Обсуждение:Распятие

Iequran / Crucifixion

Muhammad Mushtaq and Hasan Spiker

Crucifixion is a form of capital punishment whereby a human being is nailed or bound to a gibbet, whether a simple stake or a cross, and left to hang until death. The Qurʾān uses two verbal forms (I and II) of the root ṣ-l-b in six verses (Q 4:157; 5:33; 7:124; 12:41; 20:71; 26:49) to refer to crucifixion in three different contexts.

Definitions and Usage

The Qurʾānic Denial of the Death of ʿĪsā, upon him peace

The Alleged Crucifixion of ʿĪsā, upon him peace

Questions Arising from the Apparent Deception

Bibliography

Definitions and Usage

Q 4:157 uses the Form I verb to deny crucifixion of Prophet ʿĪsā, upon him peace: They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him (wa mā ṣalabūhu);

Q 12:41 uses the same form of the verb in passive voice to refer to the fate of one of the prison-companions of Prophet Yūsuf, upon him peace (q.v.): as for the other, he will be crucified (yuṣlabu) so that the birds will eat from his head. The master exegete of the third/ninth century Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī (224-310/839-923) states that the companion of Prophet Yūsuf, upon him peace, was the king’s baker, who was accused of trying to kill the king by poisoning his food (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr).

The other four verses use Form II verb, which gives the meaning of intensity (Ibn Manẓūr, Lisān, sub ṣ-l-b): Q 5:33 mentions crucifixion as punishment for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger: Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment. (see Legal Punishments). The remaining three verses Q (7:124, 20:71 and 26:49) refer to the verdict of Pharaoh (see Firʿawn) for the magicians who had just accepted faith and give additional details of the punishments before their curcifxion: He said: “ You believed him before I gave you permission. Indeed, he is your leader who has taught you magic. So I will surely cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will crucify you on the trunks of palm trees, and you will surely know which of us is more severe in [giving] punishment and more enduring." (Q 20:71). Q 7:124 uses the word thumma between the two punishments of amputation and crucifixion, which signifies that first the hands and feet were to be cut off and then they were to be crucified on the trunks of palm-trees (Abū Ḥayyān, Baḥr).

The Pharaoh also charged the magicians with rebellion when he said: Surely this is the plot that you have devised in the city so that you drive out its people (Q 7:123). “He meant: this is the common plan between you and him [Prophet Mūsā, upon him peace] for the purpose of dominating Egypt” (Qurṭubī, Tafsīr).

In addition to the verbal forms, two verses use the noun of this root (Q 4:23, aṣlāb as plural; and 86:7, ṣulb as singular), which is translated as "loins".

The Qurʾānic Denial of the Death of ʿĪsā, upon him peace

In addition to Q 4:157, which clearly denies the crucifixion of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, there are other verses which refute this false claim. For instance, immediately after the denial of the claim of his crucifixion, the next verse (Q 4:158) mentions his ascension (from root r-f-ʿ) to Allah. This is also mentioned in Q 3:55: When Allah said, “O ʿĪsā, indeed I will take you (innī mutawaffīka) and raise you to Myself (Rāfiʿuka ilayya), purify you from those who disbelieve, and make those who follow you [in submission to Allah alone] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me shall be your return, and I will judge between you concerning that over which you used to differ. This verse uses the participle mutawaffī and Q 5:117 uses the form V verb tawaffayta from the root w-f-y, which can mean death . For exegetes, this necessitated analysis of the roots w-f-y and r-f-ʿ in order to fully explain the Qurʾānic teachings on the question of crucifixion of ʿĪsā, upon him peace. They also cite Hadiths which explicitly mention the second coming of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, before the Day of Judgment (see below) as proof that he was not crucified.

Taking Fully (tawaffī)

The Qurʾān uses ten forms of the root w-f-y 66 times, generally to convey the meaning of completion, fulfilling, paying in full and the like. Explaining the meaning of this root, the Abūl-Faḍl Jamāl al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Mukarram Ibn Manẓūr al-Ifrīqī (d. 711/1312) says:

Al-wafāʾ is the antonym of treachery (ghadr). It is said: wafā bi-ʿahdih (he fulfilled his promise) and the same meaning is conveyed by [form IV] awfā bi-ʿahdih. However, Shamir says: [the distinction between the two is that] when one says wafā, he means: completed; thus, when you say wafā lanā fulān, you mean “he kept his word and did not break his promise…”; but when one says awfā, one means “he gave me full right and did not take away anything…” Tawaffā al-muddata: “he reached his appointed time and completed it”… al-wafāh: “death”… Tuwuffiya fulānun “So-and-so died”. Tawaffāh Allāh: “Allah took his soul”… Tawaffī al-mayyit: completion of the deceased’s appointed time and the number of days, months and years allocated to him”… Tawaffayt al-māl minh wa-stawfaytuh: “I took from him the whole of the money [he owed me]… so that nothing remained payable”. Tawaffaytu ʿadad al-qawm: “I finished counting every one of the group…” Tawaffī al-nāʾim: “completion of the duration of a sleeping person’s reason and discretion until they actually fall asleep (Lisān).

