-
Virgin Birth Of Jesus AS
At-Tahrim – 66:12
Arabic
وَمَرۡيَمَ ٱبۡنَتَ عِمۡرَٰنَ ٱلَّتِىٓ أَحۡصَنَتۡ فَرۡجَهَا فَنَفَخۡنَا فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِنَا وَصَدَّقَتۡ بِكَلِمَٰتِ رَبِّهَا وَكُتُبِهِۦ وَكَانَتۡ مِنَ ٱلۡقَٰنِتِينَ
Why is it فيه and not فيها.
And what about the interpretation that when the angel came to Maryam عليها السلام she said that a man hadn’t touched her but this doesn’t mean it didn’t happen afterwards.
Al-An’am – 6:85
Arabic
وَزَكَرِيَّا وَيَحۡيَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ وَإِلۡيَاسَۖ كُلٌّ مِّنَ ٱلصَّٰلِحِينَ
Al-An’am – 6:86
Arabic
وَإِسۡمَٰعِيلَ وَٱلۡيَسَعَ وَيُونُسَ وَلُوطًاۚ وَكُلًّا فَضَّلۡنَا عَلَى ٱلۡعَٰلَمِينَ
Al-An’am – 6:87
Arabic
وَمِنۡ ءَابَآئِهِمۡ وَذُرِّيَّٰتِهِمۡ وَإِخۡوَٰنِهِمْۖ وَٱجۡتَبَيۡنَٰهُمۡ وَهَدَيۡنَٰهُمۡ إِلَىٰ صِرَٰطٍ مُّسۡتَقِيمٍ
Here it also seems to mention a ‘father’ of isa عليه السلام
-
29 Replies
-
Virgin Birth Of Jesus AS
updated 3 years, 5 months ago
4 Members
·
29
Replies
-
Al-An’am – 6:101
Arabic
بَدِيعُ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضِۖ أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لَهُۥ وَلَدٌ وَلَمۡ تَكُن لَّهُۥ صَٰحِبَةٌۖ وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَىۡءٍۖ وَهُوَ بِكُلِّ شَىۡءٍ عَلِيمٌ
Allah uses reasoning here to say that how could he have a son when he doesn’t have a wife. So if Isa عليه السلام has a miraculous birth then this reasoning would be incorrect.
-
Is it?
I think God is again addressing us in our language, just like the wordings of the ayah that you mentioned about recreation being easier the second time.
So while considering our need for a spouse in order to procreate, He explains that He doesnt have a wife (because He doesn’t need a wife, because how could God have a wife?) And thus, no son. Although humans need a spouse in order to be able to produce off-spring and so Isa (as)’s birth, on our part, is definitely a miracle!
-
Thanks! It was answered here too Discussion 31293
-
-
For reference:
-
The Quran is very much clear that Maryam was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. The mention of ancestors (6:87) is a style used almost in every language. Grandfathers are also fathers though not actual fathers. So just like others Isa did came from a line of forefathers, it does not affirm that he had a biological father too.
Maryam got pregnant through the blow of the angel.
when she was about to give birth to the child she wished to die out of shame she had of face later.
when she carried Jesus to her people they accused her of adultery. She did not say that the child did have a father so don’t blame her, rather she pointed at the child and he spoke to acquit her mother with his miraculous speech.
This is only Isa who is mentioned with the name of her mother Isa Ibn Maryam to affirm that he did not have a father.
General rule does not apply here. The verse 6:101 is for general law prevails in the world, while Jesus’ birth was a miracle. Miracles have their own functionality in the grand scheme of God. We need to differentiate between the two when studying the Quran. God is not bound to his general physical laws. Miracle happens only when God breaks His general law for Ittimam-e-Hujjat.
Isa came as a sign of the day of judgement as mentioned in the Quran 43:61
وَإِنَّهُ لَعِلْمٌ لِّلسَّاعَةِ فَلَا تَمْتَرُنَّ بِهَا وَاتَّبِعُونِ ۚ هَـٰذَا صِرَاطٌ مُّسْتَقِيمٌ
That is why not only he showed miracles in abundance but his being too was a miracle.
-
The lack of a nasab in Isa ibn Maryam does not negate that there is a father. I did a quick search and there have been Arabs named after their mothers.
Furthermore, Isa was of the Jews. The Bible even references some sons with a matronymic name. Look up “Sons of Zeruiah”.
The question is why is Isa named for his mother rather than father? I can think of two reasons right now. One, it highlights the importance of the mother. In this case, the maternal parentage of Isa is highlighted because she herself was “chosen above all women”. She is the actor, not her eventual husband/mate.
Second, this is a way to build bridges and relations with the Christians. They identify Jesus as the Son of Mary. The issue of Virgin Birth is not important compared to the shirk that they were committing. Believing in a Virgin Birth does not affect one’s belief in Tawheed.
Also don’t forget that that the yahud have used this type of naming convention in the past. Also, apparently Arabs in the past have too, although rare.
This is a contention I met
-
I did not write this so I apologise for any disrespectful tone
-
What does this mean? please clarify this @AhmadShoaib
-
Basically that isa عليه السلام being called ibn maryam isn’t argument for a virgin birth. There could be other reasons
-
This was not even the primary argument in Irfan Sahab’s response. There were many other arguments from Quran put forth by Irfan Sahab which clearly indicate this fact. The name only complements those other arguments. Besides, both the points presented in the above reply regarding maternal lineage are mere conjecture based on isolated logic.
