Man has always been preoccupied with the question of the existence of an afterlife; his curiosity, his deep-seated aversion to death, his wish to see his dead loved ones once again, his desire to have another shot at life, and his fear of the unknown have all informed his morbid fascination with what may happen beyond the grave. For this reason, religions have by and large attempted to address this most puzzling of questions: Can we come back to life once we are dead? The answer in the affirmative is probably one major reason why various religions have won so many adherents; the Abrahamic religions are no exception.
Judaism is the only Abrahamic religion where the question of an afterlife is somewhat controversial: To begin with, the hereafter is not mentioned in the Torah. Consequently, the Sadducees- a major ancient Jewish sect- rejected the existence of anything beyond this life. By contrast, the Pharisees- another major ancient Jewish sect- insisted that our life on this planet was not the end. The Pharisees found their quest in an idiosyncratic interpretation of some of the verses found in Jewish scripture: In one of those, (Deuteronomy 32:39), God says that He kills and He gives life. Pharisee interpreters therefore suggested that the act of killing preceded that of giving life; hence the existence of an afterlife. Furthermore, those interpreters referred to other parts of Jewish scripture that hinted at the tantalizing prospect of an afterlife: Ezekiel’s Valley of Dry Bones is a case in point (Ezekiel 37:1-14), as are some of the verses in the Book of Daniel (Daniel 12:2, 12:13). Christianity clearly believed in the hereafter: There are many verses in Christian scripture that refer to the existence of life after death (Matthew 10:28, 25:46; Luke 23:43; John 3:16; 2 Corinthians 5:1; Revelation 20:4-6, 21:8). But what about Islam?
No religion has given us such a graphic portrayal of the hereafter like Islam has done, be it heaven or hell. No reader of the Quran can possibly miss the richness of the descriptions detailing the fate of those who believe in Allah as well as of those who don’t. One of the most seductive aspects of the Quranic portrayal of paradise includes an extraordinary category of females known as houris (hour al ‘ieen, in Arabic): Those are supposedly beautiful, buxom women (An-Naba’ 78:33) of the fairest complexion, with large beautiful eyes (Ad-Dukhan 44:54); they are virgins who are passionately enamoured of their spouses (Al-Waqi’ah 56:36-37) and who restrict their eyes to them and to them only (Ar-Rahman 55:56). To be sure, the number of houris a Muslim man can get in heaven is not specified in the Quran itself, but one of the hadiths (sayings by Muhammad) states that each Muslim shall have two spouses (e.g., Sahih Muslim, Kitab Aj-Janna, No. 2834), while another says that the martyr shall get seventy two houris (Sunan At-Tarmadhi, Kitab Fadha’il Aj-Jihad, Bab Fi Thawab Ash-Shaheed, No. 1663). This has led many to believe that the culture of death promoted by jihadis is instigated by the prospect of copulation with seventy two beautiful virgins in the next world.
More recently, however, certain attempts have been made- most notably by Christoph Luxenberg- to take the sting out of jihad by suggesting that the word “hour” in “hour al ‘ieen” is of Syriac-Aramaic origin and that it means “white grapes” which- in Luxenberg’s view- is consistent with the context within which it is mentioned in the Quran. But, we may ask Luxenberg, how can one then explain the Arabic word “zawwajnahum” (We shall pair them with) which precedes “hour al ‘ieen” in the Quran (Ad-Dukhan 44:54)? Luxenberg seems to think that the actual Arabic word is “rawwahnahum” (We shall make them comfortable) and that the dots in the current Quranic word were mistakenly added at a later stage. He goes on to explain that the real translation of “We shall pair them with wide-eyed virgins” ought to be “We shall make them comfortable under white crystal-clear grapes.” This approach to the aforementioned Quranic words has given rise to a considerable level of relief and schadenfreude among many a non-Muslim, leading them to express ill-disguised delight that the death knell of jihadism may have already sounded. Yet, could this be a premature reaction? Let’s briefly examine the context of jihad:
The concept of jihad is almost as old as Islam itself. It was given prominence in the Quran particularly after Muhammad’s emigration from Mecca to Medina. Martyrs were then promised generous recompense in the afterlife for their huge earthly sacrifices. Some of those heavenly rewards can be found in the aforementioned hadith quoted in Sunan At-Tarmadhi (which is apparently the only source of the seventy-two houris hadith): In addition to those seventy two virgins, all of the martyr’s sins shall be forgiven; he shall be spared the fires of hell; he shall not undergo “the torture of the grave”; and he shall be able to intercede with God on behalf of seventy of his relatives. Even without the seventy two virgins, such remarkable incentives could easily motivate a Muslim to undertake jihad. If we add to this the fact that – as mentioned above- Muhammad said that each Muslim in heaven would have two spouses- most likely houris- we can then easily see that the potential removal of the seventy two virgins from jihadi consideration would most unlikely dampen their enthusiasm for jihad. But that is not all:
Even if one assumes that the word “hour” in “hour al ‘ieen” originally meant white grapes in Syriac-Aramaic, it does not necessarily follow that that was how Muhammad used it, nor that that was how his Muslim followers understood it. Let’s take an example from the English language: The word “maid” originally meant a virgin or an unmarried individual (Hence, “maiden name.”) Nowadays, it means a female domestic helper. “She is a maid” to us means that she is a domestic servant, not that she is a virgin. This point is important in our trying to fathom the meaning of “hour al ‘ieen” as mentioned in the Quran: Did Muhammad (or Allah) mean “beautiful virgins” or were “white grapes” meant instead? We may never know the exact answer to these questions, but we can try to speculate as to the likelihood of that answer. When we examine the details of the various descriptions of paradise in the Quran, we discover two interesting themes: One is made up of items or situations that are the opposite of what life was like in Arabia at that time- Cool weather, gardens, abundance of food, peace, security, repose, good health, and so forth. The other theme reflects what Muhammad personally liked, such as rivers of milk, of honey, and of grape juice. Given the fact that Muhammad reportedly loved having women, as did many of his followers, it is obvious that women would have become part of his paradise. In one of the hadiths, mentioned above, Muhammad says that a Muslim in heaven shall have two spouses. Since he was absolutely determined to provide a very strong incentive for a Muslim to fight non-Muslims and in the process risk death, it is quite possible that Muhammad may have promised such a martyr seventy two- as opposed to merely two- houris. It is therefore not inconceivable that Muhammad may have used “hour al ‘ieen" to refer to heavenly women either because that was how those words were literally used and understood in Arabia back then or he may have used them figuratively (as one would use the English word “honey” as a term of endearment.) Due to the fact that Muhammad’s hadiths clearly use “hour al ‘ieen” to mean beautiful virgins in paradise, one may safely conclude that there is a reasonable chance that the Quran used those words in that same sense, rather than that of “white grapes.”
It is essential that people who deal with counter-terrorism in one capacity or another refrain from falling victim to reductionism, i.e. they must under no circumstance entertain the illusion that jihadis wholeheartedly embrace their culture of death only- or even mainly- because of the seventy two virgins; other contributing factors include their zeal for Islam, their hatred of those whom they deem to be its enemies, their desire to go to paradise, have all of their sins forgiven, avoid the terrible torment of the grave, save themselves from the fires of hell, and intercede with God for the full forgiveness of the misdeeds of seventy of their relatives. Therein lies the jihadis’ religiously-inspired willingness for self-sacrifice.
About the author
Husam Dughman comes from a family that is historically descended from Europeans on his father’s side and Middle Easterners on his mother’s side. He was born in Libya and educated in Libya and the United Kingdom. Before Qaddafi came to power, Husam Dughman’s father had been the president of the University of Libya and his maternal grandfather had been a prime minister. Immediately following Qaddafi’s military coup d’état in 1969, both stood up to the Qaddafi regime and were consequently imprisoned: Husam Dughman’s father was incarcerated for a period of 10 years, during which he was subjected to regular torture by the Qaddafi regime, and his grandfather was incarcerated for five years.
In the 1990s, Husam Dughman returned to Libya and worked as a university professor of political science. Due to conflicts with the Qaddafi regime, he resigned from his university position in 1997 and subsequently worked in legal translation. Years later, Husam Dughman left Libya for North America, where he has been working as a newcomer specialist, helping new immigrants and refugees with their settlement. He currently resides in the United States.
Husam Dughman has published a book, Tête-à-tête with Muhammad, and he has also published various articles about the Middle East. He is currently working on a new book on the Abrahamic religions and scepticism. You can find out more by visiting his website at http://www.husamdughman.com