Thus the root basically conveys the meaning of completion, which in particular contexts may also imply the meaning of death, because death completes the lifespan. Form V verb from this root (tawaffā) occurs twenty times in active voice and four times in passive. In twenty cases the context clearly implies the meaning of death. These include: (i) the mention of the angel, or angels, taking a person’s life (8 verses: Q 4:97, 6:61, 7:37, 8:50, 16:28 and 32, 32:11 and 47:27) (see: Angels); (ii) the context of supplication (3 verses: tawaffanā maʿ al-abrār, take us with the righteous; tawaffanā muslimīn, take us as Muslims; tawaffanī musliman, take me as a Muslim; Q 3:193, 7:126 and 12:101); (iii) the law of inheritance, when people are “taken” and “leave behind” widows (2 verses: Q 2:224 and 240): (iv) the different stages of human life (4 verses: Q 10:104; 16:70, 22:5 and 40:67); (v) reassurance to the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, that he may either see the Divine punishment of his adversaries or it may befall them after “We take you” (3 verses: Q 10:46, 13:40 and 40:77); and (vi) use of this verb in conjunction with the noun mawt, meaning death (2 verses: Q 4:15 and 39:42). The last of these verses uses this one verb simultaneously for death as well as sleep. Q 6:60 also uses this verb for sleep—which a Prophetic tradition likens to death (Bukhārī, daʿawāt, mā yaqūl idhā nām).

In Q 3:55 (And when Allah said: O ʿĪsā, Truly I will take you), raise you to Myself, and cleanse you from those who disbelieve), the context is that of giving glad tidings to Prophet ʿĪsā, upon him peace, that Allah Most High will protect him from the conspiracies of his adversaries. This, coupled with the Prophetic traditions about his second coming, provides a compelling reason for a majority of jurists and exegetes to prefer the literal meaning of “taking” to the figurative meaning of “giving death”. Abūl-Qāsim Maḥmūd b. ʿUmar al-Zamakhsharī (467-538/ca. 1344-1392) explains this as follows:

And when Allah said; this is adverb (ẓarf) for the best of the schemers or for Allah schemed [in the preceding verse]: O ʿĪsā, I will take you (innī mutawaffīka): that is, “I will complete your appointed time”, meaning “I will protect you from being murdered by the disbelievers and will grant you respite till the time I appointed for you, and will then give you a natural death instead of you being killed by them.” And cause to ascend to Me: that is, “to My heaven and to the place of My angels”. And will cleanse you from those who blaspheme: “from their evil society and bad company”. It is also said that mutawaffīka means: “I will take you from earth”, as in tawaffayt mālī ʿalā fulān (I took my money from so-and-so [which he owed me]) idhā astawfaytuh (when I got it in full). Another interpretation is: “I will give you death when your time comes, after which I will make you descend from the sky; but presently I will raise you.” Yet another interpretation is: “I will take your soul by making you sleep [as in Q 39:42], and will raise you while you are asleep so that you do not feel fear; and when you will wake up you will be in heaven, safe and close [to Me]” (Kashshāf).

Ascension (rafʿ)

The Qurʾān uses form I verb of the root r-f-ʿ (Q 3:55 and 4:158) for the ascension of ʿĪsā, peace be on him. Although eight forms of this root occur 29 times in the Qurʾān, often meaning “raise in status” (cf. Q 2:253, 6:83 and 165), it is only in Q 3:55 and 4:158 that the Qurʾān uses after it the preposition ilā (to); in both cases with a pronoun referring to Allah Most High. This specific usage has led exegetes to conclude that these verses imply physical ascension. Elaborating on this usage, Abū Ḥayyān asserts:

Al-rafʿ: raising from a lower place to a higher place; to Me (ilayya), ascribed for the purpose of honoring (iḍāfat tashrīf) and implying: “to My sky and to the place of My angels”… Another interpretation is: “to a place where no one else rules, either in reality or apparently, unlike earth where it appears that creatures rule. Another opinion is: “to the place of your reward”. According to Ibn ʿAbbās: “Allah raised him to the sky, the nearest to the heavens; so he is there, praising Allah along with angels; then Allah will make him descend upon the Dome of Bayt al-Maqdis when the Dajjāl appears (Baḥr, sub Q 3:55).

The Qurʾān, then, not only denies the crucifixion but also provides the basis for belief in the physical ascension of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, and his second coming near the Day of Judgment; and this is confirmed and further expounded in Hadiths (see below).