Secondly, the virgin birth (along with other mighty miracles) was the biggest miracle that could have ever happened in front of a nation on whom ‘sword of eternal damnation/punishment’ was hanging right above their head.
(In future please do mention if you’re forwarding some reply from the internet or another source. It will help the responder to better assess the nature of his response)
-
Also if the angel blew into maryam عليها السلام then why doesn’t it say فنفخنا فيها but فيه
And some say that maryam عليها السلام was married at the time of the birth of Jesus عليه السلام . And that احصنت فرخها indicates this.
So when the angel asked her she said that she wasn’t ever touched but that doesn’t mean that later the birth and conception was natural.
-
-
in another verse Quran says: وَالَّتِي أَحْصَنَتْ فَرْجَهَا فَنَفَخْنَا فِيهَا مِن رُّوحِنَا 21:91. Here it used the word فیھا so no doubt left that the blow was in into Maryam into her Farj, which made her pregnant. Please pay heed to all the points i made and read the full story of Jesus birth in Quran to come to conclusion.
-
Thank you so much sir for your reply.
May I ask then, out of curiosity, why was فيه used in the other verse?
-
-
Here فیہ refers to Farj which is a masculine.
-
Couldn’t it refer to isa عليه السلام who was already created?
Because of this too:
Aal-e-Imran – 3:59
Arabic
إِنَّ مَثَلَ عِيسَىٰ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ كَمَثَلِ ءَادَمَۖ خَلَقَهُۥ مِن تُرَابٍ ثُمَّ قَالَ لَهُۥ كُن فَيَكُونُ
This would mean that isa عليه السلام was first created- then it was said to him ‘be’. Shouldn’t the ‘be’ command come first?
-
-
Another argument people give is that the ruh would be blown anyway since babies have the ruh blown into them.
And that maryam عليها السلام was only fearful because the people would assume she had done zina.
But actually, just like the birth of yahya and Ismael, there must have been some physical relationship that took place. They say that maryam عليها السلام actually got married- and then the father went out of the picture for some reason.
-
They say the reason maryam عليها السلام didn’t say anything was because the Jews were going to accuse her whatever she said
-
And it would also come in that ‘ahsanat farjaha’ usually means marriage
-
The meaning of being similar to Adam عليه السلام would simply mean that he is also a human and not God
-
Aal-e-Imran – 3:59
Arabic
إِنَّ مَثَلَ عِيسَىٰ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ كَمَثَلِ ءَادَمَۖ خَلَقَهُۥ مِن تُرَابٍ ثُمَّ قَالَ لَهُۥ كُن فَيَكُونُ
This would mean that isa عليه السلام was first created- then it was said to him ‘be’. Shouldn’t the ‘be’ command come first?
-
To bring in the father of Jesus needs a lot of speculations. It was a well known tradition existed before Quran that Maryam was virgin. It is usually Quranic dictum to rectify the mistakes of bible of they are that grave. Quran not only didn’t correct it but also describe the event to support the all known fact that it was a miraculous birth without father.
If God has to tell that Jesus was just like a man he should have said a man like you بشر مثلکم instead he resembled him with Adam for particular reasons.
خلقہ ثم قال کن فیکوں means that he created Adam then gave him a human disposition just like a baby in womb who is first created and then made a human being by blowing into him.
-
So did the nafkh e rooh that the angels did to maryam عليها السلام create isa عليه السلام or did it give him the insani shakhsiyat?
-
-
with this blow she became pregnant, the human personality might have been given at the time when normally it is given to fetus
-
Do we as Muslims believe maryam عليها السلام was married at the time of the virgin birth?
-
@Irfan76 unless this is just left to history. Because if we accept that she was married then the same way zakariya عليه السلام had a son (there must have been some physical relation perhaps) then maryam عليها السلام could have also had this relation. But the Jews thought that what she did was so bad because she had violated some rule of the temple.
(I’m just covering all bases of questions that people ask about the virgin birth as they think the Quran doesn’t make it fully clear as in ‘don’t you remember the time Jesus عليه السلام was born from no father?’)
-
-
married or not, the dictum of Quran is quite clear, it endorsed the traditional fact that she was not touched by any man before she got pregnant with Isa AS
-
Why does that have to necessarily ensue a virgin birth? Why not just after this exclamation of maryam عليها السلام , she (if she was married) had this relation with her husband- and the blowing of the ruh is just the blowing of the spirit in the Fetus. Then kun fayakun doesn’t have to ensue an instant or supernatural creation either.
People also bring up that the concept of virgin birth appeared later in Christianity- that call this entire narrative an israiliyaat
-
@Irfan76 I mean is this a possibility from the wording? Since there’s no unequivocal statement saying that isa عليه السلام was born from a virgin
-
-
Read the whole anecdote of birth of Isa in Quran it tells she was unmarried when she gave birth to Isa.
Reiterated. Quran is supposed to correct the previous misconceptions of they are of that importance. Qurankc description is in line with the miraculous birth of Isa without father.
Now the arguments are circulating. You may ponder upon the case having both argumenys before you.
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
