Download Qur`ānic Commentators on Jewish and Zoroastrian Approaches to

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
brill.nl/rrj
Qur’ānic Commentators on Jewish and Zoroastrian
Approaches to Menstruation1
Haggai Mazuz
Center of Basic Jewish Studies, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 52900, Israel
[email protected]
Abstract
The early Qur’ānic commentators argued that, in pre-Islamic times, Arabs observed many Jewish
customs relating to menstruation. From the tenth century on, we find Qur’ānic commentators
who claim that pre-Islamic Arabs observed Zoroastrian menstruation customs rather than Jewish
ones. From the eleventh century on, commentators combined Jewish and Zoroastrian customs
in their commentary on Qur’ān 2:222. This paper sets out the close relationship between Jewish
and Zoroastrian rules regarding menstruation, which may explain why Jewish and Zoroastrian
menstruation customs are connected in some Muslim scholars’ commentaries: the Muslim commentators were making an accurate assessment of the similarities between the two sets of
customs. At the same time, we only find Jews and the Zoroastrians mentioned side by side in
the Qur’ānic commentaries from the eleventh century on, since only by then had Muslim scholars’ understanding of other religions expanded enough to provide this knowledge. Early commentators simply did not know enough about Judaism and Zoroastrianism to notice the
similarities. It is possible, though by no means certain, that the post-tenth century Qur’ānic
commentators who mention only the Jews in regard to pre-Islamic menstruation rituals did
so because they were not familiar with Zoroastrian customs and their similarities to those of
Judaism.
Keywords
Menstruation in Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Islam
According to Islamic tradition, while he was in Medina, Muḥammad received
the first and only revelation regarding contact with a menstruating woman:
“They ask you about menstruation. Say: It is an indisposition. Keep aloof
from women during their menstrual periods and do not go near them until
they are pure again. Then have intercourse with them in a way Allāh enjoined
you. Allāh loves those that turn to him in repentance and strive to keep
1
This article is dedicated to Naphtali Stern.
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2012
DOI: 10.1163/157007012X622935
90
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
themselves pure” (Qur’ān 2:222).2 According to the literal meaning of the
verse, Allāh commanded Muslim men to avoid intercourse with their wives
while they are menstruating.
The Qur’ānic commentators discussed the background of this revelation
and the menstruation customs of Arabs in the pre-Islamic period. Commentators such as Muqātil b. Sulaymān (d. 767), Aḥmad b. Shu‘ayb al-Nasā’ī (830–
910), ‘Abd al-Raḥmān b. ‘Alī b. Muḥammad Ibn al-Jawzī (1116–1201),
Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Anṣārī al-Qurṭubī (d. 1273), Ismā‘īl b. ‘Umar Ibn
Kathīr (1301–1373) argued that in pre-Islamic times Arabs imitated many
Jewish customs relating to menstruation.3 Other commentators such as
Muḥammad b. ‘Abd Allāh Ibn Abī Zamanīn (953–1008) and Abū al-Ḥ asan
‘Alī al-Naysābūrī (d. 1075) argued that in pre-Islamic times Arabs imitated
many Zoroastrian customs relating to menstruation.4
Later Qur’ānic commentators such as Maḥmūd b. ‘Umar al-Zamakhsharī
(1074–1144), Muḥammad b. ‘Umar al-Rāzī (1149–1210), ‘Abd Allāh b.
‘Umar al-Bayḍāwī (d. 1268), ‘Abd Allāh b. Aḥmad al-Nasafī (d. 1301) and
Ḥ asan b. Muḥammad al-Qummī al-Naysābūrī (d. 1328) argued that the
Arabs imitated both Jewish and Zoroastrian custom: They did not eat, drink,
live with their wives, or even sit on the same blanket with their wives during
menstruation (ruwiya anna ahl al-jāhiliyya idhā ḥ āḍat al-mar’a lam yu’ākilūhā
wa-lam yushāribūhā wa-lam yujālisūhā ‘alā farsh wa-lam yusākinūhā fī al-bayt
ka-fi‘l al-yahūd wa’l-majūs).5 These later commentators apparently believed
that the Jewish rituals regarding menstruation were identical to those of
Zoroastrianism.