The Alleged Crucifixion of ʿĪsā, upon him peace

Another key verse on the background to the alleged crucifixion of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, is Q 61:6:

And [remember] when ʿĪsā the son of Maryam said: ‘O Children of Israel, I am the Messenger of Allah to you, confirming that which was before me in the Torah and giving glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me whose name is Aḥmad.’ But when he brought them clear proofs, they said: ‘This is manifest sorcery!’

This verse identifies those addressed by the Prophet ʿĪsā, upon him peace, as the Children of Isrāʾīl who, as al-Sayyid Maḥmūd b. ʿAbdallāh al-Alūsī (1217-1270/1803-1853) pointed out, were addressed by this title because they took pride in it (Alūsī, Rūḥ). Even though those Children of Isrāʾīl were ruled by the Romans at the time, the Qurʾān nowhere mentions that ʿĪsā, upon him peace, ever addressed the latter. Q 3:49 also calls him a Messenger unto the Children of Israel. “They were specifically named so that it is known that he was sent specifically to them” (Rūḥ). Q 3:52 describes the situation when both the religious and the political éĺites of the Jews rejected the message of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, and he turned to the masses to seek their support for the cause of Allah: When ʿĪsā perceived disbelief on their part, he said: Who will be my helpers in the cause of Allah? The zealous disciples (al-Ḥawariyyūn) said: We are Allah’s helpers. We believe in Allah; bear witness that we are submitting ones (muslimūn). Al-Ṭabari comments:

The interpretation of this verse is: when ʿĪsā perceived on the part of the Children of Israel—to whom Allah had sent him—denial of his prophethood, rejection of his preaching, and turning away from that message of Allah to which he had called them, he said: Who will be my helpers in the cause of Allah? By this He means that ʿĪsā said: “Who will support me in the cause of Allah against those who reject Allah’s proof, those who turn away from His religion and deny the prophethood of His Prophet?”

Q 3:54 mentions the conspiracy against ʿĪsā, upon him peace, by his adversaries: And they schemed and Allah [also] schemed; and Allah is the best of schemers. “Those who disbelieved among the Children of Israel conspired; and they were the same people whom Allah spoke of as the people on whose part ʿĪsā perceived disbelief” (Ṭabari, Tafsīr). At this stage, Allah informed ʿĪsā, upon him peace, of how he would be saved from his adversaries (see Q 3:55).

Al-Ālūsī, like several exegetes before him, cites Qatāda (d. 118/736) as holding that this verse contains a sequential reversal (taqdīm wa taʾkhīr): namely that ʿĪsā, peace upon him, was in actuality first “raised” around the time of the alleged Crucifixion, and then “he would be made to die” after his second coming (Rūḥ). However, the most common reconciliation of Q 3:55 and Q 4:157, as noted earlier, is to interpret the phrase mutawaffīka literally, such that the verse means “I will take you to Me,” not “I will cause you to die” (cf. Bayḍāwī and Jalālayn, Tafsīrs; Ibn al-Jawzī, Zād; Ibn Juzayy, al-Tashīl, sub Q 3:55). Al-Ṭabarī, preferring this interpretation and, in support of his preference, refers to the Prophetic Hadiths about the second coming of ʿĪsā, upon him peace (Tafsīr). The following hadith may be the most compelling authentic text relevant to the topic, and has almost certainly exerted the strongest influence on Muslim understanding of the theme of crucifixion:

Abū Hurayra related that the Messenger of Allah said: “The Hour will not come to pass until the Son of Maryam descends amongst you as a just ruler, breaks the Cross, kills the swine, and imposes the jizya. Wealth will become greatly abundant, such that none shall accept it.” (Bukhārī, Maẓālim, kasr al-ṣalīb wa qatl al-khinzīr; near-identical version in Muslim, Īmān, nuzūl ʿĪsā b. Maryam ḥākiman bi-sharīʿat Nabiyyinā Muḥammad ṣallā Allāh ʿalayh wa sallam; for “imposes” the jizya rather than the common interpretation of “abolishes”, see ʿIyāḍ, Ikmāl al-muʿallim 1:471)

Upon his return to earth, ʿĪsā, peace be upon him, will break the Cross and thereby, according to Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī’s (773-853/1372-1449) commentary, “discredit the religion of the Christians, and also actually [not merely figuratively] break the Cross and invalidate the reverence of the Christians’ claim for it” (Fatḥ al-bārī, Aḥādīth al-Anbiyāʾ, nuzūl ʿĪsā b. Maryam ʿalayhimā al-salām). The evident sense of this hadith explicitly refutes the doctrine of the Cross (and thus vicarious atonement and related soteriological notions) and also denies, albeit implicitly, the historicity of the Crucifixion.

