نوع مقاله : پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری تفسیر تطبیقی دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران.
2 استاد، گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
Introduction
One of the most well-known historical controversies concerning the Qur’an pertains to the expression "O sister of Aaron" (Yā ukhta Hārūn) used in reference to Mary, the mother of Jesus (Qur’an 19:28). This phrase has been a focal point of interreligious debate between Muslims and Christians from the earliest Islamic centuries. According to various hadith sources, including accounts cited by al-Suyuti, Christians in Najran challenged the Prophet Muhammad’s envoy, al-Mughīra ibn Shu‘ba, regarding the temporal discrepancy between Aaron, the brother of Moses, and Mary, mother of Jesus, questioning how they could be siblings despite the centuries that separate them. While the authenticity of this hadith may be debated, its presence in early Islamic literature confirms the antiquity of this theological challenge.
Critics, particularly among Western orientalists and scholars of the Bible, have argued that this expression reflects a confusion on the Prophet’s part between Mary (Maryam) and Miriam (sister of Moses and Aaron), allegedly due to his indirect knowledge of Biblical narratives. In response, Muslim scholars and exegetes have offered a range of interpretations, rooted primarily in traditional and historical frameworks. As this study reveals, there are approximately 14 distinct theories proposed to resolve this issue. This article aims to critically and analytically assess these various interpretations. The central research question is: among the 14 proposed explanations, which hold the strongest evidential and interpretive merit, and why?
Research background
Beyond the interpretations offered by exegetes, numerous scholarly studies have been conducted on the subject of this research. To the best of the author’s knowledge, these investigations have yielded fourteen distinct hypotheses, which will be addressed in detail throughout the main text of this study. A number of these valuable contributions are as follows:
Al-Sa‘idi (1313 AH): Adopting a comparative approach, he argues that Mary was maternally descended from Aaron and, after the death of her parents, was genealogically connected to the priestly household of Zechariah, a descendant of Aaron. He maintains that this new affiliation justifies the Qur’anic titles “daughter of ʿImrān” and “sister of Aaron.” However, this argument lacks historical support and contradicts established Jewish inheritance customs, which do not allow such lineage affiliation except through a son-in-law.
Erjan Çelik (n.d.): Çelik interprets verses 33–37 of Sūrat Āl ʿImrān as relating to the biblical narrative of Amram and his wife Jochebed, suggesting that Miriam was the initial response to Jochebed’s prayer, with Mary being the ultimate fulfillment. This conceptual link allows the Qur’an to refer to Mary as “daughter of ʿImrān” or “sister of Aaron.” However, this hypothesis lacks coherence with the thematic structure of the surah and fails to yield convincing conclusions.
Angelika Neuwirth (2005, 2009): In her works, Neuwirth views the reference to Mary as “sister of Aaron” in Sūrat Maryam as a typological identification with the biblical prophetess Miriam. She argues that this reflects early Christian exegetical efforts to parallel the stories of Moses with those of Mary and Jesus. Though more nuanced than other Orientalists, her claims—such as the later insertion of the verses to appeal to Jewish audiences—remain debatable.
Mohammad Shokri et al. (2016): These scholars argue that the title “sister of Aaron” has long been problematic for critics of the Qur’an due to the lack of a direct historical reference to Mary having a brother named Aaron. They suggest, based on the Prophet Muhammad’s response to Mughīra ibn Shuʿba, that the expression is an honorific or metaphorical title common in Jewish-Arabic usage. While their criticism of classical exegeses is justified, their proposed solution remains open to further scrutiny.
Tuyserkani (2007): Contrary to the claims of Orientalists, he maintains that the Qur’an makes no confusion between Miriam and Mary, nor between ʿImrān and Amram. He argues that the confusion arises from misinterpretation, suggesting that Mary’s father might have been Joachim (as in apocryphal gospels), with ʿImrān being the Arabic equivalent. Despite aiming to defend the Qur’an, his views rest primarily on conjecture rather than solid evidence.
Azam Sadat Shabani et al. (2023): Drawing from Christian typological hermeneutics and Qur’anic exegetical traditions, these researchers claim that Mary, like her cousin Elizabeth, belonged to the priestly class and thus was associated with Aaron's lineage. They assert that the phrase “sister of Aaron” aligns with Semitic language norms and cultural conventions. Nevertheless, their interpretation assumes a priestly role for Mary that is not substantiated by Qur’anic discourse, which remains silent on such affiliations.
Eyvazi (2013): Through a comparative study, he highlights that the canonical Gospels do not mention Mary’s parents, and even Christian exegetes view Joachim traditions as weak. He posits that Mary was paternally from the tribe of Judah and maternally linked to the tribe of Levi, justifying the title “sister of Aaron.” This explanation, grounded in social and tribal realities of the time, is among the more plausible interpretations.
Sabbah (2011): Examining commonalities between the Qur’anic and Gospel accounts, Sabbah contends that the Qur’an symbolically connects Mary to the prophetic and priestly household of Amram, paralleling the biblical Miriam, sister of Moses. He sees the title “sister of Aaron” not as literal, but as emphasizing Mary’s spiritual and theological affiliation with a revered lineage. His symbolic interpretation reflects an effort to honor Mary’s exalted status within the prophetic tradition.
Ali-Mohammadi (2012): He critiques Sabbah’s position, arguing that the Qur’anic narrative elevates Mary’s lineage in contrast to the Gospels' silence. From his perspective, the Qur’an seeks to defend Mary against the slanders of the Jews, emphasizing her noble ancestry. He views the reference to ʿImrān as a defense mechanism to affirm Mary’s and Jesus’s sanctity and prophetic dignity within a hostile socio-religious context.
Research method
The method of this article is analytical-critical method, employing both historical and literary approaches.
Result
Research findings indicate that among the 14 existing possibilities, the strongest probability is an indirect lineage-based or genealogical connection between Mary and Aaron. This view is reinforced by narrative and contextual evidence and aligns with the literary exegesis of the Qur’an. Following this, the probability of a genealogical link through a namesake half-brother of Aaron holds significant credibility, as it does not conflict with the verse’s context or other logical principles, though it diverges from rhetorical and literary-exegetical approaches. Finally, the likelihood of Maryam’s resemblance to Aaron in terms of priestly status ranks third among the most probable views on this matter.
کلیدواژه‌ها English
قرآن کریم، ترجمه مکارم شیرازی و الهی قمشه‌ای.
کتاب مقدس، ترجمه: پیروز سیّار، هزاره نو.
https://www.academia.edu/21983615/Miriam_to_Mary_A_Messianic_Lineage_in_the_Quran
DOI:10.22034/isqs.2023.43121.2050
قطب، سید. (1425 ق). فى ظلال القرآن. بیروت: دار الشروق.
سایتهای اینترنتی:
https://jscenter.ir/judaism-and-islam/israiliyyat/15413/ مریم-مقدس-خواهر-هارون/
http://sokhanrani.iranseda.ir/detailsalbum/?g=536723
https://youtu.be/Gscv3cZho5o?si=-eamIKVAOuAabiWI
