Did Hazrat Maryam ever marry in her lifetime? Are there any accounts of her life after the miraculous birth of Prophet Esa? Or did she simply stay in a Holy Sanctuary all her life?
She never married in her life. That is why word virgin is associated with her name.
She never married.
There is a whole chapter on Maryam alaisalam in the Quran.
She's regarded as the most pious woman in Islam.
19:20 "She said: "How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?"
Actually Hazrat Mariyam (as) married Hazrat Joseph (as) and they had children other than Hazrat Isa (as). According to some traditions Hazrat Isa (as) had four brothers & two sisters and while most historians agree on the number of brothers, they don’t quiet agree on how many sisters he had.
^ which historians and which traditions?
Read this again
19:20 "She said: “How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?”
There is no prove of Mary being married. Its all based on fallacy. Jewish tried their @$$ off to destroy and confuse the personality of Mary and Jesus. So many stories hanging around. Right thing is what Quran teaches us.
gupguppy, If you read tafaseer related to the Quranic verses about Hazrat Isa (as), most Muslim scholars do not go into details of Isa (as) life. If they do mention such details as to why was Hazrat Isa (as) in Egypt, or when did he return to Jerusalem, they mention either secular (mostly Greek or Roman) historians or the Christian historians. Only other traditions about Hazrat Isa (as) that Muslims can claim to be their own is from the Hadiths, which either talks about him in heaven or his second coming.
smooth_guy, before laughing you should read it carefully, the verse is related to the time when Hazrat Isa (as) was conceived, which doesn’t mean Hazrat Mariyam (as) never married.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by ahmadjee: *
gupguppy, If you read *tafaseer related to the Quranic verses about Hazrat Isa (as), most Muslim scholars do not go into details of Isa (as) life. If they do mention such details as to why was Hazrat Isa (as) in Egypt, or when did he return to Jerusalem, they mention either secular (mostly Greek or Roman) historians or the Christian historians. Only other traditions about Hazrat Isa (as) that Muslims can claim to be their own is from the Hadiths, which either talks about him in heaven or his second coming.
[/quote]
A little vague... perhaps you can be more specific... when you said, "while most historians agree on the number of brothers..." etc., exactly which historians are in "agreement"? And what is their agreement based on? Any examples?
[quote]
Only other traditions about Hazrat Isa (as) that Muslims can claim to be their own is from the Hadiths, which either talks about him in heaven or his second coming.
[/quote]
Not really relevant...
[quote]
smooth_guy, before laughing you should read it carefully, the verse is related to the time when Hazrat Isa (as) was conceived, which doesn’t mean Hazrat Mariyam (as) never married.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. There's no proof that i can see in the verse smooth_guy cited... perhaps a stronger proof might be that Maryam's mother vowed and dedicated her in the service of God (Qur'an 3:35) and if this means her being free of worldly affairs then it's likely she didn't marry... one could try and look into the customary habits of the time in respect of how those "dedicated to God's service" in this way lived out their lives...
... the above should be considered in tandem with the verse that speaks about self-invented monasticism (Qur'an 57:27)
The gospels (Mathew, Mark & John) mention Jesus having brothers and Mathew mentions four brothers [James, Joseph, Judas and Simon], so those who believe everything in the gospels consider Jesus having four brothers. The number of sisters is not mentioned. Others historians, both Christian & secular who take the gospel with a grain of salt do not always agree on the number 4 or that he even had any brothers. But as this is not a critical piece of history, not much attention is paid to it.
As far as the verse relating to Hazrat Mariyam’s mother’s prayer is concerned; she prayed for whom she hoped was a son in the service of Allah. Some might argue that she didn’t mean celibacy as she belonged to Nazoreans tribe, and they didn’t use to practice celibacy among their priests (as appose to Essenes who did practice it). But even if for the sake of argument we do consider her prayer equal to raising her new born for an unmarried monastic life, the very next verses where she prays for Hazrat Mariyam and her off spring to be saved from Satan shows that she meant Hazrat Mariyam to marry, once she found out that she gave birth to a female child.
I am surprised, you completely believe in Gospels as their have been numerous alteration in them. we as Muslim believe in the message only that tallies with Quran.
Check out Quranic references of Jesus and Mary here.
smooth_guy, there is no verse in Quran that mentions Hazrat Mariyam dying unmarried. It does mention her conceiving Jesus (as) as a virgin and her God fearing life, rejecting the charges against her. I don't know of any Hadiths where it is claimed that Isa (as) was her ONLY son or that she never married. If you do have any such references, please feel free to mention it.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ahmadjee: *
The gospels (Mathew, Mark & John) mention Jesus having brothers and Mathew mentions four brothers [James, Joseph, Judas and Simon], so those who believe everything in the gospels consider Jesus having four brothers.
[/quote]
Very few, if any, in the Christian mainstream have understood these brothers to refer to blood-brothers of Jesus... it's akin to the brotherhood referred to in the Qur'an among believers - namely, a "brotherhood of faith", not by birth...
[quote]
But even if for the sake of argument we do consider her prayer equal to raising her new born for an unmarried monastic life, the very next verses where she prays for Hazrat Mariyam and her off spring to be saved from Satan shows that she meant Hazrat Mariyam to marry, once she found out that she gave birth to a female child.
