biological brother and sister, and he said that these words, had been defectively translated from Semitic languages, where they had been used to denote “kin” in the general sense and the people in question were probably cousins. As the word “cousin” did not exist in Hebrew and Aramaic, the languages spoken by both Jesus and his disciples, they probably had no other option; they could either use the word “brother” or would have to define a person by calling them “my father’s sister’s son” and so on, which is neither easy nor appropriate, and this was the likely reason for Jesus using “brother” for his close acquaintances.

In the New Testament, the equivalent of brother in Aramaic was given as the word “adelphos,” which in the general sense means “brother” or “brotherly friend,” a kind of sign of closeness to someone. Unlike in Hebrew or Aramaic, the word “anepsios” in ancient Greek gave a distinct meaning to the word “cousin,” but those who wrote the scriptures used “adelphos” or “friend” to correspond “cousin.”

So we understand from this that the writers of the New Testament used the same word “adelphos” from ancient Greek to convey the meaning of “friend” and for the meaning of “two sons of the same family” or “biological brothers.” This is very confusing when the text is translated into English or any other language.

C. According to the New Testament

One of the reasons for opinions that Jesus had brothers or sisters several verses in the New Testament which say that Mary was betrothed to Joseph, but before they had come together Joseph realized that she was carrying a child and had decided to leave Mary. But an angel came to Joseph in his dream and told him the truth of the miraculous conception, and Joseph decided to take Mary as his wife (Matthew 1:18–20; Luke 1:27; 2:5). There is no mention in the Qur’an or hadith of Joseph, the person said to be betrothed to Mary in the Bible, and there is certainly no report of the Biblical scriptures found in the Qur’an and hadith stating that Mary married this man called Joseph. However, there are a few weak reports of some historical sources that say that there was a carpenter of the same name who was a member of Mary’s family and both of them were serving at the Temple during the same period.

Another matter which leads the Protestant churches to believe that Jesus may have had brothers and sisters is the verse in the Gospel of Luke saying that Jesus was Mary’s “firstborn son” (2:7). However, this declaration is no reason to believe that Jesus had brothers and sisters, this statement being rather a declaration that her first child would be a holy servant of his Lord (Luke 2:23) a declaration invoking a legislation in the scriptures.

As further evidence, the Gospel of Luke (2:41–52) tells how Jesus attended the Temple in Jerusalem for the feast of the Passover with his parents, that he went missing, and that his parents were searching for him. We see there is no mention at all of any other children except Jesus. To the contrary, the context leads us to believe that there was only one child present.

Another special detail is that according to the Gospel of John (19:26–27), Jesus entrusted his mother to one of the disciples when he was being placed on the crucifix, so immediately the question arises: if Jesus had brothers and sisters, then why did he entrust his mother to someone else? Even if we assume that Joseph, who was claimed to have married Mary was not alive at the time, there being no mention whatsoever of the existence of Jesus’ brothers or sisters at this point is another aspect which seems to invalidate the allegation.

D. The use of the word “brother” in reference to Jesus

It is apparent that when the word “brother” was mentioned in reference to Jesus, in most cases it was actually used as a figure of speech and there is no indication to the contrary. For instance in the verses of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, where Jesus’ mother and brother ask to speak to Jesus while he is talking to his disciples, and he replies, “Here are my mother and my brother! For whoever does the will of my Father in Heaven is my brother and sister and mother” (Matthew, 12:46–50; Mark, 3:31–35; Luke, 8:19–21) Again, the Gospel of John (20:10–18) claims that following the crucifixion of Jesus, he was resurrected and appeared before Mary Magdalene, telling her “Go to my brothers and say to them I am ascending to my Father and your Father and my God and your God.” This is clear evidence that “brothers” was a figurative expression, for it goes on to say, “Mary went and said to his disciples.”

Another statement which only appears in the Gospel of John (7:3–10) says that the “brothers” of Jesus invited him to leave Galilee and set out for Judea as the Jewish festival of Passover was approaching, but Jesus refused the invitation and told his “brothers” to attend the feast, following on in secret later. Again, an event only recorded in the Gospel of John (2:12) states that following the miracle of the wine, Jesus, along with his mother, brothers and disciples went to Capernaum and stayed there for a few days. It is almost impossible to prove that from these narrations in the Gospels that Jesus had any biological brothers or sisters.

In Antiquities of the Jews, a book written by the famous Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, it is claimed that Jesus had at least one brother, Jacob. But a narration of Simon bar Cleopas, who is known to have been a cousin of Jesus, and who is said to have died when he was 120 years old, claims that the man Jacob, the so-called brother of Jesus, was stoned to death in 62 CE at the age of 96. According to this statement Jacob must have been born in 34 BC, which proves that it was impossible for him to be Jesus’ biological brother since this date would make Jacob older than Mary, his supposed mother.

It is interesting that when Luke’s gospel portrays the same event as the Gospels of Matthew and Mark the word “brother” is not used at all (4:14–30). When we compare the names mentioned with those of the disciples, we see an interesting connection with the names of the supposed brothers: the names given as the four brothers of Jesus, with the exception of Joseph, are among those on the list of the chosen disciples. In the lists given in the Synoptic gospels, the gospel of Barnabas and in commentaries by Al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir respectively, the names Simon and Jacob are both mentioned twice. Another interesting fact is that Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus, is the one name mentioned by all of them.

