1. Introduction
To understand the nature of prophetology in the Qurâan, and more particularly the distinction between true and false prophets, the foils of a true prophet have to be taken into account. One of these foils is Balaam. Balaam is never mentioned by name in the Qurâan. However, many exegetes have assumed that verses Q 7:175â176 refer to him.1 The verses read as follows:
Recite to them the story of the one to whom we gave out signs [=ÄyÄt], and he distanced himself from them, and Satan followed him, and he was one of the deluded. Had we wanted, we would have raised him by them [i.e., the signs]. But he stayed on earth and followed his desires. His parable is the parable of the dog who if attacked, will stick out its tongue, and if left alone, will still stick out its tongue. This is the parable of the people who denied our signs [=ÄyÄt]. Tell the story, so that they may think.
It is true that the Muslim reception of particular passages is not always to be trusted with full force for understanding the historical meaning of the Qurâan. Still, I start by assuming that the text might refer to Balaam, and then look at the meaning of the character of Balaam in late antique Jewish and Christian literature. As I will show below, the story of Balaam was an occasion for late antique Christian authors to talk about the conditions of prophethood, as well as the border between false and true prophecy. While the text literally refers neither to Balaam nor to prophethood, the text would be best understood if it is contextualized in the symbolism around his character. In this sense, the Muslim exegetes were not wrong in assuming that this text was referring to Balaam. A literary analysis of the entire Surah 7 will confirm this historical conclusion.
2. Balaam, According to the Hebrew Bible
Let us start off by briefly introducing the character of Balaam. The ambivalent attitude of Jewish and Christian literature toward Balaam is mostly due to his strange position on the border between the satanic and the divine. According to Num. 22â24, he is a diviner who is summoned by Balak the Moabite â the enemy of Israel â to curse them. He does not have any problems with doing that, except that God orders him not to go with the Moabites to curse Israel. He accepts the invitation, only after God allows him under the condition that he says whatever is to be dictated by God. In the next episode, Balaam arises to go to the Moabites. But his donkey, upon seeing an angel of the Lord standing in the road with a drawn sword, turned off. The angel obstructs the donkeyâs way in the right and left, and then Balaam falls off and starts striking the donkey, whereupon the donkey starts to speak. Balaam is also able to see the angel, who condemns him, and allows him to go to his fellow Moabites only on the condition that he says what he is told to say. That is why Balaam continues on his way towards Balak the Moabite.
Balaamâs first oracle, after he offered a sacrifice, involves a blessing rather than a curse: âHow can I curse whom God has not cursed?â (Num. 23:6). And Balak recognizes this, to which Balaam responds: âMust I not take care not say what the Lord puts in my mouth?â (Num. 23:12). Balaamâs second oracle also involves a blessing: âThere is no enchantment against Jacob, no divination against Israelâ (Num. 23:23a). The third oracle is similarly a blessing. Finally, here is the famous fourth oracle: âI see him [=the Almighty], but not now; I behold him, but not near â a star shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the borderlands of Moab, and the territory of all Shethites/ Edom will become a possession, Seir a possession of its enemies, while Israel does valiantly. One out of Jacob shall rule and destroy the survivors of Irâ (Num. 24:15â19). After this, Balak is disappointed of gaining any benefit from Balaamâs divinatory powers. This brief synopsis shows why Balaam is seen as standing somewhere between the enemy and the friend, the satanic and the divine, the prophetic and the magical, etc.
3. The Reception of Balaam in Late Antiquity
As seen in the above narrative, Balaam can be both positive and negative. He is not an Israelite and does not personally have any qualms with cursing Israel. He does have divine powers and can hear oracles from God; but he could just as well have access to Satanic powers. In the end, he does bless Israel, and does not succumb to the wishes of the enemies of Israel. That is why he walks on the thin line between the divine and the satanic, the prophetic and the magical, etc., although he tends to fall on the more negative side of the spectrum. In late antique Jewish and Christian literature â both before and after the emergence of Islam â in the Fertile Crescent (or let us say Palestinian and Babylonian Judaism, and Chalcedonian as well as anti-Chalcedonian Christianity), Balaam is associated with sorcery, where sorcery is also reminiscent of Magians and Zoroastrians, even to the point that Zoroaster is identified with Balaam. Balaam also reminds scholars of the conditions for prophethood, such as the character of the prophets, their belonging to the Gentiles, as well as what counts as true prophethood. Contested between different groups across the confessional and political spectrum, prophethood (and its difference with magic) should be read in a variegated context.
