Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Article on Uzayr by Jonathan A.C. Brown

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

  • Development Team

Why does the Quran tell us that the Jews claim Ezra (ʿUzayr) is the son of God (Quran 9:30), when Jews do not make this claim or anything approaching it?  This is not a question that arose just recently during an interfaith panel. It’s not a new question at all. Even in the ninth century, the Zaydi Imam and renowned scholar al-Qāsim b Ibrāhīm al-Rassī (d. 860 CE), who had studied Jewish and Christian scriptures in Egypt and who had engaged in debates with priests and rabbis, said that he had never encountered a Jew who believed Ezra was the son of God.1 Nor was this a question that Muslims pondered at ease in the libraries of Baghdad or Cordoba. As early as the ninth century, Muslim scholars like al-Jāḥiẓ (d. 868, who wrote a famous rebuttal of Christianity) were being confronted by Christian opponents who argued that the Ezra claim was evidence that the Quran contained patent falsehoods. So is the Quran wrong in attributing this belief to Jews?  Is it rebutting the belief of a community that never actually held that belief?  How should we understand this?

An explanation given by Muslim scholars from the time of al-Jāḥiẓ and al-Ṭabarī  (d. 923) was that this belief had, in fact, been held by a group of Jews in Arabia, but that this sect had died out. Ibn Ḥazm, the famous Andalusian scholar (d. 1064), wrote that there was a group of Jews in Yemen who believed this.2 (Interestingly, an inscription from a 4th-6th-century CE Jewish temple in South Arabia suggests possible angel worship).3 A second explanation was that this Quranic verse related to the verse immediately following it: ‘They have taken their rabbis and monks as lords apart from God…’ (Quran 9:31). In other words, Jews venerated Ezra so much that it was as if he were a god to them.4]

Muslim scholars found a basis for the first claim – that some Jews actually considered Ezra to be the son of God – in a Jewish work entitled The Fourth Book of Ezra (probably composed in the first century CE), which had not been included in the Hebrew Bible but which rabbis still read and consulted (it belongs to a body of works known as the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, namely works that claimed to be written by some Old Testament figures such as Enoch but which were really produced in the Hellenistic or early Roman periods). Fourth Ezra tells how Ezra led the Children of Israel after their return from the Babylonian exile, when their scriptures had been lost (this is all in the Bible’s book of Ezra as well). Ezra is given inspiration by God to reconstitute the Torah in 451 BCE. As a reward, God tells Ezra that “You shall be taken up from among men, and henceforth you shall live with my son….”  Here it is important to remember that, like the belief of the Quraysh that angels were the daughters of God (“We worship the angels, who are daughters of God,” said the Quraysh to the Prophet in Ibn Isḥāq’s Sīra; see also Quran 17:40, 37:150-53), in Jewish scriptures of this period angels were called the children of God.5

But there does not seem to be any strong evidence that the Jews of western Arabia at the time of the Prophet ﷺ believed this about Ezra. The problem is that we do not have any external sources (in other words, non-Muslim sources) for what Jews in Arabia believed. As F.E. Peters observed, the Quran is pretty much the only source we have for what Jews believed in seventh-century Arabia.6

Another possibility is that ʿUzayr as mentioned in the Quran was never a one-for-one counterpart of Ezra. First, the Quran does not actually specify that Jews believed that Ezra was the son of God; it says that they said that ʿUzayr was the son of God. The Quran provides no more information about ʿUzayr, nor do the mainstay Hadith collections. A Hadith in Sahih al-Bukharireiterates the claim made in the Quran, and a Hadith in the Sunan of Abū Dāwūd quotes the Prophet ﷺ as saying that he does not know if ʿUzayr is a prophet or not.7 What other information we find in less critical collections of Hadiths comes from stories drawn from figures like the Successor (and Jewish convert to Islam) Kaʿb al-Aḥbār (d. circa 653) and the early collector of stories of the prophets, Wahb b. Munabbih (d. 732), without any chain of transmission to any authoritative source.8

The persona of Ezra was highly complex in the milieu in which the Quran was revealed. The figures of Enoch (Idrīs in the Islamic tradition) and Ezra were intermingled in the Hellenistic and early Roman periods (roughly 300 BCE – 100 CE), particularly in a body of religio-philosophical writing called the Hermetic Corpus (appeared in Greek circa 1st – 4th centuries CE).9 All this occurred before Islam, so it would not have been the Quran confusing Ezra with someone else. The Quran would have been referring to a character who had already emerged as a composite figure in the overall body of Judeo-Christian material circulating in the Near East in the centuries before Islam.