The word “brother” is similarly mentioned in two verses of the Qur’an, one of them being To the ‘Ad people (we sent) Hud, one of their own brethren (Hud 11:50), in which it is clear there is no indication of any blood tie, and the other is when the sons of Israel address Mary as “O sister of Aaron!” (Mary 19:28). Scholars have stressed the fact that this is not a reference to a biological sister ; as the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, explained in one of the hadith, “The Israelites used to name their children after their prophets and pious persons who had gone before them” (Muslim, Tirmidhi, Hanbal). Another present-day example supporting this theory is nuns who refer to each other as “sister,” which is, of course, used in the spiritual sense.

So it is probable that those who were referred to as Jesus’ brothers were actually his spiritual brothers or brothers in religion.

Ahmet Cetinkaya is managing editor at Nil Yayınları, Istanbul. He is a Ph.D. candidate in theology and his dissertation is on narrations about Jesus in the hadith literature.

Notes

1. Fath Al-Bari, VI: 470.
2. II. Samuel, 1:26; Amos, 1:11
3. Deuteronomy, 23:7; Nehemiah, 5:7; Jeremiah, 34:9; Kings 2, 10:13–14.
4. Song of Solomon 4:9–12; 5:1.
5. Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, the Qur’an, and Science, NY: Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an, 2003, p. 96.
6. Some say, “maternal uncle’s son” (Ibn Kathir, History II, 68) and “paternal uncle’s son” (Al-Alusi, Tafsir, xvi, 80).
7. See at-Tabari, Tafsir XVI, 64-5; Tarih I, 350; Ibn Kathir, Tafsir III, 113.
8. Eisenman, Robert H.; James the Brother of Jesus, Penguin books, Paperback edition, 1998, p. 320.
9. Barnabas mentions his own name instead of Simon’s. The gospels of Luke and Barnabas mention another person apart from Judas Iscariot. See: Matthew, 10:1–4; Mark, 3:13–19; Luke, 6:12–16; Gospel of Barnabas, 14; At-Tabari, Tafsir, vi, 14 onward.
10. At-Tabari, Tafsir xvi, 77–78; Fahruddin ar-Razi, Tafsir, xv, 327–328.

Hadiths are narrative accounts by Muhammad’s companions of situations involving God’s Messenger and rulings or statements that Muhammad made. Since Muhammad is considered by Muslims to be an excellent exemplar, hadiths have had a major impact on Islam’s worldview. There are six major collections of hadith. The most influential one is by al-Bukhari (who died about 240 years after Muhammad). Bukhari claims to have examined almost six hundred thousand hadith. He only accepted seventy-four hundred of them (1.2%) as being undeniably authentic. The other five collections also did not include the vast majority of hadiths they examined, but they do overlap considerably in the ones that they do consider authentic. I have selected five hadiths to gloss from my perspective as a Reform Rabbi. The first is from Sahih Muslim and the following four are from Bukhari.

Menstruation

Sahih Muslim: Thabit narrated it from Anas: Among the Jews, when a woman menstruated, they did not dine with her, nor did they live with them in their houses; so the Companions of the Apostle (may peace be upon him) asked the Apostle (may peace be upon him), and God, the Exalted revealed: “They also ask you about (the injunctions concerning) menstruation. Say: ‘It is a state of hurt (and ritual impurity), so keep away from them during menstruation’” to the end (Baqara 2:222). The Messenger of God (may peace be upon him) said: “Do everything except intercourse.” The Jews heard of that and said: “This man does not want to leave anything we do without opposing us in it.” (Book 003, Number 0592)

Gloss: Both Islam and Judaism have laws about ritual pollution deriving from a woman’s monthly period. Orthodox Judaism had greatly expanded the prohibitions against physical contact during a woman’s period. Muhammad opposes this expansion and limits the prohibition for Muslims. Reform Rabbis today are much closer to Islamic practice than they are to Orthodox Jewish practice.

Extremism

Bukhari; Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded.” (Volume 1, Book 2, Number 38)

Gloss: Unlike Christianity, both Islam and Judaism teach the importance of sacred slaughter of meat, and the avoidance of certain animals for food. In Islam, the rules are simpler and fewer than in Orthodox Judaism. Reform Rabbis would regard the increasingly restrictive developments in the laws of kosher diet, especially for Passover, as a counterproductive, overburdening of the people. The expansion of restrictions on Shabbat activities is also seen by Reform Rabbis as a counterproductive, overburdening of the joy of Shabbat. Muhammad wisely differentiates between extremism and striving to be near perfect (no one is perfect) which involves a rejection of extremism. Just trying to do well will be rewarded. Religion should not be hard. Making religion easier does not mean making religion soft or impious. This is a very important hadith because all religions have believers that think more is better, and harder is still better.

Worshiping none other than God

Narrated ‘Aisha and Ibn’ Abbas: On his deathbed God’s Apostle put a sheet over his face and when he felt hot, he would remove it from his face. When in that state (of putting and removing the sheet) he said, “May God’s Curse be on the Jews and the Christians for they build places of worship at the graves of their prophets.” He intended to warn (the Muslim) from what they (i.e. Jews and Christians) had done. (Volume 4, Book 56, Number 660)

Gloss: God’s apostle strongly opposed any diversion of reverence or worship to anyone other than God. Christians, and even Jews, had started worshiping at the graves of holy men, saints and prophets. Although they claimed to be only worshiping God, their feeling that prayer was better or more effective at such sites was cursed by Muhammad. In later centuries, some Muslims also began worshiping at the tombs of holy men and building places of worship near their graves. For Islam, none other than God can be attributed with divinity. Therefore, seeking divine assistance from the graves is shirk, associating partners with God, which is the gravest sin in Islam. However, some ignorant Muslims may unintentionally hypothesize divine qualities for certain deceased people. Although such Muslims are not too many, and they do not really intend to worship them, this is one of the developments that the Wahhabi movement strongly opposes.¹

Reform Rabbis would agree that such activity at grave sites should be condemned and could be seen as a curse. God’s apostle must also have realized that even the Muslim community would produce people whose piety would lead to such errors. No religious community is exempt from people who use piety and belief improperly. This hadith teaches us all to be humble when we view other religions and other sects within our own religion. The next hadith teaches this even more explicitly.

