بسم الله الرحمان الرحيم
There has been much confusion surrounding the names used when talking about the children of Israel especially within the Muslims. This confusion has disseminated from a general lack of clarity and understanding of the subject. A toxic, political environment has allowed the misunderstanding to remain because it fuels the de-humanising of those who called themselves Jews.
In order to appreciate the Quranic narrative one must first understand at least this one aspect of the author, who is Allah. Allah has claimed about himself that he does not create anything without that thing having serious purpose. Thus everything he does has a reason and purpose behind it.
وَمَا خَلَقۡنَا ٱلسَّمَآءَ وَٱلۡأَرۡضَ وَمَا بَيۡنَہُمَا لَـٰعِبِينَ
“We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them playing about” Surah al Anbiya 16.
The very same creator of the heavens and the earth who authored the Quran and sent down the revelation has expressed that he is a creator giving everything purpose and that no matter how small or how big nothing is done as an act of play or without purpose. Thus we then wonder how this approach can even be contemplated when considering the Quran itself. The Quran was revealed to us through the process of the Angel Jibreel alayhisalaam reciting it to Muhammed sallallahualayhiwasalam and every word was checked and rechecked. Muhammed sallallahualayhiwasalam recited to his companions at the time and every word and letter was checked and confirmed. This meticulous process was maintained carefully so as not one letter of the Quran was lost and this process remains with us today. If one letter is out of place or removed or even if a vowel (tashkeel) is placed wrongly then the body of literature cannot be considered as the Quran because it will have contained an error.
If all the above is true then how can we even consider that treating names and words as interchangeable when reading the Quran. Surely, Allah has used words and names for a reason and in their place so that we are guided by the light and wisdom from those words. Thus the names used and the place in which those names appear and how they are used and in what context they are used are all revelation which is a source of guidance for humanity. It would be strange and, dare I say, foolish of a person to assert that when Allah uses a name it could be substituted by or with another name. This is woefully either arrogant or ignorant. Everything is wahy in the Quran so too the way they appear and the position of the words and names used, thus to believe that names can be substituted is not to understand the fundamental nature of the Quran.
The majority of the Muslims use the names Banu Israel and Yehud interchangeably as if they were exactly the same and had exactly the same meaning. Allah (swt) uses these names in the Quran and uses them consistently throughout the Quran. Even the blessed Prophet sallallahualayhiwasalam uses the two terms consistently with the Quranic narrative. Never do they use them in a haphazard way so as to confuse the reader either in terms of time and concept. If the basis upon which the concept and the messages are confused or muddled then knowledge is lost. But, Allah never confuses you nor does he cause the mind to believe the Quran has in some way contradicted itself whether internally nor externally. If a contradiction is found then Allah makes it very clear that a contradiction is a sign that the material in which you find a contradiction is not divine and therefore cannot be attributed to Him.
“and, if this (Quran) was from other than Allah they would surely find many contradictions in it” Surah Nisaa 82
So, the DNA of the divine and the revelation is that it will never ever contain contradictions, nor anything that will confuse the human being. If we look closely at the two names we will see consistent themes throughout the Quran which then can inform us about how the two groups are viewed by Allah. If the names are treated in different ways then it is possible from the Quranic narrative to infer that the two names are pointing to two quite distinct concepts.
The History of the Names
Banu Isreal is the name given to the descendants of the Prophet Yacoub alayhisalaam ; it means the Children of Israel. The Prophet Yacoub alayhisalaam had his name changed by Allah to Israel. Israel means in Hebrew the Bonded one of Allah or in more familiar terms the slave of Allah. This translated directly into Arabic means Abdullah. Isra means slave and EL which means Allah in Hebrew. The word Yehood was one of the names of the sons of the prophet Yacoub alayhisalaam and the patriarch of the tribe which bears his name. Yehudah was the fourth son of his father through his wife Leah. Yehudah comes from the Hebrew meaning thankful or give thanks.
הודה=hudah
The story in Genesis relates the moment of the name being first used as when Leah gave birth to Yehudah and she was grateful to Allah and named the child Yehuda meaning he is grateful or is being grateful יהודה.
