وَلَمّا ضُرِبَ ابنُ مَريَمَ مَثَلًا إِذا قَومُكَ مِنهُ يَصِدّونَ
When the Son of Mary was cited as an example, behold, your people raise an outcry.
EXEGESIS
Idhā (behold) is a particle that denotes suddenness. This implies that the reaction of the polytheists upon hearing about Prophet Jesus (a) was one that was spontaneous and lacked contemplation.
Qawmuka (your people) refers to the Quraysh. According to those exegetes who accept the story of Ibn al-Zibʿarā as the occasion of revelation, which will be discussed shortly, this wording is used to express astonishment as to how they rejoiced over Ibn al-Zibʿarā’s supposed triumph over Prophet Muhammad (s) regarding the matter of Prophet Jesus (a).
Yaṣiddūn (raise an outcry): according to Ṣāḥib ibn ʿAbbād, this term refers to the most intense form of laughter accompanied by noise and clamour. Most lexicographers, however, have conjugated the verb as yaṣuddūn, which is the preferred reading of some exegetes, and which means ‘to turn away’. This reading has been attributed to Nāfiʿ, Ibn ʿĀmir, and Kisāʾī. The object of aversion is omitted because it is evident from the context – they turn away from the Quran, as their arguments falsely suggested contradictions in it. This meaning is reflected in Arberry’s translation: ‘And when the son of Mary is cited as an example, behold, thy people turn away from it.’
Some have opined that both readings carry the same meaning and can thus be considered as two ways of pronouncing the same word.
According to a report, Prophet Muhammad (s) is reported to have said: ‘Al-ṣudūd [the infinitive of yaṣiddūn] in Arabic means “to laugh”.’
EXPOSITION
The previous verses presented the encounters of the previous prophets in their confrontations with the tyrants of their time, drawing a parallel between the current situation of the polytheists of Mecca and those past communities. It clearly indicated that these polytheists were following the customs and mindsets of those previous nations and thus should expect a similar consequence, for the laws of God do not change. The current set of verses address how Prophet Jesus (a) confronted the Children of Israel, but it begins with a short introduction on how the polytheists of Mecca reacted to the story of Prophet Jesus (a) in the Quran.
When the Son of Mary was cited as an example: the main questions that exegetes have tackled in this verse are: who cited Prophet Jesus (a) as an example and for what reason? Some exegetes suggest that it was God who cited the example.
According to Tabatabai, by ignoring the conflicting reports surrounding the occasion of revelation of this verse and by solely focusing on the context of these verses, whilst bearing in mind that this is a Meccan surah, it seems that When the Son of Mary was cited as an example refers to the verses at the beginning of Sūrat Maryam, which is the only Meccan surah to discuss the story of Prophet Jesus (a) in detail. Furthermore, after recounting the lives of various prophets, Sūrat Maryam concludes with, They are the ones whom Allah has blessed from among the prophets (19:58), which is almost identical to verse 59 of this chapter which describes Prophet Jesus (a) as, He was just a servant whom We had blessed.
A similar view has been opined by Faḍl-Allāh. According to him, after the revelation of Sūrat Maryam, the Quraysh were engaged in heated debates because of the metaphysical content of the chapter, regarding the creation of Prophet Jesus (a) without a father, the Christian perspective on him, and the reverence the Quran accorded to his prophetic personality. The leaders of the Quraysh sought to confront the message with words that stirred trouble and undermined the sanctity of the Quranic message. They began to clamour and laugh, turning the matter into an object of mockery and ridicule instead of a subject for reflection and contemplation. In their words, Are our gods better, or he?! (verse 58), why do you speak about him and exalt him but do not speak about our gods?! If there are some mysteries in his creation and his personality, we believe that our gods also possess such mysteries that connect them to God, and they can bring us closer to God.’
Another view maintains that the polytheists themselves invoked Prophet Jesus (a) as an example of a being worshipped besides God in an attempt to justify their own deviant practice of idol worship. By doing so, they sought to argue that the worship of beings other than God was not without precedent, since among the adherents of earlier religions there were those who had elevated human beings to the status of worship.