From very early on in the New Testament, Balaam is mentioned as an exemplar of false prophecy. In an extensive condemnation of âfalse prophets,â Balaamâs name comes along: âThey have eyes full of adultery, insatiable for sin. They entice unsteady souls. They have hearts trained in greed. Accursed children! They have left the straight road and have gone astray, following the road of Balaam son of Bosor, who loved the wages of doing wrong, but was rebuked for his own transgression; a speechless donkey spoke with a human voice and restrained the prophetâs madnessâ (2 Pet. 2:14â16). This passage harks back to a similar passage in the Letter of Jude (v. 11), in which Balaamâs name is mentioned as an example of false prophets.2 The reference to Balaam in Rev. 2:14 is probably the result of an ambiguity.3
The Babylonian Talmud mentions Balaam as one of the four commoners who do not have a share in the world to come (Sanhedrin 90a). This passage (and the famous discussion of the resurrection that is occasioned by it) comes up in the context of a rather extensive discussion of the punishment of false prophets, who they are, and how they are recognized. According to the Mishnah, âThe false prophet mentioned in the Torah includes one who prophesies that which he did not hear from God and one who prophesies that which was not said to him, even if it was said to another prophet. In those cases, his execution is at the hand of man, through strangulation imposed by the courtâ (Sanhedrin 89a).
The Gemara explains this based on the content of a certain prophetic message, rather than something in their character. But what is subsequently said about Balaam (e.g., his bestiality with his donkey) reflects a correspondence between the prophetâs character and the content of his message. In other words, more than belonging to Israel, the character of the prophets as well as what they say determines whether they are true prophets. In the Babylonian Talmud, Balaam becomes some sort of âmock Jesus,â a false prophet to convince its audience of its anti-Christian sentiments.4 Yet, according to Ronit Nikolsky, in the Talmud âthe figure of Balaam should not be understood as a hard symbol, but a flexible one, allowing different interpretations according to need. Therefore, an interpretation of him as Jesus, while possible, is not exclusive. Balaam could be any âOtherâ of the rabbinic culture.â5
This âotheredâ prophet did function as the bearer of the good news of Jesus, and even a testimony to his truth. But references to the question of prophetic character also abound. In a homily of Jacob of Serugh (d. 521) on Balaam, the main point is the coming of Jesus; but the possibility of the existence of a gentile prophet, the revocation of prophethood, and character are also discussed. According to Jacob, the story of Balaam shows the possibility of a gentile prophet:
[The Lord] called the Nations by his prophet who was from the Nations, for they did not listen then to the Israelite prophets. Because he, an interpreter, prophesied that the star would shine, and the Nations heeded him and trusted his word without a doubt. Balaam was more credible to the Nations than Moses, and on account of this the Lord made him a prophet to the Nations [de-âamÄ«ma nebia].6
Jacob did not have any problem with granting that Balaam was given âthe spirit of prophecy that reveals the mysteriesâ.7 The word for mysteries (raze, meaning sacraments, symbols, signs) has almost the same semantic field as Qurâanic word ÄyÄt, something that according to Qurâan 7:175 was given to the person who refused to take it (perhaps Balaam). If asked how prophecy can be given to a pagan, Jacob suggested, we should respond that it was like a speech given to the donkey: âThe Lord, who allowed that donkey to speak, allowed the evil man to prophecy. That speech did not persist with the donkey, but it ended, [the donkey] became dumb and silent as is natural. Nor with Balaam did the matter of prophecy persist, just as he was before, the pagan remained as a diviner.â8 The gifts that were given to both Balaam and his donkey were âborrowed gifts,â not âoriginalâ or ânaturalâ ones; hence, they could be revoked.9
It should be remembered, nevertheless, that these gifts were unnatural not because Balaam did not belong to Israel, rather because he preferred worldly pleasures. For example, when after God commands Balaam to go with Balakâs messengers and only say what God tells him, the story is suddenly interrupted by Godâs anger at Balaam for going (Num. 22:22). Jacob justifies this shift by saying that Godâs anger was caused by âthe stirring of the lust of money and deceptionâ in Balaamâs soul.10 This passage is reminiscent of the Qurâanic description of the person who âfollowed his own desiresâ (7:175). Balaamâs exposure to âwondersâ and his turning away from them due to âgreedâ had also been mentioned by Ephrem the Syrian (d. 373): âWhen that donkey unexpectedly spoke, Balaam saw the miracle, but completely failed to marvel. Yet, as the donkeyâs mouth was rational, forgot about himself and was persuaded by his donkey.â11 Ephrem goes on to say, âLet the ass put the serpent to shame with its brief words: it spoke the truth, while from the serpent issued falsehood; it turned aside to turn away greedy Balaam who had gone awry.â12 The human-animal binary is significantly present in many commentaries on Balaam.