The Qurʾānic treatment of the event of the alleged Crucifixion forms a part of an exposition (Q 4:153-161) of certain aspects of the fall from grace of the Jewish people: their breaking of the covenant (q.v.); killing of the Prophets, upon whom be peace (Q 4:155); calumny (q.v.) against Maryam (q.v.) (Q 4:156); and “boastfully” (Jalālayn, Tafsīr) saying Certainly we killed the Messiah (Q 4:157). In the remainder of this verse and the next verse the Qurʾān specifically refutes this claim, declaring:

They killed him not, nor did they crucify him; but so it was made to appear to them. Those who differ concerning him are in doubt about it. They have no real knowledge about it, merely conjecture. And of a certainty they killed him not. But Allah raised him up to Himself; and Allah is Almighty, All-Wise.

About the part of the verse which states “but so it was made to appear to them (wa lākin shubbiha lahum),” Abū Ḥayyān Muḥammad b. Yūsuf al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344), has the following explanation:

Shubbiha (it appeared) is related to the prepositional phrase (al-jārr wal-majrūr), like: khuyyila ilayh (it was imagined to him); [that is to say] ‘but appearance occurred for them’ (waqaʿa lahum al-tashbīh). It is also possible that it relates to the pronoun for the murdered person implied by the sentence certainly we killed, that is, ‘but the one whom they killed so appeared to them’. In any case, it is not related to the pronoun for the Messiah [in they killed him not, nor did they crucify him] because the Messiah is the one sembled to (mushabbah bih) not the one made to resemble (mushabbah) (Baḥr).

Neither the Qurʾān nor any authentic report from the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, gives details of how the appearance occurred. As the verse explicitly mentions the disagreement of the various groups of the People of the Book on this issue, the exegetes record many Israelite accounts (see: Israelite Accounts) explaining the bewilderment it caused them (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr). Indeed, as Abū Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq Ibn ʿAṭiyya al-Andalusī (d. 481-541/1088-1147) states: “Narrators have differed drastically regarding this story and as to how events proceeded… Not one of these narrations can decisively be said to be sound, because no authentic narration from the Prophet, blessings and peace upon him, has come down to us concerning [the events]. Therefore the pronouncements of the Book of Allah are the only real criteria we have for preferring one [narration] over another” (Muḥarrar, sub Q 4:157). Many exegetes saw in this verse a reference to early Christological controversies. “The meaning of their ‘differing [concerning him]’ is that the Nestorian Christians held that it was only ʿĪsā’s human nature (nāsūt) that was crucified, and not his divine nature (lāhūt), whereas the Melkites (al-malkāniyya) (from the Syriac malkāyā, “the royalists,” so called because of their adherence to the formulations of the Councils of Ephesus (212bh/431) and Chalcedon (200bh/451) as endorsed by the Byzantine emperors) held that the entirety of ʿĪsā was crucified, both his human and divine natures.” Others say that this “difference” pivots on the fact that “the generality of the Jews say ‘We killed him’, whereas those who witnessed ʿĪsā’s ascension said ‘We did not kill him’” (Qurṭubī, Tafsīr, sub Q 4:157; see also Rāzī, Tafsīr). This last opinion, with its mention of a group who were coeval with ʿĪsā and denied that he was really crucified, accords with some early Christian writings, such as the Apocalypse of Peter and the Second Treatise of the Great Seth, which also affirm that it was not really ʿĪsā who was killed, but that he was raised to heaven by God.

The next verse (Q 3:159) adds another dimension to this issue: And there is not one in the People of the Book but will certainly believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them. Commentators differ on the interpretation of this verse primarily because they disagree as to whom the pronouns in believe in him and before his death refer to. One view is that the pronoun in the first phrase refers to ʿĪsā, upon him peace, and in the second phrase it refers to kitābīs (Jews or Christian) and thus the verse means that every Jew or Christian before his death must believe in ʿĪsā, upon him peace, but it will be of no benefit to him at that time (Ālūsī, Rūḥ). The interpretation preferred by al-Ṭabarī and most other exegetes is that both the pronouns refer to ʿĪsā, upon him peace, so that the verse means that before the death of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, and after his second coming, every Jew and Christian will believe in him (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr). Hence Q 3:159 is deemed a proof of the continuity of life and second coming of ʿĪsā, upon him peace.

Finally, Q 43:61 is also understood as mentioning ʿĪsā, upon him peace, as the sign of the coming of the Day of Judgment: And certainly he is the sign of the Hour [of Judgment]; therefore, doubt not about it [the Hour] and follow me; this is the right path. Although some of the exegetes are of the view that the pronoun at the beginning of the verse refers to the Qurʾān or the Prophet Muḥammad, upon him blessings and peace, a majority of the exegetes have understood it as referring to ʿĪsā, upon him peace, primarily because the preceding verses (Q 43:57-60) as well as the following verses (Q 43:63-65) mention him. Abū Ḥayyān asserts:

The pronoun here refers to ʿĪsā, because the pronouns in the preceding verses evidently refer to him. According to Ibn ʿAbbās, Mujāhid, Qatāda, al-Ḥasan, al-Suddī, al-Ḍaḥḥāk and Ibn Zayd, this verse means that the advent of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, will give knowledge of the [Last] Hour, implying that the Hour is at hand (Baḥr).

