The Life of One Chosen by God: A Study of the Stories of Moses in Jewish, Christian and Muslim Sources 9781463244262

Citation preview

The Life of One Chosen by God

Gorgias Studies in Classical and Late Antiquity

29

Series Editorial Board Johannes Niehoff-Panagiotidis Rebekka Nieten Adrian Pirtea

Irene Schneider Manolis Ulbricht

Advisory Editorial Board Stefan Esders Thomas Figueira Christian Freigang David Hernandez de la Fuente Markham J. Geller Susan Ashbrook Harvey

Nicola Denzey Lewis AnneMarie Luijendijk Roberta Mazza Arietta Papaconstantinou Meron-Martin Piotrkowski Shabo Talay

This series contains monographs and edited volumes on the Greco-Roman world and its transition into Late Antiquity, encompassing political and social structures, knowledge and educational ideals, art, architecture and literature.

The Life of One Chosen by God

A Study of the Stories of Moses in Jewish, Christian and Muslim Sources

Elena Narinskaya

gp 2022

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2022 by Gorgias Press LLC All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC.

‫ܒ‬

1

2022

ISBN 978-1-4632-3913-8

ISSN 2690-2222

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A Cataloging-in-Publication Record is available from the Library of Congress. Printed in the United States of America

TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ......................................................................... v Introduction ................................................................................. 1 Chapter 1. Moses’ Childhood: The formative years of God’s chosen one in the Biblical narrative, the Jewish Exegesis, the writings of St Ephrem the Syrian and in the Qur’an........................................................................... 39 Chapter 2. From the Burning Bush onwards: The beginning of signs in Moses’ story ........................................................... 81 Chapter 3. Preparation to the Crossing of the Red Sea............ 115 Chapter 4. The LAW for the Chosen People............................. 193 Chapter 5. Theology of Signs in relation to the story of Moses ............................................................................ 275 Conclusion ................................................................................ 367 Bibliography ............................................................................. 391

v

INTRODUCTION Judaism, Christianity and Islam are three world religions, which are united by their profession of faith in One God, the Creator of Heaven and earth. These three religions also share a common legacy of the history of human encounters with God, which are narrated in the biblical accounts of the Old Testament. Taking a next step in exploring the common heritage of the three monotheistic religions, the biblical figures of the OT Prophets and Patriarchs provide a unifying ground. Biblical prophets and patriarchs are revered and appreciated in the writings of Jewish, Christian and Muslim origin. The figure of one of those prophets and patriarchs, Moses, provides a unifying theme for the study in this book. This study aims to present a comparative analysis of Moses’ stories in the biblical narrative, in the Jewish Rabbinical Exegesis of Midrash Rabbah, in the biblical commentaries of Christian Syriac origin written by Ephrem the Syrian, and in the writings of the Qur’an.

FOUR PRIMARY SOURCES FOR THE STUDY: OT NARRATIVE, MIDRASH RABBAH, EPHREM THE SYRIAN, QUR’AN

The four original sources were chosen according to their significance within the religious traditions of the Abrahamic faiths. Among the four sources the OT narrative has a common place, as it provides the ‘original’ narrative of the life of Moses from which the exegeses of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an develop. The Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an are selected by two criteria. Firstly, each source represents one of the three monotheistic traditions, i.e. Judaism, Christianity or Islam. And secondly, each source has an important place within their respec1

2

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

tive religious traditions. Below is a small introduction to each of the primary sources. From the outset of this research a few clarifications have to be made. The main sources of the study are the Torah / Hebrew Bible / Old Testament / primarily Exodus; alongside these are, essentially commentaries on the biblical narratives: Midrash Rabbah and Ephrem the Syrian. There is a clear attempt in this study to fit the biblically related passages of the Qur’anic narrative within this context, as a part of the common tradition of biblical exegesis. In doing so this study offers insights into the possibility of historical development of the common, initially Judaeo-Christian, tradition of biblical exegesis, into the biblically related passages of the Qur’an. One has to emphasize here that it is not the whole Qur’an which is looked at in this study and analysed in the context of possibly being identified as one of the biblical exegetical sources of late antiquity, but only specifically and clearly biblically related passages from it. Therefore, without diminishing the value and appreciation of the Qur’an as a whole, as a sacred source of the Muslim religious tradition, the selected passages in this study are not considered on their own, and not as part of the Muslim tradition with its own development of Qur’anic exegesis, but as a reflection and continuation of Judaeo-Christian tradition of biblical exegesis. In doing so there are advantages and disadvantages to the methodological approach of this study, and it will be further discussed. At this point, however, it is important to give a brief introduction to the four primary sources of this study.

THE BIBLICAL NARRATIVE

As mentioned before the biblical narrative of the OT 1 is chronologically the earliest source in this study. The compilation of the five books of the Torah is dated from the Babylonian Exilic peri-

For this study the first two books of the Torah will be used, first and foremost Exodus, and on occasions Genesis.

1

INTRODUCTION

3

od of 600 BCE 2. The earliest written manuscripts of the OT books, which have been found so far are the manuscripts of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Qumran caves and their earliest suggested date was the middle of the third century BCE 3. Beside Hebrew manuscripts, the earliest translated version of the OT, the Septuagint, also found in Qumran, is of the first century BCE. There are other earlier Greek translations, which date to the second century BCE. Both Hebrew and Greek manuscripts suggest that the dating of the earliest manuscripts of the OT Bible is prior to the second century BCE. This is the chronological foundation, on which the study in this book builds its argument in considering the OT narrative as the ‘original’ version of the stories of Moses. 4

THE MIDRASH RABBAH

Dating of the Jewish rabbinical material of the Midrash Rabbah is difficult. It is an exegetical compilation, which embraces the interpretations, illustrations, often expansions, in a moralizing or edifying manner, of the non-legal portions of the Bible. One has to bear in mind that the oral tradition of rabbinical exegesis precedes its compiled and written form. However, for the purpose of ascribing the time frame to the collected manuscripts of Midrash Rabbah, it is possible to affiliate the compilation of Midrash Rabbah to the time period of Palestinian Amoraim of the third to sixth century CE. Rabbi Hoshaiah, who lived in PalSee in Blenkinsopp, Joseph, The Pentateuch: An introduction to the first five books of the Bible. Anchor Bible Reference Library. (New York: Doubleday, 1992), p. 1. 3 As, for example, 4QExod-Lev. See in Frank Moore Cross (ed.) in Eugene Ulrich et al. Qumran Cave 4–VII: Genesis to Numbers, Discoveries in the Judean Desert 12 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), p. 133ff. 4 The subject of critical research in the field of biblical scholarship is complicated. It is constantly evolving through the process of new findings in the field. The contemporary selection of the articles in the field can be found in the Alexander T. D. and Baker, D.W. (eds.) Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch: A compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2003). 2

4

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

estine in the third century, could be named as the author of the earliest collection of rabbinic material of the Midrash Rabbah on the book of Genesis. He was followed by further compilations of exegetical material of the following books of the OT over subsequent centuries. 5

EPHREM THE SYRIAN

Ephrem the Syrian (306–373CE) is the fourth century poet, theologian and church leader. Not much is known about his personal life apart from the fact that most of his life he lived in the town of Nisibis 6, while the last ten years of his life he had to spend in Edessa 7 where he produced most of his work. His writings testify that he was a talented author, who among other things produced biblical commentaries which have survived until today in their original language, Syriac, and in many translations into Greek, Armenian, Russian and other languages. The fact that Ephrem’s work is appreciated until now testifies to the importance of the figure of Ephrem in the Christian tradition. The writings of St Ephrem the Syrian are deeply incorporated into liturgical practices of the Orthodox Christian traditions in this day and age. His hymns and prayers are often being read in the Syrian, Russian and Greek Orthodox churches during the course of the liturgical year and also over the special period of Great Lent. In recent years there has been a growing interest in the writings of Ephrem the Syrian in academic scholarship, largely due to the works of Sebastian Brock, as well as Alison Salvesen, Robert Murray, Cathleen McVey and others. The material used in this book will be taken from the edited collection of the Midrash Rabbah in English from Freedman, H., Maurice Simon (eds.), etc. Midrash Rabbah, Exodus, transl. S.M. Lehrman, (London: Soncino Press, 1983) or in Hebrew from Epstein, E. (ed.), Midrash Rabbah (Tel-Aviv, 1956–63). On the history of the text see Neusner, J, Christian Text and the Bible of Judaism: The Judaic Encounters with Scripture (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990). 6 Currently located in South East Turkey, on the border with Syria. 7 Modern name for it is Urfa, and it is also in South East Turkey. 5

INTRODUCTION

5

THE QUR’AN

The Qur’an is the main religious text of Islam. At the time of Muhammad’s death in 632 CE the Qur’an existed in its oral form. According to the traditional views, shortly after his death the scribes led by Zayd ibn Thabit (d.655) collected the verses and produced them in a written form. Therefore the written copy of the Qur’an was produced and finalised within the twenty years after Mohammad’s death 8. Modern researchers in the field also suggest that the Qur’an may have well be largely redacted close to the period of the lifetime of Muhammad. 9 It is clear from the introduction above that the Qur’an appeared in its written form after the biblical narrative and after the writings of Ephrem, and during the time of the production of some of the corpus of the Midrash Rabbah. In determining the Qur’anic place within the tradition of exegetical development of the biblical stories of Moses this study presents biblically related material in the Qur’an. The goal of See Tabatabai, Sayyid M. H. (1987). The Qur'an in Islam: its impact and influence on the life of muslims. Zahra Publ; Richard Bell (Revised and Enlarged by W. Montgomery Watt) (1970). Bell’s introduction to the Qur’an. Univ. Press. pp. 31– 51; Lambton and Bernard Lewis (1970). The Cambridge history of Islam (Reprint. ed.). Cambridge Univ. Press. p. 32; Denffer, Ahmad von (1985). Ulum al-Qur’an: an introduction to the sciences of the Qur’an (Repr. ed.). Islamic Foundation. p. 37. 9 See Behnam Sadeghi and Mohsen Goudarzi, “Ṣan‘ā’ 1 and the Origins of the Qur’ān,” Der Islam 87 (2012): 1–29; cf. Elisabeth Puin, “Ein früher Koranpalimpsest aus Ṣan‘ā’ (DAM 01–27.1),” in Markus Groß and Karl-Heinz Ohlig (eds.) Schlaglichter: Schriften zur frühen Islamgeschichte und zum Koran, Band 3: Die beiden ersten islamischen Jahrhunderte (Berlin: Hans Schiler, 2008), 461–93; eadem, „Ein früher Koranpalimpsest aus Ṣan'ā' (DAM 01–27.1): Teil II“ in Markus Groß and Karl-Heinz Ohlig (eds.) Vom Koran zum Islam (Berlin: Hans Schiller, 2009), 523–81; eadem „Ein früher Koranpalimpsest aus Ṣan'ā' (DAM 01–27.1): Teil III: Ein nicht-‘uṯmānischer Koran“ in Markus Groß and Karl-Heinz Ohlig (eds.) Die Entstehung einer Weltreligion I: von der koranischen Bewegung zum Frühislam (Berlin: Hans Schiller, 2010), 233–305. The questions about the carbon dating remain, as well as about palaeography of Ṣan'ā' 1. On this see Déroche, F., Qur’ans of the Umayyads: a Preliminary Overview (Leiden: Brill, 2014). 8

6

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

selecting biblically related material about Moses in the Qur’an is for the purpose of illustrating the ways in which Qur’an interprets the earlier circulating biblical stories. The studies of the Qur’anic interpretations of the Bible determine the place of the Qur’an in the exegetical tradition of the biblical commentaries of Jewish and Christian origin. Hence the attempt of this research is to discern whether the narrative of the Qur’an joins the common tradition of biblical exegesis or whether it proposes its own unprecedented understanding of the biblical stories. In each of the outcomes from this research the analysis of the contribution of the Qur’an to the biblical stories about Moses is added to the analysis of the contributions of Ephrem and the Midrash. In the process of gathering their respective interpretations of the biblically related stories of Moses, the Qur’an, Ephrem and the Midrash are summoned under the umbrella term of being part of the common tradition of biblical interpretation of Jewish, Christian and Islamic origins respectively. There has been much research done in determining whether there was a common tradition of Jewish-Christian exegesis during the first centuries of the common era 10. The novel contribution of this study is its attempt to expand the definition of the common tradition of biblical exegesis into the biblically related passages of the Qur’an. On the one hand, such a representation of the Qur’an in this study relates it to the biblical exegetical sources of Judaism and Christianity, e.g. Midrash and Ephrem, while on the other hand the unique position of the Qur’an in this study cannot be undermined. The Qur’an is a unique source which also can be compared to the biblical narrative itself, as a sacred source with its own exegetical tradition. In this way Qur’an becomes unparalleled and disengaged from the purely biblical exegetical sources, such as Midrash and Ephrem, and is paralleled to the Jewish and Christian sacred scriptural sources. See bibliography in Narinskaya, E., Ephrem, a Jewish Sage… which presents a comparative analysis of Ephrem’s commentaries on Exodus and Rabbinical exegetical traditions of the time.

10

INTRODUCTION

7

Herein lies a complex and unique position of the Qur’an in relation to the primary sources in this study. One had to emphasize that in this study there will be no discussion about the Qur’an as a sacred source in itself, and neither will there be much, if any reference to the extensive and scholarly valuable tradition of Qur’anic exegesis. The emphasis of this study, therefore, will be on selecting biblically related passages of the Qur’an and analysing them alongside the biblical narrative and alongside the passages of Midrash and Ephrem. This style of enquiry of the Qur’an will deprive it of the scholarly consideration of Tafsir and the later post-Qur’anic traditions, sources and interpretations which could be considered as disadvantageous in this study. Nonetheless the deliberate choice of this work is to prioritise and to single out the biblical/post-biblical legacy of the Qur’anic narrative and devote to it most of its focus and attention. 11 There will be numerous occasions in this study discussion of Qur’anic material where the use of Tafsir literature could be relevant. However, it is a deliberate methodological choice of the author of this book to refrain from engaging any post-Qur’anic traditions and sources and to keep them outside the scope of primary sources considered in this study. This is done in order to emphasise the engagement of the Qur’an with the biblical tradition of Judaeo-Christian origin rather than illustrating the Qur’an shaping, influencing and to some extent creating its own tradition of Qur’anic exegesis. The rare and very occasional and nonsystematic appearance of some of the Tafsir material in this work is rather an exception to the methodological rule of this study and only used marginally for illustrative purposes. This being said, there is much need for further research into the field of Qur’anic exegesis and its relation, engagement and appreciation of the Judaeo-Christian tradition of biblical exegesis. The lack of this quest in this book is only due to the different emphasis and the deliberate attempt to consider exclusively the biblical passages of the Qur’an as this study primary focus. Similarly, in the attempt of the current research to situate the biblically related passages of the Qur’an into the Judaeo-Christian tradition of biblical exegesis there is an almost artificial attempt in this study to disengage the Qur’an from its own exegetical tradition. Therefore, the absence of Tafsir (and secondary) literature in this study is a deliberate attempt which is considered by the author to be justified by the aims of this study. 11

8

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESEARCH & THE OUTCOMES

This study aims to analyse, interpret and define the chronological sequence of the religious and historical development of the tradition of biblical exegesis across the writings of the three Abrahamic traditions. In doing so the biblical narrative of Exodus is taken by default as an ‘original’ source, which chronologically pre-dates all of the other three sources in the study. The study presents an attempt to discover how the stories of Moses were developed, unfolded and narrated by these selected sources. The analysis of the stories of Moses in the selected writings allows one to reach the conclusions of this study with regard to the nature of the connections, dialogues and communications between the studied sources. In order to achieve the proposed goal, this book provides for the creative use and application of the sources in order to provide fresh insights on the biblical narrative of Exodus and the sources employed. The proposed methodology of the research consists of a three-step process. Firstly, it displays a narrative about Moses the prophet and God’s chosen one, as presented by the four primary sources, which are the Hebrew Bible, the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem the Syrian and the Qur’an. Secondly, the study analyses these sources and shows the development of the Hebrew biblical narrative and its unveiling through time. The process of exegetical unravelling of the ‘original’ biblical stories through the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an demonstrates the connections between the sources, and offers textual evidence on which the conclusions of this book are built. The ‘Mosaic’ narratives of the Hebrew Bible, Ephrem, the Midrash and the Qur’an are compared in this study, and the similarities and differences between their respective narratives are highlighted. As the final third step of the study, there is an attempt to present the outcomes from the exercise of analysing the exegetical writings across the three monotheistic traditions, and to consider their respective exegetical contributions to the common exegetical tradition of the collaborations and encounters between them.

INTRODUCTION

9

This research attempts to define common ground between the studied sources. In doing so the similarities between the sources are identified and differences between them are analysed. The purpose of this study is to establish a dialogue between the original sources. The overall attempt in this book is to present the relationships between the original biblical story, the writings of rabbinical exegetes, Ephrem the Syrian and the Qur’an. In doing so the underlying task is to find out whether there is a possibility to identify a common exegetical tradition which unites these sources.

EXEGESIS: DEFINING THE TERM

In offering a definition of biblical exegesis, this study proposes a broad definition of the term in order to include the writings of three monotheistic religions. The basic definition of Exegesis is taken from various on-line dictionaries 12. The four main points are extracted from this definition on which this study concentrates, and through the prism of which the selected texts are analysed. These four points cover critical views, explanations, interpretations and analysis, as four pillars in defining the process of exegetical appreciation of the biblical narrative in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. In adopting the broad definition of exegesis in this study there is a possibility of defining the biblically related material The online dictionary gives the following broad definition of Exegesis: Critical explanation or analysis, especially of a text. Etymology of the word exegesis is of Greek origin, from the word ἐξηγεῖσθαι, to interpret. Another definition of the same on-line source contextualises exegesis within the religious setting: It offers the following additional definition of exegesis as a critical interpretation or explication, especially of biblical and other religious texts. And the final definition provided by the same dictionary limits it to the Christian biblical exegesis presenting it as ‘an explanation or critical interpretation (especially of the Bible)’. See in Oxford English Dictionary (https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/66027?redirectedFrom=exegesis#eid), https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exegesis, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exegesis, 29.05.20.

12

10

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

from the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an as biblical exegesis. Thus, the definition of exegesis in this study comfortably includes biblically related verses of the Qur’an under the definition of biblical exegesis 13. Another definition of Exegesis allows the identification of specific components of exegesis, which are adopted in this book. The exegesis in this book is identified as Historical Biblical Exegesis. The definition offered by this study identifies the biblical text as a foundation source, on which the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an are built. By uniting the exegetical sources there is an attempt to present a process of historical, religious and exegetical development of the interpretations of the biblical material across the three Abrahamic religious traditions.

EXPLORING POSSIBILITIES FOR THE DIALOGUE: THE MIDRASH, EPHREM AND THE QUR’AN OFFERING THEIR PERSPECTIVES ON THE BIBLICAL STORY OF MOSES

The main goal of this study is to establish a dialogue and to test the idea of a connection between the four original sources in this book. Consequently, the outcome of the research in relation to the biblical narrative, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an, will allow a projection of the findings into the religious traditions, which these sources represent. As a foundation for comparative study, the starting place for each chapter is found in considering the biblical stories of Moses as common ground for each source. In doing so the HeThere have been scholarly approaches to the Qur’anic narrative in relation to the Biblical subtext. As an example of a contextualised study of the Qur’anic narrative one can look at Reynolds, G.S., Qur’an and its Biblical Subtext (London, NY: Routledge, 2010), Reynolds, G.S., Qur’an and its Historical context (London, NY: Routledge, 2008). The study in the current book makes a further step in conducting its research and proposes defining the biblically related passages in the Qur’an as biblical exegesis, which is paralleled with the writings of Jewish origin (Midrash) and the Christian origin (Ephrem). 13

INTRODUCTION

11

brew text of the biblical narrative is charged with the role of organising the dialogue between the sources. It is first and foremost the biblical stories of Moses, which contribute themes, concepts and notions for the research. Consequently, biblical themes are further discussed and analysed in relation to the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The common story on which all of the selected sources comment is the story of Moses. Selected passages from the original sources offer their respective accounts of the ‘common’ stories and by doing so give an answer to the question as to whether there is common knowledge or common tradition between them. In answering the question, the ways in which each of the studied sources are affected, inspired or influenced by each other are explored. By presenting systematic illustrations of the comparison between the stories of Moses, the possibility of accidental similarities between the texts is minimised. Further analysis of the sources in the study contributes to the attempt of the research to connect them as being parts of an exegetically threaded tradition of biblical interpretation, which is united by the common quest for better understanding of the biblical stories across the three Abrahamic traditions. In each chapter of this book there are many extensive passages quoting directly from the Bible, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. There is a reason for that. It seemed important to present the original texts in dialogue with each other, and as a first step to allow the texts to speak for themselves by offering an analytically selected and organised compilation from the respective sources. The original sources in this book are brought together thematically. There are five major themes in this book which each chapter represents. The book starts with the four major themes from Moses’ life: Moses’ childhood; meeting God at the Burning Bush; Crossing the Red Sea; and the reception of the Law. The final chapter of the book looks at the theology of the signs in the story of Moses. Common themes from the stories of Moses facilitate exegetical dialogue between the primary sources. The importance of the dialogue between the original sources is crucial, as it sup-

12

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

ports the main attempt to unite the studied sources under the umbrella term of the common tradition of biblical exegesis across the three Abrahamic faiths. By illustrating the possibilities for dialogue between the texts through each chapter in the book, evidence is collected in support of the argument that they are united by the common tradition of biblical exegesis. The analysis of the selected passages from the primary sources gives the study its form and flow in leading the research to its concluding remarks which will summarise its outcomes. The two-fold connection will be illustrated in this study. Firstly, the connection of each of the exegetical texts to the biblical narrative, and secondly their connection to each other’s respective exegesis. In doing so the analysis of the Qur’anic passages with other exegetical sources of Jewish and Christian origin is used in support of the argument of this research, which considers the biblically related passages of the Qur’an within the common tradition of biblical exegesis of Jewish and Christian origin. In other words, all of the primary sources considered in this book are analysed under the commonality of their relation to the biblical text of the Old Testament and to each other. Consequently, they are described under the umbrella term of belonging to the common tradition of biblical exegesis across the three Monotheistic traditions. The interest in presenting an exercise of building a conversation between the texts reflecting on one common theme of the figure of Moses is determined by the theme itself. By reading about Moses, one learns more about Moses and the appreciation of his stories throughout the scope of the writings of biblical, Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic origin. In doing so this study builds a foundation of textual illustrations reflecting on common stories, and possibly illustrates common knowledge which was accumulated in the early centuries through the process of appreciation of the biblical stories about Moses.

COMMON TRADITION OF BIBLICAL EXEGESIS: EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIPS

Many different relationships are going to be traced in this book on many different levels. On the theological level there is an

INTRODUCTION

13

attempt to see into the presentation of the God-human relationships in the biblical narrative, and in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Thus, the study of the God-human relationship makes an inter-textual, theological, exegetical, and analytical task for the current research. The figure of Moses is the main focus for the study, but also the members of his family, as well as the people in his life are of interest for providing a theological definition of the God-human relationship in the following chapters. On the exegetical level this study aims to present the relationship between the OT narrative and the exegetical sources. In doing so the question of the scriptural authority of the OT is considered in relation to the exegesis of the Midrash Rabbah, the biblical commentaries of Ephrem the Syrian, and in the biblically related passages of the Qur’an. In addition, in determining the level of the exegetical relationship between the primary sources, the ways in which the Midrash, Ephrem and Qur’an relate to each other exegetically are explored. In doing so the study addresses the main question for this research, which is whether there is a common tradition of biblical exegesis across the three monotheistic traditions and whether the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an are part of this common tradition of biblical exegesis. In the process of finding an answer to the main question of this research, the answers to the other questions posed in this book are offered. In answering the question of the scriptural authority of the OT, this study presents an analysis of how the exegetical sources treat the OT narrative. In answering the question of the relationship between God and people, the examples from the selected sources are analysed in determining the similarities between their presentations of the nature of the Godhuman relationship through the example from the life of Moses and the people around him. Also, the differences in the respective presentations are identified and analysed. In doing so the questions of freedom of will and the partnership with God are discussed. Further concrete examples from the chapters are analysed in illustrating the question of responsibility in the God-

14

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

human relationship and the roles of the parties involved in the relationship. As indicated earlier there are five major themes in this book which make five chapters. Each chapter follows through a particular theme from the life of Moses and presents the accounts of these themes in the four primary sources. The structural core of each chapter is the same. Each chapter starts with the biblical account of events and follows into the presentation of the biblical stories in the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Each chapter offers illustrative textual examples which contribute towards building evidential support for the main argument of the research. A combination of the textual evidence from the five chapters expands the scope of the research and provides a possibility of drawing more general conclusions as to the nature of the exegetical relationship between the studied sources as well as between the religious traditions which they represent. Chapter one looks at the stories of Moses’ childhood with special attention to the episode of his mother casting the baby into the water. The story of Moses’ mother is further unravelled in the presentations of Ephrem and the Qur’an. Her relationship with God is portrayed differently in the exegesis of the studied sources. This gives an incentive for the research in the chapter to analyse their exegetical avenues and provides theological explanations to the dramatic situation of Moses’ mother casting her baby into the river. The question of the prayer of Moses’ mother and her position in relation to her people is explored. With this, the typology of the Jewish midwives and their role for the future of their people is discussed. Additionally, the chapter explores the possibility of ascribing prophetic characteristics to the female biblical characters in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Special attention is ascribed in this chapter to the concept of Divine Revelation and Divine Inspiration in the Qur’an. This question is raised in relation to the verses of the Qur’an suggesting that the mother of Moses received direct revelation from God and acted according to this revelation. Several verses from the Qur’an are analysed in order to determine the type of recipi-

INTRODUCTION

15

ents of Divine Revelation in various verses of its narrative. There is an attempt to understand the differences between the nature of Divine communication with people by means of either revelation or inspiration from God. Consequently, the study in the chapter aims to illustrate the nature of the relationship of the mother of Moses with God. In doing so the fact that she was the recipient of Divine Revelation plays an important role. Therefore, the question is addressed as to whether the mother of Moses could be perceived in the Qur’an as being considered among other prophets and messengers who received direct Revelation from God. Another question is explored in this chapter in relation to the Moses’ mother sacrifice. A comparison between the sacrifice of Abraham and the sacrifice of Moses’ mother is presented and the outcome of the comparison is offered. All of the above-mentioned questions are looked at in relation to the writings of the Qur’an, but are also addressed in the passages from Ephrem’s exegesis and the exegesis of the Midrash. This allows for a comparative analysis between the writings of Jewish, Christian and Muslim origin in relation to the biblical narrative. The analysis of the sources in the chapter allows identification of the possible connections between their exegetical approaches as their way of developing the biblical text. By identifying similarities in presenting non-biblical information which the writings of the Midrash and Ephrem offer, the study allows for the possibility to suggest a common exegetical background for their writings. In relation to the Qur’anic argument, the question of the Qur’an further developing the theological appreciation of the figure of Moses’ mother is addressed. Overall, the illustrations in this chapter initiate the process of collecting textual evidence from the biblical narrative, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an on the subject of Moses’ stories. Further analysis of the textual examples from the original sources explores other possibilities of their connections to the biblical text and to the exegesis of each other. Chapter Two brings the study of this book into the story of Moses’ initial encounter with God at the Burning Bush. The chapter starts with the biblical narrative of the account which is used to identify the key questions for the analysis in the re-

16

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

search. The question of the mountain Horeb and its description in the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an is addressed as a starting point. This question is expanded into further enquiry into the definition of the mountain as holy, and the ground and the mountain being considered as sacred spaces. In relation to the question of the holiness of the ground, Ephrem’s use of Jacob’s ladder is examined as his exegetical model of establishing a connection of the Burning Bush event with the event from the past. Midrashic and Qur’anic allusions to the reception of the Torah as an exegetical model of future connections are also considered in this chapter. Eschatological and mystical motives in the Qur’an are picked up in relation to Moses and the Burning Bush event. The ways in which the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an present their answers to the posed questions allow for analytical conclusions as to the method of their exegetical approaches to the subject of the sacred ground in the biblical story of Moses and the Burning Bush. The other question for the research in this chapter is about the Divine presence in the Burning Bush. This question evolves from the biblical narrative which indicates that there was a presence of an angel in the bush. The analysis of the answers of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an to the problematic information in the Bible allows for a number of illustrative conclusions of the chapter. First of all, the ways the exegetical passages of each source treat the inconsistency of the biblical narrative allow a determination of the level of their appreciation of the biblical narrative. This opens up a question for further discussion in this study about the appreciation of the OT narrative as a scriptural authority in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Secondly, exploration into the line of argument in the respective exegetical passages of the studied sources, allows the drawing of more evidence for the research in relation to the similarities and differences between them. The study of the ways by which the passages from the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an present their arguments allow for the analytical conclusions about their exegetical methodologies. In doing so, there are illustrations in this chapter of the exegetical connections between prior events in the biblical narrative and the story of

INTRODUCTION

17

Moses and the Burning Bush. On the basis of these connections in the exegetical passages of the studied sources their respective didactics become apparent. The analysis of the outcomes of their respective exegesis gives more evidence as to the possibility of the interplay between the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The use of the examples of the biblical prophets in connection to the episode of Moses and the Burning Bush allow for further explorations in this chapter into the nature of the covenantal relationship between people and God. The relationship of Abraham with God is introduced in this chapter in relation to the fulfilment of Divine promise to Abraham in the story of Moses. The calculation of years between the promise of God to Abraham and Moses’ fulfilment of the promise gives further illustrative examples of the dynamics of the relationship between the exegesis of Ephrem, the Midrash, the Qur’an and the biblical narrative. The reasons behind the fact that Ephrem and the Midrash reconcile the discrepancy of the number of years in the Bible are explored. The outcome of the analysis of the chronology in the respective sources leads to the conclusions about their appreciation of the biblical narrative. Illustrations from the writings of the Qur’an are also used in support of its relationship with the Bible. The use of the notion of the Term in its exegesis of the Burning Bush is examined, and the possibility of looking at the Qur’anic notion of the Term as its reflection on biblical chronology is explored. The example of the Qur’anic exegesis is offered in this chapter as an illustration of the connection between the Qur’an and the exegesis of Ephrem and the Midrash. The use of biblical chronology in the exegesis of the studied sources gives another illustration for the possibility of embracing their writings under the definition of the common tradition of biblical exegesis. The following question for consideration in the chapter is how the nature of Divine Revelation to Moses at the Burning bush is expressed in the writings of the studied sources. Their respective illustrations of Divine intervention allow for analytical comparison. The exegesis of the Qur’an in relation to the biblical episode of Moses at the Burning Bush is explored in rela-

18

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

tion to the notion of Divine knowledge and awareness. The possibility of a connection between Ephrem and the Midrash is tested by means of their mutual appreciation of the biblical phrase in relation to God seeing the suffering of the people of Israel in Egypt. The question of the God-human relationship is readdressed in this chapter. A new level of intimacy in God-human encounters is introduced by the biblical account of the Burning Bush event. The expression of this relationship in the exegetical passages of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an are considered in their relation to the biblical narrative about the Divine introduction of God to Moses. The reasons behind Ephrem and the Qur’an not referring to the moment of Divine introduction in their exegesis of the story are analysed. The overall aim of the second chapter is to look further into the possibilities of establishing the dialogue between the original sources used in this study. Chapter three presents exegetical accounts of the opportunities in the God-human relationship, which are either lost or gained depending on the choice of the people and the nations. The study in this chapter considers events which lead to one of the culminating events in the Exodus narrative, that is the crossing of the Red Sea. The study in the chapter presents different illustrations of the encounters between Pharaoh and Moses. Looking at the background of the biblical narrative, the research in the chapter enters Moses’ story from the time of him resuming his vocation as the chosen one by God and returning to Egypt. Different aspects of Moses’ mission to the people around him are demonstrated in this study. In doing so the appreciation of Moses’ vocation is shown in the original sources of the study. The question of Moses’ ministry to the people of Israel as well as to the people of Egypt is discussed. Moses’ testimony about God, and Pharaoh’s resistance to his testimony are illustrated by exegetic passages from the selected sources. The question of the stubbornness of Pharaoh is considered together with the relating theme of the hardening of the heat of Pharaoh. In doing so the question of free will in relation to God hardening Pharaoh’s

INTRODUCTION

19

heart is addressed in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The subject matter about repentance under the pressure of the plagues makes another theme for analysis in the chapter, as all of the exegetical sources bring it up for discussion in their writings. The illustration of the conversion of the Pharaoh is offered in this chapter along-side the example of the conversion of the magicians and the didactics of their respective conversions in the writings of the exegetical sources is analysed. The illustration of the Qur’an changing the biblical narrative with regard to Pharaoh’s drowning in the Red Sea follows the discussions in this book by re-addressing the question of the authority of the OT. Another reoccurring theme of the signs is followed in the chapter. In addition, the reasons behind the multitude of plagues and their significance is unravelled in the exegesis of the selected sources. The corresponding theme of Divine intentions for and expectations from Pharaoh and the Egyptians as well as Divine providence for the people of Israel is addressed in this chapter. The question of Divine Mercy and Justice in relation to the Plagues of Egypt is also discussed in the study. The perspective of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an on the subject matter is offered. The exegesis of the biblical account of the Israelites taking the Egyptian gold and silver with them, gives an illustration to the broader subject of the relationship between the people of Israel and God, as well as to the place of the people of Egypt in that relationship. The origins of the Qur’anic phrase in describing God as the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ is analysed in relation to the biblical writings of the Moses-Pharaoh encounters and the exegesis of the biblical narrative in the Midrash. The outcome of the analysis of the Qur’anic phrase gives an opportunity to offer an illustration of how the phrase the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ could have Midrashic origins in the Qur’an. This outcome is followed with a discussion about how the exegetical sources of this research contribute to the broader, deeper, and more nuanced and theologically and exegetically analysed understanding of the biblical narrative. The illustrations in this chapter show how each source adds its

20

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

unique contribution to the process of creative and exegetical unravelling of the biblical stories. The place of the people of Israel and their significance in the studied sources is the reoccurring theme in this study. In chapter three this question is addressed in relation to the dynamics of the God-Pharaoh-Moses encounters prior to the crossing of the Red Sea. The power struggle as an illustration of the encounters between Moses and Pharaoh is addressed. In relation to this the didactics of the right and wrong conduct in the Godhuman relationship is analysed as they are expressed in the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. In doing so the study presents the extracts from the primary sources where Moses is presented in unfavourable light and Pharaoh’s behaviour is justified. The research in this chapter looks closely at the relationships between God, Moses and Pharaoh, together with the people of Israel and Egypt. In doing so the study summons the textual evidence from the stories of Moses in the Bible, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an, and builds up evidential support illustrating their connections and interactions with each other. The reasons behind the similarities in the exegetical approaches of the selected sources are proposed, and the analysis of their disagreements is offered. Both similarities and differences are considered as potential opportunities in showing the interplay between the studied sources. Chapter four looks at the next stage in the God-human relationship and in the life of Moses, which is the reception of the Law. This chapter opens a new level of conducting research which is about notions, concepts, ideas and religious teachings in the Bible and selected sources. The common themes are the ones relating to the Decalogue and God’s sayings to Moses prior to the reception of the Law. The chapter starts with the introduction of several biblical phrases, which are looked at in the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. These are the notions of ‘kingdom of priests’ and a ‘holy nation’ as Divine definitions of Israel, and the expression of God about Israel in Exodus 19:4: ‘I carried you on eagle’s wings and brought you to myself’. The reflection of

INTRODUCTION

21

these concepts in the exegetical writings gives an opportunity in this chapter to explore the possibility of the dialogue between the sources. The illustration of the Qur’an provides a clear example of the Qur’an interacting with the biblical text and changing the biblical notion of ‘kingdom of priests’ into its own of ‘kings and prophets’. Ephrem’s exegesis of this concept indicates his reliance on the Jewish tradition of the Targumim. Further illustrations from the selected writings aim to collect more evidence from the studied texts in support of the suggestion of an exegetical dialogue between them. The concept of Israel is another theme, which this chapter offers for discussion between the writings of the selected sources. The views of the Qur’an on the chosen status of the Children of Israel is offered, as well as the writings of the Midrash and Ephrem on the subject. The Qur’anic criticism of the shortcomings of the Jews is read alongside similar critical remarks of the rabbinic exegesis. The illustrations of similarities between the texts allow the study in this chapter to support the idea of these sources being connected to each other. A broader question of the God-Israel relationship is addressed in this chapter, as well as a very specific notion of the ‘wood’ in the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. When the broad subject of the study allows for an exchange of theological ideas between the sources, the exploration into the concrete exegesis of the wood/staff in the Moses’ story provides evidence of collaboration and exchanges between the sources. Another illustration in the chapter has to do with the ability of people to see God and the references to this subject in the selected passages. The comparison between the exegesis of Ephrem and the Qur’an on the matter presents polar opposite interpretations of the biblical story. When Ephrem writes that the people of Israel at Mount Sinai were able to see God, the Qur’an clearly denies such a possibility and writes that even Moses was not able to do so. Such a clear disagreement between the sources gives an opportunity to explore whether there is an underlying connection between the exegesis of Ephrem and the Qur’an, which establishes a certain relationship between them by means of exegetical dialogue and apologetics.

22

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Further possibilities of illustrating the Qur’an being in dialogue with the biblical narrative are explored in this chapter. In doing so the concept of the OT prophets is evoked, as well as the idea of continuation in the Qur’an of the heritage of the ‘previous scriptures’ and the legacy of the OT patriarchs and God’s chosen people. The presentation of the Decalogue in this chapter comprises two major themes. One is the theme of Monotheism and the other is the theme of the Golden Ethical Principle of the OT Law. On the subject of Monotheism, the first two commandments of the Decalogue are studied in the biblical narrative, as well as in the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The focus on Monotheism in this chapter gives an opportunity for an analytical study of each of the respective sources’ presentations on the matter. Christological interpretations of Monotheism in Ephrem are put in dialogue with the writings of the Midrash and the Qur’an. In doing so the arguments in the Midrash and the Qur’an about God having no son are analysed and considered as the attempts of the Jewish and Muslim sources to preserve their ideas of Monotheism and in reaction to the teachings of Christianity. On the subject of the ethical principles in the law, the commandments of love of one’s neighbour is discussed in relation to Jewish, Christian and Muslim interpretations, as well as the commandment relating to the responsibility of children for the sins of their parents. The exegetical illustrations of the biblical commandments in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an, permit new possibilities in establishing the dialogue, connection and interaction between the studied sources. For example, the verses of the Qur’an in direct contradiction to the biblical principle of children being held responsible for the sins of the fathers is seen as the Qur’anic attempt to present its corrections to the teaching of the Bible. As another way of the Qur’an engaging with the biblical narrative, the biblical concept of the Jealous God from Exodus 20:5 is explored in its writing. The Qur’anic silence with regard to the biblical verses referring to the notions of a punishing God are discussed in connection to the Qur’anic concept of a just God. The fact that the concept of a

INTRODUCTION

23

Jealous God is not present in the Qur’an is seen in this study as its disagreement with the biblical assertion, and the alternative definitions of God in the Qur’an are taken as its replacement of the biblical notion. As an illustration of the Qur’an approving the commandment of the Law, the notion of Shabbat is considered. The attempts of the Qur’an to depict a relationship of kinship between the three monotheistic religious traditions is also explored in this chapter. The similarities with the Qur’anic presentation and the exegesis of the Midrash are studied. The outcome of this chapter brings another dimension to the research by adding to it the study of the common concepts, notions and ideas in the Bible, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. With this the chapter offers its own contributions to the stories of Moses, which were analysed in the first three chapters of the book. Chapter five brings the research of the book into the theological area. The focus of the study in the chapter is on the singular notion of the signs and their theological appreciation in the biblical narrative and in the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The notion of signs is not easy to be seen as a theological concept in the biblical narrative. With the research in this chapter there is an attempt to show how the exegetical sources of this study allow for the possibility of unravelling and exegetically regenerating the theology of signs in the Bible. Such an exercise allows for an illustration of the two-way process of the relationship between the studied sources. On the one hand, the exegetical writings of this book take their foundation for their interpretations from the ‘original’ narrative of the Bible, while on the other hand further exploration into exegetical texts feed back into the biblical narrative and allow for a deeper, more complex and nuanced understanding of the original biblical text. Such an exercise allows the introduction of a new way for academic researchers in the future. The newly defined field of common tradition of the biblical exegesis furthers scholarly opportunities for studies of biblical exegesis by including the writings representing the three Abrahamic faiths in the scope of its research.

24

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

The study of the biblical narrative of the signs is offered from the time of creation until the story of Moses. The theological appreciation of the signs in the Bible are systematised in several definitions of signs being: human aids, witnesses of the covenants, and testimonials about God. Also, the definition of signs as distinction and division between the people, and the signs for generations to come are discerned from the biblical narrative in the first two books of the Torah. All of the identified theological definitions of the signs in the biblical narrative form the structure of the research in the chapter. The Biblical definitions of signs become the definitions which are tested in the exegetical writings about the signs in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Ephrem’s appreciation of the signs in the story of Moses conveys a theological message based on the reality of the Godhuman relationship. Ephrem offers his views on the process of one’s explorations into the God-human relationship by means of appropriation of the signs. The didactics of Ephrem’s exegesis allows for the process of one asking for the signs from God as part of one’s encounters with the Divine. Further research in this chapter shows that this idea appears in the exegesis of the Moses-Pharaoh encounters in the Midrash and the Qur’an. Therefore, the didactics of asking for signs illustrates a point of agreement between the studied sources. The study of the Moses-Pharaoh encounters in the selected writings lead the research of the chapter into exploring the biblical question of Pharaoh to Moses: ‘Who is the Lord?’. The analysis of this question in the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an lead to the possibility of interaction between them through their respective exegetical writings. The Qur’anic definition of God as the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ is seen in this study as being borrowed and developed from the rabbinical phrase featuring in the Midrash Rabbah in relation to the Moses-Pharaoh first encounter. The fact that this phrase is not present in the biblical narrative allows one to propose that the Qur’an was interacting with the rabbinical exegesis directly, and not via the biblical story. Further developing the idea of collaboration between the writings of the Midrash and the Qur’an, the story of the creation

INTRODUCTION

25

of luminaries is given due attention. The outcome of the analysis of the two sources allows that both of them develop the biblical idea of luminaries being intended as Divine aids for people at the time of creation. In addition, this idea is considered in relation to the Christian Syriac tradition of looking at nature as the witness and testimony about God. Theological appreciation of the luminaries as the originally intended signs for God-human encounters connects all four original sources in the study. Textual illustrations in the chapter reveal that the theological appreciation of the luminaries was initially commenced by the biblical account of Genesis. Consequently, further illustrations in the study show how the biblical idea of God’s original anticipation to have a relationship with people is developed by the Midrash and the Qur’an through a theological appreciation of the creation of the luminaries. The Qur’an is shown developing the idea further into elaborating that the luminaries were created for people as aiding signs for the recognition of time and for the organising of people’s daily affairs. The Midrash adds to the Qur’anic appreciation of the signs of the luminaries, the area of liturgical worship being calculated by the luminaries. Midrashic theological appreciation of the signs is further presented in this chapter in relation to the association of Israel with the moon, and the pagan Rome with the sun. The concept of Israel as the first-born son of God is analysed in the chapter. The didactics of the Midrash are founded on the idea of the greatness of the nation being determined by their association with the luminary. Ultimately the Midrash builds its theological appreciation of the luminaries by associating the moon with God and the sun with the created world. With this the Midrash elevates Israel over other nations by its association to God via choosing the aiding sign of the moon. The theological appreciation of the notion of Israel in the Midrash is matched with the theological appreciation of the prophetic use of signs in the Qur’an. The study establishes an invisible dialogue between the exegesis of the biblical concept of the signs in the Midrash and in the Qur’an on the topic of signs and prophets. The three-way process of the exegetical encounters between the Bible, the Midrash and the Qur’an is illustrated

26

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

through the analysis of their respective writings. The illustrative example of the Qur’an changing the biblical narrative in order to strengthen its theological appreciation of the signs is offered through the story of Pharaoh’s drowning. According to the Qur’anic narrative, Pharaoh converts while drowning and his body is spared and made into a sign for the generations to come. Such a strong example from the Qur’an is used in this chapter to illustrate the different levels of interaction between the studied sources. The question of the God-human relationship is further addressed through the theme of the signs and prophets. The Qur’anic view on the subject is analysed and compared with the Midrashic exegesis. The outcome of the comparison allows for the highlighting of the distinctive features in the theological appreciation of the signs in the Midrash and the Qur’an. Their respective theologies of the signs are seen in the chapter as being refined via exegetical dialogue and encounters with each other, as well as with the biblical narrative of the OT and through the common theme of God-human collaboration and their respective views on it. The analysis of the Qur’anic view of the God-human encounters is offered through its appreciation of Divine superiority as an overwhelming factor in the didactics of the Qur’an on the subject. The Midrash, through the analysis of its illustration of the prophets and signs in the story of Moses, is seen as offering a model of a team effort, in partnership and collaboration between people and God. The outcome of the comparison in this chapter highlights the different outcomes from the theological appreciation of the signs and prophets in the respective writings. The chapter also points to the uniting theme in the theological appreciation of the signs and prophets in the Midrash and the Qur’an, which is their mutual appreciation of the biblical prophets. The study re-addresses the question of the scriptural authority of the Bible in the selected sources. The outcome of the comparison pairs the Midrash and Ephrem in their appreciation of the OT as Sacred Scripture, while it also pairs Ephrem and the Qur’an based on their analogous methodological exercises of using the biblical narrative to promote and further their own

INTRODUCTION

27

respective exegetical messages. The Midrash is seen as using the methodological approach of interpreting the Sacred Scripture by means of other references from the same Sacred Scripture. Ultimately the theological appreciation of the signs follows with the biblical ideas and their further theological digestion in the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The continuous exercise of reading the four primary sources along-side each other gives an unprecedented account of how the common exegetical tradition of biblical interpretation penetrated the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an, and how each of the respective sources contributed to the common tradition of biblical exegesis by adding to it their appreciation of the biblical narrative. The conclusion of the book presents the following illustrations to the main argument. It allows for the consideration of all of the primary sources as being connected thematically and exegetically to each other. In this sense they are seen as being part of the common tradition of biblical exegesis. Their interaction with each other and with the biblical text is seen on many levels, including the main level of their respective direct connections to the biblical narrative of the Old Testament. The illustrations of the other levels of connection are also presented indicating the possibility that there is an exegetical and theological dialogue between the primary sources. Textual examples from the studied sources and the analysis of their exegesis illustrates the links between the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Special attention is awarded to the connection of the Qur’an to the Midrash, Ephrem and to the biblical narrative itself. This connection is explored through the writings of the text of the Qur’an itself, and also through the analysis of the common themes, concepts and ideas, which the biblically related passages in the Qur’an share with the writings of the Midrash and Ephrem. The differences in the Qur’anic narrative and its alteration or additions to the biblical narrative are seen as its unique way of engaging with the Bible, which influenced the conclusions in this study in determining the nature of the relationship between the Bible and the Qur’an.

28

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

This study offers insights into the world of biblical exegesis across the three monotheistic traditions. Such a wide perspective of the study allows the identification of common interests and concerns in the biblical exegesis of the studied sources. The story of Moses is considered from four perspectives, which start with the biblical narrative, and is followed by the exegesis of the biblical verses in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. In this way the study makes it possible to follow through the exegetical narratives of the studied sources in relation to each other, as well as in their respective relation to the biblical narrative. The collection of the exegetical passages, as well as the passages from the biblical narrative give an indication as to the commonalities and to the differences in their respective appreciation of the biblical texts. The common overarching theme of the God-human relationship gives a theological aspect to the studies. With the selected theme of each chapter, the study explores the presentation of the God-human encounters in the story of Moses through the exegesis of the biblical stories about Moses in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Comparing their respective questions asked of the biblical story and the answers they provide, presents the analysis of their respective contributions to the common tradition of biblical exegesis. In doing so the role of each source is considered on its own merit, and feeds into a deeper understanding of the biblical stories. The examples show the level of the exegetical contribution that is afforded by each of the studied sources to the biblical narrative of the Old Testament. The book offers new insights into the emerging field of biblical exegesis across the three monotheistic religions. The proposed methodology of this research explores one way of addressing the subject of reading the biblical narrative along-side the exegetical works of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The conclusion of the book provides a summary of the advantageous points of the proposed methodology, as well exposing the weaknesses of this method. Overall, this study considers the possibility of either a comparative or analytical study of the selected sources as furthering the research in the field of the common

INTRODUCTION

29

tradition of biblical exegesis across the three monotheistic religious traditions of the Abrahamic faiths.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTERS IN THE BOOK

Chapter One: Moses’ childhood. This chapter explores the question of the chosen one of God in the story of baby Moses being cast into the river. In this chapter the emphasis is on the peripheral characters of Moses’ family, especially on his mother. Her portrayal in the selected writings is presented in order to explore their respective depictions of how the destiny of the chosen one of God is being determined by the people around him. Therefore, the question of the mother of Moses’ relationship with God makes one of the highlights of the research. Also, the figure of Pharaoh and his family is looked at in the selected passages as illustrations of how the people around Moses contributed to his destiny as a chosen one from God. Chapter Two: Moses and the Burning Bush. This chapter looks at the Moses-God relationship during the time of God’s revelation to Moses. The ways in which the primary sources answer the following questions are analysed. Who was it that was talking to Moses from the Burning Bush, and why was the ground where Moses stood blessed twice? The answers from the selected sources pave a way in offering a comparative analysis. Chapter Three: Moses’ encounters leading to the Crossing of the Red Sea. This chapter looks into the dynamics in the relationship between: Moses and Pharaoh, Moses and God, God and Pharaoh, and leads to the presentation of the relationships between Israel, Egypt and God. The ways in which the biblical narrative, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an, highlighted, identified and defined these relationships makes a rich ground for research in the chapter. This chapter also concludes the method of following the stories of Moses’ life, and makes a transition into the following two chapters which look into the concepts and ideas and their presentation in the four primary sources of the study. Chapter Four: Moses receiving the Law. The focus of this chapter is on the Decalogue and the Monotheistic teaching,

30

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

which it presents, and the more general idea of how each of the selected sources summarises the Ten Commandments into one principle in the Golden Rule of Ethics. Thus, the dynamics between Ethics and Monotheism is followed through in the respective writings. The overarching theme of this chapter is to show how the reception of the Law on the Mount of Sinai affected the nature of the God-human relationship. Another aim of the chapter is to show how the selected sources indicate the transition into the conditional nature of the God-human relationship after the reception of the Law. Chapter Five: Theology of the signs in the story of Moses. The final chapter of the book looks into the possibility of the determining a theological appreciation of the signs in the biblical narrative and in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. It also attempts to show how the exegetical sources interact with the biblical narrative on the question of the theology of the signs, and also how the appreciation of the biblical narrative changes under the influence of the theological and exegetical appreciation of the signs in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an.

IDENTIFYING THE NICHE FOR THE CURRENT STUDY AMONG THE SCHOLARLY EXPLORATIONS

This study is a continuation of previous research in various fields of studies in Jewish and Christian biblical exegesis and in the studies of the Qur’an. This book is also a continuation of the previously conducted investigations by the author in studying exegesis of Jewish and Christian sources 14. The current book carries on with a similar exercise, but expands the scope of the reSee Narinskaya, E., Ephrem, a ‘Jewish’ Sage: A comparative analysis of the Exegetical Writings of Ephrem the Syrian and Jewish Traditions (Turnhout: Brepols, 2010). The book explored the Jewish roots of Syriac Christianity by comparing the exegesis of rabbinical writings with the exegesis of Ephrem the Syrian. In doing so it offered a comparison of the Exodus commentaries of Jewish rabbinical writings and a Christian Syriac writer, St Ephrem the Syrian.

14

INTRODUCTION

31

search by adding the studies of the Qur’an. The direction of the research was crystallised by association to previous research in the field. A similar academic approach to the study area is the book of Reynolds, G.S., The Qur’an and its Biblical Context (London: Routledge, 2010). The current book introduces the way of scholarship thinking in looking at the writings of the Qur’an from the religious context of Jewish and Christian traditions. In doing so the author offers an alternative scholarly route to the medieval reading of the Qur’an from the context of Mohammad’s biography. This study takes the methodological suggestion of Reynolds and applies it in a wider context by looking at the Qur’an from a biblical context, and also applying to the study of the Qur’an the context of the biblical exegetical traditions of Jewish and Christian origin. The studies of Reynolds could be seen as a development from the writings of Theodore Nöldeke, Régis Blachère, Alfred Guillaume, and Montgomery Watt, and furthering the field of studies of the Qur’an 15. In relation to the recently published monographs the current book goes along with the two recent publications in the field of the research, which involves attentive work with primary sources dealing with the writings of Christian and Muslim relations. The two recently published books are Tieszen, C., A textual History of Christian-Muslim Relations: Seventh-Fifteenth Centuries (Fortress Press, 2015) and Penn, M.P. , Envisioning Islam: Syriac Christians and the Early Muslim World (Divinations: Rereading Late Ancient Religion) (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015). The contribution of the current study is that it exSee Nöldeke, T., The History of the Qur’an, ed. and transl. Wolfgang H. Behn (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2013), p. 5 where the author discusses the Jewish and Christian influences in the Qur’an and quotes from the Syriac Scriptures, and referring to the aggadic oral influences in the Qur’anic recitations of the biblical stories (p. 6). See also Watt, W.M., Bell's Introduction to the Qur’an. (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1970); ibid. Muhammad in Mecca (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1953). 15

32

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

pands the research from the field of Muslim-Christian relations into the field of Muslim-Christian-Jewish relations. The current book introduces a new definition of a common tradition of biblical exegesis across the three monotheistic religions, which has never been used by scholars in their comparative studies of biblical exegesis. This is the novel contribution of this study. However, it takes its origins from earlier studies which considered the interaction between biblically related passages of Jewish, Christian and Muslim origin. On the evolution of ideas between monotheistic religious traditions one can point to: Firestone, R., Journeys in Holy Lands: The Evolution of the Abraham-Ishmael Legends in Islamic Exegesis (Albany, 1990). On the subject of oral and written traditions and their interrelation one could point to: Ong, W., Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the World (London, 1982) or Goody, J., The Interface between the Written and the Oral (Cambridge, 1987). As far as the idea of religious heritage and the transmission of religious knowledge of the scriptural traditions is concerned, the work of William A. Graham gives an insight into the oral and written traditions and their interactions in the history of religions. 16 Taking into the account the fact that the foundational source for this study is the biblical narrative of the Old Testament, one has to point to a vast amount of work in the field and to the longstanding scholarship in existence. Therefore, the studies in this book cannot be taken in separation from the longstanding tradition of the studies of the Old Testament. This book is built on the foundation of the centuries of studies in the fields of biblical exegesis, religious studies, and the studies of OT theology. For an overview of the development of the OT theology, see Kraus, H.J., Die Biblische Teologie: Ihre Geschichte und Problematic (Neukirchen, 1970), Smart, J.D., The Past, Present and Future of Biblical Theology (Philadelphia, 1979). The ways biblical theology evolved and transformed in the past centuries indiSee Graham, W.A., Beyond the Written World: Oral aspects of Scripture in the History of Religion (Cambridge, 1987).

16

INTRODUCTION

33

cate how scientific research in the field were crystallised under the influence of new methods and scholarly arguments 17. The development of biblical theology is an on-going process, and the study in this book adds to the possible avenues in the development of the biblical studies, and especially in the field of biblical exegesis. This book builds upon the heritage and legacy of the history and methods of ‘Source Criticism’. 18 This brings these studies into the area of religious studies and the challenges of this field of research. 19 Considering the historical stages in the development of academic and critical thinking in the area of biblical studies, there is a possibility to suggest analogous stages in the development of critical studies of the Qur’an in the future. Therefore, it is possible to consider this study as a continuation of past research as well as a projection for future academic researchers in corresponding fields. Relating more specifically to the theme of this study in relation to the studies in the Qur’an, the work of Wheeler, B.M., Moses in the Qur’an and Islamic Exegesis (London: Routledge, 2002) can be named. This study differs in that the focus of the study is the same, the stories of Moses, but the context of the study is somewhat different. Wheeler looks at the figure of Moses and its development in the Qur’an and in the tradition of Islamic comSee the overview in Smart, J.D., The Past, Present, and Future of Biblical Theology (Philadelphia, 1979); Reventlow, H.G., Problems of Old Testament Theology in the Twentieth Century (Philadelphia, 1985); Haynes, J.H., Prussner, F., Old Testament Theology: Its History and Development (Atlanta, 1985); Neusner, J. et al. (eds.) Judaic Perspectives on Ancient Israel (Philadelphia, 1987). 18 See Cassuto, U., The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch (Jerusalem, 1961); Clements, R.E., One Hundred Years of Old Testament Studies (Philadelphia, 1984); Wellhausen, J., Skizzen und Vorarbeiten. II, Die Composition des Hexateuchs (Berlin, 1885). 19 See, for example, in Rudolph, “Basic Positions of Religionswissenschaft,” Religion 11 (1981): 97–107; Bianchi, U., History of Religions (Leiden, 1975); Smith, W.C., “The study of Religion and the Study of the Bible”, Journal of the American Academy of Religion 39 (1971), p. 131–140. 17

34

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

mentaries of the Qur’an. Therefore, his area of research is internalised within the Muslim sources. This research could also be seen in connection to Luis H. Feldman who thematically compiled research on Moses in Philo and Ancient Jewish sources 20. The current research differs in that although the figure of Moses is a central figure of the thematic study, it is still different from the internal focus of studies within one particular religious tradition. This study is of an external nature compared to the internal studies of Wheeler in relation to the Qur’an and its exegesis, or Fieldman in relation to the Jewish sources. The attempt of this research is to present an original academic research of the stories of Moses in Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic writings, while keeping in line with the suggestions of previous scholars indicating the possibility of some aspects of such a research 21. This brings the classification of this study into the field of scholarly studies of intertextuality and associated problems. The most acute problem in this study is that of dating the studied texts. The real difficulty is ascertaining the dates and the directions for the transmissions between the Bible, Jewish and Christian interpretations, and the Qur’an. Firestone’s claims 22 of oral See Fieldman, L.H., Philo’s Portrayal of Moses in the Context of Ancient Judaism (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2007). 21 The other sources studying Moses in the Qur’an include Elder, E.E., “Parallel Passages in the Koran – the story of Moses” Muslim World 15 (1925), p. 254– 259; Heller, B., ““Mussa”, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. (Leiden, 1960), p. 7:638–639; Johns, A.H., “Let my people go!” Sayyid Qutb and the Vocation of Moses”, Islam and the Christian Muslim Relations 1 (1990), p. 143–170; Sirat, C., “Un madras juif en habit musulman: la vision de Moïse sur le mont Sinaï,” Revue de l’histoire des religions 168 (1965), p. 15–28; Künstlinger, D., “Tūr und Gabal im Kurān, ” Rivista Orientalia 5 (1927), p. 58–67. The views of the scholars on the subject are widespread. For example, Wansbrough indicates that the Qur’an is a reduction in part of other sacred scriptures, in particular the Judaeo-Christian in ‘Qur’anic studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural interpretations (1977) and in ‘The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History’ (1978). 22 See Firestone, Journeys in Holy Land, p. 15–18. 20

INTRODUCTION

35

transmissions of religious knowledge in relation to the written or printed word are backed by Newby, G., A history of the Jews of Arabia from ancient times to their Eclipse under Islam (Columbia, 1988). There are more academic writings building upon the relationship of the Qur’an with Judaism by means of analysing the historical situation of the time and the relationship of Mohammad with the Jews in particular. 23 Although the current study is not historical in its nature, it benefits from the historical researches in the field, and often appeals to the arguments of previous scholars assuming and demonstrating strong connections between the Jews of Medina and the followers of Mohammad. The emerging field of research, as presented in this book, considers the relationship between the four major texts, which are the OT Bible, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Such a research has not been done before although some indications for various possibilities were made by a number of scholars 24. There See Gil, M., “The origins of the Jews of Yathrib”, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 4 (1984), p. 203–223; Lecker, M., Muslims, Jews and Pagans: Studies on Early Islamic Medina (Leiden, 1995) and also in Lecker, M., Jews and Arabs in Preand Early Islamic Arabia (Brookfield, 1998). 24 On the theme of origins of the Sufi movement in the Christian tradition of Hesychasm See S. Seppala, In Speechless Ecstasy (2003), which looks at the question of the Sufi movement in Islam being influenced by the hesichast movement in Christianity; also see the article by G. Gobillot, in A. Desraumaux (ed), Les mystiques syriaques (2011), for a different perspective on the phenomena. Julian Baldick, in his book on Sufism, was also open to the idea of Muslim-Christian encounters and collaborations. On the subject of Muslim-Jewish collaboration see researches on the Israeliat traditions in Islam, as presented in Vagda, G. (1973). “Isrāʾīliyyāt”. Encyclopaedia of Islam 4 (2nd ed.). Brill Academic Publishers. pp. 211–212. See also Adang, C. Muslim Writers on Judaism and the Hebrew Bible: from Ibn Rabban to Ibn Hazm. (New York: E.J. Brill, 1996); Bernstein, M.S. Stories of Joseph: Narrative Migrations between Judaism and Islam. (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2006); Juynboll, G.H.A. The Authenticity of the Tradition Literature: Discussions in Modern Egypt. (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1969); Lassner, J., Demonizing the Queen of Sheba: Boundaries of Gender and Culture in Postbiblical Judaism and Medieval Islam. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993); Rubin, U., 23

36

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

are suggestions among the scholars that the works of Syriac Christian Mystics were translated into Arabic, such as the works of the seventh century Isaac of Nineveh, and the fourth century writers, such as Aphrahat and Ephrem the Syrian. 25 However there were no further studies done until now investigating furBetween Bible and Qur’an: The Children of Israel and the Islamic Self-Image. Vol, 17 of Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam. (Princeton: The Darwin Press, 1999).On the Abrahamic religious collaborations see Grévin B., Nef A., Tixier E. (eds.) Chrétiens, juifs et musulmans dans la Méditerranée médiévale: études en hommage à Henri Bresc (Paris: De Boccard 2008); al-Hājj, M.A. (ed.) Hidāyat alhayārá fī ajwibat al-Yahūd wa'l-Nasārá / Ibn Qayyim al-Jauzīyah (Damascus Beirut: Dar al-Qalam; Dar al-Shamiyah 1996); Klauck, H.-J et.al. (eds.) Encyclopedia of the Bible and its reception. (Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter 2009– 2012); Taylor M.C., (ed.) Critical terms for religious studies. (Chicago [Ill.]: University of Chicago Press 1998); Molloy M., Experiencing the world's religions: tradition, challenge, and change. (New York: McGraw-Hill c2010); Shah S.I.A., Lights of Asia. (Arthur Barker Ltd.: 1934); Steigerwald D., L'islâm: les valeurs communes au judéo-christianisme. (Montréal: Médiaspaul c1999); Medieval encounters: Jewish, Christian and Muslim culture in confluence and dialogue. Vol. 5, no. 3. (Leiden: Brill 1999); Arnaldez, R., À la croisée des trois monothéismes: une communauté de pensée au Moyen Age. (Paris: A. Michel c1993); Markham I.S. (ed.) A world religions reader. (Malden, Mass.; Oxford: Blackwell 2000); Reat N.R., Perry E.F., Constructing a world theology: an analysis of five religions. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1991); Judentum, Christentum, Islam: kennen, respektieren, akzeptieren: Verleihung des Preises für Internationale Verständigung und Menschenrechte am 29. April 2008 / [herausgegeben von Collegium Europaeum Jenense]. Jena: Paideia 2009. The book of Silverstein, A., Stroumsa, G., Blidstein, M. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of the Abrahamic Religions (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015) further elaborates on some of the current themes in Abrahamic Studies at present, and also on some themes addressed in this book. 25 See in Dupuche, J.R., “Sufism and Hesychasm” in Neil, B., Dunn, G.D. and Cross, L. (eds.) Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church (Strathfield, NSW: St Pauls, 2003), p. 338; Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, S.A.A., A history of Sufism in India. (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal,1978), p. 49; Gillman, I. and Klimkeit, H.J., Christians in Asia before 1500 (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1999), p. 68.

INTRODUCTION

37

ther into the finding of the scholars. The current research is building on the suggestions of the previous scholars, but it also navigates the scholarly research into a new area of study. This links this study to previous research in different fields of studies of the Old Testament, Jewish Exegesis, Biblical Studies, Qur’anic Studies and Religious studies. Additionally, this study develops a new field of cross-disciplinary study across the three Abrahamic traditions and in the field of biblical exegesis.

CHAPTER 1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD: THE FORMATIVE YEARS OF GOD’S CHOSEN ONE IN THE BIBLICAL NARRATIVE, THE JEWISH EXEGESIS, THE WRITINGS OF ST EPHREM THE SYRIAN AND IN THE QUR’AN INTRODUCTION

The opening chapter in this book is a first step to putting the suggested methodology for this research into practice. Therefore, as has been suggested in the introduction to this study, it is an attempt to establish the trialogue between the Jewish, Christian and Muslim texts by bringing them together thematically. The theme for this particular study is Moses’ childhood. In conducting the research on this topic, the chapter will look into the people who surrounded Moses in his formative years and their depiction in the biblical narrative, Midrash Rabbah, Ephrem the Syrian and in the Qur’an. For this study of the beginning of Moses’ life the narrative of the Bible, Exodus 2:1–10, will be used as a starting point. The biblical story of Moses’ birth and the first few months of his life will provide the schematic blueprint scenario for research in this chapter. Particular attention will be paid to the verses 3 and 4 of chapter two, which describe the story of Moses being cast into the river. Considering the scene of Moses at the river as the core element of the study in this chapter makes it easier to trace the depiction of it in the writ39

40

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

ings of Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Since the narrative of Exodus provides a clearly defined list of participants in the story, the following characters will be traced and identified in the respective exegetical sources: the mother of Moses, his sister Miriam, Moses himself (as an infant) and Pharaoh and his family. As identified already, the biblical story of Moses’ childhood makes a blueprint for further biblical exegesis. In staging their exegetical development of the story each exegetical source presents its own interpretation of the original story. Therefore, in presenting their exegetical interpretations selected for this study analogically, the different sources will offer their unique understanding of the original story. However, in spite of their differences and unique features, they will remain united by the very fact that they are derived from the original, very often only schematically shaped, and almost abbreviated biblical narrative. There are a number of steps for the research in this chapter. Firstly, there will be an attempt to establish a connection between the exegetical writings of Ephrem the Syrian and the Qur’an. This will be possible by identifying the common theme from the story of Moses’ childhood and analysing selected passages from Ephrem’s commentaries and from the Qur’an. The question at hand in analysing the texts is how the Qur’an and Ephrem perceive and develop the concept of a Divine Plan, and the way it was revealed in the story of baby Moses. In doing so the following question will be addressed: Can selected verses of the Qur’an be identified as belonging to the tradition of biblical exegesis? The connection of the Qur’an to the Jewish tradition of biblical exegesis and to the biblical narrative of the Old Testament is another aspect which the study in this chapter will aim to address. This will be achieved by applying the proposed methodology for this study, which is by reading the pre-selected texts of the biblical narrative, the Jewish Midrash, the Christian Syriac exegete, and the Qur’an alongside each other. They will all be united by a common theme in the first instance of Moses’ childhood. The overarching question which is going to be addressed at every step of the study is how do Jewish, Christian, and Mus-

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

41

lim texts relate to each other, and how do they contribute to the original biblical narrative about Moses in the Old Testament. As indicated earlier, in the case study of Moses’ childhood in this chapter of the book an analysis of the portrayal of Moses and the characters around him will be presented. Therefore, the depiction of Moses’ mother, his sister, Pharaoh and his family will be offered from the point of view of the Jewish Midrash, Ephrem the Syrian and the Qur’an. Analysing these sources within the context of the same theme will allow one to see whether there are any connection and continuation between the identified sources, and whether each of them could be seen as being part of the common tradition of biblical exegesis. As far as the question of Jewish-Christian common tradition of biblical exegesis is concerned there is less need to reaffirm the findings of previous studies in the field. Therefore, the original contribution of this study will be an attempt to include the selected verses of the Qur’an alongside the common Jewish-Christian tradition of exegesis and define the place, which can be ascribed to it. Further on there is a selection of featured concepts which are singled out for the purpose of conducting research in this chapter. Selected exegetical passages will be read through the prism of these featured concepts which are: the concept of Divine Revelation; the concept of Divine Providence; and human participation and collaboration in relation to these two concepts. Each text considered in this study presents its own unique account of the interplay between the participants of the biblical narrative in relation to each other, and in response to the Divine Plan that has been vocalised from the very beginning of Moses’ life through Divine Revelation. The aim of this presentation therefore is to set selected exegetical narratives alongside each other in order to determine to what extent they show similarities between themselves, and also to find out if there are key differences between the respective narrations. After laying out and analysing the textual examples, the study will make one further step by exploring the possibility of setting a precedent of establishing common exegetical ground,

42

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

which would be applicable to the selected original sources. The exercise of finding similarities and differences between these texts will show their relationship to each other, and also to the original biblical story to which all these texts relate. Hence in further pursuing such an exercise the following argument is addressed: that the texts selected for this study, and many others outside the scope of current research, belong to the broad and on-going continuous tradition of Biblical Exegesis. Their commonality firstly lies in their direct relation and affiliation to the ‘original’ biblical story. Secondly the relationship between the exegetical texts of Jewish, Christian and Muslim origin can be traced to the multi-religious context in which they were written. Therefore, without going into much of the historical and religious analysis of the contexts, the study in this chapter will look closely at the original sources selected for it. The starting point for such an exercise will be the biblical narrative of Exodus, which is shown below. Exodus 2:1–10: The Birth of Moses Exodus 2:3: But when she could hide him no longer, she got a papyrus basket for him and coated it with tar and pitch. Then she placed the child in it and put it among the reeds along the bank of the Nile. 4: His sister stood at a distance to see what would happen to him. (NIV)

The biblical narrative of Exodus 2:3–4 leaves an open-ended suggestion about the fate of the baby Moses. It just says, ‘let us wait and see what would become of him?’ 1. The open-ended biblical phrase gives plenty of opportunities for biblical exegesis. Therefore, further discussion of this chapter will start with Ephrem’s and the Qur’anic presentation of the story. There are some differences in the respective writings, but there are also very strong parallels in addressing, for example, the interplay between Divine destiny, Moses and his family, and the people 1

See Exodus 2:4.

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

43

around him. These parallel interpretations start from the selected sources reflecting on the biblical narrative focusing on the question of Moses’ destiny or his predestined vocation. Ephrem writes the following on the subject: ExodCom 2:1: ‘See how carefully the Egyptians were making investigations, in that she was no longer able to conceal Moses! And see how Grace preserved them, in that six hundred thousand went out from Egypt!’ 2

Ephrem straight away emphasises Moses’ vocation to save the people of Israel in the future when he introduces Moses by his destiny. Hence, he identifies the baby Moses in the cradle as a future saviour of Israel. He writes that it was the protection of Divine Grace that kept Moses and his family in order that he could fulfil his mission towards the people of Israel 3. Divine choice on Moses was a strong factor, according to Ephrem, in his life and in the life of his family. His mission was an identifying and influential factor from the very early days of his childhood. Could there be a typology of Christ that Ephrem subtly introduces here? Maybe, but it is not very explicit at this stage. Qur’an also reflects on setting the identifying definitions for the baby Moses, which reflect on the rest of his life’s vocation. The passage below is selected to illustrate the point: Q.28:7: So We sent this inspiration to the mother of Moses: ‘Suckle (thy child), but when thou hast fears about him, cast him into the river, but fear not nor grieve: for We shall restore him to thee, and We shall make him one of Our messengers’. (transl. A.Y. Ali) 4 ExodCom 2:1, p. 14. ExodCom 2:1. 4 The translation of Abdel Haleem will be used as a main translation for this study, but on some occasion other translations will be provided to illustrate different approaches of the authors. For example, in this instance the translation of Abdel Haleem is less clear on the first part, while giving more detail on the second part of the verse. Abdel Haleem’s translation is the following: ‘We in2 3

44

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD ‫�� ْزَ� ِي‬ َ �َ �َ‫ْت �َلَيْه ِ ف َ�� لْق ِيه ِ �ِي ال ْ� َِ� ّ وَ� َ� �َ�َا�ِي و‬ ِ ‫خف‬ ِ ‫ضع ِيه ِ ف �َإذ َا‬ ِ ‫حي ْنَا �إ�َى ُأ ِمّ م ُو� َ� أ� ْن أ� ْر‬ َ ‫و َأ� ْو‬ َ‫ن ا� ْ�ُرْسَلِ�ن‬ َ ِ ‫�إ َّ�ا ر َا ُدّوه ُ �إلَي ْكِ وَ� َا� ِ�ُ�ه ُ م‬

Qur’anic recitation of the biblical narrative makes an emphasis on the apostolic vocation of Moses (or his closeness to be a God’s messenger). Also the text builds up a prominent direct comparison between Moses and Mohammed on the basis of their vocation as God’s messengers. The Qur’an, in its presentation, similarly to Ephrem, underlines the subject of Divine interference in Moses’ life and in the life of his family in order that Moses can be made the messenger of God in the future. 5 In the following passage Ephrem accentuates the figure of the mother of Moses in his writings, and especially pays attention to describing her gift of prayer: ExodCom 2:1: ‘So his mother put Moses into the ark (Exod. 2:3), went indoors and knelt in prayer. Sobbing, she appealed to the God of Abraham against Pharaoh: “You blessed our people so that they would multiply, and now they are as many as your blessing promised. But Pharaoh’s scheme is that by slaying little boys the fields will lie fallow for want of farmers, and by killing children the seed that you blessed will die out altogether.’ 6

Ephrem’s narrative gives a further account of the events after the biblical story stops narrating about what happened after Moses was put in the ark and before he was found. It is interesting to compare Ephrem’s account with the Qur’anic one in this particular instance in order to highlight the accentuating points of the respective sources. spired Moses’ mother, saying, ‘Suckle him, and then, when you fear for his safety, put him in the river: do not be afraid, and do not grieve, for We shall return him to you and make him a messenger.’’ Ali’s translation was used as it clearly states that God send Inspiration to the mother of Moses. This will be further analysed in this chapter. 5 See Q.28:27. 6 ExodCom 2:1, p. 15.

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

45

Ephrem gives a picture of fervent prayer by Moses’ mother. She, according to Ephrem, goes indoors in order to kneel in order to pray sobbingly. It was neither a regular prayer nor was it a hysterical cry of the mother who has just sent her toddler alone along the river. Her prayer, in fact, was for the future of the whole people. In her prayer the woman pleads to God, almost points out to Him that He is not living up to His promise. Moses’ mother did not simply pray to God about her son, but she prayed for the whole body of her people, and she appealed to God emphatically, with zeal and courage. She prayed with a flame in her heart, and her dialogue with God was held accordingly. Ephrem writes that the mother of Moses appealed to God of Abraham, pointing directly to the biblical events of God’s covenant with Abraham and his descendants. And, therefore, Moses’ mother appeals to God’s initial promise to Abraham, and she does so to protect the safety of the entire promise of God, and not only for her son. She was daring, but with a contrite heart, she was tough, but she was on her knees. She told the God of Abraham about His blessing upon His people, and emphasised that there were generous fruits of this Divine blessing on His people, and that the people indeed multiplied. During her prayer, the Mother of Moses managed to identify her personal loss with the potential loss for the whole nation. Through her concern for her son, she shares with God her concern for His people whom He blessed to multiply and prosper, and who are in danger of extermination. Hence, Moses’ mother reports to God about the current hardships on the people through the unfavourable decrees of Pharaoh. Her motivation is not only the fate of her son, it is not only the fate of the people, but it is foremost the fact that the current events are potentially threatening to the initial Divine blessing of God to Abraham. She is concerned that the human initiative of a Pharaoh is jeopardising Divine Providence. And, therefore, Moses’ mother shares her concern and despair with her God. With such a narrative Ephrem shows Moses’ mother as a charismatic woman of prayer and courage. In contrast, one cannot but notice that Moses’ father is not mentioned by Ephrem in the narrative. He plays even a smaller

46

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

part in Ephrem’s writings than he does in the biblical narrative. Moses’ mother, however, is brought to light by Ephrem. He crowns her with the gift of having a quiet and strong relationship with God. This relationship is a personal relationship whereby a woman is able to stand on her own in prayer, and converse with God as a chosen one, the one who is able to ask questions to God and to expect answers from Him. This kind of communicative prayer with God, which Ephrem ascribes to the mother of Moses could be seen as Ephrem’s own contribution to the exegetical tradition of biblical narrative 7. It is somewhat unprecedented, as the reference to the prayer of Moses’ mother cannot be found in earlier Christian or Jewish sources. Ephrem develops his initiative further and builds a typological significance of the female figures in his writings. Ephrem’s exegesis in this instance could be compared to the Jewish exegetical tradition of the Midrash, which also develops distinct typology of two female figures, i.e. Moses’ mother Jochebed and her sister Miriam. They are identified by Midrash Rabbah as Jewish midwives who work for the preservation of Abraham’s seed during the time when his seed was deliberately destroyed. Midrash Rabbah on Exodus writes the following about Moses’ mother and his family: ExodRab 1:13: ‘Who were these midwives?… R. Samuel b. Nahman said: It was a woman and her daughter namely Jochebed and Miriam. Miriam was then only five years old, for Aaron was the senior of Moses by three years’ 8.

What is important to point out here that in this instance Midrash confirms the name of Moses’ mother, which is mentioned in the biblical narrative of Exodus 6:20 and Numbers 26:59, and which rabbinical tradition of exegesis preserves, thus, filling the gaps See Salvesen’s remark about that in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), 15, footnote 16. 8 Midrash Rabbah, Exodus, transl. by S.M. Lehrman (London, NY: The Soncino Press, 1983) p. 16, [I.13]. 7

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

47

in the earlier biblical narrative. Midrash also gives further information about the birth story of Moses, as the passage below shows. In the following passage Midrash narrates that it was disclosed to the family of Moses that he was the chosen one of God already at his birth, as the light filled the room at the time: ExodRab 1:20: ‘He was fit for prophecy…The sages say: When Moses was born the whole house became flooded with light…’ 9

Rabbinical exegetes also call the sister of Moses, Miriam, as a prophetess. According to the rabbinical exegetes, Miriam already at a very early age demonstrated prophetic qualities. The passage below from the Midrash describes the account of events when Miriam prophesied about her mother giving birth to the ‘chosen one of God’ who will save Israel: ExodRab 1:22: ‘R. Amram in the name of Rab said: Because Miriam prophesied ‘My mother is destined to give birth to a son who will save Israel’. [Exodus 15:20] And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel.’ 10

One may clearly see here an attempt to present a Jewish type of woman performing certain women’s ministries, which were salvific for the people of Israel. And the women were rewarded for it, according to Midrash, which describes them not only as Hebrew midwives, but also as shepherds of the people, saviours of the nation. Their virtues were compared to the virtue of Abraham 11. It is clear that rabbinic exegetes highlight the biblical spiritual examples of two women, mother and daughter, Jochebed and Miriam, and create a type of virtuous and courageous people out of them. They are used as an example to adMidrash Rabbah, Exodus, transl. by S.M. Lehrman (London, NY: The Soncino Press, 1983), p. 27, [I.20]. 10 Midrash Rabbah, Exodus, transl. by S.M. Lehrman (London, NY: The Soncino Press, 1983), p. 28, [I.22]. 11 See SSRabIV:5.2, p. 20; EcclRabV:5.1, p. 169–170; ExodRab I:15, p. 16–22. Also see my book Ephrem, The Jewish Sage… p. 207–9. 9

48

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

mire and as a lesson to follow. They are women who embraced the virtues of zeal, courage, devotion and care for the protection of their people. Ephrem continues with the Jewish exegetical tradition, or goes along the same path, when he clearly presents the mother of Moses as an example of prayer, devotion, courage and zeal. He can also be seen as developing rabbinical exegetical tradition further when he celebrates the prayer of Moses’ mother in his writings, which were quoted above. In doing so he makes his mark in the common tradition of biblical exegesis on the matter by introducing the issue, which is either not to be found in rabbinical writings or which is not as clearly emphasised. In developing the ‘gaps’ in the biblical story Ephrem brings more light to the characters of each of the participants in the narrative of Moses’ childhood, especially focusing on Moses’ mother and his sister, Miriam. The context of Ephrem’s introduction of the above characters is solely focused on the story of Moses as God’s chosen one, and on the fulfilment of the Divine plan through Moses’ life. Together with the rest of the involved characters, his family contribute their actions to the process of saving and preserving Moses for his destiny as the future saviour of Israel. Ephrem contributes to the biblical exegetical tradition by further developing and strengthening the characters of these two women, i.e. the Mother of Moses and his sister, Jochebed and Miriam. How does he do so and where does he take his inspiration from? First of all, he draws his inspiration from the biblical text and also from the existing tradition of biblical exegesis, either of Jewish origin or from a common JewishChristian exegetical heritage. 12 What is important to show here Midrash Rabbah, Exodus, transl. by S.M. Lehrman (London, NY: The Soncino Press, 1983) writes the following about Moses and his family: p. 16, 1:13: ‘Who were these midwives?… R. Samuel b. Nahman said: It was a woman and her daughter namely Johebed and Miriam. Miriam was then only five years old, for Aaron was the senior of Moses by three years’. p. 27, 1:20: ‘He was fit for prophecy…The sages say: When Moses was born the whole house became flooded with light…’ [story of light at Moses’ birth] 12

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

49

is that Ephrem presents his writings within the common JewishChristian exegetical tradition, which already attempted to unravel and bring to light the story of Exodus 2 adding to it a number of descriptive and analytical details. What Ephrem does with his exegetical work is that he highlights a few meaningful characteristics to the figures of Moses’ mother and his sister by further developing their characters as Jewish midwives, while also further developing the character of Moses’ mother as a typological character of prayer, courage and zeal. The following part of the chapter will further look into the depiction of the mother of Moses in the Qur’an.

MOSES’ MOTHER AND GOD’S REVELATION IN THE QUR’AN

In unison with the rabbinic and Ephrem’s contribution to the figure of Moses’ mother and her relationship with God, the Qur’an could be seen as following a similar pattern of offering its interpretation of the characters. It is very important to emphasise here that the Qur’an singles out the mother of Moses as the chosen one who was able to have a very special relationship with God. As the quotes from the Qur’an will show further in this chapter, the Qur’an’s appreciation of the mother of Moses could be seen as being compatible with that of the biblical prophets and messengers. The following verse from the Qur’an gives its exegesis of the biblical story of Exodus 2:

p. 28, 1:22: ‘R. Amram in the name of Rab said: Because Miriam prophesied [calling Miriam a prophetess+ story of light at Moses birth again in the text] ‘My mother is destined to give birth to a son who will save Israel’. [Exodus 15:20] And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel.’ p. 29, 1:23: ‘Pharaoh’s daughter was leprous and went down to bathe, but as soon as she touched the ark she became healed’. p. 30, 1:24: [divine interplay plus Moses plays his part when he cries, similar to the Qur’an story of Moses refusing to suckle, and also the part of Egyptian princes so that she picks him up and saves the babe] ‘Gabriel came and smote Moses so that he should cry and the [the princess] be filled with pity for him’.

50

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Q.28:12: And We ordained that he refused suck at first, until (his sister came up and) said: “Shall I point out to you the people of a house that will nourish and bring him up for you and be sincerely attached to him? (transl. A.Y. Ali)

It is interesting that the same verse in the Qur’an found in the translation of Farid refers to the mother of Moses as a wet-nurse by presenting the following course of events: ‘And We had already decreed that he shall refuse the wet-nurses; so she [Miriam] said, ‘Shall I direct you to the people of a household who will bring him up for you and will be his sincere wellwishers?’. 13 One can identify a parallel interpretation of the Qur’an to the rabbinic exegesis, which explicitly calls the mother of Moses a midwife. It is of crucial importance for the readers of the Qur’an to be able to appreciate the people who were able to receive direct revelations from God. It is not such a well-known and wellnoticed fact that among all other distinguished people of the Qur’an who had the honour of receiving revelation from God was the mother of Moses. The passage of the Qur’an below clearly makes the point in identifying the occasion of Moses’ mother receiving God’s revelation: Q.28:7: “So We sent this inspiration (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫ )أ� ْو‬to the mother of Moses: ‘Suckle (thy child), but when thou hast fears about him, cast him into the river, but fear not nor grieve: for We shall restore him to thee, and We shall make him one of Our messengers’.”

�َ �َ‫ْت �َلَيْه ِ ف َ�� لْق ِيه ِ �ِي ال ْ� َِ� ّ وَ� َ� �َ�َا�ِي و‬ ِ ‫خف‬ ِ ‫ضع ِيه ِ ۖ ف �َإذ َا‬ ِ ‫حي ْنَا �إ�َى ٰ ُأ ِمّ م ُو� َ� أ� ْن أ� ْر‬ َ ‫و َأ� ْو‬ ٰ َ‫ن ا� ْ�ُرْسَلِ�ن‬ َ ِ ‫�� ْزَ� ِي ۖ �إ َّ�ا ر َا ُدّوه ُ �إلَي ْكِ وَ� َا� ِ�ُ�ه ُ م‬ َ

Q.20:38–39: “Behold! We sent to thy mother, by inspiration (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫)أ� ْو‬, the message: “Throw (the child) into the chest,

The translation of the Qur’an is taken from Malik Ghulam Farid (ed.) The Holy Qur’an – Arabic text with English translation and short commentary (Islam International Publications LTD: Islamabad, Tilford, 2010), p. 788. 13

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

51

and throw (the chest) into the river: the river will cast him up on the bank, and he will be taken up by one who is an enemy to Me and an enemy to him: but I cast (the garment of) love over thee from Me: and (this) in order that Thou mayest be reared under Mine eye”. (transl. Ali)

The relationship of God and Moses’ mother is clearly defined in the Qur’an in 28:7 when the verses present the close interplay between God and the woman: Q.28:7: ‘And WE directed the mother of Moses by revelation, ‘Suckle him and when thou fearest for him, then cast him down into the river and fear not, not grieve; for We shall restore him to thee, and shall make him one of the Messengers.’ 14 (Transl. Farid)

A number of different translations are deliberately provided here to show their interpretive nuances, and also to illustrate how each one of them expands the scope of understanding of the original Arabic verse. There are several repetitions in the Qur’an, which again and again use the word for the revelation (‫ )و ح ي‬referring to what the mother of Moses received from God. Q.20:38–40: ‘When WE revealed (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫ )أ� ْو‬to thy mother what was an important revelation (ٰ ‫)م َا يُو�َى‬, to wit: ‘Put him in the ark, and place it into the river, then the river will cast it on the shore, and there one who is an enemy to Me and also an enemy to him will take him up. ’ And I rapped thee with

The translation of the Qur’an is taken from Malik Ghulam Farid (ed.) The Holy Qur’an – Arabic text with English translation and short commentary (Islam International Publications LTD: Islamabad, Tilford, 2010), p. 787 (in the following footnotes this translation will be referred to as Farid). 14

52

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD love from Me: and thus I did that thou mightiest be reared before My eye. 15

It is not surprising that some of the translations of the Qur’an do not emphasise such an intensity in the relationship of the mother of Moses and God. Ali’s translation, for example, amends the word revelation and uses the following narrative: Q.28:7: So we send this inspiration to the mother of Moses: “Suckle (thy child), but when Thou hast fears about him, cast him into the river, but fear not nor grieve: for we shall restore him to thee, and WE shall make Him one of Our messengers. 16 ‫�� ْزَ� ِي‬ َ �َ �َ‫ْت �َلَيْه ِ ف َ�� لْق ِيه ِ �ِي ال ْ� َِ� ّ وَ� َ� �َ�َا�ِي و‬ ِ ‫خف‬ ِ ‫ضع ِيه ِ ف �َإذ َا‬ ِ ‫حي ْنَا �إ�َى ُأ ِمّ م ُو� َ� أ� ْن أ� ْر‬ َ ‫و َأ� ْو‬ ُ ‫ن ا� ْ�ُرْسَلِ�ن‬ َ ِ ‫�إ َّ�ا ر َادّوه ُ �إلَي ْكِ وَ� َا� ِ�ُ�ه ُ م‬

Q.20:38: “Behold! We sent to thy mother, by inspiration, the message: ‫ك م َا يُو�َى‬ َ ِ ّ‫حي ْنَا �إ�َى ُأم‬ َ ‫�إ ْذ أ� ْو‬

Q.20:39–40: “Throw (the child) into the chest, and throw (the chest) into the river: the river will cast him up on the bank, and he will be taken up by one who is an enemy to Me and an enemy to him: but I cast (the garment of) love over َ ْ ‫)و َأ� لْقَي ْتُ �َلَي‬: and (this) in order that thee from Me (‫ك �َ�َب َّة ً م ِ� ِ ّي‬ Thou mayest be reared under Mine eye (‫”)و َلِت ُصْ ن َ َع �َ�َ� عَيْ�ِي‬.

The crucial word of the selected passages indicates that God send a direct revelation to the mother of Moses, as all of the selected verses read ‘we inspired’ - awḥaynā – (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫)أ� ْو‬. It is, therefore, possible to suggest here that Moses’ mother receives direct The translation of the Qur’an is taken from Malik Ghulam Farid (ed.) The Holy Qur’an – Arabic text with English translation and short commentary (Islam International Publications LTD: Islamabad, Tilford, 2010), p. 629. 16 Ali, A.Y., The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an, English and Arabic. New rev. (8th) ed. (Beltsville: Amana Publications, 1996), 962 (in the following footnotes this translation will be referred to as Ali). 15

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

53

communications from God through revelation. Moses’ mother received inspiration directly from God in the similar manner as Mohammed was receiving it from God. Such an analogy is possibly based on the same word used for either of the actions on behalf of God, i.e. the word for inspiration directed from God (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫ – أ� ْو‬we inspired). Such a way of communication with God elevates a selected person to a chosen status of being reared or chosen before God. Therefore, it is also possible to suggest that the mother of Moses was honoured by God in the same manner as her son. Developing the argument further one could pose the question as to whether Moses’ mother, due to the special relationship with God, could be perceived as being similar to God’s messengers and prophets, and consequently could also be considered as one herself. Another important observation from the passages quoted above are poetic terms of endearment, which are used as being addressed towards Moses from God. One of these phrases can be read as a counter action of God after Moses has been cast into the river, so the same word to throw/cast is used in the Qur’an in the same verse to indicate that God casts His love over Moses. The following part of the chapter will look closer into another construction used in the verse above, which is the one of Moses being ‘reared’ under God’s eyes.

‘REARED UNDER MY EYES’ CONSTRUCTION AND ‘I HAVE PREPARED THEE FOR MYSELF’ PHRASES IN THE QUR’AN

Such definitions of the Qur’an cannot be taken lightly. They are clear indications of Divine choice and selection of people to perform certain tasks. The phrase ‘reared under Mine eyes ( �َ�َ� ‫و َلِت ُصْ ن َ َع‬ ‫ )عَيْ�ِي‬could be literally translated as: ‘that you may be brought up under my eyes’. The verb's triliteral root is ṣād nūn ʿayn (‫)ص ن ع‬ and it has a meaning of doing something, constructing, and in this case bringing up or rearing, as Ali’s translation suggests. Or choosing as in the following verse of the Qur’an 20:41 ( ‫ك‬ َ ُ ‫و َاصْ طَنَعْت‬ �ِ �‫)لِن َ ْف‬, which Ali translates as ‘And I have prepared thee for Myself’, while Farid adds to it his translation of ‘I have chosen thee for Myself’. In studying the different meanings of the word these slightly varied translations are useful. They all indicate that God

54

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

was preparing and choosing Moses from a very early age. Moses was the chosen one from God to perform a certain task in his life, and his task was to become God’s messenger, where the same word/verb is used in the Qur’an. This indication in the Qur’an of singling out Moses as a chosen one and making a certain type out of Moses, the type to follow and imitate, the type which can be used as a type for comparison and affiliation. Moses is made into a type of God’s anointed person, anointed with his love and with his choice. Such a concept of God selecting a chosen one among the people to perform a certain task for Him is similar to a rabbinical concept. 17

GOD’S REVELATIONS FOR HIS CHOSEN PEOPLE INSPIRATION OR REVELATION (OTHER USAGES OF REVELATION AND INSPIRATION IN THE QUR’AN)

The word wahaya, which has the following root – ‫ و ح ي‬, is one of the three words that the Arabic dictionary presents as carrying the meaning of the word inspiration together with alsam and daiham. The use of the word waihana comes from the triliteral root waw ha ya (‫)و ح ي‬, and it occurs 78 times in the Qur’an, in two different forms: • •

72 times as the form IV verb awḥā (ٰ ‫)أ� ْو� َٓى‬ six times as the noun waḥ (‫)وَ�ْى‬.