Jacobâs contemporary, Severus of Antioch (d. 538), also explored the possibility of prophecy for those who fail in character. According to Severus, âThe prophesying and workings of miracles are not under all circumstances performed by men who are worthy, but perhaps by men who are unworthy also for their own profit, because they are barbarians, and cannot be brought to religion by teaching or by any other similar method. This same thing our Lord and God Jesus Christ also said in the gospel: «Many shall say in that day, âOur Lord,] our Lord, did we not in [thy] name prophecy, and in [thy] name cast out demons, and in thy name do many mighty works?â and then will I profess unto them,â I never knew you, depart ye from me, workers of iniquityâ» [Matt. 7:22â23]â.13 Balaam is not the only example of an âunworthyâ prophet, according to Severus. Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Belteshazzar also had visions of future events. Therefore, knowing the future does not make a person virtuous; rather, others may become virtuous through these wonders.14
Balaam symbolism carries certain sociopolitical undertones. He was known as the forefather of the Magi, those who followed the star to find the infant Jesus. In his commentary on the Balaam story, âIÅ¡oâdad de Merv (Bishop of Hdatta in Mesopotamia in the middle of the ninth century) made a few references to Gabriel of Qatar and Michael Badoqa, both of whom died in early seventh century. These references might reflect the âEasternâ perception of Balaam immediately prior to the rise of Islam. The dualistic interpretations, reflecting possible Persian influences, cannot be easily missed. âIÅ¡oâdad did not perceive Balaam in a positive light, and interpreted most of his actions and motivations to have come from a demon rather than from God. According to him, Balaam was a native of Haran of Mesopotamia, who dwelt in the country of the Ammonites.âIÅ¡oâdad also claims that Balaamâs references to âLordâ (Numbers 22:8,13,18; 23:3,8,12,21,26; 24:6,11,13) really means the demon he was serving as a sorcerer. Michael Badoqa held that God comes and chases away the demons, and then appears to Balaam in the same guise as the demon. Gabriel of Qatar also believed that God forced this demon to say what God would want to be said, just as he forced the Magi to visit Christ the child with presents. While in the expression âthe spirit of God came upon [Balaam]â (Num. 24:2), the Spirit is usually identified as the Holy Spirit, Gabriel held that it actually referred to the âevil spiritâ, just as Scripture, according to âIÅ¡oâdad, also called âthe spirit of Godâ the evil spirit that tormented Saul (1 Sam. 16:14â23). Another reason, for âIÅ¡oâdad, to claim that Balaam received the evil spirit is the phrase in Num. 24:4 (âthe oracle of him who hears the words of God, who sees the vision of the Almighty, falling down, but having his eyes uncoveredâ).