This interpretation is further strengthened by the fact that in one of the canonical readings (q.v.) the word ʿalam (“sign”) is used in place of ʿilm (“knowledge”) (Rāzī, Tafsīr). For this reason, the exegetes cite many Prophetic traditions about the second coming of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, as the sign of the coming of the Hour (Qurṭubī, Tafsīr).

Questions Arising from the Apparent Deception

The emphatic Qurʾānic rejection of the claim of crucifixion of Prophet ʿĪsā, upon him peace, is in Q 4:137:

And because of their saying: We slew the ʿĪsā, the son of Maryam, the Messenger of Allah—they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and indeed, those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.

The apparent reading of the verse raises several issues; Fakhr al-Dīn Muḥammad al-Rāzī (543-606/1148-1209) elaborates on the most essential of these in his commentary:

To say that it is conceivable that Allah Most High cast the likeness of a person onto another person opens the door to sophistry. If it were so, then when we [say, we] saw Zayd, perhaps it might not be Zayd; rather, it might just be that the likeness of Zayd had been cast onto [whoever it is]. This will result [in casting doubts on the actuality] of marriage, divorce, and ownership; these could not be trusted. Moreover [such a notion] results in the calling into question trust in the continuous transmission (tawātur) of reports which are the basis of [transmitted] knowledge. Now, were we to consider possible that doubtfulness of this kind exists regarding sense-objects, then a challenge is thereby directed against [the whole notion of] continuous narration—and that entails casting aspersions on all the Sacred Laws (Tafsīr, sub Q 4:157).

Al-Rāzī rejects this possibility as an explanation of the shubbiha lahum and says the answer provided by Muslim theologians is that it was not so much that the “likeness” of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, was cast onto someone else, but rather that someone who merely resembled him was seen from afar as being crucified, and it was thus not so much a matter of the senses being deceived, but rather of their being improperly employed. Al-Rāzī also points out that such reports “can be traced only to small number of people, who could very conceivably have grouped together to lie [about the event].” The report of the alledged crucifixion does not meet the requirements of a continuous transmission. In his influential Commentary on Creedal Doctrines (Sharḥ al-ʿaqāʾid), Saʿd al-Dīn Masʿūd al-Taftāzānī (722-792/1322-1390) likewise states that “the [notion that the] report given by Christians of the killing of ʿĪsā, upon him be peace, [was related by] continuous transmission rests on unsound grounds.”

Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. Abī Sahl al-Sarakhsī (d. 483/1090) in his treatise on Islamic jurisprudence (uṣūl al-fiqh) emphasizes the lack of soundness of these reports:

This is not a continuous narration as the Christians narrate it only from the four persons who accompanied ʿĪsā, upon him peace. The zealous disciples had already dispersed when the Jews intended to kill them… and the Jews narrate it from the seven persons who entered the place… It is further reported that they did not know Christ till a person named Judah pointed him out to them. He accompanied [Christ] for some time till he betrayed him to obtain a reward of thirty dirhams and told [the Jews]: “When you see me kiss a person, he is the one you are looking for.” With this [kind of] narration, continuity is not established. To the objection that the event of the crucifixion was narrated by large number of people who could not be perceived to have grouped together on fabricating the report, and so continuity of the narration about crucifixion is established, we reply: “That is not the case, because they obtained the information from a small number of persons and trusted their report that the one crucified was a particular person when [in fact] they were watching him from a distance without focusing on him, because people naturally avoid focusing on the one being crucified–added to this is the fact that changes in appearance occur because of crucifixion. From these various perspectives, doubts arise about it. Thus we come to realize that just as there is no continuous narration about his murder, there is no such narration about his crucifixion. At the most, there is a continuous narration about a person being crucified whom they believed to be ʿĪsā (Uṣūl al-Sarakhsī, 1:285-286).

For al-Sarakhsī, moreover, if one were to accept the explanation of Divine casting of the likeness of ʿĪsā, upon him peace, on someone else, it was an expression of Divine Power and Wisdom:

Casting the likeness of Christ onto someone else is neither impossible nor against the wisdom; rather, there is consummate wisdom (ḥikma bāligha) in it, which is protection of Christ from the evils of his adversaries who were determined to kill him. This [semblance] protected him from being killed, by subtle means (bi-wajh laṭīf). And Allah has peculiar ways of repelling harm from His Messengers. Allah knew about those who intended to murder him that they would never believe in him; hence, He cast his likeness onto another as a means of gradually leading them to ruin (istidrāj) so that they might increase in their rebellion and disease. But the same would not happen with those who come to the Messenger for the purpose of believing in him and getting advice from him for mending their ways.

