Maryam (19:16-17)

And mention in the Book...

Issues Discussed Herein:

Intabazat (انتبذت) means she secluded herself. It is said: Jalasa nubdhah min an-nās (جلس نبذة من الناس) or nubdhah (with a dammah or fatḥah on the nūn), meaning a small group or a side area. This is used when someone sits near you such that if you were to throw something towards them, it would reach them.

To nabadha ash-shay' (نبذت الشيء) means to throw it. This is the origin of nabīdh (the drink), because the ingredients are thrown into the container. The word originally was manbūdh (منبوذ) but was changed to fa'īl. The term manbūdh is also used for an abandoned infant (a foundling) because he is thrown away.

From this also comes the prohibition of munābadhah (المنابذة) in sales, which is when one says: "If I throw this garment or pebble to you, the sale is finalized."

Given this understanding, the Almighty's saying: {\text{When she withdrew from her people to an eastern place}} (19:16) means she separated herself and secluded herself quickly to a place situated towards the East.

Then, the Almighty clarified that despite this seclusion, she took a hidden veil/screen (ḥijāb mastūr) from her people. The apparent meaning is that she did not just isolate herself in a location, but she placed a barrier, such as a wall or something else, between herself and them. The second interpretation—that she placed a screen between herself and them—is more apparent than the first.

Her seclusion must have been for a sound purpose, which is not explicitly mentioned. The commentators have differed on this purpose in several ways:

1. First View: When she saw her menstruation, she moved away from her usual place of worship to wait for purity, so she could perform ghusl (ritual bath) and return. When she became pure, Gabriel (peace be upon him) came to her.
2. Second View: She sought solitude so that she would not be distracted from worship.
3. Third View: She sat in an eastern place to perform ghusl from her menses, veiled by something that concealed her.
4. Fourth View: She had a separate sanctuary (miḥrāb) in the house of her sister's husband, Zechariah, where she resided. When Zechariah left, he would lock it for her. She wished (to God) to find solitude in the mountain to comb her hair, so the roof opened for her, and she went out to the wilderness, sat in a high place behind the mountain, and the Angel came to her.
5. Fifth View: She was thirsty and went out to the wilderness to fetch water.

All these views are plausible, and the wording does not indicate a preference for one over the others.

• The Majority View: It was Gabriel (peace be upon him).
• Abu Muslim's View: It was the Spirit that took human form within her womb.

The first view is closer because Gabriel (peace be upon him) is called the Spirit, as God says: {\text{The Trustworthy Spirit brought it down upon your heart}}} (Ash-Shu'ara: 193-194). He is named the Spirit because he is spiritual (rūḥānī), or because he was created from the Spirit, or because life/religion is sustained by him. Alternatively, God named him His Spirit metaphorically out of love and closeness, as you say to your beloved, "My spirit."

Abu Haywah recited it as Rūḥanā (روحنا) with a fatḥah because he is the cause of what brings spirit to the servants, and the attainment of the Spirit from God, which is the provision for the pious, as in: {\text{Then if he is of those brought near, *then Rūḥ and Rayḥān, and a Garden of Bliss}}} (Al-Waqi'ah: 88-89). Or, it is because he is among the Muqarrabīn (those brought near), who are promised the Spirit, meaning "Our Spirit" or "The Spirit belonging to Us."

If it is established that he is called the Spirit, then here it must mean Gabriel, because He said: {\text{I am only a messenger from your Lord, to bestow upon you a pure boy}} (19:19), and this is only fitting for Gabriel (peace be upon him).

They also differed on how he appeared to her:

1. First View: He appeared to her in the form of a handsome, smooth-cheeked, well-formed young man.
2. Second View: He appeared to her in the form of one of her servants/attendants at the Holy House named Yusuf.

Both are plausible, and the text gives no indication to specify one.

He only took the form of a human so that she might be reassured by his speech and not be repulsed. If he had appeared to her in the form of an angel, she would have recoiled and been unable to listen to his words.

Here are some critical issues (ishkālāt):

1. Issue 1: If it is permissible for an Angel to appear in the form of a specific human, then we cannot be certain that the person we see now is the same Zayd we saw yesterday, due to the possibility that an Angel or Jinn has assumed his form. Opening this door leads to sophistry.
   • Rebuttal: One might argue this is only permissible during the time when sending messengers was possible, but not now. We reply that this distinction is known only through evidence (dalīl). The one ignorant of this evidence must not be certain that the person seen now is the same person seen yesterday. Furthermore, anyone who admits the necessity of an active Creator must admit God's power to create another person exactly like Zayd in form and feature. If we allow this, the doubt about whether the observed Zayd is the same Zayd seen before remains. Even the denier of an active Creator, attributing events to planetary conjunctions, must allow for a strange conjunction that causes a person exactly like Zayd to appear in all respects, leading back to the same doubt.

2. Issue 2: Reports state that Gabriel (peace be upon him) is a tremendously huge being. How did his body fit into the size of a human body? Did his parts scatter, meaning he ceased to be Gabriel? Or did his parts interpenetrate, which necessitates the interpenetration of parts, which is impossible?
   • Rebuttal: It is not impossible that Gabriel (peace be upon him) has essential parts and surplus parts. The essential parts are very few, allowing him to assume the human form if we consider him corporeal. If we consider him spiritual, what is the improbability of him sometimes donning a large form and other times a small form?

3. Issue 3: If we allow Gabriel (peace be upon him) to assume human form, why not allow him to assume a form smaller than a human, such as a fly, a beetle, or a mosquito? Any doctrine leading to this conclusion is false.
   • Rebuttal: The basis for allowing this assumption is rooted in reason ('aql). Its falsehood is known only through the evidence of transmission (sam', i.e., revelation/reports). This also answers the fourth issue.

4. Issue 4: Allowing this leads to casting doubt upon established, continuous reports (tawātur). Perhaps the person who fought at Badr was not Muhammad, but someone else who resembled him, and so on for all reports.
   • Answer: This is covered in the rebuttal to Issue 3.

God knows best.