2
Translation taken from Muḥammad ‘Alī Maulana, The Holy Qur’ān: Arabic Text, English
Translation and Commentary (Lahore, 1998 [First Edition, 1917]).
3
Muqātil b. Sulaymān, Tafsīr Muqātil b. Sulaymān, 3 vols. (Beirut, 2003), vol. 1, p. 118;
Aḥmad b. Shuʿayb al-Nasāʾī, Tafsīr al-Nasāʾī, 2 vols. (Cairo, 1990), vol. 1, p. 253; ʿAbd
al-Raḥmān b. ʿAlī b. Muḥammad Ibn al-Jawzī, Zād al-Masīr fī ʿIlm al-Tafsīr, 9 vols. (Beirut,
1984), vol. 1, p. 248; Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Anṣārī al-Qurṭubī, Al-Jāmiʿ li-Aḥ kām al-Qurʾān,
10 vols. (Beirut, 1965), vol. 3, p. 81; Ismāʿīl b. ʿUmar Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-Karīm,
4 vols. (Egypt, n.d.), vol. 1, p. 258.
4
Muḥammad b. ‘Abd Allāh Ibn Abī Zamanīn, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAzīz, 5 vols. (Cairo,
2002), vol. 1, p. 222; Abū al-Ḥ asan ʿAlī al-Naysābūrī, Asbāb al-Nuzūl (Cairo, 1968), pp.
46–47.
5
Maḥmūd b. ‘Umar al-Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf ʿan Ḥ aqāʾiq al-Tanzīl wa-ʿUyūn al-Taʾwīl
fī Wujūh al-Taʾwīl, 3 vols. (Egypt, 1948), vol. 1, p. 361; Muḥammad b. ʿUmar al-Rāzī, Mafātīḥ
al-Ghayb: al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr, 17 vols. (Cairo, 2003), vol. 1, p. 57; ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Umar al-Bayḍāwī,
Anwār al-Tanzīl wa-Asrār al-Taʾwīl, 2 vols. (Osnabrück, 1968), vol. 1, p. 117; ‘Abd Allāh b.
Aḥmad al-Nasafī, Tafsīr al-Nasafī, 2 vols. (Beirut, 1960), vol. 1, p. 87; Ḥ asan b. Muḥammad
al-Qummī al-Naysābūrī, Tafsīr Gharāʾib al-Qurʾān wa-Raghāʾib al-Furqān, 6 vols. (Beirut,
1996), vol. 1, p. 613.
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
91
The Qur’ānic commentators did not explain why they held such a variety
of opinions on the subject of menstruation. It does raise a few questions, however. Did the pre-Islamic Arabs observe Jewish or Zoroastrian customs relating to menstruation? How and why did some of the commentators come to
place Jewish and Zoroastrian traditions under the same rubric? What can the
commentaries on this subject teach us about the extent of the commentators’
knowledge of other religions? Did the later Qur’ānic commentators simply
encounter both theories and, not knowing which was correct, cite both of
them?
In this article I examine the reports of these Qur’ānic commentators on the
similarities between Jewish and Zoroastrian approaches to menstruation
through the Jewish and the Zoroastrian textual sources. As we shall see, Jewish
and Zoroastrian views on menstruation were, in fact, similar in many ways:
Both perceived menstruation as a disease and distanced menstruating women
from other family members.