Al-Sarakhsi cites two examples of such semblances: (i) Iblīs, upon him be curses, appearing to the polytheists of Makka once in the guise of an elderly person from Najd and once as Surāqa b. Mā’ik abetting them in their conspiracies against the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace; and (ii) Jibrīl, upon him peace, appearing to ʿĀʾisha and Ibn ʿAbbās, Allah be well-pleased with them, like Diḥya al-Kalbī, Allah be well-pleased with him, and to other Companions in the guise of a nomad who had come to ask the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, about important aspects of the religion of Islam. He also cites Q 8:44 to substantiate that Allah showed polytheists to Muslims as few in number although in actuality they outnumbered Muslims, so that Allah might accomplish a matter that must be done (Uṣūl al-Sarakhsī, 1:287).

Bibliography

ʿAbd al-Jabbār, Qāḍī. Tathbīt dalāʾil al-nubuwwa. Translated with Arabic text as Critique of Christian Origins. Ed. and tr. G.S. Reynolds and S.K Samir. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 1430/2009.

Ālūsī. Rūḥ.

Bayḍāwī. Tafsīr.

Bukhārī. Ṣaḥīḥ

al-Farhārī, Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz. al-Nibrās sharḥ Sharḥ al-ʿaqāʾid. Istanbul: Asitane, 1430/2009.

Ibn ʿAṭiyya. Muḥarrar.

Ibn al-Jawzī. Zād.

Ibn Juzayy al-Kalbī, Abūl-Qāsim Muḥammad b. Aḥmad. al-Tashīl li-ʿulūm al-tanzīl. Ed. Muḥammad Sālim Hāshim. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1415/1995.

ʿIyāḍ b. Mūsā al-Yaḥṣubī, al-Qāḍī Abūl-Faḍl. Ikmāl al-muʿallim bi-fawāʾid Muslim. Ed. Yaḥyā Ismāʿīl. al-Manṣūra: Dār al-Wafāʾ lil-Ṭibāʿa wal-Nashr wal-Tawzīʿ, 1419/1998.

Jalālayn. Tafsīr.

Māturīdī. Taʾwīlāt.

Qurṭubī. Tafsīr.

Rāghib. Mufradāt.

Rāzī. Tafsīr.

al-Sarakhsī, Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. Abī Sahl. Tamhīf al-fuṣūl fil-uṣūl [Uṣūl al-Sarakhsī]. Ed. Abūl-Wafāʾ al-Afghānī. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1414/1993.

Ṭabarī. Tafsīr.

Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān / Crucifixion

Article Table of Contents

Etymology and meaning

Crucifixion as a pre-Islamic punishment

The non-crucifixion of Jesus

Crucifixion as a divinely-ordained punishment?

Bibliography

Nailing or binding the hands and feet of a criminal to a cross of execution. The verb ṣalaba, “to crucify,” occurs six times in the Qurʾān: twice in the root form and four times in the second verbal form. It is probably a Syriac loan word (see foreign vocabulary ).

Etymology and meaning

The verb “to crucify” (ṣalaba), which occurs in the active voice at q 4:157 and in the passive at q 12:41, is a denominal verb from the noun ṣalīb, meaning a cross. This noun does not occur in the Qurʾān, although found in early poetry (see poetry and poets ). It is probably derived from ṣelībā, the word for cross in Syriac. The precise meaning of the second form of the verb ( ṣallaba), which occurs at q 5:33 in the passive voice and at q 7:124, 20:71 and 26:49 in the active, is uncertain. J. Penrice assumes that it is causative (Dictionary, 85) but as the verb is denominal the first and second forms may be interchangeable. Other possibilities are that the second form is intensive (“to crucify with great violence”) or numerically extensive (“to crucify in large numbers”).

Crucifixion as a pre-Islamic punishment

Crucifixion was widely practiced in antiquity. Herodotus (fifth century b.c.e.) makes numerous references to its employment by the Persians and other classical authors testify to its currency amongst Indians, Assyrians, Celts, Carthaginians and Romans ¶ (M. Hengel, Crucifixion, 4-5). According to the Gospels, when the Romans crucified Jesus they nailed him to a cross which had to be carried to the site of execution (e.g. John 19:17-23; 20:25). However, Paul equates crucifixion with hanging on a tree (Gal 3:13; cf. Deut 21:23).