Behold, your people raise an outcry: the polytheists reacted to the account of Prophet Jesus (a) without reflection or reasoning, and are censured for responding with jeering and derision.
INSIGHTS FROM HADITH
- It has been attributed to Imam Ali (a): ‘I came to the Prophet (s) while he was in a gathering of the Quraysh. He looked at me and said: “O Ali, your likeness in this ummah is like that of Jesus, the son of Mary. A group of people loved him excessively, and another group hated him excessively.” The gathering around him laughed and said: “Look how he compares his cousin to Jesus, the son of Mary!” Then, revelation descended, When the Son of Mary was cited as an example, behold, your people raise an outcry.’
- It is reported through several Sunni sources that Imam Ali (a) once said: ‘This verse was revealed concerning me: When the Son of Mary was cited as an example, behold, your people raise an outcry.’
Note: If authentic, this narration would indicate that Imam Ali (a) was identifying his case as an application of the verse, rather than asserting that it was revealed about him.
REVIEW OF TAFSĪR LITERATURE
Exegetes have differed heavily as to what event is being referred to in these verses and how to understand them, to the extent that Ibn ʿĀshūr says: ‘This verse is one of the most obscure in the Quran in terms of its intended meaning.’ Similarly, Subḥānī says: ‘These verses, from the fifty-seventh to the sixtieth, are of the most concealed in the Quran regarding their intent, hence the discordance among the exegetes’ statements in interpreting them.’
The more popular opinion is that the said incident involves ʿAbd-Allāh ibn al-Zibʿarā al-Sahmī. He was told by al-Walīd ibn al-Mughīrah: ‘Muhammad claims that we and what we worship of these idols are fuel for hell.’ ʿAbd-Allāh replied: ‘By Allah, if I had found him, I would have debated with him. Ask Muhammad: “Is everything that is worshipped besides Allah in hell along with its worshippers? For we worship the angels, the Jews worship Ezra, and the Christians worship Jesus, the son of Mary.”’ Walīd and those with him in the gathering were impressed by ʿAbd-Allāh ibn al-Zibʿarā’s statement, and they saw that he had presented a strong argument and rebuttal. This statement of Ibn al-Zibʿarā was mentioned to the Prophet, and he said: ‘Indeed, everyone who is worshipped besides Allah will be with their worshippers. They only worship devils and those whom the devils command them to worship.’ Then, 21:101 was revealed: Indeed those to whom there has gone beforehand [the promise of] the best reward from Us will be kept away from it. Verse 57 was also revealed simultaneously, When the Son of Mary was cited as an example, behold, your people raise an outcry.
Those exegetes who advocate for this story as the occasion of revelation add that the verse in question uses the verb cited in the passive voice which would align with Ibn al-Zibʿarā being the one who cited Prophet Jesus (a). This understanding is supported by the next verse, They only cite him to you for the sake of contention, which indicates that the ones citing the example of Prophet Jesus (a) were the polytheists. If, however, the verse was referring to another incident whereby God was the one who cited Prophet Jesus (a) as an example, it would have been more appropriate to say ‘We cited’, just as verse 59 says, We … made (jaʿalnā).
Those exegetes who do not accept this event as the occasion of revelation for these verses argue that, firstly, this story has only been reported without a reliable chain of narrators. And that secondly, this event took place in the early years of the Meccan period and none of the early Meccan surahs mention the name of Prophet Ezra (ʿUzayr) (a). Rather, Prophet Ezra (a) is mentioned in Sūrat al-Tawbah, which was revealed towards the end of the Prophet’s life in Medina, which raises the question as to how Ibn al-Zibʿarā came to know of this belief of the Jews. However, this could have been a well-known fact, and therefore this objection would not hold much weight. Thirdly, this report suggests that the Jews would worship Ezra (a), but the Quran only indicates that they considered him as a son of God, as a form of reverence, similar to how they would consider themselves to be the children of God (5:18). Fourthly, this understanding portrays the verse as suggesting that Ibn al-Zibʿarā was the one citing Prophet Jesus (a) as an example, whereas this group of exegetes argue that the one citing Prophet Jesus (a) as an example was God, in line with verse 59, He was just a servant whom We had blessed and made an exemplar for the Children of Israel.
