Subtleties and Allusions

1. Examining the Arguments of Supporters and Opponents of Mary’s Prophethood

There is no doubt about the angels’ dialogue with Mary (a.s.). However, there is disagreement among exegetes whether this characteristic necessitates her prophethood or not: some Sunni exegetes consider Mary (a.s.) to have the status of prophethood,(123) while others do not.(124)

Some of the arguments of those who claim her prophethood are:

1. God says: “He sends down the angels with the Spirit of His command to whomever He wishes of His servants”.(125) The “Spirit” is revelation, and the bearer of revelation is only Gabriel (a.s.), so the intended meaning is not a group of angels, but rather an individual mentioned in plural form; like the statement of Nuʿaym ibn Masʿūd al-Ashjaʿī that is attributed to “people”: “Those to whom the people said, ‘All the people have gathered against you; so fear them’”.(126)
2. It is also evident from the verses of Sūrat Mary that only one angel spoke with Mary (a.s.), and that was Gabriel (a.s.): “Thus did she seclude herself from them, whereupon We sent to her Our Spirit and he became incarnate for her as a well-proportioned human”.(127)

Those who deny Mary’s (a.s.) prophethood have responded to the first argument in three ways: First, Gabriel (a.s.) is the bearer of legislative revelation (waḥy tashrīʿī) and descends upon prophets and messengers (a.s.), whereas Mary (a.s.) received guiding revelation (waḥy tasdīdī), supporting revelation (waḥy taʾyīdī), glad tidings (waḥy tabshīrī) and the like, which other saints also receive. Therefore, what descended upon her was not specific legislative revelation that would necessarily require Gabriel (a.s.) as its bearer, just as not all instances of Gabriel’s descent involved prophethood for the recipient of revelation, since he would descend upon non-prophets as well, and such a characteristic for Mary’s (a.s.) revelation is never established from the verses of the Qur’an.

Second, it is not certain that the “Spirit” in “He sends down the angels with the Spirit”(128) specifically refers to revelation; perhaps it refers to Gabriel (a.s.) himself, with whom other angels descend under his leadership, just as Gabriel (a.s.) is called the “Trustworthy Spirit”: “This is indeed [a Book] sent down by the Lord of all the worlds, brought down by the Trustworthy Spirit upon your heart (so that you may be one of the warners).”(129)

Third, even if “Spirit” refers to revelation, Gabriel is not the only bearer of revelation, as there are other angels who also carry this role, though Gabriel is their leader: “in honoured scriptures, exalted and purified, in the hands of envoys, noble and pious”.(130) Thus, there are many angels who bear revelation, although Gabriel is their leader, just as there are many who take souls, though Azrael (a.s.) leads them, and similarly with giving life and providing sustenance, which Israfil and Michael (a.s.) are in charge of.

This group of exegetes has responded to the second argument as follows: This point is also not complete, because the angels spoke to Mary (a.s.) twice, not once. Therefore, the fact that one angel spoke to her the first time does not mean that it was the same familiar angel the second time.

Those who deny Mary’s (a.s.) prophethood, in addition to responding to these two arguments, have presented two proofs against it:

First: God states that He only granted prophethood to men: “We did not send [any messengers] before you except as men to whom We revealed from among the people of the towns”(131) “We did not send [any messengers] before you except as men to whom We revealed—ask the People of the Reminder if you do not know”(132)

Second: “Consensus” (ijmāʿ): Only men have attained the status of prophethood.

Note: It should be noted that with the existence of reliable textual evidence, namely the verse of the Qur’an, it is likely that those who claim consensus are basing it on that, so this would not be a devotional consensus. However, if the known consensus has been achieved, based on the authority of consensus itself, one can rely on it, as it reveals the ruling of the Infallible (a.s.), and the definitive statement of the Infallible is authoritative in both principles and branches.(133)

Al-Ālūsī, in response to the first argument of those who deny the prophethood of Mary (a.s.), says: The verse “We did not send before you any messenger…”(134) negates messengership (risāla) from women, not prophethood (nubuwwa); and messengership is an executive matter that comes after prophethood; meaning that the bearer of religious law, if also given the mission to convey that law, will be a messenger, and this verse proves that only men attain messengership; but it does not negate the prophethood of women. In other words, every messenger is a prophet, but not every prophet is a messenger; meaning prophethood does not necessitate messengership.(135) The statement of the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) who said: “There is no prophet after me”,(136) also entails the negation of messengership, because with the negation of prophethood, messengership, which is dependent on prophethood, will also be negated.