Learning from failings

Narrated Abu Said: The Prophet said: “You will follow the wrong ways of your predecessors so completely and literally that if they should go into the hole of an animal, you too will go there.” We said, “O God’s Apostle! Do you mean the Jews and the Christians?” He replied, “Whom else?” (Volume 4, Book 56, Number 662)

Gloss: Muhammad criticized the failings of many in the Jewish and Christian communities (as did the prophets of Israel), but he realized that people are human, and most do not seem to learn from the failings of others. He hoped that Muslims would retain their original purity, but he foresaw that decay and falsification were inevitable. God’s apostle would certainly attack female genital mutilation in Africa today as sharply as he attacked female infanticide in Arabia in his day.² It is a shame that many Muslim leaders in Africa today do not condemn it. Reform Rabbis, who have now been part of a modern democratic society for several generations are openly critical of those Orthodox practices and ideas that we think betray the spirit of Judaism in today’s world.

Superiority

Abu Huraira related: Two men, a Muslim and a Jew, abused each other. The Muslim said, “By Him Who gave superiority to Muhammad over all the people.” At that, the Jew said, “By Him Who gave superiority to Moses over all the people.” The Muslim became furious at that and slapped the Jew in the face. The Jew went to God’s Apostle and informed him of what had happened between him and the Muslim. God’s Apostle said, “Don’t give me superiority over Moses, for people will fall unconscious on the Day of Resurrection and I will be the first to gain consciousness, and behold! Moses will be there holding the side of God’s Throne. I will not know whether Moses has been among those people who have become unconscious and then has regained consciousness before me, or has been among those exempted by God from falling unconscious.” (Volume 8, Book 76, #524)

Gloss: God’s Messenger is so well known for his sense of justice that a Jew can appeal to him even in a conflict with a Muslim who has attacked a Jew. It is only natural for Jews to think that Moses is the best, and for Muslims to think that Muhammad is the best. Muhammad rebukes the Muslim, telling him not to claim that Muhammad is superior to Moses because even on the day of Resurrection, Muhammad himself will not know their relative merit, for although Muhammad will be the first to be revived, Moses will already be there holding the side of God’s throne. Muhammad teaches us that comparisons of religious superiority are wrong, for no human in this world, and perhaps even in the world to come, will know who the best is, and such comparisons do not help anything but polarize people by inciting partisan fervor. All Reform Rabbis would applaud this teaching although we know that during the Middle Ages all three religions claimed superiority.

Most Americans would be amazed to hear such liberal and flexible statements coming from a religion that they think is rigid and fanatical. But the politicized Islam that has captured so much attention in the world today is the outgrowth of two recent factors. One is an anti-western reaction and scapegoating due to the great dislocations and upheavals occurring as a result of globalization in all modernizing societies in the twentieth century. The second factor is the result of several previous centuries of socio-economic decline that took place in the Middle East. Jews and Christians have already had reforming movements. Muslims have not. But the Prophet predicted that Muslims also would become more rigid and orthodox just as the Jews and Christians had. As we have seen Abu Sa’id al-Khudri reported God’s Messenger as saying: You will tread the same path as was trodden by those before you inch by inch and step by step, so much so that if they had entered into the hole of a lizard, you would follow them in this also. We said: Do you mean Jews and Christians? He said: Who else?”

Unlike Orthodox Rabbis, Reform Rabbis accept the doctrine of nullification, which teaches that one verse in scripture can nullify another, and that rulings can be changed due to changed circumstances. Muhammad provides an excellent example of this principle in the following account. The Prophet originally told women not to visit graveyards, but toward the end of his life, he said to them: “I had told you not to visit graves; now I am telling you to visit them.” The reason was that Arabian women used to wail at graves. The Prophet wanted this practice to be stopped. Therefore, he banned women from visiting graves to start with. After some time, when Muslim women were better aware of how Islam wants them to behave in different situations, he allowed them such visits. In fact, the Prophet encourages visiting graveyards because such a visit reminds the visitor of his or her own death and the fact that they would have to stand in front of God when their actions are reckoned to determine their reward or punishment. Scholars like Ibn Qudamah, of the Hanbali school of law, make it clear that since this is the purpose of visiting graveyards, both men and women need such visits.

Another important teaching of the Qur’an for people all over the world today is that God chose not to create human beings as one nation and bestowed upon them free will to believe or not to believe. As it is written in the Qur’an (Maedah 5:48) “For every one of you did We appoint a law and a way. If God had pleased He would have made you one people, but (He didn’t) that He might test you in what He gave you. Therefore compete with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; for all return to God, so He will let you know (after Judgment Day) that in which you differed.” This is a wonderful further development of the teaching of the Biblical prophet Micah (4:5) that in the end of days-the Messianic Age-”All people will walk, each in the name of their own God, and we shall walk in the name of the Lord our God forever.”