The Origin of Menstruation
The most common form of Zoroastrian theology holds that since the beginning of humankind there has been an ongoing and permanent struggle
between Ahūra Mazdā, the supreme god who is the source of all good in the
universe, and Ahriman (Avestan. Angra Mainyu), who represents evil and
darkness (i.e., Satan). His symbol in Persian mythology is a snake. According
to the myth, at the dawn of humankind Ahriman lusted after a demoness
called Jeh (Av. Jahikā; Jahī). After Ahriman kissed her face, she began to menstruate.6 Because the material world exists as a mixture of good and evil, all
women are afflicted with menstruation.7
In Rabbinic tradition, the origin of menstruation is the sin of Eve, who ate
from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and seduced Adam into doing the
same (Gen. 3:1–3). R. Yohanan said: “At the moment that the primal snake
seduced Eve, he cast impurity into her [which she passed on to future
generations].”8 The Talmud does not specify the nature of the impurity, but a
possible answer is suggested in Abōt de-Rabbī Nathan, which states that one
6
Bundahishn, 4:4.
Jamshid Choksy, Purity and Pollution in Zoroastrianism: Triumph over Evil (Texas, 1989),
pp. 95–96.
8
B. A.Z. 22b. The Talmud mentions a demoness called Lilith. According to some of the
Midrashim, Lilith was Adam’s first wife and was sexually aggressive. See Tōldōt Ben Sīrā [Version B], 232–233. In many reliefs, Lilith is painted with a snake around her body. This is very
reminiscent of the descriptions of Jeh in the Zoroastrian sources.
7
92
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
of the ten punishments of Eve was the “sorrow of menstrual blood.”9 Moreover, the only impurity that is unique to females is menstrual blood, so it is
highly likely that this is the impurity in question. The snake, in Judaism, and
Ahriman, whose symbol is a snake, in Zoroastrianism, then, cause Eve/Jeh to
menstruate through some form of sexual contact.
The Perception of a Menstruating Woman as Impure and the Need to
Isolate Her
Judaism and Zoroastrianism both considered menstruation an illness. For
this reason, the Zoroastrians avoided all physical contact with their wives
during menstruation,10 as did the Jews.11 Zoroastrian practice in the ancient
and medieval periods was for women at the onset of menses to wear
specific garments intended for that occasion only.12 During medieval times,
similarly, Jewish females set aside specific clothes for use during their menstrual periods.13
The Zoroastrians believed that a man’s children will be born demons if he
has intercourse with a menstruating woman.14 The Midrashic literature says
that “he who had intercourse with his wife while menstruating, eventually she
will have leper sons.”15 Despite the desire to isolate menstruating women
9
Abōt de-Rabbī Nathan (version B) 1:7.
Mary Boyce, A Persian Stronghold of Zoroastrianism: Based on the Ratanbai Katrak Lectures,
1975 (Oxford, 1977), p. 100.
11
Abōt de-Rabbī Nathan (version B) 3. One of the words used by the Bible to refer to a
menstruating woman is “anguished” (Heb. dava, Lev. 20:18) which connotes illness and disease.
Any contact with her (not only sexual) was forbidden (Lev. 18:19). In some diaspora Jewish
communities, such as those in Gaul and what the Talmud calls the “maritime cities,” a menstruating woman was called galmūda. The Talmud asks: “In what way does the word galmūda
connote a menstruating woman? It is an acronym for gemūla dā—i.e. this one is separated from
her husband;” (B. Sot. 42a; B. R.H. 26a). Onkelos translated the word nīdda as “distanced”
(Onkelos, Lev. 15:25). Indeed, all of the words mentioned above connote isolation and
distancing.
12
Vidēvdāt, 16:4.
13
Maimonides, Hīlkhōt Īsūrey Bīāh, 4:8; Nachmanides, Hīlkhōt Nīdda, 8:8.
14
See further Elizabeth Davis and Carol Leonard, The Circle of Life (California, 2002), pp.
40–41.
15
“R. Aḥā said: If a man has intercourse with his wife when she is menstruating, the children
will be afflicted with leprosy.” See Midrash Tanḥūmā, Leviticus, Metzōra‘, a. Translation by
John T. Townsend, Midrash Tanḥ ūmā: Translated into English with Indices and Brief Notes
(S. Buber Recension), Vol. 2: Exodus and Leviticus (New Jersey, 1997), p. 95. See also Leviticus
Rabbah 16.