In the Qurʾān, crucifixion is associated principally with ancient Egypt (q.v.). Joseph (q.v.) interprets the dream (see dreams and sleep ) of a fellow prisoner to mean that the latter will be crucified and birds will eat from his head ( q 12:41; cf. Gen 40:23, where Pharaoh's chief baker is hanged on a tree; see bread ). Another instance occurs in reference to Moses (q.v.). When Pharaoh's magicians testify to their belief in the God of Moses, Pharaoh (q.v.) says that he will cut off their hands and feet on opposite sides and crucify them ( q 7:124; 20:71; 26:49). We are not given details of the procedure, although in one of these qurʾānic references, Pharaoh tells his magicians that he will crucify them “on the trunks of palm trees (q.v.)” ( q 20:71).

The non-crucifixion of Jesus

The Qurʾān takes the Jews to task for claiming that they killed Jesus (q.v..) and it states that they did not kill him or crucify him but that it appeared so to them ( q 4:157; see jews and judaism; christians and christianity). According to the traditional Sunnī and Shīʿī commentators, God raised him alive to heaven, having first projected his likeness onto someone else whom the Jews crucified in the belief that he was Jesus. In support of this interpretation, they cite ḥadīths which state that Jesus will descend to kill the Antichrist (q.v.) before he dies (see apocalypse; eschatology), as well as reports attributed to the early exegetes Ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/686-8), Wahb b. Munabbih (d. 110 or 114 a.h.) and al-Suddī¶ (d. ca. 127/745) which narrate how God outwitted the Jews (N. Robinson, Christ in Islam, 127-41, 171-2). Muslim rationalists were quick to point out the difficulties in the projection theory. Some of them proposed more credible alternatives, e.g. that the authorities, after failing to arrest Jesus, knowingly crucified another person and that the crowds were misled into thinking that the substitute was Jesus because they were kept at a distance and his appearance was disfigured by the ordeal (N. Robinson, Christ in Islam, 136-8, 172; see polemics and polemical language ).

As some pre-Islamic texts such as the gnostic Apocalypse of Peter discovered at Nag Hammadi mention the crucifixion of a substitute, it is possible that the traditional commentators have interpreted this verse correctly. However, Christian apologists have long argued that q 4:157 does not actually deny that Jesus was crucified, but rather, that it denies that it was the Jews who crucified him. This accords with the gospel accounts, which attribute his execution to the Romans (N. Robinson, Christ in Islam, 108-9). Christian apologists also draw attention to q 3:55, which seems to imply that Jesus' death is in the past and to q 3:169, which asserts that Muslim martyrs are alive with God. The Brethren of Purity (see brother and brotherhood ) apparently accepted these arguments and adopted the view that Jesus' body was nailed to the cross but that his spirit was raised alive into God's presence (N. Robinson, Christ in Islam, 56).

M.Z. Khan's translation of q 4:157 (…“those who have differed in the matter of his having been taken down alive from the cross are certainly in a state of doubt concerning it”…) gives the impression that the Arabic explicitly states that Jesus was taken down alive from the cross. However, as the Arabic reads: wa-inna lladhīna khtalafū¶ fīhi la-fī shakkin minhu, a more literal translation would be along the lines of “those who have differed in it are certainly in a state of doubt concerning it.” He also renders q 2:72-5 so as to allude to the crucifixion. His rendition of q 2:72-3, in particular, is at variance with the Arabic: “Call to mind also when you claimed to have brought about the death of a Personage [wa-idh qataltum nafsan, lit. “and when you killed a man”] and then differed among yourselves concerning it, and Allah would bring to mind that which you concealed. So We said: ‘Test the crucial question by putting together other incidents relating to the affair and you will arrive at the truth.’ Thus does Allah plan to preserve alive those considered dead [kadhālika yuḥyi llāhu l-mawtā, lit. “thus does God make the dead alive”] and shows you His Signs that you may understand.” The interpretations conveyed in this translation, corresponding to the teaching of the Aḥmadiyya (q.v.), have no textual basis.

Crucifixion as a divinely-ordained punishment?

The traditional interpretation of q 5:33 is that it prescribes crucifixion as one of four possible punishments for brigandage. The basis for this view is a ḥadīth which states that the verse ( āya) was revealed when some people from the tribe of ʿUkl abused the Prophet's hospitality by killing a herdsman and stealing cattle (Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ, viii, 201-2; see occasions of revelation ). Without mentioning this ḥadīth, M. Asad argues that the Qurʾān would hardly promulgate a divine law which advocated a punishment identical to that inflicted by Pharaoh, whose qurʾānic characterization is that of an enemy of God. Asad suggests that the āya is not a legal injunction, but rather a description of what the unbelievers were doing to each other in their perverseness (The message, 148-9; see chas- ¶ tisement and punishment ; belief and unbelief; gratitude and ingratitude; disobedience; law and the qurʾān).

Bibliography

Primary

K. Aland et al. (eds.), The Greek New Testament, London 1966

Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ

M.Z. Khan, The Quran. Arabic text with a new translation, London 1971, 19813 (rev. ed.)