A Muslim is one who submits to the will of God and believes that God has sent many different prophets to the many peoples of the world. As a Reform Rabbi I believe that Muhammad was the Prophet sent to the Arab people. I believe that the Qur’an is as true for Muslims as the Torah is true for Jews. Indeed, I love the hadith also narrated by Abu Huraira that says, “The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. God’s Apostle said (to the Muslims). “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in God, and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever was revealed to you.’”³ Following Muhammad’s teaching I too neither believe nor disbelieve in the Qur’an. I do respect the Qur’an very much as a kindred revelation to a kindred people in a kindred language.⁴ “We have not sent you but as an unequalled mercy for all the worlds” (Anbiya 21:107). The Prophet Muhammad’s mission, peace be upon him, is not restricted to Arabs only. Arabs today comprise not more than twenty percent of the entire Muslim population around the world. Belief in the Prophets and previous revelations are two of the six pillars of faith in Islam. Likewise, the Qur’an is the final revelation that was sent after the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels. Its message is universal and does not cover one specific nation only. (Ed.)In fact, the people, the language and the theology are closer to my own people, language and theology than that of any other on earth. Of course, more than eighty percent of Muslims in the world today are not of Arab decent. But Arabic is their sacred language and the tradition that Arabs and Jews are cousins is widely accepted. This makes the present conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis especially tragic. It is very important to realize that the conflict is a political one and not a religious one. There can be no religious conflict between religions like Judaism and Islam because neither of them declares that their scriptures are the only ones from God. The strong support that the Qur’an gives to religious pluralism is a lesson that is sorely needed by the religious fundamentalists of all religions in the world today.

Notes

1. The tradition of building mosques next to graves, or the other way round is a common practice. However, Muslims do not have the intention of worshiping the deceased saints. Muslims worship and petition God, and God only. Besides, there are practical reasons, like performing funeral services more easily and praying for one’s deceased. (Ed.)
2. Female genital mutilation (or female circumcision) has nothing to do with any Islamic practice. It is a custom in some parts of Africa and the Middle East. In Islamic sources, there is no absolute prohibition, nor is there any kind of encouragement regarding this practice. This practice is also considered reprehensible since it carries a risk to the girl’s future ability to enjoy sexual relations with her husband. (Ed.)
3. This hadith refers to the fact that as a part of the Islamic creed, Muslims have to believe in all the Prophets and revelations sent to them. Muslims believe the previous scriptures have not remained in their original state. Since it is not certain how much these scriptures have been changed, the Prophet enjoins Muslims not to accept or deny completely the message of these scriptures. (Ed.)
4. “We have not sent you but as an unequalled mercy for all the worlds” (Anbiya 21:107). The Prophet Muhammad’s mission, peace be upon him, is not restricted to Arabs only. Arabs today comprise not more than twenty percent of the entire Muslim population around the world. Belief in the Prophets and previous revelations are two of the six pillars of faith in Islam. Likewise, the Qur’an is the final revelation that was sent after the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels. Its message is universal and does not cover one specific nation only. (Ed.)

There are two different types of rules in the universe. One of these consists of the principles of the sciences, such as physics, chemistry, astronomy, astrophysics, biology and medicine, all of which occur in the universe. These sciences can be considered to be the “book of the universe.” This book does not have a language in the usual sense, but contains signs of God that are read through the eyes of wisdom. The second of these sciences consists of the rules that God has sent to us through the prophets; there is the Qur’an, brought by Prophet Muhammad, as well as revelations brought by other prophets, like the Psalms, the Torah, and the New Testament. It is essential that the revelations and the Book of the Universe, along with their contents, are known and the requirements within them adhered to. Generally speaking, the reward of reading and applying the Book of the Universe is granted in this world. The reward of adherence to the Qur’an is given in the Hereafter. Therefore, if believers only read and adhere to the sections concerned with worship in the Qur’an, they will be rewarded only in the Hereafter. If they read the Book of the Universe and adhere to it, they will be rewarded in this world. Happiness in both worlds is dependent on both these books being read and applied in balance. In actual fact, these two books are like the two sides of one reality. The same hand and authority is present in both. God, Who presents the universe to us, with all its richness and depth, speaks of this in the Qur’an. He tells us about ourselves-we are also a part of the Book of the Universe-through the Qur’an.