See my book Ephrem, a Jewish Sage… in the chapter ‘The depiction of the figure of Moses in Ephrem’s writings within the Context of the rabbinical concept of the Merits of the Fathers’ where there is an illustration of the continuity and the link to the Merits of the Fathers and forefathers of different types of God’s chosen one, which is widely used in rabbinical writings with reference to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses (p. 215–222)

17

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

55

An Arabic word may have a range of meanings depending on the context. 18 What is important to note at this point in the study is that the Qur’anic meaning of the word waihana fluctuates between the elevated meanings of inspiration and revelation from God. What also deserves to be noted here is the observation that as a verb this word carries the strong and persistent meaning of inspiration, while as a noun it has a more established meaning of revelation. Overall, the context of the use of this word in the Qur’an fluctuates between the two identified meanings, i.e. inspiration and revelation. In order to find out whether the use of the word revelation or inspiration is interchangeable in the Qur’an, one has to look at other instances of the use of the same word in the Qur’anic narrative. The most indicative of the contexts for the use of this word is the context of chapter four, Women, verses 163–164: Q.4:163. We have sent thee inspiration (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫)أ� ْو‬, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers (َ‫ و َالن َّب ِيِّ�ن‬lit. prophets) after him: we sent inspiration (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫ )و َأ� ْو‬to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms.

ٍ ُ ‫حي ْنَا �إ�َى ن‬ ‫ل‬ َ ‫حي ْنَا �إ�َى �إ �ْ� َاه ِ�� َ و �َ� ْ�مَاعِي‬ َ ‫وح و َالن َّب ِيِّ�نَ م ِن ب َ ْعدِه ِ و َأ� ْو‬ َ ‫ك �َ�َ� أ� ْو‬ َ ْ ‫حي ْنَا �إلَي‬ َ ‫�إ َّ�ا أ� ْو‬ َ ‫� و َه َار ُونَ وَسُلَيْم َانَ و َآتَي ْنَا د َاو ُود‬ َ ُ �‫ُوب و َا ْ���سْ بَاطِ وَ� ِي� َ� و َأ� ُي ّوبَ و َيُو‬ َ ‫و �َ� ْ��َاقَ و َي َ ْعق‬ ‫ز َبُور ًا‬

164. Of some apostles (�ً �ُ‫ وَرُس‬lit. messengers) We have already told thee the story; of others We have not; - and to Moses Allah spoke direct; - (Transl. Y. Ali) ‫ا��� ُ م ُو� َ� تَكْ�ِيم ًا‬ َ ْ ‫ص�ْ� ُ ْم �َلَي‬ ُ ‫ل وَرُسُ� ً� َّ� ْ� ن َ ْق‬ ُ ْ ‫ك م ِن قَب‬ َ ْ ‫وَرُسُ� ً� ق َ ْد قَصَصْ نَاه ُ ْم �َلَي‬ َّ َ ��ََّ ‫ك وَك‬

What is important to highlight here is that the context for the use of the word for inspiration/revelation is set among the choThis was also the remark of Qur’anic on-line concordance when it gave the statistic of the use of the root of the word wāw ḥā yā (‫)و ح ي‬, see in http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=wHy#%2828:7:1%29, 29.05.2020 18

56

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

sen people, i.e. the messengers and the prophets of the Old Testament. There is room in the above Qur’anic verses for other names of the prophets, which the Qur’an did not explicitly reveal in this instance, but which are implied by the way of God’s inspiration directed to them. In other words, in answering the question of: ‘who are the people to whom God spoke through revelation and inspiration directly’, one can deduce who they are from the context of the above verses. They are distinguished patriarchs who are chosen by God directly. Similarly, stepping from the use of the word inspiration/revelation in the contexts of Moses’ story, one can assume that one of these ‘chosen’ people could be named as the mother of Moses who is not referred to by her own name in the Qur’an, but to whom God reveals important messages during the very difficult and very important period of her life. The portrait of Moses’ mother comes to light not as much in the biblical narrative, but through the work of the biblical exegetes. Her name, Jochebed, is being discovered through rabbinical exegetes, as was indicated earlier in this chapter. Her zeal for prayer and her courage in her relationship with God is known to us through the writings of Ephrem the Syrian. And finally, her ability and her uniqueness in being chosen to receive direct revelation from God, as written in the Qur’an, could also suggest that it is also this very woman that was ‘reared before the eyes of God 19’ by being chosen as a recipient of special messages directly from God. Further illustrating the point, below is the selection of other verses in the Qur’an, which indicate the context of chosen people receiving revelation from God. Among them the figure of Mohammad is the prominent figure together with the prophets of the Bible.

See Qur’an 38:39, and although the verse in the Qur’an refers to Moses, it is possible to assume that the mother of Moses is included in this definition by affiliation to her son and due to her ability to receive inspirations from God.

19

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

INSPIRATION AND REVELATION IN THE QUR’AN

57

Looking at other examples in the Qur’an where the word inspiration is used one finds out that in some English translations the word inspiration is used in reference to other Arabic words, as in the Case of verses 28:86, 42:52, 91:8 and 99:5. These particular verses are indicated by the English Concordance of the Qur’an as the ones carrying the meaning for inspiration. If one reverts to the original language of the Qur’an, it becomes clear that the English Concordance is not following the use of the same Arabic word in each instance. Thus, it becomes clear that the work of translators allows a certain variety in interpreting and translating words referring to divine communication. Therefore, it is often down to the translators or interpreters to mark possibly synonymous Arabic words or notions with the definition of either ‘inspiration’ or ‘revelation’. Hence similarly, our word ‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫ أ� ْو‬is either translated as inspiration or as a revelation interchangeably. In the same manner, the definition of ‘inspiration’ is ascribed to other words, which appear in the contextual narration when God is revealing something to humanity. Therefore, the exercise with English Qur’anic Concordance did prove to be useful , as it allowed a certain exegetical space and flexibility in the use of various Arabic words, which could mean either inspiration or revelation from God, and could in some instances be considered as synonymous and even interchangeable. There are more examples from the translation of the Qur’an where the translators choose to use the word inspiration where the Arabic word suggests otherwise. The following examples are illustrations of the point where in the same verse the translation of the words vary. Below are other instances of translation into English using the word for inspiration and revelation when the original Arabic word is different. The example of the verse is taken from Q.28:86: ‘You did not expect that the Book would be inspired to you’. Yousif Ali translation: ‘And thou hadst not expected that the book would be sent to thee except as a mercy from thy

58

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Lord’ 20. The Arabic text of the Qur’an does not have the word ‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫‘ – أ� ْو‬we inspired’ and is written with the word �َ�ُْ‫ – يل‬yul'qā would be sent down: ‫ك‬ َ ِّ ‫ك الْ�ِ�َابُ �إ َّ�� رَ�ْ� َة ً مّ ِن َرّ ب‬ َ ْ ‫وَم َا كُنتَ �َ�ْجُو أ� ن يلُْ�َ� �إلَي‬ ‫ن‬ َ �ِ‫ظه ِ�� ًا لِّلْك َ�فِر‬ َ ّ‫فَ� َ� تَكُونَن‬

It is noteworthy here that some translators use this word as a representative one for revelation, such as in the example of Farid’s translation: Q.28:27: ‘And thou didst never expect that the Book would be revealed to thee; but it is a mercy from thy Lord’ 21. There seems to be a certain trend, at least between the two translations of the Qur’an, when both Ali and Farid would present a more theologically inspired translation and often opt out of a more literal one. The question, which is important to address at this point is - Are the meanings of inspiration and revelation interchangeable in the Qur’an, and to what extent each one of them is important? The answer to this question can be found by looking at the context of the cited verse. On the one hand the whole Surah, in which this verse is situated, relates to the history of Moses, but also it illustrates the history of Muhammad. Therefore, here our translators attempt to give the contextual interpretation of the Surah in its representation of the interplay between God’s revelation and human reciprocation of it. There are two other interesting words from the verse 28:87, which are translated slightly differently by Ali and Farid. Ali’s translation reads: ‘And let nothing keep thee back from the Signs of Allah after they have been revealed to thee’ 22, while Farid’s is the following: ‘And let them not turn thee away from the Signs of Allah, after they have been sent down to thee’. The Arabic word in this verse is (‫ت‬ ْ َ ‫ – ) ُأ�� ِل‬unzilat – which is another synonymous word, which can be translated either as ‘they 20 21 22

Ali, 984–985. Farid, 802. Ali, 985.

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

59

have been sent’ or ‘they have been revealed’. While Farid in this instance prefers to use the literal translation for the word, Ali refers to the direction of the revelation by mentioning that it was sent down from God to Muhammad and Moses, and therefore applies the meaning of revelation to his translation of the verse of the Quran cited below: Q.28:87: �َ �َ‫ك و‬ َ ِّ ‫ك و َا ْدعُ �إ�َى ر َب‬ َ ْ ‫ت �إلَي‬ ْ َ ‫ا��� ِ ب َ ْعدَ �إ ْذ ُأ�� ِل‬ ِ �‫ك ع َنْ آ‬ َ ‫ص ُ ّد َّن‬ ُ َ ‫وَ� َ� ي‬ َّ ‫َات‬ َ‫ن ا� ْ�ُ�ْ�ِكِ�ن‬ َ ِ ‫تَكُوننََّ م‬

It is important to highlight here that both translations prefer to use the concept ‘The Signs of Allah’ instead of another literal translation, which is indicated by the word ayaat (‫َات‬ ِ �‫ – )آ‬the verses, therefore the translation could be the ‘Verses of Allah’. There will be reference to the ‘Signs of God’ later on in the study, but we shall not spend much more time reminiscing about this particular instance. The point of this section was to note briefly that contextual interpretation is something which is often used even by the translators of the Qur’an. What the exercise above showed us is that the meanings of the words in original Arabic and also in the English translation are interchangeable. Therefore, both the interpreters and the translators of the Qur’an choose the meaning for each word according to the context of the narration. Therefore, it becomes more complicated to determine the one and only literally legitimate meaning of the verses of the Qur’an. For example, as in the case of the verses sited above, the meaning of revelation was determined by the relevance of the message of the verses to the human encounter with the Divine. Therefore, the use of two different Arabic words was considered as synonymic, and the meaning of one word (‫ت‬ ْ َ ‫ – ) ُأ�� ِل‬unzilat – was used leaning towards the other Arabic word for revelation. For the purpose of this research, the meaning or definition of the interpretive meaning of the words for revelation will be considered as indicative of a. Divine communication and b. the fact that the person with whom God chooses to communicate is the ‘chosen one’ equal to the prophets and messengers. Basing the meaning of the word ‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫‘ – أ� ْو‬we inspired’ the actual translation of it refers to the inspiration, but the question

60

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

that was addressed in this part of the research is about the contextual meanings of this word in the Qur’anic narrative. In other words, what does the Qur’an intend when it uses the word ‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫أ� ْو‬ when it refers to the process of God communicating with the chosen people. At least this much can be determined, that this word refers to the process of direct communication, as in the case of God instructing Moses’ mother in 28:7. Other instances in the Qur’an often refer to Mohammad receiving communications from God: Q.42:52: And thus did We reveal to you an inspired book by Our command

‫ك ر ُو� ًا مّ ِنْ أ� �ْ� ِ� َا م َا كُنتَ � َ ْ�رِي م َا الْ�ِ�َابُ وَ� َ� ا� �ْ� ��َانُ و َل�َكِن‬ َ ْ ‫حي ْنَا �إلَي‬ َ ‫� أ� ْو‬ َ ِ ‫وَ�َ�َل‬ ��ٍِ ‫ك لَ�َ�ْدِي �إ�َى �ِ� َاطٍ ُمّسْتَق‬ َ ‫جع َل ْنَاه ُ نُور ًا َ ّ��ْدِي بِه ِ م َن َ� ّ� َاء ُ م ِنْ عِبَادِ� َا و �َ� َّن‬ َ

Ali: And thus have We, by Our command, sent Inspiration (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫ )أ� ْو‬to thee: Thou knewest not (before) what was revelation (‫)ر ُو� ًا‬, and what was faith; but we have made the (Qur’an) a Light, wherewith WE guide such of Our servants as We will; and verily Thou dost guide (men) to the Straight Way. 23 47F

The word, which is used in this verse is the original for revelation – (‫حي ْنَا‬ َ ‫ – )أ� ْو‬awḥaynā – ‘We have revealed’, while the following word is different – (‫ – )ر ُو� ًا‬rūḥan – and is translated as inspiration. The context of the verse is about God’s choices to bestow His will on people according to His plan. There is no distinction between male or female, but it is all up to Divine providence to whom He chooses to bestow His blessings, because, as the Qur’an narrates, Q.42:49–50: To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth. He creates what He wills (and plans). He bestows (children), male or female according to His Will (and plan). 23

Ali, 1261–2.

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

61

Or he bestows both males and females, and He leaves barren whom He will: for He is full of knowledge and power. 24

Additionally, there is the following verse where the Qur’an explains the ways in which God chooses to communicate with people: Q.42:51: It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration, or from behind a veil, or by sending of a Messenger to reveal, with Allah’s permission, what Allah wills: for He is Most High, Most Wise.

ِ ‫�ي َ � �ِإذْنِه‬ ِ ‫ل رَسُو� ً� ف َي ُو‬ َ ‫س‬ ِ ْ�ُ� ‫َاب أ� ْو‬ ٍ ‫ا��� ُ �إ َّ�� و َحْ يًا أ� ْو م ِن وَر َاء ِ ِحج‬ َّ ُ ‫وَم َا ك َ�نَ لِب َ�َ�ٍ أ� ن يُكَ� ِّ� َه‬ ٌ ��ِ‫م َا �َ� َاء ُ �إن َّه ُ �َ�ِ�ّ ٌ �َك‬

The word used in the verse is (‫ – )و َحْ يًا‬waḥyan – (by) revelation. This verse is the most significant for this presentation, as it singles out the fact that by inspiration or by revelation (‫ )و َحْ يًا‬God communicates to the ‘chosen people’ directly, and the ways that God chooses these people is ‘as He wills’ (see Q.42:50). However, as the examples of different translations below will show, the authors use synonyms quite freely if they want to emphasise or downplay the significance of the Arabic words. The context of the verse below is God sending his inspiration to nature. For example, to the earth: Q.99:5: Because you Lord had inspired her

‫ك أ� ْو�َى �َ�َا‬ َ ‫ن ر ََّب‬ ّ َ �‫� ِأ‬

Ali: For that thy Lord will have given it inspiration.

Q.91:8: Then He inspired it to understand what is right and wrong for it ‫ف َ�� � ْ�َمَه َا �ُ�ُور َه َا و َتَقْوَاه َا‬

Ali: And its enlightenment as to its wrong and its right

24

Ali, 1260–1.

62

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Farid: And He revealed to it the ways of evil and the ways of righteousness

The narrative of the Qur’an also presents the examples when the use of the Arabic word for revelation, which was directed towards the bee, as in Q.16:68: ‘And your Lord inspired the bee…’. The response to such an object of God’s revelation is yet another example of God’s will and God’s work in His creation and through His creation. Therefore, it is possible to assume that the revelation could ultimately happen to anyone. 25 Again in this verse the inspiration of God, and his enlightenment is directed towards the feminine object, as the verb ‫ف َ�� � ْ�َمَه َا‬, means grammatically ‘and he inspired her’, as the verb form is in the third person singular feminine form, which could supposedly be addressing the soul, or the moon, or the sun, as the Surah is called Al-Shams, The Sun. What is interesting about this verse, is that the word signifying revelation/inspiration is affiliated with the feminine pronoun (her – ‫)�َ�َا‬. Within the context of this Surah 99 (Al Zalzalah, the Earthquake), the reference in this verse could well be to the earth. However, within the scope of the current discussion, it is important to note and underline here that direct revelation from Another way of understanding the term wahy is as communication. Therefore, when it is from God, it becomes the form of Divine communication. When it is not from God, as in the case of Q.6:112, 121 when the communication is presented between two demonic creatures, the term wahy can no longer be seen as representing exclusively Divine revelations. One other observation to be highlighted here is the fact that in the Qur’an the word wahy is never used describing the mode of communication between people. On the term wahy in the context of revelation see Daniel Madigan, The Qur’an’s Self-Image (Princeton University Press: Princeton-Oxford, 2001), p. 141–144. Madigan distinguishes between the pre-Islamic and post-Qur’anic understanding of the term wahy suggesting that in the earlier period of pre-Islamic Arabic poetry the term wahy was of much less mystified use than in the post-Qur’anic authors (see ibid. p. 142–143). Overall, Madigan suggests that ‘given the range of its use, it seems best to translate wahy simply as ‘communication’, understanding that it normally refers to divine communication.’ (ibid, p. 144) 25

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

63

God is bestowed only upon those whom He chooses, and the choices of God, as the previously discussed verses of Qur’an suggested, cannot be determined by strictly male or strictly female recipients. All the verses chosen above are significant. First of all, the first three reflect on God’s relationship to Mohammad, and indicate one of the ways that God communicated to him, that is through inspiration and through revelation. In that sense, the use of the word inspiration in the relationship between God and a ‘chosen one’ already indicates a. the context of a person being able to sustain a Divine encounter and b. the purposeful selection of the person as a ‘chosen one’ to receive Divine communication (be it through revelation or through inspiration). Additionally, verse 42:52 gives an example of when both words are used in relation to the Divine encounter between God and Mohammad.

MOTHER OF MOSES AS A RECEIVER OF DIVINE REVELATION

This attribution to Moses’ mother in the Qur’an can be found in many places. It is possible to assume that when God refers to Moses as a chosen one and as the one ‘reared under mine eyes’, in 38:39 and 38:41, that these words also apply to his mother at the time when she was the ‘main executor’ of Divine providence in Moses’ life. Hence, it is possible to deduce that the mother of Moses is also perceived as ‘God’s chosen one’ together with her son, as the verses of the Qur’an suggest (e.g. 38:39: ‘reared under Mine eye’, and 38:41: ‘prepared/chosen thee for Myself’). As the Qur’an also explicitly comments that the mother of Moses was receiving direct revelation/inspiration from God, as it is indicated in Q.28:7: ‘We sent this inspiration to the Mother of Moses’ and Q.20:38: ‘We sent to thy mother, by inspiration’. On the basis of these verses, one needs to pose the following question: Can the Mother of Moses be perceived as one of the

64

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

unnamed Prophets of the Qur’an, as the Surah of Women Q.4:163–164 suggested earlier? 26 The answer to this question can be found by looking closely into the already mentioned Qur’anic verses. The fact that Moses’ mother, although she is not called here by name, is the one who was receiving the revelation, and the important one, as the writing of Qur’an 20:38 suggests, puts her in a very distinct and privileged position of being among the ‘chosen ones of God’. The fact that she was the recipient of very important revelations from God could be seen in the writings of the Qur’an, as Farid suggests in his translation below: Q.20:38: “Behold! We sent to thy mother, by inspiration, the message: (Yousif Ali) When we revealed to thy mother what was an important revelation to wit: (Farid)

‫ك م َا يُو�َى‬ َ ِ ّ‫حي ْنَا �إ�َى ُأم‬ َ ‫�إ ْذ أ� ْو‬

The question of women prophets was discussed and supported by Ibn Hazm (d.1064) in his treatise Al-Fisal fi al-Milal wa-al-Ahwai'i wa-al-Nihal (Beirut: Daral-Jil, 1985). The part I refers to nubuwwa al-nisa'i (the prophethood of women) in vol. 5, p. 17–19. Ibn Hazm here makes a distinction between being a messenger and being a prophet. Also he points out that the recipient of Divine communications does not necessarily make a prophet using the example of Divine communication being directed to the bee in (Q.16:68). Using other examples from the Qur’an when the demons were involved in communicating (Q.6:112), Ibn Hazm insists that it was the sorcery, which is also not to be confused with prophethood. Revelation, according to Ibm Hazm, which is Nabuwwa (Prophethood) can be transmitted through an angel and through a message directly revealed to a person. He supports that Moses’ mother was a receiver of such a prophetic revelation from God. Ibn Hazm also compares her revelation with the one of Abraham by writing the following: ‘it becomes – with assuredness – true that that which came to (Yakabid) – of throwing her son in the Yam – was a revelation, like that which was revealed to Ibrahim in his dream…Hence their (the women’s) Prophethood becomes obviously true”. The English translation of the text is taken from http://www.jannah.org/sisters/nubuwwa.html, 29.05.2020. 26

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

65

Farid deliberately adds to his translation that Moses’ mother was receiving an important revelation. The commentaries of Farid added to his translation suggest the significance of the revelation to the Mother of Moses 27, which he bases on the additional ma in front of the word yuha – lit. meaning ‘is inspired’ but he translates the word as revelation. Hence the additional ma (which is literally translated as what) intensifies the meaning of the following word, be it revelation or inspiration and makes it into a very important one, and the one which came from God directly. The fact that the mother of Moses was chosen for an important revelation from God already shows that she belongs to the close circle of God’s chosen people. Her elevated status, therefore, could not only be defined by proximity to the ministry of the future leader of the people, and her son, Moses. Her status is also firmly grounded by the fact that she was chosen to be a receptacle of direct communication from God. Furthermore, the Qur’anic narrative suggests that Moses’ mother rose to the challenge of performing a very difficult task of casting her baby down the river when God revealed His request to her. The narrative of her casting the babe along the river has similarities with the sacrificial story of Abraham if one looks at it from a certain angle. Of course, there are considerable differences between the two stories, however, it is important for the purpose of this study to highlight some similarities. For example, the idea of throwing a small toddler into the river by his mother is not far away (in the ‘common sense’ / interpretation of her actions) from the deliberate attempt of Abraham to sacrifice his See Farid’s translation of 20:39: ‘We revealed to thy mother what was an important revelation… and stating in the footnote that Ma being Masdariyyah, the verb following it imparts to it an intensiveness of meaning. The Expression ma yuha thus means, an important revelation; or what was necessary to be revealed at the time’. Farid, p. 629. The translation of the Qur’an is taken from Malik Ghulam Farid (ed.) The Holy Qur’an – Arabic text with English translation and short commentary (Islam International Publications LTD: Islamabad, Tilford, 2010). 27

66

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

son. Additionally, what is asked of the mother of Moses is not a simple matter, according to the Qur’an. First of all, she is asked to cast her baby into the river, and secondly, she is asked to let the enemies of God and the enemies of Moses take him. 28 Therefore, the amount of trust in God and obedience to Him that both Abraham and the mother of Moses must have exhibited makes it appropriate to compare these two people and to put them in the category of God’s chosen people, first of all. And secondly, they are singled out as the people who rose for the task of being chosen and welcomed the challenge of following God’s providence by being obedient to God’s revelation in their lives. Thus, executing God’s plan with their actions and facing up to the choice of being initially singled out by God as His people. The Divine choice on Moses’ family was also for the sake of him and his brother, as Qur’an suggests in 20:41: ‘I have chosen you for myself’ 29. The Qur’an could be indicating here that in the process of execution of Divine Providence for the life of Moses, Moses becomes ‘one of the Messengers’, and the participation of his mother and his sister were crucially important at the early/formative/tender years of his life. The Qur’an also indicates a clear collaboration between mother and daughter in furthering the Divine plan for Moses. Each person, including Moses himself, seem to fulfil their role according to the Divine Plan for the child. Moses contributes by refusing the Egyptian wet-nurse, Miriam by being on watchful guard and initiating her mother as

See Q.20:38–39: 38. “Behold! We sent to thy mother, by inspiration, the message: 39. “‘Throw (the child) into the chest, and throw (the chest) into the river: the river will cast him up on the bank, and he will be taken up by one who is an enemy to Me and an enemy to him’: But I cast (the garment of) love over thee from Me: and (this) in order that thou mayest be reared under Mine eye.” (Ali) 29 The translation of the Qur’an is taken from M.A.S. Abdel Haleem, The Qur’an – Translated with an introduction and notes (Oxford University Press: NY, 2010). This translation will be used by default unless indicated otherwise. 28

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

67

a wet-nurse, and even Pharaoh’s wife by picking the boy up and taking him to her family. Ephrem with his exegesis further contributes to strengthening the typology of the two women in his commentaries on Exodus when he mentions that Miriam ‘and her mother were trusting in God’ 30 by putting the fate of young Moses into God’s hands. The Qur’an also mentions the trust of Moses’ mother in God’s Providence. In Qur’an verse of chapter 28:8 it is said that: ‘We directed the mother of Moses by revelation’. This is a clear indication of Divine Providence guiding the mother of Moses, and the reciprocity of the woman to Divine Revelation in verse 18:9 when it says: ‘she did accordingly’ to what was expected of her in the role that she was expected to fulfil in her son’s life 31. Furthering the description of the situation and developing the character of Moses’ mother, the Qur’an narrates in 28:11 that ‘the heart of the mother of Moses became free of anxiety, and she had almost disclosed his identity, were it not that we had to strengthen her heart so that she might be of the firm believers.’ 32 There is an interesting interplay here between Moses’ mother and God. She seems to be so ecstatic about seeing God’s providence coming through that she almost loses any caution and her trust in God’s providence becomes ultimate. Thus, God almost has to step in and restrain her ecstasy in order for Divine Providence to take its furthering in the life of her child. There is a slight difference with regard to the position of Miriam in the episode of Moses in the ark. Both the biblical narrative and the Qur’an state that Miriam stood afar off, while Ephrem chooses the following description of the setting: ‘MiriExodCom 2:2, p. 15. The translation of the Qur’an is taken from Malik Ghulam Farid (ed.) The Holy Qur’an – Arabic text with English translation and short commentary (Islam International Publications LTD: Islamabad, Tilford, 2010), p. 787. 32 The translation of the Qur’an is taken from Malik Ghulam Farid (ed.) The Holy Qur’an – Arabic text with English translation and short commentary (Islam International Publications LTD: Islamabad, Tilford, 2010), p. 787–788. 30 31

68

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

am, Moses’ sister, sat by the river.’ 33 The Qur’an, on the other hand, also presents unique verses when God in the first person is speaking the following words about Moses in 20:38–39: ‘I cast down upon thee love from me and that thou mightiest be brought up before my eyes.’ This signifies a great place that God predestined for Moses, and demonstrates a special place that he is destined to occupy in God’s plan. This place could be unprecedented, as there might not be another verse in the Qur’an where God in the first person ‘casts down’ his love upon someone else. Further on in the Qur’an God adorns Moses with gifts, this time it is with wisdom and knowledge, thus, appropriately equipping the future leader of the people with relevant virtues. Qur’an 28:15 says: Q.28:15: ‘And when he reached his age of full strength and attained maturity, We bestowed wisdom and knowledge upon him; and thus do we reward those who do good.’ 34

It is clear from the narrative above that God took close care of Moses by providing for his advancement every step of his way. By birth Moses was from the chosen people of God, while by upbringing he had access to the royal privileges in education from the best available tutors of the time, and from Divine wisdom as well by God bestowing on him further/advanced spiritual faculties/gifts. The following part of this chapter will look closely into the narrative in the Bible after Moses was cast into the river and the outcomes of it according to Ephrem and the Qur’an.

ExodCom 2:2, p. 15. See also further thoughts on the posture of Miriam in my book, Ephrem, A ‘Jewish’ sage…p. 209–212. 34 The translation of the Qur’an is taken from Malik Ghulam Farid (ed.) The Holy Qur’an – Arabic text with English translation and short commentary (Islam International Publications LTD: Islamabad, Tilford, 2010), p. 788. 33

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

69

FINDING THE BABE

The biblical account of Pharaoh’s daughter finding the child describes the event as a chain of one coincidence after another. NIV reads the account of Exodus 2:5–6 as follows: Exodus 2:5–6: Then Pharaoh’s daughter went down to the Nile to bathe, and her attendants were walking along the riverbank. She saw the basket among the reeds and sent her female slave to get it. She opened it and saw the baby. He was crying, and she felt sorry for him.

Ephrem uses the opportunity to expand the biblical text in such a manner that it becomes clear that the whole scene is developed under the close guidance of Divine Providence and the interplay between God’s intention and human collaboration with it. Ephrem writes: ExodCom 2:2: ‘That day Pharaoh’s daughter found the weather unbearably hot, and so she went out to bathe in the river earlier than usual. Although she went out freely enough owing to the heat of the day, since she did not get at her usual time she was also going out against her will. She was forcibly led, freely assenting, to draw out of the river the one who was going to take vengeance in the sea for the children who had been cast into the river.

The interplay between the free-will of human beings and Divine Providence is vocalised in an interesting way in the above passage from Ephrem. On the one hand, Ephrem clearly unravels the biblical narrative indicating that all of the steps of it are under the guidance of Divine Providence. On the other hand, however, he makes sure to indicate that people involved in the scene are acting as free agents. 35 Ephrem is very carefully presenting See Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), 15; See also Jansma, T., “Ephraem on Exodus ii.5: reflections on the interplay of human freewill and divine providence” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 39 (1973), p. 5–28. 35

70

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

the balance between Divine Providence and human participation in it. Even in the case of Pharaoh’s daughter, and Pharaoh himself, later on in the biblical narrative 36, Ephrem makes sure that he is clearly stating that, as the biblical history is unfolding, there is always a free-willed participation in it of the people involved. Ephrem does not allow for an argument to suggest that there is a mechanical and forcefully blunt execution of God’s intentions, and that the people are functioning only as marionettes. Therefore, even Pharaoh, being a negative character and an opponent to God, is acting freely and willfully in every step of his way. The Qur’anic narrative has its own perception of Pharaoh’s side of the story. While it has been clearly noticed that the members of Moses’ biological family, that is his mother and his sister (with the total absence of his father from the scene), were joining freely in the process of collaborating with God, the situation with Pharaoh’s family is somewhat more complicated. Quran states: Q.28:8–9: Pharaoh’s household picked him up – latter to become an enemy and a source of grief for them: Pharaoh, Haman and their armies were wrongdoers – and Pharaoh’s wife said, ‘Here is a joy to behold for me and for you! Do not kill him: he may be of use to us, or we may adopt him as a son.’ They did not realize what they were doing.

There are a few interesting moments that need to be highlighted from this passage. Moses is presented as an enemy here of the family of Pharaoh, and not the other way around, as the earlier narrative suggested. The explanation of this could be in the fact that the Pharaoh’s family were the ‘wrongdoers’, according to the Qur’an, and this would naturally put Moses as an enemy to such people. Also, the perception of the ‘wrongdoers’ in this narrative seems to be totally distorted. Instead of realising that they The story of Pharaoh-Moses and their place in Divine Providence interplay will be discussed in the further chapters of this study.

36

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

71

are about to accept their ‘enemy’, they are attracted to him, which is an action to their disadvantage. Also, their perception about receiving Moses to their family is again in contradiction to the subsequent biblical history. The wife of Moses is emphasising that Moses might be a source of joy for them, while the Qur’an clearly suggests that he will bring them ‘sorrow’. It is more than clear that the family of Pharaoh did not know God’s purpose and were acting unknowingly towards fulfilling it. What is interesting is that the translation that is used here to illustrate the example is an interpretation of the established phrase in the Qur’an (wahum la yashʿurūna – َ‫ – و َه ُ ْم � َ� � َ ْ�ع ُر ُون‬and they did not know). 37 This phrase is appropriate here, as Pharaoh’s household indeed were not aware of what they did, because they did not know the purpose of God. The interplay between Divine Providence and human free will here in the Qur’an is such that the narrative presents the situation when Pharaoh’s family ‘unknowingly’ (َ‫ )و َه ُ ْم � َ� � َ ْ�ع ُر ُون‬act outside their own interests, but in favour of Moses and the Divine plan for him.

OUTCOMES OF THE RESEARCH IN THIS CHAPTER

In concluding this chapter, the following points need to be highlighted. Firstly, the legitimacy of the exercise of the proposed research, which is aiming at establishing a trialogue between the selected texts representing the three monotheistic traditions: i.e. the biblical Exodus narrative and rabbinical exegesis of it; exegesis of the Exodus narrative by Ephrem; and the recollection of the stories of Exodus in the Qur’an. Secondly, the attempt of this study is to analyse the place of each of these texts within the broader tradition of biblical exegesis, so that they are seen in the light of their respective attempts to further unfold, develop, and explain the original biblical story. This exact phrase is also used in the story of Joseph when he was sold into slavery. See Q.12:15.

37

72

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

In the attempt to show how each of the selected texts contextualise or ‘stage’ their accounts of the biblical story of Moses’ childhood, the similarities in the respective textual presentations have been highlighted. Each of the original sources used in this study have looked into developing the characters around Moses, be they the close members of his family (e.g. his mother and sister) or Pharaoh’s family who adopted Moses at a later stage. In highlighting the respective roles of each character in the story of Moses, both Ephrem and the Qur’an further explain the roles that each character plays in the light of illustrating Divine Providence ‘at work’ in Moses’ life. Therefore, in reading the Qur’an’s and Ephrem’s recollection of the biblical events of Exodus, one can almost see how each of the respective sources develop their own, yet similar scenarios of the abbreviated and brief account of Moses’ childhood outlined in the biblical narrative. This indicates their collaborative efforts in contributing their respective exegesis to the common tradition of biblical interpretation. A creative collaboration could be identified between Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an in developing the character of Moses’ mother by means of their respective exegesis of the biblical story. Developments of the story through the exegetical narration of Ephrem and the Qur’an, offer their unique perceptions through their respective choices, to describe the lives of the ‘peripheral’ characters and their interplay with each other. Also the ways in which each of the characters behave in the story develops a larger picture of their own personal relationships with God (as in the case of Moses’ mother and sister), or at least their role in fulfilling God’s Providence (as in the case of Pharaoh’s family). When the biblical characters show deliberate or nondeliberate participation in the fate of Moses, they join a much larger picture of events unfolding not only in their own lives but in the lives of the whole nation (be it Israel or Egypt). Ephrem and the Qur’an, as well as the Midrash, allow for the expansion of the biblical characters, be it Moses’ mother or Moses himself. They are made into types or prophetic examples to imitate, to follow, or to appreciate.

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

73

Another point of collaboration or dialogue between the texts of Ephrem and the texts of the Qur’an was also found. In bringing to life the story of Moses one could see their respective deliberate attempts to highlight spiritual didactics from the portrayal of the characters in the story. In other words, both the Qur’anic and the Ephremic narratives strive for a broader context in their respective understandings of the original biblical story. Therefore, in their exegetical attempts, the story of Moses’ childhood becomes the story of the execution of the Divine Plan. They take the story of Moses as a starting platform for their exegetical exercise in order to thread the biblical story of Moses into the story of Divine Intention, human hope, and human response to Divine Inspiration. Ultimately the story of Moses’ childhood evolves into the story of how the destiny of the ‘chosen one’ affects the destiny of the peoples of Israel, Egypt, and the nations thereafter. Therefore, in further analysing the selections of the exegetical texts in this chapter, the following question was addressed: can the narrative of the Qur’an be considered in the context of continuation from or in collaboration with the prior exegetical narratives? In order to answer the question this study started with the comparison of the Qur’an’s writings and Ephrem’s exegesis. Ephrem was chosen as a representative of the Syriac Christian tradition of biblical exegesis which originated long before the Qur’an. Another characteristic of Ephrem is his close links with the Jewish tradition of biblical exegesis. Using the example of Ephrem the Syrian, the fourth century Christian theologian and poet, one can see that much of his exegetical material comes from the Jewish tradition of biblical commentaries. 38 As was demonstrated in the passages from MoSee my book, Ephrem, a Jewish sage… on the subject. Whether Ephrem was borrowing directly from rabbinical tradition or whether he had access to the common tradition of biblical exegesis is a question open for discussion. What remains clear, however, is the fact that one can see the continuity and kinship in the exegetical writing of Ephrem and Jewish traditions of exegesis, be it of direct 38

74

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

ses’ childhood, Ephrem clearly builds upon a common tradition of biblical exegesis as far as the matter of Moses’ mother and Moses’ sister is concerned. Their portrayal as Hebrew midwives and their active role in caring for Moses brings together Ephrem’s exegesis with the rabbinical exegesis. The development of the figures of Moses’ mother and his sister, lead to Ephrem and Midrash to create exegetical types from them. Thus, in describing their care for Moses, Midrash and Ephrem were describing their vocation of caring for the whole nation of Israel and for its destiny. The following question for discussion is therefore, whether the Exodus narrative of the Qur’an can be seen as being related to the previous exegetical traditions of Jewish or Christian origin. In order to attempt to answer this question, comparative research will be conducted chapter after chapter in this book and certain conclusions will be made. As far as the findings in this chapter are concerned, the biblical exegesis of the Qur’an regarding the mother of Moses fits into the line of thought demonstrated by the common Jewish-Christian tradition of biblical interpretation. Summarising the findings of the study in this chapter the following abbreviated synopsis was produced comparing the similarities and/or differences in the studied passages. For the initial analysis of the exegetical development of the story of Moses outside the biblical narrative the following conclusion was made after revisiting the biblical story of Exodus 2:1–10. In presenting the dramatic narrative of Moses’ mother casting the baby into the river, the biblical verses provide a brief history of the event using a schematic description of the situation, but almost leaving the development of the story open-ended, as in Exod. 2:4: ‘His sister stood at a distance to see what would happen to him’. In leaving an open-ended and brief account of Moses’ early childhood events, the biblical narrative allows for further exegetical encounters on the matter. rabbinic origin, or via Targumim, or any other way of oral transmission of exegesis at the time (for example, via canting the hymns).

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

75

One of the exegetical avenues in approaching the biblical story of Moses’ childhood was the development of the characters involved in Moses’ life at the time. Jewish exegetical tradition names the mother of Moses and with it gives her a unique ministry and an important place in the life and fate of the whole nation of Israel. Ephrem follows on by building further on the character of the mother of Moses. While doing so he introduces the notion of interplay between God’s ‘chosen one’, Moses, and his family. Ephrem took his time describing each of the characters in the story of finding baby Moses, and their role in fulfilling God’s plan. In doing so Ephrem brought coherence to the biblical story by vocalising the biblical narrative in the places when the narrative itself kept silence. In further developing the character of Moses’ mother, Ephrem presented her as a type of courage, prayer and zeal, which again could be compared to the similar notions ascribed to Moses’ mother by Jewish exegetes. What distinguishes Ephrem’s commentaries however, is the fact that he emphatically described Moses’ mother as a woman who is mediating the fate of the people of Israel in the middle of her personal crisis. Therefore, Ephrem was able to identify the pain of Moses’ mother with the pain of the whole nation. Such a distinctive stance in Ephrem’s exegesis also bears similarities with Jewish rabbinical tradition. Rabbinical exegesis presents Moses’ mother among the Jewish midwives who saved Hebrew babies and so became the saviours of the future of Israel. 39 In presenting his exegetical initiative of the biblical passage Ephrem introduces the following observations that he derived from the text of Exodus. He brings to the attention of the reader the interplay between the ‘God’s chosen one’, that is Moses himself, and his family. The significance of this initiative in See in EcclRab V:5.1, p. 169–170 where Johebed and her daughter presented as Hebrew midwives; see also in SSRab IV:5.2, p. 200 where they are presented as the ones who nurtured and fed Israel; see also ExodRab I:15, p. 16–22 where the midwives are presented saviours of the nation. See also in my book, Ephrem the Jewish Sage, p. 207. 39

76

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Ephrem’s presentation is such that it shows the support of his family during the time when Moses could not rise to the challenge of being God’s chosen one, that is during the days of his infancy. Thus, it is his family that joined Moses in taking upon themselves the responsibility of taking care and protecting him for the sake of the Divine plan. For the sake of his future calling of being the leader and the saviour of the nation, the peripheral characters take on the role of furthering Divine destiny in the life of the child. According to Ephrem, all the peripheral characters join in furthering the Divine plan for Moses, even Pharaoh and his family. Such dynamics in the development of the biblical characters by means of exegesis is similar to the Qur’an. Therefore, the Qur’an can be jointly considered in a collaborative exegetic exercise of developing the character of Moses’ mother in her distinctly charismatic relationship with God. The findings of the research in this chapter showed that the Qur’an further unfolded the interplay between God’s ‘chosen one’ and his family. By giving an account of the event of finding baby Moses the Qur’an presents the family of the Pharaoh as strictly following the Divine plan, even while behaving out of character or out of their own interests. The Qur’an is consistent in giving its detailed description of how each participant in Moses’ story performed their tasks as a direct or indirect contribution to fulfilling the Divine plan for Moses. The Qur’an also could be seen as affirming and further highlighting the significance of Moses’ mother as a unique character, and a person who can be considered in direct relationship with the prophetic history of humankind. The fact that the Qur’an described her receiving direct revelation from God put her alongside other prophets and messengers who had similar experiences. On the basis of the findings in this chapter the main argument of this study can be substantiated with textual evidence. Consequently, the Qur’anic narrative in this study can be seen through the prism of the pre-existing tradition of biblical exegesis on the basis of the current analysis in this chapter. The outcomes of the analytic exercise of the story of Moses’ childhood suggest that the Qur’anic narrative of Moses’ childhood coher-

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

77

ently follows on from the preceding exegetical narratives of Jewish and Christian origin. For the purpose of this study, the compilation from Qur’anic narratives about Moses was exhibited as evidence which illustrates and highlights the instances where the Qur’an further unfolds the biblical narrative and brings a valuable contribution to it. First of all, in the context of previously discussed matters, it is important to emphasise that the Qur’anic narrative further unfolds and develops the interplay between Moses’ family members in the process of seeing that God’s plan and destiny is followed through, and that Moses’ life during his early years is developed according to Divine providence. Hence the Qur’an narrates the story of family members, such as Moses’ mother and his sister, showing how they designate to themselves certain tasks which they successfully perform in accordance with Divine Revelation. The focal point in Moses’ family members performing these tasks is their importance for Moses’ life. According to the narrative of the Qur’an, even the baby Moses is fully involved in this interplay of characters. At the appropriate moment he refused to suckle, so that Miriam, his sister, could volunteer her mother and the mother of Moses to be a wet-nurse for Moses. Together with the stories of ‘the chosen ones’ rising to their tasks, the Qur’an unfolds step by step with each initiative in the story, the place of all of the peripheral characters. Their unity is accumulated in the Qur’an by the universal significance and influence of Divine Providence. Therefore, starting from Moses’ mother casting the babe into the water, all the characters thereafter are seen by the Qur’an as collaborating with the process of advancing Divine Providence in Moses’ life. Thus, when Pharaoh’s family members pick the babe from the water and bring him into their family they provide for him the best possible upbringing. When Miriam, the sister of Moses, monitors the whole process from afar and steps in at the right moment in order to reintroduce the role of Moses’ birth-mother into his life, she secures his birth mother to influence his upbringing in the house of Pharaoh. The circle is closed by the Qur’anic exegesis of the biblical narrative. The Qur’an shows Divine Providence at work in Moses’ life. And Divine Providence in the child’s life was to place him in the royal

78

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

household of the Pharaoh after a short separation from his physiological family. Furthermore, the Qur’anic narrative offers a valuable contribution to the advancement in the development of the character of Moses’ mother. It illustrates the significance of the woman’s character elevating her to the rank of ‘God’s chosen people’, similar to the ones of the prophets and God’s messengers, who are specifically chosen by God, and are therefore privileged to receive revelation and inspiration from Him by means of God speaking to them directly. Hence the Qur’an clearly indicates in the story of Moses’ mother that she was benefiting from a very intimate encounter with God, which is clearly marked in the Qur’anic narrative on several occasions. It is therefore possible to propose that the figure of Moses’ mother, as it is presented in the Qur’an, is charged with the qualities equivalent to the virtues of the greatest prophets of human history, such as Noah, Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, Solomon, David and other Messengers 40. The Qur’an could be seen as affiliating the mother of Moses to such a distinguished circle of people. 41 Based on all of the above-mentioned offerings and contributions of the Qur’an to the biblical narrative it is possible to start redressing the question about the relationship of the Qur’an to the biblical tradition of exegesis. Based on the findings of study in this chapter, the Qur’an can be seen as having connections to the pre-existing tradition of Jewish and Christian tradition of exegesis. This is identified by the comparison of Qur’anic verses with the writings of Ephrem and Midrash. Considering the Qur’anic relationship to the biblical story, the outcomes of the The recitation of the names of the prophets is given according to Qur’anic verses of 4:163. 41 Although Moses’ mother never mentioned by name in the Qur’an, it has to be noted here that in the Middle East it is quite appropriate to refer to people by the names of their first-born sons. Therefore, the tradition of referring to the mother of Moses by the name of her son can be accepted as a legitimate practice of naming a person. 40

1. MOSES’ CHILDHOOD

79

study in this chapter clearly show that the Qur’an could be seen as further unfolding the biblical story of Moses’ childhood by adding a valuable contribution by further developing biblical characters, as for example, the character of Moses’ mother. Therefore, in concluding this chapter it is possible to consider selected verses of the Qur’an as being part of the broader tradition of biblical exegesis. Further illustrating the final point in concluding this part of the research it seems important to demonstrate the table of analytical comparison of the exegetical encounters of Ephrem and the Qur’an with the biblical story of Moses’ early childhood. The Biblical narrative of the open-ended verses 3 and 4 of Exodus 2, which state the abbreviated scenario for Moses’ early months, give starting questions to be developed further in the respective exegetical sources of this study. As a reminder of the Exodus narrative the verses are: Exodus 2:3: ‘But when she could hide him no longer, she got a papyrus basket for him and coated it with tar and pitch. Then she placed the child in it and put it among the reeds along the bank of the Nile. 4: His sister stood at a distance to see what would happen to him’.

The biblical narrative of Exodus 2:4 gives away very little information upon which to build. Therefore, all the extra information which is found in the biblical commentaries of Ephrem and the Qur’an, is their contribution to the common tradition of biblical exegesis as well as an indication of their reliance on it. The biblical narrative does not disclose the intensity of Moses mother’s anxiety; does not reveal the fervency of her prayer (as Ephrem does); and definitely does not tell us about God’s revelation to the mother of Moses before she parts with her baby (as in the Qur’an). All this information is revealed to us through the exegetical tradition of biblical commentary, which is represented in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. They confirm to us the names of the peripheral figures in Moses’ life and many other small and large stories; details and emphasises that allow us to understand more about the context of the bibli-

80

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

cal narrative; and the further development of the biblical characters. Coming back to the table of comparison between our sources, it is important to single out two of them in order to highlight how similar they are in directing their exegetical projector and highlighting the particular aspects which the sources below brought to life and vocalised. The following table demonstrates the points of expansion from the biblical narrative, which Ephrem and the Qur’an share: Ephrem the Syrian

Qur’an

Introduced interplay between God’s ‘chosen one’ and his family

Further unfolded the interplay between God’s ‘chosen one’ and his family

Described the role of each participant in fulfilling God’s plan

Detailed description of how each participant of Moses’ story performed their tasks in direct/indirect contribution to fulfilling the Divine plan for Moses

Highlighted the character of Moses’ mother as a type of courage, prayer and zeal

Highlighted the significance of Moses’ mother in the prophetic history of humankind

The following chapter of this book will look into the experience of Moses with the Burning Bush. The chapter will continue the research in this study by looking at the biblical narrative of Moses’ stories and by analysing the exegesis of these stories in Midrash, Ephrem and Qur’an.

CHAPTER 2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS: THE BEGINNING OF SIGNS IN MOSES’ STORY

Continuing the research in this book with the story of the Burning Bush, the study re-enters the biblical narrative from the striking story of God appearing to Moses. Jewish, Christian and Muslim sources provide different interpretations of the biblical narrative. The variety of the viewpoints on the Burning Bush story, enables a comparison of the Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic narratives, and an analysis of their respective interpretations of the biblical narrative. Additionally, the study in this chapter will initiate further discussion about the use of signs in the story of Moses. The discussion on signs and their theology will culminate in the final chapter of this book. Therefore, the current chapter will follow the interpretations of the Burning Bush story in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The theme will be open for discussion in this part of the book and will be further developed as part of the Moses’ stories narrative. The familiar methodology used in chapter one is replicated here in presenting the biblical narrative on the subject, and reading it alongside Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic interpretations of the stories of Moses. The episodes selected from the Burning Bush stories in the respective writings of the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an will be considered and analysed according to the commonly identified questions in the study. The question of Mount Horeb and its status of being a blessed or sacred 81

82

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

land will be considered initially. This question will be followed by another relating to the identity of the One who spoke to Moses from the Burning Bush. Subsequently the meaning of God revealing His name to Moses will be analysed in the selected exegetical writings. And finally, the question of the Term in relation to Moses’ story and the covenant of God with Abraham will be addressed. By addressing these questions in the selected writings the research in this chapter will look into the ways in which the Burning Bush events are perceived by the Hebrew biblical narrative, in the writings of St Ephrem, rabbinical sources, and in the Qur’an. Therefore, this part of the research precedes the following chapter, which will look at the further development of the biblical narrative in the stories of Moses crossing the Red Sea and the receiving of the Law directly from God on Mount Sinai.

BIBLICAL NARRATIVE OF EXODUS 3:1–6

The study of the Burning Bush story in this chapter starts in the usual manner by looking at the biblical narrative of the Old Testament. The biblical narrative of the Burning Bush story starts as follows: Exodus 3:1–6: One day while Moses was taking care of the sheep and goats of his father-in-law Jethro, the priest of Midian, he led the flock across the desert and came to Sinai, the holy mountain. There the angel of the Lord appeared to him as a flame coming from the middle of a bush. Moses saw that the bush was on fire but that it was not burning… When the Lord saw that Moses was coming closer, he called to him from the middle of the bush and said, “Moses! Moses!” He answered, “Yes, here I am.” God said, “Do not come any closer. Take off your sandals, because you are standing on holy ground. I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” So Moses covered his face, because he was afraid to look at God.

‫ת־צ ֹאן יִ ְת ֥רוֹ ח ְֹתנ֖ וֹ כּ ֵ ֹ֣הן ִמ ְד ָ ֑י ן וַ יִּ נְ ַ ֤הג ֶאת־‬ ֛ ‫וּמ ֶֹ֗שׁה ָה ָי֥ה ר ֶֹﬠ֛ה ֶא‬1 ‫�הים ח ֵ ֹֽר ָבה׃‬ ֖ ִ ‫ל־הר ָה ֱא‬ ֥ ַ ‫אן ַא ַ ֣חר ַה ִמּ ְד ָ֔בּר וַ יָּ ֛ב ֹא ֶא‬ ֙ ֹ ‫ַהצּ‬ ‫ת־אשׁ ִמ ֣תּוֹ� ַה ְסּ ֶנ֑ה וַ ַ֗יּ ְרא וְ ִה ֵנּ֤ה‬ ֖ ֵ ‫הוֹ֥ה ֵא ָל֛יו ְבּ ַל ַבּ‬ ָ ְ‫ ַו֠יֵּ ָרא ַמ ְל ַ֨א� י‬2

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

83

‫ַה ְסּנֶ ֙ה בּ ֵֹﬠ֣ר ָבּ ֵ֔אשׁ וְ ַה ְסּ ֶנ֖ה ֵא ֶינ֥נּוּ ֻא ָ ֽכּל׃‬ �‫ת־ה ַמּ ְר ֶ ֥אה ַהגָּ ֖ד ֹל ַה ֶזּ֑ה ַמ ֖דּ ַוּ‬ ַ ‫ה־נּ֣א וְ ֶא ְר ֶ֔אה ֶא‬ ָ ‫אמר מ ֶֹ֔שׁה ָא ֻ ֽס ָר‬ ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֣יּ‬3 ‫לֹא־יִ ְב ַ ֥ﬠר ַה ְסּ ֶנֽה׃‬ ‫�הים ִמ ֣תּוֹ� ַה ְסּ ֗ ֶנה‬ ִ֜ ‫הו֖ה ִ ֣כּי ָ ֣סר ִל ְר ֑אוֹת וַ יִּ ְק ָר ֩א ֵא ֨ ָליו ֱא‬ ָ ְ‫וַ יַּ ְ֥ רא י‬4 ‫אמר ִה ֵנּֽנִ י׃‬ ֶ ֹ ‫אמר מ ֶ ֹ֥שׁה מ ֶ ֹ֖שׁה וַ ֥יּ‬ ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֛יּ‬ ‫י� ֵמ ַﬠ֣ל ַרגְ ֔ ֶלי� ִ ֣כּי ַה ָמּ ֗קוֹם ֲא ֶ ֤שׁר‬ ֙ ‫ל־תּ ְק ַ ֣רב ֲה�֑ ם ַשׁל־נְ ָﬠ ֨ ֶל‬ ִ ‫אמר ַא‬ ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֖יּ‬5 ‫עוֹמד ָﬠ ֔ ָליו ַא ְד ַמת־ ֖קֹ ֶדשׁ ֽהוּא׃‬ ֣ ֵ ‫ַא ָתּ ֙ה‬ ‫א�הי‬ ֣ ֵ ֵ‫�הי ְיִצ ָ ֖חק ו‬ ֥ ֵ ‫�הי ַא ְב ָר ָ ֛הם ֱא‬ ֧ ֵ ‫�הי ָא ִ֔בי� ֱא‬ ֣ ֵ ‫ֹכי ֱא‬ ֙ ִ ‫אמר ָאנ‬ ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֗יּ‬6 ‫�הים׃‬ ֽ ִ ‫ל־ה ֱא‬ ָ ‫יַ ֲﬠ ֑קֹב וַ יַּ ְס ֵ ֤תּר מ ֶֹשׁ ֙ה ָפּ ֔ ָניו ִ ֣כּי יָ ֵ ֔רא ֵמ ַה ִ ֖בּיט ֶא‬ This passage presents the following points in the Burning Bush story: -

-

-

While approaching Mount Sinai, the holy mountain, the Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses, Exod.3:2a. The Hebrew of the verse explicitly states that the Angel of the Lord (‫הוֹ֥ה‬ ָ ְ‫ ) ַמ ְל ַ֨א� י‬appeared from inside the bush (‫ ) ִמ ֣תּוֹ� ַה ְסּ ֶנ֑ה‬and from the midst of the fire (‫ת־אשׁ‬ ֖ ֵ ‫;) ְבּ ַל ַבּ‬ Moses saw the bush being on fire, but not actually consumed by the fire, Exod.3:2b; The Lord, seeing that Moses comes to the bush, called to him from the middle of the bush, Exod.3:4; The Lord called Moses by name and Moses responds – here I am (end of Exod.3:4); The Lord asks Moses to take his sandals off, because it is holy ground (the whole mountain was holy beforehand, but this time the holiness of the ground demands extra actions from Moses, namely the removing of his shoes (Exod.3:5); God reveals Himself to Moses by introducing Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (Exod.3:6); Moses becomes afraid and hides his face from fear of looking at God (end of Exod.3:6).

One can already identify several problematic issues in the biblical narrative of Exodus 3:1–6. Problems or inconsistencies of the actual text of the bible and the way our exegetical sources deal with them will determine the content of this part of the study. One can start from verse 1 of Exodus 3 and pause on the definition of Sinai as the holy mountain, or more precisely, the

84

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

mountain of God, as the Hebrew text suggests (‫�הים‬ ֖ ִ ‫) ַ ֥הר ָה ֱא‬. The curiosity of the biblical story suggests exploring this question further. Firstly, why was the ground of the mountain holy (i.e. ‘the mountain of God’) beforehand, as Exod. 3:1 suggests? Why was this mountain already associated with God before God actually started revealing Himself to Moses, firstly in the Burning Bush and later, on the very top of the mountain? Looking at Midrash Rabbah on Exodus 3.1 we find clarifications to the following questions: 1. What does the name Horeb mean, as further definition of Exodus 3:1 suggests that the mountain of God is actually called Horeb (‫�הים ח ֵ ֹֽר ָבה‬ ֖ ִ ‫?) ַ ֥הר ָה ֱא‬ 2. Why was Horeb, the mountain of God, referred to as a holy place before God revealed himself in it?

MIDRASH RABBAH ON THE MOUNTAIN OF GOD (EXODUS 3:1)

Midrash Rabbah on Exodus unsurprisingly picks up on the two crucial questions in relation to the first verse of Exodus 3 and states the following: Exod Rab 2:4: ‘AND HE CAME TO THE MOUNTAIN OF GOD, UNTO HOREB. The mountain had five names 1. The mountain of God, the mountain of Bashan, the mountain of peaks 2, the mountain of Horeb, and the mountain of Sinai. The mountain of God – because there Israel accepted the Godhead of the Holy One, blessed be He. The mountain of Bashan – because everything that man eats with his teeth (be-shem) is given for the sake of Torah which was given on the mount; so it says: If ye walk in My statutes… then I will give your rains in their season (Lev.XXVI, 3–4). The mountain of peaks (gabnunim) – pure as cheese (gebinah) and pure from

1 2

V. Num. R. 1:7 (where six names are given). Ps. 68:17.

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

85

every blemish 3. The mountain Horeb – because from it the Sehnedrin derived power to slay with the sword (hereb). R. Samuel b. Nahman says: The idol worshippers received their sentence from there, as it is said: those nations shall be utterly wasted – harob yaherabu (Isa. LX, 12), from Horeb they shall be destroyed (yeharabu). Sinai – because hatred (sin’ah) descended to idolaters thence 4.’ 5

It is clear from Midrash Rabbah’s exegesis that the mountain was holy because of the future events, which resulted in Israel receiving the Torah. Also the meaning of the name Horeb was reached through the exegetical tool of playing with names 6, and the meaning of the word had direct relation to judgement and the judicial system. So far the unravelling of Midrash Rabbah only slightly opens up the biblical text. It seems that the biblical verse of Exodus 3:1 exercises prophetic exegesis in its definition of the mountain of God and affiliates the holiness to the mountain because of the future significant revelations of God to Moses in this mountain. The other problem with the biblical narrative relates to the Divine presence in the Burning Bush. The biblical text suggests that the angel appeared to Moses from the bush. However, further narrative apparently contradicts this when the so-called angel starts to speak to Moses directly by speaking about God in first person singular, i.e. ‘I am the God of your father’ 7. Hence, the most natural question to address is who is that person who Cheese is made from pure milk, so Israel at Sinai was healed from every physical defect. 4 I.e. they showed their unworthiness by rejecting the Torah. The passage may also mean that they contracted a hate – of Israel – from Sinai, Israel being hated and persecuted on account of Torah. 5 Midrash Rabbah Exodus 2:4, see in Midrash Rabbah. Exodus, transl. S.M. Lehrman (The Soncino Press: London, NY, 1983), 51–52. 6 Play on names (mischak ha-shem) is one of many rabbinical techniques of exegesis. 7 See in Exodus 3:6. 3

86

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

addressed Moses from the bush. Looking further into the biblical narrative we find out that there is an introduction by name that is directed to Moses, and the situation about Divine presence at the event becomes complicated. The angel could not possibly say the name of God in the first singular form – ‘I am who I am’, as in Exodus 3:14, as it was a direct revelation from God about Himself.

EPHREM ON EXODUS 3:1

It is natural that the above question could not escape the attention of Ephrem. His exegesis of Exodus 3:1 seems to go along with the biblical verse by staying relatively close to the narrative: ExodCom 3:1: When Moses was pasturing sheep near Horeb, he saw an angel in a fire that blazed in a bush. When Moses went to look more closely at the bush that was not being burnt up in the fire 8.

The next biblical verse stimulates Ephrem to write the following clarification: ExodCom 3:1: it was the ordinary likeness of an angel that was visible to him while he was approaching. When he got there, it was not the angel he had seen, but God who called him, and God then appeared to him in an angel, a terrifying sight 9.

When the biblical story does not explain the confusion between the presence of an Angel in the bush or the presence of God, Ephrem makes an effort to clarify the biblical narrative by paraphrasing it and stating that it was simply a likeness of an angel, while the actual presence that Moses was experiencing at the bush was the presence of God Himself.

8 9

ExodCom 3:1, p. 21. ExodCom 3:1, p. 21–22.

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

87

Ephrem does not contradict the biblical verse by simply stating that ‘it was not an angel that was in the bush’, but he develops the biblical narrative by explaining the mystery of the whole situation. In fact, rather than departing from the biblical narrative, Ephrem goes along with its story by means of adding his explanations to its complexity. One needs to be reminded that the setting of the biblical narrative was not straightforward. For example, although the mountain Horeb was already ‘the mountain of God’, the area around the Burning Bush seemed to be even holier, as Moses was required to take his shoes off by God repeatedly stating that it was holy ground 10. Also, the Bush was burning, but not really burning, as it was not consumed by the fire 11. The angel was talking about God in first person, as if he was God himself. From the very first verse chapter three of Exodus seems to be very unclear on the literary level, while being charged heavily on other levels, be it prophetic, eschatological and so on. Therefore, in accordance with the non-straight-forward biblical presentation, Ephrem carries on by attempting to clarify the confusion between the literal representation of the biblical narrative and the spiritual reality behind it. The vision from the bush seemed to be of an angel to Moses, but in fact, according to Ephrem, it was a likeness of an angel. In fact, it was not an angel at all, but God Himself, which appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush, and it made the whole experience as a ‘terrifying sight’ indeed. Ephrem further elaborates on Moses’ reaction to the fact that it was God that he was beholding and communicating with: ExodCom 3:1: Previously, Moses was approaching without fear. But when there appeared to him a sign too great for him to look at, he hid his face, because he was afraid to look at

10 11

See in Exodus 3:5. See in Exodus 3:2.

88

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD God in the same way that he had looked at an angel (Exod. 3:6). 12

It is important to note that Moses received caution and guidance about how to dwell in the place of holiness. Hence, Moses had to change his initial curious approach completely and to treat the space around him as a sacred space, and the presence that he was experiencing as a sacred presence. So Ephrem elaborates on the biblical narrative with a few more remarks, as follows: ExodCom 3:1: He [God] said to him, “Do not approach here as you would ordinary ground, for it is a holy place” (Exod. 3:5) – like the place where Jacob slept. There it was because of the ladder and the angels who were ascending and descending to watch over him: here it was because God was present in the fire blazing in the bush. “Take off your sandals, come and trample the Egyptians! The time of their ingathering is thirty years overdue”. 13

With the remarks above Ephrem immerses himself into an exegetical sea of unlimited allusions and possibilities, and he flavours it all with the following calculation of comparing two ‘Sacred space’ narratives of the Bible, and linking the Burning Bush episode with Jacob’s Ladder narrative. The following analysis of the passages will attempt to further explore Ephrem’s exegesis of the matter. Firstly, Ephrem emphasises the extra holiness of the ground that Moses was standing on. Let us not forget that the ground of the Horeb mountain was already referred to by the biblical narrative as a mountain of God in Exod. 3:1 when it is stated that Moses came into Horeb, the mountain of God: (‫ל־הר‬ ֥ ַ ‫וַ יָּ ֛ב ֹא ֶא‬ ‫�הים ח ֵ ֹֽר ָבה‬ ֖ ִ ‫) ָה ֱא‬. What we discovered in Midrashic prophetic exegesis is that the name of Horeb had some affiliation with judgement, sentencing and separation between righteous and idol

12 13

ExodCom 3:1, p. 22. ExodCom 3:1, p. 22

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

89

worshippers, and the holiness of this mountain was linked to the future event when Moses received the Torah. Additionally, Ephrem draws a parallel between two occurrences in the biblical narrative when the ground was made extra-holy or was sanctified by means of sacred encounters that were happening on it, or in other words, by means of sacred presences that were revealed through encounters. In the case of Jacob it was because of the appearance of angels, and in the case of Moses it was because of the appearance of God Himself. Hence, the Burning Bush story could be clearly seen as a prelude to further appearances of God to Moses. In fact, the Burning Bush story may be seen as an unprecedented one in the life of Moses where God chose to reveal Himself by name. This unprecedented Divine revelation was passed on to Moses so that he could pass it on to his people. The whole experience of Moses, therefore becomes of an enormous significance to the whole nation. The biblical narrative reflects with the following words on the occasion of God revealing His name to Moses: Exodus 3:14: God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you’.”

‫ֹאמ ֙ר‬ ַ ‫אמר ֤כֹּה ת‬ ֶ ֹ ‫שׁר ֶ ֽא ְה ֶי֑ה וַ ֗יּ‬ ֣ ֶ ‫ים ֶאל־מ ֶֹ֔שׁה ֶ ֽא ְה ֶי֖ה ֲא‬ ֙ ‫�ה‬ ִ ‫אמר ֱא‬ ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֤יּ‬ ‫יכם׃‬ ֽ ֶ ‫ִל ְב ֵנ֣י יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵ֔אל ֶ ֽא ְה ֶי֖ה ְשׁ ָל ַ ֥חנִ י ֲא ֵל‬ DIVINE INTRODUCTION TO MOSES IN EXODUS 3:14: ‘I AM WHO I AM’

If one compares this revelation to others in biblical history, then it is possible to define it as a retrospective reassurance. There was no new covenant as such in the Burning Bush experience, but there was a strong connection to the previously made covenant of God with Abraham about the deliverance of Israel. Additionally, through the Burning Bush encounter between Moses and God, there is a clear affirmation of God’s covenant with

90

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Abraham 14, and His participation in Israel’s vocation. Hence, through the Burning Bush encounter with Moses, God reaffirms His promises to Abraham and makes an extra step to bond with Moses and with his people on a very personal level. The latter step to intimacy between Israel, Moses and God was a singular encounter in the entire biblical history. The divinely initiated introduction of Exodus 3:14 is an act of personal revelation. It became personal when God chose to reveal His name to His creation. It also became personal when God chose a single individual, Moses, to whom to reveal His name. The relationship with God from there on could be on a ‘first name’ basis, which was indeed very close. Therefore, this episode of Divine introduction at the Burning Bush could be seen as new level of intimacy in the entire history of the God-human relationship. It is God who through the Burning Bush revelation made an extra step to establishing a closer relationship with His people. It is therefore very surprising that Ephrem does not mention anything about the introduction of the Name of God in his commentaries. He elaborates on God’s promise to Abraham and corrects the discrepancy in chronology of the years that Israel was in bondage. He also mentions God’s reaction to the suffering of his people, as in Exodus 3:7 and 3:8, but no mention whatsoever of God sharing his name with Moses. It is not clear why Ephrem ignores such a crucial biblical verse. More so, it is surprising when one discovers that Peshitta’s version of Exodus 3:14 follows the Hebrew word by word and introduces the event of God declaring his name to Moses:

̇ ‫ܐܗܝܗ‬ ̇ .‫ܐܫܪ ܐܗܝܗ‬ .‫ܐܡܪ ܐܠܗܐ ܠܡܫܐ‬ ̣ ‫̣ܘ‬ And God said to Moses, “I am that I am”.

We shall discuss the question of Ephrem not explicitly commenting on the above verse further in this study, but for now we shall look at the prior verses in the biblical narrative.

14

Cf. Exodus 3:15–16.

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

91

Exodus 3:7–10: The Lord said, “I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey – the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing then. So now, go. I am sending you to Pharaoh to bring my people the Israelites out of Egypt.”

Coming back to the covenant of God with Abraham and the calculation of the years that Israel remained in bondage since the promise, Ephrem clearly mentions that ‘the time of their ingathering is thirty years overdue’ 15. In other words, 400 years was promised 16, and 430 years passed from the first year of the promise of God to Abraham until the exodus of Israelites from Egypt, so God’s promise to Abraham was 30 years overdue 17. As Alison Salvesen puts in her translation, Ephrem ‘makes it an exegetical feature’ by stating that the deliverance of Israel was 30 years overdue 18. Ephrem here successfully attempted to overcome another biblical inconsistency with chronology in reference to God’s promise to Abraham, i.e. with regard to the promise of bringing Israel to the land of milk and honey. In fact, the whole setting of Genesis 15:12–14 is interesting for several points: Genesis 15:12–14: As the sun was setting, Abram fell into a deep sleep, and a thick and dreadful darkness came over him. Then the Lord said to him, “Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own, and ExodCom 3:1, p. 22. See Genesis 15:12–14. 17 The calculation of the years was taken from Eusebius, see Eusebii Pampili, Pars II (1818), 69, 105; see also my book, Ephrem – a Jewish sage, p. 195. 18 See in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), 22 footnote 33. 15 16

92

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD they will be enslaved and mistreated four hundred years. But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves, and afterward they will come out with great possessions.

Firstly, it refers to dreadful darkness that came over Abraham during his encounter with God (similar to Ephrem referring to Moses’ encounter with God as being a terrifying sight). Secondly, it clearly states the number of 400 years that God designated for Israel to dwell under Egyptian oppression. Thirdly, there is a matter of great possessions, which is significant in Ephrem’s exegetical radar that would pick up on the fulfilment of this promise further on in his commentaries. 19 So far in the study we have looked at the biblical narration of the Burning Bush story and the ways in which Ephrem dealt with it. At the moment it seems that Ephrem occasionally attempts to explain inconsistencies in the biblical narrative, such as the one about the appearance of the angel instead of God, and the biblical chronology. However, in the most crucial point of God’s revelation to Moses by name, Ephrem remains silent. This is indeed puzzling, and we have to leave it at that at the moment, while we turn to the representation of the Burning Bush story in the Qur’an.

QUR’AN ON THE BURNING BUSH STORY

We read in the following verse the unravelling of the Burning Bush story, which is very close to the biblical narrative. Q.28:29. Once Moses had fulfilled the term and was travelling with his family, he caught sight of fire on the side of the mountain and said to his family, ‘Wait! I have seen the fire. I will bring you news from there, or a burning stick for you to warm yourselves.’ 20

See also my book, Ephrem, a Jewish Sage, p. 195. The translation here and in most of English verses of the Qur’an are of M.A.S. Abdel Haleem unless stated otherwise. 19 20

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS ‫ل � ِ ��هْ�ِ� ِ ا ْمكُث ُوا �إ� ِّي‬ َ ‫طورِ � َار ًا قَا‬ ّ ُ ‫� م ِن � َان ِِب ال‬ َ َ �‫ل وَسَار َ � ِأ� هْ�ِ� ِ آ‬ َ َ ��� �ْ ‫فَ�َ� َّا ق َ� َ� م ُو� َ� ا‬ َ‫ن الن َّارِ لَع ََّل�� ُ ْ� تَصْ طَ�ُ�ن‬ َ ِ ّ‫آ�َ�ْتُ � َار ًا َّلع َ� ِّ� آتيِ� ُ� مِّ�ْ�َا �ِ � َ�َ�ٍ أ� ْو � َ ْذوَة ٍ م‬

93

Qur’an 28:29 deals very specifically with Moses and the Burning Bush story by clearly pointing to a number of important elements in this story. Firstly, it is important to draw one’s attention to the phrase of this verse mentioning that ‘Moses filled the term’ ( �َ �‫ق َ� َ� م ُو‬ ‫ل‬ َ َ ��� �ْ ‫)ا‬. Secondly, it is important to look more closely into the Qur’anic depiction of Moses’ reactions to the site of the Burning Bush. Thirdly, the direct introduction of God to Moses is crucially important for this study. Therefore, the Qur’anic interpretation of it will be analysed. When the Qur’an mentions the notion of ‘term’ in relation to Moses this remark becomes significant and rather important for this study, especially in its relation to the earlier commentaries of Ephrem and biblical passages writing about the time of fulfilment of God’s promise to Abraham. Qur’an 28:29 is one of a very few references in the Qur’an, which potentially could be seen as actually acknowledging the possibility of God’s promise to Abraham about redeeming Israel. Of course, the preceding verses of the Qur’an, especially 28:27–28 suggest that this refers to completely different terms, that is of Moses serving one of the two terms, that is of eight or ten years, for his future wife. However, I shall still speculate here about Qur’an acknowledging the connection to the biblical allusion of the fulfilment of the Moses’ term in relation to God’s covenant with Abraham. The very fact that the Qur’an in its reflection of the Moses’ story preserves the notion of the term, but only offers its own definition of it, already is an indication of the Qur’an offering its alternative reading of the meaning of the term in the story of Moses. The notion of the term is suggested by the biblical narrative and Exegesis of Ephrem. Therefore, the connection of the Qur’an to the biblical narrative here could be traced either directly or via Ephrem. The big difference in the Qur’anic narrative is the fact that its definition of the term is different from biblically suggested, i.e. in referring to God’s covenant with Abraham. The Qur’an therefore, switches from the covenant with Abraham and presents its definition of the term from the personal life of Moses. The reason

94

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

behind deferring the definition of the term can be found in Q.2:124 where we read in the Qur’an that God’s promise to Abraham was a conditional promise with Abraham alone, and not with his descendants. Therefore, there is an elimination of the concept of the covenant of God with Abraham’s descendants and consequently of the notion of the ‘fulfilment of the term’ in the context of the fulfilment of God’s promise to Abraham and the people. Qur’an 2:24 reads: Q.2:124: When Abraham’s Lord tested him with certain commandments, which he fulfilled, He said, ‘I will make you a leader of people.’ Abraham asked, ‘And will you make leaders from my descendants too?’ God answered, ‘My pledge does not hold for those who do evil.’

What is interesting in the above verse from the Qur’an is the fact that all the elements of the biblical story are there 21, but the outcome of the story is rather different. We have God testing Abraham, and after him successfully fulfilling the test, we have God making a promise to Abraham. The nature of the promise has the nations involved in it. However, in the Qur’anic narrative the implication of God’s promise to the descendants is categorically removed. Therefore, the descendants of Abraham are removed from the covenant, and the promise of God is directed solely to Abraham who is made an Imam (leader, model, the one placed in front) to the nations. The Qur’anic illustration is very clear – Abraham asks about the promise being applicable to his descendants and God says no. There is an opportunity here to test the idea that the Qur’an’s presentation of the story of God’s covenant with Abraham is a deliberate reaction, and therefore an attempt to offer a direct response or a contradiction to the biblical story. Looking at the biblical narrative, t one can appreciate God saying yes to the descendants of Abraham and in fact God’s promise to Abraham has a direct implication on the descendants of Abraham, 21

Cf. Gen.12:1–3.

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

95

while Abraham himself is only a recipient of that promise. We find the following recitation of God’s covenant with Abraham in Genesis 17:7: Genesis 17:7: I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you.

It is therefore possible to strengthen the suggestion that both Qur’anic narratives, the one of Q.2:124 on Abraham, and the other Q.28:29 on Moses were produced in direct relation to the biblical narrative, which is in the instance of God’s covenant with Abraham, and, as a consequence, in the instance of ‘Moses fulfilling the term’. Referring back to Q.28:29 and the burning bush story in the Qur’an, one can notice that the Qur’an makes it an interesting exercise to look closely into Moses’ reaction to the burning bush. Moses suspects that the fire is useful for his family in several ways, i.e. either it being a source of gaining some information, or it being put into utilitarian use to warm his family from it. Initially Moses is very cautious about the fire and the burning bush, but he allows the usage of the fire for himself and for his family, not only in the physical sense of warming the travellers in the desert, but also in the sense of enlightening their understanding of matters, which at that time were not yet specified. Moses as a responsible man suggests that ‘perhaps’ he can bring to his family some information from this fire. The word for information that is used in the Qur’an for this verse is ٍ�َ�َ � ِ�, bikhabari, and the noun's triliteral root is kha ba ra (‫)خ ب ر‬. The use of this word in the Qur’an often carries the connotations of the all-awareness of God, or of God having the full knowledge of justice, as in the story of dispute between the family in Q.4:35, where it is clearly stated that ‘He [God] is all knowing, all aware’ (khabiran – all-aware – ‫)ا��� َ ك َ�نَ �َلِيم ًا خَب ِ�� ًا‬. َّ In another verse of the Qur’an there is an affirmation that God is wise and acquainted with all things, as in 6:17 or 6:73 when it is written:

96

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Q.6:73: It is He who created the heavens and the earth for a true purpose. On the Day when He says, ‘Be’ it will be: His word is the truth. All control of the Day the Trumpet blows belongs to Him. He knows the seen and the unseen: He is the All Wise, the All Aware.

ُ �َ�َ‫ل كُن فَيَكُونُ قَوْ�ُ� ُ ا�ْ� َُقّ و‬ ُ ‫ق و َيَوْم َ يَق ُو‬ ِ ّ َ �ْ�‫ْض � ِا‬ َ ‫َات و َا ْ� ��ر‬ ِ ‫سم َاو‬ ّ َ ‫� ال‬ َ َ �َ � ‫و َه ُو َ ا� َ ّ� ِي‬ ُ ‫خ �ِي‬ ُ ��ِ َ‫ْب و َال َّ�� َادَة ِ و َه ُو َ ا�ْ�َكِ�� ُ ا�ْ�ب‬ ِ ‫الصّ ورِ �َا�ِ� ُ الْغ َي‬ ُ َ ‫� يَوْم َ يُنف‬ ُ ْ ‫ا� ْ�ُل‬

In this verse there is an emphasis of the all-awareness of God plus an affirmation that God is all-wise and all-aware, ُ ��ِ َ‫ا�ْ�َكِ�� ُ ا�ْ�ب‬, al-hakimu alkhabiru. Therefore, the use of the same word kha ba ra (‫ )خ ب ر‬in the story of Moses and the Burning Bush implies the possibility of Moses hinting towards finding some Divineaffiliated information from the Bush. There is a possibility to assume that Moses potentially sensed the possibility of being exposed to Divine awareness and knowledge. In further analysis of the Qur’anic presentation of the Burning Bush story the question of God speaking directly to Moses will be considered here. The Qur’an is stating that it was God who in direct speech revealed Himself to Moses by saying: ‘I am God, the Lord of the worlds.’ – (ana Allahu, rabbu al aalamina), – َ‫َب الْع َا��َ� ِن‬ ّ ُ ‫ا��� ُ ر‬ َّ ‫أ� � َا‬ Q.28:30. But when he reached it [fire], a voice called out to him from the right-hand side of the valley, from a tree on the blessed ground: ‘Moses, I am God, the Lord of the Worlds.

�َ �‫ن ال َّشجَرَة ِ أ� ن � َا م ُو‬ َ ِ ‫ن �ِي ال ْب ُ ْقعَة ِ ا� ْ�ُبَارَ�َ� ِ م‬ ِ ِ‫فَ�َ� َّا أ� � َاه َا نُودِيَ م ِن شَاط‬ ِ َ �ْ ��� �ْ ‫ئ ال ْوَادِ ا‬ َ‫َب ال ْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ ّ ُ ‫ا��� ُ ر‬ َّ ‫�إ� ِّي أ� � َا‬

It appears that Moses was called from the side, from the blessed ground (ِ �َ�َ‫( ال ْب ُ ْقعَة ِ ا� ْ�ُبَار‬alalbuq’ati almubaraki)), implying that it was holy ground already, but then again the calling was from the tree (ِ ‫شجَرَة‬ ّ َ ‫ن ال‬ َ ِ ‫( – )م‬min alshajarati). The revelation that Moses received was beyond his expectations indeed. God spoke directly from the side of the bush or from the wood, and it was a direct revelation that Moses was led to by the fire in the valley. The Qur’an here strips the scene from the angelic participation, and in that sense is similar to the presentation of Ephrem. It is a rep-

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

97

resentation of direct communication of God with Moses, and it is a sign of Divine revelation to Moses by means of God introducing Himself to Moses as God and as the Lord of the worlds/universe in a similar manner as in the first verse of the Qur’an 1:2 where the Qur’an affirms the same message of Allah being the Lord of the worlds/universe: Q.1:1: In the name of God, the Lord of Mercy, the Giver of Mercy 2: Praise belongs to God, the Lord of the worlds

َّ ‫ن‬ َّ ِ ���‫ا‬ ِ َ �ْ���‫ا‬ َّ �ِ ْ �ِ � ِ��ِ‫ا��ح‬ َ‫َب الْع َا�� َ�ِن‬ ِّ ‫ا ْ��� َْد ُ � َِّ�� ِ ر‬

So far the Qur’anic narrative has expanded the opening of the biblical story of the Burning Bush by emphasising Moses’ initial reactions to the sight of the Burning Bush. Therefore, the Burning bush narrative in the Qur’an is presented in such a manner that it could be indicative of the following revelations of God to Moses on the mountain. Therefore, in Q.28:29 Moses could be seen as prophetically indicating that the fire of the Burning Bush is going to be useful for him in the future, which is during the time of the future revelation of God to him. Hence, the Qur’an, similarly to Midrash, could be introducing prophetic exegesis by allowing the connection between the events of the Burning Bush and the future events of God’s encounters with Moses at the mountain, as derived from the above verse of the Qur’an. However, at the moment we shall pause on this note in order to come back to it at a later stage. It is important to follow this study into discussing the question of God’s promise to Israel in Exodus 3:7–13.

GOD’S PROMISE TO ISRAEL (EXODUS 3:7–13) AND THE MIDRASH, EPHREM AND THE QUR’AN

EXEGESIS OF IT IN THE

The biblical narrative of Exodus 3:7–13 gives a long and elaborate account of the dialogue between God and Moses in the Burning Bush. We shall look closely at some expressions that are used in the Hebrew text of the passage.

98

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Exodus 3:7–8: Then the Lord said, “I have seen how cruelly my people are being treated in Egypt; I have heard them cry out to be rescued from their slave-drivers. I know all about their suffering, and so I have come down to rescue them from the Egyptians and to bring them out of Egypt to a spacious land, one which is rich and fertile and in which the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites now live.

‫שׁר ְבּ ִמ ְצ ָ ֑ריִ ם וְ ֶאת־‬ ֣ ֶ ‫ת־ﬠ ִ ֥ני ַﬠ ִ ֖מּי ֲא‬ ֳ ‫יתי ֶא‬ ִ ‫אה ָר ִ ֛א‬ ֹ ֥ ‫הוה ָר‬ ֔ ָ ְ‫אמר י‬ ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֣יּ‬ ‫ת־מ ְכא ָ ֹֽביו׃‬ ַ ‫ַצ ֲﬠ ָק ָ ֤תם ָשׁ ַ֨מ ְﬠ ִתּ֙י ִמ ְפּ ֵנ֣י ֹֽנגְ ָ֔שׂיו ִ ֥כּי יָ ַ ֖ד ְﬠ ִתּי ֶא‬ ‫ל־א ֶרץ‬ ֤ ֶ ‫א ֶא‬ ֒ ‫ן־ה ָ ֣א ֶרץ ַה ִהו‬ ָ ‫�תוֹ ִמ‬ ֮ ‫וָ ֵא ֵ ֞רד ְל ַה ִצּיל֣ וֹ׀ ִמיַּ ֣ד ִמ ְצ ַ ֗ריִ ם וּֽ ְל ַה ֲﬠ‬8 ‫ל־מ ֤קוֹם ַ ֽה ְכּנַ ֲﬠנִ ֙י וְ ַ ֣ה ִח ִ֔תּי‬ ְ ‫ל־א ֶרץ זָ ַ ֥בת ָח ָל֖ב ְוּד ָ ֑בשׁ ֶא‬ ֛ ֶ ‫טוֹב ֙ה ְוּר ָח ָ֔בה ֶא‬ ָ ‫בוּסי׃‬ ֽ ִ ְ‫וְ ָ ֽה ֱאמ ִ ֹ֙רי וְ ַה ְפּ ִר ִ֔זּי וְ ַה ִחִ ֖וּי וְ ַהי‬ The biblical passage uses ‫יתי‬ ִ ‫אה ָר ִ ֛א‬ ֹ ֥ ‫ ָר‬expression, which repeats the same word ‘to see’ twice, indicating emphatically ‘God’s seeing’. This is naturally the cause for biblical commentators to further explore the narrative and to present their explanations of the potential problem of tautology. Midrash Rabbah on Exodus writes the following explanations of the occasion: ExodRab 3:2: ‘I HAVE SURELY SEEN. It does not say ‘I have seen’ once, but ‘roah raithi’. Why? God said: ‘Moses, you can only see one vision, but I see two visions. You see them coming to Sinai and receiving My law and so do I. This, however, is not the only one vision. But I can also see the vision of the Golden Calf, as it is said: I have seen this people (Ex. 32:9). When I come to Sinai to give them the Torah, I will come down in My chariot with four animals abreast 22. Yet though they will observe Me and unhitch one [of the four animals of

This is an allusion to Ezekiel’s vision of God’s chariot drawn by four living creatures; v. Ezek. 1.

22

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

99

My chariot] 23 and provoke Me thereby, yet I will not judge them on the actions they will do but on their present ones.’ 24

Here the explanation of Midrash touches on God’s clairvoyant ‘seeing’ into Israel’s future and his judgements of their actions, but also on God’s mercy upon His people in spite of their future sins, which are already known to God in the moment of His revelation to Moses at the Burning Bush. Ephrem follows Peshitta’s rendition of Exodus 3:7 with an emphasis on the verb ‘to see’ by putting ‘I have indeed seen’ (‫ )ܡܚܙܐ ̇ܚܙܝܐ‬phrase as an exegetical solution to the Hebrew text. Peshitta’s verse of Exodus3:7 is the following:

.‫ ܡܚܙܐ ̇ܚܙܝܐ ܫܘܥܒܕܗ ܕܥܡܝ ܕܒܡܨܪ ̣ܝܢ‬.‫ܘܐܡܪ ܡܪܝܐ‬ ̣ ̈ ‫ܫܡܥܬ ܡܢ ܩܕܡ‬ ̇ ̇ ‫ܘܓܥܬܗܘܢ‬ ‫ܕܝܕܥ ܐܢܐ ܠܗ‬ ‫ ܡܛܠ‬. ‫ܡܫܥܒܕܢܝܗܘܢ‬ ̣ . ‫ܠܟܐܒܗܘܢ‬ Peshitta Exodus 3:7: And the Lord said, ‘I have indeed seen the bondage of my people who have been in Egypt. And I have heard their cry from their oppressors. And I know about their suffering.’

Ephrem follows the Peshitta version of the narrative, while slightly elaborating on it in various places: ExodCom 3:3: ‘His Lord said to him, “I have indeed seen the bondage of my people who have been in Egypt eighty years now (Exod. 3:7). I have come down that through you I may release them to deliver them and bring them into the land of the Canaanites which I promised to their fathers (Exod. 3:8)” 25

It becomes apparent that Ephrem’s narrative of Exodus 3:7 differs from both the Hebrew text and the Peshitta, as he offers extra information about the promise of God to the fathers, and Wherewith to make the Calf. Though they will detract from My glory thereby – metaphorically; they will remove one of the animals of My chariot. 24 ExodRab 3:2. See translation in Midrash Rabbah. Exodus, transl. S.M. Lehrman (The Soncino Press: London, NY, 1983), 60–61. 25 ExodCom 3:3. p. 22–23. 23

100

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Ephrem is also more explicit about the years of the people under Egyptian tyranny (80 years). Ephrem expands the biblical verses of Exodus 3:7–8 and adds crucial information. He connects the years of suffering and the promise of God to Abraham, bringing a continuity and chronology to the original biblical verse, which neither in Hebrew nor in Syriac provides him with additional information. Ephrem ExodCom 3:3

‫ ܡܚܙܐ ܚܙܝܐ‬.‫ܘܐܡܪ ܠܗ ܡܪܝܐ‬ ̣ ‫ܫܘܥܒܕܗ ܕܥܡܝ ܕܒܡܨܪܝܢ ܗܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܬܡܢܐܝܢ‬ ̈ ‫ܕܒܐܝܕܝܟ‬ ‫ ܘܢܚܬܬ‬. ‫ܫܢܝܢ‬ ‫ ܘܐܠܪܥܐ‬. ‫ܐܫܕܪ ܠܡܦܨܝܘ ܐܢܘܢ‬ ̈ ̈ ‫ܐܠܒܗܝܗܘܢ‬ ‫ܕܟܢܥܢܝܐ ܕܐܫܬܘܕܝܬ‬ ‫ܠܡܗܠܘ ܐܢܘܢ܀‬

His Lord said to him, “I have indeed seen the bondage of my people who have been in Egypt eighty years now (Exod. 3:7). I have come down that through you I may release them to deliver them and bring them into the land of the Canaanites which I promised to their fathers (Exod. 3:8)

Peshitta Exodus 3:7–8

‫ ܡܚܙܐ ̇ܚܙܝܐ ܫܘܥܒܕܗ‬.‫ܘܐܡܪ ܡܪܝܐ‬ ̣ ̇ ‫ ܘܓܥܬܗܘܢ‬.‫ܕܥܡܝ ܕܒܡܨܪ ̣ܝܢ‬ ‫ܫܡܥܬ‬ ̣ ̈ ‫ܡܢ ܩܕܡ‬ ̇ ‫ܕܝܕܥ‬ ‫ ܡܛܠ‬. ‫ܡܫܥܒܕܢܝܗܘܢ‬ . ‫ܐܢܐ ܠܗ ܠܟܐܒܗܘܢ‬ ̇ ‫ܘܢܚܬܬ ܠܡܦܨܝܘܬܗ ܡܢ ܐܝܕܐ‬ ‫ ܘܠܡܤܩܗܬܗ ܡܢ ܐܪܥܐ‬.‫ܕܡܨ̈ܪܝܐ‬ ̣ ̇ ‫ ܐܠܪܥܐ‬.‫ܘܛܒܐ‬ ‫̇ܗܝ܇ ܐܠܪܥܐ ܕܪܘܝܚܐ‬ ̇ ‫ ܐܠܪܥܐ‬.‫ܚܠܒܐ ܘܕܒܫܐ‬ ‫ܕܡܪܕܝܐ‬ ̣ ̈ ̇‫ ܘܕܐܡܘ̈ܪܝܐ‬.‫ܘܕܚܬܝܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܥܢܝܐ‬ ̣ ‫ܕܟܢ‬ ̈ ̇ ̈ .‫ ܘܕܚܘܝܐ ܘܕܝܒܘܤܝܐ‬.‫ܘܕܦ̈ܪܙܝܐ‬

And the Lord said I have indeed seen the bondage of my people in Egypt. And I have heard their cry from their oppressors. And I know about their suffering. And I came to save them from the hand of the Egyptians. And to bring them out of the land to this land and to the good and spacious land, land of milk and honey, into the land of Canaanites and Hittites, and Amorites and Perizzites, and Hivites and Jebusites.

Ephrem’s additional information, which he includes in his commentaries to the biblical text, suggests his intention to emphasise the connection between the Burning Bush revelation of God to Moses and the initial promise of God to Abraham. Ephrem

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

101

sees the unfolding of biblical events in this instance as a continuation or evolving of God’s relationship with His people. Ephrem as a biblical exegete is so concerned about the continuation of the unfolding of the Divine revelation in human history that he is scrupulous about counting the number of years that Israel was in bondage, and adds the exact calculation of the eighty years that Israel was in Egypt in his exegetical writings on the verses of Exodus. It is not only Ephrem’s preoccupation with chronology that is important in this instance. More so it is about his emphasis in connecting the Abrahamic and Mosaic revelations by all possible means, including chronology, if it is relevant as an illustration of his point. The Qur’an, on the other hand, as has been shown earlier 26, only briefly mentions the fulfilment of the term, while significantly shifting the definition of this term by relating it to Moses’ private life 27. This view is supported by major Tafsirs, as AlJalalays and al-Maqbas min Ibn Abbas explain it as a ten or eight year term of Moses in his tending for sheep. 28 What is important, however, for this part of the work is the fact that in the Qur’an there is an indication of the fulfilment of the term at the moment Moses discovers the Burning Bush. This correlates with the biblical narrative and the previously identified JewishChristian common tradition of biblical chronology, as Ephrem and Midrash indicate in their writings. Therefore, the presence of the word ‘term’ is significant in this particular verse of the Qur’an, as it allows the possibility of a dialogue between the Qur’an and the common Jewish-Christian tradition of biblical exegesis on this point, if only indicating Qur’anic disagreement with the Judeo-Christian tradition on the matter.

