A Body unlike bodies: transcendent anthropomorphism in ancient semitic tradition and early Islam.

• Author: Williams, Wesley

1. INTRODUCTION

In taking up and elaborating upon John Wansbrough's insistence that emergent Islam be seen as a continuation of the Near Eastern Semitic monotheistic tradition, (1) Gerald R. Hawting makes an important observation:

That Islam is indeed related to Judaism and Christianity as part of the Middle Eastern, Abrahamic or Semitic tradition of monotheism seems so obvious and is so often said that it might be wondered why it was thought necessary to repeat it. The reason is that although it is often said, acceptance of Islam as a representative of the monotheist religious tradition is not always accompanied by willingness to think through the implications of the statement (emphasis added). (2) Although both Muslim tradition and Western scholarship articulate a recognition of Islam's place within the Semitic monotheistic tradition, there is not only often an unwillingness to embrace the implications of this recognition, there is also in practice the tendency to distance Islam from that tradition. (3) This is particularly the case regarding the Islamic Gotteslehre. Islam is often viewed as the religion par excellence of divine transcendence. (4) God is khilaf al-'alam--"the absolute divergence from the world"--and this characteristically Islamic doctrine of mukhalafa, "(divine) otherness," precludes divine corporeality and anthropomorphism. (5) But such a model of divine transcendence is Hellenistic, not Semitic. (6) The very notion of "immateriality," as well argued by Robert Renehan, seems to have been the brain-child of Plato. (7) The Semitic, and the ancient Near Eastern (ANE) models in general, embraced both "otherness" and corporeality/anthropomorphism: the gods were "transcendently anthropomorphic," to use Ronald Hendel's term. (8) That is to say, while the gods possessed an anthropoid or human-like form, this form was also in a fundamental way unlike that of humans in that it was transcendent, either in size, beauty, the substance of which it was composed, or all three. (9)

Ancient Israel stood in linguistic, cultural, and religious continuity with her neighbors in the Levant. (10) Morton Smith suggested in a classic article that Israel participated in "the common theology of the ancient Near East."(11) However ill-defined this concept of an ANE "common theology," it is clear that the god(s) of Israel and the gods of the ANE actually differed less than has been supposed. (12) Like the gods of the ANE, the god(s) of Israel and biblical tradition were transcendently anthropomorphic. (13) This ancient Near Eastern/Semitic transcendent anthropomorphism stands in stark contrast to normative Islamic notions of divine transcendence. But the latter, as Fazlur Rahman has pointed out, "does not emerge from the Qur'an, but from later theological development in Islam."(14) This "later theological development" included the appropriation of Hellenistic concepts and terms in order to interpret the Qur'an and the Sunna, particularly the statements about God. (15) Early Islam was, among other things, clearly a formulation of ancient Near Eastern mythological tradition. (16) It is specifically the "oriental monotheism," to use John Wansbrough's characterization of the ancient Near Eastern biblical tradition, to which Islam and the Qur'an are heir, (17) a point the latter concedes. (18) This disparity between ANE/Semitic and Islamic tradition the insistence, by Islamic tradition and Western scholarship, that the deity is the same in the three monotheistic traditions: "The monotheists not only worship one God; he is the same god for all. Whether called Yahweh or Elohim, God the Father or Allah, it is the selfsame deity who created the world out of nothing." (19) What then is the relation between the transcendently anthropomorphic Yahweh-Elohim and the incorporeal Allah?

It will be argued here that at an earlier period Islam possessed a tradition of "transcendent anthropomorphism" similar in many ways to that articulated in ANE and biblical sources. Through the mediation of hellenistically-influenced schools such as the Mu'tazila, Greek-inspired notions of divine transcendence would eventually characterize all of Islam, Sunni and Shici alike. (20) But while the triumph in Shi'ism was achieved by the third/ninth century, (21) Sunnism held out for considerably longer. Sherman Jackson has pointed out that in early Muslim debates over the divine attributes Rationalist groups such as the Mu'tazila privileged Aristotelian-Neoplationic logic and motifs while Traditionalists rejected them, at least ostensibly. (22) It thus should come as no surprise that it is in traditionalist Sunnism that this ancient Semitic transcendent anthropomorphism survived well into the sixth/twelfth century. (23) We will first document this ANE/biblical tradition of transcendent anthropomorphism and then explore its resonances in Islamic tradition.

