by
Damien F. Mackey
“In searching the Hebrew Bible for a wicked man whose name resembles
Abu Lahab, one finds Ahab (Hebrew: אַחְאָב), the seventh king of ancient Israel …
son of King Omri and husband of Jezebel of Sidon”.
Ercan Celik
Ercan Celik is, I feel, on the right track here, in seeking to find, in the Bible, a leading character of the early Islamic story. For the Prophet Mohammed (Muhammad) is, himself, a fictitious (largely) biblical composite as according to my series:
Biography of the Prophet Mohammed (Muhammad) Seriously Mangles History
https://www.academia.edu/12500381/Biography_of_the_Prophet_Mohammed_Muhammad_Seriously_Mangles_History
With the life of Mohammed having borrowed so many of its bits and pieces from the Bible (both the Old and New Testaments), it is no wonder that Mohammed himself has been portrayed as a most remarkable kind of man (verging on a superman), having such a breathtaking career.
The real miracle is that scholars down through the ages have been able to compile a coherent life of the man. The downside of it is - apart from the religious implications - that it is historically a complete shambles.
Better to view the whole thing as a marvellous work of fiction.
1,025 × 400
Now, a Turkish writer, Ercan Celik, believes that he has traced the so-called “uncle” of Mohammed to the Old Testament:
https://iqsaweb.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/celik_abu-lahab-jezebel/
Who were Abu Lahab and His Wife? A View from the Hebrew Bible
In The Qur’an and Its Biblical Subtext, G. S. Reynolds observes that
…scholars of the Qur’an accept the basic premise of the medieval Islamic sources that the Qur’an is to be explained in light of the life of the Prophet Muhammad…
However, he proposes that critical Qur’anic scholarship not depend on prophetic biography (sīrah) or traditional Qur’anic exegesis (tafsīr), but rather,
… the Qur’an should be appreciated in light of its conversation with earlier literature, in particular Biblical literature… This argument necessarily involves an examination of both the relationship of Muslim exegetical literature to the Qur’an and the relationship of the Qur’an to Biblical literature.
Sūrat al-Masad (Q 111) offers a valuable example for how a Biblical perspective can augment our understanding of the Qur’anic text. The text of the sūrah names its main character Abu Lahab, and mentions that he has a wife, but does not provide any further identifying information. Only extra-Qur’anic literature can give us more details about who he was. In this blog post, I compare how he may be identified through the Islamic literary sources and through the Hebrew Bible.
Abu Lahab In Islamic Literature
Abu Lahab, meaning “the father of flame,” is identified as the uncle of the prophet Muhammad, ʿAbd al-ʿUzza ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib, nicknamed Abu Lahab on account of his reddish complexion. He is said to have been a rich and proud man, and he and his wife Umm Jamil, sister of Abu Sufyan, are depicted as fierce enemies of Muhammad and the early Muslim community.
There are many anecdotes in the Islamic literary sources about their verbal and physical attacks on the prophet. Some Qur’an commentators say that Umm Jamil used to litter Muhammad’s path with harmful thorns of twisted palm leaf fibres, and that this is the historical context for the final verse of Sūrat al-Masad: “Will have upon her neck a halter of palm-fibre” (Q 111:5).
Abu’l-Ahab in Biblical Literature
In searching the Hebrew Bible for a wicked man whose name resembles Abu Lahab, one finds Ahab (Hebrew: אַחְאָב), the seventh kings of ancient Israel (r. ca. 885-874 BCE), son of King Omri and husband of Jezebel of Sidon. We could read “Abu Lahab” alternatively, and without substantial change, as “Abu’l-Ahab,” father of Ahab. According to the Hebrew Bible, the father of Ahab is Omri, who is described in 1 Kings 16:25 as having acted “more wickedly than all who were before him.” His son Ahab, in his own time, “married Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and went to serve Baal and worshiped him . . . Thus Ahab did more to provoke the Lord God of Israel than all the kings of Israel who were before him” (1 Kings 16:31-33).
….
As for Jezebel, it is said that she ordered the killing of prophets (1 Kings 18:4). The prophet Elijah escaped her persecution and with God’s command confronted Ahab with a challenge to the priests of Baal: “You call on the name of your god and I will call on the name of the Lord; the god who answers by fire is indeed God” (18:24). The supporters of Baal called upon their god to send fire to consume their sacrifice, but nothing happened.
When Elijah called upon the name of the Lord, fire came down from heaven immediately and consumed their offering.
Eventually Ahab in killed in battle, and when Elisha, successor to the prophet Elijah, anoints Jehu king of Israel, the latter had the house of Ahab killed. Jezebel was captured by her enemies, thrown out of a window, trampled by a horse, and her flesh eaten by dogs.