See Qur’an 28:29 and explanation of it earlier in this work. See Qur’an 28:27–28. 28 See in Altafsir.com (looked on 30.05.20): http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=28 &tAyahNo=29&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 26 27

102

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

SACRED SPACE IN THE QUR’AN

The Qur’an further emphasises the idea of Sacred Space and Revelation of God, as the unique God who expects prayer of remembrance. Developing further this theme one ought to look at Qur’an 20:24. Also there is the beginning of the use of the signs, such as the staff of Moses: Q.20:12–13: Surely I am thy Lord: so put off thy shoes, for thou art in the sacred valley which is blessed twice. I have chosen thee: so hearken to what shall be revealed: verily I am Allah, there is no god but I, therefore serve Me and keep up prayers for My remembrance. And what is that in thy right hand, O Musa! He said: This is my staff; I recline on it and I best? the leaves with it to make them fall upon my sheep and I have other uses for it. He said: Cast it down, O Musa! So he cast it down, and behold! it was a serpent running. He said: Take hold of it and fear not. We will restore it to its former state; and thrust thy hand into thine armpit: It shall come out white without hurt. That will be another sign - that We may show thee of Our greater signs. 29

In the above translation of the Qur’anic verse Q.20:12: there is an emphasis on the fact that the sacred valley was blessed twice. It is an important translation as it resembles Jewish exegesis of Midrash Rabbah and the discussions in this chapter about the holiness of the ground 30. It is not very visible how these themes can be derived from the original Arabic text of the verse. Haleem’s translation does not mention the two blessings concept as he recites the verse in the following way: Q.20:12: ‘I am your

Lessons from the stories of the Qur’an by Ali Musa Raza Muhajir, Moses in Qur’an and Bible in http://www.quran.org.uk/articles/ieb_quran_moses.htm (21 July 2012). The quotation is no longer available online, but the book is available for consulting under Ali Musa Raza Muhajir, Lessons from the stories of the Qur’an (Kitab Bhavan/; New Delhi, 1997). 30 See ExodRab 2:4. 29

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

103

Lord. Take off your shoes: you are in the sacred valley of Tuwa.’ 31 Exploring further the phenomenon of the blessed valley we can turn to the following Qur’anic verse, which mentions on a second occasion in the Qur’an that the valley was blessed: Q.28:30: But when he [Moses] reached it [Fire], a voice called out to him from the right-hand side of the valley, from a tree on the blessed ground: ‘Moses! I am God, the Lord of the Worlds 32.

�َ �‫ن ال َّشجَرَة ِ أ� ن � َا م ُو‬ َ ِ ‫ن �ِي ال ْب ُ ْقعَة ِ ا� ْ�ُبَارَ�َ� ِ م‬ ِ ِ‫فَ�َ� َّا أ� � َاه َا نُودِيَ م ِن شَاط‬ ِ َ �ْ ��� �ْ ‫ئ ال ْوَادِ ا‬ َ‫َب الْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ ّ ُ ‫ا��� ُ ر‬ َّ ‫�إ� ِّي أ� � َا‬

The first explanation of the double blessed valley could be due to the fact that this blessed valley is mentioned on two occasions in the Qur’an. The second explanation could be due to the Qur’an, similarly to rabbinic exegetes of the Midrash, retrospectively referring to the future events on Mount Sinai and the second appearance of God to Moses. The latter explanation is supported by the following verse from the Qur’an: Q.20:14: ‘I am God; there is no god but Me, so worship Me [only], and keep up the prayer so that you remember Me.

َ ‫ا��� ُ � َ� �إ�َ� َ �إ َّ�� أ� � َا فَاعْب ُ ْد� ِي و َأ� ق ِ ِم‬ ‫الصّ � َ�ة َ �ِ� ِ�ْ� ِي‬ َّ ‫�إ َّ��ِي أ� � َا‬

Here the Qur’an makes a direct connection between the Burning Bush story and the story of the Ten Commandments, as the phrase ‘there is no God but Me’ – ‫[ – � َ� �إ�َ� َ �إ َّ�� أ� � َا‬la illaaha illa ana] could be seen as the paraphrase of the first commandment. Maybe this is also an indication that the sacred space of the mountain was made holy twice because of these two occasions, as the earlier presented translation of Ali Musa Raza Muhajir of The only other translation that mentions the valley being sanctified twice is Assad’s: Verily, I am thy Sustainer! Take off, then, thy sandals! Behold, thou art in the twice-hallowed valley. 32 On the definition of God as the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ see the research in the following chapter of this book. 31

104

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

the Q.20:12 verse suggests. This link between the two events is similar to Ephrem’s connecting of these events in his commentaries on the same passage in the biblical narrative. Further discussion of the same verse in the Qur’an, ‘serve/worship Me [only]’ – ‫[ – فَاعْب ُ ْد�ِي‬fa-‘u'bud'nī] could allude to the second commandment that God gave to Moses on Sinai. َ ‫[ – و َأ� ق ِ ِم‬wa-aqimi The next paraphrase of the verse, ‫الصّ �َ�ة َ �ِ�ِ�ْ�ِي‬ l-ṣalata lidhik'rī] – ‘establish prayer for my remembrance’ could be seen as a foundational verse for the Muslim regularity in the five times a day prayer rule. It is interesting to read further the Qur’anic narrative and return to the following verse: Q.20:15: The Hour is coming – though I choose to keep it hidden – for each soul to be rewarded for its labour. �َ ��ْ َ � ‫س �ِ�َا‬ ّ ُ ُ ‫�إ َّن ال َّسا� َة َ آتيِ َة ٌ أ� ك َ�د ُ ُأخْ ف ِ��َا لِت ُجْ ز َى ك‬ ٍ ‫� ن َ ْف‬

There are clear eschatological motives to the verse, which are supported by ‘the hour will be coming’ (ٌ ‫سا� َة َ آتيَِة‬ ّ َ ‫ – ال‬l-sāʿata ātiyatun) expression. There is also an interesting concept that can be derived from this verse, which is judgement of the soul on its merit. Additionally, there is a mystical aspect to the whole revelation in this verse, as it is God’s intention to ‘keep it hidden’ (‫ – ُأخْ ف ِ��َا‬ukh'fīhā – lit. I hide it). There is a connection to verse in the Burning Bush story if one looks at it as a story revealing one of the signs of God. Tafsir al-Jalalayn states the following with regard to this verse: ‘The Hour is assuredly coming. [But] I will keep it hidden, from mankind – and its nearness [in time] will manifest itself to them through its signs – so that every soul may be requited, thereupon, for what it strives for, of good or evil’. 33 As discussed earlier on in this work, the Qur’anic narrative of the fire in the Burning Bush, at the first glance, paints the 98F

See in Tafsir al-Jalalayn, trans. Feras Hamza, in http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=20 &tAyahNo=15&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 (30.05.20).

33

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

105

picture of Moses contemplating two potential opportunities. Firstly, Moses saw the practical use of the fire in the desert, and secondly, Moses sensed that the particular fire could bring some news. Looking closer in the use of the word information/news in the Qur’an, it becomes obvious that the very news that Moses might have been anticipating to hear is that God is the Lord of the worlds. Therefore, reverting back to the initial intention of Moses with regard to the Burning Bush, it expands the simple meaning of ‘being warmed by the fire’ beyond the physical reality of being comforted and warmed, into a metaphysical realm of the effects of Divine revelation in human life. The outcomes of the practical/mystical encounter of Moses with the Burning Bush were used by the Qur’an in order to pave the way into the mystery of God’s revelation and God’s introduction to Moses and the people as the Lord of the universe. There is a possibility that in close connection to this passage, the Qur’an offers an indication of a more practical application of the God-Moses encounter at the Burning Bush, which could be seen as an encouragement of the five-times-a-day prayer in Islam. Therefore, it could be considered that the narration of the Qur’an on the Burning Bush story deliberately presented the twofold anticipation by Moses from the Burning Bush revelation, which resulted in both the practical and the mystical outcomes from his potential encounter with God in the proximity of the Burning Bush. The mystical outcome from the encounter resulted in Moses learning about God as Lord of the universe, and in God revealing Himself to Moses and to the rest of humanity through him. The practical outcome from the application of the first two commandments possibly grounded the practice of prayer in Islam and the moral/ethical foundation criteria of judging a soul on its merit. The Qur’an misses the narration about the remembering of God in connection to His promise to Abraham and to His people. God’s care for Israel, therefore, is of less concern to the Qur’an as it is, for example, to Ephrem and to the Jewish Midrash. However, in opposition to Ephrem, the Qur’an mentions explicitly the manner of God’s revelation to Moses, which is God introducing Himself to Moses by name. Herein lies a surprisingly

106

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

curious exegetical presentation by Ephrem, when he is only subtly and not at all explicitly referring to the Divine introduction of God to Moses in Exodus 3:14. The Qur’an on the other hand, could be seen as pointing towards the direction of God’s promise and relationship with Israel when the completion of the term is mentioned in the story of Moses, but there is no further clarification in the Qur’an as to which term the narrative exactly refers to. Therefore, in the exegesis of the biblical story in the Qur’an there is no direct connection to the initial promise of God to Abraham.

EPHREM ON DIVINE INTRODUCTION

It is important therefore to carry on noticing when our major sources, i.e. Ephrem and the Qur’an, either intentionally or not intentionally are not mentioning certain passages from the biblical narrative. Such an exercise could be helpful in further understanding their intentions and possibly even agendas of the selected sources. As a puzzling example one cannot help but come back to noticing that Ephrem in his Burning Bush story did not comment about the revelation of God to Moses, as in God revealing His name to Moses. It is such an unprecedented initiative in the OT narrative, but Ephrem simply avoids mentioning it in his exegesis of Exodus 3. It is not to say that Ephrem avoids commenting on this instance all together in the broader scope of his writings. For example, in Fid. 47:10 and Haer.53:12 Ephrem recollects on God’s revelation by name in the following ways 34: Fid. 47:1: Consider Daniel: although he was a prophet, he asked the angel to teach the simple minded and ignorant about hidden things – one by one they asked and beseeched. The prophet Moses, also glori-

‫ܚܘܪ ܒܗ ܒܕܢܝܐܝܠ ܕܟܕ ܛܒ ܢܒܝܐ‬ ‫ܗܘܐ‬ ‫ܠܥܝܪܐ ܡܫܐܠ ܗܘܐ ]ܕܢܐܠܦ‬ ̈ [‫ܦܫܝܛܬܐ‬ ̈ ̈ ‫ܘܤܟܐܠ ܒܟܣܝܬܐ ܚܕ ܠܚܕ ܬܒܥܘ‬ ‫ܘܐܦܝܣܘ‬ ‫ܡܘܫܐ ܢܒܝܐ ܬܘܒ ܡܫܒܚܐ‬

The idea to look at these Hymns in connection to Exodus 3:14 was given to me by Dr Sebastian Brock in private communication.

34

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS ous, fearfully asked about the name Ehyeh, even though we have examined its concealment light heartedly. Haer. 53:12 He revealed the name Ehyeh to Moses, that He [God] Himself called, which is the name of the being / substance / entity. The priest never applies the name to any other, like the names he applies to the many, which He [God] expelled with one name, so that they would know that He was the only one and there is no other 35.

107

‫ܥܠ ܫܡܗ ܕܐܗܝܗ ܒܕܚܐܠ ܡܫܐܠ‬ ‫ܗܘܐ‬ ‫ܐܢܚܢܢ ܕܝܢ ܠܟܣܝܘܬܗ ܒܫܥܝܐ ܗܘ‬ ‫ܥܩܒܢܗ‬ ‫ܠܡܘܫܐ ܓܠܝܗܝ ܠܫܡܐ ܕܐܗܝܗ‬ ‫̣ܩܪܐ ܢܦܫܗ‬ ‫ܕܫܡܐ ܗܘ ܕܐܝܬܘܬܐ ܘܐܠ ܡܢ‬ ‫ܡܬܘܡ ̇ܟܢܝ‬ ‫ܟܗܢܐ ܫܡܐ ܐܠܚܪܝܢ ܐܝܟ ܡܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܕܒܫܡܗܘܗܝ‬ ̈ ̇ ‫ܕܫܒܩ‬ ̣ ‫ܟܢܝ ܠܣܓܝܐܐ ܕܒܚܕ ܫܡܐ‬ ‫ܢܘܕܥ ܕܗܘܝܘ ܠܚܘܕ ܐܝܬܝܐ ܘܠܝܬ‬ ‫ܐܚܕܝܢ‬

10F

It is apparent, especially from the Hymn against Heresies, that Ephrem has a clear understanding of the unprecedented occasion of God revealing His name to Moses in the Exodus narrative. Although in his commentaries on Exodus, Ephrem does not have any direct recollection of the verse of Exodus 3:14, his attention returns to this verse in his Hymns. It is, therefore, not very clear why the author chooses to ignore such a significant verse in his commentaries where it is most appropriate to elaborate on such an important occasion. The only explanation of the dilemma at this point in the research that can be offered is to look extra carefully at Ephrem’s conclusion of the Burning Bush story where he writes: ExodCom 3:2: The bush that was of no use for making an image of dead gods was able to symbolise the Living God [‫ ] ܐܠܠܗܐ ܚܝܐ‬Moses, this is a sign for you that you have English translations of the two extracts from Ephrem are made by the author in collaboration with Salam Rassi. 35

108

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD seen the God who dwells in the midst of fire! In the same way, you must serve with fire the God who dwells in fire.

What is interesting in this verse is the emphasis on the sign of God to Moses. The Burning Bush therefore is used by Ephrem as a sign, one of many in God-Moses encounters. The indirect reference that Ephrem makes here to the revelation of God in the Burning Bush is the definition of God as ‘the Living God’ (‫)ܐܠܠܗܐ ܚܝܐ‬. This definition etymologically, through its trilateral root, has a direct connection to the divinely revealed name in Exodus 3:14 and therefore indicates a connection to God’s introduction to Moses by name in this verse. Also the fact that Ephrem singles out the Living God dwelling in the Burning Bush allows one to believe that the author chose in this instance to refer to Exodus 3:14.

SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER

The story of the Burning Bush provided much work for the biblical exegetes, and therefore it became an important exercise to follow in the writings of the Jewish Midrash, Ephrem the Syrian, and the Qur’an in their representations of the story. It was interesting to discover that all of the above-mentioned sources covered, with more or less scrutiny, several important subjects, i.e.: -

Whether it was an angel or God who appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush;

-

Why the land of the mountain was blessed twice;

-

The name with which God revealed Himself to Moses;

-

The significance of the fulfilment of the ‘term’ and its relationship to God’s initial promise to Abraham.

The Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an relate to and expand these questions differently and in their own unique way. However, in pursuing the themes listed above, Jewish and Christian exegetical sources seem to develop their exegesis by complementing each other. In tackling the question of the holiness of the ground, both the Midrash and Ephrem touch upon the issue of Mount Sinai being blessed twice and build on that assump-

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

109

tion. This results in the Midrash proposing a prophetic exegesis when explaining the second blessing of the land by referring to the future occurrence of the reception of the Law at Mount Sinai. Ephrem on the other hand, approaches the same subject from the historical exegetical point of view. He looks at the Burning Bush story as a second blessing of the land, while recollecting the story of Jacob’s ladder as the one connected to the blessing of the land and to the communication of God with the people. The Qur’an can be seen as opting out from allusions to the past and adopting a mystical, eschatological, and didactic exegesis of the Burning Bush story. Hence the allusions in the Qur’an are relating to the practices of prayer, the concept of justice, and eschatology. While Ephrem and the Midrash are careful not to contradict the biblical narrative, they suggest that it could have been an angel, but it was indeed God who spoke to Moses from the Burning Bush. This shows reverence to the biblical narrative, which both Ephrem and the Midrash exercise. When they attempt to deal with the question discussing the point whether it was an angel or God appearing to Moses in the Burning Bush, both Ephrem and the Midrash, while admitting to the appearance of the angel, emphasise the reality of the presence of God in the Burning Bush encounter. Therefore, they do not openly contradict the biblical story which mentions the appearance of the angel to Moses. This clearly indicates that the rabbinical writers and Ephrem treated the biblical story reverentially. Their precision in following the biblical story as closely as possible allows them to develop their exegetical understanding of the Burning Bush story in a similar way. The Qur’an on the other hand, is less concerned with staying close to the biblical narrative and affirms the solemn presence of God in the Burning Bush encounter. While excluding any appearance of an angel, the Qur’an creates ambiguity 36. However, in doing so the Qur’an clearly What makes this particular instance significant is the fact that the understanding of Divine communications with the prophets in Islam is usually perceived 36

110

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

diverts from the biblical narrative but indirectly supports its dialogue with the biblical narrative and the Judeo-Christian tradition of exegesis on the matter. And by dialogue in this instance the idea of communication is assumed. Therefore, the dialogue of the Qur’an could be considered in the form of its apologetics or as a response to the message of the biblical narrative and to the further traditions of Jewish-Christian exegesis. The research in this chapter illustrates that the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an address similar questions, which they derive from the Burning Bush story of the biblical narrative. For example, the re-occurring concept of the ‘Term’ in the Burning Bush story is also indicative of the possibility of the interplay between the exegetical sources at hand. The fact that the concept of the ‘Term’ is initially indicated in the biblical narrative as being related to the covenant of God with Abraham sets a precedent for the Midrash and Ephrem to further explore the matter. Ephrem therefore together with rabbinical sources employs biblical chronology in his exegesis and presents the calculation of the years between the covenant of God with Abraham and Moses’ lifetime 37. Such an exegesis pursues two goals in relation to the biblical narrative. Firstly, it develops the connection between the covenant of God with Abraham and Moses’ life. And secondly it gives greater historical credibility to the biblical narrative by illustrating that there was a certain and through Archangel Gabriel, according to the tradition of Islam. (see in Bukhari volume1, book 1, number 3 in http://www.sahihbukhari.com/Pages/Bukhari_1_01.php (30.05.20) The Qur’an does not specifically mention the angel as a deliverer of the revelation (see Q.53:4–9; 96:1– 5)Therefore, it would not be problematic if the Qur’an allowed for the presence of an angel in the burning bush. However in this instance the Qur’an choose not to do so. If one places this Qur’anic story alongside the biblical one and the Judeo-Christian exegesis of it, then there is a possibility to draw a conclusion that this was a deliberate attempt of the Qur’an to distance itself from the biblical narrative of the matter to hand. 37 See relevant passages from my book Ephrem, a Jewish Sage… on biblical chronology (p. 191–200).

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

111

definite number of years, according to which the ‘Term’ of the promise of God to Abraham in relation to the years of Israel in slavery was overdue. The Qur’an’s reference to the ‘Term’ in relation to the Burning Bush story is therefore significant, as it bears a connection to the attention to the ‘Term’ in the Midrash and in Ephrem. However, the difference in the Qur’an, is in the use of the word ’Term’, which is ambiguous, and which was possibly deliberately distanced from its relation to the covenant of God and Abraham by the authors of the Tafsir. This distancing in itself is indicative of the connection between the Muslim and previous monotheistic traditions. What is important to emphasise in this work are two points. Firstly, that the Qur’an does not deny the connection of the word ‘term’ to the covenant of God and Abraham. However, it does not emphasise or support this connection either. Secondly that it is only the Tafsir sources, presented in this work, which fill the concept ‘Term’ with a completely different meaning totally unrelated to the covenant of God with Abraham. This very methodological approach is common to both Jewish and Christian exegetes 38. This concept of the ‘term’ in the Qur’an could be seen as being inherited from Jewish-Christian religious traditions. It is also filled with a different meaning in the Qur’an by means of exegesis. Following from the study in this chapter it is demonstrated that the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an differ on the subject of Abrahamic heritage and the continuation of God’s covenant with Abraham via Moses. Ephrem and the Midrash are very keen to preserve the connection both with Abraham and other OT patriarchs, such as Jacob, for example. The continuation of God’s revelation is always present in Ephrem’s commentaries, and he uses his exegetical tools to emphasise this connection. Therefore, Analogous examples could be seen with the typology of the wood in Moses’ stories in Judaism and in Christianity. In Christianity it was used as a typology of the Cross, while in Judaism it had no recollection of such a connection, while different typology was ascribed to the symbolism of the wood in Midrash. See the discussion of this further in this study, and also in my books, Ephrem, a Jewish sage…, p. 237–241.

38

112

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

the example in Ephrem’s chronological exercise and other allusions to Abraham and Jacob in the story of the Burning Bush are very explicit in his writings. The Qur’an cannot be perceived as prioritising this particular allusion to God’s covenant with Abraham in relation to the story of the Burning Bush. However, the Qur’an does not completely deny this possibility. In its recollection of the story of the Burning Bush the main emphasis is on God’s revelation to Moses by name and further implications of the Divine encounter. The Qur’an can be seen as linking the story of the Burning Bush and the first two commandments, which Moses is yet to receive on Mount Sinai. In that sense the Qur’anic exegesis of the Burning Bush story is not linking it to the past events, be it the former covenant of God with Abraham or prior stories of OT patriarchs, but it links the Burning Bush story to the future event of God granting Moses the Law, and especially the first two commandments. In this instance the Qur’an can be seen as exercising prophetic exegesis, similar to the Midrashic explanations of the second blessing of the land 39. The implication of this observation is an indication of the Qur’anic leaning towards the common tradition of biblical exegesis. Whilst Ephrem and the Midrash strive to preserve the continuity of the on-going Old Testament tradition of Divine Revelation in human history, the Qur’an selectively presents its accounts of the Old Testament narrative. However, it is important to stress again that the potential link with the past is not completely lost but rather understated in the Qur’anic narrative. The slight remaining link to Abraham in God’s covenant with him (or God’s promise to him) could be seen in the link in the writings of the Qur’an between Moses and him ‘fulfilling the term’, which in both Jewish and Christian exegesis explicitly relates retrospectively to God’s covenant with Abraham. In the Qur’an this connection is not laboured, but only indicated to the extent that it becomes lost in further comFirst time being the Burning Bush, while the second one being in the future during the receiving of the Commandments.

39

2. FROM THE BURNING BUSH ONWARDS

113

mentaries on the Qur’an, and is therefore not developed in Islamic (through Tafsirs) understanding of the Burning Bush story. It is important to mention here that in the particular emphasis on God revealing Himself by name to Moses, the Qur’an could be seen as exceeding Ephrem on this particular point. It is hard to explain why Ephrem chooses to downplay Exodus 3:14 in his OT exegesis, as he does not comment on it explicitly. This allows for the conclusion here that it is due to the personal choice of this Christian exegete. It is difficult to read more into Ephrem’s silence on the verse, especially when on other occasions as in the two hymns discussed, Ephrem allows for direct reference to God revealing His name to Moses. As for the writings of the Qur’an on the Burning Bush story, they give us a more expanded exegesis on the biblical verse and build a link to this verse on several layers, be it eschatologically, mystically or practically (by connecting it to the final judgement of souls, practice of prayer in Islam and so on). The general conclusions from this chapter in the study are that our respective exegetical sources picked up on similar themes from the biblical story of the Burning Bush, but offered variable conclusions from it. It is therefore important to provide further biblical examples in this work in order to have a broader picture of how the Old Testament narrative is being developed by the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The following chapter will look at the event of Israel’s Exodus from Egypt, negotiations between Moses and Pharaoh, and into the dramatic outcomes of the crossing of the sea stories in the selected writings.

CHAPTER 3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA This chapter is presenting another significant episode in the life of Moses and his people, that is the Crossing of the Red Sea and the events, which lead to such a dramatic scenario concerning Israel’s departure from Egypt. Therefore, the immediate events prior to the actual crossing of the sea are discussed at length. In the context of the preamble of the Crossing of the Red Sea one cannot miss the lengthy communications that Moses and his brother were having with Pharaoh. Hence the beginning of these communications is taken as the starting point for this chapter. The background of the biblical narrative is about Moses coming back to his original vocation as the leader of the people, and feeling a need to return to Egypt in order to check on the state of his people. 1 Moses does so after clear communications with God about his return to Egypt and the instructions from God as to what to expect in his encounters with Pharaoh. 2 Thus the encounters with Pharaoh are about to begin, and the events are taking place in Egypt, more specifically at Pharaoh’s residence where Moses and his brother, Aaron, are frequenting for dialogues with Pharaoh and his entourage.

1 2

See Exodus 4:18. See Exodus 4:19–24.

115

116

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

The study in this chapter will look at the biblical narrative of the Moses and Pharaoh encounters in order to identify the themes that the biblical text offers. Further on in this study these themes are going to be picked up for discussion in this chapter. The question of a power struggle between Moses and Pharaoh will be considered and compared in the respective writings of the selected exegetical sources. The theme of Moses’ testimony about the God of Israel and the reactions of Pharaoh, will be key points of the study in this chapter. This question of Moses’ testimony to Pharaoh will be looked at as an external testimony to the people of Egypt, but also as an internal testimony to the people of Israel. Therefore the theme of Moses’ testimony about God is going to be traced further in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. God’s attributes of Mercy and Judgement will be looked into as presented in the exegesis of Midrash and the Qur’an. God’s actions towards the transgressions of Moses and Pharaoh will be analysed, as well as God’s standpoint as to the place of the people of Israel in the Godhuman relationship. Further themes for the study are going to evolve through the process of considering the exegesis of these sources. The dynamics of the power struggle during the Moses-Pharaoh encounters will be analysed in the selected writings. In doing so, the Pharaoh’s question: ‘Who is the Lord?’ is going to be discussed, and the answers of the selected texts will be offered as their exegetical understanding of Exodus 5:2. Additionally the theme of questioning God and rejecting God, and the difference between the two will be analysed. The legitimacy of questioning God will be further addressed, and the explanations of it will be presented in the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Further on, the analysis of the Qur’an in presenting Moses’ answer to Pharaoh’s question ‘Who is the Lord?’ as ‘the Lord of the Worlds’ will be analysed and compared to the Midrashic presentation on the matter, and to the writings of Ephrem. The person of Pharaoh will be studied closely in this chapter. Therefore his role in the biblical narrative and in the writing of exegetical sources will be compared and analysed. A number of questions and themes will be singled out for the purpose of

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

117

comparative analysis. For example, the question of the resistance of Pharaoh and the role of free will in the context of the Moses-God-Pharaoh relationship will be brought forward. The biblical verse regarding the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart 3 will be singled out for further analysis in this chapter, and the question of free will and God’s providence will be addressed. Looking at the presentations of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an on the hardening the heart of the Pharaoh and his ability to make free choices and free decisions will make an important case study in this chapter. Also the exegetical understanding of the reoccurring biblical theme of Pharaoh actively resisting God and facing the consequences of his decisions in relation to the God of Israel will be considered in this study. The question of repentance and purification will follow naturally from the biblical story, and therefore will be addressed in this study. Specifically, the question of repentance under the influence of suffering will be developed in this chapter. Also the question of the purpose of the plagues and their effect on the Pharaoh, Egypt and Israel will be addressed. On the basis of the addressed questions in this chapter there will be an attempt to present the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an on the biblical narrative about Pharaoh and Moses, Israel and Egypt, and their experiences of the plagues and the crossing of the Red Sea.

THE QUESTION OF POWER: ‘WHO IS THE LORD?’ AND THE ANSWERS OF THE MIDRASH AND EPHREM

The question ‘Who is the Lord’, although posed by Pharaoh is his dialogues with Moses, becomes an important question to discuss in this part of the research. It is not only the question of learning about God, but it is also a question of understanding self and one’s relationship with this God. The biblical story of Exodus unfolds the drama of human responses to God and presents a number of examples in people’s responses to Him. In this 3

See Exodus 4:21, 9:12.

118

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

part of the research the examples of the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an of the biblical narrative will be compared, and the ways these sources elaborate on the initial biblical narrative will be discussed. Therefore, below is the selection of the relevant biblical verses: Exodus 5:1–2: Then Moses and Aaron went to the king of Egypt and said, “The Lord, the God of Israel, says, ‘Let my people go, so that they can hold a festival in the desert to honour me’.” “Who is the Lord?” the king demanded. “Why should I listen to him and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord; and I will not let Israel go.”

The Midrash Rabbah commentary on Exodus gives a very detailed account of the first occasion when Moses and Aaron addressed Pharaoh with their request to let the people go, as presented in Exodus 5:1. The Midrash further develops the biblical verse by describing the situation when the two powers clashed, the power of an earthly king, Pharaoh, and the power of the God of Israel. The Midrash gives a demonstration of how Moses and Aaron shook the powers of Pharaoh at the very day when everyone else was busy reaffirming Pharaoh’s status as the ‘Lord of the world’ 4. Hence, it is obvious that the reaction of Pharaoh was negative towards Moses and towards the message, which he brought. Below is the account of the Midrash on the matter: ExodRab 5:14: R. Hiyya b. Abba said: That day was Pharaoh’s day for reception of ambassadors, when all the kings came to pay him honour bringing with them gifts of crowns wherewith they crowned him Lord of the world, and also their idols did they bring with them. After they had crowned him, Moses and Aaron were still standing at the door of Pharaoh’s palace; whereupon his servants came and said: ‘Two elders are at the gate.’ The reply was: ‘Let them enter.’ When they entered, he looked at them as if expressing that they wished to crown him or give him their credentials, but 4

Cosmocrator was the title of the Roman Emperor.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

119

they did not even greet him. He said to them: ‘Who are you?’ They replied: ‘We are the ambassadors of the Lord, blessed be He.’ ‘What do you want?’ he asked. They replied: ‘THUS SAITH THE LORD, LET MY PEOPLE GO,’ etc. Then Pharaoh became very angry and said: ‘WHO IS THE LORD, THAT I SHOULD HARKEN UNTO HIS VOICE TO LET ISRAEL GO?’ (Exodus 5:2) 5

The fact that Moses and Aaron introduced themselves as ambassadors of God made the situation even more complex. What complicated the situation and made Moses and Aaron stand out is the fact that all other ambassadors of other kings accepted and supported the title of Pharaoh as the ‘Lord of the world’. Hence Moses and Aaron brought an alternative message with them, which created a power struggle between Pharaoh and another Lord. This other ruler immediately stood out from the crowd, because it broke the protocol of the occasion. Instead of supporting the crowning occasion for Pharaoh, the Lord of Moses and Aaron put Pharaoh to shame by demanding obedience from him. What is important to learn from the Midrash above is its clarity in presenting the power struggle which Pharaoh had to face with the address of Moses and Aaron. His position had just been reaffirmed by the majority of other kings, while this particular Lord of Moses and Aaron was dictating to Pharaoh what he should do. In addressing the situation of the first meeting between Moses and Aaron and Pharaoh Ephrem picks up on the fact that Pharaoh moderated his rage because of the respectable crowds of Hebrew elders in attendance. Hence adding his commentaries to the biblical account, Ephrem writes the following: ExodCom 5:1: They entered Pharaoh’s presence together and said to him, “Thus says the Lord, ‘Send forth my people that they may hold a festival to me in the desert” (Exod. 5:1)

5

ExodRab 5:14, p. 93–94.

120

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Pharaoh did not give Moses a harsh reception because of the crowds of Hebrew elders, and because he had heard about the signs Moses had performed in front of the elders. But he said to them, “why are you stopping the people from working, Moses and Aaron?” (Exod. 5:5) 6

Ephrem, in his engagement with the biblical text, clarifies the nature of the relationship between Pharaoh and Moses. Being a power struggle between two unequal forces, represented by the king of Egypt and the Lord of the Hebrew slaves of Egypt. In such a depiction of the counter-opposing forces it becomes puzzling why Pharaoh even received Moses. Ephrem explains the fact that Pharaoh took any notice of Moses by drawing a picture of Moses gaining all the support he could get from the respectable crowds of the people. Therefore Pharaoh’s attention was drawn to the leader who was clearly supported by the crowds. The challenge of the Lord of Israel to Pharaoh was a challenge of his status as being superior. Thus it initially provokes Pharaoh’s agitation with Moses’ message. And the more Moses repeats the demands of his God to Pharaoh, so his reaction towards Moses and God’s demands escalates. Pharaoh’s initial reaction to the God of Israel is a clear rejection. The basis of his rejection is his own identity as an established ruler of Egypt. According to Ephrem such a blunt rejection of Pharaoh needed to be established not as much by the words, but by the signs. It also becomes clear from the outset of Moses’ communications with Pharaoh that there is a third presence in the dialogues between the two. Ephrem’s explanation of the biblical narrative of the exchanges between Moses and Pharaoh suggest the underlying powerful presence of the God of Israel behind the feeble and ineloquent presence of Moses. Therefore Pharaoh’s task was not to disregard Moses and his message, but to prove that his authority is greater than the authority of the Lord, who Moses represents. Pharaoh’s concern with keeping his slaves at work and in obedience is therefore his upfront demonstration and reaction 6

ExodCom 5:1, p. 28.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

121

to the initial demand of Moses. Pharaoh’s increasing of the people’s labour is therefore, his initial measure to encourage them not to shift their obedience from the ruler of Egypt, Pharaoh, to their Divine ruler, the God of Israel. Therefore Pharaoh charges them with more labour in order to distract his slaves from the idea of Exodus in order to worship their God. However the underlying theme of the conversations between Moses and Pharaoh is already the matter of the God of Israel and his authority over His own people, but also over Pharaoh himself. And this Divine authority over the supreme rule of Pharaoh is the main challenge that the Pharaoh has to face. Thus Ephrem in his commentaries depicts Pharaoh’s rejection of the Lord of Moses and Aaron, because their Lord and His message deliberately interfered in Pharaoh’s dominion. Pharaoh’s anger was initially directed towards Moses and Aaron, but shortly it shifted to the people of Israel whose Lord was challenging him. This Lord of Israel was invading Pharaoh’s domain over his slaves. Hence Pharaoh took this as a threat to his position. This was evident through the demands of the God of Israel who was imposing limitations to Pharaoh’s possessions and who was expecting Pharaoh’s obedience to His demands. The whole situation therefore presented a threat to Pharaoh’s identity on many levels, be it as a ruler of the country, or as a head of state, or as a religious authority. Therefore the God of Israel by initiating the Exodus of His people was also initiating the series of challenges to Pharaoh. Pharaoh’s initial task, which Moses repeatedly vocalised, was to give up his property by letting go of his slaves. As a reaction against this initiative Pharaoh demonstratively exercises his power over his slaves. Ephrem makes an attempt to clarify the meaning of Pharaoh’s question about the God of Israel. In presenting an analysis of the dialogue, Ephrem clearly makes a statement based on the question of Pharaoh ‘Who is your Lord?’. If taken on its own the question is unclear, but if taken within the context of what the Midrash Rabbah was describing earlier, then Pharaoh’s question shows clear disobedience to the Lord of Israel, and an attempt to confront the Lord of Moses and Aaron with his own credentials of being the Lord of the world. Hence Ephrem is very clear in

122

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

explaining that this very question of Pharaoh revealed his true intentions towards the Lord of Moses and Aaron. Therefore according to Ephrem, with this question Pharaoh decided his future of harsh struggles with the plagues: ExodCom 5:1: When they spoke to him again, he flew into the rage, and instead of asking for a sign that he should let the people go, he said, “Who is the Lord that I should obey him?” (Exod. 5:2) Because he said, “Who is the Lord?”, he had to perceive the Lord through signs, since God did not appear to him in visible form. This is why Scripture refers to them by the harsh term “plagues”, because Pharaoh said “Who is the Lord?” 7

Ephrem’s passage initiates several questions. First of all, what is the meaning of Pharaoh’s question, ‘Who is the lord?’. The question remains, as Ephrem does not answer it in his Exodus commentaries. Consequently, Midrash and the Qur’an give their replies. Secondly, what is the nature of the connection between Pharaoh’s question and the plagues? Ephrem briefly attempts to connect the two by stating that because Pharaoh asked the wrong question, he got harsher experiences in his encounters with God. In order to understand where Ephrem is coming from the exegesis of the Midrash on this issue will be helpful. The answer to the second question, as already stated can be found in the Midrash. The Midrash below clearly connects the Pharaoh’s question with the plagues of Egypt. The way the Midrash reaches this connection is through its exegetical tool of gematria, or play with the meaning of the numbers of the Hebrew letters. Therefore, the calculations of the Midrash is as follows: ExodRab 5:14: He [Pharaoh] answered them: ‘I do not know who this God of yours is’; as it is said: WHO IS THE LORD THAT I SHOULD HARKEN UNTO HIS VOICE? God then said to him: ‘Wretch! “WHO (mi) IS THE LORD?” thou

7

ExodCom 5:1, p. 28.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

123

sayest. Well, thou wilt be punished with this word “Mi” 8 The letter mim is forty and yod is ten – indicating the fifty plagues which God brought upon the Egyptians at the sea… 9

Although Ephrem does not use gematria in establishing his connection between Pharaoh’s question and the plagues of Egypt, what is important to highlight here is that both Ephrem and the Midrash come to the same conclusions. However, each of the sources use their own exegesis in reaching this conclusion. As already pointed out, Midrash uses the play on words, letters and numbers, while Ephrem bridges the path between Pharaoh’s question and the future plagues by means of indicating that Pharaoh’s question was an opening statement of his clear confrontation with the Lord of Israel. In the earlier passage of the Midrash there is a definition of Pharaoh as the ‘Lord of the World’. There is also a subtle implication that the Lord of Moses and Aaron is also the One who is claiming the title of the ‘Lord of the Worlds’, although the Midrash is not explicit about it. The Qur’an on the other hand is very explicit in its numerous statements about the God of Moses being ‘The Lord of the Worlds’. Therefore in showing the development of the definition of God as ‘The Lord of the World’ in the exegetical writings across the three Abrahamic faiths one can observe the lack of the concept in the biblical narrative and in Ephrem’s exegesis, but the introduction of it in the Midrash with further extensive development in the Qur’an. Therefore multiple examples of the use of the definition of ‘The Lord of the Worlds’ in the Qur’an in its biblically related context will show that the Qur’an takes and further develops this definition from the biblical context of the MosesPharaoh encounters, and also from the Jewish tradition of biblical exegesis of Midrash Rabbah.

Mim and yod are two letters of the Hebrew alphabet whose numerical equivalent is 50. 9 ExodRab 5:1, p. 96. Midrash goes further on with its calculations and ultimately makes the final calculation of the ten plagues of Egypt. 8

124

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

There is another question, which needs to be discussed in the context of the Moses-Pharaoh encounters. This question is about the role of the people of Israel and their place in the triangular relationship between Moses, God and Pharaoh. The symbolic triangle in Ephrem’s presentation becomes a square with a clear dynamic between Moses, God, Pharaoh and the people of Israel. Each party involved is seen through the prism of their relationship with the God of Israel, and with each other. However their respective relationships with the God of Israel ultimately determines their lives and their future. Therefore it is important for this study to include an analysis of these relationships in giving an overall exegetical presentation of the story of the Exodus and the sub-stories leading to the crossing of the Red Sea. In the following passage Ephrem shows the dynamics in the relationship between Pharaoh and his slaves as an underlying demonstration of Pharaoh’s relationship with the God of the Hebrews: ExodCom 5:1: What Pharaoh had said did not satisfy his cruel nature: he went on to withhold straw from the people so that they would be in such a plight that they could not sit about thinking of leaving. The people scattered to collect straw, which was found with much effort as it was Nisan, the time of blossom, and not Tamuz or Av, the season of threshing. The Hebrew clerks complained to Pharaoh that they were being beaten by Pharaoh’s taskmasters, but he showed them no pity. Instead, he said to them, “It’s because you are lazy (Exod. 5:17) that you want to go and sacrifice to the Lord!” 10

According to Ephrem’s exegesis, Pharaoh’s initial resentment of God’s commands expresses itself through his relationship with his slaves, the Hebrews. He is resenting the God of the people by channeling his anger towards the people. He is therefore exercis10

ExodCom 5:1, p. 29.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

125

ing his earthly authority over the people in order to demonstrate his disobedience, or at this stage in the Exodus narrative, his superiority over the God of his slaves. The Midrash offers explanations which are similar to Ephrem’s, while adding to it that Pharaoh increased their labour because they kept the Shabbat and rested on it, and he did not want the people to ‘rest and take delight in the Sabbath day.’ 11 There was more to Pharaoh’s action than merely increasing one day of labour for the people. Since the Shabbat day was not simply the day of rest, but also the day on which Israel prayed to their God. And their prayers among other things, were for their redemption from Egyptian slavery. Hence by increasing Israel’s labour on the day of Shabbat, Pharaoh was challenging Israel’s relationship with God as much as he was challenging their physical strength. Another explanation in the Midrash as to why Pharaoh wanted to make the burden of Israel harsher is that he wanted to target the tribe of Levi: ExodRab 5:16: R. Joshua b. Levi: the tribe of Levi was exempt from servile work; hence did Pharaoh said to them: ‘Because you are exempt from work, therefore do you say “Let us go and sacrifice to our God”’; hence GET YOU UNTO YOUR BURDENS. 12

Both Moses and Aaron were from the tribe of Levi. The fact that the tribe of Levi served particular religious duties for God 13 also could be an incentive for Pharaoh to attack them in particular with severe labour. Therefore in restricting their religious obligations by extra labour, Pharaoh was aiming to distract the people from performing religious rituals and prayers to their God. See in ExodRab 5:14, p. 98. ExodRab 5:16, p. 97; see also Exodus 5:17. 13 For example, when Joshua led the Israel into the land of Canaan (Joshua 13:33), each tribe got their land, but the tribe of Levi was not allowed to be landowners, ‘because the Lord, the God of Israel Himself is their inheritance’ (Deuteronomy 18:2). 11 12

126

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

The overall impression that one can draw from the exegetical illustrations of the Midrash and Ephrem, is that they are on the same page in addressing similar questions to the biblical narrative, and they also reach similar answers to the questions. However, their ways of reaching conclusions are different. The Midrash and Ephrem employ different exegetical techniques in connecting the question of Pharaoh and the plagues, which nonetheless lead them to similar outcomes of affirming the connection. This particular illustration is used to support the overall argument of this book, which links exegesis of Ephrem and the Midrash to the common tradition of interpreting the biblical narrative. The following part of the chapter will further test the suggested theory by adding interpretations from the Qur’an of the biblical story of Moses and Pharaoh’s communications.

THE ANSWER OF THE QUR’AN TO THE QUESTION ‘WHO IS YOUR LORD’ – THIS IS ‘THE LORD OF THE WORLDS’

The Qur’an in presenting the dialogues between Moses and the Pharaoh also starts with the question of authority, boundaries, possession, and the land. The main concern of the Pharaoh, according to the Qur’anic passage below, is addressed by his advisors when they clearly indicate that Moses intends to conquer the land of Egypt. Moses is treated as a magician, and the advice to the Pharaoh is to deal with Moses by means of local magic. Initially the Qur’an presents a competition between the magic of Moses and the magic of Pharaoh’s enchanters. The unexpected outcome of this competition is the conversion of the Pharaoh’s enchanters and their declaration of faith and adoration to the God of Moses and Aaron. Qur’anic narrative further polarises the relationship between parties involved by singling out the two major forces of the biblical narrative in the concluding verse of the passage. Thus, the exposition of the Qur’anic passage brings the narrative of the Bible into the critical point of the clash between the authority of the Pharaoh and the authority of the God of Moses and Aaron. The Qur’an’s presentation of the dialogues between Moses and the Pharaoh is the following: Q.7:109: The leaders among Pharaohs’ people said, ‘This man is a learned sorcerer! 110: He means to drive you out of

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

127

your land!’ Pharaoh said, ‘What do you suggest?’ 111: They said, ‘Delay him and his brother for a while, and send the messengers to all the cities 112: to summon every learned sorcerer to you.’ 113: The sorcerers came to Pharaoh and said, ‘Shall we be rewarded if we win?’ 114: and he replied, ‘Yes, and you will join my inner court.’ 115: So they said, ‘Moses, will you throw first or shall we?’ 116: He said, ‘You throw’, and they did, casting a spell on people’s eyes, striking fear into them, and bringing about great sorcery. 117: Then We inspired Moses, ‘Throw your staff,’ and – lo and behold! – it devoured their fakery. 118: The truth was confirmed and what they had produced came to nothing: 119: they were defeated there and became utterly humiliated. 120: The sorcerers fell to their knees 121: and said, ‘We believe in the Lord of the Worlds,

َ‫َب الْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ ِّ �ِ� ‫قَالُوا آم َن َّا‬

122: the Lord of Moses and Aaron!’ 123: But Pharaoh said, ‘How dare you believe in Him before I have given you permission?

The Qur’anic passage above clearly indicates the power struggle between the Pharaoh and the Lord of Israel. What is interesting here is the phrase of the Qur’an when the magicians proclaim their faith to God of Moses and Aaron and refer to Him as the ‘Lord of the Worlds’. The statement of the magicians was literally ‘We believe in the Lord of the worlds’ (āmannā birabbi lʿālamīna – َ‫َب الْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ ِّ �ِ� ‫)آم َن َّا‬. The evocation of the Lord of the Worlds in this particular story allows one to support the argument that in this instance the Qur’an could be writing within the common tradition of biblical exegesis 14, as well as in collaboration with 18F

Although the definition of God as the Lord of the Worlds is not unusual for the Qur’an, the legitimate question to pose is whether the origins of this phrase could be traced to the tradition of biblical exegesis, and more so to the biblical story of Moses and Pharaoh, as also in Q.7:104 when Moses proclaims himself as the messenger of the Lord of the Worlds prior to the magicians reaffirming their

14

128

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Midrashic passage of Exodus Rabbah 15. Also, the following verse of the Qur’an could be considered as its own testimony to its reliance on the former Scriptures. One can explain the above verse of the Qur’an as either referring to the biblical narrative of the Old Testament or to the exegesis of the Scriptures in the Midrash 16: Q.10:37: Nor could this Qur’an have been devised by anyone other than God. It is a confirmation of what was revealed before it and an explanation of the Scripture. Let there be no doubt about it. It is from the Lord of the Worlds. ‫ل‬ َ ‫ق ا� َ ّ� ِي بَ�ْنَ �َ� َيْه ِ و َتَفْصِ ي‬ َ ‫ا��� ِ و َل�َكِن ت َصْ دِي‬ ِ ‫وَم َا ك َ�نَ هَذَا الْقُر ْآنُ أ� ن يُفْ�َ� َى م ِن د ُو‬ َّ ‫ن‬ َ‫ب الْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ ِّ ‫اب � َ� ر َي ْبَ ف ِيه ِ م ِن َّر‬ ِ َ �ِ�ْ‫ال‬

trust in Him (Q.7:121) . The other reference in the Qur’an to the same phrase also has a biblical reference, in this instance to Abraham who, after being asked, proclaims his faith by stating Q.2:131: ‘I devote myself to the Lord of the Universe’ (aslamtu lirabbi l-ʿālamīna – َ‫)أ� سْ �َ� ْتُ � ِ� َِّب الْع َا��َ� ِن‬. So as the next one of Q.5:28 refers to the biblical story of two sons of Adam. Q.7:61 refers to Noah who proclaims himself a messenger of the Lord of the worlds (together with Hud in Q.7:67). The verse Q.7:54 refers to the creation story, and the use of the phrase ‘Lord of the Worlds’ used there as a blessing on God. This genre of using the phrase at hand as a blessing for God, or praise (Q.6:45,10:10), guidance (Q.6:71) or devotion as in Q.6:162 is also used in the Qur’an. However, the direct speech towards God as the Lord of the Worlds is often attributed to the Old Testament Patriarchs. The illustrations in chapter two of this book show that Q.28:30 uses the phrase ‘the Lord of the Worlds’ as part of Divine introduction to Moses at the Burning Bush. 15 See ExodRab 5:14, which is also the passage quoted in the beginning of this chapter. 16 It is obvious that there could be other explanations of the meaning of the Scriptures in this verse of the Qur’an, but the one offered in this study is not alien to the Muslim interpretations of the verse. For example the Sahih International translation of the verse is the following: ‘And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah , but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds’.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

129

Could the verse of the Qur’an above be used as Qur’an confirming its position in continuing the previous tradition of biblical exegesis by defining itself as an exegesis of the Scripture before (watafṣīla l-kitābi – ‫اب‬ ِ َ �ِ �ْ‫ل ال‬ َ ‫ ?)و َتَفْصِ ي‬If so then the job if this book is done. However, this is just one of the possible explanations of the verse. And in order to substantiate the overall argument of this study there is a need for further evidence, i.e. more examples from the Qur’an in relation to the biblical tradition of exegesis. Hence, more findings of this research will be presented in the following chapters. However, what is important to point out at this point of study is the fact that the popular definition of God in the Qur’an as ‘the Lord of the Worlds’, is first introduced in the Midrashic context in relation to the dialogue of Moses and the Pharaoh. As have been indicated earlier in this study, the Midrash Rabbah presents the following phrase of the introduction of Moses and Aaron to the Pharaoh: ‘We are the ambassadors of the Lord, blessed be He.’ 17 In relation to this the Qur’an offers the following addition to their phrase, which was dictated by God to Moses and Aaron: 12F

Q.26:16: Go, both of you, to Pharaoh and say, “We bring a message from the Lord of the Worlds: 17: let the Children of Israel leave with us.” َ‫َب الْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ ِّ ‫ل ر‬ ُ ‫ف َ�� تيَِا فِرْعَوْنَ فَق ُو� َ� �إ َّ�ا رَسُو‬

The verse 26:16 of the Qur’an should be more accurately translated as ‘We are the messengers of the Lord of the Worlds’ (innā rasūlu rabbi l-ʿālamīna – َ‫َب الْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ ِّ ‫ل ر‬ ُ ‫)إ َّ�ا رَسُو‬. � A more literal translation brings the verse of the Qur’an closer to the exegesis of the verse in the Midrash. Hence, one can pause the argument that the Qur’an was further developing the Jewish exegetical tradition of the biblical account of the first dialogue between Moses and Aaron with the Pharaoh. Thus, further narrative of the Qur’an as to the question of the Pharaoh to Moses and his ExodRab 5:14, p. 94. Also in the same passage of the Midrash the Pharaoh was introduced as being considered the ‘Lord of the World’. 17

130

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

brother is adjusted in the Qur’an accordingly. Pharaoh asks in Q.26:23: ‘What is this “Lord of the Worlds?”, which is a further developed biblical question of Exodus 5:2 ‘Who is the Lord?’. The fact that, according to the biblical narrative, Moses and Aaron do not give an answer to the Pharaoh’s question allows the Qur’an to fill in the gap and present its answer, and to develop it further in its exegesis of the biblical event: Q.26:24: Moses replied, ‘He is the Lord of the heavens and earth and everything between them… 26: Moses said, ‘He is your Lord and the Lord of your forefathers.’ 28: Moses continued, ‘Lord of the East and West and everything between them…

Above recitations of Moses about God are very biblical, as they have reminiscence with biblical references to God as the Lord of heaven and earth in Deuteronomy 10:14, Isaiah 1:2, Jeremiah 32:14, Psalm 115:16, and especially Exodus 20:11: ‘For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them…’. The definition of the Lord of the forefathers is also very biblical, and very rabbinical for that matter. The third clause of the Qur’anic passage above defines God as the Lord of the East and West, which is also biblical as it carries with it the reminiscences of the NT revelations, such as the one in Matthew 8:18 or Revelation 22:13. Therefore, it is possible to suggest here that the Qur’an compiles in its exegesis of Exodus 5:2 Jewish and Christian Scriptures, as well as the Jewish Midrash. The reason for that could be seen in the need of the Qur’an to develop further exegesis of the biblical account, which Jewish and Christians writings offered. In other words, in its relation to the common tradition of biblical exegesis Qur’an could be seen as engaging with this tradition by identifying potential opportunities in it and by offering its contribution to the biblical narrative, as well as to the exegetical traditions of its development prior to the Qur’an. Consequently, the Qur’an could be seen as noticing the fact that in the biblical account of the definitions of God of Israel in Exodus the following definition of the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ is not present. Hence, the Qur’an introduces this definition to its exegesis of the Bible. Additionally, the Qur’an

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

131

could be seen as collaborating with Jewish exegetical tradition of Midrash Rabbah, which does bring the definition of the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ in its exegesis of the Bible, but without developing it further. When we see multiple uses of the phrase ‘the Lord of the Worlds’ in the Qur’an in relation to the Old Testament prophets, it is a clear indication of the biblical origin of this Qur’anic phrase. Also, as the case study of this chapter showed, through this phrase the connection of the Qur’an to the tradition of the Midrash can be illustrated with textual evidential support. Further describing the process of the enchanters losing the battle of the rod with Moses the Qur’an clearly states that the magicians admitted to their defeat and converted by submission to the God of Israel. Therefore, the Qur’anic presentation of the power struggle between God of Moses and the Pharaoh is more dramatic, as it indicates Pharaoh’s initial defeat to the God of Israel. It is, therefore, becomes clear from the quoted earlier verse of the Qur’an 7:123 that the initial competition between Moses and the Pharaoh was clearly a competition between the Divine authority of God as the Lord of the Worlds and the authority of the Pharaoh who also considered himself as such. The power struggle between the Pharaoh and the God of Moses and Aaron is initiated by God proposing, or rather demanding from the Pharaoh to let his slaves go. This request enrages the Pharaoh, because it undermines his authority over his slaves and declares that they are no longer his slaves, but the subjects of another Master. Hence, the Pharaoh is faced with an impossible proposition, firstly, to let his slaves free, and secondly, to admit to his own loss of power as the Lord of the Worlds. The contribution of the Qur’an to the biblical narrative is its contribution to the story of the conversion of the magicians. Bible narrative of the Old Testament does not explicitly speak about magicians as believers in the God of Moses after the episode with the rod. However, we have a mention of these magicians by their names in the New Testament, 2 Tim 3:8. Therefore, one can affirmatively state that there was an exegetic tradition of Jewish-Christian origin, on the basis of which the Qur’an was building its own exegesis. Hence, the Qur’anic story could be seen as following on and from that exegetical tradition,

132

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

which established the fact of the conversion of the magicians. For example, rabbinical Midrashic literature does mention some Egyptians, which accompanied Moses when he departed from Egypt. This idea is derived by the Midrash from the Bible verse stating about a mixture of people partaking in Exodus with the Hebrews, i.e.: “And a mixed multitude also went up with them” (Exodus 12: 39). Midrash Rabbah’s commentary on Exodus 12:38 only suggests that ‘the virtuous among the Egyptians came and celebrated the Passover with Israel, and went up with them, for it said: And a mixed multitude went up also with them (Exod. 12:38)’. 18 What can be noticed in the above comparative exercise is the fact that Jewish, Christian and Muslim exegetes were occupying themselves with the conversion of the magicians or at least with the fact that the impact of Moses’ signs on the unbelievers was as such that they believed in God of Israel, and also followed Moses in his pursuit of finding the destiny for his people. Following on from the questions of the definition of God as the Lord of the Worlds and the stories of the conversion of the magicians the following part of this study will look into the development of the biblical account after the initial conversation of the Pharaoh with Moses and Aaron.

PURIFICATION AND REPENTANCE IN THE MIDRASH, EPHREM AND IN THE QUR’AN

Following on the earlier findings from the Qur’an, in Surah Ta Ha 20:70–76 there is another clear indication that the magicians on their conversion proclaimed the God of Moses and Aaron as their God, and the mighty God, but they also changed sides and Midrash Rabbah 18:10, p. 226. As a part of common exegetical tradition, the two converted Egyptians are commemorated by their names, Yanos and Yambross, who accompanied Moses and his people during Exodus, so it is possible to assume that Islamic exegetical tradition took its development from the earlier sources (see Exod.12:38,also Num.11:4, also see Shab. 89a; Tan., Ki Tissa, 19). 18

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

133

turned against Pharaoh and his beliefs, which is an extra step of their devotion to their new acquired faith. Hence, Qur’an reads: Q.20:70–71: [So it was, and] the sorcerers threw themselves down in submission. ‘We believe, they said, ‘in the Lord of Aaron and Moses.’ Pharaoh said, ‘How dare you believe in him before I have given you permission? This must be your master, the man who taught you witchcraft. I shall certainly cut off your alternate hands and feet, then crucify you on the trunks of palm trees. You will know for certain which of us has the fiercer and more lasting punishment.

It is interesting to note here that the Qur’an presents the line of argument of faith of the Pharaoh based on fear and punishment. It is clear that the Pharaoh is trying to reaffirm his position of authority by means of power and force. As a response to his argument the newly converted magicians reaffirm their commitment to the God of Moses and Aaron: Q.20:72: They said: We shall never prefer you to the clear sign that has come to us, not to Him who created us. So decide whatever you will: you can only decide matters of this present life – we believe in our Lord, [hoping] He may forgive us our sins and the sorcery that you forced us to practice – God is better and more lasting.

Magicians theologically put the Pharaoh in his place as an authority on this earth, but not beyond the boundaries of one’s life. And they clearly give to God of Moses and Aaron superiority over their craftsmanship. Consequently, they admit that the God of Moses and Aaron is the One who has the dominion over the life thereafter. After such theological manifestation of the authority of their Lord over the earthly power of the Pharaoh the magicians follow onto repentance mode and plea for God’s forgiveness of their sins. And even in their plea for forgiveness they judge the Pharaoh as the one who forced them into the sorcery and its practice. Q.20:74–76: Hell will be the reward of those who return to their Lord as evil-doers: there they will stay, neither living nor dying. But those who return to their Lord as believers

134

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD with righteous deed will be rewarded with the highest of ranks, Gardens of lasting bliss graced with flowing streams, and there they will stay. Such is the reward of those who purify themselves.

And with the final remarks the magicians draw the conclusion of their faith in stating the reward and punishment principles for the faithful believers. It is through repentance and good deeds of self-purification that one inherits paradise, while through evildoing and rejection one inherits hell. With these remarks the magicians condemn the Pharaoh theologically speaking. Magicians took their stand in the power struggle between the Pharaoh and God. It seems that after comparing the sides, they decided in favour of God on the basis of Him being demonstrably more forgiving and merciful that the Pharaoh. Hence, the notions of repentance and forgiveness are illustrated from another angle here. It is through witnessing the mercy and forgiveness of God, as well as His strength and magnitude, that the magicians choose to repent and turn their faces away from the Pharaoh and towards God. The Qur’an here seems to suggest that an evil doing and resentful person is scandalised by the very presence of God. Hence, the Pharaoh’s reaction is scandalous when he hears the words of God. What God expects is repentance and the change of heart of the Pharaoh away from evil doings and towards Him. And by rejecting God Pharaoh remains unchanged and his heart remains hardened. If one looks at the Qur’anic story of the relationship between Moses, Pharaoh and God then the Qur’an reflects similarly to the biblical narrative and to the Jewish-Christian exegetical tradition of looking at the story through the prism of desired repentance and purification of the Pharaoh and the help of the warning signs from God in that process. The following part of the study is looking at the development of the ideas of purification and repentance, which Ephrem derives from the lessons inspired by the biblical passages of the Exodus story. According to Ephrem, it is God who instructs Moses to show the signs to the Pharaoh. It is interesting to notice here that Ephrem’s rendition of the biblical passages slightly

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

135

differs from the Peshitta version of Exodus 7:9, but instead follows the Hebrew text. In the following quotation, if Ephrem was to follow the Peshitta translation of the verse, it should have read ‘your staff’, but Ephrem prefers the reading of MS 7al 19. ExodCom 6:1: The Lord said to Moses, “If Pharaoh wants a sign, throw the staff in front of him and it will become a serpent.” (Exod. 7:9) 20.

The next verse in Ephrem’s commentaries resembles the Qur’anic narrative in mentioning that the magicians were attempting to produce the imitations. This emphasis on the imitations deprived the magicians of the originality, which immediately testified that the source of craftsmanship of the magicians was different from the source of Moses’ inspirations. ExodCom 6:1: But Pharaoh summoned the magicians and they did the same with their spells (Exod. 7:11). This means that they produced imitations. For when Scripture says they did it with their spells, they did nothing out of the ordinary, since they employed the normal practice of their art. Because they thought that they had beaten Moses in imitating what he had done, they suffered an unforgettable defeat when Moses staff swallowed up their staffs (Exod. 7:12) 21.

Towards the end of the Ephrem’s verse above he again changes the biblical narrative in stating that the staff belonged to Moses, while the biblical text states that it was Aaron’s staff 22. It is not the big deviation from the biblical text, but it could mean that Ephrem is keen to focus on the specific dynamic in the relationship between Moses (represented by God) and the Pharaoh (represented by the magicians). On the account of the magicians See the original remark on the textual preferences of Ephrem in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), 29. 20 ExodCom 6:1, p. 30. 21 ExodCom 6:1, p. 30. 22 ExodCom 6:1, p. 29–30. 19

136

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

replicating the miracle with the staff it became clear that the strength of the signs of Moses testify to the strength of the force behind him. ExodCom 6:1: The men who thought they were altering the basic nature of things were unable to save their own staffs from that of Moses. The staff had swallowed the staffs so that Death should not swallow up the first-born. From the swallowing of the staffs Pharaoh should have learned that unless he repented, the first-born were going to be swallowed up too. God had warned them about it so that they would repent in order that this should not happen. Moreover, he made the death of the first-born last in the series of plagues, because of its severity, so that if they mended their ways during the earlier plagues, they would be delivered from that of the first-born, which was more serious than all that proceeded it. 23

In deriving the exegetical lesson from the biblical narrative Ephrem concludes in the passage above, by creating poetic analogies to the future disaster in Egypt. Apart from perceiving the signs in the Exodus story first and foremost as a preventative measure from future disaster, Ephrem perceives them also as a stimulus for repentance and change of heart. The author indicates that the smaller signs to the Pharaoh were aiming to prevent the future disaster. Hence, the aim of the earlier plagues was, first and foremost, for Pharaoh’s repentance. The ultimate goal of the signs in Ephrem’s presentation resembles the pedagogy of the Qur’an, and both sources indicate that the presence of the signs in the negotiations between Moses and the Pharaoh was predominantly aiming at encouraging Pharaoh’s repentance. Ephrem explains here how the less dramatic plagues were intended for the Pharaoh as a warning and an invitation for his change of heart. And although the whole initiative of Moses appearing in Pharaoh’s life was initially pronounced to be for the 23

ExodCom 6:1, p. 30.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

137

sake of Israel, in the cause of the plagues and their teaching and preventative nature, it becomes evident that the intention of God was not only and exclusively for the sake of Israel, but also for the wellbeing of the people of Egypt and the Pharaoh. Hence, there is a clear indication here in Ephrem’s writings that Pharaoh’s repentance was the vital goal of the plagues. Therefore, it might be possible to suggest that among the main intentions of the Exodus/Crossing the Red Sea story were the following two, which are to lead Israel out of slavery, and to lead Pharaoh to repentance. Therefore, the passages from Ephrem’s exegesis indicate these two identified Divine intentions for the plagues. As already mentioned, Ephrem persistently draws the line of his argument that there was a preventative measure in the earlier plagues, which were starting from being less dramatic, and which were amplifying their severity one after another. In such a development of the plagues there was an attempt to prevent the last plague, and the most tragic one of the death of the first born of Egypt. According to Ephrem’s understanding of the biblical passages describing the plagues, the other overarching main purpose of their appearance in Egypt was to lead Pharaoh to his change of heart. Therefore, considering the magnitude of the plagues and their essential role in the Crossing the Red Sea narrative of Exodus, it is possible to support the idea of at least two main goals of the Exodus narrative. The first one, and the most obvious one, is the narrative, which follows Israel’s path from slavery in Egypt into the new beginnings. While the second one is not as much on the surface at the first glance, but if one reads the Exodus commentaries through the eyes of Ephrem, it becomes more and more significant for the Exodus narrative. Thus, the second important goal of the narrative of Exodus is to show to the Pharaoh the way to repentance. The fact that the Pharaoh ultimately fails to reach repentance does not undermine the importance of the ‘repentance’ narrative for the Exodus story. Therefore, it is important to emphasise here that there were two trajectories of two Exoduses, and two Crossings of the Sea, one is for Israel, and it becomes the story of dramatic success, and the other one is for the Pharaoh, and it ends up being the

138

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

story of dramatic disaster. Therefore, the development of two stories is followed in parallel by Ephrem and its outcomes are the trajectories of the two religious paths in their relationship with God. One path is of obedience, suffering and reliance on God, and the other one is of pride, power hunger and rejection of God’s guidance. Two motifs, one of repentance and one of purification are picked up by the Qur’an as well. This indicates that the moral and spiritual aspects of the stories of the Egyptian plagues were of interest to the biblical exegetical narrative of the two respective sources. It is also clear that Ephrem in his presentation of the biblical narrative stays close to the Jewish tradition of biblical exegesis, as will be demonstrated with the illustrations from rabbinical exegesis further on in this chapter. Hence, the selected passages from the biblical narrative testify once again that one could talk about common tradition of biblical exegesis running through three monotheistic traditions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The context of Ephrem’s discussion touches on and further develops the following important outcomes from the biblical narrative. He writes about the obedience of Israel, and implies God’s striving for repentance of the Pharaoh. Qur’an could be seen as adding or deducing from the above-mentioned elements the one about the conversion of the magicians. This broadens the horizon of the biblical narrative with a touch of novel information, which was not picked by Ephrem, but might have circulated in the oral tradition of biblical exegesis at the time. 24 Identified above, the theme of the Exodus story aiming at Pharaoh’s repentance has a clear interwoven motif for the hardening of the Pharaoh’s heart. Therefore, with the following parts of this chapter we will be looking into the biblical narrative of the Pharaoh-Moses encounters and their further analysis in the exegetical writings of Midrash Rabbah, Ephrem and in the The names of the two converted magicians, Yambros and Yanos (see in Exod.12:38, Num.11:4; see also in Shab. 89a; Tan., Ki Tissa, 19).

24

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

139

Qur’an. The following part of the study will look in great detail at the rabbinical side of the biblical story.

THE MIDRASH RABBAH ON MOSES AND PHARAOH AND ON DIVINE ATTRIBUTES OF MERCY AND JUSTICE

The story of the Pharaoh-Moses communication is extensively developed in the Midrash. Rabbinical exegesis offers much exegetical material, which is filling in the gaps in the biblical story by expanding the spectrum of the biblical narrative about the stories of Moses, Pharaoh and their surroundings. The dynamics in the relationship between Moses and Pharaoh are fluctuating. The Midrash often portrays Moses in unfavourable light, while Pharaoh is depicted as the one who deserves respect for his position in the world. For example, the Midrash depicts Moses trying to escape from God’s commands at the beginning of his mission. Moses is portrayed as finding excuses to avoid doing what God was asking him to do. Hence he was punished for it, and so his brother was asked to fill in for Moses, although initially Moses was supposed to perform the miracles alone. 25 As for Pharaoh, the Midrash says that God showed respect to Pharaoh because of his ‘regal position’ 26, while instructing Moses about his encounters with Pharaoh. In another place the Midrash states that God needed Pharaoh to fulfil His purpose 27. As for the explanation of what was the purpose of God with regard to Pharaoh, one can look at the Midrash, which states that ‘God’s praise ascends from the mouth of the righteous in Paradise, so does it ascend from Hell from the mouth of wicked’ 28. There is more that the Midrash has to say about the Pharaoh. One of the suggestions of the Midrash is that it was God’s intention to justify Pharaoh if he chose His way. Thus the Midrash states that God ‘wished to justify His creatures… He does not want to condemn any crea25 26 27 28

See in ExodRab 8:1,2, p. 110–111. ExodRab 8:3, p. 111. See in ExodRab 7:4, p. 112. ExodRab 7:4, p. 112.

140

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

ture’ 29. The Midrash also justifies Pharaoh for asking Moses to show him signs from God 30. Hence the Midrash does not consider all the actions of Pharaoh as incriminating, while some of Moses’ actions are considered by Midrash as worthy of punishment. As far as depicting Moses during the time of his encounters with Pharaoh, he was not always at his best according to the Midrash. Adding another example of Moses’ unfavourable portrayal, the Midrash conveys that after being pressured by the people about their suffering, Moses gets angry with God and confronts God with a tough question. The background of the story is that the people were devastated because their labour was increased as an immediate outcome of the Moses-Pharaoh encounters. According to Midrashic depiction, people were described as being ‘a lamb which a wolf comes to devour, and after which the shepherd pursues in order to save them from the wolf. Meanwhile the lamb is torn by the wolf.’ 31 Such a parabolic description brings a very tangible feel to the situation in which Moses found himself, being compared to the shepherd by the Midrash. Hence it was not easy for him to face the plea from Israel, which the Midrash presents as their question, ‘Moses, what with thee and with Pharaoh, we are dying.’ 32 This leads to Moses being daring with God and asking God to give an account of His actions. People in despair blame Moses, while he in his turn shifts the blame to God. 33 Consequently Moses is being subjected to God’s Judgement which is reverted by God’s Mercy. What the Midrash seems to be doing is putting Moses and Pharaoh together, and looking at their characters being developed from the same platform, that is as two men being faced by the situation created by God. Therefore their reactions to God’s ExodRab 9:1, p. 120. See in ExdRab 9:1, p. 121. 31 ExodRab 5:21, p. 100. 32 ExodRab 5:21, p. 101. 33 See in ExodRab 5:22, p. 101. 29 30

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

141

actions sometimes co-relate, and the Midrash makes sure to point this out to its readers. In this particular case the Midrash depicts Moses taking his turn in being angry with God. As a consequence of his actions the Midrash implies that Moses should have faced punishment. However he was spared retribution for his actions due to the fact that his intentions were not selfish. Therefore the Midrash concludes with the following deduction: ExodRab 5:22: Then did the attribute of Justice seek to strike Moses, but after God saw that Moses argued thus only because of Israel, He did not allow the Attribute of Justice to strike him. 34

What is interesting here is the indication in the Midrash of two Divine Attributes, Mercy and Judgement, being interchanged in the instance of Moses’ punishment. The attribute of Justice was due to have its effect on Moses, but God intervenes and decides to execute His attribute of Mercy on him instead. What other lessons can one derive from this passage of the Midrash? Comparing the two people, Moses and Pharaoh, in their subsequent moments of questioning God, Midrash shows the different outcomes of their actions. Moses was angry with God under the influence of the devastation of his people, and Pharaoh was angry with God, because he personally felt threatened by Him. Midrash takes sides with Moses and pardons his daring question to God. Therefore initially in picturing Moses and Pharaoh in similar situations, the Midrashic assessment of their intentions leads to different conclusions. Therefore in depicting the outcomes from Moses’ and Pharaoh’s actions the Midrash writes the following about Divine action on the two: ExodRab 6:1: He [God] had revealed to him [Moses] that He would strengthen the heart of the Pharaoh in order to ex-

34

ExodRab 5:22, p. 102.

142

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD ecute judgement upon him for having made them [people of Israel] serve with such rigor. 35

Thus according to the Midrash, God’s retribution on Pharaoh was according to His attribute of Justice, and the actions of Pharaoh could not change that. However the situation for Moses was different. When he had to face the Divine attribute of Justice, God ‘retracted and dealt with him according to the Attribute of Mercy’ 36 by revealing His name to him once again 37. This is not to say that God was pleased with Moses’ questioning Him. And the Midrash describes God as being displeased with Moses’ behaviour with the following words: ExodRab 6:4: God said to Moses: ‘Oh, for those that are gone cannot be replaced! Many times I revealed Myself to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty, but I did not make known to them that My name was Adonai, as I have told you, and still they did not criticise My ways.

The implication of the Midrash is that there are different names for God’s attributes. For example, when Midrash states that God said that I am ‘Elohim to the Egyptians; I am the Lord (Adonai) to the Israelites’ 38, this means that God shows His attribute of Mercy to Israel, while he judges the Egyptians according to His attribute of Judgement. This verse shows that Moses indeed crossed the line by criticising God, but God pardoned him. There were at least two reasons as to why God pardoned Moses. The first one, which the Midrash indicates, is because Moses’ intentions were to protect Israel, and the second one was that God further intended to use Moses in order to fulfil His promise to redeem His people from slavery. Therefore Israel plays an important role in the relationship between Moses and Pharaoh. God executes His Judgement or Mercy to each man according to 35 36 37 38

ExodRab 6:1, p. 105. ExodRAb 6:1, p. 105. See Exodus 6:2 when God said to Moses ‘I am the Lord’. See in ExodRab 6:2, p. 107.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

143

their attitude to the people of Israel during the time of their servitude. Therefore according to these verses, Moses is pardoned because he was having Israel’s interests at hand when he transgressed, but Pharaoh was judged because he was adding to Israel’s suffering with his actions. Therefore it is not surprising when the Midrash presents the following account of the Divine instructions to Moses clearly revealing God’s intentions for the people of Israel and the reasons behind them: ExodRab 3:7: Go and speak unto them in My name of Divine Mercy, for in that character will I conduct Myself towards them because of their ancestors. 39

One needs to highlight here that the predisposition of Divine Mercy towards the people of Israel was not due to Moses’ actions, but due to the ancestral virtues of the OT Patriarchs. The names of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were indicated in the earlier verses of the Midrash in this chapter. Therefore once again the Midrash is being clear that God chose Israel only because of the virtue of the Patriarchs. Hence the origin of the chosen status of Israel and God’s pledge to execute his attribute of Mercy towards them is found in Israel’s pre-Egyptian past, and not in the conduct of the people in Egypt. One needs to notice here that often the Israelites behaved in a similar way to the Egyptians to the extent that some of them were idolatrous in Egypt, according to the Midrash 40. And still ‘God swore to Moses that He would redeem them’ 41, because of the merit of their Patriarchs. Hence God was firm in His actions, stating: ‘I will do unto them what I have promised their ancestors’. 42 Bringing the discussion back to the Moses-Pharaoh encounters in the Midrash, it seems that two of them are often used in 39 40 41 42

ExodRab 3:7, p. 65. See in ExodRab 6:5, p. 109. ExodRAb 6:6, p. 108. ExodRab 6:4, p. 109.

144

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

comparison to each other. One such occasion is their position in the world. On the one hand, there is the Pharaoh who is charged as being guilty by the Midrash for falsely claiming divinity to himself. On the other hand, there is the Midrash describing God lifting up Moses’ status over the Pharaoh’s in order to teach Pharaoh a lesson, so that Pharaoh could appreciate the God of Israel as his God. And in doing so God tells Moses: ‘Behold I have made thee as a God unto Pharaoh’ 43. Therefore the Midrash disqualifies Pharaoh of his self-claimed divine qualities, while at the same time lifts Moses to a status of being a god to Pharaoh. One possible explanation of this is that God ‘assigns Glory to those who fear Him’ 44. Therefore between the two men, Moses and Pharaoh, He takes divinity from one and gives it to the other 45. What is important to highlight here is that the Midrash clearly indicates that God’s intention in doing so was for Pharaoh’s benefit. The Midrash again shows Moses and Pharaoh switching their statuses when Pharaoh’s position as royalty is overshadowed by Moses’ rise over him. And most probably such a manipulation of the positions of the two men was done for the benefit of both. For Moses it was yet another step in reaffirming him in the status of God’s chosen one, while for the Pharaoh it was done for his repentance. Therefore God’s care for Moses and for Pharaoh is clearly shown in the Midrash. And the reason Moses is raised above Pharaoh is to humble Pharaoh. Hence according to the Midrash, God instructs Moses to ‘Go and make him that made himself a god an abomination in the world, because he exalted himself’ 46. The many trials and tribulations that ExodRab 8:1, p. 115–116. ExodRab 8:1, p. 115. 45 One needs to point out here that the divinity of Moses, as well as the divinity of Pharaoh were not of the same status as the divinity of God. Pharaoh unjustly claimed his, and Moses became as God to Pharaoh. According to the Midrash, in the following context: “God said to Moses: ‘The wicked Pharaoh has made himself out to be a God… let him, therefore, see thee and say: ‘This is God’” (ExodRab VIII:1, p. 115–116). 46 ExodRab 8:2, p. 117. 43 44

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

145

God sent to Pharaoh, indicate a long process of Divine encounters with him, which in their turn pre-suppose the fact that the conversion of Pharaoh was important to God. In other places the Midrash points out to the fact that God sends Moses to Pharaoh to teach him ‘the way of repentance’ 47 and to point him to ‘the path of penitence’ 48. The Midrash emphasises God’s attention to Pharaoh and to his people and to their livelihood. For example, during the time of the plagues God made sure that the cattle of the Egyptians remained unharmed. Thus according to Midrash, God was attentive to the Egyptians and showed His Mercy to them ‘even in His wrath’ 49 when He instructed them to protect themselves and their cattle from the plague of hail. The next part of this chapter will therefore look into the ways in which the Midrash depicts the plagues of Egypt and their effects.

THE PURPOSE OF THE PLAGUES IN THE MIDRASH

The question of God’s care for Pharaoh is developed further in the Midrash. The following quote from the Midrash is clear: ‘God warned Pharaoh with every plague, in the hope that he might repent’ 50. Therefore one can again see dual results from the plagues. The multitude of plagues was clearly a way of convincing Pharaoh. However according to the Midrash the plagues were fulfilling many other objectives. According to the Midrash God delayed the plagues, ‘so that they [Egyptians] might feel remorse and do penitence’ 51. The effect of the plagues was intended for the spiritual benefit of the Egyptians, and for the occasional benefit of the Israelites. One of the most unexpected outcomes is presented in the Midrash in relation to the plague of water turning into blood. This plague 47 48 49 50 51

ExodRab 12:4, p. 153; ExodRab XII:1, p. 143. ExodRab 12:1, p. 143. ExodRab 12:2, p. 144. ExodRab 9:9, p. 126. ExodRab 13:6, p. 154.

146

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

made Israelites rich, as the Midrash states: ‘The Israelites became wealthy from the plague of blood’ 52 by selling clean water to the Egyptians. 53 The incentive for the Israelites to get wealthy was taken by the Midrash from the prophecy in Genesis 15:14 that states that Israel ought to come out of their oppression with great substance. According to the Midrash Rabbah there was another reason for the blood plague to occur, The first and foremost reason for this plague was to destroy Egyptian idolatrous behaviour in worshiping the Nile 54. In another plague: ‘during the three days of thick darkness 55, God gave favour to the people in the eyes of the Egyptians… so they let them the things’ 56 in fulfilment of Genesis 15:14 about Israel taking Egyptian riches. In another plague, the one of frogs, it was for the benefit of the Egyptians. According to the Midrash they had a border quarrel with the Ethiopians, which the plague of frogs settled. The Ethiopians and the Egyptians settled their border concerns with the frogs which only afflicted Egyptian land. Hence according to the Midrash, ‘the plagues which God brought upon the Egyptians were the means of establishing peace among them’ 57. The other reason for the plague of frogs was to glorify God’s creation. Hence the most superfluous creature was chosen to perform the task of being used as God’s tool 58. By bringing frogs into the river Nile, God was acting against Pharaoh’s convictions that the Nile belonged to him. Hence, ‘God said to Pharaoh: ‘Thou hast said: “Mine is the river”, well, I will show thee

ExodRab 9:10, p. 127. Apparently, it was only when Israelites sold their clean water to the Egyptians it did not turn into blood. Any other way when the Israelites passed on their clean water to the Egyptians it was turning into blood in their hands. 54 ExodRab 9:9, p. 126. 55 See in Exodus 10:22–23. 56 ExodRab 14:3, p. 158. 57 ExodRab 10:2, p. 132. 58 See in ExodRab 10:1, p. 131. 52 53

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

147

whether it is Mine or thine’ 59. More so frogs hurt Pharaoh’s body, and even his heart 60. All of the illustrations above suggest that according to the Midrash, each plague carried with it several purposes to fulfil, and often the benefits from the plagues expanded beyond the immediate purpose of convincing Pharaoh. The reoccurring theme in connection to many of the plagues is their being as a result of the Egyptians treating the Israelites badly. Therefore the reoccurring explanations of the Midrash in relation to the plagues could be abbreviated in the following manner: because Egypt did so and so to Israel they got this plague. Hence the Midrash seems to find an accompanying deed from the Egyptian’s past behaviour towards Israel, which matched every plague that they endured. Therefore the frogs were sent because the Egyptians subjected Israel to slavery, and ‘ordered them to bring reptiles and creeping things; in retaliation did He [God] bring frogs upon them’ 61. To teach the Egyptians another lesson for their harsh enslavement of Israel the plague of gnats was brought upon them, ‘because they made Israel the scavengers of their streets’ 62. The plague of swarms was because the Egyptians ‘used to say to Israelites: ‘Go and bring unto us bears, lions and leopards’ in order to vex them’ 63. Hence the meaning of the plagues could be seen as retributions to the Egyptians for their ill-treatment of Israel during the slavery. Such an analogous retribution upon Egypt finds its expression in the exegesis of Ephrem as well. He writes that the slaughter of the first born of Egypt was a retribution for the slaughter of the Hebrew babies during the time of Moses’ childhood 64. Therefore the genre of recollecting events from the previous biblical narrative as an explanation of analogies in the ExodRab 10:2, p. 133. See in ExodRab 10:5, p. 134 and 10:3, p. 133. 61 ExodRab 10:4, p. 134. 62 ExodRab 10:7. P. 136. 63 ExodRab 11:3, p. 140; for the plague of murrain see ExodRab XI:4, p. 140; for the plague of boils see ExodRab 11:5, p. 141. 64 See in ExodCom 11:1, 12:4, 14:7. 59 60

148

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

unfolding biblical story, could be seen as something which both Jewish and Christian authors used in their exegesis of the stories of the plagues. The dynamic of Israel-Egypt encounters goes further into the area of God’s retribution. According to the Midrash, ‘Israel too deserved to be smitten with this plague’ 65 of gnats, but ‘God made the Egyptians their ransom’ 66. It seems that according to the Midrash, it is the Egyptians who took punishment for Israel for their idolatrous behaviour in the land of Egypt. The Midrash also points out that the magicians were also among the target audience who reacted to the plagues, and who changed their ways under the influence of the plagues. According to the Midrash, magicians recognised the ‘finger of God’ in the plague of gnats and stopped comparing themselves with Moses. They recognised ‘that the deeds were those of God and not witchcraft’ 67. There is no mention of the conversion of the magicians in this instance, but there is an account of their testimony about Moses acting on God’s behalf. 68

HARDENING THE HEART OF PHARAOH IN THE MIDRASH

Biblical exegetes had to deal with the question of Pharaoh’s heart being hardened in order to develop their understanding of God’s involvement in Pharaoh’s hard-heartedness. It is noteworthy at this stage of the study, to bring examples of Jewish exegetes joining the debates about the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart and contributing their view on the matter. The Midrash Rabbah, presenting its viewpoint on the hardening of the heart of the Pharaoh, draws a parallel between the notion of the heavy heart

ExodRab 11:2, p. 139. ExodRab 11:2, p. 139. 67 ExodRAb 10:7, p. 136. 68 Qur’an, on the other hand, testifies to magicians converting at the first demonstration of the rod. This will be illustrated in the section of the chapter on the Qur’anic exegesis. 65 66

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

149

of Pharaoh and the heaviness of the stone in Proverbs 27:3, and Job 38:38. Hence Midrash states: ExodRab 13:2: ‘God said: ‘This may appear heavy in the sight of man who thinks it is a great burden to Me, but really it is not, because it says: He faineth not, neither is weary (Isa. XL,28) With what do I become weary? Only with him who provokes Me with idle words, as it says: Ye have wearied the Lord with your words (Mal.II,17) – hence ‘a fool’s vexation is heavier than they both’. 69

The insights into the argument of the Midrash suggest that it was not the heart of Pharaoh that was hardened, but it was Pharaoh’s own resistance and opposition to God that eventually backlashes on him and burdens his heart, and eventually his whole life and the life of the people that were in his charge. Another explanation in the Midrash Rabbah on Exodus touches on the issue of repentance in connection to Pharaoh’s hardening of his heart. It relates to the natural concern of the people about freedom of will and the impossibility of repentance when one’s heart is hardened by God. This is the line of the argument, similar to that of Ephrem. However the outcome in the Midrash is slightly different. In vocalising the verse from Proverbs which implies that one reaps what one sows, the Midrash clearly holds Pharaoh responsible for his actions. Therefore the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart was not as much deserved, but earned and a self-imposed measure for a man whose heart was already hardened towards God. The Midrash also explains that God used five preventative measures to warn Pharaoh by means of the plagues, but they had no effect on him. In fact each of the plagues was only followed by further hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. ExodRab 13:3: For I have hardened his heart (X.1)…If it concerns the scorners, He scorneth them (Prov.III,34): when God warns the man once, twice, and even a third time, and he 69

ExodRab 13:1, p. 150–151.

150

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD still does not repent, then does God close his heart against repentance so that He should exact vengeance from him for his sins. Thus it was with the wicked Pharaoh. Since God sent five times to him and he took no notice, God then said: ‘Thou hast stiffened thy neck and hardened thy heart; well I will add to thine uncleanness’; hence For I have hardened his heart. 70

The Midrash continues analysing where the path of Pharaoh went wrong. It states that ‘Pharaoh was one of four men who claimed divinity and thereby brought evil upon themselves’ 71. Also there is an indication in the Midrash that Pharaoh’s heart was proud, so he was smitten by God 72. One of the explanations of this could be found in God hardening the heart of Pharaoh, the heart, which was already hardened by Pharaoh’s pride. The question of Pharaoh’s heart is something that needs to be looked at further. Therefore the following part of the chapter is about the question of God hardening the heart of Pharaoh. In its description of the first miracle with Aaron’s rod, the Midrash indicates that this was the time when Pharaoh was already doubting his authority 73. However Pharaoh’s behaviour remained foolish as he did not choose to turn to God, but rather remained relying on his magic. In this instance the Midrash describes Pharaoh’s actions in the following way: ExodRab 13:1, p. 152, see also in the footnote 3 of Midrash Rabbah the clarification that Rashi ‘observes (Ex.8:3) that in connection with the first five plagues the word used is wa-yehezak, and Pharaoh’s heart was hardened of his own accord. It is only after that Scripture writes wa-yehazzek, and He (God) hardened his heart (Rashash)’. Hence, Rashi bases his midrash on the grammatical construction in Hebrew of the verb to harden, which in the first instance refers to Pharaoh, and only after the five plagues were completed refers to God’s action toward the Pharaoh. 71 ‘These were Hiram, Nebuchadnezzar, Pharaoh and Joash, King of Judah’ (ExodRab 8:2, p. 116). 72 See in ExodRab 8:2, p. 117. 73 See in ExodRab 9:7, p. 125. 70

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

151

ExodRab 9:7: ‘A fool spendeth all his spirit’. This verse may also refer to Pharaoh, who scoffed at God, imagining that Moses and Aaron performed their wonders by witchcraft, and called the members of his household to do likewise. 74

The verses of the Midrash above and below could be linked in as much as the lesson of the Midrash is that the gifts of God are there for people to collect. However if a person persistently resists to appreciate Divine presence in his life, then they have to face the consequences of the absence of God. Hence in the verse below the Midrash could be understood as taking a long shot in referring to Pharaoh’s hardness of hart as a result of the absence of Torah in it: ExodRab 6:2: Torah was given as a gift to the heart of man. 75

One of the possible ways of looking at this verse in the Midrash is its understanding in relation to the hardness of Pharaoh’s heart. Therefore it could be the gift of the Torah, that God withheld from Pharaoh when He hardened his heart. In other words, the heart of Pharaoh was hardened due to the lack of Torah in it. And by Torah in this instance one can assume the account of Divine Revelation in human history. The pattern of behaviour of Pharaoh in withdrawing his repentance after the plagues were gone, is something that Midrash picks on again and again with the following words: ExodRab 10:6: This is just like the wicked when are in trouble they cry, but when they have respite, the return to their perversity. 76

The same pattern was pointed out in the Qur’an in its exegesis of the behaviour of Pharaoh during his experience of the plagues. 74 75 76

ExodRab 9:7, p. 124. ExodRab 6:2, p. 106. ExodRab 10:6, p. 135, the same passage is also used in ExodRab 12:7, p. 149.

152

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Another lesson of the Midrash is its didactics about what happens if one is persistent in ignoring God’s signs. The example of Pharaoh is used as an illustration in the following Midrash: ExodRab 11:1: If the godless, for whose repentance God waits, do not do so, then even they do think of it later on, He distracts their heart from being patient. 77

This verse from the Midrash emphasises two things. First of all, it is the fact that God was waiting for the repentance of Pharaoh. And second, the indication of the Midrash is to do with the Pharaoh’s behaviour and his reactions to God’s consideration. When Pharaoh repeated the pattern of resuming his wicked ways after the end of each plague, God eventually withheld from helping Pharaoh. Thus it was the sole recklessness of Pharaoh which lead to the harshness of the plagues. In support of this idea the Midrash explains: ExodRab 11:2: God said to Moses: ‘This wicked man who has hardened his heart in face of the first three plagues will find the fourth one more grievous than those that preceded’. 78

What the Midrash adds to the above statement is the continuous Divine attempt to reach out to Pharaoh even if it meant amplifying the harshness of the plagues. On the one hand, God served each plague after the previous one to encourage Pharaoh’s repentance, while on the other hand, God continuously wanted to prevent an escalation of the plagues and their harshness. Consequently the Midrash testifies to the fact that God sent Moses to warn Pharaoh with the following words: ‘Go and warn him to send out My people, so that the plague may not come’ 79. It shows here, the observation in the Midrash that God was more

77 78 79

ExodRab 11:1, p. 138. ExodRab 11:2, p. 138. ExodRab 11:2, p. 138.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

153

concerned about the well-being of Pharaoh than Pharaoh had for his own good. Therefore in answering the question as to whether Pharaoh had access to freedom of choice during the time when God hardened his heart, the Midrash presents an answer, which supports the freedom of will of Pharaoh in every step of his wicked ways. Therefore the Midrash does not doubt that Pharaoh made his own choices and conducted his actions according to his free will. Additionally what the Midrash attempted to show through the examples used in this study is that it was often God who acted in the interests and for the benefit of Pharaoh and his people, whilst Pharaoh himself was often choosing the path of selfdestruction and leading his people with him. The following part of the study will look at the question of Pharaoh’s heart in the exegesis of Ephrem and the Qur’an.

HARDENING THE HEART OF PHARAOH IN EPHREM AND IN THE QUR’AN

The motif of hardening the heart of the Pharaoh is discussed both by Ephrem and by the Qur’an. It deserves further attention in the course of this study, and the following part of this book is going to explore the matter in more detail. The following biblical passages are significant as they bring to light further insights into the trialogue between Moses, God and the Pharaoh. Biblical exegetes associate these verses with the discussion about free will and predestination in the Exodus narrative. Hence, it is important to see whether selected exegetical samples from Ephrem and the Qur’an are contributing their insights on the biblical story. Exodus 7:14–16: Then the Lord said to Moses, “The king is very stubborn and refuses to let the people go. So go and meet him in the morning when he goes down to the Nile. Take with you the stick that was turned into a snake, and wait for him on the bank of the river. Then say to the king, ‘The Lord, the God of the Hebrews, sent me to tell you to let his people go, so that they can worship him in the desert.

154

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

The above biblical passage contains a repetition of the initial request of Moses to the Pharaoh, but in a different context of the meeting between Moses and the Pharaoh. The difference in the relationship between Moses and the Pharaoh is influenced by the previous plagues. It is no longer the case of an unknown character, Moses, making his impositions on the ruler of Egypt. It is a God’s chosen one who is trying to convince the Pharaoh to take God’s side in the matter: Exodus 7:16–17: But until now you have not listened. Now, Your Majesty, the Lord says that you will find out who he is by what he is going to do.

The fact that the Pharaoh is no longer expected to believe in God through the eyes of faith is already a testimony to the firmness of the Pharaoh’s convictions, but also a clear indication that he is given yet another chance to find out about the God of Israel through His actions. God’s actions in order to convince the Pharaoh are multiple and persistent. It is possible to assume, therefore, that it is a part of the Divine plan to convince the Pharaoh and his people to believe in the God of Israel. And this part of the Divine plan in its turn potentially expands God’s providence for the people of Israel as well as for the people of Egypt. However, the fulfilment of the plan for the people of Egypt was not to be, as the Pharaoh puts the end to it through his persistent decline of God’s initiative in his life and in the life of his people. Thus, as the biblical story conveys, the outcome of the Pharaoh’s action is the drift away from Divine guidance and protection over the people and the Pharaoh himself and the perishing of the latter with his army at the crossing of the Sea. The biblical passages show the slight shift in Pharaoh’s attitude under the influence of the plagues. In Exodus 7 Pharaoh is still stubborn, while in Exodus 9 the Pharaoh repents under pressure 80. However, after the plague of hail passes, the Pharaoh also

80

Below is the selection of relevant biblical passages:

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

155

reverts to rejection and stubbornness. The motifs for changing the heart of the Pharaoh depending on the circumstances and under the pressure of suffering are discussed and presented later on in the study passages from Ephrem, Qur’an and, as was already shown, in Midrash. The first passage from Exodus 7:14–18 is almost a repetition of the request to Pharaoh as presented by Moses in the beginning of Exodus 5. It was necessary for Moses to keep repeating his request as long as the Pharaoh kept rejecting it under different circumstances. The issue of stubbornness of the Pharaoh is highlighted in the biblical passages. Ephrem in his commentaries on the matter of Pharaoh’s stubborn or hardened heart attempts to resolve a question as to whether the Pharaoh was acting with his free will, or was he a part of the Divine Providence projected on him, and merely a puppet in the hands of God. For this reason, Ephrem engages himself in a theological analysis of Pharaoh’s actions, and comes to the conclusion that the Pharaoh was persistent in his rejection of God due to his free Exodus 7:17: Look, I am going to strike the surface of the river with this stick, and the water will be turned into blood. The fish will die, and the river will stink so much that the Egyptians will not be able to drink from it’.” Exodus 7:22: Then the king’s magicians did the same thing by means of their magic, and the king was as stubborn as ever. Just as the Lord had said, the king refused to listen to Moses and Aaron. Exodus 9:27–30: [After hail] The king sent for Moses and Aaron and said, “This time I have sinned; the Lord is in the right, and my people and I are in the wrong. Pray to the Lord! We have had enough of this thunder and hail! I promise to let you go; you don’t have to stay here any longer.” Moses said to him, “As soon as I go out of the city, I will lift my hands in prayer to the Lord. The thunder will stop, and there will be no more hail, so that you may know that the earth belongs to the Lord. But I know that you and your officials do not yet fear the Lord God.” Exodus 9:34–35: When the king saw what had happened, he sinned again. He and his officials remained as stubborn as ever and just as the Lord had foretold through Moses, the king would not let Israelites go. Exodus 11:27: The Lord made the king stubborn, and he would not let them go. MT reads: But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart.