10
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
93
entirely, both Zoroastrians16 and Jews17 were forced to be lenient in certain
circumstances. For example, women were allowed to breastfeed their children,
since the children might starve if the women were forbidden from doing so.
The Zoroastrians believed that a menstruating woman is possessed by a
demon. As a result, they were afraid of her gaze.18 In addition, menstruating
women were forbidden to walk without shoes, because it was believed they
would defile the ground they walked on; thus they were required to wear cotton shoes called jība.19 They also believed that a menstruating woman could
pass on her impurity by talking, and that a wind which blows on a menstruating woman and then on an undefiled man renders him impure.20
Because of these various taboos, Zoroastrians would place a menstruating
woman in a chamber called dashtānestān (Phl. “place for menstruating
women”), usually a small building with no windows and only a single entrance.
Since in that chamber she could not look at anyone or touch water, land,
plants, animals, human beings, and fire, she was powerless to harm anyone.21
A Jewish parallel to the dashtānestān is mentioned in Mishnah Tractate Nīdda.
It is called the house of impure women (Heb. beyt ha-ṭmeōt).22
In the third part of The Guide for the Perplexed, Moses Maimonides (1138–
1204) discusses Zoroastrian customs related to menstruating wives. These customs were common in the lands of the East (Arab. bilād al-mashriq) and
included the Zoroastrian practices I just listed, such as isolating menstruating
women, burning the ground they had stepped on, and the belief that their
impurity could be transmitted by talking or by the wind:
It is generally known that according to the usages observed up to our times by the
Sabians in the land of the East, I refer to the remnants of the Magians (Arab. baqiyyat
al-majūs), the menstruating woman remains isolated in her house; the place upon
which she treads are burnt; whoever speaks with her becomes unclean; and if a wind that
blows passes over a menstruating woman and a clean individual, the latter becomes
unclean.23
16
Choksy, Purity and Pollution, pp. 97–98.
Mordechai Margoulies, The Differences between Babylonian and Palestinian Jews (Jerusalem,
1938), p. 79.
18
Vidēvdāt, 16:2–7.
19
Boyce, Lectures, p. 101.
20
Vidēvdāt 16: 2–7; The Zend Avesta: The Sacred Book of the East, translated by James Darmesteter (Oxford, 1985), 4:188–189.
21
Choksy, Purity and Pollution, pp. 97–98.
22
M. Nid. 7:4. On the house of impure women see further Eyal Regev, The Sadducees and
Their Halakha: Religion and Society in the Second Temple Period (Jerusalem, 2005), p. 188, n. 45.
23
Maimonides, Dalālat al-Ḥ ā’irīn, 3:47. Translation taken from Moses Maimonides, The
Guide for the Perplexed, Translated and with Introduction and Notes by Shlomo Pines. With an
17
94
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
Maimonides mentions these Zoroastrian customs because of their influence
on the Jewish communities of the East.24 He condemned these practices and
wrote:
See how great the difference is between this and our dictum: All various kinds of work
that a wife does for her husband are also done by a menstruating woman for her husband except for washing his face, and so on. It is only forbidden to have intercourse with
her in the days in which she is unclean and defiled. Another generally known usage of
them [i.e., the Zoroastrians] that continues to our time is to regard as unclean everything that is separated from the body—that is, hair or nails or blood. . . . They have
many burdensome usages of this kind, whereas for us we only claim that something is
unclean or clean with regard to holy things and to the Sanctuary.25
Maimonides called on the eastern Jewish communities to stop imitating
Zoroastrian customs. Maimonides’ son, R. Abraham (1186–1237), said that
one who imitates Zoroastrian customs regarding menstruation is guilty of
heresy (Heb. mīnūt),26 “and the elders must protest against him.”27 It appears,
then, that Zoroastrian menstruation rituals were pervasive in eastern Jewish
communities.