Balaam was known as the forerunner of the Magi. Not only is he, like the Magi, associated with divination and sorcery, but also his reference in the fourth oracle to a star that shall come out of Jacob allegedly led the Magi to Jesus. We should remember that the Magi were not positive figures in Greco-Roman literature prior to Matthew, nor did classical and late antique Christians see them as positive. Even though they followed the signs of the birth of Jesus, they were the negative bearers of good news, those from outside who testify to the true event, despite themselves. According to H. J. W. Drijvers,
from the fifth century AD on, traditions based on Zarathustra and the Magians play a certain role in the exegetical literature and in particular of the Nestorian church, where the first chapter of the Gospel of St. Matthew is explained. It is in the hostile relations between Christianity and the Mazdaean State Church in the Sassanian Empire that the background and origins of this special traditions and the Magians should be sought. These traditions offer a strong anti-Iranian trend and try, on the other hand, to prove that Zarathustra already knew about the coming of the Savior.15
The Church of East associated Balaam with the Magi, claiming that they read his oracle about the rise of the Star of Jacob. Contemporary Zoroastrian priests represented the Magi to them.16 One of these traditions of the Church of East is the gnostic text, âProphecy of Zardusht,â surviving in both the eighth century Scholion by Theodore bar Konai and the ninth century commentary on Matthew by Ishoâdad de Marv. The testimony of the powerful enemy, i.e., the prophecy of Zoroaster concerning Jesus, is very meaningful in the Sassanian context. From the very beginning of the text, there is a reference to the birth of an infant from a virgin, whose crucifixion and ascension are articulated in gnostic terms of light and darkness, which also resonate with the Iranian context. In this text, Zoroaster prophesies the coming of Jesus: âWhen that star which I told you about rises, you shall dispatch messengers bearing gifts, and they shall offer worship to him and present the gifts to him. Do not be neglectful, so that you not perish by the sword, for he is the king of kings, and all (kings) receive their crowns from him. I and he are one.â Here Zoroaster is called the âsecond Balaamâ: âAs is customary, (either) God forced him to expound them; or he derived from a people who were conversant with the symbolic prophecies about Christ, (and) he predicted them.â This entire prophecy is strange because on the one hand Zoroaster is identified with Balaam â an identification that was, according to John Reeves, customary both in the West and East â17 and, on the other hand, Zoroaster is associated with Christ. Given the political dynamic in the Church of East, it should not surprise us that Zoroaster is both denigrated and taken as a strong testimony of Christ. Again, Zoroaster stands on the border between true and false prophecy, being like a sorcerer, but also giving true prophecy.
Prophethood as a point of contestation between Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (as well as Manichaeans) can also be witnessed in the Babylonian Talmud:
Rabbi Abdimi from Haifa said: Since the day when the Temple was destroyed, prophecy has been taken from the prophets and given to the wise. Is then a wise man not also a prophet? â What he meant was this: Although it has been taken from the prophets, it has not been taken from the wise. Amemar said: A wise man is even superior to a prophet, as it says, âAnd a prophet has a heart of wisdomâ [Psalms 90] (Bava Batra 12a).18
According to Yaakov Elman, an analysis of other statements by Amemar indicates that he was responding to an Iranian context, where Zoroaster and more than him, Mani were proclaimed as prophets, and where the existence of a written scripture was used as a proof for the authenticity of a divine mission. When it came to having scriptures, Jews seemed to have the upper hand. Mani seemed to be the prophet par excellence, and here the Jews also could boast of their own prophets, and then wise men.19 To follow up on this argument, we can see how in the above passage, rabbis are represented as replacing the prophets. Therefore, while the Jews seem no longer to have prophets, they do have a stronger gift, that of the wisdom of the rabbis. According to Charlotte Fonrobert in Chapter 1 of this volume, this passage also signifies a transition from the Holy Spirit to knowledge as the source of maintaining a connection with the divine. So far, we have seen that Balaam was an occasion to speak of the prophetic. In the interreligious setting of the question of prophethood, prophethood marks a privilege. Yet, both the rabbis and the Syriac fathers show a desire to beyond the age of the prophets, through rabbinic or typological knowledge respectively. More particularly in the work of Jacob of Serugh and Ephrem the Syrian, Balam would have been a true prophet, had he not failed in character by following âworldly pleasureâ. This is very close to the Qurâanic account of the anonymous man who preferred his lusts rather to divine signs (7:175â176), a literary analysis of which will follow.