156

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

will, and by his own choice. As an illustration of his conclusion Ephrem uses the fact of Pharaoh realising that he had sinned, and repenting for that at a certain point in his dealings with Moses. On a theological level this kind of transformation or a realisation of one’s own sinfulness is only possible under the influence of free will and free choice 81. Hence, Ephrem writes the following: ExodCom 9:4: And Pharaoh said to Moses, “I have sinned this time” (Exod. 9:27). On previous occasions when he had hardened himself, had he not sinned? Even if he had sinned on previous occasions, he had not sinned as greatly as he had in this. God had warned him to bring in his cattle and he had not believed. So in this plague his culpability was greater than in all others. 82

The biblical phrase of the Pharaoh ‘I have sinned this time’ is a testimony of a person who is making his choices and regrets them under the influence of the circumstances. Therefore, in acknowledging his own sinful behaviour the Pharaoh acknowledges also that he was solely responsible for his choices prior to that. Pharaoh’s repentance does not last long, and it stops the moment plagues are seized. However, the shortly lived repentance of the Pharaoh is enough to show that he was acting as a free agent, and that his free will was not compromised. Ephrem in his commentaries does not miss commenting on the repeating pattern in Pharaoh’s behaviour. Below Ephrem writes about the Pharaoh hesitating in his stubbornness while the plagues are active, but retrieving his own ways straight after the plagues are stopped: ExodCom 9:4: Moses went out and as he lifted his hands the thunder fell silent and the rain no longer beat upon the earth (Exod. 9:33). Either it vanished into the air, or it rose into the clouds and went up. It ascended faster into the sky than 81 82

See Ephrem’s Commentary on Exodus 10:3 further in this chapter. ExodCom 9:4, p. 35–36.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

157

it had descended. But after this Pharaoh and his court became stubborn and he did not let the people go. 83

On many occasions Ephrem reflects on Pharaoh’s stubbornness in the context of Divine providence or interference. Below Ephrem is more explicit in presenting his argument that Pharaoh’s free will was not jeopardised, and that he did what he did by his own accord, choosing freely to disobey until the very end of his life. In stating that ‘the heart that is hardened is a stranger to repentance’ Ephrem, in unison with the Midrash, clearly indicates that only free will inspires repentance: ExodCom 10:3: Next Moses brought locusts, and they ate the grass and everything that the hail had left. Pharaoh said, “I have sinned against the Lord and against you. Now forgive my faults.” (Exod. 10:16–17) If he had been hardened, he would not have said this, because the heart that is hardened is a stranger to repentance. And if in his suffering he asked for mercy, and then rebelled during a respite, he was acting as a free agent. Both facts testify to his free will. The locusts departed at Moses’ command, and Pharaoh’s repentance lasted no longer than the locusts. 84

The last phrase in Ephrem’s passage, ‘and Pharaoh’s repentance lasted no longer than the locusts’, is similar to what is stated in the Qur’an 13:47–54 85. Ephrem is persistent in arguing for the fact that during each of his actions the Pharaoh is acting as a free agent. Looking at the biblical narrative from the theological point of view, Ephrem highlights the fact that if God intended to harden the heart of the Pharaoh, then it would have been an irreversible change in him. Hence, he would not have been able to change in his heart’s inclinations. Therefore, when the bibliExodCom 9:4, p. 35–36. ExodCom 10:3, p. 37; see also Jansma, “Reflections…” about the issue of free will in Ephrem. 85 The Qur’anic passage of 13:47–54 is presented and discussed further on in this study. 83 84

158

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

cal account of the events continuously shows the change in the Pharaoh’s behaviour, it is, according to Ephrem, a clear sign that the Pharaoh’s heart was not hardened by God, but was able to change according to the Pharaoh’s own wishes and preferences. Below Ephrem repeats his argument about Pharaoh’s heart: ExodCom 10:5: And the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart and he refused to let the people go (Exod. 10:27). If God had hardened him, no change would have been possible in the heart made hard by God. But since he said, “I will let them go,” during chastisement, and once it had passed refused and did not release them, this was not hardness of heat from God, but from the inmost mind, which in suffering submits to obeying what is commanded, and during a respite spurns your laws. 86

Ephrem here further unfolds his argument about Pharaoh’s heart and brings about the discussion about Pharaoh’s mind. Ephrem shifts his attention from the question of hardening of the Pharaoh’s heart to the question of manipulation with the Pharaoh’s mind. It is because of the devastating effects of the plagues and their threatening nature that the Pharaoh’s mind was manipulated into short-lived changes. Hence, under the influence of the plagues Pharaoh changes from resisting God to obedience and repentance. It is due to the experience of suffering that Pharaoh’s behaviour changes. However, by the moment each of the sufferings was over, so was the end of Pharaoh’s inclination to be obedient and to follow God 87. In order to illustrate his conclusions Ephrem points out the deliberate phraseology in the biblical narrative, which clarifies the matter of the hardened heart of the Pharaoh. The heart of the Pharaoh was indeed hardened, but it was not hardened by God, but by Pharaoh himself. Thus, Ephrem writes: ExodCom 10:5, p. 38. The motif of repentance and suffering is highlighted here. Similar motifs we find in other writings presented further on in this study.

86 87

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

159

ExodCom 7:1: And the Lord said, not “I have hardened his heart” but “Pharaoh’s heart is hardened, and he refuses to let the people go” (Exod. 7:14).

Looking at Ephrem’s commentaries one can see that, although the discussion of Pharaoh’s heart being hardened brings about many questions for the author, his main emphasis is on the gradual development in the relationship between God and the Pharaoh. It was God’s intention to lead the Pharaoh to repentance, and through the multiple courses of plagues God was extending His patience towards the Pharaoh. And the Pharaoh’s repentance was indeed inspired by the plagues. Below Ephrem illustrates the dynamics in the Pharaoh-God relationship: ExodCom 8:1: Again the Lord said to Moses, “Go out to him and stand on the river bank” (Exod. 7:15). Had Pharaoh gone out to the river early in order to pour libation to it, or did he go out there every morning for recreation? From his reliance on the magicians it seems that the King of Egypt used to pour libations to the river of Egypt. 88 Moses went out and representing his Lord told him to let the people go. Because Pharaoh refused, Moses smote the river. Since the former Pharaoh had defiled it with the blood of the babies who had drowned in it, its waters would be turned into blood, and the fish that had grown fat on the infants’ corpses would die (Exod. 7:17). This second plague was intended to frighten them in that the fish died instead of the first-born. But since Pharaoh was unconvinced by the death of the fish, he was convinced by the death of the first-born. The magicians also produced the same effect with their spell, unrestrained by Moses (Exod. 7:22). 89

Qur’an shows similarity to Jewish-Christian sources in its exegesis of Pharaoh’s behaviour, especially in describing the Pharaoh 88 89

ExodCom 8:1, p. 30. ExodCom 8:1, p. 31.

160

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

changing his mind through the influences of suffering. Qur’an also comments on the Pharaoh showing the signs of obedience to God while being in the middle of the plagues, while outside the effect of the plagues and suffering the Pharaoh abandons all his pledges that he was making under the influence of the plagues. Qur’an writes: Q.43:46: We sent Moses to Pharaoh and his courtiers and he said: ‘I am truly a messenger from the Lord of the Worlds,’ 47: but when he presented Our signs to them, they laughed, 48: even though each sign We showed them was greater than the previous one. We inflicted torment on them so that they might return to the right path. 49: They said, ‘Sorcerer, call on your Lord for us, by virtue of His pledge to you: we shall certainly accept guidance,’ 50: but as soon as We relieved their torment they broke their word. 51: Pharaoh proclaimed to his people, ‘My people, is the Kingdom of Egypt not mine? And these rivers that flow at my feet, are they not mine? Do you not see? 52: Am I not better than this contemptible wretch who can scarcely express himself? 53: Why has he not been given any gold bracelets? Why have no angels come to accompany him?’ 54: In this way he moved his people to accept and they obeyed him – they were perverse people.

There are similarities in the Qur’anic depiction of the Pharaoh’s behaviour with Ephrem’s exegesis of the God-Pharaoh-Moses relationship. There are at least two parallels to Ephrem’s and Midrashic development of the Qur’anic argument. For example, the idea of the plagues as means of repentance (e.g. Q.43:48:‘We inflicted torment on them so that they might return to the right path’) and the Pharaoh’s reversal to his stubborn ways after the plagues were over (Q.43:50: ‘but as soon as We relieved their torment they broke their word’). There is also an interesting line of thought that the Qur’an attributes to the Pharaoh in his attempt to discredit Moses as a ‘legitimate’ leader of the people. The Qur’an presents the Pharaoh’s arguments as follows: a. Moses is not a worthy leader, because of his physical shortcomings, such as the lack of eloquence’; b. earthly riches are per-

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

161

ceived by the Pharaoh as a sign of power and leadership 90; c. there is an expectation of Divine support for the ‘chosen one’ through angels and visions. What is noteworthy in the above definition of the Pharaoh is that his emphasis is primarily on the external attributes of the leader, such as physical perfection and financial riches. This could have been the way the Pharaoh perceived himself, and the difference in Moses’ appearance was a clear indication for the Pharaoh of his non-leadership qualities. The third definition, however, is more theologically sound, as the Pharaoh’s expectation is for the leader of the people to be anointed with Divine blessings. The expression of such a Divine blessing, according to the Pharaoh, comes by means of angelic support and visions. Although the Pharaoh talks here of Divine support, he limits its expression in two ways. Hence, its legitimacy is verified by the external signs of either angelic presence or visions. And since Moses fails on both accounts, Pharaoh uses this argument in order to bring Moses into disrepute as a leader. Could it be due to the fact that the Pharaoh suspected Moses to take his place? What is clear enough is that the power struggle between Moses-God and the Pharaoh makes the Pharaoh take Moses seriously and to seek a place for his presence in the Pharaoh’s system of priorities. Hence, according to Pharaoh’s definitions, Moses does not fit into the category of the leader of the people and God’s chosen one. Here Qur’an approaches the aspect of the Pharaoh’s hardening of the heart not externally, as in God hardening it for the Pharaoh, but internally, from the perspective of the Pharaoh himself. It seems that the Pharaoh is so much bound by his own definitions of power that he cannot see outside his own self-made or adopted boundaries. The attention of the Qur’an to the vessels of silver and gold, as the riches of Egypt, is corresponding to Ephrem and Midrash commenting on the biblical passages of Exodus (see in Exodus 12:35–36, Gen.15:13–14; Jub.48:18–19, p. 140, ExodCom, Synopsis, p. 9; ExodCom 3:4; also see in my book, Ephrem, a Jewish Sage, p. 167–171).

90

162

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Therefore, he almost dictates to the God of Israel the protocol of appointing the leader for the people and the ways of manifesting these things externally. All the Pharaoh’s expectations, be it from Moses’ ministry or from God Himself is highly artificial and speculative. He does not seem to be able to dispute with Moses on theological groundings, and therefore he only appeals to the culturally accepted definitions in his religious beliefs and in his thought. The Pharaoh fabricates his own arguments, which are made from the cultural and religious beliefs of his country in order to manipulate the masses. Therefore, the explanation of the Pharaoh’s behaviour could be that he acts on the existing popular beliefs of his people and uses them in order to demonstrate the illegitimacy of Moses’ demands. People going into the desert are perceived by Pharaoh’s entourage as a threat to the position of the Pharaoh and ultimately to the divine status of the Pharaoh himself. Therefore, the essence of the power struggle at hand is all about Pharaoh’s attempt to hold on to his authority, and the God of Israel claiming to be the ruler not only of the People of Israel, but of the Pharaoh and his people as well. Hence, in the following passage the Qur’an shows that through the dialogue of Moses and the Pharaoh, there is also the side dialogue that is going on. And this side dialogue is between Moses and his people. There is a link between the prior speech of the Pharaoh and the speech below of Moses to his people. What is similar is the external assessment of the situation by the Pharaoh, and the despair of the people because of their external conditions of being the slaves of Egypt and their suffering. If one looks at both arguments, the Pharaoh’s one and the people’s one, then the response of Moses might have meaning for both parties. Hence, in the response below, Moses could be seen as conversing with his people and also addressing the Pharaoh’s point of view. The people of Israel were oppressed prior to Moses’ arrival. Additionally, the persecution of the people since Moses’ arrival might have worsened. Although Moses came to Egypt as an advocate for his people, the immediate reaction from Moses intervention with Pharaoh’s slaves resulted in harsher treatment of the people. Therefore, Moses’ plea to the people is to see the

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

163

bigger picture, and to strive through the immediate hardship. Moses asks the people to wait for God’s intervention on their behalf, and to trust their lives to the hands of their God. And Moses also promises that as a reward for their trust in God the situation for the people will change dramatically, and the current slaves of Egypt will become victorious over their enemies, and will destroy them. And more so, the people of Moses will become the rulers in the land of their slavery. However, this will be on the condition that they will be tested afterwards. It seems that there will be an assessment of the people’s faith after which the promised things will be granted to them. It seems that the Qur’an here anticipates the future shortcoming of the people and already at this point preamps the story of the Golden Calf and Israel’s idolatry 91. Alternatively, it is also possible to read into Moses’ argument the additional reassurance given to the people. By setting the condition on the people based on their reaction to all the promises from God, Moses inadvertently makes a reality of these promises from the God of Israel closer to the people’s expectations and even more palpable. The Qur’an presents the following passage on the subject: Q.7:127: The leaders among Pharaoh’s people said to him, ‘But are you going to leave Moses and his people to spread corruption in the land and forsake you and your gods?’ He replied, ‘We shall kill their male children, sparing only the females: We have complete power over them.’ 128: Moses Such a line of thought is familiar to Midrash, as was shown in the study in this chapter. Neither Midrash nor the Qur’an here try to justify Israel of her idolatrous behaviour. However, the difference between Midrash and the Qur’an is that the Midrash never suggests the alternative for the place of Israel in her relationship with God, while the Qur’an could be seen in places as entertaining replacement theology and attempting to disrepute Children of Israel of its former elected position. See, for example, in Q. 11:116, 2:71–75,90, 3:181, 9:35, 4:46, 9:30 (although quite often the contextual interpretation of some of the verses of the Qur’an could be affiliated with the specific Jewish tribe of Medina of the time of Mohammad).

91

164

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD said to his people, ‘Turn to God for help and be steadfast: the earth belongs to God – He gives it as their own to whichever of His servants He chooses – and the happy future belongs to those who are mindful of Him. 129: and they replied, ‘We were being persecuted long before you came to us, and since then too.’ He said, ‘Your Lord may well destroy your enemy and make you successors to the land to see how you behave.’

The Qur’an here perceives Moses as carrying out a didactic provision for the people of Israel. The following passage of the Qur’an presents additional instructions on how the people should express their faith in God. It involves submission to, and reliance on Him. The people’s response to God’s teachings conveyed to the people through Moses is noteworthy, as it shows their spiritual maturity and growth in their faith and understanding of God. They are already speaking as firm believers and followers of God. Hence, their request to be delivered is not dictated solely by burdens of slavery, but by the burden of being under the rule of the unbelievers. It is not the matter of simply being released from the hardship of oppression and hard labour, but a much more profound dynamic of the people of Israel exhibiting zeal for the purity of their faith and its conduct in the environment, which is not polluted by the ungodly and unjust people of Egypt. And God responds to His people accordingly by sending them a revelation. God’s request for the people is to worship Him, and to pray to Him in their houses, so that they become the sacred places of worship. Also there is a call for the people to mission, i.e. to ‘give good news to the believers’. It is a highly elevated relationship that is being established between God and the people in the verses of the Qur’an cited below. Moses here is a mediator in this relationship, but the emphasis is really on the relationship between God and the people of Israel. What is interesting in the Qur’anic passage below is that at some point when Moses volunteers his prayer, he almost lowers the bar of the elevated conversation between the people and their God by bringing the matter of earthly riches to it. It seems that in the relationship between the people and God, Moses uses the Pharaoh’s argument and lowers the conversation to the ground and to external matters, while the people were conversing with

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

165

God about the spiritual matters. Also Moses intercedes to God to harden the heart of the people of Egypt and to destroy their riches. Moses again demonstrates a less spiritually elevated side to his character by pleading to God to reject the Pharaoh from joining in the relationship with God. Hence, it is important to note that the Qur’an clearly states that it was not God who hardened the heart of the Pharaoh, but it was due to Moses and Aaron’s request to harden the heart of the Egyptians. According to the Qur’an, in the matter of the hardening of the heart of the Pharaoh God simply accepts the prayers of Moses and Aaron and acts on them. Q.10:84: Moses said, ‘My people, if you have faith in God and are devoted to Him, put your trust in Him’. 85: They said, ‘We have put our trust in God. Lord! Do not make us an object of persecution for the oppressors. 86: Save us, in Your mercy, from those who reject [Your message].’ 87: We revealed to Moses and his brother: ‘House your people in Egypt and make these houses places of worship; keep up the prayer; give good news to the believers!’ 88: And Moses said, ‘Our Lord, You have given Pharaoh and his chiefs splendour and wealth in this present life and here they are, Lord, leading others astray from Your path. Our Lord, obliterate their wealth and harden their hearts so that they do not believe until they see the agonising torment.’ 89: God said, ‘Your prayers are answered, so stay on the right course, and do not follow the path of those who do not know.’

In the passage above Moses tests the people’s faith on the spot with questions. He leads the people into pledging their faith and their loyalty to God. As an answer the people choose God as their ruler and as their protector and plea to Him for deliverance from their suffering. Additionally, according to the people’s responses, the power struggle between Israel and the Pharaoh and his people changes from the ‘slaves-ruler’ relationship into ‘true believers and the followers of God vs. the unbelievers’. In picturing respective peoples, the Qur’an could be seen as using the people of Israel as an example to follow and the people of Egypt as an example to avoid. Thus, there is a spiritual significance to

166

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

the prayer of people of Israel to God to be separated from the unbelievers and to be protected from their influences and attacks. Another interesting observation from the passage above is the conduct of the dialogue between Moses and God. What is noteworthy is the fact that what God says to Moses and what Moses says to God seem to be the subject matters of almost two different conversations. The one conversation is about the messianic statue of the people and the extent of their spirituality, so that even their homes become the houses of prayer. In this conversation God says: make houses of Egypt the houses of prayer, sustain the prayer in Egypt, and give good news to the people (comfort them and sustain their faith). The other conversation is brought about by Moses. And his argument reminisces with the argument of the Pharaoh from the previously mentioned Surah (Q.13:4–54) when Pharaoh uses the riches as a sign of both divine and earthly power (see Pharaoh’s remarks in Q.13:50–54). Hence, Moses asks God to revert to the symbolism of riches and to deprive the Egyptians from their earthly possessions in order to punish them. Moses asks for God’s vengeance on the people of Egypt and for the hardening of their hearts. With this Moses wants to deprive the Egyptians from the earthly support of riches, and from the heavenly support of God 92. The Qur’an in the passages above brings depth to the relationship between God, Moses, and Israel as well as the Pharaoh and Egypt. On this occasion the Qur’an presents an elevated relationship between the people of Israel and God, depicting God as a spiritual coach of the people leading them to the depth of faith and to the missionary vocation of the people of Israel in the world. Moses, on the other hand, is portrayed as being occupied with the earthly possessions of Egypt. He is also described as the one pleading to God to harden the hearts of the EgypThere is an emphasis on the riches of Egypt in Jewish Midrash, which will be discussed further in the study under the title The Significance of Egyptian Gold and Silver. 92

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

167

tians. It is important, therefore, to highlight here that on this occasion the relationship of people of Israel and God is more spiritually tuned, while Moses appeals to God from the lower ground of material goods and worries of possessions. Moses’ encounter with God at that moment in time appeals to God’s judgement on the people of Egypt, while God’s appeal to the people of Israel is to be the enlighteners of the people of the world. The contrast is obvious here. The people of Israel are inspired for the greater spiritual good of the universe, while Moses is occupying himself with the matters of the world. What is interesting to notice here is that none of the other exegetical sources in this study, that is neither Jewish Midrash nor Ephrem in their commentaries offer such a complexity into this particular conversation between Moses and God, which colours the overall relationship between God, the people of Israel and Egypt, and Moses and the Pharaoh. It is interesting to analyse the dynamics in the relationship between God-Moses and the Pharaoh on the matter of the hardening of the heart of the pharaoh across the three monotheistic exegetical traditions. It is not God, who, according to Qur’an hardens the heart of the Pharaoh, but it is done according to Moses and Aaron’s prayer to God. In Ephrem’s case, the heart of the Pharaoh was not hardened by God. While Jewish commentaries take the intermediary position stating that Pharaoh’s heart was hardened before, so God simply adds to the hardening, therefore, stating that Pharaoh’s heart was a small illustration of his unworthy and ungodly state of being.

THE DRAMA OF EXODUS UNFOLDS: A HUMAN DRAMA AND THE MERCY OF GOD UNTIL DEATH

The aim of this subchapter is to demonstrate how the following concepts and ideas are derived from the biblical story of Crossing the Red Sea. The concepts at hand are repentance, mercy and vengeance, punishment of God, freedom of choice, and the Pharaoh’s weakness and strength. There will be a special focus on a paradox of the textual analysis of the exegetes, in as much as the weakness of the Pharaoh being his potential strength in building his relationship with God through repentance. While

168

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

strength of the Pharaoh and his army being his greatest weakness that eventually leads him into the abyss of Divine Presence and ultimate defeat after confrontation with God at the sea. The biblical plot below describes the aftermath of the most horrific events of the slaughter of the first born. The situation for the Pharaoh is indeed unbearable, so he asks Moses and the people to leave the country. Does this constitute the defeat of the Pharaoh, or yet another momentarily weakness? The stubborn Pharaoh shortly picks himself up and follows the people in order to die in the Red sea. Does this episode show the Mercy of God or His vengeance on the Pharaoh? Could God’s Mercy be encapsulated in the process of giving to the Pharaoh multiple chances to repent? Or does throwing Pharaoh and his army into the abyss constitute God’s vengeance? Could the Red Sea be a symbolic representation of pride, greed and human rage and craving for power, that eventually consumes the Pharaoh and his army? Some of these questions are to be unravelled in this part of the research. The following verses of the biblical narrative are to be discussed in this part of the chapter: Exodus 11:4–5: Moses then said to the king, “The Lord says, ‘At about midnight I will go through Egypt, and every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the king’s son, who is heir to the throne, to the son of a slave woman… Exodus 11:6: There will be loud cry all over Egypt, such as there has never been before or ever will again. Exodus 12:29: At midnight the Lord killed all the first-born sons in Egypt… all the first born of the animals were also killed. Exodus 12:31: The same night the king sent for Moses and Aaron and said, “Get out, you and your Israelites! Leave my country; go and worship the Lord, as you asked. Exodus 12:40–42: The Israelites had lived in Egypt for 430 years. On the day the 430 years ended, all the tribes of the Lord’s people left Egypt. It was night when the Lord kept watch to bring them out of Egypt; this same night is dedicat-

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

169

ed to the Lord for all time to come as a night when the Israelites must keep watch.

At this point of the study it is noteworthy to highlight the Imitatio Dei commandment for the people in Exodus 12:42 to imitate God in remembrance of the day of their departure from Egypt, and as a sign of thanksgiving and devotion to their God who ‘kept watch’ over them during the night of their departure. This concept together with the description of Israel taking Egyptian Gold and Silver could be seen as common for exegetical renderings across Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic passages. Hence, the following part of the study will explore further into the narrative of Israel exiting Egypt with the Egyptian riches.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF EGYPTIAN GOLD AND SILVER Exodus 11:2: Now speak to the people of Israel and tell all of them to ask their neighbours for gold and silver jewellery.

In the verse above, one chapter prior to the Red Sea crossing the biblical narrative explicitly states that it was God’s command to the people to ask their neighbours, the Egyptians, for their gold and silver jewellery. And this asking they were supposed to do prior to the killing of the first born. The significance of this asking is not easily found on the surface of the biblical message. The verse below further develops the idea by stating that the people of Israel departed Egypt not as newly released slaves, but as newly enriched people, on the High note so to speak. They were departing while gaining respect from their oppressors, and also by being rewarded with earthly riches. The question to ask here is why did the Israelites ask for Egyptian gold? Didn’t they know that they were going into the desert? What use is the gold in the desert? In fact, this very gold was used later on in the narrative by the people in building the Golden Calf. Therefore, there was no need at all to ask for the gold. Why does Moses ask the Israelites to accumulate Egyptian gold, as the following verse suggests: Exodus 12:35–36: The Israelites had done as Moses had said, and had asked the Egyptians for gold and silver jewel-

170

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD lery and for clothing. The Lord made the Egyptians respect the people and give them what they asked for. In this way the Israelites carried away the wealth of the Egyptians.

There are more questions to be asked here. Why do all of the selected exegetes mention this detail of the Israelites taking the gold with them into the desert? What is the meaning of the phrase ‘the Israelites carried away the wealth of the Egyptians’? Some of the questions above will be the ones that our sources make an attempt to address. In the passage below Ephrem connects the tragic events in the life of Moses. In doing so he highlights the fact that there was continuity to human suffering in the biblical narrative. The death of the first born of Egypt was a reliving of the horror of the slaughter of the Hebrews during the time of Moses’ birth. Ephrem illustrates here how Divine Providence acts in biblical history. Divine involvement often goes together with human participation. In the case of Moses’ life there are the fates of the two people at hand, Hebrews and the Egyptians. Therefore, according to the peoples’ reactions the curses of the Egyptian plagues turned to be a blessing for the Hebrews. The prevailing factor, which let Divine Providence act on peoples’ behalf, was the willingness of the Israelites to follow God. On the other hand, the unwillingness of the Egyptian leader and his people to listen to God resulted in their receiving exactly the same punishment of the slaughter of their babies, which they bestowed on the Hebrew babies in the past. Thus, initially in Moses’ story there was an Egyptian curse on the Hebrew babies, which according to Ephrem resulted or backlashed, as the curse on the Egyptian babies during the course of the plagues. On the other hand, this very plague on Egypt turned into a blessing for the Hebrews, as it allowed them to become free from Egyptian slavery, and to follow their God into the desert. Ephrem writes: ExodCom 11:1: The Lord said, “Let each person ask his friend for vessels of gold and silver (Exod. 11:2) because in the middle of the night the first-born of Egypt and the first-born of cattle will die (Exod. 11:4). And there will be a wailing (Exod. 11:6) in the whole of Egypt as there were wailing in all the He-

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

171

brews’ houses when their children were thrown into the river.” 93

Ephrem’s passage above connects the asking for gold and silver with the death of the first born. Was it a purely practical measure to ask for gold before the death or was there more to it?

THE DYNAMICS OF THE EGYPT AND ISRAEL RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD IN EPHREM ’S EXEGESIS

Illustrating how further actions of God had opposite effects on the people of Israel and the people of Egypt one can look at the story of the actual crossing of the Red Sea. The following passages are the original biblical narrative of the crossing of the Red Sea and the function of the pillar of cloud/fire for the two peoples: Exodus 14:19: And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them: 14:20: And it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel; and it was the cloud and darkness to them, but it gave light by night to these: so that the one came not near the other all night. 14:21: And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. 14:24–25: And it came to pass, that in the morning watch the Lord looked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians. And took off their chariot wheels, that they drove them heavily: so that the Egyptians said, Let us flee from the face of Israel; for the Lord fighteth for them against the Egyptians.

93

ExodCom 11:1, p. 38.

172

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD 14:27–28: And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled against it; and the Lord overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea. And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the hosts of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them. 14:31: And Israel saw the great work which the Lord did upon the Egyptians: and the people feared the Lord, and believed the Lord, and his servant Moses.

In the passage below Ephrem shows that the same action of God through the pillar of cloud, had opposite effects on the two peoples. It was a blessing on Israel and a curse on the Egyptians. This polar dynamic in the relationship between the Egyptians and the Hebrews experiencing God’s actions is much developed during the crossing of the Red Sea. The same action of the Crossing of the Sea also led to opposite outcomes for the two peoples. The crossing of the sea brought the Hebrews to their liberation and a new beginning, while the very same act of crossing the sea by the Egyptians led to and become the ultimate and total loss and the end of the road for them. The contradicting effects from the pillar of cloud are described by Ephrem as a blessing for the Hebrews and a hostile force for the Egyptians. Ephrem writes: ExodCom 14:4: The angel took the pillar of cloud that was in front of them, and placed it between the Hebrew camp and the Egyptians (Exod. 14:19). The cloud had provided shade for the people by day, and when he placed it between the camps at night it produced darkness for the Egyptians like that which had covered them for three days and nights. But for the Israelites it was bright, because the pillar of fire shone on them. 94

94

ExodCom 14:4, p. 44.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

173

The original Hebrew is difficult to understand in the verse of Exodus 14:19. In order to avoid facing difficulties with the problematic verse Ephrem shares his interpretation of it with the Targums and the Jewish Greek translator Symmachus. 95 This instance is a clear illustration that Ephrem’s exegetical heritage shares similarities with Jewish traditions of biblical interpretation. Ephrem further writes: ExodCom 14:4: This happened to frighten the Egyptians and to encourage the Hebrews. If the Egyptians had been chastened by the darkness they would not have dared to go down to the sea. The sea could have been parted in the twinkling of an eye, but to give the Egyptians time to repent, the whole night a scorching wind laboured to drive it back and make it into dry land. 96 (Exod. 14:21)

Ephrem further unfolds the meaning of God’s actions in the interwoven process of Hebrew-Egyptian relationship. While on the surface, Ephrem’s exegesis painted a picture where God’s actions had polar opposite effects on the two peoples commonly resulting in a blessing for the Hebrews and a curse for the Egyptians, there was a deeper significance in the actions of God. For example, the parting of the Red Sea was deliberately delayed for the sake of the Egyptians. Hence, there was an expression of God’s Mercy on the people, which they managed to turn into a disaster by not responding to it accordingly 97. Ephrem’s discussion on repentance could be seen as following from his prior descriptions of the multiple opportunities for Pharaoh’s repentance. In a similar way, each of the Egyptians plagues was seen as a potential opportunity for repentance by See in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), 44. 96 ExodCom 14:4, p. 44. 97 By not repenting and turning to God. 95

174

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Pharaoh, likewise the last one, the splitting of the sea, was the last chance of repentance for Pharaoh and for his people. Therefore, in all the expressions of God’s acts in Egypt, Ephrem sees the signs of God’s care and mercy for Israel, and also for Egypt. Therefore, even the last expression of God’s participation in the lives of the peoples was aiming for the salvation of both the Israelites and the Egyptians. The outcomes of the crossing of the sea for the two peoples could not be more different. For Hebrews it resulted in the fear of and belief in God, and also acceptance of Moses and belief in him as God’s servant 98. For the Egyptians the expectation was repentance, which they rejected. The difference, therefore, lies in people’s reactions and actions to God’s signs. What was similar in every act of Divine involvement in Egypt, through plagues and the splitting of the sea, was the fact that each act was the act of God’s Mercy, according to Ephrem, and not the act of Divine vengeance. Summarising the Divine input and the human outcome in the stories of the plagues and miracles in Egypt, one can observe that there was a clear dynamic in the human-God relationship, which determined the outcome from God’s acts in Egypt. However, as far as the ultimate goal of Divine participation was concerned, it was for the Israelites to believe in their God as well as for the Egyptians. Therefore, it was up to the people to contribute their responses to the acts of God and with these responses to seal their relationship with God. Consequently, the decision of the Egyptians not to repent had a direct implication on the outcome of the events and on their lives. In that sense all the plagues together with the event of the splitting of the sea were the expressions of God’s Mercy in as much as they provided the opportunity for the people to change their fate. What turned the events of God’s Mercy into His Wrath was the deliberate and persistent rejection of God by the Egyptians and Pharaoh. By declining God’s offers to repent, Pharaoh and his people selfimposed the expression of God’s wrath as the outcome of their 98

See Exodus 14:31.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

175

lack of repentance. In their persistence in turning their faces against God the Egyptians were led to the increase of suffering from the plagues and to death in the sea. The whole discussion about repentance of the Egyptians, as indicated earlier in this study, is an important part of Ephrem’s perception of the story of Exodus. The main characters of the narrative are as much the people of Egypt and Pharaoh as Moses and his people. The only difference between these characters is catalysed through their responses to acts of God. There is an affirmation of the title of ‘God of Israel’ through the obedience and trust of the Hebrews. Hence, God remains the ‘God of Israel’ through their actions towards Him. However, there is also an unrevealed potentiality of ‘God of Egypt’. This potentiality was revoked, as seen in the Exodus narrative, through numerous plagues, and until the very last moments before the death of the Egyptians under the sea. This potentiality was never reciprocated and was brought by the Egyptians and their leader to their sea grave. However, what is important for this study is the fact that almost every step of the way Ephrem acknowledges this opportunity for Pharaoh and his people in the following commentaries on the biblical passages: ExodCom 14:5: The Egyptians chased after the Hebrews. They had no fear of the darkness between them and the Hebrews, nor did they tremble because the sea had parted. They charged at night, into the middle of the sea that had parted to fight people before whom travelled the pillar of fire! At the morning watch, the Lord appeared to the Egyptians and threw them into confusion, and bound the wheels of their chariots, either so that they should not pursue the people, or so that they would not escape from the sea (Exod. 14:24–25). But they were not afraid of the Lord who appeared to them,

176

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD nor were they chastened by the blinding of their wheels: they dare to drive their chariots by force. (Exod. 14:25) 99

The first from the above passages clearly relates the notion of fear of God to the notion of salvation, or its reverse in the case of the Egyptians and their perishing as the reverse effect of salvation. ExodCom 14:6: When the sea was divided, Scripture says “Moses raised his hand over the sea (Exod. 14:21). When it returned to its place, it says “Moses let his hand drop over the sea” (Exod. 14:27) 100

It is noted that both verses in the Peshitta have the words “Moses raised his hands over the sea”. In explaining Ephrem’s change of the biblical account there is a suggestion that Ephrem was referring to God’s instructions in Exodus 14:16 101. Another explanation could be seen as Ephrem’s emphasis on the role of Moses in collaboration with God in the relationship between Moses, God and the Egyptians. ExodCom 14:6: So it seems that from the time it was parted until the whole people had passed through, Moses kept his arms outstretched, just as he did later with the battle with Amalek. 102 14:7: The Lord overthrew the Egyptians and not one of them remained. The Hebrews saw the Egyptians lying dead on the sea shore (14:27–28), as the Egyptians had seen the Hebrews’ sons heaped on the river bank. Because of the things that had happened in Egypt and in the sea, the people had faith in the Lord and in Moses his servant (Exod. 14:31). 103

ExodCom, p. 44–45. ExodCom, p. 45. 101 ExodCom, p. 45. 102 ExodCom, p. 45. 103 ExodCom, p. 45. 99

100

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

177

The crossing of the Red Sea and perishing of the Egyptians reaffirmed the faith of the people of Israel. Hence, every event of Exodus was carrying either a curse or a blessing for each of the participants. And the outcomes were solely determined by their respective responses. Ephrem often reminisces on the antinomies/ parallels in the narrations of biblical events. It is almost as if he is emphasising Divine retribution for the deeds of the Egyptians. Most probably, however, he is writing his exegesis in poetic form of repetitions, allusions and comparisons of the events, by paralleling and coupling them with each other, either as antinomies or as coupling circumstantial events leading from one to another in presenting the Divine providence in action. This is his style of biblical exegesis and his unique contribution to the tradition of interpretation of the biblical account of Exodus stories.

THE DIDACTICS OF THE QUR’AN FROM THE BIBLICAL STORIES LEADING TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

Qur’an points out two important factors in the leadership qualities of Moses and Pharaoh. Firstly, Moses took his instructions from God and was obedient to Him. And secondly that the Pharaoh failed his people as a leader and lead them astray from God. Another observation from the verse below is that the people of Moses are called the servants of God. This is an honorary title signifying a special relationship of the Israelites with their God. Q.20:77: We sent an inspiration to Moses: “Travel by night with My servants, and strike a dry path for them through the sea, without fear of being overtaken (by Pharaoh) and without (any other) fear.” 78: Then Pharaoh pursued them with his forces, but the waters completely overwhelmed them and covered them up. 79: Pharaoh led his people astray instead of leading them aright.

Qur’an also dwells on the subject of fear. However, the difference in the Qur’an is that it deals with fear, not from the side of the Egyptians, but from the side of the Hebrews. The accents of the Qur’an’s attention are shifting in this instance, and the projector is focused on the Hebrews. And the encouragement of

178

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

God to the Hebrews is not to have any fear in following God’s path, which was providentially prepared for them in the middle of the splitting sea. The other message of the Qur’an in its exegesis of the biblical story is the conclusion that Pharaoh failed as a leader of his people, which brought him and his flock away from God and, therefore, ultimately to their death. Another Qur’anic passage below refers to the Hebrews as the ‘servants of God’. This verse is significant, as it identifies the whole people who followed Moses as the people of God and His obedient followers: Q.26:52: Then We revealed Our will to Moses, ‘Leave with my servants by night, for you will be pursued!’ 53: Pharaoh sent messengers into the cities, proclaiming, 54: ‘These people are puny band – 55: they have enraged us – 56: and we are a large army, on the alert.’ 57: So it was that We made them leave their gardens and their springs, 58: their treasures and the noble dwellings – 59: We gave [such] things [later] to the Children of Israel. 60: Pharaoh and his people pursued them at sunrise 61: and soon as the two sides came within sight of one another, Moses’ followers said, ‘We shall definitely be caught.’ 62: Moses said, ‘No, my Lord is with me: He will guide me,’ 63: and We revealed to Moses: ‘Strike the sea with your staff.’ It parted – each side like a mighty mountain – 64: and we brought the others to that place: 65: We saved Moses and all his companions, 66: and drowned the rest.

The Qur’anic passage above testifies to the strength of faith of Moses as a leader of the people and as God’s chosen one. In the middle of the attack of the large military force of the Egyptians Moses holds on to his firm belief in God’s protection. The accent of the Qur’an is on Moses being a virtuous believer. Therefore, it is clearly stated in God’s response, that God saves Moses first and foremost and then He saves those who were with him. Although the Israelites are called the servants of God at the beginning of the cited verses, it is God and Moses that are brought forward at the end of the passage. It is God who saves Moses

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

179

and the people with him, and it is also God who draws the Egyptians into the sea and then drowns them. Surah 10 gives further description as to the action of Pharaoh in his pursuit of the Israelites across the sea. The Qur’an indicates the hostility and oppression as the leading emotional forces of Pharaoh. It is only at his final moment while he was drowning that the Pharaoh believes in God and testifies that ‘there is no God but He’, and also Pharaoh testifies to the faith of the children of Israel in their God, and as a third testimony Pharaoh openly testifies to his submission to this God. And God saves the Pharaoh in his body after such a profound testimony of faith. In spite of Pharaoh’s rebellion and a mischief he was granted his life back in order that he becomes a living sign of God 104. Q.10:90: We took the Children of Israel to pass across the sea. Pharaoh and his troops pursued them in arrogance and aggression. But as he was drowning, he cried, ‘I believe there is no God except the one the Children of Israel believe in. I submit to Him.’ 91: ‘Now? When you had always been a rebel, and a trouble maker! 92: Today We shall save only your corpse 105 as a sign to all posterity. A great many people fail to heed Our signs.’

See chapter five of this book on theology of signs in the Qur’an. The Arabic of the verse is ambiguous. It says in Q.10:92 َ ‫ۡک فَال ۡیَوۡم‬ َ ‫ِک �ُ�َ� ِّی‬ َ ‫– ببَِدَن‬ ‘today We shall save you’ (nunajjīka – ‫‘ )�ُ�َ� ِّي‬in your body’ (bibadanika – ‫ك‬ َ ِ ‫)ببَِدَن‬. The first word describing the action of God indicates the act of salvation and rescue. This word is used multiple times in the Qur’an indicating the same. However, the second word, describing what was saves, is only used one more time in the Qur’an (Q.22:36: wal-bud'na – َ‫ )و َال ْب ُ ْدن‬where it describes the lifeless corpses of camels and cattle. Therefore, depending on the emphasis one chooses to put to the verse of Q.10:92, alternative conclusions of its meaning could be reached. If one chooses to emphasise that only the lifeless corpse/body of the Pharaoh was saved, such an understanding could be reached by analogy with the only other use of this word in Q.22:36. Alternatively, one could suggest that Pharaoh’s life was spared with his body, emphasising the understanding of the

104 105

180

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

After such an emphasis on the signs in the Qur’an, it seems important that the whole chapter of this book, chapter five, will be dedicated to the research about the concept of signs in the Qur’an, Ephrem and Rabbinical exegesis.

SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER

In conclusion, this chapter further develops insights into the relationship of God, Moses, Pharaoh, and the peoples of Israel and Egypt as it was presented by the Qur’an, Ephrem and Midrash. It is noteworthy that Ephrem showed the most inclusive depiction of the relationships between Moses, Pharaoh, Israel, Egypt and God. He drew a picture where God is perceived as being concerned for Moses and Israel, as well as for the salvation of Pharaoh and the Egyptians. The Qur’an, detouring from the biblical story, also presents Pharaoh as actually being saved by God from physical death at the Red Sea. There is a difference between Ephrem’s account of the events and the one in the Qur’an. Ephrem reports on the account of the Crossing of the Red Sea events in correlation with the biblical narrative where all the Egyptians die with their Pharaoh. So it looks as if the Qur’an shows more concern about Pharaoh’s life being saved. It is by studying the surrounding events and the implications of either Pharaoh’s death or his life that we understand the reason behind such an ending to the Crossing of the Red Sea stories in the Qur’an and in Ephrem. Ephrem, together with Jewish Midrash, is naturally concerned with following the biblical story as close to the original as possible. Hence, such an important matter of the Pharaoh’s death could not be disregarded. Qur’an, on the other hand, is much freer with the biblical narrative, and often allows significant changes to it. As in the case of Pharaoh’s life being saved, the implication of the Qur’an is that it was a trilateral root (‫ )ن ج و‬often meaning salvation and deliverance in the Qur’an. The emphasis on the salvific effect of God’s actions towards the drowning body of the Pharaoh, therefore, will be used in this study as an alternative meaning of this verse.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

181

consequence of his final action of proclaiming his faith in God. However, because his faith was only evoked before his death, he is not granted salvation, but his life is spared to make Pharaoh into a sign for further generations. Although the endings of the stories of the Crossing the Sea of the Qur’an and Ephrem are different, the lesson from their exegesis is similar. Both sources emphasise the implications that one’s actions bear on one’s relationship with God. Hence, the actions of Pharaoh in both accounts of the events led to certain actions by God. The final proclamation of faith by Pharaoh led to God sparing his life in the Qur’an, and the persistent rebellion of Pharaoh against God led to his death in the Red sea in Ephrem. What is important to emphasise here, is that although Pharaoh’s life was spared in the Qur’an, there is no indication that Pharaoh received salvation from God. In fact, the implication is that he did not, and therefore, only his physical life was granted back to him as a sign to the people. Ephrem, on the other hand, goes to great lengths in his exegesis to suggest that God’s concern was as much for Pharaoh and the Egyptians as it was for Moses and the Hebrews. What is also significant in the chapter above is that all of the sources at hand dwell on the question of free will in the story of the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh. Ephrem and Midrash offer exegetical exercises, which give theological and philosophical explanations of the matter. The unison concern of Midrash and Ephrem is to emphasise that Pharaoh’s free will was not compromised. Qur’an, on the other hand, again steps outside the biblical narrative in order to present its account on the matter of Pharaoh’s heart. Qur’an reinvents the biblical narrative and offers the explanation of God hardening the heart of Pharaoh as his response to the requests by Moses. In this way the Qur’an diverts from the theological question of Jewish and Christian exegetes in solving the problem of God interfering or not interfering with the freedom of will of Pharaoh. Instead, the Qur’an localises the question of the hardening of the heart of the Pharaoh to the request of Moses. Therefore, it is not an omnipresent decision of Divine origin to harden the heart of Pharaoh, but the response of God to Moses’ prayer. In this manner the Qur’an avoids dealing with the theological or philosophical di-

182

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

lemma of the Jewish and Christian exegetes, and presents its anthropological solution to the question. It is, therefore, by implication that Pharaoh’s free will is detached from Divine involvement, and relocated into the hands of the man, Moses, who becomes the main executor of the matter of the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh. What can be derived from the examples offered in this chapter of the book is the clear indication that Ephrem and Midrash are using biblical narrative as guidelines to their exegesis. They are to a certain extent bound by the narrative of the OT. The Qur’an, on the other hand, exercises the liberty of detouring from the narrative of the Bible to the extent of occasionally changing the biblical endings of the stories, as in the case of Pharaoh’s death at the sea, or changing the nuances, as in the case of God hardening the heart of the Pharaoh as an answer to Moses’ request. The latter nuanced changing of the original narrative is not alien to Jewish or Christian exegesis, and occasionally Midrash and Ephrem put in their exegesis a narrative outside the biblical text of the Old Testament. This was demonstrated in this study in chapter one where both Ephrem and Midrash offered additional material about Jochebed, the mother of Moses. Therefore, as far as adding new material to the biblical narrative, the Qur’an could be seen as going along with the Jewish-Christian exegetical tradition. The difference between the Qur’anic approach and the Jewish-Christian tradition of exegesis is that the Qur’an goes one step further outside the biblical narrative by not treating the OT as an ultimate canonical or scriptural authority. Therefore, the Qur’an often provides its own narrative, which could be seen as an alternative one to the ‘original’ biblical story. However, as far as the Moses’ stories in the Qur’an are concerned, the discoveries of this study are able to establish an organic collaborative effort in reading the OT passages in the Qur’an when the biblical story is not compromised, but further enriched by the respective exegesis of the above mentioned sources. Hence, the writings of the Qur’an, when one looks at them alongside the Jewish and Christian exegesis of the original biblical text, fit into the common traditional approach of Jewish-Christian exegetical writings.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

183

The above argument contributes to the main goal and the subject matter of this book, which aims to offer a case study of continuous reading of the biblical stories of Moses in the OT in the context of Jewish-Christian exegesis and the writings of the Qur’an. Thus the chapter tested the main argument of this study, that is whether one can treat the biblically related passages in the Qur’an as part of the commonly developed 106 exegetical tradition of the OT, which was initially of Judeo-Christian origin, and which could have been adopted by the Qur’an in its presentation of original biblical material. The collaboration of the Qur’an with the writings of the Midrash was found during the course of the research in this chapter. For example, one of the prominent definitions of God in the Qur’an could be seen as being a part of the exegetical formulas of Midrash. Consequently, this study pointed to the gradual development of the concept of ‘The Lord of the Worlds’ throughout the biblical traditions of exegesis across the Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic narratives. The fact that Ephrem’s and biblical narratives do not use the definitions of the Lord of the Worlds in their narratives of the Moses-Pharaoh encounters can possibly indicate that in this instance such a definition was still assumed as a part of oral tradition of biblical exegesis, which was vocalised by Midrash Rabbah and the Qur’an consequently.

CONCLUSION OF THE CHAPTER

Being a mid-way chapter in this book it already indicates the possibility of sketching the end results of the current study. The collection of the evidentiary support from the selected biblical and exegetical texts of the current chapter provides half of the research in this book, and therefore could indicate a continuity of concluding remarks in this study. First of all, the general methodology of the research in this book has proved to work well so far as each chapter, including the current one, succeeded in implementing it. For this reason, 106

Across three monotheistic religions, i.e. Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

184

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

this methodological approach can be pursued further and can be recommended for the use of others. The exercise of reading the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an along-side the biblical stories of the Old Testament gives the current research its structure and continuity. Secondly, exegetical sources selected for this study preserve direct links to the biblical narrative, as in the case of the Midrash and Ephrem, or to the oral tradition of it, as in the case of the Qur’an 107. Staying linked with each other through the narrative of the Old Testament, the respective exegetical sources also exhibit a number of textual evidences in support of the argument that the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an are connected to each other through their exegesis of the OT narrative. Their connection is derived from similarities of thought in asking the same questions and presenting similar answers to them, from the use of similar phrases and concepts in the relation to the stories of Moses in the biblical narrative. Textual examples in this chapter offered their illustrations of the similarities between the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an in presenting their exegetical stories of Moses’ and Pharaoh’s first encounter. Reporting on the first meeting of Moses with Pharaoh, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an could be seen as working in unison in their analysis of the biblical stories. For example, all of the selected sources chose to develop the idea of the power struggle between Moses and Pharaoh. Naturally the origin of this idea is in the biblical text. For this reason, in picking up on the biblical lead and developing it further with their exegesis, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an already show their connection via the biblical text of the OT narrative. Additionally the findings of the research in this chapter take the argument of this book to the next level by collecting the evidence The question of whether there was availability of the written account of the Old Testament during the time of the emergence of the Qur’an is left outside of the scope of this research. Therefore, without excluding the possibility of the OT in Arabic in eight century CE, the certainty of the oral biblical tradition is taken as a basic starting point. 107

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

185

illustrating that the selected exegetical sources are connected to each other as well as to the biblical narrative of the OT. In order to support the idea that the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an are connected to each other exegetically, the study of Moses’ testimonies about God was conducted in their respective writings. In doing so the biblical question of Pharaoh ‘Who is the Lord’ of Exodus 5:2 was taken as a starting point for the analysis in this chapter. From this question, a comparison of the answers of Pharaoh was examined in passages of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. As an outcome of the conducted study the following conclusions were derived. First of all, the fact that all of the exegetical sources picked up on the same question from Pharaoh and offered their answers to it, was an indication of their working collaboratively. Secondly, there was clear evidence from the Qur’an in presenting its answers to the question ‘Who is the Lord’ and developing the question exegetically differently from ‘Who is the Lord of the Worlds’. Such an exegetical development of the biblical question by the Qur’an indicated that the Qur’an introduced a definition of ‘God of Israel’ as the ‘Lord of the Worlds’. One cannot find traces of this definition in Ephrem’s Commentaries on Exodus or in the biblical narrative of Exodus. However there is a trace of this definition in the Midrash. The exegesis of the Midrash introduces this phrase exactly at the moment when describing the first meeting of Moses and Pharaoh. However the difference with the Midrashic introduction of the phrase the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ is the fact that this definition is not used directly as being related to the definition of God. With this definition the Midrash characterises Pharaoh. Nonetheless by looking closely into the context of the Midrashic passage, the definition of the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ could be applied to the God of Israel indirectly. Therefore the outcome from the comparison of the use of the phrasing the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ in the exegesis of Midrash and Qur’an showed that both sources use the same phrasing in their recollections of the first meeting of Moses and Pharaoh. The difference in the use of this phrasing in the texts of the Midrash and the Qur’an lies in the popularity of the concept, which this phrase represents. The Midrash only samples this phrase in

186

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

its exegesis of Exodus. The Qur’an on the other hand, makes the phrase into a prominent concept and the featuring definition of God throughout the whole scope of its corpus. Looking at the pattern of use of the phrase the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ in the Qur’an, one can observe that many of these verses in the Qur’an have a biblical context. This observation leads to the conclusion in this chapter that the definition of God as the ‘Lord of the Worlds’ in the Qur’an has biblical origins. But since the phrase ‘Lord of the worlds’ does not actually feature in the biblical narrative of Exodus, the natural development of thought leads to the conclusion that the origins of the phrase the ‘Lord of the World’ in the Qur’an are Midrashic, and most probably reached the Qur’anic text via oral tradition of biblical exegesis. In analysing the similarities between the Midrash and Ephrem, the study in the current chapter looked into their respective methodologies in building their exegetical connections between the question of the Pharaoh ‘Who is the Lord’ and the Plagues of Egypt. Both Midrash and Ephrem make an attempt to explain the direct link between Pharaoh’s question and the plagues. This is an indication of the similarities in their exegesis. Their differences lie in the line of argument, which they use to reach similar conclusions. While Midrash uses gematria as an exegetical technique of finding numerical values of letters and builds its exegesis based on it, Ephrem uses the concept of signs as a connecting link between the plagues and the question of Pharaoh. It is very important for this study to notice Ephrem using the concept of signs in this way, as a whole chapter in this book is devoted to the theology of the signs in the Bible, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. For the conclusion of this chapter however, the concept of signs and the process of asking for signs from God is important, as both Ephrem and the Midrash dwell on it in their exegesis of the first communication between Moses and Pharaoh. The didactics of the Midrash and Ephrem could seem as being different on the matter of asking questions to God. However if one looks into their line of argument analytically, one might pick many similarities in their respective writings. For example, although Ephrem blames Pharaoh for asking the question, the

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

187

reason for Ephrem’s criticism is not about asking God as such. Ephrem blames Pharaoh for asking the wrong question. Pharaoh’s error, according to Ephrem’s exegesis, was the fact that he did not ask for God’s signs first, but instead questioned His authority. A similar line of argument can be seen in the Midrash when it justifies Pharaoh’s attempt to ask for God’s signs. On the basis of Pharaoh’s question, the Midrash builds its argument legitimising the process of questioning God on the basis of many OT patriarchs also doing so. On the other hand, Midrash does not support Moses in questioning God. Thus again both Midrash and Ephrem while discussing the matter of Moses and Pharaoh, emphasise the legitimacy of asking for signs from God, but do not support daring and bold questions addressed to God. Such an exegetical similarity of drawing complementary didactics from the biblical story of the Moses-Pharaoh encounters, is yet another indication of Ephrem and the Midrash being united by the common tradition of biblical exegesis. There are also variations in Ephrem’s and the Midrashic presentations. For example the fact that, according to Ephrem, the Pharaoh does not ask for signs from God, but according to the Midrash he does. However the didactics behind the exegesis of both on the matter of Pharaoh’s questioning God is that both sources justify the process of asking for signs from God and promote this as proper conduct in one’s relationship with God. Therefore the didactical message of the Midrash and Ephrem, which they derive from the question of Pharaoh, ‘Who is the Lord’, unite their respective exegesis and allow the highlighting of their united exegetical position in the conclusion of this chapter. The question of the outcomes from the choices of the Hebrews and the Egyptians gave a solid platform for comparative studies in this chapter. For example, according to Ephrem the Hebrews and the Egyptians stand equally in front of their chances for repentance and salvation. However the different choices of the two peoples in conducting their relationship with God lead to different outcomes. Thus the Hebrews follow God and are led by Him to salvation, while the Egyptians reject their salvation and perish. The Qur’an calls the Hebrews the servants

188

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

of God, and describes God encouraging the people to leave fear aside in their pursuit of faith. Hence the Qur’an could be seen as depicting the Hebrews as the people of God and as His obedient followers, and thus staying in-tune with the Midrash and Ephrem’s portrayal of the people. The difference in the Qur’an in depicting the ending of the Egyptians and their leader is in the fact that, according to the Qur’anic narrative, Pharaoh’s life is spared at the last minute before his drowning. Therefore in sharing much of the exegesis with Ephrem and the Midrash, one can notice that on occasions the Qur’an steps away from the biblical narrative in order to demonstrate its own narrative. This follows on to the Qur’anic biblical exegesis stepping away from the writings of the common tradition of biblical exegesis. This is not a matter of slight variations, which the Midrash and Ephrem allow in their exegesis, but this is the matter of the Qur’an establishing its authority as an alternative to the biblical authority. Therefore in this particular question of spiritual authority, the message of the Qur’an could be seen as being different to the message of the Midrash and Ephrem, as neither of the latter sources would attempt to challenge the authority of the biblical narrative. The Qur’an on the other hand does not openly challenge the biblical narrative, but it does offer an alternative ending to the biblical story. This could qualify as an indirect challenge to biblical authority as being a Sacred Scripture, which is the definition mutually accepted by the Midrash and Ephrem, but not necessarily by the Qur’an. Another exercise in this chapter was to follow the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an in the process of their explanations of the biblical phrase about God hardening the heart of Pharaoh. The analysis of their respective exegetical endeavours on the matter gave a powerful illustration in support of the main argument of this research, which attempts to connect the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an under the broad umbrella term of the common tradition of biblical exegesis, which spreads across the three monotheistic religions. The fact that in the instance of the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh, all three selected sources make an attempt to explain the reality behind the process of the hardening of the Pharaoh’s heart, already connects them exeget-

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

189

ically. Ephrem and the Midrash use a theological line of argument to make sure, and demonstrate that Pharaoh’s freedom of choice and his free will was not jeopardised in the process. The Qur’an, on the other hand, shies away from the theological argument on the matter and instead slightly changes the biblical narrative in order to build up a different context to the story of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. According to the Qur’an, it is Moses who prays to God and asks God to harden the heart of the Pharaoh. For this reason, Pharaoh’s heart is hardened, but it is done because of the will of Moses, and not because of God’s choosing. What unites the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an is their determination to justify God’s actions in the instance of the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh. However they differ in choosing their paths in reaching their results. Further summarising the study of the episode of the hardening of the heart of the Pharaoh, the answer to the question ‘who was responsible for the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart’ presents a different set of answers from each of the respective sources. The Midrash clearly advocates the responsibility of Pharaoh acting according to his free will, and stating that his heat was already hardened by his own free choice and decision. Ephrem also advocates that by sinning and repenting afterwards, Pharaoh demonstrated his free capacity for change and remorse. Hence the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh could not be the responsibility of God, because if it was from God, Pharaoh would lose his ability to change the disposition of his heart, and consequently to repent. The Qur’an could be seen as standing apart from the Midrash and Ephrem on the subject of the Pharaoh’s ability to use free will and free choice. The difference in the Qur’an is that it does not give any explanation as to whether the free will of Pharaoh was compromised in the act of God hardening his heart. But what the Qur’an clearly does in its exegesis of the biblical incident is that it shifts the responsibility for hardening of the heart of Pharaoh from God to Moses. In doing so the Qur’an could be seen as portraying the power of one’s petition to God. Hence the story of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart in the Qur’an could be summarised as the story of Moses using his privileged access in communicating with God as

190

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

a disadvantage to Pharaoh. Hence Moses influences God and asks for Pharaoh’s affliction. Further illustrations of the dynamics in the relationship between Moses and Pharaoh, and between Egypt and Israel, in this chapter were useful in supporting the main argument of this study. The analysis of the research in this chapter leads to the following conclusions. The Midrash is often seen judging the actions of Moses and Pharaoh according to their attitude to the suffering of the people of Israel. Hence the status of the people of Israel is unprecedented in the Midrash. Although the Qur’an often writes about Israel as a chosen people and the special people before God’s eyes, it also does not shy away from mentioning the transgressions of the people. And neither does the Midrash, especially in stating that some of the people of Israel were idolatrous in Egypt. In doing so the Midrash reaffirms the chosen status of the people of Israel, which was only made possible because of the virtues of its Patriarchs. Therefore according to the Midrash, Israel is under a predisposition of experiencing God’s attribute of Mercy, while Egypt could be experiencing God’s Judgement, even occasionally on Israel’s behalf. What needs to be highlighted here is that the Midrash and the Qur’an allow a great deal of attention to the people of Israel while commenting on Israel’s highs and lows. God’s attributes of Mercy and Justice are prominent concepts in the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Therefore this could be seen as another unifying concept for the respective writings which could be seen as connecting them exegetically. The portrayal of Moses in the Midrash and the Qur’an made an interesting illustration in this chapter. The Midrash often compares Moses and Pharaoh, and Moses’ portrayal is not often victorious in comparison to Pharaoh’s. The Qur’an’s comparison of Moses with Israel also showed Moses in a disadvantageous light. Israel is depicted as more spiritual than Moses in their indirect encounters with God. It is shown in the Qur’an that God pitches high spiritual expectations from the people, while Moses lowers the elevated mode of the Israel-God encounters. In other places in the Qur’an, Moses is portrayed as a virtuous believer, and so is the case in the Midrash.

3. PREPARATION TO THE CROSSING OF THE RED SEA

191

In portraying Pharaoh, the Midrash could be seen as writing in unison with the Qur’an about the repetitive pattern of Pharaoh turning back to his wicked ways after the plagues were over. Both sources pay close attention to the repetition in Pharaoh’s behaviour under the influence of the plagues and draw similar conclusions. Therefore the response of the Midrash and the Qur’an to Pharaoh’s repentance under the influence of the plagues, amount to their similar respective conclusions invalidating Pharaoh’s sincerity in his remorse. Hence both the Midrash and the Qur’an summarise their didactics from the instance into a message about the short-lived remorse, which is influenced by physical suffering, but which is also short-lived after the suffering is over. The overall impression from the research in this chapter is that the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an could be considered as being connected by developing their biblical exegesis of the first Moses’ encounter with Pharaoh in unison. Therefore their exegesis could be united under the umbrella term of the common tradition of biblical commentaries. This common tradition is biblical in its origin, but is also cross-influential between the various exegetical sources. Thus the earlier tradition of Jewish and Christian biblical exegesis could be seen as influential in the biblical exegesis of the Qur’an. Therefore at this point in the research, by collecting many illustrations, the argument that the commonality in the exegetical tradition between the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an is not solely based on each source being closely linked to the biblical narrative of the Old Testament, is well supported. As the evidential examples in this chapter indicate, exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an often share common exegetical approaches to the biblical narrative, ask similar questions, share non-biblically based information, and consequently draw similar conclusions from their exegesis on the biblical verses. The following chapter of this book will further this study into the story of Moses receiving the Law on the Mount of Sinai.

CHAPTER 4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE The main question to be considered in this chapter is the nature of the God-Israel relationship and the account of it in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Therefore the exegesis of the selected sources will be considered and the God-Israel relationship through the prism of the reception of the Law. 1 Subsequently the following biblical concepts will be examined in the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an: God carrying Israel on eagle’s wings; Israel being God’s treasured possessions; and Israel being called for a kingdom of priests and a holy nation 2. The appearance of these concepts will be analysed in the selected passages from the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an, and the conclusions about their respective position with regard to the God-Israel relationship pre and after the reception of the law will be investigated. Also, the question of the vocation of the people of Israel and God’s expectations for them after giving them the Law will be discussed. Consequently, the possibility for the exegetical dialogue between the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an will be considered based on their commentaries on the biblical story of Moses receiving the Law. Within the scope of the research in this chapter the presentation of the Qur’an on The stories of Israel and the Golden Calf will not be covered in this book. They deserve a full manuscript written about them. Therefore, there is a strong possibility that the author’s next book will be covering these stories. 2 All of these concepts are derived from Exodus 19:4–6. 1

193

194

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

the chosen status of the people of Israel will be considered in dialogue with the biblical narrative of Exodus. As an illustration of the interaction between the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an, the notion of the ‘wood’ and its exegetical meanings in the writings of the Midrash and Ephrem will also be explored in this chapter. The ability of people to see God and the exegesis of it in the Qur’an will be considered as it compares to the presentations of Ephrem. The ten commandments as presented in the biblical narrative, Exodus 20:1–17, will be surveyed in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The exegesis of the first two commandments of Monotheism and the ethical principles of the Decalogue will be explored in the selected passages. Special attention will be given to the commandment of ‘love of neighbours’, and the different interpretations of this commandment will be explored across the three Abrahamic faiths. Under the theme of the ten commandments the concept of a ‘Jealous God’ will be explored, as well as more general questions of the definitions of God. The overall objective in this chapter will therefore be to look at the presentation of the Decalogue and the surrounding issues pre and post the reception of the Law in the exegetical traditions of Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic origin. In doing so identifying the common themes and notions will help to determine the extent to which the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an present a collaborative effort of offering their exegesis on the matter. Therefore, the question of the exegetical contributions of one religious tradition to the other will be open for discussion. In doing so the hidden dialogues, apologetics, and the possible influences between the respective traditions of biblical exegesis will be identified and unravelled. The usual place to start the discussion in each chapter of this book will be the biblical text, which is offered as a background introduction for the reception of the Law story.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

195

AT THE FOOT OF MOUNT SINAI: A NEW FOUNDATION FOR GOD’S RELATIONSHIP WITH HIS PEOPLE

The background story of God singling out the people on the Mount Sinai and bestowing His blessings on them, as depicted in the Exodus narrative of chapter 19, describes the process of God guarding His people and His relationship with them subject to a number of conditions. The closeness proposed by God in his covenant relationship with His people was an offer, which could be rewarding if the people were actively fulfilling their part of the relationship. The conditions are described in the passage below as obedience and fulfilling the covenant: Exodus 19:1: In the third month after the Israelites left Egypt – on the very day – they came to the Desert of Sinai. 3: Then Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the house of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4: ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5: Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6: you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

‫מר ֤כֹּה‬ ֹ ֔ ‫ן־ה ָ ֣הר ֵלא‬ ָ ‫�הים וַ יִּ ְק ָ ֨רא ֵא ָל֤יו יְ הוָ ֙ה ִמ‬ ֑ ִ ‫ל־ה ֱא‬ ָ ‫וּמ ֶ ֹ֥שׁה ָﬠ ָ ֖לה ֶא‬ ‫יִשׂ ָר ֵ ֽאל׃‬ ְ ‫ֹאמ ֙ר ְל ֵב֣ית יַ ֲﬠ ֔קֹב וְ ַת ֵגּ֖יד ִל ְב ֵנ֥י‬ ַ ‫ת‬ ‫ל־כּנְ ֵפ֣י‬ ַ ‫יתי ְל ִמ ְצ ָ ֑ריִ ם וָ ֶא ָ ֤שּׂא ֶא ְת ֶכ ֙ם ַﬠ‬ ִ ‫יתם ֲא ֶ ֥שׁר ָﬠ ִ ֖שׂ‬ ֶ֔ ‫ ַא ֶ ֣תּם ְר ִא‬4 ‫נְ ָשׁ ִ ֔רים וָ ָא ִ ֥בא ֶא ְת ֶכ֖ם ֵא ָ ֽלי׃‬ ‫יתם ִ ֤לי‬ ֶ ‫יתי וִ ְה ִ֨י‬ ֑ ִ ‫ת־בּ ִר‬ ְ ‫וּשׁ ַמ ְר ֶ ֖תּם ֶא‬ ְ ‫עוּ ְבּק ֔ ִֹלי‬ ֙ ‫ם־שׁ ֤מ ַוֹ� ִתּ ְשׁ ְמ‬ ָ ‫וְ ַﬠ ָ֗תּה ִא‬5 ‫ל־ה ָ ֽא ֶרץ׃‬ ָ ‫י־לי ָכּ‬ ֖ ִ ‫ל־ה ַﬠ ִ֔מּים ִכּ‬ ֣ ָ ‫ְסגֻ ָלּ ֙ה ִמ ָכּ‬ ‫יוּ־לי ַמ ְמ ֶ ֥ל ֶכת כּ ֲֹה ִנ֖ים וְ ג֣ וֹי ָק ֑דוֹשׁ ֵ ֚א ֶלּה ַה ְדּ ָב ִ ֔רים ֲא ֶ ֥שׁר‬ ֛ ִ ‫וְ ַא ֶ ֧תּם ִתּ ְה‬6 ‫ל־בּ ֵנ֥י יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵ ֽאל׃‬ ְ ‫ְתּ ַד ֵ ֖בּר ֶא‬ The biblical narrative of Exodus 19 describes God’s initiative to bring Israel to the next level in the God-Israel relationship. This new status for Israel is introduced by God who grants Israel the title of the ‘holy nation and the kingdom of priests’. God reas-

196

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

sures Israel by stating that his care for his people was for every step of their way, and that God was closely protecting the people as if carrying them on eagle’s wings. Such a poetic reminder from God to his people was vocalised again after their exodus from Egypt. The time was chosen by God when the people were starting to forget the bigger picture of their exodus. It is possible that the hardships in the desert were finally catching up with them and the bigger picture of working on further advancing the God-Israel relationship was getting blurred. This is the time when God addressed His people again, and challenged them to a new level in their relationship. This new level meant God imposing a number of conditions on His people, which was total obedience to God and the keeping of the covenant. The fruit of the relationship between the people and their God was the status of Israel as a chosen one for and by God, and also as a holy nation and/or as a kingdom of priests. This signifies a continuous priestly service of Israel to God and an on-going spiritual and constitutional relationship of the people with their God. The vocation of the people, as outlined by God to Moses was a vocation of service, and the basis of this vocation was obedience to God and to the conditions of the covenant. The biblical passage above is concluded with a powerful seal indicating that these words were clearly a Divine direction to Israel on mount Sinai, which Moses was obliged to communicate to the people. Several emphases of the biblical passage above will be further investigated in the course of this chapter. The phrase (1.) ‘I carried you on an eagles’ wings’, and another one from God’s speech directed to Israel, as (2.) ‘You will be My treasured possessions’, which is followed by (3.) ‘You will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation’. While looking at these clauses from the biblical passage it is possible to dissect the dynamics of the God-Israel relationship, which God proposed to them through Moses. The first selected clause ‘I carried you on eagle’s wings’ is a fact, while the second and third are pre-conditioned. Israel can only remain God’s ‘treasured possession’ and the ‘kingdom of priests and a holy nation’ if the people obey God fully and keep the covenant. This indicates the stage in the God-

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

197

Israel relationship when God imposes His expectation on the people. The expectation of total trust is one of them, which is indicated by total obedience. The other expectation of God for the people is a proactive contribution to the relationship through such conduct of their lives, which is constituted by the covenant. The goal of this new stage in the God-Israel relationship is for the people to reach the Divine state of holiness that is to bring sanctity into their lives, which potentially could unite the people and God even more. Beginning this chapter on such a powerful and highly pitched note sets the whole narration of the reception of the Law on mount Sinai as a significant and powerful experience for the people. It is clear from the biblical narrative that the outcome of this encounter with God was laying a foundation, on which the future of Israel was going to be built. The intensity and the responsibility of the people for their fate was therefore, of enormous magnitude. In the presence of their Lord, Israel was taking an active stand for their future. Their present situation was inspired by their recent dramas and tribulations, while their future was laid out as an outstanding and unprecedented collaboration with their God in service and in obedience to Him. It is therefore important to see how the studied sources perceived these biblical verses of Exodus and what accents they put into their exegetical narratives of the story. The chapter will follow the above-mentioned biblical narrative and will bring perspectives on it from the writings of Ephrem, rabbinical sources, and from the Qur’an. Below is the brief summary of what is going to be unfolded in this chapter. Firstly, the biblical narrative of Exodus 19 will be studied. In doing so God’s initiative to bring Israel to the next level in the God-Israel relationship will be analysed, and the concepts of ‘holy nation’ and ‘kingdom of priests’ in relation to Israel will be considered. This will be followed by Ephrem’s presentation of the biblical narrative. The following themes of his exegesis will be discussed. Ephrem wrote a prelude to mount Sinai in the desert by bringing the Cross/Christology into the picture. Also the way he approaches ‘kingdom of priests/holy nation’ and ‘eagles wings’ in accordance with the Jewish tradition of the Targumim

198

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

will be illustrated. In looking at the passages from the Qur’an, its accents on the process of God choosing Israel among other people will be highlighted. Also the illustrations in the Qur’an in its descriptions of God raising kings and prophets from Israel will be analysed in relation to the biblical verses which mention kings and priests. Overall, the possibility of the dialogue between the selected sources will be considered as far as the concepts of ‘eagle’s wings’ and the ‘chosen nation’ are concerned, as well as their respective exegesis of ‘the wood’, and Israel’s ability to see God among others. In Ephrem’s writing the following passage clearly identifies him as a Christian exegete, and also manages to encapsulate his theological points of preference in the matter of the God-Israel relationship. What seems to be important for Ephrem in depicting the process of the development in the God-Israel relationship is that there were clearly supernatural influences from God while leading Israel in that process. God transforms the waters, so that through the power of the ‘tree’ human nature could be transformed. Here one can see a possible allusion to the baptismal waters transforming the nature of people as well as the clear Christological allusions to the Cross and to the transformation of life through it. On the other hand, Ephrem emphasises below a clear position of Israel in her relationship with God. There is a mutuality in that relationship when Israel takes a stand in the relationship with God as a free subject, and the relationship is developed through the process of collaboration between the law and the freedom of choice. Ephrem writes the following: ExodCom 24:1: When he had transformed the water, he gave them laws (Exod. 15:25), that the power of the tree should transform human nature, and law should entice and persuade freewill. 3

3

ExodCom 24:1, p. 49–50.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

199

Ephrem begins his narration of Israel’s reception of the Law from the story of the waters of Marah in the desert as found in the biblical narrative below: Exodus 15:24–27: So the people grumbled against Moses, saying, “What are we to drink?” Then Moses cried out to the Lord and the Lord showed him a piece of wood. He threw it into the water, and the water became sweet. There the Lord made a decree and a law for them, and there he tested them. He said, “If you listen carefully to the voice of the Lord your God and do what is right in his eyes, if you pay attention to his commands and keep all his decrees, I will not bring on you any of the diseases I brought on the Egyptians, for I am the Lord, who heals you.”

‫מר ַמה־נִּ ְשׁ ֶ ֽתּה׃‬ ֹ ֖ ‫וַ יִּ �֧ נוּ ָה ָ ֛ﬠם ַﬠל־מ ֶ ֹ֥שׁה ֵלּא‬ ‫ל־ה ַ֔מּיִ ם ַוֽ יִּ ְמ ְתּ ֖קוּ‬ ַ ‫יּוֹרהוּ יְ הוָ ֙ה ֔ ֵﬠץ וַ יַּ ְשׁ ֵל ֙� ֶא‬ ֤ ֵ ַ‫הוה ו‬ ֗ ָ ְ‫וַ יִּ ְצ ַ ֣ﬠק ֶאל־י‬25 ‫וּמ ְשׁ ָ ֖פּט וְ ָ ֥שׁם נִ ָ ֽסּהוּ׃‬ ִ ‫ַה ָ ֑מּיִ ם ָ ֣שׁם ָ ֥שׂם ל֛ וֹ ֥חֹק‬ ‫�הי� וְ ַהיָּ ָ ֤שׁר ְבּ ֵﬠינָ ֙יו‬ ֶ֗ ‫הו֣ה ֱא‬ ָ ְ‫ם־שׁ ֨מ ַוֹ� ִתּ ְשׁ ַ֜מע ְל ֣קוֹל׀ י‬ ָ ‫אמר֩ ִא‬ ֶ ֹ ‫וַ יּ‬26 ‫ל־ה ַ ֽמּ ֲח ֞ ָלה ֲא ֶשׁר־‬ ַ ‫ל־ח ָ ֑קּיו ָ ֽכּ‬ ֻ ‫וֹתיו וְ ָשׁ ַמ ְר ָ ֖תּ ָכּ‬ ָ֔ ‫ַתּ ֲﬠ ֶ֔שׂה וְ ַ ֽה ֲאזַ נְ ָ֙תּ ְל ִמ ְצ‬ ‫הו֖ה ר ְֹפ ֶ ֽא�׃ ס‬ ָ ְ‫א־א ִ ֣שׂים ָﬠ ֔ ֶלי� ִ ֛כּי ֲא ִ ֥ני י‬ ָ ֹ ‫ַ ֤שׂ ְמ ִתּי ְב ִמ ְצ ַ ֨ריִ ֙ם ל‬ It becomes apparent from this text that at that moment in time the relationship between God and Israel was still ‘work in progress’. Hence, the tone of God’s communication is reward and punishment; that is if you are good you get the reward and lack of punishment, while the danger of the punishment remains if you are bad. God at that point in Israel’s history is the healer, leading Israel further and to a higher state in the God-Israel relationship, which is yet to be vocalised at the foot of Mount Sinai. The biblical passage above gives clear instructions to people on the path to building a relationship with God. They are encouraged to listen to God and to do right by Him, to pay attention to the commandments and to keep His decrees. Such instructions testify to the infancy of the Israel relationship to God, whilst also clearly picturing the process of potential growth in that relationship through Israel taking an active part in it by following pro-active deeds of listening, acting, paying attention and preserving.

200

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Further commenting about Israel’s path from crossing the Sea to the reception of the Law, Ephrem clearly brings Christ into the picture. Ephrem sees a unique opportunity at this point to bring typology of the Cross into the biblical story of Moses. It is a significant event in Ephrem’s exegesis of Exodus, as it is not often that he chooses to use Christological allusions in his Exodus exegesis. ExodCom 24:1: When they had crossed the sea, God wanted to test them by withholding water. They complained angrily about the water at Mauret, and God showed Moses a tree. He threw it into the water and it became sweet (Exod. 15:23–25). The tree was a symbol of the Cross, by which the bitterness of the nations was going to be sweetened. 4

The passage above is one of only two times in Ephrem’s commentaries on Exodus when he mentions the Cross. Therefore, these two places must have been crucially significant for Ephrem. In this instance he refers to the nations who are to be converted to Christianity. But it is also quite possible that he refers to the Jews who at his time were ‘bitter to Christ’, and Ephrem’s ambition and therefore possible target audience for his OT commentaries could have been the Jews of his time. Again Ephrem vocalises the supernatural and transformative qualities of the people’s contact with the Cross when the people’s lives are transformed for the better in the same manner as the waters of the river became sweet. The significance of the tree was also used by the Jewish exegetes. However, they ascribed different typological significance to it. In Targum Pseudo-Johnathan there is a picture of a bitter Oleander tree, which is thrown into the water, and the effect of this action is transformative to the water due to the Divine Name being carved on the tree. In the Targum Neofiti the words of the Torah were cast into the water and transformed the bitterness of it into sweetness. In Mekhilta 5, 4 5

ExodCom 24:1, p. 49. Vayessa’ 1:2I, p. 92.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

201

Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai indicates that God showed Moses only one word from the Torah, and it had a transformative effect 6. What is important to highlight here is the apologetic effect in these exegetical writings. There seems to be a clear dialogue of typological interpretation here. And it is clearly seen in the example of the wood in the Moses’ story. All of the sources above emphasise the significance of the wood and make an attempt to give a typological interpretation of it. Since the wood of the Cross became such a powerful type in Christianity, the Jewish sources are filling their typology with no less powerful interpretations of the Torah, as the word of God, or the Divine Name, the tetragrammaton, with which God revealed Himself to Moses at the Burning Bush. Coming back to Ephrem’s writings, the illustration below is used to strengthen the point of Christological significance of the wood, or of the staff, in the biblical narrative about Moses. Below is another instance when Ephrem vocalises the strength of the wooden staff during the battle with Amalek when Moses was holding the staff and stood with raised arms in order for Israel to prevail in the battle: ExodCom 27:2: After these events Amalek came to fight them and Joshua went out to oppose him (Exod. 17:8). Moses ascended the mountain with the staff of God in his hand. Moses only held the staff on the occasion of mighty deeds and miracles, so that you would know that it was the sign of the Cross, and that it was through the power of the Cross that he performed all the miracles. Aaron and Hur went up with Moses… 7

This is another instance when Ephrem allows Christological interpretations in his Exodus’ commentaries. And in this case also he uses the typology of the Cross. See also the footnote in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), p. 49. 7 ExodCom 27:2, p. 51. 6

202

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

The following passage from Ephrem’s commentaries will bring the study of this chapter to the initially identified notions, which the biblical narrative of Exodus 19 suggested. Reflecting on the symbolism of God carrying Israel as if on an eagles’ wings Ephrem writes the following: ExodCom 19:1: In the third month, forty five days after leaving Egypt, Moses went up to the mountain of God, and God said to him, “You all saw what I did to the Egyptians,” meaning “the plagues that I brought upon them on the land and in the sea”, “and I carried you as on eagles’ wings, by the cloud that is leading you, and I brought you to myself, to this mountain (Exod. 19:4). Now if you obey me, you will be dearer to me than all the nations, in that I have chosen you alone out of all the races (Exod. 19:5), to be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy people,” because from them would come kings and priests, and all of them would be set apart in sanctity from all the abominable deeds of the nations (Exod. 19:6). 8

Referring back to the Exodus 19 narrative of the biblical story, Ephrem picks up and expands on all of the three identified notions, which he puts in the context of the God-Israel relationship. Additionally, Ephrem is surprisingly close to the Targumic interpretations of the verses. Examples of Ephrem’s and the Targumic interpretations are shown below: 1. God carrying Israel as if on eagles’ wings: The interpretation of Ephrem is similar to the Targumim 9 2. God bringing Israel for Himself (Exod.19:4,5): This interpretation of the verse is similar in Ephrem to the Targumim. 3. Israel being called to be a kingdom of priests and a holy people (Exod.19:6): Ephrem in this verse changes the biblical formula from the kingdom of priests to kings 8 9

ExodCom 19:1, p. 55–56. TgPsJon and Neofiti 19:4, see also TgPsJohn on 12:37.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

203

and priests, which is also similar to what the Targum does. 4. Ephrem adds in his exegesis of the biblical verses the clause that distinguishes Israel from all of the other nations. One can see a very similar explanation of Mekhilta Bachodesh 10: “holy and sanctified, separate from the nations of the world and their abominations”. 11 Although Ephrem’s exegetical exercise and his style is similar to that of the Targumim, there is one clear difference in the conclusions and in the focal point of Ephrem’s attention. Looking at Ephrem’s writings on the biblical passages in their context, one has to emphasise that the accent of Ephrem is on Christology (presenting Christ as God’s anointed one), while the accents of the Midrash below and the Targumim above are on holiness, sanctification and the anointing of Israel. Midrash Rabbah explains below the metaphor of God carrying Israel on eagles’ wings in the following way: ExodRab 29:7: ‘And I will carry’, as it says, And now I bore you on eagles’ wings (Ex.19:4). ‘I will bear’ [the sin of the] Golden Calf. ‘And deliver’, as it says, And the Lord said: I have pardoned according to thy word (Num. 14:20).

Here the Midrash already presupposes the pardon of God on Israel for the Golden Calf. Hence even in the prelude to the ten commandments story there is a manifestation of God’s mercy and pardon on Israel. One can look at this expression of Jewish exegesis also as a way of protecting the Jewish identity from external criticisms, which is based on the idolatrous behaviour of Israel with the Golden Calf. While starting the research in this chapter from the biblical narrative and its expansion in Jewish and Christian writings, it Mekhilta Bachodesh 2, p. 206. See also in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), p. 56.

10 11

204

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

became apparent that each of the exegetical sources pursue their own agenda in accentuating the biblical metaphors. Hence, Ephrem, while being very close to the Targumic explanations, and possibly in order to attract the Jewish audiences, inserts the typology of Christ and the Cross in his exegesis on the verses. The Jewish sources fill their types in place of Christian types. One can observe the ways by which exegetical sources compete with each other on these verses by trying to build their theological perceptions of the passages so that the other exegetes of the opposing camp could not overshadow them. It can only be expected that the Qur’anic narrative of the same biblical story will spread its accentuating points differently. Therefore, the following part of the chapter will look into the perspectives of the Qur’an on the biblical verses of Exodus.

REFERENCES TO THE BIBLICAL CONCEPTS IN THE QUR’AN

The following study will look at the references to Mount Sinai in the Qur’an. The Qur’anic affirmation of the chosen status of Israel will be another area of study in this subchapter. In connection to that, the Qur’anic relation to the biblical notion of kings and priests in relation to Israel will be considered. The question to address at this point of the study is whether the Qur’an allows for continuity between the religious traditions of biblical exegesis, as expressed in the Midrash and Ephrem. Therefore, the verse of the Qur’an advising to remember the stories of old with regard to the message of the Qur’an is taken in this study as an illustration of the position of the Qur’an. The following passage from the Qur’an gives its narrative of the Giving of the Law story. There are a number of interesting phrases and notions that can be picked from the passage below: Q.7:142–145: We appointed thirty nights for Moses, then added ten more: the term set by his Lord was completed in forty nights. Moses said to his brother Aaron, ‘Take my place among my people: act rightly and do not follow the way of those who spread corruption.’ When Moses came for Our appointment, and his Lord spoke to him, he said, ‘My Lord, show yourself to me: let me see You!’ He said, ‘You will never see me, but look at that mountain: if it remains standing

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

205

firm, you will see Me,’ and when his Lord revealed Himself to the mountain, He made it crumble: Moses fell down unconscious. When he recovered he said, ‘Glory be to You! To You I turn in repentance! I am the first to believe! 144. He said, Moses, I have raised you above other people by [giving you] My messages and speaking to you: hold on to what I have given you; be one of those who give thanks.’ ‫ن‬ َ ِ ّ‫ك وَكُن م‬ َ ُ ‫س �ِ�ِسَا� َ�� ِي و َبِك َ�َ��ِي �َ� ُ ْذ م َا آتَي ْت‬ ِ ‫ك �َ�َ� الن َّا‬ َ ُ ‫ل � َا م ُو� َ� �إ� ِّي اصْ طَفَي ْت‬ َ ‫قَا‬ ‫ن‬ َ �ِ �ِ�‫شا‬ ّ َ ‫ال‬

We inscribed everything for him in the Tablets which taught and explained everything saying, ‘Hold on to them firmly and urge your people to hold fast to their excellent teachings. I will show you the end of those who rebel.

ِ َ ‫وَكَتَب ْنَا �َ� ُ �ِي ا ْ���ل ْو‬ ‫ك‬ َ َ ‫� �َ�ْءٍ �َ�ُذْه َا بِق ُ َّوة ٍ و َأ� � ُْ� قَوْم‬ ِ ّ ُ ‫� �َ�ْءٍ َّموْعِظَة ً و َتَفْصِ ي� ً� لِّك‬ ِ ّ ُ ‫اح م ِن ك‬ َ‫سق ِ�ن‬ ِ ‫� َأ� �ُذ ُوا � ِأ� حْ سَ�ِ�َا س َُأرِ ي� ُ ْ� د َار َ الْف َا‬

Starting from the three selected notions from the biblical narrative, one can see whether the Qur’an follows any of them or whether it substitutes them with something else. Although there is no direct reference to the kings or priests in the passage above, there is evidence of this concept in the following passage presented below. The passage above, however, presents a wish for people to be grateful. The Qur’an also clearly states in the passage above that it was Moses, and not actually the whole people, who was chosen above all people, which could be seen here as an attempt of the Qur’an to replace the chosen status of the people with one person, Moses, who was clearly having a special place in God’s eyes. However, one has to make it clear that often the message of the Qur’an, which seems to be directed to one person in the literal sense of the sentence, carries with it universal significance. Therefore, the possible interpretation of this passage within the biblical context, could mean that the descriptions of Moses at the time apply to his people as well. Looking at the Arabic text of verse 7:144, grammatically it becomes possible to suggest that the wish of God for Moses was to be one of the grateful ones – ‫ن‬ َ �ِ �ِ�‫شا‬ ّ َ ‫ن ال‬ َ ِ ّ‫ – وَكُن م‬due to the last noun for grateful – ‫ن‬ َ �ِ �ِ�‫شا‬ ّ َ ‫ – ال‬l-shākirīna – used in the Genitive mascu-

206

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

line plural active participle form and translated as ‘the grateful ones’, but can be also interpreted as the wish of God for Moses and his followers as well. The verb for being raised or chosen by God in verse 7:144 is – ‫ك‬ َ ُ ‫ – اصْ طَفَي ْت‬iṣ'ṭafaytuka, which is the verb used in the first person singular (form VIII) perfect verb form, and is a verb, which is also used in the Qur’an in relation to other Old Testament Patriarchs, such as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in Q.38:47 and other Old Testament prophets and their families and even a New Testament figure (as Mary, for example, as in Q.3:42). Therefore, the meaning of real closeness is very clearly present in this verb. And in the context of the Qur’an this verb is often used in describing the choices of God towards his elected people 12. This verb on one occasion is even used in the meaning of purification in verse Q.47:15, which describes Paradise, which the righteous are promised. In the description of paradise there is one element, which is present in paradise, the rivers of purified honey, where the word for purified is – ��ّ ً ‫ص‬ َ ُ ‫ – م‬muṣaffan, the same verb, but used in the passive participle form (II) among rivers of water unaltered, rivers of milk the taste of which never changes, rivers of wine delicious to those who drink, and rivers of purified honey, in which they will have from all [kinds of] fruits and forgiveness from their Lord. What becomes apparent from looking at the context of the use of this particular word in the Qur’an is that it has a clear reference to the chosen status initiated by God, and it also has a transcendent quality of being related not only to this world, but also to the world thereafter. One verse of the Qur’an, which comes very close to affiliating the people of the book, or What God has chosen for Mohammad (Q.17:40, 43:16), the chosen status of Abraham in this world and in the world thereafter (Q.2:130), the choice of religion for the sons of Abraham by God (Q.2:132), choosing of Saul as a king by God (Q.2:247), Adam, Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of ‘Imran being chosen by God over the worlds (Q.3:33), Mary being chosen and purified by God among the women of the worlds (Q.3:42), God choosing from the angels messengers and from the people (22:75), God choosing His servants (Q.27:59), choosing daughters over sons (Q.37:153), God choosing the son (Q.39:4). 12

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

207

of the Scripture, ( َ‫ )الْ�ِ�َاب‬as the ones whom God has chosen as His servants is the following verse: Q.35:32: We gave the Scripture as a heritage to Our chosen servants: some of them wronged their own souls, some stayed between [right and wrong], and some, by God’s leave, were foremost in good deeds.

‫ق‬ ٌ ِ ‫سه ِ وَمِ�ْ� ُم ُمّقْت َصِ دٌ وَمِ�ْ� ُ ْم سَاب‬ ِ ‫ن اصْ طَفَي ْنَا م ِنْ عِبَادِ� َا ��َِ�ْ� ُ ْم ظَا�ِ� ٌ لِّن َ ْف‬ َ �ِ �ّ َ �‫اب ا‬ َ َ �ِ�ْ‫� َُّ� أ� ْورَث ْنَا ال‬ ُ ��ِ ‫ل ال ْ�كَب‬ ُ ْ‫� ه ُو َ الْف َض‬ َ ِ ‫ا��� ِ ذ َل‬ ِ ‫َات � �ِإ ْذ‬ ِ �ْ�َ� �ْ ‫� ِا‬ َّ ‫ن‬

The perception in the Qur’an of the chosen people of God (and of the people of the book) is balanced, as it presupposes that out of the chosen people there were the ones who went astray, and the ones who stayed with God. Therefore, it is possible to suggest that the people of Israel could be included in the definition of the ‘people of the book’ and, therefore also in the definition of the chosen one from the servants of God (‫ن اصْ طَفَي ْنَا م ِنْ عِبَادِ� َا‬ َ �ِ �ّ َ �‫)ا‬. Returning back to the studied passage Q.7:142–145, it has to be noted here that the passage gives a very clear parable in the Qur’an with regard to the ability of Moses, and anyone for that matter, to see God. There is a very clear lesson, which can be drawn from the passage. There is no way in the Qur’an for the God of Moses to be seen. It is possible that this particular narrative was used to oppose exegetical writings prior to the Qur’an, which suggested otherwise. One of these writings could be found in Ephrem’s commentaries on Exodus, when he clearly mentions that on one occasion the whole of Israel was able to behold the Glory of God 13. The Qur’an, therefore, clearly rejects such a possibility. In Ephrem’s commentaries, however, the people lost the ability to see God directly only after the transgression with the Golden Calf. This allows one to conclude that po-

See in ExodCom 24:2: ‘Moses and his relatives and seventy of the elders went up, and they saw God’ and in ExodCom 24:4: ‘And the whole house of Israel saw the glory of the Lord’.

13

208

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

tentially they were able to see God, but under the influence of sin that ability was taken away from them. 14 And the final remark about the studied passage relates to the last of the selected verses, which is Q.7:145 stating that Moِ َ ‫ )ا ْ� ��ل ْو‬directly from God and for the ses received the Tablets (‫اح‬ use of his people. This is yet another indication in the Qur’an that all the blessings directed towards Moses were also for the sake of his people. Therefore, his chosen status was also for the sake of the people. Moving further into more Qur’anic verses using the biblical notions and concepts from Exodus 19, the following verse of the Qur’an clearly reflects on the notion of kingship: Q.5:20: Moses said to his people: ‘My people, remember God’s blessings on you: how he raised prophets among you and appointed kings for you and gave you what he had not given to other people.

�ً ‫جع َل�َ� ُ� ُمّ�ُ�ك‬ َ َ ‫ل ف ِي� ُ ْ� أ� نب ِيَاء َ و‬ َ َ ‫جع‬ َ ‫ا��� ِ �َلَيْ� ُ ْ� �إ ْذ‬ َ ‫و �َ� ْذ قَا‬ َّ َ ‫ل م ُو� َ� لِقَوْمِه ِ � َا قَوْ ِم ا ْذ� ُ� ُوا ن ِ ْعم َة‬ َ‫ن الْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ َ ِ ّ‫ْت أ� �َدًا م‬ ِ ‫و َآ� َا�ُ� َّما � َ ْ� يُؤ‬

21: My people, go into the holy land which God has ordained for you – do not turn back or you will be the losers.

