Title:
Questioning the Angelic Identity of Jibril: A Critical Examination of Qur’anic Interpretation
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba – Shimba Theological Institute
Abstract
Islamic theology traditionally identifies Jibril (Gabriel) as one of the four archangels of Allah. However, a critical reading of the Qur’an reveals an absence of explicit declaration where Allah directly calls Jibril an angel (malak). The question arises: If the Qur’an is the ultimate source of truth, why does it never clearly say, “Jibril is one of the angels”? This article engages in a theological and exegetical debate challenging the conventional Islamic interpretation, particularly through the lens of Surah Al-Baqarah 2:98, where Jibril and Michael (Mikail) are mentioned separately from “the angels.”
1. Introduction: The Foundational Question
The Qur’an, in Surah Al-Baqarah (2:98), states:
“Whoever is an enemy to Allah, and His angels, and His messengers, and Jibril and Mikail, then indeed, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers.”
This verse explicitly distinguishes between “angels” (mala’ikah) and “Jibril and Mikail.” The immediate linguistic and theological question is:
If Jibril and Mikail are indeed angels, why are they mentioned separately from ‘the angels’?
In classical Arabic rhetoric, separation of nouns within a list usually indicates categorical distinction rather than redundancy. Hence, this verse invites critical scrutiny:
Was Jibril truly considered an angel by the Qur’an’s author, or was his nature conceptually different?
2. The Missing Declaration: “Jibril is an Angel”
Unlike the Bible, where Gabriel is explicitly called “the angel Gabriel” (Luke 1:26, Daniel 8:16), the Qur’an never once describes Jibril using the title malak (angel).
There is no verse in the Qur’an where Allah says:
“Jibril is one of My angels.”
This silence raises profound theological and linguistic questions:
-
Why is Jibril’s angelic status assumed rather than stated?
-
If Jibril were truly an angel, why does the Qur’an not use the same grammatical structure it uses for other angels, such as the angels of death, punishment, or recording?
-
Could Jibril have been a different class of celestial being—a spirit, or a divine messenger distinct from the angelic order?
3. Qur’anic Terminology: Jibril as “Ruh” (Spirit)
In multiple verses, Jibril is called Ruh al-Qudus (the Holy Spirit) or Ruh al-Amin (the Trustworthy Spirit):
-
“Say, the Holy Spirit has brought it down from your Lord in truth” (Surah An-Nahl 16:102)
-
“The Trustworthy Spirit has brought it down upon your heart” (Surah Ash-Shu‘ara 26:193–194)
If Jibril is consistently identified as a Ruh (Spirit) and never explicitly as a Malak (Angel), one must ask:
Are “Ruh” and “Malak” identical terms in the Qur’an?
If not, why has Islamic theology merged the two into one category?
Moreover, the Qur’an in Surah Al-Qadr (97:4) says:
“The angels and the Spirit descend therein by permission of their Lord.”
Here again, the Spirit (Ruh) is listed alongside the angels, implying a distinct being, not one of them.
4. The Linguistic Distinction and Theological Implications
Arabic linguists and Qur’anic commentators have long recognized that when two entities are mentioned separately, it indicates difference of essence or category.
Thus, when the Qur’an says:
“The angels and the Spirit,”
it cannot mean “the angels including the Spirit.”
Rather, it suggests:
“The angels (a class of beings) and another distinct being known as the Spirit.”
Therefore, from a purely linguistic standpoint, the Qur’an consistently differentiates Jibril (the Spirit) from the angelic hosts.
This raises further theological questions:
-
If Jibril is the Spirit, how can he simultaneously be an angel?
-
Did early Muslims or the Qur’an’s redactors misunderstand the original Judeo-Christian references to the Holy Spirit and the angel Gabriel as separate entities?
-
Could the conflation of “Ruh” and “Malak” reflect a later interpretive tradition rather than the Qur’an’s original intent?
5. Comparative Scriptural Context
In the Bible, Gabriel is clearly defined as an angel:
“I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God” (Luke 1:19).
“The man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision, came to me in swift flight” (Daniel 9:21).
In contrast, the Qur’an never uses such clarity.
Instead, it attributes the Qur’an’s revelation to Ruh al-Qudus and Ruh al-Amin, titles that align more with the Christian understanding of the Holy Spirit than with an angelic messenger.
Hence, one might debate:
-
Did the Qur’an adopt the name “Jibril” from Judeo-Christian sources but reinterpret his role to fit Islamic theology?
-
Was Jibril originally conceived as the Spirit of Revelation, not an angelic being, and only later identified as one through Islamic exegesis (tafsir)?
6. Debate Questions for Muslim Scholars
To stimulate further scholarly debate, the following critical questions should be addressed:
-
Where in the Qur’an does Allah directly call Jibril an angel (malak)?
-
Why does Surah Al-Baqarah 2:98 separate Jibril and Mikail from “the angels”?
-
Why does the Qur’an refer to Jibril as Ruh al-Qudus and Ruh al-Amin, but never Malak Jibril?
-
If Ruh and Malak are the same, why are they consistently distinguished in Qur’anic grammar and syntax (e.g., Surah Al-Qadr 97:4, Surah An-Nahl 16:2)?
-
Could “Jibril” in the Qur’an represent a metaphor for divine inspiration or spirit, rather than a literal angelic being?
-
How does Islamic theology reconcile the Qur’anic “Ruh” with the Christian concept of the Holy Spirit?
7. Conclusion
The Qur’an’s portrayal of Jibril raises significant linguistic, theological, and hermeneutical questions. Nowhere is Jibril explicitly called an angel; rather, he is identified as the Spirit. Moreover, Qur’anic verses consistently separate him from “the angels,” suggesting a distinct identity or nature.
Thus, the Islamic assumption that Jibril is an angel appears to stem not from Qur’anic revelation itself but from post-Qur’anic interpretation and theological construction.
This invites a re-examination of Islamic angelology and the origin of revelation within the Qur’an’s framework—questions that remain unresolved within orthodox Islamic scholarship.
Author:
Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute
Orlando, Florida, USA
No comments:
Post a Comment