4. The Historical Symbolism of Balaam and the Question of Prophethood in the Qurâan
One of the preoccupations of the Qurâan is to prove that Muhammad is a true prophet bringing divine message, not a poet (21:5; 36:69; 37:8; 52:31; 69:41), a demon-stricken man (7:184; 15:6; 23:70; 34:8, 46; 37:8; 44:14; 51:52; 52:29; 68:2, 51; 81:22), a magician (43:30), or a priest (41:42). Muhammadâs words come from God, and not those of another teacherâs (16:103) or from his desires (53:2). Muhammad is a prophet although he is not angelic (25:7) and does not belong to the wealthy elite (11:12; 25:8; 43:31) or Israel. In this sense, Muhammad both resembles diviners â poets, priests, magicians, etc. â and does not meet the alleged requirements of a diviner â wealth or angelic behavior. The Qurâan should show that Muhammad meets the many requirements that make him a true prophet. One way for the Qurâan to do so is to refer to different âpropheticâ figures, showing their similarities with the Prophet Muhammad. Surah 7 can be read as providing an occasion for Muhammadâs story to become the story of every prophet. As this Surah is especially centered on the conflict between the elite and the poorer sections of the society, in verses 175â176 there is a reference to the parable of the one who followed his desires. But more than this, the parable can make better sense if read in light of Balaam symbolism and prophetology in late antiquity.
What makes a prophet? Is it a matter of character and virtue? Or is it just by divine (random) choice? Does the prophet have any choice at all? It is commonly known that Biblical idea of prophethood does not rest on personal choice or the development of character. Rather, it is God who decides to whom a message should be given, and that person does not have the option of not declaring the message. (The story of Jonah represents a character who decides not to give the message, and then must go through the consequences of that decision.)20 That is why late antique discussions around Balaamâs character are in some sense radical. Besides, as observed above, according to Jewish and Christian authors of late antiquity, some sort of relationship with the supernatural does not necessarily imply that one is a true prophet. It might just as well be the work of satanic powers, or magic. Even belonging to Israel does not guarantee true prophethood. People outside Israel might have access to prophecy. However, what marks a true prophet from a false one is good character. In this sense, the symbolic Balaam of the late antiquity is the character who does have access to the supernatural, but is not a true prophet, because he failed in his character. The Qurâanic parable of the man who refuses divine signs to follow worldly pleasures fits well with this image. As I will show further below, there is evidence in the text that makes a prophetological reading of this narrative possible.
In the late antique Fertile Crescent, prophethood also had to compete with rabbinic wisdom. The Qurâan seems to take a stance on this, glorifying prophethood. It testifies to the importance of both prophets and scriptures for a particular community: âEvery one of them wants to be given unfolded scrollsâ (Q 74:52); âHad we sent down to you a book in paper and they touched it, the unbelievers would have said this is but an obvious magicâ (Q 6:7), and the accusation against the Jews that they attributed to God what they themselves have written down (Q 2:79; 3:78). In the Qurâan, God is frequently introduced as the one who has sent down the âbookâ to the prophet (Q 3:3; 7:169; 25:1; 40:2; etc.). That is, the existence of the book signifies prophethood, and prophethood is itself a sign of true religion. As shown above, in the variegated community of the Qurâan, prophethood was about marking oneâs differences with the other. While according to the Babylonian Talmud, the wisdom of a sage might be superior to the message of a prophet, the Qurâan reflects this kind of debate over superiority, as well: âWoe unto those who write the book with their own hands, and then say it is from God â¦â (Q 2:79), âThere is a group from among them who twist their tongues in the book, so that you count it from the book, while it is not from the book; and they say it is from God, while it is not from Godâ (Q 3:78). Thus, it seems that we are facing an audience that used prophecy both to establish itself and to disparage others, and here the question of the conditions of prophethood is related to the question of identity and border marking.
According to this brief study of the reception of Balaam, he both represented many binaries and signified their blurry boundaries. The divine-satanic, the human-animal, the gentile-prophetic, Christian-Zoroastrian, prophethood-wisdom are important binaries associated with Balaam in the historical milieu of the Qurâan. In the following, I investigate whether Balaam symbolism helps better understand the Qurâanic prophetology, especially in Surah 7.