Al-Ālūsī, in rejecting the consensus argument, also says: In a disputed matter, such as the prophethood of Mary (a.s.), the prophethood of Moses’s mother, or the prophethood of Hājar (those with whom the angels spoke), it is not permissible to rely on consensus.(137)

In response to Al-Ālūsī, it can be said that merely seeing angels or hearing their speech is not a sign of legislative prophethood, because prophethood encompasses both informative and legislative aspects. Yes, revelation is sometimes legislative and for conveying to people, like “And maintain the prayer, and give the zakat, and bow along with those who bow [in prayer]”,(138) “Then complete the fast until nightfall”,(139) and “And it is the duty of mankind toward God to make pilgrimage to the House—for those who can afford the journey to it”.(140) Sometimes revelation is for acting upon the law and relates to action rather than ruling, like “Celebrate the Name of your Lord, the Most Exalted”(141) and “So celebrate the Name of your Lord, the All-supreme”.(142) In such cases, the revelation might also be for legislation. What came to the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) was of this kind, hence he (s.a.w.) said regarding “Celebrate the Name of your Lord, the Most Exalted”: “Place it in your prostrations”,(143) and regarding “So celebrate the Name of your Lord, the All-supreme”: “Place it in your bowings”.(144)

Sometimes revelation is supportive, providential, and confirmatory, and it is revelation of action rather than ruling; and does not necessitate legislation, like the revelation to the Imams of the Household (a.s.) or some of the previous Imams: “We made them imams, guiding by Our command, and We revealed to them the performance of good deeds, the maintenance of prayers, and the giving of zakat, and they used to worship Us”.(145)

Al-Zamakhsharī, like his fellow thinkers (the Muʿtazila), has gone to the extreme of deficiency and said: Miracles and extraordinary acts do not pertain to Mary (a.s.), because Mary (a.s.) was not a prophet and extraordinary acts are not permissible for non-prophets. Therefore, Mary’s (a.s.) conversation with angels was among the miracles of Zechariah (a.s.), who was the prophet of that time, or it relates to Jesus (a.s.) as a precursor (irhāṣ)(146).(147)

Al-Qurṭubī has gone to the extreme of excess and considered Mary (a.s.) a prophet, because revelation came to her through angels, just as it did to the prophets; and angels only descend upon prophets (a.s.).(148)

The third view, which is the middle path and the truth, is that these miraculous acts belonged to Mary (a.s.) herself; however, they are not proof of her prophethood, because extraordinary acts (karāma) are not exclusive to prophethood, and whoever reaches the station of sainthood (wilāya) can perform extraordinary acts. Yes, these same acts when accompanied by a claim to prophethood are called miracles (muʿjiza). For example, raising the dead, which was a miracle of Jesus (a.s.), is considered a miraculous act (karāma) in relation to the Imams (a.s.). Of course, challenge (taḥaddī) in its general sense, which includes the Imamate, brings with it miracles in the broader sense. In this case, the miraculous acts of the infallible Imams (a.s.) can be called miracles.

The apparent meaning of the verse under discussion, which first speaks of God’s choosing Mary (a.s.) and then of the angels’ conversation, shows that speaking with angels was a miraculous act of that noble lady herself; however, it does not necessitate her legislative prophethood, rather it is “informative prophethood” (nubuwwat inbāʾī).(149) Mary (a.s.) followed the religious law of Zechariah (a.s.).

It should be noted that perhaps the source of al-Qurṭubī’s misconception was Mary (a.s.) being called truthful: “The Messiah, son of Mary, is but a messenger. Certainly [other] messengers have passed before him, and his mother was a truthful one”(150) “She confirmed the words of her Lord and His Books, and she was one of the obedient”(151)

Al-Qurṭubī interpreted “My Lord, grant me a sign”, which like “My Lord! Show me how You revive the dead”(152) is for reassurance and knowledge of when the miraculous act would occur, not for improbability, in that incorrect meaning (seeking a sign to distinguish divine speech from satanic suggestion).(153) The inevitable result of such a belief is that Mary (a.s.) did something that Zechariah (a.s.) did not do, even though Mary (a.s.) had more reason to ask for a sign, because a daughter having a child without a husband is much more astonishing than a man having a child in old age, even with an infertile wife.

2. Comparison between Mary (a.s.) and Joseph (a.s.)

Mary (a.s.) said to the angel who appeared to her in human form: “I seek the protection of the All-beneficent from you, should you be Godwary!”(154) Not only did she keep herself pure from impurity, but she also called upon her opponent to be God-fearing. Therefore, Mary’s (a.s.) action, if not superior to Joseph’s (a.s.) deed, is no less than it: Joseph (a.s.) was completely saved from impurity: “She certainly made for him; and he would have made for her [too] had he not beheld the proof of his Lord. So it was, that We might turn away from him all evil and indecency. He was indeed one of Our dedicated servants”.(155) Neither did the evil deed occur nor were its preliminaries arranged; even the inclination towards the preliminaries was not acted upon, for He said: “had he not beheld the proof of his Lord”; meaning that at the stage of intention, he made it contingent upon the non-existence of something (if he had not seen the proof of his Lord, he would have intended). God presented Joseph (a.s.) as infallible in three stages: “intention,” “preliminaries of action,” and “external action”; however, all this pertains to Joseph (a.s.) himself, while Mary (a.s.) also called upon her opponent to be God-fearing.