R. Kittel (ed.), Biblica Hebraica, Stuttgart 1937

J.M. Robinson, The Nag Hammadi library in English, Leiden 1977

Secondary

M. Asad, The message of the Qurʾān, Gibraltar 1980

M. Hengel, Crucifixion in the ancient world and the folly of the message of the cross, London 1977

B.T. Lawson, The crucifixion of Jesus in the Qurʾān and qurʾānic commentary. A historical survey. Part II, in Bulletin of the Henry Martyn Institute of Islamic Sciences 10.3 (1991), 6-40

J. Penrice, A dictionary and glossary of the Koran, London 1873; repr. 1971

N. Robinson, Christ in Islam and Christianity. The representation of Jesus in the Qurʾān and the classical Muslim commentaries, London 1991

O. Spies, Über die Kreuzigung im Islam, in R. Thomas (ed.), Religion und religionen. Festschrift für Gustav Mansching, Bonn 1967, 143-56

F.E. Vogel, Ṣalb, in ei2, viii, 935-6

A.J. Wensinck and D. Thomas, Ṣalīb, in ei2, viii, 980-1

Cite this page

Robinson, Neal, “Crucifixion”, in: Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān, General Editor: Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Georgetown University, Washington DC. Consulted online on 07 January 2017 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-3922_q3_EQCOM_00046>

Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition / Ṣalb

(a.), “crucifixion”. In Islamic doctrine and practice, it refers to a criminal punishment in which the body of the criminal, either living or dead, is affixed ¶ to or impaled on a beam or tree trunk and exposed for some days or longer.

Before Islam, many cultures, including the Persian and Roman ones, practised crucifixion as a punishment for traitors, rebels, robbers and criminal slaves (M. Hengle, Crucifixion in the ancient world, London 1977).

The Ḳurʾān refers to crucifixion in six places. The significant verse for legal practice is V, 33: “The recompense of those who make war on (yuḥāribūn) God and His messenger and sow corruption (fasdd) in the earth shall but be that they shall be slain, or be crucified (yusallabu), or have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, or be banished from the earth...".

The standard hadith collections report one case where Muhammad practiced crucifixion (of persons who murdered a shepherd and stole camels). This account is, however, contradicted by many others describing a different punishment (cutting hands and feet and gouging eyes) (see al-Nasa°I, tahrim al-dam, bdbs 7-9). In another hadith, the first crucifixion in Medina was by cUmar, of two slaves who killed their mistress (see Abu Dawud, saldt, bdb 61).

Fikh [q.v.] applies the above verse chiefly to highway robbers, as hadd [q.v.; and see KATL]. The choice of crucifixion, instead of another of the four stated penalties, is governed by complex, contested rules. Most scholars require that a robber who both killed and took property be crucified, as a hadd penalty (see KATL); others, while requiring execution, do not demand crucifixion. For most scholars, offenders are to be beheaded before being crucified. Malikls, with most Hanaffs and most Twelver ShIcTs, provide that the offender is crucified alive, but then killed by lance thrust. For the Zahiris, crucifixion itself must cause the death. Most scholars limit the period of crucifixion to three days (after which the body is to be washed, prayed over and buried).

Various minority views permit or prescribe crucifixion for crimes other than highway robbery, usually on authority of the same verse. These crimes include insults to the Prophet (sabb al-nabi) [see KATL], heresy (zandaka) [see MURTADD; ZINDIK], sorcery [see SIHR], and killing by stranglers (khanndkuri) and assassins drugging their victims (mubanniajun), such punishments sometimes represented as hadd and sometimes as tacztr [ q . v . ] . The quoted verse itself conceivably applies to anyone whose corrupting effect on society can be prevented only thereby (Ibn Taymiyya, al-Siydsa al-sharciyya, Cairo 1322, 55). Al-Mawardi (apparently alone) permitted crucifixion while alive (but not necessarily to death) as a generally applicable form of tacztr (al-Ahkdm al-sultdniyya, Cairo 1966, 239; cf. al-Ramli, Nihdyat al-muhtddj., Cairo 1967, viii, 21). Reports of actual crucifixions exist under most of these doctrinal headings. Exposure, often extremely prolonged, of headless bodies is common, especially for political or religious opponents [see e.g. CABD ALLAH B. AL-ZUBAYR; HASANAK; IBN BAKIYYA], Crucifixion while alive also appears, such as for al- Halladj [q.v.] and murderous slaves (H. Ritter, Kreuzigung eines Knaben, in Oriens, xxv [1976], 38-40, suggesting a frequency in the 7th/13th century of crucifixion to death).

In later Persian and Turkish usage, salb meant "hanging". In the form of exposure after beheading, crucifixion is practised in Saudi Arabia today.

Cite this page

Vogel, F.E., “Ṣalb”, in: Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, Edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs. Consulted online on 18 March 2021 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_6530>

8/935