Within the guidelines of physical laws, He tells us about all creatures. He informs us of the irrevocable damage that will occur when something is missing from either of these two books. The verses in the Qur’an and the sayings of the Prophet concerning work are focused for the most part on earning a livelihood. This situation should not be interpreted to mean working in a limited circle and neglecting other areas. There are two essential components concerning working. One of these is the necessity for the individual to work to secure their basic needs in order to survive, that is, working for their livelihood. The second is to work on the principles of making life easier. The Prophet encouraged working on both these points and personally taught the Companions how to work. In the Hadiths of the Prophet, working for earning a living has been is esteemed. For example “There are some sins that neither prayer, nor fasting or Pilgrimage can assist in forgiving, they can only be forgiven through the work carried out for one’s livelihood,”¹ “No human being has eaten anything more virtuous then what they have earned themselves. A messenger of God, the Prophet David also used to eat what he had worked for.”² It is also worthwhile to mention the following events to highlight this point. One day the Prophet met with Sa’d ibn Muadh and shook hands. The Prophet saw that the hands of Sa’d were calloused and asked the reason why, to which the latter replied ‘they are like this because I was working for my family’. Then the Prophet stated that ‘here are the hands that God likes.’” The Prophet set an example through working himself and also in teaching others how to work. On one occasion, after telling a man who was begging how bad begging was, the Prophet asked him, “Do you have nothing in your home?” to which the man replied he had nothing other than a cloth and a pot. Upon this, the Prophet asked the man to bring those to him. Then the Prophet auctioned off these objects to the Companions, raising two dirhams (the currency of the time). He gave the two dirhams to the man, telling him to use one dirham for his family and to buy a rope and an axe with the remaining dirham. The man came back with the rope and axe and the Prophet told him to cut and gather wood from the forest and sell this at the market, giving him a fifteen-day period. After a fortnight the man returned with ten dirhams.⁴ It is important to note that one aspect of how this topic is dealt with in both the Qur’an and the Hadiths is the balance between the two worlds. This balance is described in Sura Qasas, verse 77: With the things that God has endowed on you try to gain the Hereafter. Do not forget your share from the world. The Prophet indicates this balance in the hadith “do you know who is best of you? Those who do not forgo their world for the Hereafter or their Hereafter for their world, people who are this way will gain both the Hereafter and this world and will not be relianton any other.” It is apt to focus at this point on the theme of reliance on God (tawakkul). Understanding the connection between resigning oneself to God’s will and working has occasionally been problematical in the Muslim world. Even though reliance on God means to expect results from God and to have full faith in Him after having completed all the necessary requirements, there have been, amongst Muslim communities, those who have come to believe that reliance onGod means abandoning all rationale and believing that work is against such an entrustment of oneself in God’s hands. These people have argued that resignation to God’s hands means “to trust purely in God and refrain from carrying out any activities in relation to work; to do so enables people to connect with God and provide protection against (attaching one’s heart to) worldly possessions.” It is also possible to find religious principles that endorse this belief. People who think in this way give the following hadith as proof of their ideas “Your God orders as follows ‘O Mankind! Put aside time to worship so that I may fill your heart with richness and your hands with livelihood. O Mankind! Do not stray from me, otherwise I will fill your heart with poverty and your hands with preoccupation.’” “Whoever leaves all other activities and gives themselves over to the worship of God will fulfill all requirements for livelihood from where they least expect it. Whoever devotes themselves to the world, then God will make them a deputy to the world.” However such an understanding of placing oneself completely in God’s hand can only be applicable and reserved to those few who have devoted themselves purely to worship; it is not for the general public. The grindstone of social life is working. If there was no labor, communal life will come to a standstill. What we are saying is not that everyone forego the requirements of this trust, but rather they should hold steadfast, and the heart should be content after having done all that is necessary, and wait for the outcome. An Arab asked the Prophet “O Prophet, shall I rely on God after I tie my camel or after I let it go? To which the Prophet replied “Tie your camel then put your faith in God’s hands.”⁷ This answer is enough to resolve the issue. It is appropriate to give an explanation of the hadith that is used as evidence for reliance on God, but which is often misinterpreted. In this hadith the Prophet says “Had you placed yourselves in God’s hands sincerely, you would be fed like the birds. Birds leave their nests in the morning hungry and return full.” This hadith, on the surface, seems to mean that one should not do anything but wait for everything from God. But if you look at the sentences carefully, you will see that it stresses that the birds leave their nests to look for food and that they find their food in this manner; they do not stay in their nests waiting for food to come to them. Accordingly, true reliance on God means to do all that is necessary, then to wait for the results from God. This hadith also clearly highlights the difference between reliance on God and laziness. In fact, the annotator Qurtubi points out that the verse “Take your provisions for the Hajj. In truth, the best provision is righteousness and piety…” (Baqara 2:197) which deals with the pilgrimage, is another warning. He quotes this hadith in parallel to the following event: “The Yemenis who come to Mecca without provision to perform their Pilgrimage, begging there to satisfy their hunger then classing themselves as ones who have put themselves in Gods hands. When this verse was revealed it was a warning for people to get their own provisions on their travels.”⁹ It can be understood from the statement that “the best of provisions is piety” that it is considered pious to be content with what one gets without asking for more from others.

The two sides of piety

1) “(Piety is)… abiding by what is allowed and prohibited,in other words, adhering to what the religion says to ‘do’ and ‘not to do.’

2) “Abiding by the laws of creation, in other words, acting in accordance with the prevalent rules in the universe.” “It is important not to neglect this aspect of reliance on God. If we look at the life of the Prophet we can see that he lived his life by reading the rules of the universe and adhering to them, without neglecting all the causative factors. For example, he asked his Companions to “extinguish all fires in the house before going to sleep.” In this and similar examples one can see that it is important to adhere to causative factors so that no harm comes to the house through a fire.”¹⁰ Umar ibn Khattab, who was well aware of this fact, expelled all the Yemeni people who used to beg, saying they had resigned to God’s will, from the streets of Medina. He told them that they had not actually resigned themselves to God’s will, but rather they were like parasites. He went on to say that “One who resigns themselves to God’s will plants a seed”¹¹

It can be seen from this that resignation to God’s will and work are not opposed to one another. Scholars who see no contrast between working and resignation to God’s will have offered the following explanation: “One can work and place their faith in God’s hands at one and the same time. Reliance on God means placing your faith in God and believing that everything is from God and the place for this is in the heart. Fulfilling the requirement of causes is through the organs. Accordingly, it is possible for things to do with the heart and the organs to co-exist in one person”¹² It is also possible to give the following explanation: As much as it part of God’s will that we expect results from God, it is also His wish for us to adhere to the causal factors. Therefore it is inconceivable that these two wishes contradict one another. On the contrary, adherence to these two wishes is compulsory and it is the one who adheres to these who will be successful in both this and the other world. In conclusion, we can say that both the Qur’an and the Sunna glorify any form of work that increases productivity and production. In other words, in line with Islamic principles, Islam places great value on any production that meets the needs for continuing life or to making life easier and more enjoyable. This being the case, it is also possible to see that the Muslim world does not present a picture that is parallel to this thought. This must be related to ideas that are placed in our mentality through basic teachings. We see it as necessary to rethink these values that have been embodied in our minds.