َ ‫� َا قَوْ ِم ا ْد� ُ�ُ�ا ا ْ� ��ر‬ ‫ا��� ُ ل�َ� ُ ْ� وَ� َ� �َ�ْ� َ ُ�ّوا �َ�َ� أ� دْ� َارِ� ُ ْ� فَتَنق َلِب ُوا‬ َّ َ‫ْض ا� ْ�ُق َ َ ّدسَة َ َّال�ِي كَت َب‬ ‫ن‬ َ �ِ �ِ�‫� َا‬ 22: They said, ‘Moses, there is a fearsome people in this land. We will not go there until they leave. If they leave then we will enter.

23: Yet two men whom God had blessed among those who were afraid said, ‘Go in to them through the gate and when you go in you will overcome them. If you are true believers, put your trust in God.’

On the ability of Israel to see God see the chapter 6: Ephrem presenting Israel: The ability of Israel to see God in my book Ephrem, a Jewish Sage… 14

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

209

�ْ ُ �‫اب ف �َإذ َا دَ� َل ْتُم ُوه ُ ف �َإ َّن‬ َ َ ‫ا��� ُ �َلَ�ْ�ِم َا ا ْد� ُ�ُ�ا �َلَ�ْ�ِم ُ ال ْب‬ َ �ِ �َّ�‫ن ا‬ َ ِ‫ن م‬ ِ �َ �ُ �َ‫ل ر‬ َ ‫قَا‬ َّ َ ‫ن �َ�َاف ُونَ أ� نْعَم‬ َ‫ا��� ِ فَت َو َ َّك�ُوا �إن كُن� ُ� ُمّؤْم ِنِ�ن‬ � َ � َ �َ ‫و‬ ‫ن‬ َ ‫ُو‬ ‫�َالِب‬ َّ

24: They said, ‘Moses, we will never enter while they are still there, so you and your Lord go and fight, and we will stay here’. He said, ‘Lord, I have authority over no one except myself and my brother: judge between the two of us and these disobedient people.’ God said, ‘The land is forbidden to them for forty years: they will wonder the earth aimlessly. Do not grieve over those who disobey.’

Starting with the first cited verse Q.5:20 there is a notion of kings, which it features. The translation of Haleem reads that God appointed kings for the people, but the Arabic texts – �ُ �َ�‫جعَل‬ َ َ‫و‬ �ً ‫ – ُمّ�ُ�ك‬wa jaʿalakum mulūkan – could also suggest the translation ‘he made you kings’, which makes this verse of the Qur’an in close correlation with the Bible, and with the Exodus’ narrative of chapter 19. Another observation from the verse is the chosen status of Israel on the basis that God gave to the people what ‘He had not given to other people’. The Qur’an does not explicitly recite the blessings for the people of Israel, and neither at this point does it go into the details of what exactly was given to Israel from God. If one looks at this verse of the Qur’an from the biblical account of chapter 19, there is no reason to decline the possibility that the Qur’an could be referring to the ‘eagles wings’ metaphor, as well as to the concept of the holy nation alongside the kingdom of priests. It is possible to assume at this point of study that the Qur’an is in dialogue with the biblical verses of Exodus 19. However, it is very clear that the Qur’an does not support the priesthood aspect of the concept, and therefore, possibly replaces the priests aspect of the biblical definition with the more familiar Qur’anic concept of prophets. Additionally when the following verse of the Qur’an 5:21 refers to the concept of the holy land – َ ‫ْض ا� ْ�ُق َ َ ّدسَة‬ َ ‫ – ا ْ� ��ر‬l-arḍa l-muqadasata, it could be seen as a Qur’anic replacement of the concept of the holy na-

210

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

tion, as the biblical story suggested. Then the Qur’an amplifies on the concept of the holy land by stating that it was ordained by God to the people – �ْ ُ �َ�‫ا��� ُ ل‬ َّ َ‫ – كَت َب‬kataba l-lahu lakum. 15 The fact of God ordaining, decreeing, and prescribing to the people the holy land is a very significant notification in the Qur’an, which could not but elevate the status of the Israel-God relationship, which indicates the people as being chosen among the worlds. The only unfortunate outcome of the God-people encounter, according to the Qur’anic narrative, is that the people were reluctant to receive God’s gift, as further verses of the passage above suggest, and consequently their entry into the land was delayed by forty years. Another suggestion in relation to the dynamics of the Qur’anic exegesis of the biblical narrative is the possibility that the concept of the staff of the biblical account of events was replaced by the concept of the gate – َ‫ – ال ْب َاب‬l-bāba and trust in God – ‫ا��� ِ فَت َو َ َّك�ُوا‬ َّ – l-lahi fatawakkalū. 16 The gate instead of the staff in this instance affords the transition in the Qur’anic narrative. 26 F

27F

The verb – َ‫ – كَت َب‬has direct relation to God’s degrees, ordinances and Scriptures, as the multiple verses of the similar use of the word suggest in the Qur’an. For example, 7:45 talks about ordination of laws, 9:51 states that God decreed, and 4:77,81,127, 5:21,32,45,83 and others which refer to what was ordained. 16 Different Tafsirs give a united explanation of the meaning of the gate. For example, Tafsir Al-Kashani states: ‘For if you enter by the station of trust which is the gate of the village, you will be victorious, by having departed from your acts and your states and by being agents through God’. (Seen in section 5:23 of Kashani Tafsir, Great Commentaries on the Holy Qur’an, Part I, Surahs 1–18 (Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought: Fons Vitae, 2008), p. 197). Tafsir Al-Jalaylan refers to entrance by the gate of the town in the attack. Therefore, the implication is on the bold move of the minority of the people of the Jews against the warfare on that town: ‘‘Enter against them by the gate!” the gate of the town, and have no fear of them, for they are bodies without hearts. For if you enter by it, you will be victorious: the two [Joshua and Caleb] said this because they were certain of God’s assistance and the fulfilment of His promise. Put your trust in God, if you are believers’. (see in 15

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

211

Overall, the passage above shows hopeful beginnings for the people, but a grievous end. The Qur’an seems to be comparing the people of Moses with Cain, who according to the biblical narrative, was wandering the earth aimlessly as a punishment for his sin. It is not surprising that the story about Adam’s sons follows straight after the narrative about the people and Moses in Surah 5. The Qur’an suggests here that the forty years in the desert was the punishment given to the people for being reluctant in following God’s advice to fight, and for being afraid to ask God to fight for them. As a final minor remark one could add here that according to the biblical narrative of the reception of the Law, Moses received the Torah in the form of tablets written by the hand of God: ‘The tablets were the work of God and the writing was the writing of God graven upon the tablets’ 17. The biblical narrative presents this story as a single event in the sacred history of the God-human relationship. But according to the Qur'an the Torah was revealed to Moses in the same manner as other books were revealed to other prophets and also as the Qur'an was revealed: ‘Who was it who sent down the Scripture, which Moses brought…’ (Q.6:91); ‘We gave Moses the Scripture’ (Q.6:154); ‘This, too, is a blessed Scripture, which We have sent down…’ (Q.6:154); ‘He has laid down for you [people] the same commandments that He gave Noah, which We have revealed to you [Muhammad] and which We enjoined on Abraham and Moses and Jesus (Q.42:13); ’We have sent revelations to you [Muhamhttp://www.altafsir.com/ on 29.05.20). Tafsir ibn-Abbas complements the previous Tafsir by stating that the bold move through the gate of the town will bring the victory. This Tafsir also reaffirms that the victory lies in the monotheism of the belief: ‘Enter in upon them by the gate, for if ye enter by it, lo! ye will be victorious. So put your trust (in Allah) that you will be victorious (if ye are indeed believers) it is also said that the two men who said this are two men from the assassins who feared Moses and with whom Allah was gracious by bestowing upon them belief in Allah's divine Oneness.’ (see in http://www.altafsir.com/ on 25.05.20) 17 Exodus 32:16.

212

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

mad] as We did to Noah and the prophets after him…’ (Q.4:163). All of the verses above give yet another illustration that the Qur’an presents itself as continuing on with the same tradition, which is encapsulated in the Bible. In concluding this part of the chapter, it needs to be stated that the Qur’an depicts the God and people of Israel relationship with a complexity and variety of meanings. In some verses the Qur’an raises people to an elevated status of being the chosen ones from God (e.g. Q.5:20–21) in agreement with the biblical narrative, while in others the Qur’an puts the people down and depicts them as losers or transgressors (e.g. Q.5:25), also in some agreement to the biblical account of events. What the Qur’an offers to the exegetical picture of its recitations of the biblical stories is its own judgement and its own perspective on the biblical story. Therefore, what is important to highlight here is that the Qur’anic narrative of the Moses’ story could be seen as being in dialogue with the biblical narrative and with later developed traditions of biblical exegesis. Therefore, the Qur’an offers its own contribution to the exegetical tradition by presenting its view and its interpretation of the biblical stories, which can be analysed alongside the biblical narrative of the Old Testament as well as alongside Jewish and Christian exegesis of the biblical texts. Such an analysis of the selected passages from the Bible, Jewish and Christian exegetes, and from the Qur’an is offered in this book. The following part of the chapter will look closely into the actual writings of the law, which Moses received from God, and the way they were depicted in the biblical narrative and in the exegetical writings of Ephrem, Midrash and in the Qur’an.

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS: EXODUS 20:1–17

The biblical narrative of Exodus gives a detailed recitation of the commandments, which God passed on to Moses and the people on mount Sinai. The following passage is the first seventeen verses of chapter twenty: Exodus 20:1–17: And God spoke all these words: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath, or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments. You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name. Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labour and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, not your manservant or your maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For the six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. Honour your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you. You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not give false testimony against your neighbour. You shall not covet your neighbour’s house. You shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.”

‫מר׃ ס‬ ֹ ֽ ‫ל־ה ְדּ ָב ִ ֥רים ָה ֵ ֖א ֶלּה ֵלא‬ ַ ‫�הים ֵ ֛את ָכּ‬ ִ֔ ‫וַ יְ ַד ֵבּ֣ר ֱא‬ ‫אתי� ֵמ ֶ ֥א ֶרץ ִמ ְצ ַ ֖ריִ ם ִמ ֵ ֣בּ֥ית ֲﬠ ָב ִ ֑דֽים׃‬ ֛ ִ ‫הוֹצ‬ ֵ ‫�הי� ֲא ֶ ֧שׁר‬ ֑֔ ֶ ‫הו֣ה ֱא‬ ָ ְ‫ֹכי י‬ ֙ ֖ ִ ‫ ָ ֽאנ‬2 ‫ל־פּ ָ ֗ ֽניַ ׃‬ ָ ‫�הים ֲא ֵח ִ ֖ ֜רים ַﬠ‬ ֥ ֨ ִ ‫ֽה־ל ֛֩� ֱא‬ ְ ‫ ֽ ֣ל ֹא יִ ְה ֶי‬3

213

‫‪THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD‬‬

‫‪214‬‬

‫ל־תּמוּנָ֡ ֔ ה ֲא ֶ ֤שׁ֣ר ַבּ ָשּׁ ַ ֣֨מיִ ֙ם׀ ִמ ֡ ַ ֔מּ ַﬠל ַו ֲֽא ֶ ֥שׁר֩‬ ‫ה־ל�֥ ֣ ֶ ֣֨פ ֶסל֙ ׀ וְ ָכ ְ‬ ‫‪֣ ֽ 4‬ל ֹא ַ ֽת ֲﬠ ֶ֨שׂ ְ‬ ‫תּ ַחת וַ ֲא ֶ ֥שׁ֣ר ַבּ ַ ֖מּ֣יִ ם׀ ִמ ַ ֥תּ ַ֣חת ָל ָ ֗ ֽא ֶרץ׃‬ ‫ָבּ ָ ֖֨א ֶרץ ִמ ָ ֜ ֑ ַ‬ ‫�ה ֙י� ֵ ֣אל ַק ֔ ָנּא‬ ‫הו֤ה ֱא ֶ֨‬ ‫ם ִ ֣כּי ָ ֽאנ ִֹ֞כי יְ ָ‬ ‫ח ֥ו ֣ה ָל ֶ ֖ה ֮ם וְ ֣ל ֹא ָת ָﬠ ְב ֵ ֑ד ֒‬ ‫א־ת ְשׁ ַתּ ְ ֶ‬ ‫‪ֽ 5‬ל ֹ ִ‬ ‫ל־ר ֵבּ ִ ֖ﬠים ְלשׂ ֹנְ ָ ֽ ֑אי׃‬ ‫ל־שׁ ֵלּ ִ ֥שׁים וְ ַﬠ ִ‬ ‫ל־בּ ִנ֛ים ַﬠ ִ‬ ‫֠ ֹפּ ֵקד ֲﬠוֹ֨ן ָא ֧בֹת ַﬠ ָ‬ ‫וֹתי׃ ס‬ ‫וּלשׁ ְֹמ ֵ ֥רי ִמ ְצ ָ ֽ‬ ‫‪6‬וְ ֥ ֤ﬠֹ ֶשׂה ֶ ֖֨ח ֶס ֙ד ַל ֲא ָל ִ ֑֔פים ְלא ֲֹה ַ ֖בי ְ‬ ‫הוה ֵ ֛את‬ ‫�הי� ַל ָ ֑שּׁוְ א ִ ֣כּי ֤ל ֹא יְ נַ ֶקּ ֙ה יְ ָ ֔‬ ‫הו֥ה ֱא ֶ ֖‬ ‫ת־שׁם־יְ ָ‬ ‫‪֥ 7‬ל ֹא ִת ָ ֛שּׂא ֶא ֵ ֽ‬ ‫ת־שׁ ֖מוֹ ַל ָ ֽשּׁוְ א׃ פ‬ ‫ֲא ֶשׁר־יִ ָ ֥שּׂא ֶא ְ‬ ‫ת־יוֹם ַה ַשּׁ ָ ֖֜בּת ְל ַק ְדּ ֽ֗שׁוֹ׃‬ ‫‪8‬זָ ֛כוֹר֩ ֶא ֥֨‬ ‫אכ ֶ ֽתּ�֒׃‬ ‫ל־מ ַל ְ‬ ‫ית ָכּ ְ‬ ‫ים ַ ֽתּ ֲﬠ ֔בֹ ֮ד וְ ָﬠ ִ ֖ ֣שׂ ָ‬ ‫‪֤ ֵ 9‬שׁ ֶ֣שׁת יָ ִ ֣מ ֙‬ ‫אכה‬ ‫ל־מ ָל ָ֡ ֜‬ ‫א־ת ֲﬠ ֶ ֣֨שׂה ָכ ְ‬ ‫�הי� ֽ ֣ל ֹ ַ‬ ‫יהו֣ה ֱא ֶ ֑֗‬ ‫יﬠי ַשׁ ָ ֖בּ֣ת׀ ַל ָ‬ ‫וֹם ַה ְשּׁ ִב ֔ ִ ֜‬ ‫‪10‬וְ י֨ ֙‬ ‫וּב ֶה ְמ ֶ֔ ֗תּ� וְ גֵ ְר ֙ ֖� ֲא ֶ ֥שׁ֣ר ִבּ ְשׁ ָﬠ ֶ ֽ֔רי�׃‬ ‫וּבנְ ֽ�֣־וּ ִ֠ב ֶ֗תּ� ַﬠ ְב ְדּ ֨ ֤� וַ ֲא ָ ֽמ ְת ֜֙� ְ‬ ‫ַא ָ ֣תּה׀ ִ‬ ‫ת־היָּ ֙ם‬ ‫ת־ה ָ֗א ֶרץ ֶא ַ‬ ‫ת־ה ָשּׁ ַ ֣מיִ ם וְ ֶא ָ‬ ‫הוה ֶא ַ‬ ‫ים ָﬠ ָ֨שׂה יְ ָ ֜‬ ‫‪֣ ִ 11‬כּי ֵ ֽשׁ ֶשׁת־יָ ִמ ֩‬ ‫הו֛ה ֶאת־י֥ וֹם‬ ‫ל־כּן ֵבּ ַ ֧ר� יְ ָ‬ ‫יﬠי ַﬠ ֵ֗‬ ‫ר־בּם וַ יָּ ֖נַ ח ַבּיּ֣ וֹם ַה ְשּׁ ִב ִ ֑‬ ‫ל־א ֶשׁ ָ֔‬ ‫ת־כּ ֲ‬ ‫וְ ֶא ָ‬ ‫ַה ַשּׁ ָ ֖בּת ַוֽ יְ ַק ְדּ ֵ ֽשׁהוּ׃ ס‬ ‫ת־א ֶ ֑מּ� ְל ַ֨מ ַ ֙ﬠן יַ ֲא ִר ֣כוּן יָ ֶ֔מי� ַ ֚ﬠל ָה ֲא ָד ָ֔מה‬ ‫ת־א ִ ֖בי� וְ ֶא ִ‬ ‫‪ַ 12‬כּ ֵ ֥בּד ֶא ָ‬ ‫�הי� נ ֵ ֹ֥תן ָ ֽל�׃ ס‬ ‫הו֥ה ֱא ֶ ֖‬ ‫ֲא ֶשׁר־יְ ָ‬ ‫‪֥ 13‬ל ֹ֖א ִֿתּ ְר ָ ֖צֽח׃ ס‬ ‫‪֖ ֣ 14‬ל ֹא ִֿתּנְ ָ ֑אֽף׃ ס‬ ‫‪֖ ֣ 15‬ל ֹא ִֿתּגְ ֔ ֽ ֹנב׃ ס‬ ‫א־ת ֲﬠ ֶנ֥ה ְב ֵר ֲﬠ�֖ ֵ ֥ﬠד ָ ֽשׁ ֶקר׃ ס‬ ‫‪ֽ 16‬ל ֹ ַ‬ ‫תוֹ‬ ‫מד ֵ ֣א ֶשׁת ֵר ֗ ֶﬠ� וְ ַﬠ ְב ֤דּוֹ וַ ֲא ָמ ֙‬ ‫א־ת ְח ֞ ֹ‬ ‫מד ֵבּ֣ית ֵר ֶ ֑ﬠ� ֽל ֹ ַ‬ ‫‪֥ 17‬ל ֹא ַת ְח ֖ ֹ‬ ‫שׁוֹרוֹ וַ ֲחמ ֹ֔רוֹ וְ ֖כֹל ֲא ֶ ֥שׁר ְל ֵר ֶ ֽﬠ�׃ פ‬ ‫וְ ֣‬ ‫‪The First Commandment gives a clear affirmation of Monothe‬‬‫‪ism for Moses and the people. A clear definition is offered by the‬‬ ‫‪Decalogue, that is of God as the One and the Only. One can‬‬ ‫‪identify two clauses representing Monotheism in the first com‬‬‫‪mandment. The first definition of ‘I am’ is ‘I am the Lord thy‬‬ ‫‪God’ and the other one is ‘I am the One who brought you out of‬‬ ‫‪Egypt’. The interplay between these clauses of the first com‬‬‫‪mandment are crucially important in the exegetical writings of‬‬ ‫‪the selected sources. Therefore, the perspectives of the Midrash‬‬

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

215

Rabbah, Ephrem and the Qur’an on the Monotheism of God, and consequently on the Decalogue will be analysed in this chapter. The important comparison and observation, which will be offered in this chapter is the viewpoint of both the Qur’an and the Midrash Rabbah on the Exodus verses with regard to their statements that God does not have a son. This argument will be analysed as a reaction to Christian teachings on Christology. Also the reasons behind the Qur’an and the Midrash, as well as Ephrem in not reciting the Decalogue in full will be compared. The study in this chapter will explore in significant detail the Qur’anic recollections of the selected commandments from the Decalogue. It has been brought to light earlier on in this chapter that the Qur’an clearly affirms the fact of Moses receivِ َ ‫ – ا ْ� ��ل ْو‬l-alwāḥi) from God. 18 The appreciation of ing the Tablets (‫اح‬ the Qur’an for the Tablets, which Moses received is clearly indicated in Q.7:145: ‘We inscribed everything for him in the Tablets which taught and explained everything, saying, Hold on to them firmly and urge your people to hold fast to their excellent teaching.’ The Qur’an here gives an elevated value judgement to the Law of Moses by stating that Moses received excellent teaching from God (‫ – � ِأ� حْ سَ�ِ�َا‬bi-aḥsanihā). Therefore, in addition to tracing the commandment related verses in the Qur’an, there will be an attempt to draw out the Qur’an’s perception of the following concepts, which can be derived from the Decalogue. These concepts are: the Jealous God; the sins of the fathers; and the Shabbat. In this part of the chapter the whole Decalogue will be summarised in two major themes. Particular attention will be given to the first four commandments, as their broader definition can be set as an affirmation of the religious path of Monotheism, while the remaining six commandments can be described as the foundation of the universal ethical and moral code of human conduct. Therefore, the affirmation of and relation to Monotheism, as well as to the universal ethical principles ِ َ ‫وَكَتَب ْنَا �َ� ُ � ِي ا�ْ�� ل ْو‬ See Q.7:145: ‫ك‬ َ َ ‫� �َ�ْءٍ �َ�ُذْه َا بِق ُ َّوةٍ و َأ� � ُْ� قَوْم‬ ِ ّ ُ ‫� �َ�ْءٍ َّموْعِظَة ً و َتَفْصِ ي� ً� لِّك‬ ِ ّ ُ ‫اح م ِن ك‬ َ‫سق ِ�ن‬ ِ ‫� َأ� �ُذ ُوا � ِأ� حْ سَ�ِ�َا س َُأرِ ي� ُ ْ� د َار َ الْف َا‬ 18

216

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

will be traced in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and in the Qur’an. With regard to the commandments of ‘love of God’ and ‘love of neighbour’ the study in this part of the research will analyse this principle against the golden ethical rules in the Christian exegesis and expand it into the realm of sacrificial love. The big question of ‘love to the neighbour’, as it is presented in the commandments on love, will be addressed to all of the selected sources. The specific question will be raised to the writings of the Qur’an: does ‘love to the neighbour’ apply to Qur’anic ethics? Also does ‘love to the neighbour’ apply if the neighbour is a non-Muslim? Also, the standpoint of the Qur’an and rabbinic exegesis will be analysed in relation to the Christian maxima. It will be shown whether the Qur’an can appreciate the Christian maxima as well as the golden rule of ethics as presented by Jewish exegesis of the concept of Law. This chapter will show the Qur’anic exclusivity in its application of love by restricting its boundaries to the circle of the faithful. Therefore, the conclusion will be drawn on where the Qur’an stands in relation to the Jewish and Christian appreciation of love in relation to God and to people. The detour into the Qur’anic appreciation of the concept of ‘love of the neighbour’ is chosen for this chapter as a demonstration of the subtle differences in appreciation of the biblical commandments of love towards one’s neighbour in Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic traditions of biblical exegesis respectively.

MIDRASH RABBAH ON THE LAW

In setting out the ground for research at the beginning of this chapter, it was clearly indicated that the exegetical sources of this study will be analysed as they advocate the monotheistic principles of faith. The passage below sets the rabbinical exegetical tone for the discussion by stating that Monotheism for Israel was the condition, on which the God-Israel relationship was built. The following passage from the Midrash highlights that the deliverance of Israel from Egypt was on the condition of the

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

217

people being the followers of Monotheism and being witnesses to their God: ExodRab 29:3: R. Tobiah b. Isaac expounded: I am the Lord thy God – it was on this condition that I brought you out of the land of Egypt. 19

Here is a strong emphasis on God’s relationship with Israel. It sets the account straight, only for the purpose of Monotheism being the main reason for Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian oppression. The following three passages from the Midrash are chosen for two reasons. Firstly, because they have connection to the first commandment of the Decalogue, and secondly, because they demonstrate the dialogue with other religious traditions. For example, the passage below in its advocacy for Monotheism is using the argument, which could be seen as relating to the Christian concept of Jesus being the Son of God: ExodRab 29:5: Another explanation of I am the Lord thy God. R. Abbahu illustrated thus: A human king may rule, but he has a father and brother; but God said: ‘I am not thus, I am the first, for I have no father, and I am the last for I have no brother, and besides me there is no God, for I have no son. 20

The passage above could be seen as a Midrashic apology and a response to the Christology in the clause ‘beside me there is no God, for I have no son’. Additionally, the following phrase from the Midrash above ‘I am the first…and I am the last…’ may be seen as an apology to the prophecy, which is in Revelation 22:12, and is traditionally accepted as the prophecy about Jesus: ‘I am the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, the beginning and the end’. 21 There are verses in the Qur’an, which clearly adExodRab.29:3, p. 338. ExodRab 29:5, p. 339–340. 21 One has to note here that the cross reference of this verse in the Revelation can be found in Isaiah 41:4: “Who has done this and carried it through, calling 19 20

218

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

vocate the similar principle, that is that God does not have a son 22. More so, the Qur’an in the verses Q.9:30–31 engages in the apologetic dialogue with both Christians and Jews on the question of Monotheism by stating: Q.9:30:The Jews said, ‘Ezra is the son of God, and the Christians said, ‘The Messiah is the son of God’: they said this with their own mouth, repeating what earlier disbelievers had said. May God thwart them! How far astray they have been led!’ 31: They take their rabbis and their monks as lords beside God, as well as Christ, the son of Mary. But they were commanded to serve only one God: there is no god but Him; He is far above whatever they set up as His partners.’

The importance of the Qur’anic passage above is the clear indication that it refers to the oral tradition of rabbinical exegesis and Christian teaching. The fact that the Qur’an refers to the oral tradition is due to the indication in the cited verse that both Jews and Christians orally proclaimed their teachings, thus, the Qur’an uses the word said (‫ت‬ ِ َ ‫ )و َقَال‬and not written. Also, the verses above, among others in the Qur’an, put the writings of the Qur’an in direct dialogue with rabbinical and Christian exegetical traditions. Here the Qur’an is writing its apology to the respective exegetical traditions, which were existing at the time. Therefore, although not exclusively, the selected verses of the Qur’an clearly need to be studied within the context of Jewish forth the generations from the beginning? I, the LORD – with the first of them and with the last – I am he.” Also Midrash could be linked to another verse in Isaiah, 44:6: “This is what the LORD says – Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.” See also Isaiah 48:12, Revelations 1:8. 22 See in Q.2:116: ‘They have asserted, ‘God has a child.’ May He be exalted! No! Everything in the heavens and earth belongs to Him, everything devoutly obeys His will.’ The indication in the Qur’an could possibly be to the pagan Arabs (according to Razi’s suggestion), as indicated in Q.16:57: ‘They assign daughters to God – may He be exalted! – and the [sons] they desire to themselves.’ See also Q.5:116, 6:101, 10:68, 19:35, 19:88, 23:91, 37:151, 39:4, 43:82, 72:3, 112:1–4.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

219

and Christian exegetical traditions. This is the exercise of this chapter in particular, and the whole research in this book. Coming back to the rabbinical writings on Moses receiving the Law, the passage below is chosen. The implication of the Midrash is that the Law (or the Torah) was given to the whole world. Therefore, the granting of the Law to Moses and his people had universal significance: ExodRab 29:7: God came down to Sinai to give the Decalogue so that the world shall not totter [It was the Torah that set the earth on the solid foundation]. 23

This passage is significant as the Qur’an does not support the Midrashic claim when it indicates in Surah 7:145 that the Law was given only to Moses and to his people 24. These two examples above are illustrating the fact that the exegetical works of Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic origin could be put in dialogue with each other, especially with regard to their reflections on the Monotheistic commandments of the Decalogue. The passage from the Midrash below clearly indicates the dialogue of the Midrash, from the Jewish theological point of view, with the religious teachings at the time: ExodRab 29:1: Some sectarians once asked R. Sialai: ‘Are there not many deities in the world? He… God said to Israel: ‘Do not believe that there are many deities in heaven, because you have heard many voices, but know 25…

The questions one needs to ask here, in relation to this passage is: who are those sectarians? They were people of the time who confessed polytheism, or who could have been seen by the rabbis as confessing polytheism. What is important to highlight for the purpose of this research is the fact that rabbinic exegetes ExodRab 29:7, p. 340. See Q.7:145: ‘We inscribed everything for him in the Tablets which taught and explained everything, saying, ‘Hold on to them firmly and urge your people to hold fast to their excellent teachings.’ 25 ExodRab 29:1, p. 338. 23 24

220

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

were referring to the surrounding exegetical traditions of the time and were writing in relation to those. The following part of the chapter is going to look at the writings of the Christian exegete, Ephrem the Syrian, on the theme of God’s commandments on mount Sinai.

EPHREM ON THE LAW

As a Christian exegete of the Old Testament, Ephrem shows remarkable restraint in inserting Christological typology in his writings. In all his commentaries on Exodus he only allows two New Testament allusions. Frequently Ephrem’s exegesis sees value in the Old Testament narrative on its own terms. Therefore, he often treats the biblical narrative as an on-going revelation, which he as an exegete unravels layer by layer to his audiences. When he is referring to the Decalogue, he demonstrates a pious approach of a believer who sees the reception of the Law as an intimate act in the God-human relationship. Therefore, he values every single aspect of it, including the very tablets, which have a sacramental value for him. Hence, Ephrem writes the following: ExodCom 24:3: “He gave them tablets inscribed by the finger of God” (Exod. 31:18) so that God’s commandments would be precious in their eyes even if only because God has written them. 26

Such a brief expansion of the biblical verse already sets the tone in describing Ephrem’s appreciation of the Old Testament Law and the Decalogue. His way of dealing with the revelation of the Commandments is unravelling the Divine nature of God personally passing on his Commandments in the form of the Tablets. The tangible and the visual aspect in the God-human relationship in the process of receiving the Law is crucially important for Ephrem. He does not stop at the finger of God inscribing the commandments, but he carries on into the ability of the people 26

ExodCom 24.3, p. 61.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

221

to see the whole process with their own eyes. Such a closeness in the God-Israel relationship is unprecedented, as Ephrem reports in the verse below that the house of Israel in its entirety was granted the privilege and the ability to see the Glory of the Lord. This is Ephrem moving far and beyond the simple recollection of the biblical events. By stating that Israel was able to see God’s Glory, Ephrem openly admits that at that time the people were in the status of the holy nation, and that their relationship with God reached the highest heights, which transcended their natural abilities, and with it allowed the house of Israel to see: ExodCom 24:4: Moses and Joshua ascended the mountain, and the Lord called to Moses on the seventh day from within the cloud. And the whole house of Israel saw the glory of the Lord (Exod. 24::13–17). 27

Ephrem’s addition to the biblical text shows his high esteem for the people of Israel, and also illustrates his appreciation of the Old Testament Law as a pure, intimate and Divine way of God communicating with His chosen people. The following part of the study will look in more detail at the process of God giving His Commandments, as well as singling out a number of the postulates from the Decalogue in Ephrem’s writings.

THE CONCEPTS OF GOD’S MERCY AND JUDGEMENT IN EPHREM’S EXEGESIS

What is interesting is the fact that Ephrem elaborates on the concepts of God’s wrath and judgement, which is so clearly presented in Exodus 20:5: ExodCom 20:1: There he gave them commandments, and said, “I am the Lord, visiting the sins of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,” because in his patience he tolerates the evil man and also his son and grandson, but unless they repent he punishes the

27

ExodCom 24.3, p. 61.

222

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD fourth generation who imitate the evildoing of their forefathers (20:5). “And I act justly for thousands of generations to those who love me and who keep my commandments: as I have towards you and your people for the sake of your ancestors, the family of Abraham and Isaac (20:6).” 28

In analysing the passage from Ephrem’s exegesis it was noted that in citing the biblical text from Exodus 20:5 Ephrem adds the word ‘generations’, which is the addition found in the Targumim and in the Peshitta, but not in the Hebrew version of the verse 29. One can argue here that the Syriac Christian tradition of the OT translation is similar to the Targumic one. However, one has to always make corrections to the unique character of Ephrem’s exegesis. He is often using rabbinic exegesis, but not as a primary and dominating source of his own exegetical writings. The principle is that Ephrem uses and chooses whatever tradition of interpretation, which he thinks appropriate for his exegetical argument. For example, in his recitation of Exodus verse 20:5 he changes the Peshitta’s translation of ‘I act graciously’ to ‘I act justly’. It is an important change to the content of this biblical verse, which highlights Ephrem’s exegetical point to emphasise the concept of God’s Judgement over the concept of God’s Grace in interpreting the verse. The following passage from Ephrem’s exegesis summarises the last six commandments of the Bible into the golden rule of Ethics: ExodCom 20:2: All the commandments he gave them depend on this maxim: “Do not do to your neighbour what is hateful to you”: “Do not kill,” that another person may not kill you; “do not commit adultery” with your neighbour’s wife, so that you do not receive through your own wife your just deserts for seducing your friend’s wife. “Do not steal” what is ExodCom 20:1, p. 56. See in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), 56. 28 29

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

223

not yours, so that others do not steal what is yours. “Do not give false testimony against your neighbour” so that another may not give lying testimony against you. “Do not covert anything that belongs to your neighbour” so that another may not covet anything that is in your house. 30

The maxima of Ephrem “Do not do to your neighbour what is hateful to you” is directly similar to the teaching of Rabbi Hillel in the Talmud 31: “Do not do to your neighbour what is hateful to you.” This is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary. Go and learn it!” was the answer of the Rabbi when he was asked the question to teach the person the whole Torah while he stands on one leg. Ephrem in his commentaries shows a preference to the rabbinic formula over the NT one in summarising the essence of the Law “You shall love your neighbour as yourself” 32. Therefore, in analysing Ephrem’s passage one can suggest that he is working under the umbrella of the Old Testament conduct of the law. However, shortly after these verses Ephrem makes the link to the New Testament maxima. What is imExodCom 20:2, p. 57. See Talmud Shabbat 31a, also seen in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), 57. 32 See the context of the verse in Mathew 22:36–40: 20:36: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37:Jesus replied: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind 38: This is the first and greatest commandment. 39: And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ 40: All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”. See also Mark 12:30–31: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”. The first clause of the commandment is taken from Deut.6:4–5: ‘6:4 “Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one! 5: “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might’, while the second one is from Lev.19:18: ‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbour as yourself. I am the LORD’. 30 31

224

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

portant to notice here is the fact that Ephrem finds himself working comfortably within both Old Testament exegetical traditions and within the New Testament exegesis of the OT. Therefore, Ephrem could be seen as embracing the Old Testament Law on its own terms, or on the terms of rabbinical exegetes, like Rabbi Hillel, while also accepting Jesus’ interpretation and the summary of the Torah. Ephrem freely adopts the rabbinical formula of universal ethics in summarising the Torah, and he crowns this tradition of biblical exegesis with the New Testament appreciation of the Law of love by quoting the Christcentred summary of it in the Gospel. What is important to highlight at this point is that in Ephrem’s exegesis one cannot see the apologetic collaboration between the Jewish and Christian exegetical traditions on the matter, but the successful collaboration and non-conflicting or contrasting approach to the respected traditions of exegesis. In the writings of Ephrem the Jewish and Christian exegesis is co-existing and co-inspiring, one shines brightly upon the other. There is no negativity or replacement theology in Ephrem’s exegesis, but rather fruitful and constructive dialogue between the so-called Old and the New. Thus, in the passage below Ephrem introduces the Christ-centred appreciation of the Old Testament Law: ExodCom 20:3: Consider how right our Lord was when he said “On these two commandments the Law hangs” (Mathew 22:40), the Law being the natural laws contained in the “Law” and the Prophets, and not including new laws that were introduced for circumstances as they arose. 33

The point, which Ephrem could be making in this exegetical passage is the essence of the law and the practice of the law. On the one hand, Ephrem promotes the overarching principle of the rabbinical formula of universal ethics of not doing to one’s neighbour what is hateful to oneself. This Ephrem calls the natural laws of the Torah and the Prophets. On the other hand, 33

See ExodCom 20:3, p. 57.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

225

Ephrem also mentions the everyday occurring sub-laws, such as the divorce laws and agricultural practices of the time 34. One has to highlight that in Ephrem’s appreciation of the Decalogue he clearly uses the two major ingredients of it, which were identified at the beginning of this chapter. Ephrem’s Decalogue, therefore, equals Monotheism plus Ethics. The monotheistic aspect of it shows when he highlights the monotheistic principle of ‘I am the Lord’ 35, while the ethical principles of the law follows the proclamation of Monotheism 36. What Ephrem seems to be doing also in his recitation of the Ten Commandments is to put them in a New Testament context; that is to present them in such a manner that they illustrate the two-commanded maxima of Matthew 22:40, which highlights the monotheistic principle of one God and the ethical principle of loving one’s neighbour as yourself, from which all the ‘ethical’ commandments of the Decalogue follow naturally. The context of the Matthew verses is Jesus’ reply to the question of the Pharisees about the greatest commandment from the Decalogue: Mathew 22:37–40: Jesus replied: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

The following part of the study will look closely into the concept of one’s neighbour, as it is suggested by the ethical principle of the exegetical appreciation of the Decalogue in rabbinic literature and in the writings of Ephrem. The study will also look at the concept of one’s neighbour in the Qur’an. Salvesen suggests that Ephrem might be referring to the divorce laws and agricultural customs in his passage. See in Salvesen, A., The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem (Kottayam, India: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1995), 57. 35 See ExodCom 20:1, p. 56. 36 See ExodCom 20:2, p. 57. 34

226

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

WHO ARE YOUR NEIGHBOURS: JEWS, CHRISTIANS OR MUSLIMS?

This part of the chapter will look closely into the progression of the concept of one’s neighbour throughout the three monotheistic exegetical traditions: from the Qur’anic strict exclusivity of treating with love only the Muslim neighbour, via Rabbinical exclusivity as well as inclusivity (as suggested by Leviticus 19:18), to Christian universality of loving one’s enemy. Such an exercise is important in order to understand better the relevant verses from the respective exegetical sources selected for this study. Reading literally the relevant verses in the Qur’an one can get the impression that, on the surface, the implication is for identifying one’s neighbour as only the person who is of the same faith. This could be seen as an exclusive way of interpreting the Qur’anic standpoint of the concept of loving one’s neighbour. Therefore, a closer look into the definition of one’s neighbour in the Qur’an is important. Can one entertain the possibility of an inclusive approach in the verses of the Qur’an, which suggest love to any neighbour of any faith? The focus of the further research will be on trying to determine the ways of interpreting the concept of the neighbour in the Qur’an. Starting from the Christian maxim of love to one’s enemy, it becomes clear that the Qur’an does not advocate love for one’s enemies, as there are no verses to be found in the Qur’an suggesting that. Instead of love to the enemy, the Qur’an suggests showing justice to someone whom you hate. This could be seen as a preventative measure in the Qur’an advising a believer to prioritise impartial justice over personal feelings of hate. Hence, the Qur’anic advice to the believers is as follows: Q.5:8: You who believe, be steadfast in your devotion to God and bear witness impartially: do not let hatred of others lead you away from justice, but adhere to justice, for that is closer to awareness of God. Be mindful of God: God is well aware of all that you do.

The Qur’anic verse sets a clear measure of one’s justice, and that is utter honesty and justification of one’s actions in the eyes of

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

227

God who is aware of all. The other preventative measure in the Qur’an with regards to one’s enemy is the advocacy of forgiveness, by setting it along-side the Old Testament controlling harm formula of ‘an eye for an eye’: Q.42:40: Let harm be requited by an equal harm, though anyone who forgives and puts things right will have his reward from God Himself – He does not like those who do wrong.

Although the Qur’an does not abolish the ‘eye for an eye’ law, the statement above allows the opportunity to forgive instead of punishment. The sentiment of the verse is also that it is forgiveness that is pleasing to God and is rewarded by Him. The verse below goes a step further in the conduct of the believers and requires forgiveness from them. In this way the believer leaves Judgement to God, while choosing personal forgiveness over personal judgement: Q.45:14: Tell the believers to forgive those who do not fear God’s days [of punishment in this word, not the Day of Judgement] – He will requite people for what they have done.

Here again the Qur’an advocates the preventative measure for controlling the believers in executing Judgement on people who do not fear God. However, the Qur’anic suggestion is not to love, but to forgive, that is to execute mercy rather than judgement. The reason for this approach in the Qur’an could be the following. The enemies of people (or of Muslims) are identified with the enemies of God, and therefore, they have to be separated from true believers as a bad influence. Thus, the Qur’an offers segregation and advises true believers to be separate from the disbelievers by rejecting the wrongdoers as a sign of total acceptance of God’s law: Q.60:1: You who believe, do not take My enemies and yours as allies, showing them friendship when they have rejected the truth you have received, and have driven you and the Messenger out simply because you believe in God, your Lord

228

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD – not if you truly emigrated in order to strive for My cause and seek My good pleasure. You secretly show them friendship - I know all you concealed and all you reveal – but any of you who do this are straying from the right path.

The summary of the verses from the Qur’an could lead to the conclusion that the Qur’an projects the preventative measures with regard to the concept of one’s neighbour. The advice of the Qur’an is to offer justice to the ones one hates, to offer forgiveness along-side the ‘eye for an eye’ principle, and to propose forgiveness as a conditional requirement from the believer. However, whether the advice of the Qur’an has an exclusive application to all, or only to the Muslims is an open ended question. If one is to base the argument on the verses in this study, then the definitions of the Qur’an are addressed to the believers only. However, there is also a possibility to apply the Qur’anic teaching universally, and in that case it should cover believers and unbelievers alike. At this point of the chapter the ambiguity of the Qur’an will remain as such. The following part of the chapter will look into the possible definitions of one’s neighbour in Judaism.

IS THERE LOVE FOR ENEMIES IN JUDAISM?

Variable interpretations of the definitions are possible in Judaism. If one is to base the definition of one’s neighbour on Leviticus 19:18 then one can only define a neighbour as a person from ‘among your people’. Thus, the commandment not to seek revenge against the neighbour could not be applicable for someone outside the definition of ‘the people’. Therefore, there could be a primary sense of the precept to love only the Israelite. 37 However, there are also instructions in Judaism that suggest expanding the OT formula of an ‘eye for an eye’ into a more universal expression of righteousness. For example, Rabbi Joshua taught: “An evil eye, the evil nature, and hatred of men, put 37

See also Deut.25:17–19, Exod.23:4, Job.31:29, Psalm 109.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

229

one out of the world” 38 or another universal advice to expand charity to all people: “It is a law of peace to support the poor of all peoples as well as the poor of Israel, to assist their sick, to bury their dead” 39. In extending the prospect of Salvation outside Judaism there is the following statement: “God judges the nations by their righteous members” 40; “The pious ones of the nations of the world have a share in the future life”; “righteous men who are always to be found among the heathen, and whose merits save their peoples” 41. As far as the teaching of the Talmud is concerned about how to treat anyone, the advice is to treat people the same, even if they are of another faith: “It is forbidden to deceive anyone, even a heathen” 42. And finally, the following remark clearly states that the definition of one’s neighbour in Judaism should be an inclusive one in order to include all people: “Cultivate peace with thy brethren, thy neighbours, with all men, even the heathen” 43. It is clear that the teaching of the Talmud, which is the main rabbinic source of Law and legislation, favours the inclusive definition of the commandment to love one’s neighbour. The following part of the study will look into the Christian appreciation of the commandment.

THE CONCEPT OF LOVING ONE’S ENEMY IN CHRISTIANITY

The concept of loving one’s enemy as an expansion of the OT commandment of loving one’s neighbour is unprecedented. This concept is expressed in the New Testament verses below: Matthew 5.43–48: You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy.” But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heav38 39 40 41 42 43

See in Abot, Pirḳe ii. 15. See in Giṭṭin (Talmud) 61a. See in Abodah Zarah 3a. See in Ḥullin (Talmud) 92a. See in Ḥullin (Talmud) 94a. See in Berakhot (Talmud) 17a.

230

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD en; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Without going very much into the theme of definition of neighbours and practicing love to one’s neighbour in the various religious traditions, certain conclusions can be drawn from the textual examples presented above. It is unavoidable that the Christian exegetes in considering the verses about loving one’s neighbour, will have the NT maxima as a measure. However, it is possible to assume that the Qur’an does not appreciate the NT maxima of loving one’s enemy, nor does it seem to appreciate the golden rule of the rabbinical ethics of Rabbi Hillel. What the Qur’an offers is an application of love exclusively to the faithful. Therefore, the Qur’an could be seen as stepping away from the biblical commandment of universal application of the golden rule of ethics. The exclusivity of the Qur’an seems to apply love only to the truly believing neighbour. There is also a possibility within Judaism to apply the good treatment of the neighbour ethnically. The neighbour who is deserving good treatment, according to the Leviticus 19:18 is the neighbour from one’s people. Therefore, both Qur’an and the OT are limiting the concept of one’s neighbour to Muslims or Jews respectively 44. There is an exegetical possibility of an inclusive approach to one’s neighbour in the Qur’an. If one reads the message of the Qur’an as a universal message, addressed not only to Muslims, but to all humanity then the definition of one’s neighbour can be expanded. Therefore, if the Qur’an gives the message to all humanity then the concept of one’s neighbour becomes universal. However, if one looks at the Qur’anic message to Muslims However, as the Talmudic references in this chapter showed, rabbinical advice is to expand the maxima of one’s neighbour to be applied universally. 44

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

231

alone, then the concept of one’s neighbour becomes limited to Muslim neighbours only. This brings exegesis as the crucial question in determining one’s approach to the practice of the commandment to love one’s neighbour. The NT message appears to be introducing the Christcentred sacrificial example of love, which is universally inclusive and applicable to everyone, including one’s enemy. The Jewish maxima of Hillel: do to others what you want to be done to you, and the Qur’anic maxima of forgiving the faithful and rejecting the unfaithful are the ways to control unnecessary violence. Sacrifice in the Qur’an, however, has a place as a matter of fighting for the purity of faith and against the unbelievers 45. What is important to notice here that in each religious tradition, the definition of love towards one’s neighbour is formulated in reference to the biblical texts and to the religious practices of the time. Therefore, the Qur’an, together with Jewish and Christian exegetes, can be seen as staying in apologetic dialogue with each other and with the challenges of the times during which the texts were created. As has been demonstrated in this chapter, the selected sources of Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic origin are interdependent in defining their ethical or exegetical messages in relation to the formula of treating the other in the same way as you want to be treated. As a result of reading the selected exegetical writings on the matter of love of God and to the people, one can conclude that each of the selected exegetical sources was sharing its perspective on the matter internally, that is within its religious tradition, but also externally, that is as a reaction or as an apology to the writings of other religious traditions of Monotheism. In the following part, the research in this chapter will look closely into the presentation of the Decalogue in the Qur’an.

On Love in the Qur’an see H.R.H. Prince Ghazi, Love in the Holy Qur’an (Kazi Publication: Chicago, 2010). 45

232

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

THE RESEMBLANCE OF DECALOGUE IN THE QUR’AN

There is no direct narrative in the Qur’an, which recites all the ten commandments in one place, although the Qur’an refers to the event of Moses receiving the Tablets 46 on the mountain. However, many of the commandments can be traced throughout the text of the Qur’an. The general observation is that with matters of the Law, the Qur’an often refers to the children of Israel as recipients of it. For example, the Surah 17 of the Qur’an, AlIsra, ‘The Night Journey’, Q.17:22–37, gives a set of rules very closely related to the commandments of Exodus 20:1–17. Further on in this study there will be an attempt to single out some of the commandments in the Decalogue in order to analyse the way in which the Qur’an represents them in its text. Looking at the first clause of the first commandment, Exodus states the following: Exodus 20:2: I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the Egypt, out of the land of slavery

From this Exodus verse, a number of important elements can be singled out. First of all it is the message and the advocacy of Monotheism: ‘I am the Lord your God’. Secondly it is the biblical presentation of the relationship between God and Israel. God is portrayed in this verse as the God of the people of Israel who redeems His people from slavery and brings them out of Egypt into the promised land The passage below from the Qur’an could be read alongside the biblical verse, and it is not difficult to notice that the Qur’an reflects on all of the motives mentioned in Exodus 20:2: Q.7:137: and We made those who had been oppressed succeed to both the east and the west of the land that We had blessed. Your Lord’s good promise to the Children of Israel was fulfilled, because of their patience…

46

See Q.7:145.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

233

There is the definition in the Qur’anic verse of God as the God of Israel: ‘Your God’. Also there is a depiction of the relationship between Israel and God, which includes the promise and its fulfilment in relation to the land (the land, which is blessed) and to the deliverance of Israel from oppression. Additionally there is exegetical furtherance of the biblical verse in the Qur’an where it states that the conditional promise of God to the people of Israel was fulfilled because of the virtue of the people’s patience. This verse in the Qur’an, therefore, can be seen as a positive Qur’anic appreciation of the God-Israel relationship, as well as the exegesis of Exodus 20:2. The following verse in the Qur’an also reflects on the closeness in the God-Israel relationship, when God is depicted as the God of the people who takes control of their fate by being their saviour 47 from oppression: Q.20:80: Children of Israel, We rescued you from your enemies. We made a pledge with you on the right hand side of the mountain. We sent down manna and quails for you.

ُ�ُ�ْ‫ن و َ� ََّ�ل ْنَا �َلَي‬ َ َ �ْ ��� �ْ ‫طورِ ا‬ ّ ُ ‫ل ق َ ْد أ� ��َي ْنَا�ُ� مّ ِنْ �َدُوِّ� ُ ْ� وَو َا�َدْ� َا� ُ ْ� � َان ِبَ ال‬ َ ِ‫� َا �َ�ِي �إ�ْ� َائي‬ ‫ا� ْ� ََنّ و َال َّس� ْ� َى‬

The God of the Children of Israel, according to the Qur’anic definitions, is the God of Monotheism, the deliverer of the people from oppression, and the saviour. He is also a provider of justice for people, as well as the God of forgiveness 48. He is also a caring God who guides and trains people in faith. The Qur’an clearly states that there was an on-going dynamic in the God-Israel relationship, which involved promises and pledges from their God. The God of Israel is depicted as taking the children of Israel’s fate close at hand. This is one of the five occasions in the On the depiction of God as the Saviour of Israel see also Q.44.30: We saved Israel from their degrading suffering. 48 God’s attributes of Mercy and Justice are clearly present in the Qur’anic definitions of God of the Children of Israel. This is a point of commonality between the Qur’an, Midrash, and Ephrem. 47

234

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Qur’an when God’s speech is directly addressed to the sons of Israel, Bani Israel, in the vocative case, Yaa Bani Israel – ‫� َا �َ�ِي‬ ‫ل‬ َ ِ‫إ�ْ� َائي‬.� 49, which can be also translated as ‘Oh Children of Israel! Analysing further the dynamic in the God-Israel relationship as depicted in the selected verses in the Qur’an, the following two verses from Surah 20 are indicative. They vocalise the definition of the God of Israel as their provider, but also as a Judge of the people. This definition in verse 81 is balanced with another attribute of God in the relationship with His people, as the God of forgiveness who is willing to guide the people. It is important to highlight here the familiar concept of God’s Mercy and of God’s Judgement, which often go hand in hand with each other in Rabbinical writings and also in the exegesis of Ephrem 50. In the two verses of the Surah 20, verses 81 and 82, both attributes of God are present, and one follows after the other 51. Overall, the verses below, when analysed in the context of the relationship of God to the Children of Israel, present the picture of a very intimate bond between them. The God of Israel 260 F

The other three times it is in Sura Al-Baqarah, The Cow, Q.2.40, 2.47, 2:122 (and the latter verse is identical to Q.2:47) The instances refer to the covenant of people of Israel with God, their special relationship with Him, and the election motif. The only one other occasion when the Children of Israel are addressed by direct speech in the vocative case is by Jesus in Q.61:6: Jesus, son of Mary, said, ‘Children of Israel, I am sent to you by God, confirming the Torah that came before me and bringing good news of a Messenger to follow me whose name shall be Ahmad.’ Yet when he came to them with clear signs, they said: ‘This is obviously sorcery.’ َّ ‫ن‬ ‫ل � َأ� � ِي‬ ٍ ‫التوْر َاة ِ وَم ُبَ� ِّ� ًا � ِ�َسُو‬ َ ِ ‫ص ّدِقًا �ِّ�َا بَ�ْنَ �َ� َيَّ م‬ َ ّ‫ا��� ِ إ� لَيْ� ُ� ُم‬ َ ِ‫ن � َْ� � َ� َ � َا �َ�ِي إ� �ْ� َائي‬ ُ ْ �‫ل � ِي� َ� ا‬ َ ‫و �َ� ْذ قَا‬ َّ ُ‫ل إ� � ِّي رَسُول‬ ٌ‫ات قَالُوا هَذَا �ِ � ْر ٌ ُمّبِ�ن‬ ِ َ ‫م ِن بَعْدِي ا�ْم ُه ُ أ� �ْ�َد ُ فَ�َ� َّا � َاءَه ُم � ِال ْبَي ِّن‬ 50 See MekRSbY p. 4–5, 136–137; ExodRab I.35; DeutRab II.12,18–21 about examples of rabbinical exegesis about the concept of Mercy and Justice, and also see a detailed look at these and other texts in my book, Ephrem, a Jewish sage… p. 157–167 for rabbinical material, and ibid, p. 168–170 on Ephrem’s presentation of the concept in his Exegesis of Exodus. 51 The attribute of God’s Judgement is in Q.20:81: ‘My wrath’, and the attribute of God’s Mercy is in Q.20:81: ‘I am most forgiving’. 49

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

235

is depicted as a caring God who trains people in faith and in relationship with himself: Q.20:81: Eat from the good things We have provided for you, but do not overstep the bounds, or My wrath will descend on you. Anyone on whom My wrath descends is truly fallen. 82: Yet I am most forgiving towards those who repent, believe, do righteous deeds, and stay on the right path.

Commenting further on the attention of the Qur’an given to the children of Israel one has to highlight here that in the instance of the verses above, although they proceed from the very contextual speech of God towards the Children of Israel in Q.20:80, the message of the verses 81 and 82 is of universal significance and directed to the children of Israel as well as to the rest of the people who attempt to have a relationship with their God, with God of Israel, and with Allah. Therefore, one can say that the Children of Israel are used in the Qur’an as a typological example of the chosen people to whom God keeps on addressing His guidance, ordinances and commandments in order to keep the relationship going. The verse quoted below is a clear example of God reminding the people of the favours, which He bestowed on them. Additionally the verse looks at the Covenant between God and the people as a double obliging covenant. The Qur’an here reflects on the point that the God of Israel almost holds Himself accountable for the promises of the Covenant, and consequently reports on His own actions in fulfilling the Covenant. Hence, the lesson for Israel, which God is addressing to the people, is to hold on to their side of the Covenant and to fear no one, but God: Q.2.40: Children of Israel, remember how I blessed you. Honour your pledge to Me and I will honour My pledge to you: I am the One you should fear. َ‫وف بِع َ ْهدِ� ُ ْ� و �َ� َّ�اي‬ ِ ‫ل ا ْذ� ُ� ُوا ن ِ ْعمَ�ِي َ َّال�ِي أ� نْعَمْتُ �َلَيْ� ُ ْ� و َأ� ْوف ُوا بِع َ ْهدِي ُأ‬ َ ِ‫� َا �َ�ِي �إ�ْ� َائي‬ ‫ن‬ ِ ‫فَارْه َب ُو‬

The emphatic address of God to the Children of Israel needs to be translated here as Oh Children of Israel! (‫ل‬ َ ِ‫)� َا �َ�ِي �إ�ْ� َائي‬. There is a tone of special attention to the addressee of God’s speech and

236

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

also to the meaningfulness of the message, which is to follow. The message to follow is the direction of God to the people in the path of Monotheism – ‘I am the One’ (and me alone – َ‫– و �َ� َّ�اي‬ wa-iyyāya), and also in the process of training the people in the relationship, which has resemblance to reverse the concept of Imitatio Dei – honour your pledge to Me, and I will honour My pledge to You. The verse also brings in the aspect of the conditional relationship between the people and their God. Two parties are responsible for keeping the relationship going, which makes the role of the people important and vital for the GodIsrael association, as their actions determine either the success or failure of their relationship with God. The verse below brings another aspect to the God-Israel relationship. In addressing the people God treats the people as one entity, which He singles out from all of the other peoples. The reflection of the Qur’an on the God-Israel relationship carries with it a personal note. Israel is not a random people, but the selected nation, which is chosen by God: Q.2:47: Children of Israel, remember how I blessed you and favoured you over other people. َ‫ل ا ْذ� ُ� ُوا ن ِ ْعم َ�ِي َ َّال�ِي أ� نْعَمْتُ �َلَيْ� ُ ْ� و َأ� � ِّي ف ََضّ ل ْتُ� ُ ْ� �َ�َ� الْع َا�� َ� ِن‬ َ ِ‫� َا �َ�ِي �إ�ْ� َائي‬

This verse is repeated another time towards the end of the Surah, which indicates the vitality of the message, which it conveys 52. The relationship between the Children of Israel and God in the Qur’an carries universal significance if the concept of the Children of Israel is taken as an exegetical type. The Qur’an advocates the conditional nature of the relationship between the Children of Israel and God. Therefore, the Children of Israel are accountable for success or failure in their relationship with God. The Qur’an also could be seen as spreading conditional nature to the chosen status of Israel among all nations

52

See also in Q.2:122.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

237

OTHER DEFINITIONS OF GOD IN THE QUR’AN IN RELATION TO THE FIRST COMMANDMENT OF THE DECALOGUE

The omnipresence of God in the Qur’an is described in many ways. He knows all things, answers prayers, and has multiple beautiful names attributed to Him in Islam. Some of these definitions of God are singled out in this work in their relation to the first commandment of Exodus 20:2–3. The selection of verses from the Qur’an, which is presented in this part of the work is collected according to two principles. Firstly, by their relation to the Monotheistic confession of faith in the first biblical commandment of the Decalogue, and secondly, by their relevance to other exegetical traditions of Jewish or Christian origin. The first example is a clear illustration of both principles. The verse below proclaims clear Monotheism. Also this verse could be considered in relation to the Christian definition of Jesus as the son of God. Therefore, this verse of the Qur’an could be seen as an apology to the definition of Christ in the Nicene Creed of the Early Church 53: Q.112:1–4: Say: He is God, the One, 2: God, the eternal. 3: He begot no one nor was He begotten; 4: No one is comparable to Him.

َ ُ ���‫ا‬ ٌ‫ا��� ُ أ� �َد‬ َّ َّ َ ‫الصّ مَد ُ قُلْ ه ُو‬

ٌ‫كف ُو ًا أ� �َد‬ ُ ُ �َّ � ‫� َ ْ� ي�َِ�ْ و َ� َ ْ� يُو�َ�ْ و َ� َ ْ� يَكُن‬

The whole Surah 112 is about the unity, sincerity, and oneness of God, and can be clearly seen in the context of the first commandment of the Decalogue. But it could be seen also as a reaction to the Christological formula of the Creed and to the Trinitarian dogma of the early Church. 54

The definition of Christian Monotheism is taken from the Nicene creed of the church stating the faith in ‘One God’. 54 The Nicene Creed of the Church presents Christ as the ‘only begotten Son of God’. 53

238

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

In the following definition of God as the Creator and sustainer of all, the Qur’an allows anthropomorphic qualities as an illustration of God’s omnipresence: Q.42:11: [God] the Creator of the heavens and earth.’ He made mates for you from among yourselves – and for the animals too – so that you may multiply. There is nothing like Him: He is the All Hearing and All Seeing.

�ْ ُ �ُ ‫ن ا ْ���نْع َا ِم أ� ْزو َا� ًا � َ ْ�رَؤ‬ َ ِ ‫س� ُ ْ� أ� ْزو َا� ًا وَم‬ ِ ُ ‫ل ل�َ� ُ� مّ ِنْ أ� نف‬ َ َ ‫جع‬ َ ‫ض‬ ِ ‫َات و َا ْ� �� ْر‬ ِ ‫فَاطِر ُ ال َّسم َاو‬ ُ �� ِ‫ْس �َ�ِث ْ�ِ� ِ �َ�ْء ٌ و َه ُو َ ال َّسمِي ُع ال ْب َص‬ َ ‫ف ِيه ِ لَي‬

The above verse could be seen as being created in relation to the anthropomorphic definitions of God in the Bible, and in Jewish and Christian exegesis. The fact that further on in the development of the Muslim exegetical and theological appreciations of God, the tradition of ascribing to God anthropomorphic qualities diminishes and becomes less popular, could also bear connection to the Jewish and Christian traditions, especially to the Christian one where God became a man and was appreciated and acknowledged as a man. In reflecting on God the Creator, the verses below depict God as the One whose creation was for the purpose of people’s appreciation. God’s omnipresence in people’s affairs was intended at the creation, when the luminaries were created, and after the creation God is extending His helping hand to the people in their labours: Q.14:32–33: It is God who hath created the heavens and earth, who has sent down water from the sky and with it brought produce to flourish you; He has made ships useful to you, sailing the sea by His command, and the rivers too; 33: He has made the sun and the moon useful to you, steady on their paths; He has made the night and the day useful to you

In the description of the Old Testament prophets the Qur’an clearly depicts God as the One who bestowed peace and security in the life of Abraham, and preserved his family from worshiping idols: Q.14:35: Remember when Abraham said, Lord, make this town safe! Preserve me and my offspring from idolatry… 38:

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

239

Our Lord? You know well what we conceal and what we reveal: nothing at all is hidden from God, on earth or in heaven.

Expanding God’s definition as a protector of one family into the Divine protection for all, the Qur’an also depicts God as the giver of life: Q.42:9: How can they take protectors other than Him? God alone is the Protector: He gives life to the dead; He has power over all things, 10: Whatever you may differ about is for God to judge. [Say], ‘Such is God, my Lord. In Him I trust and to Him I turn.

Returning back to the definition of God as the God of the Old Testament Patriarchs, one can see in the verse cited below that the Qur’an rephrases the widely accepted Jewish and Christian biblical definition of God as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob 55 by introducing Ishmael into the formula of the forefathers: Q.2:133: Were you [Jews] there to see when death came upon Jacob? When he said to his sons, ‘What will you worship after I am gone?’ they replied, ‘We shall worship your God and the God of your fathers, Abraham, Ishmael, and Isaac, one single God: we devote ourselves to Him’.

In changing the name in the Old Testament formula, the Qur’an is being suggestive of the name in its presentation of the sacrifice of Abraham from Genesis 22. Although the Qur’an does not give a name to the son of Abraham whom he took for sacrifice in Q.37:100–117, its tradition of exegesis has fluctuated over the years between Isaac and Ishmael, while settling later on Ish-

See Exodus 3:6 where God revealed his Name to Moses and introduced Himself to Him as “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob”; See also this formula featuring in the New Testament, e.g. Acts 3:13, Matthew 22:32. 55

240

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

mael. 56 What is important to add at this point is the fact that here the Qur’an is clearly referring to the Old Testament formula for the God of Israel being referred to as the God of Forefathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. By changing one name in the formula the Qur’an makes an attempt to revise the Jewish and Christian definitions of God by presenting its own. The fact that the possible addressees of this verse were Jews, only reinforces that this verse is clearly written as an apology of Qur’an to Judaism, and, therefore, stands in direct contrast to it. Additionally, the importance of this verse for the theological appreciation of the definitions of God and of Monotheism is marked by the ending of the verse ‘one single God’, which could be linked to the earlier verse Q.2:128: ‘Our Lord, make us devoted’ (Aslama), and is used as an interpretation of Islam as devotion 57. In its definitions of God, the Qur’an uses the God of the Children of Israel in its stories about Moses, or more specifically in the following description of the drowning of the Pharaoh: Q.10:90: We took the Children of Israel across the sea. Pharaoh and his troops pursued them in arrogance and aggression. But as he was drowning, he cried, ‘I believe there is no God except the one Children of Israel believe in. I submit to Him’.

The Qur’an here depicts Pharaoh confessing Monotheism, and also indicating that the God of that Monotheism is the God of the Children of Israel. The sacrifice of Abraham is depicted in Surah 37:100–111, but the name of the son is not given in the Qur’an. However, the later traditions of Islamic Exegesis suggest that Abraham brought his other son, Ishmael for the sacrifice. This was not the case of the early Islamic Exegesis. Abraham was sacrificing Isaac, and then the legend evolved of Abraham sacrificing Ishmael, which lineage was traced to Mohammad. See Firestone, Reuven (1990). Journeys in Holy Lands: The Evolution of the Abraham-Ishmael Legends in Islamic Exegesis. Albany, NY: State University of NY Press. pp. 39–40; also see Calder, Norman (2000). “4”. In Andrew Rippin. The Qur'an: formative interpretation. Aldershot: Ashgate. pp. 92–95. 57 See in Haleem, The Qur’an, p. 21, footnotes a,b. 56

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

241

Summarising the Qur’anic definition of God in the selected verses, one can point out that the Qur’an is clearly instancing and promoting Monotheism. With such a strong emphasis on Monotheism the Qur’an could be reacting to Christological dogma. The following verse of the Qur’an could be seen as an apology to Christian theology. Its context is Christological dogma of the Church, the Trinitarian dogma of the Church, and also the claim of Christianity in its belief in ‘One God’ through its profession of faith in the Nicene Creed. 58 The verse below, therefore, could only be read as the Qur’an stating its point on Monotheism and in relation to the Christian position on it: Q.5:72: Those who say, ‘God is the Messiah, son of Mary,’ have defied God. The Messiah himself said, ‘Children of Israel, worship God, my Lord and your Lord.’ If anyone associates others with God, God will forbid him from the Garden, and Hell will be his home. No one will help [such] evildoers.

The attempt in the Qur’an is to refer to the Christian traditions or scriptures where the sayings of Jesus are preserved. Therefore, the Qur’an here can only be seen as openly engaging with Christian traditions. The association of other gods with the God of Israel brings the research in this chapter to the second clause of the first commandment of the Decalogue.

EXOD.20:3: ‘YOU SHALL HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME’ IN THE QUR’AN

The Exodus formula of 20:3 is very significant in the writings of the Qur’an and in the profession of the faith in Islam. The selection of the verses below will offer illustrations of the point. The verse below professes the oneness of God and illustrates His other qualities, as the forgiving God, but also the One who knows all: The dating of the creation of the Greed of Nicea was during the first Ecumenical Council of the church in the year 325 CE. See also William Carl Placher, Readings in the History of Christian Theology (1988), p. 52–53. 58

242

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Q.47:19: So [Prophet], bear in mind [lit. know] that there is no God but God, and ask forgiveness for your sins, and for believing men and women. God knows whenever any of you move, and whenever any of you stay still.

The selection of the Qur’anic verses in this part of the work is made, firstly in its relation to the biblical verse above, but also to demonstrate the qualities and definitions of God, which are exhibited in the Qur’an in relation to the monotheistic principle of faith. The finality of the God of the Qur’an is declared in the verse below: Q.28:70: He is God; there is no God but Him; all praise belongs to Him in this world and in the next; His is the Judgement; and to Him you shall be returned.

There seems to be a certain pattern in the Qur’an to offer religious advice, or a pattern of behaviour after proclaiming or professing the monotheism of faith by citing that God is One, and there is no God but Him. The pattern is similar to biblical phraseology of conveying the Decalogue. At the top of the commandments there is a Monotheistic profession of faith, and after that there are ethical norms of proper religious behaviour. On the one hand, therefore, the Qur’an carries on with the pattern of the biblical traditions. On the other hand, the Qur’anic attempt is to prioritise certain qualities and definitions of God, which are more relevant to its message. In the instance of the verse above it is the attribute of the Judgement of God, as well as this very God being the focal point of one’s life, one’s praise, and one’s initial and final destination 59. In relation to the verse above, it is understandable that the teaching of the Qur’an concerning Monotheism is very clear. The first point in the scale measuring the faith of a person is their profession of Monotheism, and therefore no association with other gods. 60 Thus, the

59 60

Initial destination in creation, and the final destination in the next world. Association with other gods means Polytheism in the Qur’an.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

243

illustration of the person of true faith in the Qur’an was taken from Abraham: Q.3:67: Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian. He was upright and devoted to God, never the idolater. َ‫ن ا� ْ�ُ�ْ�ِكِ�ن‬ َ ِ ‫م َا ك َ�نَ �إ �ْ� َاه ِ�� ُ �َ� ُودِ ًّ�ا وَ� َ� نَ�ْ� َان ًّيِا و َل�َكِن ك َ�نَ حَن ِيفًا ُمّسْ� ِ�ًا وَم َا ك َ�نَ م‬

The expression َ‫ن ا� ْ�ُ�ْ�ِكِ�ن‬ َ ِ ‫ وَم َا ك َ�نَ م‬literally means that Abraham was not with the polytheists. The trilateral route for the noun affiliating with polytheism is shīn rā kāf (‫ )ش ر ك‬and it carries with it the meanings of partnership as well as polytheism. The classical Arabic dictionary gives the following description of the triliteral route meaning ‘a sharer, participator, partaker or partner with another, a co-partner, an associate or a colleague, of another’ or ‘a sharer in what is not divided’ 61. Therefore, the Qur’anic use of this word in relation to the first biblical commandment of Exodus 20:3 brings the emphasis on the monotheistic nature of Abraham’s life, and therefore his eligibility to be considered as a true believer, which in the Qur’anic sense means Monotheism among other matters. The Qur’an separates all people into two camps, the ones who profess and practice Monotheism and the ones who do not. There is an attempt to segregate the two camps from each other. Hence, the following verse gives a warning for the followers of God to avoid those who do not believe One God, i.e. the polytheists: 27F

Q.6:106: Follow what has been revealed to you from your Lord, there is no god but Him. Turn away from those who join other gods with Him. َ‫ن ا� ْ�ُ�ْ�ِكِ�ن‬ ْ �‫ك � َ� �إ�َ� َ �إ َّ�� ه ُو َ و َأ� ْع‬ َ ِّ ‫ك م ِن َّر ب‬ َ ْ ‫�ي َ �إلَي‬ ِ ‫ا َّتب ِ�عْ م َا ُأو‬ ِ َ ‫ِض ع‬

Turning away from the path of Polytheism indirectly suggests turning towards the path of Monotheism, and the lifestyle of a Lane, Edward William, Arabic-English Lexicon, Book I (London: Williams & Norgate 1863), p. 1542. 61

244

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

true believer. The following part of this study will look closely into the concept of the Jealous God, as He is described in Exodus 20:5 in further descriptions of Monotheism in the Decalogue.

THE CONCEPT OF THE JEALOUS GOD – ‫ – ֵ ֣א ל ַק ָ֔נּ א‬IN THE BIBLICAL NARRATIVE AND IN THE Q UR’AN

One of the definitions of God from the biblical narrative could be the one of the Jealous God. This concept stands in direct relationship with the forbiddance of Polytheism, and can be seen as an anthropomorphic attempt for justification of Monotheism from the Divine point of view. More so, this is the definition, which God volunteers about Himself in direct speech while giving Moses the Commandments. Therefore, the concept of the Jealous God emerges from the Decalogue and consequently from the verses of Exodus 20:5–2: Exodus 20:5–6: You shall not bow down to them or worship them: for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

‫�ה ֙י� ֵ ֣אל ַק ֔ ָנּא‬ ֶ֨ ‫הו֤ה ֱא‬ ָ ְ‫ם ִ ֣כּי ָ ֽאנ ִֹ֞כי י‬ ֒ ‫ח ֥ו ֣ה ָל ֶ ֖ה ֮ם וְ ֣ל ֹא ָת ָﬠ ְב ֵ ֑ד‬ ֶ ְ ‫א־ת ְשׁ ַתּ‬ ִ ֹ ‫ ֽל‬5 ‫ל־ר ֵבּ ִ ֖ﬠים ְלשׂ ֹנְ ָ ֽ ֑אי׃‬ ִ ‫ל־שׁ ֵלּ ִ ֥שׁים וְ ַﬠ‬ ִ ‫ל־בּ ִנ֛ים ַﬠ‬ ָ ‫֠ ֹפּ ֵקד ֲﬠוֹ֨ן ָא ֧בֹת ַﬠ‬ ‫וֹתי׃‬ ֽ ָ ‫וּלשׁ ְֹמ ֵ ֥רי ִמ ְצ‬ ְ ‫וְ ֥ ֤ﬠֹ ֶשׂה ֶ ֖֨ח ֶס ֙ד ַל ֲא ָל ִ ֑֔פים ְלא ֲֹה ַ ֖בי‬6 In studying these verses in the context of the research in this book one has to single out at least two lines of thought from it. These two lines of thought will be developed in this part of the chapter. The first attempt of this part is to look into the concept of the Jealous God, while the second one is to trace the concept of children paying for the sins of their fathers for three and four generations. Both of the two notions are derived from the biblical text, and therefore it is crucial to see how they are addressed in the Qur’an. The significance of the choice in this study is because neither of the two notions is supported in the Qur’an. The first one of the Jealous God is not even present in the Qur’an,

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

245

while the second one, the Qur’an presents the verses where it clearly disagrees with it. Hence, in both cases, and more so, in the case of the second Qur’anic reaction, one can assume a dialogue in the Qur’an with the biblical narrative. Following the introduction to this part of the chapter, one has to state that there is no concept of the Jealous God in the Qur’an, and that jealousy and envy is attributed to evil rather than to God, as, for example in the Surah 113, The Daybreak, Dawn. This Surah only consists of five verses, of which the fifth clearly identifies envy as a mischief (ِّ�َ� – shark) from which one seeks refuge in the Lord of the Dawn. The actual Arabic word for jealousy (‫ – ���ة‬ghaira) is not present in the Qur’an in any context. The closest concept in the Qur’an is the concept of ‘the punishing God’, as for example, it is present in the verse below: Q.2.211: [Prophet], ask the Children of Israel how many clear signs We brought them. If anyone alters God’s blessings after he has received them, God is stern in punishment.

This concept of the punishing God has a clear connection to another concept of Justice which is very prominent in the message of the Qur’an. As mentioned earlier in this work, the concept of God’s Justice and God’s Mercy is a common concept for Jewish and Christian traditions. What is interesting is the fact that in Judaism, for example, these two attributes of God are often cited along each other, while in the Qur’an each of the attributes are allowed its own attention. For example, each Surah of the Qur’an is preceded by the recitation of the attribute of God being the Most Merciful and the Most Gracious. The continuous repetition of the statement suggests the importance of the message for the Qur’an. Also the concept of Justice and the Justice of God could be seen as being one of the central themes in the Qur’an, which is often presented as an independent concept, not necessarily as another side of the dual relationship of two attributes of God, i.e. Justice and Mercy, as it is in rabbinical exe-

246

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

gesis 62. There is however, a lengthy passage referring to God’s Judgement and the concept of Justice in the Midrash in relation to the Decalogue. The impression that one gets from the Midrash is that the concept of Justice is introduced through the concept of the Law. Therefore, the giving of the Law could be seen as the way of Israel being trained in the concept of Justice, as indicated in the passage below: ExodRab 30:1: Thus it is written, The strength also of the king who loveth justice (Ps.XCIX,4). When is strength assigned to God? When he executes judgement on the heathen … Strength belongs to the supreme King of kings, the Holy one, Blessed be He, and He loveth Justice and gave it to Israel His beloved’ 63 … God said to Israel: ‘Just as I could overstep the bounds of judgement on the heathen, yet do not overstep them but adhere to judgement, so must you not pass without the bounds of judgement 64.

Turning to the other Divine attribute of His Mercy, and touching upon the capacity of God to forgive sins, the Qur’an again draws the line on Monotheism in describing the forgiving capacity of God. In other words, there are sins which are forgivable in the Qur’an, and also there are ones which are not. And the unfor-

See on the Concept of God’s Mercy and Justice in my book, Ephrem the Jewish Sage, p. 157–167. On the concept of Justice in the Qur’an see Rosen, Lawrence on “Justice” in The Oxford Encyclopaedia of the Islamic World, ed. John L. Esposito, Oxford University Press, 2009; see also Rosen, Lawrence. The Justice of Islam: Comparative Perspectives on Islamic Law and Society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2000 63 ExodRab 30:1, p. 346. 64 ExodRab 30:1, p. 347–348; the other place in the Midrash stating the close link between the Law and Justice is the following: ‘R. Eleazar said: the whole Torah rests on justice.’ God purposefully gave the law after the Decalogue to teach the world that He punishes those who transgress the law. He did not overthrow Sodon till after it had perverted justice… Jerusalem, also, was not sent into exile before she had perverted justice’ (ExodRab 30:19, p. 368). 62

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

247

givable sins are the ones of polytheism, as the verse below suggests: Q.4:116: God does not forgive the worship of the others beside Him – though He does forgive whoever He will for lesser sins – for whoever does this has gone far, far astray.

‫ض َّل‬ َ ‫ك � َِّا��� ِ فَق َ ْد‬ ْ ِ�ْ�ُ� ‫� �� َِن �َ� َاء ُ وَم َن‬ َ ِ ‫ا��� َ � َ� ي َ ْغف ِر ُ أ� ن �ُ�ْ�َك َ بِه ِ و َي َ ْغف ِر ُ م َا د ُونَ ذ َل‬ ّ َ ‫�إ‬ َّ ‫ن‬ ‫ضَ� َ�� ً� بَع ِيدًا‬

This indicates that there are sins that are unforgivable in the eyes of God, and the sin of not fulfilling the first of the biblical commandments of Monotheism is one of them. However, there is no concept in the Qur’an that indicates that the children receive the punishment for the sins of the fathers who hate God. The Qur’an in fact suggests the opposite, that the children are not punishable for the sins of the fathers 65, and therefore, can be seen as mellowing down the strong statement of Exodus 20:5. The second half of the Exodus 20:5 statement, which has continuation in Exodus 20:6 presupposes the unlimited love of God shown to multiple generations of those who love God and keep His commandments. In the Qur’an there is an indication of this concept, but reverted from the following generations, and into God himself. Again the Qur’an leaves everything in the control of God when it states on a number of occasions that God ‘does forgive whoever He will’ – ُ ‫ – م َن �َ� َاء‬man yashāu 66, however, with clear indication that this particular charismatic endurance of God does not spread to those who break the first commandment, as the following Qur’anic verse indicates: 27F

See Q.17:15: ‘No soul will bear another’s burden, nor do We punish until We have sent a Messenger’; Q.53:38: ‘no soul shall bear the burden of another’; also Q.35:18: ‘No burdened soul will bear the burden of another: even if a heavily laden soul should cry for help, none of its load would be carried, not even by a close relative.’ 66 See, for example, in Q.4:116. 65

248

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Q.6:88: Such is God’s guidance: with it He guides whichever of His servants He will. If they have associated other gods with Him, all their deeds would have come to nothing. َ‫ا��� ِ �َ�ْدِي بِه ِ م َن �َ� َاء ُ م ِنْ عِبَادِه ِ و َلَوْ أ� �ْ�َكُوا �َ�بَ َِط عَ�ْ� ُم َّما ك َ�نُوا ي َ ْعم َ�ُ�ن‬ َ ِ ‫ذ َل‬ َّ ‫� هُدَى‬

There is a distinction in Qur’an, which suggests a limitation in the offer of God’s blessings, which are withdrawn from the sinners: Q.42:8: If God had so pleased, He could have made them a single community, but He admits to His mercy whoever He will; the evil-doers will have no one to protect or help them.

‫ل م َن �َ� َاء ُ �ِي رَ�ْ�َتِه ِ و َال َّظا�� ُِونَ م َا �َ� ُم مّ ِن‬ ُ � ِ �ْ ُ � ‫�دَة ً و َل�َكِن‬ ِ ‫ا��� ُ �َ�َع َلَه ُ ْم ُأ َّمة ً و َا‬ َّ َ ‫و َلَوْ شَاء‬ ٍ�� ِ‫و َ� ِ ٍيّ وَ� َ� نَص‬

The verse of the Qur’an below suggests that there is an implication of the sins of the father being transferred to their children, but it is not God who implicates or punishes the children, but the sinners themselves: Q.70:11: The guilty person will wish he could save himself from the suffering of that Day by sacrificing his sons…

The direct and clear contradiction to the biblical verse at hand are the verses of the Qur’an below. The message of these verses is opposite to the biblical verse suggesting the responsibility of the children for the sins of their parents until the third and the fourth generations. Hence, the immediate verse of the Qur’an below suggests that, although the good deeds are multiplied by the doer, the bad deeds are his responsibility only: Q.6:160: Whoever has done a good deed will have it ten times to his credit, but whoever has done a bad deed will be repaid only with its equivalent – they will not be wronged.

Adding to the verse above, the verse below states a contradictory position to the biblical argument in proclaiming that no one is responsible for another’s sins (Arabic. wazra meaning burden or sin): Q.6:164: Each soul is responsible for its own actions; no soul will bear the burden of another.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

249

This is also in disagreement with the Gospel statement of Paul when he encourages the Christians to ‘carry each other’s burdens’, and by this to fulfil the law of Christ 67. Although the New Testament and the Epistles are outside the scope of the research in this book, it is important to pause here on the Epistle of Paul with regard to this particular aspect relating to the law of Christ. Paul was an observant Jew (Pharisee) before he became a follower of Jesus. Therefore, his relationship with the Law was very serious and strict, as was and is the case with every observant Jews then and now. Therefore, when he offers his exegesis of the understanding of the Law in his Epistle to the Galatians, he expands the Old Testament understanding of the Law of God the Father to the New Testament understanding of the Law of Christ. One can go into a bigger debate of stating to what extent Paul polarises the two concepts of the Law, but for the purpose of this study only, one small observation will be made from the whole Pauline message 68. What is important to note here is that already in the first century CE, the spectrum of understanding the concept of the Law was wide, in as far as the concept of the children being held responsible for the sins of the fathers and the concept of carrying one another’s sins is concerned. Over the centuries these ideas were developed even further presenting the complications of the questions at hand and expanding the tradition of interpretation of the concepts of Law and the concept of being held responsible for one’s sins and so on. Therefore, by the time of the Qur’an appearing in the eighth century onwards, the biblical tradition of the exegesis of this verse was well established so that for the Qur’an to stay in contradiction to it would have to have been deliberate. Hence, the message of the Qur’an is there, and it is clear and direct, as the verse below suggests: See Galatians 6:2: ‘Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ’. 68 On the studies of Galatians see Richard N. Longenecker, World of Biblical Commentary, Vol.41 Galatians (World Books: Dallas, 1990). 67

250

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Q.17:15: Whoever accepts guidance does so for his own good; whoever strays does so at his own peril. No soul will bear another’s burden, nor do We punish until we send a Messenger.

The message of the Qur’an is uncompromising, and could be seen as a corrective measure to the message of the Bible 69: Q.35:18: No burdened soul will bear the burden of another: even if the heavily laden soul will cry for help, none of its load will be carried, not even by a close relative…

Concluding this part of the study one has to note that the overall message of Qur’an is a disagreement with the biblical text of Exodus 20:5 in relation to the concept of the Jealousy of God, and also with regard to the responsibility of the children for the sins of the fathers. In analysing the Qur’anic perspective on the concept of jealousy, the text ignores mentioning it in relation to God, but touches upon the subject in relation to people. Therefore, in the Qur’an the concept of the Just God could be its presentation of the Monotheistic guard, while avoiding the concept of jealousy. However, the punishment for polytheism in the Qur’an is severely portrayed. The Qur’an promotes purity of the Monotheistic faith and strives to dissuade the true believers from all forms of polytheism. One has to note here, that the Qur’an avoids giving a definition of Christianity, and therefore avoids giving a value judgement to its beliefs concerning

The reference here is to the tradition of Tahrif, or the understanding in Islam that the Jewish and Christian traditions, possibly referring to the exegetical ones, have corrupted their Scriptures, and therefore the Qur’an is perceived as giving the most pure form of Divine Revelation, which has not been tampered with by people of the respective religious traditions. On forms of Tahrif see Amin Ahsan Islahi, Tadabbur-i-Qur’an, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Lahore: Faran Foundation, 1986), p. 252; see also in P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs (eds.) Encyclopaedia of Islam (Brill: 1998). 69

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

251

Christ 70. On the contrary, the Qur’an never looks at Christianity on its own terms. In other words, Christ is never depicted in the Qur’an as God, but always as a prophet. However, in its depiction of Polytheism, the Qur’an among other pagan religions, could possibly be dealing with the Christological arguments by writing its apologetics to the Christian teaching of Christ being the Son of God, and by writing its analysis and its understanding of the concept of God having sons or daughters. Therefore, the Qur’an could be seen on the one hand strictly declining the Polytheism, while on the other hand avoiding being involved in such a difficult dilemma of reflecting on the Trinitarian Dogma of the Church or on the Christological one. Therefore, the Qur’an depicts Jesus only and exclusively as a prophet of God. With such a firm definition for Jesus the Qur’an cuts off its necessity for treating Christianity as a Polytheistic religion. As far as the second clause of the biblical verse of Exodus is concerned, the Qur’an is more vocal in its disagreement with the statement that sons are being held responsible and even punished by God for the sins of the fathers. In doing so the Qur’an presents multiple verses where the biblical statement is reversed and disagreed. This observation is valuable for this study, as it shows that on this occasion the arguments of the Qur’an and the Christian tradition of faith, as presented in the Nicene Creed, and also in the Christological dogma firmly believes and professes that Jesus Christ was God and Man. Both of Christ’s natures were full and complete, while his essence was one. See the Chalcedon council of the church on Christology. Also see Gerald O’Collins, Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus (2009); Catholic Encyclopaedia: John Bowden (1975) Christology; Christ in Christian Tradition: From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon by Aloys Grillmeier, Jeff Astley, David Brown, Ann Loades (2009) Christology: Key Readings in Christian Thought; Gerald O’Collins (2009) Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus. On the Ecumenical Councils of the Church see Davis, SJ, Leo Donald (1990), The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787): Their History and Theology (Theology and Life Series 21), Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier/Liturgical Press, p. 342. See also Erwin, Fahlbusch (Eds) The Encyclopaedia of Christianity (Leiden, Netherland: Brill, 1999), p. 463. 70

252

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

biblical texts on this matter of the Law are polar opposite. In other words, the Bible states one thing, and the Qur’an contradicts. Although the text of the Qur’an never quotes from the Bible and never states its arguments in direct contradiction to the biblical text, it is possible to suggest in this study that the textual examples from the Qur’an bear a resonance to the biblical narrative, and especially to the Decalogue, which was and remains the crucially important legislative teaching of the Jewish and Christian religious traditions. In the following part of the study the Jewish concept of the Shabbat will be considered, and its representation in the Qur’an will be analysed. Overall impressions from the presented parts of the research so far have indicated that the Qur’an often stands in dialogue with the surrounding religious traditions. Therefore, the Qur’anic appreciation of the Jewish religious day of worship and the study of Judaism is in itself an important indication of the Qur’an relating to Judaism and its religious traditions.

SHABBAT OF THE JEWS AND ITS REPRESENTATION IN THE QUR’AN

The Qur’anic references to the Shabbat can be found in chapter four, An-Nisa, Women, which picks up on Israel falling short of God’s favour on the account of breaking the Shabbat commandment. The verses below are an indication of the Qur’an addressing the people of the book, which could have included both Jews and Christians under its definition. The message of the Qur’an again is about reaffirmation of Monotheism. Additionally, the passage below indicates that the revelation of the Qur’an is an integral part of the previous revelations of God stating that the Qur’an confirms the previous revelations revealed to the people of the book. Therefore, the Qur’an advocates a kinship between the religions of the previous Divine Revelations, and the religion of the current one. Also, there is a clear indication in the verses that the institution of the Shabbat is a Divine initiative. Therefore, it is God who is guarding its fulfilment by cursing the breakers of the Shabbat. Overall, the verses below

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

253

can be seen as an introduction into the subject of Shabbat in the Qur’an: Q.4:47: People of the Book, believe in what We have sent down to confirm what you already have, before We wipe out [your sense of] direction, turning your back, or reject you, as We rejected those who broke the Sabbath: God’s will is always done. 48. God does not forgive the joining partners with Him: anything less than that He forgives to whoever He will, but anyone who joins partners with God has fabricated a tremendous sin.

The Qur’an is singling out the People of the Book in the same way as it is singling out the Children of Israel and other significant people in the Qur’an by addressing them emphatically, Oh, Ye People of the Book! could be a literal translation of the verse. The fact that the Shabbat is even mentioned in the Qur’an is already an indication of its acknowledgement of Judaism and to Jewish Law. First of all, keeping of the Shabbat is one of the Decalogue commandments revealed to Moses on the Mount of Sinai. As the research in the early parts of this chapter indicated, there is a fair amount of material, which indicates that the Qur’an takes the Decalogue seriously. Firstly, the narrative of the Qur’an indicates the fact of God giving the Tablets to Moses, and the Qur’an’s main message is reaffirmation of the first commandment. Secondly, the fact that the Qur’an acknowledges the reception of the Law by Moses leads one to believe that the commandments of the Law, although not clearly marked as in the original Decalogue, are represented in its texts. Therefore, by indicating certain places reaffirming Monotheism one can address these places in the Qur’an as being related to the Decalogue, as well as the places talking about the Shabbat in the Qur’an, and consequently all other commandments which are represented in the Qur’an. The verses from the Qur’an below bear an implication that the Shabbat was only for the selected people: Q.16:124: The Sabbath was made obligatory only for those who differed about it.

254

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

This verse could also bear an implication that the Shabbat was only for the Jews. The surrounding verses of the Surah were starting the conversation on the dietary laws, and then the conversation carried on to Abraham being an example of the righteous believer. In the earlier verse the Qur’an sets Jews apart by certain restrictions, which God imposed on them exclusively: Q.16:118: [Prophet], We forbade the Jews what We told you about. We did not wrong them; they wronged themselves.

Reflecting on the broader question of the God-Israel relationship the verse above is very important. The Qur’an seems to imply in this verse that the Jews as people seem to be falling out of favour with God. But what is important for the purpose of this study is that God often converses about them in the Qur’an, and includes examples of their good deeds as well as their bad ones. After all Abraham is the father of the Jews as much as he is the father of Muslims and Christians, and he is referred to in the Qur’an as an example of virtue and devotion to God. The verses of Surah 16, The Bee, from 119–124 reflect on the relationship between the people and God in such a way that puts repentance and forgiveness as the way for transgressing people. Abraham is described as a model example of devotion, obedience, gratitude, and the straight path of faith. The attention of the Qur’an to the transgressions of the people of Israel, as indicated in the Surah 2, The Cow, presents the suggestion that Israel fell into disgrace on the account of not following the commandment of keeping the Shabbat: Q.2:65: And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath: We said to them: “Be ye apes, despised and rejected.” َ‫ْت فَق ُل ْنَا �َ� ُ ْم كُونُوا ق ِرَدَة ً � َاسِئِ�ن‬ ِ ‫ن اعْتَدَوْا م ِن� ُ ْ� �ِي ال َّسب‬ َ �ِ �َّ�‫و َلَق َ ْد � َ�ِ� ْ� ُ� ُ ا‬

The appearance of this is significant, as it is written in the context of religious monotheistic tolerance of the previous verses stating a clear acceptance of the People of the Book and reassurance of God’s mercies over them.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

255

The concept of being punished for not fulfilling the law is similar to the rabbinical one. Midrash Rabbah associates the fulfilment of the commandments with a personal fulfilment of one’s duties towards God. Midrash, therefore writes the following ExodRab 30:21: Because they transgress the commandments and the laws of the Torah given after the Decalogue their punishment is severe, for this is tantamount to abrogating the Decalogue 71.

But even in reflecting on the concept of justice and punishment the Midrash often contributes it with another concept of Reward. Therefore, as much as God’s attributes of Mercy and Judgement go along with each other, so much so is the concept of Reward and Punishment. One has to point out that in the Jewish Midrash there is a continuous dialogue and juggling of ideas, which often on the surface seem to be contradictory, while in their essence convey an encouragement of faith, and love towards religious obligations and the life of virtue. Therefore, the Midrash often encourages the readers to join on the path of biblical exegesis in discovering the biblical meaning on the surface as well as in its essence. Comparing the exegesis of the Midrash and the writings of the Qur’an in this chapter one has to indicate that the Qur’an often functions within the realm of the biblical narrative, and therefore its message contributes to the exegetical tradition formed prior to its revelation. In the instances when the Qur’an ExodRab 30:21, p. 370. Further on in the Midrash the idolatry if Israel is described as being forgivable: ‘He forgave them, for in idolatry there is only jealousy’ (ibid), because ‘what benefit does Israel have from worshiping idols, that neither see, her, nor speak…’ but the immorality of Israel and not keeping the commandments is a much more severe transgression, according to this Midrash: ‘But for immorality, which is a tangible sin, they were punished. For idolatry, therefore, were they forgiven, but concerning the laws and the commandments God warned them, as it says, Keep my commandments and live (Prov.7:2), and also, Write them upon the table of thy heart (ibid.3)’ (ExodRab.XXX.21, p. 371).