The entire Surah seems to revolve around the question of status, which is, not the least, marked by clothing. Social status is also seen as part of the question of prophethood. The Surah starts with discussions of proper ornaments and coverings in places of worship (vv. 26, 31), including a reference to the story of Adamâs nakedness (vv. 11â25). In this context, it is stated that God does not prohibit the use of worldly ornaments and pleasures (v. 32). While in the story, Iblis falls down from heaven due to arrogance, the Qurâan declares that the denying and arrogant people are described as not being able to enter the heaven âuntil the camel goes through the needle eyeâ (v. 40), a passage that replicates a Jesus quote in the New Testament (Matt. 19:23â26; Mark 10:24â27; Luke 18:24â27), which is also in the context of the relation between social status and spiritual powers. Up to this part, it seems that for the Qurâan the prelapsarian world was without any class distinction. It is only with the fall that humans realize their nakedness (v. 27, where ironically the stripping of clothing brings out distinctions), and only when they return to heaven, they put aside their animosity (v. 43). In the other world, there is only one distinction, i.e., that between the inhabitants of âgardensâ and inhabitants of fire (vv. 44â50), reminding the reader of the creature who was âcreated from fireâ (v. 12). The inhabitants of fire are proud of their worldly pleasures, forgetting God, and failing to realize the fulfillment of divine words (vv. 51â53).
Then, the stories of different prophets are told â Noah, Hud, Salih, Lot, Shuâayb, and most extensively Moses (vv. 59â155). The main theme that connects the stories of these prophets is the conflict between the social and/or political leaders (malaâ) and the respective prophets of their communities, who are described as âfrom themâ or âtheir brotherâ. Now, the Qurâan deals with the question whether righteousness is a matter of choice or divine decision? Is it inborn, like oneâs tribal religion? Or is it acquired? What about prophethood more particularly? The Qurâan seems rather ambivalent with regards to this question. On the one hand, it calls its audience to faith, guidance, and righteousness (vv. 42, 87, 96, 153, 156â158); on the other hand, it emphasizes random divine intervention in bringing people to guidance (vv. 30, 43, 155, 178). It seems that divine guidance depends on certain capabilities similar to basic senses (vv. 179, 195, 198), which mark humans from animals (v. 179). Thus, faith is an indication of having the necessary senses to accept, and these senses have certainly been given by God. Even if one is to follow oneâs inherited beliefs, the primordial divine covenant is the key (v. 172). This is to counteract the argument that (a) oneâs tribal faith should determine oneâs stance toward guidance (vv. 28, 70, 173); and (b) that it is impossible to have a gentile Prophet (157, 158). Even the Mosaic episodes contribute to the Qurâanic counterarguments. For example, while the Egyptian sorcerers believe (vv. 120â126), Mosesâ brother did not (albeit justifiably) take the necessary steps to prevent the people from unbelief (v. 150). The Surah shows that the people around Moses were also variegated â some believed (v. 159), while others did not (vv. 163â164). Thus, the prophetology of Surah 7 revolves around having the capacity to diverge from oneâs own community to believe. Based on this interpretation and the reception of Balaam in late antiquity, it can be argued that verses 175â176 also speak to Balaam symbolism in a prophetological sense.
Here we come across the parable of the person who decides to follow worldly pleasures instead of receiving divine signs. Ironically, the signs would have helped him rise, but he stayed on earth to achieve greatness by his own means. The word âsignsâ is a keyword in this Surah. It refers to those who have rejected divine signs (vv. 9, 36,37, 40, 51, 64, 72, 103, 136, 146, 147, 177, 182), and those who have believed in them (vv. 126, 156). God explains his signs (vv. 32, 174), and even sends messengers to tell people about his signs (v. 35), Moses being one of them (v. 103). Heavenly gates will not open to those who are arrogant and deny divine signs, nor can they enter heaven until a camel goes through the needleâs eye (v. 40). In this sense, the protagonist of the parable in verses 175â176 chooses to belong to the class of the arrogant, rather than a divine messenger like Moses. He chooses to stay on earth (v. 175), rather than benefit from the open doors of heaven (v. 40). Faced with the choice between the two paths, he goes astray. The question of choice (rather than inborn qualities) is shared between this parable and Balaam symbolism in late antiquity. The latter was also guided but chose not to follow the right path. As seen above, Jacob of Serugh more particularly uses the terminology of following âworldly pleasures,â which is also the point of focus in the Qurâan. Similarly, both Jacob of Serugh and the Qurâan mention the protagonistâs rejection of âsignsâ. Interestingly, in both accounts, animals have a special role in showing the truth. Not only is the Qurâanic parable accompanied by another example of a dog who would anyway stick out its tongue, in verse 179 the deniers are despised as being even âmore lost than animalsâ: âCertainly we made many of the jinn and humans for hell. They have hearts with which they do not understand, and they have eyes with which they do not see, and they have ears with which they do not listen. They are like animals, and even more lost. They are ignorant.â The occurrence of the image of the dog, the man who stays on earth, and the animals, where Balaam symbolism is reminiscent of a character who failed to see what his donkey had seen, gives even more depth to the message that the Surah tries to convey. At the same time, these verses hark back to the elite-mass binary that had already been developed in the text, where the binary is recreated not only in terms of faith or character, but also in terms of basic human understanding (heart, eye, and ear).