2. THE BODY DIVINE IN ANCIENT TRADITION

In ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean tradition the divine body was thought to be so sublime it bordered on the non-body. (24) One of the distinguishing characteristics of this body divine is its dangerously luminous and fiery nature.

The body of the gods shines with such an intense brilliance that no human eye can bear it. Its splendor is blinding ... if the god chooses to be seen in all his majesty, only the tiniest bit of the splendor of the god's size, stature, beauty and radiance can be allowed to filter through, and this already enough to strike the spectator with thambos, stupefaction, to plunge him into a state of reverential fear ... (25) This "awe-inspiring luminosity" of the deities is in Akkadian termed pulhu melammu (Sum. ni.me.lam), an hendiadys meaning "fear, glory."(26) This, as A. Leo Oppenheim told us in a seminal article, denotes a dazzling aureole or nimbus surrounding a divinity. (27) The pulhu or puluhtu is often described as a supernatural garment of fire and flame. (28) The ancient and ubiquitous garment-as-body metaphor is certainly operative here, (29) as pulhu/puluhtu is equated with the Sumerian ni, "body, corporeal shape."(30) The melammu is associated with some sort of sparkling headwear, like a crown or even a luminous mask. (31) According to E. Cassin, the melammu is better understood as the expression of a vital force in the form of pulsating light. (32) Thus, pulhu melammu is the terrible epiphanic glory of the gods. (33) Its radiance overwhelmed enemies on the battlefield:(34) "The awe-inspiring splendor of Assur, my Lord, overwhelmed the men"; "the effulgence of his surpassing glory consumed them." (35) Even deities seek shelter from the radiant splendor of the greater gods: "O my Lady (Inanna), the Anunna, the great gods, Fluttering like bats fly off before you to clefts [in the rock],/They who dare not walk [?] in your terrible glance, who dare not proceed before your terrible countenance." (36)

Theirs is "[a] body invisible in its radiation, a face that cannot be seen directly." (37) To catch a glimpse of a deity could mean death for a human onlooker, because the mortal constitution is unable to bear it. (38) In order to be seen when such is desired or necessary, or in order to intervene directly in human affairs, the gods must conceal their divine forms. (39) Concealment is achieved either by veiling--enveloping the divine body in a mist, fog or cloud to become invisible (40)--or by some sort of divine metamorphosis. (41) This latter is usually done by reducing the divine size and splendor and taking on the appearance of a mortal human. (42)

The God of ancient Israel, too, was transcendently anthropomorphic, (43) and His transcendence was morphic as well.

Yahweh has a body, clearly anthropomorphic, but too holy for human eyes ... Yahweh's body was believed to be incommensurate with mundane human existence; it has a different degree of being than human bodies ... It is a transcendent anthropomorphism not in form but in its effect, approachable only by the most holy, and absent in material form in the cult ... The body of God was defined in Israelite culture as both like and unlike that of humans. (44) No doubt the signature feature of this Israelite transcendent anthropomorphism is a brilliant luminosity that is the morphic manifestation of God's signature holiness. (45) It is for this reason, we are given to understand, that humans cannot see God, Not because God is invisible, but because humans are unholy, and unholy beings are in great danger in the immediate presence of God's consuming, morphic holiness (46) This divine body is also characterized by a divine substance (ruah) antithetical to mortal flesh (basar). (47)

In the biblical canon this luminous divine body has been called in some sources his [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBE IN ASCII], kabod. (48) In the priestly material (P and Ezekiel) in particular, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBE IN ASCII] (kabodyhwh). denotes Yahweh's radiant human form, "with the strongest possible emphasis on God as light." (49) The fire that emanates from [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBE IN ASCII] is dangerous: it consumes whatever it touches. (50) Like the pulhu melammu of the Mesopotamian deities, the flames of the [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBE IN ASCII] can be unleashed on Yahweh's enemies. (51) To look upon [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBE IN ASCII] was deadly: the brightness was too much for the mortal eye. (52) To abide with Israel, but not consume her, Yahweh, like the Homeric and Hesiodic deities, cloaks his fiery [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBE IN ASCII] with a black cloud [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBE IN ASCII] (53) When Yahweh wants to visit wrath on an enemy or punish one of his own, he thrusts aside the cloud, exposing them to his undimmed radiance. (54)

The God of Israel, like the deities of the ANE generally, was a divine anthropos whose morphic transcendence imperils man. (55) The best example of transcendent anthropomorphism in the Bible is the inaugural vision of Ezekiel (Ezek, ch. 1). The priest-prophet sees God seated...