Yehudah then became the name of the tribe and those that came from the tribe were known as the Yehood or Yehoodi. The Yehood were given the responsibility of rulership and thus became the ruling tribe. When Israel divided into two kingdoms Judah was the name of the southern kingdom that also contained the tribes of Simeon and Benjamin. King David alayhisalaam was from the tribe of Judah and so too King Solomon alayhisalaam . So, Yehood was the name of a single tribe of the Children of Israel. It was only later that anyone who was from the Children of Israel were called Yehood. There could be many explanations as to why the name yehood would have been given to all of Israel but none of these reasons would come from revelation. Other tribes around them may have decided to use the name for all of Israel because it was the tribe of the ruling elite. Or, it could be that those who did run into Arabia and Africa were from the tribe of Yehudah and therefore those tribes who came into contact with them decided to call them by their tribe name and then this became synonymous for all those related to the Children of Israel. We have examples of this today in the term German. The German people call themselves Deutsch or Dutch but the English adopted the Gaelic word which was used to name the invaders from Europe. So, the English, the descendants of those very same Deutsch invaders do not call their ancestors Deutsch but call them German because the word used for the Deutsch invaders was Gair which meant neighbour. So, the name that was used for a part became the name for the whole.
Nowhere in the khumash (the five books of the Torah) does Allah refer to the descendants of the Yacoub collective as the yehood and the term is not used even as a synonym to mean the Children of Israel.
Israel and Yehood in the Quran
In the Quran the names are treated in very different ways and as concepts they are treated in very significant different ways. We will highlight here just a few. In the Quran Allah speaks to the Children of Israel directly in first person without the agency or instrument of a prophet. In contrast Allah speaks about the Yehood and never does He speak directly to them but speaks in third person. Nowhere else in the Quran is a Tribe mentioned and is spoken to in first person directly not even the Bani Hashim nor the Ahlul Bait. Examples of both types of speech can be found in these surahs: surah Baqara 40-47 and surah Al Ahzab 28-33:
“Oh Children of Israel remember my favours which I bestowed upon you and fulfil my covenant I will fulfil your covenant and fear me.”
The above ayah is clearly direct speech addressing the Children of Israel in first person and the dialogue requests that the subjects of the ayah acknowledge the direct quality of the relationship. Allah is not talking through a prophet nor is he instructing a prophet to speak on his behalf as is the situation when Allah commands the prophet to “say”. This is a very intimate situation and this level of intimacy of dialogue is only reserved for the Prophets. While in the speech to the Ahlul Bait they are spoken about and Allah’s wishes for them are conveyed in the speech of the blessed Prophet. Albeit that he does singles them out which is still a great honour but he still does not talk to them directly in first person.
“O prophet say to your wives. “If you desire the life of this world, and its glitter, then come! I will make a provision for you and set you free in a handsome manner. But if you desire Allah and his messenger and the home of the hereafter, then verily, Allah has prepared the doers of good amongst you an enormous reward. O wives of the prophet! Whoever of you commits an open fahisha, the torment for her will be doubled, and that is ever easy for Allah. And whoever of you is obedient to Allah and his messenger and does righteous good deeds, we shall give her, her reward twice over, and We have prepared for her a noble provision. O wives of the Prophet! You are not like other women. If you keep your duty, then be not soft in speech, lest he in whose heart there is a disease should be moved with desire, but speak in an honourable manner. And, stay in your houses, and do not display yourselves like that of the times of ignorance, and perform salaat, and give zakat and obey Allah obey Allah and his messenger, Allah wishes only to remove rijs (evil sins and deeds) from you, o members of the Family, and to purify you with a thorough purification.”
In the above narrative it is clear that it begins with Allah instructing the Prophet to say to his wives and within the narrative Allah’s name is mentioned so we know this is not Allah addressing them himself directly but via the agency of the prophet himself. There is an intimacy but there are still three parties involved in the dialogue. The conversation is in third person because the Prophet is informing the Ahlul bait of what Allah wants for them. So, we have to note at this point the honour in which the Quran is giving to the Children of Israel that Allah speaks to them directly. This relationship is reserved only for the prophets. Allah does speak to humanity as a whole and this honour is given to us as the children of Adam but no other tribe is singled out and spoken to directly without agency in first person.