Notes

1. Sahawi, Ahsanut Taqasim, Beirut, 1994, p. 157.

2. Bayhaqi, Sunanul Kubra, Ijara, 15.

3. Sarahsi, Al-Mabsut, vol.30, p:246, Darul Marifa, Beirut.

4. Abu Dawud, Zakat, 26; Ibn Maja, Tijarat, 25.

5. Ajluni, Kashful Khafa, I, 393.

6. Tirmidhi, Qiyama, 30; Ibn Maja, Zuhd, 2.

7. Tirmidhi, Qiyama, 60.

8. Tirmidhi, Zuhd, 33; Ibn Maja, Zuhd, 14.

9. Qurtubi, al-Jamiu li Ahkamul Qur’an, 2:411.

10. F. Gulen, Kirik Testi (Broken Jug), Istanbul 2004, p. 165.

11. Ibn Abud Dunya, Kitabut-Tawakkul, p.1; Ahmet Naim, The Principles of Islamic Ethics, p.70).

12. Bajuri, Sharhu Jawharatit Tawhid, p.442–446; Kushayri, ar-Risala, p. 163.

There are many interpretations of the “image of God” among Christian theologians. However, almost all of them center on the supremacy of human beings over all of God’s creation. Not in the Qur’an, but in Islamic traditions, Muslims have a similar expression in the term of “the image of Rahman.” Rahman, one of God’s names, describes the quality of abounding Grace inherent in and inseparable from the Almighty. While some Muslim scholars have rejected this expression, because it evokes anthropomorphic thoughts about God, some have tried to interpret it in the light of general Islamic principles. Muslim scholars have brought forward many explanations about the term khalifa. After exploring these explanations, the Sufi understanding and Said Nursi’s approach will be presented. In a general sense, the figure of the khalifa will be discussed, as this is the most conspicuous figure in Islamic thought that represents the dignity of humanity. As such, this term serves to find a common ground for inter-religious dialogue.

The Image of God in Christianity

The term “image of God” is derived from Genesis 1: 26-27:

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

These verses bring to light two ideas: God’s “image” and His “likeness.” At first glance, the two ideas awake one notion: resemblance to God. This resemblance can be understood both physically and ideally. As a result, anthropomorphic interpretations regarding these accounts abound (Migliore 140). However, many theologians disregarded the idea of physical resemblance when they carefully considered the other accounts. As a matter of fact, the related verse we are studying establishes a connection between such a “likeness” and “dominion” on the earth. This connection forces us to conclude that human likeness to God is the major factor for human dominion over the world. Therefore, the idea of the “dominion of humanity” in the world has become one of the interpretations of the verse.

Considering what distinguishes humanity from animals, theologians such as Augustine have interpreted “the image of God” to be human reason (McGrath 441). According to Augustine, God created humanity with the gift of the power of reason, which comes from the wisdom of God and makes people different from other creatures and the most powerful of creatures. Like Augustine, Thomas Aquinas thought that the image of God refers to the rational nature of human beings (Migliore 140). However, the Cappadocians interpreted the doctrine as being restricted to Adam’s heavenly life before falling down to the earth, arguing that being created in the image of God means being free from all weaknesses and disabilities, such as death (McGrath 442). So, according to this interpretation, after the fall of Adam and Eve, the image of God in human nature was defaced. Athanasius, on the other hand, relates the doctrine to the human capacity to relate to and partake in the life of God (McGrath 441). For William C. Placher, the image of God denotes the nature of human relationships (134). According to this explanation, to be human entails being involved in relationships not only with God but with other humans and the environment. The last interpretation of the image of God touches on human freedom. Many modern philosophers and theologians emphasize that humans are free, self-determining, and self-transcending (Migliore 141).

In conclusion, the four soundest explanations of the phrase “the image of God” found in Genesis 1:26, 27 are: dominion over the earth, the power to reason, relationships with God and other creatures, and human freedom.

Khalifa fi’l-Ard in Islam

No Qur’anic verse states that humans were created in the image of God; however, we can find similar expressions in the collections of hadith (sayings of the Prophet). Narrated by Abu Huraira, the Prophet said: “God created Adam in His own image.”¹

At first glance, this hadith seems to contradict some Islamic teachings since it implies anthropomorphism, which is strongly rejected by Islam, but Muslim scholars have interpreted this hadith in a way different to how it reads. Some have questioned the authenticity of the traditions implying anthropomorphism.² However, the majority have judged the authenticity of this hadith, interpreting it in accordance with the principles of Islam.³