71

256

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

is in agreement with the biblical narrative, or when it offers its corrections to it, in all instances the Qur’an does not breach the exegetical ‘norm’ of the previous Jewish or Christian exegetical traditions. Therefore, the point of this study is to set the framework where the Qur’an together with Jewish Midrash and Christian exegesis is considered and studied under the umbrella of the common exegetical tradition of the Bible. The Qur’anic verse below further illustrates the dialogue of the Qur’an with Jewish and Christian exegesis, if not on a literary textual level, but most certainly on the level of the oral tradition of biblical interpretation: Q.2:62: The [Muslim] believers, the Jewish (scriptures), the Christians and the Sabians 72 – all those who believe in God and the Last Day and do good – will have their reward with their Lord. No fear for them, nor will they grieve.

In this verse the Qur’an seems to collect the Monotheistic faiths in overlooking the particular differences in the respective Jewish, Christian and Sabian traditions for the purpose of joining their forces in reaffirming Monotheism. Therefore, for the sole purpose of finding fertile ground for the study of common tradition of biblical exegesis, the successful task of methodology is suggested here by the Qur’an. The Qur’an is prepared, therefore, to be associated with Judaism and Christianity in advocating Monotheism. Therefore, jointly with Jewish and Christian exegetes the Qur’an is proclaiming the Covenant of God with Moses on Mount Sinai and the generations of those who believe afterwards. Thus, the message of the Qur’an below is addressing the believers of Monotheistic faiths: Q.2:63: Remember when We took your pledge, and We made the mountain tower high above you, and said: ‘Hold fast in what We have given you and bear its contents in mind, so that you may be conscious of God’. The Sabians were a monotheistic religious community at the time. See M. Asad, The Message of the Qur’an (Gibraltar/l Dr al-Andalus, 1997), p. 40 n.49.

72

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

257

Furthermore, the content of the surrounding verses of Surah 2, The Cow, has a lot to do with the common exegetical concepts, such as God’s attributes of Mercy and Grace, as in verse 2:64, the matter of being punished by transgressing the Shabbat as in verse 2:65, and the lessons from the past for future believers, as in the verse 2:66. Prior to verse 2:62 there is a recitation of the signs of God to Moses and after verse 66 is the description of the Red Heifer. Hence the context of these verses in the chapter is eschatological in its direction towards God’s day of Judgement and the Atonement, as well as the context of the historical reference to God reaffirming His covenant with His people on Mount Sinai. The context of Surah 2, therefore is not only ecumenical in its addressees, but could be seen also as an attempt to connect the different times and with it to break the boundaries of this world into the next one. All of these attempts of the Qur’an cannot be considered in isolation from the similar attempts of Jewish and Christian exegetes. The universal striving of people to come closer to God is another common task, with which Jewish and Christian authors were struggling. And the Qur’an here seems to join the common monotheistic tradition by setting its boundaries broadly inclusive to other monotheistic traditions on the one hand, and by contributing to it its own perspective on the other hand. Turning from the general assumption to the particular examples of the Qur’an dealing with the fourth commandment of the Decalogue, the verse below is a clear affirmation of the fourth commandment. Additionally, if one looks at it from within the context of the previous verses then the realisation is that the verse is written within the eschatological motif of the day of the Last Judgement. Hence the message of the Qur’an is clearly eschatological when it refers to the commandments of the Law. The message of the Qur’an is Monotheism and a life of faith in fulfilment of the commandments. Therefore, in the verses 4:36– 52 the Qur’an recites the biblical commandments, such as honouring your parents, elaborates on them and puts them in a clear context of the service of God. As a quick example of how the Qur’an elaborates on the commandment of honouring one’s parents, one can look at the verse 4:36:

258

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Q.4:36: Worship God; join nothing with Him. Be good to your parents, relatives, to orphans, to the needy, to neighbours near and far, to travellers in need, and to your slaves.

The usual context of Monotheism is set from the start. But also there is a tendency to expand the commandment of honouring your parents towards honouring all people around, which is starting from the immediate family, and covering all who are in need. Additionally, the Qur’an in these verses of Surah four, points out the fact that some Jews were distorting the revelation. For example, in the following verse it is very clearly expressed: Q.4:46: Some Jews distort (َ‫ )�ُ� َرِّف ُون‬the meaning of [revealed] words; they say, ‘We hear and disobey’, and ‘Listen,’[adding the insult] ‘May you not hear’, and ‘Ra’ina [look at us]’, twisting it abusively with their tongues so as to disparage religion. If they had said, ‘We hear and obey’. ‘Listen’, and ‘Unzurna [look at us]’, that would have been better and more proper for them. But God has spurned them for their defiance; they believe very little.

The Qur’an offers constructive criticism to the behaviour of the people of Israel by characterising the people as being of little faith on a number of occasions. Such a critical reprimand of Israel is not alien to the rabbinical exegesis. Therefore, even in its critical remarks towards the nation of Israel the Qur’an stays connected with Jewish and Christian exegetical traditions. What needs to be highlighted here is that the later tradition of Tahrif as a distortion with regard to the Jewish and Christian dealings with God’s Revelation, could have one of its origins in the verse above 73. The Arabic word used in the verse for Jews distorting Other instances in the Qur’an of the use of the verb to distort are also in relation to the Jews, such as Q.2:75: ‘So can you [believers] hope that such people will believe you, when some of them used to hear the words of God and then deliberately twist them, even when they understood them?’; Q.5:13: ‘But they broke their pledge, so We distanced them [from Us] and hardened their hearts. 73

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

259

the word is َ‫ – �ُ�َرِّف ُون‬yuḥarrifūna, which is a derivative (3rd person masculine plural (form II) imperfect verb) of the triliteral root ḥā rā fā (‫)ح ر ف‬, of which also is the noun Tahrif. Discussing further the theme of Israel in the Qur’an, with the verses below, the Qur’an could be referring to the concept of the Holy nation. The verse Q.4:49 states that ‘God purifies whoever He wills’. The Qur’an supports its claim in the verse Q.4:52 by proclaiming that ‘those given a share of the Scripture, [evidently] now believe in idols and evil powers’. Further verses of chapter four also recall Shabbat in Q.4:154. What is important is that the context in which this verse appears is again Monotheistic and the Qur’anic discussion brings together three Abrahamic religions and explores their relationship to each other. Also the context for the Monotheistic discussion is brought into the Eschatological realm when the reflection on the Day of Judgement is present together with the concepts of God’s Wrath and Mercy. The verse at hand, Q.4:154 is significant as it recites the commandments and singles out the notable events and other matters. According to this Qur’anic verse the importance of the Revelation, the covenant on the Mount Sinai, humility, and the matter of Shabbat is emphasised: Q.4:154. We made the mountain tower high above them at their pledge; We said to them, ‘Enter the gate 74 humbly’, and ‘Do not break the Sabbath’, and took a solemn pledge from them.

The connection of the Children of Israel with the law and with their God is present in the verses Q.4:153–163. The amount of attention and detail given to the life and faith of the Children of They distort the meaning of [revealed] words and have forgotten some of what they were told to remember…’, 5:41: ‘…Jews who listen eagerly to lies and to those who have not even met you, who distort the meaning of [revealed] words and say [to each other], ‘If you are given this ruling, accept it, but if you are not, then beware!’. 74 The gate is the gate of the town mentioned in Q.2:58 and 7:16.

260

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Israel that the Qur’an recounts cannot but testify to the relationship between the message of the Qur’an and the message of the God of the Children of Israel. The image of the Children of Israel, which the Qur’an is attempting to portray is the one of the people receiving the revelation from heaven and having a close relationship with God when people were asking God to be revealed. (Q.4:153). People breaking the covenant (Q.4:155), and rejecting faith (Q.4:156). There is clear evidence of the Qur’an using the Christian anti-Jewish argument of the Jews killing Jesus Christ (Q.4:157), however the Qur’an objects to this idea and presents the whole situation as unclear. The Qur’an balances its argument with another verse Q.4:162 below when it gives a high view of those of the Jews who are righteous in their faith: Q.4:162: But those of them who are well-grounded in knowledge and have faith, to believe in what hath been revealed to you [Muhammad], and in what was revealed before you – those who perform the prayers, pay the prescribed alms, and believe in God and the Last Day – to them We shall give a great reward.

There is a clear distinction in the Qur’an between the Jews who do not accept Muhammad, and become the bearers of all the sins of the Children of Israel, and those who accept him, and are identified with the best qualities of the chosen people. The goal of the Qur’an is to keep the continuity of the people of Israel going by joining its own revelation into the lineage of the OT prophets. With the following verse the Qur’an establishes the connection of the Jewish tradition to the Christian tradition by connecting the prophets of these traditions to God, and through God, to each other and to the Messenger of the Qur’an: Q.4:163. We have sent the revelation to you [Mohammad] as We did to Noah and the prophets after him, to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon – to David We gave the Book [of Psalms] 164… to Moses God spoke directly.

Jewish and Christian traditions, therefore, are crucially important for the Qur’an as the traditions-bearers of Divine Revela-

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

261

tion before the message of the Qur’an. The Law and the Prophets of the Jewish faith are an integral part of the message of the Qur’an, in as much as they take their origin from the direct Revelation of God. Moses, in that sense is singled out among the Prophets as the one to whom God spoke directly. Therefore, it is directly that God revealed to Moses His commandments on the mount Sinai. And for this reason, it is that the Qur’an advocates the commandment about the Shabbat with the earthly rewards, as well as the heavenly ones. In Surah 7, Al-Araf, The Heights, there is a direct connection between keeping Shabbat and gaining prosperity, as the Qur’an states that keeping Shabbat law influences the livelihood of the people 75. The context of the Q.7:159–170 starts with a positive statement about the descendants of Moses in reaffirming that ‘There is a group among the people of Moses who guide with truth, and who act justly according to it 76. Then the Qur’an reports of the division among the twelve tribes of Israel, depicting God’s kindnesses on each of the tribes and on the people as a whole 77. But after the people were doing wrong among themselves 78 they were punished by God ‘for their wrongdoings’ 79. And ‘when, in their arrogance, they persisted in doing what they had been forbidden to do, We said to them, ‘Be like apes! Be outcasts!’ 80. However, towards the end of the selected passage there is again a reaffirming statement from the Qur’an as to ‘those who are mindful of God and Thereafter is better’ 81 and ‘those who hold fast to the Scripture and keep up the prayer. We do not deny righteous people their rewards’ 82. What can be seen as a prominent concept in the above verses in relation to the commandment of the Shabbat is the day of Judgement, but 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82

See Q.7:163. See Q.7:159. See Q.7:160–161 See Q.7:160: ‘They did no wrong Us; it was themselves they wronged’. See Q.7:162. See Q.7:166. See Q.7:169. See Q.7:170.

262

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

also the interaction between God’s retribution being rapid, while God’s mercy and His forgiveness as being present alongside his attribute of Justice. Therefore the long passages of attention that the Qur’an gives to the relationship between God and Israel, and considering the fact that the use of the attributes of God’s Judgement and God’s Mercy is a common to Jewish and Christian exegetes, the Qur’an can be seen as functioning within the Judaeo-Christian tradition of exegesis, as well as being deeply involved in analysing the pros and cons of these traditions in its writings. The other verse of the Qur’an referring to the Shabbat is from chapter 16, An-Nahl, The Bee, and it incorporates eschatology, historical allusion, and also a look to the future, in the didactical guidance of the Qur’an towards preaching and mission. The context of the verse Q.16:124 is crucial to understanding its message, which if written on its own is ambiguous: Q.16:124: The Sabbath was made obligatory only for those who differed about it. On the Day of Resurrection your Lord will judge between them as to their differences.

It is important to note here that the concepts of the Day of Judgement and the Day of Resurrection (ِ ‫يَوْم َ الْق ِيَامَة‬.) are included as a similar concept in this verse. It is indeed that on many occasions in the Qur’an, the day of Resurrection is associated with Judgement and the wrath of God, as for example in the following verse dealing with the food laws and fasting: Q.2:174: As for those who conceal the Scripture that God sent down and sell it for a small price, they only fill their bellies with Fire. God will not speak to them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them; an agonizing torment awaits them.

Returning back to the Surah 16, and the question of associating the Shabbat law and the Day of Judgement, it seems that the Qur’an attempts to set the scale of measuring one’s fulfilment of faith by means of establishing the law. However in the line of the righteous prophets, Abraham is depicted as a model of a righteous man and true believer, and the one who enjoyed fa-

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

263

vours from God in this world and the other, because he was appreciative of God in his life. 83 The concept of the righteousness of Abraham is a very prominent concept in the Midrash. What needs to be observed here is that the Midrash often presents similar sayings, when for example, attributing speech to God it states that ‘I handed over righteousness to Abraham’ 84. Therefore, it could be seen as a deliberate attempt on the part of the Qur’an to use the rabbinical and possibly well-known concept of the righteousness of Abraham in order to use it as a foundation ground for the message of the Qur’an. And the message of the Qur’an becomes apparent in the following verse when it clearly indicates that there is a certain someone who is inspired and instructed in the same message, and who is following the same path of Abraham 85. And in this context the verse at hand about the Shabbat becomes the significant passage, which marks the transition from the Abrahamic era into the era of a new Messenger of God whose mission is universal, and whose path is being prepared by the best Prophets there are. Hence, with the following verse the Qur’an passes the prophetic vision to the new chosen of God: Q.16:125: [Prophet], call [people] to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good teaching. Argue with them in the most courteous way, for your Lord knows best who has strayed from His way and who is rightly guided.

Such an instruction does not exclude the righteousness of the past, and therefore, does not devalue any of the previous prophets in the line. However, there is a clear indication in the Qur’an that the times are changing, and there is a possibility that the call of the new Prophet is going to sound different from all the others. Therefore, even in the matters of the Law there could be differences, shifting and divide. On the one hand, functioning 83 84 85

See Q.16:120–122. See in ExodRab 30:24, p. 374. See Q.16:123.

264

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

within the Old Testament Law of the Decalogue, the Qur’an supports some if its postulates of Monotheistic and ethical nature, and on the other hand it brings correction to the law of the Decalogue either by reducing the obligatory nature of the Shabbat 86, or by abrogating the idea of Exodus 20:5 of the Jealous God punishing the sons for the sins of the fathers 87.

CONCLUSION: RE-AFFIRMATION OF THE GOD-ISRAEL

RELATIONSHIP AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE RECEPTION OF THE

LAW

The reception of the Law in the biblical account is the highlight illustrating the development of the God-human relationship. In the story of Moses it is also a singular moment culminating the role of the leader bringing his people to the next level in their encounters with God. This chapter looked into how the role of the people of Israel evolved in their relationship with God, according to the account of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. One of the distinctive features following the reception of the Law experience was the conditional nature of the Godhuman relationship. As demonstrated in this chapter, all of the selected passages indicated the conditional relationship between the people and God through their recitations of the commandments and their respective understandings of the didactics of the Decalogue. In doing so, Rabbinical exegesis and Ephrem could be seen as working alongside each other in providing a similar understanding from the Decalogue of the commandment to love one’s neighbour and to love God. Therefore, the commandment of love as the focal commandment of the Decalogue could be seen as emerging inside the common Jewish-Christian tradition of biblical exegesis. Textual examples in this chapter showed similarities in the appreciation of certain commandments of the Decalogue, while also noticing the fact that neither of the exegetical sources in 86 87

See Q.16:124. See Q.6:160,164; 17:15; 35:18.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

265

this study chose to replicate the ten commandments in full in their exegesis. In other words, neither of them presents the ten commandments in the sequence as was done in Exodus 20. Although it looks as something that could potentially unite our sources, their underlying reasons for not doing so could not be more different. Starting with the Midrash, there was no need to recite the Decalogue in its writings, as the tradition of Judaism developed a significant body of work dealing with the Law and all of the commandments related to them as recorded scrupulously in the Talmud and the Mishnah. Therefore the reason that the Decalogue is not presented in full in the Midrash is not because it is not important for the Midrash, but on the contrary, because of the enormity of the concept of the Law for Judaism. Hence Jewish tradition separated its genres of biblical exegesis into Haggadah, as the rabbinical homiletics or exegesis of nonlegal matters, and the Halachah, as the sayings of the rabbis on the matters of the law. Therefore, the absence of specific discourses on the Law in the Midrash indicate nothing but the fact that the Midrash leaves matters of the Law to the Mishnah and the Talmud which deal directly with the significance of the Law for Judaism 88. Ephrem wrote his exegesis of Exodus in such a way that it singles out the essence of it for him, but does not go too much into its details. Therefore, his commentaries on Exodus could be seen as an introduction to the exegesis of this book of the Bible. The absence of the ten commandments written in full in Ephrem’s exegesis is therefore an indication of the abbreviated genre of his biblical exegesis. However, what can be concluded and affirmed in this study is the fact that for the Midrash, as it is for Ephrem, the biblical commandments of the Decalogue in The other reason of the same matter could be due to the fact that the Exodus Rabbah is not uniform in its composition when only the first fourteen chapters of it give commentaries on each verse of Exodus 1–11, while the rest of the book sites only selected verses of Exodus (usually the first verses of each weekly Sidra). 88

266

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Exodus are a foundation for the teachings of Monotheism and universal ethics in the respective traditions of Jewish-Christian origin. The absence in the Qur’an of the sequence of the ten commandments in one place could be seen in a different light. As illustrations from the previous chapters in this study already show, it is often that the Qur’an steps away from the biblical narrative in order to present its own account of the biblical events. Therefore, on matters of the Law the Qur’an is indicatively reaffirming its own stance. Also with its message, the Qur’an does not present the Old Testament law of the book of Exodus, but the law of the Qur’an, in spite the fact that most of the ten commandments can be found in the text of the Qur’an. In fact this very scattering of the biblical commandments of Exodus in the Qur’an can be seen as an indirect down-playing of the significance of the Decalogue which is being compartmentalised as a local matter for Israel, while the legal message of the Qur’an is being projected as the universal one. All in all, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an differ on the question of the authority of the Decalogue. For the Midrash, the Decalogue is the beginning of the journey for the people into the world of Mitzvah as the way of expressing their love for God. For Ephrem, the Decalogue is sacred, being the direct revelation of God to his people. The Midrash and Ephrem are united in their appreciation of the Old Testament Law. The Qur’an, on the other hand does not undermine the OT Law in its writings but neither does it over-emphasise it. In doing so the Qur’an could seem to be legitimising the OT law and giving to each commandment of the Decalogue its approval or disapproval. The Qur’an acknowledges the Law as given to Moses by God, but it also corrects its postulates in its writings, and therefore demonstrates its superiority over the ‘Jewish Law’ without actually objecting to most of the ten commandments. Referring back to the illustration of the commandment of love, the Qur’an again demonstrates its different stance in looking at it exegetically in its writings. However, the most illustrative example is the Qur’anic disagreement with responsibility of the children for the sins of the fathers, and with the biblical

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

267

concept of a Jealous God. As far as the concept of a Jealous God goes, it is replaced in the Qur’an with the concept of a punishing God. However, the God of the Qur’an never punishes children for the sins of the fathers, which goes in direct contradiction, and therefore as a reaction to the commandment in the biblical narrative. Some statements of the Qur’an could be seen as a reaction to the Christological dogma of the Church (in its verses stating that God has no son), although the Qur’an never openly engages in discussion about the Divinity of Christ, while honouring Him as one of God’s prophets. On rare occasions the Qur’an uses anthropomorphic definitions of God, which could be seen in relation to the anthropomorphic definitions of the biblical narrative and Jewish-Christian exegesis. However, the Qur’an generally avoids anthropomorphic exegesis in its depictions of God. The Qur’an’s definitions of God promote Monotheism. On the subject of Monotheism, which is encapsulated in the first two commandments of the Decalogue, there is united agreement among our sources. The Midrash supports its stance on Monotheism as the only reason for Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian slavery. The Qur’an is also found supporting the two first commandments of the Decalogue by recording them in different Suras of the text. Ephrem’s support of Monotheism is in line with the teaching of the Church of his time. What makes Ephrem stand out among other Christian biblical exegetes is the fact that in supporting Monotheism he is very reverential to the OT account of God’s revelations. Looking further at the proclamations of Monotheism as a unifying exegetical theme among the studied sources, there were indications in the Qur’an of either working along-side the Jewish-Christian traditional definitions or deliberately changing them. The study looked into the phenomena of the Qur’an paying significant attention to giving its definitions to the God of the Children of Israel. According to the Qur’an, the God of the Children of Israel is God of Monotheism. He is also the deliverer and saviour of Israel from oppression, provider for the people, who shows Mercy and Justice to guide them, cares for them and trains them in faith. God is depicted in the Qur’an as offering the whole of creation for people to appreciate. These are the

268

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

points of agreement in the Qur’an with the common tradition of Jewish-Christian biblical exegesis. As far as the OT prophets are concerned, the Qur’an allows for its own contribution to the usual prophetic names of the OT. As far as the Qur’anic idea of defining God as the God of OT Patriarchs from Abraham to Moses, the Qur’an brings the figure of Ishmael into the picture. The Qur’an starts by depicting God protecting Abraham and his family, as well as Moses and his family, and it follows this idea further by presenting God as the giver of life and the one offering Divine protection to all. All of the above definitions in the Qur’an show its direct links to Jewish-Christian concepts and ideas, as well as to the legacy of the OT narrative through the stories of the Patriarchs, Abraham, Moses and others. It was also noticed that the Qur’anic appreciation of all of the above is for the purpose of grounding its own message and for legitimising it in the line of revolutionary biblical events, as well as allying the message of the Qur’an with the unprecedented authority of the OT prophets. Looking further at the definitions of God and the dialogue between the different traditions of exegesis, the biblical phrase of Israel being carried on ‘eagle’s wings’ was studied. The outcome from this study resulted in finding particular implications of this concept in the biblical exegesis of each source. The Midrash used the concept of God carrying Israel on eagle’s wings as an indication of the pre-granted pardon of God to the people for the transgression with the Golden Calf. Therefore, the emphasis of the Midrash was on establishing a stable and permanent ground for Israel in her relationship with God. Ephrem’s use of the concept, indicated similarity to the tradition of the Targumim, thus reaffirming his dialogue with Jewish exegesis. The Qur’anic verse 5:20 allowed the possibility of understanding the verse in the Qur’an in dialogue with the biblical account in Exodus 19:6 on the matter of God’s projecting the chosen status for Israel. The underlying biblical theme of Israel being carried by God on eagle’s wings proved to bring a unifying acceptance of the favourable place of Israel in her relationship with God.

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

269

Further conclusions on the subject of the people of Israel in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an allowed for more detailed outcomes. The Midrash can be seen as being nothing but firm in supporting Israel in its unprecedented status as the chosen nation. Therefore, its ups and its downs are treated as ups and downs of a chosen nation. The only condition which the Midrash imposes on Israel in her relationship with God is to maintain closeness and loyalty, and to keep on demonstrating their love to God by keeping the commandments. Hence in the concept of the Law, the Torah becomes crucial for the process of the continuous manifestation of love in the God-Israel relationship. Ephrem also shows high esteem for the people of Israel. He also supplements his appreciation of the people with high Christological expectations from them. Therefore, his understanding of the conditional relationship between Israel and God is tied in with people accepting the New Testament revelation of God in Christ. The Israel of the OT remains Israel with a very close relationship with God, but his exegesis suggests a new stage in the God-Israel relationship. Therefore, by failing to fulfil the condition of recognising Christ in the Old Testament narrative, the people of Israel bring disappointment for Ephrem 89. In the Qur’an, the position of the people of Israel could be seen as an important concept for its message. And the message of the Qur’an is its attempt to build a new generation of people of God. The new people of God are encouraged to be attentive to the message of the Qur’an and its Messenger. In that sense both Ephrem and the Qur’an use the people of Israel concept for their own purposes. And when the people of Israel fail to fulfil their expectations, which Ephrem and the Qur’an project on them, they vocalise their disappointment with Israel in their Ephrem’s disappointment with the people of Israel is not so vivid in his exegetical work, but more expressed in his Hymns. In his exegetical work Ephrem projects his expectation for the people of Israel by bringing Christ in the core of the Exodus narrative.

89

270

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

respective writings. The Qur’an in its turn uses the notion of the people of Israel as a type, which facilitates the message of the Qur’an. Thus, using Israel as a type, the Qur’an exhibits Israel’s failures as a step into a new era in the God-human relationship, which the Qur’an proclaims. Therefore, the Qur’an could be seen as stepping over the people of Israel, and introducing a new reality of a Qur’anic message for the Qur’anic believers. Ephrem here differs in his exegesis as he stays with the people of Israel and extends his invitation for them to join the NT reality of Christ 90. The question of the relationship between the Children of Israel and God in the Qur’an could be looked at in another way. Taking into account the Qur’anic claim for proclaiming the universally significant message, the concept of the Children of Israel in the Qur’an could be taken as an example of the successful conduct of the God-people relationship in the stories of Israel’s ups and downs. The Qur’an emphasises the conditional aspect of the God-Israel relationship which is based on Israel honouring its pledge to God, and God accordingly honouring His pledge to Israel. Therefore, according to the Qur’an, the Children of Israel are accountable by their actions for the successes or failures in the God-Israel relationship. Consequently, the chosen status of Israel among all nations can be challenged. A small illustration of the ability of Israel to see God, provides a further illustration to the point of the study. Ephrem through his exegesis allows Israel to see God on two occasions, but withdraws the ability after they transgress. The Qur’an, on the other hand declines this ability to see God as humanly impossible both for Israel and for anyone else. Opposite opinions matter in this research as they indicate the possibility of the Qur’anic exegesis as being reactive to the exegesis of Ephrem, or In other of his writings, especially in his Hymns, Ephrem offers much harsher critical remarks to the people of Israel, but in his exegetical work he could be seen as addressing both Jewish and Christian audiences, which possibly influenced his exegetical approach. 90

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

271

to the tradition of Christian appreciation of the ability of people to behold God as a part of the God-human intimate relationship. Two other matters were indicative in the research in this chapter. One is the Qur’anic appreciation of the Shabbat, and the another one is the exegesis of Wood in the respective writings. The appreciation of the Shabbat is self-explanatory, as it shows the Qur’an in dialogue with Judaism. The positive depiction of the Shabbat releases the seal of approval from the Qur’an to this practice of Jewish Law. The matter of the Wood in the exegetical writings in this study allowed the possibility to draw more generic conclusions about the nature of the exegetical relationship between Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Therefore, the findings of the research in this book on the matter of Wood and its exegesis in the stories of Moses deserve lengthier explanations. The Midrash and Ephrem could be seen as engaging in exegetical encounter with each other by writing apologetics to each other with regard to the exegesis of the Wood in the biblical narrative 91. When Ephrem clearly ascribes Christological significance to the Wood, the Midrash replaces the Christian understanding of the significance of the Wood with the meaning of the Torah or the Name of God. The Qur’an could be seen as replacing the notion of the staff with its own notion of the gate. The overall impression from the study of the exegesis of the Wood in the Midrash, Ephrem and in the Qur’an is their invisible connection to each other on the matter. Therefore considering the well-known fact that the typology of the Wood became so significant in Christian exegesis, the exegesis of the Wood outside the Christian tradition of biblical interpretation could be seen as deliberately downplayed or replaced with other concepts, such as the Torah or the name of God in Judaism, and the gate in the Qur’an. By using replacement exegesis for the Wood, It is not a personal correspondence which is implied here, but the Jewish and Christian traditions of exegesis on the matter being developed alongside each other and under the influence of each other’s interpretations. 91

272

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

the Midrash and the Qur’an clearly show their influence by Christological exegesis in the matter. This conclusion is yet another illustration of the overall argument of this book in support of the exegetical connection between the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an through their respective exegetical arguments which are either in agreement or in disagreement with each other. 92 The example of how the exegetical meaning of the Wood was developed and transformed across Jewish, Christian and Qur’anic exegesis of the Bible provided a small illustration, which needs further discussion. Most of the research on the matter is left outside the scope of this study. However a small glimpse into the other side of the phenomena could also be shared here. For example, there are a number of concepts, practices and rituals that are shared among Jewish, Christian and Muslim practices 93. Many of Muslim traditions, as well as some

The example of the collaborative efforts of Ephrem, the Midrash and the Qur’an on the question of offering their exegesis of the Wood is significant, because it can be used as a blueprint, indication, or illustration of a certain development in the common tradition of biblical exegesis across the three Abrahamic faiths. The formula of this rule could be generalised as the following: when a popular concept, ritual or practice in the Christian tradition became commonplace, it was gradually charged with new meanings outside the Christian tradition. There was a similar tradition among early Christians when dealing with pagan practices. It resulted in many pagan rituals entering Christianity while being charged with Christian symbolism, exegesis and meanings. (e.g. pagan traditions of eggs and pancakes being re-accentuated by Christianity in relation to Easter). 93 The common practice of prostrations in Judaism was gradually abandoned, because it became popular in Christianity. This very same practice was adopted and popularised in Muslim tradition of piety possibly under the influence of Christianity. Another example of Muslim traditions adopting Christian culture is the clothing of women in Islam. On the other hand, the hierarchy in the Orthodox church, especially the clothing of the Metropolitan, is similar to the clothing of a High priest in Judaism. The covering of the heads of the Roman catholic clergy is similar to the Jewish traditions, likewise the coverings of men’s heads in the Muslim faith could be traced to Jewish heritage. 92

4. THE LAW FOR THE CHOSEN PEOPLE

273

Christian practices were picked up and popularised, while being originally associated with Judaism 94. Leaving aside the generalisations of the last paragraph, one has to turn back to the question of methodology in the research in the current chapter and the following one. The current chapter allowed the transition from the study of the exegesis of Moses’ stories and introduced the study of exegesis of biblical notions and concepts. Therefore, the following chapter will look into the theology of Signs in the story of Moses and its appreciation in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an.

Such as the practice of prostration, clothing for women or head covering for men.

94

CHAPTER 5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES This chapter is different from all the previous ones, which closely followed the biblical accounts of the stories of Moses either in the three monotheistic traditions, or in the selected exegetical texts representing these traditions. This chapter, although keeping the link to the story of Moses and to the exegesis of it in Ephrem, Midrash and the Qur’an, brings the study in this book into a more analytical and theological sphere in as much as it follows theologically the concept of signs in Jewish, Christian and Muslim texts and Scriptures. Therefore, the focus of this chapter is centred on a theological appreciation of the concept of signs in the story of Moses, and the usual sources of the three Abrahamic faiths are selected as examples, i.e. biblical narrative, Midrash Rabbah, Ephrem the Syrian, and the Qur’an. The methodological approach of this chapter is similar to all the previous ones, as the selected texts in the chapter are closely analysed specifically in their relation to the biblical narrative and to each other. The method of selecting the textual examples for this chapter is either by their relation to the story of Moses or to the concept of signs in the biblical narrative, in the writings of Ephrem the Syrian, in rabbinical exegesis and the Qur’an. The overarching focus of this chapter is similar to all the previous ones as it aims to follow how selected textual examples describe the relationship between people and God. This relationship will be considered through the prism of the concept of 275

276

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

signs. Therefore, this chapter will look into the description of signs as Divine aids, signs as testimonials of the covenants, signs for generations to come, signs as distinction and divide, accents of knowledge and signs and prophets. These definitions of signs will be illustrated by textual examples across the spectrum of the three Abrahamic faiths. The questions which are to be considered in this chapter are fundamentally about whether there is theological appreciation of signs in the biblical narrative of the Moses’ stories and in the subsequent exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. This chapter consists of four attempts of looking at the theological appreciation of signs based on the four major sources of study in this book. Firstly, the biblical narrative in relation to the signs is studied. The purpose of biblical analysis of the signs in this chapter is to identify major themes which can be followed in the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Therefore, the biblical narrative is taken as a leading source in offering common themes to be identified and analysed in the research of this chapter. By identifying the common themes for analytical and comparative study in this chapter, the thematic structure of the research is established. The theme of signs in connection to the God-human relationship becomes the main theme with which the study in this chapter opens up its consultations with the original sources. The connection between the signs and the covenants is another theme to be followed in this chapter. The application of the identified biblical ideas about signs in the story of Moses will bring more illustrative examples to the theological appreciation of signs in the biblical narrative and in the following exegetical writings. Consequently, the following themes will be open for discussion among the selected writings. Firstly, the ways of the prophet of God using signs in relation to the people and to God will be further illustrated in the selected passages in this study. Secondly the role of the signs for the people will be studied as the following theme for comparative analysis in this chapter. This will lead to the following sub-themes being considered in the study: i.e. signs as distinctions and division among

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 277 the people; signs for generations to come; and signs as markers of historical memory for the people. All of the themes identified above will lead the research of the chapter into its summary, which will be presenting the outcomes of the study on the matter of theological appreciation of signs in the biblical narrative and in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and in the Qur’an.

GENESIS NARRATIVE OF THE OT: BIBLICAL RECOLLECTION OF SIGNS FROM GENESIS ONWARDS

The following biblical accounts, describing the signs and their place in the God-human relationship, can be singled out from the Genesis narrative of the Old Testament for the purpose of this study: 1. Genesis 1:14: And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years. 2. Genesis 9:12: And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: 13: I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. Genesis 9:17: So God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth.” 3. Genesis 17:11: You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. All of the verses above describe the ways of the mediation of signs in the God-human relationship. The following parts of the chapter will look closely at the biblical examples. The outcome of the chapter will aim to answer the question as to whether there is a theology of signs in the biblical narrative and in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The other question to address is whether the respective theologies of signs relate to each other.

278

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

GOD’S SIGNS AS HUMAN AIDS

The way to start a discussion on the issue of signs in this study is by closely reading the biblical account of events. The following concepts will be singled out as focal ones, and later on in the chapter they will be revisited from the viewpoint of Jewish, Christian and Muslim writings. Reading the biblical account of the concept of signs brings about the notion of signs as Divine aids with which God communicates with humanity. Through signs God directs people in faith and teaches them to see the presence of Divine in the created world. These Divine signs are offered as indicators for people how to live their lives in accordance with the didactics of the natural and scriptural revelations. The most important point to note at this point is the Divine origin of signs and their human orientated purpose. In the biblical narrative of Genesis, the first-time signs appear in the creation story. They are introduced as supplementary tools which God provides for people in order for them to understand their time patterns 1. Genesis 1 narrates that the Sun and Moon were created as signs and aids for the people at the time when Adam was not yet created. There is an interesting preempting of the future dynamics in the God-human relationship of Divine aids through signs even at this early stage of the creation story. 2 What is important to highlight at this point of the study is the fact that the biblical story does point its readers in the direction of the specifically designated function of the created luminaries, such as the sun and the moon. This function of the created lights is closely related to the concept of time, as both the sun and the moon were created as the markers of time. There is a similar approach in the Quran to the purposeful value of the creation of sun and moon, so that people can organise their affairs. The analysis of the Qur’anic passages will be presented later on in this chapter. 2 There is a clear understanding of such a dynamic in the God-Human relationship, which later on will be illustrated in this chapter by the excerpts from the rabbinical exegetes presenting the concept of God knowing the end of the journey from the beginning (See passages of Midrash Rabbah in this chapter). 1

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 279 And the reason that they were created in relation to time is for the benefit of the people, and for the use of the people. 3 The applicable verse is cited below: Genesis 1:14: And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years

‫אר ֹ֙ת ִבּ ְר ִ ֣ ק ַי� ַה ָשּׁ ַ֔מיִ ם ְל ַה ְב ִ ֕דּיל ֵ ֥בּין ַהיּ֖ וֹם ֵוּב֣ין‬ ֹ ‫�הים יְ ִ ֤הי ְמ‬ ִ֗ ‫אמר ֱא‬ ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֣יּ‬ ‫וּליָ ִ ֖מים וְ ָשׁ ִ ֽנים‬ ְ ‫וֹﬠ ִ ֔דים‬ ֲ ‫וּל ֣מ‬ ְ ‫את ֹ֙ת‬ ֹ ‫ַה ָלּ֑יְ ָלה וְ ָהי֤ וּ ְל‬ There is another indication of the sacramental charge in the timing indicated by the luminaries, which one can find in this biblical text. The word ‫וֹﬠ ִ ֔דים‬ ֲ ‫וּל ֣מ‬ ְ , which is translated in the verse as ‘to serve’ carries the root yod, ayn, dalet (‫)י ע ד‬, which has a meaning of verbs ‘appoint’, ‘betrothe’, ‘assemble’, ‘meet’. The meaning of the derivative form this verb in the biblical verse, therefore already signifies the congregational and the sacred aspect of the concept. Also the root ayn, dalet, he (‫ )ע ד ה‬bears a reference to the congregation, as well as the word ‫ – םועד‬moed (mem, vav, ayn, dalet), which means appointed place or moad (with different vocalisation of ayn), and the word means appointed assembly. Therefore, there is a hidden exegesis within the selected biblical word, which could potentially be developed into the area of congregational worship, sacred time and so on. As this study will show in the coming sections, this opportunity was not missed by the rabbinical exegetes, and the selected Midrash will explore further the issue of the use of the luminaries for liturgical purposes. Therefore, there will be further exegetical analysis of the concept of signs as Divine aids for people not only as testimonials of Divine existence, but also for the conduct of their ordinary lives, as well as in their spiritual lives of prayer and worship. What is important to note at this point however, is that the potential for such an exegesis can already be seen in the This concept of the moon and the sun being created as aids for people in organising their affairs is further illustrated in the Qur’anic narrative of the creation story, and will be discussed later in this chapter.

3

280

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

biblical text. Therefore, the biblical narrative of Genesis, although not explicitly, nevertheless paves the way for the theological understanding of the concept of signs as Divine aids for the people. Another idea, which can be derived from the biblical narrative, is relating to the purpose for the whole of creation. Using the above verse in Genesis as an example, it is possible to assume that such an introduction of signs in the creation story is indicative of the overall purpose for the whole of creation as being intended for use by Adam, and collaboration with Adam as a type for human kind. Therefore, collectively presenting the meanings for signs in the biblical narrative one can already state that at the early stages of creation, the signs are being used as sign-posts for the purpose of signifying either specific events, or to aid certain actions, as for example defining time. Later on in the biblical narrative the signs will be used for the commemoration of significant stages in the development of human biblical history, as for example sealing the covenants, such as the ordinance of circumcision and the rainbow commemorating the Noahic covenant or the pledge between God and Abraham. Additionally, the purpose of signs was also to bring to mind or signify the theological importance and the implications of these events for the God-human relationship. To explain this idea further, one can look at the following biblical episodes when the signs are closely related to new developments in the God-Human relationships, which were represented by the covenants between God and the people. The theme of the covenants and the signs of the covenants are going to be further developed in the following part of the study.

GOD’S SIGNS AS WITNESSES/TESTIMONIALS OF THE COVENANTS

In order to commence the discussion in this part of the study two biblical stories from Genesis are selected. The first one is about the sign of the rainbow, and the second one is about the sign of circumcision. These biblical stories are selected to illustrate the point of the development in the relationship between people and God. In order to see this development a closer look is

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 281 required at the signs of the covenants between the people and God. The following two biblical accounts in Genesis illustrate God offering His people the signs of the two crucial covenantal events. First, the biblical story narrates the sign of the covenant with Noah when the Rainbow was given as a seal and a reminder of that covenant. Second, the sign of circumcision was introduced to Abraham and his descendants as a sign of God’s covenant with Abraham. The first sign is offered to people to observe and to be reminded about God’s pledge, while the second sign is for people to perform on their bodies. Therefore, the signs indicate the stages of the development in the God-human relationship. The following parts of this subchapter will look closely into the two signs as they are presented in the biblical narrative. As mentioned already, initially the idea of the covenant between people and God emerges in the story of Noah and the rainbow, which has been appointed by God as a sign of the covenant: Genesis 9:12: And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: 13: I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth… 17: So God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth.”

The biblical story reflects on the covenant between people and God and all of creation. It is a general covenant which God initiates with all of humanity after the flood. And it is God who appoints the rainbow as a naturally reoccurring sign of this covenant and as a reminder of it. Further on in the biblical narrative one can see a shift in the dynamics in the God-human relationship from an allinclusive covenant between God and Noah to an exclusive one of God with Abraham. The exclusivity of the covenant of God with Abraham is based on the fact that this covenant was targeted specifically at Abraham and his descendants. Hence, it could be seen as a personal covenant. Also the sign of Abraham’s covenant becomes the subject of Abraham’s efforts and a matter

282

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

of him offering a sacrifice to God. Therefore, the requirements of personal commitment and sacrifice are essentials of the Abrahamic covenant, which are expected from all the people, descendants of Abraham, who want to join in that covenant. One can observe in the biblical story that the signs of Noah’s covenant and Abraham’s covenant facilitate a change in the relationship between the people and God. From the rainbow, which is a naturally reoccurring created phenomena, the signs of the covenant become the signs of human conscious effort and commitment, as the sign of circumcision illustrates. Furthermore, through the act of circumcision, as the sign of the covenant, people are participating in the covenant by the very act of performing the sign. It is not a naturally reoccurring sign any more, it is an act and an expression of free will of the people. The sign of the covenant, therefore, becomes an act of personal responsibility for the relationship between people and God and for the covenant with God from the person receiving the covenantal sign on themselves throughout human history. As indicated earlier, in the Abrahamic covenant, the dynamics in the God-Human relationship changes. The responsibility of sealing the covenant with its signs is passed to a man who voluntarily takes upon himself a continuous performance of the sign throughout the generations as a reoccurring sign of the covenant and as a sign of personal renewal of the covenant with God through it. On the one hand, performing the sign of the circumcision is a commandment from God to humanity, while on the other hand, its execution is an act of free choice and a sign of obedience by the people. And the following biblical verse indicates the dynamics in the God-human relationship through the sign of the circumcision: Genesis 17:11: You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you.

In the first part of the verse it is clearly stated that the circumcision is God’s expectation from the people. The second part of the verse explains the outcome of the circumcision for the Godhuman relationship. Firstly, God gives the commandment of circumcision to the people. Secondly, people themselves obediently

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 283 perform the sign in order to receive or seal their personal covenant with God. One can start building up a theological concept of the several functional uses of signs, which can be identified from the biblical story so far. The bible starts from depicting the signs as tools that assist in calculating time in creation. Then the story follows into the portrayal of the signs as sealers of the covenant and reminders of a new deeper level in the relationship between people and God in the time of Noah. By the time of Abraham, the signs are charged with signifying mutuality and commitment for both sides in the Abrahamic covenant. Therefore, there are differences in the first two covenants, which can be seen and analysed from a theological point of view. As one can see from the biblical story of the covenant with Noah, it is still a one way process of God initiating the covenant and sealing it with the sign. However, further depth in the relational development between God and people can be seen in the covenant with Abraham. This covenant, although initiated by God, is only sealed by the faithful actions of a man, Abraham. Therefore, the privilege of sealing the covenant by performing the sign of it is also delegated to Abraham and his descendants. One of the novel things, which is being introduced by the Abrahamic covenant, therefore, is the process of renewing by the reliving of one’s covenant with God through the sign of circumcision. This process of a continuous covenantal relationship between the people and God is introduced in the biblical story. Thus, the concept of people’s response to the God’s covenant by means of performing the sign of the covenant becomes a continuously practiced religious obligation. It carries with it two significant functions. Firstly, the sign of the circumcision is a reminder about the covenant between God and the people of Abrahamic descent. Secondly, by continuously performing the sign there is a re-enactment of the Divinely inspired initiative, which this sign represents. Therefore, each re-enactment of the sign becomes a personal witness and testimonial of the covenant. Considering all the findings within the biblical story in Genesis, the research in the following parts of this chapter will

284

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

zoom into the story of Moses in Exodus and the place of signs in it.

MOSES, SIGNS AND FAITH: SIGNS AS AIDS AND TESTIMONIALS IN MOSES’ STORY

The Exodus narrative introduces the phenomena of miraculous signs in the story of Moses. The context of Moses and the signs has to do with God equipping His chosen one with special abilities to perform these miraculous signs in order to convince the people. The convincing process was firstly extended to Moses to demonstrate that he was the chosen one. Secondly, Moses took part in convincing the people. Therefore, the signs in Moses’ mission had a clear function of legitimising and sealing the level of the relationship between God, Moses and the people. Also, the miraculous or transcendental nature of signs clearly pointed to the fact that Moses’ mission originated from God. Furthermore, in relation to all stated above, Moses could be seen as God’s appointed one, or chosen one, who is delegated to encourage people with signs. And the encouragement of Moses was first and foremost to join in a relationship with God. Hence, the development of the concept of signs in the story of Moses could be seen as the continuation of the relationship between people and God as seen in the stories of Noah and Abraham. Following on the covenant relationship of God with Abraham and the signs ascribed to that story, the biblical story further leads its narrative into linking the exodus of the people from Egypt as a fulfilment of God’s promise to Abraham 4. It is thereSee Genesis 17:7–8 as the original promise of God to Abraham (‘I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God’), and Exodus 3:17 when God in conversation with Moses links the idea of the fulfilment of the Abrahamic covenant through Moses and Exodus: ‘and I have promised to bring you up out of your misery in Egypt into 4

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 285 fore important to see here the broader picture of Moses functioning within the covenant of God with Abraham. The Exodus story of the God-human relationship continues with the process of the signs mediating this relationship. Initially the signs are there to convince Moses, and further on in the narrative Moses performs the signs in an attempt to convince the people of Israel, Pharaoh and the people of Egypt. The purpose of convincing is explained in the following biblical verse: Exodus 3:12: And God said, “I will be with you. And this will be the sign to you that it is I who have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you will worship God on this mountain.”

The biblical narrative here and throughout Moses’ story presents the signs in close relation to faith. The signs are performed as an encouragement to faith. The signs are there to convince the people and to further lead them to faith. The biblical story continues repeating the pattern of convincing through signs time and time again. Initially the convincing takes place between God and Moses. Further succession of convincing is passed from Moses to Aaron, and from Aaron to the people of Israel. And then the story reverts back to Moses and Aaron convincing Pharaoh and the Egyptians with signs. The following verses are selected to illustrate the dynamics in the convincing process throughout the Exodus narrative: 1. God convincing Moses: Exodus 4:1: [Signs for Moses] Moses answered, “What if they do not believe me or listen to me and say, ‘The Lord did not appear to you’?” Exodus 4:17: But take this staff in your hand so you can perform the signs with it. 2. Moses convincing Aaron: Exodus 4:28: Then Moses told Aaron everything the Lord had sent him to say, and the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites – a land flowing with milk and honey.’

286

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD also about all the signs he had commanded him to perform. 3. Aaron convincing the people: Exodus 4:30: and Aaron told them everything the Lord had said to Moses. He also performed the signs before the people. 4. Moses and Aaron convincing Pharaoh and the Egyptians: Exodus 7:3: But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in Egypt, he will not listen to you.

The Exodus narrative of Moses, therefore can be seen as further developing the appreciation of signs as the tools, with which God equips His chosen ones, and which are used to convince the people in faith. The following part of the study will look closely into the roles of the signs in the biblical story of Moses.

SIGNS FOR ALL: KEEP ON CONVINCING EACH OTHER WITH SIGNS

Chapter four of Exodus recites various miraculous signs, which God instructs Moses to perform. They often provoke amusement, fear and surprise, as they transform the natural reality of things into their supernatural realm. The biblical narrative starts with the staff, which was turned into a snake, as in Exodus 4:2–4. It carries on by justifying the purpose of the signs as the tools which are used to encourage the people to faith, as the verse below indicates: Exodus 4:5: “This,” said the Lord, “is so that they may believe that the Lord, the God of their fathers – the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob – has appeared to you.”

The biblical narrative is self-explanatory about the purpose of signs in Moses’ mission. They are the seal of approval of Moses’ closeness to God. More concretely, the sign of Moses’ ability to turn the staff into a snake is given to Moses as a demonstration of the fact that the God of his fathers, Abraham and Isaac, appeared to Moses.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 287 Another miraculous transformation affects Moses physically, as narrated in Exodus 4:6–7. God afflicts his hand and teaches him to either bring the skin disease or to get it cleared. Again the sign brings with itself an element of surprise and fear, and also a new element, which is supernatural healing. The variety of signs and their repetition was needed for Moses in order to gain people’s trust. In the following verse there is a description of how God prepares Moses for a sequence of signs in order to convince the people: Exodus 4:8: Then the Lord said, “If they do not believe you or pay attention to the first miraculous sign (‫את‬ ֹ ֣ ‫) ָה‬, they may believe the second.

‫אשׁוֹן וְ ֶ ֽה ֱא ִ֔מינוּ‬ ֑ ‫את ָה ִר‬ ֹ ֣ ‫ם־ל ֹא יַ ֲא ִ ֣מינוּ ֔ ָל� וְ ֣ל ֹא יִ ְשׁ ְמ ֔עוּ ְל ֖קֹל ָה‬ ֣ ‫וְ ָהיָ ֙ה ִא‬ ‫את ָה ַא ֲח ֽרוֹן׃‬ ֹ ֥ ‫ְל ֖קֹל ָה‬ More and varied signs are offered to Moses in the subsequent biblical story. The sole purpose of the multiple signs is to make Moses’ message more and more convincing in order to draw the people into relationship with God. The example of the sign in the passage below shows how Moses was able to affect nature by turning water into blood. The instruction from God to Moses is to increase the severity of the signs if the milder signs do not bring the required effect. Hence, God instructs Moses as follows: Exodus 4:9: But if they do not believe these two signs or listen to you, take some water from the Nile and pour it on the dry ground. The water you take from the river will become blood on the ground.

The repetitive mode of signs in Exodus makes them into a prominent tool of intermediation in the relationship between the people and God. If the relationship is slow to develop, the signs are repeated or the new ones are introduced. The severity of signs also plays a role in the process of convincing. The shocking effects of turning the water into blood is there to shake the faith of the people, as well as to convince them as to the seriousness of what is happening in front of their eyes. The relationship between the people and God is being developed and progressed in

288

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

so far as the signs are being reciprocated and the people’s faith is being encouraged. Apart from the use of the signs in order to convince the people in faith, the Exodus narrative reflects on the signs being used to distinguish between the people of faith, the chosen ones, and the others. The following part of the study will illustrate this point.

SIGNS OF DISTINCTION AND DIVIDE

Apart from signs being there for everyone to appreciate faith in God and to join in a relationship with Him, there is another function of the signs. The signs are there to polarise and divide people as they choose their reactions to them. Therefore, if one contemplates on the function of signs in matters of faith and more so in the relationship between the people and God, it becomes clear from the following verse that there is a distinction that is being introduced through the signs. It is again through the Divine initiative that the signs separate people from one another. Therefore, God selects His target audience, which are to be affected by the signs: Exodus 8:23: I will make a distinction between my people and your people. This miraculous sign will occur tomorrow. 5

‫את ַה ֶזּֽה׃‬ ֹ ֥ ‫וְ ַשׂ ְמ ִ ֣תּי ְפ ֻ ֔דת ֵ ֥בּין ַﬠ ִ ֖מּי ֵוּב֣ין ַﬠ ֶ ֑מּ� ְל ָמ ָ ֥חר יִ ְה ֶי֖ה ָה‬ The word for the sign (‫את‬ ֹ ֣ ‫ ) ָה‬is clearly present in the verse above, and the context of this verse is related to the plagues of Egypt, and the plague of the swarms of flies in particular. The Exodus verse preceding the one cited above clearly affirms the distinction 6: 31 F

The relevant verse in Hebrew has different numbering. Instead of Exodus 8:35 it is 8:19. 6 The other characteristic feature of Exodus 8:23 is that the Hebrew text introduces the word ‫ – ְפ ֻ ֔דת‬deliverance, while the Vulgate and Septuagint use the word ‘distinction’. There is an occasion when the word for the signs is used in Hitpael form (awa – ‫ =אוח‬mark/sign/describe with the mark) as in Numbers 5

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 289 Exodus 8:22: But on that day I will deal differently with the land of Goshen, where my people live; no swarms of flies will be there, so that you will know that I, the Lord, am in this land.

‫יה ְל ִב ְל ִ ֥תּי‬ ָ ‫מּי ע ֵ ֹ֣מד ָﬠ ֔ ֶל‬ ֙ ִ ‫ת־א ֶרץ ֗גּ ֹ ֶשׁן ֲא ֶ ֤שׁר ַﬠ‬ ֣ ֶ ‫יתי֩ ַביּ֨ וֹם ַה ֜הוּא ֶא‬ ִ ‫וְ ִה ְפ ֵל‬ ‫הו֖ה ְבּ ֶ ֥ ק ֶרב ָה ָ ֽא ֶרץ׃‬ ָ ְ‫וֹת־שׁם ָﬠ ֑ר ֹב ְל ַ ֣מ ַﬠן ֵתּ ַ ֔דע ִ ֛כּי ֲא ִ ֥ני י‬ ָ֖ ֽ‫ֱהי‬ This verse clearly indicates that even the absence of the signs is used for convincing the people of Divine participation in their lives. Hence, in this instance there is a dividing among the people into either recipient of the effect of the signs or into the observers of the process. The plan is for one group of people to be influenced by the signs in order to join in a relationship with God, while for the other group it is to be reaffirmed in their relationship with God. The division between the people is further explained from the point of view of God being protective towards His chosen people. The illustration below brings about a new characteristic to the signs, which should be added here. As the verse below points out, the purpose of the sign is to be a sign of protection. The protection offered by God to His people is from the plague of the death of the first born. Hence, the sign of protection from the plague is the sign of blood, which was already featuring in the biblical narrative prior to that. However this time, the blood is used as a sign, which identifies the people’ houses, which are in need of being sheltered from the effect of the plague. The verse below illustrates this process: Exodus 12:13: The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are, and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt.

34:10 when the conversation is about the Boundaries of Canaan. The verse reads as follows: For your Eastern boundary, run a line from Hazar Enan and Shepham ֥ ֶ ִ‫)וְ ִה ְת ַאוּ‬. (‫יתם ָל ֶכ֖ם ִלגְ ֣בוּל ֵ ֑ק ְד ָמה ֵמ ֲח ַ ֥צר ֵﬠ ָינ֖ ן ְשׁ ָ ֽפ ָמה‬

290

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

‫יתי ֶאת־‬ ֙ ִ ‫שׁר ַא ֶ ֣תּם ָ֔שׁם וְ ָר ִ֨א‬ ֣ ֶ ‫ים ֲא‬ ֙ ‫את ַ ֤ﬠל ַה ָבּ ִתּ‬ ֹ ֗ ‫וְ ָהיָ ֩ה ַה ָ ֨דּם ָל ֶ֜כם ְל‬ ‫וּפ ַס ְח ִ ֖תּי ֲﬠ ֵל ֶכ֑ם וְ ֽל ֹא־יִ ְֽה ֶ֨יה ָב ֶ ֥כם ֨ ֶנגֶ ֙ף ְל ַמ ְשׁ ִ֔חית ְבּ ַהכּ ִ ֹ֖תי ְבּ ֶ ֥א ֶרץ‬ ָ ‫ַה ָ ֔דּם‬ ‫ִמ ְצ ָ ֽריִ ם׃‬ Summarising the role of signs in creating distinctions among people, one cannot solely charge the notion of signs with the purposeful aim to divide. It is rather that the signs illustrate and highlight the division, which is already present between the people in their relationship with God. Therefore, the signs often indicate or illustrate the boundaries of the division between the people. The presence or the absence of the signs in the biblical story often symbolises the belonging of one nation to God, while at the same time separating one nation from another one, which does not yet belong to God. However, what is interesting to note here is that at every stage in the people’s relationship with God the signs are there to offer a helping hand of improving the relationship and of furthering it. The following part of this chapter is looking into the natural progression of the relationship between the people and God, and the role of signs in this development.

SIGNS FOR THE GENERATIONS TO COME

As the relationship between the people and God is being developed further through the biblical narrative of Exodus, one can indicate the instances when God introduced signs as aids in building or strengthening this relationship. Continuing the exercise of reading the narrative of Exodus through the prism of signs, one can trace the beginnings of the theological appreciation of signs in the biblical text. The theology of signs in Exodus is not very strong but one can see it being established in its provisional form. Therefore, an attempt to classify the concept of signs in the biblical narrative of Exodus leads one to the following suggested definitions of signs. Signs could be seen as testimonials of the relationship between the people and God or as assets of knowledge. Signs can also be used as reminders of significant events in the past. Therefore, the following paragraphs will look closely into each of the above definitions.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 291

SIGNS AS TESTIMONIALS TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PEOPLE AND GOD AND AS ASSETS OF KNOWLEDGE

This section commences by referring to the following two biblical verses which illustrate a Divine attempt to continue building a relationship with the Hebrews. This relationship could be seen as being built at a cost to the people of Egypt, which already indicates the special position of the Hebrews in the eyes of God. The context of the verse is the plague of Locusts in the land of Egypt. God hardens the heart of the Pharaoh in order to perform the signs in Egypt. The aim of God’s actions is to build a collective memory in the people for the generations to come. The biblical narrative attempts to explain it in the dialogue between God and Moses: Exodus 10:1: Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials so that I may perform these signs of mine among them…

Although the signs are performed among the Egyptians, the message of the signs is for the Hebrews. This is explained in the following verse. The significance of the second verse in Exodus 10 is that God reveals His Name to Moses once again. And in order to signify this moment God deliberately takes a position in the narrative and highlights the solemnity of the moment to Moses. Significantly this moment in the Moses-God relationship is transformed into a sign. This sign becomes a landmark for religious tradition and for human knowledge of this tradition throughout the generations to come. Therefore, God can be seen as the builder of historical memory in the people through signs. The study of the verse below illustrates God’s logistics in drawing Moses’ attention to the significance of the moment: Exodus 10:2: that you may tell your children and grandchildren how I dealt harshly with the Egyptians and how I performed my signs among them, and that you may know ָ ְ‫) ֲא ִ ֥ני י‬. (‫ )ִ ֽו ַיד ְﬠ ֶ ֖תּם‬that I am the Lord (‫הוֽה‬

‫תּי ְבּ ִמ ְצ ַ ֔ריִם‬ ֙ ִ ‫ן־בּנְ ֗� ֵ ֣את ֲא ֶ ֤שׁר ִה ְת ַﬠ ֨ ַלּ ְל‬ ִ ‫וּב‬ ֶ �֜ ְ‫וּל ַ֡מ ַﬠן ְתּ ַס ֵפּר֩ ְבּ ָאזְ ֨ ֵני ִבנ‬ ְ ‫הוֽה׃‬ ָ ְ‫י־א ִ ֥ני י‬ ֲ ‫ר־שׂ ְמ ִתּי ָ ֑בם ִ ֽו ַיד ְﬠ ֶ ֖תּם ִכּ‬ ֣ ַ ‫את ַ ֹ֖תי ֲא ֶשׁ‬ ֹ ‫וְ ֶאת־‬

292

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

The Hebrew text of the biblical verse signifies several important messages of God to Moses. First of all, once again God reveals His Divine Name to Moses and to the people. The name of God, which is pronounced again in the verse is (‫הוה‬ ֽ ָ ְ‫ )י‬the name with which God introduced himself to Moses at the Burning Bush. This time however, God instructs Moses and the people to know His name through the generations. The commandment ‘that you may know’ in Hebrew is not addressed to Moses, but to the people, as it has a verb used with the plural ending. Therefore, God is initiating the memory of Divine knowledge for the people to appreciate and to pass on for future generations. And signs play an important part in facilitating, encapsulating, sealing, and illustrating this knowledge. Another possibility for the use of signs can be derived from the verse above. When God repeats His Name to Moses, as He did at the Burning Bush, 7 He re-affirms His revelation with the sign for the generations to come. God creates the sign to highlight the people’s knowledge of His revelations about Himself. Therefore, the repetition of the initial introduction of God to Moses at the Burning Bush is re-enacted and made into a sign for the benefit of the generations to come. The possible implication of this verse to the God-people relationship is that it establishes the process of appropriation of the Divine Revelation through human knowledge. Hence the Divine revelation ‘I am the Lord’, which is the revelation of God by His Own NAME, is inviting a human response which is in keeping with the knowledge of that revelation through generations to come. And the sign is there to mark an event of Divine revelation for the collective memory of the generations to come.

See Exodus 3:14: ‘God said to Moses, ‘I am who I am’ (‫שׁר ֶ ֽא ְהיֶ ֑ה‬ ֣ ֶ ‫)א ְהיֶ ֖ה ֲא‬, ֽ ֶ or Exodus 3:15 ‘… this is my name forever, the name by which I am to be remembered from generation to generation’. 7

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 293

SIGNS AS REMINDERS OF SIGNIFICANT EVENTS IN THE PAST

Following on from the previous section, it is important to see how God was initiating the sequence of signs as a reminder of the significant events in the biblical history of the God-human relationship. The following verses describe the process of God pre-empting the event by creating a sign by which it will be recognised in the future 8: Exodus 3:12: And God said, “I will be with you. And this will be the sign to you that it is I who have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you will worship God on this mountain.”

The verses below exhibit a similar pattern in presenting the signs, which are the reminders of the significant actions of God on behalf of the people: Exodus 13:9: This observance will be for you like a sign on your hand and a reminder on your forehead that this law of the Lord is to be on your lips. For the Lord brought you out of Egypt with his mighty hand. 13:16: And it will be like a sign on your hand and a symbol on your forehead that the Lord brought us out of Egypt with his mighty hand. Exodus 31:13: Say to the Israelites, ‘You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the Lord, who makes you holy. 31:17: It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.’

Most of the examples above refer to Moses’ story and the story of the Exodus of the people of Israel from Egypt. However, the last two verses: Exodus 31:13 and 17 combine the story of the creation of the world and the story of the creation/sanctification The Rabbinical concept of God knowing the end from the beginning will be discussed further on in this chapter.

8

294

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

of the people of Israel into a holy nation. Another important characteristic of all of the verses above is that their structures almost pre-suggest the use of the verses as thanksgiving prayers. Exodus 3:12 brings the notion of worship into the picture, while the verses 3:9 and 16 give an insight into thanksgiving prayer ‘for the Lord’ for bringing the people ‘out of Egypt with his mighty hand’. With these verses people are encouraged to address God while remembering His signs. These verses could be seen as formulas of remembrance or the basis for thanksgiving prayers. In the process of remembrance and thanksgiving, the signs are there to accommodate the collective memory of the people. In addition to that the presence of the signs also indicates the pattern of liturgical inspiration for the people.

SUMMARY OF THE BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION INTO THEOLOGICAL APPRECIATION OF SIGNS

Alongside the summary of the biblical introduction into signs the following brief recap into the beginnings of biblical theology of signs can be offered. The biblical narrative suggests that, with signs, God gives aid in time of creation for people to understand the time and its conduct. Further on in biblical history, in establishing the relationship with creation, God seals the covenants with the creation and with the significant individuals. Therefore, a chosen people are singled out throughout biblical history as recipients of these covenants on behalf of either all of creation (as in Noah’s case) or on behalf of future and present generations (as in Abraham’s case and in Moses’ case). God further educates with signs, protects, testifies to His people, and to the people of the world as in the case of Moses – Aaron – Israel, or Moses – Pharaoh – Egypt. God also commemorates His revelation to the people through creating new signs, even the most intimate ones of Him revealing His Name (His essence) to Moses and through Moses to the people. This dynamic in the Godhuman relationship is not as formal as the covenantal one, but it is a much more intimate conduct of the relationship between the people and God. The intimacy in the relationship between the people and God is grounded in the fact of all people knowing God by Name and being able to pass this knowledge to future

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 295 generations. Such knowledge is already a sign of having a special relationship with God. This relationship is secured by further signs, which are there to aid people in keeping intimacy in the relationship going (e.g. be it the sign of the circumcision, or the Shabbat celebrations or others). There is much that can be added to the complexity of the relationship between people and God. What needs to be emphasised that the relationship was initiated by God throughout biblical history. It could be seen as reaching its most intimate point when God revealed His Name to Moses. Further expanding on this relationship, God includes the rest of the people into the knowledge of His Name and insists on the people keeping this knowledge for generations to come. Such a knowledge therefore, becomes a significant marker in the relationship between Israel and God. And such an intimate understanding of the relationship between Moses and God is bringing a new level of relationship and connection between the people and God from that point in the history onwards. 9 Keeping the memory of the Divine knowledge alive, God facilitates through signs the process of people remembering the stages in the God-human relationship. Hence, throughout biblical history God encourages people to create memories of signs, as well as to create their spiritual conduct with Him through prayers of remembrance as well as through prayers of gratitude. The overall impression is that the biblical narrative about the signs does not stop at the level of There is a long tradition of piety and reverence in relation to God’s name in Judaism. Observant Jews treat God’s Name with care and with awe. This could be seen as an on-going practice of keeping with the tradition of appreciating God’s revelation to Moses by His Name. For example, by making a deliberate attempt of not pronouncing the name of God in Judaism, the tradition of appreciating God’s gesture is kept relevant and alive in the people’s religious piety. Also the tradition of not pronouncing God’s name and instead pronouncing the replacement words, such as the word ‘name’ (shem) or ‘place’ (makom) indicates that this very word replacement could be seen as a sign, and the sign of human origin and as a marker of intimacy in the relationship between people and their God. 9

296

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

narrative, but attempts to develop the theological significance of signs. The following paragraphs will look into the exegetical appreciation of the signs in Ephrem, Midrash Rabbah and in the Qur’an.

EPHREM’S APPRECIATION OF THE SIGNS IN THE STORY OF MOSES

The purpose of this section is to understand the theology of ̈ signs – atwata – ‫ܐܬܘܬܐ‬ in relation to the biblical narrative in Ephrem’s writings. Taking as an example his commentaries on Exodus and the story of Moses-Pharaoh encounters one can single out the two passages where Ephrem uses the word signs in relation to Pharaoh and Moses: ExodCom 5:1: They entered Pharaoh’s presence together and said to him, “Thus says the Lord, ‘Send forth my people that they may hold a festival to me in the desert” (Exod. 5:1). Pharaoh did not give Moses a harsh reception because of the crowds of Hebrew elders, and because he had heard about ̈ the signs (‫ )ܐܬܘܬܐ‬Moses had performed in front of the elders. But he said to them, “why are you stopping the people from working, Moses and Aaron?” (Exod. 5:5) 10. 315F

When they spoke to him again, he flew into a rage, and instead of asking for a sign that he should let the people go, he said, “Who is the Lord that I should obey him? (Exod. 5.2) Because he said, “Who is the Lord?”, he had to perceive the Lord through signs, since God did not appear to him in visible form. That is why Scripture refers to them by the harsh term “plagues”, because Pharaoh said “Who is the Lord?”

In the attempt to reconstruct Ephrem’s theology of signs in the passages above it is important to understand the theological message of Ephrem. ‘Who is the Lord’ seems to be the question 10

ExodCom 5:1, p. 28.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 297 of Pharaoh, which must have triggered, according to Ephrem, the harshness of the plagues. Additionally, it seems that the expectation from Pharaoh was to ask for signs from God. However, he asks the wrong question, which leads to the unfavourable consequences. In other words, at the end Pharaoh receives signs, but not the ones that the Pharaoh should have asked for. Instead of asking for a sign that he should let the people go, he said “Who is the Lord that I should obey him?” 11, and this question determined his fate. Ephrem’s theological message is therefore based on the reality of one being tuned into a relationship with God, and paying close attention to the stages of one’s relationship with God. The use of the signs seems to play an important part in illustrating one’s stages in the relationship with God. In the case of the Pharaoh, he was required to ask for the sign from God in order to see a way of developing his relationship with Him further. Instead Pharaoh asks the rebellious question, which leads to him experiencing the harshness of signs for the one who rejects God. The fundamental mistake of Pharaoh, according to Ephrem, is that he rejects the Lord without allowing God to convince him through signs. Therefore, the harshness of Pharaoh’s rejection of God leads to the harshness of signs of convincing, which he ultimately brings upon himself. Ephrem therefore could be seen as embracing the biblical theology of signs as means of convincing the people in their faith in God. Consequently, in Ephrem’s exegesis of the biblical passages he firmly adopts this aspect in his theological appreciation of signs as vehicles of Divine conviction. It is important to look into the concept of signs in relation to the biblical story of Moses, and the ways it was developed further in the exegetical history in the writings of the Qur’an.

11

See also in Exodus 5:2.

298

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

QUR’AN ON THE SIGNS

The subject of signs in the Qur’an needs to be narrowed down. Each verse of the Qur’an is a sign, as it is called in Arabic ‘aya’ – the sign. Therefore, the whole Qur’an could be interpreted as a sign. For the purpose of narrowing this research, only one Surah is chosen as an illustrative example. The reason for such a choice is based on the fact that the Surah chosen has direct relation to the story of Moses and also presents some theology of signs.

SURAH 10, JONAH

There are reoccurring themes in the Surah, which are using the biblical story of the Crossing of the Red Sea, and the notion of signs in particular, in order to draw theological conclusions about the God-Human relationship and its conduct from the human point of view. The question of Israel is touched lightly in the Surah inside the broader question of the Human-God relationship. This aspect of the God-human relationship will be further discussed in this part of the study. The further appreciation of the notion of Israel will be then discussed from the rabbinical perspective of Jewish Midrash, and in the relation to the subject of the theology of the signs. Surah 10 presents Moses’ story and offers extensive references to the significance of signs. This Surah is a medium size Surah situated in the middle of the Qur’an, and it discusses the issues of belief and disbelief in God and His creation (Q10.3). It is also about the relationship of God with people, both believers and unbelievers (Q.10:4). From the very beginning the Surah sets the reader on the path of appreciating the Divine revelation which is conveyed in its writings. Therefore, it refers from the outset to the notions of wisdom and the notion of the Scriptures:

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 299 Q.10:1: These are the verses of the decisive Scripture 12.

The first verse of the Surah is clearly paralleled further on in the Surah with the verses 38–39. The same is applicable to the second verse describing the self-revelation of the Qur’an about itself, which is present at the beginning of the Surah and repeated in further verses in it (Q.10.37). The message of the second verse is about reassuring that the revelation of the Surah is a true one from God: Q.10:2: It is so surprising to people that We have revealed to a man from among them that he should warn people and give glad news to those who believe, that they are on a sure footing with their Lord? [Yet] those who disbelieve say, ‘This man is clearly a sorcerer’.

This verse could be understood much better if one looks at it from the context of the biblical story of Moses and Pharaoh, which comes up later on in the same Surah. Although the first half the Surah discusses general matters of belief and disbelief and the consequences of each way, it is later on that the same matters are illustrated through the biblical stories of Noah and Moses, with an emphasis on the story of Moses and the Pharaoh. Already by the third verse, the Surah establishes itself in the biblical narrative of the Creation story, from which it takes its start into further biblical allusions. The study to follow will offer a systematic analysis of the verses in Surah Jonah. There will be an attempt to read the verses analytically in relation to the Jewish and Christian sources considered in this book. Therefore, the following part will look closely at the theme of signs as Divine aids, and as the source of distinction and divinity in the presentation of the Surah.

The word for Scriptures – ‘Hakim’ in Arabic is also understood as ‘full of wisdom’ to suggest that it gives decisions on matters, and to convey that it is perfect and well formed. See in verses 38–39. 12

300

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

SIGNS AS DISTINCTIONS IN THE QUR’AN

In the relationship between God and Man signs play an important/distinctive role. They play the role of the catalyst distinguishing between people of vigilant faith through attention to signs and their life by the signs, and others doing otherwise. The following verse of the Qur’an could as well be describing the Pharaoh’s case. The emphasis on the guiding/educational purpose of the signs is stressed further in the Qur’anic narrative as it follows: Q.10:7: Those who do not expect to meet Us and are pleased with the life of this world, contenting themselves with it and playing no heed to Our signs, 8: shall have the Fire for their home because of that they used to do. ‫ن ه ُ ْم ع َنْ آ� َاتنَِا‬ َ �ِ �ّ َ �‫ن � َ� �َ�ْجُونَ لِق َاءَ� َا وَرَضُوا � ِا�ْ�يََاة ِ ا� ُ�ّن ْيَا و َاطْ م َأ� ُن ّوا �ِ�َا و َا‬ َ �ِ �ّ َ �‫ن ا‬ ّ َ ‫�إ‬ َ‫�َاف ِ�ُ�ن‬ َ‫كسِب ُون‬ ْ َ ‫ك م َأ� و َاهُم ُ الن َّار ُ �ِ�َا ك َ�نُوا ي‬ َ ِ ‫ُأولَئ‬

In this verse there is an attempt to indicate the path of attentiveness to God’s signs as the way of right conduct for an individual who strives to build a relationship with God, and ultimately a meeting with Him (‫ – لِق َاءَ� َا‬liqaa-ana – to meet us). In the process of building one’s relationship with God the Qur’an offers its guidance through the selection of the signs of Divine guidance for the faithful: Q.10:9: But as for those who believe and do good deeds, their Lord will guide them because of their faith…

In the path of the reciprocity in the God-human relationship there is a clear indication of God’s supervision over people’s affairs. In this relationship there is a place for signs, which are there being offered by God. The fate of the people who disregard God’s signs is described further in the verses Q.10.11–12, and the outcomes of the disbelief and disregard for the signs is also remarkably similar to the pattern of Pharaoh’s misconduct in his relationship with the God of Israel. Pharaoh in the biblical story was only showing his attentiveness to the signs in the time of trouble, while all the rest of the time, when he received relief

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 301 from suffering, he demonstrated his disregard to God’s signs. The Qur’anic description of this conduct of behaviour is described in the verse below: Q.10:13: Before you people, We destroyed whole generations when they did evil – their messengers brought them clear signs but they refused to believe. This is how we repay the guilty.

What follows on in the Surah is the reference to Divine Revelation and the Qur’an itself being a part of it (Q.10.15–16). The emergence of the statement above promotes the idea of Divine Revelation in the Qur’an being one of the signs from God to the people. In reaffirming the message of the Surah in reassuring the Divine origins of the Qur’anic revelation further allusions into biblical history are presented. The verses below allude to God’s mercy on people throughout history and instruct the believers to be patient during the time of absence of signs from God: Q.10:19: All people were originally one single community, but later they differed 13. If it had not been for a word 14 from your Lord, the judgement would already have been passed between them regarding their differences. 20: They say. ‘Why has no miraculous sign been sent down to him from his Lord?’ Say [Prophet], ‘Only God knows the unseen, so wait – I too am waiting’.

In this verse there is an attempt in the Qur’an to present its apologetics to the opponents of the Divine origins of its message and doubts about its messenger. There is interesting advice in verse 20 for the believers to wait during the time of doubt. This waiting is most likely for the signs from God. In the verses below the Qur’an clearly presents the distinction between those who take heed and those who do not. The Possibly there is a reference here to the biblical story of the Babel tour. See in Genesis 11:1–8. 14 Postponing judgement. 13

302

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

illustration in the Qur’an in the verse below moves from the created world to the world to come. The message of the Qur’an seems to suggest that the appreciation or non-appreciation of the signs in the created world leads to consequences in the next one. And again, the use of signs as the aids to meet God in the created world will bring dividing results for the world to come. Therefore, the objective of the Qur’an, is to emphasise the world to come, because human endeavour in the created world is compared to a single hour, which pre-empts the eternity of the world hereafter: Q.10:45: On the Day He gathers them together, it would be as if they have stayed [in the world] no longer than a single hour, and they will recognise one another. Those who denied the meeting with God will be the losers, for they did not follow the right guidance.

The divide in the Qur’an is crucial. And the signs are seen as an indication or a catalyst of one’s relationship with God. One might not have a direct personal relationship with the Creator, but one is certainly given enough tools in nature and in all of creation to pay attention to God, to meet with God, and to follow Him through His signs. With the divide in the Qur’an come the different outcomes from the Day of Judgement. The judgement will be different for those who recognised God’s signs and through them followed Him. The ones who did not follow God’s aiding signs will receive the unfavourable judgement and will become losers. With the potential divide in the Qur’an through signs, the idea of using the signs in order to be on the right side of God’s judgement becomes very important. Therefore, with the following part the study in this chapter explores the idea of signs as Divine aids in the Qur’an.

SIGNS AS AIDS FROM GOD IN THE QUR’AN: ALL OF THE CREATION AS A SIGN FROM GOD

The verses below are selected to illustrate the appreciation of signs in the Qur’an as helpful tools for people in finding the

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 303 right path. The verse below suggests that through faith and good deeds one can expect God’s guidance and support on one’s path: Q.10:9: But as for those who believe and do good deeds, their Lord will guide them because of their faith…

The idea of Divine Guidance is repeated in the second half of the same Surah supporting the importance of this function of assistance, which signs offer to people on their path of faith: Q.10:25: But God invites [everyone] to the Home of Peace, and guides whoever He will to a straight path. ��ٍِ ‫و ََّا��� ُ � َ ْ�ع ُو �إ�َى د َارِ ال َّس� َ� ِم و َ�َ�ْدِي م َن �َ� َاء ُ �إ�َى �ِ� َاطٍ ُمّسْتَق‬

Again the Qur’an reaffirms with this verse the aiding function of signs on the path to becoming a person of good faith. The straight path is the one that leads to the Home of Peace, and also it is the one which ultimately brings a person of good faith to their final destination of meeting God. And once again there is a direct relationship between people’s faith and their ability to appreciate God’s signs. The verse of Surah Jonah below provides an illustration of the relationship between God and creation. In doing so it portrays the dynamics of the whole creation in its strive towards the understanding of God’s revelation. In that sense all of the creation and all of its conduct could be perceived as a sign from God, according to the Qur’anic verse below: Q.10:24: The life of the world is like this: rain that We send down from the sky is absorbed by the plants of the earth, from which humans and animals eat. But when the earth has taken on its finest appearance, and adorns itself, and its people think they have power over it, then the fate We commanded comes to it, by night or by day, and we reduce it to stubble, as if it had not flourished just the day before. This is the way we explain the revelations for those who reflect.

The passage describes the way of appreciating natural resources as helping tools in explaining the Revelation of God to people. This idea is similar to the theological standpoints of Syriac Christian thinking when nature is seen very much as a testimony

304

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

to God 15. The idea behind it is the creation through its natural phenomena pointing to the Creator. Looking further at the natural phenomena of the luminaries the following part of the study will present the Qur’anic appreciation of the moon and the sun as the aiding signs for people.

THE SUN AND MOON AS AIDING SIGNS FOR PEOPLE IN THE QUR’AN

Following on the discussion about the dynamics in the relationship between the creation and the creator, the studies of the luminaries is presented in this section. The verses below pick up on the biblical idea of the sun and the moon being created as signs for people and elaborate further on this biblical idea. The Qur’an depicts the sun and the moon as signs aiding people to organise their affairs and as the aiding framework for people’s time management. The following three verses from the Surah illustrate the point: Q.10:67: It is He who made the night so that you can rest in it and the daylight so that you can see – there truly are signs in this for those who hear. Q.10:3: Your Lord is God who created the heavens and earth in six Days [periods], then established Himself on the Throne, governing everything; there is no one that can intercede with Him, unless He has first given permission: this is God your Lord so worship Him. How can you not take heed?

ُ �ِ ّ �َ�ُ� ‫ش‬ ِ ْ ‫ْض �ِي س َِّتة ِ أ� َّ�ا ٍم � َُّ� اسْ ت َو َى �َ�َ� الْعَر‬ َ ‫َات و َا ْ� ��ر‬ ِ ‫سم َاو‬ ّ َ ‫� ال‬ َ َ �َ � ‫ا��� ُ ا� َ ّ� ِي‬ َّ ُ�ُ�‫�إ َّن ر ََّب‬ ٍ ‫شف‬ َ‫ا��� ُ ر َُب ّ� ُ ْ� فَاعْبُد ُوه ُ أ� فَ� َ� �َ� َ َّ�� ُون‬ َ ‫ا ْ� ���ْ�َ م َا م ِن‬ َّ ُ�ُ�ِ�‫ِيع �إ َّ�� م ِن ب َ ْعدِ �إذْنِه ِ ذ َل‬

The following Arabic phrase of the verse Q.10:3 �ْ��� �ْ ‫– �ُ�َ� ّ ِ� ُ ا‬ yudabbiru l-amra could also mean ‘disposing the affairs’. It is imSuch a theological vision is very clearly expressed in Ephrem’s writings. However, it can also be seen as a distinguished feature of Syriac theological thought. On Ephrem’s theology see Brock, S., The Luminous Eye: The Spiritual World Vision of Saint Ephrem the Syrian (Cistercian Publication: Kalamazoo, 1992), p. 40, 53. 15

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 305 portant in relation to the question of the purpose of the signs in the Qur’an. It has a direct relation to the purpose of the creation of the luminaries, which are clearly identified as signs in the biblical narrative of Genesis 16. The statement in this verse is about God’s essential presence in the daily affairs of people. In fact, the message here is that it was initially God’s purpose in creation to assist humans in their lives and in everything that they do. God is therefore prescribed by the Qur’an to be placed as the central focal presence on the throne of all people’s doings by governing them. Therefore, the creation of the moon and the sun which are considered as signs in the biblical narrative, carry similar resemblance in the Qur’anic narrative in which the message of the two verses below state the relation of the moon and the sun to the signs of God: Q.10:5: It is He who made the sun and a shining radiance and the moon a light, determining phases for it so that you might know the number of years and how to calculate time. God did not create all these without a true purpose; He explains His signs to those who understand.

‫َاب‬ َ ‫سِنِ�نَ و َا�ْ�ِس‬ ّ ‫ل لِتَعْ�َ� ُوا �َدَد َ ال‬ َ ِ‫ْس ضِيَاء ً و َالْقَم َر َ نُور ًا و َق َ ّدرَه ُ م َنَاز‬ َ ‫ل ال َّشم‬ َ َ ‫جع‬ َ ‫ه ُو َ ا� َ ّ� ِي‬ َ‫َات لِقَوْ ٍم يَعْ�َ� ُون‬ ِ ��ْ�‫ل ا‬ ُ ‫َص‬ ِّ ‫ق يُف‬ ِ ّ َ �ْ�‫� �إ َّ�� � ِا‬ َ ِ ‫ا��� ُ ذ َل‬ َ َ �َ � ‫م َا‬ َّ �

Q10:6: In the succession of night and day, and in what God created in the heavens and earth, there truly are signs for those who are aware of Him. َّ ‫َ�ف‬ َ‫َات لِّقَوْ ٍم ي ََّتق ُون‬ ٍ ��َ � ‫ض‬ ِ ‫َات و َا ْ� �� ْر‬ ِ ‫ا��� ُ �ِي ال َّسم َاو‬ َ َ �َ � ‫ل و َال َّ��َارِ وَم َا‬ ِ �ِ ‫ن �ِي اخْ ت‬ ّ َ ‫�إ‬ ِ ْ ‫اللي‬ َّ �

The Qur’an explicitly states the utilitarian use of the solar system which is made specifically for humanity’s suitable conduct for days and years on. The relation to time and to God’s assistance to humankind through the creation is similar to the biblical narrative. The Qur’an follows with its reflection on the creation of luminaries: See Genesis 1:14, and the references to the creation of the luminaries at the beginning of this chapter.

16

306

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD Q.10:5: It is He who made the sun and a shining radiance and the moon a light, determining phases for it so that you might know the number of years and how to calculate time. God did not create all these without a true purpose; He explains His signs to those who understand.

‫َاب‬ َ ‫سِنِ�نَ و َا�ْ�ِس‬ ّ ‫ل لِتَعْ�َ� ُوا �َدَد َ ال‬ َ ِ‫ْس ضِيَاء ً و َالْقَم َر َ نُور ًا و َق َ ّدرَه ُ م َنَاز‬ َ ‫ل ال َّشم‬ َ َ ‫جع‬ َ ‫ه ُو َ ا� َ ّ� ِي‬ َ‫َات لِقَوْ ٍم يَعْ�َ� ُون‬ ِ ��ْ�‫ل ا‬ ُ ‫َص‬ ِّ ‫ق يُف‬ ِ ّ َ �ْ�‫� �إ َّ�� � ِا‬ َ ِ ‫ا��� ُ ذ َل‬ َ َ �َ � ‫م َا‬ َّ �

Q.10:6: In the succession of night and day, and in what God created in the heavens and earth, there truly are signs for those who are aware of Him. َّ ‫َ�ف‬ َ‫َات لِّقَوْ ٍم ي ََّتق ُون‬ ٍ ��َ � ‫ض‬ ِ ‫َات و َا ْ� �� ْر‬ ِ ‫سم َاو‬ ّ َ ‫ا��� ُ �ِي ال‬ َ َ �َ � ‫ل و َال َّ��َارِ وَم َا‬ ِ �ِ ‫ن �ِي اخْ ت‬ ّ َ ‫�إ‬ ِ ْ ‫اللي‬ َّ �

What unites the verses selected for this part of the study is the message of the Qur’an about the purposeful creation of the luminaries for the people. Each verse indicates the human faculty, which is catered. For example: human hearing is indicated in Q.10:67; human mind through understanding is mentioned in Q.10:3; and human awareness is evoked in Q.10:5–6. Each verse therefore contributes its definition to the purpose of the signs in directing people’s attention to God. This line of the argument determines the overall impression from the message of the Surah. Summarising the theology of the signs in the Qur’an so far, one can argue that the Qur’an on the one hand stays close to the biblical theological appreciation of the signs, while on the other hand offers its insights into the matter. From the biblical narrative one can see the invocation of the sun and the moon being the aiding lights for the people to distinguish time. The Qur’an takes its time to explain the matter further. Firstly, the sun and moon are portrayed in the Qur’an as clear signs for those who hear. Hence the emphasis in the Qur’an is an attentive listening to the signs of God in nature and supposedly in one’s own life. Secondly the following passages of the Surah establish the supremacy of God over all of the creation. It is God according to the Qur’an who rules the world, and He alone is the One to be worshiped. Therefore, the purpose of the signs is refined by the goal of aiding the believers in finding the true path of faith, as

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 307 well as inspiring them to admire the Creator. Thirdly there is a direct implication for people from the creation of the sun and the moon. The luminaries were created in order for people to be able to calculate their time and to organise their affairs. Therefore, the Qur’an testifies to the purpose of all God’s signs as aids for the people in their path of faith. However herein lies a divide which the signs bring. The divide is between the people of faith and the people of no faith. Therefore, God exercises His privilege to explain the signs only to those who understand. Consequently, for the people of faith there is an underlying message to make an effort in order to be vigilant to God’s signs in the world, and ultimately to His presence in it. Therefore, one is encouraged to be understanding of God in order for God to reciprocate one’s efforts and reward one with desired explanations. This leads to the final point of people being aware of God in every aspect of creation. This accent on the awareness of God’s omnipresence in the world is the one that the Qur’an encourages people to acquire in their relationship with God through signs. If one is to look again at the passages above, they could be seen as almost suggesting one to tune all of one’s faculties in unison with God’s signs. The ultimate goal of the exercise is to be in-tuned with God Himself in order to take heed. And the Qur’an indeed asks the question – in Q.10:3 – ‘How can you not take heed?’, and often laments of the people being َ‫– �َاف ِ� ُ�ن‬ ghaafiluna – heedless 17. The aiding function of signs is supplemented in the Qur’an by the people who are chosen for the task of delivering its message. Therefore, the Qur’an offers another illustration of God’s help through signs as well as through the prophets. The following part of this chapter will look into the relationship between the signs and the prophets in the teaching of the Qur’an. 32F

17

See in Q.10:7.

308

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

SIGNS AND PROPHETS

In understanding the depiction of signs and prophets in the Qur’an, one has to refer to the ministry of the prophets as conveying the message of warning to people from God. Often this message is transmitted through signs, according to the Qur’anic verse below: Q.10:13: Before you people, We destroyed whole generations when they did evil – their messengers brought them clear signs but they refused to believe. This is how we repay the guilty.

Expanding further on the definition of signs in relation to the prophets one has to highlight that the signs are depicted as tools with which the prophets issue warnings to the people who refuse to believe. Again the other side of the relationship between signs and faith is demonstrated here. For the people of faith, signs lead them in the straight path of faith, but for the people without faith, the signs are there to warn them and to invite them to the path of faith. Another important definition of signs and prophets needs to be added at this point. In the Qur’anic presentation, the signs as well as the prophets convey the universal message. Therefore, their appeal is for all people, i.e. believers and non-believers alike. Continuing with the theme of signs and prophets the Qur’an depicts signs as marks of recognition for the validity of the Prophet of God. In other words, it is not only the message of the prophets which is validated or facilitated by the signs, it is often the whole ministry of prophethood which is being made apparent by means of the signs, which are revealed testifying to it. The verse below indicates that the lack of signs validating the mission of the prophet could lead to difficulty in accepting the prophet among the people: Q.10.20: They say. ‘Why has no miraculous sign been sent down to him from his Lord?’ Say [Prophet], ‘Only God knows the unseen, so wait – I too am waiting’.

This verse is a didactic one. Firstly, it confirms the dynamic in validating the prophet by signs, while secondly it encourages

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 309 patience in the relationship between God and people. It is possible to assume that with this verse the Qur’an attempts to cover a certain degree of uncertainty in the relationship between people and God. And by referring to the times of lack of clear signs, one waits for the signs patiently, while in the meantime one can recite the verses in the Qur’an where God promises signs for those who are looking for them: Q.10:101–103: Say, ‘Look at what is in the heavens and on the earth.’ But what use are signs and warnings to people who will not believe? 102: What are they waiting for but a punishment like that which came to those before them? Say, ‘Wait then, I am waiting too’. 103: In the end We shall save Our messengers and the believers. We take it upon ourselves to save the believers.

One is encouraged to wait at all times. And the Qur’an repeats its instruction to wait at the beginning of Surah 10, and at the end of it. The signs are worth waiting for, as they are revealed both in heaven and on earth. Therefore, the Qur’an reflects on the state of both believers and unbelievers, and confirms that they share the same state of waiting for signs, as well as for God’s Judgement. However, their waiting is for a different ending. The outcome for the believers is being saved by God, while the outcome for the unbelievers is their punishment. The following part of this chapter will further develop the idea of signs and the prophets in the Qur’an by looking at where the Qur’an reflects on the biblical examples of God’s prophets/messengers.

BIBLICAL EXAMPLES OF THE MESSENGERS OF THE SIGNS IN THE QUR’AN

In the description of the messengers of the signs, the Qur’an recollects a number of the biblical types of the prophets. Noah and Moses are two of them, which will feature in this part of the study. In commemorating Noah the Qur’an presents the type of the prophet who delivers warning for people, and also the one who demands action from them. By means of the prophets

310

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Qur’an describes Divine attempt to bring the relationship with the people to a human level. For example, dealing with idolatry in the verse below, the communication of Noah with the people seems to adopt the technique of negotiations. Thus, the message of Noah is that worshiping other gods limit the message of the prophet about the true God, and suffocate it: Q.10:71: Tell them the story of Noah. He said to his people, ‘My people, if my presence among you and my reminding you of God’s signs is too much for you, then I put my trust in God. Agree on your course of action, [call] your partner-gods – do not be hesitant or secretive about it – then carry out your decisions on me and give me no respite.

Noah is depicted as a messenger and a prophet who reminds people about God by means of his message as well as by his own life. Thus, the figure of the prophet is also the model to follow. Noah is the one who put his trust in God and with this gave an example for people to follow. In the following verses one can see another model to follow from the prophet Moses: Q.10.74: Then, after him, We sent messengers to their people who brought them clear signs. But they would not believe in anything they had already rejected: in this way we seal the hearts of those who are full of hostility. 75: After them We sent Moses and Aaron with Our signs to Pharaoh and his leading supporters, but they acted arrogantly – they were wicked people.

The continuity of the biblical prophets seems to be important for the Qur’an when it tries to illustrate the consistency of Divine efforts of communication with people through signs and prophets. There is another aspect in the Qur’anic emphasis on highlighting the lineage of the biblical prophets prior to the messenger of the Qur’an. Mohammad is depicted by the Qur’an as joining in the continuous prophetic efforts on God’s behalf. Furthermore, he also becomes validated by the prophets before him through vocalising the call of people to faith. Thus, Mohammad becomes the messenger of the Qur’an who is validated by the signs and by the prophets before him. Therefore, the position of

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 311 the messenger of the Qur’an is depicted in the Surah as his attempt to vocalise the Divine initiative of offering himself as a sign and as Divine aid.

THE PLACE OF THE MESSENGER OF THE QUR’AN IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PEOPLE AND GOD

Surah Jonah illustrates the following mode of the God-human relationship when God conveys His instructions to the prophet and via him God releases Divine introductions to the people. It is highlighted in the verses below that the main function of the messenger of the Qur’an is to enhance the message of Monotheism. In doing so the messenger identifies with his audience. He becomes a vessel for transmitting the messages, which are brought to him. Quite often, therefore, when the messenger receives what appears to be the personal instructions for his life of faith, they could carry with them a universal message. Consequently, the figure of the messenger of the Qur’an evolves into the type of its own. As an example, the verses below convey the message of Monotheism for the people as well as deliver instructions about the conduct of faith for the messenger: Q.10:104: [Prophet] say, ‘People, if you are in doubt about my religion, I do not worship those you worship other than God, but I worship God who will cause you to die, and I am commanded to be a believer’. 105: [Prophet], set your face towards religion as a man of pure faith. Do not be one of those who join partners with God; 106: do not pray to any other [god] that can neither benefit not harm you: if you do, you will be one of the evildoers.