When Allah mentions the Yehood the whole narrative is in third person. Allah talks about them as if he is speaking to the audience while clearly referring to them. There is no intimacy whatsoever and Allah never makes references to any obligations with the Yehood that they should keep nor that they must fulfil any covenant. Allah only speaks about the wrong that they have done and holds them up as an example and warning of what the believers should not do. There is also a distinct pattern where Allah does not even mention the name the Children of Israel when he is describing the wrongs that some of them did or a party of them did without making it obvious that it was only a part. This is a mercy and justice as this would be an injustice to those who were clearly righteous from Banu Israel. Allah is careful not to besmirch the blessed name given to his Prophet and the descendants of his intimate friend Ibrahim alayhisalaam.
The narrative of Banu Israel being cursed seems to be rather at odds with the Quranic narrative. How can the whole of Bani Israel be cursed if indeed Allah gives them an honour and status that is present in the Quran for the world to witness? If indeed they were cursed then their status would be something akin to those who are cursed within the text.
The Quran clearly treats the two groups of people in different ways and Allah clearly gives an honour to one of them which is not given to a comparable group. This is already suggestive that the two names are referring to, if not, separate entities, then at least two different concepts.
Some problems with treating them as direct synonyms
One way of determining whether the two can be used interchangeably without causing any theological problems is to see if when using them interchangeably this would throw up any contradictions or situations that would be offensive to the Sharia.
The first issue that could be offensive to the sharia is that Banu Israel is a tribe and an ethnicity. If indeed Banu Israel is cursed then the result would be that anyone from the line of Banu Israel would, by accident of birth, be cursed and beyond redemption. No one is held responsible for the sins of their fathers and if Banu Israel is cursed then it would amount to the condemning of the whole tribe or nation for the sins of their ancestors. Also, another absurd result would be the implication this will have on the prophets of Banu Israel. They too would be included in any curse because they are from the line of Banu Israel.
The term Yehood when used in the Quran is not being used as a synonym for Banu Israel because even if it was to refer to any of Banu Israel it would be referring to the tribe of Yehudah (Judah) but this would also fall foul of the same issues as above because it would result in the curse of innocents based upon nothing more than birth. Also, the Prophets alayhumusalaam that came from yehudah such as David and Soloman would be affected by membership of that particular tribe.
But when we look at the term Yehood in the Quran it is used in relation to one’s belief in opposition to anything to do with a tribal or national affiliation. An example that gives this context is verse 120 Baqara which states:
“Never will the Jews nor the Nasara be pleased with you until you follow their religion.”
Here Allah uses the word Yehud when referring to a religion or creed by using the word millah. Ethnicity is never coupled with creed or religion so as to condemn a person just because of his or her tribe. The use of the word Yehood suggests that it is being used to denote a creed, religion or a set of beliefs. Another example of when the Quran uses Yehood and how it is using the term to mean belief in opposition to a bloodline is the verse 67 Ali Imran:
“Ibrahim was neither Yehood nor Nasara but he was a Haneef Muslim he was not from the mushrikeen”
This Ayah clearly sets up opposition to Ibrahim being either a Yehud or Nasara which demonstrates through opposites that Yehud is a belief not a bloodline because it is opposite to being Muslim and Haneef. Banu Israel is a bloodline and thus cannot be a belief or a creed so as to be a different creed or belief to Haneef. Tribal identity is not a millah nor a religion which opposes other creeds or beliefs but members within a tribe may be of different beliefs.