[/QUOTE]
Good point... although we still don't have any evidence that she did marry (or not)...
gupguppy is right, we don't have prove or report of her marriage either.
....OK boss!
Instead of turning this into another Ahmadi bashing thread, why don't you guys, for a change, stick to the topic. The discussion is interesting. Lets focus on the issue on what evidence we have from Islamic literature that Mary (Peace be upon her) NEVER married. If there is no mention, then should we consider non-Islamic literature?
Gupguppy, I know Christians on both boats; one who believe in the marriage of Mary & Joseph and those who don’t. Quiet frankly, the ones who do out number the ones who don’t by an overwhelming majority. But then you could have a totally different experience. Though I doubt it, as those who would consider them to be brothers in belief would get in a real tough time trying to hold on to the belief the ‘father’ is meant to be literal. So, maybe one of the Christian guppies can explain a little further?
BTW, did you miss the big news about the artifact (ossuary) found last year of James the brother of Jesus, considered to be the first archaeological evidence of Jesus' existence? Ah, Brother James was exceedingly interesting, as he rejected for the longest time the influence of Paul in the early church & considered Isa (as) teachings to be for the Jews alone. But then, I digress.
smooth_guy, and the relevance is??
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ahmadjee: *
Gupguppy, I know Christians on both boats; one who believe in the marriage of Mary & Joseph and those who don’t. Quiet frankly, the ones who do out number the ones who don’t by an overwhelming majority. But then you could have a totally different experience.
[/quote]
Perhaps you are talking to or reading about Protestant Christians (=Mary had other children) and my experience is of Roman Catholics (=Mary remained a virgin and had no other children)... There are probably twice as many Catholics as there are Protestants...
[quote]
Though I doubt it, as those who would consider them to be brothers in belief would get in a real tough time trying to hold on to the belief the ‘father’ is meant to be literal.
[/quote]
I think Christians accept that not every use of the words 'son', 'sister' etc. in the Bible, and perhaps even 'father', is to be taken literally...
[quote]
BTW, did you miss the big news about the artifact (ossuary) found last year of James the brother of Jesus, considered to be the first archaeological evidence of Jesus' existence? Ah, Brother James was exceedingly interesting, as he rejected for the longest time the influence of Paul in the early church & considered Isa (as) teachings to be for the Jews alone. But then, I digress.
[/quote]
Just did a search on it... interesting...
gupguppy, the way I understand the Catholic belief is that they do not dispute that a man named Joseph married Harzat Mariyam. What they do dispute is that together did they have any children or not, with their belief in Mary being a virgin for life. They speculate the siblings of Jesus mentioned in the gospels to be either children of Hazrat Joseph from his first marriage, or cousins. So, even in Catholic Christian belief, Hazrat Maryam did marry.
There are a couple of Catholic Christians here on the board, maybe they can explain it better.
Here I found the explaination of The Family of Jesus by Elizabeth McNamer
All Christians are familiar with the story of the birth of Jesus. In Luke’s Gospel we read the story of Joseph and Mary traveling from Nazareth to Bethlehem for the census. In Matthew, we read of wise men from the East consulting with King Herod about the place of the Messiah’s birth.
Matthew then tells us that Jesus’ parents took him to Egypt and remained there for about two years before returning to and settling in Nazareth.
We learn no more until Luke tells us about an incident when Jesus was 12 years old and got lost in the Temple at Jerusalem. Jesus returns to Nazareth and we hear nothing again until he is 30 years old and starts his public ministry.
**Brothers, Sisters and Cousins
Luke’s Gospel refers to John the Baptist being a cousin. We hear nothing about siblings in the infancy narratives. It comes as a surprise, then, when we read in Mark’s Gospel: “His mother and his brothers arrived and as they stood outside they sent word to him to come out” (Mark 3:31). Later we are told that their names are James, Jude, Simon and Joses; sisters are also mentioned.
Two letters in the New Testament purport to have been written by brothers of the Lord. Where did they come from, particularly if Mary was a virgin, as Catholic Tradition teaches?
St. Jerome, in the fourth century, refers to these four as cousins of Jesus. It is not unusual in the Middle East to refer to cousins who grew up together as brothers and sisters. Orthodox tradition proposes that they were children of Joseph by a former marriage. Jesus apparently grew up in a lively household at Nazareth.**
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ahmadjee: *
gupguppy, the way I understand the Catholic belief is that they do not dispute that a man named Joseph married Harzat Mariyam. What they do dispute is that together did they have any children or not, with their belief in Mary being a virgin for life. They speculate the siblings of Jesus mentioned in the gospels to be either children of Hazrat Joseph from his first marriage, or cousins. So, even in Catholic Christian belief, Hazrat Maryam did marry.
[/quote]
Oh yes, quite possibly... i somehow jumped to concentrate on the issue of whether Maryam had other children forgetting that the discussion is whether she ever got married ... regarding the former - i have a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and of course the belief that Maryam was 'ever-virgin' is stated emphatically...
Wasnt this proven to have been an elaborate forgery?, along with another tablet carried out by an Israeli antiquities collector, Oded Golan.
Remember watching a documentray about this. See this link
You can read the final reports here
and more specifically here
So apparently, theres still no real archaeological evidence of his existence.