These verses indicate a pattern in the Qur’an with regard to the didactics of the message of the Qur’an as well as to its messenger. It is a common place in the Qur’anic narrative that on giving instructions to the messenger of the Qur’an the text seems to be conveying a message which is applicable to the rest of humanity. In that sense the messenger of the Qur’an is similar to and different from the biblical prophets. He is similar in the sense of attempting to convey the message of God to the people, but he is different in often receiving the message of God as if it

312

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

is addressed personally to him. Hence there is an attempt in the Qur’an to single out the messenger who is privileged among other prophets by being addressed by God. The verses above reinstate the ultimate message of Monotheism and the command to worship One God. The verses below discuss the question of God’s punishment, judgement, forgiveness and mercy. Again the way of transmission of the messages in the verses below is through the personal addressing of the universal message and instructions to the messenger of the Qur’an: Q.10:107: If God inflicts harm on you, no one can remove it but Him, and if He intends good for you, no one can turn His bounty away: He grants His bounty to any of His servants he will. He is the Most Forgiving, the Most Merciful. 108: Say, ‘People, the Truth has come to you from your Lord. Whoever follows the right path follows it for his own good, and whoever strays does so to his own loss: I am not your guardian’. 109: [Prophet], follow what is being revealed to you, and be steadfast until God gives His judgement, for He is the Best of Judges.

The verses speak about the qualities of God, which are contradicting and complimentary at the same time, as illustrated by Divine attributes of Mercy and Judgement. God is called Most Forgiving and Most Merciful, granting His bounties to whomever He wills from His servants. But He is also the Best of Judges, giving His judgement to all. God will judge the believers, the followers of the right path, and God will also judge the people who went astray. There is reception of goodness as well as the reception of loss that is involved in Divine Judgement, but until the actual day of Judgement all of the people are united by the process of waiting. These are attributes that are given to all of the people in order to guide them in the process of waiting for Judgement. These are also God’s signs that direct and guard the people in the Straight Path, and there is a messenger in the Qur’an, who is singled out in the text by virtue of being a receptacle of Divine messages. The singling out the messenger in the Qur’an could be seen as bringing the relationship between the people and God to a more personal level. However, it is more

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 313 likely that by bringing the messenger of the Qur’an forward the Source of the Qur’anic message is distanced. If the signs are there to communicate their messages to the people, and the messenger of the Qur’an is transmitting this message, then there is a clear distance between the people and God which requires a messenger to bridge the gap. As a completely different example from the spectrum of using people as signs, there is an illustration in the Surah Jonah about Pharaoh being made into a sign for the generations to come. Therefore, the next part of this chapter is going to look closer into the function of the signs for future generations.

SIGNS FOR GENERATIONS TO COME IN THE QUR’AN

There is another development of theology of signs in the Qur’an, which cannot be found in the biblical story. As was already indicated in this book Qur’an deviates from the biblical narrative in its depiction of the drowning of Pharaoh, which has direct implications on the Qur’anic theology of signs. To introduce the context of the Qur’anic narrative one needs to look at the following passage where the verses 10:90– 93 reflect on the story of the Crossing the Red Sea. The Qur’an here adds to the biblical story an alternative, which indicates that Pharaoh’s example was made into a sign for the generations to come. The definition of the signs as reminders to the generations to come as a concept is used in the biblical narrative 18, and the particular use of Pharaoh’s event as a sign is a novel contribution of the Qur’an. The main difference of the Qur’anic account of Pharaoh drowning is that, contrary to the biblical narrative, Pharaoh’s life is spared in the event, as indicated in the verses below: Q.10:90: We took the children of Israel across the sea. Pharaoh and his troops pursued them in arrogance and aggression. But as he was drowning, he cried, ‘I believe there is no The use of the sign of the rainbow in the story of Noah is initiated for the generations to come, as is the sign of circumcision.

18

314

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD God except the one the Children of Israel believe in. I submit to Him.’ 91: ‘Now? When you had always been a rebel, and a trouble-maker! 92: Today We shall save only your corpse as a sign to all posterity. A great many people fail to heed our signs.’ َ‫س ع َنْ آ� َاتنَِا لَغ َاف ِ�ُ�ن‬ ِ ‫ن الن َّا‬ َ ِ ّ‫ك آيَة ً و �َ� َّن كَث ِ�� ًا م‬ َ َ ‫ك لِتَكُونَ �� َِنْ � َلْف‬ َ ِ ‫ك ببَِدَن‬ َ ‫فَال ْيَوْم َ �ُ�َ� ِ ّي‬

In the verse 10:92 Qur’an repeats its criticism of the people being heedless (َ‫ – لَغ َاف ِ� ُ�ن‬la ghaafiluna) adding to a number of occasions of the use of the same phrase in the text. Earlier verses of the Qur’an 10.21–23 are vocalising similar premises about people turning to God during the time of their hardship, and soon after the hardship has passed, they abandon their strive to God. This argument is later illustrated by the story of Pharaoh when the structure of the Surah thematically links the earlier verses with the later ones. Later verses of the Qur’an 10:90–92 bring the narrative back to the beginning of the Surah, to verse 7, in picking up the theme of taking heed in the Lord and in His signs: Q.10:7: Those who do not expect to meet Us and are pleased with the life of this world, contenting themselves with it and playing no heed to Our signs. ‫ن ه ُ ْم ع َنْ آ� َاتنَِا‬ َ �ِ �ّ َ �‫ن � َ� �َ�ْجُونَ لِق َاءَ� َا وَرَضُوا � ِا�ْ�يََاة ِ ا� ُ�ّن ْيَا و َاطْ م َأ� ُن ّوا �ِ�َا و َا‬ َ �ِ �ّ َ �‫ن ا‬ ّ َ ‫�إ‬ َ‫�َاف ِ�ُ�ن‬

This repetition of the use in the Qur’anic statements (َ‫– �َاف ِ� ُ�ن‬ ghaafiluna – heedless) at the beginning of the Surah and towards the end could be seen as the Qur’anic attempt to support the argument of the whole Surah talking about general issues of faith and disbelief. Therefore, the story of Moses and Pharaoh is used in the Surah as a showcase and an illustration of the different outcomes in the God-human relationship. Consequently, Moses and his people are used as examples of true believers, while Pharaoh and his followers are an illustration of disbelief. What is interesting however, is that by the end of the Surah Pharaoh’s body, after his conversion into faith, is used as a sign for those who succeed him. And this sign of Pharaoh is not only for his immediate successors, but also to the whole of mankind. In sup-

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 315 port of the statement above one can see that the Qur’anic verse 92 uses initially the words ‫ك‬ َ َ ‫ – �� َِنْ � َلْف‬liman khalfaka – ‘those who will succeed you’, but straight after there is a lament that people ‫س‬ ِ ‫ – الن َّا‬alnaas are generally heedless of God’s signs. To conclude the presentation of this part of the chapter it is important to reflect on the issue of signs and reason. The Qur’an seals its own theology of signs by letting God make the last judgement in deciding the outcome and even the decision of the people. Therefore, the very decision of a soul becoming a believer is only possible as an expression of God’s will as indicated in the verse below.

SIGNS, FAITH AND REASON: ‘NO SOUL CAN BELIEVE EXCEPT ِ ْ‫ن �إ َّ� � � �ِإ ذ‬ َ ِ ‫س �أ ن ت ُؤ ْم‬ BY GOD’S WILL ’ – ِ � ��‫ا‬ ٍ ‫[ – و َم َا ك َ�نَ ل ِن َ ْف‬WAMA KANA َّ ‫ن‬ LINAFSIN AN LUIMINA ILLA BI -IDINI L-LAHI ]

Q.10:98–100: If only a single town had believed and benefited from its belief! Only Jonah’s people did so, and when they believed, We relieved them of the punishment of disgrace in the life of this world, and let them enjoy life for a time. 99: Had your Lord willed, all the people on earth would have believed. So can you [Prophet] compel people to believe? 100: No soul can believe except by God’s will, and He brings disgrace on those who do not use their reason. َ‫ن � َ� ي َ ْعق ِ�ُ�ن‬ َ �ِ �ّ َ �‫س �َ�َ� ا‬ َ ْ‫ل ا�� ِّج‬ ُ َ ‫��ْع‬ َ َ ‫ا��� ِ و‬ ِ ‫ن �إ َّ�� � �ِإ ْذ‬ َ ِ ‫س أ� ن تُؤْم‬ ٍ ‫وَم َا ك َ�نَ لِن َ ْف‬ َّ ‫ن‬

These verses are significant for the Qur’anic teaching about signs and the God-human relationship. With signs it is clear that they are aiding factors for people in their search for belief. The origin of signs is either from God or the people whom God appoints. However, in choosing faith the final say is not with people and their choices, but according to God’s will which either permits or supposedly prevents people coming to belief. The last verse from the passage above, appeals to people’s reason in finding the right path. It is possible therefore to suggest that the signs appeal to people’s reason also. Therefore ,in the process of acquiring faith through signs, the Qur’an suggests that human reasoning should play its part.

316

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Also in the matter of repentance, or a person turning to a straight path it is also due to God’s will to allow a person to find repentance. God’s will has no restrictions in the matter of which person He wishes to bring to ‘the Home of Peace’. This again expands the message and the target audience of the Qur’an into the universal domain, as the verse below suggests: Q.10:25: But God invites [everyone] to the Home of Peace, and guides whoever He will to a straight path. ��ٍِ ‫و ََّا��� ُ � َ ْ�ع ُو �إ�َى د َارِ ال َّس� َ� ِم و َ�َ�ْدِي م َن �َ� َاء ُ �إ�َى �ِ� َاطٍ ُمّسْتَق‬

The inclusivity of this verse, which is situated in the first part of the Surah, sets the tone of uncertainty for the final destination of the people. For example, it is always up to God’s last word for either unbelievers or believers alike as to where their fate would lead them. And it is up to God to lead people into the fire or to their dwelling in paradise. The uncertainty in the Qur’an is illustrated by the verses that deconstruct the formation of definite criteria about people’s faith or people’s deeds determining people’s fate. On the contrary, without disregarding the virtue of faith and good deeds, the Qur’an highlights that the determining factor in people’s lives is not due to their actions or choices, but due to Divine choice and Divine destiny 19. As the verse below suggests, the final decision on the fate of the whole nation, the people of Israel, is left to God’s Judgement: Q.10:93: We settled the Children of Israel in a good place and provided good things as sustenance for them. It was only after knowledge had come to them that they began to differ among themselves. Your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection regarding their differences.

This resolution of the Qur’an could be seen as its response to the early Christian debates about the means of salvation either by faith or by deeds. The Qur’an clearly indicates here that people’s salvation or damnation is finalised by God’s will only. 19

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 317 There are a number of points, which can be singled out from the above passage. Firstly the acknowledgement in the Qur’an of the closeness in the relationship between God and the Children of Israel. This verse clearly testifies that the Children of Israel have a specially designated and good place which is chosen for them by God. Secondly, this verse suggests postponing the judgement of people’s differences to the Day of Resurrection and to God himself. This statement could be devaluing any value judgements on behalf of any people at present and consequently leaving the Children of Israel in their chosen status until the end of the world. In order to develop the argument further one could refer to the following verse, which could be interpreted as advising the Prophet to seek advice from ‘those who have been reading the Scripture before’. There are various possibilities for identifying who those people were. One such possibility could be placing the Children of Israel in that category. Hence reading the verses below in the context of the previous verse about the Children of Israel and their chosen status could cast light on the following verses: Q.10:94: So if you [Prophet] are in doubt about what We have revealed to you, ask those who have been reading the scriptures before you. The Truth has come to you from your Lord, so be in no doubt and do not deny God’s signs – 95: then you would become one of the losers. 96: Those against whom your Lord’s sentence is passed will not believe, 97: even if every sign comes to them, until they see the agonizing torment.

The verses above clearly indicate the authority of the ‘previous scriptures’ for understanding the nature of God’s revelations. In order not to disregard the Truth of the Lord, the advice of verse Q.10:94 is to support one’s relationship with God, with Scrip-

318

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

tures, and with the signs 20. There is also another point, which is present in these verses of the Qur’an about the people who are awaiting judgement from God, and the ones who will not believe until the agonising torment comes to them. Recalling the verses of Surah 10:98–100, from the beginning of this section, one can see the complexity in the process of receiving judgement which is waiting until God delivers it. Therefore, the verses of the Qur’an are only issuing warnings of the outcomes of the Judgement, while the actual Judgement can only see its incarnation during the last days. God’s prerogative is manifest in people’s lives, even in the matter of choice of belief. Therefore, one’s faith is not down to the choice of the person, nor is it due to the prophetic mission of the chosen ones or the signs, but it is all down to God. One can see the challenges to the Prophet’s mission to encourage people to believe, while the only possible way for them to do so is by God’s will. The relationship between signs and reason in people’s journey to faith is explained in the verses below: Q.10:101: Say, ‘Look at what is in the heavens and on the earth.’ But what use are signs and warnings to people who will not believe? 102: What are they waiting for but a punishment like that which came to those before them? Say, ‘Wait them, I am waiting too’. 103: In the end We shall save Our messengers and the believers. We take it upon ourselves to save the believers.

The process of waiting for God is advocated here as well as in earlier verses of the Surah. This process is advocated in the verses above as proper conduct for the believers, who by means of their patience in waiting and in their faith in God are hoping to be saved. There is a promising indication in verse Q.10:103 The argument could bear some similarities to the Christian Syriac theology of modes of revelation by God in the world through Scripture, through nature, as well as through the Incarnation. See Brock, S., The Luminous Eye, p. 40–43. 20

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 319 that God intends to save the believers, while the belief itself is down to God. The Qur’an goes further and commands people to believe by virtue of what was commanded to the Prophet in his mission to reaffirm Monotheism 21. This path of Monotheism is based on the commandment to be a believer. This commandment of being a believer is further explained in the verses below, which present the reality of God being the One who determines every aspect of human life in this world, and in the world to come: Q.10:107: If God inflicts harm on you, no one can remove it but Him, and if He intends good for you, no one can turn His bounty away: He grants His bounty to any of His servants He will. He is the Most Forgiving, the Most Merciful. 108: Say, ‘People, the Truth has come to you from your Lord. Whoever follows the right path follows it for his own good, and whoever strays does so to his own loss: I am not your guardian’. 109: [Prophet], follow what is being revealed to you, and be steadfast until God gives His judgement, for He is the Best of Judges.

From the passages above it becomes clear that every occurrence in people’s lives is all down to God who leads people in the path of faith. The message of the Qur’an is therefore directed to all, unbelievers and believers alike. Surah 10 uses the biblical stories of Moses and Pharaoh 22, Noah and Jonah, as illustrative examples for its message and for the purpose of grounding its narrative in biblical context. On the biblical grounds the Surah develops and delivers its teaching on the signs throughout its verses. The main purpose of signs is to alert people in their appreciation of various gifts from God to the people in their journey towards faith, and ultimately towards Him as Creator. Summarising the theology of signs in the Qur’an, one has to highlight the following dimensions in its teaching. The signs are 21 22

As in Q.10:104–106. See esp. Q.10:76–83.

320

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

present in the created world as tools in order to guide people in faith and in the path which is straight. There are signs in nature and there are also prophets who bring the signs as reassuring indicators of their prophetic ministry. The signs fill the natural world, but also there is an indication in the Qur’an that the signs are also present in the world to come. The transcendental nature of signs could be also seen as purposefully helping people to find their faith and to be guided in their faith. The Qur’an overwhelms its theology of signs when the whole teaching about the signs is overshadowed by Divine impact on human lives. The finality of finding one’s faith, as well as guidance in faith, is only possible through God’s Mercy. People, on the other hand, are living in suspense waiting for their experience of God’s Judgement. People are gathering their appreciation of signs throughout generations as a process of generating a collective memory experience, which ultimately has implications for the people building or conducting their relationship with God. People of faith are encouraged to follow their faith while being attentive to God’s signs. People of no faith are also encouraged to find their faith in signs, as illustrated in the life of Pharaoh, when he professed his faith just before his death and is spared from death. Additionally, his example becomes a sign for generations to come, and for their collective memory. The example of Pharaoh although inconsistent with the biblical narrative is consistent with the message of the Qur’an which states that at the end of the day even the matters of one’s personal faith is down to God’s will or God’s judgement, because according to the Qur’an, ‘no soul can believe except by God’s will’.

SUMMARY OF THE THEOLOGY OF THE SIGNS AS PRESENTED IN THE BIBLE AND AS THEY ARE FURTHER DEVELOPED IN THE QUR’AN

After looking at the concept of signs from the Qur’anic points of view, one can draw the following summarising thoughts on the subject of its relation to the biblical narrative. The biblical narrative often links the notion of signs with the collaborative effort between human and Divine initiatives. Although it is God who

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 321 initiates the signs, the signs are ultimately intended for human appropriation. Therefore, the signs are aiding factors offered by God for the purpose of God-human connection and communication. The signs are there for people to appreciate and to make use of them in the process of building their relationship with God. Therefore, to a certain extent the signs in the biblical narrative reveal the character of God, as a caring God who is offering guidance and help in facilitating His relationship with people. Thus, it is through signs that God often chooses to reveal the shape and form of the God-human relationship. As an illustrative example one can look at the sign of circumcision given to Abraham as a model and type of individual personal commitment. His example is there to be replicated throughout the generations to follow. Therefore, God initiates the Abrahamic form of the God-human relationship and introduces it as a model to follow subsequently. The sign of circumcision therefore plays an important part in maintaining that ongoing relationship. On the physical level it allows the relationship with God to be initiated by human effort. While on the theological level the sign of circumcision evocates the tradition of the Abrahamic faith and the model of God-human relationship which takes its origin in the history of the biblical narrative. It is also developed into the significant identifying feature of the religious traditions following from it. What is important to understand is that at the core of the Divine initiative of God-human relationship in the biblical account of Abrahamic traditions, there is a clear indication of God initiating the relationship, while the people are expected to take an active part in participating in it. Therefore, the concept of signs is charged with many attributes which aim to help in facilitating God-human collaboration. The Qur’an clearly supports the idea of signs (ayaat) being a result of God offering His help. Therefore, it is stated in the Qur’an that the agency of signs is Divine. If the Qur’an is to describe the non-divine agencies of signs, as for example the acts of sorcery of the magicians in the story of Moses, then the

322

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Qur’an uses a different word for sigs, as for example (mithal) 23. Signs in the Qur’an emphatically reveal the existence of God and are introduced in order to testify to the presence of God. The Qur’an gives testimony to God through signs as revealed in nature, through the prophets who perform the signs, and through conscious human effort in recognising signs in one’s life. Therefore, God is described in the Qur’anic narrative as the One who is both hidden and revealed through the signs. Consequently, Divine attributes such as Justice and Mercy are often also revealed through signs. In introducing the theological argument of looking at the signs as Divine aids to humans, both the biblical narrative and the Qur’an start from creation. Hence the luminaries described by the biblical narrative are signs intended for people in order to understand time and its conduct. In addition to this biblical definition of the nature of signs, the Qur’an continues with the theological appreciation of signs and further develops it by looking at signs as tools to guide people in faith, which in Qur’anic terms means leading them on the path which is straight. The Qur’an presents the signs filling the natural world, and also Qur’an point to the signs being a part of the world to come. The signs are there to help people find God and to guide people in their faith. The Qur’an further prescribes the use of signs for different categories of people, depending on their situation on the journey along the path of the faith. Therefore, the people of faith are encouraged to follow their faith by being attentive to God’s signs, while the people of no faith are encouraged to find their faith through signs. This can be illustrated by the story of Pharaoh who was continuously encouraged to step into the path of faith through Moses and Aaron showing him signs. The example of Pharaoh’s ending in the Qur’an testifies that he eventually submits to God on the verge of death. Therefore, the outcome of Pharaoh’s conversion allows God to spare his life. Another outcome of Pharaoh’s conversion is the fact that his life is 23

See Q.10:76–83.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 323 spared in order for him to become a sign for the generations to come. Hence the didactic address of the Qur’anic message is to be applied universally, for believers and non-believers alike. The Qur’an does not stop at the point of establishing the connection between signs from God and faith in Him. The verses of the Qur’an clearly indicate that the process of finding one’s faith and guidance in faith is due to God’s Mercy. With such an argument the Qur’an emphasises Divine superiority over all. That is over the natural created order and also over human choices and decisions. Therefore, in the process of finding one’s faith as well as in matters of Judgement and Salvation the final seal of approval is up to God. Therefore, there is another universal argument which Qur’an is promoting in the Surah 10. The message which the Qur’an transmits is that all people, both believers and unbelievers alike, are living in suspense and waiting for their experience of God’s Judgement. This can be seen as a unifying humanitarian message of the Qur’an, which projects the reality of the process of the common human position in the God-human relationship where the finalising prerogative in that relationship is according to God’s Will. In other words, in spite of one’s effort or lack of it in striving for a relationship with God, it is down to God to approve it in the end. Therefore, human influence and human effort in the relationship with God are not the decisive factors as far as God’s Will and God’s Judgement are concerned. Consequently, one can assume that the Qur’anic projection of the God-human relationship is a one-way process, and the vital direction in that relationship is from God towards people in every step of the way. The biblical narrative shows how human input and participation are encouraged through the signs. The Bible introduces signs as seals of God’s covenant with creation. It can be seen as a general introduction to a new stage in the God-human relationship, as in the case of the Rainbow after the flood. God as usual initiates the new relationship with a significant individual, for example with Noah, and makes him a recipient of the covenant on behalf of all creation. Another Divinely initiated covenant in the biblical narrative was made with another significant individual, Abraham, on behalf of future generations. Each cov-

324

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

enant came with its signs for chosen people. The connection between the covenants, signs, and chosen people, established further development in the biblical narrative of the theology of the signs. The illustration of the development in people’s appreciation of the signs is clearly seen as being a progression from Noah to Abraham. In the case of Noah, the natural independent phenomena of the rainbow is chosen as a sign of the covenant. Therefore, in order to be reminded about it there was no expectation on Noah’s part. In the case of Abraham and the generations to follow, it becomes people’s conscious effort and responsibility to perform the sign as their contribution towards the continuation of the covenant with God. The biblical dynamics of the God-human relationship sees its progress in people’s appreciation of the signs as facilitators or vehicles or aiding factors in that relationship. Consequently, in the biblical development of the theology of signs in its contribution to people’s relationship with God, the human response and the choices of people together with their actions are vitally important for the maintenance of their relationship with God. The Qur’anic reflection on the personal appreciation of the signs in God-human conduct is specified to the use of signs in relation to the ministry of the prophethood. The signs therefore become the tools of the prophets with which to warn the people. The figure of the prophet warning the people with signs becomes a prominent feature of the Qur’anic message. Also the signs themselves are there to validate the prophets in their ministry. And the prophets are expected to show people the signs, which will institutionalise their status of being chosen by God, and therefore able to bring Divine messages to the people. Therefore there are signs as Divine tools revealing God’s existence, and there are also signs, which are utilised by the prophets to warn the people. This seems to be a Qur’anic contribution to the biblical didactic: protective and testimonial functions of the signs. The biblical God further educates, protects, and testifies to His people and to the peoples of the world, as in the case of the Moses-Aaron-Israel, or the Moses-Pharaoh-Egypt relationships. The Qur’an picks up on the biblical relationship of the prophets and the people. It makes the office of the prophethood as an

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 325 extra help being of human origin on one hand, while also having access to the signs of God and to His messages of warning to the people. The common theme can be traced in the biblical narrative and in the Qur’an about the use of signs for the generations to come in order to create a collective memory of the relationship between people and God. On the one hand, the Qur’an steps outside the biblical narrative in stating that Pharaoh survives the crossing of the Red Sea and his life is spared. On the other hand, the very idea of sparing Pharaoh’s life for the sole purpose of making him into a sign for the generations to come stays along with the biblical appreciation of signs. There seems to be a difference between the biblical and Qur’anic narratives on the question of intimacy in the relationship between people and God. Biblical intimacy in the relationship between people and God finds its culmination in the story of Moses when God chooses to crown His revelation to His people with the most intimate revelation of all. In the entire Old Testament narrative of Divine revelations, the one where God reveals His own name (His essence) to Moses and through Moses to His people is the one, which has to be considered as the most intimate. This Divine revelation of God of His name overarches the whole theological significance of the signs, and introduces new insights into a new stage in the relationship between people and God. From this new step of intimacy in the God-human relationship people are encouraged to keep on re-living, also by means of signs, this on-going revelation of intimacy. The Qur’an, on the other hand, can be seen as firmly establishing the Divine agency of signs as well as developing further the concept of the use by the Prophets of signs in transmitting the messages of God to the people. Although, the Qur’an does not over-emphasise intimacy as an aspect of the God-human relationship, it still remains in line with the biblical appreciation of signs as a collaborative effort, both human and Divine, if only by restricting the human input to the performance of the signs by the Prophets. Whilst this part of the book attempts to present a theology of signs, it is important to note here that a ‘theology of signs’ is not explicitly revealed in the biblical narrative as such. It is only

326

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

through the prism of the Qur’an’s more systematic presentation of the theology of signs that one can go back to the biblical narrative and crystallise the theological significance of signs in its narrative. Therefore, it is possible to suggest here that the biblical narrative suggests the seeds of a theological appreciation of signs, while the Qur’an adds to it with a more theologically developed argument on the matter. It is therefore an important clarification to interpret the notion of signs (ayaat) as the ‘signs of God’ in His omnipresence and in human awareness of His existence. The designation ‘signs of God’ can therefore be placed alongside the usual translation of the ‘signs from God’ designation in the process of developing the Qur’anic theological appreciation of signs. Another important connection between signs and human existence which can be observed in the Qur’an, is the process by which the signs are being conveyed to the people. The transmission of signs appeals to a variety of emotional and receptive faculties of people, such as hearing (Q.10:67), knowledge/ understanding (Q.10:5), fear (Q.10:6), and reflection (Q.10:24). Therefore, it becomes fitting to analyse further the question of the overall function of signs in the Qur’an. Since the Qur’an could be perceived as employing the concept of signs for theological purposes, this immediately charges signs with their main function which is leading and pointing people to faith. Thus, with the fact that signs are given frequently, the Qur’an promotes the idea of the continuous call to God through signs. By supporting the idea of signs being a natural phenomenon in the created world, the message of signs also becomes connected to the message of creation itself. In other words, the response to the call to God by faith is a natural response. A lack of a positive response to the call from God to faith is therefore un-natural. The consequence of going against nature and against creation is therefore deserving of punishment and can be perceived as just. Such a rational justification in the Qur’an for the punishment of unbelievers could find some resonance in the biblical story of Moses. In fact Pharaoh himself incurs just punishment by drowning in the sea after multiple rejections of God evidenced through signs. However, the Qur’an changes the story of Phar-

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 327 aoh, and it seems that the Qur’anic perception of just punishment for Pharaoh is to spare his life and to make a sign from it. This could lead to the assumption that the Qur’an advocates variety in its appreciation of the concept of justice. Pondering on the question of justice and free will in the Qur’an it is important to highlight the differences in the Qur’anic and in the biblical appreciation of signs. In the biblical narrative the outcome of human choices faith is determined by free will. The Qur’anic teaching limits human capacity in the matters of faith and life choices to Divine will. On the question of justice in relation to faith and to the theology of signs one can see these concepts noticeably present in the Qur’an and also vivid in the biblical narrative. The difference of the Qur’anic argument is that it is based on the rational conclusion of lack of faith being an unnatural phenomenon. It is therefore the predisposition of the Qur’an to expect faith from people as an attribute inherited from the creation. In other words, by infiltrating the whole of creation with signs, the expectation of the Qur’an from people is to accept this as a reality, and to embrace it by being led to God through signs. Consequently, the outcome from a deliberate ignoring of signs in the world is just punishment. What is important to highlight here is that the Qur’an emphasises a human predisposition towards God and faith in Him as the only natural desire of the created world. This in itself cannot be seen as limiting people’s freedom of will and choice, but could be concluded as such when taken in combination with the next point in the Qur’anic theological appreciation of signs. The difference in the Qur’anic theology of signs with the biblical one is apparent from the dynamics in the God-human relationship. The Qur’an puts matters of faith and salvation solely into God’s hands. It is up to God’s will and to His choices to whom is granted either belief or Salvation. In that sense the Qur’an could be seen as advocating a different theological appreciation of the God-human relationship, which is not based on the concept of

328

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

partnership or synergy of people with God 24. The Qur’an establishes the ultimate superiority of God in his relationship with people. With this the Qur’an advocates limited capacity of people in the matters of either faith or salvation. In order to appreciate the different path of the Qur’an in the matter of the dynamics in the God-human relationship, the study in the paragraphs to follow is offered. The following part of this chapter will present the theology of signs in the rabbinical writings of the Jewish Midrash.

THE MIDRASH RABBAH ON SIGNS

The study in this chapter will look into the following areas of the theology of the signs in the presentation of the Midrash. It will present the appreciation of the signs in the Midrash as part of the covenantal relationship between the people and God. The study will continue in following the argument of the Midrash with regard to God’s knowledge as an expression of God’s intentions. This will share insights into the theme of signs and prophets and the dynamics in their relationship as presented in the Midrash. The question of the greatness of one over the other will be another area of study in the Midrash in this chapter. The illustrations will be taken from the study of signs in creation, being the luminaries of the moon and the sun, and it will be followed by the study of two brothers, Moses and Aaron, and will Synergy is a theological concept of partnership and collaboration with God, which is an essential part of the God-human relationship, and which is granted to the first Adam in creation. The very fact that the first person was created in the image and likeness of God pre-supposes a potential partnership in the relationship (See Genesis 1:27). On the concept of synergy in Christianity see McGrath, Alister E., “Historical Theology: An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought” (Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, 1998), also Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church (Penguin: UK, 1993). There are similarities in appreciating the process of collaboration with God in Judaism. See in “The image of God in humanity from a Muslim perspective” in Norman Solomon, Richard Harries and Tim Winter (ed.): Abraham’s Children: Jews, Christians and Muslims in conversation. (T&T Clark: NY, 2005), 163–174. 24

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 329 be concluded by the study of the nations of the world. There will be an attempt to determine the criteria of greatness according to the Midrash. This will lead to the questions about Israel, the definition of Israel as the first born of God, and the place of Israel among the nations.

ROLE OF SIGNS IN THE COVENANTAL RELATIONSHIP OF PEOPLE WITH GOD

The first instance to be discussed is the question of signs in Midrash Rabbah is chapter nine (VA’YEARA) together with the context of Exodus 7:9. Midrash brings the idea of the covenant into its discourse and also the concept of Divine providence in the life of the people of Israel. In the rabbinic discussion of the question of the relationship between God’s knowledge and His desire for people. The Midrash below elaborates on the concepts of the mystery of God’s knowledge, which is expressed in time, but which takes its origins outside of time. Coming from outside the created boundaries of time Divine knowledge has the capacity to transcend the boundaries of time. By penetrating into the created world God’s knowledge penetrates the time as well. This explains the Divine ability to know the end of the events from the beginning. The Midrash reads: ExodRab 9:1: WHEN PHARAOH SHALL SPEAK UNTO YOU, SAYING (Exod.7:9) R. Phinehas, the priest, son of Hama, began his discourse thus: Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying: My counsel shall stand, and all my pleasure will I do (Isa. XLVI,10). God declares at the beginning what the end will be, for thus he told Moses: And this people will rise up, and go astray after the foreign gods of the land (Deut. 31:16) – which they actually did after the death of Joshua. And they will forsake Me and break My covenant (ib.): they did forsake the Lord and refused to serve Him, [Judg.2:12], which shows that ‘He de-

330

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD clares the end from the beginning’. [even in such matters that are dependent on free will (Radal)] 25

The Midrash above introduces the idea of God knowing the end from the beginning. However, together with Divine knowledge Midrash introduces also the desire of God for the salvation of all through His Mercy. Midrash Rabbah carries on with a discussion about the freedom of will following from the verses above. Midrash touches on the possibility of resolving the conflicting arguments by reconciling the matter of God knowing the end from the beginning with the concept of God’s Mercy and His desire for salvation for everyone, even for the people of wickedness. The passage below is elaborating on God’s attributes of Justice and Mercy. Midrash states that God’s attribute of Mercy is His pleasure, and that God’s desire is for each and all to live and prosper, and not to parish. ExodRab 9:1: R. Phinehas, the priest, son of Hama, said: He who reads the verse will think: Is there a conflict of opinions above [in heaven], that it says, ‘My counsel shall stand and all My pleasure will I do?’ 26 No, the meaning of ‘And all My pleasure will I do’ is that He wishes to justify its creatures, as it says: The Lord was pleased, for His righteousness’ sake, to make the teaching right and glorious (Isa. XLII,21). He does not wish to condemn any creature, for it says: I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked , but that the wicked turn from his way and live (Ezek.33:2); this is the meaning of ‘And all the pleasures will I do’. 27

The biblical context of the Midrash above is the Moses-PharaohGod relationship. The focus of its attention is Pharaoh in as much as God instructs Moses to show Pharaoh signs indicating His care for him. Therefore, Pharaoh’s conversion to believe in the God of Israel is part of the Divine plan for him. And Midrash 25 26 27

ExodRab 9:1, p. 120. Text as amended by Rashbash. As though he did it in spite of opposition. ExodRab 9:1, p. 120.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 331 clearly states that within the boundaries of the God-Pharaoh relationship, Pharaoh’s prerogative to ask the God of Israel for signs was granted. The discussion goes further into justifying why Pharaoh was asking God for signs. And the explanation of Midrash is clear. It was according to His Will and His pleasure that God was granting the signs for the sake of Pharaoh, in spite of the fact that he was an unworthy and ungrateful person. This fact was established earlier in the Midrash when it was convincingly proved by textual examples that God was taking care of the salvation of ungodly people, and that such care for people gives pleasure to Him. Following from the statement about God’s pleasure, the Midrash is unravelling the reasons behind the question of Pharaoh’s request for God’s signs. And the explanation is found in the biblical example of righteous people who all asked for signs from God. These people are named as Noah, Hezekiah, Hananiah, Mishael, Azariah. And thus, the Midrash concludes, ‘Now if righteous men ask for a sign, then how much more so the wicked?’ 28. What is interesting to point here is that both Midrash and the Qur’an use the authority of the biblical prophets in illustrating their arguments. Therefore, one can claim that both sources share their appreciation of significant biblical figures such as Noah, Abraham, Moses etc. However, the difference seems to be in their respective attitudes to the narrative of the Bible. For Midrash the biblical narrative is an unprecedented authority, while for the Qur’an it is at best one of the ‘previous scriptures’ on which the Qur’an builds its own message. Reverting back to the study of the rabbinical exegesis, the passage below is an illustration of Midrash justifying the actions of Pharaoh in asking for God’s signs. On the surface such a demand from Pharaoh could be interpreted as a sign of his unbelief and unwillingness to appreciate the God of Moses. However, the Midrash highlights the precedents in biblical history when asking for signs was considered as an act of piety and of appro28

ExodRab 9:1, p. 121.

332

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

priate spiritual caution. Consequently, the Midrash brings to light the example of Noah and the sign of the rainbow. This is used in the Midrash as an illustration of God using signs as part of His relationship with people. Therefore, in the passage below Pharaoh’s request for signs from God is used in order to excuse Pharaoh’s inquisitiveness rather than to incriminate him for it. Midrash here is supporting Pharaoh’s request to see God’s signs. Hence, he is not undermined because of his request for signs, but is almost made into an example to follow. This is a lesson which the Midrash is attempting to teach its audience. And the message is clear in its support of asking for signs from God as an integral part of the God-human relationship. The following passage from Midrash illustrates two important messages. The one is of God knowing the end from the beginning, and the other is in support of needing and asking for signs from God: ExodRab 9:1: So also in the case of Moses, God told him the end at the beginning. Note that it does not say: If Pharaoh will speak unto you, but, WHEN HE SHALL SPEAK UNTO YOU, as if to say, Pharaoh will speak unto you thus. R. Judah, son of R. Shalom said: [God said, ‘Pharaoh] is quite right to say: SHOW A WONDER FOR YOU (Exod.7:9), for so you find in the case of Noah.’ After all the miracles which God had performed for him in the ark, when He brought him forth and said to him ‘And the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh’ (Gen 9:15) [or Gen.9:11], Noah began to demand a sign, and God had to assure him: I have set My bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token (Exod 9:16) [this implies that he had asked for a sign]. If Noah who was righteous asked for a sign, shall not the Pharaoh who is wicked certainly do so? 29

In this passage Midrash connects the signs of Moses to the story of Noah. There is a similar connection in the prophetic examples of Noah’s story and in the Moses-Pharaoh story in relation to 29

ExodRab 9:1, p. 120–121.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 333 signs in the Qur’an, Surah 10:71–74 30. In analysing the similarities one can highlight here that both Midrash Rabbah and the Qur’an draw their theologies of signs from their common appreciation of the prophetic stories of Noah and Moses. Midrash and the Qur’an seem to use the same biblical examples of the prophets for the same reason. Therefore, one has to point out this overarching similarity, from the study of the Qur’anic and Midrashic theologies of signs. In order to further analyse the respective theologies of signs in the Qur’an and in Midrash Rabbah one needs to look further into the Midrash. The plagues of Egypt according to Midrash Rabbah was a joint effort between Aaron, Moses and God. Each of their performances was based on their complementary distributed responsibilities. It seems that Moses, Aaron and God formed a team, and to a certain extent the powers of each of the implementers followed from one to the other. The narrative describes the process of the Aaron-Moses-God collaboration starting from Aaron performing the signs, which was followed by Moses and then God, and then the plague of boils was the one performed by the collaborative efforts of all three of them: ExodRab 12:4: AND MOSES STRETCHED FORTH HIS ROD TOWARD HEAVEN (Exod. 9:23) Three of the plagues came through the agency of Aaron, three through Moses, three through God, and one through the united efforts of all three. Blood, frogs, and gnats, being on the earth, were through Aaron; hail, locusts, and darkness, through Moses, because they were in the air, and Moses had power over earth and heaven; the swarms, the murrain, and the plague of the firstborn through God, and the boils – through all of them. [V.supra, xi,5] 31

What is crucially important to address at this point of study is the fact of human collaboration with God by Moses and Aaron 30 31

See earlier in this chapter. ExodRab 12:4, p. 146.

334

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

in the process of performing signs. The Midrash does not only reflect on the two brothers doing what they were told by God, but aims for a much higher goal. The attempt here is to show the partnership and the team work between people and their God. Such a collaborative effort between people and God in performing the signs is something that divides the theology of Midrash Rabbah and the Qur’an. The division is not as much in the fact that prophets are able to perform the signs, but it lies deeper in their respective understanding of the nature of the Godhuman relationship. The Qur’an clearly manifests God’s superiority in His dealings with people, while the attempt of the Midrash Rabbah here is to advocate the relationship of partnership in the God-Moses-Aaron collaboration and in the offering of signs to the people. While contemplating the sequence of the plagues in the biblical narrative and the involvement and participation in them of God, Moses and Aaron, the question of superiority is further addressed in the Midrash. Discussing the matter of Moses and Aaron, the following Midrash elaborates on the question of Moses being greater than his brother: ExodRab 9:5: AND MOSES AND AARON WENT IN UNTO PHARAOH (Exod.7:10). Should not Aaron have gone in first, since he was his senior in years? Why Moses first? Because he was the greater in the land of Egypt, as it says: Moreover the Man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt (Exod 11:3); alternatively, because God send him in His stead over Aaron, as it says: And thou shalt be to him in God’s stead (Exod.4:16). It is etiquette for the greater to enter first. AND THEY DID SO, AS THE LORD HAD COMMANDED THEM not performing their wonders before Pharaoh had asked for them, as God had said. As soon as he asked for a wonder, Aaron cast down his Rod. 32

32

ExodRab 9:5, p. 123.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 335 The Midrash above establishes the superiority of the younger brother, Moses, over his older brother, Aaron. This status is granted to Moses, according to the Midrash, because of Moses’ relationship with God. Therefore, because Moses exceeded Aaron in the land of Egypt, he is considered by the Midrash to be the greater of the two brothers. The question of superiority of one over the other is continued in the Midrash in relation to the people of Israel. For this reason, the following part of this work will discuss the subsequent questions, while focusing attention on the concept of Israel in the story of Moses as follows: God’s attributes of Mercy and Judgement, the question of Divine knowledge, and the superiority of one over the other.

ISRAEL AS ...

The passage from Midrash Rabbah, which is chosen for the study in this section is a lengthy one. Consequently, it is very rich in biblical exegesis. The study of this Midrashic passage is deserving of a whole book. However, for the purpose of the current study the following points from it are highlighted and suggested for further analysis. Firstly, the concept of time, the appreciation of Israel as the first-born son, of the blessing on Israel, and the taking of the birth right are all addressed. And the killing of the first born of Egypt is discussed in relation to Israel being the first born. Secondly God’s attribute of Judgement is considered in relation to the notion of signs. Thirdly the process of the transmission of signs through the biblical prophets is addressed: i.e. from Abraham via Isaac-Jacob-Levi-Kohath-Amshan and to Moses. And fourthly in relation to the story of Moses, the Midrash reflects on Abraham withstanding trials whilst Pharaoh did not, and Moses and Aaron doing their part without failing. In reading the passage below and giving consideration to concepts and ideas suggested above, further clarifications are suggested. For example, one of the explanations of Midrash Rabbah in the text describes the killing of the first born as a sign, which was transmitted from Abraham to Moses. Such a connection is an attempt by the Midrash to draw an understanding of the universal significance of the concept and the place of

336

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Israel in biblical history. Therefore, the understanding of Israel as a ‘first born’ of God is charged with further clarification in the Midrash. Consequently, one of the arguments in the passage below suggests that all of the events in biblical history lead to the building up of the relationship between Israel and God. Such an Israel-centred exegetical approach by the Midrash endorses Israel-centred explanations of biblical stories, such as the one of Moses conversing with Pharaoh. Below is the applicable Midrash: ExodRab 15:27: THIS MONTH SHALL BE UNTO YOU (Exod.12:2). It is written: And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is My son, My firstborn. And I have said unto thee: Let my son go, that he may serve Me; and thou hast refused to let him go. Behold, I will slay thy son, thy firstborn (Exod.4:22,23). Exalted be the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, who foretells the end at the beginning. In connection with Abraham it says: ‘And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge’ (Gen.15:14). What was the judgement? The slaying of the firstborn, which was called a plague, as it says: Yet one plague more (Exod.11:1) What is the meaning of: ‘I will judge’? God said: ‘I will punish them with the slaying of the firstborn,’ for it says: ‘Behold, I will smite thy son, even thy firstborn.’ God transmitted this sign 33 to Abraham, Abraham to Isaac, Isaac to Jacob, Jacob to Levi, Levi to Kohath, Kohath to Amram, And Amram to Moses, and Moses guarded it closely. 34 What is the meaning of ‘My son, My firstborn, Israel’? R. Hiyya explained: Sons whom their fathers had blessed with their deeds, such as Abraham, of whom it says: Blessed be Abram of God Most High (Gen. 19:19). Another explanation of ‘My son, Israel, My firstborn’. They are the children of him who took the birthright. Another explanation: God said to the wicked Pharaoh: ‘Dost thou not know how I love the firstborn? I have written in my To33 34

That they will be liberated by the slaying of the firstborn (Rashash). V. Supra, 5,13.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 337 rah: Thou shalt do no work with the firstling of thine ox (Deut.15:19), warning that he who does work with it will be punished. It is only proper, therefore, that whoever has stretched out thine hand against My firstborn shalt be smitten’. God brought ten plagues upon him, corresponding to the ten trials with which Abraham our father was tried and all of which he withstood. These plagues God brought through Moses and Aaron and with His own hand. 35

The Midrash proposes the definition of Israel as the first-born son of God. With this it aims to parallel the punishment of the firstborn of Egypt with Pharaoh jeopardising the very existence of Israel as the first born of God. The Midrash makes a connection between the slaughter of the firstborn in Egypt, and the prophecy in Genesis where God predicts judgment on the nation whom Israel will serve. Hence the Judgement of God on the Egyptians was the fulfilment of the prediction of God to Abraham as part of their covenant. Following the reference to the Judgement of God in Exodus, the Midrash further connects the chain of events and people through signs in Genesis continuing in the biblical narrative. According to Midrash Rabbah, the sign of liberation, i.e. the plague of slaying the first born, which became a sign, was being passed via the succession of the OT patriarchs, i.e. from Abraham to Isaac, then to Jacob and Levi, and to others until it reached Moses. And Moses is described by the Midrash as a guardian of the sign. And finally, this portion of Midrash Rabbah defines what constitutes the making of the first born son. According to Midrash it is a blessing from the father by their righteous deeds. So Israel became the first born by taking the birthright (as Jacob did from his brother Esau 36). Hence another definition in the Midrash is: ‘My son, Israel, My first born’ ‘They are the children of him who took the birthright’. Additionally, Midrash emphasises 35 36

ExodRab 15:27, p. 198–199. See in Genesis 25:31ff.

338

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

the special relationship of love and Divine protection of God Himself over all the first born, but especially over the first born of Israel. Hence it is due to Pharaoh that it can be said: ‘stretching out his hand against the first born of God he was smitten’. And also: ‘God brought ten plagues upon him, corresponding to the ten trials with which Abraham our father was tried and all of which he withstood. These plagues God brought through Moses and Aaron and with His own hand’ 37. The message of the Midrash implies that the trials were brought on Abraham and on the Pharaoh, but Abraham withstood the trials and became a blessing for his people, whilst Pharaoh failed the trials and brought punishment on himself and on his people as well. The implication of the Midrash is that at the beginning of their journey in building their relationship with God, Pharaoh and Abraham were under similar circumstances of facing trials. Thus, they could be considered as starting from similar situations. What makes for differences in their outcomes are their choices and their own efforts in building their respective relationships with God. A similar trajectory of one’s efforts in building one’s relationship with God is projected to the nation of Israel. Midrash gives a balanced definition of Israel being the first born and allowing biblical history to testify to the successes of Israel. However, what remains undisputable is the fact that Israel is considered the first born Son of God, and this title is the one that was granted to the people by God, and also preserved by God from the time of Abraham until the time of Moses. In fact, the connection between the forefathers of Israel was so close that the promises which God made to Abraham saw their fulfilment in the life of Moses. Another aspect of the relationship between the people and God is the performance of the people in time of trials. Consequently, the relationship between the people and God either grows stronger or weaker, according to the performance of the people. Hence, the emphasis in the relationship between the people and God is a two-way process, where God 37

ExodRab 15:27, p. 199.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 339 keeps His promises and blessings, whilst the people have to withstand trials and collect the blessings from their virtuous leaders throughout the generations to come. The discourse of Midrash Rabbah about the firstborn son of God as Israel is interesting as it subtly implies that there are sons of God that are to follow after Israel. This argument of Midrash Rabbah brings us immediately into the context of the three Abrahamic Religions. 38 Another important note about the studied passage from Midrash is its context in relation to the setting of time. Midrash presents lengthy discussions in relation to the biblical narrative of Exodus 12:2 when God sets the month of the Passover as the first month in calculating the time of the year. This commandment of God to Moses naturally carries an enormous significance within itself. Taking the calculation of the year from the Passover signifies the importance of the event for Israel’s future. Most of the discussion of Midrash Rabbah on this matter will stay outside the scope of this research, while one particular remark will be excepted. The passage below concerns the creation story which is the first-time signs are mentioned in the biblical narrative. It is significant as the signs are generally made within the realm of creation. 39 Hence in the Midrash Rabbah’s passage below, while still talking about the sonship of Israel as the first born, connects it with the story of creation and the relationship Expanding the question of sonship of God within the three monotheistic religions, one can see the possibilities for disputes between the representatives of these religions with regard to this phenomenon. One possible suggestion is that the Midrash tries to substitute the Christian teaching of the sonship of God with naming Israel as the first born of God. Also this could be the signs of rivalry between three monotheistic religions about their proximity in their relationship to God, be it the original blessing of the firstborn of Israel, or the one of the ‘True Israel’ and so on. 39 Note the difference in Ephrem’s definition of symbols, which are of transcendental and transcendent nature (see Brock, The Luminous Eye, p. 53–60; Murray, Symbols of Church and Kingdom on symbols in the Syriac Exegesis). Also note that the Qur’an mentions that signs are present in Paradise. 38

340

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

between the created matter of sun and moon prioritising between them and stating the predominance of the moon over the sun.

MOON AND SUN: THINE IS THE DAY AND THE NIGHT, BUT WHO IS THE GREATER LIGHT?

Midrash Rabbah uses the creation story as an illustration of the mission of the people of Israel. Theology of signs in rabbinical presentation, leads further into the realm of symbolic theological definitions for the people of Israel and their vocation. For the purpose of its exegetical argument the Midrash keeps the stories of the creation of the sun and the moon connected with the Mosaic adventures in Egypt. However, the attention of the rabbinical exegetes here is on the people of Israel. Therefore, Midrash brings us to the very beginning of the story of creation in order to highlight the following points by unravelling the reasons for creating the two lights, the moon and the sun, and exploring the purpose of each of the lights and the distinction between them. According to the Midrash below, the reason for creating the sun was for producing light, while the moon was created for seasons in order to sanctify the years. The implication of the Midrash is that the moon was created for liturgical purposes, that is for the purpose of the sanctification of time. 40 ExodRab 15:27: Israel are the heirs of two worlds – this world and the World to Come. On this account did God entrust the secret of the moon to Israel 41 that they should recon according to it, whereas idolaters recon according to the sun, to imply that just as the sun only rules by day, so will their rule only be in this world; and just as the sun is of fire, so will they be punished with it, as it says: For, behold, the day If the moon was created for seasons then the question of which seasons is in order. The possible answer is that the Midrash is pointing to the liturgical seasons as the Jewish year is built on the moon calendar. 41 See in GenRab 6:3. 40

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 341 cometh, it burneth as a furnace; and all the proud, and all that work wickedness, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall set them ablaze, etc. (Mal.3:19) Just as the moon shows itself both by day and night, so do Israel rule both in this world and the World to Come; and just as the moon is of light, so will Israel inherit light, as it says: ‘Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart’ (Ps. XCVII.11); and also: ‘Arise shine, for thy light is come’ (Isa.LX:1). 42 When it says, therefore: THIS MONTH SHALL BE UNTO YOU it means, it shall be yours, because you are so much like it. 43

This Midrash designates symbolism to the luminaries. To the sun Midrash designates the realm of this world, while to the moon the affiliation is to the world to come. The outcome of such an affiliation is directly linked to the calculation of time and the reliance of people on either of the luminaries. In other words, if people are ruled by the sun in their time calculations, then their heritage is of this world. But if people are ruled by the moon in calculating their seasons and liturgical celebrations, then their heritage is of the world to come. Another illustration of the Midrashic explanation of the reasons for creating the luminaries supports a similar idea, which is expressed in the following passage. Midrash Rabbah on Genesis clearly suggests that the sun and the moon were created for light and for the count of seasons: GenRab 6:1: AND GOD SAID: LET THERE BE LIGHTS (1,14). R. Johanan began thus: Who appointest the moon for seasons (Ps.CIV,19). R. Johanan commented: The orb of the sun alone was created to give light. If so, why was the moon created? ‘For seasons’: in order to sanctify new moons and years thereby. 44

The light of the sun, of course, is even greater, but its intensity is sometimes harmful, whereas that of the moon is never harmful (Y.T.) 43 This month meaning the lunar month. ExodRab 15:27, p. 201. 44 The Jewish Year is lunar. The quote is from GenRab 6:1, p. 41. 42

342

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

According to the Midrash the moon was created for seasons. Which seasons are they? Could they be of pilgrimages and religious festivities? Sanctification of the seasons is the task, which the moon is helping the people to achieve. By pointing out the beginning and the end of the moon seasons it assists people with fulfilling their liturgical celebrations. What is of crucial importance is for people to choose to be bound to the moon as the one of two luminaries which was specifically created for liturgical purposes, i.e. for the purpose of aiding people in the process of worshiping their God. One can see the connection here to the theology of signs as Divine aids to the people in order to be aware of the presence of God. In addition to the aiding function of the signs, the Midrash describes the creation of the moon to aid people in building up their spiritual/liturgical relationship with their God, and for sanctification of that relationship. An additional characteristic found here in the Midrash is that the sun and moon were created as two luminaries on purpose. It was a protective measure against idolatry, so that people did not choose to worship either of them exclusively. Therefore, once again in the beginnings of creation God could be seen as having people in mind. Therefore, the deliberate creation of two luminaries instead of one could be seen as a protective measure for the future God-human relationship. Consequently, this is yet another characteristic of the aiding functions of the luminaries, which were created to assist people with time, as well as to secure people’s vocation of staying faithful on the path of Monotheism. The Midrash below is very clear in its explanation of the reasons behind the creation of the two luminaries: GenRab 6:1: R. ‘Azariah said in R. Hanina’s name: The orb of the sun alone was created to give light; yet if so, why was the moon created? Because the Holy One, blessed be He, foresaw that the peoples of the world would treat them as divinities. Said the Lord: ‘If they are two, opposed to each other, and yet the people of the world treat them as divini-

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 343 ties, how much more would they do so if there were but one!’ 45

The Midrash above again testifies to the knowledge of the God of the history of humanity already at the very beginning of creation. Therefore, God being aware of human weakness towards idolatry, created the sun and the moon as opposites of each other in order to obstruct the process of humans worshiping them. The aiding hand of God through the creation is obvious here. It is almost as if God makes an extra step to guard people from idolatry. One the one hand, God gives a clear commandment to worship the One and Only God on the mount of Sinai. On the other hand, He makes sure through the process of creation that there are no unnecessary temptations for people to slip into idolatry by reading the signs of the sun and the moon in a wrong way. The Midrash describes God in His relationship to the people as a caring Father, educating his children in what is proper and what is not. This is not an unusual portrayal of the relationship between God and the people, and the following excerpts from the Midrash will illustrate the didactic role of the Creator with the people. Developing further the idea of God aiding the people through creation, the Midrash steps from the didactic assistance to the people into the liturgical sphere. The Midrash below builds up an argument suggesting that in the process of creation the luminaries their religious and liturgical functions were initiated. Thus, the luminaries become the markers for the three pilgrimage festivals and for the ultimate ‘sanctification of the years’ through the annually repeated acts of religious piety and religious festivities: GenRab 6:1: AND LET THEM BE FOR SIGNS: this refers to the Sabbaths 46; AND FOR SEASONS: to the three pilgrimage

45 46

GenRab 6:1, p. 41–42. See Ex.31:17, where Sabbath is called a sign.

344

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD festivals; AND FOR DAYS: to the beginnings of the months; AND YEARS means the sanctification of the years. 47

The beginning of the Shabbat is calculated by the luminaries, and likewise the liturgical calendar of the Jewish feasts. By introducing a liturgical aspect into the aiding function of the luminaries in the God-people relationship, the role of the people becomes important. The following passage from the Midrash presents the reader with the description of the relationship between the people and God as a two-sided process. On the one hand, it is God who sanctifies day and night by His miracles. On the other hand, people carry on with the process of sanctification of their days and nights through praising God for these miracles: GenRab 6:2: AND GOD MADE THE TWO GREAT LIGHTS (1,16). It is written, Thine is the day, Thine also the night (Ps.LXXIV,16): to Thee the day gives praise, to Thee the nights gives praise. Just as the day is under Thy control, so it the night under Thy control. When Thou performest miracles for us by day, ‘Thine is the day’; and when Thou performest miracles for us by night, ‘This also in the night’. When Thou performest miracles for us by day, we utter song to Thee by day; and when Thou performest miracles for us by night, we utter song to Thee by night. 48

Midrash Rabbah on Genesis gives a further explanation on the matter of the two great lights. Since Midrash Rabbah on Exodus states that Israel is compared to the greater light, which is the moon, below is the explanation as to how the moon becomes the greater of the two luminaries created by God: GenRab 6:3: R. Tanhum and R. Phinehas in the R. Simon’s name said: After calling them GREAT, He actually casts a

I.e. the proclamation of the New Year by the proper authorities. The quote is from GenRab 6:1, p. 42. 48 GenRab 6:2, p. 42. 47

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 345 slur [on one by writing] THE GREAT LIGHT…AND THE SMALL LIGHT (1,16)! The reason is because it penetrated into the neighbour’s territory. 49 R. Phinehas said: In respect of all other sacrifices it is written, And one he-goat for a sinoffering, 50 whereas in respect of New Moon it is written, and one he-goat for a sin-offering for the Lord (Num.XXVIII,15): The Holy One, blessed be He, said: ‘It was I who caused it to enter its neighbour’s domain.’ 51 Then if that [sc. the moon] which entered with permission was thus disparaged by Holy Writ, think how much more one is deserving of this who enters without permission! 52

Thus, the Midrash establishes that the moon is the greater light by the very fact of it being able to show itself during the daytime. Hence it is a greater light because of its capacity to be present during the times of the sun, that is by day, and during the times of absence of the sun, that is by night. Since the sun could never show itself by night, its powers are limited to day, and it does not have the capacity to enter the moon’s domain. The moon on the other hand has the capacity to enter the sun’s domain. A somewhat questionable definition of greatness if one approaches the subject scientifically. However, the Midrash does not appeal to scientific explanations regarding the greatness of the luminaries. The insights into the Midrashic argument are both theological and political. In reflecting the power struggle in this world, the measure of greatness of one is determined by their capacity of invading the territory of the other. Hence the moon is greater as it has a capacity to invade the domain of the sun. There is also the matter of God permitting the moon to do so. It is not that the moon is the greater one by its own accord, but it is designed and permitted to be greater by its Creator. The moon is sometimes seen by day too, and thus encroaches, as it were, upon the domain of the sun. 50 Num.28:22, 29:11. 51 Therefore I need a sin-offering; cf. Hul.60b. 52 GenRab 6:3, p. 42–43. 49

346

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Hence according to the Midrash, the moon is a greater of the two lights. ‘Thine is the day and the night, but who is the greater light?’ – there is further political significance of the above Midrashic statement. The discussion in the Midrash follows on to the affirmation of Israel being the greater nation. Midrash discusses the matter of Israel being a greater nation, although it is small, while Rome is a larger nation, but is it a great nation? The discussion in the Midrash continues and leads to the point of Israel being the greater by the virtue of being represented by the greater light, i.e. the moon, while others, such as pagan Rome, for example, are represented by the sun. Therefore, there is a connection of Israel to the moon, and the definition of both is projected in a similar manner by the Midrash. For example, the moon is considered as a greater light although it might not seem greater from the scientific point of view. Likewise, Israel, being a smaller nation, could hardly be considered a greater nation in comparison to Rome. However, by virtue of being singled out by God and through the process of the God-Israel connection the nation is afforded its greatness. Analogically to the luminaries, Israel becomes greater by God’s choosing, and by its vocation to serve Him. Therefore, the Midrash below connects the greatness of Israel and reaffirms it by her connection to the greater light: GenRab 6:4: R. Levi said in the name of R. Jose b. Lai: It is but natural that the great should count by the great, and the small by the small. Esau 53 counts [time] by the sun, which is large, and Jacob by the moon, which is small. Said R. Nahman: That is a happy augury. Esau counts by the sun, which is large: just as the sun rules by day but not by night, so does Esau enjoy this world, but has nought in the World to Come. Jacob counts by the moon, which is small: just as the moon rules by day and by night, so has Jacob a portion in this world and in the World to Come. R. Nahman made 53

i.e. Rome.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 347 another observation, thus: R. Nahman said: As long as the light of the greater luminary functions, the light of the smaller one is not noticeable, but when the light of the greater one sets, the light of the smaller one becomes noticeable; even so, as long as the light of Esau prevails, the light of Jacob cannot be distinguished; but when the light of Esau sets, that of Jacob shall be distinguished, as it is written, Arise, shine,… For, behold, darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the peoples, but upon thee the Lord will arise, and His glory shall be seen upon thee (Isa. LX,1 f) 54.

According to this Midrash it is Esau who carries the typology of Rome, while Jacob is the one representing Israel 55. The Midrash also further clarifies the definition of the greatness of the luminaries according to the distinction of their domain. The domain of the sun is this world, while the domain of the moon is this world and the world to come. The dialectics of greatness and smallness is a complicated matter, as the passages from the Midrash show. The implication of the Midrashic argument on the matter of Israel is that a visibly greater power by day (which is in this world) might not necessarily retain its greatness by night (which is in the World to Come). And this argument is illustrated in the Midrash under a subtle discussion of the created lights of the sun and the moon, while the core argument is about the greatness of Israel. Hence in the following passages the Midrash reaffirms Israel’s greatness by virtue of humility 56. Further on the Midrash lists the gifts of the Lord to the people, which are the gift of the Torah, the luminaries, rain, peace, salvation, Eretz Israel, vengeance, compassion, and Crossing the Red Sea 57. In these passages the Midrash again connects the creation story and the following biblical

54 55 56 57

GenRab 6:4, p. 43–44. In Genesis 35:10 God gives Jacob another name, Israel. GenRab 6.4. GenRab 6.5, p. 44–45.

348

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

events depicting the journey of Israel which subtly indicates the perpetual care of God for his people. As indicated earlier the purposeful discussion of the greatness of the moon in the Midrash was building up the argument for the greatness of Israel. Therefore, the Midrash below further builds on the idea of the greatness of the two lights, by adding strength to the connection of the idea of the greatness of Israel: ExodRab 15:27: Israel are the heirs of two worlds – this world and the World to Come. On this account did God entrust the secret of the moon to Israel 58 that they should recon according to it, whereas idolaters recon according to the sun, to imply that just as the sun only rules by day, so will their rule only be in this world; and just as the sun is of fire, so will they be punished with it, as it says: For, behold, the day cometh, it burneth as a furnace; and all the proud, and all that work wickedness, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall set them ablaze, etc. (Mal.3:19) Just as the moon shows itself both by day and night, so do Israel rule both in this world and the World to Come; and just as the moon is of light, so will Israel inherit light, as it says: ‘Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart’ (Ps. XCVII.11); and also: ‘Arise shine, for thy light is come’ (Isa.LX:1). 59 When it says, therefore: THIS MONTH SHALL BE UNTO YOU it means, it shall be yours, because you are so much like it. 60

The summarising argument of the Midrash above is deduced from the prior discussion about who is the greater light. Only this time the greater light is the light of Israel, and the smaller light is the light of other nations. The parallel of Israel and the moon is continuously built up, as both of them are perceived as the heirs of this world and the world to come. The greatness of See in GenRab 6.3. The light of the sun, of course, is even greater, but its intensity is sometimes harmful, whereas that of the moon is never harmful (Y.T.) 60 This month meaning the lunar month. See in ExodRab 15.27, p. 201. 58 59

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 349 Israel, therefore, is by her affiliation to the greater light, but more importantly is by her affiliation to God, the Creator of heaven and earth. Therefore, the greatness of the nation depends upon their maintaining their relationship and their connection to God 61. Reflecting on the greatness of Moses, the Midrash ascribes to Moses the honorary authorship of the Torah on the basis that he put his life up for it 62. What is important to note here, recollecting the notions of greatness in the Midrash, the main criteria for greatness on the one hand is the relationship to God, and on the other hand God’s choice. Consequently, the Midrash clearly emphasises the importance of the two-sided participation in the relationship between the people and God. Each side is contributing to the relationship, and the lack of contribution from either of the sides is potentially detrimental for the relationship. However as far as God’s side is concerned, His contribution and participation in the relationship with the people was intended and constructed at the very beginning stages of the creation of the universe, even prior to the creation of Adam. This testifies to the constant devotion of God to the relationship with His people. The study of signs in the Midrash Rabbah in this chapter sampled a number of passages. This led to a discussion about the theology of signs in the Midrash especially indicating that much Midrashic attention had to do with the people of Israel and their relationship with God. The concluding remarks are offered below.

This argument is used in the Qur’an when it criticises the Children of Israel for their failures in the relationship with God. In adopting this line of argument, the Qur’an could be seen as using a similar argument to the rabbinic Midrash. The topic of the nation of Israel across the three monotheistic religions deserves further studies. 62 See in Tehillim Rabbah 1:2. 61

350

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

SUMMARY OF THE THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN THE MIDRASH

The study in this chapter looked into the different theological and exegetical appreciation of signs as presented in the Midrash. The contribution of the Midrash in comparison to the other exegetical writings in this book, could be seen in its preservation of the link of the signs with the covenantal relationship between the people and God. Taking as an example the stages of the Godhuman relationship, as they were developed from one sign to another in the biblical story, one can notice in the Midrash an appreciation of the progression in the God-human relationship from the Noahic covenant onwards. The Midrash sees this progression of personal involvement of the people and their intimacy in their relationship with God as a Divinely intended process. Presenting the idea of God knowing the end from the beginning, can be seen as a theological and an exegetical attempt of the Midrash to vocalise its standpoint in its appreciation of the purpose for creation. God’s intentions at the beginning of creation, as well as all the way through human history are very focused on building a relationship with the people. Therefore, the Midrash highlights that the attribute of Divine Mercy is prevalent in God’s dealings with the people. It is therefore apparent in the Midrash that God’s desire and His pleasure is to save sinners. The stance of the Midrash is not totally incompatible with the Qur’anic attribution concerning the matters of Salvation and God’s will. The Midrash accentuates different aspects of God’s will and God’s intentions. While the Qur’anic instructions are for the people and their projections as to their salvation, the teaching of the Midrash is about God’s predisposition to forgive rather than to punish. The Qur’an encourages its audience to live in suspense patiently awaiting God’s Judgement. The Midrash encourages its audience to thrive by being proactive in building one’s relationship with God. The focus of the attention of the Midrash and the Qur’an are on God, while their differences lie in their projections as to the right conduct of human participation in the relationship with God. The Qur’anic model of the God-human relationship is a patient awareness of Divine suspense, while the Midrashic mode is a pro-active appreciation of partnership with God.

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 351 The above conclusion is illustrated by the respective presentations of the signs and the prophets in the Midrash and in the Qur’an. The unifying point with the Midrash and the Qur’an is that each of the sources use prophetic figures in support of their arguments. They are united by the authority of the OT prophets, but they differ in their respective appreciations of the authority of the OT itself 63. The other difference between the two sources is their appreciation of the office of the prophethood. The Midrash implies collaboration and partnership with God in its illustrations of Moses and Aaron’s relationship with God. The Midrash depicts Moses and Aaron performing signs together with God, in a collaborative effort and as a team. In the Qur’an, taking as an example the role of the messenger of the Qur’an, his mission is limited to sheer transmission of the message addressed to him. There is no partnership with God and neither is there collaboration. The God of the Qur’an does not join in the team effort with the messenger of the Qur’an. The Qur’anic expectation from the people in their relationship with God is obedience, patience, and a non-judgemental approach as part of their submission to God. The theological appreciation of signs in the Midrash lead to the Midrash sharing its definitions of greatness. The Midrash adopts a unifying criterion in measuring the greatness of the person or the nations, or the one luminary over the other. Taking the example of Moses, he is taken to be greater than his brother Aaron by virtue of performing greater deeds in Egypt. The moon is greater than the sun because of its ability of having access to this world and to the world to come. Thus, the criteria of greatness, according to the Midrash, is one’s relationship with God above all other criteria of power, size, strength, etc. Following on from the question of greatness, the question of Israel being a greater nation did not avoid exegetical attenAs was indicated earlier, the authority of the OT Scriptures is unprecedented for the Midrash, while the Qur’anic appreciation of the OT Scriptures is less defined in comparison to the Midrash. 63

352

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

tion in the Midrash. Israel was presented by the Midrash as the first born of God, which singles out the place of Israel among other nations. The Midrash however admitted that the starting point for the people as well as for the nations before God was equal, but the granted status of a person or of a nation once they entered into a relationship with God was based on their efforts. Therefore, the Midrash could be seen as advocating a two-way process in the relationship between the people and God. Taking into account the outcomes of the research in this chapter on the Midrash and signs, the following part of the chapter will offer its general conclusion to the study of signs in the biblical narrative and in the writings of the exegetical sources at hand.

SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER

In the study of the concept of signs in Midrash, Ephrem and in the Qur’an, the following similarities could be identified. First of all, in presenting their respective theologies of the signs the sources are generally building on and drawing on the original biblical narrative of the OT. For example, it is often that the sources are using examples of the OT prophets as an authority on which they build their respective arguments. Second of all, in presenting a theology of the signs, Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an arrive at similar general conclusions. For example, all of the sources considered in this study reflect on the signs being the source of aid for the people and for the generations to come. The luminaries are perceived by Midrash and the Qur’an as aids for people to organise their affairs and so on. It is possible therefore to conclude that the basic theological appreciation of the signs as was indicated in the biblical narrative of the OT is also accepted by the exegetical sources considered in this study. In analysing the theology of the signs in the biblical narrative of Genesis and Exodus, and in the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an, one can say that in the biblical narrative one can find the seeds of actual theology of the signs, but not the systematic teaching about them. It is only through the purposeful study of the appreciation of the signs in the Midrash, Ephrem and especially in the Qur’an that one can

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 353 notice that there is a gradual development of the theology of the signs in the respective sources. And only by revisiting the biblical narrative, after exploring the exegesis of the signs in the Midrash or in the Qur’an, that one can fully appreciate that the biblical narrative could be seen as providing the initial steps for the exegetical developments as far as the notion of the signs in the story of Moses is concerned. It is important therefore to conclude here that there is a strong connection to the biblical narrative of the OT, which unites the writings of Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. This connection is not only limited by the actual texts from the biblical narratives of Genesis or Exodus. The connection can be seen through the offerings of the biblical text, which later on are being developed by the exegetes. Taking the concept of signs as aids from the biblical narrative of Genesis and the creation of the luminaries and developing this concept in detail in the Midrash and in the Qur’an, suggests the possibility that these sources could be paired in dialogue with the biblical text and with each other. For further studies in this field the question needs to be asked, as for example, whether the later source, the Qur’an, was also considering Jewish Midrash in its theological appreciation of the concept of signs in the biblical story. 64 These are important questions, which need to be considered in future research in the field. These questions are based on the similarities identified in this study of the notion of the signs in the Bible, Midrash, Ephrem and in the Qur’an. Following from the summary above, in stating that the general conclusions of the respective sources are similar, one needs to address the matter of the particular and individual approaches of each of the studied sources. It became apparent that specific approaches and goals of the studied texts were different, while their respective relation to the original biblical narrative remained. Whether it is a written tradition of Midrash or in oral form is another question, which needs to be addressed.

64

354

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

The Biblical narrative subtly initiated a number of exegetical avenues which were followed and were developed in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and Qur’an. The concept of signs as Divine aids was identified as one of the common themes in the studied writings. The creation story of the luminaries in the biblical narrative considered in the writings of the Qur’an and the Midrash, provided the possibility of interpreting liturgical and sacramental potential to the future use of luminaries for humanity. The other possibility which is suggested in the Bible, and was further developed in the exegesis of signs in Ephrem, the Midrash and the Qur’an, is the whole purpose of creation being for the benefit of humanity. Out of all of the three sources considered in the study, the Qur’an offered a broad theological appreciation of signs. The Midrashic passages showed a tendency to develop the theme of the people of Israel over any other in its exegesis of the signs. However, what all of the exegetical sources achieved in their commentaries on signs in the biblical narrative was to bring depth to the original biblical narrative about the signs. Therefore, the exercise of the comparative analysis of the theologies of signs allowed a fruitful collaboration between the studied sources. Taking the idea of the common tradition of biblical exegesis and applying it thematically, allowed the current study to be conducted as a comparative and analytical research into the theological appreciation of signs in the Bible, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The study showed that each source contributed in such a way that there could be identified a collaborative effort among them to present the concept of signs in relation to the God-human relationship. Describing the God-human relationship through their theological appreciation of signs, the Midrash and the Qur’an could be seen as taking different stages in the biblical process of development in the God-human relationship. The Qur’an could be seen as supporting the Noahic model of the God-human involvement when God is an overwhelming authority, the starting point, and the finishing seal of that relationship. The Midrash could be seen as taking the Abrahamic covenantal responsibility as a foundational model of the

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 355 God-human relationship. In doing so the Midrash is seen as developing the human aspect of the two-sided process of the Godhuman relationship. The Midrash also highlighted the covenantal relationship between the people and God, while the Qur’an downplayed it. Comparing the Midrashic and the Qur’anic arguments reflecting on God’s will, both sources elaborate on the subject in relation to people’s faith, salvation, and final judgement. The exercise in this chapter proved to be beneficial on many levels. Comparing similar themes in the primary sources of this study allowed for better understanding of their respective theological appreciation of signs. What remained a prominent feature of the comparison is the fact that all of the exegetical sources remained connected with the biblical text. In presenting their exegesis they highlighted, contributed, and expanded the biblical narrative by feeding their respective exegetical visions into it. The question of biblical authority in relation to the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an became apparent and needed further consideration.

SCRIPTURAL AUTHORITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT IN THE WRITINGS OF THE MIDRASH , EPHREM AND THE Q UR’AN

Starting from the broad issue of the authority of the OT Scripture it is important to highlight that this question was perceived differently by the sources in this book. For example, Midrash is using the scriptural authority of the OT writings as an ultimate tool for unravelling its exegesis and its understanding of it. Therefore, its general pattern of exegesis is to explain the scripture by means of scripture itself. Thus, one can conclude that the scriptural authority for the Jewish Midrash is ultimate and unprecedented. For Ephrem there is a certain exegetical flexibility which he allows in order to support his arguments. Ephrem as an exegete, on some occasions could be seen reading the NT revelation into the OT stories. It results in Ephrem’s exegetical attempts to unveil the Christ-revelation in the OT without however undermining the OT, but by showing Christ/Cross being present in the middle of the biblical narrative of Moses in Exodus. Therefore, Ephrem adds the Christian scriptures to his exe-

356

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

gesis of the Jewish scriptures. However, one has to reaffirm here that both of the scriptures are treated as scriptures of authority by Ephrem. The Qur’an takes further steps away from the OT scriptures in allowing alterations and changes to the biblical story as in the instance of the Pharaoh not dying at the Red Sea. In fact, the question of the scriptural authority of the OT is open in relation to the Qur’an. There is no doubt that the Qur’an acknowledges the existence of the Hebrew Bible, as it often draws on the stories of the Bible. However, the way the Qur’an retells the biblical stories and the way the Qur’an sees itself, allows one to suggest that the Qur’an attempts to step away from the biblical story in order to highlight its own message as the one from God or of God. Changing the criteria from the broad issue of scriptural authority, one can look at the concrete examples of the prophetic figures in the OT and their appreciation in the biblical exegesis of the Midrash, Qur’an and Ephrem. As far as the use of the OT prophets across the three monotheistic manuscripts in this study there are no principle differences. OT prophets are types to imitate, figures of authority, on whose examples each of the texts build their arguments and use them as the foundations of their teaching. Prophetic legacy and lineage is important for each source. However, differences start to appear when one analyses the reasons behind the significance of the OT prophets in the respective sources. For example, the Midrash uses prophets as the foundation stones of the Jewish faith. Hence there is often the phrase of ‘the God of the forefathers’, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, which precedes many of the verses of the Midrash. As far as the figure of Moses is concerned, Ephrem connects Moses with the Cross by means of exegesis of the staff of Moses. Such use of biblical exegesis fulfils Ephrem’s task to establish the continuity of OT and NT revelation, or rather to indicate that the NT revelation was already present in the OT through the figure of Moses. The Qur’an similarly affiliates the messenger of the Qur’an with Moses and the prophets, while using the prophetic lineage of the OT and NT as a legitimising foundation for its own message, and for its own messenger. The Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an rely on the authority of the OT prophets and with this

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 357 they recognise the continuity of the religious and spiritual tradition of the God-human encounters that these prophets represented. The question of the scriptural authority of the OT remains clearly and visibly present in the writings of the Midrash and Ephrem. The Qur’an often allows for its own alternative views in relation to the biblical stories which are contradictory to the biblical narrative. Therefore, the question of scriptural authority in the writings of the Qur’an is in need of further analysis. In answering the question of the theology of signs in the biblical narrative and in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an, the following observations were made in the course of the research in the chapter. The theology of signs evolves in the Midrash and the Qur’an as they start their appreciation of the concept of signs from the moment of creation. This is when they start introducing their theological argument about signs being the aiding factors in the God-human relationship. Both the Midrash and the Qur’an indicate that the luminaries were created for the purpose of the human understanding of time. The Midrash adds to it the liturgical and spiritual component of calculating the times of worship and the times of pilgrimage according to the luminaries. The Midrash also develops the idea of the greatness of the lights, and furthers it into the realm of the greatness of one nation over the other. On the one hand there could be political implications to the argument of the Midrash, while on the other hand there was a clear theological and exegetical effort in the Midrash to offer its interpretations of the biblical narrative in relation to the signs of God. Another important factor which was observed in the course of the research in the chapter is the fact that through the study of the theological appreciation of signs in the exegetical sources, the theology of signs in the biblical narrative comes to light. For example, the main theological argument of the Midrash with regards to the signs of the luminaries is the fact that God knows the end from the beginning. This brings the theology of signs into the realm of God’s intended purpose of creation of the luminaries for the use of humankind prior to the time of creation of Adam. This idea is very strongly expressed in the exegesis of

358

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

the Midrash and also is found in the Qur’an. As the next step, if one applies the exegetical conclusion from the biblical story of creation back into the biblical narrative, then one can appreciate with more clarity the theological implications on the nature of the God-human relationship at the time of creation. Thus, looking at the biblical narrative through the eyes of the biblical exegetical sources in this book one can hear the voice of the Bible stronger on the subject of the theology of signs. Therefore, the theological conclusion of God intending the luminaries for the people at creation can be fed back to the biblical narrative after a closer study of the exegetical sources. Although if read on its own, a theological appreciation of signs is not apparent in the Bible, but it certainly is more vivid after the study of the biblical exegesis in the Midrash and the Qur’an. This conclusion feeds back into the general argument of the book in establishing the nature of the relationship between the biblical narrative and the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an. As was illustrated in this chapter, the theological appreciation of signs in the Qur’an and the Midrash become leading exegetical sources for furthering and deepening an understanding of the theology of signs in the Bible. Hence their fruitful exegetical and theological collaboration on the matter is apparent. Summarising the identified common themes from the biblical narrative and their relation to sings, all of our exegetical sources followed the themes from the biblical narrative in relation to signs being aiding tools of Divine origin, and for the purpose of building, strengthening, and aiding the people’s relationship to God. Thus, on the theme of God’s signs, the analysis of the commonly identified themes in this study lead to the following concluding remarks. Looking at the question of the role of signs in connection to the God-human relationship all of our sources had much to say. Ephrem presents signs as part of one’s conduct in building the relationship with God. The Midrash looks at the signs as signposts of progression in the covenantal relationship between the people and God. The Qur’an gives much attention to the signs as means of Divine guidance, warning, communicating, and mediating between the people and God. The study in this chapter

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 359 showed how a theological appreciation of signs in the selected sources indicated their theological appreciation of the Godhuman relationship. The Biblical narrative of Genesis and Exodus schematically presents major topics as illustrated by the biblical exegetes, but does not provide them in a systematic form. This is only due to exegetical efforts that the biblical theology of signs in connection to one’s relationship with God grows in its standing, and shows its formative features. Therefore, as an outcome of this chapter one has to highlight that the exegetical writings of the studied sources play a vital role in understanding the theology of signs in the biblical narrative. Without the exegetical analysis, the theology of signs in the Bible has much weaker bearings. Looking at the relationship between signs and the covenants, the biblical narrative of Genesis plays a vital role. It is in the biblical illustrations of the Noahic and Abrahamic covenants that we observe how the signs of the covenant indicate new stages in the God-human relationship. Consequently, the process of people being coached by God into taking more responsibility in the God-human relationship is illustrated through the signs of the covenants. Thus, by Divine initiative, humanity moves from the observation of the natural phenomenon of the rainbow as the seal of the Noahic covenant, to taking an active stand in performing the sign of circumcision in the Abrahamic covenant with God. As an exegetical contribution to the matter, the Midrash presents a strong link between the story of Moses and the covenant of God with Abraham. Allusions to the promise of God to Abraham are often echoed in the Midrashic presentation of the signs/plagues of Egypt. Especially, it is strongly highlighted in the Midrash in relation to the plague of the killing of the first born of Egypt as a fulfilment of God’s prophecy concerning the tragic fate of the oppressors of Israel. Ephrem joins the lead of the Midrash in connecting the plagues of Egypt with the past events and sufferings of Israel. He also draws an analogy between the killing of the Egyptian babies and the killing of the Hebrew babies by the Egyptian leader in the early years of Moses’ life. Ephrem also supports the idea of the promises from the covenant of God with Abraham being fulfilled in the story of

360

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Moses delivering Israel from servitude and slavery. Thus, Ephrem’s exegesis on the subject of the connections between signs and the covenants could be seen as being in agreement with the exegesis of the Midrash on this matter. The Qur’an on the other hand could be seen as standing separate from Ephrem and the Midrash in its presentation of the link between signs and the covenants. In fact, the role of the covenant with Abraham is underplayed by the Qur’an altogether. Therefore, the connection of Moses’ story to the covenant with Abraham is not vocalised in the writings of the Qur’an. The emphasis in the Qur’an is to shift the idea of the covenant to the figures of the Old Testament prophets. Thus, both Abraham and Noah feature in the writings of the Qur’an as prominent figures who provide continuity and authority to the message of the Qur’an, and who to a certain extent legitimise the messenger of the Qur’an also. The illustrations of the relationship between signs and the covenants in the Bible, the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an indicated their collaboration with each other on an exegetical level. They further group the sources into two groups. The first group is the one of Ephrem and the Midrash which in particular can be identified as preserving and developing their respective exegesis of the continuity of the covenantal relationship between God and the people. The second group consisting of the Qur’an could be seen as offering an alternative exegesis, which downplays the covenantal relationship and emphasises continuity via the prophets of the OT. This brings the conclusion in this chapter to the next theme, which is the way in which the prophets of God use the signs. The Midrash offers its contribution to the subject by expanding the theme of prophets and signs into the realm of its illustrations of the nature of the God-human relationship. Firstly, the Midrash contributes to the common theme between the studied sources of the prophet of God demonstrating Divine signs to the people as a means of Divine communication with the people. Secondly the Midrash tops its previous argument with illustrations from the story of Moses when the prophets, i.e. Moses and Aaron, were collaborating with God in performing the signs. With such an intimate level in the God-human rela-

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 361 tionship, the Midrash portrays Moses and Aaron as partners with God when each of them takes turns in performing signs for the people. In comparison to the elevated mode of prophet-God relationship in the Midrash, the Qur’an could be seen as limiting the role of the prophet to a functional use of signs in the process of issuing Divine warnings to the people or in utilising the signs to validate their prophetic missions, i.e. in convincing people with signs. Ephrem validates the process of asking for signs from God as a legitimate exercise in the building of one’s relationship with God. This argument of Ephrem is common in the writings of the Midrash and the Qur’an. There are further agreements in the studied writings on the question of the functional uses of signs in the process of distinguishing and dividing between the people, or in issuing signs for the generations to come. Or for the purpose of creating historical memory by reminding people about significant events in the past. All of the above uses of signs are biblical, and they are also picked up in the exegetical writings of the Midrash and the Qur’an. Ephrem also remains biblically grounded in his appreciation of the theology of signs as aids for people in their journey to God. The Midrash and the Qur’an respectively pay due attention to the concept of the people of Israel and their theological appreciation of signs. Their respective appreciation of the people of Israel is biblically grounded and is also evoked in relation to God’s attributes of Mercy and Judgement. Another common theme between the Midrash and the Qur’an in relation to the concept of the people of Israel is the question of their closeness in their relationship to God. The difference between the Midrash and the Qur’an, however lies in their own judgements on the ongoing nature of that relationship. The Midrash, although appreciating the conditional nature of the God-Israel relationship, does not dispute the on-going nature of Israel’s participation in that relationship. The Qur’an on occasions could be seen as challenging the bond between God and Israel. In fact, the Qur’an often uses the Midrashic argument of measuring the greatness of the nation according to their efforts in maintaining their relationship and their connection to God. In that sense the Qur’anic

362

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

standpoint as far as the Children of Israel is concerned, could be similar to Ephrem’s. In both cases, Ephrem and the Qur’an, in appreciating Israel’s relationship with God put high expectations on the people. Therefore, whenever they describe Israel as not fulfilling their expectations they are inclined to dispute the nature of the God-Israel relationship. This line of thought separates them from the Midrash. In the Midrash, the appreciation of the concept of the Children of Israel and their status in their relationship with God is unprecedented, and could not be compromised by the shortcomings and even the failures of the nation. On the one hand, the argument of the Midrash could be seen as contradictory 65, while on the other hand, it is reconciled by the fact that the elected position of Israel is based on the virtues of the forefathers. In their appeal to the forefathers, the Midrash and the Qur’an are united in their exegesis. Each source relies on the virtues of the forefathers in pursuing their arguments. Their arguments could be different, so also their agenda for these arguments, but the exegetical principle they employ in order to determine their arguments is the same. It is the unprecedented authority, virtue, spiritual lineage, heritage, and legacy of the Old Testament patriarchs and prophets. This observation feeds into the question of using the signs as standpoints in the historical memory for the generations to come. In this sense for both the Midrash and the Qur’an, the Old Testament patriarchs could be seen as being the human signs from God. On the question of marking humans as signs, the Qur’an is unprecedented in presenting Pharaoh as a sign for the generations to come. This is the unique contribution of the Qur’an to the theological appreciation of signs, and such an emphasis does not feature in any of the other sources in this research. The distinguishing and dividing functions of the signs are commonly supported in the selected writings in relation to peoThe contradiction is with another Midrashic argument, which presents the idea that the greatness of one nation depends on their relationship with God. 65

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 363 ple’s faith in God. All of the exegetical writings in this study, as well as the biblical narrative, clearly demonstrate the divide in faith in the stories of Moses’ encounters with Pharaoh which the signs initiated. The differences start to show in the appreciation of the notion of signs for the generations to come. The Midrash stays connected to the biblical narrative in its report of signs of the covenants: the celebrating of the Shabbat as a sign for generations to come: and the signs of the first two covenants of God with the people. Therefore, the Midrash stays very much in the framework of the covenantal relationship between the people and God. As for the Qur’an, as was indicated earlier, the covenantal mode of description of the relationship between the people and God is not its choice. In its presentation of the theological appreciation of signs, the re-occurring theme of Divine finality over everything overwhelms all that is to do with human participation. Therefore, the construction of the God-human relationship in the Qur’an is headed, led, conducted, and finalised by God and God only. In supporting such an argument, the Qur’anic illustration of Pharaoh’s conversions can be used. The Qur’an changed the biblical narrative and offered the example of Pharaoh being spared his life and being made into a sign for the generations to come in order to illustrate Divine authority over all. The biblical account resulting in Pharaoh’s drowning could not be more just for the person who continuously rejected God and subjected himself and his people to suffering. However according to the Qur’an, all that is to do with the just punishment of the sinner, or to do with the reward of the saint, is down to the will of God and Him only. Therefore, the only appropriate state of conduct in the God-human relationship in matters of Judgement or Mercy is the state of human waiting. The Qur’an could be seen as putting a stop to a progression in the God-human relationship by indicating that on matters of Salvation or Damnation there could be no human influences, as all the decisions and choices are made according to God’s will. There is no direct contradiction in the Qur’an of the biblical writings, or the writings of the Midrash or Ephrem on this matter. However, the message of the Qur’an is far stronger than any of the other messages on the matter of signs and the God-human

364

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

relationship as shown in this study. What can be identified here is the clear divide which the Qur’an points to in certain areas of the God-human relationship. This divide is often breached by the Midrash by pointing to the synergetic and collaborative partnership of human collaboration with the Divine. However, the Qur’an seems to stand firm on its message of the limitations and boundaries of human participation and collaboration with the Divine. The overall impression from the study of the theology of signs in the biblical narrative and in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an, is that the study of the matter is far from being exhausted. On the one hand, the study area seems to cover the marginal aspect of singular events in biblical history. However, when put in perspective and looked at in progression, the history of signs in the biblical narrative expands. The history of signs becomes the history of the relationship between God and the people. If the initial signs of the luminaries are taken into account then the projection of Divine intention and anticipation of future encounters with the people could be seen as one of the reasons for creation. This level of Divine preparation and anticipation of future encounters with people allows for endless theological interpretations of the place of signs in the Godhuman relationship. Therefore, in looking at the projection in exploring the stages of the God-human relationship through the progression of the signs in the biblical narrative one can notice that in the period from the Noahic to Abrahamic covenants the nature of signs changes drastically from the natural phenomenon of the rainbow to the sign of circumcision. This led to a personal and intimate act of human commitment to the anticipated personal and intimate relationship with God. Thus, the Midrash strives to continue the progression of illustrating the increase in intimacy in the relationship between God and humanity throughout the narrative of biblical history. What could be seen as a choice of the Qur’an, is its conscious decision to stop at the level of the Noahic model of relationship between the people and God. Here God is an inferior object of worship and veneration, the God of Justice and Mercy, the God all-knowing and ever-present, but also the God who can never be reached be-

5. THEOLOGY OF SIGNS IN RELATION TO THE STORY OF MOSES 365 cause of the clear divide between the human and Divine. The purpose of this book was never to study the nature of the Godhuman relationship in the Qur’an. Therefore, the conclusion of this chapter is only a partial impression from the study of the selected texts and themes of this research. However, the observations of differences in presenting the illustrations about the God-human relationship in the biblical narrative, the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an allow for the concluding remarks of this chapter. Both similarities and differences between the studied manuscripts highlighted one particular aspect which became a common theme for the study in this book. The biblical narrative of the OT plays a vital role for the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Taking the story of Moses as an example for this study it became possible to compare the exegesis of his life in stages in the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an. Therefore, the conclusion of the book will summarise the findings of the research in each chapter and with it will present the general outcomes from the study. This brings the research part of this book to an end, and the following part the book will conclude its study and will share the findings of the research in an analytical summary.

CONCLUSION This conclusion will expand on several themes in relation to the findings of the research in this book. An analysis of the connections and the relationships between the four primary sources in this book will be offered. In doing so the place of the OT narrative will be defined in relation to the biblically related passages from the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an. The question of the spiritual authority of OT will be discussed in relation to the biblical commentaries in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. A description will be provided of each of the three sources offering their exegesis to the biblical narrative. The four models of relationship will be considered defining the interactions between their respective exegetical writings. These four models will be titled as agreements, disagreements, apologetics, and complementarities or collaborations. Each identified model is evolved from the textual examples analysed in this research. Therefore, this conclusion will sign-post the origins of each model by referring to the examples from the studied texts. The analysis of the God-human relationships in the studied sources will be offered as a unifying theological theme between them. This will make one of the several definitions of the Common Tradition of Biblical Exegesis (CTBE), which is proposed in this conclusion as an outcome from the research in this book. Further definitions of the CTBE will be offered based on the findings of the research in this book. The place of the Qur’an, the Midrash and Ephrem will be discussed in relation to the Bible. In doing so the answers to the following two questions will be offered: How does the Qur’an join the CTBE? And what is the contribution of the Qur’an to the CTBE? The projections of the 367

368

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

findings of the research will be offered on the Abrahamic religious traditions and on the models of the relationship between them. Pre-empting critical remarks about the study in this book, the reasons behind lengthy quotations from the primary sources throughout the study will be explained. Also the ethics behind working with the original sources in this book will be vocalised.

METHODOLOGY OF LONG AND MANY QUOTATIONS: LET THE TEXTS SHINE

One aspect of the methodological approach in this study was to offer many textual examples. Many direct quotations from the primary sources were necessary for this research. It allowed a creative compilation of the primary sources, chapter after chapter, in order to give illustrations in support of the main argument. The methodological approach in this study consisted of two steps. The first step allowed the textual examples from the studied sources to speak for themselves. The second step provided analytical research which followed each of the textual examples. The two-step process of the analytical study in this book allowed for the conclusions of the author to be supported by the textual evidence from the primary sources. The number of textual illustrations collected in this study gave a solid foundation and evidentiary support for the argument that the four primary sources share many similarities. This led to the analytical study of these similarities and to the drawing of the following conclusions on the basis of the analysis. By analysing the connections between the sources there was an attempt to illustrate the relationships between them. As a result, two major underlying connections were identified. The first layer of the relationship could be named as hierarchical, and it represented the relationship between the ‘original’ source of the OT narrative and the exegesis of it in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The second layer of the relationship between the sources could be titled as paralleled, chronological, religious, exegetical, theological, and it illustrated the connections of the exegetical sources to each other. The passages of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an were analysed in relation to each other’s

CONCLUSION

369

exegetical appreciation of the biblical stories. The analysis of the sources included the process of identifying the possibility of their contributions to the CTBE in general, and to the exegesis of each other in particular. In other words, the study presented two-way collaborations between the primary sources. On the one hand, the narrative of the OT Bible was a foundation for the exegesis in the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. On the other hand, their respective exegetical encounters with the biblical text fed back into the biblical narrative and expanded the meaning of the text. There was an additional level of collaboration which the study identified. Namely, the exegetical collaboration between the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an. Further consideration of the nature of the relationship between the studied sources lead to the following analytical outcomes. One other definition of the connections between the studied sources was identified at the beginning of this book in uniting them under the umbrella term of being a part of the Common Tradition of Biblical Exegesis. The following part of the conclusion will explore the matter further.