Examples from the Seerah
There were companions of the Prophet sallallahualayhiwasalam who were of the lineage of Banu Israel such as Abdullah bin Salaam who accepted Islam with the Prophet sallallahualayhiwasalam . If indeed Banu Israel was cursed then the Prophet sallallahualayhiwasalam surely would have informed him that whatever he did in pursuit of becoming Muslim would have been fruitless due to his bloodline. This clearly never happened, quite the opposite he was revered and honoured as a companion of the blessed Prophet. This is a clear example of where to substitute the name Banu Israel with that of Yehud would return an absurd result. It is reported that the Prophet sallallahualayhiwasalam said that Abdullah bin salaam was from the people of paradise before Abdullah ibn Salaam had died. If indeed he was from Banu Israel, how could someone from Banu Israel be guaranteed Jennah if Banu Israel and he were cursed. The profound error of this understanding is no more evident than when this narration is juxtaposed against the idea that Yehood and Banu Israel are the same.
Another example is the wives of the Prophet sallallahualayhiwasalam . The Prophet’s wife Safiyya was also from Banu Israel. When she was called the daughter of a Yehoodi by her co-wife Hafsa, she took this as an insult and was saddened by it. When Safiyya informed the Prophet sallallahualayhiwasalam concerning Hafsa’s behaviour the Prophet chastised Hafsa for calling her a daughter of a Yehoodi. If indeed Hafsa was speaking the truth concerning Safiyya and she was the daughter of a Yehood and thus it made her a Yehoodiya because it was a bloodline, then why did she not insult Safiyya by calling her a Yehoodi, as this should have passed to her by fact of birth. The very fact that she called her the daughter of a Yehoodi was to remind her that she came from a non-Muslim background concerning her father’s beliefs. If Banu Israel was interchangeable with Yehood then calling her Banu Israel would have sufficed to be an insult or calling her a Yehoodiya directly.
Does Allah curse Banu Israel himself or say they are cursed and beyond salvation?
Nowhere in the Quran does Allah say or suggest the Children of Israel are cursed or subject to damnation forever. The only place where Banu Israel is mentioned as being cursed is not by Allah but on the tongues of two Prophets. The first is David alayhisalaam and then by Isa alayhisalaam who were hundreds of years apart. This is mentioned in surah Al Ma’ida 78:
“Cursed are those who disbelieved from the Children of Israel upon the tongue of David and Isa the Son of Mary that was when they were disobedient and were transgressing beyond the bounds”
This is the closest the Quran comes to mentioning that Banu Israel is/are cursed but the statement is qualified by saying that those who disbelieved from Banu Israel were cursed by David and Isa not all of Israel. Also, when the word Min (from) is used it signifies a part of the whole so as to distinguish from the whole and also to signify that it could be a minor or small part leaving the majority unaffected. The ayah also says it happened on the tongue of both David alayhisalaam and Isa alayhisalaam therefore this happened at two different times, thus if being cursed by David alayhisalaam was indeed the cursing of the whole then why would Isa alayhisalaam have to curse them a second time. This would make Prophet Isa alayhisalaam rather merciless when the Children of Israel were already damned to hell forever. The Prophet Isa alayhisalaam cursed another part of Banu Israel at a different time because a part of Banu Israel, when he arrived, had committed another act of disbelief at his time and he cursed those who disbelieved not the whole of Banu Israel. If they were already cursed then it would have been pointless to do it again. This is consistent with the understanding of Yehood being related to a belief or creed. The Children of Israel who rejected their prophet at their time would be deemed Yehood as they would have disbelieved. Just as the Banu Israel in Medina who rejected the Prophet and did not become Muslim they could be legitimately referred to as Yehood but those who had accepted Islam would be Muslims or believers.
So, Allah does not mention that the Children of Israel are cursed in the Quran as a whole group whatsoever nor does he hint at this being the case. But, as above he has given Banu Israel a very elevated position within the Quran and it would be inconsistent to say they are cursed as a group but yet give them an elevated position within the Quran until judgment day.
It is very clear in the Quranic narrative Allah does not and has never cursed the Children of Israel. But, yes the bad decisions of some of the tribe were used as examples of poor judgment. But, to say that Banu Israel are cursed is patently wrong and when examined would throw up absurd results when applying which would cause contradictions within the text itself and with foundational principles such as no soul should bear the burden of another.