Enoch and Ezra were closely associated with one another because both were referred to as ‘The Scribe’ and both were elevated to angelic status. But in the case of Enoch, he was not simply referred to as an angelic ‘son of God.’  In another famous Old Testament Pseudeprigrapha, The Book of Enoch (which dates early second century BCE to first century CE), Enoch is raised up to the status of the righteous ‘son of man,’ i.e., an angel with the appearance of a man (II Enoch 46.1, 71.14). But in III Enoch (which perhaps dates from 5th to the 7th centuries CE) he is transformed into the Metatron (yes, Metatron!), a super archangel who is designated the ‘lesser God (Yahweh)’ (III Enoch 12.5).10 The figure of the Metatron appears in the Babylonian Talmud11](circa 500 CE), the predominant expression of rabbinic Judaism in the Near East at the time, as well as in the Hekhalot literature (literature of mystical ascent), which developed in the region from the 6th-7th centuries.12

While we do not have direct information from Jewish sources about what the Jews of Arabia believed at the time of the Prophet ﷺ, we do know that many of the other beliefs that the Quran mentions Jews having were, in fact, found in the Babylonian Talmud (for example, the belief that Abraham would descend into Hell to remove all the Jews, and thus that they would only be punished there ‘for an hour’, reminiscent of Quran 2:80).13 And we know that a belief in Ezra/Enoch assuming the status of a super angel was common among Jews in Babylon/Iraq, the nearest and most influential center of Jewish thought and lore in the area in which the Quran was revealed. In fact, in 8th-century Baghdad, when a Jewish movement named Karaite Judaism emerged as a response to Rabbinic Judaism, one of its criticisms of mainstream Rabbinic Judaism was that it worshiped the Metatron as a archangel and substitute for God.14

The question of what the Quran means by its mention of Jews and ʿUzayr reminds us of an important question, one that has occupied Muslims since the death of the Prophet ﷺ: Is everything in the Quran eternally binding upon Muslims? If not, how do we know which parts are and which parts aren’t?  This would require volumes to answer, since it is, in truth, the single greatest engine of thought in the Islamic tradition.

But briefly, Muslims have always held that the Quran was and remains ‘suitable for all times and all places (ālih li-kull zamān wa kull makān).’  But this applies to the revelation as a whole, not to all its particular rules and references. To offer a blunt, non-legal example: ‘Perish the hands of Abū Lahab’ (Quran 111:1) will always be true, but it only applies to one person – Abū Lahab – and he has been dead for fourteen centuries. In the realm of law that could be binding on Muslims, the ulama have also concluded that some legal commands of the Quran applied only in the time of the Prophet. For example, in Surat al-Mumtahana, God commands the Muslims to refuse to return Meccan women who had fled to Medina as Muslims but instead to compensate their husbands by sending them the equivalent of the mahr. Although a minority of scholars has considered this ruling to have continued, so that, when believing women flee from outside the Abode of Islam to Muslims lands, Muslims might have to compensate their husbands, the vast majority of Muslim scholars consider this ruling to have ceased to apply.15 In the case of the Jews and ʿUzayr/Ezra, the same principle applies to a question of theology. The Quran’s discussion of what Jews believe ceases to be applicable once they stop believing it, and it would be sheer ignorance for Muslims to insist that our discussions with Jews hinge on obsolete tenets of faith.

Note: It’s also possible that, in the religious climate of pre-Islamic Arabia, ʿUzayr was actually a reference to Azarias, a figure connected to the Old Testament Book of Daniel. He is one of the Jews thrown into the fire by the Babylonians. But instead of burning, he looks like ‘a son of God’ (Daniel, 3:25). This story was reported by Wahb b. Munabbih and Ibn Qutayba (d. 889).16


For the longest time,I thought Uzayr was either Ezra or perhaps Elijah but Dr.Brown might be on to something with the theory of Azarias being the Uzayr mentioned in the Quran. Especially when you consider how sketchy our current knowledge of pre-Islamic Arabia. As a Shia Muslim, I believe that the Quran and the messenger who revealed it are infallible, so to say that Uzayr is either Elijah or Ezra makes no sense when you consider or have the same beliefs as I do. This Azarias figure is quite interesting when the Book of Daniel said he looked like a "son of God" when the Babylonians threw him into the blazing furnace; The man might very well be the Uzayr of the Quran. I am wondering if there are references to this figure in the Babylonian Talmud or other Rabbinical literature?