Despite the opinions of Maimonides and his son, some Jews argued that
the practices condemned by Maimonides were actually based on halakhic
sources, not Zoroastrian influence. Moses Nachmanides (1194–1270) argued
that the taboos on touching a menstruating woman, being gazed at by her,
talking to her, and walking in her footsteps, as well as the practice of isolating
her from others, derive from customs that were common among the ancient
Jews:
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that in ancient days menstruants were
kept very isolated; for they were ever referred to as nīddōt on the account of their isolation since they did not approach people and did not speak with them; for the ancients in
their wisdom knew that their breath is harmful, and their gaze is detrimental and makes
Introductory Essay by Leo Strauss (Chicago, 1963). Emphases are the author’s. Maimonides identifies the Sabians with the Zoroastrians, though other Arabic sources and modern scholars disagree and offer different theories as to the Sabians’ identity. On the Sabians see Haggai Mazuz,
“The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights” in Dov Schwartz and Raphael Jospe, eds., Jewish
Philosophy: Perspectives and Retrospectives (Academic Studies Press, forthcoming).
24
Mordechai A. Friedman, “Menstrual Impurity and Sectarianism in the Writing of the
Geonim and of Moses and Abraham Maimonides” in Arthur Hyman, ed., Maimonidean Studies
1 (Yeshiva University Press: New York, 1990), p. 20.
25
Maimonides, Dalālat al-Ḥ ā’irīn, 3:47.
26
Abraham Maimonides called the Zoroastrians heretics, as they were sometimes called in
the Talmud.
27
Friedman, “Menstrual Impurity,” p. 20.
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
95
a bad impression, as the philosophers have explained. I will yet mention their experience in this matter. And the menstruants dwelled isolated in tents where no one entered,
just as our Rabbis have mentioned in the Beraytā of Tractate Nīddah: “A learned man
is forbidden to greet a menstruant. Rabbi Neḥemya says: ‘Even the utterance of her
mouth is unclean.’ Said Rabbi Yohanan: ‘One is forbidden to walk after a menstruant
and tread upon her footsteps, which are as unclean as a corpse; so is the dust upon which
the menstruant stepped unclean. . . .’ ”28 Therefore, Rachel said to her father, “I cannot rise
before you, for the way of women is upon me” (Heb. derekh nashīm lī), because their
custom was not to walk or step on the ground [a menstruating woman had stepped
on]. And thus the Torah was more stringent regarding sitting on anything she had sat
upon and lying on anything she had laid upon than it was regarding her touch.29
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that a woman in the days of menstruation is called shunned (Heb. nīdda) because she is avoided by and kept distant
from all people. Men and women would not approach her, and she would sit alone and
not speak with them, for even her speech was considered by them impure, and they
regarded the dust upon which she stepped to be impure as the dust of the decomposed
bones of the dead. Our Rabbis have mentioned this. Even her gaze was considered
harmful.30
Maimonides and Nachmanides are the main sources of evidence for Jewish
menstruation customs that are similar to those of Zoroastrianism. Maimonides argued that these customs were the result of outside influence. He did
not specify when this influence took place, but his words, “It is generally
known that according to the usages observed up to our times by the Sabians
(i.e., the remnants of the Magians) in the land of the East,” indicate that it was
at a time of considerable antiquity. Nachmanides, however, held that these
customs were of ancient Jewish origin. Like Maimondies, he did not provide
a possible date.
The Attribution of Mystical Powers to Menstruating Women and
Similar Motifs in the Talmud
Tractate Shabbat recounts a discussion that deals with the question of what a
woman should do if she has been seen by a snake and does not know whether
or not it desires her sexually. Some sages say that she should remove her clothes
and throw them in front of it (Aram. teshallaḥ manna ve-nishdyye qameyh). If
the snake winds itself around her, then its mind is upon her. If it does not,
28
See further Choksy, Purity and Pollution, p. 97.
Nachmanides, Commentary on the Torah, Gen. 31:35. Translation taken from Moses
Nachmanides, Commentary on the Torah, Translated [From Hebrew] and Annotated with Index
by Charles B. Chavel (New York, 1971).
30
Nachmanides, Commentary on the Torah, Lev. 12:4.