There is another hadith: “God created man in the form of al-Rahman (the All-Merciful One).”4 Because this hadith is popular in Sufi circles, it has been interpreted mostly in mystical ways. Some ecstatic Sufis consider the human’s spiritual nature to be in the form of the All-Merciful. Said Nursi criticizes the Sufi interpretation of this hadith mentioned above. According to him, “the Pure and Holy God who administers the universe as easily as it were a house, has no equal or match, no partner or opposite” (Nursi 2005). The verse saying, There is nothing whatever like unto Him states clearly that “He has no form, like, or peer, there is nothing resembling or similar to Him.” Nursi explains the related hadith within the understanding of “divine names and attributes.” Accordingly, the entire universe is the place where God’s divine names and attributes (not His essence, as His essence is a mystery for us) are manifested. However, the human being is the brightest mirror, reflecting God’s divine names more even than the whole universe. In this sense, human beings have been created like a mirror to illuminate God’s beauty. Nursi says:

… A further indication may be derived from the following analogy: Animate creation and humanity are loci of evidences of the Necessarily Existent One, proofs and mirrors to the All-Merciful, All-Compassionate. These proofs are so certain, clear, and evident that just as we might say that a mirror reflecting the sun “has the form of (or is like) the sun” (emphasizing the brilliant evidence of the sun’s light), we also might say: “Humanity has the All-Merciful One’s form,” stressing the clear evidence within us, and the completeness of the connection in Him, of the All-Merciful. Therefore, the more moderate and balanced believers in the Unity of Being said: “There is no existent but He,” expressing clarity of the evidence and perfection of the connection. (Nursi 2005, p.11)

In the same way that the Biblical account mentioned above does, the following verse from the Qur’an clearly shows the importance of human beings before God:

Remember (when) your Lord said to the angels: “I am setting on the earth a vicegerent.” The angels asked: “Will you set therein one who will cause disorder and corruption on it and shed blood, while we glorify You with Your praise and declare that You alone are all-holy and to be worshipped as God and Lord.” He said: “Surely I know what you do not know. (God) taught Adam the names, all of them. Then, He presented them to the angels, and said, “Now tell Me the names of these, if you are truthful. … And (remember) when We said to the angels: “Prostrate before Adam!” (Baqara 2:30-34)

Muhammad Asad suggests that the term khalifa is used to denote the rightful supremacy of mankind on earth. More tellingly, the sequel of the verse strengthens the idea of the superiority of humanity. As seen clearly, the angels could not understand the creation of man and asked God why He had created this being. But God said He would create a khalifa, a kind of representative, because the angels, who had no ability to improve or regress, could not reflect God’s beautiful names or attributes properly. Adam’s ability to learn the names that the angels did not know points out his ability to develop mentally, physically, and spiritually. On the contrary, angels always remain at the same level. Because human beings have free will, which does not exist among the angels, they are capable of ascending to the heavens or going down to the abyss.

It would be helpful if we mention another verse from the Qur’an related to our discussion. The verse reads,

We did indeed offer the Trust to the heavens, and the earth, and the mountains; but they refused to undertake it being afraid thereof. But man assumed it; indeed, he is most unjust, most foolish. (Ahzab 33:72)

The scholars vary also in their explanations about what this “trust” means. While some think that the Trust is reasoning power, which distinguishes humans from all other creatures, others assume that it is religious responsibility, such as worship. However, Nursi has a different understanding. According to him, this “Trust” can be understood as the “ego”; the “I” part of the psyche, because humans can know the existence of God only with their ego, which is planted in their nature. How? Nursi answers this question as follows:

“An absolute and all-encompassing entity has no limits or terms, and therefore cannot be shaped or formed, and cannot be determined in such a way that its essential nature can be comprehended. For example, light undetermined by darkness cannot be known or perceived. However, light can be determined if a real or hypothetical bounding line of darkness is drawn. In the same way, the Divine Attributes and Names (e.g., Knowledge, Power, Wisdom, and Compassion) cannot be determined, for they are all-encompassing and have no limits or like. Thus what they essentially are cannot be known or perceived. A hypothetical boundary is needed for them to become known. In our case, this hypothetical boundary is our ego. Ego imagines within itself a fictitious lordship, power, and knowledge, and so posits a bounding line, hypothesizes a limit to the all-encompassing Attributes, and says: ‘This is mine, and the rest is His.’ Ego thus makes a division. By means of the miniature measure it contains, ego slowly comes to understand the true nature of the Divine Attributes and Names. Through this imagined lordship, ego can understand the Lordship of the Creator of the universe. By means of its own apparent ownership, it can understand the real Ownership of its Creator, saying: ‘As I am the owner of this house, the Creator is the Owner of this creation.’ Through its partial knowledge, ego comes to understand His Absolute Knowledge. Through its defective, acquired art, it can intuit the Exalted Fashioner’s primary, originative art.” (Nursi, 2005, p.552-3)

Whatever the interpretations may be, these two verses clearly articulate the superiority of mankind. Under the influences of these verses, Muslim thinkers, particularly Sufis, have placed humans at the center of creation. Needless to say, there are many other Qur’anic, traditional, and historical accounts that support human dignity and importance in Islam.

The verses we examine in the Bible and the Qur’an offer a common ground for dialogue among the three Abrahamic religions. But it must be said that this promising ground goes beyond religious identities because it is about the higher identity: being human. Therefore, not only religious persons, but also non-religious ones will appreciate what the Bible and the Qur’an emphasize on the subject of human dignity.

How do Biblical and Qur’anic accounts inspire us to interfaith dialogue?