Furthermore, it seems strange that two verses from two different chapters would be simultaneously revealed.
What seems most likely to have been the case is that the narrators who narrated this incident confused the events relating to the revelation of the verses of Sūrat al-Anbiyāʾ with the event related to this verse, and thus mixed the two together. What strongly supports this hypothesis is that there are several Sunni reports that mention the story of Ibn al-Zibʿarā in the context of the revelation of 21:98-101 but make absolutely no reference to this verse of Sūrat al-Zukhruf. It is noteworthy that in Shia works, Tafsīr al-Qummī has also reported the incident of Ibn al-Zibʿarā but without any indication to it being related to the present verses of Sūrat al-Zukhruf, and thus, assuming this event did occur, it was in the context of those verses of Sūrat al-Anbiyāʾ.
Another opinion is that this verse is related to 3:59: Indeed the case of Jesus with Allah is like the case of Adam: He created him from dust, then said to him: ‘Be,’ and he was. When Prophet Muhammad (s) presented the creation of Prophet Jesus (a) without a father as similar to Adam (a), some of the polytheists objected, and as a result, this verse was revealed. Their objection was that if God was capable of creating Adam (a) without a father or mother, then why did He not do the same with Jesus (a) (i.e. there was no need for Lady Mary either). It is also said that when Prophet Jesus (a) was mentioned as being free from sin and likened to Adam (a) in this regard, the polytheists stated that the implication of this is that they should also worship Jesus (a) as the Christians do. In a similar vein, some exegetes state that their claim after hearing the aforementioned verse was that they were better guided than the Christians, for the latter worship a human, whilst they worship angels, in that their idols represented angelic deities.
[1] Rahnama, 17/82.
[2] Ibn Ashur, 25/276.
[3] Al-Muḥīṭ fī al-Lughah, 8/79.
[4] Tasnīm, 72/116; Mizan, 18/114.
[5] Daqaiq, 12/79.
[6] Ibn Ashur, 25/276.
[7] Baydawi, 2/369.
[8] Maani, p. 220.
[9] Hadi, 3/240.
[10] Mizan, 18/113; Tasnīm, 72/116.
[11] Mizan, 18/113-114; Tasnīm, 72/116.
[12] Fadlallah, 17/51.
[13] Hadi, 3/243.
[14] Rahnama, 17/82.
[15] Mizan, 18/114.
[16] Furat, p. 403.
[17] Ibn Asakir, 2/211-219; Ahmad, 1/160; Hasakani, 2/226-236; Abū Nuʿaym, al-Nūr al-Mushtaʿal min Kitāb mā Nazala min al-Qurʾān fī ʿAlī ʿalayhi al-salām, pp. 220-226 (see the footnotes for copious details regarding the different chains of transmissions as found in other works).
[18] Ibn Ashur, 25/274.
[19] Munyah, 25/224.
[20] Ibn Hisham, 1/385; Muqatil, 3/798-799; Zamakhshari, 4/259; Ibn Ashur, 25/274; Amthal, 16/78-79.
[21] Ibn Ashur, 25/274.
[22] Munyah, 25/229-230.
[23] Hadi, 3/242.
[24] See Tabarani, 12/553; Mustadrak.S, 2/416; Haythami, 7/168-169; Ḍiyāʾ al-Dīn al-Maqdasī, al-Aḥādīth al-Mukhtārah, 4/194.
[25] Qummi, 2/76.
[26] Hadi, 3/242.
[27] Tibyan, 9/209.
[28] Tasnīm, 72/121; Ibn Ashur, 25/274.