29
96
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
then its mind is not upon her. What can she do (Aram. māī taq-qantah)? She
should cohabit [with her husband] in front of the snake (Aram. teshammesh
qameyh) and then the snake’s desire for her will abate. The snake will grow
tired of her and will leave.
Other sages disagree, saying that this will only inflame the snake’s desire.
Instead, the woman should take some of her hair and nails (Aram. mi-mazyah
ū-mi-ṭūfrah), throw them at the snake, and say, “I am a menstruating woman”
(Aram. dīshtnā anā).31 Then the snake will tire of her and leave.32
This Talmudic discussion shares many of its motifs with Zoroastrian taboos
on menstruation. According the Zend Avesta, the hair, nails, or blood of a
menstruating woman defile anyone who touches them.33 Maimonides mentioned this taboo in his discussion of the Zoroastrians.34 The snake (a symbol
of Ahriman in Persian Mythology) is frightened by the combination of hair
and nails with the words “I am a menstruating woman” and gives up his desire
for intercourse.35
Tractate Pesaḥīm discusses the repercussions of a menstruating woman’s
passing between two [men]. If it is at the beginning of her menstrual period,
31
The word “dīshtnā” would appear to be an Aramaic distortion of dashtān, the term for a
menstruating woman in Pahlavi, the language of the Zoroastrians. On the issue of the influence
of Persian on Aramaic, see H.I. Greenfield’s article, “Aramaic in the Persian Period,” in Haim
Tadmor, ed.,The Return to Zion—Under Persian Rule (Jerusalem, 1983), pp. 114–228 [Heb.].
The term appears in distorted form several more times in the Talmud. A discussion is recorded
in the Talmud in which the sages attempt to interpret certain Pahlavi terms in a homiletic manner. One of the terms is dashtanā. According to R. Ashi, the reason a menstruating woman is
called dashtanā in Pahlavi is because it includes the Hebrew letters dalet, shīn, and nūn. These
letters also appear in the phrase “the way of women” (Heb. derekh nashīm). Thus, dashtanā is an
acronym of sorts for a Hebrew phrase that refers to menstruation. This is based on a verse from
the book of Genesis, in which Rachel uses these words in order to escape her father’s request to
get off her camel so he can check if she has stolen his idols: “the way of women is upon me”
(derekh nashīm lī. Gen. 31:35). “R. Ashi said: In accordance with what verse (literally, “with
whom”) do Persians call menstruating woman ‘dashtanā?’ Here is a scriptural source: “For the
way of women is upon me” (Aram. ke-mān qarū parsaēy le-nīdda dashtanā? me-hakhā: kī derekh
nashīm lī). See B. A.Z. 24b.
32
B. Shab. 110a.
33
Zend Avesta 4:188–189.
34
Maimonides, Dalālat al-Ḥ ā’irīn, 3:47.
35
The term dashtān also appears in a similar context in the following story. Tractate Ta‘anīt
contains a story about a Jewish jailer who pretends to be a gentile while working at a Persian jail.
One day, the jailer met R. Broka and told him that the Persians focused their attentions on a
female Jewish prisoner, but the jailor prevented the Persians from raping her by a trick. He took
lees of red wine (Aram. shaqlī dūrdayyā de-ḥ amrā) and threw them on the lower part of her skirt
(Aram. ve-shddāī la be-shīpūla) to make it appear blood stained and then told the wardens that
she was menstruating (Aram. ve-amrī dīstnā hī). See B. Ta. 22a. The story ends there, but it
seems clear that when the Persians wardens heard that the girl was menstruating they gave up
and left, like the snake.
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
97
the tractate says, she kills one of them. If it is at the end of her menstrual
period, she causes a quarrel between them.36 This indicates that the Jews of the
Talmudic period ascribed harmful supernatural and magical powers to menstruation. The Zoroastrians did the same, which is why they isolated menstruating women in the dashtānestān mentioned above.37
Clearly, the Jewish and Zoroastrian attitudes toward menstruation have
many similarities, such as the origin of menstruation in their creation myths.