DEFINITION OF THE CTBE IN THIS STUDY

In pursuit of an understanding of the CTBE in this study, the biblical narrative of the OT was identified as a main link/source/foundation for the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an. Further analysing the dynamics in the relationship between the studied sources, the following two questions will need to be addressed in this conclusion. One is the place of the OT narrative in relation to the biblical exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an, and the other one is the question of the scriptural authority of the OT in the other three sources. In the meantime, further insights into the relationship between the studied sources will be offered. The process of exegesis of the biblical text was common for all of the sources in this study. However, it was the use of their own ‘agenda’, which separated them. Ephrem could be seen as paving the way for the Qur’an in using the biblical narrative of the OT as a foundation for its message. In Ephrem’s case it was

370

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

making the point of revealing Christ as part of the OT narrative about Moses. In the Moses stories of Exodus, Christological interpretations by Ephrem were few, but they were placed in strategic places. The process of exegetical development that can be seen emerging with Ephrem and being followed in the Qur’an, could be summarised as functional use of the biblical narrative as far as it was supporting the exegesis of the source. Therefore, Ephrem to a lesser extent, and the Qur’an to a greater extent were able to part or detour from the biblical narrative when it was not supporting their respective ‘agendas’. The levels of exegetical undertakings vary but the principle remains. The Midrash in that sense can be looked at in separation from Ephremic and Qur’anic methods. The primary method for the Midrash in presenting its exegesis was in its engagement with the biblical text itself. In presenting interpretations of the text, the Midrash uses the text itself, i.e. interpreting the Bible by means of the biblical narrative. In doing so the authority of the OT Scriptures is uplifted and reaffirmed as unprecedented in the Midrash. In their common quest for interpreting the Scriptures of the OT all of the three sources were doing so by means of offering their respective exegetical interpretations of the text. In doing so they were united by their connections to the biblical text. However, they were often separated by the amplitude of their dealings with the biblical narrative. Their reasons for engaging with the biblical text often determined the outcomes from their exegetical methods. The Midrashic use of non-biblical material and information, for example, was part of its engagements with the Oral Torah, i.e. the oral tradition of biblical exegesis. The use of non-biblical material in the Midrash was for the purpose of expanding the biblical narrative, or in order to reconcile the discrepancies or inconsistencies in the text. Ephrem often dug into the richness of the tradition of Jewish biblical exegesis and retrieved from it useful information, methodology and other tools for building up his own biblical commentaries. He used a creative approach in discerning which parts of Jewish exegetical tradition to adopt, and which parts of it to leave aside. His goal in offering his biblical exegesis of the OT was to let the biblical narrative shine on its own accord, as well as to show how the

CONCLUSION

371

OT Revelation of God embraced the NT Revelation. Therefore, in addition to rabbinical biblical exegesis, Ephrem used Christian exegesis in his Exodus commentaries. The Christian exegetical approach of Ephrem, as well as his rabbinical material, united Ephrem and the Midrash. As this study showed, the Midrash was also engaging with Christological interpretations in an apologetical and reactive mode 1. This mode of apologetic and reactive exegesis was also noticed in the Qur’an. However, the difference between the Qur’an and other two exegetical sources was that in targeting their respective exegeses, Ephrem and the Midrash never targeted the biblical narrative of the OT. On a number of occasions the use of non-biblical material in the Qur’an differed from Ephrem’s and Midrashic principles. The Qur’anic conduct in offering its biblical exegesis in contradiction to the biblical narrative, and doing so, deliberately and intentionally separated the Qur’an from the other two sources 2. This model of biblical exegesis was alien to the Midrash and Ephrem. Both the Midrash and Ephrem strived to reconcile biblical inconsistencies 3 when they occurred, and never intentionally offered their exegesis in contradiction to the biblical narrative. The purpose of the Qur’an, on the other hand, was often to correct the biblical narrative through its exegesis. By doing so the Qur’an volunteered its efforts in projecting itself as a corrective scripture. Ultimately this model of relationship with the For example, the Midrash emphasised its own interpretations of the wood in the story of Moses, which was seen in this study as its reaction to the Christological interpretations of the wood. Also, in presenting its arguments that God has no son, the Midrash was seen as reacting to the Christian teaching on Christology. 2 E.g. the drowning scene of Pharaoh at the Red Sea and his survival; the refusal of the Qur’an to support the commandment of children being responsible for the sins of their fathers; and the Qur’an disagreeing with the OT openly. 3 E.g. from the story of the Burning Bush when the Bible states that it was the angel who spoke to Moses, while Ephrem and the Midrash gently present their exegetical commentaries exploring the alternative views of understanding the text without contradicting it. 1

372

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

biblical narrative was seen in this study as part of the Qur’anic message in reaffirming itself as being of equal status with the Bible. The Qur’an never undermined the OT authority openly, but instead left the question of its superiority open to various interpretations.

THE OT NARRATIVE AND THE CONNECTIONS AND MIDRASH, EPHREM AND THE QUR’AN

COMMONALITIES BETWEEN THE

If one was to develop further the definition of the CTBE, the question of a driving force or a foundation needs to be addressed. For this study the first and foremost driving source for the research was the biblical narrative of the OT. It provided the narrative which offered the structure for consideration. It also indicated the notions, concepts, and themes to be followed through in the exegetical sources. Overall, the biblical narrative of the OT in this study became a common link between the sources. The biblical narrative was sufficient to address the main argument of this book in relation to it. In doing so the definition of a CTBE was applied to the biblically related materials from the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur'an. Therefore, from the start of the research the four sources were provisionally united by their affiliation to the biblical narrative of the OT. They were united as belonging to the common tradition of biblical exegesis due to their exegetical efforts in interpreting the biblical stories of Moses. However, as the research developed further, the analysis of the exegetical sources indicated their possible connection to each other as well as to the biblical narrative. The connections between the primary sources in this research were revealed through the process of systematically collecting and analysing the evidence from the studied sources. The outcomes were achieved by choosing thematic passages from the original sources and analysing them in accordance with the common themes from the biblical narrative about Moses. And the outcome from such a study showed that there was a dialogue between the sources through their exegetical ideas, concepts, notions, questions, and answers, which they displayed.

CONCLUSION

373

Most of the common ideas, concepts and notions, which were studied, were firstly identified in the biblical narrative, if only in a very schematic form. Secondly the similarities and differences in the exegetical passages of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an were acknowledged. The analysis of their respective exegesis allowed a determination of the level of their engagement with the biblical narrative and with the exegesis of each other. In some cases, either similarities or disagreements between the exegesis of the studied sources were considered as their reactions, apologetics, and responses to the writings of the other. The illustrative examples in this book from the passages of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an showed these writings in relation to each other’s exegetical arguments. Consequently it was possible to notice how one idea or concept, or the exegetical model, travelled from one source to another. Taking a concept, idea, or notion as common ground between the selected sources it was possible to see how they got transformed, enriched, and developed through the exegetical undertaking of each of the sources. For example, in presenting their interpretation of the significance of the wood in the stories of Moses, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an offered their unique contributions to the matter by each offering their distinctive exegesis of it. This showed that each source was aware of the exegesis of the other and offered their own interpretation of the significance of the wood in relation to the other. Another example of collaboration between the studied sources was their respective presentations of the figure of Moses’ mother, their descriptions of her prayer, and the nature of her relationship with God. There were other instances when the Midrashic argument reflected Ephrem’s exegesis, or when it provided the base for the argument in the Qur’an. There were also instances when the sources disagreed with one another. For example, the Qur’an stated that Moses was not able to see God, while Ephrem clearly allowed such a possibility for Moses and the people of Israel in his commentaries on the narrative of Exodus. In analysing similarities between the studied texts, the possibility of borrowing was identified. The general rule with

374

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Ephrem or the Qur’an borrowing from the Midrash could be characterised as follows. If using the exegesis of the other was helpful, then Ephrem and the Qur’an would be inclined to use the exegesis of the Midrash. And if not, then each source would present their own exegetical narrative of the biblical stories. In some instances, it was possible to identify that the biblical exegesis in the Qur’an or in Ephrem were first influenced by the biblical exegesis of the Midrash and second by the biblical narrative. For example, the analysis of the Midrashic phrase: ‘Lord of the Worlds’ in the Qur’an lead to the conclusion that this phrase was inherited and developed by the Qur’an from the Midrash and not from the biblical narrative. Also the description of the mother of Moses as a midwife in Ephrem’s writings was of Midrashic origin. For later historical sources, for example, for Ephrem or Qur’an, their exegesis consisted of two ingredients. The first ingredient was the biblical narrative and the second one was the exegesis of the other sources 4. The conclusions of this study are based on the textual evidence of exegetical collaboration found in the studied sources. The outcomes from the analysis of the textual examples in this study supported the argument that there was a common tradition of biblical exegesis, which united the writings of Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Consequently, the contribution of the CTBE to the writings of the studied sources was seen through their interaction with each other, as well as with the biblical narrative. Through these interactions within the CTBE their distinct arguments were sharpened, and their positions were crystallized. Through their dialogues, apologetics, and interactions with each other, the sources offered their contributions to the CTBE. Following from the analysis of the place of the OT narrative in the CTBE the question of the scriptural authority of the OT needs to be addressed. In determining the dynamics in the relationship between the studied sources under the umbrella term of 4

These sources were available at the time whether in written or in oral form.

CONCLUSION

375

the CTBE, the question of biblical authority is essential, and therefore it will be revisited here. In answering the question of biblical authority in relation to the studied sources the following conclusions are offered.

THE QUESTION OF THE SCRIPTURAL AUTHORITY OF THE OT

The question of the Scriptural authority of the OT had to be addressed in the process of analysing the relationships between the biblical narrative and the other sources in this study. There are dividing and uniting factors between the sources with regard to certain nuances in answering the question of the Scriptural authority of the OT narrative. In addressing the question of the Scriptural authority of the biblical narrative as a text, the Midrash and Ephrem can be united in showing their appreciation of the biblical narrative of the OT as an unprecedented Scriptural authority 5. In approaching the question of the hierarchy of the biblical authority as Sacred Scriptures the Midrashic and Ephrem’s positions were identical. Each of the two sources respected the hierarchy of the biblical narrative, and they offered their exegetical support to the biblical narrative as their main incentive for their exegetical endeavours. When Ephrem presented his Christological exegesis of the OT on two occasions in his commentaries on Exodus, he did so to reconcile the OT revelation of God with the NT revelation of Christ. This indicated that both revelations for Ephrem were of Divine origin and of a Scriptural authority. The situation with the Qur’an is more complicated. The Qur’an has a unique relationship with the biblical narrative, which is somewhat different from the other two sources. The main difference between the Qur’an and the other sources in this book, is its inconsistency in its relationship with the biblical As was shown in this study, Ephrem sees NT revelation as an integral part of the OT revelation. Therefore, both revelations, according to the Exegesis of Ephrem, are part of the same Divine Revelation, and are part of one continuous revelation of the Divine rather than two conflicting revelations. 5

376

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

narrative. The observations in this study showed that on a number of occasions the Qur’an was in unison with the biblical narrative, while other illustrations indicated the opposite. The difference in the Qur’anic appreciation of the OT as a Scriptural authority lies in the self-appreciation of the Qur’an. The Qur’anic self-revelations suggested that it did not classify its own writings as supplementary to the OT narrative, but often as a possible alternative to the biblical narrative. In doing so the Judaeo-Christian hierarchy of the Scriptures of the OT was challenged by the Qur’an. In relation to its own authority, the Qur’an exercised its own evaluations in relation to the biblical narrative. Thus, the Qur’an either approved or disapproved of the biblical narrative of the OT. In approving the biblical narrative, the Qur’an presented the biblical message as its own, and in disapproving the biblical narrative, the Qur’an assumed the alternative position. This relationship with the biblical narrative is unique to the Qur’an, and it not expressed in the Midrash or by Ephrem. The Qur’an accepts the narrative of the OT reflecting the history of the God-human relationship and with this accepts the biblical account of it as a revelation from God. However, in doing so the Qur’an often doubts and disagrees with the text of the biblical narrative and consequently corrects it. For example, on the ethical principles of the biblical Law, the Qur’an exercised its liberty to disagree with the biblical account of the Decalogue. It was expressed in the Qur’an on the matter of the responsibility of the children for the sins of the fathers, and on the concept of a Jealous God. Another example was identified when the Qur’an selectively picked on the authority of the OT prophets and used them for supporting its own message and its own messenger. There were many examples found in this study indicating that the Qur’an was often in dialogue with the biblical narrative. The textual example in chapter four, the Reception of the Law, showed that on the subject of Monotheistic principles, the Qur’an was in total agreement with the biblical account of the first two commandments of the Decalogue. Also there was an indication in the Qur’an in support of the idea of a continuation of its legacy from

CONCLUSION

377

the ‘previous scriptures’, of which the OT narrative could be identified as one. In doing so the Qur’an promoted the idea of the Scriptural kinship between the Sacred writings of the Abrahamic faiths. The overall impression of the Qur’an in its relationship with the biblical narrative is that the Qur’an accepted it as part of ‘previous scriptures’, which gave the Qur’an the solid platform to present its own message. Stepping away from the individual positions expressed in the studied sources, the research in this book was also collecting textual illustrations of the God-human relationships in the biblically related stories of Moses in the Midrash, Ephrem, and the Qur’an. The following part of the conclusion will summarise the outcomes of the research on this subject.

EXEGESIS OF THE GOD-HUMAN RELATIONSHIP AS A UNIFYING THEME FOR THE STUDIED SOURCES

In the process of their exegetical collaboration, another avenue of a theological nature was identified in the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Their presentations of the nature of the God-human encounters through the Moses’ stories expanded the horizons of theological appreciation of the Godhuman relationship in the biblical narrative. On the one hand, the Qur’an had a distinctive emphasis on the prophetic relationship between the people and God, and identified the priority of a theological appreciation of the God-human encounters. On the other hand, the Midrash highlighted the idea of partnership and collaboration in the God-human encounters in the stories of Moses. This could either be seen as both sources emphasising their theological priorities in presenting the question of God-human encounters, or as their respective contributions to the common theological appreciation of God-human collaboration on the exegetical and theological level. Different levels in the God-human relationship were indicated in the studied passages. These stages in the relationship

378

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

were already identified in the biblical presentation of the covenantal relationships of God with Noah, with Abraham 6, and the New Covenant of God with people through Christ. Each of the studied sources was seen as identifying with one of the three covenantal models of relationship between people and God. The Qur’an was seen as supporting the Noahite model of the covenantal relationship between people and God. In the presentation of this model the Qur’an emphasised Divine superiority over all aspects of human existence. In doing so the didactics of the message of the Qur’an described the process of patient awareness of God in one’s life, and the total submission to the will of God and to His Mercy. The Midrash was seen as emphasising the Abraham–Moses model of the relationship of people with God. For both sources the continuity of the Old Testament patriarchs was important, and was used respectively as the foundation for their exegetical, didactic, and theological presentations. In the Midrashic appreciation of the Abraham-Moses model of covenantal relationship with God, the idea of partnership and collaboration with God was emphasised. In doing so the Midrash encouraged people to take more religious responsibilities and to fulfil their part of the covenantal relationship with God. Ephrem’s theological appreciation of the question of the God-human relationship brought the reality of Christ-revelation as the new stage in Godhuman collaboration. Ephrem’s exegesis of the biblical narrative of the OT was crowned by the introduction of Christ into Moses’ story. In doing so Ephrem demonstrated the continuation of God-human collaboration throughout biblical history and highlighted his priorities by embracing the New Covenantal model of the God-human relationship. In spite of the fact that each source expressed their distinct priorities in identifying their preferred model of the covenantal relationship with God, the overall spectrum of their models showed that they all belong to stages in the covenantal history of humankind, which was mapped in the biblical narrative. Each 6

And the fulfilment of God’s promises to Abraham in the stories of Moses.

CONCLUSION

379

source specified their preferred model in the biblical mapping of the covenantal relationships between God and people, and each of them partook in the process of collaboration with the biblical stories. In other words, in picking up on either of the biblical models of Divine communication with Noah, or Abraham-Moses, or through Christ, each of the three studied sources contributed their own perspective to the common tradition of biblical interpretation. In doing so each source expanded, deepened, and enriched this tradition by means of offering its contributions. Chapter two offered more textual examples of the exegesis of God-Moses encounters. The Midrash elaborated on the meaning and the significance of the Divine encounter with Moses, by highlighting the importance of knowing the Name of God for Israel. The Qur’an in offering its exegesis of the Divine encounter with Moses, highlighted the definition of God as ‘the Lord of the Worlds’. This signified that the Qur’an used its prominent definition for God which it inherited from the Midrash. Ephrem did not include the episode of the Divine encounter in his exegesis, but offered interpretations of it in his Hymns. Ephrem’s exegesis explored one avenue in interpreting the Name of God as a ‘Living God’. In associating the meaning of Divine Name with life in his writings, Ephrem could be drawing an analogy with Christ 7. Elaborating on different levels and avenues in God-human relationships, the following examples were picked in this research: Israel/Moses relationship with God, and Egypt/Pharaoh relationship with God. In presenting the Egypt/Pharaoh relationship with God the common themes were addressed by the studied sources. These were the themes of Divine expectations for Egypt and Pharaoh, as well as the matter of Divine providence for Moses and Israel. Each source elaborated on the complexities in the dynamics in the relationships between IsraelEgypt, Moses-Pharaoh and God. The unifying factor in their reOne of the names for Christ in Ephrem’s Hymns is ‘the Medicine of Life’. See in my book The Poetic Hymns of St Ephrem the Syrian.

7

380

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

spective exegesis was that the two models of relationships, which were between nations and God and between a singular person, i.e. Moses or Pharaoh, with God, showed the similarities of Divine intentions for people’s salvation. These intentions were more vocal in the Midrash when it stated that it was Divine pleasure to save the sinners. The Qur’an contributed its own perspective to the question by vocalising that the matters of salvation and perdition were God’s prerogative alone, and that it was exclusively up to God to save or to judge. The example of the Qur’an changing the biblical story of the drowning of Pharaoh was used as an illustration of the Qur’anic didactics on the matter. 8 Ephrem’s perspective on the dynamics in the relationship between Israel-Egypt, Moses-Pharaoh, and God, was consistent with the Midrashic interpretation of God’s intention for and expectation of salvation for all. The extensive analysis of textual illustrations in this book led to the conclusion that there was common knowledge which was shared among the studied sources. This led to further conclusions in addressing the question of the CTBE. Consequently, it became possible to suggest at this point that the common knowledge which was shared among the studied sources was part of the CTBE.

FURTHER DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CTBE: THE QUR’AN AND THE OTHER SOURCES

In shaping the CTBE each source offered their own perspectives and contributions. Their intentions and goals played an important part in their exegetical conduct. The following section will offer further analysis of the place of the Qur’an in relation to the other three primary sources and in relation to the CTBE.

The body/corpse of Pharaoh was saved by God in order to make a human sign out of him for the generations to come. In doing so the Qur’an indicated that it was all up to God whether to spare the sinner’s life or to grant it back to the sinner at the last moment of their conversion prior to perdition.

8

CONCLUSION

381

THE PLACE OF THE QUR’AN IN RELATION TO THE BIBLE, THE MIDRASH, EPHREM AND TO THE CTBE

In determining the place of the Qur’an in the common tradition of biblical exegesis the following two questions need to be addressed. The first one is how does the Qur’an join the CTBE? The second question is what is the contribution of the Qur’an to the CTBE? The answer to the first question is two-fold. Firstly, the Qur’an joins the CTBE by incorporating biblically related material into its corpus. And secondly the Qur’an joins the CTBE by using the exegetical material of Judaeo-Christian tradition of biblical interpretation. On the basis of the two parameters the Qur’an is considered in this study as being part of the CTBE. In answering the second question, the textual illustrations in this study demonstrated that in a number of instances the Qur’an contributed to a deeper understanding of the biblical narrative and with this offered its insights to the tradition of biblical exegesis. One of the instances which illustrated Qur’anic contribution to the CTBE in this study was indicated in chapter one. In presenting its appreciation of the character of Moses’ mother, the Qur’an elevated the status of the woman in her relationship with God. Based on the fact that the mother of Moses was receiving direct Revelations from God, her interactions with God could be equalled to the ones of the prophets. The insights of the Qur’an about the mother of Moses were unprecedented in its own writings. 9 Similarly, further developments in the exegesis of the figure of Moses’ mother in the Midrash and Ephrem celebrated her as one of the midwives and the saviours of Israel. 10 Further reflections on the character of Moses’ mother through the collaborative exegesis of the Qur’an, the Midrash, No other woman is presented in the Qur’an as receiving direct Revelations from God. 10 By saving the Jewish babies from slaughter, the midwives were saving the future of the Jewish nation. 9

382

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

and Ephrem allowed for a deeper appreciation of her as a significant biblical character. Re-visiting the biblical story of Moses’ mother and further reflecting on her actions, her sacrifice of the child at the river was compared to the sacrifice of Abraham. This particular analogy is not mentioned in any of the exegetical sources in this book, but the insights into the story of Moses’ mother were inspired by the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. For example, the prophetic ministry of Moses’ mother in the Midrash and the Qur’an was further elaborated by the exegesis of Ephrem in presenting her fervent prayer and the strength of her relationship with God. Further developing the idea of the closeness in her relationship with God, as was presented in all of the three sources, a comparison of her biblical story with the one of Abraham occurred. Consequently, all of the primary sources in this book contributed to the expansion of the character of Moses’ mother and invited further insights into her story. Another illustration of the Qur’anic contribution to the CTBE was identified through its development of the Midrashic concept of the ‘Lord of the World’. As the study in this book indicated the Midrashic phrase the ‘Lord of the World’ entered the body of the Qur’an and was developed into one of its prominent definitions of God. This indicated that the Qur’an appropriated the concept from other exegetical sources and offered it back to the biblical tradition of exegesis. In its appreciation of the concept, the Qur’an put its stamp on it by making it its own. In doing so the Qur’an picked up an inferior Midrashic concept and charged it with massive significance for its writings. Further indications of collaboration between the sources in this study were found in chapter five. Textual examples in this chapter showed the contributions of the Qur’an and the Midrash in offering their exegesis of the theological significance of the signs to the biblical narrative. Summarizing the place of the Qur’an in the CTBE, this study showed that biblical exegesis in the Qur’an could be considered as offering its own unique contribution to the CTBE. This marked the biblically related passages in the Qur’an as an

CONCLUSION

383

integral part of the CTBE across the three Abrahamic religious traditions.

PROJECTION OF THE FINDINGS OF THIS RESEARCH INTO

RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS, WHICH WERE REPRESENTED BY THE SOURCES STUDIED IN THIS BOOK

As far as the sources in this book are concerned, the research identified connections between them. At the beginning of this study there was a suggestion to explore the possibility of expanding the findings of the study into more generalized conclusions in relation to the connections between the three Abrahamic traditions, which the sources represented. The question to answer at this point is the following: Can the dynamics in the relationship between the studied sources be projected on their respective religious traditions and the relationships between them? To expand the findings of this detailed study into a much more general area of religious studies can be problematic. However, it is still possible to use the finding of this research as a potential model in exploring the relationships between the Abrahamic religious traditions. The current research is based on the evidential support collected from the study of textual evidence. Generalizing findings of the research into a broader area is weakened by lack of evidence outside of the studied sources. Therefore, generalizing the argument of this book is only possible by indirectly using the evidential support from this study. This research opens up further possibilities for academic endeavours in the studies of three Abrahamic faiths. Further academic studies in the field are desirable. The study in this book attempted to make the first step in the newly emerging academic discipline of studies in the Abrahamic religions. In doing so it offered a close collaboration with the primary sources, and offered its methodological approach to the original texts.

CTBE: FURTHER ANALYSIS OF THE MODELS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE STUDIED SOURCES

In summarizing the relationships between the primary sources in this study, four models of connection between them were

384

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

identified. They are: similarities; differences; apologetics; and complementarities. The analysis of the four models in this conclusion is determined by considering the exegetical connections and the possible dialogue between the studied sources. In the process of the analytical study of the biblical exegesis of the selected sources it was often observed that the levels of agreement or disagreement fluctuated. Therefore, in drawing the outcomes from this study, the classification offered is schematic. The main reason behind this classification is to present a systematic analysis of the relationship between the studied sources.

AGREEMENTS

The origins of agreements between the exegesis of the studied sources could often be drawn via the influences of the biblical text. In the course of the research the following agreements were identified between the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. In presenting the didactics of one’s conduct of the relationship with the Divine, all of the three studied sources indicated that the asking for signs from God was proper conduct in this relationship. On the question of the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh, Ephrem and the Midrash built their exegesis in order to reconcile Divine action towards Pharaoh. In reaching their goals Ephrem and the Midrash presented their own distinct arguments, but reached the common conclusion of showing that Pharaoh’s will and freedom of choice were not compromised. On the question of the origins of Divine action regarding the hardening the heart of Pharaoh, the Midrash and Ephrem agreed that it was God who initiated the process, while the Qur’an ascribed the initiative to Moses. In doing so the Qur’an shifted its focus from the question of freedom of choice to an explanation as to who was the initiator of the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh. In doing so the Qur’an explicitly testified that it was done on the request of Moses. This indicated that based on their mutual intention of reconciling Divine action towards Pharaoh, there was an agreement between the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The sources used different avenues in reaching this agreement, but they managed to arrive at similar conclusions via their own exegetical processes.

CONCLUSION

385

On the subject of biblical chronology, three of the studied sources showed agreement in identifying the time of Moses’ mission in connection to the promise of God to Abraham. The similarity could be further expanded to the exegesis of the Midrash and Ephrem. In their intentions to reconcile the discrepancy in biblical chronology in presenting the number of years between the two events, both sources used their exegesis to support the biblical narrative. By pointing out that there was a promise of 400 years and the reality of 430 years between the two events, Ephrem and the Midrash stayed true to the biblical narrative and used their exegesis to reflect on the two events accordingly. As for the Qur’an, the indication of the notion of ‘the Term’ in relation to the story of Moses was seen in this study as its reaction to biblical chronology. On the question of appreciation of the Shabbat, the Qur’an showed agreement with other exegetical sources, as well as on the matter of the mountain Horeb being blessed twice. There was exegetical agreement between the sources in highlighting the biblical notion of ‘kings and priests’. Their exegetical collaboration with this notion illustrated their original intention to further develop the biblical notion. In doing so the Qur’an for example indicated that the notion of prophecy was overwhelming the notion of priesthood in its exegesis of the biblical formula of ‘kings and priests’. Thus, the Qur’an offered its interpretation of it as ‘kings and prophets’. Ephrem however showed his reliance on the tradition of Targumim in reflecting on the notion of ‘kings and priests’ in his biblical commentaries. Answering the common question about who was the One who spoke to Moses from the Burning Bush, all of the sources agreed that it was God. However, in reaching this agreement they chose their own exegetical journeys. Ephrem and the Midrash stayed in unison with the biblical narrative. Both sources mentioned the presence of an angel at the Burning Bush and reconciled this with the biblical account via their exegesis. The Qur’an ignored the fact that the biblical narrative mentioned the presence of an angel at the Burning Bush, which indicated a lack of scrutiny in the Qur’an in its dealings with the OT.

386

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

DISAGREEMENTS

The argument for the connection between the sources on the examples of disagreements between them is substantiated by the possibility that the sources illustrated their reaction to the exegesis of each other by disagreement. Additionally, the disagreements between the sources illustrated their distinctive positions as well as their reactions to the position of each other. The disagreements between the texts were identified as indications of direct or indirect contact between the studied texts, or at least between the ideas expressed in these texts. The following illustrations of disagreement between the sources were identified in the course of the research. In reflecting on the process of human ability to behold the Divine there was clear disagreement between Ephrem and the Qur’an in their exegesis regarding the ability of Moses to see God at mount Sinai. The Qur’an clearly denied such a possibility in its verses, while Ephrem indicated that the people of Israel were able to behold the Glory of God at the foot of mount Sinai. Their arguments illustrated their respective appreciations of the levels of intimacy in the God-human relationship. For the didactics of the Qur’an there was a clear divide between God and the people. For Ephrem the Incarnation of Christ brought the level of intimacy between people and God to its physical intimacy in addition to the spiritual one. 11

APOLOGETICS

The examples of apologetical arguments between the studied sources were a testimony to their connections. The following illustrations indicated contact and reaction of one text to another via their exegetical positions and didactics. The examples from the texts are the following ones. The statements of the Midrash and the Qur’an regarding God having no son were conThe theological significance of Christology is based here on the appreciation of the Eucharistic theology in Ephrem’s Hymns. See my book on the subject The Poetic Hymns of Saint Ephrem the Syrian (2013).

11

CONCLUSION

387

sidered in this study as their respective apologetics to the Christological teachings of the Church. The examples in the Qur’anic verses stating that one is solely responsible for one’s own transgressions is seen as the apologetics of the Qur’an in relation to the biblical commandment of the children being responsible for the sins of their fathers.

COMPLEMENTARITIES/COLLABORATIONS

In analysing textual examples from the selected sources, the additional model of relationship was identified between them. On a number of occasions, the analysis of the sources led to a conclusion that there were complementarities between the exegetical writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. By the first chapter, the textual illustrations from the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an demonstrated their collaborative attempts to develop the character of Moses’ mother. Considering the schematic portrayal of Moses’ mother in the biblical narrative, the respective attempts to amplify her character in the studied sources is an indication of their mutual exegetical endeavours. All of the sources in this study presented Moses’ mother as an exegetical type. Moses’ mother in their respective biblical interpretations became an example of fervent prayer and a special relationship with God. Each of the studied sources added their own exegetical and theological layers to the complexity of the relationship of the mother of Moses to God. With their respective writings they built up a complementary picture of a multi-dimensional and an elaborately presented exegesis of the biblical character, thus adding their contributions to the simple portrayal of her in the biblical narrative. The other example of theological collaboration between the sources was seen through their respective theologies of the signs. The research in chapter five gave an account of the theological appreciation of signs in the exegesis of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. The study in the chapter showed that the exegetical efforts of the selected sources were beneficial for a better understanding of the theology of the signs in the biblical narrative. The exegesis of the selected sources illustrated collaboration and further expansion of the nascent biblical indi-

388

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

cations towards the possibility of the theological appreciations of the signs. Therefore, the input of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an on the matter was seen as a collaborative effort using the primary sources built on biblically inspired ideas. In doing so the studied sources added to the biblical narrative their own didactics and their theological understandings of the notion of the signs. On the concept of Israel, all of the studied sources showed similar intent to praise Israel for its highs and to criticise Israel for its lows. The criticism of Ephrem and the Qur’an of the people of Israel was often expressed as the failure of the people to fulfil the expectations which were projected on Israel by Ephrem and the Qur’an. Their expectation of Israel was always to preserve the purity of faith as expressed in the Qur’an, or to recognise Christ as expressed in Ephrem’s writings 12. The Midrashic tendencies in depicting the shortcomings of Israel were aiming towards re-affirmation of the exclusive relationship of people with God. In offering their perspectives on the significance of Israel, the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an were contributing to a broadening of the spectrum of the exegetical appreciation of the biblical portrayal of the people of Israel. The complementarities of their respective exegesis is an indication of the fruitful collaboration between the studied sources under the umbrella term of the CTBE. On the one hand, the studied sources were presenting and building their own respective exegetical corpus in relation to the biblical narrative of the OT, while on the other hand with their respective writings they were contributing to the CTBE. This illustrates the process of fruitful collaboration in building one’s own biblical exegesis on the foundation of or in relation to the other.

The examples of Ephrem’s critical remarks regarding the people of Israel are lacking in his exegetical work, but present in his Hymns. See my book, Ephrem, a Jewish Sage (2010), chapter one, for an analysis of Ephrem’s critical remarks of Jews and Judaism. 12

CONCLUSION

389

As already indicated, the first step of the study was to analyse the primary sources, and the second step was to analyse and illustrate the connections between them. The original intention for this book was to provide much textual evidence in support of its arguments, and it was followed throughout the study. In doing so the textual evidence fulfilled its purpose of offering evidentiary support to the academic arguments in this research. The lack of quotations from the primary sources would have been disadvantageous for the conduct of this research, and the outcomes of the study would have been less convincing. In the process of working closely with the original texts, this study selected passages from the original sources and quoted them in this book. In doing so the selected passages were often deprived of their context. However, the proper referencing of the quoted passages allowed the readers to explore further the textual evidence in its full context by drawing attention to the original sources. This was one of the sub-goals of this book. The intention of the author of this book with regard to the original sources was similar to the intentions of the biblical exegetes with regard to the original biblical material. The main idea behind the original quotations in this study was to allow the original sources to shine first and foremost. The other task for the author was to analyse the original sources in order to draw the concluding remarks of this study. Until this study there were no scholarly attempts to compare the biblical narrative of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an systematically and thematically. The attempt of this study to do so proved to be successful and illustrated the continuity of biblical stories through the writings of the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an. Also, exegetical illustrations of the biblical themes, figures, ideas and concepts, in the selected passages from the Midrash, Ephrem and the Qur’an, showed their continuation from and their connection to the narrative of the OT as well as their respective relationships to the exegesis of each other. As already noted, the methodology of this study can be further applied by scholars in the disciplines of biblical studies and Abrahamic studies. The concluding remarks of this research in-

390

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

vite further steps by academic researchers to explore additional fields in Abrahamic studies. It is the hope of the author that this book will pave the way for more scholarly endeavours.

BIBLIOGRAPHY DICTIONARIES

Badawi, Elsaid M. & Abdel Haleem, Muhammad. Arabic-English Dictionary of Qur’anic Usage. Leiden: Brill, 2010.

Jastrow, M. A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, 2 vols., New York: Pardes Publishing House Inc., 1950. Lane, Edward. W. Arabic-English Lexicon. London: Nabu Press, 2010.

——. Arabic-English Lexicon, Book I. London: Williams & Norgate, 1863.

Liddell, Henry. G. & Scott, Robert. Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Smith, Payne (ed.). A Compendious Syriac Dictionary. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1976. Sokoloff, M. A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic. RamatGan: Bar Ilan University Press, 1992.

Koehler, Ludwig and Baumgartner, Walter. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament 5 vols., trans. and ed. M.E.J. Richardson, Leiden: Brill, 1994.

PRIMARY SOURCES

Abdel Haleem, M. The Qur’an, English translation with parallel Arabic text, Oxford: University Press, 2010.

Ali, A.Y. The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an, English and Arabic. New rev. (8th) ed., Beltsville: Amana Publications, 1996. 391

392

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Al-Tabari. The History of al-Tabari, 40 vols., Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1987–1999.

Arberry, A.J. The Koran Interpreted, NY: The Macmillan Co, 1970. Bedjan, P. ed. Acta Martyrum et Sanctorum, vol. III, Paris & Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1892.

Braude, W.G. Kapstein I.J. eds., Pesikta de-Rab Kahana, transl. from Hebrew and Aramaic, Philadelphia: JPS, 1975.

Braude, W.G. ed. Pesikta Rabbati, trans. W.G. Braude, Yale Judaica Series XVIII, New Haven, 1968.

Charlesworth, J.H. ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1, 2, Garden City, NY, 1985.

Clarke, E.G. ed. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of the Pentateuch: Text and Concordance. Hoboken, New Jersey, 1984.

Cohen, A. ed. The Soncino Chumash. Hindhead, Surrey: Soncino Press, 1947. Danby, H. ed. The Mishnah. Oxford: OUP, 1933.

Diez Macho, A. ed. Neophyti 1. Targum Palestinense MS de la Biblioteca Vaticana. Tom II, Exodo. Madrid-Barcelona, 1970.

Ehrman, A. ed. The Talmud with English Translation and Commentary. Jerusalem: El-Am, 1965.

Epstein, I. & Slotki, I.W. eds. Hebrew-English Edition of the Babylonian Talmud. London: Judaica Press, 1983.

Epstein, J.N. & Melamed, E.Z eds. Mekhilta D’Rabbi Sim’on b. Jochai. Jerusalem, 1955.

Epstein, E. ed. Midrash Rabbah. Tel-Aviv, 1956–63.

Elliger, K. & Rudolph, W. eds. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Stuttgart: Gesamtherstellun Biblia-Druck, 1966/77.

Farid, M.G. ed. The Holy Qur’an. Arabic Text with English Translation and Short Commentary, Tilford: Islam International Publication Ltd, 2010.

Firestone, R. Journeys in Holy Land: Evolutions of AbrahamIshmael Legends in Islamic Exegesis. State University of New York Press, 1990.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

393

Funk, F. X. Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum. Paderborn, 1905. Freedman, H. & Simon, M. eds. Midrash Rabbah. Vol. III, Exodus. trans. S.M. Lehrman, London & Bournemouth, 1951.

——. Midrash Rabbah. Vol. V, Numbers. Vol. I, Genesis. trans. J.J. Slotki, London, 1961. ——. Midrash Rabbah. Vol. II, Genesis. trans. S.M. Lehrman, London, 1961.

——. Midrash Rabbah. Vol. VIII, Ecclesiastes. trans. A. Cohen, London, 1961.

Friedlander, G. ed. and trans. Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer: the chapters of Rabbi Eliezer the Great, according to the text of the manuscript belonging to Abraham Epstein of Vienna. NY, 1965.

Ginzberg, L. The Legends of the Jews. Vol. II, Bible Times and Characters from Joseph to Exodus. trans. Henrietta Szold, Philadelphia, 1954.

——. The Legends of the Jews. Vol. III, Bible Times and Characters from Exodus to the Death of Moses. trans. Paul Radin, Philadelphia, 1954. Halton, T. ed. The Fathers of the Church. Washington, 1994.

Hazm, Ibn. Al-Fisal fi al-Milal wa-al-Ahwai'i wa-al-Nihal. Beirut: Dar-al-Jil, 1985.

Hoftijzer, J. & Hospers, J.K eds. Semitic Studies Series, No. V, A Targumic Aramaic Reader. Texts from Onkelos and Jonathan. Leiden: Brill, 1981.

Josephus. Jewish Antiquities. Vol. IV, trans. Thackeray, Books IIV, The Loeb Classical Library, London: 1961. Al-Kassai, M.A. Tales of the Prophets. transl. W.M. Thuckston, Great Books of the Islamic World, series ed. Seyyed, Hossein Nasr, US: Kazi Publications, 1997. Klein, M.L. ed. The Fragment Targums of the Pentateuch According to their Extant Sources. Vol. I, Texts, Indices and Introductory Essays. Rome, 1980.

Koster, M.D. The Peshitta of Exodus. Assen, 1977.

394

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Lambert, M. ed. Sa’adia ben Joseph de Fayoum, Commentaire sur le Sefer Yesirah ou le Livre de la Création. Paris, 1891.

Lauterbach, J. Z. ed. trans. Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael. Philadelphia, 1949, reprint 1933–35. Le Boulluec, A. & Sandevoir P. La Bible d’Alexandrie l’Exode. Paris, 1989.

Leloir, L. ed. Commentaire de l’Evangile Concordant, Texte Syriaque. Dublin, 1963.

——. Ephrem de Nisibe, Commentaire de l’Evangile concordant ou Diatessaron, traduit du syriaque et de l’arménien. SC 121, Paris, 1966.

Mathews, E.W. ‘The Armenian Commentaries on ExodusDeuteronomy attributed to Ephrem the Syrian.’ CSCO 587/8, Scr.Arm., 2001.

McCarthy, C. Saint Ephrem’s Commentary on Tatian’s Diatessaron: An English Translation of Chester Beatty Syriac MS 709 with Introduction and Notes. JSS Sup.2, Oxford, 1993. McNamara, M., et al eds. The Aramaic Bible. The Targums. Vol. 2 Targum Neofiti 1, Pseudo Jonathan. Edinburgh, 1994.

——. The Aramaic Bible. Vol. 7 The Targum Onkelos to Exodus. Edinburgh, 1988.

McVey, K.E. ed. The Fathers of the Church. Vol. 91, St. Ephrem the Syrian. Selected Prose Works. trans. Edward G. Mathews and Joseph P. Amar. Washington, 1994. ——. Ephrem the Syrian. Hymns. trans. Kathleen E. McVey. The Classics of Western Spirituality. NY, 1989. Midrash Rabbah al Sefer Shemot ve Megillat Esther. Jerusalem.

Midrash Rabbah. Exodus. transl. by S.M. Lehrman. London, NY: The Soncino Press, 1983. Migne, J. P. ed. Patrologia Graeca. Paris, 1857–1886.

——. Patrologia Latina. Paris, 1844–1864.

Mishnah. Shishah sidre mishnah / meforashim bi-yede Hanokh Albek; u-menukadim bi-yede Hanokh Yalon. Jerusalem, 1958–1959.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

395

Morris, J.B. Select works of St Ephrem the Syrian. Library of the Fathers. Oxford, 1847.

Neusner, J. Mekilta According to Rabbi Ishmael. An Analytical Translation. Vol.2 Amalek, Bahodesh, Neziqin, Kaspa and Shirata. Atlanta, 1988.

——. Esther Rabbah I. An Analytical Translation. Atlanta, 1989. New Jerusalem Bible (English translation) CD version.

Nöldeke, T. Compendious Syriac Grammar. London, 1904.

Oden, T.C. ed. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Old Testament. Vol. III, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Downers Grove, 2001. Ortis de Urbina, I. Patrologia Syriaca. editio altera. Rome, 1965.

Philo. Vol. I, trans. F.H. Colson. The Loeb Classical Library. London, 1959.

Philo. Vol. IX, trans. F.H. Colson, London: William Heinemann LTD, 1967.

Parisot, J. Aphrahates sapientis persae demonstrationes. I–XXII, PS I/1, Paris, 1984.

Penn, M.P. Envisioning Islam: Syriac Christians and the Early Muslim World, Dicinations: Rereading Late Ancient Religion. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015.

Pesikta de-Rav Kahana. R. Kahana’s Compilation of Discourses for Sabbaths and Festal Days. trans. William G. Braude (Gershon Zev) and Israel, J. Kapstein. London, 1975. Pesikta Rabbati. trans. W. G. Braude. Vol. II. New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1968.

Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer. The Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer the Great According to the Text of the Manuscript Belonging to Abraham Epstain in Vienna. trans. G. Friedlander. NY, 1965.

Rahlfs, A. ed. Septuaginta. Id est Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes. Vol.1. Stuttgart, 1962. Richardson, E.E. Hieronymus. Leipzig: Liber de Viris Inlustribus, 1896. Roberts, A. &, Donaldson, J. eds. Anti-Nicene Fathers. Peubody, 1995.

396

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Rouwhorst, G.A.M. Les Hymnes Paschales d’Ephrem de Nisibe. Vol.II. Textes. Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae. VII/1-2, Leiden, 1989. S. Hieronymi Presbyteri Opera. Commentarium in Mattheum Libri IV. CC LXXVII, Bruges. Salvesen, A. The Exodus Commentary of St. Ephrem. Kottayam, India, 1995.

Sarna, N.M. ed. The JPS Torah Commentary. Exodus. Philadelphia-NY-Jerusalem, 1991.

Schaff, P. & Wace, H. eds. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Peabody, 2nd series, 1995.

Shanz, M., Hosius, C. & Krüger, G. eds.. Geschichte der Römischen Literatur. München, 1922. Skehan, P.W., et al eds. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert. Vol. IX Qumran Cave 4, Vol. IV Paleo-Hebrew and Greek Biblical Manuscripts. Oxford, 1992.

Sperber, A. ed. The Bible in Aramaic. Based on Old Manuscripts and Printed Texts. Vol.1 The Pentateuch According to Targum Onkelos. Leiden, 1959.

The Life of Muhammad. A translation for Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, intro and notes by A. Guilaume, Lahore, Karachi. Dacca: Oxford University Press, 1967.

The Peshitta Institute, Leiden. The Old Testament in Syriac. According to the Peshitta Version. Part I Genesis – Exodus. Leiden, 1977. The Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch; With the Fragments of the Jerusalem Targum: from the Chaldee. trans. J.W. Etheridge. London, 1862.

Thomas Aquinas. Catena Aurea, Commentary on the Four Gospels collected out of the works of the fathers by St. Thomas Aquinas. Vol. I St. Matthew Part I. Oxford, 1841.

Tieszen, C. A textual History of Christian-Muslim Relations: Seventh-Fifteenth Centuries. Fortress Press, 2015.

Toal, M.F. ed. The Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers. Vol. 4. London, 1963.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

397

Tonneau, R.M. Sancti Ephraem Syri in Genesim et in Exodum Commentarii. Louvain, 1955. Wevers, J.W. ed. Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scentiarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. II, 1 Exodus. Göttingen, 1991.

SECONDARY SOURCES

Aaron, D.H. Etched in Stone: The Emergence of the Decalogue. NY: T&T Clark, 2006.

Abegg, M.J. Jr. ‘Messianic Hope and 4Q285: A Reassessment,’ JBL 113, 1994, 81–91.

Achobadze, L.T. ‘Klassifikation der Sammelhandschriften auf Grund der in ihnen erhaltenen Schiften Ephrems des Syrerrs,’ [Russian], in Izv. AN Gruz. SSR ser.jas.i lit. 1982:3, 53–65.

Achobadze, L.T. ‘Über die Wechselbeziehungen der georgischen Übersetzungen von Werken Ephrems des Syrers,’ [Russian], in Izv. AN Gruz. SSR ser.jas.i lit. 1981:2, 110–125.

Adang, C. Muslim Writers on Judaism and the Hebrew Bible: from Ibn Rabban to Ibn Hazm. New York: E.J. Brill, 1996. Adler, W., Tuffin, P. eds. trans. The Chronography of George Synkellos. Oxford, 2002.

Agren, I. ‘K probleme ispol’zovaniya pechatnih izdanii grecheskih textov pri issledovanii drevnih slavjanskih perevodov. Na primere slavanskogo perevoda Parenesisa Jefreme Sirina,’ Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Slavica 31. 1991 [Russian].

Agren, I. ‘Parenesis Efrema Sirina. K istorii slavanskogo perevoda,’ Acta Univ. Upsal., Studia Slavica Upsaliensa 26. 1989 [Russian with English summary]. Alexander T.D. & Baker W.D. eds. Dictionary of the Old Testament. Pentateuch; a compendium of contemporary biblical scholarship. Downers Grove, IL; Leicester : InterVarsity Press, 2003.

398

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Amar, J. ed. ‘A Metrical Homily on Holy Mar Ephrem by Mar Jacob of Serugh; Critical Edition of the Syriac Text, Translation and Introduction’, Patrologia Orientalis 47.1. 1995.

Amar, J. The Fathers of the Church 91. Washington DC.

——. ‘Ephrem the Syrian’s Use of Female Metaphors to Describe the Deity,’ Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum 5, 2001, 261–288. ——. ‘Ephrem the Syrian: a theologian of the presence of God’ in S. T. Kimbrough (ed.), Orthodox and Wesleyan Spirituality, Crestwood NY, 2002, 241–264. ——. ‘Images of Joy in Ephrem’s Hymns on Paradise: Returning to the womb and the Breast,’ Journal of the Canadian Society of Syriac Studies 3, 2003, 59–77.

Arnaldez, R. À la croisée des trois monothéismes : une communauté de pensée au Moyen Age. Paris: A. Michel, 1993.

Assmann, J. Moses the Egyptian: the memory of Egypt in western monotheism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998.

Attridge, J.J., Collins & T.H. Tobin eds. Of Scribes and Scrolls: Studies on the Hebrew Bible… presented to J. Strugnell, NY, 229–240. ——, ed. St. Ephrem Syrian, Selected Prose Works, trans. E. G. Mathews Jr. and J. P.

Auerbach, E. Mimesis. The Representation of Reality in Western Literature. trans. R. Willard, Princeton, 1994. Auerbach, E. Scenes from the Drama of European Literature. Theory and History of Literature Vol. 9. Manchester, 1984.

Aus, R.D. The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, and the death, burial, and translation of Moses in Judaic tradition. Lanham: University Press of America, 2008.

Bacher, W. Die exegetische Terminologie Traditionsliteratur II. Leipzig, 1905.

der

jüdischen

Baldick, J. Mystical Islam: An introduction to Sufism. London: I.B. Tauris, 2012.

Bardenhewer, O. Geschichte der Altkirchlichen Literatur. 4 Band : Darmstadt, 1962.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

399

Bardy, G. ‘Interprétation.’ Dictionnaire de la Bible, Supplément IV, col. 380, 1947.

Barnard L.F. ‘The Origins and Emergence of the Church in Edessa During the First Two Centuries AD.’ VC 22 1968, 161– 175. Barron, S. Moses and Judaism. London: Hodder Wayland, 2003.

Beare, F.W. The Gospel According to Matthew. Oxford, 1981.

Beck, E. Die Theologie des hl. Ephraem in seinen Hymnen über den Glauben. Studia Anselmiana, fasc. XXI; Città del Vaticano, Libreria Vaticana, 1949. ——. ‘Das Bild vom Spiegel bei Ephraem.’ OCP 19, 1953.

——. Ephraems Reden über den Glauben; ihr theologischer Lehrgehalt und ihr geschichtlicher Rahmen. Studia Anselmiana, fasc.XXXIII, Rome, 1953.

——. ‘Les houris du Coran et Éphrem le Syrien’, in Mélanges de l’Institut Dominicain d’études orientales du Caire 6 1961, 85– 97. ——, ‘Das Bild vom Weg mit Meilensteinen und Herbergen bei Ephraem’. OC 65 1981, 1–39. ——, Ephraems Trinitätslehre I, Bild von Sonne/Feuer, Licht und Wärme. CSCO 425, 1981.

——, Techne und technites bei dem Syrer Ephraem, OCP 47 1981, 295–331.

Beck, N.A. Mature Christianity: the recognition and repudiation of the Anti-Jewish polemic on the New Testament. Selinsgrove, 1985.

Benedictus, P. Sancti Patris nostri Ephraem Syri Opera Omnia, Syriace at Latine I. Romae, 1737.

Ben-Hayyim, Z. ‘Samaritan Piyyutim for Festive Occasions,’ Tarbiz 10/2 1939, 190–200; 10/3–4, 331–337. (Hebrew)

Benin, S.D. ‘Commandments, Covenant and the Jews in Aphrahat, Ephrem and Jacob of Sarug’ in D.R. Blumenthal ed. Approaches to Judaism in Medieval Times. Chico, CA, 1985, 135–156.

400

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Bernstein, M.S. Stories of Joseph: Narrative Migrations between Judaism and Islam. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2006. Bezold, C. Die Schatzhöhle “Me’arath Gazze”, Leipzig, 1883– 1888.

Bianchi, U. History of Religions. Leiden, 1975.

Blanchard, M. ‘The Coptic heritage of St Ephrem,’ Acts of the 5th International Congress of Coptic Studies, II:1, Rome, 1993, 37–51. Blenkinsopp, Joseph, The Pentateuch: An introduction to the first five books of the Bible. Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Blum, G.G. ‘Rabbula von Edessa. Der Christ, der Bischof, der Theologe,’ CSCO, Subs. 34 Louvain, 1969. Bockmuehl, M. ‘A ‘Slain Messiah’ in 4Q Serekh Milhamah (4Q285)?’ Tyndale Bulletin 43, 1992, 155–69.

Bonian, S. ‘Mary and the Christian in the mystical poetry of St Ephrem,’ Diakonia 17, 1982, 46–52.

Boochs, W. Echnaton und Moses: Monotheismus und Aussatz. Essen: Oldib Verlag, 2011.

Botha, P.J. ‘Polemiese trekke in die Paasfeeshimnes van Afrem die Sirier.’ Unpublished MA dissertation, University of Pretoria, 1982. Botha, P. ‘Christology and apology in Ephrem the Syrian,’ Hervormde Theologiese Studies 45 1989, 19–29.

——. ‘Polarity: the theology of Anti-Judaism in Ephrem the Syrian’s Hymns on Easter,’ Hervormde Theologiese Studies 46 1990, 36–46. ——. ‘The poetic face of rhetoric: Ephrem’s polemics against the Jews and heretics in C. Haereses XXV,’ Acta Patristica et Byzantina 2 1991, 16–36.

——. ‘A comparison between Aphrahat and Ephrem on the subject of Passover,’ Acta Patristica et Byzantina 3 1992, 46– 62.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

401

——. ‘Cleansing of the eye: spiritual vision and fast in Ephrem’s Hymns de Ieunio,’ Acta Patristica et Byzantina 4 1993, 13– 22. ——. ‘The significance of the senses in St Ephrem’s description of Paradise,’ Acta Patristica et Byzantina 5 1994, 28–37.

——. ‘Ephrem the Syrian treatment of Tamar in comparison to that in Jewish sources,’ Acta Patristica et Byzantina 6 1995, 15–26. Britt, B.M. Rewriting Moses: the narrative eclipse of the text. London : T&T Clark International, 2004.

Brock, S.P. ‘Some aspects of Greek Words in Syriac’, in A. Dietrich (ed.) Synkretismus im syrisch-persischen Kulturgebiet III.96, Göttingen, 1975, 98–104. ——. ‘St Ephrem on Christ as light in Mary and in the Jordan: H. de Ecclesia 36,’ ECR 7 1976, 137–44.

——. ‘Some Syriac accounts of the Jewish Sects’, in R. H. Fischer (ed.) Studies in Early Christian Literature and Its Environment, Primarily in the Syrian East. A Tribute to Arthur Vööbus, Chicago 1977, 265–276.

——. ‘The Poet as Theologian,’ Sobornost 7 1977, 243–250.

——. ‘Jewish Traditions in Syriac Sources,’ JJS 30 1979, 212– 232.

——. ‘An introduction to Syriac Studies,’ in J. H. Eaton (ed.), Horizons in Semitic Studies: Articles for the Student, University Semitic Study Aids 8, University of Birmingham, 1980. ——. ‘Syriac Legends Concerning Moses.’ JJS 33 1982, 237–255. ——. The Harp of the Spirit, Oxford, 1983.

——. The Luminous Eye. The Spiritual World Vision of St. Ephrem, Rome, 1985.

——. ed. trans. St Ephrem. A Hymn on the Eucharist. Hymns on Faith No 10. Lancaster, 1986.

——. ed. The Syriac Fathers on Prayer and the Spiritual Life. Kalamazoo, 1987. ——. ‘A hymn of St Ephrem on the Eucharist [H.Fid 10].’ The Harp 1 1987, 61–68.

402

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Brock, S.P. & Ashbrook, H.S. Holy Women of the Syriac Orient, Berkeley, LA, London, 1987. ——. A garland of Hymns from the Early Church, McLean Virginia, 1989.

——. ‘A brief guide to the main editions and translations of the works of St Ephrem.’ The Harp 3:1/2 1990, 7–29.

——. St Ephrem the Syrian. Hymns on Paradis. Crestwood, NY, 1990.

——. ‘The Holy Spirit as a Feminine in Early Syriac Literature.’ in Janet Martin Soskice (ed.), After Eve: Women, Theology and the Christian Tradition. London, 1990, 73–88. ——. The Luminous Eye. The Spiritual World Vision of St. Ephrem. Kalamazoo, 1992 2nd ed.

——. ‘A Palestinian Targum Feature in Syriac.’ JJS 46 1995, 271–282.

Bruns, P. ‘Arius hellenizans? – Ephram der Syrer und die neoarianischen Kontroversen seiner Zeit; ein Beitrag zur Rezeption des Nizänums im syrischen Sprachraum.’ Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 101, 1990.

Buck, C. Paradise and Paradigm. Key Symbols in Persian Christianity and the Baha’i Faith, Albany, 1999.

Burkitt, F.C. Early Eastern Christianity; St. Margaret’s Lectures on the Syriac-Speaking Church. London, 1904. Cassuto, U., The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch. Jerusalem, 1961.

Cerbelaud, D. ‘L’Antijudaïsme dans les Hymnes de Pascha d’Ephrem le Syrien.’ PdO 20 1995, 201–207.

Cassingena-Trevedy, F. ‘Ephrem le Syrien et le judaïsme.’ in A. Chahwan & A. Kassis eds. Etudes Bibliques et Proche Orient Ancien. Mélanges offerts au Père Paul Feghali. Fédération Biblique, Subsidia 1, Jounieh, Lebanon, 2002, 343–352.

Cayre, F. Précis de patrologie: histoire et doctrine des pères et docteurs de l’Église, Tom.I, Paris, 1927.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

403

Chester, A. ‘Divine Revelation and Divine Titles in the Pentateuchal Targumim.’ Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 14 1986, 330–368.

Cerbelaud, D. ‘L’Antijudaisme dans les Hymnes de Pascha d’Ephrem le Syrien.’ PdO 20 1995, 201–207.

Childs B.S. “A Tradition-Historical Study of the Reed Sea Tradition,” VT 20 1970, 406–418.

Clements, R.E. One Hundred Years of Old Testament Studies. Philadelphia, 1984.

Coats G.W. ‘Moses: Heroic Man, Man of God.’ JSOT Sup 57, Sheffield, 1988, 1–48.

Coats G.W. ‘The Tradition-Historical Character of the Reed Sea Motif.’ VT 17 1967, 253–265. ——. ‘The Sea Tradition in the Wilderness Theme: A Review.’ JSOT 12 1979, 2–8.

Cohen, A. ed. The Soncino Chumash. The Five Books of Moses with Haphtaroth. Hindhead, Surrey, 1947.

Collins, J.J. The Sceptre and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature. The Anchor Bible Reference Library 10, NY, 1995. Cook, M. Muhammad. Oxford University Press, 1996.

Cook, David “Review of Crossroads to Islam”. Middle East Quarterly. Fall 2006.

Cragg, K. The Call of the Minaret. New York: Oxford University Press, 1956.

——. The Event of the Quran: Islam in its Scripture. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1971. ——. The Mind of the Quran: Chapters in Reflection. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1973. ——. The Wisdom of the Sufis. New York: W.W. Norton, 1976.

——. The Kalam Cosmological Argument. New York: Harper and Row, 1979.

Cramer, W. Der Geist Gottes und des Menschen in frühsyrischer Theologie. Münster, 1979.

404

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Cullmann, O. Christ and Time, trans. Filson Floyd V, London, 1951.

Danielou, J. ‘Hymnes sur le Paradis,’ Dieu Vivant 22 1952, 79– 82. Danielou, J. ‘Terre et Paradis chez les Pères de l’Eglise,’ Eranos Jahrbuch 22 1953, 433–472. Darling, R. ‘The ‘Church from the Nations’ in the exegesis of Ephrem,’ IV SympSyr 1987, 111–21.

Daube, D. The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, London, 1956.

Davies, W.D. The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount, Cambridge, 1977.

Denffer, A. von. Ulum al-Qur’an : an introduction to the sciences of the Qur’an. Islamic Foundation, 1985.

De Margerie, B. ‘La poésie biblique de Saint Ephrem exégète syrien (306–373),’ in Introduction à l’histoire de l’exégèse: I.Les pères grecs et orientaux. Paris, 1980, 179–184. Deschner, Karlheinz Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums, Bd.1, Reinbek, 1986. Desreumaux, A. ‘Ephrem in Christian Palestinian Aramaic’, Hugoye 1:2 1998.

Desraumaux, A. ed. Les mystiques syriaques. Paris: Geuthner, 2011. Dozeman, T.B. Exodus. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009.

Drijvers, H.J.W. ‘Syrian Christianity and Judaism.’ in Lieu, North & Rajak eds. The Jews among Pagans and Christians. London, NY, 1992, 124–146. Drijvers, H.J.W. ‘Jews and Christians at Edessa.’ JJS 36 1985, 88–102.

——. ‘Christians, Jews and Muslims in Northern Mesopotamia in Early Islamic Times: The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles and Related Texts.’ in Pierre Canivet and Jean-Paul ReyCoquais, La Syrie de Byzance à l’Islam: VII–VIII siècles, Actes du colloque international, Lyon, Maison de l’Orient Méditerra-

BIBLIOGRAPHY

405

néen, Paris, Institut du Monde Arabe, 11–15 Septembre 1990, Damascus, 1992, 67–74.

——. History and Religion in Late Antique Syria, Aldershot, 1994.

Dupuche, J.R. ‘Sufism and Hesychasm.’ in Neil, B., Dunn, G.D. & Cross, L. eds. Prayer and spirituality in the early church. Vol. 3 Liturgy and life. Strathfield, NSW: St Pauls, 2003. Duval, Rubens Histoire d’Edesse: politique, religieuse et littéraire. Paris, 1982.

Elder, E.E. ‘Parallel Passages in the Koran – the story of Moses.’ Muslim World 15, 1925. El-Khoury, N. ‘Hermeneutics in the works of Ephrem the Syrian,’ IV SympSyr 1987, 93–99.

Evans, C. & D. Hagner Anti-Semitism and Early Christianity: Issues of Polemic and Faith. Minneapolis, 1993.

Feghali, P. ‘Notes sur l’exégèse de St. Ephrem: commentaire sur le déluge (Gen 6, 1-9, 17).’ PdO 8 1977/8, 67–86. ——. ‘Influence des Targums sur la pensée d’Ephrem?’, OCA 229 1984, 71–82.

exégétique

——. ‘Commentaire de l’Exode par saint Ephrem,’ PdO 12 1984/5, 91–131. ——. ‘Le Messie du Juda: Gen. 49:8–10 dans saint Ephrem et les traditions judaïques.’ in H. Cazelles, La Vie de la Parole. De l’Ancien Testament au Nouveau Testament. Etudes… offertes à Pierre Grelot, Paris, 1987, 165–172.

——. ‘La figure d’Abraham dans le Commentaire de la Genèse d’Ephrem.’ PdO 29 2004, 83–102.

Fieldman, L.H. Philo’s Portrayal of Moses in the Context of Ancient Judaism. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2007. Finegan, J. Handbook of Biblical Chronology. Princeton, 1964.

——. Archaeological History of the Middle East, Boulder, 1979.

Fishbane, M. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel, Oxford, 1988.

Florovskiy, G.V. Vostochniye Otsi IV Veka, Moscow, reprint 1931, Paris, 1992. (Russian)

406

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Fredricksen, P. & Reinhartz, A. eds. Jesus, Judaism and Christian Anti-Judaism: Reading the New Testament after the Holocaust. Louisville, KY, London, 2002. Friedlander, M. Der Göttingen, 1898.

Vorchristliche

Jüdische

Gnostizismu.

Funk, S. Die haggadischen Elemente in den Homilien des Aphrahates, Vienna, 1891. Gager, J. ‘The Dialogue of Paganism with Judaism: Bar Cochba to Julian.’ HUCA 44 1973, 89–118.

Gager, J.G. The origins of Anti-Semitism. Attitudes toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity, Oxford, 1983.

Gavin, F. ‘Aphrahates and the Jews,’ Journal of the Society of Oriental Research 7 1923, 95–166.

Gerson, D. ‘Die Commentarien des Ephräm Syrus im Verhältnis zur jüdischen Exegese,’ MGWJ 17 1868, 15–149. Graham, W.A. Beyond the Written World: Oral aspects of Scripture in the History of Religion. Cambridge, 1987.

Gillman, I. & Klimkeit, H.J. Christians in Asia before 1500. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1999. Gil, M. ‘The origins of the Jews of Yathrib.’ Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 4, 1984. Grant, R.M. L’interprétation de la Bible des Origines Chrétiens à Nos Jours, Paris, 1967.

Graupner, A. & Wolter, M. eds. Moses in Biblical and extraBiblical traditions. Berlin, New York: W. De Gruyter, 2007. Grévin B., Nef A. & Tixier E. eds. Chrétiens, juifs et musulmans dans la Méditerranée médiévale: études en hommage à Henri Bresc. Paris: De Boccard, 2008. Gribomont, J. ‘La tradition liturgique des hymnes pascales de st. Ephrem.’ PdO 4 1973, 191–246.

Griffith, S.H. ‘Ephraem, the Deacon of Edessa, and the Church of the Empire.’ in Thomas Halton &. Williman J.P. eds. Diakonia: Studies in Honour of Robert T. Meyer. Washington DC, 1986, 22–52.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

407

——. ‘Ephrem the Syrian’s Hymns ‘Against Julian’: Meditations on History and Imperial Power,’ VC 4 1987, 238–266.

——. ‘‘Faith Seeking Understanding’ in the Thought of St. Ephrem the Syrian,’ in Berthold G.C. ed. Faith Seeking Understanding: Learning and the Catholic Tradition. Selected Papers from the Symposium and Convocation Celebrating the Saint Anselm College Centennial, Manchester NH, 1991, 35–55. ——. ‘Faith Adoring the Mystery’: Reading the Bible with St. Ephrem the Syrian, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1997.

——. ‘Setting Right the Church of Syria: Saint Ephrem’s Hymns against Heresies.’ in W.E. Klingshirn & M. Vessey eds. The Limits of Ancient Christianity: Essays on Late Antique Thought and Culture in Honour of R.A. Markus, Ann Arbor, MI, 1999, 97–114. ——. ‘Christianity in Edessa and the Syriac-speaking world: Mani, Bar Daysan and Ephrem. The struggle for allegiance on the Armenian frontier.’ CSSS 2 2002, 5–20.

Guillaumont, A. ‘A propos du célibat des Esséniens.’ in A. Dupont-Sommer, Hommages à André Dupont-Sommer. Paris, 1971, 395–404.

——. ‘Un midrash d’Exode 4,24–26 chez Aphraate et Ephrem de Nisibe,’ in R. H. Fischer (ed.), A tribute to Arthur Vööbus: Studies in Early Christian Literature and Its Environment, Primarily in the Syrian East, Chicago, 1977. al-Hājj, M.A. ed. Hidāyat al-hayārá fī ajwibat al-Yahūd wa'lNasārá / Ibn Qayyim al-Jauzīyah. Damascus, Beirut: Dar alQalam, Dar al-Shamiyah, 1996.

Ḥalamish, Mosheh. Kasher, Hannah. & Ben-Pazi, Hanokh. Mosheh avi ha-neviʼim. Ramat Gan: Universiṭat Bar-Ilan, 2010. Hayman, A.P. ‘The image of the Jew in the Syriac anti-Jewish Polemical Literature.’ in J. Neusner & E.S. Frerichs eds. “To see ourselves as others see us”: Christians, Jews, “Others” in Late Antiquity. Chico, 1985, 423–441. Haynes, J.H. & Prussner, F. Old Testament Theology: Its History and Development. Atlanta, 1985.

408

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Hayward, C.T.R. ‘Jerome’s Hebrew Questions on Genesis.’ in Henry Chadwick and Andrew Louth, eds. Oxford Early Christian Studies. Oxford, 1995. Heineman, J. ‘Profile of a Midrash.’ Journal of the American Academy of Religion 39 1971, 141–150.

Heller, B. ‘Mussa.’ Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. Leiden, 1960.

Hidal, S. Interpretatio Syriaca. Die Kommentare des heiligen Ephräm des Syres zu Genesis und Exodus. Conjectanea Biblica, OT Series 6, Lund, 1974.

Horbury, W. Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ. London, 1998.

——. Messianism among Jews and Christians. London, 2003.

Hoyland, R.G. Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam. Gorgias Islamic Studies, 1998. Hughes, P. ‘Moses’ Birth Story: A Biblical Matrix for Prophetic Messianism,’ in Evans, Flint (eds.), Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Cambridge, 1997.

Humphreys, R. Stephen Islamic History: A framework for Inquiry. Princeton University Press, 1991.

Iser, W. The Act of Reading: a theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978.

Jansma, T. ‘Ephraems Beschreibung des ersten Tages der Schöpfung. Bemerkungen über den Charakter seines Kommentars zur Genesis.’ OCP 37 1971, 295–316. ——. ‘Ephraem’s Commentary on Exodus: Some remarks on the Syriac text and the Latin translation.’ JSS 17 1972, 203–12.

——. ‘The provenance of the last section in the Roman edition of Ephraem’s Commentary on Exodus.’ LM 85 1972, 155– 68. ——. ‘Ephraem on Exodus II.5: reflection on the interplay of human free will and divine providence.’ OCP 39 1973, 5– 28. ——. ‘Ephraem on Genesis XLIX 10.’ PdO 4 1973, 247–56.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

409

——. ‘Weitere Beiträge zur Berichtigung einzelner Stellen in Ephraems Kommentaren zu Genesis und Exodus.’ OC 58 1974, 121–31.

Jaeyoung, J. The call of Moses and the Exodus story: a redactionalcritical study in Exodus 3–4 and 5–13 Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013. Johns, A.H. ‘Let my people go!’ Sayyid Qutb and the Vocation of Moses. Islam and the Christian Muslim Relations 1, 1990.

Jones-Hunt, J. Moses and Jesus: the shamans. Winchester: O Books, 2011.

Judentum, Christentum, Islam: kennen, respektieren, akzeptieren: Verleihung des Preises für Internationale Verständigung und Menschenrechte am 29. April 2008 / [herausgegeben von Collegium Europaeum Jenense]. Jena: Paideia, 2009

Juynboll, G.H.A. The Authenticity of the Tradition Literature: Discussions in Modern Egypt. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1969. Kamesar, A. ‘The Evaluation of the Narrative Aggada in Greek and Latin Christian Patristic literature.’ JTS 45 1994, 37– 71.

Kazan, S. ‘Isaac of Antioch homilies against the Jews.’ OrChr 46, 87–98; 47 1963, 89–97; 49 1965, 57–78.

Kim, A. Y. ‘Signs of Ephrem’s exegetical techniques in his Homily on our Lord’, Hugoye 3:1 2000.

Klauck, H.-J et.al. eds. Encyclopedia of the Bible and its reception. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2009–2012.

Kofsky, A. & Ruzer, S. ‘Justice, Free Will and Divine Mercy in Ephrem’s Commentary on Genesis 2-3.’ LM 113 2000, 315– 332. Koonammakkal, T. ‘Ephrem’s imagery of chasm.’ SympSyr VII 1998, 175–183. ——. ‘Ephrem’s polemics on the human body.’ StPatr 35 2001, 428–432.

410

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

——. ‘Ephrem on the imagery of divine love and revelation.’ in Dieu Miséricorde, Dieu Amour.Actes du Colloque VIII. Patrimoine syriaque I- II, Antelias 2003, 159–172.

——. ‘Ephrem’s idea of revelation as divine pedagogy.’ The Harp 16 2003, 355–432. ——. ‘Divine love and revelation in Ephrem.’ The Harp 17 2004, 33–44.

Krasovec, J. Antithetic structure in biblical Hebrew poetry. Leiden, 1984.

Kronholm, T. Motifs from Genesis 1–11 in the genuine hymns of Ephrem the Syrian with particular reference to the influence of Jewish exegetical tradition. Coniectanea Biblica, OT Series 11, Lund, 1978.

Kruisheer, D. ‘Ephrem, Jacob of Edessa and the monk Severus: An Analysis of Ms.Vat.Syr. 103, ff.1–72.’ In Lavenant R. ed. SympSyr VII, OCA 256, Rome, 1998, 599–605.

Kuhlmann, K.H. ‘Healing in St Ephrem’s Commentary on Diatessaron.’ The Harp 4, 1991, 35–47. ——. ‘The harp out of tune: the anti-Judaism/anti-Semitism of St Ephrem.’ The Harp 17 2004, 177–183.

Kürle, S. The appeal of Exodus: the characters God, Moses and Israel in the rhetoric of the Book of Exodus. Milton Keynes, Bucks: Paternoster, 2013. Künstlinger, D. Tūr und Gabal im Kurān, Rivista Orientalia 5 1927. Lassner, J. Demonizing the Queen of Sheba: Boundaries of Gender and Culture in Postbiblical Judaism and Medieval Islam. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.

Lecker, M., Jews and Arabs in Pre- and Early Islamic Arabia. Aldershot: Ashgate/Variorum, 1998. Lecker, M., Muslims, Jews and Pagans: Studies on Early Islamic Medina. Leiden, 1995.

Leloir, L. ‘Symbolisme et parallélisme chez Saint Ephrem.’ in A la rencontre de Dieu. Mémorial Albert Gelin, Le Puy1961, 363–374.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

411

——. ‘Doctrines et méthodes de saint Ephrem d’après son commentaire de l’Evangile Concordant (Original Syriaque et Version Arménienne),’ CSCO 220 1961, Subsidia 18, Louvain, 40–52. Lewis, B., The Jews of Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987. Lewis Lambton & Bernard The Cambridge history of Islam. Cambridge Univ. Press, 1970.

Likhṭenshṭain, M., Moses: envoy of God, envoy of his people: leadership and crisis from the Exodus to the plains of Moab. Jersey City, NJ: KTAV; Alon Shevut, [Israel]: Yeshivat Har Etzion, 2008.

Madigan, D. The Qur’an’s Self-Image. Princeton University Press: Princeton-Oxford, 2001. Mansour, T.B. La Pensée symbolique de Saint Ephrem le Syrien. Bibliothèque de l’Université Saint-Esprit 16, Kaslik, 1988.

Maori, Y. The Peshitta Version of the Pentateuch in its Relation to the Sources of Jewish Exegesis, Diss., Jerusalem, 1975.

Markham I.S. ed. A world religions reader. Malden, Mass.; Oxford: Blackwell, 2000.

Markus, R.A. ‘Presuppositions of the Typological Approach to Scripture.’ Church Quarterly Review 158, London, 1957, 442–451.

Martikainen, J. ‘Some Remarks about the Carmina Nisibena as a Literary and a Theological Source,’ OCA 197 1974, 345– 352. Martin, R.C. Approaches to Islam in Religious Studies. Oxford, UK: Oneworld, 2001. Maude, M.M. ‘Rhythmic patterns in the Homilies of Aphraates.’ ATR 17 1935, 225–233.

McCarthy, C. ‘Gospel Exegesis from a Semitic Church: Ephrem's Commentary on the Sermon on the Mount.’ in G.J. Norton & S. Pisano eds. Tradition of the Text: Studies offered to Dominique Barthélemy in Celebration of his 70th Birthday, OBO 109, Freiburg and Göttingen, 1991, 103–23.

412

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

——. ‘Saint Ephrem’s commentary on Tatian’s Diatessaron,’ JSSS 2 1993, 14–16.

——. ‘Allusions and illusions. St Ephrem’s verbal magic in the Diatessaron Commentary.’ in K. J. Cathcart & M. Maher eds. Targumic and Cognate Studies. Essays in Honour of M. McNamara. Sheffield, 1996, 187-207. Meri, J.W. The Cult of Saints among Muslims and Jews in Medieval Syria. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

McAuliffe J.D. Walfish B.D. & Goering J.W. eds. With Reverence of the World: Medieval Scripture Exegesis in Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Oxford: Oxford university Press, 2003.

McGrath, A.E. ‘Historical Theology: An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought.’ Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1998.

McVey, K.E. intro., trans. Ephrem the Syrian. Hymns on the Nativity, Hymns Against Julian, Hymns on Virginity and on the Symbols of the Lord. Classics of Western Spirituality. New York, 1989.

——. ‘The Anti-Judaic polemic of Ephrem Syrus’ Hymns on the Nativity.’ in Attridge H.W. ed. Of Scribes and Scrolls. NAPH, 1990. Meeks, W.A. & R.L. Wilken Jews and Christians in Antioch in the First Four Centuries of the Common Era. Missoula, 1978.

Molenberg, C. ‘An invincible weapon. Names in the Christological passages in Ephrem’s Hymns on Faith XLIV–LXV.’ V SympSyr 1990, 135–42.

Molloy M. Experiencing the world’s religions: tradition, challenge, and change. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Mosshammer, A.A. The Chronicle of Eusebius and Greek Chronographic Tradition. Lewisburg, London, 1979.

Murray, R. ‘Ephrem Syrus,’ in Catholic Dictionary of Theology, Vol. II, London, 1967, 220–223.

——. Symbols of Church and Kingdom, London. 1975, 2nd edn. 2004.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

413

——. ‘The Theory of Symbolism in Saint Ephrem’s Theology.’ PdO 6–7 1975–1976, 1–20.

——. ‘Some rhetorical patterns in early Syriac Literature.’ in R. H. Fischer ed. A Tribute to Arthur Vööbus. Chicago, 1977, 109–131. ——. ‘Der Dichter als Exeget : der hl. Ephräm und die heutige Exegese,’ Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie 100 1978, 484–494. ——. ‘Hellenistic-Jewish rhetoric in Aphrahat,’ in III SympSyr (1980), OCA 221 1983, 79–85.

——. ‘‘Circumcision of heart” and the origins of the QYAMA.’ in G.J. Reinink & A.C. Klugkist eds. After Bardaisan: Studies on Continuity and Change in Syriac Christianity in Honour of Professor Han J.W. Drijvers, Leuven, 1999, 201–211.

Naduvilezham, J. ‘Pascal Lamb in Ephrem of Nisibis.’ The Harp 5 1992, 53–66. ——. The Theology of the Pascal Lamb in Ephrem of Nisibis, OIRSI 239, Kottayam, 2000.

Narinskaya, E. Ephrem, a ‘Jewish’ Sage: A comparative analysis of the Exegetical Writings of Ephrem the Syrian and Jewish Traditions. Turnhout: Brepols, 2010. Narinskaya, E. The Poetric Hymns of Saint Ephrem the Syrian. Lewiston, Lampteter: Mellen Press, 2013.

Najjar, N. ‘Poésie et langage mystique chez Saint Ephrem et les mystiques des premiers siècles de l’Islam.’ The Harp 11/121999, 159–173. Neusner, J. A History of the Jews in Babylonia. Leiden, 1969.

——. Aphrahates and Judaism, SPB 19, Leiden, 1971.

Neusner, J. Judaism and the interpretation of scripture: introduction to the rabbinic midrash. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004.

Neusner, J. Christian Text and the Bible of Judaism: The Judaic Encounters with Scripture. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990.

Neusner, J. et al. eds. Judaic Perspectives on Ancient Israel. Philadelphia, 1987.

414

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Noth, M. Überlieferungsgeschichtliche des Pentateuch. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1948.

——. A History of Pentateuchal Traditions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1971. ——. Exodus: A Commentary. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1962.

Nöldeke, T. The History of the Qur’an. ed. and transl. Wolfgang H. Behn. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2013. Pacht, O. ‘Ephraimillustration, Haggadah und Wiener Genesis.’ Festschrift K. M. Swaboda. Vienna, 1959, 213–221. Paikatt, M. ‘Repentance and penitence in Mar Aprem of Nisibis.’ ChrOr 12 1991, 135–46.

——. ‘Life and glory lost: the spiritual thoughts of Mar Aprem of Nisibis on the first sin.’ ChrOr 20 1999, 160–175.

——. Life, Glory and Salvation in the Writings of Mar Aprem of Nisibis, Kottayam, 2001.

Palmer, A.N. ‘A Lyre without a voice.’ The poetics and the politics of Ephrem the Syrian.’ Aram 5 1993, 371–99.

Palmer, A.N. ‘The Merchant of Nisibis. Saint Ephrem and his faithful quest for union in numbers,’ in J. den Boeft & A. Hilhorst eds. Early Christian Poetry. A collection of Essays. VC Suppl. 22 1993, 167–233.

——. ‘Words, silence, and the silent word: acrostics and empty columns in Saint Ephrem’s Hymns on Faith,’ PdO 20 1995, 129–200. Patrick, D. ‘Traditio-History of the Reed Sea Account.’ VT 26 1976, 248–249.

Patterson, D. Kelley Touched by greatness: the women in the life of Moses. Fearn: Christian Focus, 2011.

Pattie, T.S. ‘Ephraem’s ‘On Repentance’ and the translation of the Greek text into other languages.’ The British Library Journal 16 1990, 174–86. Peters, F.E. A Reader on Classical Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

415

Peters, F.E., Muhammad and the Origins of Islam. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1994.

Peters, F.E. The Children of Abraham: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Princeton University Press, 2004.

Parisot, I. Aphraatis Sapientis Persae: Demonstrationes, PS 1 and 2, Paris 1894, 1907. Perles, J. Meletemata Peschitoniana, Bratislav, 1859.

Phillips, G. The Moses Legacy: in search of the origins of God. London: Pan, 2003.

Pinkerton, J. ‘The Origin and the Early History of the Syriac Pentateuch.’ JTS XV 1914, 14–41.

Poirier, P.H ‘Le Sermon Pseudo-Ephrémien in Pulcherrimum Josephum. Typologie et Midrash.’ in Figures de l’Ancien Testament chez les Peres, Cahiers de Biblia Patristica 2, Strasbourg, 1989, 107–22. Possekel, U. Evidence of Greek Philosophical Concepts in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian. CSCO 580, Subsidia 102 1999.

Reynolds, G.S. Qur’an and its Biblical Subtext. London, NY: Routledge, 2010.

Reynolds, G.S. Qur’an and its Historical context. London, NY: Routledge, 2008.

Rahman, F. Major Themes of the Qur’an. Minneapolis, MN: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1980.

Reat N.R. & Perry E.F. Constructing a world theology: an analysis of five religions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Reuther, R. Faith and fratricide: The theological roots of antiSemitism. New York, 1974.

Reventlow, H.G. Problems of Old Testament Theology in the Twentieth Century. Philadelphia, 1985.

Richardson, P. Anti-Judaism in Early Christianity. Vol. 1 Studies in Christianity and Judaism 2 Waterloo, Ont. 1986. Rippin, A. & Knappert, J. Textual Sources for the Study of Islam. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1986.

416

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Rippin, A. ed. Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qur’an. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 1988. ——. The Qur’an: Formative Interpretation. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate/Variorum, 2000.

——. ed. The Qur’an: Style and Contents. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2001.

——. Muslims: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. London: Routledge, 2nd ed., 2001.

——. The Qur’an and Its Interpretive Tradition. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2002. Rizvi, S.A.A. A history of Sufism in India. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1978.

Robinson, C.F. Islamic Historiography. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Robinson, N. Christ in Islam and Christianity. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1991.

Rosen, L. The Anthropology of Justice: Law as Culture in Islamic Society. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989

——. The Justice of Islam: Comparative Perspectives on Islamic Law and Society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Rosenthal, F. trans. and ed. The Classical Heritage in Islam. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1975.

Rokeah, C. D. Jews, Pagans and Christians in Conflict, JerusalemLeiden, 1982.

Romeny, B.H. ‘Biblical studies in the Church of the East: the Case of Catholicos Timothy I.’ in E. J. Yarnold & M. F. Wiles eds., Studia Patristica 34: Papers presented to the Thirteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies held in Oxford 1999, Leuven 2001, 503–510. ——. ‘The identity formation of Syrian Orthodox Christians,’ PdO 29 2004, 103–121.

Rubin, U., Between Bible and Qur’an: The Children of Israel and the Islamic Self-Image. Vol, 17 of Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam. Princeton: The Darwin Press, 1999.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

417

Ruggini, L.C. ‘Pagani, Ebrei e Cristiani: Odio sociologico e odio teologico nel mondo antico.’ Gli Ebrei nell’Alto Medioevo, Settimane XXVI, Spoleto, 1980, 15–101. Russell, P.S. ‘St. Ephraem the Syrian Theologian.’ Pro Ecclesia 7.1, Winter 1998, 79–90.

——. ‘A first look at the Christology of Ephraem the Syrian.’ SympSyr VII 1998, 107–115.

——. ‘Ephraem the Syrian on the utility of language and the place of silence.’ JECS 8 2000, 21–37.

——. ‘Making sense of Scripture: an early attempt by St Ephraem the Syrian.’ Communio 28 2001, 171–201. Ruthven, M.. Islam in the World. New York: Oxford University Press, 2nd ed., 2000.

——. Islam: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Sæbø, M. ed. Hebrew Bible/ Old Testament. The History of Its Interpretation. Vol. I Part 1 Antiquity, Göttingen, 1996.

Sala, T. A. ‘Odysseus’ bruises’. Traces of literary influence between the Manichaeans and Ephrem Syrus.’ Aram 16 2004, 245–262. Salvesen, A. ‘Themes in Ephrem’s Exodus Commentary.’ The Harp 4 1991, 21–34.

——. ‘The Exodus Commentary of St Ephrem,’ StPatr 25 1993, 332–338.

Samir, Kh. ‘Note sur l’auteur du commentaire de la Genèse et ses recensions.’ in Kh. Samir (ed.), Actes du II Congrès International d’Etudes Arabes Chrétiennes, OCA 226 1986, 177–82.

Sasson, V.R. The birth of Moses and the Buddha: a paradigm for the comparative study of religions. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2007.

Schacht, J. An Introduction to Islamic Law. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 1984.

Schreckenberg, H. Die christlichen Adversus-Judaeos-Texte und ihr literarisches und historisches Umfeld: 1.-11 Jahrhundert. Frankfurt am Main, New York, 1999, 286–292.

418

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

Sed, N. ‘Les hymnes sur le Paradis de saint Ephrem et les traditions juives.’ LM 81 1968, 455–501.

Segal, J.B. The Jews of North Mesopotamia before the Rise of Islam, Jerusalem, 1965.

——. Edessa ‘The Blessed City’, Oxford, 1970.

Seppala, S. In Speechless Ecstasy. Helsinki: Oriental Institute, 2003.

Shemunkasho, A. ‘Salvation history as a process of healing in the theology of Mar Ephrem.’ The Harp 11/12 1999, 175– 185. ——. ‘The healing of the interior and exterior blindness in Ephrem.’ StPatr 35 2001, 494–501. ——. Healing in the Theology of St Ephrem, NJ, Piscataway, 2002.

Shepardson, C.C. ‘Anti-Jewish rhetoric and intra-Syriac conflict in the sermons of Ephrem Syrus.’ StPatr 35 2001, 502–507.

——. ‘Exchanging reed for reed.’ Mapping contemporary heretics onto Biblical Jews in Ephrem’s Hymns on Faith.’ Hugoye 5:1 2002. Shirmann, J. ‘Hebrew Liturgical Poetry and Christian Hymnology.’ JCR 44 1953–1954, 123–161.

Silverstein, A., Stroumsa, G. & Blidstein, M. eds. The Oxford Handbook of the Abrahamic Religions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Simon, M. Verus Israel. trans. H. McKeating, The Littman Library, Oxford, 1986.

Sirat, C., ‘Un madras juif en habit musulman: la vision de moïse sur le mont Sinaï.’ Revue de l’histoire des religions 168 1965.

Smart, J.D. The Past, Present, and Future of Biblical Theology. Philadelphia, 1979. Smith, W.C. ‘The study of Religion and the Study of the Bible.’ Journal of the American Academy of Religion 39 1971, p. 131-140. Snaith, J.G. ‘Aphrahat and the Jews.’ in J.A. Emerton and S.E. Reif (eds.), Interpreting the Hebrew Bible: Essays in honour of E.I.J. Rosenthal, Cambridge, 1982.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

419

Solomon, N., Harries, R. & Winter, T. eds. Abraham’s Children: Jews, Christians and Muslims in conversation. NY T:&T Clark, 2005. Souaiaia, A.E. Contesting Justice. Albany: SUNY, 2009. Steigerwald D., L'islâm: les valeurs communes christianisme. Montréal: Médiaspaul, 1999.

au

judéo-

Suomala, K.R. Moses and God in dialogue: Exodus 32–34 in postbiblical literature. New York, Oxford: P.Lang, 2004.

Tabatabai, S.M.H. The Qur'an in Islam: its impact and influence on the life of muslims. Zahra Publ, Richard Bell, 1987. Taylor M.C. ed. Critical terms for religious studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.

Teixidor, J. ‘Muerte, Cielo y Seol en San Efren.’ OCP 271961, 82–114. Terant, P. ‘La Theoria d’Antioche dans le cadre des sens de l’Ecriture.’ Biblica 34, 1953. Travers, H. Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, London, 1903.

Ulrich, E. et al. Qumran Cave 4-VII: Genesis to Numbers, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 12. Oxford: Clarendon, 1994.

Vaccari, A. Scritti di erudizione e di filologia, Vol.1, Roma, 1952.

Vagda, G. ‘Isrāʾīliyyāt.’ Encyclopaedia of Islam 4 2nd ed. Brill Academic Publishers, 1973, 211–212.

Valavanolickal, K.A. ‘The exegesis of Aphrahat and Ephrem with special reference to the Gospel Parables.’ The Harp 132000, 99–108. VanderKam, J.C. & W. Adler eds. The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity, Assen, Van Gorcum, 1996. Van Puyvelde, C. ‘Versions syriaques.’ in F. Vigouroux ed. Dictionnaire de la Bible, Syppl. VI, Paris, 1960, 834–883.

Van Rompay, L. ‘The Christian Syriac Tradition of Interpretation.’ in M. Sæbø ed. Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. The History of Interpretation 1. From the Beginning to the Middle Ages (until 1300) 1. Antiquity, Göttingen 1996, 612–641.

420

THE LIFE OF ONE CHOSEN BY GOD

——. ‘Jacob of Edessa and the early history of Edessa.’ in G. J. Reinink & A.C. Klugkist, After Bardaisan. Leuvein, 1999, 269–285. ——. ‘Past and Present Perceptions of Syriac Literary Tradition,’ Hugoye 3.1 2000, 11–23.

Vergani, E. ‘Giustizia e grazia di Dio per la città assediata. Le raffigurazioni del nemico negli inni su Nisibi (1-12) di Efrem il Siro.’ in G. Ruggieri ed. I Nemici della Cristianità. Bologna, 1997, 21–58. Vermes G. ‘Bible and Midrash: Early Old Testament Exegesis.’ in Geza Vermes, Post-Biblical Jewish Studies, Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 8. Leiden, 1975, 59–91.

Vööbus, A. Literary Critical and Historical Studies in Ephrem the Syrian. Stockholm, 1958.

——. ‘Afrem and the school of Urhai.’ Ephram-Hunayn Festival, Baghdad, 1974, 209–216.

Wacholder, B.Z. Eupolemus. A Study of Judaeo-Greek Literature. Cincinnati, NY, LA, Jerusalem, 1974. Waines, David. An Introduction to Islam. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed., 2003.

Wasserstrom, S.M. Between Muslim and Jew: The Problem of Symbiosis under Early Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995.

Watt, W.M. Bell’s Introduction to the Qur’an. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1970. ——. Mohammad at Mecca. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1953.

——. Mohammad at Medina. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962.

——. Mohammad Prophet and Statesman. London, Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press, 1978. ——. Early Islam: Collected Articles. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1991.

——. The Formative Period of Islamic Thought. Oxford, UK: Oneworld, 1998. ——. The Influence of Islam on Medieval Europe. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1972.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

421

——. The Majesty that was Islam: The Islamic World, 661–1100. London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1974. ——. What is Islam? London: Longman, 1970.

Wevers, J.W. Notes on the Greek Text of Exodus. Atlanta, 1990.

Weitzman, M.P. The Syriac Version of the OT. An Introduction. Cambridge, 1999.

Wernberg-Moller, P. ‘Some Observations on the Relationship of the Peshitta Version of the Old Testament to the Palestinian Targum Fragments ... and to Targum Onkelos,’ Studia Theologica 15 1961, 128–180; and JSS 7 1962, 253–266. Wheeler, B.M. Moses in the Qur’an and Islamic Exegesis. London, NY: Routledge, 2002. Wilken, R.L. Judaism and the early Christian mind: A study of Cyril of Alexandria’s exegesis and theology, London, 1971.

——. John Chrysostom and the Jews. Rhetoric and Reality in the late 4th Century, London, 1983.

Wilken, R.L. & W.A. Meeks Jews and Christians in Antioch in the First Four Centuries of the Common Era. Missoula, 1978. Wilson, S. G. ed. Anti-Judaism in Early Christianity. vol. 2 Studies in Christianity and Judaism. Waterloo, Ont, 1986.

Winslow, K. Early Jewish and Christian memories of Moses’ wives: exogamist marriage and ethnic identity. Lewiston, N.Y.; Lampeter: Mellen, 2005.

Winter, M.M. ‘Jewish and Christian Collaboration in Ancient Syria.’ in A. Rapoport-Albert & G. Greenberg, eds. Biblical Hebrew, Biblical Texts. Essays in memory of Michael P. Weitzman. London, NY, 2001, 355–365. Wright, W. A Short History of Syriac Literature. London, 1894. Ware, T. The Orthodox Church. Penguin: UK, 1993.

Wellhausen, J. Skizzen und Vorarbeiten. II, Die Composition des Hexateuchs. Berlin, 1885.