A Comparison of the Qur’anic and Biblical Characters
There are some significant parallels between the qur’anic character of Abu Lahab and the biblical character of Abu’l-Ahab. To illustrate these, let us evaluate Sūrat al-Masad in light of the biblical account:
• May the hands of Abu Lahab [Abu’l-Ahab] be ruined and ruined is he. The biblical story of Ahab fits well with this verse, in both linguistic and narrative/thematic terms. The father is invoked for ruin. Omri was the first person to introduce the worship of Baal in Israel, for which his progeny are to be ruined. In Qur’anic Arabic terminology, hands (here, yadā) are symbolic of power and of progeny. The fate of Omri’s progeny is pronounced not so much in the tafsir literature as in the biblical texts.
• His wealth will not avail him or that which he gained. The Ahab of the Bible seems to have had greater wealth than the Abu Lahab of Islamic tradition; his great wealth failed to prevent his demise by God’s command.
• He will [enter to] burn in a Fire of [blazing] flame. Hellfire is an eschatalogical concept associated with unbelief, especially with the sort of idolatry instituted by Omri and Ahab.
• And his wife [as well]—the carrier of firewood. The feature of firewood (ḥaṭab) is key. The challenge at Mount Carmel consisted of sacrificing bulls on firewood in order. We can imagine Jezebel supporting the Baalist priests by collecting the best woods to burn the sacrifice easily. The image of Jezebel carrying firewood makes more sense of this verse than that of Umm Jamil dumping thorns.
• Around her neck is a rope of [twisted] fiber. Traditional exegetes struggle to explain the meaning of the rope of palm-fiber (masad). It may be better understood in light of the Jezebel story. The term masad appears to be a hapax legomenon in the Qur’an that might have a Hebrew root and be related to Jezebel’s violent death. This term begs for further examination along these lines. ….
[End of quotes]
Name within a name
No one could argue with Ercan Celik’s statement that: “In searching the Hebrew Bible for a wicked man whose name resembles Abu Lahab, one finds Ahab (Hebrew: אַחְאָב) …”.
Why, the very element ahab appears in the name L-ahab.
From what I have read, the name Ahab is somewhat problematical, with certain scholars suggesting that it may actually have been a foreign (non-Hebrew) name. Another suggestion is that Ahab means “uncle”, which would, at least, work in well with the view that Abu Lahab was the “uncle” of Mohammed.
I have identified the biblical King Ahab with Lab’ayu (Labaya) of the El Amarna [EA] letters, an identification that I now consider to be virtually certain:
King Mesha of Moab tells that he built Jericho (Qeriho) and used “prisoners of Israel”
(4) King Mesha of Moab tells that he built Jericho (Qeriho) and used "prisoners of Israel" | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
King Ahab as El Amarna’s Lab’ayu
What absolutely clinches Ahab as Lab'ayu for me is that King Abdi-hiba of Jerusalem (Urusalim) will complain in EA # 289 that Lab'ayu had been giving away “the land of Sakmu” (Shechem) to the Habiru.
“Are we to act like Labayu when he was giving away
the land of Sakmu Shechem] to the [tent-dwelling] Hapiru?”
Abdi-Heba of Jerusalem, Amarna Letter
EA 289: 18-24
Shechem was the northern Bethel, the Bethulia of the Book of Judith, as C.C. Torrey showed beyond all doubt (even though he did not believe that Judith was historical).
The Habiru must be, in this case, the Moabites under King Mesha, who must therefore be Hiel the Bethelite (Shechemite) who built Jericho at the time of King Ahab.
Mesha tells us straight out that he built Qeriho (Jericho) using "prisoners of Israel" (Moabite Stele): “I built Qeriho [Jericho]: the wall of the parkland and the wall of the acropolis; and I built its gates, and I built its towers; and I built the king’s house … and I dug the ditches for Qeriho with prisoners of Israel”.
This adds a new dimension to our consideration of Ahab/Abu Lahab and the name.
For Lab’ayu, not entirely dissimilar to Abu Lahab, inverted (Lahab Abu), is thought to mean ‘Lion Man’.
The ‘Lion Man’ now becomes a perfect partner for Queen Jezebel, as EA’s Baalat-neše, ‘Mistress of Lions’.
This would give us three sets of significant husband-and-wife combinations, namely:
King Ahab-Queen Jezebel;
Lab’ayu-Baalet-neše;
Abu Lahab-(wife) Umm Jamil
Two of these sets are regarded as being wicked, Ahab-Jezebel, and - as we read above - the accursed Abu Lahab and his wife.
The little that we know of EA’s Lab’ayu would tend to give the impression, again, of a somewhat devious, or duplicitous, character.