Any thoughts?

@Netzari @Yoel  @wmehar2 @Qa'im @reisiger

(Sorry Qaim, reisiger and Waseem, I know you guy aren't Jewish but you guys have interesting insights, maybe you can help?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

An interesting read. As the article notes, there's no record of this in Jewish belief (aside from the Qur'an). There are a few possibilities. Perhaps there were groups in Arabia that believed such a thing. There have been times in the past where Jewish communities in isolated regions held certain misguided beliefs or were mired in ignorance. Usually one of two things would happen. Sometimes, knowledgeable Rabbis would move to the community and guide them in correct Torah observance (as in the case of Bukharian Jewry, or more recently, the Falashim of Ethiopia). At other times, when faced with great upheaval, they would flee to a larger Jewish community, in which case most would assimilate into mainstream Judaism. Perhaps one of these two scenarios occurred with the Jews that the Qur'an speaks of. 

I'm only vaguely familiar with the Gnostic religions of the Middle East. While the first book of Enoch at one time did enjoy popularity among the Jewish people of the 1st and 2nd century, it was never accepted as "canonical". The 2nd and 3rd books of Enoch were likely written by Christians. I'm unaware of any connections with Ezra. But one thing did catch my eye:


The figures of Enoch (Idrīs in the Islamic tradition) and Ezra were intermingled in the Hellenistic and early Roman periods (roughly 300 BCE – 100 CE), particularly in a body of religio-philosophical writing called the Hermetic Corpus (appeared in Greek circa 1st – 4th centuries CE).

The Arabic name for Enoch (Idris) and the Greek name for Ezra (Esdras) seem very similar. Maybe there's a connection. It's speculation, but perhaps there could have been some strange Gnostic/Jewish/Christian group in Arabia that used both Arabic and Greek and eventually confused the two names. The names Ezra (עזרא‎) and Azarias (עזריה‎‎) are also somewhat similar. I personally find it hard to believe people would confuse these names and personas, but I guess it's within the realm of possibility.

Salaam and Shalom!

Edited by Netzari
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
On 1/14/2017 at 5:54 AM, Qa'im said:

There is a genre of Jewish mystical texts called the hekhalot literature which deals with the ascensions of various prophets and sages. It is said that Enoch (who is normally identified as Idris, and he is also associated with Hermes in some medieval Jewish circles, and some Kabbalah circles associate him with Gabriel) was raised to the heavens. Upon ascension, in this literature, people become angelic, and so Metatron was the angelic name of Enoch. Metatron is seen by mystical Jews as a guiding angel of light and representation of the divine presence. Some medieval Jews elevated his status and worshiped him, it is likely that the Quran is referring to this. Not every statement in the Quran about Jews, Christians, or polytheists necessarily applied to all Jews, all Christians, and all polytheists, and early exegeses noted the exceptions.

Also keep in mind that there were many converts from polytheism to Judaism in Arabia (particularly in Yemen but also in Yathrib and elsewhere) between the 3rd and 7th centuries. It is entirely possible that polytheistic practices crept into some communities.

But why in the Quran there is here a generalization saying "the jews believe that" ? Is it maybe a particularity in arabic grammar that i dont understand ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
7 minutes ago, alidu78 said:

But why in the Quran there is here a generalization saying "the jews believe that" ? Is it maybe a particularity in arabic grammar that i dont understand ?

Yes, it is grammatically valid - al-yahud doesn't necessarily mean each and every Jew, it can simply refer to a group among them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
28 minutes ago, Qa'im said:

Yes, it is grammatically valid - al-yahud doesn't necessarily mean each and every Jew, it can simply refer to a group among them.

Thank you for your rapid answer. If i could also ask what our tafsir or simply our imams (as) said about this Uzayr or the verse 9:30 in general ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 7/23/2018 at 5:50 AM, alidu78 said:

But why in the Quran there is here a generalization saying "the jews believe that" ? Is it maybe a particularity in arabic grammar that i dont understand ?

It is not always a generalization and such statements are quite often related to the context rather than to rules of the language.

Even in English, if I told you that Christians say something, I could just be referring to the Christians I know and not necessarily to the doctrines of their faith.

The Quran has many verses that begin with "They say ......." where "they" refers to a particular group of people.

it does not mean that it is talking about every member of that group. 

It is merely referring to a sub-set defined by the context. 

As we all know, the Quran is heavily context-driven.

Edited by baqar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...