When faith does not belong to a particular tribe or blood or inheritance, prophethood does not belong to one community either. In the people of Moses, there was diversity of belief. Interestingly, the Qurâan plays with the word âummahâ (i.e., nation; pl. umam) and its derivative âummÄ«â (scriptureless).21 While it serves as an idiomatic attribute for the Prophet in verses 157â158 (meaning âscripturelessâ), in verses 38, 159, 160, 163, 164 it is employed in the literal sense of âcommunityâ or âgroupâ (even within Mosesâ people). And here we are with a âscriptureless Prophet,â with a virtuous character and leadership qualities: âThose who follow the scriptureless [ummÄ«] messenger, prophet, written for them in Torah and Gospel, who enjoins them to the right, and forbids them the wrong, allows them to enjoy the good, and prohibits them from using the dirty, freeing them from the chains and burdens that were on them. Those who believed in him, and supported, and helped him, and followed the light that was sent down with him, they are saved. Say, O people [nÄs]! I am Godâs messenger to you all [jamÄ«âÄ]. The God who owns the property of heavens and earth. There is no god, but him. He brings to life and brings to death. So, believe in God and his scriptureless [ummÄ«] messenger prophet, who believes in God, and in his words. Follow him, so that you are guidedâ (vv. 157â158). The addressees of verse 158 might just have been the entire community around Muhammad; but with all the discussion on lineage and tribal beliefs, they could be interpreted as a universal audience. Whatever the case, the point is that divine guidance does not belong to a particular people â whether Israelites who have the prophets or the non-Israelites who inherit polytheism from their fathers â or a particular class â the elite rejected divine signs. Receiving guidance and signs belong only to matters of basic human understanding.
As mentioned earlier, Balaam was the occasion for late antique Jewish and Christian authors to talk about the âotherâ prophet, who remains a magician because of his character. In a prophetology that is centered on class and tribal binaries, a reference to Balaam symbolism seems quite apt. But why does the Qurâan refer to Balaam by name? Now that we do not have the name of Balaam, could we not say more confidently that these verses refer to any character who would not receive divine gifts only because they like to follow their desires? The references to the non-Israelite prophet (Muhammad), the entire prophetological episodes, the parableâs insertion in between Mosaic episodes, the animals functioning as foils to the character, all support that the Qurâan is referring to an all but named Balaam. But Balaam (even though symbolically neutralizing the argument for the necessity of Israelite ethnicity for a prophet) was charged with a lot of ethnic and religious connotations, which the Qurâan might not want to subscribe to. In this sense, Balaam becomes some sort of Everyman who does not become a prophet, not because he is not Israelite, but because he refuses divine signs and follows his lust; an Everyman that does not need be Persian, Zoroastrian, magician, etc.