It would be controversial to deduct anthropomorphic interpretations from such Scriptural information. To some extent, all religions have this kind of approach, where God is assumed in human form. This may be the result of two major reasons: first, people tend to understand and accept their Creator at their intellectual capacity. For example, because seeing, for people, becomes truth only with their “eyes,” they imagine a kind of “eyes” for God. Second, the Scriptures allow people to think of a human-like God because they address humans, who have a certain limited capacity. In other words, if the Scriptures had drawn a transcendental picture of God, their addressees, namely humans, would not have understood the idea. Therefore, the Holy Books contain many anthropomorphic details such as “the hand of God” or “the face of God.” Muslim scholars have come to the conclusion that all these details must be taken as metaphorical and understood/interpreted in the light of a basic principle revealed in the Qur’an:

There is nothing whatever like unto Him, and He is the One that hears and sees (all things) (Shura 42:11).⁵

McGrath points out that “the fact that humanity is created in the image of God is widely regarded as establishing the original uprightness and dignity of human nature.” (441). As it is readily apparent, being human is the first and the most important identity of human beings. The human dignity emphasized in the Bible and the Qur’an forces us to be respectful of each other, even though we do not share the same religion. As reported, the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, once stood up when he saw a funeral. His companions told him that the deceased was Jewish. “Is he not a human?” replied the Prophet.⁶ So, human beings deserve to be seen with respect, as all are creatures of God.

Conclusion

I have tried to determine a common ground for interfaith dialogue. Which subjects are to be talked about and how the boundaries are to be drawn in such a dialogue is another issue, but I propose that the fact that humanity was created in the image of God, or as a khalifa of God on earth, should be the common ground. This idea, I believe, can be not only a common ground among the three Abrahamic religions, but also a starting point to launch dialogue and a factor supporting the dialogue during the process. I can summarize what I have said with the following: humanity is the apex of God’s creation and the terms “Image of God” and “khalifa fi’l-Ard” point to this superiority; all human beings must be respected because of the dignity granted to them by God, and no matter what their religion is, all humans are worthy of participating in dialogue. Religious people who have respect for their God must show respect to His creatures.

In brief, religious people are more likely to succeed in dialogue because they have a common ground to begin with. They consider humans as valuable creatures created in the image of God or as the khalifa of God. This consideration must give birth to respect among them. And this respect is the most significant factor nurturing a healthy dialogue.

Notes

1.  Bukhari V, 2299; Muslim IV, 2017.
2. Suyuti I, 167.
3. Nawawi, a prominent hadith scholar, points out that there are four opinions in this hadith. First, the Salaf, the scholars who lived before the emergence of Islamic theological schools, avoided stating anything about this kind of tradition and its implications. Second, some claim that the pronoun in the word “His image” (in Arabic: “suratihi” with the third person masculine singular suffix) refers to Adam not God. Namely, the meaning is the following: “God created Adam in his (Adam’s) (complete and perfect) image.” However, this interpretation, which seems wrong according to Arabic grammar, is rejected by many. Third, accepting the use of the pronoun for God, the majority of the scholars suggest interpretation according to basic principles. In this case, the phrase shows the dignity of human beings. Remarking on its importance, Muslims call the Ka’ba “the house of God.” Likewise, considering the image of God in human creation reminds us of the degree of excellence of human beings (See Nawawi XVI, 166). In this case, the last group suggests that we understand the hadith metaphorically.
4. Daraqutni I, 37; Shaybani I, 229.
5. Most Islamic scholars have interpreted the allegorical verses in the Qur’an in the light of verse 42:11, mentioned above. For example, they have explained “God’s hand” as His power and “God’s face” as His Essence.
6. Bukhari I/441; Muslim II/661

References

• Asad, Muhammad. The Message of the Qur’an. Kazi Publications Inc, 1980.
• The Harper Collins Study Bible (NRSV). London: 1993.
• Al-Bukhari, Muhammad b. Ismail. Al-Jami’ al-Sahih, Dar Ibn Katheer, Beirut: 1987.
• Coffman, James Burton. Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament. <http://www.studylight.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=ge&chapter=001’.Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.
• Al-Daraqutni, Ali b. Omar. Al-Sifat. Maktaba al-Dar, Madina: 1981.
• Gill, John. The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible. <http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=ge&chapter=001&verse=026’.
• Ibn Katheer, Ismael bin Omar. Tafsir Ibn Katheer. Dar al-Fikr, Beirut: 1980.
• McGrath, Alister E. Christian Theology: An Introduction. Oxford: 2004.
• Migliore, Daniel L. Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology. Michigan: 2004.
• Muslim, Ibn al-Hajjaj. Sahih Muslim. Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, Beirut.
• Al-Nawawi, Ebu Zakariyya Yahya b. Sharaf. Sharh al-Nawawi ala Sahih Muslim. Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, Beirut: 1972.
• Nursi, Said. Words. http://www.sozler.org/risnur/words/1.htm.
• Placher, William C. (Ed.). Essentials of Christian Theology. Kentucky: 2003.
• Al-Shaybani, Amr bin Ebu Asim. Al-Sunna li Ibn Ebu Asim. Al-Maktaba al-Islami, Beirut: 1979.
• Al-Suyuti, Abdurrahman bin Ebu Bakr. Tanwir al-Hawalik. Maktaba al-Tijariyya al-Kubra, Egypt: 1969.
• The Holy Qur’an. Trans: Yusuf Ali. Riyad: 1983.
• Al-Qurtubi, Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Ebu Bakr. Tafsir al-Qurtubi. Dar al-Sha’b, Cairo: 1952.
• Al-Tabari, Muhammad bin Jarir. Tafsir al-Tabari. Dar al-Fikr, Beirut: 1984.