The Mount Carmel Incident
Thanks to Ercan Celik’s piece above, I can now include Elijah and the Mount Carmel showdown with the Baalists, in the presence of King Ahab, as being yet another biblical borrowing in the biography of Mohammed. I had not noticed this one before.
And his wife [as well]—the carrier of firewood. The feature of firewood (ḥaṭab) is key. The challenge at Mount Carmel consisted of sacrificing bulls on firewood in order. We can imagine Jezebel supporting the Baalist priests by collecting the best woods to burn the sacrifice easily.
Mohammed has now assumed the rôle of the steadfast prophet Elijah against the Baalists, as represented by Abu Lahab and his wife: “… he and his wife Umm Jamil … are depicted as fierce enemies of Muhammad and the early Muslim community”.
The Qur'an is so derivative!
The Lord’s intended ruination of the House of Ahab, including Queen Jezebel, as conveyed by the great prophet Elijah, is echoed in Ercan Celik’s comments:
• May the hands of Abu Lahab [Abu’l-Ahab] be ruined and ruined is he. The biblical story of Ahab fits well with this verse, in both linguistic and narrative/thematic terms. The father is invoked for ruin. Omri was the first person to introduce the worship of Baal in Israel, for which his progeny are to be ruined. In Qur’anic Arabic terminology, hands (here, yadā) are symbolic of power and of progeny. ….
• His wealth will not avail him or that which he gained. ….
• He will [enter to] burn in a Fire of [blazing] flame. Hellfire is an eschatalogical concept associated with unbelief, especially with the sort of idolatry instituted by Omri and Ahab.
• Around her neck is a rope of [twisted] fiber. Traditional exegetes struggle to explain the meaning of the rope of palm-fiber (masad). It may be better understood in light of the Jezebel story. The term masad appears to be a hapax legomenon in the Qur’an that might have a Hebrew root and be related to Jezebel’s violent death. ….
Including King Baasha of Israel
There is yet a further dimension to be added to all of this.
Emmet Sweeney comes close to it when he proposes to identify Lab’ayu with Elah, the son of King Baasha of Israel (The Theban Empire: Vol. 3, Ages in Alignment Series. Second and revised edition, p. 102): “… Labayu … can only be Baasha’s son Elah …”.
Since I have, however, in various articles, identified Baasha with Ahab, then I must logically conclude that Baasha, not Elah, was EA’s Lab’ayu (= Ahab).
The name Baasha, apparently meaning “rotten”, “stinking”, may be a derogatory name applied to an evil, ill-fated king.
For more on this identification, see e.g. my article:
Baasha as Ahab
(5) Baasha as Ahab | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
There I wrote:
Baasha and Ahab compare quite favourably
Baasha’s sudden irruption onto the scene has its later ‘justification’,
I would suggest, in the far more detailed biography of Ahab.
As to reign length, we have almost a perfect match in that Baasha reigned for 24 years (I King 15:33) and Ahab for 22 (16:29).
But that becomes quite a perfect match when we further realise that Baasha reigned for 2 years at Tirzah [which I have tentatively identified elsewhere as Shechem].
Though, in conventional terms, Samaria (at the time of Baasha) was not yet a capital city, according to my revision it would already have been. And king Ahab of Israel is said specifically to have reigned for 22 years “in Samaria”.
Putting it all together, we get Baasha’s 2 years at Tirzah, and then a further 22 years (making his total 24 years); 22 years being the length of Ahab’s reign.
In other words, Baasha-Ahab (if it is the same person) reigned for 2 years at Tirzah, and then for 22 years at Samaria, a total of 24 years of reign.
This must have been after Ahab’s presumed father, Omri, had built Samaria (16:24).
I say ‘presumed’, because I have, in my related articles, followed T. Ishida in his view that the Bible does not mention a House of Omri, but does refer to one of Ahab, thereby allowing for me to make the tentative suggestion that Ahab was probably related to Omri only though marriage.
And that would further allow now for Ahab’s direct father to be, not Omri, but - as Baasha’s father: “Ahaziah of the house of Issachar” (1 Kings 15:27).
….
Tomoo Ishida instead suggested that the narrative of dynastic instability in the Kingdom of Israel suggests an underlying rivalry between tribes for its throne.[1] In the biblical narrative, the House of Jeroboam was from the Tribe of Ephraim, while the House of Baasha was from the Tribe of Issachar.[1] The Omrides are connected in this narrative with the city of Jezreel, where they maintained a second palace. According to the Book of Joshua, Jezreel was controlled by the Tribe of Issachar. Ishida views the narrative as suggesting that the Omrides themselves were members of the Tribe of Issachar.[1] ....
I would modify this, though, to say instead, not “the Omrides”, but the Ahabites “were members of the Tribe of Issachar”.
Comments