5. Conclusion
This essay was an exploration of Balaam symbolism in late antiquity as a background to understanding the border between false and true prophets in the Qurâan. I started by assuming that Qurâan 7:175â176 referred to Balaam symbolism. Studying the reception of his character in Jewish and Christian literature just before the emergence of Islam shows that the Balaam, who in the Bible is only prevented from cursing Israel by all sorts of supernatural events, becomes a character who chooses not to curse Israel. Indeed, in late antiquity he is a pretext to discuss important questions about the possibility of a gentile prophet, or the necessity of character for election to prophethood. According to this historical analysis, the Qurâan responds by showing that although prophethood is given at will, it may or may not be fulfilled due to flaws in character. Without necessarily focusing on giving information about a Biblical figure, the Qurâan is responding to the debates around prophetology, which, among other places, recur around Balaam symbolism. This is parallel to the prophetology that is developed in Surah 7, which revolves around the importance of status and worldly pleasures for determining where one stands in relation to prophets and prophethood. Both the protagonist of the parable and the late antique âBalaamâ choose to belong to the earthly classes rather than the heavenly community. The prophetology of Surah 7 also deals with the question of genealogy and prophecy, rejecting any link between the two, thus referring to Balaam symbolism. In this sense, Muslim exegetes were not wrong in assuming that the protagonist of the parable referred to Balaam, the non-Israelite who did not become a prophet only because he failed in his character.
ÄlÅ«sÄ«, Rūḥ al-maÊ¿ÄnÄ« fÄ« tafsÄ«r al-QurʾÄn al-Ê¿aáºÄ«m wa-al-sabÊ¿ al-mathÄnÄ«, 5:104; Ibn Ê¿AshÅ«r, TafsÄ«r al-taḥrÄ«r waâl-tanwÄ«r, 21:149; Ibn KathÄ«r, TafsÄ«r al-taḥrÄ«r wa-l-tanwÄ«r, 2:275â77; al-QurtubÄ«, Al-JÄmiÊ¿ li-aḥkÄm al-QurʾÄn, 7:319â20; RashÄ«d RidhÄ, TafsÄ«r al-ManÄr, 9:347. Aá¹-ṬabarÄ«, JÄmiÊ¿ al-bayÄn, 13:252â56; ṬabÄtabÄÄ«, Al-MÄ«zÄn fÄ« tafsÄ«r al-QurʾÄn, 8:338; TÅ«sÄ«, At-TibyÄn fÄ« tafsÄ«r al-QurʾÄn, 5:31. For a commentary on the Qurâanic reception of Balaam, see: Leemhuis, âBalâam in Early Koranic Commentaries.â Some exegetes, such as Aá¹-ṬabarÄ« and his followers, presumed that the verses could refer to the renowned poet Umayyah b. AbÄ« as-á¹¢alt.
Fornberg, âBalaam and 2 Pet. 2:15.â
Henten, âBalaam in Revelation 2:14.â
Urbach, âThe Rabbinic Sermons about the Gentile Prophets and the Story of Balaamâ; Baskin, Pharaohâs Counselors; quoted in Fornberg and Nikolsky, âInterpret Him as Much as You Want,â 213, 224.
Fornberg and Nikolsky, âInterpret Him as Much as You Want,â 224.
Jacob of Serugh, âThe Mimro on Balaam and Balak,â 45â86, lines 345â350.
Ibid., line 315.
Ibid., lines 409â414.
Ibid., lines 421â424.
Ibid., lines 149â150.
Wickes, Ephrem the Syrian, 41:7.
St. Ephrem, Hymns on Paradise, 15:16.
Brooks, A Collection of Letters of Severus of Antioch, 234f.
Ibid., 239ff.
Drijvers, Cults and Beliefs at Edessa, 39.
Isoâdad de Merv Eynde and Ceslas van den, eds., Commentaire dâIÅ¡oâdad de Merv Sur lâAncient Testament, II Exode â Deutronome, Num. 22â23, 142â152 (french), 105â112 (Syriac); quoted in Robert Kitchen, Introduction in Jacob of Serugh, âThe Mimro on Balaam and Balak,â 57.
John Reeves, âReconsidering the âProphecy of Zardusht,ââ <https://www.academia.edu/4620462/Reconsidering_the_Prophecy_of_Zardusht>. Accessed 28 Feb 2022. A translation of the gnostic text can be found both in this essay, and in the translatorâs personal webpage: <https://pages.charlotte.edu/john-reeves/research-projects/trajectories-in-near-eastern-apocalyptic/prophecy-of-zardusht/>.
New Edition of the Babylonian Talmud, trans. Rodkinson and Wise.
Elman, âMiddle Persian Culture and Babylonian Sages,â 165â97.
Berlin and Zvi Brettler, The Jewish Study Bible, 457f.
For this translation, see Sinai, Key Terms of the Qurâan, 94â99.