In addition, their women set aside specific clothes for use during their menstrual periods. Both cultures perceived menstruating women as impure and
isolated them. Both believed that if a man is having intercourse with a menstruating woman his children will be punished for it. Both considered the
menstruant’s gaze harmful, her speech impure, and the dust upon which she
stepped contaminated. Despite the desire to isolate menstruating women
entirely, however, both cultures allowed them to breastfeed their children.
Conclusion
The early Qur’ānic commentators argued that, in pre-Islamic times, Arabs
observed many Jewish customs relating to menstruation, including distancing
themselves from menstruating women. From the tenth century on, we find
Qur’ānic commentators who claim that the pre-Islamic Arabs observed Zoroastrian menstruation customs rather than Jewish ones. From the eleventh century on, we find commentators who combine Jewish and Zoroastrian customs
in their commentary on Qur’ān 2:222, even though one religion is totally
monotheist and the other is dualistic.
Century
Jewish customs
8
9
10
11
12
13
Muqātil b. Sulaymān
al-Nasā’ī
14
Ibn Kathīr
36
37
Zoroastrian customs
Ibn Abī Zamanīn
al-Naysābūrī
Ibn al-Jawzī
al-Qurt ̣ubī
B. Pes. 111a.
Choksy, Purity and Pollution, p. 98.
Both
al-Zamakhsharī
al-Rāzī
al-Bayḍāwī
al-Qummī al-Naysābūrī
al-Nasafī
98
H. Mazuz / The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15 (2012) 89–98
Is it possible that the later Qur’ānic commentators encountered their predecessors’ theories on both Jewish and Zoroastrian origins for pre-Islamic menstruation customs and simply combined the two? In my opinion, this is
unlikely. During the first centuries of Islam, Muslim scholars were extremely
interested in other religions. In most cases, this was because of the need to
understand certain aspects of Islamic law. Sometimes, their interest was motivated by the desire to differentiate Islam from other religions.38
It appears that we only find the Jews and the Zoroastrians mentioned side
by side in the Qur’ānic commentaries from the eleventh century on because
Muslim scholars’ knowledge of other religions expanded with time. The early
commentators simply did not know enough about Judaism and Zoroastrianism to notice the similarities between them on the issue of menstruation. It is
possible, though by no means certain, that the post-tenth century Qur’ānic
commentators who mention only the Jews in regard to pre-Islamic menstruation rituals did so because they were not familiar with Zoroastrian customs
and their similarities to those of Judaism.
As we have seen, there is a great deal of similarity between Jewish and Zoroastrian menstruation rituals. This similarity may explain why Jewish and
Zoroastrian menstruation customs are connected in some Muslim scholars’
commentaries. It appears that these Muslim commentators were making an
accurate assessment of the similarities between the two sets of customs, with
which they were well acquainted.
38
The most comprehensive medieval monograph dealing with the latter is Ibn Taymiyya’s
(1263–1328) book The Necessity of Following the Straight Path: Differentiating Oneself From Those
Who Are Going to Hell (Arab. Iqtiḍā’ al-Ṣirāṭ al-Mustaqīm: Mukhālafat Aṣḥ āb al-Jaḥ īm). “Those
who are going to hell” refers to non-Muslims. The phrase is derived from the sixth and seventh
verses in sūrat al-Fātiḥ a: “Guide us on the right path. The path of those upon whom Thou hast
bestowed favors” (Arab. ihdinā al-ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm ṣirāṭ alladhīna anʿamta ʿalayhim). According
to Qurānic commentators, “those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors” refers to Muslims.
On the desire of Islam to differentiate themselves from other religions, see further Haggai Mazuz,
“Menstruation and Differentiation: How Muslims Differentiated Themselves from Jews regarding the Laws of Menstruation,” in Der Islam 87 (2011), pp. 204–223; Haggai Mazuz, Menstruation and Its Legislation: The Evolution and Crystallization of the Law of Menses in the Islamic
Juristic Tradition (Bar-Ilan University Press, forthcoming) (Heb).